What is the political center of the word. Analysis of the work “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”
Slide 1
Goals and objectives of the lesson:
- analyze “Yaroslavna’s Lament” and “The Golden Word of Svyatoslav” - the ideological center of “The Lay of Igor’s Campaign”, compare images of Yaroslavna by different artists, discuss the problem of the authorship of “The Lay...” and the image of the author;
- develop skills in working with literary texts, students’ thinking, the ability to use various sources to obtain information, and develop their own point of view;
- cultivate interest in the history of the country, a sense of patriotism, compassion, and empathy.
During the classes
1. Teacher's introduction
The culminating center of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign,” the greatest work of ancient Russian literature, is “Yaroslavna’s Lament” and “The Golden Word of Svyatoslav.” At the same time, these fragments are the ideological center of “The Lay...”, political and lyrical. Today we will try to compare these fragments, and also discuss a question to which there is still no clear answer - the question of the authorship and author of the “Word...”.
During the lesson we will work in two groups.
2. Working with a table
Slide 2
Answer the questions and fill out the table using the lines of comparison.
Teacher questions.
"The Golden Word of Svyatoslav"
- “Decipher” Svyatoslav’s vague dream.
The prince dreamed in the “golden-domed mansion” that the beam above him cracked, crows croaked and rushed to the sea. And they began to prepare the prince himself for burial: they dressed him “in black papoloma on a plank (or yew) bed”, they began to mourn with “blue wine mixed with grief”, they began to sprinkle large pearls - tears. And the boyars said to the prince: “Woe is yours because two falcons have flown from your father’s golden table; the falcons were captured in iron straps and their wings were clipped.”
Four princes were captured: Igor, Vsevolod, Oleg and Svyatoslav. The speech of the boyars turns into a figurative, picturesque lament: “darkness covered the light, blasphemy defeated praise, Gothic maidens sang on the shore of the Blue Sea, tinkling with Russian gold.” Then Grand Duke Svyatoslav utters his “golden word”, reproaching Igor and Vsevolod for excessive arrogance. And the Grand Duke would stand up for insulting his nest; but he already knows how Vladimir Glebovich groans under the Polovtsian sabers.
Which great princes does Svyatoslav address?
What does Svyatoslav reproach the great princes for?
What does it call for?
And is it Prince Svyatoslav himself, or is it the author of “The Tale of Igor’s Host” who calls on the forces of modern Rus': Grand Duke Vsevolod, son of Yuri Dolgoruky, and his close Glebovichs, then the Rostislavichs, Rurik and David, the powerful Yaroslav Osmomysl of Galicia and the famous Roman with Mstislav (Roman Volynsky). The author once again remembers Igor with grief and again calls on the Mstislavichs and Vseslav’s tribe, focusing most of all on this hero of Boyan’s songs. All these are daring warriors: Yaroslav of Chernigov with the steppe inhabitants wins with the clique of his regiment; Vsevolod can crumble the Volga with oars, and scoop up the Don with helmets; Rurik and David with their squads are not afraid of either wounds or blood, swimming in it with golden helmets; Yaroslav Osmomysl rushes with his iron regiments along the Danube, approaches Kyiv, fights the steppe inhabitants; Roman and Mstislav are terrible for Lithuania and the Polovtsians.
Features of the word genre.
What feeling is imbued with the “Word”? Has it been passed on to you?
Will Svyatoslav's call achieve its goal?
"Yaroslavna's Lament"
What forces of nature does Yaroslavna turn to?
Why does Yaroslavna turn to the wind, the Dnieper, and the sun?
What does she reproach them for?
Features of the crying genre.
Why does he compare himself to a cuckoo?
What is the meaning of the words “I will wet my silk sleeve in the Kayala River,
In the morning the prince will see his bloody wounds"? (it was believed that there was dead water in the Kayala River, and in fairy tales wounds were healed with the help of dead water)
Compared to the “Golden Word,” what intonation does “Yaroslavna’s Lament” sound like?
How do the forces of nature respond to her call?
What feeling is imbued with “Crying”? Has it been passed on to you?
Based on the call of Svyatoslav and Yaroslavna, guess who could be the author of the “Word...”. Prove your point.
Why is this the political and lyrical center of the Lay?
Whose call sounds more convincing: Svyatoslav’s or Yaroslavna’s? Why?
What kind of Yaroslavna do you imagine?
On stage, the image of Yaroslavna was presented by different actresses. On the slide are some images.
Slide 3
Artists also imagined Yaroslavna in different ways. Among them are I. Glazunov, K. Vasiliev, V. Favorsky. ( Slides 4, 5, 6).
Slide 4
Slide 5
Slide 6
Which image is closest to you? Explain your choice.
Consider a reproduction of I. Glazunov’s painting “Russian Song”. ( Slide 7). What does it have in common with “Yaroslavna’s Lament”?
Slide 7
3. Results of working with the table
Slide 9
5. The main idea of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”
What word reflects the central idea of “The Lay”? (unity).
Which characters in The Lay convey and express this idea? ( Slide 10)(Svyatoslav, Yaroslavna, Igor, author).
Slide 10
6. Homework
Write an essay on one of the topics:
- Native nature in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”;
- The image of the Russian land in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”;
- How do you imagine the author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”?
Option 1
1) Vladimir Monomakh
2) chronicler Nestor
3) Daniil Sharpener
2. One of the first copies of “The Lay...” was intended:
1) Peter I
2) Alexander II
3) Catherine II
4) Elizaveta Petrovna
3. What was the result of the first battle with the Polovtsians?
1) the Cumans immediately surrendered
2) Prince Igor’s army was defeated
3) the Polovtsian army was defeated
4) the Polovtsians drove the Russian army far back
4. What is the role of the “Golden Word of Svyatoslav” in the “Word ...”?
1) is an inserted episode in the work
2) is the political center of “Slovo...”
3) with the help of “The Golden Word of Svyatoslav” the reader learns about Igor’s pedigree
5. How does “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” end?
1) death of Igor
2) Igor’s escape from captivity
3) Igor remains in captivity
4) execution of Igor
6. Who prowled to the roosters of Tmutarakan?
1) Yaroslav
2) Izyaslav
3) Igor
4) Vseslav
5) Nobody dared
7. Who did Yaroslavna want to fly along the Danube?
1) Fly
2) Swan
3) Falcon
4) Eagle
5) Cuckoo
8. "Igor and Svyatoslav in “The Tale of Igor’s Host” (comparative analysis)"
Option 2
1. When was “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” created?
1) in the 11th century
2) in the 12th century
3) in the 13th century
4) in the 15th century
2. Original “Words...”:
1) was lost during the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945.
2) burned down during a fire in Moscow in 1812
3) Catherine II gave it to the Prussian king
4) was stolen from archives in the 19th century
3. What happened to Igor during the second battle?
1) was killed
2) was wounded and captured
3) was wounded, but was able to escape with his brother Vsevolod
4) was seriously wounded
4. The main idea of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” is:
1) glorification of Igor’s feat
2) condemnation of Igor’s campaign
3) passionate appeal of Russian princes for unification
4) glory to the Kyiv prince
5. Indicate which of the Russian poets did not translate “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign.”
1) V. A. Zhukovsky
2) V. I. Maikov
3) N. A. Zabolotsky
4) A. S. Pushkin
6. How did the night awaken the birds?
1) The sound of rain
2) Moans of a thunderstorm
3) The rustle of leaves
4) Movement of troops
5) Battle
7. Who did Igor turn to first when the Polovtsians “moved forward”?
1) Into the wolf
2) In ermine
3) In Gogol
4) In the falcon
5) In the goose
8. Essay - miniature on the topic: "Depiction of nature by the author of "The Tale of Igor's Campaign"
Option 3
1. From what language was “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” translated?
1) from Old Church Slavonic
2) from Old Russian
3) from Church Slavonic
4) from Latin
2. What event is the work talking about?
1) on the creation of a unified Moscow state at the end of the 13th century
2) about Monomakh’s campaign against the Polovtsians in 1115
3) about the Tatar-Mongol yoke in the 13th century
4) about the campaign of Prince Igor against the Polovtsians in 1185
3. Who are we talking about? “...full of sadness, crying like a cuckoo in the Jura.”
1) Yaroslavna
2) Olga
3) daughter of Khan Konchak
4) Elena
4. Indicate which of the listed princes is not a participant in Igor’s campaign.
1) Svyatoslav Rylsky
2) Vladimir Monomakh
3) Vladimir Putivlsky
4) Vsevolod Kursky
5 . The main character of “The Lay...” Igor was a prince...
1) Pereyaslavl-Zalessky;
2) Novgorod-Seversky;
3) Vladimir.
6. Where did Vladimir “plug his ears”?
1) In Vladimir
2) In Novgorod
3) In Pskov
4) In Moscow
5) In Chernigov
7. To whom was Igor going in Borichev?
1) To the Mother of God
2) To Yaroslavna
3) To Saints Boris and Gleb
4) To Svyatoslav
5) To Vsevolod
8. Essay - miniature on the topic: " What is the attitude of the author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” to the main character of the story?
Option 4
1. When was the manuscript with “The Word...” discovered?
1) at the end of the 13th century
2) at the end of the 12th century
3) at the beginning of the 19th century
4) at the end of the 18th century
2. How did Prince Igor’s campaign end?
1) The Russian army defeated the Polovtsians.
2) Igor was mortally wounded.
3) Prince Igor and his army were defeated and captured.
4) Neither side won.
3. Who are we talking about? “...I chose courage as my support, I sharpened my heart with a military spirit...” (translation by N. Zabolotsky).
1) Vsevolod
2) Oleg
3) Yaroslav
4) Igor
4. Indicate the nickname of Igor's brother Vsevolod.
1) Red
2) Wise
3) Bui-Tur
4) Goreslavich
5. Before the hike Igor...
1) asked for permission from the Kyiv prince Svyatoslav and received it;
2) asked for permission from the Kyiv prince Svyatoslav and did not receive it;
3) did not agree with Svyatoslav.
6. What was the wine that was served to Svyatoslav mixed with?
1) With anger
2) With grief
3) With resentment
4) With sadness
5) With courage
6. Determine from the statement of the hero of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”: “Brotherhood and squad! It is better to be killed than captured; Let us sit down, brothers, on our greyhound horses, and look at the blue Don.”
1) Rostislav
2) Svyatoslav
3) Vladimir
4) Igor
7. What is the next episode of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” about: “The earth clattered, the grass rustled... And Prince Igor galloped like an ermine to the reeds and, like a white nog, to the water. He jumped onto a greyhound horse and jumped off it like a gray wolf... and flew like a falcon over the clouds, killing geese and swans”?
1) Igor's defeat in battle
2) Igor’s escape from captivity
3) Igor’s campaign against the Polovtsians
4) Overnight stay for Igor’s troops in the steppe
8. Essay - miniature on the topic : "The embodiment of the idea of the unity of the Russian land in the Tale of Igor's Campaign"
Option 5
1. A.I. Musin-Pushkin first published “The Word...”:
1) in 1812
2) in 1800
3) in 1805
4) in 1806
2. How many battles were there?
1) 1
2) 2
3) 3
4) 4
3. What means of expression did the author use in the phrase below?
“The raw mother earth groans with a groan” (translation by N. Zabolotsky).
1) oxymoron
2) personification
3) gradation
4) anaphora
4. What was the name of the khan with whom Igor entered into battle?
1) Kobyak
2) Sharukan
3) Konchak
5. Boyan grandson...
1) Trojan
2) Simargla
3) Veles
4) Svarog
5) Nightingale
6. Whose “brave thought attracts the mind to heroic deeds”?
1) From Roman and Mstislav
2) In Rurik and Davyd
3) With Igor and Vsevolod
4) At Svyatoslav and Oleg's
5) At Ingvar and Yaroslav
7. Which episode of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” precedes the tragic lines: “Darkness covered the light: the Polovtsians spread across the Russian land”?
2) “The Golden Word” by Svyatoslav
3) The story of Igor’s defeat
4) Yaroslavna's lament
8 . Essay - miniature on the topic : " Why is the image of Yaroslavna from “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” included in the gallery of classical images of Russian literature?
Option 1
1) Vladimir Monomakh
2) chronicler Nestor
3) Daniil Sharpener
2. One of the first copies of “The Lay...” was intended:
1) Peter I
2) Alexander II
3) Catherine II
4) Elizaveta Petrovna
3. What was the result of the first battle with the Polovtsians?
1) the Cumans immediately surrendered
2) Prince Igor’s army was defeated
3) the Polovtsian army was defeated
4) the Polovtsians drove the Russian army far back
4. What is the role of the “Golden Word of Svyatoslav” in the “Word ...”?
1) is an inserted episode in the work
2) is the political center of “Slovo...”
3) with the help of “The Golden Word of Svyatoslav” the reader learns about Igor’s pedigree
5. How does “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” end?
1) death of Igor
2) Igor’s escape from captivity
3) Igor remains in captivity
4) execution of Igor
6. Who prowled to the roosters of Tmutarakan?
1) Yaroslav
2) Izyaslav
3) Igor
4) Vseslav
5) Nobody dared
7. Who did Yaroslavna want to fly along the Danube?
1) Fly
2) Swan
3) Falcon
4) Eagle
5) Cuckoo
8. "Igor and Svyatoslav in “The Tale of Igor’s Host” (comparative analysis)"
Option 2
1. When was “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” created?
1) in the 11th century
2) in the 12th century
3) in the 13th century
4) in the 15th century
2. Original “Words...”:
1) was lost during the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945.
2) burned down during a fire in Moscow in 1812
3) Catherine II gave it to the Prussian king
4) was stolen from archives in the 19th century
3. What happened to Igor during the second battle?
1) was killed
2) was wounded and captured
3) was wounded, but was able to escape with his brother Vsevolod
4) was seriously wounded
4. The main idea of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” is:
1) glorification of Igor’s feat
2) condemnation of Igor’s campaign
3) passionate appeal of Russian princes for unification
4) glory to the Kyiv prince
5. Indicate which of the Russian poets did not translate “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign.”
1) V. A. Zhukovsky
2) V. I. Maikov
3) N. A. Zabolotsky
4) A. S. Pushkin
6. How did the night awaken the birds?
1) The sound of rain
2) Moans of a thunderstorm
3) The rustle of leaves
4) Movement of troops
5) Battle
7. Who did Igor turn to first when the Polovtsians “moved forward”?
1) Into the wolf
2) In ermine
3) In Gogol
4) In the falcon
5) In the goose
8. Essay - miniature on the topic: "Depiction of nature by the author of "The Tale of Igor's Campaign"
Option 3
1. From what language was “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” translated?
1) from Old Church Slavonic
2) from Old Russian
3) from Church Slavonic
4) from Latin
2. What event is the work talking about?
1) on the creation of a unified Moscow state at the end of the 13th century
2) about Monomakh’s campaign against the Polovtsians in 1115
3) about the Tatar-Mongol yoke in the 13th century
4) about the campaign of Prince Igor against the Polovtsians in 1185
3. Who are we talking about? “...full of sadness, crying like a cuckoo in the Jura.”
1) Yaroslavna
2) Olga
3) daughter of Khan Konchak
4) Elena
4. Indicate which of the listed princes is not a participant in Igor’s campaign.
1) Svyatoslav Rylsky
2) Vladimir Monomakh
3) Vladimir Putivlsky
4) Vsevolod Kursky
5 . The main character of “The Lay...” Igor was a prince...
1) Pereyaslavl-Zalessky;
2) Novgorod-Seversky;
3) Vladimir.
6. Where did Vladimir “plug his ears”?
1) In Vladimir
2) In Novgorod
3) In Pskov
4) In Moscow
5) In Chernigov
7. To whom was Igor going in Borichev?
1) To the Mother of God
2) To Yaroslavna
3) To Saints Boris and Gleb
4) To Svyatoslav
5) To Vsevolod
8. Essay - miniature on the topic: " What is the attitude of the author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” to the main character of the story?
Option 4
1. When was the manuscript with “The Word...” discovered?
1) at the end of the 13th century
2) at the end of the 12th century
3) at the beginning of the 19th century
4) at the end of the 18th century
2. How did Prince Igor’s campaign end?
1) The Russian army defeated the Polovtsians.
2) Igor was mortally wounded.
3) Prince Igor and his army were defeated and captured.
4) Neither side won.
3. Who are we talking about? “...I chose courage as my support, I sharpened my heart with a military spirit...” (translation by N. Zabolotsky).
1) Vsevolod
2) Oleg
3) Yaroslav
4) Igor
4. Indicate the nickname of Igor's brother Vsevolod.
1) Red
2) Wise
3) Bui-Tur
4) Goreslavich
5. Before the hike Igor...
1) asked for permission from the Kyiv prince Svyatoslav and received it;
2) asked for permission from the Kyiv prince Svyatoslav and did not receive it;
3) did not agree with Svyatoslav.
6. What was the wine that was served to Svyatoslav mixed with?
1) With anger
2) With grief
3) With resentment
4) With sadness
5) With courage
6. Determine from the statement of the hero of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”: “Brotherhood and squad! It is better to be killed than captured; Let us sit down, brothers, on our greyhound horses, and look at the blue Don.”
1) Rostislav
2) Svyatoslav
3) Vladimir
4) Igor
7. What is the next episode of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” about: “The earth clattered, the grass rustled... And Prince Igor galloped like an ermine to the reeds and, like a white nog, to the water. He jumped onto a greyhound horse and jumped off it like a gray wolf... and flew like a falcon over the clouds, killing geese and swans”?
1) Igor's defeat in battle
2) Igor’s escape from captivity
3) Igor’s campaign against the Polovtsians
4) Overnight stay for Igor’s troops in the steppe
8. Essay - miniature on the topic : "The embodiment of the idea of the unity of the Russian land in the Tale of Igor's Campaign"
Option 5
1. A.I. Musin-Pushkin first published “The Word...”:
1) in 1812
2) in 1800
3) in 1805
4) in 1806
2. How many battles were there?
1) 1
2) 2
3) 3
4) 4
3. What means of expression did the author use in the phrase below?
“The raw mother earth groans with a groan” (translation by N. Zabolotsky).
1) oxymoron
2) personification
3) gradation
4) anaphora
4. What was the name of the khan with whom Igor entered into battle?
1) Kobyak
2) Sharukan
3) Konchak
5. Boyan grandson...
1) Trojan
2) Simargla
3) Veles
4) Svarog
5) Nightingale
6. Whose “brave thought attracts the mind to heroic deeds”?
1) From Roman and Mstislav
2) In Rurik and Davyd
3) With Igor and Vsevolod
4) At Svyatoslav and Oleg's
5) At Ingvar and Yaroslav
7. Which episode of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” precedes the tragic lines: “Darkness covered the light: the Polovtsians spread across the Russian land”?
2) “The Golden Word” by Svyatoslav
3) The story of Igor’s defeat
4) Yaroslavna's lament
8 . Essay - miniature on the topic : " Why is the image of Yaroslavna from “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” included in the gallery of classical images of Russian literature?
- - - - - - - -22
The address to the prince “master” first began to be used in the northeast of Rus', where a new strong princely power was taking shape, starting in the mid-70s of the 12th century. (that is, ten years before the writing of the Lay). It begins to be used at first only among urban and rural residents. Before that, this term “master” was used only in the field of possessive relations: this was the name of the owner of slaves, the owner of purchases (in “Russkaya Pravda”). In political life, in relation to the prince, the term “master” is first encountered in the speeches of residents of Vladimir-Suzdal cities addressed to the Vladimir prince. This is what Suzdal and Rostovites (citizens) call Mikhail Yuryevich in 1176 and 1177; this is what Vladimir residents (again, townspeople) call Vsevolod Yuryevich in 1177; This is what they call it in other cases as well. In 1180, apparently for the first time, this term passed into the mouths of the vassal princes, in their address to their head, and again in the Vladimir-Suzdal principality. This is what the Ryazan princes Vsevolod and Vladimir Glebovich called Vsevolod Yuryevich of Vladimir-Suzdal, their feudal head: “You are a lord, you are a father,” the Ryazan princes said through ambassadors to Vsevolod, “my brother (ours - D.L.) the oldest Roman occupies the volosts at nayu (us. - D.L.), listening to his father-in-law Svyatoslav, and kissed the cross and crossed over to you” (Ipat. years.). Apparently, the new relations of unconditional subordination that developed in the northeast between the Vladimir-Suzdal prince and the Ryazan princes at his side required for their definition a new term, in which any “kin softening” of political concepts, so characteristic of the old traditional feudal terminology - “father”, “son”, “brother”. That is why the word “master” began to be used instead of the word “father” or next to it at the time of strengthening of princely power.
This new political term - “lord” (instead of “father”), which reflected in the northeast the growth of the feudal head over the princes standing below him on the ladder of feudal subordination, begins to be used not only by the Ryazan princes in relation to Vsevolod Yuryevich, but also in Another center of the struggle for strong princely power was in Galicia. Just ten years later, in 1190, the son of Yaroslav Osmomysl, Vladimir Galitsky, in his request to Vsevolod of Suzdal, resorted to a similar appeal: “Mr. Father! Keep Galich under me, and God’s tongue and yours are with all Galich, and I am always in your will” (Ipat. years). The energy of this new political term is supported in this request by an unusual degree of humility, to which Vladimir agrees: “I am God’s and yours.”
The use of the word “master” in relation to the prince has a completely precise chronology. It has been used since the 70s of the 12th century. and during the XIII century. (it is typical of the “Prayer of Daniel the Imprisoner”). Subsequently, in the XIV-XV centuries, it is replaced by the word “sovereign”: the prince will be called “sovereign”, but not “master”. This word will be found only in “Zadonshchina” and “The Tale of the Massacre of Mamayev”, but as a borrowing from “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” (in the first work - directly, and in the second - through the first).
By adopting the new term “master,” the author of the Lay obviously accepted a new attitude toward princely power. It is no coincidence that he exaggerates the power of the princes, calls some of them “great” and “formidable” (Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich), and speaks of the “thunderstorm” of Svyatoslav and Yaroslav Osmomysl.
Let's summarize. The author of the Lay is a man of broad historical awareness. He is an attentive reader of The Tale of Bygone Years and at the same time has heard a lot of folk historical poetry. He has his own distinct ideas about Russian history, although these ideas are the ideas of a poet, not a historian, and a poet of the 12th century. His judgments about Russian history are the fruit of a poetic perception of this history, but a poetic perception imbued with historicism within the limits accessible to his era. Russian history has for him clearly visible features of its own existence. At least three periods, three successive images of historical eras are outlined in his poetic consciousness: the time of Troyan, the time of Yaroslav and the time of Oleg Gorislavich.
In his historical views, the author of the Lay depends on the chronicle, folklore and popular rumor, but his historical views are higher than the chronicle, folklore, and those represented by rumor. What separates the author of the Lay from the chroniclers is the enormous power of historical generalization. He summarizes history in specific poetic images. What separates him from the “song makers” is his critical assessment of the past and present. However, he takes his information from the chronicle, folklore, and oral folk memory. He develops individual thoughts of the chronicler and is imbued with the spirit of folk poetic creativity.
The author of The Lay does not separate his opinions from public opinion. He constantly relies on this public opinion in his assessments of what is happening. He recognizes himself as a spokesman for public opinion, striving to convey his assessment of events as a national assessment. But at the same time, the public opinion that he expresses is the public opinion of the best Russian people of his time.
The author of “The Lay” finds the best sides in the norms of feudal behavior, in the code of squad morality, in the ideology of the top of feudal society and strives to rethink feudal concepts. He fills the concepts of “honor”, “glory”, “praise” and “blasphemy” with his own patriotic content.
The author of the Lay is a supporter of strong princely power in the name of curbing the arbitrariness of petty princes, in the name of the unity of the Russian land. The entire “Word” is imbued with a single patriotic mood and a single patriotic idea - the idea of the unity of the Russian land. Essentially, it is a call for this unity and for the firm defense of Rus' from the “filthy”. In this too, the author of the Lay was a man of his time, a mouthpiece for the opinions of the best of his contemporaries. He creates ideas, the need for which was vividly felt in his time. He is the eye and mind of the people. He says what needs to be said. That is why the author of the Lay is inseparable from his era that gave birth to him.
His true hero is the Russian people and the Russian land. The image of the Russian land is central in the Lay. The author imagines it in a broad historical perspective, in the images of military feats and peaceful creative labor. His work, with its calls for unity, is directed towards a future full of bright hopes for him; it paints pictures of a sad present and looks for the roots of this present in the past. It is full of faith in the future, sorrow for the present, pride in the past and wise reflection on the past, the present, and the future, merged for him in a single image of the Russian land.
Who was the author of “The Lay of Igor’s Campaign”? He could be close to Igor Svyatoslavich: he sympathizes with him. He could also be close to Svyatoslav of Kyiv: he also sympathizes with him. He could be a Chernigov resident or a Kyivian resident. He could have been a vigilante: he constantly uses vigilante concepts. However, in his political views he was neither a “courtier”, nor a defender of local trends, nor a warrior. He took his independent patriotic position. His work is an ardent call for the unity of Rus' in the face of external danger, a call to protect the peaceful creative labor of the Russian population.
Did the call of the author of the Lay reach those for whom it was intended? It can be assumed that to a certain extent, yes. Igor Svyatoslavich abandons his solo actions against the Polovtsians. In 1191 he organized an entire coalition against the Polovtsians. In addition to Igor Svyatoslavich, the following participants took part in the campaign: Vsevolod Svyatoslavich, Mstislav and Vladimir Svyatoslavich, the sons of Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich of Kiev, Rostislav Yaroslavich, the son of Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, and the son of Oleg Svyatoslavich - Davyd. This campaign was unsuccessful, but its very organization on such a scale, I think, was not accidental.
However, the real meaning of the call of the author of the Lay may not have been an attempt to organize this or that campaign, but in a broader and bolder task - to unite public opinion against the feudal strife of the princes, to brand harmful feudal ideas in public opinion, to mobilize public opinion against the princes' search for personal glory, personal honor and revenge or personal grievances. The task of the “Slovo” was not only military, but also the ideological unity of the Russian people around the idea of the unity of the Russian land. That is why the author of The Lay so often and so persistently appeals to this public opinion. This task was not designed for a year or two. In contrast to the call for organizing a military campaign against the Polovtsians, it could cover with its mobilizing influence an entire period of Russian history - right up to the Tatar-Mongol invasion. “The essence of the poem,” wrote K. Marx in a letter to Engels, “is the call of the Russian princes to unity just before the invasion of the Mongol hordes proper.”
D.S. Likhachev
The Golden Word of Russian Literature
About eight centuries ago, in 1187, “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” was created - a brilliant work of ancient Russian literature. The passing centuries have not muffled its poetic sound or erased its colors. Interest in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” not only has not diminished, but is becoming more and more widespread, more and more profound.
Why is this work so durable, so small in size? Why do the ideas of the “Word” continue to excite us?
Love for the Motherland inspired the author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign.” She seemed to be guiding him with a pen. She made his work immortal - equally understandable and close to all people who truly love their Motherland and their people.
“The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” is imbued with great human feeling - a warm, gentle and strong feeling of love for the Motherland. The “Word” is literally drunk with it. This feeling is reflected in the emotional excitement with which the author of the Lay speaks about the defeat of Igor’s troops, and in the way he conveys the words of Russian wives crying for the killed soldiers, and in the broad picture of Russian nature, and in the joy of Igor’s return .
The significance of the “Word” is especially great for us also because it is a living and indisputable evidence of the height of ancient Russian culture, its originality and its nationality.
Rus' of time "Tales of Igor's Campaign"
“The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” was created in the years when the process of fragmentation of Rus' reached its greatest strength. Many small principalities - "semi-states" - are at enmity with each other, challenging each other's possessions, seniority, being drawn into fratricidal wars in the name of selfish princely interests. The importance of Kyiv as the center of the Russian land is declining.
The collapse of the unified Kyiv state began already under Yaroslav the Wise, in the first half of the 11th century, when the Polotsk land became isolated. The death of Yaroslav the Wise led to the further division of the Russian land. According to Yaroslav's will, the main Russian cities of that time: Kyiv, Chernigov, Pereyaslavl, Vladimir-Volynsky, Smolensk, with their surrounding regions, were distributed among his sons. At the end of the 11th century, the Chernigov principality was finally assigned to Yaroslav's grandson, Oleg Svyatoslavich, and his descendants. The author of “The Tale of Igor’s Host” nicknamed this Oleg Svyatoslavich Oleg Gorislavich, correctly identifying him as one of those princes from whom the Russian land was “sown with strife.”
The separation of individual lands as hereditary princely possessions was recognized under Vladimir Monomakh at the Lyubech Congress of Princes in 1097. One of the decisions of this congress read: “Let everyone keep his fatherland,” that is, “Let everyone own his father’s land.”
The Lyubech Congress, which recognized the division of the Russian land, did not even lead the princes to a temporary agreement; its decisions were immediately violated. One of the princes - Vasilek Terebovlsky - was treacherously captured by the other two and blinded. Princely discord began again. Calling for unity, the people of Kiev turned to Vladimir Monomakh with a request not to “destroy the Russian lands” with their strife, recalling that the enemies of the Motherland - the Polovtsy - “should rejoice and disturb our land.” The call ended with a direct reproach to the princes who, with their strife, want to “destroy the Russian land.” This call of the people to the princes was on the lips of every generation of Russian people, in every principality, in every city.
Galich, Ryazan, Smolensk, Vladimir-Volynsky, Vladimir-Zalessky, Rostov, Novgorod - all these regional centers are resolutely striving for political independence, leaving the influence of the weakening golden table of Kiev, withdrawing into their selfish local interests; the princes enter into struggle with each other, say about small things “this is great” and get bogged down in endless fratricidal wars.
The internecine struggle of the princes was tragically complicated by the Polovtsian danger hanging over Russia. The Polovtsians occupied the steppes between the Volga and Dnieper, the Crimea in the middle of the 11th century and penetrated the Balkan Peninsula. They represented such a powerful military force that they repeatedly threatened the existence of the Byzantine Empire, and the latter constantly turned to the Russian princes for help. At the beginning of the 12th century, the Russian princes managed to win major victories over the Cumans, but the Cumans continued to ravage the civilian population of Russian villages and cities: they robbed the rural population, burned cities, beat and drove residents into slavery. The fast steppe cavalry knew no natural barriers on the endless, open, vast southern and southeastern borders of Rus', which were difficult to protect. Nomads from the endless “wild field”, from the “unknown country”, with unexpected campaigns, sought to penetrate deeply into the Russian land. Waves of steppe raids crashed against the stubborn resistance of scattered principalities. Some of the Polovtsians settled on the border lands and, under the name of “Kovuev” and “their filthy ones,” that is, “their pagans,” gradually became imbued with the peaceful influence of Russian culture. But the discord of the Russian princes created the opportunity for new invasions. Enmitying among themselves, the princes called upon the Polovtsians to help them, thereby shaking the edifice of Russian statehood that had taken shape over centuries.
Russian culture of the time “Tales of Igor’s Campaign”
The decline in the political unity of Rus' was not, however, associated with its cultural decline. The very collapse of the Kyiv state was caused by the development of local economic life and was accompanied by the growth of its individual parts, the formation of new regional centers, and an increase in the activity of the urban masses of the population.
Near Kiev, Novgorod and Chernigov during this period, numerous new centers of Russian culture grew and strengthened: Vladimir-Zalessky and Vladimir-Volynsky, Polotsk and Smolensk, Turov and Galich. Local literary schools, the deeply unique architecture of each region, painting and applied art developed and strengthened during this period. Numerous stone buildings were erected in Kiev, Chernigov, Vladimir-Volynsky, Galich, Novgorod, Smolensk, Vladimir-Zalessky and other cities of the vast Russian land.
The chronicler wrote about one of the buildings of this time that it was “destroyed” with “all the cunning” available to man. The white stone buildings of this period that have been preserved in Vladimir-Zalessky are richly decorated on the outside with relief images of lions, leopards, griffins, centaurs, horsemen, etc. In painting, excellent frescoes are created, that is, wall paintings with water paints on specially prepared plaster. Remains of such paintings have been preserved in Pskov, Staraya Ladoga, and Novgorod.
The high level of Russian culture of the time of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” is clearly evidenced by applied art. Artistic crafts in the 12th century are represented by luxurious manuscripts, the finest jewelry made of gold and silver with enamel and niello, iron products, carvings in bone, stone, wood, etc. Forty-two names of various craft specialties of this time have reached us.
The art of speech reached a special development in the 12th century. Most of the ancient Russian written works of the 12th century have not reached us as a result of destruction by enemies and fires; but even the little that has survived testifies to the general high literary culture of the 12th century, the presence of several literary schools, the multiplicity of genres, the very need for literature, and the habit of literary reading. The chronicle at this time was kept in almost every city, in many monasteries, often at the court of the local prince.
The exceptionally rapid development of Russian literature of the 11th–12th centuries is associated with the growth of the Old Russian literary language - concise, expressive, flexible, rich in words, abundantly saturated with synonyms capable of reflecting numerous shades of thoughts and feelings. The Russian language of this time responded to the needs of the extremely complicated Russian reality and created a rich political, military and technical terminology, was able to fully embody sophisticated oratory, convey the complex historical content of world and Russian history, and translate the best works of pan-European medieval literature. The development of the Old Russian literary language reflected the general high level of Old Russian culture, which had not yet been subjected to the destruction of the Mongol-Tatar invasion.
The Old Russian written literary language grew on the basis of the oral Russian literary language - a highly developed language of oral folk poetry and the language of political life. The speeches with which the Russian princes “gave impudence” to their soldiers before battles were magnificent in their laconicism, imagery, energy and freedom of expression. The speeches delivered at veche meetings were distinguished by their special laconicism, elaborate verbal formulas, and imagery. The same can be said about speeches at feasts, at courts, at princely congresses, and about speeches made by ambassadors. Individual words and expressions of the ancient Bulgarian language, used in church writing and in worship and known as the Church Slavonic language, merged into the Russian literary language.
However, the grammatical structure of the Russian language remained Russian, and individual Church Slavonic words did not destroy the main vocabulary of the Russian language. The Russian language has reworked elements of the Church Slavonic language and become even richer and more expressive.
The vocabulary of the Old Russian language in the 12th century was already very rich.
The language of Russian chronicles, the language of Russian treaties and charters and many other works of Russian writing, and first of all the language of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” is the Old Russian written literary language. Rich and expressive, it was one of the main achievements of the Russian people of that time.
Events of Russian history that preceded the campaign of Igor Svyatoslavich Novgorod-Seversky
Most of the feudal strife of the 12th century was associated with the enmity of the descendants of Monomakh and the descendants of his opponent Oleg Svyatoslavich - Oleg Gorislavich. Both the Monomakhovichs and the Olgovichs constantly used Polovtsian help in their campaigns against neighboring Russian principalities. The Chernigov Olgovichi especially often resorted to the help of the Polovtsians, seeking peace and an alliance with the restless population of the adjacent steppes. And this Polovtsian “help,” like the independent campaigns of the Polovtsians, became a cruel national disaster from the end of the 11th century. The Polovtsian raids especially intensified in the 70s of the 12th century, when, in the words of the chronicler, “the army began without a break.”
By this time, the Russian princes had experienced and battle-hardened professional warriors who formed the main core of their army - the squad. In addition to these squads, the princes could, if necessary, assemble a large army from peasants and townspeople. There were outposts on the borders with the steppe; in the steppe itself there were Russian “watchmen” - scouts who monitored the movements of the nomads.
The Russian army in the 12th century was mainly mounted; it was very fast in its movements and developed skillful tactics to combat the nomads. Russian campaigns in the steppe were undertaken mainly in the spring, when the horses of the Polovtsians, exhausted from the meager winter grazing, turned out to be much weaker than the horses of the Russian army. In battle, Russian troops knew how to operate in complex formations, were persistent and fearless. A sense of military honor and love for the Motherland distinguished both professional combatants and ordinary soldiers recruited from the people. The armament of the warriors consisted of swords, sabers, bows, and sometimes shestopers (special clubs with six-edged tips). In addition, the warriors had spears - a weapon that, although easily broken, was irreplaceable in the first skirmish with the enemy.
The warriors had strong steel (damask steel) helmets and armor, that is, chain mail, which appeared in Rus' earlier than in Western Europe. The armament of ordinary warriors was simpler - spears and axes were more common here. Heavy helmets and armor that glowed in the sun were usually put on just before the battle.
However, there was no all-Russian army with a unified command in Rus' at that time. The allied campaigns of the Russian princes were assembled with difficulty, and each of the troops of one or another Russian prince was much smaller in number than the Polovtsian army.
The particularly strong onslaught of the Polovtsians, which began in the 70s of the 12th century, was broken by the retaliatory campaigns of the Russians. After a series of defeats, the Cumans united under the rule of Khan Konchak. Polovtsian troops receive a unified organization and good weapons; they acquired complex throwing weapons, “Greek fire”, and huge crossbows that moved “on a high cart”, the string of which was pulled by more than fifty people. Rus', separated by discord, came face to face with a strong and, most importantly, united army of nomads.
Under the influence of the Polovtsian danger, as later under the influence of the Mongol-Tatar danger, even among the princes, the idea of the need for unity was maturing. In the 80s of the 12th century, an attempt was made to reconcile the Olgovichi and Monomakhovichi. The Olgovichi themselves are breaking with their traditional policy of union with the steppe, and it is remarkable that in the history of this turning point in the policy of the Olgovichi, the hero of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” - Olgovich Igor Svyatoslavich, Prince Novgorod-Seversky, plays a very important role.
At the beginning, Igor is a typical Olgovich. Back in 1180, the Polovtsians actively helped Igor Svyatoslavich. Completely defeated by Rurik Rostislavich of Kiev at Dolobsk, together with his allies - the Polovtsians, Igor Svyatoslavich jumped into a boat with his future worst enemy, and current ally Khan Konchak, and managed to hide from the Kiev prince.
Having won the victory, the Kiev prince Rurik took advantage of its fruits in a unique way. Not feeling strong enough to keep Kiev in his power, he left the Olgovich, Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich, the future hero of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign,” in the great reign of Kiev, and took the rest of the cities of the Kiev region for himself. Kiev was ceded by Rurik to Svyatoslav of Kiev on conditions that we can only guess about: apparently, Svyatoslav undertook to renounce the alliance with the Polovtsians and agreed to act against them in agreement with all the Russian princes. In the coming years, Rurik and Svyatoslav managed to widely organize the allied campaigns of the Russian princes on the steppe.
The obligations of the head of all the Olgovich princes - Svyatoslav of Kyiv - extended to Igor Svyatoslavich of Novgorod-Seversky, his cousin, who was subordinate to him. Straightforward and honest, Igor decisively breaks with his previous politics; he becomes a fierce opponent of the Polovtsians. However, Igor Svyatoslavich did not immediately manage to prove his devotion to the new policy of unity and joint struggle with the Polovtsians.
In 1184, through the combined efforts of the Russian princes under the leadership of Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich of Kyiv, the Polovtsians were defeated. Military vehicles were captured, Russian prisoners were repulsed; a “basurman” who shot with “live fire” was captured. The Polovtsians were terrified, and the danger, it would seem, had been removed from the Russian land for a long time. However, Igor Svyatoslavich of Novgorod-Seversky was unable to participate in this victorious campaign: the campaign began in the spring, and icy conditions prevented his cavalry army from arriving on time. Apparently, Igor Svyatoslavich took this failure seriously: he failed to prove his loyalty to the alliance of Russian princes against the Polovtsians; he could have been suspected of deliberately avoiding participation in the campaign, as a former ally of Konchak. That is why, in the next 1185, Igor, “unable to contain his youth” - his young enthusiasm, without an agreement with Svyatoslav and Rurik, rushes into a campaign against the Polovtsians.
He sets himself a bold task - to use his own strength to “search” for the old Chernigov Tmutorokan, which was located on the Black Sea coast and once belonged to the Chernigov princes. A high sense of military honor, repentance for his previous policy, devotion to the new - all-Russian, hatred of his former allies - witnesses of his shame, the torment of suffering pride - all this motivated him on the campaign.
Courage, sincerity, a sense of honor collided in Igor’s character with his short-sightedness, love for the Motherland - with the lack of a clear idea of the need for unity and joint struggle. Igor acted with exceptional courage during the campaign, but he did not subordinate all his activities to the interests of the Motherland, he could not give up the desire for personal glory, and this led him to a defeat that the Russians had not yet known. For the first time in the entire history of the fight against the Polovtsians, the Russian princes - Igor and his brother Vsevolod - “bui tur” - were captured. For the first time, the Russian army suffered such a terrible defeat. These are the features of the special tragedy of Igor Svyatoslavich’s campaign - a tragedy that riveted the attention of the author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” and the chroniclers who composed their stories about it in different parts of the Russian land, the most extensive and, perhaps, the most vivid of all. stories about the steppe campaigns of Russian princes.
Campaign of Igor Svyatoslavich Novgorod-Seversky
Two chronicle stories have been preserved about the campaign of Igor Svyatoslavich in 1185: one more extensive - in the Ipatiev Chronicle, the other more condensed - in the Laurentian Chronicle. This is how, based on these two chronicle stories, one can imagine Igor’s campaign.
On April 23, 1185, on Tuesday, Igor Svyatoslavich of Novgorod-Seversky, his son - Vladimir Putivlsky, nephew - Prince Svyatoslav Olgovich of Rylsky, together with the Kovuev squads sent from Yaroslav Vsevolodovich of Chernigov, led by Olstin Oleksich, set out on a distant steppe campaign against the Polovtsians without collusion with Kiev prince Svyatoslav. The horses, fattened over the winter, walked quietly. Igor rode, gathering his squad. While hiking off the banks of the Donets on May 1, when the day was approaching evening, they were caught by a solar eclipse, which was considered in those days an omen of misfortune, but Igor did not turn his horses. At the Oskol River, Igor waited for two days for his brother Vsevolod, who was coming from Kursk by a different route. From Oskol we went further to the Salnitsa River.
It was not possible to take the Polovtsians by surprise, as Igor had hoped: unexpectedly the Russian guards, who were sent to catch the “tongue,” reported that the Polovtsians were armed and ready for battle. The guards advised us to either go faster or return. But the Russians did not stop for the night, but rode all night. The next day, at lunchtime, the Russians met the Polovtsian regiments. The Polovtsians sent back their vezhi (nomadic dwellings on carts), and they themselves, having gathered “from young to old,” lined up on the other side of the Syurlia River. Igor's troops formed into six regiments. According to the custom of that time, Igor Svyatoslavich said a brief encouraging word to the princes: “Brothers, this is what we were looking for, but let’s pull it together.” Igor’s regiment stood in the middle, on his right hand was the “buy tour” regiment of Vsevolod, on the left was the regiment of Igor’s nephew Svyatoslav of Rylsky, in front was the regiment of Igor’s son, Vladimir, and the regiment of the Chernigov forges. Selected riflemen drawn from all regiments stood at the front of the line. The Polovtsians lined up their archers. “Having fired an arrow,” that is, firing a volley from bows, the Polovtsians fled. Those Polovtsian regiments that were stationed far from the river also fled. The advanced regiments of the Chernigov kovuys and Vladimir Igorevich chased the Polovtsians. Igor and Vsevolod walked slowly, maintaining the battle formation of their regiments. The Russians took possession of the Polovtsians and captured full (prisoners). Part of the army chased the Polovtsians further and returned at night with the full force.
As the Ipatiev Chronicle tells, the very next day after the first victory over the Polovtsians, at dawn, the Polovtsian regiments, “ak borove,” that is, like a forest, suddenly began to attack the Russians. The small Russian army saw that it had gathered “the entire Polovtsian land” against itself. But even in this case, brave Igor did not turn the shelves. His speech before the battle is reminiscent of the speeches of Vladimir Monomakh in his concern for the “black people,” that is, for simple peasant warriors. He said: “If we die or run away and leave the black people, then we will be a sin... Let's go! But either we die or we live in the same place.” In order to make their way to the Donets, without getting ahead or behind each other, Igor ordered the horsemen to dismount and fight all together.
For three days, day and night, Igor slowly made his way to the Donets with his army. In the battle, Igor was wounded in his right hand. Pushed back from the water by the Polovtsians, the warriors were exhausted with thirst. The horses were the first to faint from thirst. There were many wounded and dead in the Russian regiments. They fought hard until the evening, they fought for the second night; At dawn on Sunday morning, the Chernigov settlements trembled. Igor galloped towards the Kovayas to stop them. He took off his helmet to be recognized by them, but could not detain them. On the way back, within an arrow's flight from his regiment, exhausted from a wound, he was captured by the Polovtsians. Captured by them, he saw how cruelly his brother Vsevolod fought at the head of his army, and, according to the chronicle, he asked for death so as not to see his death. The wounded Igor was taken into custody by his former ally, Konchak. Of the entire Russian army, only fifteen people were saved, and even fewer Kovaevs. The others drowned.
At that time, Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich of Kiev, having decided to go against the Polovtsians to the Don for the whole summer, gathered soldiers in the north of his possessions - in the “upper” lands. On the way back from Novgorod-Seversky, Svyatoslav heard that his cousins had gone against the Polovtsians, hiding from him, and “he didn’t like it.” When Svyatoslav was already approaching Chernigov in the boats, he learned about Igor’s defeat. Svyatoslav, hearing this, “took a deep breath,” “wiped his tears,” and said: “Oh, my beloved brothers and sons and men of the Russian land! God gave me to wear out the filthy, but without restraining my youth (youth) I opened the gates to the Russian land... Yes, what a pity for me to complain about Igor (as I was annoyed with him before), so now I pity more (so now I regret even more) for Igor, wash my brother."
These words of Svyatoslav precisely define the consequences of Igor’s defeat. Svyatoslav “tired the filthy” in his campaign of 1184, and Igor, “unable to restrain his youth,” negated his results - he “opened the gates” to the Polovtsians to the Russian land. Grief and fierce grief (sadness) spread throughout the Russian land. “And it’s not nice to berate your neighbor then,” says the chronicler.
The Polovtsians, having defeated Igor and his brothers, “took great pride” and, having gathered all their people, rushed to the Russian land. And there was a quarrel between them: Konchak wanted to go to Kiev - to avenge Bonyak and his grandfather Sharukan, who were defeated there in 1106, and Gzak proposed to go to the Seim River, “where the wives and children are left: we are ready for everything; Let us enter cities without fear.”
And so they split in two. Konchak went to Pereyaslavl-Yuzhny, besieged the city and fought here all day.
Vladimir Glebovich was then a prince in Pereyaslavl. He was “daring and strong towards the army,” he left the city and rushed at the Polovtsians, but few of the squads dared to follow him. The prince fought hard with the enemies, was surrounded and wounded by three spears. Then others arrived from the city and took the prince away. Vladimir sent from the city to say to Svyatoslav of Kyiv, Rurik and Davyd Rostislavich: “Behold, the Polovtsy are with me, and help me.” Disagreements arose between the troops of Rurik and Davyd; Davyd’s Smolensk squads “became a veche” and refused to go on a campaign. Svyatoslav and Rurik sailed along the Dnieper against the Polovtsians, and Davyd and his Smolnyans returned back. Hearing about the approach of the troops of Svyatoslav and Rurik, the Polovtsians retreated from Pereyaslavl and on the way back besieged the city of Rimov. All these events were reflected in the Lay.
In captivity, Igor enjoyed relative freedom and honor. Twenty guards were assigned to him, who did not interfere with him going wherever he wanted, and obeyed him when he sent them anywhere. Igor went hawk hunting with them.
A Polovtsian named Laurus suggested that Igor flee. Igor refused to take the “unglorious path,” but circumstances eventually forced him to flee: the thousand’s son and the groom, who were in captivity with Igor, informed him that the Polovtsians returning from Pereyaslavl intended to kill all Russian prisoners. The time for escape was chosen in the evening - at sunset. Igor sent his groom to the Laurus with an order to move to the other side of the river with a lead horse. The Polovtsy, who were guarding Igor, got drunk on kumiss, played and had fun, thinking that the prince was sleeping. Igor picked up the half of the Polovtsian vezha, went out, crossed the river, mounted a horse there and fled.
For eleven days Igor made his way to the border city of Donets, running away from pursuit. Arriving in Novgorod-Seversky, Igor soon set off on a detour - to Chernigov and Kiev - looking for help and support, and was greeted with joy everywhere.
Time of creation of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”
“The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” was created shortly after the events of Igor’s campaign. It was written under the fresh impression of these events. This is not a historical narrative about the distant past - it is a response to the events of its time, full of grief that has not yet dulled. The author of “The Lay” addresses in his work the contemporaries of the events, to whom these events were well known. Therefore, the “Word” is woven from hints, from reminders, from silent indications of what was still alive in the memory of every contemporary reader.
There are also more precise indications in the “Tale of Igor’s Campaign” that it was written shortly after the events described. In 1196, the “buy tour” Vsevolod died, in 1198 Igor Svyatoslavich reigned in Chernigov, and before that he went against the Polovtsians more than once, but all this remained without mention in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign.” Other events in Russian history that occurred after 1187 are not mentioned. In particular, the author of the “Lay” names among the living princes Yaroslav Osmomysl of Galicia, who died in 1187: the author of the “Lay” appeals to him to “shoot” Konchak “for the land of Russia, for the wounds of Igor, the great Svyatoslavich.” From this it is clear that the “Lay” was written no later than 1187; but it could not have been written earlier than 1187, since it consists of “glory” to the young princes, including Vladimir Igorevich, only in the same year, 1187, who returned from captivity. Therefore, one can think that “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” was written in 1187.
“The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” - a call for unity
“The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” was a direct response to the events of Igor’s campaign. It was a call for an end to the princely strife, for unification in the face of a terrible external danger. In the exact words of Karl Marx, “the meaning of the poem is the call of the Russian princes to unity just before the invasion of the Mongols.” This appeal constitutes the main content of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign.” Using the example of Igor's defeat, the author shows the sad consequences of the political disunity of Rus'.
“The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” not only tells about the events of Igor’s campaign - it evaluates them. It represents a passionate and excited speech of a patriot, now turning to the events of living modernity, now remembering the deeds of hoary antiquity. This speech is sometimes angry, sometimes sad and mournful, but always full of faith in the Motherland, full of love for it, confidence in its future.
In “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign,” the broad and free breath of oral speech is clearly felt. It is also felt in the choice of expressions - ordinary ones used in oral speech, and military terms; it is also felt in the choice of artistic images, devoid of literary sophistication, accessible and popular; it is felt in the very rhythm of the language.
The author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” constantly addresses his readers, calling them “brothers,” as if he sees them in front of him. He introduces both his contemporaries and people of the past into the circle of his imaginary listeners. He turns to Boyan: “Oh Boyan, the nightingale of old times! If only you tickled her cheeks.” He turns to “buy tur” Vsevolod: “Yar tur Vsevolod! Stand on the harrow, howling with arrows, rattling your swords on your helmets!” He addresses Igor, Vsevolod of Suzdal, Rurik and Davyd Rostislavich and many others. Speaking about the sad omens that preceded Igor’s campaign and accompanied Igor on his fatal path, he seems to want to stop him and thereby introduces the reader into the alarming situation of the campaign. He interrupts himself with exclamations of sorrow: “O Russian land! You are already behind the helmet! All this creates the impression of close proximity of the author of the Lay to those to whom he addresses.
This intimacy is more than the closeness of the writer to his reader, but rather the closeness of the speaker or singer directly addressing his listeners.
When you read “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign,” you vividly feel that the author most likely intended it to be spoken aloud.
However, it would be a mistake to assume that “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” was intended only for pronunciation or only for reading; the possibility cannot be ruled out that the author of the “Tale” also intended his work for singing. The author of the “Word” himself, although he calls his work very vaguely - sometimes a “word”, sometimes a “song”, sometimes a “story”, however, when choosing his poetic manner, he does not consider as his predecessor any of the writers and speakers known to us XI -XII centuries, and Boyan - a singer, poet, who performed his works to the accompaniment of some stringed instrument - apparently, the gusli. The author of “The Lay” considers Boyan his predecessor in the same kind of poetry in which he himself creates.
Thus, “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” is a call for unity. It was undoubtedly written by the author, but the author felt his connection with the spoken word, with oral poetry; the author felt his work was spoken, but whether it was intended to be spoken aloud as a speech or to be sung is difficult to say. If it is speech, then it still has similarities to song; if it is a song, then it is close to speech. Unfortunately, it is not possible to more closely define the genre of “Words”. Written, it retains all the charm of a living spoken word - a word of ardent, convincing, full of the most sincere, most sincere and heartfelt love for the Motherland.
The real meaning of the call of the author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” was, of course, not only an attempt to organize this or that campaign, but also to unite public opinion against the discord of the princes, to turn public opinion against the princes’ search for personal “glory,” personal “ honor" and their revenge on personal "grievances". The task of the “Slovo” was not only military, but also the ideological unity of all the best Russian people around the idea of the unity of the Russian land.
Political worldview of the author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”
How did the author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” imagine the unity of Rus' to which he called his readers? The unity of Rus' was presented to the author of the Lay not in the form of beautiful-hearted “good neighborly” relations between all Russian princes based on their good will. It goes without saying that it was impossible to simply persuade the Russian princes to stop fighting among themselves. What was needed was such a strong central government that could consolidate the unity of Rus' and make Rus' a powerful state. The author of the Lay is a supporter of strong princely power, which would be able to curb the tyranny of petty princes.
He sees the center of a united Rus' in Kyiv. The Kiev prince is depicted to him as a strong and “formidable” ruler. Therefore, the author of the “Tale” endows the “weak” Kyiv prince Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich with the ideal properties of the head of the Russian princes: he is “formidable” and “great”.
Appealing to the Russian princes to stand up for the defense of the Russian land, the author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” reminds these princes of their military might and, as it were, draws in his appeal a collective image of a strong, powerful prince. This prince is strong in army: he is “many-armed.” He is strong in court: “the courts line up to the Danube.” He instills fear in the countries bordering Russia; he can “sprinkle the Volga with oars and pour out the Don with helmets.” He “supported the Ugric mountains with his iron planks, interceding the queen’s path, closing the gates to the Danube.” He is famous in other countries; the glory of the “Germans and Venedits”, “Greeks and Moravians” is sung to him.
Before us is the image of a prince who embodies the idea of strong princely power, with the help of which the unity of the Russian land was to be realized. This idea of strong princely power was just emerging in the 12th century. Subsequently, this same image of the “formidable” Grand Duke was reflected in the Life of Alexander Nevsky and in a number of other works of the 13th century. The only thing that will not stand behind this image of the “formidable” Grand Duke is Kyiv as the center of Rus'. The shift of the center of Rus' to the northeast and the decline in the importance of the Kyiv table will become too obvious. The importance of the center of the Russian land in the 15th–16th centuries will pass to Moscow, which will unite Rus' with the help of the strong power of the Moscow prince.
In the 12th century, strong princely power was just beginning to emerge; it had yet to develop in the future, but the author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” already saw that with the help of strong princely power it would be possible to unite Rus' and give a strong rebuff to external enemies.
The image of the Russian land in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”
The author of “The Lay of Igor’s Campaign” embodied his call for unity, his sense of the unity of the Motherland in a living, concrete image of the Russian land. “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” is dedicated to the entire Russian land as a whole. The hero of the Lay is not any of the princes, but the Russian people, the Russian land. All the best feelings of the author are directed towards it, towards the Russian land. The image of the Russian land is central in the Lay; it is outlined by the author broadly and freely.
There is hardly a work in world literature in which such vast geographical spaces are simultaneously drawn into action. Polovtsian steppe (“country unknown”), “blue sea”, Don, Volga, Dnieper, Donets, Danube, Western Dvina, Ros, Sula, Stugna, Nemiga, and from the cities - Korsun, Tmutorokan, Kiev, Polotsk, Chernigov, Kursk , Pereyaslavl, Belgorod, Novgorod, Galich, Putivl, Rimov and many others - the entire Russian land is in the author’s field of vision, included in the circle of his narration. The vastness of the Russian land is emphasized by him by the simultaneity of action in its different parts: “the girls sing on the Danube, the voices curl across the sea to Kyiv.” Simultaneously with Igor’s campaign, the Polovtsians are moving towards the Don on “unprepared roads”, their unoiled carts creaking.
The vast spaces of the Motherland, in which the action of “The Lay of Igor’s Campaign” unfolds, are united by the hyperbolic speed of movement of the characters in it. Vseslav touched the golden throne of Kiev with a spear, bounced off it like a fierce beast, at midnight disappeared from Belgorod in the blue darkness of the night, and the next morning, rising, he opened the gates of Novgorod with his weapon, smashing the glory of Yaroslav... Vseslav the prince judged the people, and he himself prowled the night like a wolf : from Kiev he searched for the roosters of Tmutorokani; the great Khors (sun) scoured the path like a wolf. Svyatoslav, like a whirlwind, tore the filthy Kobyak out of the Lukomorye, from the great iron regiments of the Polovtsians, and Kobyak fell in the city of Kyiv, in the grid of Svyatoslav.
In the vast expanses of Rus', the power of the heroes of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” acquires hyperbolic proportions: Vladimir I Svyatoslavich could not be nailed to the Kiev mountains, Galician Yaroslav propped up the Ugric (Hungarian) mountains with his iron regiments, blocking the king’s path, closing the gates to the Danube.
The landscape of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” is also distinguished by the same grandeur, always concrete and taken as if in motion: before the battle with the Polovtsians, bloody dawns will tell the light, black clouds are coming from the sea... there will be great thunder, it will rain like arrows from the great Don... The earth is humming , the rivers flow muddy, the ashes rush over the fields. After the defeat of Igor's army, widespread sadness flows across Rus'.
The wind, the sun, thunderclouds in which blue lightning flutters, morning fog, rain clouds, the tickling of a nightingale at night and the cry of a jackdaw in the morning, evening dawns and morning sunrises, the sea, ravines, rivers make up a huge, unusually wide background against which the action unfolds “Words” convey the feeling of the endless expanses of the Motherland.
The wide expanse of native nature is vividly felt in Yaroslavna’s cry. Yaroslavna turns to the wind blowing under the clouds, nurturing ships on the blue sea, to the Dnieper, which pierced stone mountains through the Polovtsian land and nurtured Svyatoslav’s boats to Kobyakov’s camp, to the sun, which is warm and beautiful for everyone, but stretches out in the waterless steppe its burning rays on the Russian soldiers, thirst twisted their bows, languor stopped their quivers.
All Russian nature takes part in the joys and sorrows of the Russian people: the concept of the Motherland - the Russian land - unites for the author its history, “countries”, that is, rural areas, cities, rivers and all nature - living, sympathizing with Russians. The sun obscures the prince's path with darkness - warns him of danger. The Donets makes a green bed for Igor, who is escaping from captivity, on its silver banks, clothes him with warm fog, and guards him with goldeneyes and wild ducks.
The wider the author covers the Russian land, the more concrete and vital its image becomes, in which the rivers come to life, entering into conversation with Igor, and animals and birds are endowed with human intelligence.
The feeling of the vastness of the space and vastness of the Motherland, constantly present in “The Lay of Igor’s Campaign,” is enhanced by numerous images of falconry, the participation in the action of birds (geese, goldeneyes, crows, jackdaws, nightingales, cuckoos, swans, gyrfalcons) making long flights to the Don and to the blue sea, across wide fields. Constant references to the sea emphasize this feeling.
Covering with his mind's eye the entire Russian land, the author sees and hears everything that happens in it. The author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” talks about the details of camp life, about methods of defense and attack, about various details of weapons, and notes the behavior of birds and animals.
The image of the Motherland, full of cities, rivers and numerous inhabitants, is, as it were, contrasted with the image of the deserted Polovtsian steppe - the “unknown country”, its ravines (ravines), hills, swamps and “muddy” places.
For the author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign,” the Russian land is, of course, not only “land” in the proper sense of the word, not only Russian nature, Russian cities, but, first of all, the people inhabiting it. The author of the Lay speaks of the peaceful work of the Russian “Ratai” - plowmen, disrupted by the strife of the princes; he talks about the wives of Russian soldiers mourning their husbands who died in the battle for Rus'; he talks about the grief of the entire Russian people after the defeat of Igor, about the destruction of the property of the Russian people, about the joy of the inhabitants of cities and rural areas at the return of Igor.
The army of Igor Novgorod-Seversky is, first of all, “Rusichi” (Russian sons). They go against the Polovtsians for their Motherland; crossing the border of Rus', they say goodbye to their homeland - to the Russian land as a whole, and not to the Novgorod-Seversky principality, not to Kursk or Putivl. “Oh Russian land! You are already behind the helmet!”
At the same time, the concept of the Motherland includes for the author “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” and its history. In the opening to the Lay, the author says that he is going to conduct his narrative “from old Vladimer (Vladimir I Svyatoslavich) to present-day Igor.” Outlining the history of Prince Igor’s unsuccessful campaign against the Polovtsians, the author covers the events of Russian life over a century and a half and conducts his narrative, “shaping the glory of both sexes of this time” - constantly turning from modernity to history, comparing past times with the present. The author recalls the centuries of Troya, the years of Yaroslav, the campaigns of Oleg, the times of “old Vladimer” Svyatoslavich.
The author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” paints a surprisingly vivid image of the Russian land. Creating the “Word”, he was able to look at the whole of Rus', uniting in his description both Russian nature, Russian people, and Russian history. The image of the suffering Motherland is very important in the artistic and ideological concept of “The Lay”: it evokes the reader’s sympathy for it, it arouses hatred of its enemies, it calls the Russian people to its defense. The image of the Russian land is an essential part of the “Word” as a call for its protection from external enemies.
“The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” is a work of amazing integrity. The artistic form of “The Lay” very accurately corresponds to its ideological concept. All images of the “Lay” help to identify its main idea - the idea of the unity of Rus'.
Images of Russian princes in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”
The attitude of the author of “The Lay of Igor’s Campaign” towards the Russian princes is ambivalent: he sees them as representatives of Rus', he sympathizes with them, proud of their successes, mourning their failures, but condemns their selfish, narrowly local politics and their discord, their reluctance to jointly defend the Russian land.
Using the example of the campaign of Igor Svyatoslavich Novgorod-Seversky, the author shows what the lack of unity can lead to. Igor is defeated only because he went on a campaign alone. He acts according to the formula: “We are for ourselves, and you are for yourself.” The words of Svyatoslav of Kyiv addressed to Igor Svyatoslavich characterize to a certain extent the attitude of the author of the Lay towards him. Svyatoslav reproaches Igor and Vsevolod for going on a campaign without an agreement with him, seeking glory for themselves. He reproaches them for wanting to steal the glory of his victories over the Polovtsy and share only among themselves the glory of their campaign.
The entire story about Igor’s campaign follows these same lines: the brave but short-sighted Igor goes on a campaign, despite the fact that this campaign is doomed to failure from the very beginning; he goes on despite all the unfavorable “signs.” Igor loves his homeland, Rus', but his main motivation is the desire for personal glory. Igor says: “Brothers and squad! Lutsa would have wanted to be, rather than being full of being; and let us all, brethren, look upon our eyes, and let us see the blue Don”; and again: “I want,” he said, “to break a spear at the end of the Polovtsian field; I want to lay my head with you, Russians, and would like to drink the Don with a helmet.” The desire for personal glory “is a sign for him.”
However, the author emphasizes that Igor Svyatoslavich’s actions are determined to a greater extent by the concepts of his environment than by his personal properties. In himself, Igor Svyatoslavich is more likely to be good than bad, but his actions are bad because they are dominated by the prejudices of society. Therefore, in the image of Igor, the general rather than the individual comes to the fore. Igor Svyatoslavich is the “average” prince of his time: brave, courageous, to a certain extent loving the Motherland, but reckless and short-sighted, caring more about his honor than the honor of the Motherland.
The author of “The Lay of Igor’s Campaign” speaks with much greater condemnation about the ancestor of the Olgovich princes and the grandfather of Igor Svyatoslavich - Oleg Gorislavich, the grandson of Yaroslav the Wise and the constant opponent of Vladimir Monomakh. Remembering this Oleg (Oleg lived in the second half of the 11th - early 12th centuries; died in 1115), the author of the Lay says that he forged sedition with a sword and sowed arrows on the ground, under him the Russian land was sown and sprouted with strife. The author of “The Lay” notes the disastrous nature of Oleg’s sedition, first of all, for the working people, for the peasantry: “Then in the Russian land, the Rataevs would quickly rant, and often lie and lie, making a corpse for themselves, and the Galicians would blaspheme their speech, even if they wanted to fly to hell.” The author gives Oleg the ironic patronymic “Gorislavich,” meaning, of course, not his personal grief, but the people’s grief caused by Oleg’s strife.
The founder of the Polotsk princes, Vseslav of Polotsk, is also depicted as the initiator of the strife. The entire text about Vseslav is a reflection on his ill-fated fate. Vseslav is depicted in the Lay with condemnation, but also with some, albeit very insignificant, amount of sympathy. This is a restless prince, rushing about like a hunted animal, a cunning “prophetic” loser. Before us is an exceptionally vivid image of a prince from the period of fragmentation of Rus'.
In the rest of the Russian princes, the author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” notes their positive traits to a greater extent than their negative ones. The author emphasizes the exploits of the Russian princes, depicts their power, their glory. The images of Russian princes reflect his dreams of strong power in Rus', of the military power of Russian princes. Vladimir I Svyatoslavich went on campaigns against enemies so often that he “could not be nailed to the Kyiv mountains.” Vsevolod of Suzdal can splash the Volga with oars and pour out the Don with helmets, and the author of the Lay mourns that this prince is no longer in the south. Yaroslav Osmomysl supported the Hungarian mountains with his iron regiments, blocked the road for the Hungarian king, opened the gates of Kyiv, and shot at the Saltans beyond the lands.
The concept of hyperbole can be applied to “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” only with great limitations. The impression of hyperbole is achieved in the Lay by the fact that the exploits of his squad are transferred to one or another prince. So, for example, Vsevolod the “buy tur” shoots arrows at his enemies, rattles his kharaluzhny swords on their helmets; the Ovar helmets were “scratched” by his red-hot sabers. Of course, arrows, swords and sabers are not Vsevolod’s personal ones. The author of the Lay says here that Vsevolod shoots at his enemies with the arrows of his squad, fights with their swords and sabers. We see the same transfer of the exploits of the squad to the prince in other cases. Svyatoslav of Kiev “pulled away” the treachery of the Polovtsians “with his strong plakas and haraluzhny swords”; Vsevolod of Suzdal can “pour the Don with helmets” - of course, not with his one helmet, but with many helmets of his army.
A very special group is made up of the female images of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”: all of them are covered with the thought of peace, of family, of home, imbued with tenderness and affection, a brightly folk principle; they embody the sadness and care of the Motherland for its soldiers. In the author's ideological plan, these female images occupy a very important place.
The wives of Russian soldiers, after the defeat of Igor's troops, cry for their fallen husbands. Their cry, full of tenderness and boundless sadness, has a deeply folk character: “We can no longer comprehend our dear ones in our thoughts, nor in our minds, nor in our eyes.” The cry of Yaroslavna, Igor’s young wife, has the same folk-song character. It is remarkable that Yaroslavna mourns not only the captivity of her husband - she mourns for all the fallen Russian soldiers: “Oh wind, sail! What, sir, are you forcing? Why are the Khinov arrows mowing on their easy wings in my own way?.. A bright and bright sun! You are warm and red to everyone: why, sir, do you spread your hot ray on your way?”
The contrast between war and peace, embodied in the image of Russian women, is especially vivid in the lyrical appeal of the author of the Lay to Vsevolod, “bui tur.” In the midst of the battle, Vsevolod does not feel his wounds; he has forgotten honor and life and his sweet, beloved “Red Glebovna’s habits and customs.” It is characteristic that not a single translator of the Lay could satisfactorily translate the excellent and, in essence, well-understood expression: “custom and custom.”
So, the images of Russian princes, the female images of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” are not given on their own - they serve the author’s ideas, serve the goals of the same call for unity. Before us and here, “The Lay” appears as an exceptionally purposeful work. The hand of the artist - the author of the Lay - was guided by political thought, a passionate thought, full of ardent love for the Motherland.<...>
“The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” and Russian folk poetry
If we take a closer look at the artistic means used by the author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign,” we will be convinced that he mainly draws them from oral folk poetry and from oral Russian speech. And this is far from accidental. He is connected with folk poetry not only by his artistic tastes, but also by his worldview and political views. The author of “The Lay” creates in the forms of folk poetry because he himself is close to the people.
The folk images of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” are closely related to his folk ideals. The artistic side and the ideological side are inseparable from each other in The Lay. Here, for example, is the usual comparison of battle with harvest in the Lay: under Oleg Gorislavich, the Russian land is “sown and stretched by strife”; in Igor’s battle with the Polovtsians, “the black earth was sown with bones under the hooves, and the clearing was cleared with blood”; about the battle of Vseslav on the Nemiga River it is said: “On the Nemiza they lay sheaves with their heads, thresh their chains with haraluzhny, they lay their souls on the belly and winnow the soul from the tavla. Nemiza bloody breze, don’t sow with a bolog - sow with the bones of Russian sons.” These comparisons were very frequent in oral folk poetry. They are also found later - in recordings of Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian songs made in the 18th and 19th centuries. In old soldier and Cossack songs we find the following lines:
New arable land has been sown
Soldiers' heads.
New arable land watered
Hot soldier's blood.
Or:
The field was not plowed with plows,
And the field is plowed with horse hooves,
The field is sown with non-germinating seeds,
Sown with Cossack heads,
The field is covered with Cossack black curls.
Or:
Chorna rola [arable land] zaorana,
The bushes are covered with
Bilim is dragged by tilom,
I'm drained of blood.
It is remarkable, however, that this comparison of the battlefield with arable land in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” and in folk poetry has a deep ideological meaning. This is not even a comparison, but a contrast: in the Lay and in folk poetry, war is contrasted with peaceful labor, destruction with creation, death with life (in Old Russian “life” is not only “existence”, but also wealth, the fruits of agriculture labor, “living”).
The images of peaceful labor that permeate the entire “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” as a whole make this work the apotheosis of peace. “Slovo” calls for a fight against the Polovtsians, first of all, in the name of protecting peaceful labor.
The opposition of peace to war permeates other parts of The Tale of Igor's Campaign. The author of the Lay refers to the image of a feast as the apotheosis of peaceful labor: “there is not enough bloody wine; The brave Russians finished that feast: they hunted matchmakers, and they themselves fought for the Russian land.” With striking specificity, contrasting the Russians with their enemies, he calls the latter matchmakers: Igor Svyatoslavich was indeed Konchak’s matchmaker (Konchak’s daughter was engaged to Igor’s son, Vladimir). It follows that the image of the feast-battle was not simply borrowed from folk poetry, where it is common, but skillfully interpreted. The same purpose of contrasting peace with war is served by the female images of “The Lay”: Yaroslavna and the red Glebovna.
There are also other signs of its close connection with oral folk poetry in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”: negative metaphors (“Nemize of the bloody Breze do not sow with the bolog - sow with the bones of Russian sons”), some typically folk epithets (open field, gray wolves, sharp swords, blue sea, red-hot arrows, greyhound horses, black raven, red maidens and many others). Lamentations (the lament of Yaroslavna, the lament of Russian wives) and glorifications are given in the “Word” (“The Word” consists of “glory” to the Russian princes).
We have already said above that this connection between the author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” and folk poetry was not accidental. The author of the Lay took his independent patriotic position, which was close in spirit to broad sections of the working population of Rus'. His work is an ardent call for the unity of Rus' in the face of external danger, a call to protect the peaceful, creative labor of the Russian people. That is why the artistic and poetic system of the Lay is closely connected with Russian folk art.
Rhythm of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”
More than once attempts have been made to decompose the text of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” into verses, to find one or another poetic meter in the “Tale”. However, all these attempts led to nothing, since the “Lay”, of course, was not written according to the laws of modern versification. It is rhythmic, but its rhythmic system is deeply original, belongs to its time - the 12th century - and cannot be decomposed into contemporary poetic meters.
The rhythm of the “Word” is mainly associated with the syntactic construction of phrases and is inseparable from the meaning and content of the text.
The alarming rhythm of short syntactic-semantic units perfectly conveys Igor’s excitement before fleeing:
Igor is sleeping,
Igor is vigilant,
Igor measures the fields with his thoughts.
A different rhythm - the rhythm of the large, free breathing of the people's crying - is felt in Yaroslavna's appeals to the sun, to the wind, to the Dnieper:
About the Dnieper Slovutytsia!
You have broken through stone mountains through the Polovtsian land.
You cherished Svyatoslav's plantings on yourself
to Kobyakov's cry.
Cherish, sir, my kindness towards me,
But I wouldn’t have sent the sea of tears to him early.
The cheerful and energetic rhythm of the rushing army is felt in the description of Vsevolod’s mark - “buoy of the tour”:
...hang under the pipes,
Cherished under the helmets,
the end is a copy of the story,
lead them the way,
we know the yarugi,
They're tense,
open the Tuli,
sharpened sabers;
gallop like gray people into the field,
seek honor for yourself, and glory for the prince.
The triumph of the Russian victory over the Polovtsians is perfectly conveyed by an energetic phrase, devoid of a predicate and therefore giving the impression of a joyful exclamation-cry:
Cherlen banner,
Bela Khoryugov,
scarlet stockings,
silvered shavings -
brave Svyatoslavich!
The rhythmicity of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” is closely connected with its entire composition. The entire structure of the “Word” as a whole is rhythmic. Rhythmic, uniform transitions from one topic to another. The lyrical digressions and repeated lyrical exclamations evenly distributed in the Lay are rhythmic. The exclamation is repeated twice in the Lay: “O Russian land! You are already behind the helmet!” The exclamation was repeated twice: “Don’t baptize the brave Igor!” The call was repeated three times: “For the Russian land, for the wounds of Igor, dear Svyatoslavich!” Yaroslavna’s identically structured appeals to the wind, to the Dnieper and to the sun are rhythmically repeated. Calls to the Russian princes rhythmically replace each other: to Vsevolod, to Rurik and Davyd, to Yaroslav Osmomysl. The rhythm of speech is emphasized by the same beginnings of phrases:
* * *
Retko Rataeve kicks,
often lie and lie.
* * *
When Igor flies as a falcon,
then Vlur began to flow.
These contrasts are inseparable from the main content of the Lay and correspond to its ideological concept.
So, the flexible rhythm of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” is subordinate to the content. The rhythm of the “Word” changes, closely following the meaning and content of the work. In this exact correspondence of rhythmic form and ideological content, the “Words” are one of the most important foundations for the unique musicality of his language.
Who was the author of The Tale of Igor's Campaign?
The author of the Lay could have been close to Igor Svyatoslavich: he sympathizes with him. He could also be close to Svyatoslav of Kyiv: he sympathizes with him too. He could be a Chernigov resident or a Kyivian resident. He could have been a vigilante: he constantly uses vigilante concepts. He was undoubtedly a book-educated man and, in terms of his social status, hardly belonged to the exploited class of the population. However, in his political views he was neither a “courtier”, nor a warrior, nor a defender of local interests, nor an ideologist of princes, boyars or clergy. Wherever the “Word” was created - in Kyiv, Chernigov, Galich, Polotsk or Novgorod-Seversky - it did not embody any local features. The author of the Lay was alien to local interests and close to the interests of broad sections of the Russian working population, who everywhere strived for the unity of Rus', although he himself was probably neither a peasant nor an artisan, but most likely belonged to the vigilantes.<...>
Discovery of "The Tale of Igor's Host", its publication and study
One of the copies of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign,” apparently dating back to the 16th century, was found in the early 90s of the 18th century by the famous lover and collector of Russian antiquities A.I. Musin-Pushkin. The text of “The Lay” was in a collection of ancient Russian works of secular content. This collection was acquired by A.I. Musin-Pushkin through his commission agent, among other manuscripts from the Spaso-Yaroslavl Monastery. The first, very brief, message about the “Word” was made by the famous poet of that time, Kheraskov, in 1797 in the second edition of his poem “Vladimir”. Then Karamzin reported on the “Word” in somewhat more detail in the October 1797 book of the journal “Spectateur du Nord” (“Northern Review”, French), published by French emigrants in Hamburg. Copies were made of the manuscript of the Lay; one of them, intended for Catherine II, has reached us. In 1800, “The Lay” was published by Musin-Pushkin in collaboration with his learned friends: A.F. Malinovsky, N.N. Bantysh-Kamensky and historian N.M. Karamzin - three of the best experts on ancient Russian manuscripts at that time. In 1812, the collection, which included “The Lay of Igor’s Campaign,” burned down during the Moscow fire. Most of the copies of the first edition of the Lay also burned.
A comparison of Catherine’s copy and the 1800 edition clearly shows how much was initially misunderstood in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” due to ignorance in the history of the Russian language, natural for the end of the 18th century, or the inability to read ancient manuscripts. What now seems simple and clear to us in the Lay was not “recognized” by its first publishers. They introduced their own errors into the text of the Lay, already spoiled by scribes of the 12th–16th centuries, and in some places failed to read it correctly. But these same mistakes of the publishers also testify to their conscientiousness: they preferred to leave the text “dark” rather than arbitrarily “clarify” it.
An obvious misunderstanding of the text of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” is noticeable in many places in the first edition, where the words of the text are incorrectly divided or merged (in the original, according to A.I. Musin-Pushkin, the words were written in a continuous line, as was customary in the 16th century century). So, for example, in the first edition of the Lay it was printed separately “by jumping” instead of “by jumping”, “locking in the Danube” instead of “having closed the Danube”, “having a husband” instead of “having a husband”, etc. The first publishers of the Lay sometimes wrote words they did not understand in capital letters, implying proper names in them. This is how it turned out: the village in the Pereyaslav region “Shelomyanem”, while we know that “shelomya” is a hill, “Koshchey” is supposedly the proper name of the Polovtsian, while “koschey” is an old Russian word meaning “slave” , etc. Finally, the first publishers of the Lay left without translation at all such a clear passage for us as: “the path of the great Christ was crossed” - “he crossed the path of the god Khors like a wolf,” that is, “kept up before the sunrise.”
The ideas of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” were not understood; Nor did they find understanding of all the typically Russian features of the form of the “Lay” - the correspondence with folk poetry, chronicles, and works of ancient Russian literature.
Subsequently, many historical details in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” were explained; many phenomena of the language of the “Word” that seemed incomprehensible at the end of the 18th – beginning of the 19th centuries became clear; parallels to the images and phraseology of the “Word” were discovered in folk poetry and in many book works of the 11th–13th centuries that remained previously unknown.
“The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” has been studied by literary scholars, poets, linguists and historians. “The Word” was handled by Pushkin, who left us drafts of his preparatory work for its translation. “The Lay” was translated by V. Zhukovsky, A. Maikov, L. Mei and many other Russian poets of the 19th century.
There was not a single major Russian philologist who did not write about “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign.” In total, there are more than seven hundred works on the “Word” in the research literature. It has been translated into all Slavic and most Western European languages. Expensive, superbly executed and carefully annotated editions of “The Tale” published in Slavic countries testify to the intense interest in “The Tale of Igor’s Host” among our brotherly peoples.
Numerous translations of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” into the languages of many peoples, publications and studies of “The Tale” made in recent years speak of popular love for this wonderful patriotic work of Russian literature.
The text of the article is based on the book: The Lay of Igor’s Campaign. – M.: Children’s Literature, 1970, p. 5–38.
