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

Based on Old Russian literary sources of 11-13th cc., this paper examines how illness was perceived in the Middle Ages. This research concentrates on a certain perception type (“communication illness”) and describes its distinctive features. This type of sickness integrates several versions of the medieval illness etiology, including “illness as a punishment” and “illness as a trial”. The author suggests that an Old Russian scribe considered “communication illness” as a message from God. The circumstances of the illness allowed the sick person to recognize the situation of “communication” and decipher the message. Some details like visions or the absence of “sickness agents” could help to recognize this type of illness. The research distinguishes several subtypes of “communication illness”, which are called “sign illness”, “punishment illness”, “inborn illness” and “deathbed illness”. The last one could be perceived as an ascetic practice available to both clergy and laity. Scribes condemned any attempt to feign a “communication illness”, this was viewed as an act of sacrilege. The message of “communication illness” was more often positive, it was perceived as a sign of God’s favor to the sick person. Biblical quotations used in descriptions of the illness show that “communication illness” was closely related to the virtue of patience. The conclusions of this research make it possible to correct the present conception that Old Russian scribes prohibited any attempts to apply methods of classical (Hippocratic) medicine. The author believes that scribes condemned Hippocratic methods exclusively in the situations of “communication illness”, in other cases of sickness they had no objection to a classical approach to the treatment.

the Old Rus’, Biblical quotations, hagiography, chronicles, illness, sin, asceticism

1. Arnautova Iu. (2004) Kolduny i sviatye: Antropologiia bolezni v srednie veka [Sorcerers and saints: Anthropology of illness in the Middle Ages]. St. Petersburg (in Russian).
2. Artamonov Iu. Biographicheskie shtrikhi k portretu inoka Polikarpa — odnogo iz avtorov Kievo-Pecherskogo paterika [Some aspects of the biography of Monk Polikarp, one of the authors of the Paterikon of the Kievan Cave Monastery], available at https://history.jes.su/s207987840010080-7-1/ (accessed 08.12.2021).
3. Bogoiavlenskii N. (1960) Drevnerusskoe vrachevaniye v 11–17 veke. Istochniki dlia izucheniia istorii russkoi meditsiny [Ancient Russian therapy in the 11–17th cc. Sources for the study of the history of Russian medicine]. Moscow (in Russian).
4. Chumakova T. (2001) “V chelovecheskom zhitel′stve mnozi obrazy zriatsia”. Obraz cheloveka v kul′ture Drevnei Rusi [“Numerous images are seen in man’s life”. Image of man in Old Russian culture]. St. Petersburg (in Russian).
5. Danilevskii I. (2018) Istoricheskaia tekstologiia [Historical textology]. Moscow (in Russian).
6. Dorofeeva L. (2014) “Chelovek smirennyi v agiografi i Drevney Rusi (11 — pervaia tret′ 17 v.)” [The humble man in the Old Russian hagiography (11th — fi rst third of the 17th cc.)], in Germenevtika drevnerusskoy literatury [Hermeneutics of the Old Russian literature], 16−17 Moscow, pp. 9–388 (in Russian).
7. Ferngren G. B. (2009) Medicine and Health Care in Early Christianity. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press (in English).
8. Gerasimova I., Milkov V. (2020) “Vrachevatel′nye praktiki v Drevnei Rusi” [Healing practices in Ancient Rus′], in Aktualnye voprosy fundamental′noi, klinicheskoi meditsiny i farmatsii: sbornik statei po materialam konferentsii, posviaschennoi 25-letiiu Instituta meditsinskogo obrazovaniya NGU im. Iaroslava Mudrogo [Current issues in fundamental medical sciences, clinical medicine, and pharmacy. Conference proceedings]. Veliky Novgorod, pp. 9–14 (in Russian).
9. Koniavskaia E. (2019) “Drevnerusskii prepodobnyi pri konchine” [Old Russian saint when close to death]. Quaestio Rossica, 2019, vol. 7 (4), pp. 1057–1066 (in Russian).
10. Koniavskaia E. (2018) “Tema kontsa zhizni v drevnerusskikh letopisiakh 12 v. (posledniye dni kniazia)” [The topic of the end of life in Old Russian chronicles of the 12th c. (last days of the prince)]. Drevniaia Rus′: Voprosy medievistiki, 2018, vol. 4 (74), pp. 121–128 (in Russian).
11. Larchet J.-C. (2016) Théologie de la maladie. Moscow (Russian translation).
12. Levin E. (2008) “Identifying Diseases in Pre-Modern Russia”. Russian History, 2008, vol. 35, № 3/4, pp. 321–333 (in English).
13. Malakhova A., Malakhov S. (2014) Fenomen bolezni v soznanii i povsednevnoi zhizni cheloveka Drevnei Rusi (XI — nachalo XVII v.) [The phenomenon of illness in mind and daily life of the man of Ancient Rus’ (11th — beginning of the 17th cc.)]. Armavir (in Russian).
14. Medved′ A. (2017) Bolezn′ i bolnye v Drevnei Rusi: ot rudometa do dokhtura. Vzgliad s pozitsii istoricheskoi antropologii [Illness and the ill in Ancient Rus′: from “rudomet” to “dokhtur”. A perspective of historical anthropology]. St. Petersburg (in Russian).
15. Milkov V. (2015) “Drevnerusskoe monashestvo i ego otnoshenie k nedugam” [Ancient Russian monkhood and its’ attitude towards illness]. Vestnik slavianskykh kul′tur, 2015, vol. 2 (36), pp. 13−28 (in Russian).
16. Milkov V. (2017) “Chelovek boliaschii v “Voproshanii” Kirika Novgorodtsa: o svoeobrazii podhoda k neduzhnym s tochki zrenia otnoshenia k boliezniam v Drevnei Rusi” [“Sick person” in the “Voproshanie” by Kirik the Novgorodian: on the uniqueness of the approach to the sick in terms of the attitude towards illness in Ancient Rus′], in Kirik Novgorodets i drevnerusskaya kul′tura [Kirik the Novgorodian and the Ancient Russian culture]. Veliky Novgorod, pp. 56−83 (in Russian).
17. Nazarenko A. (2001) Drevniaia Rus′ na mezhdunarodnykh putiah: mezhdistsiplinarnye ocherki kul′turnykh, torgovykh, politicheskikh sviazei [Ancient Russia on international routes: interdisciplinary essays on cultural, trade-related and political links]. Moscow (in Russian).
18. Odesskii M. (1995) “Chelovek boleiushchii” v drevnerusskoi literature” [“Sick person” in the Ancient Russian literature], in Drevnerusskaia literatura: izobrazhenie prirody i cheloveka [Ancient Russian literature: depiction of nature and man]. Moscow, pp. 158−181 (in Russian).
19. Pautkin A. (2002) Besedy s letopistsem: poetika rannego russkogo letopisaniia [Conversations with the chronicler: poetics of the early Russian chronicles]. Moscow (in Russian).
20. Trofimova N. (2019a) Bibleiskiie tsitaty v Kievskoi letopisi [Biblical quotes in the Kievan Chronicle], in Kuskovskie chteniia. Aksiologicheskoie prostranstvo russkoi slovesnosti: traditsii i perspektivi izucheniia. Materialy mezhdunarodnoi nauchnoi konferentsii 3–6 oktiabria 2019 g. [Kuskovskiie readings. Axiological space of the Russian literature: traditions and perspectives of the research. Materials of the international conference, October 3–6, 2019]. Moscow, pp. 225–233 (in Russian).
21. Trofimova N. (2019b) Bibleiskie tsitaty vo vladimiro-suzdal′skom letopisanii [Biblical quotes in the chronicles of Vladimir and Suzdal′], in Literatura Drevnei Rusi: Materialy vserossiiskoi nauchnoi konferentsii 6–7 dekabria 2018 g. [Ancient Russian literature: Materials of the all-Russian scientific conference, December 6–7, 2018]. Moscow, pp. 23–44 (in Russian).

Pelezneva Natalia

The author expresses gratitude to F. Uspenskij for scientific counseling.

The article is devoted to the experience of the Russian Orthodox Church in the fortresses and fortifications of the Left Wing of the Caucasian Cordon Line. During the study of the available literature and sources available to us, it was revealed that the missionary activity of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) was based on the principles of tolerance towards local peoples and Islam. Analyzing the activities of the ROC on the cordon Line, it is worth noting that initially churches on the Line were erected as regimental ones, with military units - to maintain moral and ethical values among Orthodox soldiers. The Russian government, at the founding of the first fortresses of the Caucasian Line, saw cordon fortifications as the agony of confrontation, which, in their opinion, could only be used as a dividing line between the troops and the highlanders. At the beginning of the 19th century, the fundamental idea of Caucasian politics changed and the policy was transformed from defensive to civilian colonization of the region, where the activities of the church were presented more than just overseeing and observing the spiritual needs of military personnel on the Line. The churches, both civil and military, participated in the complex process of acculturation in the region, where, by means of their functioning, they pushed the boundaries of the idea and perception of the mountaineers about Russia, carried out missionary activities in spreading Orthodoxy on the Lines, supported the ritual and everyday life of the Orthodox population of the region - civil and military. The activities of the Russian Orthodox Church extended to the issues of the dissemination of education, which in general had a positive trend for the region. In the fortifications and fortresses of the Left Wing of the Caucasian Cordon Line, the activity of the ROC was relative, in comparison with the Right Wing of the Line. This was due to the fact that the main concentration of the Orthodox population was concentrated there.

ROC (Russian Orthodox Church), cordon Line, temple, church, Kizlyar, fortresses, Caucasian politics, Synod.

1. Gadzhiev B. (2006) Tsarskie i Shamilevskie kreposti v Dagestane [Tzar’s and Shamil’s fortresses in Dagestan]. Moscow (in Russian).
2. Gazieva A. (2016) “K voprosu o musul′manskikh kvartalakh Kizliara v politike Rossii v Dagestane v XIX veke” [The issue of the Muslim quarters of Kizliar in the policy of Russia in Dagestan of the 19th century]. Islamovedenie. 2016. Vol. 7. № 1 (27). P. 93–99 (in Russian).
3. Gedeon (Dokunin), metropolitan (1992) Istoriia khristianstva na Severnom Kavkaze do i posle prisoedineniia ego k Rossii [History of Christianity in the North Caucasus before and after its affiliation with Russia]. Moscow; Piatigorsk (in Russian).
4. Iona, archbishop (ed.) (2002) Ocherki istorii Astrakhanskoi eparkhii za 400 let ee sushchestvovaniia [Essays on the 400-year history of Astrakhan diocese], in 2 vols. Vol. 2: Ocherki istorii Astrakhanskoi eparkhii s 1902 po 2002 gg. [Essays on the history of Astrakhan diocese from 1902 to 2002]. Rostov-na-Donu.
5. Kiniapina N. (1984) Kavkaz i Sredniaia Aziia vo vneshnei politike Rossii vtoroi poloviny XVIII — 80-kh gg. XIX v. [Caucasus and Central Asia in the foreign policy of Russia of the latter half of the 18th century — 1880s]. Moscow (in Russian).
6. Nevskaia T. (2017) “Evropeiskie avtory XIII–XVIII vv. o khristianstve u narodov Severnogo Kavkaza” [European authors of the 13th — 18th centuries on Christianity of peoples of the Northern Caucasus], in Pravoslavie v istorii i kul′ture Severnogo Kavkaza: voprosy istochnikovedeniia i istoriografi i: Materialy VII mezhdunarodnykh Sviato-Ignat’evskikh chtenii (Stavropol’, 12 maia 2015 g.) [Orthodoxy in the history and culture of the North Caucasus: issues in source criticism and historiography. Proceedings of the 7th International St. Ignatiy Readings (Stavropol′, 12 May 2015)]. Stavropol′, 2017. Vol. 1. P. 104–111 (in Russian).
7. Ol′shevskii M. Kavkaz s 1841 po 1866 g. [Caucasus from 1841 to 1866], available at http://www.vostlit.info/Texts/Dokumenty/Kavkaz/XIX/1840-1860/Olsevskij /frametext5.htm (accessed 10.03.2021) (in Russian).
8. Sergeev A. (2011) “K istorii sozdaniia tserkvei na territorii Dagestana po proektam kniazia G. G. Gagarina” [On the history of building churches in the territory of Dagestan according to the projects by Prince G.G. Gagarin]. Izvestiia Dagestanskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta. Obshchestvennye i gumanitarnye nauki. Makhachkala, 2011. Vol. 3 (16). P. 43–50 (in Russian).
9. Sergeev A. (2012) “Istoriia voennykh pravoslavnykh khramov v sel′skoi mestnosti Dagestana (vtoraia polovina XIX — nachalo XX v.)” [The history of military churches in the rural area of Dagestan (second half of the 19th — early 20th centuries)]. Izvestiia Rossiiskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta im. A.I. Gertsena. S. 60–70 (in Russian).
10. Shidlovskii Iu. Zapiski o Kizliare. Vostochnaia literatura [Notes on Kizlyar. Literature of the East], available at http://www.vostlit.info/Texts/Dokumenty/Kavkaz/XIX/1840-1860/Sidlovskij _Ju/text1.htm (accessed 02.04.2021).
11. Vikhreva A. Rannie khramy na Azovo-Mozdokskoi voennoi linii [Early churches on the Azov-Mozdok military line], available at https://superinf.ru/view_helpstud.php?id=1432 (accessed 10.05.2021) (in Russian).

Gasanov Magomed

*According to ISCED 2011, a post-doctoral degree called Doctor of Sciences (D.Sc.) is given to reflect second advanced research qualifications or higher doctorates.

Gazieva Abidat

The article is dedicated to the Russian bishop of the XIX century, Bishop Jeremiah (Soloviev) (1799-1884) as the compiler of akathists, who wrote an akathist to the Monks Anthony and Theodosius and other Kiev Pechersk wonder-workers in the 60-70s of the XIX century, as well as an akathist to the Guardian Angel. These texts preserved in several manuscripts were never published and did not become the subject of special scientific study. The author attempts to look at the social aspect of the phenomenon of the Orthodox Russian akathist of the 18th and early 20th centuries using the example of the life of one of the authors of the akathists. The research is aimed at elucidating the motives behind the writing of akathists, at finding the place of Bishop Jeremiah among other akathistographers, studying akathists in the context of the entire literary work of the spiritual writer and tracing the functioning of his texts. On the basis of archival materials, the facts of the life of Bishop Jeremiah, which influenced his akathist work, connections and relations with other representatives of the circle of compilers of akathists, are reconstructed, and hymns belonging to him are analysed. The akathist work of Bishop Jeremiah is a vivid example of the hymnography of the "Learned Monasticism", in which more and more often a place was given to akathist writing in the Modern Times. The exclusive motivation for compiling akathists for Jeremiah was personal piety and veneration of individual saints, like most of Jeremiah's prayers, they were intended for personal use and a narrow circle of close people, but not for general church use. The stories about the traditions of composing and using akathists testify to the development of akathist culture in the Russian Church during the Synodal era.

Bishop Jeremiah (Soloviev), Orthodox Russian akathist, N.V. Elagin, Abbess Parthenia (Adabash), Archbishop Innokenty (Borisov), compilers of akathists, akathist creativity, Synodal period.

1. Adrianova I. (2016) “Dukhovnaia poetessa Ig. P.A.: atributsiia pis′ma odnoi neizvestnoi korrespondentki Dostoevskogo” [A spiritual poetess Ig. P. A.: attribution of the letter of one unknown correspondent of Dostoevsky]. Neizvestnyi Dostoevskii, 2016, no. 4, pp. 85–107 (in Russian).
2. Bogdanova T. (2016) “¼Na moiu doliu vypal zhrebii ves′ma zavidnyi, on nauchit menia perenosit′ trudnosti v zhizni slugi Tserkvi i Otechestva!″ Arkhimandrit Moisei (Rybal′skii) po pis′mam k episkopu Ieremii (Solov′evu)” [“An enviable lot befell me which will teach me to endure hardships in life of a servant of church and fatherland!” Archimandrite Moisei (Rybal′sky) and his letters to Bishop Ieremia (Solov′ev)]. Vestnik Ekaterinburgskoi dukhovnoi seminarii, 2016, no. 3 (15), pp. 185–232 (in Russian).
3. Kreidun G., priest (2008) Altaiskaia dukhovnaia missiia v 1830–1919 gody: struktura i deiatel′nost′ [Spiritual mission in Altai in 1830–1919: structure and activities]. Moscow (in Russian).
4. Mar′eva A., Zakharchenko N. (2017) “Rukopis′ Preosviashchennago episkopa Ieremii, b. episkopa Nizhegorodskago ¼Vospominaniia o Pr. Innokentie, Arkhiepiskope Khersonskom i Tavricheskom″” [Manuscript of Bishop Ieremia, the former Bishop of Nizhny Novgorod “Memoirs about St. Innokenty, Archbishop of Kherson and Tauride”]. Trudy Nizhegorodskoi dukhovnoi seminarii, 2017, vol. 15, pp. 337–381 (in Russian).
5. Nemashkalov P. (2019) “Zhizn′ i deiatel′nost′ preosviashchennogo Ieremii (Solov′eva) v 1843–1849 gg. (Kavkazskaya kafedra)” [Life and work of Ieremia (Soloviev) in 1843–1849 (Caucasian see)]. Voprosy istorii, 2019, no. 11, pp. 222–234 (in Russian).
6. Popov A. (2013) Pravoslavnye russkie akafi sty [Orthodox Russian akathists]. Moscow (in Russian).

Sidneva Maria

The article contains the first attempt to analyze systematically the reasons, driving forces and results of the struggle for the editorial office journal in 1892. The history of the study of the problem, the achievements and mistakes of contemporaries and historians is considered. The chronology of the conflict is being reconstructed on the basis of the censorship case of Russkoe Obozrenie and the extensive correspondence of dozens of actors. The role of Konstantin Leontiev’s death in rallying his students and associates around Tertiy Filippov and at the beginning of Nikolai Boborykin’s attempts to take away Russkoe Obozrenie from Prince Dmitriy Tsertelev is demonstrated. The role of the journal’s sponsor David Morozov, chief censor Yevgeny Feoktistov and other interested persons in these events is being clarified. There are revealed the reasons for the nomination of Anatoly Alexandrov, little-known at that time, to the new editor of Russkoe Obozrenie, as well as the circle of his supporters and opponents. There are considered the reasons for the refusal to transfer the journal to him at the end of August 1892 and the permission that followed a month and a half later to approve Aleksandrov as editor and publisher. Evidence of the participation of prominent dignitaries and outstanding publicists in the struggle for Russkoe Obozrenie is being introduced into scientific circulation. The position of the Main Directorate for Press Affairs, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Office of the Moscow Governor-General, Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, are analyzed. Attention is paid to the struggle of Konstantin Pobedonostsev and Tertiy Filippov for influence on the new editorial office of the journal and its political course. The adherence to Leontiev’s ideas is shown as a key factor in the formation of the circle of the young editorial board (Anatoly Alexandrov, Vasily Rozanov, Lev Tikhomirov, Rev’d. Joseph Fudel and others).

“Russkoe Obozrenie”, Prince Dmitriy Tsertelev, David Morozov, Nikolay Boborykin, Anatoly Alexandrov, Terty Filippov, Russian conservatism, periodicals

1. Dinershtein E. (1983) I. D. Sytin. Moscow (in Russian).
2. Fetisenko O. (2009) “Protoierei Iosif Fudel′ o mitropolite Filarete” [Archpriest Iosif Fudel′ on Metropolitan Philaret]. XIX Ezhegodnaia bogoslovskaia konferentsiia PSTGU: materialy [19th Annual Theological Conference of St Tikhon Orthodox University for the Humanities: Proceedings], vol. 1. Moscow, pp. 111–114 (in Russian).
3. Fetisenko O. (2012) “Geptastilisty”: Konstantin Leontiev, ego sobesedniki i ucheniki (Idei russkogo konservatizma v literaturno-khudozhestvennykh i publitsisticheskikh praktikakh vtoroi poloviny XIX — pervoi chetverti XX veka) [The ¼Heptasylists″: Konstantin Leontiev, his interlocutors and students (ideas of Russian conservatism in literary and journalistic practices of the second half of the 19th — first quarter of the 20th centuries)]. St. Petersburg (in Russian).
4. Fetisenko O. (2019) “Aleksandr Petrovich Salomon (1853–1908) — vozmozhnyi sobesednik F. M. Dostoevskogo” [Alexander Petrovich Salomon (1853–1908) as a possible interlocutor of F. M. Dostoevsky]. Dostoevskii: materialy i issledovaniia, no. 22, pp. 88–102 (in Russian).
5. Goncharova E. (2020) “Vasilii Rozanov i Anatolii Aleksandrov (iz perepiski 1892 g.)” [Vasily Rozanov and Anatoly Alexandrov (from the correspondence of 1892)]. Slovesnost′ i istoriia. Zhurnal fi lologicheskikh i istoriko-kul′turnykh issledovanii, no. 3, pp. 143–179 (in Russian).
6. Medovarov M. (2020) “D.N. Tsertelev kak pervyi redaktor zhurnala ¼Russkoe obozrenie″ (1890–1892 gg.)” [Prince Dmitriy N. Tsertelev as the fi rst editor of Russkoe obozrenie (1890–1892)]. Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Seriia Istoriia, no. 2, pp. 98–109 (in Russian).
7. Platon (Rozhkov), hierodeacon (2010) Prepodobnyi Varsonofii i Optinskaia smuta [St. Varsanofi y and the Optinskaya tumult], available at https://shhshhshh.optina.ru/pub/p48/ (accessed 28.11.2021) (in Russian).
8. Polunov A. (2010) K.P. Pobedonostsev v obshchestvenno-politicheskoi i dukhovnoi zhizni Rossii [K. P. Pobedonostsev in the socio-political and spiritual life of Russia]. Moscow (in Russian).
9. Repnikov A., Milevskii O. (2011) Dve zhizni L′va Tikhomirova [Lev Tikhomirov’s two lives]. Moscow (in Russian).
10. Tarasova A. (1982) “Reaktsionno-okhranitel′naia zhurnalistika” [Reactionary and protective journalism], in Literaturnyy protsess i russkaya zhurnalistika kontsa XIX — nachala XX veka. 1890–1904. Burzhuazno-liberal′nye i modernistskie izdaniia [Literary process and Russian journalism in the late 19th — early 20th centuries, 1890–1904. Bourgeois-liberal and modernist periodicals]. Moscow, pp. 234–260 (in Russian).
11. Vedernikov V. (2010) “Russkoe obozrenie”. Russkii konservatizm serediny XVIII — nachala XX veka: entsiklopediia [Russian conservatism in the mid-18th — early 20th centuries: an encyclopaedia]. Moscow, pp. 432–436 (in Russian).

Medovarov Maksim

*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 is devoted to the topic of freedom of conscience, which by the beginning of the twentieth century had become one of the main topics in Russian church and public thought. The relevant discussion was largely initiated by a speech in September 1901 at the Missionary Congress in Orel by the leader of the nobility of the Orel province, M. A. Stakhovich, who proposed introducing freedom of conscience in Russia and abolishing criminal penalties for falling away from the Orthodox Church. This event has been repeatedly considered in the context of the all-Russian controversy that has arisen, but the consequences of Stakhovich's speech in the Oryol diocese itself have not been subjected to scientific study before. The author of the article managed to establish the fact of the activation of conservative church thought in the Oryol diocese at the end of 1901 and the clear formulation of the positions of the Oryol conservatives on the introduction of freedom of conscience and other liberal freedoms, which were a threat to the existence of the church-state union and the Russian Orthodox state. Special attention in the study is paid to attempts to blur the boundaries of the Church in the Orel diocese, to include "random persons" acting on a political order in church life. It also drew criticism from conservatives. After 1901, the manifestation of church conservative thought in the Orel diocese on these issues can be traced in a number of journalistic materials. This concerns, first of all, the period of the revolutionary years 1905-1907. and 1917, which indicates a certain stability of church conservative ideas in the Oryol diocese, the presence of these ideas of groups of supporters who became active at crucial moments in history.

freedom of conscience, Missionary Congress, M. A. Stakhovich, church conservative thought, Bishop Nikanor (Kamensky), Mitrofan of Athos, liberalism, Oryol Orthodox Peter and Paul Brotherhood

1. Balyko T. (2020) “Formirovanie predposylok obnovlencheskogo raskola v srede liberal′nogo dvorianstva i dukhovenstva Orlovskoi gubernii v 1900–1917 gg.” [Formation of prerequisites for the Renovationist schism among the liberal nobility and clergy of Orel province in 1900–1917]. Vestnik PSTGU. Seriia II: Istoriia. Istoriia Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi, 2020, vol. 97, pp. 94–107 (in Russian).
2. Bendin A. (2010) “Svoboda sovesti ili veroterpimost′?: Polemika v rossiiskoi pechati (nachalo ХХ veka)” [ Freedom of conscience or religious tolerance? Polemics in the Russian press (the beginning of the 20th century)]. Novyi istoricheskii vestnik, 2010, no. 2 (24), pp. 5–14 (in Russian).
3. Gularian A. (2012) “M.A. Stakhovich: politicheskie vzgliady i obshchestvennaia zhizn′” [M. A. Stakhovich: Political views and public life]. Rossiiskaia istoriia, 2012, no. 2, pp. 184–192 (in Russian).
4. Dorskaia A. (2016) “Osobennosti vzaimodejstviia gosudarstva i lichnosti po voprosam svobody sovesti v otechestvennoi pravovoi traditsii” [Features of interaction between the state and the individual on issues of freedom of conscience in the Russian legal tradition]. Prava i svobody cheloveka i grazhdanina: teoreticheskie aspekty i iuridicheskaia praktika [Human and citizen rights and freedoms: theoretical aspects and legal practice]. Materialy ezhegodnoi Mezhdunarodnoi nauchnoi konferentsii pamiati professora Feliksa Mikhailovicha Rudinskogo [Materials of the Annual International Conference in the Memory of Professor Felix Mikhailovich Rudinsky], 2016, pp. 170–174 (in Russian).
5. Efimov A. (2007) Ocherki po istorii missionerstva Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi [Essays on the history of the missionary work of the Russian Orthodox Church]. Moscow (in Russian).
6. Kondakova L. (2019) “Episkop Mitrofan Afonskii (Orlovskie stranitsy zhizni)” [Bishop Mitrofan of Athos (life in Orel)]. Istoriia. Istoriki. Istochniki (elektronnyi nauchnyi zhurnal Tul′skogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta), 2019, no. 3, pp. 22–32 (in Russian).
7. Kurilov V. (2013) “Problemy prava na svobodu sovesti v Rossiiskoj imperii nachala ХХ veka” [Problems of the right to freedom of conscience in the Russian Empire of the early 20th century]. Nachalo: zhurnal instituta bogosloviia i filosofii, 2013, vol. 28, pp. 194–206 (in Russian).
8. Matiukhina O. (2014) Missionerskaia i prosvetitel′skaia deyatel′nost′ Orlovskogo Pravoslavnogo Petropavlovskogo Bratstva v 1887–1905 gg. [Missionary and educational activity of Orel Orthodox Peter and Paul Brotherhood in 1887–1905]. Vestnik KGU im. N. A. Nekrasova, 2014, vol. 20, no. 7, pp. 113–116 (in Russian).
9. Pavlova O. (2014) “Obsuzhdenie voprosa o svobode sovesti v ramkakh deiatel′nosti religioznofi losofskikh sobranii v Sankt-Peterburge v 1901–1903 gg.” [Discussion of the issue of freedom of conscience within the framework of the activities of religious and philosophical assemblies in St. Petersburg in 1901–1903]. Kul′tura. Dukhovnost′. Obshchestvo, 2014, no. 10, pp. 104–108 (in Russian).
10. Ponomariov A. (2012) “K voprosu o predostavleniiakh russkoi pravoslavnoi Tserkvi o pravakh i obiazannostiakh cheloveka v ХХ veke” [On the question of the Russian Orthodox Church’s provision of human rights and duties in the 20th century], in Pravovaia sistema sovremennoi Rossii: problemy i perspektivy ikh preodoleniia [The legal system of modern Russia: problems and prospects for overcoming them], 2012, pp. 31–36 (in Russian).
11. Rodnianskaia I. (2015) “Epizody zashchity svobody sovesti russkimi literatorami khristianskogo mirovozzreniia (ХХ vek)” [Episodes of the protection of freedom of conscience by Russian writers of the Christian worldview (20th century)]. Kul′turologiya, 2015, no. 4 (75), pp. 118–128 (in Russian).
12. Safonov A. (2007) Problemy svobody sovesti i veroispovedanii v obshchestvennykh diskussiiakh nachala ХIХ stoletiia [Problems of freedom of conscience and religion in public discussions of the early 20th century]. Izvestiia vysshikh uchebnykh zavedenii. Pravovedenie, 2007, no. 2 (271), pp. 203–211 (in Russian).
13. Shimanskaia O. (2001) “Svoboda sovesti v Rossii: istoriia, genezis, sovremennoe sostoianie” [Freedom of conscience in Russia: history, genesis, modern state]. Vestnik Nizhegorodskogo universiteta im. N.I. Lobachevskogo. Seriia: Pravo, 2001, no. 1, pp. 308–314 (in Russian).
14. Zhukova O., Kara-Murza A. (2011) “V bor′be za svobodu sovesti (o diskussii vokrug rechi M. A. Stahovicha na Missionerskom s»ezde v Orle 1901 g.)” [In the struggle for freedom of conscience (on the discussion around the speech of M.A. Stakhovich at the Missionary Congress in Orel in 1901)], in Orlovskii mudrets, operedivshii vremya [The sage of Orel, who was ahead of time], Orel, 2011, pp. 27–45 (in Russian).

Balyko Timofey

To the priest, Professor, Deputy Head of the Department of the Modern History of the Russian Orthodox Church, Alexander Mazyrin

The article is devoted to study of deanery councils in Yaroslavl diocese of Russian Orthodox Church at the beginning of XX-th century. The author reveales the date of establishment of deanery councils (October 19, 1903) and analyzes the "Rules for Deanery Councils in the Yaroslavl Diocese". Special attention is paid to the changes of the regulatory framework of Deanery Councils and Deanery meetings during the period since 1903 to 1916. The article also explores the main directions of activity of Deanery Councils. The Deanery Council was a church governing body created to help the Dean. As a rule, the council consisted of a dean appointed by the diocesan leadership, and two members. The members of the council were elected at deanery meetings. On the scale of the entire Russian Church, Deanery Councils were established by the Local Council of 1917-1918, but in a number of dioceses they were created earlier. The clerical documents of the deanery councils of the Yaroslavl diocese have not been introduced into scientific circulation. Together with the reports of the deans, the journals of the meetings of the Yaroslavl general diocesan congresses of the clergy, materials from periodicals, these documents allow us to characterize the deanery councils as self-governing bodies of the clergy, which played a prominent role in the system of administration of the diocese. At their core, the Deanery Councils were the magistrates' courts for the clergy. They dealt with minor disciplinary offenses of clergy members, as well as civil disputes. The surviving documents make it possible to compose a picture of the most frequent offenses and disputes in the church environment. The documents also allow making a conclusion about dificult relationship between priests and the lower clergy - psalmists and deacons. In 1903-1916 the role of the lower clergy was increased in the activities of deanery councils and meetings. Since 1910 the psalmists and deacons had the voting right at deanery meetings. Archbishop Tikhon (Belavin) agreed at 1912 with the decision of the general diocesan congress of clergy: deacons and psalmists were included to the deanery councils.

Russian Orthodox Church, Yaroslavl diocese, spiritual consistory, revolution of 1905-1907, deanery, deanery council, deanery assembly, Tikhon (Belavin), clergy.

1. Alekseeva S. (2003) Sviateishii Sinod v sisteme vysshikh i tsentral′nykh gosudarstvennykh uchrezhdenii poreformennoi Rossii, 1856–1904 gg. [The Holy Synod in the system of higher and central state institutions in post-reform Russia, 1856–1904]. St. Petersburg (in Russian).
2. “Blagochinnicheskoe sobranie” (2002) [Deanery meeting], in Pravoslavnaia entsiklopediia [Orthodox Encyclopaedia], vol. 5, Moscow, pp. 340–341 (in Russian).
3. Nechaeva M. (2016) “Pravoslavnye monastyri i monashestvo sinodal′nogo perioda: traditsii izucheniia” [Orthodox monasteries and monasticism of the Synodal period: traditions of study]. Nauchnyi dialog, 12 (60), Ekaterinburg, pp. 302–319 (in Russian).
4. Tsypin V. (2002) “Blagochinnicheskii sovet” [Deanery council] in Pravoslavnaia entsiklopediia, vol. 5, Moscow, p. 339 (in Russian).
5. Tsypin V. (2002) “Blagochinnyi” [Dean] in Pravoslavnaia entsiklopediia, vol. 5, Moscow, p. 341–342 (in Russian).
6. Vsevolodov A. (2014) “Blagochinnicheskie s»ezdy dukhovenstva i deiatel′nost′ popechitel′nykh sovetov o bednykh dukhovnogo zvaniia v Vologodskoi eparkhii v 60–70-e gg. XIX v.” [Deanery congresses of the clergy and the activities of the boards of trustees for the poor clergy in Vologda diocese in the 1860-70s], Vestnik Severnogo (Arkticheskogo) federal′nogo universiteta. Seriia Gumanitarnye i sotsial′nye nauki, 1, Arkhangelsk, pp. 5–9 (in Russian).

Leonov Dmitry

*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 analyzes the events in Omsk on February 15-22, 1918, when an attempt by the regional Soviet authorities to implement the "Decree on the separation of church from state and school from church" led to riots in, Soviet historiography called the "priest's rebellion". In the course of these events, the novice and housekeeper of the bishop's house, Nikolai Tsikura, was killed and later canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church. The aim of the work is to analyze the circumstances of the death of Nikolai Tsikura in the context of the events of the Civil War that broke out in Russia. Along with published reports in periodicals and published and unpublished memoirs, one of the key evidence of the topic under consideration is the act record of the death of Nikolai Tsikura, stored in the Historical Archive of the Omsk Region. The article introduces into scientific circulation a brief description of the personality of Nikolai Tsikura, given to him in connection with the events of the “priest’s rebellion” in the memoirs of Omskovite M.A. Stolpovsky, who personally knew him. After analyzing two points of view on the cause of the murder of Nikolai Tsikura (he defended the bishop during the arrest or was killed for no apparent reason), the author notes the absence of a source that allows to unambiguously answer that question. When analyzing the circumstances of the death of Nikolai Tsikura, special attention is paid to the fact that the bells rang by killed priest triggered the mass unrest in Omsk, brought the people out into the streets who defended Bishop Sylvester and other arrested priests from possible reprisals and postponed for a month the implementation in Omsk of the “Decree on the separation of church from state and school from church.” It is emphasized that the canonization of Nikolai Tsikura in In 2000, continued the church tradition of venerating him as a holy new martyr started in 1918 at the Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church.

Russian Orthodox Church, Russian revolution, Civil war in Russia, Omsk, priest's revolt, Nikolai Tsikura, Bishop Sylvester (Olshevsky), new martyrs and confessors.

1. Biriukova Iu. (2012) “Ispoved′ v zastenkakh VChK. K biografi i istorika i obshchestvennogo deiatelia professora protoiiereya P.V. Verkhovskogo” [Confession in the dungeons of the Cheka. On the biography of the historian and public fi gure, Professor Archpriest P. V. Verkhovsky]. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia 2: Istoriia. Istoriia Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi, 2012, no. 5 (48), pp. 87–104 (in Russian).
2. Biriukova Iu. (2020) “Sviashchennik Vladimir Vostokov — uchastnik belogo dvizheniia i osnovatel′ Bratstva Zhivotvoriashchego Kresta” [Priest Vladimir Vostokov, a member of the White movement and the founder of the Brotherhood of the Life-Giving Cross]. Vestnik Sviato-Filaretovskogo instituta, 2020, no. 34, pp. 194–214 (in Russian).
3. Petin D. (2020) “100-letie Grazhdanskoi voiny v Sibiri: nauchnoprosvetitel′skaia refl eksiia v Omske” [100th anniversary of the Civil War in Siberia: scientifi c and educational refl ection in Omsk]. Severnyye arkhivy i ekspeditsii, 2020, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 131–142 (in Russian).
4. Petin D. (2020) “Mify v lokal′noy istorii: obzor raboty kruglogo stola v Omske” [Myths in the local history: an overview of the round table in Omsk]. Sibirskii antropologicheskii zhurnal, 2020, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 38–49 (in Russian).
5. Petin D. (2020) “Kapitan M. M. Pospeev: opyt rekonstruktsii zhiznennogo puti kadrovogo ofitsera topografi cheskoi sluzhby” [Captain M. M. Pospeev: describing the life of an officer of the topographic service]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2020, no. 452, pp. 140–146 (in Russian).
6. Petin D. (2021) Istoriia omskogo roda Batiushkinykh [History of the Omsk family of the Batyushkins]. Omsk (in Russian).
7. Petin D., Stel′mak M. (2021) “¼Ubity pri vzryve v dome Verkhovnogo pravitelia″: k analizu aktovykh zapisei o smerti chinov konvoia admirala A.V. Kolchaka 27 avgusta 1919 g.” [“Killed in an explosion in the house of the Supreme Ruler”: analysis of death records of the offi cers of Admiral A.V. Kolchak’s convoy, August 27, 1919]. Vestnik arkhivista, 2021, no. 3, pp. 725–740 (in Russian).
8. Prispelo vremia podviga... Dokumenty Sviashchennogo Sobora Pravoslavnoi Rossiyskoi Tserkvi 1917–1918 gg. o nachale gonenii na Tserkov′ (2012) [The time has come for the feat... Documents of the Holy Council of the Orthodox Russian Church, 1917–1918, on the beginning of the persecution of the Church]. Moscow (in Russian).
9. Sukhovetskii V. (2018) “Letopis′ tserkovnykh sobytii goroda Omska s 21 ianvaria po 22 fevralia 1918 g.” [Chronicle of church events in the city of Omsk from January 21 to February 22, 1918], in Tserkov′. Bogoslovie. Istoriia: materialy VI Vserossiiskoi nauchno-bogoslovskoi konferentsii (Yekaterinburg, 10–12 fevralia 2018 g.) [Church. Theology. History: Materials of the 6th All-Russian conference (Yekaterinburg, February 10–12, 2018)]. Yekaterinburg, 2018, pp. 171–176 (in Russian).
10. Sushko A. (2019) “¼Ofitser tserkvi″ v usloviiakh antireligioznoi politiki Sovetskogo gosudarstva: podvig ispovednichestva omskogo sviashchennika V.F. Infant′ieva” [“Officer of the Church” in conditions of the anti-religious policy of the Soviet state: Omsk Priest V. F. Infantiev’s feat of confession]. Noveishaia istoriia Rossii, 2019, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 642–659 (in Russian).
11. Sushko A. (2021) “¼Popovskii miatezh″: k voprosu ob antibol′shevistskikh volneniiakh v Omske” [“Priests’ mutiny”: on the issue of anti-bolshevik riots in Omsk in February 1918]. Omskii nauchnyi vestnik. Seriya: Obshchestvo. Istoriia. Sovremennost′, 2021, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 62–70 (in Russian).
12. Shchit i mech Omskogo Priirtysh′ia (2018) [Shield and sword of Omsk Irtysh region]. Omsk (in Russian).
13. Tsikura Nikolay, in Drevo. Otkrytaia pravoslavnaia entsiklopediia, available at https://drevo-info.ru/articles/13312.html (accessed 09.12.2021) (in Russian).
14. Zdanovich A. (2021) “¼Kontseptual′no my dolzhny pisat′ ne o tom, kak pobedili, a o tom, kak na dolgom puti voevali i cherez poteri prishli k Velikoy Pobede…)” [“Conceptually, we should write not about how we won, but about how we fought on a long journey and through losses came to the Great Victory...”]. Omskii nauchnyi vestnik. Seriia: Obshchestvo. Istoriia. Sovremennost′, 2021, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 55–61 (in Russian).

Sushko Aleksey

*According to ISCED 2011, a post-doctoral degree called Doctor of Sciences (D.Sc.) is given to reflect second advanced research qualifications or higher doctorates.

The article was prepared with the support of the Russian Science Foundation project, 21-18-00266 "The religious factor in Russia during the Civil War: the phenomenon, significance and regional specificity", implemented at the St. Petersburg State University.

This article deals with a radical change in the religious politics of the Soviet government between 1987 and 1988. Then, the celebration of the 1000th Anniversary of the Christianization of Rus’ became not only a Church issue but also an event of great political significance. Additionally, the official visit of Mikhail Gorbachev to the Vatican was designed in this period. The author argues that the communication problems which Gorbachev faced during his negotiations with Ronald Reagan in Geneva, Reykjav?k, and Moscow were the reason for this change. Since the anti-religious policy of the Soviet Union was one of the main obstacles to rapprochement between Reagan’s administration and the Soviet government, Gorbachev and his advisers decided to revise their approach to the Church issues. The author also assumes that Pope John Paul II unofficially played an important role in the negotiations between the US diplomats and the Soviet government. According to the article, the “Holy Alliance” between Reagan and Pope John Paul II had a significant impact on this negotiation process. Gorbachev’s visit to the Vatican was, in the author’s view, a link in the chain of events which led to the changes of Soviet religious politics. The legalization of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church was, according to the author, a price to pay for the normalization of the relationships both with the Vatican and with the USA. Based on recently published and unpublished sources, the author describes this process in a broad historical context and analyze the attitude of both the Russian Orthodox Church and the Holy See towards the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church, religious freedom, and the role of religion in the public sphere.

of the CPSU Central Committee Secretariat, Politburo, religious policy, reputation, trust, Holy Synod, "Holy Alliance", Vatican, Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church, jubilee, freedom of religion, M. Gorbachev, R. Reagan, John Paul II, K. Kharchev, V. Falin, A. Casaroli, A. Chernyaev

1. Alekseev V. (1992) “Shturm nebes” otmeniaetsia? Kriticheskie ocherki po istorii bor′by s religiei v SSSR [“The assault on heaven is cancelled?” Critical essays on the history of struggle against religion in the USSR]. Moscow (in Russian).
2. Bernstein C. Cover Story: The Holy Alliance (Time, 24.02.1992), available at http://www.carlbernstein.com/magazine_holy_alliance.php (accessed 30.10.2020).
3. Bublyk T. (2014) “Problema greko-katolicheskoi identichnosti v Zapadnoi Ukraine v khode bor′by za legalizatsiiu (rubezh 1980–1990-kh gg.)” [The issue of the Greek-Catholic identity in the Western Ukraine during the struggle for the legalisation (late 1080s — early 1990s)]. Gosudarstvo, religiia, tserkov′ v Rossii i za rubezhom, 2014, no. 4, pp. 235–260 (in Russian).
4. Elenskii V. Religiia i perestroika v Ukraine [Religion and perestroika in the Ukraine], available at https://archipelag.ru/authors/elensky/?library=962 (12.05.2021) (in Russian).
5. Filippov B. (2021) “Il papa come catalizzatore dei cambiamenti: Giovanni Paolo II e la politica di informazione in URSS sulle questioni religiose”, in J. Mikrut (ed). Giovanni Paolo II e la chiesa cattolica in unione sovietica e nei paesi sorti dalla sua dissoluzione nel centenario della nascita di Karol Wojtyła (1920–2020) e nei Paesi sorti dalla sua dissoluzione Nel centenario della nascita di Karol Wojtyła (1920–2020). Verona, pp. 259–282.
6. Filippov B. (1989) “Ioann Pavel II: politicheskii portret” [John Paul II: political portrait]. Nauka i religija, 1989, no. 2, pp. 12–20 (in Russian).
7. Filippov B. (2019) “Leaving Socialism Behind: How Churches in the Post-Soviet Territories Adapted to a New Life in Russia and Poland”, in Latvij as Universitātes. Filozofi jas un socioloģij as institūts. Reliģiski-filozofiski raksti XXV. Riga, pp. 25–45.
8. Filippov B. (1988) “Mir v politicheskoi doktrine Ioanna Pavla II. Obzor” [The world in John Paul’s II political doctrine. An outline], in B. Filippov (ed.) Papstvo v sovremennom mire [Papacy in the contemporary world]. Moscow, pp.14–38 (in Russian).
9. Filippov B. (2013) “Papa, Pravoslavie, Ukraina” [Pope, Orthodoxy, Ukraine], in B. Filippov. Ioann Pavel II. Pol′sha. Politika [John Paul II. Poland. Politics]. Moscow, pp. 111–118 (in Russian).
10. Filippov B. (2016) “Ruzvel′t, Pii XII, I. Stalin i problema reputatsii SSSR v gody Vtoroi mirovoi voiny” [Roosevelt, Pius XII, Stalin, and the issue of the reputation of the USSR during World War II]. Vestnik PSTGU. Serij a II: Istoriia. Istoriia Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi, 2016, vol. 4 (71), pp. 84–102 (in Russian).
11. Gordienko N. (1986) Kreshhenie Rusi: fakty protiv legend i mifov: polemicheskie zametki [Christianisation of Rus′: facts against legends and myths. Polemical notes]. Leningrad (in Russian).
12. Grinevskii O. (2004) Perelom. Ot Brezhneva k Gorbachevu [The fracture. From Brezhnev to Gorbachev]. Moscow (in Russian).
13. Ikonowicz M., Santini A. Papież w Moskwie. Wywiad, available at https://www.tygodnikprzeglad.pl/papiez-moskwie/ (accessed 22.07.2021).
14. Kengor P. (2011) Ronald Reagan. Duchowa biografia. Krakow.
15. Kharchev K., Achil′diev I. (1987) “Garantii svobody. Interv′ju” [Guarantees for freedom: an interview]. Nauka i religiia, 1987, no. 11, p. 23 (in Russian).
16. Klibanov A., Mitrokhin L. (1987) “Istoriia i religiia” [History and religion]. Kommunist, 1987, no. 12, pp. 91–98 (in Russian).
17. Koroleva L., Mel′nichenko O. (2011) “Prazdnovanie tysiacheletiia Kreshheniia Rusi: tserkovnoe meropriiatie ili obshchestvennoe sobytie?” [Celebration of the 1000th anniversary of the Christianisation of Rus′: a church action or a public event?]. Istoricheskie, filosofskie, politicheskie i iuridicheskie nauki, kul′turologija i iskusstvovedenie. Voprosy teorii i praktiki, 2011, no. 7, pt. 3, pp. 107–109 (in Russian).
18. Koroleva L., Mel′nichenko O. (2012) “Vlast′, Russkaia pravoslavnaia tserkov′ i Rimsko-katolicheskaja tserkov′ v Rossii (1985–2000 gg.): k voprosu o vzaimootnosheniiakh” [State authori ties, Russian Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church in Russia (1985–2000): on the issue of relationships]. Vestnik KRASGAU, 2012, no. 2, pp. 222–226 (in Russian).
19. Kurliandskii I. (2011) Stalin, vlast′ i religiia (religioznyi faktor vo vnutrennei politike sovetskogo gosudarstva v 1922–1953 gg.) [Stalin, power and religion (religious factor in the internal policy of the Soviet state in 1922–1953)]. Moscow (in Russian).
20. Maslova I. (2015) “Gosudarstvenno-konfessional′naia politika v SSSR: povorot kursa v 1985–1988 gg.” [The policy of state towards religious denominations in the USSR: the change of strategy in 1985–1988]. Izvestija vysshikh uchebnykh zavedenii. Povolzhskii region. Gumanitarnye nauki, 2015, vol. 4 (36), pp. 43–54 (in Russian).
21. Massie S. (2013) Trust but Verify: Reagan, Russia, and Me. Rockland: Maine Authors Publishing. Mel′nichenko O. Gosudarstvo i RPC nakanune 1000-letiia Kreshcheniia Rusi [The State and the Church prior to the 1000th anniversary of Christianisation of Rus′], available at https://www.rusnauka.com/30_NNM_2010/Istoria/73003.doc.htm (27.03.2020).
22. Mitrokhin N. RPTs i ~uniaty″ v Zapadnoi Ukraine: mify i realii [Russian Orthodox Church and the “Uniates” in the Western Ukraine: myths and actual facts], available at https://religion.in.ua/main/analitica/3830-rpc-i-uniaty-v-zapadnoj-ukraine-mify-i-realii.html (17.04.2021).
23. Muren M. (1966) Vatikan i SSSR [Vatican and USSR]. Moscow (in Russian).
24. Musiewicz P. Ronald Reagan a Jan Paweł II. Kontekst ideowy i polityczny współpracy prezydenta i papieża, available at https://www.omp.org.pl/artykul.php?artykul=255 (13.05.2021).
25. Orlov A. Dnevniki Reigana [Reagan’s diaries], available at https://rusrek.com/news/eshhe/istoriya/30846-dnevniki-rejgana (12.04.2021) (in Russian).
26. Olszański T. (2013) Kresy Zachodnie: miejsce Galicji Wschodniej i Wołynia w Państwie Ukraińskim. Warszawa.
27. Polynov M. (2013) “Sovetsko-amerikanskie otnosheniia vo vneshnei politike M.S. Gorbacheva 1985–1988 gg.” [Soviet-American relations in Gorbachev’s foreign policy in 1985–1988]. Trudy Istoricheskogo fakul′teta Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta, 2013, no. 14, pp. 307–326 (in Russian).
28. Pospelovskii D. (1995) Russkaia pravoslavnaia tserkov′ v XX veke [Russian Orthodox Church in the 20th century]. Moscow (in Russian).
29. Preston A. (2012) The Sword of the Spirit, the Shield of Faith: Religion in American War and Diplomacy. New York: Knopf.
30. Raushenbakh B. (1975) Prostranstvennye postroeniia v drevnerusskoi zhivopisi [Spacial designs in the Old Russian painting]. Moscow (in Russian).
31. Raushenbakh B. (1987) “Skvoz′ glubinu vekov” [Through the depths of the centuries]. Kommunist, 1987, no. 12, pp. 99‒115 (in Russian).
32. Shveitser P. (1995) Pobeda. Rol′ tainoi strategii administratsii SShA v raspade Sovetskogo Soiuza i raspade sotsialisticheskogo lageria [The victory. Role of the secret strategy of the US administration in the collapse of the USSR and collapse of the socialist group of countries]. Minsk (in Russian).
33. Smolkin V. (2021) Sviato mesto pusto ne byvaet: istoriia sovetskogo ateizma [The holy place is never empty. History of Soviet atheism]. Moscow (in Russian).
34. Stremidlovskij S. Posol SShA v Vatikane rasskazala, kak papa i Reigan protivostoiali kommunizmu [US ambassador in the Vatical told how Pope and Reagan opposed Communism], available at https://regnum.ru/news/polit/2612901.html (accessed 11.07.2021).
35. Veigel′ G. (2001) Svidetel′ nadezhdy. Ioann Pavel II [The witness of hope, John Paul II]. Moscow (in Russian).
36. Zagorskii A. (2005) Khel′sinskii protsess [Helsinki process]. Moscow (in Russian).

Filippov Boris

*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.