In solving the question of the time when the first historical works appeared in Russia, an important place belongs to establishing the origins of the Novgorod chronicle. In the last century, the beginning of the Novgorod chronicle tradition was usually attributed to the XI century (approximately to the middle of it)1 . Some authors have suggested the possibility of chronicle records appearing in Novgorod as early as the tenth century. 2 A. A. Shakhmatov dated the first Novgorod record to 1017, and the first chronicle to 1050 .3 The idea that the first Novgorod chronicle was compiled in the 50s of the XI century was developed on the basis of new material by B. A. Rybakov [4]. However, many modern experts (including followers of A. A. Shakhmatov) doubt the existence of the Novgorod chronicle earlier than the 12th century .5Skepticism about the possibility of the existence of the Novgorod chronicle of the XI century stems from a certain assessment of the nature of the Russian chronicles, which consists in the desire to reduce the entire chronicle to one tree, coming from a common root. The recognition of the existence of the Novgorod chronicle parallel to Kiev inevitably undermined the idea of a single tree and required a rethinking of the general approach to the study of chronicle materials. In this paper, the task is to provide an additional argument in favor of the very fact of the existence of the early Novgorod chronicle, as well as some clarifications regarding its composition. As for the way of its following according to all-Russian or Novgorod chronicle works, the solution of this question at this stage cannot go beyond preliminary assumptions. A close acquaintance with the chronicle material shows that even for the preliminary distribution of texts in their interrelationship, it is not necessary to use the following methods:- 1 Cf. S. M. Solovyov. The history of Russia since ancient times. Book II. Moscow, 1960, p. 4. 99; I. Senigov. Historical and critical st ... Read more