HARVARD UKRAINIAN STUDIES - See also - Harvard University

298 ANDRZEJ POPPEtreatise is by no means anti-Byzantine (today few authors maintain so). 27True, he did not give Byzantium a major role in the Rus' recognition of theone true God, but he did convey essential elements that made the Byzantineimpact clearly evident.The Pantocrator guided the intentions and deeds of Volodimer. Whenthe prince decided "to find the one true God," he, still pagan, showed verygood acumen: "Then he heard of the Orthodox land of Greece, so Christlovingand strong in faith." This recognition of Byzantine Christianity and,simultaneously, of the sources of the religious inheritance results directlyfrom Ilarion's comparison of the acts and roles of Volodimer and Constantine:"He [Constantine] with his mother Helen brought the Cross fromJerusalem and, affirming the faith, spread it over all their land; so you withyour grandmother Ol'ga carried the Cross from New Jerusalem, from thecity of Constantine, and having placed it in your land, affirmed the faith." 28The cross symbolizes not only the triumph of Christianity in Rus', but alsoshows its genealogy and institutional ties. The composition is an expressionof utmost regard for Byzantine Christendom and at the same time a declarationof loyalty to one's own confessional affiliation, since for Kiev the cityof Constantine is the New Jerusalem, a new terrestrial icon of God's City.Referring to the Byzantine capital as such, while emphasizing Volodimer'sguidance directly by God, can only be interpreted as an expression of religioushomage and of Kiev's desire to be a true icon of Constantinople as aNew Jerusalem. 29 That in Kiev efforts were made to resemble Constantinopleeven in appearance is illustrated by the Constantinopolitan influence inearly Kievan architecture, 30 and by travelers' impressions from about 1070that the capital of Rus' imitates Constantinople, "the brightest ornament ofGreece." 3127But M. Priselkov's thesis is still alive. See, for instance, M. Ju. Brajcevs'kyj, Utverdzeniexristjanstva na Rusi (Kiev, 1988), pp. 171 -73; Vvedenie xristianstva na Rusi (Moscow, 1987),pp. 149-208; Kak byla krescena Rus (Moscow, 1988), pp. 237f.28Miiller, llarion Lobrede, pp. 102, 118- 19; Moldovan, Slovo, pp. 92, 97.29Cf. N. Schneider, Civitas Celestis: Studien zum Jerusalem Symbolismus (Miinster, 1969);Podskalsky, Christentum, pp. 119f.30See C. Mango, Byzantine Architecture (New York, 1976), Reg.; Poppe, "Building of St.Sophia," pp. 30-56; A. I. Komec, Drevnerusskoe zodcestvo konca X-nacala XII v. (Moscow,1987), pp. 133-232, 316-18. Cf. also P. A. Rappoport, "O roli vizantijskogo vlijanija v razvitiidrevnerusskoj arxitektury," Vizantijskij vremennik45 (1984): 185-91.31"Magistri Adam Bremensis, Gesta Hammaburgensis ecclesiae Pontificum," in Quellendes 9 und 11 Jahrhunderts zur Geschichte der Hamburgischen Kirche und des Reiches (Berlin,1961), p. 254. The information of the chronicler recorded between 1072-76 that"Ruzziae.. .metropolis civitas est Chive, aemula scerptri Constantinopolitani, clarissimumdecus Greciae" (lib. II, §22) has been misinterpreted (also in English translation, by Tschan,1959, p. 67) to mean that Kiev was a rival of Constantinople. But there are no grounds for such