The Lives of Zosima and Savvatiy Solovetsky as part of the “Book of Lives of Saints” by Demetrius of Rostov (problems of sources)

The Lives of the Solovetsky saints as part of the collection of lives of Demetrius of Rostov needs special study, taking into account the specific requirements that its compiler made for the structure and content of this collection as a single literary whole. Without touching on this topic in this case, let us dwell on the question of how the history of the development of the text of the Lives of Zosima and Savvatius over almost two centuries in manuscripts (XVI - XVIII centuries) was reflected in a work that, like the Great Menaions of the Fourth (GMC) of Metropolitan Macarius, had the goal of uniting and collecting together works of ancient Russian hagiographic and teaching literature, but to do this at the level of the requirements of another historical era. In this regard, of particular interest is the question of what sources Demetrius used in this case in the process of compiling his extensive corpus and in what direction he creatively processed them. As Dimitri himself reports, in the process of working on the Life of Zosima and Savvatius, he used the text of the Great Menaion of Metropolitan Macarius and was guided mainly by it. Thus, justifying the fact that the Life of Savvaty and the Life of Zosima are placed in his code, which had a strictly calendar basis, under one day - April 17 (the day of memory of St. Zosima, the day of memory of St. Savvaty was established by the Church on September 27), Demetrius writes: “Let the Lives of both be put together on this day. At the beginning is the Life of the Venerable Savvatius, who lived like the one who lived before, just like the Great Menaion of Chetya, the southern blessed Macarius, Metropolitan of Moscow, compiled with diligent care, written on this day, April 17, the Life of the Venerable Savvatius, also the Venerable Zosima, so we too subsequently, we begin Savvatiev’s Life first” 1 . Further, in the margins of the Life, Demetrius will once again mark: “From the Great Menaion of the Chetya in abbreviation” 2. It is also known that Demetrius used the printed text of the Prologue in his work (the Lives of the Solovetsky saints were included in the Prologue, starting with its second edition of 1642 - 1643; in the first, unfinished, edition of 1641, which was limited to readings only for the first half of the year in September - February, the Life of Savvaty, of course, was absent). However, in order to fully elucidate the history of the text as part of Dimitri’s corpus, it is inevitable to turn, in one way or another, to the question of the fate of the Life in manuscripts, about its pre-existing handwritten editions and their relationship, since this is what determines the features of the prologue text dedicated to the memory of the Solovetsky ascetics, and through its medium the features of Dimitri’s Life. The Life of Zosima and Savvatiy Solovetsky, one of the popular works of ancient Russian hagiography, created at the turn of the 15th – 16th centuries, was widely distributed in manuscripts of subsequent times (thus, only in the central ancient repositories of Moscow, St. Petersburg, and Arkhangelsk, about 230 copies of this work, dating from the 16th and 17th centuries, are stored). The work had a difficult fate, and many questions related to the history of the development of the text of the monument still remain unclear. For a long time, the generally accepted opinion of V. O. Klyuchevsky, who spoke primarily about one edition of the Life, although he did not deny the possibility of the existence of other editions 3. I.K. Yakhontov also argued that the Life has come down to us only in one edition of Spiridon-Sava 4. Contemporary researcher of the Life of R.P. Dmitrieva made an important assumption that the text of the Life of Zosima and Savvaty has reached us in manuscripts in several different editions 5 . A word-by-word textual analysis of the lists of the Life from a number of Moscow manuscript collections and the State Archive of the Arkhangelsk Region allows us to confirm the correctness of this assumption by R. P. Dmitrieva and identify seven editions of the text of the monument: the edition of the Volokolamsk collection, which R. P. Dmitriev characterizes it as the original and, obviously, belonging to the pen of Spiridon-Sava himself; the edition of the Grand Marshal of Metropolitan Macarius, which is the result of a direct reduction of the edition of the Volokolamsk collection; subjected to further sequential reduction of the editions of the “Tale of the Life”, the Abridged and Late Brief, and vice versa, which emerged later, obviously at the turn of the 16th – 17th centuries, new supplemented editions of the Life - the edition with a Preface by Maxim the Greek and the edition supplemented according to the “Honours” of Lev the Philologist 6. (R.P. Dmitrieva identified four editions of the text: the edition Volokolamsk collection, edited with a Preface by Maxim the Greek, edited by VMC Macarius and “Laudatory words” by Leo the Philologist, which she considers as an independent hagiographical narrative 7). In connection with the question under consideration about the sources of the Lives of the Solovetsky saints in the edition of the Prologue and as part of the code of Demetrius of Rostov, the question of the place of the edition of the VMC, used, as mentioned above, by Demetrius in the general history of the development of the text of the monument, as well as the question of the relationship with different editions of the Lives of the “Honorable Words” attributed to the pen of the Serbian scribe Ankita Lev, is of fundamental importance Philologist, since they, in turn, formed the basis of the Life of Zosima in the Prologue edition. Consideration of the problem posed, however, is more logical to begin with a direct analysis of the text of the Life as part of the Dimitrievsky corpus, aimed at clarifying the question of the nature of its compiler’s use of the above sources. When analyzing Dimitriev's Life of Savvaty, it becomes clear that the compiler in this case followed in his presentation mainly the text of Macarius. This, in particular, is evidenced by the fact that the beginning of the Life of Savvatiy in Demetrius corresponds in general to the beginning of the text in the VMC: “In the days of the pious Grand Duke Prince Vasily Vasilievich of Vladimir and Moscow and all Russia, and the Grand Duke Boris Alexandrovich of Tver, and the Grand Duke Theodore Olgovich of Ryazan, I maintain the throne of the Russian metropolitan Photius Grechin, in the great Novegrad and Pskov to Archbishop Euthymius Bradatom...” (L. 335) “Great Menaion of Cheti” 8: “There was in the days of the pious and Grand Duke Vasily Vasilievich of Vladimir and Moscow and all Russia, and the Grand Duke Boris Alexandrovich of Tver, and the Grand Duke Theodore of Ryazan Olgovich, in the summer of 1436, who was then a certain Greek Metropolitan Photius, in In Novgorod I rule the throne of Archbishop Euthymius Bradaty...” (Col. 503) If you compare the above texts with Prologue 9, then an abbreviated version is presented there: “It happened in the days of the pious and Grand Duke Vasily, the son of Vasiliev, Vladimir and Moscow, and the Grand Duke Boris of Tver, and Prince Theodore of Ryazan, that the church ruling the great Novagrad and Pskov, Archbishop Euthymius Bradaty, fed in the summer of 1436” (L. 129 rev.). As can be seen from the comparison of the three texts, the compiler of the prologue Life eliminated from the text indications of the patronymics of the Tver and Ryazan princes, information about Metropolitan Photius, who was installed “according to the old custom” “from the Greek”, contained in the VMC. It is interesting to note that, with all the desire to shorten the text, the compiler of the Prologue transferred to it the date of 1436, presented in the VMC, as in most other handwritten editions of the Life. At the same time, Dmitry, having transferred all the information from the editorial office of the VMC without changes, eliminated this date from his text. What caused Dimitri’s similar attitude to the selection of material in this case? It seems that Demetrius himself sought to preserve in his text all the few accurate facts, information, and specific details contained in the VMC, as evidenced by the nature of all his subsequent work on the text of the sources. The fact that he removed a specific date from the text may indicate that he doubted its correctness, its correlation with the events described in the text. And indeed, as D.S. Likhachev noted, in the edition of the Life in this case there is a clear discrepancy between the chronological period of the reign of these persons (it dates back to 1425–1427) and the date contained in the text 10. In this regard, the question arises: what does this date even refer to? R.P. Dmitrieva suggests that the date of 1436 may mark the beginning of the development of Solovki - the time of arrival of Savvatiya and Herman or Zosima and Herman to the island, and the researcher herself believes that the second assumption is the most likely 11. At the same time, she points out that the later Solovetsky chronicler (GPB. Solov. Collection No. 987. XVII century) contains the date of Savvaty’s arrival with German on Solovki - 1429, and Savvaty, based on the edition of the Life according to the Volokolamsk collection, stayed on the island for a total of at least two years. However, D.S. Likhachev questioned the correctness of the date contained in the Solovetsky chronicler 12. At the same time, a textual analysis of various handwritten editions of the Life showed that in a number of later versions of the text, starting with its Abridged edition, this date is read in the title: “Before they began to live on the island of the sea by the life and leadership of the servant of God Savvaty the former mentioned and Herman, a certain God-loving man, and therefore the father came to the island Zosima and formed a monastery in the summer of 1436" 13. Probably, this version of reading, which was apparently the result of a later rethinking of the clearly contradictory text, should be considered the most correct from a factual point of view. The date 1436 is most likely connected with Zosima and means either the time of his arrival on Solovki, or, more likely, the year of foundation of the Solovetsky monastery. The dating at the beginning of the Life, given by indicating the time of the reign of historical figures (1425–1427), obviously refers to the events that are described here further - to the time of the presence of St. Savvaty in the Kirillo-Belozersky Monastery. From all of the above, it is important for us to emphasize that in this case, Demetrius, having analyzed the text of the VMC, considered it necessary to eliminate a clearly contradictory chapter from the beginning of the Life, which, as mentioned above, had already been previously noticed by scribes, while the compiler of the prologue edition of this contradiction, apparently, did not notice and left the hagiographic text unchanged. Further, in the edition of the VMC, the author directly moves on to the story of Savvaty’s stay in the Kirillo-Belozersky Monastery. At the same time, it is important to note that the Life lacks some of the most valuable episodes from the point of view of the hagiographic canon - as in the edition of the Volokolamsk collection, nothing is said here about the origin of the saint, his homeland, or parents. Refusing to use in this case traditional hagiographic formulas and descriptions praising the saint’s virtues manifested in early childhood and youth, characteristic of most lives, the author refers to his lack of necessary information: “And even the city or the weight, or the parent of his stay, many more years passed the essence before writing this, and did not find it, or how many years of his age were then, when in the image monastic life below” (VMC. Stlb. 503). In this case, Demetrius, like the compiler of the prologue edition, refrained from any instructions of this kind and, not having the necessary information, moved on to the story of Savvaty’s stay on White Lake. Obviously, having considered the text of the Prologue here to be more consistent with the requirements of the hagiographic genre in a stylistic sense, and perhaps describing in more detail the necessary virtues of an ascetic, Demetrius conveys it in his text almost verbatim: “There was an elder in the Belozersky Kirillovsky monastery named Savathia, with the name there monks living in fasting and working for the Lord day and night, killing their bodies with greed and thirst, vigils and prayers and all sorts of sorrowful labors of monastic life, obeying the abbot and the brethren of existence and all monastic services without laziness passing away, for the sake of being beloved and revered by everyone, and be to the other brethren an image of a virtuous and hardworking life, and his name was glorious in the monastery” (L. 335v.). “There was one inhabitant of the Belozersky monasteries, called Kirillov, an elder named Savvatai, who stayed with other monks, working for the Lord day and night, exhausting his body with fasting and vigil and prayers. That elder was in obedience to the abbot and the brethren, and through all the monastery services well, he was loved and revered by everyone, as if he were like another monk in all virtues” (L. 129v. – 130v.). “Likewise, living in the foretold monastery with those who were there, they overcame obedience to the abbot and the entire brotherhood in Christ in the services commanded to him, and to this end, with many abstinence and polish, they exhausted their body and overcame passions, and all the demonic couples in the capital and the devil himself suffered a considerable plague impose. We love and glorify the monk from all those staying there and from the abbot of that monastery himself, and for his many obedience, and meekness, and humility we love from everyone and honor him, as if he were an image of life in all the virtues of those who stayed there and the corrections of life” (St. 504). Perhaps, the case considered is the only one for the Life of Savvaty, when Demetrius preferred the prologue edition to the Makaryev text. In the future, he will focus mainly on VMC. In addition to the general structure of the narrative, reflecting the peculiarities of the edition of the VMC, this is also evidenced by many examples when Demetrius reflects details of Macarius’ text that are absent in the Prologue. So, for example, Dimitri transfers into his text a complete description of the location of the Valaam Spaso-Preobrazhensky: “And hearing that in the Novgorod region there is a lake, called Nevo, on it is an island, called Valam, and there is the monastery of the Transfiguration of the Lord” (L. 335). “I heard from some strangers saying: There is a lake in the Nougorodtsk region, called Nevo, on it is an island, called Valam, and on that island is the monastery of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Holy Transfiguration” (St. 504). “There is,” he said, “in the Novgorod monasteries there is a monastery on an island, the verb is Valam” (L. 130). Dimitriev’s Life also tells in equal detail about Solovetsky Island. In this case, he connects two passages from the World War II describing the island: “Hearing about the Solovetsky Island on the sea-ocean, which is two days away from the shore. At that time, the island was empty, uninhabited by people, hearing that it is a great island, having a district of one hundred miles, and it has sweet waters, and lakes of fish, mountains and wilds, forests and hogs and other lands for human habitation. This world is not inhabited by people whose path to it is inconvenient. And many many people wanted to settle there, unable to cope with fear for the sake of the need of the sea. Sometimes fishermen come there in boats, having seen the time to catch fish, and having fulfilled their needs, they return” (L. 335v.). “Having heard from those living on the island, we recommend Solovki, in the sea-ocean, saying that the name of the procession is two days away from the earth. They say that its district is about 100 versts, and there are many lakes in its midst, and there are many different kinds of fish in them, according to their kind, not sea fish, but those in the sea, sea fish, there is also a district of its fishing, the fishermen who come against their labor each take their bribe and go home. The island of that tree is full of different flowers, and covered the mountains with trees, and according to its abundance, every tree is named, buttocks of many different kinds, and pine trees are great for making churches, and for all the needs of landscaping” (St. 505 - 506). “... the island is great and everything is implicated in the organization of human life. Many and many years settled there, many wanted and were not able to live there, fear for the sake of the need of the sea” (St. 507). All this specific information was not reflected in the Prologue. In the subsequent story about the life and exploits of the Monk Savvaty, Demetrius also follows the VMC, speaking in detail about Savvaty’s meeting with Elder Herman, about the conversation with the inhabitants of the coast, about his arrival on Solovetsky Island. From the VMC, Dimitri, almost without changes, also transfers into his text the story of the miracle of the expulsion of the Korelian fisherman, of Savvaty’s last trip to Vyg, of his meeting with Abbot Nathanael and John the Novgorodian, and of the saint’s death that soon followed. In this case, he deliberately abandoned the form of a short prologue narrative and described all these events in accordance with Makaryev’s edition. In connection with this, Demetrius reflected episodes that, during the development of the text of the Life in manuscripts, were eliminated and were absent in later editions, starting with the “Tale of the Life.” Compare, for example, the description of Savvaty’s conversation with the residents of the coast: “The venerable one answered them: “I am the son of such an imam ruler, who makes the nature of old age youthful, just as he grows a baby to old age, the message is to enrich the poor, and to give the needy alms to the poor, and to satisfy the greedy with little food; how sometimes he fed five thousand people in the desert with five loaves of bread.” The nuns, hearing the old man’s bookish prophecy, admired the old man’s senselessness and foolishness, and laughed at him” (L. 336). “The Reverend Savatie said: “I am so, children, such is the lord imam, the nature of old age is creating youth and the baby is growing mastitis to old age and nourishing the poor. Once upon a time he fed five thousand people with five loaves, and four thousand with seven loaves, and put water into wine.” The villagers, having heard what was said from him, having the understanding, were amazed. Friends, who do not have the meaning of good, curse at him” (St. 507 - 508). Compare in the edition of “The Tale of the Life” 14: “My friends, having no sense of good, curse at him. The servant of God Savvaty, put your trust in God, think in yourself what was said: “Cast your sorrow on the Lord, and he will nourish you” (L. 241). In the later handwritten editions of the Life, starting with the Abridged, the story about the meeting of the Monk Savvaty on Vygu with Abbot Nathanael was significantly shortened, which Demetrius also conveyed in detail in accordance with the edition of the VMC. Thus, a comparison of the text of the Life of Savvatiy from the Dimitrievsky codex with its direct sources - the edition as part of the VMC Macarius and the Prologue - shows that in this case Demetrius was guided entirely by the text of the VMC. We find correspondence with the Prologue only in one episode - the description of Savvaty’s stay in the Kirillo-Belozersky Monastery, which, obviously, was more consistent with the requirements set by Demetrius for the style of his work and the requirements of the hagiographic canon. All other episodes find a fairly accurate correspondence in Makaryev’s text. Contrary to the instructions of Demetrius himself, he slightly shortened this text due to small details, mainly reasoning of an abstract moralistic nature. Moreover, Dimitriev’s Life, as was shown, retained many of the specific features of the VMC edition as one of the earliest in the history of the development of the text, since a number of these episodes in the later handwritten editions of the Life were lost as a result of their reduction. As for the additions made by Demetrius himself from other sources, they are very insignificant and, obviously, taken from the prologue text of the Life of Zosima: this is a mention of “sweet waters” in the description of Solovetsky Island and a small rhetorical argument introduced into the text before the story of the death of Savvaty, corresponding compositionally to the story of the death of Zosima and very close to it in form: “What was his sojourn, what was his fasting, what were his spiritual deeds? When he thought of his departure to God, he fulfilled these days and God-pleasing labors, thinking how he might be worthy to partake of the divine mysteries” (L. 337; compare in the prologue Life of Zosima, l. 230 vol.: “Fulfill these days) old man, the time has come for him to bow down to his father.” It is interesting that Demetrius did not use the indicated text from the Prologue in the Life of Zosima, following, as will be shown below, in his presentation the text of the Great Patriotic War). The question of the main source that Demetrius used when compiling the Life of Zosima should be resolved completely differently. The complexity of resolving this issue necessitates a detailed comparison of different texts and a solution for each individual case to the question of their relationship. The beginning of the Life of Zosimas in the code of Demetrius is fully consistent with the Prologue and contains information about the origin, place of birth, parents and childhood of the saint, necessary from the point of view of the hagiographic canon, but almost completely absent in the edition of the VMC: “They came from the region of the great Novgorod, from the great village called Tolvuya, Lake Onega. His parents Gabriel and Varvara, Christians by faith, abiding in piety, from them the boy was born and raised in book learning and instructed in good morals, and was quiet, and humble, and meek, disgracing youthful customs” (L. 338v). “See Zosima from the great village, called Tolvuya, Lake Onega, region of the great Novagrad. Those who gave birth to this child, Gabriel and Barbara, were Christians with faith and abiding in piety, and in their acquisitions they were neither rich in great things nor poor in poverty, but had enough. When a youth matures in age, we teach the sacred books... and the rest of youthful customs are put to shame and he holds on, having been quiet and humble in his youth, and loving purity” (L. 226 vol. - 227). “There was a certain man who rejected the world, named Zosima. He was the son of a pious and rich parent, and one of the rulers of the Novgorod state living there” (St. 515). As can be seen from the comparison of the above texts, Demetrius sought to supplement the edition of the VMC with the necessary information that was missing in it, and as a source for supplementing the text, he again turned to the Prologue. The fact that Demetrius was guided by the text of the VMC is evidenced by the fact that he transferred to his code without changes the introduction to the Life of Zosima, to which we find full correspondence in the Makariev edition: “After the single year of the repose of the Monk Savatius, although God raised and glorified the place, his saint worked on it for many years on Solovetsky Island, and in the desert it was a glorious and great monastery for many monastics” (L. 338 vol.). “After the one year of the repose of the Monk Savatius, although God erected that place, so that the works of his saint would not fade into oblivion. And glorify the desire of God, where the servant of God Savate spent many summers with a fast and hard-working stay on the island of Solovetsky... And now God willing and the Most Pure Mother of God erected this place...” (St. 515). There is no corresponding introduction in the Prologue. The question of why the Prologue in this case was the source for supplementing the beginning of the Life of Zosima in the edition of the VMC is of particular interest and is connected, in turn, with the question of the sources and main features of the prologue edition of the Life of Zosima itself. Prologue editions of the lives are usually distinguished by the brevity of the narrative, which is due both to the requirements of the literary genre of the collection as a whole, and to extra-literary factors - the use of readings from the Prologue in the process of worship 15. Therefore, the prologue edition of a particular life was usually created on the basis of its lengthy edition by processing it in the direction of significant reduction by eliminating specific details and reducing the details in the overall volume of the narrative that reflect the plot development of the action. Based on this, it is logical to assume that the compiler of the prologue edition of the Lives of the Solovetsky Saints should have used the shortest biography that he could have at that time. Indeed, the text of the Life of Savvaty in the Prologue is the result of further reduction of the already short text of the Abridged Edition of the Life. Obviously, this is why, as shown above, he did not attract the attention of Demetrius, who, apparently, set himself the task, contrary to his own indication of his desire to shorten the Makaryev text, to preserve and convey in his version of the Life all the specific facts and details known to him and to display all the necessary canonical episodes for the hagiographic genre. This question is resolved completely differently in relation to the Life of Zosima. A comparison of the text of the Prologue edition of the Life of Zosimas with different versions of its lengthy edition presented in the manuscripts showed that none of these options could have been used by the compiler of the Prologue. At the same time, the analysis of the texts shows that the Prologue edition of the Life of Zosima is the result of a reduction of the “Laudatory” in memory of Zosima Solovetsky, previously used by the compilers of several handwritten editions of the Life (edition with a Preface by Maximus the Greek and edition supplemented by the “Honorables”), traditionally attributed to the Serbian scribe Anikita Lev Philologus 16. It is in the “Eulogy” in memory of Zosima that we find information about his origin, childhood, parents, which, as shown above, then entered through the Prologue into the Life of Zosima as part of the Dimitrievsky arch. Compare in Zosima’s “Eulogy”: “These Zosima, O man, from the village of the great Lake Onega, called Tolvuya, the region of the great Novagrad, who gave birth to this child Gabriel and Barbara, a Christian by faith and in piety, abiding by the struggle of being neither rich in greatness, nor wretched and poor, but contented with property” (Part 2. P. 353). It is interesting that the specific information under consideration about the origin of the saint contradicts the information contained in the edition of the Volokolamsk collection, which, apparently, being closest to the original form of the monument, was the only one of the early editions of the Life that preserved data on the origin of Zosima. Compare in Volokolamsk collection 17: “There are some husbands from the Tame living villages, called Shunga, by the name of Zosima. This son was born to a pious and rich parent. Before his father's death, he had a life in the great Novgorod, and so he settled in that village near the sea, because he wanted to have a life, like two hundred miles from the sea or more" (L. 231–231 vol.). Without dwelling here on the source of this information for the author of the Word, which is the subject of a special discussion, we also note that it was the “Eulogy” in memory of Zosima that was the source of the next episode of the Prologue, also later used by Demetrius. In accordance with the hagiographic canon, Demetrius introduces into his text from the Prologue discussions about the virtues of Saint Zosimas that manifested themselves in his youth, about his decision to refuse marriage, which he does against the will of his parents (here Demetrius additionally refers to a quote from the Apostle: “having listened to the Apostle who says: “Not getting married, and caring for the Lord, how to please the Lord, but when one gets married, he worries about the things of the world, how to please his wife” - see l. 338 vol. - 339; cit.: 1 Cor. 7:32-33), reflections on the contradiction that lies in the need to follow the Divine will and at the same time, as the Scripture says, not to despise the will of one’s parents. This entire text finds full correspondence in the Prologue (see l. 227) and the “Eulogy” in memory of Zosima by Leo the Philologist (Part 2, pp. 354 – 356). There, the general discussion about Christian monastic virtues, which precedes the story about Zosima’s decision to become a monk, finds its correspondence, that they can be achieved only as a result of long labors and exploits, and having before one an example of a good mentor, and a number of worthy students and imitators. It is also emphasized here that the absence of a teacher does not hinder Zosima in his exploits, which makes it possible to once again return to glorifying the virtues of the saint. Ultimately, Zosima comes to the idea of ​​the need for solitude and, as is emphasized repeatedly in the text, he immediately thinks about founding his own monastery “not for his own sake, but also for the sake of those who want to become monks.” From all that has been said, a conclusion is drawn that logically ends with the message about Zosima’s decision to go to Solovki. Thus, in this case, in all the texts under consideration we find a fairly detailed and basically canonical story about the childhood, youth and life of St. Zosimas before he accepted monasticism. Compare: “A word of praise” to Zosima – part 2, p. 353 – 361; Prologue – l. 227 – 227 rpm; “Book of Lives of Saints” – l. 338 rev. – 339. This entire text in most handwritten editions of the Life, with the exception of the later ones, supplemented again according to the “Laudatory Words” of Leo the Philologist (edition with a Preface by Maxim the Greek and the edition supplemented according to the “Laudatory Words”), corresponds to only one paragraph. “And he sought, as if the trees were living waters, he thought within himself, saying: “How I and yet again in a little way have created the rejection of the world, in one word. It is written: “It is not words that are given as rewards, but deeds; and it is not the obedients of the law who are saved, but the creators.” A parent always before my eyes and all my neighbors according to the flesh, a friend and a known one, and gathering among them. What is my rejection from the world? It is written: “Do not love the world and the hedgehogs in it. It is not powerful for one eye to look at heaven, and the other to look at the earth, and it is not powerful for a single slave to work for two masters: either he will love one and hate the other, or he will hold on to one and begin to be careless about each other. Speech: work for God and mammon.” I think of this to God’s servant Zosima in my heart, burning with God’s love all day and night and hour, and adding love to love and fire to fire, and seeking someone who helps him in spiritual feat” (St. 515 vol. - 516). This extremely abstract text, which is essentially a combination of several quotations from Scripture (see Psalm 42:2; James 1:22 - 25 and 4:11; Romans 2:13; Galatians 11:12; Matthew 6:42; Luke 16:13) and concludes Demetrius could hardly have satisfied himself in the Life with the entire narrative about the life of Zosima before he decided to go to Solovki, especially in the case when he had another, more complete source. It is quite natural that Demetrius presented this part of his Life, focusing entirely on the Prologue. And it is also natural that then, when talking about Zosima’s meeting with Elder Herman before they decided to go together to Solovetsky Island, Dimitri now turns not to the Prologue, but to the text of the Great Patriotic War, since it is he who in this case conveys more specific information: “And according to God’s will, you found a virtuous husband - the monk Herman, who had previously lived on the island with the Monk Savvaty. Then I told the blessed Zosima everything about the Monk Savvatiya, and tell him in detail about this island, as it is remote from the villages of the world, but it is suitable for monks to settle in, having forests, and oak groves, and lakes abounding with fish” (L. 339). “And by God’s providence you found the servant of God, the foretold old man, who lived with the blessed Savvaty, named Herman, on that Solovetsky island for a few short years. And I told him everything in a row, like about the blessed Savathia and about the islands of that state, and about suitable places for the construction of a monastery, and good land, and trees for a building, and lakes with fish, and catching sea fish” (St. 516). “A certain reverent monk named Herman, who had previously lived with the Monk Savvatius on Solovetsky Island, met with the Monk Zosima and told him all the details about the Monk Savvatius, having labored in his father’s okyanstem and how to correct monasticism. The story is also about the island, as if it is removed from the universe and is suitable for a village by a person who wants to stay there” (L. 227v.). Dimitri then turns to the Prologue again. He talks about the death of Zosima's parents, talks about the arrival of the monk in Solovki together with Elder Herman, about the miracle of the appearance of the church "in the air", about the beginning of construction at the Solovetsky monastery. All these episodes, important for the hagiographer, were quite fully reflected in the “Eulogy” in memory of Zosima by Lev the Philologist, and then in the Prologue, and the differences in this case from the Life in other editions were mainly of a stylistic nature. Obviously, the style of the prologue edition, due to the peculiarities of the narrative style of “Honors,” attracted Dimitri to a greater extent, since it differed from the Makaryev edition in much greater rhetorical sophistication. However, as soon as in the edition of the VMC we find specific details from the lives of the saints, which are naturally absent in the Prologue, we immediately find them in Demetrius. Thus, in accordance with the editors of the VMC, the Life of Demetrius tells about Herman’s departure to the coast, when, due to bad weather, he did not have time to return to Zosima on the island before the onset of winter. “But a certain time had passed, the need for Herman to go to this country of the sea for the sake of the sea, and having delayed the days of a certain person, when the desire to return to the island, it was not possible. It’s already autumn, and the heavenly air has changed to jelly, and the snow and storms are fast, and the sea is surging with untamed waves, and I’m floating on the ice-covered sea, and no ship can powerfully sail across that abyss to Solovetsky Island” (L. 340). “At some point in the summer, Herman alone went to a certain shore for the sake of a thing, but I left the elder Zosima alone on the island. Herman, having stayed there for a few days, was too slow and eager to come to the island, but was unable to: for it was already autumn, and the heavenly air had changed to jelly, and the snow was fast, and the sea was indomitable, and the ice was floating on the sea. And languishing in need, although it was not possible to reach the island. And there the elder Herman wintered on the shore - there was no way anyone could come to the island. Byahu, on the sea of ​​ice and snow, greatness, and nature indomitably pass by, semo and ovamo, with aspiration, rapidly... Until then, for the sake of this, it is impossible to move powerfully to the island or from the island” (St. 520). “In time, a certain Herman left for a certain sea country for the sake of needs and stayed there until spring” (L. 229). In the process of comparing the texts of the Life as part of the Dimitrievsky corpus, the Prologue and Macarius's magisterium, one involuntarily gets the impression that Dimitri also compared the Prologue edition with the Makarievian one, carried out a kind of word-by-word comparative analysis, finding a specific solution for each individual case, choosing for himself that specific episode in that particular edition, which for certain reasons suited him more. This is also indirectly confirmed by the fact that in the future Demetrius does not simply rely on different sources when describing different episodes from the life of the saint, as was shown earlier, but in the course of the story complements one source after another, combining them in a unique way. This can be confirmed by the example of an analysis of the essentially canonical episode about Zosima’s struggle with demons, when he was left alone on the island after Herman left for the coast. Dimitiy begins the presentation of this episode in accordance with the text of the Prologue. “It is impossible for demons to see such a virtuous life of his; neither tolerate being mocked by him, raising up many slander against her: sometimes it brings despondency, sometimes it dreams of various monsters, and creates certain rumors, so that they will frighten the fearless warrior of Christ and shake the unshakable one” (L. 340). “Zosima is the only one who remains, and applies labor to labor in unceasing prayer, and receives many slander from demons: sometimes it brings despondency to him, sometimes it stirs up troubles, so that they will frighten him, sometimes in the images of wondrous animals a multitude appears to him, his desire shows him rage” (L. 228 vol.). “When he saw the demons being mocked and humiliated by the Monk Zosima, he began to forge and create a lot of troubles” (St. 520). The prologue edition does not pay more attention to the description of the demonic machinations, so Dimitri then turns to the text of the Great Patriotic War, which talks about this in more detail. “... sometimes transformed into wondrous beasts and serpents, I rush at her with rage in the abundance of my strength, as if to tear him to pieces and devour him as I wish. The servant of God resisted them with the sign of the cross and prayer, and cursed at them, saying: “O weak power of the enemy! If God has given me power, then do whatever you want, but if not, then why are you toiling in vain?” (L. 340 – 340 vol.). “And he came again, and Ovi was transformed into a serpent, and Druzi into various beasts, and a lizard, and many reptiles that creep on the earth. And they all rushed together, the snakes gaping, wanting to devour, the beast roaring, imagining to tear to pieces and. The servant of God Zosima called and said: “O gross weakness of the enemy! If you have naturally assumed power over me, then do whatever you want, or else you are toiling in vain, for you cannot separate me from the love of Christ!” (Col. 521). Following further the text of the VMC and even supplementing it with another quotation from the Psalter (“And the belt from David’s psalms: “He went around, obliterated me””, fol. 340 vol.; the next quote, obviously, has a source from the VMC: “May God rise again and his enemies will burst into tears” - see VMC, st. 521), Demetrius introduces from the Makaryev edition the prayer contained there: “Eternal God, beginningless king” (“Book of Lives of the Saints.” L. 340 vol.; VMC. Stlb. 521). This extensive prayer was eliminated in all subsequent handwritten editions, starting with the “Tale of the Life”; it is read only in the Volokolamsk collection and the VMC, and through the VMC it was also reflected in the text of Demetrius. Thus, a comparative analysis of the texts shows that Demetrius, in the process of work, obviously checking two sources, supplemented them one after the other. He did the same in the future: when describing the miracle “about the appearance of two bright men” who delivered Zosima the necessary supplies of food (here he also introduced an additional quotation from the Gospel: “he remembered what was spoken by the Lord himself in the Gospel: “Do not worry about what you eat, do not worry about food, but seek first the Kingdom of God and its righteousness, and all these things will be added to you, for your heavenly Father knows, cheso you demand" - Matt. 6:31 - 36 and Luke 12:29 - 31; the form of the adjective “psalm” is also characteristic of Demetrius, genetically related to the form of the Polish language); in the story about the arrival of the fisherman Mark to the island together with Herman, about the construction of the first wooden building of the Transfiguration Cathedral. As before, Demetrius combines his text in the process of telling the story, focusing either on the edition of the VMC or on the Prologue, trying to more fully reflect in the Life all the details and details that he had. Therefore, it is quite natural that Demetrius again turned to the text of the Great Church when he began to talk about the installation of the Monk Zosima as abbess. Demetrius considered it necessary to describe this episode, which was of utmost importance in the history of the Solovetsky monastery, with all the specific details and details that were absent in the Prologue, but reflected in the Makaryev text. From there Dimitri also took the story about two abbots - the predecessors of Zosima, Paul and Theodosius, who “could not bear the desert habitation, having stayed for a short time, went home” (VMC. Col. 525), which is only briefly mentioned in the Prologue. At the same time, speaking about the return of Zosima to the monastery after his installation as abbess and about his first miracles during his lifetime, Demetrius again turned to the Prologue. It is in the Prologue that we find an almost literal correspondence to Dimitriev’s text in the story of a stylistically interesting miracle with prosvira, donated by the Monk Zosima to the merchants who were staying at the monastery, and lost by them on the way to the shore. Obviously, Dimitri considered the episode, which describes with vivid life details the behavior of a dog who wanted to grab the prosvira, but was driven away by the flames “plowing from the ground along the way,” to not meet the requirements of the hagiographic canon and unimportant in the general plan of the narrative, therefore, following the Prologue, he limited himself to a more concise and abstract story from the point of view of style. For the same reason, apparently, and again following the Prologue, Demetrius omitted the story about the miracle during the construction of a new church, which was also distinguished in the hagiographic editions by its specificity and described the realities of life (the struggle of builders with midges - “mosquitoes and moss” with the help of a fire lit “for the sake of smokers” and which became the cause of the fire). At the same time, in detail, following the text of the VMC, Demetrius outlined a miracle that was canonical in its basis and important in the compositional structure of the Life during the first liturgy, which was served at the Solovetsky monastery by the Monk Zosima, when “the face of the saint was enlightened, like the face of an angel, and the church was filled with fragrance, testifying to the dignity of his priesthood” (VMC. Stlb. 528). The last episodes from the life of the Monk Zosima, telling about the transfer of the relics of the Monk Savvaty from Vyg, where he died and was buried, to the monastery on Solovki, about Zosima’s trip to Novgorod to the archbishop and the boyars with a request for protection from local residents, “boyar servants”, “perpetrating dirty tricks on his monastery”, about the meeting with the noblewoman Martha and about the famous vision at the feast, and then, in connections with this, about the Novgorod campaigns of Ivan III and his reprisal against the mayor and the boyars, and finally, about Zosima’s dying testament to the brethren, the death and burial of the saint, are described very briefly in the Prologue. That is why the entire last part of Demetrius’ Life of Zosima is a fairly detailed and very close to its source retelling of Makary’s text, containing a lot of specific information and reflecting the historical realities of that turbulent era. It is interesting in this regard to note that Demetrius did not turn to the text of the Prologue until the end of his narrative, apparently considering it deliberately short. He did not turn to him even when the text of the Prologue contained canonical additional details as part of the “Testament of Blessed Zosima to the Brethren,” which had their source in the text of the “Eulogia” in memory of Zosima Leo the Philologist and were absent from the Great Patriotic War: “and having taught them nothing from the customs of harm devoted to that monastery, and drunken drinking in the monastery in no way, and effeminate to run away from people, but also to milk milk and butter to never bring to the island - all this is the monk of the monastery of the good current” (Prologue. L. 230 vol.; “Eulogy” to Zosima. Part 2. P. 499). According to the edition of the VMC, Demetrius also gives a brief retelling of the posthumous miracles of Zosima and Savvaty, which mentions 15 stories always presented in manuscripts containing the text of the Life in this edition: the miracle of the appearance of Daniel; about the appearance to Elder Tarasius; two miracles about the appearance of Gerasim; the miracle of Theodulus (this story is presented only in manuscripts containing the edition of the VMC); “a miracle about two people suffering in the sea” (Mitrofan); miracle about the monk Elisha; about Nikon; about the blind man; about the appearance of pillars of fire; “the miracle of the deliverance of those suffering on Shuzhmuy Island”; “about Anisim’s wife”; “about the deceased wife”; "About the monk Vasily." Thus, a comparative analysis of the Lives of Zosima and Savvatiy of Solovetsky with the text of the prologue edition, the edition of the Great Martyr Macarius, “Laudatory words” in memory of Zosima and Savvatiy, attributed to the Serbian scribe Anikita Lev Philologus, as well as different editions of the Lives of the Solovetsky saints, presented in manuscripts of the 16th – 17th centuries, showed that the direct sources for Demetrius in the process of his work were the editors of the VMC and the text of the Prologue. The connections with all other editions of the Life and with the “Laudiae” were indirect and were determined, in turn, by the peculiarities of the editions of the VMC and Prologue, which can also be explained by the nature of the use of their direct sources. It was not possible to find evidence of Dimitri’s direct appeal to the texts of hagiographic editions and “Laudiae” involved in the process of analysis, which, however, apparently does not in itself deny the need for such an analysis to sufficiently fully resolve the issue of the relationship between Dimitri’s edition of the Life and various handwritten editions of the monument and other works dedicated to the memory of the Solovetsky ascetics. Of no less interest is the question of the nature of Demetrius’s use of these sources. The analysis showed that in this case, obviously, we can talk about a kind of creative compilation, a combination of two sources, complementing them one by another. The conclusions that Demetrius combined his sources, based in each specific case on his own creative considerations, are clearly confirmed by a table compiled on the basis of a comparative analysis of three texts: Demetrius’ use of a certain source in each specific case is most likely due, as has been shown, to the desire to reflect in his text as fully as possible all available information about the life of the holy ascetics and to achieve the greatest compliance in terms of composition and style with the requirements of the hagiographic genre. Obviously, it is the latter desire that explains Dimitri’s consistent use of the prologue version specifically in the Life of Zosima, where, as mentioned above, it was the result of a simple abbreviation of the “Laudatory” in memory of Zosima by Lev the Philologist and therefore was distinguished by a more abstract style and complicated narrative structure. It is quite natural that the prologue edition of the Life of Savvaty, which is the result of a consistent reduction of the hagiographic text, did not attract Demetrius, and he was guided mainly by the VMC. Thus, the complex history of the text of the Lives of Zosima and Savvatius in manuscripts throughout the 16th – 17th centuries, which was reflected in the creation of several editions of it and in interaction with works of a related genre - “Laudatory words” to the Solovetsky saints, attributed to Leo the Philologist, determined the features of the prologue edition of the Life, and through it the editions of the Life as part of Demetrius’s codex Rostovsky. Dimitriev's Life of the Solovetsky Saints absorbed the features and characteristic features of many handwritten editions and “Laudiae” due to the desire of its compiler to generalize all the information at his disposal, despite his own indication that the text was shortened in comparison with the VMC. As has been shown, the reductions made by Dimitri are not of a fundamental nature and are not significant. Perhaps the note “from the Great Menaion of the Chetya is an abbreviation” indicates that in a number of cases Demetrius deliberately used the Prologue instead of the text of the Great Menaion, which, according to its genre purpose, was supposed to contain a short text of the Life. In any case, an analysis of the sources used by Demetrius in the process of preparing the text of the Lives of Zosima and Savvatiy for his compilation, and the nature of the compiler’s work on them shows, but Demetrius used not only the techniques of simple compilation of different texts, so characteristic of ancient Russian scribes and scribes, but also the methods of comparison and analysis, conscious combination of sources, which, obviously, is a feature of the consciousness of a person of a different historical era, who turned to the use of the old accumulated experience and traditions from the point of view of new requirements. Dimitry Rostovsky. Book of Lives of Saints. III quarter (March – May). Publication: Kiev-Pechersk Lavra. 1.1700; for April 17. L. 334 – 335. Right there. Further footnotes to the sources are given in the text indicating the page of the manuscript or page of the printed publication. Klyuchevsky V. O. Old Russian lives of saints as a historical source. M., 1871. S. 190 – 203. Yakhontov I. K. Lives of the holy northern Russian ascetics of the Pomeranian region as a historical source. Kazan, 1881. pp. 13–32. Dmitrieva R. P. The Word on the Creation of the Life of the Chief of the Solovetsky Zosima and Savvaty // Russian and Armenian medieval literature. L., 1982. S. 123 – 126; The significance of the Life of Zosima and Savvatiy Solovetsky as a cultural and historical source // Armenian and Russian medieval literature. Yerevan, 1986. P. 215 – 228; Life of Zosima and Savvaty Solovetsky // Dictionary of scribes and bookishness of Ancient Rus'. L., 1988. T. 2. Part 1. P. 264 – 267; The Life of Zosima and Savvaty Solovetsky, as edited by Spiridon-Sava // Book centers of Ancient Rus' of the 11th – 16th centuries. Various aspects of the study. St. Petersburg, 1991. pp. 220 – 225. Mineeva S. V. Life of Zosima and Savvaty Solovetsky: history of the text and style (based on manuscripts of the 16th – 17th centuries). Abstract of the dissertation of a candidate of philological sciences. M., 1993. Dmitrieva R. P. The meaning of the Lives of Zosima and Savvaty Solovetsky... S. 217 – 229; Life of Zosima and Savvati // Dictionary of scribes... P. 266. The text of the VMC is quoted from the publication of the Archaeographic Commission: St. Petersburg, 1912, April 17. The prologue is quoted from the publication: M., 1696, 1st quarter (October - December), for September 27. Likhachev D. S. Solovki in the history of Russian culture // Architectural and artistic monuments of the Solovetsky Islands. M., 1980. S. 15 – 16. Dmitrieva R. P. The meaning of the Lives of Zosima and Savvaty Solovetsky... S. 223 – 224 Likhachev D. S. Decree. op. pp. 15 – 16. Quoted from the manuscript: RSL. F. 304. Collection of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery. No. 693. XVI century. L. 43. Quoted from the manuscript: RSL. F. 304. Collection of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery. No. 788. XVI century. Sazonova L. I. Prologue presentation as a literary form // Russian early printed literature XVII - first. Thursday XVIII century. Literary collection of the 17th century Prologue. M., 1978. S. 26 – 63. “Words of praise” in memory of Saints Savvaty and Zosima were published in the “Orthodox Interlocutor”. Kazan, 1859. Part 2. P. 229 – 240; 347 – 368; 471 – 511; Part 3. pp. 96 – 118, 197 – 216. See also: Subbotin N. I. Information about the Philologist Chernorizets, a preacher of the 16th century // Additions to the Works of the Holy Fathers. 1859. Part 18. P. 522 – 548; Dmitrieva R. P. On the question of the literary activity of Lev Philologist // Research on ancient and new literature. L., 1987. S. 64 – 68. Quoted from the manuscript: RSL. F. 113. Collection of the Joseph-Volokolamsk Monastery. No. 659, first quarter of the 16th century. The Life of Zosima in the prologue edition is quoted from the 1696 edition, III quarter (March - May), for April 17.