The image of Byzantium in the narratives of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (15th – first half of the 17th century)

Pavel Anatolievich Vаrаbyou
{"title":"The image of Byzantium in the narratives of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (15th – first half of the 17th century)","authors":"Pavel Anatolievich Vаrаbyou","doi":"10.21638/spbu19.2022.107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article is devoted to the perception of the heritage of Byzantium in the socio-political thought of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in the period from 1453 to the middle of the 17th century. Already in the second half of the 17th century, the Left-Bank Ukraine left the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, and the Metropolitanate of Kyiv withdrew from the jurisdiction of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. The process of influence of the Byzantine civilization on the East Slavic culture after the fall of the Byzantine Empire is investigated. According to the findings, in the process of discussing the Union of Brest in the written tradition of the GDL and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Orthodox, Uniate, Catholic and Reformation narratives developed, in which the image of Byzantium had different shades: from positive to extremely negative, respectively. However, these narratives, which well complement the rather meager information about Byzantium in local letopis sources, are similar in one thing: they tend to see in it not the imperial past, but the current church heritage of the Greek people, which had a significant impact on the historical fate of the lands of Rus’. For the Polish-Lithuanian szlachta as an estate, the heritage of Byzantium was not a source of their own identity. Attempts to update the political idea of the liberation of Constantinople from the rule of the Turks came from the environment of the Greek diaspora of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. However, such projects were not approved here and were cut off from life. And even a major Orthodox magnate, Prince Wasyl-Konstanty Ostrogski, did not support, albeit difficult to implement, but a more realistic project to transfer the residence of the Patriarch of Constantinople to the city of Ostrog. He also did not claim political succession from the Byzantine emperors, but did not interfere with the idea of his spiritual succession. The article pays more attention to the writings of Orthodox polemicists, because the heritage of Byzantium is very important and deserves special attention.","PeriodicalId":41089,"journal":{"name":"Studia Slavica et Balcanica Petropolitana","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studia Slavica et Balcanica Petropolitana","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu19.2022.107","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article is devoted to the perception of the heritage of Byzantium in the socio-political thought of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in the period from 1453 to the middle of the 17th century. Already in the second half of the 17th century, the Left-Bank Ukraine left the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, and the Metropolitanate of Kyiv withdrew from the jurisdiction of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. The process of influence of the Byzantine civilization on the East Slavic culture after the fall of the Byzantine Empire is investigated. According to the findings, in the process of discussing the Union of Brest in the written tradition of the GDL and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Orthodox, Uniate, Catholic and Reformation narratives developed, in which the image of Byzantium had different shades: from positive to extremely negative, respectively. However, these narratives, which well complement the rather meager information about Byzantium in local letopis sources, are similar in one thing: they tend to see in it not the imperial past, but the current church heritage of the Greek people, which had a significant impact on the historical fate of the lands of Rus’. For the Polish-Lithuanian szlachta as an estate, the heritage of Byzantium was not a source of their own identity. Attempts to update the political idea of the liberation of Constantinople from the rule of the Turks came from the environment of the Greek diaspora of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. However, such projects were not approved here and were cut off from life. And even a major Orthodox magnate, Prince Wasyl-Konstanty Ostrogski, did not support, albeit difficult to implement, but a more realistic project to transfer the residence of the Patriarch of Constantinople to the city of Ostrog. He also did not claim political succession from the Byzantine emperors, but did not interfere with the idea of his spiritual succession. The article pays more attention to the writings of Orthodox polemicists, because the heritage of Byzantium is very important and deserves special attention.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
立陶宛大公国和波兰立陶宛联邦叙事中的拜占庭形象(15世纪至17世纪上半叶)
这篇文章致力于在立陶宛大公国和波兰立陶宛联邦的社会政治思想中对拜占庭遗产的看法,从1453年到17世纪中叶。早在17世纪下半叶,乌克兰左岸就脱离了波兰立陶宛联邦,基辅大都会也退出了君士坦丁堡宗主教区的管辖范围。考察了拜占庭帝国灭亡后,拜占庭文明对东斯拉夫文化的影响过程。根据调查结果,在讨论GDL和波兰立陶宛联邦书面传统中的布列斯特联盟的过程中,东正教,统一,天主教和宗教改革的叙述发展起来,其中拜占庭的形象有不同的阴影:分别从积极到极端消极。然而,这些叙述,很好地补充了当地letopis来源中关于拜占庭的相当贫乏的信息,在一件事上是相似的:他们倾向于看到的不是帝国的过去,而是希腊人民当前的教会遗产,这对罗斯土地的历史命运产生了重大影响。对于波兰立陶宛的什拉赫塔来说,拜占庭的遗产并不是他们自己身份的来源。试图更新君士坦丁堡从土耳其人的统治下解放出来的政治观念,来自波兰立陶宛联邦希腊侨民的环境。然而,这些项目在这里没有得到批准,并被切断了生活。就连东正教巨头,瓦西里-康斯坦丁·奥斯特洛夫斯基亲王,也不支持将君士坦丁堡大牧首的住所迁往奥斯特洛夫斯基的计划,尽管这一计划很难实施,但却更为现实。他也没有要求拜占庭皇帝的政治继承权,但也没有干涉他的精神继承权。本文更多地关注东正教辩论家的著作,因为拜占庭的遗产非常重要,值得特别关注。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Representation of the Council of ambassadors of the Russian diaspora in Bulgaria (1919–1940) Orders of Socialist Yugoslavia awarded to Russian diaspora representatives Six by five: Soviet and emigrant historians at the 7th International congress of historical sciences The cult of Josaphat Kuntsevych in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in the 17th century: Between religious intolerance and proselytism The veneration of the Ostrobram icon of the Mother of God in the context of Lithuanian identity
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1