Novgorod in the Early Middle Ages: The Rise and Growth of an Urban Community 9781407300658, 9781407331126

Table of contents :
PAGES 1-25.pdf
PAGES 9 -END.pdf
Prelims.pdf
1642 verso.pdf
John and Erica Hedges Ltd.
British Archaeological Reports
Front Cover
Title Page
Copyright
Preface
Other Works by the Author
Table of Contents
Introduction
List of Abbreviations
Part One: The Settlement
Chapter One: The Geographical Setting
Chapter Two: The Shaping of the Twon
Part Two: The Rulers
Chapter Three: The Princes and the Town Assembly
Chapter Four: The Rise of the Bishopric
Part Three: The Basis for Urban Unity
Chapter Five: The Church and Local Custom
Chapter Six: The Church and History
Appendices and Maps
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
Maps
Bibliography

Citation preview

BAR S1642 2007

Novgorod in the Early Middle Ages

DEJEVSKY

The Rise and Growth of an Urban Community

NOVGOROD IN THE EARLY MIDDLE AGES

Nikolai J. Dejevsky

BAR International Series 1642 B A R

2007

Novgorod in the Early Middle Ages

Novgorod in the Early Middle Ages The Rise and Growth of an Urban Community

Nikolai J. Dejevsky

BAR International Series 1642 2007

Published in 2016 by BAR Publishing, Oxford BAR International Series 1642 Novgorod in the Early Middle Ages

©

NJDejevsky 1977 & 2007 and the Publisher 2007

The author's moral rights under the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any form of digital format or transmitted in any form digitally, without the written permission of the Publisher.

ISBN 9781407300658 paperback ISBN 9781407331126 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781407300658 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library BAR Publishing is the trading name of British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd. British Archaeological Reports was first incorporated in 1974 to publish the BAR Series, International and British. In 1992 Hadrian Books Ltd became part of the BAR group. This volume was originally published by John and Erica Hedges Ltd. in conjunction with British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd/ Hadrian Books Ltd, the Series principal publisher, in 2007. This present volume is published by BAR Publishing, 2016 .

BAR

PUBLISHING BAR titles are available from:

EMAIL

PHONE FAX

BAR Publishing 122 Banbury Rd, Oxford, OX2 7BP, UK [email protected] +44 (0)1865 310431 +44 (0)1865 316916 www.barpublishing.com

PREFACE

Novgorod is perhaps the most studied and least understood urban centre of medieval Russia. Controlling the northern part of the nascent Land of the Rus', Novgorod was the the dominant economic power both within Rus' and in terms of international trade routes. For a half-millenium, the city-state enjoyed effective independence, and built a ten-itorial state stretching from the Gulf of Bothnia to the White Sea and into the Urals. Novgorod was overwhelmed and destroyed by Moscow after a sustained war lasting over 1471-78. The historical evidence of Novgorod during its time of independence is abundant but beset by problems. The chronicles and diverse documents which survive generally reflect pro-Muscovite tendencies in the city. When taken alone, the written sources cast too little light on indigenous Novgorodian sentiment. Luckily, the evidence of archaeology helps redress the balance. Archaeology rose to prominance in Novgorodian studies as a result of the modern city's destruction during World War II. As elsewhere across Europe, this misfortune provided an unprecedented opportunity for excavation. The very frirst digs in Novgorod brought a major discovery - the birch-bark documents which were found scattered between the rungs of log-paved streets. Mostly, these seem to have been rudimentary business records - IOUs, shipping notices, inventories, etc. It is likely that these documents were prepared by pubiic scribes for sub-literate clients. This would help explain why all the birch-bark documents were tl:1row-aways, and why no depositories or archives have ever been found. The main archaeologists connected with Novgorod are Artemiy Artsikhovsky (the discoverer of birch-bark documents), Valentin Yanin (numesmatician, sphragist), Mikhail Karger (architecturist), and Boris Colchin (dendrachronologist and generalist). Of these, Colchin's work - including two volumes published by BAR - must be singled out for its exemplary quality.

In the summer of 1974, I joined the excavations at Novgorod, under the aegis of the American-Soviet academic exchange (IREX of New York). Over ten weeks, I was able to watch the Soviet archaeologists at work. At the time, Yanin was in overall charge while Colchin headed daily operations. Getting to know the two scholars led to a vital insight - understanding the reason for their inability to rise from the level of technical studies to the sweep of historical overview. The reason, in short, was the doctrinnaire constraints of Communist ideology. To put it in Western terms, this meant blanket imposition of Marxist-Leninist tenants on each and every historical summation. Most Soviet historiai-is were determined to avoid this dimension, remembering that many of their number had been conden1ned and even purged on these grounds. In the circumastance, detailed studies in the realm of subsidiary historical disciplines provided safety. The instinct and allure of interpretive historical summation died away. The scholars based in Moscow were mostly untroubled by the loss, but a few, plus the smaller contingent based in Leningrad (St Petersburg) registered disquiet. Novgorod studies were controlled by Moscow scholars, which meant that interpretive history was virtually abandoned.

Clearly, an effort was required to stir the issue, and my thesis was intended as an excercise in this direction. I chose to concentrate on on the 12th century because it seemed ideal for the interdisciplinary approach. The evidence of archaeology and architecture could be linked to certain kinds of written source (primarily ecclesiastical) which, when pieced together, uncovered evidence of an early historical revision aimed at separating the city's identity from the rest of Rus'. Chapter-by-chapter, the interdisciplinary approach I used separates as follows; Chapter Chapter Chapter Chapter

1: landscape, environment and toponymy -

2: settlement dynamics and the roots of urbanization 3: princes and assembly per written sources4: the ascent of the church and status of the prelates; written sources and eccelasisastical archaeologyChapter 5: the great prelates of the 12th century, as aboveChapter 6: the pagan and Latin conundrum canon law and ethnoarchaeology, Appendix A: tracing fragments of the prime episcopal history textual reconstruction Appendix B: mapping the great burst of church-building chronology and mapping of architectural archaeology. I defended this thesis successfully in May of 1977. My supervisor was Professor Dimitri Obolensk:y of Christ Church, Oxford. My examiners were: Professor Nikolay Andreev of Cambridge University, and Dr Anthony Stokes of University College, Oxford .. Circumstances moved me towards a career in publishing and business. From the late 1980s to the late 1990s, I was able to apply this expertise in the Russian context. This came of agenting for a New York law firm specializing in intellectual property; project managing for Reuters in Moscow; and business research as an associate of Henley Management College. Over this period, I had ample opportunity to renew tracking current scholarship about Novgorod. Sadly, the temerity of ex-Soviet-now-neo-Russian historians remained undimished. They seemed frozen in the past, whilst their country accelerated through the turbulance of "perestroyka" and the catharsis of overthrowing Communism.

In this context, I conclude that my thesis does remain of interest. I off er it in this spirit, with special gratitude to BAR for agreeing to publish it. Needless to say, all the shortcomings and limitations are my responsibility alone.

Nikolai Dejevky

May2007

OTHER WORKS BY THE AUTHOR "Vikings, Varangians and Soviet Archaeology Today," !vffiDIAEVAL SCANDINAVIA 10, Odense University Press, Denmark, 1976, pp 7-34. "Novgorod: the Origins of a Russian Town," EUROPEAN TOWNS; THEIR ARCHAEOLOGY AND EARLY HISTORY, ed MW Barley, Academic Press, London, 1977, pp 391-403. "The Urbanization of Eastern Europe," THE CAMBRIDGE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF ARCHAEOLOGY, ed Andrew Sherratt, London, 1980, pp 314-318. "The Churches of Novgorod: the Overall Pattern," MEDIEVAL RUSSIAN CULTURE (CALIFORNIA SLAVIC STUDIES, 12), eds H Birnbaum & M S Flier, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1984, pp 206-223. (co-author) CULTURAL ATLAS OF RUSSIA AND THE SOVIET UNION, Phaidon UK/Facts on File USA, 1989. FREE-WHEELING IN BEAR COUNTRY; AUTOMOTIVE M,~~UFACTIJRING AND TRADING IN THE FORMER SOVIET UNION (INTERNATIONAL AUTOMOTNE REVIEW, Winter 1993/94 Volume 13 Special Issue), Henley Management College/EMAP. WOODLAND OF WEIR, AMERICA IN 2276 AD (novel), Polar Bear & Co, USA, 2004. MOODS AND MEMORIES (poetry), ibid, 2006.

TABLEOF CONTENTS pages INTRODUCTION List

ix

of Abbreviations

PARTONE. THE SETTLEMENT Chapter One: The Geographical Setting Chapter Two: The Shaping of the Town

1-30 31-89

PART TWO.THE RULERS Chapter Three: Chapter Four:

The Princes and the Town Assembly The Rise of the Bishopric

93-115 116-168

PART THREE• THE BASIS FOR URBANUNITY Chapter Fiv.:e: Chapter Six:

The Church and Local Custom The Church and History

~NCLU:SION APPENDIX1: APPENDIX2:

MAPS:

171-213 214-282

283-288

The Controversy about the Major Episcopal Chronicle of Twelfth Century Novgorod

291-311

The Churches and Monasteries of Novgorod in the Twelfth Century - Charts 1 and 2

312-323

1. 2.

3. BIBLIOGRAPHY

The Churches of Novgorod in the Twelfth Century The Monasteries of Novgorod in the Twelfth Century The Pagan Sanctuary at Peryn'

324 325 326 327-339

i

INTRODUCTION

The medieval lea.st understood

Russian state,

until

Ivan III

effect

century.

state.

Kievan Rus', state

controlled

the routes

linking

the Volga and the Caspian) and the Black Sea), easternmost

of trade;

centuries

throughout

its

particularly

since

written

documents of different

League.

tecture

and art

(via the Dnieper

available

archaeological

exists

has yet been made to draw together

histories

the existing

and up-to-date

of Novgorod written

as the

Novgorod was city

in

a vast

field

today - including evidence,

archi-

and variety.

concerning

much of it made possible

a comprehensive

thrived

in quantity;

various

by extensive

conducted in the town over the past twenty or thirty

and to write

Middle Ages it

and enterprising

- are more than plentiful

of Novgorod's history,

Gulf

Economically,

Culturally,

the sources

An imposing body of scholarship

general

from the

of Novgorod is therefore

kinds,

centuries,

it gained con-

Middle Ages it

the most prolific

The history

disin-

with the Middle East (via

and with Constantinople

while in the later

history

medieval Russia.

in the early

the Baltic

port of the Hanseatic

a

in the 1470s, Novgorod was in

empire which stretched

centre

It

but sep-

gradually

to the White Sea and the Ural mountains.

Novgorod was a great

for study,

called

During these

over a vast territorial

and

It was at first

For more than three

of Moscow conquered it

an independent

of Finland

often

city.

of Russia when the early

during the twelfth

the most studied

in Russia during the Middle Ages.

Novgorod was a great

from the rest

tegrated

trol

that

of the early

arated

of Novgorod is perhaps

urban centre

is indisputable part

city

years.

aspects

excavations No attempt

wealth of scholarship

history

of Novgorod.

in the nineteenth

century

The are so

ii outdated

as to be useless

small part

of the material

(such as the chronicles) evidence

today.

discovered

Their authors

available

today:

the sources

were poorly understood,

by modern archaeologists

not have been anticipated. therefore

little

ambitious

of them, written

had access only to a

and art historians

now.

town's affairs. liberal

The largest

interpretation

typical

it does not help us to understand

of Novgorod. in scholarly after

2

medieval Novgorod.

the

Kostomarov's but

1

works about Novgorod in this

explained century,

and by a certain

to generalize

by the great bith before

between 1929 and 1971 which attempt

increase and

lack of orientation

about Novgorod's history.

of the problem is perhaps best seen by comparing the three

early

directed

of the age of Alexander II,

This lack may be largely

attempts

reveals

where

century has yet to produce a comprehensive history

the Russian revolution,

successive

republic

heard through the town~assembly,

sentiments

The twentieth

and most

by N.I. Kostomarov, is a case in point.

This idealized

political

could

of the time are

Kostomarov saw medieval Novgorod as a true democratic the voice of the people,

then

while the wealth of

Even the best histories

more than curiosities

available

to s~etch a general

in

The nature works written

history

of

Novgorod.

1 N.I. Kostomarov, Severnorusskiya narodopravstva, 2 vols., StP, 1863, A comprehensive reference to the works of nineteenth century historians of Novgorod is given by v.s. Ikonnikov, Opyt russkoy istoriografii, t.2, k.1, Kiev, 1908, pp.740-7. 2 Two cultural histories of Novgorod have been produced in the last thirty years: one is by N.G. Porfiridov (Drevniy Novgorod; ocherki iz istorii russko kul'tur XI-XV vv., M-L, 1947), and the other by D.S. Likhachev Nov orod Veliki • ocherk istorii kul'tur Novgoroda XI-XVII vv., M, 1959. Both studies are concerned primarily with arts and letters, and are not histories in the wider sense. While this thesis was being typed shortly before submission, I received from Novgorod N.L. Podvigina's Ocherki sotsial'no-ekonomicheskoy i politicheskoy istorii Novgoroda VelikQgo v XII-XIII vv., M, 1976. This brief monograph, of which I have not been able to make use, is in the main a compendium of the views currently held by Soviet scholars concerning the social and economic structure of Novgorod in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries.

iii The first the political

of these concepts

was written and terminology

Novgorod became an independent 1

century. treatment

which rests

of fragmentary

evidence,

ond of these containing

a general

account

no matter

them, and trying

use to later

Aleshkovsky

tried

to ignore nevertheless suggestions

in Soviet

article

sources,

uncritical

giving

The sec-

in 1932 by I.M. Trotsky 3

history.

'.l'he author

approach

on every question

he

his study has proved of

in 1971, V.L. Yanin and M.K. of Novgorod's

origins

evi.d ence.- I+ Their most stimulating lack of clarity

in Chapter

afresh.

with

article

and by a tendency

and theory.

and illuminating

are remarkably to start

2

equal weight to every event

conclusion

the question

many original

may be seen as an attempt

scholarship.

but was for

which could be deduced from

between hypothesis

articles

and oversimplified

published

Finally,

on which I have relied

'rhese three

in the twelfth

is of no academic value,

marred by a certain

contains

revolution°

11

on doctrinaire

how conjectural,

to approach

the difference

a

of Novgorod I s early

scholars.

t h e h elp o f arc h aeo 1ogical is unfortunately

after

to reach a definite

Because of this

of his time to claim that

question

only on written

or development,

little

without

works was a lengthy

based himself

raised.

state

This theory,

a long time accepted

in 1929 by B.D. Grekov, who used

The article

observations

and

Two,

disconnected,

and each one

Grekov pointedly

ignored

1

'Revolyutsiya v Novgorode Velikom v XII veke', Uchenye zapiski instituta istorii rossiyskoy assosiatsii nauchno-issledovatel'skikh institutov obshchestvennykh nauk, t.IV, M, pp.13-21.

2

In 1970 V.L. Yanin showed that this theory is unfounded ('Problemy sotsial'noy organizatsii Novgorodskoy respubliki', ISSSR, 1970, no.1, pp.44-54).

3

Vozniknovenie Novgorodskoy respubliki', Izvestiya AN; otd. obshchestvennykh nauk - VII seriya, L, 1932, no.4, pp.271-91 and no.5, pp.3'+9-74.

4

'Proiskhozhdenie pp.32-61.

1

Novgoroda (k postanovke

voprosa)',

~'

1971, no.2,

iv the imposing body of scholarship by the 1920s. history

Instead

about Novgorod which had accumulated

he concentrated

around which he developed

as a whole.

'l'rotsky

too many disparate

themes without

f,ailed

to define

is an attempt

such a central

them into

basis

pitfalls

can be found,

I suggest,

categories.

and to define

in the sense of urban

by the town's

their

aim of urban unity

in different

and juridical,

while others

leaders

to promote that

to combine them in this

choosing

the ideological

aspect thesis

designed

of Novgorod's

different

kinds.

Charter

of Prince

Paving Charter

of Prince

People,

and Commercial "weights,

are:

to

and legal

charters

of

(1) the 1136-7

of Novgorod to the Sofiya of Prince

and (4) the Charter

Mstislavich

of Novgorod to the Merchant Association

St.

Opokakh.

The greatest

myself

community, I would

Novgorodian

Vsevolod of Novgorod concerning

1

Evidence of

to confine

a single

of these

Ol'govich

Charter

pursued

but I have made no attempt

instead

to extant

'I'he most important

(2) the Street

The leaders

with administrative

to shape Novgorod into

Svyatoslav

formu-

urban unity.

been concerned

have had to devote much attention

unity.

were ideological.

to be studied,

study,

in the plans

ways, some of which were admini-

both kinds of methods survives

Johnna

evidence,

the study of

for coordinating

lated

Cathedral;

preconceived

various

which grew up in the town, and particularly

measures

importance.

theme.

history

Had this

relative

on archaeological

unity

strative

to encompass

theme which would embrace the

to avoid these

'l'he most satisfactory Novgorod's

discussion

forcing

of Novgorodian history

for their

a central

without

event in the town's

extreme by trying

regard

based their

wide range of sources This thesis

an explanation

went to the other

Yanin and Aleshkovsky but likewise

on a single

possible

Yaroslav;

(3) the

Ecclesiastical of Prince

Courts, Vsevolod

of the Church of

disagreement

exists

about

1 'I'he texts of these charters and a bibliography relating to them have been published by Ya. N. S~hapov (ed.), Drevnerusskie knyazheskie ustavy XI-XV vv., M, 1976, pp.147-65 an6 212-9.

V

the dating

and interpretation

separate

study

done,

is impossible

it

Novgorod's

documents,

to write

administrative

an up-to-date

and juridical

is possible

thesis

is concerned

diverse

and include

the measures

sources

historical

period

I was able

to discern

century

Novgorod to provide

unity.

The church

the ideological The thesis

my study

mentioned

on a limited

sources

from a new angle,

of a major attempt

made in twelfth

the town with an ideological

for unity

consists

writings.

as the charters

of Novgorod was responsible

basis

are

in some way, but they are not

the relevant

the outline

rhis

1

sources

and didactic

by concentrating

and examining

of

by Novgorod's

of unity.

The relevant

interpretations

I have found that

is

study

devised

sense

literature

are controversial

open to such conflicting above.

measures.

works of art,

this

development.

to study

with these

Before

and exhaustive

to endow the town with an ideological

Most of these

and an exhaustive

needs to be made of them as a group.

However, it leaders

of these

which it

r:J;J:h:ree: parts,

basis

for this

developed

for

attempt,

and

was religious

each of which contains

in nature. two

chapters. The first natural

of the Russian

terrain

settlements,

that

Two turns

man-made landscape. the medieval

which merged into

It will

lead

unsuited

landscape,

to the early

medieval

to the conclusion

that

to the growth of substantial in the region

with the potential

to the community settlement Archaeological

both

of the natural

form of settlement

communities

town was preceded a town.

Novgorod's

North with reference

the indigenous

concentrated

Chapter

examines

One is a description

was basically

and that

did not favour

its

Chapter

when Novgorod took shape.

the natural

towns.

of the thesis

and man-made.

environment ·period

part

and other

to become

of Novgorod and

evidence

by a group of three

It was only in the twelfth

indicates

settlements century,

when the

vi townseape

was studded

resemble

a town.

'I'his architectural

town a distinct (the

sky;line,

churches)

the unifying areas.

with many new churches,

influence

of churches in detail

Novgorod began to not only gave the

a network of local of the bishopric

of the church throughout

has never been studied

its

created

the authority

The proliferation

(including

development

but also

representing

that

centres and carrying

Novgorod's

residential

in Novgorod in the twelfth

century

and my study of the subject

before,

Appendix 2 and Maps 1 and 2) may claim to be the first

of

kind. rhe second part

of the thesis

1

government

to provide

Novgorod with stable

the bishopric

to authority

effectiveness

of Novgorod's

and town assembly events

in the town. secular

- as evidenced

of the twelfth

influence

century.

wa:s the result

strengthen

at Novgorod has not, The third Novgorod's

for urban unity

relations written

part

in 1165.

Il'ya,

in the town. by Novgorod's

crisis

in Russia

The creation

to provide

an ideological

this

at the time,

in order

to

of an archbishopric

in this

century,

perspective. made by Bishop Nifont

or inspirational

basis

archbishop

didactic

Novgorod and the attitudes

and lay habits

as they affected

one of these Il'ya,

to

elevation

Chapter Five examines two lengthy

In my belief,

the

elevation

that

of the twelfth

first

princes

which describe

I conclude

prelates

practices

the

- the town's

examines the attempts

composed in twelfth-century to religious

Three surveys

of

Four examines the growing

now, been understood

in Novgorod.

and the rise

of Constantinople

of the thesis

of civic

in the town, and its

in the land.

until

outstanding

and Archbishop

authors

Chapter

by the patriarch

his authority

Chapter

by the chronicles

of a major ecclesiastical

and was engineered

leadership

administration

of the Novgorod bishopric

the rank of an archbishopric

writings

examines the failure

of their social

works, an instruction

contains

a carefully

vii camouflaged plan for adapting inspired

ceremony which promoted civic

clearly vival

to Christian

made careful and transform

of Christian

and cautious an ancient

civic

unity.

incorporated

into

unity.

to the status

as a basis

history

ing that

from its

of Nvogorod.

beginning

of _an archuishopric.

been challenged,

that

had from its

their

the history

analysis

chronicle

its

existence

of 1167 survive

purpose was to show that been an independent

used by the chronicler

and manipulation

from a close study of these describes

depicted.it.

how fictitious circumstances

prelates dignity church.

passages.

Novgorod's

of Novgorod and had been

The methods of histemerge clearly

The most illuminating

conversion

entry in

I have drawn on a wide range of sources

he obscured.

It seems clear

of 1167

as the chronicler

his account was, and to suggest

of his inventions

in extant

archbishopric

orical

falsely

lost)

foundation.

the diocese

of Novgorod.

respect

of

which

(itself

are without

concerned only with the interests

this

which

and I have examined a number of these passages.

inception

invention

was

promotion in 1165

The textological

from the chronicle

Novgorodian chronicles,

compilation

its

of that

unity in the

This history

to record

until

also

and I have devoted Appendix 1 to show-

the doubts regarding

A number of entries

I suggest

for civic

the major Novgorodian chronicle

has been used to prove the existence has recently

an instrument

Chapter Six examines a plan devised

chronicle

the Novgorod diocese

had

the pagan sur-

pagan community-bond into

commissioned in 1167: it was intended

Il'ya

The archbishop

plans to "baptize"

by Archbishop I1'1ya to use history form of an idealized

usage a major pagan-

what actual

that

to show

events and

the ideological

aim

was to convince the townsmen of Novgorod that

had aiways served and independence

the interests

rested

Once convinced of this,

primarily

of Novgorod and that on the

achievements

their

the town's of its

the townsmen would come to believe

viii in their

glorious

with historical

heritage pride.

This deliberate

taken in the chronicle

made in twelfth

to a single

altered

in the twelfth

century,

community together

show that

way to growing into

the later

Middle Ages.

recognized

and their

me to trace

under-

of

Novgorod to endow the citizens community.

The appearance

of the

recOO'-dwere

This plan reveals

that

by Novgorod's ablest

far-sighted

the need leaders

schemes for drawing the

the town of the twelfth the great

didactic

the outlines

and the historical

in the process.

for urban unity was clearly

on its

century

the force of tradition,

deliberately

- urban topography,

- have permitted

with a sense of belonging townscape,

mam.pulation of history

kinds of evidence

and chronicles

a major attempt

be cemented

of 116? has not so far 'been recognized.

Three different writing,

and the community would therefore

medieval city

century was well which it became in

ix

LIST 0Jt ABBREVIA'l'I0NS

AN: Akademiya Nauk (StP,

L, M).

M-L, 1949.

GVNP: Gramoty Velikogo Novgoroda i Pskova (ed. S.N. Valk), ISSSR: Istoriya

SSSR (M).

KSIA: Kratkie

soobshcheniya

Insti tuta

Arkheologii

KSIE: Kratkie

soobshcheniya

Instituta

Efa,ografii

KSIIMK: Kratkie

soobshcheniya

Instituta

Istorii

AN (M). AN (M).

Material'noy

Kul'tury

L: Leningrad. LGU: Leningradskiy

Gosudarstvennyy

Universitet.

M: Moscow. MIA: Materialy

i issledovaniya

NL: Novgorodskie letopisi

po arkheologii

SSSR (M, L).

(ed. A.F. Bychkov), StP, 1879.

NPL: Novgorodskaya pervaya letopis

1

(ed. A.N. Nasonov), M-L, 1950.

N2C: Novgorod Second Chronicle. N3C: Novgorod Third Chronicle. N4C: Novgorod F'ourth Chronicle. PSRL: Polnoe sobranie

russkikh

letopisey

(StP, L, M).

PVL: Povest' vremennykh let (eds. V.P. Adrianova-Peretts Likhach.ev) , I, II, M-L, 1950. RIB: Russkaya istoricheskaya SA: Sovetskaya SAI: Arkheologiya SE: Sovetskaya

biblioteka

arkheologiya

(StP, L).

(M).

SSSR; svod arkheologicheskikh etnografiya

and D.S.

istochnikov

(M).

(M).

StP: Saint Petersburg. T0DL: Trudy otdela drevnerusskoy Literatury AN (L). ZMNP:Zhurnal Ministerstva

literatury

Instfututa

Narodnogo Prosvya$:::heniya

Russkoy (StP).

The system of transliteration used in this thesis follows, with one or two exceptions, system 1 given in An Introduction to Russian History (Companion to Russian Studies 1), eds. Robert Auty and Dimitri 0bolensky, Cambridge, 1976, pp.XII-XIII.

AN (M).

PART

0 N E

'.l'HE SE'I'TLEMENT

Chapter

One:

The Geographical

Setting

Chapter

Two:

The Shaping of the Town

1

CHAPTEf{ Q.NE

THE GEOORAPHICPJ.. SET'.l.'ING

place

a remarkable

was not suited

North

Russian

there

were scarcer other

than

towns of any size

1

~mlya.

the

to the area

the 't!Vhite

to

south

which

height

in the

west

sea and the

geography

remains)

very different

medieval

Russia

developed.

of urbanism

Urals.

Novgor~•s

rise

a triumph itself

Russian

setting

of the North must be appreciated

with a survey

1

of Novgorod's

geographical

where

represents

on the town in various

1'he natural

and this

Plain

which did not prevent

from imprinting

urbanism,

refer

\ife shall

in the North

setting

Novgorod's

of Smolensk

North was ( and

the natural

understand

fourteenth

North.

of the Great

over nature,

centres

Novgorodskaya

the

and the lands

Northern

agese

Middle

as regional

( in the

of the Novgorodian

from that

later

was called

its

at

simply as the Novgorodian

The physical

a triumph

stretched and Finhmd

from Estonia

century) in

empire

This

empire,

of its

part

the southern

in the

to Novgorod and served

These towns were subordinate in

size

grew to a similar

Pskov

only

Novgorod;

than

smaller

were significantly

All three

Ladoga and Rusa.

were F'skov,

these

the Middle ages:

during

grew up there

towns

only three

Indeed,

of Russia@

in the rest

of the

medieval

settlement,and

to urban

in

rose

,

The landscape

town.

medieval

an early

for

Rus 1

of ancient

cities

one of the largest

Novgorod,

study begins,

in order

wayso

to

therefore,

location.

A.N. Nasonov, 'Russka.ya zemlya• i obrazvanie territorii M. 1951, pp. 93-116; Ao Kuza, gosudarstva, drevnerusskogo knyazhestva X-XIII vv 'Novgorodskaya zemlya,• Drevnerusskie 1975, pp. 144-201. red. L.G. Beskrovnyj,M,

otv.

2

THE NORTHERN LANDSCAPE Novgorod is situated

on the edge of sparsely

wilderness

known as the taiga.

coniferous

forest

regions

forest

of the Artie of European

This

across

which stretched of it

south Ocean.

Russia,

The Novgorodian a territory

streams

and marshes.

region

covered if

is a glacial

European

the land

lies

Russia.

formed by Lake 11 'men'

climate is

The soil,

of the Novgorod area

give

exactly

way to coniferous

The river

which the river the southernmost a surface

shallow

described

flows, large

glaci~l

of approximately

(usually

between

as a permanently

most recent

flooded

v.rhich

in a basin

extent, The town

forests

of the

1

and Lake ll'1men,

region.

kilometers,

hollow

ice

to a lesser

from

Lake Il 'men' is 2

lake in the district.

6 and 10 meters

The

is the southernmost

This

Novgorod,

1110 square

rivers,

marshy.

\mere the deciduous

of the lake

region

with water:

of the taiga.

forests.

shores

and Onega.

is usually

fauna and,

Nordic

are part

lakes,

Ladoga

Volkhov,.

which divides

Volkhov,

it

the

from the Gulf of

is saturated

are typical

at the point

roughly

by the

of primaeval

the lake

of the lake region,

and the river

of the taiga.

situated

south

with water

extension

included

are

left

This region

is not covered

along

with innumerable lakes

territory

in the southernmost

extension

largest

The

North

northern

between the decidous

tundra

extending

to the White Sea and dotted

territory

Eurasia

and the barren

Finland

iake

is a vast

populated

It covers

but is extremely

in depth). 3

I 1 1 men1 has

which is unable

been

to drain

1

z.v. Dashkevich, E.v. Karnaukhova, FizikoA.G. Isaehenko, ~ograficheskoe rayonirovanie severo-zapada SSSR, L, 1965 (hereafter abbreviated as Rayonirovanie), map on p. 214.

2

I.I'. Gerasimov, G.D. Rikhter, A.G. Cbikishev(eds), SeV!f;F evropeyskoy chasti SSSRt M, 1966 (hereafter abbreviated as Sever), maps on pp. 51, and 146. On glacial origin of lakes in the lake region see the work cited in footnote 1 on page 3.

3

Rayonirovanie,

Po 174.

3

completely

into

Lake Ladoga.

The river

Volkhov,

over 224 kilometers,

mostly

which stretches

Il'men

connects

wide but shallow, ( also

1

with Ladoga.

1

and is replenished

shallow

in a virtually

than through

only part

of themters

line

The Volkhov is

through

primarily

rather

streams)

2

straight

its

lake

tributaries

Il'men,

its

3

source.

The river

and lake

the Il 1 men 1 -Volkhov marshland

4

of the land

the

that

at the turn

50% of the land

is

and drainage,

only 6e5%

can be ploughed.

6

The quality

from the land

7

surface

of the lake region

many of the present

'Whilst some of today•s

is

well

the inhabitants

of the Middle Ages must have been even less

ta,i_ga

times;

needs.

in the basin

permit ltmch cultivation,

around Novgorod does not serve

'.I'he water

hospitable.

is thought

cannot

which saturate

the land

poor and the yield

the area's

If the land

in recent

this

much reclamation

is considered for

then

like

half

same time nearly

in the Novgorod district

of the fields insufficient

after

At least At the

A landscape

and even today,

today,

basin.

even today. 5

forested.

are

fi~lds

the water

level

of the millenium.

marshes

were yesterday's in the area In the early

was greater

were then water marshes.

than surfaces,

Indeed,

was much higher

than now

Middle Ages Lake Ladoga

1

Ros~iya, Polnoe geogrficheskoe opisanie nashego otechestv~ (ed. V.P. Semenov), t. III (Ozernaya oblast•), stP, 1900 {herafter pe15. abbreviated as Ozernaya obla%~'),

2

Rayonirovanie,

3

~.,

4

ibid.

5

Ozernaya

6

V .s. Zhekulin,

p.

173

P• 174.

oblast'

, p., 47,

,!,s_t.2,I'icheskaya geografiya

Po 166.

7

it

RayonJrovaniet

pp 175-7.

landshaftov

,Novgorod,

1972,

4

as well.

tribulations of the

rising

and the Volkhov are given

of the Il'men'

The waters

century

show that

can fluctuate

between

620 and 2200 square

1110 square

kilometers

caused widespread

areas

damage to the lake-side

2

of

As

and the resulting

wide fluctuation

as the 1920s and 1930s this

recently

figure

(the

kilometers

is an average).

earlier

mentioned

in

taken

of Lake Il'men'

area

surface

the

the twentieth

to unpredictable

Measurements

which can cause havoc.

and falling

even today.

the Novgorod area

which afflicts

lake region

instability

from the geo-physical

These arose

other

caused

and the landscape

land,

in their

of water

of the excess

1

much because

Novgorod must have suffered

The townsmen of medieval

strait.

of that

Neva, which is but a vestige

of the river

wide instead

30 kilometers

nearly

by a strait

and the Gulf of J. work are

them all.

of the towns-

the habits

into

some order

to bring

fathers,

as spiritual

practices

when trying,

guidance

for

own need

of their

and ,social

religion

of popular

in the details

very interested

such as Novgorode

Usur;x:o

urban .social

concerns

inthis

prie.sts

who engaged in usury: and that

intolerable,

his

be discouraged

urged

Kiri.k's

chapter

the most zealous practices

secular

about is

that

they cannot

'I'he bishop

also

instructed

Laymen should,

interest

on loans,

is instructive

because

he

or at least

charged. it

shows that

churchmen of the diocer:,e were not prepared

24-5.

s

must be told

money-lending.

which were common in a great

1 RIB, cols.

I

such conduct

that

replied

usury.

from taking

on usury

asking

began

Kirik

individuals

the interest

to reduce

1

Kirik

'.I'his is

in Novgorod were

many clerics

Nifont

renouncing

to discourage

clerics

advised,

guilty

without

priests

remain

that

business.

profitable

engaged

with m:mry.

deals

relations

which reveals

chapter,

fourth

which most clearly

in the Voproshaniya

One of the chapters

commercial

centre

like

to tol:erate Novgorod,

con-

178

standpoint.

but immoral from a Christian indeed

must have been great

usurers.

social

Another example of unacceptable

to lay

to be taught

how to

whenever trying

to

(and one with

relations

in

of concubinage

occurence

lay in the frequent

pagan antecedents)

severe towards

among the laity.

habits

but well-rooted

change unacceptable,

did,

as Nifont

with restraint,

purpose

exercise

that

in relation

needed particularly

The young clerics

The idealism

was himself

Nifont

to resist

from the fact

at the same time accomodating

clerics,yet

guilty

the matter.

to raise

decided

Kirik

town afforded. is apparent

around Nifont

of the young clerics

were unable

if many clerics

a wealthy

that

profit

the financial

of the problem

The scale

Novgorod. Concubinage

social

established

into

relations

69 Kirik

asks if" a layman,- who:'gpenly keeps a single

by her deserves

. secre. t 1 t han ano th er wh o k eeps many in thought

some priests

because

concubine overt

chapter

In asks if it Nifont's

order

consists

1

RIB, cols.41-2

2

RIB, col,42

by Kirik

that

(and 41h).

was less

and pronounced

both

intolerable.

equally

from the preceding

even solitary

of two parts.

that

possible

than a man with a veritable

in this attitude

70, which continues

is not best

reply

It is quite

he, being "monogamous" in appearance,

described

alternatives

more tolerance

the owner of a single

to tolerate

best

saw no logic

Nifont

harem.

it

to the Christian

a threat

against

of the time by pronouncing

as a wife and has children

concubine

intrude

and seventieth,

concubines.

the cw.stomof keeping In chapter

the sixty-ninth

chapters,

Two of Kirik's

concubines He states

one, Kirik

be let

first

that

free. there

2

179

vskoupiti

2

unclear

better]

to impose a monetary

caution

to othersd'

those

1

the still

It is cl.ear

as chattel.

from chapters

is a

example of

as an

79 and 80 that

in the middle of the

treated

by many Novgorodians

were being

threatened

from Novgorodian

the unity

homeso

and religious

social

of the church

about the influence

by the chapters

should

tha.t his priests

was determined habit

un-christian

and one which directly

is provided

J..

J , as

be fined

individuals

L·t

and at the

concubinage,

abandoned

example of unacceptable

A third

e, •

unreformed.

Bishop Nifont this

eradicate

,!I •

the laudable

acknowledged

more recalcitrant

women slaves

century

twelfth

as

fine [ on an owner of a concubine

Thus Nifont

that

same time suggested

it

paraphrasing

by

who had already

Novgorodians

example to

phrase

has caught

R. Pikhoya

aby sya. i drouga.ya. na tom kaznila.o

the meaning of this

inogo cheloveka

a lepshe

but then adds

is a custom to do so in Novgorod,

of Latin

practices, in Novgorod, priests

in the

town. with Latins

Relations

'I'he tasks were complicated

St.

influence,

known:

'l

sources

in Novgorod.

some scholars

merchant

century

in the mid-twelfth influence

on the town's

which describe

the exact

which must have emanated from the Latin

Olaf in the permanent

maintained

Latin

by a noticeable

There are no extant

ulation. of this

fa.cing Novgorod I s clergy

emporium which traders

that

it

nature

church of from Gotland

'I'he time of the church I s foundation

surmise

pop-

is un-

was founded in the second half

trudyashchikhsya 2ikhoya, 1 Dokumenty pokayan:nogo prava i polozhenie 1 v. 2, Vspomogat_~l 'riy1;,, :ts.tor:icheskie distsipliny, v drevney Rusi, 1974, p.11. Sverdlovsk,

1{.

180

1

century.

twelfth

The position

the king of Sweden. 2

Whatever form it

among the Novgorodians

troubled

of

of Latins

the presence

took,

the

wife a daughter

from 1090 to 1117, took for his first

prince

town's

community probably Vladimirovich,

when Mstislav

century

twelfth

improved in the early

Latin

of Novgorod's

of the

decades

to the first

point

while others

century,

of the eleventh

with

who consulted

the young clerics

Nifont.

to Orthodoxy. 3

who wants tp convert

faith

candidate

must follow

whether his question

questions some natives

chapter

gives

Nifont

in the Latin detailed which the

of ceremonies

course

10, where

does not explain

before

being baptized.

Kirik

pertains

to foreigners

of the Latin

persuasion,

baptism.

One of

Latin

who had accepted

Novgorodians

or to native Il'ya's

a week-long

concerning

instructions

in his

by Kirik

deal w~th someone christened

should

he asks how a priest

that

mentioned

are first

The Latins

in the Voproshaniya

of the town were indeed

now see)

(as we shall

suggests

being baptized

by Latin

priests.

In Il'ya's question

from Il'ya's

placed

of these

concern

under the influence

1 See Chapter 2

what to do when children

The purpose

priests.

2 of this

chapter

some townsmen had adopted

Which shows that

Il I ya asks Nifont

clear

of the Voproshaniya

section

that

visits

thesis=.

the Latin

are taken to

is not explained,

some Novgorodian

of the Latin

16 contains

clergy.

works eited

children

a 4

faith.

Varangian

11

but it

11

is

were being

It would appear

that

on P• 69n.

Paris, 1924; tserkovnye 'Russko-vizantiyskie See al§o pp. 146-7. 1 vsemirvo Rossiya Feodal'naya v.,' X! ya v kontse protivorech M, for L. V. Cherepnin), (F'estschrift protsese noistoricheskom 1972, PP• 216-24.

B. Leib, Rome, Kiev at Byzance a la fin du Xle siecle, M. Mur I yanov,

3 RIB,

col.

26.

4 RIB, col. 60.

181

their

mothers

those

in

were responsible:

chapters

17 to 19 as well,

various

transgressions.

cluster

of chapters

this

were taken

children

rernarkablein culturally

Russia

more conservative

defenders of the

to Latin

medieval

of established

native

no further

matter.

priests

conclude

discussed:

in the Voproshaniya

that

16 to 19

some Novgorodia:p,

A ha,bi t of this

kind is

tl:1e women are known to have been

than

habits

to form a

chapters

If

by women.

where

the men, a.nd tended /1

and customs¢

women were taking

proof

many of the chapters

subject

16, and

by women are

caused

we mal'V ten ta ti vely

linked,

appear

16 to 19 thus

since

to their

in chapter

with women as a cause of

in which transgre:3sions

according

thematically

are

question

deal

Chapters

is a,11 the more likely

are grouped

another

their

is needed of the

If,

some

therefore,

to Latin

children

strength

to be the strong

of Latin

priests,

influence

then

in

Novgorod., Nifont's the Latin

reply

inroads

at fault

people

thoroughly

misguided

that

Nifont

I think, Latin

In his

saw Latin

or not - should

religion

col.62.,

that

their

has

worship

of Novgorod.

exp,liHn another

the was tainted

been mentioned)

already

feeling

viewed

tnat faith

as but one part

anti-Latin

of a greater 'I'here is no

in his reply.

of Il' ya' s questions.

[ a man] does not know whether ,, he be baptized? 11c. Nifont replied that

pp. 280-1;

'Rusalii i bog Simargl-Pereplut, ceeding .. ~'

He declared

from Chr:Lstian

influence

Volgo-Okskogomezhdurech'ya

2

i.e.

term (which

28 he asked Nifont:

op.cite,

11 ,

and no different

may also

shows how the prelate seec

dvoevertsy

in the popular

influence

chapter

Anichkov,

diocesan

of any particular

he is baptized

1

question

'I'he use of the

web of confusion hint,

made in his were ljlike

with pagan.i.sm. suggests

to Il'ya's

'If

Goryunova, (IJiIA., no.94), 1

Etnicheskaya M, 1961,

p.

istoriya 247;

Bo Rybakov,

SA, 1967, n©-2, p .. 116 and pre=

182

baptism

was appropriate

could be found.

arose,

forgetful about

I would suggest,

movements in twelfth

century

not confused

account.

to Il'ya's

with the Latin baptism was

adult

question

The Latin

influence

enough to trouble ingrained social

I

s reply conflict

were found,

Latin

of witnesses to Orthodoxy.

of Novgorod~ whilst

was overshadowed

alike

would have Nifont

as a new convert

influence

that

did not want direct

witnesses

on the population

and more detrimental life

if

priests

but only in the absence

the clergy,

and religious

of heretical

neighbours.

the bishop

to,msman to be treated

confused

is easy to imagine

Orthodox

community in Novgorod: to stand,

'rhe

so the townsmen were presuma.bly

by his mother to Latin

that

would

not with unusually

who were genuinely

However 1 it

among his

suggests

was allowed

a confused

from encounters

Novgorod,

who had been taken

become a confused

a:i.,y Novgorodian

'I'here is no evidence

status.

the child

that

baptism

or not he had been baptized.

but with tnose

Christian

on that

to a previous

to imagine

as to whether

Novgorodians,

their

no witnesses

It is difficult

have been uncertain questi.on

only if

by the more deeply

of paganism,

and hindered

important

which infused

religious

and civic

unity.

Pagan Survivals The townsmen of Novgorod were in the mid-twelfth deeply

affected

by various

forms of· paganism~

in a town which had been converted A number of chapters in Nifont's Novgorodians.

1

· This is

only a century

in the Voproshaniya

This evidence

Chapter 6 of this thesis of Novgorod's conversion,

suggests

that

still

observed

still

not· s-iirprising

and a half

can be taken

time some pagan customs were openly

century

earlier.

1

to show that by many

more pagan survivals

contains a discussion of the extant which they date to 989.

accounts

183

must have existed

in the form of various

':Che tone of the replies that

church leaders

pagan influence Kirik

found in the chapters

were - predictably

summarized

- most anxious

revealed his

first

worry about paganism

t in . .1:-r.iev . .• • 11J.4 9 -, -o• 1 in

those

sacrifices

'

people

who offer

rozhanitsa:

these

'l'he sacrificial

the

worship

reference

all

familiar

practi.sed

of rod-rozhanitsa

church

Other,less chapter

vJoe to those

ancestral

the particular In chapter

practice

54- (which survives

to pagan burials,

1

RIB,

2

Gal'kovsky,

3

Anichkov, op.cit., tserkov' v drevney

or,

there

in very

his

peasants

t.1, p.

was still

and Kliment's

by this

troubled

Kirik

the question

as well.

of divination:

made use of human faeces. compressed

as seems more likely,

reply

survival.

4

form) he apparently sacrifices.

PP• 153-83.

162; Ya.Shchapov, Kn,yazriesJ.de M, 19?2, p.244.

Rusi,

with

to rozhanitsalll

col.31.

op.cit.,

in

condemmed

condemnation

century,

he ra~ses

mentioned

2

of fertility.

Kliment

pagan worship

pagan survivals

example,

images venerated

by Russian

who drink

were very worried

striking,

concerns

Bread and cheese

,. 3 Russ::i.a.

11

leaders

34, for

enough.

and emphasized

shows that

the time

see below - a very important

in Novgorod in the mid-twelfth

shows that

lasting

and mead to rod and

as symbols

offerings

in medieval

feasting

during

'Ihe question

cheese

also

mead was - as we shall

question

turned

are

to mead-drinking:

Kiri.k's

this

in a question

anthropomorphic

and perhaps

commonly used as symbolic

of ritualized

In his

figures

offerings

modern times,and part

of bread,

were male and female

as abs tr a.ct ancestor

were still

below shows

about

to Metropoli ta.n Kliment

~ I • • or~ N:i..1on-r; s :i..mprisonmen ·v• •

and traditions.

on the laity.

33) which he addressed

( Chapter

superstitions

ustavy_i

In

184

this

chapter

+h ...,ey

~ f'

Nifont

exhorted

ouna." un b urJ.e · d•1

mounds in the Russian

the

pious

to bury whatever

way on pagan burial

Bones could be found in this North:

secondary

burials

human bones

were often

made near the ')

surface

of a mound and the remains

There is no sign is more likely

probably that

as a

the skulls

of pagan barrow fields the bones mentioned

result

of pagan bu.ilders {>ften sacrificed

of horses

in particular

however,

threshold

of a Novgorodian

be slaughtered

ruins.

burial

·

walls. 3

In

were found beneath

the

human beings

The wooden houses

in Kirik's

the remnants

have shown

was constructed:

human bones wer·e probably

exhortation

to erase

Excavations

shows that

4

and it

were found in the town,

found beneath

skulls

home, and this

and

Nifont's

have been intended proper

are often

as bi!J.d:lders' sacrifices.

however,

sacrifices.

1

a number of children's

down frequently,

charred

by Nifont

when a building

1

one case,

burned

near Novgorod,

that

were

animals

might with time be washed out.,:;.

often

chapter

could

of Novgorod found beneath

54 may well

of the pagan custom by giving

to human bones left

by builders'

pagan custom current

in twelfth

sacrifices

when they were

discovered. Another discerned

in Ki.rik

1

prohibition

against

which still

contains

prohibition

suggests,

,s

90. 5 'I'his chapter

chapter

drinking blood

century

molozivo,

i.e.

(colostrum).

however,

that

Novgorod can be

cm1tains

the first

an emphatic milk after

birth

I'he wording of Ni.font's

he was speaking

not of colostrum The bishop

per~,

but of a drink

1

RIB,

col.

2

I.I. i.yapusnKin, SJ=av;yane vostochnoy E'vropy nakanune obrazovaniya 1968, p.112, etc.; V.V. drevnerusskogg gosudarstva ( MIA, no.152),L, Sedov, Novgorodski~sopki (SAI~. E1-8), M, 1970, pp. 18-20.

3

Sedov,

1

37,.

K voprosu

o zhertvorJrinosheniyakh 1957, pp. 2.2-6, etc.

KSIIMK, v.68,

4

M.

Sedova,

5 RIB, col.

made by mixing milk with blood.

1

.A.mulet iz drevnego

1+8.

v drevnern Novgorode,

1

Novgoroda~ SA, 1957 1 no. 4, p. 167.

185

days

three

f'irst

the

11

only when

definition,

while

with blood,

Ji!e Anichkov,

compared Kirik

1

1

drink.

prepared

natives.

non-Russian

a pagan

to

suggests

pronouncement,

which may ha.v e had some ritual

drink

The fina.1

1

and most

pagan priests

that

twelfth

Novgorod in the l!liddle of the

children

Orthodox

priests

for prayersn.

'ihis

(perhaps

surviving

11

of Novgorod in the middle a considerable

preference

may attest

left

in its

clearly

felt

the churchis

wakeG

arts,

rather

either

century

influence ❖

o;,e! cit.

1

Anichkov,

2

Hl.o, Col. 60.

enduring

In either

in twelfth

'

P• 272.

than rely

case,

asks

what to do

It

and it

pagan

is clear

priests

commanded that

to appeal

on Christian

the influence

than to

rather

and still

crypto-paganism

Novgorod,

found in

among the townsmen

present

need prefer

of serious

18. 2

,3ti11

shows that

century,

of the twelfth

of the laymen would :i.n cases i.n pegan

chapter

among the population.

following

one versed

to volkhvy~

were still

as magicians)

were

Il'ya

century.

sick

their

with women who take

the

in

survivals

in Il' ya I s chapter

shamans)

(probably

fact

ca.nee.

signifi

contained

consider:is

by

of Ni font's

wa.s in

discussed

of pagan

evidence

telling

.YoJ?roshaniya which I shall '.L'his proves

molozivo

the

that

U:3

delicacy

as \-Jell as the phrasing

parallel,

T1his

of

dish

a particular

which was conside:ced

a specially

described

to a; Siberian

for comparison

He referred.

found in medieval

they all

that

and concluded

mixed with blood,

flour

on Rw3sian paganism,

passages

90 with other

s chapter

contaminated

of milk temporarily

authority

the eminent

blood by

contains

Now molozivo

spoke clearly

Nifont

church writings

Russian

clean.

is

j_ t

drink: it

but humans should

to a calf,

be given

should

it

11

during

blood:

contains

must not be drunk when it

molozivo

that

declared

many

to some-

priests.

'I'his

or superstitions

of paganism was still impeded the spread

of

186

Il'ya's

Approach

to Unacceptable

'l'he questions instances cussed

raised

in the Voproshaniya.

of questionable

behaviour

ever,

this

as the result explanation,

of the questi.onary, apparently

cannot

preferred

valid

to discuss

at other

ponent

times

he elicited ha.bi ts,

wa,s developed

archbishop,

prepared

to that in

dealing

cases

.,_h i, em. 1

l1

of his

when adults

'.['his "torment

take 11

1

ya

cur3toms obliquely. to disits

com-

doing

directed

but together

this

at corH::,tituted

a

pagan

which 11 1 ya I then

in 11660

Before

turning

some of Il'ya.'s

he was formulating

his strategy

a decade

before

were not simply

stated

the adult

that

than if

col.

for

becoming

11 1 ya inquired

them and then

abuse,

Nifont's

a matter

in question

to bed with

to sexual

as murder.

he was intoxicated.

58.

in the Voproshaniya

children

must refer

such crimes

RIB,

How-

Il

custom into

in the Pouchenie

section

is as odious

1

s section.

method of undermining

pagan practices

the offence

sober

texts.

prelate.

In chapter about

is may often

separately.

b;y considering

, see that

with important

Novgorod's

in themselves,

we can,

Voproshaniya

the

a given

for a dioce,sBn council

instruction

1

of condemnations

further

individual are dis-

the more effectively

to discuss

'I'his indirect

surv:mvals

there

intolerable

a practiee

a series

which seemed trivial

complex old custom.

to Il'ya

he fragmented

from Nifont

and these

in the extant

certain

which he proceeded

concern

for Ki.rik I s and Savva. 1 s sections

be applied

At ti.mes he would misrepresent credit:it;

what obscurity

of corruptions

while

generally

among the laity,

way.

in a straightforward

be explained

Customs

,,nd Il

reply

guilty

if

If he was drunk,

ya asked

indicates

of lasciviousness.

waij less

I

!!torment"

that

'l'he bishop he acted

his

whilst

crime was

if

187

equal

to murder.

Does this

wa,s in principle If so,

rega.rded

Nifont's

we suppose drunkaxd

fact,

resulted

transgression

it

of children

than a drunken

voluptuary?

of justice,

was c-wrnething other

t'

unless

nan a simple

If the drunkeness

which led

from some ceremony of pagan origin,

then any

that

ceremony in pagan-type Il I ya pa.:r·hcularly

odious

debaucher

childrer1~

would be doubly odious

it, well-known

mentioned

adult

on ravishix1g

to such crimes

a sooer

would seem a travesty

the guilty

intent

resulting

as less

judgement

that

mean that

drinking

to the church.

to intoxication

communal feasts

called

bratchiny,

when he became archbishop.

by him must~ I suggest,

was

a

In

central

which concerned

'I'he abuse of children

be seen in relation

to ceremonial

intoxication. A still

more striking

exar.aple of Il

pagan survivals

is found in his

discussed

appear

there

are a.11 connected In chapter a.

girl

budet).

Nifont

replies

asked Nifont

that

husbands"

24 Il'ya

Chapter

a pronouncement

monastery and shortly Novgorod);

1

RIB,

is

col.

that,

11

62.

lezet

by 1:\rkadiy

to be Ni font's he said,

na devitsu

ashche

preserved'?n intended

is like

they

communal brat china.

with the same line

25, which is apparently

two >contains

shows that

mounts

i semya im

they ''comrnit a wrongdoing

if seed comes, but virginity

to

'Ihe practices

what to do w-hen "a girl

(Lzha tvoryashe

persists

approach

but examination

of the

and seed comes 11 (azhe devitsa

not with the1r chapter

with one aspect

ya I s indirect

23, 24 and 25. 1

chapters

very confused,

23 II'ya

I

if

[they

are

J

ne s muzhem). In

of questioning: Nifont

"And

recommends penance.

as a summary of the preceding

( then abbot

successor the sin

as the

of the Dormi tion next Bishop of

of sodomy".

188

by the clergy.

Novgorod and condemned as unnatural is confused.

reader

Chapter

25 again suggests

with sodomy in chapter unnatural

sexual

be solved

if

relations.

confused.

equinox.

with the winter

with men being

ceremonies,

recently, is

these

who has studied

Chicherov,

. . a sec t·ion a .bout. magic ~ \o k.u d ese kh\ ;. in ~5 I

If

we

resulting

encounters

paTts

most confusing mounting

girls

irony,

suggested

1

11

11' ya I s chapters

from ritual

in the chapters.

may be seen a,s an ironic

11 1 ya intended

to discredit Chapter

deviation.

sexual

.:.,1rnniy period russkogo (Trudy insti tuta etnografii

V.V. Chicherov, XV!.-Xl.X vv.

2

ibid., --

3

Srhirnov,

up. 166-2120 "'

'Materialy,'

p.10.

V.

until

meaning., 2

ritual

It

of the

redaction

are re-

Il I ya I s chapters ;;

23,

weddings"

11

where the man was masquerading

encounters using

that

accept

they survived

of the w.b.ole questionBTy

section..c, by to::;iics) grouped

into

as

tha.t the later

in t:his rerspect

V'2]?_roshaniya ( where the chapters arranged

ceremonies

tr.iey had a complicated

has shown that

significant

as women and women as men. 1

dressed

such

during

were staged

weddings

Imitation

in connection

:particularly

celebrations,

were a pa.rt of many bratchiny

on masquerading,

1r1hich depended

customs,

Such transvestite

of a

discussion

was deliberately

of participants

identity

custom in which the sexual

can

the confusion

as an oblique

are read

is

discussed

the subject

that

It seems to me that

chapters

the three

but the analogy

encounters,

to heterosexual

clearly

refers

2Lt

to lesbianism,

impression.

this

contradicts

of seed and husbands

but the mention

the

Beyond this

to refer

23 seems at first

Chapter

found in

habits

deal with sexual

appaTently

chapters

These three

2½· and

deal

explain

we can readily of

The description description

with sexual

girls

11

of natural

as a women~

the

Perhaps

sexual by

e.

with mockery a ce:r;rnony which may be interpreted

as a

cheskogo kalendarya zernledel' AN t. XL),M, 1957, pp. 201-2.

189

reference

to unconswnmated

pronouncement ritual

in chapter

"weddings"; the irony

in chapter

24.

similarly to appear,

i.e. three

weddings

11

11

developed expose

analogy

The abbot

a wedding of man to

chapters

rJerformed

straightforward

reflected

unacceptable different

of local

mined graduallys refined

rather

are discer:nable

diocesan

council

used his

bratchina role

than

by Il'ya

features

ll'ya

of

He

'l'here,

feast~

in Novgorodian

society.

Archbishop

4 of this

occasions,

and th2t

that

under-

This strategy

main

at the

the Voproshaniya

of

for dealing played

was

its

which he presented part

the

>

with the

a central

unifying

to the Pouchenie.

and his Pouchenie

of Novgorod in 1165 as a result

and political. thesis

with certa:i.n.

felt

Let us now turn

Il'ya

had

apparently

which apparently

I1 1 ya was made Archbishop

See chapter

Il'ya

confrontation

as in his

to

If both Kirik

to Nifont,

condemned directly.

method of approach

complex ecclesiastical

in order

in the community were best

in the Pouchenie

1166.

indirect

Il I ya had

'Ibis manner of attack

ceremony.

questions

cuc,toms.

with masqueraded

when he became Novgorod 1 s prelate:

ceremonial

B.

1

a larger

pagan survivals

was intended

sh.ow that

sides.

method£, were needed for different rooted

condemnation

:pagan survival,s

on the need to avoid direct

aspects

most deeply

further

bratchiny

from different

and Savva addressed

his question

his

concerned

manner of discussing

and dissected

Arkadiy

phrased

Hmarr:i.age 11 as it

which are evideLtly

both mis-represented

of the

man or woman to woman.

a.t pagan-inspired

an indirect

that

chose to phrase

the masqueraded

them to condemnation

clearly

with which Il'ya

apparently

Arkadiy's

condemnation

with sodomy suggests

and mockery

by picturing

at the same ceremony.

2.5 rnay be seen as a final

his

understood

wantonness

state

of Russia

of the

at the tirnii. 1

He

190

was consecrated returned

time over an annual

mission

new a.rchbishopric Chapter

Li-)•

by Il'ya

concerning

instruction, egist

pastoral

who formulated

Bouchenie

for his

ability

deals

replies.

see,

received

clergy

he seems to have realized

that

to Christian

manner of discussion

Nifont

him, Il

before

incompatible of the

that

in many

instances

One of the greatest· view,

as in Nifont's,was

in the second

Pavlov,

chapter

'Neizdannyy

discussed

were concerned,

1

to usury. 1

p. 287

obliquely

and

clergy

from Like

with. habits

when members in his

however,

approach

of Novgorod's

of the Pouchenie.

pamyatnik,

he deals

ya was unrestrained

propensity

ways:

become clear

especially

weaknesses its

will

(such as usury),

a more subtle

now

in which he used one

out social

Where pagan survivals

condemnation.

in varied

to root

1

had been in

could be named clearly

subjects

Here Il

were involved.

'I'he

as we shall

problems

to the other

ya was concerned

with Christianity

clergy

realized

1

strat-

care suited

exhibit,

were best

of the salient

prepared

as the Voprpshaniy1:=;

'l'he circumstances

in preference

in

of this

charge.

of problems

confronting

others

usage.

discussion

in their

some practises

while

the following

instruction

of pastoral

instructions

for

and condemned outright,

is discussed

in hi.s comments than Nifont

'I'he archbishop's

to the

was an accomplished

a

and to the people

facility

adapted

Il'ya

in

blessings

An examination

with as wide a range

a remarkable

mission

diocese

for

welcomed back

special

a ,special

shows that

does but 11' ya wa,s more deft his

who brought

matters.

or Pouchenie,

both to their

apparently

from the Holy Land (that also

he presided

of the Novgorodian

~:'his council

of kaliki

'l'he C)uncil

in Kiev and

On 13th Marchi1166

council

new rank of Archbishop.

to Novgorod a

1

1165 by the metropolitan

to Novgorod on May 11th.

the first his

on Harch 28th,

Il'ya

was required.

in Il' ya.' s

'I'his is discussed

'J:he archbishop's

comments

191

were more specific

11' ya issued

than

an ou.tright

money-lending. states

dealing

with

physical If this

correct,

more severe suggests,

than

then Nifont

1

sentence

the priests]

1

'Ihe last

others

!._styagnuti

o l::i.e.

ouchi ti).

There

:i.t].n

[against

grounds

are

for

priest's

profiteering.

published

to usury

the money

the Pouchenie,

but to actual

severe

chapter2

a certain

among the

of his

.sentence

1

state,s

that

thing

before

tozhe

2

believing

were perhaps

blamelessly

perCvee

this

sebe

be-zazora refers

to

vow,s, but were unable

or unwj_lling

A. Niki tsky

accux·ately

has noted

was

n[theyJthemselves

lyudiy

that

clergy

condemnation

measures

(,Samem bo dostoyno

ot] kakoy lyubo veshchi

laymen who had taken

secular

abandon

of all

for

the use of whips or chains.

the1t these

of 11':y-a's

own measures

his

not to penance,

ya 1 s attitude

so

should

instructing

their

Il

in

ways or forfeit

expropriation

who first

perhaps

as vm sha:t-1 now see,

The last

[i.e.

including

mend their

announced

included

A. Pavlov,

who engaged

from the nomocanon which

case kazni

punishment, is

ll'ya

Like Nifont,

priests

must either

these

in this

of all

a passage

In addition,

and kaz,ni. that

s dm the same problem.

priests

the guilty:

in question,

concluded

cited

profiteering

priesthood.

I

condemnation

He also

that

their

Nifont

to abandon

that

,., entry

the ranks

into

Fossibly,

certain

were patrons

wealthy

of church

to become priests

a layman's

greed

A. Nikitsky,

Stf,

1879, P•

clergy

and influential

building

or monks,

in the

without

In such

in profit.

interest

2

of Novgorod's

cases

was not at all

men,maybe some of those twelfth

resolving a usurer

for money was transformedinto

Ocherki 75 ■

vnutrenney

difficult.c.

istor:ii

century,

rashly

decided

their

wordly

profiteer,

and

to abandon became

a.

a clerical

tserkvi

who

vice.

v Velikom Novgorode

192

wrath.

ll'ya's

kindled

.

gamb] .1.ng.

1

in

order

all

this

to gain salvation.

from dice.

ways aside was infected

with the in.stinct

or gambling,

and that

out that

on rooting

usury

through

whether

for profiteering, wa1:3intent

Il'ya

of Novgorod

the clergy

seems that

'I'hus it

11 •••

gambled in other

priests

that

that

and Holy

to us by the Apostles

suggests

example

a personel

he mentions

In his prohibition

the term vsego togo

fathersn;

to set

obligation

is forbidden

togo)

(vsego

to priests,

was prohibited

pastime

on the clergy's

at length

and dwelt

a form of

clearly

dice,

who cast

this

that

declared

He

of the Pouchenie

In the fourthpronouncernent

condemned priests

he emphatically

which

clergy

of Novgorod's

Usury was not the only wordly failing

habit.

Pagan survivals

this

discuss

and in detail.

openly

failing

In pronouncement

of

survival

in the Poucherde

Three pronouncements

and habits.

pagan customs

to be the widespread

time continued

Il'ya's

during

clergy,

to the

in contrast

of Novgorod 1 ,s laity,

failing

the most obvious

17 Il'ya

exhorts

to forbid

priests

his

women

')

from associating

had troubled

Il 1 ya when he was still chapter

(see

discussed

above).

He does not go into

11•••

of the d,:::ngers which arise

in that

result]

various

preserve

1

association

Pavlov,

murders

each and every

op.cit.,

there

lies

(dushegub

1

Christian

:p. 288.

in the Voproshaniya

18 of Il'ya's

to Nifont

presenting

priest

a parish

questions

description

~:he very same :prob1em

with volkhvy.,r...

parishioners

,bu.t' does give a. sweeping

detail,

with volkhvy;

from association much evil;

,stvo)and from it

for

much other all

11 •

there evil

are [ as

a

- may God

It is clear

from

193

· 1 h enie. ,., pronouncemen t 19 or~ t' ne .l:-ouc~

her by arrangement

brought

kidnapping

ritual

privel);

informal

or voluntary

Ru,isian

Novgorod •

2

Nevertheless,

ll'ya those

ways of overcoming

.suggested condemning

them)

to have children.

~:he archbishop

bound by non-Christian

acceptance

of the

in this

to children

church's Indeed,

Pavlov

pronouncement

clergy

to

long enough

had been together reasoned

apparently

in this

that

could be drawn into

understandings

to condemn

openly

having

without

reference

believed

that

the passing

indicated

that

the retroactive

by Il'ya

included

to

Christian

in pagan wedlock to take

authority

wedding encouraged

Christian

to

(in addition

Novgorod's

instructed

even when the couples

way people

old habits.

Il'ya

living

the townsmen still

vow,s of marriage,

their

in

to have

known cleric

pagan arrangements

that

Q

In the same pronouncement encourage

and were not peculiar

the first

is

mentioned

are often

marriage

literature,

and church

chronicles

Pavlov has noted

(sublyalisya).

cohabitation

devku zhene);

(pol ozhil

concubinage

( umcha.l);

to a man (v vechere

barter)

through

(probably

forms of non-Christian

three

these

time.

in Novgorod in his

ceremony in which a woman's parents

a presentation

included

These rites

of

on the rituals

'There he dwelt

practised

which were still

pagan marriage

in

pagan customs

of some surviving

account

gave a detailed

ll'ya.

Novgorod of paganism.

had not purged

domination

of Christian

two centuries

nearly

among the town.smen, and that

influence

siderable

had con-

shamans - still

- probably

pagan priests

words that

these

a sort

of

weddingn of

11

7,

children

existing

1

ibid.,

2

ibid.

-z, _,

ibid.

2

11$

296.

P•

279.

to their

newly-wedil

11

parents. ✓

In other

words,

the

194

so as to create

to Christian

absorb

pagan survivals. Il

impossible,

where Il

Pouchenie,

1

after

day

whatsoever

on a large

ceremony centred

inside

believe

that

it.

This figure

a

New

horse

which· was carried

I

and some scholars

a. tur,

around

revolved

the ceremony originally

The

century.

by a number of men

Yea.r dragon)

was called

on the

significance

thi,s

until

of a bull, ,or

figure

( in the same way as a Chinese hidden

below.

no Christian

had

culture

in peasant

survived

and

it

(Semik);

Easter

and

ceremony rierformed

popular

prati,ced

26 of the

lodygi,kolyadnitsi

These pagan customs are explained

'.I1ury was a widely seventh

1'his trenchant

in pronouncement

with tury,

ya dealt

1

kind was

of this

adaptation

is well illu,strated

£21:•

bezzakonnyy

however,

ya condemned the custd:;m categorically.

I

to paganism

reaction

If,

could

institutions

whenever comparable

society

utions

pagan instit-

on adapting

intent

was clearly

ll'ya

Archbishop

bond in the family.

Christiic)n

a

gradually

were to be consecrated

a pagan family

bonds which united

a real

animal

'.)

the sun and fertility.'-

which symbolized

'l'he ceremony called suggests

that

it

reminded other

him of the ritual

games.

Pavlov

Tsar Alexey Mikhailovich with

cards,

1 ibid., 2

dice

(17th

and a "diabolical

his

point

century)

was orig-

he believes,

The game apparently

entertainment.

and s&cred functions

emphasised

to

related

(itself

which,

to bowling),

more than idle

something

inally

to babki

was a game similar

gorodk:i., and more generally

Pavlov

J:9dygi had not been much studied.

to various

assigned

by citing

which prohibits

mare 0 (tury?)

a gramota

lodygi

as sinful

of together

and

p. 298.

StP, A.S. l"amitsyn, Bozhestva dre'lriikh slavya£, 233-40; I'. Kryukova, 'Vozhdenie rusalki v sele SE,1947, no. 1 pp. 185-92; R. Lipets, ohlasti,' Slavyanskiy v bylinakh,' kul'ta i otgoloskiego pp. 82-109.

1884, pp. 209-11, Voronezhskoy 0s'kine '0braz drevnego tura M, 1972, fol'klor,

195

. "' b'j_ t-s. 1 sacr1". J.eg1_ous na be sure

which

that

the

Kolyada

is

game was rooted

celebrated

and festivities

the

name given

the

winter

in which

Bezzakonnyy

to think

as it

on a list

does,

11

l·t

lawless o

3

It

thus

role

simply

in

where;

combat

11

seems

that

early

Russian

t,,inrnent"

until

vie know also despite

Il'ya evidence

recently

in Russia,,

FJven women could trial

church's

.

.

together

with

tury,

show that

the

op.cit.,

p.

Iavlov,

2

Chicherov,

3

Pavlov,

op.cit., op.cit.,

'.) D. Zelenin, P• i+16.

6 H. Dewey, !X,

1960,

clergy

listed

combat

a requiem

custom

combatn

lodygi deal

"enterin

the

combat. 5

in medieval

"lawless

else-

more fully

festive

considerations

£2X·

a ceremonial

been rooted

'l'hese

before

bezzakonnyy

to this

used

that

Russia,

encourage

us

as a pagan-inspired

and kolyadnitsy. with

pagan

of Novgorod

survivals

faced

in Il'ya's

a wealth

of pagan

starina,StP,

1911,

281. 125-31.

pp.

p. 281.

'K voprosu

o rusalkakh,'

''I'rial by combat 21-31.

pp.

speculated

to conduct

in such

was widely

6

ceremony,

part

is

probably

term

played

~eferred

theEe

this

of the

and ri tue.l

take

and to see

which

but

Following,

has

not

and may have

lead

The pronouncements

term,

a common form of festive

by combat obJections.

2

ceremonies

form of combat

society. that

the

as a result

some murderous

ceremonies

combat.

Pavlov

priests

apparently

Pavlov's

1

ceremonies,

directs

to follow

Pouchenie

ceremonia.l

with

of ceremonies

participated.

a vague

violence.

we may

as a ceremony.

variou,s

communities

describes

were indeed

that

the

and included

colltclbat11 ) is

fights

past., 4

distant

sentence

examine

l✓iassed

below.

cycle

was somehow connected

murdered

we shall

to an extensive

whole

to wanton

took,

and treated

of recognizable

refer

those

it

that

The vex·y next

mass for

the

actually

in paganism

equinox

boy (11Lawless

good reason

doe,s not

\;Jha1tever form lodygi

Zhivaya

in Muscovite

Russia,

1

Oxford

Slavonic

Vo11'!-1V Paoers

196

habits

and customs

mentioned, lent

ready

in the town.

to mould into

themselves

The archbishop Christian

to adapt$ltion.

was, as I _biavee,lready

form those

local

was impossible

When this

customs which he condemned

a custom irrevocably. l here

is one pagan-rooted

1 1

great

lengths

to adapt

ritual,

however,

to Christianity.

This custom was the bratchina

ceremony which has already

been

about

in the Voproshaniya.

masqueraded

raised

weddings

the problem

when imparting

Chr:Lstianity

the central of Il

I

with regard

to his

ritual

to Il'ya's

In that

way in order

In the Pouchenie

presentation

'l'he details

mentioned

in a most oblique

mocked and condemned.

which he went to

questions

case 11 1 ya

to have the excesses

he used the same manner of

clergy

a plan

for adapting

to

in the brat china:

the ceremonial

become apparent

from the following

ya I s plan will

feast.

ana.lysis.

Il'ya

adapts

a local

11 1 ya' s plan

immediately presented

ritual. to adapt

apparent openly;

when one reads its

the instruction.

bratchina

and discussed

the separate

and drinks

they all i)

(no,

1he first

to separate

The plan is not

in effect

form

disassembled

the

representing

'.I'he larger

from different

If we analyse

and feasting

parts

in disguised

in isolation,

taken

23), and manslaughter

is not

1

to be curbed.

passages

with drunkenness

ritual

are scattered

part,3

are examined together.

seem to refer

Drunkenness

excesses

when certain

ments which deal foods

parts

'l:'he archbishop

them as so many unrelated

the Pouchenie

feasting

the Pouchenie.

constituent

throughout

becomes apparent

tl10 brat china

(nos. I ,nos.

whole pl.aces

the pronounce-

1,9,18);

n o, ?6),

of a bratchina

memorial

we find celebration.

and feasting pronouncement

in the Pouchenie

:i.n

contains

a lengthy

that

197

of drunkennes,s.

condemnation

'l

feasts.

as against laymen.

priests

some of the laymen might

that

He expected

of the bad example set

because

prohibition

to his

object

as much against

his invective

directed

case Il'ya

In this

at

took place

drunkenness

this

show that

comments in the text

spare

a few

censure;

is not a general

l'his

by their

J

do (a pop:L cheinµ t~o:s;i~t'Jll

"and what do the priests

priests,

not to participate

the priests

with laymen very often.

drinking

in festive

question

11' ya' s rhetorical

th 1t1-:L

speak well

11And

if

azhe n

drugom: ne lga po ,Eir 1 ;yildobre besedovati, took this

with a layman during

feasts

conducted

by

ibid.,

and other

of

a coherent refrain

he should

Il'ya

the liturgy

that

pp. 286-?.

286n.Q

were,

followed

1

comments in :pronouncement their

evensong

he proclaimed,

clergy]

at

acknow-

before

a

'.I'he services

its elf.

the rhetorical

nwe [the

abstinence Il'ya

duties.

religious

in their

intoxicated

with a declaration

p.

choice

Il'ya's

that

Le.

became drunk even after

them while

1 Pavlov,~., 2.

can

conversation

remain

should

with laymen,

and sometinnes before

rnan, but not to God11• mentioned

fa.iled

some priests

day,

then

is so,

of Novgorod were not renowned for

therefore

and

edged that feast

from these

clear

the priests

that

Bogom1 ).

commonly done thereo

from the drinking It is

a priest

wl:um feasting

witness

Christian

If this

that

concern

his

words reveals

2

a feast.

sr'

a good religious

conduct

commune with God if he cannot

bo s •

asks how a priest

which rhetorically

to be a.. question

to

at feasts

with God" (I oli

possible

then how is it

others,

from

'1'his can be inferred

is impossible

it

took part

the clergy

that

suggests

ya ordered

However, another

in such drinking.

comment in the same pronouncement

I

sin

11

a favour

to

question

already

greatly

through

198

God11 (

of them.

clear

to stay

right

condemnation

thing.

Instead,

he spoke of his

an evening

ikh i poshli

He added that

pirov

that

he himself

a bratchina),

(apparently

feast

posloushali

feasts

confessed

Il'ya

in his

more spiritual

benefit

(A egda zhe ssedel Il'ya

n-e dobyti).

exhortation everything

boroli,

of feasts

concluded

will

spent

a egda zhe esmy

piously after

at home could attending

tgda mi vdal Bog, egozhe ni vi

ten I":'

:pronouncement 1 with a pious the Kingdom of Heaven, and

Seek ye first

11

be added unto you".

and of drunken feasters

as

nothing

tgda ne dobyl nichtozhe).

than would accumulate

doma esm',

from the Gospel: else

an evening

experience

who

had once gone to

9ut he had gained

v pir,

po vecherii

in a way which suggests

than condemn the priests

(I sami bo sya esmy s temi mysl'mi

a. result

bring

rather

to discourage,

held such company.

own experiences

an out-

he did no such

In fact

as such.

of the bratchiny

who

of lldrunkards"

have issued

hope from God, 11' ya could easily

their

he intended

speaking

1, after

Toward the end of pronouncement

that

in

I think,

can be seen,

His restraint

1 and 9.

pronouncements

"displaced''

his priests

care not to order

to have taken special

he appears

indeed

At

specifically:

feasts

condemn bratchiny

did Il'ya

however,

no time,

from

it

esmy na pyanyya lyudi).

s Boga nadezhyu polozhili

s'emshe

•••

in God, and those

displaced

hope in drunken men, having

their

''placed

at fault

with

Association

of faith

to a loss

in his view,

amounted,

"drunkards"

occurred.

excesses

where those

condemn the feasts

hand he did not

but on the other

categorically,

condemned drunkeness

On the one hand Il'ya

and bratchiny.

on drunkeness

pronouncement

Il'ya's

to

were two sides

there

that

to recognize

however,

It is essential,

than in churches.

rather

feasts,

during

priests

inebriated

by

performed

ceremonies

to religious

may refer

this

such services":

The archbishop's

was in this

case intended

criticism as a cautiom

199

into

and drinking.

the feast

group fea.sting;

of many problems

a list various

hibited

maxim was follwed

town to force

Il'ya

it,

permits

us to link

with bratchiny Most scholars

the ceremonial 1 ~' 2

~•,

feast

P• 290. PP•

(vidite

This sentence,

piyut').

nasilivo before

down drink"

294-5.

which pro-

This special

the clergy

Il' ya reminds

each exactness. this

themselves.

which explains

sentence

by an illuminating

that

out

period,

in that

by a. sentence

in the text

of mead in particular.

the drinking

was followed

from drinking

prohibition

the need for

' 1you see a custom in

bo obychay v grade sem, ozhe

together

the drinking

with the reference mentioned

repe~tedly

to mead by

feasts. who have dealt was impossible

in

The priests

Lent.

during

to set a good example by abstaining

and particularily '.L'his general

everyone

18,

It was the first

with the aim of pointing

on Christians

to discourage

were instructed

of

in pronouncement

with Lent. 2

there

discussed

incumbent

restraints

also

is discusr;ed

in connection

was mentioned

Consequently,

named or condemned.

was neither

itself

The problem of drinking where it

that.

a condemna.tion only of the excesses

9 contained

pronouncement

and the

sins,

led to other

was to prevent

proclaimed,

Il'ya

duty,

priest's

who become rowdy from feasting

(myatezh)

'rhat rowdiness

in

(as becomes apparent

are intended

only for those

from the second part)

which are enumerated

The penances

of the pronouncement

part

the first

1

i o pit'e).

brashne

drinking(~

and

to feasting

9 which relates

is found in pronouncement

feasts

bratchiny

towards

seeming tolerance

of Il'ya's

evidence

Further

feasts.

bratchiny

against

a prohibition

not expanded

deliberately,

It was, I think

of Novgorod:

to the priests

with Russian without

bratchiny

either

agree

that

mead or beer as

200

the ritual before

drink.

'I'he drink

the bratchina,

. . eviaence

01.,

bratchina.

2

and was therefore

coopera- t·ion. 1

t·t1eir .

with a large

after

drink

could not produce developed

much grain,

than

condemn it local force

11

drink

A

was concerned another

found in a gramota

customs

present 4

1

A. ),,opov,

2

Zelenin,

reason

in the lands 'I'he charter

a set

concluded

of together

that

these

by bee-keepers,

Mead must have been the most t:he land around muBt therefore

whether it

ll'ya

were just

in pronouncement

and even solitary

a favourite

among

and the phrase

18 indicates

that

is practically identical

I'his phrase

which refers

and settlements discussed

have been

would have chosen to

must have existed,

of Ivan rt!,

the town

Russia.

have been drunk for simple

if

called

Novgorod.

in a circle

organized

in medieval

piyut')

with bratchiny.

metropolitan.

mead.

council

graver

(nasilivo

11

and archaeologists

arranged

bratchina

but one doubts

at a diocesan

imbibers.

thrin beer,

and beer-brewing

elsewhere

in Novgorod,

sometimes

of the town uncovered

l'fovgorod I s bratchiny:

in

l1lead co-i.J.l.d,of course,

pleasure

11

was certainly

drink

was its elf

'J..'hearchaeologists

a nprofessional

common ritual

less

of

and symbolical

use in bmth-century

bowls used in bratchiny

piece

whose ritual

konets

by the participants

both practical

drink

ceremonial

in the Nerevsky

wooden drinking

were left

of its

jointly

'I'he drink

I1Iead was a more ancient

have found evidence Excavations

was prepared

in part

it with

to various

owned by the Moscow

in particular

the harm caused

1 Arkhj_v istoriko-yuridicheskikh 'Piry i bratchiny, svedeniy k.2, pol,2,M, 1854 otnosyashchild1sya do Rossii (ed. N. Kalachev), otd.L1, pp. 37, 38i'l; D. Zelenin, 'Drevnerusskaya brat china. kak obryadovyy L. 1926, p. 133; V.Sedov, prazdnik sbora urozhaya, 1 (off-print), 1 Yazyche,skaya. bratchina v drevnem Nov;orode, 1 KSIIlviK, v.65, 1956, PP• 1 V. hironova, 138-41. and his 1 K voprosu o zhertvoprinosheniyakh, 1 Yazyr:::heskie zhertvoprinosheniya. v lfovgorode, 1 i3A, 1967, no 1, pp. 215-27.,

Sedov,

1

Drevnerusskaya

'Yazycheskaya

4 Ponv, op.cit.,

brat china,

brat china.'

pp. 20-2.

1

p.

133.

201

by people

who had drunk to excess

for such behaviour.

'.l'he

trouble

in these

is described

similarity

with na.silivo

in the gramota It

is

clear

start

at bratchiny, of excessive

words:

piyut'

may be translated

fwhen

1

from Ivan I s gramota

that

discussed

( using

almost

the same words)

Pouchenie

also

took place

at bratchiny.

needs

bition

to be

drinking

our b~)lief

and feasting,

bro before,

custom.

restraint

Lent

during

of bratchiny.

1

and is

which deal

ya

18

a certain

into

In pronouncement

restraint

before

to the need for

a general

but it

of

condemnation

shows that

Il'ya

1, 9 and 18 deal

ceremony.

food and drink.

Pronouncement

Hf.au [the

I

'18 of his

above.

Il' ya I s :pronouncements

with that

which Il

objections.

his

that

ce at

and 9 on the ,subject

i.r, limited

not extended

11 •

Lent in pronouncement

11' ya demonstrates

not to overstate

Memorial

sanctuaries

'I

His discussion

Having established

so deeply

during

drink

tooi.

pronouncement

in

to the

and the phrase

to force

drinld.ng

This may seem a minor point,

was careful

apparent,

which we have discussed

the unacceptable

ii)

o:f drinking

which led

the occu.rence

with :pronouncements

'18, as in the

Pouchenie

that

fines

sil'no.

one] begins

forced

confirms

ya. 1 s

piti

is immediately

this

1

drinking

uchnet

bratchiny:

Il

and levelled

rooted

ll'ya

churches. know thst

holy altar

in the sanctuary,

they bring

[into

1vhich is forbidden

reveals

that

in the ways of the townsmen that

of the priests]

2.3 in the Poucbenie

other

priests

this

fasts.

]memorial

pronouncement

into as

the kanun behind

it

and drink

food for

Do not bring

were

they intruded

place

where they bless

the sanctuary during

began

bratchiny

the dead,

any kanun

it;

the

follo@s: the or else

or even food to the altar

202

1vhere the office altar

of oblation

is for that

ozhe druzii k.11r'stite

Li.e.

i piete

eshche skoronrno.

We

idezhe

stavlyaete

passage

kanun i

vnoshivaete,

prosfu.mni.sfu'e es:'nikakogo

bo oltar'

a

kanuna

est' ••• ). 1

na to uchinen

is another

the third

term for the ceremonia.1

which 11 1 ya condemned indirectly

in the pronouncements

have examined above.

a13 a drink

who published

the Pouchenie,

briefly

which was drunk in memory of the dead;

only as an accompaniment 2

passage.

trapezoyu

one;

etc~(A i se zhe vede

zaupoko;ynoe boroshno

tretiy

in this

drink

Pavlov,

to the memorial

He did not refer

in a ,separate drink

altar

azhe n v velikyy:

intoxicating

of kanun,

za svyatoyu li

nbr to the great

I

the blessing

v oltare,

A i v s'

'I'he kanun discussed

which

for

popove v oltare tu,

vnos:Lti,

is prepared

study

prepared

for

those

that

pagan-inspired

the kanl£!;

he apparently

food msntioned

to A J?:::ipov's earlier

of the bratchiny,

described

later

conclusion,

the kanun

ceremonial

saw it in the reached

was a special

feasts

jointly

by

-;;

the participants expressed

• ..,.

D. Zelenin,

the same vi.e,11as Popov:

was synonymous with mirshchinka to the ceremonial Pronouncement so tolerant the ritual their

drink

measure

some priests

bratchiny

th,,t

pagan-inspired apparently

of respectability they

a rite

mentioned

p. 2?8.

3

Popov,

op.cit.

1+

Zelenin,

7

may have done so during

brat china,'

in Novgorod were

they agreed

partaking the office

'I'he practice

p. 37.

'Drevnerusskaya

'

to bless of

gave the ceremony a still

by t:hemselves

specifically.

names given Li

ceremony in the sanctuaries

PP• 29?-8

op.cit.,

ibid.,

feast.

later

the term kanun

two other

that

reveals

The priests

2

or bratchina,

that

23 ttus

in the sanctuary:

1 Pavlov,

he explained

at the bratchina

of that

which Il'ya

ethnographer.

dr'ink shared

of the pagan-inspired

churches.

greater

the eminent

P• '133•

of the drink of. oblatj,on may :oerhaps

>

203

is given to the congregation.

the Eucharist

We may conclude that

described

and that

the kanun and memorial food were prepared

and blessed

for

purpose.

services

reaction

reveals

both caution

observed in his other pronouncements.

could not allow too blatant

that

where sacrements

area of the sanctuary

The diakonnik

were stored.

which comprises

church.

The central

and largest

the table

of oblation

(zhertvennik)

one serves

the objections

which might have arisen

from the sanctuary

By taking

were prepared.

of discouraging

of

offending the parish

By restricting

had he barred

the areas of the sanctuary this

course of action

Il'ya.

the laymen who respected priests

alcove; the

seems to have anticipated the local

at the same time he ensured that

entirely:

custom did not contaminate

twin dangers

areas Il'ya

(prestol);

in the northern

as the diakonnik. 1

of these three

kanun to the last

end of an Orthodox

alcove houses the altar is located

books,

of three

is the southern

at the eastern

the sanctuary

alcoves

and the southern

could

were not prepared.

where vestments,church

(the diakonikon),

This was the diakonnik and vessels

of the sacrements

and the foods which went with it were brought

if the~

be preserved

where

the sanctuary

into

the purity

He decided that

with the~•

The archbishop

but he chose not to deal categorically

were prepared;

sacraments

an intrusion

church

of qualities

a combination

and purpose,

into

of bratchiny

to the penetration

Il'ya's

we have already

into

the

was connected with a memorial bratchina,

by Il'ya

practice

that

before

of the host in the altar

partaking

from the priest's

have derived

who admitted

the~

custom the

where sacraments avoided the the kanun

and

into the

sanctuary.

P• 298~; The uses of the lesser alcoves are explained 1 Pavlov, op.cit., k izuchenizy ustava bogosluzheniya pravosPosobie by K. Nikol'sky, pp. 13-4,~ 20. 1900, StP, lavnoy tserkvi,

204

unity.

given

Novgorod would become an im3trument

to condemn them.

Even in such clear-cut

took care whenever

possible

not to offend

which

and Il'ya however,

cases,

had

he evidently ln this

loca.1 feeling.

is most revealing.

violence

to institutionalized

hire, attitude

respect

in

could

festivity

ceremonies

intolerable,

were quite

the main feast

accompanied

of a brat china

,iome of the lesser

to Christianity.

be adapted

ceremony of unity

of the church.

and ev:ery part

not each

Of course,

churches.

their

in

'I'hus the traditional

meaning.

Christian

it

could be harneE3Sed and

the bra.tchina

:3upervision

VJith the priest's

who

by the same priests

by blessing

the kanun for consumption

:prepared

the

hoped that

probably

Il'ya

would be restrained

drinking

ceremonial

chapters.

in other

drinking

against

stand

from his uncompromising

case be seen as a retreat

and town

must not in this

drink

ritual

of the bratchina

His tolerance

bratchina

the cause of church

they served

if

particularly

possible,

whenever

to Christianity

customs adapted

to have local

was willing

.l:'le

23 show once more ttiat

in pronouncement

11 1 ya I s instructions

::i.lii) Manslaughter. noted

\/Je have already

however,

of the custom,

" ·t s muruer, comrni komu dushegub

1

Pavlov,

I

8 includes

.,_,. ·b•" ,_, i"' .1.02 -..,nen stvo,

op.cit.,

to vuzbranyayte

p.

290.

·t o

e,n

its

suggests

adherents Il

that

I

ya

with bratchiny.

the following

~ "n__ eri, -r,,.

con-

an indirect

not to turn

apparently

combat connected

of ritual

Fronouncement

hoping

to formulate

'Ihis manner of condemnation

away from the church. waL~speaking

8, he undertook

case,

l:n this

he spoke of the same custom obliquely.

found in pronouncement dernnation

On another

pagan custom.

condemned oezz'akonnyy boy as a deplorable occasion,

26 11 1 ya openly

in pronouncement

that

instruction:

t~r u -'- ., c: c'hu~ches

emou tserkov

I

"If someone

-11·.-e (A"',... _ ""' _pri·goa.'i"t's.-y-a __

'h .. ) nogo v 11K.-ocJ.a

fl

•

1

205

Il'ya

cited

orders

in his support

murderers

to be forbidden

munion and from kissing imposed by ll'ya

Il'ya

subservience

section

what to do

v rabote

II

sut'

or submissiveness,

'J.'he bishop had advised

if some people

was in both instances

There is reason,

however,

and to conclude instead

to reject

that

constituted

ceremony was not treated authorities.

membe:rsthe bratchina,

2 ~' col, yazyka,t.

I see no reason

58; III,

not a result

Pavlov's

a part

indicating

compulsion').

2

to note that

I.I.

StP,

he states,

that

as a crime unless

to question

8 and Il'ya's to doubt that

to trial resulted

from real

could be accompanied

with such occurences.

combat enacted the combatants

later

"reconciled"

dlya slovarya

It

at a bratchina

and combat among members did not result

Sreznevsky, Materialy 1903, co1.3.

by combat,

ceremonial.

bratchiny

Thus they were normally

the

of wanton violence.

reference

of bratchina

two gramoty which dealt

from both texts,

to the civic

became

rabote,

means 'under

the murders in question

A. Popov was the first

is clear

accounted At :that time

in subjection

nor do I see any reason

murder discussed

he cited

this

Kirika.

The idiom!

choice]"•

cha.pter 2 in the Voproshaniya;

by combat;

and that

proposed by Pavlov between pronouncement

combat which often

pol'e

to halve the penance "because_ they are not free

did not murder through

the connection

the punishment

was "involuntary";

in the Voproshaniya

here presumably

com-

the same "involuntary''

priest,

dushegoubtsy?

that

by combat, called

that

when he was a parish

2 of Il'ya's

murderers•,azhe

from trial

which

from taking

the murder in question

Pavlov also believed

Il'ya

asked Nifont

[ i.e.

that

churches,

A. Pavlov concluded

he suggested,

in medieval Russia. 1 murder troubled

from entering

the Bible.

indicates

it may have resulted,

for chapter

the Nomocanon of John Scholasticus,

complained by the in complaints

drevnerusskogo

206

other authorities.

of litigation

involving

who took part

in a bratchina

or troubles

which arose during feasting

quarrels

to another

and were settled

authority. from violent

he claimed,

in the two gramoty resulted,

The combat described

whatever complaints

to settle

held a right

meetings without reference

arose at its

those

Popov concluded that

by the participants

in the bratchina.

combat and early Russian customs.

with igrishcha

Chapter 4 of Russkaya Pravda,

He also noted that

criminal

medieval Russian

were not liable

feasts

a fine on the!!!:!.:

the feast. 3

before

probably drink)

have planned the combat in advance (just

combat became clear many aspects

only after

of Russian folklore

would

as they did the~

However, the full

a study by D.K. Zelenin, and popular

res-

meaning of such who investigated

customs.

PP• 27-8. 33-4.

1 l?opov, ,op.cit., 2

kulachnykh boev na Rusi; V. Lebedev, 'K istorii StP, 1913, July, P• 109. starina,

3

I~~

(ch.2),

In; this" 1case

the members of the celebration

festivity.

to the

then it must

would have been seen as a joint

it began, i.e.

as a part of their

refers

in a feast,

.,bond whichc united. them.

murderous combat at a bratchina ponsibility

of murder during

If the Pravda apportioned

among the participants

the ceremonial

code of

the Pravda imposed

case apparently

a term which in this

for murder equally

have re~ognized

Instead,

games). 2

the great

those guilty

that

to punishment.

group wh:tch'organized

related guilt

law, states

(games),

(ritual

and rusalii

skomorokhi (wandering minstrel-clowns)

passage 6f

a chronicle

He cited

1048 where combat is mentioned together

between violent

the connection

Following Popov, V. Lebedev stressed

~•t

1913, August, P• 331.

ch. 1, 'Russkaya

1

207

During a study of residual concluded

that

boxing matches

of the memorial feasts Easter,

that

Zelenin

took place

had earlier claimed,

that

boy derived. 1

the term trizna

combat which was staged Zelenin

noted that

a part

this

from which, he

A. Kotlyarevsky

had earlier

spe.cifically

to memorial

referred

ceremonial

mound.,2

custom, and remained

of the Russian

combat probably

but N. Kostomarov states

or killed

in kulachnye

boi. 4

when the ceremony retained

temporarieso

combat which

North

,:.

and the seventeenth

ceremonial

after

century. ✓

of time,

century

in those

more of its

that

original

was greater.

as a criminal

lessened

as late

very many people

as the

were crippled

in earlier

significance

centuries, and

local

for

in the course of

or murderer

Only those who had renounced

with

I find no reason

times someone who killed

combat was regarded

condemned the practice

that

One can conclude

the' number of victims

that

Indeed,

(trizny)

in the Vyatka region

sixteenth

thinking

Saturday

to remembering

combat was a resilient

The damage done during

importance,

feasts

part

in honour of the dee.eased on his burial

of memorial feasts

the passage

on the seventh

custom with the ceremonial

itself

ceremonial

the nineteenth

~elen1n

boy) were an important

church has dedicated

accompanied pagan burial

kulachnyy

claimed

linked

worship in Russia

(kulachnyy

a day which the Russian

ancestors.

into

ancestor

by his

con-

customs could have

and denounced the killers.

In Il'ya's

time

1

D. Zelenin, 'Drevnerusskiy yazycheskiy kul' t zalozhnykh Izvestiya AN, VI seriya, t, XI, 1917, no. 7, Petrograd,

2

A. Kotlyarevsky, '0 pogrebal'nykh obychayakh yazycheskikh slavyan,' Sbornik otdeleniya russkogo yazyka i slovestnosti AN, t. XLIX, StP,

1891, PP• 131-2, 238-90 3 Zeierµn/Drevnerusskiy 4

Cited by Lebedev,

yazycheskiy op.cit.,(ch.2),

kul't,

'P• 411.

P• 324.

pokoynikov, p. 411.

1

208

8.

in pronouncement

There must have been some special

26.

pronouncement

custom was discussed

why the

reason

instance.

in the first

obliquely

in

condemned explicitly

all,

It was, after

terms

in indirect

it

why he discussed

explains

this

doubt whether

common in Novgorod, but I

quite

combat was apparently

ceremonial

That reason

can,

I hope tb s~ow, be detected. Pronouncement

would punish

priests

church. 1

a Christian

drawn to enter

paganism ..

If,

saw him in church.

that order

used an oblique

The

new light.

method of approach

in pronouncement

to those

attachment

ceremonial

status

was not recognized against

transgression

a Christian's

Christian

habits

was indirectly

Their

to dust off pagan habits.

but were reluctant

it,

confirmed

but declared

as paganism, values.

In this

even on people

guilty

Christian

8 in

to people

tha.t the church be both demanding and accommodating

who entered

penance,

It would seem, therefore,

and the church opened to him again.

Il'ya

in the man's

with time and after

could,

imposed on him by Il'ya

prohibition

values

Christian

on his deed in that

mind and lead him to reflect

who

he were condemned in terms of Christian

however,

could both imprint

this

alone,

be lifted

from

be alienated

if he were denounced openly as a pagan by a priest

Christianity

his

half-way

Such a manistranded

would probably

between paganism and Christianity,

ethics

that

Il 1 ya need~d to ensure

such a man for his grave sin but would not at the

him back into

same time drive

been

for some reason

but had also

to pagan habits,

according

killed

who had

how to deal with a murderer

8 explains

way of

pagan murder.

The pronouncement us to discern

of the Pouchenie

the strategy

of certain

local

1 Pavlov,

op.cit.,

formulated

customs and habits p. 290.

which we have examined permit

by Il'ya

to encourage

the adaptation

to Christian

worship.

If we regard

209

the separate that

items as components of a single

the archbishop

celebration variety

into

was determined

a Christian

of ways.

attend

the celebrations,

ritual

drink

Abstinence instead

their

drink

1n

parts

of the sanctuary.

churches,

the most venerated people

associated

guilty

any inclination

At the same time,

of the bratchina,

with the bratchina

towards

gave the drink,

apparently

Christian

sanction.

from ritual

authority

could never be adapted

to Christian

values,

connection

towards

The overall of the Pouchenie

of local

murder)

Il'ya.

with bratchina,they

was also openly

'the laity

of ceremonial

ceremony clearly

and these

(e.g.

condemned in various

mas-

ways, both direct

As for pagan customs in the community which ha.d no

in the Pouchenie. tolerance

ceremonies

the church. of the bratchina

and indirect.

Mean-

if they demonstrated

many aspects

or ritual

the ritual

the main

At the same time,

querading

the priests

into

( such as murder as a result

under the church's

the

word at the gathering

care not to allow it

of crimes resulting

combat) were brought

the Christian

This adaptation

part

from drinking

over the ceremony by blessing

while taking

to

among the participants.

a drunken torpor.

influence

bratchina

of Novgorod were permitted

would allow them to spread

were to extend

while,

clergy

but only if they refrained

into

is clear

This he hoped to do in a

which led to mass inebriation

of lapsing

it

to make the pagan-rooted

festival.

The parish

custom,

Laxity

were condemned openly and unequivocally

in the clergy,

some aspects

whether

of the bratchina

through

excessive

or usury or gambling,

condemned by the archbishop. picture suggests

of Il'ya that

which emerges from an examination

he was an able administrator

of Novgorod and drew up a plan for integrating custom into

Christian

ritual.

This picture

who observed certain

helps

us to

parts

210

with Nifont,

compare him as a prelate

to the church of Novgorod.

they bequeathed

The Legacy of Ni.font and Il'ya.

C.

unity

religious

in Novgorod.

of beliefs

diversity

kaleidoscopic They pursued

They sought

of

means, but the achievement

with the achievements

only by comparison

appreciated

in Novgorod.

and customs which existed

the same aim with different

each man is properly

the

into

order

to bring

ana

of civic

agents

as important

must be regarded

and Il'ya

Nifont

the legacy

and to discuss

of the other. as a teacher

in Novgorod and brought

advice

immediate and practical custom.

guidance

was needed particularly

of canonic

generally

low level

by Kirik,

Savva (particularly)·and

The bishop, level

in this

Smirnov noted further, respect,

s.

did not contain

respect.

1

by a

Practical

of Novgorod was

Smirnov has remarked on the

knowledge and sensitivity Il'ya

in their

questions

stood on an incomparably

and his replies

much

was, it seems,

Kirika

the clergy

since

law

The great

who was perplexed

to a priest

in church law.

with

the Kormchaya Kniga,

the Kormchaya in this

to supplement

not well schooled

to his attention.

The Voproshaniya

intended

he

the priests

to provide

in Novgorod at the time,

which were available

local

The training

in particular

codes of the Ea.stern church,

particular

care.

and customs which they en-

beliefs

the various

concerning

countered

a handful

was intended

consultations

gave at regular

of

who trained

in the ways of pastoral

priests

outstanding

guidance

primarily

acted

Nifont

were often

intended

revealed to Nifont. 2 higher only to

1

from the Nomocanons which were found I.Zu~ek has noted the citations Christiana in the Voproshaniya. See his Korm~aja Kniga (Orientalia 168), Rome, 1964, PP• 134-8. Analecta,

2

Smirnov,

'Drevnerusskiy

dukhovnik,'

pp. 109-12,

116-7,

127-32.

211

the centuries.

of Novgorod through

Nifont"

"The Rule of Blessed

laity.

of Novgorod's

habits

the diocese

and provide

in the Pouchenie

problems

ways, sometimes

times indirectly

and even elusively.

as we have seen,

by practical

adapt

the bratchina

aimed to transform

part

of the Pouchenie

into

a Christian

into

the very fabric

of Novgorod's

The contributions

of Nifont

1 ~bid., 2

Pavlov,

The church's

PP• 124-5. op.cit.,

p. 291

traditional and Il'ya

various some-

were dictated,

subtl~

plan to

the most original

an important

influence

His

considerations.

ll'ya's

This plan,

use.

seems to

openly and clearly,

than canonical

when examining

to Christian

one.

was able

than Nifont.

These differences

rather

most clearly

this

He

a man who discussed

reveal

in markedly different

One observes

faults

and its

with the clergy

have been stricter instructions

as an administrator.

by his ability

unity

cause of civic

Il'ya

in Novgorod and hence to advance the

religion

popular

to regularize

conditions.

pastoral of clerics,

a teacher

was primarily

Whereas Nifont

of Il'ya)

true

(thisisespecially

with a guide to local

teacher

as outstanding

from his gift

others

whm would influence

of clerics

on religious

effect

unifying

Nifont's

in Novgorod thus derived

practices

on how to deal with the

guidance

and for more general

instruction

2 This shows

both for immediate

with reverence

comments were reread

Nifont's

that

the Voproshaniya

NifontaJ.

(Ustav blazhennogo

can

advice

of his called

Il'ya

Archbishop

that

be adduced from the fact

redaction

first

its

It underwent

and the importance

death,

Nifont's

after

shortly

in the church

very popular

made the questionary

in the Voproshaniya

advice

His

views.

and even distorted

away from simplistic

the priests

steer

pagan ceremony

could as a result, social

penetrate

relations.

to Novgorod's

civic

mnity are

212

illustrated Nifont

most forcefully

conferred

the Bishop's

with a handful

Palace,

he gave erudite He apparently clergy

perched

advice

to all

assembled

at a diocesan

council.

of that churches

after

built

in his parish.

2) must therefore

to pursue

also during

visits ceremonies

It is fair

to say that

ho~ed I1'ya's

problems to formulate

to Christian

Nifont's

his plan.

rule".

of local

made it their

but

There they would attend usage as Il'ya

envisaged.

in the Voproshaniy~

guidanceo

offices

churches.

recorded

it

century

necessary

was justified

I think

as much when he described

number

teaching

Il 1 ya ,,ould probably Nifont's

to their

of the twelfth

mind and gave him the necessary

gifts,

'l'he adaptation

returned

in the Pouchenie

consultations

a plan without

acknowledged Nifont's

rule.

to implement Il'ya's

the task not only inside

and adapt it

The regular

his natural

strove

to the townsmen's homes.

to implement

The increasing

the remainder

numbers of priests

for the priests

so subtle

to this

be seen as multiplication

The pronouncements

handt

The pronouncements

of 13th March, 1166.

instructions.

all

on the other

Each of them was expected

in Novgorod during

where ever-increasing

clearly

Il'ya,

in person when they were

were no exception

the council

(see chapter

actions.

plan to regulate

ceremony was to begin as soon as the priests

of churches

bratchiny

an integrated

priests

pronouncements

to the bratchina

put to him.

to admit more of the diocesan

and customs in Novgorod.

his Pouchenie

relating

in the chambers of

comments on matters

or to formulate

addressed

the archbishop's

priests

geography.

high above the town in the citadel.

showed no inclination

habits

to the town's

of select

and sensible

to the meetings

the laity's

by reference

is safe

by Il'ya

1

s

grasp of pastoral to assume that,

not have been able The archbishop

the Voproshaniya

for

to devise

himself

as "Blessed

213

The two great to regulate rooting

prelates

the diverse

out those

and Il'ya

steered

religious

and civic

of twelfth-century

rituals

and customs found in the town whilst

they considered

most odious.

the Novgorodians

have been insufficient

unity.

By itself,

to provide

however,

an enduring

and inspiring

be implanted

in the minds of the Novgorodians

allegiance

Il'ya

ordered

idea of Novgorod's

to the town. a new episcopal

chronicle

of Novgorod and its

as will

be seen in the next chapter,

their

city

in Novgorod's

their

way Nifont sense of bequest

would

sense of urban unity. identity before

had first

to

they would owe

This need was met in 1167 when Archbishop

history

sense of pride

In this

towards an increased

A convincing

full

Novgorod were concerned

church.

past

had always been united

to be compiled to summarize the The main aim of that

to impart

chronicle

to the townsmen a

and to demonstrate and self-relianto

to them that

was,

214

CHAPTERSIX THE CHURCH ANDHIS'l.'ORY

In the preceding

chapters

Novgorod assumed a position twelfth

century.

Archbishop

Novgorod's that

of leadership

This achievement

Il'ya.

the religious

we established

Nifont

life

trained

He thus laid

used his position

civic

uhity.

Il'ya

into

to it

a unifying

rather

also

new churches

in the town;

his success

liturgy

into

every part

devised

by Il'ya

writing

of history.

to instil

to summarize the history

of Il'ya's

and showing their

1

See Appendix 1.

autonomy,although prestige to the cause

of

worship

endeavor

of many

brought

parts

in Novgorod dealt

the

with the

church and to celebrate in 1165.

The chronicle

of it were incorporated

Shakhmatov has established

1

plan

comm:i:.ssioned a new chronicle

by examining a number of these

relationship.

in the

However, the most ambitious

of the Novgorodian

but certain

force

the construction

in this

a sense of unity

of Novgorod.

original

Christian

than divisive

encouraged

of the towne

chronicle

for

with Andrey Bogolyubsky.

to the rank of an archbishopric

does not survive,

existence

to guide

the foundation

his dedication

In 1167 the archbishop

chronicles

of priests

and

a major pagan ceremony was intended

'I'he archbishop

the extant

the mid-

the church's

plan for regulating

communityo

itself

raised

by demonstrating

His far-sighted

promotion

during

to make the church of Novgorod a patron

in Novgorod and adapting

its

political,

the grim confrontation

Il'ya

to make religion

a new generation

Archbishop

in Novgorod to new heights of the town during

in the city

and ultimately

was not his aim.

the church of

was the work of Bishop Nifont

of the townsmen.

ecclesiastical,

that

The chronicle

into the

fragments

of 1167 was

215

I believe,

suggest,

chronicle

from Il'ya's

history

than it had been.

The glorious

dedication

their

and strengthen

will

This examination

(1030-60),

of 1167 in order

first

A similar

sequence. three

afford

the deepest

events

he claims

being left insight

into

until

rather

last.

from the

arises

exists

in a separate This section

for

is relevant

to

section,

with

will

the work of the 1167 chronicler

· a o drevne shikh -257, 611-29.

exact

than from their

amount of evidence

to describe.

1 A.A. Shakhmatov, svodakh, StP, 190

first

2) Novgorod's

of Luka, and 4) the destruction

be considered

Each entry will

'11heentries

but much more material

entries,

the

as regards

in Novgorodo

Vladimir;

to each entry

relevant

section

All four and Luka

Akim (d.1030)

Our order of consideration

paganism.

each of the first

the largest

by St.

3) the persecution

amount of evidence

the fourth.

which occupied

of history

methods used by him.

achievements

1) Akim's appointment

of Novgorod's

history.

of local

show embellishment

two bishops,

in

and seem to have been reworked by the chronicler

and their

wooden cathedral;

self-esteem

which originate

entries

to magnify the autonomy of the bishops

Kievan metropolitan

chronological

town.

the literary

concern Novgorod's

describe:

to their

the revision

illustrate

and reveal

the chronicler

Zhidyata

the Novgorodians'

of 1167 and clearly

the chronicle

woven by the chronicle

to raise

examines four chronicle

This chapter

was intent

the archbishop

tapestry

historical

intended

of 1167 was apparently

that

A number of fragments

of the Novgorod church appear more impressive

on making the early

entries

in 1050. 1

by Shakhmatov, was written

constructed

re-

the first,

compiled in Novgorod:

only the second major chronicle

also and the

216

Akim's appointment.

1.

of 989 (6497) in some Novgorodian

entry

passage.

of the relevant

versions

There are two in the later

survives

·

Chronicle:

centn:ny) of the Novgorod :first

( fifteenth

redaction

chronicles.

'I'he oldest

in the

sources

in Russian

appears

church first

The Novgorodian

11Vladimir with the whole Russian land: was baptized together in Kiev, an archbishAP in Novgorod, he appointed a metropolitan 1 and deacons in other towns. priests and bishops,

the passage The term

0

archbishop

of Kor sun these

that

editing.

11

is replaced

by

Two changes are most important., bishop

in Novgorodian

appeared

changes

This legendary

p9litan

Michael,

was apparently

century

or early

thirteenth

account of

his

prelate:

in the chronicle was composed

1167.

'I'he

only

account

Chronicle.

of Novgorod's

as we shall other

together

Russia. 4

soon see

mention

5

with Metro-

than the late

no earlier

in southern

3

of Novgorod's

Akim was

He is the central

conversion, by the

of Aki.m occurs

but this chronicler in the

2 PSRL t. 5, ch. 1, L, 1925 P• 90. 3

Shakhmatov,

ibid.,

twelfth

of the town's

name heads both lists

found in the Novgorod First

prelates

figure

first

century

in

mush imporLance.

metropolitan,

invented

believed

Shakhmatov

on the process

The name of Leon throws no light chronicle-writing.

is Akim Korsunyanin

chronicle-writing

of 1i+l+8,to which he attached

the compilation

Novgorod's

bishop

and names are given:

name for Cher son). 2

the Hussian

1 ,

11 ,

11

is Leon and Novgorod's

the metropolitan (i.e.

by later

is altered

where

century),

to the fifteenth

dates

also

redaction

extant

oldest

(the

Chronicle

is found in the Novgorod Fourth

version

'I'he other

p.213

4 A. }Joppe 'Leon' and 'Michal' in Sibwnik starozytnos'ci \-Jarsaw, 1967, pp. 43-4 and 24?-3. t.III,

sbwianskich,

217

late

Novgorod Third Chronicle

claims that

( a seventeenth But this

he died in 1030.

century

dating

titles

which

does not convince,

may have been made by someone using retrospective attention,

composition)

dating. 1

and

Our

however, should fix not on Akim, but on the different

ascribed

to him in the entry of 989 by the Novgorod First

Fourth Chronicles.

These titles

help us to understand

and

the chronicle

of 1167 ..2 The Novgorod First descended

from early

Chronicle. First

Chronicle

Novgorodian compilations

Consequently,

Chronicle

The first

some features

1156. 3

this

title

from the chronicle

Chronicle

politann

which the chronicler

this

the metropolitan that

that

bishops

of

of Novgorod

the passage

in the entry

where Akim is styled

the titles

title

"archbishop"

consists

of ,,"archbishop"

of 1167 introduced

A number of Kievan sources

suggests

it was the chronicler

of Akim's fabricated

comparison between the titles

that

of "archbishop

of 11670

implied

indicate

that

Hence we can be certain

The second feature

989.

of 1167.

is Akim's title

to the names of all

of 989 in the Novgorod First derives

of the chronicle

feature

A.A. Shakhmatov has shown convincingly

before

expect the Novgorod

can be found.

and most important

1167 who affixed

than the Novgorod Fourth

one can reasonably

to preserve

Three such features

is supposed to be more directly

re'lating

into

metropolitan

11

11

Metro-

and

11

the passage

to the eleventh

in Kiev was also called

of the

of

century

an archbishop;

and "archbishop"

were

1 Shakhmatov, 1 0 nachal'nom Kievskom letopisnom svode', Chteniya obshchestva istorii i drevnostey rossiyskikh,1897, k. 3, otd III, pp. 31-3; Poppe, Panstwo i kosciolna Rusi w XI wieku, Warsaw, 1968, PP• 161-2. 2 Poppe questions

Luka(~.,

the very existence P• 144).

3 Shakhmatov, Razyskaniya, stitution

is discussed

of a prelate

in Novgorod before

p. 189, etc. The reason for this in the conclusion. to Appendix 1.

sub-

11o

218

then synonymous.

Golubinsky

and both concluded

that

re-examined

No similar

until

evidence

the unpublished in a seventeenth

sources:

century

that

of a Novgorodian chronicle inserted 4

all this

If he favoured

Novgorod.

the bishops

by the Byzantine

Novgorodian chronicler prelates ulated

Likhachev's

metropolitan

the title editor

(maybe in Smolensk) for a West Russian

of Moscow and

he would

"metropolitans century.

of

have of Russia

11

Only a

Novgorod's

could not have been form-

it became subservient

metropolitan.

view that

to

rank for the archbishop

could have wished to claim that Such claims

3

"metropolitantt

the metropolitan

in the mid-fifteenth

11o

edition

If he was favourable

of Smolensk, who were styled

and their

However,

11

are no reasons

a similar

by the Novgorodian church after

Muscovite conquerors

prelates

the Grand Duchy of Lithuania

were metropolitans.

to accept

that

have extolled

patriarchate

century. 2

even fifteenth,

is a West Russian

by a West Russian

would havel:ad no need to fabricate

exalted

chronicle

to have made such insertions.

Moscow he would presumably

were

by D.S. Likhachev to be a

Novgorod's

But there

the two titles

of Bishop Paul which survives

and concluded

centuryo

that

Novgorodian sources.

copy and is believed styles

Shakhmatov believed

chronicler

Chronicle

sources,

A. Poppe has recently

and possible

is found in published

Novgorodian compilation,

in the sixteenth

He suggests

the thirteenth,

and. unstudied

was systematically

examined the relevant

the synonymy is genuine. 1

the relevant

interchangeable

and Priselkov

the Chronicle

Therefore

to the town's

it is reasonable

of Bishop Paul is a

1 E. Golubinsky, Istoriya russkoy tserkvi, t. 1, p.1, M, 1901, pp. 264-9; M. Priselkov, Ocherki po tserkovno-politicheskoy istorii Kievskoy Rusi X-XII;w.•.StP, 1913, PP• 40-3. 2 Poppe, 'Uwagi o najstarszych dziejach historyczny, 1964, PP• 374-5. 3

D.S. Likhachev, Russkie letopisi M-L, 1947, PP• 467-8.

4 Shakhmatov, Obozre:nie russkikh P•

308.

koscicila

na Rusi,

ch. I',

i ikh kul'turno-istoricheskoe letopisnykh

Przeglad znache:nie,

svodov XIV-XVLvy.M-L,1938,

219

Novgorodian source.

pre-Muscovite

it is impossible

Until it has been studiedt

"

in Novgorod •••

appointed

The reader

would then believe

past,

directly

exactly

The third,

archbishopric, equal footing

By claiming Il'ya's

this

was

and autonomous as

view of the Novgorodian church's the equality

of status

in the passage of 989 was

feature

of this

that scribe

by the act

it

passage which links

the bishopric raised

was actually

always an

the Novgorodian church onto an

with the Kievan metrqpj.itanatei

By claiming by Vladimir,

hoped to free the Novgorodian church from the authority The formula behind this

which

a bishopric,

of an early Russian met~

Novgorod's church was also founded directly

p;Litanate.

in each town.

is connected with the second feature.

it was established

ropolitan.

Chronicle

The main aim of the compilation

the Novgorodian church was originally

We know that

in Kiev, an archbishop

of 1167.

more general

with the 1167 compilation

means that

to the patriach

and "metropolitan"

chronicler

by the

implied

case the words

of equal status

to conclude that

and it is reasonable

between "archbishop"

and

the Novgorodian archbishopric

in Kiev.

the metropolitan

of 1167 was to further

that

to

evidence

direct

in the entry of ,a9 in the Novgorod First

founded to be subordinate regards

a metropolitan

Vladimir founded archdioceses

that

signify

In this

could be used synonymously.

He O>t. Vladimir]

to use the Chronicle

"metropolitan''

in Novgorod, as in Kiev, the titles

"archbishop" "• ••

contains

chronicle

this

that

confirm my impression

emendation.

as a late

such a study would, I believe,

evidence;

of Bishop Paul as decisive

show that

occurs systematically

This title

and should not be dismissed

through the chroncile

from some

must derive

for Novgorod's prelates

ttmetropolitan"

title

use of the

systematic

its

and to conclude that

Novgorodian chronicle

claim,

that

the scribe of the metro-

as we have suggested,

220

could be

equal in status

and juridically

11

The three

features

in the Novgorod First doubt that

this

compilation.

which link

Chronicle

sentence

the first

indeed originated

equal status

with Kievan metropolitanate Akim as a bishop

who always appointed

iographical

2.

the early

of Novgorod's Chronicle

as its

in his realm.

in the compilation

Novgorod's

first

1

By

to the metropolitan,

Such a passage could

of 1167, whose historof the passage preserved

wooden cathedral

of 1167 whose purpose was to

Novgorodian church can be found in the description first

wooden cathedral.

(the fourteenth

1045 (6553) consists

The older

century account

The second sentence

states

of this

of two sentences.

that

century

of the Novgorod

cathedral's The first

what

fate. states

'l'he later

in two fifteenth

one) does not place

The that

an exact date and hour,

in the same year the foundations

a church of the same name were laid. 2 (which survives

edition

Synodal copy) contains

the church of Ste Sofiya burned down, giving

one eighteenth

birthright.

in every feature

of the chronicler

to be the most logical

chronicle

episcopal

Chronicle.

Another creation

entry

in Il'ya's

it made him subordinate

scheme is apparent

in the Novgorod First

appears

of 1167 leave no

the Novgorodian church from claiming

the bishops

not have been tolerated

First

of the 989 entry

sentence

The changes found in the Novgorod Fourth Chronicle design and prevent

extol

11 •

with the compilation

confuse this

describing

separate

century

edition

for

of the same

manuscripts

the two sentences

and in together

1 The Novgorod Fourth Chronicle must have used some source which stated that the Novgorodian church had originally been':bishopric (see Skakhmatov, Razyskaniya, stemmata between pp. 536 and 537). 2

NPLt p. 16.

221

in one entry,

this

has shown that

of Russian chronicling

entry of 1049 also gives a brief

copy) definitely

the Novgorod First

in a late states

Chronicle

that

old cathedral thirteen

edition as being"•

domes •••

3

11

••

finely

and places

or early

the original

seventeenth

cathedral

First

was wooden:

it burned down (sgore),

wooden construction.

built

but

Only the Novgorod Second

sixteenth

of the Novgorod

'rhe

order.

of the old cathedral,

says simply that

which has been seen as proof of its The later

was indeed their

description

does not say if it was wooden or stone. (which survives

of the chronology

but an examination

order of events may seem cor1fusing,

century

was

while the wooden one burned in 1049 (6557). 1 This

begun in 1045 (6553),

Chronicle

the stone cathedral

entries:

but in two different

Chronicle

and decorated,

it on the site

2 described

the

and having

of the stone church

1 NPL, p. 181. N. Berezhkov has shown that this was, in fact, the actual M, 1963 pp. 221, order of events (Khronologiya russkogo letopisaniya, 226-7). 2

The relevant passage in the Novgorod Second Chronicle is NL, p.2. which is dated 989. It is, however, exactly the same description dated 1049 in the later redaction of the NPL (and 1045 in the earlier that the cathedral Itclaims except for three details. redaction), this by claiming that the church was built by Akim, but contradicts the passage thus seems to stood for sixty years before the fire: have been placed in an entry for 989 by dating the construction It also claims that the from the fire of 1049. retrospectively first Sofiya was built of wood, a detail absent from the NPL&

3

The term used for 'domes' is verkhi, which K. Conant has interpreted hypothetically On this assumption he reconstructed as 'roofs'. church with twelve roof the first Sofiya as a Scandinavian-type and slopes and a single central tower ('Novgorod, Constantinople Slavonic and East Kiev in Old Russian Church A~chitecture', European Review, v. XXII, noo59, August 1944, PP• 77-82).

222

of Sts.

Boris and Gleb, whose foundations

passage is one of the mgin fragments which permit the existence

chronicle

of Boris and Gleb has not survived,

but its

to be traced. 2 foundations

been excavated.

The archaeologists

attempted

the wooden Sofiya

which supposedly

lay beneath,

edition

of Novgorod's

of the Novgorod First

therefore

only reasonable

first

Chronicle

to question

This

of 1167

from the compilation

of that

Thus, the exact location

in 1167.'

were laid

The church

have recently

to find some traces

of

but none were found. 3

cathedral

given in the later

is proved to be wrong. the description

of that

It

is

church in

the same passage. Soviet

scholars

of the original

to support

have been found,

either

cathedral

have assumed that

1 ~'

exception

Sofiya as a thirteen-domed

is no evidence

the surviving

have without

this.

accepted

the description

wooden structure.

No traces

of the early

There

cathedral

under the church of Boris and Gleb, or under where they were also sought.

the original

cathedral

was similar

4

Soviet

scholars

in construction

p. 818.

2

See Appendix 1~

3

Oral communication to the author from G.M. Shtender, the specialist on Novgorod's early architecture in the Novgorod Special Restoration and Production Workshop. M.K. Karger refused to accept the obvious and continued to claim that some traces of the wooden cathedral must lie beneath the unexcavated part of the church of Sts. Boris and Gleb However, (Novgorod Velikiy, M-L, 1961, pp.94-6 and later editions). the excavations have uncovered nearly the whole church, including its central nave and apse, so that there is little ground for Karger's insistence. Also an analysis of Novgorod's thirteenth century street paving charter (ustav o mostekh) by M.K. Aleshkovsky has shown that the entry of 1049 in the later redaction of the~ is untrustworthy in important details. This entry claims that the first cathedral stood where the church of Sts. Boris and Gleb was built, at the end of Bishop's Street (Piskuplya ulitsa); Aleshkovsky has shown that the street in fact lay in a different part of the citadel ('Novgorodskiy Detinets, 1044-1430', Arkhitekturnoe nasledstvo, no. 14, M, 1962,

PP• 18-9). 4

G.M. Shtender believes that the original Sofiya stood either on a spot beneath the surviving cathedral, or slightly south-east of it.

223

to the thirteen-domed

and appearance

wooden churches which appearea

in the Russian North in the seventeenth Their assumption

thesis

This paradoxical

a cross pattern,

the assumption must be dismissed

into

four-walled

architecture

the twelfth

centruy,

a single

The buildings

secular

cabin-like

ex:tensi.ons azrangoo.1n

which could support

of what archaeology Excavations

Russia.

was based

wooden architecture log building

which was often inner

wall.¢

interconnected

a number of such !9:,tl' buildings

complex, perhaps under a single

which were united

in this

When

part of

became more complex in the latter

it began to unite

an

Until such time, however,

of early

two uneven chambers by an additional

residential

into

all

only when

of such buildings

on the strength

wooden architecture

about secular

in Novgorod have shown that

divided

as thirteen).

at the

existed

with four~

the only ground plan structure

uneven numher of domes as great

on the ~ta

can be accepted

log foundation

octagonal

a central

it was

zenith,

evidence is found of the existence

archaeological

reveals

at the very time when the

which had supposedly

structures

complicated

beginning.

(i.e.

that

of Russian wooden churches was at its

architecture repeating

one to believe

requires

1

centuries.

and eighteenth

way were usually

roof.

placed in a

of the original Sofiya have been drawn 1 Two possible reconstructions on the basis of this assumption (M.K. Aleshkovskyt 'Gde stoyala Novgorodskaya Pravda, 19 February 1969, p.4. drevnyaya Sofiya?', Soviet scholars have generally made a great effort to argue that_ and was highly sophisticated wood architecture Russia's earliest Smpport for this view has been drawn from such unelaborate. likely sources as decorative detail in Muscovite manuscript See N.N. Voronin, 'Glavneyshye etapy russkogo illuminations. i filosofii, Izvestiya AN,seriya istorii zodchestva X-XV stoletiya', drevneyshego 1944, t.1. no.4, PP• 164-5, and his '0 kharakteristike KSlIMKv. XVI, 1947, PP• 97-102. zodchestva vostochnykh slavyan', 1 Usad'by i postroyki drevnego Novgoroda', !1!,!, no. 2 •. P.I. Zasurtsev, 123, M, 1963, and his Novgorod, otkrytyy arkheologami, M, 1967.

224

row, and occasionally any variation evidence

at right-angles.

of the square kl.et'

from excavations

octagonal

building

the belief ambitious

that

construction,

!!ill that

thts

of the description

Sofiya that

source.

cathedral

with early

stone Sofiya was apparently

Sofiyas that

Il'ya~s

chronicler

it as an that

the original

but has rashly

is no archaeological sources

surmised

evidence

mention nothing

of the

about its

to connect the Novgorodian cathedral The thirteen-domed

their

smaller

burn down. 3

well-known in 1167; had sufficient

compare them and to invent

cathedral

completed in Kiev in the 104o 1 s, just

wooden predecessor

were, of course,

by

the unreliability

convincingly

is helpful.

the Novgorodians began to raise and ,saW1its

domes was made by

church in Novgorod was modelled after

However, there

Kievan architecture

centuries.

and treated

in Kiev was a wooden building,

And yet Popp;'s attempt

more

(w~oden) Sofiya

in the. Novgorod chronicle

wooden Sofiya in Kiev, and written

domes.

no grounds for

anything

he overlooked

Poppe has argued quite

as an

can be understood

the first

Unfortunately,

the supposed thirteen-domed

the one in Kiev. 2

thirteen

description

comparing it with what he imagines in Kiev to have been.

provide

constructed

the enigmatic

is no

so ambitious

during the town's early

to explain

He believes

and there

These excavation

the medieval architects

An attempt

authentic

These changes never led to

in Novgorod of anything

layout.

in wood than

A. Poppe.

1

a description

when

six-domed stone cathedral The Kiev and Novgorod it is most probable

knowledge of both cathedrals of a thirteen-domed

to

cathedral

in Novgorod.

1 Yu. P. Spegal'sky, Zhilishche severo-zapadnoy L, 1972, PP• 215, 220-1, 223, 265, etc.

2

Poppe, 'Uwagi',

Rusi,

IX-XIII vv.

1

; • ,,.,, P• 164 pp. 381-2, and his Panstwo i koscim.,

3 For the Kiev Sofiya see M.K. Karger, P• 104 (on the date of construction)

Drevniy Kiev, t. II, M-L, 1961 and PP• 146-8 (on the domes).

225

It would seem that

and less

smaller

grandeur

their

not in fact. also

cathedral

by claiming

Indeed,

certain

3.

The persecution

'l'he editor surviving

form of those

that

of their

flattery.

cathedral,

of its

actual

with Bishop Luka Zhidyata.

time they and appearance.

1

of Luka Zhidyata

of 1167 must also be held responsible entries

was

Novgorod's

by this

first

if

'l'he Novgorodian'

welcomed this

it in good faith;

abmut the site

in fable

wooden Sofiya

Novgorod's

whether they remembered anything

is doubtful

domes amd decided

thirteen

his audience

would have certainly

was

The chronicler

as grand as the one in Kiev.

the townsmen could accept

were no longer

that

domes, assure

was just pride

sense of civic

than the Kievan one.

should be matched on Novgorodian soil

He could,

was

for the Novgorodian Sofiya

by the Kievan Sofiya's

crowned by thirteen

first

it

impressive

impressed

apparently that

cathedral,

as the existing

impressive

had been as

cathedral

first

Novgorod's

scheme, to show th~t

overall

of his

as part

of 1167 undertook,

the editor

in the Novgorodian

These entries

describe

chronicles

for the which deal

Luka as a righteous

cathedral have been found beneath the 1 No traces of Novgorod's first or the remains of the church of Sts. Boris and Glebo standing cathedral of the standing cathedral. A third possible site lies just south-east A small chapel which stood there until recently has been indentified of Bishop Akim from which the relics with the stone polatka(chapel?) into the cathedral in 1699 (NL, P• 379). It may be were transferred church, which need that this marked the site of Novgorod's firststone The Novgorod Third Chronicle not have been dedicated to St. Sofiya. states that Akim built a strong church dedicated to Sts. Joachim and Anna in 989 and "served in that church until the Sofiya [was builtJ u, This report follows immediately on the most detailed (NL, PP• 173-4). One of the chapels in the of the wooden Sofiya. description existing is dedicated to Joachim and Anna: it may be surviving cathedral that a church of the same name was once dismantled nearby and its If that church was indeed built by altar moved into the cathedral. the town, then it may well have in one stone Akim and was the first cathedral. been the first

226

The later

entry

described

of 1055 (6563) and 1058 (6566). 1 The first

Yefrem.

as charged and imprisoned states

second entry informer

Dudik fled

Luka's

that

century

Novgorod Third Chronicle

being multilated,.

return

journey

to Novgorod and was buried

adds that

in the Sofiya

as a victim,

while Yefrem is discredited.

denunciation

is described

as slander

error

of believing

it

clearer

by the fact

that

is made still

is returned

to himo 3

in 1050. 2

The two chronicle

Luka

because Dudik's

and the metropolitan

(kleveta),

judged guilty

his whose

cathedral,

in 1045 and which he had consecrated

is presented

is implicitly

'l'he seven-

Luka died during

must be Novgorodian in origin,

These two entries

The

in Kiev.

to him, while the

was restored

to the "Germans" after

he had blessed

years

him for three

diocese

Dudik

Luka to Kiev, found

Yefrem ordered

teenth

foundations

(kholop)

how Luka was denounced by his slave

to the Kievan metropolitan him guilty

speaks of Luka's

Chronicle

of the Novgorod First

edition

in the entries

plight

Kievan metropolitan.

at the hand of a deluded

who suffered

prelate

and acting Luka's

entries

on it.

episcopal

are clearly

This authority intended

1

NPL, PP• 182-3.

2

a second time in 1052t after The cathedral may have been consecrated The later date is given in the Novgorod in 1050. consecration the first (NL, Third Chronicle and by the Chronicler of Novgorodian Prelates date. -Either give the earlier pp. 145n and 184): all other chronicles there is confusion in the dating, or- as V.G. Bryusova suggests - the ('O vremefii twice in quick succession cathedral was consecrated Kul'tura srednevekovoy Rusi Cl!'estschrift osvyashcheniya Novgorodskoy Sofii', for M.K. Karger), L, 1974, PP• 111-3} On reasons for reconsecrating statyakh 1039 i 1131', churches see M.F. Mur'yanov, 1 0 letopisnykh for A.N. Nasonov), M, 1974, p. 113. Letopisi i khroniki (Festschrift

The entry of 1055 3 The dating of this event to 1058 is questionable. states that Yefrem sentenced Luka to three years of confinement, a term If the term was served fully which would have run its course by 1058. appeal, nor would the bishop have there would have been no successful and his acc:iJ.sors Yet we know that Luka was reinstated been reinstated. this must were punished, i.e. the sentence against Luka was annulled: have happened before the bishop's term of imprisonment was scheduled to run its normal course in i1Q58. The date of 1058 may be ascribed about the (the one of 1167?) who was uncertain to a later chronicler it without care. and calculated time of Luka's acquittal,

227

to recount dioceses

events

in a way which suggests

of Novgorod and Kiev, and the righteousness

This treatment

betrays

who was compiling

There is another a prominent

the craftsmanship

reason

to think

Luki k bratii

of the sixteenth

that

for the chronicle

church from the

Luka Zhidyata

which is found in the entry and also exists

and seventeenth

century

of 1167. 3

was given

This is his sermon,

centuries.

to study the sermon at length,

in the eleventh

of 1167

1

1058 in the Novgorod Ji'ourth Chronicle,

who was the last

of the forme~.

of the chronicler

place in the 1167 chronicleo

Pouchenie arkhiepiskopa

manuscripts

between the

a case for the autonomy of Novgorod's

Kievan metropolitanate.

present

a collision

His reasoning

in separate 2

concluded

Novgorodian chronicle

of

Bugoslavsky, that

it was

and was altered

is hard to fault,

and we

1

D.S. Likhachev has argued that Dudik headed a movement of social discontent against the bishop and the church. His case rests on the Nikon chronicle which claims (in the entries of 1055 and 1058) that Dudik acted together with the "evil accomplices Koz'ma and Damian" (~, t. 9-10, M, 1965, P• 91). Likhachev suggests that this is a distorted reference to a church of Sts. Cosmas and Damian in the Nerevskiy konets, which once was thought to be a craftsmen's quarter (PVL, II, pp. 390-1). Two churches dedicated to these saints existed there later, but the earliest of them is first mentioned in 1146 (NPL• pp. 27, 213-4): there is no reason to think that another one existed there earlier. Furthermore, scholars today no longer believe that Novgorod was divided into professional quarters. Shakhmatov has given the most plausable explanation of the Koz'ma and Damian mentioned by the Nikon chronicle: he surmised that the original passage reported that Luka was arrested on the feast day of those saints (Razyskaniya, p. 245). As for Dudik, he may have been a member of Novgorod's ooyar aristocracy. The report of 1058 states that he was punished by mutilation (his nose and hands were cut off), a punishment expressly prohibited by ecclesiastical courts (P. Sokolov, Russkiy arkhierey iz Vizantii i pravo ego naznacheniya, Kiev, 1913 P• 148). This means that Dudik was tried by a civilian court, which shows that he could not have been the bishop's slave (Kholop), as the chronicle claims. If Dudik was a layman who could influence the Metropolitan of Kiev, he must have been a man of considerable standing.

2

PSRL t.5, ch.1,L, 1925, pp.118-20; S. Bugoslav.sky, 'Pouchenie episkopa otdeleniya russkogo Luki Zhidyaty po rukopisyam XV-XVII vv.', Izvestiya yazyka i slovestnosti AN,t. XVIII, k.2, 1913, PP• 196-237.

3

Bugoslavsky,

illh,

p.214.

228

but un:intiated. 1

community of eleventh

Christian

2

which attracted

practices

questions23-25

in Il'ya's also

condemns sexual

Il'ya.

Finally,

advice,

do piyanstva)

a [ne]

with bratchiny

in his struggle

those shown by archbishop therefore,

no reason, chronicle

of slaves,

The editor

2

to doubt that

Luka's

All these

is inappropriate, ,. ne pii

concerns

bez goda,

reflect There is

writing.,

sermon,

and

with Il' ya I s position

exactly

canonical

of 1167 reworked information

the surviving

entries

I.E. Evseev in Pamyatniki literatury,

in his

••• "( ••

Luka

together

with the

in the form given to them

of 11670

by the editor

1

drinkingo 3

obliquely

Kirika.

when it

Do not drink

corresponds

Il'ya.

as do both Nifont

11

of 1055 and 1058, survive

entries

to produce

Il'ya

of Archbishop

which is discussed

but in good measure and not to drunkenness no sdovol,

a number of

Also,

in the Voproshaniya

to Nifont

11

of the sermon deal with

the attention

exploitation

Luka's

1167.

if

version

Luka condemns masquerading,

For example,

a.rchbishop

of the sermon names Luka as

maxims in the surviving

more specific

in the eleventh

translation

the work of the editor

which is obviously

those

the title

Meanwhile;

of Cyril

of the catechism

which was known in Slavonic

of Jerusalem,

In a number of

Novgorod.

century

for the

suitable

was eminently

the influence

the sermon betrays

passages

century.

content

Their

of the baptized,

as a catechization

described

which is best

maxims of Christian

of general

sermon is a collection

Luka's behaviour

support.

in its

can add some considerations

v. 4 StP,

from earlier

about Akim Korsunyanin,

drevnerusskoy 1~94, p.10.

centuries about the

tserkovno-uchitel'skoy

of Cyril of p ..13. Eleventh century Slavonic translations Ibid., Jerusalem are mentioned by P.V. Vladimirov, Drevnyaya russkaya Kievskogo perioda, Kiev, 1900, P• 135 literatura

3 See pp.

!11-'l.

11 ,

229

sermon).

4. A. Perun's

of paganism in Novgorod.

about the destruction

is the tale

of 1167, however,

of the chronicler

creation

The most elaborate

with his

(together

in Novgorod and about Luka Zhidyata

cathedral

first

The destruction

of paganism.

demise and his curse.

We have already

sentence

examined the first

989 in the Novgorod First

Chronicle

(see section

is followed

by a tale

which we shall

That sentence

about the Destruction

of the entry

chapter).

1 of this

of Novgorodian Paganism.

for

the Tale

call

that upon

It states

in Novgorod Akim Korsunyanin:-

arriving

cut down Perun, and ordered him l]?eru4] destroyed altars, dragged into the Volkhov; and tying [Perun] with ropes f they] dragged him through dung, kicking [him) and beating [himj with clubs; and 1he [AkimJ ordered that ~o one was to harbour (Perun] anywhere".,

u •••

by a sentence

This is followed found the idol

which ·recounts

how a certain

Novgorodian

bank and pushed it away disdainfully,

by the river

saying:0

You, Perun, One finds

chronicles,

have drunk and eaten your fill, this

tale

about Novgorod's

now float

conversion

borrowed from Novgorodian fifteenth-century preserve

the Novgorod First his fate

1

~'

2

Ibido

one more sentence Chronicle

version.

and cursed the Novgorodians.

P• 160.

in all

2

the Novgorod

of Avraam, the Moscow Chronicle

as well as in the Chronicle

of 1479-80, the Nikon, Yermolin and Ustyug chronicles

chronicles

away".

(all

compilations).

in the tale

of which All these

which is absent

It describes

from

how Perun lamented

The wording of the lament varies

230

enough to warrant

but the curse diners

to chronicle,

from chronicle

insignificantly

attention.

The lament in its

form reads:-

fullest

". • • beating [him] ,with clubs; and at that time a demon entered into perun ~i