The economic situation in Russia without propaganda. From information to nuclear

The Russian lands devastated by the Mongols were forced to recognize vassal dependence on the Golden Horde. The ongoing struggle waged by the Russian people against the invaders forced the Mongol-Tatars to abandon the creation of their own administrative authorities in Russia. Rus' retained its statehood. This was facilitated by the presence in Rus' of its own administration and church organization. In addition, the lands of Rus' were unsuitable for nomadic cattle breeding, unlike, for example, Central Asia, the Caspian region, and the Black Sea region.

In 1243, the brother of the great Vladimir prince Yuri, who was killed on the Sit River, Yaroslav Vsevolodovich (1238-1246) was called to the khan's headquarters. Yaroslav recognized vassal dependence on the Golden Horde and received a label (letter) for the great reign of Vladimir and a golden tablet (“paidow”), a kind of pass through the Horde territory. Following him, other princes flocked to the Horde.

To control the Russian lands, the institution of Baskakov governors was created - leaders of military detachments of the Mongol-Tatars who monitored the activities of the Russian princes. Denunciation of the Baskaks to the Horde inevitably ended either with the prince being summoned to Sarai (often he was deprived of his label, or even his life), or with a punitive campaign in the rebellious land. Suffice it to say that only in the last quarter of the 13th century. 14 similar campaigns were organized in Russian lands.

Some Russian princes, trying to quickly get rid of vassal dependence on the Horde, took the path of open armed resistance. However, the forces to overthrow the power of the invaders were still not enough. So, for example, in 1252 the regiments of the Vladimir and Galician-Volyn princes were defeated. Alexander Nevsky, from 1252 to 1263 Grand Duke of Vladimir, understood this well. He set a course for the restoration and growth of the economy of the Russian lands. The policy of Alexander Nevsky was also supported by the Russian church, which saw the greatest danger in Catholic expansion, and not in the tolerant rulers of the Golden Horde.

In 1257, the Mongol-Tatars undertook a population census - “recording the number.” Besermen (Muslim merchants) were sent to the cities, and they were in charge of collecting tribute. The size of the tribute (“output”) was very large, only the “tsar’s tribute”, i.e. the tribute in favor of the khan, which was first collected in kind and then in money, amounted to 1,300 kg of silver per year. The constant tribute was supplemented by “requests” - one-time exactions in favor of the khan. In addition, deductions from trade duties, taxes for “feeding” the khan’s officials, etc. went to the khan’s treasury. In total there were 14 types of tribute in favor of the Tatars.

Population census in the 50-60s of the 13th century. marked by numerous uprisings of Russian people against the Baskaks, Khan's ambassadors, tribute collectors, and census takers. In 1262, the inhabitants of Rostov, Vladimir, Yaroslavl, Suzdal, and Ustyug dealt with the tribute collectors, the Besermen. This led to the fact that the collection of tribute from the end of the 13th century. was handed over to the Russian princes.

Russian lands and principalities in the second half of the 13th - first half of the 15th century. Between the Horde and Lithuania.

By the middle of the 13th century. Russian lands found themselves between the Golden Horde and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. In the Baltic States, on lands inhabited by Lithuanian tribes (Zemaitians - Juds, Aukshaits, Yatvagi, Curonians, etc.), an early feudal state arose. Prince Mindovg is considered its founder. Russian chronicles first mention it in 1219. From the moment of its inception, the Lithuanian state included lands in the Neman River basin (the cities of Novogrudok, Grodno, etc.), the so-called Black Rus'. From the ancient Russian people of the period of pre-Mongol Rus', the Belarusian people began to separate.

The Principality of Galicia became part of Poland; the lands of southern and southwestern Rus' (Kyiv, Volyn, Podolia, etc.) after the conquest by the Mongols paid tribute to the Horde. However, due to the strengthening of the Lithuanian state after the battle of Blue Vola (a tributary of the Southern Bug) with the Horde (1363), these lands became part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Russia. On the lands of southwestern Rus', the Ukrainian nation took shape.

The center of Russian political life moved to northeastern (Vladimir-Suzdal) and northwestern (Novgorod) Rus'. On this territory, on the basis of the Old Russian nationality, the Great Russian (Russian) nationality took shape.

The apogee of the fragmentation of northeastern Rus' occurred at the turn of the XIII-XIV centuries. Then, on the lands of the Vladimir-Suzdal principality, 14 appanage principalities were formed (Suzdal, Rostov, Yaroslav-skos, Tver, Moscow, Pereyaslav, etc.), in turn, divided into even smaller possessions. The rulers of the Golden Horde considered the Grand Duke of Vladimir to be the head of northeastern Rus'. He was supposed to be the eldest in the family from the descendants of Vsevolod the Big Nest. However, the appanage princes soon violated this order, entering into the struggle for the great reign of Vladimir, based on the power of their principalities and the disposition of the Horde khans towards them. In this struggle for supremacy among the Russian lands, the Tver and Moscow princes were most active.

FROM BAPTISM TO THE MONGOL Yoke

It is not known for certain when the Baptism of Rus' took place. The first preacher of the teachings of Christ in Rus' was the Apostle Andrew, nicknamed the First-Called. This is what it says in The Tale of Bygone Years. The chronicle says that the Apostle Andrew was heading from Crimea to Rome. But his path lay through Novgorod and the Varangian lands. The Apostle sailed along the Dnieper to those mountains where the city of Kyiv was subsequently founded. He blessed these mountains and placed a cross with the words: “Do you see these mountains? As if the grace of God will shine on these mountains: the city will be great and the churches raised by God will be many.” Since the 80s of the 11th century, the cult of St. Andrew the First-Called began to spread throughout Rus'.

According to Byzantine documents, the first Baptism of Rus' took place in 867. Photius was the Patriarch of Constantinople at that time. In the “District Epistle,” Photius wrote that the “so-called Russians,” who had recently dared to “raise their hands” against the Roman Empire and attacked Constantinople in 860, now changed the pagan faith, “in which they were primarily kept,” for “pure Christian teaching, becoming one of our devoted friends,” and even “accepted a shepherd and perform Christian rituals with great care.”

This is stated in the Nikon Chronicle of the 16th century, as well as in the Western Russian edition of the Russian Chronograph. It is alleged that the Kyiv prince Askold was baptized. However, scientists question the version of Askold’s baptism, putting forward strong arguments against it. Nevertheless, the baptism of 867 is recognized by all reliable fact. It remains unclear which particular Rus' was baptized - Baltic, Black Sea, Don, or still Kiev. Detailed analysis Byzantine documents indicate that Black Sea Rus' was baptized.

The first Christians appeared in Kyiv in the first half of the 10th century. Written sources indicate that in 947 a Christian community functioned in Kyiv, which included the squads of Prince Igor. Later, in 959, Princess Olga was baptized in Constantinople. Under Prince Vladimir Svyatoslavovich (960 - 1015), Christianity became the state religion in Kievan Rus. This happened at the end of the 10th century. The Baptism of Kievan Rus is described in the Tale of Bygone Years, where it dates back to between 986 and 989. Various sources called different places, where Prince Vladimir was baptized. These are Kyiv, Korsun (Chersonese) and Vasiliev.

It is important for us to know in what form the teaching of Christ came to Rus'. Not everything is reliable here either. There are different versions.

Historical documents that appeared before the 14th century provide little information about the Christian clergy in Kyiv. There is practically no information about the metropolitans in Kyiv before the 13th – 14th centuries. If they existed and played an important role in political life, then this would not go unnoticed.

Experts do not rule out that Christianity came to Kievan Rus from Bulgaria even before the See of Constantinople arose in Kyiv. It is believed that from 972 to 1018 the Russian Orthodox Church, centered in Kyiv, was subject to the patriarchate, which was located in Ohrid, Bulgaria.

The Christian Church at that time had not yet divided (documentedly) into Catholic and Orthodox. There was a struggle between the Western and Eastern churches. S.V. Perevezentsev draws attention to the fact that the Russian Orthodox Church borrowed a lot from the Western (Catholic) Church. If we talk about formalities, then these are the concepts of “church”, “altar”, “lamb”, “shepherd”, “cross”. The tradition of paying taxes to the church in the form of “tithes” also came from the West. A church was built in Kyiv, called "Tithe". But this does not mean that Christianity in Kyiv was founded by the popes. Not at all.

The true teaching of Christ would be most consistent with the spirit of the Slavs, their tradition, community and democracy. But by that time it was pretty distorted. This applied to both Catholicism and Orthodoxy. Close to the teachings of Christ was the Irish-British Church. It developed among the Celtic population of the British Isles around the 3rd century. The features remained here for a very long time early Christianity. First of all, the church hierarchy was not recognized here. In Ireland and Britain, monasteries were the centers of religious life. Monastery abbots were superior to bishops. The main thing is that the democratic principles on which the entire teaching of Christ is built were observed. Remember how Christ, after washing the feet of his disciples-apostles, said: “Whoever wants to become higher than others, make him a servant.” So in the Irish-British Church, each church community chose a priest by voting. Nobody appointed priests from above. Experts note that “Irish Christianity itself was brighter and more optimistic, without Eastern mysticism and asceticism, but also without Catholic pragmatism.”

Monasteries in the Irish-British Church built their work on the basic principle of the teachings of Christ - “help your neighbor.”

The monks of the Irish-British Church cared about “purity of heart,” which is necessary for the salvation of the soul and comprehension of the Lord, through selfless service to people, as well as limiting oneself for the sake of others. Unfortunately, this principle was not accepted by the fathers of the Russian Orthodox Church. They acted exactly the opposite - selflessly they served only own interests to strengthen their power for the purpose of enrichment. They limited others (in everything) for their own sake.

The monks of the Irish-British Church were the only ones in Europe who spoke Greek and Hebrew. They were engaged in translations of Christian literature into different languages. They also translated into Latin. The teachings of Christ have always been perceived with optimism, with hope for the best. It made the woman completely free. By the way, it was women who were the most active disseminators of the teachings of Christ in the first decades. Christ never reproached women for anything, even harlots. He knew well about original sin, but he never blamed women for it, did not put them in a special, degraded position. Only the Russian Orthodox Church did this, which considered woman the source, the cause of the fall of mankind, the vessel of sin. The entire teaching of Christ, as we have already said, is permeated with the light of love and forgiveness. There is no place for fear, intimidation, or violence. The Russian Orthodox Church has built its relations with the people on the principles of fear, coercion, enslavement, even murder.

The Irish-British Church successfully spread the true teachings of Christ throughout Europe. Thousands of missionaries worked in Europe in the 6th – 8th centuries. They brought the teachings of Christ to the tribes of the Frisians and Saxons (North Sea coast), the Alemanni and Bavarians (Southern Germany), and the inhabitants of the Middle Danube, Pannonia and Moravia. The teaching preached by the missionaries spread very successfully because it corresponded to the traditional Slavic worldview. The fact that there is no rigid church hierarchy in the teachings of Christ was fully consistent with the principles of Slavic communal life.

Another important point that the Russian Orthodox Church should have heeded even today is that Irish monks everywhere introduced worship in the understandable, modern language of a given tribe or people. If a tribe did not have a written language, the monks created it themselves.

If true Christianity with its principles of democracy (community) and love for one's neighbor had come to Russia a thousand years ago (it would have been consistent with our previous history, morality, traditions), then we would have remained free people and would not have plunged into a thousand-year slavery, when, on pain of death, the church controlled everything, even intimate relationships church-married husband and wife. Church slavery permeated the people not only physically (hundreds and thousands of villages, along with peasants, were slaves of monasteries), but also spiritually.

But, unfortunately, neither the Eastern nor the Western churches could calmly tolerate the proximity of true Christianity. Both of them have long learned to extract huge profits from the teachings of Christ. They developed the concept of the fear of God and the infallibility of the holy fathers, since they are supposedly the representatives of God on earth. Together they destroyed the Irish-British Church. At first they simply hounded her, accusing her of heresies. And then they pushed out European continent. At the end of the 11th century, Pope Gregory VII anathematized the Irish-British Church. That was the end. The monasteries were rebuilt as Catholic ones, and there were no more exponents of the true teachings of Christ.

Russia had another opportunity to receive the true teaching of Christ. We mean the Cyril and Methodius Church. It is usually called a tradition rather than a church, since it was not officially independent. Brothers Cyril (before accepting monasticism, Constantine) and Methodius were Slavic educators.

Their father Leo held the position of assistant military commander in Thessaloniki, the brothers’ mother was Greek. Thessaloniki (Solun) was surrounded Slavic tribes, therefore Cyril and Methodius knew the Slavic language from childhood.

The youngest son Constantine was born in 827. He was a very gifted boy. When he was 15 years old, their father Lev died. At this time, Constantine was invited to Constantine to visit the six-year-old Emperor Michael, with the hope that he would have a good influence on the youth sovereign. The inquisitive Konstantin had the opportunity to “improve in science.”

The Patriarch of Constantinople at that time was a learned monk, the Sicilian St. Methodius. He suffered for Orthodoxy (died in 846).

But during his lifetime, the talented learned monk tried his best to spread education. Thanks to his initiative, a higher school was opened at the palace. Konstantin studied there. Outstanding scientists taught there, in particular famous Leo. Philosopher who was previously Metropolitan of Thessaloniki. Since 857, the famous Patriarch Photius, who had a huge influence on Constantine, also taught here.

The gifted Constantine had brilliant prospects at court. It was possible to marry the goddaughter of the tutor of Tsar Theoktistus. It was he who discharged Konstantin from Thessaloniki as a gifted, promising young man. Theoktist appointed Constantine librarian of St. Sophia. But Konstantin himself did not like such a luxurious life. He had another task - he felt it. Around 850 he was ordained a priest and soon retired to a monastery on the Sea of ​​Marmara (the “narrow” sea). After some time, he was returned to the capital and appointed teacher of philosophy at the court school of Caesar Vardas. The king knew the capable Constantine well and therefore persuaded him to enter into a discussion with the deposed Patriarch John the Grammar, who defended the thesis that the use of icons contradicts the teachings of Christ. The grammarian was skillful and intelligent and practically remained invincible in various debates on philosophical and church topics. The king was not mistaken - Constantine won the discussion with Grammar. From that time on, Philosopher began to be added to the name Constantine.

In 851, Constantine the Philosopher was sent to Baghdad to the Saracens. There he had to debate with local sages on the following topics: “The Essence of the Holy Trinity,” as well as “The Incarnation of the Lord Jesus Christ from the Virgin Mary.” The Saracens were defeated in these disputes, but decided to take revenge - they tried to poison Constantine. In such discussions, Constantine improved his mind and understanding of the essence of faith. In particular, he expanded his knowledge of religion and the study of languages ​​(especially Arabic).

Constantine's elder brother Methodius was also a very gifted and highly moral person. In addition, he had a stately appearance. The king appointed him prince (voivode) of the Strum region in Macedonia. His service began in 843 and lasted ten years. During this time, he experienced life with all its flaws. He wanted to live away from this bustle and occupy his mind with more important issues. He retired to a monastery on Mount Olympus. There were several monasteries there. Methodius devoted himself not only and not so much to prayers, but also to the study of the most valuable books. After some time, Konstantin joined him. Both of them prepared themselves for future educational work.

At this time, ambassadors from the Khazars came to Emperor Michael. The Khazars were of Ural-Chips origin. Starting from the 3rd – 4th centuries, they lived near the mouth of the Volga along the shores of the Caspian Sea. They extended their power to the Dnieper and even to the Oka. Most of them were Muslims, but there were also many who professed Christianity and Judaism. At the end of the 8th century, the Jewish faith became most popular among the Khazar nobility - nobles and princes (“khagans”). The delegation that arrived in Byzantium asked Emperor Michael to send confessors of the Christian faith to the Khazars. They had to compete with the Jews and Saracens in religious disputes.

The emperor sent Constantine and Methodius to debates. The brothers were in no hurry. On the way to the Khazars, they lived for six months in Chersonesus (Korsun) in the Crimea. Here Constantine improved his knowledge of the Hebrew language. Here Constantine read Samaritan books. The historical documents literally say the following: “He (Constantine) found the Gospel and the Psalter, written in Russian letters.” Please note that this was before Cyril (Constantine) and Methodius invented Slavic alphabet– Cyrillic. Isn't it strange? We have already written in several books that the Russians had an alphabet thousands of years before Cyril and Methodius.

For three years, the brothers Constantine and Methodius successfully preached Christianity among the Khazars, proving its superiority over Judaism. During this time they baptized about 200 people.

When the brothers returned to Constantinople, Constantine remained at the Church of the Holy Apostles. Methodius was offered the episcopal see. But he abandoned it and became the abbot of the Polychronium Monastery. Methodius did not have holy rank, but at that time it was allowed to be an abbot without rank. Photius was the Patriarch of Constantinople at that time.

In 862, Emperor Michael received ambassadors from the Moravian prince Rostislav. The prince reported that his people had adopted Christianity, and therefore he asked the emperor to send a teacher who would explain the essence of the Christian faith in a Slavic language understandable to the Moravians. It is clear that Emperor Michael, with the approval of Patriarch Photius, sent the brothers Constantine and Methodius on this mission.

At that time, the Western (Catholic) and Eastern (Orthodox) churches competed in Europe. The missionary brothers felt this confrontation between the Christian churches. The fact is that Moravia was part of the empire of Charlemagne. It was he who baptized the people of this country. At the direction of Charlemagne, the Bishop of Salzburg (he was responsible for Moravia) and the Bishop of Passau sent their missionaries there. But services for the Slavs took place in a language incomprehensible to them. German. Prince Rostislav, although he was placed on the throne by the Germans (King Louis the German), fought to the best of his ability against foreign power. And in 855 he completely withdrew from the kingdom of Charlemagne. Therefore, he turned to Orthodox Byzantium in defiance of Catholic Rome.

Constantine and Methodius arrived in Moravia in the spring of 863 and settled in Devin (Valegrad). The missionary brothers organized services in the Slavic language, created icons, successfully preaching Christianity. The Germans did not like the brothers' activities. The Pope didn't like her either. Let us remember that there was no complete, official separation of the Catholic and Orthodox churches at that time.

Pope Nicholas I was extremely dissatisfied with the actions of Patriarch Photius. He ordered the missionary brothers to come to Rome. It was impossible to disobey without risking life. After a three-year stay in Moravia, they set off, stopping in Pannonia, where the nephew of Prince Rostislav Kocel reigned. Prince Kocel studied with Constantine and Methodius using Slavic books. The brothers moved to Rome not alone, but with a group of disciples. It was replenished by 50 students from Pannonia. In Venice, the brothers were met with hostility by representatives of the Western Church. There was a reason for this. And very serious. Westerners argued that there were inscriptions on the cross of Christ in only three languages: Greek, Latin and Hebrew. There was no inscription in the Slavic language, so the missionary brothers allegedly seriously sinned against Christianity by preaching in Slavic.

While the brothers were on their way, the Pope died (867). He was replaced by Adrian II, who was softer and more capable of compromise. He received the missionary brothers with due honor. Moreover, they brought the relics of the third Pope, Saint Clement, which they found in Chersonesus (Korsun). Let us remember that Clement was exiled to work in the quarries and drowned in the sea around 100 AD. In Rome the relics of St. Clementius were placed in the church named after him.

Attitudes towards missionaries were determined by the confrontation between the Western and Eastern churches. During the absence of the brothers in Constantinople, Vasily the Macedonian became emperor, Patriarch Photius was deposed. His place was taken by Ignatius, loyal to Rome. The Pope at this time supported the western Carolingians. The Moravian prince was hostile to the East German Carolingians. And this was good for dad.

That is why Pope Adrian greeted the missionary brothers with honor. The disciples brought by the brothers were ordained deacons and priests. Methodius then became a hieromonk. The pope made concessions: the papal council approved the orders introduced by Constantine in the Slavic countries. It was allowed to perform canonical hours and divine services in the Slavic language. But these were the last days of Constantine - on February 14, 869, he died, having lived only 42 years. We know Constantine as Kirill - 50 days before his death, he accepted the schema with the name Kirill. Methodius asked to bury his brother in his homeland, as his mother bequeathed to them. But the pope refused this request, and Saint Cyril was buried in the Church of Saint Clement in Rome.

Methodius was consecrated bishop of Moravia and Pannonia. The Pope sent him to Pannonia - Prince Kocelj asked for this. Bulgaria at this time was subordinate to the Eastern Church (Byzantium). As for Moravia, the usual event in the struggle for power took place there: Prince Rostislav was overthrown by his nephew Svyatopolk and handed over to the Germans. The Moravian prince began to serve the Germans, and the pope made plans on how to win over the people of Moravia and, of course, Pannonia. Therefore, the pope kindly allowed services to be held in the Slavic language, but during the liturgy the Gospel and the “Apostle” should first be read in Latin. Only then in Slavic.

Methodius successfully began his activities in a new field. He settled in Moosburg near Lake Blaten. However, after some time, the Bishop of Salzburg sharply opposed him, believing that Pannonia was under his jurisdiction. In 871, he ordered Methodius to be imprisoned in a prison in Swabia, and he spent two and a half years there. Only the new Pope John VIII in 874 freed Methodius from prison, where the Bishop of Salzburg had completely illegally hidden him. It is illegal if only because Pannonia, as part of Illyria, was under the direct jurisdiction of Rome.

After his release from prison, Methodius returned to Moravia, settled in Velegrad and continued his missionary work. He did not limit himself to Moravia and promoted Christianity in Krakow Poland and the Czech Republic. The seeds of this propaganda, as historians write, fell into Slovakia and Carpathian Rus (Ugric and Chervonnaya), as well as Serbia and Slovenia.

The faithful servant of the Germans, the usurper prince Svyatopolk, pursued Methodius and sent denunciations to the pope against him. In 879, Methodius was summoned to the pope in Rome, where he was interrogated at a meeting of bishops. The Pope announced his decision - Archbishop Methodius of the Moravian Church was recognized as “Orthodox in all church teachings.” He was returned to Moravia. Svyatopolk appointed the German Viching as suffragan bishop in the city of Nitra. Methodius felt his death approaching and was in a hurry to complete the translation of the sacred books. Methodius died on April 6, 885. The German henchman Svyatopolk expelled the followers of Methodius from Moravia, and the Pope supported him. He wrote about Methodius: “...we completely reject him.”

The Christian teaching, spread by Cyril and Methodius, took root in Bulgaria. Tsar Boris did not want to depend on Byzantium. He did not obey the Pope. With the help of Methodius' students, he developed active educational activities in the Slavic language. Boris's work was continued by his second son Simeon. In 899 he installed Saint Clement as bishop. Saint Clement prepared worthy people and numerous priests, deacons, and readers. In 907, the Bulgarian Tsar Simeon ended the church's dependence on Constantinople. He declared Metropolitan Leonty of Dorostol the patriarch of the Bulgarian church. But the golden age of the Orthodox national culture Bulgaria was short-lived. Bulgaria again fell under Byzantine rule.

From Moravia, Christianity spread to the Czech Republic (Bohemia). However, it did not last there very long - Catholicism, which was gaining strength year by year, ousted Orthodoxy from the Czech Republic. The last to fall was the Sazan Orthodox monastery. This was in 1097. The same thing happened in Poland. Already in 1025, King Mieczysław II expelled the last Orthodox priests and monks from Poland. In “The History of the Russian Church” N. Talberg wrote: “It was especially important for the destinies of Russia that the great work of Saints Cyril and Methodius was consolidated and developed in Bulgaria, closest to it, which transferred the Orthodox Church to it. Slavic culture" We do not agree with this opinion. All the facts indicate that the Orthodoxy that came to Rus' was not the one that Cyril and Methodius preached and which was quite close to the true teachings of Christ. Unfortunately, this teaching did not reach Russia. For the princes, Byzantine Orthodoxy was more convenient. But it was also greatly distorted, replacing the love preached by Christ with the universal fear of God. The church fathers considered themselves God's representatives on earth. Therefore, it was about fear of the church. The Synod and church judges burned unwanted members of the flock alive, starved and smoked them, tore out their nostrils, separated husband and wife who had lived together for many years, and approved the landowner's right to the first (wedding) night. This list can be continued, and more will be said about this in the book.

Relations between Rus' and Byzantium, which led to the Baptism of Rus', developed as follows. The Slavs traded with Byzantium, carried out raids from time to time, and some even served in the imperial troops.

On June 18, 860, the Russians raided Constantinople and approached its walls. Patriarch Photius writes about this, who in fear carried the miraculous robe of the Mother of God along the city walls. The Rosses were amazed by this miracle and retreated. Moreover, after this they sent an embassy to the emperor and asked to be baptized. Photius writes that then the princes Askold and Dir, who reigned in Kyiv for 20 years (862 - 882), were baptized. But Oleg Rurik killed Askold and Dir in Kyiv and took their place. At a later time, the Church of St. Nicholas was erected on the site of Askold’s grave.

This treacherous murder of Christians did not prevent Prince Oleg from trading with Byzantium. In 910 he signed a profitable trade treaty. According to the agreement, Russian traders had the right to live for several months at the monastery of St. Mamma in Constantinople.

Prince Igor continued cooperation with Byzantium. A new trade agreement was signed. Historical documents indicate that in 946 there were already baptized and unbaptized populations in Kyiv. Baptized Kiev residents swore to comply with the agreements in the Kyiv Church of the Holy Prophet Elijah. At that time, Christianity was not yet the state religion in Kyiv. It is believed that Prince Igor himself was a Christian at heart, but his power was not sufficient to baptize the entire population by force. Igor was killed by the Drevlyans in 946.

Prince Igor's wife, Princess Olga, was baptized between 954 and 957 and was named Elena. In 957, Olga traveled to Constantinople. Emperor Constantine Porphyrogenitus (Porphyrogenitus) described this in his narrative. Princess Olga survived her husband by 23 years. She built churches in Kyiv, spread Christian teaching, and raised her grandchildren. She reposed in 969 and was buried in a Christian manner. In the chronicle, Saint Princess Olga is called “the morning star, foretelling the light of day; she shone like the full moon in the night, she shone among the infidels like a pearl.”

After Igor, his son Svyatoslav Igorevich reigned (946 - 972). He did not accept Christianity. The goal of his life was war for the sake of war. After Svyatoslav, his eldest son Yaropolk reigned. He died in 978. Vladimir Svyatoslavich defeated his brother Yaropolk and took the throne in Kyiv. It was Prince Vladimir who created the pantheon of pagan gods on the hill in front of his palace. But politics led Vladimir to Byzantine Christianity. Events developed as follows.

Vladimir went to war against Byzantium. He took Korsun (Chersonese) and threatened to go further. Previously, he asked Anna, the sister of Emperors Constantine and Vasily, to marry him. He was refused. Now the emperors agreed to this marriage. Naturally, the squad was baptized along with Vladimir. Vladimir returned to Kyiv with Princess Anna, accompanied by Korsun priests. They brought with them to Kyiv particles of the relics of St. Clement and his student Thebes.

Therefore, Prince Vladimir “God himself ordered” to baptize his subjects. He did this according to the principle “those who are not with me are against me.” The population of Kyiv was driven into the Dnieper, and they were baptized. This Vladimir baptism took place in 988.

But Christians were known in Rus' long before this. Historians claim that when Christians of the Cyril and Methodius persuasion were expelled from Great Moravia, a significant part of them moved to Kyiv.

Vladimir forced Constantinople to accept his terms by military force, since he did not intend to submit to Byzantium. Despite the fact that priests from Korsun and Constantinople began to serve in the Tithe Church in Kyiv, the services were held in the Slavic language. The basic ideology of the first Christian communities in Kyiv corresponded to the ideas of Cyril and Methodius, that is, it was very close to the teachings of Christ. There was no place for the fear of God, there was no enslavement of one's neighbor, there was no extremely humiliating position of women in society. This appeared through the efforts of the Russian Orthodox Church much later. And then Kyiv tried to maintain its political independence from Byzantium, although it strived for full cooperation with it. True cooperation can only be between equals, in in this case equal in strength. Kyiv tried to maintain this balance. Therefore, he did not allow the copying of Byzantine rules in the organization of the church. And not only for this reason - the Kyiv Christians were of a democratic persuasion (Cyril and Methodius, and perhaps the influence of the ideas of the Irish-British church was also reflected). Even more important was that the rules of community life among the Slavs were built exclusively on a democratic basis. Elections prevailed everywhere, they lived in communities, which ensured social security, women had equal rights with men both in the family and in society. This is why the first bishops in Kyiv were elected by members of the Christian community. They were not appointed by Constantinople. The church was completely subordinate to the prince, but it built its work and structure on democratic, communal principles.

Let us remember that there has not yet been a final legal division of the churches into Catholic and Orthodox. In the Christianity that Cyril and Methodius preached, there was no dividing line between the Western and Eastern churches, which was dictated purely by politics (the struggle for power) and which has survived to this day. Now, after a thousand years, we understand that the two parts of Christianity, in their struggle with each other, not only completely departed from the true teachings of Christ, but also destroyed each other. Yes, they destroyed it. Only their material shell remains. There is no spirit, a common spirit of Christianity that would unite not only individual nations, but the entire Christian world. Now they are trying to compensate for the lack of this spirit by increasing the number of parishes, expanding the scope of their non-church business, etc. But one should not be confused with one another. Spirit is spirit, and money is money. Only the spirit can defeat money, but not the other way around. Many people now talk about two civilizations - Christian and Muslim. Some even argue that Christian civilization is more high level than Muslim. In fact, no Christian civilization has existed for a long time. There is no single Christian organism that would be able to protect its individual parts. Proof? As much as you like. When Christians in Yugoslavia were bombed by other Christians of high civilization, none of them Christendom didn't stand up for them. Why? Yes, because there is no single, healthy, living Christian world, there is no Christian civilization as such, while Islamic civilization exists and is on the rise in its development. Despite all the ulcers on her body, she is a single, integral organism and will remain so if she can get rid of the cancer of extremism and terrorism. Christian civilization has nothing to get rid of, since it is too late - it has long been a corpse, dust from a rotten, once healthy tree. For a thousand years this tree was still alive. Further affairs of both the Orthodox and Catholic churches determined our current state, a state of discord, mutual strife, and intra-Christian wars. We convince ourselves that we can live without the spirit, that the church has nothing to do with the state, etc. But you don’t have to be very smart and very educated to understand that this is nonsense. The state cannot think only about the stomach of the people, giving their soul to an unknown person. The essence of a people is not in the stomach, but in the soul. Therefore, it was the church that, over a thousand years, led Russia to complete serfdom and enslavement own people. This was a turning point for history, for the future of Russia. We mean a change in the vector of Russian Orthodoxy from the teachings of Christ, democracy (corresponding to the Slavic tradition) and respect for family and women to the teaching of the fear of God, which replaced love with fear, helping others with their enslavement, mercy with physical destruction. This “moment” of replacing one with the other ended in the 13th – 14th centuries. At this time, the Byzantine interpretation of Christianity, multiplied by Russian lawlessness, was fully established in Rus'.

Why did such a sad turn for the Russian people take place? Mainly for political reasons. Initially, from the moment of baptism, the church in Kyiv completely submitted to the prince. She was a tool in his hands. From the second half of the 11th century, the situation forced the Kyiv princes to flee under the wing of Constantinople. It was necessary to escape, first of all, from Rome, which had very successfully taken over Europe and was aiming at Rus'. By the Act of 1050, Catholicism and Orthodoxy were legally (and territorially) separated. Rus' (with its consent) went to Constantinople. Kievan Rus became one of the many metropolises of the Byzantine Church. True, the first Byzantine metropolitan appeared in Kyiv before that, in 1037.

Perhaps there was no need to recognize the power of Byzantium over itself. After all, Kievan Rus in the 11th - early 12th centuries entered its heyday.

Yaroslav the Wise (974 – 1053), Vladimir Monomakh (1053 – 1125) and subsequent princes who occupied the Kiev throne significantly expanded the boundaries of Kievan Rus. Influence Kyiv State the situation in Europe has increased significantly.

The transition from the truly Christian Cyril and Methodius ideology to the reactionary (directed against the individual and family) Byzantine ideology was accompanied by an irreconcilable struggle, but the forces were unequal. In the camp of true Christians there were also pagans with their own vision of the world and communal structure of life. Chronicles report that the Slavs (pagans) defended their rights, which they had enjoyed for hundreds of years, with weapons in their hands. The church and princes acted with sword and word. The word was supposed to discredit pagan faith and morality (lies were used very widely) and exalt the new morality, which was based on fear, called the fear of God.

Priests of the Cyril and Methodius persuasion served in the Church of the Tithes in Kyiv, which was founded by Prince Vladimir the Saint. Metropolitans Hilarion and Kliment Smolyatich actively defended the principles of true Christianity. Metropolitan Hilarion in 1051, during the reign of Yaroslav the Wise, was elected at the council of bishops by voting. He was Russian by origin. Before him and after him, metropolitans were appointed from Byzantium. They were Greeks. Yaroslav the Wise tried to revive the tradition of the pre-Byzantine Russian Church, when the metropolitan was elected by all the bishops. In addition, he demonstrated the independence of Kyiv from Byzantium. But Hilarion held the position of metropolitan for only three years. After the division of churches in 1054, when the influence of Byzantium on Kievan Rus increased, he was replaced by a Byzantine protege. The following treatises by Hilarion are widely known: “The Sermon on Law and Grace”, “Prayer” and “Confession of Faith”. Christianity as presented by Metropolitan Hilarion is close to early Christianity, reflected in the Cyril and Methodius tradition. Hilarion believed that Rus' should take its most worthy place among other Christian states. He defended the independence of the path that Rus' would take, in comparison with both the West and the East. As for the introduced Byzantine Christianity, it settled in the Kyiv Metropolitan See (Byzantine, mystical-ascetic sense), as well as in the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery, which was founded in the 11th century by Anthony of the Pechersk. Under Abbot Theodosius, the Pechersk Monastery became a stronghold of the most reactionary branch of Byzantine Christianity. What was his reactionary nature? Christianity, as interpreted by Cyril and Methodius, was perceived as Good News. Read the Gospels (the Good News) and you will see that they are a hymn to life on earth, a joyful hymn. This hymn, this Message is permeated with faith in man, in his rebirth for the better, faith in the salvation of any sinner, faith that all of us, as Christ taught, are children (sons and daughters) of the Lord God. Therefore, he called the prayer that Christ gave us: “Our Father.”

The Byzantine ideologists of Christianity, who settled in the Pechersk Monastery (starting with Theodosius of Pechersk), laid the idea of ​​the fear of God as the basis of Christian teaching. They saw man's salvation in the test of the fear of the Lord. And they experienced this fear of the Russian people for many centuries. This was not difficult to do, since over time they gained unlimited power over people. The church fathers believed that the Lord sent His punishments and the fear of God to people in order to cleanse them of filth and save them from sins. But they themselves did not want to be among these people. They did everything to ensure a luxurious existence for themselves, not stopping at the enslavement of other Christians. It was beneficial for these others to suffer because it cleansed them of filth and freed them from sins. The church ministers themselves did not want to cleanse themselves and get rid of sins.

As for Theodosius himself, his activities and works fully express the basic principles of the Byzantine church, which were persistently transplanted onto Russian soil. Theodosius was the exponent of the mystical-ascetic Byzantine direction of Christianity. He is called the creator of the “Pechersk ideology”. This ideology was directed against the optimistic early Christianity. Theodosius and his Pechersk comrades forcibly introduced the idea of ​​asceticism (renunciation of everything earthly, worldly and carnal) into Russian spiritual life. This idea is fundamentally contrary to the teachings of Christ and early Russian Christianity.

The unnatural, pro-Byzantine ideology of the sinfulness of everything bodily led to many sad consequences in Rus'. These include mass castration (the fight against devilish temptations) and mass self-immolation (to defeat the carnal principle).

Under Abbot Theodosius of Pechersk, the monastery began to live according to the rules of the Byzantine Studite monastery, the rules of which were very strict. But Theodosius tried to outdo them. Many monks could not stand the unreasonably cruel tests and left. The abbot himself kicked some of them out. There remained fanatics like himself.

The worst thing in any religion, in any society, in any business is fanaticism. The fanatical Pechersk elders did everything they could to break ideas and traditions ancient Russian man. And not only in theological, but also in moral and ethical terms. The elders preached that serving God consisted of suffering and patience. But not every Christian can be saved, but only an ascetic, an ascetic who has rejected everything worldly. Only those who devote their entire lives only to prayers can be saved. There is nothing like this in the teachings of Christ. This position generally contradicts the teaching of Christ, who taught that faith without deeds is dead. About prayer, Christ said: “Do not be verbose.” Christ gave us one and only prayer, “Our Father.” This is clearly stated in the gospels.

The fanatical Pechersk elders demanded that those who wanted to be saved voluntarily, consciously torture their bodies, killing everything carnal (and therefore devilish) in themselves. The self-torture of the Pechersk monks, imposed by Theodosius and other elders, is very colorfully described in the treatise “Kievo-Pechersk Patericon”, which is a kind of monument to masochism.

It was necessary to self-torture one’s body under the influence of the fear of God in its Byzantine interpretation. Every monk had to be motivated to any action by fear, the fear of God. Theodosius instructed the cellarer of the monastery: “Have the fear of God before your eyes: try to immaculately complete the work entrusted to you in order to be worthy of a crown with Christ.”

In the daily prayer that Theodosius himself composed, he speaks about himself this way: “And without entering the Kingdom of Heaven and creating obstacles for you with his own...” In this, Theodosius was absolutely right - his perverted ideology, completely contrary to the teachings of Christ, closed the way to many Kingdom of heaven. And, of course, to himself.

Theodosius completely denied worldly life. She was all sinful. But he himself was not indifferent to her. He wanted unlimited power over everyone, so he demanded complete spiritual control of the church over secular power. The true purpose of the princes, according to Theodosius, is to protect the church, the Byzantine church with unlimited power in Rus'. No more, no less. Theodosius wrote about this to Prince Izyaslav Yaroslavich. It is quite natural that Theodosius not only preached, but also in practice realized a complete rejection of other religions. He especially hated his “brothers in Christ” - Catholics. To them he pronounces the final verdict: “And those living in another faith - either in the Latin, or in the Saracen, or in the Armenian - will not see eternal life.”

It is precisely such irreconcilable fanatics that threaten the entire earthly civilization in our time. They spent all the energy of Christianity on self-destruction. Therefore, modern Christians do not have a drop of true Christian spirit. Christianity has exhausted itself, having spent all its strength in hatred of its fellows.

The monks protested against the fanaticism of Theodosius. But in vain. He answered them like this: “If I remain silent because of your murmuring, pleasing you because of your weakness, then the stones will cry out.” All this did not prevent Theodosius from being canonized as a saint in 1108.

Theodosius tormented everyone with his holiness. Therefore, on May 27, 1147, Grand Duke Izyaslav Mstislavich appointed monk Clement from Smolensk (Smolyatich) as metropolitan in Kyiv. The issue was not agreed upon with the Patriarch of Constantinople. Clement was a monk of the Zarubsky monastery (near Kyiv). This was the second Russian metropolitan. Clement was worthy of this highest position in Rus'. The Ipatiev Chronicle says about him: “And there was a scribe and a philosopher, the likes of which never existed on Russian soil.” Clement fought against the dominance of Byzantine representatives in the Russian Church.

Unfortunately, not all Kyiv princes were patriots. Many preferred to serve Byzantium, deriving personal benefits from it. As soon as Prince Izyaslav Mstislavich died, Clement was removed. For this purpose, the Greek Constantine was sent from Constantinople to Kyiv. He ordered the expulsion of all the priests whom Clement had appointed. Whoever wanted to stay had to publicly renounce the Russian Metropolitan. And they renounced. They renounced a man, a teacher who defended the right of a Russian scribe to use not only theology, but also philosophy, even pagan philosophy. Justifying himself, he wrote: “Telling me: “You are expounding philosophy” - but what you write is very unfair. Christ said to the disciples and apostles: “To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom, but to others parables.” Isn’t my philosophy that I want to understand the miracles of Christ described by the Evangelist allegorically and spiritually?” Clement was accused of striving to understand the world created by God, and also of defending the human right to free will.

Free will given to a person God, Clement understands this: “And if we, being God’s creation, act as we want in the creature created by God, then what could be better for us, beloved, than to think especially about God, whose advice and wisdom our mind cannot in the least comprehend "

Clement, following the teachings of Christ, believes that everyone who believes in God and sincerely serves him can be saved. “Nothing is offended by the Lord, His sleepless eye sees everything, looks after everything, stands above everything, giving salvation to everyone,” wrote Clement. He clearly formulated the idea of ​​non-covetousness. In his opinion, true freedom is possible only when a person renounces property. The burden of property prevents you from directing all your efforts to spiritual development and self-improvement. This principle has always been very close to the Slavs.

Byzantine henchmen - metropolitans - influenced those around them not only with words, but also with the “sword”. Let's give an example. In Vladimir, Prince Andrei Bogolyubsky expelled the Byzantine bishop from the city and installed the Russian bishop Theodore in his place. But the Byzantine metropolitan in Kyiv, who had previously removed the Russian metropolitan Clement Smolyatich, considered this to be arbitrary. He demonstrated his power over the prince - he overturned his decision and executed the Russian bishop Theodore in 1169. Chronicles were also written in the Byzantine style. In them, for the sake of Byzantium, Bishop Theodore, who cares for the independence of Rus' and the Russian Church, is called nothing less than “false bishop Theodore.” This example shows how great the power of the Byzantine clergy was in Kievan Rus. By the end of the 12th century, the process of Byzantineization of the Russian Orthodox Church ended. The clear and humane principles of Christ's teaching (love for neighbors, mutual assistance, forgiveness) were replaced by diametrically opposed ones - the fear of God, the complete submission of the flock to the holy fathers, and in the future its enslavement.

A legitimate question arises: why did the independent state of Kievan Rus voluntarily surrender to Byzantium? But because it was no longer strong.

The church had its own morals. Let's give one example. The Pechersk monk Evstratiy was sold to a Jewish merchant in Crimea. The Jew demanded that the monk renounce Christ. When he refused, the Jew crucified the monk. In response to this, the Byzantine emperor Alexei Komnenos destroyed the entire Jewish community in Crimea. Such were the customs.

When Svyatopolk died in 1113, the people of Kiev plundered the houses of many boyars, the courtyard of the thousand Putyata and the shops of Jewish moneylenders. This was the first Jewish pogrom in Kyiv. The Kyiv boyars sent the metropolitan for Vladimir Monomakh. Vladimir was met in Kyiv with great joy and was recognized as the Grand Duke. Monomakh resolved the Jewish question in the following way: all their property remained with them, but Jews who came secretly were deprived of the protection of the law. They were denied residence rights. The authorities asked all Jews to immediately leave for where they came from. To ensure their safety along the way, the necessary escort was allocated. Monomakh and his son Yaropolk also dealt with the Polovtsians who lived west of the Don. The Polovtsians surrendered and became part of Rus'. They were called “their filthy ones” (the Latin word paganus means “pagan”). Those Polovtsians who lived beyond the Don (on the Volga and Kuban) were not their own. They were called "wild". But both of them helped the princes fight each other. The “wild” helped the Rostov-Suzdal princes, while “their” Polovtsians supported the princes of Volyn and Kyiv.

Monomakh was a good, wise ruler. But he ruled for only 12 years (from 1113 to 1125). His son Mstislav the Great also ruled successfully. He captured Polotsk, and annexed the Principality of Polotsk to the Russian land. He sent the Polotsk princes themselves to Byzantium.

It was a very short period when it seemed that the main problems had been solved and Rus' was united. But this was the last bright flash before the end. After the death of Mstislav, the end came instantly. The Polotsk princes returned from Byzantium, and Polotsk fell away from Kyiv. Then in 1135 Novgorod separated. The Novgorod Republic simply stopped sending money to Kyiv.

Mstislav's brother Yaropolk ruled in Kyiv. After his death in 1139, the throne was taken by his brother Vyacheslav. At this time, Prince of Chernigov Vsevolod (son of Oleg) attacked Kyiv. He kicked out Vyacheslav and declared himself Grand Duke. The princely branch of the Monomashichs opposed Vsevolod. Volyn supported them. Vyacheslav's nephew Izyaslav tried to return the Kiev throne to Monomakh, but was unable to overthrow Vsevolod. Vsevolod died in 1146. His brother Igor became prince in Kyiv. He was a mediocre ruler and very soon turned the majority of Kiev residents against himself. The grandson of Monomakh took advantage of this, who came from Volyn with the Polovtsians (“his own”). Prince Igor fled on horseback, but his horse got stuck in a swamp near the Lybid River. He was captured and imprisoned in a cut (a wooden cage without windows, doors or roof). His brother Svyatoslav Olgovich tried to save Igor. He gathered the necessary forces in Chernigov and moved towards Kyiv. Izyaslav’s warriors took Igor out of the cutting and tried to take him to the Church of Hagia Sophia. In this way they hoped to protect the prince from the revenge of the Kievites, since the Hagia Sophia Cathedral enjoyed the right of refuge. Here, as in certain temples of ancient Judea, violence was not allowed against any criminal. However, on the cathedral square, the people of Kiev recaptured the prince from his guards and literally trampled him underfoot. The prince's corpse was left here without burial. This was in 1147.

A war began between the Kyiv and Chernigov principalities. The Rostov-Suzdal land separated from Kievan Rus. The son of Monomakh, Yuri Dolgoruky, ruled there. At that time, he was the rightful head of the senior line of Monomashichs. Clashes between the princes were continuous. Yuri Dolgoruky was poisoned in 1157. The son of Yuri Dolgoruky, Andrei Yuryevich Bogolyubsky, inherited the Rostov-Suzdal principality.

In fact, the children of Monomakh fought with the grandson of Monomakh. They fought not for life, but for death. Uncles and nephews fought for the Kiev throne. By the beginning of the 13th century, Kievan Rus had broken up into several independent states. North-Eastern Rus', as well as the south-western lands (Volyn, Kiev region and Galicia) became independent. The Chernigov principality was ruled by the Olgovichi and Davidovichi. Smolensk, as well as the Turovo-Pinsk land, became independent. Novgorod gained independence. “Our” Polovtsians had autonomy. No one encroached on their autonomy.

Kievan Rus was disintegrating - the ethnic group was disintegrating. The same people lived in all the separate “independent” states into which Kievan Rus split. But it ceased to be an ethnic group, something united, because they looked at each other as their worst enemy.

Any society cannot exist for any long time without a single idea, without high morality, without conscience. The Slavs had a highly moral religion and were distinguished by their religious tolerance, humane attitude towards the vanquished and even towards prisoners, who, under certain conditions, could even become members of their families. A woman, a wife, a mother occupied a high place in the family and society. History knows cases when the Slavs, having occupied the lands of another people, not only lived peacefully with this people, but also paid tribute to this defeated people. It was in good faith, they paid as if for renting the land, although no one could force them to do this. Their conscience forced them. All this happened during a period of healthy life in society.

Slavic society, which has a tradition of many thousands, at a certain stage (at the end of the 1st millennium) began to lose its spiritual component. More precisely, not the whole society, but only its ruling elite. It was she who began to lose morality and conscience. Immoral behavior became the norm for princes. And the highly moral religion of the Slavs pricked their eyes. If they were striving for a high religion, then they would take the religion of the Cyril and Methodius sense (or the Irish-British church), which fairly well reflected the true teaching of Christ and was close, if not identical, to the moral standards of the Slavs. Very much (in essence) coincided in the most humane teaching of Christ and in the Laws of Government that governed the society of our ancestors.

But this religion, truly Christian, was not needed by the princes. They needed a religion that justified violence, outrages, unlimited power, and slavery. That is why the Russian princes (but not the people) chose the most reactionary version of Orthodoxy - Byzantine, which in fundamental matters not only has nothing in common with the teachings of Christ, but also fundamentally contradicts this teaching. It must be said that the Russian Orthodox Church has significantly “improved” Byzantine Orthodoxy for the worse, bringing it to the extreme of cruelty, enslavement, and humiliation of women and families.

As we already wrote in the book “Holy Rus',” the princes adopted Byzantine Orthodoxy in order to exclude any election, any democracy, in order to commit any atrocities in the name of God himself. According to this ideology, the prince was the representative of God on earth, his power was unlimited and he could do anything - gouge out eyes, burn alive, tear out nostrils, quarter, separate husband and wife, children and parents, exile to a monastery and much more. But this right was guaranteed to the prince by the church, which shared the supreme power. She shared it fraternally: both the church and the prince (tsar) had uncontrolled, unlimited power.

One of the ideologists of Russian Orthodoxy monarchs N.D. Talberg motivated the expediency of inviting Byzantine metropolitans as follows: “The presence of Greek hierarchs in that era undoubtedly brought great benefit young Russian church. The Russian hierarchy, if it had been formed immediately after the Baptism of Rus', would have had nothing to rely on among the semi-lingual flock and with the instability of the civil foundations of the specific time. The Metropolitan, elected at home and from among his people, could easily be exposed to various accidents of princely accounts and strife. And he himself could not rise above these scores and strife, or remain impartial and independent towards them. It could easily have happened that the princes at war with each other would have elected several metropolitans for themselves at the same time - then the feudal feuds would have threatened to divide the Russian Church itself. From this side, to have as metropolitan an outsider, alien to local appanage accounts and independent of individual princes, would have been necessary until a certain time, not only for the Russian Church, but also for the state itself. The metropolitan’s dependence on the foreign power of the Greek patriarch was not great and could not be a great obstacle either to his own church-governmental activities or to original development local church life. It was also useful for the state to have someone else's hierarchical power. It appeared in the form of a tightly knit society of educated individuals, well acquainted with the political wisdom of their thousand-year-old empire, and immediately acquired enormous authority, not only spiritual, but also political. The young state itself voluntarily rushed under the tutelage of the church...” This is what a teacher of the history of the Russian Church at the Holy Trinity Theological Seminary in Jordanville (USA) reasoned.

All decisions of the princes were made with the participation of the clergy. It came first. The Byzantine Church “transferred to Rus' the concepts unknown to it about the supreme power established by God.” Before this, in Rus' the word was behind the veche. There was no death penalty in Rus'. But the Byzantine bishops convinced Prince Vladimir to carry out execution. They said: “Prince, you have been appointed by God to be executed by the evil and by the good to be pardoned.”

It was not possible for a long time to establish the unlimited and uncontrolled power of the clergy and the prince in Novgorod. There was a strong meeting there.

Since the 12th century, rulers have been elected by the people. The prince and clergy usually took part in the elections. The chosen ruler was sent to Kyiv for initiation. Talberg writes that the princes did not decide on important enterprises without the blessing of the metropolitan (bishops).

In the Charters of the Grand Dukes Vladimir and Yaroslav, as well as in the charters of the Smolensk Prince Rostislav and the Novgorod Prince Vsevolod, special rights were assigned to the clergy. Clergy were exempt from liability before secular courts for any of their crimes, and were also exempt from taxes and from any civil services.

But the clergy themselves had their own courts, which considered the cases of “church people,” including charitable institutions, and tried the laity for crimes against faith and church piety, including sacrilege. In addition, the ecclesiastical courts had jurisdiction over all matters relating to marriage and the rights of parents, including disputes over inheritance. The church was charged with overseeing the accuracy of trade weights and measures. It was also very profitable. The Byzantine Church did not have such rights materialized in money. Church ideologists explain this simply: “The princes, reverent for spiritual power, were ready to do more for the church than was required by the customs of the Greek empire, of course, taking into account the civil life of the then Rus'.” At the same time, we must not forget about the tithe that the church received. But that's not all. The church owned the property. Thus, the metropolitan owned several cities with volosts and villages. For example, Andrei Bogolyubsky donated several settlements to the Vladimir Cathedral, villages and the city of Gorokhovets.

The church hierarchy at that time looked like this. The entire territory subject to the metropolitan was divided into dioceses. The division was made in 991 by Metropolitan Leonty. The bishop managed church affairs. At that time, bishops were installed in Novgorod, Chernigov, Rostov, Vladimir Volynsky, Belgorod (now Belogorodka near Kyiv), Turnov, Polotsk, Tmutarakan. Later dioceses were opened in Pereyaslavl Russian, or Kiev, and Yuryev. In 1137 the diocese of Smolensk was opened, and in 1165 - Galich. Before 1207, the Ryazan diocese was opened, and in 1214, the Vladimir-Klyazminsk or Suzdal diocese. Around 1220 the diocese of Przemysl and Ugrov was opened.

The Metropolitan was accountable to the Patriarch of Constantinople. Only the patriarch and his council had the right to judge the metropolitan.

Before Mongol invasion There were 21 metropolitans in Rus', of which only two were Russian.

The structure of the church hierarchy was as follows. A council of presbyters was held under the bishop. The bishops had a college of diocesan officials - kliros or klyros. These were cathedral choirs. In addition to them, the diocesan administration consisted of governors, tiuns and tithes. Some governors were attached to the bishops themselves. Other governors lived in the districts. They were in charge of parts of the diocese. They had their own choirs or councils of presbyters. Spiritual officials of the tiuna appeared in the second half of the 12th century. In fact, they were also assistant judges. Most often, these places were occupied by secular people - lawyers. There were tithe officers in the districts. These were lower officials. They were appointed from the laity. Their task was to collect tithes from the population of the diocese (in favor of the bishop). Sometimes the bishop himself “surveyed” his diocese.

The Greek code of laws Nomocanon served as the legislative basis for the internal governance of the church. We used its Slavic translation. From this Byzantine code of laws, the princes borrowed laws, which they set out in special charters. It must be said that these laws were formulated many hundreds of years ago and did not reflect Slavic tradition and were hopelessly outdated. They referred to Moses, who created laws for the Jews, whom he led out of Egypt. Russian shepherds and princes (tsars) were guided by these laws back in the 16th century. These laws were tightened in the main areas of life - in the area of ​​religion, family life, church piety, hierarchy. Throughout all time, the decrees of the Patriarchs of Constantinople were binding laws for Rus'.

As for the clergy personnel, they were all from Constantinople. But over time, part of the lower clergy began to be appointed from Russian people. They swore allegiance to Byzantium and its church. There were parish priests and brownies. Church ministers were most often formed from new generations of clergy. There were deacons and sextons. They were in the clergy of the white clergy priest. Under the bishop there were subdeacons and, much less frequently, archpriests. House priests served in house churches. The hierarchy is as follows: deacon - deacon - sexton. In the beginning there were deacons in Rus'. They were called “urary”, that is, orary. Among the Greeks these were readers and singers (church ministers). Later the name “deacon” appeared. There were also sextons (in Greek - guardians). Their functions were to keep the church clean, prepare everything for worship, and also serve the priests. The clergy also included prosphora bakers or mallow makers. The black clergy (monastic) included: abbots, hieromonks, hierodeacons. There were three archimandrites at that time.

The relations between Rus' and the Golden Horde can briefly be called hostile. The Mongol-Tatars were an extremely warlike people; they captured huge nations. Genghis Khan managed to unite disparate tribes and turn them into the most powerful force at that time. The first contact between the Mongols and the Russian principalities ended with the murder of the Mongol ambassadors, which provided an excellent reason to begin military operations not only against the Cumans, allies of Rus', but also against the Russian principalities themselves. In 1223 on the Kalka River (modern Donetsk region Ukraine) the army of Russian principalities and Polovtsy tried to stop the advance of the Golden Horde, and was defeated.

In 1238, Batu Khan continued the aggressive activities of his father Jochi Khan (son of Genghis Khan). The principalities that once made up Kievan Rus were mired in struggle with each other, so cities such as Ryazan, Vladimir, Chernigov and Kyiv were easily taken. At the same time, the city of Uglich bought itself off from the invaders, and small Kozelsk held out for seven weeks under the blows of the Mongols. After this, the Mongol-Tatar invasion of Rus', briefly described in this section, could be considered completed. The Mongols, having imposed tribute on the Russian principalities (only Galician and Novgorod Rus were not affected), attempted to invade Poland and Hungary, but the Golden Horde was no longer the irresistible powerful force as before, since it also began to be torn apart by internal struggle, and the expansion of territory ceased .

The Russian principalities were forced to constantly pay tribute to avoid senseless bloodshed. Over time, a unification process began, expressed in Moscow’s aggressive policy. Having conquered Tver in a long and bloody struggle, Moscow began to seize the Russian principalities one by one, as the Mongols had done before. In addition, a monarchical form of government developed in Moscow, in which the ruler had much more weight than other authorities. Ivan Kalita achieved significant success in the fight against the Horde, who managed to accumulate great wealth- all tribute from the Russian principalities to the Golden Horde passed through his hands. It was possible to finally free ourselves from Mongol power only in the 15th century; for this, Moscow actively took advantage of the fragmentation in the Horde itself. An attempt to stop paying tribute to the Mongols led to the sack of Moscow in 1382, but in 1480 the Mongols finally lost their power in Rus'.

Lecture 5.

The system of supreme power in Rus' after the invasion.

The policy of world conquest proclaimed by the founder of the Mongolian state - Genghis Khan , became the reason for the arrival of the Mongol conquerors in Rus'. During the invasion led by Batu (grandson of Genghis Khan) 1237-1241., most of the Russian lands were devastated and conquered. In 1243, after a campaign in Europe, Batu founded a state in the southern Russian steppes Golden Horde, which included Russian lands.

The collapse of the Mongol Empire into a number of states. formations competing with each other and waging internecine struggle, caused the formation of the independent state of the Golden Horde, which included Rus'. The relationship between the Golden Horde and Russia was based on a system of military-political protectorate.

Vassalage.

The trips of Russian princes to the Horde for a label to reign and their participation in the military campaigns of the Golden Horde khans were part of the system of political subordination of the Russian principalities to the Golden Horde. The Horde preserved the internal structure of Rus', arrogating to itself the right to levy tribute and approve princes. From a formal legal point of view, Rus' did not have independent government controlled during the Mongol period. The Great Khan of Mongolia and China was considered the suzerain of all Russian lands.

In the process of the liberation struggle Tatar-Mongol yoke, the form of Russian statehood was transitioning from a federation system headed by the Grand Duke of Vladimir to a centralized monarchy. In pre-Mongol Rus' there were 9 largest lands controlled different branches Rurikovich, who fought among themselves for three all-Russian princely tables - Kyiv, Novgorod and Galich. This struggle was a centripetal factor that preserved the formal unity of the Russian lands.

The establishment of Horde power stopped the struggle for these tables and, moreover, small appanage principalities were assigned to certain dynasties, which prevented the possibility of easy advancement from the senior table to the junior. Now the Grand Duke of Vladimir was installed as the oldest in all of Rus' (in pre-Mongol Rus' he was one of the strongest, but not of all-Russian significance). It was the status of the Vladimir (from the 14th century - actually Moscow) prince that contributed to the desire to extend his power to all the lands that were once part of Kievan Rus. Ultimately, the bearer of eldership in the Russian land is Vladimir Grand Duke- becomes “autocrat of the entire Russian land.”

Grand Duke clearly fit into the Mongolian nomenclature of aristocratic beks who ruled vassal territories of various statuses within the Golden Horde, being built into power through certain signs of subordination: receiving a label, paying tribute, etc. In the same way, in Mongolia there was a formal presentation of the Great Khan's label to the Golden Horde ruler, who was essentially an independent ruler. The Khan of the Golden Horde was considered a ruler of a higher rank than the Russian princes: he was called a tsar, i.e. imperial title. That is why Ivan the Terrible, the first tsar to be crowned king, insisted so much on his title in order to surpass European kings, standing on a par with the Holy Roman Emperor of the German nation.

The severance of traditional cultural ties with Byzantium and Europe predetermined a reorientation to the East and, accordingly, an orientation towards eastern despotism as a form of statehood. The southern and southwestern lands begin to fall under the rule of Lithuania - the formation of Little Rus' - Little Russia.

Local land ownership is expanding, because the mass of the boyar nobility died, and the princes distributed their lands for their service as estates. A lot of land went to the church, because... Church property was not subject to tribute from the Horde, and the church supported the unification of Rus'. Monastic estates are formed. A term appears that refers to the majority of the country's population: if in Novgorod and Pskov farmers continued to be called, according to Russian Pravda, smerds, then in Vladimir land they were called Christians - peasants. At this time, corvee and quitrent - forms of feudal rent - began to spread, because part of the taxes went to the Horde as tribute.

The peasantry still had the right to transfer from one owner to another. Black-growing peasants - “black lands” - the lands of the state, the treasury in the person of the Grand Duke of Vladimir. But it was precisely these that the princes distributed to the boyars, nobles and monasteries as estates. Thus, the number of free peasants was rapidly declining. Communities began to unite into a volost - an administrative unit. Slaves gradually become the undivided property of the master, who can be sold, bought, or killed.

The influx of population into the area between the Oka and Volga rivers, into lands surrounded by forests and closed from the Tatars by other principalities (Ryazan in the south and Vladimir in the east), at the intersection of rivers trade routes, identified two young principalities - Tver (descendants of Nevsky's brother - Yaroslav Yaroslavich) and Moscow (descendants of Nevsky's youngest son - Daniil of Moscow - 1276). From the beginning of the 13th century. Tver and Moscow fought for the great reign of Vladimir, the label for which was issued by the khan of the Golden Horde (given to the one who promised more tribute). In 1304 Khan issued the Vladimir label for the reign of Tver, but the new Uzbek Khan, who made Islam the state. religion of the Horde, transferred the label to Moscow, because. Yuri Daniilovich Moskovsky (1303-1325) became his son-in-law.

After the suppression of the Tver uprising of 1327, Moscow became the first force (1332 - label on Vladimir). Uzbek transferred the right to collect tribute from Russian lands to Kalita, which allowed Moscow to grow rich. Kalita (1325-1340) inherited eight cities, but bought Uglich, Galich and Belozersk. Kalita bought up individual villages and estates in foreign principalities, then annexing these pieces to Moscow. Hence the new political element of the period of fragmentation: the system of personal great reigns, enshrined in the spiritual of Ivan Kalita in 1339, who laid the foundations appanage-patrimonial system control of Russia.

All Russian land was considered the collective property of the Kalitichs. Each of the members of Ivan Kalita’s family had the right to their part of this common possession - an appanage. At the same time, temporary land grants could be allocated to service people from any inheritance - estates. At the same time, a member of the princely family continued to be considered the owner of the estate.

Feudal hierarchy:

Grand Dukes,

Appanage princes,

Boyars (Boyar Duma),

Governors (volostels),

Nobles (combatants).

The lands were divided into princely, patrimonial and local, state (black). However, at the same time Rus' was divided by the khan into 4 great reigns competing for the Grand Duchy of Vladimir, in order to prevent the unification of Rus'. Only in 1392 one of them, Nizhny Novgorod, was annexed to Moscow, and Tver and Ryazan - and even later.

In addition, the formation of the appanage-patrimonial system was undoubtedly influenced by Mongolian law and the Mongolian system of power. The clan of Genghis Khan had power over the entire territory of the Great Mongol Empire, within which each family member received his own inheritance. However, only Genghisid could become the legitimate khan of any part of the collapsed empire (which is why not only Mamai, but also Tamerlane kept the Genghisids on the formal throne as supreme khans).

From the point of view of Mongolian legislation, the power of the Moscow Grand Duke and other princes was based primarily on the khan's label. Accordingly, the recognition by the Mongols of the right of the Rurik dynasty to Russian reigns made it easier for the Russians to recognize Mongolian suzerainty. Now the Rurikovichs ruled their lands not only on the basis of genealogy, but also according to the khan’s grant, which allowed the Golden Horde to maintain control over Russian lands for a long time, using well-known principle: "divide and rule". Consequently, gradually the principle of transfer of power from father to son came to the fore, and this became psychological basis the power of the Moscow princes, who soon transferred this principle from Moscow to the Grand Duchy of Vladimir. And Dmitry Donskoy did it.

3.Great Moscow Principality. In 1359 took the Moscow throne Dmitry Donskoy(9 years: 1359-1389). By this time, large feudal centers of unification had already formed, and the strongest, Moscow, stood out as a political and territorial center.

The personality of Dmitry Donskoy became a symbol of the reviving Rus'. His naming in official documents spoke of the continuity of Kievan Rus: “Prince great Dmitry Ivanovich, grandson Ivanov, great-grandson Danilov, great-great-grandson Alexandrov, great-great-great-grandson Yaroslavl, ancestor Vsevolozh, great-great-grandfather Yuryev, great-great-great-grandson of Vladimirov Vsevolodovich Yaroslavich Volodymyrechi, the great new Constantine, who baptized the Russian land, a relative of the new miracle workers Boris and Gleb.”

September 8, 1380 the Horde army was defeated by the Russians at Kulikovo field, after crossing the Don on the river. Not straight.

In 1382 With an unexpected blow, Tokhtamysh invaded Russian borders and managed to take and burn Moscow by deception (Dmitry was gathering regiments in the north). After this, Moscow agreed to pay tribute, and Tokhtamysh was forced to admit that the label for the great reign of Vladimir would be issued only to Moscow. Dying, Donskoy bequeathed Moscow and Vladimir to his son Vasily. Thus, the legal system of tributary relations and Horde power was restored. However, Dmitry indicated in his spiritual testament: “If God changes the Horde, my children will not give access to the Horde, and whichever my son takes as a tribute on his inheritance, then that is it.”

Gradually, Vasily I began to subjugate Nizhny Novgorod, Murom, and Suzdal. In 1395 During the invasion of the Central Asian ruler Tamerlane, he carried out a pogrom of the Golden Horde (the invasion of Rus' did not take place). The final unification of the Moscow and Vladimir principalities meant that now the annexation of Russian lands to Moscow took on a unifying character.

The next step on the path to the centralization of the Russian state was the feudal unrest of the second third of the 15th century. After the death of Vasily I, his son Vasily II the Dark was 10 years old. Opposed to him younger son Dmitry Donskoy Yuri Dmitrievich Galichsky, who claimed the Moscow throne. The entire Moscow nobility, townspeople and church came out on Vasily’s side. On Yuri’s side is a coalition of appanage princes and local boyars. Plague epidemic 1425-1427. exacerbated the confrontation.

After the death of Metropolitan Photius in 1431. Yuri began to seize power. Together with him are his sons Vasily Kosoy and Dmitry Shemyaka, insulted in Moscow. In 1433 Moscow troops were defeated by Yuri, who seized the throne. Vasily received Kolomna as an inheritance, and all the Moscow boyars and nobility immediately left there, which forced Yuri to abandon his great reign.

However, the feudal war engulfed the entire Muscovite Rus', which was aggravated by the lack of strength among the Galich princes and the lack of military leadership talent among Vasily II. In 1434 Yuri reoccupies Moscow, but soon dies. The throne is occupied by Vasily Kosoy, but his brothers unite with Vasily II, who was sitting in Nizhny Novgorod. In 1436 Scythe was defeated and blinded.

At the Council of Florence, among other church patriarchs of the Eastern Church, the Russian Metropolitan Isidore signed Union of Florence 1439 about the unification of the Western and Eastern churches, which was opposed by the majority of the population both in the West and in the East. Union is the unification of the Orthodox and catholic churches under the supremacy of the Pope. After this, Isidore was arrested in Moscow and then fled to Lithuania.

In 1446 Vasily II was captured and blinded, receiving the nickname Dark. The prince was exiled to Uglich, and then to Vologda. However, Moscow did not accept Yuri’s son, Dmitry Shemyaka, as Grand Duke. At the beginning of 1447 Vasily returns to the throne. Metropolitan Jonah called on Shemyaka to stop the confrontation. In 1450 Shemyaka was finally defeated and died in 1453.

The significance of the feudal war: despite the strife between the heirs of Dmitry Donskoy, the process of unifying Rus' under the rule of Moscow became irreversible.

How did Russia react to the Union of Florence in 1448? not by the Patriarch of Constantinople, as before, but by a council of Russian bishops, the Metropolitan of Moscow and All Rus', Archbishop Jonah of Ryazan, was installed.

Thus, it was for the period 13-15 centuries. there is a dramatic struggle between individual Russian principalities for political leadership in North-Eastern and North-Western Rus'. In the end, it came down to the rivalry between the Grand Duchy of Moscow, the Grand Duchy of Tver and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Each of them had certain advantages in individual episodes of this struggle.

A particularly fierce struggle on the part of Moscow unfolded with the Lithuanian-Russian state, which practically recreated the ancient Russian power within its borders, approaching the borders of Novgorod and Moscow. Independence from the Horde and greater openness to the West made the civilizational prospect of the development of Russian lands as part of the Lithuanian-Russian state quite tempting, but only to a certain limit. Under the conditions of the Polish-Lithuanian personal union at the end of the 14th century. (not to mention the later formation of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth), the further turn of Lithuania and the Lithuanian nobility from Russian spiritual, cultural, religious values ​​towards Poland, Catholicism, discrimination of the Russian elite and the Russian population, it was Moscow, which by this time had gained the upper hand over Tver, becomes the center attraction of all national Russian forces. And slowly but persistently, fighting both against the Horde and against Lithuania, he is tipping the political scales to his side.

However, the movement of the political and economic center of the East Slavic lands to Moscow, its transformation into a symbol of Russian statehood, national sovereignty, and Orthodoxy also had far-reaching negative civilizational consequences. Russian statehood was being revived in a remote peripheral corner of Europe, isolated from the main European trade routes, far from the sea shores, i.e. geographical conditions, significantly more unfavorable even in comparison with the Middle Dnieper region, not to mention the countries of Central and Western Europe.