Talk:Khlebnikov Codex

Provenance and physical description

 * Much of this information is still new to me, I'm exploring these surviving manuscripts and what scholars have been writing about them only in recent days. I'm gathering reliable sources and building up the information across various articles, including Khlebnikov Codex which I have just recently created. I still don't know where it was written, discovered or what linguistic features it has. Gippius (2014) considered the Hypatian/Khlebnikov copies to represent the "southern, Kievan branch" of the PVL, but if the IEU is referring to Khlebnikov when it talks about the second redaction being probably written in Belarus, then I'm not sure how "southern, Kievan" we can call it. More like "western, Polotskian"? Anyway, need to read more instead of speculating haha. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 08:16, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * This might be useful, by B. M. Kloss. A. A. Shakhmatov calls it southern. Mellk (talk) 08:39, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * It is, thanks!! I'm gonna read it all. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 11:54, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I found an English translation of basically the same remarks made by Kloss. I'm citing it now in Khlebnikov Codex: He provides a great physical description of what the codex is like. I also found all the photocopies of the Khlebnikov Codex at the National Library of Russia. What I find particularly interesting is that the list of princes of Kiev seems to start with "Olga" instead of "Oleg", and there does not seem to be any mention of "Riurik". I tried to search for any secondary source which makes the same observation, but so far I find none. Kloss only says Folio 1 contains a list of princes that ruled in Kyiv up to its sacking by Batu Khan. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 18:00, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * OK, sounds good. Which page did you see this? Mellk (talk) 19:29, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * https://nlr.ru/manuscripts/dep/img/manuscripts/IzoCatalogue/0B66BF7C-C91B-42AF-B168-4D3721CA8153/3.jpg Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 20:49, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Олга. Not even Ольга like in the PVL itself, where it can mean "Oleg" or "Olga" depending on context. I think this is a copying error. Before that it does say "Dinari [sic] and Askold' ", which obviously means Askold and Dir. A few lines down it seems to say Volodimer' who prince in Kyevê and enlightened the Rus' land with Christianity. The fact that until Volodimer every name is in red and after that in black seems to incidate that writer / copyist found it important to visually distinguish the pagan and Christian princes of Kiev. But there is no Riurik. Just like in the Hypatian Codex. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 20:57, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * "Се же суть имена князем киевским, княжившим в Киеве до избитья Батыева" -- basically the names of the princes of Kiev who reigned in Kiev until Batu, from Oleg to Vladimir Rurikovich. Mellk (talk) 21:12, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Of course, Rurik was never prince of Kiev. Mellk (talk) 21:19, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is a fair point, Ostrowski also said that may be an explanation why there is no Riurik in the regal lists of Hypatian and Khlebnikov. In the chronology section of Laurentian there is no Riurik either, it just says "29 years between the accession of emperor Michael and Oleg in Kiev".
 * The last entry is Volodimer Riurikovich, Vladimir IV of Kiev? It seems to say something like that this Volodimer was dethroned by Danilo (Daniel of Galicia?) and then something with "Tatar prince", which probably refers to Batu sacking Kiev in 1240. Interestingly there is no mention of Michael of Chernigov, who is claimed by other sources to be the last pre-Golden Horde Grand Prince of Kiev. Volodimer Riurikovich seems a really obscure guy. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 21:41, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, here it mentions Vladimir Rurikovich and ends with Dmitr, tysyatsky of Daniel, when Batu took the city. Rostislav Mstislavich was the last prince to actually sit in the city before the siege but he is probably not mentioned due to ideological reasons. Mellk (talk) 22:53, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Interesting. Well, we have kind of drifted off-topic. Maybe we should move this last bit to Talk:Khlebnikov Codex? It's no longer about Primary Chronicle. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 06:23, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately it seems we do not have an article on him. Mellk (talk) 18:36, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately it seems we do not have an article on him. Mellk (talk) 18:36, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

✅. Moved from Talk:Primary Chronicle to here. @Mellk FYI. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 06:59, 24 May 2023 (UTC)


 * I wonder which "Ustia" and which "Krosnyk"/"Krasnyk" are meant here. All three likely candidates for "Ustia" are on or close to the modern Moldovan-Ukrainian border. Not sure if "Ustia" is a Romance or Slavic toponym (meaning "door" or "estuary", apparently?), but "Krosnyk"/"Krasnyk" is probably uk:Красник (48° 8′ 40″ N, 24° 44′ 11″ E) in Ivano-Frankivsk Oblast. This may make Ustia, Ukraine (48°36′48″N 26°05′12″E) in the southern tip of neighbouring Ternopil Oblast the most likely candidate. They are about 140 kilometres apart. uk:Красник and Ustia, Glodeni are almost 300 km apart; uk:Красник and Ustia, Dubăsari more than 400 km. The latter two are located in present-day Moldova, but Ustia, Ukraine may have just been inside of Bukovina, which has historically been under Moldavian/Romanian control. There's probably someone who has written about this and knows the answer, but I haven't found it yet. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 09:24, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The fact that the note claiming that Vitold Maroc owned the codex was written in Ruthenian Cyrillic rather than Romanian Latin suggests a Slavic institutional context. Moreover, both Krasnyk in I-F Oblast and Ustia in Ternopil Oblast are inside the historical region of Galicia (Eastern Europe), which is probably not a coincidence; the Moldovan Ustias are outside that region. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 09:35, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
 * So unless the Khlebnikov Codex was somehow written somewhere in Belarus in the 1560s and then transported all the way to Krasnyk in Galicia by the 1600s or 1610s, when Vitold Maroc is known to have been a Moldavian logothete, IEU may not be referring to Khleb when it mentions the "second redaction" of Ipat. Incidentally, the Kievan Chronicle has been connected to Volodymyr-Volynsky in Volyn Oblast, which is a lot closer to modern Belarus than to Galicia, but does have a closer historical-political connection with Halych in Galicia than with Belarus. At any rate, IEU should just be clearer haha. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 09:42, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Now that I think about it, I think Omeljan Pritsak said something about renaming the Khlebnikov Codex to "Ostroh Codex" because it was allegedly written in Ostroh, Rivne Oblast (an oblast between Belarus, Volyn Oblast, and Ternopil Oblast). Well that ties them all together. :) Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 09:45, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
 * My reconstruction of provenance so far: In the 1560s, a "Belarusian"/"South(west)ern Rus'" (?) copyist in Ostroh (near the Belarusian/Ukrainian border) copies texts originally from Volodymyr-Volynsky (Kievan Chronicle) and elsewhere in Galicia-Volynia (wherever the Galicia-Volynia Chronicle was written; the latter part probably in Volyn). Between c. 1570 and c. 1600, that Ostroh copy gets transported to the south in the hands of the governor of Ustia (Ternopil Oblast), who took it to Krasnyk (Ivano-Frankivsk Oblast), where Vitold Maroc stole it but it was brought back around the 1600–1610s. Then someone undertook a restoration effort in the 1640s (perhaps it was damaged during the stealing and retrieving?). Then corrections were made to it after the 1640s but before the 1750s on the basis of the Tver Compilation, so in this 100-ish year period, the codex must have been transported to Suzdalia, where this Tver Compilation was made. Kolomna merchant Pyotr Kirillovich Khlebnikov (1734–1777) got hold of it at some point, before or (more likely) after the bookbinding of the late 1750s (which may have taken place in Yaroslavl). Then I've still got a provenance gap until summer 1809 when this "Khlebnikov Codex" was unexpectedly discovered. But the fact that, until 15 May 1767, the textually close Hypatian Codex was located at the Ipatievsky Monastery at Kostroma (80 kilometres from Yaroslavl) may not be a coincidence. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 10:00, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Kloss mentions 1637 in Kiev-Pechersk Lavra. According to this it was found in the library of Khlebnikov which at the time belonged to his daughter. Mellk (talk) 19:05, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Interesting, I'll have to find some time to read that in detail. I added some info from Tolochko 2007, who critically examined the possibility that Khlebnikov or a closely related copy was present or known in Kiev in the 1620s. But it heavily depends on that marginal note in Zacharias book mentioning a "chronicle of Nestor". There are numerous possibilities, it is not certain at all. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 09:05, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The Oleg Ivanov article you sent me is quite interesting. It explains, for example, how (but not when) the Khlebnikov Codex came from Kolomna to Moscow. If it hadn't been for Poltoratsky, the 1812 Moscow Great Fire of Moscow may have destroyed the Khlebnikov Codex just like the Trinity Chronicle. I'll have to read more Kloss, Tolochko and Pritsak.
 * The name "Volyn" was used by Nikolai Mikhailovich because the third part of the Khlebnikov list is the Galician-Volyn chronicle.
 * I'm not sure if the fact that Karamzin used the name "Volyn" means he was referring to the third part of Khleb (Galician-Volhynian Chronicle, GVC). The Kievan Chronicle (KC) has a close connection with Volodymyr-Volynsky, and if we may assume that Karamzin read Khleb cover to cover - PVL, KC, GVC - then the first thing that would be notable to him would probably be that after the PVL, the Khlebnikov Codex's narrative shifts its focus from Kiev to Volodymyr-Volynsky. That colours the text's Tendenz. But, I'll have to check that. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:40, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Kloss 1998
Hello I am a bit puzzled why you made this edit. What makes a .djvu file download (illegal?) from an unsecure website (I got multiple warnings from my web browser not to download it) a "better source" than a digitised open-source text website that allows easy autotranslation to English of its contents for anyone who cannot easily read the source language? NLeeuw (talk) 22:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)


 * That version seems to be an authentic digital copy of that book, having page numbers and the actual publisher's name (Yazyki russkoy kul'tury). Many modern browsers actually open .djvu files just like .pdf files. However, since you are getting those warnings I will bring the previous URL back. Alexschneider250 (talk) 22:57, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Done. But it's hard to tell whether the Izbornyk-version is not illegal either, since the website literally shares an excerpt from that book without even mentioning the original publisher. Alexschneider250 (talk) 23:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I also appreciate the more precise annotation of the source's pages and publication. NLeeuw (talk) 01:21, 2 June 2024 (UTC)