A Byzantine Sermon


Gentile Prof. Ronchey,

vorrei segnalarle questo articolo, che potrebbe essere di suo interesse. 
Cordiali saluti.


A BYZANTINE SERMON
Feb 14th 2008 


The drawing of inaccurate historical parallels with Constantinople

WHEN Nikolai Patrushev, head of Russia's federal security service (FSB), spoke to his staff to mark the 90th anniversary of the Soviet secret service last year, he made an odd historic diversion. "Those who study history know that security existed before. Sophia Paleologue married Ivan III, and being a niece of the last Byzantine emperor, paid close attention to questions of security." Few understood what he was talking about. 


The mystery was cleared up a few weeks later, when Russia's state television channel aired an hour-long film, "The Destruction of the Empire: a Byzantine Lesson". It proved so popular that the channel repeated it and added a 45-minute discussion concluding that Russia could exist only as an Orthodox empire. The author and narrator of the film is Father Tikhon Shevkunov, reputedly the confessor of Vladimir Putin. In recent weeks the film has become one of the most talked-about in Moscow. 


Russian rulers often appeal to history to justify their actions. Mr Putin revealed his interest in history from the start of his presidency, when he restored Stalin's anthem as a national hymn. Last year he promoted a school textbook justifying Stalin's brutal rule as a necessary evil. When other ex-Soviet republics commemorate Soviet brutalities, Russia treats this as a distortion of history. This week the foreign ministry held a meeting behind closed doors on the subject of "Counteracting the falsification of history aimed against Russia: a task of national importance". 


In the minds and language of the ex-spooks who dominate Russia, history is a powerful tool. The television film seems to be in that genre. In it, Father Tikhon is transported in full attire from a snow-swept church to Istanbul and Venice, where he exposes the West as a "genetic" hater of both Byzantium and its spiritual heir: Russia. The Byzantine empire's rich and cultured capital, Constantinople, was the envy of dark and aggressive barbarians from the West, who looted it during the fourth crusade in 1204. Modern Western capitalism, argues Father Tikhon, is built on Byzantine loot and Jewish usury. 


In this version, Byzantium's first mistake was to trust the West (represented in the film by a cloaked figure in a sinister, long-nosed Venetian mask) and surrender the commanding heights of the economy--trading and customs collection--to Western entrepreneurs and greedy oligarchs. Using a term from today's Russia, Father Tikhon talks of some "stabilisation fund" when describing the achievements of one Byzantine emperor, Basil II, godfather to Russia's Prince Vladimir, who crushed separatists and sent oligarchs to prison. But even great emperors could have weak successors. (The film was made before Mr Putin chose Dmitry Medvedev as his successor, to be endorsed by voters in the election on March 2nd.) 


The film's usage of modern words and imagery is so conspicuous that the moral cannot escape a Russian viewer. Instead of sticking to its traditions, Byzantium tried to reform and modernise, as the West demanded, and it paid the price. Worst of all, the West infiltrated Byzantium with harmful, individualistic ideas, which destroyed the core values of the empire--so the people lost faith in their rulers.


Sergei Ivanov, Russia's leading scholar on Byzantium, says all this lumps together a 1,000-year history of Byzantium and crudely extrapolates the result to today's Russia. In fact, the film has little to do with the true history of Byzantium. But neither history nor the values of the Orthodox faith are its real object. In the absence of any new ideology, it manipulates a story of Byzantium to justify Russia's anti-Westernism and xenophobia in a 1,000-year history. The film also carries an implicit message to Mr Putin: do not listen to the West, stay in power, close off the country. 


It is of little concern to Father Tikhon, or to Russian state television, that the Russian empire gained most when it opened up to the West, not when it fenced itself off. Byzantium was always the source of Orthodox faith for Russia, but few Russian tsars looked to Byzantium as a political model. It was for good reason that they called Moscow a third Rome, not a second Constantinople. It fell to Stalin to revive Byzantine studies, along with the idea of imperialism, says Father Tikhon, approvingly. "He knew whom to learn from." But the danger of manipulating history in this way is that its tragedies may recur. 

See this article with graphics and related items at http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10701960 



Caro Tommaso,
grazie infinite della segnalazione. In effetti avevo già avuto notizia del documentario e mi riprometto di intervistare in proposito il mio collega e vecchio amico Sergej Ivanov (che è menzionato anche nell'articolo) e pubblicare qualcosa sulla Stampa in occasione della Pasqua (cattolica o russa: vedremo). Un amichevole saluto!
SR 



L'enigma di Piero


Cara Silvia, ho letto il tuo bellissimo “L’enigma di Piero”, questa estate sul Garda. Ero a Limone, dove è sempre fresco e mi è tornato in mente tutto: te e Scaraffia quella sera in un teatrino di Trastevere, le risate, anche un po’ di nervosismo, ma tanta simpatia. E poi il mio editore, Francesco Maria Gallo, le tue battute sulla strage degli alberi dell’Amazzonia che si cela dietro ogni libro, e io che rispondevo ma cavolo, pubblico per la prima volta a cinquanta anni e devo subito pentirmi d’averlo fatto… Forse dovevo ascoltarti e tornare nel silenzio. Ho pubblicato un libro di racconti nel 2003 e il mio editore il mese dopo ha pubblicato Vanna Marchi, e poi – sempre di fila - è fallito. Poi ho pubblicato con la Bohumil Edizioni di Bolo

gna un libricino di poesie (100 copie digitali, forse qualche ramo dell’Amazzonia, non di più). Ecco, non voglio disturbarti, solo brevi notizie ma con tanto affetto e stima per quello che scrivi. Un caro saluto. 
Franco



Caro Franco,
che piacere sentirti. Sai, alberi amazzonici a parte, resto convinta che si pubblichino troppi libri, e che in ogni caso sia bene, se proprio uno non vuole tenersi i propri scritti nel cassetto, essere breve (il mio Enigma di Piero, ad esempio, sono contenta ti sia piaciuto ma è troppo lungo: il prossimo, sulla caduta di Costantinopoli, cercherà di non superare le 150 max 200 pagine). E però scrivere, caro Franco, scrivere bisogna, sempre, per carità. Tieni duro, quindi. E un abbraccio!
SR