Slovo o polku Igoreve

[Alexander Boguslawski]

Markus Osterrieder wrote:
>
> My main suspicion concerning the authenticity of "Slovo" stems from the
> "spiritual message" that it transports. Of course it appeals to a
> scientific mind of the 19th or 20th century to have such a expressive
> testimony of dvoeverie AND pan-Rus' patriotism in a document from the
> late 12th century. But: Who at that time had access to education, was
> able to read and write? Where, in which institutions could he learn this?
> Place yourself a bit in the mental context of the 12th century. In
> Scandinavia, Wales and Eire, there is in fact the transmission of old
> pagan lore, but it is always historic. Never, an *author* (someone who
> belongs to a elite) would freely mix Pagan and Christian concepts. There
> would be confrontation, yes, and christianizing of old spiritual beliefs
> and customs (the world of the peasants in many parts of Europe, not only
> among Eastern Slavs!, is full of this "dvoeverie" until late in our
> century - just have a look to the Bavarian countryside, for instance),
> but there would never be an sentimental invocation of the Old Gods as
> part of a praise to Svjataja Rus'.  One can argue that the concept of
> Rus'kaja zemlja has got pagan roots, but in the 12th century it was
> firmly anchored in the Christian sphere, in pravoslavie, and I doubt
> whether it would have been possible to bring up the Old World in such
> "official" matters without suffering serious consequences.
>
> To give an example: Towards the end of the Slovo, Igor rides "k svjatej
> Bogorodici Pirogoshchej". The author sings: "Zdravi knjazi i druzhina,
> pobaraja za khrist'jany na poganyja pl''ki!" He opposes the christian
> heroes and "poganii", but then he speaks about "vnuci Dazh'bozha" i
> "vetri, Stribozhi vnuci". This is nice, poetic, but not medieval, not
> even in Rus'. He could have called them grandchildren of their
> forefather, but not of a God, because this involves a rather complicated
> metaphysical outlook (the question from which God and totem a certain
> tribe derives). As a Christian, the author would have never used such
> elements to improve his style. And the winds as grandchildren of Stribog?
> Snorri Sturleson would have had a good laugh.
>
> This said, the use of the Old Gods seems so modern, it is completely out
> of context of the mind of medieval man, but hits exactly the tone of
> someone trained by Sturm und Drang and Enlightenment - well, yes, think
> of Ossian -, who has not a real spiritual understanding anymore, but just
> a sentimental approach. Just compare the use of the supernatural in e.g.
> Nibelungenlied and Slovo o polku Igoreve, or Slovo o pogibeli rus'koj
> zemli and Slovo o polku Igoreve.
>
> There is a political implication of the Slovo as well, of course, but I
> don't need to go into this now. The Slovo *is* great literature, no doubt
> about that.
>
> Markus Osterrieder, M.A.
>
> eMail: u9511bw at mail.lrz-muenchen.de
Dear Seelangers,

I am happy that the list found another fascinating topic to discuss,
but...  It is hard for me to understand (and believe) that even today
there are scholars who doubt the authenticity of the Slovo.  I am not
Russian and cannot be blamed for exaggerated patriotism, but I think
that enough was written about Igor to put to rest Mazon's inventions.
First of all, there is linguistic evidence.  Slovo is an authentic
12th-century work and nobody in the 18th-century Russia had enough
knowledge of linguistics to write a forgery of this kind.  Secondly,
Robert Mann, if I am not mistaken, wrote a convincing study of folk
background of Slovo, again proving that it is original and fits in the
literary and folklore tradition.  Third, Likhachev showed very clearly
that Zadonshchina is a secondary work which used Slovo as its basis, but
failed to understand the cultural layers of the original and thus
appears as an anachronistic work (Likhachev uses the term literary
etiquette and proves that Zadonshchina, by using Slovo without all the
necessary scholarly apparatus, violates the literary etiquette).
Finally, the message of the work is simple -- a call to unity (again,
appropriate for the 12th century) and obedience to the grand prince.  In
the 14th-15th centuries, such a call is no longer valid because of the
leading role of Moscow in the Russians' fight with the Mongols.  As far
as the pagan elements are concerned, they all fit quite well into the
overal poetic/folkloric spirit of the work.  All this has been analyzed
and elucidated much better by countless specialists who did extensive
research of chronicles, folklore, and primary and secondary sources.
Ascribing the work to some Masonic individual is, pardon my indignation,
senseless.  If such an individual (genius) existed, he would have given
us some other proofs of his incredible talents.

Alexander Boguslawski
Rollins College