Beauty and the Military Saint: The Case of Alexander Nevsky

Sergei A. Holodny 1

It is as hard and severe a thing to be a true politician as to be truly moral.

Francis Bacon

In the currently political climate, leaders are often thought of as being without moral principles, whose decisions stem from the latest polls and image-makers. 2 Aside from the compromise of ethical principles and the ubiquity of personal moral failings, the role of a politician is inevitably fraught with difficult decisions, including sending soldiers to their deaths during wartime. 3,4,5,6 The principles that guide political leaders often appear to be pragmatism and self-interest rather than the good of those who they profess to govern. Such a culture seems incompatible with Christian ideals.

Specifically, the Christian ideal of Beauty, which according to Dostoyevsky’s Prince Myshkin will “save the world”, seems almost axiomatically irresoluble with the standard, current view of a political or military leader. Images associated with shrewd political maneuvering or modern (and for that matter medieval) warfare appear diametrically opposed to internal and external grace, calm and beauty depicted in Orthodox icons and hymnography. In contrast to the “profession” of a monk or a physician, which seem more compatible with saintliness, the “job” of being a political or military leader by its very nature demands compromise.

Orthodox hagiography, however, is filled with examples of military and political leaders who, in the Orthodox

1 I would like to thank Professor Vera Shevzov for her valuable assistance and guidance in the preparation of this essay. I would also like to thank Archimandrite Cyril Hovorun and Eugenia Temidis for their help in identifying sources, Maestro Peter Fekula, Professor Peter Bouteneff and Elizabeth Ledkovsky for help with liturgical questions and translations, Elena Holodny for editorial assistance and Professor Andrei Holodny for his ideas.2 Balz D, Johnson H. The Battle for America. Viking. New York. 2008.3 McGreevey J. The Confession. HarperCollins. New York. 2006.4 Elkind P. Client 9: The Rise and Fall of Eliot Spitzer. Penguin. New York. 2010.5 Lifton RJ. The Atomic bomb: voices from Hiroshima and Nagasaki. M.E. Sharpe. Armonk, NY. 1990.6 Herring GC. LBJ and Viet Nam. University of Texas Press. Austin, TX. 1994.

1

understanding, successfully combined careers as statesmen and military leaders with saintly lives. This paper focuses on the thirteenth-century saint, Alexander Nevsky, who was able to govern his country successfully in difficult historical circumstances and yet, according to the Orthodox Church, was able to remain true to the Christian ideal. In the Orthodox view, Saint Alexander was able to resolve the inherent tension between the demands of his political and military responsibilities and the requirements of a saintly life, including a sense of both inner and outer beauty.

Orthodox iconography and hymnography appear to be ideally suited to depict the resolution of this tension. An icon or hymn, on the one hand depicts actual historical events from the lives of the saint; yet, icons and hymns as works of art, are inherently objects of beauty by their very nature. In addition, icons or hymns ideally depict not only the outer or physical circumstances of an individual’s existence but also the inner conflicts which pervaded the life of the saint and his (or her) victory in this spiritual struggle. 7 This paper will examine how the harmonious solution to the apparent tension of a political and military career and a saintly life is depicted iconographically and hymnographically in the figure of Alexander Nevsky, considering in particular the seemingly irreconcilable concepts of beauty and political/military prowess.

Historical backgroundAlexander Yaroslavovich Nevsky lived in a time of great

peril for Russia as well as for Orthodoxy in general. He was born in Pereslavl-Zalessky in 1220, sixteen years after the great sack of Constantinople by the Latin Crusaders in 1204. He died in 1263, two years after the recapture of the capital of the Byzantine Empire by Michael VIII Palaeologous.

In 1236, at the age of 16, Alexander became the prince of Novgorod. During the first few years of his tenure, Russian land was devastated and subjugated by the Mongols under the leadership of Khan Batu, the grandson of Genghis Khan. In 1237 and 1238, Khan Batu captured and destroyed essentially all of the major centers of northern Rus’, including Vladimir. By 1240, Khan Batu annihilated Kiev and the southern part of Rus’. During Batu’s campaign, Novgorod was spared probably

7 Lossky V, Ouspensky L. The Meaning of Icons. St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. Crestwood, NY. 1999.

2

because its surrounding terrain was inhospitable to the Mongol cavalry.

Sensing the weakness of the Russian land, Swedes and Germans attacked Novgorod and Pskov from the West. In 1240, Alexander Nevsky and his numerically- inferior forces decisively defeated the Swedish army on the Neva River. For this victory, Alexander was given the title Nevsky. In 1242 Nevsky defeated the Livonian Knights on Lake Ladoga.

Alexander Nevsky resisted the efforts of the Catholic Church and other political forces in the West to form an alliance against the Mongols and instead chose to become a vassal of the Mongol overlords. His policy of appeasement of the conquerors from the East, including the collection of taxes from his own people and the suppression of anti-Mongol uprisings (for example the Novgorod uprising of 1259) while avoiding internal wars was successful in gaining a respite from devastating Mongolian forays. 8 His success in this diplomatic endeavor, which earned him the eternal love of his people, is highlighted by the subsequent failure of ensuing rulers to achieve these aims. 9 For example, Alexander Nevsky’s two sons, Dimitri and Andrei, fought endless wars against each other on Russian territory. In this struggle, each of the combatants brought Mongol armies to devastate not only each other but also the Russian land itself. 10 The chroniclers depicted the stark contrast between the rule of Alexander Nevsky and that of his children. The words of Metropolitan Archbishop Cyril pronounced at Alexander Nevsky's funeral proved prophetic: “'My children, you should know that the sun of the Suzdalian land has set. There will never be another prince like him in the Suzdalian land.' And the priests and deacons and monks, the poor and the wealthy, and all the people said: 'It is our end.’" 11Alexander Nevsky was considered a local saint immediately after his untimely death.12, 13 The Russian Orthodox Church officially canonized him in 1547.

8 First Novogorodian Chronicle. Synodal document. 136-8. (as referenced in Schenk. Aleksanrd Nevsky p 68 and 82).9 Alexander Nevsky was declared the main hero of Russia’s history by popular vote. Kommersant 24 September 2008.10 Karamzin NM. History of the Russian State (Istoria Gosudarstva Rossiakago) book I, tome IV, chapters V and VI, pp 81-103, Moscow 1842-44, reprinted “Khiga” Moscow 1989.11 Begunov, K. (translator) Second Pskovian Chronicle. Isbornik. Moscow, 1955.

3

The Hagiographic Life of Alexander NevskyMuch of what we know about St. Alexander Nevsky is

from a manuscript entitled “Tale of the Life and Courage of the Pious and Great Prince Alexander (Nevsky)”, which was written soon after his death (henceforth referred to as the “Life”). 14 When reading this chronicle, one is struck by the combination of detailed descriptions of the battle scenes and of extensive quotes and allusions to religious texts and ancient, secular history. Zenkovsky understood this to mean that the chronicle had at least two different authors – an experienced warrior and a learned churchman. 15,16 However, the dichotomy between the military and political world and the religious/ethical and esthetic mindset assumed by Zenkovsky is an artificial construct of the modern mind and did not exist in the medieval world. In contrast to perhaps contemporary expectations, military and political leaders at that time were expected to be pious and godly.

Current scholarship rejects the opinions of Zenkovsky and Serebryanky and acknowledges the symbiotic relationship between military/political and the religious/esthetic in medieval personages such as Alexander Nevsky. Contemporary researchers have emphasized that the stylistic melding of the strictly factual historical narrative with the spiritual dimension is an essential characteristic of the hagiography of the period.

12 Karamzin. History of the Russian State book I, tome IV, chapters V and VI, p 58.13 Schenk FB. Aleksanrd Nevsky in Russian Cultural Reminiscence: saint, statesman and national hero. “Novoye Literaturnoye Obozreniye” Moscow 2007 (translated from the original German) p 58.14 Zenkovsky SA (editor and translator). Medieval Russian’s Epics, Chronicles, and Tales. Meridian. New York. 1963. pp 224-236. Zenkovsky uses the version from the Second Pskovian Chronicle, published in Pskovskie Letopisi, vol II Moscow. 1955, pp 11-16.15 Serebryanky N. ‘The lives of old Russian princes.’ Proceedings of the Imperial Historical and Archeological Society. St. Petersburg 1915, tome 245, book 3, p 151. (as referenced in Schenk Aleksanrd Nevsky. p 79).16 Schenk Aleksanrd Nevsky p 60.

4

17,18,19,20,21 Indeed, the historian, Werner Philipp goes as far as to maintain that the author of the “Life,” in depicting the deeds of Alexander Nevsky, actually created a new type of saint. 22 As opposed to the "Lives" of prior Russian princely saints (such as Boris and Gleb and Igor or Michael of Chernigov), the "Life" of Alexander Nevsky does not describe martyrdom for the Christian faith or for averting a fratricidal war. Rather, the “Life” serves to “…canonize the godlike rule of the prince, and, in this way, the successful resolution of everyday, earth concerns with pious responsibility.” 23 Alexander Nevsky achieves sainthood through his deeds for the good of society (obschedstvennoye sluzheniye). Phillip saw the sacred and the political as indissolubly intertwined in the figure of Alexander Nevsky. 24

The linking of the spiritual and the temporal is emphasized in the “Life” through a miraculous vision of two Russian saints Boris and Gleb, who were witnessed to be hastening to the aid of “our relative Alexander” prior to the battle against the Swedes. 25 Why, however, was it the saints Boris and Gleb who were depicted in the vision? Their military achievements were rather modest during their own lifetimes. The answer can be gleaned from a textual analysis of the original “Life” of Alexander Nevsky. Prior to his battle with the Swedes, Alexander was cautioned by advisors against immediately attacking the invaders, since the enemy was numerically superior to the forces of Alexander’s Novgorodians. According to the “Life”, Alexander Nevsky replied, “God is not in strength but in

17 Schenk Aleksanrd Nevsky p 60.18 Okhotnoikova VI. Chronicle on the Life of Alexander Nevsky (Povest’ o Zhitii Aleksandra Nevskago). p 354-355 (as referenced in Schenk Aleksanrd Nevsky p 78-9).19 Philipp W. Verhaltnis. p 10 (as referenced in Schenk Aleksanrd Nevsky p 79).20 Lilienfeld F. Das herz zum Verstand neigen. Altrussische Heilige des Beginns. Freiburg, 1989. p 9.21 Begunov. Die Vita des Fuersten Aleksandr Nevskij in der Novgoroder Literatur. p 93-95. (as referenced in Schenk Aleksanrd Nevsky p 79).22 Philipp W. Heiligkeit und Herrschaft. p 66 (as referenced in Schenk Aleksanrd Nevsky p 81).23 Phillip. Heiligkeit und Herrschaft. p 67.24 Schenk. Aleksanrd Nevsky. p 63-4.25 Zenkovsky SA. Medieval Russian’s Epics. p 228. See also Karamzin NM. History of the Russian State book I, tome IV, chapters I, p 18.

5

truth (Ne v sile Bog a v pravde).” Hence, being on the side of truth was more important than a tactical military advantage.

An interesting contrast is the most famous phrase said by Alexander Nevsky in the 1938 film of the same name by Sergei Eisenstein at Stalin’s commission. 26 In Eisenstein's interpretation of his life, Alexander Nevsky states “Who comes to us with the sword, shall die by the sword (kto k nam s mechom pridet, ot mecha i pogibnet).” These words, however distort the following verse in the Gospel: “Then came they, and laid hands on Jesus and took him. And, behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest's, and smote off his ear. Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword” (Matthew 26:51-53). Accordingly, Eisenstein altered the original meaning of Christ’s words, which admonished the Apostle Peter after his violent, ill-advised and futile attempt to defend Jesus from the arresting Romans soldiers. In Eisenstein’s (Stalin’s) version, physical power predominates and all mention of truth (pravda) is eliminated. In stark contrast, in the original description, written soon after the actual battle, Alexander Nevsky clearly subjugates strength to truth. For Alexander Nevsky, faithfulness to his ideals trumped strategic, military considerations even though he was a military and political leader, soon to engage a numerically superior enemy force on the field of battle.

The Liturgical Celebration of Alexander NevskyThe Russian Orthodox Church celebrates the feast day of

Saint Alexander Nevsky twice during the year: first, on the day of his repose (November 23, Old Style, December 6, new Style) and, second, on the occasion of the transfer of his relics to St. Petersburg in 1724 (August 30, Old Style, September 12, New Style). Archimandrite Vikentii, the abbot of the Nativity Monastery, originally composed the first service soon after the first opening of the relics of Alexander Nevsky in 1380. This service was edited around 1540 by nobleman (boyarin) Mikhail (according to other versions - Vasilii) Tuchkov, in preparation for his canonization in 1547 by the Metropolitan Makarii of Moscow (1482- 1563). The second service was written in 1724 during the reign of Peter the Great. 27

26 Bordwell D. The Cinema of Eisenstein. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, MA, 1993. p 28-9.

6

There are interesting distinctions in the Church services, which reflect differences in the ideals and objectives of Russian society during these two eras. The earlier version was written when religion (specifically Orthodoxy) played a dominant role in the lives of the Russian people. As such, it can be argued that this earlier version most likely was a more accurate reflection of the times of the saint himself. The second service was written during the waning of religious life and the rise of the Russian Empire. Consequently, the earlier version is more concerned with the inner, spiritual life. In the pre-Petrine service, for instance, the saint is referred to as "venerable" (prepodobnyi) as well as "most faithful" or "pious" (blagovernyi), whereas in the later version, he is referred to exclusively as "most faithful”. Interestingly, blagovernyi is a term essentially reserved for princes and other high rulers. The term prepodobnyi usually refers to monks and priests. Therefore, the earlier church service, while praising Nevsky's statesmanship, also emphasized his saintly life. The later version subtly highlighted his political and military deeds instead.

The different emphases of the two services are even evident in their titles. The earlier version highlights that Alexander Nevsky became a monk at the end of his life. The title of the service includes: “…whose monastic name was Aleksei (narechennogo vo inotsekh Alkseia)”. This detail is absent in the later version. There are number of possible reasons. It is hard to overestimate the domination of Peter the Great over the political and cultural milieu of Russia at that time. Peter was not well enamored with monastics, as evidenced by his monastic reforms. 28 Therefore, the author of the Petrine service probably thought it wise to deemphasize the final decision of Peter’s glorious ancestor to take monastic vows. 29

27 Spassky FG. Russian Literature (Russkoye literaturnoye tvorchestvo). Publishing Council of the Russian Orthodox Church. Moscow. 2008. Originally published in Paris by the St. Sergius Institute in 1951. Referenced as from http://www.klikovo.ru/db/book/msg/17693 on Dec 1, 2011.28 Massie RK. Peter the Great: His Life and World. Alfred A. Knopf. New York. 1980. p 788.29 Also, Peter the Great’s son, who rebelled against his father and met his untimely demise (probably) at Peter’s behest (Massie. Peter the Great. pp 704-707) was named Aleksei. The composer of the service subtly avoided the mention the name of Peter’s son, even if it was the monastic name of his famous predecessor. In support of this contention, it is interesting to note that the Petrine service contains a seemingly out of place reference to Absalom, the son of King David, who rebelled against his father (2 Samuel 14:25). However, the reference becomes understandable when one appreciates the analogy to

7

In reading the first service to the saint, one is almost overwhelmed by frequent references to the interweaving of spiritual and physical beauty, a characteristic currently not often associated with either political or military leaders. For example, we see the direct use of the word “beauty” in the following phrases: “You [Alexander Nevsky] are beautified most brightly by piety and faith" (blagochestiem i veroiu presvetlo ukrashen) (third sticheron, at the little vespers). 30 “You [Alexander Nevsky] are brightly beautified by good deeds, charity and purity and became the vessel of the Holy Spirit (blagimi deli svetlo ukrashen yesi, milostinyami I chistotoiu sosud Svyatogo Dukha bil yesi)” (third sticheron at Lity); “in joy and beauty (v radoste i krasote)” (kanon, song 4 troparion 3); “You shine like beautifully like a star (Yako zvezda siyaya krasno)” (Kanon, song 7 troparion 4). These numerous examples illustrate the organic linking of Christian virtues, including ethics and esthetics, which, in the earlier service, blend seamlessly with the military and political achievements of Alexander Nevsky. Moreover, it can be easily argued that the glorification of the harmonious coexistence of esthetic values with political success in a major political figure such as Alexander Nevsky actually served to extoll his descendants to emulate their ancestor’s accomplishments.

A remarkable example references the beauty of Alexander Nevsky actually singing in Church during the service: “You were the beauty of Christ’s Church and decorated Her with your singing, o glorious one. Even now we pray to you: rescue those who sing of you from physical and spiritual warfare, o Alexander (Tserkvi byl esi Khristovoi krasota, peniem bo siiu ukrasil esi preslavne. I nynye molim tia: svobodi ny ot vsiakiia brani boritelya, poiushchim ti, Aleksandre)” (Kanon, song 1, troparion 3). This is an interesting metaphor of defeating one’s demons through the esthetic value of singing in Church. Here the composer of the service references Alexander Nevsky’s triumphs in actual, physical warfare (bran’) as well as in spiritual (or unseen) warfare and extolls the saint to intercede on the behalf of

Peter the Great’s own son - tsarevich Aleksei Petrovich (sticheron at Lity, on “Both now and ever”).30 The quotations from the Church service here and further are taken from http://orthlib.ru referenced in December 1, 2011 and which represents the current standard of the Russian Orthodox Church (Moscow. Publishing Council of the Russian Orthodox Church (Izdatelski sovet russkoi pravoslavnoi tserkvi) 2002. The translations are by the author.

8

those who currently sing his praises. 31 This example, from the Kanon again artistically weaves together the concept of beauty (this time on the form of singing in Church) with the victories of the saint on both the spiritual and physics battlefields.

The following excerpt from the Church service explicitly coalesces Alexander Nevsky’s princely position with essential Christian values and brings these entities together into one indivisible whole in the figure of Alexander Nevsky. “O pious father, Alexander…you were named by God to wear the crown, and were brightly beautified by piety and truth, charity and chastity (Prepodobne otche Aleksande… bogimenit ventsenosets bil yesi, prepodobiyem i pravdoiu svetlo ykrashen: milostinyami zhe I chistotoiu)” (fourth sticheron, little vespers). Alexander Nevsky was a prince (literally, “God-appointed crown-wearer - bogimenit ventsenosets”) while at the same time a person made beautiful by piety and truth, charity and chastity.

The Petrine service also differs from the earlier service by the unremitting presence of Imperial and military references. The constant allusions to the martial successes of Alexander Nevsky turn the attention of the faithful listener to the accomplishments of the reigning Tsar, Peter the Great. For example, Alexander Nevsky (sticheron aposticha, on “Both now and ever”) is hailed as a military leader and a builder, akin to Peter the Great. References to miracles, beauty, healing, and monasticism are missing. The surviving mentions of beauty in the second service are direct quotations from the first service.

The 1724 Service is coupled with another feast: the commemoration of the establishment of peace between the Russian Empire and the Swedish Crown. This feast commemorates the victory of the Russian Empire over Sweden (in 1721), which definitively established Russian presence in the Baltic Sea and significantly solidified the heretofore-precarious position of the fledgling capital of St. Petersburg. 32 The service, consequently, consists of two interwoven narratives: one or St. Alexander Nevsky and the other for the victory over the Swedes and the glorification of Peter the Great – often by name. Frequently, the references to the two leaders dovetail, making it difficult for somebody standing in church and not having the text

31 Scupoli L, (edited and revised by Theophan the Recluse and Nicodemus of the Holy Mountain). Unseen Warfare: The Spiritual Combat and Path to Paradise of Lorenzo Scupoli. St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, Crestwood, NY. 1997.32 Massie. Peter the Great. pp. 735-743.

9

in front of them to differentiate between the glorification of the two leaders. Both claimed victories over the Swedes, secured the Baltic Sea and were great leaders. One, however, was a canonized saint and the other was a contemporary ruler. 33 The sycophantic metaphors and similes for Peter the Great are numerous in this service. For example (sticheron at Lity, on “Both now and ever”) compares Alexander Nevsky to Peter the Great “flesh from flesh (Peter the Great was a direct descendant of Alexander Nevsky - SH) and power from power (plot’ ot ploti, i vlast’ ot valsti)”.

Shlyapkin expresses the opinion that the canonization of Alexander Nevsky in 1547 and the hagiography composed at that time were done to support the cruel, imperialistic policies of Ivan IV and the faltering dynasty after his death. 34 However, this opinion does not seem reasonable. First, Alexander Nevsky was canonized during the All-Russian Council of 1547. Ivan IV was crowned in January of that year – at the age of 16. During the first few months of his reign, there were no signs of future troubles. It is much more likely that Metropolitan Makarii the editor of the Great Menaion Reader who oversaw the canonization of 38 other Russian saints spearheaded the canonization of Alexander Nevsky. The compilation of the Great Menaion Reader, including the preparation of documents for the canonization such a large number of saints, was a laborious, time-consuming task that commenced prior to the elevation of Ivan IV to the throne. From analysis of the service composed in 1380 and edited in 1547 for the canonization of Alexander Nevsky, it is clear that the main emphasis of this later service is on the Christian characteristics of the saint, not the least of which are beauty, piety and chastity with an accentuation on his monasticism. There is clear glorification of Alexander Nevsky’s martial and diplomatic achievements in the 1547 service, but an exultation of the dynasty and comparisons to a living Tsar only appear in the Petrine (1724) version.

Shlyapkin references the veneration of the relics of Saint Alexander by Ivan IV prior to the taking of Kazan as evidence of the support of the Church of the rule of Ivan IV. 35 The taking of Kazan, the capital of the Tatar Khanate of Kazan, by Ivan IV in

33 Massie. Peter the Great. pp. 373-382.34 Shlyapkin IA. Iconography of Saint, Pious, Great prince Alexander Nevsky (Ikonographia Svatogo Balgovernago Velikago knyaza Aleskanda Nevskago). Typgraphia Aleksandrova. Petrograd. 1915, pp 11-12.35 Shlyapkin IA. Iconography of Alexander Nevsky. pp 11-12.

10

1552 was seen as a great strategic and political victory, which solidified the growing regional influence of the Russian state and emphasized the waning power of the Tatars, Russia’s conquerors. The veneration of the relics of Alexander Nevsky by Ivan IV immediately proceeding this victory, however, cannot be seen as a reason for the canonization of the saint as the military triumph occurred (1552) after the actual canonization (1547). 36

A much later composition “The Akathist to the holy, pious great prince Alexander Nevsky” written in 1852 expresses much of the same sentiment as the 1548 service (rather than the 1724 service). 37 An akathist is a hymn dedicated to a saint or an icon of the Mother of God. Originating in the fifth century, the akathist experienced a revival in late nineteenth century Russia as an expression of both public and private piety. 38 The Akathist is a much shorter composition and can be sung at any time, whereas the standard services are generally reserved for the actually feast day of the saint in question. Already the Akathist's opening phrases present the resolution of the two seemingly irreconcilable characteristics: warrior (voyevoda) and beautification or ornamentation (ukrasheniye): “The chosen warrior of the Russian Land, the bright beautification of the Orthodox Church, the holy, pious, great prince Alexander Nevsky (Izbrannomu voyevode zemle Rossiiskiya, svetlomu ukrasheniu Tserkve pravoslavniya, svyatomu blagovernomu velikomu knyaziu Aleksandru Nevskomu)” (Kondakion #1). Modern historians fail to take stock of such literary devices. 39,40 However, the Church liturgy is replete with examples where at first seemingly incompatible features are combined to emphasize a certain characteristic of the saint’s life. A famous example is

36 Also, the Church at that time was far from the handmaiden of the State. Metropolitan Philip of Moscow, the primate of the Russian Orthodox Church was killed by Maliuta Skuratov in 1569 on the orders of Ivan IV (Bulgakov S. Handbook for Church Servers. January 9. Kharkov, Russia. 1900, p. 22.). Also, Ivan IV personally beheaded Kornili, the hegumen of one of the major Russian monasteries - the Pskov-Pechorski monastery on February 20, 1570 ironically not far from the place of Alexander Nevsky’s victory over the Livonian Knights on the Ice of Lake Ladoga.37 Popov A. Orthodox Russian Akathists (Pravoslavniye russkiye akafisti). Kazan State University Press. Kazan. 1903. pp149-153.38 Shevzov V. ‘Poeticizing Piety: the Icon of Mary in Russian Akathesoi Hymns.’ St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly. 2000;44:343-373.39 Isaho M. The Image of Aleksandr Nevskiy in Medieval Russia: Warrior and Saint. The Northern World. Brill. Leiden. 2006.40 Shlyapkin IA. Iconography Alexander Nevsky.

11

the troparion to St. Nicholas of Myra in Lycia (also the general troparion to hierarchs): “You have attained great heights through humility and great prosperity through poverty (smireniye – visokoye, nishchetoiu – bogatoye)”. In an analogous manner, the Akathist service to Alexander Nevsky emphasizes the unity of his Christian characteristics with his success as a ruler. Rather than being a hindrance, it is because of these Christian characteristics, including beauty, piety, truth, charity and chastity that God grants Alexander Nevsky the ability to be an outstanding statesman

Alexander Nevsky and his IconSt. Isaac the Syrian once wrote: “Speech is the organ of

this present world. Silence is the mystery of the world to come”. 41 “Speech” represents the unique human ability to chronicle our temporal states, while “silence” represents that eternal moment of beholding the Divine. Thus, given that understanding, one might view Art, specifically Orthodox iconography, as maintaining a mysterious ability by means of beauty to act as a bridge and simultaneously connect to both realms. On the one hand, icons depict stories of the lives of saints. The icon, therefore, fastens itself to a certain time period in which that figure lived. This binding gives the icon the quality of “speech” because it actively tells a story of the past. Saints strove to see God and eternal truths, consequently creating a certain movement in the icons. Iconographers saturate their icons with universal symbols of the “world to come,” in order for others to also see what the saints saw. Thus, icons manage concurrently to “speak” of the individual and to “see” the universal, giving an onlooker the ability also to see the truths through the icon’s storytelling. 42

In Russian ecclesiastical culture, beauty had a central position ever since Prince Vladimir chose the “Greek faith” in 988 as the new religion for his realm in a large part due to esthetic considerations:

Then we went to Greece, and the Greeks led us to the edifices where they worshipped their God, and we knew not whether we were in heaven or on earth. For on earth

41 as quoted in: Ware K. The Orthodox Way. St Vladimir’s Seminary Pr. Crestwood, NY. 1995. p. 178.42 Lossky V, Ouspensky L. The Meaning of Icons. St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. Crestwood, NY. 1999.

12

there is no such splendor or such beauty, and we are at a loss to describe it. We only know that God dwells there among men, and their service is fairer than the ceremonies of other nations. For we cannot forget this beauty. Every man, after tasting something sweet is afterwards unwilling to accept that which is bitter. 43

The concept of beauty possesses the unique ability to

unite seemingly opposite things. In this particular text we see that the men “knew not whether [they] were in heaven or on earth” indicating that two opposing realms were blended together when they experienced something beautiful. Because beauty can disintegrate the boundary created between binary oppositions, it has remained central in Russian Orthodox iconography (which often deals with opposing ideas such as the political/military versus the ethical).

The iconographic representation of saints who were also powerful politicians begs the initial question-- “Can a politician really be saint?” and “What role does the concept of beauty have in the life of a statesman?” In light of St. Isaac’s quote, however, we might view a political saint vis-a-vis the "speech and sight" dichotomy. In terms of speech, a politician or military leader participates in conquests, reforms, and other miscellaneous endeavors, giving the iconographer an abundance of stories to chronicle. In terms of sight, the political figure traditionally stands for certain ideals and attempts to move his people towards those ideals. Undoubtedly, there exists a tension between the career of the saint who is also a statesman and his spiritual life; that tension is mirrored by the overlap of time and eternity. While a modern misconception asserts that the friction leads to negative effects, in actuality, the double-sided pressure can in certain circumstances mold leaders into men and women of character. The ideals for which they struggled are then crystallized in Orthodox iconographic art.

In pre-Petrine icons Alexander Nevsky was occasionally depicted as a monk in a great “skhema” (monastic garb of the strictest order) for example in the Sophia Cathedral in Novgorod – mid XVI century and occasionally as a prince. Iconographic instructions recommend portraying the saint in the following manner: “In a schema [monastic headdress] and monastic

43 Cross SH, Sherbowitz-Wetzor OP (translators and editors). The Russian Primary Chronicle: Laurentian Text. The Mediaeval Academy of America. Cambridge, MA. 1953.

13

vestments, with a lock of curly hair protruding from underneath the headdress, himself broad shouldered… (v skhime, rizi predodobnocheskiye, kudretsi videt, malen’ko is pod skhimi, sam plechist telom…)”. 44 The directive to portray a lock of curly hair protruding from underneath the headdress of the strictest monastic order is very telling. Such a depiction would be exceptionally unusual for person who spent the majority of his life as a monk. In the case of Alexander Nevsky, however, the interplay of the unruly lock of hair and the “skhema” might be read as an artistic testament to the resolution of the tension between his princely duties and earthly life on the one hand and his deep Christianity on the other. One can think of the lock of curly hair as representing the life of Alexander Nevsky as a forceful and successful ruler who refuses to be contained; yet, in this iconographic representation, the fact that Alexander Nevsky’s head is covered in the monastic tradition implies his striving for a moral, Christian life.

After Peter the Great, iconographers were instructed to portray Alexander Nevsky in princely garb (“Ukaz” of the Holy Synod, dated June 15, 1724) going as far as to forbid his portrayal in monastic garb: “.. henceforth, it is forbidden to depict this saint as a monastic (…otnine togo svyatogo v monasheskoi persone otniud’ ne pisat’)”. 45 Even in post-Petrine icons, however, Alexander Nevsky is depicted as having his crown placed on the table behind him and with a halo around his head, showing the spiritual first and the political second, while maintaining the importance of both aspects. With his eyes gazing up and into the light, he appears immersed in the light of God.

ConclusionOrthodox iconography and hymnography depict not only

physical reality, but also one’s interior life and spiritual beauty. Specifically, early manuscripts and iconographic depictions of Alexander Nevsky depict both a successful statesman and a saint. The tension of beauty, chastity, charity and piety on the one hand and military prowess and statesmanship on the other in

44 Library of the Russian Academy of Science. Stroganoff Iconographic School, #60. P 56, as referenced in the Kalividze NV. ‘Alexander Yaroslavich Nevsky.’ Orthodox Encyclopedia. Vol I, p544.45 Complete collection of the orders and directives regarding the Orthodox religion of the Russian Empire. (Polnoye sobraniye postanovlenii i rasporyazhenii po vedomstvu pravoslavnogo ispovedaniya Rossiiskoi imperii.) Tome 4, p 148. No 1318 and 1328. St. Petersburg 1876, (as referenced in Schenk Aleksanrd Nevsky p 164).

14

the life and deeds of Alexander Nevsky is resolved through an artistic medium in both iconography and hymnography.

15