Why is the story of the Battle of Kulikovo called Zadonshchina. "Zadonshchina": year of creation. Monument of ancient Russian literature of the late XIV - early XV centuries. When was "Zadonshchina" written

Ancient Moscow. XII-XV centuries Tikhomirov Mikhail Nikolaevich

"ZADONSHINA"

The attention of literary historians has long been drawn to the "Zadonshchina", and yet it cannot be said that the results of its study were completely satisfactory. Most researchers were interested in the question of the imitation of this monument associated with the "Tale of Igor's Campaign". S. K. Shambinago writes: “This work, which bore the usual names of the Word or the Tale, but later received the name of the Tale, was written in imitation of the Tale of Igor's Campaign, preserving not only its images and expressions, but also the plan” . The origin of the "Zadonshchina" is correlated by him with the authorship of Zephanius, a priest, a Ryazan, named in one list as a Bryansk boyar. The book by S. K. Shambinago depicts the arrival of a southern native in Ryazan, where the manuscript of The Tale of Igor's Campaign is brought, and perhaps an entire library. According to N. K. Gudziy, the author of "Zadonshchina" is also a Bryansk boyar, "... apparently, an adherent of Dmitry Bryansky, a member of the coalition against Mamai, and then a Ryazan priest." A new work in French by A. Mazon is also devoted to the “Zadonshchina”, which praises it in order to prove that it was the source of the “Tale of Igor's Campaign”, considered by A. Mazon as a forged work compiled at the end of the 18th century.

At present, the question of the origin of the "Zadonshchina" is increasingly attracting researchers, especially since a new copy of this work has been found. Personally, he was known to me for a long time for his work on the chroniclers of the State Historical Museum. The new list of "Zadonshchina" is included in the Novgorod 4th chronicle of the type of the Dubrovsky list (manuscript of the museum collection No. 2060). The meaning of the new list is self-evident, if we take into account that from known lists of this work, two belong to the 17th century, one (incomplete) - to the 15th century. Our list of the middle of the XVI century. the most complete and serviceable, basically similar to Undolsky's list.

The text of "Zadonshchina" is inserted into the annalistic story about the Battle of Kulikovo. Therefore, he remained little known. At the beginning it says: “In the summer of 6887. Praise to the Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich and his brother Prince Vladimir Ondreevich, sometimes defeating the filthy Mamai with all his strength with the help of God.” This is followed by the text of the chronicle story "about the discovery of Mamai", interrupted by the story of the sending by Dmitry Donskoy for Prince Vladimir Andreevich and the governors. Here “Zadonshchina” begins: “And then I wrote off pity and praise to the Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich and his brother Prince Vladimir Ondreevich. Let us descend, brethren and friends, sons of Russia, let us put it word for word and magnify the Russian land ... "

A. D. Sedelnikov wrote an interesting article in which he connects Zadonshchina with Pskov writing, but his evidence is shaky and stands far from the text of Zadonshchina itself. Meanwhile, a number of strokes scattered in the "Zadonshchina" indicate that the author wrote it in the years close to the Battle of Kulikovo. He was well aware of the life of the higher Moscow circles. So, in the word there appear Moscow “bolyaryns”, the wives of the dead governor: the wife of Mikula Vasilyevich is Marya, the wife of Dmitry Vsevolozhsky is also Marya, Fedosya is the wife of Timofey Valuevitch, Marya is Andrey Serkizovich, Oksenya (or, according to Undolsky’s list, Anisya) is the wife Mikhail Andreevich Brenk. It is necessary to assume that the author is well informed about Moscow affairs in order to explain the appearance of the list of boyar wives, which is interesting and understandable only for contemporaries. Of course, such words describing the formidable Russian army do not belong to the later author either: “We have a greyhound komoni under us, and we have gilded armor on ourselves, and Cherkassy helmets, and Moscow shields, and Orda sulits, and Frankish charms, damask swords.” The “strong”, “glorious”, “stone” city of Moscow, the fast river Moscow are the focus of the author's attention.

Our conclusions seem to be contradicted by the reference to Zephanius of Ryazan as the author of the legend. But already S.K. Shambinago noted that in the text of the “Zadonshchina” the Ryazan priest Zephanius (Efonya in our list) is mentioned in the third person, as if the author of some other work, in the new list it is said about him like this: “And I I will commemorate Efonya, the priest of Ryazan, in praise of songs and gossip and riotous words. Considerations of literary historians about the origin of Zephanius do not change anything in the Moscow character of the work. Indeed, in all Russian cities, the nicknames "Ryazan", "Volodimer", etc. were given to those people who settled in a foreign city. A Muscovite did not write himself as a Muscovite in Moscow, but called himself that in another place. Therefore, the nickname Ryazan does not in the least contradict the fact that Zephanius was a Muscovite, unless his name was inscribed on the "Lay of Igor's Campaign", which was used by the author of "Zadonshchina", attributing to him the compilation of this work (and also taking from there slurred and violent words) .

First of all, the question is important for us: when was Zadonshchina written? Literary historians answer this with general words about the composition of the work at the beginning of the 15th century, while in the text of the monument we have a fairly accurate dating indication. In the summary text of S. K. Shambinago, the passage of interest to us, rearranged by him to another place, sounds like this: “Shibla glory to the sea, chu, and to the Cafe, and to the Tsar city, that Rus' has overcome the filthy ones.” The quoted phrase is not in the Kirillo-Belozersky list, and in the Undolsky list it is read in a faulty, but significantly different form than S.K. Shambinago gives it. In it we find the words: "And the glory of Shibla to the Iron Gates, to Karanachi, to Rome, and to Safa, by sea, and to Kotornov, and from there to Tsaryugrad."

Having correctly restored the reading “to Cafe” instead of “to Safa”, S.K. Shambinago threw out the obscure words “to Kotornov” from the text, and they contain important dating indications. Indeed, in the Museum list we read: “Shibla glory to the Iron Gates, to Rome and to the Cafe by sea and to Tornav and from there to Tsaryugrad for praise: Great Rus' defeated Mamai on the Kulikovo field” (L. 219v). These words are read in a completely corrupted form in the Synodal list: “Shibla glory to the sea and (to) Vornavich, and to the Iron Gates, to the Cafe and to the Turks and to Tsaru-grad.”

It is easy to see that the phrase about fame changed during correspondence, and some names became incomprehensible. Incomprehensible in Undolsky's list - "Karanachi" (in the Synodal - "to Vornavich") means "to Ornach", which should be understood as Urgench in Central Asia. The Iron Gate is most likely Derbent, but what does it mean to Kotor? The Museum list makes clear the text of Undolsky's list: it is necessary to read "to Tornov" (in the Museum list - "to Tornav"). Under this name, one cannot see another city, except for Tarnovo, the capital of Bulgaria. It is known that the last Bulgarian kingdom was conquered by the Turks in 1393, when Tarnov also fell. This means that the original text of "Zadonshchina" was compiled no later than this year.

Our conclusion can be confirmed by another consideration. IN complete lists"Zadonshchina" is shown from the Kalat rati to the Mamaev battle for 160 years. There is no doubt that "Zadonshchina" means the battle on the Kalka, with which the battle on Kayala, glorified in the Tale of Igor's Campaign, was confused. The battle on the Kalka took place, according to our chronicles, in 6731 (Laurentian) or 6732 (Ipatiev). In the Moscow chronicles, the second date was usually accepted (see Troitskaya, Lvovskaya, and others). Let's add 160 years to 6732, we get 6892, which is equal to 1384 in our chronology. Meanwhile, in the chronicles 6888 is constantly indicated as the date of the Battle of Kulikovo. Of course, one can assume an error in the calculation of time, but nothing prevents us from seeing in this a certain dating sign that relates the composition of the monument to 1384.

"Zadonshchina" absorbed many features of the Moscow life of the XIV century. Therefore, in it North-Eastern Rus' is called the Zalessky land, as in other monuments of that time. Moscow is called the “glorious city”, the Moscow River is called “fast”, “honey is our sweet Moscow”, shields are “Moscow”. The special imitative nature of the "Zadonshchina" and its small size they did not give its author the opportunity to develop Moscow motifs widely, but even without that, Zadonshchina can be considered a monument of Moscow literature par excellence, whatever the origin of the author.

From book Battle on the Ice and other "myths" of Russian history author

From the book Battle on the Ice and other "myths" of Russian history author Bychkov Alexey Alexandrovich

Zadonshchina. Reconstruction based on the List of Undolsky A word about Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich and his brother, Prince Vladimir Andreevich, how they defeated the adversary of their Tsar Mamai. Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich with his brother, Prince Vladimir Andreevich, and with his

From the book Dismantling author Kubyakin Oleg Yu.

Zadonshchina No less significant "monument of the Kulikovo cycle" is considered to be "Zadonshchina". Although it is suggested that the work received its name "Zadonshchina" at a later time. The most likely title is generally considered to be “The Word about the Great

From the book Ancient Moscow. XII-XV centuries author Tikhomirov Mikhail Nikolaevich

"ZADONSHINA" The attention of literary historians has long been drawn to "Zadonshchina", and yet it cannot be said that the results of its study were completely satisfactory. Most researchers were interested in the question of the imitation of this monument associated with

From the book Pre-Petrine Rus'. historical portraits. author Fedorova Olga Petrovna

ZADONSHINA(148) (extract)<...>While the eagles flocked from all over the northern country. These were not eagles flocked - all the Russian princes gathered to the Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich (149) and his brother, Prince Vladimir Andreevich (150), telling them this: “Mr. Great Prince, already filthy

From the book Book Rus author Glukhov Alexey Gavrilovich

A poetic story about the events of the Battle of Kulikovo, in contrast to the documentary "Tale", is given in another monument of ancient Russian literature - "Zadonshchina". The story is dedicated to the glorification of the victory of the Russian troops over the Mongol-Tatar hordes. The author drew the factual material from the chronicle story, and the Tale of Igor's Campaign served as a literary model - he used the poetic plan and artistic techniques of the Lay. The story juxtaposes past and present events. This is manifested, according to D.S. Likhachev, the pathos of historical design. The struggle against the Polovtsy is interpreted here as a struggle for national independence.

In "Zadonshchina" the poetic attitude of the author to the events of the Battle of Kulikovo is expressed. His story, as in "The Tale of Igor's Campaign", is transferred from one place to another: from Moscow to the Kulikovo field, again to Moscow, to Novgorod, again to the Kulikovo field. The present is intertwined with memories of the past. The author himself described his work as "pity and praise to the Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich." "Pity" is a cry for the dead. "Praise" - glory to the courage and military prowess of the Russians, one of the modern scientists believes.

"Zadonshchina", like "The Lay of Igor's Campaign", does not seek to consistently describe the entire course of events, its goal is different - to sing the victory of the Russians, to glorify Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich and his brother, Prince Vladimir Andreevich of Serpukhov. This idea forced the author to consciously contrast the episodes of the Russian defeat in Igor's campaign with the victorious battle on the Don. The author of "Zadonshchina" sees an important historical milestone in the Battle of Kulikovo: the time of "tightness and sorrow" began with the defeat on Kalka, and it ended with victory in the Battle of Kulikovo.

The text of "Zadonshchina" is correlated with the "Tale of Igor's Campaign". The author consciously compares events, seeing in the Lay an aesthetic role model. To explain his idea to the reader, he prefaced it with a preface composed in epic tones. "Let's get together, brothers and friends, sons of Russia, let's make up word for word and glorify the Russian land, let's throw sadness on the eastern country, proclaim victory over the filthy Mamai, and give praise to the Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich, and his brother Prince Vladimir Andreevich ..." 1 .

The author refers to the past of Rus': "... let us remember the first years of the times and praise the prophetic Boyan, a skilled harp player in Kiev. That Boyan laid his skillful fingers on living strings and sang glory to the Russian princes ... And I praise with songs and under the harp with violent words and this Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich..." 2 .

In The Tale of Igor's Campaign, formidable omens accompany the campaign of Russian troops: "wolves howl, foxes bark at Russian shields." In "Zadonshchina" the same ominous signs accompany the campaign of the Tatar troops: the impending death of the Tatars makes birds fly under the clouds, eagles screech, wolves and foxes howl. In the "Word" - "children of demons" (Polovtsy) by clicking the field "barrier"; in "Zadonshchina" - "Russian sons wide fields with a wedge garden." In the "Word" - "black earth under the hooves" was sown with the bones of Russians. In "Zadonshchina" - "the earth under the hooves is black with Tatar bones" was sown. Everything that was addressed in the "Tale of Igor's Campaign" to the Russian land, in "Zadonshchina" turned to its enemies.

The result of the battle is sad: it is terrible and pitiful to hear how crows croak over human corpses, to see grass covered in blood. Nature itself expresses sympathy for the dead - the trees bowed to the ground from sadness. The sad news that many died near the Don reached Moscow. The wives lamented for the dead, their weeping is compared to the pitiful singing of birds. The women in weeping seem to echo each other, the many-voiced weeping grows, spreads, so the Kolomna wives also lamented, as if "the squints sang pitiful songs early." In the weeping of the wives, there is not only “pity” and grief, but also a strong-willed call “to scoop out the Don with helmets, and block the Sword River with Tatar corpses”, “close the gates of the Oka River”, so that the filthy ones could no longer come to the Russian land.

In the composition "Zadonshchina" the weeping of Moscow and Kolomna wives is the turning point of the battle. "And, having called a cry, Prince Vladimir Andreevich rushed with his army to the regiments of filthy Tatars ...". So the cries and cries of Russian women merge with battle cries and calls on the Kulikovo field.

In "Zadonshchina" there is no detailed depiction of the decisive moment of the battle; the dialogue between Vladimir Andreevich and Dmitry Ivanovich occupies a central place in the story of the final victory. Vladimir Andreevich encourages his brother and urges him not to yield, not to hesitate: “The Tatars are already trampling our filthy fields and beaten a lot of our brave squad - there are so many human corpses that greyhound horses cannot gallop: they roam knee-deep in blood” 3. The military appeal of Dmitry Ivanovich and his appeal to Prince Vladimir Andreevich are built on the image of a "chalice" ("charm"), which goes back to the symbolic comparison of the battle with the feast. Dmitry Ivanovich tells the soldiers that here, on the Kulikov field, "your Moscow sweet honeys", and he calls on Vladimir Andreevich to drink "honey circle charms", to attack the Tatar army with his strong regiments.

Swiftly and powerfully, burning with the desire to drink the "circular honey spell", the Russian regiments advance - the wind roars in the banners, the Russian sons blocked the fields with a click, the filthy regiments turned back, beat and flogged them mercilessly. The author depicts the confusion and helplessness of the enemies with such artistic details: the Tatars run, covering their heads with their hands, fleeing from swords, their princes fall from their horses. Confusion and fear were so strong that the Tatars gnashed their teeth and tore their faces. Their emotional condition the monologue-lamentation also conveys: “We, brothers, will not be in our own land, and we won’t see our children, and we won’t caress our wives, but we will caress the damp earth, and we will kiss the green ant, and we won’t go to Rus' with the army and don't ask us for tribute from the Russian princes" 4 .

It is important that the enemies themselves admit their complete defeat, the author can only add that "the Tatar land groaned, filled with troubles and grief, ... their joy has already drooped." Now, over the Russian land, which for a long time was "gloomy" and "sadness seized", "joy and glee" spread, and the glory of victory swept through all the lands.

Mamai, once a formidable conqueror, flees to Kafu. It is known that Mamai fled there some time after the Battle of Kulikovo and was killed there. But the author of "Zadonshchina" does not mention the death of Mamai, he only cites the caustic, mocking speech of the friags (Genoese), woven from folklore images. The fryags compare Mamai with Batu and ironically: Batu captured the entire Russian land with small forces, and Mamai came with nine hordes, and was left alone, "there is no one to spend the winter with in the field." Their words are especially caustic: "It is evident that the Russian princes gave you a good meal ... It is evident that they were very drunk at the fast Don on the Kulikovo field, on feather-grass." The expressions "strongly regaled", "drunk heavily on grass-feather grass" (that is, to death) again return to the image of "battle-feast" and "honey bowl", but now in an ironic sense. Not by the news of the death of Mamai, but by mockery in the mouths of other peoples, the honor and glory of the once powerful enemy are humiliated. In the view of ancient Russian warriors, mockery and notoriety were a shame worse than death, and therefore they preferred death on the battlefield to defeat and captivity.

The author of Zadonshchina contrasts the inglorious end and loneliness of Mamai with the spiritual unity of Russian princes and warriors. He returns to the description of what is happening on the Kulikovo field, and completes the story with a scene of "standing on the bones": on the battlefield, the victors gather the wounded, bury the dead, count their losses. It is "terrifying and sad" to look at the place of the battle - "the corpses of Christians lie like haystacks." Dmitry Ivanovich and all the survivors pay tribute to those who laid down their lives "for the holy churches, for the Russian land, for the Christian faith." 300 thousand soldiers participated in the Battle of Kulikovo on the part of the Russians, and 253 thousand were "cut" by Mamai. 5 Addressing the fallen, Dmitry Donskoy said: "Forgive me, brothers, and bless me in this age and in the future" 6 . Having earned honor and a glorious name for themselves, the brothers Dmitry Ivanovich and Vladimir Andreevich return home to the glorious city of Moscow.

"Pity and praise" - this is how the author himself defined the emotional mood and meaning of his work. He did not set out to give an accurate, detailed account of the movement, the disposition of troops, the course of the battle itself. The entire text of "Zadonshchina" consists mainly of speeches, monologues, lamentations, dialogues, appeals, appeals. "Zadonshchina" is an emotional response to the Battle of Kulikovo, the glory of a great victory, and not a historical story.

The connection between "Zadonshchina" and oral folk art is palpable. This is manifested in folklore imagery, repetitions, epithets, comparisons, as well as in the lamentation of Russian women for dead soldiers (their appeal to the wind, the Don, the Moscow River). Symbolic images of folk poetry (geese, swans, falcons, gyrfalcons, wolves, eagles) are constantly present in the work.

The national-patriotic pathos of the literary monument is emphasized by the lyrical proclamation of the idea of rallying and uniting all the forces of the Russian land.

QUESTIONS AND TASKS

Reread the text. Why can "Zadonshchina" be considered a poetic expression of the author's attitude to the events of the Battle of Kulikovo?
How is the story structured?
How is the patriotic idea expressed, the glorification of the victory of the Russians and the glorification of Dmitry Donskoy? Bring text.
What genre of folk art resembles the beginning of "Zadonshchina"?
What does the author want to tell about, remembering Boyan from "The Tale of Igor's Campaign"?
How does the author introduce the theme of the present and past of Rus' into the narrative? Why and for what does he glorify the Russian princes who "stand up for the Christian faith"?
How are events developing? Tell us about the ceremonial gathering and the campaign, about the deeds of Russian soldiers and use the author's description.
Which of the heroes of the Battle of Kulikovo does the author describe in the most detail and why? How is Peresvet portrayed? What role do the words play in characterizing his personality: "Better to be killed than captured"? What is the author's assessment of the hero?
How does the mood of the author and the description of events change after the defeat of the Russians (nature, lamentations of wives, the spread of sad news throughout Rus')?
How does the crying of Russian wives respond to the actions of the princes and induce them to a new battle? What is the outcome of the battle? Tell us about the flight of the Tatars, their crying.
Show, referring to the text, that "Zadonshchina" is an emotional response to the Battle of Kulikovo. How does the nature of the author's depiction of events meet this goal? How does the author's voice sound?
Why does the author end the story by listing the names of those killed in the Battle of Kulikovo?
Show that the narrative is also factual in nature.
What is the meaning of the words of Dmitry Donskoy after the battle: "Forgive me, brothers, and bless me in this century and the future"? How do they characterize the prince?
The author defines the ideological and artistic meaning of his story as "pity" and "praise". Is he right? Prove based on content.
Trace the connections of "Zadonshchina" with oral folk art (folklore images and artistic techniques).
How does "Zadonshchina" compare with "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" (poetic plan and artistic devices)? Find common artistic images, constant epithets, comparisons.
Prepare a message: "Zadonshchina" and "The Tale of Igor's Campaign". Compare the works by theme, plot, composition.
Compare the descriptions of the battle scenes in "The Tale of the Devastation of Ryazan by Batu", "The Tale of the Battle of Mamaev" and "Zadonshchina". What are the similarities and differences between these descriptions?

By the very end of the XIV - beginning of the XV century, there are two works describing the Battle of Kulikovo, the largest and an important event era of the Tatar yoke, which showed the Russian people that there is hope and an opportunity to free themselves from the hated Tatars. [Cm. on our website a brief and description of the Kulikovo battle.]

Zadonshchina, The Legend of the Battle of Mamaev. Lecture by A. N. Uzhankov

In the annals we find a dry historical account of this event, but it was reflected in literature in the “Tale of the Battle of Mamaev” [see. its full text and analysis] and in "Zadonshchina" [see. full text]. Both of these works were definitely written under the influence of The Tale of Igor's Campaign. They resemble it in their plan, structure; in some places you can see just imitation.

Perhaps these two works are a reworking of one another, it is also possible that they were written independently. The author of "Zadonshchina" is considered Sophrony, a native of Ryazan, who was a witness to the battle. But even in "Zadonshchina" there are anachronisms, historical inaccuracies; so, for example, it says here that Mamai's ally was the Lithuanian prince Olgerd, who, in fact, died 3 years before the Battle of Kulikovo.

In the Zadonshchina, even more than in the Tale, one can feel the imitation of the Tale of Igor's Campaign. In the introduction of the Lay, its author refers to the prophetic singer Boyan. The author of "Zadonshchina" instead of Boyan refers to the "prophetic boyar", apparently without understanding who Boyan was.

The well-known phrase, repeated twice in the "Word": "Oh, Russian land, you are already behind the helmet!" (oh, Russian land, you are already over the hill) - the author of "Zadonshchina" interpreted it in his own way. He translated the expression “behind the helmet” - “behind Solomon": " Thou art the Russian land, as thou hast been before the king behind Solomon, so wake up now for the great prince Dmitry Ivanovich".

"Zadonshchina" is shorter than "Tale", it has fewer details, but its language is better, simpler. There is a great patriotic enthusiasm about the national victory of the Russians over the Tatars.

Very beautiful and solemn is the picture of the farewell of Prince Dmitry with his dead soldiers who dotted the Kulikovo field. After the battle, the prince and the voivode "stand on the bones." “Terrible and pitiful, brethren, at that time look, hedgehog Christian corpses lie near the great Don on a birch, like haystacks, and the Don river flowed with blood for three days.”

Kulikovo field. Standing on the bones Artist P. Ryzhenko

Saying goodbye to those who fell in battle, Prince Dmitry said: “Brothers, princes and boyars and boyar children! Then you have a narrowed place between the Don and the Dnieper, on the Kulikovo field, along the Nepryadva River; and naturally laid down their heads for the holy churches, for the Russian land, for the Christian faith. Forgive me, brethren, and bless me!”

Historically, this place is incorrect. It is known that during the Battle of Kulikovo, Prince Dmitry was seriously wounded, he was taken away in a serious condition and, of course, he could not give this speech to the dead soldiers. But the historical inaccuracy does not detract from the beauty of this scene.

"Zadonshchina" - a monument of ancient Russian literature of the XIV century. Authorship is attributed to Zephanius Ryazants. The story is contrasted with the Tale of Igor's Campaign, which describes the defeat of the Russian troops in the fight against the Polovtsy and the brilliant victory of the armed forces of Rus', led by the Moscow prince Dmitry.

"Zadonshchina" belongs to the group of stories that arose in connection with the Battle of Kulikovo. The story was formed on the basis of annalistic legend, oral traditions, works of folk poetry.

The Battle of Kulikovo showed that in an alliance, the Russian principalities could successfully resist the Mongol-Tatars. The victory at the Kulikovo field was of great moral significance for national self-consciousness. It is no coincidence that the name of St. Sergius: the founder and rector of the Trinity Monastery, according to legend, blessed the campaign of Dmitry of Moscow (nicknamed "Donskoy" after the battle on the Kulikovo field) against Mamai and, contrary to the monastic rules, sent two monks of his monastery with Dmitry's soldiers - Oslyabya and Peresvet. Interest in the events of the Battle of Kulikovo in Rus' has not weakened since the time of the battle to the present day. IN Ancient Rus' a number of works dedicated to the battle of 1380 were created, which in science are combined under the name "Kulikovo cycle": chronicle stories about the Battle of Kulikovo, "Zadonshchina", the Legend of the Mamaev Battle.

Zadonshchina is an emotional, lyrical response to the events of the Battle of Kulikovo. Zadonshchina has come down to us in 6 lists, the earliest of which is Kirillo-Belozersky (K-B), compiled by the monk of the Kirillo-Belozersky monastery Euphrosyn in the 70-80s. XV century, is a revision of only the first half of the original text. The remaining 5 lists are of a later time (the earliest of them is an excerpt from the end of the 15th - early 16th centuries, the rest - from the 16th - 17th centuries). Only two lists contain the full text, all lists contain many errors and distortions. Therefore, based on the data of only all the lists taken together, it is possible to reconstruct the text of the work.

Based on the totality of a number of indirect data, but mainly on the basis of the very nature of the work, most researchers date the time of its creation to the 80s. 14th century

It is traditionally believed that the author of the Zadonshchina was a certain Sofony Ryazanets: in two lists of the Zadonshchina, he is named in the title as the author of the work. In the Chronicle of Tver there is a small fragment of the text, close in separate readings to Zadonshchina and the "Tale of the Mamaev Battle", beginning with the following phrase: "And here is the writing of Sophony Rezants, the Bryansk boyar, to the praise of Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich and his brother Prince Volodimer Andreevich" (before this entry is the date of the Battle of Kulikovo - 1380).

A. D. Sedelnikov drew attention to the similarity of this name with the name of the Ryazan boyar from the entourage of the Ryazan prince Oleg - Sofony Altykulachevich (Oleg Ryazansky in 1380 was going to take the side of Mamai). Thus, Zephanius of Ryazan is undoubtedly somehow connected with the monuments of the Kulikovo cycle. In the text of the Zadonshchina itself, it is said about him as a person in relation to an outsider: "I will remember the chisel Zephanius ..." On the basis of this reading, the researcher of the Kulikovo cycle I. Nazarov argued back in 1858 that it defines Zephanius as the author's predecessor Zadonshchina.

Recently, the hypothesis of the authorship of Zephanius was considered by R.P. Dmitrieva, who came to the conclusion that Zephanius was not the author of Zadonshchina: "... the latter refers to Zephanius as a poet or singer of his time, whose work he was inclined to imitate" . Apparently, Zephanius was the author of another poetic work about the Battle of Kulikovo, which has not come down to us, the poetic images of which influenced the authors of both the Zadonshchina and the "Tales of the Battle of Mamaev." This assumption is consistent with the hypothesis of Acad. A. A. Shakhmatova on the existence of the non-preserved "Tale of the Battle of Mamaev".

The main idea of Zadonshchina is the greatness of the Battle of Kulikovo. The author of the work exclaims that the glory of the victory on the Kulikovo field reached different parts of the earth. The work is based on the real events of the Battle of Kulikovo. The story is transferred from one place to another: from Moscow to the Kulikovo field, again to Moscow, to Novgorod, again to the Kulikovo field. The present is intertwined with memories of the past. The author himself described his work as "pity and praise to the Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich and his brother, Prince Vladimir Ondreevich".

Already by the nature of the work, by the combination of lamentation and praise in it, Zadonshchina is close to The Tale of Igor's Campaign. But this closeness is not only of a general nature, but of the most direct one, and this is another remarkable feature of this work of ancient Russian literature.

A number of scientists proceed from the position according to which the "Word" was written in imitation of the Zadonshchina (French scientists L. Leger, A. Mazon, Russian historian A. A. Zimin). Comparative textual analysis of the "Word" and the Zadonshchina with the involvement of reminiscences from the Zadonshchina in the "Tale of the Battle of Mamaev", the study of the nature of the book-writing activity of Euphrosynus, who owns the authorship of K-B., the study of the phraseology and vocabulary of the "Word" and the Zadonshchina, a comparative analysis of grammar - everything testifies to the secondary nature of the Zadonshchina in relation to the "Tale of Igor's Campaign".

Zadonshchina has been repeatedly translated into modern Russian, several poetic transcriptions of the monument have been created (by V. M. Sayanov, I. A. Novikov, A. Skripov, A. Zhovtis). Zadonshchina transferred to a number foreign languages. A large scientific literature is devoted to the monument.

military story about the battle of Kulikovo 1380, a monument of ancient Russian literature of the late 14th century. Author "Z." used the work of Zephanius Ryazants, as well as "The Tale of Igor's Campaign". The main idea of "Z." - the struggle for the unity of the Russian principalities in the face of an external enemy, as well as opposing the disastrous outcome of events in the "Word" to the victorious one in "Z."

Great Definition

Incomplete definition ↓

ZADONSHINA

On September 8, 1380, on the Kulikovo field (a locality within the Tula region, located in the upper reaches of the Don River, at the confluence of the Nepryadva River, in 1380 - a "wild field" - an uninhabited steppe), a battle took place between the coalition of Russian princes , headed by the Grand Duke of Moscow Dmitry Ivanovich, with the Mongol-Tatar army, reinforced by mercenary detachments, under the leadership of the Horde ruler Mamai. This was the first big battle between the Russians and the enslavers after the establishment of the Mongol-Tatar yoke (1237), which ended in the complete defeat of the Mongol-Tatars. The Battle of Kulikovo (often called the Battle of Mamaev) did not put an end to the foreign yoke in Rus' (this will happen only after 100 years - in 1480), but the nature of the relationship between the Russian principalities and the Horde has changed dramatically, the dominant unifying role of the Moscow principality and the Moscow prince has been identified. The Battle of Kulikovo showed that in an alliance, the Russian principalities could successfully resist the Mongol-Tatars. The victory at the Kulikovo field was of great moral significance for national self-consciousness. It is no coincidence that the name of St. Sergius (see LIFE ...): the founder and rector of the Trinity Monastery, according to legend, blessed the campaign of Dmitry of Moscow (see TALE OF LIFE) (nicknamed "Donskoy" after the battle on Kulikovo Field) against Mamai and, contrary to monastery rules, sent with Dmitry's soldiers on the battlefield of two monks of his monastery - Oslyabya and Peresvet. Interest in the events of the Battle of Kulikovo in Rus' has not weakened since the time of the battle to the present day. In Ancient Rus', a number of works dedicated to the battle of 1380 were created, which in science are combined under the name "Kulikovo cycle": chronicle stories about the Battle of Kulikovo, "Zadonshchina", "The Legend of the Mamaev Battle". 3.- emotional, lyrical response to the events of the Battle of Kulikovo. 3. came to us in 6 lists, the earliest of which, Kirillo-Belozersky (K-B), compiled by the monk of the Kirillo-Belozersky monastery Euphrosyn in the 70-80s. XV century, is a reworking of only the first half of the original text 3. The remaining 5 lists are of a later time (the earliest of them is an excerpt from the late XV - early XVI century, the rest - XVI-XVII centuries). Only two lists contain the full text, all lists contain many errors and distortions. Therefore, based on the data of only all the lists taken together, it is possible to reconstruct the text of the work. Based on the totality of a number of indirect data, but mainly on the basis of the very nature of the work, most researchers date the time of its creation to the 80s. 14th century V.F. Rzhiga, who paid much attention to 3. in his works, wrote: “Attempts to date the monument to a time closer to 1380 seem quite appropriate. They correspond to the explicitly emotional character that the Word of Zephaniah has (3.- L.D.) from beginning to end. In this regard, there is reason to believe that the Word of Zephaniah appeared immediately after the Battle of Kulikovo, perhaps in the same 1380 or the next. " It is traditionally considered that the author of 3. was a certain Sofony Ryazanets: in two lists 3. he is named in the title as the author of the work. In the Chronicle of Tver there is a small passage of text, close in separate readings to 3. and "The Tale of the Battle of Mamaev", beginning with the following phrase: "And this is the writing of Sophony Rezants, the Bryansk boyar, to the praise of Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich and his brother Prince Volodimer Andreevich" (before this entry is the date of the Battle of Kulikovo - 1380). A. D. Sedelnikov drew attention to the similarity of this name with the name of the Ryazan boyar from the entourage of the Ryazan prince Oleg - Sofony Alty-kulachevich (Oleg Ryazansky in 1380 was going to take the side of Mamai). Thus, Zephanius of Ryazan is undoubtedly somehow connected with the monuments of the Kulikovo cycle. But can we consider him the author of 3.? In some lists of the main edition of the "Tales of the Battle of Mamaev" Zephanius is named the author of this work. In the text itself 3. it is said about him as a person in relation to the author 3. an outsider: "Az (i.e. "I" - the author of 3.) I will remember the chisel Zephanius ..." Based on this reading, 3. the researcher of Kulikovsky cycle, I. Nazarov, back in 1858, argued that it identifies Zephanius as the predecessor of the author of 3. Recently, the hypothesis of the authorship of Zephanius was considered by R. P. Dmitrieva, who came to the conclusion that Zephanius was not the author of 3.: ". ..the latter refers to Zephanius as a poet or singer of his time, whose work he was inclined to imitate" ("Was Zephanius Ryazanets the author of "Zadonshchina"?" - p. 24). Apparently, Zephanius was the author of another poetic work about the Battle of Kulikovo, which has not come down to us, the poetic images of which influenced the authors of both 3. and "Tales of the Battle of Mamaev." This assumption is consistent with the hypothesis of Acad. A. A. Shakhmatova on the existence of the non-preserved "Tale of the Battle of Mamaev". The main idea 3. is the greatness of the Battle of Kulikovo. The author of the work exclaims that the glory of the victory on the Kulikovo field reached different parts of the earth ("Shibla glory to the Iron Gates, and to Karanachi, to Rome, and to Cafe by the sea, and to Tornav, and from there to Tsaryugrad to the praise of the Russian prince") . The work is based on the real events of the Battle of Kulikovo, but this is not a consistent historical story about the preparation for the battle, about the battle itself, about the return of the winners from the battlefield, but the emotional refraction of all these events in the author's perception. The story is transferred from one place to another: from Moscow to the Kulikovo field, again to Moscow, to Novgorod, again to the Kulikovo field. The present is intertwined with memories of the past. The author himself described his work as "pity and praise to the Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich and his brother, Prince Vladimir Ondreevich". "Pity" is a cry for the dead, for the difficult share of the Russian land. "Praise" - glory to the courage and military prowess of Russian soldiers and their leaders. About many events, about which the "Legend of the Mamaev Battle" narrates in detail, in 3. is said in one or two phrases, half a hint. So, for example, about the actions of an ambush regiment under the command of Prince Vladimir Andreevich of Serpukhov, cousin Dmitry Donskoy, who decided the outcome of the battle, it is said: “And having sniffed (clicked a call) Prince Vladimir Andreevich much, and galloped along the rati in half of the filthy Tatars, and shone with a gilded helm. Damask swords rattle on Khin’s helmets.” If the detailed narrative of the "Tale of the Battle of Mamaev" had not been preserved, many places 3. would have remained mysterious and inexplicable for us. Already by the nature of the work, by the combination of lamentation and praise in it, 3. is close to the Tale of Igor's Campaign. But this proximity is not only general, but the most direct, and this is another remarkable feature of this work of ancient Russian literature. The "Word" was a model for the author 3. at the textual level as well. The plan depends on the "Word" 3., a number of poetic images 3.- repetition of the poetic images of the "Word", individual words, turns, large passages of the text 3. Repeat the appropriate places, "Words". The author 3. turned to the "Word" as a model in order to compare and contrast the political situation in Russia at the time of the "Word" (80s of the XII century) with the 80s of the XIV century. The main ideological meaning of the "Word" was the author’s call to the Russian princes to forget internecine strife and unite their forces to fight the external enemies of Russia.The author 3. in the victory over the Horde, saw the real embodiment of the call of his brilliant predecessor: the combined forces of the Russian princes were able to defeat the Mongol-Tatars, who were considered before invincible. The author 3. reinterprets the text of the "Lay" in accordance with the events of the Mamaev battle and contributes a lot from himself. 3. differs in stylistic inconsistency - the poetic parts of the text alternate with prose, which are in the nature of business prose. 3. to a greater extent than the "Lay" The main thing is that in the "Word" techniques and elements close to oral folk art are presented in an artistically executed author's processing, author's rethinking, in 3. they are much closer both verbally and in character to oral sources. This circumstance and the condition of lists 3. (numerous distortions and errors) served as the basis for the assumption of a folklore, oral origin of the monument. It is entirely possible that individual lists 3. were written down from memory and not copied from other lists, but there is no reason to believe that 3. originally a work of oral creativity. 3. goes back to the "Word" - a literary monument. The combination in 3. of a poetic text with prose, close in nature to business writing, also speaks of the literary character of the monument. This is also evidenced by the church-religious symbolism and terminology strongly expressed in 3.. A number of scientists proceed from the position according to which the "Word" was written in imitation of 3. (French scientists L. Leger, A. Mazon, Russian historian A. A. Zimin). Comparative textual analysis of the "Word" and 3. with the involvement of reminiscences from 3. in the "Tale of the Battle of Mamaev", the study of the nature of the book-writing activity of Euphrosynus, who owns the authorship K-B list 3., the study of the phraseology and vocabulary of the "Words" and 3., a comparative analysis of the grammar of the "Words" and 3. - all testify to the secondary nature of 3. in relation to the "Lay of Igor's Campaign". 3. repeatedly translated into modern Russian, several poetic transcriptions of the monument were created (by V. M. Sayanov, I. A. Novikov, A. Skripov, A. Zhovtis), 3. translated into a number of foreign languages. A large scientific literature is devoted to the monument. The main bibliographic indexes for 3.: Droblenkova N. F., Begunov Yu. ; L., 1966.- S. 557-583; Aralovets N.A., Pronina P.V. Battle of Kulikovo in 1380: Literature Index // Battle of Kulikovo: Sat. Art.-M., 1980.-S. 289-318. Below is a bibliography of only the most basic publications and studies 3. Ed .: Monuments of the ancient Russian language and literature of the XV-XVIII centuries / Underg. for publication and provided explanatory remarks. Pavel Sichoni. Issue. 3: "Zadonshchina" according to the lists of the XV-XVIII centuries. - Pgr., 1922; Adrianov-Peretz V.P. 1) Zadonshchina: Text and notes // TODRL. - 1947. T. a. - S. 194-224; 2) Zadonshchina: Experience in the reconstruction of the author's text // TODRL. - 1948.- T. b-S. 201-255, Rzhiga VF Word of Zephanius Ryazanets about the Battle of Kulikovo ("Zadonshchina"): With the application of the text of the Word of Zephanius and 28 pictures from the text according to the manuscript of the State. ist. museum of the 16th century - M., 1947; Tale of the Battle of Kulikovo / Ed. M. N. Tikhomirov, V. F. Rzhiga, L. A. Dmitriev. M., 1959 - S. 9-26 (ser. "Literary monuments"); "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" and the monuments of the Kulikovo cycle: On the question of the time for writing the "Lay".-M.; L., 1966.-S. 535-556 - Zadonshchina / Preparing. text, translation and notes. L. A. Dmitrieva//Izbornik (1969).-S. 380-397, 747-750; Pole Kulikovo: The Legend of the Battle of the Don / Entry. Art. D. S. Likhachev; Comp. preparation texts, after and note. L. A. Dmitrieva. M., 1980. - S. 20-49; Zadonshchina / Predg. text, translation and notes. L. A. Dmitrieva // PLDR: XIV-mid-XV century.-M., 1981- S. 96-111, 544-549; Legends and stories about the Battle of Kulikovo / Ed. preparation L. A. Dmitriev and O. P. Likhacheva.-L., 1982.-S. 7-13, 131-137. Lit .: Nazarov I. The legend of the Mamaev battle // ZhMNP. - 1858, - July - August. - P. 80-85; Shambinago S. K. The story of the Mamaev battle. - St. Petersburg, 1906. - S. 84-143; Likhachev D.S. 1) Zadonshchina//Lit. study.- 1941.-№ 3.-S. 87-100; 2) Features of imitation of "Zadonshchina": On the question of the relationship of "Zadonshchina" to the "Tale of Igor's Campaign" / / Gus. lit.-1964.-No. 3.-S. 84-107; 3) Zadonshchina // Great Heritage.- S. 278-292; 4) The relationship between the lists and editorial offices of "Zadonshchina": A study by Angelo Danti // TODRL. - 1976.-T. 31.-S. 165-175; 5) Textological triangle: "The Tale of Igor's Campaign", the story of the Ipatiev Chronicle about the campaign of Prince Igor in 1185 and "Zadonshchina": To the textological remarks of prof. J. Fennela // Likhachev D. S. "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" and the culture of his time. L., 1978.-S. 296-309; Solovyov A.V. The author of "Zadonshchina" and his political ideas // TODRL.- 1958.- T. 14.- P. 183-197; Rzhiga VF 1) The word of Zephanius Ryazants about the Battle of Kulikovo ("Zadonshchina") as a literary monument of the 80s. 14th century // Tale of the Battle of Kulikovo.- S. 377-400; 2) About Zephaniah Ryazanets//Ibid.-p.401-405; Adrianov-Perets V.P. "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" and "Zadonshchina" //