«ÈÍÑÒÈÒÓÒ ÂÑÅÎÁÙÅÉ ÈÑÒÎÐÈÈ ÐÎÑÑÈÉÑÊÎÉ ÀÊÀÄÅÌÈÈ ÍÀÓÊ ÃÎÑÓÄÀÐÑÒÂÅÍÍÛÉ ÓÍÈÂÅÐÑÈÒÅÒ ÃÓÌÀÍÈÒÀÐÍÛÕ ÍÀÓÊ ÑÅÐÈß ÎÁÐÀÇÛ ÈÑÒÎÐÈÈ ...»
In general medieval authors accepted the view of history formulated by Isidor of Seville in the VIIth c.: historia est narratio rei gestae. Authors were interested in events, though not so much in ‘what happened’, but rather in ‘what was done’ by ‘illustrious men’ (viris illustribus): by princes, prelates of the church, the righteous and nations. Narrative was focused on the origin of state, or the rule of a king or a dynasty, or on nation’s conver sion into Christianity and achievement of the unity of the church. A histo rian was supposed to imagine the ‘order of time’, to establish reliable chro nology of events. He was not so interested in causes of events: all of them to some extent made a necessary part of God’s plan which had become evi dent to people in time. Medieval historians viewed the difference between ‘truth’ and ‘fiction’ in a specific way. To describe ‘deeds’, scenes, charac ters, speeches, and motives of actions was important not for the sake of details but rather for showing universal meaning of the past.
Main sources for historical narratives were found in writings by other authors. Often an author wanted to continue their work that was thought of as ceaseless tradition. The evidence of the past given by ‘hon orable’ and ‘reliable’ witnesses and other materials that could be gathered were also of great importance. The task of historian was to limit the amount of separated events and to put them into orderly narrative with conventional structure.
The text of Scripture gave the key to understand the world and his tory. Models and constructions taken from the Old Testament and Patris tic texts helped to place facts in order: history got evidence, which was reliable from typological point of view. Since events did not just happen but showed the will of God, a historian had to use certain proceedings to interpret facts. History represented the first and easiest level of interpreta tion. History had to be ‘factual’. Moral meaning of an event could be come a criterion to place it into historical text. Heroes of didactic stories were taken not only of kings, generals and bishops but also of episodic characters that personified virtues or sins.
Allegory was used in Christian historiography to interpret the Old Testament: the events described there were understood in connection with the events that took place after the Nativity. Christian time was thought of to be linear, to have the beginning and the end;
it goes from eternity to eternity and seeks its fulfillment. The space of time within which human history took place was short and limited. History had a goal: spreading of Christianity;
it could be achieved when all nations convert into the true faith. Soon after that the end of the world would come. Time seen through the text of the Scripture had its centre and culmination: the Nativity of Memory, Images of the Past… Christ and its life in the world. Thus all events were divided into those that happened ‘before’, after’, and ‘in the time’ of this crucial period.
Chronicles usually began with the creation of the world;
historical narrative was placed into the context of Biblical time, of the past of an cient nations. Events were dated according to the time since the Crea tion or by the years of the rule of a prince or the years of pontificate.
Historical writings widely used relative chronology when a new event happened ‘slightly later’ then the previous one. Narratives were of dif ferent scale: they could tell about the world, and of the history of a cer tain monastery, of a nation and of a local community. Nations often be came main characters of early medieval histories. ‘The life’ of a nation was construed according to Biblical model: history seen through the relationship of God and the people who accepted or rejected the faith.
The concepts of ‘righteous’ and ‘sinful’ people helped authors to ex plain historical changes.
A special form of historical memory is represented by biographical writings. Reconstruction of biography has its specific. Positive or nega tive representation of a person influences current political events (if one writes about important figures);
on the other hand it depends on a biogra pher’s subjective attitude towards a historical figure whom he had known.
The evidence of this kind reflects information preserved by the memory of social group. If an author of biography lived long after his ‘hero’ then his narrative is influenced, apart from ideological, political, genealogical, pecuniary and other motives, also by the desire to add some fantasies to reliable material.
Einhard, the first biographer of Charlemagne, represents the past how it should have been from the point of view of his prince Louis. By manipulating historical evidence (written sources and possibly words of witnesses) Einhard shows that it had been necessary to depose the Merovengians and proclaims legitimate right of Carolingian rulers. He tried to show military actions and personal life of Charlemagne in most favourable view. He created an image of victorious king. Einhard often ignores his failures in order to persuade the reader that Charlemagne al ways was under God’s protection. Einhard idealizes the emperor;
he shows what deserves respect and diminishes or ignores his negative acts and features. Einhard’s aim is to write an eulogy to Charlemagne to commemorate his deeds for his successors. Einhard also had another goal although it is not so obvious: the biography of Charlemagne could be un derstood as justification for the reforms of 816–818 that Louis started soon after he had succeeded the crown.
In his other text, ‘On translation of the relics and on the miracles of Saint Marcellines and Saint Peter’ Eihnard justifies his own actions, du 752 Memory, Images of the Past… bious in terms of law and piety, by representing the story in such a way as if he stole the relics following the will of God.
The study of different works by Einhard shows his means of dealing with the past. The historian does not only record the events important for the kingdom of Franks but also transforms them and presents them how they should have been seen by contemporaries and later generations.
By High Middle Ages historiography got its stable and numerous forms. Every historical work reflects historical consciousness of its author;
since many historical writings had been ordered, their contents also reflects the historical consciousness of wider strata of those to whom it was ad dressed. Until the XIIIth c. historical texts were written mostly by clerics, and nations were of no importance. One could see instead the historical consciousness of clerics mixed with elements of imperial, aristocratic or tribal consciousness. Authors could be divided by schools, centres of learn ing — a monastery or Episcopal see. By the XIIth c. historical conscious ness could be divided into monastic and scholastic, orthodox and heretic;
monastic consciousness could be further divided according to orders: it is possible to speak of Cluniac, Franciscan and Cistercian historiography.
Medieval historian who compiles his records of the past from his sources consciously selects his materials and organizes his narrative ac cording to certain historical interest;
he makes ‘history’ from what had once been ‘history’. In such way he makes a text that reflects historical consciousness of the author and his epoch.
Since the number of manuscript copies made of histories of recent events was low, it is evident that their readers were strictly limited. Narra tives of the ‘past’, on the contrary, have a great deal of copies. It is possi ble to conclude that historical consciousness in the Middle Ages was ori ented towards the past not to recent events. The histories of the past however ended in ‘the present’, and stories of recent events mentioned distant past, so there is no strict line between two types of narrative. It is also hard to tell what time the author dealt with in the life of a saint if the author based himself on an older ‘Life’ of his hero. Apologetic ‘lives’ and ‘gesta’ where sanctity of a hero is ‘proved’ by his life and mores, and miracles are downplayed or completely omitted, had their origin in Latin secular biography and are characterized by detailed historical back ground. Liber pontificalis and gesta episcoporum are even more detailed.
The XIIth c. witnessed a turning point for the development of Euro pean culture, and it could be demonstrated in historiography. Changes could be seen everywhere. An important role was played by new disci plines of the XIIth-century Renaissance: by scholastic philosophy and exegetic interpretation of the Bible. Great changes in social life led to revision of tradition, and the need to justify various claims in a conflict of Memory, Images of the Past… institutions for dominance determined rise of interest towards historical arguments. Patristic concept of history as the story of Salvation was turned into a model for interpreting contemporary events. The main fea ture of general chronicles of the High Middle Ages consists of their nar rower scale both in space and in time.
Traditional medieval image of history always had not only theologi cal but also political dimensions since it always correlated with the theory of three kingdoms in general and with the rights of a certain dynasty in particular. The acting force of history is God’s will but it is also certain people (personae), mundane instruments of Divine Providence. History of nation, abbey or diocese is history of kings, abbots or bishops. An author did not concentrate his attention on individual qualities of historical fig ures (since they reflected Christian virtues) but focused himself on how they performed their duties. Person therefore is defined by the space that recognized its authority and by the time of its rule. All meaningful events were correlated to the rule of princes important for an author. The same scale — i. e., personal contribution to the general history of Salvation — helped to evaluate the fact that a monastery was founded (or a church, bishopric, or city) or a kingdom was created. The following history of that place witnessed an unbroken tradition.
The historiography of the High Middle Ages is characterized by one more novelty. The XIIth-century Renaissance revived interest to rhetoric and rhythmic prose. Historiography turned into literature, or art. New rhythmic versions of old histories appeared. Attention towards form of the narrative showed that authors reflected upon the images of the past, criteria for the selection of material and for means of expression.
Authors identified themselves by their relation to state, Church and its institutes, smaller groups (family, guild etc.) In dynastic chronicles one could find national identity. Authors sought to fill the information vac uum of the X–XIth cc. and to write (or to invent) history of past centuries, correlating their country (or region) with empires of the past, and defining its place in contemporary world through relationship with neighbour states. Monastic historical identity shows itself in the history of a monas tery, that usually belongs to the genre of gesta abbatorum or vita of the founder and/or its first abbot, or to the life of the saint patron of the ab bey. The connection of historiography with groups and institutions shaped group (institutional) identity of authors. But the rule worked the other way round: historiography construed identity of a social group. An initial stage of group’s history was linked with a ‘founder’, a ‘patron’, or a ‘famous ancestor’. They gave the group its place in God’s world order and became an object of group (social, professional, and familial) identi 754 Memory, Images of the Past… fication. They symbolized the tradition of its famous deeds (fama) that selected this group from others.
In the High Middle Ages history was turned into means to interpret and even to solve contemporary conflicts, and it gave a new impetus to re flection on the meaning, course and actors of history. Group (or profes sional) orientation of historical conscience led historians to pay more atten tion to the role of their ‘own’ history in the global plan of human salvation.
The meaning of res gestae was defined by intentions of historian, and by the function of the text. An author usually worked with older re cords and rewrote them according to the needs of his time. His own con tribution consisted of making a new historical text out of the ‘chaos’ of known facts.
The motto of historians is to tell only about reliable facts;
it is men tioned in any preface to a historical text. At the same time medieval crite ria of truthfulness did not always take the invented to be false. ‘Invention of facts’ was motivated by believe that they had taken place in reality. It could always be assumed that past tradition did not preserve them, or that previous records were lost by some reason. Interpretations existed within the framework of Christian ethics but could also be pragmatic, deter mined by particular interests.
Chronological and genetic homogeneity of the image of history en abled historians to link or to identify events from different epochs, plac ing them above time. Categories of the past, the present and the eternal were complex and interconnected. Historical interest was shaped by needs of the present. History was a criterion for human thoughts and ac tions since an author appealed to the distant and usually the ‘better’ past.
History was not so much reconstructed but rather used;
therefore it had being constantly re-written to actualize its main function of an argument.
The present was justified and legitimized by history, but ‘non-used’, ‘non-actualized’ knowledge simply disappeared from the cultural mem ory of the epoch. One should not speak of cognition but rather about chronological and factual ordering of the past. Its image tells more about its authors than about its subject. However the image of history was ori ented towards the past. Connection between the past and the present was achieved by various means. Narrative goes up to the present moment (and at the same time events are selected according to contemporary interests).
Historical figures or events are correlated to the Biblical models or his torical typology. Author’s commentaries linked the past and the present.
The author gives examples from the past.
The past gives knowledge and admonition;
it is also gives examples in morals, law and politics;
it legitimizes claims and rights and created historical identity. Historical consciousness of the High Middle Ages was Memory, Images of the Past… oriented towards legitimization, and it could be found in any genre of historiography. An appeal to mythical past, to the root helps to explain the origin of a group (institute, practice or phenomena);
it also gives evi dence of their old age and thus of their legitimizing by tradition.
In the High Middle Ages historiography tended to search for the prin ciple of ordering changes in the world, of their interpreting, and explaining in accordance with existing tradition. Historiography revived the memory of the past by particular reasons: to legitimize the power (in dynastic tradi tion of royal and noble families) or to find historical arguments for property rights of freedoms. In that sense historical texts had many functions: histo rians wanted to preserve the memory of glorious acts of famous persons but also — to save the property and demesne of their successors, ‘their group’, from encroachments, and if it had been alienated — to reclaim it.
Christian historians made use of all goals of writing history known in Antiquity (preserving the memory of ancestors, past experience neces sary for the future and moral examples) but gave them new meaning. The truth of narrative was as important for them as it had been for ancient his torians but if for the latter it had been a question of their professional eth ics, for their Christians successors it was religious ethics.
There were three criteria of truthfulness: information should be either given by the author of a text, or from an authoritative author, or it should contain a ‘moral example’ (that is, witness something how it should have been). Moral factor was more important than the opinion of authority. Ac cording to that an event or a legend that confirmed Christian morals could be thought authentic (or simply be never subjected to any doubts). A histo rian could accept or reject historical evidence of his predecessors according to their moral meaning. Medieval historians went even further and placed their own inventions in the texts to fill in the gaps in events.
Memory of the events of sacral history in the medieval visionary lit erature reflected widespread historical views. They could be interpreted in a number of ways and forms suitable for different social and religious groups within Christian community as well as for an individual imagina tion. Memory of the past in visionary texts was also influenced by goals of those texts.
The past played an important role in the life of medieval people.
Events of the church history were commemorated since early childhood.
Child’s imagination together with competent and constant adult guidance could persuade a child to follow the way of Christ at the early age. It shows that ‘history lessons’ were learned well. Biblical events were constantly reproduced during numerous ecclesiastical feasts repeated annually. The most powerful instrument however was preaching. It was used to shape correct views on important things and explain them. It is known that images 756 Memory, Images of the Past… of the past played an important role in sermons, and medieval preachers took great care of the emotional impact of their message. Creating of col lective historical memory meant creating social values. There were other instruments of guiding believers: processions, liturgy, mystery plays etc.
Visual images were also used during the liturgy and independently.
There existed yet another mean to remind one of the events of sa cred history. Deep emotional impact was often connected with a certain sign or an action. The most important for visionaries image is Crucifix ion;
remembrances of the Virgin came second. Among other ‘popular’ subjects are episodes from the life of Jesus Christ and the Virgin Mary, St. Anna with a child, the meeting of the Virgin Mary and St. Elizabeth, the adoration of the magi etc. Visions are ‘standard’: their scenes were those that were often reproduced during the liturgy, in images etc. They represent collective images of the past that existed in memory after nu merous interpretations.
Not only images but also emotions connected with them belong to collective and cultural memory. It is evident that central events of history, related to the categories of good and evil, were remembered and repro duced through fixation of emotional attitude towards the event, positive or negative, that is, love or fear. Collective memory prepared a model to shape individual emotions. Thus it became possible to live through the events of personal biography by using (imaginary) past of the group.
This emotional impact makes historical events parts of personal life.
The demonstration of these emotions was turned into a privilege, and the ability to see, and to experience the events of the imaginary past in the Middle Ages was seen as a sign of divine election. Such high value of emotions and feelings could be explained, as it was the way collective values were expressed on individual level.
For authors (and characters) of humanistic dialogue history was a source of useful interpretations of the same concept. Researchers ac cepted the idea of potentially unlimited source of historical information and its meanings, of numerous representations of the past.
Such possibility was personified by writings by Bartholomeo Scala who inherited the office of the chancellor of Florentine Republic and of its historian after Leonardo Bruni and Poggio Bracciolini. Bruni and Braccio lini wanted to be historians although they remained writers. Both of them saw history through concepts. Scala rejected all principles of orientation in the past connected with selection of facts: he decided to include all he knew about the past and the present into his work. In his opinion, events should be presented in several versions;
a historian should not comment on them so that he would not influence the reader. Since all reasons (rationes) of events are given in actions one should not explain them.
Memory, Images of the Past… In order to understand what was humanistic historiography and to what extent author’s declarations differed from practice one should note that unlike ancient historians, humanists were looking for models. But unlike humanists ancient historians did not view history as historiogra phy. Humanists inherited all numerous genres of ancient historiography, and the temptation to see them as a system with several levels and strict rules was too strong. The views of early humanists on historiography could be found not in rules but in prefaces to their historical texts where they announced their work.
Early humanistic culture was very sensitive to written forms of re cording the past: to different genres of classical historiography, to histori cal evidence that could be found in other texts. Humanists paid attention to literature, to all written texts but also to all material traces of Antiquity:
here appear epigraphic and archaeology. Flavio Biondo sought not only to get historical evidence but also to systematize it.
Humanistic historiography knew three main ways to expand the pre sent into the past. First of them was didactic. Memory is seen as virtue:
history is supposed to teach through entertainment. This way was used in ‘mirrors’, biographies, and historical anecdotes. The second way is eru dite: it was used mostly in making synopsis of ancient knowledge. The last way was esthetic. It is humanistic cult of language and form.
For humanists the present was the apogee and the aim of historical process. Therefore the present should be described using the same classi cal rules and the same linguistic means as had been used to show perfect ancient states. Events of the past got their meaning only after they had been turned into examples of
qualities of human nature. The paradox of humanistic view is that the past became history only after it had lost its own historicity.
Lorenzo Valla rejected hierarchic relations between philosophy, po etry and history. Since invention could not come earlier than reality it was evident that historical studies had appeared earlier than poetry. History deals with universals: it presents a source of particular examples of gen eral qualities.
For the advocates of history of illustrious men the story of events prevailed over experience since the former was totally rational and causal.
Main requirements to historical text are maiestas, dignitas, decorum.
And the main stylistic rule is brevitas. ‘Low’, vulgar objects, ‘unimpor tant’ events and persons are selected out, and ‘high’ themes remain. There is a contradiction between Valla’s veritas and brevitas of other humanist panegyrists. Valla desired to reproduce events ‘as they had happened’, with all contradictions of real life. He seeks to show the difference be tween reconstruction and falsification, checks and compares texts by his 758 Memory, Images of the Past… predecessors, historical documents, and oral testimonies. He evaluates actions of his ‘characters’ and grasps what we call the political meaning of events. Valla wanted to be and was a researcher.
Humanistic view of history produced the concept of the cultural gap between Antiquity and their present (it was relevant for Italy and other European states that had been provinces of the Roman Empire), and the idea of cultural continuity (Byzantium). Historical memory of the Renais sance intellectuals showed that the present (that had to adopt Byzantine cultural heritage) was just a draft for the future that would excel the past.
The XVIth c., an age of religious schism, witnessed numerous con flicts, including ‘pamphlet wars’ that provoked waves of religious polem ics. Polemical literature of the Reformation and the Counter-Reformation was extremely influential;
the invention of book printing made polemical texts accessible for wide audiences and therefore turned them into major phenomenon of culture. The same period saw the rise of interest towards history. The XVIth c. was a period when the ‘culture of history’ was shaped. This process was influenced by humanistic techniques of textual analysis and interpretation, as well as by the religious movements of the late XVth – early XVIth cc. that had forced many European intellectuals to turn to the history of the Primitive Church in search of remedies against the crisis of the Catholic Church. The Reformation intensified these trends. The past of the Church became even more important. For the first Protestant polemicists and their opponents the movement from the Church of Apostles to the present was a history of corruption of the Ro man Church. Later Protestant theologians would study history trying to answer the question: where was the ‘true’ church after the Apostles but before Luther? The rise of interest towards history in the XVIth c. cer tainly could not explained only by the Reformation. But it was the Ref ormation that gave the ‘culture of history’ religious sanction, and there fore, a powerful impulse for its development.
At that period history was defined by three powerful currents — by Christianity, humanism and the knowledge of nature. Each of those cur rents combined the heritage of Antiquity, medieval reality and humanistic innovations.
The XVIth c. produced a ‘division of labour’ among those humanists who dealt with writing history. Antiquaries collected commented on and published sources. For others history existed as ‘practical description’ of certain events or biographies. Finally, ‘historians’ shaped their narratives following ‘the most reliable’ constructions of their predecessors. Political history got new qualities in the XVIth c. since some of authors managed to combine the textual analysis of antiquarians, instruments of chroniclers and the style of ‘historians’. In the XVIth c. writing of history meant texts Memory, Images of the Past… that recorded the past (chronicles, annals), while ‘the art of history’ sug gested that historical text had a harmonic structure and was written in a good style. Quite often the ‘art of history’ and ‘history were identified.
Philosophers of the XVIth cc. — Jean Bodin, Francesco Patrizzi, Louis Leroy — separated history from rhetoric, literature, philosophy and law. History is a discipline that deals with reality, past and present. His tory is a true (or thought to be true) reflection of reality in all modes of time. In the early Modern period history became less personified. Accord ing to Bodin, its object is the development of human communities and states. Any historical study begins with general history;
only when its mechanisms and instruments are defined one could deal with lower lev els — regional and personal history.
The Reformation determined European conscience and changed the attitude towards the past. Now scholars would look for reasons and causes of events, for connections between them and for the mechanisms of history. The past was supposed to give answer to general questions about first reasons and ultimate causes of social reality. The past should predict future. In the XVIth c. historical writings were full of explanations, comparative models that determined social or world order. The main task of historian was to establish authenticity of a fact. Facts turned into ‘stones’ to build the edifice of history. This interpretation helped many philosophers of the XVI–XVIIIth cc. (Bacon, Vico, Turgot, Montesquieu etc.) to identify historical knowledge with the knowledge of nature.
Bodin, Patrizzi, Aventin thought about the criticism of historical sources since their selection determined reliability of a historical text. To find the truth one should compare texts that belonged to different authors, period and countries. By the time of Bacon the term ‘history’ got its original meaning: ‘research, description’. Time was edited out of this definition as an event was researched and described as something un changeable, no matter whether the author witnessed it or read about it.
Bacon also addressed the problem of dividing history into periods.
Instead of medieval opposition ‘time-eternity’ he showed an opposition within time itself;
‘the past — the future’. ‘The present’ serves as a limit and as a link between them. This change made historical movement irre versible and placed it into perspective. History was identified with posi tive changes, with progress, mostly in art and science.
In the early Modern period historians did not only addressed history of nations, states and persons but also tried to make a coherent theory of historical process.
A study of the images of the past in Russian medieval literature of the XI–XIIth cc. enables one to demonstrate functioning of historical memory on different levels of religious conscience. At the period of con 760 Memory, Images of the Past… version into Christianity the creation of Church institutes and religious communities had to be reflected in new concepts. New system of ‘memo rable signs’ should be made in order to help ‘new people’ to find their place in Christ’s flock and in Church history. Russian religious identity had being created on the base (and at the same time) of historical memory and from the beginning it got complicated, multi-layered structure. In certain circumstances common Christian components got into foreground;
or it could be Eastern Christian (Orthodox) ones, or the interests of a par ticular metropolitan see or a bishopric, monastery or a parish. All those levels of religious consciousness were connected with different layers of historical memory and various constructs of historical consciousness mo bilized from a certain text.
The highest level of Christianity could be seen at the earliest stage of conversion when new identity should demonstrate itself through oppo sition to its own pagan past. In the newly Christened country this opposi tion ‘pagans — Christians’ should have been the most important one, unlike confessional ideas.
For the most part of the XIth c. historical consciousness existed within oral tradition. The Metropolitan Hilarion wrote ‘The Epistle on Truth and Grace and Encomium to the Prince Vladimir’ about 1140, be fore systematic history writing had began in Russia. This text is the first example of Russian historical, philosophical, political thought, the first attempt at reflecting on Russian history in the context of divine provi dence for all humankind. The only meaningful event of world history was, for Hiarion, the ‘rejection’ of the elect nation and the acceptance of all former pagans, ‘new peoples’;
if all were called for, what did it matter who was converted first? Real Russian pagans were identified with the pagans of the Old Testament;
thus Russian history is placed into the his tory of the world. Paganism of Russians at the Age of the Law of Moses was providential: now, at the Age of Grace, new people were called for to accept the new doctrine.
In 65 years, in the Primary Chronicle [‘Povest’ vremennykh let’] we would not find any addresses ‘we / ours’ in connection with pagan ances tors. There were polyans, drevlyans before the Conversion, after that there were ‘Christians of all countries’. Thus the idea of spreading Chris tianity corresponds with the continuity in identity, which unites pagan ancestors and Christian successors in one term ‘we’. If one thought of conversions of different peoples into Christianity as particular events separated in time and space, one would tend to demonstrate the opposi tion ‘pagans — Christians’.
The idea of providential meaning of pagan period is demonstrated in the ‘Encomium’, which placed Vladimir together with the Apostles. For Memory, Images of the Past… Hilarion the continuity of ethnic and political identity includes Vladimir’s pagan ancestors — Svyatoslav and Igor’. As a consequence the country, the people and the dynasty were made sacral. Texts by Hilarion influ enced Russian medieval historiography although no one of his ideas was accepted in its original form.
It is noteworthy that first Russian historical texts got fragments of anti-Catholic polemical writings. It shows that in the late XI – early XIIth cc. Orthodoxy became an integral part of Russian religious identity.
Later, when the opposition ‘Christianity-paganism’ lost its importance, and tensions between Eastern and Western branches of Christianity deepened, the common Christian level of religious identity revealed itself less fre quently. It could be see in the XVIth century paraphrases of the XIIth c. Rus sian texts where ‘Orthodox’ was synonymous to ‘Christian’ and ‘Russian’.
For centuries scholars studied the events of early Russian history common for Ukrainians, Belorussians and Russians. At the ages of struc tural changes historical memory helped to evaluate changing realities while having been transformed by new doctrines. The central place in any historical text was reserved for conversion of Russia into Christianity.
In 1547 Ivan IV, the Great Prince of Moscow, was crowned as a tsar. For contemporaries this title was equal to that of emperor. The change in status forced Moscow intellectuals of the group of the Metro politan Makarij to reflect on new reality. A great deal of attention was paid to the origin of the Moscow kingdom and its dynasty.
The ‘Stepennaya kniga’ tells about Russian history from ancient times till early 1560s. The structure of the book is based on the image of stairs leading to God;
steps were made of ‘deeds’ of Russian princes.
The ‘Stepennaya kniga’ demonstrates that rules of the first pagan princes formed a particular period of Russian history. The author however ignored all information about other princedoms of the period before Ru rik. For him Russia was united from the beginning so there was no need to tell how Russian princes gradually subjected Slavonic tribes to their power. The anonymous author pays a good deal of attention to the ‘glory’ of Russia. Therefore he did not mention the fact that some Slaves were subjects to khazars. He also ignored all princes that did not belong to the dynasty of Rurik. His attitude towards the dynasty is ambiguous: on one hand, the first Russian princes were pagans;
on the other, Rurik was a founder of the dynasty. This ambiguity determined the double count in genealogy of Russian princes (from pagan Rurik and Christian Vladimir).
The use of double count helped to connect two periods of Russian history and the history of the dynasty — pagan and Christian.
The rule of Prince Vladimir was of great importance for the author of the ‘Stepennaya kniga’. It is shown in the text that Vladimir sought 762 Memory, Images of the Past… God even before his conversion into Christianity. The author gives a de tailed story of coming of St Andrew to Russia and draw the central line ‘St Andrew — Olga — Vladimir’ in order to demonstrate that the conver sion of Russia by the grandson of the first Russian Christian was natural.
He presented the history of pagan Russia as movement towards conver sion. Prince Vladimir was shown as warrior and pious monarch. Vladimir was put in the same line with Emperor Constantine the Great. The ‘Ste pennaya Kniga’ demonstrated that the history of the only kingdom faith ful to Orthodoxy had begun in times immemorial, that its first Christian ruler Vladimir was a model of monarch, and Russia was led by God through actions of pious princes of the dynasty of Vladimir.
Other topic important for Moscow ideology of the XVIth c. was the theme of Kiev heritage. It was first dealt with in the will of Dmitrij Don skoj. Later texts written after Moscow had got its sovereignty, and after the coronation of Ivan IV, developed the idea that Russia had been bap tized by the Apostle Andrew. It was claimed that Moscow and Roman traditions were of same value. In the XVIth c. Russia accepted the saint patron of Byzantium — St Andrew. Moscow was viewed as the second Constantinople, and at the same time — as the second Kiev. As for Prince Vladimir, in the XIVth c. he was called ‘saint’ and ‘Baptist’;
in the early XVth c. — ‘equal to Apostles’. In the mid-XVIth c. Muscovite scholars claimed that rights of St Vladimir were inherited — through dynastic suc cession — by the tsar Ivan IV.
Political preeminence of Russia was based on sovereignty (Moscow had it unlike Kiev). St Vladimir was thought of as the ancestor of the princes of Moscow. Political power of Moscow was explained by its pi ety, and the Church of Kiev was presented as loosing its sanctity, which it had gotten at the times of the baptism. Some developed concepts of trans lation of grace from Kiev to Moscow (a variant of translatio imperii).
In the mid-XVIth c. the theme of Kiev heritage was closely con nected with Russian foreign policy. The task of liberating all territories of former Kiev Rus’ served as ideological justification for the Livonian war.
One could see how the conversion theme was developed through the use of a Ukrainian text of the XVIIth c. (‘Palinodia’ by Zacharia Kopys tensij, 1617–1624). Zacharia’s story of conversion is based on the Pri mary Chronicle as well as on Greek, Latin and Polish historical writings.
The author used the baptism of Russia by St Vladimir to show the impor tance of the Russian Church in universal Christendom. Zacharia treated the schism as the apostasy of the Catholic Church from the true faith. But at the same time when Christendom lost Rome it got newly converted Russia. Thus through baptism Russia got not only the Christian faith but also the sanctity of the Roman see. However Kopystenskij did not speak Memory, Images of the Past… of the translation of grace from Kiev to Moscow. His ideas presented ca nonic arguments for creation of the new Patriarchate in Kiev.
In 1632–1643 an anonymous Ukrainian author made a pro-Moscow adaptation of ‘Palinodia’ — ‘The Book of faith’. In this version the legend on St Andrew’s coming into Russia proved that Moscow could be called the apostolic see (as Constantinople). In the late XVIth c. the weightiest argument for creating a new Patriarchal see in Moscow was the purity of its faith. Texts intended for Russians operated by the complex of ideas known as ‘Moscow is the third Rome’. Apart from concepts of dynastic succession and of the translation of grace new arguments were used: Moscow had Holy relics of St. Andrew and St. Vladimir. Moscow was seen as new Kiev and Kiev should be subjected to the see of Moscow.
‘The Book of Faith’ (the adaptation of ‘Palinodia’) was used as a source for the introductory part of ‘Kormchaya’ by the Patriarch Nikon (1650–1653). As in the source the beginning of Russian Christian history was connected with the apostasy of Rome. But in this text the general history of Christendom and the Roman apostasy was viewed as prelude for the history of the Church of Moscow, and Kiev period was included into the latter part. Thus in the initial Ukrainian version Kiev was the fo cus of attention while in Moscow versions Kiev period ended with St Vladimir. All the rest was the history of Moscow.
Both Ukrainian and Moscow Churches turned to the images of St Andrew and St. Vladimir at the periods of changes: in Russia it was the establishing of sovereign state, autocephalia, the coronation of Ivan IV, the Patriarchate, the Church reform of the XVIIth c., the war for Ukraine;
for Ukraine it was the Union.
Historical legends of Russian diplomacy (Posol’skij Prikaz) also shaped Russian identity and at the same time expressed it. They consoli dated an ‘imaginary community’ by the stories of God’s grace shown to Russian Princes, Orthodox virtues, glorious victories etc. In diplomatic registers one could find historical justifications of accepting the title of tsar, genealogical legends, claims to power over ‘all Russia’. Russian im perial schemes often came into conflict with analogous cultural constricts of other countries.
Russian diplomacy adopted the tradition of Byzantine chronographs.
Particular legends were put into groups according to certain rules. Such example as a narrative structure was extremely short and simplified so it presented minimum of details together with formula. Forms had being changed according to the needs of time but they also could be viewed as logical stages in development of imperial myth making. Imperial symbols and rhetoric dominated the text but particular historical details were under constant revision, and it influenced the Russian historiography.
CONTENTS INTRODUCTION The Culture of History as a Subject of Research (L. P. Repina)………. I. Memory and the Writing of History (L. P. Repina)…...………........ II. The Culture of Remembrance and the History of Memory (Yu. A. Arnautova)……………………………………………….. AN TIQUITY CHAPTER Paradoxes of Historical Memory in Ancient Greece (I. E. Surikov)………………………………..…………….…………. CHAPTER Roman Annals: Making of a Genre (O. V. Sidorovich)…………….... CHAPTER Mythology of Historical Memory in Late Antiquity and Early Middle Ages (P. P. Shkarenkov)…..…………...………………….… W E STERN EUROPE MIDDLE AGES AND EAR LY MOD ERN P ER I OD CHAPTER Historical Memory in German Oral Tradition (E. A. Mel’nikova)………………………..…………………………..
CHAPTER Images of the Past in the Writings by Christian Historians of the Early Middle Ages (V. V. Zvereva)…….......………………….
CHAPTER Representation of the Past by a Medieval Historian:
Einhard and his Writings (M. S. Petroff)…………………………......
CHAPTER The Image of History and Historical Conscience in Latin Historiography of the X–XIIIth cc. (Yu. A. Arnautova)………..….…. CHAPTER Memoria of the House of Welf: a Tradition of an Aristocratic Family (O. G. Oexle)………………………………………………………… CHAPTER An Idea of Authenticity in Medieval Historical Tradition (E. V. Kalmykova)…………..……………………………………….. CHAPTER The Norman Conquest in the English Historiography of the XIII–XIVth cc. (M. M. Gorelov)….…………………………… CHAPTER “Historical” Memory in the Writings by Female Visioners of the Late Middle Ages (A. G. Soupriyanovich)……………………. CHAPTER The Culture of History in Quattrocento (Yu. V. Ivanova, P. V. Letshenko)……………………………………. CHAPTER Continuity and Innovation in the Culture of History of the Late Middle Ages and the Early Modern Period (M. S. Bobkova)…...…… CHAPTER History and the English Religious Controversies in the XVIth and the Early XVIIth cc. (A. Yu. Seregina)………………………...… RUS’ — RUSSIA IN TH E X VII T H C EN TURY CHAPTER Religious Aspects of Historical Memory in Rus’ before Mongols (I. V. Vedyushkina)…………………………..…….………………… CHAPTER The Earliest Period of Russian History in Historical Memory of Moscow Kingdom (A. S. Usachev)……...…………..……………….
CHAPTER Moscow as New Kiev, or Where did the Baptism of Rus’ Take Place? A View of the Early XVIIth Century. (T. A. Oparina)……….. CHAPTER History Serving Diplomacy: Memory and Diplomacy in the XVIth Century Russia (K. Yu. Erusalimskij)………………...… CONCLUSION Historical Culture in Pre-Modern Europe (L. P. Repina)....................
Memory, Images of the Past and Historical Culture in pre-Modern Europe (L. P. Repina)............................................…..
ÑÎÄÅÐÆÀÍÈÅ ÂÂÅÄÅÍÈÅ Èñòîðè÷åñêàÿ êóëüòóðà êàê ïðåäìåò èññëåäîâàíèÿ (Ë. Ï. Ðåïèíà).. I. Ïàìÿòü è èñòîðèîïèñàíèå (Ë. Ï. Ðåïèíà)…...………................... II. Êóëüòóðà âîñïîìèíàíèÿ è èñòîðèÿ ïàìÿòè (Þ. À. Àðíàóòîâà). ÀÍ ÒÈ× ÍÎÑ ÒÜ ÃËÀÂÀ Ïàðàäîêñû èñòîðè÷åñêîé ïàìÿòè â àíòè÷íîé Ãðåöèè (È. Å. Ñóðèêîâ)………………………………..…………….………. ÃËÀÂÀ Ðèìñêàÿ àííàëèñòèêà: ñòàíîâëåíèå æàíðà (Î. Â. Ñèäîðîâè÷)…… ÃËÀÂÀ Ìèôîëîãèÿ èñòîðè÷åñêîé ïàìÿòè íà ðóáåæå Àíòè÷íîñòè è Ñðåäíåâåêîâüÿ (Ï. Ï. Øêàðåíêîâ)………………………………… ÇÀÏÀÄÍÀß ÅÂÐÎÏÀ ÑÐ ÅÄÍÈ Å ÂÅÊÀ È ÐÀÍ ÍÅÅ ÍÎ ÂÎ Å ÂÐÅÌß ÃËÀÂÀ Èñòîðè÷åñêàÿ ïàìÿòü â ãåðìàíñêîé óñòíîé òðàäèöèè (Å. À. Ìåëüíèêîâà)…………………………………………………..
ÃËÀÂÀ Îáðàçû ïðîøëîãî ó ðàííåñðåäíåâåêîâûõ õðèñòèàíñêèõ èñòîðèêîâ (Â. Â. Çâåðåâà)…………..……………………………….
ÃËÀÂÀ Ðåïðåçåíòàöèÿ ïðîøëîãî ñðåäíåâåêîâûì èñòîðèêîì:
Ýéíõàðä è åãî ñî÷èíåíèÿ (Ì. Ñ. Ïåòðîâà)……………………......
ÃËÀÂÀ Îáðàç èñòîðèè è èñòîðè÷åñêîå ñîçíàíèå â ëàòèíñêîé èñòîðèîãðàôèè X–XIII âåêîâ (Þ. À. Àðíàóòîâà)………………....
ÃËÀÂÀ Memoria Âåëüôîâ:
äîìâàÿ òðàäèöèÿ àðèñòîêðàòè÷åñêèõ ðîäîâ (Î. Ã. Ýêñëå)……… ÃËÀÂÀ Ïðåäñòàâëåíèå î äîñòîâåðíîì â Ñðåäíåâåêîâîé èñòîðè÷åñêîé òðàäèöèè (Å. Â. Êàëìûêîâà)…………………………………….…. ÃËÀÂÀ Íîðìàíäñêîå çàâîåâàíèå â àíãëèéñêîì èñòîðèîïèñàíèè XIII–XIV âåêîâ (Ì. Ì. Ãîðåëîâ)….…………………………….….. ÃËÀÂÀ «Èñòîðè÷åñêàÿ» ïàìÿòü â æåíñêîé âèçèîíåðñêîé ëèòåðàòóðå ïîçäíåãî Ñðåäíåâåêîâüÿ (À. Ã. Ñóïðèÿíîâè÷)…………………….. ÃËÀÂÀ Èñòîðè÷åñêàÿ êóëüòóðà Êâàòðî÷åíòî (Þ. Â. Èâàíîâà, Ï. Â. Ëåùåíêî)…………………………………… ÃËÀÂÀ Ïðååìñòâåííîñòü è íîâàöèè â èñòîðè÷åñêîé êóëüòóðå ïîçäíåãî Ñðåäíåâåêîâüÿ è íà÷àëà Íîâîãî âðåìåíè (Ì. Ñ. Áîáêîâà)….…… ÃËÀÂÀ Èñòîðèÿ è àíãëèéñêàÿ ðåëèãèîçíàÿ ïîëåìèêà XVI – íà÷àëà XVII âåêîâ (À. Þ. Ñåðåãèíà)…..…………………… Ä Ð ÅÂÍßß ÐÓÑ Ü — ÐÎÑÑ Èß X V II ÂÅÊÀ ÃËÀÂÀ Èñòîðè÷åñêàÿ ïàìÿòü äîìîíãîëüñêîé Ðóñè:
ðåëèãèîçíûå àñïåêòû (È. Â. Âåäþøêèíà)……….………………… ÃËÀÂÀ Äðåâíåéøèé ïåðèîä ðóññêîé èñòîðèè â èñòîðè÷åñêîé ïàìÿòè Ìîñêîâñêîãî öàðñòâà (À. Ñ. Óñà÷åâ)……………………………….
ÃËÀÂÀ Ìîñêâà êàê íîâûé Êèåâ, èëè Ãäå æå ïðîèçîøëî Êðåùåíèå Ðóñè:
âçãëÿä èç ïåðâîé ïîëîâèíû XVII âåêà (Ò. À. Îïàðèíà)……..…… ÃËÀÂÀ Èñòîðèÿ íà ïîñîëüñêîé ñëóæáå: äèïëîìàòèÿ è ïàìÿòü â Ðîññèè XVI âåêà (Ê. Þ. Åðóñàëèìñêèé)………………………… ÇÀÊËÞ×ÅÍÈÅ Èñòîðè÷åñêàÿ êóëüòóðà Åâðîïû äî íà÷àëà Íîâîãî âðåìåíè (Ë. Ï. Ðåïèíà)…………………………………….………….........… Memory, Images of the Past and Historical Culture in pre-Modern Europe (L. P. Repina)….........................................…..
ÈÑÒÎÐÈß È ÏÀÌßÒÜ ÈÑÒÎÐÈ×ÅÑÊÀß ÊÓËÜÒÓÐÀ ÅÂÐÎÏÛ ÄÎ ÍÀ×ÀËÀ ÍÎÂÎÃÎ ÂÐÅÌÅÍÈ Îáùàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Ëîðèíû Ïåòðîâíû Ðåïèíîé è Ìàéè Ñòàíèñëàâîâíû Ïåòðîâîé Äèðåêòîð èçäàòåëüñòâà È. Â. Äåðãà÷åâà Õóäîæåñòâåííîå îôîðìëåíèå Ì. Ñ. Ïåòðîâîé Äèçàéí îáëîæêè È. Í. Ãðàâå Îðèãèíàë-ìàêåò è êîìïüþòåðíàÿ âåðñòêà Ì. Ñ. Ïåòðîâîé ËÐ 066332 îò 23. 02. Ïîäïèñàíî â ïå÷àòü 01. 04. Ôîðìàò 60õ90/16. Áóìàãà îôñåòíàÿ ¹ 1.
Ãàðíèòóðà Òàéìñ. Ïå÷àòü îôñåòíàÿ.
Óñë. ïå÷. ë. 48. Òèðàæ 800. Çàêàç ¹ Èçäàòåëüñòâî «Êðóãú»
Òåë. / ôàêñ: (495) 729 72 e-mail: email@example.com http://www.krugh.ru Îòïå÷àòàíî â ïîëíîì ñîîòâåòñòâèè ñ êà÷åñòâîì ïðåäîñòàâëåííûõ äèàïîçèòèâîâ â ÏÏÏ «Òèïîãðàôèÿ ‘Íàóêà’»
121099, Ìîñêâà, Ã-99, Øóáèíñêèé ïåð., 6.
I SBN 5 73 9 6 0 0 9 9 - 9 785739