Ivan IV

Verified Timeline

Lore & Background

The painting depicts a supposedly historical tableau set in 1676, based on the legend of Cossacks sending an insulting reply to an ultimatum from Sultan Mehmed IV. According to the story, the Zaporozhian Cossacks, inhabiting lands around the lower Dnieper River in Ukraine, had defeated Ottoman forces. Despite this loss, Mehmed demanded submission. The Cossacks, led by Ivan Sirko, replied with a letter replete with insults and profanities. The painting exhibits the Cossacks' pleasure at striving to come up with ever more base vulgarities. Whether the incident actually happened is not known; no concrete or reliable evidence exists, but the question remains disputed. Historian Daniel C. Waugh observed that the correspondence underwent a textual transformation in the eighteenth century, where controlled satire was debased into vulgarity, and in this vulgar version spread widely in the nineteenth century.

In Their Own Story

Repin made his first sketches for the painting in the home of Savva Mamontov, with whom he associated. He traveled for study drawings to stanitsa Pashkovskaya (today within Krasnodar), Yekaterinoslav (today Dnipro), and Kachanivka. The models for the 'Cossacks' were friends of Repin and academics from Saint Petersburg University, including men of Ukrainian, Russian, Cossack, Jewish, and Polish ancestry. Historian Dmytro Yavornytsky assisted Repin in portraying the scene authentically. While working on the original version, Repin in 1889 began a second version, which remained unfinished, intended to be more 'historically authentic'. This second version was transferred by the Tretyakov Gallery to the M. F. Sumtsov Kharkiv Historical Museum in 1932, then moved to the Kharkiv Art Museum in 1935. During the Russian invasion of eastern Ukraine in March 2022, when the Kharkiv region came under heavy artillery and air fire, museum staff rushed to remove artworks; the second version was among those relocated for safety.

Reader's Guide

The painting has become a well-known reference in Russian culture, parodied or emulated by political cartoons, including *Members of Duma drafting a reply to Stolypin* and *Soviet leaders write the letter of defiance to George Curzon*. It is referenced in both the 2009 Russian film *Taras Bulba*, which depicts the scene itself, and the American film of the same name (which includes the painting in its opening credits); both are adaptations of a historical novella by that name, though the novella does not include the scene. Beyond Russia, the painting is frequently used as a symbol for Cossacks in general. The 'Cossacks' expansion to the video game *Europa Universalis IV* adapted the text of the reply for its trailer and included artwork based on the original painting. The text inspired a French versification by Guillaume Apollinaire, included as 'Réponse des Cosaques Zaporogues au Sultan de Constantinople' in his 1913 collection *Alcools*, later set to music by Dmitri Shostakovich in his Symphony No. 14 and by French singer-songwriter Léo Ferré. Not all treatment has been positive: Dwight Macdonald called it 'kitsch' in an article in the *Partisan Review*, writing that ignorant peasants should not prefer Repin to Picasso. Art critic Clement Greenberg subsequently popularized Macdonald's phrasing in an influential 1939 essay, 'Avant-Garde and Kitsch'. Painter Vassily Nesterenko made a version in 2017 featuring modern Russian soldiers in Syria, while French photographer Émeric Lhuisset made a photographic version in 2023 featuring modern Ukrainian Army soldiers. Russia considers the painting to be an example of Russian heritage, while Ukraine considers it to be Ukrainian.

Did You Know?

• Repin began the canvas in 1880 and finished in 1891, recording the years of work along the lower edge of the canvas.
• Alexander III bought the painting for 35,000 rubles.
• The models for the Cossacks included friends of Repin and academics from Saint Petersburg University, of Ukrainian, Russian, Cossack, Jewish, and Polish ancestry.
• During the Russian invasion of eastern Ukraine in March 2022, the second version of the painting was among artworks relocated for safety from the Kharkiv Art Museum.
• The painting was featured in the 1980 BBC Two series *100 Great Paintings*.

Artistic Genesis and Acquisition

Ilya Repin dedicated over a decade to creating this monumental canvas, beginning his work in 1880 and completing it by 1891. To ensure authenticity, the artist traveled extensively for study drawings across various locations including stanitsa Pashkovskaya, which is today within Krasnodar, Yekaterinoslav, and Kachanivka. Repin meticulously documented the years of labor along the lower edge of the finished canvas itself. The Russian Tsar Alexander III purchased the primary artwork for a sum of 35,000 rubles. Following this acquisition, the piece found a permanent home within the State Russian Museum in Saint Petersburg. While the original resides there, another version created by Repin exists today at the Kharkiv Art Museum in Ukraine. This secondary canvas was initially smaller than the main work and remained unfinished during its creation phase before being transferred through various institutions over time. The painting also gained international recognition when it was featured in a BBC Two series regarding great paintings in 1980.

Historical Legend and Authenticity

The artwork portrays a legendary scene supposedly occurring in 1676 involving the Zaporozhian Cossacks and the Ottoman Empire. According to the narrative, Sultan Mehmed IV demanded submission from the Cossacks following a battle loss, prompting them to draft an insulting letter under the leadership of Ivan Sirko. The painting captures their delight in generating vulgarities for this correspondence. However, historians debate whether this event truly occurred or remains a picaresque tale popularized in the nineteenth century. Daniel C. Waugh noted that earlier texts underwent transformation where controlled satire became debased vulgarity over time. While Nikolai Gogol referenced the incident in his novella Taras Bulba, no concrete evidence confirms the specific event depicted. The story likely evolved through textual changes in the eighteenth century before becoming a widely recognized symbol of Cossack defiance against authority. The Zaporozhian name itself refers to lands beyond the rapids along the lower Dnieper River where these groups inhabited during that era.

Composition and Subject Portrayal

To achieve a realistic depiction of the figures, Repin utilized friends and academics from Saint Petersburg University as models for the Cossacks. These individuals represented a diverse mix of backgrounds, including Ukrainian, Russian, Cossack, Jewish, and Polish ancestry. The artist was associated with Savva Mamontov's artistic circle, where he likely encountered the story and created initial sketches within Mamontov’s home. Historian Dmytro Yavornytsky provided assistance to ensure the scene appeared historically authentic during production. In 1889, while working on the original, Repin commenced a second version intended to be more historically accurate, though it remained unfinished. This smaller canvas was eventually moved from the Tretyakov Gallery to museums in Kharkiv. During the Russian invasion of eastern Ukraine in March 2022, when the region came under heavy fire, museum staff urgently relocated this specific artwork to ensure its safety amidst the danger.

Cultural Resonance and Criticism

The image has transcended its original context to become a significant reference point in Russian culture and beyond. It inspired political cartoons depicting figures like Members of the Duma or Soviet leaders drafting defiant letters. In cinema, both 2009 Russian and American adaptations of Taras Bulba featured the scene or the painting itself, despite the novella lacking this specific moment. Video games such as Europa Universalis IV incorporated elements of the reply into their trailers and logos. Literary adaptations include a French versification by Guillaume Apollinaire, later set to music by Dmitri Shostakovich and Léo Ferré. Conversely, critics like Dwight Macdonald labeled the work kitsch in a Partisan Review article. Clement Greenberg subsequently popularized this critical perspective regarding avant-garde versus mass appeal art forms through his influential 1939 essay on the subject.