home / Self-development/ Facial vault actaeon. Facial vault of Ivan IV

Facial vault actaeon. Facial vault of Ivan IV

For the first time, the legendary Front Chronicle of Tsar Ivan the Terrible has appeared in open and free access on the website of the OLDP (Society of Lovers of Ancient Writing). The manuscript with hundreds of colorful miniatures can be downloaded from the links below.

The facial chronicle was created in the 16th century by order of the Russian Tsar Ivan the Terrible for the education of the royal children. The work on compiling this Code was headed by the most educated man of his time - St. Macarius, Metropolitan of Moscow and All Rus'. The best scribes and icon painters of the capital worked on compiling the Code. What they performed: a collection of all reliably known sources from Holy Scripture(text of the Septuagint) to the history of Alexander the Great and the writings of Josephus - the entire written history of mankind from the creation of the world to the 16th century inclusive. All times and all peoples who had writing are reflected in dozens of books in this collection. No human civilization has created such a chronicle collection, decorated with a huge number of highly artistic illustrations: neither Europe, nor Asia, nor America or Africa. The fate of the Russian Tsar himself and his children was tragic. The facial chronicle was of no use to the princes. After reading the Facial Vault, part of which is dedicated to the period of Ivan the Terrible, it becomes clear why. Over the next hundreds of years, official historiography appeared, often opportunistic and politically biased, and therefore reliable chronicle sources were doomed to destruction or correction, that is, falsification. The facial chronicle corpus survived these centuries due to the fact that after the death of Ivan the Terrible, during a period of unrest and timelessness, this tome became a coveted object for “enlightened” bibliophiles. Its fragments were stolen from their libraries by the most influential nobles of their time: Osterman, Sheremetev, Golitsyn and others. After all, even then, high-ranking collectors understood that such a tome with sixteen thousand miniatures had no price. So the Code survived until the revolution and was dumped in heaps in several museums and storage facilities.

Already today, through the efforts of enthusiasts, scattered books and sheets have been collected together from various repositories. And the revived Society of Lovers of Ancient Writing has made this masterpiece accessible to everyone. Unparalleled historical source, will now be able to receive many large educational establishments world, national libraries different countries and, of course, our compatriots for raising children on this treasure of experience and wisdom of millennia. In such an amazing way, the work that was done for the royal children five hundred years ago went to our children, dear contemporaries, for which we congratulate you with all our hearts!

First volume

Second volume

Third volume

Volume 4

Library

Source -

Fifth volume (Troy)

Volume six (The earthly life of Jesus Christ)

Volume Seven (Josephus War of the Jews)

Eighth volume (Roman Byzantium)

Part 1 (81-345 AD) -

Part 2 (345-463 AD) -

Ninth volume (Byzantium)

Part 1 (463-586 AD) -

Part 2 (586-805 AD) -

Part 3 (805-875 AD) –

Part 4 (875-928 AD) -

Library

Facsimile editions of Slavic and Byzantine manuscripts of the 11th – 16th centuries. – priority area of activity of the OLDP. The Foundation has begun to formulate a long-term publication plan based on proposals already received. At the same time, we are ready to cooperate with the archives of Russia and foreign countries in the implementation and financing of facsimile editions of other rare monuments of Slavic and Byzantine literature. The publications will be produced at a high printing level and sold in large quantities. Preference is given to early manuscripts (up to the 16th century inclusive), with illustrations that require facsimiles due to low availability and (or) poor preservation.

Attention to the readers of the Qatar Commissioner's group.-

Ladies and Gentlemen.

You have a unique opportunity to be one of the first to get acquainted with the work of my comrades from the electronic library of the Society of Lovers of Ancient Writing, who have placed the unique heritage of our ancestors on the Internet. What will be revealed to you is truly magnificent, and studying the material will help you understand what the epic of the Russian Land actually looked like. Discoveries and amazing events of the past await you, most of which have never been covered by Torah adherents - historians. Before you is the TRUTH, the same one that many of you have been painfully searching for all your lives. Read and be proud that you belong to the Great Russian People.

A grandiose artistic project: the front chronicle of Ivan the Terrible, the Tsar Book - a chronicle of events in world and especially Russian history, written, probably in 1568-1576, especially for the royal library in a single copy. The word “facial” in the title of the Code means illustrated, with images “in faces”. Consists of 10 volumes containing about 10 thousand sheets of rag paper, decorated with more than 16 thousand miniatures. Covers the period “from the creation of the world” to 1567.

The facial chronicle - the source of truth

What they accomplished: a collection of all reliably known sources from the Holy Scriptures (the text of the Septuagint) to the history of Alexander the Great and the writings of Josephus - the entire written history of mankind from the creation of the world to the 16th century inclusive. All times and all peoples who had writing are reflected in dozens of books in this collection. No civilization of mankind has ever created such a chronicle collection, decorated with a huge number of highly artistic illustrations: neither Europe, nor Asia, nor America and Africa.

The fate of the Russian Tsar himself and his children was tragic. The facial chronicle was of no use to the princes. After reading the Facial Vault, part of which is dedicated to the period of Ivan the Terrible, it becomes clear why

Over the next hundreds of years, official historiography appeared, often opportunistic and politically biased, and therefore reliable chronicle sources were doomed to destruction or correction, that is, falsification. The facial chronicle corpus survived these centuries due to the fact that after the death of Ivan the Terrible, during a period of unrest and timelessness, this tome became a coveted object for “enlightened” bibliophiles. Its fragments were stolen from their libraries by the most influential nobles of their time: Osterman, Sheremetev, Golitsyn and others. After all, even then, high-ranking collectors understood that such a tome with sixteen thousand miniatures had no price. So the Code survived until the revolution, after which it was dumped in heaps in several museums and storage facilities.

Already today, through the efforts of enthusiasts, scattered books and sheets have been collected together from various repositories. And the revived Society of Lovers of Ancient Writing has made this masterpiece accessible to everyone. This historical source, which has no analogues, can now be obtained free of charge by many major educational institutions of the world, national libraries of different countries and, of course, by our compatriots to raise their children on this treasure of experience and wisdom of millennia.

In such an amazing way, the work that was done for the royal children five hundred years ago went to our children, dear contemporaries, for which we congratulate you with all our hearts!

The “Makaryev school” of painting, the “school of Grozny” are concepts that cover a little more than three decades in the life of Russian art of the second half (or, more precisely, the third quarter) of the 16th century. These years are full of facts, rich in works of art, characterized by a new attitude to the tasks of art, its role in the general structure of the young centralized state, and, finally, they are notable for their attitude towards the creative personality of the artist and attempts to regulate his activities, more than ever to subordinate them to the tasks polemical, to involve in participation in the intense dramatic action of state life. For the first time in the history of Russian artistic culture, issues of art became the subject of debate at two church councils (1551 and 1554). For the first time, a pre-developed plan for the creation of numerous works different types art (monumental and easel painting, book illustration and applied art, in particular wood carving) predetermined themes, plots, emotional interpretation and, to a large extent, served as the basis for a complex set of images designed to reinforce, justify, glorify the reign and deeds of the first “crowned autocrat”, who ascended the throne of the centralized Russian state. And it was at this time that a grandiose artistic project was being carried out: the front chronicle of Ivan the Terrible, the Tsar-Book - a chronicle of events in world and especially Russian history, written, probably in 1568-1576, especially for the royal library in a single copy. The word “facial” in the title of the Code means illustrated, with images “in faces”. Consists of 10 volumes containing about 10 thousand sheets of rag paper, decorated with more than 16 thousand miniatures. Covers the period “from the creation of the world” to 1567. A grandiose “paper” project of Ivan the Terrible!

Face chronograph. RNB.

The chronological framework of these phenomena in the artistic life of the Russian centralized state in the second half of the 16th century. determined by one of the most significant events of that time - the crowning of Ivan IV. The wedding of Ivan IV (January 16, 1547) opened a new period of establishment of autocratic power, being a kind of result of a long process of formation of a centralized state and the struggle for the unity of Rus', subordinate to the power of the Moscow autocrat. That is why the very act of crowning Ivan IV, which served as the subject of repeated discussions among the future participants of the “elected council”, as well as among the inner circle of Metropolitan Macarius, was, as historians have already said more than once, furnished with exceptional pomp. Based on literary sources from the end of the previous century, Macarius developed the very ritual of the royal wedding, introducing the necessary symbolism into it. A convinced ideologist of autocratic power, Macarius did everything possible to emphasize the exclusivity (“God’s chosenness”) of the power of the Moscow autocrat, the original rights of the Moscow sovereign with references to historical analogies in the field civil history and above all the history of Byzantium, Kievan and Vladimir-Suzdal Rus'.

Royal book.

The ideology of autocracy should, according to Macarius’s plan, be reflected in the written sources of the era and, first of all, the chronicle, books of the royal genealogy, the circle of annual reading, which were the Chetya Menaion compiled under his leadership, and also, apparently, it was intended to turn to the creation of appropriate works visual arts. That the plans for addressing all types of artistic culture were grandiose from the very beginning is shown by the scope of literary works of that time. It is difficult, however, to imagine what forms the implementation of these plans in the field of fine art would have taken and in what time frame they would have been realized, if not for the fire in June 1547, which devastated the vast territory of the city. As the chronicle says, on Tuesday, June 21, “at 10 o’clock on the third week of Peter’s Lent, the Church of the Exaltation of the Honorable Cross behind Neglimnaya on Arbatskaya Street caught fire... And a great storm came, and fire began to flow, like lightning, and the fire was intense... And the storm turned into a larger hail, and the cathedral church of the Most Pure Top caught fire in the city, and in the royal courtyard of the Grand Duke on the roof sheets, and the wooden huts, and the sheets decorated with gold, and the Treasury courtyard and with the royal treasury, and the church in the royal courtyard royal treasuries The Annunciation is golden-topped, Andreev's Deesis of Rublev's letters, overlaid with gold, and images decorated with gold and beads of valuable Greek letters of his ancestors collected from many years... And in many stone churches, Deesis and images, and church vessels, and many human bellies were burnt out , and the Metropolitan's courtyard." “...And in the city all the courtyards and roofs are burning, and the Chudovsky monastery is all burning, the only relics of the great holy miracle worker Alexei were quickly preserved by the mercy of God... And the Ascension Monastery is also all burning, ...and the Church of the Ascension is burning, images and vessels Church and human lives are many, only the archpriest brought out one image of the Most Pure One. And all the courtyards in the city were burnt, and in the city the roof of the city, and the cannon potion, wherever in the city, and those places where the city walls were torn apart... In one hour, a lot of people burned, 1,700 men and women and babies, a lot of people burned people along Tferskaya Street, and along Dmitrovka, and on Bolshoy Posad, along Ilyinskaya Street, in Gardens.” The fire on June 21, 1547, which began in the first half of the day, continued until night: “And in the third hour of the night the fiery flame ceased.” As is clear from the above chronicle evidence, buildings in the royal court were severely damaged, numerous works of art were destroyed and partly damaged.

Battle on the Ice. Chronicle miniature from the Front Vault of the 16th century.

But Moscow residents suffered even more. On the second day, the tsar and the boyars gathered at the bedside of Metropolitan Macarius, who was injured in the fire, “to think” - the state of mind of the masses was discussed, and the tsar’s confessor, Fyodor Barmin, reported on the spread of rumors about the cause of the fire, which black people explained by the witchcraft of Anna Glinskaya. Ivan IV was forced to order an investigation. In addition to F. Barmin, Prince Fyodor Skopin Shuisky, Prince Yuri Temkin, I. P. Fedorov, G. Yu. Zakharyin, F. Nagoy and “many others” took part in it. Alarmed by the fire, the Moscow black people, as the course of further events explains in the Continuation of the Chronograph of 1512 and the Chronicler Nikolsky, gathered at a meeting and on Sunday morning, June 26, entered the Kremlin’s Cathedral Square “to the sovereign’s court,” seeking trial of the perpetrators of the fire (the perpetrators of the fire , as stated above, the Glinskys were revered). Yuri Glinsky tried to hide in the Dmitrovsky chapel of the Assumption Cathedral. The rebels entered the cathedral, despite the ongoing divine service, and during the “cherubic song” they extracted Yuri and killed him in front of the metropolitan seat, dragged him outside the city and threw him at the place of execution of the criminals. The Glinsky people were “beaten countless times and their stomachs were razed by the princess.” One might have thought that the murder of Yuri Glinsky was an “execution” dressed in a “traditional” and “legal” form.

Mityai (Mikhail) and St. Dionysius before the leader. book Dimitry Donskoy.

Miniature from the Facial Chronicle. 70s XVI century

This is evidenced by the fact that Glinsky’s body was taken out for auction and thrown “before the stake, where they would be executed.” The black people's protest did not end there. On June 29, armed and in battle order, they (at the “cry of the executioner” or “birich”) moved to the royal residence in Vorobyovo. Their ranks were so formidable (they were with shields and spears) that Ivan IV was “surprised and horrified.” Black people demanded the extradition of Anna Glinskaya and her son Mikhail. The scale of the action of black people turned out to be quite large; the readiness for military action testified to the strength of the people's anger. This uprising was preceded by protests of the dissatisfied in the cities (in the summer of 1546, the Novgorod pishchalniks spoke out, and on June 3, 1547, the Pskovites, complaining about the royal governor Turuntai), and it is clear that the size of the popular unrest should have made a formidable impression not only on Ivan IV. The inner circle of the young tsar, who determined the policy of the 30s - 50s, had to take them into account. The organized uprising of the Moscow lower classes was mainly directed against boyar autocracy and arbitrariness, which was especially painfully reflected in the destinies of the broad masses during the youth of Ivan IV, and had a certain impact on the further development of domestic politics.

One of the books of the Front Vault of the 16th century.

Most likely, those historians who consider the Moscow uprising after the fire of 1547 to be inspired by opponents of boyar autocracy are right. It is not unreasonable to try to find the inspirers of the uprising in the inner circle of Ivan IV. However, inspired from the outside, it, reflecting the protest of the broad masses against boyar oppression, as we know, took on an unexpected scope, although it coincided in its direction with the new trends of the emerging government of the 50s. But at the same time, its scale, speed and strength of the popular reaction to the events were such that it was impossible not to take into account the significance of the speech and those deep social reasons that, regardless of the influence of the ruling political parties, gave rise to popular unrest. All this aggravated the complexity of the political situation and greatly contributed to the breadth of ideas and searches for the most effective means of ideological influence, among which works of fine art that were new in their content occupied a significant place. One might think that when developing a plan for political and ideological measures to influence broad public circles, it was decided to turn to one of the most accessible and familiar educational means - to formal and monumental painting, due to the capacity of its images, capable of leading from the usual edifying themes to more broad historical generalizations. A certain experience of this kind developed already during the reign of first Ivan III, and later Vasily III. In addition to influencing the Moscow black people, as well as the boyars and service people, the works of painting were intended to have a direct educational effect on the young Tsar himself. Like many literary endeavors carried out in the circle of Metropolitan Macarius and the “chosen council” - and the leading role of Macarius as the ideologist of autocratic power should not be underestimated - the works of painting in their essential part contained not only “justifications of the policy” of the tsar, but also revealed those basic ideas that were supposed to inspire Ivan IV himself and determine the general direction of his activities.

Ivan the Terrible at the wedding of Simeon Bekbulatovich.

It was important to interest Ivan IV in the general plan of restoration work to such an extent that their ideological orientation would, as if predetermined by the sovereign himself, come from him (remember that somewhat later the Stoglavy Cathedral was organized in a similar way). The initiative for restoration work was divided between Metropolitan Macarius, Sylvester and Ivan IV, who, naturally, had to officially lead. All these relationships can be traced in the very course of events, as the chronicle sets them out, and most importantly, as evidenced by the materials of the “Viskovaty case”. The interior of the temples burned out, and the fire did not spare the royal home or the royal treasury. Leaving churches without shrines was not the custom of Muscovite Rus'. Ivan IV first of all “sent out holy and honest icons to the cities, Velikiy Novgorod, and to Smolensk, and to Dmitrov, and Zvenigorod, and from many other cities, they brought many wonderful holy icons and at the Annunciation they placed them for worship by the king and all the peasants.” Following this, restoration work began. One of the active participants in the organization of restoration work was Priest Sylvester, who himself served in the Annunciation Cathedral - as is known, one of the most influential figures of the “elected council”. Sylvester tells in detail about the progress of the work in his “Complaint” to the “consecrated cathedral” of 1554, from where one can glean information about the organization and performers of the work, and about the sources of iconography, and about the process of ordering and “acceptance” of works, as well as about the role and relationships Metropolitan Macarius, Ivan IV and Sylvester himself during the creation of new monuments of painting.

Shchelkanovschina. Popular uprising against the Tatars in Tver. 1327.

Miniature from the Front Chronicle of the 16th century

“The Complaint” allows one to judge the number of invited masters, as well as the very fact of inviting masters, and most importantly, about those artistic centers from which cadres of painters were drawn: “the sovereign sent icon painters to Novgorod, and to Pskov and to other cities, icon painters came together , and the Tsar Sovereign ordered them to paint icons, whoever was ordered to do what, and ordered others to sign the plates and to paint images at the city over the gates of the saints.” Thus, the areas of activity of painters are immediately determined: easel painting (icon painting), secular ward painting, creation of gate icons (it is possible to understand them as mural painting and as easel painting). Sylvester names two cities as the main artistic centers from which masters come: Novgorod and Pskov, and it is very interesting how the relationship between the masters and the organizers of the order develops. All from the same “Complaint” of Sylvester, as well as from his message to his son Anfim, one can judge the leading role of Sylvester in organizing the leadership of the squad itself, which carried out painting work after the fire of 1547. In particular, with the Novgorod masters, Sylvester apparently had relations Habitual, well-coordinated relationships have long been established. He himself determines what they should order, where they can get the sources of iconography: “And I, reporting to the sovereign Tsar, ordered the Novgorod icon painters to paint the Holy Trinity, the Life-Giving One in the acts, and I Believe in one God, and Praise the Lord from heaven, and Sophia, the Wisdom God, yes it is worthy to eat, and the translation of the Trinity had icons, why write, but on Simonov.” But this was done if the plots were traditional. The situation was much more complicated when these translations did not exist.

Defense of Kozelsk, 16th century miniature from the Nikon Chronicle.

The other part of the work was entrusted to the Pskov residents. Their invitation was not unexpected. They turned to Pskov craftsmen back at the end of the 15th century. True, at that time they invited skilled builders, whereas now they invited icon painters. Macarius, in the recent past the Archbishop of Novgorod and Pskov, himself, as is known, a painter, in all likelihood, at one time established relations with Pskov masters. In any case, based on the completed orders, one can judge the rather significant size of the workshop at the archbishop's court in Novgorod. The generally accepted opinion is that this entire workshop, following Macarius, moved to the metropolitan court in Moscow. Macarius, being already a metropolitan, could maintain relations with the Pskovites through the priest of the Annunciation Cathedral, Pskov Semyon, the same one who presented his “Complaint” to the “consecrated cathedral” together with Sylvester. Obviously, the best masters from different cities were convened to fulfill such a complex order, which laid the foundation for the “royal school” of painters. The Pskovites, without explaining the reason, did not want to work in Moscow and undertook to fulfill the order, working at home: “And the Pskov icon painters Ostan, yes Yakov, yes Mikhail, yes Yakushko, and Semyon Vysoky Glagol and his comrades, took time off to Pskov and were there to paint four large icons":

1. Last Judgment

2. Renewal of the Temple of Christ our God of the Resurrection

3. The Passion of the Lord in the Gospel parables

4. Icon, there are four feasts on it: “And God rested on the seventh day from all his works, that the only begotten Son is the Word of God, that people come, let us worship the three-part Divinity, that in the carnal grave”

So, at the head of the entire grandiose plan of restoration work was the king, “reporting” to whom or “asking” whom (partly nominally), Sylvester distributed orders among painters, especially if there was an immediate opportunity to use samples.

Battle on the Ice. The flight of the Swedes to the ships.

It should be especially emphasized that the Moscow sources of traditional iconography were the Trinity-Sergius Monastery and the Simonov Monastery. (IN written sources until the second half of the 16th century. There was no information about an art workshop in Simonovo, despite the mention of the names of several masters who came from this monastery). It should also be recalled that among the authoritative sources of iconography, Novgorod and Pskov churches are also mentioned, in particular the murals of St. Sophia of Novgorod, the Church of St. George in the Yuryev Monastery, St. Nicholas on the Yaroslav's Courtyard, the Annunciation on the Settlement, St. John on Opoki, the Cathedral Life-Giving Trinity in Pskov, which is very typical for the Novgorod connections between Sylvester and Macarius. Despite the fact that it would seem natural to consider Metropolitan Macarius himself as the main inspirer of the paintings, it is clear from the text of the “Complaint” that he played a rather passive role in the organizational side of the order. But he carried out the “acceptance” of the order, “performing a prayer service with the entire consecrated cathedral,” because the most important act of approbation from the point of view of church ideology was the moment of consecration of completed works, primarily works of easel, as well as monumental painting. Ivan IV could not do without the participation at this stage either - he distributed new icons to churches. Restoration work after the fire of 1547 was considered a matter of national importance, since Ivan IV himself, Metropolitan Macarius and Sylvester, the member of the “elected council” closest to Ivan IV, took care of their implementation.

Ivan the Terrible and royal icon painters.

It was in the era of Grozny that art was “deeply exploited by the state and the church,” and a rethinking of the role of art took place, the importance of which as an educational principle, a means of persuasion and an irresistible emotional impact increases immeasurably, at the same time the usual way of artistic life changes dramatically. The possibility of “free creative development personality of the artist." The artist loses the simplicity and freedom of relationship with the client-parishioner, the church ktitor or the abbot - the builder of the monastery. Now orders of national importance are strictly regulated by ruling circles, which consider art as a conductor of certain political trends. Themes and plots of individual works or entire ensembles are discussed by representatives of state and church authorities, become the subject of debate at councils, and are specified in legislative documents. During these years, plans were developed for grandiose monumental ensembles, cycles of easel works and illustrations in handwritten books, which generally have common trends.

Construction of St. Basil's Cathedral (Intercession on the Moat) on Red Square.

A desire is revealed to connect the history of the Moscow state with world history, to show the “chosenness” of the Moscow state, which is the subject of “divine economy.” This idea is supported by numerous analogies from Old Testament history, the history of the Babylonian and Persian kingdoms, the monarchy of Alexander the Great, Roman and Byzantine history. It is not without reason that the chronographic volumes of the Front Chronicle were created with special attention and such thoroughness in the circle of Makaryev scribes. It is not for nothing that in the monumental ensembles of temple paintings and paintings of the Golden Chamber such a significant place was given to historical and Old Testament subjects, selected on the principle of direct analogy. At the same time, the entire cycle of works of fine art was permeated with the idea of the divinity of autocratic power, its establishment by God, its originality in Rus' and the direct succession of royal dignity from the Roman and Byzantine emperors and the continuity of the dynasty of “God-appointed sceptre holders” from the princes of Kyiv and Vladimir to the sovereign of Moscow. All this taken together was intended to reinforce and justify the very fact of the crowning of Ivan IV, to justify the further course of autocratic policy not only in the Moscow state itself, but also in the face of the “Orthodox East”.

Ivan the Terrible sends ambassadors to Lithuania.

This was all the more necessary because the “approval” of the wedding of Ivan IV by the Patriarch of Constantinople was expected, which, as we know, took place only in 1561, when a “conciliar charter” was received. An equally important place in the overall plan was occupied by the idea of glorifying the military actions of Ivan IV. His military performances were interpreted as religious wars in defense of the purity and inviolability of the Christian state from infidels, liberating Christian captives and civilians from Tatar invaders and oppressors. Finally, the topic of religious and moral education seemed no less significant. It was interpreted on two levels: more in-depth with a certain philosophical and symbolic connotation in the interpretation of basic Christian dogma and more directly - in terms of moral purification and improvement. The last topic was also of a personal nature - it was about the spiritual education and self-correction of the young autocrat. All these trends, or, more precisely, all these facets of a single ideological concept, were realized in different ways in individual works of art throughout the entire Grozny reign. The culmination of the discovery and implementation of this concept was the period of restoration work of 1547-1554. and more broadly - the time of activity of the “elected Rada”.

Battle of Kulikovo. 1380

After 1570 until the end of the reign of Ivan IV, as is known, the volume of work in the field of fine arts sharply decreased, the tension of emotional content, the feeling of uniqueness and chosenness gradually faded. It is replaced by another, more severe, sorrowful, and sometimes tragic. Echoes of triumph and self-affirmation, so characteristic in the initial period, only occasionally make themselves felt in individual works as belated reflections of the past, only to fade away completely in the early 80s. At the end of the reign of Ivan the Terrible, applied art came to the forefront in artistic life. If it becomes impossible to affirm and glorify the idea of autocracy as such, then it is natural to add splendor to palace everyday life; palace utensils, like royal clothes, covered with patterns and jewelry, often turn into unique works of art. The nature of the literary works undertaken in order to “prepare” for the wedding in the circle of Metropolitan Macarius is noteworthy. Among them, the rite of crowning the kingdom itself, with its direct connection with the “Tale of the Princes of Vladimir,” should be especially highlighted. The story about Vladimir Monomakh receiving the royal crown and his coronation “to the kingdom” is contained in the Degree Book and the Great Menaions of the Fourth, i.e., literary monuments of the Makaryev circle. The initial volumes of the chronographic part of the Litsevoy Chronicle Code, as well as an expanded (compared to other lists of the Nikon Chronicle) edition of the text of the first six sheets of the Golitsyn volume of the Litsey Chronicle Code, also contain a narrative about the beginning of the reign of Vladimir Monomakh in Kyiv and about his crowning “to the kingdom” with regalia , sent byzantine emperor. In direct connection with them are miniatures decorating the chronographic part of the Front Vault, as well as miniatures of the first six sheets of the Golitsyn volume. In the miniatures of the chronographic part of the Litsa Chronicle, in turn, there is further disclosure of the theme of the divine establishment of autocratic power, the introduction of Rus' into the general course of world history, as well as the idea of the chosenness of the Moscow autocratic ruler. Thus, a certain circle of literary monuments is designated. These same themes are further explored in the paintings of the Golden Chamber, in the reliefs of the royal seat (“Monomakh’s throne”) erected in the Assumption Cathedral, and in the painting of the portal of the Archangel Cathedral. The icons executed by the Pskovites, seemingly purely dogmatic in their content, carry within themselves the beginning, and perhaps also the revelation, of the theme of the sacred nature of the wars led by Ivan IV, the divinely chosen feat of warriors awarded the crowns of immortality and glory, which culminates in the icon “ Church Militant" and in the depiction of Christ - the conqueror of death in the "Four Parts" of the Annunciation Cathedral.

Battle of Kosovo Field. 1389

This theme in its programmatic, most developed form is embodied in the first Russian “battle picture” - “The Militant Church”. A direct revelation of its subtext are the paintings of the tomb of Ivan IV (in the deaconry of the Archangel Cathedral), as well as the system of paintings of the cathedral as a whole (if we assume that its painting that has survived to this day completely repeats the painting carried out no later than 1566). Even if we remain within the most cautious assumptions about the preservation of earlier paintings, one cannot help but see that the military themes included in the murals directly lead to the cycle of Old Testament battle scenes in the paintings of the Golden Chamber, in which contemporaries found direct analogies with the history of Kazan and Astrakhan taking. To this should be added personal, “autobiographical” themes, if this is how we can talk about the subjects of the murals of the Archangel Cathedral (the main tomb of Grozny) and the Golden Chamber, and partly the icon-painting “Church Militant”. Finally, the main Christological, or symbolic-dogmatic, cycle of icons made according to the “sovereign order” is associated with the main compositions of the painting of the Golden Chamber, being a visual expression of the entire system of religious and philosophical views of that group, which is usually called the “government of the 50s” and which included both representatives of the “elected Rada” and the head of the Russian Church - Metropolitan Macarius. Being addressed to relatively wide circles of the people, this painting also had another purpose - a constant reminder of the basic religious and philosophical principles to the young king, whose “correction” was undertaken by his closest members of the “elected council.” This is also evidenced by the presence in the system of painting of the Golden Chamber of compositions on the theme of the Tale of Varlaam and Joasaph, in which contemporaries tended to see the story of the moral renewal of Ivan IV himself, and by Varlaam they meant the same all-powerful Sylvester. Thus, before us are, as it were, links of a single plan. Themes, starting in one of the monuments, continue to be revealed in subsequent ones, read in direct sequence in works of different types of fine art.

Facial chronicle vault(Front chronicle collection of Ivan the Terrible, Tsar Book) - a chronicle collection of events in world and especially Russian history, created in the 40-60s of the 16th century (probably in 1568-1576) specifically for the royal library in a single copy. The word “facial” in the title of the Code means illustrated, with images “in faces”. Consists of 10 volumes containing about 10 thousand sheets of rag paper, decorated with more than 16 thousand miniatures. Covers the period “from the creation of the world” to 1567. The front (i.e., illustrated, with the image “in the faces”) chronicle vault is not only a monument of Russian handwritten books and a masterpiece of ancient Russian literature. This is a literary, historical, artistic monument of world significance. It is no coincidence that it is unofficially called the Tsar-Book (by analogy with the Tsar-Cannon and the Tsar-Bell). The facial chronicle was created in the 2nd half of the 16th century by order of Tsar Ivan IV Vasilyevich the Terrible in a single copy for his children. Metropolitan and “sovereign” artisans worked on the books of the Front Vault: about 15 scribes and 10 artists. The arch consists of about 10 thousand sheets and over 17 thousand illustrations, and the visual material occupies about 2/3 of the entire volume of the monument. Miniature drawings (landscape, historical, battle and everyday life genres) not only illustrate the text, but also complement it. Some events are not written, but only drawn. The drawings tell readers what clothing, military armor, church vestments, weapons, tools, household items, etc. looked like in ancient times. In the history of world medieval writing, there is no monument similar to the Front Chronicle, both in breadth of coverage and in volume. It included sacred, Hebrew and ancient Greek history, stories about the Trojan War and Alexander the Great, plots from the history of Roman and Byzantine Empire, as well as a chronicle covering major events Russia of four and a half centuries: from 1114 to 1567. (It is assumed that the beginning and end of this chronicle, namely the Tale of Bygone Years, a significant part of the history of the reign of Ivan the Terrible, as well as some other fragments, have not been preserved.) In the Litsevoy Vault, the history of the Russian state is considered inextricably with world history.

The volumes are grouped in relatively chronological order:

Bible story
History of Rome
History of Byzantium
Russian history

Contents of volumes:

Museum collection (GIM). 1031 sheets, 1677 miniatures. An account of sacred, Hebrew and Greek history from the creation of the world to the destruction of Troy in the 13th century. BC e.
Chronographic collection (BAN). 1469 sheets, 2549 miniatures. Exposition of the history of the ancient East, the Hellenistic world and ancient Rome from the 11th century BC e. until the 70s I century n. e.
Face Chronograph (RNB). 1217 sheets, 2191 miniatures. Outline of the history of the ancient Roman Empire from the 70s. I century to 337 and Byzantine history to the 10th century.
Golitsyn volume (RNB). 1035 sheets, 1964 miniatures. Presentation national history for 1114-1247 and 1425-1472.
Laptev volume (RNB). 1005 sheets, 1951 miniature. Outline of Russian history for 1116-1252.
Osterman's first volume (BAN). 802 sheets, 1552 miniatures. Outline of Russian history for 1254-1378.
Osterman's second volume (BAN). 887 sheets, 1581 miniatures. Outline of Russian history for 1378-1424.
Shumilovsky volume (RNL). 986 sheets, 1893 miniatures. Outline of Russian history for 1425, 1478-1533.
Synodal volume (GIM). 626 l, 1125 miniatures. Outline of Russian history for 1533-1542, 1553-1567.
Royal Book (GIM). 687 sheets, 1291 miniatures. Outline of Russian history for 1533-1553

History of the creation of the vault:

The vault was probably created in 1568-1576. (according to some sources, work began in the 1540s), commissioned by Ivan the Terrible, in Aleksandrovskaya Sloboda, which was then the residence of the Tsar. In particular, Alexey Fedorovich Adashev took part in the work. The creation of the Facial Chronicle lasted intermittently for more than 30 years. The text was prepared by scribes from the entourage of Metropolitan Macarius, the miniatures were executed by masters of the metropolitan and “sovereign” workshops. The presence in the illustrations of the Facial Chronicle corpus of images of buildings, structures, clothing, tools of craft and agriculture, household items, corresponding in each case to the historical era, indicates the existence of more ancient illustrated chronicles, which served as models for the illustrators of the Facial Chronicle corpus Illustrative material, occupying about 2/3 The entire volume of the Facial Chronicle contains a developed system of illustrating historical texts. Within the illustrations of the Facial Chronicle, one can talk about the origin and formation of landscape, historical, battle and everyday genres. Around 1575, amendments were made to the text concerning the reign of Ivan the Terrible (apparently under the leadership of the Tsar himself). Initially the vault was not bound - binding was carried out later, at different times.

Storage:

The only original copy of the Code is stored separately, in three places (in different “baskets”):

State Historical Museum (volumes 1, 9, 10)

Library Russian Academy Sciences (volumes 2, 6, 7)

Russian National Library (volumes 3, 4, 5, 8)

Cultural influence and meaning. B. M. Kloss described the Code as “the largest chronicle-chronographic work of medieval Rus'.” The miniatures from the Code are widely known and used both in the form of illustrations and in art.

FACE CHRONICLES - Russian chronicles, decorated with illustrations, conveying the content of history. events not only through words, but also through the means of fine art. Using the opportunity to convey a detailed narrative with meager lines and colors, medieval scribes and chroniclers often considered the image to be equivalent to the text. The traditions of facial chronicle writing of the 11th-16th centuries are established on the basis of three manuscripts that have survived to this day: the Tver copy of the Chronicle of George Amartol (began work 1304-1307, completed 1368-1377), the Radzivilov or Königsberg Chronicle (90s of the 15th century) and Facial chronicle vault. Each of the named monuments of facial chronicles contains traces of the most ancient illustrated chronicles that have not survived to our time. In the monuments of facial chronicle, a deep correspondence is revealed between the style of the text and the miniatures illustrating it. The conventional language of the miniaturist is subordinated to the main goal: to clearly show where, when and how this event took place. The need to talk about various events and convey the socio-historical ideas of medieval Rus' gave rise to a coherent iconographic system that developed over several centuries. An iconographic scheme was established for depicting the granting or reception of investiture, the beginning of the reign of a great or appanage prince, taking an oath (kissing the cross), concluding treaties, sending or receiving embassies, depicting an army, etc. The facial chronicle used historical symbols (for example, a raised sword or a saber is a sign of a military threat, a ciborium is a sign of the holiness of a place). The attributes of royal and princely dignity are preserved. The complex “feudal table of rank” is strictly observed, first of all, when depicting clothing, headdresses, the shape of thrones, etc. Facial chronicle vault The 2nd half of the 16th century can be considered as a kind of culmination in the formation of the iconography of historical illustration. Subsequent facial chronicles - the Kungur Chronicle and numerous copies of the "Kazan History" - follow the general tradition of historical illustration.

O. I. Podobedova. Moscow.

Soviet historical encyclopedia. In 16 volumes. - M.: Soviet encyclopedia. 1973-1982. Volume 8, KOSSALA – MALTA. 1965.

Literature:

Presnyakov A. E., The Royal Book, its composition and origin, St. Petersburg, 1893; him, Mosk. ist. encyclopedia of the 16th century, "Izv. ORYAS", St. Petersburg, 1900, vol. 5, book. 3; Artsikhovsky A.V., Old Russian. miniatures as ist. source, M., 1944; Alshits D.N., Ivan the Terrible and postscripts to the facial vaults of his time, "IZ", vol. 23, 1947; his, Origin and features of the sources telling about the boyar rebellion of 1553, ibid., vol. 25; Schmidt S. O., Miniatures of the Royal Book as a source on the history of Moscow. uprising of 1547, "PI", vol. 5, M., 1956; Podobedova O.I., Russian miniatures. historical manuscripts. On the history of Russian facial chronicle writing, M., 1965.

The volumes are grouped in relatively chronological order:

Bible story
History of Rome
History of Byzantium
Russian history

Museum collection (GIM). 1031 sheets, 1677 miniatures. An account of sacred, Hebrew and Greek history from the creation of the world to the destruction of Troy in the 13th century. BC e.
Chronographic collection (BAN). 1469 sheets, 2549 miniatures. An account of the history of the ancient East, the Hellenistic world and ancient Rome from the 11th century. BC e. until the 70s I century n. e.
Face Chronograph (RNB). 1217 sheets, 2191 miniatures. Outline of the history of the ancient Roman Empire from the 70s. I century to 337 and Byzantine history to the 10th century.
Golitsynsky volume (Royal Chronicler)(RNB, F.IV.225). 1035 sheets, 1964 miniatures. Outline of Russian history for 1114-1247 and 1425-1472.
Laptev volume(RNB, F.IV.233). 1005 sheets, 1951 miniature. Outline of Russian history for 1116-1252.
Osterman's first volume(BAN, 31.7.30-1). 802 sheets, 1552 miniatures. Outline of Russian history for 1254-1378.
Osterman's second volume(BAN, 31.7.30-2). 887 sheets, 1581 miniatures. Outline of Russian history for 1378-1424.
Shumilovsky volume(RNB, F.IV.232). 986 sheets, 1893 miniatures. Outline of Russian history for 1425, 1478-1533.
Synodal volume(GIM, Syn. No. 962). 626 l, 1125 miniatures. Outline of Russian history for 1533-1542, 1553-1567.
Royal book(GIM, Syn. No. 149). 687 sheets, 1291 miniatures. Outline of Russian history for 1533-1553.

It is assumed that the beginning and end of this chronicle have not been preserved, namely the Tale of Bygone Years, part of the history of the reign of Ivan the Terrible, as well as some other fragments.

History of the creation of the vault

The miniatures from the Code are widely known and used both in the form of illustrations and in art.

Facsimile edition (2008)

A copy of the complete facsimile edition of the Litsevoy Chronicle can be found in the library of the Manuscripts Department of the State Historical Museum in Moscow and in the Pushkin House in St. Petersburg.

Currently, the Facial Chronicle is published for charitable and educational purposes by the Society of Lovers of Ancient Writing. Distributed free of charge.

Write a review about the article "Facebook chronicle"

Notes

Literature

Artsikhovsky A.V. Old Russian miniatures as a historical source. - M., 1944.

Podobedova O. I. Miniatures of Russian historical manuscripts: On the history of Russian chronicles / USSR Academy of Sciences, . - M.: Nauka, 1965. - 336 p. - 1,400 copies.

Pokrovskaya V.F. From the history of the creation of the Facial Chronicle of the second half of the 16th century. // Materials and reports on the collections of the Department of Manuscripts and Rare Books of the Library of the USSR Academy of Sciences. - M.; L., 1966.

Amosov A. A. Facial chronicle of Ivan the Terrible: A comprehensive codicological study. - M.: Editorial URSS, 1998. - 392 p. - 1,000 copies. - ISBN 5-901006-49-6.(in translation)

Facial chronicle code of the 16th century: Methodology for describing and studying a disparate chronicle complex / Comp. E. A. Belokon, V. V. Morozov, S. A. Morozov; Rep. ed. S. O. Schmidt. - M.: RSUH Publishing House, 2003. - 224, p. - 1,500 copies. - ISBN 5-7281-0564-5.(in translation)

Presnyakov A. E. Moscow Historical Encyclopedia of the 16th century // IORYAS. - 1900. - T. 5, book. 3. - pp. 824-876.

Morozov V.V. Front chronicle about the campaign of Igor Svyatoslavich // TODRL. - 1984. - T. 38. - P. 520-536.

Kloss B. M. Chronicle collection obverse // Dictionary of scribes and bookishness of Ancient Rus'. Vol. 2, part 2 (L - Z). - L., 1989. - P. 30-32.

An excerpt characterizing the Facial Chronicle vault

– Vive l"Empereur! Vive le Roi de Rome! Vive l"Empereur! [Long live the Emperor! Long live the Roman King!] - enthusiastic voices were heard.
After breakfast, Napoleon, in the presence of Bosse, dictated his orders for the army.
– Courte et energique! [Short and energetic!] - said Napoleon when he read the written proclamation immediately without amendments. The order was:
“Warriors! This is the battle you have longed for. Victory depends on you. It is necessary for us; she will provide us with everything we need: comfortable apartments and a quick return to our homeland. Act as you acted at Austerlitz, Friedland, Vitebsk and Smolensk. May later posterity proudly remember your exploits to this day. Let it be said about each of you: he was in great battle near Moscow!
– De la Moscow! [Near Moscow!] - Napoleon repeated, and, inviting Mr. Bosset, who loved to travel, to join him in his walk, he left the tent to the saddled horses.
“Votre Majeste a trop de bonte, [You are too kind, Your Majesty," Bosse said when asked to accompany the emperor: he was sleepy and did not know how and was afraid to ride a horse.
But Napoleon nodded to the traveler, and Bosse had to go. When Napoleon left the tent, the screams of the guards in front of the portrait of his son intensified even more. Napoleon frowned.
“Take it off,” he said, pointing to the portrait with a graceful, majestic gesture. “It’s too early for him to see the battlefield.”
Bosse, closing his eyes and bowing his head, took a deep breath, with this gesture showing how he knew how to appreciate and understand the words of the emperor.

Napoleon spent the entire day of August 25, as his historians say, on horseback, inspecting the area, discussing the plans presented to him by his marshals, and personally giving orders to his generals.
The original line of Russian troops along Kolocha was broken, and part of this line, namely the Russian left flank, was driven back as a result of the capture of the Shevardinsky redoubt on the 24th. This part of the line was not fortified, no longer protected by the river, and in front of it there was only a more open and level place. It was obvious to every military and non-military person that the French were supposed to attack this part of the line. It seemed that this did not require many considerations, there was no need for such care and troubles of the emperor and his marshals, and there was no need at all for that special highest ability called genius, which they so like to attribute to Napoleon; but the historians who subsequently described this event, and the people then surrounding Napoleon, and he himself, thought differently.
Napoleon drove across the field, thoughtfully peered at the area, shook his head with himself in approval or disbelief, and, without informing the generals around him of the thoughtful move that guided his decisions, conveyed to them only final conclusions in the form of orders. After listening to Davout's proposal, called the Duke of Ecmul, to bypass the Russian left flank, Napoleon said that this did not need to be done, without explaining why it was not necessary. To the proposal of General Compan (who was supposed to attack the flushes) to lead his division through the forest, Napoleon expressed his consent, despite the fact that the so-called Duke of Elchingen, that is, Ney, allowed himself to note that movement through the forest was dangerous and could upset the division .
Having examined the area opposite the Shevardinsky redoubt, Napoleon thought for a while in silence and pointed to the places where two batteries were to be set up by tomorrow to operate against the Russian fortifications, and the places where field artillery was to be lined up next to them.
Having given these and other orders, he returned to his headquarters, and the disposition of the battle was written under his dictation.
This disposition, about which French historians speak with delight and other historians with deep respect, was as follows:
“At dawn, two new batteries, built in the night, on the plain occupied by the Prince of Eckmuhl, will open fire on the two opposing enemy batteries.
At the same time, the chief of artillery of the 1st Corps, General Pernetti, with 30 guns of the Compan division and all the howitzers of the Dessay and Friant divisions, will move forward, open fire and bombard the enemy battery with grenades, against which they will act!
24 guards artillery guns,
30 guns of the Compan division
and 8 guns of the Friant and Dessay divisions,
Total - 62 guns.
The chief of artillery of the 3rd Corps, General Fouche, will place all the howitzers of the 3rd and 8th Corps, 16 in total, on the flanks of the battery, which is assigned to bombard the left fortification, which will total 40 guns against it.
General Sorbier must be ready, at the first order, to march with all the howitzers of the Guards artillery against one or another fortification.
Continuing the cannonade, Prince Poniatowski will head towards the village, into the forest and bypass the enemy position.
General Compan will move through the forest to take possession of the first fortification.
Upon entering the battle in this way, orders will be given according to the actions of the enemy.
The cannonade on the left flank will begin as soon as the cannonade of the right wing is heard. The riflemen of Moran's division and the Viceroy's division would open heavy fire when they saw the beginning of the attack of the right wing.
The Viceroy will take possession of the village [of Borodin] and cross his three bridges, following at the same height with the divisions of Morand and Gerard, which, under his leadership, will head to the redoubt and enter the line with the rest of the army.
All this must be done in order (le tout se fera avec ordre et methode), keeping the troops in reserve as much as possible.
In the imperial camp, near Mozhaisk, September 6, 1812.”
This disposition, written in a very unclear and confused way, if we allow ourselves to regard his orders without religious horror at Napoleon’s genius, contained four points - four orders. None of these orders could be or were carried out.
The disposition says, first: that the batteries set up at the place chosen by Napoleon with the Pernetti and Fouche guns aligned with them, a total of one hundred and two guns, open fire and bombard the Russian flashes and redoubts with shells. This could not be done, since the shells from the places appointed by Napoleon did not reach the Russian works, and these one hundred and two guns fired empty until the nearest commander, contrary to Napoleon’s orders, pushed them forward.
The second order was that Poniatowski, heading towards the village into the forest, should bypass the left wing of the Russians. This could not be and was not done because Poniatovsky, heading towards the village into the forest, met Tuchkov there blocking his way and could not and did not bypass the Russian position.
Third order: General Kompan will move into the forest to take possession of the first fortification. Compan's division did not capture the first fortification, but was repulsed because, leaving the forest, it had to form under grapeshot fire, which Napoleon did not know.
Fourth: The Viceroy will take possession of the village (Borodino) and cross his three bridges, following at the same height with the divisions of Maran and Friant (about which it is not said where and when they will move), which, under his leadership, will go to the redoubt and enter the line with other troops.
As far as one can understand - if not from the confused period of this, then from those attempts that were made by the Viceroy to carry out the orders given to him - he was supposed to move through Borodino on the left to the redoubt, while the divisions of Moran and Friant were supposed to move simultaneously from the front.
All this, as well as other points of disposition, was not and could not be fulfilled. Having passed Borodino, the viceroy was repulsed at Kolocha and could not go further; The divisions of Moran and Friant did not take the redoubt, but were repulsed, and the redoubt was captured by cavalry at the end of the battle (probably an unexpected and unheard of thing for Napoleon). So, none of the orders of the disposition were and could not be executed. But the disposition says that upon entering the battle in this way, orders will be given corresponding to the actions of the enemy, and therefore it would seem that during the battle Napoleon would make all the necessary orders; but this was not and could not be because during the entire battle Napoleon was so far from him that (as it turned out later) the course of the battle could not be known to him and not a single order of his during the battle could be carried out.

Many historians say that battle of Borodino the French did not win because Napoleon had a runny nose, that if he had not had a runny nose, then his orders before and during the battle would have been even more ingenious, and Russia would have perished, et la face du monde eut ete changee. [and the face of the world would change.] For historians who recognize that Russia was formed by the will of one man - Peter the Great, and France from a republic developed into an empire, and French troops went to Russia by the will of one man - Napoleon, the reasoning is that Russia remained powerful because Napoleon had a big cold on the 26th, such reasoning is inevitably consistent for such historians.
If it depended on the will of Napoleon to give or not to give the Battle of Borodino and it depended on his will to make this or that order, then it is obvious that a runny nose, which had an impact on the manifestation of his will, could be the reason for the salvation of Russia and that therefore the valet who forgot to give Napoleon On the 24th, waterproof boots were the savior of Russia. On this path of thought, this conclusion is undoubted - as undoubted as the conclusion that Voltaire made jokingly (without knowing what) when he said that the Night of St. Bartholomew occurred from an upset stomach of Charles IX. But for people who do not allow that Russia was formed by the will of one person - Peter I, and that the French Empire was formed and the war with Russia began by the will of one person - Napoleon, this reasoning not only seems incorrect, unreasonable, but also contrary to the whole essence human. When asked what constitutes the cause historical events, another answer seems to be that the course of world events is predetermined from above, depends on the coincidence of all the arbitrariness of the people participating in these events, and that the influence of Napoleons on the course of these events is only external and fictitious.
Strange as it may seem at first glance, the assumption that the Night of St. Bartholomew, the order for which was given by Charles IX, did not occur at his will, but that it only seemed to him that he ordered it to be done, and that the Borodino massacre of eighty thousand people did not occur at the will of Napoleon (despite the fact that he gave orders about the beginning and course of the battle), and that it seemed to him only that he ordered it - no matter how strange this assumption seems, but human dignity tells me that each of us, if not more, then no less a person than the great Napoleon orders that this solution to the issue be allowed, and historical research abundantly confirm this assumption.