Development of ideas of the Russian fairy tale. Historical roots of fairy tales
Page 1 of 16
“Russian Folk Tales” by A. N. Afanasyev became, in the full sense of the word, a folk book. For the first time, thanks to Afanasyev, the reader saw the Russian fairy tale in all its richness and diversity, in its true beauty, unadorned and genuine. Unlike most of his predecessors, who were involved in collecting and publishing works of folk art, Afanasyev strove to preserve all the features of the original recordings of fairy tales, not allowing himself any literary processing of these recordings, limiting himself to the role of an editor and publisher.
Before the appearance of Afanasyev's collection, the authentic Russian folk tale was almost unknown. Only popular prints and all sorts of stylized adaptations and adaptations of folk tales into adventurous magical knightly novels were published. While there were already a large number of collections of folk songs, the peasant fairy tale was still neglected. The rights of literary citizenship were not recognized for her. It took the poetic genius of Pushkin to understand for the first time the true nationality of the Russian fairy tale. It took Belinsky's insight to theoretically define for the first time the foundations of the philosophy and aesthetics of folk poetry, including fairy tales. But Pushkin, in most of his fairy tales, and partially Belinsky in his articles, relied not on published texts, but on fairy tales heard directly from the mouths of the storytellers. Only by the middle of the 19th century did broader public and scientific interest in folk tales emerge. This interest was caused primarily by the attention of the most educated and progressive people of that time to the fate of the enslaved peasantry, to their way of life and worldview. The fairy tale also begins to attract the ordinary reader, who is no longer satisfied with popular prints and various adaptations of folk tales. The first large publication of truly folk tales was the publication of A. N. Afanasyev (8 issues, 1855-1863).
In the 60s, following the appearance of Afanasyev’s fairy tales, a huge number of collections of various genres of folk art were collected and published. “Great Russian Tales” by I. A. Khudyakov (1860-1862), “Folk Tales Collected by Rural Teachers” by A. A. Erlenwein (1863), “Russian Folk Tales, Jokes and Fables” by E. A. Chudinsky (1864) are published. , “Proverbs of the Russian people” by V. I. Dahl (1861), “Russian songs collected by P. Yakushkin” (1860), “Songs collected by P. V. Kireevsky” (10 issues, 1860-1874), “Songs, collected by P. N. Rybnikov" (4 volumes, 1861-1867), "Russian folk songs from the collection of P. Yakushkin" (1865), "Lamentations of the Northern Territory by E. F. Barsov" (3 volumes, 1872-1886) and a whole a number of other publications. Thus, Afanasyev was not alone in his activities.
Vladimir Propp
Historical roots of the Fairy Tale
Preface
The proposed work is provided with an introductory chapter, and therefore the preface can be limited to some technical remarks.
The book often contains references to fairy tales or excerpts from them. These excerpts should be considered as illustrations and not as evidence. Behind the example lies a more or less common phenomenon. When analyzing the phenomenon, one should give not one or two illustrations, but all available cases. However, this would reduce the book to an index that would be larger than the entire work. This difficulty could be circumvented by reference to existing indexes of plots or motifs. However, on the one hand, the distribution of fairy tales by plot and plot by motive, adopted in these indexes, is often very arbitrary; on the other hand, references to fairy tales appear several hundred times in the book, and it would be necessary to provide references to the indexes several hundred times. All this forced me to abandon the tradition of giving a type number for every plot. The reader will understand that the materials provided are samples.
The same applies to examples from the field of customs, rituals, cults, etc. All the given facts are nothing more than examples, the number of which could be arbitrarily increased or decreased, the given examples could be replaced by others. Thus, the book does not report any new facts, only the connection established between them is new, and it is the center of gravity of the entire book.
It is necessary to make another reservation regarding the method of presentation. The motifs of a fairy tale are so closely related to each other that, as a rule, not a single motif can be understood in isolation. It has to be presented in parts. Therefore, at the beginning of the book there are often references to what will still be developed, and from the second half - to what has already been stated above.
The book is one whole and should not be read from the middle for reference on individual topics.
In this book the reader will not find an analysis of many of the motives that he has the right to look for in such work. Much did not fit in it. The emphasis is on the analysis of the main, most important fairy-tale images and motifs, the rest has been partly published before and is not repeated here, and partly, perhaps, will appear in the form of separate essays in the future.
The work came out of the Leningrad Order of Lenin State University. Many of my workmates supported me, willingly sharing their knowledge and experience. I especially owe a lot to the corresponding member of the Academy of Sciences, prof. Ivan Ivanovich Tolstoy, who gave me valuable instructions both on the ancient material I used and on general issues of the work. I offer him my deepest and sincere gratitude.
Chapter I. Background
1. Main question
What does it mean to specifically research a fairy tale, where to start? If we limit ourselves to comparing fairy tales with each other, we will remain within the framework of comparativism. We want to expand the scope of our study and find the historical basis that brought the fairy tale to life. This is the task of studying the historical roots of a fairy tale, formulated so far in the most general terms.
At first glance, it seems that there is nothing new in the formulation of this problem. Historically, there have been attempts to study folklore before. Russian folkloristics knew a whole historical school headed by Vsevolod Miller. Thus, Speransky says in his course on Russian oral literature: “When studying the epic, we try to guess the historical fact that underlies it, and, starting from this assumption, we prove the identity of the plot of the epic with some event known to us or their circle "(Speransky 222). We will neither guess historical facts nor prove their identity with folklore. For us, the question is fundamentally different. We want to explore what phenomena (not events) of the historical past the Russian fairy tale corresponds to and to what extent it actually conditions and causes it. In other words, our goal is to find out the sources of the fairy tale in historical reality. The study of the genesis of a phenomenon is not yet the study of the history of this phenomenon. The study of history cannot be carried out immediately - this is a matter of many years, the work of more than one person, it is a matter of generations, a matter of the Marxist folkloristics that is emerging in our country. The study of genesis is the first step in this direction. This is the main question posed in this work.
2. Importance of premises
Each researcher proceeds from some prerequisites that he has before he starts work. Veselovsky, back in 1873, pointed out the need, first of all, to understand one’s positions and to be critical of one’s method (Veselovsky 1938, 83-128). Using the example of Gubernatis's book "Zoological Mythology", Veselovsky showed how the lack of self-examination leads to false conclusions, despite all the erudition and combinatorial abilities of the author of the work.
Here we should give a critical outline of the history of the study of fairy tales. We won't do this. The history of the study of the fairy tale has been outlined more than once, and we do not need to list the works. But if we ask ourselves why there are still no completely solid and universally accepted results, we will see that this often happens precisely because the authors proceed from false premises.
The so-called mythological school proceeded from the premise that the external similarity of two phenomena, their external analogy testifies to their historical connection. Thus, if the hero grows by leaps and bounds, then the hero’s rapid growth supposedly responds to the rapid growth of the sun rising on the horizon (Frobenius 1898, 242). Firstly, however, the sun does not increase for the eyes, but decreases, and secondly, an analogy is not the same as a historical connection.
One of the premises of the so-called Finnish school was the assumption that the forms that occur more often than others are also inherent in the original form of the plot. Not to mention the fact that the theory of plot archetypes itself requires proof, we will have occasion to repeatedly see that the most archaic forms are very rare, and that they are often replaced by new ones that have become widespread (Nikiforov 1926).
B-St.ftPOfifi
Jlo&ecmu. .
B.ST.Jtponn
. (. . .) , . . . "", ., 2000. 416 . : . . : . . : . .
. . , : , () , . - , .
. ., "", 2000 . ISBN 5-87604-065-7 (.4) ISBN 5-87604-072-
BBD, . "" . Fabel "" fabulieren " " . , . (Bolte, Polivka, IV, 13). : , . fiaba, favola, fabula, conto, racconto. -cont- "" (. -). conte, "", raconter "". conte populaire (" "), conte de fees (" ",), recit, legende. . tale, " , ". , "The Tale of Two Cities" : fairy-tale " ". nursery-tale (nurse ""). story, legend. . , . .22
XIX Fabula*, . 21
, . , . , - . , . , . : , (Bolte, Polivka, III). ? , : 1. , . , . , . 2. ? (,). . . 3. . . . ,
4. , . , . . : Definitio fit per genus proximum et dinerentiam specificam, . .: . , . , . . ? ? , . , -, . ., . . . , ; . , . , . , . . , . , . , . ? , . , . . 23
, . , : (genus proximum), . , . , . , . . , . . . . . , . , : , (,) . . , . , . , . , . . , . 23
. . , . / / . . . .., 1930, . 7. 24
, . , . , . . , . . . , (,), . , . , . , . . . . , . , . . , . , . . , - . , (,), . , 24
1959, 46 . (2- . ., 1977 .). 25
, (), . , -, . , . , . . , . , - . , . , . , . , () (), . , - . , : . , . , . , . , . . . , 26
, : (. .) , . . , . . , . *. . : Wer"s nicht glaubt, zahlt nTaler. , : . . , : . . , . , . . : , - (, 1959, 1 0) . . . . . . , . . 25 2
. . / / . . ., ., 1953-1956, . V, 354. .: . . / / , 1963, 3 (.) (. .).26
. , . , . , . , . , . , . (, 1959, 218). , . : (, 1959, 4 0 4 1) , . , . , .
1. . , - , . , . , . : , 28
, . . ? , . , . , . , . , . , . , . , . . , . : , . . . Mythenmarchen. , (,), (), (), (), (traditions, stories). .27 28 29 30 31 32
Beth. 1) Mythus, Sage, Marchen. Leipzig, s. a. 2) Hessische Blatter ftr Volkskunde. Leipzig, 1905, Bd. IV. Wundt W. Murchen, Sage und Legende als Entwickelungsformen des Mythus // Archiv f. Religionswissenschaft. Bd. XI. Leipzig, 1908. Brinton D. G. The myths of the new world. S. I., 1868. Cushing F. Zuni folktales. New York, 1901. Rand O. Legends of the Mimacs. LondonNew York, 1894. Boas F. Indianische Sagen von der Nord-Pazifischen Kliste Amerikas. Berlin, 1895.28 29 30 31 32
, (, :), ; . - . . , . , . , . . , . 132 (, 1929, 132). (). . . (6). (3). . , (,). . . , . , . , . , . , .33
: . , . III. ., 1980, 1981 (.). thirty
. , . , . . (). , . . . . , . . . , . . 41, . 284. : .34
. : , . , . . , . (, . .) . , . . - . , . , . (,X,8-10):
41 . .: . / . . . . . . . . , 1940, . 284287 (.). 31
, . , . , . . . , . : , . . , . : , . . . , ... , . , .35
. . . , - , . , . . , . : , : , . , . Schwab G. Die schttnsten Sagen des Klassischen Altertums, 1. Teil Giitersloh; Leipzig, 1882. S. 113. 3235
, . : , . (X, 53-57) : , ! , . ! , ?6
1959, . 107108 (. . . IV, 494498).. 7936
. . , . . , . , . , . , : , . . . . , . , . . . . . . . -, . , . , . . , . . , . , . , . , . , . , . . / / . . . ., 1934, . 534. 3437
2. . . , . . ? , ? , . , . , . , . . , Mythische Sagen. , . ., . . , ; (). , . . , . , . , . , . . . , 35
(1 8 8 4) . . , . . : , . , . . . . , . . , . , . . , "Deutsche Sagen", Orts-Sagen, . . . . . (,). , . . .39 40
. . / / . , . ., . XII. ., 1884. . . . ., 1941, . 292-373. .39 4 0
1961 , . , . , . . () . , . , . (, . .) , . . . . , . , . , . , . , . , . , 41
Simonsuuri L. Typen und Motiwerzeichnis der finnischen mythischen Sagen. FFC N 182, Helsinki, 1961. ., : . . XIX XX. .., 1957; . . . ., 1975, . (.).2
3. . . . , -. legenda , (", "). , . , -, . . , - (,), . . , . , . . . , . . . , . , . , . 38
. . , . , . , . , . . , (750849). , . . . . . . . . . . 43 , 37 . - . , . : , . (): ,43 44
1. ., 1859. Andrejew N. P. Die Legende von dem zwei ErzsUnder. FFC N 54. Helsinki, 1924. .: . . 1) / / .. XIX XX . . . 56., 1979, 2526; 2) () / / 1962, 7, . 8 4 - 9 8 (.).44
99 , . . . ((, 1884, 229, 9 9) , . , (... ,). . . . - , . (,). (,), . , . : - . . . , ? , . : : , . , . : ? , . , () , . , . , . . ,
, () , . , . , . . , . , . . . . . . , . , . . , . (II, .
) . . 756 .
(). . . , . , . . - (), . II. ., 1890, . 3 7 1 - 373. . II () , . 2(). . . .: . . . . . , . III. ., 1949, . 363366. : . . , . 1927* (.).4 6 4
, . , : , . . - , . : . . . . II, 1955.47
4. , . , . , . , - . , . - , . . , . : , . . . , (, .). . . . , . , .: . . . // , . II, . 1; XVIII XIX. . - , 1954, . 378 - 386. 4247
. , . , . , . "Deutsche Sagen" "Geschichtnche Sagen" . , . , . . . . . , . (.): ! -, . , . , . , . . , . , . 5. . , . . , . XVI. , . . . .48 49
1915, . 297, 163. . / / . . . ., 1956, . 344 352. 434 9
XVIII XIX , -, . , . , . . . . , . 6./. . . , 50
1857. 44
, . , . ? , ? , . , : , . , . , . . . . . : , . . , -. , . . , . , . , . . . . , (), 1917 . . . , 51
/ . . . . . . . . . . ., 1934. 45
, . . , . , . , - . ; . . . , . , - .52
, . , (-): , . , . , . , . / ., . . .. . , 1951. 4652
Sage(); , . . . ., . 7. . . . . , . , . . , . , . . 453527. . , . . , (, . .), 47
, . , . . . , . , . , (.,), . . , . . . . : . (, 1930, 13). , . , . : , . . , .
. , . , . , . , . . . . , . ., . . , . , . . , () . , . , . , . , . , . , . . . . , . 1851864 ()4 3. 79
. , . , . , - , (1873), (1871), . . , : (186). (87, 88): , ; (89, 90): , ; (9194): , . , (95 307). (308316): , . (317318): , . (319 .). (351 .): , . (453527). (5 2 8 - 5 3 2) . (533547). , . , . , . , . , : . : 50
) ,) (). . .53
12 . , . , . . . . , . . . . . , . : ? . . . . 1910 FFC (Folklore Fellows Communications). . . , . , . . 54
, (). : . . . ., 1975, . 1471 (.). Aarne A. Verzeichnis der Marchentypen. FFC N 3. Helsinki, 1910.54
707, . . , . . , . , -, . , 531, . . , . , . . , .
1929 . . , -, 402- . . 2400 . . ,...
B-St.ftPOfifi
Jlo&ecmu. .
B.ST.Jtponn
. (. . .) , . . . "", ., 2000. 416 . : . . : . . : . .
. . , : , () , . - , .
. ., "", 2000 . ISBN 5-87604-065-7 (.4) ISBN 5-87604-072-
BBD, . "" . Fabel "" fabulieren " " . , . (Bolte, Polivka, IV, 13). : , . fiaba, favola, fabula, conto, racconto. -cont- "" (. -). conte, "", raconter "". conte populaire (" "), conte de fees (" ",), recit, legende. . tale, " , ". , "The Tale of Two Cities" : fairy-tale " ". nursery-tale (nurse ""). story, legend. . , . .22
XIX Fabula*, . 21
, . , . , - . , . , . : , (Bolte, Polivka, III). ? , : 1. , . , . , . 2. ? (,). . . 3. . . . ,
4. , . , . . : Definitio fit per genus proximum et dinerentiam specificam, . .: . , . , . . ? ? , . , -, . ., . . . , ; . , . , . , . . , . , . , . ? , . , . . 23
, . , : (genus proximum), . , . , . , . . , . . . . . , . , : , (,) . . , . , . , . , . . , . 23
. . , . / / . . . .., 1930, . 7. 24
, . , . , . . , . . . , (,), . , . , . , . . . . , . , . . , . , . . , - . , (,), . , 24
1959, 46 . (2- . ., 1977 .). 25
, (), . , -, . , . , . . , . , - . , . , . , . , () (), . , - . , : . , . , . , . , . . . , 26
, : (. .) , . . , . . , . *. . : Wer"s nicht glaubt, zahlt nTaler. , : . . , : . . , . , . . : , - (, 1959, 1 0) . . . . . . , . . 25 2
. . / / . . ., ., 1953-1956, . V, 354. .: . . / / , 1963, 3 (.) (. .).26
. , . , . , . , . , . , . (, 1959, 218). , . : (, 1959, 4 0 4 1) , . , . , .
1. . , - , . , . , . : , 28
, . . ? , . , . , . , . , . , . , . , . . , . : , . . . Mythenmarchen. , (,), (), (), (), (traditions, stories). .27 28 29 30 31 32
Beth. 1) Mythus, Sage, Marchen. Leipzig, s. a. 2) Hessische Blatter ftr Volkskunde. Leipzig, 1905, Bd. IV. Wundt W. Murchen, Sage und Legende als Entwickelungsformen des Mythus // Archiv f. Religionswissenschaft. Bd. XI. Leipzig, 1908. Brinton D. G. The myths of the new world. S. I., 1868. Cushing F. Zuni folktales. New York, 1901. Rand O. Legends of the Mimacs. LondonNew York, 1894. Boas F. Indianische Sagen von der Nord-Pazifischen Kliste Amerikas. Berlin, 1895.28 29 30 31 32
, (, :), ; . - . . , . , . , . . , . 132 (, 1929, 132). (). . . (6). (3). . , (,). . . , . , . , . , . , .33
: . , . III. ., 1980, 1981 (.). thirty
. , . , . . (). , . . . . , . . . , . . 41, . 284. : .34
. : , . , . . , . (, . .) . , . . - . , . , . (,X,8-10):
41 . .: . / . . . . . . . . , 1940, . 284287 (.). 31
, . , . , . . . , . : , . . , . : , . . . , ... , . , .35
. . . , - , . , . . , . : , : , . , . Schwab G. Die schttnsten Sagen des Klassischen Altertums, 1. Teil Giitersloh; Leipzig, 1882. S. 113. 3235
, . : , . (X, 53-57) : , ! , . ! , ?6
1959, . 107108 (. . . IV, 494498).. 7936
. . , . . , . , . , . , : , . . . . , . , . . . . . . . -, . , . , . . , . . , . , . , . , . , . , . . / / . . . ., 1934, . 534. 3437
2. . . , . . ? , ? , . , . , . , . . , Mythische Sagen. , . ., . . , ; (). , . . , . , . , . , . . . , 35
(1 8 8 4) . . , . . : , . , . . . . , . . , . , . . , "Deutsche Sagen", Orts-Sagen, . . . . . (,). , . . .39 40
. . / / . , . ., . XII. ., 1884. . . . ., 1941, . 292-373. .39 4 0
1961 , . , . , . . () . , . , . (, . .) , . . . . , . , . , . , . , . , . , 41
Simonsuuri L. Typen und Motiwerzeichnis der finnischen mythischen Sagen. FFC N 182, Helsinki, 1961. ., : . . XIX XX. .., 1957; . . . ., 1975, . (.).2
3. . . . , -. legenda , (", "). , . , -, . . , - (,), . . , . , . . . , . . . , . , . , . 38
. . , . , . , . , . . , (750849). , . . . . . . . . . . 43 , 37 . - . , . : , . (): ,43 44
1. ., 1859. Andrejew N. P. Die Legende von dem zwei ErzsUnder. FFC N 54. Helsinki, 1924. .: . . 1) / / .. XIX XX . . . 56., 1979, 2526; 2) () / / 1962, 7, . 8 4 - 9 8 (.).44
99 , . . . ((, 1884, 229, 9 9) , . , (... ,). . . . - , . (,). (,), . , . : - . . . , ? , . : : , . , . : ? , . , () , . , . , . . ,
, () , . , . , . . , . , . . . . . . , . , . . , . (II, .
) . . 756 .
(). . . , . , . . - (), . II. ., 1890, . 3 7 1 - 373. . II () , . 2(). . . .: . . . . . , . III. ., 1949, . 363366. : . . , . 1927* (.).4 6 4
, . , : , . . - , . : . . . . II, 1955.47
4. , . , . , . , - . , . - , . . , . : , . . . , (, .). . . . , . , .: . . . // , . II, . 1; XVIII XIX. . - , 1954, . 378 - 386. 4247
. , . , . , . "Deutsche Sagen" "Geschichtnche Sagen" . , . , . . . . . , . (.): ! -, . , . , . , . . , . , . 5. . , . . , . XVI. , . . . .48 49
1915, . 297, 163. . / / . . . ., 1956, . 344 352. 434 9
XVIII XIX , -, . , . , . . . . , . 6./. . . , 50
1857. 44
, . , . ? , ? , . , : , . , . , . . . . . : , . . , -. , . . , . , . , . . . . , (), 1917 . . . , 51
/ . . . . . . . . . . ., 1934. 45
, . . , . , . , - . ; . . . , . , - .52
, . , (-): , . , . , . , . / ., . . .. . , 1951. 4652
Sage(); , . . . ., . 7. . . . . , . , . . , . , . . 453527. . , . . , (, . .), 47
, . , . . . , . , . , (.,), . . , . . . . : . (, 1930, 13). , . , . : , . . , .
. , . , . , . , . . . . , . ., . . , . , . . , () . , . , . , . , . , . , . . . . , . 1851864 ()4 3. 79
. , . , . , - , (1873), (1871), . . , : (186). (87, 88): , ; (89, 90): , ; (9194): , . , (95 307). (308316): , . (317318): , . (319 .). (351 .): , . (453527). (5 2 8 - 5 3 2) . (533547). , . , . , . , . , : . : 50
) ,) (). . .53
12 . , . , . . . . , . . . . . , . : ? . . . . 1910 FFC (Folklore Fellows Communications). . . , . , . . 54
, (). : . . . ., 1975, . 1471 (.). Aarne A. Verzeichnis der Marchentypen. FFC N 3. Helsinki, 1910.54
707, . . , . . , . , -, . , 531, . . , . , . . , .
1929 . . , -, 402- . . 2400 . . ,...
Preface
The proposed work is provided with an introductory chapter, and therefore the preface can be limited to some technical remarks.
The book often contains references to fairy tales or excerpts from them. These excerpts should be considered as illustrations and not as evidence. Behind the example lies a more or less common phenomenon. When analyzing the phenomenon, one should give not one or two illustrations, but all available cases. However, this would reduce the book to an index that would be larger than the entire work. This difficulty could be circumvented by reference to existing indexes of plots or motifs. However, on the one hand, the distribution of fairy tales by plot and plot by motive, adopted in these indexes, is often very arbitrary; on the other hand, references to fairy tales appear several hundred times in the book, and it would be necessary to provide references to the indexes several hundred times. All this forced me to abandon the tradition of giving a type number for every plot. The reader will understand that the materials provided are samples.
The same applies to examples from the field of customs, rituals, cults, etc. All the given facts are nothing more than examples, the number of which could be arbitrarily increased or decreased, the given examples could be replaced by others. Thus, the book does not report any new facts, only the connection established between them is new, and it is the center of gravity of the entire book.
It is necessary to make another reservation regarding the method of presentation. The motifs of a fairy tale are so closely related to each other that, as a rule, not a single motif can be understood in isolation. It has to be presented in parts. Therefore, at the beginning of the book there are often references to what will still be developed, and from the second half - to what has already been stated above.
The book is one whole and should not be read from the middle for reference on individual topics.
In this book the reader will not find an analysis of many of the motives that he has the right to look for in such work. Much did not fit in it. The emphasis is on the analysis of the main, most important fairy-tale images and motifs, the rest has been partly published before and is not repeated here, and partly, perhaps, will appear in the form of separate essays in the future.
The work came out of the Leningrad Order of Lenin State University. Many of my workmates supported me, willingly sharing their knowledge and experience. I especially owe a lot to the corresponding member of the Academy of Sciences, prof. Ivan Ivanovich Tolstoy, who gave me valuable instructions both on the ancient material I used and on general issues of the work. I offer him my deepest and sincere gratitude.
Author
Chapter I. Background
1. Main question
What does it mean to specifically research a fairy tale, where to start? If we limit ourselves to comparing fairy tales with each other, we will remain within the framework of comparativism. We want to expand the scope of our study and find the historical basis that brought the fairy tale to life. This is the task of studying the historical roots of a fairy tale, formulated so far in the most general terms.
At first glance, it seems that there is nothing new in the formulation of this problem. Historically, there have been attempts to study folklore before. Russian folkloristics knew a whole historical school headed by Vsevolod Miller. Thus, Speransky says in his course on Russian oral literature: “When studying the epic, we try to guess the historical fact that underlies it, and, starting from this assumption, we prove the identity of the plot of the epic with some event known to us or their circle "(Speransky 222). We will neither guess historical facts nor prove their identity with folklore. For us, the question is fundamentally different. We want to explore what phenomena (not events) of the historical past the Russian fairy tale corresponds to and to what extent it actually conditions and causes it. In other words, our goal is to find out the sources of the fairy tale in historical reality. The study of the genesis of a phenomenon is not yet the study of the history of this phenomenon. The study of history cannot be carried out immediately - this is a matter of many years, the work of more than one person, it is a matter of generations, a matter of the Marxist folkloristics that is emerging in our country. The study of genesis is the first step in this direction. This is the main question posed in this work.
2. Importance of premises
Each researcher proceeds from some prerequisites that he has before he starts work. Veselovsky, back in 1873, pointed out the need, first of all, to understand one’s positions and to be critical of one’s method (Veselovsky 1938, 83-128). Using the example of Gubernatis's book "Zoological Mythology", Veselovsky showed how the lack of self-examination leads to false conclusions, despite all the erudition and combinatorial abilities of the author of the work.
Here we should give a critical outline of the history of the study of fairy tales. We won't do this. The history of the study of the fairy tale has been outlined more than once, and we do not need to list the works. But if we ask ourselves why there are still no completely solid and universally accepted results, we will see that this often happens precisely because the authors proceed from false premises.
The so-called mythological school proceeded from the premise that the external similarity of two phenomena, their external analogy testifies to their historical connection. Thus, if the hero grows by leaps and bounds, then the hero’s rapid growth supposedly responds to the rapid growth of the sun rising on the horizon (Frobenius 1898, 242). Firstly, however, the sun does not increase for the eyes, but decreases, and secondly, an analogy is not the same as a historical connection.
One of the premises of the so-called Finnish school was the assumption that the forms that occur more often than others are also inherent in the original form of the plot. Not to mention the fact that the theory of plot archetypes itself requires proof, we will have occasion to repeatedly see that the most archaic forms are very rare, and that they are often replaced by new ones that have become widespread (Nikiforov 1926).
There are a lot of such examples that can be cited, and in most cases it is not at all difficult to find out the fallacy of the premises. The question arises: why didn’t the authors themselves see their mistakes, which were so clear to us? We will not blame them for these mistakes - the greatest scientists made them; the fact is that they often could not think differently, that their thoughts were determined by the era in which they lived and the class to which they belonged. In most cases, the question of prerequisites was not even raised, and the voice of the brilliant Veselovsky, who himself repeatedly revised his premises and retrained himself, remained a voice crying in the wilderness.
For us, this implies that we need to carefully check our premises before starting the study.
3. Highlighting fairy tales
We want to find and explore the historical roots of a fairy tale. What is thought of as historical roots will be discussed below. Before doing this, it is necessary to define the term “fairy tale”. The fairy tale is so rich and varied that it is impossible to study the entire phenomenon of the fairy tale in its entirety and among all peoples. Therefore the material must be limited, and I limit it to fairy tales. This means that I have the premise that there are some special fairy tales that can be called magical. Indeed, I have such a premise. By fairy tales I will understand those fairy tales whose structure I studied in “Morphology of Fairy Tales.” In this book, the fairy tale genre is highlighted quite accurately. Here we will study the genre of fairy tales that begins with the infliction of some kind of damage or harm (kidnapping, exile, etc.) or with the desire to have something (the king sends his son for the firebird) and develops through the hero’s departure from home, meeting with a donor who gives him a magical remedy or an assistant with the help of which the object of the search is found. In the future, the fairy tale gives a duel with the enemy (its most important form is snake fighting), return and pursuit. Often this composition gives a complication. The hero is already returning home, his brothers throw him into the abyss. Subsequently, he arrives again, is tested through difficult tasks and becomes king and marries either in his kingdom or in the kingdom of his father-in-law. This is a brief schematic presentation of the compositional core that underlies so many and varied subjects. Fairy tales that reflect this scheme will be called fairy tales here, and they form the subject of our study.
So, the first premise says: among fairy tales there is a special category of fairy tales, usually called fairy tales. These tales can be isolated from others and studied independently. The very fact of isolation may raise doubts. Isn't the principle of connection in which we must study phenomena violated here? However, in the end, all the phenomena of the world are interconnected, meanwhile, science always distinguishes the phenomena that are subject to its study from among other phenomena. It's all about where and how the border is drawn.
Although fairy tales form part of folklore, they do not represent a part that would be inseparable from this whole. They are not like a hand in relation to a body or a leaf in relation to a tree. They, being a part, at the same time constitute something whole and are taken here as a whole.
Studying the structure of fairy tales shows the close relationship of these tales with each other. The kinship is so close that it is impossible to accurately distinguish one plot from another. This leads to two further, very important premises. Firstly: not a single plot of a fairy tale can be studied without the other, and secondly: not a single motif of a fairy tale can be studied without its relationship to the whole.
This puts the work on a fundamentally new path.
Until now, the work was usually carried out like this: one particular motif or one particular plot was taken, all the recorded options were collected if possible, and then conclusions were drawn from the comparison and comparison of materials. Thus, Polivka studied the formula “it smells like the Russian spirit,” Radermacher studied the motif about those swallowed and vomited by a whale, Baumgarten studied the motif about those sold to the devil (“give back what you don’t know at home”), etc. (Polivka 1924, 1–4; Radermacher 1906; Baumgarten 1915). The authors do not come to any conclusions and refuse to draw any conclusions.
Individual plots are studied in the same way. Thus, Mackensen studied the tale of the singing bone, Liljeblad - of the grateful dead, etc. (Mackensen 1923; Liljeblad 1927) There are quite a lot of such studies, they have greatly advanced our knowledge of the prevalence and life of individual plots, but questions of origin in these works not resolved. Therefore, for now, we completely abandon the plot-by-plot study of the fairy tale. For us, a fairy tale is something whole; all its plots are interconnected and conditioned. This also makes it impossible to study the motive in isolation. If Polivka had collected not only all the varieties of the formula “it smells like the Russian spirit,” but had asked himself the question of who makes this exclamation, under what conditions it is issued, who is greeted with this exclamation, etc., that is, if he studied it in connection with the whole, it is very possible that he would come to the right conclusion. The motive can be studied only in the plot system; plots can only be studied in their connections relative to each other.
4. A fairy tale as a phenomenon of a superstructural nature
These are the premises gleaned from a preliminary study of the structure of a fairy tale. But the matter does not stop there.
It was stated above that the premises from which the authors proceed are often a product of the era in which the researcher lived.
We live in the era of socialism. Our era has also developed its own prerequisites on the basis of which it is necessary to study the phenomena of spiritual culture. But unlike the preconditions of other eras that lead the humanities to a dead end, our era has created the preconditions that lead the humanities to the only correct path.
The premise in question here is a general premise for the study of historical phenomena: “The method of production of material life determines the social, political and spiritual processes of life in general” (Marx, Engels 13; 7). From this it follows quite clearly that we must find in the past the mode of production that determines the fairy tale.
What was this method of production? A very cursory acquaintance with a fairy tale is enough to say that, for example, capitalism does not condition a fairy tale. This, of course, does not mean that the capitalist mode of production is not reflected in the fairy tale. On the contrary, here we will find a cruel factory owner, a greedy priest, an officer-secun ("sec-major"), an enslaving master, a runaway soldier, and a poor, drunken and ruined peasantry. Here it must be emphasized that we are talking specifically about magical, and not novelistic fairy tales. The real fairy tale with winged horses, fiery snakes, fantastic kings and princesses, etc. is clearly not caused by capitalism, it is clearly older than it. Without wasting unnecessary words, let's say that a fairy tale is older than feudalism - this will be clear from the entire course of the study.
However, what happened? It turned out that the fairy tale does not correspond to the form of production in which it widely and firmly exists. We will also find an explanation for this discrepancy in Marx. “With a change in the economic basis, a revolution occurs more or less quickly in the entire enormous superstructure” (ibid.). The words "more or less quickly" are very important. A change in ideology does not always occur immediately after a change in economic fundamentals. The result is a “discrepancy” that is extremely interesting and valuable for the researcher. It means that the fairy tale was created on the basis of pre-capitalist forms of production and social life, and which ones exactly should be investigated.
Let us remember that it was precisely this kind of discrepancy that allowed Engels to shed light on the origins of the family. Quoting Morgan and referring to Marx, Engels writes in “The Origin of the Family”: “The family,” says Morgan, “is an active principle; it never remains unchanged, but moves from a lower to a higher form as society develops from a lower to a higher stage. In contrast, kinship systems are passive; only at long intervals do they register the progress made by the family during this time, and undergo radical changes only when the family has already radically changed." "And in exactly the same way," adds Marx, "the situation is with political, legal, religious, philosophical systems in general" (21, 36). Let us add that the situation is exactly the same with a fairy tale.
So, the emergence of a fairy tale is not connected with the production basis on which it began to be written down from the beginning of the 19th century. This leads us to the next premise, which for now is formulated in a very general form: the fairy tale must be compared with the historical reality of the past and its roots must be sought in it.
Such a premise contains an unexplored concept of the “historical past.” If the historical past of the pony/is given as Vsevolod Miller understood it, then it is very possible that we will come to the same thing that he came to, arguing, for example, that the snake-fighting of Dobrynya Nikitich developed on the basis of the historical fact of the baptism of Novgorod.
We, therefore, need to decipher the concept of the historical past, determine what exactly from this past is necessary to explain the fairy tale.
5. Fairy tale and social institutions of the past
If a fairy tale is considered as a product that arose on a known production basis, then it is clear that it is necessary to consider what forms of production are reflected in it.
Very little and rarely is produced directly in the fairy tale. Agriculture plays a minimal role, hunting is more widely reflected. They usually plow and sow only at the beginning of the story. The beginning is the easiest to change. In the subsequent narrative, archers, royal or free hunters, play a large role, and all kinds of forest animals play a large role.
However, the study of forms of production in a fairy tale only from the side of its object or technique advances us little in the study of the sources of the fairy tale. What is important is not the production technique as such, but the social system corresponding to it. This is how we get the first clarification of the concept of the historical past in relation to the fairy tale. The whole study comes down to determining under what social system the individual motives and the entire fairy tale were created.
But “build” is a very general concept. We need to take specific manifestations of this system. One such manifestation of a system is the institutions of this system. Thus, one cannot compare a fairy tale with the tribal system, but one can compare some motifs of the fairy tale with the institutions of the tribal system, since they are reflected in it or conditioned by it. From this follows the premise that the fairy tale must be compared with the social institutions of the past and its roots must be sought in it. This introduces further clarification into the concept of the historical past, in which the origin of the fairy tale must be sought. So, for example, we see that the fairy tale contains different forms of marriage than now. The hero is looking for a bride in the distance, and not at home. It is possible that the phenomena of exogamy are reflected here: obviously, for some reason the bride cannot be taken from one’s own environment. Therefore, the forms of marriage in a fairy tale must be examined and the system, that stage or phase or stage of social development in which these forms actually existed must be found. Further, for example, we see that the hero very often reigns. Whose throne does the hero occupy? It turns out that the hero takes the throne not of his father, but of his father-in-law, whom he very often kills. Here the question arises about what forms of succession of power are reflected in the fairy tale. In short, we proceed from the premise that the fairy tale has preserved traces of vanished forms of social life, that these remains need to be studied, and that such study will reveal the sources of many of the fairy tale's motifs.
But that's not all, of course. Many motifs in the tale, however, are explained by the fact that they reflect institutions that once existed, but there are motifs that are not directly related to any institutions. Therefore, this area is not enough as a material for comparison. Not everything is explained by the presence of certain institutions.
6. Fairy tale and ritual
It has long been noted that fairy tales have some connection with the area of cults, with religion. Strictly speaking, a cult, a religion, can also be called an institution. However, just as the system is manifested in institutions, the institution of religion is manifested in certain cultic actions; each such action can no longer be called an institution, and the connection between the fairy tale and religion can be isolated into a special issue arising from the connection between the fairy tale and social institutions. Engels in Anti-Dühring quite accurately formulated the essence of religion. “But every religion is nothing more than a fantastic reflection in the heads of people of those external forces that dominate them in their everyday life - a reflection in which earthly forces take the form of unearthly ones. At the beginning of history, the objects of this reflection are, first of all, forces nature... But soon, along with the forces of nature, social forces also come into play - forces that confront man as just as... inexplicable to him as the forces of nature... Fantastic images, which initially reflected only the mysterious forces of nature, now also acquire social attributes and become representatives of historical forces" (328–329).
But just as a fairy tale cannot be compared with any social system in general, it cannot be compared with religion in general, but must be compared with specific manifestations of this religion. Engels establishes that religion is a reflection of the forces of nature and social forces. This reflection can be twofold: it can be cognitive and result in dogmas or teachings, it is manifested in ways of explaining the world, or it can be volitional and result in acts or actions aimed at influencing nature and subjugating it. We will call such actions rituals and customs.
Rite and custom are not the same thing. So, if people are buried by burning, then this is a custom, not a ritual. But custom is surrounded by rituals, and separating them is methodologically incorrect.
The fairy tale has preserved traces of many rituals and customs: many motifs receive their genetic explanation only through comparison with rituals. For example, the fairy tale says that a girl buries the bones of a cow in the garden and waters them with water (Aph. 100). There really was such a custom or ritual. For some reason, animal bones were not eaten or destroyed, but buried (Propp 1934). If we could show what motives go back to such rituals, then the origin of these motives would, to a certain extent, already be explained. It is necessary to systematically study this connection between fairy tales and rituals.
Such a comparison may turn out to be much more difficult than it seems at first glance. A fairy tale is not a chronicle. Between a fairy tale and a ritual there are various forms of relations, various forms of connection, and these forms should be briefly considered.
7. Direct correspondence between fairy tale and ritual
The simplest case is the complete collapse of ritual and custom with a fairy tale. This case is rare. So, in a fairy tale they bury bones, and in historical reality this is also how they did it. Or: the fairy tale says that the royal children are locked in a dungeon, kept in the dark, food is served to them so that no one can see it, and in historical reality this is also how it was done. Finding these parallels is extremely important for the folklorist. These correspondences need to be developed, and then it may often turn out that a given motif goes back to one or another rite or custom, and its genesis can be explained.
8. Rethinking the ritual with a fairy tale
But, as already indicated, such a direct correspondence between a fairy tale and a ritual does not occur so often. More often there is another relationship, another phenomenon, a phenomenon that can be called a rethinking of the ritual. Reinterpretation here will be understood as the replacement by a fairy tale of one element (or several elements) of a ritual that has become unnecessary or incomprehensible due to historical changes with another, more understandable one. Thus, rethinking is usually associated with deformation, with a change in form. Most often, the motivation changes, but other components of the ritual may also change. So, for example, the fairy tale tells that the hero sews himself into the skin of a cow or horse in order to get out of the pit or get into the thirtieth kingdom. He is then picked up by a bird and carries the skin along with the hero to that mountain or beyond the sea where the hero cannot otherwise get. How can we explain the origin of this motif? There is a well-known custom of sewing dead people into the skin. Does this motive go back to this custom or not? A systematic study of this custom and the fairy tale motif shows their undoubted connection: the coincidence is complete, not only in external forms, but also in internal content, in the meaning of this motif in the course of action and in the meaning of this ritual in the historical past (see below, Chap. VI, § 3), with one exception, however: in a fairy tale he sews himself alive into the skin, in the ritual they sew up a dead man. This discrepancy is a very simple case of rethinking: in custom, sewing into a skin ensured that the deceased would enter the kingdom of the dead, but in a fairy tale it ensures that he would enter the thirtieth kingdom.
The term “rethinking” is convenient in that it indicates the process of change that has taken place; the fact of rethinking proves that some changes have occurred in the life of the people, and these changes entail a change in motive. These changes must in any individual case be shown and explained.
We have given a very simple and clear case of rethinking. In many cases the original base is so obscured that it is not always possible to find it.
9. Conversion rite
We should consider a special case of rethinking to be the preservation of all forms of ritual while giving it an opposite meaning or meaning, a reverse interpretation, in a fairy tale. We will call such cases conversion. Let us explain our observation with examples. There was a custom of killing old people. But the fairy tale tells how the old man was supposed to be killed, but he is not killed. The one who spared the old man, if this custom existed, would have been ridiculed, and perhaps scolded or even punished. In a fairy tale, the one who spared the old man is a hero who acted wisely. There was a custom to sacrifice a girl to the river, on which fertility depended. This was done at the beginning of sowing and was supposed to promote plant growth. But in the fairy tale, the hero appears and frees the girl from the monster to whom she was brought to be devoured. In fact, in the era of the ritual, such a “liberator” would have been torn to pieces as the greatest wicked person, endangering the well-being of the people, endangering the harvest. These facts show that the plot sometimes arises from a negative attitude towards the once former historical reality. Such a plot (or motive) could not yet arise as a fairy tale, when there was a way of life that required the sacrifice of girls. But with the fall of this way of life, the custom that was once revered as sacred, the custom in which the hero was the victim girl, who sometimes even voluntarily went to her death, became unnecessary and disgusting, and the hero of the fairy tale is already the wicked one who prevented this sacrifice. This is a fundamentally very important establishment. It shows that the plot does not arise through evolutionary direct reflection of reality, but through the denial of this reality. The plot corresponds to reality in contrast. This confirms the words of V.I. Lenin, who contrasted the concept of evolutionary development with the concept of development as a unity of opposites. “Only the second gives the key to the “self-movement” of all things; only it gives the key to “leaps”, to the “break of gradualism”, to the “transformation into the opposite”, to the “destruction of the old and the emergence of the new”” (Lenin collection, vol. XII , p. 324).
All these considerations and preliminary observations force us to put forward one more premise: the fairy tale must be compared with rituals and customs in order to determine which motives go back to certain rituals and in what relation they are to them.
One difficulty arises here. The fact is that ritual, having arisen as a means of fighting nature, later, when rational ways of fighting nature and influencing it are found, does not die out, but is also rethought. Thus, it may turn out that the folklorist, having reduced the motive to the ritual, will find that the motive goes back to a reinterpreted ritual, and will be faced with the need to explain the ritual as well. There may be cases where the original basis of the ritual is so obscure that this ritual requires special study. But this is no longer the job of the folklorist, but of the ethnographer. A folklorist has the right, having established a connection between a fairy tale and a ritual, in other cases to refuse to study the ritual as well - this would take him too far.
There is another difficulty. Both ritual life and folklore are composed of literally thousands of different details. Is it necessary to look for economic reasons for every detail? Engels says about this: “... the low economic development of the prehistoric period has, as an addition, and sometimes as a condition and even as a cause, false ideas about nature. And although economic need was and over time increasingly became the mainspring of progress in knowledge nature, it would still be pedantry if anyone tried to find economic reasons for all this primitive nonsense" (Marx, Engels XXXVII, 419). These words are clear enough. In this regard, it is also necessary to add the following: if we bring the same motive to the level of a tribal society, to the level of a slave system such as ancient Egypt, antiquity, etc. (and such comparisons have to be made very often), and we establish the evolution of the motive , then we do not consider it necessary to especially emphasize every time that the motive has changed not due to evolution from within, but due to the fact that it finds itself in a new historical situation. We will try to avoid the danger not only of pedantry, but also of schematism.
But let's return to the ritual. As a rule, if a connection is established between a ritual and a fairy tale, then the ritual serves as an explanation of the corresponding motif in the fairy tale. With a narrowly schematic approach, this should always be the case. In fact, sometimes it's just the opposite. It happens that, although a fairy tale goes back to a ritual, the ritual is completely unclear, and the fairy tale has preserved the past so completely, faithfully and well that a ritual or other phenomenon of the past only receives its real illumination through a fairy tale. In other words, there may be cases when a fairy tale from the phenomenon being explained, upon closer study, turns out to be an explanatory phenomenon; it can be a source for studying the ritual. “Folklore tales of the diverse Siberian population served us as perhaps the most important source for the reconstruction of ancient totemic beliefs,” says D.K. Zelenin (Zelenin 1936, 232). Ethnographers often refer to the fairy tale, but do not always know it. This is especially true for Fraser. The grand edifice of his Golden Bough rests on premises drawn from a fairy tale, and a misunderstood and insufficiently studied fairy tale at that. An accurate study of the tale will make it possible to make a number of amendments to this work and even shake its foundations.
10. Fairy tale and myth
But if we consider ritual as one of the manifestations of religion, then we cannot ignore another manifestation of it, namely, myth. There is a huge literature on the relationship of fairy tales to myth, which we will completely ignore here. Our goals are not directly polemical. In most cases, the distinction is made purely formally. When starting the research, we do not yet know what the relationship of a fairy tale to myth is - here for now there is a requirement to investigate this issue, to involve myth as one of the possible sources of a fairy tale.
The variety of available interpretations and understandings of the concept of myth forces us to define this concept precisely.
