After the declaration of the Union of Brest in 1596, it was precisely the Basilian monastic Order and its monks that initiated the ‘creative tension’ within the Ukrainian–Belarusian cultural sphere of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. They determined both the strategy and tactics of creating the ‘Ruthenian reality’, while helping the spiritual leadership play a crucial role in formulating the ‘strategy of absorption’ of the contemporaneous cultural codes offered by the Baroque and Catholic Enlightenment. Thanks to the parochial soul shepherding and the activities of the fraternities (book printing and organized schooling), the Basilian monastic Order gradually entered the socio-cultural realm of the Polish–Lithuanian Kingdom as an integral and simultaneously autonomous component that represented the unique confessional subculture Slavia Unita. Having at its disposal powerful spiritual, intellectual, and human potential, as well as sufficient material resources, the Basilian Fathers gained publicity. This level of socialization is attested to by the presence of Union-adhering monks in the ceremonies that were observed in cities, towns, and villages, where the monks participated in numerous processions and celebrations and organized public ceremonies.

When describing the internal structure of the monastic community within the cloisters’ walls, one has to understand that the life of the Basilian monastic Order as an institution was based on prayer and a system of worship that was externally represented through monastic charters. In other words, a monastery is, first and foremost, a community of praying monks.[1] As Father Dr. Porfyrii Pidruchnyi from Rome accurately observed, monastic rules represent a ‘living tradition of the monastic life that is founded on the teachings of the holy fathers’, and they rely on both an ‘order of worship that remains the same in all monasteries’, as well as ‘the living word of the prior’.[2]

The initial form of the monastic organization in Kyiv Metropolitan archdiocese was anachoresis, which is seclusion and eremitism combined with strict ascetic practices, such as elimination of meat from one’s diet, strict fasting, etc. Pastoral and educational activities were not characteristic of Eastern monasticism, which is why the impact of monks on social life was limited to teaching by the example of spiritual deeds, as well as spiritual tutelage over those who came to the monastery. The newly founded Basilian Order, on the contrary, was focused on missionary and pastoral activities within society.[3] Yosyf’s (Veliamyn Rutsʹkyi) reform of 1617 introduced the Union Church to the communal form of monastic life, or koinonia. Implicitly, this particular model of Basilian piety emphasized the communal life of monks, and it combined the ascetic spirituality of Eastern monasticism with openness to the Commonwealth and its society. One had to be ready for active soul shepherding and for cultural, educational, and missionary work grounded on ideals borrowed from Western Latin forms of monastic life, such as those propagated by Jesuits and, in part, Discalced Carmelites.

With the founding of the Basilian Order, some ground-breaking changes took place in the self-organization of Eastern monasticism in the lands of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth and, in part, the Polish Kingdom. Initially, monasteries functioned autonomously, while the local bishop, or metropolitan, would be considered their real or formal ruler.[4] This means that the monasteries observed diocese laws. However, after the reform of 1617, the monastic communities that were united with the Roman Apostolic throne became centralized.[5] The Union-adhering monks came together during the first council of the priors who led the five monasteries, which took place in Nahorodowicze during July 20–26, 1617. Yosyf (Veliamyn Rutsʹkyi), Kyivan Metropolitan, became the leader of the monastic council. At his proposal, the Wilno Congregation of the Holy Trinity, which would soon become known as the Order of St. Basil the Great, was founded.[6] Having confirmed the status of the new monastic community through breve Exponi nobis (‘Exposed to Us’), signed by Pope Urban VIII, and dated August 20, 1631, Rutsʹkyi set out to revitalize Eastern monasticism in Kyiv Metropolitan archdiocese.[7] He determined that the main prior for all Basilians would be the protoarchimandrite and initially appointed this position for life, while spiritual and institutional leadership was reserved for the head of the Union Church, the Metropolitan, who also had the right to give his blessing for the choice of protoarchimandrite. By and large, the reform of 1617 provided for the assimilation of the experience of post-Trent Catholicism whilst preserving the main foundations of Kyivan Christianity, such as the legacy of worship, ascetic and penitential practices, etc.

One far-reaching consequence of these innovations was the gradual and steady unification of the monastic practices; another was the initiation of the Basilian Order’s active public life in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. In the 17^th–18^th centuries, the Order’s activities simultaneously unfolded in three areas:

Internal life of the monastic community within the cloisters’ walls.
Communicative practices of interaction within the Union Church and the Catholic world.
Socio-cultural engagement with the contemporaneous public space of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth.

Let us mention the following institutionalized forms of the communal integration of the Basilians:

monasteries as places where monks prayed for the salvation of souls;
monastic temples as centres of Christian worship and burial grounds for members of society;
ecclesiastical missions;
seminaries, collegia, dormitories, and other forms of education and upbringing;
publishing houses and libraries;
Basilian general capitula (assemblies of monks);
festive religious processions.

As of 1631 and shortly before the death of its founder, Yosyf (Rutsʹkyi), the Basilian Order consisted of 160 monks and 36 monasteries and boasted a well-organized community of novices in Bytenʹ monastery. In the decades that followed, the Order suffered a spiritual and institutional crisis that was caused, first and foremost, by the turbulent mid-17^th-century wars. Among the other causes, one should mention the monks’ tendencies toward Latinization, their reduced interest in the monastic vocation, and poorly regulated relations with the bishops of the Union Church. Right before the Khmelʹnytsʹkyi uprising and the Russo–Swedish Deluge, the Sviatotroitsʹk province of the Basilian monastic Order consisted of 90–100 monks in some 30 monasteries, half of which had the status of archimandrite chapters and covered the territories of the Great Duchy of Lithuania, Volynʹ, Kholmshchyna and, in part, Peremyshlʹ diocese.[8] However, in the last three decades of the 17^th century, the Basilians managed to overcome these internal struggles, strengthened their organization, and created a foundation for the rebirth of the Union Church. During the Nahorodowicze Assembly of 1686, an agreement (Nexus) was made between Kyivan Metropolitan and the Basilian Order, while the Apostolic Nunciature in Warsaw served as an intermediary. This document stipulated the limits of jurisdiction between the two sides. Concurrently, codification, rectification, and modernization of the Order’s legislation took place, including the ‘Rules’ of Rutsʹkyi and the constitution of the assembly.[9]

Shortly before the Synod of Zamość in 1720, the Basilian monastic Order consisted of 55 monasteries, 21 of which were active in the metropolitan diocese within the Grand Duchy of Lithuania; 14 – within the Kingdom of Poland; 10 – in the Brest part of the Volodymyr diocese, as well as Pinsk diocese; and another 10 – in Polotsk diocese.[10] In the early 18^th century, the chain of Basilian monasteries started to spread to the north of Wilno, covering Inflanty Voivodeship, or Polish Livonia, which is a territory of present-day Latvia. Two missions or residences of the Basilian Fathers were active in this region – in Ilūkste and Jakobstadt. They serviced the soul-shepherding requirements of the Catholics of Eastern rite, using, among other languages, Latvian and German.[11] Among all of the Union monasteries, only the one in Supraśl, together with its branches in Warsaw and Kuźnica, did not join the Basilian Order. This decision was dictated by the opinions of the donors, who were from the noble family of Chodkiewicz, as well as by the monastery’s status of ‘lavra’. The legislative status of Supraśl monastery as an autonomous community within the Union Church was defined in Concordia (1632), which placed the archimandrite chapter in immediate subordination to the Kyivan Metropolitan and maintained its old monastic Order.[12]

The Synod of Zamość resolved to consolidate all the Union-adhering monks of the Kyiv Metropolitan archdiocese into a single Basilian province.[13] After lengthy discussions, the monasteries from the territories of the newly converted dioceses, including Lutsʹk, Lviv, Peremyshlʹ, and Kyiv in Right-Bank Ukraine, agreed to adhere to this new format of monastic life. The local monastic traditions to the piety of the Basilian Order were partly adjusted, first by the Diocesan Synod of Peremyshlʹ of 1693, which introduced a superintendent’s position that was equal to that of a prior for all monasteries of the dominion,[14] and then by the Union Monastic Synod of 1711,[15] the rulings of which were never approved by the Roman curia. In 1739, those monasteries that entered a ‘new union’ in the late 17^th and early 18^th centuries created a crown (Ruthenian) province, known under the name of the Intercession of the Virgin. This new Crown province was led by a separate archimandrite,[16] which consisted of 130 monasteries and 700 monks, half of which were located in the Lviv and Peremyshlʹ dioceses.[17] At the demand of the Papal cathedra, crown (Polish) Basilians united with their Lithuanian brethren during the Dubno General Capitol of 1743. The Order became known as the Ruthenian Order of St. Basil the Great (Ordo Sancti Basilii Magni Ruthenorum) and comprised some 200 monasteries and 1,150 monks. This act of unification was confirmed the following year by the decree of Pope Benedictus XIV, Inter plures. In 1772, the united Basilian Order had 158 monasteries populated by 11,268 brethren, with 72 monasteries in the Lithuanian province that were inhabited by some 600 monks.[18]

After the first Partition of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Belarusian province, situated in the eastern part of the Commonwealth, was separated from Lithuania in 1780, while Halych province was singled out from Pokrov province (the latter one united the monastic communities of Lviv and Peremyshlʹ Greek–Catholic dioceses under the rule of the Habsburg monarchy). In Galicia, Basilian monasteries fell victim to the politics of Enlightened Absolutism, which led to the closure of the majority of the Union monasteries, in line with the policies of Josephinism: Austrian functionaries considered the monasteries not socially beneficial as they did not provide schools or hospitals (at the beginning of Josephinism, Halych province of the Basilian Order comprised 36 monasteries; in 1800, however, just over 20 remained).[19] While some Basilian monasteries within the Austrian monarchy at the end of the 18^th century suffered under the policies of European Enlightenment, in the Russian Empire, which after 1795 hosted the remaining Union monasteries, the Basilians were persecuted on confessional grounds. All monastic centres of the Basilian Order, as well as other structures of the Greek Union Church, were officially liquidated during the pseudo-Synod in Polotsk in 1839.[20]

Thanks to the participation of priors in monastic capitula (congregations, monastic synods), which took place every four years, the unity of the Basilian Order received foundational support. The capitula also reviewed internal issues of the Kyivan Union Metropolitan and, according to Father Porfyrii Pidruchnyi’s accurate observation, they were ‘similar to the semi-synods of the Unified Church and helped it to survive’.[21] During these gatherings of the Ruthenian monastic communities, the necessary decisions (rules, or constitutions)[22] that had a major impact on the unification of the internal life of the Basilian Order were approved. The other effective communication practice was visitation, or revision, which was carried out by archimandrites, protohegumens, or proto-consultors. These evaluation practices helped with the consolidation of the monastic communities and nurtured Basilian piety. Judging by the limited data we have, in the 18^th century at least 20 full-scale visitations of monasteries located in the Sviatotroitsʹk province took place.[23] One of the first successful revisions that spread to the vast majority of the monasteries was carried out by Lev (Kyshka) in 1704–1705, during the Great Northern War.[24] The same dynamics can be observed within Pokrov (crown) province, which in 1740–1780 saw at least five visitations by protohegumens, covering practically all the Basilian communities of the region.[25]

Following the directive of the Apostolic capital, in 1686 the Basilian Order put its legislation in order for the first time; this legal system was recognized until the Dubno General Capitol of 1743. Later on, protoarchimadrite Lev (Kyshka) produced a new collection of constitutions that covered 26 capitula from 1617–1719.[26] In the early 1730s, the well-known Basilian chronicler Ignacy Kulczyński used a handwritten codex from the Church of Saints Vergius and Bacchus in Rome as the basis of a full compendium of the general capitula that he was preparing.[27] Thus, the rules were codified between the end of the 17^th century and first three decades of the 18^th century; they had a substantial influence on the development of the particular canon law of the Union Church and the adjustment of the entire ethos of the Kyivan Christianity to the contemporaneous discourse of Catholic universalism.[28]

The monastic community of every Basilian monastery was usually led by a hegumen (prior, superior) or, in some cases, an archimandrite (abbot, or prior). The hegumen would be elected for a duration of four years, for a maximum of two terms. Other brethren in the community served in the roles of vicar (prior of the Basilian diocese), consultor (adviser), sexton (sacristan), preacher, confessor, sacellarius (provisor), pocillator (piwniczy), prefect, pharmacist, professor (docent), etc.[29] Since medieval times, some of the most influential and wealthy monasteries had the status of archdioceses, therefore the leading monastic centres were headed by an archimandrite. This lifetime-long position was held by a prior of noble background; he was recommended (‘presented’) by a monarch or ktitor (benefactor), with the blessings of the Kyivan Metropolitan but without agreement from the Basilian Order, not to mention the monks’ brethren.[30]

That is why the archimandrites, high-ranking clergy of the Union Church, were quite independent in their actions, and their activities did not always agree with the interests of the order or monasteries they headed. The dioceses’ connections to the ktitors (benefactors) complicated their standing even further, leading to many misunderstandings and arguments within the Basilian Order. This was caused by the fact that the nature of the relationships between the monasteries and their numerous benefactors was in many ways determined by the ‘right of patronage’ (ius patronatus).[31] Legally established supreme rights of secular patrons to property that had been donated to the Church, as well as the right to dispose of and govern such property, presented the magnates with a wide range of opportunities to interfere with the internal affairs of Basilian monasteries. At the same time, this state of affairs limited the contact between the Church and society.

As an attempt to avoid further misuse, during the capitula in Wilno (1667) and Żyrowicze (1675), the liquidation of all archdioceses within the Basilian Order was announced, and the Basilians even attained some success by enforcing this decision (in particular, the status of archdiocese was removed from Wilno monastery).[32] However, because of opposition from part of the Union episcopate, as well as Basilian elites and magnates, this decision was not fully put into action. Further instances of nominating inappropriate candidates for the archimandrite administration destabilized the steady rhythm of the monasteries’ devotional modus vivendi. Despite decisions taken at the Basilian capitulum that followed afterwards, specifically the one at Nahorodowicze in 1703, until the end of the 18^th century the royal court in Warsaw produced nomination charters for the archimandrite administrations.[33] The secular authorities were disinterested in the liquidation of administrations as this would make them lose influence in the process of appointing high-ranking Basilians. The other opponents of liquidation were among the multiple candidates for the position of archimandrite from within the circles of the Catholic gentry of both Latin and Eastern rites. These candidates were seduced by a prestigious church career and the abundant benefits. Despite the resolutions of the 1719 Nahorodowicze capitulum, which renewed the fourth Basilian sacrament not to seek any appointments within the church, the candidates in question, who were hungry for their slice of ‘spiritual bread’, were performing outright simony.[34]

According to the Basilian rules, each monastic community included two groups of novices: brethren-priests (hieromonks) and brethren-helpers (lay persons). The Order accepted Catholics of Latin and Slavic–Byzantine rites, regardless of their ethnic, geographical, or social background. This approach made it possible for the representatives of various ethnic groups and confessions to be included the Basilian milieu. At the same time, the Orthodox monks (schemamonks) were not accepted ‘unless somebody showed great promise of being beneficial for the [Basilian] Order’.[35] One was allowed to profess perpetual vows (złożyć profesię) at the age of sixteen (the upper age limit was mostly not fixed), corresponding with the practice of the post-Trident Catholic Church. According to the data provided by the Belarusian researcher Serhiy Klimov, in the second half of the 18^th century the median age of those accepted into Basilian monasteries was 23–26 years, with a distinct tendency toward younger novices.[36] Candidates for priesthood were expected to know how to read and write; once they had matured spiritually, the young novices took the perpetual vows of obedience, chastity, and poverty. Rotation between monasteries was a necessary requirement: every four years the monks had to change cloister, and this rule was usually strictly observed.[37]

Because the Basilian Order was open to the idea of serving the Church and society in the broad sense of this word, from the 1620s hieromonks were predominant within its midst (according to the Nahorodowicze capitulum of 1675, they vowed not to seek any high ranks within the Union Church),[38] while lay persons (who were mostly engaged in household tasks and were allowed reduced participation in the worship and liturgy) constituted a small part of the brethren-monks; in line with the Lauryshava capitulum of 1621, they were required to never seek priesthood. As of 1773, the Lithuanian province of the Basilian Order consisted of 2.8% of lay persons but almost 72% of monks.[39] A similar situation was observed in Pokrov province, particularly in Peremyshlʹ diocese, where, in the six monasteries and four residences, hieromonks constituted two thirds of all monks, who were recruited from the milieu of small gentry and middle-class families, with a noticeably increasing number of representatives of peasantry.[40]

During the 17^th century and (to some extent) the 18^th century, the institutional and spiritual centre of not only the Basilian Order but also the Union Church in its entirety was the monastery complex on Sviatotroitsʹk mount in Wilno.[41] Here, the codification of the Eastern rite Catholics’ experience of unity with Rome took place. The new ideal of monastic piety – with its distinctive spirituality that included both Eastern ascetic practices and Latin institutionalized monasticism – had formed here as well. Having joined the elite ecclesiastical circles of Kyiv Metropolitan archdiocese, the Wilno Basilians for a long time determined the Union Church’s strategy and tactics for the reception of contemporaneous cultural codes. The arrival at Sviatotroitsʹk monastery of the energetic Yosyf (Veliamyn Rutsʹky), a former Calvinist brilliantly educated in the West, as well as charismatic Yosafat (Kuntsevych), who laid the foundations for the spiritual renewal of the Union Church monastic community, enabled the Ruthenian monks to unite the Basilian Order. From that moment until the mid-18^th century, Sviatotroitsʹk monastery functioned as a ‘seminary’ for the entire Kyiv Metropolitan archdiocese. Almost half of Wilno archimandrites and hegumens later became bishops and metropolitans, and most of them occupied leading positions within the Order. It was in Wilno that the ethno-confessional identity Slavia Unita started taking shape, and it was from here that, thanks to the efforts of the local Basilians, the ritual and socio-cultural practices of the Union-adhering Ruthenians spread to all territories of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth.

Concurrently, in the mid-18^th century the influence of the Basilian Order on the internal life of the Union Church started to decrease. As a result of the administrative reform that transformed the institutional-representative model of diocese governing (via appointing the Basilians to key positions) into a personal-elective one (via creating competitive recruitment for the best representatives of secular clergy), the majority of hieromonks were removed from the high-ranking church governance and the wealthy benefice. These changes were especially full of strife in Lviv and Peremyshlʹ dioceses, where in 1740–1780 a number of legal disputes took place between the metropolitans and secular clergy on one hand, and the Basilians on the other. The disputed matters included the right of ownership to the monasteries and cathedrals, privileges, leading positions in the diocese kliroi-capitula and other institutions of the metropolitan courts, as well as soul-shepherding within the cloisters that had the status of parishes.[42]

Founding Fathers of the Basilian Order:

Yosyf (Veliamyn Rutsʹky) and Yosafat (Kuntsevych)

Two figures played a special role in the history of the Basilian Order and without doubt can be considered the founding fathers of this union. We are talking here about the talented, energetic, and well-educated Yosyf (his secular name was Ivan) Veliamyn Rutsʹky (1574–1637),[43] as well as Yosafat (known as Ivan in the secular world) Kuntsevych, a man deeply devoted to prayer, monastic asceticism and imitatio Christi. They were drawn together by friendship, ideals, dedication to the Union, the shared experiences of the monastic calling, the overcoming of hardships, and decisive courage when advocating for the dignitas of Ruthenian Catholicism. Even though their social background and experiences differed, their personalities complemented one another due to their special charisma and personal resolve to sacrifice their own careers in the name of the common good. Rutsʹky and Kuntsevych became the founding fathers of the Basilian Order and, to some extent, of the entire Ruthenian–Belarusian Union Church; they also educated its first ecclesiastic elite.

Yosyf (Rutsʹky) originated from the Veliamyns, a noble family of Tatar background that had been known in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth since the late 15^th century.[44] His parents were Calvinists; Yosyf, however, having been baptized by an Orthodox priest under the influence of Jesuits, converted at a young age to Catholicism. During his studies at the Pontifical Greek College of St. Athanasius in Rome, Rutsʹky discovered his calling for the monastic life and even considered joining the Society of Jesus. Nevertheless, at the insistence of the Holy Father he decided to accept the Eastern rite. The Hagiography of Yosyf Veliamyn Rutsʹky (Vita Josephi Velamini Rutski (Rutscii)), compiled by one of Yosyf’s students, Rafail (Korsak) in 1640, reveals the extremely rich spiritual life and organizational activity of the future Kyivan Metropolitan.[45] Rutsʹky’s missionary trip to Moscow in 1605–1606 as part of the pontific mission of Discalced Carmelites was an important phase of his evolution, as were his conversations with Pope Paul V and Roman cardinals in the summer of 1606 regarding the conversion of the Eastern Slavic lands. Upon his return to Kyiv Metropolitan archdiocese in September 1607, Ivan Rutsʹky entered the novitiate of the Holy Trinity monastery in Wilno, accepted the monk’s cassock and the name of Yosyf, and not long after completed his perpetual vows and bestowed his family estate Ruta upon the monastery. In 1608, Rutsʹky became a hieromonk, and the following year he was appointed as the archimandrite and headed the monastic community in Wilno.

As a young prior, Rutsʹky stood out not only with his organizational talent but also his personal virtues, which attracted middle-class Ruthenians, Eastern rite clergy, and generous benefactors. It was he who used prayers, personal asceticism, and humility to lay down the foundations of the Basilian virtues; moreover, following St. Basil’s rules, he brought up the first generation of young Union-adhering monks in the Holy Trinity monastery, as well as in the neighbouring cloisters in Bytenʹ, Żyrowicze, Minsʹk, and Nahorodowicze (there was an unsuccessful attempt to replicate this experience in Kyiv, specifically in Vydubychi monastery).[46] Rutsʹky initiated a strict monastic charter in all these cloisters, thus attracting the most-devoted young men who wanted to dedicate their lives to God:

At the monastery, Rutsʹky introduced daily contemplations and scrutiny of conscience. He dutifully observed the canon rules according to the Eastern rite, partook in modest communal meals, and took part in recreational activities. Archimandrite Yosyf lectured on the history of Church, taught Latin, Greek, and Old Church Slavonic languages, and taught the monks perfection in religious matters in accordance with St. Basil’s admonitions. The Liturgy of the Hours was held daily at the monastery so that the novices could take communion. The Holy Trinity Church was open to those faithful who wished to partake in the Holy Sacraments. Young monks continued their spiritual and theological training at the Metropolitan Seminary, while the most gifted ones studied at Wilno Jesuit Academy or went to study abroad, mainly to pontifical colleges.[47]

In his two treatises, Account by a Certain Ruthenian Regarding Reformation of the Eastern Rite (Discursus, 1606) and Union Programme (Programma Unionis, 1606),[48] Yosyf Rutsʹky offered his own programme for the renewal of the ‘Ruthenian faith’ by means of reforming Eastern monasticism. Having diagnosed as weary the contemporaneous state of the Union Church (‘our unhappiness stems from two reasons: a lack of education for our leaders, and a lack of perfection and holiness’[49]), Rutsʹky proposed reorganizing the monastic community in Kyiv Metropolitan archdiocese to follow the format of Western monastic orders. As a result of such a reform, well-educated and saintly monks would emerge – ‘confessors and good preachers’; new educational institutions would ‘produce good priests and worthy statesmen’. All in all, the most important ecclesiastical governing bodies would be headed by well-trained monks with solid theological education. Rutsʹky had high hopes for Jesuits and Discalced Carmelites – well-trained monks who were ready to accept the Eastern rite and the local monastic practices – and appealed to have them sent to Kyiv Metropolitan archdiocese. The future prospects included the initiation of the missionary work in the East, in Muscovy state, by the reinvigorated Union-adhering monastic communities.

Yosyf (Rutsʹky) narrated the spiritual and organizational principals of the Basilian monasticism in his General Rules, Specific Rules, and Capitular Charters,[50] as well as Rules for the Bishops (1636).[51] These texts followed the format of the monastic charters of St. Basil the Great, as well as the Latin legal system, foremost the Society of Jesus’ Rules. Rutsʹky’s monastic teachings were approved by Rome in 1624 and until this day remain the foundation for the Order of St. Basil’s activities in Ukraine and the world.[52] As Kyivan Metropolitan in 1613–1637, Yosyf (Rutsʹky) introduced three more capitula in Ruty (1623), Lauryshava (1626), and Wilno (1636),[53] thus setting an example to follow and creating the foundation for the Basilian legislation.

The model for the Basilian monasticism that was formulated by Rutsʹky entailed a union of the Eastern Byzantine and Western Latin piety: the ascetic contemplative life of the Orthodox priests and active cultural, religious, and social engagement with contemporaneous society, which was characteristic of the Catholic Orders and congregations (Jesuits in particular). The reform of Yosyf (Rutsʹky) caused an actual upheaval in the activities of the Union-adhering monks that, in a manner of saying, made them face the world. It seems that only the ‘reverend ladies’ or the Basilian Sisters continued to observe the traditional setup of monastic life, serving God according to the Basilian rules compiled by Rutsʹky.[54] However, since many of them came from elite backgrounds, even the nuns maintained sufficiently intense socio-economic and cultural-educational relationships with the secular world.

The other founding father of the Basilian Order, St. Yosafat (Kuntsevych),[55] was a man of ‘many worlds’ of the early modern Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. He was probably born in the Ukrainian town of Volodymyr in Volhynia, spending his youth and the formative years of his monastic life in Lithuanian Wilno; his archimandrite service took place in Belarusian Polotsk; his relics remained in Biała Podlaska, Poland for quite some time and are now kept at St. Peter’s Basilica in the Vatican, Rome. Kuntsevych was rooted in the contemporaneous Ruthenian culture; he did not know any Latin, and as a rule he used Polish in public discourse; neither did he receive proper education, theological or otherwise. Despite that, he was well versed in the Holy Bible, the foundations of faith, and the teachings of the Church Fathers. First and foremost, Ivan (Yosafat) was a man of prayer who was deeply engaged with spiritual asceticism. As the beatification processes of 1628 and 1637 testify, he imparted incredible influence on Latin, Union, and Orthodox monks alike.[56]

In 1604, the young Kuntsevych joined the Wilno Holy Trinity monastery and became a living icon, serving as a model for the righteous life of the Eastern monk-anchorite within the Union Church. He spent most of his time in vigils, wore a sackcloth at all times, engaged in self-flagellation, limited his food and drink, and showed a distinct affinity with Christian ascetism. He was provided with spiritual nourishment by hagiographies and the legacy of Church Fathers, as well as Kyivan–Ruthenian literature such as Pechersʹky Paterikon, Sermon on Law and Grace by Metropolitan Hilarion, chronicles, and other texts.[57] His contemporaries attributed Kuntsevych’s charismatic influence on Wilno monks and the entire Ruthenian ethno-confessional community to his virtuous life as a monk and priest. Together with Yosyf (Rutsʹky), he initiated a hermitic and communal form of monastic life, known as koinonia, in Kyiv Union Metropolitan archdiocese:

The servant of God was used to rising before the others…Upon entering the church, he always served [Midnight Office] and sang [Prime]. The voice that God graced him with was angelic; he had an utmost admiration for singing… Having finished [Prime], he would immediately leave the monastery, and the same would happen after dinner; he visited the houses of schismatics, strengthened their faith, and encouraged them to go to Holy Confession. Otherwise, he would stop by the hospital at the Holy Trinity monastery and serve the sick in various manners: kiss their feet, give them a bath, move them from one place to another, adjust their beds, and feed them. If he could not be found at the monastery or the church, he would be there [at the hospital]. At times, they said that a church or a hospital served as his cell.[58]

Thanks to the personal testimony of Kuntsevych and his brethren, whom he brought up in the novitiate, a renewal of the spiritual (in part, devotional), liturgical, and monastic life took place in Wilno, which was the heart of the young Union Church at the time. Gradually, these new religious practices spread to the other Ruthenian Union centres of Kyiv Metropolitan archdiocese (parishes, monasteries, and fraternities), thus providing an example to follow and facilitating the forming of Slavia Unita and the appearance of the Basilian Order.

Concurrently, as hegumen and archimandrite of Wilno monastery, and later as archbishop of Polotsk (1618–1623), Yosafat (Kuntsevych) displayed determination and pertinacity with the questions of doctrine, advocating for the Union of Brest and the conversion of the Orthodox monks, who called him a ‘soul snatcher’, to Ruthenian Catholicism. The methods used by Kuntsevych to subordinate the Ruthenians to his ecclesiastical jurisdiction in Vitebsk and Polotsk voivodeships provoked not only resistance within the Orthodox milieu but also rejection by Catholics dedicated to the Union, such as the Grand Chancellor of Lithuania Lew Sapieha (1557–1633).[59]

After the murder of Yosafat (Kuntsevych) by a crowd of middle-class city dwellers in Wilno on November 12, 1623, his cult formed; it was supported and promoted mostly in the Basilian milieu. The veneration of this martyr fit ideally with the new Catholic identity of the Union Ruthenia, personifying its rootedness in the Eastern Christian (Kyivan) tradition, shaping its own historical-ecclesiastical memory, demonstrating the political loyalty of the Union-adhering population to the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, and testifying to the elite status of the Basilian monks in the public sphere of the contemporaneous society. Not long after the martyrdom of the Polotsk archbishop and at the initiative of Kyivan Metropolitan Yosyf (Rutsʹky), the Rome curia started the beatification process (the sessions of the special commission took place in 1628 and 1637[60]), which led to Yosafat (Kuntsevych) being endowed with the status of ‘blessed one’ by Pope Urban VIII in 1642. In 1867, he was also pronounced a saint of the Catholic Church.[61]

King and Grand Duke Władysław IV Vasa (1632–1648)[62] took part in the festive reception of the papal bull which proclaimed Kuntsevych the ‘blessed one’; the ceremony took place in Wilno, which at that time was the capital of the Metropolitan archdiocese of Kyiv and all Rus’. In the description of the festivities put together in 1642 by the Jesuit Stanislaw Rostowski (Decretum excepit insignis Vilnae celebritas, praesente Rege Vladislao), the nationwide character of this celebration was emphasized:

After festive fireworks and a military parade in the suburbs, finely dressed warriors and other participants set off from the Cathedral, walking in three columns. In one column marched those who represented the troops of Jehoshaphat, the king of Judah from the Old Testament; the second column apparently portrayed the army of the Indian prince Josaphat[63]; the third column consisted of academy members and was followed by a triumphal carriage decorated with the icon of the holy martyr, as well as musical accompaniment (there was a children’s choir here, some singing, recitation, trumpets, etc.). When the procession reached the triumphal gates near the Holy Trinity Church, the entire group of Basilian monks walked toward it with ‘Greek’ prayer melodies rising from their lips (Graecanicis cantibus excipiens). By the altar displaying the image of Kuntsevych, the rector of the academy served the Divine Liturgy, during which the martyr was venerated in Polish by Father Honchel. Father Albert Ceciszewski preached during the evening sermon, while one more sermon was delivered in Latin.[64]

In the papal breve, the commemoration of Kuntsevych was scheduled for November 12^th (November 2^nd by the Julian calendar, the day of his martyrdom); in the Metropolitan archdiocese of Kyiv, however, in the last quarter of the 17^th century, the September honouring of the blessed one gained in popularity. This is why, in 1670, in response to the request of Metropolitan Cyprian (Żochowski), the Sacred Congregation of Rites authorized the celebration date to be moved from November 12^th to September 26^th. This decision was partially practical in that it allowed the pilgrims to travel to the sepulchre of Yosafat at St. Sophia’s Archcathedral in Polotsk. Later on, Żochowski added this festival as an obligatory liturgical celebration to the Missal that he had printed in 1692, thereby spreading its canonical legitimacy to the entire Ruthenian Church. As September 26^th (September 16^th by the Julian calendar) would often fall on a weekday, the Basilian capitulum of 1703 in Nahorodowicze agreed to hold the celebration on the nearest Sunday.[65] The Volodymyr Diocese Union of 1715, summoned by Bishop Lev (Kyshka), adjusted the martyr’s cult to local traditions, ordering ‘to celebrate the festive occasion of St. Yosafat on the first Sunday after September 27^th according to the new calendar’. The devotional practice of celebrating it on other days was also maintained ‘according to the custom’.[66]

Even though the cult of the Polotsk holy martyr did not essentially influence the territorial spread of the Union in the Metropolitan archdiocese of Kyiv, it nevertheless become a basic constituent of the new Ruthenian–Catholic identity among laymen, clergy, and nobles in the first quarter of the 17^th century, including those adhering to the Latin rite.[67] This process was largely facilitated by the contemporaneous hagiography and eulogic literature which started to appear en masse within the Catholic intellectual milieu of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth and of Rome. The first such work was Relatio, a hagiography of Kuntsevych, published in 1624 by Illia (Morokhovsky) and Yosyf (Rutsʹky). The following year saw the funeral sermon delivered by Lev (Krevza) after the martyr’s death.[68] The popularization of Kuntsevych’s spiritual personality was further supported by Jesuit Albert Wijuk Kojałowicz’s lengthy Miscellanea regarding the State of the Church in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (1650),[69] as well as a 1675 treatise by Andrzej Młodzianowski, Symbolic Images of Life and Death of the Blessed Yosafat the Martyr (Icones symbolice vitae et mortis B. Josaphat martyris); the latter is a Baroque masterpiece of contemporaneous literature.[70] Within the Union church, sacralization of the Polotsk holy martyr was confirmed with the 1665 publication in Rome of a fundamental work by Chełmno bishop and protoarchimandrite of the Basilian Order, Jakub (Susza), The Flow of Life and the Martyrdom of the Blessed Yosafat Kuntsevych (Cursus vitae, et certamen martyrii, B. Iosaphat Kuncevicii), as well as the emergence of iconography surrounding the saint.

After the Deluge in the middle of the 17^th century, the first public veneration of Yosafat (Kuntsevych) took place in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth in the fall of 1667.[71] Well-attended ceremonies were organized that entailed the transportation of St. Yosafat’s relics from Żyrowicze monastery to Wilno and farther on to Polotsk. The main celebratory events took place on September 25^th in the capital of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, at the Cathedral of the Intercession of the Virgin, with the participation of Metropolitan Havryil (Kolenda), the Wilno Roman-Catholic bishop Aleksander-Kazimierz Sapieha (1667–1671), members of the Wilno Latin capitulum, numerous Lithuanian senators, and a large number of adherents of the Latin rite and the Union. From the Metropolitan archdiocese cathedral, the festive procession, consisting of soldiers, musicians, middle-class dwellers, nobles, and students, set off for the Holy Trinity Basilian church, which for a long time hosted a side altar dedicated to Kuntsevych, and a celebratory Liturgy was held here.[72]

According to a Basilian protohegumen (provincial prior), during the veneration of Kuntsevych’s relics ‘numerous schismatics kept arriving, unable to hold back their tears, particularly during the sermon by the Basilian monk, Father [Yosyf] Grodzinski, Polotsk archimandrite, who delivered a sermon on the third day. Next, liturgies were held for the entire week in Wilno as a testimony to Catholic piety, and many schismatics started contemplating conversion’.[73] As observed by one of the participants of the festivities, the Vitebsk voivode Jan-Antoni Chrapowitzki, the body of St. Yosafat remained unharmed and imperishable while in the open casket-hearse, and this alone could be seen as a confirmation of the superiority of the Holy Union over Orthodox Christianity.[74]

Although, from the 18th century onward, for various reasons the memory of the holy martyr did not evolve into a powerful cult within the Union and within its successor, the Greek–Catholic Church, the personality of Kuntsevych became one of the foundations of Kyivan Basilian identity. Since 1931, the community has officially held his name: the Basilian Order of St. Yosafat.

Persecutions of the Catholic Faith

The events of the Khmelnytsky Uprising and the Russo–Swedish Deluge of 1648–1667 turned out to be a major test for the Basilian Order and the entire Union Church. As we know, the Cossack Uprising chose religious slogans to be the key ones in their programme, which invariably included points demanding the liquidation of the Union (starting with the Treaty of Zboriv in 1649) and provided privileges for the Kyivan Orthodox Metropolitan Archdiocese.[75] This exclusionist policy of the Ukrainian Hetmanate in regards to Ruthenian Catholics comes across distinctly in the 1658 Treaty of Hadiach, established between Herman Ivan Vyhovsʹky (1657–1659) and royal commissaries; this Treaty envisioned the emergence of the ‘Grand Duchy of Ruthenia’ and the transformation of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth into a confederation of the three peoples.[76] Even though the Treaty supported religious tolerance towards Ruthenians of both ecclesiastic jurisdictions, the freedom to publicly profess one’s faith (‘nabożenstwo’) and to serve the church rites, ‘poki język narodu Ruskiego zasięga,’[77] in practice it allowed for the liquidation of the Union in three Ukrainian voivodeships: Bratslav, Kyiv, and Chernihiv.

The Cossack-Peasant uprising had a direct impact on the Basilian Order, with far-reaching consequences. Already by the spring of 1648 and up until his death in exile in Podlachia in 1655, the protoarchimandrite of the Basilian Order and Kyivan Metropolitan Antoni (Sielawa, 1640–1655) was very ill and practically incapacitated. That is why, at the beginning of the war, the Order lacked centralized governance, a fact that complicated communication between the monasteries, as well as monks’ adjustment to the new, radical circumstances of living in a situation of warfare and systematic violence. Sielawa summoned the General capitulum only in June of 1650 to Wilno, the capital of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, in order to ‘confer on the matter of [Ruthenian] rite and the Holy Union, which are being greatly violated by the schismatics, whom one can hardly withstand’ (‘abyschmy radzili de ritu et unione sancta, która maximam patit violentiam a schismate, et vix subsistere potest’).[78] As an attempt to prevent the monks from being pulled into the military conflict and keep them from converting to the Latin rite, the Wilno capitulum of 1650 prohibited Basilians from storing any cold steel or firearms in their cells, using Roman missals during the Liturgy, or introducing any kind of innovations in the rituals. However, as is testified by the materials of the following General capitulum in Minsk (1652),[79] the leadership could prevent neither disorganization within the Order, nor its persecution.

With its destructive impact, the Khmelnytsky Uprising advanced to the monasteries and Ruthenian Catholic churches primarily located in Volhynia, Polisia, and Kholmshchyna, where the Union gained widespread acceptance and built up an organizational chain and the support of the local elites.[80] Furthermore, with the beginning of the Deluge, the Basilian shrines suffered devastation at the hands of the Muscovite army, the Protestant troops of Semyhorod Kingdom and Sweden, and the soldiers of the royal army, who marched through the monasteries’ estates or stopped at military stations, plundering the locals and monks along the way. The fragmentary sources do not allow us to recreate a full picture of the massive persecution of Union-adhering monks and the destruction of monasteries, soul-shepherding communities, and educational and beneficent institutions and estates. However, even the fragmentary character of the testimonies points to the tragic and catastrophic nature of the situation that the Basilian Order found itself in.

According to the report by bishop Jakub (Susza) ‘De laboribus unitorum’, in 1649 on the territories of the Chełmno diocese, the Cossacks confiscated the Basilian monastery, and hieromonks were forced to serve the liturgies in secret in an abandoned Roman Catholic chapel.[81] The Minsk Union Seminary, which opened in 1650 after a long period of preparations (between five and twenty students from the secular and monastic milieu studied here), was forced to cease its operations shortly thereafter. In mid-1654, the Seminary buildings, together with the estate, were completely destroyed by Muscovite troops, and this educational institution was subsequently not able to fully recover. The rector of Minsk Seminary, Basilian Father Benedykt (Terlecki), wrote in despair in one of his letters to the Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith in 1657, saying that ‘against us, Ruthenians, united with the Holy Roman Church, are waging war’, and that almost all Union monasteries ‘are ruined because of the war, their estates seized’, and that some of the monks had perished, while others had been abandoned to their fate and were hardly surviving.[82] The Basilian nuns also suffered during the Khmelnytsky Uprising. In 1648, in Pinsk, the congregation headed by Yevfrosinia (Tryzna) refused the Cossacks’ demand to renounce the Union; their monastery and the church were burned down, however, and the nuns were forced to leave the town.[83]

Thanks to the research done by Mykhailo Dovbyshchenko, a historian from Kyiv, we are well informed about the persecution of the Union-adhering monks in Volhynia. Even though the data is general, filled with stereotypical idioms like ‘tyrannical death of many Union-adhering monks’ at the hands of the Cossacks, it points to the scorning and even the killing of said monks based on their confessional belonging. In particular, we are referring here to the events in Ostrih in March of 1649 and 1651, when Cossacks and Tatars invaded the town, bringing about a pogrom and a massacre, and to the capture of Kremenetsʹ in the fall of 1648. The local Union archpriest, Father Fedor Dubnytsʹky, managed to flee the town, while the other Union-adhering priest, Father Fedor Turyansky-Tursʹky, was first tortured by the Cossacks and then slashed to death with sabres. To benefit from this favourable situation, the Orthodox pastor Father Oleksandr Denysko occupied Ruthenian churches in Kremenetsʹ (specifically, the cathedral of the Christ Resurrection, which was burned by the Cossacks) and sanctified them repeatedly, while some Union-adhering monks were even baptized for the second time,[84] which contradicted church canon.

A similar fate befell the Union monastery in Dermanʹ, which was plundered by the Cossacks, Tatars, and twice by the Swedes. A telling description of the events can be found in the monastery chronicle:

Roku 1648. Nastąpiła potym straszna z uniwersalną całej ojczyzny ruiną herszta Chmielnickiego rebelia, pod który czas od zuchwałego kozactwa zuchwałości, Dermański monaster zdawna w unii swiętey zostaiący pofturnie został spustoszony, ludzie od tatarow wybrani, zakonnicy wszyscy rozproszeni po lasach y paryach tułac się musieli, nie tylko cerkiewne arygentarye y ornamęta, ale nawet y dokumenta gdzie mozna chowaiąc monasterne ktore przez lat siedm rok po rok trwaiąc nieustannie hostilittes niesłusznie uzurpowanych dobr sobie monasternych in spatio tego czasu ułuzerdziły possessią [...]. Jeszcze się y na to nie skączyło gdy z miłowania Boga wrędzy głodzic y mizeryi biedni czekając zakąnnicy: aż nowa z pułnocy niespodziane takze. Roku 1655 od szwiedzkiey potencyi nastąpiła burza pod ktury czas trzecie znowu nastało Dermanskiego monastera spustoszenie y w czym kozacka przepusciła złosc w tym szwedzkie dopełniło lepiey okrucięstwo ozdoby cerkiewne zabrane utracilismy do reszty mizerni rozproszeni zakonnicy. Dobra cięzkiemi obciężone kontrybuciami ktorym niepodobną było wystarczyc dla zrujnowania, dobr przez kozaki y tatary niesłychanego, kture do takich juz przyszli byli angustyc przez te trzy lata woyny szwedzkich ze się w nich ledwie kylka osob dusz żyjących znaydowało w takowey tedy pałaięcego marca zawierusie nie mozna się było zadnym sposobem o niesłuszne w dobra wdarcie y sprawiedliwey upomniec krzywdzie.[85]

A wealthy and influential Basilian archdiocese of St. Nikolas in Zhydychyn,[86] which was plundered by the Cossacks and Tatars in 1648, became another victim of the Khmelnytsky Uprising. In this particular case, the records emphasize not only economic but also religious motivation behind the attack on the Union monastery, which was carried out ‘z nienawiści ku jedności świętej.’ Even the newly appointed Orthodox archimandrite of the monastery, Father Oleksandr Mokosii Denysko, later described the events as a ‘fervent and frenzied Cossack rebellion.’[87] Other Union monasteries in Volhynia suffered concurrently; for instance, the convent in Rozvazh and the Holy Trinity monastery in Shums’k were burned down by the Cossacks.

In the aforementioned report to Rome, De laboribus unitorum, Prior Jakub Susza describes the impact of the Khmelnytsky Uprising and the Russo–Swedish Deluge in apocalyptic terms, paying particular attention to the numerous victims among Union monks at the time: ‘Numerous monasteries have been burned down together with churches; secular priests, monks, even laymen have been wounded, robbed, or killed. We know for certain that forty Union-adhering monks have been killed because of the holy Union.’[88] Similar information can be found in a letter of the Basilian protohegumen Benedykt Terlecki, who was elected in 1656; he confessed his helplessness in these tragic circumstances: ‘How can I possibly comfort the Order when monasteries, churches, and altars have been burned down or destroyed […], when some monks have been killed, while others are wasting away as beggars.’[89] The martyrdom of Union-adhering monks was personified in the Hagiography of Basilians, compiled by Lev Kyshka in the late 17^th century. He cites numerous examples of the demise of Basilian hieromonks, naming each one and regarding them as confessors of Catholicism and the Holy Union.[90]

The tragic nature of the entire situation in which the Basilian Order found itself at the end of the 1640s and throughout the 1650s is confirmed by the dramatic resolution approved at the Bytenʹ capitulum of 1657, which called upon all the monks ‘to hold on to the Catholic faith steadfastly, even if they have to let go of the monasteries, estates, and their own rites, or even leave their motherland or sacrifice their lives’ (‘przy wierze świętej katholickiej stać, by przyszło od monastyrów, od dóbr y ab ipso ritu odpadać, a na ostatek a patria exulare et vita privari’).[91] The Orthodox and Union populations alike were well aware of the fratricidal nature of the opposition between ‘Ruthenia and Rusʹ’, which is why, even at the climax of the Khmelnytsky Uprising, both sides of the conflict were trying to reach a temporary agreement, or at least soften the clashes on a personal level. One rare example of such a dialogue was the attempts of the Basilian Union bishop from Chełmno, Jakub Susza, to establish contact with Herman Ivan Vyhovsky (1657–1659) and Pavlo Teteria (1663–1665). In one of his letters that is known to researchers, Susza even ventured to convince Vyhovsky to unite with the Roman throne.[92] At the time, however, it was practically impossible to come to a mutual understanding with the Cossacks; only the Treaty of Andrusovo of 1667 between the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Muscovy Tsardom ceased the persecution of the Basilian Order and the entire Union Church for a quarter of a century.

The Basilians, with their clearly Catholic Union-oriented identity, as well as cultural and social integration in the multiconfessional and multi-ethnic community of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, provoked an existential lack of acceptance from the Muscovian Orthodoxy as well as the entire political system of the Romanov state. Having survived the dramatic events of the Khmelnytsky Uprising and the Deluge of the mid-17^th century, which were accompanied by the destruction of monasteries and property and massive persecutions and martyrdom of many monks, the Basilian Order faced a new threat a few decades later: Russian presence in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, in the role of a formal ally during the Northern War of 1700–1721 alongside the Swedish Empire of Charles XII. During the first decade of the 18^th century, the Tsarist army was situated in contemporary Belarus and Lithuania, where, together with other troops, it plundered the churches, monasteries, and estates of the Union Church and persecuted its clergy and monks.[93]

In Wilno, invaded in early 1705 by a Russian army unit a few thousand strong and headed by Peter I, Union-adherent monks did not suffer from direct oppression.[94] In mid-March the representatives of aristocracy and senators, as well as Wilno bishop and the Grand Chancellor Carol Radziwiłł, arrived in the city for the regular meeting of the Lithuanian Tribunal. Having gathered at Ogiński Palace, they demanded that Field Marshal Sheremetyev withdraw the Muscovy troops from the city and refused to continue with the Tribunal sessions with the foreign army present.[95] Simultaneously, the protoarchimandrite of the Basilian Order Lev (Kyshka), who was in the capital of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth in early March, noted in his diary that ‘in Wilno, everyone was scared of the Swedes, and people were awaiting their own final demise in the event that the Muscovites, unable to defend themselves, would have to withdraw from Wilno and would be chased by the advancing Swedes.’[96]

In contrast to Wilno, in the other territories of the Commonwealth the Muscovy army was directly threatening monasteries and monks of the Basilian Order. When senators of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth attempted to intercede on behalf of the Bytenʹ and Żyrowicze monasteries to Prince Aleksandr Menshikov, the royal nobleman compared the Union-adhering monks ‘with dogs who are not even Calvinists, neither they are Lutherans, nor Roman Catholics.’[97] Some bishops of the Metropolitan archdiocese of Kyiv also suffered persecution at the hands of Russians. For instance, Tsar Peter I (1682–1725) raised personal accusations against Pinsk bishop Porfiriusz (Kulczycki, 1703–1716) and openly harassed Lutsʹk bishop Dionysius (Żabokrycki, 1695–1711). The latter one, having recklessly supported Stanisław Leszczyński, the candidate for the Commonwealth’s throne and a personal enemy of Peter I, was first imprisoned in 1706; he was later on taken to Moscow and then to Solovki, where he passed away as a martyr.[98]

The persecutions culminated with the well-known Polotsk Tragedy[99] in the summer of 1705, wherein the Tsar tortured to death several Basilians in Sofia Cathedral who had publicly professed their loyalty to Ruthenian Catholicism. Closely following these events, the Diarium Excidii Monasterii Polocensis Patrum Basilianorum cum Sancta Romana Ecclesia Unitorum, patrati a Serenissimo Moscoviae Duce, Anno praesenti 1705, die 11, et 12 Iulii (Diary of the Manslaughter Committed by the Muscovite Prince on July 11^th and 12^th of the Current Year, of the Basilian Fathers from Polotsk Monastery United with the Holy Roman Church) relays the entire tragedy and cruelty of this affair:

Niewidziany nigdy, ani słyszany od początku prześladowania Cerkwie Chrystusowey, (od Cesarzów, Królów i Panów Bałwochwalstwu służących, ani od Heretyków najgorszych) niepraktykowany, aż do tego 1705 roku, dnia 30 iunia podług starego kalendarza, sławny y wiekom następuiącym dziwny, Cerkwi Chrystusowey w Rusi, Litwie, i Polszce, jedność Świętą z Cerkwią Świętą Rzymską (jako wszystkich innych po całem świecie będących i mających z narodów jeszcze niewiernych) bydż, powszechną Mistrzynią i Matką, trzymającej, chwalebny, zakonowi S. Bazylego W[ielkiego] ozdobnya odszczepieństwu – Greko-Ruskiemu haniebny, sławny uczynek, Wielkiego Monarchi Ruskiego Piotra Alexiejewicza Cara Moskiewskiego, nie mądrego nabożeństwa, i błędliwey żarliwości niecny Experyment w roku 1705 dnia 30 Junia starego, a dnia jedynastego Jula nowego kalendarza solennie w cerkwi katedralney Połockiej S. Sophiey od godziny z południa szustey, odprawiony, według tey, ktorey mogłem mieć tak od swoich Braci Zakonników (zwłaszcza tegoż okrutnego postępku, pozostałych uczestników) iako też y od samych Moskiewskich ludzi (jako tam pobliższy w Witebsku rezydując) wiadomości dla pamiątki opiszę.

Kiedy pomieniony Piotr Alexiejewiez Car moskiewski za wiarę świętą z okazyey jedności z Cerkwią Świętą Rzymską, pozabijał okrutnie mordując czeterech różnemi jako się położy śmierciami, kapłanów, a piątego brata kleryka, po śmiertelnych razach, dla wiadomości też takowyeh tyrańskich akcii (o których nikt inny powiedzieć nie mógł) Pan Bog aż do dzisia dnia 28 Maja 1713 w życiu chowa.[100]

In reaction to the persecutions of the Union monks, Metropolitan Shlyubych-Zelensky desperately appealed to Rome and the Commonwealth monarch.[101] In his breve dated October 17, 1705, Pope Clement XI (1700–1721) declared his moral solidarity with Ruthenian Catholics, making an appeal not to shed the blood of ‘the Union’s sons’ nor ruin their churches.[102] The Roman pontiff also turned to August II, asking him to take care of the adherents of the Union.[103] In his frantic reports dated 1708, the primate of the Metropolitan archdiocese of Kyiv emphasized a threat ‘to the holy Union’ from the Russian army. As an example, bishop Lev mentioned the devastation inflicted upon the Basilian monasteries in Berezewcz and Minsk (where Field Marshal Count Boris Sheremetyev was stationed), as well as in the estates of Wilno Metropolitan archdiocese Cathedral and Pinsk Union diocese. These efforts indeed had a certain impact, and after the Polotsk Tragedy the political stance of Russia and its occupation army vis-à-vis Catholics of the Eastern rite changed, if only superficially, and became more flexible. Moreover, in November 1705 a tolerant privilege was issued for the Ruthenian Church united with Rome, warranting the personal freedom and immobility of the clergy’s property. There also appeared other kinds of ‘immunity charters’ to protect land ownership and individual Union shrines.[104]

Monasteries as a Locale of Christian Worship: Benefactors and Architectural Masterpieces of the Baroque Age

In the 17^th–18^th centuries, Basilian monasteries gradually started to self-integrate into the public sphere of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth by way of enhancing the reciprocal influence between society and these monastic communities. Concurrently, monasteries represented special sacred locales for nobles, middle-class dwellers, and peasants of various confessions; in these locations one could find examples of exalted spirituality, Christian perfection, and faithfulness to Christ visualized via the artistic ‘signs of the times’ characteristic of the Baroque[105] and the Enlightenment. The Divine Office, the ascetic practices of the monks, the daily prayers for a Grand Prince and a King, ktitors, and benefactors lent Basilian monasteries a sense of ‘belonging’ to the contemporaneous Baroque culture in general and Polish–Lithuanian society in particular. Miraculous healings that occurred as a result of praying to the wonderworking icons of Theotokos (specifically, of Żyrowicze and Pochaiv), the relics of holy martyrs and saints, the burials of middle-class dwellers and nobles in crypts of Basilian monasteries created a special cultural and spiritual aura which was attractive for Ruthenians, Poles, Lithuanians, and other ethnicities alike.

For the first time, contemporaneous Baroque literature mentions the presence of the Basilians in the public sphere of the Polish–Lithuanian state in the book of Quirini Cnogleri the Austrian, Pompa Casimiriana (1604)[106], which was compiled on the occasion of the festive canonization of St. Casimir in Wilno, May 10–12, 1604. The Basilians are mentioned in part of a procession where the clergy was marching, following four monastic ranks, fraternities, and students, ‘After these schools, the Greek-Catholic priests were marching, carrying the torches according to their tradition. There were many acolytes and two archimandrites (see, this is how they call the monasteries’ priors)’.[107] The same treatise mentions for the first time the Holy Trinity monastery as one of the main Catholic cloisters of the city: the dramatized performance featured an angel of the Basilian church who appeared right after the angel of the Cathedral Basilica of St. Stanislaus[108] in Wilno. According to the Lithuanian literary scholar Mintautas Čiurinskas, this ‘confirms the public recognition of the Basilian Union Church and its incorporation into the ecclesiastic topography of the Catholic city’.[109]

First and foremost, Eastern rite monasteries were places of prayer and monastic asceticism which attracted numerous representatives of contemporaneous society. Union-adhering monks, as well as monks of other monastic communities and orders of the Commonwealth, played the role of ‘trustworthy intermediaries’ who had been abiding by the model of ars bene moriendi, which was traditional for the Church and society, by offering funeral services and other prayers for the soul salvation of noblemen, clergymen, middle-class dwellers, or peasants. Out of gratitude to the praying Basilians for their ministering of the ‘honourable death’ and the afterlife, laymen of various confessions and ethnic groups acted as ktitors and benefactors of their monasteries and other ecclesiastical organizations.[110] As a rule, such support entailed monetary donations and the granting of land allotments and other material resources that enabled the functioning of monastic communities and the various pastoral, cultural, and social initiatives of the Basilian Order.

The Wilno Holy Trinity monastery in Lithuania, the Buchach monastery of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross in Galicia and the Holy Dormition Pochaiv lavra in Volhynia are all telling examples of the living connection between the Basilian Fathers and the poly-confessional and multi-ethnic society of the Commonwealth. According to the data provided in Memorial by procurator Father Jan Olszewski, and The Diary,[111] the monks from the Holy Trinity monastery in Wilno received monetary donations from various benefactors in the sum of a few hundred thousand Polish złoty, as well as numerous inheritance bequests for townhouses and land allotments in Wilno, and estates in Wilno and Polotsk voivodeships (Bilychany, Zalissya, Svirany, Shankopole, or Voychany, and so on).[112] Representatives of noblemen and the middle-class were eager to choose the Holy Trinity monastery as their eternal resting place. Thanks to their patronage, a few votive chapels for the testators’ burials were erected, including those for the Wilno voivode Janusz Skumin Tyszkiewicz (died in 1642) and his daughter Eugenia-Katarzyna (the wife of prince Korybut-Wiśniowiecki), as well as influential families of Ruthenian patricians, such as Dubowicz, Sinczyl, and Ogurcewicz.[113] Having received generous donations, the monastery in Wilno was able to maintain a vast community of monks and servants to carry out renovations after numerous fires, to decorate the interior of the monastery and sustain its many institutions, including the Basilian novitiate, konvikt (a dormitory for youngsters of noble background), a theological school, hospital, fraternity, choir, etc. As Ukrainian researcher Oksana Vinnychenko rightly observed, ‘the bequests to the Basilian monastery in Wilno were the means of public manifestation of the new Union identity pertaining to the Ruthenian ethno-confessional community in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth’.[114]

An impressive albeit singular example of the charitable work and personal engagement of the Polish Catholic nobility with the affairs of the Basilian Order is the activity of the influential and affluent Potocki family. One of its representatives, Belz voivode Stefan-Aleksander Potocki (1652–1726/1727) from the Prymasowa/Złota Pilawa line, became a ktitor of the Buchach monastery of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross. The monastery was in immediate subordination to the Lithuanian (Sviatotroitsʹk) province of the Order. The principal part of the so-called ‘Buchach Foundation’ (1712–1717) became the charter, whereby Potocki endowed the new monastery with 30,000 Polish złoty and a folwark in Pushkari, the outskirts of Buchach.[115] In 1740, a Latin archbishop from Lviv passed the local St. Cross Roman-Catholic church (kostelyk, a small church) on his way to the Buchach Basilians. In 1765–1771, on the foundations of this small church and following the blueprint of the architect Jan Gottfried-Hoffmann, a new grand Church of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross was erected in the Wilno Baroque style. This time, the construction was carried out under the patronage of Stefan-Aleksander’s father, Mikołaj Bazyli Potocki (ca. 1706–1782), a starosta of Bohuslav and Kaniv who worked closely with the well-known artists of that time, such as architect Bernard Meretyn (died in 1759) or sculptor Johann Pinsel.[116] Mikołaj Potocki chose Buchach as his magnate residence, endorsed the ‘Buchach Foundation’ of his father, and donated almost 20,000 Polish złoty for the construction of an ornate Union church.[117] Thanks to Potocki’s special benevolence toward the Buchach hegumen, Father Hieronim (Nereziusz), who ‘opened Potocki’s heart and purse to the Basilians’,[118] a new monastery edifice, a public school (gymnasium), and a boarding school for the education and youth’s upbringing were erected using the magnate’s funds; all these institutions were maintained thanks to the monastic estates of Zvenyhorod and Zelena.

Nevertheless, one of the biggest and most successful patronage projects of Mikołaj Potocki, his ‘spiritual Jerusalem’, was foundational support for Pochaiv Basilian monastery, into which this magnate, according to various estimates, invested up to 2,200,000 Polish złoty. For the construction of the new Baroque cathedral in Pochaiv lavra, Potocki hired a well-known architect from Silesia, Jan Gottfried Hoffmann; the cornerstone of the construction was solemnly consecrated on July 3, 1771, while the construction itself took until 1791. This cathedral, which has a grand monastery complex at its centre, is a striking example of the Basilian architecture of the late Baroque period (or the ‘Basilian Baroque’, according to the Ukrainian researcher, Archbishop Ihor Isichenko.)[119] Potocki also sponsored a festive coronation of the wonderworking icon of Pochaiv Virgin Mary. The ceremony, which took place on July 3, 1773 and included over 100,000 Christians, demonstrated the Union’s triumph within the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. Mikołaj Potocki was so inspired by the Basilian piety that, even before 1758, he converted from Latin rite to the ‘Ruthenian faith’, thereby becoming an Eastern rite Catholic. He settled on the outskirts of Pochaiv monastery, regularly visited Union liturgies (he owned a house within the monastery), and was buried in 1782 as a benefactor of Pochaiv monastery in the crypt of the Basilian cathedral, which is to the left of the main entrance.

A different representative of the noble family of Potocki, Volhynian and Kyivan voivode Franciszek Salezy Potocki (1700–1772), who belonged to the Hetman line of Srebrna Pilawa and was considered a ‘Little King of Ruthenia’,[120] also supported the Basilian Order on the lands of his vast domain in Galicia and Right-Bank Ukraine. Under the influence of the Enlightenment, which emphasized the dissemination of rational civility via church institutions, Franciszek founded a church and a Basilian monastery (1763–1764) at his residence in Krystynopol, and he also facilitated the establishment of the Union monastery in Strusiv near Terebovlya (1760). His biggest investment into the Basilian Order was the foundation a monastery with a church and a public school in Umanʹ, a private town of the Potocki family.[121] This town was situated on the Great Steppe border between the Judeo-Christian and Islamic civilizations in the southern part of Bratslav voivodeship, on the frontier between the nomad camps of Crimean Tatars and territorial domains of Zaporozhian Sich, not far from the notorious Kuchmansʹky and Chorny Ways. The local Umanʹ community at that time united the prevailing numbers of Union-adhering Ruthenians and Hebrews (Rabbinic Jews and Caraites); concurrently, the town was inhabited by Roman-Catholics, Orthodox Christians, Protestants (mostly Lutherans), Armenians-Monophysites, and even Muslims.

The foundation in 1765–1768 of the Shroud of the Virgin monastery in Umanʹ was confirmed by the Sejm constitution of 1768. Potocki’s foundation privilege allowed for up to 14 Basilian monks (hegumen, priest-vicar, four missionaries, four teaching professors, and a few confessors and preachers). Franciszek Salezy Potocki granted funding for the monastery’s activities by gifting a square at the centre of the town for the construction of a church, crypts, and a school. He also donated the initial sum of 2,000 Polish złoty and even donated two of his estates, the villages of Gerezhenivka and Monastyrok, to the monks.[122] The activities of Umanʹ Basilian collegium were especially successful. This institution remained in existence up until 1834; in 1773 it became a centre of high learning, with theology as well as new ‘secular’ disciplines (geometry, physics, history, geography, etc.) being part of the curriculum. Well-known representatives of the ‘Ukrainian School’ of Polish literature of the 19^th century, such as Seweryn Goszczyński, Michał Grabowski, brothers Aleksandr and Sylwestr Groza, and Józef Bohdan Zaleski,[123] were among its graduates.

From the 1770s until the early 1830s, the Umanʹ Basilian community became a full-fledged partner in the interconfessional dialog taking place along the Great Border; concurrently, the Basilians served as mediators in numerous local conflicts between the Jews, Poles, and Ruthenians. This ‘Golden Age’ was a culmination of the socio-cultural engagement of the monastery in the public space of Umanʹ and the entire Right-Bank Ukraine. The new brick edifices of the Basilian collegium, dormitory (konvikt), monastic cells and the church, all of which were erected in 1785, became a visual symbol of the town, as well as a spiritual and cultural centre of the Ruthenian population of the region.

One of the most tragic chapters in the history of the Basilian monastery and the entire Umanʹ were the events of Koliivshchyna.[124] In June of 1768, Cossacks, peasants, and middle-class dwellers led by Maksym Zalizniak and Ivan Gonta captured Umanʹ and massacred the Jews and Catholics who had found shelter in the town. Among the numerous residents of Umanʹ who were tortured and killed, there were a few graduates of the Basilian collegium, together with their prior, Heraklii Kostecki. Starting in the 2010s, ecumenic commemoration services have been taking place in the yard of the former Basilian monastery in memory of the innocent victims of Koliivshchyna.[125] In 2018, a community initiative was announced to erect a memorial in the shape of a wellspring which, among Umanʹ Christians and Jews, would symbolize victims of the 1768 massacre and emphasize the need for compassion and mutual understanding between ethnic groups; among the Jews, Poles, and Ukrainians, it also symbolized non-conflictual memories shared by the victims of these tragic events.

The monastery complexes in Buchach, Pochaiv, and Umanʹ, together with other equally striking monuments of the Basilian architecture on the territory of modern Belarus, Lithuania, Poland, and Ukraine, should be perceived as part of the cultural realm of Wilno Baroque, which included Sviatotroitsʹka province and, with some reservations, Pokrovsʹka (Ruthenian, Polish) provinces of the Basilian Order. This cultural realm had its own shared artistic traits as well as regional features, in particular in the dioceses that belonged to the ‘new Union’, where monasteries of the Eastern rite joined the Order only in the early 1740s. The characteristic architectural traits of the Basilian monasteries and churches, built by such well-known artists as Johann Christoph Glaubitz, Jan Gottfried-Hoffmann, Oleksandr Osinkiewicz, and Jakub Fontana (1710–1773), included the traditional cross-domed, single-apse plans of the order system that, concurrently, did not follow the rule of facing eastward; openwork and multilayering of the architectural forms; the main façade featuring enhanced plasticity and bearing two tiered towers; the main altar decorated according to the Roman-Catholic tradition; columns and statues within the church interior, etc. Typically, the architecture of the Basilian monasteries and churches combined Western European forms of the Late Baroque with the local regional traditions. Specifically, in present-day Ukrainian lands (Volhynia, Galicia, and Right-Bank Ukraine), this process manifested itself in a fluid interaction between the traditional sacred architecture of Ruthenian churches and the Cossack Baroque.[126]

One of the impressive monuments of the Basilian (Union) Baroque style that is entirely or partially preserved in Belarus, Lithuania, Poland, or Ukraine is the Cathedral of St. Sophia the Holy Wisdom in Polotsk; it was rebuilt by Kyivan Metropolitan Florian (Hrebnicki) in the 1750s, after it had been blown up in 1710 by the Muscovite army, led by the tsar’s dignitary Aleksandr Menshikov. Other examples include the aforementioned Buchach monastery and the Church of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross; the Basilian shrine in Volna (built in 1768, Brest region of Belarus); Petropavlivsʹk church of Berezwecz monastery (destroyed in the 1960s); the Shroud of the Virgin Church (in the shape of a cross fit into a rotunda) in Piddubtsi near Lutsʹk (1761); the church of the monastery in Boruń (built after 1757 from a blueprint by the local Basilian hegumen Oleksandr Osinkiewicz); Trinity Gate of Wilno monastery (1761); the Shroud of the Virgin Church in Talachyn monastery (1787, Foundation of princes Sanguszko); and the Epiphany and Exaltation of the Holy Cross churches in Żyrowicze.[127] These sacred edifices spread widely over the territory of Kyivan Metropolitan archdiocese and became an important manifestation of the Union Church’s inculturation within the social, political, and religious structure of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. The grand Dormition Cathedral of Pochaiv lavra, which was erected on an elevated terrace in the 1770s–1780s, is particularly impressive in terms of its scale and artistic perfection; it is a variation of a domed basilica, featuring an elongated altar section and a sculpturesque southern façade that is supported by two angular four-tiered towers (designed by the architect Gottfried-Hoffmann, with the participation of Piotr and Maciej Polejowski, and Franciszek Kulczycki).[128]

Topography of Holiness: Basilian Wonderworking Icons

The massive dissemination of St. Mary’s cult in contemporaneous Europe (caused by both the reaction of Catholics to the Protestants’ negation of the Holy Mother of God cult and the nationalization of the Virgin Mary’s guardianship over certain ethno-confessional communities within specific socio-cultural circumstances), as well as the view regarding St. Anne’s immaculate conception of the Holy Mother of God[129], promoted by Jesuits, imparted direct influence on the Basilian milieu, which readily accepted this peculiar ‘theology of fear’ that was characteristic of the Baroque culture.[130] On an institutional level, the reception of St. Mary’s cult manifested itself through the sanctuaries, which were patronized by such important Kyivan Metropolitan dioceses as Żyrowicze and Pochaiv (according to the Eastern Christian topos,[131] the Holy Mother of God founded them in order to provide space for contemplating the wonderworking icons). Union sanctuaries attracted thousands or even tens of thousands of pilgrims and created a distinctive spiritual atmosphere of the close proximity of God in the world, as well as the immediate effect of miracles.[132]

Basilian wonderworking icons and the Union sanctuaries that grew around them created a particular trans-confessional sacred space for communication between a human and God.[133] Sacred objects such as icons and the miracles revealed through them played a special role in creating space for the spiritual unity of a human and God; they created a palpable ‘God’s presence’. In the interpretation of Mircea Eliade and Oleksii Lidov, the process of erotopos (from Greek ‘eros’ – sacred, and ‘topos’ – place, space) made it possible to single a certain territory out of the external world which was endowed with specific qualities. Such a ‘topography of holiness’ emerged as a result of either the purposeful activity of human beings who were engaged in a certain hierophany, or the process of transformation of a regular profane space into a sacred one, within the boundaries of which a special holiness was preserved.[134] The application of this theoretical model helps us to better understand the role of the wonderworking icons and sanctuaries in the formation of a special Basilian piety in the 17^th–18^th centuries; it also helps us track the socio-cultural mechanisms of constructing the public religious cult of Ukrainian–Belarusian Slavia Unita within the Basilian milieu of the Commonwealth before the first partition.

The description of the procession of the less popular Wilno Holy Mother of God confirms the trans-confessional and supra-ethnical nature of the cult of wonderworking icons which were entrusted into the care of the Basilians. As papal nuncio Mario Filonardi[135] noted in 1636,

On Sunday June 15^th, during the celebration of Pentecost, the city’s Union-adhering monks walked in a festive procession from one of their churches, the Holy Trinity, to the other, that of the Annunciation of the Holy Virgin Mary. The faithful carried two icons of the Holy Virgin Mary, with the wonderworking icon being abundantly decorated. In front of the holy images, over a hundred torches were ablaze. The multitudes of people who gathered here kneeled on the ground and remained still, while the icons floated above. Finely dressed Union clergy walked with the Metropolitan of Rusʹ [in the lead]. The procession also included the Polish Vice Chancellor (Piotr Gembicki), ‘His Excellency marszałek Radziwiłł’, the Royal Chancellor, the Lithuanian referendar, and other magnates. Music rang out from the windows of the neighbouring houses, and children read poems from the carpeted raisers, glorifying the Holy Mother of God in their native tongue.[136]

The icon of Wilno Holy Mother of God was honoured by the Basilians and middle-class city dwellers as a wonderworking image; it attracted numerous pilgrims (Orthodox and Union-adherent ones alike), who donated substantial amounts of money and jewellery out of gratitude for being blessed with grace. The description of the silver garments, precious ornaments, and votive tablets on the icon demonstrate that it was one of the most treasured holy objects in the capital of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. Every Saturday, the monks of St. Trinity monastery served an akathist in front of the Holy Mother of God icon.[137] During the Russo-Swedish Deluge in 1662, the wonderworking icon was taken by the Don Cossacks under uncertain circumstances to Moscow, where a copy was produced. In just a few years, however, the holy image, ‘bearing a new lining and a case, framed with bright red satin’, was returned in 1668 to Sviatotroitsʹk Basilian monastery.[138] This was done according to articles 8 and 9 of the Treaty of Andrusovo, which entailed the restitution of valuables looted from the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, as requested by its [Commonwealth] envoys. The monastery took care of the icon up until 1849, when the Union was officially liquidated in the Romanov empire.

However, the honouring of the two other wonderworking icons from Żyrowicze and Pochaiv achieved a trans-regional and even an all-state dimension within the Basilian Order in the 17^th–18^th centuries. Their worship created a special ‘space of faith’[139] which went beyond the scope of the Basilian Order or even the Union Church itself; it took on a trans-confessional and supra-ethnic character, becoming part of the contemporaneous religious mentality of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. In the course of the 18^th century, 26 festive coronations of the wonderworking icons of the Roman-Catholic Church[140] took place there; four of these icons were Union ones that belonged to the Kyivan Christian tradition.[141] The extraordinary popularity of wonderworking icons is exemplified by the fact that, in 1742–1807, the registry of miracles demonstrated by the Foot of Pochaiv Virgin Mary, together with spiritual chants (‘Sing merrily, bow your foreheads’, etc.),[142] was published seven times in a finely decorated book, Pochaiv Mountain (‘Góra Poczajowska’). Both icons turned Żyrowicze and Pochaiv Basilian monasteries into widely popular centres of pilgrimage and sanctuaries of the Virgin Mary. These centres attracted pilgrims of various social, ethnic, and confessional backgrounds, the majority of which (almost three quarters) were clergy, peasants, and middle-class city dwellers.[143]

Żyrowicze was the main centre of the veneration of the Virgin Mary on the territories of contemporaneous Belarus, where one of the largest Basilian monasteries, together with the grand Dormition of the Holy Mother of God Church (erected ca. 1650, rebuilt in 1710[144]), had been in operation since 1613. The main founders of this monastery were the noblemen and Union-adhering spouses Ivan and Anna Meleszko, while a dedicated custodian of the Virgin Mary’s religious centre was Lew Sapieha, the Grand Chancellor of Lithuania and a starosta (prefect) of Slonim. The veneration of the Żyrowicze wonderworking icon of the Holy Mother of God, a representation of the iconographic type of Eleusa (Virgin of Tenderness, ‘queen of the Ruthenian nation in Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth’), spread equally in the Roman-Catholic, Orthodox, and Union milieu alike. The local parish fraternity of the Holy Mother Mercy supported and propagated this veneration; in 1639, the fraternity received from Pope Urban VIII the right to give absolution to all Christians taking part in the pilgrimage to the site of the wonderworking icon. The pilgrims arrived at Żyrowicze from everywhere – Wilno and Žemaitija in the north, Volhynia and Podlachia in the south – while individual devotees came from as far as the outskirts of Moscow.[145]

According to the legend, during the first decades of the 16^th century a miraculous revelation of the icon of Virgin Mary took place in Żyrowicze when shepherds from the household of marszałek Oleksandr Oleksandrovych Soltan found the icon in a wild pear tree. From that moment on, the veneration of Żyrowicze Holy Mother of God started to spread. The first miraculous healings, and even resurrections of the dead, date back to 1558 (by the mid-17^th century, some 2,000 miracles had been registered). The icon was a miniature one, painted on an oval-shaped jasper stone sized 5.6 x 4.4 cm. It was an object of veneration for Roman Catholics, Orthodox Christians, and adherents of the Union.[146] Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth monarchs often visited Żyrowicze; during the Khmelʹnytsʹkyi uprising and the Russo–Swedish Deluge, the veneration became saturated with military undertones and acquired all-state significance. Numerous surviving testimonies of regular soldiers and nobility describe their rescue during battles with Cossacks and Muscovites thanks to protection by Żyrowicze Holy Mother of God. Noblemen often consecrated their battle banners in front of the holy image and, according to the Books of Miracles, this was the reason they did not perish during the war. In 1649, members of Minsk Union church fraternity arrived at Żyrowicze to express their gratitude to the wonderworking icon for not letting the ‘Cossack sword’[147] invade their city.

In 1644, Władysław IV and his wife Cecilia visited Żyrowicze; in 1651, Jan II Kazimierz prayed there (‘to take an oath to Virgin Mary’) when leaving for the military campaign against the army of Bohdan Khmelʹnytsʹkyi. During the sermon given on this occasion, Basilian archimandrite Aleksy (Dubowicz) emphasized that, thanks to the care of and protection of Żyrowicze Holy Mother of God, the Polish–Lithuanian army would attain an ‘overwhelming victory’ over Cossacks and Tatars. Concurrently, soldiers were sanctifying their war banners on the eve of the Battle of Berestechko.[148] When, in 1655, the Muscovian army approached the town, Basilians took the icon to Bytenʹ, where it survived the calamity, after which it was returned to Żyrowicze. In 1684 and 1688, Jan III Sobieski also visited this sanctuary of Virgin Mary to worship and thank the Holy Mother of God for the victory over the Turkish army in the Battle of Vienna.[149] The holy image attained the most significant military renown in 1660, when on the eve of the victorious – for the Commonwealth – Battle of Polonka, located not far from Slonim, a Lithuanian division of the great Herman Paweł Sapieha arrived at Żyrowicze to worship the wonderworking icon. The soldiers perceived their victory over the army of the Muscovite voivode Ivan Khovansky as another act of mercy from Żyrowicze Virgin Mary. Thus, starting in the mid-17^th century, this holy image became perhaps the most sacred Union sanctuary. According to Catholic Ruthenians, its protection saved them during the ordeal of the Khmelʹnytsʹkyi uprising and, in 1654–1667, during the war between the Commonwealth and the Tsardom of Muscovy.

The triumphant spreading of veneration of Żyrowicze Holy Mother of God culminated at the icon’s festive coronation on September 7–15, 1730, against the backdrop of the discovery of a copy of this icon, known as Madonna del Pascolo,[150] in 1718 in Rome at the Basilian church-residence of Saints Sergius and Bacchus. This was the sixth icon to be crowned in the Commonwealth and the first Union one; not only the Union diocese and the Basilian Order but also the influential noble families of Radziwiłł and Sapieha joined the organization of the large-scale public festivities. The wonderworking icon was embellished with two golden crowns delivered from Rome, while all participants were given valuable commemorative medals. At the occasion of the coronation, in vernacular language a Basilian monk composed A Song About the Holiest Virgin of Żyrowicze. The song praised the wonderworking image, and the town of Żyrowicze was praised as the ‘new Częstochowa’ and the capital of Virgin Mary in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth; this composition was popular among the clergy and the faithful, and can de facto be considered a political manifesto of the ‘Ruthenian Union nation’ within the Commonwealth.[151] The coronation act of the ‘Queen of Ruthenia’ was carried out by Kyivan Metropolitan Athanasius (Szeptycki), while some 140,000 people (with many Orthodox Christians among them[152]) participated in the pilgrimage to the site of the wonderworking icon. As the German scholar Mathias Niendorf observed, the veneration of Żyrowicze Holy Mother of God, constructed by Basilians, turned out to be the most effective instrument of the consolidation of multi-ethnic and poly-confessional society of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth.[153]

The veneration of Pochaiv Holy Mother of God also acquired a supra-regional character, and Basilians actively invested in it after 1712, when Arsen (Koczarowski), the hegumen of Pochaiv monastery, together with his monks-brethren, converted to the Union.[154] Narrative half-legendary accounts connect the emergence of the wonderworking icon with the visit of the Greek Metropolitan Neophyte to Kyivan Metropolitan diocese in 1559. He gifted the icon to Anna Goiska, nee Kozińska, an Orthodox Christian of noble background (the first recorded mention of the holy image goes back to 1641[155]). The wonderworking icon was quite small in size (29 x 24 cm), painted with red paint on cypress board; it belonged to the iconographic type of Eleusa (Tenderness; Ελεούσα), which depicts the Virgin Mary holding baby Jesus with her right hand, pressing Him to her face. The icon had silver casing and was decorated with numerous votive tablets.[156]

Initially, this icon was kept at Anna Goiska’s private chapel. However, to venerate the icon properly after the miraculous healing of her brother, who gained eyesight thanks to the icon’s wonderworking power, in 1597 Goiska founded Pochaiv monastery and provided it with vast lands and monetary donations.[157] In the 1620s–1640s, the holy image became a victim of the confessionalization of the noblemen’s religious self-awareness. The successor of Anna Goiska, a castellan from Belz (future voivode of Sandomierz) called Andrzej Firlej (ca. 1586–1649/1650), who was active as Protestant–Calvinist, took the icon to his family estate in Kozyn, and only returned it to Orthodox monks in 1647, following the decision of the Lublin royal tribunal. The specific character of the adoration of Pochaiv Holy Mother of God and Her Foot was its pairing with the veneration of the local hegumen and ascetic Iov (Zalizo), who, in 1659, was proclaimed a saint of the Orthodox church.[158] Back then the veneration was still a local custom; it became widespread after the emergence in 1665 of Ioanykiy Halyatovsky’s treatise Nebo novoye (The New Heaven), which for the first time described the miraculous deeds of Pochaiv Holy Mother of God. Adoration gained popularity during the events of July 20–23, 1675, when Pochaiv was besieged by Turks, and, thanks to protection from the Holy Mother of God (the ‘Pochaiv miracle’), both the monastery and the town were saved from being captured by the enemy (a striking representation of this military topos is apparent in the 1704 etching by Nykodym Zubricki, Obloha Pochayeva turkamy (The Siege of Pochaiv by Turks)).[159]

Xięga Cudów obrazu Poczajowskiego N[ajświętszej] Maryi Panny y Stopki, which has been closely studied by Valentyna Losʹ and Natalia Yakovenko,[160] relates some 379 accounts of healing (according to other data, the number is 278) between 1607 and 1827 that were recognized as miraculous by the monks. During the Orthodox epoch, only 21 miracles were registered, while the lion’s share of acknowledged healings occurred in the 1770s (almost 30% of records). The subject matter of the wonderworks of Pochaiv Holy Mother of God and their narrative content generally fits with the common Christian topoi. The records, edited and systematized by the Basilians, reflect the solidarity of the Union community in the face of the growing socio-political and confessional destabilization of the Commonwealth in the 18^th century and demonstrate a clear connection with ‘Ruthenian antiquity’, marked by Old Church Slavonic and ‘Ruthenian vernacular’ as these languages were used to record miracles heard from regular pilgrims (Polish appears in these sources in 1736, and starting mid-18^th century it dominates The Book of Miracles).[161] Records regarding the miraculous deeds of the Union epoch stand out with their realistic and rational manner, putting emphasis on providing mandatory proofs for miraculous healings with the help of sworn witnesses and the ‘materialization’ of the miraculous impact of Pochaiv Holy Mother of God on worshippers.

The veneration of Pochayiv Holy Mother of God (an Orthodox holy icon that became truly accepted by the Catholics of Eastern and Roman rites^{^[162]}), propagated by the Basilians, spread first and foremost in Volhynia, Podlachia, Podilia, and the Ruthenian voivodeship. The opportunities for pilgrimage here were extremely varied. The largest number of records in the Book of Miracles is connected with pilgrims from the Lutsʹk diocese (around 70), while only one worshiper arrived from the neighbouring Union diocese. Regarding the quantity of miraculous healings, second place was taken by the neighbouring Ruthenian voivodeship (the localities close to Volhynia); considerably fewer pilgrims came from Kyiv region and Podilia. The mass printing of Pochayiv Mountain was conducive to the rapid spread of the veneration. From 1743 to 1774, five main groups of pilgrims to Pochayiv appear in 115 records: priests and monks (40%), low-ranking nobles (23.5%), peasants (17%), middle-class city dwellers (15%), and individual communities (4.5%).^{^[163]}

Noblemen (approx. 30%) and Union clergy (almost 27%) constituted a large percentage of the pilgrims to Pochayiv Holy Mother of God and her Foot, although among the healed worshippers there were also an Orthodox hegumen from Cossack Hetmanate and a Capuchin-missionary. Among the witnesses of miraculous revelations and healings, one could frequently find monks from the neighbouring Dominican monastery in Pidkaminʹ. At the same time, the supra-confessional character of the Virgin Mary’s veneration is evident, since the list of the healed Christian pilgrims includes adherents of the Union, Roman Catholics, and Orthodox Christians alike. Moreover, Union-adhering monks dominated among the peasants, while middle-class dwellers were more varied from a confessional standpoint.^{^[164]} Natalia Yakovenko mentions a striking example of solidarity between the rites during the plague in 1771: Six pilgrims from Tovstenke near Husiatyn (western Podilia), ‘adhering to our Ruthenian, as well as Roman rite, arrived in Pochayiv’. During the epidemic they submitted themselves to the care of the Pochayiv Holy Mother of God, gathering together to read the book of Pochayiv miracles; while some were sick, none passed away, and so out of gratitude they brought a silver tablet to Pochayiv to decorate the wonderworking icon. The Roman Catholics and adherents of Union from Pidhirtsi and Lutsʹk did the same by submitting themselves to the care of the icon during the plague.

The spread of veneration of Pochayiv Holy Mother of God culminated during the festive coronation of the wonderworking icon in September 1773, organized by the Basilian Order, the Union hierarchy, and the magnate Mikołaj Potocki. After a special committee headed by the Lutsʹk Union Bishop Sylwester (Lubieniecki-Rudnicki) recognized the genuine nature of the miracles, and, in April 1773, Pope Clement XIV issued a bull announcing an eight-day indulgence for all the participants of the coronation. Those who had taken part in the liturgies, had prayed to the wonderworking icon, had confessed, and had taken holy communion were supposed to be completely forgiven (receive an indulgence) for their sins.^{^[165]} The entire Kyivan Metropolitan diocese and particularly the Basilian monasteries experienced a bold mobilization aimed at preparing the highest number of pilgrims, both spiritually and organizationally, to participate in the coronation. The equestrian royal regiment and infantry squadron of Prince Janusz Sanguszko kept order during the ceremony.

The actual festivities took place on September 19, 1773, during the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary celebration (according to the Julian calendar), and followed the scenario provided by the Wilno capitulum. The festive ceremony started one day earlier, when two papal crowns were brought to the monastery’s church, while the wonderworking holy image was moved to a special space that had been built for it by the architect Jan de Witte: a shrine of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary on the outskirts of Pochayiv. The road from the monastery to the shrine was planted with trees and decorated with five triumphal arches; numerous paintings depicting the miracles revealed by the icon were placed on the side of the road. The coronation rite took place on the following day, September 19^th, with the main protagonists being the Pochayiv hegumen Dometius (Janowski), the proto-hegumen of Pokrov province Onuphrius (Bratkowski), and the proto-archimandrite of the Basilian Order Porfiriusz (Ważyński).^{^[166]}

To immortalize the coronation, 5,000 commemorative medals (koronatki) and 11,000 small paper images depicting the Pochayiv Holy Mother of God were produced. In the evening after the actual coronation, a theatrical demonstration of artificial lights that had been brought from Warsaw^{^[167]} was organized in Pochayiv by military engineers. In total, some 100,000 pilgrims and guests participated in the celebrations, which continued until September 26^th. According to calculations by the Basilians, 24,000 adherents of the Union and 9,300 Roman Catholics received confession and holy communion. Pilgrims brought their votive tablets to the holy image and participated in numerous liturgies and nightly contemplations.^{^[168]}

Based on the chalcography Crowning of the Pochayiv Virgin Mary Icon, created by the engraver Teodor Strzelbicki in the 1780s, one can form a certain impression as to the scope of the coronation ceremony. This etching confirms the massive nature of the coronation and the participation of the numerous representatives of Union-adhering and Catholic clergy, magnates and nobles, local royal administration, church fraternities, and peasant pilgrims. The large-scale celebrations in Pochayiv facilitated the popularization of the wonderworking icon, thereby supporting the emergence of the impressive sanctuary of the Basilian Order, which remained a striking symbol of the triumph of the Ruthenian Catholic triumph in Right-Bank Ukraine up until the very liquidation of the Union.

Cultural Transfer: Book Printing in Wilno, Pochayiv, and Supraśl

The Basilians’ noticeable contribution to the culture of the ethnic groups who inhabited the Commonwealth, first and foremost in the areas of book publishing and education, can be partially explained by the Union monks’ successful usage of contemporaneous methods of inculturation. Among other things, these methods allowed for the emergence of the phenomenon of Basilian Enlightenment, which fits within the wider discourse of the European Enlightenment. In the 18^th century, especially its second half, the Enlightenment substantially changed the religious life of Christian Europe and led to the appearance of ‘educated piety’ (pietas litterata). The assimilation of Enlightenment ideas by various representatives of political and spiritual elites, as well as an active secular milieu, started the process of rejuvenation (modernization) of the Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox Churches. This was done by way of the rationalization of faith with the simultaneous application of techno-scientific progress alongside new models of education and civility. This is how the ‘Catholic Enlightenment’ formed; with the help of Enlightenment-inspired methods of cultural modernization, they implemented contemporary mechanisms for religious reformation and developed their ability to communicate with the world in ordinary language. The Catholic Enlightenment was also partially successful in opposing followers of the Enlightenment’s attempts to rid Europe of its traditions and remove the Church as an institution of highest authority from the public sphere.^{^[169]}

The ideas of the Enlightenment also spread in the Commonwealth and its eastern Lithuanian–Belarusian–Ukrainian lands, farther to the east (to Kyiv, the Cossack Hetmanate and the Russian Empire^{^[170]}) and to the south (to Slavic ethnic groups of the Balkans, the so-called ‘Orthodox Enlightenment’ phenomenon^{^[171]}). The Kyiv Union Metropolitan diocese and its Basilian Order, where the impact of the Enlightenment and its reception by the Catholics of the Eastern rite took various forms, were no exception to this rule. First and foremost, we are referring here to the emergence of an elaborate chain of Basilian public schools (including those for secular youth), and widespread utilization (after 1773) of the potential of former Jesuit collegia, specifically the Wilno Academy (known after 1801 as Imperial University). All of these helped to transform the local Sviatotroitsʹk monastery into a kind of ‘educational corporation’.^{^[172]}

The periodization of the Commonwealth Enlightenment (‘early’, 1740–1773; ‘high’, 1773–1794; ‘late’, 1795–1820)^{^[173]} that is offered by the British historian Richard Butterwick can be applied to the Basilian Enlightenment only in part. Visible manifestations of the reception of Enlightenment ideas within the milieu of Union-adhering monks can be detected, first and foremost, in schooling. New Enlightenment standards of education in the Basilian public schools allowed for reduced attention being paid to classical languages, the introduction of science, math, history, and law as individual disciplines, as well as an emphasis on learning both native and other European languages. The new educational discourse of the Basilian schooling programme underlined the need for learning a ‘Slavic language’, rigorous control over the educational process, and ensuring an adequate professional level for teachers. A system for encouraging students was implemented as well.^{^[174]} In addition, scholars make observations regarding changes of several aspects within the Basilian religious environment: models of sainthood; organization of community life in the monasteries and within the individual (e.g., devotional practices); a degree of secularization of the repertoire of published works^{^[175]} (an expanded range of secular books on husbandry, belle-lettres, nature, and politics); increased attention to non-official national languages (specifically Lithuanian and Ruthenian vernacular)^{^[176]} and Biblical languages (Greek and Hebrew), as well as major European languages, namely Italian, German, and French.

This is how the Union-adhering monks, while remaining under the influence of Enlightenment discourse and the ideas of the European Renaissance, contributed to the development of national cultures. A striking example of Basilian educational inculturation is the work of Sviatotroitsʹk monastery’s printing house in Wilno. Specifically, in 1794 a patriotic sermon was published in Lithuanian by Father Mykolas Karpavičius (Kozonius ant gailingo atprovijimo pagrabo) on the occasion of the burial of the Kosciuszko Uprising participants; in 1811, one of the Wilno monks, Oleksandr (Butkiewicz), prepared a Lithuanian grammar and Lithuanian–Polish dictionary (Kalbriedą Lietuwiškay Lenkiszka Ležuwie mieleyšnieme Zemayciu) for printing.^{^[177]} A different example of Basilian inculturation can be seen in the activities of the Umanʹ collegium, which provided elite education for Union adherents, Roman Catholics, and Orthodox Christians in line with the Jesuit motto ‘To teach everyone regardless of their confession’ (during the first three decades of the 19^th century, some 400–800 students, predominantly sons of local nobility, studied there). Raised within the walls of this particular collegium were the best representatives of Right-Bank Ukraine’s contemporaneous intellectual elite. It suffices to mention such figures as Józef Bohdan Zaleski and Seweryn Goszczyński, who started the ‘Ukrainian School’ of 19th-century Polish literature, as well as a number of other well-known scholars in the fields of ethnography, history, medicine, etc.^{^[178]}

Book printing was one of the most successful cultural initiatives of the Basilian Order; it ensured that the Order’s need for ascetic, liturgical, polemical, and homiletic texts was met. It also served as an effective tool of Union confessionalization^{^[179]}, especially in the realm of liturgy. In the 17^th and 18^th centuries, Basilians supported six printing houses in Wilno, Lviv, Minsk, Pochayiv, Supraśl, and Univ; all these were noticeably active in the Commonwealth’s book printing landscape and were bested in terms of thematic diversity only by the Jesuits and Piarists.^{^[180]} The Basilian Fathers set up their first press in Wilno monastery, having purchased a well-known printing house that belonged to the Mamonicz family. Here, in 1628, the first Basilian book – a catechism written in ‘vernacular’ Ruthenian^{^[181]} – saw the light of day. Despite the occasional moment of crisis in the activities of this printing centre, by the end of the 18^th century the Wilno monks had published a few hundred books, having collaborated with such well-known engravers as the German Conrad Götke and the Ruthenian Leontii Tarasevych. The most fruitful periods were the 1640s through the early 1650s (22 printed eulogies) and from the 1760s to the 1790s (172 books), when the Basilian Press renewed its work. Among the printing house’s successes were translations of the Book of Hours (Semi-Uncial) into Church Slavonic in 1670, and a Grand Missal in 1692.^{^[182]}

In the second half of the 18^th century, the Wilno printing house was publishing books predominantly in Polish and partly in Latin; this went in line with the contemporaneous language preferences of the Basilian milieu and the process of acculturation. Concurrently, texts in Cyrillic remained an important part of the publishing repertoire and fulfilled several needs of the Union Church: liturgical (missals, breviaries, etc.), educational (primers, dictionaries), and evangelical (catechisms). 75 such editions from Wilno are known to us, while Pochayiv Press printed 321 books in vernacular Ruthenian or Church Slavonic language^{^[183]}. Statistical data for the year 1800 testify to the publishing potential and impact of Wilno Press; almost 26,000 copies of 53 editions were printed at the monastery bookstore. Church Slavonic primers and Polish prayer books gained the most popularity.^{^[184]}

In the early 1690s, the Wilno printing house was transferred to the Basilian monastery in Supraśl on the initiative of Metropolitan Cyprian (Żochowski); it thereby laid the foundation for one more impressive printing centre for the Union Church (the Press was active until 1803). One of the most fruitful periods in the activities of this centre was during the governance of archimandrite Lev (Kyshka), when 65 titles were published. Up until the early 19^th century, some 500 editions were published in Supraśl, the majority of which were books in Polish and, in part, Latin (respectively, ca. 70% and 10%–18%). There was no lack of Cyrillic books, which constituted almost one-fifth (99 titles) of the published output; a few books in Lithuanian saw the light of day as well.^{^[185]}

The biggest Basilian printing house of the 18^th century was initiated in Pochayiv in 1730 by the Lutsʹk Union bishop, Theodosius (Lubieniecki-Rudnicki). In 1618, Kyrylo (Trankvillion-Stavrovetsʹkyi) from the Orthodox Press, a distant predecessor of Pochayiv printing house, published his theological treatise The Mirror of Theology.^{^[186]} In October 1732, Augustus II granted Pochayiv monastery the privilege to initiate book printing, since there was a lack of liturgical ‘Ruthenian books’ within the Union Church. This legitimizing clause of the royal charter is very telling as it explains the main reason behind setting up the printing house: the need to arrange for the publication of unified and edited liturgical books for the ‘new Union’ dioceses, in line with resolutions taken at the Synod of Zamość in 1720.^{^[187]} The reception of the liturgical reform in the Kyivan Union Metropolitan diocese was one of the main goals of the Pochayiv Press, and this explains the domination of Church Slavonic and vernacular Ruthenian languages among its publications.

Shortly, after having won the competition with Lviv and Univ, the new Basilian Press became the largest publishing centre for Union-adhering Ruthenians in the Crown lands of the Commonwealth. Pochayiv’s status as a St. Marian sanctuary helped to provide financial support for the book printing. Generous donations were made both by the numerous pilgrims visiting the wonderworking icon and by the residencies of the Basilian proto-hegumen (located in Pokrov province). This concurrently widened the circle of reader-consumers. The Holy Dormition lavra’s yearly revenue from book sales ranged from about 2,000 to 20,000 Polish złoty yearly, and on average constituted 15% (2,000–3,000 złoty) of the total income of the monastery.^{^[188]}

The Pochayiv centre stood out among the Basilian publishing houses thanks to the increased number of books in vernacular Ukrainian and liturgical Church Slavonic languages^{^[189]}. In the 1830s and 1840s, a few dozen monks lived here, some of whom were involved with the printing.^{^[190]} Apart from finely decorated and precious liturgical codices (Anthologion, Apostol, Menaion, Psalter, Missal, Typikon, Euchologion, etc.), books of didactic, homiletic, and catechistic literature, which were popular among the clergy and laymen alike, were also published. Among these publications one can mention Didactic Theology (Casus), with an addendum entitled Lexicon, namely Thesaurus of the Slavonic Language; a Church Slavonic-Polish dictionary (seven editions); a collection of sermons entitled Evangelism, or a Sermon for Catholics, featuring a question-answer format and an introduction for priests and catechists (published in 1756, 1768, and 1778)^{^[191]}; Seed of God’s Word on the Pastures of Human Hearts (1772; reissued in 1781); and a translation by Julian (Dobrylowski) of the treatise Weekly Parochial Lore and Yearly Festivities (editions in 1792 and 1794), which was published in vernacular Ruthenian (this writer also composed a popular song called ‘God Willing, We’ll Have a Good Time’).^{^[192]} Pochayiv Basilians also published ‘practical’ resources dealing with everyday organizational activities and the soul-shepherding work of the Order and Union Church (panegyrics, pastoral letters and epistles sent by high-ranking clergy, constitutions of the assemblies, monks’ registries, charters of church fraternities, etc.), curriculum of collegia, as well as translations of theological and homiletic treatises by leading Catholic theologians (for example, St. Thomas à Kempis’ Imitation of Christ).^{^[193]}

In response to soul-shepherding challenges connected to the process of Christianization among the Union-adhering populace, and to the widening of the missionary activities of Basilian preachers, in 1791 the Pochayiv Press published a unique collection of religious songs (Bohohlasnyk: Reverent Songs for Our Lord, Virgin Mary, and Saints’ Holidays throughout the Year). This book included poems and carols by Basilian poets and texts by Orthodox theologians such as Dymytrii (Tuptalo), Heorhii (Konysʹky), Hryhorii (Skovoroda). In total, 251 pieces were published in the collection: 213 in Church Slavonic; 33 in Polish; and five in Latin. These addressed Virgin Mary and Our Lord’s holidays, were dedicated to saints and individual wonderworking icons, or dealt with the subjects of repentance, death, and Judgment Day.^{^[194]} Especially popular were church carols (devotional songs celebrating Christmas), which through the Basilian tradition became part of the parish (liturgical) practice of the Union-adhering monks, Orthodox Christians, and Catholics, while also acquiring a folk character.^{^[195]}

The trans-confessional Bohohlasnyk was reprinted numerous times in the 19^th and early 20^th centuries and became popular not only among Greek-Catholics but also Orthodox Christians of the Austrian monarchy and the Russian empire. This compendium of songs imparted a powerful influence on Ukrainian and, in part, Belarusian and Polish folk cultures. It facilitated the deepening of the Christianization of these cultures in the spirit of the Enlightenment and can be seen as a successful example of the reception of monastic scholarship at the level of ‘parish civilization’, when religious songs created by the ‘high culture’ combined with folk sources and became an important element in modern Ukrainian nation-building.

A lesser-known but quite telling example of the efficacy and capability of the Pochayiv Basilian Press is the 1770 publication of Secular Politics – a book of advice on ‘appropriate behaviour’ for young people, written in vernacular Ukrainian with the addition of Church Slavonic.^{^[196]} An interesting example of a bilingual edition can be seen in the Book of Husbandry (Książka Lekarstw Końskich). This treatise laid out the household and veterinarian advice that was traditional at the time and emphasized the necessity for clergy, monks, and laymen to study ‘Slavonic’ language, which was used for communication by the majority of commonwealth folk in the Bratslav, Volhynia, Kyiv, and Podilia voivodeships.^{^[197]} Confessional texts were also important for the Basilian Order, since they showed the assimilation of Metropolitan Synod of Zamość’s resolutions of 1720 into the Union Church (How to Follow the Festivals of the Holy Sacrament of Eucharist, Our Lady of Sorrows, and Blessed Martyr Yosafat..., etc.).

Another feature of the Pochayiv Press was its openness toward collaborating with the Orthodox and Old Believers’ centres in Kyiv, the Cossack Hetmanate, and contemporary Russian territories.^{^[198]} This interaction facilitated intercultural exchange, the overcoming of ethno-confessional stereotypes, and the emergence of successful printing projects, while being prompted by practical, entrepreneurial calculations: mainly, the desire to spread the marketing of products to territories that were not inhabited by Catholics. Ukrainian scholar Yaroslav Isaievych draws attention to the Basilians’ publication of Hagiography of Iov Zalizo, an Orthodox saint, as well as the fact that Pochayiv printers were using ‘frontispieces’ (title pages) from Orthodox Christian presses for the publication of Union books. For instance, for the five-volume Bible of 1798, the frontispiece and depiction of the Assumption monastery complex were borrowed from the cognominal edition of the Kyiv-Pechersʹk lavra, while the attached calendar contained the dates on which the Orthodox saints were remembered. In the late 18^th and early 19^th centuries, Spyrydon (Kobersʹky), the prefect of Pochayiv Press, maintained friendly relations with his colleague, the monk Yustyn from Kyiv-Pechersʹk Press. Thanks to this connection, both printers, ‘taking into account their belonging to the same nation and old friendship’, coordinated a mutually beneficial exchange of books and printing materials from both sides of the border.^{^[199]}

Most editions produced by Basilians’ presses were published in Polish, while some contained fragments in Latin script in Church Slavonic and Ruthenian; these were addressed to the Polonized clergy and laymen. The domination of Polish language among the printed editions of Pochayiv Press should not be surprising since, in the 17^th and especially 18^th centuries, the Union Church used this language and its native one. Polish was also the language of communication, the courts, and the Sejm Parliament. According to the latest calculation, between 1734 and 1800 the Pochayiv Press published over 170 books in Polish (approx. 38% of all production) – considerably fewer than the Wilno (73%), Minsk (100%), and Supraśl (68%) printing centres.^{^[200]}

The majority of Pochayiv editions printed in Polish fit into the following categories: prayer books, catechism handbooks, theological treatises by Basilian and other Catholic writers (specifically the Union hieromonk Tymoteusz Szczurowski); school textbooks and various courses on rhetoric, theology, and natural philosophy (for instance, Ethologia czyli nauka dla młodzi szkolnej, 1772); poems and moral-ethic writings (Dialog Between Wisdom and Artfulness, Conversation about the Purpose of Human Happiness, etc.); historical documents and translations of classical literature works (Sallust, Cicero, etc.).^{^[201]}

Unev publishing house, which had been sporadically active since the 1640s, resumed its activities in 1732, mostly producing small books and texts in Church Slavonic and vernacular Ruthenian. In the 1760s, however, this Basilian Press did not survive the competition with Lviv and Pochayiv and was shut down.^{^[202]} Similarly, the activities of the Minsk Basilian Press were limited in scope; between 1790 and 1793, this printing house published a small number of books, mainly servicing the needs of the Sejm of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, which met every four years in Grodno.^{^[203]}

In the second half of the 18^th century and the first three decades of the 19^th century, Basilians in Wilno, Pochayiv, and Supraśl started to actively collaborate with communities of Old Believers, publishing relevant religious literature at their request (some 50 editions of this kind have survived^{^[204]}). For the needs of Old Believers, the Alphabet and Edifying Gospel were published in Supraśl; Precepts of Abba Dorotheus and individual works of the Church Fathers (a reprint of Muscovy editions from the 17^th century), precepts from Ephrem the Syrian, and liturgical texts were published in Wilno. In similar ways, the collaboration with Old Believers developed successfully at the Pochayiv Press.^{^[205]} In 1781, its prefect Spyrydon (Kobersʹky) received a blessing from the Lutsʹk Union bishop to publish works by Russian religious dissidents, one of whom arrived in Pochayiv from Klyntsi (at the time, this was within the territory of the Hetmanate; nowadays it is Russia’s Bryansk oblast) to oversee the printing. In the 1790s, Basilian printers published Pandektai and Taktikon by Nikon of the Black Mountain and, overall, some 40 individual customized editions were published in Pochayiv.^{^[206]} Russian Old Believers were interested in collaborating with Union printing centres as this provided a chance to avoid censorship in the territories of the Russian Empire while receiving high-quality books.

The Enlightenment policies that Basilian presses carried out in the second half of the 18^th century also manifested in non-religious publications, such as belle-lettres, classical literature, books on science, geography, history, husbandry, etc. Geographical Lexicon (1766) by Basilian Hilarion (Karpińsky), A Brief History of the Eastern Indies (1776) by Tadeusz Podlecki, Husbandry (1791) by Jan Herman, poetry by Mikołaj Białkowski, dramatic works by Michał Tomaszeweski – all these are examples of the internalization of Catholic Enlightenment discourse by the Wilno Press.^{^[207]}

Basilian Enlightenment: Educational Initiatives

When compared with publishing, the Basilian Enlightenment manifested in a far more pronounced way within the educational sphere.^{^[208]} The emergence of Basilian schooling was prompted by the necessity to build the Order’s own system of spiritual formation and theological discipline, as well as to create a chain of public schools for secular youth, a potential source of monastic callings. Another factor was preparing hieromonks for soul-shepherding service in parishes, since the majority of diocesan seminaries of the 17^th and 18^th centuries (in particular, those in Wilno, Volodymyr, Minsk, and Chełmno) turned out to be short-lived educational projects.^{^[209]} Initially, the monks received theological education at several places: the Wilno Jesuit Academy, founded in 1582 (over 80 Basilian students studied here between 1670 and 1774); the Lviv Theatine papal collegium, founded in 1665 (prior to 1780, some 130 Armenians and 200 Ruthenians received their education there); and Jesuit collegia overseas (Braniewo, Prague, and elsewhere).^{^[210]}

In March of 1613, King Sigismund III granted the privilege to the Basilian Fathers to establish schools where Greek, Latin, Church Slavonic (Ruthenian) and Polish languages would be taught, and in 1615 Pope Paul V declared the Basilian schools to be of equal standing with Jesuit ones.^{^[211]} At least in the first half of the 17^th century, the monks paid great attention to the study of Church Slavonic – the language of Union Church liturgy, used in the majority of hagiographical, ascetic, and patristic literature.^{^[212]} Acquiring knowledge per se was not the main goal of education in those schools: the emphasis was put on bringing up the youth by way of introducing students to appropriate literature, as well as nurturing their spirit, mainly through encouragement of weekly or monthly confession and receiving regular communion. To this end, such treatises as Menologium bazyliańskie, a two-volume compendium compiled by Ignacy Kulczyński, which consisted of examples of the righteous life led by Basilians from various monastic communities in Italy, Spain, and other countries,^{^[213]} were used.

The first Basilian collegium opened in Volodymyr in 1675 at the initiative of the local bishop Benedictus (Korsak-Gliński). It soon became one of the most successful educational institutions of the Union Church, which in the XVII–XVIII centuries covered the Kyivan Metropolitan diocese with a dense network of collegia.^{^[214]} In the period following the Synod of Zamość, the Basilian Order maintained over 30 public schools that were considered some of the best in the Commonwealth, especially for the local noble youth.^{^[215]} In the second half of the 18^th and first half of the 19^th centuries, the Union monks were so successful in their educational activities and spiritual tutelage among the local Lithuanian population in Padubysis township (in 1748, a theological school for the local youth was established at the request of magnates Beinor) that soon enough this settlement (the only one in the world) received the name of Bazilionai^{^[216]} in honour of the Basilian Fathers.

The majority of Basilian collegia were considered ‘incomplete’, which meant that they were secondary schools (Bar, Lyubar, Umanʹ, Sharhorod, and others) that provided a five-grade curriculum of the humanities (Greek and Latin schooling), without the ‘high disciplines’ (superiora), i.e., theology and divinity (among the Jesuit collegia of the Commonwealth, only Wilno Academy offered theological studies). A secondary school of this kind provided education consisting of seven ‘liberal arts’: trivium (grammar, rhetoric, dialectic) and quadrivium (arithmetic, geometry, music, and astronomy). Such a curriculum possessed a secular rather than theological character; particular attention was given to nurturing personal devotion via emotions and public activities (participation in church school fraternities, religious processions, theatrical performances, etc.). The system followed the Jesuit liberal arts curriculum, which was based on studying Greek and Latin classical literatures (studia humanitatis) as ‘imitation of antiquity’ (imitatio antiquorum); rhetoric was considered the main discipline to properly prepare students for the public sphere, according to the principle of ‘educated devotion’ (pietas litterata).

After the liquidation of the Society of Jesus in 1773, Basilians took under their control a portion of the Commonwealth’s Jesuit educational institutions with the help of the Commission for National Education (Komisia Edukacji Narodowej).^{^[217]} This step contributed to an improvement of the level of education and created elite status for schools in the last quarter of the 18^th century. A special curriculum was developed; it reflected the new educational strategy of the Enlightenment, with emphasis on the ideals of utilitarianism, and was adapted to the schools’ special needs in the form of a separate charter.^{^[218]} The majority of rectors, prefects, and professors teaching at Basilian schools represented the elite of Ruthenian ecclesiastical culture; they were highly educated and boasted a wide intellectual outlook of a European calibre.

As a rule, these Basilian schools were of two levels, offering either three or six grades, where philosophy and physics could be studied in addition to the regular subjects. Similarly to other schools in the Commonwealth, Basilians paid less attention to mathematics and natural sciences.^{^[219]} Taking into consideration the level of the primary education in the Kyivan Metropolitan diocese at the time, studies in Basilian schools started with foundational courses aimed at teaching spudeyi[220] how to read and write in ‘Slavonic’ and Polish (this form of education corresponded to the level of the Jesuit’s proforma course). It is unclear whether Basilian schools were even partially based on the tradition of the school fraternities (studii ruthenici) of the Kyivan Metropolitan diocese of the late 16^th and 17^th centuries (e.g., close collaboration with students’ families; open character of student admissions, carried out in public; devotional practices; the didactic process of studying Greek and Church Slavonic languages; and preparing spudeyi for active public life).^{^[221]}

The concept of free education that was established in the Ratio studiorum (full version of 1599; attachments of 1615) in the sense that it was understood within the territories of the Commonwealth^{^[222]} was primarily used in middle-level Basilian educational institutions. It entailed the upbringing of a ‘well-rounded – intellectually, spiritually, emotionally, and physically – personality to better serve God and the community of people’.^{^[223]} Despite the fact that some scholars display a rather sceptical attitude to the educational potential of the Union’s educational institutions, one must admit that most of these provided adequate theological education, in some cases approaching and exceeding the average level of the Commonwealth’s ecclesiastical schools.^{^[224]} Concurrently, starting from the second half of the 17^th century, the programme of Basilian education was no longer a compromise ‘between the Byzantine–Slavic tradition of Enlightenment and “Latin scholarship”’.^{^[225]}

Not only Union but also Orthodox educational institutions (first and foremost, the Kyiv-Mohyla collegium, which became an academy in 1701) borrowed from and actively incorporated the Jesuit system of education and the internal organization of such collegia. ^{^[226]} This applies to the way students were divided into groups, the organization of the classes, lectures, and exams, as well as the teaching methodologies:

nurturing of student’s sense of ambition;
constant repetition;
competitiveness;
public speaking;
memory training;
mutual questioning of one another (concertations) as a ‘reminder that every human action is controlled by God and one has to be ready, every minute, to be held accountable for his actions’);
attention to students’ recreation.^{^[227]}

According to the charters of the Basilian Order,

…first and foremost, the students are attempting not to look for anything within their studies that is beyond God’s glory, gain for the Church, their native land, and the Order; they are trying to follow God’s will in everything, study with diligence, and they should not hope to avoid God’s Last Judgment if they do not make use of their natural talents, even if they have never had a chance to put what they have learned to practical use.^{^[228]}

Capitula expected orderly behaviour from spudeyi during their short trips to the city and that they use Latin in all situations except for recreation (when they were allowed to communicate in their ‘native language’). Students were instructed to converse in Latin not only during lectures but also in everyday life, with the goal of creating a language milieu for processing knowledge. In a similar manner, courses on poetics, rhetoric, philosophy, and theology were conducted in Latin, as well as arbitration of disputes.^{^[229]}

According to the Basilian programme of studies, laid out in part in Sposób uczenia się teologii moralnej w Poczajowie ustanowionej, students were supposed to memorize theology lessons in Polish, not Ruthenian; Polish was also the language of instruction for moral theology.^{^[230]} Concurrently, the resolutions of the Basilian capitula allowed the study of rhetoric in one’s ‘native language’, with the caveat that one be aware of the grammatical differences between the native language and Latin. The most impressive compositions were read aloud by the students from the pulpit of the refectory during lunch. The course of ‘philosophy’ was considered to be of a high level; it prepared students for the course in theology, which one had to study for three years; here, they consecutively gained knowledge of logic (dialectic), physics (philosophy of nature) according to Aristotle, metaphysics (spiritual foundations of existence), ethics (moral philosophy), and mathematics and geography.^{^[231]}

One of the Basilian charters’ most important objectives for the schools and collegia was the assertion and propagation of the ‘Holy Union’. Special attention was given to the professional level of the teachers and administrators, as well as the curricula of classes taught by professors, as the success or failure of the Basilian Order’s educational projects hinged on these factors. The charters also determined the yearly academic calendar, including vacations. Twice a year (at the beginning of the academic year and on St. Basil’s Day), public lectures on rhetoric were offered; they included recitations of poems in Greek, Latin, Polish, Ruthenian, and other languages.^{^[232]}

Apart from the disciplines normally studied within the system of Ratio studiorum, Basilian collegia emphasized the importance of studying canon law, in particular the dogmatic resolutions of ecumenical and local Synods and Church Tradition; this included resolutions regarding the basic truths of faith, heresies, church discipline and legal proceedings, Christian morality, rituals, etc. Apart from these, the curriculum also entailed the exposition of Papal charters and decrees of the Holy See.^{^[233]} The specifics of the Basilian school curriculum included an in-depth study of ecclesiastical and secular history (within the Jesuit realm, history was seen as a discipline necessary for understanding works of classical literature and composition of speeches; it was therefore simply a part of rhetoric).^{^[234]}

The so-called Manuscript of Kyshka^{^[235]} was a collection of materials prepared for the course of lectures on ecclesiastical history, taught in the first half of the 1690s at Volodymyr school (Collegio Zalesciano) by Lev (Kyshka); it provides a certain sense of the content of the ecclesiastical history curriculum of Basilian collegia. Kyshka, at the time a professor of rhetoric and philosophy, later became a proto-archimandrite of the Basilian Order (1703–1713), bishop of Volodymyr and Brest dioceses (1711–1728), and the head of the Union Church (1714–1728). The narrative of this codex was supposed to create the foundation for Kyshka’s work on the history of the Ruthenian Church; however, this plan was never realized. Even in its draft format, the Manuscript of Kyshka makes possible the reconstruction of the historical memory in the Basilian and Ruthenia Union milieu of the late 17^th and early 18^th centuries, as well as the content of the historical curricula in the public schools of the Order.

Lev Kyshka organized the Manuscript of Kyshka in a way that represents world history from Antiquity to the 17^th century in chronological order, while thematically connecting historical events in the Ukrainian–Belarusian lands of the Commonwealth with ancient Rome and Greece and, later on, Christian Europe.^{^[236]} The first chapter contains notes on quotations by writers from antiquity and their biographies (Cesare Baronio, Herodotus, Eusebius, Pliny, Polybius, Seneca, Sozomen, Socrates), works on European history, and stories. In the second chapter, one finds notes, in Polish, on Annales Nestora, a text of the Hypatian Chronicle, which relates stories regarding the travels of Andrew the Apostle to Kyivan Rusʹ, the reign of the legendary Kyi, Shchek, and Khoryv, the invitation of Rurik to Rusʹ, and up until the entry from the year 1301 concerning Prince Lev Danylovych.^{^[237]} The third and sixth chapters present an original compendium of chronicles, compiled by Lev Kyshka, on the subject of various predominantly church-related historical events in Lithuania, Poland, and Ruthenian lands between 1469 and 1718.^{^[238]} In the fourth chapter, one finds polemical texts which represent fragments of Lev (Kyshka’s) work about the Kyivan Union Metropolitan, Hypatius (Pociej), published in Supraśl (1714) under the title Kazania i Homilie Męża Bożego niesmiertelney sławy i pamięci Hypacyusza Pocieja.^{^[239]}

The next chapter of the Manuscript deals with the traditions of Kyivan Rusʹ and presents the Union Church and Basilian Order as successors to it. Alongside lengthy hagiographies of Ruthenian princes from the 10^th through 15^th centuries (Saints Cyril and Methodius, ‘the Apostles of Rusʹ’, St. Volodymyr the Great, Saints Borys and Hlib, St. Olha, Ihor, Rurik, Vaišvilkas, princess Paraskevi of Polotsk), Lithuanian martyrs Antonius, Johannes, and Eustachius, and Eleazar, archimandrite of Lauryshava monastery, one encounters biographies (384 full and 14 concise ones) of metropolitans, bishops, and Basilian monks up until 1703.^{^[240]}

The Manuscript of Kyshka was compiled not only for the needs of Basilian public schools but also for the desire to present an alternative Union history of Slavonic–Ruthenian Christianity that did not agree with the official version narrated by the Orthodox Synopsis (Kyiv, 1674): this was the first text to connect Ruthenian history with the historical past of the Muscovy Tsardom, thereby creating a Muscovy-centred conception of the past of the Eastern Slavic lands.

The importance of Basilian schooling in the 17^th and 18^th centuries lies, first and foremost, in the fact that it broke down the confessional and socio-cultural barriers that had set apart religious and ethnic communities of the Commonwealth throughout the centuries. With the Union Church and the Basilian Order as intermediaries, the Western models of schooling permeated the Orthodox milieu of the Kyivan Metropolitan diocese, and even that of the Muscovy patriarchy. Concurrently, the curriculum and character of the activities carried out in the public schools and collegia testify to evident tendencies within Ruthenian culture to preserve its separation from both Polish and Muscovy (Russian) cultures.

*** *** ***

Prior to the first partition of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, one can provisionally single out four chronologically consecutive periods:

Initium: the reform of Yosyf (Rutsʹkyi) of 1617; the asceticism and martyrdom of Yosafat (Kuntsevych); the formation of the chain of Basilian monasteries.
Bellum et resurrection (1648 to the early 18^th century): the persecution and ruin during the Khmelnytsʹky Uprising and the Russo–Swedish Deluge; the Basilian revival from the last quarter of the 17^th century until the early 18^th century.
Formatio (1720s–1750s): the unification of the ‘New Union’ monasteries with the Lithuanian province and the formation of a ‘Lithuanian–Polish’ (Ukrainian–Belarusian) model of Basilian piety.
Schola professorum (second part of the 18^th – early 19^th century): the Golden Age of the Order, which is characterized by the active functioning of presses and public libraries, the formation of a chain of Basilian collegia, as well as participation in the Educational Commission and the Wilno Jesuit Academy.

During the 17^th and 18^th centuries, the Basilian Order was one of the foundations of the Union Church’s organizational structure, while its monks belonged to the ecclesiastical elite of the Kyivan Metropolitan diocese within the public space of the Commonwealth. Basilians became creators and carriers of the new model of Slavia Unita within European Christianity; as ‘public figures’, they joined the cultural development of Sarmatian Baroque within Central-Eastern Europe and facilitated the entry of the ‘Ruthenian nation’ into Western civilization. Not only were the Union monks able to maintain their educational institutions (some 20 Basilian collegia) at a high level, they also brought about an intensification of Catholic religious life in the Commonwealth. The monks organized numerous ecclesiastical missions, managed some 100 parish churches, and supported primary schools, popular vacation spots, Marian sanctuaries and publishing centres. Owing to its universal character, the Basilian Order formed a common Early-Modern identity of Union-adhering Ruthenians, the kind of identity that united Slavic–Byzantine and Latin traditions on Ukraine’s Great frontier.

Bibliography

[Kreuza, Leon], Kazanie o świątobliwym zywoćie y chwalebney śmierći Przewielebnego w Bodze oyca Iosaphata Kuncewicza Arcybiskupá Połockiego, Witebskiego y Msćisławskiego w cerkwi Cathedralney Połockiey przy depozyciey ciała iego odprawowane od oyca Leona Kreuży Nominata na Episkopstwo Smolenskie. Za wolą y ukazaniem starszych z Ruskiego języka na polski przełożone y w druk podane, ([Wilno], 1625)

[Olszewski, Jan], Memoryał, albo informacja y objaśnienie klasztoru Wileńskiego cerkwi Przenayświętszey Trуjcy

[Quirinus Cnoglerus Austrius], ‘Pompa Casimiriana sive de labaro D. Casimiri Regis Poloniae etc. F. Iagellonis N. M. D. Lith. Principis etc. a Leone X. Pontif. Max. in Diuos relati, ex urbe transmisso, et Vilnam Lithuaniae Metropolim solenni pompa, ad 6. Idus Maii, Anno M.DC.IV. illato, Quirini Cnogleri Austrii Sermo Panegyricus’, in Theatrum S. Casimiri, in quo ipsius prosapia, vita, miracula, et illustris pompa in sollemni eiusdem apotheoseos instauratione, Vilnae Lithuaniae metropoli, V Id. Maii, anno D[omi]ni M.DC.IV. instituta graphice proponuntur, ed. by Gregorius Swiecicki (Vilnae, 1604), pp. 37–127

Adadurovas, Vadimas, ‘Švč. Trejybės vienuolynas kaip švietimo institucija’, in Kultūrų kryžkelė: Vilniaus Švč. Trejybės šventovė ir vienuolynas, ed. by Alfredas Bumblauskas, Salvijus Kulevičius, and Ihoris Skočiliasas (Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla, 2017), pp. 137−43

Akty, izdavaemye Vilenskoj Archeografičeskoj komissiej, 39 vols (Vilʹna, 1865–1915), IX (1878)

Alexy Dubowicz, Złota godzina. Dnia złotego Początek, Przed Naiasnieyszym Janem Kazimierzem Krolem Polskim, Wielkim Książęćiem Litewskim etc. etc. w Cerkwi Zyrowickiey (Wilno, 1651).

Alʹmes, Іvan, ‘Kontroversijne misce pam’jati ta spilʹna kulʹturna spadščyna: Počajivsʹka obytelʹ i monastyrsʹka drukarnja domodernoho času’, in Kataloh starodrukiv Počajivsʹkoji vasylijansʹkoji drukarni XVIII – peršoji tretyny XIX stolitʹ (Lʹviv, 2020) (in print)

Alʹmes, Іvan, Іstorija čytannja: Čenci v sociokulʹturnomu prostori Lʹvivsʹkoji jeparchiji (rannij novyj čas) (Lʹviv, 2020) (in print);

Almesas, Ivanas, ‘Spaustuvė’, in Kultūrų kryžkelė: Vilniaus Švč. Trejybės šventovė ir vienuolynas, ed. by Alfredas Bumblauskas, Salvijus Kulevičius, and Ihoris Skočiliasas (Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla, 2017), pp. 203−8

Analecta OSBM. Miscellanea in honorem S. Josaphat, 6.1–4 (1967)

Andrey Sheptytsky National Museum in Lviv (hereafter NML), Rkl.-138, ark. 35–35 zv.

Balyk, Borys, ‘“Katafalʹk černečyj vasylijan” XVII–XVIII st. (Rukopysna zbirka žyttjepysiv Vasylijan)’, Analecta OSBM, 8.1–4 (1973), 269–310

Balyk, Borys, ‘Z istoriji kulʹtu sv. Josafata v Peremysʹkij jeparchiji (XVII/XVIII st.)’, Analecta OSBM, 8.1−4 (1973), 43–62

Baran, Ołeksandr, ‘Rękopis Lwa Kiszki: struktura i treść źródła. Z dziejów bazyliańskiej historiografii przełomu XVII i XVIII wieku’, Rocznik Instytutu Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej, 3 (2005), 23−54

Barącz, Sadok, Pamiątki Buczackie (Lwów, 1882)

Barbera, Mario, La Ratio studiorum e la parte quara della Costituzioni della Compagnia di Gesù (Padova, 1942)

Bartnicka, Kalina, and Irena Szybiak, eds, Raporty generalnych wizytatorów szkół Komisji Edukacji Narodowej w Wielkim Księstwie Litewskim (1782–1792) (Wrocław, 1974)

Baŭtovič, Michasʹ, ed., Èpistaljacyja Sʹvjatoha Jazafata: Zbor dakumèntaŭ (Polacak: Hrèka-katalickaja parafija Sʹvjatapakutnika Jazafata, 2006)

Beauvois, Daniel, Szkonictwo polskie na ziemiach litewsko-ruskich 1803–1832. Szkoły podstawowe i średnie, 2 vols (Lublin: KUL, 1991)

Berezhnaya, Liliya, ‘“Heilige Gottesmutter von Počajiv, sie wird uns retten!” Die Gottesmutter von Počajiv als Erinnerungsort in der postsowjetischen Ukraine’, in Maria in der Krise: Kultpraxis zwischen Konfession und Politik in Ostmitteleuropa, ed. by Agnieszka Gąsior, and Stefan Samerski (Köln: Böhlau, 2014), pp. 347−58

Berezhnaya, Liliya, ‘Kloster Počajiv’, in Religiöse Erinnerungsorte in Ostmitteleuropa: Konstitution und Konkurrenz im nationen- und epochenübergreifenden Zugriff, ed. by Joachim Bahlcke, Stefan Rohdewald, and Thomas Wünsch (München: Akademie, 2013), pp. 74–80

Bieńkowski, Ludomir, ‘Organizacja Kościoła wschodniego w Polsce’, in Kościół w Polsce. Studia nad historią Kościoła katolickiego w Polsce. Tom 2: Wieki XVI–XVIII, ed. by Jerzy Kłoczowski, 2 vols (Kraków, 1969), pp. 781–1049

Bilyk, Viktorija, and Oksana Karlina, Žyva spilʹnota v impersʹkomu sviti: Lucʹka hreko-unijna jeparchija kincja XVIII – peršoji tretyny XIX stolitʹ (Lʹviv: Ukrajinsʹkyj Katolycʹkyj Universytet, 2018)

Blažejovskyj, Dmytro, Byzantine Kyivan rite students in Pontifical Colleges, and Seminaries, Universities and Institutes of Central and Western Europe (1576−1983) (Rome, 1984)

Blažejovskyj, Dmytro, Ukrainian and Armenian Pontifical Seminaries of Lviv (1665−1784) (Rome, 1975)

Bočkovsʹka, Valentyna, ‘Počajivsʹkyj duchovnyj oseredok v istoriji i kulʹturi ukrajinsʹkoho narodu XVIII–XIX st.’ (unpublished candidate’s of sciences thesis, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, 2018)

Bočkovsʹka, Valentyna, Ljudmyla Chaucha, and Valerij Adamovyč, eds, Kataloh vydanʹ Počajivsʹkoho ta Univsʹkoho monastyriv XVIII-XX st. z kolekciji Muzeju knyhy i drukarstva Ukrajiny (Kyjiv: Vydavnyčyj dim Kyjevo-Mohyljansʹka Akademija, 2008)

Borek, Piotr, ed., W kręgu Hadziacza A. D. 1658: Od historii do literatury (Kraków: Collegium Columbinum, 2008)

Borowik, Teodozy, Historia albo powieść zgodliwa przez pewne podanie ludzi wiary godnych, o obrazie przeczystey Panny Mariey Zyrowickim cudotwornym W. X. L. W powiecie Słonimskim, Y o rozmaitych cudach, ktore się przy nim… dzieią… (Wilno, 1628)

Bumblauskas, Alfredas, Salvijus Kulevičius, and Ihoris Skočiliasas, eds, Kultūrų kryžkelė: Vilniaus Švč. Trejybės šventovė ir vienuolynas (Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla, 2017)

Bumblauskas, Alʹfredas, Salʹvijus Kuljavičjus, and Іhor Skočyljas, eds, Na perechresti kulʹtur: Monastyr i chram Presvjatoji Trijci u Vilʹnjusi (Vilʹnjus, 2017)

Bumblauskas, Alʹfredas, Salʹvijus Kuljavičjus, and Іhor Skočyljas, eds, Na perechresti kulʹtur: Monastyr i chram Presvjatoji Trijci u Vilʹnjusi: Kolektyvna monohrafija, 2nd edn (Lʹviv: Ukrajinsʹkyj Katolycʹkyj Universytet, 2019)

Butterwick, Richard, ‘Catholicism and Enlightenment in Poland-Lithuania’, in A Companion to the Catholic Enlightenment in Europe, ed. by Ulrich L. Lehner, and Michael Printy (Leiden−Boston: Brill, 2010), pp. 297–358

Central State Historical Archives of Ukraine in Lviv (hereafter TsDIAL), f. 201, op. 4б, spr. 421

Chojnackij, Andrej, Počaevskaja Uspenskaja lavra. Istoričeskoe opisanie, ed. by Grigorij Kryžanovskij (Počaev, 1897)

Chomik, Piotr, Kult ikon Matki Bożej w Wielkim księstwie Litewskim w XVI–XVIII wieku (Białystok, 2003)

Chotkowski, Władysław, Redukcje monasterów Bazyljańskich w Galicji (Kraków, 1922)

Chraban, Hryhorij, Spalach hnivu narodnoho: Antyfeodalʹne narodno-vyzvolʹne povstannja na Pravoberežnij Ukrajini u 1768–1769 rr (Kyjiv, 1989)

Chrapowicki, Jan A., Diariusz, cz. 2: Lata 1665–1669, ed. Andrzej Rachuba, and Tadeusz Wasilewski (Warszawa: Pax, 1988)

Chyžnjak, Zoja, Kyjevo-mohyljansʹka akademija (Kyjiv: Vyšča škola, 1981)

Čiurinskas, Mintautas, ‘Biografiniai šaltiniai ir barokinės literatūros tradicija’, in Palaimintojo kankinio Juozapato, Polocko arkivyskupo, gyvenimo ir mirties simboliniai atvaizdai: šaltinis, vertimas ir studija, ed. by Andriejus Mlodzianovskis (Vilnius: Vilniaus dailės akademija, 2015), pp. 401–43

Čiurinskas, Mintautas, ‘Vaizdai XVII a. raštijoje’, in Kultūrų kryžkelė: Vilniaus Švč. Trejybės šventovė ir vienuolynas, ed. by Alfredas Bumblauskas, Salvijus Kulevičius, and Ihoris Skočiliasas (Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla, 2017), pp. 157–76

Čiurinskas, Mintautas, ed., Casimiriana: fontes vitae et cultus S. Casimiri = Šv. Kazimiero gyvenimo ir kulto istorijos šaltiniai (Vilnius: Aidai, 2003)

Cubrzyńska-Leonarczyk, Maria, Oficyna supraska 1695–1803 (Warszawa: Biblioteka Narodowa, 1993)

Czernecki, Jan, Mały król na Rusi i jego stolica Krystynopol. Z Pamiętnika klasztornego 1766 – 1787 i z innech źródeł zebral i zestawił Jan Czernecki (Kraków, 1939)

Dąbrowski, Dariusz, and Adrian Jusupović, eds, Kronika halicko-wołyńska. Kronika Romanowiczów (Kraków−Warszawa: Avalon, 2017)

Deruga, Aleksy, Piotr Wielki a unici i unja kościelna, 1700–1711 (Wilno, 1936)

Derwich, Marek, ed., Kasaty klasztorów na obszarze dawnej Rzeczypospolitej Obojga Narodów i na Śląsku na tle procesów sekularyzacyjnych w Europie, 4 vols (Wrocław: Wrocławskie Towarzystwo Miłośników Historii, 2014)

Dikovskij, Nikolaj, Koronovanie Žirovickoj čudotvornoj ikony Bogomateri (1730 god) (Grodna, 1902)

Dobrowolski, Radosław, ‘Status i rola monasteru supraskiego w dziejach Cerkwi unickiej XVII–XIX w’, in Zakon bazyliański na tle mozaiki wyznaniowej i kulturowej Rzeczypospolitej i krajów ościennych, ed. by Stanisław Nabywaniec, Słavomir Zabraniak, and Beata Lorens (Rzeszów: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Rzeszowskiego, 2018), pp. 67−85

Donohue, John W., Jesuit Education: An Essay on the Foundation of Its Idea (New York, 1963)

Dovbyščenko, Mychajlo, ‘Rukopysna “Chronika” Dermansʹkoho monastyrja (1511−1673 rr.)’, Drohobycʹkyj krajeznavčyj zbirnyk, 11–12 (2008), 438–51 (p. 444)

Dowbyszczenko, Mychajło, ‘Cerkiew unicka na Wołyniu w dobie wojen kozackich w latach 1648−1667’, in Ruchy religijne na Wołyniu w XVI i XVII wieku, ed. by Andrzej Gil (Lublin: KUL, 2013), pp. 11–120

Dubieniecki, Jozafat, Historia o obrazie przeczystej Panny Mariey cudownym (Wilno, 1653)

Dubowicz, Alexy, Coniunctia plánet ziemskich z niebieskimi w cerkwi zurowickiey wystáwiona gdy niezwyćieźony monárcha Władysław. IV. Krol Polski z naiáśnietza Caecilia Renata Krolowa Polska: ludowny obraz náwiedzáli (Wilno, 1644)

Duch, Oleh, Prevelebni panny: Žinoči černeči spilʹnoty Lʹvivsʹkoji ta Peremyšlʹsʹkoji jeparchij u rannʹomodernyj period (Lʹviv: Ukrajinsʹkyj Katolycʹkyj Universytet, 2017)

Dutkiewicz, Józef E., ‘Fabryka cerkwi Wniebowziecia NMP w Poczajowie’, Dawna Sztuka, 2 (1939), 131–62

Èliade, Mirča, Izbrannye sočinenija. Očerki sravnitelʹnogo religiovedenija (Moskva: Ladomir, 1999)

Florja, Boris, Issledovanija po istorii Cerkvi. Drevnerusskoe i slavjanskoe srednevekovʹe: Sbornik (Moskva, 2007)

Frick, David, ed., Wilnianie. Żywoty siedemnastowieczne, Bibliotheca Europae Orientalis, 32 (Warsaw: Studium Europy Wschodniej, 2009)

Gaudemet, Jean, Storia del diritto canonico. Ecclesia et Civitas (San Paolo, 1998)

Gerasimova, Irina, Pod vlastʹju russkogo carja. Sociokulʹturnaja sreda Vilʹny v seredine XVII veka (Sankt-Peterburg: Evropejskij universitet v Sankt-Peterburge, 2015)

Getka, Joanna, ‘Secular lexis in 18th-century Ruthenian religion-related printed matter (based onBasilian “moral theologies”)’, in Beiträge zum 19. Arbeitstreffen der Europäischen Slavistischen Linguistik (Polyslav), ed. by Enrique G. Rubio, Ekaterina Kislova, and Emilia Kubicka (Wiesbaden, 2016), pp. 81–91

Getka, Joanna, Poskojęzyczne druki bazyliańskie (XVIII wiek) (Warszawa, 2013)

Getka, Joanna, Prosta mowa końca XVIII wieku. Język ‘Nauk Parafialnych’ (Poczajów 1794) (Warszawa: Uniwersytet Warszawski, 2012)

Getka, Joanna, U progu modernizacji: Ruskojęzyczne drukarstwo bazyliańskie XVIII wieku (Warszawa: Uniwersytet Warszawski, 2017)

Gil, Andrzej, ‘Kult Jozafata Kuncewicza i jego pierwsze przedstawienia ikonowe w Rzeczypospolitej (do połowy XVII wieku). Zarys problematyki’, in Kościoły wschodnie w Rzeczypospolitej XVI–XVIII wieku. Zbiór studiów (Lublin: Instytut Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej, 2005), pp. 65–72

Gil, Andrzej, Kościoły wschodnie w Inflantach i ich zaplecze w okresie od XIII do początku XIX wieku (Lublin, 2019)

Gilʹ, Andžej, ‘Unijni monastyri Cholmsʹko-Belzʹkoji jeparchiji (1596–1720)’, in Kovžeh. Naukovyj zbirnyk iz cerkovnoji istoriji. Čyslo 5 (Lʹviv: Vydavnyctvo Otciv Vasylijan ‘Misioner’, 2007), pp. 285−300

Gilʹtebrandt, Pëtr, and others, eds, Archeografičeskij sbornik dokumentov, otnosjaščichsja k istorii Severo-Zapadnoj Rusi, izdavaemyj pri upravlenii Vilenskogo učebnogo okruga, 14 vols (Vilʹna, 1867–1904), X (1874), XII (1900)

Griciūtė-Šverebienė, Liepa, XVII–XVIII a. bažnytinės procesijos Lietuvos Didžiojoje Kunigaikštystėje (Vilnius: Vilniaus Dailės Akademijos, 2011)

Guépin, Alphonse, Żywot ś. Jozafata Kuncewicza męczenika, arcybiskupa Połockiego rit. gr. opowiedziany na tle historyi kościoła ruskiego według dzieła O. Alfonsa Guépin, z przedmową H. Kalinki C. R (Lwów, 1885)

Habrusʹ, Tamara, ‘Stylistyčnyja aspekty architèktury vilenskaha baroka’, in Baroka ŭ belaruskaj kulʹtury i mastactve, ed. by Viktar Šmataŭ (Minsk, 1998), pp. 14−166

Habrusʹ, Tamara, Muravanaja sakralʹnaja architèktura XVI–XVIII stst. (Minsk: Belaruskaja navuka, 2006)

Habrusʹ, Tamara, Muravanyja charaly. Sakralʹnaja architèktura belaruskaha baroka (Minsk: Uradžaj, 2001)

Haluščynskyj, Theodosius T., and Athanasius G. Welykyj, eds, Epistolae metropolitarum kioviensium catholicorum: Josephi Velamin Rutskyj Metropolitae Kioviensis catholici (1613 – 1637) (Romae, 1956), pp. 369–80 (№ 188)

Holovacʹkyj, Rodion, ‘Mytropolyča seminarija Rutsʹkoho’, Analecta OSBM, 9.3–4 (1960), 387−91

Horbatsch, Olexa, Epitome praeceptorum rhetoricorum: Počajiv 1764. Die lateinische Schulrhetorik des Basilianerordens aus d. J. 1764 (München, 1992)

Horin, Serhij, Monastyri Lucʹko-Ostrozʹkoji jeparchiji kincja XV − seredyny XVII stolittja: funkcionuvannja i misce u volynsʹkomu sociumi (Kyjiv: Vydavnyčnyj dim ‘Kyjevo-Mohyljansʹka akademija’, 2012)

Horin, Serhij, Monastyri Zachidnoji Volyni (druha polovyna XV − perša polovyna XVII stolitʹ (Lʹviv: Vydavnyctvo Otciv Vasylijan ‘Misioner’)

Horin, Serhij, Žydyčynsʹkyj Svjato-Mykolajivsʹkyj monastyr (do seredyny XVII storiččja) (Kyjiv: Majsternja knyhy, 2009)

Hruševsʹkyj, Mychajlo, ‘Materialy do istoriji Kolijivščyny’, in Hruševsʹkyj, Mychajlo Serhijovyč. Tvory, ed. by Pavlo Sochanʹ, and others, 50 vols (Lʹviv: Svit, 2005), VII, pp. 120−39

Hrynčyšyn, Dmytro, ‘Polětyka svěcka – unikalʹna Počajivsʹka pam’jatka kincja XVIII stolittja’, Zapysky NTŠ, 246 (2003), 246–63

Isaievych, Іaroslav, ‘Confraternities of Laymen in Early Modern Ukraine and Belarus’, in Belarus. Lithuania. Poland. Ukraine. The Foundations of Historical and Cultural Traditions in East Central Europe. International Conference (Rome, 28 April – 6 May 1990), ed. by Jerzy Kłoczowski (Lublin−Rome: Foundation John Paul II, 1994), pp. 175−98

Isajevyč, Jaroslav, ‘Do charakterystyky kulʹtury doby Baroko: vasylijansʹki osvitni oseredky’, Ukrajina: kulʹturna spadščyna, nacionalʹna svidomistʹ, deržavnistʹ, 12 (2004), 195–206

Isajevyč, Jaroslav, ‘Knyhovydannja i drukarstvo v Počajevi: iniciatory ta vykonavci’, in Drukarnja Počajivsʹkoho Uspensʹkoho monastyrja, pp. 7–22.

Isajevyč, Jaroslav, ‘Ukrajinsʹki monastyrsʹki drukarni Pravoberežžja: Univ i Počajiv’, in Ukrajinsʹke knyhovydannja: vytoky, rozvytok, problemy, ed. by Jaroslav Іsajevyč (Lʹviv, 2002), pp. 276–86

Isajevyč, Jaroslav, Ukrajinsʹke knyhovydannja: vytoky, rozvytok, problemy (Lʹviv, 2002)

Isičenko, Іhor, ‘Prepodobnyj Іov Počajivsʹkyj u kulʹturnomu kodi Počajivsʹkoho vasylijansʹkoho monastyrja’, in Kulʹturotvorča misija Počajivsʹkoho vasylijansʹkoho monastyrja: Zbirnyk naukovyj statej, ed. by Іhor Іsičenko (Charkiv: Akta, 2018), pp. 51–61.

Isičenko, Іhor, ‘Vasyliansʹke baroko’, Slovo i Čas, 1 (2011), 3–21

Jakovenko, Natalja, ‘“Bytva za duši”: Konkurencija Bohorodyčnych čud miž unijatamy ta pravoslavnymy u 17 st. (vid Teodozija Borovyka do Joanykija Haljatovsʹkoho)’, Harvard Ukrainian Studies, 32/33.2, Žnyva: Essays Presented in Honor of George G. Grabowicz on His Seventieth Birthday (2011–2014), 807−25

Jakovenko, Natalja, ‘Čudo Počajivsʹkoji ikony na mori pid Neapolem 1762 roku’, Zapysky NTŠ, 270 (2018), 201−19

Jakovenko, Natalja, ‘Latynsʹke škilʹnyctvo i škilʹnyj humanizm v Ukrajini kincja XVI – seredyny XVII st.’, Kyjivsʹka starovyna, 12 (1997), 11−27

Jakovenko, Natalja, ‘Ochtyrsʹka čudotvorna ikona: prostir i semiotyka relihijnoho dosvidu’, in V orbiti chrystyjansʹkoji kulʹtury. (Materialy naukovoji konferenciji do 1030-riččja chreščennja Rusi; Kyjiv, 25–26 žovtnja 2018 roku), ed. by Іhor Skočyljas, and Maksym Jaremenko, Kyjivsʹke chrystyjanstvo, 21 (Lʹviv: Ukrajinsʹkyj Katolycʹkyj Universytet, 2020), pp. 45–57

Jakovenko, Natalja, ‘Tvorennja lokalʹnych “prostoriv viry”: topohrafija i socialʹna stratyhrafija palomnyctv v Ukrajini ChVІІІ stolittja (za knyhamy čud Počajivsʹkoji ta Ochtyrsʹkoji bohorodyčnych ikon)’, Zapysky NTŠ, 271 (2018), 209–30

Jakovenko, Natalja, Narys istoriji serednʹovičnoji ta rannʹomodernoji Ukrajiny, 2nd edn (Kyjiv: Krytyka, 2005)

Jakovenko, Natalja, U pošukach Novoho Neba: Žyttja i teksty Joanykija Galjatovsʹkoho (Kyjiv: Krytyka, 2017)

Jankevičienė, Algė, ‘Dviejų stilių sintezė XVI a. Vilniaus cerkvių architektūroje’, Acta Academiae Artium Vilnensis. Lietuvos Didžiosios Kunigaikštystės gotika: sakralinė architektūra ir dailė, 26 (2002), 167–79

Jaroševič-Pereslavcev, Zoja, ‘Vilʹnjusskoe kirilličeskoe knigopečatanie: ego sudʹba i značenie’, in Vilniaus Universiteto bibliotekos metraštis, ed. by Viktorija Vaitkevičiūtė, and others (Vilniaus: Vilniaus universitetas, 2015), pp. 303–24

Jaroszewicz-Pieresławcew, Zoja, Starowiercy w Polsce i ich księgi (Olsztyn, 1995)

Ji: Nezaležnyj kulʹturolohičnyj časopys, Lʹviv epochy Pinzelja, 72 (2013)

Jobst, Kerstin S., ‘Transnational and Trans-Denominational Aspects of the Veneration of Josaphat Kuntsevych’, Journal of Ukrainian Studies, 37 (2012), 9−15

Jorgenson, Wayne James, Orthodox Monasticism: Byzantine, in Encyclopedia of Monasticism, ed. by William M. Johnston, and Christopher Kleinhenz (London: Fitzroy Dearborn, 2000), pp. 974–76

Kania, Janusz, Unickie seminarium diecezjalne w Chełmie w latach 1759-1833 (Lublin, 1993)

Kaufmann, Thomas, Die Mitte der Reformation. Eine Studie zu Buchdruck und Publizistik im deutschen Sprachgebiet, zu ihren Akteuren und deren Strategien, Inszenierungs- und Ausdrucksformen (Tübingen, 2019)

Kaupuž, Anna, Ingė Lukšaitė, ‘A. Butkevičiaus gramatikos była’, Kalbotyra, 5 (1962), 122–61

Kažuro, Ina, ‘Bazilijonų vienuolijos ryšiai su Vilniaus universitetu’, Lietuvos istorijos studijos, 42 (2018), 29–47

Kažuro, Ina, ‘Vilniaus bazilijonų spaustuvės (1628–1845) veiklos organizavimas’, Knygotyra, 69 (2017), 14−19

Kažuro, Ina, ‘Vilniaus bazilijonų vienuolyno spaustuvės veikla 1628–1839 m.’ (doctoral thesis, Vilnius University, 2019)

Kempa, Tomasz, ‘Czy męczeńska śmierć arcybiskupa Jozafata Kuncewicza przyczyniła się do rozwoju unii brzeskiej na obsarze archidiecezji połockiej?’, in Kościoły wschodnie w Rzeczypospolitej XVI–XVIII wieku. Zbiór studiów (Lublin: Instytut Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej, 2005), pp. 93–105

Kempa, Tomasz, ‘Recepcja unii brzeskiej na obsarze Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego i ziem ruskich Korony do połowy XVII wieku’, Rocznik Instytutu Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej, 3 (2005), 141–70

Kempa, Tomasz, ‘Unia i prawosławie w Witebsku w czasie rządów biskupich Jozafata Kuncewicza i po jego męczeńskiej śmierci (do połowy XVII wieku)’, in Między Zachodem a Wschodem. Etniczne, kulturowe i religijne pogranicza Rzeczypospolitej w XVI–XVIII wieku. Tom 3, ed. by Krzysztof Mikulski, and Agnieszla Zielińska-Nowicka (Toruń: Mado, 2005), pp. 135–54

Kempa, Tomasz, ‘Unicki ośrodek zakonny w Wilnie i jego rola w reformie bazylianów przeprowadzonej przez metropolitę Józefa Welamina Rutskiego’, in Zakon bazyliański na tle mozaiki wyznaniowej i kulturowej Rzeczypospolitej i krajów ościennych, ed. by Stanisław Nabywaniec, Słavomir Zabraniak, and Beata Lorens (Rzeszów: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Rzeszowskiego, 2018), pp. 13−29

Kempa, Tomasz, Konflikty wyznaniowe w Wilnie od początku reformacji do końca XVII wieku (Torun: Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika, 2016)

Klimov, Serhej, Baziliane (Mogilev, 2011)

Kohut, Zenon, ‘Myths Old and New: The Haidamak Movement and the Koliivshchyna (1768) in Recent Historiography’, Harvard Ukrainian Studies, 1 (1977), 359−78

Krečiunas, Pavlo, and Vasilis Parasiukas, ‘Švč. Trejybės unitų vienuolynas ir Bazilijonų ordino steigimas’, in Kultūrų kryžkelė: Vilniaus Švč. Trejybės šventovė ir vienuolynas, ed. by Alfredas Bumblauskas, Salvijus Kulevičius, and Ihoris Skočiliasas (Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla, 2017), pp. 80−91

Krečun, Pavlo, Cvjatyj Josafat Kuncevyč (1580−1623) jak svidok viry v eposi relihijnoji kontroversiji (Lʹviv: Misioner, 2013)

Krochmal, Jacek, ‘Rola bazylianów we wprowadzaniu unii kościelnej w eparchii przemysko-samborskiej w latach 1610–1693’, in Zakon bazyliański na tle mozaiki wyznaniowej i kulturowej Rzeczypospolitej i krajów ościennych, ed. by Stanisław Nabywaniec, Słavomir Zabraniak, and Beata Lorens (Rzeszów: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Rzeszowskiego, 2018), pp. 45−66;

Kroll, Piotr, Od ugody Hadziackiej do Cudnowa: Kozaczyzna między Rzecząpospolitą a Moskwą w latach 1658−1660 (Warszawa: Uniwersytet Warszawski, 2008)

Krykun, Mykola, ‘Dokumenty pro nadannja pustyni Umanʹ u vlasnistʹ Valentiju Aleksandrovi Kalynovsʹkomu 1609 roku’, Ukrajinsʹkyj archeohrafičnyj ščoričnyk, 21−22 (2018), 698−712

Kryvošeja, Іhor, Tetjana Tyščenko, and Oksana Zelinsʹka, ‘Storinky istoriji Umansʹkoho vasyliansʹkoho monastyrja’, in Kyjivsʹki polonistyčni studiji, ‘Ukrajinsʹka škola’ v literaturi ta kulʹturi ukrajinsʹko-polʹsʹkoho pohranyččja (Kyjiv, 2005), pp. 180–92

Kryvošeja, Іhor, Umansʹkyj vasyliansʹkyj monastyr (1765–1834) (Umanʹ, 2009)

Kryvošeja, Іhor, Volodymyr Kryvošeja, and Іhor Blyznjuk, Umanščyna v etnopolityčnij istoriji Ukrajiny (kinecʹ XVIIІ – perša tretyna XIX st.) (Kyjiv, 1998)

Kuncevičius, Albinas, and others, ‘Nekropolis ir jo archeologiniai tyrimai’, in Kultūrų kryžkelė: Vilniaus Švč. Trejybės šventovė ir vienuolynas, ed. by Alfredas Bumblauskas, Salvijus Kulevičius, and Ihoris Skočiliasas (Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla, 2017), pp. 224−36

Labyncev, Jurij, ed., V pomoščʹ sostaviteljam svodnogo kataloga, Vyp. 3: Kirillovskie izdanija Supraslʹskoj tipografii (Moskva, 1978)

Lehner, Ulrich L., and William P. O’Brien, ‘Mysticism and Reform in Catholic Theology between 1600 and 1800’, in The Oxford Handbook of Early Modern Theology, 1600−1800, ed. by Ulrich L. Lehner, Richard A. Muller, and Anthony G. Roeber (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016), pp. 63–74

Lehner, Ulrich L., The Catholic Enlightenment: The Forgotten History of a Global Movement (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016)

Leo Metropolitanus totius Russiae, ed., Synodus provincialis Ruthenorum habita in Civitate Zamosciae anno MDCCXX (Romae, 1724)

Levycʹka, Mar'jana, ‘Koronovani ikony Bohorodyci v ukrajinsʹkij unijnij tradyciji ChVІІІ–ChІCh st. (istoriohrafija i zrazky)’, Karpaty: ljudyna, etnos, cyvilizacija, 7–8 (2017–2018), 270−84

Lidov, Aleksej, ‘Sozdanie sakralʹnych prostranstv kak vid tvorčestva i predmet istoričeskogo issledovanija’, in Ierotopija: Sozdanie sakralʹnych prostranstv v Vizantii i Drevnej Rusi, ed. by Aleksej Lidov (Moskva: Indrik, 2006), pp. 9−58

Lisejčikov, Denis, ‘Zaveščanie mitropolita Iosifa Velʹjamina Rutskogo’, in Zaveščanija uniatskich ierarchov Kievskoj mitropolii XVII i XVIII vv. kak primer religioznoj kulʹtury obščestva Reči Pospolitoj, ed. Andžej Gilʹ (Ljublin, 2016), 47–73

Lisejčykaŭ, Dzjanis, ‘“Pjacʹ haloŭnych šturmaŭ…”: Duchoŭny tastament mitrapalita Kieŭskaha, Halickaha i Usëj Rusi Іosifa Velʹjamina-Ruckaha 1627 hoda’, Belaruski histarčn časopis, 3 (2020), 13−20

Lisejčykaŭ, Dzjanis, ‘Matèryjaly heneralʹnych vizitacyj manastyroŭ Litoŭskaj pravincyi Bazylʹjanskaha ordèna XVIII st. u fondach Aŭstryjskaj nacyjanalʹnaj biblijatèki’, in Belaruskija archivy na mjažy tysjačahoddzjaŭ: zdabytki i straty. Matèryjaly navukova-praktyčnaj kanferèncyi, prysvečanaj 80-hoddzju Nacyjanalʹnaha histaryčnaha archiva Belarusi (Minsk, 28 čèrvenja 2018 h.) (Minsk, 2019), pp. 197−215

Lithuanian State History Archive, f. 1178, ap. 1, b. 374

Lorens, Beata, ‘Bazylianie w Galicji wobec działań kasacyjnych w latach 1772−1792’, in Kasaty klasztorów na obszarze dawnej Rzeczypospolitej Obojga Narodów i na Śląsku na tle procesów sekularyzacyjnych w Europie. Tom 1: Geneza. Kasaty na ziemiach zaborów austriackiego i rosyjskiego, ed. by Marek Derwich, 4 vols (Wrocław: Wrocławskie Towarzystwo Miłośników Historii, 2014), I, pp. 215–32

Lorens, Beata, Bazylianie prowincji koronnej w latach 1743–1780 (Rzeszów: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Rzeszowskiego, 2014)

Lorentz, Stanisław, Jan Krzysztof Glaubitz, architekt wileński XVIII w. Materiały do biografii i twórczości, Prace z Historii Sztuki, 5 vols (Warszawa: Towarzystwo naukowe warszawskie, 1936–1946), III (1937)

Losʹ, Valentyna, Uniatsʹka Cerkva na Pravoberežnij Ukrajini naprykinci XVIII − peršij polovyni XIX st.: orhanizacijna struktura ta kulʹturno-relihijnyj aspekt (Kyjiv: NBUV, 2013)

Łoś, Walentyna, ‘Księga cudów Najświętszej Marii Panny monasteru Bazylianów w Poczajowie: analiza ponadkonfesyjnej mentalności religijnej (XVII – początek XIX wieku)’, Orientalia Christiana Cracoviensia, 10 (2018), 111–30

Makrides, Vasilios N., ‘The Enlightenment in the Greek Orthodox East: Appropriation, Dilemmas, Ambiguities’, in Enlightenment and Religion in the Orthodox World, ed. Paschalis M. Kitromilides (Oxford: Voltaire Foundation, 2016), pp. 17–47

Medvedyk, Jurij, Ukrajinsʹka duchovna pisnja XVII−XVIII stolitʹ (Lʹviv: Ukrajinsʹkyj Katolycʹkyj Universytet, 2006)

Mickevič, Valery, Katalickija kljaštary ChIV−XVIII stst. u mežach sučasnaj Belarusi (Minsk: Rymska-katalickaja parafija Sv. Symona i Sv. Aleny, 2013)

Mironowicz, Antoni, ‘Jozafat Dubieniecki – historia cudownego obrazu żyrowickiego’, Rocznik Teologiczny, 33 (1991), 195–215

Miscellanea rerum ad statum ecclesiasticum in Magno Lituaniae Ducatu pertinentium, collecta ab Alberto Wiiuk Koiałowicz Societ. Iesu, S. Theol. Doct. Almae Uniuersitatis Vilnensis Procancellario, et Ordinario S. Theol. Professore vulgata Superiorum permissu, (Vilnae, 1650)

Moschos, Dimitrios, ‘The Churches of the East and the Enlightenment’, in The Oxford Handbook of Early Modern Theology, 1600−1800, ed. by Ulrich L. Lehner, Richard A. Muller, and Anthony G. Roeber (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016), pp. 505–13

Mycʹko, Іhor, Svjatouspensʹka Lavra v Unevi (kinecʹ ChІІІ – kinecʹ ChCh st.) (Lʹviv, 1998)

Mycyk, Jurij, Umanʹ kozacʹka i hajdamacʹka (Kyjiv: Kyjevo-Mohyljansʹka Akademija, 2002)

Myšanyč, Oleksa, ed., Ukrajinsʹke barokko: Materialy І konhresu Mižnarodnoji asociaciji ukrajinciv (Kyjiv 27.08 – 3.09.1990) (Kyjiv: Іnstytut archeohrafiji AN Ukrajiny, 1993)

Myšanyč, Oleksa, ed., Ukrajinsʹke literaturne barokko: Zbirnyk naukovych pracʹ (Kyjiv: Naukova dumka, 1987)

Nalyvajko, Dmytro, and Leonid Uškalov, eds, Ukrajinsʹke baroko, 2 vols (Charkiv: Akta, 2004)

Nardi, Isidor, Relacya historyczna o ziawieniu cudownego obrazu Naswietszey Panny Zyrowickiey, nazwanego po wlosku Del Pascolo od Zyru w Rzymie przy Gorach w Resydencyi WW. OO. Bazylianow Ruskiego Narodu po wlosku wydana teraz przetlumaczona przez Ign. Kulczynskiego (Supraśl, 1728)

Nardi, Isidoro, Relazione storica dello scoprimento della sacra e miracolosa immagine della Madonna del Pascolo (Roma, 1721)

Niendorf, Mathias, Das Grossfürstentum Litauen: Studien zur Nationsbildung in der frühen Neuzeit (1569−1795) (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2006)

Obirek, Stanisław, Jezuici w Rzeczypospolitej Obojga Narodów w latach 1564−1668. (Działalność religijna, społeczno-kulturalna i polityczna) (Kraków, 1996)

ÖNB, cod. SN-2799

ÖNB, cod. SN-3838

ÖNB, cod. SN-3847

ÖNB, cod. SN-3849

Ostrowski, Jan, and Guilhem Scherf, eds, Johann Georg Pinsel: Un sculpteur baroque en Ukraine au XVIIIe siècle (Paris: Louvre, 2012)

Panucèvič, Vaclaŭ, Sʹvjaty Jazafat, archijapiskap polacki (Polacak: Safija, 2000)

Patrylo, Іsydor, ‘Narys istoriji vasylijan vid 1743 do 1839 roku’, in Narys Іstoriji Vasylijansʹkoho Čynu Svjatoho Josafata (Rym: Vydavnyctvo OO. Vasylijan, 1992), pp. 183–278

Petrov, Nikolaj, ‘Očerkʺ istorii Bazilianskago ordena vʺ byvšej Polʹše’, Trudy Kievskoj duchovnoj akademii, 12.7 (1871)

Petrović, Marija, ‘Austrian Enlightenment the Orthodox Way. The Church Calendar of the Habsburg Serbs and the Josephinist Reforms’, in Encounters in the Europe’s Southwest. The Habsburg Empire and the Orthodox World in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries, ed. by Harald Heppner, and Eva Posch (Bochum: D. Winkler, 2012), pp. 45–54

Pidlypčak-Maerovič, Marija, ‘Izdanija na litovskom jazyke vasilianskich i iezuitskich tipografij’, in Istoričeskij putʹ litovskoj pisʹmennosti: Cb. materialov konf. (4–6 nojabrja 2004 g., Moskva), ed. by Juozas Budrajtis, and Sergej Temčin (Vilʹnjus, 2005)

Pidłypczak-Majerowicz, Maria, ‘“Menologium bazyliańskie” Ignacego Kulczyńskiego − forma i treść księgi’, in Zakon bazyliański na tle mozaiki wyznaniowej i kulturowej Rzeczypospolitej i krajów ościennych, ed. by Stanisław Nabywaniec, Słavomir Zabraniak, and Beata Lorens (Rzeszów: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Rzeszowskiego, 2018), pp. 267−80

Pidłypczak-Majerowicz, Maria, Bazylianie w Koronie i na Litwie. Szkoły i książki w działalności zakonu (Warszawa−Wrocław, 1986)

Pidruchnyj, Porfyrij, ‘Il “Diario” del Capitolo Basiliano di Dubno (1743) scritto da mons. Giorgio Lascaris (Sullʼunione dei Basiliani in unʼOrdine)’, Analecta OSBM, 14 (1992), 171−226

Pidručnyj, Porfyrij, ‘Počatky Vasylijansʹkoho čynu i Berestejsʹka unija’, in Berestejsʹka unija ta vnutrišnje žyttja Cerkvy u XVII stolitti: Materialy Četvertych „Berestejsʹkych čytanʹ (Lʹviv, Lucʹk, Kyjiv, 2–6 žovtnja 1995 r.), ed. by Borys Gudzjak, and Oleh Turij (Lʹviv: Іnstytut Іstoriji Cerkvy Lʹvivsʹkoji Bohoslovsʹkoji Akademiji, 1997), pp. 79–124

Pidručnyj, Porfyrij, ‘Vasylijansʹkyj Čyn vid Berestejsʹkoho Z’jednannja (1596) do 1743 roku’, in Narys istoriji Vasylijansʹkoho čynu Svjatoho Josafata, pp. 96–182.

Pidručnyj, Porfyrij, and Bohdan Pʼjetnočko, Vasylijansʹki heneralʹni kapituly vid 1617 po 1636 rik. Bazyliańskie kapituły generalne od 1617 do 1636 roku. Capitula generalia basilianorum ab anno 1617 ad annum 1636 (Rym–Lʹviv, 2017)

Pidručnyj, Porfyrij, Іstoryčnyj narys zakonodavstva Vasylijansʹkoho Čynu sv. Josafata (1617–2018) (Rym–Lʹviv, 2018)

Pidručnyj, Porfyrij, Іstoryčnyj narys zakonodavstva Vasylijansʹkoho Čynu Svjatoho Josafata (1617–2018) (Lʹviv: Misioner, 2018)

Piechlik, Ludwik, ‘Działalność kulturalna Towarzystwa Jezusowego na północnych i wschodnich ziemiach Polski w XVI–XVIII wieku’, in Dzieje Lubelszczyzny, Między Wschodem i Zachodem. Kultura umysłowa, ed. by Jerzy Kłoczowski, 8 vols (Warszawa, 1974–1995), VI (1989), pp. 75−96

Pilipowicz, Włodzimierz, ed., Ustawy rządu duchownego i inne pisma biskupa Innocentego Winnickiego, ed. by (Przemyśl: Południowo-Wschodni Instytut Naukowy w Przemyślu, 1998)

Plochij, Serhij, ‘Svjaščenne pravo povstannja: Berestejsʹka unija i relihijna lehitymacija Chmelʹnyččyny’, in Deržava, suspilʹstvo i Cerkva v Ukrajini u XVII stolitti. Materialy Druhych ‘Berestejsʹkych čytanʹ’. Lʹviv, Dnipropetrovsʹk, Kyjiv, 1−6 ljutoho 1995 r., ed. by Borys Hudzjak, and Oleh Turij (Lʹviv, 1996), pp. 1−13

Plochij, Serhij, ‘Vid Jakova Suši do Atanasija Velykoho (Ohljad vydanʹ rymsʹkych džerel z istoriji ukrajinsʹkoji cerkvy)’, Ukrajinsʹkyj archeohrafičnyj ščoričnyk, 1 (1992), 6–14

Plochij, Serhij, Nalyvajkova vira: kozactvo ta relihija v rannʹomodernij Ukrajini (Kyjiv: Krytyka, 2005)

Počinskaja, Irina, Staroobrjadčeskoe knigopečatanie XVIII — pervoj četv. XIX v. (Ekaterinburg, 1994)

Porfyrij Pidručnyj, ‘Dva prohramovi pysannja Rutsʹkoho: Discursus i Programma Unionis’, Analecta OSBM, 15 (1974), 24–47

Praszko, Johanne, De Ecclesia Ruthena Catholica sede metropolitana vacante 1655−1665 (Romae: Ex typographia Augustiniana, 1944)

Puchowski, Kazimierz, Edukacja historyczna w jezuickich kolegiach Rzeczypospolitej, 1565–1773 (Gdańsk: Uniwersytet Gdański, 1999)

Radwan, Marian, ‘Bazylianie w zaborze rosyjskim w latach 1795−1839’, Nasza Przeszłość, 93 (2000), 153−225

Radwan, Marian, Carat wobec Kościoła greckokatolickiego w zaborze rosyjskim 1796−1839 (Lublin: Instytut Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej, 2004)

Rohdewald, Stefan, ‘Medium unierter konfessioneller Identität oder polnisch-ruthenischer Einigung? Zur Verehrung Josafat Kuncevycs im 17. Jahrhundert’, in Kommunikation durch symbolische Akte. Religiose Heterogenität und politische Herrschaft in Polen-Litauen, ed. by Yvonne Kleinmann (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 2010), pp. 271−90

Romanova, Anastasija, ‘Knigoizdatelʹskaja dejatelʹnostʹ Počaevskogo monastyrja (1732–1830)’, in Počaevskij sbornik, ed. by Natalija Kolpakova (Sankt-Peterburg, 2007), pp. 8–14.

Romanyk, Josafat, ed., trans., Svjatyj Josafat Kuncevyč. Dokumenty ščodo beatyfikaciji: Dokumenty ščodo beatyfikaciji (1623−1628 rr.). Katechyzm, ukladenyj Josafatom Kuncevyčem. Pravyla i konstytuciji, napysani svjatym Josafatom dlja svojich svjaščenykiv (Žovkva: Misioner, 2010)

Rostowski, Stanislao, Lituanicarum Societatis Jesu historiarum provincialium pars prima (Vilnae, 1768)

Rothe, Hans, and Jurij Medwedyk, eds, Bogoglasnik: Pěsni blagogovějnyja (1790/1791): Eine Sammlung gestlicher Lieder aus der Ukraine: Facsimile und Darstellung, 2 vols (Köln−Weimar−Wien: Böhlau, 2016)

Rusiecki, Marian, Cud w chrześcijaństwie (Lublin, 1995)

Ryčkov, Petro, and Viktor Luc, Počajivsʹka Svjato-Uspensʹka lavra (Kyjiv, 2000)

Saganovič, Gennadij, ‘Žirovičskaja ikona Bogomateri kak “mesto pamjati” rusi VKL v XVI−XVIII vv.’, in ‘Mesta pamjati’ Rusi konca XV – serediny XVIII v., ed. by Andrej Doronin (Moskva, 2019), pp. 149−68

Sahanovič, Henadzʹ, ‘Militarnyja abrysy kulʹtu Božaj Maci Žyrovickaj u ChVII st.’, Belaruski Histaryčny Ahljad, 25 (2018), 33−56

Summariusz regul świętego oyca naszego Bazylego Wielkiego, z Reguł obszernieyszych y Krotszych, z Konstytucyi Mniskich, y Nauk Iego Zakonnych, w kretce zebrany (Poczajów, 1751)

Savyč, Oleksandr, Narysy z istoriji kulʹturnych ruchiv na Vkrajini ta Bilorusi v XVI–XVIII v., Zbirnyk istoryčno-filolohičnoho viddilu, 90 (Kyjiv, 1929)

Scientific and Historical archive of Saint-Petersburg Institute of History (hereafter SPbIH RAS), col. 52, op. 1, ed. chr. 350

Senyk, Sofija, ‘Dva mytropolyty – Potij i Rutsʹkyj’, in Іstoryčnyj kontekst, ukladennja Berestejsʹkoji uniji ta perše pounijne pokolinnja: Materialy Peršych ‘Berestejsʹkych čytanʹ’ (Lʹviv, Іvano-Frankivsʹk, Kyjiv, 1–6 žovtnja 1994 r.), ed. by Borys Gudzjak, and Oleh Turij (Lʹviv, 1995), pp. 137–48, 149–72

Senyk, Sofija, Duchovnyj profilʹ sv. Josafata Kuncevyča (Lʹviv: Svičado, 1994)

Senyk, Sofija, Ukrajinsʹka Cerkva v dobu Chmelʹnycʹkoho (Lʹviv: Svičado, 1994)

Senyk, Sophia, ‘Rutskyj’s Reform and Ortodox Monasticism: A Comparison. Eastern Rite Monasticism in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in the Seventeeth Century’, Orientalia Christiana Periodica, 48.2 (1982), 406–30

Senyk, Sophia, ‘The Sources of the Spirituality of St. Josaphat Kuncevyč’, Orientalia Christiana Periodica, 51 (1985), 425–36

Senyk, Sophia, Women’s Monasteries in Ukrainae and Belorussia to the Period of Suppressions (Roma: Pont. Institutum Studiorum Orientalium, 1983)

Septyckyj, Andreas, ed., Monumenta Ucrainae historica, 10 vols (Romae, 1964–1971)

Serczyk, Władysław, Koliszczyzna (Warszawa, 1968)

Ševčenko, Tetjana, Jezujitsʹke škilʹnyctvo na ukrajinsʹkych zemljach (Lʹviv: Svičado, 2005)

Sklokin, Volodymyr, ‘Čy isnuvalo ukrajinsʹke Prosvitnyctvo? Kilʹka mirkuvanʹ iz pryvodu nezaveršenoji istoriohrafičnoji dyskusiji’, Kyjivsʹka akademija, 12 (2014−2015), 146–59

Skočiliasas, Ihoris, and Juliana Tatjanina, ‘Vilniaus bazilijonų gyvenimas XVIII a.’, in Kultūrų kryžkelė: Vilniaus Švč. Trejybės šventovė ir vienuolynas, ed. by Alfredas Bumblauskas, Salvijus Kulevičius, and Ihoris Skočiliasas (Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla, 2017), pp. 116−28

Skočyljas, Іhor, ‘“Volodymyrsʹki Ateny” XVII – počatku XVIII st.: vid katedralʹnoji školy do jeparchialʹnoji seminariji’, Kyjivsʹka Akademija, 7 (2009), 54−73

Skočyljas, Іhor, ‘Jeparchijalʹnyj sobor Unijnoji Cerkvy v Kyjevi 1610 roku: mytropolyčyj namisnyk Antonij (Hrekovyč) suproty pravoslavnoho duchovenstva, miščan i kozakiv’, in V orbiti chrystyjansʹkoji kulʹtury. (Materialy naukovoji konferenciji do 1030-riččja chreščennja Rusi; Kyjiv, 25–26 žovtnja 2018 roku), ed. by Іhor Skočyljas, and Maksym Jaremenko, Kyjivsʹke chrystyjanstvo, 21 (Lʹviv: Ukrajinsʹkyj Katolycʹkyj Universytet, 2020), pp. 129−40

Skočyljas, Іhor, Halycʹka (Lʹvivsʹka) jeparchija XII−XVIII stolitʹ: orhanizacijna struktura ta pravovyj status (Lʹviv: Ukrajinsʹkyj Katolycʹkyj Universytet, 2010)

Skočyljas, Іhor, Relihija ta kulʹtura Zachidnoji Volyni (Lʹviv: Ukrajinsʹkyj Katolycʹkyj Universytet, 2008)

Skrutenʹ, Josafat, ‘Žyttjepysy vasylijan. Vyjimok z rukopysnoho zbirnyka mytropolyta Lʹva Kyšky’, Analecta OSBM, 1.2 (1925), 284–91; 2.3 (1927), 376–401

Sljunʹkova, Inessa, Monastyri vostočnoj i zapadnoj tradicii: Nasledie architektury Belarusi (Moskva, 2002)

Šmataŭ, Viktar, ed., Baroka ŭ belaruskaj kulʹtury i mastactve, 3rd edn (Minsk: Belaruskaja navuka, 2005)

Smolij, Valerij, ed., Іstorija ukrajinsʹkoji kulʹtury, 5 vols (Kyjiv: Naukova dumka, 2000–2013)

Sochanʹ, Pavlo, ed., Hadjacʹka unija 1658: Zbirnyk naukovych statej (Kyjiv, 2008)

Sophia Senyk, ‘Methodius Terlec'kyj ― bishop of Xolm’, Analecta Ordinis Sancti Basilii Magni, 12 (1985), 342−73

SPbIH RAS, col. 52, op. 1, ed. chr. 207

SPbIH RAS, col. 52, op. 1, ed. chr. 321

SPbIH RAS, col. 52, op. 1, ed. chr. 328

SPbIH RAS, col. 52, op. 1, ed. chr. 350

SPbIH RAS, col. 52, op. 1, ed. chr. 50

Stecyk, Jurij, Černectvo Svjatopokrovsʹkoji provinciji ČSVV (1739 – 1783 rr.): prosopohrafične doslidžennja (Drohobyč, 2018)

Stecyk, Jurij, ed., Vizytaciji vasyliansʹkych monastyriv Peremyšlʹsʹkoji jeparchiji 1747–1767 rokiv (Lʹviv: Misioner, 2016)

Stecyk, Jurij, Vasyliansʹki monastyri Peremyšlʹsʹkoji jeparchiji (kinecʹ XVII – XVIII st.) (Drohobyč, 2014)

Stocʹkyj, Jaroslav, Bučacʹkyj monastyr Otciv Vasylijan: na službi Bohovi j Ukrajini. Do 300-littja zasnuvannja (Žovkva: Misioner, 2011)

Stratij, Jaroslava, Vladimir Litvinov, and Viktor Andruško, Opisanie kursov filosofii i ritoriki professorov Kievo-Mogiljanskoj akademii (Kiev, 1982)

Šynkaruk, Volodymyr, ed., Pam’jatky bratsʹkych škil na Ukrajini. Kinecʹ XVI – počatok XVII st.: Teksty i doslidžennja (Kyjiv, 1988)

Szady, Bogumił, Prawo patronatu w Rzeczypospolitej w czasach nowożytnych. Podstawy i struktura (Lublin, 2003)

Szegda, Mirosław, ‘“Vita Rutscii”: Prima biographia Josephi Velamin Rutskyj, Metropolitae Kioviensis (1613–1637)’, Analecta OSBM: Miscellanea in honorem Cardinalis Isidori (1463–1963), 4.1–2 (1963), 135–82

Szegda, Mirosław, Działalność prawno-organizacyjna metropolity Józefa IV Welamina Rutskiego (1613–1637) (Warszawa: Akademia Teologii Katolickiej, 1967)

Tajirova-Jakovleva, Tetjana, Kolijivščyna. Velyki iljuziji (Kyjiv: Klio, 2019)

Trofimov, Pantelejmon (Denys), ‘Traktaty De Deo Uno et Trino vasylijansʹkych bohosloviv Svjato-Pokrovsʹkoji provinciji (XVIII st.)’, Naukovi zapysky UKU, serija ‘Bohoslov’ja’, 14.7 (2019), 179−92

Tryjarski, Edward, Katalog kolegium teatyńskiego we Lwowie (Kraków, 1960)

TsDIAL, f. 201, op. 4б, spr. 421

Tylawskyj, Ivan, ‘Monastero di Počaiv – la sua tipografia e le sue edizioni'’, in Analecta OSBM, 4.1–2 (1963), 230–92

Tyljavsʹkyj, Іvan, Liturhijni naprjamky Počajivsʹkoho monastyrja pid čas uniji (1712−1831) (Rym−Lʹviv, 1997)

Urban, Jan, Św. Józafat Kuncewicz: biskup i męczennik (Kraków, 1921)

Vasiliauskienė, Aldona, and Olena Lukačuk, eds, Šv. Bazilijaus Didžiojo ordinas: iš liaudies – liaudžiai. Mokslinių straipsnių rinkinys (Šiauliai–Lvovas, 2017)

Vavryk, Mychajlo, ‘Cerkovni drukarni i vydannja v Ukrajinsʹkij katolycʹkij cerkvi 17 stol.’, Analecta OSBM, 9 (15) (1974), 119–21

Vavryk, Mychajlo, Narys rozvytku i stanu Vasylijansʹkoho Čyna XVII–XX st.: topohrafično-statystyčna rozvidka (Rym, 1979)

Vienna, Austrian National Library (hereafter ÖNB), cod. SN-2798

Vijūkas-Kojalavičius, Albertas, ‘Įvairenybės apie Bažnyčios būklę Lietuvos Didžiojoje Kunigaikštijoje’, in Lietuvos istorijos įvairenybės, 2 vols (Vilnius: Lietuvių literatūros ir tautosakos institutas, 2003–2004), II, pp. 8–275

Viničenko, Oksana, ‘Rusėnų tapatybės, arba meldžiantis už sielas’, in Kultūrų kryžkelė: Vilniaus Švč. Trejybės šventovė ir vienuolynas, ed. by Alfredas Bumblauskas, Salvijus Kulevičius, and Ihoris Skočiliasas (Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla, 2017), pp. 120−35

Volumina legume, t. 4, (Petersburg, 1859)

Voznesenskij, Andrej, and Irina Počinskaja, ‘Knigoizdanie XVIII – pervoj četverti XIX vekov’, in Knigoizdatelʹskaja dejatelʹnostʹ staroobrjadcev (1701–1918). Materialy k slovarju, ed. by Andrej Voznesenskij, Petr Mangilev, and Irina Počinskaja (Ekaterinburg, 1996), p. 8–24

Voznycʹkyj, Borys, Mykola Potocʹkyj starosta Kanivsʹkyj ta joho mytci architektor Bernard Meretyn i snycar Іoan Heorhij Pinzelʹ (Lʹviv: Centr Jevropy, 2005)

Walczak, Wojciech, The Structure of the Uniate Turaŭ-Pinsk Eparchy in the 17^th and 18^th Centuries (Białystok: Instytut Badań nad Dziedzictwem Kulturowym Europy, 2013)

Welykyj, Athanasius G., and Porphyrius B. Pidrutchnyj, eds, Litterae episcoporum historiam Ucrainae illustrantes (1600–1900), 5 vols (Romae: PP. Basiliani, 1972–1981)

Welykyj, Athanasius G., and Porphyrius B. Pidrutchnyj, eds, Litterae episcoporum historiam Ucrainae illustrantes (1600–1900), 1641–1664, 5 vols (Romae: PP. Basiliani, 1972–1981)

Welykyj, Athanasius G., and Porphyrius B. Pidrutchnyj, eds, Litterae basilianorum in terris Ucrainae et Bielarusjae, 1601–1730, 2 vols (Romae: PP. Basiliani, 1979)

Welykyj, Athanasius G., ed., Acta S. C. de Propaganda Fide Ecclesiam Catholicam Ucrainae et Bielarusjae spectantia, 5 vols (Romae, 1954)

Welykyj, Athanasius G., ed., Documenta Pontificum Romanorum historiam Ucrainae illustrantia, 2 vols (Romae, 1953–1954)

Welykyj, Athanasius G., ed., Epistolae metropolitarum kioviensium catholicorum: Cypriani Zochovskyj, Leonis Slubicz Zalenskyj, Georgii Vynnyckyj 1674–1713 (Romae, 1958)

Welykyj, Athanasius G., ed., S. Josaphat Hieromartyr. Documenta Romana Beatificationis et Canonisationis, 3 vols (Romae, 1952-1967)

Welykyj, Athanasius G., Epistolae metropolitarum Kioviensium Catholicorum, Raphaelis Korsak, Antonii Sielava, Gabrielis Kolenda (1637-1674) (Romae: PP. Basiliani, 1956)

Welykyj, Athanasius G., Litterae nuntiorum apostolicorum historiam Ucrainae illustrantes, 1629–1638, 14 vols (Romae: PP. Basiliani, 1959–1977), V (1961), p. 212 (№ 2335).

Wereda, Dorota, ‘Koronacje wizerunków maryjnych w Cerkwi unickiej’, in Koronacje wizerunku Matki Bożej na przestrzeni dziejów, ed. by Ewelina Dziewońska-Chudy, and Maciej Trąbski (Częstochowa: SIM, 2018), pp. 67−79

Witkowska, Aleksandra, ‘Uroczyste koronacje wizerunków maryjnych na ziemiach polskich w latach 1717–2005’, in Maria Regina. Koronacje wizerunków maryjnych w II Rzeczypospolitej, ed. by Aleksandra Witkowska (Tarnów: Biblos, 2011), pp. 29−40

Wojnar, Meletius M., ‘Basilian Scholars and Publishing Houses (XVII–XVIII)’, Analecta OSBM, 9 (1974), 64−94

Wojnar, Meletius M., ‘Basilian Seminaries, Colleges and Schools (XVII–XVIII)’, Analecta OSBM, 9 (1974), 48–63

Wojnar, Meletius M., ‘De studiis philosophico-theologicis in Provincia Rutheno-Ucraina Ordinis Basiliani s. XVIII eorumque manualibus’, Analecta OSBM, 7 (1971), 85−113

Wojnar, Meletius M., De Protoarchimandrita Basilianorum (1617–1804) (Romae: Sumptibus PP. Basilianorum, 1958)

Wojnar, Meletius, De Capitulis Basilianorum (Romae: PP. Basiliani, 1954)

Wolodzko, Ignacy, Della Madonna Santissima del Pascolo (Roma, 1719)

Zakrzewski, Andrzej, W kręgu kultu maryjnego: Jasna Góra w kulturze staropolskiej (Częstochowa, 1995)

Železnjak, Olena, ‘Kyrylyčni vydannja svitsʹkoho pryznačennja drukarni Počajivsʹkoho Uspensʹkoho monastyrja’, Rukopysna ta knyžkova spadščyna Ukrajiny, 16 (2012), 197–205

Železnjak, Olena, ‘Počajivsʹki vydannja kyrylyčnym šryftom: 1734–1830’, in Drukarnja Počajivsʹkoho Uspensʹkoho monastyrja ta jiji starodruky: Zb. nauk. pracʹ, ed. by Oleksij Onyščenko (Kyjiv, 2011), pp. 162–92

Zernova, Antonina, ‘Tipografija Mamoničej v Vilʹne (XVII vek)’, Kniga: Issledovanija i materialy, 1 (1959), 167–223

Zielińska, Zofia, ‘Potocki Mikołaj Bazyli h. Pilawa (1706?–1782)’, in Polski Słownik Biograficzny, ed. by Emanuel Rostworowski, and others, 53 vols (Wrocław−Warszawa−Kraków−Gdańsk−Łódź, 1935–), XXVIII, 116, pp. 113−15

Żochowski, Cyprian, Relacyja czternastoletnego wygnania z katedry Połockiej b. męczennika Ioaphata przy, szczęsliwym powrocie onego do teyze kathedry czyniona (Wilno, 1667)

Żochowski, Cyprian, Valete imieniem b. męczennika Iozaphata Kuncewicza arcybiskupa Połockiego, Witepskiego, [...] do kathedry Połockiej ruszájącego śię dane stolecznemu Wilnowi, y W. X. L. magnatom na ten czas zebranym, w cerkwi kathedralnej Przeczystej S. Nazwanej (Wilno, 1667)

Żychiewicz, Tadeusz, Jozafat Kuncewicz (Kalwaria Zebrzydowska: Calvarianum, 1986)

[1] Porfyrij Pidručnyj, and Bohdan Pʼjetnočko, Vasylijansʹki heneralʹni kapituly vid 1617 po 1636 rik. Bazyliańskie kapituły generalne od 1617 do 1636 roku. Capitula generalia basilianorum ab anno 1617 ad annum 1636 (Rym–Lʹviv, 2017), pp. 391–497.

[2] Porfyrij Pidručnyj, ‘Počatky Vasylijansʹkoho čynu i Berestejsʹka unija’, in Berestejsʹka unija ta vnutrišnje žyttja Cerkvy u XVII stolitti: Materialy Četvertych „Berestejsʹkych čytanʹ (Lʹviv, Lucʹk, Kyjiv, 2–6 žovtnja 1995 r.), ed. by Borys Gudzjak, and Oleh Turij (Lʹviv: Іnstytut Іstoriji Cerkvy Lʹvivsʹkoji Bohoslovsʹkoji Akademiji, 1997), pp. 79–124 (pp. 113–14).

[3] Іsydor Patrylo, ‘Narys istoriji vasylijan vid 1743 do 1839 roku’, in Narys Іstoriji Vasylijansʹkoho Čynu Svjatoho Josafata (Rym: Vydavnyctvo OO. Vasylijan, 1992), pp. 183–278 (p. 233).

[4] Mychajlo Vavryk, Narys rozvytku i stanu Vasylijansʹkoho Čyna XVII–XX st.: topohrafično-statystyčna rozvidka (Rym, 1979); Serhej Klimov, Baziliane (Mogilev, 2011).

[5] See: Meletius M. Wojnar, De Protoarchimandrita Basilianorum (1617–1804) (Romae: Sumptibus PP. Basilianorum, 1958).

[6] Porfyrij Pidručnyj, ‘Vasylijansʹkyj Čyn vid Berestejsʹkoho Z’jednannja (1596) do 1743 roku’, in Narys istoriji Vasylijansʹkoho čynu Svjatoho Josafata, pp. 96–182 (pp. 117–18).

[7] Porfyrij Pidručnyj, Іstoryčnyj narys zakonodavstva Vasylijansʹkoho Čynu sv. Josafata (1617–2018) (Rym–Lʹviv, 2018), pp. 57−58.

[8] Litterae basilianorum, ed. by Athanasius G. Welykyj, 2 vols (Romae: PP. Basiliani, 1979), I, pp. 59−61 (№ 29); Vavryk, Narys rozvytku i stanu Vasylijansʹkoho Čyna XVII–XX st., pp. 9−10; Andžej Gilʹ, ‘Unijni monastyri Cholmsʹko-Belzʹkoji jeparchiji (1596–1720)’, in Kovžeh. Naukovyj zbirnyk iz cerkovnoji istoriji. Čyslo 5 (Lʹviv: Vydavnyctvo Otciv Vasylijan ‘Misioner’, 2007), pp. 285−300 (pp. 286−89); Serhij Horin, Monastyri Zachidnoji Volyni (druha polovyna XV − perša polovyna XVII stolitʹ (Lʹviv: Vydavnyctvo Otciv Vasylijan ‘Misioner’), pp. 20−25, 291−92; Serhij Horin, Monastyri Lucʹko-Ostrozʹkoji jeparchiji kincja XV − seredyny XVII stolittja: funkcionuvannja i misce u volynsʹkomu sociumi (Kyjiv: Vydavnyčnyj dim ‘Kyjevo-Mohyljansʹka akademija’, 2012), pp. 407−9; Valery Mickevič, Katalickija kljaštary ChIV−XVIII stst. u mežach sučasnaj Belarusi (Minsk: Rymska-katalickaja parafija Sv. Symona i Sv. Aleny, 2013), pp. 27−56; Jacek Krochmal, ‘Rola bazylianów we wprowadzaniu unii kościelnej w eparchii przemysko-samborskiej w latach 1610–1693’, in Zakon bazyliański na tle mozaiki wyznaniowej i kulturowej Rzeczypospolitej i krajów ościennych, ed. by Stanisław Nabywaniec, Słavomir Zabraniak, and Beata Lorens (Rzeszów: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Rzeszowskiego, 2018), pp. 45−66; Wojciech Walczak, The Structure of the Uniate Turaŭ-Pinsk Eparchy in the 17^th and 18^th Centuries (Białystok: Instytut Badań nad Dziedzictwem Kulturowym Europy, 2013), pp. 71−94.

[9] Pidručnyj, ‘Vasylijansʹkyj Čyn vid Berestejsʹkoho z'jednannja’, pp. 138−66; Pidručnyj, Іstoryčnyj narys zakonodavstva Vasylijansʹkoho Čynu, pp. 161−68.

[10] Scientific and Historical archive of Saint-Petersburg Institute of History (hereafter SPbIH RAS), col. 52, op. 1, ed. chr. 350, l. 3 ob.

[11] Andrzej Gil, Kościoły wschodnie w Inflantach i ich zaplecze w okresie od XIII do początku XIX wieku (Lublin, 2019), pp. 173−83.

[12] Radosław Dobrowolski, ‘Status i rola monasteru supraskiego w dziejach Cerkwi unickiej XVII–XIX w’, in Zakon bazyliański na tle mozaiki wyznaniowej i kulturowej Rzeczypospolitej i krajów ościennych, pp. 71−78.

[13] Synodus provincialis Ruthenorum habita in Civitate Zamosciae anno MDCCXX, ed. by Leo Metropolitanus totius Russiae (Romae, 1724), pp. 107−8.

[14] Ustawy rządu duchownego i inne pisma biskupa Innocentego Winnickiego, ed. by Włodzimierz Pilipowicz (Przemyśl: Południowo-Wschodni Instytut Naukowy w Przemyślu, 1998), pp. 44−46.

[15] Acta Capituli s. d. Unioviensis Basilianorum, in Litterae episcoporum historiam Ucrainae illustrantes (1600–1900), 1711–1740, ed. by Athanasius G. Welykyj, and Porphyrius B. Pidrutchnyj, 5 vols (Romae: PP. Basiliani, 1972–1981), V (1981), pp. 80−93. See also: Acta S. C. de Propaganda Fide Ecclesiam Catholicam Ucrainae et Bielarusjae spectantia, 1710-1740, ed. by Athanasius G. Welykyj, 5 vols (Romae, 1954), III, pp. 48, 52–53, 58, 70–73, 82–83 (№ 880, 886, 893, 908, 910, 916).

[16] Beata Lorens, Bazylianie prowincji koronnej w latach 1743–1780 (Rzeszów: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Rzeszowskiego, 2014), pp. 32−37.

[17] Jurij Stecyk, Vasyliansʹki monastyri Peremyšlʹsʹkoji jeparchiji (kinecʹ XVII – XVIII st.) (Drohobyč, 2014), pp. 48−53.

[18] Ludomir Bieńkowski, ‘Organizacja Kościoła wschodniego w Polsce’, in Kościół w Polsce. Studia nad historią Kościoła katolickiego w Polsce. Tom 2: Wieki XVI–XVIII, ed. by Jerzy Kłoczowski, 2 vols (Kraków, 1969) II, pp. 781–1049 (p. 1017); Porfyrij Pidruchnyj, ‘Il “Diario” del Capitolo Basiliano di Dubno (1743) scritto da mons. Giorgio Lascaris (Sullʼunione dei Basiliani in unʼOrdine)’, Analecta OSBM, 14 (1992), 171−226.

[19] See: Władysław Chotkowski, Redukcje monasterów Bazyljańskich w Galicji (Kraków, 1922); Kasaty klasztorów na obszarze dawnej Rzeczypospolitej Obojga Narodów i na Śląsku na tle procesów sekularyzacyjnych w Europie. Tom 1: Geneza. Kasaty na ziemiach zaborów austriackiego i rosyjskiego, ed. by Marek Derwich, 4 vols (Wrocław: Wrocławskie Towarzystwo Miłośników Historii, 2014); Beata Lorens, ‘Bazylianie w Galicji wobec działań kasacyjnych w latach 1772−1792’, in Kasaty klasztorów, pp. 215–32.

[20] Valentyna Losʹ, Uniatsʹka Cerkva na Pravoberežnij Ukrajini naprykinci XVIII − peršij polovyni XIX st.: orhanizacijna struktura ta kulʹturno-relihijnyj aspekt (Kyjiv: NBUV, 2013); Marian Radwan, ‘Bazylianie w zaborze rosyjskim w latach 1795−1839’, Nasza Przeszłość, 93 (2000), 153−225; Marian Radwan, Carat wobec Kościoła greckokatolickiego w zaborze rosyjskim 1796−1839 (Lublin: Instytut Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej, 2004). See also: Viktorija Bilyk, and Oksana Karlina, Žyva spilʹnota v impersʹkomu sviti: Lucʹka hreko-unijna jeparchija kincja XVIII – peršoji tretyny XIX stolitʹ (Lʹviv: Ukrajinsʹkyj Katolycʹkyj Universytet, 2018).

[21] Pidručnyj, ‘Počatky Vasylijansʹkoho čynu’, pp. 91−92.

[22] Archeografičeskij sbornik dokumentov, otnosjaščichsja k istorii Severo-Zapadnoj Rusi, izdavaemyj pri upravlenii Vilenskogo učebnogo okruga (hereafter ASD), ed. by Pëtr Gilʹtebrandt, and others, 14 vols (Vilʹna, 1867–1904), XII (1900); Pidručnyj, and Pʼjetnočko, Capitula Generalia Basilianorum, pp. 27–367; Meletius Wojnar, De Capitulis Basilianorum (Romae: PP. Basiliani, 1954).

[23] SPbIH RAS, col. 52, op. 1, ed. chr. 328; Vienna, Austrian National Library (hereafter ÖNB), cod. SN-2798; cod. SN-2799; cod. SN-3838; cod. SN-3847; cod. SN-3849. Огляд цих матеріалів у: Dzjanis Lisejčykaŭ, ‘Matèryjaly heneralʹnych vizitacyj manastyroŭ Litoŭskaj pravincyi Bazylʹjanskaha ordèna XVIII st. u fondach Aŭstryjskaj nacyjanalʹnaj biblijatèki’, in Belaruskija archivy na mjažy tysjačahoddzjaŭ: zdabytki i straty. Matèryjaly navukova-praktyčnaj kanferèncyi, prysvečanaj 80-hoddzju Nacyjanalʹnaha histaryčnaha archiva Belarusi (Minsk, 28 čèrvenja 2018 h.) (Minsk, 2019), pp. 197−215.

[24] SPbIH RAS, col. 52, op. 1, ed. chr. 328.

[25] Some of them have already been published: Vizytaciji vasyliansʹkych monastyriv Peremyšlʹsʹkoji jeparchiji 1747–1767 rokiv, ed. by Jurij Stecyk, (Lʹviv: Misioner, 2016).

[26] SPbIH RAS, col. 52, op. 1, ed. chr. 207, l. 9.

[27] Pidručnyj, Іstoryčnyj narys zakonodavstva Vasylijansʹkoho Čynu; Wojnar, De Capitulis Basilianorum.

[28] Pidručnyj, ‘Vasylijansʹkyj čyn vid Berestejsʹkoho z’jednannja (1596) do 1743 r.’, in Analecta Ordinis S. Basilii Magni occasione sacri millennii Rus'–Ukraine 988-1988, fasc. 1-4, XIII (Romae: PP. Basiliani, 1988), pp. 144, 147.

[29] Pidručnyj, and Pʼjetnočko, Capitula Generalia Basilianorum, pp. 433–9, 445–62. Див. також: Klimov, Baziliane, pp. 74–75.

[30] Patrylo, ‘Narys istoriji vasylijan’, p. 201.

[31] Jean Gaudemet, Storia del diritto canonico. Ecclesia et Civitas (San Paolo, 1998), pp. 710–20; Bogumił Szady, Prawo patronatu w Rzeczypospolitej w czasach nowożytnych. Podstawy i struktura (Lublin, 2003), pp. 5–7; Boris Florja, Issledovanija po istorii Cerkvi. Drevnerusskoe i slavjanskoe srednevekovʹe: Sbornik (Moskva, 2007), p. 33.

[32] ASD, XII, pp. 95, 110; Kultūrų kryžkelė: Vilniaus Švč. Trejybės šventovė ir vienuolynas, ed. by Alfredas Bumblauskas, Salvijus Kulevičius, and Ihoris Skočiliasas (Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla, 2017), pp. 110−11.

[33] Lithuanian State History Archive (hereafter LVIA), f. 1178, ap. 1, b. 374, l. 22; Akty, izdavaemye Vilenskoj Archeografičeskoj komissiej (hereafter AVAK), 39 vols (Vilʹna, 1865–1915), IX (1878), pp. 437–50; ASD, X (1874), p. 317 (№ 43).

[34] Litterae basilianorum, I, pp. 265−6 (№ 163); Porfyrij Pidručnyj, Іstoryčnyj narys zakonodavstva Vasylijansʹkoho Čynu Svjatoho Josafata (1617–2018) (Lʹviv: Misioner, 2018), pp. 187−9; Wojnar, De capitulis basilianorum, p. 22.

[35] Pidručnyj, and Pʼjetnočko, Capitula Generalia Basilianorum, pp. 126, 142, 164, 181.

[36] Klimov, Baziliane, p. 61–64.

[37] Ibid., p. 74.

[38] ASD, XII, pp. 109–10.

[39] Bieńkowski, ‘Organizacja Kościoła wschodniego w Polsce’, pp. 1006–7.

[40] Relevant calculations can be found in: Stecyk, Vasyliansʹki monastyri Peremyšlʹsʹkoji jeparchiji; Jurij Stecyk, Černectvo Svjatopokrovsʹkoji provinciji ČSVV (1739 – 1783 rr.): prosopohrafične doslidžennja (Drohobyč, 2018).

[41] The history of this monastery can be traced in more detail in the collective monograph: Na perechresti kulʹtur: Monastyr i chram Presvjatoji Trijci u Vilʹnjusi, ed. by Alʹfredas Bumblauskas, Salʹvijus Kuljavičjus, and Іhor Skočyljas (Vilʹnjus, 2017) (Lithuanian version: Kultūrų kryžkelė: Vilniaus Švč. Trejybės šventovė ir vienuolynas, ed. by Alfredas Bumblauskas, Salvijus Kulevičius, and Ihoris Skočiliasas (Vilnius, 2017). See also additional sources of reprints of this work: Na perechresti kulʹtur: Monastyr i chram Presvjatoji Trijci u Vilʹnjusi: Kolektyvna monohrafija, ed. by Alʹfredas Bumblauskas, Salʹvijus Kuljavičjus, and Іhor Skočyljas, 2nd edn (Lʹviv: Ukrajinsʹkyj Katolycʹkyj Universytet, 2019). See also: Tomasz Kempa, ‘Unicki ośrodek zakonny w Wilnie i jego rola w reformie bazylianów przeprowadzonej przez metropolitę Józefa Welamina Rutskiego’, in Zakon bazyliański na tle mozaiki wyznaniowej, pp. 13−29.

[42] Іhor Skočyljas, Halycʹka (Lʹvivsʹka) jeparchija XII−XVIII stolitʹ: orhanizacijna struktura ta pravovyj status (Lʹviv: Ukrajinsʹkyj Katolycʹkyj Universytet, 2010), pp. 641−44.

[43] For more about him, see: Sofija Senyk, ‘Dva mytropolyty – Potij i Rutsʹkyj’, in Іstoryčnyj kontekst, ukladennja Berestejsʹkoji uniji ta perše pounijne pokolinnja: Materialy Peršych ‘Berestejsʹkych čytanʹ’ (Lʹviv, Іvano-Frankivsʹk, Kyjiv, 1–6 žovtnja 1994 r.), ed. by Borys Gudzjak, and Oleh Turij (Lʹviv, 1995), pp. 137–48, 149–72; Sophia Senyk, ‘Rutskyj’s Reform and Ortodox Monasticism: A Comparison. Eastern Rite Monasticism in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in the Seventeeth Century’, Orientalia Christiana Periodica, 48.2 (1982), 406–30; Mirosław Szegda, Działalność prawno-organizacyjna metropolity Józefa IV Welamina Rutskiego (1613–1637) (Warszawa: Akademia Teologii Katolickiej, 1967).

[44] Denis Lisejčikov, ‘Zaveščanie mitropolita Iosifa Velʹjamina Rutskogo’, in Zaveščanija uniatskich ierarchov Kievskoj mitropolii XVII i XVIII vv. kak primer religioznoj kulʹtury obščestva Reči Pospolitoj, ed. Andžej Gilʹ (Ljublin, 2016), 47–73 (pp. 49–51, 56–57); Dzjanis Lisejčykaŭ, ‘“Pjacʹ haloŭnych šturmaŭ…”: Duchoŭny tastament mitrapalita Kieŭskaha, Halickaha i Usëj Rusi Іosifa Velʹjamina-Ruckaha 1627 hoda’, Belaruski histarčn časopis, 3 (2020), 13−20.

[45] Mirosław Szegda, ‘“Vita Rutscii”: Prima biographia Josephi Velamin Rutskyj, Metropolitae Kioviensis (1613–1637)’, Analecta OSBM: Miscellanea in honorem Cardinalis Isidori (1463–1963), 4.1–2 (1963), 135–82 (pp. 135–43).

[46] Іhor Skočyljas, ‘Jeparchijalʹnyj sobor Unijnoji Cerkvy v Kyjevi 1610 roku: mytropolyčyj namisnyk Antonij (Hrekovyč) suproty pravoslavnoho duchovenstva, miščan i kozakiv’, in V orbiti chrystyjansʹkoji kulʹtury. (Materialy naukovoji konferenciji do 1030-riččja chreščennja Rusi; Kyjiv, 25–26 žovtnja 2018 roku), ed. by Іhor Skočyljas, and Maksym Jaremenko, Kyjivsʹke chrystyjanstvo, 21 (Lʹviv: Ukrajinsʹkyj Katolycʹkyj Universytet, 2020), pp. 129–40 (pp. 131−32).

[47] Цит. за: Pavlo Krečiunas, and Vasilis Parasiukas, ‘Švč. Trejybės unitų vienuolynas ir Bazilijonų ordino steigimas’, in Kultūrų kryžkelė, pp. 80–91 (pp. 86−87).

[48] Pidručnyj, and Pʼjetnočko, Capitula Generalia Basilianorum, pp. 371−380; Porfyrij Pidručnyj, ‘Dva prohramovi pysannja Rutsʹkoho: Discursus i Programma Unionis’, Analecta OSBM, 15 (1974), 24–47; Pidručnyj, Іstoryčnyj narys zakonodavstva Vasylijansʹkoho Čynu, pp. 28–35.

[49] Pidručnyj, and Pʼjetnočko, Capitula Generalia Basilianorum, p. 372.

[50] Ibid., pp. 391–497.

[51] Epistolae metropolitarum kioviensium catholicorum: Josephi Velamin Rutskyj Metropolitae Kioviensis catholici (1613 – 1637), ed. by Theodosius T. Haluščynskyj, and Athanasius G. Welykyj (Romae, 1956), pp. 369–80 (№ 188).

[52] One of the many compendiums of these rules was published in the mid-18th century by the printery of the Pochaiv Monastery: Summariusz regul świętego oyca naszego Bazylego Wielkiego, z Reguł obszernieyszych y Krotszych, z Konstytucyi Mniskich, y Nauk Iego Zakonnych, w kretce zebrany (Poczajów, 1751).

[53] Pidručnyj, and Pʼjetnočko, Capitula Generalia Basilianorum, pp. 27–367.

[54] Oleh Duch, Prevelebni panny: Žinoči černeči spilʹnoty Lʹvivsʹkoji ta Peremyšlʹsʹkoji jeparchij u rannʹomodernyj period (Lʹviv: Ukrajinsʹkyj Katolycʹkyj Universytet, 2017); Sophia Senyk, Women’s Monasteries in Ukrainae and Belorussia to the Period of Suppressions (Roma: Pont. Institutum Studiorum Orientalium, 1983).

[55] See the section on his beatification and canonization published by Basylians in Rome: S. Josaphat Hieromartyr. Documenta Romana Beatificationis et Canonisationis, ed. Athanasius G. Welykyj, 3 vols (Romae, 1952-1967) (their translation into Ukrainian: Svjatyj Josafat Kuncevyč. Dokumenty ščodo beatyfikaciji: Dokumenty ščodo beatyfikaciji (1623−1628 rr.). Katechyzm, ukladenyj Josafatom Kuncevyčem. Pravyla i konstytuciji, napysani svjatym Josafatom dlja svojich svjaščenykiv, ed., trans., by Josafat Romanyk (Žovkva: Misioner, 2010)). A special edition of the collection, published for the 100th anniversary of Kuntsevich's canonization, is also noteworthy: Analecta OSBM. Miscellanea in honorem S. Josaphat, 6.1–4 (1967). There are the following works in Belarusian historiography: Èpistaljacyja Sʹvjatoha Jazafata: Zbor dakumèntaŭ, ed. by Michasʹ Baŭtovič (Polacak: Hrèka-katalickaja parafija Sʹvjatapakutnika Jazafata, 2006); Vaclaŭ Panucèvič, Sʹvjaty Jazafat, archijapiskap polacki (Polacak: Safija, 2000), in Polish one − Alphonse Guépin, Żywot ś. Jozafata Kuncewicza męczenika, arcybiskupa Połockiego rit. gr. opowiedziany na tle historyi kościoła ruskiego według dzieła O. Alfonsa Guépin, z przedmową H. Kalinki C. R (Lwów, 1885); Jan Urban, Św. Józafat Kuncewicz: biskup i męczennik (Kraków, 1921). Basilian perspective on the activities of this ascetic of the union is represented in the book: Pavlo Krečun, Cvjatyj Josafat Kuncevyč (1580−1623) jak svidok viry v eposi relihijnoji kontroversiji (Lʹviv: Misioner, 2013).

[56] S. Josaphat Hieromartyr, I, pp. 11 (№ 3), 147 (№ 71), 176 (№ 71), 177 (№ 71), 181 (№ 71); II, pp. 223, 289 (№ 137).

[57] Sophia Senyk, ‘The Sources of the Spirituality of St. Josaphat Kuncevyč’, Orientalia Christiana Periodica, 51 (1985), 425–36 (український переклад: Sofija Senyk, Duchovnyj profilʹ sv. Josafata Kuncevyča (Lʹviv: Svičado, 1994), pp. 10–11).

[58] Svjatyj Josafat Kuncevyč. Dokumenty ščodo beatyfikaciji, p. 148.

[59] See his letter to Kuntsevych dated 12 March 1622 published in: Tadeusz Żychiewicz, Jozafat Kuncewicz (Kalwaria Zebrzydowska: Calvarianum, 1986), pp. 159–71.

[60] S. Josaphat Hieromartyr, I, pp. 1−2.

[61] Kerstin S. Jobst, ‘Transnational and Trans-Denominational Aspects of the Veneration of Josaphat Kuntsevych’, Journal of Ukrainian Studies, 37 (2012), 9−15.

[62] Stanislao Rostowski, Lituanicarum Societatis Jesu historiarum provincialium pars prima (Vilnae, 1768), p. 357.

[63] According to the legend, an Indian king persecuted the Christian Church in his realm after astrologers predicted that his own son would become a Christian. The king imprisoned the young Prince Josaphat, who nevertheless met the hermit Saint Barlaam and converted to Christianity.

[64] Mintautas Čiurinskas, ‘Vaizdai XVII a. raštijoje’, in Kultūrų kryžkelė, pp. 157–76 (pp. 160−61).

[65] Borys Balyk, ‘Z istoriji kulʹtu sv. Josafata v Peremysʹkij jeparchiji (XVII/XVIII st.)’, Analecta OSBM, 8.1−4 (1973), 43–62 (pp. 44−45, 48); Stefan Rohdewald, ‘Medium unierter konfessioneller Identität oder polnisch-ruthenischer Einigung? Zur Verehrung Josafat Kuncevycs im 17. Jahrhundert’, in Kommunikation durch symbolische Akte. Religiose Heterogenität und politische Herrschaft in Polen-Litauen, ed. by Yvonne Kleinmann (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 2010), pp. 271−90.

[66] SPbIH RAS, col. 52, op. 1, ed. chr. 50, l. 42; Іhor Skočyljas, Relihija ta kulʹtura Zachidnoji Volyni (Lʹviv: Ukrajinsʹkyj Katolycʹkyj Universytet, 2008), pp. 30−31.

[67] Andrzej Gil, ‘Kult Jozafata Kuncewicza i jego pierwsze przedstawienia ikonowe w Rzeczypospolitej (do połowy XVII wieku). Zarys problematyki’, in Kościoły wschodnie w Rzeczypospolitej XVI–XVIII wieku. Zbiór studiów (Lublin: Instytut Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej, 2005), pp. 65–72; Tomasz Kempa, ‘Czy męczeńska śmierć arcybiskupa Jozafata Kuncewicza przyczyniła się do rozwoju unii brzeskiej na obsarze archidiecezji połockiej?’, in Kościoły wschodnie, pp. 93–105; Tomasz Kempa, ‘Recepcja unii brzeskiej na obsarze Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego i ziem ruskich Korony do połowy XVII wieku’, Rocznik Instytutu Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej, 3 (2005), 141–70 (p. 170); Tomasz Kempa, ‘Unia i prawosławie w Witebsku w czasie rządów biskupich Jozafata Kuncewicza i po jego męczeńskiej śmierci (do połowy XVII wieku)’, in Między Zachodem a Wschodem. Etniczne, kulturowe i religijne pogranicza Rzeczypospolitej w XVI–XVIII wieku. Tom 3, ed. by Krzysztof Mikulski, and Agnieszla Zielińska-Nowicka (Toruń: Mado, 2005), pp. 135–54.

[68] [Leon Kreuza], Kazanie o świątobliwym zywoćie y chwalebney śmierći Przewielebnego w Bodze oyca Iosaphata Kuncewicza Arcybiskupá Połockiego, Witebskiego y Msćisławskiego w cerkwi Cathedralney Połockiey przy depozyciey ciała iego odprawowane od oyca Leona Kreuży Nominata na Episkopstwo Smolenskie. Za wolą y ukazaniem starszych z Ruskiego języka na polski przełożone y w druk podane, ([Wilno], 1625), p. [B3 v.].

[69] Miscellanea rerum ad statum ecclesiasticum in Magno Lituaniae Ducatu pertinentium, collecta ab Alberto Wiiuk Koiałowicz Societ. Iesu, S. Theol. Doct. Almae Uniuersitatis Vilnensis Procancellario, et Ordinario S. Theol. Professore vulgata Superiorum permissu, (Vilnae, 1650). Publication with the traslation into Luthainian: Albertas Vijūkas-Kojalavičius, ‘Įvairenybės apie Bažnyčios būklę Lietuvos Didžiojoje Kunigaikštijoje’, in Lietuvos istorijos įvairenybės, 2 vols (Vilnius: Lietuvių literatūros ir tautosakos institutas, 2003–2004), II, pp. 8–275.

[70] Mintautas Čiurinskas, ‘Biografiniai šaltiniai ir barokinės literatūros tradicija’, in Palaimintojo kankinio Juozapato, Polocko arkivyskupo, gyvenimo ir mirties simboliniai atvaizdai: šaltinis, vertimas ir studija, ed. by Andriejus Mlodzianovskis (Vilnius: Vilniaus dailės akademija, 2015), pp. 401–43 (pp. 435–41).

[71] Liepa Griciūtė-Šverebienė, XVII–XVIII a. bažnytinės procesijos Lietuvos Didžiojoje Kunigaikštystėje (Vilnius: Vilniaus Dailės Akademijos, 2011), pp. 26–32, 195–202; Tomasz Kempa, Konflikty wyznaniowe w Wilnie od początku reformacji do końca XVII wieku (Torun: Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika, 2016), pp. 476–477; Čiurinskas, ‘Vaizdai XVII a. raštijoje’, pp. 168−71.

[72] Cyprian Żochowski, Relacyja czternastoletnego wygnania z katedry Połockiej b. męczennika Ioaphata przy, szczęsliwym powrocie onego do teyze kathedry czyniona (Wilno, 1667); Cyprian Żochowski, Valete imieniem b. męczennika Iozaphata Kuncewicza arcybiskupa Połockiego, Witepskiego, [...] do kathedry Połockiej ruszájącego śię dane stolecznemu Wilnowi, y W. X. L. magnatom na ten czas zebranym, w cerkwi kathedralnej Przeczystej S. Nazwanej (Wilno, 1667).

[73] Epistolae metropolitarum Kioviensium Catholicorum, Raphaelis Korsak, Antonii Sielava, Gabrielis Kolenda (1637-1674), ed. by Athanasius G. Welykyj (Romae: PP. Basiliani, 1956), p. 267 (№ 46).

[74] Jan A. Chrapowicki, Diariusz, cz. 2: Lata 1665–1669, ed. Andrzej Rachuba, and Tadeusz Wasilewski (Warszawa: Pax, 1988), pp. 352–55, 365.

[75] Serhij Plochij, ‘Svjaščenne pravo povstannja: Berestejsʹka unija i relihijna lehitymacija Chmelʹnyččyny’, in Deržava, suspilʹstvo i Cerkva v Ukrajini u XVII stolitti. Materialy Druhych ‘Berestejsʹkych čytanʹ’. Lʹviv, Dnipropetrovsʹk, Kyjiv, 1−6 ljutoho 1995 r., ed. by Borys Hudzjak, and Oleh Turij (Lʹviv, 1996), pp. 1−13; See also: Serhij Plochij, Nalyvajkova vira: kozactvo ta relihija v rannʹomodernij Ukrajini (Kyjiv: Krytyka, 2005), pp. 230−48.

[76] The recent researches: Hadjacʹka unija 1658: Zbirnyk naukovych statej, ed. by Pavlo Sochanʹ (Kyjiv, 2008); Piotr Kroll, Od ugody Hadziackiej do Cudnowa: Kozaczyzna między Rzecząpospolitą a Moskwą w latach 1658−1660 (Warszawa: Uniwersytet Warszawski, 2008); W kręgu Hadziacza A. D. 1658: Od historii do literatury, ed. by Piotr Borek (Kraków: Collegium Columbinum, 2008).

[77] Andrey Sheptytsky National Museum in Lviv (hereafter NML), Rkl.-138, ark. 35–35 zv.; Volumina legume, t. 4, (Petersburg, 1859), pp. 297−301.

[78] ASD, XII, p. 47.

[79] Ibid., pp. 47−52; Pidručnyj, Іstoryčnyj narys zakonodavstva Vasylijansʹkoho Čynu, pp. 123−26.

[80] Sofija Senyk, Ukrajinsʹka Cerkva v dobu Chmelʹnycʹkoho (Lʹviv: Svičado, 1994), pp. 9−14; Johanne Praszko, De Ecclesia Ruthena Catholica sede metropolitana vacante 1655−1665 (Romae: Ex typographia Augustiniana, 1944).

[81] Litterae episcoporum historiam Ucrainae illustrantes (1600–1900), 1641–1664, ed. by Athanasius G. Welykyj, and Porphyrius B. Pidrutchnyj, 5 vols (Romae: PP. Basiliani, 1972–1981), II (1973), pp. 321−22. See also: Sophia Senyk, ‘Methodius Terlec'kyj ― bishop of Xolm’, Analecta Ordinis Sancti Basilii Magni, 12 (1985), 342−73.

[82] Litterae basilianorum in terris Ucrainae et Bielarusjae, 1601–1730, ed. by Athanasius G. Welykyj, and Porphyrius B. Pidrutchnyj, (Romae: PP. Basiliani, 1979), II, pp. 89−90 (№ 45).

[83] Ibid., pp. 98−100 (№ 53).

[84] Mychajło Dowbyszczenko, ‘Cerkiew unicka na Wołyniu w dobie wojen kozackich w latach 1648−1667’, in Ruchy religijne na Wołyniu w XVI i XVII wieku, ed. by Andrzej Gil (Lublin: KUL, 2013), pp. 11–120 (pp. 38−45, 49−50).

[85] Mychajlo Dovbyščenko, ‘Rukopysna “Chronika” Dermansʹkoho monastyrja (1511−1673 rr.)’, Drohobycʹkyj krajeznavčyj zbirnyk, 11–12 (2008), 438–51 (p. 444).

[86] See about him: Serhij Horin, Žydyčynsʹkyj Svjato-Mykolajivsʹkyj monastyr (do seredyny XVII storiččja) (Kyjiv: Majsternja knyhy, 2009).

[87] Dowbyszczenko, ‘Cerkiew unicka na Wołyniu w dobie wojen kozackich’, pp. 48, 57−63.

[88] Litterae episcoporum historiam Ucrainae illustrantes (1600–1900), 1641–1664, II, p. 320.

[89] Litterae basilianorum, I, p. 89 (№ 45). See also: Narys Іstoriji Vasylijansʹkoho Čynu, pp. 144–45.

[90] Central State Historical Archives of Ukraine in Lviv (hereafter TsDIAL), f. 201, op. 4б, spr. 421. Див. також: Josafat Skrutenʹ, ‘Žyttjepysy vasylijan. Vyjimok z rukopysnoho zbirnyka mytropolyta Lʹva Kyšky’, Analecta OSBM, 1.2 (1925), 284–91 (pp. 287, 289−91); 2.3 (1927), 376–401 (pp. 377, 393).

[91] ASD, XII, p. 55.

[92] Serhij Plochij, ‘Vid Jakova Suši do Atanasija Velykoho (Ohljad vydanʹ rymsʹkych džerel z istoriji ukrajinsʹkoji cerkvy)’, Ukrajinsʹkyj archeohrafičnyj ščoričnyk, 1 (1992), 6–14 (p. 6).

[93] SPbIH RAS, col. 52, op. 1, ed. chr. 321, l. 56 ob.–57; Borys Balyk, ‘“Katafalʹk černečyj vasylijan” XVII–XVIII st. (Rukopysna zbirka žyttjepysiv Vasylijan)’, Analecta OSBM, 8.1–4 (1973), 269–310 (pp. 80–1).

[94] SPbIH RAS, col. 52, op. 1, ed. chr. 328, l. 164 ob.

[95] Ibid.

[96] Ibid., l. 164–164 ob.

[97] Epistolae metropolitarum kioviensium catholicorum: Cypriani Zochovskyj, Leonis Slubicz Zalenskyj, Georgii Vynnyckyj 1674–1713, ed. by Athanasius G. Welykyj (Romae, 1958), p. 214 (№32).

[98] Aleksy Deruga, Piotr Wielki a unici i unja kościelna, 1700–1711 (Wilno, 1936), pp. 16–7.

[99] Epistolae Zochovskyj, Zalenskyj, Vynnyckyj, pp. 207–210 (№ 28); Monumenta Ucrainae historica (hereafter MUH), ed. by Andreas Septyckyj, 10 vols (Romae, 1964–1971), V (1968), pp. 14–5 (№ 15).

[100] SPbIH RAS, col. 52, op. 1, ed. chr. 321, l. 56 ob.

[101] Epistolae Zochovskyj, Zalenskyj, Vynnyckyj, pp. 206–10.

[102] MUH, V, pp. 28–29 (№ 16).

[103] Documenta Pontificum Romanorum historiam Ucrainae illustrantia (hereafter DPR), ed. by Athanasius G. Welykyj, 2 vols (Romae, 1953–1954), II, pp. 6–8.

[104] SPbIH RAS, col. 52, op. 1, ed. chr. 321, l. 57; Deruga, Piotr Wielki a unici i unja kościelna, pp. 89–221.

[105] The Ukrainian perspective of this cultural phenomenon is represented in the following works: Ukrajinsʹke baroko, ed. by Dmytro Nalyvajko, and Leonid Uškalov, 2 vols (Charkiv: Akta, 2004); Ukrajinsʹke barokko: Materialy І konhresu Mižnarodnoji asociaciji ukrajinciv (Kyjiv 27.08 – 3.09.1990), ed. by Oleksa Myšanyč (Kyjiv: Іnstytut archeohrafiji AN Ukrajiny, 1993); Ukrajinsʹke literaturne barokko: Zbirnyk naukovych pracʹ, ed. by Oleksa Myšanyč (Kyjiv: Naukova dumka, 1987).

[106] [Quirinus Cnoglerus Austrius], ‘Pompa Casimiriana sive de labaro D. Casimiri Regis Poloniae etc. F. Iagellonis N. M. D. Lith. Principis etc. a Leone X. Pontif. Max. in Diuos relati, ex urbe transmisso, et Vilnam Lithuaniae Metropolim solenni pompa, ad 6. Idus Maii, Anno M.DC.IV. illato, Quirini Cnogleri Austrii Sermo Panegyricus’, in Theatrum S. Casimiri, in quo ipsius prosapia, vita, miracula, et illustris pompa in sollemni eiusdem apotheoseos instauratione, Vilnae Lithuaniae metropoli, V Id. Maii, anno D[omi]ni M.DC.IV. instituta graphice proponuntur, ed. by Gregorius Swiecicki (Vilnae, 1604), pp. 37–127. See also: Casimiriana: fontes vitae et cultus S. Casimiri = Šv. Kazimiero gyvenimo ir kulto istorijos šaltiniai, ed. by Mintautas Čiurinskas (Vilnius: Aidai, 2003), pp. 231–83.

[107] Čiurinskas, ‘Vaizdai XVII a. raštijoje’, pp. 158−59.

[108] ‘Pompa Casimiriana’, pp. 114–15.

[109] Čiurinskas, ‘Vaizdai XVII a. raštijoje’, p. 159.

[110] Oksana Viničenko, ‘Rusėnų tapatybės, arba meldžiantis už sielas’, in Kultūrų kryžkelė, pp. 129−35.

[111] [Jan Olszewski], Memoryał, albo informacja y objaśnienie klasztoru Wileńskiego cerkwi Przenayświętszey Trуjcy, pp. 1–217 (№ 1); ASD, X, pp. 26–32 (№ 1).

[112] Ihoris Skočiliasas, and Juliana Tatjanina, ‘Vilniaus bazilijonų gyvenimas XVIII a.’, in Kultūrų kryžkelė, pp. 116−28.

[113] Materials of archaeological and anthropological research of burials in crypts of Vilna Basilian Monastery in the 2010s has recently been published: Albinas Kuncevičius, and others, ‘Nekropolis ir jo archeologiniai tyrimai’, in Kultūrų kryžkelė, pp. 224−36.

[114] Viničenko, Rusėnų tapatybės, p. 133.

[115] SPbIH RAS, col. 52, op. 1, ed. chr. 350, l. 6 ob.; Jaroslav Stocʹkyj, Bučacʹkyj monastyr Otciv Vasylijan: na službi Bohovi j Ukrajini. Do 300-littja zasnuvannja (Žovkva: Misioner, 2011), pp. 56–57.

[116] Borys Voznycʹkyj, Mykola Potocʹkyj starosta Kanivsʹkyj ta joho mytci architektor Bernard Meretyn i snycar Іoan Heorhij Pinzelʹ (Lʹviv: Centr Jevropy, 2005); Johann Georg Pinsel: Un sculpteur baroque en Ukraine au XVIIIe siècle, ed. by Jan Ostrowski, and Guilhem Scherf (Paris: Louvre, 2012).

[117] Stocʹkyj, Bučacʹkyj monastyr Otciv Vasylijan, pp. 57−60; Zofia Zielińska, ‘Potocki Mikołaj Bazyli h. Pilawa (1706?–1782)’, in Polski Słownik Biograficzny, ed. by Emanuel Rostworowski, and others, 53 vols (Wrocław−Warszawa−Kraków−Gdańsk−Łódź, 1935–), XXVIII, 116, pp. 113−15.

[118] Sadok Barącz, Pamiątki Buczackie (Lwów, 1882), p. 74.

[119] This concept is presented in: Іhor Іsičenko, ‘Vasyliansʹke baroko’, Slovo i Čas, 1 (2011), 3–21. Unfortunately, there is still no separate monographic study of the Uniate Baroque, nor is there a scientific name for this cultural phenomenon (for example, in historiography there have long been definitions of ‘Vilna Baroque’, ‘Cossack/Mazepa’s Baroque’, etc.).

[120] For more about him, see: Jan Czernecki, Mały król na Rusi i jego stolica Krystynopol. Z Pamiętnika klasztornego 1766 – 1787 i z innech źródeł zebral i zestawił Jan Czernecki (Kraków, 1939).

[121] Mykola Krykun, ‘Dokumenty pro nadannja pustyni Umanʹ u vlasnistʹ Valentiju Aleksandrovi Kalynovsʹkomu 1609 roku’, Ukrajinsʹkyj archeohrafičnyj ščoričnyk, 21−22 (2018), 698−712; Іhor Kryvošeja, Volodymyr Kryvošeja, and Іhor Blyznjuk, Umanščyna v etnopolityčnij istoriji Ukrajiny (kinecʹ XVIIІ – perša tretyna XIX st.) (Kyjiv, 1998).

[122] Іhor Kryvošeja, Umansʹkyj vasyliansʹkyj monastyr (1765–1834) (Umanʹ, 2009), p. 16.

[123] Daniel Beauvois, Szkonictwo polskie na ziemiach litewsko-ruskich 1803–1832. Szkoły podstawowe i średnie, 2 vols (Lublin: KUL, 1991), II, pp. 181−83; Іhor Kryvošeja, Tetjana Tyščenko, and Oksana Zelinsʹka, ‘Storinky istoriji Umansʹkoho vasyliansʹkoho monastyrja’, in Kyjivsʹki polonistyčni studiji, “Ukrajinsʹka škola” v literaturi ta kulʹturi ukrajinsʹko-polʹsʹkoho pohranyččja (Kyjiv, 2005), pp. 180–92.

[124] Tetjana Tajirova-Jakovleva, Kolijivščyna. Velyki iljuziji (Kyjiv: Klio, 2019); Zenon Kohut, ‘Myths Old and New: The Haidamak Movement and the Koliivshchyna (1768) in Recent Historiography’, Harvard Ukrainian Studies, 1 (1977), 359−78; Władysław Serczyk, Koliszczyzna (Warszawa, 1968). Див. також: Jurij Mycyk, Umanʹ kozacʹka i hajdamacʹka (Kyjiv: Kyjevo-Mohyljansʹka Akademija, 2002), pp. 122–30; Hryhorij Chraban, Spalach hnivu narodnoho: Antyfeodalʹne narodno-vyzvolʹne povstannja na Pravoberežnij Ukrajini u 1768–1769 rr (Kyjiv, 1989), pp. 62–73.

[125] Mychajlo Hruševsʹkyj, ‘Materialy do istoriji Kolijivščyny’, in Hruševsʹkyj, Mychajlo Serhijovyč. Tvory, ed. by Pavlo Sochanʹ, and others, 50 vols (Lʹviv: Svit, 2005), VII, pp. 120−39.

[126] The most important synthetic researches of the recent decades on the phenomenon of the Vilna Baroque are the following: Baroka ŭ belaruskaj kulʹtury i mastactve, ed. by Viktar Šmataŭ, 3rd edn (Minsk: Belaruskaja navuka, 2005); Tamara Habrusʹ, Muravanaja sakralʹnaja architèktura XVI–XVIII stst. (Minsk: Belaruskaja navuka, 2006); Inessa Sljunʹkova, Monastyri vostočnoj i zapadnoj tradicii: Nasledie architektury Belarusi (Moskva, 2002), pp. 397–522.

[127] Tamara Habrusʹ, Muravanyja charaly. Sakralʹnaja architèktura belaruskaha baroka (Minsk: Uradžaj, 2001), pp. 117−20, 174−204; Tamara Habrusʹ, ‘Stylistyčnyja aspekty architèktury vilenskaha baroka’, in Baroka ŭ belaruskaj kulʹtury i mastactve, ed. by Viktar Šmataŭ (Minsk, 1998), pp. 14−166; Іstorija ukrajinsʹkoji kulʹtury. Ukrajinsʹka kulʹtura druhoji polovyny XVII–XVIII st., ed. by Valerij Smolij, 5 vols (Kyjiv: Naukova dumka, 2000–2013), III (2003), pp. 844, 846; Ji: Nezaležnyj kulʹturolohičnyj časopys, Lʹviv epochy Pinzelja, 72 (2013); Algė Jankevičienė, ‘Dviejų stilių sintezė XVI a. Vilniaus cerkvių architektūroje’, Acta Academiae Artium Vilnensis. Lietuvos Didžiosios Kunigaikštystės gotika: sakralinė architektūra ir dailė, 26 (2002), 167–79; Stanisław Lorentz, Jan Krzysztof Glaubitz, architekt wileński XVIII w. Materiały do biografii i twórczości, Prace z Historii Sztuki, 5 vols (Warszawa: Towarzystwo naukowe warszawskie, 1936–1946), III (1937).

[128] Petro Ryčkov, and Viktor Luc, Počajivsʹka Svjato-Uspensʹka lavra (Kyjiv, 2000), pp. 40−66.

[129] Natalja Jakovenko, ‘“Bytva za duši”: Konkurencija Bohorodyčnych čud miž unijatamy ta pravoslavnymy u 17 st. (vid Teodozija Borovyka do Joanykija Haljatovsʹkoho)’, Harvard Ukrainian Studies, 32/33.2, Žnyva: Essays Presented in Honor of George G. Grabowicz on His Seventieth Birthday (2011–2014), 807−25.

[130] Andrzej Zakrzewski, W kręgu kultu maryjnego: Jasna Góra w kulturze staropolskiej (Częstochowa, 1995), pp. 86–8.

[131] See: Wayne James Jorgenson, Orthodox Monasticism: Byzantine, in Encyclopedia of Monasticism, ed. by William M. Johnston, and Christopher Kleinhenz (London: Fitzroy Dearborn, 2000), pp. 974–76.

[132] Marian Rusiecki, Cud w chrześcijaństwie (Lublin, 1995), pp. 125–40.

[133] Aleksej Lidov, ‘Sozdanie sakralʹnych prostranstv kak vid tvorčestva i predmet istoričeskogo issledovanija’, in Ierotopija: Sozdanie sakralʹnych prostranstv v Vizantii i Drevnej Rusi, ed. by Aleksej Lidov (Moskva: Indrik, 2006), pp. 9−58.

[134] Mirča Èliade, Izbrannye sočinenija. Očerki sravnitelʹnogo religiovedenija (Moskva: Ladomir, 1999), pp. 337−38.

[135] Litterae nuntiorum apostolicorum historiam Ucrainae illustrantes, 1629–1638, ed. by Athanasius G. Welykyj, 14 vols (Romae: PP. Basiliani, 1959–1977), V (1961), p. 212 (№ 2335).

[136] Čiurinskas, ‘Vaizdai XVII a. raštijoje’, p. 160.

[137] Irina Gerasimova, Pod vlastʹju russkogo carja. Sociokulʹturnaja sreda Vilʹny v seredine XVII veka (Sankt-Peterburg: Evropejskij universitet v Sankt-Peterburge, 2015), pp 219–20; Piotr Chomik, Kult ikon Matki Bożej w Wielkim księstwie Litewskim w XVI–XVIII wieku (Białystok, 2003), p. 197; Wilnianie. Żywoty siedemnastowieczne, ed. by David Frick, Bibliotheca Europae Orientalis, 32 (Warsaw: Studium Europy Wschodniej, 2009), p. 123 (№ 46).

[138] Gerasimova, Pod vlastʹju russkogo carja, pp. 136, 195, 219–20.

[139] This is Natalia Yakovienko’s statement: Natalja Jakovenko, ‘Ochtyrsʹka čudotvorna ikona: prostir i semiotyka relihijnoho dosvidu’, in V orbiti chrystyjansʹkoji kulʹtury, pp. 45–57 (pp. 53, 57).

[140] Aleksandra Witkowska, ‘Uroczyste koronacje wizerunków maryjnych na ziemiach polskich w latach 1717–2005’, in Maria Regina. Koronacje wizerunków maryjnych w II Rzeczypospolitej, ed. by Aleksandra Witkowska (Tarnów: Biblos, 2011), pp. 29−40.

[141] Mar'jana Levycʹka, ‘Koronovani ikony Bohorodyci v ukrajinsʹkij unijnij tradyciji ChVІІІ–ChІCh st. (istoriohrafija i zrazky)’, Karpaty: ljudyna, etnos, cyvilizacija, 7–8 (2017–2018), 270−84; Dorota Wereda, ‘Koronacje wizerunków maryjnych w Cerkwi unickiej’, in Koronacje wizerunku Matki Bożej na przestrzeni dziejów, ed. by Ewelina Dziewońska-Chudy, and Maciej Trąbski (Częstochowa: SIM, 2018), pp. 67−79.

[142] See more details: Jurij Medvedyk, Ukrajinsʹka duchovna pisnja XVII−XVIII stolitʹ (Lʹviv: Ukrajinsʹkyj Katolycʹkyj Universytet, 2006).

[143] Natalja Jakovenko, ‘Tvorennja lokalʹnych “prostoriv viry”: topohrafija i socialʹna stratyhrafija palomnyctv v Ukrajini ChVІІІ stolittja (za knyhamy čud Počajivsʹkoji ta Ochtyrsʹkoji bohorodyčnych ikon)’, Zapysky NTŠ, 271 (2018), 209–30 (p. 221).

[144] Habrusʹ, Muravanyja charaly, pp. 193−4; Mickevič, Katalickija kljaštary, p. 38

[145] Gennadij Saganovič, ‘Žirovičskaja ikona Bogomateri kak “mesto pamjati” rusi VKL v XVI−XVIII vv.’, in ‘Mesta pamjati’ Rusi konca XV – serediny XVIII v., ed. by Andrej Doronin (Moskva, 2019), pp. 149–68 (pp. 152−54).

[146] Teodozy Borowik, Historia albo powieść zgodliwa przez pewne podanie ludzi wiary godnych, o obrazie przeczystey Panny Mariey Zyrowickim cudotwornym W. X. L. W powiecie Słonimskim, Y o rozmaitych cudach, ktore się przy nim… dzieią… (Wilno, 1628); Jozafat Dubieniecki, Historia o obrazie przeczystej Panny Mariey cudownym (Wilno, 1653); Antoni Mironowicz, ‘Jozafat Dubieniecki – historia cudownego obrazu żyrowickiego’, Rocznik Teologiczny, 33 (1991), 195–215.

[147] Saganovič, ‘Žirovičskaja ikona Bogomateri’, pp. 149−57, 163−66; Henadzʹ Sahanovič, ‘Militarnyja abrysy kulʹtu Božaj Maci Žyrovickaj u ChVII st.’, Belaruski Histaryčny Ahljad, 25 (2018), 33–56 (pp. 47−52).

[148] Alexy Dubowicz, Coniunctia plánet ziemskich z niebieskimi w cerkwi zurowickiey wystáwiona gdy niezwyćieźony monárcha Władysław. IV. Krol Polski z naiáśnietza Caecilia Renata Krolowa Polska: ludowny obraz náwiedzáli (Wilno, 1644); Alexy Dubowicz, Złota godzina. Dnia złotego Początek, Przed Naiasnieyszym Janem Kazimierzem Krolem Polskim, Wielkim Książęćiem Litewskim etc. etc. w Cerkwi Zyrowickiey (Wilno, 1651).

[149] Sahanovič, ‘Militarnyja abrysy kulʹtu Božaj Maci Žyrovickaj, pp. 44−46.

[150] Ignacy Wolodzko, Della Madonna Santissima del Pascolo (Roma, 1719); Isidoro Nardi, Relazione storica dello scoprimento della sacra e miracolosa immagine della Madonna del Pascolo (Roma, 1721) (Polish translation: Isidor Nardi, Relacya historyczna o ziawieniu cudownego obrazu Naswietszey Panny Zyrowickiey, nazwanego po wlosku Del Pascolo od Zyru w Rzymie przy Gorach w Resydencyi WW. OO. Bazylianow Ruskiego Narodu po wlosku wydana teraz przetlumaczona przez Ign. Kulczynskiego (Supraśl, 1728).

[151] Saganovič, ‘Žirovičskaja ikona Bogomateri’, pp. 163–166.

[152] See: Nikolaj Dikovskij, Koronovanie Žirovickoj čudotvornoj ikony Bogomateri (1730 god) (Grodna, 1902).

^{^[153]} Mathias Niendorf, Das Grossfürstentum Litauen: Studien zur Nationsbildung in der frühen Neuzeit (1569−1795) (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2006), p. 164.

[154] Skočyljas, Halycʹka (Lʹvivsʹka) jeparchija, pp. 287−88. The controversy over the historical and cultural memory of this monastery is described by: Liliya Berezhnaya, ‘Heilige Gottesmutter von Počajiv, sie wird uns retten!’ ‘Die Gottesmutter von Počajiv als Erinnerungsort in der postsowjetischen Ukraine’, in Maria in der Krise: Kultpraxis zwischen Konfession und Politik in Ostmitteleuropa, ed. by Agnieszka Gąsior, and Stefan Samerski (Köln: Böhlau, 2014), pp. 347–58 (pp. 348−55); Liliya Berezhnaya, ‘Kloster Počajiv’, in Religiöse Erinnerungsorte in Ostmitteleuropa: Konstitution und Konkurrenz im nationen- und epochenübergreifenden Zugriff, ed. by Joachim Bahlcke, Stefan Rohdewald, and Thomas Wünsch (München: Akademie, 2013), pp. 74–80.

[155] Horin, Monastyri Lucʹko-Ostrozʹkoji jeparchiji, pp. 333−34.

[156] Іstorija ukrajinsʹkoji kulʹtury, III p. 774.

[157] Horin, Monastyri Lucʹko-Ostrozʹkoji jeparchiji, pp. 315−37.

[158] This fact was emphasized by: Berezhnaya, ‘Heilige Gottesmutter von Počajiv, sie wird uns retten!’, pp. 349−51. See also: Іhor Іsičenko, ‘Prepodobnyj Іov Počajivsʹkyj u kulʹturnomu kodi Počajivsʹkoho vasylijansʹkoho monastyrja’, in Kulʹturotvorča misija Počajivsʹkoho vasylijansʹkoho monastyrja: Zbirnyk naukovyj statej, ed. by Іhor Іsičenko (Charkiv: Akta, 2018), pp. 51–61.

[159] Natalja Jakovenko, U pošukach Novoho Neba: Žyttja i teksty Joanykija Galjatovsʹkoho (Kyjiv: Krytyka, 2017), p. 431.

[160] Jakovenko, ‘Tvorennja lokalʹnych “prostoriv viry”’, pp. 209−230; Natalja Jakovenko, ‘Čudo Počajivsʹkoji ikony na mori pid Neapolem 1762 roku’, Zapysky NTŠ, 270 (2018), 201−19; Walentyna Łoś, ‘Księga cudów Najświętszej Marii Panny monasteru Bazylianów w Poczajowie: analiza ponadkonfesyjnej mentalności religijnej (XVII – początek XIX wieku)’, Orientalia Christiana Cracoviensia, 10 (2018), 111–30 (pp. 120–22).

[161] Jakovenko, ‘Tvorennja lokalʹnych “prostoriv viry”’, pp. 210−12, 217−22; Łoś, ‘Księga cudów Najświętszej Marii Panny’, pp. 123−24.

[162] This fact was emphasized by: Berezhnaya, ‘Heilige Gottesmutter von Počajiv, sie wird uns retten!’, pp. 351−53.

[163] Jakovenko, ‘Tvorennja lokalʹnych “prostoriv viry”’, pp. 221.

[164] Ibid., pp. 218−19; Łoś, ‘Księga cudów Najświętszej Marii Panny’, pp. 125−26.

[165] Lorens, Bazylianie prowincji koronnej, pp. 278−80.

[166] Józef E. Dutkiewicz, ‘Fabryka cerkwi Wniebowziecia NMP w Poczajowie’, Dawna Sztuka, 2 (1939), 131–62; Lorens, Bazylianie prowincji koronnej, pp. 281−82.

[167] Lorens, Bazylianie prowincji koronnej, pp. 283−84.

[168] Ibid., p. 284.

[169] Ulrich L. Lehner, The Catholic Enlightenment: The Forgotten History of a Global Movement (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016), pp. 5–7, 128, 154; Ulrich L. Lehner, and William P. O’Brien William P. O’Brien, ‘Mysticism and Reform in Catholic Theology between 1600 and 1800’, in The Oxford Handbook of Early Modern Theology, 1600−1800, ed. by Ulrich L. Lehner, Richard A. Muller, and Anthony G. Roeber (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016), pp. 63–74 (pp. 64–65).

[170] See polemic article: Volodymyr Sklokin, ‘Čy isnuvalo ukrajinsʹke Prosvitnyctvo? Kilʹka mirkuvanʹ iz pryvodu nezaveršenoji istoriohrafičnoji dyskusiji’, Kyjivsʹka akademija, 12 (2014−2015), 146–59.

[171] Vasilios N. Makrides, ‘The Enlightenment in the Greek Orthodox East: Appropriation, Dilemmas, Ambiguities’, in Enlightenment and Religion in the Orthodox World, ed. Paschalis M. Kitromilides (Oxford: Voltaire Foundation, 2016), pp. 17–47; Dimitrios Moschos, ‘The Churches of the East and the Enlightenment’, in The Oxford Handbook of Early Modern Theology, 1600−1800, pp. 505–13; Marija Petrović, ‘Austrian Enlightenment the Orthodox Way. The Church Calendar of the Habsburg Serbs and the Josephinist Reforms’, in Encounters in the Europe’s Southwest. The Habsburg Empire and the Orthodox World in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries, ed. by Harald Heppner, and Eva Posch (Bochum: D. Winkler, 2012), pp. 45–54.

[172] Vadimas Adadurovas, ‘Švč. Trejybės vienuolynas kaip švietimo institucija’, in Kultūrų kryžkelė, pp. 137−43; Ina Kažuro, ‘Bazilijonų vienuolijos ryšiai su Vilniaus universitetu’, Lietuvos istorijos studijos, 42 (2018), 29–47.

[173] Richard Butterwick, ‘Catholicism and Enlightenment in Poland-Lithuania’, in A Companion to the Catholic Enlightenment in Europe, ed. by Ulrich L. Lehner, and Michael Printy (Leiden−Boston: Brill, 2010), pp. 297–358 (pp. 297, 310).

[174] Oleksandr Savyč, Narysy z istoriji kulʹturnych ruchiv na Vkrajini ta Bilorusi v XVI–XVIII v., Zbirnyk istoryčno-filolohičnoho viddilu, 90 (Kyjiv, 1929), pp. 278−81, 297−98, 305−6; Maria Pidłypczak-Majerowicz, Bazylianie w Koronie i na Litwie. Szkoły i książki w działalności zakonu (Warszawa−Wrocław, 1986), p. 103.

[175] The last one who drew the attention to this fact was: Joanna Getka, ‘Secular lexis in 18th-century Ruthenian religion-related printed matter (based on Basilian “moral theologies”)’, in Beiträge zum 19. Arbeitstreffen der Europäischen Slavistischen Linguistik (Polyslav), ed. by Enrique G. Rubio, Ekaterina Kislova, and Emilia Kubicka (Wiesbaden, 2016), pp. 81–91.

[176] Іvan Alʹmes, Іstorija čytannja: Čenci v sociokulʹturnomu prostori Lʹvivsʹkoji jeparchiji (rannij novyj čas) (Lʹviv, 2020) (in print); Marija Pidlypčak-Maerovič, ‘Izdanija na litovskom jazyke vasilianskich i iezuitskich tipografij’, in Istoričeskij putʹ litovskoj pisʹmennosti: Cb. materialov konf. (4–6 nojabrja 2004 g., Moskva), ed. by Juozas Budrajtis, and Sergej Temčin (Vilʹnjus, 2005), p. 34; Joanna Getka, U progu modernizacji: Ruskojęzyczne drukarstwo bazyliańskie XVIII wieku (Warszawa: Uniwersytet Warszawski, 2017), pp. 113–126; Ina Kažuro, ‘Vilniaus bazilijonų vienuolyno spaustuvės veikla 1628–1839 m.’ (doctoral thesis, Vilnius University, 2019).

[177] Na perechresti kulʹtur, 2nd edn, pp. 674−93 (№ 15); Anna Kaupuž, Ingė Lukšaitė, ‘A. Butkevičiaus gramatikos była’, Kalbotyra, 5 (1962), 122–61.

[178] Kryvošeja, Umansʹkyj vasyliansʹkyj monastyr, pp. 3−4, 16−17.

[179] The use of printing as an instrument of Catholic confessionalization in early modern Europe is emphasized by: Thomas Kaufmann, Die Mitte der Reformation. Eine Studie zu Buchdruck und Publizistik im deutschen Sprachgebiet, zu ihren Akteuren und deren Strategien, Inszenierungs- und Ausdrucksformen (Tübingen, 2019).

[180] Mychajlo Vavryk, ‘Cerkovni drukarni i vydannja v Ukrajinsʹkij katolycʹkij cerkvi 17 stol.’, Analecta OSBM, 9 (15) (1974), 119–21; Pidłypczak-Majerowicz, Bazylianie w Koronie i na Litwie, pp. 59−60.

[181] Antonina Zernova, ‘Tipografija Mamoničej v Vilʹne (XVII vek)’, Kniga: Issledovanija i materialy, 1 (1959), 167–223 (p. 219).

[182] Ivanas Almesas, ‘Spaustuvė’, in Kultūrų kryžkelė, pp. 203–208 (pp. 203, 207−208); Ina Kažuro, ‘Vilniaus bazilijonų spaustuvės (1628–1845) veiklos organizavimas’, Knygotyra, 69 (2017), 14−19.

[183] Olena Železnjak, ‘Počajivsʹki vydannja kyrylyčnym šryftom: 1734–1830’, in Drukarnja Počajivsʹkoho Uspensʹkoho monastyrja ta jiji starodruky: Zb. nauk. pracʹ, ed. by Oleksij Onyščenko (Kyjiv, 2011), pp. 162–92; Zoja Jaroševič-Pereslavcev, ‘Vilʹnjusskoe kirilličeskoe knigopečatanie: ego sudʹba i značenie’, in Vilniaus Universiteto bibliotekos metraštis, ed. by Viktorija Vaitkevičiūtė, and others (Vilniaus: Vilniaus universitetas, 2015), pp. 303–24 (pp. 303–4).

[184] Almesas, Spaustuvė, pp. 203−8.

[185] V pomoščʹ sostaviteljam svodnogo kataloga, Vyp. 3: Kirillovskie izdanija Supraslʹskoj tipografii, ed. by Jurij Labyncev (Moskva, 1978); Maria Cubrzyńska-Leonarczyk, Oficyna supraska 1695–1803 (Warszawa: Biblioteka Narodowa, 1993), p. 28.

[186] Jaroslav Іsajevyč, ‘Knyhovydannja i drukarstvo v Počajevi: iniciatory ta vykonavci’, in Drukarnja Počajivsʹkoho Uspensʹkoho monastyrja, pp. 7–22 (pp. 8−9).

[187] This aspect of the operation of the printery draws attention in: Іvan Alʹmes, ‘Kontroversijne misce pam’jati ta spilʹna kulʹturna spadščyna: Počajivsʹka obytelʹ i monastyrsʹka drukarnja domodernoho času’, in Kataloh starodrukiv Počajivsʹkoji vasylijansʹkoji drukarni XVIII – peršoji tretyny XIX stolitʹ (Lʹviv, 2020) (in print).

[188] Lorens, Bazylianie prowincji koronnej, pp. 220−24, 410–15.

[189] The general background of the functioning of the Pochaiv printery is represented by the following works: Jaroslav Іsajevyč, ‘Ukrajinsʹki monastyrsʹki drukarni Pravoberežžja: Univ i Počajiv’, in Ukrajinsʹke knyhovydannja: vytoky, rozvytok, problemy, ed. by Jaroslav Іsajevyč (Lʹviv, 2002), pp. 276−86; Ryčkov, Luc, Počajivsʹka Svjato-Uspensʹka lavra; Ivan Tylawskyj, ‘Monastero di Počaiv – la sua tipografia e le sue edizioni'’, in Analecta OSBM, 4.1–2 (1963), 230–92 (Ukrainian translation: Іvan Tyljavsʹkyj, Liturhijni naprjamky Počajivsʹkoho monastyrja pid čas uniji (1712−1831) (Rym−Lʹviv, 1997)). An older work has not lost its relevance too: Andrej Chojnackij, Počaevskaja Uspenskaja lavra. Istoričeskoe opisanie, ed. by Grigorij Kryžanovskij (Počaev, 1897). In recent decades there have been a number of new studies about this monastery and its contribution to the culture of the time: Valentyna Bočkovsʹka, ‘Počajivsʹkyj duchovnyj oseredok v istoriji i kulʹturi ukrajinsʹkoho narodu XVIII–XIX st.’ (unpublished candidate’s of sciences thesis, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, 2018); Drukarnja Počajivsʹkoho Uspensʹkoho monastyrja, ed. by Onyščenko; Olena Železnjak, ‘Kyrylyčni vydannja svitsʹkoho pryznačennja drukarni Počajivsʹkoho Uspensʹkoho monastyrja’, Rukopysna ta knyžkova spadščyna Ukrajiny, 16 (2012), 197–205; Kataloh vydanʹ Počajivsʹkoho ta Univsʹkoho monastyriv XVIII-XX st. z kolekciji Muzeju knyhy i drukarstva Ukrajiny, ed. by Valentyna Bočkovsʹka, Ljudmyla Chaucha, and Valerij Adamovyč (Kyjiv: Vydavnyčyj dim Kyjevo-Mohyljansʹka Akademija, 2008); Kulʹturotvorča misija Počajivsʹkoho vasylijansʹkoho monastyrja: Zbirnyk naukovyj statej; Anastasija Romanova, ‘Knigoizdatelʹskaja dejatelʹnostʹ Počaevskogo monastyrja (1732–1830)’, in Počaevskij sbornik, ed. by Natalija Kolpakova (Sankt-Peterburg, 2007), pp. 8–14.

[190] Alʹmes, ‘Kontroversijne misce pam’jati’.

[191] The treatise consists of five introductory parts on key themes of Christian doctrine and seven chapters. The last chapter separately discusses the case of the conversion from the Byzantine to the Latin rite, notes the uniqueness and self-sufficiency of the rites of the Christian East, and legitimizes the 1596 Berestaian Union. (Іsičenko, ‘Vasyliansʹke baroko’, pp. 13−15).

[192] Detailed analysis of this book: Joanna Getka, Prosta mowa końca XVIII wieku. Język ‘Nauk Parafialnych’ (Poczajów 1794) (Warszawa: Uniwersytet Warszawski, 2012).

[193] Іsajevyč, ‘Knyhovydannja i drukarstvo v Počajevi’, p. 19; Іsičenko, ‘Vasyliansʹke baroko’, pp. 12–13.

[194] The latest critical publication of this text: Bogoglasnik: Pěsni blagogovějnyja (1790/1791): Eine Sammlung gestlicher Lieder aus der Ukraine: Facsimile und Darstellung, ed. by Hans Rothe, and Jurij Medwedyk, 2 vols (Köln−Weimar−Wien: Böhlau, 2016).

[195] Іsičenko, ‘Vasyliansʹke baroko’, pp. 15–16.

[196] See: Dmytro Hrynčyšyn, ‘Polětyka svěcka – unikalʹna Počajivsʹka pam’jatka kincja XVIII stolittja’, Zapysky NTŠ, 246 (2003), 246–63.

[197] Іsajevyč, ‘Knyhovydannja i drukarstvo v Počajevi’, p. 17.

[198] Ibid., pp. 11−12.

[199] Ibid., p. 20.

[200] Joanna Getka, Poskojęzyczne druki bazyliańskie (XVIII wiek) (Warszawa, 2013), pp. 247−49.

[201] Іsajevyč, ‘Knyhovydannja i drukarstvo v Počajevi’, pp. 15–16; Іsajevyč, ‘Ukrajinsʹki monastyrsʹki drukarni Pravoberežžja’, pp. 283–84.

[202] Іsajevyč, ‘Ukrajinsʹki monastyrsʹki drukarni Pravoberežžja’, pp. 276–86; Іhor Mycʹko, Svjatouspensʹka Lavra v Unevi (kinecʹ ChІІІ – kinecʹ ChCh st.) (Lʹviv, 1998), pp. 222–53.

[203] Podlipczak-Majerowicz, Bazylianie w Koronie i na Litwie, pp. 65−66.

[204] Andrej Voznesenskij, and Irina Počinskaja, ‘Knigoizdanie XVIII – pervoj četverti XIX vekov’, in Knigoizdatelʹskaja dejatelʹnostʹ staroobrjadcev (1701–1918). Materialy k slovarju, ed. by Andrej Voznesenskij, Petr Mangilev, and Irina Počinskaja (Ekaterinburg, 1996), pp. 8–24 (p. 8); Zoja Jaroszewicz-Pieresławcew, Starowiercy w Polsce i ich księgi (Olsztyn, 1995), pp. 121–22.

[205] Voznesenskij, and Počinskaja, ‘Knigoizdanie XVIII – pervoj četverti XIX vekov’, pp. 11−20; Irina Počinskaja, Staroobrjadčeskoe knigopečatanie XVIII — pervoj četv. XIX v. (Ekaterinburg, 1994), pp. 45−50, 123−37; Jaroszewicz-Pieresławcew, Starowiercy w Polsce, pp. 82−86, 158−60.

[206] Іsajevyč, ‘Knyhovydannja i drukarstvo v Počajevi’, pp. 15–16.

[207] Almesas, ‘Spaustuvė’, p. 208.

[208] See the programme article: Jaroslav Іsajevyč, ‘Do charakterystyky kulʹtury doby Baroko: vasylijansʹki osvitni oseredky’, Ukrajina: kulʹturna spadščyna, nacionalʹna svidomistʹ, deržavnistʹ, 12 (2004), 195−206.

[209] Their activities and training programme are considered by: Rodion Holovacʹkyj, ‘Mytropolyča seminarija Rutsʹkoho’, Analecta OSBM, 9.3–4 (1960), 387−91; Іhor Skočyljas, ‘“Volodymyrsʹki Ateny” XVII – počatku XVIII st.: vid katedralʹnoji školy do jeparchialʹnoji seminariji’, Kyjivsʹka Akademija, 7 (2009), 54−73; Janusz Kania, Unickie seminarium diecezjalne w Chełmie w latach 1759-1833 (Lublin, 1993); Szegda, Działalność prawno-organizacyjna, pp. 202−8.

[210] Dmytro Blažejovskyj, Byzantine Kyivan rite students in Pontifical Colleges, and Seminaries, Universities and Institutes of Central and Western Europe (1576−1983) (Rome, 1984); Dmytro Blažejovskyj, Ukrainian and Armenian Pontifical Seminaries of Lviv (1665−1784) (Rome, 1975); Edward Tryjarski, Katalog kolegium teatyńskiego we Lwowie (Kraków, 1960), p. 77.

[211] Pidłypczak-Majerowicz, Bazylianie w Koronie i na Litwie, p. 30; Meletius M. Wojnar, ‘Basilian Seminaries, Colleges and Schools (XVII–XVIII)’, Analecta OSBM, 9 (1974), 48–63 (p. 62).

[212] This language was learned from textbooks by Meletìj Smotricʹkij: Grammatìki slovenskiâ pravilʹnoe sintagma 1619 r. (the only textbook for learning the Slavic language), Pamvi Berindi Leksìkon slavenorosskìj i imen tolkovanìe 1627 r. and Leksikonʺ latinskìj Êpifanìâ Slavinecʹkogo 30–40 of XVÌÌ century (a Latin Church Slavonic dictionary with 27,000 entries, distributed in numerous copies).

[213] Maria Pidłypczak-Majerowicz, ‘“Menologium bazyliańskie” Ignacego Kulczyńskiego − forma i treść księgi’, in Zakon bazyliański na tle mozaiki wyznaniowej, pp. 267−80.

[214] Their training programme is considered by: Pantelejmon (Denys) Trofimov, ‘Traktaty De Deo Uno et Trino vasylijansʹkych bohosloviv Svjato-Pokrovsʹkoji provinciji (XVIII st.)’, Naukovi zapysky UKU, serija ‘Bohoslov’ja’, 14.7 (2019), 179−92; Olexa Horbatsch, Epitome praeceptorum rhetoricorum: Počajiv 1764. Die lateinische Schulrhetorik des Basilianerordens aus d. J. 1764 (München, 1992); Meletius M. Wojnar, ‘Basilian Scholars and Publishing Houses (XVII–XVIII)’, Analecta OSBM, 9 (1974), 64−94; Wojnar, Basilian Seminaries, Colleges and Schools; Meletius M. Wojnar, ‘De studiis philosophico-theologicis in Provincia Rutheno-Ucraina Ordinis Basiliani s. XVIII eorumque manualibus’, Analecta OSBM, 7 (1971), 85−113.

[215] Іstorija ukrajinsʹkoji kulʹtury, III, p. 451.

[216] Šv. Bazilijaus Didžiojo ordinas: iš liaudies – liaudžiai. Mokslinių straipsnių rinkinys, ed. by Aldona Vasiliauskienė, and Olena Lukačuk (Šiauliai–Lvovas, 2017), p. 237.

[217] See: Raporty generalnych wizytatorów szkół Komisji Edukacji Narodowej w Wielkim Księstwie Litewskim (1782–1792), ed. by Kalina Bartnicka, and Irena Szybiak (Wrocław, 1974).

[218] Savyč, Narysy z istoriji kulʹturnych ruchiv, pp. 288−92; Natalja Jakovenko, Narys istoriji serednʹovičnoji ta rannʹomodernoji Ukrajiny, 2nd edn (Kyjiv: Krytyka, 2005), pp. 495−97.

[219] Pidłypczak-Majerowicz, Bazylianie w Koronie i na Litwie, pp. 35−37.

[220] A student of bursa and other spiritual educational institutions; the name of students of secondary and junior classes of the Kyiv Academy.

[221] Іaroslav Isaievych, ‘Confraternities of Laymen in Early Modern Ukraine and Belarus’, in Belarus. Lithuania. Poland. Ukraine. The Foundations of Historical and Cultural Traditions in East Central Europe. International Conference (Rome, 28 April – 6 May 1990), ed. by Jerzy Kłoczowski (Lublin−Rome: Foundation John Paul II, 1994), pp. 175−98; Pam’jatky bratsʹkych škil na Ukrajini. Kinecʹ XVI – počatok XVII st.: Teksty i doslidžennja, ed. by Volodymyr Šynkaruk (Kyjiv, 1988), pp. 37–47.

[222] Stanisław Obirek, Jezuici w Rzeczypospolitej Obojga Narodów w latach 1564−1668. (Działalność religijna, społeczno-kulturalna i polityczna) (Kraków, 1996).

[223] Tetjana Ševčenko, Jezujitsʹke škilʹnyctvo na ukrajinsʹkych zemljach (Lʹviv: Svičado, 2005), pp. 5, 10−11. The best studies of the Jesuit concept of education: Mario Barbera, La Ratio studiorum e la parte quara della Costituzioni della Compagnia di Gesù (Padova, 1942); John W. Donohue, Jesuit Education: An Essay on the Foundation of Its Idea (New York, 1963). The influence of the Ratio studiorum model on the Ukrainian school is traced by: Natalja Jakovenko, ‘Latynsʹke škilʹnyctvo i škilʹnyj humanizm v Ukrajini kincja XVI – seredyny XVII st.’, Kyjivsʹka starovyna, 12 (1997), 11−27.

[224] Bieńkowski, ‘Organizacja Kościoła Wschodniego w Polsce’, s. 1015−22.

[225] Jakovenko, Narys istoriji, p. 293.

[226] Zoja Chyžnjak, Kyjevo-mohyljansʹka akademija (Kyjiv: Vyšča škola, 1981); Jaroslava Stratij, Vladimir Litvinov, and Viktor Andruško, Opisanie kursov filosofii i ritoriki professorov Kievo-Mogiljanskoj akademii (Kiev, 1982); Ludwik Piechlik, ‘Działalność kulturalna Towarzystwa Jezusowego na północnych i wschodnich ziemiach Polski w XVI–XVIII wieku’, in Dzieje Lubelszczyzny, Między Wschodem i Zachodem. Kultura umysłowa, ed. by Jerzy Kłoczowski, 8 vols (Warszawa, 1974–1995), VI (1989), pp. 75−96.

[227] Іstorija ukrajinsʹkoji kulʹtury, III, p. 517; Ševčenko, Jezujitsʹke škilʹnyctvo na ukrajinsʹkych zemljach, pp. 48, 73–74, 76.

[228] Nikolaj Petrov, ‘Očerkʺ istorii Bazilianskago ordena vʺ byvšej Polʹše’, Trudy Kievskoj duchovnoj akademii, 12.7 (1871), p. 186−88.

[229] Pidručnyj, and Pʼjetnočko, Capitula Generalia Basilianorum, pp. 415−16.

[230] Pidłypczak-Majerowicz, Bazylianie w Koronie i na Litwie, pp. 35−36.

[231] Petrov, ‘Očerk istorii Bazilianskago ordena’, pp. 180−83; Pidručnyj, and Pʼjetnočko, Capitula Generalia Basilianorum, pp. 415−16.

[232] Petrov, ‘Očerkʺ istorii Bazilianskago ordena’, pp. 157−66.

[233] Ibid., pp. 178−79.

[234] Jaroslav Іsajevyč, Ukrajinsʹke knyhovydannja: vytoky, rozvytok, problemy (Lʹviv, 2002), pp. 333–38. See also: Kazimierz Puchowski, Edukacja historyczna w jezuickich kolegiach Rzeczypospolitej, 1565–1773 (Gdańsk: Uniwersytet Gdański, 1999), pp. 145−46.

[235] TsDIAL, f. 201, op. 4б, spr. 421.

[236] See a structural analysis of this text: Ołeksandr Baran, ‘Rękopis Lwa Kiszki: struktura i treść źródła. Z dziejów bazyliańskiej historiografii przełomu XVII i XVIII wieku’, Rocznik Instytutu Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej, 3 (2005), 23−54.

[237] TsDIAL, f. 201, op. 4б, spr. 421, pp. 1−130. This source is taken into account in the publication: Kronika halicko-wołyńska. Kronika Romanowiczów, ed. by Dariusz Dąbrowski, and Adrian Jusupović (Kraków−Warszawa: Avalon, 2017).

[238] TsDIAL, f. 201, op. 4б, spr. 421, pp. 131−226, 491−767.

[239] Ibid., pp. 227−38.

[240] Some of them were published in the interwar period: Skrutenʹ, ‘Žyttjepysy vasylijan’, 1 (1924−1932), pp. 105−30, 284−91, 496−520; (2), pp. 123−38, 376−401; (3), pp. 496−520; (4), pp. 219−37, 496−520.

Who are the Basilians?

Who are the Basilians?

[25] Some of them have already been published: Vizytaciji vasyliansʹkych monastyriv Peremyšlʹsʹkoji jeparchiji 1747–1767 rokiv, ed. by Jurij Stecyk, (Lʹviv: Misioner, 2016).

[73] Epistolae metropolitarum Kioviensium Catholicorum, Raphaelis Korsak, Antonii Sielava, Gabrielis Kolenda (1637-1674), ed. by Athanasius G. Welykyj (Romae: PP. Basiliani, 1956), p. 267 (№ 46).

[84] Mychajło Dowbyszczenko, ‘Cerkiew unicka na Wołyniu w dobie wojen kozackich w latach 1648−1667’, in Ruchy religijne na Wołyniu w XVI i XVII wieku, ed. by Andrzej Gil (Lublin: KUL, 2013), pp. 11–120 (pp. 38−45, 49−50).

^{^[153]} Mathias Niendorf, Das Grossfürstentum Litauen: Studien zur Nationsbildung in der frühen Neuzeit (1569−1795) (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2006), p. 164.

Author:Ihor Skochylias

Latest Articles

Featured

From Editor in Chief

Interview with Hieronim Grala: Russian State Ideology Has Been Referring to a Selectively Treated Past Since Early Modernity

History Between the Drops. Book Review: Yaroslav Hrytsak, Podolaty mynule. Hlobalʹna istorija Ukrajiny, Kyjiv: Portal, 2021, 432 s.

Who are the Basilians?

Who are the Basilians?

[25] Some of them have already been published: Vizytaciji vasyliansʹkych monastyriv Peremyšlʹsʹkoji jeparchiji 1747–1767 rokiv, ed. by Jurij Stecyk, (Lʹviv: Misioner, 2016).

[73] Epistolae metropolitarum Kioviensium Catholicorum, Raphaelis Korsak, Antonii Sielava, Gabrielis Kolenda (1637-1674), ed. by Athanasius G. Welykyj (Romae: PP. Basiliani, 1956), p. 267 (№ 46).

[84] Mychajło Dowbyszczenko, ‘Cerkiew unicka na Wołyniu w dobie wojen kozackich w latach 1648−1667’, in Ruchy religijne na Wołyniu w XVI i XVII wieku, ed. by Andrzej Gil (Lublin: KUL, 2013), pp. 11–120 (pp. 38−45, 49−50).

[153] Mathias Niendorf, Das Grossfürstentum Litauen: Studien zur Nationsbildung in der frühen Neuzeit (1569−1795) (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2006), p. 164.

Author:Ihor Skochylias

Latest Articles

Featured

From Editor in Chief

Interview with Hieronim Grala: Russian State Ideology Has Been Referring to a Selectively Treated Past Since Early Modernity

History Between the Drops. Book Review: Yaroslav Hrytsak, Podolaty mynule. Hlobalʹna istorija Ukrajiny, Kyjiv: Portal, 2021, 432 s.

^{^[153]} Mathias Niendorf, Das Grossfürstentum Litauen: Studien zur Nationsbildung in der frühen Neuzeit (1569−1795) (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2006), p. 164.