Holly Russia

8/13/2019 Holly Russia

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/holly-russia 1/22



"HolyRussia": Study n the Historyof an Idea

MICHAEL CHERNIAVSKY

"NOT with the mind can Russia be understood.... One can onlybelieve nRussia,"wrote Tiutchev. The poet tried o answer ne of the vital questionshis contemporaries ere asking: What is Russia? Tiutchev's olution, er-tainly, id not satisfy verybody; he question was asked, time and again,and is still being asked, and there has been no dearth of answers. Yet the

poet saw the true nature of the question and so offered aith rather hanreason, or what was sought was not the reality ut the myth. Those whowould accepthis solution, owever, till had to decide which of a number fpossibleRussias,which answer to the original uestion, hey would believein. It is with one possible nswer hat intend o deal in this tudy, ne com-ponent of the Russian dea, expressed n the commonplace, Holy Russia."That this trange pithet s a common ymbol orRussia would be difficultto deny. But if the use of commonplaces s a problem for the socialpsy-

chologist, he history f a symbol nd its content, many stranded hough tmay be, s the province f the historian.

The article y AlexanderV. Soloviev, Holy Russia (Study of the Devel-opment f a Social-Religiousdea),"1 published n 1927,drew my attentionto this history. olovievwas the first, omy knowledge, o attempt historicalsurvey f the epithet. n a later tudy, ublished n 1954,2 heRussianscholarexplores he question f the possiblederivation f "Holy Russia" from arlymedieval oncepts. oloviev s quite correct when he points out the signifi-cance of the epithet. Holy," after ll, evokes the mage of the Holy Land,the and where Christ ivedand on which He set His foot; Palestine s holyas a sum total of all the holy placeswithin t.' Russia is the only other and

1 Soloviev, Sviataia Rus' (ocherk azvitiia eligiozno-obshchestvennoidei)," Sbornik usskagoArkheologicheskagobshchestvaKorolevstve .Kh.S. Belgrade), (I927), 77-113 (hereaftercited as Soloviev).

2 Soloviev, Helles Russland-Heiliges Russland," estschrift ar Dmytro yz'evskii um 6o.Geburtstag, er6ffentlichungen er Abteilung ur lavische prachen nd Literatur es Osteuropa-Instituts Slavisches eminar) an der Freien Universitit erlin, VI (Berlin, 954), pp. 282-89

(hereafter ited s Festschrift).3 The tradition f Terra Sancta derives rom he Old Testament; f. Zach. 2:i2; Sap. I2:3;I Macc.1:7; in the Greek f the Septuagint t appears s 'yfi tyc. In Christian imes, owever,the epithet erra Sancta appears first uring he Crusades; ee Carl Erdmann, Die Entstehungdes KreuzzugsgedankensStuttgart, 935), pp. 279 f. The epithet nd the dea behind t existed,of course, hough n a different orm, n classical ntiquity; or tLQaL AOfivat ee,for xample,Fustelde Coulanges, he Ancient ity, rans.Willard Small (4th ed., New York, 882), p. I87and passim.

617



6I8 Michael Cherniavskythat as eceivedhis pithet ith ny onsistency,4nd t scertainlyurious,sSoloviev oints ut, that he problem ad not been studied arlier.5 heintent f his tudy, owever,srevealed y he uestion e asks fter ointingout the uniqueness f the epithet: Is it deserved?" e then gives briefsurvey f Russianhistory n order o udgewhether heRussian laim oholinesss ustified.6 e seesRussian hought hrough he ges s peculiarlyGod-centered,ut the historical roblems limited y the fact hat olovievfinds he arliest ated use of the pithet n the writings f PrinceAndrewKurbskii n the seventies f the sixteenth entury. e then rgues hatKurbskii ndoubtedlyidnot reate he erm utfound t n common sage,sothat ne may xpect o find arlier ocumentaryroof.7n his ater

rticleSolovievoncludeshatKurbskii s the arliest ated ourcewepossess. edoes,however, uggest ources hat how arlier se of the pithet, amely,Russian olk ongswritten own n the eighteenth entury nd later utgoing ack n oral radition,ccordingoSoloviev,othe ourteenthentury.8

Searching or he rigin f holy," oloviev indst, oth deologicallyrndetymologicallyn the pithet bright," enlightened,"illumined."9orrectly,I believe, oloviev nterprets vetlaia r svetlorusskaian the arliest ources,

such s the lovo o polku goreve, omean illumined ythe faith."10 hefinal tage n the developmentf this conceptwas expressedn the sunimagery mployed y the writers f the ate fifteenth nd early ixteenth

4The Sacrum mperium omanumwas a legallyderived erm nd in the MiddleAges wasused in apposition o the SanctaEcclesia. The whole problem f national pithets s a compli-cated one and deserving f study; mplications f sanctity r holiness o appear occasionallynthe national tates f Western urope. For the iterature n the "holy realm of France" and itsconnection ith the Terra Sancta of the

Crusades ee Ernst H. Kantorowicz, Pro Patria Moriin MedievalPoliticalThought," AmericanHistoricalReview,LVI (1951), 479-84. The sameconnotation s carried by the "BlessedLady Spain"; see Gaines Post, "BlessedLady Spain-Vincentius ispanus and SpanishNational mperialism n the 13th Century," peculum,XXIX(1954), I98-210. The closest arallelwith "Holy Russia" s "Virginal" r "Holy Ireland"; see,for example, he poem by Giolla Modubhda, a. 1200, in the Todd Lecture Series (Dublin,I892), pp. 408-37; see also the eighteenth-century oem The Fair Hills of Holy Ireland, rans-lated by Sir SamuelFerguson n An Anthology f Irish Verse, d. Padraic Calum (New York,1948), p. I82. For all of the material n Ireland am indebted o Professor ohnKelleher fHarvard University.

5 Soloviev, . 77, fn. I. As far as I have been able to determine oloviev s right when heclaims that no study rior to his own had appearedon this ubject.The traditional cceptanceof the epithet was apparently o deep that t occurred o no one to examine t. The exampleofthis kind of acceptancewhich have before me, a social and political tudy f modern Russiaby Georges riedmann, alla Santa Russia All'U.R.S.S.(Rome,1949), is one of many.

6 Because of this outlook, oloviev,while nvestigating heproblem f the history f "HolyRussia,"becomespart of that history imself.

7 Soloviev, . gI, fn. .8Festschrift, p. 283-85.9Sveto-russkaia, vetlo-rsisskaiaemlia, Festschrift, p. 282 f.10See Festschrift, . 282, for references o Slovo o pogibeli rutsskoi emli and to Slovo o

polku Igoreve.





620 Michael CherniavskySalvation hus oincided ith political oundary;t could nly eattainedin Russia.The future f the wholeworlddepended pon. hefaith f thenewRussian sardom.

For a century fter his, ussianwriters evelopedhetheme n all itsvariations, hich an be subsumed nder different logan-Moscow, heThird Rome.14 he focus, owever, orall these deaswas the ruler fMoscow, he Grand rince f Moscownd All Russia,"who, o fulfill isnewrole, ecame n I547 the tsar, he Orthodox nd Universal mperor."It is not my purpose ere oanalyze henewMoscovitedeology, ut Rus-sianhistory f the ifteenthndsixteenthenturiessstriking n the xclusivefocus n theprince. ne might ay hat here as n theRussia f hat imemyth f the uler ut not f he and, f the ountry ndpeople s a whole.15

If we accept, hen, he ossibility,r rather he pplicability,f the pithet"Holy Russia" rom hemiddle f the fifteenth entury n, the question fits first ppearance ecomes ighly nteresting. or over century fter tbecame ossible,heepithet as never sed n any of the numerous ndextremist ritings edicatedothe xaltation nd virtual eificationf theRussian uler. t first ppears n thewritings f Prince urbskii, amous or

his friendship ith his tsar, van the Terrible, nd for his, etrayal f vanandflight oLithuania. herehe wrote is etters o vanandhisHistory fthe Prince f Moscow.'8n his answer o Ivan's second pistle, urbskiiaccuses he tsar of having dishonored ourself nd all the holyrussianlands."'7 ight more imes n his History he prince sesthe epithet, ivetimes n the form f "holyrussianands,"'8 nce s "holyrussiansardom,"'9and twice s "holyrussianmpire."20 his is the only knownuse of theepithet n the sixteenth entury. oloviev efers o its use in the etter f

PhilotheosoGrand rince asil II but doesnotplacemuch redencen t,14The literature n this subject s quite extensive; mong the better works are Vladimir

Val'denberg, revnerusskiia cheniia predielakh sarskoi lasti Petrograd, 9I6); I. Budovnits,Russkaia ublitsistika VI veka Ak. N. SSSR,947); and Hildegard chaeder,Moskaudas DritteRom (Hamburg, 929); see also the brilliant nd provocative tudy y Sevcenko, A NeglectedByzantine ource of Muscovite olitical deology," Harvard Slavic Studies Cambridge,Mass.,I954), II, I41-80.

15 If anything, he myth f the ruler s created t the expense f the myth f the "land."The twelfth-century lovo o polku Igoreve peaks of the zemlia russkaia, he Russian and, thecommonfatherland; n the fourteenth entury, articularly fter he battle f Kulikovo n 1380,it is the prince nd only the princewho symbolizes he state nd the country.

16 n Russkaia Istoricheskaia iblioteka St. Petersburg, 9I4), XXXI (hereafter ited asR.I.B.).17"Na preskvernoe vechnoe tvoe postydienie vsea sviatorusskie emli," R.l.B., p. 134.18 Sviatorusskie emli.19Sviatorusskoe sarstro.20 Imperiia viatorusskaia. his formula robably eflects urbskii's olish and generalWest-

ern associations.mperiia would normally efer o the Western, absburg mpire; he Roman-Byzantine mpire was called tsarstvo. s one can see, in all usagesby Kurbskii, viataia ndrusskaia re combined nto one word, hat s, used as an epithet.



"Holy Rtussia 62 1

for he erm AllHolyandGreatRussia" s found nly n a redaction f theseventeenthentury.21

The problem hen emains: ssuming ven hat he pithet as n com-mon usage, eflectedn the folk ongs nd epics,why was there nly nereflectionf t in the politicaliterature f the ixteenth entury? urbskii,after ll, belongeddeologicallyoa group f boyar ppositionoautocracythat ated rom he eginningf he ixteenthentury, rom he ircle roundMaxim heGreek.22

The answermaybefound, t least artially,n the use Kurbskiimade fthe pithet.n each ase t s used na sentence escribinghe vildeeds f heautocraticsar: Oh,Satan . . whyhaveyouplanted uch

godlesseed n

theheart f a Christian sar, rom which uch fire wept ver ll theHoly-russian andthat no words re needed owitness t fromme? . . Oh evilones, illedwith various ices nd slyness, estroyersf your atherland,rbetter aidof the wholeHolyrussiansardom . .23 Suchevil, icious . .ones hat hey ave orn hebelly f theirmother, hat s of theHolyrussianlands,whohasborn hem nd raised hem. . ." Warning van, hetorically,of the xample f Herod,Kurbskii ells he sar hat yourmajesty'sbund-

ance of evilwill devastate otonly riends ut all the Holyrussianands,"andhewrites f Theodore asmanov,he sar's beloved"nd the estroyer. . of theHolyrussianands."vankilled great oblewhose ather, tepan,servedmany ears, ntil ewaseighty, erved ell nd honestly heHoly-

russian mpire.""Again, he sar illed Nikita, urnamed azarinov, ithhis only on Theodorewho was in the bloom f his youth, ho [that s,Nikita]hadservedmany ears nd faithfully heHolyrussianmpire."25nfact, hetsar had ordered ismurderers owipeout men whoweredyingin the defense f "Holyrussian"ands gainst he pagans.26In every asethe epithet s used to create n antithesis o the tsar, heantithesis f a "HolyRussia."van's ctions, readful s theywere, ecamethe morehorrible hen directed gainst iscountry, hich s not ust hisproperty ut s the HolyLand.Perhaps rince urbskii egan oconstructthat myth f the nation hathe found ecessaryooppose hemyth f theruler. he "HolyRussian"ands, he sardom r empire, xisted part romthe xalted nd newly reated sar. ertainly,n this ense, he pithet ould

21.Festschrift, p. 285, fn. 7; "Khristianskomu sariu vladeltse sekh, razdoderzhateliu hevseiasviatyia velikiia osiia,"Malinin,Appendix, . 50.

22 On this, nd also for bibliography, ee Budovnits, sp. chaps. Ii-v.23 This was addressed o the tsar's councilors.24R.I.B.,pp. 2I6, 262, 266, 27I, 305.25 Ibid., p. 307. In another ariant, he word "region" oblast') is written n on the margin.26Ibid., p. 306.The pagans n this ase are the Tatars.



622 Michael Cherniavskyexpress political heory onsistent ith the views of Kurbskii nd hisideological redecessors: ussia was a land, exalted y ts orthodoxy ndpurity, ntrusted o a princely lan which n common eld Russia nd incommon uled over t.27 hus, for Kurbskii, van became monster finiquity fter aving ejected is councilors nd boyars nd acted utocrati-cally, aving magined imself o be "immortal nd divine."28

Nevertheless, urbskii's niqueness emains problem. ertainly heargument rom ilence s a dangerous ne,but the epithet ppears o havepassed nnoticed.29hough t was used n a letter o van, he sar id notpick t up; it did not appear n the political ritings t his court. et onemust greewithA. V. Soloviev hat t s most nlikely hat urbskii nventedthe term; moreprobably herebellious rince sed an epithet n commonusage. o muchmore triking, hen, s the ilence f official saristdeology.It seems o confirm y uggestion hat rom hevery eginning he pithet"HolyRussia" s an antitsarist,ntistate logan.

One more onsideration emainss far s Kurbskii sconcerned. is let-ters re dated uiteprecisely,ut he arliest anuscriptf hiswritings hathas survived s from heearly eventeenthentury.0 here ppears o be,

therefore, o conclusivevidence or he useof the epithet uring he ix-teenth entury. his is not to saythat ne must eject he ixteenth-centuryorigin f "Holy Russia,"but Kurbskii's niquenessmay have the verysimple xplanation hat HolyRussia"s a seventeenth-centurynterpolation.The ikelihoodhat seventeenth-centurycribe asuallydded HolyRussia,"or substituted t for heoriginal ame r epithet, ust e udged ythehis-tory f the ymboln the eventeenthentury. hatmay ecalled he eriodof silence xtends rom he middle f the fifteenth entury ll through hesixteenth, hat s, through heperiod f the evolution nd culmination fByzantinemperialdeology,f thedeificationf the tate, irstn the personof thegrand rince nd then f the sar.

The history f the itle HolyRussia" n the eventeenth enturys a verydifferent ne. t begins arly n the entury, hen nJune 4, i6i9, theMetro-

27 See Vasilii 0. Kliuchevskii, oiarskaia uma drevnei usi (4th ed., Moscow, 909).28 R-l.B., pp. I-2, 28i.29 See, for example, he main "royalist"writers: he monk Filofei Philotheos), n Malinin,

Appendix; Abbot osif Sanin of Volokolamsk, rosvetitel', n Pravoslavnyi obesednik Kazan',i856, i857), and also in Chteniia Imp. Obshch. storii drev. rossiiskikh or 847; ArchbishopVassian of Rostov n Polnoe Sobranie Russkikh etopisei,VI. See also, for example,Zhitiekhozhdenie Daniila russkia zemli igumena, ed. Mikhail A. Venevitinov, n PravoslavnyiPalestinskii bornik St. Petersburg, 883-85), nos. 3 and 9; the earliestMS is from 475. Inthis travelogue nd pilgrimage alestine s frequently eferred o as the Holy Land, but theepithet s never pplied to the "russian and" for which the abbot prays n his pilgrimage.

30 R.l.B., pp. v-vii; Poslaniia vana Groznogo, d. Varvara P. Adrianova-Perets Moscow,Leningrad, 1951), pp. 529 f.



"Holy Russia" 623politanFilaret Romanov, ather f the newly lected sar,MichaelRomanov,returned o Moscowfrom his long years of captivity n Poland. The joyexperienced y the young tsar and the country was expressed n a songbeginning:

The Moscovite sardom ejoicedAnd all the Holyrussianand.3'

The song then describes hereception f Filaret nd his companions y TsarMichael and the mass that was celebrated, nding with the metropolitan'sblessing f his imperial on:

Godgrant ealth othe Orthodox sarGrandPrinceMikhail edorovich-Mayhehold heMoscovitesardomAnd all the Holyrussianand.

This is the first eallydated use of the epithet, or, within wo monthsof its creation, he song was recorded by the Englishman, Richard James,chaplain to the embassy ent out in i6i8 by James J'32 T'he exact date, ofcourse, s not the ssue.What is significant s that heepithet ppears ohavebeen in common usage, that it was used in a popular song, and that itemerged n a period of new developments n Russian deology. 'he new tsarand the new dynasty ymbolized new national onsciousness. ichaelwaselected y an Assembly f the Land (Zemskii obor) after ears f civilwarand foreign nvasions, heTime of Troubles.The threat onational xistenceand to orthodoxy for this was how the Russians aw Polish intervention)cameat a time, however,when the traditional entral uthority asvirtuallyabsent.33 alvation came from he Russian people-towns, monasteries, nd,lower gentry; here

was a conception f a popular, nationalwill expressed nthe great ssembly. t is against this background hat he use of the epithetin a songshouldbe considered.

In the song, the predication Holy Russia," while not antithetical, snevertheless eparated from the state, from the Moscovitetsardom. Theepithet ymbolizes new and a different imension n the concept f Russia.Despite the historical rigin of this dimension n the fifteenth entury, ncontrast ith the historical oscovite sardom t symbolizes henonhistorical,

31Pavel K. Simoni, Velikorusskie esni apisannye I6I9-20 gg. dlia Richarda zheimsa,"SbornikOtdeleniiaRusskago azyka i Slovesnosti, kademiiaNauk, LXXXII (I907), 7.

ZradovolosiaTsarstvo Moskovskoei vsia zemlia Sviato-russkaia.

32 Carl Stief, tudies n the Russian Historical ong (Copenhagen, 953), pp. I3 f., 54.33 See Sergei F. Platonov, mutnoe vremia; ocherki o istorii muty v Mosk. Gosudarstve

xvI-xvII VV. (St. Petersburg, 899).



624 Michael Cherniavskytranscendental ussia.34he identifying eature f this ther ussia s theorthodox ussian eople.

No one n the eventeenth entury eems o have nalyzed he pithet, orevento have been conscious f its use and implications, ut the availableevidenceupports his nterpretation.his evidence onsists f epics f theDon Cossacks, ating rom he middle f the eventeenth entury.35n theso-calledPoetical" ale of the iege ofAzov,36heCossacksrecalled ponto surrender y Turkish eneral f thebesiegingrmy: You have njured. . . the Turkish ord and tsar. ruthfully re you till alled n Russia heholyrussianeroes; ow an younow,you hieves, lee rom is dread and?"When the situation f the beleaguered ossacks ecomes esperate, heyappealprayerfullyo their atron, ohn he Baptist: We shallnever e inHolyRussia gain Our sinful eath omes n the deserts oryourmiracle-working cons, or he Christian aith, or he tsar's ame nd for ll theMoscovitetate."37n the ament f heCaptivesf he aporozh'e ossacks,the enslaved ossacks ing: "Deliver, od, the poor aptive/ o the holy-russian ank/ o the happy and/ Among hristian olk."38

The use of the pithet n the Azov tale uggests hat Holy Russia" m-

braced ll the values orwhich heCossacks ied: the holy cons, hefaith,the sar, nd the tate. his becomes learwhen ne recalls heunique osi-tion of the Great on Army" VelikoeVoiskoDonskoe), s the Cossackassociationalled tself. n effect, t was an independent oliticalntity, eal-ing as a sovereign owerwith he Turks, atars, oland, nd Moscow;ndyet, s individuals, s orthodox ussians, he members ecognized hesovereigntyf the sar. hat s to say, s Orthodox, heCossackswereRus-sians, venthough y origin many f them wereTatars, oles, r Lithu-anians, nd as Orthodox ussians hey ould only cknowledgene ruler-the Orthodox sar.Nevertheless,he Moscovite sardom eganacross hefrontier, nd the Don Cossackswere lways nxious o preserveheright oenter Russia.What s interesting, owever,s that Moscow lso saw itsboundariess those f the political" oscovitetate nd ordered heCos-sacksnot o allow freemen o enter Russia nd theupper river] owns."39

34In the same way, the grand prince of Moscow was also the grand prince of all Russia,t,seia Rutsi.

35 Festschrift, . 286; Voinskie povesti dr-evnei Rtusi, d. Adrianova-Perets (Moscow, 1949).36 "Skazochnaia"povest' vziatiiAzova, n Voinskie ovesti revoei Rusi,pp. 265 f.37 Ibid., pp. 62-63, 76.38 V. Antonovich nd M. Dragomanov, storicheskie esnimalorusskago aroda Kiev, I877),

T, 95, in Festschrift, . 286, fn. I3. Another variant of the song, quoted by Soloviev, illustratesthe equation between Russian Christianity and holiness: "Vyzvol', Hospody, nevol'nika / Naiasny zory / Na ruskii bereh / Mezh mir khreshchenyi."

39 Donskie Dela, III, in R.I.B., XXVI, 543. On this whole problem, see S. Tkhorzhevskii,"Donskoe voisko v pervoi polovine semnadtsatogo veka," Russkoe Proshloc, III (1923), 9-28.



"Holy Russia" 625The Moscow overnments well as the Cossacks cknowledgedmplicitlythedistinction etween,r the nonidentity f, he Moscovitetate nd "HolyRussia."

But n this cknowledgment, here as a diff-erence,or he overnment-that s,the sar, he bureaucracy,he hurch, nd the deologists f Moscovitepower-never sed the epithet Holy Russia." This, think, s essential.Officialoliticalhought idnot eem o be aware, r refused obecomeware,of this ther imension, hepopular imension f Russia, nd this fficialposition id not hange ntil he very nd, n 9I7.4? The focus, f ll sanctitywas n the rthodox nd holy sar; he unique unction f Russia, xpressedin the formula Moscow, he Third Rome,"was from he beginning,n themid-fifteenthentury, ependent n the sar. ne may rgue hat he uiteextraordinaryecoveryf autocracy fter he Time of Troubles ignified hepreservationf the thought f the monkPhilotheos,hatMoscowwastheThird Romeand a fourth here ould not be, and that he burden f pre-serving hristianitynd the world ested pon he grand rince f Moscow,the nly Orthodox uler nd therefore he uler f all men. alvation xistedonlywithin he political oundaries f Russia, whichweredetermined y

the power nd rule f the sar. his more r ess official ational ride ndconsciousnessere ymbolized y the "reigning ity f Moscow," he "im-pregnable,"he beautiful," he New Rome" s it was called by AvramiiPalytsin, hegreat hronicler f the Time of Troubles, f the period f re-ligious ndpolitical umiliation.41

"HolyRussia,"hen, as popular pithet xpressingpopulardeology.twasused y heDonCossacks,utlawsegally utnotmorally r deologically.It wasa territorial onceptnsofar s it embraced he andof salvation, ithits cons, aints, nd the Christian ussian eople. The way n which heepithet as used n popular olk ong nd epics id notprescribehe oliticalform f Russian ociety; hat s to say, Russiacouldbe "Holy Russia"whether here asa tsar r not.

40 I have been able to find only one instance f official se of the epithet, n the emergencyproclamation f Emperor Nicholas on the Revolution f 1848: "We are ready to meet ourenemies,wherever hey may appear, nd, without paring urselves, e will, n an indissolubleunion with our Holy Russia defend the honor of the Russian name and the inviolability four bor(lers." f. Nikolai K. Schilder, mperator ikolai Pervyi St. Petersburg, 903), II, 629.It is interesting o note that the epithet was used by members f the nmperial amily nd highofficials ery arely, pparently n connection ith emergencies or hecountry. ee, for xample,the reaction o I848 by the Grand Duke Konstantin ikolaevich, nevni4 Velikogo KniaziaKonst. Nik., quoted in A. S. Nifontov, ossiia v 1848 goda (Moscow, 1949), p. 202; or thespeech f Mikhail V. Rodzianko before he Duma, July 6, 1914, n Arkhiv Russkoi Revoliutsii(Berlin, 926), XVII,81.

41 SkazanieAvraama Palitsyna, rkheograficheskaia ommissiia St. Petershurg, 909), pp.297-98.



626 Michael CherniavskyPerhaps his s the point t which ne should eal with heproblem f

folk ongs nd epics. he epithet sfound n the ong omposedor ilaret'sentry ntoMoscow.n addition here re four olk ales reservedn seven-

teenth-century anuscripts."n one of them, he picof Michael otok, refound he pithets holyrussianero" nd "holyrussianand."43t s possible,therefore,hat hemany ongs isplayinghe erm HolyRussia" ontainedit as early s the seventeenthentury, venthough heywerenot writtendownuntil 750, at the earliest.44n most f them he pithet s usedwithstandard ssociations.t wouldbe superfluousoquote ll the nstances fuse, running nto the hundreds, ut t is worth whilenoting hat n thegreat ong cycle ssociated ith the history f Ivan the Terrible, hoseimagehas remained o vivid mong heRussian eople, heepithet, sedmany imes,s not ssociated ith he errible sar r with he tate; n thecontrary, HolyRussia" s employedn bawdy nd satirical ongs hatmakefun of the tsar nd of his marriage ithMariaTemgriukovna.45ere theantithesisf sar nd HolyRussia" eems xplicit.

In any ase, onsideringhe vidence or he eventeenthentury nd thedates f the ubsequentongcollections hich ppear n print, he epithet"HolyRussia"

has beena commonplacemongst hemasses, he peasants,at east rom he arly eventeenthentury ntil he present.46

Sofar,wehavebeen ble nly o guess t themeaning f he device,t thecontent f "HolyRussia." he abundancef popular ources nlymarks hefact hat,with hepossible xception f Kurbskii, o one in the educatedclasses,hegovernment,he hurch, hegentry, r among he politicalhink-ers, sedthe pithet n the eventeenthentury. or the ighteenth entury,

onehasto agreewith oloviev hen e points ut hat either HolyRussia"nor Illumined ussia" re thought f n that ge of borrowed lassicism.47It is with his ackground,hen, hat he pithet nters he nineteenth en-tury, he astperiod f tshistory.

Valuable hought may e, t s virtually mpossibleo ist ll the nstances42 A. P. Evgen'eva, "O nekotorykh oeticheskikh sobennostiakh usskagoustnago eposa

xvII-xIx vv.," Trudy OtdelaDrevnerusskoi iteratury Moscow,Leningrad, 948), VI, 177-78.43 Ibid., p. 178, fn. 3 and 6. See also Vladimir a. Propp, RusskiiGeroicheskii pos (Lenin-

grad,955),

pp. I05 f.44The Kirsha Danilov Collection. or detailson this collection ee Festschrift, p. 286-87.45 See VsevolodF. Miller, storicheskie esni russkago naroda, xvI-xvII VV., Sbornik Otd.

Russ. Iaz. i Slov., AkademiiaNauk, XCIII (1915) pp. 41 f.46See, for recent ollections, ropp, pp. 5o8 f.; Byliny evera Moscow, 1938), 1, 253 f.;

AlexanderD. Grigoriev, rkhangel'skie yliny istoricheskie esni (St. Petersburg, 904-I0).47See Festschrift, . 287. This, too, s an argument rom ilence, fter n examination f all

the more or lessobvious ources. ven the appellation us' does not seem to be used, however,in an age which peaks of Rossiia nd Rossiane.



"Holy Russia" 627of the use of "Holy Russia" n the nineteenth entury; t s sufficientosaythat, rom hemiddle f the entury, t became commonplacen all kindsof writing. he epithet ppears o start tsmodern istory ith ushkin, nhis first pistle o the censor: Tell me, re younot shamed hat n HolyRussia Because fyounobooks re o be seen?" n BorisGodunov ushkindescribesheapproach f the False Pretender o the Russian rontier; heyoung rince urbskii, on f he xile, allops p to he order nd xclaims:"Here,here t is, here's he Russian order Oh Holy Russia,my father-land, 'm yours " nd n EugeneOnegin ushkin escribesishero eturn-ing,homesick,fter is European ravels: Onegin ides: or he shall ee /Holy Russia, er fields, her deserts ities nd her eas."48 t is true hatthe ensor oem receded odunov y hree ears, ut t s tempting o pecu-late whether ushkin id not discover he pithet n his historical esearchfor his great rama, n reading hewords f the lderKurbskii, hich ethen ut n the mouth f Kurbskii'son. t is, f course, ifficult opindowntheprecise nd constant eaning f the pithet or he poet.What ne maycall the positiveymbol ppears o be in contrast ith he atirical seof theepithet hen ddressed o the censor. et one may argue hat here s a

significantarallel etween rince urbskii nd Pushkin, etween hemem-ber of the great oyar pposition f the ixteenth entury nd the memberof the iberal ristocratic pposition f the early nineteenth, nd that hesimilarity asfelt y he poet.At any ate, ushkin sed he pithet asually,as a commonplace.he new awareness,hediscoveryf a popular ationalidealexpressedn an epithet, eflects newperiod f national onsciousness.What 6i3 did for hemasses,8l2 perhaps idnotonly or hemasses utfor he ducated lass, henobility, he ntelligentsia.49n a search ormean-ing, he ntelligentsiaevitalizedn oldsymbol.The period f consciouswareness f the pithet as ushered n by theSlavophiles;t s associated ith he outlook laiming dherents mong hegreatest ussianwriters nd thinkers. HolyRussia" ontinued hrough he

48"Skazhi, ne stydno i, chto na Sviatoi Rusi / Blagodaria tebia, ne vidno knig dosele?""Vot, vot ona, vot russkaia granitsa / Sviataia Rus' otechestvol a tvoi " "Onegin, edet: onuvidit / Sviatuiu Rus's, eieia polia / Pustyni, rady moria." For all Pushkin citations eeFestschrift, p. 287 f.

49 For this uggestion here s available truly ronicbit of evidence. n a letter f January4, i8I7, to his old friend ount later Prince) MikhailSemenovich orontsov, ount AleksandrKhristoforovich enckendorff rote, bout the patriotism nd generosity f provincial entrytowardhis troops: C'est ncalculable e qu'on peut faire e la bonne volonte esgentilshommes,de la richesse t de la prosperite roissante e notre ainte Russie."Arkhiv Kniazia Vorontsova,ed. Petr Bartenev Moscow, 889), XXXV, i86. One of the earliest nstances f the epithet nthe nineteenth entury s thus n a letter y a German, ducated n Bayreuth nd at the famousJesuit ension f Abbe Nikoly n St. Petersburg, ritten o a member f a great Russianfamilywho was brought p and educated n England and who, ike Benkendorff, hought, poke, ndwrote n French.





"Holy Russia" 629Butwhatmysteriousnexplicableorce raws ne to you?Whydoes hemournfulsong hat loats ll overyour ength nd breadth rom ea to, ea echounceasinglyin the ar? What s in it, n that ong? What s it that alls nd sobs nd clutchesat my heart? . . Russia what do you want f me? Whatunthinkable ondhidesbetween s? Whydoyou ook t me so and why s everything here swithin outurning ts yes n me,full f expectation?.. And still, ull f perplexity standmotionless hile n awful loudheavywith oming ains ooms bovemy head,and thought s dumb before your mmensity. hat does this imitless paceprophesy? s it not here, n you that here s to be born nfinite hought, henyouyourself re without nd? .. And am engulfedmenacingly ythe mightyspacewhich eflects ith fearful orce eep within me; a supernatural owerhasenlightened yeyes:Oh, what radiant,marvelous nknown o earth istanceRussia 5

Gogol'doesnot hereuse the pithet HolyRussia," ut the uestion easks, nd the answer e expects, nticipate heformulations hich omelater: his and, o gigantic, ounearthly s to be terrifying, ust ave ome-thing nique, omething lso terrifying, o say. Russia s both omethingclose nd ntimate ndyet we nspiring, nutterabilyrosaicndunearthly.56For Gogol',Russiahassomething osay, omethingooffer. ussia s a rid-dle.The riddle s hidden oth n the past and the future; t evokes othnostalgia nd anticipation.n this ense Gogol'swords eflect hedirectionsof search or nswers n thepart f the lavophiles.

Oneof the most triking xpressionsf "HolyRussia"nostalgias foundonly a few years fter Gogol'soutburst. he poet-prince iazemskiiwrote his poem Holy Russia as a reaction o the European events f I848;clearly, Viazemskii was afraid of the revolutions aking place beyond thefrontier. n the poem he expresses is joy that his country, Holy Russia,"escaped he nfection. ussiawas safe from haosand anarchy ecauseof herdivine purpose, xpressed n her glorioushistory, er people,her ruler, ndher language.At the end of the poem, however,Viazemskii abandons thestandard f political atriotism nd writes:

HolyRussia n its verymeaningProvidence oretold erpathAndnot fornothing t her BaptismDid He endowher with hisname....Oh, safeguard henyour ledgeKeepto the ame elf-chosen athBefore ll men nd before odOh HolyRussia,Holybe 57

55Nikolai V. Gogol', Mertvye ushi, I, Polnoe sobranie ochinenii Moscow, Leningrad,I951), VI, 220-21.

56 For a Western quallymystical iew, eeOswaldSpengler, he Declineof the West NewYork, I939), II, 295, fn. i.

57 Kniaz' P'etr A. Viazemskii, olnoesobranie ochinenii St. Petersburg, 88o), IV, 3 4-I5.



630 Michael CherniavskyThe poet etsforth ll the basicfeatures f "Holy Russia." rom the firstmoment f ts real that s,Christian) xistence, ussia eceivedhe ndow-ment f holiness roin od. Russia s holynot only n the yes f Russiansbut bjectively,n the yes f God.Thisdivine ttribute etermines ussia'slife, erhistory. oreover,t ndicates er uperhumaniask: HolyRussia"has to beholy, asto remain oly.

The poemhad an evenmore nterestingequel n the etter hegreat oetZhukovskii, iazemskii'sriend, rote fter eading olyRussia.A.Solovievcalls t a "vivid utmuch oo yrical ndbrief n attempt t analysis."58t istempting oquotethis xtraordinaryocumentn full, ut for ur purposethe following villuffice:HOLY RussIA-this word is coevalwith Christian Russia. It is given to her, s yourverses ay, at her baptism nd it will never ose its deep meaning, ven though thas become a commonplace lieux communs]. .. That which has become com-mon, s accepted y all, it is undeniable; t has lost ts novelty ecause f itsantiquity, ut for that very reason t is a necessary nd universal ruth.... So is ithere: HOLYRussIA-how often nd how long has this word been repeated, howwe are accustomed to it, how some use it even ironically-but said now does itnot astonish us with ts novelty nd truth? . . Does it not make more clear ourparticular nion with God becauseof which from ur forefathers here amedownHis marvellous ameof the RussianGod? 9 . . . RussianGod,HolyRussia-such names for God and for fatherland re not possessed y any Europeanpeople. In the expressionHolyRussia here s reflected ur whole unique history;this name Russia has from ts baptism,60 ut its deep meaning it acquired fromthe period of fragmentation nto appanages, when there was one chief, greatprince over various subordinate nes, when, together with the great principalitythere were many small independent nes, and when it all conjoined nto one, notinto Russia but into Rus', that s, not into a state but into a family where all hadthe same fatherland, ame faith, ame language, the same memories nd legends;this s why n the bloodiest ivil strife, hen there was as yet no Russia . . . therewas for ll the one, living, ndivisibleHolyRus'.. .. Since then Russia has becomea state, he particular ttribute f the tsar while Holy Rus' remained s a legend,the common treasure f tsar and people. Russia Rossia) belongs to the complexof European states; HolyRussia Rus') is the particular ereditary roperty f theRussian people, confirmed o it by God.61

One can seewhyA. Solovievalls hismuch oo yrical.t is not pro-found nd reflectivenalysis f the ontent f HolyRussia." et t containsthe essence f nineteenth-cenituryhought n the subject, nd it is all the

more ignificant or ts mpromptu ature.What Zhukovskiixpressesrethe raditional,opular onceptionsf "HolyRussia": t is holy hroughtss8Soloviev,p. ioo, fn. i.59RusskoiBog, not Rossiiskii og, Zhukovskii oints ujt.60 Kreshchatik.61Vasilii A. Zhukovskii, ochineniia 7th ed., St. Petersburg, 878), VI, I64--66. Zhukovskii

then continueswith a very nteresting isculssioin n the Russian God, a subject hat deservesseparate tudy.



"Holy Russia" 631particular nd uniqueunionwith God,through ts possession f a specialdivine evelation hichmakes ts own history eflecthe mage f Christ;the ign f this s the uniquenessfRussian hristianity, f Orthodoxy. nd"HolyRussia"for Zhukovskii,s for hepeasants, as and is somethingdistinct rom he Russian tate, omething reater han he tate-it s theuniversal wareness y Russians f their union with God. This aware-ness ncludes he state nd the ruler ut does not require hem, nd thisawarenessxists rom he moment f Russia's nception, hat s, from tsbaptism.What "Holy Russia" ignifies,hen, s the historicaldeal of theRussian eople, bjectifiedy ts divine onfirmation.

The myth hich rose n the eventeenthentury as carried ack, sallmyths, othe beginning f time. ut while he Russian easant reated t asmyth, hat s,outside f time, inleteenth-centuryhought ried o ustify heepithet istorically. ut of this here eveloped he Slavophile ttempt orewrite ussian istory, o find he concretenessf Russian oliness.62urconcern ere s not with hese xtremist istortionsf the Russian ast butrather ith heproblem hich hey aise, hat f explaining ussia's istory,of reconcilingt with nykind f a historicaldeal.History ay e "a night-

mare reamt yan idiot" et ach ociety ries o find ome ustificatoryx-planation or t, n terms f somehistoricaldeal mage. n trying oexplainRussian istory, eculiarly ightmarishs it was n terms f ny Humanitas,Russian ineteenth-centuryhought as certainly otunified. nly he mostextreme nd crudest lavophilesought oshow hat heobjectivedealof"HolyRussia" ad been ealizednthepast;nevertheless,HolyRussia" anbe used s an indicator or ll the onflictingurrents f thought. hus, heWesterners, ejecting orrectly he distorted lorificationf the past, lsorejected he deal f Holy Russia" ndeven he xistence f his deal mongthe people;Belinskii rgues hat heRussian eoplewerenot t all religiousas a whole.63 t the other xtreme, hepolitical eactionaries,he statists"saw the glory f the Russian astbut aw t n the nheritancef Byzantineimperialdeologyf state nd ruler; hey oorejected he oncept f "HolyRussia" nd even he pithet." HolyRussia" pparentlyanbe a touchstonefor he roblem f Russian ational onsciousness.

62 See, for xample, ne of the earliest ttempts, y Kireevskii, O kharaktere rosveshcheniiaEvropy ego otnoshenii prosveshcheniiu ossii,"Moskovskii bornik, .

63Vissarion Belinskii, etter o Gogol', July 5, i847, in Sobranie sochinenii, d. FedorGolovanchenko Moscow, r948), III, 710, see also the attack on Khomiakov's oem quotedabove by the brilliant collective" atirist oz'ma Prutkov, olnoe sobranie ochinenii Lenin-grad, 953), p. 97, and Prutkov's oem, bid., p. I53. For a typical Western" ejection fSlavophile deflization f Russia, see Mikhail E. Saitykov-Shchedrin, literature Moscow,1952), p. 570 and passim. This liberal Western radition s continued y Leonid Andreev nhis article UbogaiaRus'," Polnoesobranie ochinenii St. Petersburg, 913), VI, pp. 204, 208.

64 See particularly onstantin eontiev, Vostok, Rossiiai Slavianstvo Moscow, I885), I,



632 Michael Cherniavsky

The searchfor the ustification f "Holy Russia" in Russia'spast, for heproof f the objective alidity f the epithet, asrejected y virtually ll whowere concernedwith the problem.65 ut if the darkness f the Russian pastdid not revealholiness oncretely, hat of the Russian present? On this astquestion, he answer was nearly unanimous.Again, exceptfor the extremeright, which was both unconcernedwith holiness nd pessimistic bout thefuture, Russian writers iving in the police state of Nicholas I, and evenunder Alexander I, saw little ustification or he national deal. That is notto say that some of them, t least at times, did not commit he fallacy fsearching orholiness n reality, hat s, of dentifying piritual plendor withmaterial plendor nd finding n the Russian empire he proof of holinessthat n turn guaranteed urther olitical uccess.One of the most strikingexamplesof this type of occasionalfallacy s Dostoevskii n his Diary of aWriter.66

What may be called the unilinear nswer-Russia is holy becauseGodmade her so, and therefore hisholiness s reflected n all her history nd inall her actions s a state-did not satisfy hosewho continued o think n theproblem f "Holy Russia.""A truly reat peoplecan never be reconciled oa

secondary ole amongst humanity, r even to a major role, but only andnecessarily o the first ole.Those who lose this faith re no longer people.But the truth s one and therefore nly one of the peoplescan have the trueGod," cries out Shatov n the Possessed.67ladimir Soloviev, he great Rus-sian philosopher nd writer, tates ostoevskii's houghtmore harply: Theimage of every people is not what it itself hinks f itself within ime butwhat God thinks of it within eternity."68 et Father Zosima says in theBrothers aramazov: "The people stinks smraden] but believes n truth,"and Dostoevskii, ater, n his polemicwith Alexander . Gradovskii,writes:"Our people s sinful nd crude: beastly s its mage."69 So.far from olyhadbeen the Russian past that t was able to corrupt ven the Russian commonpeople, at least in their outward behavior. mplicit n this view, of course,is the cause of evil and corruption. The state n principle s evil.... Thestate n its very dea is a lie," wrote one of the founders f Slavophilism,

280 f.; see also Konstantin . Pobiedonostsev, oskovskii bornik Moscow, 896).65 Soloviev, p. ioI f.; Leontiev, oc. cit.; Khomiakov, ol. sobr. soch., , I97 f.; VladimirSoloviev,obranieochinenii St. Petersburg,90I-1907), V, I47 f., 357 f. (hereafter ited s

Vladimir Soloviev).66 Fedor M. Dostoevskii, nevnik pisatelia za I876 g., Polnoe sobranie sochinenii St.

Petersburg, 896), XX, p. 202 f. A variation f this heme s in the proverb uoted proudly yIvan S. Aksakov: "In Holy Russia one does not starve odeath," n Riasanovsky, . I20.

67 Dostoevskii, ol. sobr. soch., XII, 349-50.68Quoted in Soloviev,p. IO9.69 Quoted n Soloviev, . 104, fn. .



"Holy Russia" 633Konstantin ksakov.70 homiakov, evelopinghis dea, argues hat hestate nd Christianityre rreconcilable;hepeople,n fact, ive ll power othe uler, he sar, s a monstrous urden f vil which e carries or he akeof all; for ower, tate ower, s evil.7'

If neither hepastnor he present ffer herealization f "HolyRussia,"what then s left? Holy Russiademands oly deeds,"warns VladimirSoloviev,72nd these deedshad to be envisaged or the future. arlierKhomiakov adasked he ame uestion nd answeredt: "ForRussia nlyone task s possible: obecome he mostChristian f human ocieties."73Russia ossesseshenecessaryndowment or t, ontainedn the oncept f"Holy Russia," nd only an eschatologicalunction an justify ussianreality.What doesthis ask mean,however, nd how does oneenvisageRussiawhich s to fulfill t? Again, here re ome choes f theThirdRomeconception hat there s one Christian uler n the world, hat he rulesspirituallyll Christians,nd that e will rule hem n reality; but hey reonly choes. ladimir olovievries o find base forKhomiakov'selief:Usually people, hen ryingopraisets wnnationality,xpressesnthis raiseitsnationaldeal, hatwhichsbest n t, hatwhicht desires ost f ll. Thus

Frenchmanpeaksf . . a belle rance, agloire u nom ranfais; nEnglishmansayswith ove . . old England; German ises igher nd, ivingn ethical har-acter o hisnationaldeal,with ride peaks f die deutsche reue.What oestheRussian eople ay n similar ircumstances,owdoes t praise ussia? oesit call t beautifulr old,does t speak f Russian lorytheglory f he Russianname s sometimesoundn the newspapers,ut t is a translationrom heFrench) r of Russian onestynd oyalty? . . it speaks nly f HolyRussia.That s the deal:not liberal ne, ot politicalne, ot nestheticne, ven ota formal-ethicalne, ut moral-religiousne.75Basically,oloviev'snalysiss again popular ne.He doesnot reject hestate, t least n the past;but n the future, here HolyRussia"demandsholy eeds, heres ittle oom or t. The deal s a moral-religiousne,whichat best son a differentevel rom he deal nd practice f the tate.76

Dostoevskiiolves heproblem uchmore ramatically.very eople asa God,Shatov xclaims, ut only ne can have the true God: "The onlypeople, he God-bearings the Russianpeople " n his Diary for 876,Dostoevskii rites: We have realized ur universal unction, ur per-

sonality nd role mong humanity; e couldnot helpbut realize hat his70 Quotedby NikolaiBerdiaev n Russkaia deia (Paris, 1946), p. 148.71 Pol. sobr. och., , I93 f.; see also Berdiaev, p. 149 f.72 In Soloviev, . io2; see also Khomiakov's oemRossii, ol. sobr. och., V, 255-56.73Pol. sobr. soch., III, 335.74See Soloviev,pp. I02 f.75Vladimir oloviev,p. 50.76 Ibid., pp. 5 f., 35 f-, 336 f-, 379 f.



634 Michael Cherniavskyfunction nd role re unlike hat f any ther eople or here ach nationalpersonageives nly or tself nd n tself, hile we shall egin ur functionnow that he ime has come, ust from he fact hat we shallbecome very-one's ervant, oruniversal eace.And this s not t all disgraceful;n thecontrary his s our greatness, or t all leads o the final nity f mankind."Time and againDostoevskiieturns o this hought: Our great ussia ..will ay othewholeworld . . its new nd unheard fWord. his wordwillbe saidfor he ood nd he ruth f he nity f mankind n a new, rotherlyuniversal nion."77 The Russian oul, he genius f the Russian eople sperhaps he most apable mong ll other eoples o fulfill n itself he deaof universal nion nd brotherhood."78

For Dostoevskiihen, espite is occasionaleaps nto fficialhauvinism,the Russian eople s the God-bearer. espite ll the evilaccretions f itshistory it believesn the ruth.. . The main chool f Christianityhroughwhich t (the Russian eople) had passed re the centuries f nfinite ndunending uffering hich t has born during ts history; hen, bandonedby ll, purned y ll, working or ll, t remained lonewith hrist he om-forter, hom t took nto ts oul for ver nd Who n return aved ts oul

from despair."79 he God-bearer s the common people, who carry Christin them,whosehistory arallels hat f Christ. he realization f "HolyRussia" ay, or Dostoevskii,n the process f rejoining heRussian eople.

Hereemerges hat ne may allthenineteenth-centuryimensionf heproblem. or the ntelligentsia he deal of "HolyRussia"wasnot onlysocialbut alsoa personal,ndividualdeal.This ideal,however,s realizedin the Russian eople,more pecifically,n the Russian easant. ut t hasobjective eality, nd therefore hatov ails: I onlywished ofind ut: doyouyourself elieven God or not? asked tavrogin]. believen Russia,believen her rthodoxy.... believen the ody f Christ.... I believe hatthe econd omingwilltakeplace n Russia.... I believe.. Shatovmur-mured ysterically.ut n God? In God? I . . . I will believen God."80 obelieven the God-bearingeoplesnot ufficient;nehasto become neofthe God-bearing,nd that ne cannot o without elievingn God, n thesameway hat he people o. Vladimir oloviev eturns othis uestion imeand again:the ign f Russia's olinesss the Christian aithwhich mbues

77 Pol. sobr. och.,XII, 350; XX, 213; XXI, 231.78 Quoted in Berdiaev, L'esprit de Dostoevski Paris, 1946), p. 194. Until the Russian

genius is fulfilled, owever, urope necessarily ears and distrusts omething hat it cannolunderstand ithin ts own nontranscendental rame f reference. Holy Russia" thus providedan explanation or the national nferiority omplex o typical f the Russian ntelligentsia ndof Dostoevskii imself. n this problem, ee Riasanovsky, p. 62 f.

79 Quoted n Soloviev, . 104.80 Dostoevskii, ol. sobr. soch., XII, 35I.



"Holy Russia" 635theRussian eople, ut t s the aith ather han he eligion.81HolyRussia"isnot nly eyond he tate, ut ften utside he hurch swell.Thechurchdid perform hechief askof spreading hristianity nd; eaching hepre-cepts f Christ, utnowClhrists carried ithin hebody f the people ndonereaches im through heir yes.

The history f the narodnik ovements not within he scopeof thisproblem, ut the underlyingdea s the ame s Shatov's.82 orshipwhatthepeopleworship, ndbecausehey ossesshe ruth, he ndividual s wellas the ocialproblem s solved, orboth re moral-religiousn nature. histruth s so simple hat he onversionppearsmiraculous.n Anna areninaLevingoesfor walk n the woods,meets peasant, nd n talking o himhears he atter escribenother easant: Helives or he oul, ie emembersGod.What, e remembers od?What, e ives or he oul?nearly houtedLevin.Obviously hat, ccording otruth, ccording oGod.Menare dif-ferent. or example ou,you alsowillnot hurt man.Yes,yes, oodby-saidLevin, hoking rom xcitement nd turning round, e took up hiscane nd walked uickly way."83 o live or he oul, o remember od -thesewords hock evinbecause erealizes heywere lways here, lways

available ll around imto be used, o iveby. Here s the olution or heindividual-what obelieve, owto live;through his hehuman roblemhas beenresolved nd can be universally esolved.he mystique rises utof the onvictionhat his ndividual elief s shared nd therefore nites na bodymystical wholepeople, heGod-chosennd God-bearing eople,"HolyRussia."

The historical oots f this onception, owever, ere lear oVladimirSolovievnd others. HolyRussia"had always xisted n potential nd in

the ouls f tspeople.Whatpreventedt from eing ealizedwasthe uto-cratic tate f Moscow, ounded n Byzantine mperial deology, n theabsolute uthority f the holy mperor ver hechurch, hat s, on the de-struction f socialprinciples hich attempted t least to reflect HolyRussia."84he precedencen time nd n eternity ver heThird Romebe-longs o"HolyRussia,"which s to be realized n the future. he form fthis future may be discerned n the convictionsf the Russianpeople,peoplewhothink f Peter heGreat nd of Napoleon s Antichrists,85ho

81 For example, eeVladimir oloviev, . 148f.; seealso Berdiaev, usskaia deia, p. 200 f.82 SeeDostoevskii, ol. sobr. och., XII, 348, on the whole problem f Narodnost' nd God.83 Lev N. Tolstoi, Anna Karenina, Pol. sobr. soch., ed. V. G. Chertkov Moscow, 935),

XIX, p. 376. Tolstoi's hought s brilliantly nd bitterly nalyzedby Dostoevskiin his review fthe book,Pol. sobr. och.,XXI, 240 f.

84Vladimir Soloviev, p. I4i and passim.86 Berdiaev,Russkaia deia, p. I98. Berdiaev's tatement s quite accurate s far as it goes

but it is certainly oubtful hat heRussianpeoplethought f Peter nd Napoleonas Antichristsbecausethese rulers xpressed he essenceof worldly ower, of the state, s Berdiaev mplies.





"Holy Russia" 637preservet, o reinterpret t for ny reality. n The Twelve, lexander lokdescribesheOctober evolution ndthe welve agged ymbols f t as theymarch hrough henightwith ifles t the ready. he poem nds with hefamous ines:

On they marchwith overeign read,With starving ogbehind,With blood-red lag head-In the tormwhere one an see,From the rifle ullets ree,Gentlywalking hrough hesnow,Where he pearly nowflakes low,Marches ose-crownedn the vanJesus hrist, he on of Man.93

What I hope to have shown s that Holy Russia" represented nationalpopular deal. It arose n the seventeenth entury s an expression f a newnational onsciousness uring nd after he Time of Troubles. n its originit was made possible by the thought f the ate fifteenth nd sixteenth en-turies, y the dea that Orthodoxy, ssentially hristianity, as restricted othe Russian land and people and was the exclusive hereditary roperty, n

fact, f Russia. This ideal carried n antistate onnotation, nd it was de-veloped and preserved mong the common people, the peasants, he rebelsagainst the society.

The symbol ived on and became a commonplace, nd in the nineteenthcentury t was discovered y the ntelligentsia, orwhom 8I2 perhaps layedthe ame role as I6I3 did for he masses. or the educated lasses Holy Rus-sia" provided an established ymbol for their own antistate onvictions,which grew out of the ever increasing ressure f the bureaucratic tate.

While the epithet was taken over as a commonplace, he Slavophiles at-tempted o examine t consciously. hus they rediscovered he original re-ligious implications f what had become largely a social and politicalsymbol. he circle was completed.

As a religious ymbol, Holy Russia" resolved otonly he ocialproblem,however, ut the personalproblem or members f an alienated lass.Thereligious imensions ave "Holy Russia" an eschatological haracter o thatit couldprovide higher ruth, n explanation orreality. ll societies eemto need a justification ortheir eality; he rony f Russian reality was suchas to require he most extreme ustification f all.

WesleyanUniversity

93 Trans. by Cecil M. Bowra n his The Creative xperiment London, 1949), p. 182.

Documents

Holly Russia