JOURNAL OF ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY

(p. 132, and cf. p. 32). Obviously French was the acquired language and one in
which Gerald had acquired such proficiency during his student years in France.
Once this is accepted as a possibility, then the fact that the Marcher Lords who
established themselves in Ireland after 1169 regarded themselves as Angli takes
on new significance (cf. Expugnatio Hibemica, ed. A. B. Scott, F. X. Martin (Dublin
1978), p. 80, an edition referred to though not used throughout by Bartlett), as
does Gerald's reference, in the late 1180s, to noster Anglorum populus (first recension
of Top. Hib., ed. J. J. O'Meara, Proc. Royal Irish Acad., Hi (1949), 173). Bartlett
brings out well how Gerald later shifted his loyalties to the Welsh, writing now
of gens nostra Rritannica and even employing for the English the vaguely derogatory
term commonly used by the Celtic peoples, 'Saxon' (cf. De Inv., p. g^f). Here,
further analysis could bring results of great importance well beyond Gerald.
Bartlett's general assessment of Gerald's ethnographic works makes a refreshing
and imaginative departure by comparing Gerald's works on Ireland and Wales
with near-contemporary continental works about neighbouring societies, equally
written by clerics, the works of Adam of Bremen and Helmolt of Bosau. All three
wrote in Latin, and they were all fairly generous with the term barbarus in
describing the neighbouring peoples. What Bartlett calls the comparison of
'modern societies' with 'barbarians' would perhaps be termed more neutrally
an insider's view and an outsider's view. I am not convinced by Bartlett's
conclusion, on the basis of the three works, that' England, France and Germany
themselves had crucial common features' (p. 173). Similar judgements seem more
likely to be produced by important features which the three authors shared and
which coloured their outlook: clerical education full of self-centred value-
judgements, contempt for the neighbours, who were regarded as inferior in so far
as they were different, and their common use of Latin where the term barbarus
had a long history that suggested stereotyped associations and numerous cliches.
The concept of barbarus has often been studied, but much work remains to be done,
addressed less to a study of the semantic changes than to one of cultural contrasts.
There is, thus, room for more, much more discussion of the works of Gerald
of Wales. There is no other personality of the Middle Ages who reveals (often
unintentionally, but never without effort by the reader) so many dimensions; this
in itself makes the study worth while. Beyond that, as I have tried to show, Gerald
also reveals to us issues of much greater importance. Bartlett's book could well
provide the point of departure that Gerald so amply merits.
UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA MICHAEL RICHTER

Ulconostase: une evolution historique en Russie. By Nathalie Labrecque-Pervouchine.

Pp. 294 + 33 illustrations. Montreal: Bellarmin, 1982. S15.
One of the merits of Mme Labrecque-Pervouchine's work is her emphasis on
the need to study the Russian iconostasis in its liturgical and theological context.
A chapter is devoted to the controversy amongst twentieth-century theologians and
churchmen over the significance and, indeed, the desirability of the iconostasis.
Mme Labrecque-Pervouchine ranges herself with the advocates of the iconostasis:
far from being a barrier shutting off the laity from the clergy, its curtains, icons
and doors represent to believers both the mysteries and the accessibility of Christ's
Presence. She stresses the sense of dramatic development, as well as the visual
instruction, which the iconostasis offers through the successive stages of the
liturgy.
460
 REVIEWS
This is avowedly a work of synthesis, the first to be devoted to the iconostasis,
as distinct from the icons which it carries. Mme Labrecque-Pervouchine surveys
the period from the conversion of Russia to the twentieth century. There are,
for example, some interesting pages on the effect of the Slavophile movement on
iconostases in nineteenth-century churches. Mme Labrecque-Pervouchine is not
always sure-footed on the historical background, as is inevitable in a work
spanning so broad a period. Her emphasis on the historical significance of the
Battle of Kulikovo (1380) accords with conventional Western, and contemporary
Soviet, interpretations. But it is open to the objection that within a few years
Grand Prince Dimitri was paying tribute to a Tatar khan'. Moreover, Dimitri's
cautious stance towards Mamay in the late 1370s, refusing tribute and then
marshalling an attempt to repel him, scarcely amounted to a 'croisade contre
l'infidele' (p. 63).
The core of the book deals with the emergence in Russia of the tall iconostasis
of four, and eventually five, registers in the late fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.
Mme Labrecque-Pervouchine raises the question of how and why the Russian
wooden iconostasis developed from the Middle Byzantine templon, a low, open-
work, marble or stone barrier for the sanctuary, topped by a Deisis. Several
interesting possible sources of influence are considered: the proliferation of icons
on the sanctuary screens in fourteenth-century Serbia; the appearance of masonry
screens, up to two metres high, in North-East Russia in the fourteenth century
and their Early Byzantine precursors. The fact that in Russia, unlike Byzantium,
churches were mostly wooden undoubtedly gave rise to distinctive interior
furnishings there. The wish of fourteenth-century princes to promote the cults of
local saints, whose icons could be displayed on one of the registers of a tall
iconostasis, may also have contributed to the appearance of a new form of screen.
If a decisive answer to the question cannot be given, this is partly because the
early iconostases seldom survive intact, and partly because there may not be a
single 'source'. Iconostases developed in fourteenth-century Novgorod, where
there was no prince capable of determining the interior design of churches. Mme
Labrecque-Pervouchine discusses both the icons and the overall programmes of
the iconostases. Perhaps the strongest feature of her book is the sympathetic
exegesis of the work of such painters as Andrei Rublev, relating his choice of
colours and symbols to Hesychast thought on illumination by Divine Light and
on the inter-relationship of the Persons of the Trinity. The exegesis is followed
by a careful description of five fifteenth-century iconostases, surviving intact or
in fragments. This useful synthesis offers an up-to-date survey of recent literature
on the Russian iconostasis. It should serve as a stimulus to further research on the
subject. Two works which appeared too late for inclusion in the bibliography,
and which will guide interested readers further along the path charted by Mme
Labrecque-Pervouchine are: J. Meyendorff, Byzantium and the Rise of Russia
(C.U.P., 1981), and D. Buxton, The Wooden Churches of Eastern Europe (C.U.P.,
1981).
SELWYN COLLEGE, JONATHAN SHEPARD
CAMBRIDGE

461