Novgorod First Chronicle
Novgorod First Chronicle
Main page
1764801

Novgorod First Chronicle

logo
Community Hub0 subscribers
What are your thoughts?
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Novgorod First Chronicle

The Novgorod First Chronicle (Russian: Новгоро́дская пе́рвая ле́топись, romanized: Novgoródskaya pérvaya létopisʹ, IPA: [nəvɡɐˈrot͡skəjə ˈpʲervəjə ˈlʲetəpʲɪsʲ], commonly abbreviated as NPL), also known by its 1914 English edition title The Chronicle of Novgorod, 1016–1471, is the oldest extant Rus' chronicle of the Novgorod Republic. Written in Old East Slavic, it reflects a literary tradition about Kievan Rus' which differs from the Primary Chronicle.

The earliest extant copy of the NPL is the so-called Synod Scroll (Sinodálʹnyy), dated to the second half of the 13th century. First printed in 1841, it is currently preserved in the State Historical Museum. It is the earliest known manuscript of a major Old East Slavic chronicle, predating the Laurentian Codex of the Primary Chronicle by almost a century. In the 14th century, the Synod Scroll was continued by the monks of the Yuriev Monastery in Novgorod. Other important copies of the Novgorod First Chronicle include the Academic Scroll (Akademícheskiy) and Commission Scroll (Komissiónnyy)), both dating to the 1440s, and the Tolstoi (Tolstóvoi) copy. This "Younger Redaction" contains entries from the year 854 up to 1447.

The beginning of the Synod Scroll or "Older Edition" of the Novgorod First Chronicle is missing. The surviving text starts in the middle of a sentence in the year 1016, during the Kievan succession crisis between Yaroslav and Sviatopolk. The lost contents of the Synod Scroll before the year 1016 are unknown, and can only be speculated about. Soviet researcher Oleg Viktorovich (1987) asserted that later editions of the chronicle reflect a lost Primary Kievan Code (Russian: Нача́льный Ки́евский свод) of the late 11th century, which contained information not present in the later Primary Chronicle (PVL). But in her doctoral dissertation, The Chronicle and the Chronograph (2015), Ukrainian historian Tetyana Vilkul demonstrated that the Novgorod First Chronicle in the Younger Redaction (Younger NPL) has been contaminated by the PVL, so that the PVL text must necessarily be older, and the Younger NPL text reflected the 14th- or 15th-century chronographs and could not be an archetype for the PVL text.

The Synod Scroll was written in several stages by different hands. The oldest parts have been palaeographically dated to the second half of the 13th century. Later passages such as the entry on the Battle of Lake Peipus (1242) have been dated to the middle of the 14th century.

The Archaeographic Commission (Komissiónnyy) copy of the Novgorod First Chronicle, which stems from the mid-15th century, contains at the beginning two genealogies and a chronological regnal list of Rus' princes; all three of them begin with "Rurik". This is in sharp contrast with the Hypatian Codex (compiled c. 1425), wherein the list of knyazi ("princes") of Kiev starts with "Dir and Askold", followed by "Oleg", and then "Igor", and does not mention "Rurik" at all. Similarly, the chronology at the start of the Laurentian Codex (compiled 1377) makes no mention of "Rurik", but starts the regnal list of Rus' princes from the year in which Oleg took up residence in Kiev.

The narrative part of the NPL starts from the legendary origins of Rus' and its last records refer to mid-15th century events. It describes the accession to the throne of the princes of Novgorod, the elections of major officials such as tysyatsky and posadnik, building of churches and monasteries, epidemics and military campaigns.

The Academic (Akademícheskiy) copy of the NPL dates from the mid-15th century, came into the possession of Vasily Tatishchev, and was acquired in 1737 by the Library of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Saint Petersburg, where it is currently being preserved with registration number "17.8.36".

The chronicle is notable for its focus on local events, lack of stylistic embellishments and the use of local dialect.

See all
User Avatar
No comments yet.