Traditions ancient Russian literature are found in the works of Russian writers of the 18th century. Partly they can be identified in the works of M.V. Lomonosov, A.N. Radishcheva, N.M. Karamzina and others.
A new level of assimilation of the traditions of ancient Russian literature is revealed by the work of A.S. Pushkin. “The great Russian poet not only used plots, motifs, and images of ancient Russian literature, but also resorted to its styles and individual genres to recreate the “spirit of the times”” 1. In his work on “Ruslan and Lyudmila,” the poet used the name of the main character of the ancient Russian story about Eruslan Lazarevich - Ruslan - and the motive of his meeting with the heroic head holding a sword.
Pushkin repeatedly turned to Russian chronicles; he was struck by their “simplicity and accuracy of depiction of objects.” Under their impression, the “Song of prophetic Oleg" The Old Russian text prompted the poet to think philosophically about the purpose of the poet. A poet is a Magus, a soothsayer, a prophet. He “is not afraid of mighty rulers” and does not need a princely gift. From here, from this Pushkin ballad, threads stretch to the programmatic poem “The Prophet”, as well as to the image of the chronicler Pimen in the tragedy “Boris Godunov”. Pushkin's Pimen is a wise old man, an eyewitness to many historical events, who writes only the truth about them. “The character of Pimen is not my invention,” wrote Pushkin. “In him I collected the features that captivated me in our old chronicles, touching meekness, simplicity, something childish and at the same time wise, zeal, one might say, devout for the power of the king given to him by God, a complete absence of vanity, passions breathe in these precious monuments of times long past" 2. Following ancient Russian traditions, Pushkin recreates the “touching good nature of the ancient chroniclers.”
A modern researcher has noted that the chronicle and hagiographic styles appeared in a new way in Pushkin in the 1830s in such works as “The Genealogy of My Hero”, “The History of the Village of Goryukhin”, “Belkin’s Tale” 3.
The romanticism of Lermontov's poetry was also based on the heroic-patriotic motifs of ancient Russian historical tales and legends, which was manifested in the development of the theme of Ivan the Terrible, demonological motives (“Demon”).
N.V. approaches the use of the traditions of ancient Russian literature in a new way. Gogol. It has been noted that in the early works of the writer (“Evenings on a farm near Dikanka”, “Mirgorod”) folklore motifs are linked with the motifs of ancient Russian legends and beliefs. In his mature period of creativity, he pays attention to the monuments of the teaching eloquence of Ancient Rus' (“Selected passages from correspondence with friends”).
In the second half of the 19th century new stage development artistic traditions ancient literature is associated with the names of L.N. Tolstoy and F.M. Dostoevsky.
In ancient Russian literature, Dostoevsky sees a reflection of the spiritual culture of the people, an expression of their ethical and aesthetic ideals. It is no coincidence that the writer considered Jesus Christ to be the highest moral ideal of the people, and Theodosius of Pechersk and Sergius of Radonezh to be the historical people's ideals. In the novel The Brothers Karamazov, refuting the individualistic anarchic “rebellion” of Ivan Karamazov, he creates a “majestic positive figure"Russian monk - Elder Zosima. “I took a face and a figure from ancient Russian monks and saints,” wrote Dostoevsky, “with deep humility, boundless, naive hopes about the future of Russia, about its moral and even political destiny. Didn’t St. Sergius, Peter and Alexei Metropolitans always have Russia in mind in this sense? 4 "
By placing philosophical and moral problems the meaning of life, good and evil, the writer transferred their solution from the temporal plane to the sphere of “eternal truths” and for this purpose resorted to methods of abstraction characteristic of ancient Russian literature.
L.N. Tolstoy in his novel “War and Peace” uses the epic traditions of ancient Russian chronicles and military stories. The writer is interested in ancient Russian hagiography, in which he saw “our real Russian poetry,” and uses the material of literary monuments in his pedagogical activities (“ABC”).
Old Russian works are used by Tolstoy in other works of art(“Father Sergius” - an episode from “The Life of Archpriest Avvakum”). Gospel parables and symbols are widely used by the writer in philosophical and journalistic treatises. He was attracted by the moral and psychological side of ancient Russian masterpieces, the poetry of their presentation, and the “naively artistic” places. In the 70-80s years XIX century, collections of hagiographic works - Prologues and Menaions - became his favorite reading. Tolstoy wrote in “Confession”: “Excluding miracles, looking at them as a plot expressing a thought, reading this revealed to me the meaning of life” 5 . The writer comes to the conclusion that saints are ordinary people: “There have never been and cannot be such saints as would be completely special from other people, whose bodies would remain incorruptible, who would perform miracles, etc. » 6.
G.I. considered Russian ascetics to be the type of “national intelligentsia”. Uspensky. In the series of essays “The Power of the Earth,” he noted that this intelligentsia brought “divine truth” to the people. “She raised the weak, helplessly abandoned by heartless nature to the mercy of fate; she helped, and always in action, against the too cruel pressure of zoological truth; she did not give this truth too much scope, she set limits to it... she was the type God's saint... No, although our people's saint renounces worldly concerns, he lives only for peace. He is a worldly worker, he is constantly in the crowd, among the people, and does not talk, but actually does the work” 7.
Old Russian hagiography organically entered the creative consciousness of the remarkable and still not truly appreciated writer N.S. Leskova. Comprehending the secrets of the Russian national character, he turned to the legends of the Prologue and the Chetyih-Menya. The writer approached these books as literary works, noting in them “pictures that you cannot imagine.” Leskov was struck by the “clarity, simplicity, irresistibility” of the narrative, “plots and faces.” Prologue's stories allowed him to find out "how people imagine deity and his participation in human destinies." Creating the characters of the “righteous” 8, “positive types of Russian people,” Leskov showed the thorny path of searching for a moral ideal. His heroes are inextricably linked with the vast expanses of their native land, its centuries-old long-suffering history. They are filled with true humanity, dedication, talent and hard work.
The traditions of ancient Russian literature are also mastered by writers of the 20th century: Russian symbolists, M. Gorky, V. Mayakovsky, S. Yesenin, etc.
The ideals of the moral and spiritual beauty of the Russian person have been developed by our literature throughout its almost thousand-year development. Old Russian literature created characters of stalwart, pure-hearted ascetics who devoted their lives to serving people, public good. They complemented the folk ideal of the hero - the defender of the borders of the Russian land, developed by epic poetry. D.N. wrote about the close connection between these two ideals. Mamin-Sibiryak in a letter to N.L. Barskov on April 20, 1896: “It seems to me that the “heroes” serve as an excellent complement to the “hierarchs.” And here and there are representatives of their native land, behind them one can see that Rus', on whose guard they stood. Among the heroes, the predominant element is physical strength: they defend their homeland with broad chests, and that is why this “heroic outpost” is so good (we are talking about the painting by V.M. Vasnetsov “Bogatyrs”. - Auto.), pushed to the battle line, ahead of which wandered historical predators... “The Saints” show another side of Russian history, even more important, as a moral stronghold and holy of holies for the future multi-million people. These chosen ones had a presentiment of the history of a great people...” 9
Works of ancient Russian literature have found a new life these days. They serve as a powerful means of patriotic education, instilling a feeling national pride, faith in the indestructibility of the creative vitality, energy, and moral beauty of the Russian people. As A.I. correctly and deeply noted. Herzen: “Humanity in different eras, in different countries, looking back, sees the past, but by the very way of perception and reflection of it it reveals itself... Consistently looking back, we look at the past differently each time, each time we look at a new side in it, Each time we add to his understanding the whole experience of the newly traversed path. By becoming more fully aware of the past, we understand the present; By descending deeper into the meaning of the past, we reveal the meaning of the future; looking back, we step forward” 10.
In the second half of the 19th century. a new stage began in the study of ancient Russian literature and a new stage in the development of its traditions in fiction.
Now Russian literature is turning to ancient literature in search of moral revival and healing of modern man, as the most important psychological source and source of new forms of artistic storytelling.
These features in the development of the traditions of ancient Russian literature were clearly manifested in the works of F. M. Dostoevsky and L. N. Tolstoy.
F. M. Dostoevsky was alien to “blind, selfless appeal to ancient antiquity.” However, “obsessed with the evils of the day”, “longing for the current”, the writer came to the deep conviction that “a man of independent ideas, a man of independent business, is formed only by the long independent life of the nation, its centuries-long long-suffering labor - in a word, is formed by the entire historical life countries".
Already at the beginning creative path, developing the theme of the “little man” in “Poor People”, “The Double”, Dostoevsky clearly reflected the protest of the individual against his depersonalization and leveling.
You cannot turn a person’s personality into a “rag” - a rag. The image of a man - “rags”, apparently, was generated by the apocryphal legend “The Tale of Bygone Years” under 1071.
Probably, from the apocryphal dualistic tales about the eternal struggle between God and the devil, good and evil, comes Dostoevsky’s concept of the constant struggle of these two principles in the human soul, which is the internal psychological tragedy of the individual.
Turning to ancient Russian literature, Dostoevsky sees in it a reflection of the spiritual culture of the people, an expression of their ethical and aesthetic ideals.
"All thousand-year history Russia,” the writer noted, “testifies to the amazing activity of the Russians, who consciously created their state, fighting it off for a thousand years from cruel enemies who, without them, would have descended on Europe.”
“Under the circumstances of almost all of Russian history, our people before... were corrupted, seduced and constantly tormented, what is also surprising is how they lived, preserving their human image, and not just preserving its beauty. But he also preserved the beauty of his image,” wrote Dostoevsky.
The writer saw this beauty in the moral ideal of the humble, patient Russian peasant who meekly carries his cross of suffering. The writer was convinced of the indestructibility “in the heart of our people of the thirst for truth, which is dearest to them.”
He noted that among the people “there are positive characters of unimaginable beauty and strength.” This is Ilya Muromets - “an ascetic for truth, a liberator of the poor and weak, humble and not arrogant, faithful and pure in heart.”
Dostoevsky considered Jesus Christ to be the highest moral ideal of the people, whose image the Russian people “love in their own way, i.e. to suffering.
It should be noted that in the second half of the 19th century. In Russia, the Christological problem became particularly acute, which was generated by the general crisis experienced by Christian culture.
Appearance famous painting artist A. A. Ivanov’s “The Appearance of Christ to the People” evoked a warm response in Russian society. I. N. Kramskoy’s painting “Christ in the Desert” was perceived as a kind of manifesto by advanced revolutionary youth.
He gave a new interpretation to the Gospel image in his Christological cycle
N. N. Ge (“ Last Supper", "Exit to the Garden of Gethsemane", "The Kiss of Judas", "What is truth?", "The Court of the Sanhedrin", "Golgotha"). Leo Tolstoy tried to cleanse Christianity from church distortions.
Dostoevsky associates with the image of Christ faith in the final triumph of the kingdom of light, goodness and justice.
“Child of the century, child of unbelief and doubt,” Dostoevsky strives to convince, assure, first of all, himself that “there is nothing more beautiful, more sympathetic, more intelligent, more courageous and more perfect than Christ.”
In Christ, Dostoevsky saw the embodiment of the ideal of a harmonious personality - the “god-man” and contrasted it with the painfully proud, split personality of the egocentrist - the “man-god”.
Dostoevsky's Christ is very far from the orthodox church image and much closer to the apocryphal image, which reflected popular ideas about the ideal person.
This was perfectly understood by K. Leontyev, who wrote that Dostoevsky speaks about Christ “not quite Orthodox, not patristic, not church-like” (Leontyev K. East. Russia and the Slavs).
Placing philosophical and moral problems of the meaning of life, good and evil at the center of his novels, Dostoevsky transferred their solution from temporary captivity to the plane of “eternal truths” and for this purpose resorted to abstraction techniques characteristic of ancient Russian literature. The gospel and hagiographic plots, motifs and images used by the writer serve this purpose.
Thus, in the novel “Crime and Punishment” much attention is paid to the gospel parable of “The Raising of Lazarus”, and the genre structure of the life is used, depicting the path of a sinner from crime to repentance and moral resurrection. The symbolism of the cross plays a large role in the novel.
The meeting of Christ with Mary Magdalene lies at the heart of the plot of the novel “The Idiot,” which also skillfully uses the plot of Dostoevsky’s especially beloved “Life of Mary of Egypt.”
In general philosophical meaning Dostoevsky gives the parable about Christ’s healing of the demoniac in his novel “Demons.”
Dostoevsky contrasts the idea of universal disintegration, the separation of people, “when everyone is apart, even children are apart,” with the idea of fraternal unity of people, the bearer of which is the wanderer Makar Ivanovich Dolgoruky in the novel “The Teenager.”
Wandering and “feats of penitence” are characteristic life phenomena folk life", stated Dostoevsky. They are generated by the ineradicable thirst for truth that lives in the Russian people.
In the novel “The Brothers Karamazov” Dostoevsky synthesizes and generalizes the philosophical and moral ideas of his work and widely uses the text of the Gospel, plots and images of Russian hagiography, as well as apocryphal literature.
In search of new genre forms in last period In his work, Dostoevsky turns to “The Life of a Great Sinner”, to the idea of the parable novel “Atheism” and thereby outlines new paths in the development of the Russian novel.
Writers of the 60s and 70s followed this path. XX century, in particular Chingiz Aitmatov (“The White Steamship”, “And the day lasts longer than a century”).
L.N. Tolstoy moved toward mastering the traditions of ancient Russian literature through the “book of humanity’s childhood, the Bible.” The writer paid serious attention to this book in the late 50s and early 60s, during the period of his first passion for teaching.
The Bible, according to Tolstoy, opens a new world to man, makes him “without knowledge... fall in love with knowledge.” “Everyone from this book will learn for the first time all the charm of the epic in its inimitable simplicity and power” (L. N. Tolstoy).
Tolstoy the teacher is interested in “what books are common among the people, which ones do they love and read more than others?” From his own experience, the writer is convinced that people “read works of folklore, chronicles and all monuments of ancient literature without exception with constant and new eagerness.”
The people read not what we want, but what they like... and develop their own moral convictions in their own way.”
The moral beliefs of the people become the object of close attention of the writer, are organically assimilated by him and become decisive in the writer’s assessment of various phenomena of modern life.
Turning to the events of the Patriotic War of 1812, Tolstoy in his epic novel War and Peace uses the epic traditions of Russian chronicles and military stories.
Tolstoy began to take a deep interest in ancient Russian hagiography in the 70s. when creating your own “ABC”. He carefully reads the “Cheti-Minea” and discovers “real Russian poetry” in our lives. For the Slavic section of the ABC, Tolstoy selects materials from the Bible, chronicles and lives.
In the first book of the ABC, Tolstoy includes from the Chetyi-Menya of Macarius: “About Philagria Mnich”, “About the woodcutter Murin”, from the Chetyi-Menya of Dmitry of Rostov “The Life of the Venerable David”.
In the second book of the “ABC” - “The Life of our Venerable Father Sergius, Abbot of Radonezh, the new miracle worker”, in the third book - “The Miracle of Simeon the Stylite about the Robber” and in the fourth book “The Word of Wrath” from the Makaryev menias.
All these works were translated into modern Russian “interlinearly, if possible,” while preserving the syntax features of the Old Russian original, and are distinguished by simplicity and clarity of presentation, accessible to a child’s understanding.
They reveal the spiritual beauty of Christian ascetics: honesty, hard work, selfless service to people, the destructiveness of anger and hatred.
While working on the ABC, Tolstoy came up with the idea of publishing separate lives for folk reading. He turns to Archimandrite Leonid (Kavelin), an expert in ancient writing, with a request to “compile a list of the best, dearest lives from the Makaryevskys (Chetikh-Menai), Dmitry of Rostov and the Patericon.”
In a letter to Leonid dated November 22, 1847, Tolstoy wrote: “In the book (or series of books) I propose, I separate two sides: form - language, size (i.e. brevity or length) and content - internal, i.e. i.e. moral and religious foundations, and external, i.e. the events described."
Tolstoy intended to begin his publication with short, simpler in language, Lives of Makaryev, gradually moving on to more “complex in internal content” lives, from simpler feats of martyrdom “to more complex ones, like the exploits of the archpastors of the church, acting not only for their own salvation, but and for the common good."
It is noteworthy that hagiographic literature interests Tolstoy for its internal moral and psychological content.
Having become familiar with scientific work Archimandrite Leonid “The Annunciation Priest Sylvester and His Writings”, Tolstoy wrote: “Judging by it, I guess what treasures, like which no other nation has, are hidden in our ancient literature.”
Tolstoy’s plan to publish lives for the people was not realized. Only a sketch of the beginning of “The Life and Sufferings of the Martyr Justin the Philosopher” (1874-1875) has survived.
Tolstoy prefaced the biblical epigraph “Vengeance is mine and I will repay” for the novel Anna Karenina. This epigraph summarizes the ambiguity of the moral and philosophical content of the novel. In the text of the novel, Tolstoy uses symbols dating back to ancient Russian literature: “candles,” “iron,” “machines.”
Tolstoy’s interest in ancient Russian hagiography intensified during the period of turning point in his worldview. Chetii-Minei, Prologues become Tolstoy’s favorite reading, which he writes about in “Confession”. This reading reveals to the writer the “meaning of life.”
Judging by the notebook, Tolstoy is especially interested in the lives of Paphnutius Borovsky, Savva Storzhevsky, Simeon the Righteous, Lawrence of Kaluga, Eleazar of Anzersky, Alexander of Svirsky, Macarius the Great, Barlaam and Josaph.
Tolstoy’s close attention is drawn to the personality and “Life” of Archpriest Avvakum. He makes extracts from his life while working on the historical novel “Peter I”.
In the story “Father Sergius” Tolstoy uses an episode from the “Life” of Avvakum - the confession of a harlot. Avvakum reconciled the “prodigal liquefaction” with the flame of a candle, Tolstoy’s Sergius cuts off a finger.
The commonality of the “travel” motif in the “Life” of Avvakum and Nekhlyudov in the novel “Resurrection” is noteworthy. Only for Avvakum this is the “forced” journey of a disgraced exiled rebel, for Tolstoy it is a voluntary journey through the stage of a repentant nobleman.
In his philosophical treatises, Tolstoy often uses medieval parables: in “Confession” the parable of the unicorn, he illustrates the treatise “On Life” with parables, and he is working on the drama-parable “Peter the Breadgrower”. Many of Tolstoy's folk stories have the character of parables.
Gospel parables and symbols are widely used by Tolstoy in philosophical and journalistic treatises, enhancing their didactic side and accusatory pathos.
In the 1900s, when the writer was concerned about the problem of “leaving” the family, his attention was drawn to “The Life of Alexei, the Man of God,” where this problem occupies an important place.
A new stage in the development of the traditions of ancient Russian literature begins in the 20th century. These traditions are mastered in their own way by Russian symbolism, Maxim Gorky, Mayakovsky, Yesenin.
Kuskov V.V. History of Old Russian Literature. - M., 1998
The concept of “Old Russian literature” is so familiar that almost no one notices its inaccuracy. Until about the middle of the 15th century, it would be more correct to call Old Russian literature Old East Slavic. In the first centuries after the baptism of Rus' and the spread of writing in the East Slavic lands, literature Eastern Slavs was uniform: the same works were read and copied by scribes in Kyiv and Vladimir, in Polotsk and Novgorod, in Chernigov and Rostov. Later, three different East Slavic nationalities emerged in this territory: Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians. The previously unified Old Russian language is disintegrating: Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian languages are emerging, a new language is being formed in Ukraine - “prosta mova”, penetrating bookishness, although not displacing the Church Slavonic language, traditional for East Slavic literature.
Until the 15th century, Old Russian or East Slavic literature formed a single whole with the book literature of other Orthodox Slavic countries. Like the book monuments of Ancient Rus', medieval Bulgarian and Serbian works were also written in Church Slavonic, which differed from the East Slavic Russian version only in particulars. The main body of monuments is the absolute majority of translations (and translations accounted for more than 90% of the works in Old Russian literature, according to the calculations of A.I. Sobolevsky - even about 99%) and many original works were common to Rus' and the Orthodox South Slavs. National differences were not recognized by the scribes as the main ones: the community of faith was incomparably more important for them. The Italian Slavist R. Picchio proposed considering the bookishness of these three countries as a single phenomenon and called it “Litteratura Slavia Orthodoxa” - “Literature of the Orthodox Slavs”
Old Russian literature - it is still customary to use this term - arose in the 11th century. One of its first monuments, “The Sermon on Law and Grace” by Metropolitan Hilarion, was created in the 30s and 40s. XI century, most likely at the very end of the 1040s. The 17th century is the last century of ancient Russian literature. During its course, traditional ancient Russian literary canons are gradually destroyed, new genres and new ideas about man and the world are born. Therefore, some researchers do not include the 17th century in the history of ancient Russian literature, considering it as a special period.
Literature refers to the works of ancient Russian scribes, the texts of 18th-century authors, and the works of Russian classics. XIX century, and works by contemporary writers. Of course, there are obvious differences between the literature of the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries. But all Russian literature of the last three centuries is not at all similar to the monuments of ancient Russian verbal art. However, it is precisely in comparison with them that it reveals many similarities.
The term “literature” is usually used to designate the so-called “fine literature”, or artistic literature - works written by authors to evoke in readers aesthetic experiences. Such texts can pursue edifying, educational, and ideological goals. But the aesthetic function remains the main, dominant one in it. Accordingly, in fiction, art, the author’s ingenuity, and skillful mastery of various techniques are valued above all. The setting of a literary text is aimed primarily not at the content, but at the method of its transmission, at expression. IN European culture fiction appears in ancient Greece and in Ancient Rome. Literary works of antiquity, the European Middle Ages, the Renaissance, the 17th and XVIII centuries(the era usually called classicism) are very different from the works created at the turn of the 18th-19th centuries. and later. These were works traditionalist, focused not on fundamental novelty, but on recreating samples, canons, dictated by the rules of a. Imitation in traditionalist literature was not condemned as epigonism or plagiarism, but was a normal phenomenon. The rules by which traditionalist literature “lived” were formulated in special guidelines for the compilation of written and oral texts - rhetoric - and in treatises dedicated to literature — poetics.
The era of pre-romanticism and romanticism is considered to be the time of “turning point”, when individual style triumphs over literary rules dictated by tradition. However, some researchers believe that the opinion about the triumph of the author’s individuality over traditionalist literary attitudes (supposedly accomplished at the turn of the 18th - 19th centuries) and about the fundamental difference between “new” literature and “old” literature is nothing more than an illusion: we are “inside” modern literature and therefore better see the differences rather than the similarities between the works of different authors; in the literature of other eras, which we see “from the outside,” for us, on the contrary, what is more clear is the general, and not the features of this or that individual style. This position was held by the largest Russian literary critic of the second half of the 19th - 20th centuries. A.N. Veselovsky. Its supporter was the famous researcher of ancient and Russian literature M.L. Gasparov.
Old Russian literature is no less traditionalistic than ancient literature or works of so-called classicism. But its traditionalism and canonicity are different. The culture of Ancient Rus' did not know rhetoric and poetics. Scribes resorted to a variety of rhetorical techniques: anaphors, syntactic parallelism, rhetorical questions and exclamations. But at the same time, they imitated texts inherited from Byzantine literature, and not at all the rules clearly formulated in special manuals. Until the 17th century Rhetorics were not common in Rus', and the attitude towards them was, apparently, persistently negative. He spoke very harshly about rhetoric at the beginning of the 16th century. Elder (monk) of one of the Pskov monasteries Philotheus (we remember him as the creator of the historiosophical theory “Moscow is the third Rome”). They spoke disparagingly and condemningly about rhetoric in the 17th century. Old Believers who defended the centuries-old foundations of Russian Orthodoxy and Russian culture; among them was famous author own “Life”, Archpriest Avvakum. For ancient Russian scribes, rhetoric was “alien knowledge”, belonging to the “Latin”, Catholic world. And Catholicism in Rus' was considered a heresy, a deviation from Christianity. The addressee of manuals on rhetoric was author, creator, a writer who treated the text as to his creation. But for the ancient Russian religious and cultural consciousness, a scribe, a writer is not an author in the proper sense of the word, but “ tool" in the hands of God, “ weapon"Gentlemen. He writes by the grace of God. It is no coincidence that the Kiev scribe of the late XI - early XII centuries. Nestor, well-read in Byzantine hagiography (“hagiography” - lives of saints), writes in the Life of Theodosius of Pechersk about himself that he is “rude and unreasonable.” The most educated Moscow hagiographer Epiphanius, nicknamed by his contemporaries the Wise One, also apologizes for his ignorance and “unbookishness”: in the brilliant and most skillful Life of Sergius of Radonezh, he writes self-deprecatingly about his own lack of education and inability to master verbal skills. The True Creator is one God, who created heaven and earth. The word given by Him to man is sacred (sacral), and one cannot “play” with the word: this is blasphemy, a crime against the Creator. Meanwhile, the “rhetorical” attitude to the text presupposes just such a game and daring: the writer creates an autonomous verbal world, like God who created the Universe. The writer “arrogantly” demonstrates his skill. The ancient Russian consciousness could not accept such an attitude towards the text.
When rhetoric and poetics exist in a culture, this means that literature recognizes itself precisely as literature—an independent phenomenon. She reflects, “thinks” about herself. In this case, the role of the author’s principle increases: the artist’s skill is valued, writers enter into competition with each other to see who can write their work better and surpass some example. Traditionalist literature, which has “proclaimed” itself as literature, is not like traditionalist literature, which has not yet realized its originality.
Among such literatures that have not become an independent sphere of culture and do not reflect on their own specificity is ancient Russian book literature. Old Russian bookishness is not yet artistic literature. The aesthetic function in it is not independent, but is subordinated to the utilitarian, edifying, and cultic ones. The lack of self-reflection in ancient Russian literature determined the author's relatively smaller role than in medieval Western Europe or Byzantium.
What is this connected with? One could explain this feature by the subordination of the personality to the “conciliar” principle inherent in Orthodoxy: the Catholic teaching about the salvation and justification of a person by works gives personality higher value. But in Orthodox Byzantium the situation was completely different: Byzantine literature, in comparison with Old Russian literature, reveals more differences than in comparison with the literatures of the medieval West. One can say that the whole point is in the properties of the “Russian soul”, alien to individualism and secular culture. But the literature of other medieval Orthodox Slavic countries - Bulgaria, Serbia - is similar in type to Old Russian. If we declare that the root cause is in the nature of the “Slavic soul,” then the example of the Catholic Slavic countries - Poland and the Czech Republic - will refute this statement.
The reason is not in certain features of ethnic psychology or in the differences between Orthodoxy and Catholicism (although confessional differences in medieval culture are in other cases extremely significant). The specificity of Old Russian literature and other Orthodox Slavic literatures is truly connected with faith. But not with religious differences, but with a special religious attitude to the word: books, writing and the alphabet itself were sacred for the Orthodox Slavs. Western world, former barbarian tribes and states inherited the culture and its language - Latin - from the fallen Roman Empire. By the time of its fall in 475, the Western Roman Empire had already professed Christianity for about one hundred and fifty years. The Latin language (as well as Greek and Hebrew) was considered sacred by the Western Church: the argument was the Gospel testimony that it was in these three languages that the inscription was made on the cross of the crucified Jesus Christ. But Latin was never accepted in Western Europe only like a sacred language. Latin was also the language of Roman pagan literature, inherited by the Christian West. The attitude towards Roman writers of the pre-Christian era (primarily Virgil and Horace) in the Western medieval world varied - from enthusiastic acceptance to complete rejection. Sometimes in monastic book-writing workshops - scriptoria - the texts of pagan authors were washed off from parchment manuscripts and pious Christian works were written in their place. But still, the works of ancient authors continued to be copied and read. Latin was also the language of pagan philosophy, not all of whose works were rejected by the Christian West, and the language of jurisprudence. On Latin In the Middle Ages, both church monuments and secular works were created.
The fate of the book language among the Orthodox Slavs was completely different. In the middle of the 9th century. Byzantine missionaries brothers Constantine (in monasticism - Cyril) and Methodius created the Slavic alphabet. Constantine and Methodius preached Christianity in the Moravian Principality; later Methodius was forced to leave Moravia and settled in Bulgaria. According to the vast majority of researchers, it was not the Cyrillic alphabet (the name “Cyrillic” comes from the name of Constantine - Cyril), which underlies the modern alphabets of the Eastern Slavs, Bulgarians and Serbs, but another alphabet - the Glagolitic alphabet (however, there is also an opinion that Constantine compiled first the Glagolitic alphabet and then the Cyrillic alphabet). The Slavic alphabet was created specifically for the Slavic translation of sacred Christian texts. Constantine and Methodius were also the creators of the book Slavic language, and the first translators of sacred texts from Greek into this language. The book Slavic language (usually called Old Church Slavonic) was created, apparently, on the basis of the South Slavic dialects of Macedonia. It included words composed by analogy with the words of the Greek language, and some original words acquired new meanings that convey the meaning of Christian doctrine. The Old Church Slavonic language became the single liturgical language of the Orthodox Slavs. In the same language, priests in churches offered prayers to God both on the banks of the Danube, and on the spurs of the Rhodope Mountains, and in the dense forests of the Novgorod North, and on the Solovetsky Islands lost in the cold sea...
Over time, in different Orthodox Slavic countries their own versions of the liturgical language developed, losing some of the features characteristic of the language that existed under Constantine and Methodius. The liturgical language of the Eastern Slavs, Bulgarians and Serbs is usually called Church Slavonic.
The acquisition of writing was perceived by the Orthodox Slavs as a sacred event: Constantine and Methodius created Slavic writing by the grace of God. In the Bulgarian work of the late 9th - early 10th centuries, “The Tale of Writings” by Chernorizets Khrabra (this work was well known in Ancient Rus') it was said: “After all, before the Slavs, when they were pagans, did not have writings<...>.
Then God, the lover of mankind, who rules over everything and does not leave the human race without knowledge, but leads everyone to knowledge and salvation, had mercy on the Slavic race and sent them Saint Constantine the Philosopher, named (in tonsure) Cyril, a righteous and true man.<...>... For the Slavs there is only Saint Constantine<...>and translated books in a few years<...>. And therefore (also) Slavic writings are more holy and [more worthy of veneration], because they were created by a holy man, and the Greek ones were created by pagan Hellenes.<...>After all, if you ask the Greek scribes, saying: who created the writings or translated the books for you and at what time, then few among them know (this). If you ask the Slavic scribes who created the letters for you or translated the books, then everyone knows and, answering, they say: Saint Constantine the Philosopher<...>he created writings, and translated books, and Methodius, his brother” (Tales of the beginning of Slavic writing. M., 1981. pp. 102-105, trans. B. N. Flori).
Medieval Slavic scribes revered Church Slavonic as a sacred language and could not imagine that it should serve other purposes than the expression of the revealed truth of Christianity. Therefore, Church Slavonic could not become the language of artistic, secular literature, and therefore the writing of the Orthodox Slavs for centuries was almost exclusively religious in nature.
Famous philologist S.S. Averintsev, distinguishing between ancient Hebrew writing, represented by sacred texts (in the Christian tradition, the body of these texts was called the Old Testament), and ancient Greek works, proposed calling religious books “literature,” reserving the term “literature” only for works similar to ancient Greek. We cannot call the Jewish king David, who is credited with the authorship of one of the biblical sacred books - the Psalter - an author in the same sense of the word in which we call them, for example, Greek lyricists. And it is no coincidence for the biblical religious tradition It is not so important whether all the psalms really belong to David: what is important is not the authorship (the psalmist does not seek to express his individual feelings or demonstrate his own skill), but the authority of the name. Old Russian literature can also rightfully be called “literature”.
The main feature of literature is fiction. Art world literary works has a special status, “fictionality”: a statement in literary text- This is neither a lie nor the truth. The role of fiction is especially clear in narrative and plot works. Works with fictional plots and characters existed both in medieval Europe (for example, chivalric romances) and in Byzantium (for example, romance novels). But ancient Russian literature, until the 17th century, did not know fictional characters and plots. From our outside point of view, much ancient Russian works seems like fiction. For example, when, under 1096, in the chronicle known as “The Tale of Bygone Years,” the story of a certain Novgorodian Gyuryata Rogovich is given. People from the northern Ugra tribe told the envoy of Gyuryata Rogovich about a certain people imprisoned in the mountains: “<...>The essence of the mountain is beyond the bow of the sea, its height is as high as heaven, and in those mountains there is a great cry and talk, and a slash of the mountain, wanting to be carved; and in that mountain there is a little cut-out window, and there is nothing to say there, and there is no understanding of their language, but to speak on iron and anoint (waving. - A.R.) with a hand, asking for iron; and if anyone gives them a knife or an axe, they will give it against the speed (fur. - A.R.)“. To modern man Having a rationalistic consciousness, the miracles described in the lives of saints also seem to be fiction. But both ancient Russian scribes and their readers believed in the events described.
Fiction was also alien to the South Slavic Orthodox literature. The fate of “Alexandria”, a translation of the ancient Greek novel about the great king and commander of antiquity, Alexander the Great, is interesting in Rus' and among the southern Slavs. “Alexandria” was translated into Church Slavonic in Rus' in the 12th century. and in Serbia in the XIII - XIV centuries. (Serbian translation, the so-called “Serbian Alexandria” spread in Muscovite Rus' in the 15th century). “Alexandria” reported that Alexander’s father was not the Macedonian king Philip II, but the Egyptian wizard Nectanabus: he entered the chambers of Queen Olympias, Philip’s wife, taking the form of a huge serpent. The fantastic creatures that Alexander the Great met on his campaigns are described in detail in “Alexandria”: six-armed and six-legged people and people with dog heads, one-legged people and half-humans, half-horses - centaurs. It tells about a wonderful lake in the water of which dead fish came to life.
For educated Byzantines, “Alexandria” was entertaining reading, a fairy tale novel. They distinguished the novel about the Macedonian king from the historical works dedicated to him, and when they wanted to find out the truth about Alexander’s campaigns, they read, for example, his biography, belonging to the ancient Greek historian Plutarch. But ancient Russian scribes (as well as Bulgarian and Serbian) treated “Alexandria” differently: as a reliable historical source. The Greek novel in Rus' was included in historical works - chronographs.
Old Russian literature until the 17th century. does not describe love experiences and does not seem to know the very concept of “love”. She talks either about sinful “prodigal passion” leading to the death of the soul, or about a virtuous Christian marriage (for example, in “The Tale of Peter and Fevronia”).
In the 17th century In Russia, fictional works are gradually spreading - love adventures, adventurous stories. The first stories with fictional plots and characters were translations and adaptations. The most famous among them are “The Tale of Beauvais the Prince,” which dates back to the French novel about the knight Beauvais d’Antono, and “The Tale of Eruslan Lazarevich,” the source of which was the Eastern legend about the valiant hero Rustem (this story served as one of the sources of Pushkin’s poem “ Ruslan and Ludmila"). These works caused dissatisfaction among conservative-minded people who were accustomed to the works. Thus, the courtier, steward Ivan Begichev sternly reprimanded in a message to readers of adventurous stories: “All of you, except for the fabulous stories spoken about Prince Bova and the spiritually beneficial things you imagine, which are stated from an infant<...>and about other similar fabulous stories and ridiculous letters - they haven’t read any divine books or theological doctrines” (Yatsimirsky A.I. Message of Ivan Begichev about the visible image of God... // Readings in the Society of Russian History and Antiquities. 1898 Book 2. Dept. 2. P. 4). Begichev was accustomed to seeing “spiritually beneficial reading” in literature, and he could not understand that lovers of “unhelpful stories” were not at all deceived, did not mistake them for “spiritually beneficial reading”: they reveled in their “unhelpfulness”, the intricacies of events, bold deeds and love adventures of the characters.
Usually in textbooks and lecture courses it is customary to distinguish between religious and secular ancient Russian literature; This distinction is maintained in many scientific studies. In fact, it reflects the peculiarities of the researcher’s consciousness rather than the structure of ancient Russian literature. Of course, a liturgical hymn (canon) to a saint, a word (a genre of solemn eloquence) for a church holiday, or the life of a saint are works of religious content. But both the military story and the chronicle, most often classified as monuments of secular literature, depict and interpret events from a religious point of view. Everything that happens is explained by the participation of Providence, the implementation of the divine plan: events take place either by the will and grace of God (these are good events), or by God’s permission, as punishment for the sins of the Russian princes and their subjects (these are unkind, “evil” events - invasions of foreigners, crop failures , natural disasters). The chronicler is not interested in the cause-and-effect relationship in history - he is not a historian, but a “recorder.”
In the chronicles, Russian history was inscribed in a series of events world history and was considered within the framework of ideas about the movement of time inherited from the Bible. The landmarks of sacred history are the creation of the world, the flood and the settlement of peoples after the flood, the incarnation of God, the death on the cross and the Resurrection of Christ, the spread of Christianity and, from an eschatological perspective, the Second Coming of Christ and the Last Judgment - these are the milestones of history for the chroniclers. They constantly draw analogies between contemporary events and acts described in the Bible. It is no coincidence that most of them were monks. Some researchers (I.N. Danilevsky, A.N. Uzhankov) are inclined to believe that the chronicles were created as a list of good and evil deeds, intended for God himself, as books by which the Lord would judge people on the day of the last judgment, but no direct there is no evidence of this. The books by which the Lord judges the human race in the Revelation of John the Theologian are not chronicles written by people.
Old Russian literature did not know proper secular genres until the 17th century. There was nothing in it love lyrics, similar to the poetry of the Minnesingers and troubadours in Western Europe, nor stories of exploits and love adventures, like the chivalric romances in the West. There were no historical works whose authors offered their own interpretations, detailed analysis events. Such authored historical works were widespread in Byzantium (works by Michael Psellus, Nikita Choniates, etc.). In Rus', “author’s” stories appeared only in the 16th century. (“The Story of the Grand Duke of Moscow” by Andrei Kurbsky) and were widely distributed in the next century. Over the previous centuries, ancient Russian scribes from the rich Byzantine historiographical heritage became acquainted only with chronicles - works that simply and artlessly presented the events of world history in chronological order; the compilers of the chronicles, like the Russian chroniclers, explained what was happening by Divine Providence.
In the West and in Byzantium, the same material, the same plots and motives could be described in both sacred and secular texts: not only the Gospels and lives, but also poems told about the earthly life of Christ, the Mother of God and the saints and dramatic writings. The lives of rulers, if they were canonized, were told in both lives and secular biographies.
It was different in Rus'. Only sacred texts spoke about Christ and the saints. If a chronicle told about a saint, then the description of his life was either directly borrowed from hagiography or was written in a hagiographic style. When ancient Russian scribes described the life of rulers, under their pen it invariably turned into hagiography: secular biography Old Russian literature did not know until its decline.
Of course, secular motifs existed in Russian folklore (however, the composition of the Old Russian oral folk art we have very rough ideas, since the oldest records of Russian folklore are no older than the 17th century). But folk literature was a special sphere of culture, not similar to ancient Russian literature.
In relation to ancient Russian literature, it would be more correct to speak not about the distinction between the religious and secular spheres, but about the boundaries between sacred, divinely inspired texts and works of lower religious status. The Bible (Holy Scripture), Holy Tradition (works of saints - the Fathers of the Church - who formulated the foundations of Christian doctrine, dogma), liturgical (liturgical) texts formed the core or - if we use another spatial image - the pinnacle of ancient Russian literature. Unauthorized editing and interference with the texts of Holy Scripture and liturgy were not allowed. In 1525, a Greek who came from a Greek monastery on the famous Mount Athos (here was a kind of “monastic republic”, an “inflorescence” of Orthodox monasteries - Greek, Bulgarian, Serbian, Russian) Maxim was convicted by Russian church authorities and sent to prison for repentance; The reason for the harsh decision was Maxim the Greek’s translations from the Old Testament, which contained deviations (in grammar!) from the tradition established in Rus'.
Monuments of church eloquence, lives, walks (descriptions of pilgrimages), patericon (collections of stories about monks of a monastery or locality) had less authority. Scribes often edited, supplemented or shortened their text. Works dedicated to real, everyday events were still “a step lower.”
Thus, Old Russian literature does not represent a rigid system with clearly demarcated spheres: there are not boundaries between different areas of literature, but gradual, “smooth” transitions.
Old Russian literature did not know comic, funny, or parody works, although they existed both in the West and in Byzantium. There are only isolated ironic phrases or satirical “sketches.” Talking about the defeat of Voivode Pleshcheev, the chronicler noted that he ran, turning his “shoulders” (shoulders). In the narration of the terrible and humiliating defeat of the Russian army by the Tatars on the Piana River in 1377, the chronicler accuses the Russians of spending their time in feasts and carelessly not preparing for an attack by the enemy. “Truly, you are drunk,” wrote an ancient Russian scribe. But these individual ironic or satirical fragments are part of completely “serious” works. “Laughter leads to sin,” says a Russian proverb. Laughter and unbridled fun in ancient Russian Orthodox culture were considered not only sinful, but also blasphemous. Laughter and fun accompanied folk holidays of pagan origin. The Church invariably condemned these holidays.
Only in the 17th century. Comic literature is emerging in Rus'. At the same time, in the 1670s, the Russian theater was created, the first plays were staged on the court stage and composed. Acting and acting were considered sinful activities. Firstly, this is empty entertainment. Secondly, and this is the main thing, playwrights and actors created their own, illusory world, as if encroaching on the rights of God, the only Creator. The artists renounced their personality, their own destiny given to them by God, and played other people's lives and roles. Archpriest Avvakum, who fiercely defended the blessed antiquity, wrote about the court theater of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich and about the actors like this: a child plays an angel, but he does not know that it is not he who portrays the angel, but the demon himself.
“If you don’t have enough, you have nothing,” this caustic remark of one of the characters in Bulgakov’s novel “The Master and Margarita”, at first glance, is ideally applicable not only to the Soviet shortage, but also to ancient Russian literature. But the differences between ancient Russian literature and contemporary literatures of the Latin West or Byzantium do not at all indicate its inferiority, “second-rateness.” Just ancient Russian culture - in many ways different. Culturologist and semiotician B.A. Uspensky explained the uniqueness of Old Russian literature as follows. A word, according to semiotics (the science of signs) is a conditional (conventional) sign in which the signified (this or that concept, meaning) and the signifier (the sound “shell”, the sound composition of the word) are arbitrarily connected. There is no internal relationship between sounds and concepts. It is not for nothing that in different languages the same signifieds correspond to different signifiers, and in the same language a concept can be designated by different synonymous words. But to the ancient Russian religious and cultural consciousness, the connection between the signified and the signified seemed involuntary, indissoluble. Sacred texts were thought of as a “message” emanating from God himself. Words - conventional signs - were perceived in Ancient Rus' as iconic signs (in semiotics, this term refers to signs based on the similarity or resemblance between the signified and the signifier - photographs, road signs with images, painting, sculpture, cinema). With such an attitude towards literature, the aesthetic “game” inherent in fiction turned out to be impossible.
Old Russian literature is not “fine literature.” Old Russian literature is connected with everyday life, with ritual, with the practical needs of society in a completely different way than the literature of modern times. Church hymns were sung at certain times during services, and samples of church eloquence and short lives of saints were heard in the church. (They were called complex, according to the Slavic name of the collection of short lives - Prologue; These texts were read during the sixth song of the liturgical hymn - the canon). The monks listened to the reading of lengthy lives during meals; information from the lives of the posthumous miracles of saints served to justify the canonization (establishment of church veneration) of these saints. Chronicles were a peculiar thing for the people of Ancient Rus' legal document. After the death of Moscow Prince Yuri Dmitrievich in 1425, his younger brother Yuri Dmitrievich and son Vasily Vasilyevich began to argue about their rights to the Moscow throne. Both princes turned to the Tatar Khan to arbitrate their dispute. At the same time, Yuri Dmitrievich, defending his rights to reign in Moscow, referred to ancient chronicles, which reported that power had previously passed from the prince-father not to his son, but to his brother.
But nevertheless, ancient Russian literary monuments have undoubted aesthetic properties. In a culture that does not distinguish between artistic and non-artistic, aesthetic properties are found in works that have utilitarian functions: everything became involved in divine beauty.
In ancient Russian literature, events and things surrounding a person are symbols and manifestations of a higher, spiritual, divine reality. Two forces rule in the world - the will of God, who desires the good of man, and the will of the devil, who with his machinations desires to turn man away from God and destroy him. Man is free to choose between good and evil, light and darkness. But by succumbing to the power of the devil, he loses his freedom, and by resorting to the help of God, he gains Divine grace that strengthens him.
Compilers of lives and sermons, chroniclers, and authors of historical stories invariably turn to the Bible. Old Russian writings are a kind of fabric. The constant basis and “red thread” of these texts, their leitmotifs, are symbols, metaphors, sayings borrowed from biblical books. Thus, “The Tale of Boris and Gleb” (XI - early XII century) - a hagiographic narrative about the holy brothers, the sons of the baptist of Rus', Prince Vladimir, who voluntarily and innocently accepted martyrdom at the hands of their half-brother Svyatopolk - opens with the lines: “The family of the righteous will be blessed, - the prophet said, “and their seed will be blessed.” This reminiscence from the biblical book of Psalms is one of the semantic keys to the text. But sometimes allusions to Scripture pointing to symbolic meanings, introduced into the text by the ancient Russian scribe, are not so obvious to us. And ancient Russian readers recognized them without difficulty. The youth Gleb in the same “Legend...” touchingly prays to the murderers: “You will not cut the vines without fully growing, but having the fruit!” The young vine is not just an emotional metaphor, but a Christological symbol: in the Gospel of John (chapter 15), Jesus Christ calls himself the vine. Gleb is mercilessly killed on the orders of Svyatopolk’s envoys by his own cook: “The cook Glebov, named Tarchin, took the knife and, blessed be he, slaughtered it like a lamb, immaculately and without forehead<...>" Comparison with a lamb (lamb) not only testifies to the gentleness and meekness of the saint; Lamb, Lamb of God is a metaphorical name for Christ in the Holy Scriptures. Comparing Gleb with a lamb, the compiler of the “Tale...” likens him to Christ, who accepted an innocent death.
Time and space in ancient Russian literature are not physical categories. They have special semantics. Eternity shines through the temporary. Recurring every year church holidays: the birth, death and Resurrection of Christ were not just a memory of the events of the Savior’s earthly life, but a mysterious and real repetition of these very events. Believers experienced each holiday of the Nativity as the birth of the baby Jesus, and each Easter holiday was for them a new resurrection of Christ from the dead. It is no coincidence that the ancient Russian preacher of the 12th century. Kirill Turovsky, remembering the resurrection of Christ, constantly uses the word “today” (“now”).
Biblical events were interpreted as types of what was happening in the present. Past events for ancient Russian man did not disappear without a trace: they gave birth to a long “echo”, repeating themselves and being renewed in the present. An echo, an echo of the biblical story about the murder of Abel by brother Cain for the ancient Russian scribes was the treacherous murder of the holy princes brothers Boris and Gleb by the “new, second Cain” - half-brother Svyatopolk. In turn, later Russian princes were likened to Svyatopolk, just like him, who took the lives of their relatives.
Space for ancient Russian people was not just a geographical concept. It could be “friend” and “alien”, “native” and “hostile”. Such, for example, are, on the one hand, Christian lands and especially “holy places” (Palestine with Jerusalem, Constantinople with its shrines, Mount Athos monasteries in the Balkans). The semantics of space in ancient Russian literature was studied by Yu.M. Lotman. The “holy”, “righteous” lands were located in the east, “at sunrise” (it is no coincidence that the main part of the Christian temple, its “holy of holies” was always facing the east). The “sinful lands” were located in the west and north. But the concepts of “east” and “west” in ancient Russian religious consciousness had, first of all, not a geographical, but a value-religious meaning.
The city with its temples and walls was contrasted with the Wild Steppe, from where foreigners - the Polovtsians and Tatars - launched raids. The secular territory of the city, villages, and fields were contrasted with the sacred space of temples and monasteries.
Style in ancient Russian literature depended not on the genre of the work, but on the subject of the story. In describing the life of the saint, a stable set of expressions was used - “stencils” and biblical quotes. The saint was usually called an “earthly angel and heavenly man”, “wonderful and wonderful”, it was said about the “light” of his soul and exploits, about the unwavering, thirsty love for God. He was likened to the illustrious saints of the past. These same “stencils”, “common places” are used when depicting the saint both in the chronicle fragment and in the laudatory speech.
The image of the ideal prince remained unchanged in various works: he is pious, merciful and fair, and brave. His death is mourned by all people - rich and poor.
Another set of “stencils” was characteristic of the military style. This style was used to describe battles in chronicles, historical stories, and lives. The enemy came out “in heavy strength” and surrounded the Russian army like a forest; Russian princes offered prayers to God before the battle; arrows flew like rain; the warriors fought, clutching their hands; the battle was so fierce that blood flooded the valleys, etc.
In the culture of the New Age, everything non-trivial and not yet known is highly valued. The main advantage of a writer is his individuality and inimitable style.
In ancient Russian literature, the canon reigned - the rules and patterns according to which scribes compiled their works. The role of the canon in other areas is no less significant. ancient Russian culture, in particular, in icon painting: images of various scenes of sacred history had a stable composition and color scheme. The icon represented this or that saint in an unchanged appearance, and not only facial features were repeated, but also clothing, and even the shape of the beard. In the 16th–17th centuries, special manuals for painting icons—iconographic originals—became widespread.
Researcher of ancient Russian literature, academician D.S. Likhachev proposed a special term to denote the role of tradition, the canon in the monuments of medieval Russian literature - “literary etiquette”. Here is how the scientist himself explains this concept: “The literary etiquette of a medieval writer was composed of ideas about: 1) how this or that course of events should have taken place, 2) how the character should have behaved in accordance with his position, 3) what words should have been used the author describes what is happening.<...>
It would be wrong to see in the literary etiquette of the Russian Middle Ages only a set of mechanically repeating patterns and stencils, a lack of creative invention, the “ossification” of creativity, and to confuse this literary etiquette with the patterns of individual mediocre people. works of the XIX V. The whole point is that all these verbal formulas, stylistic features, certain repeating situations, etc. are used by the medieval writer not at all mechanically, but precisely where they are required. The writer chooses, reflects, and is concerned about the overall “prettyness” of the presentation. The very literary canons are varied by him, changing depending on his ideas about “literary decency.” It is these ideas that are central to his work.
What we have before us is not a mechanical selection of stencils, but creativity, in which the writer strives to express his ideas about what is proper and proper, not so much inventing something new as combining the old” (Likhachev D.S. Poetics of Literature // Artistic and Aesthetic Culture of Ancient Rus'. XI - XVII century. M., 1996. P. 66).
The term “literary etiquette” has become generally accepted in studies on the history of ancient Russian literature.
Yu.M. Lotman called canonical art (which includes ancient Russian literature) an “information paradox.” The new text should convey new information, however, in the case of canonical art this does not happen: it is the message, the content that turns out to be “clichéd” and repetitive. Thus, the lives of various saints are, in a certain sense of the word, one text with the same “character” and sequence of events (the image of the saint and his actions in numerous lives are similar). In works of canonical art, as the researcher claims, the form, the “plane of expression”, is noticeable, and not the repetitive content. Yu.M. Lotman saw the function of texts of canonical art in communicating to the perceiver (reader, contemplator, listener) the principles on which these texts are constructed. Such principles are a code (“language”, a system of techniques that conveys information), with the help of which the reader could interpret other texts in a new way. These include, according to Yu.M. Lotman, and the world around him, and the ideas about it of a person of canonical culture. (Yu.M. Lotman uses the concept “text” in an expanded, semiotic meaning: reality is also a text that has certain meaning, which needs to be comprehended.) But mastering this code does not require a large number of texts (as it actually is), and therefore Yu.M. Lotman believes that canonical art contains and transmits not only codes, but also new messages. According to the researcher, these new messages are created due to the fact that when creating texts there is a violation of the rules declared by traditionalist cultures (see: Lotman Yu.M. 1) About two models of communication in the cultural system; 2) Canonical art as an information paradox // Lotman Yu.M. Selected articles: In 3 volumes. Tallinn, 1992. T. 1. P. 84-85; 243-247). However, such an interpretation threatens to level out the difference between traditionalist and anti-traditionalist cultures. Other cases are probably more typical for canon-oriented cultures, and in particular for Old Russian literature.
New things in a traditionalist text can be created not due to the originality of the message, but due to the peculiarities of the code expressing this message. The Life of Sergius of Radonezh (1417-1418) by Epiphanius the Wise is an example when a given, familiar content is conveyed using codes, the interaction of which in the text is unpredictable and original. The reader of the Life knows that he will be informed about the mystical connection between the life of Sergius and the Holy Trinity. But he cannot predict how this will be done: at the phrasal level (using triple repetitions of some words or expressions), at the event level (and it is not known through what events), with the help of hagiographer’s explanations and retrospective analogies with biblical righteous people , in the narrative of which there are also thrice repeated events. Elements of triple repetitions in the Life often do not form single blocks, but are separated by significant fragments of text. The reader must discover these series. Reading the Life turns out to be a reconstruction of the life of a saint as a whole with meaning. The text of the Life leads the reader to the deep meaning of the dogma of the Holy Trinity - a multi-valued and hidden meaning...
The originality of the ancient Russian scribe (and Epiphanius was undoubtedly skillful and original writer) is manifested not in neglecting tradition, not in violating it, but in “building on” its own additional principles of ordering and organizing the text over its rules.
The style of some ancient Russian scribes is easily recognizable and has striking distinctive features. Thus, it is impossible to attribute to someone else not only the writings of Epiphanius the Wise, with his sophisticated “weaving of words.” The style of Ivan the Terrible’s messages is inimitable, boldly mixing eloquence and rude abuse, learned examples and the style of simple conversation. But these are rather exceptions. Old Russian authors did not consciously try to be original, did not boast, did not “show off” beauty and grace or the novelty of style.
The author's origin in ancient Russian literature is muted and implicit. Old Russian scribes were not careful with other people's texts. When rewriting, the texts were processed: some phrases or episodes were excluded from them or inserted into them, and stylistic “decorations” were added. The author's ideas and assessments were replaced by the opposite. Lists of one work that differ significantly from each other are called “editions” by researchers. Old Russian scribes rarely indicated their names in manuscripts. As a rule, authors mention their names only when necessary to give the story authenticity and documentary quality. Thus, the compilers of lives often said that they were eyewitnesses to events in the life of the saint. The authors of pilgrimage narratives, describing their own journeys to great Christian shrines, reported their names. What was valued above all was not authorship, but the authority of the writer. Russian scribes even attributed to some of the Greek theologians - church fathers - St. Basil the Great, St. John Chrysostom - teachings against paganism that were actually created in Rus'. The authority of the name gave these texts greater influence and weight. Among the works attributed to the famous preacher Saint Cyril of Turov, many, apparently, do not belong to him: the name of Cyril of Turov gave these works additional authority.
The concept of authorship in the modern sense appears only in the 17th century. The court poets Simeon of Polotsk, Sylvester Medvedev, Karion Istomin already consider themselves the creators of original creations, emphasizing their literary skills. They receive from kings cash rewards for his writings. Their contemporary Archpriest Avvakum, a zealous adherent of the traditions of antiquity, nevertheless constantly breaks the established rules and writes an autobiographical narrative - his own biography in the form of the life of a saint (not a single scribe previous centuries I couldn’t even imagine such a thing). Habakkuk likens himself to the apostles and Christ himself. He moves freely from book language to colloquial vernacular.
Modern literature is characterized by an awareness of its own dynamics and development: both writers and readers distinguish between the recognized, authoritative “fund” of literature - the classics - and today’s works that create new ones artistic languages, transforming reality in a new way, causing controversy. Such self-awareness is alien to Old Russian literature. For a Moscow scribe of the 15th or 16th centuries, the works of Kyiv chroniclers or hagiographers of three and four centuries ago and modern texts are not fundamentally different. Old texts may be more authoritative than new ones, sometimes less understandable than modern ones, and therefore, for example, their language requires updating when rewritten. Antique works were sometimes subjected to both ideological and stylistic editing. However, the same thing happened with texts created recently. Ancient and modern texts were read equally and were often included in the same manuscript collections. Works of different periods are thought of as synchronous, belonging to the same time. All literature is, as it were, “achronic”, has a timeless character.
The literature of modern times represents a certain system, all elements (genres, texts) of which are interconnected. When something is formed literary movement or direction, then its inherent features are manifested in the most different genres. Thus, researchers write about a romantic poem, a romantic elegy, and a romantic tragedy or story. The evolution of a single genre or group of genres, discoveries made in these genres, are also perceived by works belonging to completely different literary spheres. Thus, the techniques of the psychological novel of the mid-second half of the 19th century are inherited by the lyrics; under the influence of dominant prose, poetry is “prosaicized” (lyrics and poems by N.A. Nekrasov); the dominant role of poetry in the literature of symbolism leads to the “lyricization” of symbolist prose.
In ancient Russian literature such a connection between different types bookishness, which scientists traditionally also call genres, does not exist.
Back in the 17th century, when historical narratives undergo dramatic changes and arise before unknown genres, the scribes continue to create the lives of the saints according to the old schemes. Some genres develop faster, others slower, and others “stagnate” in immobility. Naturally, genres whose structure is determined by the rules of worship do not evolve. The lives have changed little, for they tell about the eternal - about the revelation and presence of holiness in the earthly world. Different genres have their own And human life. At the same time, for example, a hagiographic “character”, a saint, and in other genres will be portrayed differently from ordinary, sinful people, a prince - invariably differently from a commoner. In a similar way, saints, the Mother of God and Christ, servants, sinners, demons are always depicted on icons differently, regardless of their position in space: Christ and the Mother of God are much taller than the apostles standing next to them; even smaller than the servant. Demons are invariably shown in profile.
In the literature of modern times, works of various genres “speak” about different things, create different artistic worlds: the world of elegy is other world than the world of a novel or comedy. The world of ancient Russian literature is one - it is a reality created by God. But it is seen in different genres from different points of view; genre in And The writing of the chronicle is unlike hagiography: the chronicler records and selects events differently than the hagiographer. But these different approaches to reality are compatible: for example, a hagiographical story is often inserted into a chronicle text. A brief mention in the chronicle of a saint or a story about the deeds of a prince in the name of the land and faith in the chronicle can be transformed into a hagiographical narrative. Ideas about man and the world are not created by an ancient Russian scribe, but are given, “pre-found” in church teaching. In the literature of modern times, these ideas have a different origin: they are dictated to varying degrees by the genre, era, and worldview of the author.
Now some Russian (for example, V.M. Zhivov) and many foreign (G. Lenhoff, R. Marti, R. Picchio, etc.) researchers, not without reason, believe that such a category as genre is not applicable to Old Russian literature at all: the identification of genres is associated with the awareness of poetics and style as valuable artistic phenomena in their own right, but this was not the case in Ancient Rus'. Works various types were not separated from each other by clear boundaries, “crossed”, “flowed” into each other. The number of exceptions - works that are not traditional in genre terms - almost exceeds the number of texts that are “correct” from a genre point of view. This is not accidental: genre consciousness presupposes the isolation of texts from each other. The monuments of ancient Russian literature, designed to express and carry the only Divine Truth, constituted a single semantic space.
Religion determines not just a set of themes of ancient Russian literature; faith determines the very essence of ancient literature.
The reforms of Peter I charted a new path for Russian culture and literature: secular, worldly art triumphed, and the works of Western European authors became a model. Ancient traditions were broken, our own literature was forgotten. The gradual discovery, the “rebirth” of Old Russian literature took place in the 19th and 20th centuries. A special world appeared before researchers and readers, beautiful and mysterious in its difference from modern literature.
© All rights reserved
Peeva M.V. The role of ancient Russian literature in modern literary education of schoolchildren // D.S. Likhachev and Russian culture: materials of regional scientific readings dedicated to the 100th anniversary of academician D.S. Likhachev, Kemerovo, November 9, 2006 / ed. E.L.Rudnevoy.-Kemerovo: KRIPKiPRO Publishing House, 2007.
The role of ancient Russian literature in modern literary education of schoolchildren
Appreciating the beautiful in the past, protecting it, we thereby seem to follow the behest of A.S. Pushkin: “Respect for the past is the feature that distinguishes education from savagery...”. This quote fully reveals the role of ancient Russian literature in modern education schoolchildren.
“Monuments of ancient Russian literature influence the formation of our primary ideas about Ancient Rus' and the sources of knowledge of Russian culture. They effectively influence in general the formation in our young - school - years of our artistic taste, concepts of artistic values, general aesthetic concepts of what a perfect work of literature is, helps to understand how important it is for us today to turn to a very ancient cultural heritage" 1 .
“The amazing thing is that already in the texts of the 16th century. we discover features typical of the great Russian classical literature, and elements of thinking that seem to anticipate our modern train of thought, historicism with a rare breadth of chronological, as well as spatial-geographical range, the richest, at the same time very specific and symbolically - refined associativity, the idea of “sign” - a historically specific image, which is at the same time a symbolic image. In the brilliant monument of literature of the 12th century, “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign,” we already see a synthetic perception and reflection in the relationship of man and nature, the lyrical and the epic, that is, the beginning of that line of development of great literature that dates back to L. Tolstoy’s “War and Peace” 2 . According to Tolstoy, the great texts of the distant past open up a new world for a person, making him “without knowledge... fall in love with knowledge.” “Each of these books learns for the first time all the beauty of the epic in its inimitable simplicity and power.”
In this regard, the educational literature of Ancient Rus', which was subordinate to the tasks of moral description and moral teaching, plays a large role in the formation of the unlimited moral improvement of man. “Her etiquette and “good manners” in life are closely related. For example, “Reading about the life and death of Boris and Gleb,” studied at school, is permeated from beginning to end with a heightened sense of etiquette. “The blessed one fell down and bowed down to his father and kissed his nose with honor, and then stood up and wrapped his neck in his arms, kissing him with tears” (Reading about the life and destruction of Boris and Gleb). Thus, a special, national ideal of beauty is revealed to students. First of all, this is spiritual, inner beauty, the beauty of a Christian merciful and loving soul.
It is especially important that in the literature of Ancient Rus' there is no place for hatred and contempt for other peoples (which is usual for many other works of the Middle Ages); it fosters not only patriotism, but, in modern terms, internationalism.
“Stable etiquette features are composed in literature into hieroglyphic signs, into emblems. The emblem is close to an ornament. “Weaving of words”, which has widely developed in Russian literature since the end of the 14th century, is a verbal ornament. We can graphically depict the repeating elements of the “weaving of words”, and we will get an ornament close to the ornament of handwritten headpieces - the so-called “braiding” 5.
Here is an example of a relatively simple “weaving” from the “Tale of the Coming of Khan Temir Aksak to Moscow,” which was part of the chronicles. The author strings together long rows of parallel grammatical constructions and synonyms - not in a narrow linguistic sense, but more broadly - in a logical and semantic sense. News comes to Moscow about Temir Aksak, “how he is preparing to fight the Russian Land and how he boasts of going to Moscow, although taking it, and captivate the Russian people, and destroy holy places, and eradicate the Christian faith, and persecute the Christians, torment, torture, caves and and cut off the swords..." By focusing their attention on such examples, students absorb a sense of harmony and unity of literature, preparing to study the solemn, lofty word of M.V. Lomonosov, G.R. Derzhavina, A.S. Pushkin, etc.
“An important role is also played by studying specific word ancient Russian literature. The word appears here not only in its sound essence, but also in its visual image. It is also “timeless” to some extent.
The cultural horizon of the world is constantly expanding, and in modern society there is a decline in morals. The desire to switch to a Western perception of the world destroys the national worldview system and leads to the forgetting of traditions based on spirituality. Fashionable imitation of the West is destructive for Russian society, and, therefore, needs “treatment” through history. Thanks to her, the unity of the world becomes more and more tangible. Distances between cultures are shrinking, and there is less and less room for national enmity. This is the greatest merit of the humanities. One of the urgent tasks is to introduce into the circle of reading and understanding of the modern reader the monuments of the verbal art of Ancient Rus', in the great and unique culture of which fine art and literature, humanistic and material culture, broad international connections and a clearly expressed national identity are closely intertwined. If we preserve our culture and everything that contributes to its development - libraries, museums, schools, universities - if we preserve our unspoiled, rich language, literature, art, then we, of course, are a great nation. That is why it is so important that a school teacher is worthy of his subject of teaching.
____________________________
1 Schmidt S.O. “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” and the formation and development of the concept of a cultural monument” // Monuments of the Fatherland. - No. 1. - 1986, p. 160.
2 Schmidt S.O. “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” and the formation and development of the concept of a cultural monument” // Monuments of the Fatherland. - No. 1. - 1986, p. 160.
3 Likhachev D.S. Selected works: In 3 volumes. T. 1. – L.: Khudozh. lit., 1987, p. 286.
In this article we will look at the features of Old Russian literature. The literature of Ancient Rus' was primarily church. After all, book culture in Rus' appeared with the adoption of Christianity. Monasteries became centers of writing, and the first literary monuments were mainly works of a religious nature. Thus, one of the first original (that is, not translated, but written by a Russian author) works was the “Sermon on Law and Grace” by Metropolitan Hilarion. The author proves the superiority of Grace (the image of Jesus Christ is associated with it) over the Law, which, according to the preacher, is conservative and nationally limited.
Literature was created not for entertainment, but for teaching. Considering the features of ancient Russian literature, it should be noted that it is instructive. She teaches to love God and her Russian land; she creates images of ideal people: saints, princes, faithful wives.
Let us note one seemingly insignificant feature of ancient Russian literature: it was handwritten. Books were created in a single copy and only then copied by hand when it was necessary to make a copy or the original text became unusable over time. This gave the book special value and generated respect for it. In addition, for the Old Russian reader, all books traced their origins to the main one - the Holy Scriptures.
Since the literature of Ancient Rus' was fundamentally religious, the book was seen as a storehouse of wisdom, a textbook of righteous life. Old Russian literature is not fiction in the modern sense of the word. She does everything avoids fiction and strictly follows the facts. The author does not show his individuality; he hides behind the narrative form. He does not strive for originality; for the ancient Russian writer it is more important to stay within the framework of tradition, not to break it. Therefore, all lives are similar to one another, all biographies of princes or military stories are compiled according to a general plan, in compliance with the “rules”. When “The Tale of Bygone Years” tells us about Oleg’s death from his horse, this beautiful poetic legend sounds like a historical document; the author really believes that everything happened that way.
The hero of ancient Russian literature does not have no personality, no character in our view today. Man's destiny is in the hands of God. And at the same time, his soul acts as an arena for the struggle between good and evil. The first will win only when a person lives by moral rules given once and for all.
Of course, in Russian medieval works we will not find either individual characters or psychologism - not because ancient Russian writers did not know how to do this. In the same way, icon painters created planar rather than three-dimensional images, not because they could not write “better,” but because they were faced with other artistic tasks: the face of Christ cannot be similar to an ordinary human face. An icon is a sign of holiness, not a depiction of a saint.
The literature of Ancient Rus' adheres to the same aesthetic principles: it creates faces, not faces, gives the reader example of correct behavior rather than depicting a person's character. Vladimir Monomakh behaves like a prince, Sergius of Radonezh behaves like a saint. Idealization is one of the key principles of ancient Russian art.
Old Russian literature in every possible way avoids mundaneness: she does not describe, but narrates. Moreover, the author does not narrate on his own behalf, he only conveys what is written in the sacred books, what he read, heard or saw. There can be nothing personal in this narrative: no manifestation of feelings, no individual manner. (“The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” in this sense is one of the few exceptions.) Therefore, many works of the Russian Middle Ages anonymous, the authors do not even assume such immodesty - to put your name. And the ancient reader cannot even imagine that the word is not from God. And if God speaks through the mouth of the author, then why does he need a name, a biography? That is why the information available to us about ancient authors is so scarce.
At the same time, in ancient Russian literature a special national ideal of beauty, captured by ancient scribes. First of all, this is spiritual beauty, the beauty of the Christian soul. In Russian medieval literature, in contrast to Western European literature of the same era, the knightly ideal of beauty - the beauty of weapons, armor, and victorious battle - is much less represented. The Russian knight (prince) wages war for the sake of peace, and not for the sake of glory. War for the sake of glory and profit is condemned, and this is clearly seen in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign.” Peace is assessed as an unconditional good. The ancient Russian ideal of beauty presupposes a wide expanse, an immense, “decorated” earth, and it is decorated with temples, because they were created specifically for the exaltation of the spirit, and not for practical purposes.
The attitude of ancient Russian literature is also connected with the theme of beauty to oral and poetic creativity, folklore. On the one hand, folklore was of pagan origin, and therefore did not fit into the framework of the new, Christian worldview. On the other hand, he could not help but penetrate literature. After all, the written language in Rus' from the very beginning was Russian, and not Latin, as in Western Europe, and there was no impassable border between the book and the spoken word. Folk ideas about beauty and goodness also generally coincided with Christian ideas; Christianity penetrated into folklore almost unhindered. Therefore, the heroic epic (epics), which began to take shape in the pagan era, presents its heroes both as patriotic warriors and as defenders of the Christian faith, surrounded by “filthy” pagans. Just as easily, sometimes almost unconsciously, ancient Russian writers use folklore images and plots.
The religious literature of Rus' quickly outgrew its narrow church framework and became truly spiritual literature, which created a whole system of genres. Thus, “The Sermon on Law and Grace” belongs to the genre of a solemn sermon delivered in church, but Hilarion not only proves the Grace of Christianity, but also glorifies the Russian land, combining religious pathos with patriotic ones.
Genre of life
The most important genre for ancient Russian literature was the hagiography, the biography of a saint. At the same time, the task was pursued, by telling about the earthly life of a saint canonized by the church, to create an image of an ideal person for the edification of all people.
IN " Lives of the Holy Martyrs Boris and Gleb"Prince Gleb appeals to his killers with a request to spare him: “Do not cut the ear, which is not yet ripe, filled with the milk of goodness! Do not cut the vine, which is not yet fully grown, but bears fruit!” Abandoned by his squad, Boris in his tent “cries with a broken heart, but is joyful in his soul”: he is afraid of death and at the same time he realizes that he is repeating the fate of many saints who accepted martyrdom for their faith.
IN " Lives of Sergius of Radonezh“It is said that the future saint in his adolescence had difficulty comprehending literacy, lagged behind his peers in learning, which caused him a lot of suffering; when Sergius retired into the desert, a bear began to visit him, with whom the hermit shared his meager food, it happened that the saint gave the last piece of bread to the beast.
In the traditions of life in the 16th century, “ The Tale of Peter and Fevronia of Murom”, but it already sharply diverged from the canons (norms, requirements) of the genre and therefore was not included in the collection of lives of the “Great Chet-Minea” along with other biographies. Peter and Fevronia are real historical figures who reigned in Murom in the 13th century, Russian saints. The author of the 16th century produced not a hagiography, but an entertaining story, built on fairy-tale motifs, glorifying the love and loyalty of the heroes, and not just their Christian deeds.
A " Life of Archpriest Avvakum", written by himself in the 17th century, turned into a vivid autobiographical work, filled with reliable events and real people, living details, feelings and experiences of the hero-narrator, behind which stands the bright character of one of the spiritual leaders of the Old Believers.
Genre of teaching
Since religious literature was intended to educate a true Christian, teaching became one of the genres. Although this is a church genre, close to a sermon, it was also used in secular (secular) literature, since the ideas of the people of that time about the correct, righteous life did not differ from the church ones. You know" Teachings of Vladimir Monomakh", written by him around 1117 "while sitting on a sleigh" (shortly before his death) and addressed to children.
The ideal ancient Russian prince appears before us. He cares about the good of the state and each of his subjects, guided by Christian morality. The prince's other concern is about the church. All earthly life should be considered as work to save the soul. This is the work of mercy and kindness, and military work, and mental work. Hard work - cardinal virtue in the life of Monomakh. He made eighty-three major campaigns, signed twenty peace treaties, learned five languages, and did what his servants and warriors did.
Chronicles
A significant, if not the largest, part of ancient Russian literature is works of historical genres that were included in the chronicles. The first Russian chronicle - "The Tale of Bygone Years""was created at the beginning of the 12th century. Its significance is extremely great: it was proof of the right of Rus' to state independence, independence. But if the chroniclers could record recent events “according to the epics of this time,” reliably, then the events of pre-Christian history had to be restored from oral sources: legends , legends, sayings, geographical names. Therefore, the chroniclers turn to folklore. These are the legends about the death of Oleg, about Olga’s revenge on the Drevlyans, about Belgorod jelly, etc.
Already in The Tale of Bygone Years, two most important features of Old Russian literature appeared: patriotism and connections with folklore. Book-Christian and folklore-pagan traditions are closely intertwined in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign.”
Elements of fiction and satire
Of course, ancient Russian literature was not unchanged throughout all seven centuries. We saw that over time it became more secular, elements of fiction intensified, and satirical motifs increasingly penetrated into literature, especially in the 16th-17th centuries. These are, for example, " The Tale of Misfortune", showing what troubles disobedience and the desire to “live as he pleases,” and not as his elders teach, can bring a person, and “ The Tale of Ersha Ershovich", ridiculing the so-called "voivode's court" in the tradition of a folk tale.
But in general, we can talk about the literature of Ancient Rus' as a single phenomenon, with its own enduring ideas and motives that have passed through 700 years, with its own general aesthetic principles, with a stable system of genres.
