The Suzdalian Chronicle (Church Slavonic: Суздальскаѧ Лѣтопись, romanized: Suzdal'skaę Lětopys'; Russian: Суздальская летопись, romanized: Suzdal'skaia letopis'[1]), also known as the Chronicle of Vladimir-Suzdal,[2] Suzdal–Vladimirian Chronicle[3] or Laurentian–Radziwiłł–Academic Chronicle (LRAC),[1] is a Rus' chronicle. It is one of several continuations of the Primary Chronicle (PVL).

In the strictest sense of the term, Suzdalian Chronicle only means the segment between 1177 and 1203, the preserved source texts of which are very similar in four surviving manuscripts: the Laurentian Codex, the Radziwiłł Chronicle, the Academic Chronicle,[2] and the Chronicler of Pereyaslavl-Suzdal (LPS).[4] In its broadest sense, the Suzdalian Chronicle encompasses events from 1111 to 1305, as transmitted in the Laurentian Codex (the oldest surviving copy, dating from 1377, in columns 289–437).[5] The chronicle is about the late period Kievan Rus', and the Laurentian continuation up to 1305 also includes events of its subsequent Rus' principalities under the early dominion of the Golden Horde. It has a pro-Yurievichi dynastic Tendenz, and a focus on the northeastern principalities of Vladimir-Suzdal, where it was compiled.

Textual witnesses

The northeastern Rus' principalities of Vladimir-Suzdal and their neighbours after the Battle of Lipitsa (1216)
Academic ChronicleSofia First ChronicleRadziwiłł Chronicle

Primary ChronicleAcademic ChronicleAcademic ChronicleRadziwiłł ChronicleRadziwiłł Chronicle Primary ChronicleRadziwiłł ChronicleRadziwiłł Chronicle Laurentian Codex

Primary ChroniclePrimary ChronicleLaurentian CodexLaurentian CodexGreat TroublesGolden HordeKievan Rus'

Contents

Scholarly studies

Composition

The Laurentian Codex compiled several codices of the Vladimir chronicles.[5] The Laurentian Codex was not just copied by the Nizhegorod monk Laurentius (commissioned in 1377, either by metropolitan Dionysius of Suzdal,[18] or by prince Dmitry Konstantinovich of Novgorod-Suzdal[19]).

The first part until folio 40 verso was written by an unknown scribe commissioned by Andrey Bogolyubsky.[citation needed] In 1177 it was completed after the assassination of the prince.[citation needed] The second chronicle about Vsevolod the Big Nest continued up to 1193.[citation needed] Some scholars think that the entire first section of the Chronicle of Vladimir-Suzdal until the year 1193 was written during the years 1177–1193.[2]

Because the Laurentian homily of 1093 is missing from Radziwiłł and LPS, which do have an "Amen" in 1185 where Laurentian doesn't, early scholars such as Shakhmatov (1902, 1938), Priselkov (1940) and Prokhorov (1989) to conjecture that the "Vladimir" chronicle was compiled in several stages, with two or three possible redactions taking place in the mid-1170s, in 1185, and/or in 1193.[20] Alan Timberlake (2000) tested these hypotheses linguistically, and found evidence of four distinct segments: 1177–1185a, 1185b–1188, 1189–1190, and 1192–1203.[21] Although he was able to confirm redactional activity in 1185, he found other linguistic divisions that no previous scholar had proposed, and concluded there was no boundary in 1193, but instead a continuous narrative from 1192 to 1203.[22] Laurentian, Radziwiłł and LPS 'are quite similar through 1203, at which point they diverge.'[4]

The original text on events from 1284 to 1305 was a lost codex compiled for the Grand Prince Mikhail of Tver in 1305, but Laurentius re-edited the presentation of Yuri Vsevolodovich, the founder of Nizhny Novgorod, from positive into a negative, partly rehabilitating the role of Tatars. Vasily Komarovich (1976) studied traces of changes within the manuscript and established a hypothesis about differences between Laurentius' version and the lost one of the Tver chronicle.[18] The 1193–1212 part, which glorified Vsevolod, was composed in 1212 by his son Yuri II Vsevolodovich of Vladimir.[citation needed] The Vladimir Chronicles borrowed from sources of the Southern Rus', especially from Pereiaslav, since Vladimir princes regarded the city as part of their patrimony.[citation needed] The critical edition (1926–1928) presented the text with all its variants given in other chronicles.[citation needed]

Comparison with Kievan Chronicle

The text of the Suzdal'–Vladimirian Chronicle shows strong similarities with that of the Kievan Chronicle found in the Hypatian Codex, but also some remarkable differences.[23] Jaroslaw Pekenski (1988) made the following comparison (italics by Pelenski):[3]

Kievan Chronicle[3] Suzdal'–Vladimirian Chronicle[3]
The same year [1155] Prince Andrej went from his father from Vyšhorod to Suzdal' without his father's permission, and he took from Vyšhorod the Icon of the Blessed Mother of God which was brought from Cesarjagrad on the same ship with the Pirogošča [Icon]. And he had it framed in thirty-grivny-weight-of-gold, besides silver, and precious stones, and large pearls, and having thus adorned [the Icon], he placed it in his own church of the Mother of God in Vladimir.[3] The same year [1155] Prince Andrej went from his father to Suzdal', and he brought with him the Icon of the Blessed Mother of God which was brought from Cesarjagrad on the same ship with the Pirogošča [Icon]. And he had it framed in thirty-grivny-weight-of-gold, besides silver, and precious stones, and large pearls, and having thus adorned [the Icon], he placed it in his own church in Vladimir.[3]

Pelenski observed that the Kievan Chronicle framed Andrey's actions as improper and illegal, whereas the Suzdal'–Vladimirian Chronicle omitted any such references.[24] This is in line with how the Kievan is generally ambivalent or openly critical of Andrey's reign, whilst the Suzdal'–Vladimirian is positive and complimentary of his actions.[24]

Francis Butler (2012) remarked that the Legend of Gorislava of Polotsk sub anno 1128 is contained in the Suzdalian Chronicle, but not the Kievan Chronicle. Nevertheless, both are continuations of the Primary Chronicle, which mentions the related Legend of Rogned' of Polotsk sub anno 980.[1]


References

  1. ^ a b c Butler 2012, p. 335.
  2. ^ a b c Thuis 2015, p. 249.
  3. ^ a b c d e f Pelenski 1988, pp. 762–763.
  4. ^ a b c Timberlake 2000, p. 239.
  5. ^ a b Bermel, Neil (1997). Context and the lexicon in the development of Russian aspect. University of California publications in linguistics. Vol. 129. University of California Press. p. 4. ISBN 978-0-520-09812-1.
  6. ^ a b Thuis 2015, p. 287.
  7. ^ a b Kuchkin, V. A. (1994). "Suzdal Chronicle". In Joseph L. Wieczynski (ed.). The Modern encyclopedia of Russian and Soviet history. Vol. 38. Academic International Press. p. 86. ISBN 978-0-87569-064-3.
  8. ^ Thuis 2015, p. 248–249.
  9. ^ Pelenski 1987, p. 309.
  10. ^ Pelenski 1987, p. 310.
  11. ^ Pelenski 1987, p. 311.
  12. ^ Pelenski 1987, p. 312.
  13. ^ a b Pelenski 1987, p. 307.
  14. ^ Pelenski 1987, p. 303.
  15. ^ a b Pelenski 1987, p. 314.
  16. ^ Timberlake 2000, p. 238.
  17. ^ a b Timberlake 2000, p. 237.
  18. ^ a b Komarovich, Vasily L. (1976). "Из наблюдений над Лаврентьевской летописью [From observations of the Laurentian Chronicle]". Труды Отдела древне русской литературы Института русской литературы АН СССР Л. 30: 27–57.
  19. ^ Thuis 2015, p. 248.
  20. ^ Timberlake 2000, p. 237–239.
  21. ^ Timberlake 2000, p. 260.
  22. ^ Timberlake 2000, p. 260–261.
  23. ^ Pelenski 1988, p. 762.
  24. ^ a b Pelenski 1988, p. 763.

Bibliography

Translations

Critical edition

Literature

Categories