Search results

Чеснокова Т. Г. «День святого Патрика» Р. Б. Шеридана и традиции фарса как «малой комедии» в английском театре XVIII в // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия III: Филология. 2013. Вып. 2 (32). С. 65-77.
A small number of plays written by R.B. Sheridan and the close limits of the period of his active work sometimes tend to overshadow the wide range of comic genres presented in his dramatic heritage. The creator of «the most finished and faultless comedy which we have» (as William Hazlitt called The School for Scandal), Sheridan was no less skilful at writing «short» (or «brief») drama. This side of his dramatic talent claims our special attention. Its importance is emphasized in the article which is particularly devoted to the analysis of Sheridan’s farce St. Patrick’s Day, or The Scheming Lieutenant (1775). In Britain the word «farce» came into general use during the Restoration period, when farcical pieces became widely spread, commonly functioning as «afterpieces». The term had no strict defi nition and was interpreted in different ways. Yet among the diversity of its different applications the two main tendencies may be marked out. In the first place farce presented a generalized genre model, lying at the bottom of the total majority of the irregular «short» genres, close to parody, burlesque and satire. On the other hand, the term was also applied to the specimens of the so-called «brief comedy», which appeared as a «concise» parallel to the 5-act comedy. It is the latter model which was realized in Sheridan’s farce under discussion. Taking it into account, the author of the article analyzes St. Patrick’s Day against the background of 17th and 18th centuries’ «short comedy» tradition. The most signifi cant genre characteristics are brought to light on the levels of plot, character system and style. As regards the play’s comic dialogue, its close relation to the Rococo style in combination with neoclassical tendencies is emphasized. The substitution of words in dialogue (or quo pro quo device) is paid special attention in the article along with some other features of comic speech. Comparative study of the former’s functions in comedies and farces by Moliere, Murphy and Sheridan helps to define more accurately characteristics of style peculiar to different trends in European comic drama of the 17th and 18th centuries. Such study provides a basis for determining the place of St. Patrick’s Day in Sheridan’s dramatic career as well as in the history of European «short» dramatic forms.
R. B. Sheridan, farce, short (brief) comedy, humour, comic dialogue, Rococo style, neoclassical style
1. Andreev L. G. (ed.) Zarubezhnaja literatura vtorogo tysjacheletija. 1000—2000 (The Foreign Literature of the Second Thousand Years. 1000-2000), Moscow, 2001.
2. Bekket S. V ozhidanii Godo (Waiting for Godot), Moscow, 1998.
3. Filding G. Farsy (Farces), Moscow, 1980.
4. Fielding Henry. The Complete Works, New York, 1902.
5. Hughes Leo. A Century of English Farce, Princeton, 1956.
6. Kagarlickij Ju. I. Literatura i teatr Anglii XVII—XX vekov: Avtory, sjuzhety, personazhi (Literature and Theatre of England in the 18th-20th Centuries: Authors, Plots, Personages), Moscow, 2006.
7. Losev A. F. Plavt (Plautus), in http://antique-lit.niv.ru/antique-lit/losev/plavt.htm (Date: 21.04.2012).
8. Mol'er. Sobranie sochinenj (Collected Works), Moscow, 1957.
9. Murphy Arthur. The Way to Keep Him and Five Other Plays, New York, 1956.
10. Pahsar'jan N. T. Istorja zarubezhnoj literatury 17—18 vekov (History of the Foreign Literature of the 17th and 18th Centuries). Moscow, 1998.
11. Plavt Tit Makcij. Komedii (Comedies), Moscow, 1997.
12. Sheridan R. B. Dramaticheskie proizvedenja (Dramatic Works), Moscow, 1956.
13. Sheridan R. B. The Dramatic Works, Oxford, 1973.
Чеснокова Н. П. Газский митрополит Паисий Лигарид в России: заметки к биографии // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия II: История. История Русской Православной Церкви. 2020. Вып. 96. С. 11-28. DOI: 10.15382/sturII202096.11-28
The last years of life of Paisios Ligaridis, Metropolitan of Gaza, were closely associated with the Russian state and, as it may seem, are well known to researchers. However, some facts of his biography are still insuffi ciently studied and require further research. Paisios Ligaridis’ activity at the Great Moscow Council of 1666/67 is evaluated in the relevant scholarly literature mostly negatively. Both supporters and opponents of Nikon, Patriarch of Moscow, treat him either as an initiator of the decisions taken at the council, or as an embodiment of servility. However, such views do not take into account either unpublished archival materials or historical sources published as early as the 18‒20th centuries. Even less explored are the facts associated with the departure of Paisios Ligaridis to the Orthodox East and his second return to Moscow. They are dealt with differently in historiography not only because of the insuffi cient source base but more often because of the biased interpretation of the available pieces of evidence. Paisios arrived in Kiev in May 1673 and was not going to leave it quickly. Using published and unpublished sources this article puts forward a hypothesis about the possible reasons for the return of Paisios Ligaridis from Kiev to Moscow and his new departure from Moscow in 1676.
Russia, Orthodox East, Metropolitan Paisios Ligaridis, Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, Patriarch Nikon, Great Moscow Council of 1666/67, Greek-Russian ties, sources, biography
  1. Chesnokova N. (2019) “Paisii Ligarid” [Paisios Ligaridis], in Pravoslavnaia entsiklopediia [Orthodox encyclopaedia], 54, p. 240‒243. Moscow (in Russian).
  2. Chesnokova N. (2019) “Zhalovannye gramoty grecheskim ierarkham v kontekste konfessional’nopoliticheskikh sviazei Rossii i pravoslavnogo Vostoka v XVIII v.” [Charters to Greek hierarchs in the context of confessional and political relations between Russia and the Orthodox East in the 18th century], in Kapterevskiie chteniia [The Kapterev Symposium], 17, p. 190‒211. Moscow (in Russian).
  3. Floria B. (2001) “Voiny Osmanskoi imperii s gosudarstvami Vostochnoi Evropy (1672‒1681 gg.)” [Wars of the Ottoman Empire with the states of Eastern Europe (1672‒1681)], in Osmanskaia imperiia i strany Tsentral’noi, Vostochnoi i Iugo-Vostochnoi Evropy v XVII v. [Ottoman Empire and the countries of Central, Eastern and South-Eastern Europe in the 17th century], 2, p. 108‒148 Moscow (in Russian).
  4. Fonkich B. (2003) Grecheskie rukopisi i dokumenty v Rossii v XIV — nachale XVIII v. [Greek manuscripts and documents in Russia in the 14th — early 18th centuries]. Moscow (in Russian).
  5. Kapterev N. (2008) “Kharakter otnoshenii Rossii k pravoslavnomu Vostoku v XVI i v XVII stoletiiakh” [The nature of Russia’s relations with the Orthodox East in the 16th and 17th centuries], in N. Kapterev. Sobranie sochinenii [Collected works], 1, p. 21‒505. Moscow (in Russian).
  6. Kapterev N. (2008) “O greko-latinskikh shkolakh v Moskve v XVII v.” [On the Greek-Latin schools in Moscow in the 17th century], in N. Kapterev. Sobraniie sochinenii [Collected works], 2, p. 652‒712. Moscow (in Russian).
  7. Kapterev N. (2008) “Khlopoty moskovskogo pravitel’stva o vosstanovlenii Paisiia Aleksandriiskogo i Makariia Antiokhiiskogo na ikh patriarshikh kafedrakh i o razreshenii ot zapreshcheniia Paisiia Ligarida” [The eff orts of the Moscow government as to the restoration of Paisius of Alexandria and Macarius of Antioch in their Patriarch’s sees and as to the elimination of the prohibition of Paisius Ligaridis], in N. Kapterev. Sobranie sochinenii [Collected works], 2, p. 741‒788. Moscow (in Russian).
  8. Kudriavtsev I. (1963) “Izdatel’skaia” deiatel’nost Posol’skogo prikaza (K istorii russkoi rukopisnoi knigi vo vtoroi polovine XVII veka)” [“Publishing” activity of the Ambassadorial Office (On the history of Russian manuscript books in the second half of the 17th century)], in Kniga: issledovaniia i materialy [The book: Studies and materials], VIII, p. 189–193. Moscow (in Russian).
  9. Makarii (Bulgakov), Metropolitan (1996) Istoriia Russkoi tserkvi [History of the Russian Church], 7. Moscow (in Russian).
  10. Oparina T. (2016) “Perevodchik Posol’skogo prikaza Anastas Selunskii” [The translator of the Ambassadorial Offi ce Anastas Selunsky], in Drevniaia Rus’. Voprosy medievistiki, 4 (66), p. 66‒84 (in Russian).
  11. Oparina T. (2017) “Ioannikii Grek i grecheskoe zemliachestvo Moskvy” [Ioannikios the Greek and the Greek community of Moscow], in Drevniaia Rus’. Voprosy medievistiki, 3 (69), p. 96‒97 (in Russian).
  12. Oparina T. (2019) “Prevratnosti sud’by «grechenina» Nikolaia Dmitrieva” [The vicissitudes of fate of the “Grechenin” Nikolai Dmitriev], in Srednie veka, 80 (2), p. 162–185 (in Russian).
  13. Pavel Aleppskii (2005). Puteshestvie antiokhiiskogo patriarkha Makariia v Rossiiu v polovine XVII veka [The journey of Patriarch Macarius of Antioch to Russia in the middle of the 17th century]. Moscow (in Russian).
  14. Romanova A. (1998) “Paisii Ligarid” [Paisios Ligaridis], in Slovar’ knizhnikov i knizhnosti Drevnei Rusi [Dictionary of scribes and booklore of Ancient Rus’], 3, p. 8–12. St Petersburg (in Russian).
  15. Timoshina L. (2012) “Gazskii mitropolit Paisii Ligarid: o nekotorykh datakh i sobytiiakh” [Metropolitan Paisios Ligaridis of Gaza: Some dates and events], in Kapterevskie chtenia [The Kapterev Symposium], 10, p. 89‒133. Moscow (in Russian).
  16. Vitsen N. (1996) Puteshestvie v Moskoviiu. 1664‒1665 [Journey to Muscovy. 1664‒1665]. St. Petersburg (in Russian).
Chesnokova Nadezhda
Academic Degree: Candidate of Sciences* in History;
Academic Rank: Senior Research Fellow;
Place of work: Institute of World History of Russian Academy of Sciences; 32A Leninskiy Prospect, Moscow 119991, Russian Federation;
Post: Senior Researcher;
ORCID: 0000-0002-7304-1968;
Email: npchesn@mail.ru. *According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.