{"title":"Ancient Heritage in the History of the Synod by Paisius Ligarides, Metropolitan of Gaza: Dedication to the Russian Tsar","authors":"S. Sevastyanova","doi":"10.15826/qr.2023.4.855","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The History of the Synod, compiled at the beginning of 1667 by Paisius Ligarides, Metropolitan of Gaza († 1678), shortly after the condemnation of Patriarch Nikon († 1681) at the Great Moscow Synod (1666), has long attracted the attention of researchers. However, it is studied without involving the Greek text and its complete translation into Russian. The arrangements made between the middle and second half of the nineteenth century differ from the original in their selectivity and inaccuracy. The anonymous Russian translation, short and unprofessional, resembles a free paraphrase; in comparison with the Russian version, the English one, belonging to the British theologian and historian W. Palmer († 1879), is closer to the original in content. However, it omits complex phrases and designations of culture-specific Russian elements and contains the translator’s comments. The stumbling block for interpreters was Ligarides’ appeal to Antiquity, a literary device that characterises the writer’s style in the Moscow period of his life (since 1662). Appeals to ancient authors and writings and techniques dating back to ancient rhetoric are scattered throughout the History of the Synod, but there are many of them in the dedication to the client, Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. This article considers the problem of ancient heritage in the History of the Synod with reference to this introductory section. An analysis of the content of his three themes – the idealisation of Antiquity, the appointment of history and the dignity of the ruler – helps reveal the significance of ancient culture and mythology to the writer. The appeal of the Metropolitan of Gaza to the classical heritage correlates with didactic and educational tasks. Ligarides supported the messianic idea, popular with the Greek clergy, about the significance of Moscow – the heir of Rome and the ruler of Moscow as the liberator of Christian peoples from the Muslim yoke. Approving the Byzantine model in the issue of separation of powers, according to which the secular ruler was an absolute monarch, Ligarides oriented Alexei Mikhailovich to follow the example of the rulers of the ancient era, who had the virtues of the kingcreator, triumpher, and enlightener. Encouraging the Russian elite to become more familiar with the ancient heritage and thus contributing to the Europeanisation of court culture, the Metropolitan brought closer the situation called the antiquity of Russian culture by philologists.","PeriodicalId":43664,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio Rossica","volume":"16 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quaestio Rossica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2023.4.855","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The History of the Synod, compiled at the beginning of 1667 by Paisius Ligarides, Metropolitan of Gaza († 1678), shortly after the condemnation of Patriarch Nikon († 1681) at the Great Moscow Synod (1666), has long attracted the attention of researchers. However, it is studied without involving the Greek text and its complete translation into Russian. The arrangements made between the middle and second half of the nineteenth century differ from the original in their selectivity and inaccuracy. The anonymous Russian translation, short and unprofessional, resembles a free paraphrase; in comparison with the Russian version, the English one, belonging to the British theologian and historian W. Palmer († 1879), is closer to the original in content. However, it omits complex phrases and designations of culture-specific Russian elements and contains the translator’s comments. The stumbling block for interpreters was Ligarides’ appeal to Antiquity, a literary device that characterises the writer’s style in the Moscow period of his life (since 1662). Appeals to ancient authors and writings and techniques dating back to ancient rhetoric are scattered throughout the History of the Synod, but there are many of them in the dedication to the client, Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. This article considers the problem of ancient heritage in the History of the Synod with reference to this introductory section. An analysis of the content of his three themes – the idealisation of Antiquity, the appointment of history and the dignity of the ruler – helps reveal the significance of ancient culture and mythology to the writer. The appeal of the Metropolitan of Gaza to the classical heritage correlates with didactic and educational tasks. Ligarides supported the messianic idea, popular with the Greek clergy, about the significance of Moscow – the heir of Rome and the ruler of Moscow as the liberator of Christian peoples from the Muslim yoke. Approving the Byzantine model in the issue of separation of powers, according to which the secular ruler was an absolute monarch, Ligarides oriented Alexei Mikhailovich to follow the example of the rulers of the ancient era, who had the virtues of the kingcreator, triumpher, and enlightener. Encouraging the Russian elite to become more familiar with the ancient heritage and thus contributing to the Europeanisation of court culture, the Metropolitan brought closer the situation called the antiquity of Russian culture by philologists.
期刊介绍:
Quaestio Rossica is a peer-reviewed academic journal focusing on the study of Russia’s history, philology, and culture. The Journal aims to introduce new research approaches in the sphere of the Humanities and previously unknown sources, actualising traditional methods and creating new research concepts in the sphere of Russian studies. Except for academic articles, the Journal publishes reviews, historical surveys, discussions, and accounts of the past of the Humanities as a field.