This article intends to address some of the representative pre-Stanislavskian discourses which existed in Russia concerning its theatre and acting. The Stanislavsky System is a product of the tradition of Russian theatre rather than a totally new invention by Constantin Stanislavsky (1863-1938). However, while Stanislavsky's artistic ideals and his System are still considered important and studied by the people in theatrical arts, the previous discourses about acting which influenced the Stanislavsky System are rather neglected. The ignorance of the discourses to which the foundation of the Stanislavsky System was indebted to can cause not only the misconception that the identity of the system is something separated from other theatrical legacies but also a rigid or prejudiced definition of the suystem when one questions what the Stanislavsky System is. In order to well illuminate the identity of the Stanislavsky System as a principle for good acting, it is necessary to understand what efforts and discussions prepared for the birth of the system. Understanding by what tradition it was formed can make us avoid any dogmatic approaches to it and use it as a foothold for new theatrical discourses in right ways. With this purpose, I will focus primarily on the discourses produced by the three actors of the nineteenth century, Vasily Andreyevich Karatygin (1802-1853), Paul Stepanovich Mochalov (1800- 1848), and Michael Semyonovich Shchepkin (1788-1863). Through them, I am going to examine the major aspects of nineteenth century conversations on Russian acting which influenced the development of Stanislavsky’s artistic theory. In the discussions on Karatygin, Mochalov and Shchepkin, the foreshadowing elements of Stanislavsky’s systematical theorization are found. Karatygin and Mochalov produced the first remarkable discourses about native Russian acting by their acting methods which were contrasting to each other. Karatygin approached his role primarily from the outer aspects rather than psychology of character. On the other hand, Mochalov concentrated his effort on the inner psychology of his role while neglecting any exterior technique. An effort to combine these two actors’ merits is found in Shchepkin. Throughout his theory and practice, Shchepkin pursued naturalness in acting and an earnest attitude toward art. In addition, he developed them into the tradition of the Maly Theatre in Moscow which influenced Stanislavsky. On the foundation of the previous discourses about acting, Stanislavsky formed his famous “system” in which he realized consistent creative state, naturalness, and discipline in the actor’s work. Stanislavsky’s system, therefore, is not a totally new invention that broke from the past but is located in certain tradition of the Russian theatre.