Authors

Discussion

The legacy of Francysk Skaryna holds exceptional significance for the history of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and its successor states – Belarus, Lithuania, Ukraine, and Russia. Over centuries, the "heritagization" of Skaryna has consistently resonated with shifting political and cultural agendas.

From its inception, research on Skaryna’s portrait – an emblematic element of his printed legacy – has been deeply intertwined with political narratives. In the Russian Empire, his editions were viewed as expressions of authentic "Russianness" on the "corrupted" Western-Russian lands of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, with emphasis on Orthodox elements in his portrait. In the post-revolutionary era, intellectuals elevated Skaryna as a national symbol, highlighting his "Europeanness." During the Soviet period, historians reinterpreted him as a "people’s hero," promoting his portrait as a “democratic message” to his descendants, “the common people”. The early years of Belarusian independence saw radical "nationalization" of Skaryna’s image, followed by a surge of academic, popular, and pseudo-academic literature. However, this initial fervor gave way to stagnation, leaving Belarusian historiography – which self-proclaimed itself the leader of Skaryna Studies – largely inert.

The 2017 celebration of the "500th Anniversary of Belarusian Printing," which included the release of The Book Legacy of Francysk Skaryna facsimile edition, marked the last notable moment in Belarusian Skaryna Studies. Even the 2022 quincentenary of printing in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania passed without recognition in Belarus.

This stagnation stems less from fault than from misfortune. Widespread repression and an official ideological focus on "pan-Slavic cultural values, civil harmony, and the unique identity of Belarusians" have restricted scholarly inquiry. Over the past two decades, Belarusian historians have largely been absent from Skaryna Studies, a phenomenon we term "disruption" – in Belarusian historiography and historiographies of countries-neighbors.

Since the late 20th century, scholars in Lithuania, Poland, the Czech Republic, and France have abandoned Soviet-era frameworks that divided the Grand Duchy of Lithuania’s heritage along national, linguistic, or confessional lines. They have embraced multicultural, multilingual, and multiconfessional perspectives, positioning Skaryna within a broader European historical context. These approaches explore his portrait through cultural context, art and intellectual history.

Examining Skaryna’s portrait as an interplay of image and text in his Bible editions, scholars analyze the relationship between Renaissance aesthetics and Biblical thought. By framing this study within concepts of “disruption” and “continuity,” these efforts contribute to a richer understanding of the visual cosmos of the early 16th century intellectual.