p The unification of Kazan with Moscow in 1552 was the most notable political and historical event of the century. Contemporaries saw it as payment for the twohundred-year Mongol-Tatar yoke. With the taking of Kazan, and in 1556 of Astrakhan, a trade route to the East was opened.

p To commemorate this historical victory the great Russian architects Barma and Postnik created the renowned Cathedral of the Intercession (the Cathedral of Basil the Blessed). It was a symbol of a unified, mighty state protected by the Virgin herself. Its unusual, life-affirming style unites the styles of Muscovite, Novgorod-Pskov and Vladimir-Suzdal architecture, as well as folk wooden architecture. The religious symbol of the holy city of Jerusalem is subordinate here to the people’s dream of the “radiant city”, the kingdom of beauty, goodness and justice.

p The taking of Kazan was widely reflected in oral 261 folk literature: legends, songs and folk tales. Literature could not pass this event by as well. Apart from chronical tales, in 1564-1566 the History of the Empire of Kazan or the Kazan Chronicle was composed. It was popular enough to have survived in 200 copies. The History of the Empire of Kazan is a coherent historical narrative steeped in historical-polemic conceptions. It tells of events beginning with founding of Kazan in 1172 by the legendary Bulgarian king Sain to the taking of the city by Ivan the Terrible in 1552; its purpose is to glorify the Muscovite kingdom and its ruler. The entire history of Kazan is viewed as the history of its increasing dependence of Muscovy. The Kazan Chronicle tells of events from the 1540’s to 1550’s: Ivan’s campaigns against Kazan, the building of the city of Sviyazhsk, the military outpost of the Russian forces, on the right side of the Volga, the storming of Kazan’s walls and the fall of the city.

p The author himself witnessed these events. In 1532 he was taken prisoner by the “barbarians” and presented to Safa-Girei, king of Kazan, whom he served for twenty years, until Ivan the Terrible took Kazan. Then the tsar christened him, gave him a modest plot of land for “coming over to his (Ivan’s) service and serving faithfully”. Among the most important sources of the tale are wise and honourable citizens of Kazan and stories from the lips of the tsar himself. Literary models include Nestor-Iskander’s Tale of the Taking of Constantinople and the tales of the battle with Mamai; historical facts are taken from the Nikonovsky, Voskresensky and Novgorod V Chronicles, as well as the St. Sophia I Chronicle, the Russian chronograph of 1512 and the Book of Generations. In addition the author used the razryadnyc knigi (book listing participants in battle and describing the course of campaigns—TV.), diplomatic correspondence, the epistles of Ivan to the Conclave of the Hundred Chapters and his first epistle to Kurbsky.

p The central hero of the tale is Ivan the Terrible, who is wreathed in a halo of military and royal glory. He takes harsh reprisals against the rebels, traitors and unjust judges, but is merciful to the soldiers and the 262 people. His campaign to take Kazan was dictated not by a desire to capture foreign lands, but by the interests of the defence of his own country. The tale ends with an apotheosis of the victor solemnly riding into the great city of Moscow. Foreign emissaries, representing Babylon, Sweden, Denmark and Poland as well as messengers from the Nogai Horde, Wallachia, and English merchants marvelled at the sight: “We have not seen the like, neither in our own kingdoms, nor in foreign lands, and no emperor or king can compare with this beauty and might and great glory.” So as to better view the tsar the Muscovites crawl up on rooves of high churches and palaces, and along the walls; many run ahead; but the virgins, princesses and noble women “could not join the crowd due to their sense of shame and decorum, and did not leave their homes and climb to the tops of churches, but remained where they sat and lived, like birds kept in cages, and leaned out from doors and windows and looked through peepholes and enjoyed much of the glittering wonder and goodness and glory of the sight”. This vivid picture of the Muscovites’ reception of their victorious tsar offers a typical detail from the life of women in society at the time.

p In his depiction of Ivan’s triumph, the author affirms the political significance of the tsar’s victory over the enemy and makes a series of attacks on the boyars, princes and voyevodas. He declares that Kazan was conquered by the tsar and the Russian army, and not by the voyevodas and boyars. Here is a clear polemic against the boyar ideology.

p The tale employs many fantastic images: visions or omens foreshadowing the end of Kazan. In accordance with the Tale of the Taking of Constantinople and the tales of the battle with Mamai, the author paints colourful scenes of assaults and battle.

p Set formulas from military tales are included in the general desciptions of the battles, and supplemented with new comparisons of soldiers with birds and squirrels. These comparisons allow the reader to imagine the major battles. The author also stresses the courage, not only of the Russian soldiers, but of their enemies, the men of Kazan: “Some soldiers of Kazan overcame 263 their mortal fear and took courage, standing at the gates of the city and the places where the walls were broken; and the Russians and Tatars met in a great battle.... It was terrible to see the bravery and valour of both sides.... And spears and swords crashed in their hands like thunder, and the voices and cries from both sides rang out.”

p This attempt to reveal the psychological state of the enemy in battle was a new contribution made by the author of the History of the Empire of Kazan to the historical narratives of the sixteenth century. Much of the tale is devoted to describing the psychology of the characters. One example is the description of the emotions of Tsarina Anastasia when she had said farewell to her husband setting on the campaign of Kazan; another is the grief of Kazan Empress Sumbeka as she laments her husband and takes leave of her subjects, as well as the lament of the people of Kazan themselves. The lament is both literary and rhetorical and abounds in folk imagery.

p There are many elements of folklore in the tale, and the author uses expressions from folk epics, as well as the lyrical images of folk songs and laments and individual motifs from Tatar folklore. All this leads the author to call his work “a beautiful, new and sweet tale" which he is attempting to tell in logical narrative form.

Its profound attention to describing the human psyche, wide use of folklore and violation of the norms of rhetorical style make the History of the Empire of Kazan a work on the threshold of early seventeenth century historical works.

The Tale of the Kievan Bogatyr

p Ivan’s capture of Kazan was reflected in an unusual manner in the Tale of the Kievan Bogatyrs, an original literary reworking of an oral epic subject, which appeared in the late sixteenth or early seventeenth century. The tale has survived in five copies; the oldest is from the first half of the seventeenth century. Its 264 heroes are seven Kievan bogatyrs: Ilya Muromets, Dobrynya Nikitich, Dvoryanin Zaleshanin, Alesha Popovich, Shchata Elizynich, Sukhan Domentyanovich and White Mace (Belaya palitsa or polyanitsa}. Their opponents are forty-two knights from Constantinople (Tatars), including Idol Skoropeyevich and Tugarin Zmeyevich.

p Vs. Miller observed that the Tale of the Kievan Bogatyrs reflects the political and social life of the Muscovite state in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Constantinople resembles Kazan; the Smugra river—the river Ugra where the great battle between the forces of Ivan III and Khan Akhmet occurred in 1480. Kazan is also replaced by Constantinople in folk songs about Ivan the Terrible.

p The Tale of the Kievan Bogatyrs shows the development of the new tendencies in sixteenth century narrative: folklore was beginning to play an increasing role; it was democratised; and finally writers began to depart from historical plots in favour of epic generalisations and interesting stories.

p The development of the sixteenth century literature was characterised by the unification of regional literatures into one all-Russian literature ideologically supporting the political unification of the Russian lands around Muscovy. Official literature composed in ruling circles worked out a representative rhetorical style, a second monumentalism or idealised form of biography  [264•1  whose purpose was to eulogise the Muscovite kingdom, its pious autocratic rulers and “new wonder-workers”. This was to testify to the fact that the Russian kingdom was chosen by God.

p The style observed strict rules of “etiquette”: it was ceremonious, and depicted heroes in primarily abstract terms. The latter stood before the readers in all the grandeur and magnificence of the virtues that adorned them. They pronounced solemn speeches in accordance with rank and the occasion, and their deeds are performed in 265 strict correspondence to their official position. But the pressures of life began to destroy this style; at times they consciously included concrete sketches of life, folklore, and colloquial language. Already in the literature of the sixteenth century we see a process of democratisation in the increasing influence of folklore and the use of forms of official writing. Historical narratives also undergo changes; they strive to generalise, and begin to allow for imaginary events and more interesting plots.

The works of this time evidence a certain interest in daily life and questions of morality, which entails the introduction of living colloquial speech and even common parlance into the literary language. This enriches the literature and enables it to reflect reality with greater breadth and profundity.

Sources

p 1. A. P. Evgenyeva, “‘Skazanie o kievskikh bogatyryakh’ po spisku XVII veka. Zametki o yazyke i stile" (“The ’Tale of the Kievan Bogatyrs’ According to a Seventeenth Century Copy: Style and Language”), TODRL, vol. 5,1947.

p 2. Kazanskaya istoriya (History of the Empire of Kazan}. Preparation of texts, introduction and notes by G.N. Moiseyeva, M.-L., 1954.

p 3. A. S. Orlov, Drevnyaya russkaya literatura XI-XVJ vv. (Old Russian Literature from the Eleventh to the Sixteenth Centuries), M.-L., 1937.

p 4. Povest o Dmitrii Basarge i o syne ego Borzomysle (The Tale of Dmitry Basarg and His Son Borzomysl). Research and preparation of texts by M. O. Skripil, L., 1969.

5. Khrestomatiya po drevnei russkoi literature (Anthology of Old Russian Literature). Compiled by N. K. Gudzy, 8th edition, M., 1973.