Talk:Petro Mohyla/Archive 1

A starting note
The Ukrainian Wikipedia has an image  that is very tempting to use but it does not provide any info on its source. If anyone can find out that that image is indeed free from copyright restrictions, please post the info here or just add the image to the article. The article itself is also a good source of information to be used here.

One more note: This historic figure is of a profound importance in several cultures and we should be careful to avoid conflicts about the terms. To start with the very title, I used Peter Mogila because this is the name this person is called in English literature (for example in Britannica). I hope, the editors will be careful with choosing the best terms (I will also try my best) and will concentrate on the article content rather than in pushing the terms they favor into the article. This is not to say, that terms I chose are the best, but I tried. Thanks to all, who will contribute Irpen 03:22, 20 March 2005 (UTC)


 * There's no reason to assume that image is infringing copyright. Perhaps it is scanned from a book, but if it is not identifiable as such, then I think the image of the painting itself is free of copyright under U.S. law (it looks old enough to me).  Pre-1973 Soviet publications are also out of copyright.  I'll move it to English-language WP.


 * Regarding the name, all the popular references are naturally using his name in Russian. But it seems that the people actually using his name, in both academic and other contexts, are Ukrainian (esp. the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, and their U.S. foundation).  You can get some idea of this by looking at image search results Petro Mohyla (14 relevant results on 9 sites), Peter Mogila (0), Petro Mogila (0).  &mdash;Michael Z. 2005-04-15 15:16 Z  15:16, 15 April 2005 (UTC)

To be merged
from St. Peter Moghila

Petru Movila, descendant of the Romanian boyar family Movila, whose members ruled for some periods the Romanian medieval states of Moldavia and Wallachia, took the chair of Kyiv Mitropoly into then Polish territory of Ukraine. Had the big merritt to introduce for the first time the western-style instruction and Latin language study into the Orthodox Church, and to unify the big thesis of Russian, Greek, Constantinople and Romanian orthodox churches (Iassy Declaration).

Even if he was not a native Ukrainian, Petu Movila produced the first recognition of the orthodox (mainly Ukrainian) church in the Polish terittories. He established many printing workshops, in Ukraine and abroad.

The legend of Movila family is related to the ruler of Moldavia Stephen the Great (Stefan cel Mare) who, during a battle, was raised on his horse's saddle on the back of a little boyar (named Aprodul Purice). The boyar thus added, for him and his family, the surname of Movila ("little hill" in Romanian language).

from Peter Mogilas

Peter Mogilas, or Petru Movilă in Romanian, (1597-1647), was Metropolitan of Kiev and author of the Greek Confessio Orthodoxa, or Orthodox Confession.

He was born of a Wallachian family ca. 1597.

He was elevated to the metropolitanate in 1632 by Patriarch Theophanes of Jerusalem, and published several liturgical works.

In 1638, he prepared the first draft of his "Confession" with the aid of three of his bishops. The work, originally written in Latin, with a Romaic Greek version by Meletius Syrigus, was amended and approved by the Synod of Kiev in 1640, and by that of Jassy in Moldavia in 1642. With an introduction by Nectarius of Jerusalem (1642) and the approbation of Parthenius (1643) this "Orthodox Confession of the Catholic and Apostolic Church of the East" was first printed at Amsterdam in 1667. Several editions followed, the best that of E. J. Kimmel, in his Libri symbolici (Jena, 1843). The "Confession" was translated into Romanian in 1691 and into Russian in 1696.

The situation of the period was one of struggle for the Greek Church to preserve her individuality between Roman Catholicism, working vigorously in Russia and Poland, on the one hand, and Protestantism, to which individual Greeks (notably Cyril Lucar) felt themselves drawn, on the other. As the patriarchate at Constantinople was far too weak to take any step decisive for the Church at large, the overthrow of Cyril's creed by another based upon Greek tradition naturally proceeded from the younger, but more independent, Russian Church. The immediate cause of the "Confession" was a Roman Catholic catechism printed at Kiev, in 1632.

The "Confession" is a comprehensive summary of the doctrines of the Greek Church, and its substance is given in its declaration that the requisites of the Catholic Christian for eternal life are "orthodox faith and good works." This twofold division is obscured by Mogilas' basal arrangement according to faith, hope, and love, comprised in exegesis of the Nicene Creed, the Lord's Prayer and the Sermon on the Mount, and the Decalogue.

A further twofold division is into the Bible and tradition, the latter leading to numerous patristic citations, especially from Gregory, Athanasius, Basil, Dionysius, and John of Damascus.

The Confession lays out a stance on a number of doctrinal issues. In the doctrine of the Trinity a distinction is drawn, though not too subtlely, between the essential and hypostatic idiomata. The controversy on the procession of the Holy Ghost is decided chiefly because of the lack of the Filioque clause in the oldest text of the Creed. The creation is traced in Greek fashions through nine classes of angels to man, who is termed a microcosm. The omnipresence of God is reconciled with his exaltation by the statement that, "himself being his own place," he at once controls and excludes all limitations of space. The definitions of original sin lack Roman Catholic and Protestant definiteness. Through disobedience Adam lost his perfect reason, righteousness, and ignorance of sin, and his nature became exceedingly inclined to evil. But he was only weakened, not destroyed, so that the spirit and grace of God might freely operate upon him--a synergism which is indispensable to Greek theology.

In his discussion of foreknowledge, foreordination, and providence, Mogilas makes the second conditioned by the first, while the third combines the other two, controls them, and thus guides all earthly things in the best possible way. The sole head of the Church is Christ, and the mother Church is Jerusalem. The traditional seven sacraments are defended, though the influence of non-Greek developments may here be discerned.

The second section of the "Confession" is on hope, or the grace partly given and partly promised by Christ. The exegesis is conditioned by ecclesiastical and ascetic points of view, while parallels and lists of analogies take the place of inner development. Revelation 4:5 and Isaiah 6:2 afford bases for the theory of the seven graces, and Galatians 5:22 for the doctrine of the nine fruits of the Spirit.

There are likewise nine rules of the Church (including confession, fasting, and avoidance of heretical books) and seven works of mercy each for the body and the soul, the number nine corresponding to the angels and seven to the sacraments and their effects.

In the third part of the "Confession," with its theme of love and its exegesis of the Decalogue, the same themes are further developed under the captions of the seven virtues of prayer, fasting, benevolence, understanding, righteousness, bravery, and moderation. The first two commandments give rise to a justification of the invocation of the saints and the use of icons. The saints are invoked, but not prayed to, as the friends of God; while icons are considered representations of actual persons and things, and hence fitted to raise the thought from the material to the celestial, and so to God. The worship, therefore, is not received by the icons, but by the divinity or the saint represented.

The "Confession" of Mogilas, accordingly, reproduces the point of view of ancient Catholicism, as maintained by the Eastern Church in opposition to Rome; nor can it be said, as is sometimes thought, that it is either Roman Catholic or Lutheran in tendency.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bogdangiusca (talk • contribs) 00:06, 24 March 2005 (UTC)


 * When you are merging these, please exclude references to him being "Wallachian", and stick to "Moldavian". His family was Moldavian aristocracy. (I should mention that this has nothing to do with the Romanian-Moldovan dispute, in case you consider wether this is biased. It's just that Wallachia and Moldavia were different countries.)Dahn 20:14, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

about mohyla-movila
Somehow I lost the picture, so if you know a way to retrieve it, please do. About the transliteration of the name in English, 1) think of him first from the Romanian perspective: if the man's name is Movila, and he kept it (he didn't take a religious name) then probably he had his reasons; maybe he didn't want to lose the connection with his family, which was a strong one. 2) then think of him from the Ukrainian perspective: mohyla/mogila means obituary in Ukrainian language. Now, how would you like for the world to find personalities in the English-speaking area like John Skeleton, Kelly Broken Belly, Peg No Leg, especially when these aren't in fact their names? In conclusion: the guy lived most of his time in Moldavia and Wallachia - he was a landowner, a soldier and a church builder; but did most of the things for which he is now famous, in now Ukraine. Although he was in cordial relations with the Polish court and nobility, he fought for the rights of his brothers of faith (the Ukrainians, which were Orthodox, like the Romanians themselves), a thing that brought him the consecration in the highest religious position. So the transliteration PETRO MOVILA, I think, won't harm anyone It respects the local scent (more like, for example, Peter Mogila), and, when pronounced, eliminating the harder-to-read letters, sounds pretty similar to all the other proposed names. After all, he is a saint of three orthodox churches (Ukrainian, Romanian, Polish).


 * See this. No need to invent the weel. --Irpen 07:59, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Mogila/Mohyla
Yakudza, please control your itch to purge anything Russian from everything related to Ukraine. This case here is very clear. Britannica article is called Peter Mogila (note that EB is the source frequently used by our main Ukrainizer, user:AndriyK. On top of that, in plenty of English books he is called Mogila. The google books search for Mogila Metropolitan gives 132 books (this included only books indexed by google books, there are more of course. A similar search for Mohyla Metropolitan gives some 80 books as well, but some of them use "Mohyla (Mogila)", some included twice and so on. That our friend frivolously moved the article with his trademark trick without the discussion is no excuse for you to continue on his footstep to totally purge a relevant name. If this continues, I will as at WP:AN for the article to be moved back as per the decision of an ArbCom which says "Moved pages which have become irreversible by adding to the page history of the redirect page may be moved back without the necessity of a vote at Wikipedia:Requested moves." That would then require a vote to repeat the frivolous move, not the other way around. --Irpen 21:20, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
 * "Peter Mogila" is already mentioned in the article. Please bring the reference in support of the use of "Pyotr Mogila". KPbIC 21:47, 11 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Some 17th century Romanian-language sources use the version "Moghila", i.e. with a hard "g" (spelled "gh" in Romanian), not with "h", so I assume that back then, the name was widely pronounced like this. bogdan 18:31, 13 May 2006 (UTC)


 * If Russians and Ukrainians continue to argue about such nonsense, why not rename the article Petru Movilă? After all, he was probably a native speaker of Romanian.  ;-)  --Daniel Bunčić 07:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

LOL! A good point! Please stay around :) --Irpen 07:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Keep Russian propaganda out of here
Modern Russian spellings and links to Russian language DO NOT belong here. КРЫС, please keep me informed of the situation hare in case if I miss something.AlexPU 18:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Title
I've moved this page back to it's original title per Requests for arbitration/AndriyK:

Moved pages which have become irreversible by adding to the page history of the redirect page may be moved back without the necessity of a vote at Requested moves.

&mdash; Khoikhoi 05:40, 22 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Also, it's Wikipedia policy to use the most common term in English for something, regardless of whether it's "correct" or not. This is applied throughout our encyclopedia for establishing the titles of the articles.


 * So, it's not hard to see that "Peter Mogila" is the more common name:
 * Results 1 - 10 of about 1,240 for "Peter Mogila"
 * Results 1 - 10 of about 671 for "Petro Mohyla"


 * &mdash; Khoikhoi 05:56, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Khoikhoi, the decision of arbcom gives a permition, not an obligation to revert AndriyK's page moves.

It's Wikipedia policy to use the most common term in English, as supported by established sources. Per Google book search, "Petro Mohyla" is the most common name, as it has been used more widely in the published sources than the alternative "Peter Mogila" (495 vs 331),. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.84.5.56 (talk • contribs) 20:47, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
 * False. Petro Mohyla google books search produces just 43 hits. while Peter Mogila produces 124. --Irpen 20:54, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
 * While producing 43 and 121 hits at this point (book's search is branded as "beta" service), it does indicate the total number of book's citations as 495 vs 331. And, as a side note, Google Scholar also favors "Petro Mohyla" 37 vs. 23, . 134.84.5.56 (talk) 21:22, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

And, as this is an English wikipedia, it would be nice to restrict the search to English pages:
 * Search Results 1 - 10 of about 199 for "Peter Mogila"
 * Search Results 1 - 10 of about 519 for "Petro Mohyla" 134.84.5.56 (talk) 21:28, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Naming - Mohyla/Mogila 2007
Hello, the name should be moved to "Peter Mohyla". Here are the google results, which I ran five times at different times, just to make sure: Petro Mohyla -Wikipedia: 1,590 Peter Mogila -Wikipedia: 877 This is compared to the results last year. The increase shows that Mohyla is more common.

Any arguments against?

Thanks, Horlo 04:09, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the proposal was no consensus. JPG-GR (talk) 06:43, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Peter Mogila → Petro Mohyla — Both, Petro Mohyla and Peter Mogila are established names. Nowadays, Petro Mohyla is the most common. —Greggerr (talk) 03:17, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.


 * Support - Petro Mohyla is more common. Ostap 20:53, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose per WP:UE and WP:NAME. This is right at the borderline of when people generally use Ukrainianized spelling, and I was initially thinking about support. However, having reviewed the evidence, "Peter Mogila" is substantially the more/most popular way of writing his name in the English language. Almost double the gbhits as "Petro Mohyla". Gshits give Mohyla a slight lead, though I notice with these [too] many are non-native English speakers or Ukrainians writing in English, and in terms of mainstream English publications, Mogila leads this substantially. While it is not doubted that Ukrainian anglophones would prefer this version, the issue here is actual English usage. Simple google hits tell you about textual replication, not English usage, and are certainly not a way of measuring usage in the English language. Also note normal google hits seem to be about Ukrainian institutions named after him that the man himself (e.g. Petro Mohyla Institute). So we should follow the Britannica article for now, keep the English name in the main text and title, but have the Ukrainianized and Romanianized alternatives in brackets. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 22:55, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * CommentI don't buy the English-but-not-of-native-speakers argument. To me, English is English.  Magocsi and Subtelny both use Mohyla, and more recently the 2007 Ukraine: Birth of a Modern Nation Oxford University Press uses Mohyla.  I say it is now the accepted version. If its good enough for Oxford, it should be good enough for wikipedia. Ostap 23:17, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Response Ostap, if that were your argument anyone could just find another reputable publisher using Mogila and argue "if it's good enough for x it's good enough for me". Can't really work. The Gbhits and Gshits already establish that reputable sources use either, just that more use the English form and the vast majority when you eliminate Ukrainian anglophones. We already know Ukrainian anglophones would prefer Mohyla, but I'm interested in natural English usage. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 23:51, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Response Please see the numbers below. Thanks, Horlo (talk) 19:43, 24 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment I have no opinion on the surname, but we don't usually translate fist names. For example, Józef Piłsudski is much better than Joseph Piłsudski (although the latter is used by a minority of sources).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 01:06, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose Not again; do what English does (and English does often translate first names, especially of Princes, including Princes of the Church).  Consider Benedict XVI, not Benedetto or Benedikt; outside the Church, compare Henry IV of France and Peter Kropotkin. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 03:12, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose it is absolutely clear from Google Books what is the standard usage in English-language publications. It is possible that this might change over time - but Wikipedia should not be used as a means to change the standard.  Wikipedia should only change when and if the majority of other publications change. Noel S McFerran (talk) 01:47, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Two third of the books which use "Peter Mogila" were published more than 100 years ago. --21:05, 19 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Support Doesn't it seem strange that we have the Kyiv Mohyla Academy but its founder is Peter Mogila? Look at the history section of the Academy and how they themselves spell the name of their school's founder. The name is quite common in historiographic literature as well. --Hillock65 (talk) 22:03, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Academy is free to use any spelling of its choosing. It does not regulate the English spelling of the name of its founder. FC Dynamo Kyiv is named to the city of Kiev. I hope you don't propose to rename the former. --Irpen 05:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose. As I stated in the reason for my page move, Google proves that Peter Mogila is the most common name. Arguments such as "Petro Mohyla is more common" are not sufficient enough as they lack evidence. Deacon and McFerran pretty much summed it up: we should reflect what most mainstream English publications use for the time being. Khoikhoi 05:48, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. Back in 2006 you wrote that "it's not hard to see that "Peter Mogila" is the more common name" and supported it with a Google test, which gave 2:1 advantage to "Peter Mogila" over "Petro Mohyla" . Since that time "Petro Mohyla" has become more common, and exactly the same test now gives 2:1 advantage to "Petro Mohyla". A honest and neutral editor sets criteria first and then follows them. An unworthy POV pusher states his POV first, and then looks for each and every evidence in support. --Greggerr (talk) 06:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Question to Greggerr: The results are below. Who "unworthy POV pusher" do you mean? --Irpen 07:27, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Oppose - he's a figure claimed by Ukrainians and Romanians, and given a) lack of evidence that he preferred the former over the latter variant and b) he's better known in English by his anglicised name - let's keep it as it is, to conform with policy and, as an added benefit, defuse ethnic tension in the process. Biruitorul (talk) 03:30, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Support As per the numbers listed below. Horlo (talk) 19:42, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Either for Peter Mohyla or Petro Mohyla. In Canada I have never once heard the term Peter Mogila... this is a blatant pro-Russian whitewashing of wikipedia. If the Russian users of wikipedia are to insist on using the Russian transliteration of Kyiv, then they need be consistent and use the more common English version. Yakym 14:42, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Any additional comments:

Google books

 * "Peter Mogila", 627
 * "Petro Mohyla", 318
 * "Peter Mohyla", 196

Google scholar

 * "Petro Mohyla", 84
 * "Peter Mohyla", 78
 * "Peter Mogila", 67

Google

 * "Petro Mohyla", 6,700
 * "Peter Mogila", 3,350
 * "Peter Mohyla", 1,170
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Romanian?
Since when Peter Mohyla is Romanian??? Romania appeared only in 1866 and Mohyla died 200 years before that. It is the same way we can call Charlemagne a Belgium-native. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 02:06, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Peter Mogila. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121024080649/http://credo.stormloader.com/Ecumenic/pmohila.htm to http://credo.stormloader.com/Ecumenic/pmohila.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:22, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Requested move
Peter Mogila → Petro Mohyla The current situation indicates the dominance of the name Petro Mohyla among reliable sources. The new name is used by:


 * Britannica
 * Encyclopedia of Monasticism
 * Slavonic Encyclopedia
 * Internet Encyclopedia of Ukraine
 * The Catholic Encyclopedia
 * The modern encyclopedia of Russian and Soviet literature
 * Encyclopedia of literature

The new name is used by authors from different countries. --KHMELNYTSKYIA (talk) 05:48, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

I second this notion; he is a predominantly Ukrainian figure, and his article should be written as such. — Preceding unsigned comment added by UkrainianSavior1 (talk • contribs) 06:18, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 9 February 2022

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 01:34, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Peter Mogila → Petro Mohyla – This is probably the most WP:COMMONNAME in reliable sources. The proposed spelling for this person whose significance is associated with Ukraine also corresponds to standard Ukrainian romanization, as recommended by WP:UKR. The spelling has WP:CONSISTENCY with eponymous entities National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy (Kyiv), Petro Mohyla Black Sea State University (Mykolaiv), St. Petro Mohyla Institute (Saskatoon), but not with his ancestral name Movileşti, “also Movilă family or Moghilă family.”

Some references use this spelling:
 * Britannica: Petro Mohyla; alternate titles Peter Mogila, Petru Movilă
 * Internet Encyclopedia of Ukraine: Mohyla, Petro
 * Library of Congress Subject Headings: Mohyla, Petro, Metropolitan of Kyïv and Halych, 1597-1647

Google Scholar Search of academic sources (some of these include a lot of non-English language sources, estimated counts always appear to be accurate but can’t confirm when there’s more than 100 pages of results)
 * 1) "Petro Mohyla" -Wikipedia: Page 100 of 6,320 results
 * 2) "Petru Movilă" -Wikipedia: Page 100 of 1,100 results
 * 3) "Petru Movila" -Wikipedia: Page 100 of 1,100 results
 * 4) "Peter Mogila" -Wikipedia: Page 33 of 332 results
 * 5) "Petr Mogila" -Wikipedia: Page 30 of 300 results
 * 6) "Piotr Mohyła" -Wikipedia: Page 23 of 235 results
 * 7) "Piotr Mohyla" -Wikipedia: Page 5 of 42 results
 * 8) "Pyotr Mogila" -Wikipedia: Page 2 of 13 results
 * 9) "Piotr Mogila" -Wikipedia:Page 2 of 12 results

Google Advance Book Search (per WP:SET, restricted to English-language sources, check last page of results, sometimes the estimated number is still wildly wrong):
 * 1) "Peter Mogila" -Wikipedia: Page 57 of about 4,150 results (actual count appears to be 575)
 * 2) "Petro Mohyla" -Wikipedia: Page 56 of about 2,900 results (appears to be 561)
 * 3) "Petr Mogila" -Wikipedia: Page 46 of 459 results
 * 4) "Petru Movila" -Wikipedia: Page 44 of 433 results
 * 5) "Petru Movilă" -Wikipedia: Page 43 of about 1,170 results (appears to be 431)
 * 6) "Pyotr Mogila" -Wikipedia: Page 10 of 97 results
 * 7) "Piotr Mohyła" -Wikipedia: Page 9 of 89 results
 * 8) "Piotr Mohyla" -Wikipedia: Page 3 of 30 results
 * 9) "Piotr Mogila" -Wikipedia: Page 3 of 25 results

—Michael Z. 00:40, 9 February 2022 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Support per strongly-cited and well-researched nomination. In its present state, the name in the article's main title header is an inconsistent combination of Anglicized given name and Russian-transliterated surname. As the promoter of Ukrainian language and culture and as the leading clergyman and theologian based during his time in what is now the Ukrainian capital, it is only proper that his name be transliterated in its Ukrainian form per statistics submitted in the nomination. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 02:37, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Support per above—blindlynx 15:36, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Support per nom--RicardoNixon97 (talk) 22:40, 11 February 2022 (UTC)