What is Orthodoxy? The whole truth about the baptism of Russia. Logic and forcible baptism of Russia In which chronicles it is said about the planting of Christianity

It is generally accepted that in the initial period of the adoption of Christianity in Russia, there was a dual faith. Not in the sense that this term began to be understood much later, but literally - two faiths. The fact is that when people were forcibly baptized, they continued to honor the old gods, while at the same time honoring the new ones, which was quite pagan. But over time, with the change of generations, pure pagan rituals became a thing of the past, as a separate faith. Paganism smoothly merged into Christianity, and as a result of the transformation, Russian Orthodoxy was formed. Russian Orthodoxy is not "pagan Orthodoxy" and not "Orthodox paganism", it is Christianity and it is what it is. A synthesis of two cultures took place, when the new faith included the artifacts of the previous faith and everyone was very happy with this except, perhaps, Orthodox Christianity. It is thanks to the synthesis that we have what is absent in other branches of Christianity - the veneration of icons, the veneration of holy relics, the veneration of holy sources, even a somewhat pagan veneration of stones associated with saints, pagan holidays in a new interpretation, and more. There was a struggle "against" the adoption of Christianity and there was a struggle for it. In this struggle, Christianity was a strong point, because the ruling elite, the trading elite, and the squad became Christians. The strength of Christianity was also in the fact that there are no people more zealous in the faith than the new converts. In the end, the strong side that represented Christianity won, even if it took a long time. The push was given, and then everything rolled like a snowball. So Christianity swept through paganism, gathering in a huge ball of Russian Orthodoxy.

Neopaganism about Christianity in Russia.

In a conversation about how Christianity was born and then adopted in Russia, it is impossible to avoid some topics. Scientists ignore these topics, because it makes no sense to discuss someone's inventions. But neo-paganism, nevertheless, puts forward many sharp theses regarding the adoption of Orthodoxy in Russia, makes many statements. Answering them, the history of the adoption of Christianity in Russia can be further illuminated.

Neopaganism is very different. There are many very different trends. Some, patiently studying various historical sources, are trying to reconstruct bit by bit some moments of Slavic paganism, others shout that they are Slavs, that paganism is the faith of their fathers and grandfathers, and the Kolovrat on a T-shirt is the original symbol of Slavic paganism. The polemic with the Christians of these latter usually consists in denigrating and insulting the Christian faith and the Russian people. Such techniques often demonstrate complete ignorance of the history of Russia - Russia and the Russian people. The topic of the forcible baptism of Russia is a myth about a powerful religious resistance to attempts to impose Christianity, in fact about a religious war in Russia at that time. Let's try to figure out what is true and what is fiction.

Planting Christianity in Russia with great blood. Truth and fiction.

The forcible implantation of Christianity in Russia is a very big and serious question. It would be ridiculous to think that as soon as Vladimir Krasnoe Solnyshko announced that Russia was accepting Christianity, the people under his control ran to be baptized. This was not and could not be. By persuasion, promises, appeasement, but more often simply by the threat of the use of military force, or even the use, Orthodoxy was introduced in Russia. Yes, it was often done by force. This is no secret to anyone. There are many tribes, principalities and cities, each with its own disposition.

Vladimir Svyatoslavovich, in order to strengthen his power, sent his 12 sons to the most important cities of Russia. Local princes were removed. Vladimir's sons began to strengthen the central government. An important part of which was the baptism of local tribes.

But it should be borne in mind that in those days everything was done by force, such were the rules of life. How many first princes of Kievan Rus made military campaigns against neighboring (mainly Slavic) tribes before they were taught? How much blood was shed while Kievan Rus was being created. The tribes did not fled with joy to the Old Russian state, bearing tribute. Not. They fiercely resisted. And as soon as they rebelled, they split off and they had to be conquered again. The entire history of the creation of Russia consists of military campaigns against neighboring tribes.

Who is now mourning the murdered Drevlyans whom Olga, then a pagan, cruelly avenged for the death of her husband Igor and for the attempt at separatism. Cruel, but quite in the spirit of that pagan time. They misbehaved and paid the price.

What about big blood? Here we can say that in comparison with other countries, the adoption of Orthodoxy in Russia took place quite peacefully. After all, everything is known in comparison. What rivers of blood flowed during the Christianization of Bulgaria, Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic. You cannot compare with Russia. It makes no sense to talk about some bloody history of the adoption of Christianity.

Here you can tell one interesting historical fact about Olav Tryggvason. We are interested in it for many reasons. He was born in 963, lived in Russia from the age of 9 (there is a version that it was Vladimir Svyatoslavovich who bought him out of slavery), first in Novgorod, then in Kiev. He served in the squad of Prince Vladimir "Red Sun" Svyatoslavovich, the future Baptist of Russia, lived in Russia for 9 years, and the most interesting thing is that after becoming King of Norway, the already baptized Olav began to actively spread Christianity. Officially, it is he who is considered the baptist of Norway. What an interesting and surprising coincidence! He served with the Baptist of Russia and himself became the Baptist of Norway. True, it should be noted that, in contrast to Vladimir Svyatoslavovich, Olav did often baptize with fire and sword, planting Christianity in the most cruel way. From his efforts, he died. He was betrayed and killed by opponents of Christianity.

The most striking event is of course the baptism of Novgorod, when “Putyata baptized with a sword, and Dobrynya with fire”. Most often, it is he who is cited as an example when they talk about the rivers of blood that Christians poured in Russia. Novgorod was the second most important center of Kievan Rus. Vast territories were subject to Novgorod, it was the Novgorodians (Chud, Slovenia, Krivichi and the rest of them lived on these lands) who invited Rurik to reign. Did Novgorod, feeling its strength, want to remain subject to Kiev? Probably not, in the further history it happened. During the period of feudal fragmentation of Russia, Novgorod was independent. The Novgorod Republic existed from 1136 to 1478. It is usually said that the city was ruled by the veche, although in fact there was no real people's democracy in Novgorod. Everything was ruled by the elite - the merchant oligarchy, although popular opinion seriously influenced the decisions made.

Now about the resistance and uprisings, which, according to some versions, were of a religious nature. The nature of the resistance to the spread of Christianity.

In 980, Dobrynya, at the behest of Prince Vladimir the Red Sun, during the pagan reform, established the idol of Perun in Novgorod. Novgorodians get another main god instead of Volos.

In 990, a "small baptism" took place in Novgorod. Voluntary baptism of a number of Novgorodians.

In 991, Dobrynya and his army came to baptize Novgorod forcibly. And it flared up. Why? I think there are several reasons and a forceful attempt to overthrow the old gods is only one of the reasons, and even then not the main one. The researchers believe that the main reason is that the Novgorod authorities saw for themselves in the popular excitement an opportunity to gain independence from Kiev. In short, the story is as follows: Novgorod is divided by the Volkhov River, on the one hand, Dobrynya with strength, on the other, the rebellious Novgorodians led by the sorcerer Bogomil (nicknamed the Nightingale for his oratorical ability) and the mayor We drive away. The bridge between the banks was destroyed. On the side where Dobrynya is, the priests go from house to house and persuade to be baptized. The rebels are destroying the Christian church and the Dobrynya estate.

Attempts to reach an agreement with peace fail and Putyata conducts a "special operation". At night, with his 500 Rostovites (were there completely Christians in this detachment?), He crosses the river, captures the leaders of the rebels and ferries them to Dobryna, he strengthens himself in the estate Driving away and begins to act against him up to 5,000 (it is difficult to say whether the figure is correct, as well as those 500 Rostovites) of the rebels. They beat all night. Someone was chopped, of course, but the night siege could not end with much blood.

In the morning, Dobrynya is crossed by boats, sets the city on fire. The insurgents have no leader, they submit to force and run to extinguish houses. All! The operation performed can be admirable. With little blood, quickly, the issue was resolved. They did the same with Perun as in Kiev, subjected them to pagan execution and floated down the Volkhov. How many people died is not reported, but judging by the speed and circumstances, not many. The city remained practically intact and was not plundered. Novgorodians were baptized in Volkhov. This story is quite unusual for its time, the captured cities were ravaged, plundered, people were taken prisoner. So everything turned out to be a little bloody. If you are interested, you can remember, for comparison, a much later time. The times of Ivan the Terrible and the campaign against Novgorod by his oprichnina troops in 1569-70. That campaign ended for the freedom-loving Novgorodians very sadly, with great blood.

Let's summarize. Of course, the Christianization of the Russian people could not completely change the worldview, leave centuries-old traditions, we can observe echoes of paganism in our days, the same superstitions, belief in dreams, burning an effigy on Shrovetide and much more. But, in my opinion, Christianity is gaining strength again, every time it gets stronger, despite constant persecution. I am sure that without God's providence such a global change could not have happened on earth in principle. And only with His help the Christianization of Rus was possible and takes place to this day.

Was the baptism of Rus the result of violence? There are quite a few people who will answer in the affirmative and even in an ultimatum - yes, the forced baptism of Russia is a historical fact! No fewer people will answer in the negative and also, oddly enough, will refer to historical facts. Quite a few scientific and popular articles have already been written on the arrival of Christianity in ancient Russia, but nevertheless, disputes among users of the Russian-speaking Internet not only do not subside, but are also gaining momentum. Why? Why were the rather unambiguous facts speaking in favor of the peaceful adoption of Christianity unable to put an end to this issue? Why, in spite of these facts, the myth about the forced baptism of the Slavs is gaining more and more popularity? Apparently the question here is more in the field of psychology than in the field of history or education of the disputants. Dead end? But if you try to speculate about history from a different perspective - "talking at the kitchen table late in the evening ..."? Just sorting out the most popular today reproaches towards Christianity and its appearance in Russia. Let's try.

If we forget for a minute about all the historical evidence of the nonviolent Baptism of Rus [incidents of violence could not but happen, but these are rare and sad exceptions], if we just try to think logically? For what? And for the fact that very often the supporters of the myth of the forcible implantation of Christianity the facts of history, what they say is not a decree, but it may be precisely through progressive logical reasoning that it will be possible to awaken in free or unwitting opponents a more critical attitude to the "axioms" widespread in society, when then imposed on him by unscrupulous propaganda. In our reasoning we will try to rely only on completely obvious and unambiguously understood facts of history.

First rebuke – bloody, total Christianization [colossal figures are named from a third of the total population of pagan Rus to 9 million "tortured and killed pagans by villains priests and princes sold to Zion"].

We argue ...

Where such a large number of population came from in Russia, none of the accusers is able to explain. But, well, even if it is so much and even more. Accordingly, along with the color of an ancient powerful nation, its greatest statehood and culture were destroyed. Destroyed mercilessly and, one might say, scrupulously.

1. What can tell us the speed with which Christianity spread in the territories, which in the future are destined to become the Motherland for the Russian nation that emerged from the mixing of Slavic (and not only Slavic) tribes of the Russian nation (the period of the emergence and formation of a superethnos from the 13th to the 17th centuries inclusive)? The rate of conversion of multilingual, multicultural and heterogeneous tribes to Christianity was almost several centuries.

1.1. This begs the question - how could the total massacre and violence have dragged on so deeply? In fact, this is a civil war that lasted for centuries. The testimonies of "witnesses" from the camp of critics vary to the opposite to each other, and do not give any redirects to history, mathematical calculations, etc.

1.2. If you look around and pay attention to examples of a clearly forceful version of the imposition of religion, we will see, for example, how Islam appeared in Azerbaijan. And it appeared as a result of completely trivial violence. Less than 10 years after the death of Muhammad, in 632 about 30,000 Muslim Arabs attacked and conquered Iran, overthrowing the power of the decaying Sassanid empire. Azerbaijan became part of the new Muslim empire, although resistance to the Arab invasion in the northern and central regions of Azerbaijan continued until the ninth century. In 837, the Arabs captured the Babek fortress, a stronghold of a powerful rebel movement in central Azerbaijan, and established their rule over the country. By the time the Muslim invaders arrived in Azerbaijan, the Diophysite direction of Christianity was already widespread and a significant portion of the population professed Zoroastrianism. Christianity appeared on the territory of Azerbaijan through Caucasian Albania in the first centuries of the new era - even during the period of the apostles of Jesus Christ.

The national hero of the Azerbaijani people Babek (in Azerbaijan he is the number one hero and the monuments to him were probably not much less than Lenin in due time) was a Christian. So, the national liberation movement went under the banner of preserving its faith. And it was as a result of aggressive Islamization that the famous Azerbaijani proverb was born - "we are Muslims by the sword", that is, Muslims as a result of violence. Note that all this happened much earlier than the appearance of Christianity in Russia.

Why was such an excursion into the history of the former fraternal republic made? In order to see if anything remains after the forcible imposition of religion and culture over a period of more than a millennium? Does information about such large-scale events remain in history and in national memory? Here we boldly state that there is more than enough historical and cultural information left. Hence another question follows - on what basis can one then assume that for Russia the bloody baptism took place so fleetingly and fatally (although in fact it lasted centuries) that literally did not survive: not a word, not a burnt firebrand, not a single testimony from the neighbors Rus (did not notice the centuries-old wars for the faith?), Nor the Russians themselves? Let's make a reservation - Azerbaijan is not at all alone in its tragedy and not only Islam was marked with great blood in ancient history. There are enough bright and bloody examples from the history of both Europe and Asia (yes, and peaceful Buddhism was also noted).

Second rebuke - if not for the squads of princes, Christianity would never have been able to be imposed on the Slavs.

We argue ...

Let's pay attention to what were the armed forces of that time? In addition to the constant small squad, all the militia gathered from the people. Those. the people were armed and were not new to the fighting. Could it be that a "police" squad of one of the princes could have resisted a popular uprising and could have caused bloodshed in millions of lives, even in thousands of lives? Were the princes so strong and was their power so indisputable and absolute? For example - in Novgorod XII-XIII centuries. princes changed 58 times, often more often than the seasons. And they were driven out and called upon by the people. The veche democracy of Novgorod at that time, of course, is a unique and atypical case for Russia, but nevertheless it demonstrates how dependent the princes were on the mood and sympathy of the people.

Moreover, if the clergy enjoyed strong support from the government, and the government, in turn, had sufficient strength to forcibly implant a new faith, then how to explain, for example, the fact that the pagans expelled bishops. For example, in Rostov the Great, from where the first two bishops were expelled, and the third, Saint Leonty, was killed. And this is with the presence of a community of Christians in the city and the favor of Christianity in the authorities ...

Third rebuke - the facts of the forcible baptism of certain people at a later time speak in favor of the fact that in the first centuries of the Christianization of Rus, religious violence was undoubtedly more widespread and usual. If Christianity does not teach violence, then in the presence of such facts already in a Christian environment, how can one deny the high probability of religious violence in that distant time?

We argue ...

A little about the logic of extrapolation: they say that, for example, a pregnant woman went to a tavern, drank hard there and made a drunken brawl that ended in a general fight - you can, of course, believe this ... But you must admit that such behavior in general, nevertheless, is not characteristic of the overwhelming most pregnant women.

Cases of violence could not but be ... Minor episodes, even if we do not know them well, for sure there were, but just their episodicity and contradiction to the Christian paradigm only favorably set off the peaceful process of Christianization.

It is undoubted and obvious that it is always worth paying attention first of all to what a particular religion teaches. It is worth distinguishing the teaching of religion from the actions of its specific carriers. If violence in one form or another finds itself justification or justification in a specific religious teaching, then only in this case it is correct to assume (but not having facts, in no case to assert) systematic religiously motivated violence. It is impossible to find a justification for violence in the Teaching of Christianity.

Fourth rebuke - yes, only because Christianity was absolutely alien to the Slavs and imposed by brute force in the first decades, most of the priests were foreigners - people of a different nationality, a different faith and culture, deeply alien to our ancestors.

We argue ...

What can the presence of Christians in Russia tell us in the centuries of the so-called violent Christianization?

Let's imagine a picture. Most of our neighbors characterize the Slavs as quite staunch people, one might say whole and with a high sense of their own national and personal dignity, love of freedom. How can one explain the fact of the presence of a large number of ascetics and Saints from among the tribes and clans that have just undergone forcible Christianization? The presence of such people with extremely high authority both for Christians and even for pagans ...? There is no place for heroes of the spirit, martyrs and confessors when they are forcibly converted to another faith. A person who did not sacrifice his life for the old faith will never voluntarily sacrifice it for the sake of the forcibly implanted new one, for two probable reasons:

Negative attitude towards the new violent faith;

The actual lack of ability to sacrifice in the name of faith, because he was already incapable of her for the faith of his ancestors during his forced baptism.

Where, then, do these numerous heroes of the Spirit come from? In the case of violence, in the first centuries of the constantly going Christianization of Russia, they simply had nowhere to come from. But with every century, the number of Holy ascetics has multiplied along with the number of converts ... "A slave is not a pilgrim."

By the way, what was the name of Vladimir by his contemporaries? Prince Vladimir was popularly called Vladimir Krasno Solnyshko - an affectionate prince. A monster and a tyrant would not be called that. But what about the fact that Vladimir, after adopting Christianity, hesitated to pass death sentences? Is this the man who drowned pagan Russia in blood?

Fifth rebuke - christians destroyed an entire civilization, just as later Christians destroyed the civilizations of the American Indians. Destroyed the culture. writing and other elements of the highest civilization of our ancestors.

We argue ...

If the Slavs were highly civilized peoples before Christianity - where are the traces of this civilization? Let the heathens show. No? Ah, it was all in Hyperborea? In any case, something had to remain from a real civilization, despite the struggle with the old pagan faith or even with an entire people and its culture.

Example: Crete-Minoan culture. This ancient civilization was completely destroyed by the Achaeans, and the Minoans themselves were partially massacred, partially assimilated by the conquerors. That is, as a people, they disappeared from the face of the earth. But, despite this (as well as the terrible earthquakes that shook the island more than once in that era and destroyed a lot), there are many monuments of Minoan culture left on Crete, according to which this civilization is now being studied by archaeologists (including sunken cultural monuments. But the Minoans, unlike the living Slavic peoples, were destroyed more than 3 thousand years ago!

And wait a minute, but after all, Vladimir apparently planted Christianity not in Hyperborea, but in Russia, where there are no traces of "ancient civilization" and there never was.

And here two options are possible:

1. Either the Slavs, after the "Hyperborean flood", completely lost their high culture (this happened with other peoples), and therefore did not leave cultural traces on the territory of modern Russia. But in this case, Christianity did not destroy anything ... By the time of Christianization, everything had disappeared a long time ago as a result of the cataclysm, and the Christians again civilized the already "barbarized" people. Then Christianity, in any case, can only say thank you.

2. Either there was simply no "Hyperborean civilization" ...

If Christians really burned all the pagan books, and nothing survived, then how did you, gentlemen, know after 1000 years that such books existed and were burned? After all, pagan sources, as you yourself claim, have not survived, and in the Christian annals there is no mention of pagan writing, books and their burning.

By the way, in relation to the Indian theme - the latter circumstance is rather strange: after all, the people of that time had a slightly different psychology than you and I (without political correctness), and the missionaries of that time were not only not ashamed, but even proud of the fact that they destroyed pagan temples , books, etc. (where such destruction took place), and therefore references to such acts usually fell into manuscripts. This attitude persisted for a very long time: for example, the Spanish missionary of the 16th century Diego de Landa was not at all shy about destroying the sacred books of the Maya Indians - and this despite the fact that later he studied the culture of this people with interest all his life (and left valuable works on this topic).

Writing! Oh Velesov's wise book, oh All-holy letter! Would you be so kind, gentlemen, to show at least one piece of "birch bark" on which something would have been "inscribed" in the pre-Christian period? No, no, we are certainly not talking about books - you claim that they were all burned. But after all, any literate people uses writing not only for religious purposes! In the same Christian Novgorod XI-XIII centuries. literate people (and there were, apparently, the majority of such people) wrote to each other anything on birch bark: business notes, personal letters, jokes, threats ... Having received and read such a birch bark note, a person usually did not keep it, but threw it into garbage can or directly on the street (if not very neat). There the note was reliably trampled into the mud, and it remained there - the birch bark, as it turned out, is very well preserved in such an environment. Therefore, in our time archaeologists find in the Novgorod land a lot of such "letters" - the ancient Novgorod Christians literally "spat" them on their city. Logically, if these same Novgorodians (and other Slavs) had a pre-Christian script, which they "drew on birch bark," then at least a few similar "letters" from the times of paganism would have to be preserved (the Christians clearly could not destroy - they did not climb through the garbage dumps and did not excavate in the city in order to find some scraps of business notes ten, twenty or a century ago). But, alas, not a single one was found in the pre-Christian strata ...

Thomas Laik

Vedic Information Agency Midgard-INFO

The number of Europe before Christianization is 800 million people, after baptism - 4 million people ...

Ros (Rus) - in the period from 988 to 1000, when forced baptism took place out of 12 million people, 3 million remained.

In Russia, Christianity was implanted by force, while the religious buildings of the Slavs were destroyed, often together with the people who resisted. Note that Christianity was an urban religion, for the villagers as a whole, this belief was both incomprehensible and unhelpful, since it did not help them in any way, in contrast to the natural cults of VeRa. But even in the cities of Russia, the introduction of Christianity as the only religion, accompanied by the destruction and desecration of native shrines, aroused stubborn resistance. The key point is that they did not rebel against Christianity as such (for several centuries before that, a few Christians coexisted relatively peacefully with pagans), they rebelled against the destruction of the old faith.

Few of the modern Orthodox theologians mentions the existence of contradictory explanations for the beginning of the “baptism of Rus”, and preachers generally bypass this delicate topic. Most often, the Korsun version is presented, and it is presented to their listeners and readers as the only and absolutely reliable one. Meanwhile, such a prominent and authoritative church historian as Professor EE Golubinsky resolutely rejected it (see: vol. I, part I, p. 127).

About how the Christianization of Rus proceeded, archeology reports interesting data: of 83 stationary settlements of Kievan Rus' fortified by archaeologists in the 9th - early 11th centuries. 24 (almost 30%) “ceased to exist by the beginning of the 11th century. Apparently, we are talking primarily about those settlements of the ancient Slavs, which were originally sanctuaries. Archaeologists have discovered a system of nests of settlements that accumulate around the "fortifications", which did not bear any so-called "cultural layer", evidence of permanent residence of people on them, or any serious fortifications. But on these strange settlements, traces of a constantly maintained fire and the remains of "pillars" towering in the center of a circle outlined by a symbolic shaft were often found - that is, traces of pagan temples.

It was such large well-known pagan centers of worship that were destroyed in the first place, and people from the settlements either died defending their shrines, or preferred to go farther away, where they would not be reached by Christian missionaries who were planting a new faith with "fire and sword." The cruel actions of the prince, his desire to destroy the pagan gods and magi are also explained by the mentality of the people of that time. The prince had to destroy all the statues of the old gods, all their servants, as they destroy deadly enemies. Raised in a pagan society, Vladimir could not help but believe in the power of the gods, could not help fearing their revenge. Even Christian chroniclers did not doubt the power of the Magi: "It is no wonder that magic comes true from sorcery," writes Nestor, and Jacob Mnikh echoes him in praise of Prince Vladimir - "And the Magi have performed miracles."

By the way, in the Novgorod region, a legend has been preserved that the baptist of Novgorod, Dobrynya, subsequently drowned himself in Ilmen out of remorse. At least in the chronicles after 990, he really is no longer mentioned. The chronicles keep deaf silence about the death of Prince Vladimir, only by recording the fact itself. But it is interesting that on old icons, starting from the 12th century frescoes. in the cathedrals of Vladimir, the baptist prince is depicted with a very characteristic cross in his hands - an attribute of a martyr. This is how Christians were portrayed who were martyred for their faith. After Vladimir's death, the baptism of Rus continued with the same methods, although at a much slower rate. In Murom and Rostov, the resistance to the spread of Christianity, according to traditional church history, continued until the 12th century. Longer than other Slavic tribes, the Vyatichi retained their native faith, resisting Christian missionaries until the 13th century. At the same time, up to the 12th century, anti-Christian uprisings broke out in the already baptized lands. (see the article "Anti-Christian demonstrations of the pre-Mongol period").

Not only scientists, but also some church authors did not deny in the past the compulsory nature of the baptism of the inhabitants of the capital of the Kiev state. Many historians of the church pointed out in their writings that the people of Kiev were forced into the new faith. For example, Archbishop Makarii (Bulgakov) wrote: “Not all who then accepted our holy faith, accepted it out of love, some - only out of fear of the one who commanded; not all were baptized willingly, some were reluctant ”(vol. I, p. 27). “Those who did not want to be baptized,” admitted E. E. Golubinsky, “there were quite a few both in Kiev and in general throughout Russia” (vol. I, part I, p. 175). Archbishop Philaret (Gumilevsky) has the same opinion on this matter (see: History of the Russian Church, p. 31),

The violent nature of the introduction to Christianity of the inhabitants of Kiev was also openly acknowledged on the pages of pre-revolutionary church periodicals - in articles dedicated to Prince Vladimir and his activities in the “baptism of Rus”. In particular, priest M. Morev wrote, commenting on the chronicler's story about the baptism of the Kievites: “Many did not want to be baptized: some out of indecision, in which Prince Vladimir himself had been for a long time, others out of stubbornness; but the latter did not want to listen to the sermons either ... Fierce adherents of the old faith fled to the steppes and forests "(Parish Life, 1911, no. 12, p. 719). Archimandrite Macarius retold the chronicle narrative in the same spirit. Having stated that many residents of Kiev “came to the river for fear of the prince,” he further noted: “A lot of Kievites were baptized at the same time. But there were also those who did not want to listen to either the sermons of the clergy or the orders of the prince: they fled from Kiev to the steppes and forests ”(Orthodox Evangelist, 1914, no. 2, pp. 35 - 36).

It couldn't have been otherwise. As already noted, the need for a new religion was initially felt only by the social upper classes of Kievan Rus. Vladimir and his closest entourage needed it to strengthen the grand ducal power. The emerging class of feudal lords sought in her a justification for their privileged position in ancient Russian society and an ideological bridle for servants and smerds. The Christianization of Rus promised merchants the expansion and strengthening of trade ties with Christian countries. All of them received the opportunity, with the help of the new faith, to instill in the masses a spirit of obedience, to reconcile the oppressed with the hardships of forced life, and thereby keep the masses from active forms of social protest. For the sake of such prospects, it was possible to change the centuries-old tradition, break with the pagan past, abandon the usual forms of spiritual life.

As has been repeatedly noted, the baptism of the Kievites was just the beginning of the process of Christianization of the Old Russian state. The new faith, which became a state religion, had to be spread throughout the cities and villages of Kievan Rus. And although baptism was widely practiced not only by the clergy brought from Byzantium, but also by the princely authorities, it was not so easy to fulfill the task.

Judging by the chronicles and hagiographic materials, rarely where the planting of Christianity did without violence and coercion on the one hand and resistance on the other. Here are just a few facts.

The second city of Kievan Rus in terms of size and importance during the reign of Vladimir Svyatoslavich was Novgorod. Therefore, following the Kievites, the Novgorodians had to be baptized. For this purpose, Bishop Joachim of Korsunian was sent to Novgorod in 991, accompanied by the Novgorod voivode Dobrynya (Vladimir's maternal uncle) - the same one who, ten years earlier, had installed an idol over Volkhov at the behest of the Kiev prince. To help them, a Kiev squad was attached, led by the tysyatsky 1 prince Vladimir Putyata.

1 Tysyatsky - an official who was elected by the veche; during the hostilities he commanded the people's militia ("thousand").

Having learned about the goal, the arrival of Dobrynya with the bishop, the Novgorodians decided at the veche not to let these missionaries into the city and not to accept the new religion. Realizing that the Kiev warriors did not come with Dobrynya for a walk, the residents of Novgorod took up arms. Their actions were directed by the Thousand Hijack and the pagan priest Bogomil the Nightingale. The center of resistance was the Sofia Stroma. To prevent the baptists from moving to it from the Trade Side, where they forcibly led several hundred Novgorodians to the new faith, a bridge across the Volkhov was scattered. Putyata, with the help of military cunning, penetrated with his detachment into the center of the Sofia side and captured Ugonyay himself and his associates. But the rebellious Novgorodians continued to resist. Only after the Dobrynya detachment, which secretly crossed the river, set fire to the houses of the participants in the uprising, the resistance of the opponents of the Christianization of the Novgorod land was suppressed.

Of course, the insurgents of Novgorod were guided in their actions not only by religious motives, but also by political considerations - unwillingness to become completely dependent on the Kiev prince. It is the last circumstance that explains the participation of many representatives of the Novgorod nobility in the uprising. And nevertheless, the rejection of the new faith was evident, and this rejection was most sharply and openly demonstrated by the ordinary Novgorod people, to whom the imposed Christianity did not carry anything good.

When, by order of Dobrynya, the pagan idols were defeated (the wooden ones were set on fire, and the stone ones were drowned in Volkhov) and the procedure for adopting the Christian faith began, there were not so many who wanted to be baptized. The soldiers of the princely squad had to move from persuasion to direct coercion and by force to drive the stubborn Novgorodians into the river.

This whole procedure of forced conversion of Novgorod to Christianity gave the Novgorodians a reason to declare that "Putyata baptized them with a sword, and Dobrynya with fire."

Quite a few dramatic situations, testifying to the rejection of Christianity by a significant part of the townspeople in the peasants of Ancient Rus and about the forcible conversion of disobedient people to the new faith, developed in other places as well.

In particular, it was with great difficulty that Christian missionaries succeeded in introducing the inhabitants to the new faith.

ancient Rostov. The first two bishops Fyodor and Hilarion (XI century) could not do anything with the pagan Rostovites and themselves renounced their stay in this city: "escaping, not tolerating unbelief and much annoyance from people." The city rebelled against the third Bishop Leonty: a real threat of not only exile, but also violent death hung over the "lord". Only the fourth bishop Isaiah was able to achieve some success, and even then not in Rostov itself, but in the Rostov land. But he also failed to force all Rostovites to abandon paganism and finally convert to Christianity.

The same difficulties arose during the Christianization of the population of ancient Murom: neither the son of the Kiev prince Vladimir Gleb, nor his successor could introduce the Murom people to the new faith.

Sometimes the local population lynched some of the missionaries who showed excessive zeal when planting Christianity. This is exactly what the Vyatichi did, for example, who killed the missionary monk Kuksha, who in the middle of the 12th century arrived on the Vyatka land from the Kiev-Pechersky Monastery.

There is no information about the circumstances of the introduction to Christianity of the inhabitants of other cities and localities of Ancient Rus. But it is unlikely that baptism took place there any differently than in the cities mentioned above.

All this, taken together, gave the historians (including the church ones) the basis to say that the introduction of Christianity in Russia under Prince Vladimir and his successors was not a peaceful and calm process, that the new faith was implanted with the use of violence, which provoked opposition from various groups the local population and, above all, the common people. Russia, wrote E. E. Golubinsky, “was baptized not only by preaching, but also by compulsion” (vol. I, part I, p. 199). Arguing against those who argued that our ancestors were baptized "without struggle and violence," E. E. Golubinsky wrote: "The complete obedience of the Russians in the matter of changing the faith to the will of the prince and the so-called peaceful spread of Christianity in Russia is nothing more than an impossible invention of our immoderate patriots who want to sacrifice common sense to their patriotism. There is no doubt that the introduction of the new faith was accompanied by considerable excitement among the people, that there were open resistances and revolts ”(ibid., Pp. 175 - 176).

The authors of many articles published in pre-revolutionary times on the pages of church periodicals are just as categorical in their statements on this topic. “Paganism,” said the article “Political and social activities of the highest representatives of the Russian Church (X-XV centuries)”, was still strong, it had not yet outlived its time in Russia, it resisted the introduction of Christianity; therefore, the government takes violent measures in the spread of Christianity, resorts to fire and sword in order to introduce the gospel teaching in the hearts of the pagans. And ministers of Christ do not arm themselves against such means; on the contrary, they justify them and erect the cross of Christ on the corpses ”(Zvonar, 1907, no. 8, p. 32).

All these facts and statements, unflatteringly characterizing the secular and ecclesiastical "baptists" of Kievan Rus, are well known to the theological and ecclesiastical circles of the Moscow Patriarchate. And nevertheless, modern theologians and preachers either keep silent about them, or make statements of exactly the opposite content - they assure their readers and listeners that no one opposed the introduction of Christianity and this action was carried out in an atmosphere of universal support. “The attraction of pagans and non-believers in Kievan Rus to the Church of Christ,” asserts Metropolitan Anthony (Melnikov), without giving any reason for his assertion, “was accomplished not by violence, but by the power of persuasion, with the assistance of the grace of God, living and wonderful” (ZhMP, 1982, No. 5, p. 50).

Vladimir understood that new churches needed ministers. And if the people met the Byzantine bishops with obvious hostility, then what to say about the priests, who would have to communicate with the forcibly converted pagans personally and daily. And there would not have been so many in Byzantium who wanted to go to serve in the churches of the newly baptized Rus. The prince gathers children (mostly orphans) from all over the world to teach bookish, primarily, of course, biblical, wisdom. Byzantine books are translated into Russian, of course, not completely, in an abbreviated, often simplified version.

Indicative in this respect is the coverage by the contemporary church press of the circumstances of the baptism of Novgorodians. In the preface to the "Orthodox Church Calendar for 1983", dedicated to the church history of Novgorod and Pskov, the introduction of Novgorodians to Christianity is presented as a peaceful idyll: "The inhabitants of Novgorod were baptized in 988 (?) From St. Joachim of Korsunian ... who became the first Novgorod bishop" (p. 2). And not a word about how this baptism took place and what was the reaction of the Novgorodians to the appearance of Joachim in the city.

Statements of this kind are designed for people who do not know anything about the past of their people - including the fact that they baptized our ancestors forcibly and did it in the interests of the ruling estates of the emerging feudal society.

The last, and one of the favorite arguments of the supporters of the concept of "violent" Christianization is the chronicle indications of the murder of the Magi in the period under consideration.

1.2 The inconsistency of the "Iakimov Chronicle" as a historical source.

The baptism of Novgorod with "fire and sword" has long become a textbook example in the presentation of the history of the baptism of Russian lands in 988–989. under Prince Vladimir. There is nothing surprising in this: this is the only example that can be cited in support of the concept of "forced" baptism, which has become almost generally accepted in the domestic science of the Soviet period.

In fact, there is practically no material evidence (fires, flight or death of the population, etc.) of the massive nature of social cataclysms, allegedly accompanying baptism. Even pagan sanctuaries on the periphery of Russia functioned centuries later.

On the basis of the bulk of written and archaeological sources, there is a feeling of a peaceful and partly formal acceptance of baptism by the townspeople in 988. It took place under the undoubted influence of the supreme power, but as if it was not accompanied by either repression or massive forceful tests. By the way, it should be remembered that we are also talking about a society where weapons, in general, were in the house of every free “husband”. Opportunities for a massive rebellion were enough - but it did not happen. However, for some reason it is believed that the news of the Joachim Chronicle of the 17th century. about the baptism of Novgorod destroys this idealized picture.

The oldest story about the baptism of Novgorod is found in the Novgorod first chronicle of the younger version. “In the summer of 6497. Volodymyr and the whole land of Rus were baptized; and appointed in Kiev a metropolitan, and Novugrad an archbishop, and in other cities bishops and priests and deacons; and joy is everywhere. And when Archbishop Akim of Korsunin came to Novugrad, destroy the treasury, and cut Perun, and lead him to Volkhovo; and already higher, I drag him over the feces, beating with a rod; and the commandment should not be accepted by anyone anywhere. And if a pidblyan is going to the river early, although the mountains lead to the city; Sitsa Perun sailed to the bervy, and I will reject it and shistom: “you, speech, Perunische, drink and eat, and now swim away”; and a window float from the light. "

As you can see, there is no data on the violent nature of baptism and any conflicts. The authorities, as in Kiev, call for "not to accept" the overthrown and disgraced idol - and this call has been heard. The potter from Pidba (a village near Novgorod) puts the fallen god to shame, which, of course, meets the full approval of the chronicler. In such a picture, we note, there is nothing unreliable - the "aristocratic" state cult of Perun was imposed on the Novgorod region from Kiev as the main one only a few years earlier.

Note that even then there is no talk of any disorder or conflict (“ and to him the people of Novgorod like to God").

Only one text stands out against the background of numerous revisions of this narration in other vaults - a fragment of the Joachim Chronicle, with the mention of which we began this work. Let us emphasize that in the form that has come down to us, the chronicle, which came down only as part of VN Tatishchev's History, was compiled no earlier than the last quarter of the 17th century. Needless to say, the source of the text could not belong to the first Novgorod bishop Joachim, for the retelling of the narrative of which an unknown chronicler gave his work. Suffice it to say that the baptism of Rus was associated in it with the name of the Bulgarian Tsar Simeon, who died several decades before the reign of Vladimir. The Joachim Chronicle reports the following about the baptism of Novgorodians:

"In Novyegrad, people who have seen the hedgehog Dobrynya go to baptize, uchinisha veche and vowed not to let everything into the city and not allow idols to refute. And when they arrived, they, sweeping the great bridge, worn out with weapons, and asce Dobrynya with suppression and laudable words, weighed them down, both of them didn’t hear the hotyahu and hung out 2 great crossbows with a lot of stone, placing them on the bridge, as if they were their enemies. We are standing on a trading country, walking through the marketplaces and streets, teaching people, very much. But perishing in wickedness is the word of the cross, like an apostle of the rivers, being madness and deceit. And so for two days, a few hundred baptizing. Then the thousand Novgorodian Ugonyay, driving everywhere, yelled: "Die to the best, even our gods should be mocked." The people of this country, having razsviripev, the house of Dobrynin was ruined, the estate of the plunderer, his wife and some of his relatives beat him. Tysetskiy Vladimirov Putyata, like a meaningful and brave husband, having prepared a lodia, choosing 300 husband from Rostovtsy, but having transported above the city to that country and entered the city, I will postpone no one, all the teas of my warriors to be. He reached the court of Ugonyaev, Onago and other fore husbands of the ambassador to Dobryna across the river. The people of the same country, having heard this, gathered up to 5000, stopping Putyatu, and was passing evil between them. Neky is walking more than the Transfiguration of the Lord to scatter the houses of Christians and rake. Even during the development of Dobrynya with all the suschis with him (and commanded some houses near the shore, for which people were more intimidated, I flee to extinguish the fire; and abiye), stop whipping, then the men asked for peace.

Dobrynya, gather your warriors, prohibit robbery and crush the abiye idols, burned the wood, and break the stones into the river Vergosh; and the sorrow of the wicked is great. Husbands and wives, who saw that, with a great cry and tears, cleared up for nya, as if they were their gods. Dobrynya, laughing, vescha to them: "What, madness, do you regret those who cannot defend themselves, why you can hope from them." And the ambassador everywhere, announcing that they should go to the christening. The sparrow mayor, the son of Stoyanov, was brought up like Vladimir under Vladimir and was sweet-tongued, this idea was on the marketplace and more than anyone else weighed. Idosha many, and not wanting to be baptized warriors vlachah and kreschakh, men above the bridge, and wives below the bridge. Then the people of non-killing will tell about themselves to be squeamish; for the sake of commanding all the crescents, wooden crosses, copper ovo and marque should be placed on the neck, and they don’t have anything like that, don’t believe and baptize; and an abiye scattered church paki construction. And so baptizing, Putyata is going to Kiev. This is what people revile the Novgorodians for: Pussies cross with a sword, and Dobrynya with fire".

There is a directly opposite attitude in science to the Joachim Chronicle in general and to this, its most famous testimony in particular. Some researchers, such as S.M. Solovyov see in Joachimovskaya a completely adequate source and, sometimes without any reservations, write about the "uprising" of the Novgorodians against baptism. On the other hand, M.M.Shcherbatov, B.A.Rybakov and A.P. Tolochko expressed strong doubts about the authenticity of the source in general, suggesting that it be completely or partially the work of V.N.Tatishchev himself. Most researchers, however, recognized the authenticity of the preserved text of Joachim's text, identifying it as a Novgorod monument of the late 17th century.

Even N.M. Karamzin believed that the whole history of the baptism of the Novgorodians is only a developed speculation around a proverb of vague origin. Even recognizing the presence of genuine legends in the basis of Joachim's, which were also recorded for the first time in the XIII century, we cannot deny the contradictions and inconsistencies of the existing text. There are also clearly unreliable details in it. We encounter an outright absurdity at the very beginning: how could the Novgorodians put their “crossbows” “on the bridge” that they had just “scattered” themselves? Or did they build it again - towards Dobryna? By the way, it was under this bridge, safe and sound, that Perun sailed, as we remember.

We, of course, can assume that the author of the XIII and then the end of the XVII century. relied on a genuine historical tradition, based on real facts. But, all the more recognizing some force of the document behind the Joachim Chronicle, we must trust its testimony as a whole. And it is quite unambiguous: "for this reason people revile the Novgorodians: Putyata baptize with a sword, and Dobrynya with fire." Who could "revile" the Novgorodians if all of Russia had been forcibly baptized, "with fire and sword"? - obviously nobody.

In addition, the very term "baptized" from the Novgorod proverbs cited to Dobryna and Putyata, by and large, is not applicable. Since it was already present in Novgorod before the events described by Tatishchev, and the very Church of the Transfiguration, which according to the Joachim Chronicle was destroyed according to another chronicle source, stood for 60 years: In the summer of 6497. (988) " Build Vladyka Bishop Joachim the first church, the ancient oak St. Sophia, which has a top 13; and stood 60 years, and rose from the fire in the summer of 6557, March 4, on Saturday, under the second bishop Luke, in 13 summer. Being honestly arranged and decorated; and it stood at the end of Piskuplya Street, above the Volkhov River, up to the Stone Castle of Detinets ..." .

All this does not make the Joachim Chronicle reliable. And it is undoubtedly necessary to note once again that it has come down to us only as part of VN Tatishchev's History. Of course, there were cases in history when the found historical documents were lost in a later period. As it happened, for example, with the Trinity Chronicle, found by Karamzin in the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, which died in the fire of Moscow in 1812. But this list was transferred by Nikolai Mikhailovich to the Society of History and Antiquities, thanks to which an exhaustive description of it was compiled. In the case of the "Joachim Chronicle", Tatishchev did not have a single witness belonging to the scientific community who could confirm the reality of the existence of the source, retold by him.

Based on the above, we can speak of the Joachim Chronicle, at best, as a collection of 17th century legends in Tatishchev's compilation. Consequently, the story about the baptism of Novgorod transmitted in it cannot be considered a historical fact.

2. The point of view of 19th century church historians.

2.1 The opinion of E. Golubinsky

It is necessary to immediately characterize the period in the history of the Russian Orthodox Church in which the works we are examining were written. This period is known by the name "synodal", when from 1721 to 1917. The Orthodox in Russia was subordinate not to the patriarch elected from the hierarchs, but to a state body - the Holy Synod. The sad consequence of the reform was the subordination of the church government to the secular supreme power. An oath was drawn up for the members of the Synod: "I confess with the oath of the extreme judge of this Spiritual Collegium the existence of the All-Russian monarch, our most merciful sovereign." This oath, insulting the bishop's conscience, contrary to the canonical principles of the Church, existed until 1901, for almost 200 years.

Undoubtedly, during this period, many holy ascetics were revealed to the world, such as Saints Innokenty of Irkutsk, Ignatius Bryanchaninov, Theophan the Recluse, the Monks Seraphim of Sarov, Herman of Alaska, Saint John of Kronstadt, Xenia of Petersburg and many others, but theological education, including church history, were far from the best times.

As an example, we can cite the fact that the textbook of dogmatic theology of Metropolitan Makarii "Bulgakov", although it is used in modern Orthodox theological educational institutions, at the same time is not an immutable authority. Some of the provisions of this work, containing seemingly dogmatic formulations, are disputed by modern theologians. In particular, the concept of understanding the Sacrifice of Christ as a ransom.

Golubinsky in his work, in addition to the words given above, also says the following: “ ... the utter obedience of the Russians in the matter of changing the faith to the will of the prince and the so-called peaceful spread of Christianity in Russia is nothing more than an impossible invention of our immoderate patriots who want to sacrifice common sense to their patriotism. There is no doubt that the introduction of the new faith was accompanied by considerable excitement among the people, that there were open resistances and riots, although we do not know any details about them. There is a proverb about the baptism of Novgorodians that "Putyata baptized them with a sword, and Dobrynya with fire." This is obvious, it means that in Novgorod the new faith was met with open indignation, and that the most energetic measures were required and were used to suppress the latter. It is very possible that similar indignations were not in Novgorod alone."

His statements, in contrast to the mtrp. Macarius are straightforward, and exclude any possibility of thinking differently, and it would seem that the best way to confirm the point of view of the supporters of the "violent" Christianization of Russia. The problem is. That E. Golubinsky does not cite a single source, except for a proverb that confirms his opinion. Therefore, this statement can be considered only the opinion of the author, but not as a proven historical fact.

2.2 Opinion mtrp. Makariya (Bulgakova)

Metropolitan Macarius, unlike Golubinsky, expresses himself much softer, and confirms his opinion by referring to Metropolitan Hilarion. At the same time, speaking of the fact that “they were baptized… some were reluctant,” he continues: “However, we did not have any stubborn resistance to the Gospel preaching, with the exception of only two cities: part of Rostov and especially Murom.” (meaning the "rebellion of the Magi" which we will analyze below). And he explains this situation as follows: “ ... the peoples of the non-Slavic tribe that lived in the northeast of Russia, what are: all - in Rostov, Murom - in Murom, it was difficult to instruct in the truths of Christianity: who could be found for them a preacher? Meanwhile, neither the books of Holy Scripture nor the books of liturgical services were translated into their language.".

From the above, we can make an objective conclusion that the mtrp itself. Macarius in no way shares the opinion of both Golubinsky and, in general, supporters of the "violent" Christianization of Russia.

2.3 Legal grounds for the persecution of pagans in Russia in the pre-Mongol period.

To confirm the opinion of E. Golubinsky that paganism in Russia after the adoption of the book. Vladimir baptism " was declared a forbidden and persecuted faith»It is necessary to cite as evidence any legal investigated period that would confirm such a prohibition and would legitimize the persecution.

If we look at the legal documents of the time, we will not find any mention of legitimate religious persecution in them. The most ancient legal acts that have come down to us that determined the place of the church in the social and state system are the statutes of the Grand Dukes of Kiev Vladimir (approximately from 986 to 1015) and Yaroslav (from 1019 to 1054). The parts of these statutes dealing with ecclesiastical courts do indeed contain the names of such crimes as, “ ... witchcraft, doings, witchcraft, sorcery, greenery, .., and potions, and heresy ..."in the Church charter of Prince Vladimir, and in the church charter of Prince Yaroslav we find the following" ... If the wife will be a sorceress, a witch, or a sorceress, or a sorceress, the husband will do it, execute you, and not lose" .

It is immediately necessary to explain the fact that all the listed crimes were transferred exclusively to the department of the Orthodox Church " And what to do in monastic affairs, in church affairs, in the monasteries themselves, let the prince, not the volostel". The jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical court extended and to this day extends exclusively to people included in. Over people who have no relation to the church, this court has no power." And now there are church people: hegumen, priest, deacon and who are in the kliros, the monk, the devil, the priest, the priest, the healer, the forgiven, the soulful person, the monastery, the hospital, the hotel, the country reception. That is the people of the church, the poor house, the metropolitan or the bishop, who knows between them the court or the insult that is, ass. And even there will be an offense to another person with him, then a common court" .

The Church has no power over those who are not part of it "S the oud of the Church extends to all its members, both perfect, that is, baptized, and catechumens, who can be subjected for their sins to the measures of church discipline (I vse. 14; Neoc. 5); but does not judge external, that is, alien persons ...". For example, the Church rule of Metropolitan John to James the monk in paragraph 5 says" Izh do not receive communion in the rustei of the earth, like these rekl, and during the great fasting they eat bad flesh, it befits in every way to direct you and forbid that malice, by punishment and teaching to return to the faithful doctrine, and immersion (neglect) as if Christians do not exist, yes that fear will remain toa of malice and will be attached to good faith. Staying tacos and not suggesting not to give them the Holy Part, but as if any foreigner, truly the faith of our adversary, set and walk into their own will" .

That is, for those who did not want to fall under the jurisdiction of the church court, it was enough just to stop participating in the life of the church, that is, attending services, participating in the sacraments, and not calling themselves a Christian.

Moreover, the Orthodox Church has never had the legal right to sentence to death, let alone carry out the sentence. If there were any proposals from the hierarchs, they always asked them to exercise secular power. The Church does not have such a right, and never did it.

This system and this order are built on the distinction and correlation between the concepts of sin and crime. The church knows sin, the state knows crime. The church considers every crime a sin, but not every state considers it a crime.

As for the punishments, a woman who was engaged in any kind of sorcery was to be "executed after the execution," and the Metropolitan was to pay a penalty of 6 hryvnias. The same "Rule" of the Metropolitan in paragraph 7 explains what this "execution" should have been. Those practicing sorcery should first be rejected from sin by verbal admonition, and if they did not obey, “ execute violently, but not kill to death, nor circumcise these bodies". Under the "yara", strict execution, which does not deprive of life and does not "circumcise", that is, not disfiguring the body, one can understand only simple corporal punishment.

It is also noteworthy that if all other crimes in the church statutes are related to both sexes, then in this case it is only about the wife. From this, we can draw a completely fair conclusion that this article was valid only for those families in which the head of the house, the husband, was a Christian.

As we can see, there was no legislative act that would put paganism in Russia in the pre-Mongol period in the position “ forbidden and persecuted faith (religio prohibita, intolerata, illicita)”, As E. Golubinsky tries to present it.

3. Chronicle evidence of the murder of the Magi.

3.1 Magi as ministers of public worship.

One of the most beloved arguments of the supporters of the concept of “forcible” Christianization of Rus is the chronicle mentions of the executions of the Magi in the X-XII centuries. In such interpretations, the Magi are presented as pagan priests who are at the head of a popular movement that resists violent Christianization, for which they are destroyed.

In connection with such statements, one should turn to the question of the extent to which the Magi were "pagan priests." The chronicles of 1024 and 1071 portray the Magi as representatives of magical religiosity. It is also important to take into account other chronicle testimonies or mentions of the Magi. The Tale of Bygone Years also provides very curious material in this respect. Under 911, the chronicler places the well-known legend about the death of the prophetic Oleg from his own horse, informing before that that he had asked the "wise men and kudosnik" to predict his death to him. In support of the fact that the wise men can sometimes predict the future, and maybe in order to protect themselves from possible accusations of trust in the wise men, Nestor cites a number of similar cases with the magical power of Apollonius of Tnansky.

"Formerly we are the only poverty-stricken in Rostov region, two wise men from Yaroslavl stood up, saying: "as if in Sveva, who should keep abundance;" and go along the Volza, where to blow out in the churchyard, the best wives are tighter, saying, like this is to keep it, a si honey, and si fish, and si quickly. And I bring my sisters to him, my mother and my wives; she, in a dream, cut through the shoulder, vyimasta any live, any fish, and kill many wives, and weed them off to her. And coming to Baloozero; and she doesn't have 300 people ".

Understanding and religious studies of chronicles depends to a large extent on how to translate the old Russian expression "old child". One of the translation options is "old people", "old people". He is relatively neutral socially and economically; old age in this case is a general cultural age parameter. Historians of the Soviet era, for the most part, viewed the events as a massive popular uprising. And the "old child" seemed to them to be a social-class category. So NN Voronin wrote that “the uprising was caused, first of all, by internal contradictions among the population of the Suzdal land, especially aggravated in the area close to the old trading Volga. Here, obviously, there was some kind of prosperous elite - an old child - who stood out from the environment of the local society; its accumulation in the form of livestock and household products made the famine that gripped this area especially acute. The fact that Yaroslav hastily arrived from Novgorod<...> and defended the old child, it shows that this layer was already under the patronage of the princely power, being the backbone of its local policy. " MN Tikhomirov, VV Mavrodin, LV Cherepnin, AA Zimin, PM Rapov, VI Buganov unconditionally recognized the antifeudal nature of the "beating" of the old child.

Sharing the views of colleagues on the feudalization of ancient Russian society, B. A. Rybakov noted that “ people came to life not after the massacre of the Magi with the "old child", but only after the purchase of livestock in Bulgaria, which makes it possible to understand the guilt of the "old child" not in the actual possession of grain reserves, but in some kind of pagan influence on the course of agricultural economy". It can also be added that in order for" people to come to life "in the entire region the withdrawn stocks might not have been enough, but for the Magi and their supporters - quite.

Whichever point of view we support, we cannot but state the fact that in the cases described, those whom the supporters of the concept of “violent” Christianization are trying to pass off as exponents of popular religious consciousness and opponents of Christianity, in fact, were engaged in elementary robbery and looting. In these cases, the secular authorities did not even defend, they were establishing legal order.

The Magi did not call for worship of the old gods. They did not lead the people to destroy temples and priesthood. They did not blame the new religion for the troubles and misadventures that befell the people. Therefore, these cases in no way can be interpreted as uprisings on religious grounds, with an appeal to fight the usurper - Christianity.

Also in 1071 “In the summer of 6579. ... Sits be sorcerer stood at Gleb Novgorod; to say more to people, doing like, there are many delusions, not all the city is not enough: to say bo, as if "I know everything," and blaspheme the Christian faith, to say bo: "as if I will read the Volkhov in front of everyone." And there was a rebellion in the city, and all I have faith in him, and I want to destroy the bishop; The bishop, however, took up the cross and put on the vestments of a hundred rivers: “If you want the faith of a magician, then let him follow; If anyone believes, then let him go to the cross. " And they were divided in two: the prince bo Gleb and his friendly idosha and stasha with the bishop, and all the people went for the sorcerer and the rebellion was great between them. But Gleb lifted the ax under the scut, came to the sorcerer and said to him: "Do you weigh that morning wants to be, and perhaps until evening?" He said: "I know everything." And the speech of Gleb: "do you weigh that you want to be today"? "Chydesa is great, I will open" speech. Gleb, however, will take out the ax, growing and, and the pad is dead, and the people are running wild; he will die in body and soul, indulge in ..." .

This situation, in my opinion, does not require any comments at all. Not a single ruler, either in the Middle Ages or earlier, would have tolerated open incitement to rebellion taking place in front of his eyes, no matter what religion he professes.

There are two more mentions of the dead wise men, but without outside interference. " In the summer of 6578.(1070) In the same summer, a certain sorcerer will come to Kiev, telling: “as if five gods appeared, saying: tell people how the Dnieper will flow for five years, and the land will cross into another place, Greek to Ruska, and Ruska to Greek, and the rest of the earth will begin to change. " His madness and obedience, while the intellect laughed, saying: "as if the devil is playing a lie with you, bewitching people, even if you will die;" hedgehog and byst: in one night take him into the abyss of the vrinush, and so the death of the cursed magician" .

And " In the summer of 6599. (1091) In the same summer, the sorcerer appears in Rostov." .

Indicative is the message about the execution of the Magi in the XIII century already by representatives of the masses, and not the secular authorities. “In the summer of 6735. (1235) Magi, sorcerers, connives, and many sorcerers, appearing in Novyegrad, and indulgence and false banner to the creatures, and a lot of evil to dovakh, charming many. And Novgorodtsi gathered together to take them out, and led them to the archbishop's court, and all the men to the prince Yaroslavl entered about them, Novgorodtsi led the magi to the Yaroslavl court, and put down the great fire on the court of Yaroslavl, and bound all the magi, and the vrinush to fire everything is wrong". Another set of chronicles specifies the number of deaths as a result of this execution." Izzhgosha Magi 4, I am creating indulgence, but I have burned the news in the Yaroslavl yard". That is, in the middle of the XIII century, the very people who, according to the supporters of the concept of" violent "Christianization, fiercely resisted the imposition of Christianity, he himself repairs lynching and destroys the Magi.

From the above, we can fairly conclude that the executions of the Magi in Russia in the pre-Mongol period did not take place due to the forcible imposition of Christianity. They were the reaction of the secular authorities to the undermining of the socio-political situation in the state. The last described case also speaks not in favor of the supporters of the concept of "violent" Christianization.

4. "Forced" Christianization in the context of the problem of dual faith.

The problem of dual faith in the Russian Orthodox Church in the period under consideration is recognized by both supporters of the concept of forced Christianization and its opponents. Over the past 2 centuries, there have been numerous debates about what is meant by the term "dual faith", the Christianization of paganism, or the inclusion of pagan elements in Christianity.

It should be noted that the question of the place of Christianity and paganism in the system of Old Russian religiosity rarely became the subject of special monographic studies. The history of the study of the problem shows that it appeared either in the pages of works devoted to church history, or in works that illuminated pagan religiosity; and also, as a private plot, included general courses on the history of Russia. Valuable theoretical observations and a huge amount of factual material accumulated over two centuries have not been fully comprehended by modern science either. Therefore, the scientific community has to make a lot of efforts to comprehensively solve this multifaceted problem.

In any case, while recognizing the presence of dual faith, in any of its forms, we also need to recognize the existence of two independent religious worldviews. If any of them were exterminated, then TWO Belief could not exist. Nevertheless, the problem of dual faith in the Russian Orthodox Church continues to this day.

First, one should pay attention to the fact that if Christianity were really imposed by "fire and sword", then there was always an opportunity to leave the state, the religious policy of which, for some reason, is unacceptable. Russia was not surrounded by walls. Nearby there were states and tribes that professed a variety of cults - choose any religion and live where you like.

Bulgaria, neighboring Russia, can be cited as a striking example, where the people openly opposed Christianity and killed the priesthood. “In the summer of 6538. (1030) At the same time, the great Boleslav died in Lyasekh, and there was a mutiny in the land of Lyadsk: the bishops, and priests, and their boyars, got up to beat people up, and there was a revolt in the NPC.“Subsequently, Bulgaria was invaded by Muslims.

In addition, in the chronicle sources, we find information about the existence of pagan worldviews in Russia itself, during the entire period we are considering, and not only among the lower social strata of the population, but also among representatives of princely families. “In the summer of 6579. (1071) ... Most of the wives of demonic wives are, from time immemorial, a devil is a charming wife, and a husband; tako in this kind of sorcery a lot of wives with sorcery, and poison, and frost with demonic minds. But even men of delusion are from the demons of unbelief ..." . "Bonyak(Polotsk prince) But the lustful one will go out sorcerer in the night, and howl like a wolf, and lift up a wolf to him, and pack other oxen of exaltation; and from this magic Bonyak's mind, as if he could defeat Koloman"." In summer 6552. (1044) The same summer, the prince Bryachislav, the son of Izyaslavl, the grandson of Volodimerov, the father of Vseslavl, will die; and Vseslav sede on his father's table. This mother was born of sorcery; for having given birth to his mother, there would be a stinging banner on his head, a pit on his heads; rekosha of his mother's words: "Behold the ulcer, bind it on, and wear it to your belly Vseslav on yourself"; for this sake of mercy there is bloodshed" .

There is also a story of a chronicler about a certain Novgorod man who asked a magician for sorcery. And indications that “... wives of demonic wives are, from time immemorial, a devil is a charming wife, behold a husband; tako in this kind of sorcery a lot of wives with sorcery, and poison, and frost with demonic minds. But even men of delusion are from the demons of unbelief ..." .

In addition, communities of other confessions freely exist in Russia. Mtrp. Macarius writes " It is undoubted that the confessors of the Roman faith, namely some Varangians and Poles, lived in the Russian land and that our princes showed them religious tolerance and Christian love. The Monk Theodosius of the Caves, in his well-known epistle about the Varangian faith to the Grand Duke Izyaslav, among other things, wrote: “Our land is also fulfilled with that evil faith of people, there are no more varangians all over the earth; there is a great need for orthodox Christians, those like those who live in one place; but if anyone observes them, carrying pure faith, he will rejoice at the right hand before God. " And then he inspired the prince: “Be merciful not only to your Christians, but also to strangers; if you see someone naked, or hungry, or in distress, then, even if he was a Latinian, have mercy on everyone and save him from trouble as you can" .

Rejection of Christianity in no way causes any forceful punitive measures, both from the Russian Orthodox Church and from the secular authorities.

We do not know of a single case of the murder of a Christian preacher, priest, or monk, which would have caused any punitive actions on the part of the Church or princes.

From the described picture it becomes clear that both worldviews, both pagan and Christian, existed in parallel, and neither of them was destroyed by the secular authorities forcibly.

Only thanks to such a coexistence of two worldviews, when they have the same opportunities to influence the population, we can talk about the problem of dual faith.

Conclusion

Summing up, we can draw the following conclusions:

"Iakimovskoy Chronicle" as a source raises huge doubts about its reliability.

The opinion of prof. Golubinsky, despite his belonging to church historical science, remains his personal, unconfirmed opinion. Mtrp. Makariy (Bulgakov) did not share this opinion.

There are no legislative acts on the general extermination of paganism in Russia. Those that somehow relate to the topic we are discussing belong to the area of \u200b\u200bthe church court, and, therefore, apply exclusively to members of the Church, and not to the entire population of Russia.

The chronicles of the uprisings and executions of the Magi in no way support the opinion that they had religious motives as their origin.

This study clearly shows the inconsistency of the concept of "violent" Christianization of Russia in the pre-Mongol period. Moreover, while recognizing the existence of the problem of dual faith, such a concept is absolutely illogical.

List of used sources and literature

1 ... Alekseev S. V. "Literary and archaeological sources about the baptism of Novgorod" // "Knowledge, understanding, skill." M, No. 2, 2005

2 ... Golubinsky E.E. History of the Russian Church. -M., 1901, reprint. Vol. 1.– M., 2002.

3 ... Sh. Kakabadze. Russian legislation of the X-XX centuries. M. Legal Literature 1984.

4 ... Kartashev A.V. Essays on the history of the Russian Church. T. 2. Paris, 1959.

5 ... Lectures on Church Law. Archpriest V.G. Singers. Petersburg, 1914.

6 ... Metropolitan Macarius (Bulgakov). History of the Russian Church. - M .: Publishing house of the Spaso-Preobrazhensky Valaam Monastery. 1994-1996.

7 ... The complete collection of Russian chronicles published by the highest order of the archaeographic commission T. 1-5, 10 St. Petersburg in the printing house of Eduard Prats (http://dlib.rsl.ru/view.php?path)

8 ... Rusanova I.P., Timoshchuk B.A. Pagan sanctuaries of the Eastern Slavs. M., 1993.

9 ... Rybakov B.A.Pagan outlook of the Russian Middle Ages // Questions of history. M, No. 1, 1974.

10 ... Tatishchev V.N. Russian history. Part 1.M., 1994.

In response to the anti-church and anti-feudal rebellions of the 11th century, the princes issued a more complete set of laws "Russkaya Pravda", which severely punished for causing damage to princes and clergy, their servants, their property and possessions.

[!] The charter of "Russkaya Pravda", drawn up in Novgorod after the uprising of 1209, fixes the methods of turning free smerds into slavery, prohibits a slave from testifying in court.

[!] The articles "on the monthly cut" (percent) describe in detail usury.

[!] So, along with the "good news" slavery came to Russia.

[!] By the time Russkaya Pravda talks about, the princes and boyars seized the lands of previously free smerds (privatized - A).

[!] "Russkaya Pravda" vividly depicts the plight of a smerd who was sitting on a foreign land. The prince used the labor of a stinker during his lifetime and had the right to his property after death.

[!] "Russkaya Pravda" established: if the smerd dies without leaving any sons-heirs, then his property will go to the prince.

[!] If an unmarried daughter remains, then only part of the inheritance is allocated for her.

[!] And the article following this article said that after the death of a boyar or a vigilante, his property goes to the sons or daughters, but not to the prince (the smerds were in a humiliated position).

"Russkaya Pravda" draws in detail the position of another dependent person - "purchase".

[!] The purchase does not have its own farm. He cultivates the master's land with the help of the master's agricultural implements - a plow and a harrow. If the purchaser breaks these tools, he is obliged to pay the master for them. If the purchase does not drive the cattle into the yard, does not close the gate, or if the cattle dies in the field while working, then the fault also lies with him. If the purchase runs away from the master, then upon his return to the master he becomes a complete slave.

[!] Life was the hardest for the "slaves" - slaves. Serfs were, first of all, the children of slaves. Sometimes free people were forced to sell themselves to servitude. The one who took over the management of the princely or boyar economy also became a slave, became a tiun or a key keeper without an agreement that he remained free. The slave was the complete property of the master, and "Russkaya Pravda" threatens with severe punishment those who help the slave escape, show him the way to escape.

[!] "Russkaya Pravda" primarily guarded the princely interests. The prince could give the property of a person unwanted to him for "stream and plunder." Fines from the population, collected by court, went to his treasury. For the murder of a princely tiun (to put it simply, a lackey), Russkaya Pravda establishes a fine of 80 hryvnias, and for the murder of a peasant or serf who worked in the prince's household, only 5 hryvnias.

The spread of stinking Christianity in pure Russia

By the end of the 11th century, only the Slavic lands of the Bodrich, Lyutich, Polab and Pomorians remained free.

In the east, the Vyatichi, the largest East Slavic tribe, remained unconquered. In 1113, they killed the Christian missionary Kuksha near the city of Serensk.

In the XII century, Christianity continued to creep across the Slavic land. Foreign preachers became frequent visitors to the lands of the Polabs and Lyutichs.

One of the famous carriers of the "word of God" was Bishop Otto of Bamber, who twice visited Slavia in 1124-1127. He writes the following about the "wild" pagans:

[!] “The abundance of fish in the sea, rivers, lakes and ponds is so great that it seems just incredible. One denarius can buy a whole load of fresh herrings, which are so good that if I began to tell everything I know about their smell and thickness, I would risk being accused of gluttony. All over the country there are a lot of deer and fallow deer, wild horses, bears, pigs and wild boars and various other game. There is an abundance of cow's butter, sheep's milk, lamb and goat lard, honey, wheat, hemp, poppy, all kinds of vegetables and fruit trees, and if there were still vines, olive trees and fig trees, one could take this country for the promised , before that there are many fruit trees in it ...

The honesty and camaraderie among them is such that they, completely unaware of theft or deception, do not lock their chests and boxes. We did not see a lock or a key there, and the residents themselves were very surprised to notice that the bishop's pack boxes and chests were locked. They keep their dresses, money and various jewelry in covered vats and barrels, without fear of any deception, because they have not experienced it. And surprisingly, their table is never empty, never left without food. Each father of the family has a separate hut, clean and elegant, intended only for food. There is always a table with various drinks and food, which is never empty: one ends - immediately another is brought. Neither mice nor mice are allowed there. The dishes awaiting the participants of the meal are covered with the cleanest tablecloth. At any time, whoever wants to eat, whether a guest or a family member, they go to the table, where everything is already ready ... ”.

Poor, wild and ignorant Slavic people! Of course, they should have been baptized for the dubious happiness of eating matzo after death in the backyard of the "Heavenly Jerusalem"!

[!] In 1113 a Jewish pogrom took place in Kiev. People, infuriated by Jewish "national characteristics": cheating, deceit and gesheft, threw this evil spirits out of the Russian lands.

“The Kievans, being annoyed by the Jews for undermining and trickery in trade, rip-off and secret relations with the Greeks, rushed at them furiously, carrying murder and robbery everywhere,” writes the Lithuanian historian Osip Yaroshevich (1793-1860).

There were several such pogroms. Not counting the fire of the "Jewish quarter" in 1124. But, alas, the Christian plague continued to spread across Russia.

Russian Jewish Congress of the 12th century model

Soon the Jews again appear in Kiev. Benjamin of Tudel (about 1170) and Rabbi Petachia (about 1180) come here. They were the emissaries of the national Jewish center. Through such messengers, the Jews of the whole world are invisibly united into one whole. All important matters were directed at the direction of the center through the chief rabbis (now berl lazarov) and further through the kagals.

Soon the prince of the lutich Pribyslav was baptized, becoming dependent on the Polish king Boleslav. Has the promised salvation arrived?

In 1138, another strife took place, during which Stargrad was destroyed. Immediately, Bishop Gerold arrived in Wagriya. And another round of Christianization began.

[!] Prove's idol is overthrown by his own hand. He also burned the sacred forest of Prove.

[!] Christianity spread throughout almost all of Slavia. The Vyatichi fought back with all their might, going farther and farther to the northeast, into deep forests. The Slavs still held out in the Upper Ponemane, in the northern Novgorod lands. Fighting off the crusaders Niclot, the prince of the eastern vigor, and Arkona stood indestructible - a white rock on the island of Ruyan.

Arkona - the last stronghold of the Slavs from the Christian Herods

In 1160, Niclot died, and the Eastern vigilantes suffered the fate of Christian "salvation."

[!] Lyutichi and Bodrici were completely destroyed by the end of the XII century.

[!] By 1167, the small island of Ruyan remained free from the once huge Slavia.

In May 1168, the troops of the Danish king Valdemar I "the Great" landed on the island. On June 12, 1168, the fortress wall of Arkona burned, and many defenders threw themselves into the fire in order not to fall into slavery.

The defenders, finding that they were surrounded, put their spears forward and stood around the temple. But the forces were unequal. None of the pagan warriors surrendered, no one asked for mercy, no one tried to escape. They all knew for sure what courage Perun was waiting for them in his squad in the monastery of Navi.

Valdemar ordered a chair to be brought, sat on it and watched the spectacle.

[!] Bishop Absalon, this damned "lamb of Christ" on the same day ordered to destroy the Slavic shrine - the Temple of Svetovita.

Compared to Svetovit, this Absalon turned out to be a shriveled gnome, a small Christian bug. The statue of Svetovit was barely torn off, and even then: they had to break down the wall to get Svetovit out of his house. Helmold witnessed what was happening, who said:

"And the king ordered to pull out that wooden idol of Svyahovit, which the Slavic people so revered, and ordered to put a noose around his neck and drag it in front of the whole army in front of the Slavs and, having cut it into pieces, throw it into the fire."

Yes, the king was great. Because he shed great rivers of Slavic blood. Otherwise, he would not be “great”.

[!] Let these two Christian bastards be despised!

Zealous heart for the cause of the church,
Dad sends the word to Roxild:
Stand up! You are overwhelmed
Those pagans are dashing,
Raise the banner for faith, -
I forgive you your sins

(A. K. Tolstoy, "Borivoi")

In 1204, in Suzdal, some "dashing women" were burned, who arranged a crop failure in the principality (in the Middle Ages, in all states, famine was attributed to "witches" - convenient and practical).

In the XII century, the rule of Metropolitan John reads:

"Do not give the sacrament to the one who walks by the wise men."

It was very serious at the time. A piece of the body of his “rescuer” who had not stuffed his mouth into his mouth could not count on “salvation”.

Bishops - biblical fanatics

The Rostov bishop Fyodor was famous for his savage cruelty. The chronicler says about him that he

"He was an unmerciful tormentor, he cut off some heads, burned out the eyes and cut tongues with others, crucified others on the wall and tortured them mercilessly."

At the end of the XIII century, justifying the practice of bloody reprisals against dissidents and those who resist, the priests willingly referred to the words and activities of biblical goggle-eyed extremists. So that there are plenty of examples of cruelty in the "holy book".

Vladimir Bishop Serapion at the end of the XIII century, calling for reprisals against "sorcerers" and "witches", pointed to the example of the prophet and King David in Jerusalem, who eradicated

"All those who do lawlessness: some by murder, some by imprisonment, and others by imprisonment."

Have church leaders seen that the extermination of people is contrary to some of the principles of Christianity? Of course they did. They could not help but see this, but they remembered about the gospel mercy only when it was FAVORABLE for them. And when it was not profitable, they remembered the exact opposite. Vile and vile hypocrites.

In 1227 there was an attempt at an uprising in Novgorod.

[!] “Magi appeared in Novgorod, sorcerers, connoisseurs, and many sorceries, and indulgences, and signs worked. The people of Novgorod caught them and brought the Magi to the court of the husbands of Prince Yaroslav, and tied all the Magi, and threw them into the fire, and then they all burned down. "

[!!!] In 1254, the entire southern Baltic coast was firmly occupied by German-Christian invaders. The Brandenburg brand was formed on the conquered lands. The cities became German: Branibor (Brandenburg), Berlin, Lipsk (Leipzig), Drozdyany (Dresden), Stargrad (Altenburg, present-day Stralsund), Dobresol (Halle), Budishin (Bauzen), Dymin (Demmin), Vedegosch (Volgast), Korenitsa (Harz), Rostock, Mechlin (Mecklenburg), Mishny (Meissen), Velehrad (Didrichshagen), Varnov (Waren), Ratibor (Ratzenburg), Dubovik (Dobin), Zverin (Schwerin), Vishemir (Wismar), Lenchin (Lenzin ), Brunzovik (Braunschweig), Kolobreg (Kohlberg), Volyn (Jomsburg), Lubitsch (Lubeck), Szczecin (Stettin), and so on.

As soon as Russia was put on a Christian leash, Simeon the New Theologian became one of the first ideologists in the Pechersk Monastery in Kiev. His teachings were strikingly different from the Russian pagan freemen. Simeon insistently called for humility, abandonment of the search for superiority in anything, instilling crying with prayers, solitude, bridling the womb. He appealed to self-abasement, a complete rejection of his own will, not to contradict the spiritual mentor in anything.

“Although you will see him doing fornication or getting drunk and managing, in your opinion, the affairs of the monastery are bad. Even though he beat you and dishonored you and caused you many other sorrows, do not sit with those who annoy him and do not go to those who talk against him. Stay with him to the end, not at all curious about his sins. "