Established in 2019 and dedicated to publishing occasional collections of articles on different topics.
Vilniaus universiteto leidykla / Vilnius University Press
List of Illustrations Index of Persons Index of Places
Copyright (c) 2025 Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
What Makes the Era of St. Josaphat Unique? A Few Historiographical Notes
The article raises the question as to whether it was a coincidence that three saints of phenomenal significance to Lithuanian historical memory emerged specifically during the first half of the 17th century: St. Casimir was canonized in 1602, while two other martyrs of the era, St. Josaphat and St. Andrew Bobola, would be canonized later. The following question is posed: Are not these saints related to the ‘golden age’ of old Lithuania – the Grand Duchy of Lithuania – which existed neither before nor after it? The paper considers to what extent the first half of the 17th century, also known as the Vasa epoch, could justifiably be regarded as the age of civilizational progress in Lithuania, and whether it is not related to the aforementioned phenomena of historical memory.
Saints in the National Memory Cultures of the 20th Century: The Cases of Saint Casimir and Saint Josaphat
The article examines the 20th-century histories of the veneration of Saint Casimir and Saint Josaphat Kuntsevych, seeking to answer the following questions: Does the development of these cases correlate with tendencies to instrumentalize national patrons in other contexts, or does it challenge them? Where do the 20th-century trajectories of the veneration of St. Casimir and St. Josaphat overlap, and where do they diverge? And why were neither of them included among the top-tier people of the pantheons of national heroes in the 20th century? The review analysis essentially confirms the insights of other researchers regarding the adaptability of such sites of memory across different contexts and their particular relevance to diasporic communities. The analysis also reveals the obstacles which prevented St. Josaphat from transcending the boundaries of religious veneration and becoming a national hero. Although the research found that St. Casimir did surpass these boundaries, he did not attain the status of a national patron due to competition with other sites of memory.
Euphrosyne vs. Josaphat: Colonizers and ‘Confessionalizers’ in Poland-Lithuania and Later, in Russian Belarus and Ukraine
The analysis of Josaphat Kuntsevych as a living and remembered person, or lieu de mémoire, should take place not least within a discussion of the concepts of confessionalization and colonization, as this contribution argues. If, for the Catholic Confession, Piotr Skarga was a typical confessionalizer, seeking to foster confessional homogeneity or aspects of confessional discipline in multiconfessional everyday life, then Josaphat illustrates what a confessionalizer could achieve for the Union of 1596. Indeed, his veneration became established within the Polish-Lithuanian state’s framework, being based on both Ruthenian and Roman Catholic denominational foundations. Thus, this contribution will interpret Russian imperial politics through the example of the use of St. Euphrosyne, a 12th-century Polatsk princess, as a substitute for the veneration of St. Josaphat up until 1914, as seen from a postcolonial perspective on denominational politics. The imagined Russian imperial history concerning Ruthenia was pivotal concerning the policy of Russification, which had already been partially applied after the first uprising in 1831, but especially after the second uprising in 1863.
Directions of Cultural Transfer in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania: Pochaiv–Vilnius (18th–Early 19th Centuries)
The article deals with the issue of cultural relations between Lithuania and Ukraine during the 18th and early 19th centuries on the basis of copies of old books preserved in Vilnius University Library. The object of the study is the Pochaiv Basilian Monastery printing house, one of the largest printing establishments in Ukrainian lands during the 18th century. A total of 152 books produced by the Pochaiv printing house have been identified in Vilnius University Library, of those: 48 books in Cyrillic script (86 copies) and 54 books in Latin script (66 copies). The earliest publication is a 1618-dated theological work by the theologian Kyrylo Tranquillion, which had been printed even before Pochaiv Monastery joined the Church Union. An analysis of the content and provenance of the books from Ukrainian lands reveals not only connections with the realities of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania but also the characteristics of their readers. Pochaiv books in Latin script circulated in the eastern lands of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, with one even reaching western Lithuania; while most of the Cyrillic books bear the ownership marks of Ukrainian churches. The article includes an Annex presenting a bibliographical list of all Latin-script books from the Pochaiv printing house held in Vilnius university library.
the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the 18th century
Cunceviciana in Polish Monastic, Private, and Public Libraries of the 18th and 19th Centuries
The study examines the prevalence of copies of Cunceviciana2 in Polish libraries of the 18th and 19th centuries, with a focus on books currently held in the collection of early printed books at the Ossoliński National Institute in Wrocław. Individual copies of publications associated with Josaphat Kuntsevych from other Polish and Ukrainian book collections were also used for provenance analysis. The research is limited to works printed in Latin script prior to the 19th century. The collected data serve to illuminate the historical dissemination of Cunceviciana and to elucidate the factors contributing to their noteworthiness in both ecclesiastical and lay contexts within Poland over the aforementioned centuries.
The Spread of the Cult of Josaphat Kuntsevych through the Cyrillic Texts of the Basilian Printing Houses in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth
Over time, publications produced in Vilnius, Lviv, Supraśl, Univ, and Pochaiv came to reflect the cult of Josaphat Kuntsevych, and were designed to meet the needs of the Uniate Church. A service dedicated to him was included in the Liturgikon and Menaion, and a book called Возслідування празникам (Celebration of the Feasts). In Lviv, the service was published as a separate edition, with the text of the service changing over time. In addition to the service, the Life of St. Josaphat, along with his image, were also published (Pochaiv Menaion). Other pieces, dedicated to Josaphat Kuntsevych, are the songs in Pochaiv Bohohlasnyk (Hymn Book), and the sermons by Yulian Dobrylovsky in the ‘Parochial Lessons’. The largest and most diverse contribution to honouring Josaphat Kuntsevych in terms of quantity and genre was created by the Pochaiv printing house. Pochaiv publications in Latin script also contributed to the spread of his cult. The marginalia in the books, which mention the blessed man, testify to the indifferent attitude which readers, including Orthodox believers, had towards this religious personality.
editions of the printing houses of Supraśl, Univ, Pochaiv, and Lviv
The Josaphat Sisters’ Activities in Biała and Parczew in the Late 18th and Early 19th Centuries
The article discusses the activities of the Josaphat Sisters, a female tertiary community who operated in Biała and later in Parczew at the end of the 18th and beginning of the 19th centuries. The congregation was founded by Fr. Tymothei Shchurovsky, a well-known missionary and canonist who was hegumen of the Basilian monastery in Biała. The monastery had preserved the relics of Blessed Josaphat Kuntsevych since 1705. The formation of the community was greatly influenced by the events of the first half of the 1790s; specifically, the Russian-Polish war of 1792 and the uprising led by Tadeusz Kościuszko in 1794 had significant impacts. During this time, many individuals sought refuge in Biała, a fortified stronghold of the Radziwiłł family, where the relics of Blessed Josaphat Kuntsevych were kept and revered by the local population. The prevailing uncertainty and the fear for their lives fostered a growth in piety among these people. A small group of devout women, mostly composed of local nobility and burghers, gradually formed at the local Basilian monastery. Due to Fr. Shchurovsky’s organizational skills, this group transformed into a tertiary community. A former sister of Charity, Kateryna (Pelahiya) Brylivna, was the first to take simple vows, and she led the community of the Josaphat Sisters from 1793 to 1802. The Josaphat Sisters’ community, consisting of up to ten nuns, resided in Biała in a dwelling they constructed on the grounds of the Basilian monastery. Following the eviction of the sisters and the removal of Fr. Shchurovsky from his position as hegumen, the community relocated to Parczew. The primary activities of the Josaphat Sisters were needlework and education. The Austrian authorities’ recognition of the sisters’ educational activities in Parczew at the end of the 18th century was a critically important event. The community also received significant support from Porfyrii Vazhynsky, the Uniate Bishop of Chełm. The activities of the Josaphat Sisters were closely linked to Fr. Shchurovsky, their founder and chaplain. It seems that, shortly after his death in 1812, the community ceased to exist.
The Creation of the Cult of Josaphat Kuntsevych in the Radziwiłł Family’s Stately Magnate Home in Biała Radziwiłłowska
At the beginning of the 18th century, the relics of Josaphat Kuntsevych were transported from Polatsk to the Radziwiłłs’ stately family home in Biała Radziwiłłowska (known since 1837 as Biała Podlaska). This was intended to be a form of temporary security for the relics during the Great Northern War and the unstable situation in the Archdiocese of Polatsk. Leon Kiszka, the Proto-Archimandrite of the Basilian Order, decided that the protector of the relics should be the Grand Chancellor of Lithuania, Karol Stanisław Radziwiłł, after unsuccessful efforts were made with Lithuania’s Field Hetman Michał Serwacy Wiśniowiecki. The Radziwiłłs placed the relics in the family’s chapel at the castle, where one of the altars was dedicated to Josaphat; however, they did not take any initiative to spread the cult of the relics. They also returned to Leon Kiszka the magnificent reliquary, in the form of a silver coffin, in which the relics had been displayed in Polatsk. This situation did not change until after 1743 following a decision made by the Basilians at a monastic chapter meeting in Dubno, during which, a compromise was worked out between the Basilian Order and the Radziwiłłs concerning the further fate of the relics. The relics remained in Biała Radziwiłłowska on condition that the Radziwiłłs would finance the building of a new church to house them. In 1743, Anna Radziwiłł issued a foundation document in which she guaranteed funds for the maintenance of six singers who were obliged to sing during liturgies and participate in religious ceremonies in the castle chapel. The Radziwiłłs began to hold indulgence ceremonies at the castle for invited guests from the elite. The setting for these religious ceremonies mimicked the lavish and spectacular Baroque ceremonies of magnate courts. Josaphat was regarded as the noble family’s intercessor in matters of health. The cessation of public worship of the relics for more than half a century contributed to the involvement of the Uniate Church’s elite in the creation of Marian cult sites and efforts to organize coronation ceremonies at which papal crowns would be placed on cult images of the Virgin Mary (Zhyrovichy, Chełm). The consequence of the absence of the martyr’s cult centre was the loss of the status of a supra-local cult and the abandonment of forms of worship adequate to the position of the patron of the Polish Crown and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (proclaimed at the 1673 Sejm).
The Appropriation of a Confessional Saint: The Image of Josaphat Kuntsevych in Engravings from Basilian Monasteries in the Second Half of the 18th Century
This article explores how the image and cult of Josaphat Kuntsevych were appropriated by Basilian monasteries in the second half of the 18th century to shape the Uniate confessional identity within the Ukrainian territories of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Through an analysis of Basilian-produced engravings, such as The Apotheosis of the Virgin of Pochaiv, and depictions alongside the miraculous icons of Terebovlya and Piddubtsi, the study demonstrates how Josaphat’s martyrdom was visually framed to reinforce Uniate religious and cultural narratives. The Basilians employed iconography, relics, and commemorative rituals not only to promote Kuntsevych’s veneration but also to position him as a confessional saint, representing the distinctiveness and confessional character of the Uniate Church. The article suggests that these efforts may have contributed to elevating Josaphat’s role within Uniate devotional practices and to shaping a more defined religious identity in the Ruthenian Basilian Province.
Images of Josaphat Kuntsevych in Uniate Churches of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania during the 17th and 18th Centuries
The images of Josaphat Kuntsevych in churches, as well as their veneration, were important factors not only for the survival of the cult of the martyr himself but also for the overall development of the Uniate Confession. However, to date, no comprehensive studies have been done on the spread of such images in either Uniate or Roman Catholic shrines. After 1839, the vast majority of altarpieces and other images dedicated to St. Josaphat were destroyed or repainted – thus ‘hiding’ the image of the martyr under the guise of another saint. As a result, few authentic altarpieces of Josaphat have survived. The main source of information about these former altarpieces and other types of images of Josaphat are the visitation records and other written documents from parish churches and monasteries. The article summarizes source data concerning the veneration of Josaphat’s images in the most famous Basilian churches within the Lithuanian Basilian province during the 17th and 18th centuries, i.e., before his official canonization. Due to the extremely large number of Uniate churches which existed, the uneven survival of their documents, and the limited scope of the article, it has not yet been possible to prepare a comprehensive and in-depth study of all the images of St. Josaphat which were located in the Uniate churches in Lithuania. The article focuses primarily on those churches which Josaphat was more or less associated with during his lifetime.
Saint Josaphat Kuntsevych and Spanish Baroque Spirituality
The study focuses on a close reading of the Prologue, which was composed by Miguel Pérez, a Spanish Basilian monk and intellectual who taught at the University of Salamanca. In 1684, he published a book in Madrid which contained his translation of Yakiv Susha’s Life and Martyrdom of St. Josaphat Kuntsevych, which had been published in 1665 in Rome in the Latin language. This 1684 edition opened with the Prologue, also written by Pérez, an outstanding theological treatise which used the sophisticated stylistic devices of Baroque literature and rhetoric in order to demonstrate the spiritual authority of the Rules of St. Basil the Great. The result is amazing: in his Prologue, Pérez creates a myth concerning St. Josaphat, and skilfully inscribes it in the cultural space of the Spanish Golden Age. Together, the translation of Susha’s Life and Martyrdom of St. Josaphat Kuntsevych and Pérez’s commentaries have remained an unknown episode in the history of St. Josaphat’s veneration.
the myth of St. Josaphat in Golden Age Spain
The Canonization of Josaphat Kuntsevych in 1867: Places, Actions, and Persons
The article examines the lengthy process leading up to the canonization of Josaphat Kuntsevych, a process which lasted over two centuries, from his beatification in 1643 to his canonization in 1867. It delves into the various challenges and efforts involved, including political barriers, financial hurdles, and ecclesiastical procedures. Key individuals such as Bishop Yakiv Susha, Father Hieronim Kajsiewicz, and Hieromonk Teodoro Toscani were actors in advancing Kuntsevych’s cause. The article outlines the significant revival of these canonization efforts in the mid-19th century, spearheaded by the Polish Congregation of the Resurrection and the Italian Basilians of Grottaferrata. It also highlights Pope Pius IX’s crucial role in managing the political and religious intricacies associated with the canonization. The process culminated in a solemn ceremony on 29 June 1867, which coincided with the 1,800-year anniversary of the martyrdom of Saints Peter and Paul. The study further discusses the subsequent three-day celebrations in Rome, Grottaferrata, and Lviv, illustrating the extensive veneration which occurred for Saint Josaphat Kuntsevych throughout the Catholic Church. Through detailed documentation and analysis, this article provides a thorough understanding of the canonization process, highlighting its significance within the religious and historical context of the period.
Creating Josaphat: The Making of a Saint in the Church-Slavonic Office for Josaphat Kuntsevych
The liturgical commemoration of Josaphat Kuntsevych, the Uniate Archbishop of Polatsk, was initiated soon after his death in the hands of Orthodox citizens in Vitsyebsk in 1623. The hymnographical Office (sluzhba) for Josaphat developed in the course of the seventeenth century, first in manuscripts, and, from the 1730s, at the latest, also in the printed form. This article examines the Office with a constructivist approach, analyzing how the historical figure is turned into a hymnographical protagonist through the selection of relevant elements and life events that demonstrate his sanctity. The focus is on three aspects: the ‘saintly arguments’ that are used in ‘creating Josaphat’, the imitation of Christ through parallel narratives, and the depiction of Josaphat as the pillar of the Church Union.
The Making of a Saint through the Lenses of (Panegyrical) Poetry: Aleksander Walenty Szlachtowicz’s Tryumph duchowny (1628) and Josaphat Kuntsevych’s First processus in partibus
The contribution argues that Tryumph duchowny, one of the earliest hagiographic pieces devoted to Josaphat Kuntsevych, dwells on those facts known from the records of the first local investigation, which was conducted in Polatsk and Vitsyebsk in 1628, concerning the process for the recognition of his sanctity; thus it must have been composed shortly after the conclusion of this process. The poem, which has been analysed here for the first time in the context of hagiographic practices and writings, explores the militant metaphors used in relation to sanctity, yet it differs slightly from the epic model of hagiographic poetry and has similarities with the concept of the sermon. Apart from the poem’s hagiographic goal, it aimed to eulogize the Tyszkiewicz house, which was also involved in Josaphat’s saint-making and which apparently also supported the poet Aleksander Walenty Szlachtowicz, the rather obscure Ruthenian author who is profiled here.
Martyr et Pontifex: The Formation of St. Josaphat Kuntsevych’s Iconography
This paper traces the origins of the iconography of Josaphat Kuntsevych to the early adoption of the Baroque aesthetic on the part of the Ruthenian Uniate Church, following the Union of Brest of 1595. Beatified in 1643, Kuntsevych’s iconography developed, on the one hand, along the iconographies of Catholic ecclesiastical martyrs who suffered a similar manner of death (struck by blades/axes/knives) – such as St. Peter of Verona – but also alongside the iconography of a copy of the revered Ruthenian icon – Our Lady of Zhyrovichy – found in Rome at the national church of the Ruthenian ‘nation’, SS. Sergio e Bacco. The Roman copy of the Marian icon was known as the Madonna del Pascolo, and its own early iconography parallels the developments seen in the early printed images of then-Blessed Josaphat. At some point, after Josaphat’s canonization of 1867, the established Early Modern iconography of the Ruthenian martyr started to change yet again, moving away from the Baroque drama of his gruesome death to that of an Eastern-rite bishop without any traces of violent death and only with a palm branch to suggest his martyrdom. Thus, a new, modern (and present) chapter in the iconographic development was opened.
The First Portraits of the Uniate Martyr Josaphat Kuntsevych at the Beginning of the 17th Century: The Vilnius Group of Images
The subject of the article is the earliest images of the Uniate martyr Josaphat Kuntsevych and their influence on the later development of the martyr’s iconography. The article considers what things were being emphasized in the earliest known of those graphic portraits of the martyr which included a coat of arms or scenes of martyrdom, what elements were used in his later images, and how these images related to Kuntsevych’s true likeness. The origin of these early images of the martyr is investigated by using the broader context of the images created in Vilnius at that time, and explored through an attempt to identify the wood carver who worked in Vilnius on Kuntsevych’s images during the first quarter of the 17th century. The later development of these works is examined through the copper engravings produced by Claes Jansz Visscher, an engraver and publisher who worked in Amsterdam, where these types of engravings attained the form of professional art.
wood carver from the first half of the 17th century
The Canonization Procedure during the Confessional Age: The Beatification of Josaphat Kuntsevych in 1643 as a Success Story in Times of Reform
The fact that Josaphat Kuntsevych was only beatified in 1643 rather than canonized, which only occurred much later, was, and still is, considered a disappointment by many. Placed in the context of the longer-term developments in the Roman canonization policy, however, the beatification of Kuntsevych in 1643 can certainly be seen as a success. To illustrate this point, the chapter outlines the general framework in which the efforts to canonize Josaphat took place. The centralization of decision making in Rome, bureaucratization, and juridification, but also the need to accept regional diversity – these were the tendencies that shaped the canonization process and its regulation during the first decades of the 17th century. A look at the figures makes it clear how low the chances of canonization, or even beatification, actually were during these decades. Nevertheless, Josaphat’s advocates succeeded in setting the beatification process in motion very quickly; their rapid success could only have been achieved at the expense of the still-new regulations issued by Pope Urban VIII. In light of these findings, this question should be reversed – it is the reasons for the success of the year 1643 campaign, regarding Poland, the Church Union of Brest, but it is also the image policy of the Barberini family, which deserve our attention.
The City after the Tragedy: The Life Strategies of Vitsyebsk Residents in the Aftermath of the Assassination of Josaphat Kuntsevych (1623–1641)1
The article examines the situation of Vitsyebsk City’s community in the first years following the murder of Josaphat Kuntsevych (1623–1641), Archbishop of Polatsk. The present study is aimed at investigating the events surrounding the murder from a different perspective, namely, that of the townspeople themselves, including the opponents and supporters of the Archbishop of Polatsk. Following the murder of Josaphat Kuntsevych on 12 November 1623, the rights previously held by the city of Vitsyebsk under the Magdeburg Law were revoked. For a period of two decades after the revocation, the jurisdiction of the ziemski court became responsible for all municipal affairs. Meanwhile, daily life in the city continued uninterrupted. Indeed, the relatives of those who had participated in the violent events of November 1623 remained resident in Vitsyebsk, compelled to adapt to the new conditions. The reverberations resulting from this high-profile event in 1623 marked themselves indelibly on the documentation of the judicial institutions of Vitsyebsk. These documents have been preserved to the present day and offer an exceptional opportunity to reconstruct the life strategies of the diverse social groups in the city during the initial two decades following the murder. The sequence of events which took place in Vitsyebsk is to be considered within the broader context of a series of European wars, including the Thirty Years’ War (1618–1648), a major European conflict in which religious factors played a key role.
The Monastic Journey of St. Josaphat Kuntsevych: Byzantine Traditions and Spiritual Parallels with the Saints of the Kyiv Pechersk Lavra
The article aims to explore the monastic journey of St. Josaphat Kuntsevych, beginning with his family background and continuing with his monastic life at the Basilian Monastery of the Holy Trinity in Vilnius. The article also explores how the religious literature of that time may have influenced Josaphat’s spiritual beliefs and his decision to pursue the monastic path. Special attention is given to the traditions of the Byzantine Church Fathers and the local Kyiv-Pechersk Paterikon, which shaped the spiritual practices reflected in Josaphat’s life, as analysed through his ascetic and spiritual disciplines.
St. Josaphat Kuntsevych’s Regulae and Constitutiones for the Priesthood
The chapter delves into two works associated with St. Josaphat Kuntsevych, who was Archbishop of Polatsk from 1618 to 1623: Regulae S. Josaphat pro suis praesbyteris (Rules of St. Josaphat for His Priests) and Constitutiones pro omnibus sacerdotibus (Rules for All Priests). Research supports St. Josaphat’s authorship of the Regulae, although it suggests that the final version may have emerged shortly after his martyrdom. The origins of the Constitutiones, which is seemingly a compilation of offenses and their punishments, predate the Regulae, and likely existed as a metropolitan list. The Regulae, comprising 48 articles, was introduced during Josaphat’s tenure in order to spearhead the reform of the clergy and enhance the organisation of the parishes’ ministry; these were communicated at annual eparchial councils. The Constitutiones specifies nine articles outlining penalties for clerical misconduct. The investigation extends to the primary sources of these works, suggesting that Josaphat adapted pre-existing council precepts, which were common in Ruthenian Kórmchaia books, for their formulation. Further, the chapter explores the manuscript tradition, publication, and translation of these documents, scrutinising both Ruthenian and Latin manuscripts and their editions. These normative documents were aimed at eparchial protopresbyters, priests, and deacons, but explicitly excluded monastic clergy, highlighting their integral role in ecclesiastical discipline and governance.
Peter Arkoudios (1563–1633): A Greek, and a Herald of Ecclesiastical Unity in Lithuania and Europe
The present article is a biographical study of the Greek-Rite Catholic priest and theologian Peter Arkoudios (1563–1633). The study employs the theoretical approach of civilisational axes in order to shed more light on the historical significance of this personality, who played a prominent role in the promotion of the ecclesiastical Union of Brest (1596). Data are presented indicating the influence exerted by Arkoudios on both the future bishop Ipatii Potii and on the future martyr Josaphat Kuntsevych. Emphasis is placed on his Greek origin and his profound erudition, i.e., on qualities which could not fail to have an impact on the Ruthenians who traditionally felt a deep respect for Greek theological thought. Questions are raised, the discussion of which will provide a better understanding of the circumstances surrounding why Peter Arkoudios did not pursue an ecclesiastical career in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. From the traces of his cultural activities preserved in Vilnius, it can be seen that Arkoudios contributed to the dissemination of late Byzantine theological thought among both Catholics and Uniates. In belonging to different worlds, primarily Greek and Roman, he played a significant role as an agent of cultural transfer at the end of the 16th century and the beginning of the 17th century.
Introduction: Josaphat Kuntsevych, from Confessional to Transnational Saint
The paper examines the regional and local scale of the cult of Josaphat Kuntsevych during the 17th and 18th centuries. As one of the beati moderni, the cult of Blessed Josaphat Kuntsevych was granted official recognition for the Basilians, as well as for believers within the Kyivan Uniate Metropolitanate and across the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. It was only after his canonisation in 1867 that all restrictions on its spread were lifted; a visible sign of this universal acceptance was the transfer of his relics to the Basilica of Saint Peter in Rome. The introduction traces the mechanisms, strategies, and actors involved in shaping Kuntsevych’s image both as a confessional and as a transnational saint, situating these dynamics within the historiography of and contributions to this volume.
Литовцы и история Литвы в русской художественной литературе XIX–первой половины XX вв.
Straipsnyje nagrinėjamą mažai ištirtą lietuvių ir LDK istorijos įvykių bei veikėjų vaizdavimo dėsningumus rusų rašytojų dramos, poezijos ir prozos kūriniuose temą, taip pat Lietuvos temos rusų literatūroje sąsajas su viešpataujančia carinėje Rusijoje ideologija, oficialia istoriografija bei romantizmo estetika. XIV–XVII a. Lietuva vaizduojama A. Bestuževo-Marlinskio, N. Durovos, N. Kukolniko romanuose, P. Kukolniko eilėraščiuose kaip svetimas egzotiškas kraštas, savito gyvenimo būdo, ypatingo pagoniškojo tikėjimo, specifinės socialinės struktūros šalis. Viduramžių Lietuvos egzotiškumą akcentuoja žmonių ir dievų vardai, svetimkalbiai vietovardžiai ir realijų pavadinimai. Mūšiai ir pilių užpuolimai, keisti papročiai ir mįslingos apeigos, avantiūriniai pabėgimai, klastingi pagrobimai, žynių intrigos susideda į įspūdingą tolimos praeities vaizdą. Rusų literatūroje ypatingas dėmesys skiriamas herojiškiesiems kovų su kryžiuočiais laikams, to meto įvykiams ir valdovams nuo Gedimino iki Vytauto. Lietuvos valdovai siejami giminystės ryšiais su rusų kunigaikščiais, Lietuva ir ypač sostinė vaizduojamos gausiai apgyvendintos rusais ir buvusios stiprioje stačiatikių kultūros įtakoje. Kitas svarbus rusų rašytojams lietuvių istorijos laikotarpis yra Lietuvos krikštas, vertinamas kaip protėvių tikėjimo atsižadėjimas, kultūrinio tapatumo ir politinio savarankiškumo praradimas, bei priešiškos lenkų civilizacijos įsigalėjimas. Kurdami daiktiškąjį senovės Lietuvos paveikslą, rusų rašytojai naudojosi daugeliu įprastų „senovės“ kolorito detalių: lietuvius aprengė kailiais, žemaičius apginklavo kuokomis, nurodė kraštą esant gausiai apaugusį miškais su šventomis giriomis ir fantastiškomis šventyklomis. Senovės lietuvių vaizdavimas kaip bemaž laukinius sieja egzotiškumą su artumu gamtai, gyvenimo paprastumu, jausmų natūralumu, kartu pabrėždamas istorinę distanciją.
Copyright (c) 2008 Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
Формирование национальной идентичности литовцев: политическая традиция Великого княжества Литовского, имперский патриотизм и русский «Другой»
Lietuvių tautinės tapatybės formavimasis šiame straipsnyje nagrinėjamas nauju aspektu. Pagrindinis klausimas: koks buvo Rusijos įvaizdis XIX–XX a. lietuviškos tapatybės formavimosi ankstyvojo periodo metu. Be to, analizuojama tai, kaip lietuviškos (etninė) tapatybės susidarymas buvo įtakojamos rusiško „Kito“. Dichotomija „Aš/Kitas“ gali padėti geriau suvokti kolektyvinę tapatybę. Daroma išvada, kad jau ankstyvajame nacionalistiniame lietuvių diskurse Rusija suvokiama kaip aiškiai fiksuojamas „Kitas“, kurio politinis viešpatavimas buvo Lietuvos užkariavimo rezultatas. Ši Rusijos kaip istoriškai ir politiškai „Kito“ ir, be to, Lietuvos užkariautojo reprezen-tacija viešpatavo XX a. ir fragmentiškai išlieka šiuolaikiniame lietuvių nacionalistiniame diskurse. Kartu lietuviškasis Rusijos kaip užkariautojos įvaizdis buvo „barbaro prie vartų“ vaizdinio (iškilo XIX a. strateginiame diskurse) variacija europietiškoje tapatybėje. Šalia to, priklausomai nuo Abiejų Tautų Respublikos prijungimo prie Rusijos vertinimo, buvo bandoma sukurti įvairius bendradarbiavimo tarp Lietuvos visuomenės ir Rusijos valdžios modelius: vieni pabrėžė lietuvių socialinių ir kultūrinių interesų gynimo svarbą, o kiti iškėlė gilesnės integracijos rusiškoje visuomenėje mintį.
The Context of Reality and the Understanding of Mythology in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania by the Lithuanian Jewish Community
Although academic Jewish historiography and the fixation of historical community events have attracted the attention of researchers, the local processes of those events and their influence on the development of self-consciousness in the Jewish community has only been explored to a rather small extent, especially in the context of Eastern Europe. This article aims to find the divide between the real day-to-day conditions in the GDL, its evaluation in contemporary texts and images of the mythologized past or its segments in later generations of Jewish communities. The chronological beginning of the analysis of this issue was determined by the earliest known sources (since the second half of the 16th century) that were necessary to lend the topic to adequate investigation; the closing limit is the Holocaust. The associated trauma was the turning-point that influenced the very telling of and, in a qualitative sense, the variety of emotionally colorful diversions of Jewish imagery from the past, the varied interpretations and their relevance under new conditions. Sources of various character were used in the research community‘s internal documents, memoirs of people of Jewish origin, fiction, and the historiography of the second half of the 19th century to the early 20th century.
Reflections on the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in Lithuania in the 19th and early 20th centuries
Although modern national movements of the Lithuanians, Poles, Belarusians and Ukrainians in the 19th century were born in the same area of the former Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth territories, the paths of the new nations very quickly diverged, radically departing from the old Polish, Lithuanian or Ruthenian nobility-based identities. The manifestations of the new identities first took place among the Polish-Lithuanian emigrants in Western Europe. The new Polish identity that was first to emerge from the remnants of the Commonwealth was later followed by „the new” Lithuanian, Belarusian and Ukrainian identities. The new Lithuanian identity based on popular culture and the language of the Baltic language family had a complex and difficult relationship with then old Lithuanian identities in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and radically departed from the traditional nobility culture and values, and the dominant Polish language. The old, modern and future Lithuanian identities finally retreated in the first quarter of the 20th century in the Independent Republic. The Grand Duchy of Lithuania and its imagery remained of secondary importance in the context of the modern Lithuanian identity of the Interwar Republic.
Eine studentische Gestaltung der ethnischen Identität von Simonas Daukantas
„Die Taten der alten Litauer und Sameiten” hat S. Daukantas im Jahre 1822 abgeschloßen. So wurde sein erstes historisches Werk während seiner Studienjahre in der Vilniusser Universität gereift und beendet. Diese Lehranstalt war damals ein Teil des Bildungssystems des russischen Reiches, hörte aber nicht auf auch als ein Bestandteil des europäischen Aufklärungs- und Wissenentwicklungskreises zu verwesen. S. Daukantas lernte sich bei den berühmten Professoren J. Lelewel, I. Daniłowicz, G.E. Groddeck, I. Ołdakowski, I. Onacewicz, A. L. Cappelli, welche eine ausgezeichnete Umgebung der Humanitätwissenschaften geschaffen hatten. In der Lehrjahren von S. Daukantas wetteiferte in der Universität die traditionelle Aufklärungs- und Naturrechtsrichtung des Wissens mit den Ideen des Kernvolkstums und des Nationalrechts der historischen Rechtsschule, was den paradigmischen Kampf zwischen der als eine Wissenschaft sich bildenden Historiographie und der verteidigenden ihre Vorherrschaft Historiosophie abspiegelte. Dieser Kampf diskredizierte die Weltgeschichte als eine Historiographieart und räumte den Weg der Nationalgeschichte. Es ist möglich über den mindestens undirekten Einfluß des Kritzismus von J.G. Fichte zu sprechen, woraus die Teilung der sich bildenden historistischen Geschichtswissenschaft in den aposteriorischen (die Tatsachenbeschreibung) und den apriorischen (die Feststellung der Stufen der historischen Entwicklung) Zweig folgte, das eine Hilfe dem Empirismus leistete. Darum behauptete sich die Quellenkritik als solche. In dieser Richtung übte besonders I.Daniłowicz eine positive (leider die ungenügende) Wirkung aus. Von der anderen Seite muß man über die Auswirkung eines Lehrlings der Königsberger Universität und Burschenwesensträg� � � ers der deutschen Studenten I. Onacewicz sprechen. S. Daukantas hat einen mäßigen Einfluß des ersten und einen großen des anderen Professoren erfahren. Der junge Magister verabschiedete sich mit der Hochschule als ein mittelmäßiger Schüler von I. Daniłowicz, ein guter von G.E. Groddeck und als ein Junger von I.Onacewicz. Die letzte, entstandene in den 20-sten Jahren des 16. Jahrhunderts, Redaktion der litauischen Chroniken leitete die Herkunft der Litauer von den römischen Ankömmlingen ab und erzählte über eine Reihe der phantastischen Herrscher bis zu den realen Ereignissen des 14. Jahrhunderts. Dieses Schema ging in das Geschichtsbuch der Renaissance von M. Stryjkowski und des Baroks von A. Kojelavičius über, dann wurde von A. Schlözer in seine „Weltgeschichte” übertragen. Von der Fachliteratur konnte S. Daukantas die Auskunft der deutschen und russischen Chroniken nur durch den Bericht von A. Kotzebue und N. Karamsin anwenden. Paradigmatisch gehörten diese Werke dem Historismus nur wegen ihrer Chronologie und nicht wegen ihres Niveau. Also verblieben die phantastischen Fürsten in dem Werke von S.Daukantas, was sein historiographisches Wert gar verminderte. Das gute Kentnis der antiken Geschichte erlaubte ihm doch etwas gläublicher (in Vergleichung mit den Römern) die Szythen und die Heruler als die litauischen Ahnen vorzustellen. Das im Werdegang des Historismus entstehende romantische Volksmuster war zweiartig: das sich geschichtlich entwickelndes Kernbauertum (die Grundidee von J.Möser, übernommene durch die historische Rechtsschule) und das eroberte doch unbezwungene und schöpferische Volkstum, welches endlich seine Eroberer überwältigt hatte (die Grundidee der Aufklärung, überleitete von E.J. Sieyés und entfaltete von A. Thierry). Der Zustand des zeitgenössischen litauischen Volkes war traurig: die litauischsprechende Bauernschaft befand sich in der Leibeigenschaft des polonisierten Adels und das Land gehörte dem russischen Reich. Für S. Daukantas taugte von jenen Mustern keines. Die russische Herrschaft störte hier nicht: das war eine äußere und aufgezwungene Erscheinung. Der Schwerpunkt der Anpassung lag anderwärts: bis zu der russischen Herrschaft ist das Großfürstentum Litauen bestanden, Litauen hat keine polnische Eroberung erfahren, in Litauen hieß aber der Herr ein Pole und der Untertan ein Litauer. In der Einleitung hat S.Daukantas eine subtile historiosophische Lösung dieser Frage gefunden: die Union Litauens mit Polen war eine ungleiche historische Entwicklung, wo die Polen ihre Kultur und ihre Sprache gepflegt und gehegt hatten, den Litauern aber solche Möglichkeit entnommen wurde. Darum wurde ihr Adel polnischsprechend und–denkend. So fand man einen Sündbock um den geschichtlichen Rückstand Litauens zu entschuldigen, was zu der Erinnerung zu den barbarischen Eroberer aus den Wäldern Germaniens von E.J. Sieyés führte. Die niedere Schicht des litauischen Adels (besonders in dem Sameitenlande) hatte, die polnische Sprache benutzend, noch nicht das litauische Nationalbewußtsein verloren. Diese Schicht fühlte sich als ein selbstständiges anderes polnisches Volk (= Litauer). S.Daukantas gehörte dem Studentenkreis der Sameiten, fühlte sich aber, seiner bäuerlichen Herkunft nach, kein Pole überhaupt. In seinem ersten Werk „vertrieb” er „den anderen Polen” aus der litauischen Geschichte.
What is the Origin of the Litvak? The Legacy of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania
XIX a. pabaigoje „Litvako“, LDK žydo, samprata išplito visame žydų pasaulyje. Litvakas pasižymėjo kaip griežtas misticizmo oponentas, racionalistas, radikalas, žmogus, savitai vartojantis jidiš kalbą, ir šaltos, šiaurinės šalies gyventojas, turintis įpročius, atitinkančius to krašto bruožus. Šiame straipsnyje siekiama analizuoti tokio įvaizdžio atsiradimą. Tvirtinama, kad XVIII a. pabaigoje LDK žydų situacija iš esmės nesiskyrė nuo Lenkijos žydų padėties. Specifinių bruožų turinčio „Litvako“ įvaizdžio atsiradimas yra greičiau XIX a. rezultatas. Tuomet padidėjo žydų mobilumas Rytų Europoje ir jų kontaktai. Tai kartu paskatino religinius ginčus tarp išplitusių chasidų ir mitnagetų, pabrėžiančių Toros svarbą ir priešiškų karštai misticizmo praktikai. Kartus Lietuvoje atsirado ir nuosaikesnė chasidizmo forma – Habad judėjimas. Kita veiksnys, formavęs „Litvako“ tapatybę, buvo Haskalos savitumas Lietuvoje, pabrėžiančios hebrajų kalbos ir tradicijos reikšmę. Pagaliau, nesant šiame regione vieningos dominuojančios nacionalizmo formos, čia stiprėjo žydų autonominė savimonė, visų pirma Sionizmas. Be to, ekonomiškai atsilikusiame regione, kuris XIX a. nepatyrė bent kiek spartesnės pramoninės raidos, išaugo socializmo judėjimas, ypač Bundas.