The President and Fellows of Harvard College
BYZANTIUM AND THE EASTERN SLAVS AFTER 1453
Author(s): IHOR ŠEVČENKO
Source: Harvard Ukrainian Studies, Vol. 2, No. 1 (March 1978), pp. 5-25
Published by: Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41035764 .
Accessed: 30/09/2014 19:09
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
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 [email protected].
.
Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute and The President and Fellows of Harvard College are collaborating
with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Harvard Ukrainian Studies.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 216.251.195.190 on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 19:09:38 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
BYZANTIUM AND THE EASTERN SLAVS
AFTER 1453*
IHOR SEVCENKO
To Kenneth
M. Setton
I
Sometimebetween1466and 1472,a merchantfromTver'bythenameof
Afanasij Nikitintraveledfromhis nativecity,which is northwestof
Moscow, to a place in India southeastof Heyderabad.There,he must
have come across a largestatueof Buddha; in any case, in a big temple
complex,he saw an idol whichhe called "But" and about whichhe had
thisto say: "Butb is carvedout of stone,is verybig,and raiseshis right
* Thefirst
draft
ofthisessaywasreadat a Dumbarton
OaksSymposium
backin
1968. It has been writtenmostlyfromsources. Thus, to take an example fromthevery
beginning,the opening paragraphs of the essay go back to Afanasij Nikitin's Travelogue and Epiphanius the Wise's Letterto Cyrilof Tver1,ratherthanto theinformative
article by D. A. Belobrova, "Statuja vizantijskogo imperatoraJustinianav drevnerusskix pis'mennyx istoõnikax i ikonografii," Vizantijskij vremennik 17 (1960):
114-23. Understandably,practicallyall the sources on which the presentessay rests
have appeared in print.Only in two instancesdid I relyon unpublishedmaterial.The
manuscriptsalluded to on pp. 14-15 and 17-18 below are Sinaiticus Graecus 1915,
fols. 28v-60 (Paisios Ligarides' Answers to the Tsar's Sixty-One Questions) and
Jerusalem,Panagiou Taphou 160,especiallyfols. lv,153v-154,258v,259v-260v
(Paisios
Ligarides' Prophecies).
An essay is best read without encumberingfootnotes,and I have followed this
principlehere. Still, I wish to mentiontwo works,separated by a century,in orderto
provide the reader with some perspectiveand with a minimum of bibliographical
guidance. The early (and still quite useful) book is by F. A. Ternovskij, Izuöenie
vizantijskojistoriiiee tendencioznoeprilozenie v drevnejRusi, vol. 1 (Kiev, 1875), vol.
2 (Kiev, 1876); the recentmonographwhich,in space and time,goes over much of the
ground covered in the present essay, is by William K. Medlin and Christos G.
Patrinelis, Renaissance Influences and Religious Reforms in Russia [ = Etudes de
philologie et d'histoire,18] (Geneva, 1971). The superb monograph by B. L. Fonkiõ,
Greâesko-russkiekul'turnyesvjazi v XV-XVII vv. (Moscow, 1977), deals only with
thefateofGreek manuscriptsin Muscovy. It does, however,devote importantpages to
two figurestouched upon in the present essay, Arsenij Suxanov and Arsenius of
Elasson.
This content downloaded from 216.251.195.190 on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 19:09:38 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
6
IHOR SEVCENKO
theemperorofConstantinople":
handup and extendsitas does Justinian,
Nikitin
was referring
to Justinian's
carb
Carjagradsky.
aky Ust'janb
famousequestrianstatue.As faras we know,Nikitinhad neverbeen to
Constantinople;anyhow,by thistime,thatstatuehad, in all likelihood,
beentorndownby MehmetII. This statueis mentionedbutthricein Old
Russian literature.On the otherhand, we know thatabout 1400, the
painterTheophanestheGreekhad drawna pictureofSt. Sophia,together
with the Augusteionwhere Justinianstood, for the benefitof the
Muscovites;thatthe Muscovitescopied his patternon manyicons;and
of Justinian'sequestrian
that their copies included a representation
statue.It is one such icon thatAfanasijmusthave been recallingin his
travelogue.For the art historian,then,Nikitin'sreferenceis a minor
problem,witha readysolution.
It is notso fortheintellectualhistorian.For him,itis ofimportanceto
in Byzantium'ssurvivalin EasternEurope
be able to tellthoseinterested
timeshad
Russianmerchantofpost-Byzantine
thatwhena half-educated
fora newexperienceina farawayland,the
to providea frameofreference
firstthinghe thoughtof was a statueof a Byzantineemperor,whichhe
had neverseen.
This essay will not be about the causes of events,the meaningof
PatriarchNikon's reform,or Muscovite librarycatalogues. It will be
about statesof mindand about people,some likeAfanasijNikitin,some
more sophisticatedthan he, who had to accommodatetheirframesof
reference
to the factthat Byzantiumwas no more.
II
The storiesof the Conquest of Constantinoplein 1453 read in Eastern
Europe fall into two kinds:the shortchronicleentriesand the longer
reports.The shortentriesmade in local chroniclesseem to have been
withtheeventitself.Yet, oddlyenough,none of
roughlycontemporary
thembewailedthefateof theOrthodoxGreekChristians.In fact,most
did not expresslymentionthe Greeksat all whenspeakingof thecity's
fall.One shortchronicleentrywas peculiarand a signofthingsto comeit containeda remarkto the effectthat,althoughhe took the city,the
sultandid not discontinuethe "Russian" faiththere- thismusthave
meanttheOrthodoxfaith,sincethetwowereapparently
equated.On the
with
the
otherhand,all thelongerreportssympathize
Greeks,but,except
forthe Dirge of JohnEugenikostranslatedintoSlavonic by 1468,they
are not contemporarywiththe event;at least,theyappear in chrono-
This content downloaded from 216.251.195.190 on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 19:09:38 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
BYZANTIUM AND THE EASTERN SLAVS AFTER 1453
7
logical compilationsno earlierthanthesixteenthcentury.Accordingly,
theChronographof 1512,whichclosed witha dirgeofSlavonicoriginon
theconquestof thecity,showedempathywiththeGreeks.However,the
author's point of view was that of Orthodoxyin general,ratherthan
Byzantiumalone. The Greek Empire was mentionedalong withthe
Serbian,Bosnian,and Albanianempires,and towardsthedirge'send,a
passage destinedforfamein thehistoryof Muscovitepoliticalideology
proclaimedthat while theseempireshad fallen,"Our Russian land is
growing,gettingeveryounger,and moreexalted;mayChristallow itto
become rejuvenatedand spread its boundariesuntilthe end of time."
The reason forthisstateof affairsis thatthe fall of Constantinople,
was notthemostdecisiveevent
whichforus is sucha landmarkinhistory,
in theshapingof Muscoviteintellectual
attitudestowardslateByzantium
and the post-Byzantine
world. That decisiveeventwas the Council of
Florence.To theMuscovites,whathappenedat Florencewas thebetrayal
oftheOrthodoxfaithbytheGreekemperor,theGreekpatriarch,
and the
of
Greeks.
The
a
Council Florence,too, gave riseto number
silver-loving
of Muscoviteworks.In them,theGreekapostasywas contrasted,more
as timewenton, withtheunswerving
and morestridently
Orthodoxyof
the Muscoviteprince.
As long as theCouncil of Florencerankled,timeswerenotpropitious
for spreadinggeneraltreatisesabout the end of Byzantium,since such
textscould not but arouse sympathyforthe hapless,if shifty,Greeks.
Whenthetreatiseswerespread,theyweremade to servethepurposesof
the Muscovites,not those of the Greeks.
Muscovitebookmenknewtwocontradictory
thingsto be trueat once:
that
the
Greek
and
knew,
wrote,
they
Empirehad failedin its faithat
Florencebeforeit failedpoliticallyon thewallsoftheimperialcity.Yet,
theyalso knewthattheirown Orthodoxfaith,and more,had come from
the Greek Empire.Knowingtwo contradictory
thingsat thesame time
makes one feel uncomfortable.With Muscovitebookmen,this led to
and, later,towardstheGreeks.
ambiguousattitudestowardsByzantium,
Occasional ambiguitytowardsByzantiumhad been withthe Eastern
of thatregionand the Primary
Slav eliteeversincetheChristianization
Chronicleis a good witnessto this;afterthe city'sfall, however,this
ambiguitywas to become more frequentand ever more painful.The
Greekshad proved,and wereto proveagain inthecourseofthesixteenth
and seventeenthcenturies,unreliablein theirfaith.Their empirewas
and defiledbytheTurks.Yet theMuscovitebookmenofabout
prostrate,
1500 and for a centuryafterwardscould point to no new frameof
This content downloaded from 216.251.195.190 on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 19:09:38 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8
IHOR SEVCENKO
historicalreference
and to no new systemof culturalvalues otherthan
thatwhichtheirpredecessorshad takenover fromByzantium.
The Russian writerEpiphaniusthe Wise dated the timeat whicha
Permiansas
special alphabet was createdfor the newly-Christianized
follows:"The alphabetforthe Permianswas createdin theyear6883 thatis 1375- 120 yearsbeforetheend oftheworldwas expectedat the
whileJohnwas emperorof theGreeks,
end of the seventhmillennium,
while Philotheoswas patriarch,while Mamaj was rulerof the Horde,
whileDmitrijIvanoviõwas princeof Rus' - as we see, DimitrijDonskoj
in Rus',and while
comesin lastplace - whiletherewas no metropolitan
we werewaitingforsomeoneto come fromConstantinople."
century.Yet
Epiphaniuswas writingat the beginningof thefifteenth
formuchof
framework
to
continued
providechronological
Byzantium
Russian historicalwritingor compilationsafterthe fall,as well. The
Chronographof 1512- whichwe alreadyknow- is dividedintochapters.Whenthisworldchronicle'snarrativecomes to thefourthcentury,
each ofthechaptersopenswiththeentry"ruleofemperorsuchand such"
or "Greek Empire,"in whichByzantinehistoryis givenand whereupon
othereventsfollow.
What was trueforthe principleof generalorganizationheldtruefor
thecorrelationsbetweensingleevents.Whenone ofthechroniclescame
on theUgra
up to theyear1480,whichincludedthefamousconfrontation
RiverbetweenIvan III and theTartarkhan,it exhortedtheRussiansto
act withvigoragainsttheHagarenes,so as to avoid thefateofotherlands
which had been conquered by the Turk, like Trebizond and Morea.
When,toward 1550,a writer- eitherthetsar'sadviserSil'vestror his
thetsar's
Makarij- addressedIvan theTerriblepredicting
metropolitan
in
four
events
he
world
of
of
the
Kazan',
history:
quoted
empire
conquest
of the four,only one was Russian - namely,this veryconfrontation
betweenthe haughtytsar of the GreatHorde,Ahmet,and Ivan III. He
put it side by side withone biblicaland two Byzantinevictories,won by
thepeopleofGod againsttheinfidel.The biblicalone was theslaughterof
the warriorsin Sennacherib'sarmyunderthe walls of Jerusalemat the
handoftheangeloftheLord; theByzantineones werethetwolongArab
sieges of Constantinople:under ConstantinePogonatus (674-78) and
to
under Leo III (717). By thisdevice,the authorwas demonstrating
on theUgrawas a historicaleventofworldwide
Ivan IV thatthestand-off
and thatthefall of Kazan' would be another.
significance,
Parallels between rulerswere even easier to establish than those
betweenevents.Constantine,Theodosius,and JustiniantheGreatwere
This content downloaded from 216.251.195.190 on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 19:09:38 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
BYZANTIUM AND THE EASTERN SLAVS AFTER 1453
9
themostpopularmodelsheldout to theIvans,Aleksejs,and Fedors.Bad
as well.Here Phocas easilywon
rulershad theirByzantinecounterparts,
Ivan
on points,followedbyConstantineCopronymus.Not surprisingly,
theTerriblewas mostoftenquoted in suchcompany.Byzantineprelates,
too, wereintroducedforpurposesofcomparison.WhenIvan theTerrible
condemnedhis formeradvisor,Sil'vestr,in absentia,thiswas likenedto
the condemnationof John Chrysostom.A centurylater,the patriarch
Nikon consoled himselfby recitingthe examplesof Byzantineprelates
who had been banishedand yet later returnedto theirthrones:John
Chrysostom,again, and Athanasiusthe Great.
a tsarin theartofgoverning,
to puta
Whetherthetaskwas to instruct
hereticon thestake,to condonethemorethanfourmarriagesofIvanthe
abdicatedwhenhe
Terrible,or to trap a patriarchwho improvidently
should not have,a Byzantinelegal,historical,or hagiographicalpassage
was put to good use, and to thepracticalexclusionof any other.A tsar
would be feda quotationfromthesixthnovelofJustinianabout priesthood and empire,and thequotationwould be reinforced
byexemplaof
love betweenmenofspiritand menofaction,culledfromtheOld Testamentand fromByzantinehistory:Constantinethe Great loved Pope
Silvester,Theodosius I, Gregoryof Nazianzus, and Arcadius, John
Chrysostom.A synodof Russianbishopswouldprovetheillegalcharacter of the fourthmarriageby referring
to Leo VI, the emperor,and
Nicholas, the patriarch.When it came to dealing with the heretic
Judaizersaround 1500,it was pointedout thatEmpressTheodora and
her son Michael had condemned many heretics- among themthe
Since,
patriarchIannij,or JohntheGrammarian- to lifeimprisonment.
however,theJudaizershad to be punishedwithdeath,St. Theodosia was
enrolledinto the holy ranks.Did she not killthe officialattempting
to
destroytheicon ofChristat theBrazenGate inConstantinoplebypulling
theladderout fromunderhim?JosephofVolokolamskwas themanwho
quoted St. Theodosia,forhe likedexamplesof resoluteactionin defense
of a righteouscause.
Whenevera historicalmiraclewas needed, a Byzantinemodel was
the
there,evenifitsmeaningwas to be put on itshead. Nestor-Iskinder,
of
the
author
Slavic
on
the
final
longest
report
purported
conquest,
describedhow,on theeveofthefallofthecity,a lightleftthechurchofSt.
Sophia throughthewindowsof thedome, turnedintoa ball offire,and
ascended to heaven - a sure sign that therewas no hope leftforthe
empire,now forsakenby God. AvraamijPalicyn,the monk of Sergius
TrinityLavra, describedthesiegeof his monasteryby thegodless Poles
This content downloaded from 216.251.195.190 on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 19:09:38 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
10
IHOR SEVCENKO
towardsthebeginningoftheseventeenth
century.He observedmuchthe
same thing,but in his versionthe lightdescendedfromheaven,turned
into a ball of fireand enteredhis churchthrougha windowabove.
Ill
All Muscovite political ideology developed afterByzantium'sfall dead
roughly,in thefirsthalfofthesixteenth
century- but Byzantium,
and alive, remainedthe centralpoint of referencefor all of it. The
Muscovitebookmenaimedat securingforMoscow a meaningful
placein
thesequenceofworldhistoryand a centralspotintheworldoftruefaith.
Since,in 1492- thatis,theyear7000- theendoftheworldshouldhave
occurredbut didn't,the metropolitanof Moscow, Zosima, published
Paschal Tables for subsequentyears. In the preface,he establisheda
historicalsequencefromConstantinetheGreatthroughVladimirofKiev
to Ivan III. He called Ivan thenewConstantine- whichwas routineand Moscow,thenewConstantinople- whichwas said forthefirsttime
in Russian recordedhistory.Philotheosof Pskov's familiartheoryof
Moscow as theThirdRome restedon thetwinpillarsofthefailureofthe
Greekfaithat theCouncilofFlorenceand thefailureofGreekarmsinthe
Second Rome. The Story of the Princes of Vladimir,composed by
Spiridon-Sava,a prelatewho had been to Constantinople,had Prince
VladimirMonomax obtain both the regaliaand theimperialtitlefrom
theByzantineemperorConstantineofthesamefamilyname.The regalia
were said to have been transmittedto Kiev by a metropolitan,two
bishops,and threeByzantineofficials.Neitherthemetropolitannorthe
bishops are known from any episcopal list; the title of Praefectus
Augustalisof Egyptwas mistakenfora propername,but thepointwas
made.
The Storyof the Princesof Vladimiralso tracedthe lineage of the
Muscovite,princesback to Caesar Augustusofthe
Kievan,and therefore
old FirstRome. Here we seem to lose the scentleadingus to Constantinople - in fact, scholars have not yet establishedby what means
Augustusappeared in the Kremlin.But evenat thispoint,I submit,we
ifviaa Serbiandetour.Serbianprincely
mightgetto Byzantium,
genealoofConstantinethe
gieslinkedtheSerbianprincesand thebrother-in-law
Great,EmperorLicinius,who was, ofcourse,said to havebeena Serbian
himself.In turn,Constantine,or so thesamechroniclessay,was notonly
of Rascian, i.e., Serbian,blood, butalso a relativeof Caesar Augustus.
This content downloaded from 216.251.195.190 on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 19:09:38 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
BYZANTIUM AND THE EASTERN SLAVS AFTER 1453
11
We knowthatthe Muscoviteprincesof theearlysixteenthcenturywere
Serbian princes of the
related by marriageto the semi-independent
fifteenth.
Princelygenealogies may have wanderedwith brides from
Serbia up north.We are also sure that the author of the Storyof the
Princesof Vladimirknew Serbian literature,since he inserteda long
passage froma Serbian workinto his text.
Centers,politicalor ecclesiastical,whichvied withMoscow or were
benton assertingtheirindependencefromit,reliedon thesame- thatis,
The eulogistof PrinceBorisAleksanByzantine- frameof reference.
droviéof Tver',a citywhichwas Moscow's rivalfora time,treatedhis
hero like a Byzantineemperor,comparinghim to Augustus,Justinian,
Leo theWise,and Constantine.The storyoftheNovgorodianwhitecowl,
the archbishopof Nova headgearwhichfor some timedistinguished
gorod fromall otherprelatesof Russia, attributedthe cowl's originto
Pope Sylvesterand quoted the Slavic version of the Donation of
Constantine.The cowl covered the distance betweenSt. Peter's and
Novgorod by stoppingin Constantinople.And when it floatedby sea
fromRome to theimperialcity,itduplicateda famousvoyagewhichthe
icon of Maria Romana had made in theoppositedirectionat thebeginthecowl was sent
ningof the Iconoclasticperiod.FromConstantinople,
to
on Novgorod,presumablyby the patriarchPhilotheos.
Dependence on Byzantiumdid not necessarilymean a respectforthe
ByzantineEmpire.In elaboratingtheideologyof theirstate,Muscovite
bookmenalso restedtheircase on the ever-unblemished
Orthodoxyof
theirprinces,and on thehereditary
principleoftheseprinces'succession.
Byzantiumcould not boast theformer- witnessConstantineCopronymus- and in principledid notadhereto thelatter.Muscoviteautocratic
constructs,
powercould bejustifiedwithoutthehelpofelaborateliterary
to God, antiquity,and local tradition,and this
simplyby referring
methodwas openlyapplied,both by Ivan III and Ivan IV. Bytheseventeenthcenturythe Muscovitescould deridethe Greeksand theirpast,
sincetherehad beenGreekemperorswhotaughtevilinthechurch,armed
themselvesagainsttheholyicons,and became worsethanpagans. How
ifsome oftheseemperorswerelikeLeo the
could it have beenotherwise,
Armenian,who not only was of no imperiallineage,but did not even
belongto the Greeknation?
But theMuscovitedefianceoftheGreekhad a reverseeffect,
ofa kind
whichin individualbehaviorpsychologistscall "delayedobedience."A
local Constantinopolitan
synodwas asked to confirmIvan IV's imperial
coronationof 1547. This happened in 1561. In 1590, anothersynod,
This content downloaded from 216.251.195.190 on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 19:09:38 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
12
IHOR SEVCENKO
thecreationoftheMuscovite
whichdubbeditselfecumenical,confirmed
was
Greeks'
the
Thus,
soughton each of thetwo
approval
patriarchate.
occasionswhenMuscovitesmade stepstowardsideal supremacywithin
the Orthodoxworld. Finally,in 1666,whenPatriarchNikon had to be
crushed,those who sat in judgmentover him,and strippedhim of his
insignia,were the patriarchsof Antiochand Alexandria. In 1592, a
unique device appeared in the letterwhich Moscow's newlycreated
to Greek
Job,addressedto Constantinople.The letterreferred
patriarch,
ecclesiasticscomingfrom"theGreekEmpire,"to a council"ofthewhole
GreekEmpire"stillto be heldat Constantinople,and to conciliardecisions made, and prayerssaid, both in "the Russian and in the Greek
to "all thecitiesand placesoftheGreek
Empire."Once,Jobevenreferred
make-believe
worldwas createdinwhich
a
For
after
1453,
once,
Empire."
the body of the Eastern
within
not
was
alive
just
again,
Byzantium
church,butside byside withtheempireof Muscovy.The prize- thatof
obtainingpatriarchalrank- was so considerablethatitwas worthwhile
fortheMuscovitechanceryto indulgein thereverieforthebenefitofthe
Greekprelates.
IV
The firstrecordedGreek refugeearrivedin Moscow seekingalms and
to hisfellow
ransomforhisfamilyin 1464,and was warmlyrecommended
Christiansby MetropolitanTheodosius. He was followedby a long
processionof otherrefugees- membersof Sophia Palaeologina's enabbots and monksfromAthos,Patmos,St. Sabas,
tourage,merchants,
Mt. Sinai, and even the Island of Milos, patriarchs,bishops, and
finally,ecclesiasticsdoubling as intellectuals.It is the last group that
interestsus most.OrthodoxEasternEurope soughttheguidance,or at
least the services,of Greek teachersand scholars for 250 years after
Byzantium'sfall.These Greekswerea variegatedgroupofpeople. From
villain.As
amongthemI shallsingleout a positiveheroand a resourceful
time
at the
be
allotted
will
less
the
extremes,though representative,
usual,
the
he
reflected
expense of the man in the middle,although probably
majorityof the Greek daskaloi, earningtheirhonestbread in Eastern
Europe,as did Arsenius,archbishopof Elasson, who lefthisteachingin
L'viv (Lemberg)to go to Moscow withPatriarchJeremiahII in 1588.
Maksim the Greek,our positivehero,came to Moscow in 1518,and
was a uniquephenomenonin thehistoryofMuscoviteculture.Thisis not
because he had spent time in Italy and broughtwith him storiesof
This content downloaded from 216.251.195.190 on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 19:09:38 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
BYZANTIUM AND THE EASTERN SLAVS AFTER 1453
13
Savonarola, Lodovico Sforza il Moro, and theneo-pagancirclesof the
Renaissance.In thesixteenthcenturyand later,otherGreekscomingto
Moscow had known the West as well as he. Maksim the Greek is so
importantbecause throughhim for the firstand only time between
Volodimerthe Great in the tenthcenturyand Ivan the Terriblein the
EasternEuropewas exposedto prolongedcontactwitha represixteenth,
sentativeof the refinedlayersof Byzantineculture.It is a pitythatthis
should have happened only afterByzantium'sfall. If the Muscovites
could followMaksim'sSlavic,whichhe neverthoroughly
mastered- he
locatives
his
and
more
Serbico, genitives
mixed,
theylearned,orcould
fromhim.In one
have learned,somethingabout Greeksecularliterature
of histreatises,he offeredtheplotofAeschylus'sOresteia;he quoted the
verseof
beginningof Hesiod's Worksand Days, and theseventy-fourth
the FifteenthBook of the Odyssey:"Treat a man well,whilehe is with
you,butlethimgo whenhe wishes,"a plea pro domo,sinceMaksimhad
been accused of heresyand interned.He knewhis mythology
and told
the Muscovitesthat Zeus gave birthto Pallas fromhis head. To my
knowledge,Maksim was also the onlyauthorin Old Rus'ian literature
beforetheseventeenth
centuryeverto haveusedthewords"Hellene"and
"Hellenic" in a positivesense.
Since he was a good Byzantine,however,Maksimsprinkledhisprose
withByzantineproverbs,ifbarelyrecognizableintheirSlavicgarb.I also
suspectthat he did not adduce the line fromthe Odysseydirectly,but
rememberedit fromthe early ByzantinerhetoricianAphthonios,who
quoted it in his collectionof set oratoricalpieces. It is probablythrough
AphthoniosthatMaksimintroducedhis Russian readersto thegenreof
an entryfromtheLexicon
ethopoiia;moreover,he insertedinhiswritings
of Suda, a sayingbyPseudo-MenanderfromStobaeus,and a storyon the
virtuousand chasteBelisarius.He could also transcendbothClassicism
and showan open mind.To theMuscoviteshespokeof
and Byzantinism
the existenceof a largeland called Cuba - politicallyone of his more
propheticstatements.His own Greekshe toldto freetheirsouls fromthe
illusoryand vain hope thattheimperialpowerin Constantinoplewould
as ithad beenbefore,orthattheGreekswouldarisefrom
be reestablished
the slumberof carelessnessand indifference
in whichtheyhad sunkfor
manyyears.
In termsof imponderableswhich bring one's downfall,Maksim's
troublewas his havingbeen too muchof a scholar.He talkedtoo much,
and he quoted his authoritiesas a scholarwould,eventhoughsome,like
Origenor Eusebius,weretaintedwithheresy.Beinga trueerudite,hedis-
This content downloaded from 216.251.195.190 on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 19:09:38 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
14
IHOR SEVCENKO
dained discussingBasil the Great and John Chrysostomat length,
because,he said,theyweretoo wellknown- a wrongapproachwiththe
Muscovites,who had always displayeda talentfordwellingon theobvious at length.Maksim showeda scholar'svanity- and a foreigner's
- whenhe made funof theold, and therefore
venerable,
impertinence
Slavic translatorswho had not been able to tellekklisia,'church',from
the verb ekklise,'to exclude'. Finally,Maksim displayedthe scholar's
hubris.Proud of his achievementsas correctorof the Psalter,he comoftheOld TestamentintoGreekpared himselfto thelatertranslators
Aquila, Symmachus,and Theodotion.Had he knownhis milieubetter,
he would have realizedthat some fiftyyearsbefore,an archbishopof
of the
Novgorod consideredtheseverytranslatorshereticalperverters
Maksim
on
thin
ice.
was
a
man
was
Writ.
Such
banished,
treading
Holy
and never allowed to leave Muscovy and see his beloved Athonite
ofVatopedi.It givesone foodforthoughtabout theMuscovy
monastery
centuriesto realizethatthishighlyculof thesixteenthand seventeenth
on thesign
turedByzantinewas longreveredin Russia forhisstatements
never
were
references
of the cross,whereashis classical
pickedup.
Of Arsenius,archbishopof Elasson,our middle-of-the-road
traveler,I
shall onlysay thathe was a leadingdaskalin theschool organizedbythe
of L'viv in the 1580s.He lefthis teacher'sposition
EpiphanyFraternity
thereto followPatriarchJeremiahII to Moscow in 1588,and he wrotea
and
descriptionof his tripin politicverseglued togetherby repetitions
in
ofthepatriarchate
assonancerhymes.He presentedtheestablishment
of
forthepatriarch Constantinople,
and
Moscow as a seriesof triumphs
wrotefromthe perspectiveof a hanger-onwithan emptystomachand
graspinghands.The mostdetaileddescriptionin Arsenius'spoemwas of
the vessels and table utensilsdisplayedat the banquet held afterthe
Russian metropolitanJob had been ordained patriarch.In Moscow,
himselfas a
Arseniusdid well; he residedin the Kremlin,distinguished
Muscovite
on
and
wrote
of
history.
contemporary
copyist manuscripts,
Our resourcefulvillain will be the metropolitanof Gaza, Paisios
Ligarides.From 1662 on, he was Tsar Aleksej'smainforeignexperton
themeansforbringingabout PatriarchNikon'sdownfall.Nearlyeveryagility- Byzantinephilologists
bodygrantshimlearningand intellectual
rememberhimforbringingPhotius'sSermonon the Rus'ian attackof
860 to Moscow,and shouldcommendhimforhisuse ofPhotius'sBibliotheca. Everybody- modern scholars and Paisios's contemporaries
adventurer.I
alike - condemnthelack of scruplesof thisinternational
careerofthisnotoriousman.Instead,I
shallnotdwellon thewell-known
This content downloaded from 216.251.195.190 on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 19:09:38 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
BYZANTIUM AND THE EASTERN SLAVS AFTER 1453
15
shallintroducea newfindand use itto suggestthatinat leastone aspectof
the Nikon affair,the unprincipledPaisios showed some consistencynamely,in fidelityto the Greekpointof view.
The findis a manuscriptof Sinai, perhapsthe autographof Paisios,
withanswersto thesixty-onequestionswhichTsar Aleksejhad secretly
posed to him in the presenceof the Boyar's Council*in all likelihood
sometimesoon after26 November1662. In the last century,Vladimir
Solov'ev observedthatthe Greekswho had come to Moscow to judge
Nikon condemnedhimforhisun-Byzantine
ways- thatis,forresisting
thetsar- butdisculpatedhimon countswherehe behavedlikea Byzantine- thatis, forfollowingGreekcustoms.The Sinai manuscriptbears
out Solov'ev's observation.To all thetsar'squestionsobliquelyattacking
Nikon,Paisios answeredto theformer'ssatisfaction.All thosetouching
a choice betweenthetraditionalMuscoviteand
on ritualand presenting
he answeredin favorof the latter.Could the
the Greek interpretation,
a
local
convoke
Synod? By all means. If a prelatetalksoffenemperor
the
is fitting
forhim?If out of
emperor,whatpunishment
sivelyagainst
histongueshouldbe cutout. Ifa
thencompassion.Ifotherwise,
stupidity,
bishopabdicates,does he retainpoweroverhissee? He does not.On the
otherhand, should the passage of the Credo run:"To whose Kingdom
thereis no end," ratherthan"shall be no end?" No. This is redolentof
Origen'sheresy.Should Alleluiabe sungtwoor threetimes?Three.How
do you make the signof the cross?Withthreefingers.And, finally,in
what letterswerethe wordsthatConstantinesaw in heavenwrittenLatin or Greek?In Greekletters,accordingto theviewof EmperorLeo
the Wise.
V
EverybodyagreedthatByzantiumfellon accountofitssins.Whatthese
sinsweredependedon thepointofviewand interests
oftheobserver.To
theMuscovites,whetherofthefifteenth
or
of
the
the
seventeenth,
century
mostgrievoussins of Byzantium,and therefore
of its heirs,theGreeks,
weretwo:themostseriousexplicitsinwas againstthefaith,and themost
seriousimplicitsin was to have lost.
Five years afterthe city'sfall, the metropolitanJonah held up the
example of the empireto the Lithuanianbishops,to deterthemfrom
to Orthoyieldingto the Pope. WhenConstantinopleremainedfaithful
doxy, it was invincible.The imperialcity had not sufferedfromthe
Bulgariansnor fromthe Persians,who kepthersevenyearsas in a net,
This content downloaded from 216.251.195.190 on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 19:09:38 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
16
IHOR SEVCENKO
because on that occasion - which,we mustassume, was the siege of
626 - she had keptherpiety.Bythemid-seventeenth
therewere
century,
the
had
lost
their
that
Greeks
that
the
and
Muscoenoughproofs
piety,
viteswerethesole depositoriesofit.At theMoscow Councilof 1666,the
Old BelieverAvvakumturnedto the Greek patriarchs,and to many
Greekprelatessittingin judgmenton him,with- as he put it - their
foxyRussianfollowerslisteningin,and said to them:"Your Orthodoxy
has becomevariegatedon accountoftheTurkishMohammed'sviolence.
Thereis nothingastonishingin this.You've come to be weak. Fromnow
on come to us to be taught.ByGod's gracethereis autocracyhere"- that
is, freedomfromforeigndomination.Avvakum'swordswererepeated
throughoutMuscovyboth by the Old Believersand by Orthodoxconservatives,and the Greeks were vulnerableto the argumentof lost
authorityand power.
At first,
theMuscovitecase appearedto haveone weakness.No matter
how tarnishedthe Greekfaithmay have subsequentlybecome,thefact
remainedthatthe Russes had gottentheirBaptismfromGreece.It was
a pointon theGreeksideduringthedisputationwhichtheyheld
certainly
withtheconservativeRussianmonkand collectorofGreekmanuscripts,
ArsenijSuxanov,in Moldavia in 1650.The GreekskeptaskingSuxanov:
"From where did you get your faith?You were baptized by us, the
Greeks."Two escapes fromthisimpassewerepossible.First,one could
say,"We got itfromGod, and not fromtheGreeks."Second, one could
referto a Slavic elaborationon an eighth-century
Byzantinelegend,and
maintain that the Russes had accepted baptism originallyfromthe
apostle Andrew,not fromtheGreeks.Suxanov used boththeseescapes,
but thenwentover to the offensive,
askingtheGreeksthemselvesfrom
wheretheythoughttheyhad receivedtheirbaptism.Whentheysaid they
had receivedit fromChristand his BrotherJames,Suxanov - an early
revisionistof Byzantinehistory- exploded this part of the mythof
notinChrist's
was no Greekmonopoly;certainly
Hellenism.Christianity
timein Palestine.Greeks,he knew,livedin Greeceand Macedonia while
Christand St. JameslivedinJerusalem.In Christ'stime,Jewsand Arabs,
not Greeks,lived there.The truthwas that the Greeksreceivedtheir
baptismfromSt. Andrew,preciselyas theRussesdid; hence,theywerein
no respectbetterthan the Russes. As forthe Greeks'claim to be "the
source"foreveryone,theyshould have considereda fewfacts:thefirst
Gospel, by Matthew,was writtenin Jerusalemforthe Jews,who had
believedin him,and not fortheGreeks.Ten yearslater,Mark wrotehis
Gospel in Rome fortheRomans,and notfortheGreeks.Hence,eventhe
This content downloaded from 216.251.195.190 on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 19:09:38 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
BYZANTIUMAND THE EASTERNSLAVSAFTER 1453
17
Romans were ahead in receivingthe glad tidings.The claim that the
Greekswerethe sourcefor"all of us" was just overbearingtalk;even if
theyhad once been thesource,it had driedup. The Turkishsultanlived
amongtheGreeks,yettheywereunableto givehimwaterand lead himto
thetruefaith.God's wordabouttheGreekshad cometrue.Theyhad been
firstand now werelast; theRusseshad beenlastand werenowfirst.The
Greekshave been leftbehind(zakosneli este). The conclusionfromall
thiswas thatthenormof whatwas Orthodoxand whatwas notlaywith
the Russiansof Suxanov's time,and not withthe Greeks.
VI
If the Muscovites could not easily abandon the Byzantineframeof
itstood to reasonthattheGreeks,whendealingwithMuscovy,
reference,
would adhereto it. In 1593thepatriarchof Alexandria,MeletiosPigas,
theestablishment
ofthePatriarchateof Moscow. In
belatedlyconfirmed
hisletterto thetsarhejustifiedhisconsentbyquotingand paraphrasing,
withoutgivinghissource,partsofthetwenty-eighth
canonoftheCouncil
of Chalcedon. In its time,thatcouncilhad raisedtherankof thesee of
because,likeMoscow inthe1580s,itwas "a cityadorned
Constantinople,
witha senateand an empire."
All thisamountedto flattering
thebarbarian.However,theGreeksalso
turnedto ByzantiumwhentheywerecounteringMuscoviteprejudicesor
just clingingto theirown. When Byzantiumgave out, theyused their
own heads,or cheateda bit.The PatriarchalCharterof 1561,confirming
the imperialtitle to Ivan the Terrible,assertedthat its issuance was
necessarybecause Ivan's coronationby the metropolitanof Moscow,
This rightwas reservedexclusivelyfor
Makarij,alone was notsufficient.
thepatriarchsof Rome and Constantinople.At an earliertime,Maksim
the Greektook issue withthoseprelateswho did not acceptordination
fromthepatriarchofConstantinople,
becausehelivedinthedominionof
theTurk. Pagan dominationdid not impugnone's faith.Beforetheyear
300 theChurchUniversalwas also subjugated,yetit had maintainedits
purity.Maksim did not begrudgeMoscow Constantinople'sold titleof
"New Jerusalem,"buthe saw no reasonto assert,as one ofhisMuscovite
correspondentshad done, thatOld Jerusalemhad lost its sanctity.Althoughtheylosttheempire,theGreeksretainedtheLogos. Theydidlose
everythingthat was passing and worldly;Orthodoxy,however,firj
yévoiTo,
theynot onlydid not lose, buttaughtto others.In thiscontext,
themonksofAthos- foritwas theywhothoughtup thesearguments
for
This content downloaded from 216.251.195.190 on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 19:09:38 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
18
IHOR SEVCENKO
the Slavs shortlybefore1650 - quoted the Gospel: "thediscipleis not
above his master,nor the servantabove his lord."
Whenstilllivingin Wallachia,Paisios Ligaridesdedicateda big- and
stillunpublished- volume of the Prophecies(XprjajuoÀóyiov)
to Tsar
Aleksej Mixajlovié. This was in 1656,one yearbeforePatriarchNikon
thisgiftedand potentially
usefulmanto Moscow,and
thoughtofinviting
six yearsbeforePaisios actuallywentthereand enrolledintheservicenot
ofNikon,butofthetsar;Paisios believedin planning.He mustalso have
believedthatrulersto whombooksarededicatedseldomreadthem,since
his manuscriptcontainspeculiarmaterialon East Europeanhistory.He
theMuscoviteboastofhavingbeenbaptized
had no difficulty
countering
that
by St. Andrew.Anyonecould readin ConstantinePorphyrogenitus
thefirstwomanfromRus' to receivebaptismwas PrincessOlga, and in
underBasil I.
TheophanesContinuatusthattheRusseswerechristianized
of
into
the
Old
came
In his further
Rus', Ligarides
forays
history
up with
more astoundingtrophies.Rjurik,Sineus and Truvor,the traditional
to yévoç).
foundersof the Rurikiddynasty,were Byzantines('Pco/taïoi
had
been
"the
handed
down
Muscovites
Consequently,Ligaridessaid,
from
not only the faith, but also the empire,
us, the Byzantines
ÇPœfiaïoi)." On the otherhand, VladimirMonomax, the Muscovite
was notconnectedwiththeempireafter
ideologist'slinkwithByzantium,
all. He was called Monomax simply"because he was monarchin all of
Rossia" However,Ligaridesdid stressMoscow's reallinkwitha Byzantine ruling house. He played the marriageof Ivan III with Sophia
Palaeologina up forall its worth.Ivan Ill's manyand unexpectedvictories,"so theysay," weredue to thismostastuteand lovingmother's
wisdomand advice. And Tsar Aleksejhimselfwas remindedon thevery
firstfolio of the Propheciesthathis lineagewentback to Sophia.
Towards the year 1700, and followingfifteenyears of tug-of-war,
Greekwas to yieldto Latinas a basictool ofeducationin Moscow. About
thattime,the patriarchof Jerusalem,Dositheos, made a last standfor
ofa panoplyofprejudicescurrent
Byzantinecultureand deliveredhimself
since Photius."To thepersonwho told you thatchildrenshould not be
taughtinGreekbutin Latin,"so hewroteto a Russian,"answer:First,the
Old Testamentwas translatedbytheHoly GhostintoGreekand notinto
another language." After making ten more equally cogent points,
Dositheos concluded: "in matterspolitic,secular, rhetorical,logical,
and astronomical,the
geometrical,
poetical,philosophical,arithmetical,
Hellenesare the teachersof the Latins."
bornofpridearespokenbytheweak,theyareseldom
Whenarguments
thebetterpartof wisdom.In orderto securea passagefromthefrontier
This content downloaded from 216.251.195.190 on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 19:09:38 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
BYZANTIUM AND THE EASTERN SLAVS AFTER 1453
19
townof Putyvl'to Moscow withitspromiseof rublesand sable,in order
or at leastprolongedreligiousreorientato avoid possibleimprisonment,
in
the
in
a
north,itwas wiserto admit,evenifyouwerea
tion,
monastery
Greek,thattheGreekshad notretainedone-halfofthefaith- wiser,too,
to flatterMuscoviterulers,even before1547,as worthyof beingcalled
emperorsnot only of Russia but of the whole earth,and to bestow
imperialor biblicaltitleson them.SometimesByzantineepithetssuffered
and one patriarchcalled
depreciation,as whentwo Greekmetropolitans
a newMoses and a newConstantine,
theUkrainianhetmánXmel'nyc'kyj
and when Paul of Aleppo comparedhim to Basil I.
favorwiththeMuscovite,therealso laya genuine
Butbehindcurrying
hope thatof liberationfromtheTurkishyoke.AlreadyMaksimthe
Greek exhortedVasilij III to follow in the steps of Constantineand
Theodosius and rule"over us," thatis, the Greeks.Hopes of liberation
continuedthroughoutthesixteenthand seventeenth
centuries.As lateas
1698 the patriarchof JerusalemDositheos passed on the rumorthat
PeterI had assuredthekingof Englandthatin theyear1700he wouldbe
celebratingliturgyin thechurchof St. Sophia. Therewas muchwishful
and muchpropheticmumbo-jumboin thesecalls forMuscovite
thinking
help. Throughhis book on theProphecies,Ligarideswas somethingofa
specialiston the topic; he knewthe propheciesof Andrewthe Fool suchas theone thatthe"yellow,"i.e.,blond,people,weredestinedto beat
the Turk - the prophecyof Gennadius Scholarius,and even the one
containedin the Turco-Graeciaof MartinCrusius.Otherpeople circulated propheciespurportedlycomingfromthe Turks themselves,prerulerwould subjugatetheTurkishland. Eventhe
dictingthata northern
anti-GreekSuxanov was swayedbytheGreekpassion- to which,bythe
way,theWest,too, had succumbedin thesixteenthcentury- and transof prophetic
lated into Russian Gennadius Scholarius'sdecipherment
letters,said to have been inscribedon the sarcophagusof Constantine.
To give strengthto the prophecies,Greekand otherBalkan visitors
circulated stories about tens of thousands of Serbians, Bulgarians,
Albanians,and Greeks ready to rise if the tsar would only cross the
Danube. The tsar,however,was verycautious.Towardsthemiddleofthe
sixteenthcentury,Ivan Peresvetovreportedthe Greeks' hopes that
Ivan IV would liberatethemfromtheTurk,butsixteenth-century
Mus'
refused
to
be
into
an
anti-Turkish
action.
The
Povest
dragged
covyfirmly
o dvuxposol'stvaxis,to myknowledge,thefirstsemi-official
Muscovite
tractprophesying
Constantinople'sliberationbythetsar;itdates- or so
its editorsays fromthe earlyseventeenth
century.
Before the liberationof Orthodox Christianscould be practically
This content downloaded from 216.251.195.190 on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 19:09:38 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
20
IHOR SEVCENKO
envisagedby Muscovy,the infidelhad to be sized up; here,theGreeks
wereusefulindeed.AlongwithChristianrelics,theybroughtinformation
to the Eastern
on the Turk. Alms givenby the Muscovitegovernment
about Turkish
patriarchswerealso paymentsforprovidingintelligence
affairs.Between 1630 and 1660, ten Greek metropolitanswere in the
Russian service.Some Greekdiplomatsweredouble agents,and some
weredenouncedas Janissary
spies.Otherswereimpostorsappearingwith
fromthe Easternpatriarchsobtainedin Molforgedrecommendations
in thesecondhalf
davia, for,accordingto one oftheRussianinformants,
center
forforgingpatria
Moldavia
was
of theseventeenth
great
century
archal charters.
On the whole, however,the Greeks servedthe Russian cause well,
sometimeslayingdown theirlives. In 1657 theTurksweresaid to have
hung the patriarchof Constantinople,PartheniosIII, forhis relations
were
Greekpatriarchsand metropolitans
withthe Russiangovernment.
instrumental
and successfulin mediatingthe submissionof Hetmán
to Moscow in 1654.One ofthemreceived600 rublesforhis
Xmel'nyc'kyj
servednot
servicesin thismatter,butothers,likeDositheosofJerusalem,
formoney,but out ofconviction.SincetheyhopedthattheRussiantsar
would liberatethem,the Greekscould believethathe was thedefender
theworldand shouldbe obeyed
and protectorofOrthodoxythroughout
by all Orthodoxwithoutexception.
VII
Therewas one area of EasternEuropewhereGreekprelatescould count
on therespectoflocal bookmenand wherenobodywas checkingon their
credentials.This area was the Ukrainianand Belorussianlands under
Polish-Lithuaniandomination.In these lands the communityof faith
of fate.As
betweenGreeksand nativeswas reinforced
bythesimilarity
theTurkslordedit overtheGreeks,so theCatholicapostates,thePoles,
persecutedthe Easternchurch.
As spokesmenfor hostilebut independentpowers,the JesuitPeter
Skarga in thesixteenthcenturyand our acquaintanceSuxanov scorned
the Greeksin almostidenticalterms- Skarga sayingthatlearninghad
died amongtheGreeksand had turnedtowards"us Catholics,"Suxanov
assertingthat all thatwas best withthe Greeks had gone over to "us
Muscovites."But the subjugatedOrthodoxof L'viv, Kiev, and Vilnius
needed the Greeks to help themestablishschools in responseto the
theOrthodox
Catholicchallengeand evenmore,to helpthemreestablish
This content downloaded from 216.251.195.190 on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 19:09:38 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
BYZANTIUMAND THE EASTERNSLAVSAFTER 1453
21
hierarchyin their lands. Schools under either princelyor burgher
patronagewerecreatedfromthe 1580son, halfa centurybeforethefirst
such attemptswereundertakenin Moscow, and Greeksparticipatedin
theirinceptioneverywhere.
Cyril Lukaris,later patriarchof Constanof
beforehis more profitabletrek up
Arsenius
and
Elasson,
tinople,
in
these
schools.
Latinjoined Greekand soon overwere
teachers
north,
shadowed it. However,Latin was studiedbecause one neededit to succeed in a Catholicstate,while- as one oftheearlyseventeenth-century
Kievan writersput it - "it was not necessaryto driveKievansto learn
Greek."
Between1616, when its firstbooks appeared, and 1700, the Kievan
pressof the Caves monasterypublishedmostlySlavonic translationsof
liturgicaland Byzantinetexts.Severalofthemwerenewor revisedtranslationsfromtheGreek,and the Kievans,unliketheMuscovites,showed
forGreekoriginalsprintedin theWest.In 1624,theyprinted
no mistrust
JohnChrysostom'sSermonson the Acts.The translationwas made by
one GavriilDorofejeviõ,"the daskal of themostphilosophicand artful
Helleno-Greektongue in LViv, from the Helleno-Greekarchetype
printedin Eton (v Etoni izobrazenom)." To my knowledge,this was
the earliestmentionof Eton in EasternEurope.
In theirpolemicswithCatholicsaftertheUnionof 1596,theOrthodox
of the Ukrainehad to face the perennialargumentabout thefallof the
ByzantineEmpire. Meeting this argumentwith much empathy,the
Orthodoxdescribedthe spiritualpurityof the Greeks,since theywere
unhamperedby the cares of the worldlyempireand freeto seek the
kingdomof God underthe eye of the tolerantTurk - a rosypicture
indeed.True,the Greekswerenot rulinganylonger.This,however,was
an advantagewhenit came to thesalvationoftheirsouls,fortheGreeks
now had to be humbleand did not raise the swordof blood. Even the
pagans,in themidstofwhomtheylived,wonderedat theirpiety.One or
two propheciesabout therebirthof Byzantiumwerequoted out ofhabit,
but theyhad nothingof the vigorand impatienceof those the Greeks
addressedto the seventeenth-century
Muscoviterulers.
Such meeknessdisappeared,however,whentheOrthodoxof Poland
and Lithuania had to counterthe claim for the superiorityof Latin
learning.One of the polemicistswentbeyondDositheos of Jerusalem's
old contentionthatLatinwisdomwas Greek,and beyondthedustingoff
of Plato and the churchfathers.Around the year 1400, he said, the
sciences had been broughtto the West by people like Chrysoloras,
Theodore of Gaza, Georgeof Trebizond,Manuel Moschopulos- here
This content downloaded from 216.251.195.190 on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 19:09:38 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
22
IHOR SEVCENKO
the chronologywas a bit wobbly- and DemetriosChalkokondylas.
Thus, "now," whenthe"Russes" weregoingto "Germanlands" forthe
sake oflearning,theyweretakingback whatwas theirown and had been
lentto theWesterners
bytheGreeksfora shorttime.I knowofno parallel
to thisargumentin an earlymodernSlavic text.The Orthodoxpolemicistsof Poland-Lithuaniawereremarkably
up-to-dateon whatwenton in
theGreeklands intheirowntime- a resultofclosecontactswithvarious
writtenin 1621,quoted in thesame
Greekhierarchs.One ofthetreatises,
breathJohnChrysostom,Gregoryof Nazianzus,and theletterof Cyril
Lukaris,dated 1614,to showthatthetruechurchofChristwas thechurch
ofpersecution.To showthatholinesshad notlefttheEasternchurch,the
same treatisecompileda listof about 130 saintshavingshonein various
Orthodox lands. The list opened withthe saints of Greece,excluding
Athos, which had a special rubric.The firstname on the list was
Seraphim,a martyrand a nationalheroof theGreeksbeheadedby the
in
Turksin 1612. He was said to have beenabbot of St. Luke monastery
ofpossibleuseto modern
Hellas (Hosios Lukas?), a pieceofinformation
Greekhistorians.
The culturalleveloftheseanti-unionist
polemicswas higherthananythingthe Muscovites could offerin the firsthalf of the seventeenth
century.The pointis broughthomeifwe juxtapose thebibliographyof
155 items- not many of which were appended just for show - of
Zacharias Kopystens'kyj'sPalinodia (1621) withthe fewbooks quoted
duringthedisputationheldin Moscow in 1627withLavrentijZyzanij,the
Ukrainianauthorofa catechism.AmongotherGreektexts,thePalinodia
to NicephorusGregoras,Zonaras, and Chalkokondylas,while
referred
the Muscovitesmerelyreferredto Nicephorus,patriarchof Constantinople,and to the book of Esop, "the Frankishwise man." However,
these erudite polemics lacked the Muscovite bookmen's clarityand
seriousnessof purpose. When the Muscovitesquoted the Storyof the
Princesof Vladimir,
theyknewthattheirgoal was to enhancethegloryof
Moscow. ButwhentheUkrainianKopystens'kyj
quotedthesamestoryin
hedid so justto beefup the
a prefaceto theSermonsofJohnChrysostom,
genealogyof the book's patron,the princeCetvertyns'kyj.
Even in the Ukraine,deep respectfortheGreeksand Greeklore was
limitedto theeruditeOrthodox.A lesslearnedWestUkrainianwriterof
about 1600, Ivan VySens'kyj,scorned Plato and Aristotle,associated
themwithOrigen,and foundJohnChrysostom,
or betteryet,theHoroIn mattersoflanguage,VySensTcyj
logionand the Oktoechos,preferable.
he
meant
bothChurchSlavonicand the
that
Slavic
which
thought
by
This content downloaded from 216.251.195.190 on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 19:09:38 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
BYZANTIUMAND THE EASTERNSLAVSAFTER 1453
23
semi-popularlanguagein whichhe himselfwrote- was morehonored
beforeGod thanGreekand Latin. This adherenceto nativetraditionat
the expense of Byzantinemodelshad its reward.Vysens'kyjis the most
Ukrainian
vigorous and excitingwriterof early seventeenth-century
as ProtopopAvvakum who also rejectedwhathe called the
literature,
was "not learnedin dialectics,"and wrotein prac"Hellenic swiftness,"
- is the most vigorousand best writerof
Russian
vernacular
tically
Russian
literature.
One difference,
however,helpsto
seventeenth-century
measurethedistancewhich,intheseventeenth
century,
separatedthetwo
AvvakumexculturalcommunitiesfromGreece. When in difficulty,
for
a
horse
the
and
a
for
a
book
of
Nomocanon
changed
Ephrem Syrian
whospent
theservicesofa helmsman;hedid notknowGreek.Vy§ens'kyj,
muchof his lifeas a solitarymonkon Mt. Athos,knewitwell. He could
make Greekpuns and raisehis Slavonictongueto thelevelofthecaique
of theGreekat will.Thus he could call thehatedMichaelVIII Palaeologus Mateolog and, in anotherpassage, Suetoslov,whichin bothcases is
"Mr. Vainword,"expressedonce bymeansofGreekand anothertimeby
means of Slavic components.
VIII
thelearnedGreekvisitors,itwas becauseso
IftheMuscovitesmistrusted
manyof themhad indulgedin suspiciousactivitiesin the West before
comingto theirland. MaksimtheGreekhad workedin VenicewithAldus
Manutius; Ligaridesstudiedin the Athanasianumof Rome; Patriarch
Nikon's helper, Arsenius the Greek, in Venice and Padua; and the
BrothersLeichudes, the ill-fateddirectorsof the Slavo-Greco-Latin
Academyin Moscow,in thesame twocities.The Greekbooks thesemen
broughtwiththemand fromwhichthe Muscoviteswere supposed to
learnthe correctfaithhad been printedin Venice,Paris, or, as we now
know,Eton. In theGreeks'ownwritings,
quotationsfromJohnChrysostom stood side by side with those from St. Augustine- a suspect
author- or, worseyet,fromMartinCrusius,or AleksanderGwagnin.
decriedGreek
However,at theverytimewhenMuscoviteconservatives
books printedin theWest,theculturalimpactoftheWestupon Moscow
had beenin swingforhalfa century.In 16 17, theChronographof 15 12 a textquotedat thebeginningofthisessay- underwent
a face-lifting.
In
the new recension,manychaptersstillbegan withtheold entryentitled
"The Greek Empire,"but the finaldirgeon the Conquest of Constantinoplewas omitted,and a shorterversionofNestor-Iskinder's
storywas
This content downloaded from 216.251.195.190 on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 19:09:38 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
24
IHOR SEVCENKO
The body of thechronographwas substantially
substituted.
enlargedby
translationsfromPolish chroniclers,and among other pieces of new
"oftheislandsofwildmenwhomGermans
information
was a description
called the New World or the FourthPart of the Universe."
Even Muscoviteconservativeshad to relent:theyfoundthemselves
invokingLatin sources in defenseof super-Orthodoxcauses. In 1650
ArsenijSuxanov was tellingtheGreeksof Russia'svenerabletraditions.
The cityofNovgorodhad beenestablishedjust afterthefloodand was so
powerful,he said, thatthe Latin chroniclershad writtenabout it:"Who
can oppose God and the Great Novgorod?" The Latin chroniclers,I
Kopysuspect,were in realitythe UkrainianpolemicistKopystens'kyj.
contra
et
a
Deum
in
turn
magnum
quoted phrase"Quis potest
stens'kyj
to a certain"Krancius,"whoturnsout
Novogrodum"whichhe attributed
to have been Albert Kranz, a German historianwritingin Latin. In
Moscow itself,Ligaridesrefutedthe petitionof the Old BelieverPop
was thentranslatedintoRussian.InciNikitain Latin,and therefutation
in the Ukraine.There, antino
different
was
the
situation
dentally,
Catholicpolemicistspridedthemselveson theirknowledgeofGreek,put
Greeksentencesintotheirworks,and quotedfromByzantinechroniclers.
However,the long passages fromGregorasthatone polemicistused to
impresshisreaderswerequoted notfromtheoriginal,butfromtheLatin
translationof 1562 by HieronymusWolf of Augsburg.
In 1722,Feofan Prokopovyõwas obligedto helphisprotectorPeterI,
who had had his firstson condemnedto deathand hadjust lostanother.
To do so, Prokopovyõwrotea treatiseprovingthatan emperorcould
establishan heirotherthan his son, and quoted a numberof examples
fromByzantinehistory;thus,he citedLeo I forhavingbypassedhissonin-lawZeno; however,his source was not a Byzantinechronicler,but
was
Cassiodore. He also mentionedPhocas theTyrant,buthisreference
to the GermanCalvisius,whose Opus Chronologicumwas publishedin
1605,ratherthanto a Greeksource.
The storyof thosewho reliedon theByzantineor Muscoviteframeof
referencecould be carriedinto Peter I's timeand beyondit; however,
the recountingwould be repetitiousand outside the mainstreamof
Russia's culturalhistory.Peter'snameconjuresup theimageofAmsternotofConstantinopleand Moscow. In Russian
dam and St. Petersburg,
schemes
of
the
eighteenthcentury,Byzantiumwas no longer
political
butpurelyas an itemofpropaganda;thiswas
used as a frameofreference,
and in CatherineII's grand
evidentin Peter'sappeal to theMontenegrins
to
a Greek empirewithher
establish
from
the
1780s,
project,dating
This content downloaded from 216.251.195.190 on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 19:09:38 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
BYZANTIUMAND THE EASTERNSLAVSAFTER 1453
25
grandson, appropriatelychristenedConstantine,ruling in Constantinople. The most interestingnuggetthis latterproject offersto the
intellectualhistorianis Joseph II's quip that he would not sufferthe
sincethevicinityoftheturbanwould be less
Russiansin Constantinople,
that
oftheRussiansapka, shades- conscious
to
Vienna
than
dangerous
to Lukas Notarason theeve
attributed
perhaps of thesayingunfairly
of the fall of the city.
Lukas Notaras bringsus back to 1453, our pointof departure.The
and theend of theseventeenth
yearsbetweenthemiddleof thefifteenth
and the
centurywerethe yearsof EasternEurope'sde-Byzantinization,
storytheytell the intellectualhistorianabout MuscoviteRussia can be
summed up thus: AfterFlorence and Constantinople'sfall, Russian
bookmen attemptedto build a culturaland ideological frameworkof
theirown by re-usingthe veryelementswhich Byzantiumhad given
- intheprecedingfourcenturiesoftheirhistory.
them- oftenindirectly
This buildingof newcastlesout of old blocksdid not givethebookmen
in the face of Russia's formerly
gloriousbut by
enoughself-confidence
thendebased Greekmentors.Hence theinstancesofdefianceagainstthe
Greeks by the Muscovites throughoutthe sixteenthand seventeenth
centuries.In the meantime,the neo-Byzantinecastles continuedto be
builtnot onlyfromold blocksand fromtheirnativeimitations,
butalso
fromWesterncomponents.This was a contradictory
situation,and itdid
not last. When a new system,based on Westernblueprints,emerged
about 1700,the Russian elite,withoutever becomingobliviousto the
Byzantineheritage,relegatedit to the sidelines.
Harvard University
This content downloaded from 216.251.195.190 on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 19:09:38 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions