Allusions to the Victim and Sacrifice in the Andrey Kurbsky’s History and Reception of the 17th — Early 18th Centuries

A. I. Popovich
{"title":"Allusions to the Victim and Sacrifice in the Andrey Kurbsky’s History and Reception of the 17th — Early 18th Centuries","authors":"A. I. Popovich","doi":"10.22455/horl.1607-6192-2021-20-186-207","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The literary topoi and allusions to the victim and sacrifice in the biblical and historical context at the same time played a great role for Andrey Kurbsky as a traditionalist and innovator writer in the embodiment of the complex author’s intention of the History of the Grand Prince of Moscow (the second half of the 16th century). The article notes that the writer distinguishes, as opposites, the axiology of sacrificial feat for power doer and persecuted heroes. The article reveals the diverse reception of the author’s interpretation by readers and scribes of History. Kurbsky’s contemporaries and readers of the late 17th — early 18th century had different attitudes toward Kurbsky’s definition of the personality of Ivan the Terrible who makes unrighteous victims and the characterization of people affected by him as new martyrs. The rich handwritten tradition of History, including as part of the Kurbsky Collections, contributed to the emergence of new reader’s interpretations based on literary topoi and allusions used by Kurbsky. The intellectuals of the ‘transitional’ period A.S. Matveev, Evfimy Chudovsky, A.I. Lyzlov, V.V. Golitsyn and others were involved in this process. Textological and typological comparisons of certain monuments and Kurbsky’s History contributed to a deeper understanding of the literary context of the time when the prince’s writings spread. The study also helped to determine which Kurbsky’s ideas about the victim and sacrifice remained relevant for members of different class groups, and which were leveled out and outdated in the text interpretation process.","PeriodicalId":352878,"journal":{"name":"Hermeneutics of Old Russian Literature: Issue 20","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hermeneutics of Old Russian Literature: Issue 20","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22455/horl.1607-6192-2021-20-186-207","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The literary topoi and allusions to the victim and sacrifice in the biblical and historical context at the same time played a great role for Andrey Kurbsky as a traditionalist and innovator writer in the embodiment of the complex author’s intention of the History of the Grand Prince of Moscow (the second half of the 16th century). The article notes that the writer distinguishes, as opposites, the axiology of sacrificial feat for power doer and persecuted heroes. The article reveals the diverse reception of the author’s interpretation by readers and scribes of History. Kurbsky’s contemporaries and readers of the late 17th — early 18th century had different attitudes toward Kurbsky’s definition of the personality of Ivan the Terrible who makes unrighteous victims and the characterization of people affected by him as new martyrs. The rich handwritten tradition of History, including as part of the Kurbsky Collections, contributed to the emergence of new reader’s interpretations based on literary topoi and allusions used by Kurbsky. The intellectuals of the ‘transitional’ period A.S. Matveev, Evfimy Chudovsky, A.I. Lyzlov, V.V. Golitsyn and others were involved in this process. Textological and typological comparisons of certain monuments and Kurbsky’s History contributed to a deeper understanding of the literary context of the time when the prince’s writings spread. The study also helped to determine which Kurbsky’s ideas about the victim and sacrifice remained relevant for members of different class groups, and which were leveled out and outdated in the text interpretation process.
17世纪至18世纪初安德烈·库尔布斯基的历史与接受中的牺牲者和牺牲的暗示
在《莫斯科大公史》(16世纪下半叶)中,文学主题和对受害者和牺牲的典故同时在圣经和历史语境中发挥了重要作用,安德烈·库尔布斯基作为一个传统主义和创新的作家,体现了复杂的作者意图。文章指出,作者区分了权力实施者的牺牲功绩价值论和受迫害的英雄价值论的对立面。文章揭示了读者和史家对作者解读的不同接受。与库尔布斯基同时代的人以及17世纪末至18世纪初的读者对库尔布斯基对伊凡雷帝的人格的定义有不同的态度,他把伊凡雷帝塑造成不义的受害者,把受他影响的人塑造成新的殉道者。丰富的手写历史传统,包括作为库尔布斯基文集的一部分,有助于新读者基于库尔布斯基使用的文学主题和典故的解释的出现。“过渡”时期的知识分子A.S. Matveev、Evfimy Chudovsky、A.I. Lyzlov、V.V. Golitsyn等人都参与了这一过程。对某些纪念碑和库尔布斯基的《历史》的文本学和类型学比较有助于对王子作品传播时的文学背景有更深的理解。这项研究还有助于确定哪些库尔布斯基关于受害者和牺牲的观点仍然适用于不同阶级群体的成员,哪些在文本解释过程中被淘汰和过时。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信