Eschatology and geopolitics: on the eve of the first Russian-Turkish war
Intercession Cathedral is, in a sense, a symbol of eschatological expectations
Preamble, or myth as the key to understanding the Middle Ages
Let's continue what we started in the article The fall of Constantinople as the starting point of the confrontation between Russia and Turkey talk about the prelude to the first the war between the powers that claimed the legacy of the Eastern Roman Empire.
But first, a little preamble. In the comments to the mentioned material, there was criticism addressed to me on the subject: how appropriate is it to address the topic of eschatology when considering military-political stories? After all, the conflict between Russia and the Ports was determined by pragmatic reasons, or, as they say now, geopolitical ones.
I answer: in relation to the Middle Ages and the first century of the Modern Age, it is not only appropriate, but also represents the only way to understand the motivation for decision-making - motivation expressed in the categories of myth.
For medieval man could not think beyond them. Myth was for him, as A.F. Losev wrote, an absolute reality - man lived in it from birth to death. The myth determined both the worldview and the character of thinking based on it, which was significantly different from ours, as the reader will be convinced of by becoming acquainted below with the eschatological content of some of the reasonings of Ivan IV.
Accordingly, we cannot escape eschatology if we want to understand not only the external form of events, but also their true essence - the way our ancestors understood it, and not put current ideas about the same military-political realities into the head of, say, the first Russian Tsar.
At one time, positivist and Marxist scientists (with the undeniable contribution of both to science) already stepped on a similar rake. Don't repeat their mistakes.
Anticipation heightened the atmosphere
So, 1492nd. Within the framework of the chronology then accepted in Rus', it corresponded to the 7000th year from the creation of the world and was associated with the coming completion of earthly history. Therefore, they did not compile Paschals for the further period, believing that there would be no need to celebrate the Resurrection due to the expected Second Coming of the Savior and the Last Judgment.
As historian A.L. Yurganov notes:
“The closer 1492 came, the more tense the atmosphere became.”
From the point of view of Orthodox people of that time, the struggle between good and evil intensified, and the world was divided, within the framework of the medieval understanding of the Bible and apocryphal literature popular in Rus', into “pure” and “unclean” lands.
However, such sentiments did not appear in the 15th century, but were reflected already in the Tale of Bygone Years (PVL), with its allusions to the Holy Scriptures:
“In the story about the victory of the Russian princes over the Polovtsians,” writes the American medievalist D-K. Prestel, there are many parallels with the Old Testament history of the Israeli people.
A striking parallel is found at the end of the story about the victory over the Polovtsians. 20 Polovtsian princes were killed during the battle, and one, Beldyuz, was captured and taken to Svyatopolk. Beldyuz offered a ransom for his release, but Svyatopolk sent him to Vladimir Monomakh, who, reminding the prisoner of how he had violated all his previous oaths, ordered his execution. This type of treatment of enemies is repeatedly described in the Old Testament as characteristic of the Israelites. The episode from the chronicle is reminiscent of a scene from the Old Testament when Gideon, before executing him, reproaches the Midian kings Shalman and Zebah. It was the refusal to fulfill God's order to kill the king of the Amalekites, Agag, that ultimately led to the fall of Saul. The actions of Vladimir Monomakh confirm his submission to the divine plan."
A striking parallel is found at the end of the story about the victory over the Polovtsians. 20 Polovtsian princes were killed during the battle, and one, Beldyuz, was captured and taken to Svyatopolk. Beldyuz offered a ransom for his release, but Svyatopolk sent him to Vladimir Monomakh, who, reminding the prisoner of how he had violated all his previous oaths, ordered his execution. This type of treatment of enemies is repeatedly described in the Old Testament as characteristic of the Israelites. The episode from the chronicle is reminiscent of a scene from the Old Testament when Gideon, before executing him, reproaches the Midian kings Shalman and Zebah. It was the refusal to fulfill God's order to kill the king of the Amalekites, Agag, that ultimately led to the fall of Saul. The actions of Vladimir Monomakh confirm his submission to the divine plan."
Both Nestor himself and his contemporaries saw in the PVL a continuation of the Holy Scripture (more precisely: Sacred History), called
“serve,” notes Prestel, “as a link between the biblical history of salvation and the history of Kievan Rus, since here an attempt is clearly made to show how Rus' is included in the divine plan of salvation.”
The American scientist is not alone in his conclusions. Russian medievalist I. N. Danilevsky views PVL in a similar way; for example, analyzing the story of the construction by Prince Vladimir of the Assumption - Tithes - Church in Kyiv:
“Its unconditional parallels with the story of the 3rd book of Kings about the construction of the Temple of the Lord by Solomon clearly indicate the identity - for the chronicler and his readers - not only of the image of Vladimir with Solomon, but also of the image of Kyiv with Jerusalem, and the Church of the Tithes with the “house of the Lord” "."
The idea of the end of earthly history and the Last Judgment has worried at least the educated part of Russian society since the time of Prince Vladimir, as evidenced by the monologue of the Philosopher given in PVL when the prince chose faith. Hence the popularity in Rus' of Methodius of Patara, imbued with eschatological content.
“In addition to the well-known books of the Holy Scriptures,” writes A.L. Yurganov, “imbued with a prophetic spirit and predictions of the end of the world, eschatological apocrypha were known and enjoyed no less popularity in Rus', one of which was the so-called “Revelation” attributed to Methodius of Patara, which directly spoke of the end of the world after seven thousand years.”
On the way to the Third Rome
The idea of Rus' as the “house of God” became actualized in the minds of its elite after the fall of the Second Bulgarian Kingdom under the blows of the Turks.
Actually, some scientists believe that Vladimir adopted Christianity from Bulgaria. In any case, the influence of its culture on early medieval Russian culture is significant; Let's say, a friend of St. Sergius of Radonezh, Metropolitan of Kiev and All Rus' Cyprian, was a Bulgarian.
And the capture of Tarnovo by the Ottomans in 1393 only strengthened the Russian scribes in eschatological expectations, thought in logic: the collapse of the Orthodox kingdoms - is this not the threshold of the end?
At the end of the 15th century. The Grand Duchy of Moscow remained the only independent Orthodox state in the world. Why, in the minds of our ancestors, did the seemingly unshakable Eastern Roman Empire fall?
Because, having accepted the Union of Florence in 1439, she retreated from the true faith. Metropolitan Isidore of Kiev and All Rus', who signed the union, returned to Moscow and remembered the pope at a service in the Assumption Cathedral, and was imprisoned, from where he, however, was given the opportunity to escape. He later took part in the defense of Constantinople from the Turks in 1453.
The result of Moscow’s rejection of the union was the election of Jonah as Metropolitan of Kyiv and All Rus' in 1448, without the consent of the Patriarch of Constantinople. Of course, the last election was not recognized, which led to a gap that was overcome only a century later - a gap at the beginning of the XNUMXth century. unthinkable. What could be the gap between Moscow, lost in the forests, and the Second Rome - the center of the civilized world?
But with the military successes of the Muslim Turks and at the same time the expansion of the borders of Muscovy, the consciousness of Russian scribes also changed, creating conditions for the formulation of the concept of the Third Rome.
At the same time, it was not only about moving the political center of an empire that was unable to die, because according to the theological ideas formulated at the dawn of Christianity, it cannot disappear, since the Lord chose it as the place of His Nativity. It was about the land where the Second Coming would take place.
And it is not surprising that the concept of “Moscow – the new Jerusalem”, filled with eschatological content, appeared even earlier. For if Constantinople was thought of as the political center of the Universe (hence the corresponding name of the first Councils that formulated the dogmas of the Orthodox Church), then Jerusalem was considered the spiritual center.
The great (in this case I speak about this without a shadow of exaggeration) scientist and our living contemporary philologist and historian Boris Andreevich Uspensky explains the birth of the mentioned concept as follows:
“In the 16th century, the Russians believed that old Jerusalem had become “indecent”, having been desecrated by the infidel Saracens, and therefore Moscow should be called Jerusalem.”
In turn, I. N. Danilevsky emphasizes:
“As for Moscow specifically, it is called Rome only in the so-called “Kazan History”, written in the mid-60s of the XNUMXth century.”
In a word, the Romans’ retreat from the true faith predetermined their fall, but not the death of the empire as such.
Accordingly, after the capture of Constantinople by Mehmed II, the empire moved to Rus'. There were no alternatives: it was not for her to move to the Epirus Despotate, which was on its last legs and mired in internal turmoil.
Sultan Mehmed II Fatih (Conqueror), who saw himself as Emperor of Rome and a descendant of the powerful Komnenos dynasty that once ruled Byzantium
I believe that everything written above provides the key to understanding the undiplomatic behavior of boyar M.A. Pleshcheev at the Sultan’s court mentioned in the previous article.
After all, he thought in a paradigm, the essence of which B. A. Uspensky defined as follows:
“In ancient Russian culture, space was perceived in value categories: certain lands were regarded as clean and unclean, righteous and sinful.”
Pleshcheev was sure: he was on “unclean” land and was communicating with the wicked. That’s why you can’t accept gifts from them and you can’t sit at the table either. Not to mention bowing to the Sultan, even due to etiquette.
Did eschatological expectations cease after the end of the world did not occur in 1492? No. The date was simply postponed - eschatological expectations continued in the XNUMXth century, being accumulated by the church schism.
On this score, historian E. A. Vanenkova writes:
“In 1489, Demetrius Trachaniot (a Greek diplomat by origin who served Ivan III - I.Kh.) in his treatise “On the Years of the Seventh Thousand” pointed to the sacramental meaning of the number “7”. From this it could be concluded that the end of the world could come in 7070 or 7077 from the creation of the world (i.e. in the 60s of the XNUMXth century).”
In these years, the first military clash between Russia and the Portes took place.
Ivan IV, judging by his correspondence with A.M. Kurbsky, expected the imminent onset of the Last Judgment. E. A. Vanenkova draws attention to the lines from the second message to the prince, where Grozny emphasizes his desire to sue his former mentor, one of the leaders of the Chosen Rada and the author - we can say this with a certain degree of probability - of the famous "Domostroy" Archpriest Sylvester, after the end of the world.
"Tsar Ivan the Terrible and Priest Sylvester during the great Moscow fire on June 24, 1547." Painting by P. F. Pleshanov
According to her:
“It is quite possible that the king believed that there was very little left before this (the message was written in 1564, on the eve of dates associated with eschatological expectations).”
They were not least responsible for the creation of the Oprichnina, the symbolism of which we judge from the notes of G. Staden, who did not understand its mystical content.
Hence the flat explanations of the purpose of the broom and the dog’s head tied to the saddle. Their symbolic meaning is much deeper, as I wrote about in the article: “What did the angels of death fight against?"(For those wishing to get acquainted with the topic on a deeper level, I recommend the excellent monograph by A. Bulychev “Between Saints and Demons”).
Under Ivan IV, Russia was thought of as the only “pure” land, which was reflected in the style of the Intercession Cathedral (St. Basil’s Cathedral), called
“to become a bright symbol of the God-protected power, the sacred capital of the Eastern Christian world, combining the greatness of the “third Rome” and the chosenness of God “Russian Jerusalem.”
This is how art critic V. Baidin assesses the semantic content of the cathedral, and it is difficult to disagree with him. He also notes, taking us back to biblical allusions - and in this case already expressed in architecture:
“Most likely, in their eyes, the cathedral was likened to the biblical Temple of the Lord, which, at the will of King Solomon, was built by foreign artisans led by the skilled Hiram (Z Kings 7:13-14).”
That is why, in his letters to Kurbsky, Grozny writes about his military successes:
“Not my victory, but God’s.”
About the last hour in Islam
In the context of the above, we cannot ignore the question: were eschatological expectations characteristic of Muslims?
There were, but mainly during the Crusades:
“Medieval Muslims,” writes British medievalist R. Irwin, “were so well aware of all the details of the end of the world that the 14th-century Arab chronicler Ibn Kathir was able to finish his historical work “The Beginning and the End” with a description of future events. During the Crusades, many Muslims believed that the end of the world would come when the black sun rose in the west, followed by the barbarian hordes of Gog and Magog.”
In whom the civilized Muslims of that period saw the barbarian hordes, I believe there is no need to explain.
But even with the advent of the late Middle Ages, eschatological expectations did not fully weaken in the world of Islam, divided into Shiite Safavid Iran and the Sunni Porte, which in the south of Arabia was at least resisted by Zaydi Yemen, which I wrote about, see: The Houthis in retrospect.
Although such expectations were not experienced as intensely as in Russia.
And yet, one of the hadiths says (I quote it in Irwin’s translation):
“The last hour will not strike until Allah gives my people victory over Constantinople.”
Constantinople fell, but the final hour did not come for the Muslims. On the contrary, in the person of the Porte, Islam continued its expansion, which made its clash with Russia inevitable. But more on this in the next article.
Использованная литература:
Baidin V. About the symbolism of the Church of the Intercession of the Virgin Mary on the moat and its builders // https://lib.rmvoz.ru/bigzal/o-simvolike-hrama-pokrova.
Bulychev A.A. Between saints and demons. Notes on the posthumous fate of the disgraced Tsar Ivan the Terrible. M.: “Znak”, 2005.
Vanenkova A.E. Eschatological aspect of Ivan the Terrible’s messages to Andrei Kurbsky // https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/eshatologicheskiy-aspekt-poslaniy-ivana-groznogo-andreyu-kurbskomu.
Danilevsky I.N. Ancient Rus' through the eyes of contemporaries and descendants (IX – XII centuries) M.: “Russian Perspective”, 2024.
Irwin R. Islam and the Crusades // http://krotov.info/history/12/misho/reyli_13.htm.
Kamentseva E.I. Chronology. M.: Aspect-Press, 2003.
Prestel David K. Fruits of Providence: pagan and sacred history in the Tale of Bygone Years // https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/plody-provideniya-yazycheskaya-i-svyaschennaya-istoriya-v-povesti-vremennyh-let.
Khodakov I.M. / What the “angels of death” fought against // https://hist-etnol.livejournal.com/2354965.html.
Yurganov A.L. Categories of Russian medieval culture. M.: MIROS, 1998.
Information