/
Search results


Ильяшенко Н. А. Студенческий вопрос в Московском университете в конце XIX в. на страницах дневника М. С. Корелина // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия II: История. История Русской Православной Церкви. 2014. Вып. 1 (56). С. 107-112. DOI: 10.15382/sturII201456.107-112
The article examines the attitude of the Moscow University Professor M. S. Korelin to the student movement. Analysis of the views of Korelin is made on the basis of nonpublished diary of Professor, which preserved in the Central State archive of Moscow. Actually Korelin considers the student activity during the period (1889—1896) of the particularly interesting from the point of view of the formation of the student movement in Russia. The author comes to the conclusion that Korelin held an active position in relations with youth, sought to get closer acquainted with the students, to find a contact with them, and common interests, to understand their environment. Using the trust part of the students he could learn more about the life and the essence of illegal student corporations. sympathizing with noble motives students fight against immorality — Korelin rejected terroristic methods of struggle. However, he believed that the unifying factor for professors and students can only be established in the scientific activity. Korelin points out that the cause of the student movement was the University Law of 1884 which made the administration of the University powerless against the student movements. The analysis of the views of Korelin allows to expand the idea of relationship between professors and students of that time, provides new information on the history of the student movement in Russia and about the history of the faculty-student relationships in the end of XIX century.
student corporation, The Union Council, Student movement, M. S. Ko-relin

1. Ivanov A. E. Mir rossijskogo studenchestva (World of Russian Students), M., 2010.
2. Mel'gunov S. P. Iz istorii studencheskih obshhestv v russkih universitetah (From History of Student Societies in Russian Universities), M., 1904.
3. Mel'gunov S. P. Studencheskie organizacii 80–90-h gg. v Moskovskom universitete (Student Organizations of 80–90 Years in Moscow University), M., 1908.
4. Cygankov D. A. V. I. Ger'e i Moskovskij universitet ego jepohi (Gerye and Moscow University of His Time), M., 2008.
5. Cygankov D. A. Professor V. I. Ger'e i ego ucheniki (Professir V. I. Gerye and His Followers), M., 2010.
6. Cygankov D. A. (2013) “Tragedija uchitelja: V. I. Ger'e i M. S. Korelin: k istorii intellektual'nogo dialoga“ (Tragedy of the Teacher: V. I. Gerye and M. S. Korelin: to History of Intellectual Dialog), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija II: Istorija. Istorija Russkoj Pravoslavnoj Cerkvi, 2013, № 4.
Ильяшенко Н. А. Состав иерархии Русской Православной Церкви в преддверии Большого террора. Список архиереев из архивно-следственного дела митрополита Серафима (Александрова) 1937 г. // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия II: История. История Русской Православной Церкви. 2014. Вып. 3 (58). С. 114-146. DOI: 10.15382/sturII201458.114-146
This article comments on the important source of information on the history of Russian hierarchy which is the list of bishops. This list belonged to Metropolitan Seraphim (Alexandrov) and is now stored in the Archives of the National Security Committee of the Republic of Kazakhstan in Akmola region in the investigation fi le of Metropolitan Seraphim. The list was composed in 1933-1934, and off ers the following characteristics of bishops : the date of birth and ordination , the rank, the academic degree, whether abroad, in offi ce or retired . The last parameter denoted those who did not actually rule the diocese. The work of keeping records on the changes in life of the Russian episcopate was conducted systematically; the list is remarkably full. The introductory article analyzes the principles of formation and changes in the list of the episcopate which took place under the change of the supreme ecclesiastical authority. It also compares the data of the list with the published documents of the Moscow Patriarchate of 1934. Thus we come to the following conclusions: bishops Renovationists, Gregorians and those ordained abroad are not found in the list with few exceptions. It is explained by the ignorance of the compiler. The fi rst and the second were not recognized as bishops of the Russian Church, and they didn’t have actual data on those abroad because of the diffi culties in dealing with foreign countries. Nonetheless, the list contains the hierarchy who were opposed to Metropolitan Sergius which means that de facto they were considered fullfl edged gracious bishops in spite of being reprimanded for “separating”. Mass ordinations allowed to hold back the decline of the episcopate for a while. The soviet authorities prevented the bishops from ruling their dioceses even under the compromise policy of Metropolitan Sergius ( Stragorodsky ) during the second period of his episcopacy. At this time much fewer bishops were ordained, and the new bishops were characterised as being in agreement with the Locum Tenens. The authorities still harassed them but less than the rest. The article also notes that after the Revolution of 1917–1918 there was a tendency to ease the requirements to the candidates for the episcopacy: the level of education was deteriorating.
Russian Orthodox Church, Moscow Patriarchate, episcopacy, church schisms, repressions, church records management, Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky) Metropolitan Seraphim (Alexandrov)
Цыганков Д. А., Ильяшенко Н. А. Протоиерей Александр Михайлович Иванцов-Платонов и историки Московского университета // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия II: История. История Русской Православной Церкви. 2015. Вып. 1 (62). С. 137-146. DOI: 10.15382/sturII201562.137-146
The question of the unifi ed field of Church history studies in Russia’s pre-revolutionary era recently became under hot discussion among historians and theologians. Suggesting that the approved program of Church-historical research in this period has not been formed, experts are trying to find the cause of this discrepancy between representatives of secular and ecclesiastical approach and facts about cooperation between them. The proposed publication shows the position of the Department of Church history at Moscow University at the end of 1894, when doctor of theology priest Alexander Ivantsov-Platonov decided to communicate his position to the secular historian and doctor of the universal history Mikhail Sergeyevich Corelin. For Ivantsov-Platonov it was a thought-out position. The Professor wanted to attract student attention and public interest to the problem of Church history. In this regard, in the absence of the nominee to vacancy from Theological Academy, Ivantsov-Platonov wanted to see on his chair secular historian, has already attracted the attention of students studying questions closely connected with the history of the Church. It was a risky option, because secular professors of the University were considered such an option primarily from the practical point of view, especially from the point of view of the curriculum of the faculty. Above all this project was not agreed by The Ministry of national education. This led to the failure of Ivantsov-Platonov project and final marginalization of the Department of Church history at the historical-philological faculty of Moscow University in the early 20th century.
Department of Church history at Moscow University, the curriculum, secularization, V. I. Guerier, M. S. Korelin, A. M. Ivantsov-Platonov, A. P. Lebedev

Tsygankov Dmitrii
Il'iashenko Nikolai