The history of the discovery of the "Lay of Igor's Regiment" and its preparation for publication, the public impact of the monument on the closest contemporaries of its discovery, the first steps in studying, commenting on and translating the "Word", i.e. all the circumstances that were somehow connected with the rebirth of this remarkable work of national and all-Slavic culture, make up an important page in the historiography of "Words". Over the past decades, interest in this issue has increased. One of the initiators of its development was D. S. Likhachev, who, in particular, has the merit of generalizing the question of the archaeographic study of the text of the " Word "and the lists that arose in the process of preparing the publication of 1800 and later. 1 In this regard, we would like to draw attention to some little-studied aspects of the existence of the "Word" in the coming decades after the death of the monument in 1812. It is known that the so-called ancient, but in fact dating back to the text of the 1800 edition, lists of "Words" have become widespread-
1 Likhachev D. S. Archeographic commentary. In: Slovo o polku Igorev [The Word about Igor's Regiment], Moscow, l. 1950. History of preparation for printing of the text "Words about Igor's Regiment" at the end of the XVIII century-TODRL. Vol. 13, 1957.
page 167
wounded shortly after the loss of the Musin-Pushkin collection with "A Word about Igor's Regiment". M. N. Speransky, who was specially engaged in their study, described four such lists, linking them to the activities of the forger of manuscripts of the early XIX century A. I. Bardin. In addition, he mentioned two more lists-from the collection of P. I. Shchukin in the State Historical Museum (GIM) and from the main collection of the manuscript book of the State Public Library named after M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin (GPB). However, he did not dare to attribute them to Barda products .2 This is a really complex and historically and culturally important issue.
The history of archeography shows that forgeries created for ideological, commercial or other reasons usually pursued certain functional goals: to assure contemporaries of the discovery of ancient monuments of folk writing that did not actually exist ("Hymn" of Boyan, created in the 1810s by A. I. Sulakadzev, falsifications of 1817-1819. "ancient Czech Zelenogorsk and Kraledvor manuscripts, etc.), convince them to discover "new" lists of previously known works of ancient writing (Barda parchment lists not only "Words about Igor's Regiment", but also "Teachings of Vladimir Monomakh" and "Russian Truth"). A special variety is auction forgeries of autographs of great writers and statesmen, manufactured for commercial purposes. Obviously, in each of these cases, you need to take into account design 3 . This is once again confirmed by the analysis of the list "Words about Igor's Regiment" from the GPB collection, to which Speransky referred 4 .
The collection, which includes the text of the monument, is a facial manuscript on 88 pages, written in a large half-post on rag paper in 1838 with rough engraving. The manuscript is enclosed in a cardboard cover covered with cloth, and the sequence of sheets is mixed up. In addition to "The Tale of Igor's Grandson" (ll. 26 vol. - 86 vol.), the collection includes the 15th - century novella "The Miracle of the Novgorod Posadnik Shchil" (ll.1-26). The origin of the collection could not be determined. According to I. A. Bychkov, it has been in the GPB since 1902 and is registered in the book of receipts under No. 25, and against the record of the presence of the "Word" in it is marked: "Fake of the XIX century" 5 . But is this qualification acceptable? And was it even appropriate to fake it on dated paper?
I. P. Eremin, who got acquainted with the collection, noted that the text of "Words about Igor's Regiment" was copied from the 1800 edition. At the same time, the researcher treated the previous text of "The Tale of Posadnik Shchil" with scientific confidence, publishing it as the first version of the second edition of this work6 . It is striking that neither he nor any of the other researchers were seriously interested in the text "Words about Igor's Regiment" following the "Miracle", nor did they raise the question of the cultural and historical significance of the collection as a whole.
Leaving aside some peculiarities of the style of writing (for example, " ou "instead of" u " or misspellings in individual words), the study of the text "Words about Igor's Regiment" placed in the collection gives a number of interesting discrepancies in both individual words and entire fragments compared to the original text of the 1800 edition. Without trying to reproduce all these discrepancies in this case, we will focus on the most notable ones.
As for the differences in reading individual words, they were usually the result of the compiler's efforts to make sense of the text. So, in the 1800 edition, we read: "Boyan bo syshsh", and in the collection of GPB - " vvlshsh "(l. 27ob.), which corresponds to the generally accepted reading. The famous and long-debated phrase of the canonical text "a moi ti Kuryani Sv'domi k'meti" in the GPB collection is again given in a different breakdown, corresponding to the modern norm: "sv'domi k'meti "(l. 36). Overall out of 10 similar ones
2 Speransky M. N. Russian forgeries of manuscripts at the beginning of the XIX century. (Bardin and Sulakadzev). In: Problemy istochnikovedeniya [Problems of Source Studies], vol. 5, Moscow, 1956, pp. 74-79.
3 Mylnikov A. S. "The Word about Igor's Regiment" and Slavic studies of the late XVIII - early XIX centuries. Voprosy istorii, 1981, No. 8, pp. 45-46.
4 GPB, OSRK, 17, Q. 48.
5 imp report. Public Library for 1902, St. Petersburg, 1903, E. 180, N 52.
6 Eremin I. P. From the history of the old Russian story "The Tale of Posadnik Shchil". In: Proceedings of the Commission on Old Russian Literature of the USSR Academy of Sciences, vol. I. L. 1932, pp. 124-127.
page 168
only three cases coincide with the so-called Catherine's copy of "Words about Igor's Regiment", but seven correspond to the breakdown of the text proposed by D. S. Likhachev. But there are also differences, both interesting and compelling in their own way. Thus, the publication of 1800 contains an appeal to Boyan, "old time nightingale", in which, in particular, it is said that he flew "mind the clouds". And in the list of GPB, the word "umom" is read differently: "flying eagle under the clouds "(l. 33 vol.).
Editorial discrepancies are more significant (there are 25 of them in total). They can be divided into two groups. First, there are complete omissions of a part of the text known from the publication of 1800. For example, in the collection of GPB there are no phrases: "Sleep to the Prince of mind of lust, and pity to him znameshe intercede, tempt the great Don" (p. 6); "Kaya wounds are dear, brother, forgetting to honor both the belly and the city of Crnigov, taking away the gold of the table, and your own sweet red Glebovny's desire and custom?" (p. 13-14); "For them I will click Karn and Zhlya, on skochi ps Russkoy land, smag mychyuchi in plamyan Roz" (p. 20); "Thunderstorm byashet; I trembled with my strong plki and haraluzhnymi swords" (p.21) and others (there are ten such cases in total).
Secondly, there are discrepancies in the text of the GPB, which are explained by the exclusion of individual phrases or phrases. As a result, a new version of a part of the monument's text appears. Here are the most illustrative examples of such processing. In square brackets - the text of the 1800 edition omitted in the GPB collection:
1) "Igor leads the howl to the Don [already the birds are grazing him; podobda] vl'tsi thunderstorm v srozhat on yarugam" (l. 39).
2) "Glory to Boris Viacheslavlich is brought to trial [and to Kanina Zelena papoloma postla] for insulting Olgov" (l. 48ob.).
3 )" All the burden of the evening [bosuvi] vrani vzgrayahu [in Plsnska na boloni bSha deb Kisanyu] " (l. 59ob.).
4) "We will crack the earth, and many countries [Khinova] Lithuania, Yatvyaz [Deremela] and Polovci sulitsi own povrgosha" (l. 68ob.).
5) "Rek Boyan [and the moves to Svyatoslav pystvorets of the old time Yaroslavl Olgov Cohan hoti] are hard on your head and shoulders" (l. 87).
Features of the text "Words about Igor's Regiment" from the GPB collection confirm I. P. Eremin's observation about its dependence on the printed edition of 1800. However, this in no way reduces the textual and historical and cultural significance of the collection. On the contrary, it is noteworthy that the discrepancies encountered here are far from arbitrary, and even more so - fantastic innovations. They arose as a result of either a new understanding of individual words, or the exclusion of certain fragments from the Musin-Pushkin edition. The latter is particularly interesting because it was not accidental. Abbreviations of this kind, as can be seen from the above examples, mainly concerned the so-called dark places, which turned out to be incomprehensible to the first publishers of the monument and are still partly the subject of various interpretations (for example, the expressions "strikuses", "on the green canine", "trunks plow", etc.). They were not intelligible to the creator either the GPB list, which, as a rule, preferred to exclude them. It is interesting that some of the eliminated "dark places" coincide with the list compiled at one time by A. F. Malinovsky .7 It should be emphasized that the bills are made carefully, with editorial tact. This active creative approach sharply distinguishes the GPB list from the previous Bardeen lists, which mechanically reproduced the 1800 edition.
The time of creation of the collection and its composition were hardly random. It was at the turn of the 30 - 40s of the XIX century. disputes about the origin of the "Word about Igor's Regiment" have flared up again. One of the staunch adherents of the antiquity of this monument was A. S. Pushkin 8 . The compiler of this collection, combining under one binding "The Tale of the Novgorod Posadnik Shchil" and "The Word about Igor's Regiment", deliberately emphasized their organic relationship as monuments of ancient Russian writing. Careful processing of the text, extensive use of illustrations made in the Old Russian manner, not to mention the use of dated paper-all this completely eliminates the idea of forgery. On the contrary, before us is a lovingly executed-
7 See Dmitriev L. A. Istoriya pervogo izdaniya "Slova o polku Igorev" [History of the first edition of the "Words about Igor's Regiment"], Moscow, 1960, pp. 175-176.
8 Priyma F. Ya. "The Word about Igor's regiment" in the Russian historical and literary process of the first third of the XIX century. l. 1980, p. 157.
page 169
a simplified stylization, one of the examples of a late Russian handwritten book.
Unfortunately, the lack of reliable data on the history of this manuscript does not allow us to definitively answer the question of who was the creator of the collection under consideration. However, there is no doubt, firstly, that the compiler of the collection was an informed person who knew not only the monuments of ancient Russian writing, but also the state of modern archeography. This is supported by the conscious and purposeful nature of the editorial processing of the "Word", including the exclusion of" dark " places from its text. At the same time, although the tradition of the handwritten book not only in the first half of the XIX century, but also much later was held mainly in the Old Believers ' environment, the creator of the GPB collection could hardly belong to it. This is contradicted by the composition of the collection, which is far from religious themes. The compiler of the collection was most likely a native of the city's diverse environment. There, in the first half of the 19th century, interest in the manuscript book changed significantly: respect for the traditions of Russian culture was preserved, but its former strongly confessional character was lost.
This is confirmed by the discovery of samples of a late handwritten book, its circulation in the literate strata of the posadsky and rural population of Russia in the XVIII-XIX centuries. The largest collection of monuments of Russian folk writing is the Ancient Repository of the Pushkin House of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, initiated by the remarkable Soviet archaeographer V. I. Malyshev. Similar work is being successfully carried out in a number of other major book repositories. In particular, a vivid illustration of our topic is the latest finds of the archaeological expedition of 1983 in the Pskov region. Among the handwritten books brought from there by the employees of the Saltykov-Shchedrin State Library, V. S. Belonenko and A. G. Bobrov, is a collection of literary content written in a half-post on paper with filigrees from the 1820s. This collection also includes "The Tale of the Novgorod Posadnik Shchil". The similarity in the time of creation of both collections is also understandable. Here a general (and still, unfortunately, poorly understood) pattern was revealed, a lively attention of the national - urban and peasant-audience to the heritage of their culture. One of the stages of this process reflected the collection discussed above. At the same time, he captured a new, previously unknown aspect of the existence of the "Lay of Igor's Regiment" in the popular consciousness.
page 170
New publications: |
Popular with readers: |
News from other countries: |
![]() |
Editorial Contacts |
About · News · For Advertisers |
![]() 2014-2025, LIBRARY.RS is a part of Libmonster, international library network (open map) Keeping the heritage of Serbia |