Две версии предательства Иуды: Сказание Иеронима и «Трагедия о Иуде, принце искариотском» А. М. Ремизова

Abstract

The perception of Judas Iscariot in world culture has repeatedly changed. The evangelists’ scant information about him in medieval apocrypha was overgrown with bizarre episodes. The image of the traitor disciple in the works of Modern age was often subjected to reflection, complication and even “rehabilitation”. The extreme points in the spectrum of possible interpretations of this image are revealed by the comparison of A. M. Remizov’s play “The Trage-dy of Judas, Prince of Iscariot” (1909) with its Old Russian source – The Tale of Jerome about Judas the Traitor. The moral Tale, according to the author’s idea, was supposed to prove the innate depravity of the future traitor of the Messiah, whose life path, even before meeting the Teacher, was burdened with the atrocities of Cain and Oedipus. But the unequivocally negative assessment of Judas in the Tale was hindered by the medieval tradition of using the Oedipus plot as an illustration of the Christian dogma of repentance and redemption. In the A. M. Remizov’s play the schematism of the original source is not only overcome, but also the image of the title character is consciously enlarged, and turned into a hero of the trag-edy of rock. The betrayal of Judas is also reinterpreted in the play, and became strangely symmetrical to the redemptive sacrifice of Christ. The prince Judas, persecuted by fate, with-out even discussing the possible path of repentance, consciously sacrificed immortality with his soul for the salvation of mankind. This version of the evangelistic betrayal reflected not only the ideas of Gnosticism, which was popular at that time, but also the moral aspects of the activities of revolutionary terrorists discussed by Russian society at the beginning of the 20th century.