The names of Peresvet and Oslyabya are probably as well known as the names of the organizers of the victory in 1380 on Kulikovo Field - Dmitry Donskoy, Vladimir Serpukhov and Dmitry Bobrok, because Peresvet and Oslyabya seem to represent a lot of ordinary Russian warriors, those whose efforts accomplished this victory. It was in this capacity that they interested the authors of the works of the Kulikovsky cycle. But their life "outside the battle" is covered in sources with sparse and fragmentary strokes. Sometimes Over-

page 177

svet and Oslyabya may even appear as symbolic figures created by the imagination of the author of "Zadonshchina", on the pages of which they first appear. Meanwhile, both warriors were real people who lived and acted in the second half of the XIV century.

This is confirmed by specific references to them in the chronicle stories about the battle (short and lengthy editions), "Zadonshchina", "The Legend of the Battle of Mamaev". Since these sources were created at different times, there are some differences in the information they contain. And in the aggregate, sources are unanimous that Peresvet died on Kulikovo field (in "Zadonshchina" this is stated in the form of a prediction uttered by Oslyabey: "Already I see wounds on your body, already your head was flying on the grass"); that Peresvet and Oslyabya are brothers; finally, none of the sources testifies to the death of Oslyabya on Kulikovo Field, as oral tradition says.

The pre-Kulikovo period of their life is marked by only two biographical milestones. The first one is related to the social status and place of residence. Both Peresvet and Oslyabya belonged to the Boyars. In the" Zadonshchina " and a lengthy chronicle story, Peresvet is called the Bryansk boyar. Other sources repeat these data, except for the widespread edition of the "Legend of the Mamayev Battle", where it says "chernets Lyubochanin" about Peresvet. As for Oslyabi, he is only once called a Bryansk boyar in the "Legend of the Mamayev Battle", and it is "about his cousins, about the Bryansk boyars, Peresvet and his brother Osleby" 1 . However, in the chronicles describing the events of the end of the XIV century, Oslyabya is called the boyar of Lyubut 2, which there is no reason not to trust.

The desire of medieval authors to see both brothers as boyars of Bryansk or Lyubut is recorded in later versions of the "Legend of the Battle of Mamayev". Most likely, this is caused by an attempt by scribes who are familiar with the chronicle materials to eliminate the discrepancy: one brother is a Bryansk boyar, the other is a Lubutsky. In fact, the brothers could simply own different fiefs, which was reflected in their titles.

The news that they were brothers is not in doubt, since in none of the contexts is this term of kinship used in the sense used in the church circle ("brotherhood in Christ"). A more precise determination of the degree of their relationship (siblings or cousins) on the basis of preserved sources is impossible. In addition, both heroes are widely known not by their first names, but by the nicknames Peresvet and Oslyabya 3 . Sources have kept only the name Oslyabi - Rodion 4, and they are silent about the mundane name of Peresvet. In the monuments of the Kulikovo cycle, the brothers perform under the names received during the adoption of the schema ("in inotsekh schema-monks Alexander and Adrian").5 .

The second famous milestone in the life of the brothers of the Dokulik period was their departure from the world to become monks of the Trinity Monastery founded by Sergius of Radonezh. Sources are silent about the reason for their tonsure. Based on indirect data, it can be assumed that this happened in the second half of the 70s of the XIV century. The conclusion is based on the fact that the brothers were people experienced in military affairs, as Dmitry Ivanovich Moskovsky knew, and the general tone of the sources indicates their personal acquaintance with the Grand Duke. This circumstance and military experience could be a consequence of the participation of the Bryansk and Lyubut boyars in the campaigns against the Lithuanians of the late 60s-early 70s of the XIV century. The Grand Duke's large military forces were then operating at Bryansk and Lyubutsk6, so that Peresvet and Oslyabya were vitally interested in the outcome of the struggle. The lack of tangible results for them in the confrontation with Olgerd could serve as one of the reasons or reasons for leaving for the monastery.

The further history of their lives is determined by-

1 Tales and stories about the Battle of Kulikovo. L. 1982, pp. 10, 22, 98, 109.

2 PSRL. Vol. 6. SPb. 1853, p. 130; vol. 23. SPb. 1910, p. 136; vol. 25. Moscow-l. 1949, p. 228.

3 It is possible that the nickname "Oslyabya" is distorted, and originally sounded "Oslyadya" (bar, long pole) and could indicate the growth and thinness of a person. This word was used in the Kaluga region, where the ancient city of Lyubutsk was located (M. Fasmer). Etymological Dictionary of the Russian language, vol. III. M. 1971, p. 161).

4 PSRL. Vol. 6, p. 130; vol. 23, p. 136; vol. 25, p. 228.

5 Rozanov N. P. Church of the Nativity of the Most Holy Theotokos on Stary Simonov, Moscow. In the collection: Russian Memorials, vol. 2, Moscow, 1877, p. 15.

6 Kuchkin V. A. Pobeda na Kulikovo pole [Victory on the Kulikovo field]. Voprosy istorii, 1980, No. 8, p. 19.

page 178

It is characterized by the following facts: their appearance on Kulikovo Field and participation in the battle. There are legends about the burial of heroes. The study of sources and comparison of earlier descriptions of the battle with subsequent detailed images of it allow us to speak about a purposeful and significant change in some data in order to exalt the role of the clergy in the struggle against the Golden Horde. Church bias in the presentation of some events of the Battle of Kulikovo appears even in the table of contents of chronicle stories about it. If in the early chronicles the course of the battle was described under the headings "About the great battle that took place on the Don" or "About the battle that took place on the Don and about how the great Prince fought with the Horde"7, then in the Nikon Chronicle the title already sounds like this:" The story is useful to the former chyudesi, when with the help of God and his most pure mother the Mother of God, and their saint Saint Peter the Wonderworker, Metropolitan of All Russia, and the Venerable Abbot Sergius the wonderworker, and all the saints through the prayers of Prince Dmitry Ivanovich the great with his brother, who is one of the cousins." After this revision, the actual participants in the battle and the organizers of the victory look like third-rate characters. As for Peresvet and Oslyabi, as a result of the scheme they adopted, they turned from well-versed warriors into warrior monks, personifying the Russian clergy and elevating them to the level of the main fighter against the "cursed yoke" 8 .

The authors of "Zadonshchina", a short and lengthy story about the Battle of Kulikovo, are not interested in finding out how two boyars who became monks got to Kulikovo Field in general. They pay all their attention to the description of the situation of extreme tension and the seriousness of the general political situation, which led to the patriotic upsurge, as a result of which the all-Russian militia gathered under the banners of Moscow. Peresvet and Oslyabya at such a moment could not remain bystanders, because their duty called them to stand under the banner of Dmitry Ivanovich. This does not exclude the fact that the Moscow prince also remembered his comrades in the fight against Olgerd and asked them to participate in the campaign. After all, both of them are "shelves that know how to row" 9 . If we take into account that the army assembled by the Grand Duke exceeded all previous Russian armies in number, then its need for experienced leaders is understandable, in the light of which the alleged call of two monks from the monastery seems to be a well-founded hypothesis. Another thing is how this fact was later used by the clergy in the writings of the XVI century. It was the challenge of Peresvet and Oslyabi from the Trinity Monastery that allowed us to introduce into the narrative of the battle the story of the arrival of Grand Duke Dmitry there specifically to receive a blessing from Sergius. With this presentation, the emphasis shifts, the episode with Peresvet and Oslyabey fades into the background, and after the abbot's permission for their participation in the campaign, the figures of warrior monks grow into a symbol that embodies the clergy's contribution to the battle and the subsequent victory over the oppressors of Russia.

Academician M. N. Tikhomirov considered the story of the blessing of Prince Dmitry by Sergius of Radonezh for the battle with Mamai to be "a narrative of a legendary character." 10 A. N. Robinson also emphasizes the symbolic meaning of Sergius sending two monks to battle, especially since this is compounded by giving them "imperishable weapons" - Christian symbols. In comparison, the author cites "Zadonshchyna", where Peresvet appears not in a monastic hood, but in the "golden armor" befitting a hero. 11 In connection with the episode under consideration, the discrepancy between the dates in the text of the "Legend" and the lengthy chronicle story is of interest. The "Legend" reports the arrival of Grand Duke Dmitry with his cousin and "all the Russian princes" at the Trinity Monastery on August 18, 1380 12 . A long chronicle story, the creation of which is closer to the end in time.-

7 Tales and stories about the Battle of Kulikovo, pp. 14, 16.

8 In passing, we note that some modern American authors try to portray the Orthodox Church and its hierarchs as the main force that contributed to the victory at Kulikovo Field (see Belov A.V., Pavlov S. I., Shilkia A.D. The Myth of the "religious revival" in the USSR, Moscow, 1583).

9 Tales and stories about the Battle of Kulikovo, p. 56.

10 Tikhomirov M. N. The Battle of Kulikovo in 1380. In the collection: Stories about the Kulikovo Battle, Moscow, 1959, p. 346.

11 Robinson A. N. Evolution of heroic images in stories about the Kulikovo Battle. In: Kulikovo Battle in Literature and Art, Moscow, 1980, p. 33.

12 Tales and tales of the Battle of Kulikovo, p. 31. It is already fantastic that the highest military leadership abandoned to the mercy of fate the preparation of the campaign and the gathering of troops at the most crucial moment.

page 179

ve, claims that the Russian army led by Dmitry 20 August has already left Kolomna. What date the militia arrived in the city, the source does not say, but, of course, earlier than the named date, since before that it tells about the visit of Grand Duke Dmitry Kolomna Assumption Cathedral, where the prince and "all his howl" was blessed by Bishop Gerasimov . It turns out that Dmitry was almost simultaneously in two places, the distance between which is considered to have existed in the XIV century. It was impossible to get around in just a few hours.

The evidence that Dmitry did not visit Sergius of Radonezh indirectly comes from the abbot of the Trinity Monastery himself. According to a lengthy chronicle, he sent the Grand Duke a letter and blessing when the army was already standing on the bank of the Don, "telling him to fight with Totara" 14 . Such an action would not have made sense if the Grand Duke had received his personal parting words earlier. Therefore, there is no need to consider the appearance of Peresvet and Oslyabi on Kulikovo Field as special representatives of the clergy. They came there at the call of the Grand Duke and at the behest of their hearts.

In the monuments of the Kulikovo cycle, one Peresvet takes part in the battle; Oslyabya is mentioned only in "Zadonshchina" as a person who predicts his brother's death. One of the main events in the cycle is the duel between Peresvet and the hero from Mamai's army. Sources are divided into two groups regarding this fact. In "Zadonshchina", a short and lengthy chronicle story, there is no such episode at all. And in all versions of the "Legend of the Mamayev Battle" and the Nikon Chronicle (XVI century), an expressive description of the duel is given. His appearance in later works did not go unnoticed by researchers. Academician L. V. Cherepnin noted the" fantastic coloring " inherent in the scene of the single combat of Peresvet with the warrior Mamai. L. A. Dmitriev, speaking about the use of oral traditions in the "Legend of the Battle of Mamai", attributed to them the "single combat of Peresvet with the Tatar hero" 15 .

"The Legend of the Battle of Mamayev" is a literary work of the epic genre, which is based on actual historical events. In accordance with the laws of the genre, the author could develop various plot points without going beyond the historical outline. However, in the presence of broad plot and compositional possibilities, he sought to give his presentation historical authenticity, strengthening only certain points. But he never forgot about his "super-task", as a result of which a work "with a pronounced ecclesiastical and religious coloring"was published from his pen16 . But the latter is absent in the "Zadonshchina", where the readers pass as if a series of disparate memories of the participant of events related to the battle. At the same time, the effect of the narrator's personal presence at the feast of Mikula Vasilyevich, in Novgorod the Great and on Kulikovo Field gives the narrative not only a special penetration, but also a tangible authenticity and impartiality of the presentation. Hence , a fair assessment of "Zadonshchina" as a lyrical response to the Battle of Kulikovo 17 .

Among the sketches-memories, the figure of Peresvet also appears - an epic hero, ready to lay down his head for the Motherland. In "Zadonshchina" he suddenly appears to the reader as if from the thick of the fight. The knight does not go by himself: he is led, and probably not out of respect for his boyar rank and not because he is a monastery black man. He is being led to the" intended place " of eternal rest, most likely because he is gravely wounded. In the" narrowed place", Peresvet seems to convey to Grand Duke Dmitry the testament of those who have already fallen in the battle that has flared up: "We would rather be sweaty than be full." And then, distracting from this picture, the author admires the military prowess of Peresvet, who just shone in the heat of battle: "Peresvet gallops on his greyhound horse, and dedicates to the golden armor, and others lie slashed on the brez at Don the Great" 18 . According to this passage, Peresvet did not fall dead in single combat even before the battle began, but took an active part in the battle, and at the very height of it, when it was already over.

13 Ibid., p. 18.

14 Ibid., p. 19.

15 Tcherepnin L. V. Obrazovanie Russkogo tsentralizirovannogo gosudarstva v XIV - XV vekakh [Formation of the Russian centralized State in the XIV-XV centuries]. Moscow, 1960, p. 617; Dmitriev L. A. K literaturnoi istorii skazaniya o Mamaev poboishche. In the collection: Stories about the Battle of Kulikovo, p. 435.

16 Dmitriev L. A. Literary history of monuments of the Kulikovo cycle. In the collection: Tales and stories about the Battle of Kulikovo, p. 347.

17 Ibid., p. 347.

18 Ibid., pp. 10-11.

page 180

"they are laid down by Don the Great on the Brez." Peresvet's participation in the battle is also evidenced by the previous episode, when he is taken out of the thick of the fight, wounded.

In a lengthy chronicle story, the moment of the meeting of the opposing troops and the first minutes of the battle are clearly described: "And it was in the sixth year of the days (at 11 o'clock. in the morning-V. E.), the Izmaltians began to appear in the field, but the field was clean and large and green. And that ispolchishasya totarstii poltsiu against the peasants. And that sretoshasya regiment. And, having seen the forces, they led them, poidosha, and the land was full of mud, the mountains and hills were shaking from the multitude of innumerable howls, and the weapons were sharpened everywhere in their hands... Having come as a doom, we have already begun to unite the guard regiments and Ruski with the Totarian ones. The Grand Duke himself went ahead to the guard regiments for the filthy king of the Calf, called the dense devil, Mamaa; and then, not long in vain, the prince left for the grand regiment. And lo and behold the great army of Mamaev and all the power of totarskaa, and away went the Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich with all the princes of Russia, having dressed up regiments, went against the filthy Polovtsians and with all their armies " 19 . In the above excerpt, the actions of both sides are consistently outlined. In the morning, Mamai's advanced units appeared on Kulikovo Field, which began to rebuild from a marching position to a combat one. Immediately, the first clash involving the scouting squads took place. Then the main forces began to converge. Their advanced units consisted of guard regiments, in which Grand Duke Dmitry was on one side, and Mamai on the other. In the ensuing fight, they almost collided, and after a while Dmitry drove off to the main forces. Apparently, Mamai did the same.

So, the chronicle shows that Dmitry took a personal part at the beginning of the battle. His presence in the vanguard was required as a commander, who was obliged to properly group and arrange forces to repel the first blow. This was not only of tactical importance, giving a gain in time for the deployment and "training" of the great regiment, but also had a psychological impact on the soldiers who were intensely watching the beginning of the battle. The duel between Peresvet and the Golden Horde hero could have occurred somewhere during the clash of reconnaissance detachments or guard regiments. As for the episode depicted in the "Legend of the Battle of Mamaev" and drawing two huge armies frozen against each other, and between them - fighting heroes, it is made in the best artistic traditions of the epic epic. However, as a result of the introduction of this plot in the text of the "Legend", the accents changed, which the author wanted: now Grand Duke Dmitry is no longer a commander who personally led the beginning of the battle, but an ordinary vigilante who laid down the burden of command. The honor of opening the battle is given not to Peresvet the warrior, but to "the monk Peresvet, novice of the Venerable Abbot Sergius" 20 . As a result, the wise boyar who accompanied the Moscow prince in previous campaigns turns into a symbol of the redemptive sacrifice made by the church on the altar of freedom of the Fatherland. Finally, one more detail: The Battle of Kulikovo was the least like a jousting tournament, where the names of opponents competing in single combat were loudly proclaimed. Therefore, the name of the hero who left the ranks of Mamaev's army could only be known by his associates. However, the laws of the genre of historical legend require both detailing of events and personification of participants. And in the "Tale of the Battle of Mamaev", the enemy of Peresvet gets a specific name, more precisely-three different names. This did not depend on the imagination or desires of the scribes and editors, but on their knowledge and the historical works at hand. The absence of the name of the Horde hero in the early editions of the work and the subsequent complication of the description of his portrait 21 , accompanied by the appearance of a specific name, are striking. In the main edition of the "Legend", the enemy of Peresvet is called "evil pecheneg". The use of such an ethnonym in this context is surprising: after all, throughout the work, the ethnonym "Tatars" is used in relation to Mamaev's army, and occasionally "Polovtsians", which was considered the norm for the XIII - XVI centuries. Most likely, the image of pecheneg is borrowed from earlier sources of a chronicle nature or drawn from epic-song creativity.

19 Ibid., p. 20.

20 Ibid., p. 64.

21 Dmitriev L. A. Literary history of monuments of the Kulikovo cycle, pp. 354-355.

page 181

In Kiprianov's edition of the Legend, Mamaev Bogatyr appears under the specific name Temir-murza 22 . The second part of the name began to be used in Russian sources from the end of the XV and in the XVI century. This title was applied exclusively to the aristocracy, and came from the distorted " emir-zade "(son of the emir). In other versions, the enemy of Peresvet is called Tavrul 23 . The third variant - Chelubey-appears in the Synopsis of the XVII century 24 . The latter option received the most popularity. Its origin is most likely connected with a chronicle article describing the capture of the capital of the Bulgarian Kingdom, Tarnovo, by the Turks in 1393 [25]. Chelyabinsk-Amira, the son of Sultan Murad I, is named the conqueror there. In a distorted form, the name of the Turkish prince could have been used by the compilers of the collection of the XVII century. when editing the "Legend".

In the oral tradition, there was an opinion about the joint burial of Peresvet and Oslyabi, which later a number of authors considered as a historical fact. A study of the interior of the Church of the Nativity of the Virgin at the old Simonov monastery 26 to determine the authenticity of this report cannot give tangible results: it was repeatedly rebuilt in the XVI - XIX centuries, its floor was significantly destroyed, so there is almost no hope for the preservation of old burials there. Oral tradition held that the grave of the two heroes of the Battle of Kulikovo was located to the west of the church, and a wooden bell tower stood above it. After its demolition, a refectory was added to the church, and the grave was also located inside, and its exact location has long been questionable .27
The fact of the death of Peresvet on Kulikovo field is confirmed by all sources, but they are silent about the fate of Oslyabi. Nor is his name mentioned in the parchment memorial Synod (preserved in the State Historical Museum), which lists Russian people who died on Kulikovo Field. The name of the Lubut boyar Rodion Oslyabi appears 18 years after the battle: he is mentioned under 1398 in a number of chronicles 28, which report that Grand Duke Vasily Dmitrievich sent the black man Rodion Oslyabya to Constantinople with a significant amount of money. This message confirms that Oslyabya was still alive after the Battle of Kulikovo. Of particular interest is the presentation of the 1398 article in the Nikon Chronicle, compiled between 1526 and 1530 .29 Its compiler, repeating the content of the article of 1398, taken from more ancient chronicle codes, speaks about the siege of Constantinople by the Turks in 1453 and about the sending of the collected "alms" by the besieged, without mentioning the name of the ambassador who brought the money. 30 the case for the Nikon code, famous for its detailed descriptions, is almost unique. This observation suggests a connection between two phenomena: the disappearance of Oslyabi's name from the article of 1398 in the code of the XVI century and the appearance of a legend about his death on the Kulikovo Field and the subsequent joint burial of the brothers. In the 16th century, the legend of Oslyabi's death in battle was already widespread, and the compiler of the Nikon code deleted the name of the Lyubut boyar from the text of the article, because mentioning it would contradict the established oral tradition and look like an anachronism.

N. M. Snegirev reported that "in the reign of Anna Ioannovna, during the dismantling of the old bell tower and during the digging of ditches for a new stone meal, a brick crypt was opened, covered with tombstones without inscriptions, 1 ar. 14 ver. long. When these stones were removed, they saw through the hole the coffins of spiritual knights"31 . There are two points that attract attention: tombstones had no inscriptions, therefore, the names of those buried were not known; brick in Moscow construction began to be widely used in the 50s-60s of the XV century. 32 This makes us cautious about dating-

22 Tales and stories about the Battle of Kulikovo, pp. 43, 64.

23 Ibid., p. 406.

24 Kuchkin V. A. Uk. soch., p. 6.

25 PSRL. Vol. 18. SPb. 1913, p. 143; vol. 23, p. 133; vol. 25, p. 220-221.

26 is now located on the territory of the Moscow plant "Dynamo".

27 Rozanov N. P. Istoriya tserkva Rozhdestva presvyatoi Bogoroditsy na stary Simonov [History of the Church of the Nativity of the Most Holy Theotokos on Stary Simonov]. Moscow, 1883.

28 PSRL. Vol. 6, p. 130; vol. 8. SPb. 1859, p. 71; vol. 23, p. 136; vol. 25, p. 228.

29 Kloss B. M. Nikonovsky svod i russkiye letopisi XVI - XVII vekov [The Nikonovsky Svod and Russian Chronicles of the XVI-XVII centuries]. Moscow, 1980, p. 51.

30 PSRL. T. I. SPb. 1897, p. 168.

31 Russian antiquity in monuments of church and civil architecture. The Fifth Notebook, Moscow, 1848, p. 35.

32 Rabinovich M. G. Cultural layer of the Central districts of Moscow. In the collection: Antiquities of the Moscow Kremlin, Moscow, 1971, p. 56.

page 182

the discovery of a crypt dating back to the 14th century. As noted above, the tradition concerning the graves of Peresvet and Oslyabi dates back to the 17th-century handwritten monastic calendar, where it is said that both monks were laid "at the Church of the Nativity of Christ" 33 . This church stood until 1509, when it was replaced by a stone one, so that the data of Mesyatseslov can also refer to the XV-beginning of the XVI century, which fits into the interval between the last mention of Oslyabi in 1398 and the removal of his name from this article in the Nikon code. It can be seen that the legend about the death of both heroes on Kulikovo Field and their subsequent joint burial was formed in the XV-early XVI century.

Other authors used different traditions. N. Ivanchin-Pisarev attributed the dismantling of the wooden bell tower to 1794 - the time of the construction of the refectory and the installation of a new tombstone. He relied solely on the oral tradition that the coffins of the knights were "found by signature" .34 V. V. Passek, based on the argument "as a reliable legend says", reported that Grand Duke Dmitry Donskoy granted Simonov Monastery on Kulikovo field "land and the village of Rozhestvino, which was also called Monastyrschinoyu" .35 Such legends further contributed to further confusion of the issue.

In reality, Peresvet and Oslyabya were first of all brave soldiers who fought for their Homeland.

33 Russkaya starina v pamyatniki [Russian Antiquity in Monuments], p. 35.

34 Ivanchin-Pisarev N. Evening in Simonov, Moscow, 1840, p. 75.

35 Passek V. V. Istoricheskoe opisanie moskovskogo Simonova monastora [Historical description of the Moscow Simonov Monastery]. Moscow, 1843, p. 127.

page 183

Permanent link to this publication: