Reads in 6 minutes
A word about Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich and his brother, Prince Vladimir Andreevich, how they defeated their adversary Tsar Mamai.
Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich with his brother, Prince Vladimir Andreevich, was at a feast with the Moscow governor. And he said: “The news has come to us, brothers, that Tsar Mamai is standing at the fast Don, he has come to Rus' and wants to go to us in the Zalessk land.” And the Grand Duke and his brother, having prayed to God, steeling their hearts with their courage, gathered brave Russian regiments. All the Russian princes came to the glorious city of Moscow and said: “The filthy Tatars are standing near the Don, Mamai the Tsar is at the Mechi River, they want to cross the river and part with their lives for our glory.” And Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich turned to his brother: “Let’s go there, test our brave men and fill the Don River with blood for the Russian land and for the Christian faith.”
What makes noise, what thunders early before dawn? Then Prince Vladimir Andreevich builds regiments and leads them to the great Don. And the great prince Dmitry Ivanovich admonished him: “We have already appointed governors - seventy boyars, and the princes of Belozersk are brave, and both brothers Olgerdovich, and Dmitry Volynsky, and the soldiers with us are three hundred thousand men-at-arms. The squad has been tested in battles, and all, as one, are ready to lay down their heads for the Russian land.”
After all, those falcons and gyrfalcons and Belozersk hawks soon flew over the Don and struck countless herds of geese and swans. It was not falcons or gyrfalcons - it was the Russian princes who attacked the Tatar force. And the red-hot spears struck the Tatar armor, and the damask swords thundered against the Khinov helmets on the Kulikovo field, on the Nepryadva river.
The ground is black under the hooves, the fields are strewn with Tatar bones, and the ground is flooded with their blood. On that field, menacing clouds converged, and from them lightning continuously flashed and great thunder roared. It was not the tours that roared near the Don on the Kulikovo field. It’s not the Turs who were beaten, but the Russian princes, and the boyars, and the governors of Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich. Peresvet the Chernets, a Bryansk boyar, was brought to the place of judgment. And Peresvet the Chernets said: “It’s better for us to be killed than to be captured by the filthy Tatars!”
At that time, in the Ryazan land near the Don, neither plowmen nor shepherds called in the field, only crows incessantly cawing over human corpses, it was scary and pitiful to hear this then; and the grass was drenched in blood, and the trees bowed to the ground in sadness. The birds sang pitiful songs - all the princesses, and boyars, and all the voivod's wives began to lament for the dead. So they said: “Can you, sir, great prince, block the Dnieper with oars, and scoop up the Don with helmets, and dam the Sword River with Tatar corpses? Lock the gates at the Oka River, sir, so that the filthy Tatars don’t come to us anymore. Our husbands have already been beaten in battle.” The wife of Mikula Vasilyevich, the Moscow governor, Marya cried on the visors of the Moscow walls, wailing: “Oh Don, Don, fast river, bring my master Mikula Vasilyevich to me on your waves!”
And, throwing out a cry, Prince Vladimir Andreevich rushed with his army to the shelves of the filthy Tatars. And he praised his brother: “Brother, Dmitry Ivanovich! In evil and bitter times, you are a strong shield for us. Do not give in, Great Prince, with your great regiments, do not indulge the seditious people! Don’t delay with your boyars.” And Prince Dmitry Ivanovich said: “Brothers, boyars and governors, here are your Moscow sweet honeys and great places! Then get a place for yourself and your wives. Here, brothers, the old must become younger, and the young must gain honor.” And then, like falcons, they flew headlong to the fast Don. It was not falcons that flew: the Grand Duke galloped with his regiments beyond the Don, and behind him the entire Russian army.
And then the Grand Duke began the offensive. Damask swords rattle against Khinov helmets. And so the filthy ones rushed back. The wind roars in the battles of Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich, the Tatars are fleeing, and the Russian sons fenced off the wide fields with a clique and illuminated them with gilded armor. The battle has already begun! Here the Tatars scattered in confusion and ran along unbeaten roads into the Lukomorie, gnashing their teeth and tearing their faces, saying: “We, brothers, will not be in our own land, and will not see our children, and will not caress our wives, but we will caress the raw the earth, but we should kiss the green grass, and we should not go to Rus' as an army and we should not ask tribute from the Russian princes.”
Now the Russian sons have captured Tatar armor and horses, and are bringing wine, fine fabrics and silks to their wives. Fun and rejoicing already spread across the Russian land. Russian glory has overcome the blasphemy of the filthy. And the cruel Mamai darted away from his squad like a gray wolf and ran to Cafe-town. And the Fryags said to him: “You came to Russian land with great forces, with nine hordes and seventy princes. But, apparently, the Russian princes thoroughly treated you: there are neither princes nor governors with you! Run away, you filthy Mamai, from us beyond the dark forests.”
The Russian land is like a sweet baby to its mother: its mother caresses it, flogs it for mischief, and praises it for its good deeds. So the Lord God had mercy on the Russian princes, Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich and his brother, Prince Vladimir Andreevich, between the Don and the Dnieper on the Kulikovo field, on the Nepryadva river. And Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich said: “Brothers, you laid down your heads for the Russian land and for the Christian faith. Forgive me and bless me in this age and in the next. Let’s go, brother Vladimir Andreevich, to our Zalesskaya land to the glorious city of Moscow and sit on our reign, and we have won honor and a glorious name.”
Retold
“Zadonshchina” (in the manuscripts it has the titles “Zadonshchina of the Grand Duke Mr. Dmitry Ivanovich and his brother Prince Vladimir Andreevich”, “The Word about the Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich and about his brother, Prince Vladimir Andreevich, how they defeated their adversary Tsar Mamai”, etc.) - a monument of ancient Russian literature of the late XIV - early XV centuries.
In 1380, the Horde ruler Mamai undertook a large campaign against the Moscow principality. Dmitry Donskoy, as in 1378, decides to go out to meet the enemy. Many Russian principalities advocated an alliance with Moscow. The battle took place on September 8, 1380 within the Ryazan land, on the Kulikovo field, at the confluence of the Nepryadva River with the Don. Having suffered huge losses, the Russians won. This was the first big victory over the Mongol-Tatars, which was a turning point in the relationship between Rus' and the Horde.
The Battle of Kulikovo was reflected in several works: “Zadonshchina”, short and lengthy chronicle stories about the Battle of Kulikovo and in “The Tale of the Massacre of Mamaev”. There is every reason to believe that "Zadonshchina" was written in the 80s. XIV century, shortly after the Battle of Kulikovo and, in any case, during the life of Dmitry Donskoy (i.e. before 1389), to whom, as the author of the monument himself says, he praises with his work.
"Zadonshchina" is a lyrical-epic description of the battle on the Don. The author does not conduct a consistent plot story, but expresses his feelings and emotions associated with the events of the Battle of Kulikovo. The author of "Zadonshchina" took "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" as the basis for his work - when talking about the victory over Mamai, he uses images, individual phrases, and entire passages of the "Tale".
L.A. Dmitrieva
Zadonshchina
Summary of the book
A word about Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich and his brother, Prince Vladimir Andreevich, how they defeated their adversary Tsar Mamai.
Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich with his brother, Prince Vladimir Andreevich, was at a feast with the Moscow governor. And he said: “The news has come to us, brothers, that Tsar Mamai is standing at the fast Don, he has come to Rus' and wants to go to us in the Zalessk land.” And the Grand Duke and his brother, having prayed to God, steeling their hearts with their courage, gathered brave Russian regiments. All the Russian princes came to the glorious city of Moscow and said: “The filthy Tatars are standing near the Don, Mamai the Tsar is at the Mechi River, they want to cross the river and part with their lives for our glory.” And Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich turned to his brother: “Let’s go there, test our brave men and fill the Don River with blood for the Russian land and for the Christian faith.”
What makes noise, what thunders early before dawn? Then Prince Vladimir Andreevich builds regiments and leads them to the great Don. And the great prince Dmitry Ivanovich admonished him: “We have already appointed governors - seventy boyars, and the princes of Belozersk are brave, and both brothers Olgerdovich, and Dmitry Volynsky, and the soldiers with us are three hundred thousand men-at-arms. The squad is tested in battles, and that’s all, as alone, ready to lay down their heads for the Russian land."
After all, those falcons and gyrfalcons and Belozersk hawks soon flew over the Don and struck countless herds of geese and swans. It was not falcons or gyrfalcons - it was the Russian princes who attacked the Tatar force. And the red-hot spears struck the Tatar armor, and the damask swords thundered against the Khinov helmets on the Kulikovo field, on the Nepryadva river.
The ground is black under the hooves, the fields are strewn with Tatar bones, and the ground is flooded with their blood. On that field, menacing clouds converged, and from them lightning continuously flashed and great thunder roared. It was not the tours that roared near the Don on the Kulikovo field. It’s not the Turs who were beaten, but the Russian princes, and the boyars, and the governors of Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich. Peresvet the Chernets, a Bryansk boyar, was brought to the place of judgment. And Peresvet the Chernets said: “It’s better for us to be killed than to be captured by the filthy Tatars!”
At that time, in the Ryazan land near the Don, neither plowmen nor shepherds called in the field, only crows incessantly cawing over human corpses, it was scary and pitiful to hear this then; and the grass was drenched in blood, and the trees bowed to the ground in sadness. The birds sang pitiful songs - all the princesses, and boyars, and all the voivod's wives began to lament for the dead. So they said: “Can you, sir, great prince, block the Dnieper with oars, and scoop up the Don with helmets, and dam the Sword River with Tatar corpses? Lock the gates at the Oka River, sir, so that the filthy Tatars will no longer come to us. Our husbands have already been beaten in battle.” The wife of Mikula Vasilyevich, the Moscow governor, Marya cried on the visors of the Moscow walls, wailing: “Oh Don, Don, fast river, bring my master Mikula Vasilyevich to me on your waves!”
And, throwing out a cry, Prince Vladimir Andreevich rushed with his army to the shelves of the filthy Tatars. And he praised his brother: “Brother, Dmitry Ivanovich! In evil, bitter times, you are a strong shield for us. Do not give in, Great Prince, with your great regiments, do not indulge the seditionists! Do not delay with your boyars.” And Prince Dmitry Ivanovich said: “Brothers, boyars and governors, here are your Moscow sweet honeys and great places! Here, get a place for yourself and your wives. Here, brothers, the old must grow younger, and the young must gain honor.” And then, like falcons, they flew headlong to the fast Don. It was not falcons that flew: the Grand Duke galloped with his regiments beyond the Don, and behind him the entire Russian army.
And then the Grand Duke began the offensive. Damask swords rattle against Khinov helmets. And so the filthy ones rushed back. The wind roars in the battles of Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich, the Tatars are fleeing, and the Russian sons fenced off the wide fields with a clique and illuminated them with gilded armor. The battle has already begun! Then the Tatars scattered in confusion and ran along unbeaten roads into the Lukomorye, gnashing their teeth and tearing their faces, saying: “We, brothers, will not be in our own land, and will not see our children, and will not caress our wives, but we will caress the raw the ground, but we should kiss the green grass, and we should not go to Rus' as an army and we should not ask tribute from the Russian princes.”
Now the Russian sons have captured Tatar armor and horses, and are bringing wine, fine fabrics and silks to their wives. Fun and rejoicing already spread across the Russian land. Russian glory has overcome the blasphemy of the filthy. And the cruel Mamai darted away from his squad like a gray wolf and ran to Cafe-town. And the fryags said to him: “You came to Russian land with great forces, with nine hordes and with seventy princes. But, apparently, the Russian princes thoroughly treated you: there are no princes or governors with you! Run away, filthy Mamai, from us beyond the dark forests."
The Russian land is like a sweet baby to its mother: its mother caresses it, flogs it for mischief, and praises it for its good deeds. So the Lord God had mercy on the Russian princes, Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich and his brother, Prince Vladimir Andreevich, between the Don and the Dnieper on the Kulikovo field, on the Nepryadva river. And Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich said: “Brothers, you laid down your heads for the Russian land and for the Christian faith. Forgive me and bless me in this century and in the future. Let’s go, brother Vladimir Andreevich, to our Zalesskaya land to the glorious city of Moscow and sit down from our reign, but we have gained honor and a glorious name.”
Retold by N.B. Vinogradova.
At the very end of the 14th and beginning of the 15th centuries, there are two works describing the Battle of Kulikovo, the largest and most important event of the era of the Tatar yoke, which showed the Russian people that there is hope and the opportunity to free themselves from the hated Tatars. [Cm. on our website there is a brief description of the Battle of Kulikovo.]
Zadonshchina, The Legend of Mamaev's Massacre. Lecture by A. N. Uzhankov
In the chronicle we find a dry historical account of this event, but it was reflected literary in “The Tale of the Massacre of Mamayev” [see. its full text and analysis] and in “Zadonshchina” [see. full text]. Both of these works were written definitely under the influence of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”. They resemble it in their plan and structure; in some places it is simply an imitation.
It is possible that these two works are reworkings of one another, or it is also possible that they were written independently. The author of “Zadonshchina” is considered to be Sophrony, a native of Ryazan who witnessed the battle. But “Zadonshchina” also contains anachronisms and historical inaccuracies; for example, it says here that Mamai’s ally was the Lithuanian prince Olgerd, who, in fact, died 3 years before the Battle of Kulikovo.
In Zadonshchina, even more than in “The Legend,” one can feel the imitation of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign.” In the introduction of “The Lay,” its author addresses the prophetic singer Boyan. The author of "Zadonshchina" instead of Boyan refers to the "prophetic boyar", without, obviously, making out who Boyan was.
A well-known phrase, repeated twice in the Lay: “Oh, Russian land, you are already behind the shroud!” (oh, Russian land, you are already over the hill) - the author of “Zadonshchina” interpreted it in his own way. He translated the expression “behind the mantle” - “behind Solomon”: “You are a Russian land, just as you were hitherto behind the king behind Solomon, so be now behind the great prince Dmitry Ivanovich.”
“Zadonshchina” is shorter than “The Legend”, it has fewer details, but its language is better and simpler. One can feel great patriotic enthusiasm about the national victory of the Russians over the Tatars.
The picture of Prince Dmitry’s farewell to his killed soldiers who dotted the Kulikovo field is very beautiful and solemn. After the battle, the prince and the governor “began to stand on the bones.” “It’s terrible and pitiful, brethren, at that time to look at the corpses of Christians lying on the birch tree near the Great Don, like haystacks, and the Don River flowed with blood for three days.”
Kulikovo field. Standing on bones. Artist P. Ryzhenko
Saying goodbye to those who fell in battle, Prince Dmitry said: “brothers, princes and boyars and boyar children! Then you have a narrowed place between the Don and the Dnieper, on the Kulikovo field, along the Nepryadva river; and they naturally laid down their heads for the holy churches, for the Russian land, for the Christian faith. Forgive me, brothers, and bless me!”
Historically this place is incorrect. It is known that during the Battle of Kulikovo, Prince Dmitry was seriously wounded, he was taken away in serious condition and, of course, he could not make this speech to the killed soldiers. But the historical inaccuracy does not detract from the beauty of this scene.
military story about the Battle of Kulikovo 1380, a monument of ancient Russian literature of the late 14th century. Author "Z." used the work of Zephanius of Ryazan, as well as “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign.” The main idea of "Z." - the struggle for the unity of the Russian principalities in the face of an external enemy, as well as contrasting the disastrous outcome of events in the “Tale” with the victorious one in “Z.”
Excellent definition
Incomplete definition ↓
ZADONSHCHINA
On September 8, 1380, on the Kulikovo field (an area within the Tula region, located in the upper reaches of the Don River, at the confluence of the Nepryadva River, in 1380 - a “wild field” - an uninhabited steppe) a battle of a coalition of Russian princes took place , led by the Grand Duke of Moscow Dmitry Ivanovich, with a Mongol-Tatar army, reinforced by mercenary troops, under the leadership of the Horde ruler Mamai. This was the first big battle between the Russians and the enslavers after the establishment of the Mongol-Tatar yoke (1237), which ended in the complete defeat of the Mongol-Tatars. The Battle of Kulikovo (often called the Massacre of Mamaev) did not put an end to the foreign yoke in Rus' (this would happen only 100 years later - in 1480), but the nature of the relationship between the Russian principalities and the Horde changed dramatically, and the dominant unifying role of the Moscow principality and the Moscow prince emerged. The Battle of Kulikovo showed that in an alliance the Russian principalities could successfully resist the Mongol-Tatars. The victory on the Kulikovo Field had enormous moral significance for national identity. It is no coincidence that the name of St. Sergius (see LIFE...): the founder and abbot of the Trinity Monastery, according to legend, blessed the campaign of Dmitry of Moscow (see THE TALE OF LIFE) (nicknamed "Donskoy" after the battle on the Kulikovo field) against Mamai and, contrary to the monastery rules, sent with Dmitry’s soldiers on the battlefield of two monks of their monastery - Oslyabya and Peresvet. Interest in the events of the Battle of Kulikovo in Rus' has not waned from the time of the battle to the present day. In Ancient Rus', a number of works were created dedicated to the battle of 1380, which in science are united under the name “Kulikovo cycle”: chronicle stories about the Battle of Kulikovo, “Zadonshchina”, “The Tale of the Massacre of Mamaev”. 3.- emotional, lyrical response to the events of the Battle of Kulikovo. 3. has come down to us in 6 lists, the earliest of which, Kirillo-Belozersky (K-B), compiled by the monk of the Kirillo-Belozersky monastery Efrosin in the 70-80s. XV century, is a revision of only the first half of the original text 3. The remaining 5 lists are of a later date (the earliest of them is an excerpt from the late XV - early XVI centuries, the rest are from the XVI-XVII centuries). Only two lists contain the complete text; all lists contain many errors and distortions. Therefore, based on data from all the lists taken together, it is possible to reconstruct the text of the work. Based on a combination of a number of indirect data, but mainly based on the nature of the work itself, most researchers date the time of its creation to the 80s. XIV century V.F. Rzhiga, who paid a lot of attention to 3. in his works, wrote: “Attempts to date the monument to a time closer to 1380 seem quite appropriate. They correspond to the clearly emotional character that the Word of Zephaniah has (3.- L.D.) from beginning to end. In this regard, there is reason to believe that the Word of Zephaniah appeared immediately after the Battle of Kulikovo, perhaps in the same 1380 or the next." It is traditionally believed that the author 3. was a certain Sophony of Ryazan: in two lists 3. he is named in the title as the author of the work. In the Tver Chronicle there is a small fragment of text, close in individual readings to 3. and “The Tale of the Massacre of Mamayev,” beginning with the following phrase: “And this is the writing of Sophonia Rezants, the Bryansk boyar, for the praise of Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich and his brother Prince Volodymer Andreevich.” (this entry is preceded by the date of the Battle of Kulikovo - 1380). A.D. Sedelnikov drew attention to the similarity of this name with the name of the Ryazan boyar from the entourage of the Ryazan prince Oleg - Sophony Alty-kulachevich (Oleg Ryazansky in 1380 was going to take the side of Mamai). Thus, Sophony Ryazan is undoubtedly somehow connected with the monuments of the Kulikovo cycle. But can he be considered the author of 3.? In some lists of the main edition of “The Tale of the Massacre of Mamayev,” Zephanius is named as the author of this work. In the text itself 3. it is said about him as a person in relation to the author 3. an outsider: “I (i.e. “I” - the author 3.) will remember the cutter Zephaniah...” Based on this reading, 3. Kulikovsky researcher cycle I. Nazarov back in 1858 argued that it identifies Zephanius as the predecessor of the author of 3. Recently, the hypothesis about the authorship of Zephanius was considered by R.P. Dmitrieva, who came to the conclusion that Zephanius was not the author of 3: ". ..the latter refers to Zephanius as a poet or singer of his time, whose work he was inclined to imitate" ("Was Zephanius of Ryazan the author of "Zadonshchina"? - P. 24). Apparently, Sophony was the author of another poetic work about the Battle of Kulikovo that has not reached us, the poetic images of which influenced the authors of both Z. and “The Tale of the Massacre of Mamayev.” This assumption is consistent with the hypothesis of academician. A. A. Shakhmatova about the existence of the unpreserved “Tale of the Massacre of Mamaev.” The main idea 3. is the greatness of the Battle of Kulikovo. The author of the work exclaims that the glory of the victory on the Kulikovo field reached different ends of the earth (“Shibla glory to the Iron Gates, and to Karanachi, to Rome, and to Cafe by sea, and to Tornav, and then to Constantinople for the praise of the Russian princes”) . The work is based on the real events of the Battle of Kulikovo, but this is not a consistent historical story about the preparation for the battle, about the battle itself, about the return of the victors from the battlefield, but an emotional refraction of all these events in the author’s perception. The story is transferred from one place to another: from Moscow to the Kulikovo Field, again to Moscow, to Novgorod, again to the Kulikovo Field. The present is intertwined with memories of the past. The author himself described his work as “pity and praise for Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich and his brother, Prince Vladimir Ondreevich.” “Pity” is a cry for the dead, for the difficult lot of the Russian land. “Praise” is glory to the courage and military valor of Russian soldiers and their leaders. Many of the events that are narrated in detail in “The Tale of the Massacre of Mamaev” are told in 3. in one or two phrases, half a hint. So, for example, about the actions of the ambush regiment under the command of Prince Vladimir Andreevich of Serpukhov, cousin of Dmitry Donskoy, which decided the outcome of the battle, it is said: “And Prince Vladimer Andreevich, having called out the cry, galloped through the army in half a squad of filthy Tatars, and "The damask swords rattle on the helmets of Khinov." If the detailed narrative of “The Tale of the Massacre of Mamaev” had not been preserved, many places 3. would have remained mysterious and inexplicable to us. Already by the nature of the work, by the combination of lamentation and praise in it, 3. is close to “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign.” But this closeness is not only of a general nature, but is most immediate, and this is another remarkable feature of this work of ancient Russian literature. “The Word” was a model for the author 3. at the textual level as well. Plan 3., a number of poetic images 3. - repetition of poetic images of the “Word”, individual words, phrases, large passages of text 3. Repeat the corresponding places, “Words” depend on the “Word”. Author 3. turned to the “Word” as a model with the aim of comparing and contrasting the political situation in Rus' at the time of the “Word” (80s of the 12th century) with the 80s of the 14th century. The main ideological meaning of the “Word” was The author's call to the Russian princes to forget internecine strife and unite their forces to fight the external enemies of Rus'. Author 3. in the victory won over the Horde, saw the real embodiment of the call of his brilliant predecessor: the combined forces of the Russian princes were able to defeat the Mongol-Tatars, who had previously been considered invincible. Author 3. rethinks the text of the Lay in accordance with the events of the Mamaev Massacre and brings in a lot of his own. 3. characterized by stylistic inconsistency - poetic parts of the text alternate with prosaic ones, which are in the nature of business prose. 3. To a greater extent than the “Word”, the techniques of oral folk poetry are characteristic. The main thing is that in “The Lay” techniques and elements close to oral folk art are presented in an artistically executed author’s processing, author’s rethinking, but in 3. they are much closer both verbally and in character to oral sources. This circumstance and the state of the lists 3. (numerous distortions and errors) served as the basis for the assumption of the folklore, oral origin of the monument. It is quite possible that individual lists 3. were written down from memory and not copied from other lists, but there is no reason to believe that 3. was originally a work of oral creativity. 3. goes back to the “Word” - a literary monument. The combination of 3. poetic text with prosaisms, similar in nature to business writing, also speaks of the bookish and literary character of the monument. This is evidenced by the strongly expressed church and religious symbolism and terminology in 3. A number of scientists proceed from the position that the Lay was written in imitation of 3. (French scientists L. Leger, A. Mazon, Russian historian A. A. Zimin). Comparative textual analysis of “The Lay” and 3. with the involvement of reminiscences from 3. in “The Tale of the Massacre of Mamayev”, a study of the nature of the book-writing activity of Efrosyn, who authored K-B list 3., a study of the phraseology and vocabulary of “The Lay” and 3. , a comparative analysis of the grammar of “The Lay” and 3. - everything indicates that 3. is secondary in relation to “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”. 3. has been repeatedly translated into modern Russian, several poetic transcriptions of the monument have been created (by V. M. Sayanova, I. A. Novikova, A. Skripov, A. Zhovtis), 3. translated into a number of foreign languages. A large amount of scientific literature is devoted to the monument. Main bibliographic indexes on 3.: Droblenkova N. F., Begunov Yu. K. Bibliography of scientific research works on the “Zadonshchina” (1852-1965) // “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” and monuments of the Kulikovo cycle.- M. ; L., 1966.- P. 557-583; Aralovets N. A., Pronina P. V. Battle of Kulikovo 1380: Literature Index // Battle of Kulikovo: Collection. Art.-M., 1980.-P. 289-318. Below is a bibliography of only the most basic publications and studies 3. Ed.: Monuments of the ancient Russian language and literature of the XV-XVIII centuries / Prod. for publication and provided explanatory notes. Pavel Sichoni. Vol. 3: "Zadonshchina" according to the lists of the 15th - 18th centuries. - Pgr., 1922; Adrianova-Peretz V.P. 1) Zadonshchina: Text and notes // TODRL. - 1947. T. a. - P. 194-224; 2) Zadonshchina: Experience in reconstructing the author’s text // TODRL. - 1948.- T. b-S. 201-255, Rzhiga V.F. The Word of Zephanius of Ryazan about the Battle of Kulikovo ("Zadonshchina"): With the attached text of the Word of Zephaniah and 28 photographs from the text based on the manuscript of the State. ist. Museum of the 16th century - M., 1947; Stories about the Battle of Kulikovo / Ed. prepared by M. N. Tikhomirov, V. F. Rzhiga L. A. Dmitriev. M., 1959- P. 9-26 (ser. "Literary monuments"); “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” and monuments of the Kulikovo cycle: On the question of time for writing “The Tale” - M.; L., 1966.-S. 535-556- Zadonshchina / Prep. text, translation and notes. L. A. Dmitrieva//Izbornik (1969).-S. 380-397, 747-750; Kulikovo Field: The Legend of the Battle of the Don / Intro. Art. D. S. Likhacheva; Comp. preparation texts, afterword and note. L. A Dmitrieva. M., 1980. - P. 20-49; Zadonshchina / Prep. text, translation and notes. L. A. Dmitrieva // PLDR: XIV - mid-XV century.-M., 1981- P. 96-111, 544-549; Tales and stories about the Battle of Kulikovo / Ed. preparation L. A. Dmitriev and O. P. Likhacheva.-L., 1982.-P. 7-13, 131-137. Lit.: Nazarov I. The Legend of Mamaev’s Massacre // ZhMNP.- 1858,- July - August.- P. 80-85; Shambinago S.K. The Tale of Mamaev’s Massacre. - St. Petersburg, 1906. - P. 84-143; Likhachev D.S. 1) Zadonshchina//Lit. studies.- 1941.-No. 3.-S. 87-100; 2) Traits of imitation of “Zadonshchina”: On the question of the relationship of “Zadonshchina” to “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” // Gus. lit.-1964.-No. 3.-S. 84-107; 3) Zadonshchina // Great Heritage.- P. 278-292; 4) The relationship between the lists and editors of “Zadonshchina”: Research by Angelo Danti // TODRL. - 1976.-T. 31.-S. 165-175; 5) Textual triangle: “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”, the story of the Ipatiev Chronicle about the campaign of Prince Igor in 1185 and “Zadonshchina”: On the textual comments of Prof. J. Fennel // Likhachev D. S. “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” and the culture of his time. L., 1978.-S. 296-309; Solovyov A.V. The author of “Zadonshchina” and his political ideas // TODRL.- 1958.- T. 14.- P. 183-197; Rzhiga V.F. 1) The word of Zephanius Ryazan about the Battle of Kulikovo (“Zadonshchina”) as a literary monument of the 80s. XIV century // Tale of the Battle of Kulikovo.- P. 377-400; 2) About Zephaniah of Ryazan//Ibid.-P.401-405; Adrianova-Peretz V.P. “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” and “Zadonshchina” //
Standing somewhat apart in the cycle of stories about the Battle of Kulikovo is a work briefly called “Zadonshchina,” which has different titles according to the lists. The timing of the text's creation remains controversial. The most substantiated point of view is that “Zadonshchina” was written in the 80s. XIV century, since in 1392 the two cities mentioned in it - Tarnovo and Ornach - were captured and destroyed: one by the Turks, the other by the Tatars. The author of the work is also unknown; the hypothesis about the authorship of Zephanius Ryazan, which was actively discussed in the scientific press, has not been thoroughly confirmed. Most researchers come to the conclusion that he was the author of some literary work about the Battle of Kulikovo, which has not reached us and preceded “Zadonshchina.”
Composition
The greatest attention to the work from the moment of its discovery was attracted by the fact that the author took “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” as a model of the narrative. But “Zadonshchina” did not become an imitation, following the sample text in everything; it is an independent work of art, which was undoubtedly influenced by two more traditions - folklore and the tradition of chronicle military stories. In the construction of the text, the author interweaves features of a military story and “The Word...”. The introduction is focused mainly on the poetic monument of the 12th century; it mentions Boyan, previously known only from the text of “The Words...”. But at the end of the fragment the time of the event is established (“And from the Kalat army to the Momayev massacre is 160 years”), which has no analogy in the “Word...”. The further text of "Zadonshchina" generally repeats the structural three-part scheme of the military story. However, within each of the parts the narrative is built on the basis of individual episodes-pictures, which alternate with the author’s digressions, both of which are often directly oriented towards the text of the earlier monument. At the same time, they are not in all respects similar to the “Word...”. First of all, "Zadonshchina" is characterized by documentary elements that are absent in the work of the 12th century. and expressed in the widespread use of digital data, for example in the speech of the Lithuanian princes: “And the brave Lithuanians are with us 70,000 chained armies”; the number of Novgorod soldiers is indicated: “And with them 7000 troops,” etc. There are lists of names of governors leading units of the army; boyars who died in the first half of the battle; losses of warriors from different lands at the end of the battle. These elements are associated with the tradition of military stories. The same range of documentaries includes three cases of mentioning dates according to the church calendar, for example: “And they fought from morning until noon on Saturday on the Nativity of the Holy Mother of God.” This is how the dates of events were often indicated in chronicles.
Basically, in “Zadonshchina” the chronological principle of narration characteristic of a military story is preserved, while in “The Lay...” one of the most important features of the composition can be considered historical digressions, correlated with the destinies of the main characters and the author’s idea. Minor deviations from the chronological order in “Zadonshchina” can be explained by various reasons. The passage predicting the victory of the Russian princes at the beginning of the battle (“Shibla glory to the Gallic Gates...”), although it uses the images of the “Word...”, but follows the military chronicle tradition, which allowed predictions of the outcome of the battle before it began, mainly in the form of a mention of the Divine protection of one of the parties.
Another case of fragments moving through time cannot be explained unambiguously. This is a transfer of Peresvet’s speech addressed to Dmitry, and Oslyabi’s prophecy addressed to Peresvet, after the story about the death of the boyars in battle, while both remarks could only be spoken before the battle, since Peresvet died at the very beginning. The most likely reason for this rearrangement is the relative compositional freedom of the text, built on the basis of a chain of episodes-pictures depicting the main moments of events. It is also possible that it arose during the process of rewriting the text, especially since all known copies of the monument contain defects. These minor chronological violations of the text do not change the very principle of the narrative, which is close to a military story.
A significant difference between the composition “Zadonshchina” and the composition “The Lay of Igor’s Campaign” is the smaller number of lyrical fragments. They are represented by the author's digressions, most often inspired by the text of an earlier monument, and the laments of Russian wives, which were created in imitation of Yaroslavna's lament, but occupy a different compositional place. Yaroslavna's lament is placed towards the end of the work, when the story about Igor's campaign has already been completed and the princes' call for unity has been made, immediately before the story of Igor's escape from captivity, which is symbolically caused by the lament. The wives' cries in "Zadonshchina" break the story of the Battle of Kulikovo, completing the story of its first half, which was extremely difficult for the Russian army, in which many soldiers died. They add an additional emotional touch to the story of the battle, but do not carry any symbolic meaning. In addition, each of the four laments is many times shorter than Yaroslavna’s lament, uses one image of him, often adding to it stylistic turns from other passages of “The Lay...”.
Of the other lyrical genres unknown to the text of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign,” “Zadonshchina” uses prayers, one of which is only mentioned, and the other is given in the text. Both were spoken by Dmitry Ivanovich before the battle. In military stories already in the 12th century. Similar fragments began to appear, and during the era of the Battle of Kulikovo they became widespread. The appearance of this genre in “Zadonshchina” is due to the fact that the text contains the motif of God’s patronage of the Russian army, sounding in the author’s remarks and in the refrain taken from “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”, but modified. This very motif was widespread in military stories, where it was embodied in formulas of God’s wrath or the protection of one of the parties. In “The Word...” it sounds only in one fragment.
Thus, the lyrical fragments in “Zadonshchina” are few in number and are connected both with the tradition of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” and with the tradition of military stories.
Heroes of "Zadonshchina"
The main character of "Zadonshchina", Prince Dmitry Ivanovich, is presented as an ideal hero, both in chronicles and in "The Tale of Mamaev's Massacre". First of all, he is the unifier of the forces of the Russian princes, and in this regard, undoubtedly, continues the tradition of the image of Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich of Kyiv in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign.” But at the same time, the traits of a brave warrior and commander characteristic of Igor are transferred to him; the author directly borrows the characterization of this hero, giving it to Dmitry and Vladimir. They paint the image of the prince-defender of Rus', his speeches and actions during the preparation of the campaign and in its process. In general, the image of the main character is similar to the chronicle works of that era, and only certain stylistic means connect him with “The Word...”. At the same time, it must be recognized that “The Long Chronicle Tale” and “The Tale of the Massacre of Mamayev” paint the image of the main character in a more versatile and detailed way, paying close attention to his personality and inner world.
Other princes are depicted in “Zadonshchina” within the framework of the chronicle military tradition in one or two strokes: they emphasize the desire to unite all the forces of Rus' and military valor. Only in the images of Dmitry and Andrei Olgerdovich is the influence of the image of Igor and Vsevolod in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” noticeable.
The enemies of Rus' are depicted more schematically than in other monuments of the Kulikovo cycle. Mamai and his warriors appear only at the moment of flight from the battlefield, and the author conveys the fear and disappointment of the enemies through their gestures and direct speech. The depiction of enemies in “Zadonshchina,” as in “The Lay...” and in the tradition of the military story, is schematic and one-sided; The use of Russian folklore in the speech of the Tatars can be noted as a new feature.
Artistic media in “Zadonshchina”
The visual and expressive means of “Zadonshchina” are also associated with the combination of the three indicated traditions, although the leading influence in this area undoubtedly belongs to “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” (up to direct borrowings). The folklore influence is most noticeable in the use of negative comparisons (in contrast to “The Lay...”, where their function was usually metaphors-symbols, which, on the contrary, were almost never used by the author of “Zadonshchina”).
So, “Zadonshchina” is a monument created at the intersection of three artistic traditions (folklore, the tradition of the military story, in ideological and partly stylistic terms - “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”). Based on the structure of the text, the ways of depicting the heroes, the predominance of the epic narrative rather than the emotional-lyrical principle, the tradition of the military story should be recognized as the leading one, accordingly classifying the work as a genre of military story.
Loading...
