VOVINA-LEBEDEVA V.G. “Who Was It Who Tried to Pay Off Chepchugov?” (Additional Commentary on the Drama by A.S. Pushkin, “Boris Godunov”)

Details

Hits: 116

item->id; ?>

DOI: https://doi.org/10.15688/jvolsu4.2026.1.23

Varvara G. Vovina-Lebedeva,

Doctor of Sciences (History), Leading Researcher, Deputy Director for Academic Cooperation, Saint Petersburg Institute of History of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Petrozavodskaja St, 7, 197110 Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation,

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. ,

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1465-4139

Abstract. Introduction. This article examines the sources of A.S. Pushkin’s drama “Boris Godunov.” It is widely believed that the poet drew on N.M. Karamzin’s “History of the Russian State,” considering his work a response to it. The literature also contains comments on A.S. Pushkin’s use of 17th-century historical works, including The New Chronicler and “The Chronicle of Many Rebellions.” Methods and materials. The article, using the comparative method, identifies instances of the possible direct and indirect influence of The New Chronicler on the content of “Boris Godunov.” Analysis. The influence of The New Chronicler is evident in the structure of the text, including the chapter on the death of Tsarevich Dmitry, the praise of the victim, and the account of assassins sent. The names of the boyars mentioned in the drama as victims of Tsar Boris are taken from The New Chronicler. It is also no coincidence that Pushkin included Semyon Godunov among his characters, who is described in detail in The New Chronicler as the instigator of Boris Godunov, responsible for the death of the princess’s fiancé. In Pushkin’s version, he brings the tsar denunciations from Shuisky’s slaves. In a number of other instances, the general narrative logic in The New Chronicler and Pushkin coincides. The article also demonstrates a number of direct textual borrowings in five fragments: the preparation for the assassination of Tsarevich Dmitry, the listing of the Tsarevich’s killers, the account of the events in Uglich and the resulting uprising of the townspeople, the description of the death of Tsar Feodor Ivanovich, and the description of the origin of the Impostor. Results. Through comparison, the author concludes that many passages in the drama could not have been taken from N.M. Karamzin’s work and demonstrates that they undoubtedly originate in the Nikonovskaya redaction of The New Chronicler. Funding. The study was supported by the grant of the Russian Science Foundation, No. 25-7820012 “From the Medieval Scriptorium to the Chancellery of the Modern Age: Writing Practices of Russia and Western Europe”, https://rscf.ru/project/25-78-20012/.

Key words: A.S. Pushkin, “Boris Godunov”, N.M. Karamzin, The New Chronicler, “The Chronicle of Many Rebellions”.

Citation. Vovina-Lebedeva V.G. “Who Was It Who Tried to Pay Off Chepchugov?” (Additional Commentary on the Drama by A.S. Pushkin, “Boris Godunov”) . Vestnik Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya 4. Istoriya. Regionovedenie. Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya [Science Journal of Volgograd State University. History. Area Studies. International Relations], 2026, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 264-274. (in Russian). DOI: https://doi.org/10.15688/jvolsu4.2026.1.23

This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)  

Attachments:

23. Vovina-Lebedeva.pdf URL: https://hfrir.jvolsu.com/index.php/en/component/attachments/download/3879	261 Downloads
23_Vovina-Lebedeva V.G..jats.xml URL: https://hfrir.jvolsu.com/index.php/en/component/attachments/download/3930	30 Downloads