Slovo o polku Igoreve

[James L. Rice]

Colleagues:                                     May 3, 1998

If you feel the need of some essential homework on the Igor Tale (SOPI),
here are a few sources that should not be overlooked:

(1) Roman Jakobson, SELECTED WRITINGS, vol. 4: SLAVIC EPIC STUDIES, 1966.
        Reprints his major contributions on the subject, targets his chief
        opponent of the 'forties & 'fifties, Mazon. A good popularizing
polemic, in English, is his "Puzzles of the Igor' Tale on the 150th
Anniversary of Its First Edition" (tam zhe).
(2) A. Zimin, "Kogda bylo napisano 'Slovo'?" in VOPROSY LITERATURY 1967 No
3,         135-152.  By then Zimin's doubts about the authenticity had come
under attack by a massive interdisciplinary collective in the
        USSR, and Jakobson had lambasted Z's unpublished 1963 monograph in
the volume cited above: see "Retrospect" pp. 656f.)
(3) The eighteenth-century European and Russian background (Ossianism, etc.)
        which encourages one to take the possibility of "hoax" seriously is
        richly reviewed by Charles A. Moser in the issue of
CANADIAN-AMERICAN         SLAVIC STUDIES that appeared in early fall 1973.
<I remember reading         it then, but don't have it handy.>
(4) Many very good articles on all aspects of the problem are found in
        ISSLEDOVANIE "SLOVA O POLKU IGOREVE, ed. by D. S. Likhachev (Nauka
1986 (esp.: Likhachev's "Problema daty sozdaniia 'Slova o polku
Igoreve'", and V. P. Kozlov's "K istorii 'Slova o polku Igoreve' v
kontse XVIII v.").
(5) The best efforts of gifted poets like Karamzin and L'vov to stylize
ANYTHING in a "folk manner" are ham-handed and ludicrous (leaning
toward parody), and on the other hand, Pushkin -- who had perfect
stylistic pitch (no doubt through a special genetic endowment) --
never expressed the least doubt about the Igor Tale's authenticity.

Modern arguments are buttressed not just by Turcology and Slavic linguistics,
but also by geographic, geological, zoological, and genealogical studies.
The argued opinions of many scholars expert in the 12th century are on
record.  There is nothing productive to be had by "polling the delegation"
of Slavic literary historians.  Better to follow their refereed publications.

Jim Rice
University of Oregon