Facial vault of Ivan IV. Obverse annalistic collection of the 16th century Obverse annalistic collection of the 16th century

The volumes are grouped in relatively chronological order:

Biblical story
History of Rome
History of Byzantium
Russian history

Museum collection (GIM). 1031 p., 1677 miniatures. Presentation of sacred, Hebrew and ancient Greek history from the creation of the world to the destruction of Troy in the 13th century. BC NS.
Chronographic collection (BAN)... 1469 p., 2549 miniatures. Presentation of the history of the ancient East, the Hellenistic world and ancient Rome from the XI century. BC NS. until the 70s. 1st century n. NS.
Face Chronograph (RNB)... 1217l., 2191 miniatures. Presentation of the history of the ancient Roman empire from the 70s. 1st century until 337 and Byzantine history until the X century.
Golitsyn volume (Royal Chronicler)(RNB, F.IV.225). 1035 p., 1964 miniatures. Presentation of Russian history for 1114-1247 and 1425-1472.
Laptev volume(RNB, F.IV.233). 1005 sheets, 1951 miniatures. Presentation of Russian history for the years 1116-1252.
Ostermanovsky first volume(BAN, 31.7.30-1). 802 l., 1552 miniatures. Presentation of Russian history for the years 1254-1378.
Ostermanovsky second volume(BAN, 31.7.30-2). 887 p., 1581 miniatures. Presentation of Russian history for the years 1378-1424.
Shumilovsky volume(RNB, F.IV.232). 986 fol., 1893 miniatures. Presentation of Russian history for 1425, 1478-1533.
Synodal volume(State Historical Museum, Syn. No. 962). 626 l, 1125 miniatures. Presentation of Russian history for 1533-1542, 1553-1567.
The regal book(State Historical Museum, Syn. No. 149). 687 p., 1291 miniatures. Presentation of Russian history for 1533-1553.

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

The history of the creation of the vault

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

Facsimile edition (2008)

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

At present, the Faithful annalistic collection is published for charitable and educational purposes by the "Society of Lovers of Ancient Writing". Free distribution.

Write a review on the article "Facial Chronicle Collection"

Notes (edit)

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 facial annals / USSR Academy of Sciences,. - M .: Nauka, 1965 .-- 336 p. - 1 400 copies.

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

A.A. Amosov The obverse annalistic collection of Ivan the Terrible: Comprehensive codicological research. - M .: Editorial URSS, 1998 .-- 392 p. - 1,000 copies - ISBN 5-901006-49-6.(in lane)

The obverse chronicle collection of the 16th century: Methods for describing and studying the scattered chronicle complex / Comp. E. A. Belokon, V. V. Morozov, S. A. Morozov; Resp. ed. S.O.Schmidt. - M .: Publishing house of the Russian State University for the Humanities, 2003 .-- 224, p. - 1,500 copies. - ISBN 5-7281-0564-5.(in lane)

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

V.V. Morozov The obverse annals of the campaign of Igor Svyatoslavich // TODRL. - 1984 .-- T. 38 .-- S. 520-536.

Kloss B.M. Chronicle of the obverse // Dictionary of scribes and bookishness of Ancient Russia. Issue 2, part 2 (L - Z). - L., 1989 .-- S. 30-32.

An excerpt characterizing the Facial Chronicle Code

- 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 without any corrections. The order read:
“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 the fatherland. Act as you did under Austerlitz, Friedland, Vitebsk and Smolensk. Let the later offspring proudly remember your exploits on this day. Let it be said about each of you: he was in the great battle near Moscow! "
- De la Moskowa! [Near Moscow!] - Napoleon repeated, and inviting Monsieur Bosse, who loved to travel, to his walk, he left the tent to the saddled horses.
- Votre Majeste a trop de bonte, [You are too kind, your majesty,] - said Boss to the invitation to accompany the emperor: he wanted to sleep and he did not know how and was afraid to ride a horse.
But Napoleon nodded his head to the traveler, and Boss had to go. When Napoleon left the tent, the shouts of the guards in front of the portrait of his son intensified even more. Napoleon frowned.
“Take it off,” he said, gesturing gracefully at the portrait with a majestic gesture. “It's too early for him to see the battlefield.
Bosse closed his eyes and bowed his head, took a deep breath, with this gesture showing how he knew how to appreciate and understand the words of the emperor.

All this day on August 25, as his historians say, Napoleon spent 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 disposition of Russian troops along the Koloche was broken, and part of this line, namely the left flank of the Russians, as a result of the capture of the Shevardinsky redoubt on the 24th, was carried back. This part of the line was not fortified, no longer protected by the river, and in front of it alone was a more open and level place. It was obvious to every military and non-military man that this part of the line was to be attacked by the French. It seemed that this did not require many considerations, that such solicitude and troublesomeness of the emperor and his marshals was not needed, and that special superior ability, called genius, which they love to ascribe to Napoleon, was not needed at all; but the historians who later described this event, and the people who then surrounded Napoleon, and he himself thought differently.
Napoleon rode across the field, gazed thoughtfully at the area, shook his head with himself approvingly or incredulously, and, without informing the generals around him of the thoughtful move that guided his decisions, passed them only final conclusions in the form of orders. Having listened to the proposal of Davout, called the Duke of Eckmühl, to bypass the left flank of the Russians, Napoleon said that this should not be done, without explaining why it was not necessary. On the proposal of General Compan (who was supposed to attack the flushes), to lead his division in the forest, Napoleon expressed his consent, despite the fact that the so-called Duke of Elchingen, that is, Ney, allowed himself to notice 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 for action against the Russian fortifications, and the places where field artillery was to line 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 enthusiasm and other historians with deep respect, was as follows:
“At dawn, two new batteries, set up in the night, on the plain occupied by Prince Eckmühl, will open fire on two opposing enemy batteries.
At the same time, the chief of artillery of the 1st corps, General Pernetti, with 30 guns of the Kompan division and all the howitzers of the Desse and Friant division, 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 Kompan division
and 8 guns of the Friant and Desse division,
In 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 fire on the left fortification, which will total 40 guns against it.
General Sorbier must be ready at the first order to carry out with all the howitzers of the guards artillery against one or another fortification.
In the continuation of the cannonade, Prince Poniatovsky will go to the village, into the forest and bypass the enemy position.
General Kompan will move through the forest to capture 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 will open heavy fire when they see the start of an attack from the right wing.
The vice king will take possession of the village [Borodino] and cross his three bridges, following at the same height with the divisions of Moran and Gerard, who, under his leadership, will go 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 troops in reserve whenever possible.
In the imperial camp, near Mozhaisk, September 6, 1812 ".
This disposition, very vaguely and confusedly written, - if you allow yourself to treat Napoleon's orders without religious horror at Napoleon's genius, - contained four points - four orders. None of these orders could be and were not executed.
The disposition says, first: so that the batteries arranged in the place chosen by Napoleon with the guns of Pernetti and Fouche, only one hundred and two guns, which have to align with them, opened fire and bombarded the Russian flashes and redoubts with shells. This could not be done, since the shells did not reach the Russian works from the places designated by Napoleon, and these one hundred and two guns fired at an empty one until the nearest commander, contrary to Napoleon's orders, pushed them forward.
The second order was that Poniatovsky, heading for the village into the forest, bypassed the left wing of the Russians. This could not and was not done because Ponyatovsky, heading to the village in the forest, met Tuchkov, blocking his path, and could not bypass and did not bypass the Russian position.
Third order: General Kompan will move into the forest to capture the first fortification. The Kompan division did not capture the first fortification, but was repulsed, because, leaving the forest, it had to be built under grape-shot fire, which Napoleon did not know.
Fourth: The vice king 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.
How much you can understand - if not from the stupid period of this, then from the attempts that were made by the viceroy to carry out the orders given to him - he had to move through Borodino to the left to the redoubt, while the divisions of Moran and Friant had to move simultaneously from the front.
All this, as well as other points of the disposition, was not and could not be fulfilled. Having passed Borodino, the Viceroy was recaptured at Koloch and could not go further; the divisions of Moran and Friant did not take the redoubt, but were repulsed, and at the end of the battle the redoubt was captured by the cavalry (probably an unforeseen matter for Napoleon and unheard of). So, none of the orders of the disposition was 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 might seem that during the battle all the necessary orders will be made by Napoleon; 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 executed.

Many historians say that the Battle of Borodino was not won by the French because Napoleon had a cold, that if he did not have a cold, then his orders before and during the battle would have been even more brilliant, and Russia would have perished, et la face du monde eut ete changee. [and the face of the world would have changed.] For historians who admit that Russia was formed by the will of one person - Peter the Great, and France from a republic to an empire, and French troops went to Russia at the behest of one person - Napoleon, such reasoning is Russia remained powerful because Napoleon had a big cold on the 26th, such reasoning for such historians is inevitably consistent.
If it depended on Napoleon's will to give or not to give the Battle of Borodino and if it depended on his will to make such or another 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 to Napoleon On the 24th, waterproof boots, was the savior of Russia. On this path of thought, this conclusion is unquestionable - just as unquestionable as the conclusion that Voltaire jokingly (not knowing what) drew when he said that St. Bartholomew's Night came from an upset stomach of Charles IX. But for people who do not admit 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 at the will of one person - Napoleon, this reasoning not only seems to be incorrect, unreasonable, but also contrary to all essence human. To the question of what constitutes the cause of historical events, another answer is presented, which consists in the fact 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 St. Bartholomew's Night, 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 Battle of Borodino of eighty thousand people did not take place at the will of Napoleon (despite the fact that he gave orders about the beginning and course of the battle), and that it only seemed to him that he ordered it - strange as it may seem this assumption, but human dignity, telling me that each of us, if not more, then no less a man than the great Napoleon orders to admit this solution of the question, and historical research abundantly confirms this assumption.

"Makarievskaya school" of painting, "school of Grozny" - concepts that embrace 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 towards 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 artist's creative personality and attempts to regulate his activities, more than ever to subordinate it to its tasks. polemical, to involve them in the intense dramatic action of state life. For the first time in the history of Russian artistic culture, questions of art become 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 of different types of art (monumental and easel painting, book illustration and applied art, in particular woodcarving) predetermined themes, plots, emotional interpretation and, to a large extent, served as the basis for a complex set of images designed to reinforce, substantiate, 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 carried out: the front annalistic collection of Ivan the Terrible, the Tsar Kniga - a chronicle collection of events in world and especially Russian history, written, probably in 1568-1576, especially for the royal library in a single copy. The word “obverse” 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 grandiose "paper" project of Ivan the Terrible!

Front 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 wedding to the kingdom of Ivan IV. The wedding of Ivan IV (January 16, 1547) opened a new period of the establishment of autocratic power, being a kind of result of a long process of forming a centralized state and the struggle for the unity of Russia, subordinated to the power of the Moscow autocratic ruler. That is why the very act of the wedding to the reign of 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 said more than once, furnished with exceptional pomp. Based on the literary sources of 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 monarch, the primordial nature of the rights of the Moscow sovereign by referring to historical analogies in the field of civil history and, above all, the history of Byzantium, Kievan and Vladimir-Suzdal Rus.

The regal book.

According to Macarius, the ideology of monocracy should have been reflected in the written sources of the era and, first of all, the chronicle, books of the tsarist genealogy, the circle of annual reading, which were compiled under his leadership by the Chetya Menaia, and, apparently, it was supposed to turn to the creation of appropriate works of fine art. That the plans for addressing all types of artistic culture were grandiose from the very beginning is shown by the scope of the literary works of that time. It is difficult, however, to imagine what forms the implementation of these ideas in the field of fine arts would take 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 recounts, on Tuesday June 21, “at 10 o'clock in the third week of St. Peter's Lent, the Church of the Exaltation of the Honest Cross behind Neglimnaya on Arbat Street caught fire ... the storm turned to a greater hail, and caught fire in the hail near the cathedral churches of the Prechista up, and in the royal court of the Grand Duke on the rooftops, and wooden huts, and battens decorated with gold, and the Treasury court and with the royal treasury, and the church in the royal court near the royal treasury The Annunciation of the Golden Domed, Andreev's Deesis, Rublev's letters, overlaid with gold, and the images, decorated with gold and beads, the highly valuable Greek letters of his ancestors collected from many years ... , and the courtyard of the metropolitan. " “... And in the city all the courtyards and floors are hot, and the Chyudov Monastery is completely burned out, the relics of the great holy miracle-worker Alexei are united by God's mercy ... And the Ascension Monastery is also burned out, ... church and the bellies of many people, only one image of the Most Pure Archpriest endured. And all the courtyards in the city are burned, and on the city there is a hail roof, and cannon potion, where would it be on the hail, and those places are torn apart by the walls ... people on Tferskaya Street, and on Dmitrovka, and on Bolshoy Posad, along Ilyinskaya Street, to Sadakh. " The fire on June 21, 1547, which began in the first half of the day, continued until the night: "And at the third hour of the night the fiery flame ceased." As it is clear from the cited chronicle testimony, the buildings in the royal court were badly damaged, numerous works of art were destroyed and partially damaged.

Battle on the Ice. Chronicle miniature from the Observatory 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 Makarii, who was injured during the fire, to discuss the mood of the masses, and the tsar's confessor, Fyodor Barmin, reported on the spread of rumors about the cause of the fire, which black people attributed to the witchcraft of Anna Glinskaya. Ivan IV was forced to appoint an investigation. In addition to F. Barmin, Prince Fyodor Skopin Shuisky, Prince Yuri Temkin, IP Fedorov, G. Yu. Zakharyin, F. Nagoy and “other people” took part in it. Excited by the fire, Moscow black people, as the continuation of the Chronograph of 1512 and the Chronicler Nikolsky explains the course of further events, gathered at the veche and on Sunday morning, June 26, entered the Kremlin's Cathedral Square "to the court of the sovereign", looking for a trial over the perpetrators of the fire (the perpetrators of the fire , as mentioned above, the Glinskys were revered). Yuri Glinsky tried to hide in the Dmitrov side-chapel of the Assumption Cathedral. The rebels entered the cathedral, despite the ongoing divine service, and during the "cherubic song" they removed Yuri and killed him against the metropolitan place, dragged them out of the city and threw the criminals at the place of execution. The people of the Glinskys "were beaten innumerable by the prince's belly." One might think that the murder of Yuri Glinsky was a "execution" clothed in a "traditional" and "legal" form.

Mityai (Michael) and St. Dionysius in front of the led. book Dimitri Donskoy.

Miniature from the Obverse Chronicle Code. 70s XVI century

This is evidenced by the fact that Glinsky's body was brought up for auction and thrown "in front of that stake, where they will be executed." This did not end the performance of the black people. On June 29, armed, in battle formation, they (at the "call of the executioner" or "birich") moved to the royal residence in Vorobyevo. 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 performance of black people turned out to be quite large, the readiness for a military action testified to the strength of the people's anger. This uprising was preceded by demonstrations of the disaffected in the cities (in the summer of 1546, Novgorod squeakers appeared, and on June 3, 1547, the Pskovites, complaining about the Tsar's 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 young tsar's inner circle, who determined the policy of the 30s - 50s, had to reckon with them. The organized uprising of the Moscow lower classes was mainly directed against the boyar's autocracy and arbitrariness, which was especially painfully reflected during the youth of Ivan IV on the fate of the broad masses, and had a certain influence on the further development of domestic politics.

One of the books of the Observatory of the 16th century.

Most likely, those of the historians are right who consider the Moscow uprising after the fire of 1547 inspired by the opponents of boyar autocracy. Attempts to find the inspirers of the uprising in the immediate circle of Ivan IV are not without reason. However, inspired from the outside, it, reflecting the protest of the broad masses against the boyar oppression, as is known, took on an unexpected scale, although it coincided in its direction with the new tendencies of the government that was being formed in the 1950s. But at the same time, its scale, speed and strength of the popular reaction to events were such that it was impossible not to take into account the significance of the speech and those deep social causes of it, which, regardless of the influence of the ruling political parties, gave rise to popular unrest. All this exacerbated the complexity of the political situation and in many ways contributed to the breadth of the concept and the search for the most effective means of ideological influence, among which a significant place was taken by works of art that were new in their content. One might think that, while developing a plan of political and ideological measures of influence on broad popular circles, it was decided to turn to one of the most accessible and familiar educational means - to the camp 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 was formed already in the reign of first Ivan III, and later Basil III. In addition to influencing black people in Moscow, as well as boyars and servicemen, paintings were intended to have a direct educational effect on the youngest tsar himself. Like many literary undertakings carried out in the circle of Metropolitan Macarius and the "elected council" - and the leading role of Macarius, as an ideologist of the autocratic power, should not be underestimated - the works of painting in their essential part contained not only "justifications of politics" 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 was, as it were, predetermined by the sovereign himself, emanating from him (recall that a little later, the Stoglavy Cathedral was organized in a similar way). The initiative for the restoration work was divided between Metropolitan Macarius, Sylvester and Ivan IV, who, of course, was supposed to be officially in charge. All these relationships can be traced in the very course of events, as they are described in the chronicle, and most importantly - evidenced by the materials of the "case of Viskovaty". The interior of the temples burned out, the fire did not spare the tsar's dwelling and the tsar's treasury. Leaving churches without shrines was not in the custom of Muscovite Russia. First of all, Ivan IV “sent holy and honest icons to the cities, to Veliky Novgorod, and to Smolensk, and to Dmitrov, and Zvenigorod, and from many other cities, many wonderful holy icons were brought and put to the Annunciation to be worshiped by the Tsarevo and all the peasants. ". Following this, restoration work began. One of the active participants in the organization of the restoration work was Priest Sylvester, who himself served in the Cathedral of the Annunciation, - as you know, one of the most influential figures of the “elected council”. Sylvester tells about the progress of the work in detail in his "Complaint" to the "consecrated cathedral" in 1554, from where you can get information about the organization and performers of the work, and about the sources of iconography, and about the process of ordering and "accepting" 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 Observational Codex of the 16th century

"Complainer" allows us to judge the number of invited masters, as well as the fact of inviting masters, and most importantly, about those art centers from which the frames of painters were drawn: “the emperor sent icon painters to Novgorod, Pskov and other cities, , and the tsar sovereign ordered them to write icons, to whom what was ordered, and to others he commanded the signatures to sign and at the city above the gates of the saints the images of writing. " Thus, the areas of activity of painters are immediately determined: easel painting (icon painting), secular ward writing, the creation of gate icons (it is possible to understand them as wall painting and as easel painting). Two cities are called Sylvester as the main art centers from which the 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" by 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 performed paintings after the fire of 1547. In particular, with the Novgorod masters at Sylvester, apparently, the habitual well-coordinated relationship has long been formed. He himself determines what to order for them, where they can get the sources of iconography: “And I, reporting the sovereign tsar, told the Novgorod icon painters to paint the Holy Trinity of the Life-giving in deeds, and I also believe in one God, Praise the Lord from heaven, yes Sophia, Wisdom God, yes it is worthy, and the Trinity has translated icons, from where to write, but on Simonov. " But this was done if the plots were traditional. The situation was much more complicated when these transfers were not available.

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

Another part of the work was entrusted to the Pskovites. Their invitation was not unexpected. They turned to the Pskov masters at the end of the 15th century. True, at that time skillful builders were invited, whereas now - icon painters. Macarius, in the recent past the Archbishop of Novgorod and Pskov, himself, as you know, a painter, in all likelihood, struck up a relationship with the Pskov masters at one time. In any case, on the basis of the completed orders, one can judge the rather significant size of the workshop at the archbishop's court in Novgorod. It is generally accepted that this entire workshop, following Macarius, moved to the Metropolitan's court in Moscow. To maintain relations with the Pskovites, being already a metropolitan, Macarius could through the priest of the Annunciation Cathedral, Semyon of Pskov, the very one who presented his “Complaint” to the “consecrated cathedral” together with Sylvester. Obviously, the best masters of different cities were called to fulfill such a complex order, which laid the foundation for the "royal school" of painters. The Pskovites, without explaining the reasons, did not want to work in Moscow and undertook to fulfill the order, working from home: "And the Pskov icon painters Stay, yes Yakov, yes Mikhail, yes Yakushko, yes Semyon Vysoky Glagol and his comrades, leave to Pskov and went to write four large icons ":

1. The Last Judgment

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

3. The Passion of the Lord in Gospel Parables

4. The icon, on it there are four holidays: "And God rest on the seventh day from all his deeds, but the Only Begotten Son of the Word of God, yes Come people, let us worship the three-part Deity, yes In the grave of the flesh"

So, at the head of the entire grandiose plan of restoration work was the tsar, "reporting" to whom or "asking" whom (partly nominally), Sylvester distributed orders between the painters, especially if there was a direct opportunity to use the samples.

Battle on the Ice. Flight of the Swedes to the ships.

It should be 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, information about the art workshop in Simonov was not found, despite the mention of the names of several masters who left this monastery). It should also be recalled that Novgorod and Pskov churches are also mentioned among the authoritative sources of iconography, in particular the murals of St. Sophia of Novgorod, the Church of St. George in the Yuriev Monastery, St. typical for Novgorod connections and Sylvester and Macarius. Despite the fact that it would seem natural to consider Metropolitan Macarius himself 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 aspect 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 finished works, primarily easel paintings, as well as monumental painting. It was not without the participation of Ivan IV at this stage - he distributed new icons to churches. Restoration work after the fire of 1547 was considered a matter of state importance, since Ivan IV himself, Metropolitan Macarius and Sylvester, the closest member of the "elected council" to Ivan IV, took care of their implementation.

Ivan the Terrible and tsarist icon painters.

It was during the epoch of Grozny that art was “deeply exploited by the state and the church,” and the role of art is being rethought, the importance of which as an educational element, a means of persuasion and an irresistible emotional impact grows immeasurably, at the same time the usual way of artistic life changes dramatically. The possibility of "free creative development of the artist's personality" decreases. The artist loses the simplicity and freedom of relations with the ordering parishioner, the church keeper or the abbot - the monastery builder. Now the order of state importance is strictly regulated by the ruling circles, who regard art as a conductor of certain political trends. Themes, plots of individual works or integral ensembles are discussed by representatives of state and church authorities, become the subject of debate at cathedrals, and are stipulated in legislative documents. During these years, plans were developed for grandiose monumental ensembles, cycles of easel works and illustrations in handwritten books, which, on the whole, have common tendencies.

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

There is a desire 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 house-building”. This idea is supported by numerous analogies from the 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 chronographic volumes of the Litsevoy Chronicle Code 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 according to the principle of direct analogy. At the same time, the entire cycle of works of fine art was also permeated with the idea of the divinity of sovereign power, its God-established nature, its primordiality in Russia and the direct continuity of royal dignity from the Roman and Byzantine emperors and the continuity of the dynasty of "God-affirmed scepter holders" from the princes of Kiev and Vladimir to the sovereign. All this taken together was intended to reinforce and justify the very fact of the wedding to the reign of Ivan IV, to substantiate the further course of the 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, was realized only in 1561, when the “cathedral 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 actions were interpreted as religious wars in defense of the purity and inviolability of the Christian state from infidels, freeing Christian prisoners and civilians from the Tatar invaders and oppressors. Finally, the topic of religious and moral education was no less significant. It was interpreted in two ways: more profound with a certain philosophical and symbolic shade in the interpretation of the main Christian dogma and more directly - in terms of moral purification and improvement. The last theme was also personal - it was about the spiritual education and self-correction of the young autocrat. All these tendencies, 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 in the disclosure and implementation of this concept was the period of restoration work 1547-1554. and, more broadly, the time of activity of the “elected council”.

Battle of Kulikovo. 1380 BC

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 exclusivity gradually faded away. It is replaced by another, more severe, sorrowful, sometimes tragic. Echoes of triumph, 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 Grozny, applied art came to the fore in artistic life. If it becomes impossible to assert and glorify the idea of autocracy as such, then it is natural to add splendor to the palace household, palace utensils, like royal clothes, covered with ornamental and jewelry, often turn into unique works of art. Attention is drawn to the nature of the literary work undertaken in order to "prepare" for the wedding in the circle of Metropolitan Macarius. Among them, it is especially worth highlighting the very rite of the wedding to the kingdom, with its direct connection with the "Legend of the princes of Vladimir". The story of Vladimir Monomakh's receipt of the royal crown and his wedding “to the kingdom” is contained in the Book of Degrees and the Great Menaion of the Chetykh, that is, in the literary monuments of the Makaryev circle. The initial volumes of the chronographic part of the Obverse Chronicle, as well as the expanded (in comparison with other lists of the Nikon Chronicle) version of the text of the first six sheets of the Golitsyn volume of the Obverse Chronicle, also contain a story about the beginning of the reign of Vladimir Monomakh in Kiev and about his crowning "to the kingdom" with regalia sent by the Byzantine emperor. In direct connection with them are miniatures that adorn the chronographic part of the Obverse Arch, as well as miniatures of the first six leaves of the Golitsyn volume. In the miniatures of the chronographic part of the Obverse Chronicle, in turn, one finds further disclosure of the theme of the God-established autocratic power, the introduction of Russia into the general course of world history, as well as the idea of the chosenness of the Moscow monarchist. Thus, a certain range of literary monuments is designated. These themes are further revealed in the murals of the Golden Chamber, in the reliefs of the royal place ("Monomakh's throne") erected in the Assumption Cathedral, in the painting of the portal of the Archangel Cathedral. The icons painted by the Pskovites, it would seem, are purely dogmatic in their content, carry in themselves the plot, and perhaps the disclosure of the theme of the sacred nature of the wars waged by Ivan IV, the chosen feat of the warriors awarded the crowns of immortality and glory, which culminates in the icon " Militant Church "and in the image of Christ - the conqueror of death in the" Four-part "of the Annunciation Cathedral.

Battle of the Kosovo field. 1389 BC

This theme in its programmatic, most elaborated form is embodied in the first Russian "battle picture" - "Militant Church". The direct disclosure of its subtext is the paintings of the tomb of Ivan IV (in the deaconist of the Archangel Cathedral), as well as the system of the cathedral's paintings as a whole (if we assume that the painting that has survived to this day completely repeats the painting made no later than 1566). Even if we remain within the limits of the most cautious assumptions about the preservation of the earlier painting, one cannot fail to see that the military themes that make up the murals directly lead to the cycle of Old Testament battle scenes in the painting 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 that is how we can talk about the plots of the murals of the Archangel Cathedral (chief about the burial vault of Grozny) and the Golden Chamber, and partly the icon-paintings "Militant Church". Finally, the main Christological, or symbolic-dogmatic, cycle of icons made according to the "tsar's order" is associated with the main compositions of the painting of the Golden Chamber, being a clear expression of the entire system of religious and philosophical views of the group, which is usually called the "government of the 50s." and which included representatives of the "elected council" and the head of the Russian Church, Metropolitan Macarius. Being addressed to relatively wide popular circles, this painting had another purpose - a constant reminder of the basic religious and philosophical principles to the young tsar, whose "correction" was undertaken by his closest members of the "elected council". This is evidenced by the presence in the system of painting of the Golden Chamber of compositions on the theme of the Tale of Barlaam and Joasaph, in which contemporaries were inclined to see the history of the moral renewal of Ivan IV himself, and by Barlaam they meant the same omnipotent Sylvester. Thus, before us are, as it were, the links of a single plan. Themes, starting in one of the monuments, continue to unfold in subsequent ones, being read in direct sequence in works of different types of fine art.

Facial annalistic vault(The obverse annalistic collection of Ivan the Terrible, Tsar Kniga) is a chronicle collection of events in world and especially Russian history, created in the 40-60s of the 16th century (probably in 1568-1576) especially for the royal library in a single copy. The word “obverse” 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 obverse (ie, illustrated, with the image "in faces") annalistic collection is not only a monument of Russian manuscript books and a masterpiece of Old Russian bookishness. It is a literary, historical and artistic monument of world significance. It is no coincidence that it is unofficially called the Tsar-Book (by analogy with the Tsar-Cannon and Tsar-Bell). The obverse annalistic collection 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 Observatory: about 15 scribes and 10 artists. The vault consists of about 10 thousand sheets and over 17 thousand illustrations, and the figurative material occupies about 2/3 of the total volume of the monument. Miniature drawings (landscape, historical, battle and everyday life) not only illustrate the text, but also complement it. Some events are not written, but only drawn. The drawings tell the readers how clothes, military armor, church vestments, weapons, tools, household items and so on looked like in antiquity. In the history of world medieval writing, there is no monument similar to the Litsevaya Chronicle Code both in terms of coverage and volume. It included sacred, Hebrew and Ancient Greek stories, stories about the Trojan War and Alexander the Great, stories from the Roman and Byzantine empires, as well as a chronicle covering the most important events in Russia for four and a half centuries: from 1114 to 1567. (It is assumed that the beginning and end of this chronicle have not survived, 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.)

The volumes are grouped in relatively chronological order:

Biblical story
History of Rome
History of Byzantium
Russian history

Volume content:

Museum collection (GIM). 1031 p., 1677 miniatures. Presentation of sacred, Hebrew and ancient Greek history from the creation of the world to the destruction of Troy in the 13th century. BC NS.
Chronographic collection (BAN)... 1469 p., 2549 miniatures. Presentation of the history of the ancient East, the Hellenistic world and ancient Rome from the XI century. BC NS. until the 70s. 1st century n. NS.
Face Chronograph (RNB)... 1217l., 2191 miniatures. Presentation of the history of the ancient Roman empire from the 70s. 1st century until 337 and Byzantine history until the X century.
Golitsyn volume (RNB)... 1035 p., 1964 miniatures. Presentation of Russian history for 1114-1247 and 1425-1472.
Laptev volume (RNB)... 1005 sheets, 1951 miniatures. Presentation of Russian history for the years 1116-1252.
Ostermanovsky first volume (BAN)... 802 l., 1552 miniatures. Presentation of Russian history for the years 1254-1378.
Ostermanovsky second volume (BAN). 887 p., 1581 miniatures. Presentation of Russian history for the years 1378-1424.
Shumilovsky volume (RNB)... 986 fol., 1893 miniatures. Presentation of Russian history for 1425, 1478-1533.
Synodal volume (State Historical Museum)... 626 l, 1125 miniatures. Presentation of Russian history for 1533-1542, 1553-1567.
The Royal Book (GIM)... 687 p., 1291 miniatures. Statement of Russian history for 1533-1553

The 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 the Aleksandrovskaya Sloboda, which was then the Tsar's residence. The work was attended, in particular, by Alexey Fedorovich Adashev. The creation of the obverse annalistic collection lasted with interruptions for more than 30 years. The text was prepared by the scribes from the entourage of Metropolitan Macarius, the miniatures were performed by the masters of the Metropolitan and the "sovereign" workshops. The presence in the illustrations of the Obverse annalistic collection of images of buildings, structures, clothing, tools of handicrafts and agriculture, household items corresponding in each case to the historical era, testifies to the existence of more ancient illustrated chronicles that served as models for illustrators. the entire volume of the obverse annalistic collection contains a developed system of illustrating historical texts. Within the limits of the illustrations of the Observational Chronicle, we can talk about the origin and formation of the landscape, historical, battle and actually 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 - the binding was carried out later, at different times.

Storage:

The only original copy of the Code is kept separately, in three places (in different "baskets"):

State Historical Museum (volumes 1, 9, 10)

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

The National Library of Russia (Volumes 3, 4, 5, 8)

Cultural Impact and Significance. BM Kloss described the Code as "the largest chronicle-chronographic work of medieval Russia." Miniatures from the Code are widely known and are used both in the form of illustrations and in art.

The obverse annalistic collection is a source of truth

The obverse annalistic collection was created in the 16th century by order of the Russian Tsar Ivan the Terrible to educate the royal children. The work on the compilation of this Code was headed by the most educated person of his time - Saint Macarius, Metropolitan of Moscow and All Russia, the tsar's confessor. The best scribes and icon painters of their time worked on the compilation of the Code.

What they have completed: 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 works of Josephus Flavius - the entire written history of mankind from the creation of the world to the 16th century inclusive. All times and all peoples who had a written language are reflected in dozens of books in this collection. Such a chronicle collection, decorated with a huge number of highly artistic illustrations, has not been created by any civilization of mankind: neither Europe, nor Asia, nor America and Africa.

The fate of the Russian Tsar himself and his children was tragic. The obverse annalistic collection was not useful to the princes. After reading the obverse, part of which is devoted to the period of Grozny, it becomes clear why

Over the next hundreds of years, official historiography appeared, often opportunistic and politically engaged, and therefore reliable chronicle sources were doomed to destruction or correction, that is, falsification. The obverse annalistic collection survived these centuries thanks to the fact that after the death of Ivan the Terrible during the period of turmoil and timelessness, this tome became a coveted object for "enlightened" bibliophiles. Its fragments were taken to their libraries by the most influential nobles of their time: Osterman, Sheremetev, Golitsyn and others. After all, even then high-profile collectors understood that there was no price for such a tome with sixteen thousand miniatures. So the Svod survived until the revolution, after which it was dumped in heaps in several museums and depositories.

Already today, through the efforts of enthusiasts, scattered books and sheets have been collected together from different repositories. And the revived Society of Lovers of Ancient Writing has made this masterpiece available to everyone. A historical source that has no analogues, now many large educational institutions of the world, national libraries of different countries and, of course, our compatriots will be able to receive free of charge for raising children on this treasure of experience and wisdom of millennia.

In such an amazing way, the work that was done for the tsar's children five hundred years ago went to our children, dear contemporaries, with which we congratulate you from the bottom of our hearts!

the largest chronicle-chronographic collection of Ancient Rus. L.S. was created by order of Ivan the Terrible in the Aleksandrovskaya Sloboda in 1568-1576. It contained a presentation of world history from the creation of the world to the 15th century. and Russian history until 1567. According to A. A. Amosov's estimates, the surviving ten volumes of L. S. have 9745 sheets, decorated with 17744 color illustrations (miniatures). There is reason to believe that the eleventh volume was compiled (or was compiled, but lost), containing an exposition of the Russian history of the most ancient period up to 1114. The first three volumes of L. S. contained the text of historical biblical books (Pentateuch, books of Joshua. Judges, the book of Ruth, the four books of Kings, the book of Esther, the book of the prophet Daniel), the full text of Alexandria, the “History of the Jewish War” by Josephus Flavius and two narratives about the Trojan War: the Old Russian translation of the Latin novel by Guido de Columna “The History of the Destruction of Troy” and extracted from the Russian Chronograph “The Tale of the Creation and Captivity of Troy”. Later, the sources of information on world history were the "Chronicler of Yellinsky and Roman" of the second edition and the Russian Chronograph based on it. Russian history in volumes 4-10 is presented mainly according to the Nikonovskaya Chronicle, but starting from the events of 1152, additional material is encountered in LS, in comparison with this chronicle. As BM Kloss established, its sources could be the Resurrection Chronicle, the Novgorod Code of 1539, “The Chronicler of the Beginning of the Kingdom” and other sources. Around 1575, at the direction of Ivan the Terrible, the already prepared text of L.S. was subjected to substantial revision in that part, which contained a description of his reign, that is, from 1533 to 1568. In the additions made by an unknown editor in the margins of the manuscript, contained, in particular, accusations against persons executed or repressed during the oprichnina. Work on LS was not completed - the miniatures of the last part were made only in ink sketch, but not painted. L. S. is not only an invaluable monument of book art, but also the most important historical source: miniatures, despite the conventionality and symbolic nature of some images, provide rich material for judging the historical realities of their time, and the study of editorial changes made to the last volume of L. S. (the so-called "Royal Book"), allows us to deepen our information about the complex political struggle in the post-causal period, to judge the changes in Grozny's assessments of the activities of certain of his associates, about the tsar's new views on the very events of his reign. L.S.'s text was published in the part based on the Nikonovskaya Chronicle (PSRL.-T. 9-13). Publisher: V. Shchepkin Obverse collection of the Imperial Russian Historical Museum // IORYAS.-1899.-T. 4, book. 4.- S. 1345-1385; A.E. Presnyakov; 1) The Royal Book, its composition and origin.- SPb., 1893; 2) Moscow Historical Encyclopedia of the 16th century. // IARYAS. - 1900.- T. 4, book. 3.- S. 824- 876; Artsikhovsky A.V. Old Russian miniatures as a historical source.- M., 1944; Podobedova OI Miniatures of Russian historical manuscripts. - M., 1965. 102-332; Amosov A. A .; 1) On the question of the time of the origin of the Facial set of Ivan the Terrible // Materials and reports on the funds of the Department of Manuscript and Rare Book of the Library of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR.- Leningrad, 1978. - P. 6-36; 2) The obverse annalistic collection of Ivan the Terrible: Experience of a comprehensive source study // ADD.- SPb., 1991; K los with B.M. 1) Nikon's collection and Russian chronicles of the XVI -XVII centuries - M., 1980.- S. 206-265; 2) Litsevoy Chronicle // Dictionary of scribes. - Issue. 2, h. 2.- S. 30-32; 3) The Royal Book // Ibid. - S. 506.-508. O. V. Tvorogov

The obverse annalistic collection of the second half of the 16th century is the summit achievement of Old Russian book art. It has no analogues in the world culture of this century. The obverse vault is also the most ambitious in terms of volume chronicle work in Ancient Russia.

Illuminated (illustrated) manuscripts with images of people - "in faces" were called facial in the Middle Ages. The obverse vault contains about 10 thousand handwritten sheets, more than 17 thousand miniatures. The obverse has long attracted the attention of art critics, bibliologists, and historians - especially those who study the problems of the development of social consciousness, the history of spiritual and material culture, the state-political history of the time of Ivan the Terrible. This precious cultural monument is unusually rich in information for those who specifically study the peculiarities of historical sources of various types - verbal, written (and where there are subscripts, oral, directly capturing the spoken language), visual, material, behavioral.

The work on the compilation of the Facial set was not fully completed. Bales of sheets remained in the 17th century. unbound. Not later than the first half of the 18th century. the arrays of sheets of the colossal collection of chronicles were already dispersed. We intertwined them independently of each other; and some of these resulting folios were named after their owner (or one of the owners during the 17th-19th centuries). Gradually, the Facial vault began to be perceived as a monumental corpus of ten huge volumes. At the same time, it turned out that individual sheets and even arrays of sheets were lost, and when weaving them into books, the order of the sheets was broken in places.

Conventionally, this ten-volume manuscript corpus can be divided into three parts: three volumes of world history, seven volumes of national history; of them five volumes - chronicles of "old years" (for 1114-1533), two volumes - chronicles of "new years", i.e. during the reign of Ivan IV. It is believed that leaves about the initial history of the Fatherland (until 1114), possibly about the world history of the 10th-15th centuries, up to the time after the fall of the Byzantine Empire, as well as sheets describing the events of the national history of the last one and a half decades of the reign of Ivan IV (or blanks for them), since in the middle of the 18th century. there were still leaves about the wedding to the kingdom of Fyodor Ivanovich.

Firm "AKTEON" together with the curators for the first time carried out a scientific facsimile edition "The obverse chronicle collection of the XVI century."

The so-called "popular edition" is an addition to the scientific apparatus of the above facsimile. It fully reproduces the miniatures and the Old Russian text of each page of the manuscript. At the same time, transliteration and translation into modern Russian are given in the external field. The sheets are arranged in chronological order of the narrative.

First section:

Bible story in 5 books. These are the historical books of the Old Testament: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Book of Joshua, Book of Judges of Israel, Ruth, Four Books of Kings, Book of Tobit, Book of Esther, as well as Visions of the prophet Daniel, including the history of ancient Persia and Babylon, history ancient Rome.

The obverse annalistic collection of the 16th century. Bible Story - Imprint by Volume

The obverse annalistic collection of the 16th century. Bible story. Book 1. - M .: LLC "Firm" AKTEON ", 2014. - 598 p.
The obverse annalistic collection of the 16th century. Bible story. Book 2. - M .: LLC "Firm" AKTEON ", 2014. - 640 p.
The obverse annalistic collection of the 16th century. Bible story. Book 3. - M .: LLC "Firm" AKTEON ", 2014. - 670 p.
The obverse annalistic collection of the 16th century. Bible story. Book 4. - M .: LLC "Firm" AKTEON ", 2014. - 504 p.
The obverse annalistic collection of the 16th century. Bible story. Accompanying volume. - M .: LLC "Firm" AKTEON ", 2014. - 212 p.

16th century obverse annals - Bible history - Contents by volume

Bible story. Book 1 contains an exposition of the Bible Books: Genesis; Book 2 - Exodus; Book 3 - Leviticus.
Bible story. Book 2 contains an exposition of the Bible Books: Numbers; Deuteronomy; The Book of Isus Navin; The Book of Judges of Israel; Book of Ruth.
Bible story. Book 3 contains an exposition of the Bible Books, called the Four Books of Kings.
Bible story. Book 4 contains an exposition of the Bible Books: The Book of Tobit; Book of Esther; The book of the prophet Daniel; History of ancient Persia and Babylon; The beginning of the kingdom of Rome.

The obverse annalistic collection of the XVI century - The Bible story - From the publisher

The obverse (that is, illustrated "in faces", depicting people) annalistic collection, created in a single copy for Tsar Ivan the Terrible, his legendary book collection is a book monument that occupies a special place in world culture. The earliest historical and literary encyclopedia is presented on 10 thousand sheets with more than 17 thousand colorful miniatures - “windows into history”. It brings together the first illustrated Bible in the Slavic language, such artistic historical works as the Trojan War, Alexandria, the Jewish War of Joseph Flavius, etc., as well as weather (by year) chronicles, stories, legends, lives of Russian annalistic history.

The obverse vault is the largest chronographic work of medieval Russia. It has survived to this day in 10 volumes.

At present, the volumes of the Obverse Collection are in different book depositories of Russia: three volumes (the Museum Collection, the Synodal Volume and the Royal Book) - in the manuscript department of the State Historical Museum (Moscow), four volumes (the Obverse Chronograph, Golitsynsky Volume, Laptev Volume, Shumilovsky Volume) in the Russian National Library (St. Petersburg) and three volumes (Chronographic collection, Ostermanovsky first volume, Ostermanovsky second volume) in the manuscript department of the Library of the Academy of Sciences (St. Petersburg).

The first three volumes of the Observational Code tell about the events of biblical and world history, following in chronological order, and include outstanding works of world literature that form the basis of book culture. They were the recommended reading for the medieval Russian person.

Volume 1 - The Museum collection (1031 leaves) contains an exposition of sacred and world history, starting from the creation of the world: the Slavic text of the first seven books of the Old Testament, the history of the legendary Troy in two versions. The first part of the Museum collection is a unique Russian facial Bible, characterized by the utmost completeness of the reflection of the content in the illustrations, and corresponds to the canonical text of the Gennadiy Bible in 1499.

After the biblical books, the Trojan story follows, presented in two versions: the first is one of the earliest copies of the medieval Latin novel "The History of the Destruction of Great Troy", created at the end of the 13th century by Guido de Columna. The second version of the Trojan story is "The Tale of the Creation and Captivity of Troy", compiled by Russian scribes on the basis of earlier South Slavic works on the Trojan War, giving a different version of the events and destinies of the main characters.

Also on the topic

Can pregnant women use shrimp?

Can pregnant women eat shrimp and why are restrictions possible?

Features of the treatment of gastritis during pregnancy

Who does not take risks, he does not drink: is it possible for pregnant women to champagne?

Can pregnant women eat sushi and rolls?