The Tale of Peter and Fevronia (original plot). Children "childless thing"
Life of Mikhail Klopsky. Like the note about last days Paphnutius, the Novgorod “Life of Mikhail Klopsky” was written in the 70s, but in its nature and origin it differs significantly from Innocent’s note. This is by no means an eyewitness account, but a detailed hagiographical narrative about the life and miracles of the Novgorod holy fool, who sympathized with the Moscow princes (it was this circumstance that contributed to the preservation of the Life in all-Russian writing after the annexation of Novgorod). The creator of the Life of Michael undoubtedly relied on certain literary traditions, folklore (or based on folklore) rather than hagiographic.
Unusual for hagiographic literature was already the very beginning of the Life: it began not with a story about the birth and upbringing of a saint, like most lives, but with a description of the unexpected and mysterious appearance not named after the hero in the Klop Monastery. Before us is a kind of “closed” plot, causing bewilderment and natural curiosity of the reader.
At night after the service, a certain priest appeared in his cell in the monastery and saw that in the cell an unknown “elder was sitting on a chair, and a light was burning in front of him.” The astonished priest backed away and brought abbot Theodosius, but the cell was locked. Looking through the window, the abbot greeted the stranger with prayer; the stranger answered with the same prayer, this was repeated three times. “Who are you, are you a man or a demon? What is your name? – the abbot asked after this. “Are you a man or a demon? What is your name? – the stranger repeated the same question. The abbot asked a second time: “Are you a man or a demon?”; the stranger also asked: “Are you a man or a demon?”; the same thing happened a third time. Having broken open the door to the cell, the abbot began to burn incense; the elder closed himself from the censer, but made the sign of the cross. However, he did not want to give his name and when asked “How did you come to us and where are you from?” answered again with the same question. The secret of his origin was revealed later, when Prince Constantine, who arrived at the monastery, told the monks that the stranger was a noble man, a “fellow” (relative) of the prince. The story goes on to tell how Mikhail Klopsky, who became a monk, recognized robbers in the people who came to the monastery, deprived the priest who stole the panagia of his mind, and predicted paralysis for the mayor who offended the monastery fishermen.
Mikhail Klopsky was a holy fool, and this largely justified the eccentric nature of the stories about him. This feature of the Life connects the “Life of Michael” with secular literature of a nature that we will talk about in the future - for example, with the tales of Solomon and Kitovras, where the “wonderful beast” Kitovras, like Mikhail, “sees through” the present and future of his interlocutors and hides deep wisdom behind external eccentricity.
The Tale of Peter and Fevronia (original plot). Wisdom central character, revealing itself unexpectedly to those around him, is also characteristic of another monument of hagiographic literature, which was originally formed, apparently, in the same period - “The Tale of Peter and Fevronia.” One of the most outstanding monuments Old Russian hagiography and literature in general, “The Tale of Peter and Fevronia,” like “The Life of Mikhail Klopsky,” arose from local material (Peter and Fevronia were saints of the Murom principality), but acquired a nationwide literary distribution.
The question of the origin of “The Tale of Peter and Fevronia” is complex and has caused controversy in scientific literature. At present, it can apparently be considered established that the written text of the Tale that has reached us dates back to no earlier than the middle of the 16th century. and was created by the writer-publicist of this era Ermolai-Erasmus. However, already in the 15th century. existed church service Peter and Fevronia, where the main motives of the story were mentioned - Peter's victory over the serpent, his marriage to Fevronia and their joint burial. It is quite possible, therefore, that Ermolai, like other medieval hagiographers, subjected the already existing hagiographic story to stylistic processing. We will turn to the story of Ermolai-Erasmus later; For now, let’s outline the main plot of the life.
The plot of the life of Peter and Fevronia is not like most hagiographic stories. Here there is neither suffering for the faith, nor the martyrdom of the heroes, confirming their holiness. The heroes of the story have very little connection with history; attempts to establish them historical prototypes doubtful; for the XV–XVI centuries. these heroes, in any case, were characters of the distant past. In the center of the story is the peasant girl Fevronia, who agreed to heal Prince Peter, who fell ill from the snake blood that spilled on him. As a reward for this, Fevronia demands that the prince marry her. At the beginning, Peter tries to “tempt” Fevronia: while washing in the bathhouse before being cured, he sends Fevronia a piece of flax and demands that she weave “srachitsa and ports and ubrusets” out of it. But Fevronia acts as befits a folk cunning person who is being fooled (cf., for example, Akira at the court of the Egyptian king): she responds with absurdity to absurdity, agreeing to fulfill Peter’s request on the condition that the prince prepares a loom for her from a sliver of wood. The healed prince’s attempt to simply break his promise ends just as unsuccessfully: Fevronia prudently ordered to smear all his ulcers (received from snake blood), except one, and Peter’s treachery leads to the fact that from “that scab many scabs began to disperse on his body”; For a final cure, Peter has to fulfill his promise. After the death of his brother, Peter takes the throne of the Murom principality. When the rebellious boyars decide to expel the peasant princess from Murom, she agrees to leave if she is allowed to take with her what she asks. The boyars agree, and the princess asks “only for my husband, Prince Peter.” Peter follows her. In the end, Peter and Fevronia safely “rule” in Murom; after the “death of the bath” (simultaneous death) and separate burial, they nevertheless find themselves reunited “in a single tomb.”
The connection of “The Tale of Peter and Fevronia” with oral folk art and the reflection of “world” folklore motifs in it are very significant and have been repeatedly noted in the scientific literature. However existing records tales and legends about these saints are late (not earlier late XIX century) and were already formed under the influence of the written hagiographic tradition (although, perhaps, they also include genuine folklore motives). The plot of the Tale combines two main fairy tale plot – fairy tale about fighting with a snake and a short story about a wise peasant girl who marries a noble man and undergoes difficult trials. The hero of the life, Peter, falls ill after defeating the snake; Fevronia cures him of ulcers. This plot brings the Tale closer to the Celtic legend and the medieval Western novel about Tristan and Isolde: like Fevronia, Isolde heals Tristan, who fell ill from the blood of the dragon; The theme of the reunion of the heroes after death also coincides with “Tristan and Isolde” (in the Tale the heroes miraculously find themselves in a single coffin; in the legend of Tristan, a thorn bush grows from his grave, connecting it with Isolde’s grave). Plot Combination unequal marriage a peasant woman and a noble man with the motive of healing the groom is not typical for the Russian fairy tales known to us, but the same combination is inherent in Boccaccio’s short story about Gillette of Narbonne (“Decameron”, day 3, short story 9) and Shakespeare’s comedy “All’s well that ends well”, – probably such a contaminated plot also existed in Russian folklore of the 15th century.
The plot of the life of Peter and Fevronia, therefore, belongs to the number of the most popular plots of world literature. To its specific development in Old Russian writing we will address in further presentation, in connection with the development of narrative literature XVI V.
The Tale of Peter Ordynsky. Close to “The Tale of Peter and Fevronia” is another hagiographic story - about Peter, Tsarevich of Ordyn. And here at the center of the story is the legendary, not historical character, and there is no theme of martyrdom and suffering for the faith. The hero of the Life is the pious Tatar prince Peter, to whom the apostles Peter and Paul appeared in a dream, gave him two bags of gold and ordered him to build a temple with this money. To build a temple, Peter needs permission from the local Rostov prince, but the prince treats Peter’s request without much sympathy. The figure of this prince is generally quite unique. He's not a villain at all - rather positive character, but at the same time a calculating politician, clearly making fun of the pious prince: “The Lord will build a church for you, but I won’t give you a place. What will you do? Peter, referring to the command of the apostles, humbly agrees to buy from the prince, “so far as your grace separates you from this land.” Hearing these words and seeing the bags in Peter’s hands, the prince decides to himself to benefit from the “horror” of Peter and the bishop (archbishop), shocked by the miracle: “You have a lot to separate from the horror of the ruler, the apostle from the saints” (p. 101). There is an obvious play here with the word “excommunicate”, which in the first case has a modestly pious meaning, and in the second - an openly cynical meaning. The prince demands so many gold coins for the land for the temple that they can be used to cover the entire plot ceded to Peter. Peter agrees, acquires a plot with a lake located on it, digs it in with a ditch and lays out so much money along the borders of his plot (taking it out of magic bags), that they fill the carts and chariots sent by the prince. After the construction of the temple, Peter plans to return to his Horde, but the prince persuades him to marry in Rostov land. And again, the motives for the prince’s behavior are frankly practical: “If this man, the royal tribe [a relative of the khan], goes to the Horde, and he will be a spontaneous for our city... Peter, do you want us to take your bride for you?” (p. 102). After the death of Peter “in the depths of old age,” a monastery was built on the land given to him by the prince.
The rest of the Life is devoted to the fate of this monastery and the descendants of Peter of Ordyn and disputes between the monastery and the city of Rostov over the lake located on the monastery land. Like the story about Peter's purchase of the princely land, this story clearly has folklore character. The dispute about the lake begins with a peculiar competition between city (Rostov) and monastery (Petrovsky) fish catchers: “With their fisherman, I catch fish more than the city fishermen. Even if, while playing, Peter’s fishermen cast in the net, then I would catch a lot of fish, but the city’s fishermen, who worked hard, would become impoverished” (p. 103). Offended by their “fishers,” the descendants of the prince who gave the charter to Peter decide to deprive Peter’s descendants (owners of the monastery land) of the right to fish, citing the fact that their ancestor ceded the land to Peter, but not the lake. The resolution of this dispute again turns out to be typically folklore, and in the role fair judge The ambassador of the Tatar king speaks. He asks the Rostov princes if they can remove water from the land given to Peter. “Our water is our fatherland, sir, but we cannot remove it, sir,” the princes answer. “If you can’t remove water from the earth, why do you call it yours? And this creation is God on high for the service of all mankind,” the ambassador decides (p. 104).
Hagiography, as we see, did not remain aloof from new trends in Russian literature of that time. With many of its features, the life-story of the 15th century. echoed the secular story - a genre that became most widespread in the second half of the 15th century.
4. Stories
Of all the genres of ancient Russian literature, the story was undoubtedly most closely connected with the literature of subsequent times. The word "story" in the Old Russian language had more broad meaning than in modern language - this term sometimes denoted extensive works of a consolidated nature (for example, “The Tale of Bygone Years” - a chronicle already known to us from the beginning of the 12th century); but most often Old Russian story– this is separate literary monument, not included in larger codes and not having a clearly designated secular or ecclesiastical purpose.
In the 15th century collections of mixed composition, including stories, are becoming widespread; one might think that it was during this period that secular monuments of this nature, known before, began to penetrate quite widely into writing. In particular, the oldest lists of translated monuments known to us, which apparently penetrated into Russian writing in previous centuries, date back to this period: for example, “The Tale of Akira the Wise” and “The Tale of the Indian Kingdom.” Some of the hagiographic monuments that we mentioned above, such as the life of Peter and Fevronia or Peter, Tsarevich of Ordyn, also belonged to the genre of the story.
Serbian "Alexandria". Among the translated stories of this time, the first to be mentioned is the so-called Serbian “Alexandria” - a novel about the life and adventures of Alexander the Great. This novel appeared in Rus' in the 15th century. and became more popular than the chronographic “Alexandria” (part of the “Hellenic Chronicler”, see earlier, p. 195); inserts from the Serbian “Alexandria” supplemented the text of the story about Alexander in the “Russian Chronograph” of the late 15th century.
The oldest Russian copy of the Serbian “Alexandria” was rewritten by the hand of the Kirillo-Belozersky monk Efrosin, already known to us; he also owns the oldest known manuscripts of “Tales of the Indian Kingdom”, “Zadonshchina” and some other monuments.
The oldest Russian list of the Serbian “Alexandria” is at the same time the only Russian list of the 15th–16th centuries. All the rest, of which there are quite a lot (about two hundred), date back to a later time, to the 17th and 18th centuries. Nevertheless, a comparison of these lists with each other and with South Slavic texts allows us to conclude that in the 15th century. Efrosin's list was not the only one. The list of “Alexandria” that originally appeared in Rus' had a number of features: for the most part, these were omissions in the text, which are one way or another characteristic of all Russian texts of the monument. Much was incomprehensible to Russian scribes, as can be seen from the errors and changes found in later manuscripts. If this all-Russian protograph was close to the South Slavic texts, then the text in Efrosin’s collection is already a slightly modified text. The scribe who created it tried, as far as possible, to make the text meaningful, without obvious gaps and spoiled places; in some cases he misinterpreted what he probably did not understand. But in any case, he did not copy the original lying in front of him, but tried to improve it. It was not Efrosin who did this, which is evident from the fact that there is an omission in his list that is not in other texts that go back to the same type of Russian lists. Since a significant part of the texts of the 17th–18th centuries. goes back not to this alteration, but to the original that underlay it (the all-Russian protograph), then, consequently, in the 15th century. in Rus' there were several Russian lists of the Serbian “Alexandria”.
The Serbian “Alexandria”, which developed in the 13th–14th centuries, apparently went back to the Middle Greek original, but it penetrated into Rus' in the South Slavic (Serbian) version (the Serbian “Alexandria” also shows some Latin influences: it is possible that its South Slavic original originated in Dalmatia, closely connected with neighboring Italian lands). The Serbian “Alexandria” differed from the chronographic one in a number of significant features. Alexander was credited here with the conquest of Rome and Jerusalem, interest in heroes Trojan War and at the same time monotheism and friendly relations with biblical prophet Jeremiah. Romantic features were also significantly enhanced in the Serbian “Alexandria”; An important place was occupied here by the theme (completely unknown to all other legends about Alexander) of love between Alexander and Roxana: Alexander tells his mother that it was this “female love” that “shot” his heart that prompted him to think for the first time about his “family”; when he dies, treacherously poisoned, Roxana mourns her “Macedonian sun” and stabs herself over her husband’s coffin. The adventurous nature of the Serbian “Alexandria” is especially striking in its Russian copies, where the entire second part (after the victory over Darius) is divided into separate chapters, each of which tells about some new amazing adventure of Alexander and new miracles seen by him: “ The legend about the marvelous cattle and the humanoid beasts, and about the marvelous women, and about the monsters...", "About the marvelous people, every person has 6 arms and 6 legs, and about the dog-headed people, and about the races...", "About the lake, make dead fish alive, and about men - a horse from the waist up, and about a mountain man - they will become gigantic, and about the sunny city and about one-legged people...", "how Alexander frightened lions and elephants with cunning...", etc.
In the novel, Alexander constantly puts himself in the most difficult situations, boldly plays with his fate, “puts his head back,” as his commanders put it. He dresses up in the clothes of his subjects, acting either as one of his associates or as own ambassador. His behavior is especially daring when he appears to Darius under the guise of a Macedonian ambassador, and then flees from royal palace with the help of a magic ring that makes him invisible. This motive, however, is complicated by another that clearly contradicts it: drinking the cups of wine presented to him under the guise of an ambassador, Alexander then hides them “in his own depths.” The Persian nobles are surprised at this, but the ambassador assures that this is the custom at his master’s court. When Alexander hastily leaves the Persian palace, he uses the hidden cups, handing them to the “goalkeepers” as a kind of pass, and at the same time a magic ring (it remains unclear whether the Persian “goalkeepers” see the person handing them the cups - p. 33 –35, p. 240, note 117).
Plot twists and turns of "Alexandria" unexpected turns in the fate of the hero served not only to enhance the entertaining nature of the story. They made the content of the story more convincing to the reader. Not yet knowing the upcoming outcome of Alexander’s desperate adventures, the reader of “Alexandria” experienced these adventures, worried and rejoiced when they ended safely. Such plot tension unusually enhanced the effectiveness of the narrative, and it also made the constantly recurring motif in the novel of the frailty and fragility of human achievements much more acute and profound. The successes achieved with such difficulty and risk ultimately led to nothing: early death was predicted for the hero from birth, and he could not avoid it. “About Alexander, the wisest of men,” asks Darius in the cave of the dead, “and are you condemned to be with us?” The thought of death did not leave Alexander even in the midst of his most cheerful adventures: “Alexander was saddened, and if death were to be announced to him, every man preaches his death, joy is replaced by pity,” - this is how one of the chapters of the novel unexpectedly ends, telling about how Alexander laughed when he caught the one-legged people. And at the end of the novel, the prophet Jeremiah, appearing to Alexander in a dream, informed him of his imminent death, and the commander held a farewell review of his troops (pp. 47–48, 62–64).
The plot twists and turns of “Alexandria” helped readers of Ancient Rus' to believe in the reality of the events that took place in the story. But in drawing its heroes, depicting their actions and conveying direct speech, “Alexandria,” like many other ancient Russian stories, most often followed the usual traditions of church and other “business” writing. The life of the “virtuous husband Alexander” was described here in the same words as the lives of saints or heroes of historical narrative were described.
Drawing the emotions of its characters, “Alexandria” largely followed those characteristic of the literature of the 14th–15th centuries. (and especially literature that reflected the so-called second South Slavic influence) to the techniques of “expressive-emotional style.” Both Alexander himself and the other heroes of the novel did not skimp on expressing their feelings, exclaimed a lot, shed tears and kissed each other. Having learned about Alexander’s entry into Babylon, Darius was “filled with great pity,” then hearing about the Indian king’s troops coming to the aid, he “came from great sorrow to small joy,” but when he saw Alexander going out to fight, “he was terrified, leaving everything, rush to run” (p. 31, 36, 37). The Persian king remained just as emotional even after complete defeat, when the unfaithful Persians, piercing the king with swords and “stakes,” abandoned him on the road. The “verbs” of Darius, addressed to the passing Macedonian king, brought Alexander into emotion; Together with other Macedonians, he took the Persian king on his shoulders and carried him to the palace, where an even more pathetic scene took place. Darius, “crying a lot,” handed over his daughter Roxana to Alexander; Alexander kissed her, and the mortally wounded king became “joyful” and, not forgetting to ask Alexander to take revenge on the murderers, died (pp. 37–38). All this expression reaches its peak in the final scenes of the novel, describing tragic death the insidiously poisoned Alexander and the suicide of his faithful wife Roxana.
While willingly noting and even exaggerating the sensitivity of its characters, Alexandria, however, invariably confines itself to only external manifestations of feelings. Behind the cries and kisses of “Alexandria” it is almost impossible to guess the inner movements of the souls of the heroes, their psychology and characters. This property is typical for other monuments of the “expressive-emotional style”, where, as D.S. Likhachev noted, “feelings, individual states human soul are not yet combined into characters,” and “manifestations of psychology do not form psychology.”
The speeches of the heroes usually turn out to be just as cliched in Alexandria. The lengthy oratory of Darius, Alexander and other characters does not reflect them in any way emotional state: they are as conventional as the speeches of heroes in military and historical stories. The fact that Darius, found by Alexander barely alive, delivers his speech “breathing little” does not in any way diminish its length and grandiloquence: “I am Darius the king, raise his temporary charm to heaven and reduce his non-statutory honor to hell. I am the famous Darei, the king of the world, I am Darei, whom we honor from many thousands of people, and now I myself am lying prostrate on the ground. And you, Alexandre, you were a self-witness to me, you died from colic of glory and the death I am dying, you too, Alexandre, will fear the same death” (p. 37). Alexander himself is no less eloquent. Having learned in a dream from Jeremiah the prophet about his near death, he was “terrible” and “crying bitterly,” but immediately burst into lengthy praises of hosts: “Glory to you, glory to you, wonderful, incomprehensible, indescribable, unsearchable God, who brought everything from non-existence into existence” (pp. 62–63) . Among the celebrations on the occasion of the arrival of the Olympiad, Alexander (in fulfillment of the prediction of imminent death) is poisoned by his cupbearer Vrinush: the king becomes “cold” and begins to “tremble”, but this does not stop his eloquence. Alexander mourns the frailty of the world, addresses individual speeches to his generals, to Roxana, to the villain Vrinush and, finally, to all kings and nobles (pp. 69–70).
The monologues of “Alexandria” are quite conventional and do not reflect psychology in any way characters. However, the situation is different with the dialogues of the novel and, in general, with all remarks directly related to the actions of the heroes.
The strength of Alexandria was its plot, and direct speech in the novel turned out to be expressive precisely in those cases when it was connected with the plot. Where the word of the heroes of Alexandria became action, it immediately acquired human intonations.
“Take this cup, hold it! The king grants the ambassador the guards to confirm me,” Alexander says to the Persian goalkeepers, handing them the cups hidden during the feast and deceivingly leaving the palace (p. 35).
“... when you acquire all the land, then you will inherit hell,” the leader of the naked sages of the Rakhmans, Ivan, predicted to Alexander, greeting the king. “Why do we say this word?” – Alexander asked fearfully. “It is not proper for a veleum to interpret,” answered Ivant. The further dialogue between the king and the Rahmans was also brief and expressive, when Alexander offered to give them something that was not in their land. “Give us, Tsar Alexandra, immortality, we are dying!” - the Rahmans exclaimed. “I am not immortal, what kind of immortality will I give you?” – Alexander answered. “Go in peace, Alexandra, go all the way to the earth, and then go to the nude yourself,” Ivan remarked again, saying goodbye to Alexander (pp. 44–46). Just as laconic was Alexander’s answer to Porus, who reminded his conqueror in the cave of the dead that he too would someday be “brought” into this cave: “Be sad dead, not alive,” Alexander answered the Indian king (p. 58) . And even in last chapter the novel, abundant in long speeches, the most powerful was the short remark of Alexander, receiving the last parade of his victorious troops: “If you look at all of these, they will all go underground!” (p. 64).
Trojan tales. "Alexandria" was not the only one in ancient Russian literature a monument that ultimately goes back to ancient tradition. End of the 15th – beginning of the 16th centuries. - the time of penetration of several detailed tales about the Trojan War into Rus' (until the 15th century it was known only short story about the conquest of Troy from the Chronicle of John Malala). Along with the “Tale of the Ruin of Troy,” which was included in the “Russian Chronograph,” the extensive “Trojan History” by Guido de Columna, compiled at the end of the 13th century, was translated in Rus' during this period (from the Latin original). This was not only a description of the Trojan War, but also a whole set of epic legends of antiquity. It told about the journey of the Argonauts for the Golden Fleece, and about the love of Jason and Medea, and about the first destruction of Troy by the Argonauts, and about the new clash between the Greeks and the Trojans after the abduction of Helen by Paris, and about all the vicissitudes of the war (the love of Achilles and Polyxena, the death of Hector and Achilles, trick with a wooden horse), and about the wanderings of Odysseus (Ulysses). Some episodes of the “Trojan History” revealed a more developed psychologism than the Serbian “Alexandria” (for example, the description of the love languor of Medea, waiting for a meeting with Jason), but in general, the “Trojan History” turned out to be a huge monument in size with inconsistent in separate parts; it was deprived of the plot sequence (the theme of the inevitable death of the main character) that is characteristic of the novels about Alexander. It is not for nothing that the original edition, which was a literal translation of the history of Guido de Columna, then underwent alteration and was supplanted by more original short editions.[
Poisonous snake bites are deadly, but there are people who by example prove that every rule has exceptions. American Bill Haast became famous for opening his own serpentarium in Miami, where he kept rattlesnakes. He suffered more than 170 bites from his charges during his life, but died at the age of 100.
The Haast Serpentarium is perhaps the most famous attraction in Florida. Every year, more than 50 thousand tourists visited Haast’s performances; they looked with bated breath as the serpentologist took his charges with his bare hands, without fear of bites, and began to milk them.
Over the years, Haast has tried to prove that by developing an immunity to snake venom and using it as medicine, one can be cured of various diseases, including multiple sclerosis and lupus, arthritis and Parkinson's disease. Haast proposed using a “cocktail” of venom from five snakes - cobra, water snake, krait, mamba and rattlesnake. Needless to say, such experiments would not be approved by any government agency.
To develop immunity, Bill Haast regularly took injections containing snake venom, gradually increasing the dose. Bill had been working with snakes all his adult life, so milking them was a common thing. He began collecting snakes at the age of 16, as soon as he graduated from school, and by the age of 19 he was already doing it quite professionally. During the war, Bill served in the air force, he visited South America, Africa and India and, taking this opportunity, brought several snakes to America, including his first cobra. In those years, the law did not yet prohibit the transportation of snakes on an airplane, however, the crew members were not at all happy about the proximity of the reptiles.
The Serpentarium was founded in 1947. For the first five years, only Haast’s family was involved in it - himself, his wife and young son. Bill Jr. fell victim to snakes four times and soon completely lost interest in his father's business. Haast himself set a record that was included in the Guinness Book: by mid-2008, he had already received 172 bites. The absence of several fingers on his hands reminded him of this. One of the cobra bites that Haast received in the 1950s turned out to be critical. Then he went to the hospital, they ordered the strongest vaccine from India, but the serpentologist refused to use it and soon recovered.
Haast often acted as a blood donor in cases where it was urgently necessary to save patients from snake bites. In total, about 20 lives were saved thanks to him. In the 1950s, Haast donated blood for researchers at the University of Miami to develop a polio vaccine.
In the Haast Serpentarium, everyone could get up close and personal with snakes. It is worth noting that strict safety rules were introduced after a six-year-old child fell into a pit with a 12-pound crocodile named Cookie in 1977. The incident ended in the death of the child, although before that the crocodile had not tarnished its reputation in any way for 20 years. The incident shocked Haast so much that the next day he shot his pet.
About death Prophetic Oleg The first Russian chroniclers reported from a snake bite: this is stated in the Tale of Bygone Years, as well as in the First Novgorod Chronicle. According to legend, the Magi predicted the prince's death from his own horse. Oleg parted with the animal, and when the horse died, he remembered the prediction and, laughing at the wise men, ordered the remains to be shown to him. Seeing the bones of the horse, Oleg placed his foot on its skull, when a poisonous snake crawled out and fatally stung the prince.
Application
A poem by A.S. gave a second life to the myth about Oleg’s death from a snake bite. Pushkin. The dramatic denouement of the “Song of the Prophetic Oleg”, vividly set out by the poet, formed a stereotype that the death of the prince was exactly like this.
Reality
The legendary nature of the chronicle legend about Oleg’s death was pointed out by a Russian historian of the 19th century. N.M. Karamzin, who called the “imaginary prophecy of the Magi or Magicians” “explicit folk fable worthy of note due to its antiquity."
This is indirectly evidenced by the appearance of a similar plot in the medieval Icelandic epic. Main character saga about the Viking Orvar Odd, compiled in the 13th century based on ancient legends, died from a snake bite on the grave of his own horse - such a death was predicted to him in childhood, when the future Viking was 12 years old, by a witch. To prevent the prediction from coming true, Odd and his friend killed the horse, threw it into a pit, and covered the corpse with stones. It has not yet been possible to establish which story, about Oleg or about Odd, appeared earlier.
Establishing the exact circumstances of the prince’s death has become a difficult task for scientists. While telling in detail how Oleg died, the chronicles do not provide comprehensive answers to other important questions: where exactly Oleg died and where he was buried.
According to the Tale of Bygone Years, his grave is located in Kyiv on Mount Shchekovitsa. The Novgorod Chronicle reports that the prince was buried in Ladoga, but at the same time says that he went “overseas.”
Academician B.A. Rybakov in 1987 combined these two versions and came to the conclusion that the prince most spent his life in Ladoga, for some time owned the Kyiv throne, and after the campaign against Byzantium he disappeared without a trace, falling out of sight of Russian chroniclers.
In 2000, researcher A.A. Vlasov tried to assess the likelihood of Oleg’s death from a snake bite, based on the assumption that the chronicle legend may be true. Having studied the habitat of snakes in the prince’s possible places of stay, he suggested that if Oleg was in the Kyiv area at the time of the events described, he could have suffered from the bites of three types of snakes: the common viper, the steppe viper or the forest-steppe viper.
A.A. Vlasov put forward a hypothesis that a meeting with a steppe viper should have been fatal for Oleg - in his opinion, the prince’s horse was most likely kept in a steppe pasture. Currently, this snake is not found in the Kyiv area, its habitat is much further south, but the climatic conditions of the 10th-12th centuries were different, and the presence of the snake in the possible place of the death of the prince was quite probable, the researcher notes.
This period was dry and warm; forest fires and droughts were often noted in chronicles. The way the vegetation is described in the Tale of Bygone Years was also quite conducive to the presence of these snakes in the region. In addition, marmots were found in those areas at the indicated time, and their habitat almost completely coincides with the boundaries of the range of vipers.
However, even if we assume that all these circumstances really coincided in this way, the prince could have received a fatal snake bite in the leg with a minimal degree of probability. For this, says A.A. Vlasov, it is necessary that the victim be completely without shoes, and the princes at that time, according to archaeological data, wore heavy and thick boots, which a snake could not bite through.
At the same time, even if the viper were somehow able to get to the unprotected parts of Oleg’s body, its bite - despite all possible problems health-wise, it couldn’t have been fatal.
Thus, even under the most fantastic set of circumstances, if the snake bit the prince, this could not in any way cause his death: in this case, Oleg could only die from improper treatment, summarizes A.A. Vlasov.
Toxicology researchers suggest that the most dangerous and often fatal decision in such cases, an attempt is made to apply a tourniquet to a swollen limb after a bite: the victim may develop “tourniquet shock,” poisoning of the body with toxins as a result of prolonged deprivation of blood supply to the affected part of the body.
Sources and literature
Vlasov A.A. What viper bit Prophetic Oleg? // Steppes of Northern Eurasia: Materials II International Symposium, year 2000.
Karamzin N.M. History of Russian Goverment. Volume 1-12. M., 2004.
Rybakov B.A. Paganism ancient Rus'. M., 1987.
One of the founders Old Russian state Prince Oleg, nicknamed for his ability to foresee the future, is considered to be the Prophetic. It is still not completely clear whether he actually existed or is it literary character, combining the features of historical prototypes - Oleg ( Prince of Kyiv, mentioned by the treaty between Rus' and Byzantium from 911 and Oleg, a contemporary of Igor Rurikovich. In addition, the Laurentian Chronicle reports that Oleg died in 912 and was buried in the city of Kyiv on Mount Shchekovitsa. At the same time, according to the New Town Chronicle, this sad event occurred in 922 and Oleg was buried in the city of Ladoga.
But the confusion is connected not only with the life of Prince Oleg, but also with the circumstances of his death.
Prediction of the Magi.
According to the classical legend, the Magi warned Oleg that he would die from his beloved horse. From that moment on, the prince stopped riding him, but ordered him to be fed with selected grain. Four years after the prediction, Oleg, returning from a military campaign, remembered his favorite and wanted to see him. Having learned that the horse had died, Oleg, laughing at the wise men, wanted to see his bones. Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin spoke wonderfully about what happened next:
The prince quietly stepped on the horse's skull
And he said: “Sleep, lonely friend!
Your old master outlived you:
At the funeral feast, already nearby,
It’s not you who will stain the feather grass under the ax
And feed my ashes with hot blood!
So this is where my destruction was hidden!
The bone threatened me with death!”
From dead head grave serpent
Meanwhile, hissing crawled out;
Like a black ribbon wrapped around my legs:
And the suddenly stung prince cried out.
"Song about the prophetic Oleg"
There is no doubt that the legend is beautiful and instructive, in the sense that one must obey the Magi, but, at the same time, it is completely unreliable.
And the point is not even that snakes do not have the habit of stinging with their sharp sting forked at the end (this is a fallacy), as Pushkin wrote, but simply and without any pretense they bite with poisonous teeth. And the point is not that in order for a snake to bite a person, the latter still needs to try. And it’s not that it’s unclear why Oleg needed to step on the horse’s skull with his foot? Some strange expression of respect for an old battle friend.
Parting.
But let's say everything was exactly like that. And the prince was still bitten by a snake. It is logical to assume that it was a viper, since neither the cobra, nor the epha, nor the rattlesnake, nor the deadliest snake in the world, the black mamba, are found in our area. And here new questions arise. It is completely incomprehensible how an ordinary viper could miraculously bite through a boot made of rough leather? But even if this did happen, then why did Oleg die? The bite of vipers is fatal to pregnant women and children, but not to a healthy and strong warrior like the prince.
It is interesting that there is an Icelandic saga very strongly reminiscent of the myth about the death of the Prophetic Oleg. In it we're talking about about the Viking Orvar Odd. The sorceress predicted his death by horse, for which he was beaten until he bled. To prevent the prediction from coming true, Odd and his friend Asmund killed the horse, threw the corpse into a hole and covered it with stones. The saga goes on to tell of Odd's death:
“And as they walked quickly, Odd kicked and bent down. “What was it that I hit my foot on?” He touched the tip of the spear, and everyone saw that it was the skull of a horse, and immediately a snake rose from it, rushed at Odd and stung him in the leg above the ankle. The poison took effect immediately, and the entire leg and thigh became swollen. Odd became so weak from this bite that they had to help him go to the shore, and when he got there, he said: “You should now go and cut out a stone coffin for me, and let someone stay here sitting next to me and write down that story.” which I will lay down about my deeds and life.”
Death by horse.
It is still unknown for sure whether the saga of Orvar Odd became the reason for the appearance of the legend about the death of the Prophetic Oleg from a snake bite, or vice versa. But we can definitely say that the cause of the prince’s death was different. Different researchers cite different reasons, among which the most popular version is that Oleg was poisoned and insidiously killed by his own vigilantes. We're in Once again We are convinced how far from reality the legends known to all of us from childhood can be.
7th grade
Option 1
1.Continue definition
Tradition is a genre of oral folk art, which_____________________________________________________________
Epics are...
b) works about nature and animals;
c) works about modern science and technology;
The orata has a downy hat,
And his caftan is black velvet...
The epics of the Novgorod cycle are characterized by:
c) heroes: Sadko, V. Buslaev;
d) the place of action is Novgorod;
e) place of action - Kyiv
________________________________________________________
7. What features of a fairy tale are present in the Tale of Peter and Fevronia?
____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
8. Put Plot Elements in the Correct Order
the complete cure of Peter, the murder of the serpent, expulsion from Murom, the visit of the boyars and their repentance, adoption of monasticism, posthumous miracles,introducing the reader to Fevronia,death in one day marriage,
Test work on ancient Russian literature
7th grade
Option 2
1.Continue definition
Epics are a genre of oral folk art, which _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
2. Find the correct answer
Tradition is...
a) works of oral folk poetry about Russian heroes and folk heroes;
b) works about nature and animals, which address issues of their protection;
c) an oral story that contains information about historical figures, events passed down from generation to generation;
d) works of folklore about good and evil
3.What two cycles of epics do you know?
________________________________________________________________
4. From which epic are the lines below
Sat on a white-flammable stone
And he began to play spring goosebumps.
_______________________________________________________________
5. Choose the right statements
The epics of the Kyiv cycle are characterized by:
a) heroes: Ilya Muromets, Dobrynya Nikitich, Alyosha Popovich;
b) the theme of trade and travel;
c) heroes: Sadko, V. Buslaev;
d) the topic of protecting Russian lands;
d) the place of action is Novgorod;
e) the place of action is Kyiv?
6. What is the theme of “The Teachings of Vladimir Monomakh”? (about what?)
________________________________________________________________
7. What features of life are present in the Tale of Peter and Fevronia?
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
8. Fill in the blanks with relevant events.
The serpent and his death,__________________________________________, an attempt to be cured,_____________________,marriage,___________________________,
the boyars' request for forgiveness, _______________________________________, death on the same day__________________________________________.
