HISTORICKÝ ZÁBER PUŠKINOVEJ “DIMITRIÁDY”. OD PANOVANIA VASILIJA II. TEMNÉHO PO TEMNÉ ČASY SMUTY
Selected contents from this journal
Historical scope of Pushkin's drama on Dmitry from the reign of Vasily II, the Blind, to the time of troubles
Languages of publication
In his drama Boris Godunov, Pushkin did not work solely on the Time of Troubles, but having chosen events that happened around 1600 he opened up the older issues that shaped them. Namely this concerns the polarization that occurred after the Council of Florence (1439). Although this council confirmed cultural plurality and recognized both Latin and Byzantine ritual practices and wordings of the Creed as valid, it was rejected during the reign of Grand Prince of Moscow Vasily II, the Blind. Dmitry, a pretender to the throne of Moscow, wished to replace the seclusionist image of Russia as the last bastion of Christendom by his messianic vision of unifying Christendom and liberating Constantinople. The study points out to the fact that the word Eastern being replaced by the word Northern. The reason of this modification was Pushkin’s effort to be as historically accurate as possible. We should also acknowledge Pushkin’s evolution as a historian between 1825 and 1831. Such precision implies that in 1831 he had a deeper consciousness of the different histories of the Greek and Slavic parts of Byzantine Christendom. Moreover, by introducing an unusual adjective instead of the traditional opposition of Eastern–Western, Pushkin might have included both Poles and Russians in the term Northern Church. In Pushkin’s understanding, Dmitry the Pretender is clearly a representative of a third (Uniat) tendency. Dimitry’s position is not purely defensive if we consider his plan to liberate the city of Constantinople. He has the intention to do so as he is animated by the idea of the Union of Florence, persisting in his native Galicia and among Hungarian Uniats – remote both from Moscow and Rome. The tragic conflict might have also resulted from the misunderstanding around 1600 between the Poles engaged in the local Brest-Litovsk Union (under Roman jurisdiction) and Dmitry, who was still a partisan of Florence (all Byzantine-rite Christians under the jurisdiction of Constantinople). Therefore, Dmitry clearly stands for a more pluralistic cultural concept of Christendom.
176 - 187
Publication order reference