AGAINST BIAS IN THE STUDY OF THE ZBRUCH IDOL (regarding the psychology of pseudoscientific populism)

Abstract

Starting from 2011, the idea of Oleksiy Komar and Nataliya Khamaiko that the Zbruch Idol is not a medieval monument, but owes its appearance to the creative imagination of the Polish romantic poet of the first quarter of the 19^th century Tymon Zaborowsky. He lived near the place where the idol was found, and was known, in particular, for a number of works related to Slavic paganism. Among many arguments, researchers put forward, for example, the alleged inconsistency of the images on the sides of the idol to the ancient epoch, and their reproduction according to T. Zaborowsky’s idea of antiquity. In particular, the saber, in their opinion, copies the coronation saber of the emperors of the Holy Roman Empire called the «Sabre of Charlemagne», although the two sabres show a difference, in particular, in the shape of the cross-guards. The saber on the Zbruch Idol is straight, while Charlemagne’s Saber is bent. The figures of the upper tier are said to be copied from the iconography of Boris and Gleb. In the same way, another argument of the authors regarding the material attributes of the idol — a cornucopia or a wedding ring — demonstrates that they do not so much see, as do not want to see, their antiquity.

The thesis about the unpunished throwing of the idol, weighing about 1 ton, into the Zbruch River, along which the Russian-Austrian border passed, or about the poet’s installation of the idol not on his own land, but on a neighbor’s land, cannot withstand criticism.

The greatly exaggerated influence of paganism on the work of Tymon Zaborowsky, who remains a supporter of Christianity in his works. None of his works mentions the stone Zbruch Idol or its alleged «prototype» — the four-headed wooden Swiatowit of the Western Slavs.

Although our criticism of the authors’ idea of an «idolatrous poet» has been ongoing for 12 years, they have never once mentioned it, in particular, in the Polish reprint of their first article. They do not mention critical articles by other authors, in particular, Polish ones, who at one time accepted the conclusions of Ukrainian scientists with interest. Against the background of this silencing and ignoring of criticism, at least one of the co-authors, Nataliya Khamaiko, regularly continues to spread in his public interviews a contradictory narrative about the exalted poet-author of the Zbruch Idol, due to which the true cultural significance of this monument is leveled.

In our opinion, the authors’ constant rebroadcasting of this dubious idea to the general public, while ignoring their many years of reasoned professional criticism, contradicts scientific ethics.