Александар ЛОМА

Филозофски факултет




Апстракт: Мада је у новије време доказано да насловни лик Гогољеве приповетке Виј има фолклорну подлогу, остаје спорно колики је у њему удео пишчеве фикције; исто питање поставља се за „грдобу“ у првој Глишићевој приповеци Ноћ на мосту, и то још заоштреније, с обзиром на Гогољев утицај на Глишића. Локална предања из Колубаре и један обичај забележен 1929. у Банату пружају основ за закључак да је Глишић у овом случају црпао из аутентичне народне традиције. Ланац идентификација води са ниже на вишу митолошку раван, преко „Хромог Дабе“ и „воденог ђавола“ до Дабога и староруског Дажбога, а на ширем поредбеном плану до индоиранског Вајуа.



Vij is a kind of monster or rather an archidaemon, appearing in the finale of Gogol’s tale thus entitled. The recent folkloric research confirms that an analogous figure is rooted in the East Slavic tradition. In a story inspired, too, by the popular beliefs, the 19th century Serbian author Milovan Glišić introduces, under similar circumstances, a similar demoniac personage. The resemblance between the both stories consists in the hero spending the night alone in a haunted place and being exposed to more and more dangerous attacks of the evil force, which culminate in the appearance of a lame creature with deeply pending eyelids: in Gogol it is called Vij, in Glišić simply grdoba ‘monster’. In view of the fact that the young Glišić was largely influenced by Gogol, a pure imitation of the latter by the former can not be excluded; nevertheless, it seems more probable that in this particular point the Serbian storywriter is not slavishly imitating the great Russian, but rather following his example in using some traditional topic he knew from his own country, for in the folklore of this, northwestern part of Serbia and of some other Serbian regions very close parallels to Glišić’s narrative are to be found, which match also its details disagreeing with the Gogol’s story. The main difference consists in Gogol’s hero being unwillingly closed in an empty church and finally put to death by taking the look at the monster, Vij, while Glišić’s hero spends the night on a bridge voluntarily subjecting himself to the demonic temptation, in order to find a cure of a disease provoked by diabolic charms. Such a healing procedure is more than a folk tale motif; as late as the first half of the 20th century it was practised in Serbian Banat, where the patient (mostly a mentally handicapped child) used to be let to spend the night alone on the so-called Devil’s bridge (Ðavolji most) over Nera river and to expect the epiphany of the oldest devil, Daba (it was desirable to see only the top of Daba’s red cap emerging, and not his face). In a widespread Serbian superstition, Hromi („The Lame“) Daba is the king of devils, and there are some place names and local legends indicating that Glišić’s monster was originally identical with him. As for Ukrainian Vij, Abaev and some other scholars compared him with the Iranian Vayu, in regard both to his name and to his function of the doorkeeper in the kingdom of dead. The Serbian evidence corroborates this comparison by supplying the characteristic motif –lacking in the East-Slavic tradition– of a bridge between this and the other world; in the Zoroastrism, it is the „Good Vayu“, Vāi i vēh, who conducts the righteous souls of dead over the Činvat-bridge to the paradise, while his evil hypostasis Vāi i vattar prosecutes the impious ones. Vayu is believed to play this double role because he personifies the atmosphere, i.e. the element mediating between the earth and the sky, where the souls of dead keep roaming, who are prohibited from approaching to heaven. Daba deriving from Dabog, the Serbian „Lame Devil“ can be traced back to the legendary personage thus named, figuring in the folk tales from Mačva as the dualistic rival of God, who rules over the evil souls –not unlike the „Evil Vayu“– and finishes up by being fixed between the earth and the sky, which recalls the archaic cosmogonical myth about the separation of the primordial couple, Mother Earth and Father Sky, by creating the airspace in between. In another legend Dabog’s affinity to the winds is manifested, corresponding to the nature of the Indo-Iranian Vāyu, who is above all a windgod. A further functional tie can be established between Gogol’s Vij, said to be the chief of the gnomes, and NE Serbian „Silver King“ of the miners’legends, the master of underground treasures, whose name seems to have been originally Dajbog. All this can throw a new light on the relationship of Serbian Da(j)bog/Daba to the homonimous Old-Russian god Daž(d)ьbogъ, as well on the much-discussed problem of Slavic dualism.