V.N. Tatishchev. Russian history.

Adaptation from Late Slavic - O. Kolesnikov (2000-2002)

PART ONE

Forewarning about the history of the general and proper Russian

I. What is history. History is a Greek word meaning the same as ours. events or deeds; and although some believe that since events or deeds are always acts committed by people, therefore, natural or supernatural adventures should not be considered, but, having carefully examined, everyone will understand that there can be no adventure that could not be called an act, for nothing itself cannot happen by itself and without a cause or an external action. The reasons for every adventure are different, both from God and from man, but enough about that, I will not interpret more extensively. Whoever is interested in the explanation of this, I advise you to familiarize yourself with the "Physics" and "Morals" of Mr. Wolf.

Divine. Church. Civil. Natural. What history contains in itself, it is impossible to say briefly about this, because the circumstances and intentions of writers are different in this respect. So, it happens according to circumstances: 1) History is sacred or holy, but it is better to say divine; 2) Ecclesiastics, or church; 3) Politics or civil, but we are more accustomed to naming secular; 4) Sciences and scientists. And some others, not so well known. Of these, the first represents the works of God, as Moses and other prophets and apostles have described. Adjacent to it is the natural or natural history, about the actions produced by the forces invested during creation from God. The natural one describes everything that happens in the elements, that is, fire, air, water and earth, as well as on earth - in animals, plants and the underground. In the church - about dogmas, statutes, orders, the application of any circumstances in the church, as well as about heresies, debates, assertions of rightness in faith and refutation of wrong heretical or schismatic opinions and arguments, and besides, church rites and orders in worship. A lot of things are included in secularism, but, mainly, all human deeds, good and praiseworthy or vicious and evil. In the fourth, about the beginning and origin of various scientific names, sciences and learned people, as well as the books published by them and other such things from which the benefit of the general comes.

II. The benefits of history. There is no need to talk about the usefulness of history, which everyone can see and feel. However, since some people are in the habit of examining and reasoning about things clearly and in detail, repeatedly, from damaging their meaning, putting the useful to the harmful, and putting the harmful to the useful, and therefore sinning in actions and deeds, it is not without regret that I hear such arguments about the uselessness of history. happened, and therefore I reasoned that it would be useful to explain briefly about it.

First, let us consider that history is nothing more than a recollection of former deeds and adventures, good and evil, because everything that we, before a long or recent time, through hearing, seeing or feeling, recognized and recalled, is the real story that we or from of his own, or from other people's deeds, he teaches about the good to diligently, and to beware of evil. For example, when I remember that yesterday I saw a fisherman catching fish and acquiring considerable profit for himself, then, of course, I have in my mind a certain compulsion to diligently apply in the same way about the same acquisition; or as I saw yesterday a thief or other villain condemned to a heavy punishment or death, then, of course, fear from such a deed, subjecting to death, will restrain me. In the same way, all the ancient stories and events we read are sometimes so sensitively imagined to us, as if we ourselves saw and felt it.

Therefore, it can be briefly said that no person, not a single settlement, industry, science, or any government, and even more so, one person by himself, without knowledge of it, can not be perfect, wise and useful. For example, taking about the sciences.

Theology needs history. The first and highest is theology, that is, the knowledge of God, his wisdom, omnipotence, which alone leads us to future blessedness, etc. But no theologian can be called wise if he does not know the ancient works of God, announced to us in holy writing , as well as when, with whom, about what the debate was in dogma or confession, by whom what was approved or refuted, for which the ancient church applied some charters or orders, set aside and new ones were introduced. Consequently, divine and ecclesiastical history, and, moreover, civic history are simply necessary for them, as Huetius2, the glorious French theologian, has sufficiently shown.

Lawyer uses history. The second science is jurisprudence, which teaches good manners and duties of each before God, before himself and others, and consequently, the acquisition of peace of mind and body. But no lawyer can be called wise if he does not know the previous interpretations and debates about natural and civil laws. And how can a judge rightly judge a case if he does not know the ancient and new laws and the reasons for their applications? To do this, he needs to know the history of laws.

The third is medicine or medicine, which consists in preserving the health of a person, and returning the lost, or at least preventing developmental diseases. This science depends entirely on history, for it must receive from the ancients knowledge of what kind of disease happens, what medicines and how it is treated, what kind of medicine has what strength and effect, which no one could have known by his own testing and inquiry for even a hundred years, and doing experiments on the sick is such a danger that it can destroy his soul and body, although this often happens with some ignoramuses. I do not mention many other parts of philosophy, but briefly it can be said that all philosophy is based on history and supported by it, for everything that we have among the ancients, right or wrong and vicious opinions, we find the essence of history to our knowledge and reasons for correction.

political part. Janus. Politics, on the other hand, consists of three different parts: internal management, or economy, external reasoning, and military actions. All these three require no less than history and cannot be perfect without it, because in economic management it is necessary to know what harms happened from what before, in what way they were averted or reduced, what benefits and through what were acquired and preserved, according to which about the present and future wisely reasoning is possible. Because of this wisdom, the ancient Latins depicted their king Janus with two faces, because he knew in detail about the past and wisely reasoned about the future from examples.

Foreign affairs history. When conducting foreign affairs, it is extremely necessary to know not only about your own, but also about other states, in what state it was before, what changes it has undergone and what state it is in, with whom, when, what debate or war about what it had, what treaties about what set and approved, and therefore it is prudent to perform your actions in current affairs.

Military. Alexander the Great. Julius Caesar. It is very necessary for a military leader to know by what arrangement or trick a great enemy force was defeated or averted from victory, etc. As we see, Alexander the Great had great respect for the books of Homer about the Trojan War and learned from them. For this, many great governors described their deeds and others. Among all, Julius Caesar, having described his wars, left the most noble butt, so that after him future governors could use his military actions as an example, in which many land and sea noble governors followed by writing their deeds. Many great sovereigns, if not themselves, then people who were skilled in writing their deeds, not only so that their memory remained with glory, but more with the aim of showing diligence to their heirs.

Own history. Foreign. Fear of true history. Passions destroy the truth. Rebuke of Russian history. Fables obscure the truth. What concerns the usefulness of Russian history proper, one should equally understand all others, and for every people of any region the knowledge of their own history and geography is much more necessary than that of outsiders. However, it should also be considered true that without knowledge of foreign ones, one’s own will not be clear and sufficient, because: 1) Writing his own history in those days could not be known from outsiders how everything was done, everything helping or hindering. 2) Writers, out of fear of some very important circumstances of the present time, are forced to keep silent or change them and portray them differently. 3) Out of passion, love or hatred, they describe it in a completely different way than what actually happened, but with outsiders it is many times more correct and reliable. As here about the antiquity of Russians, in the absence of those times of Russian writers, this first part was mostly composed from foreign ones, and in other parts, ambiguities and shortcomings were also explained and supplemented by foreign ones. And European historians reproach us for saying that we allegedly had no ancient history and did not know about our antiquity, because they do not know what kind of history we have. And since some, having composed short extracts or some circumstance, translated it, others, thinking that we have no better ones, because of this science is despised. Some of our ignorant people agree with this, and some, not wanting to work hard in antiquity and not understanding the true legend, supposedly for a better explanation, but rather to obscure the truth, adding up the fables, brought confusion and closed the real truth of the legends of the ancients, such as about the construction of Kyiv, about the sermons of Andrew the Apostle, on the building of Novgorod by Slaven, etc. But I will say precisely and clearly that all the most famous European historians, no matter how much they work about Russian history, cannot correctly know and say about many antiquities without studying ours; for example, about the peoples who became famous in these countries in antiquity, such as the Amazons, Alans, Huns, Ovars, Kimbri and Cimmerians, as well as about all the Scythians, Sarmatians and Slavs, their clan, beginning, ancient dwellings and passages, about the great glorious in antiquity In the cities and regions of the Issedons, Essedons, Argipeys, Comans, etc., where they were and what they are now called, they do not know at all whether they can gain undeniable truth from Russian explained history. Most of all, this story is needed not only by us, but also by the entire scientific world, because through it our enemies, both Polish and others, fables and outright lies, invented to reproach our ancestors, will be exposed and refuted.

> Alphabetical catalog

Download all volumes in Djvu

Russian history from the most ancient times with vigilant labors thirty years later collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev

Download Download Download Download Download Download

• The history of Russia from the most ancient times, with vigilant labors thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book one. Part one
• The history of Russia from the most ancient times, with vigilant labors thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book one. Part two
• The history of Russia from the most ancient times, with vigilant labors thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. book two
• The history of Russia from the most ancient times, with vigilant labors thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book Three
• The history of Russia from the most ancient times, with vigilant labors thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book Four
• The history of Russia from the most ancient times, with vigilant labors thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. The fifth book, or according to the author, the fourth part of the ancient Russian chronicle

Download all volumes in PDF

Russian history from the most ancient times with vigilant labors thirty years later collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev

Russian history from the most ancient times with vigilant labors thirty years later collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev

Download

The history of Russia from the most ancient times, with vigilant labors thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book one. Part two

Download

The history of Russia from the most ancient times, with vigilant labors thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. book two

Download

The history of Russia from the most ancient times, with vigilant labors thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book Three

Download

The history of Russia from the most ancient times, with vigilant labors thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book Four

Download

The history of Russia from the most ancient times, with vigilant labors thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book five, or part four according to the author

Download

Download all volumes from BitTorrent (PDF)

Russian history from the most ancient times with vigilant labors thirty years later collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev

Russian history from the most ancient times with vigilant labors thirty years later collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev

The history of Russia from the most ancient times, with vigilant labors thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book one. Part two

The history of Russia from the most ancient times, with vigilant labors thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. book two

The history of Russia from the most ancient times, with vigilant labors thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book Three

The history of Russia from the most ancient times, with vigilant labors thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book Four

The history of Russia from the most ancient times, with vigilant labors thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book five, or part four according to the author

Download all volumes with BitTorrent (DjVU)

Russian history from the most ancient times with vigilant labors thirty years later collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev

Russian history from the most ancient times with vigilant labors thirty years later collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev

The history of Russia from the most ancient times, with vigilant labors thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book one. Part two

The history of Russia from the most ancient times, with vigilant labors thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. book two

The history of Russia from the most ancient times, with vigilant labors thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book Three

The history of Russia from the most ancient times, with vigilant labors thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book Four

The history of Russia from the most ancient times, with vigilant labors thirty years later, collected and described by the late Privy Councilor and Governor of Astrakhan, Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Book five, or part four according to the author

A major historical work by the Russian historian V. N. Tatishchev, one of the most important works of Russian historiography of the second quarter of the 18th century, a significant stage in its transition from the medieval chronicle to the critical style of narration.

The "History" consists of four parts; some sketches on the history of the 17th century have also been preserved.

• Part 1. History from ancient times to Rurik.
• Part 2. Chronicle from 860 to 1238.
• Part 3. Chronicle from 1238 to 1462.
• Part 4. A continuous chronicle from 1462 to 1558, and then a series of extracts about the history of the Time of Troubles.

Only the first and second parts are relatively completed by the author and include a significant number of notes. In the first part, the notes are divided into chapters, the second in the final version contains 650 notes. There are no notes in the third and fourth parts, except for the chapters on the Time of Troubles, which contain some references to sources.

V.N. Tatishchev. Russian history.

Adaptation from Late Slavic - O. Kolesnikov (2000-2002)

PART ONE

Forewarning about the history of the general and proper Russian

I. What is history. History is a Greek word meaning the same as ours. events or deeds; and although some believe that since events or deeds are always acts committed by people, therefore, natural or supernatural adventures should not be considered, but, having carefully examined, everyone will understand that there can be no adventure that could not be called an act, for nothing itself cannot happen by itself and without a cause or an external action. The reasons for every adventure are different, both from God and from man, but enough about that, I will not interpret more extensively. Whoever is interested in the explanation of this, I advise you to familiarize yourself with the "Physics" and "Morals" of Mr. Wolf.

Divine. Church. Civil. Natural. What history contains in itself, it is impossible to say briefly about this, because the circumstances and intentions of writers are different in this respect. So, it happens according to circumstances: 1) History is sacred or holy, but it is better to say divine; 2) Ecclesiastics, or church; 3) Politics or civil, but we are more accustomed to naming secular; 4) Sciences and scientists. And some others, not so well known. Of these, the first represents the works of God, as Moses and other prophets and apostles have described. Adjacent to it is the natural or natural history, about the actions produced by the forces invested during creation from God. The natural one describes everything that happens in the elements, that is, fire, air, water and earth, as well as on earth - in animals, plants and the underground. In the church - about dogmas, statutes, orders, the application of any circumstances in the church, as well as about heresies, debates, assertions of rightness in faith and refutation of wrong heretical or schismatic opinions and arguments, and besides, church rites and orders in worship. A lot of things are included in secularism, but, mainly, all human deeds, good and praiseworthy or vicious and evil. In the fourth, about the beginning and origin of various scientific names, sciences and learned people, as well as the books published by them and other such things from which the benefit of the general comes.

II. The benefits of history. There is no need to talk about the usefulness of history, which everyone can see and feel. However, since some people are in the habit of examining and reasoning about things clearly and in detail, repeatedly, from damaging their meaning, putting the useful to the harmful, and putting the harmful to the useful, and therefore sinning in actions and deeds, it is not without regret that I hear such arguments about the uselessness of history. happened, and therefore I reasoned that it would be useful to explain briefly about it.

First, let us consider that history is nothing more than a recollection of former deeds and adventures, good and evil, because everything that we, before a long or recent time, through hearing, seeing or feeling, recognized and recalled, is the real story that we or from of his own, or from other people's deeds, he teaches about the good to diligently, and to beware of evil. For example, when I remember that yesterday I saw a fisherman catching fish and acquiring considerable profit for himself, then, of course, I have in my mind a certain compulsion to diligently apply in the same way about the same acquisition; or as I saw yesterday a thief or other villain condemned to a heavy punishment or death, then, of course, fear from such a deed, subjecting to death, will restrain me. In the same way, all the ancient stories and events we read are sometimes so sensitively imagined to us, as if we ourselves saw and felt it.

Therefore, it can be briefly said that no person, not a single settlement, industry, science, or any government, and even more so, one person by himself, without knowledge of it, can not be perfect, wise and useful. For example, taking about the sciences.

Theology needs history. The first and highest is theology, that is, the knowledge of God, his wisdom, omnipotence, which alone leads us to future blessedness, etc. But no theologian can be called wise if he does not know the ancient works of God, announced to us in holy writing , as well as when, with whom, about what the debate was in dogma or confession, by whom what was approved or refuted, for which the ancient church applied some charters or orders, set aside and new ones were introduced. Consequently, divine and ecclesiastical history, and, moreover, civic history are simply necessary for them, as Huetius2, the glorious French theologian, has sufficiently shown.

Lawyer uses history. The second science is jurisprudence, which teaches good manners and duties of each before God, before himself and others, and consequently, the acquisition of peace of mind and body. But no lawyer can be called wise if he does not know the previous interpretations and debates about natural and civil laws. And how can a judge rightly judge a case if he does not know the ancient and new laws and the reasons for their applications? To do this, he needs to know the history of laws.

The third is medicine or medicine, which consists in preserving the health of a person, and returning the lost, or at least preventing developmental diseases. This science depends entirely on history, for it must receive from the ancients knowledge of what kind of disease happens, what medicines and how it is treated, what kind of medicine has what strength and effect, which no one could have known by his own testing and inquiry for even a hundred years, and doing experiments on the sick is such a danger that it can destroy his soul and body, although this often happens with some ignoramuses. I do not mention many other parts of philosophy, but briefly it can be said that all philosophy is based on history and supported by it, for everything that we have among the ancients, right or wrong and vicious opinions, we find the essence of history to our knowledge and reasons for correction.

political part. Janus. Politics, on the other hand, consists of three different parts: internal management, or economy, external reasoning, and military actions. All these three require no less than history and cannot be perfect without it, because in economic management it is necessary to know what harms happened from what before, in what way they were averted or reduced, what benefits and through what were acquired and preserved, according to which about the present and future wisely reasoning is possible. Because of this wisdom, the ancient Latins depicted their king Janus with two faces, because he knew in detail about the past and wisely reasoned about the future from examples.

] Author: Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. Scientific and popular publication.
(Moscow: Publishing house "AST"; CJSC NPP "Ermak", 2005. - Series "Classical thought")
Scan, processing, Djv format: Timofey Marchenko, 2011

• CONTENT:
  RUSSIAN HISTORY
  PART ONE
  Forewarning about the history of the general and actually Russian (5).
  Chapter 1. On the antiquity of the letters of the Slavs (29).
  Chapter 2. Of former idolatry (35).
  Chapter 3. About the baptism of the Slavs and Russia (44).
  Chapter 4. About the history of Joachim Bishop of Novgorod (51).
  Chapter 5. About Nestor and his chronicle (71).
  Chapter 6. About the chroniclers who followed Nestor (75).
  Chapter 7
  Chapter 8
  Chapter 9
  Chapter 10. Reasons for the difference in the names of peoples (89).
  Chapter 11. Scythian name and habitation (92).
  Chapter 12
  Chapter 13. Strabo's legend from his seventh book (124).
  Chapter 14. The Tale of Pliny Secundus the Elder (145).
  Chapter 15. Legend of Claudius Ptolemy of Alexandria (169).
  Chapter 16
  Chapter 17
  Chapter 18. Remains of the Scythians, Turks and Tatars (265).
  Chapter 19. Differences between Scythians and Sarmatians (281).
  Chapter 20. Sarmatian name, origin and habitat (285).
  Chapter 21. Sarmatians in Russian and Polish history (292).
  Chapter 22. Remaining Sarmatians (296).
  Chapter 23
  Chapter 24
  Chapter 25
  Chapter 26
  Chapter 27
  Chapter 28
  Chapter 29
  Chapter 30
  Chapter 31
  Chapter 32
  Chapter 33
  Chapter 34
  Chapter 35
  Chapter 36
  Chapter 37. Eastern Slavs (427).
  Chapter 38
  Chapter 39. Western Slavs (437).
  Chapter 40
  Chapter 41
  Chapter 42
  Chapter 43. About geography in general and about Russian (455).
  Chapter 44
  Chapter 45
  Chapter 46
  Chapter 47
  Chapter 48
  Notes (540).

Publisher's note: Russian History by Tatishchev is one of the most significant works in the entire history of Russian historiography. Monumentally, brilliantly and accessiblely written, this book covers the history of our country from ancient times - and up to the reign of Fyodor Mikhailovich Romanov. The special value of Tatishchev's work is that the history of Russia is presented here IN ITS ENTIRE COMPLETENESS - in aspects not only military-political, but - religious, cultural and domestic!

Tatishchev came to the main work of his life as a result of a combination of a number of circumstances. Realizing the harm from the lack of a detailed geography of Russia and seeing the connection between geography and history, he found it necessary to collect and consider first all historical information about Russia. Since the foreign manuals turned out to be full of errors, Tatishchev turned to the primary sources, began to study the annals and other materials. At first, he had in mind to give a historical essay (“in a historical order” - that is, an author’s analytical essay in the style of the New Age), but then, finding that it was inconvenient to refer to annals that had not yet been published, he decided to write in a purely “chronicle order” ( on the model of chronicles: in the form of a chronicle of dated events, the connections between which are outlined implicitly).

As Tatishchev writes, he collected more than a thousand books in his library, but he could not use most of them, because he knew only German and Polish. At the same time, with the help of the Academy of Sciences, he used the translations of some ancient authors made by Kondratovich.

• Excerpts from the "History" of Herodotus (ch.12).
• Excerpts from the book. VII "Geography" of Strabo (ch.13).
• From Pliny the Elder (ch. 14).
• From Claudius Ptolemy (chap. 15).
• From Constantine Porphyrogenitus (Ch. 16).
• From the books of northern writers, Bayer's work (ch. 17).

The Sarmatian theory occupies a special place in Tatishchev's ethnogeographical ideas. The etymological “method” of Tatishchev illustrates the reasoning from Chapter 28: the historian notes that in Finnish the Russians are called venelain, the Finns - sumalain, the Germans - saxoline, the Swedes - roxoline, and highlights the common element “alin”, that is, the people. He singles out the same common element in the names of tribes known from ancient sources: Alans, Roxalans, Rakalans, Alanors, and concludes that the language of the Finns is close to the language of the Sarmatians. The idea of ​​the kinship of the Finno-Ugric peoples already existed by the time of Tatishchev.

Another group of etymologies is associated with the search for Slavic tribes in ancient sources. In particular, only Ptolemy, according to Tatishchev's assumptions (ch. 20), mentions the following Slavic names: agorites and pagorites - from the mountains; demons, that is, barefoot; sunsets - from sunset; zenkhi, that is, suitors; hemp - from hemp; tolstobogi, that is, thick-sided; tolistosagi, that is, thick-assed; mothers, that is, hardened; plesii, that is, bald; sabos, or dog; defenses, that is, harrows; sapotrens - prudent; svardeny, i.e. svarodei (making swaras), etc.

Tatishchevskiye Izvestia

A special source problem is the so-called "Tatishchev news", containing information that is not in the annals known to us. These are texts of various sizes, from one or two added words to large whole stories, including lengthy speeches of princes and boyars. Sometimes Tatishchev comments on these news in notes, refers to chronicles unknown to modern science or not reliably identifiable (“Rostovskaya”, “Golitsynskaya”, “Schismatic”, “Chronicle of Simon Bishop”). In most cases, the source of the original news is not indicated at all by Tatishchev.

A special place in the array of "Tatishchev's news" is occupied by the Ioakimov Chronicle - an insert text, provided with a special introduction by Tatishchev and representing a brief retelling of a special chronicle telling about the most ancient period in the history of Russia (IX-X centuries). Tatishchev considered the first Bishop of Novgorod, Joachim Korsunyanin, a contemporary of the Baptism of Russia, to be the author of the Joachim Chronicle.

In historiography, the attitude to Tatishchev's news has always been different. Historians of the second half of the 18th century (Shcherbatov, Boltin) reproduced his information without checking the annals. A skeptical attitude towards them is associated with the names of Schlozer and especially Karamzin. This latter considered the Chronicle of Joachim as a “joke” by Tatishchev (that is, a clumsy hoax), and the Schismatic Chronicle resolutely declared “imaginary”. On the basis of a critical analysis, Karamzin took a number of specific Tatishchev news and fairly consistently refuted them in the notes, without using the History of the Russian State in the main text (the exception is the news about the papal embassy to Roman Galitsky under 1204, which penetrated into the main text of the second volume due to special circumstances).

Interestingly, many skeptics (Peshtich, Lurie, Tolochko) do not at all accuse Tatishchev of scientific dishonesty and invariably emphasize that in Tatishchev's time there were no modern concepts of scientific ethics and strict rules for the design of historical research. Tatishchevskiye Izvestia, no matter how you treat them, is not at all a conscious mystification of the reader, but rather reflects the outstanding independent research, by no means unsophisticated "chronicle" activity of the historian. Additional news is, as a rule, logical links missing in the sources, reconstructed by the author, illustrations of his political and educational concepts. The discussion around "Tatishchev news" continues.

The problem of the "minus text" of Tatishchev's work

The formulation of the problem, as well as the term itself, belong to A. V. Gorovenko. This researcher calls “minus-text” news that Tatishchev does not have, although there are in the Ipatiev and Khlebnikov chronicles (in this terminology, additional Tatishchev news, respectively, are “plus-text”). The main body of the Tatishchev text between 1113 and 1198. goes back to the annals of the same type as well-known to us Ipatievskaya and Khlebnikovskaya. If Tatishchev's source was of better quality than the two chronicles of the same type that have come down to us, then why does Tatishchev's text contain not only additions, but also large gaps, as well as a huge number of defective readings, including a number of rather comic ones? There is still no answer to this question from the side of the supporters of the authenticity of Tatishchev's news.

Sources of the second-fourth parts of the "History"

The chronicle sources of Tatishchev are characterized by him in ch. 7 parts of the first "History".

The first edition of this text has also been preserved, which has a number of differences, as well as a description of the sources, which has been preserved only in the German translation.

Cabinet manuscript

The first edition of the list of sources is not mentioned at all. According to Tatishchev’s description, he received it in 1720 from the library of Peter I and became the basis of the entire collection, this chronicle “with faces”, brought to 1239, but the ending is lost. Briefly outlines the events before Yuri Dolgoruky, then in more detail.

According to Tikhomirov, this chronicle has been lost. According to Peshtich and V. A. Petrov, this is the Laptev volume of the Facial Code, brought to 1252. It was also assumed that we are talking about the same illustrated copy of the Radzivilov Chronicle (see below).

Tolochko is inclined to doubt its existence or to assume that the phrase “with faces” does not mean the illustration of the code, but the presence in it of descriptions of the appearance of the characters included by Tatishchev in the “History”.

Schismatic chronicle

According to Tatishchev, he received it in Siberia from a schismatic in 1721, it was a copy of an ancient manuscript on parchment, completed in 1197 and containing the name of Nestor in the title. Taking into account modern terminology, in 1721 Tatishchev was not actually in Siberia, but in the Urals. The manuscript, if it existed at all, is lost.

According to optimists, this is an unknown redaction of the Kievan Chronicle. In particular, B. A. Rybakov singled out many unique news from this chronicle (186 news for the 12th century) and elevated them mainly to the Chronicle of Peter Borislavich.

According to A.P. Tolochko, the proportionality of the volumes of additional Tatishchev’s news and the text of the Ipatiev Chronicle is deeply natural and is explained by the peculiarity of Tatishchev’s creative manner: his additions recreated a causal relationship between events.

Tolochko argues that a number of readings of the "History of the Russian" for the XII century cannot go back to the Ermolaevsky list, but reflect a different list of the Ipatiev Chronicle, close to Khlebnikov. Tolochko declares this hypothetical list to be the Raskolnich's chronicle, arguing that all Tatishchev's information indicating the antiquity of this manuscript is a hoax. According to Tolochko, the second chronicle of the Khlebnikov type, actually used by Tatishchev and given out as Raskolnichya, was in fact in the library of Prince D. M. Golitsyn, along with the Ermolaev Chronicle and The Chronicle by Theodosius Sofonovich, and all these three manuscripts were of Ukrainian origin and contained in the title the name of Nestor as a chronicler. However, without exception, all of Tolochko's textual observations, which allegedly pointed to the use by Tatishchev of the "second chronicle of the Khdebnikov type", were consistently refuted.

Königsberg manuscript

For Peter I, a copy of the Koenigsberg Chronicle, now known as the Radzivilov Chronicle, was made. This copy is held by the NA Library (7/31/22).

Continues until 1206, but the end is mixed. This description is consistent with the original.

According to A.P. Tolochko, even in those cases when Tatishchev refers to clearly identifiable chronicles (for example, Radzivilovskaya), he makes obvious mistakes.

Golitsyn manuscript

According to the textual analysis of S. L. Peshtich and A. Tolochko, this is the Ermolaev copy of the Ipatiev Chronicle, which was in the library of D. M. Golitsyn in the 1720s, where Tatishchev met him. According to another opinion (M.N. Tikhomirov, B.A. Rybakov), this is a special edition of the Kyiv Chronicle, close to Raskolnichi and different from the edition of all lists of the Ipatiev Chronicle.

An important argument in favor of Tatishchev's conscientiousness is the fact that all known manuscripts of the Ipatiev Chronicle contain both the Kievan and Galicia-Volyn chronicles. However, as N. M. Karamzin noted, Tatishchev knew only the Kievan, but not the Galicia-Volyn chronicle.

Tatishchev notes that the Golitsyn manuscript was completed in 1198, and after 19 years some additions were made without order. In the first surviving version of the description of the chronicles, Tatishchev says that this manuscript contained something from Stryikovsky. This phrase was removed in the final version.

According to modern ideas, the gap between the end of the Kyiv and the beginning of the Galicia-Volyn Chronicle was 5-6 years. However, on the margins of the Ermolaevsky list there is also an indication of a gap of 19 years, and a reference to the similarity with the text of Stryikovsky.

According to Tolochko, Tatishchev took the text of the Galicia-Volyn Chronicle in the Ermolaevsky list as a work dependent on the Polish historian Stryikovsky (for both texts contained praise for Roman Mstislavich), and did not consider it necessary to get acquainted with it in detail and make a copy. Later, he did not have the opportunity to turn to the library of D. M. Golitsyn.

Kirillovsky manuscript

It began with the translation of the Chronograph from the Creation of the World, continued to Ivan the Terrible.

According to Tikhomirov, this is the Book of Powers, according to Peshtich, accepted by Tolochko - the second part of the Lviv Chronicle.

Novgorod manuscript

According to Tatishchev, the Vremennik is named, includes the Law of Yaroslav and has an inscription about its compilation in 1444; taken by a historian from a schismatic in the forest and given to the Library of the Academy of Sciences. Now known as the Academic copy of the Novgorod First Chronicle of the junior edition, which really contains the Russian Truth. According to B. M. Kloss, the Tolstoy copy of the same chronicle was created by a scribe in the library of D. M. Golitsyn in the late 1720s.

Pskov manuscript

This manuscript combines the texts of the Novgorod fifth (with some additions) and the Pskov first chronicle and was preserved in the Library of the Academy of Sciences on April 31, 22 with Tatishchev's notes, the text of the Pskov chronicle ends in 1547. . According to Tatishchev, it ends in 1468. The Pskov news was not used by Tatishchev.

Krekshinsky manuscript

According to Tatishchev's description, it is continued up to 1525, includes genealogies, differs from Novgorod in terms of the composition of the news and dates.

According to Peshtich, this is a list of "Russian Time" and "Resurrection Chronicle". According to Ya. S. Lurie, this is the Novgorod edition of the Book of Powers. According to Tolochko, this is the Chronicle of Krivoborsky, known as the Chertkovsky List of the Vladimir Chronicler and published in vol. XXX PSRL.

Nikonovsky manuscript

According to Tatishchev, this is the Chronicler of the Resurrection Monastery, signed by the hand of Patriarch Nikon and continued until 1630. Its beginning is similar to Raskolnich and Koenigsberg, and until 1180 it is close to Golitsyn.

It is known that the texts of parts 3 and 4 of the "History" were based on the Academic XV list of the Nikon Chronicle (entered the Library of the Academy of Sciences from the collection of Feofan Prokopovich in 1741), a copy of which, on behalf of Tatishchev, was made between 1739 and 1741, while the manuscript was divided into two volumes, it contains notes by Tatishchev.

Nizhny Novgorod manuscript

According to Tatishchev, it ends in 1347, and he is at least 300 years old. Tatishchev reports about his discovery in a letter dated September 12, 1741.

According to M.N. Tikhomirov, this is the Alatyr copy of the Resurrection Chronicle, which is incomplete her text. According to modern data, the manuscript dates from the third quarter of the 16th century and was indeed brought to 1347.

Yaroslavl manuscript

Bought from a peddler in the square, presented to the English Royal Society. It has many additions from the death of Dmitry Donskoy. According to Tolochko, it is identical to Rostov, which is mentioned in the notes.

Manuscripts of Volynsky, Khrushchov and Eropkin

According to A.P. Tolochko, several manuscripts from the Volynsky library, including a number of chronicles of the 17th-18th centuries, have been preserved, but the desired texts are not there. The texts of the Eropkinskaya chronicle are close to "The Tales of the Beginning of Moscow". Khrushchev's manuscript is the Khrushchev's copy of the Book of Degrees with a number of additions from the 17th century.

History of the 17th century

In the “Forewarning” to the first part, Tatishchev mentions a number of other sources dating back to the history of the 17th century, most of which have survived and are identified. However, they include:

Editions

The first two parts of the first volume of the "History" were published for the first time in - years. in Moscow by G.F. Miller (Volume I part, facsimile in pdf and Volume I II part, facsimile in pdf). Volume II was published in 1774 (Volume II, facsimile in pdf), Volume III - in 1774 (Volume III, facsimile in pdf) (Volumes II-III of this edition include the second part of the "History"), Volume IV (third part of the "History") - in 1784 (IV volume, facsimile in pdf), and the manuscript of the fourth part of the "History" was found by M.P. Pogodin only in 1843 and published as V volume of the General. ist. and other Russian in 1848 (volume V, facsimile in pdf).

At the same time, only the first and second parts were basically completed by the author. The third and fourth parts underwent only initial processing and were based primarily on the Nikon Chronicle with separate additions.

Even before publication, Tatishchev's work was known to a number of contemporary historians. Part of Tatishchev's preparatory work after his death was kept in Miller's portfolios. In addition, a number of Tatishchev's materials were used by the publishers of the Radzivilov Chronicle in 1767 to supplement its text.

The complete academic edition of Tatishchev's "History" (including the previously unpublished first edition) was published in 1962-1968 and republished in 1994. In this edition, volume I included the first part, volumes II-III - the second published edition of the second part, volume IV - the first edition of the second part, volume V - the third part, volume VI - the fourth part, volume VII - some preparatory materials. The volumes contain discrepancies, comments, as well as an archaeographic review of Tatishchev's manuscripts prepared by S. N. Valk.

Published in 2003 by the AST publishing house and available online (Volume 1 Volume 2 Volume 3, the three-volume edition of the History is prepared in orthography close to modern. The preparatory materials (published earlier in Volume VII) in this edition are called the fifth part of the History.

• Tatishchev V. N. Collected works. In 8 vols. M.-L., Nauka. 1962-1979. (reissue: M., Ladomir. 1994)
  • T.1. Part 1. 1962. 500 p. ; S. N. Valka "On the manuscripts of the first part of the "History of the Russian" by V. N. Tatishchev, pp. 54-75)
  • T.2. Part 2. Ch. 1-18. 1963. 352 pages.
  • T.3. Part 2. Ch.19-37. 1964. 340 pages.
  • T.4. The first edition of part 2 of the Russian History. 1964. 556 pages.
  • T.5. Part 3. Ch.38-56. 1965. 344 pages.
  • T.6. Part 4. 1966. 438 pages.
  • T.7. 1968. 484 pages.
  • T.8. Small works. 1979.
• Tatishchev V. N. Notes. Letters. (Series "Scientific heritage". Vol. 14). M., Science. 1990. 440 pp. ( includes correspondence related to the work on the "History")

Notes

1. Gorovenko A. V. Sword of Roman Galitsky. Prince Roman Mstislavich in history, epic and legends. - St. Petersburg: "Dmitry Bulanin", 2011. "S. 294-303.
2. Ya. S. Lurie. The history of Russia in the annals and perception of modern times
3. Tolochko A. "Russian History" by Vasily Tatishchev: sources and news. - Moscow: New Literary Review; Kyiv: Criticism, 2005. 544 p. Series: Historia Rossica. ISBN 5-86793-346-6, ISBN 966-7679-62-4. Discussion of the book: http://magazines.russ.ru/km/2005/1/gri37.html Magazine room | Critical Mass, 2005 N1 | Faina Grimberg - Alexey Tolochko. Russian History by Vasily Tatishchev
4. Gorovenko A. V. Sword of Roman Galitsky. Prince Roman Mstislavich in history, epic and legends. - St. Petersburg: "Dmitry Bulanin", 2011. Four final chapters of the second part are devoted to Tatishchevskiye Izvestiya: p. 261-332.
5. Gorovenko A. V. Sword of Roman Galitsky. Prince Roman Mstislavich in history, epic and legends. - St. Petersburg: "Dmitry Bulanin", 2011. S. 421-426 (Addendum 6. Did Tatishchev have a "second list" of the Ipatiev Chronicle? The origin of articles 6652 and 6654 of the Tatishchev "chronicle code"). pp. 426-434 (Supplement 7. Farewell to the Raskolnich Chronicle. On textual evidence of Tatishchev's use of the second chronicle of the Khlebnikov type, presented by A.P. Tolochko).
6. A. V. Zhuravel. "A liar, a talker and a laughter", or Another murder of Tatishchev
7. See, for example: S. L. Peshtich. Russian historiography of the 18th century. L., 1965. Part 1. S. 261.
8. Gorovenko A. V. Sword of Roman Galitsky. Prince Roman Mstislavich in history, epic and legends. - St. Petersburg: "Dmitry Bulanin", 2011. S. 313-320
9. Tolochko 2005, p.53; Tatishchev V.N. Sobr. op. T.1. M.-L., 1962. S.47, 446
10. Gorovenko A. V. Sword of Roman Galitsky. Prince Roman Mstislavich in history, epic and legends. - St. Petersburg: "Dmitry Bulanin", 2011. - p. 307.
11. Tolochko 2005, p.285-286
12. Tolochko 2005, p.166-169
13. Tolochko 2005, p.153
14. Tolochko 2005, p.103, 142-143, 159-166
15. however, A.P. Tolochko discovered a Polish translation of the Ipatiev Chronicle (“Annales S. Nestoris”), made at the beginning of the 18th century by Metropolitan Leo Kishka, where the Galicia-Volyn Chronicle is also missing (Tolochko 2005, p. 116-134)
16. Tatishchev V.N. Sobr. op. T.7. M., 1968. S.58
17. PSRL, vol. II. M., 1998. Discrepancies from the Ermolaevsky list, page 83 of a separate pagination
18. Tolochko 2005, p.108, 115
19. Tatishchev V.N. Sobr. op. T.1. M., 1962. P.47
20. Tolochko 2005, p.58
21. Tolochko 2005, p.60; for a description of the manuscript, see Pskov Chronicles. PSRL. T. V. Issue. 1. M., 2003. S. XX, L-LI
22. Tatishchev V.N. Sobr. op. In 8 vols. T.3. M., 1964. S.309
23. Tolochko 2005, p.65-68
24. Tatishchev V.N. Notes. Letters. M., 1990. S.281
25. Tolochko 2005, p.170-177
26. Tolochko 2005, p.180-182
27. Tolochko 2005, p.185-190