St. Tikhon’s University Review . Series II: History. Russian Church History

The Church calendar in Old Rus' did not only determine the course of divine services, but also actively influenced the planning of the most important events by princes and bishops, both ecclesiastical and secular. The timing of the ceremonies (that framed such events) to significant festive milestones of liturgical cycles, besides the utilitarian and symbolic meanings, carried an important spiritual content. As the organizers see it, calendar timing was a means of special turning to God and the saints. A clear dependence on the calendar is demonstrated, in particular, by the chronological component of the celebrations dedicated to the transfer of shrines. The article clarifies and analyzes all the exact (daily) dates of such events of the 11th – the first third of the 13th centuries preserved in the sources. In total, ten such dates have come down to us: four of them relate to the relocation of the relics of sts. Boris and Gleb, the remaining six – of other Russian and imported relics. The author of the article comes to the conclusion that the organizers of the celebrations used several calendar strategies, and usually layered them on top of each other, striving to achieve what can be called “multiplication of festivity”. In most cases, the transfer of shrines turned out to be correlated with Sundays and at the same time coordinated with the rhythms of the Menologion and the Triodion: the “liturgical fields” of Easter and great feasts and (or) calendar milestones associated directly with the honored saint. The obtained results complement the scientific understanding of the temporal culture and eorthological creativity of the Old Rus' elite.

the Old Rus, Russian Church History, the Church calendar, temporality, the dates of the secular and ecclesiastical ceremonies, heortology, shrines

1. Artamonov Iu. (2003) “Zhitie Feodosiia Pecherskogo: problemy istochnikovedeniia”, in Drevneishie gosudarstva Vostochnoi Evropy. 2000 g. Moscow, pp. 173–277 (in Russian).
2. Arranz М. (2003) Izbrannye sochineniia po liturgike. Vol. 3. Rome; Moscow (in Russian).
3. Berezhkov N. (1963) Khronologiia russkogo letopisaniia. Moscow (in Russian).
4. Butyrskii M. (2017) “Podvesnaia pechat† velikoi kniagini Marii-Agaf†i Mstislavny”, in Istoriia i kultura Rostovskoi zemli. 2016. Rostov, pp. 15–20 (in Russian).
5. Floria B. (1989) “K genezisu legendy o ›darakh Monomakha″”, in Drevneishie gosudarstva na territorii SSSR. 1987. Moscow, pp. 185–188 (in Russian).
6. Gaidukov P., Engovatova A. (2018) “Novaia vislaia aktovaia pechat† iz raskopok v Iaroslavle”, in Arkheologiia: istoriia i perspektivy: Vosmaia mezhregionalnaia konferentsiia. Yaroslavl, pp. 40–43 (in Russian).
7. Gippius A. (2010) “›Letopisnye″ paremiinye chteniia o Borise i Glebe: istoriia teksta i istoricheskii kontekst”, in Fakty i znaki: Issledovaniia po semiotike kultury. Moscow, vol. 2, pp. 42–71 (in Russian).
8. Golubinskii E. (1997) Istoriia Russkoi Tserkvi. Moscow, vol. 1 (in Russian).
9. Karpov A. (2014) Issledovaniia po istorii domongolskoi Rusi. Moscow (in Russian).
10. Karpov A. (2017) Russkaia Tserkov X–XIII vv. Biograficheskii slovar. Moscow (in Russian).
11. Kloss B. (2003) “Prolozhnoe skazanie ob osviashchenii tserkvi Borisa i Gleba i perenesenii ikh grobov iz Vyshgoroda na Smiadinu v 1191 g.”, in Pismennye pamiatniki istorii Drevnei Rusi. Moscow, p. 49 (in Russian).
12. Korogodina M. (2021) “›Velikoe osviashchenie″ i Borisoglebskaia tserkov† v Kidekshe”. Drevniaia Rus: Voprosy medievistiki, 2021, vol. 3 (85), pp. 139–146 (in Russian).
13. Kuz†min A. (2014) “Kirill II”, in Pravoslavnaia entsiklopediia. Moscow, vol. 34, pp. 594‒597 (in Russian).
14. Laushkin A. (2021) “›Prikhodi Iaropolk ko Vsevolodu na Velik den†″: kniazheskie s″ezdy domongol†skoi pory v zerkale tserkovnogo kalendaria”. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta, VIII, 2021, no. 3, pp. 3–21 (in Russian).
15. Laushkin A. (2014) “K probleme pochitaniia kniagini Ol†gi i kniazia Vladimira v domongol†skoe vremia”, in TODRL, St. Petersburg, vol. 63, pp. 45–57 (in Russian).
16. Laushkin A. (2019) “Vkhod novopostavlennogo episkopa Pakhomiia v Rostov 28 ianvaria 1215 goda: vybor dnia dlia torzhestvennoi tseremonii”. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia II: Istoriia. Istoriia Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi, 2019, vol. 89, pp. 49–66 (in Russian).
17. Laushkin A. (2022) “›Vedena byst† dshchi Sviatopolcha v Liakhy...″: O dniakh odnoi svadebnoi tseremonii XII v.”, in Vostochnaia Evropa v drevnosti i Srednevekov4e. Chteniia pamiati chl.-korr. AN SSSR V. T. Pashuto. Moscow, vol. 34, pp. 153–155 (in Russian).
18. Laushkin A. (2022) “Ustraivali li triumfy russkie kniaz†ia domongol†skogo vremeni?” Rossiiskaia istoriia, 2022, vol. 3, pp. 3–14 (in Russian).
19. Limonov Iu. (1967) Letopisanie Vladimiro-Suzdal4skoi Rusi. Leningrad (in Russian).
20. Litvina A., Uspensky F. (2006) Vybor imeni u russkikh kniazei v X–XVI vv.: Dinasticheskaia istoriia skvoz prizmu antroponimiki. Moscow (in Russian).
21. Loseva O. (2001) Russkie mesiatseslovy XI–XIV vekov. Moscow (in Russian).
22. Loseva O. (2009) Zhitiia russkikh sviatykh v sostave drevnerusskikh Prologov XII — pervoi treti XV vekov. Moscow (in Russian).
23. Lur†e Ia. (1976) Obshcherusskie letopisi XIV‒XV vv. Leningrad (in Russian).
24. Mel†nik A. (2016) “Istoriia rasprostraneniia kul†ta sv. Leontiia Rostovskogo na Rusi v XV– XVI vekakh”, in Istoriia i kultura Rostovskoi zemli, 2015. Rostov, pp. 18–33 (in Russian).
25. Mel†nik A. (2003) “Stanovlenie kul†ta sv. Leontiia Rostovskogo v domongol†skuiu epokhu”, in Soobshcheniia Rostovskogo muzeia. Rostov, vol. 13, pp. 143–152 (in Russian).
26. Miliutenko N. (2006) Sviatye kniaz4ia-mucheniki Boris i Gleb. St. Petersburg (in Russian).
27. Miuller L. (2000) Poniat Rossiiu: istoriko-kulturnye issledovaniia. Moscow (in Russian).
28. Mur†ianov M. (2004) Gimnografiia Kievskoi Rusi. Moscow (in Russian).
29. Nasonov A. (1969) Istoriia russkogo letopisaniia XI — nachala XVIII veka: Ocherki i issledovaniia. Moscow (in Russian).
30. Nazarenko A. (2003) “Boris i Gleb”, in Pravoslavnaia entsiklopediia. Moscow, vol. 6, pp. 44–49 (in Russian).
31. Nazarenko A. (2004) “Vladimir (Vasilii) Sviatoslavich”, in Pravoslavnaia entsiklopediia. Moscow, vol. 8, pp. 690–703 (in Russian).
32. Nazarenko A. (2015) “Leontii”, in Pravoslavnaia entsiklopediia. Moscow, vol. 40, pp. 488–490 (in Russian).
33. Pentkovskii A. (2001) Tipikon patriarkha Aleksiia Studita v Vizantii i na Rusi. Moscow (in Russian).
34. Poppe A. (2011) Studity na Rusi: Istoki i nachal4naia istoriia Kievo-Pecherskogo monastyria. Kiev (in Russian).
35. Priselkov M. (1996) Istoriia russkogo letopisaniia XI‒XV vv. Moscow (in Russian).
36. Ranchin A. (2013) Boris i Gleb. Moscow (in Russian).
37. Ranchin A. (2017) Pamiatniki Borisoglebskogo tsikla: tekstologiia, poetika, religiozno-kul’turnyi kontekst. Moscow (in Russian).
38. Seregina N. (1994) Pesnopeniia russkim sviatym. St. Petersburg (in Russian).
39. Sergii (Spasskii), аrchbishop (1997) Polnyi mesiatseslov Vostoka. Moscow, vol. 2 (in Russian).
40. Shakhmatov A. (1938) Obozrenie russkikh letopisnykh svodov XIV‒XVI vv. Moscow; Leningrad (in Russian).
41. Turilov A., Galko V. (2003) “Skazanie o prinesenii persta Ioanna Krestitelia”, in Pismennye pamiatniki istorii Drevnei Rusi. St. Petersburg, pp. 220–221 (in Russian).
42. Uspenskii B. (2004) Istoriko-filologicheskie ocherki. Moscow (in Russian).
43. Vinogradov A. (2012) “Osobennosti borisoglebskikh torzhestv v svete vizantiiskoi traditsii”. Slověne = Slovѣne: International Journal of Slavic Studies, 2012, no. 2, pp. 117–134 (in Russian).
44. Voronin N. (1965) “K voprosu o nachale Rostovo-Suzdal†skogo letopisaniia”, in Arkheograficheskii ezhegodnik za 1964 god. Moscow, pp. 19–39 (in Russian).

Laushkin Aleksei

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

The article reports on the discovery of new texts of Pskov charateic charters of the XV – beginning of the XVI century, originating from the patrimonial archive of the Three-Holy Eleazar Monastery. They were preserved in the form of lists around 1732. The discovery was made by the author during the work on the identification and scientific description of the available composition of documents of the XVI–XVIII centuries. in the collection of the Ancient Repository of the Pskov Museum. The study showed that the Copy Notebook found as part of the book binding includes lists with 21 letters. Among them are complete documents and their fragments. This publication presents the experience of studying two acts from the Copy Book of the Three-Holy Monastery. These are certificates No. 6 and No. 11 in order in the collection. They are remarkable in that they are directly related to the history of the monastery's creation, since in the middle of the XV century they were given to the Most Reverend Euphrosyne on the land for the monastery he had built. The plots of land were located in the Krivovitsky rural district of the Belsky ambush of Pskov County between the Tolva River and a small forest lake. Transferred from the previous owners "to oderen", that is, to full unconditional ownership, they created the core of the patrimony and remained with the current monastery, despite the later secularization of 1764. The same lands are part of the modern borders of the restored monastery. Temples, monastic cells, a cemetery, a refectory, a cow village, a hotel and all other buildings necessary for a statutory life are located on them. The new letters of the era of the Veche Pskov are a valuable source for the study of the ancient Pskov script, the ancient topography of the Pskov land, church history and monastic land ownership.

charateic charters (parchment acts), St. Euphrosyne of Pskov, Eleazar Monastery, list, manuscript, Ancient repository of the Pskov Museum, land ownership

1. Alekseev Iu. (1980) Pskovskaia Sudnaia gramota i ee vremia. Razvitie feodal’nykh otnoshenii na Rusi XIV–XV vv. Leningrad (in Russian).
2. Cherepnin L. (1964) “Pskovskie gramoty kontsa XV veka kak istoricheskii istochnik”, in Issledovaniia po otechestvennomu istochnikovedeniiu. Moscow, pp. 427–429 (in Russian).
3. Koretskii V. (1969) “Vnov† otkrytye novgorodskie i pskovskie gramoty XIV–XV vv.”, in Arkheograficheskii ezhegodnik za 1967 god. Moscow (in Russian).
4. Labutina I. (1985) Istoricheskaia topografi ia Pskova XIV–XV vv. Moscow (in Russian).
5. Marasinova L. (1966) Novye pskovskie gramoty XIV–XV vekov. Moscow (in Russian).
6. Okhotnikova V. (2007) Pskovskaia agiografiia, in 2 vols. Vol. 2: Zhitiia prepodobnykh Evfrosina Pskovskogo, Savvy Krypetskogo, Nikandra Pskovskogo (issledovanie i teksty). St. Petersburg (in Russian).
7. Okulich-Kazarin N. (2001) Sputnik po drevnemu Pskovu. 3rd edition. Pskov (in Russian).
8. Pechnikov M. (2010) “Iona, sviatitel†, arkhiepiskop Novgorodskii”, in Pravoslavnaia entsiklopediia, vol. 25. Moscow, pp. 408–411 (in Russian).
9. Postnikov A. (2013) Drevlekhranilishche Pskovskogo muzeia. Obozrenie russkikh rukopisnykh dokumentov XVI–XVIII vv. Moscow (in Russian).
10. Postnikov A. (2017) “Kharateinye gramoty Eleazarova monastyria — novyi istochnik dlia izucheniia drevnepskovskoi pis†mennosti”, in N. Bol†shakova, L. Kostiuchuk (eds) Pskovskie govory i ikh issledovateli. K 100-letiiu so dnia rozhdeniia S. M. Gluskinoi i 50-letiiu vykhoda pervogo vypuska ›Pskovskogo oblastnogo slovaria s istoricheskimi dannymi″, in 2 parts. Pskov, pt. 1, pp. 273–287 (in Russian).
11. Serebrianskii N. (2013) Ocherki po istorii monastyrskoi zhizni v Pskovskoi zemle: s kritiko-bibliograficheskim obzorom literatury po istorii pskovskogo monashestva. Pskov, pp. 218–273 (in Russian).
12. Valk S. (1961) “Pskovskaia dannaia (XV v.?)”, in Voprosy sotsial’no-ekonomicheskoi istorii i istochnikovedeniia perioda feodalizma v Rossii. Moscow (in Russian).

Postnikov Arsenii

In the autumn of 1815, Alexander I created the Holy Alliance, a unique political entity that immediately attracted the attention of the foreign press. The authors of various media put forward many hypotheses as to what was behind the vague formulations of the Act of the Holy Union, what political goals this association had and how they changed. The purpose of this work is to analyze the assessments of the Holy Alliance and Alexander I as its head in English newspapers. The chronological framework of the study – 1816-1825 – is determined by the period of the existence of the Holy Alliance during the life of Alexander I. The article analyzes the perception of the Act of the Holy Union itself by British newspapermen. The reaction of English publications to the conservative policy pursued by the Holy Alliance at the turn of the 1810s-1820s is investigated, the appearance of the "black myth" about Alexander I in the British press is investigated. The article analyzes publications from all British publications that existed at that time. A comparison of publications in liberal and conservative publications was carried out. Conclusions in the article are drawn about the perception of the actions of Alexander I, as the head of the Holy Union, through the prism of the national interests of Great Britain. Conclusions are also given on how the attitude of British authors to the Holy Alliance and to Alexander I personally was changing.

Alexander I, Holy Alliance, mass media, British press, imagology, foreign policy, black myth

1. Andreev A. (2022) “›Politicheskaia teologiia″ imperatora Aleksandra I: idei, reprezentatsii, praktika”. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia II: Istoriia. Istoriia Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi, 2022, vol. 106, pp. 62–80 (in Russian).
2. Lake B. (1984) British Newspapers: A History and Guide. London.
3. Laviss E., Rambo A. N. (1938) Istoriia XIX veka. Moscow, vol. 3 (in Russian).
4. Parsamov V. (2017) “Sviashchennyi soiuz i ego interpretatory”. Rossiia i sovremennyi mir, 2017, no. 4 (97), pp. 45–60 (in Russian).
5. Paulmann J. (2000) Pomp und Politik. Monarchenbegegnungen in Europa zwischen Ancien Regime und Erstem Weltkrieg. Paderborn.
6. Pyta W. (1996) “Konzert der Mächte und kollektives Sicherheitssystem. Neue Wege zwischenstaatlicher Friedenswahrung in Europa nach dem Wiener Kongress 1815”. Jahrbuch des Historischen Kollegs. München, 1996, pp. 133–173.
7. Tendit K. (2012) Istoriia zhurnalistiki, vol. 33, pt. 1. Komsomolsk-on-Amur (in Russian).

Latonova Anastasiia

At present, the history of the emergence of the «neocircular discord» of the Belokrinitsky hierarchy is poorly studied. Even in the memory of the Old Believers themselves, information about the once former division of the Old Believers who accept the Belokrinitsky hierarchy into the so-called circle and neokruzhniki is scattered. There is very little system information about events that relate to the «neocircular discord». There are also few scientific studies devoted to the events related to the «District Message» of 1862, and the available ones are devoted to individual episodes and names. Insufficient knowledge of this topic leads to inaccuracies in studies devoted to spiritual and social thought of the late XIX-early XX century, leaves blank spots in the history of Old Believers, leads to historiographical errors in the interpretation of certain phenomena. The article examines the history of the emergence of the «neocircular discord» of the Belokrinitsky hierarchy in 1862. The publication of the «District Message» provoked discord in the Old Believer Church of the Belokrinitsky hierarchy. The search for compromises and further attempts at reconciliation in the late XIX – early XX century did not bring the proper result. In addition, the neocircular discord marked the beginning of a theological discussion on a number of issues in relation to the state and the dominant Church. In particular, the most discussed issue was the possibility of commemoration at the Liturgy of the tsar. In addition, the publication of the «District Epistle» influenced the transition to the co-faith of a number of clergy of the Belokrinitsa hierarchy, which in turn had serious consequences for historical science, since in the process of cooperation with the historian of the church, Doctor of theology I. N. Subbotin, Archdeacon Filaret gave him the archive of the Belokrinitsa metropolis, the materials of which were subsequently published.

«District message», 1862, Old Believers, belokrinitskoe accord, neokruzhniki, discord, theology, discussion, co-belief.

1. Bochenkov V. (2013) “Sviashchennosluzhiteli Tserkvi Khristovoi (Russkaia Pravoslavnaia Staroobriadcheskaia Tserkov†), pogibshie v khode repressii s 1918 po 1940-e gg.”, in Puti Russkoi Golgofy. Moscow, pp. 338–404 (in Russian).
2. Bochenkov V. (2014) Staroobriadchestvo kaluzhskogo kraia. Rzhev (in Russian).
3. Bochenkov V. (2019) Staroobriadchestvo sovetskoi epokhi. Episkopy Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Staroobriadcheskoi Tserkvi, sovetskii period (1918–1991 gg.): Bibliografi cheskii slovar’. Moscow (in Russian).
4. Chistiakov G. (2022) “Aktual†nye voprosy istorii neokruzhnicheskogo dvizheniia v Belokrinitskoi ierarkhii”, in Neokruzhnicheskoe dvizhenie v istorii staroobriadcheskoi Belokrinitskoi ierarkhii: k 160-letiiu izdaniia ›Okruzhnogo poslaniia″: materialy mezhdunarodnogo kruglogo stola. Moscow, pp. 4–6 (in Russian).
5. Mel†nikov F. (2006) Kratkaia istoriia drevlepravoslavnoi (staroobriadcheskoi) Tserkvi. Barnaul, vol. 1 (in Russian).
6. Mikhailov S. (2003) “Iz istorii staroobriadtsev-neokruzhnikov na territorii Moskovskoi oblasti v 1940–1950-kh godakh”. Tserkovno-istoricheskii vestnik. Moscow, 2003, no. 10, pp. 136–147 (in Russian).
7. Mikhailov S. (2014) Staroobriadcheskie inocheskie poseleniia v Zapadnoi Meshchere v XVIII–XX vv. Moscow (in Russian).
8. Mikhailov S. (2018) Staroobriadcheskaia molennaia v derevne Fedino Bronnitskogo uezda i ee nasledie. Moscow (in Russian).
9. Mikhailov S. (2018) “›Chernaia molennaia″: sud†ba staroobriadcheskogo khrama v Orekhovo- Zueve”. Staroobriadets, 2018, vol. 71 (in Russian).
10. Mikhailov S. (2018) “Skity v Zueve v XIX–XX vekakh”. Staroobriadets, vol. 72 (in Russian).
11. Mikhailov S. (2019) “Molennye Orekhovo-Zueva”. Staroobriadets, vol. 73; vol. 74 (in Russian).
12. Prugavin A. (2011) Staroobriadchestvo vo vtoroi polovine XIX veka: ocherki iz noveishei istorii raskola. Moscow (in Russian).
13. Taranets S. (2009) “Baltskaia eparkhiia Drevlepravoslavnoi Tserkvi Khristovoi (ne priemliushchei Okruzhnogo poslaniia) v pervoi polovine XX veka”. Lipovane: istoriia i kul’tura russkikh staroobriadtsev, vol. 6. Odessa, 2009, pp. 124–129 (in Russian).

Voloskova Marina

In the pre-revolutionary period, parochial schools were a special stage in the educational system of the Russian Empire. The active work of the Russian Orthodox Church laid the foundation for the enlightenment of the northern peripheries of the Russian Empire. The article focuses on the peculiarities of the organization of primary education in schools of the Kola District of the Arkhangelsk Region in the 19th - early 20th centuries. The article is based on the analysis of the documents of the Kola District School Department, which are kept in the State Archives of the Murmansk Region (fund I-133) and the documents of the Kem’-Kola District School Department, which are represented in the National Archives of the Republic of Karelia (fund 419). These documents include teachers' reports on the progress of studies, correspondence between the School Board and village administrators regarding the organization of schooling, the supply of books to schools, lists of learning aids for teaching in parochial elementary schools, annual reports on the progress of students, as well as reports of inspectors and supervisors on the work of parochial schools. It demonstrates that the main difficulties in the organization of education in the North were: the dependence of the study cycle on the seasonal economic calendar of the population, the ignorance of the indigenous (Sámi) population of the Russian language, and the low interest of the students in receiving a certificate of completion of the course which entitled them to IV grade military service exemption. The article reviews the content of school educational programmers and peculiarities of educational process in elementary parochial schools of the Kola North in 19th - early 20th centuries. A conclusion is made that education in parochial schools had a practical value.

parochial schools, Russian Orthodox Church, Kola North, Sámi, Pomors, daily learning, education

1. Ermolaeva A. (2007) “Missionerskaia deyatel†nost† tserkovno-prikhodskikh shkol Kol†skogo Severa sredi loparei v kontse XIX — nachale XX veka”, in Sbornik studencheskikh nauchnykh rabot Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta, 2007, vol. 1, pp. 65‒73 (in Russian).
2. Ivanova M., Shabalina O. (2019) “Izvoz i soderzhanie pochtovykh stantsii kak vid ekonomicheskoi deyatel†nosti korennogo naseleniya Kol†skogo poluostrova (saamov) v XIX v.”, in Trudy Kol4skogo nauchnogo tsentra RAN, 2019, vol. 10, no. 2–16, pp. 42–53 (in Russian).
3. Mitrofan (Badanin) (ed.) (2016) Istoriia prosveshcheniia Evropeiskogo Severa. Materialy regional4noi nauchno-bogoslovskoi istoriko-kraevedcheskoi konferentsii. Vosmye Feodoritovskie chteniya, Severomorsk — St. Petersburg (in Russian).
4. Kazakova K. (2018) “Poliarnaia ›Odisseia″ inspektora uchilishch Nikolaia Kozmina v 1911 godu”. Paradigma: filosofsko-kul’turologicheskiy al’manakh, 2018, vol. 28, pp. 140‒147 (in Russian).
5. Kalinina E. (2019) Dukhovnoe obrazovanie v Olonetskoi gubernii v XIX — nachale XX vv. Petrozavodsk (in Russian).
6. Kalinina E. (2014) “Zakon Bozhii v russkoi shkole pervoi poloviny XIX v”. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia II: Istoriia. Istoriia Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi, 2014, vol. 4 (59), pp. 85‒97 (in Russian).
7. Nikonov V. (2018) “Obuchenie remeslam i rukodeliiu v tserkovno-prikhodskikh shkolakh moskovskoi gubernii na rubezhe XIX‒XX vv.” Nauka i shkola, 2018, vol. 3, pp. 168‒174 (in Russian).
8. Pul†kin M. (2006) “Nachal†noe obrazovanie dlia ›inorodtsev″ na Evropeiskom Severe Rossii (konets XIX — nachalo XX v.)”. Antropologicheskiy forum, 2006, vol. 4, pp. 163‒176 (in Russian).
9. Pchela I. (2018) “›Ne pedagogicheskie priemy″. Metody podderzhaniia distsipliny v tserkovnoprikhodskikh shkolakh Primorskoi oblasti v kontse XIX v. — nachale XX v.” Natsional4nye prioritety sovremennogo rossiiskogo obrazovaniia: problemy i perspektivy. Ussuriysk, 2018, pp. 9‒14 (in Russian).
10. Rozhkova A. (2020) “Dinamika rosta tserkovnykh shkol v Tobol†skoi eparkhii v poslednei chetverti XIX — nachale XX vv.” Vestnik Surgutskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta, 2020, vol. 2 (65), pp. 207‒215 (in Russian).
11. Sanakina T. (2015) Pravoslavnoe dukhovnoe obrazovanie v Arkhangel4skoi i Kholmogorskoi eparkhii v XVIII — nachale XX vv. Arkhangelsk (in Russian).
12. Zakharova T. (2019) Stanovlenie i razvitie sistemy narodnogo obrazovaniia v Saratovskom Povolzhe (80ye gody XVIII — XIX vv.). Kursk (in Russian).
13. Zhukovskaia T., Ashykhmin A. (2021) “O religioznosti universitetskogo cheloveka, ee osnovaniiakh i transformatsiiakh (na materialakh Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta XIX veka): k pos tanovke problem”. Khristianskoe Chtenie, 2021, no. 3, pp. 165–180 (in Russian).
14. Zhukovskaia T., Kalinina E., Kazakova K. (2019) “Sistema inspektirovaniia i kontrolia deiatel†nosti uchilishch svetskogo i dukhovnogo vedomstv v XIX veke: tseli, formy, effektivnost″”. Trudy Kolskogo nauchnogo tsentra RAN, 2019, vol. 10, no. 2‒16, pp. 77‒92 (in Russian).

Kazakova Ksenia

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

The article was made on the topic of the state assignment of the Barents Centre of the Humanities of the Kola Science Centre of the Russian Academy of Sciences No. FMEZ-2022-0028.

At the beginning of the reign of Nicholas II, representatives of the conservativeoriented élite and their supporters from other social strata established the Society of Zealots of Russian Historical Enlightenment in memory of Emperor Alexander III with the aims of maintaining the ideological course of the Emperor (who died in 1894), as well as preventing the return to the reforms in the spirit of Alexander II. One of the directions of its activity was propaganda of political values of Alexander III among common people. For this purpose, in the late 1890s the society began to organise “people’s libraries”, where rural and urban residents could read the relevant ideological literature and where educational talks would be held with them within the ideological guidelines of the Society. The Society’s leadership was careful in deciding who among its members would be entrusted with the organisation of such libraries. To prevent the libraries from receiving ideologically undesirable literature, a complex centralised system of supplying them with both already published editions and new ones was developed. In the fi rst years of its implementation, before the political crisis of 1905–1906 and following liberal reforms, this project of the Society can generally be regarded as successful. An extensive network of libraries was established throughout Russia, and these librarians managed to handle the demands of their users. However, this stage witnessed a growing interest of readers in current events and the necessity to provide libraries with periodicals. Readers were mainly interested in fi ction and popular historical works, while spiritual literature was less asked for, except for the period of Lent. Later, during the liberalisation of the internal political life of the country, these trends could not but create diffi culties for libraries in terms of maintaining their ideological orientation.

Society of Zealots of Russian Historical Enlightenment in Memory of Emperor Alexander III, Emperor Nicholas II, Count Sergei Dmitrievich Sheremetev, Dmitry Sergeyevich Sipyagin, Valery Nikolayevich Lyaskovsky, Ivan Fedorovich Tyutchev, Aleksandr Semenovich Stishinsky, Aleksandr Vasilyevich Krivoshein, Russian conservatism in late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.

1. Andreev D. (2012) “Bor†ba revnitelei: prosvetitel†skie al†ternativy v nachale tsarstvovaniya Nikolaia II”. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia II: Istoriia. Istoriia Russkoy Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi, 2012, vol. 1 (44), pp. 58–74 (in Russian).
2. Kaplan V. (2012) “Istoricheskie obshchestva i ideia istoricheskogo prosveshcheniia (konets XIX — XX veka)”, in A. Dmitriev (ed.) Istoricheskaia kul4tura imperatorskoi Rossii: formirovanie predstavlenii o proshlom: kollektivnaia monografiya v chest4 professora I. M. Savelievoi, Moscow, pp. 355–382 (in Russian).
3. Kulikova S. (2019) Konservatory i zemstvo: plany i rezultaty deiatelnosti 1864–1914 gg. Moscow (in Russian).
4. Meshchenina A. (2011) “K voprosu ob istoricheskom prosveshchenii russkogo naroda v kontse XIX — nachale XX veka”. Peterburgskie issledovaniia, 2011, vol. 3, pp. 83–91 (in Russian).
5. Meshchenina A. (1999) “O besplatnykh narodnykh bibliotekakh Obshchestva revnitelei russkogo istoricheskogo prosveshcheniia v pamiat† imperatora Aleksandra III”, in A. Sal†nikova (ed.) Tochka zreniia: mezhvuzovskii sbornik nauchnykh trudov, Kazan, pp. 46–52 (in Russian).
6. Smirnov Ya. (2016) “Deiateli Kostromy i Nizhnego Novgoroda v materialakh lichnogo arkhiva A. A. Titova”. Soobshcheniia Rostovskogo muzeia, 2016, vol. 21, pp. 124–142 (in Russian).
7. Vorontsov A. (2016) “Vladimir Karlovich Lilienfel†d (Hugo Reinhold Woldemar Lilienfeldt): na sluzhbe otechestvu i obshchestvu”, in Kraevedcheskie zapiski, 2016, vol. 23, pp. 58–67 (in Russian).
8. Yu Jie (2022) “Kommemorativnye praktiki sbornika ›Starina i novizna″ v kontse XIX — nachale XX v.”. Chelovecheskii kapital, 2022, vol. 4 (160), pp. 34–43 (in Russian).
9. Yu Jie (2022) “Kommemoratsiia Aleksandra III i ego tsarstvovaniia Obshchestvom revnitelei russkogo istoricheskogo prosveshcheniia na rubezhe XIX–XX vv.”. Klio, 2022, vol. 2 (182), pp. 119–127 (in Russian).

Yu Jie

The article examines the possible reasons and goals for P. V. Znamensky's choice of certain saints as heroes of the Study Guide to the History of the Russian Church, analyzes what characteristic features of the lives he paid special attention to. The author comes to the conclusion: regardless of the rank of holiness, the most important for P.V. Znamensky, firstly, is missionary activity. This interest was due to contemporary problems faced by P. V. Znamensky in the multinational Kazan region: in particular, with the controversy around the missionary and educational system of N. I. Ilminsky, which unfolded in the last third of the 19th - early 20th centuries.Secondly, as a professor who saw in the low level of education one of the problems of society in its various historical periods, he emphasized the book-enlightenment activities of the saints. Thirdly, saints who defended the integrity of the Russian state and the interests of the Russian Church acquire special significance on the pages of his work.

P. V. Znamensky, Study Guide to the History of the Russian Church, A Guide to Russian Church History, history of the Russian Orthodox Church, saints, holiness, N. I. Ilminsky, Kazan Theological Academy, missionary work

1. Bazhura E. (2014) “Kritika podkhoda svetskoi istoricheskoi nauki k analizu izlozheniia russkoi tserkovnoi istorii P. V. Znamenskim”, in Lyudi i teksty: Istoricheskii almanakh, Moscow, pp. 307–327 (in Russian).
2. Chirkova E. (1995) “V. O. Kliuchevsky and P. V. Znamensky”, in Kliuchevsky: Sbornik materialov, Penza, no. 1, pp. 297–304 (in Russian).
3. Fedorov V. (2004) “Istorik Russkoi Tserkvi P. V. Znamensky (1836–1917)”. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo bogoslovskogo instituta. Seriia Filologiia. Istoriia. Filosofiia, 2004, vol. 2, pp. 132–138 (in Russian).
4. Kunitcyn B. (2014). “Molodye gody P. V. Znamenskogo po ego avtobiografi cheskim zametkam”. Gasyrlar avazy — Ekho vekov, 2014, vol. 1/2, pp. 73–80 (in Russian).
5. Lipakov E. (2009) “Znamensky”, in Pravoslavnaia entsiklopediia, Moscow, vol. 20, pp. 297–300 (in Russian).
6. Nekhorosheva T. (2018) “Blagotvoritel†nost† Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi v trudakh P. V. Znamenskogo”, in Ezhegodnaia bogoslovskaia konferentsiia PSTGU, Moscow, vol. 28, pp. 276–278 (in Russian).
7. Nekhorosheva T. (2022) “Poniatie ›obrusenie″ v traktovke professora P. V. Znamenskogo”. Uchenye zapiski Kazanskogo universiteta. Seriia: Gumanitarnye nauki, 2022, vol. 164/3, pp. 199–212 (in Russian).
8. Solntsev N. (2009) “Rol† sotsial†nogo faktora v kontseptsii tserkovnoi istorii P. V. Znamenskogo”. Uchenye Zapiski Kazanskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta. Seriia: Gumanitarnye nauki, 2009, vol. 151, no. 5/2, pp. 31–35 (in Russian).
9. Solovyov I. (2000) Professor P. V. Znamensky kak istorik Russkoi Tserkvi. Moscow (in Russian).
10. Tsygankov D. (2021) “Mirovozzrencheskie osnovy professorskogo sluzheniia S. M. Solov†eva”. Vestnik PSTGU. Seriia II: Istoriia. Istoriia Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi, 2021, no. 99, pp. 36–49 (in Russian).
11. Znamensky V. (2005) “P. V. Znamensky — retsenzent truda N. I. Kostomarova o russkikh narodopravstvakh”, in Lestvitsa: Materialy nauchnoi konferentsii po problemam istochnikovedeniia i istoriografi i pamiati prof. V. P. Makarikhina, Nizhny Novgorod, pp. 102–106 (in Russian).

Nekhorosheva Tatiana

85 years ago, on March 17, 1938, on the territory of the Butovo special zone of the NKVD, a large group of christians was shot - 11 people from a secret monastic community that existed in the city of Sergiev Posad (since 1930 - Zagorsk) in the 20-30s. XX century. One of them was Hierodeacon Afoniy (in the world - Vishnyakov Alexander Egorovich, 1870-1938), an artist, a master of lacquer painting, who played an important role in the preservation and development of the traditions of folk lacquer painting in Soviet times. He came from a family of peasant painters, the creators of the Zhostovo tray craft. From 1892 he was a monk, later a hierodeacon of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, and for some time a subdeacon of St. Patriarch Tikhon. An active participant in the secret monastic life in the city of Sergiev Posad (since 1930, Zagorsk) in the 20s - mid-30s. XX century. The article makes an attempt on the basis of newly studied documents, primarily the archival and investigative case of a group of believers, in which Fr. Afoniy, and documents of personal origin show the circumstances of the life path, arrest and execution of an outstanding monk-artist. A significant part of the documents is introduced into scientific circulation for the first time.

Domestic fine art of the 20th century, Russian artistic varnishes, Trinity-Sergius Lavra, Repressions against believers in the USSR, Political repressions of the 20th century, Great Terror, Butovo polygon, Secret monasticism.

1. Beglov A. (2008) V poiskakh “bezgreshnykh katakomb”. Tserkovnoe podpol4e v SSSR. Moscow (in Russian).
2. Iunge M., Bordiugov G., Binner R. (2008) Vertikal bolshogo terrora. Istoriia operatsii po prikazu NKVD № 00447. Moscow (in Russian)
3. Krivosheeva N. (2006) “Novye materialy iz arkhiva M. E. Gubonina”. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia 2: Istoriia. Istoriia Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi, 2006, no. 19, pp. 110‒138 (in Russian).
4. Krivosheeva N. (2006) “Troitskoe Sergievo podvor†e pri Sviateishem patriarkhe Tikhone”. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia 2: Istoriia. Istoriia Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi, 2006, no. 19, pp. 226‒340 (in Russian).
5. Krivosheeva N. (2007) “›Kto dushu svoiu polozhit za drugi svoya″: keleinik sviatogo Patriarkha Tikhona Iakov Anisimovich Polozov (23 oktiabria 1879 g. — 9 dekabria 1924 g.)”. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia 2: Istoriia. Istoriia Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi, 2007, no. 22, pp. 52‒73 (in Russian)
6. Malaeva Z. Klassik sovetskoj lakovoj miniatyury — monah Affonij avialable at. URL: https:// antiqueland.ru/articles/1096/
7. Malaeva Z. (1993) “Master lakovoi rospisi Afonii Vishniakov”, in Pamiatniki kul4tury. Novye otkrytiia. Pismennost. Iskusstvo. Arkheologiia. Ezhegodnik 1992. Moscow, pp. 376‒384 (in Russian)

Garkavy Igor

The publication presents documents of the Moscow Diocesan authorities related to the organization of national penitential events in 1919: the Message of Archbishop Joasaph (Kallistov) on the need for repentance from August 2, 1919, the Decree of the Moscow Diocesan Council on penitential services, Appendices to the decree: permanent additions to the services (litanies and penitential prayer), the Brochure "Repentance is the need of our time". These documents appeared as a reaction of the diocesan authorities to the nationwide disasters that occurred after the revolution (poverty, famine, epidemics) and were sent to the churches of the Moscow Diocese. They contain both practical instructions of a liturgical nature and a theoretical understanding of the events taking place from a theological point of view. The hardships of the time experienced are perceived in these sources as the result of a sin that requires repentance. The idea is substantiated that without the elimination of the spiritual causes of disasters, any other struggle against them will not be successful. The need to organize special church penitential events was noted by the supreme Ecclesiastical authority (represented by the Patriarch), and was also the most important activity of the Moscow Diocesan Council in 1919, while to this day this activity remains practically unexplored. The documents presented in this article are published for the first time.

Patriarch Tikhon, the Russian Orthodox Church in 1918-1919, the history of Moscow, the reaction of the Church to the first persecutions, the first years of Soviet power, national penitential events of 1918-1919, the Moscow Diocesan Council.

1. Krivosheeva N. (ed.) (2009) “V godinu gneva Bozhiia...”: Poslaniia, slova i rechi sv. Patriarkha Tikhona. Moscow (in Russian).
2. Vorob′ev V. (archpriest) (ed.) (2000) “Sledstvennoe delo Patriarkha Tikhona”, in V. Vorob†ev, N. Krivosheeva (eds) Sbornik dokumentov po materialam TsA FSB. Moscow (in Russian).

Borisyuk Andrey

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

The publication introduces into scientific circulation four letters from Metropolitan Eleutherius (Bogoyavlensky) of Lithuania and Vilna to the Deputy Patriarchal Locum Tenens Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky). The letters are dated 1934. The author of the letters not only headed the Diocese of Lithuania, but also, from 1930, managed the few parishes of the Moscow Patriarchate in Western Europe. Metropolitan Eleutherius reported on important events and problems that arose in the parishes entrusted to him. One of them was the division at the Three Hierarchs Compound in Paris, caused by the wrong parish policy of Archbishop Benjamin (Fedchenkov). Another problem was the appointment of a new rector for the Three Saints Compound in Paris. For some time, the apologist of the Moscow Patriarchate I.A. Stratonov. Metropolitan Eleutherius reported on the situation in the Russian Church Abroad and on the patronage, she received from Patriarch Varnava of Serbia. The author of the letters considered his policy to be wrong and uncanonical. At the same time, the metropolitan spoke about the reconciliation between the head of the Russian Church Abroad, Metropolitan Anthony (Khrapovitsky) and the head of the Western European Russian Exarchate, Metropolitan Evlogy (Georgievsky). The letters reflect other events as well. Among them are the mission of Hieromonk Demetrius (Balfour) among the Anglicans, the last days of Archpriest Sergei Sokolovsky, a hero of the First World War who joined the Renovationist schism and converted to Catholicism, about the attempts of the publicist M.A. Kallash to publish a pamphlet against the Russian Church Abroad, etc. Many of Metropolitan Eleutherius' assessments are biased, but, on the whole, the letters are an important source on the history of Russian Orthodoxy in exile

Moscow Patriarchy, Serbian Orthodox Church, Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, Diocese of Lithuania, Patriarch Varnava (Rosich), Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky), Metropolitan Anthony (Khrapovitsky), Metropolitan Eleutherius (Bogoyavlensky), Metropolitan Evlogy (Georgievsky), Metropolitan Veniamin (Fedchenkov), Hieromonk Dimitry (Balfour), I.A. Stratonov

1. Kostryukov A. (2011) Russkaia Zarubezhnaia Tserkov v 1925–1938 gg. Iurisdiktsionnye konflikty i otnosheniia s moskovskoi tserkovnoi vlastiu. Moscow (in Russian).
2. Mazyrin A., priest (2006) Vysshie ierarkhi o preemstve vlasti v Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi v 1920–1930 godakh. Moscow (in Russian).
3. Solov†ev I., priest (2008) “Raskol†nicheskaia deiatel†nost† ›obnovlentsev″ v Russkom zarubezh†e”, in XVIII Ezhegodnaia bogoslovskaia konferentsiia Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Materialy, vol. 1, pp. 273–281. Moscow (in Russian).

Kostryukov Andrey

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

This article was written as part of the project “Development of Relations of the Russian Orthodox Church with Other Local Churches in 1917‒1945 in the Light of the Change in the Political Situation and in the Ecclesiological Views of Leading Church Figures of that Period”, funded by St. Tikhon’s Orthodox University for the Humanities and the Foundation “Living Tradition”.