Functions of the church in ancient Russia. Abstract: Church and state in ancient Russia interaction and confrontation

17.11.2021 -

This question has two sides: what was the role and position of the church within the country, in the relationship of the metropolis, episcopias, monasteries with princely power, with cities, and what is its foreign policy position, which was mainly manifested in the relationship of the Kiev metropolis with Constantinople and in the activities of Kiev metropolitans - Greeks and Russians. The Catholic Church from abroad sought to establish its own diocese in Russia, but the matter did not go beyond the sending of missionaries, the existence of churches in the colonies of foreign merchants in Kyiv, Smolensk, Novgorod, and the activities of the Dominican Order in Kyiv in the 1220-1230s. Therefore, in state relations between the princely and city authorities, on the one hand, and the church organization, on the other, only the Russian, metropolitan church participated.

1. International status of the Old Russian Church

Formed at the end of the X century. on the initiative of the prince of Kiev and by agreement between Kiev and Constantinople, the Kyiv Metropolis was formally one of the 60, later 70, metropolises of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Its head was the patriarch of Constantinople with his council and staff. At the same time, the emperor, who had sacred functions and was the nominal head of the Christian world, also had undoubted authority in the church.

However, the Kyiv Metropolitan Eparchy differed significantly from others in many ways, which put it objectively in very special conditions. Not only was it the largest diocese among the metropolitanates of Constantinople, its borders coincided with the borders of another state, it covered the territory inhabited by a different, ancient Russian ethnic group that spoke a different language and used a different script. The Kyiv metropolitan diocese covered the territory of the Old Russian state with its state power, ruling dynasties, and its political and legal traditions. Thus, unlike most of the metropolitan dioceses of Constantinople, it was a national and state church organization.

According to the tradition prevailing in the Christian, and in particular in the Church of Constantinople and partly confirmed and formulated by the councils of the 4th-7th centuries, the competence of the patriarchate and the emperor was the formation of new metropolitanates on the territory of the diocese, i.e., the division of one diocese into several, setting and the removal of metropolitans, the trial of them and the consideration of conflicts in the metropolitan dioceses, which the metropolitans themselves were not able to resolve.

The competence of the local church and the metropolitan was to create new bishoprics and close the old ones, i.e., changing the territory of episcopal dioceses, appointing and removing bishops and judging them, convening diocesan councils and issuing rules relating to church affairs within the diocese.

In some works of historians devoted to Russian-Byzantine church relations, the nature of relations between Kiev and Constantinople received a one-sided coverage, not substantiated by evidence from sources. Thus, P.F. Nikolaevsky believed that “the power of the Patriarch of Constantinople over the Russian metropolis was complete, exclusive, far exceeding the rights of the patriarch over the metropolises, indicated by the rules of the councils. The patriarch not only managed the affairs of the Russian church, but he himself, in addition to the consent of the local councils, in addition to the consent of the Russian clergy and the Russian secular authorities, elected, installed and sent metropolitans to Russia; appointed not only metropolitans, but also bishops, and sometimes persons to lower church positions - to archimandrites and abbesses. From the metropolitans, he demanded a constant account in the management of Russian church affairs: without the knowledge and consent of the patriarch, the Russian metropolitan could not undertake anything important in his area; every two years he had to appear in Constantinople to present a report to the patriarch on his administration ... ". As shown in ch. III, in the sections on the church-administrative structure in Russia, on the archimandrites in the Russian city, much of. what Nikolaevsky writes does not find confirmation in the known facts of the 11th-13th centuries.

The same must be said about such a thesis as the obligation of the Russian metropolis to send monetary tribute to Constantinople. Nikolaevsky writes that the cost of this tribute was not regulated by exact laws, but it “was great and difficult for the Russians; the metropolitans collected this tribute from all the bishops, and those from their dioceses, from all the lower clergy and people. P. P. Sokolov also wrote about such a tribute. In his opinion, contributions from the metropolitans to the patriarch were in theory voluntary in terms of their size, but practice diverged from theory. The patriarchal synod in 1324 established an annual tax rate depending on the wealth of individual metropolitans. “We do not find the Russian metropolia in this list,” Sokolov writes, “but this does not mean that she was exempted from such contributions in favor of the patriarchate. Completely opposite; while the Greek metropolitans, by means of this synodal act, protected themselves from the former arbitrary requests from the patriarchate, with regard to Russia, the former practice remained. In Soviet literature, did you support the thesis that Russia paid tribute to the Patriarch of Constantinople? ?. Nikolsky, who wrote that “the patriarch zealously monitored the regular receipt of payments due to him - payments for those appointed to episcopal positions to the patriarch himself and his “notaries”, i.e., officials of the patriarchal curia, income from vacant chairs and churches, income from the so-called stauropegia, i.e., monasteries and churches, which were selected by the patriarchs for their direct control, and various judicial and administrative fees.

Meanwhile, the sources at our disposal, both Russian and Byzantine, in particular the named list of metropolitanates of 1374, where Russia is absent from those sees that pay an annual tax to the patriarch, do not report anything about such obligatory and permanent payments from Kyiv. Naturally, when the Kiev metropolitans and other hierarchs traveled to Constantinople, they brought gifts with them. The medieval structure of government and court determined the payment, which became traditional over time, for the arrival of a bishop for court (“honor”), a metropolitan for an arbitration court, fees for appointment to bishops and church officials (Rule 1273). Probably, for the approval of Metropolitan Hilarion, chosen by Yaroslav and appointed bishops, if there was such a thing, he also brought large gifts to Constantinople. But the system itself, according to which the appointment and consecration of the Kiev metropolitan from among the Greeks, people close to the patriarch, took place in Constantinople, as well as the arrival of such metropolitans in Russia should have led to the bringing of gifts not from Russia to Constantinople, but, on the contrary, gifts from the emperor Kiev Grand Duke. Of course, to Russia in the XI-XIII centuries. Byzantine church leaders came, who were also presented with gifts from the metropolitan and the prince, but these gifts cannot in any way be considered as permanent and obligatory tributes, which the named researchers speak about without sufficient reason. In addition, the stauropegia mentioned by Nikolsky did not exist in Russia at the time under study - all the monasteries and churches in Russia were subordinate to their bishops and princes, and not to the patriarch, in church-administrative terms. As shown in Chap. I, and the archdiocese in Russia was only nominal and was replaced not by the Greeks, but by the Novgorodians, who were subordinate to the city council and the Kiev metropolitan.

The Novgorod Chronicle I reports that the Archbishop of Novgorod Nifont, in anticipation of the new metropolitan, went to meet him in Kyiv and died there; but he also cites an unsubstantiated rumor, which, according to the chronicler, is widespread: “... and many others say, as if, having drunk (having robbed. - Ya.Shch.) Saint Sophia, I sent Caesaryugrad; and I speak a lot in n, nb myself for sin. Priselkov sees in this message only a story about the bishop bringing to his metropolitan an annual fee, collected during several years of his absence in Kyiv. The mention of Constantinople in the rumors recorded by the chronicler allows us to interpret the extraordinary collection of large sums of money by Nifont differently. It is possible that, having supported the patriarchate in not recognizing the canonicity of the appointment of Kliment Smolyatich, having received a commendable message from Patriarch Nikolai Muzalon in 1049-1050, he himself, in the absence of a metropolitan recognized by Constantinople in Kyiv, could count on being appointed to the Kiev cathedra in Constantinople. For this act, he really needed very large funds. However, he lingered in Kyiv, most likely having received the news that in the autumn of 1155 the new metropolitan Constantine had already been appointed, and died there in April 1156. If this is so, then we could see another Russian in the person of Nifont of Novgorod candidate for the metropolitan see.

Thus, again referring to the competence of the Old Russian church organization as a state church, there is reason to believe that the principles of self-government and the activities of the metropolis, recognized in the Church of Constantinople, to a certain extent met the national needs and state prerogatives of Ancient Russia, with such an important exception as the appointment and consecration the very head of the ancient Russian church - the Metropolitan of Kiev. Constantinople used this right in order to always have in Kyiv a reliable and trusted representative who would observe the interests of the patriarch and reconcile them with the interests of the local authorities without prejudice to the patriarchy. Some of the Kievan metropolitans bore court patriarchal titles, indicating that they belonged to a narrow circle of advisers, members of the patriarchal council. Such titles are on their seals: "Protoproedr and Metropolitan of Russia" Ephraim (1054-1068), "Metropolitan and Syncellus" Georgy (c. 1068-1073), and in the first case, the court title even precedes the diocesan one. This great closeness to the head of the Constantinople church of the metropolitans of the middle of the 11th century, whose seals have been preserved, is also shown by the placement on them of the personal emblems of the patriarchs.

In the context of the church-political polycentrism that existed in the Byzantine Empire, several patriarchies, the recognition of worship in local languages and the existence of state churches in countries outside the empire (Bulgaria, Russia, Serbia, etc.), for the capital Patriarchate of Constantinople, which claimed a leading role in the empire (and who had it), it was important to turn the appointment of metropolitans from a sacred act of consecration - ordination into a political act of selecting their proteges. Although the Council of Chalcedon of 451, which recognized the right of the See of Constantinople to appoint metropolitans in the dioceses belonging to it, equal to that of other patriarchates, spoke only in favor of the confirmation and consecration of new metropolitans by the Archbishop of Constantinople, this decision, which seemed to be beneficial to the New Rome, was soon reconsidered. The right to appoint metropolitans in three or four dioceses from among the candidates presented to the archbishop in the time of Justinian, already without any decisions of the councils, was turned into the right to approve and appoint those candidates who were presented to him by the patriarchal council, a narrow deliberative body. Consequently, by the time the ancient Russian church organization was established, the patriarchate had completely seized the right to appoint metropolitans, considering deviations from this practice as violations of ancient traditions.

2. The question of the role of the Greek metropolitans at the head of the Russian Church

At the head of the national state church organization in Russia from the end of the 10th century. and before the Mongol invasion, as a rule, there were Greek metropolitans sent to Kyiv from Constantinople, trained there, who did not know the Russian language, probably had not been to Russia before and knew local conditions only from the stories of travelers who came from Kyiv, as well as by correspondence, which was conducted between the two state and church centers. Thus, foreign church administrators and diplomats came to Kyiv to manage the Russian diocese.

This phenomenon in the history of Russia XI-XIII centuries. caused conflicting assessments of researchers, from recognizing it as an evil for the development of the country, which made or threatened to make it a Byzantine colony, to including it among the factors that played a positive role.

This question was raised most sharply by Golubinsky, who formulated it as follows: “Was it good or bad for the Russian church and for the Russian state that in the pre-Mongolian period our metropolitans were mostly Greeks?” He answered this question in the affirmative, considering "that the domination of the Greeks was not for us a great and decisive evil in any respect, and that, on the contrary, in some respects it was a positive and greatest blessing." “To such an extent the greatest that we must not only come to terms with the Greeks’ claim, which is absolutely not based on any right, to subjugate other Orthodox peoples in ecclesiastical terms, but also thank God that they had such a claim.”

However, the position of the researcher is contradictory. On the one hand, he agrees that “metropolitans of Greek descent ... could not take care of the affairs of the Russian Church as diligently as metropolitans from natural Russians would have diligently taken care of”, on the other hand, practically the only thing that makes Byzantine metropolitans benefactors for Russia, in his opinion, is their non-interference in the political inter-princely struggle, their lack of connection with one or another Grand Duke, which allows them to be outside this struggle.

The same position is fully shared by L. Muller. He writes that, "contrary to most researchers, it is necessary to recognize the correctness of Golubinsky" in this matter. He showed that there are no grounds to consider the metropolitan as "the emperor's envoy to the Kiev court", who would also carry out the claims of Constantinople for the state subordination of Russia to the empire. Indeed, special ambassadors were sent to negotiate on specific political issues, since the metropolitans could not be very mobile, and while protecting the interests of the emperor, they could not be completely independent of the Kiev Grand Duke. The Greek Metropolitan of Kyiv Nikifor (1104-1121) in a letter to Grand Duke Vladimir Vsevolodovich speaks of his obligation to take care of the Christian faith, protecting the flock of Christ from the wolf and the divine garden from weeds, than he must continue the “old tradition” of his fathers. Muller rightly sees behind these words of the metropolitan the assignment to the Russian prince of the same rights and obligations in relation to the church, which, according to the VI novel of Justinian, the Byzantine emperor had, i.e., he does not believe that only the emperor retained these rights in Russia. And how could it be otherwise, when the position of the church and Christianity in Kiev depended on the Grand Duke of Kyiv, and not on the nominal head of the Christian church, who did not have any rights to power in a foreign state?

Müller also writes about the mediating activity of the metropolitans in political conflicts between the princes, an activity that “foreign Greeks could perform much better, on whose election the Russian princes were not able to exert or exerted very little influence than the local bishops...”, and about "extremely positive significance" for the history of Russian culture of the fact that the Greeks were at the head of the Russian church. And the metropolitans themselves, and “the spiritual (perhaps, secular) staff accompanying them, and the artists and artisans who followed them brought to Russia the traditions of Byzantine culture, equally significant in quality and volume. This included the Greek language, and Byzantine religious, literary and scientific traditions, and the experience of building art and painting, music and artistic crafts, and, finally, clothing and comfort.

Indeed, the cultural and political significance of the fact that Russia at the end of the X-XII centuries. focused on Constantinople and was part of its church, it is difficult to overestimate. This contributed to the fact that Russia became on a par with other medieval countries of Europe, created outstanding works of literature and art, and in the conditions of feudal fragmentation, preserved the cultural and political unity of the Russian lands. The inclusion of works of Middle Eastern, early Christian, Byzantine literature, law, historiography into the composition of their own writing contributed to the fact that the achievements of world civilization served in Russia not only the feudal class, but also a wider circle of people. The belonging of Russia to the Christian civilization and its eastern unification under the auspices of Constantinople overcame the isolation of the East Slavic feudal world, made the Old Russian society open to using the cultural achievements of other countries and transferring their own achievements abroad.

Recognizing the important cultural and political significance for Russia of the fact that it was subordinate to Constantinople in church terms in the first centuries, one should, however, pay attention to the facts of the development of the country and the Old Russian Church in cultural and political terms without the participation of representatives of Constantinople in Kyiv, and sometimes and contrary to them.

The conflict between Rome and Constantinople, which led to a rupture between them in 1054, was alien to Russia, which maintained political, commercial and cultural ties with both Western and Eastern countries. The event in question was not reflected in the Russian annals. Attention was drawn to the fact that among the signatures of the metropolitans on the conciliar act of 1054, which condemned the Roman ambassadors, there is no Kiev metropolitan, for one reason or another he did not participate in this case. The leaders of the Byzantine Church in Russia, especially the metropolitans, tried, and not without success, to restore the princes and Russian society in general against contacts with the West, marriages with Catholic princesses, etc. However, the community of Russia as a European state with the countries of other parts of Europe in the XI-XIII centuries. was more than something special that united it only with Byzantium and other countries of Eastern Christianity. In Russian writing and church services, the cult of transferring the relics of Nicholas of Myra, Western saints who were not recognized in Byzantium, became widespread.

The appointment of bishops and the establishment of new episcopal sees took place at the request of the local princes, which was satisfied by these representatives of Constantinople. When Metropolitan Nicephorus II sent to Vladimir the Greek Bishop Nicholas, appointed by him, to the vacant chair, the Grand Duke did not accept him, citing the fact that “our land did not elect this people”, and achieved the appointment of the candidate he needed. But metropolitans do not always fulfill their duties. Priselkov testified that Metropolitan Nikolay delayed the appointment of new bishops to vacant sees, and only the arrival of Nikifor to replace him led to the filling of vacancies.

Russia's belonging to the Eastern Christian region and its acquaintance with the church-political ideas that were widespread there created the conditions not only for their assimilation and use, but also for the creation of their own concepts. However, the fact that there was a protege of the patriarchate in Kyiv prevented the emergence of any theories that ran counter to the official views adopted in the patriarchate. Therefore, such ideas arise outside the circle of the Greek metropolitan, among local figures associated with princely churches or monasteries.

Such is the court princely priest Hilarion, who used the theme of changing the "law" - nationally limited and obsolete with the emergence of Christianity, the Jewish religion and the moral and ethical system "grace" - with a Christian doctrine that equalizes everyone and thereby allows people who "newly know" God to take a high place that was previously inaccessible to them. He used this theme in order to oppose the “old law” - the ecclesiastical and political concepts of Constantinople - to the “new” doctrine, requiring new people, to which Russia also belongs, in the new conditions of introducing Christianity to Russia. Thus, it was the local, Russian religious and political ideologist who could put forward the idea of transferring heavenly attention and favor from one chosen people to all of humanity. Also, in a local historical work, not related to the metropolis, in the Tale of Bygone Years, ideas are carried out not only about the connection of the history of Russia with the history of the world, but also about the independence and independence of Russia in choosing its political sympathies, which puts it on a par with other great powers, especially with Byzantium.

Russian chronicle arose and existed outside the metropolitan court and the sphere of his interests - in Russian monasteries and city churches. In the construction of cathedrals, works of church architecture, the role of metropolitan orders is invisible - this is mostly a princely initiative, and the metropolitan performs his official role during the consecration of the temple.

Attention is drawn to the differences in titles in relation to the ancient Russian princes, which is sometimes used by local and never visiting figures. Laying on the Grand Duke of Kiev, as a shepherd and a vinedresser, the duty of maintaining Christianity in purity and at a sufficient height in his country, Metropolitan Nikifor in the above message calls him, however, simply “my prince” (“blessed and glorified”, “ faithful and meek", "noble", "philanthropic"), i.e. in the original Greek "????? ???". Under his pen, the naming of the Kiev prince with those titles that are known in local writings and inscriptions could not have arisen - “kagan”, as Yaroslav Hilarion calls him, “king”, as the deceased Grand Duke is called in graffiti on the wall of St. Sophia Cathedral, in praise of the 12th century ., addressed to the son of Vladimir Monomakh Mstislav and his grandson Rostislav. Meanwhile, the title applied to the heads of the feudal monarchies of medieval Europe has always been very important and served to recognize the economic and political strengthening of the state by obtaining a high title for its head. The presence in Kyiv of a metropolitan from Constantinople could not contribute to this form of recognition.

The significance of the one who is at the head of the state church organization - a local or Byzantine figure, can be seen from the codification of church law by Yaroslav and Hilarion.

The appearance of Greek church leaders (“bishops”) under Vladimir led to an attempt to introduce, at their insistence, Byzantine criminal law and those forms of punishment that were not accepted in Slavic law. However, the creation of a local code of church law is associated with the name of not the patriarch's henchman, but the collaborator and ideologist of Prince Yaroslav - Hilarion, when he became metropolitan. Naturally, it is likely that the introduction of traditional local forms of punishment into ecclesiastical law, a significant expansion of ecclesiastical jurisdiction over those cases that in Byzantium were not subject to the jurisdiction of ecclesiastical authorities, could have belonged to the initiative of a local church leader, and not a Byzantine at the Kiev cathedra. The metropolitan did not participate in the selection and transfer to Russia of the monastic charter, which Priselkov drew attention to. Even before Theodosius, the monk of the Caves, Ephraim, went to Constantinople, as he believes, to study the life of Byzantine monasticism, and later it was the abbot of the Dmitrievsky monastery Varlaam who went around the monasteries in Constantinople in search of a better charter.

The name of Hilarion, a local metropolitan, and not one sent from Constantinople, is also associated with such events that turned out to be promising and, therefore, meeting the needs of Russia, such as the foundation, together with Prince Yaroslav, of the first princely monasteries, in particular the monastery of George. In the XI - the first half of the XII century. princely monasteries in Kyiv and its environs, and in the second half of the XII century. in Vladimir Suzdal, they became an important ecclesiastical and political institution that connected the princely dynasty with the capital in addition to its rights to the grand prince's table.

Another important function of the Church of St. George's Monastery in Kyiv, which is reported by the prologue memory of its consecration in some lists: it was the place of banqueting, i.e., the rite of enthronement of bishops. It is of undoubted interest that the ordination (investiture) in Russia was also divided into secular (dedication) and ecclesiastical (ordination), the latter took place in the Cathedral of St. Sophia.

The service of the Metropolitan in the Cathedral of St. Sophia, his participation in the consecration of new bishops, in the work of local councils were necessary. But the execution of many other matters that belonged to the competence of the clergy did not stop even in the absence of the metropolitan and could be carried out without his participation. The following case during the inter-princely conflict over Chernigov is indicative. The kiss of the cross, brought before by Mstislav Vladimirovich, obliged him to go to war against Vsevolod Davydovich, who attracted seven thousand Polovtsy to his side. In the absence of the Metropolitan Abbot of the Kiev Andreevsky Monastery, the family monastery of his grandfather, Gregory took the initiative to remove the oath from the prince. Since he himself did not have sufficient spiritual dignity for this, he convened a council of the Kiev clergy, who collectively took upon themselves the sin of princely perjury. The Kyiv hegumen showed himself to be an authoritative figure in the religious and political service of the capital and an excellent organizer of a peaceful solution to the military-political conflict, which would do honor to the metropolitan.

The absence of a metropolitan in Kyiv did not prevent the selection and functioning of new bishops in Novgorod - the republican constitution of this Russian land made it possible not to remain without church power even when the approval from Kyiv of the appointments of local bishops was late. The metropolitans had to come to terms with the emergence in one of their subordinate dioceses of a special procedure for the appointment of a bishop. For the first time, a message about the election of a candidate for bishops on the spot: “... having gathered all the city of people, deigning to appoint a holy man as a bishop and the name of Arcadia was chosen by God,” is contained in an annalistic article of 1156, referring to the time when there were no metropolitan. There is no direct indication of how Arkady was chosen, but the words “chosen by God” allow us to assume that even then they used lots. These elections were recognized by the metropolitan, who was forced, though only two years after his appearance in Kyiv, to ordain him. How such an election was carried out is indicated by a message about the appointment of a new archbishop in 1193 under Metropolitan Nicephorus II: three candidates were named, and their names were placed in the cathedral in the altar on the throne. After the liturgy, the first blind man who came across was brought from the veche square, who took out a note with the name of the future Archbishop Martyrius. Thus, the development of the republican system in Novgorod led to the method of choosing a bishop, which was established in early Christianity and found expression in the Orders for the election of a bishop, but then was changed in practice by the strengthened state power and the church hierarchy, which took the replacement of this position into their own hands. .

Foreign metropolitans with their staff did little to acquaint Russian society with the works of Byzantine literature, organize translations from Greek into Old Russian, spread knowledge of the Greek language in Russia, schools and education.

The bulk of Slavic translations from Greek known in Russia was the result of the work of the Slavic enlighteners Cyril and Methodius and their students in Moravia and Bulgaria. A large number of translations were made in Bulgaria under Tsar Simeon. Translation from Greek into Russia was organized by Prince Yaroslav, who "gathered many scribes and converted from Greek to Slovenian writing." Circle translated into Russia in the XI-XII centuries. Historical, natural science, narrative, hagiographical and other works are quite wide, but it does not reflect everything that Byzantine writing contained. D.S. Likhachev believes that "translations from Greek should have been the subject of state concern in Russia." Of course, secular, narrative literature, for princely and boyar circles, could rather be translated according to princely orders than at the direction of the metropolitan. But outside the list of translations made on these orders, there were many works of literature, philosophy, history, political thought, law, which remained untranslated either in Bulgaria in the 10th-11th centuries, or in Russia in the 11th-13th centuries. Whether the metropolitans organized translations from Greek into Russia is not known; there is little information at all about any of their activities that contributed to the development of the country where they served, and acquaintance with the culture they represented.

The Greek language was known in Russia in princely circles. The mothers of Svyatopolk, Yaroslav and Mstislav Vladimirovich, Vladimir Monomakh, Vsevolod and Igor Olgovich, Daniil Galitsky and Vasilko Romanovich and other princes were Greek women, i.e. these princes could know the Greek language from childhood.

Vladimir Monomakh wrote about his father that he was “sitting at home, learning 5 languages”, and among them, of course, Greek. The Greek language should have been even better known in the environment of metropolitans and Greek bishops, where official translators were also needed to communicate with the Russian clergy and translate metropolitan messages and other documents. Choral kliros sang alternately in Greek and Slavonic in the cathedral churches of Kyiv and Rostov. Nestor, the author of "Reading on Boris and Gleb", calls the Cathedral of St. Sophia in Greek "katholikani iklisia", probably as the Greek metropolitan called it.

Successes in the development of ancient Russian culture associated with Christianity, the church, are determined by its active support from the secular government and monasteries to a much greater extent than church hierarchs sent from the shores of the Bosphorus. The absence of a Greek-speaking “intellectual elite” in Russia, as some modern researchers write about, may be primarily due to this passive position in the country of native speakers of this language, who did not consider it their task to spread it and organize schools.

Prince Vladimir the Holy (Red Sun) Under Vladimir, the Kievan state gained unity, entering a period of prosperity. Vladimir is the builder of the state and its reformer. Wars began to occupy a smaller part. He continued to push the boundaries. In process of territorial growth the problem of spiritual unity became more and more noticeable. Vladimir renounces paganism and accepts Christianity, due to the fact that paganism (polytheism), Christianity (monotheism), if there is one god in heaven, then one ruler on earth, everything helped the political strengthening of the state. + It was difficult to remain a pagan country among Christianity. In addition, the man of the Middle Ages, in his spiritual and moral quest, felt the need for a religion that would most fully and intimately answer life's questions. The impetus for the adoption of Christianity was the scornful attitude of the Greeks towards Pagan Russia. Despite this, at the beginning of his reign, Prince Vladimir tried to strengthen the spiritual unity within the framework of paganism by church reform (980), in order to give paganism a broader socio-political meaning. But paganism, by its very nature, proved incapable of becoming a regulator of social relations. In order for Vladimir to marry the sister of Emperor Vasily 2 (he sends his troops to help them in exchange), he had to be baptized. After that, baptism was accepted in Russia.

The adoption of Christianity in Russia - 988. Since paganism was closely connected with everyday life, some pagan holidays had to be adapted to Christian ones, Christian saints were endowed with the “properties” of pagan gods. Strength before the Christian belief allows us to speak of a kind of dual faith as a historical and cultural phenomenon of the folk life of medieval Russia. With the adoption of Christianity, churches began to line up. Along with the white, parish clergy, blacks also appeared, monks who settled in deserts and monasteries. Community-based monasteries began to enjoy great respect in Ancient Russia. All of their property was shared.

The date of the introduction of Christianity in Russia as a state religion is considered to be 988, when the great Kyiv prince Vladimir and his retinue were baptized. Although the spread of Christianity in Russia began earlier. In particular, Princess Olga accepted Christianity. Prince Vladimir sought to replace the pagan pantheon with a monotheistic (monotheism) religion.

The choice fell on Christianity, because:

1) the influence of Byzantium was great in Russia;

2) faith has already become widespread among the Slavs;

3) Christianity corresponded to the mentality of the Slavs, was closer than Judaism or Islam.

There are different points of view on how Christianity spread:

1) the baptism of Russia took place peacefully. The new religion acted as a powerful unifying factor. (D.S. Likhachev);

2) the introduction of Christianity was premature, since the main part of the Slavs continued to believe in pagan gods until the XIV century, when the unification of the country had already become inevitable. The adoption of Christianity in the X century. exacerbated relations between the Kievan nobility and their neighbors. The baptism of Novgorodians took place together with mass bloodshed, Christian rites, orders did not take root in society for a long time: the Slavs called children pagan names, church marriage was not considered mandatory, in some places remnants of the tribal system (polygamy, blood feud) were preserved (I.Ya. Froyanov). The Russian Church since the adoption of Christianity as the state religion was part of the Ecumenical Constantinople. The metropolitan was appointed by the patriarch. Initially, the metropolitans and priests in Russia were the Greeks. But meanwhile, Russian foreign policy retained its independence thanks to the firmness and stubbornness of the first princes. Yaroslav the Wise appointed the Russian priest Hilarion as metropolitan, thereby putting an end to the dispute with the Greeks.

The Russian Church had a great influence on all spheres of the life of the Slavs: politics, economics, culture:

1) the church began to quickly gain economic independence. The prince donated a tithe to her. Monasteries were, as a rule, an extensive economy. Some of the products they sold on the market, and some stockpiled. At the same time, the Church grew rich faster than the great princes, since it was not affected by the struggle for power during feudal fragmentation, there was no great destruction of its material values even during the years of the Mongol-Tatar invasion;

2) political relations began to be covered by the church: relations of domination and subordination began to be regarded as correct and pleasing to God, while the church received the right to reconcile, to be a guarantor, a judge in the political sphere;

3) Christian churches became the centers of not only religious but also worldly life, as community gatherings were held, the treasury and various documents were kept;

4) the Christian Church made an important contribution to the culture of ancient Russian society: the first sacred books appeared, the monk brothers Cyril and Methodius compiled the Slavic alphabet. Among the population of Russia, primarily the Kiev principality, the percentage of literate people increased. Christianity introduced new norms of behavior, morality for the Slavs, such as “do not steal”, “do not kill”

At the end of the X-beginning of the XI centuries. there is a restructuring of society on a territorial basis, the tribal community is replaced territorial. This process is also reflected in the history of the urban community, which itself becomes territorial, is formed Konchan-hundred system. In parallel, the growth of the urban district was going on - the city-states were growing and getting stronger.

In 980, Prince Vladimir united Kyiv, Novgorod and Polotsk under his rule and became the sole ruler of Russia. Vladimir set about solving major state problems, he restored the unity of the Russian land again. Strengthened the system of government of the country.

One of the most important state reforms was Baptism of Russia in 988. It turned out to be connected with the internal political crisis in the Byzantine Empire.

The Byzantine emperors Constantine and Basil II asked Vladimir for help against the rebel Varda Foki. Vladimir promised to help the emperors, but on the condition that they give him their sister Anna as a wife. The emperors agreed, but demanded that the prince accept the Christian faith. After the defeat of Phocas, they were in no hurry to fulfill their promise. Then Vladimir captured the city of Chersonesus and threatened to capture Constantinople. The emperors had to agree not only to the marriage of his sister, but also to the fact that Vladimir was baptized not in Constantinople, but in Chersonese. Returning back to Kyiv, Vladimir destroyed the pagan idols and baptized the people of Kiev. The baptism of Vladimir and the people of Kiev was the beginning of the spread of Christianity in Russia.

The baptism of Russia was explained by a number of historical reasons:

1) the developing state did not allow polytheism with its tribal gods and polytheistic religion. This undermined the foundations of the state. "One great prince, one almighty God";

2) the adoption of Christianity contributed to the development of international relations, since Christianity was accepted as a religion in almost all European countries;

3) Christianity, with its idea that everything comes from God - and wealth, and poverty, and happiness, and misfortune, gave people some reconciliation with reality.

The adoption of Christianity contributed to the flourishing of material culture (icon painting, fresco, mosaics, the construction of domes).

With Christianity came writing in the Slavic language. Schools sprang up at the monasteries.

After the adoption of Christianity, the East Slavic tribes united into the Old Russian people.

The role of the church in ancient Russia

By the end of the X-XI century. in Russia, a harmonious system of organization of church religious life appeared. It was created in the image and likeness of the Byzantine church, headed by patriarch. At the head of the Christian Church in Russia was metropolitan Kyiv and all Russia.

Schools and libraries appeared at churches and monasteries, the first of which were opened on the initiative of Prince Vladimir himself. The first Russian chroniclers, scribes and translators of famous ecclesiastical and secular works, icon painters also worked here.

The church contributed to the development of the country's economy. Prominent church figures, as well as monasteries already in the XI-XII centuries. received land holdings from the Grand Dukes and set up their own economy on them.

A close relationship is being established between secular and ecclesiastical authorities, with the primacy of the former over the latter. In the first half of the XIII century. clearance begins ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Now the competence of the church includes the consideration of cases of marriage, divorce, family, some inheritance cases. The Church also played a significant role in international affairs related to the deepening of relations with Christian states and churches.

The Church promoted philanthropy, tolerance, respect for parents and children, for the personality of a woman-mother, and called the people to this. The church also played a significant role in strengthening the unity of Russia. Church leaders in the future more than once performed the role of peacekeepers in princely strife.

In large cities, church authority over Russian lands was exercised by bishops. In Novgorod, as one of the largest cities, the center of a large region, religious life was directed by the archbishop.

The church opposed Roman-style Christianity. Those who proclaimed a folk pagan culture were considered apostates.

Thus, the church contributed to the isolation of Russia from Western European culture. For Russia, such a statement of the church was unacceptable, since Russia cooperated with many Western European countries that preached the Catholic religion.

The church prospered through the use of the labor of dependent people, robbed people through usury, and so on. Many prominent figures of the church participated in political intrigues. Therefore, the actions of the church caused more negative people.

Adoption of Christianity in Kievan Rus contributed to its inclusion in the European Christendom, which means that Rus has become an equal element of European civilized development. However, the adoption of Christianity in the Orthodox version had its negative consequences. Orthodoxy contributed to the isolation of Russia from Western European civilization.

The adoption of Christianity in Russia

The very first news about the penetration of Christianity in Russia dates back to the first centuries AD. In the ninth century Russia adopted Christianity twice: the first time under Olga - 957; the second - under Vladimir 988

Immediately after Vladimir seized the throne of Kiev in 980, having eliminated his elder brother Yaropolk (972-980), he made an attempt to create an all-Russian pagan pantheon headed by Perun, the god of thunder, and to establish a common ritual. However, the mechanical unification of the old tribal deities could not lead to the unity of the cult and still ideologically divided the country. In addition, the new cult retained the ideas of tribal equality, unacceptable to feudal society. Vladimir realized that it was necessary not to reform the old, but to adopt a fundamentally new religion, corresponding to the already formed state.

Russia maintained good relations with both Byzantium and the Roman Church; there were both Muslims and Jews. But it was necessary to accept Christianity for several reasons:

1. This was necessary in the interests of the development of the state, in order to avoid isolation from the whole world.

2. Monotheism corresponded to the essence of a single state headed by a monarch.

3. Christianity strengthened the family, introduced a new morality.

4. Contributed to the development of culture - philosophy, theological literature.

5. Social stratification required a new ideology (paganism - equality).

The annals speak of the religious missions of the Muslim Volga Bulgaria, from the Judaic Khazaria. Islam did not fit, because it forbade the use of wine. Catholicism was not suitable, because the service was conducted in Latin, and the Pope was at the head of the church, and not secular power.

In 987, Russia and Byzantium began negotiations on baptism. Vladimir demanded for his wife the sister of Emperor Vasily II - Princess Anna. Byzantium needed the help of the Russians in the fight against the rebels.

In 988, Vladimir himself was baptized, christened his boyars, his squad, and under pain of punishment forced the people of Kiev and all Russians in general to be baptized. At baptism, Vladimir received the Christian name Vasily in honor of Emperor Basil II - Basil the Great.

The change of religious cults was accompanied by the destruction of the images of the once revered gods, their public desecration by the princely servants, the construction of churches on the sites where pagan idols and temples stood. So, on a hill in Kyiv, where the idol of Perun stood, the Church of Basil, dedicated to Basil the Great, was erected. Near Novgorod, where the pagan temple was located, the Church of the Nativity was built. According to The Tale of Bygone Years, Vladimir began to build churches in the cities, appoint clergy and people began to be baptized in all cities and villages.

According to the historian Ya. N. Shchapov: "The spread of Christianity was carried out by the princely power and the emerging church organization by force, with the resistance not only of the priests, but also of various segments of the population." Confirmation of this can be found in Tatishchev V.N., who, examining the annalistic stories about baptism, cites the following facts: Metropolitan Hilarion of Kyiv admitted that baptism in Kyiv took place under duress: "No one resisted the princely order, pleasing to God, and they were baptized, if not by his own will, then out of fear of those who ordered, for his religion was connected with power. In other cities, the replacement of the traditional cult by a new one met with open resistance.

Resistance to the introduction of Christianity

The main part of the population of Russia offered active or passive resistance to the new religion. It was the general rejection of it in the conditions of limited democracy that thwarted the plans of the Kiev nobility and turned the introduction of Christianity into a centuries-old process.

In most of the cities that openly rebelled against the planting of Christianity, the local secular and former spiritual nobility came forward. So, it is known about the uprising of Prince Moguta, which lasted from 988 to 1008. Moguta's many years of struggle ended with his capture, and then pardon with exile to the monastery.

The rebels everywhere destroyed temples, killed priests and missionaries. The uprisings in different regions were similar in nature to the uprisings in Suzdal, Kyiv, Novgorod, they merged anti-Christian and anti-feudal motives.

The uprisings took place mainly in non-Slavic lands, where the struggle for independence joined the indicated motives. It was from this time that three processes began to manifest themselves simultaneously in Russia: Christianization, feudalization and colonization of neighboring lands. Also characteristic is the surprising coincidence of the dates of the uprisings with the death of princes or their absence, caused by feudal strife, i.e. periods of relative anarchy. But the reasons for the uprisings in the XI century. already others. Their beginning, as a rule, is associated with the deterioration of the economic situation of the masses, periodic crop shortages and many years of famine.

Meanwhile, the central Kiev government, ignoring the difficulties of the north-eastern lands, continued to exact taxes from the population. The situation was aggravated by internecine wars, accompanied by robberies. In this difficult time, the magicians acted as heralds of the people's anger. As Christianity strengthened, they lost their rights, and at the same time their sources of livelihood, found themselves new occupations, most often healing. In order to destroy this social group - their ideological enemies - the clergy accused them of "witchcraft", of using harmful "land" and "indulgence", set the believers and the state against them. The buffoons, who annoyed the church only with humor, games and songs, were also destroyed without trial or investigation.

The uprising of 1024 in Suzdal took place during the war between the Kievan and Tmutarakan princes, as a result of which Kievan power was weakened in the city. It was also headed by the Magi. This social group was also materially interested in the preservation of the old religion. Defending antiquity, they also fought for their economic interests. But attention should be paid to the fact that the call of the clergy of the former religion was supported by the whole people. This speaks of the extremely insignificant influence of Orthodoxy on the townspeople. The chronicle reports: "Having heard about the Magi, Yaroslav came to Suzdal; having captured the Magi, he sent some into exile, and executed others."

Uprisings of 1071 in Rostov land and Novgorod was caused by the same reasons. Most of the people followed the magi, and not the clergy, who defended the interests of the nobility.

Both uprisings had deep social causes, were anti-feudal and anti-church. There is no doubt that the social basis of this struggle was class contradictions, but they dealt blows to the process of Christianization, held back its course, forced the church to adapt.

Orthodox Church, its structure, strengthening of positions

At the head of the church was the Metropolitan of Kyiv, who was appointed from Constantinople or by the Kiev prince himself, with the subsequent election of bishops by the cathedral. In the large cities of Russia, all the practical affairs of the church were in charge of the bishops. The metropolitan and bishops owned lands, villages, and cities. In addition, the church had its own court and legislation, which gave the right to interfere in almost all aspects of the life of parishioners.

The power of the church was based primarily on its rapidly increasing material resources. Even Prince Vladimir Svyatoslavovich established the "tithe" - the deduction of a tenth of the prince's income in favor of the church; the same order was maintained by other princes. The churches owned large real estate, numerous villages, settlements and even entire cities.

Relying on material wealth, the church acquired a great influence on the economic and political life, on the life of the population. She sought to act as a guarantor of inter-princely agreements, secured by the "kiss of the cross", interfered in the negotiations, and her representatives often played the role of ambassadors.

The Church used various methods to preach the Orthodox dogma and assert its authority. Not the last role was played in this respect by the construction of temples, the architectural forms and internal painting of which were supposed to symbolize the "earthly" and "heavenly" worlds. With the same purpose of religious influence on the minds of people, divine services and rituals were performed - in honor of Christian holidays and "saints", on the occasion of christenings, marriages and funerals. Prayers were served in churches for recovery, for salvation from natural disasters, for victory over enemies, and sermons and teachings were delivered. With the help of compulsory confession, churchmen penetrated the inner world of people, influenced their psyche and actions, and at the same time found out information about any plans directed against the church, the ruling class and the existing social system.

Despite the fact that Christianity during the period of feudal fragmentation already covered a significant part of the population, even among the feudal nobility there was open disdain for the new religion and disrespect for its servants. All the more resisted Christianity among the people.

Church leaders actively tried to strengthen the position of the church in breadth and depth, the church turned into a source for the spread of Christianity among other peoples. At the same time, there was a process of interpenetration of individual elements of religious ideology and cult, which was the result of broad multilateral relationships of Kievan Rus.

Under Vladimir, the church took on not only spiritual duties, but was also in charge of worldly affairs that were closely related to the interests of the state. On the one hand, the church was given jurisdiction over all Christians, which included family matters, cases of “violation of the holiness and inviolability of Christian churches and symbols”, and the church also had the right to judge for apostasy, “insulting moral feelings”. Under the care of the church, a special society was placed, separated from the Christian flock, called the almshouse people. They included:

White clergy with their families;

Popadya widows and adult priests;

clergymen;

Prosvirni;

Wanderers;

People in hospitals and hospices, and those who served them;

- "inflated people", outcasts, beggars, the population living on church lands.

In 1019 Vladimir's son Yaroslav the Wise comes to the throne. By this time, the church had already gained strength in a new country for it, and Yaroslav decides to continue the work begun by his father, and develops a decree in which he retains the affairs under the jurisdiction of the church and, unlike his father, describes not in general terms, but in clearly formulated theses judicial procedure with a complex system of punishments.

This system is built on a clear distinction between sin and crime. “Sin is in charge of the Church, crime is in the hands of the State. Sin is not only a moral crime, a violation of divine law, but the very thought of an act by which a sinner can harm another person or society. A crime is an act by which one person causes material damage or moral offense to another person. Yaroslav's ecclesiastical court order is based on these concepts. He divided all cases under the jurisdiction of the church into several categories, providing for a different measure of punishment.

Purely spiritual matters, not related to the violation of worldly laws, were dealt with by the episcopal court without the participation of a princely judge. This included cases of violation of church commandments, such as sorcery, sorcery.

With cases of "sinful-criminal" things were quite different. Cases in which the violation of a church commandment was combined with the infliction of moral or material harm to another person or with a violation of public order were dealt with by the prince's court with the participation of the church. The princely court sentenced the criminal, and the metropolitan received a small sum of money for the development of the church. Such a category included cases of “little girls, insults in word or deed, spontaneous divorce of a husband from his wife by the will of the first, carried the guilt of the latter, violation of marital fidelity, etc.”

Ordinary illegal actions committed by both church people and laity were considered by the church court, but according to princely laws and customs. The prince reserved some participation in the trial of the people of the church department. This participation was expressed in the fact that the most serious crimes committed by church people were dealt with by the church court with the participation of the prince, with whom the former shared fines.

The results of the influence of the church on various aspects of the life of Russia

The establishment of a monotheistic religion contributed to the strengthening of the grand princely power, the elimination of the “pre-feudal fragmentation” inherent in Russia, until the end of the 10th century, when in a number of East Slavic lands there were their own princes under the auspices of Kyiv.

Christianity played a major role in the ideological substantiation of the power of the Kievan princes. “From the moment of baptism, the merciful eye of the good God looks at the prince. The prince is put on the throne by God himself.

The establishment of Christianity in Russia as the state religion had a great impact on various spheres of the social and spiritual life of the country. The eradication of local, tribal differences in certain regions of Russia and the formation of the Old Russian people with a single language, culture, and ethnic self-consciousness accelerated. The elimination of local pagan cults also contributed to further ethnic consolidation, although differences in this area continued to persist and revealed themselves later, when, during the period of feudal fragmentation, aggravated by the Tatar-Mongol invasion, separate parts of Russia became isolated from each other or fell under the rule of foreign conquerors.

The Baptism of Russia was an important stage in the development of its culture. In many respects, ancient Russian culture acquired fundamentally new features and characteristics. Just as the Christianization of Russia was a factor that significantly accelerated the formation of a single ancient Russian people from East Slavic tribes with their various cults, Christianity also contributed to the consolidation of ancient Russian consciousness - both ethnic and state.

Christianity brought to the Slavs a written language based on the Church Slavonic alphabet compiled by the enlightening brothers Cyril and Methodius in the second half of the 9th century.

Monasteries, in particular the famous Kiev Caves Monastery, founded by Saint Anthony and Saint Theodosius in the second half of the 11th century, became the center of ancient Russian education. The Monk Nestor was the first chronicler. Large libraries of handwritten books were collected in monasteries and episcopal sees.

At the same time, in the field of culture, certain negative aspects are also associated with the adoption of Christianity. Oral literature, the literature of Ancient Russia of pre-Christian times was rich and varied. And the fact that a significant part of it was lost, did not get on parchment and paper, is a certain fault of church circles, which, naturally, denied pagan culture and, as best they could, struggled with its manifestations.

The adoption of Christianity served as a powerful stimulus for familiarizing Russia with Byzantine culture. Through Byzantium, from the depths of centuries, the influence of world civilization, including the heritage of the ancient world and the Middle East, more actively began to penetrate into Ancient Russia.

Equally important were the consequences of baptism in the field of education. About a hundred years before the baptism of Kievan Rus, Christianity was adopted in Bulgaria and the Greek missionaries, who fought there and in the Czech Republic with Catholic influences, contributed to the development of the Slavic alphabet and the translation of Christian cult books into the Slavic language. Thus, Kievan Rus received writing in the Slavic language. Already under Vladimir, an attempt was made to organize a school. The students were forcibly chosen from among the children of the "people's child", i.e. from the upper layers of the household.

Baptism had a huge impact on the cultural life of the country, in particular on the development of technology in Kievan Rus under the influence of Greek Christianity. In agriculture, it was expressed in a significant increase in the technique of horticulture. This was undoubtedly facilitated by the increased consumption of vegetables, which was stimulated both by the numerous fasts established by Christian ascetic teachings and by the requirements of monastic life. The fact that, to a large extent, the culture of many vegetables was brought from Byzantium along with the Studium charter, shows the origin of the names of many of them.

Even more obvious is the influence of Byzantine Christianity in the field of building technology. We got acquainted with the stone construction in Kyiv on the example of churches that were built by order of the princes by Greek architects. From them we learned the techniques of laying walls, removing vaults and dome coverings, using columns or stone pillars to support them, etc. The method of laying the oldest Kiev and Novgorod churches is Greek. It is no coincidence that the names of building materials in the Old Russian language are all borrowed from the Greeks. And the first stone buildings of a secular nature, like a stone tower, were probably built by the same Greek architects who built churches, and that the oldest building of this type was attributed by legend to the first Christian princess, Olga.

The adoption of Christianity had the same influence on the development of crafts. The technique of stone carving, as shown by the ornamentation of the marble capitals of St. Sophia Cathedral with intertwining leaves and crosses and the tomb of Yaroslav in the style of ancient Christian sarcophagi, was borrowed from Byzantium for church purposes. Greek mosaics began to be used to decorate church buildings and, perhaps, palaces. The same must be said about fresco painting. If in the field of mosaics and frescoes Kievan Rus remained for a long time dependent on Greek masters, then “in some types of art industry, Russian students, - notes I. Grabar, - caught up with their Greek teachers, so it is difficult to distinguish cloisonné works from Byzantine ones. samples." Such are the works on enamel (enamel) and filigree (filigree). However, the Russian works show "a well-assimilated style of Byzantine designs, and their subject matter is in most cases ecclesiastical".

The influence of Byzantine baptism was especially pronounced in the artistic field. Striking in their artistic value, samples of the architectural art of Kievan Rus from the first times of Christianity, inspired by the best examples of Byzantine construction from the era of its heyday, have survived to us.

The baptism of Russia introduced it in a close way not only into the family of Christian Slavic states, but in general into the system of Christian countries of Europe with their cultural achievements. Russian culture has been enriched by the achievements of the countries of the Middle East, which have deep historical traditions, and, of course, by the cultural treasures of Byzantium. Russia benefited from an alliance with Byzantium, but at the same time, Russia continued to have to constantly resist the political and ecclesiastical claims of the Byzantine Empire, which sought to subordinate Russia to its supremacy. Nevertheless, Vladimir, the baptizer of Russia, felt his power to be full-fledged among other Christian peoples.

The choice fell on Christianity, because: