At the end of the fourteenth - at the beginning of the fifteenth century, chronicle writing developed very rapidly on the territory of modern Russia. Numerous codes date back to this time, the compilers of which were the smartest personalities of that period. The authors of these works collect, translate and edit existing chronicles, adding their own edits and thoughts.
According to tradition, each new book chronicle at the beginning contained information about the life of Kievan Rus. Often the authors referred to The Tale of Bygone Years or quoted some passages from it. Therefore, with each new collection, an uninterrupted chain of legends about the mother of Russian cities continued. Chroniclers turned their attention not only to golden-domed Kyiv, but also to others Suzdal, Ryazan, Novgorod, Moscow, Vladimir.
An important document that captured the life of the ancient world is the Laurentian Chronicle. It is named after Lawrence, the monk who, together with his assistants, wrote it in 1377. The place where the vault was created is considered to be as evidenced by the corresponding inscription on the pages of the chronicle. Thus, the first Russian chronicle is a copy of the previous lost code and contains data on events before 1305.
The Laurentian Chronicle begins with the words “The Tale of Bygone Years,” which glorifies the greatness of Rus'. Also included in the code is the “Teaching” of the Kyiv prince Vladimir Monomakh, who was famous for his wisdom and prudence. In it, the prince calls on his compatriots to stop strife, forget grievances and stand together for a just cause. Further, the Laurentian Chronicle sadly talks about the difficult struggle of the Russian people with the Mongol-Tatars, the painful death of its princes and the heroism of ordinary people.
This chronicle was written on the eve of the memorial. Therefore, it contains the aspirations of the people for victory over the invaders, a call for unity. Between the lines one can feel the aggravation of relations between the Golden Horde and Moscow. Therefore, we can safely say that this work was aimed at raising the patriotic spirit of the people.
The Laurentian Chronicle is a monument of writing. The date indicated by the author is 1377 according to the Old Russian calendar, calculated as 6885 from the creation of the world. For the most part, she paints the camp of things in Vladimir-Suzdal Rus' from 1164 to 1304. But it also contains news about the southern principalities of the country.
The ancient chronicle has always attracted the attention of historians, cultural experts and other scientists who are interested in antiquity. Of course, the original is not available to the general public - it is carefully stored in the archives of the Russian National Library in St. Petersburg. The carefully restored parchment is taken out several times a year for study and inspection.
Not so long ago the site named after. B. Yeltsin put up a digital scan of the chronicle so that anyone could see this important historical document. Each person can not only try to read the text in ancient Slavic, but also become familiar with its contents in modern Russian.
Laurentian Chronicle: textual analysis. Who corrected what and why?
Why do we turn specifically to the Laurentian Chronicle, and not to any other? The answer is simple: this chronicle (chronicle collection) is the earliest of all surviving chronicles known today. It contains a part that is traditionally considered even more ancient, recorded in the 11th–12th centuries. This part has been translated into modern Russian. It was published separately under the title The Tale of Bygone Years. They refer to it when they write about the history of Rus'. This chronicle most attracts historians from different eras. Most of all has been written about her. And, undoubtedly, more will be written. But with all this, there is one significant drawback: when studying the chronicle, most often they use not the original, but the text of the Old Russian language already translated into a printed version with a breakdown of sentences, words by meaning and the installation of punctuation marks. In this case, the printed version differs somewhat from the original chronicle. Here it is proposed to conduct a textual analysis of a copy of the electronic version of the chronicle, which is significantly closer to the original.
First, a few words about the chronicle itself. What do we know about the Laurentian Chronicle today? The fact that it was rewritten, according to the entry on page 172, by a monk
Lawrence in 1377 in Suzdal at the direction of the Suzdal prince Dmitry Konstantinovich and with the blessing of Bishop Dionysius of Vladimir. Although there are assumptions about the writing of the chronicle under the leadership of Lawrence in the Nizhny Novgorod Pechersk Monastery. The basis for such conclusions was the similarity of the Laurentian Chronicle with the chronicle of the Pechersk chronicler, created in the same Nizhny Novgorod, in separate parts. It is also assumed that two different handwritings of the Laurentian Chronicle indicate two monastic scribes.
We also know that the first date from which the chronicle became known is considered to be 1765. Then a copy was made from it at the Novgorod Seminary and sent to Moscow. Until this moment, the chronicle, as it turned out, was kept in the archives of the Novgorod St. Sophia Cathedral. The reason for the interest in the chronicle, I think, was the public speech of the German historian A.L. Schlözer (1735–1809) a year earlier. In order to study our history, Schlözer lived in Russia for six years from 1761 to 1767. Already in 1768, a book appeared in Germany under his name: “An experience in the analysis of Russian chronicles (concerning Nestor and Russian history).” As the name implies, Schlözer became acquainted with the Laurentian Chronicle in the period before 1765. In his conclusions, he proceeded from the positions of two other German historians G.Z. Bayer (16941738) and G.F. Miller (1705–1783). Both worked at the Imperial St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences and Arts, where they were invited after the opening of the Academy in 1724. Both were actively engaged in research into the question of the beginning of Russian statehood. The first, in 1735, published an article “About the Varangians.” The second one came out in 1749 with a dissertation “On the origin of the name and people of Russia.” Both referred to Nestor's Chronicle, as the Tale of Bygone Years was then called. An article from the chronicle about the calling of the Varangians under their pen becomes the main evidence of the alleged inability of the Russian people to be independent. The main postulate: the savagery of the Russian barbarians continued until the arrival of the Germanic Varangians, led by the Swedish (and the Swedes are one of the Germanic tribes) Prince Rurik and his brothers at the invitation of the Novgorodians themselves.
Since then, all three of these German historians of the 18th century. They are called the founders of the Norman theory of the origin of Russian statehood. Although not everything is so simple. For example, the same Schlözer was extremely critical of the legend of the Varangians.
August Schlözer based his conclusions on the basis of comparative analysis. According to his observations, the first pages of many Russian temporary books have been torn out. The alteration of chronicles was carried out quite recently during the time of Tatishchev, in the middle of the 18th century. Moreover, the scribes dared to change even the titles. But the real revolution in temporary books took place around the 16th century. Then, not only in Russia, but also in Bohemia, Poland, and Prussia, they began to work passionately to “fill the void in their ancient histories with nonsense, often contrary to human reason” 123. At the same time, a stupid fashion began in Germany, writes the German Schlözer, to bring their noble families out of Italy. Chronicles were rewritten to suit new trends. Degree and Rank books appeared everywhere. They contain princes, boyars, dukes, etc. arranged according to degrees of nobility and ranks. This division was mostly conditional and subjective. Things reached the point of complete absurdity. Military discipline was violated in the army. Subordinates refused to follow the orders of less noble superiors. Then the Class books began to be burned. But in some places in distant monasteries they have been preserved, and now they are presented to the public as historical evidence.
It’s funny to read in the Russian Degree Book, Schlötser further writes, that Rurik (according to Schlötser) is a descendant of the Roman Augustus in the 14th generation. Fairy tales about three brothers and three sisters are told all over the world and especially in Europe. The story in the chronicle about the calling of the brothers Rurik, Sineus and Truvor is the same tale as the biblical tale about the flood and the division of peoples and languages, about the founding of Kiev again by the three brothers Kiy, Shchok and Khoriv, about the arrival of the Apostle Andrew to the Kyiv mountains. I consider the entire “ancient history of Rus' until the death of Yaroslav in 1054 to be built on fairy tales and mistakes of copyists” (Ibid. p. 648). The Russians are also the Normans, who once came out, long before the fabulous Rurik, from Sweden and formed one people with the Novgorodians (Slovenians) and Chud (Finns). Therefore, there are many Scandinavian names and names in the chronicle. Schlözer concludes with this conclusion.
You can't agree with him on everything. But there is no need to focus on this now. In this case, we are interested in his critical approach to the chronicle of Nestor. But even more so are the tasks assigned to him. Schlözer called for investigating suspicious words and lines in order to determine whether they really belong to Nestor himself or to a copyist. As a result, you can figure out where the historical truth is and where it is fiction, and carry out the correct grammatical and historical interpretation of words that have several meanings. Perhaps in vindication of his German colleague Müller, Schlözer reports with extreme caution that in fact he is not the first to doubt the existence of Rurik. The first was Müller. Maybe that’s why Müller was not allowed to give a speech at the Academy of Sciences to Empress Elizabeth Petrovna in 1747? - asks Schlözer. Whether this is true or not is not so important. But in criticism of Schlözer, they began to focus on his interpretation of Scandinavian titles and names, the provisions on the unity of the Swedish and Novgorod peoples, instead of actually “carrying out the correct grammatical interpretation of the words and finding out where the historical truth is and where the fiction is.”
There are no other reports about the Laurentian Chronicle before 1765, approximately two hundred and fifty years.
Ivan Vasilyevich (Grozny) will be forced to admit his belonging to the Rurikovich dynasty. The revision of all available chronicle material carried out under his supervision showed the awkwardness of the situation. I wanted to descend from the Roman emperors, but it looked ridiculous. The search for historical chronicles caused unrest in monastic circles and aroused public interest in the chronicles. Foreign nationals visiting Moscow become aware of the contents of the Laurentian Chronicle. A brief summary of the initial Russian history according to the Laurentian Chronicle is retold in his “Notes on Muscovy” by the already mentioned Austrian diplomat Sigismund Herberstein. Therefore, in the version of the court chroniclers of Ivan the Terrible, Rurik himself becomes a descendant of the Roman Augusti. In the eyes of Ivan the Terrible, this was still better than descending his family from the Belskys, or Shuiskys, or Zakharyins, which meant nominally equaling their rights to the throne. In this regard, Ivan the Terrible adhered to the idea of his royalty as divinely chosen. At the same time, some shortcomings were revealed in the use of persons involved in the census of church books and other archival documents.
A scandalous story has reached us around the name of Maxim the Greek. In 1525 he was accused of deliberately distorting the meaning of liturgical books. Maxim Grek tried to shift responsibility to those with whom he did a parallel translation - Dmitry Gerasimov and Vlas Ignatov. Maxim Grek, who had been invited from Greece not long before, did not yet really know the Russian language. In turn, Gerasimov and Ignatov did not know Greek. The translation of the Psalter, which they were entrusted with, was carried out first from Greek into Latin, and then from Latin into Russian. Latin was an intermediary language for them, a kind of international language. All three of them, although to varying degrees, knew him. But he was not family to them. In this case, transfer through the third leg does not guarantee quality. Mistakes are inevitable. But the problem turned out to be much broader than it seemed. It's not about the quality of translated literature. It showed the state of literacy in Rus' as a whole. If we know that there were schools for teaching literacy at the monasteries, we do not know that Greek and Latin were studied in them at that time. Interpreters and translators were in great demand. The same Dmitry Gerasimov was from Livonia, where they spoke German. And that’s why he knew German. He has already mastered Latin on his own.
In addition to literacy, the example of Maxim the Greek also demonstrates the principle of forming a cadre of translators. They were less likely to be sent abroad to study. More often they invited people to their place with the conviction that over time the foreigner would definitely master the Russian language. Thus, in Russian monasteries there were many not only Greeks from Athos, but also Germans, Dutch, and Swedes. Mature people went to Rus', with a certain amount of knowledge, a mentality and, often, with targeted missionary tasks. XIV - early XV centuries. - the time of attempts to unite the Orthodox and Catholic churches. The activities of Catholic missionaries were encouraged in every possible way by the Pope. Not all of them came back for various reasons. The same Maxim the Greek, already excommunicated and exiled to the Joseph-Volotsky Monastery, constantly asked the Tsar to have mercy and let him go home, but he was destined to die in Russia. Still, he was close to the royal court and they did not want people in Europe to know about both good and bad deeds in Rus'.
The Laurentian Chronicle was republished in 1872, 1926, 1961, 1997. In 1950, The Tale of Bygone Years was published as a separate edition with translation. In all these publications, titles were placed under the text, indicating the abbreviation of words; in the footnotes the letter designations for words with corrections found in parallel lists of the chronicle were given; Explanations were given at the end of the texts. In any case, it was not a copy of the original, that is, it was impossible to transfer superscript edits, additions of words, or any signs to the sheet using a typographic method. And comments always have a certain amount of subjectivity.
At the dawn of the heyday of photography, attempts were made to publish the chronicle using the phototypical method. But it also did not convey the color picture of the parchment.
There was not enough brightness to see abrasions, corrections of letters in words, etc. Many generations of historians had to be content with the conclusions of academicians A.A. Shakhmatov, M.D. Priselkov and other scientists who had direct access to the original Laurentian Chronicle. And today, references to Shakhmatov and Priselkov are often used, although some of their conclusions are already outdated.
Only in June 2012, an electronic copy of the Laurentian Chronicle appeared on the website of the Russian National Library, of sufficient quality and close to the original. On it you can already distinguish letters in places of wear, although not in all places, and the condition of the parchment itself: marks on it, stitched seams, white spots, etc.
Today we can look through an electronic copy of the Laurentian Chronicle on the Internet. This means that we have the opportunity to independently compare its information with other data from archaeographic, paleographic and other studies.
The textual analysis of the chronicle offered to the reader in this case is carried out using sociological methods of working with documents. Research always begins with a statement of the problem, goals and objectives. Here they are formulated as follows. On the Norman question about the beginning of the formation of statehood in Rus', the quite officially established point of view (official because the beginning of statehood dates back to 862) comes from the recognition in different variations of the entry in the Tale of Bygone Years of the legend about the existence of the foreign prince Rurik. The very attitude towards the Norman theory easily fits into the Procrustean bed of “floating ideology” in four guises:
1. While denying the Norman theory in general, the existence of Rurik and his company in the person of a squad of Scandinavian mercenaries is recognized in particular; The legend itself about the calling of the Varangians is recognized on the basis of similar legends in other European countries.
2. While denying in particular the role of the personality of Rurik himself, the participation of Rurik’s squad is recognized as a prerequisite in resolving the internecine strife of the Russian princes in the dispute over the primacy of the possession of the Kyiv table, in fact, as described in the chronicle.
3. While recognizing the Norman theory in general, the role of the Normans in subsequent events in the formation of Russian statehood is denied in particular on the basis of the objectivity and regularity of historical processes in the format of the theory of development and turnover of socio-economic formations.
4. When recognizing in particular the personality of one Rurik, he is generally assigned the role of embryonic participation in the formation of a great-power princely dynasty, as, in fact, this is described in the chronicle: Rurik appears with his brothers, then the brothers die, he inherits everything alone, then he dies himself. There is nothing about any of his actions, be they public or personal - the birth of children, marriage, death of his wife, as in the biographies of other princes, or even any natural phenomena during his princely reign, similar to those in the biographies of other princes. it says. Rurik in the chronicle disappears through one page of complete omissions as suddenly as he suddenly appears, under article 879: “Rurik died and, having transferred his reign to Oleg, his relative, gave him his son Igor into his hands, for he was still very small."
This division of the Norman theory contains the main contradiction - the desire to escape the influence of Normanism on historical processes in Russia and, at the same time, to preserve the “acquired”, once established view of the two ruling dynasties in Russia: the Rurikovichs and the Romanovs. The goal, based on this contradictory attitude to the Norman theory, is to find out how organically or, conversely, inorganically, Rurik and Rurikovich are included in the chronicle.
There are several opinions regarding the legend itself, with the version representing the real basis of the events of the mid-9th century. to the denial of such and the version about the inclusion of the legend about Rurik at a later time during the reconstruction of the chronicle. In the previous sections it was shown that the real conditions for the appearance of the Normans on Russian soil in the middle of the 9th century. did not have. The same will be discussed in the next section using more detailed archaeological data. It remains to be assumed that the legend of Rurik was introduced into the chronicle by analogy with similar legends in other countries, either by the first chronicler in the 11th century, or by later scribes.
The main task is to clarify the question: when and who benefited from the appearance of the legend about Rurik in the Laurentian Chronicle, dating back to 1377. This cannot be done without involving additional sources, of course. But the right of primacy in this matter remains with the chronicle. Therefore, the object of study is the Laurentian Chronicle - its text, the parchment on which it is written, the design on the sheet, etc. The subject is the features, patterns that manifest themselves in repeated marks on the sheets, abrasions, numbering, edits, transfers, etc. .
For ease of perception of the material, a multi-level analysis is provided. At the first stage, an external examination of the chronicle is first carried out, then a thorough reading of it in order to identify recurring features acceptable for analysis. At the second stage, the identified features are grouped into separate blocks for sampling. On the third one, brief explanations are given to them. The fourth stage presents the results of the samples. At the fifth stage, conclusions are drawn for each sample block. At the sixth stage, all the results obtained are summarized.
Now, in order. First stage: description of the chronicle. An external examination of the electronic copy of the chronicle reveals numerous abrasions with the presence of white, probably greasy spots, on which ink letters were not written. In some places there are torn corners of the sheets and traces of stitched seams on the sheets of parchment are noticeable. In the text itself, attention is drawn to the use of three types of ink: brown, black and red, as well as two types of handwriting with the ink changing from brown to black, ustav and semi-ustav. Numerous edits are noticeable in the text of the chronicle in the form of adding individual letters above the line; adding words under the last line of the page; omissions of places for adding dates, lines without text, there are many hand-drawn letters and symbolic signs. In some places the text is highlighted in red ink in seven or more lines. Not all of the above will be included in the sample. Those features that make it possible to determine specific results are important. For example, torn or worn corners and white spots can be attributed to accidental damage to the parchment. They will remain unnoticed. But the sample will include sheets with sewn seams, because here we can see consistency in the formation of manuscript notebooks.
Second stage: identifying features and patterns. We group all the features that interest us into sampling blocks. There were twelve of them in total: 1) damage to the parchment; 2) use of red ink; 3) text layout; 4) use of hand-drawn letters and symbols; 5) numbering; 6) editing individual words, adding words in the margins of the last line of the sheet, spelling the word “summer” in dates; 7) letters of special use; 8) distortion of names; 9) possible semantic inconsistencies in the text on the sheets and between the sheets; 10) changes, corrections, additions made by correctors and modern translators to the text; 11) missing dates (years); 12) indicator words.
Third stage: brief explanations of the sample.
1. Parchment (or parchment) was made from the skins of young domestic animals: lambs, calves, piglets. That's why it didn't break in the bends. It was quite a labor-intensive process using chalk powder, flour, milk and sharp objects to remove fats and meat. To give the product elasticity, the skin was stretched, dried and sanded. The quality largely depended on the skill and patience of the master. Excessive effort when scraping or pulling could lead to tears or excessive fineness during drying and, in general, to damage to the almost finished product. The leaf format was determined by the area of the skin of the young individual. The edges have been trimmed. You can imagine the amount of material used for one book, for example, the Laurentian Chronicle of 173 sheets, if the skin of one lamb was required to make one sheet. It is not surprising that the holes formed during the processing process were skillfully mended. In the picture of the chronicle, such seams are clearly visible. Sometimes there are several such seams on one sheet. In general, out of 173 sheets, 32 have damage of this nature. What matters to us is the distribution of these sheets throughout the text of the chronicle.
2. The most noticeable places on the pages of a chronicle, as well as an ordinary book, are places highlighted in some way, be it in bold or bright font, or with sketches. The Laurentian Chronicle uses red ink to mark such places. In Rus', for the production of red ink, the main ingredient was the powder of carminiferous insects, the distribution of which is typical for Central Asia.
Anyone who takes up a pen must be aware that the reader will pay attention, first of all, to the lines or letters highlighted in red ink. Consequently, the chronicler had to highlight events, years, and persons that were important from his point of view. It can be assumed that in the process of presenting the material, the writer or copyist either deviated from the rules he had already conceived, or developed them, introducing new elements into the external outlines. In this case, a certain consistency should be observed. The opposite shows the differences in the author's styles. Systematicity or unsystematicity in the use of red ink in marking significant places is the most important indicator in determining the authorship of the chronicle.
Systemic ones include highlighting the years in red ink in the combination: “In summer + year + first letter of the next word.” This goes throughout the entire text, except for sheets 157 and 167, where the dates are not highlighted in red ink, but are only underlined in red ink in a black frame. Relatively systemic can be called the highlighting of phrases in red ink: “in the same (same) summer”, “same (same) summer”, “in the same (same) winter”, etc. Relatively because in the text these phrases themselves begin to be used not from the very beginning of the chronicle. Sometimes only the first letter is highlighted, or it is not highlighted at all, or it is highlighted intermittently. And this cannot be called an intentional innovation of the author that arose during the writing process. The same applies to the expressions: “for memory ...”, “month ... (called).” The rare mention of calculating years by indicts cannot be called systemic. It is unsystematic to highlight any significant events or natural phenomena written in red ink in several lines, because comparison with any similar event or phenomenon will be subjective. Thus, indices, events, and natural phenomena highlighted in red ink are not included in the sample. At the same time, the use of red ink is indicative in itself, and unsystematic nature is already a factor reflecting the author’s predilections. Therefore, it is important to determine his attitude to the use of red ink in general and only then to highlighting individual places, letters, numbers, signs, symbols. According to this principle, this block will consist of five samples.
3. Lined text. The indentations from the edges had both practical and aesthetic meaning. Straight lines look and read better than “jumping” lines. Indentations from the edges of the sheet on the side of the line of intended addition into the notebook are necessary so as not to cover the text. And in order not to get the letters dirty or greasy when turning the pages, it was necessary to limit the text along the sheet from the edges of the page along the entire perimeter. These norms were dictated by practice. Horizontal ruling was done at certain equal intervals. The resulting frame had to be combined with the dimensions on the subsequent sheet, which was achieved by punctures with a needle or the edge of a knife. Thus, the frame had to contain a certain number of lines, which were transferred to the next sheet. In the text of the chronicle, only after the 40th page the number of lines on the page does not change. Up to the 40th sheet, on individual pages, the gap between the top two lines is more visible than others and, accordingly, there is one more line on this page. In fact, the discrepancy in the number of lines on the page occurs in entire blocks. Horizontally, the number of letters in a line written without pauses or punctuation marks, except for periods, must also be equal or diverge by several letters. However, in the text from beginning to end the number of characters increases by about 8-10 characters. On separate sheets, 157 and 167, there are twice as many of them as at the beginning. This, however, limits the sample by the number of characters. It makes no sense to highlight it in particular. Technical performance in itself cannot serve as a basis for any conclusions, but it can be an additional help in the system of evidence or refutation of existing theories. Therefore, the text ruling is included among the studied features of the Laurentian Chronicle.
4. Drawn letters, signs and symbols are the design element that is most subject to creative influence. They may change stylistically or disappear if not included in the overall art strategy of the book. But even if they are scattered in a chaotic order throughout the text, the author’s hand is easily discernible in them. Translated religious literature served as an example for chronicles, teachings and other works of a secular nature. It especially required the identification of individual places separating canonical terms by meaning, time, manner of execution, etc. In historical chronicles, such dividing elements often served as annual, monthly dates, individual expressions such as: “that summer,” “that year,” “at the same time,” etc. In the Laurentian Chronicle, the first letter of such an expression or the entire expression written in red ink and most often on a new line.
The initial letters of these words were beautifully outlined and outlined. Here the individual style of performance was revealed. But here, too, preferences are visible in the choice of object of selection and frequency of application. These latter can no longer be attributed to the creative search of the author or copyist. They constitute the feature by which one can distinguish the writing style of one author from another. In the Laurentian Chronicle there are hand-drawn letters four lines high, others smaller and in the middle of the lines. They stand out due to their intricate configuration and red ink. It is worth paying special attention to the symbols in the chronicle. The symbols include a wave sign horizontally and once the same sign intertwined vertically, neatly and beautifully drawn in the shape of a swastika with curved edges. These symbols, tall hand-drawn letters and separately the letters “C” and “B” will be used in the selection.
5. Numbering. Today, the need to number arises for everyone who is faced with writing, collecting information, etc. in their work. on sheets of A4 size writing paper. Unless there is a need to put numbers on pages in general notebooks. Separate sheets may get confused and lost. They are stapled, filed, numbered. For greater convenience in finding the right place in books, abstract-type essays, we came up with a description on the last page of the contents by sections and paragraphs, indicating page numbers.
In the 12th–14th centuries, during the period of the formation of literary skills, the system of ordinal designation of pages was just taking shape. Formally, one chronicler could use different methods of page numbering in one book: alphabetic, Arabic or Latin systems. On the one hand, it could differ in the manner of execution, for example, on sheets 2 and 3 the numbers in the upper part are not placed in the center, but closer to the left side; it could be distinguished by the obligations assumed in a particular monastic book workshop - to put numbers above or below the text, as can be seen from the numbering of decimal pages, but, on the other hand, with all this there should be no repetitions, a single handwriting should be preserved . However, in the chronicle, many erases are found precisely in the places where sheet numbers are marked, and at the same time, starting from the tenth, all decimal sheets, except the hundredth, are duplicated four times. For analysis, not only the numbering itself is important, but also the presence of these abrasions. Unfortunately, not all of them can be identified. Ancient scribes sometimes turned out to be very skilled at their craft. Traces of their “creativity” are poorly discernible, but they can be represented according to the intended trend. In addition to the peculiarities of numbering and erasures, the selection of this block includes individual words in the corners of the sheets, which can serve as original autographs of copyists, as well as original marks in the margins in the form of crosses and plus signs.
6. Editing individual words, adding words in the margins of the last line, spelling the word “summer” in dates.
The Laurentian Chronicle of 1377 was written in accordance with the then accepted grammar, that is, without punctuation marks and separating spaces between words and sentences. In some cases, to highlight the semantic meaning of a separate segment of text, a dot or three dots were used, placed centrally between the letters. Sometimes a new sentence is opened after the name of the year with a capital letter and red ink. But basically the medieval reader had to distinguish words by meaning on their own.
The Russian proverb “What is written with a pen cannot be cut down with an ax” originates from times when there were no printing presses and people wrote on parchment with quill quills. The word “feather” is key here, and the word “knock out” takes on a figurative meaning: something that is difficult to fix. On parchment, unnecessary letters or words were scraped off with a knife. And with the same knife they drew the frames that have already been mentioned. The first chronicler, the copyist, and the right-hander held the knife. It was not always possible to scrape out the desired area cleanly. But still there were traces in the form of abrasions. Although, as is the case with numbering in the electronic version, it is difficult to highlight all the places where abrasions are found, and they are mainly in the margins above and below the text.
There are no deletions or special corrections in the chronicle. Only in a few cases are one or two words added above the line, emphasizing the emotionality of what is happening, but in no way influencing the ideological content. In one place on the 13th sheet, “or the owner of the Rusyns” is written twice. Someone noticed this and highlighted it in square brackets. More often, words are added to the last line of the page, as if hyphenation of the word is impossible. There are even more changes to the text of individual words with the addition of letters above the line. Sometimes there are more than sixty of them per sheet (or thirty per page). Moreover, not all misspelled words on the same pages are corrected.
It would be easier to rewrite the text again than to attach a sheet with a similar number of corrections to the chronicle. But it looks like the editing was done by some other editor at a later time. Is there any consistency in these edits? Of course there is. In this case, systematicity means the repetition of edits of the same words with the same errors. It should be understood that these are precisely mistakes, and not the tacitly accepted rules of grammatical structure. For example, the word “Lord” was written without vowels - “gspd”. However, the letter "s" and sometimes the "p" are often dropped from the same word, and the editor writes the "s" at the top. And this is already a mistake.
The sheer number of edits, which tells us the number of errors on the page, is an additional touch to the personality of the author or copyist. An error can be called accidental due to inattention, but a repeated error already expresses a person’s attitude towards the subject being described. One can understand the typical mistake of a schoolchild who misses the letter “d” in the word “heart” (and in the text of the chronicle, by the way, there are many such errors), but it is far from typical even for a schoolchild to write the words “grad” and “brother” without the last letters . Even more surprising are the omissions by the monks, namely, the authors of the chronicle Nestor, Sylvester, Lawrence, presented themselves as monks, of individual letters in words that seemed to set their teeth on edge in their everyday life - “s” in the word “cross”, “x” in the word “sin” ", etc. Another factor, in addition to consistency in the repeatability of edits, is the occurrence of different system errors in different parts of the chronicle. The initial part of the chronicle is characterized by corrections of the word “reche”, where the letter “ch” is dropped, and for the last pages - corrections of the word “prince” without the letter “z”.
In this case, for the most convenient perception of the material by the reader, the sample will be presented in a simplified version. It seems impractical to describe each error page by page. For analysis, to the already mentioned words “cross”, “sin”, “speech”, “hail”, “brother”, “prince” we will add the word “creating”, as well as derivatives from it and words with “Ti”, where the missing letter The "T" is written into the word itself rather than added on top. In addition, the sample includes words in which the soft sign at the end of the word is immediately corrected to a hard sign.
7. Letters of special use. Acquired skills and passions, moderation and prudence (or lack thereof) are among the qualities that determine a person’s personality. Sooner or later, to one degree or another, they manifest themselves in everyday activities, communication with others, and specific actions. You cannot hide your own individuality in public. Individuality is especially noticeable at the moment when a person entrusts his thoughts to a sheet of paper (or parchment). Moreover, handwriting may not be in the first place here. These can be repetitions of any figures of speech or even particles separated from the word, such as (in our case, using the example of the Laurentian Chronicle) “qi”: “...asamtsi...” (102v.), “...qi want me...” (126) , “...we are not princes...” (134) Sometimes individuality is manifested in the special writing of individual letters.
Linguists find in the use of our ancient Slavs a sound scale expressed in more than 50 initial letters. Not all of them were used equally on the territory of Rus'. In the Laurentian Chronicle, four letters can be named that are especially highlighted in the text: W - o, from; V - y; S; 3 (with a ponytail of three knees) - h. The last three letters are less common. They replace letters already used in the same words. Therefore, it is impossible not to notice it. For example, the spelling of the letter “3” (with tails) turns into the letter “s” in the word “Alek(s)andr”. The vertical line of four knees is perceived as too striking. Or the appearance of the letter “V” far from the first page in different words does not give this word additional meaning and is therefore not entirely explainable. At the same time, if we allow the change of the usual letter “y” to the Latin “V” with carelessly thrown tails up to the top line in all words where this letter can be used, then it would overshadow the entire text on the sheet with its presence. Maybe that’s why the letter “V” appears in different words on average two or three times per sheet, just to emphasize the individual characteristics of the author (or copyist). The last three letters were included in the sample.
8. Distortion of names. The sample includes two names - Olga and Oleg. Perhaps, due to the similarity of sound, a dynasty with a female name - Olgovichi - was included in historical textbooks. This misunderstanding is revealed upon a careful reading of the Laurentian Chronicle.
Names can change dramatically, and then it was customary for them to be given again at baptism. Names vary depending on the traditions of the southern or northern part of Rus': Ivan - Ivanko, Vasily - Vasilko, etc. Names can be diminutive in nature: Vanya, Vanyusha, Vasya, Vasenka. Names can be pronounced with an ironically rough tone: Vanka, Vaska. In any case, they are always recognizable and applicable in everyday life and literature. In official documentation and historical chronicles, names are written in full. And so that there is no confusion with similar names of other people, the names of fathers, the clan of grandfathers, that is, patronymics and surnames, which are formed according to belonging to someone or something, are added. Any distortion of the name may cause discussions in the interpretation of certain events. Unfortunately, distortions of names are quite common in the chronicles. We will talk about the reasons for this in the part where generalizations and conclusions are made. Now let’s say that not only ancient chroniclers, but also modern translators sinned with this. For example, in the text of the chronicle the name is read Svendel, and in translation it is given Sveneld. For those who do not have the opportunity or desire to look into the original, there is a reason to look for analogies, draw historical parallels, etc. In this case, we will limit the sample to two names - Oleg and Olga.
Sheet 167v. The last sentence on this sheet: “Of course, I rejected Christ and became unsurme... (continued on the next sheet) nin, having entered into the delusion of the prophet Ahmed.”
9. Possible semantic inconsistencies in the text on the sheets and between the sheets. The Laurentian Chronicle repeatedly changed its owners and storage locations. It did not reach us with a complete set of sheets. It would be difficult to expect the opposite after so many centuries of oblivion, unexpected interest, close public attention, obsequious research. One might well expect even greater losses of sheets, or places on the sheets that are greasy from frequent reading, or smudged ink from uncomfortable storage compared to today’s conditions. The condition of some sheets, for example 1,2,4, allows us to suspect this. But even on them we can read almost all the text. The rest, with small blots and technical errors of the parchment, do not particularly impede vision. On the contrary, except for one obvious place, it is clear how logically the text is connected by year, by event. One gets the impression that the chronicle was created in a short period of time, as Lavrentiy actually states on the last page, by one person (or two, since it was written in two handwritings or three, because sheets 157, 161, 167 stand out in particular) and represents a complete manuscript. However, in fact, there are semantic inconsistencies in the text, especially between sheets. It is difficult to single them out, however, it is also difficult to understand why, after the missing lines on one sheet in the subsequent text, “the loss of a fighter is imperceptible,” that is, the text of the previous page, where there are many missing lines, coincides in meaning with the text of the next sheet. The task in this part of the sample is to highlight similar places or at least part of them.
10. Introduction of changes, corrections, additions by proofreaders and modern translators. In some cases, events missing from the history of the Laurentian Chronicle were compensated for from other chronicles. Thus, the events of 899–921 are transferred from the Radziwill and Trinity Chronicles to the Laurentian Chronicle. Sometimes some additions and clarifications are allowed in the translation. This practice is quite acceptable for restoring a complete picture of the historical past in educational and research literature, but such literary processing without appropriate footnotes and explanations in publications of the translation from the original text is completely unacceptable. For example, in the Laurentian Chronicle on page 25 we read: “And so Yaropolk was quickly killed... fleeing from the yard to the Pechenegs, and he brought two men and went to his company.” The last words are difficult to understand, even more difficult to translate, so literary speculation is used, and with a categorical statement: “Varyazhko, seeing that Yaropolk was killed, fled from the courtyard of that tower to the Pechenegs and often fought with them subsequently against Vladimir.” There are not many similar passages in the translation, but they do occur, sometimes having a significant impact on the assessment of a particular event. The sample contains only a few of these, in our opinion, indicative episodes. They were not subjected to a complete sample.
11. Missing dates. Many chronicles are similar to each other in style of presentation, coincide in content in certain places, etc. The Laurentian Chronicle differs from others in its programmed sequence. If there is no article under a certain year, then the year itself must be indicated. The chronicler in this regard adheres to a firm rule: if the year is indicated, but nothing is written under it, then you will not write anything, because the year is already indicated.
Otherwise, the scribe may have the opportunity to insert something of his own under the unspecified year. Therefore, the dates in the chronicle are highlighted with meticulousness, almost all of them in order, in red ink. And those not specified cause a lot of controversy and judgment. These years are shown in the sample.
12. Indicator words. The last block of the sample turned out to be the most capacious in terms of information volume. It would be possible to generalize something, as was done in similar cases in previous sampling blocks, and thereby simplify the visual perception of the presented material. But in this case, the tasks are set depending on certain factors. After all, what are indicator words? In any message or story, no matter how long, whether oral or written, we most often use words about those people or events that we consider important and the essence of which we want to convey to the attention of our interlocutor. In an oral conversation, one’s attitude towards someone is already manifested in the intonations of speech, emotions, and facial expressions. The same thing happens in research: not only the facts of interest are studied, but also the persons who reported them. Such a person in our case is the author of the chronicle.
From the initial page of the Laurentian Chronicle, its first author twice highlights the phrase “Russian land”. Throughout the text of the chronicle, the words “Russian” and “land” are used together, as a kind of constant of the Russian spirit. The author of the chronicle always keeps in mind the reason for which a chronologically verified historical work was started - the Russian land is strong in the unity of its multi-tribal peoples. Based on patriotic motivation, “Russian land” becomes the subject of the story. Next to the concept of “Russian land”, the expression “Russian prince” (“Russian princes”) is often used. The Grand Duke's dynasty is the subject around which all major historical events unfold. But what's interesting? The word “Russian” is written differently in the chronicle: with one “s”, with a soft sign - “ss”, with two “ss”. One could assume that in this way the dynamics of the development of the Russian language can be traced if the transition from one form to another was more or less demarcated in the text. However, it is not. In addition to the word “Russian”, the word “Murom” is included in the sample according to the same principle. Here, as in the word “Russian,” there are three spelling options, which once again demonstrates to us the image of the chronicler.
These words could be included in another sampling block, say, in the sixth, where individual words are corrected, or in the eighth, adding proper names to the distortion of personal names. However, they stand out in a separate block along with the other two words - Rurik and Gyurgi - because they look together. The sampling capacity falls most on these last two words. If the sample of the first two is based on comparison, then in the sample of the names of Rurik and Gyurga certain factors are taken into account: frequency of mention, frequency of change (especially the name Gyurgya - Yurgya, Georgiy), frequency of inclination (Gyurgevich, Gyurgevi's son) and degree of obsession (Gyurgya's son is grandson Vladimir Monomakh, Gyurgya - city, Gyurgya bishop, Gyurgya prince of Murom, Gyurgya father and his son Vsevolod Konstantinovich). Therefore, to generalize something, to reduce the volume, would mean to blur the general idea of both the personality of the chronicler himself and the object of the sample - the name Gyurg.
Fourth stage. Sample.
Block 1. Damaged stitched parchment.
Table 1. Sheets are listed by number
Block 2. Using red ink.
Table 1. Highlighting events and phenomena line by line in red ink, except for highlighted years, months and in memory of someone on separate sheets. The top line is the number of lines, below is the designation of sheets
Table 2. Highlighting hand-drawn letters 4 lines high
Table 3. Highlighting individual letters: “B”, “I”, “P”, “M”, “S”, etc., in the initial words, in the margins except for the expression: “That summer (winter, spring, autumn, year etc.)” and according to the scheme: “In summer + year + first letter of the next word”
a) wave - 1 revolution; 7 (after indicating the year - 861 - before the words: “having expelled the Varangians overseas...”); 7 rev.; 8 (after the words: “become childish velmi”); 8v;
b) swastika - 8 (after the words: “byst bo detsk velmi” and indicating the years 880 and 881).
Rice. 2. Sign (one in the entire chronicle in the form of sharp four ends intertwined in a lock against the background of a shaded triangle) - 8 (in the margins after indicating the year - 879 - and before the words: “I will die Rurik”).
Rice. 3. Curly letters “B” and “C” (the letter “B” with a lowered tail is included in the sample without taking into account similar spellings in dates):
43; 44; 45; 47 rev; 48; 50; 52; 55; 85; 88 rev; 94; 99; 100; 102; 104 rev; 105; Yubob.; 119; 120; 126 rev; 134; 143 rev.
Block 5. Numbering.
Table 1. Visible abrasions
List 1. Numbering by location
a) top, center to the right of the 1st-2nd line:
sheets 2 (closer to the left corner) 2; 3 (closer to the left
corner) 3; 4 4; 5 5; 6 6; 7 7; 8 8; 9-19; 20–41; 42-172;
From the book Slavic legends about the first princes. Comparative historical study of power models among the Slavs author Shchavelev Alexey SergeevichChapter II. Plot-motivational analysis of early historical descriptions Let us not, therefore, expect a comprehensive history and theory of the glass bead game... In essence, it depends only on the discretion of the historian how far into the past he will attribute the beginning and prehistory of the glass bead game. After all,
From the book Essays on the History of Civilization by Wells HerbertChapter Two The Fossil Record 1. The First Living Creatures. 2. Natural selection and change in species 1We do not know for sure how life originated on Earth. Biologists have many ideas and assumptions on this matter, but the general belief is that life originates in warm,
From the book On the Beginning of Human History (Problems of Paleopsychology) [ed. 1974, abbr.] author Porshnev Boris FedorovichChapter 1 ANALYSIS OF THE CONCEPT OF THE BEGINNING OF HISTORY
From the book HISTORY OF RUSSIA from ancient times to 1618. Textbook for universities. In two books. Book one. author Kuzmin Apollon GrigorievichFrom The Tale of Bygone Years. Translated by A.G. Kuzmin from the publication “This Tale of Bygone Years” (Laurentian Chronicle) (Arzamas, 1993) After the flood, the three sons of Noah divided the earth, Shem, Ham, Japheth. And Shem got the East... Ham got the South... And Japhet got the northern countries
From the book The True History of Ancient Rus' author Belyakov AntonChapter 2 JOAKIM'S CHRONICLE So where did the Russian land come from? The problem of studying the initial history of the Russian state is the lack of alternative sources for PVL. They can be replaced by archeology, but it is the lines about the calling of Rurik and his Varangians
From the book New Anti-Suvorov author Veselov VladimirChapter 33 WHY? In the diplomatic war of the 30s, Germany's position was the most unfavorable. Being in the center of Europe, it stood at the center of all conflicts. Whatever war began in Europe, Germany almost inevitably had to become a participant. V. Suvorov.
From the book Apology of History, or the Craft of the Historian author Block Mark From the book Selected Works on the Spirit of Laws author Montesquieu Charles LouisCHAPTER XV That it is sometimes useful for the law to correct itself The laws of the twelve tables allowed the killing of a night thief, as well as a day one, if the latter defended himself during the persecution, but demanded that the person killing the thief shout and call
From the book The Expulsion of the Normans from Russian History. Issue 1 author From the book THE CAUCASIAN THREAT: history, modernity and prospects author Korabelnikov A. A.Chapter One ANALYSIS OF EVENTS HAPPENING IN THE SOUTH OF ANCIENT Rus' Studying historical documents today, we inevitably find ourselves under the influence of the chronicler’s subjective view of what is happening. Each chronicler, naturally, tried to present his people in the most
From the book Battle of the Varangian Pillars author Seryakov Mikhail Leonidovich From the book Mystery Theater in Greece. Tragedy author Livraga Jorge Angel From the book Source Studies author Team of authorsChapter 1 Source analysis and synthesis Source analysis is a system of research procedures aimed at establishing the information potential of a historical source, identifying and evaluating its information, as well as the possibilities of its use.
Laurentian Chronicle: [digital copy]. - Electronic text data (350 files, 1 file (kontrol shkala): 6362.7 MB). - (St. Petersburg: Russian National Library, 2012). -Access mode: Internet portal of the Presidential Library.
Original handwritten book from the collections of the Russian National Library, St. Petersburg: Laurentian Chronicle. 1377 Old Russian. 173 l. 4° (25 x 21 cm). Parchment. Binding from the 17th century. - boards in leather with embossing, remains of fasteners. Code: F.p.IV.2.
Contents: L. 1v.-173v. - chronicle text, starting with “The Tale of Bygone Years”, ending with 1305. L. 9v. ends in 898 (6406), with the story “about the presentation of books”; l. 10 begins with the counting of years, from 922/6431 to 928/6437. L. 169 rev. ends in 1263/6771, on the Life of Alexander Nevsky; l. 170 starts from 1283 (6791) L. 171 starts from 1294. There are losses of text due to defects in the protograph: there is no information for 1088/1089 (6596) - L. 69 rev. ; for 1197 (6705) g. - l. 140rpm ; for 1203-1205 (6711-6713) - l. 142; for 1287-1294 (6795-6802) - l. 170rpm The chronicle ends with the news of June 23, 1305 (6813) about the burning of the church of St. by lightning. Theodora (in Kostroma). On l. 78a-85a - Teachings of Vladimir Monomakh. - Digital copy provided by the Russian National Library (St. Petersburg) in accordance with Agreement No. 0404/12 dated April 4, 2012. - Digitization: Center for National Glory of Russia. - PSRL. St. Petersburg, 1846. T. 1..
Parchment copy of the Laurentian Chronicle, rewritten in 1377 under the leadership of the monk Laurentius by order of the Grand Duke of Suzdal-Nizhny Novgorod Dmitry Konstantinovich (1322-1383). Type of letter: charter of one handwriting and semi-charter of two handwritings; with l. 41 in two columns: I (charter) - l. 1-40rpm (8 lines); II (scribe Lawrence) - l. 40 rev. (from the 9th line) - 156g, 158a-161b, 162a-166g, 168a-173a and headings and initials throughout the manuscript, except l. 1-10; III - l. 157a-g, 161b (10 lines), 167a-g. On l. 1 rev. teratological style screensaver, cinnabar. On l. 1v., 6v., 7-7v., 8 initials of teratological style - cinnabar contour. Small capital letters are mostly cinnabar outline, colored with ink. Headings and initials in cinnabar. On l. 1 in cursive writing of the XVI-XVII half-erased entry: “...lov[e?]shche[n]sk...” (i.e. Annunciation?) and an entry in cursive writing of the first half of the 17th century: “Book of the Rozhesvensky monastery of Volodymyr”; Here is a scratched entry in semi-character (not readable). On l. 172v.-173 recording of Lavrentiy Mnich with cinnabar. On l. 173 entry in cursive from the second half of the 16th - first half of the 17th centuries. On l. 173-173 rev. samples of the pen (among them, twice the beginning of the Cyrillic alphabet (a-z), 17th century). On l. 92 rev. test of the pen with cinnabar by the scribe’s hand: “Is it good....” On l. 118, 122 rev., 152 rev. in 17th century handwriting: "Bulgar". On l. 1 and 2 in 18th century handwriting: "Chronicle". Recorded in the 18th century. about the shortage of sheets on the sheet. 10. On l. 173 below the scribe's notes are chronological calculations made in 1764: "6813" from the year "1305" to the current year "1764" would be "459". On the same sheet below is an entry (undated) by the director of the Public Library, A. N. Olenin, about the gift of the Chronicle to the Library by A. I. Musin-Pushkin: “In this book, donated by the late Count Alexei Ivanovich Musin-Pushkin to the Imperial Public Library, there are one hundred and seventy three marked sheets. Director of the Imperial Public Library Alexey Olenin." - Materials from the publication were used: 1) Description of Russian and Slavic parchment manuscripts. Russian, Bulgarian, Moldovan, Serbian manuscripts / comp. Ph.D. ped. Sciences E. E. Granstrem; edited by Dr. Philol. Sciences D. S. Likhacheva. Leningrad, 1953. pp. 34-35; 2) Consolidated catalog of Slavic-Russian handwritten books stored in Russia, the CIS and Baltic countries. XIV century / Ross. acad. Sciences, Institute of Slavic Studies, Archeogr. commission ; Ch. ed. acad. RAO S. O. Schmidt [and others]. Moscow, 2002. Issue. 1: (Apocalypse - Laurentian Chronicle) / [editorial team: A. A. Turilov (rep. ed.) etc.]. pp. 552-555. - Materials from the website of the Russian National Library, project “Laurentian Chronicle. 1377. Electronic representation of a handwritten monument” were used.
Chronicle lists
The Laurentian Chronicle also influenced later chronicles - the Trinity, Novgorod-Sophia vault, etc.
News chronology
According to the calculations of N. G. Berezhkov, the Laurentian Chronicle for the years 1110-1304 contains 101 March years, 60 ultra-Martov years, 4 years below March years, 5 empty, 26 not preserved.
Groups 6619-6622 (1110-1113), 6626-6627 (1117-1118), 6642-6646 (1133-1137) Ultramart years. 6623-6678 (1115-1170) in general March. 6679-6714 (1170-1205) are generally ultramartian. But 6686 (1178), 6688 (1180) March.
The third group of years: from repeated 6714 to 6771 (1206-1263) March, but among them 6717 (1208), 6725-6726 (1216-1217), 6740 (1231) are ultra-March. Read after the gap 6792-6793 (1284-1285) March, 6802-6813 (1293-1304) ultra-Mart.
Editions
- PSRL. T.1. 1846.
- Chronicle according to the Laurentian list. / Publication of the Archaeographic Commission. St. Petersburg, 1872. 2nd ed. St. Petersburg, 1897.
- PSRL. T.1. 2nd ed. / Ed. E. F. Karsky. Issue 1-3. L., 1926-1928. (reprints: M., 1961; M., 1997, with a new preface by B. M. Kloss; M., 2001).
- Laurentian Chronicle. (Complete collection of Russian chronicles. Volume one). Leningrad, 1926-1928
- Laurentian Chronicle (Ukrainian)
Major Research
- Berezhkov N. G. Chronology of Russian chronicles. M.: Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1963.
Notes
see also
Links
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.
- Sandhurst
- Klimova, Ekaterina Alexandrovna
See what the “Laurentian Chronicle” is in other dictionaries:
LAURENTIAN CHRONICLE- written by the monk Lawrence and other scribes in 1377. It is based on the Vladimir vault of 1305. It begins with the Tale of Bygone Years (the oldest list) ... Big Encyclopedic Dictionary
LAURENTIAN CHRONICLE- LAURENTIAN CHRONICLE, written by the monk Lawrence and other scribes in 1377. Begins with the Tale of Bygone Years (the oldest list), includes the Vladimir codex of 1305. Source: Encyclopedia Fatherland ... Russian History
LAURENTIAN CHRONICLE- a parchment manuscript containing a copy of the chronicle code of 1305, made in 1377 by a group of copyists under the hands of. Monk Lawrence on the instructions of the Suzdal Nizhny Novgorod prince. Dmitry Konstantinovich from the list of beginnings. 14th century The text of the code begins with the Tale... ... Soviet historical encyclopedia
Laurentian Chronicle- a parchment manuscript containing a copy of the chronicle code 1305, made in 1377 by a group of scribes under the leadership of the monk Lavrentiy on the instructions of the Suzdal Nizhny Novgorod prince Dmitry Konstantinovich from a copy of the early 14th century. Text… … Great Soviet Encyclopedia
Laurentian Chronicle- written by the monk Lawrence and other scribes in 1377. It is based on the Vladimir vault of 1305. It begins with the “Tale of Bygone Years” (the oldest list). * * * LAURENTIAN CHRONICLE LAURENTIAN CHRONICLE, manuscript on parchment with a copy of the chronicle... ... encyclopedic Dictionary
Laurentian Chronicle- Laurus Entyevsk chronicle... Russian spelling dictionary
Laurentian Chronicle- - a chronicle of the 14th century, preserved in the only parchment list (GPB, F.p.IV.2), rewritten in 1377 by the monk Lawrence by order of the Grand Duke of Suzdal and Nizhny Novgorod Dmitry Konstantinovich. The text of L. was brought up to 6813 (1305). In six ... ... Dictionary of scribes and bookishness of Ancient Rus'
Chronicle- This term has other meanings, see Chronicle (meanings). Laurentian Chronicle Chronicle (or chronicler) is a historical genre of ancient Russian literature ... Wikipedia
CHRONICLE- In Rus'* XI–XVII centuries. a type of historical narrative literature that is a record of what happened on a yearly basis (weather records). The word chronicle is formed from the noun summer* meaning ‘year’. Chronicles are... ... Linguistic and regional dictionary
Chronicle- a collection of historical notes in order of years and dates of the month. The Russian chronicle, begun by an unknown Kiev Pechersk monk (perhaps Nestor), was continued by different persons. These continuations are named or after the place mentioned in the chronicle... ... Complete Orthodox Theological Encyclopedic Dictionary
Books
- Complete collection of Russian chronicles. T. 1. Laurentian Chronicle, A.F. Bychkov. The first volume of the Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles, published in 1846, has long disappeared from scientific use. The Archaeographic Commission tried to fill this gap twice, releasing the second and... Buy for 1691 UAH (Ukraine only)
- Complete collection of Russian chronicles. Camping and travel notes kept during the Polish campaign in 1831. 1832. T. 01. Chronicle according to the Laurentian list (Laurentian Chronicle). 2nd ed., Politkovsky V.G.. This book will be produced in accordance with your order using Print-on-Demand technology. The book is a reprint of 1872. Despite the fact that a serious…
On June 20, 2012, employees of the Pskov library system (5 people), as part of a cultural delegation from the Pskov region, visited the Presidential Library. B.N. Yeltsin in St. Petersburg (Senate Square, 3). The reason for the visit to the library was the holding of a historical and educational conference “The Laurentian Chronicle. Historical memory and continuity of generations."
You can get acquainted with the conference program.
During the conference, reports were made on the 1150th anniversary of statehood, the significance of the Laurentian Chronicle for the history of Russia and the formation of our historical memory, and current issues of preserving the historical and cultural heritage of our country as a whole were discussed.
The conference participants were leading specialists from the State Hermitage, the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow State University and St. Petersburg State University, managers and specialists of Russian national libraries, representatives of government bodies and public organizations, scientists and artists.
The central event of the conference was the presentation of the electronic version of the Laurentian Chronicle. A documentary was shown on the plasma panel about how the digitization of the manuscript took place.
As noted by E. D. Zhabko, Deputy General Director for Information Resources of the Presidential Library, the electronic version of the Laurentian Chronicle took its rightful place in the collection “At the Origins of Russian Statehood,” prepared for the 1150th anniversary of the birth of Russian statehood. She emphasized that in the future this document could be included in the complete electronic collection of original Russian chronicles, which will be created by the Presidential Library together with partners.
The result of the meetings that lasted throughout the day was the conclusion that there was a unanimous understanding of the importance of creating (more precisely, recreating in electronic form) not just a historical document, but a document that contains the moral foundations of the ancestors, without which the existence and further future development of Russian society is impossible.
We express our deep gratitude to the State Committee for Culture of the Pskov Region for the opportunity for the employees of the Central Library to visit the Presidential Library of St. Petersburg and participate in the historical and educational conference.
The rest of the photos, which give a more complete picture of the trip to the Presidential Library, can be viewed in the album of our group in contact: http://vk.com/album-12518403_158881017.
Laurentian Chronicle. Information sheet
The Laurentian Chronicle, stored in the collections of the Russian National Library in St. Petersburg, is one of the most valuable and most famous monuments of the cultural and historical heritage of Russia. This handwritten book, created by the monk Lawrence in 1377, is the oldest dated Russian chronicle.
It contains the oldest list of the “Tale of Bygone Years” - the earliest ancient Russian chronicle work dedicated to the first centuries of the history of Rus' and which became the basis for the historiographical concept of the origin of Russian statehood. It is here that the ancient history of the Slavs is presented and the story placed under the year 862 is read about the calling of the Varangians and the arrival of Rurik in Rus' in 862. This year is considered to be the year of the birth of Russian statehood
The Laurentian Chronicle got its name from the scribe, the monk Laurentius, who did the bulk of the work of copying the text. On the last pages of the manuscript, Lawrence left a note in which he said that the chronicle was created in 1377 with the blessing of the Bishop of Suzdal, Nizhny Novgorod and Gorodets Dionysius for the Nizhny Novgorod prince Dmitry Konstantinovich, and that it was copied “from an old chronicler.”
The manuscript contains 173 parchment leaves. Parchment - animal skin treated in a special way - served as the main writing material in Rus' until the beginning of the 15th century, when parchment was replaced by paper. The material of the letter itself testifies to the venerable antiquity of the monument. Only three parchment Russian chronicles have survived to modern times. In addition to the Laurentian Chronicle, the only one precisely dated, this is the Synodal copy of the First Novgorod Chronicle, stored in the State Historical Museum in Moscow, which has significant losses of text, and the Trinity Chronicle, which burned in Moscow in 1812.
The narration of historical events in the Laurentian Chronicle is brought up to 1305, reflecting in its different parts the South Russian, Vladimir, Rostov and Tver chronicles. The monument is the main source on the history of North-Eastern Rus'. The Laurentian Chronicle preserves unique works of ancient Russian literature. Only in the Laurentian Chronicle is read (under the year 1096) the famous Teachings of Vladimir Monomakh, which came down only in this single copy.
Over its long life, the Laurentian Chronicle changed owners several times. The book was kept in the Nizhny Novgorod Annunciation Monastery, then belonged to the Nativity Monastery in Vladimir. In the 18th century the manuscript ended up in the library of the St. Sophia Cathedral of Veliky Novgorod, from where in 1791, among other manuscripts, it was sent to Moscow and came to the Chief Prosecutor of the Synod, Count Alexei Ivanovich Musin-Pushkin (1744-1817). From that time on, the Laurentian Chronicle was introduced into scientific circulation and soon became one of the main sources of all Russian historiography. N. M. Karamzin actively used the monument in his work on “The History of the Russian State.” It is the Laurentian Chronicle that opens the publication of the Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles (the first edition of the First Volume of the series was published in 1846). D.S. Likhachev chose the Laurentian Chronicle as the main source when preparing the academic publication “The Tale of Bygone Years” (in the “Literary Monuments” series, M.-L., 1950).
The fate of the Laurentian Chronicle is truly unique. In 1811 A.I. Musin-Pushkin presented the most valuable manuscript as a gift to Emperor Alexander I, and this gift saved the monument from destruction in the Moscow fire of 1812. Alexander I transferred the Laurentian Chronicle to the Imperial Public Library (now the Russian National Library) for eternal storage on August 27, 1811. Since then, the Laurentian Chronicle has been kept in the Library's Manuscripts Department for the storage of especially valuable monuments.
Despite everything, the Laurentian Chronicle did not burn down and reached us, and this is also its uniqueness. The monument continues to live, influencing the modern life of society and each of us.
In 2012, in the year of celebration of the 1150th anniversary of the birth of Russian statehood, on the initiative of the Center of National Glory and the Russian National Library, a digital copy of the Laurentian Chronicle was made and a project was carried out to present the monument on the Internet. After all, it is very important to “touch”, to see the original source, the manuscript itself - and now everyone can do this. Access to the Laurentian Chronicle has been ensured by modern technologies for every citizen of Russia.
On June 20, 2012, a new and truly worthy Internet resource was opened, allowing everyone to familiarize themselves with and study the most valuable manuscript, which has preserved on its pages the centuries-old historical memory of the people.
The digital version of the Laurentian Chronicle is posted on the portals of two libraries.
Access mode to the Laurentian Chronicle of 1377:
Russian National Library (RNL) - http://expositions.nlr.ru/LaurentianCodex
You need to click the VIEW option at the bottom, install the viewing program Silverlight.exe, return to the viewing page and directly familiarize yourself with the Laurentian Chronicle. The necessary set of options allows you to study the document as comfortably and usefully as possible.
