Kyiv Pechersk Lavra in the 10th-11th centuries
The history of modern Ukraine is strongly based on the medieval Kyivan Rus' tradition. Being one of the most powerful states in the region in the 10th-11th centuries, it became a foundation for future states such as Ukraine, Belarus, Lithuania, and Russia. However, the Rurik dynasty (and its Viking origins) connected also the Rus' territories with the Viking world and continued a tradition of military campaigns against the Byzantine Empire as well as trade. Despite the fact that Rus' became a Christian state in 988 (officially christianized by Volodymyr the Great (960/963-1015), the Grand Duke of Kyiv), there were Christians and Christian churches in Kyiv long before that day. Moreover, even some of the rulers were Christians before Volodymyr - Askold (860?-882) was baptized in Constantinople and Olha (Olga/Helga), Volodymyr's grandmother, was also baptized there.
The representatives of the Orthodox Church (monks and priests) became a real cultural and political power in Rus' since 988. More importantly, some of them became famous therapists/healers and 'doctors'. However, the knowledge of healing was spread among the locals long before, magicians/sorcerers (відун/vydun, обавник/obavnyk, потворник/potvornyk, кудесники/kudesnik, зілійники/zyliinyk, наузники/nauznyk) healing people with potions and spells (Krypyakevych 2002).
It is widely accepted that since the 11th century, Kyiv Pechersk Lavra became the centre not just of cultural and political life but of healing as well. Established not later than 1058, it was also unique in Rus' because of its foundation by a monastic community, not by a ruler, which was one of the basic reasons for its relative political independence. It was organised according to the statute of the Monastery of Stoudios in Constantinople and continued the tradition of dormitory monasticism, justified by Basil of Caesarea. There were two monastic traditions in the Rus' territories created by St. Antonii (982-1073) (renunciation of life and asceticism) and St. Theodosius (1009?-1074) (asceticism used to influence a sinful life) (Popovich 1998, 82).
There were a few 'healers' that are known from the chronicles (lytopises) and the Patericon (Lives of the Fathers). One famous 'doctor', for instance, was an unknown Armenian, who served the grand Duke of Kyiv Vsevolod (1077-1093). Peter Surozhky from the Byzantine Sourozh in Crimea, possibly Greek, was another doctor of the Duke of Chernihiv Sviatoslav (Krypyakevych 2002). Nevertheless, it was Kyiv Pechersk Lavra that became a place of many famous 'healers'. The most famous of them is Agapetus.
Agapetus
The life of Agapetus (d. 1095) is described in Kyiv Pechersk Patericon, a medieval Rus' ecclesiastical text, and the only source of information about the monk. The original text was lost, but it is available in the earliest Kasianivska version of 1462 (and later copies). It was also copied in Kyiv Pechersk Lavra in 1553-54 by the monk Nesterec. The composition is divided into 36 parts (36 'слoв', literally 'words') and the 27th one is dedicated to Agapetus (Zhilenko 2001).
It is possible that Agapetus was from Kyiv and became a monk of Lavra around the time of St. Antonii. He healed people by potions ('зеліе' - herb, potion) and prayers. When some of the Lavra brother-monks became ill, Agapetus left his cell, went to each patient, gave them potions ('яди' - literally 'poison') or boiled potions ('варяще зеліе'), and healed them by prayer. If an illness continued, the doctor stayed with the patient and relentlessly prayed until God saved them. That was the reason why Agapetus became known as a doctor ('лЬчець' from 'лічити' - to heal).
It must be noted that Agapetus' talent as a healer is described in opposition to another doctor - an unknown and unnamed Armenian whose methods are condemned in the Patericon because he 'does not heal but predict the death of an ill person' (Zhilenko 2001). Meanwhile, Agapetus used his own methods of healing, such as giving fresh vegetables that he used to eat. The effectiveness of the monk's methods made the unknown Armenian doctor jealous, so he made a few attempts to kill Agapetus. The first killer (a man sentenced to death) brought a 'deadly potion' for Agapetus, tried it in front of the monk and almost died. But the monk cured him with his 'poisons' and blessing. The second attempt was made by the Armenian's coreligionist. The monk drank a poison but it did not hurt him.
Volodymyr Monomakh, the Grand Duke of Kyiv once fell ill and the Armenian doctor was called to cure him. But all his efforts were ineffectual. Agapetus was then summoned to the Duke, but the monk refused to come, arguing that he promised not to leave the cloister. A Duke's servant begged the monk to save the ruler but nothing worked on him. However, Agapetus did give some vegetables to Monomakh and the ruler was cured. Of course, Volodymyr came to Lavra to recompense the monk, but he refused even to leave his cell for the visit and asked the Duke to give all the money to the poor.
Another story tells us that one day Agapetus fell ill and the unknown Armenian came to him. They started a discussion about the art of healing and the Armenian doctor said that the monk would live no more than three days; if that were not true, the doctor would become a monk. Of course, Agapetus did not die in three days. Moreover, he was treating people during his own illness, using some vegetables from Alexandria. It was only three months later that he finally died. It is worth mentioning that the unknown Armenian doctor did, in fact, become a monk. Taking into account that in the text the doctor is mentioned as an 'infidel', he had to be baptized in the Orthodox tradition to become a monk in Kyiv Pechersk Lavra.
The story of Agapetus is a classic one for ecclesiastical texts of the period. It shows the sanctity of the holy place (Kyiv Pechersk Lavra), uniformity of the Orthodox Church (in comparison to the Armenian one, which probably was perceived as a heretical one), and the effectiveness of spiritual healing compared to physical healing. Agapetus’ story also consistently contains two important components - using vegetables and potions. It seems likely that Agapetus recommended some vegetarian diet for his patients that could be quite effective. It's key to remember that he used to give his patients vegetables that he owned himself (to be more precise, that the cloister owed, produced or imported). The fact that he treated patients with vegetables from Alexandria may inform us about available foodstuff from the Near East, Caucasus, Byzantium or Africa used by the monk in his personal diet (as well as in healing people). The issue of potions has teeth. It seems impossible to recreate the recipe of his 'boiled poisons' which could be inherited from the pagan past. But the monk could use local herbs such as mint, thyme, sea buckthorn, elderberry, melissa, chamomile, dog-rose, plantain and many others for his 'art of healing' (as well as potentially mushrooms, honey, propolis, royal jelly, wax, apitoxin etc), and further research here would be illuminating.
Alypius of the Caves
A story about Alypius of the Caves ('Venerable Alypius') (d. 1114) tells us about a monk and a famous painter of icons. His life and work were full of miracles, told in part 34 (слово 34) of the Kyiv Pechersk Patericon (Zhilenko 2001). Particularly worth mentioning is a story about a rich man from Kyiv who had leprosy. This unknown man tried to be healed by magicians ('вольхвовь'), doctors ('врачевь'), and infidels, but all were unsuccessful. He was later advised to visit Lavra, which he did. There the 'patient' drank water from the well of St. Theodosius and washed his 'head and face' with this water. His wounds 'boiled' and a stench made everyone run away ('вьскіьпЬ весь гноемь за невЬрьствіе его, яко же бЬгати его всЬм смрада ради') (Zhilenko 2001). The man went back home, hid and waited for death. However, the 'patient' went to Lavra again to visit Alypius to confess his sins. The monk taught him, took his palette (the text uses the word 'вапьница'; from 'вапьно' which means 'paint, dye' so it can be something like palette) which he used for painting icons, and painted all the patient's wounds and abscesses. Alypius then made the patient partake of communion and wash with water from the well of St. Theodosius. His abscesses 'fell down' and the man was cured. Thus the man was healed physically and spiritually.
The issue of 'healing makeup and water' has teeth. It seems like Alypius' 'painting method of healing' could be simple makeup that enabled that man to look cured. His wounds and abscesses were literally painted but the illness itself was not cured, even if the patient did live a longer life (as it is dubiously said in the Patericon). It is tempting to think that Alypius could use some kind of therapeutic ointment which helped that man to be cured. But his 'art education' (he was taught by a Greek painter of icons) does not seem to make it possible for him to teach a healing method from Byzantium or other places.
Further Work
More information about healing can be found throughout the Patericon. Part 4 speaks about Monomakh's illness, part 10 an illness as a punishment for stealing, part 12 healing methods, part 20 a Syrian doctor, and part 35 another story about leprosy. Further details about rulers' illnesses may be found in The Tale of Bygone Years (or Primary Chronicle, ПовЬсть времяньіх лЬть) (Yaremenko 1990) and in the Galician-Volhynian Chronicle (Галицько-Волинський літопис) (Kostruba 1936).
There is indeed much more to be learnt about the medical traditions of Rus’. According to Braichevsky (2001), ‘medicine’ in this region could be said to be based on three principles:
1) Psychotherapy (prayers, confession, conversations on ecclesiastical issues etc.)
2) Phytotherapy (herbs, honey etc)
3) Physiotherapy (compresses, bandages, massages, wiping, bloodletting, baths).
Many of these methods have been seen in the tales related above, but there is much more work to be done. Starting with the Patericon, there is a range of sources available to shed light on this sphere of life in the Rus’ region. It is my hope that these short tales inspire further research.
Bibliography
Primary Sources
Kostruba, Teofil (Теофіл Коструба) (trans.). 1936. Галицько-Волинський літопис (Galician-
Volhynian Chronicle). http://izbornyk.org.ua/kostruba/gvl.htm.
Yaremenko, V. V. (В. В. Яременка) (trans.). 1990. ПовЬсть времяньіх лЬть (The Tale of Bygone
Years, or The Primary Chronicle). http://izbornyk.org.ua/pvlyar/yar.htm.
Zhilenko, Iryna (Ірина Жиленко) (ed. and trans.). 2001. Патерик Києво-Печерський (Paterik Kyiv-
Pechersky). http://litopys.org.ua/paterikon/paterikon.htm.
Secondary Sources
Braichevsky, M.Yu. (М.Ю.Брайчевський). 2001. ‘Наукові знання’ (‘Scientific Knowledge’). In
Історія української культури (History of Ukrainian Culture), vol. 1.9, Київська Русь (Kyivan Rus). http://izbornyk.org.ua/istkult/ikult09.htm.
Krypyakevych, Ivan (І.Крип'якевич) (ed.). 2002. Історія української культури (History of
Ukrainian Culture). http://izbornyk.org.ua/krypcult/krcult.htm.
Popovych, Myroslav (Мирослав Попович) (ed.). 1998. Нарис історії культури України (Essays on
the History of Culture of Ukraine). http://izbornyk.org.ua/popovych/narys.htm.
Andrii Kepsha is a PhD candidate at the Department of Archaeology, Ethnology and Cultural Studies of Uzhhorod National University, Ukraine. He previously graduated with an Mgr degree in History at the Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, and studied for a semester at the Philosophical Faculty at the University of Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic.
Andrii has participated in various archaeological excavations in Ukraine and in Sicily. His research focuses on real and imaginary borders, border identity in Outremer during the 12th-13th centuries from different points of view, Rus'-steppe border, travellers and pilgrims, nature, and relics as weapons and means of propaganda.
Email: andrii.kepsha@uzhnu.edu.ua