What chronicles say about the planting of Christianity. Orthodox Inquisition in Russia: chapter v. forced implantation of Orthodoxy among the peoples of Russia. The point of view of 19th-century church historians
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 there was a forced baptism out of 12 million people, 3 million remained.
In Russia, Christianity was planted by force, while the religious buildings of the Slavs were destroyed, often along with resisting people. Note that Christianity was an urban religion, for rural residents in general, this creed was both incomprehensible and unprofitable, since it did not help them in any way, unlike the natural cults of the Faith. But even in the cities of Russia, the introduction of Christianity as the only religion, accompanied by the destruction and desecration of native shrines, caused stubborn resistance. The key point is that they did not rebel against Christianity as such (several centuries before that, a few Christians coexisted relatively peacefully with the pagans), they rebelled against the destruction of the old faith.
Few modern Orthodox theologians mention the presence of conflicting explanations for the beginning of the "baptism of Russia", and preachers generally bypass this delicate topic. Most often, the Korsun version is presented, and they present it to their listeners and readers as the only and absolutely reliable one. Meanwhile, such a prominent and authoritative church historian as Professor E. E. Golubinsky resolutely rejected it (see: vol. I, part I, p. 127).
Archeology provides interesting information about how the Christianization of Russia proceeded: out of 83 ancient settlements of Kievan Rus of the 9th - early 11th centuries studied by archaeologists. 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 discovered a system of nests of settlements that accumulated around the "fortifications", which did not carry either the so-called "cultural layer", evidence of permanent residence of people on them, or any serious fortifications. But on these strange settlements, traces of constantly maintained fire and the remains of "pillars" were often found, towering in the center of a circle outlined by a symbolic rampart - 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, to where they would not be reached by Christian missionaries who planted a new faith "with fire and sword." The cruel actions of the prince, his desire to destroy the pagan gods and the Magi is 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. Being brought up in a pagan society, Vladimir could not help but believe in the power of the gods, could not help but be afraid of their revenge. Even the Christian chroniclers did not doubt the power of the Magi: “It is not a wonder that sorcery comes true from sorcery,” Nestor writes, and Jacob Mnikh echoes him in praise of Prince Vladimir - “the Magi did a lot of miracles.”
By the way, in the Novgorod region, a legend has been preserved that the baptist of Novgorod, Dobrynya, subsequently drowned himself in Ilmen from remorse of conscience. At least, in the annals after 990, he really is no longer mentioned. Chronicles keep a deaf silence about the death of Prince Vladimir, only fixing the fact itself. But it is interesting that on old icons, starting with frescoes of the 12th century. in the cathedrals of Vladimir, the prince-baptist is depicted with a very characteristic cross in his hands - an attribute of a martyr. This is how Christians who were martyred for their faith were portrayed. After the death of Vladimir, the baptism of Russia continued by the same methods, although much more slowly. In Murom and Rostov, resistance to the planting 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, until the 12th century, anti-Christian uprisings broke out every now and then in the already baptized lands. (See the article "Anti-Christian speeches of the pre-Mongolian period").
Not only scientists, but also some church authors did not deny in the past the forced nature of the baptism of residents of the capital of the Kievan state. Many historians of the church pointed out the violence of joining the new faith of the people of Kiev in their writings. So, for example, Archbishop Macarius (Bulgakov) wrote: “Not everyone who then accepted the holy faith with us accepted it out of love, some only out of fear of the one who commanded; not all were baptized willingly, some reluctantly” (vol. I, p. 27). “Those who did not want to be baptized,” E. E. Golubinsky admitted, “there were a lot both in Kyiv and in general in all of Russia” (vol. I, part I, p. 175). Archbishop Philaret (Gumilevsky) is of the same opinion on this matter (see: History of the Russian Church, p. 31),
The violent nature of the initiation of the inhabitants of Kyiv to Christianity was also openly recognized on the pages of pre-revolutionary church periodicals - in articles devoted to Prince Vladimir and his activities for the “baptism of Russia”. In particular, the priest M. Morev wrote, commenting on the chronicler's story about the baptism of the people of Kiev: “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 sermons either... Fierce adherents of the old faith fled to the steppes and forests” (Prikhodskaya Zhizn, 1911, No. 12, p. 719). Archimandrite Macarius retold the chronicle narrative in the same spirit. Stating that many residents of Kyiv “appeared on the river out of fear of the prince,” he further noted: “A lot of Kyivans 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 Kyiv to the steppes and forests ”(Pravoslavny Blagovestnik, 1914, No. 2, pp. 35 - 36).
It couldn't be otherwise. As already noted, the need for a new religion was initially felt only by the social elites of Kievan Rus. Vladimir and his inner circle needed it to strengthen the grand ducal power. The emerging class of feudal lords sought in it a justification for their privileged position in ancient Russian society and an ideological bridle for servants and serfs. For merchants, the Christianization of Russia promised 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 a spirit of humility in the masses, to reconcile the oppressed with the hardships of servitude, 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 people of Kiev was only the beginning of the process of Christianization of the Old Russian state. The new faith, which became the state religion, had to be spread throughout the cities and villages of Kievan Rus. And although baptism was everywhere carried out not only by the clergy brought from Byzantium, but also by the princely authorities, it was not so easy to complete the task.
Judging by chronicle evidence and hagiographic materials, it is rare 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.
Novgorod was the second largest and most important city of Kievan Rus during the reign of Vladimir Svyatoslavich. Therefore, after the people of Kiev, the people of Novgorod had to be baptized. For this purpose, Bishop Joachim Korsunyanin was sent to Novgorod in 991, accompanied by the Novgorod voivode Dobrynya (Vladimir's maternal uncle), the same one who, ten years earlier, set an idol over Volkhov at the command of the Kyiv prince. To help them, the Kyiv squad was given, headed by the thousandth 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 purpose of 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 Kyiv warriors did not arrive with Dobrynya for a walk, the inhabitants of Novgorod took up arms. Their actions were directed by the thousand Ugony and the pagan priest Bogomil Nightingale. The center of resistance was the Sofia storm. So that the baptists would not move to it from the Trade side, where they forcibly led several hundred Novgorodians to the new faith, a bridge across the Volkhov was swept away. Putyata, with the help of military cunning, penetrated with his detachment into the center of the Sofia side and captured Ugoniy himself and his associates. But the rebellious Novgorodians continued to resist. Only after the Dobrynya detachment, which had secretly crossed the river, set fire to the houses of the participants in the uprising, was the resistance of opponents of the Christianization of the Novgorod land suppressed.
Of course, the rebellious Novgorodians were guided in their actions not only by religious motives, but also by political considerations - their unwillingness to become completely dependent on the Kyiv prince. It is the latter circumstance that explains the participation in the uprising of many representatives of the Novgorod nobility. Nevertheless, the rejection of the new faith was evident, and this rejection was most sharply and openly demonstrated by the simple Novgorod people, to whom the implanted Christianity did not bring anything good.
When, on the orders of Dobrynya, the pagan idols were defeated (the wooden ones were put on fire, and the stone ones were drowned in the Volkhov) and the procedure for adopting the Christian faith began, there were not so many who wanted to be baptized. The warriors, the princely squad, had to move from persuasion to direct coercion and drive the stubborn Novgorodians into the river by force.
This entire procedure for the forced conversion of Novgorod to Christianity gave the Novgorodians reason to declare that they were "baptized by Putyata with a sword, and Dobrynya with fire."
Many dramatic situations that testified to the non-acceptance of Christianity by a significant part of the townspeople to the villagers of Ancient Russia and the forcible conversion of disobedients to the new faith developed in other places.
In particular, it was with great difficulty that Christian missionaries managed to introduce the new faith to the inhabitants of
ancient Rostov. The first two bishops Fedor and Hilarion (XI century) could not do anything with the pagan Rostovites and themselves abandoned their stay in this city: "escaping, not tolerating disbelief and much annoyance from people." The city rebelled against the third bishop, Leontius: a real threat hung over the "lord" not only of exile, but also of violent death. Only the fourth bishop Isaiah was able to achieve some success, and even then not in Rostov itself, but in 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 Gleb, the son of Prince Vladimir of Kyiv, nor his successor, could accustom the people of Murom to the new faith.
Sometimes the local population arranged lynching of some missionaries who showed excessive zeal in planting Christianity. This is exactly what the Vyatichi, for example, did when they killed the monk-missionary Kuksha, who arrived in the Vyatka land from the Kiev-Pechersk monastery in the middle of the 12th century.
No information has been preserved about the circumstances of the introduction to Christianity of the inhabitants of other cities and localities of Ancient Russia. But it is unlikely that baptism took place there differently than in the cities mentioned above.
All this, taken together, gave grounds to historians (including church historians) 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 planted with the use of violence, causing 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 coercion” (vol. I, part I, p. 199). Arguing with those who claimed that our ancestors were baptized "without struggle and violence", E. E. Golubinsky wrote: 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 unrest among the people, that there were open resistances and riots” (ibid., pp. 175-176).
Just as categorical in their statements on this topic are the authors of many articles published in pre-revolutionary times on the pages of church periodicals. “Paganism,” the article “The Political and Social Activities of the Highest Representatives of the Russian Church (X-XV centuries)” said, “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, resorting to fire and sword in order to introduce the gospel teaching into the hearts of the pagans. And the 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, which unflatteringly characterize the secular and ecclesiastical "baptizers" of Kievan Rus, are well known to the theological and ecclesiastical circles of the Moscow Patriarchate. Nevertheless, modern theologians and preachers either hush them up or make statements of the exact opposite content - they assure their readers and listeners that no one opposed the introduction of Christianity and that 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,” says Metropolitan Anthony (Melnikov), without arguing his assertion in any way, “was carried out not by violence, but by the power of persuasion, with the assistance of the grace of God, living and miraculous” (ZHMP, 1982, No. 5, p. 50).
Vladimir understood that the newly built churches needed ministers. And if the people of Byzantine bishops met with obvious hostility, then what can we say about priests who would have to communicate with forcibly converted pagans personally and daily. Yes, 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 from all over the world (mostly orphans) to teach book, first of all, of course, biblical wisdom. Byzantine books are translated into Russian, of course, not completely, in an abbreviated, often simplified version.
Indicative in this regard is the coverage of the circumstances of the baptism of Novgorodians by the modern church press. In the preface to the "Orthodox Church Calendar for 1983", dedicated to the church history of Novgorod and Pskov, the introduction of Christianity to Novgorod is presented as a peaceful idyll: "The inhabitants of Novgorod were baptized in 988 (?) from St. Joachim of Korsunyanin ... who became the first Novgorod bishop" (p. 2). And not a word about how this baptism took place and what was the reaction of Novgorodians to the appearance of Joachim in the city.
Statements of this kind are intended for people who do not know anything about the past of their people - including the fact that our ancestors were baptized forcibly and did this in the interests of the ruling classes of the emerging feudal society.
Interesting facts about the establishment of Christianity in the world:
**************************************** **************************************** **************************************
In 325 a.d. E. In the Roman Empire, Christianity officially and actually won. Christianity became the state religion and obscurantism began. The first thing the Christians did when they came to power was to burn down the Library of Alexandria, having first taken out books for the initiates. This action was of key importance in hiding knowledge and replacing the entire knowledge system with a new false knowledge system.
Christian vandals attack the library of Alexandria
In 325 AD, at the First Ecumenical Council in Nicaea, assembled with the support of Emperor Constantine, the hierarchs of the church, arbitrarily, by a majority vote (as at a party meeting) appointed Jesus Christ as God (218 - "for", 2 - "against").
Painting by V.I. Surikov "The First Ecumenical Council"
Already in 380, Christianity forbids all other forms of religiosity and becomes the only and obligatory religion.
In 389, on the direct instructions of the Patriarch of Alexandria Theophilus, the last pagan temple of God Serapis, the magnificent Serapeum, was destroyed.
The real history of writing "sacred" Christian books is quite clear today. Christianity has been brazenly plagiarizing and borrowing myths and religious ideas from wherever they can (mostly Zoroastrianism) and put it all together. As a result, a mass of books was formed in different languages, by different authors, from different periods, of completely different artistic and authentic value. The result is an eclectic set of doctrines poorly connected to each other and completely contradictory. In 393, the Synod of Guinea listed 27 !!! (and not 4 as it is now) books of the New Testament.
In order to streamline and "comb" all this information economy under a certain plan, in the fourth century the Byzantine Emperor Constantine convened the Second Christian Council, which was attended by 280 representatives of all areas of Christianity. Half of the participants in this gathering, preaching those aspects of Christianity that were contrary to the Satanic plan, were simply killed. After that, Konstantin established an organization called "Correctory", whose task was to correction of all available gospels. As a result, all texts in Aramaic were declared heretical and were burned. Only manuscripts written in Greek remain, the earliest of which dates from 331 year 6 years after the Council of Nicaea.
After that, not the Lord God, but the Ecumenical Councils of the ministers of the Christian church constantly corrected the “sacred” texts as best they could or changed their interpretations. Entire chapters and volumes of the Bible were confiscated and banned. The “word of God” was again censored. At one of these gatherings, Constantine was canonized as a saint.
At the 3rd Ecumenical Council in 431, they argued for a long time whether a woman has a soul or not. After heated discussions, they proceeded to vote and, by a majority of just one vote, they recognized that a woman is also a full-fledged person. Now this may seem ridiculous, but there is little funny here. According to Christianity, a woman is an inferior being, and nowhere is it explicitly said about the existence of her soul. In the process of creating man according to the Christian myth, God first created man in his own image and likeness, and then, so that he would not be alone, put him to sleep and created a woman from his rib (Genesis 2:21-22). So a woman does not come from a great God, but only from a male rib, which is much more prosaic and clearly nothing is said about her soul.
Fresco - Third Ecumenical Council
In 553, at the Second Constantinople Cathedral, Byzantine Emperor Justinian ordered the removal from the Bible, left even by Constantine, the doctrine of reincarnation. Although the Bible and the Gospel were cleaned thoroughly, some tails remained. For example, in the Gospel of John (9:1-3) “And as he passed by, he saw a man blind from birth. His disciples asked Him: Rabbi! Who sinned, he or his parents, that he was born blind? Such a question can only be asked by those who have an idea about karma, including tribal karma, and understand that a person is not born with zero karma, but takes it from somewhere (from previous lives).
This is how the “sacred” scriptures and their great interpretations are actually created.
If there comes a time when all these secret archives of the Vatican are opened and become public, the public will experience the shock of getting to know the wrong side of history. One of the main feelings on which Christian demagogues rely is fear. Fear is cultivated and kindled. During the four centuries before and after the birth of Christ, at least fifteen (!) apocalypses were created, that is, teachings about the end of the world. After Christ, whole herds of prophets appeared in the world, promising for two thousand years (!!!) the imminent second coming of Christ, the establishment of the Kingdom of God and, as a result, the end of this world and other grandiose phenomena. In the Middle Ages, there were periods when, as a result of regular predictions, all the peoples of Europe were demoralized in anticipation of the end of the world. But nothing like this happened, despite the endless transfers of dates and dates.
notice, that Jesus and Christ are not the same. The Gospel of Luke clearly states the real name of the Nazarene. His real name is the Hebrew name Jesus, and that's it. Only Jesus. Christ Jesus called himself at the age of 30, after returning from India and Tibet, having appropriated to himself someone else's spiritual name. There are different versions about the reality of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. There are versions that it was a deliberate falsification, and someone else was crucified, there are versions that Christ was really crucified. But for us it doesn't really matter. Even if the Jews crucified Christ, this does not at all speak of the opposition of Christianity and Jewry. The communists also killed Trotsky, but this by no means speaks of the opposite of communism and Trotskyism. It's just a squabble between different poisonous spiders in one jar.
In 529, the Christian emperor Justinian closed the Academy of Athens, founded by Plato. The human mind became confused and silent for centuries, on this day the gloomy Middle Ages finally came.
Christianity's hatred of science knew no bounds. The main forms of medicine were considered diabolical. Doctors, especially those who studied human anatomy were engaged in autopsy, were instantly burned at the stake. Emperor Justinian, a true Orthodox Christian, banned even mathematics as "pagan wickedness." Communism banned genetics as a "fascist" science, banned cybernetics for non-materialism. What's up with science. Christianity and communism are extreme intolerance towards any dissent, and most importantly hatred of truthful and true information.
According to generally accepted data in science, Christians burned thirteen million people at the stake. You imagine this terrible figure. And far from the worst burned. Suffice it to recall Giordano Bruno, a follower of the great Copernicus, whom Christians burned in Rome in 1600 because he claimed that the earth is round and that it revolves around the sun. Not the last role in the decision to burn Giordano Bruno was played by his statement: "The Jews are a plague-ridden, leprous and dangerous race that deserves to be eradicated from the day it was born."
Relief - Trial of D. Bruno
Galileo was also threatened with burning and had to formally renounce his views. In general, whom did Christians burn? The ones they called heretics. And who are these heretics? These are dissenters who disagree with Christian delusional myths. That is, these are the most intelligent people. In general, dissidents are the thinkers. Whether they think rightly or wrongly is the second question, but they think independently. Is it possible to call thinking those who, like a tape recorder, repeat other people's thoughts, but are not themselves capable of some kind of original thought that no one has previously expressed? Of course not. Dissent - this is independent thinking due to which there is a progress (or regression) of human thought. And now, for ten centuries, Christians have been waging war against human thought, against capable and talented people, engaging in anti-selection and genocide against outstanding personalities. The main enemy of Christianity is a person who thinks, thinks logically, or as they call a "left hemisphere", that is, one who has the left hemisphere of the brain working. The goal of Christians is to maximize the number of people in the crowd, for whom only the right hemisphere works, and the left is 90% paralyzed. They know how to manage such feeble-minded people to perfection.
Christian idiocy reached hard-to-understand forms. An ancient Roman city dweller took water procedures three times a day, anointing his body with incense. Baths and gyms, where the human body was strengthened, were considered obligatory state institutions. Look at ancient sculptures. The power of life is easily read in every line. And because of Christianity, Europe has not washed for more than fifteen centuries. The Jesusists considered baths and pools, where people are half or naked, hotbeds of pagan depravity.
Christianity divided a single whole person into two warring parts: soul and body. Christianity despised the body and all bodily pleasures. I only thought about my soul. How to make her more ugly. Sports and any strengthening of the "mortal" body were considered meaningless and harmful activities. Sports competitions, including the Olympic Games, were banned.
Of course, even before Christianity there were examples of savagery, debauchery, cruelty and inhumanity. It was always and everywhere. But such obscurantism, atrocities, wars, crusades and the most cruel crimes against humanity, which Christianity created, mankind did not know. Throughout their history, Christians have only been engaged in slaughtering someone: Catholics slaughtered either Albigensians or Protestants, “Orthodox” - either Paulicians or Bogomils. Blood, blood and more blood - this is what Christian love for one's neighbor and love for one's enemies are. Only the crimes of the Christian son - communism can stand side by side. Today's movies about Roman paganism like "Caligula" are highly paid targeted insinuations that are far from the real story. By the way, there were no less homosexuals among the popes than among the Roman emperors.
In Sweden, Christianity was finally established only in 1248, and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania remained pagan until the end of the 14th century. In the 16th century, the hands of Christians reached Japan, but the wise eastern ruler Shogun Tokugawa Ieyasu, having admired Christian ugliness for several years, officially banned Christianity in 1614, leaving the memory of a great ruler who truly cares about the welfare of his people. Due to the dominant national pagan religion "Shintoism", the Japanese retained a pagan worldview and a pagan way of life. Every Japanese writes poetry. Everyone creates ekibano. Everyone worships nature, knows how to admire its beauty and draw strength from nature. A Christian cannot understand the deep meaning of the Japanese system of lifetime employment, much less understand the spirit of the great Japanese samurai.
For the full picture, there is another interesting reference (not for the faint of heart).
Was the baptism of Russia the result of violence? There are quite a few people who will answer in the affirmative and even in an ultimatum form - yes, the forced baptism of Russia is a historical fact! No less number of 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 becoming more and more widespread. Why? Why are fairly unambiguous facts speaking in favor of the peaceful adoption of Christianity unable to put an end to this issue? Why, contrary to these facts, is the myth about the forced baptism of the Slavs gaining more and more popularity? Apparently here the question is more in the field of psychology than in the field of history or the education of the disputants. Dead end? But if you try to talk about history from a different perspective - "talking at the kitchen table late in the evening ..."? Simply analyzing the most popular reproaches today towards Christianity and its appearance in Russia. We try.
If we forget for a moment about all the historical evidence of the non-violent Baptism of Russia [violent incidents 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 planting of Christianity, the facts of history, what they say is not a decree, but it may be that through progressive logical reasoning it will be possible to arouse in voluntary or involuntary opponents a more critical attitude towards 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 called from a third of the entire population of pagan Russia to 9 million "tormented and killed pagans by villainous priests and princes sold to Zion"].
We argue...
Where such a large number of the population came from in Russia, none of the accusers is able to explain. But, well, let it be so much and even more. Accordingly, along with the color of the ancient mighty nation, its greatest statehood and culture were also destroyed. Destroyed ruthlessly and one might say - scrupulously.
1. What can tell us the speed with which Christianity spread in the territories that in the future are destined to become the homeland for the Russian nation that arose from the mixing of Slavic (and not only Slavic) tribes (the period of the emergence and formation of the superethnos from the 13th to the 17th centuries inclusive)? The rate of conversion of multilingual, multicultural and diverse tribes to Christianity amounted to almost several centuries.
1.1. This begs the question - how could the total massacre and violence have dragged on for so long? In fact, this is a civil war that lasted for centuries. The testimonies of the "witnesses" from the camp of critics differ to the point of opposition to each other, and do not give any redirects to history, mathematical calculations, etc.
1.2. If we look around and pay attention to the examples of a clearly forceful version of religion, we will see, for example, how Islam appeared in Azerbaijan. And it appeared as a result of a 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 decline of the 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 fortress of Babek, the stronghold of a powerful rebel movement in central Azerbaijan, and established their dominance over the country. By the time the Muslim invaders arrived in Azerbaijan, the dyophysite direction of Christianity was already widespread and a significant proportion of the population professed Zoroastrianism. Christianity appeared on the territory of Azerbaijan through Caucasian Albania in the first centuries of the new era, back in the period of the apostles of Jesus Christ.
The national hero of the Azerbaijani people Babek (he is the number one hero in Azerbaijan and probably not much less monuments were erected to him than to Lenin in his time) was a Christian. So, the national liberation movement marched under the banner of the preservation of their faiths. And it was as a result of aggressive Islamization that the famous Azerbaijani proverb was born - “we are Muslims from the sword”, i.e. 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 planting of religion and culture over a period of more than a millennium? Does information about such large-scale events remain in history and in people's memory? Here we boldly state that there is more than enough historical and cultural information left. From this follows another question - on what basis can one then assume that for Russia the bloody baptism passed so quickly and fatally (although in fact it lasted centuries) that it literally did not survive: not a word, not a charred firebrand, not a single evidence from either the neighbors Russ (didn’t notice the hundred-year wars for faith?), nor among the Russ themselves? Let's make a reservation - Azerbaijan is not alone in its tragedy, and not only Islam was marked by great bloodshed in ancient history. There are enough bright and bloody examples from the history of both Europe and Asia (yes, peaceful Buddhism was also noted).
Second reproach - 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 the armed forces of that time were? In addition to a constant small squad, the entire militia was assembled from the people. Those. the people were armed and were not new to fighting. Could it really be that the "police" squad of one of the princes could resist the popular uprising and could arrange bloodshed for millions of lives, and even for thousands of lives? Were the princes so strong, and was their power so unquestionable and absolute? For example - in Novgorod XII-XIII centuries. the princes changed 58 times, often more often than the seasons. And they were expelled and called 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 authorities, and the authorities, in turn, had sufficient power to forcibly plant 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 despite the presence of a community of Christians in the city and goodwill towards Christianity of the authorities ...
Third rebuke - the facts of the forced baptism of individuals at a later time speak in favor of the fact that in the first centuries of the Christianization of Russia, religious violence was undoubtedly more widespread and common. If Christianity does not teach violence, then in the presence of such facts already in the Christian environment, how can one deny the high probability of religious violence at that distant time?
We argue...
A little about the logic of extrapolation: they say that, for example, a pregnant woman went to a tavern, had a strong drink there and made a drunken brawl ending in a general fight - you can, of course, believe in this ... But you must admit that such behavior in general, nevertheless, is not characteristic of the overwhelming most pregnant women.
There could not have been cases of violence... Small episodes, even if we do not know them, well, there certainly were, but just their episodic nature and contradiction to the paradigm of Christianity only favorably set off the peaceful process of Christianization.
Undoubtedly and obviously, it is always worth paying attention first of all to what this or that religion teaches. It is worth distinguishing the teachings of religion from the actions of its specific bearers. If violence in one form or another finds justification or justification in a specific religious doctrine, then only in this case it is correct to assume (but without having facts, in no case to assert) systematic religiously motivated violence. It is impossible to find justification for violence in the Teachings 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 forced Christianization?
Let's imagine a picture. Most of our neighbors characterize the Slavs as people who are quite persistent, one might say wholehearted 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 had just undergone forced Christianization? The presence of such people with extremely high authority both for Christians and even for pagans...? There is nowhere for heroes of the spirit, martyrs and confessors to come from when they are forcibly converted to another faith. A person who has not sacrificed his life for the old faith will never voluntarily sacrifice it for the sake of a forcefully implanted new one, for two probable reasons:
Negative attitude to the new violent faith;
The actual inability to sacrifice in the name of faith, tk. he was already incapable of it for the faith of his ancestors during his forced baptism.
Whence, then, these numerous heroes of the Spirit? In the case of violence, in the first centuries of the constantly ongoing Christianization of Russia, there was simply nowhere for them to come from. But with each century, the number of Holy ascetics grew multiple times along with the number of converts ... "A slave is not a pilgrimage."
By the way, what was the name of Vladimir by his contemporaries? Prince Vladimir was called among the people Vladimir Krasno Solnyshko - affectionate prince. A monster and a tyrant would not be called that. But what about the fact that Vladimir, after accepting Christianity, hesitated with the imposition of 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 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 pagans show. There is not? Oh, it was all in Hyperborea? From a real civilization, in any case, something should have remained, 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 slaughtered, 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), Crete has a lot of monuments of the Minoan culture, 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, but after all, Vladimir apparently planted Christianity not in Hyperborea, but in Russia, where there are no traces of the “ancient civilization” and there never was.
And here there are two options:
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 long ago as a result of the cataclysm, and the Christians again civilized the already "barbarian" people. Then Christianity, in any case, can only say thank you.
2. Or 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 assert, have not been preserved, and in the Christian chronicles there is no mention of pagan writing, books and their burning.
By the way, in relation to the Indian theme - the last 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 then missionaries were not only not ashamed, but were even proud of the fact that they destroyed pagan temples , books, etc. (where such destruction took place), and therefore references to such acts usually ended up in manuscripts. This attitude persisted for a very long time: for example, the 16th-century Spanish missionary Diego de Landa was not at all embarrassed that he destroyed the sacred books of the Mayan 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! O wise book of Veles, O 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 - after all, you claim that they were all burned. But after all, any literate people use writing not only for religious purposes! In the same Christian Novgorod XI-XIII centuries. literate people (and, apparently, there were a majority of such people) wrote anything to each other 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 dump or right on the street (if you weren’t careful). There, the note was reliably trampled into the mud, and it remained lying there - the birch bark, as it turned out, is very well preserved in such an environment. Therefore, in our time, archaeologists find many such "letters" in Novgorod land - the ancient Novgorodians-Christians literally "spit" on their city with them. Logically, if these same Novgorodians (and other Slavs) had a pre-Christian script, which they "drawn on birch bark", then at least a few similar "letters" from the times of paganism would have to be preserved (their Christians clearly could not destroy - they didn’t climb through the garbage heaps and didn’t excavate in the city to find some scraps of household notes ten, twenty or a hundred years ago). But, alas, not a single one was found in the pre-Christian layers ...
Foma Laik
In response to the anti-church and anti-feudal rebellions of the 11th century, the princes issued a more complete code of laws, Russkaya Pravda, which severely punished those who caused damage to the princes and the clergy, their servants, their property and possessions.
[!] The charter of Russkaya Pravda, drawn up in Novgorod after the uprising of 1209, fixes the ways of converting free smerds into slavery, forbids a serf to testify in court.
[!] The articles “about the monthly cut” (percentage) describe usury in detail.
[!] So, along with the "good news" slavery came to Russia.
[!] By the time Russkaya Pravda tells about, the princes and boyars seized the lands of the previously free smerds (privatized - A).
[!] "Russkaya Pravda" vividly depicts the plight of the smerd, who was sitting on a foreign land. The prince used the work of the smerd during his lifetime and had the right to his property after death.
[!] "Russkaya Pravda" established: if a smerd dies without leaving sons-heirs, then his property will go to the prince.
[!] If an unmarried daughter remains, then only a part of the inheritance is allocated for her.
[!] And the article following this said that after the death of a boyar or combatant, his property goes to his sons or daughters, but not to the prince (the smerds found themselves in a humiliated position).
Russkaya Pravda draws in detail the position of another dependent person - “purchase”.
[!] The purchase does not have its own economy. He cultivates the master's land with the help of the master's agricultural tools - a plow and a harrow. If the purchase breaks these tools, then 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 during work, then the fault also lies with him. If the purchase runs away from the master, then upon returning to its owner, he becomes a complete slave.
[!] The most difficult life was for "serfs" - slaves. Slaves became, first of all, the children of serfs. Sometimes free people were forced to sell themselves into slavery. The one who took charge of the princely or boyar economy also became a serf, became a tyun or a key keeper without an agreement that he remains free. The serf was the complete property of the master, and Russkaya Pravda threatens with severe punishments to those who help the serf escape, show him the way when escaping.
[!] "Russkaya Pravda" in the first place guarded the interests of the princes. The prince could give the property of a person he did not like to “stream and plunder”. In his treasury were fines from the population, levied by the court. For the murder of a princely tiun (simply speaking, a lackey), Russkaya Pravda sets a fine of 80 hryvnias, and for the murder of a smerd or a serf who worked in the princely 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 Bodrichs, Lyutichs, Polabs and Pomeranians remained free.
In the east, the Vyatichi, the largest East Slavic tribe, remained unconquered. In 1113 they killed the Christian missionary Kuksha near the town of Serenska.
In the XII century, Christianity continued to spread across the Slavic land. Foreign preachers frequented the lands of the Polabs and Lutichs.
One of the famous bearers of the "word of God" was Bishop Otto of Bamber, who visited Slavia twice 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 simply unbelievable. One denarius can buy a whole cartload of fresh herring, 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. Throughout the country there are many 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, mutton and goat's fat, honey, wheat, hemp, poppies, all kinds of vegetables and fruit trees, and if there were vines, olive trees and fig trees, one could take this country for the promised , before that there are a lot of fruit trees in it ...
Honesty and comradeship among them are such that, being completely unaware of theft or deceit, they do not lock their chests and drawers. We did not see a lock or a key there, and the inhabitants themselves were very surprised to notice that the bishop's pack-boxes and chests were locked with a padlock. They keep their dresses, money and various valuables in covered vats and barrels, not being afraid of any deceit, because they have not experienced it. And surprisingly, their table is never empty, never without food. Each father of the family has a separate hut, clean and smart, intended only for food. Here there is always a table with various drinks and dishes, which is never empty: one thing ends - another is immediately brought. No mice or mice are allowed there. The dishes waiting for the participants of the meal are covered with the cleanest tablecloth. At what time would anyone want to eat, whether a guest, or household members, they go to the table, on which everything is already ready ... ".
Poor, wild and ignorant Slavic people! Of course, it was worth it for them to be baptized for the sake of the dubious happiness of eating matzah after death in the backyards of “Heavenly Jerusalem”!
[!] In 1113, a Jewish pogrom took place in Kyiv. People, infuriated by the Jewish "national characteristics": chicanery, deceit and gesheft, threw this evil spirits out of the Russian lands.
“The people of Kiev, being annoyed by the Jews for undermining and cheating in trade, ripping off and secretly dealing with the Greeks, rushed at them with a frenzy, bringing murder and robbery everywhere,” writes the Lithuanian historian Osip Yaroshevich (1793-1860).
There were several such massacres. Not counting the fire of the "Jewish quarter" in 1124. But, alas, the Christian plague continued to spread throughout Russia.
Russian Jewish Congress of the 12th century
Soon the Jews again appear in Kyiv. Benjamin of Tudelsky (circa 1170) and Rabbi Petahia (circa 1180) come here. They were 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 sent at the direction of the center through the chief rabbis (now berl lazars) and further through the kahals.
Soon the prince of the Lyutichs 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. Bishop Gerold immediately arrived in Wagria. And another round of Christianization began.
[!] The idol of Prove is overthrown by his own hand. He also burned the sacred forest of Prove.
[!] Christianity has spread almost all over Slavia. The Vyatichi fought back with all their might, moving further and further to the northeast, into the dense forests. The Slavs still held out in Upper Ponemanye, in the northern Novgorod lands. Niklot, the prince of the eastern Bodrichi, fought back from the crusaders, and Arkona, a white rock on the island of Ruyan, stood inviolably.
Arkona - the last stronghold of the Slavs from the Christian Herods
In 1160, Niklot died, and the Eastern Bodrichians suffered the fate of Christian "salvation".
[!] Lyutichi and Bodrichi 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, 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 so as not to fall into slavery.
The defenders, finding that they were surrounded, put forward their spears and stood in a circle at 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 kind of courage Perun was waiting for them in his squad in the monastery of Navi.
Waldemar ordered a chair to be brought, sat on it and watched the spectacle.
[!] Bishop Absalon, this accursed "lamb of Christ" on the same day ordered to destroy the Slavic shrine - the temple of Svetovit.
Compared to Svetovit, this Absalon turned out to be a shriveled dwarf, a small Christian bug. The statue of Svetovit was barely torn off, and even then: they had to break down the wall in order to pull Svetovit out of his house. Helmold was a witness of what was happening, who told:
“And the king ordered to pull out that wooden idol of Svyahovit, whom the Slavic people so revere, and ordered to put a noose around his neck and drag it in front of the whole army in front of the Slavs and, cutting it into pieces, throw it into the fire.”
Yes, the king was great. Because he shed great rivers of Slavic blood. Otherwise, it wouldn't be "great".
[!] Let those two Christian bastards be scorned!
Zealous in the cause of the church,
Dad sends a word to Roksild:
Get up! You are being overwhelmed
Those pagans dashing
Raise the banner for faith, -
I release your sins(A. K. Tolstoy, Borivoy)
In 1204, some "dashing women" were burned in Suzdal, who caused a crop failure in the principality (in the Middle Ages, in all states, hunger was attributed to "witches" - conveniently and practically).
In the 12th century, the rule of Metropolitan John reads:
"Do not give communion to someone who walks around the Magi."
At the time, it was very serious. A person who did not stuff a piece of the body of his “rescuer” into his mouth could not count on “rescue”.
Bishops are biblical fanatics
Bishop Fyodor of Rostov was famous for his savage cruelty. The chronicler says of him that he
“He was a tormentor who was not merciful, chopped off the heads of one, burned out the eyes of others and cut their tongues, crucified others on the wall and tortured mercilessly.”
At the end of the 13th century, justifying the practice of bloody reprisals against dissidents and resisters, the priests willingly referred to the words and activities of biblical bug-eyed extremists. So that there are plenty of examples of cruelty in the "holy book".
Bishop Serapion of Vladimir at the end of the 13th 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 iniquity: some by murder, others by imprisonment, and others by imprisonment."
Did the leaders of the church see that the extermination of people contradicts some provisions of Christianity? Of course we saw. They could not fail to see this, but they remembered the gospel mercy only when it was FAVORABLE for them. And when it was unprofitable, they remembered the exact opposite. Vile and vile hypocrites.
In 1227 there was an attempted uprising in Novgorod.
[!] “Sorcerers, sorcerers, accomplices appeared in Novogorod, and many sorcery, and indulgences, and signs worked. The Novogorodtsy caught them and brought the Magi to the courtyard 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 South Baltic coast was firmly occupied by the 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, modern Stralsund), Dobresol (Halle), Budishin (Bautsen), Dymin (Demmin), Vedegosch (Volgast), Korenitsa (Harz), Rostock, Mechlin (Mecklenburg), Mishny (Meissen), Velegrad (Diedrichshagen), Varnov (Waren), Ratibor (Ratzenburg), Dubovik (Dobin), Zverin (Schwerin), Wishemir (Wismar), Lenchin (Lenzen) ), Brunzovik (Braunschweig), Kolobreg (Kolberg), Volyn (Jomsburg), Lubich (Lübeck), Szczecin (Stettin), and so on.
As soon as a Christian leash was put on Russia, Simeon the New Theologian became one of the first ideologists in the Pechersk Monastery in Kyiv. His teachings were strikingly different from the Russian pagan freemen. Simeon persistently called for humility, refusal to seek primacy in anything, planting weeping with prayers, solitude, curbing the womb. He called for self-humiliation, a complete renunciation of one's own will, not to contradict the spiritual mentor in anything.
“Although you will see him committing fornication or getting drunk and managing, in your opinion, the deeds 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 vex him and do not go to those who converse against him. Stay with him to the end, not in the least curious about his sins.
The last, and one of the favorite arguments of the supporters of the concept of “forced” Christianization are the chronicle references to the murder of the Magi in the period we are considering.
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 to confirm the concept of "forced" baptism, which has become practically generally accepted in Russian 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 the social cataclysms that allegedly accompanied baptism. Even pagan sanctuaries on the periphery of Russia functioned even 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 repressions or mass violent protests. By the way, it should be remembered that we are talking about a society where, in general, there were weapons in the house of every free “husband”. There were enough opportunities for a massive uprising - 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 junior edition. “In the summer of 6497. Volodymyr and all the Russian land were baptized; and appointed a metropolitan in Kyiv, and an archbishop in Novugrad, and bishops and priests and deacons in other cities; and be joy everywhere. And archbishop Akim Korsunyanin came to Novugrad, and destroyed the trebbling grounds, and cut Perun, and commanded him to be dragged to Volkhovo; and more over already, I drag him along the feces, beating with a rod; and the commandment is not to be received anywhere by anyone. And the piddler went early to the river, although the mountaineers would lead to the city; sitse Perun swam to the bervy, and I will reject it with a shist: “you, speech, Perunishche, drank to your fill and yal, and now swim away”; and swam from the window light ".
As you can see, there is no data on the violent nature of baptism and any conflicts. The authorities, as in Kyiv, are calling for "not accepting" the overthrown and disgraced idol - and this call has been heard. The potter from Pidba (a village near Novgorod) shames the fallen god, which, of course, meets with 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 Kyiv as the main one only a few years before.
Note that even then there is no mention of any unrest and conflicts (“ and zhryahu him the people of Novgorod like God").
Only one text stands out against the background of numerous revisions of this narrative in other collections - a fragment of the Joachim Chronicle, with the mention of which we began this work. We emphasize that in the form that has come down to us, the chronicle, which has come down only as part of V. N. 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 have belonged to the first Bishop of Novgorod, Joachim, for retelling whose narrative the unknown chronicler gave out his work. Suffice it to say that the baptism of Russia 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 the Novgorodians:
"In Novegrad, people, having seen the hedgehog Dobrynya, go to baptize me, make a veche and swear to not let everyone into the city and not let the idols be refuted. And when they came, they, having swept away the great bridge, had come out with weapons, and after Dobrynya, weighed them down with scorn and gracious words, either way they didn’t hear at least and hung out 2 great crossbows with a lot of stones, putting them on the bridge, as if they were their own enemies. We are standing in a trading country, walking through the markets and streets, learning people, how much we can. But we perish in wickedness the word of the cross, like an apostle of rivers, appearing as madness and deceit. And so we stayed for two days, baptizing several hundreds. Then the thousands of Novgorod Ugony, riding everywhere, yelled: "The best die, rather than our gods give to reproach." The people of this country, razsviripev, ruined the house of Dobrynin, plundered the estate, robbed his wife and some of his relatives. Tysetsky Vladimirov Putyata, like a sensible and brave husband, having prepared a lodia, having chosen a husband from Rostov 300, having transported over the city to his country and entering the city, I’ll harm anyone, all the teas of his wars of life. He also reached the court of Ugonyaev, Onago and other forefathers of the yati abie sent to Dobrynya across the river. The people of the country, having heard this, gathered up to 5000, stumbled Putyata, and slashed evil between them. Some who walked past the Transfiguration of the Lord razmetash and rake the houses of Christians. Even in the development of Dobrynya with all the sluts with him, (and commanded some houses to be set on fire near the shore, which made people more afraid of the former, I ran to put out the fire; and abie) ceased to cut, then the previous men asked for peace.
Dobrynya, having gathered howls, forbid robbery and crush idols aby, burning wood, and breaking stones into the river; and for the wicked the sorrow is great. Husbands and wives, who saw that, with a great cry and tears, shed for me, as if for their gods. Dobrynya, mocking, weighs them: “What, madness, you regret those who cannot defend themselves, what help you can expect from them.” And she sent everywhere, announcing that they should go to baptism. Sparrow is a posadnik, the son of Stoyanov, who was brought up under Vladimir and was very sweet-tongued, this idea on a solemn and more than all weight. Idosha mnozi, and not those who want to be baptized, the warriors of the Vlachakha and the Kreschakha, the men are above the bridge, and the wives are below the bridge. Then many people who have not been baptized will tell about myself to be baptized; For this reason, I commanded all baptized wooden crosses, ovo coppers and privateers to lay on the neck, and those who do not have it, do not believe and baptize; and abie the smashed-out church with a paki construction. And baptizing tacos, Putyata go to Kyiv. This is why people reproach the Novgorodians: Baptize putyata with a sword, and Dobrynya with fire".
To the Joachim Chronicle in general and to this, its most famous evidence in particular, there is a directly opposite attitude in science. Some researchers, such as S.M. Solovyov see in Ioakimovskaya a completely adequate source and, sometimes without any reservations, write about the "revolt" 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 fully or partially the work of V. N. Tatishchev himself. Most researchers, however, recognized the authenticity of the surviving text of Ioakimovskaya, 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 was just a detailed conjecture 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 back in the 13th century, we cannot deny the contradictions and inconsistencies of the existing text. There are also clearly unreliable details in it. We encounter outright absurdity already at the very beginning: how could the Novgorodians put their "crossbows" "on the bridge", which they themselves had just "smashed"? Or did they build it again - towards Dobrynya? By the way, it was under this bridge - safe and sound, that Perun, as we remember, sailed.
Of course, we can assume that the author of the XIII and then the end of the XVII century. relied on a genuine historical tradition, which was based on real facts. But, all the more so, recognizing some power of the document behind the Joachim Chronicle, we must trust its testimony as a whole. And it is quite unambiguous: “for this, people vilify the Novgorodians: Baptize Putyata with a sword, and Dobrynya with fire.” Who could "reproach" the Novgorodians, if all of Russia was forcibly baptized, "with fire and sword"? - obviously no one.
In addition, the very term “baptized” from the Novgorod proverbs cited to Dobrynya and Putyata, by and large, is not applicable. Since it was already present in Novgorod before the events described by Tatishchev, and the same 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)" Vladyka Bishop Joachim erected the first wooden oak church of St. Sophia, having the top 13; and stood for 60 years, and rising from the fire in the summer of 6557, March on the 4th day, on Saturday, under the second bishop Luke, on the 13th year. Be honestly arranged and decorated; and stood at the end of Piskupli Street, over the Volkhov River, to the Stone Castle of the Castle ..." .
All this does not make the Joachim Chronicle reliable. And it is certainly necessary to note once again that it has come down to us only as part of the "History" by V. N. Tatishchev. There were, of course, cases in history when historical documents found were lost in a later period. As, for example, it happened 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 handed over by Nikolai Mikhailovich to the Society of History and Antiquities, thanks to which its exhaustive description was compiled. In the case of the Joachim Chronicle, Tatishchev did not have a single witness who belonged to the scientific community, who could confirm the reality of the existence of the source retold by him.
Based on the foregoing, we can talk about the "Joachim Chronicle", at best, as a collection of legends of the 17th century 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 church historians of the XIX century.
2.1 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 analyzing were written. This period is known by the name "synodal", when from 1721 to 1917. The Orthodox in Russia was not subordinate to the patriarch elected from the hierarchs, but to the 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 profess with an oath the ultimate judge of this Spiritual College to be the All-Russian monarch of our most merciful sovereign.” This oath, which offended the episcopal conscience and was contrary to the canonical principles of the Church, lasted until 1901, for almost 200 years.
Undoubtedly, during this period, many holy ascetics were revealed to the world, such as Sts. including church history, experienced far from the best of times.
As an example, we can cite the fact that the textbook of dogmatic theology by Metropolitan Macarius "Bulgakov", although it is used in modern Orthodox theological educational institutions, at the same time is not an indisputable 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 cited above, also says the following: “ ... the perfect 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 but 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 unrest 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 obviously means that in Novgorod the new faith was met with open indignation, and that the most energetic measures were required and used to suppress the latter. It is very possible that such disturbances were not only in Novgorod."
His statements, unlike mtrp. Macarius are direct, and exclude any possibility of thinking otherwise, and it would seem that they confirm the point of view of the supporters of the “forced” Christianization of Russia in the best possible way. The problem is. That E. Golubinsky does not cite a single source, except for a proverb confirming his opinion. Therefore, this statement can be considered only the opinion of the author, but not as a proven historical fact.
2.2 Opinion of mtrp. Macarius (Bulgakov)
Metropolitan Macarius, in contrast to Golubinsky, expresses himself much more mildly, and he confirms his opinion with a reference to Metropolitan Hilarion. At the same time, speaking of the fact that “they were baptized ... some were reluctant,” he continues: “However, we didn’t have any stubborn resistance to the gospel preaching, with the exception of only two cities: part of Rostov and especially Murom, then we didn’t have.” (meaning the "revolt of the Magi" which we will analyze below). He explains the situation as follows: ... the peoples of the non-Slavic tribe that lived in the north-east of Russia, what: all - in Rostov, Murom - in Murom, it was difficult to instruct in the truths of Christianity: who could find a preacher for them? 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. Macarius in no way shares the opinion of both Golubinsky and, in general, the supporters of the "forced" Christianization of Russia.
2.3 Legal grounds for the persecution of pagans in Russia in the pre-Mongolian period.
To confirm the opinion of E. Golubinsky that paganism in Russia after the adoption of the book. Vladimir baptism " was declared forbidden and persecuted by the faith» must be cited as evidence, any legal period under study that would confirm such a ban and legitimize the persecution.
If we look at the legal documents of that time, we will not find in them any mention of legal persecution on religious grounds. The most ancient of the legal acts that have come down to us, which determined the place of the church in the public-state system, are the charters of the Kyiv Grand Dukes Vladimir (approximately from 986 to 1015) and Yaroslav (from 1019 to 1054). Parts of these statutes relating to ecclesiastical courts do contain the names of such crimes as, " ... witchcraft, do it, sorcery, 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 is a sorcerer, a prisoner, or a sorcerer, or a greengrocer, the husband will finish, execute yu, 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 is to be done in monastic affairs, in church affairs, in the monasteries themselves, let not the prince intervene, nor the volost". The jurisdiction of the church court extended and to this day extends exclusively to people included in. Over people who have nothing to do with the church, this court has no power» And here are the church people: hegumen, priest, deacon, and someone in the kliros, black, blueberry, priest, priest, healer, forgiver, strangled person, monastery, hospitals, hotels, recipients of the land. That people of the church, almshouse, metropolitan or bishop, knows between them the court or the offense of which, ass. Even if there will be an insult to another person with him, then a general court" .
The Church has no power over those who are not part of it. the ud of the Church extends to all its members, both perfect, that is, baptized, and catechumens, who can be subjected to measures of ecclesiastical punishment for their sins (I ecum. 14; Neok. 5); but does not judge external, that is, persons alien to her ...". For example, the Church canon of Metropolitan John to Jacob Chernorets in paragraph 5 reads " Izh do not partake of the edge of the Rustey of the earth, like these rekl, and in the great fasting of meat they eat and filthy, it is appropriate to direct and forbid that malice in every way, to return to the orthodox teaching with punishment and teaching, and by immersion (neglect) as if I are not Christians, yes that fear will remain toa of malice and will be added to good faith. Staying so, I will not change not to give them Holy Communion, but like any foreigner, truly the faith of our adversary, set up and walk at your 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, to attend services, participate in the sacraments and not call themselves a Christian.
In addition, the Orthodox Church has never had the legal right to sentence to death, and even more so to carry out the sentence. If there were such proposals from the hierarchs, they always asked them to exercise secular power. The Church does not have such a right, and never has.
This system and this order are built on the distinction and correlation of the concepts of sin and crime. Sin is in charge of the church, crime is in the hands of the state. 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 in the end”, and the Metropolitan was to pay a penalty of 6 hryvnias. The same “Rule” of the metropolitan in paragraph 7 explains what this “execution” was supposed to consist of. Those engaged in sorcery should first be turned away from sin by verbal exhortation, and if they do not obey, “ vehemently execute, but do not kill to death, nor circumcise these bodies". Under the "yar", a strict execution that does not deprive of life and does not "circumcise", i.e. that does not mutilate 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-Mongolian period in the position of " faith forbidden and persecuted (religio prohibita, intolerata, illicita)”, as E. Golubinsky is trying to present.
3. Chronicle evidence of the murder of the Magi.
3.1 Magi as ministers of public cult.
One of the most favorite arguments of the supporters of the concept of "forced" Christianization of Russia is the annalistic references to the executions of the Magi in the 10th-12th centuries. In such interpretations, the Magi are presented as pagan clergymen who are at the head of a popular movement that resists forced 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 clergy." Chronicle stories of 1024 and 1071 depict the Magi as representatives of magical religiosity. It is also important to take into account other chronicle evidence or references to the Magi. The Tale of Bygone Years also provides very interesting material in this regard. Under the year 911, the chronicler places a well-known legend about the death of the prophetic Oleg from his own horse, reporting before that that he asked the "magi and sorcerer" to predict his death to him. In confirmation of the fact that the Magi can sometimes predict the future, and perhaps in order to protect themselves from possible accusations of trusting the Magi, Nestor cites a number of similar cases with the magical power of Apollonius of Tnansky.
"Having been alone in poverty in the Rostov region, two wise men stood up from Yaroslavl, saying: “like in the sveva, who keeps abundance;” and poidosta along the Volza, where to come in the graveyard, the best wives are narrower, saying, as if to keep life, and honey, and fish, and soon. And I send my sisters to them, my mothers and my wives; she, in a dream, cut through behind her shoulder, vyimasta lubo zhito, lubo fish, and killed many wives, she will take them away for herself. And pridosta on Baloozero; and if she had not 300 people ".
Understanding and religious study of chronicle news 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”. It is relatively neutral in socio-economic terms; 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 mass popular uprising. And the "old child" seemed to them a social class category. So N. N. Voronin wrote that “the uprising was caused, first of all, by internal contradictions among the population of Suzdal land, which were especially aggravated in the area close to the old trading Volga. Here, obviously, there was some kind of wealthy elite - the old child - who stood out from the environment of the local society; its accumulation in the form of zhit and household products made the famine that engulfed this area especially acute. The fact that Yaroslav hastily arrived from Novgorod<...>and stood up for the old child, shows that this layer was already under the patronage of the princely power, being the backbone of its policy on the ground. M. N. Tikhomirov, V. V. Mavrodin, L. V. Cherepnin, A. A. Zimin, P. M. Rapov, V. I. Buganov unconditionally recognized the anti-feudal 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 reprisals of the Magi with the "old child", but only after buying zhit 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 the agricultural economy". You can also add that in order for "people to come to life" in the whole region, the seized reserves might not be enough, but for the Magi and their supporters - quite.
Whatever point of view we support, we cannot but state the fact that in the cases described, those whom the supporters of the concept of “forced” Christianization are trying to pass off as spokesmen for popular religious self-consciousness and opponents of Christianity, in fact, were engaged in elementary robbery and looting. The secular power in these cases did not even protect, it established legal order.
The Magi did not call for the worship of the old gods. They did not lead the people to destroy the temples and the priesthood. They did not blame the new religion for the misfortunes and misadventures that befell the people. Therefore, these cases cannot be interpreted as revolts on religious grounds, with a call to fight against the usurper - Christianity.
Also in 1071 "In the summer of 6579. ... Sits be a sorcerer stood at Gleb Novgorod; to speak more to people, doing ak, there are many deceptions, not only the whole city is not enough: to say more, as if “I know everything,” and blaspheming the Christian faith, to say more: “I will cross the Volkhov in front of everyone.” And there would be a rebellion in the city, and all the faith in him, and even destroy the bishop; the bishop took up the cross and put on the robes, old rivers: if anyone believes, then go to the cross.” And they split in two: the prince, Gleb, and his friend, went and went to the bishop, and all the people went for the sorcerer and there was a great rebellion between them. Gleb took the ax under the scute, came to the sorcerer and said to him: “Do you know that the morning wants to be, and what until the evening?” He said: "I know everything." And Gleb said: “Do you know what you want to be today”? “I will create great miracles” speech. Gleb will take out the ax, growing and falling dead, and the people scattered; he perished in body and soul, surrendering ..." .
This situation, in my opinion, does not require comments at all. No ruler, in the Middle Ages or earlier, would have tolerated open incitement to rebellion happening before his eyes, no matter what religion he professed.
There are two more references to the dead Magi, but without third-party intervention. " In the summer of 6578.(1070) In the same summer, a certain sorcerer came to Kyiv, telling: “as if five gods appeared, saying: tell people, as if the Dnieper will flow back for five years. the rest of the earth will begin to change.” His madness and obedience, but I laugh at reason, saying: “As if playing with the devil, he lies, deceiving people, until he kills you;” hedgehog and was: in one night, he took him into the abyss of Vrinush, and so the accursed sorcerer perished without a trace" .
AND " In the summer of 6599.(1091) In the same summer, the sorcerer appeared in Rostov, who soon perished" .
Indicative is the message about the execution of the Magi in the 13th century, already by representatives of the masses, and not by secular authorities. “In the summer of 6735. (1235) Magi, sorcerers, accomplices appear in Novegrad, and many sorcery, and indulgences and false signs to the creator, and much evil to the deva, many are seductive. And Novogorodtsy gathered, taking them out, and leading them to the archbishop’s court, and these men interceded for them to prince Yaroslavl, Novogorodtsy, leading the Magi to Yaroslavl’s court, and pouring great fire into the Yaroslavl’s court, and binding all the Magi, and throwing them into the fire, and that burn all". Another chronicle specifies the number of deaths as a result of this execution. " Izzhgosha Magi 4, I do indulgence of the deed, and the news, and burned in Yaroslavl yard". That is, in the middle of the 13th century, the same people, who, according to the supporters of the concept of "forced" Christianization, fiercely resisted the planting of Christianity, themselves repair lynching and destroy the Magi.
From the above, we can rightly conclude that the executions of the Magi in Russia in the pre-Mongolian period did not occur because of the forcible planting of Christianity. They were a reaction of the secular authorities to the loosening of the socio-political situation in the state. The last described case also does not speak in favor of the supporters of the concept of "forced" Christianization.
4. "Forcible" 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 disputes 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 ancient Russian religiosity rarely became the subject of special monographic studies. The history of the study of the problem shows that it appeared either on the pages of works devoted to church history, or in works covering pagan religiosity; and also, as a private subject, included general courses in the history of Russia. Valuable theoretical observations and vast factual material accumulated over two centuries have not been fully comprehended by modern science either. Therefore, the scientific community will have to make a lot of efforts to comprehensively address this multilateral 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 there could be no TWO-Faith. Nevertheless, the problem of dual faith in the Russian Orthodox Church exists to this day.
First, one should pay attention to the fact that if Christianity was really propagated by "fire and sword", then there would always be 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.
As a striking example, one can cite Bulgaria, neighboring Russia, where the people openly opposed Christianity and killed the priesthood. “In the summer of 6538. (1030) At the same time, Boleslav the great died in Lyasekh, and there was a rebellion in the land of Lyadsk: the bishops, priests, and boyars got up, and there was a rebellion in the NPH."Subsequently, Bulgaria was captured by the Muslims.
In addition, in 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) ... More than demonic magic is wives, from time immemorial, for a demon has deceived a wife, this is a husband; tacos in this kind of wives do a lot of magic with sorcery, and poison, and hoarfrost with demonic wiles. But deceitful men also come from the demons of unbelief..." . "Bonyak(Prince of Polotsk) but the wicked one went out, magician in the night, and lifted up like a wolf, and the wolf lifted up to him, and still other wolves lifted up; and from this magic, understand Bonyak, as if to defeat Koloman". "In the summer of 6552. (1044) The same summer, Prince Bryachislav, son of Izyaslavl, grandson of Volodimers, father of Vseslavl, died; and Vseslav sat on his father's table. Give birth to this mother from sorcery; mother, having given birth to him, be on his head the banner of the ulcer, a pit on his heads; rekosha the volsvi of his mother: “it’s sore, screw it up, and wear it to your belly Vseslav on yourself”; for this sake of mercilessness there is bloodshed" .
There is also a chronicler's story about a certain Novgorodian who asked for sorcery from a magician. And indications that "... demonic magic happens to be wives; tacos in this kind of wives do a lot of magic with sorcery, and poison, and hoarfrost with demonic wiles. But deceitful men also come from the demons of unbelief..." .
In addition, communities of other confessions freely exist in Russia. Mtrp. Macarius writes: There is no doubt 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 a well-known epistle on the Varangian faith to the Grand Duke Izyaslav, among other things, wrote: great is the need of the orthodox Christian, among those living in one place; but if anyone is kept from them, bearing pure faith, he will stand at the right hand of God rejoicing. And then he inspired the prince: “Be merciful not only to your Christians, but also to strangers; if you see anyone naked, or hungry, or in distress, then, even if it be a Latin, have mercy on everyone and deliver them from misfortune as you can" .
The rejection of Christianity in no way causes any forceful punitive measures, both on the part of the Russian Orthodox Church and on the part of the secular authorities.
We do not know of a single case of the murder of a Christian preacher, priest, monk, which would have caused any punitive actions on the part of the Church or the princes.
From the described picture, it becomes clear that both worldviews, both pagan and Christian, existed in parallel, and none of them was destroyed by secular power by force.
It is only thanks to such coexistence of two worldviews, when they have the same possibilities of influencing the population, that we can talk about the problem of dual faith.
Conclusion
Summing up, we can draw the following conclusions:
"Iakimov Chronicle", as a source, raises the greatest doubts about its authenticity.
The opinion of prof. Golubinsky, despite his belonging to church historical science, remains his personal, unconfirmed opinion. Mtrp. Macarius (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 the church court, and, therefore, apply exclusively to members of the Church, and not to the entire population of Russia.
Chronicle evidence of the uprisings and executions of the Magi in no way confirms the opinion that they had religious motives as their beginning.
This study clearly shows the inconsistency of the concept of "forced" Christianization of Russia in the pre-Mongolian period. Moreover, when 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. T.1. - M., 2002.
3 . Kakabadze Sh. Sh. 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 royal command of the Archaeographic Commission, vols. 1–5, 10 St. Petersburg at the printing house of Eduard Pratz
8 . Rusanova I.P., Timoshchuk B.A. Pagan sanctuaries of the Eastern Slavs. M., 1993.
9 . Rybakov B. A. The pagan worldview of the Russian Middle Ages // Questions of history. M, No. 1, 1974.
10 . Tatishchev V.N. Russian History. Part 1. M., 1994.
