(Answers at the end of the test)
1. What was the name of the first Russian chronicle?
A) “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”
B) “The Tale of Bygone Years” by Nestor
C) “Lesson for Children” by Vladimir Monomakh
D) “The Word on Law and Grace”
2. What is patrimony?
A) land ownership of nobles
B) land ownership of the guardsmen, given out as a merit
C) land ownership of boyars and princes, inherited
D) land ownership of the voivode
3. When did feudal fragmentation in Rus' begin and end?
A) end of the 10th century - until the 12th century
B) end of the 11th century - until the middle of the 13th century
B) the beginning of the 13th century - the 40s of the 16th century
D) 30s of the 12th century - end of the 15th century
4. Who was the first Moscow prince?
A) Yuri Dolgoruky
B) Daniil Alexandrovich
B) Ivan Kalita
D) Dmitry Donskoy
5. The patriarchate was established in Russia:
A) in 1589
B) in 1605
B) in 1612
D) in 1645
6. Which historical figure played a significant role during the “Time of Troubles”?
A) Malyuta Skuratov
B) Alexander Menshikov
B) Kozma Minin
D) Ermak Timofeevich
7. What feature is characteristic of the absolute monarchy that existed in Russia in the 18th century?
A) unlimited power of the monarch
B) independence of local authorities
B) clear distribution state power into legislative, executive and judicial
D) the great role of the patriarch in public administration
8. The origin of the “policy of enlightened absolutism” in Russia is associated with the era of management:
A) Peter I
B) Elizaveta Petrovna
B) Catherine II
D) Alexander I
9. B Ancient Rus' the tax in favor of the church was called:
A) tithe
B) capitation tax
D) elderly
10. The Baptism of Rus' took place in
11. Which city did not have its own princely dynasty?
A) Vladimir
B) Chernigov
B) Novgorod
D) Pereslavl
12. Kievan Rus was replaced by uniform political structure, called:
A) Centralized state
B) Feudal Republic
B) Moscow Rus'
D) Feudal fragmentation
13. Main idea domestic policy CatherineII was:
A) absolutist bureaucracy
B) class monarchy
B) enlightened absolutism
D) constitutional monarchy
14. Andrei Rublev wrote...
A) portraits
B) landscapes of Russian nature
D) battle scenes
15. What was the name of the tribute that was collected from Russian lands for the Horde?
16. The peasant war under the leadership of Emelyan Pugachev took place...
A) in 1670-1672.
B) in 1801-1803.
B) in 1758-1760.
D) in 1773-1775.
17. The result of the Livonian War for the Russian state was:
A) obtaining access to the Baltic Sea coast
B) loss of Pskov, Novgorod and part of the northwestern lands
B) annexation of eastern Belarus and Ukraine
D) loss of Ivangorod, the southern coast of the Baltic and access to the sea
18. What was the name of the merchant who is credited with the authorship of “Walking across the Three Seas”
19. The election of Mikhail Romanov to the kingdom took place in...
A) 1650
B) 1585
B) 1613
D) 1495
20. The Declaration of "Armed Neutrality", adopted in 1780, was aimed at limiting the policy...
A) France
B) England
B) Prussia
D) Sweden
21. In what century did V.N. Tatishchev create his historical works?
22. In what century did Russia become a major maritime power?
23. Which ancient Russian princes were canonized for refusing to shed brotherly blood in internecine wars?
A) Yaroslav and Svyatopolk
B) Boris and Oleg
B) Vladimir and Yaroslav
D) Boris and Gleb
24. Who founded the oprichnina?
25. Match the name and nickname:
Question no. | Answers | Question no. | Answers |
|
Afanasy Nikitin |
||||
Ivan the Terrible |
||||
Every person is concerned about the history of his people, their origins. The history of Russia is one of the most richest stories peace. "Where did it start?" "Where are the origins?" - the most intriguing and vital questions for many of us. There are, of course, many answers, but the chronicle is a document of history that has survived to this day and has a complete narrative about our origins.
So, the topic that interested me was the chronicle.
In order to delve deeper into the study of this topic, I set a goal: to understand and be able to explain from the point of view of banal erudition what a chronicle is and its significance in the history of the Russian people.
To achieve the goal, I also formulated the following tasks:
- - Find and define the word “chronicle”;
- - Study and consider the historical significance of the chronicle;
- - Explain the term “subjectivity” of the chronicle;
- - Consider aspects of changes in the chronicle from the X-XV centuries;
- - Find the argumentation for the comparison “Chronicle vs. Bible (Orthodox)".
I also studied the literature of Moiseeva L.A., Buganov V.I., Danilevsky I.N., Eremin I.P., Likhachev D.S. These works are a rich source of information about chronicles in Ancient Rus' and the main support of my work.
I also watched films about the formation of chronicles in Rus': the film “The Chronicle of Nestor” 2006, Air Force Moscow and the film “Believe the Chronicle. Princess Wolf" 1982 Lenfilm.
Chronicles are historical works of the 11th-17th centuries, in which the narrative was told year 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. Usually the chronicles set out Russian history from its beginning; sometimes the chronicles opened with biblical history and continued with ancient, Byzantine and Russian history. Chronicles played important role in the ideological justification of princely power in Ancient Rus' and the promotion of the unity of Russian lands. The chronicles contain significant material about the origin of the Eastern Slavs, their state power, and the political relationships of the Eastern Slavs among themselves and with other peoples and countries.
A characteristic feature of the chronicle is the chroniclers’ belief in intervention divine powers. New chronicles were usually compiled as compilations of previous chronicles and various materials ( historical stories, lives, messages, etc.) and consisted of records about contemporary events of the chronicler. Literary works were also used as sources in chronicles. Legends, epics, treaties, legislative acts, documents from princely and church archives were also woven by the chronicler into the fabric of the narrative.
By rewriting the materials included in the chronicle, he sought to create a single narrative, subordinating it historical concept, consistent with the interests of that political center, where he wrote (the courtyard of the prince, the office of the metropolitan, bishop, monastery, hut, etc.).
However, along with the official ideology, the chronicles reflected the views of their immediate compilers.
Chronicles testify to the high patriotic consciousness of the Russian people in the 11th-17th centuries.
Great importance was attached to the compilation of chronicles; they were consulted in political disputes and during diplomatic negotiations.
The skill of historical storytelling has reached high perfection in them.
At least 1,500 lists of chronicles have survived. Many works of ancient Russian literature have been preserved in them: “The Instruction” of Vladimir Monomakh, “The Tale of the Massacre of Mamayev”, “Walking across the Three Seas” by Afanasy Nikitin, etc.
Ancients chronicles XI-XII centuries preserved only in later lists. The oldest list of chronicles with a date is the short chronicler of the Patra of Constantinople. Nikephoros, supplemented by Russian articles up to 1278, contained in the Novgorod helmsman 1280.
The most famous of the early chronicles that have survived 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 12th century. Chronicle writing was carried out in the Kiev-Pechersk and Vydubitsky St. Michael's monasteries, as well as at the princely court. Galician-Volyn chronicle in the 12th 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 Kyiv 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 to 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 a large number drawings. Great development chronicles were written 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, and Moscow. The chronicles reflected ch. way of the event local significance(birth and death of princes, elections of mayors and thousand in Novgorod and Pskov, military campaigns, battles, etc.), church (installation and death of bishops, abbots of monasteries, construction of churches, etc.), crop failure and famine, epidemics, notable natural phenomena, etc. Events that go beyond local interests are poorly reflected in such chronicles. Novgorod chronicle of the XII-XV centuries. most fully represented by the Novgorod First Chronicle of the older and younger editions. The older, or earlier, version was preserved in the only Synodal parchment (haratein) list of the 13th-14th centuries; the younger version reached the lists of the 15th century.
In Pskov, chronicle writing was associated with mayors and State Chancellery at Trinity Cathedral.
In Tver, chronicle writing developed at the court of Tver princes and bishops. An idea of it is given by the Tverskoy collection and the Rogozhsky chronicler.
In Rostov, chronicle writing was carried out at the court of bishops, and the chronicles created in Rostov are reflected in a number of codes, including the Ermolin Chronicle of the 15th century. New phenomena in chronicles are noted in the 15th century, when Russian state with its center in Moscow.
The politics of Moscow leaders. princes was reflected in all-Russian chronicles. The Trinity Chronicle gives an idea of the first Moscow all-Russian code. XV century (disappeared in a fire in 1812) and the Simeonovskaya Chronicle in the list of the 16th century. The Trinity Chronicle ends in 1409. To compile it, various sources were involved: Novgorod, Tver, Pskov, Smolensk, etc.
The origin and political orientation of this chronicle are emphasized by the predominance of Moscow news and a generally favorable assessment of the activities of Moscow princes and metropolitans.
The all-Russian chronicle compilation, compiled in Smolensk in the 15th century, was the so-called: Chronicle of Abraham; Another collection is the Suzdal Chronicle (15th century). Chronicle collection based on rich Novgorod writing, "Sofia Temporary", appeared in Novgorod. A large chronicle appeared in Moscow in the 15th century. XVI centuries The Resurrection Chronicle, which ends in 1541, is especially famous (the main part of the chronicle was compiled in 1534-37). It includes many official records. The same official records were included in the extensive Lvov Chronicle, which included the “Chronicle of the beginning of the kingdom of the Tsar and Grand Duke Ivan Vasilyevich,” until 1560. At the court of Ivan the Terrible in the 1540-60s, the Front Chronicle was created, i.e., chronicle, including drawings corresponding to the text. The first 3 volumes of the Litsevoy vault are devoted to world history (compiled on the basis of the “Chronograph” and other works), the next 7 volumes are about Russian history from 1114 to 1567. The last volume of the Litsevoy vault, dedicated to the reign of Ivan the Terrible, was called the “Royal Book”.
The text of the Facial Vault is based on an earlier one - Nikon Chronicle, which represented a huge compilation of various chronicles, 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 Pechersky Monastery near Pskov.
In the 16th century New types of historical narration also appeared, already moving away from the chronicle form - “The Sedate Book of the Royal Genealogy” and “The History of the Kazan Kingdom”. In the 17th century There was a gradual withering away of the chronicle form of storytelling. At this time, local chronicles appeared, of which the most interesting are the Siberian Chronicles. The beginning of their compilation dates back to the 1st half. XVII century Of these, the Stroganov Chronicle and the Esipov Chronicle are the best known. In the 17th century Tobolsk son of boyar S.U. Remezov compiled "Siberian History". In the 17th century Chronicle news is included in the composition of power books and chronographs. The word “chronicle” continues to be used according to tradition even for such works that faintly resemble the Chronicles of earlier times. This is the New Chronicler, telling about the events of the XVI - AD. XVII centuries ( Polish-Swedish intervention And peasant war), and "A Chronicle of Many Mutinies". M.N. Tikhomirov. Orthodox worldview in the Russian chronicle tradition “Russian history amazes with its extraordinary consciousness and logical progression of phenomena,” wrote K.S. Aksakov more than 120 years ago. We often forget about this awareness, unwittingly blaspheming our ancestors, substituting their high spirituality for our misery. Meanwhile, history has brought to us numerous evidence of their harmonious worldview.
Among such evidence, chronicles are particularly distinguished by their historical completeness. In the development of Russian chronicles, it is customary to distinguish three periods: ancient, regional and all-Russian. Despite all the peculiarities of Russian chronicle traditions, be it “The Tale of Bygone Years” as edited by the Venerable Nestor the Chronicler, the Novgorod chronicles with their laconicism and dryness of language, or the Moscow chronicle collections, there is no doubt about the common ideological basis that determines their views. Orthodoxy gave the people a strong sense of their community historical fate even in the most difficult times of appanage strife and Tatar rule. The basis of Russian chronicles is the famous “Tale of Bygone Years” - “the Russian land began to eat, who began to reign first in Kyiv and where the Russian land began to eat from.” Having had more than one edition, the Tale formed the basis of various local chronicles. It has not been preserved as a separate monument, having come to us as part of later chronicle codes - the Laurentian (XIV century) and Ipatiev (XV century). The story is an all-Russian chronicle compiled in 1113 in Kyiv on the basis of chronicles of the 11th century. and other sources - presumably of Greek origin. St. Nestor the chronicler, holy ascetic of the Kiev Pechersk, finished 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, respectively, on October 27 and January 2, according to Art. Art. The “Tale” clearly shows the desire to give, if possible, comprehensive concepts about 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 moves on to the history of the Russian people. After the Babylonian Pandemonium, when the peoples were divided, the Slavs stood out among the Japheth tribe, and among the Slavic tribes - the Russian people. Like everything in the created world, the course of Russian history takes place according to the will of God, princes are instruments of His will, virtue is rewarded, sins are punished by the Lord: famine, pestilence, cowardice, invasion of foreigners. Everyday details do not concern the author of the chronicle. His thought soars above vain concerns, lovingly dwelling on the deeds of holy ascetics, the valor of Russian princes, and the struggle against foreigners and infidels. But all this attracts the chronicler’s attention not in its bare historical “givenness,” but as evidence of God’s care for Russia.
In this series, the message about the visit to the Russian land of St. ap. Andrew the First-Called, who predicted the greatness of Kyiv and the future flourishing of Orthodoxy in Russia. The factual accuracy of this story cannot be verified, but its inner meaning is undeniable.
Russian Orthodoxy and the Russian people acquire the “first-called” apostolic dignity and purity of faith, which is subsequently confirmed by the equal-to-the-apostles dignity of Saints Methodius and Cyril - the enlighteners of the Slavs, and the holy blessed prince Vladimir the Baptist. The message of the chronicle emphasizes the nature of the Baptism of Rus', tacitly presuming for it the corresponding religious duties, the duty of Orthodox Church obedience. The author notes the voluntary nature of accepting service. This is served by the famous story about the choice of faiths, when “Volodimer convened his bolyars and the elders of the city.” The chronicle does not cite any circumstances restricting freedom of choice. “If you want to test much,” the “Bolyars and Elders” tell Vladimir, “by sending, test everyone... the service and how he serves God.” The desire for a godly life, the desire to find the correct path to God is Vladimir’s only motivating motive. The story of the ambassadors who returned after the test of faith is extremely revealing. Muslims are rejected because “there is no joy in them, but sadness,” Catholics - because they “have no vision of beauty.” We are talking, of course, not about worldly “fun” - Muslims have no less of it than anyone else, and not about everyday “sadness”. We are talking about the living religious experience received by the ambassadors. They were looking for that joy about which the Psalmist speaks: “Hear the voice of my prayer, 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 in You.” .
This joy and joy of a godly life is quiet, familiar to every sincere Orthodox believer from touching personal experience that cannot be explained in words. And among Catholics, the ambassadors were struck not by the lack of material beauty - although in terms of beauty and splendor, Catholic worship cannot be compared with Orthodox worship. A healthy religious instinct unmistakably determined the inferiority of Catholicism, which cut itself off from the conciliar totality of the Church, from its grace-filled fullness. “Behold what is good or what is good, but let the brethren live together,” testifies Scripture. The absence of this beauty was felt by the well-meaning ambassadors. All the more striking for them was the contrast from their presence at the liturgy in the Cathedral of St. Sophia in Constantinople: “When we came to the Greeks, we now served our God.” The service amazed the Russians so much that they repeat in confusion: “And we don’t know whether we were in heaven or on earth - for such beauty does not exist on earth - only we know for sure that God dwells there with people... And not We can forget that beauty." Their hearts, seeking religious consolation, received it in unexpected fullness and irresistible authenticity. The outcome of the matter 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. Enough full picture The Laurentian Code gives the views of contemporaries on the course of Russian life. Here, for example, is a picture of the campaign of the Russian princes against the Polovtsians in 1184: “That same summer, God put in the hearts of the Russian princes, for all the Russian princes marched against the Polovtsians.” In the 70s of the 12th century. The pressure of the Polovtsians on the borders of the Russian principalities intensifies. The Russians are undertaking a series 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: Rus' comes face to face with a united strong enemy army. The Polovtsians, seeing their superiority, take fortunate circumstances as a sign of God's favor. “Behold, God is far away, there are Russian princes and their armies in our hands.” But God's Providence is not connected with considerations human wisdom: “ignorant” are the unreasonable infidels, “for they have neither courage nor thoughts against God,” the chronicler laments. In the battle that began, the Polovtsians “fleeed and persecuted the Holy Mother of God with the wrath of God.” The victory of the Russians is not the result of their own care: “The Lord brought great salvation to our princes and their wars over our enemies. The foreigners were defeated” with the help of God under the Protection of the Most Holy Theotokos, covering with His care the God-loving Russian army. And the Russians themselves are well aware of this: “And Vladimir said: Behold the day that the Lord has made, we will rejoice and be glad on it. For the Lord has delivered us from our enemies and subdued our enemies under our nose.” And the Russian troops returned home after the victory, “glorifying God and the Holy Mother of God, the speedy intercessor of the Christian race.” It is hardly possible to more fully and clearly express the view of Russian history as an area of all-encompassing action of God's Providence.
At the same time, the chronicler, as a church man, remained far from primitive fatalism. Acting in a decisive way in history, God’s Providence at the same time does not suppress or limit freedom personal choice, which underlies a person’s responsibility for his deeds and actions. Historical material, against the background of which the concept of the religious and moral conditionality of Russian life is affirmed, events associated with the changeable military happiness appear in the chronicles. On next year after a successful campaign against the Polovtsians, carried out by the united forces of the princes, he organized an unsuccessful independent raid Igor Svyatoslavich, Prince Novgorod-Seversky. The famous "Tale of Igor's Campaign" gives an exceptionally beautiful and lyrical description of this campaign. In the chronicle about the campaign of Igor Svyatoslavich, two stories have been preserved. One, more extensive and detailed, is in the Ipatiev Vault. The other, shorter one, is in Lavrentievsky. But even his concise narrative quite clearly reflects the chronicler’s view of the freedom of human will as a force that, along with the unthinkable Providence of God, determines the course of history. This time, “we would be defeated by the wrath of God,” which fell on the Russian troops “for our sin.” Realizing the failure of the campaign as a natural result of evading their religious duty, “sighing and weeping spread” among the Russian soldiers, who recalled, in the words of the chronicler, the words of the prophet Isaiah: “Lord, in sorrow we remembered Thee.”
Sincere repentance was soon accepted by the merciful God, and “in a few short days, Prince Igor ran away from the Polovtsians” - that is, from Polovtsian captivity - “for the Lord will not leave the righteous in the hands of sinners, for the eyes of the Lord are on those who fear Him (look), and His ears are in their prayer (they are obedient to their prayers)." “Behold, having committed a sin for our sake,” the chronicler sums up, “our sins and untruths have multiplied.”
God admonishes those who sin with punishments; those who are virtuous, aware of their duty and fulfilling it, He has mercy and protects. God does not force anyone: man determines his own destiny, the people themselves determine their history - this is how the views of the chronicle can be briefly summarized. One can only reverently marvel at the purity and freshness of the Orthodox worldview of the chroniclers and their heroes, looking at the world with childlike faith, about which the Lord said: “I praise Thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that Thou hast hidden this from the wise and prudent and revealed it to babes; , Father! for such was Your good pleasure" (Luke 10:21). Developing and complementing each other, Russian chroniclers sought to create a holistic and consistent picture of their native history. This desire was reflected in its entirety 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, code 1448 and other chronicles, more and more suitable for the name "all-Russian", despite the fact that they preserved local peculiarities, and were often written not in Moscow, represent, as it were, steps along which Russian self-consciousness ascended to the understanding of the unity of the religious destiny of the people. Mid-16th century became the era of the greatest church-state triumph in Rus'. The original Russian lands were brought together, the Kazan and Astrakhan kingdoms were annexed, the path 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 churchliness and internal religious concentration. It is not surprising, therefore, that it was during the reign of John IV Vasilyevich that a grandiose chronicle collection was created, reflecting a new understanding of Russian fate and its hidden meaning.
He described the entire history of mankind in the form of a succession of great kingdoms. In accordance with the importance attached to the completion of such an important national identity work, the chronicle received the most luxurious design. Its 10 volumes were written in better paper, specially purchased from royal reserves in France. The text was decorated with 15,000 skillfully executed miniatures depicting history “in faces”, for which the collection received the name “Facial Vault”. The last, tenth, volume of the collection was dedicated to the reign of Ivan Vasilyevich, covering events from 1535 to 1567. When this last volume (known in science as the “Synodal list”, since it belonged to the library Holy Synod) was basically ready, it underwent significant editorial changes. 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 amendments. It seems that the editor of the “Facebook Vault” was John IV himself, who consciously and purposefully worked to complete the “Russian ideology.”
Another chronicle collection, which was supposed to be on par with " Facial vault"to create a coherent concept of Russian life, the Degree Book became the basis of this enormous work was the idea that all Russian history from the time of the Baptism of Rus' 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 extensive 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 nations and kingdoms, chosen by Him Himself for reasons unknown to the human mind reasons. 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 accepted by Rome, the capital of the world during early Christianity. Having fallen into the heresy of Latinism, he was removed from the ministry successively given to Orthodox Constantinople - the “second Rome” of the Middle Ages. Having encroached on the purity of the preserved faith due to selfish political calculations, agreeing to a union with Catholic heretics (at the Council of Florence in 1439), Byzantium lost the gift of service, which was transferred to the “third Rome” of recent times - to Moscow, the capital of the Russian Orthodox Kingdom. The Russian people are determined to preserve the truths of Orthodoxy “until the end of the age” - the second and glorious Coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. This is the meaning of his existence, all his aspirations and strengths must be subordinated to this;
- 2. The service assumed by the Russian people requires a corresponding organization of the Church, society and state. God-established form of existence Orthodox people is autocracy. The King is God's Anointed. He is not limited in his autocratic power by anything other than fulfilling the duties of a common service to all. The Gospel is the “constitution” of autocracy. The Orthodox Tsar is the personification of the chosenness and God-bearing nature of the entire people, its prayer chairman and guardian angel.
In the Department of Manuscripts of the Russian National Library, along with other most valuable manuscripts, there is kept a chronicle called Lavrentievskaya, named after the man who copied it in 1377. “I am (I am) a bad, unworthy and sinful servant of God, Lavrentiy (monk),” we read on the last page.
This book is written in “ charters", or " veal“, - that’s what they called in Rus' parchment: specially treated calf leather. The chronicle, apparently, was read a lot: its pages are worn out, in many places there are traces of wax drops from candles, in some places the beautiful, even lines that at the beginning of the book ran across the entire page, then divided into two columns, have been erased. This book has seen a lot in its six hundred years of existence.
The Manuscript Department of the Library of the Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg houses 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 14th century. This is a large book, heavily bound from two wooden boards covered with darkened leather. Five copper “bugs” decorate the binding. The entire book is handwritten in four different handwritings, meaning four scribes worked on it. The book is written in two columns in black ink with cinnabar (bright red) capital letters. The second page of the book, on which the text begins, is especially beautiful. It is all written in cinnabar, as if it were on fire. Capital letters, on the contrary, are written in black ink. The scribes worked hard to create this book. They set to work with reverence. “Russian Chronicler and God make peace. Good Father,” the scribe wrote before the text.
The oldest list of the Russian chronicle was made on parchment in the 14th century. This Synodal list Novgorod First Chronicle. It can be seen in Historical Museum in Moscow. It belonged to the Moscow Synodal Library, hence its name.
It's 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 Konigsberg (now Kaliningrad). Now this chronicle is kept in the Library of the Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg. It was written in semi-character at the end of the 15th century, apparently in Smolensk. Half-rest - a handwriting that is faster and simpler than the solemn and slow charter, but also very beautiful.
Radzivilov Chronicle decorates 617 miniatures! 617 color drawings - bright, cheerful colors - illustrate what is described on the pages. Here you can see troops marching with banners flying, battles, and sieges of cities. Here the princes are depicted seated on “tables” - the tables that served as the throne actually resemble today’s small tables. And before the prince stand ambassadors with scrolls of speeches in their hands. The fortifications of Russian cities, bridges, towers, walls with “fences”, “cuts”, that is, dungeons, “vezhi” - nomadic tents - all this can be clearly imagined from the slightly naive drawings of the Radzivilov Chronicle. And what can we say about weapons and armor - they are depicted here in abundance. No wonder one researcher called these miniatures “windows into a vanished world.” The ratio of drawings and sheets, drawings and text, text and fields is very important. Everything is done with great taste. After all, every handwritten book is a work of art, and not just a monument to writing.
These are the most ancient lists of Russian chronicles. They are called “lists” because they were copied from more ancient chronicles that have not reached us.
How the chronicles were written
The text of any chronicle consists of weather (compiled by year) records. Each entry begins: “In the summer of such and such,” and is followed by a message about what happened in this “summer,” that is, the year. (The years were counted “from the creation of the world,” and to obtain a date according to modern chronology, one 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 (written ) there was a church of the Holy Mother of God in Suzdal and it was paved with various types of marble”, “In the summer of 6398 (1390) there was a pestilence in Pskov, as if (how) there had never been such a thing; where they dug up one, put five and ten there,” “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 occurred in one year, the chronicler connected them with the words: “in the same summer” or “of the same summer.”
Entries related to the same year are called an article. The articles were in a row, highlighted only by a red line. The chronicler gave titles to only some of them. These are the stories about Alexander Nevsky, Prince Dovmont, about 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, this is not true.
The chronicles that have reached us are very complex works of Russian history. The chroniclers were publicists and historians. They were worried not only about contemporary events, but also about the fate of their homeland in the past. They made weather records of what happened during their lifetimes, and added to the records of previous chroniclers with new reports that they found in other sources. They inserted these additions under the corresponding years. As a result of all the additions, insertions and use by the chronicler of the chronicles of his predecessors, the result was “ 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 son - Andrei Bogolyubsky. Each of these princes had their own chronicler. The chronicler of Izyaslav Mstislavich admired the intelligence and military cunning of his prince. The chronicler of Yuri described in detail how Yuri, being unable to pass down the Dnieper past Kyiv, sent his boats across Lake Dolobskoe. Finally, the chronicle of Andrei Bogolyubsky describes Andrei’s valor in battle.
After the death of all participants in the events of 1151, their chronicles came to the chronicler of the new Kyiv prince. He combined their news in his code. The result was a vivid and very complete story.
But how did researchers manage to identify more ancient vaults from later chronicles?
This was helped by the work method of the chroniclers themselves. Our ancient historians treated the records of their predecessors with great respect, since they saw in them a document, a living testimony of “what happened before.” Therefore, they did not alter the text of the chronicles they received, but only selected the news that interested them.
Thanks to the careful attitude towards the work of predecessors, the news of the 11th-14th centuries was preserved almost unchanged even in relatively later chronicles. This allows them to be highlighted.
Very often, chroniclers, like real scientists, indicated where they received the news from. “When I came to Ladoga, the Ladoga residents told me...”, “I heard this from a self-witness,” they wrote. Moving from one written source to another, they noted: “And this is from another chronicler” or: “And this is from another, old one,” that is, copied from another, old chronicle. There are many such interesting postscripts. The Pskov chronicler, for example, makes a note in cinnabar against the place where he talks about the Slavs’ campaign against the Greeks: “This is written about in the miracles of Stephen of Sourozh.”
Since its inception, chronicles have not been personal matter individual chroniclers who, in the silence of their cells, in solitude and silence, recorded the events of their time.
Chroniclers were always in the thick of things. They sat in the boyar council and attended the meeting. They fought “beside the stirrup” of their prince, accompanied him on campaigns, and were eyewitnesses and participants in sieges of cities. Our ancient historians carried out embassy assignments and monitored the construction of city fortifications and temples. They always lived the social life of their time and most often occupied high position in society.
Princes and even princesses, princely warriors, boyars, bishops, and abbots took part in the chronicle writing. But among them there were also simple monks and priests of city parish churches.
Chronicle writing was caused by social necessity and met social demands. It was carried out at the behest of one or another prince, or bishop, or mayor. It reflected the political interests of equal centers - the principality of cities. They captured the intense struggle between different social groups. The chronicle has never been dispassionate. She testified to merits and virtues, she accused of violations of rights and legality.
Daniil Galitsky turns to the chronicle to testify to the betrayal of the “flattering” boyars, who “called Daniel a prince; and they themselves held the whole land.” At the critical moment of the struggle, Daniil’s “printer” (custodian of the seal) went to “cover up the robberies of the wicked boyars.” A few years later, Daniil’s son Mstislav ordered the treason of the inhabitants of Berestya (Brest) to be entered into the chronicle, “and I wrote down their sedition in the chronicle,” writes the chronicler. The entire collection of Daniil Galitsky and his immediate successors is a story about sedition and “many rebellions” of “crafty boyars” and about the valor of the Galician princes.
Things were different in Novgorod. The boyar party won there. Read the entry in the Novgorod First Chronicle about the expulsion of Vsevolod Mstislavich in 1136. You will be convinced that this is a real indictment against the prince. But this is only one article from the collection. After the events of 1136, the entire chronicle, which had previously been conducted under the auspices of Vsevolod and his father Mstislav the Great, was revised.
The previous name of the chronicle, “Russian temporary book,” was changed into “Sofia temporary book”: the chronicle was kept at St. Sophia Cathedral, the main public building of Novgorod. Among some additions, a note was made: “First the Novgorod volost, and then the Kiev volost.” With the antiquity of the Novgorod “volost” (the word “volost” meant both “region” and “power”), the chronicler substantiated the independence of Novgorod from Kyiv, its right to elect and expel princes at will.
The political idea of each code was expressed in its own way. It is expressed very clearly in the vault of the year 1200 by Abbot Moses of the Vydubitsky Monastery. The code was compiled in connection with the celebration of the completion of a grandiose engineering structure at that time - a stone wall to protect the mountain near the Vydubitsky Monastery from erosion by the waters of the Dnieper. You might be interested to read the details.
The wall was erected at the expense of Rurik Rostislavich, the Grand Duke of Kyiv, who had “an insatiable love for the building” (for creation). The prince found “an artist suitable for such a task”, “not a simple master”, Pyotr Milonega. When the wall was “completed,” Rurik and his whole family came to the monastery. After praying “for the acceptance of his work,” he created “no small feast” and “fed the abbots and every church rank.” At this celebration, Abbot Moses gave an inspired speech. “Wonderfully today our eyes see,” he said. “For many who lived before us wanted to see what we see, but did not see, and were not worthy to hear.” Somewhat self-deprecatingly, according to the custom of that time, the abbot turned to the prince: “Accept our rudeness as a gift of words to praise the virtue of your reign.” He further said about the prince that his “autocratic power” shines “more (more) than the stars of heaven,” it is “known not only in the Russian ends, but also by those in the sea far away, for the glory of his Christ-loving deeds has spread throughout the whole earth.” “Standing not on the shore, but on the wall of your creation, I sing to you a song of victory,” exclaims the abbot. He calls the construction of the wall a “new miracle” and says that the “Kyians,” 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 they have reached the sky” (that is, that they are soaring in the air).
The abbot's speech is an example of the high florid, that is, oratorical, 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 Miloneg.
Chronicles were given great importance. Therefore, the compilation of each new code was associated with important event in the public life of that time: with the accession to the throne of the prince, the consecration of the cathedral, the establishment of the episcopal see.
The chronicle was official document . It was referred to during various types of negotiations. For example, the Novgorodians, concluding a “row”, that is, an agreement, with the new prince, reminded him of “antiquity and duties” (customs), about the “Yaroslavl charters” and their rights recorded in the Novgorod chronicles. Russian princes, going to the Horde, took chronicles with them and used them to justify their demands and resolve disputes. Zvenigorod Prince Yuri, the son of Dmitry Donskoy, proved his rights to reign in Moscow “with chroniclers and old lists and the spiritual (testament) of his father.” People who could “speak” from the chronicles, that is, knew their contents well, were highly valued.
The chroniclers themselves understood that they were compiling a document that was supposed to preserve in the memory of descendants what they witnessed. “And this will not be forgotten in last birth” (in subsequent generations), “Let us be left behind by those who exist, so that 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 diplomas(contractual, spiritual, that is, wills).
Certificates always impress with their authenticity. In addition, they reveal details of everyday life, and sometimes the spiritual world of the people of Ancient Rus'.
Such, for example, is the charter of the Volyn prince Vladimir Vasilkovich (nephew of Daniil Galitsky). This is a will. It was written by a terminally ill man who understood that his end was near. The will concerned the prince's wife and his stepdaughter. There was a custom in Rus': after the death of her husband, the princess was tonsured into a monastery.
The letter begins like this: “Behold (I) Prince Vladimir, son Vasilkov, grandson Romanov, am writing a letter.” The following lists the cities and villages that he gave to the princess “according to his belly” (that is, after life: “belly” meant “life”). At the end, the prince writes: “If she wants to go to the monastery, let her go, if she doesn’t want to go, as long as she likes. I can’t stand up to see what someone will do to my stomach.” Vladimir appointed a guardian for his stepdaughter, but ordered him “not to forcefully give her in marriage to anyone.”
Chroniclers inserted into the vaults works of various genres - teachings, sermons, lives of saints, historical stories. Thanks to the use of diverse material, the chronicle became a huge encyclopedia, including information about the life and culture of Rus' at that time. “If you want to know everything, read the chronicler of the old Rostov,” wrote the Suzdal bishop Simon in a once widely known work of the early 13th century - in the “Kievo-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 extremely grateful to the people who have preserved information about the past for us. Everything we can learn about them is extremely valuable 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 having forgotten themselves, they talk about themselves in the first person. “It happened to me, a sinner, to be right there,” they write. “I heard many words, hedgehog (which) I wrote down in this chronicle.” Sometimes chroniclers add information about their lives: “That same summer they made me 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 chronicler’s references to himself in the first person, we learn whether he was present at the event described or heard about what happened from the lips of “self-witnesses”; 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. . So he writes how in Novgorod there were guards at the city gates, “and others on the other side,” and we understand that this is written by a resident of the Sofia side, where there was a “city,” that is, the Detinets, the Kremlin, and the right, Trade 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 “knocked,” and we can imagine that he was somewhere on the shore at that time.
It happens that the chronicler reveals himself in a rude vernacular. “And he lied,” writes a Pskovite about one prince.
The chronicler constantly, without even mentioning himself, still seems to be invisibly present on the pages of his narrative and forces us to look through his eyes at what was happening. The voice of the chronicler sounds especially clearly in lyrical digressions: “Oh woe, brothers!” or: “Who will not marvel at the one who does not cry!” Sometimes our ancient historians conveyed their attitude to events in generalized forms of folk wisdom - in proverbs or sayings. Thus, the Novgorodian chronicler, speaking about how one of the mayors was removed from his post, adds: “Whoever digs a hole under another will fall into it himself.”
The chronicler is not only a storyteller, he is also a judge. He judges by very high moral standards. He is constantly concerned about questions of good and evil. He is sometimes happy, sometimes indignant, praising some and blaming others.
The subsequent “compiler” combines the contradictory points of view of his predecessors. The presentation becomes fuller, more versatile, and 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 Gregory. This image already lived in the minds of Russian people in ancient times. Thus, in the Moscow Chronicle under 1409, the chronicler recalls the “initial chronicler of Kyiv,” who “shows without hesitation” all the “temporary riches” of the earth (that is, all the vanity of the earth) and “without anger” describes “everything good and bad.”
Not only chroniclers, but also simple scribes worked on chronicles.
If you look at an ancient Russian miniature depicting a scribe, you will see that he is sitting on “ chair” with a footstool 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, stands an inkwell and a sandbox. In those days, wet ink was sprinkled with sand. Right there on the table there is a pen, a ruler, a knife for mending feathers and cleaning up faulty places. There is a book on the stand from which he is copying.
The work of a scribe required a lot of stress and attention. Scribes often worked from dawn to dark. They were hampered by fatigue, illness, hunger and the desire to sleep. To distract themselves a little, they wrote notes 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 is afraid that he will make a mistake. And then you come across a “dashing pen, you can’t help but write with it.” Under the influence of hunger, the scribe made mistakes: instead of the word “abyss” he wrote “bread”, instead of “font” - “jelly”.
It is not surprising that the scribe, having completed last page, conveys his joy with a postscript: “Like the hare is glad, he escaped the snare, so is the scribe happy, having completed the last page.”
Monk Lawrence made a long and very figurative note after finishing his work. In this postscript one can feel the joy of accomplishing a great and important deed: “The merchant rejoices when he has made the purchase, and the helmsman rejoices in the calm, and the wanderer has come to his fatherland; The book writer rejoices in the same way when he reaches the end of his books. Likewise, I am a bad, unworthy and sinful servant of God Lavrentiy... And now, gentlemen, fathers and brothers, what (if) where he described or copied, or did not finish writing, honor (read), correcting God, sharing (for God’s sake), and not damn it, it’s too old (since) the books are dilapidated, but the mind is young, it hasn’t reached.”
The oldest Russian chronicle that has come down to us is called “The Tale of Bygone Years”. He brings his account up to the second decade of the 12th century, but it has reached us only in copies of the 14th and subsequent centuries. The composition of the “Tale of Bygone Years” dates back to the 11th - early 12th centuries, to the time when Old Russian state with the center in Kyiv it was relatively united. That is why the authors of “The Tale” had such a wide coverage of events. They were interested in issues that were important for all of Rus' as a whole. They were acutely 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 became isolated into independent principalities. Each principality has its own political and economic interests. They are beginning to compete with Kyiv. Every capital city strives to imitate the “mother of Russian cities.” The achievements of art, architecture and literature in Kyiv turn out to be a model for regional centers. The culture of Kyiv, spreading to all regions of Rus' in the 12th century, fell on prepared soil. Each region previously 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 folk culture Each region grew diverse ancient Russian art, united both thanks to the Slavic community and thanks to general pattern- Kyiv, but everywhere is different, original, unlike its neighbor.
In connection with the isolation of the Russian principalities, chronicles are also expanding. It develops in 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. Each 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 cathedral, without your monastery. In the same way, it was impossible to live without one’s chronicle.
The isolation of lands affected the nature of chronicle writing. The chronicle becomes narrower in the scope of events, in the outlook of the chroniclers. It closes itself within the framework of its political center. But even during this period feudal fragmentation All-Russian unity was not forgotten. In Kyiv they were interested in the events that took place in Novgorod. Novgorodians looked closely at what was happening in Vladimir and Rostov. Vladimir residents were worried about the fate of Pereyaslavl Russky. And of course, all regions turned to Kyiv.
This explains that in the Ipatiev Chronicle, that is, in the South Russian code, we read about events that took place in Novgorod, Vladimir, Ryazan, etc. In the northeastern arch - the Laurentian Chronicle - it tells about what happened in Kyiv, Pereyaslavl Russian, Chernigov, Novgorod-Seversky and other principalities.
The Novgorod and Galician-Volyn chronicles are more confined to the narrow confines of their land than others, but even there we will find news about all-Russian events.
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 and artistic presentation was in the 12th century. Kyiv Chronicle, included in the Ipatiev list. She led a sequential account of events from 1118 to 1200. This presentation was preceded by The Tale of Bygone Years.
The Kyiv Chronicle is a princely chronicle. There are many stories in it, in which the main actor there was one prince or another.
Before us are stories about princely crimes, about breaking oaths, about the destruction of the possessions of warring princes, about the despair of the inhabitants, about the destruction of enormous artistic and cultural values. Reading the Kyiv Chronicle, we seem to hear the sounds of trumpets and tambourines, the crack of breaking spears, and see clouds of dust hiding both horsemen and foot soldiers. But general meaning all these full of movement, intricate stories are 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, “with all their hearts they wish it well.” In this way, the chronicle ideal of the prince is created, which corresponds to the people's ideals.
On the other hand, in the Kyiv Chronicle there is an angry condemnation of order breakers, oathbreakers, and princes who begin needless bloodshed.
Chronicle writing in Novgorod the Great began in the 11th century, but finally took shape in the 12th century. Initially, as in Kyiv, it was a princely chronicle. He did a lot for Novgorod Chronicle son of Vladimir Monomakh Mstislav the Great. 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. The chronicle was transferred to the court of the Novgorod ruler, that is, the archbishop. It was held at the Hagia Sophia and in some city churches. But this did not make it at all ecclesiastical.
The Novgorod Chronicle has all its roots in the people. It is rude, figurative, sprinkled with proverbs and even in its writing retains the characteristic “clack” sound.
Most of the story is told in the form of short dialogues, in which there is not a single extra word. Here is a short story about the dispute between Prince Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich, the son of Vsevolod the Big Nest, and the Novgorodians because the prince wanted to remove the Novgorod mayor Tverdislav, whom he disliked. This dispute took place on the veche square in Novgorod in 1218.
“Prince Svyatoslav sent his thousand to the assembly, speaking (saying): “I can’t be with Tverdislav and I’m taking away the mayorship from him.” The Novgorodians asked: “Is it his fault?” He said: “Without guilt.” Speech Tverdislav: “I am glad that I am not guilty; and you, brothers, are in the posadnichestvo and in the princes” (that is, Novgorodians have the right to give and remove posadnichestvo, invite and expel princes). The Novgorodians answered: “Prince, he has no wife, you kissed the cross for 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 mayor; but we won’t go into that” (otherwise we won’t agree to that). And there will be peace.”
This is how the Novgorodians briefly and firmly defended their mayor. The formula “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 veche unrest, changes of princes, and the construction of churches. He is interested in all the little things in life hometown: weather, crop shortages, fires, prices for bread and turnips. The Novgorodian chronicler even talks about the fight against the Germans and Swedes in a businesslike, brief, without unnecessary words, without any embellishment.
The Novgorod chronicle can be compared with Novgorod architecture, simple and harsh, and with painting - lush and bright.
In the 12th century, chronicle writing began in the northeast - in Rostov and Vladimir. This chronicle was included in the codex 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 Russky, the patrimony of Yuri Dolgoruky.
The Vladimir chronicle was written at the court of the bishop at the Assumption Cathedral, built by Andrei Bogolyubsky. This left its mark on him. It contains a lot of teachings and religious reflections. The heroes say long prayers, but rarely communicate with each other alive and brief conversations, of which there are so many in the Kyiv and especially in the Novgorod Chronicle. The Vladimir Chronicle is rather dry and at the same time verbose.
But in the Vladimir chronicles, the idea of the need to gather the Russian land in one center was heard more powerfully than anywhere else. For the Vladimir chronicler, this center, of course, was Vladimir. And he persistently pursues the idea of the primacy 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. For the first time in the history of Rus', Prince Vsevolod the Big Nest of Vladimir was awarded the title of Grand Duke. He becomes the first among other princes.
The chronicler portrays the Vladimir prince not so much as a brave warrior, but as a builder, a zealous owner, a strict and fair judge, and a kind family man. The Vladimir chronicle is becoming more and more solemn, just as the Vladimir cathedrals are solemn, but it lacks the high artistic skill that the Vladimir architects achieved.
Under the year 1237, in the Ipatiev Chronicle, the words burn like cinnabar: “The Battle of Batyevo.” In other chronicles it is also highlighted: “Batu’s army.” After Tatar invasion Chronicle writing stopped 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 freeze.
The main theme of Russian chronicles of the 13th century is the horrors of the Tatar invasion and the subsequent yoke. Against the background of rather meager records, the story about Alexander Nevsky, written by a southern Russian chronicler in the traditions of Kyiv chronicles, stands out.
The Vladimir Grand Ducal Chronicle goes to Rostov, which 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 Vasilko of Rostov, who died in the battle with the Tatars on the City River. She 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 Grand Duchess”(that is, Princess Maria). She “honored Prince Alexander with love.” Maria was present at 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 the Chernetsy and into the schema. Her death is described in the chronicle in the way that the death of only prominent princes was usually described: “That same summer (1271) there was a sign in the sun, as if all of him would perish before lunch and the pack would be filled (again). (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 (when) the liturgy is sung throughout the city. And he will betray the soul quietly and easily, serenely. Hearing all the people of the city of Rostov her repose and all the people flocked to the monastery of the Holy Savior, Bishop Ignatius and the abbots, and the priests, and the clergy, sang the usual chants over her and buried 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 of Chernigov was compiled in Rostov. She built a church “in his name” in Rostov 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 homeland. It tells about the martyrdom of Russian princes, steadfast in the fight against the enemy. This is how Vasilek of Rostov, Mikhail of Chernigov, and the Ryazan prince Roman were bred. After a description of his fierce 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 for the Russian princes: through martyrdom he acquired the kingdom of heaven together “with his relative Mikhail of Chernigov.”
In the Ryazan chronicle of the time of the Tatar invasion, events are viewed from a different angle. It accuses the princes of being the culprits of the misfortunes of the Tatar devastation. The accusation primarily concerns the Vladimir prince Yuri Vsevolodovich, who did not listen to the pleas of the Ryazan princes and 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 placed bewilderment and thunder and fear and trembling in 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 for these sins the Russian people are suffering God’s execution.
At the end of the 13th - beginning of the 14th century, chronicles developed in cities that, having advanced at this time, began to challenge each other for the great reign.
They continue the idea of the Vladimir chronicler about the supremacy of his principality in the Russian land. Such cities were Nizhny Novgorod, Tver and Moscow. Their vaults differ in width. They connect the chronicle material different areas and strive to become all-Russian.
Nizhny Novgorod became a capital city in the first quarter of the 14th century under the Grand Duke Konstantin Vasilyevich, who “honestly and menacingly harrowed (defended) his fatherland from princes stronger than himself,” that is, from the princes of Moscow. Under his son, Grand Duke of Suzdal-Nizhny Novgorod Dmitry Konstantinovich, the second archbishopric in Rus' was established in Nizhny Novgorod. Before this, only the Bishop of Novgorod had the rank of archbishop. The archbishop was subordinate in ecclesiastical terms directly to the Greek, that is, the Byzantine patriarch, while the bishops were subordinate to the Metropolitan of All Rus', who at that time already lived 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 should not depend on Moscow. In connection with the establishment of the archbishopric, a chronicle was compiled, which is called the Laurentian chronicle. Lavrenty, a monk of the Annunciation Monastery in Nizhny Novgorod, compiled it for Archbishop Dionysius.
The Chronicle of Lawrence devoted great attention founder of Nizhny Novgorod Yuri Vsevolodovich, Prince of Vladimir, who died in the battle with the Tatars on the City River. The Laurentian Chronicle is an invaluable contribution of Nizhny Novgorod to Russian culture. Thanks to Lavrenty, we have not only the oldest copy of the “Tale of Bygone Years,” but also the only copy of “Teachings of Vladimir Monomakh to Children.”
In Tver, the chronicle was kept from the 13th to the 15th centuries and is most fully preserved in the Tver collection, the Rogozh chronicler and the Simeonovskaya chronicle. Scientists associate the beginning of the chronicle with the name of the Tver bishop Simeon, under whom the “great cathedral church” of the Savior was built in 1285. In 1305, Grand Duke Mikhail Yaroslavich Tverskoy laid the foundation for the grand ducal chronicle in Tver.
The Tver Chronicle contains many records about the construction of churches, fires and civil wars. 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 the Tver Chronicle a colorful story about the uprising in Tver against the Tatars.
Initial chronicle 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 Moscow chroniclers were short and dry. They concerned the construction and painting of churches - a lot of construction was going on in Moscow at that time. They reported about fires, about illnesses, and finally about the family affairs of the Grand Dukes of Moscow. However, gradually - this began after the Battle of Kulikovo - the chronicle of Moscow leaves the narrow framework of its principality.
Due to 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 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 included news from the chronicles 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 ideological preparation for this unification.
The history of chronicles in Rus' goes back to the distant past. It is known that writing arose before the 10th century. The texts were written, as a rule, by representatives of the clergy. It is thanks to ancient writings that we know the history of Rus'. But what was the name of the first Russian chronicle? Where did it all start? Why is it of great historical significance?
What was the name of the first Russian chronicle?
Everyone should know the answer to this question. The first Russian chronicle was called “The Tale of Bygone Years.” It was written in 1110-1118 in Kyiv. Linguistic scientist Shakhmatov revealed that she had predecessors. However, this is still the first Russian chronicle. It is called confirmed, reliable.
The story describes a chronicle of events that occurred over a certain period of time. It consisted of articles that described each past year.
Author
The monk described events from biblical times to 1117. The title of the first Russian chronicle is the first lines of the chronicle. 
History of creation
The chronicle had copies made after Nestor, which were able to survive to this day. They weren't very different from each other. The original itself was lost. According to Shchakhmatov, the chronicle was rewritten just a few years after its appearance. Big changes were made to it.
In the 14th century, the monk Lawrence rewrote the work of Nestor, and it is this copy that is considered the most ancient that has survived to our time.
There are several versions of where Nestor got the information for his chronicle. Since the chronology goes back to ancient times, and articles with dates appeared only after 852, many historians believe that the monk described the old period thanks to the legends of people and written sources in the monastery.
She corresponded often. Even Nestor himself rewrote the chronicle, making some changes.
The interesting thing is that in those days scripture was also a code of law.
The Tale of Bygone Years described everything: from exact events to biblical legends.
The purpose of the creation was to write a chronicle, record events, restore chronology in order to understand where the Russian people come from and how Rus' was formed.
Nestor wrote that the Slavs appeared a long time ago from the son of Noah. Noah had three in total. They divided three territories among themselves. One of them, Japheth, received the northwestern part.
Then there are articles about the princes, the East Slavic tribes that descended from the Noriks. It is here that Rurik and his brothers are mentioned. It is said about Rurik that he became the ruler of Rus' by founding Novgorod. This explains why there are so many supporters of the Norman theory of the origin of princes from the Rurikovichs, although there is no factual evidence. 
It tells about Yaroslav the Wise and many other people and their reign, about wars and other significant events that shaped the history of Rus' and made it what we know it now.
Meaning
"The Tale of Bygone Years" is of great importance today. This is one of the main historical sources, on which historians conduct research. Thanks to her, the chronology of that period has been restored.
Since the chronicle has an open genre, ranging from stories of epics to descriptions of wars and weather, one can understand a lot about both mentality and ordinary life Russians living at that time.
Christianity played a special role in the chronicle. All events are described through the prism of religion. Even the deliverance from idols and the adoption of Christianity are described as a period when people got rid of temptations and ignorance. A new religion- light for Rus'.
The most remarkable phenomenon of ancient Russian literature were chronicles. The first weather records date back to the 9th century, they were extracted from later sources of the 16th century. They are very brief: notes in one or two lines.
As a national phenomenon, chronicle writing appeared in the 11th century. People became chroniclers different ages, and not only monks. A very significant contribution to the restoration of the history of chronicle writing was made by such researchers as A.A. Shakhmatov (1864-1920) and A.N. Nasonov (1898 - 1965). The first major historical work was the Code, completed in 997. Its compilers described the events of the 9th-10th centuries, ancient legends. It even includes court epic poetry praising Olga, Svyatoslav, and especially Vladimir Svyatoslavovich, during whose reign this Code was created.
One of the figures of European scale must include the monk of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery Nestor, who by 1113 completed his work “The Tale of Bygone Years” and compiled an extensive historical introduction to it. Nestor knew Russian, Bulgarian and Greek literature very well, being a very educated man. He used in his work the earlier Codes of 997, 1073 and 1093, and the events of the turn of the 11th-12th centuries. covered as an eyewitness. This chronicle provided the most complete picture of early Russian history and was copied for 500 years. It must be borne in mind that the ancient Russian chronicles covered not only the history of Rus', but also the history of other peoples.
Chronicle writing was also carried out secular people. For example, Grand Duke Vladimir Monomakh. It was as part of the chronicle that such wonderful works of his as “Instruction to Children” (c. 1099; later supplemented, preserved in the list of 1377) have reached us. In particular, in the “Instructions” Vladimir Monomakh pursues the idea of the need to repel external enemies. There were 83 “paths” - campaigns in which he participated.
In the 12th century. the chronicles become very detailed, and since they are written by contemporaries, the class and political sympathies of the chroniclers are very clearly expressed in them. The social order of their patrons can be traced. Among the most prominent chroniclers who wrote after Nestor, one can single out the Kiev resident Peter Borislavich. The most mysterious author in the XII-XIII centuries. was Daniil Sharpener. It is believed that he owned two works - “The Word” and “Prayer”. Daniil Zatochnik was an excellent expert on Russian life, knew church literature well, and wrote in a bright and colorful literary language. He said the following about himself: “My tongue was like a scribbler’s cane and my lips were as friendly as the swiftness of a river. For this reason, I tried to write about the shackles of my heart and broke them with bitterness, as in ancient times they smashed babies against a stone.”
Separately, it is necessary to highlight the genre of “walking”, which describes the travel of our compatriots abroad. Firstly, these are the stories of pilgrims who carried out their “walks” to Palestine and Pargrad (Constantinople), but gradually descriptions of Western European states also began to appear. One of the first was a description of the journey of Daniel, the abbot of one of the Chernigov monasteries, who visited Palestine in 1104-1107, spending 16 months there and participating in the Crusader wars. The most outstanding work of this genre is “Walking across Three Seas” by the Tver merchant Afanasy Nikitin, compiled in the form of a diary. It describes many southern peoples, but mostly Indian residents. A. Nikitin’s “walk” lasting six years took place in the 70s. XV century
“Hagiographic” literature is very interesting, since in it, in addition to describing the life of canonized persons, it gave a true picture of life in monasteries. For example, cases of bribery for obtaining one or another church rank or place, etc. were described. Here we can highlight the Kiev-Pechersk Patericon, which is a collection of stories about the monks of this monastery.
The latest fashion trends of this year on the fashion portal "Lady-Glamour".
Worldwide famous work ancient Russian literature became “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”, the date of writing of which dates back to 1185. This poem was imitated by contemporaries, it was quoted by the Pskovites already at the beginning of the 14th century, and after the victory on the Kulikovo Field (1380) in imitation of the “Tale...” "Zadonshchina" was written. “The Word...” was created in connection with the campaign of the Seversk prince Igor against the Polovtsian khan Konchak. Igor, overwhelmed by ambitious plans, did not unite with the Grand Duke Vsevolod the Big Nest and was defeated. The idea of unification the day before Tatar-Mongol invasion runs through the entire work. And again, as in the epics, here we are talking about defense, and not about aggression and expansion.
From the second half of the 14th century. All higher value acquires Moscow chronicles. In 1392 and 1408 Moscow chronicles are created, which are of an all-Russian nature. And in the middle of the 15th century. “Chronograph” appears, representing, in fact, the first experience of writing world history by our ancestors, and in “Chronograph” an attempt was made to show the place and role of Ancient Rus' in the world historical process.
