Akadmiai Kiad

The Epic Dimension in Borodin's Prince Igor

Author(s): Zsuzsa Domokos
Source: Studia Musicologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, T. 33, Fasc. 1/4 (1991), pp. 131149
Published by: Akadmiai Kiad
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/902441
Accessed: 17/02/2010 06:50
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ak.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Akadmiai Kiad is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Studia Musicologica
Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae.

http://www.jstor.org

The

Epic

Dimension

in

Borodinss

Prince

Igor

ZSUZSADOMOEOS*

After being composedfor 18 years, Prince Igor remainedincomplete

whenits authordied.lUsingBorodin'sdrafts,Rimsky-Korsakov
andGElazunov
finishedit, i.e. they orchestratedthe missingparts and publishedthe operain
1888.2It is due to theireffortthat PrinceIgor can be performedas a complete
work.At the sametime, sinceonly the thirdact remainedunfinished,Borodin's
musicandtext arecompleteandcoherentenoughto provideus with anauthentic pictureof the composer'soriginalplans concerningthe music and dramatization.
Prince Igor underwentsome major conceptualand structuralchanges
duringthe longtime it was composed.Borodingot the scenariofromhis friend,
VladimirStasov,in the springof 1869.It was the 12th centuryepic,TheStory
of Iyor'sArmy,and the events recordedin the chroniclesof that periodthat
Stasov used for his scenario.In the beginningBorodinbasedhis own text and
music on this scenario,althoughas he went on working,he got furtherand
furtheraway from it. The composergraduallyrealiseda differentconception
of the musicdramawherethe epic, instead of being an externalepisode,becomes an internalstructuringelement.This determiningrole the epic gives
a particularcharacterto Borodin'sopera. The purposeof this paper is to
examinethis uniquefeatureand explorethe complesrelationshipbetweenthe
opera and the epic.
* This paper is based on my dissertation, Borodtn'sPrtnce Igor q,nthe Mtrror of
Larnm'sManqlacrtpt.I should like to thank Marta Papp for her help, and the staff of the
Glinka Museum in Moscow as well as Professor Aleksey Landinsky for their help with
my study of sources.
1Borodin completed Acts I, II, IV in his piano score, and only the last part of the
finale of Act I (the news about the Polovtsian attack, called "musicof disaster")is missing
from his autograph.
2 When comparing the modern printed editions with those of Borodin's time, we
find that the former are just reprints. For the sake of availability we take the 1983 edition as our basis of reference:A. SOpORMH: KHS3b UOpb. Onepa B MeTbIpeX AeXCTBMflX C
nponoroNk
9*

rIepeno>KeHMeRnS

neHMe

H <)opTenHaHo.

MocKBa

1983.

Studia Musicolosica Jcademiae Sczentiarum Hunaricae 33,1991

Jkademzai Ziadd, Budapest

Zs. Dornokos:The Eptc Dtrnenezontn

132

Borodtn'sPrtnceIyor

The period following the crisis between

1870 a,nd 1874 is a turning point
in the process of the composition;
Borodin's interest in the subject is aroused
again. It is at this point that we can grasp
the main dramaturgicproblem the
composeris concerned about: Can he meet the
requirementsof the stage when
composing an opera whose source is an epic
basically not suitable for the stage ?
He first replies in the negative:
"The subject matter, which is not
adequate to being set to music, will not
appeal to the audience, either. There is little
drama in it and it lacks stage
dynamism. After all, it is not easy to write a
libretto satisfying the needs of
both the stage and the music. I am not
experienced and talented in it, have no
time for it. There is nothing to make the
opera a success.... Moreover,a nondramatic opera (in the literal sense of the word)
seems an unnatural thing to
me," he writes in 1870.3
After such an outright refusal, the fact that
the composerstarts to work on
the opera again assumes paramount
importance. Although nothing proves in
his letters what might have caused this
change, it is possibe that Borodin
foundor sensed by intuition a new solution
which got crystallised during the
yearsof composition. It is this new
approach that creates the particular logic
inthe dralnaturgy of the opera.
In 1876 Borodin expresses his musical
and aesthetic views on the opera.
Whatis of significance to us here is the
second half of a sentence which, being
partof a simile is usually overlooked, but
can serve as a suitable start to the
sequenceof thoughts belows: ". . . and
similarly I keep trying to achieve my
dreamand compose my Russian epic opera."4
But what did Borodin mean by the
adjective "epic" ? Did he have the
same
idea in mind as his contemporaries?
In 1888 Stasov considers Pr?:nceIgor in
his book on Borodin as the continuationof the Glinka tradition, a perfect
match for Ruslan and Lyudrntla:5
"Andso on 20th April 1869 the future of
Borodin's opera was decided. As an
epicopera, it is the most outstanding
work of our century besides GElinka's
Rtuslan
and Lyzudrntla."
ConfrontingGlinka'sstyle with that of
Dargomizhskyin his letter mentioned
above, Borodin also regardshimself as the
follower of Rtuslan:(in the letter
he
refuses the purely declamatory style preferring
singing).
3

To his wife, 4th March 1870 in:

paHne KpEITEIMeCKH

c6epeHHoe

Cepren;HaHHH:

nUCbMa Sopoduha.

nO;nHHHbIMM
TeKCTaMM.
C npe;ncsosueM
A.
,7naHuHa.BbInycKI. (1857-1871).
MOCKBa,
1927-1928. 200.
4To Lyubov Karmalina, ist June
1876 in: CeprenHaHHH:
AuHa.
BctynuTen^HasIcTaTb5IT. Xy60Ba.
PeRaKHS,
KOMMeHTapHM
;HaH"Ha. BhlIlyCK II. (1872-1877).
MOCKBa, 1936. 108.
5 BJIagHMHp
CTaCOB: AJleKCaH8p
n. SopoduH. MOCKBa, 1954. 53.

St?dia
Musicoloyica Academiae Scientiar?m SI?ntaticae
33,1991

co6-

nonHoe

npHMeMaHMMMM

17UCbMa

A.

C.

n. sOpO-

H npHMeMaHMS

C.

A.

Zs. Domokos:The Eptc Dtqnenszon

tn Borodtn'sPrtece Igor

133

"Of courseI cannotjudgehow successfullyI will be able to realizemy ambitions, but I am convincedthat my operawill be morelike Rslan than like
The StoneG?zest."
Fortunatelythese ambitionsareexpressedby the composerhimself:"The
purerecitativestyle has alwaysgone againstmy grainand againstmy character. I am drawnto singing,to cantilena,not to recitative,eventhough,according to the reactionsof thosewho knowme, I am not too bad at the latter.Besides,I am drawnto morefinished,morerounded,moreexpansiveforms.My
wholemannerof treatingoperaticmaterialis different.In my opinion,in the
operaitself no less than in the sets, smallforms,details,nicetiesshouldhaveno
place.Everythingshouldbe patedin boldstronkes,clearly,vividly,andas practicably as possibleboth from the vocal and orchestralstandpoints.Singings
houldplay a primaryroleand the orchestrashouldstay in the background."
Theseviews characterizenot only Borodin'sindividualtaste and inclination in followingtraditions,but also the aestheticattitudeof the composersof
his time. Serov also writes about this attitude in connectionwith Rxsalka:6
"Owingto its very essenceand die circumstancesof its performance,
the opera
requiresclearandexpansiveformsin both melodyandharmony.Detailedcomposition, meticulositygo unnoticedin the huge dimensionsof the theatre
hall. . . The musicof the operamust be simple and always beautiful,then it
will be easy to understandand in consequenceenjoyablefor everybody.
As BorisYarustovskyalsopointsout,7"composingin boldstrokeks"
makes
similarmusicaldevicescometo life in the variousRussianoperas:such as the
importantrole of contrastedscenes, the clear separationof primaryand seeondary facts, tile effort to make musicalcharacterizationclearand comprehensible.
Chorusscenesof Russianoperasplay an imortantrolein creatinggrandiose
forms.Russiancomposersdo not use the chorusonly as a meansof sllapingthe
structureof the opera.For them the chorussceneis one of the most essential
elementsin creatingthe nationalcharacterof the opera.II11864Cui pointed
out in an essay what he consideredto be the characteristiefeaturesof the
Russian opera:8
"ThechorusIlasa moreimportantrolein ouroperasthan in all the others.It is
not a masswithoutany will-powerthat have cometogetherto sing,but a selfconscious,autonomousparticipant.With it a new elementappearsin music:
the universeexpandsin all dimensions."
Tox I.

neH"Hrpar,
1950.52.
1952.52.

6 AneNcaHp
cepoB:
136pannble
Cmamsu.
MocKBa-7 E;opHc SpyCTOBCKH": XpaMamypZUS pyCCKOUonepnou KnaccuKu.
MocKBa
8
l lepffoe
u ffmopoe
npeoemaffnenue
Pyenana u J7p04MUXU". in:

CesarClli:

cTaTbu.
neH"Hrpar,
1952.87.

lt36paHHble

Studia Musicolovica Academiae Scieltiaruan Hunglaricae 33,1991

134

Ze. Domokos:The Epic Dirnensionin Borodin'sPrince Igor

Eowever, Borodin'sstatementabout the similaritiesbetweenhis future

operaandRqbelan
mayhaveseemede2rtremely
audaciousto his contemporaries.
Critics,aesthetes,composersof the time had been conductingheateddebates
aboutRqbelan
andLyqzdmila
for decades.Mostof them consideredit unsuccessful. No one shouldbe deceivedby the fact that Stasov, lookingbackfromthe
end of the 1880s,matchesBorodin'soperawith Rqbelan
regardingthe latter
ae an acceptedmasterpieceof the Russianopera.In fact by the 1880sseveral
Russian operas had been composedwhich contemporarieslooked upon as
worksof everlastingvaluethat hadto be followed.Composers
no longersawthe
challengein Rtuslan,but regardedit as an outstandingworkof their national
culture.
Rtuslan,however,is appreciatedin an entirelydifferentway by the generation that, departingfrom Glinka'stwo operasratheropposedin character,
had to createthe repertoryof the Russiannationaloperaandformulatetheir
views on it. Interestinglyenough,the impulsedid not come from the first,
succ*sful Glinkaopera (A Lifefor thelrsar), but fromthe failureof the second
(R?bels6n),
as RichardTaruskinpoints it out.9Operacomposers,regardlessof
whetherthey were for or againstRuslan,couldnot avoid facingthe problem
of the relationshipbetweenthe musicand the drama.
The premiereof R?telans6ndLyqtdmils6
in 1842wassucha failurethat it did
not go on stage until 1858.The choiceof the subjectwas not successful:Pushkin's poem representedan athetic trend foreignto the tendenciesof the
1840s,it couldnot combinethe dramaticelementwith the nationalcharacter.
"It is a fairytale devoidof any senseof time andplaceor nationalcharacter,"
Belinsky,a majorliteraryrepresentativeofthe 1840s,wroteit aboutthepoem.l
As a matterof fact,the sameviewis e2rpressed
by a criticafterthe premiere
of Glinka's opera:ll
"If the subjectof the operadoes not provideany dramaticsituationsto
show emotions,the musicwill inevitablybecomelifeless.The poet has to fill
the musicianwith enthusiasm,but is therean interesting,dramaticscenein the
new operaat all ? If oureyes had not beenenchantedby the director'ssplendid
stage scenery,the subjectof the operawouldnot have given anythingto our
heartsor ears."
In fact therewas a duality of opinionsformedaboutthe opera:although
it was not deniedthat it had to be takeninto considerationas a pieceof music,
9Richard Taru#kin,Opera and drama in Rz4ssia fAs Preached and Pradised in the
1860s (Ru##ianMu#icStudie#,No. 2.) Ann Arbor, Michigen, 1981. 28.
0 Cited by Taru#kinop. cit. 3.
In: CesepHas
ntlexa.No. 27b, 277., cited by Sta#ov op. cit. 281.

Studsa Busicolosica jIcademive SofenXimumIlunsancae 33,1991

s. Dornokos:The Epic Dimensionin Borodin'sPrince Igor

135

it was regardedunacceptablefromthe point of view of dramatizationlabelled

"c'est une chosemanquee".
After the premiereof Ruslan, the debate continuedfor a few decades
between composersand critics, who, mainly in order to present their own
aestheticviews, either defendedthe opera or disapprovedof the points that
they consideredweak,andso attackedthe ideasfavouredby Ruslanists.Serov,
the mostinfluentialaestheteof the 1860s,strictlyadheredto the unity between
the draxnaand the opera,and his opinionwas fully accepted.In fact, Borodin
also shareshis view when,in his above-mentioned
letterfrom 1870,he gives up
his idea of composingPrinceIgor (seethe beginningof this paper).At the same
time a reviewon RuslanandLyudmilawrittenby Cuiwas publishedin 1864.
Its mainpointis that the authorrecognizedin Ruslana new possibilityfor the
musicdrama.He arguesthat this newkindof operainsteadof beingapproached
on the basis of the requirementsthat it cannot meet should be understood
throughits particularinner laws. "The libretto of Ruslan has always been
strongly criticizedowing to its diversity and lack of unity and dramatic
tension,as is the only type of operais the operadrama.Music,however,can
inspireimaginationbesidesthe fact that or not it expressesthe dynamism
of emotions.Ruslanis a,fantasticfairy operawithout drama.Neverthelessit
providesthe composerwith the most variedand attractiveimagesgivingscope
for creativeimagination.In this respectthe RuslanlibrettohelpedGlinkaa lot
to createmusicalmiracles,whichhe generouslydid in this opera.''l2
With this Cui acceptsthe existenceof a new genre,the epic operawhose
characteristicsare: colourfulscenes followingone another accordingto the
principleof contrasts,the denouementgoingon in a balancedrhythm,finished
and independentscenes,l3a11of whichwill characterizeBorodin'soperaas they
do Glink^'s.However,whileRuslanandLyudmilais a fairyopera,PrinceIgor,
just like the otherGElinka
operaIvan Susanin,is a historicalopera.The dramatizationof Ruslan,as the first representativeof a new tendency,coulnot have
been enoughfor Borodinto find a new solutiongiving a new stimulusto the
composer'simagination;and it does not answerthe questionwhy the threads
runningthroughStasov'slibrettoare brokenin the dramatizationof Borodin's
opera. Stasov preparesPrince Igor's escape alreadyin the first act and the
esecution of the plan is its logical consequence.Borodindoes not think it
importantto preparethe escape.Stasovdoes not sharpenthe internalconflict,
i.e. VladimirGalitsky'sclaim to the throne,so much as Borodin does in his
opera,whereGalitsky'sattemptto siezethe throneis the clima, of his first act.
Op. cit. 38.
Yarustovsky op. cit. 85.

12 C. CUi
13

Studia Musicoloica AcadeqniaeScxenXiarumBunaancoe 33,1991

136

Zs. Dornokos: The EpivcDivrnensqyon

qynBorodqyn'sPrqynceIgor

However, while in Stasov's libretto this internal

conflict i.sresolved in the last
act, when Igor settles accounts with his
enemies, the resolution of the same
conflict is missing from Borodin's work. Stasov
wrote a scenario based on cause
and effect, but Borodin gradually gave up
Stasov's idea applying some other
logic (which might not seem consistent
enough at first).
We have now returned to our original
problem to form our main question
concretely: did the epic mean anything more to
Borodin than the tradition
of the Russian epic opera created by
GElinka
?
In 1861 a large-scalescientific work on
Russian folk poetry was published
in St. Petersburg. It was written by
Fyodor Buslaev, the well-known literary
hlstorianof the time.l4 Stasov must have known
several of his works since it was
Buslaev who reviewed his study on the origin of
bylinies. It is not unlikely that
throughStasov Borodinalso knewBuslaev's
above- mentioned work, whose first
pagesare devoted to analyzing the meaning
of the various literary genres. It is
pointedout that the genre of TheStoryof Igor's
Arrnyis indicated in its original
title saying it is an epic.l5
"And therefore 'poem' took up a more general
meaning in every day usage.
Firstit was used in the sense of 'tale' or
'skazk^', then influenced by the verb
'gadat'(foretell, guess) it took up a new
meaningsimilar to that of the Lithuanian'glied-mi', which means song. The
Greek'^o; first means speech, and only
laterpoem, za '^n. The German 'saga,
sage' has the same meaning as our
'skazk^'.Finally, the original ancient meaning
of our 'slovo' was that of the
GEreek
'7r0; end the German 'saga', and it
survived in the literary works of
ancienttimes, as in the case of 'Slovo a polku
Igorjeve'.
How did the fact that the subject matter of
the opera was an epic influence
itsepic character? Is it possible that
Borodin thought of this relationshipwhen
writing
in his letter in 1876 that he wanted to
compose the Russian epic opera ?
If we consider how TheStoryof Igor's
Arrnyrelates to the libretto on the
onehand and to the opera in the process
of composition on the other, we find
some
interesting changes. In his scenario Stasov often
quotes from the epic and
thechronicles. (There are twelve
quotations from the epic and three from the
chronicles.)l6
For him these quotations establish the
connectionwith the literarysource. From the point of view of
dramatization
their
role is to slow down
the
course of events and emphasize the epic
character.
14 cDe,Rop
[iycnaeB:
PYCCKaSHapo0Has
noS3us.
IXICTOppItIeCKIvIe
OtIepKEIpyCCKEIIvI
CSOBeCTHOCTH
H MCKYCCTBa.
HapO,RHOIvI
TOM1. CaHKT_HeTeP6YPr1861.
lo Buslaev op. cit. 5.
1613esides The Story of Igor's Army

1292)
as well as the Lavretensky-ChronicleStasov quotes from the Ipat-Chronicle (1117(1185-1186).
Studia
Mustcoloca Academiae Sczentiarum lGunSartcae
33,1991

Zs. Domokos:The Eptc Dtmenszontn Borodtn'sPrtece Igor

137

In the beginning, Borodin's conception is the same. The first versions of

Prince Igor's as well as Yaroslavna's airs have images coming from The Story
of Igor'sArrnyeven more than in Stasov's libretto): the vision of catastrophe in
Yaroslavna's dream (Scene 2, Act I) can be found, though not word by word,
in the epic (in Svyatoslav's dream), and we can recognize Svyatoslav's "golden
words" as he addressesthe different princes in the first version of Prince Igor's
air in Act II.17
During the process of composition the number of quotations is getting
more and more reduced.There remain three quotations altogether: Yaroslavna's
lament in Act IV, and Prince Igor's two sentences in the Prologue:l8
MHe 6 XOTeJIOCb. . B ,a,aneux
I{Onbe flpeJIOMEITb

ctperlxx rIonoseLxKzx.

(I want, he said, to joust on the edge of Polovtsian fields.) and

}paTb5l,

C5l,eM Ha 60p3bIX KOHeEIEI fl03pEIM CHH5IrOMOpSI.

(Let us mount our horses, my brothers, to see the blue water of the see.)
The allusions to The Storyof Igor'sArmyare missing from the later versions of Yaroslavna's and Igor's airs, too. However, it does not mean that the
link between the literary source and the opera loosens, on the contrary, it
becomes closer due to a change in quality.
Although the point of the opera correspondsto that of The Storyof Igor's
Armyonly at certain essential points, the opera realizes the most important
principles of the epic concerningdramatization and structuring. In this way the
particular atinosphere, the solemn tone of the source is much better reflected
than with the help of quotations. It is a decisive element in the relationship
between the opera and its literary and historical sources that Borodin studied
these sources not only before starting the opera, but he also analysed them again
and again while colnposing the music.19
17The first versions of Yaroslavnais and Igor's airs C8l1only be found in nlanllscript,
BOIOdinrecomposed both later.
l8 See the Rus.sian edition of the piallo score (Moscow, 1983): 36., 44.
In a(l(lition to these Arnold Sohor Itlentions further expressions and phrases taken
fronl The Story of lgor's Army, in the Tgor- Konchak dialoglle (Act II), the Ovlll- Igor L)ialogue (Act TTI),the chorus of the khans and Konchak's response (Act III) and
SopoHoplupoesutl
in Skula and Yeruska's song (Act IV). in: ApHon, Coxop: AxeKca4p
oU1S. H3Hb,

---SeH"HrPaR, 1965. 604.

ReSTeSbHOCTb, My3blKaSbHoe TBOp'leCTBO. MOCKBa

19Borodin mentions several t;inles in his letters that he studies historical sources.
This is what he writes to Rimsky-Korsakov on 5th August 1879:
"Due to a closer stlldy of the Ipat-Chronicle, I arranged the second act, KonchaliovI1&'Snumber etc., quite well to the advantage of the whole opera."
In 1883, four years before his death, he asks Stasov for the Kiev-Chronicle and Karamzin's historical sttldy }ecause these "seelaed to l)e al)solutely necessary for my nhappy Igor".
Studia Musicolovica Academiae Scientiarum Nunyaricae 33,1991

138

Ze. Dom,okos:The Epic Dimensionin, Borodin'sPrince Igor

Oursearchforthe invisiblelinksbetweenTheStoryof Igor'sArmyandthe

operais basedon the analysisby DimitryLihachow,the most famousliving
scholarof medievalRussianliterature.20
At the time of its birth,The Storyof Igor'sArmywas the representative
of a new genrein Russianliterature:it is on the borderlinebetweenfolk poetry
and poetry. Folk elementscan be found mostly in the laments and songs of
praise.It is Lihachowwhodrawsourattentionto theirrelativelygreatnumber
in TheStoryof Igor'sArrny.It provesBorodin'sdeepinsightthat fromamong
the many quotationstaken fromthe epic he kept Yaroslavna'slament, whose
formis closestto folk laments.However,the most interestingthing aboutthe
operais the greatnumberof chorusesof praise.Thereis no otheroperawith so
manyof them:the beginningand end of the Prologue,the first sceneof Act I,
the praiseof the khans in the chows of the Polovtsiandancesat the end of
Act II, the praiseof the khansagainin the Polovtsianmarchin Act III, even
the responsesof the chorusin Konchak'sair in Act III, and the final chorusin
ActIV. As the frameof the operais madeup fromchorusesof praise,the focus,
as opposedto Stasov'sscenario,is shifted fromthe life of theindividualcharacters to a moregeneralhistoricallevel. This is reinforcedalso by the other
ohorusesrepresentingscenesfromeveryday life. At the sametime the choruses
of praisehave an importantstructuralrole, as well: the developmentof the
plotis basedon them a11throughthe opera;the Prologue,-the beginningof
ActI, the endof Act II,-the beginningof Act III, the endof Act IV.
This comparisondoes not want to suggestthat certainperts of The Story
ofIgor'sArrnycan be found in the opera,becausetheir relationshipis much
deeper:Borodinborrowsand realizesthe most importantstructuringprinciple
ofthe 12th centuryepic, the principleof repetition,and the questionwhether
itis due to his deliberatedecisionor to his intuitionis irrelevantat this point.
"Repetitionis the basicprinciplein the artisticworldof ancientRussian
literature,"Lihachowwrites.2l
Repetitionin theseliteraryworkshastwo directions:externalandinternal.
Itis realizedon the one handby quotationscitedfromotherworksand on the
otherhandby an internalrhythmcreatedby refrainsand imagesrecurringin
thewholeof the opera.Theabundanceof repetitionscorresponds
to theInedieval
literaryidea that lays stresson recognizingthe alreadyexistingratherthan on
learningabout the unknown.Accordingto Lihachowrepetitionhas an estremelyimportantrole in The Storyof Igor's Army. One of its forms is the
repetitionof situationsresultingfrom the structureof the epic. The story of
20 zMXTpHZ
uxaMeB:
21 Lihachow op.

cxoso

cit. 237

O nonKy

Hzopese
U UCKyCC60ezospeMenu.
neHHHrpa;,
1985.

StudiaBusicolosica Academiae Scientiaru7n ilungaricae 33,1991

Ze. Dornokos:The Eptc Dtmenszontn Borodtn'sPrtnceIyor

139

Igor'scampaignis constantlyinterruptedby recollectionsof past eventswhich

are either opposedto or paralleled with presentevents. This constantalternation and rhythm of present and past, of collectiveand individualimages
reinforcethe epic tone by slowingdown the tempo.The evocationof ancient
fraternalanimosityin the descriptionof the fight betweenIgorandVsevolodis
sucha repetitionof situationin TheStoryof Igor'sArrny:for exampleafterthe
second battle, the chroniclerremembersthe strugglefought by Igor's grandfather,Oleg,and then returnsto the present,to Igor'swar. It is naturalthen
that the praiseof winnersas well as the lament and mourningfollowingthe
defeatsarepresentthroughoutthe wholeopera.The sameemotionis expressed
by almost the same image or simile. After Igor's defeat nature mournsthe
warriorskilled in the fight:
HHWHeT

C EaSOCTH

B rope ,a,epeso

WOBbISb-TpaBa,

Ic 3eMSe

ICSOHHTCH.

(The bladesof grassbent is sorrow,

and the trees bowedto the groundin pain.)22
The same imagereturnsin the formof an opposedsimile in the dialogue
between Igor escapingfrom prison and the river Donets: while the Donets
helpsIgorto escape,the youngPrinceRostislavgets killedin the riverStugna.
The lamentis symbolizedwith a similarimagefromnatureby the authorof the
epic:

pHyHbISH uBeTbI B EaSOCTH,

It ,A,epeBbYIC rletIaJIb6OIC3eMJIe ICJIOHFITCiI.

(Sorrowwitheredthe flowers,
and pain pulledthe trees to the ground.)
In the descriptionof the beginningof the battle, there is a line returningas a
refrain,the narrator'spoetic interruptionpredictingthe final failureof the
struggle.
0 3eMJIFIMOFI,3eMSS Pyccica !
aMu!
He Bilp,Ha TbI yxce3 a IcypraH
(OhRussianland! You arelost amongthe hills !)
22 The quotations from the Story
peBe.
zBepHepyCCKHM
TeKCT H IlepeBO;bI.
JI. ItI. THMOeeBa.
MOCKBa,

1965.

of Igor's Army are based on: Cnoso o

CTHXOTBOpHOe

IlepeJIOmeHMe

kIro-

nOnKy
IlOSCHeHMM K HeMy

Studia Musicolosica Academiae Scientiatum Eungaricae 33,1991

Z. Dornokos:The Eptc
Dtmenszontn
140

Borodtn'sPrtnce Igor

Yaroslavna's lament as well as

Svyatoslav's speech is also built
In the latter the image of
upon refrains.
the defeat suffered by the
three times when Svyatoslav
Russian army returns
incites the warriorsto fight
back:
BCTYnHTe
MC
BBIB CTPeMeHa
3SaMeHBIe
3a 06HASI
HaIIIerO
BPeMeHZ,
3a 3eMnioPyccicyo,
3a paH^IIzIropH,
3a IzIrop, 6yero
CBSTOCJIaBMMa!
(Mount, gentlemen, your
golden stirrups
in revenge for our defeat
for the Russian land,
for Igor's wounds,
for the young brave
Svyatoslav !)
Besides these

recurring repetitions, there are

also some hidden ones in
The
Storyof lyor's Army.Lihachow
mentions

there turning image of the

bank
(whichis associated with a
river
ritual experience). Igor, when
militarycampaign, wants to
setting
out
on
his
drink from the water of the
Don and runs home
along
the Donets. Yaroslavna
prays to the forces of nature
for help. Returning
symbols
belong to the same type of
hidden repetitions, Igor as a
wolf
hawk, or the
running at night in the image of
their escape, or the sun and
phore
of the Russian princes.The
moon metaunity of the epic is created by
whether
these repetitions
hidden or emphasized as
refrains lacing the work with
threads.
invisible
Repetition has a fundamental role
in the structure of the
Borodin's
opera, and it has as many
drama,tizationof
varied
forms as in the epic. The role
chorus
of praise and the repetition
of the
of situations framing and
have
spanning the opera
already been mentioned. Just
like in The Storyof Igor's
creating
Arrnyrefrains
the unity of different parts
can also be found in the
with
opera,
deliberate musical allusions
together
(similarto the symbols in the
the
epic) connecting
different acts or scenes. These
allusions return almost sound
inthesame key. In the
by sound
autographs unlike in the printed
score there is an instrumental
interlude in C sharp minor with
accompaniment descending chromatically.
It represents Yaroslavna
regaining consciousness and is
else
but the beginning and the
nothing
middle part of the first (C
of
theIgor air composed in
sharp minor) version
1875. That this is a
deliberate allusion by the
composer
is easy to prove: Borodin
himself refersto the
infinale
the of Act I in his
above-mentionedscene
autographin the middle part of
the Igor air. Borodin
Studia
M?sicoloica Academiae Scientiarum Eunaricae 33, ]99]

Zs. Dornokos:The Eptc Dznlenszontn Borodtn'sPrtnce Igor

141

intended to compose the beginning of Yaroslavna and Galitsky's duet in the

second scene of Art I in a flat key (G flat major D flat major). Thereby the
first passage is connected to the previous scene (in C sharp minor) with the help
of the same key relationshipas Galitsky's air (G flat major-E flat minor) in the
first scene of Act I to the recitative (C sharp) preceding it. The composer's
deliberate intention was, as well, the return of the main theme form Igor's air
(the later, known version in b flat minor) in the Boyars' talein the finale of Act I
before the air itself (in the autograph only), and after the air in the dialogue
between Igor and Konchak. These repetitions are static symbolic images as the
character of the protagonist does not change, either, all through the opera he
represents the warrior whose duty is to save his country and a11he does is
determined by this responsibility. He has to regain freedom, this is what the
text in the musical allusions always suggests, and so the above-mentioned
recurringmotive associated with Igor correspondsto the Igor hawk symbol
appearingseveral times in the epic and it does not serve as a detailed characterization of the hero. The unity of the musical material is further strengthened in
the Prolongue by the two themes in the dialogue between Prince Igor and VlaThey are both taken from Act I (fromGalitsky's song in Scene 1,
dimir GEalitsky.
Act I, and from the GEalitsky Yaroslavna scene, in Scene 2, Act I). We can
-find another unifying element at the beginning of the Yaroslavna-Igor duet
in Act IV, where the middle part (the dream) from Yaroslavna's air in Act I
reappears and is a hidden repetition at the same time: the dream came true
when Igor returned home.
Symmetrical and refrain-like structures in the opera can mostly be found
in the Prologue and the first scene of Act I. The symmetry in the Prologue is
created by the return of the introduction and the opening chorus at the end.
The refrain is the motive in the response of the chorus to Prince Igor inciting
them to fight. This motive recursagain and again as the linking element between
the parts of the Prologue (in the printed score (1983), 33).
A refrainof a biggerscale than the above motive is createdby the recurrence
of parts the opening chorus in the first scene of Act I. In the light of all this it,
seems more important that when preparingthe opera for publishing, RimskyKorsakov omitted or shor tenedthese recurrencesfound in Borodin's autograph,
thus overshadowingthe composer's original ideas.
For the time being we are not going to answer the question whether these
correspondences are intentional or they necessarily result from an external
factor which is independent of the relationship between the epic and the opera.
Let us go one step further examining Lihachow's analysis. He supposes thar
behind the poetic device of repetitions in TheStoryof Igor'sArtnywe can find
the world view and poetic message of the age. The adverb 'already' is often
Studia MusicoloSica Academiae Scientiarum EunSaricae 33,1991

Ze. Dornokos:The Epic Dimensionin Borodin'sPrince Igor

142

repeatedin the epic. In Lihachow'sopinionit suggeststhat everythinghappenedthe way it hadbeenpredicted.Thewholeplot of TheStoryof Igor'sArmy
is connectedwith poeticprophecyand this createsa specialatmosphere-the
atmosphereof"historicallyriepoetry"."Therefore
repetitions(andamongthem
prophecies)in The Storyof Igor'sArrnyplay an importantpart not only from
the point of view of rhythm.They have a fundamentelrole in creatingthe
particularfeelingthat nothingoccurredaccidentally,whichto a certainextent
connectspast with presentandfuture.In fact whena certainpronounis repeated severaltimes at the sameinterval,it suggeststhat the differentphenomena
correspond,
they arepre-determined
and carrythe characteristics
of fatality."23
Events in The Storyof Igor's Army are describedaccordingto a double
viewpoint: we have the level of presenttime relatingwhat happensand the
level of eternity relatingwhat was boundto happen,and these two live in a
perfectunity inseparably.Lihachowcallsthis phenomenon"ancientstructure
with doublemeaning".Accordingto this ancientidea the real causa of Igor's
defeat(lackof unity, fraternalanimosity)combinewiththe transcendentcause,
the punishmentof God.
InTheStoryof Igor'sArrnytwo eventsareemphasizedandtheiroccurrence
is preparedby intuitivepropheciesjustifiedby divinepre-determination:
Prince
Igor'sdefeat and escape.
The solareclipseis a bad omenof the aoutcomeof Igor'scampaign.Comparedwith the epic, Borodinrelyingon the descriptionin the chronicleslaid
morestresson it in the middlepart of the Prologue.(ThePrologueis entirely
Borodin'sidea !)The peopletry to detaintheirleaderbut he Lsadament:
HaM SOEbe

3HaMeHbe OT

Sora, K Ao6py znz

HeT, y3HaeM MbI,

CyRb6bI CBOeElHEIKTOHe 060E1ReT, YerO 60>RTbC>R

HaM?

FI,ReM
3a upasoeMbI ,ReJIo,
3a sepy, pO,uHy,
3a Pycb.
YEeJIZ

HaM 6e3 60>S BOpOTEITbC>R

H IlyTb OTI{pbITb Bpary.

(Thisunearthlysign comesfromGod,we shallknowwhetherit meansgood

or bad. No one can escapetheirfate, what shouldwe be afraidof, then? A just
causeis leadingus, we fight forourfaJith,ourcountrJr,
Russia.Shouldwe return
withoutfighting,letting the enemyfreelyin ?)24
His wordsexpressthe beliefin predestination,andthey reflectthe tone of
the Ipat-Chronicle:
(Thefollowingis a freetranslationof the test in the chro23
24

Lihachow op. cit. 251*

See the piano score cited in Note 18, 43.

Studia MusicoloSica Academiae ScienXiarumHunSaricae 33,1991

Ze. Domokos:The Epic Dirnensiontn Borodtn'sPrtnce Igor

143

nicle.) "Andwhenin the eveningthey left for the Donets,Igorturnedhis ey

onto the skJrand saw the sun as if it werethe moon,and said to his boyarsand
warriors:
"Lookat that sight overthere!"Thenall of them noticedit, observedthe
skJrand bowedtheir heads.And they said: "Oh Prince,this is a bad omen."
And Igor answeredthem: "MJrbrethrenand warriors,nobodJrlinows God's
secrets.Godgave us this sign as H:ecreatedthe wholeworld.We cannotknow
if that whichGodcreatedforus will meangoodor badto us, unlesswe complete
our work."And sayingthis he crossedthe Donets.
At the end of the finale in Act I abovethe peal of alarmbells the chorus
sings about God's punishmentafter having heard of Igor's defeat and the
Polovtsian attack:
OTSOEbMcyAa He yuRemb HHKyRa!
(Thereis no escapefromGod'sjudgement.)25
The authorof the epic recallsthe sameidea comingfromthe chronicleby
the famousBoJran:
HZ6oraTyHZropa3,ay,HZHZWY,
XHTPY,
<<Hz
Cy,Ra6oncbero He MHHosaTb)>.

(Neitherthe shrewdman,northe cleverone, northe fast bird

can escapeGod'sjudgement.)

is the predestined
The other decisiveelementin TheStoryof Igor'sMrmy
necessityof Igor'sescape.In the epicit is precededby Svyatoslav'sspeechand
Yaroslavna'slament. The poet expressesutter despair and hopelessnessin
both: in the formerthere is despairat the level of society: only the returning
leaderand the hope for futureunity can save the country.In the lamentit is
expressedin the plaintivetone of love poetry.PrinceIgor'sescape,forthe poet
the only possible solution that will settle the problemsby itself, is just as
futureglory and the hope for
predeterminedas the defeat.The poet e2rpresses
the country'sfreedomwith a very subtle internalrepetition:the imageof the
shiningsun after the eclipse.
xpacHoe,
B He6ecseTuTczco;tHrte
!
HaPyccxo;i3eMJIe
A FIropb-KHsI3b
25

See the piano score cited in Note 18, 151.

Studia

lUu8icoloi7ica

Academiae Sci4ntiarum Bungaricae 33,1991

144

Zs. Domokos: The EpiXcDtmensiXontn Borodtn's Prtnce Igor

(The sun is shiningin the sky againPrinceIgor is on Russiansoil.)

In this respectthe fact that in Borodin'sautographthe chorussings the followingat the final notesof Act IV gainsspecialimportance:
rOCHORb

noMor!

(God helped us !)
Now we are able to point out the facts that, apart from the common
featuresof the Rz4slan-tradition,
explainthe epic characterof the opera.If the
problemsof dramatizationthat have seemedinconsistentor questionablein the
operaso far are approachedon the basis of the theory of "ancientstructure
with double meaning",i.e. the inevitable occurrenceof main events, then
Borodin'ssolutionsof compositionand dramatizationare justified.The bad
omenpredictingthe failureof the campaign,the solareclipse,and a11the predestinedevents occurringafter the defeat are, as we have seen, a11strongly
emphasizedin the opera. Borodintries to preparein his dramatizationthe
predestinednecessityof Igor'sescapein the sameway.Thatis why he sharpens
Galitsky'sclaimto the thronebesidesmakingthis internalconflictof the epic
more realisticin this way, and bringingmore stage action into the plot. It
followsfromthe predestinednecessityof Igor'sescapethat Borodindoes not
feel it importantto workout the plan of the escapein Act I, as it is done in
Stasov'sscenario,and that is why in the operaGalitsky'sfurtherlife becomes
irrelevantafter Igor'sreturnhome.Borodindoes not intendto followthrough
the life of each character,insteadof this he wantsto createenoughtensionso
that Igor'sreturn,just likein the epic, will providea satisfactoryand perfect
solution.This tensionis createdat the end of Act I, whenGalitskydecidesto
seize power and at the height of this internal conflict the news about the
enemy'sattackswoopsdownon the castleof Putivl as a realblow.
Consideringthe theoryof doubleviewpoint,it seemsto be easierto grasp
what madeseveralscholarsdrawthe conclusionthat the operawasnotfinished
in a propertone.26The final chours,apartfromthe coda,is basicallydifferent
fromthe heroicand "eternal"tone of the Prologueor the finale of Act I. Its
characteris lighter,moredance-likeandthe roleof the gudokplayers,whichis
stronglyemphasized,associatesit with the 1st scenein Act I, whereVladimir
26 David Lloyd-Jones
mainly critioizes the "mysterious and inconsistent" way
Prince Galitsky is portrayed, and that is the reason why the fincls that the attraction of
the wcorkis due to the musical quality of the individual numbers rather than to the
whole of the opera.
See Borodtn, Atexander Porftr'yevtch. Staye Mustc. in The New Grove Dictionary of
Music and Musicians (ed. by Stanley Sadie). London. 1980. III/61.

Studta Mustcoloytca Academtae Sczenttarum Mur^yartcae33, 1991

Zs. Domotc)s:The E7picDtmens?,on

?,nBorodtn'sPrtnce Igor

145

Galitskyis praised.The ending is not characteristicof the sublime,solemn

tone of The Storyof Igor'sArrnyor the byliny.27However,the same tone is
typical of the chorusin C majorwhich Borodinoriginallywanted to be the
finale.28Wecansupposethat this returnto the "sphereof eternity"mighthave
been Borodin'sintentionaccordingto which he would have endedthe opera
with PrinceIgor incitingthe peopleof fight and the chorusrespondingin the
elevatedtone of the Prologueand Act 1.
It is not only in The Storyof Igor'sArrnythat we can see a predestined
courseof eventsor the principleofpredetermination.
It is a generalphenomenon
reflectingthe attitudeof the feudalsocietyof the age and especiallytypical of
the historicalaccountsof the chronicles.Victory is the revelationof GEod's
mercy. This is how the Ktew Chrontcle(before 1185) describesSvyatoslav
Vselovod'svictoryover the Polovtsians:"TheLordin his mercygave victory
to the Russianprince."Accordingly,the defeatof the Russiansis regardedas
God's punishment.
It is not only the dramatizationof the operawherethe influenceof the
doubleviewpoint,the simultaneousexistenceof eternityand a realistichistoric
level can be detected.The linguisticcharacteristicsof PrtnceIgor, that is the
style of the librettomanifestthe relationshipbetweenTheStoryof Igor'sArmy
and the operaeven moreclearlythan the parallelismsin the musicor dramatization.T. Tcherednichenko,
the young Soviet musichistorian,analysingthe
opera'stext from a literary point of view discoverssome importantidentical linguisticfeaturesin the text of the epic andBorodin'slibretto.29
"Being a free translationand adaptation,Borodin'stext keeps the epic
tone of and the artisticstructuralprinciplesbehindits originalsourcenot only
on the wholebut also in the moreelaborateddetails.This embodiesthe poetic
valuesof the libretto,and it is even moreevidentwhenit is comparedwith the
translationsof The Storyof Igor'sArmythat Borodinmay have been familiar
with.Borodincreatedhis ownpoeticstyle influencedby two significantfactors:
the Russianheroicepic and folk poetryon the one handand mid-19thcentury
Russian poetry on the other."
Tcherednichenko's
most importantpoint in our analysis of the libretto's
style is that the double viewpoint in our analysis of the epic prevails in
the opera,too: Borodinuses linguisticmeans,as well in orderto contrastthe
charactersof PrinceIgor and VladimirGEalitsky.
This can be seen in the way
they talk and in the formof the praisesaddressedto them. Igor'sstyle is lofty
27 Byliny: heroic
28 This chorus in

epic, a genre of Russian folk poetry.

C major is at present the opening chorus of the Prologue. Originally, Borodin intended to use it in the finale and it was only later (in 1880) that he put it
into the Prologues.
29 T. qepegH"MeHEo;
SOpODUH
KaK noam. in: CoseTcKa My3blKa1978/8. 94.
Studia MusicoloSica Academiae Scientiarum Ilunancae
10

33,1991

146

Ze.Dornokos:The Epic Dirnension*n Borodin'sPrince Igor

This duality
whileGalitsky'stext is interwovenwith sayingsand proverbs.30
to the style of The Story of Igor's Army. Thelanguageof the epicis
corresponds
remarkablycomples and varied: in addition to the oratoricallanguage,it
containtselements like proverbsand salutations,as well. The languageof
PrinceIgor'spraiseis similarto the languageof bylinies,it is full of similesand
metaphoresand what is even moresignificant:the praiseis extendedinto the
infinityof time and space:3l
H...
C AOHa BeJI"KOrO

CJIaByHO>TBaM.
B 3eMSXHe3HaeMbIX

(Youare glorifiedfromthe big Don to the unknownsteppes.)

As opposedto this, VladimirGalitskyis praised"only"until the morning
inthe spiritfolksongsof praise:
0 yTpa.
BeSHMaSH
KHM3SB HeCHflX

(Theprincewas praisedwith songstill next morning.)32

In medievalRussianliteraturethe contrastof the actualpresentand the
eternalis expressedby the style, as well:
"In the caseof primarythemesliteratureis imbuedwith loftine,ssand its
languageand style are clearlydistinguishedfrom those of everydayspeach.
In the case of secondarythemesliteratuteis simpler,morepracticaland more
modest,it is of a lowerqualityboth in its languageand its origin,"Lihachow
writes.33The assumptionthat the differentiationbetween the texts of the
individualcharactersis owingto the influenceof the epic is supportedby the
fact Borodinwas thoroughlyfamiliar with the complexity of its language.
The presenceof this complexityin the librettoof the operacouldonly be the
resultof a deliberateddecision.Borodintries to keep the poetic devices of the
epic, or adaptthem to the languageof the libretto.He doeshis bestto kwp the
alliterationof the firststropheinYaroslavna'slament,he even subordinatescertain living formsof 19th centuryRussianto the soundingrulesin the te2rtof
the lament.34He tries to keep the atmosphereof the imagesbut avoidstylized
cannot know all of them." See
Scene 2, Act I).
(Yaroslavna-Galitsky
125.
18,
Note
in
cited
score
the piano
(Prologue).
28.
18,
Note
in
cited
score
piano
the
31 See
32See the piano score cited in Note 18, 69. (Scene 1, Act I).
13. in Cherednichenkoop.
33. ^"xaMeB: nepffble ceMbcom Xem pyscKou Xumepamypbl.
cit. 98
of Kievan-Rus
34An expressionthat used to belong to the rare eastern vocabulary
historian, Listova. Later
was discoveredin the Konchak-air(Act II) by the Soviet music
the Russian language.
this word "changa'n,meaning woman slave, disappearedfromsopoauRa.
in: Coo6meHns
n.
See H. JIISCTOBa:}13 usmopuu c038anuS onepu gHR3b 8Opb A.
34.
1953.
l\locKsa,
l\ly3bIKa.
15.
HyMep
lzICKyCCTB.
}3ICTOpTIIS
}3IHCTTITyTa
30 For example "Thereare many girls in the world,I

Studia MusicoloSica Academiae Sei4ntgrum Hunaorscae 33,1991

Zs. Dornokos:The Epic D*mension*n Borodin'sPrince Igor

147

archaisms and therefore replacesthem with tropes as is the case with the adapted version of Svyatoslav's "speech" in Prince Igor's air in C sharp tninor. Borodin follows the descriptive structure of TheStoryof Igor'sArrnybut shortens
the rhetoric parts by keeping only the Inost typical:

The Storyof Igor'sArrny:

XHR3b BcesonoR

BenHxHZ
IzI3SasaJIeMa

nn

nOCTOSTb

3a

TbI

Be,Rb

A AOH
ica6bI

He 3aMblcnnn

TbI

OT7OBCKHZ CTOS?

3naTon

Bonry

MOnCemb

secnaMu

BbIrInecKaTb}

SeJIOMaMH BbIMepHaTb.
TbI,

XHMXCe,

6bIn

6bI 3,^ecb

To pa6bIHZ 6bI Enu 3a 6e3RenHuy,

A pa6bIrIocaMo;irIoMenoZ.
TbI

BeAb

MOEeSb

CTpeSHTb,

CSOBHO

ctpenaMu.

YAaSbIMH CbIHaMH rSe60BbIM".

(Grand Prince, Vsevolod !

Can you not fly here from far away, if only in your thoughts,
to defend your paternal golden throne ?
You, who spill the water of the Volga with oars
and can scoop the water out of the Donets with oars !
If you were here.
the Polovtsian women would be sold cheap
and the prisoners even cheaper.
You, whose hands
throw living flames on land
the brave sons of Glleb.)
Borodin:
TbI, BCeBOSOA BeSZKHM, TbI

BecnaMu

pa36pbl3raTb

Movemb

Bonry,

IlJeSOMOB BbIMepHaTb BeCb AOH.

TbI pyCCKHMMKOCTbMMWany

He3acbInan.

(Grand Prince, Vsevolod ! You spill the water of the Volga with oars and can
scoop the water out of the Donets with helmets. You did not strew the Kayala
with Russian bones.)
The fact that Borodin took over the original verse structures is the most
convincing proof of the great effort he made to follow the style of the epic as
10*

Studia Musicoloyica ilcademiae Sczentiarum ffunsaricae 33,1991

t
148

'+

Zs. Domokos:The Epic Dztnensionin Borodin'sPrtnceIgor

closelyas possiblein the languageof the libretto.Tcherednichenko

compares
the openinglines of TheStoryof Igor'sArrny(Prooemium)to the beginningof
the openingchorusof the Prologue. In his opinionthe individuallines are
arrangedinto closedimages by the threefoldbasis of the subject, form and
general circumstancesof the plot. This structure, which itself contains a
three-partinner repetition,is repeatedthree times ;at the beginningof The
Storyof Igor's Arrny:
Te

pacTeKagq

-tCnud

|BOnKOMl

_+

Fig. 1

(Becaqbse
Boyan,the magician,whenhe wantedto singa songaboutsomething,
ran up the tree as a mousein the forest,ran on the earth as a gray wolf, flew
underthe cloudsas a grayeagle.)
e

nena

M0St1

[cT8naByl

MRoMaiH

,<

Fig. 2

(Thenhe let ten hawksdown onto the groupof swans:the one on which the
hawk swoopeddown sang first about the old and wise Yaroslav,about the
braveMstislas,who slew Rededain front of the Circassiantroops,and about
Svyatoslav'sson, the beautifulRoman.)
<>
(t)

He Aecflrs
^*KonoB

Ha

CO-

CTalO

ngeAeu

HO

nepcrs

Ha CTpyHbl

OHe

wKeca8" -_<4naByb

BOcKrWan

poKoTanu

H2nycHan

KHR3bflH

\/
|

Fig. 3

(And, oh my brethren,it was not ten hawks Boyan sent onto the group of
swans,no, but he put his magicfingerson the living strings:and they sangthe
Prince'spraise.)
The chorusof praisein the Prologuehas beensamestructure:
(W

lcnasal

lcnaBal

MX-<t>

Fig. 4
Studia Musicolorica Acadamive SienXivrum Ilunsvricae 33, 1991

(X

Z8.

|cnasa

KnaH

5/<

Domokos:The EjpicDimension in Borodin'sPrince Igor

149

(To the beautifulsun glory,glory,glory,in our skies,

To PrinceIgor glory,glory,glory,on our Russiansoil.)
Borodinnot only formallyadheresto the threefoldrepetitionin the lines
of the epic, but he also followsthe structureof its text accordingto its chain
of thoughts. In the openinglines of The Storyof Igor'sArmy cited above, a
statement about a person (Boyan ran as a gray wolf ...) is followedby a
statementwith a personification(the swan sang the glory...) and then the
synthesisof the two is createdin the thirdline (Boyandid not sendten hawks,
but his fingersonto the strings.).Thereis a similarstructurein the praiseof
PrinceIgor in the opera.Here, however,a line with a personification(to the
beautifulsunglory)is followedby a linewith a personin it (to PrinceIgorglory)
and then the symbolreplacingthe nameof the personbecomesan epithet and
thus the personand the symbol are united:To the wild bison, PrinceTrubchevsky, to the ferociousbison, Vsevolod,glory, glory, to the prince glory,
glory,. . . on Russiansoil.
In Borodin'slibrettothe structureof the thirdlinebecomesmore comples
also becausethe internalrepetitionis interruptedby namingthe subject (the
prince) twice:

(X

i3

IcnaBa]

HnH

r>,

03

Icnasal

FiE\S

X
Fig. 5

When comparingthe repetitionsin The Storyof Igor'sArmy,we did not

answerthe questionwhetherit was really the influenceof the epic that we
recognizedin the repetitivestructureof the opera.The repetitionsthemselves
do not prove this, but the influenceof the theory of "ancientstructurewith
doublemeaning",whoseeffect canbe provedobjectivelywith linguisticmeans,
can clearlybe shownin 13orodin's
opera.And it is esactly with the help of the
doubleviewpointof the epic that the maincharacteristicof the opera'sdramatization can be understood.Thus, lookingback from the end of our analysis,
the dramaticparallelismsof the epic and the opera,with the repetitionsas part
of them, cannotbe merecoincidences,either.

Studia MusicoloSica jlcaderniae Scientiarum EunSaricae 33,199]