The separation of the metaphysical, heroic and modern stages in
Njegoš’s poetry corresponds to the ancient, Christian and modern
senses of the world. Their contents exist as a reading track and spirit-
ual experience in Njegoš’s poetry. It causes us to contemplate the
constants in his poetry. It has a complex and multi-layered structure
which encompasses the elements of change of the metaphysical experi-
ence, which reveals the stages of the internal pathway through which
the metaphysical spirit flows, because it emanates – as Jovan Deretic
said – “from the inner core of the basic poetic meaning of the spark”
which represents the “common basic motif, poetic core, the nucleus
of the entirety of Njegoš’s poetry”.2 Only the metaphysical experience
changes itself in such a way and in such far-reaching transformation
that it passes through all three stages of Njegoš’s poetic experience.
Although one can discern the metaphysical experience in the ancient,
Christian, and modern conception of the world, it does not necessarily
exist in the same manner in each one of them.
There is no doubt that metaphysical experience resides in a differ-
ent way in different poetic forms and at different stages of the poetic
experience. Therefore, the Ray of Microcosm – in its central concept
– is primarily part of an unorthodox Christian experience of the world,
while the The Mountain Wreath – in its dominant reaches – achieves
the classical Hellenic sense of destiny. However, The False Emperor
Šćepan the Small – in its actuality and potentiality of suggestions – fits
the unorthodox sense of the modern world. Njegoš’s poems, however,
leave bursting traces in each of these concepts of the world. What is it,
then, that enables the constant swirl of the poet’s spirit? This issue has
great significance: it is what introduces us to the relationship between
Athens and Jerusalem in Njegoš’s poetry. That relationship is laid in
the foundation of our civilization.
Njegoš is a poet of the dramatic and authentic paradox that under-
pins our civilization. He is the embodiment of the connection between
Athens and Jerusalem. As a connection, he is a paradox; as a thought,
he is a contradiction; as an experience, he is an appeal. That appeal res-
onates with the modern. In fact, it is because of this paradox of poetic
experience that Njegoš echoes in modern sensibility, for modern sens-
ibility still thrives on both symbols: the cross and the circle.
In the world of heroic apologetics, at the very heart of the Kosovo
covenant, Njegoš does not only introduce the unknown but also an
inadequate figure in respect of the heroic expectation. Here is a sur-
prising artistic ability of the poet that – in the same period of time
– examines the heroic world both from the “heads”, as in the case of
The Mountain Wreath, and “tails” as in the case of The False Emper-
or Šćepan the Small. Although he described a historical event by the
appearance of Šćepan the Small in Montenegro, the inner spirituality,
the religious and metaphysical basis of his poetry cannot be reduced
to the mere historical background of the work. For Njegoš shows a
far-reaching shift in perspective, as he introduced a foreigner. It is a
paradoxical figure: he demonstrates that heroic freedom is not only
freedom to decide on the eradication of the converts (renegades)3 but
freedom from a false emperor.
Certainly at one end, according to political logic – as in the Hellenic
tradition – the ruler is assured of the right to lie. For Šćepan was raised
– as Plato said – on the metaphysical platform of the regal right to lie.
As a pretend-leader, he abused the right to lie.4 Here lays the paradox:
those who brought him, protected and defended him, in fact, follow
some of the premises on which the ruler’s right to lie is based. They
themselves do not have the “right” when they lie about Šćepan, since by
those lies they invite the “threat of external enemies” instead of remov-
ing them. However, at the same time, they have the right to lie about the
Russian emperor because by doing so they strengthen internal unity,
preventing the danger that may come from “their own citizens.” 5
However, of greater importance is the other end of the ontological
paradox created by the chiliastic motif. The Ray of Microcosm places
the stage emphasis on memory as knowledge, depicting a scene of the
past and poses the question of the Self. The Mountain Wreath connects
the present moment with the restoration and re-establishment of the
heroic ideal and raises the question of the Other. The chiliastic antici-
pation of the Kingdom of God on earth and the moment of the future
create the stage for The False Emperor Šćepan the Small, in order to
raise the question of the Truth. Although everything is as in the The
Mountain Wreath, it is still the one who is coming that connects the
mythical world of the past with the chiliastic power of anticipations.
The artistic emphasis is no longer placed on the foundational situa-
tion of the eradication of the converts, as is the case in The Mountain
Wreath, even though all of its political intensities are present. Instead
– in The False Emperor Šćepan the Small – the focus is set to some-
thing that comes after it, something of its mythical subconscious, as a
late fruit of a problematically based heroic freedom. Something finally
appears in relation to the eradication of the converts although moved
into the future.
Njegoš’s very idea is consistent with the rhythms of the time. It is
directly preceded by Schiller’s fragments about his false Dimitrius and
Pushkin’s drama, Boris Godunov and then, immediately afterwards
comes Hebel’s drama about the false Demetrius. The Serbian poet,
therefore, is in full resonance with the top poetic curiosity and range
of his time. However, his figure of the self-proclaimed acts differently:
he is a trickster, which in reality he is not – as in Pushkin – brave but
a coward, which he is not – as in Schiller – the frontrunner unfurling
the flag of freedom rather than the arbitrariness of timidity. Within
heroic expectations, Njegoš establishes modernity: he brings forth
unto the stage top and modern cynicism which he places in the heart
of heroic consciousness. Is it possible for one to understand this?
However, if one views Njegoš’s poetry from the perspective of meta-
physical experience, then we can see how the chiliastic concept of the
Messiah is encoded in The False Emperor Šcepan the Small. Njegoš
employs the very word with an explicit biblical subtext: “to see me…
anointed”. Poorly spread prior to the first century, the concept of “the
Messiah (in Greek, the Christ), the king of “the anointed”,6 receives –
as Karen Armstrong stated – from Christian authors “a radically new
interpretation,” as it became the “coded synonym for Jesus.” Formed
on such a platform, Njegoš’s impostor appears as a demonic parody of
buffoonery.
However, if viewed from the perspective of an emerging nihilistic
experience, given that The False Emperor Šćepan the Small is a transi-
tional work from the metaphysical to the nihilistic register of Njegoš’s
poetry, a swindler and imposter appears rather than the self-pro-
claimed with the far-reaching echo of world history in the modern
world. The chiliastic background does not only pave the way for the
demonic figure of a buffoon, but it also reveals how the nihilistic ex-
perience occurs in The False Emperor Šćepan the Small. For, as Nikolaj
Berdjajev said, “if Christ was the divine messenger of the truth of an-
archism”,7 is it not the impostor – as the one whose appearance and
rise is at all possible only against the backside of the inverted image of
Christ – as a possible messenger of the epochal truth of nihilism? He
is the messenger because he walks the same chiliastic path. Hence this
is no broad accident but rather an accident of chiliasm specifically: his
secularized potential.
The possible secularization which leads to modernity happens on
the chiliastic plantation. According to Friedrich Schlegel, “the revolu-
tionary desire to realize the Kingdom of God is an elastic point of pro-
gressive education and the beginning of modern history. That which
does not exist in such a relation to the Kingdom of God is merely a
sideshow in it.”8 As the self-proclaimed is in a direct relation with the
arrival of the Kingdom of God, then anticipation of the arrival of the
Kingdom feeds the figure of the epochal precursor to the modern world.
If we remember the performance in which the perspectives sway at the