The Paths of Folklore: Essays in Honor of Natalie Kononenko

Ritual Purity or Blaison populaire in the Literature of Kievan Rus’

The Paths of Folklore: Essays in Honor of Natalie Kononenko. Svitlana Kukharenko and Peter Holloway, eds. Bloomington, IN: Slavica Publishers, 2012, 145–50.       Ritual Purity or Blaison populaire in the Literature of Kievan Rus’ Peter Rolland In  teaching  or  analyzing  texts  of  the  medieval  period  one  often  comes  upon   passages  or  references  whose  meaning  is  obscure  or  totally  incomprehensible.   Consider  these  two  passages  from  the  Primary  Chronicle  (Povist’  vremen-­‐‑ nykh  lit).   About  the  Derevliane  the  chronicler  writes:     The  Derevlians,  on  the  other  hand  [in  comparison  to  the  Polianians,   the  tribe  of  the  author-­‐‑scribe],  existed  in  bestial  fashion  and  lived  like   cattle.  They  killed  one  another,  ate  every  impure  thing,  and  there  was   no  marriage  among  them,  but  instead  they  seized  upon  maidens  by   capture.  (Cross  1953,  56)     And  in  the  narrative  concerning  Volodimer’s  choice  of  which  religion  to   adopt  we  read  in  the  Greek  missionary’s  description  of  the  Muslim  Bulgars:       We   have   heard   that   the   Bulgars   have   come   here   teaching   to   accept   their  faith  which  is  a  faith  which  fouls  heaven  and  earth,  for  they  are   more  accursed  than  other  men  being  likened  to  Sodom  and  Gomor-­‐‑ rah  upon  which  the  Lord  rained  burning  stones  and  engulfed  them   and  who  await  the  day  of  destruction  when  God  comes  to  judge  the   earth   and   destroy   the   lawbreakers   and   the   unclean.   For   they   wash   their  private  parts  and  pour  the  water  into  their  mouths  and  smear   their  beards  with  it  while  calling  upon  Mohammed;  and  their  wives   perform  the  same  foul  actions  only  more  so.  They  consume  the  fluids,   which  are  produced  by  sexual  intercourse.  (Rolland  2002,  98)     Volodimer   reacts   to   this   by   spitting   on   the   ground,   saying,   “This   is   an   unclean  act.”     And   from   the   Galician-­‐‑Volynian   Chronicle   concerning   Danylo   Halyt-­‐‑ s’kyi’s  reception  at  the  court  of  Khan  Batyi  (Khan  Batii)  and  his  drinking  of   mare’s  milk  at  the  behest  of  the  khan:     146 PETER ROLLAND Batyi  then  inquired  whether  Danylo  drank  black  milk,  which  was  fer-­‐‑ mented  mare’s  milk  and  was  their  favorite  drink.  Danylo  confessed   that  he  had  not  yet  tried  it,  but  would  drink  it  if  he  (Batyi)  wished,  to   which  Batyi  replied  that  Danylo  was  already  one  of  them—a  Tatar— and  should  therefore  drink  their  beverage.  Danylo  drank  (the  milk),   bowed  in  accordance  with  their  custom,  and  said  that  he  would  now   go   and   pay   homage   to   the   Grand   Princess   Barakchinova,   and   Batu   agreed.  Later  Batyi  sent  him  a  keg  of  wine,  explaining  that  since  Da-­‐‑ nylo  was  not  used  to  drinking  mare’s  milk,  he  should  drink  wine.  Oh,   the  greatest  disgrace  is  to  be  (thus)  honored  by  the  Tatars.  (Perfecky   1973,  59)     How  are  we  to  consider  these  passages?  Are  they  merely  the  reflection  of   the  attitude  of  the  scribe  who  authored  them,  of  popular  attitudes  concerning   “the   Other”   (“lesser   breeds   without   the   law”)?   Do   they   reveal   something   more  serious,  a  factor  or  factors  that  escape  our  attention  given  the  temporal   and   cultural   differences   between   their   authors   and   us?   It   is   my   contention   that,  indeed,  there  is  something  more  significant  than  mere  blaison  populaire  or   the  author’s  personal  bias  behind  each  of  these  passages—concern  for  ritual   purity.   While  we  know  this  was  a  concern  for  the  Jews  of  the  Old  Testament  and   for  Orthodox  Judaism  today,  we  totally  forget  the  possibility  that  it  was  a  con-­‐‑ cern   for   not   just   early   Christianity,   but   to   a   significant   extent   for   medieval   Christianity,  both  Eastern  and  Western.   I  came  upon  the  concept  in  G.  P.  Fedotov’s  popular  book  first  published   in   1946   and   at   least   once   thereafter,   The   Russian   Religious   Mind   (volume   1,   Kievan  Christianity:  The  10th  to  the  13th  Centuries).  In  the  chapter  “The  Ritual-­‐‑ ism  of  the  Clergy,”  Fedotov  outlines  major  problems  of  ritual  purity,  concen-­‐‑ trating  primarily  on  those  which  relate  to  the  Eucharist  and  its  reception.  To   do  so  he  refers  to  three  documents.  One  he  identifies  as  a  colloquy  in  which   the   questions   of   a   Novgorodian   cleric,   Kirik,   are   answered   by   his   bishop,   Nifont.  The  titles  of  the  other  two  are  given  in  English  as  “The  Canonical  An-­‐‑ swer  of  Metropolitan  John  II  of  Kiev  (1080–1089)”  and  ”Precept  of  the  Holy   Fathers   to   the   Confessing   Sons   and   Daughters.”   The   author   also   refers   to   other  issues,  especially  those  raised  by  Kirik,  which  reflect  “the  fear  of  ritual   impurity   understood   almost   exclusively   in   the   physical,   or   physiological   sense.…  The  source  of  impurity  is  the  human  body  with  all  its  organic  func-­‐‑ tions;  impure...