Editorial Satement


 

 

95 

A. A. Gorelov (ed.). Byliny v 25 tomax: Byliny Pechory [Byliny in Twenty Five volumes: 

The Byliny of Pechora]. Vols 1-2. (Svod russkogo fol�klora.) St. Petersburg and Moscow: Nauka, 

2001. 772 + 782 pp. ISBN 1-59051-029-1. 

 

The present review concerns the first two volumes of a compendium of Russian epics 

(byliny) which will consist of twenty-five volumes. These splendid dictionary size volumes, 

which were completed for publication in 1984, but appeared only in 2001, contain 281 songs and 

eighty melodies from the far northern region along the Pechora River, which empties into the 

Barents Sea. Numerous photographs of folklorists and performers are also included. The first 

volume opens with three sections which are devoted to the principles of publication (pp. 11-20), a 

general introduction to the Russian epic (pp. 21-78) and to the epic tradition in the Pechora region 

(pp. 79-150). The third section comprises seven essays, devoted to the ethnicity, history and 

publication of Pechora epics, to other genres, the language and melodies of the epics. Different 

groups of specialists have contributed to each essay. Extensive commentaries, eight appendices, 

and four indexes are also provided in the two volumes. Melodies have been included before the 

pertinent verbal texts. It is unfortunate that a CD accompanies only two hundred of the two 

thousand copies, especially since the inclusion of a CD with anthologies or studies of folklore has 

become common practice. Ultimately works of �oral literature� should be heard and not just read. 

For many decades Russian folklorists have dreamed about publishing a compendium of 

Russian epics. The folklorists at the Academy Institute of Russian Literature in St. Petersburg 

have at long last begun to realize this dream. One can appreciate the magnitude of their 

accomplishment only by understanding some of the difficulties involved in such an undertaking. 

Some two thousand variants have been published, and perhaps a thousand more exist in 

manuscripts scattered in numerous archives. Since the appearance of the collections of Rybnikov 

[1861-1867] and Gil�ferding [1873] scholars have expressed different opinions about how the 

texts should be grouped, that is, by collector, singer, plot, genre, geographical region or 

chronology. Perhaps the most influential approach was introduced by Gil�ferding who arranged 

epics from the Onega region by performers. He also included a short introduction about each 

singer, about the person from whom they had learned their songs, their repertoire, occupation, the 

number of melodies they used, and the quality of their performance. Thus Gil�ferding anticipated 

practices which were accepted later by collectors working in other traditions, and which led to a 

focus on individual performers and the characteristics of �oral� as opposed to �written� literature.  

SEEFA Journal 2002, Vol. VII No. 2



 

 

96 

In the compendium under review the songs are presented first by geographical region, 

next by subject or plot (siuzhetnye gnezda), and finally by chronology. This permits a focus on 

the features of the epic tradition in a given region and its sub-regions. In the past folklorists 

sought to distinguish the characteristics of a general Russian tradition which was assumed to be 

present in all geographic areas inhabited by a Russian population. However, in recent decades 

many scholars have endeavored to determine the unique characteristics of a folklore tradition or 

genre in a specific region. This latter approach offers several advantages; determining local 

realizations of a particular plot, delineating singers who diverge from the tradition by improvising 

their individual versions of a song, and detecting the influence of printed sources on the singers, 

especially as the Russian epic gradually declined in the twentieth century. The addition of 

detailed indexes allows one to find all the epics of one singer or those recorded by a given 

collector. 

Several principles have been observed in the selection of suitable items from the existing 

mass of material, which includes fragments, prose versions, retellings from popular publications, 

artificially created Soviet epics called �noviny,� �hidden reprints� and extensively edited but 

questionable texts. Only someone who has worked closely with the verbal texts of folk songs and 

is familiar with studies of folklore textology can appreciate the enormous work that has gone into 

the preparation of these two weighty volumes. Not only does the quality of performers range 

widely from those who are outstanding, average or poor, but the quality of the recordings 

themselves varies greatly, especially those made before the introduction of the tape recorder in 

the 1950s. Gil�ferding was the first to discover that an accurate text can only be obtained from a 

sung performance and not from a spoken retelling [Astakhova 1966: 192], which often omits 

repetitions and filler particles so essential to the creation of the verbal rhythm. Besides problems 

which arise from different techniques used to take down the verbal texts under field conditions, 

yet others may occur when collectors �correct� the texts, for instance, by adapting them to the 

norms of the literary language. Singers may remember only parts of songs, may combine one 

song with another, may confuse the names of characters, and may lapse into prose. In some cases 

collectors first wrote down a spoken retelling and then revised it during a subsequent sung 

performance. In the commentary to each song the compilers of these two volumes have 

assiduously compared and quoted textual variations. 

Another problem concerns the composite epic (svodnaia bylina) in which a singer may 

join together several or all the songs about a particular hero. In many cases composites can be 



 

 

97 

traced to publications intended for popular consumption, especially that of Avenarius which went 

through several editions in the second half of the nineteenth century. For the most part, Russian 

folklorists have considered that Russian epics consist of a single episode or exploit of a hero, and 

that the combination of two or more episodes represents �contamination.� This is in contrast to 

other epic traditions, such as those in Central Asia, where composite epics are both common and 

accepted. It might prove worthwhile to examine the Russian tradition from a somewhat different 

viewpoint, that is, to consider that it falls somewhere between the two poles of plot singularity 

and plot multiplicity, and that it had an incipient tendency to develop composite songs but did not 

fully realize that potential [Astakhova 1948: 98-105; Putilov 1988: 15-16, 33-38]. 

In the general introduction about the Russian epic for the entire series (pp. 21-78), it is 

stated that �here we will not touch upon the nature of epic verse ..., the composition, or even the 

problem of the epithet, but we will note the main features which delineate the epic and which also 

connect the epic of various peoples with each other� (p. 24). The approach is not explicitly 

defined, but myths are evidently regarded as forming the most ancient epic plots, which over time 

are modified and become obscured. Although a number of byliny are examined from such a 

viewpoint, we will mention only �Potyk,� an extremely complex epic whose variants differ 

greatly. Briefly stated, Potyk is sent by Prince Vladimir to hunt along a river, where he is about to 

shoot a swan when it turns into Mar�ia the White Swan. She asks him to marry her on the 

condition that when one of them dies, the other must enter the tomb. Eventually she dies, Potyk 

enters the tomb, and, after various complications, she is revived only to be enticed away by the 

king of Lithuania. After a long search, Potyk finds Mar�ia, who three times offers him a poisoned 

drink. Twice he takes the drink, dies, and is miraculously revived, but the third time he kills 

Mar�ia with the help of her sister whom he afterwards marries.  

The interpretation of �Potyk� is based on the assumption that Kievan Rus originated in 

the second through the fourth centuries of our era , and that marriage in this epic reflects a 

conflict between the Slavs and the Iranian speaking Scythian peoples in the steppes during this 

early period (pp. 34-35). In the further development of this bylina Potyk ceases to be a �cultural 

hero� and becomes a bogatyr’ of the Kievan cycle. Even later the action is transferred to 

Lithuania and the Lithuanian king who abducts Mar�ia the White Swan. Although it is mentioned 

that neighboring Germanic peoples left no trace in the Russian epic (p. 30), Iarkho [1910], Georg 

Polívka [1903] and Boris Sokolov [1927-1929] point out a number of similar motifs and themes, 

especially that of the �unfaithful wife,� which appear in Germanic tales, sagas, and epics. 

SEEFA Journal 2002, Vol. VII No. 2



 

 

98 

Furthermore, Zhirmunskii [1979: 206-07] cautions that the presence of mythological elements 

does not necessarily prove that an epic is ancient in origin, because they may have been absorbed 

from other genres, especially the magic tale, at a later time. As one of his examples, Zhirmunskii 

cites the bylina �Potyk.� One could add that the theme of the �swan maiden� occurs in many 

traditions, especially in those of Central Asia and the Arctic regions. 

Although one cannot expect all aspects of the bylina to be covered in such a limited 

introduction, in such a major and comprehensive work about the Russian epic one nevertheless 

would have appreciated some presentation of the bylina as oral literature. For example, mention 

could have been made of compositional devices such as the traditional introduction (zachin) and 

conclusion (kontsovka), or the Slavic negative antithesis, all of which are just as meaningful as 

�hyperbole,� which is singled out as the main feature in the composition of the bylina (p. 24). 

Skaftymov [1924], reacting against the Historical School, delineated many characteristics of the 

bylina as an expression of �artistic literature,� in particular emphasizing the role of the 

�resonating background� in enhancing the central hero as opposed to other personages. One also 

misses references to Putilov [1976] and the typological historical approach that he applied to the 

comparative study of Russian and South Slavic epics in an effort to combine aspects of the 

historical and mythological approaches. Although the history of the collection of byliny is 

covered in detail, the history of the study of byliny is incomplete, one-sided, and subjective. One 

would have preferred a more objective and systematic survey of the various interpretations of 

Russian epics, their origins, their interaction with history and their evolution over time. The 

remaining essays in the first volume are distinguished by the high quality of their scholarship and 

their thoroughness. 

Considerable information is presented about the ethnicity, occupations, way of life, and 

epic tradition in Pechora. In this regard only a few main features will be pointed out. In the 

twelfth century Russians migrated from Novgorod to the Pechora area which was then and is still 

today inhabited by the Nenets (Samoed). In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries Old 

Believers moved to the region, an event which has probably contributed a strong religious 

element to Pechoran epics. The main occupation of the men in this isolated region was fishing 

both on the Pechora River and in the Barents Sea, something which also is reflected in the texts. 

Unlike other northern areas, few women learned to perform epics and family traditions of passing 

on songs were rare. Although Chicherov [1982] sought evidence to support his idea that schools 

of singers developed in the North, the materials available about the Pechora tradition do not 



 

 

99 

confirm the existence of such groups. On the contrary, singers appear to have used a variety of 

sources for their byliny rather than having a single teacher (p. 92-94). Onchukov [1904] first 

discovered and recorded byliny in the Pechora area in 1901. In the years 1929 to 1929 Astakhova 

[1938, 1951] led an expedition which collected epics in several northern regions including 

Pechora. From the 1930s into the 1960s other expeditions were carried out to the Pechora area but 

only a few of the materials on epics were published at the time, a situation which the first 

volumes of the compendium rectify. 

It is fortunate that musicology has been given a firm place in the presentation of the 

bylina and that accessible melodies have been included in the first two volumes. Even though the 

accompanying CD is derived from recordings made as early as the first decades of the twentieth 

century on wax cylinders, the sound quality is exceptionally good and reflects the culmination of 

years spent deciphering materials in the Fonogrammarkhiv in the Institute of Russian Literature. 

In regard to the melodies of the songs the late V. V. Korguzalov concludes that Russian epics 

were sung according to a �free rhapsodic form� and a �tirade recitative� (rapsodicheskoe 

svobodnoe intonirovanie and tiradnaia rechitatsiia, pp. 133, 138) by which the melody is varied, 

an embryonic but fluctuating stanza form emerges, and the lines in the verbal text are subject to 

wide syllabic variation. Although Trubetskoi�s study of the rhythm of the verbal text is cited 

[Trubetskoi 1987], no mention is made of Roman Jakobson�s influential article in which he 

conjectures that the original East Slavic epic line consisted of ten syllables, was related to the 

Serbo-Croatian deseterac, and in Russian was subsequently transformed into an eleven-syllable 

line corresponding to a trochaic pentameter with a dactylic ending [Jakobson 1966].  

Using a system of transcription developed with the German linguist Christian Sappok at 

Bochum University, the contributors to the essay on the language of Russian epics present a 

phonetic analysis of several songs (pp. 126-31). The varying accentuation of many words is 

accurately indicated and phonetic variation, even in the performance of a single singer, becomes 

apparent. This represents a vast linguistic improvement over attempts, often dilettantish, by some 

early collectors to convey phonetic detail in their publications of the bylina. On the one hand, 

such analysis has an important place in the study of the language of epics, even though it 

emphasizes how close the language, at least in regard to phonetics, is to the dialect of the peasant 

singers. On the other hand, scholars such as Evgen�eva [1963] and Ossovetskii [1979] have 

endeavored, mainly on the basis of vocabulary and, to a lesser extent, morphology and syntax, to 

establish the poetic features of a supradialectal and traditional folklore koine. 

SEEFA Journal 2002, Vol. VII No. 2



 

 

100 

On the whole the folklorists who have contributed to the first two volumes in the 

compendium of the Russian epics are to be congratulated for the immense and painstaking effort 

that they have made in a highly complex and enormous undertaking. Apart from the few points of 

criticism raised above, these two volumes provide a solid basis for investigating the Russian epic 

tradition for many years to come. They also demonstrate the high scholarly standards of Russian 

folklorists and of their contributions to the study of Russian epics. One can only hope that the 

ensuing volumes will appear regularly, and that they will be as thoroughly and conscientiously 

well prepared as the first two have been. 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

 

Astakhova, A. M.  1938, 1951.  Byliny Severa [Northern Byliny]. 2 vols. Moscow, 

Leningrad. 

_____.  1948.  Russkii bylinnyi epos na Severe [The Russian Bylina Epos in the North]. 

Petrozavodsk. 

_____.  1966. Byliny: Itogi i problemy izucheniia [Byliny: Summary and Problems of 

Study]. Moscow and Leningrad. 

Avenarius, V. P. 1885. Kniga bylin: Svod izbrannykh obraztsov russkoi narodnoi 

epicheskoi poezii [A Book of Byliny: A Compendium of Selected Examples of Russian Folk Epic 

Poetry]. 3rd ed. St. Petersburg. 

Chicherov, V. I. 1982. Shkoly skazitelei Zaonezh�ia [Performers� Schools in Zaonezh�e]. 

Moscow. 

Evgen�eva, A. P. 1963. Ocherki po iazyku russkoi ustnoi poezii v zapisiakh XVII-XX vv. 

[Essays on the Language of Russian Oral Poetry in Recordings from the Seventeenth to 

Twentieth Centuries]. Moscow and Leningrad. 

Gil�ferding, A. F. 1873. Onezhskie byliny, zapisannye Aleksandrom Fedorovichem 

Gil�ferdingom letom 1871 goda [Onega Byliny, Recorded by Aleksandr Fedorovich Gil�ferding 

in the Summer of 1871]. St. Petersburg. 

Iarkho, B. I. 1910. �Epicheskie elementy, priurochennye k imeni �Mikhaila Potyka�� 

[Epic elements attached to the name �Mikhail Potyk�]. Etnograficheskoe obozrenie. No. 3-4, pp. 

49-79. 



 

 

101 

Jakobson, Roman. 1966 [1952]. �Slavic epic verse.� In: Selected Writings. Vol. 4, pp. 

414-63. The Hague. 

Onchukov, N. E. 1904. Pechorskie byliny [Pechora Byliny].  St. Petersburg. 

Ossovetskii, I. A. 1979. �Nekotorye nabliudeniia nad iazykom stikhotvornogo fol�klora� 

[Some observations on the language of verse folklore]. In: A. N. Korzhin (ed.), Ocherki po 

stilistike khudozhestvennoi rechi [Essays on the Style of Artistic Speech], pp. 199-252. Moscow. 

Polívka, Georg. 1903. �Zu der Erzählung von der undankbaren Gattin.� Zeitschrift des 

Vereins für Volkskunde. No. 13, pp. 399-412. 

Putilov, B. N. 1976. Metodologiia sravnitel�no-istoricheskogo izucheniia fol�klora 

[Methodology for the Comparative-Historical Study of Folklore]. Leningrad. 

_____. 1988. Geroicheskii epos i deistvitel�nost� [Heroic Epos and Reality]. Leningrad. 

Rybnikov, P. N. 1861-1867. Pesni, sobrannye P. N. Rybnikovym [Songs Collected by P. 

N. Rybnikov]. 4 vols. St. Petersburg. 

Skaftymov, A. P. 1924. Poetika i genezis bylin [The Poetics and Genesis of the Byliny]. 

Saratov. 

Sokolov, Boris. 1927-1929. �Noveishie trudy inostrannykh uchenykh po russkomu 

eposu� [Recent work by foreign scholars on the Russian epos]. Khudozhestvennyi fol�klor. No. 2-

3, pp. 34-58; no. 4-5, pp. 9-35. 

Trubetskoi, N. S. 1987 [1937]. �K voprosu o stikhe russkoi byliny� [On the question of 

the verse of the Russian bylina]. In: Izbrannye trudy po filologii [Selected Works on Philology], 

pp. 352-358. Moscow. 

Zhirmunskii, V. M. 1979. �Epicheskoe tvorchestvo slavianskikh narodov i problemy 

sravnitel�nogo izucheniia eposa� [The Epic creation of the Slavic peoples and problems of the 

comparative study of epos]. In: Sravnitel�noe literaturovedenie [Comparative Literary Studies], 

pp. 192-280. Leningrad.  

James Bailey  

The University of Wisconsin, Madison 

 

SEEFA Journal 2002, Vol. VII No. 2