If we consider nothing but its literature, the period that extends from the Tatar invasion to the unification of Russia by Ivan III of Moscow may be called a Dark Age. Its literature is either a more or less impoverished reminiscence of Kievan traditions or an unoriginal imitation of South Slavonic models. But here more than ever it is necessary to bear in mind that literature does not give the true measure of Old Russian culture. The fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, the Dark Age of literature, were at the same time the Golden Age of Russian religious painting.
The Russian icon was the most significant artistic phenomenon of ancient Russia, the fundamental and preponderant means, and at the same time a gift, of its religious life. In its historical origin and formation the icon was an expression of the highest artistic tradition, while in its development it represented a remarkable phenomenon of artistic craftsmanship.
The religion and culture of appanage Russia, like its economic and social development, stemmed directly from the Kievan period. The hard centuries which followed the collapse of a unitary state witnessed, however, a certain retardation, and even regression, in many fields of culture. Impoverishment and relative isolation had an especially adverse effect on education in general and on such costly and difficult pursuits as large-scale building in stone and certain luxury arts and crafts. Literature too seemed to have lost much of its former artistry and
Religion in appanage Russia reflected, in its turn, the strong and weak points, the achievements and failings of the period, as it continued to occupy
a central position in the life and culture of the people. In an age of division, the unity and organization of the Church stood out in striking manner. In the early fifteenth century the Orthodox Church in Russia had, in addition to the metropolitan in Moscow, fifteen bishops, of whom three, those of Novgorod, Rostov, and Suzdal, had the title of archbishop. In 1448, after suspicions of the Greek clergy had been aroused in Russia by the Council of Florence, Jonas became metropolitan without the confirmation of the patriarch of Constantinople, thus breaking the old Russian allegiance to the Byzantine See and inaugurating the autocephalous, in effect independent, period in the history of the Russian Church. Administrative unity within the Russian Church, however, finally proved impossible to preserve. The growing division of the land and the people between Moscow and Lithuania resulted in the establishment, in Kiev, of a separate Orthodox metropoli-tanate for the Lithuanian state, the final break with Moscow coming in 1458.
As we know, the Church, with its enormous holdings and its privileged position, played a major role in the economic and political life of appanage Russia, influencing almost every important development of the period, from the rise of Moscow to the colonization of the northeastern wilderness. But the exact impact of the Church in its own religious and spiritual sphere remains difficult to determine. It has been frequently, and on the whole convincingly, argued that the ritualistic and esthetic sides of Christianity prevailed in medieval Russia, finding their fullest expression in the liturgy and other Church services, some of which became extremely long and elaborate. Fasting, celebrating religious holidays, and generally observing the Church calendar provided further occasions for the ritualism of the Russian people, while icon painting and church architecture served as additional paths in their search for beauty. Still, the ethical and social import of Russian Christianity should not be underestimated in this period any more than during the hegemony of Kiev. Many specialists credit the teaching of the Church with the frequent manumission of slaves by individual masters, realized often by means of a provision in last wills and testaments. And, in a general sense, Christian standards of behavior remained at least the ideal of the Russian people.
Saints continued to reflect the problems and aspirations of the Russians. Figures of the appanage period who became canonized ranged from princes, such as Alexander Nevskii, and ecclesiastical statesmen exemplified by Metropolitan Alexis, to obscure hermits. But the strongest impression on the Russian religious consciousness was made by St. Sergius of Radonezh. St. Sergius, who died in 1392 at the age of about seventy-eight, began as a monk in a forest wilderness and ended as the recognized spiritual leader of Russia. His blessing apparently added strength to Grand Prince Dmitrii and the Russian army for the daring enterprise of Kulikovo, and his word could on occasion stop princely quarrels. Although he refused to be met-
ropolitan, he became in effect the moral head of the Russian Church. As already mentioned, the monastery which St. Sergius founded north of Moscow and which came to be known as the Holy Trinity-St. Sergius Monastery, became one of the greatest religious and cultural centers of the country and the fountainhead of a powerful monastic movement. For centuries after the death of St. Sergius tens and hundreds of thousands of pilgrims continued to come annually from all over Russia to his burial place in one of the churches in the monastery. They still come. As in the case of many other saints, the chief explanation of the influence of St. Sergius lies in his ability to give a certain reality to the concepts of humility, kindness, brotherhood, and love which remain both beliefs and hopes of the Christians. It might be added that St. Sergius tried constantly to help all who needed his help and that he stressed work and learning as well as religious contemplation and observance.
The disciples of St. Sergius, as already mentioned, spread the Christian religion to vast areas in northern Russia, founding scores of monasteries. St. Stephen of Perm, the most distinguished of the friends of St. Sergius, brought Christianity to the Finnic-speaking tribes of the Zyriane: he learned their tongue and created a written language for them, utilizing their decorative designs as a basis for letters. Thus, following the Orthodox tradition, the Zyriane could worship God in their native language.
In medieval Russia, as in medieval Europe as a whole, intellectual life centered on religious problems, although their ramifications often encompassed other areas of human activity. While, in the main, Russia stayed outside the rationalist and reforming currents which developed in Western Christendom, it did not remain totally unaffected by them. Significantly, Russian religious movements stressing rationalism and radical reform emerged in western parts of the country and especially in Novgorod. As early as 1311 a Church council condemned the heresy of a certain Novgorodian priest who denounced monasticism. In the second half of the fourteenth century, in Novgorod, the teaching of the so-called
Later in the century, however, new heretics appeared, known as the
Judaizers. Their radical religious movement has been linked to the arrival in Novgorod in 1470 of a Jew Zechariah, or Skharia, and to the spread of his doctrines. The Judaizers in effect accepted the Old Testament, but rejected the New, considering Christ a prophet rather than the Messiah. Consequently they also denounced the Church. Through the transfer of two Novgorodian priests to Moscow, the movement obtained a foothold in the court circles of the capital. Joseph of Volok, an abbot of Volokolamsk, led the ecclesiastical attack on the heretics. They were condemned by the Church council of 1504, and Ivan III, finally ceding to the wishes of the dominant Church party, cruelly suppressed the Judaizers, having their leaders burned at the stake.
Controversies within the Russian Orthodox Church at the time had an even greater historical significance than did challenges to the Church from the outside. The most important and celebrated dispute of the age pitted the 'possessors' against the 'non-possessors,' with Joseph of Volok again occupying a central position as the outstanding leader of the first-named faction. Joseph of Volok and the possessors believed in a close union of an autocratic ruler and a rich and powerful Church. The prince, or tsar, was the natural protector of the Church with all
