We draw information about early Russian history from the chronicles. And what, in fact, do we know about them? To this day, researchers cannot come to a common opinion, both about their authorship and about their objectivity.
Who is the author?
For people who do not go deep into history, there is only one chronicler - Nestor, a monk of the Kiev-Pechersky Monastery. The consolidation of this status for him was facilitated by the canonization in the face of saints under the name Nestor the Chronicler. However, this monk as the author of the Tale of Bygone Years is mentioned only in one of its later (16th century) lists, and besides the Tale, there are many other chronicle texts created in different centuries and in different, far from each other. friend, locations.
Nestor alone could not have been torn apart in time and space to write them all. So, in any case, he is just one of the authors.
Who are the others? Monk Laurentius is listed as the creator of the Laurentian Chronicle, Troitskaya is attributed to the monk of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra Epiphanius the Wise. And in general, judging by the fact that almost all the chronicles were kept in monasteries, they owe their origin to the people of the Church.
However, the writing style of some texts gives rise to the search for authors in the mundane environment. For example, in the Kiev Chronicle, very little attention is paid to church issues, and the language is as close as possible to the folk: common vocabulary, the use of dialogues, proverbs, quotes, pictorial descriptions. The Galicia-Volyn Chronicle contains many special military words and is clearly aimed at expressing certain political ideas.
Promotional video:
Where is the original?
The fact that all the chronicles are known to us in lists (copies) and editions (editions) does not simplify the search for authors. You will not find in any collection of the world the "Tale of Bygone Years", written in the hand of Nestor at the turn of the XI-XII centuries. There is only the Laurentian list of the 14th century, the Ipatievsky list of the 15th century, Khlebnikovsky list of the 16th century, etc.
And Nestor himself was hardly the first author of the Tale.
According to the philologist and historian A. A. Shakhmatov, he only revised the Primary Code of 1093 by the Abbot of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery John and supplemented it with the texts of the Russian-Byzantine treaties and legends that have come down to him in oral tradition.
John, in turn, supplemented the code of the monk Nikon. And that version had its own predecessor - the most ancient vault of the mid-11th century. But no one can give one hundred percent guarantee that it is not based on another, more ancient, text.
This is the essence of the Russian tradition of chronicle writing. Each subsequent scribe uses old manuscripts, oral legends, songs, eyewitness stories and compiles a new, more complete from his point of view, collection of historical information. This is clearly seen in the “uneven” Kiev Chronicle, in which the abbot of the Vydubitsky monastery Moses melted down the texts of authors of very different levels of education and talent.
Why do the annals contradict each other?
The answer to this question flows smoothly from the previous one. Since there are a lot of chronicles, their lists and editions (according to some sources, about five thousand), their authors lived at different times and in different cities, did not possess modern methods of transmitting information and used the sources available to them, it was even unintentionally difficult to avoid some inaccuracies.
What can we say about the desire to "pull the blanket over yourself" and put in a favorable light this or that event, city, ruler …
Before that, we touched upon questions related to the history of the chronicles themselves, but there are many mysteries in their content.
Where did the Russian land come from?
The Tale of Bygone Years just begins with this question. However, even here there are reasons for interpretation and scientists still cannot come to a consensus.
On the one hand, it seems, it is quite clearly said: “And they went across the sea to the Varangians, to Russia. Chud, Slovenia, Krivichi and the whole of Russia said: “Our land is great and abundant, but there is no order in it. Come to reign and rule over us. " And three brothers were elected with their families, and took with them all of Russia, and came. And from those Varangians the Russian land was nicknamed."
This passage is based on the Norman theory of the origin of the state of Russia - from the Varangians.
But there is another fragment: “… from the same Slavs - and we, Russia … And the Slavic people and the Russian are one, from the Varangians they were nicknamed Rus, and before there were Slavs; although they were called glades, the speech was Slavic”, according to which it turns out that, although we got our name from the Varangians, we were a single people even before them. This - anti-Norman, or Slavic - hypothesis was adhered to by MV Lomonosov and VN Tatishchev.
To whom did Vladimir Monomakh write his "Instruction"?
"The Teaching of Vladimir Monomakh" is part of the "Tale of Bygone Years" and contains three parts: a lesson for children, an autobiographical story and a letter, the addressee of which is usually called the prince's brother, Oleg Svyatoslavovich. But why include personal correspondence in a historical document?
It should be noted that the name of Oleg is not mentioned anywhere in the letter, and the content of the text is of a penitential nature.
Perhaps by retelling this complex story with the brother who killed his son, Monomakh wanted to show a public example of humility and forgiveness, rhyming with the first part. But on the other hand, this text is included only in one of the Tale lists and was clearly not intended for a large number of eyes, so some scholars consider this a personal written confession, preparation for the Last Judgment.
Who wrote The Lay of Igor's Campaign and when?
Disputes about the origin of the Lay began immediately after it was discovered by Count A. I. Musin-Pushkin at the end of the 18th century. The text of this literary monument is so unusual and complex that its authorship was not attributed to anyone: Igor himself, Yaroslavna, Vladimir Igorevich and other princes or not princes; fans of this campaign and, conversely, those who condemned Igor's adventure; the name of the writer was "deciphered" and isolated from acrostics. So far - to no avail.
The same is with the time of writing. Did the events described coincide with the time when they were described? The historiographer B. A. Rybakov considered "The Word" to be almost a reportage from the scene, and B. I. Yatsenko postponed the date of its creation a dozen years further, since the text mentions events that were not known in the year of the campaign - 1185 th. There are also many intermediate versions.
Where is Kitezh-grad located?
The legend about Kitezh, "Russian Atlantis", has come down to us in the literary processing of the Old Believers - in a monument called "The Book of the Verb Chronicler". According to it, this city was built by Prince Georgy Vsevolodovich, and then, when attacked by Khan Batu, went under water. Most agree that this "earthly paradise" is hiding in Lake Svetloyar of the Nizhny Novgorod region, but some researchers move the desired point on the map closer to Suzdal (after the name of the former village of Kidekshi), then to Yaroslavl.