Povest vremennyh let as the literary corpus of Kyivan Rus`

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Fondation Maison des sciences de l'homme, chercheur invite

POVEST VREMENNYH LET AS THE LITERARY CORPUS OF KYIVAN RUS'

Nazarii NAZAROV

Paris



Anotation

povest vremennyh let chronicle

The oldest chronicle of the Kyivan Rus, preserved under the conventional title The Tale of Bygone Years (Povёsf vremennyh let), has almost always been the focus of attention for historians, but much less often for linguists and literary scholars. Therefore, its composition as a literary monument remains not fully researched, and the status of individual episodes is uncertain. In the present article, the author attempts to carry out a comprehensive study of various witnesses to the text of the chronicle, which convey its composition at different stages of formation. Finally, after comparing independent evidence (the Latin translation by Jan Dlugosz, the outline by Jan Binwilski, Novgorod 1st Chronicle, Radziwill and Hypatian manuscripts), the author concludes that the chronicle was the result of the gradual integration of independent corpora of texts - historical, documentary, legal, literary, religious, including those with pagan motifs - and thus can be considered a summa textorum of Kievan Rus of the pre-Mongol period. The list of episodes of the chronicle up to the 1070s was studied (up to this moment, common episodes can be traced in the Novgorod and Kyivan chronicles) at various hypothetical stages of its formation. As a result of the comparison of textual layers within the annals, the hypothesis is substantiated that to explain each stage of formation it is necessary to operate with units smaller than the entire chronicle compilation. Independent functioning of compositionally completed episodes should be assumed. So each episode deserves to be explored in terms of its individual textual history and aesthetic features. The article proposes to reassess the literary heritage of Kyivan Rus' and to talk not about a unique chronicle, but about a substantial library of texts, united into one corpus at a certain stage of the existence of literature of Kyivan Rus. The proposed theory is proposed to be called a dynamic model of compilation of the chronicle text.

Keywords: Kyivan Rus, medieval literature, chronicle, composition, textual history.



Анотація

Назарій НАЗАРОВ Фундація «Дім наук про людину», Париж

«ПОВІСТЬ МИНУЛИХ ЛІТ» ЯК ЛІТЕРАТУРНИЙ КОРПУС КИЇВСЬКОЇ РУСИ

Найдавніший літопис Київської Руси, що зберігся під умовною назвою Повісті минулих літ, майже завжди був у центрі уваги істориків, проте значно рідше -- мовознавців і літературознавців. Тому його композиція саме як літературної пам'ятки залишається не до кінця дослідженою, а статус окремих епізодів -- не визначеним. У цій статті автор намагається здійснити комплексне дослідження різних свідків тексту літопису, що передають його склад на різних етапах формування. Зрештою, порівнявши незалежні свідчення (латинський переклад Яна Длугоша, переказ Яна Бінвільського, Новгородську 1 хроніку, Радзивиллівський та Іпатський літописи), автор доходить висновку, що літопис був результатом поступової інтеграції незалежних корпусів текстів -- історичних, документальних, правових, мистецьких, релігійних, зокрема з язичницькими мотивами, і в такий спосіб може розглядатися як велика summa textorum Київської Русі домонгольського часу. Було досліджено перелік епізодів літопису до 1070-х років (саме до цього часу в новгородській та київській літописній традиції простежуються спільні епізоди) на різних гіпотетичних етапах його формування. Унаслідок порівняння текстуальних шарів у межах літопису, обґрунтовується гіпотеза, що для пояснення кожного етапу формування потрібно оперувати одиницями, меншими ніж завершений літописний звід. Слід припускати самостійне функціонування композиційно завершених епізодів. Тож кожен епізод має право бути дослідженим з погляду своєї індивідуальної текстуальної історії та естетичних особливостей. Стаття пропонує переоцінити літературний спадок Київської Руси і говорити не про монолітний літопис, а про цілу бібліотеку текстів, зведених докупи на певному етапі існування києворуської книжності. Запропоновану теорію пропонується називати динамічною моделлю укладання літописного тексту.

Ключові слова: Київська Русь, середньовічна література, літопис, композиція, історія тексту.



Theoretical part: Text witnesses for the Chronicle

The objective of this article is to reassess the compositional complexity of the Роуёи^' vremennyh let (PVL) with a primary focus on its literary significance. For this purpose, we shall refrain from delving into matters of chronology, factuality, and the text's historical accuracy. Instead, we aim to examine the PVL as a multifaceted literary collection, containing texts from various periods, styles, and social contexts. Our main aim in this study is to demonstrate that even though different episodes have been amalgamated into a single corpus, this amalgamation does not negate the importance of scrutinizing each text individually, as they possess distinct textual and literary histories. To ascertain the demarcations between these original texts (or groups of texts), a comprehensive review of all the earliest variants of the PVL corpus and previous chronicle recensions becomes imperative, which forms the central focus of this article.

Among all branches of textual history, the most extensively developed area pertains to the criticism and history of the biblical text, encompassing both the Old and New Testaments. This field has proven to be a fertile source of novel ideas, which modern textual scholars draw upon. Consequently, questions that might appear trivial and self-evident in the context of the Bible textual history have often been overlooked or not even raised in the context of the Old Ruthenian chronicles' textual history. Yet, these very questions [Tov] are of paramount importance in facilitating a comprehensive understanding of the chronicle's text and achieving the closest possible approximation to its original form, relying not on intuition but on evidence-based methodologies. The key questions are as follows:

1. The arrangement of the biblical books corresponds to the individual episodes within the chronicle.

2. Division of the biblical books into chapters aligns with the fragmentation of completed episodes in the chronicle.

3. Examination of the form of the text involves discerning whether it is presented in poetry or prose.

4. Analysis of the division into poetic lines (if any) may also be applied to the chronicle.

5. Scrutiny of individual letters and words.

6. Vocalization and accentuation both in the Bible and chronicle text constitute its prosody.

7. The masora notes can be conventionally equaled with marginal notes within the chronicle.

Indeed, the East Slavic textual history of the chronicles has primarily focused on question 5, with relatively limited attention given to the other areas. It is plausible to assume that, at the modern stage of textual studies, question 5 has been adequately addressed and resolved by D. Ostrowski [Ostrowski]. However, there remain significant gaps in the understanding of other aspects.

The present article seeks to contribute towards resolving questions 1 and 2, as question 3 (pertaining to whether the text is in poetry or prose) has already been explored in earlier works [Franko ; Nazarov 2023].

The dynamic critical text, spanning from the scholarly contributions of Shakhmatov to Ostrovsky, has played a crucial role in the field of textual studies. Shakhmatov's notable contribution lies in firmly establishing the notion that the chronicle was not the work of a single author but rather underwent several stages of «construction». Additionally, he highlighted the prominence of Kyiv, as stories were centered around the cycle of Kyivan legends [Shahmatov: 503]: «We can therefore state with certainty that all our chronicles adjoin to that ancient attempt to compile a chronicle canon, which took place in Kyiv presumably at the time of Yaroslav».

Shakhmatov's ideas represented significant advancements for his era. Nonetheless, the prevailing perception of the textual history of the PVL's 'vulgate' continues to be influenced by the legacy of the 19th-century scholar Karl Lachmann, often regarded as the pioneer of modern textual criticism. Lachmann's method, as proposed by him, comprises the following principles:

- rejection of the vulgate (i.e., the Byzantine text) and the requirement that the edited text should be entirely based on the manuscripts as determined by methodological recensio;

- 'distrust for the manuscripts of the Humanist period';

- reconstruction of the textual history and the genealogical relations linking the manuscripts;

- mechanical determination of which reading goes back to the archetype according to clearly defined criteria (stemma codicum) [Wachtel, Holmes: 3].

It is clear that there is no evidence that could prove that the resulting «initial» text ever existed in exactly the reconstructed form [Wachtel, Holmes: 7].

Similar to the text of the New Testament, the Kyiv Rus chronicles exhibit a noteworthy characteristic: each copy could be based on a mixed tradition. Consequently, it is often essential to work not only with the notion of individual texts or manuscripts but also with the concept of a «state of the text», which is reflected in various «witnesses of the text». These witnesses may not necessarily be preserved as separate manuscripts, as articulated by Gerd Mink [Mink]. In our research, such witnesses of the text include, for instance, the Latin translation or paraphrase of Jan Diugosz. While the original of this translation has not been preserved as a distinct manuscript, the translation (or paraphrase) provides valuable insights into a particular state of the PVL's text at certain moment and in a certain place.

After Shakhmatov, Soviet tekstologiya failed to provide a scientific study of the text at the modern level of textual studies. This gap was filled only by D. Ostrowski. However, Tvorogov's attempt to compare the texts of the Lavrentyevsky and Novgorod 1 Chronicle is worthy of note [Tvorogov]. Almost all researchers have neglected the works of Perfecki, who considered the Latinlanguage chronicle of Diugosz as one of the witnesses of the text, although he did not use this concept. The study of the Kyivan Chronicle has shown that the study of individual episodes as independent works is not only legitimate but also very productive [Kotliar]. Still, even in the most recent publications on the subject the notion tekstologiya is still prevailing [Tolochko], which means, that the authors regard the texts published in Polnoe sobranie russkih letopisej (PSRL) as satisfactory, notwithstanding that many volumes of PSRL render the texts in quite an arbitrary way, changing graphics, lay out of the text, and its original division into syntactic and prosodic units.

The concept of the composition of a chronicle text

The concept that a chronicle text comprises layers of other texts gradually added over time is not a recent notion, and its initial substantiation can be attributed to A. Shakhmatov. However, a significant and unresolved issue persists: the identification of the source material for these texts. It remains unclear whether the source texts were pre-existing individual narrative fragments or complete texts written ad hoc at the moment of compilation. Moreover, the interrelationships between these source texts raise questions as to whether they were scattered and random fragments or parts of a complex literary tradition. In this study, we aim to address these questions.

If an original variant of the Old Kyivan chronicles did indeed exist, we must investigate the origins of the inserts that contributed to the final Hypatian variant. These inserts were likely not composed ad hoc; instead, they exhibit similarities to other texts that have only been preserved within the chronicles. These texts can be referred to as the corpus of Old Kyivan secular literature, to which both the Kyivan Chronicle and the Tale of Ihor's Campaign eventually became connected.

This points to the possibility that these inserts were part of a preexisting literary tradition that had been circulating and preserved alongside the chronicle.

The existence and composition of the primary compilation (nacalnyi svod) are relatively well-documented through several independent sources, including Novgorodian 1 chronicle and the Latin translations and periphrasis by Jan Diugosz. These sources have provided valuable insights into the nature of the original compilation.

In our investigation, our focus is solely on the text of the PVL before the year 1070, specifically up to and including the story of Yan' and the two Magi. To facilitate the systematization, we limit our analysis to the Hypatian copy. Our primary objective is to study the sequence and presence of episodes, therefore, by concentrating on the Hypatian copy (Povest' 1871; Povist' 1990), which aligns with Laurentian copy (Letopis' 1872) in full agreement concerning the portion before 1070, we can effectively delve into our research without introducing additional complications.

Principles of studying the chronicle text

Indeed, since Shakhmatov's era, the field of textual criticism has made substantial advancements in reevaluating and refining Lachmann's concept. For our study, we will adopt Ostrovsky's account as a foundational framework [Ostrowski]. While the stemma codicum, or the family tree of manuscripts, continues to hold relevance in textual criticism, it is crucial to recognize that the process of forming a single izvod (a copy or version of a text) can involve the intersection of various versions

Indeed, the classification of certain compilations in the Old Kyivan and Old Rus chronicles can be particularly challenging, especially when these compilations have not been independently preserved but are found only within other historiographical texts. One such example is the Diugosz variant (Diugosz), which is partially incorporated into his work, the Historia Polona. The difficulty arises in determining whether Diugosz used a pre-existing «creolized» izvod or had access to several chronicles (as suggested by [Perfeckij]).

To address the problem of «intersections» between distinct branches of textual transmission, we can consider the existence of textual units smaller than a continuous chronicle. Indicators of separate and independent functioning of a text before its inclusion in a compilation can be observed through differences in language, content, and other signs, particularly evident in manuscript transmission. By identifying the variations in composition between different text witnesses of the chronicle, we can discern which specific independent works were added at various stages.

These independent works within the chronicle offer a window into the literary genre repertoire of the literature of Kyivan Rus during its early stages of development, prior to the Mongol invasion, spanning the period between the 10th and 12th centuries. Through the reconstruction of these literary elements, we can gain a deeper understanding of the literary landscape and cultural context of that era. These independent witnesses include

1. Episodes on the history of Rus from the Latin-language Polish History by Jan Diugosz.

2. The Novgorod chronicle tradition.

3. Binwilski's synopsis.

4. Distinction between illuminated and not illuminated parts of the RadziviH copy.

5. Hypatian compilation itself.

Such witnesses of the text as Novgorod 1 Chronicle (Novgorodskaya) and Hypatian compilation (Povest' 1871) need not to be presented in details, as they were not once analysied in the literature, and their significance for reconstructing the primary svod as well [Shahmatov]. However, other three witnesses need to be presented first.

Jan Dlugosz's «Polish History» (Dlugosz) is considered a valuable witness to the text of the pre-Hypatian version of the Primary Chronicle (PVL).

In Dlugosz's account of events in Rus (and other regions), each region is usually presented in a separate chapter or a distinct section within a chapter. The narrative on Rus affairs (as well as those of other Czech, German, and Polish events) remains continuous without any interruptions for comparison or synthesis with other sources. This suggests that Dlugosz attempted to provide synchronous sections that do not overlap with each other. It is conceivable that the linear sequence of the narrative within each excursion into the history of a neighboring nation aligns with the linear sequence of the source he used. Additionally, it is possible that Dlugosz's completed episodes correspond to certain structurally complete parts of the original source.

Indeed, the features of Dlugosz's presentation are crucial to understanding the omissions in his work. Instead of dismissing these omissions as mere mechanical errors, it is essential to perceive them as indicative of the absence of certain episodes in the Old Rus' Dlugosz protograph. Perfecki has already compiled a comprehensive list of these omissions, revealing certain patterns in Dlugosz's translation or paraphrase. His work provides insights into the state of the pre-PVL text, which lacks later elements, including:

- all borrowings from the Amartol Chronicle;

- the tale about the origins of Slavic writing;

- Oleh's treaties with the Greeks;

- the story about the arrival of the Apostle Andrew;

- the story about the brave boy who saved Kyiv from the Pecheneg siege (Binvilsky presents a different account in this place);

- the story about Belgorod's kysil.

Notably, the list of omissions includes compositionally complete and historically unrealistic parts, except for the treaties.

In the realm of historical conjecture, it can be reasonably postulated that the origins of the pre-PVL (Primary Chronicle of Kyiv) can be traced back to the narrative presented by Binwilski in his synopsis, as supported by the works of Dlugosz and Novg. I Com. A significant indicator of a later addition to the preceding text is the inclusion of the phrase «as they said» before the account of the arrival of the Apostle Andrew. Thus, it is plausible to consider that the commencement of the story in Dlugosz potentially represents the original starting point of the pre-PVL, a notion adhered to by Shakhmatov, and corroborated by the outline presented by Binvilsky.

Illustrations to the Radziwill Chronicle and their significance for the history of the text

The distribution of images within the text of the Radziwill Chronicle has a significance as a text witness. Observing the facsimile of the manuscript (Radzivilovskaya), we find that in the section correlated with the PVL, illustrations are consistently absent on no more than two consecutive pages. This suggests that the protograph was already illustrated, and non-illustrated texts were subsequently added to it. Therefore, the absence, rather than the presence, of illustrations serves as a distinguishing factor of the later addition of the respective episode. Such fragments without illustrations are (see the table below) mostly works with Christian themes. Since those parts of the PVL according to the RadziviH Chronicle that were presumably not in the pre-PVL have no illustrations, it means that some of the pre-PVL manuscript was already a single collection and had a continuous illustrative series.

Binwilski's «Short Chronicle»

Discovered and published by Yurii Mytsyk, Binwilski's short chronicle (Mytsyk 2002) does not always refer to polish historians Bielski or Kromer. For example, there is an episode where the compiler does not mention them at all. Instead, he mentions a «Rus chronicle» that starts (sic!) with Kyi, Schek, and Khoryv. It may be compared to the peripheral tradition of Ustyug chronicle (Ustyuzhskaya letopis) that starts immediately with the same story (Ustyuzhskie...: 17, 56). That is, it could have been a chronicle that reflected the state of the PVL before the subsequent compilations, the so-called Shakhmatov's «original variant (svod)». Here is the whole fragment with our numbering of the episodes:

1. Початок летописця руского от Щека, Кия, Хорева и от сестри их Либеди.

2. Потомкове их на Киеве били Оскарда а Дир. Которие розтирали панства на полночы. 3. Олга в Костянътинополу веру хрестиянскую приняла даное имено во светом кришеный Елена лета Бо(ж)ого 865. 4. Кгди ехала с Царигорода, благословил ей патриарха, мовечи: «Благословенна ты межи невестами рускими». 5. Але син ее Светослав не хотел се окрестит. 6. Которий по смерты Рурика, отца своего, воевал древляне або Полисе. 7. Потом оберънулсе на козари, которий теж народ бил руский, и добил под ними замок, названий Белие Вежи. 8. А потом валчил з Булъкгари, посел их замков 80, уложивъши на них дан, знову тегнул до Кгреции, которую воевал. 9. А в тот час ему печенигове Киев облегли, же жона его с тремя синами от страху умерла. 10. Услишавши то, Святослав вернулсе до Киева, а печенигове теж напротив его вийшли, поразил Кур, печенин, Святослава и самого, поймавши, утял ему голову и дал ее в золото оправит. С которое головы пил, яко з одное чаши. 11. Того теж Святослава син Володимер, вторгнувши з людом военъним до Полски, взял под кролем Мечславом Премишленни, Червоне и инъшие места, а потом тегнул до Креции и там взял место Корсунь албо Кафу. 12. Тот же Володимер мел потребу с печени(га)ми над рекою Трубешом. Тамже виехал з войска печенигов богатир досыт уродивий и силний, вызиваючи на поединок когоколъвек з войска Володимирова. Обобралсе вірньїй (?) русин одын узростом узростом невеликий, але силний и вийшол противко ему, которого кгді легце собі важил печеніг, забыл его русин. Зачим печеныгове оступилы.

А Володимер на том місцу збудовал замок, на имя своего рыцера назван Переяславль. 13. Был намовен Володимер от татар, абы віру их принял.

Не схотил, жидовской теж не схотіл, также и латинской не схотіл, але греческую віру принял. 14. Абовім кгды жадал сестры Василия и Костентина, грецких цесаров, отмовилыс ему, повідаючи, иж ее не годен, поневаж не есть хрестиянином, претож ся обецал окрестит. A гды приехал до Царигорода до Царигорода, ослеп на очы, послал до панны скаржачися, иж так несчастливи. Она рекла: «Скоро се окрестит, збудет слепоты». И так же ся стало, же скоро его окрестил еп(и)скоп с Кафы літа Б(о)жого 990, теды прозрил. А потом брал у него шлюб, которой имено названо Аанна. Олга в светим крещении Елена, баба Володимирова, крестилась напред пред Володимиром, в літ . А иж Олга наперед, а потом онук еи Володимер окрестившыся, віру християнъскую принял, кгрунтовне вся Руская земля до визнання правдиваго Б(о)га пришла. 15. Приехавшы Володимир до Киева казал всі болвані покрушит, которих звано: Дидо, Ладо, Купало, 16. а росказал всім подданым, абы се окрестыли и учинили так, иж всі заразом в Почайны и в Днепры рецы покрестилыс и сынов Володымировых 12, которих міл с першими жонамы и дал их учить писма греческаго. 17. Тот же розмаитие ремесникы привіл был з Грецыи до Киева. Которие церкви коштовне оздобне робили. 18. И еще за доброго здоровя сыны был поделил: Веславовы старшому дал Новгород, Заславовы Полоцк, Святополковы - Туров, Ияроморовы - Ростов, але кгды Весеслав умер, Иаромир взял Новъгород, а Борис - Ростов, Гліб - Муровъск, С(вя) тослав - Полісе, Всеволдові - Володымер, Мечслав - Тверкал, Зеславль Смоленск, Судыслав - Пленсков, Посвист - Волин. Жыл Влодимер по крещении своем літ 28. 19. Скоро по смерты отцевъской почелы ис собою валчит. Абовім Святополк забыл двух братов, Борыса и Гліба, а 20. Ярослав выгнал Святополъка с Киева. Святополък утек до Болеслава Хроброго, кроля полскаго, 21. с которім кроль тегнул до Киева и добыл Киева през голод, едучы в місто в місто, ударил у фортку, которою зовут Золотая, аж еї мечем до половиці протял. 22. Всадыл знову на Киеве Святополъка. 23. Потом Святополък, братоубыйца, с Киева утек. 24. Ярослав, княжа руское, знову на столицы киевъской осіл літа Б(о)жого 1015.

The scarcity of dates in this fragment is a significant characteristic since it indicates that the dates were incorporated at a later stage.

It is possible to speculate that Binwilski might have excluded some episodes known from the Hypatian compilation. However, such an assumption would contradict the consistency in his presentation, which aligns with other witnesses of the text. The same rationale applies to the other witnesses of the text. While it might be assumed that they inadvertently omitted certain episodes or deliberately excluded them due to ideological reasons, the former explanation lacks scientific basis, and the latter would necessitate a separate investigation. As a practical approach, let us adopt the working hypothesis that the witnesses of the text provide a reasonably truthful reflection of its contents.

The principle of a shorter reading being more correct, often used in biblical textual criticism, can be applied here on the higher level of textual organization. Moreover, in the context of the chronicle's history, it's important to note that at the earliest stages of compilation, episodes were typically added rather than deleted.

A comparative table presenting the «synopsis» of various chronicles based on non-contradictory facts follows in the next section, focusing on the presence of episodes in each collection and their order of sequence. The longest compilation, Hypatian, will be used as the basis for the sequence. It should be noted that the table includes only the episodes. The chronological grid of years, which was imposed later and may have discrepancies, is not included in this table to simplify the presentation.

Practical part: Building an overview table

Description of the table 1. Thus, a table should be drawn up that takes into account the following parameters:

- the presence of the episode in Binwilski's outline;

- the presence of the episode in Dlugosz;

- presence of an episode in Novgorodian 1 Chronicle according to Commissionary copy;

- presence of the episode in the Hypatian copy;

- presence of illustrations to the episode in RadziwiH copy.

The letters B, W, P, and A stand for one of four main topics of the chronicle (cf. below).

The presence of an episode is indicated by the sign - and by colour. Deeper gray shade is for episodes of the same content, - - and lighter gray stands for episodes that share some common content but do not coincide completely. A signal > stands for an episode that is present in a witness, but in different place. For the Radziviff chronicle, those episodes with continuous illustrations are shaded in light gray, those without illustrations are marked by << >>. For Hypatian copy, deep gray is for the episodes that are not present in any other svod (save for Radziviff), episodes without colour are well represented by other svods, whereas light gray is for the episodes represented only by witness other than Novgorod 1 and Radziviff.

Table 1



Interpretation of the table 1

The episodes can be divided thematically as follows:

A -- Annual event records, chronology (12)

14 15 24 31 103 108 118 121 127 132 135 143 B -- Biblical, Christian subjects (40)

1 2 3 4 44 45 47 48 50 51 56 66 72 73 76 77 78 79 80 83 84 85 87 88 89 90 93 94 95 - 97 98 99 105 106 107 114 125 126 130 140

P -- Pagan subjects, customary law (18)

6 10 11 12 27 30 35 36 61 69 73 87 93 115 119 129 136 144

W -- Warfare and princedom

5 9 8 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 25 26 28 29 32 33 34 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 46 49 52 53 55 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 67 68 70 71 74 75 81 82 86 91 92 100 101 104 109 110 111 112 113 116 117 120 122 123 124 128 131 133 134 137 138 139 141 142

S -- Secular legendary stories not about princedom

7 13 54 96 102

The classification by topic exhibits several significant features. Firstly, it serves to underscore the social importance of various subjects and their representatives. For instance, the narrative and non-narrative segments of the text extensively cover themes related to warriors' (referred to as druzhina) and princely affairs, accounting for 75 episodes. Following closely, with a slightly smaller number of occurrences (56 episodes), are religious and ritual topics, encompassing both biblical and pagan elements.

An observation can be made that during the compilation of the pre-PVL, pre-Christian social phenomena (comprising 18 episodes, equivalent to 12.5%) continue to retain considerable significance in the Hypatian recension. Meanwhile, the burgeoning impact of the new religion, Christianity, is evident, represented by 40 episodes (28%). However, the heart of social and political life, revolving around the prince and his druzhina (amounting to 73 episodes, 51%), maintains its paramount role throughout.

Other themes, on the other hand, are comparatively underrepresented, manifested in only a few episodes.

To illustrate how the story of each of the individual parts could have developed, let us consider three independent cycles of episodes: the origin of Rus, the cycle of Princess Olha, and that about Volodymyr and the baptism of Rus.

The table clearly shows that the «tale of the origin of Rus» first began with the story of the three brothers, and the rest of the story, which precedes this episode, was added later. Binvilsky says this directly: «The beginning of the Rus' chronicle from Shcheik, Kiy and Khoriv». Moreover, before the story of the arrival of the Apostle Andrew, which is immediately followed by the story of the three brothers, the unknown author says: «as it was said», apparently referring to someone else's already existing texts.

The analysis of the gradual formation of the corpus of the tales about Olha shows that there is a clear compositional boundary between the two parts of the story:

- the story of Olha's wars with the Derevlyans: a continuous sequence 37-42, attested at the same time by Dl., N, R. Ill., I. and omitted in B. Here and onwards: I. = Hyp.;

- and the story of her Christian life: a continuous sequence in a shorter version (N., R. Ill., I. together with B. and Dl.): 44, 45, 47, 50, and in the longer one (the same without B. and D.): 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50. In other words, additional tales concerning the secular side of life (the emperor wants to marry Olha, Olha refuses to reciprocate the gifts) are inserted between the already seemingly finished religious text. Therefore, we should consider the story of Olha's wars with the Derevlyans and the story of her conversion as two different works with different textual and literary histories and parallels.

The same applies to the cycle of tales about Volodymyr. From individual tales about his deeds, which were originally pagan, layer after layer of stories about his Christianization is gradually added. This process culminates in the large ensemble of texts contained in I., which even includes a lengthy exposition of biblical history from the creation of the world to the resurrection of Christ.

It is noticeable that one can distinguish a «short Christian cycle» in B.: 76, 83 87, 88, 89. A more detailed version is presented in Dl., which deals with Volodymyr's religious and political actions: 65, 69, 70, 71, 76, 79, 80, 81, 83, 84 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, (96), 98, 101, 104. In this sequence, only 96 is an insertion episode that is not related to Volodymyr's life and conversion to Christianity. If we look at the additions made in N. - R.Il., we will see that 77, 78, 85, i.e. all the episodes about the acceptance of faith, are missing. In general, the version reflected in Dl. seems to be intermediate between the elementary presentation in and the whole story of the Christianization of the Eastern Slavs in I.

Leaving aside the short reports (which should be analyzed separately, and probably primarily as purely historical evidence) and the obvious borrowings from the Byzantine chronicles (which should be considered only in comparison with the original texts), we will try to find, on the basis of the synoptic table, individual episodes that might have existed separately, outside the corpus of the chronicle, as individual texts or as parts of other, parallel corpora of Old Ruthenian texts (for example, princely court poetry and rhetorical tradition).

They obviously are (the list can be expanded, this is a «working list»):

4 -- The arrival of the Apostle Andrew

5 -- The legend of the foundation of Kyiv 23 -- Life of Cyril and Methodius

28 -- Oleh's first treaty with the Greeks

29 -- The legend of the death of Oleh

35 -- The second treaty of Ihor with the Greeks, which mentions pagan gods Perun and Volos

37-42 -- Olha's wars with the Derevlyans 61 -- Svyatoslav's treaty with the Greeks

77 -- The philosopher criticizes other faiths

78 -- Summary of the contents of the Bible 85 -- Statement of the symbol of faith

96 -- The legend of the strong fellmonger 100 -- The story of silver spoons for warriors 102 -- The legend of the Belgorod jelly 107 -- The martyrdom of Borys and Hlib 115 -- Pravda Rus'ka 126 -- Praise for books

130 -- Foundation of the Kyiv-Cave Monastery 144 -- The story of Yan and the two magi (volchvy)

The thematic diversity of these works is striking. It is this diversity that indicates that we are not dealing with a separate work written on purpose every time, but with the existence at the time of compilation of certain ready-made texts of various subjects that were included in the «codex» (both the form of the book and the form of legitimation is meant my this word here).

A separate fragment preserved only in N. is interesting, namely as an example of a military «secret code» used by Yaroslav in a conversation with his warriors (druzhina). Such a detail could hardly have been invented on purpose; it must have existed in one of the sources that originated in the milieu of the warriors.

A certain tolerance of pagan beliefs and social institutions is indicated by the fact that 18 episodes have traditional pagan content (even if it is criticized in the later layers of the text). The fact that the original version could have had even one more pagan episode is proved by the phrase attested in Dl. and N. about the worship of waters. The Hypatian version, with its strong Christian bias, therefore does not include works like the Pravda Rus'ka, although it does not remove oaths to pagan gods from the texts of the treaties (since the documents are probably quoted in full).

Stages of textual history of PVL

Thus, we have at least 5 stages in the formation of the text of the PVL's textus receptus (the system of which seems to be somewhat more complex than the linear sequence of the compilations):

Binwilski ^ Dlugosz ^ Novgorod. 1 Acad. ^ Radziwill ill. ^ Hypatian. Moreover, the «growth» of each subsequent «stage» is not entirely linear. Thus, there are works that are not present in the «intermediate stages», but they are present in the extreme ones. If stages can be distinguished, they are diffuse:

(Binwilski < > Dlugosz) ^

^ (Dlugosz <--> Novgorod 1st Acad.) ^

^ (Novgorod. 1st Acad. < > Radziwill il. < > Hypatian) ^

^ (Radziwill ill. <--> Hypatian)

The process of gradual compilation and consolidation of the textual corpus represented in its final variant in the Hypatian manuscript can be represented in the table 2:



Table 2

The diagram represents the distribution of episodes (i.e., individual works) among different states of the text of PVL. It shows that each of the compilations is a kind of frame superimposed on the field of texts that existed at the time of the creation of a particular manuscript / svod. Despite the fact that the final collection have its own compositional features as a whole, the individual texts within it retain their stylistic and semantic autonomy.

The scheme thus compiled allows us to trace at least 5 stages of the formation of the PVL text. They are correlated with the stages noted in Shakhmatov's stemma codicum [Ostrowski: XXXIII]:

B. я Compilation of 1039 Kyiv

Dl. - N. - RIl - I. я Kyiv 1073, 1st Kyiv Crypt

N. - R. Ill. - I. я nachal'nyi svod, 2nd Kyiv Crypt

I. я PVL 113, PVL 2nd and 3rd

There is a range of subsequent episodes' combinations that are represented at several stages:

- 44, 45, 47, 50 (B, Dl. - N. - R. Ill. - І, Dl. - R. Ill. - І)

- 53, 54 (B, Dl. - N. - R. Ill. - І, Dl. - R. Ill. - І, N. - R. Ill. - І)

- 87, 88, 89 (B, Dl. - R. Ill. - І, Dl. - N. - R. Ill. - І)

- 104, 107 (B, Dl. - N. - R. Ill. - І, N. - R. Ill. - І, Dl. - R. Ill. - І)

- 125, 131, 134, 139 (Dl. - N. - R. Ill. - І)

- 141, 142 (Dl. - N. - R. Ill.).

They might be referred as the stable sequences of episodes and may represent entire literary works.

It is interesting to correlate Shakhmatov's opinion that Kyivan chronicling began «somewhere during Yaroslav's reign» with the fact that a fragment of Binwilski's summary chronicle, which does not quote Polish chronicles and has almost no dates, ends at the time of Yaroslav's reign. It is possible that Binwilski could have used some text that reproduced this earlier, shorter chronicle, which was not copied later on, as it was fully included into subsequent svods.

The fact that a text was not included in one of the svod cannot prove that the text did not exist at that time. It means that it was simply not included in the collection for certain reasons.

This is especially evident in the case of such texts as the Pravda Rus'ka, the lives of Borys and Hlib, the life of Antony, and treaty texts. Nevertheless, this applies not only to these works.

It is logical to assume that in addition to the «canonical» compilations, which had a relatively fixed sequence of episodes, there were less canonical ones with a different set of episodes. Therefore, in those places where the presentation of later chroniclers partially coincides with Diugosz and Polish chroniclers, one should not always see the influence of Polish sources: if this is not explicitly stated, it may be a reflection of some other witness to the text.

Verification of the results

However, it should be borne in mind that there could have been at least two extreme approaches to compiling separate works into larger ones:

- linear addition of episodes to a completed svod;

- nonlinear combination, when the scribe could insert other episodes between the episodes of the main body of work.

It is intuitively difficult to say which option prevailed. Therefore, in order to verify the results we have already obtained, we will use an independent analysis of the use of auxiliary words and phonetic features inherent in different fragments of the chronicle. First, we performed a 59-parameter plotting. Of these, only a certain part proved to be the most productive. We show the main results in Diagram. Each horizontal patch represent the distribution of the element on the entire length of the PVL text (as it was deliminated in Hypatian copy). It was made with the help of AntConc software [Anthony].

It is noteworthy that the «seams» of the text completely coincide with the boundaries between the episodes that we have shown in the synoptic table:

- 31 (I. - R. Ill.) / 32 (I. - R. Ill. - N.) -- single annual reports / Ihor's wars with the Greeks.

- 72/73--biblical parallels / The story of the sacrifice of a Christian Varangian.

-

- 106 (I. - R. Ill. - N.) / 107 (I. - R. Ill. - N. - Dl. - B.) -- the end of the story of Volodymyr and the Christianization of Rus / The story of the martyrdom of Borys and Hlib. It is precisely here that Troitsky copy² of Novgorod 1 chronicle ends.

- 143/144 -- mutinies between the princes, short news / The story of the two Magi and Yan'.



Diagram 3

It can also be assumed that the boundaries between the episodes 72/73 and 143/144 should indicate the editorial work that accompanied the compilation of a certain version of the chronicle.

Obviously, at least until the creation of the 1073 compilation, the episodes were mostly added linearly, with minimal «overlap», which results in structural «seams» in the text at different levels: narrative, thematic, and, most importantly, at the level of the use of particles and certain phonetic forms that are independent of each other. It should be emphasized that we are not talking about a linear sequential change in linguistic features, but rather about a noticeable change in the way the authors returned to archaic forms and then used forms closer to their own colloquial language throughout the compilation of the chronicle.



Conclusions

The «primary chronicle» itself was not a solid piece of writing but it was also composed of smaller, self-substantial fragments that had a finished composition. For example, the story of Olha breaks down into two independent parts: the epic canvas about her revenge for Ihor and the ecclesiastically coloured part about her baptism. The first part is attested by all the witnesses of the text, except (!) Binvilsky. It is unlikely that he could have avoided this episode if it had been in his source. Obviously, this episode did not appear in the collection he used, directly or indirectly. Moreover, Binwilski and Dlugosz are in agreement in their presentation of church episodes from Olha's life, while Binwilski omits and Dlugosz retains the episode about the war with the Drevlyans. The War with the Derevlyans is probably an ideologically and politically coloured work that was intended to show the legitimacy of Kyiv's princely klan to rule over other tribes. And it could well have existed separately.

This is especially noticeable in a number of episodes. For example, Dlugosz and Hypatian and Radziwill copy's illustrated part include the story of Methodius and Cyril, while Binwilskyi and Novgorod 1 Chronicle (according to Commissionary copy) do not. While the story of the Apostle Andrew, which has the same ecclesiastical character as the story of Cyril and Methodius, is found only in the Hypatian and Radzuvill illustrated part. The episode with the ambassadors' stories about faith and Olha's acceptance of Christianity, on the other hand, is presented in all five witnesses of the text. Of the stories about Kyrylo Kozhumiaka (i.e., Fellmonger) and the siege of Kyiv, which are similar in content and style, the first is absent from Novgorod 1 Chronicle, and the second is present in all of the witnesses (though with different completeness, since Binwilsky does not speak of a brave boy who saved the city).

Each of the witnesses to the text shows that each stage of the formation of the corpus known today as the PVL was not thematically and ideologically homogeneous, and cannot be associated with only one stratum of the population. Similarly, in the «final» version preserved by the Hypatian manuscript, works of various kinds were added, both ecclesiastical and secular.

There might have been several equally ancient corpora of texts -- official records, princely tales, poetic legends, and religious works -- and the svods represent a gradual unification of all types of texts, to which the later corpus of texts of the Kyivan monasticism was added over time.

Thus, it is worth shifting the focus from the «reconstruction» of the original collection, which may not have existed as a stable unit but rather consisted of a diffuse set of independent works, to the study of textual history, literary parallels, and the peculiarities of the form and content of each of the individual works. We have the right to talk about each of them as a separate work, and their relationships with other works in the chronicle is no different from the relationships between works that simply belong to the same literary tradition.

Perhaps the history of the formation of the text of the chronicle we have today should be considered more dynamically, in the frame of dynamic model of text formation we just have outlined. For example, some researchers of later chronicles, the so-called Lithuanian-Belarusian chronicles (i.e., the chronicles of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania), pointed out that one can speak not even of separate izvod of the same chronicle, but of different combinations of independent works (praise of Vytautas, a story about Podolia, etc. -- see [Ulashchyk]). This approach could be at least partially adopted in PVL research, as it makes the individual style and content of each episode clearer.



References

1. Anthony L. (2022). AntConc (Version 4.2.0) [Computer Software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University. URL: https://www.laurenceanthony.net/software (last accessed: 01.09.2023)

2. Franchuk V. (1988). Litopysni opovidi pro pokhid knyazya Ihoria. Tekstolohichne doslidzhennya ta pereklady. Kyiv. [In Ukrainian].

3. Franchuk V (1986). Kievskaya letopis'. Sostav i istochniki v linhvisticheskom osveshchenii. Kyiv. [In Russian].

4. Franko I. (1976). Studii nad naidavnishym kyyivskym litopysom (chastyna persha).

5. Zibrannia tvoriv u 50-ty tomakh. Vol. 6. Poeziia. Kyiv. [In Ukrainian].

6. Kotliar M. (2007). Struktura i dzherela Kyivskogo litopysu XII st. Ukrainskyi istorychnyj zhurnal, (5), 4-17. [In Ukrainian].

7. Mink G. (S. a.). The Coherence-Based Genealogical Method - What is it about? URL: https://www.uni-muenster.de/INTF/Genealogical_method.html (last accessed: .

8. Nazarov N. (2023). Prosodyka kyievoruskykh litopysiv: strofichna budova starokyivskoi poezii. Movoznavstvo, (1), 52-79. [In Ukrainian].

9. Nazarov N. (2019). Nezamechennaya epika: metricheskaya pereocenka «Povesti vremennyh let» i «Slovo o polku Ihoreve». Slavia Orientalis, 68(2), 241-260. [In Russian].

10. Ostrowski D. (2004). Introduction. Povest' vremennykh let. An Interlinear collation and Paradosis. D. Ostrowski (Comp., Ed.). Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute, XVIILXXIII.

11. Perfeckij E. (1932). Historia polonica Jana Dlugosze a ruske letopisectvk Praha: Institut slave en commission a Orbis-Slovansky hstav v komisi Orbis.

12. Picchio R. (1972). On the Prosodic Structure of the Ihor Tale. The Slavic and East European Journal, 16(2), 147-162.

13. Pritsak O. (1973). Chomu katedry ukrayinoznavstva v Harvardi. Cambridge, Massachusets; New York. [In Ukrainian].

14. Shahmatov A. A. (2003). Istoriya russkogo letopisaniya. Vol. 1. Book 2. Rannee russkoe letopisanie XI-XII vv. Saint Petersburg: Nauka. [In Russian].

15. Tolochko O. (Ed.). (2020). Halycko-Volynskyj litopys: tekstologiya. Kyiv: Akademperiodyka. [In Ukrainian].

16. Tov E. (1992). Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible. Minneapolis: Fortress press; Assen/ Maastricht: Van Gorcum.

17. Tvorogov O. (1976). Povest' vremennyh let i Nachal'nyj svod (Tekstologicheskij kommentarij). Trydy otdela drevnerusskoj literatury. Vol. 30, 3-26. [In Russian]. Ulashchik N. (1985). Vvedenie v izuchenie belorussko-litovskogo letopisaniya. Moscow: Nauka. [In Russian].

18. Wachtel K., Holmes W. (Eds.). (2011). The Textual History of the Greek New Testament: Changing Views in Contemporary Research. Society of Biblical Literature.

Размещено на Allbest.ru

...