Confessio vs natio. Byzantine theological tradition as hindrance in formation of ethnic and national identity discourses in medieval Rus’

IF 0.1 Q4 HISTORY
M. Dmitriev
{"title":"Confessio vs natio. Byzantine theological tradition as hindrance in formation of ethnic and national identity discourses in medieval Rus’","authors":"M. Dmitriev","doi":"10.21638/spbu19.2022.105","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article attempts to verify some aspects of the research hypothesis which implies that normative orientations of the Byzanine orthodox theological thought (in ideologies, mentalities, discourses) contained traditions and constructions that were in odds with tendency to see communities of ethnic type in people whom we used to qualify as Russians and Ruthenians. In the East European Orthodox medieval Christian identity of groups included in the Church was thought of as a hindrance in forming discourses, which would claim that the Church community could be fragmented into ethnic and «national» groups (nationes). Old Russian texts, and texts of Muscovy, as well as writings of some Orthodox authors in Ruthenia (Ukraine and Belarus’) of the early 17th century have been taken in account. In these sources, very often, theological discourses were entering in conflict with tendency to transfer norms of ethnic (tribal) identity on the Christian communities. This generated a situation when «Russianness» was not perceived in ethnic terms, and in this respect relationships between Christian and «ethnic» were understood in a very different way, than in the theological culture of medieval West. Search for an explanation leads to the area of the Byzantine theological tradition, in which Christian and ethnic identities were regarded as two conflicting discourses. The Orthodox identity of emperor’s subjects was understood as «effacing» traces of tribal (ethnic) belonging. For subjects of Christian history (id est history of those, who got baptized) were regarded not the multiple nationes, but «new people» who became a united «nation of God». In medieval Rus, this discursive ligic was expressed by «Tale of the bygone years»; the same discursive «scenario» seems to be implemented in other texts of Russian Middle Ages, and this lead to Orthodox culture of Muscovy, which repelled the ethnic definition of «Russianness». It is very likely, that the same tendency was alive — disappearing and reappearing — in the worldview of literati and broader circles of the Orthodox population of Ruthenian lands.","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/spbu19.2022.105","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

This article attempts to verify some aspects of the research hypothesis which implies that normative orientations of the Byzanine orthodox theological thought (in ideologies, mentalities, discourses) contained traditions and constructions that were in odds with tendency to see communities of ethnic type in people whom we used to qualify as Russians and Ruthenians. In the East European Orthodox medieval Christian identity of groups included in the Church was thought of as a hindrance in forming discourses, which would claim that the Church community could be fragmented into ethnic and «national» groups (nationes). Old Russian texts, and texts of Muscovy, as well as writings of some Orthodox authors in Ruthenia (Ukraine and Belarus’) of the early 17th century have been taken in account. In these sources, very often, theological discourses were entering in conflict with tendency to transfer norms of ethnic (tribal) identity on the Christian communities. This generated a situation when «Russianness» was not perceived in ethnic terms, and in this respect relationships between Christian and «ethnic» were understood in a very different way, than in the theological culture of medieval West. Search for an explanation leads to the area of the Byzantine theological tradition, in which Christian and ethnic identities were regarded as two conflicting discourses. The Orthodox identity of emperor’s subjects was understood as «effacing» traces of tribal (ethnic) belonging. For subjects of Christian history (id est history of those, who got baptized) were regarded not the multiple nationes, but «new people» who became a united «nation of God». In medieval Rus, this discursive ligic was expressed by «Tale of the bygone years»; the same discursive «scenario» seems to be implemented in other texts of Russian Middle Ages, and this lead to Orthodox culture of Muscovy, which repelled the ethnic definition of «Russianness». It is very likely, that the same tendency was alive — disappearing and reappearing — in the worldview of literati and broader circles of the Orthodox population of Ruthenian lands.
忏悔与国家。拜占庭神学传统对中世纪罗斯民族和国家认同话语形成的阻碍
本文试图验证研究假设的某些方面,该假设意味着拜占庭正统神学思想的规范取向(在意识形态,心态,话语中)包含传统和结构,这些传统和结构与我们过去称之为俄罗斯人和鲁塞尼亚人的民族类型社区的倾向不一致。在东欧东正教中世纪基督教团体的身份包括在教会被认为是形成话语的障碍,这将声称教会社区可以分裂成种族和“民族”团体(国家)。古老的俄罗斯文本,莫斯科的文本,以及一些东正教作家的作品在鲁塞尼亚(乌克兰和白俄罗斯)的早期17世纪已被考虑。在这些来源中,神学话语经常与将种族(部落)身份规范转移到基督教社区的趋势发生冲突。这就产生了一种情况,当“俄罗斯性”不是从民族角度来看待的时候,在这方面,基督教和“民族”之间的关系以一种与中世纪西方神学文化截然不同的方式被理解。寻找一个解释导致拜占庭神学传统的领域,其中基督教和民族身份被视为两个相互冲突的话语。皇帝臣民的正统身份被理解为“抹去”部落(种族)归属的痕迹。因为基督教历史的主题(即那些受洗者的历史)不被视为多个国家,而是成为统一的“上帝的国家”的“新人”。在中世纪的罗斯语中,这种散乱的逻辑被表达为“过去岁月的故事”;同样的话语“场景”似乎在俄罗斯中世纪的其他文本中得到了实施,这导致了莫斯科公国的东正教文化,它排斥了“俄罗斯性”的种族定义。很有可能,在鲁塞尼亚地区的文人和更广泛的东正教人口圈子的世界观中,同样的趋势仍然存在-消失和重新出现。
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
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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