Studying Dashkov’s Chronicle: From Copy Attribution to the Original

This article reveals the methods of attribution and study of a chronicle from the late seventeenth century, which makes it possible to establish the name of the author and the course of work of A. Ya. Dashkov, a stolnik and then Duma nobleman, who began the noble Chronicle in 1680 and completed it in 1689, based on an anonymous copy from the second half of the eighteenth century, made, like many others, for the Hermitage Library. Thanks to these methods, the author has found out that the Hermitage copy was made following a rough original of the Chronicle, which was in the original author’s historical collection. The discovery of this collection, written and signed by the stolnik A. Ya. Dashkov and completed by him in the rank of a Duma nobleman, demonstrates that the rough copy of the Chronicle with the insertions identified by the author of the article was indeed initially brought up to 1680 and continued with periodical entries in the 1680s. The author of the article puts forward a hypothesis on chronicle studies, successfully developing the classical methodology of A. A. Shakhmatov, which is confirmed in all details, proving the accuracy of the applied methods of research, which the article introduces in detail for the first time. Considering that most Russian chronicles are known only in rather late copies, a 100 % confirmed method of reconstructing the original from a copy seems especially important. The rough original itself is valuable, although considering modern achievements, it is not unique. It is the chronicle of the late seventeenth century that has recently been enriched with authorial rough and fair originals of period records, chronicles and chronicle collections, whose study makes it possible to confirm and seriously clarify the general methodology of chronicle studies as a special historical discipline. Another traced and studied, and then found rough copy of the author’s historical work of the early Petrine period expands the range of similar works the author mentions in the article. In the future, it will help to significantly deepen the understanding of the work of chroniclers of the eleventh – seventeenth centuries, their methods of work, methods of their reconstruction, and research.