Baptism of Russia, scientific view. Historian Andrey Zubov - about the baptism of Russia

Baptism of Russia- the introduction of Christianity as a state religion in Kievan Rus, carried out at the end of the 10th century by Prince Vladimir Svyatoslavich. Sources give conflicting indications of the exact time of the baptism. Traditionally, following the chronicle chronology, the event is usually attributed to the year 988 and considered the beginning of the official history of the Russian Church (some researchers believe that the baptism of Russia took place later: in 990 or 991).

The Christianization of the peoples of the Russian Empire was a long and difficult process that continued for 9 and subsequent centuries.

Term and concept

The expression "Baptism of Russia" is in the "Tale of Bygone Years":

In the Russian historiography of the New Age, the term was first used by V. N. Tatishchev (“baptism of the Slavs and Russia”) and N. M. Karamzin (“baptism of Russia”). Along with it, the terms “Enlightenment of Russia”, “introduction of Christianity”, “reform of Vladimir”, etc., are also used with equal justification in the literature.

background

A number of authors consider it a completely established fact that the princes Askold and Dir, with the "bolyars" and a certain number of people, were baptized, since during the campaign against Constantinople they were frightened by the power of the Patriarch of Constantinople, who, according to legend, lowered the holy relics into the water, and most of The fleet immediately sank during the storm that rose at the same second. Byzantine sources describe the moment of the baptism of the Russians in the period 842-867, according to other sources in the time of Basil I (867-886) and Patriarch Ignatius (867-877).

At the end of the 9th century, the Russian diocese was already listed in the lists of the bishoprics of Constantinople, first in the 61st, then in the 60th place. These events are sometimes called the first (Fotiev, or Askold's) baptism of Russia.

The wife of Prince Igor was a Christian - the grandmother of Prince Vladimir, Princess Olga (+ July 11, 969). Although there are different opinions about the exact time and place of her baptism, it is generally accepted, according to later studies, that she was baptized in Constantinople in 957. Reliable information about the reception by Emperor Constantine Porphyrogenitus, who is considered to be her successor, is contained in his treatise "On Court Ceremonies". The absence in the treatise of a mention of her baptism gives reason to some researchers to assume that she could already be a Christian by that time; the treatise mentions a certain “presbyter Gregory” in her retinue, in whose person some are inclined to see her confessor.

According to V. N. Tatishchev (based on the controversial Joachim Chronicle), the Kyiv prince (972-978 or 980) Yaropolk Svyatoslavich, who was killed by the Varangians on the orders of his brother St. Vladimir, showed sympathy for Christians and Christianity.

According to The Tale of Bygone Years, before the baptism of Prince Vladimir, a “test of faith” took place: Vladimir was offered, in particular, Islam from the Volga Bulgaria, Judaism from the Khazars and Christianity. All of them were rejected by the prince for various reasons.

Baptism of Prince Vladimir and the people of Kiev

According to The Tale of Bygone Years, in 6496 “from the creation of the world” (that is, approximately in 988 AD), the Kievan prince Vladimir Svyatoslavich decided to be baptized by the Church of Constantinople. After that, in the reign of the Emperors Basil II and Constantine VIII of the Porphyrogenic, the clergy sent by the Patriarch of Constantinople Nicholas II Chrysoverg baptized the people of Kyiv in the waters of the Dnieper and (or) Pochaina. According to the Russian chronicle Tale of Bygone Years, the prince, during the baptism of his people, offered the following prayer:

Many historians attribute the baptism of Vladimir himself to 987. According to Byzantine and Arabic sources, in 987 Constantinople concludes an alliance with Russia to suppress the rebellion of Varda Foka. The condition of the prince was the hand of Princess Anna, the sister of the Emperors Basil and Constantine, a requirement extremely humiliating for the Romean basileus. Then, at the height of the war with Varda Foka, Vladimir attacked Korsun and captured it, threatening Constantinople. The emperors agree to give Anna to the prince, subject to the preliminary baptism of Vladimir, who is called the name of Vasily - in honor of his successor, Emperor Vasily II; Vladimir, “far away for the vein of Korsun by the Greek queen dividing” (in the vein for his wife).

From the Byzantine chronicles about the “baptism of Russia” in 988, only “Anonymous Banduri” is reported, in which the story about the choice of faiths by Prince Vladimir is conveyed, and the “Vatican Chronicle”:

The last message is probably a reverse translation from The Tale of Bygone Years. In general, in Byzantine literature, the event of 988 remained practically unnoticed, since, according to the Greeks, the conversion of Russia took place a century earlier.

The first Russian by origin, Metropolitan Hilarion of Kyiv (XI), explains the motives of Prince Vladimir in this way:<…>and mind in his heart, as if to understand the vanity of idol flattery and seek the one God, who created all creation, visible and invisible. More often, he would always hear about the goodness of the land of Grechsk, Christ-loving and strong in faith, how the one God in the Trinity is honored and bowed down, how strength and miracles and signs are in them, how people are full of churches, how good all the weights and cities stand in prayers , all the Gods stand. And hearing this, she longed in her heart, burned in spirit, as if he were a Christian and his land.

Establishment of a church organization in Kyiv

In the 20th century, some church historians (M. D. Priselkov and A. Kartashev) put forward and supported the hypothesis that under Vladimir the Kyiv Church was in canonical dependence on the Ohrid hierarchy of the Bulgarian Church, which at that time allegedly had autocephaly (which was not corresponds to generally accepted facts), most researchers are not inclined to share it.

Several different names of the first Metropolitan of Kyiv appear in Russian chronicle sources. In the Russian Church in the 16th century, a tradition was established to consider him the Greek (or Syrian) Metropolitan Michael (Syrian), who in the Menologion is called the “first Metropolitan of Kyiv”. Metropolitan Michael is credited with the merit of founding the Zlatoverkho-Mikhailovsky monastery in Kyiv, and the monks who arrived with him - the foundation of the monastery, which later received the name of Kiev-Mezhigorsky.

Baptism of other Russian lands

It is known that the first episcopal sees, besides Kyiv, were Novgorod, and also, possibly, Chernigov and Vladimir-Volyn and Belgorod (now the village of Belogorodka near Kyiv), Pereyaslav diocese.

In parts of the territories, Christianity was planted by force; at the same time, religious buildings of the pagans were destroyed, those who resisted were subjected to repression.

According to some chronicle evidence, Novgorod actively resisted the introduction of Christianity: it was baptized in 990 by Bishop Joachim with the military assistance of the Kyiv voivode Dobrynya (brother of Prince Vladimir's mother - Malusha) and the thousand Putyata.

In Rostov and Murom, resistance to the introduction of Christianity, according to traditional church history, continued until the 12th century: the first two bishops sent to Rostov were expelled, and the third - St. Leontius - died at the hands of the pagans in 1073 (according to the prologue, in 993). Rostovites were baptized only by Bishop Isaiah († May 15, 1090), who ascended the cathedra in 1078. By the 1070s, apparently, the events described in the "Life" of Abraham of Rostov, in particular, the crushing of the idol of Veles, on the site of which the Epiphany Monastery was erected, also belong.

According to the Icelandic sagas, Polotsk was baptized around 1000 by the Icelandic Christian Viking Thorvald Kodransson, who received from the Emperor of Constantinople Basil II a letter of "plenipotentiary representative of Byzantium in the Russian cities of the Eastern Baltic."

Consequences of adopting Christianity

Civilizational value

The civilizational significance of the baptism of Russia is difficult to overestimate. The well-known philologist V. N. Toporov, assessing the significance of the adoption of Christianity for Russian civilization, writes:

Political implications

The baptism of Russia took place before the final split of the Western and Eastern churches, but at a time when it had already fully matured and received its expression both in dogma and in the relationship between church and secular authorities.

In the Byzantine church-state legal consciousness, the Emperor ( Basileus) was conceived as the Guardian and Supreme Defender of Orthodoxy (epistimonarch), and, consequently, the single autocrat (autocrator) of all Orthodox peoples. The rulers of other Christian peoples (states) received from him the titles of archons, princes, stewards. Thus, having been baptized by the Romans (Byzantines), Vladimir included Russia in the orbit of Byzantine statehood.

So, the Kyiv Grand Duke in the XII century in Constantinople assimilated the modest court title of stolnik. The Kyiv Metropolis in Constantinople diptychs occupied a place among the latter: in the oldest of them - 61st, and in the later one, compiled under Andronicus II Palaiologos (1306-1328) - 77th.

Metropolitan Platon (Levshin) at the beginning of the 19th century saw special significance in the adoption of Christianity from Constantinople (and not Rome): “Russia is obliged to send great thanksgiving to the Shepherd Christ, that it did not embrace it with the darkness of the West, that is, that it did not undergo the yoke of the Western Roman Church , where already at this time, according to many superstitions and the appropriation of the Popes to themselves unlimited power, and according to the spirit in everything worldly, and not in the Gospel, everything was almost transformed. The Lord has freed us from these snares; although the West, by the efforts of the Antichrist, tried in every possible way to subdue us, as later this will be more visible.

Cultural implications

The adoption of Christianity contributed to the development of architecture and painting in its medieval forms, the penetration of Byzantine culture as the heir to the ancient tradition. The spread of Cyrillic writing and the book tradition was especially important: it was after the baptism of Russia that the first monuments of ancient Russian written culture arose.

The adoption of Christianity as the state religion inevitably entailed the liquidation of pagan cults, which had previously enjoyed grand ducal patronage.

The clergy condemned pagan rites and festivities (some of them persisted for a long time due to the fact that some researchers qualify as religious syncretism or dual faith). Religious buildings were destroyed - idols, temples.

At the same time, it is interesting that, judging by the sources, the pagan spiritual elite was subjected to repressions only if they initiated unrest, uprisings or separatism. According to some researchers, relying on the Tale of Bygone Years, the "revolt of the Magi" in Vladimir-Suzdal Rus in 1024 (and also in 1071) was accompanied by actions and murders that had a ritual character. Yaroslav the Wise "cruelly dealt with the Magi, putting things in order in the tributary areas"; in the 1070s in Novgorod, the sorcerer was killed by the retinue of Prince Gleb (“it was a religious and everyday conflict, intertwined with the struggle against the power of Kyiv”).

It is believed that the beginning of the year after the adoption of Christianity in Kyiv began to count from March 1, and not from the new moon after the day of the vernal equinox, as before.

In church historiography (Church history)

In the calendar of the Russian Church there has never been and there is no holiday (remembrance) in honor of the events of 988-989. Until the beginning of the 19th century, there was no history of the Russian Church in Russia as a scientific branch or academic discipline: the first systematic work was the “Brief Russian Church History” by Metropolitan Platon (Levshin) of Moscow (Moscow, 1805 in 2 hours). The church historian of the beginning of the 21st century, V. I. Petrushko, wrote: “It is amazing, but the Greek authors do not even mention such an epoch-making event as the baptism of Russia under St. Vladimir. However, the Greeks had their own reasons: the diocese of Rosia was formally opened a century earlier."

Russian church-historical literature of the 19th - early 20th century usually considered the history of Christianity in Russia and the Russian Church starting from the 1st century, linking it with the activities of the Apostle Andrew the First-Called. Thus, one of the most authoritative church historians of the late 19th century, E.E. Vladimir". The most authoritative Russian church historian, Metropolitan Macarius (Bulgakov), devotes the first 2 parts of his main work to the history of Christianity in Russia until 988. To refer to what happened in Kyiv at the end of the 10th century, various terms were used (that is, there was no established, clichéd terminology): “the common Russian land baptism under St. Vladimir”, “the conversion of Prince Vladimir”, “the final arrangement of the Orthodox Church in Russia under Saint Vladimir and Yaroslav. Prince Vladimir himself was usually called the "enlightener", as he is also called in the akathist to him compiled at the end of the 19th century.

The official publication of the Moscow Patriarchate in 1971 wrote: “According to legend, the rays of the Christian faith illuminated the borders of Russia already in the first decades of Christianity. This tradition connects the beginning of the Christianization of Russia with the name of the holy Apostle Andrew the First-Called, who was on the Kyiv mountains.<…>In 954 Princess Olga of Kyiv was baptized. All this prepared the greatest events in the history of the Russian people - the baptism of Prince Vladimir and the subsequent baptism of Russia in 989. The indication of 989 (rather than 988) corresponded to the prevailing point of view in Soviet historical science at that time that the event took place after 988.

However, in the "Orthodox Church Calendar" for 1983, when preparations began for the celebration of the "1000th anniversary of the Baptism of Russia", the year 988 was indicated, and the event was given the significance of the beginning of the process: "The baptism of Kiev in 988 marked the beginning of the establishment of Christianity throughout the Russian land ".

legally official Civil Charter of the Russian Orthodox Church, registered with the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation on May 30, 1991 (later ones were not published), read: “The Russian Orthodox Church leads its historical existence from the Baptism of Russia, which took place in 988 in Kyiv under Grand Duke Vladimir.”

There were several points of view on the introduction of Christianity as an official religion in Soviet (until 1985) historical science, from negative to generally (with reservations) positive.

Thus, in a book published in 1930 Church and the idea of ​​autocracy in Russia the following is said about the baptism of Russia: “Orthodoxy, brought to us from Byzantium, broke and ruined the violent pagan spirit of the wild freedom-loving Russian, kept the people in ignorance for centuries, was an extinguisher in Russian public life of true enlightenment, killed the poetic creativity of the people, drowned out the sounds of a living song in it , freedom-loving impulses for class liberation. By drinking and toadying themselves, the ancient Russian clergy taught the people to drunkenness and sycophancy before the ruling classes, and with their spiritual sivuha - sermons and abundant church and book literature, finally created the ground for the complete enslavement of workers in the power of the prince, boyar and cruel princely official - tiun who performed judgment and reprisals against the oppressed masses.

“A Handbook on the History of the USSR for Preparatory Departments of Higher Educational Institutions” of 1979 edition calls the introduction of Christianity the “second religious reform” of Vladimir I and gives a different assessment: “<…>The adoption of Christianity strengthened the state power and territorial unity of the Old Russian state. It was of great international importance, which consisted in the fact that Russia, having rejected "primitive" paganism, was now becoming equal to other Christian peoples.<…>The adoption of Christianity played a big role in the development of Russian culture.”

Anniversary celebrations

For the first time the anniversary of the event was officially celebrated in the Russian Empire in 1888. The Chronicle of Church Events by Bishop Arseny (Ivashchenko) mentions the opening on July 15 of that year of charitable institutions for the shelter of the old and crippled. Kyiv was the center of celebrations; Chief Procurator of the Holy Synod K. P. Pobedonostsev was also present.

In the Russian diaspora, the 950th anniversary of the Baptism of Russia was celebrated.

The 1000th anniversary of baptism was also celebrated in the USSR as an internal church anniversary; the main celebrations were held in Moscow on June 12, 1988 in the Danilov Monastery.

The 1020th anniversary was celebrated in Kyiv from July 10 to July 19, 2008 at the church and state levels; Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I and Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow and All Russia took part in the celebrations (since 2008, the "Day of the Baptism of Kievan Rus - Ukraine" has been declared a public holiday in Ukraine). The anniversary was also celebrated on October 23-25, 2008 in Belarus; The celebrations were led by Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow.

FEDERAL FISHING AGENCY

FEDERAL STATE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION

"MURMANSK STATE TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY"

MARINE ACADEMY

Department of History and Sociology

on national history

"Baptism of Russia" in the estimates of historians

Completed by: Moskalev A.A.

Su-131(2) group cadet

Checked by: Nefyodova O.V.

Associate Professor of the Department of History and Sociology

Murmansk, 2013

Introduction

1. Facts and legends about the penetration of Christianity into Russia
2. "Christians and Russia" before "baptism"
3. A bit from the history of Eastern Slavs
4. Conclusions on the meaning and consequences of the "baptism of Russia"

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

"The history of Christianity and, in particular, the baptism of Rus' are invariably topical topics." The change of beliefs in the largest state of the Middle Ages naturally attracts the attention of historians of various times, since religion in ancient societies is inextricably linked with culture and is necessary, according to the famous Soviet historian A.G. Kuzmina, "the most subtle operation, so as not to throw centuries-old cultural, social and economic experience into a landfill with prejudices." And the latter, he emphasizes, is not uncommon.

"The circumstances under which the "baptism of Russia" by Prince Vladimir took place were and remain largely mysterious. There are few sources containing the necessary information: a few chronicle legends, meager information from hagiographic and panegyric literature, isolated testimonies of foreign authors - that, in fact, is all that a modern researcher has, and yet the scientific search continues.

1. The concept of "baptism of Russia": from the Middle Ages to the present day.

It often happens in history that very little is actually known about events that seem to be known to everyone. According to the historian A.G. Kuzmin, this is because they mean more to posterity than to their contemporaries, or because their descendants perceive them differently. "Correcting information about the deeds of the past, they pull them under their own ideas and desires. The struggle for the inheritance rarely does without distorting the truth, even if the distortion is not realized" (1). This is exactly what happened with the act of "baptism of Russia" by Vladimir. A little over a hundred years have passed since the time of baptism, and the Russian people already had a rather vague idea of ​​​​this event. This means that the "baptism of Russia" was not imprinted deeply in the memory of the people, being an inconspicuous incident in the minds of contemporaries. "However, subsequently, the interest of the ancient scribes in the establishment of Christianity in Russia increased, which was the result of the establishment of the Christian religion as the dominant ideology."

"The desire of medieval writers to know more about baptism than what their predecessors gave gave rise to fantastic constructions, they began to fill in the missing facts with all kinds of fiction." “There was, for example, a legend according to which Prince Vladimir was persuaded to Christianity by Cyril himself, the philosopher, and Patriarch Photius sent the first metropolitan to him, while Cyril and Photius lived a century earlier than Vladimir. Christianity, as inspired by God, or “God-inspired.” And it is no coincidence that he was canonized as a saint.”

(1). Kuzmin A.G. History of Russia from ancient times to 1618: Proc. for stud. higher textbook institutions: In 2 books. - M.: Humanit. ed. center VLADOS, 2003. - Book. 1. - 28 pages.

The crowning achievement of all these inventions was the theory of the fivefold baptism of Russia, which carried out the flattering idea for Russian Orthodoxy about

the baptism of the people with the blood of the five wounds of Christ.

Official church historians and theologians were so impressed with this theory that they reproduced it even in the 19th century, although the Russian historian V.N. Tatishchev back in the 18th century. in his work "Russian History from Ancient Times" expressed serious "doubts" about the fivefold baptism.

In pre-revolutionary historiography, the adoption of Christianity by Russia was extolled and praised in every possible way. It was presented as a great deed of Prince Vladimir, who introduced the people to the true faith, vegetating in pagan ignorance, introduced him to the family of Christian peoples and opened the way for him to "salvation", to a new high culture, enlightenment. Formulated in the late XVIII - early XIX century. Russian writer and historian N.M. Karamzin, the idea of ​​the decisive superiority of the "Christian Law" over pagan beliefs was shared by many historians at the beginning of the 20th century.

However, some of the pre-revolutionary researchers managed to overcome the naive tradition that reduced the problem of the introduction of Christianity in Russia to the spiritual needs of the leaders of ancient Russian society. In the writings of these researchers, one can trace attempts to link the adoption of Christianity with social needs. "For example, the outstanding Russian historian S.M. Solovyov wrote that paganism could satisfy only scattered tribes, and the people of Kiev, who got acquainted with other religions, had to decide on a choice. "A liberal church historian of the nineteenth century. HER. Golubinsky emphasized that in Vladimir's decision to borrow the "true faith" from Byzantium, "state motives also took an active part, that he acted here not only as an Equal-to-the-Apostles, but also as a great sovereign." The Russian historian M.D. Priselkov, linking the initiation of Russia to Christianity with the political development of ancient Russian society: the assertion of the "autocratic way of life" was the reason for the conversion of Russia to Christianity.

But, despite these attempts, in the noble-bourgeois historiography, which stood on idealistic positions, the problem of the conditionality of the adoption of Christianity by socio-economic and socio-political processes remained generally undeveloped, while enthusiastic assessments of the baptism of Russia sounded very often.

The negative reaction of the first Soviet historians to such assessments is quite understandable. "M.N. Pokrovsky in 1920 emphasized that the Christian church owes its existence and prosperity in Russia to the upper stratum of society, which abhorred the old pagan rites. "The views of M.N. Pokrovsky and his students on the baptism of Russia marked the beginning of a revision of the views that had taken root in the noble-bourgeois historical science, which was undoubtedly a positive fact. At the same time, the statements of M.N. Pokrovsky suffered from a certain schematism and partly even nihilism, and this could hardly contribute to a correct understanding of the historical significance of the adoption of Christianity by Russia. A somewhat simplified idea about the introduction of Christianity by Vladimir spread, placing him in the category of accidents.

However, in the future, these ideas were overcome, in the late 30s. the researchers formulated provisions that played a decisive role in the further development of the question of the "baptism of Rus". Namely: "the introduction of Christianity is a progressive phenomenon; baptism had a mass character; along with Christianity, writing appeared in Russia; Christianity introduced the Eastern Slavs to the achievements of Byzantine culture, contributed to their rapprochement with the peoples of a higher culture, rapprochement with the peoples of Western Europe." "A vivid illustration of these provisions is the article by the student of the outstanding scientist of the middle of the 19th - early 20th centuries V.O. Klyuchevsky, Soviet historian S.V. Bakhrushin (1937) ... The root cause of the adoption of Christianity by Russia was revealed to the researcher in the social and cultural conditions that took place in ancient society of the 10th century, when a layer of the feudal nobility arose, which "hurried to sanctify its claims to a dominant position. " Christianity played the role of an "energetic champion" of the advanced (in comparison with the primitive communal system) feudal mode of production, it accelerated the process of feudalization of Russia, fought with the remnants tribal system, sought to eliminate the elements of slave labor. The Old Russian Church became an active conductor of the feudal order in Russia. That is why "the transition to Christianity had, objectively speaking, a very great and, undoubtedly, progressive significance for this period of time." was comprehensive focusing on the economy, socio-economic and political relations, culture and education".

"Fifty years have passed since the publication of the article by S.V. Bakhrushin, but so far the conclusions contained in it, one way or another, vary by our historians. True, something was nevertheless rejected: with the help of archeology, a high the level of agriculture of the Eastern Slavs, the ancient Russian craft appeared original and highly developed; the idea of ​​the appearance of writing in Russia only with the adoption of Christianity did not find support. into the family of advanced countries of medieval Europe, remained unchanged.

From the point of view of the needs of feudalization, the head of Soviet historians, academician B.D. Grekov, who called the adoption of Christianity facts of "paramount importance". For Academician M.N. Tikhomirov "the establishment of Christianity in Russia was the largest historical event. It marked an important stage in the development of feudal relations in Russia and the victory of new feudal relations over the moribund tribal system with its paganism. In the cultural life of Ancient Russia, the establishment of Christianity meant its accession to the traditions of Byzantium and Hellenism with their remarkable writing and art. Such are the enormous consequences of the establishment of Christianity in Russia, clear and noticeable to historians." But the opinion of another academician B.A. Rybakov, in whom Christianity appears as extremely adapted to the "needs of the feudal state". But since "the feudal formation was just beginning its historical path" at the time of baptism, being necessary and progressive, since the creation of the early feudal monarchy, which ended during the reign of Vladimir, was a "deeply progressive" phenomenon, since the Christian religion, called upon to promote the establishment of feudalism, should be considered as a factor of progress in ancient Russian history. Relatively recently, in an interview with the correspondent of the newspaper "Soviet Russia" B.A. Rybakov stated that a thousand years ago, the adoption of Christianity for a young state was a progressive fact ... But not only in scientific studies written by Soviet historians, overly enthusiastic assessments of the establishment of Christianity in Russia by Prince Vladimir sound. They are also contained in articles that have a journalistic, programmatic and ideological orientation. "For example, Corresponding Member of the USSR Academy of Sciences V.T. Pashuto calls for a worthy meeting of the millennium of the "baptism of Russia." the circle of advanced peoples of medieval Europe", but an appeal to a foreign religion. Superficial reasoning of this kind should be opposed to another, strictly scientific approach: "It was not Christianity that 'connected' Ancient Russia to European civilization, but the spread of Christianity in Ancient Russia and its adoption as the state religion ideologically completed the formation of this civilization."

Unfortunately, the idea of ​​the adoption of Christianity by Russia as an extremely important means of overcoming national backwardness in comparison with the civilized states of Western Europe and Byzantium formed the basis of the article by Academician B.V. Rauschenbakh "Through the depths of centuries" ... The theory of borrowing, developed by B.V. Rauschenbach, impoverishes national history, depriving it of its originality and national roots.

"The Soviet historian 0.M. Rapov notes that "this event had a huge impact on the development of the material and spiritual culture of Ancient Russia, as well as on many other aspects of the life of ancient Russian society." The Christian religion contributed to the establishment of feudal orders. That is why "the adoption of Christianity by Russia and the departure from paganism was an important and progressive phenomenon for that time. "The Soviet researcher A.G. Kuzmin sees in the baptism of Rus" one of the most important turning points in Russian history. He emphasizes the fact that "Soviet scientists are generally unanimous in their assessment the baptism of Russia as a progressive phenomenon"".

The main result, whether we like it or not, the result of our historians' study of the introduction of Christianity in Russia is "the progressive role of Christianity, which favored the growth of feudalism in ancient Russian society, the rise of culture, which strengthened the international position of the Kievan state. As a result, the "baptism of Russia" acquires the significance of an event of great historical And it does not lose its impressive power, despite reservations about the negative aspects of the accepted religion for the Russian people.

Such an “understanding” of the historical significance of the “baptism of Russia” suits modern theologians quite well.” Thus, V.A. great event in the history of Russia.

“A paradoxical situation has developed, according to the historian I.Ya. Froyanov, scientists themselves give into the hands of the ideologists of Orthodoxy, who praise baptism in every possible way, “good”, in the terminology of V.T. Pashuto, propaganda material.

A well-known specialist in the history of Kievan Rus I.Ya. Froyanov. It is notoriously different from what prevails in contemporary literature. Approach I.Ya. Froyanov to the question of "the baptism of Russia" deserves, in my opinion, special attention and therefore below you can often find references to his work. Presentation by I.Ya. Froyanov's point of view on the issue of the "baptism of Russia" is based on new data that have appeared recently, as well as on the rethinking of the facts of the development of Kievan Rus already known to historical science. This allows him to imagine the situation associated with the adoption of Christianity in Russia in a different way.

Short description

"The history of Christianity and, in particular, the baptism of Rus' are invariably topical topics." The change of beliefs in the largest state of the Middle Ages naturally attracts the attention of historians of various times, since religion in ancient societies is inextricably linked with culture and is necessary, according to the famous Soviet historian A.G. Kuzmina, "the most subtle operation, so as not to throw centuries-old cultural, social and economic experience into a landfill with prejudices." And the latter, he emphasizes, is not uncommon.

The study of such an important event for national history and culture as the Baptism of Rus was also studied by classical historians and modern historians.

The main source from which we learn about the circumstances of the adoption of Orthodoxy by Kievan Rus is the Tale of Bygone Years. The initial Russian chronicle conveys the legend of the missionary embassies of Muslim Bulgars, Latin Catholics, Khazar Jews and Orthodox Greeks to Prince Vladimir. All the ambassadors talked about the tenets of their faith and offered the prince to accept it. Vladimir Svyatoslavich gave preference to Orthodoxy, but decided to think for a while. Then followed the capture of Chersonesus by Vladimir and his demand to marry Princess Anna. The Greeks did not want to pass off the princess as a pagan, and Vladimir decided to be baptized. The sacrament was performed here, in Chersonese (Korsun). The Greek Patriarch appointed Father Anastas as metropolitan in Kyiv, and he baptized Russia in 988

The pre-revolutionary historiography of the baptism of Russia is represented by the works of M. V. Lomonosov, N. M. Karamzin, S. M. Solovyov, N. I. Kostomarov and other scientists. N. M. Karamzin emphasizes the importance of the adoption of Christianity for the development of Russian culture: Prince Vladimir built the Church of St. Basil, the Church of the Most Holy Theotokos. “Many people were baptized,” the historian writes, “arguing no doubt in the same way as the citizens of Kyiv; others, bound to the ancient law, rejected the new one: for paganism dominated in some countries of Russia until the very twelfth century. Vladimir did not seem to want to force his conscience; but he took the best, most reliable measures for the extermination of pagan errors: he tried to enlighten the Russians. Prince Vladimir founded schools that became the basis of education in Russia

However, in the future, these ideas were overcome, in the late 30s. the researchers formulated provisions that played a decisive role in the further development of the question of the "baptism of Rus". Namely: "the introduction of Christianity is a progressive phenomenon; baptism had a mass character; along with Christianity, writing appeared in Russia; Christianity introduced the Eastern Slavs to the achievements of Byzantine culture, contributed to their rapprochement with the peoples of a higher culture, rapprochement with the peoples of Western Europe." "A vivid illustration of these provisions is the article by the student of the outstanding scientist of the middle of the 19th - early 20th centuries V.O. Klyuchevsky, Soviet historian S.V. Bakhrushin (1937) ... The root cause of the adoption of Christianity by Russia was revealed to the researcher in the social and cultural conditions that took place in ancient society of the 10th century, when a layer of the feudal nobility arose, which "hurried to sanctify its claims to a dominant position. " Christianity played the role of an "energetic champion" of the advanced (in comparison with the primitive communal system) feudal mode of production, it accelerated the process of feudalization of Russia, fought with the remnants tribal system, sought to eliminate the elements of slave labor. The Old Russian Church became an active conductor of the feudal order in Russia. That is why "the transition to Christianity had, objectively speaking, a very great and, undoubtedly, progressive significance for this period of time." was comprehensive focusing on the economy, socio-economic and political relations, culture and education".

From the point of view of the needs of feudalization, the head of Soviet historians, academician B.D. Grekov, who called the adoption of Christianity facts of "paramount importance". For Academician M.N. Tikhomirov "the establishment of Christianity in Russia was the largest historical event. It marked an important stage in the development of feudal relations in Russia and the victory of new feudal relations over the moribund tribal system with its paganism. In the cultural life of Ancient Russia, the establishment of Christianity meant its accession to the traditions of Byzantium and Hellenism with their remarkable writing and art. Such are the enormous consequences of the establishment of Christianity in Russia, clear and noticeable to historians." But the opinion of another academician B.A. Rybakov, in whom Christianity appears as extremely adapted to the "needs of the feudal state". But since "the feudal formation was just beginning its historical path" at the time of baptism, being necessary and progressive, since the creation of the early feudal monarchy, which ended during the reign of Vladimir, was a "deeply progressive" phenomenon, since the Christian religion, called upon to promote the establishment of feudalism, should be considered as a factor of progress in ancient Russian history. Relatively recently, in an interview with the correspondent of the newspaper "Soviet Russia" B.A. Rybakov declared that a thousand years ago the adoption of Christianity for a young state was a progressive fact...

Baptism of Russia in the light of its various interpretations.

The baptism of Russia contributed to the strengthening of the foreign policy position of the ancient Russian state, and this fact is beyond doubt. All researchers, no matter what initial concepts they adhere to, recognize this and do not even try hard to argue. Indeed, it seems obvious that the adoption of Christianity meant the entry of Russia into the family of European Christian peoples, increased the prestige of the state and confidence in its foreign policy actions. Christianity contributed to the strengthening of the grand-princely power, strengthening the connection between all parts of the state, its internal stability and, consequently, military and political power. I would like to draw attention to another important aspect: the Christianization of Russia raised the moral potential of the Russian people, which is so necessary for them to fulfill their historical mission within a multinational state and in the international arena. With the introduction of Christianity, our country gained wide access to the knowledge accumulated by mankind, including historical, political, natural science knowledge, and this could not but have positive consequences for the ancient Russian state. Finally, according to V. T. Pashuto, “The Church, represented by the metropolitan, bishops, priests, and pilgrims, has become an influential element both in foreign policy and in the diplomatic service itself.”

At present, we are forced to abandon the simplistic notion that our ancestors in the pre-Christian era lived in a state of savagery. In any case, now it is impossible to follow Prot. Georgy Florovsky to assert that "the history of Russian culture begins with the Baptism of Russia" and "that the pagan time remains beyond the threshold of history." It must be admitted that pre-Christian Russia in the field of material culture and religious (pagan) ideas, which are in full analogy with the religious views of the ancient world, reached a fairly high level of development, which allowed it to so easily and quickly perceive the most complex concepts of Christian doctrine and worldview and make a grandiose breakthrough in the field of self-consciousness. Modern researchers pay special attention to the high level of figurative and poetic worldview in Ancient Russia, which was formed in the pre-literate period. That is why, in contact with Christianity, the Old Russian "word-image" proved to be so well adapted to express the complex world of new ideas. And most importantly, this figurative-artistic, irrational perception of the world turned out to be extremely close to the very spirit of Byzantine culture.

The political tasks facing Russia in the 10th century consisted, firstly, in the creation of a single state, which would decisively contribute to the completion of the process of forming a single nation, and secondly, in the conscious choice of its place in the system of civilized states and, in Thirdly, in identifying the main threats and focusing on their reflection.

The process of gathering the East Slavic tribes under a single princely authority with the help of military force began in the pre-Christian era. St. Prince Vladimir in the first period of his reign tried to use the religious factor to strengthen the unity. He reformed the ancient pagan cults, establishing a state religion with a pantheon of gods headed by the Slavic Zeus-Perun. But this princely god and this state religion remained for the people the same external force that the princely retinue was. Only the adoption of Christianity led to the emergence of strong internal ties in the state at all levels and, most importantly, at the level of the cell of the state organism - the individual.

The interpretation of the reasons for the conversion of Vladimir to Christianity caused controversy among scholars. Metropolitan Philaret's explanation is weak - the repentant mood of the fratricide and libertine Vladimir. Solovyov's explanation is not enough - the poverty and lack of content of paganism. The common reasons, apparently, were the close connection between Russia and Byzantium, the gradual penetration of Christianity into Russian society, the formation of an influential Christian community in Kyiv; Vladimir was personally influenced by childhood impressions (Princess Olga), perhaps communication with Christian wives (Golubinsky). The baptism of the people of Kiev took place in 989 or 990, perhaps according to the external situation, as described in the Tale of Bygone Years. Undoubtedly, the new faith met with some resistance, which historians are silent about. Only about Novgorod we know from the so-called chronicle of Joachim that there was not without armed struggle. Christianity under Vladimir spread slowly in Russia. Whether Russian metropolitans existed under him is an unresolved question. Other news about the time of Vladimir is mostly reliable, although it is not without legendary details and was created under the influence of folk legends and songs.

St. blessings. book. Vladimir and his church-political activity.

After baptism, Vladimir made several more campaigns, successfully fought off the Pechenegs, built cities against them. As a Christian, Vladimir took care of education (founding the first school is attributed to him) and the construction of churches, giving one of them a tithe (996). Vladimir did not execute the robbers, "for fear of sin." But the "bishops" advised, and Vladimir instituted the "execution", soon, however, again replaced by vira. Vladimir sent his sons to the regions. One of them, Yaroslav of Novgorod, retired. Vladimir was preparing to march against his son, but fell ill and died on July 15, 1015.

In 989, Vladimir, already a Christian, returned to the political line of his father and made a trip to Chersonese (Korsun). The city, besieged by sea and land, fell after it lost the water that entered it through underground pipes. However, the Rus left the city, and he returned to Byzantium. From 990, Byzantium moved from defense to counteroffensive, subjugating Georgia, part of Armenia and resuming the war against the Bulgarian king Samu-il. Vladimir's raid on Korsun caused a response in the form of an attack on Russia by the allies of Byzantium - the Pechenegs. The war lasted from 989 to 997, and then Russia lost the Black Sea steppes, and the border of the forest-steppe had to be strengthened with ramparts and a palisade. The Korsun escapade cost Russia dearly. When returning to the political course of the past, it would seem that it was natural to reject the accepted confession, but this did not happen. There was no way back.

Instead of an alliance with the Patriarchate of Constantinople, Rus established relations with the Bulgarian Patriarchate in Ohrid. Since from 976 Western Bulgaria was engulfed in an anti-Greek uprising, led by the sons of Nikola's committee: David, Moses, Aaron and Samuil, it was possible to receive books, icons and enlightened priests - teachers from there. At the beginning of the XI century. Vladimir established allied relations "with Boleslav Lyadsky, and with Stefan Ugorsky, and with Andrich of Czech", that is, with new Christians who accepted the faith from Rome. Vladimir's diplomacy shows that he was looking for an opportunity to break with the traditions of both Svyatoslav and Olga. And the third possibility in those conditions was contact with the West, because the Muslim East was at war with Russia. In 997, Vladimir was forced to go on a campaign against the Kama Bulgarians and thereby remove part of the troops from the southern border, which the Pechenegs immediately took advantage of.

So, a quarrel with Byzantium over a predatory campaign against Korsun in 989 led, in addition to a difficult war with the Pechenegs, to the contact with Bulgaria already mentioned above. And the Bulgarian Tsar Samuil brutally devastated Greece and Thrace, and the Emperor Vasily, having recovered from the first failures, then earned the nickname Bulgar Slayer with his ruthlessness. In 1001, he launched a systematic offensive, blinding the captured Bulgarians. Finally, the Bulgarians suffered a heavy defeat. Tsar Samuil died of a nervous shock in 1014. His son Gabriel-Radomir died at the hands of the conspirators, and the new ruler was killed in 1018, after which Bulgaria capitulated. The death of an ally could not but affect the position of Russia. For the people of Kiev, it became obvious that an alliance with Byzantium, that is, Olga's tradition, was much more promising than the search for friends in the West.

Relations between Russia and the Bulgarian Church.

Prince Vladimir, even after the Peace of Korsun and receiving Anna's hand, did not want ecclesiastical submission to the Patriarch of Constantinople. In this regard, he was supported and assisted by a kindred in language and independent of the Greeks, at that moment still autocephalous, the Bulgarian church, headed by a patriarch with a “kathisma” in Akhrid or Ohrid. There, in the Slavic Balkans, the Russian prince had to turn for many missionary priests in order to baptize his people, teach them and serve the churches. All ancient Russian church literature is a clear evidence of this generous literary and missionary supply of the newly baptized Russian land from the fraternal Bulgarian church. From there, the conqueror of the Greeks near Korsun could also borrow his first bishops: Anastas Korsunian for Kyiv and Joachim Korsunian for Novgorod. Ashamed of the role of Anastas as a defector and traitor, the Korsun legend and the Ancient Chronicle Code call him either “the husband of the Korsunian”, or simply “Anastas”, or a priest. If the book Vladimir put Anastas at the head of the Church of the Tithes - this metropolitan cathedral, and gave the latter, in the name of Anastasy, the exclusive privilege of "tithes throughout the Russian land", obviously because he was the "bishop" of the capital, the primate of the autonomous national Russian church. What kind of patriarch, what jurisdiction? Here, the change that took place in 1037 under Yaroslav Vladimirovich was indicative and symbolic, when he had to take the primacy from the Kyiv cathedral church of the “Tithing Mother of God” of the Assumption and transfer this title to the newly built in 1039 (together with the “metropolis” that did not exist in Kyiv) the church of St. Sophia as a sign of the connection with St. Sophia of Tsaregradskaya, as a sign of the entry of the Russian Church into the jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Constantinople as one of his "metropolises". A until now? Before this book. Vladimir placed his church under the patronage of the Patriarch of Bulgaria (Ohrid) so that he would be the direct head of the Kyiv cathedra, as if his stavropegic, and Anastasius in the Church of the Tithes was, as it were, his vicar. And together with the Bishop of Belgorod (in the vicinity of Kyiv) and Bishop. Novgorod, three of them could have compiled a collection for consecrations, and at the time of the arrival of the patriarch-archbishop in Kyiv, the two closest ones (Tsyatinny and Belgorod) could, again, three make up such a cathedral.

The position of the Russian Church after 1037.

After the death of Archbishop John of Ohrid in 1037, a Greek, Leo, was already installed over the Bulgarian church. And in connection with this, the Kyiv prince Yaroslav Vladimirovich faced an irremovable fact, so to speak, of the automatic subordination of the Russian Church to the Patriarch of Constantinople. Through the Ahrid Archdiocese, it lost its former strength. Yaroslav had to accept canonical Greek rule. That is why it was precisely in 1037 that Kyiv received its first metropolitan Theopemptus the Greek, and Yaroslav for the first time founded the metropolis, that is, the residence of the metropolitan, and built the first for the Greeks the cathedral church of St. Sophia (as if in imitation of Constantinople) with outstanding magnificence, which should was to overshadow the luxury and glory of the Vladimir Cathedral of the Assumption Pr. Mother of God. For the Greeks, the latter became an unpleasant symbol of Russian autonomy under the auspices of the Bulgarians. The church of the tithes fell into oblivion and oblivion, despite the fact that the remains of the Baptist of Russia himself, and his Greek wife Anna, and his blessed grandmother Prince. Olga. Everything seemed to be crossed out, as if schismatic.

From now on (since 1037), the Greek metropolis became the center for processing the Russian chronicle and literary traditions at the beginning of the Russian church and the center for sabotaging the soon-to-be glorification of Russian saints. That is why we are wandering in some kind of deliberate fog of stupid and contradictory legends about the baptism of Russia under Prince. Vladimir and ο the first days of the life and organization of the Russian Church. Academician Shakhmatov wittily proved (“Searching for the most ancient Russian annals”) that the Greek metropolitan already in 1039 undertook the first annals in order to bring to the young Russian church the flavor of its legitimate origin and dependence on the “Tsaregrad” source. Inserted next to it is a legend about the conversion to Christianity of the Bulgarian prince Boris by a Greek philosopher, remade in the name of Prince. Vladimir. Then the incomprehensible campaign against Korsun, the marriage with Princess Anna, the unclear purpose of the Church of the Tithes, the unclear figure of Anastas.

Thus, a whole canonical upheaval took place, and the Russian Church merged into the mainstream of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, as one of its metropolises. As young and late, she even appears in some murals of the Metropolises of Constantinople in a very low place, sometimes at 61, sometimes at 70. At the same time, all the established rights of the Patriarch of Constantinople in relation to the metropolitanates subordinate to him extended to her: 1) the right to appoint metropolitans, 2) summoning them to their councils, 3) trials of them, 4) appeals to the court of metropolitans, and 5) stauropegia. The right to appoint metropolitans belonged to the Patriarch of Constantinople, according to canonical rules, in the narrow sense of consecration, after the preliminary election of a worthy candidate by the district council of bishops (4 Ecum. pr. 28; Serdik. pr. 6). But the patriarch, by the time of the establishment of the Russian Church, managed to create for himself the customary right not only to consecrate metropolitans, but also to elect them through his synod. This evolution of the power of the Patriarch of Constantinople was reflected in the Russian Church with very important consequences. If the old canonical procedure for the local election of metropolitans were in force, a council of Russian bishops would elect their compatriots to this post. Now Greek metropolitans were successively sent to Russia from Constantinople.

Church relations between Russia and Byzantium.

Already under the descendants of Vladimir, the fact of the adoption of Christianity significantly changed the nature of the foreign policy of Russia and made important adjustments to its direction. First of all, it led to the establishment of strong allied relations with Byzantium, relations that survived the capture of Constantinople by the crusaders and the Tatar yoke in Russia. The only military conflict between them occurred in 1043. The reasons for this conflict have received different interpretations among researchers. The words of Psellos, a direct eyewitness of the events - "this barbarian tribe has always harbored a fierce, rabid hatred against the Greek hegemony" - gave rise to talk almost about Yaroslav's liberation struggle against ecclesiastical and political dependence on Byzantium. According to D.S. Likhachev and V.V. Mavrodin, Russia's campaign against Constantinople in 1043 was the culminating point of its struggle for cultural, civil, and ecclesiastical independence. And quite rightly N. M. Levchenko pointed out that not a single Russian source contains even a hint that the empire encroached on the political independence of Russia, so that any “Greek metropolitan”, even if he was an “agent of the empire”, claimed significant political role. N. M. Levchenko sees the cause of the conflict in the toughening of the position of the Byzantine government in relation to foreign merchants to please the merchants and artisans of Constantinople. It seems that the Russian military corps in Byzantium, which became a kind of imperial guard during the short reign of Michael the Fifth (December 1041 - April 1042), could play an important role in the conflict. The participation of Russian detachments in the rebellion against Michael's successor, Constantine 9, allows us to speak of Russian interference in the internal affairs of the allied power. And although the full reasons for the sixth and last Russian campaign against Byzantium are unclear, this conflict can be qualified as a family dynastic quarrel that does not reflect serious contradictions between the two countries. In the context of the Russian-Byzantine confrontation that did not exist in the middle of the 11th century, some researchers consider the issue of appointing Hilarion as the Metropolitan of Kyiv. In this regard, we would like to note the following: Russian-Byzantine church ties from the very beginning were in the nature of a voluntary choice. In the event of a divergence in political interests, with which the interests of the church were closely intertwined, they could be relatively easily rejected, as has happened more than once in history.

The unity of ideology, the commonality of spiritual and cultural values, the coincidence of political interests in terms of repelling the threat from the East, and later the expansion of the West, made Russia and Byzantium reliable allies until the capture of Constantinople by the Turks in 1453. Even those researchers who are inclined to present Byzantium’s policy towards Russia in a negative light, and see the Greek metropolitans as agents of a foreign power, are forced to admit that the rulers of Constantinople and their agents behave more than strangely, showing constant concern for strengthening unity. Russian state. And when the mortal Turkish danger hung over Constantinople, the emperor and the patriarch dealt with the problem of the unity of the Russian metropolis as the most urgent task, as if realizing that it was this problem that was connected with the future of the Orthodox world. It is also very significant that as early as the middle of the 14th century in Constantinople they paid attention to the dynamic rulers of a small specific principality with a capital in Moscow, giving them decisive preference in their struggle for the creation of a centralized Russian state.

John (Ekonomtsev), abbot. "The Baptism of Russia and the Foreign Policy of the Old Russian State". Collection of articles "Orthodoxy, Byzantium, Russia". "Christian Literature", M., 1992. Pp. 46.

Florovsky G. "Ways of Russian theology". Reprint edition. Vilnius, 1991. P. 6.

John (Ekonomtsev), abbot. "Byzantinism, the legacy of Cyril and Methodius and the baptism of Russia". Collection of articles "Orthodoxy, Byzantium, Russia". "Christian Literature", M., 1992. Pp. 19.

The development of the tribes that have become part of the Russian nation seems to follow the scenario according to which the Slavs as a whole developed before. Already at the dawn of the formation of the southern Russian state with its capital in Kyiv, we see it in political dependence on the Khazar Khaganate. The general vector of interest remains the same - it is south and east, but it bifurcates. The two great rivers of the East European Plain, the Dnieper and Volga, provide the main directions of Russian politics. At the initial stage of Russian history, the Dnieper dominates, which is the beaten, traditional path to Greece and the Mediterranean, and now to Christian Byzantium and Christianity. The Volga and its tributaries, whose importance in the Russian nation grew more and more, led to the Muslim East. Then this artery, along with goods, promoted Islam and Judaism.

John (Ekonomtsev), abbot. "The Baptism of Russia and the Foreign Policy of the Old Russian State". Collection of articles "Orthodoxy, Byzantium, Russia". "Christian Literature", M., 1992. Pp. 48.

Spiritual, cultural-historical, socio-political and other factors and details of the conversion of Vladimir and the Russian people to Christianity in: Kartashev A. V. "Essays on the history of the Russian Church." Electronic variant; "National history. History of Russia from ancient times to 1917. Encyclopedia. Scientific publishing house "Great Russian Encyclopedia". M., 1994.

A similar point of view is also expressed by M. V. Tolstoy, “Stories from the History of the Russian Church.” Electronic variant.

"Christianity". Encyclopedia of Efron and Brockhaus. M., 1993. Volume 1. Page 367.

See for more details: Gumilyov L. "Ancient Russia and the Great Steppe". "AST", M., 2001. Pp. 286.

See for more details: Gumilyov L. "Ancient Russia and the Great Steppe". "AST", M., 2001. Pp. 286-287.

See: Kartashev A. V. "Essays on the history of the Russian Church." Electronic variant.

See: John (Ekonomtsev), abbot. "The Baptism of Russia and the Foreign Policy of the Old Russian State". Collection of articles "Orthodoxy, Byzantium, Russia". "Christian Literature", M., 1992. Pp. 52.

Priest Maxim Mishchenko

Speaking about the Baptism of Russia, the most important event in the ancient history of our Fatherland, it should first be noted that by this one should understand not exactly the Baptism or Enlightenment that takes place over an individual when he enters the Church. Such an identification of the Baptism of Russia leads to rather erroneous ideas about this historical event. Strictly speaking, the Baptism of Russia was, first of all, an act of establishing Christianity, its victory over paganism in the political sense (since we are talking about the state, and not an individual). Since that time, the Christian Church in the Kievan-Russian state has become not just a public, but also a state institution. In general terms, the Baptism of Russia was nothing more than an institution of the local Church, governed by the episcopate in local sees, which took place in 988. . (perhaps 2-3 years later) on the initiative of Grand Duke Vladimir (+1015).

However, our story would be inconsistent if we did not first imagine the conditions in which Christianity penetrated and asserted itself among us and what kind of religious world, namely paganism, Christian preaching had to face in Russia.

So, the pagan cult of the ancient Slavs did not represent, in essence, anything strictly regulated. They worshiped the elements of visible nature, first of all: God bless(the deity of the sun, the giver of light, heat, fire and all kinds of blessings; the luminary itself was called Horse) and Veles (hair) — cattle god(patron of the flocks). Another important deity was Perun- the god of thunder, thunder and deadly lightning, borrowed from the Baltic cult (Lithuanian Perkunas). The wind personified stri-god. The sky in which Dazhd-god lived was called Svarog and was considered the father of the sun; why Dazhd-god and the patronymic was learned Svarozhich. The deity of the earth was also revered - Mother earth cheese some female deity — Mokosh, as well as givers of the family good - Genus and Childbirth.

Nevertheless, the images of the gods did not receive the same clarity and certainty from the Slavs as, for example, in Greek mythology. There were no temples, no special class of priests, no religious buildings. In some places, in open places, vulgar images of deities were placed - wooden idols and stone ones. women. They were sacrificed, sometimes even human, and this was the cult side of idolatry.

The disorder of the pagan cult testified to its living practice among the pre-Christian Slavs. It was not even a cult, but a naturalistic way of worldview and worldview. It was in those areas of consciousness and worldview, in the area of ​​which early Russian Christianity did not offer any alternative, that pagan ideas persisted until modern times. Only in the second half of the XIX century. with the development of the zemstvo education system, these stable worldview forms were offered a different, more Christianized (as if school) form of ethnic and naturalistic consciousness.

Already in the ancient period, these persistent worldview categories were adapted by Christianity, as if transformed into Christian symbols, sometimes acquiring quite Christian symbolic content. As a result, for example, the name Hor(o)sa, who symbolized the sun as a kind of fiery circle ( well, colo) in the sky they began to call a rounded chandelier that emits light in the church, located, among other things, under the dome, which also symbolizes the firmament in temple symbolism. Similar examples could be multiplied, which, however, is not the purpose of this essay, it is only important in the end to give an adequate explanation for this phenomenon.

It is understood that worldview syncretism was not a continuation of paganism in Russian Christianity, but only a kind of “toolkit”. In the process of perceiving Christian symbols, willy-nilly, categories more traditional for the Slavic worldview were used, as if some kind of receptors with which the Slav (be it a warrior, a plowman or a clergyman) perceived the abstractions of a new teaching for them.

However, the interweaving (syncretic) of symbols did not necessarily testify to the mass penetration of pagan ideology into Christian doctrine among the newly converted Slavs, which is clearly evidenced by the loss of the cult of one of the most popular Slavic deities, Dazhd-god, associated with an animistic (animal) understanding of the change of light and heat (summer and winters). Moreover, such a syncretism of worldview and ritual traditions was characteristic not only for the Slavs, but also for the Greco-Roman world, which accepted Christianity as if from first hand.

Even more than the cult of visible nature among the Eastern Slavs, the cult of ancestors was developed. The long-dead head of the clan was deified and considered the patron of his offspring. He was called by birth or squint (ancestor). Plant sacrifices were also made to him. Such a cult order originated and existed in the conditions of the tribal life of the ancient Slavs. When, in later times of pre-Christian history, tribal ties began to disintegrate, and families separated into separate courtyards, a privileged place kind the family ancestor stepped in - brownie, the patron of the court, invisibly managing his household. The ancient Slav believed that the souls of the dead continue to roam the earth, inhabiting fields, forests, waters ( goblin, water, mermaids) - all nature seemed to him endowed with a soul. He sought to communicate with her, participate in her changes, accompanying these changes with holidays and rituals. Thus was created the annual cycle of pagan holidays associated with the veneration of nature and the cult of ancestors. Observing the correct change of winter and summer, the Slavs celebrated the days of the autumn and spring equinoxes with holidays carols(or oatmeal), met spring ( Red hill), saw off the summer ( kupala) etc. In parallel, there were holidays for the dead - funeral feasts(feast commemoration).

However, the customs of the ancient Slavs did not differ in “special” piety, for example, blood feud was practiced . Until Yaroslav the Wise, princely power in Russia did not have judicial functions, and the punishment of the guilty was the work of the relatives of the victim. The state, of course, did not interfere in such lynching, considering it as an element common law(a relic of pre-state generic relations) . In addition, the slave trade spread. And, although this was not the main export industry, as, for example, among the Normans, the Slavs did not disdain this, albeit not on such a large scale.

The main conclusion that we must draw is that the Slavs did not even have a remote idea of ​​​​a single Creator God, which Christianity has. The pagan religion of the Slavs was by no means God-seeking, as, for example, the paganism of the ancient Greeks, but natural history, satisfied with the observation and worship of unknown natural elements. This fact, perhaps, most eloquently testifies to the nature of the perception of Christianity, new for the Slavs, and its connection with traditional paganism. Thus, the fact that all Slavs, including ours, was destined to accept St. Baptism, there is a great participation of God's providence, who desires to be saved by all men and to come into the knowledge of the truth(1 Tim 2:4).

It would also be a mistake to imagine that the Baptism of Russia "brought" Christianity to Russia. Recall that this was only a political statement of the Christian faith and the Church on the lands along the famous caravan route "from the Varangians to the Greeks", where Christianity could not but be known already, if only because of the active socio-cultural exchange associated with international trade and the labor market (ch. arr., military). What was pre-Vladimir Christianity and what were the sources of its penetration.

First of all, it should be remembered that for many years a Christian princess, St. Olga (945-969); if you still doubt the Christianity of Prince Askold (...-882). Already in the text of the agreement with Byzantium under 944, it is mentioned cathedral church St. prophet Elijah, and also, according to the chronicler, multiple besha(were) Varangian Christians (Tale of Bygone Years; hereinafter - PVL). And if Blessed Olga did not manage to attract her only son Svyatoslav to orthodoxy, because. at the time of her adoption of Christianity (944) he was already quite an adult man, moreover, absorbed by the passion for military exploits, then it is possible that she succeeded in relation to her grandchildren - Yaropolk and Vladimir, especially since the elder of them - Yaropolk was in her care until the age of 13, and Vladimir was a few more years younger.

In any case, we know that Yaropolk, being the ruler of a politically “unbaptized” state, was very protective of Christians: give free rein to the Christian, as we read in the Joachim Chronicle. Thus, there is every reason to believe that in the 80s. 10th century in Kyiv, not only many Varangians and boyars, but also partly ordinary citizens, not to mention merchants, were baptized and became Christians. But the majority of the inhabitants, both of the ancient capital and other large cities, were undoubtedly pagans, who coexisted quite peacefully with the Christian minority. The population of the villages was the most conservative; the cultivation of pagan beliefs remained here for many centuries.

Particular attention should be paid to the last two decades before Baptism. The famous conqueror Svyatoslav, son of Igor and St. Olga had three sons. The elder, Yaropolk, was planted by his father during his lifetime in Kyiv (preferring to spend his life in military campaigns far from the capital), Oleg - in Ovruch, and the youngest, Vladimir - in Novgorod. But due to his infancy, he appointed them as governors of his governors: Yaropolka - Sveneld, and Vladimir - his uncle, Dobrynya. It is not known exactly why a quarrel arose between the brothers, which resulted in the death of Oleg and the flight of Vladimir overseas to the Varangians, but it would be more plausible to attribute it, rather, to the intrigues of the governor-regents, rather than to the conscience of the young princes.

One way or another, Yaropolk at the same time reigned in Kyiv and briefly appeared as an autocratic prince (972-978). By the way, his reign was marked by a number of important events. So, in 973, Russian ambassadors were sent with rich gifts to the residence of the German Emperor Otto I. The purpose of the embassy is not known to us, but most likely the emperor of the Holy Roman Empire (as it was officially called) acted as a kind of mediator in the negotiations between Russia and Rome. Without the patronage of this most important person in Central Europe, direct contacts between the "barbarians" and "Romans" even on missionary issues at that time were hardly feasible. As a result, in 979, an embassy from Pope Benedict VII arrived in Kyiv. This was the first direct relationship between Russia and Rome, although it did not bring any results, because. a year earlier, a coup took place in Kyiv, which for some time froze the Christian policy of the Kyiv princes. Namely, using the betrayal of the governor Blud, Vladimir, having killed Yaropolk, managed to reign in Kyiv.

Immediately after the coup, Vladimir declared himself a zealous pagan, which provided him with the support of the pagan part of the people of Kiev, probably dissatisfied with the pro-Christian policy of Yaropolk. The temporary triumph of paganism in Russia was hardly just a political game of Vladimir on religious antipathies in order to put pressure on the "Olginsko-Yaropolkova" Christian elite. The fact is that during the flight to Scandinavia, Vladimir managed not only to mature with age and marry the daughter of the Varangian king (prince), but also completely wean (although not forget) from the Christian principles acquired in the environment of his grandmother, Princess Olga, having learned from the Normans of their morality and customs, nurtured by the cult of war and pirate profit.

As a result, in Kyiv, along with the traditional Slavic idols, the "Varangian" prince began to introduce the cult of the god of war and the Thunderer Perun. This Baltic Mars, as it turned out, demanded human sacrifices in addition to the usual worship. In 983, after a successful campaign against the Yotvingians (a Lithuanian tribe that lived in the area of ​​present-day Grodno), Vladimir decided to offer thanksgiving sacrifices to the gods, to which the elders and boyars decided to cast lots on the youth and the maiden, and on whom the lot would fall, that and sacrifice. The lot of the youth fell on the son of a Varangian, who was a Christian. Of course, he did not give up his son and locked himself at home. Then the crowd came and tore them both to pieces - and be defiled by the blood of the land of Rus, as the most ancient chronicle (PVL) conveys. The sources of that time did not preserve the names of our first martyrs and their burial place: and no one can tell you where to put them, but later saints call them - Theodore and John of the Varangians(the memory is honored on July 12).

However, this sacrifice should not be understood as the special pagan zeal of Prince. Vladimir. In principle, the idol of Perun stood in Kyiv long before him, and human sacrifices were quite common among the Normans, and not too outlandish for the Slavs either. In addition, as we can see, the idea of ​​bloodshed did not belong to Vladimir at all, but to the priestly elite, the elders, embittered at Christians for the long-term rule of Christian princes, and the performing mission, as always, was entrusted to the crowd, traditionally distinguished by animal fanaticism. Paradoxically, it was to Vladimir that the Russian land subsequently owed its Christian Baptism.

It is difficult to say for sure what convinced Vladimir to give up his violent temper and accept the faith of Christ. During the first years of his reign, he did not differ in good manners, at least the chronicle described him as a rather depraved young man. However, it should be borne in mind that the chronicler deliberately described Vladimir before his conversion in especially gloomy tones in order to more vividly represent the greatness of his moral transformation after Baptism. Be that as it may, as it often happens, by the age of 30 a man, all the more who has gone through a difficult military school, sometimes, looking back at his life, sees in it not quite what it was to him before ... Perhaps something similar had to be experienced by our educator.

Historians often view Vladimir's conversion in a formal historical context - as a progressive process of Christianization of other Central European rulers. Indeed, in 960 the Polish prince Mieszko I was baptized, in 974 the Danish king Harold Blotand, in 976 the Norwegian king (since 995 king) Olaf Trygvasson, in 985 the Hungarian duke Gyoza. All these rulers were the immediate neighbors of Russia, at a certain time, both allies and enemies. However, this does not sufficiently reveal the reasons for the Baptism of our enlightener, since it does not take into account the factor of Vladimir's confessional alternative, because in addition to neighbors in the west, the Kyiv sovereign had the same neighbors and allies in the Black Sea south and the steppe east. The main direction of allied relations was addressed precisely to the steppe neighbors of Russia, the pagan Polovtsy, and the main trading competitor was the Volga Bulgars - from 922 the Mohammedans (not to mention the Khazar Jews, defeated by Vladimir's father Svyatoslav). Thus, the sphere of cultural contacts of the Kyiv prince was much more diverse, which allows us to consider the version of his baptism on the principle of "imitation" as unconvincing.

There were many legends about exactly how Vladimir was baptized and how he baptized his people, but it is most likely that Vladimir, in fact, was baptized, if not secretly, then without much fanfare, as our chronicles represented this a century later. At least, the chronicler himself at the beginning of the 12th century could not provide reliable information about exactly where this memorable event took place: they say that they were baptized in Kyiv, but they decide: in Vasilevo, friends will say otherwise(PVL). The most popular, although not so reliable tradition represents this place of baptism of Vladimir the city of St. Chersonese in the Crimea (in the vicinity of present-day Sevastopol). In addition, Vladimir could have been baptized at his princely residence in Vasilevo (modern city of Vasilkov, Kyiv region), according to, for example, the famous pre-revolutionary historian E.E. Golubinsky. This version is not without foundation, since this town owed its name precisely to the event of St. Baptism of Vladimir, in which he was named Vasily.

The fact is that we have to draw the lion's share of information about the Baptism of Russia in the oldest chronicle that has come down to us - Tales of Bygone Years, which, firstly, was compiled almost 120 years after the event in question, and secondly, contains a lot of conflicting data. However, still not so contradictory as not to try to restore the actual circumstances, at least in general terms.

So, the chronicle begins the description of the Baptism of Vladimir with the plot of the “test of faith” by the grand ducal ambassadors in different countries, namely, observations of where who serves God. For us today, this would seem very outlandish, because it is difficult to imagine knowing another faith, contemplating the external ceremonial of its worship, not to mention being convinced of its truth. In addition, was there any point in going for Orthodoxy “over the sea”, when in Kyiv itself there was a rather large local Christian community, which had its main temple (probably not the only one) the Cathedral Church of St. the prophet Elijah on Podil, known since the time of Prince. Igor. Nevertheless, the chronicle legend forces Vladimir, a man, it must be said, of a remarkable state mind, to be convinced by such a "test of faith" and on this basis to accept Baptism. At the same time, Vladimir only had to be baptized by making a victorious raid on Korsun (Chersonesos) in Tauris.

Such a legend, diverging from other sources, has long aroused distrust among historians, although no one, of course, accused the chronicler of fiction, because the event and the story are separated by a huge time interval for that era. According to one of the most authoritative pre-revolutionary historians S.F. Platonov, in the annals of the beginning of the XII century. three different, but quite reliable legends turned out to be combined:

a) about the fact that Vladimir was offered to accept his faith by the ambassadors of the Volga Bulgars (Muslims), Khazars (Jews), Germans (Western Christians, probably from the same German Emperor Otto I) and Greeks (Eastern Christians, most likely Bulgarians);

b) that Vladimir was stricken with physical blindness, but after Baptism he miraculously regained his sight immediately with spiritual and bodily eyes;

in) about the siege by Vladimir of the most important Byzantine trading post in the Crimea, the city of Korsun. All these legends are based on indirect historical evidence.

Let's start in order. As already mentioned, in 979 to the book. Yaropolk was sent a response embassy from the Pope, of course, with a proposal for the Baptism of Russia, but it found on the throne not Yaropolk, but Vladimir. It is possible that it was then that Vladimir's answer to the Latin missionaries sounded, captured in the annals: go back, for our fathers did not accept this(PVL) . This rhetorical passage of the annals, oddly enough, but also has its own historical reason. As you know, in 962, the mission of the Latin Bishop Adalbert, sent to Russia, failed due to the refusal of Prince. Olga to accept the spiritual citizenship of the Pope. The words our fathers, abandoned by Vladimir, in this case do not contradict the fact that we are talking, most likely, about the grandmother of Prince. Vladimir Olga, for in the Old Russian language fathers parents were named in general (for example: Fathers of God Joachim and Anna).

As for other missionaries, earlier sources are silent about them, as well as about the corresponding embassies for a kind of "test of faith" by Vladimir, which definitely should not have escaped the attention of, at least, Byzantine diplomats, if they really such an embassy was sent. However, there is nothing surprising in the fact that Vladimir, the monarch of the largest European power, tried to lure into their faith both the Mohammedans and the Khazars, who were completely defeated by his father, who were actually left without a state at that time, and, moreover, representatives of the Vatican. Several embassies of Vladimir to different countries are known, but for purely diplomatic purposes, and not for the sake of studying liturgical rites.

In connection with the legend of Vladimir's blindness, the news of a pirate attack by the Black Sea Vikings in the 830s deserves special attention. to the Crimean city of Surozh (modern Sudak). Then the main city church was turned up for plunder, where the relics of the local saint, Bishop. Stefan Surozhsky. However, in the midst of the "triumph" of vandalism, as the Life of St. Stephen, the leader of the attackers was suddenly stricken with paralysis (he had a cramp in his neck, which had a very painful effect). The Varangians, in fear, had to not only return the loot and free the captives, but also give a rich ransom before their king was released from punishment. After what happened, the leader with all his retinue received in the same church St. Baptism. Could something similar have happened, albeit in a milder form, to our enlightener, so that he would consciously believe and lead his people to the right faith? Life calls Vladimir Russian Saul: the latter also, before becoming the apostle Paul, in bodily blindness knew Christ and received his sight in order to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles (cf. Acts, ch.9).

Finally, the last chronicle tradition is of the greatest interest and importance for us, since it contains, perhaps, the most difficult question - about the time of the Baptism of Russia and the book itself. Vladimir. Thus, The Tale of Bygone Years dates Vladimir's baptism under 988 year , however, mixing this event with the Korsun campaign and, as a result, forcing the book. Vladimir to be baptized in Korsun and for this very purpose to carry out the campaign itself. However, earlier sources, such as “Memory and Praise to Vladimir” by Jacob Mnich (end of the 11th century) and Byzantine chronicles say that Vladimir took Korsun for the third summer by your baptism. In fact, the baptized prince had no reason to go to the Crimea for baptism. Such nonsense in PVL occurs repeatedly. For example, the adoption of Christianity by Princess Olga, according to the chronicle, occurs in Constantinople from the patriarch and only with the emperor as a successor. Apparently, the court chroniclers of the XII century. it was hard to imagine the victorious Kievan princes of the 10th century receiving St. Baptism without unnecessary fanfare from a simple priest and, judging by the obscurity of the data, quite at home (if Prince Vladimir was not baptized at all in childhood during the time of his grandmother, Princess Olga-Elena). But what does the Korsun campaign have to do with it then?

Another important circumstance is woven into this. In the mid 980s. external threat and internal rebellion put the Byzantine Empire in an extremely difficult position. On top of that, in 987, an uprising broke out by the commander Varda Foki, who declared himself basil (king). In late 987 - early 988, co-ruler brothers Vasily II and Constantine VIII were forced to turn to the Kyiv prince for military support against the rebels. Vladimir agreed to send a fairly large army to Byzantium in exchange for the promise of the emperors to marry his sister, Princess Anna, to him. As a politician, Vladimir thought impeccably - to intermarry with the Byzantine dynasty would mean practically equalizing the Russian princes, if not with the Roman basileus, then at least with the great European monarchs of that time and significantly strengthening the world authority of the Kievan state.

Already in the summer of 988, with the help of the Russian legions, the tsars managed to defeat the rebels, and in April of the following 989, they finally crushed the rebellion. However, having got rid of the mortal danger, the kings were in no hurry to fulfill their promises - Princess Anna did not seem to be going to distant "barbarian" Russia. After waiting the whole summer of 989, Vladimir realized that he would simply be deceived ... But in this case, it was no longer about strengthening the world authority of the Kyiv state, but about justifying the diplomatic slap inflicted on it in the literal sense. It was then that Vladimir was forced to move troops to the Byzantine colonies and force Constantinople to fulfill his obligation (remember how 12 years earlier Vladimir, being humiliated by the refusal of the Polotsk prince Rogvold to marry his daughter Rogneda to him, went on a campaign to Polotsk, the result of which was the capture of the city and the murder of Rogvold and his sons).

So, in the fall of 989, Vladimir, according to the chronicle, having collected How many of the Varangians, Slovenes, Chudi, Krivichi and Black Bulgarians, laid siege to the most important trading post of Byzantium in the Northern Black Sea region, the city of Chersonesos. Taking advantage of the Black Sea winter storms and, accordingly, the inability to receive reinforcements by sea from Byzantium, Vladimir took the city under a complete siege and by May 990 forced him to completely capitulate. Moreover, Vladimir promised to bring the army to the walls of Constantinople itself ... In the end, the Byzantine sovereigns could not withstand the forceful pressure taken against them, and soon Vladimir was married in the same Chersonese to Princess Anna, and as a "vein" (ransom) for the city returned the bride to the emperors, laying a beautiful temple in it (to this day its ruins testify to the beauty and magnificence of the shrine). However, he nevertheless took the Korsun clergy with him to Kyiv to help for further Christianization.

In addition, in the retinue of Tsarevna Anna, the bishops appointed in Constantinople to the Russian cathedra arrived. This is how the Kyiv Metropolis began, which in a formal sense was the beginning of the Russian Church. Prof. HER. Golubinsky is right in his own way, suggesting that the year 990 be considered the date of the Baptism of Russia. However, in reality, Vladimir undertook "baptism" as the approval of Christianity by the state faith in Russia, in fact, immediately after his personal appeal, that is, already in 988: Baptized Vladimir himself, and his child, and enlighten your whole house with holy baptism (« Memory and praise to Vladimir" Jacob Mnich), the courtiers, the squad, the townspeople were baptized (of course, those who still remained in paganism).

A well-founded question may arise, to whom the enlightenment of yesterday's pagans and the prince himself could be entrusted, because the Greek clergy did not know the Russian language, and were very few in number. This issue is resolved in the context of the cultural and political contacts of Russia throughout the 10th century. The most significant direction of these contacts was associated with the First Bulgarian Kingdom (680-1018), where the heirs of Tsar Boris-Simeon, the first Christian ruler of Bulgaria (†889), ruled. It was the Bulgarian missionaries who during all this time carried out an active catechetical program in Russia, thus weaving their powerful northeastern neighbor into the orbit of the cultural influence of the Ohrid archdiocese (patriarchy). At least, we do not know the Greek Metropolitan earlier than Theopemt, who arrived in 1037 to the Kyiv cathedra really from the Patriarch of Constantinople.

We also recall that Bulgaria was baptized more than a century earlier (c. 865) and by the time of our enlightenment had a rich patristic library translated into Slavonic, as well as a developed tradition of Greek-Slavic cultural synthesis (let us recall, for example, the works of John the Exarch, Chernorizets the Brave , Konstantin Preslavsky and other prominent spiritual writers). The Bulgarian Church, it should be noted, generally played a huge role in the Baptism of Russia. This is the secret of the relative ease of the spread of Christianity in our country (compared to Western Europe), that the faith was assimilated by the people in their native Slavic language, as close as possible to the spoken language, in the spirit of the Cyril and Methodius Christian tradition. In addition, by the time of his Baptism, Prince. Vladimir acquired among the people the enormous prestige of a victorious ruler and a man of deep statesmanship. In this regard, the chronicle phrase put into the mouths of the people of Kiev looks quite reliable: if it wasn’t good, it wouldn’t be for this prince and boyars to accept(PVL). Although only those who did not strongly persist in paganism reasoned this way.

Before the Korsun campaign, catechesis was only of a private nature (as before Vladimir), probably, it did not particularly go beyond the walls of capital Kyiv. The Korsun victory brought the official approval of the Russian Church, and only then, on July 31, 990, the people of Kiev heard an almost ultimatum call from the prince: if someone does not turn up in the morning on the river, whether it is rich, poor, or poor ... let it be disgusting to me(PVL).

So, in the Baptism of Vladimir, the Russian Church was born, and not so much temples or a new political mentality, but the great beginning of everything that is now associated with ancient Russian culture and spirituality, and not only ancient - in the words of the historian L.N. Gumilyov: "The victory of Orthodoxy gave Russia its thousand-year history."