Kuczyńska, Marzanna Między wschodem a zachodem. Prawosławie i unia (review)

Abstract

SEER, 96, 4, OCTOBER 2018 778 leaves the proponents of the official consensus blinded to the prospects of growth and unity — the foremost aim of any functional society. UCL SSEES Ruta Skriptaite Kuczyńska, Marzanna (ed.). Między wschodem a zachodem. Prawosławie i unia. Kultura Pierwszej Rzeczypospolitej w diaogu z Europą, 11. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, Warsaw, 2017. 389 pp. Illustrations. Bibliography. Index. Zł45.00. The book under review is volume eleven of an ambitious twelve-volume project launched in 2015 by the Institute for Interdisciplinary Studies Artes Liberales at the University of Warsaw. Focusing on esthetics, literary culture, languages, political history and religions in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (PLC), the project is aimed at exploring different civilizational patterns of this polity in both its internal and external relationships with other religions, cultures and peoples. Exploring Ruthenian culture in early modern Poland-Lithuania, this collectionconsistsoftwelvechaptersbyspecialistsinreligious,cultural,literary and ethnic studies. In her introductory chapter, editor Marzanna Kuczyńska substantiates the significance of Ruthenian culture in the history of the PLC (pp. 7–15) and outlines the four main areas it will cover: 1) different identity aspects, including religion and church, language, social status, origins; 2) the continuity and changes in Ruthenian culture (e.g. liturgy, patristics, theology, printing, translations, icons); 3) changes in the preparation of priests; and 4) the Uniate Congregation of St Basil and the integration of culture, schooling and printing (p. 8). In the first essay, Tomasz Kempa investigates the interrelations between the Orthodox and Uniate churches in the PLC, including the politics of both secular and religious hierarchies (pp. 17–55). He follows the process of gradual Polish acculturation of the Ruthenian gentry and commoners and the introduction of the Uniate rite by the leaders of the pro-Union coterie of Orthodox bishops in 1595–96. The controversy surrounding the Union of Brest provoked an unprecedented outburst of polemical writing and the ensuing support of the Cossacks of the consecration of a new Orthodoxy hierarchy in the early 1620s. Kempa concludes that, because of the internal politics of Polish kings, the Orthodoxy in the PLC ‘lost its native character’, while all other cultures in this polity also ‘suffered’ (p. 55). Teresa Chynczewska-Hennel’s essay is concerned with issues of the religious and ethnic identity of Ruthenians (pp. 56–80). While stressing the mosaic REVIEWS 779 of religions, identities and peoples living in early modern Poland-Lithuania, Chynczewska-Hennel offers a detailed picture of linguistic, religious and cultural transformations in the development of Ruthenian identity, first and foremost the Union of Brest of 1595–96. In particular, she discusses the vicissitudes of the Ruthenian language in the Polish Crown and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the polemics around the dignities of the Ruthenian vernacular and Church Slavonic. Despite her exhaustive bibliography, she neglects Harvey Goldblatt’s study of the literary output of the Ruthenian monk Ivan Vyšens’kyj. More importantly, however, she outlines the transgression of Ruthenian self-identification from an ethnic-religious-cultural basis to the understanding of its social rights and privileges (pp. 78–79). Sergejus Temčinas concentrates on the languages of Ruthenian culture (pp. 81–120), elaborating on a typology of the respective languages on both a chronological and spatial foundation. He posits a period from 1385 (Union of Krevo) to 1569 (Union of Lublin) followed by a period from 1569 to 1795 when the PLC ceased to exist (pp. 81–82); during the aforementioned periods, different lands played the role of cultural centres, from Galicia-Volhynja to Wilno/Vil’no (Vilnius) to Kyiv. This is why, he argues, the linguistic aspect of Ruthenian identity is very complex, being comprised of Church Slavonic, Ruthenian, Polish and Latin (p. 89). Despite his detailed and exhaustive classification of languages, Temčinas proposes some dubious concepts. For instance, he claims that ‘the Ruthenian language [ruska mowa] is a largely Polonized western variety of Old Rusian [język staroruski]’ (p. 96). Not supported by a discussion of linguistic mechanisms proper, this thesis is poorly grounded; additionally, the geographical orientation in this definition does not reflect the dialectal grouping of Old Rusian (Old East Slavic) and presupposes the obsolete treatment of Old Rusian as...