Editorial

Issue 54 of the Historical Reporter continues the thematic line of issue 53 and is dedicated to the scholarly legacy of the eminent Russian orientalist, Professor Constantin Alexandrovich Panchenko (1968–2024).

The issue opens with a presentation delivered by Dr. Panchenko at the international conference held at the University of Balamand (Lebanon) in 2023. His plenary address analyzed the perception of the Union of Florence of 1439 within the Orthodox Church of Antioch and throughout the Christian East from the fifteenth to the twentieth centuries. Central to the article is the Council of the Three Eastern Patriarchs (of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem) held in 1443, which for the first time publicly rejected the Union of Florence, thus becoming «the voice of the ancient Eastern thrones» at a critical moment for the Orthodox world.

The topic of the Union was almost forgotten in the sixteenth century, only to be revived at the turn of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, assuming a central place in historical studies of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The author emphasizes that this issue – along with the Council of 1443 – is of exceptional importance for understanding the background of the 1724 schism within the Church of Antioch into Orthodox and Catholic branches, acquiring for contemporary Arab Christians not only a historical but also political and ideological significance. Dr. Panchenko convincingly disputes J. Gill’s thesis concerning the spuriousness of the 1443 Council’s charter. As a key new argument in favor of the document’s authenticity, he adduces the discovery of its Church Slavonic translation made in the Neamț Monastery in Moldavia virtually immediately after the Council, in the same year 1443. The introduction of evidence for this early Slavonic translation into scholarly circulation constitutes a significant source-critical discovery, effectively concluding the long-standing academic debate over the authenticity of the Council of the Three Patriarchs. At the same time, it opens a new field in comparative source studies and poses new challenges for Byzantinists, Slavists, and scholars of Middle Eastern Christianity.

The detailed analysis of Greek – Latin polemics and of the reception of the topic of the Union in the works of Arabic-speaking Orthodox historians and polemicists of the Early Modern and Modern periods (Anastasius ibn Mujalla, Patriarch Macarius III al-Za‘im, Paul of Aleppo, Sophronius al-Kilīzi, Asad Rustum, among others) enables the integration of the history of the Christian East into a broader ecclesiastical context. Dr. Panchenko’s study affirms the canonical and historical significance of the 1443 Council of the Three Patriarchs as the first public, pan-Orthodox act of rejection of the Union of Florence by the Eastern sees.

Evgeny M. Kopot’s contribution continues the study of the question of uniatism in the Church of Antioch in the second half of the nineteenth century, the initial results of which were published in the previous issue of the Reporter. This study involves a comparative analysis of specific cases of conversion of Orthodox communities to Greek Catholicism (and vice versa) within the dioceses of the Patriarchate of Antioch (Latakia, Zahle, Tripoli, and others). Drawing on unpublished archival materials, consular documentation, and the testimonies of Russian orientalists (Archimandrite Porphyrius (Uspensky), A.E. Krymsky), the author establishes a typology of motives underlying the Unia-related conversions. Among the dominant factors were the desire to avoid Ottoman obligations (notably the bedel-i askeriye tax), the low material status of parish clergy, property disputes concerning the exploitation of waqf lands, and violations of canon law in the sphere of matrimony. For the first time in Russian historiography, significant attention is paid to the mechanism of relative deprivation as a factor contributing to conversion to Catholicism.

The thematic block concerning the contacts between the Roman See and the Orthodox East is concluded by an article by Mikhail V. Gratsianskiy, D. Sc. (History) and Senior Research Fellow at Lomonosov Moscow State University. It offers a critical analysis of the role of the Roman delegation at the Council of Ephesus in 449. The article proposes a fundamental reassessment of the traditional historiography, which has largely been based on the Roman version of events. The author argues that the conventional perception of the Council of 449 as the «Robber Council» originated from deliberately distorted reports submitted by the papal legates to justify their own conduct. The central thesis asserts that the Roman delegation’s failure to advance its position at the Ephesian council was due not only to the opposition of its president, Dioscorus of Alexandria, but also to the incompetence, bias, and bad faith of the papal legates themselves. They left Ephesus without authorization before the official close of the Council – an act amounting, in effect, to official misconduct. Upon their return to Rome, they disseminated false claims that they had been subjected to violence and threats by Dioscorus of Alexandria. This misinformation was accepted by Pope Leo and Pulcheria Augusta, and subsequently became the foundation for the annulment of the Council’s decisions and for its enduring designation as the «Robber Council».

Dr. Gratsianskiy’s study offers a conceptual framework for understanding how the failure of a diplomatic mission could be transformed into an official narrative of violence and heresy, thereby demonstrating that the subsequent condemnation of the Council of 449 and of Dioscorus of Alexandria was, to a significant extent, based on politically motivated distortion of facts. The work deepens our understanding of the limited actual influence of the Roman See within the Eastern Empire in the mid-fifth century, particularly in the absence of the personal participation of the Pope.

The section devoted to the Western advance upon the East comprises studies that address its two principal manifestations: overt military pressure and the subtler infiltration of European ideas. The first of these questions is the focus of the article by Taras Yu. Kobishchanov, which examines a particularly important yet hitherto insufficiently studied aspect of Napoleon Bonaparte’s Eastern Campaign – namely, the reaction of the Christian population of Greater Syria to the French intervention of 1798–1801.

The scholar successfully introduces and compares a broad range of narrative sources – Christian chronicles of various confessional traditions (Maronite, Orthodox, Greek Catholic), European consular reports, as well as Ottoman administrative materials, including documents from the Jerusalem Sharia court. This approach ensures a polyphonic presentation and guards against interpretive one-sidedness. The high degree of historical contextualization achieved by the author merits special commendation, as it elucidates the unique situations in Beirut, Palestine, and Aleppo.

The key contribution of the study lies in substantiating the thesis of the ambivalent attitude of Syrian Christians toward the French intervention, revealing social and ideological divisions within the communities. The author demonstrates that the outwardly humble ecclesiastical elites – fearful for their privileges and for the religious status quo – perceived French republican ideology as «heresy», horrified by the prospect of a «tree of liberty» growing on the site of Christ’s suffering, whereas the common people and petty traders regarded the French as a potential source of material gain, which they sometimes tapped into with success (for example, by selling alcohol to soldiers at five-to sixfold markups). The Ottoman authorities and Islamic religious leaders, who proclaimed jihad against the European invaders, sought to exempt Eastern Christians from reprisals. In this context, the most vulnerable group proved to be the berat holders – Christian dragomans and merchants affiliated with the French consulate. After the withdrawal of foreign troops, despite the apparent restoration of the former order, the French invasion acted as a catalyst for change within Syrian society. Although the intervention did not result in mass pogroms, it heightened interconfessional tension, and the Muslim population began to perceive Christians as potential collaborators of the Europeans. Dr. Kobishchanov’s work makes a significant contribution to our understanding of the genesis of the modern Middle East, recording the moment of crisis in the dhimmi status of Syrian Christians.

The cohesion of Western and Eastern cultural traditions is represented in the article «The Emergence of Syrian Patriotism in the 19th Century: the Case of Butrus al-Bustani and His Contemporaries» by Dmitry R. Zhantiev. The study of Syrian Christian intellectuals and their role in the formation of Syrian national consciousness is essential for understanding the processes of modernization within the Ottoman Empire during the era of the Tanzimat reforms (1839–1876). Particular emphasis is placed on the position of Beirut – the «Paris of the East» – as a center of missionary activity (which performed a Kulturträger function) and of literary and educational initiatives. The author examines manifestations of the idea of Syrian patriotism in the writings of al-Bustani and his Arabic-speaking Christian contemporaries under the influence of contacts with American Protestant missionaries, noting that the principal stimulus for its emergence was reflection on the fate of Christian communities in the aftermath of the events of 1860 in Mount Lebanon and Damascus.

Dr. Zhantiev convincingly argues that members of the new Christian intellectual elite directly borrowed European ideas of supra-confessional patriotism and enlightenment as means of overcoming communal isolation. A notable strength of the study lies in its detailed analysis of the socio-political and economic context of the period, including the Tanzimat reforms, the rise of Beirut as the «sea gate of Ottoman Syria», and the role of missionary educational institutions (both American Protestant and French Catholic) in shaping the Arabic-speaking elite. The periodical Nafīr Sūriyya («The Clarion of Syria»), published in 1860–1861, is rightly identified as the key source for understanding al-Bustani’s patriotic thought. From its pages, al-Bustani called for the replacement of «blind prejudices» with patriotism, concord, and unity, viewing an all-Syrian patriotism as the most effective means of overcoming inter-confessional strife. His use of the toponym Sūriyya («Syria») – unfamiliar to his contemporaries and substituted for the traditional Bilad al-Sham – indicates direct influence from Western European literature.

The main conclusion of the article, which has acquired renewed relevance in light of the current crisis in inter-confessional relations in Syria, is that the tragic events of 1860 served as the decisive catalyst for the crystallization of the idea of Syrian patriotism.

The section devoted to the influence of Russia on the cultural sphere of the Orthodox Levant opens with an article by Professor Souad Abou Rouss Slim of the University of Balamand (Tripoli, Lebanon). Dr. Slim’s study focuses on the significant impact of the schools of the Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society (IOPS) in the Middle East and their role in the process of Arabization of the Patriarchate of Antioch. The work’s extensive source base merits special attention. Among the sources are the memoirs of former students such as Mikhayil Nu‘aymeh and Georges Hanna, who emphasized the free and liberal character of Russian education, its accessibility to children from the poorest families, the absence of religious segregation, and the high level of Arabic-language instruction, which distinguished these schools from other missionary institutions. Of particular note is the role of Russian schools in providing access to education for girls. The study also cites the testimony of European missionaries, such as Martin Hartmann, who highly praised the effectiveness of IOPS educational policy, as well as the apprehensive reports of Catholic missions fearing the displacement of French influence by Russian activity. Also included are striking accounts by the Muslim sheikh and Arabic teacher Muhammad al-Tantawi, whose flowery odes to Russian emperors Nicholas I and Alexander II reflected an exceptionally positive image of Russia in the eyes of local communities.

This combination of sources enables the reconstruction of a multidimensional picture of the perception of Russian presence. Presenting extensive material on Russia’s multifaceted influence in the Levant, Dr. Slim demonstrates that Russian educational and political engagement acted as a catalyst for the cultural revival of Arab Orthodox communities and created a powerful counterweight to the threat of cultural and religious assimilation emanating from the West.

Complementing this thematic line is another study by Evgeny M. Kopot’, which offers a detailed reconstruction of the establishment of the network of Russian schools of the Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society in Beirut during 1887–1897 – a subject that has not previously been analyzed in historiography. The particular value of this work lies in its empirical foundation, based on materials from the Archive of Foreign Policy of the Russian Empire introduced into scholarly circulation for the first time. The main content of the article centers on the missionary and pedagogical activity of Maria A. Cherkasova, known among Beirut’s Orthodox Arabs as «Mama Moskobie». The study of this phenomenon reveals the complex and ambivalent character of Russia’s educational mission in the Orthodox East and invites a critical re-examination of the apologetic myths entrenched in later historiography. Maria Cherkasova’s continuous thirty-year teaching career in Beirut has no parallel in the history of the Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society and is unique in both scope and content. The author concludes that the successful and long-term development of the IOPS school network in Beirut was ensured not by systematic support from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or the Society’s leadership, but solely by Cherkasova’s personal energy, sincere faith, and self-sacrifice.

The traditional «Sources» section presents an annotated translation from Coptic of a sermon by Pisentius, Bishop of Coptos, prepared by Dr. Voytenko. Delivered on the feast day of Saint Onuphrius the Great, the sermon illuminates the moral condition of Christians in Upper Egypt at the beginning of the seventh century. The text is of considerable interest both linguistically and liturgically (in particular, it includes the Coptic translation of a deacon’s exclamation from the Liturgy of Saint Mark).

The issue concludes with a complete bibliography of the scholarly works of Professor Panchenko, compiled by E. Yu. Kovalskaya.

Alexey E. Titkov Editor-in-Chief of the Journal “Historical Reporter”..