Rus' was baptized more than once. This is what the Uniates say, and so do many historians. Not only the traditional date of the baptism of Rus' is disputed, but also the continuity of the Russian Orthodox Church from the Byzantine Patriarchate.

What the chronicles are silent about

Today, the thesis that our state was baptized at the end of the 10th century is not subject to discussion. It has acquired the significance of an indisputable dogma, despite the fact that it has certain errors. For example, even authoritative representatives of the Orthodox Church are inclined to think that the date of baptism - 988 - is most likely approximate.

In Soviet historiography, the point of view gained popularity according to which, under Saint Vladimir, not all of Rus' was baptized, but only the upper class. At the same time, the state continued to remain predominantly pagan.

What's interesting is this. In foreign sources of the 10th-11th centuries, researchers have still not found evidence of the baptism of Rus' in 988. For example, the medieval historian Fyodor Fortinsky in 1888 - on the eve of the 900th anniversary of Vladimirov's baptism - did extensive work, looking for at least the slightest hints of such a significant event in European sources.

The scientist analyzed Polish, Czech, Hungarian, German, and Italian chronicles. The result amazed him: none of the texts contained any information about Russia’s adoption of Christianity at the end of the 10th century. The only exception was the message of the German canon Thietmar of Mersebur about the personal baptism of Grand Duke Vladimir in connection with his upcoming marriage.

“Even stranger is the silence of Orthodox sources, primarily Byzantine and Bulgarian. The ideological and political moment in this case seems to be the most important,” writes historian Mikhail Braichevsky. And indeed, in significant written sources of Byzantium we find information about the fall of Chersonese, the treaty of Vladimir Svyatoslavich with Emperor Vasily II, the marriage of the Kyiv prince with Princess Anna, the participation of the Russian expeditionary force in the internecine struggle for the throne of Constantinople, but there is not a word about baptism.

How can we explain the absence of reports in foreign chronicles about the baptism of Rus' under Vladimir? Maybe because Christianity came to Rus' at a different time or our state was baptized more than once?

Controversy

At the end of the 16th century, some of the hierarchs of the Western Russian Metropolis decided to strengthen their positions through connections with Rome, which led in 1596 to the crossing of the Western and Eastern branches of Christianity - Uniatism. The event caused a conflict among Western Russian society and forced a rethink not only of the dogmatic differences between Orthodoxy and Catholicism, but also of the entire history of the relationship between the two Churches.

One of the main topics discussed by polemicists was the emergence of Christianity in the Old Russian state. As the most important event in Russian history, it fundamentally influenced the nature of national and religious identity. Among the many questions raised were the following: the source of baptism (Constantinople or Rome); the history of the baptism itself (by whom and when?); whether baptism was performed during the schism or unity of Western and Eastern Churches; under which patriarch and pope was it carried out?

One of the main sources of the ideas of Russian Uniateism - the writings of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth theologian Peter Skarga - stated that Rus' received baptism from the Patriarch, obedient to Rome, and this happened in the 9th century, that is, long before the baptism of Vladimir, when the Church was united. In other words, Skarga pointed out that Rus' baptized Rome, and the subordination of the Russian Orthodox Church to the Roman Metropolis, in his opinion, was confirmed by documents - the signature of Metropolitan Isidore of All Rus' under the Union of Florence in 1439.

Baptism

Another Uniate, Archbishop of Smolensk Lev Krevza, expressed the idea of ​​a triple baptism of Rus'. The first, in his opinion, happened in the 9th century under the Byzantine Patriarch Ignatius, the second - in the same century during the missionary activity of Cyril and Methodius, and the third - generally accepted - under Vladimir.

The concept of the dual baptism of Rus' was proposed by the spiritual writer Archbishop of Polotsk Meletiy Smotritsky. One baptism (mentioned by Krevza) took place in 872 under Patriarch Ignatius, supposedly obedient to Pope Nicholas I, and was associated only with Galician Russia. Smotritsky attributed the adoption of Christianity by Kievan Rus under Vladimir not to 988, but to 980. At the same time, he argued that Patriarch Nicholas Chrysoverg, who blessed the baptism of Rus', was in alliance with Rome.

In the "Palinode" of the Archimandrite Kiev-Pechersk Lavra For Zechariah Kopystensky, only one baptism was discussed, which, however, was preceded by three “assurances.” Kopystensky connects the first – “the Rossov’s assurance” with the traditional legend about the journey of the Apostle Andrew through Russian lands.

But the Orthodox bishop Sylvester Kossov went the furthest, who in the 1630s put forward a hypothesis about the fivefold baptism of Rus': the first - from the Apostle Andrew, the second - in 883 under Patriarch Photius from Cyril and Methodius, the third - the mission of a bishop who performed a miracle with the Gospel in 886 (also under Photius), the fourth - under Princess Olga in 958 and the fifth - under Vladimir. All baptisms, according to Kossov, occurred od graekуw (from the Greeks).

The Western Russian theologian Lavrenty Zizaniy, in the Large Catechism, created in the early 1620s, essentially explains why the question of several baptisms of Rus' is raised. He writes that “the Russian people are not baptized at once, but four times,” since as a result of the first three baptisms, “a small part of the people are baptized.”

Modern researchers attach serious importance to the hypothesis of the baptism of Rus' from the Kyiv princes Askold and Dir. From the point of view of a well-known specialist in Slavic culture, historian and archaeologist Boris Rybakov, mainly representatives of the ancient Russian social elite became Christians in the middle of the 9th century. However, the scientist considers this event against a national background, as having direct significance for further development Rus'.

“The editor of The Tale of Bygone Years,” writes Rybakov, “for some reason hid this event from us and attributed the baptism of Rus' to Prince Vladimir Svyatoslavich. At the same time, the chronicle story turned out to be in conflict with the text of the treaty of 944 included in the chronicle, which directly speaks of Christian Rus' and the Church of St. Ilya in Kyiv."

But if the Uniates of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, “tying” their Church to Rome, tried to prove their supremacy and the secondary status of Moscow, then the Ukrainian Uniates acted more cunningly. They abandoned the unambiguous slogan “Rus baptized Rome” and intended to build a more complex scheme connecting the Greek Catholic Church with both Rome and Constantinople.

The Russian Orthodox Church put an end to this research: “Rus' accepted baptism according to the Greek model in 988 from the Holy Equal-to-the-Apostles Prince Vladimir.” Otherwise it can not be.

In order to understand what Rus' was like before the adoption of Christianity, and what were the reasons and consequences of the adoption of Orthodoxy in Rus', we need to turn to the works of some domestic historians, such as S.F. Platonov, N.M. Karamzin, S.I. Soloviev, as well as some modern historians who sometimes held different points of view on this issue.

Undoubtedly, the adoption of Orthodoxy for Rus' determined its entire subsequent history, the development of statehood, original culture, features of the national character of the Russian people.

The lands and peoples united under the name of Rus' learned Christianity long before 988, when it was adopted by the Grand Duke of Kiev Vladimir Svyatoslavovich (980-1015). There is evidence that one of the Russian princes and his soldiers was baptized back in the 9th century. There is also an assumption according to which it was the Rus, who were under the rule of the Khazars, who were baptized by the Slavic enlighteners Cyril and Methodius during their trip to Khazaria in 858. The road to Christianity to the very heart of the Kyiv reign was paved by Princess Olga, the widow of Prince Igor. Around 955 she was baptized in Constantinople. From there the princess brought Greek priests to Rus'. However, her son Svyatoslav did not see the need for Christianity and honored the old gods. The merit of establishing Orthodoxy in Rus' belongs to Prince Vladimir, the son of Svyatoslav.

For example, what does N.M. write? Karamzin about the adoption of Orthodoxy and the reasons for its adoption in Rus': “Soon the signs of the Christian faith, accepted by the sovereign (Vladimir), his children, nobles and people, appeared on the ruins of dark paganism in Russia, and the altars of the true God took the place of idolatry. Grand Duke built in Kyiv wooden church St. Vasily, in the place where Perun stood, and called skilled architects from Constantinople to build a stone temple in the name of the Mother of God, where the pious Varangian and his son suffered in 983. Meanwhile, zealous altar servers, priests, preached Christ in various areas of the state. Many people were baptized, reasoning, no doubt, in the same way as the citizens of Kyiv; others, attached to the ancient law, rejected the new one: for paganism dominated in some countries of Russia until the 12th century. Vladimir did not want to force his conscience, it seems; but he took the best, most reliable measures to exterminate pagan errors: HE TRIED TO ENLIGHTEN THE RUSSIANS. To establish faith on the knowledge of divine books, back in the 9th century. translated into Slavic by Cyril and Methodius and, no doubt, already known to Kyiv Christians for a long time, the Grand Duke started schools for youths, which were the first foundation of public education in Russia. This good deed seemed terrible news at the time, and famous wives, whose children were unwillingly taken to study, mourned them as if they were dead, because they considered literacy a dangerous sorcery.”

From this excerpt from the “History of the Russian State” we see that Karamzin focuses our attention on the insufficient enlightenment of Rus' before the adoption of Orthodoxy. In his opinion, this is the main reason for accepting Christianity. He does not consider political and economic reasons, or considers them, but considers them less important. This is understandable, because N.M. Karamzin presents us with the development of history as the efforts of individuals, heads of state with their strong state power (autocracy). D.I. shares the same point of view on this issue. Ilovaisky in his “Essays on Russian History” and many other historians, admirers and followers of Karamzin, who connected the adoption of Christianity with historical legends (the so-called “Test of Faith”).

Yes, undoubtedly, Christianity brought enlightenment to Rus' in the form of literacy and a higher level of distribution of writing in state structures and among local authorities, but such a state as Ancient Rus', which subjugated almost the entire Russian Plain under Vladimir’s predecessors, albeit within conditional borders , before this event it could not have existed only on force, especially since it was already multinational in those days. For correct management state economy(taxation, trade) literate people were required, writing and literacy were required and they existed, albeit to a small extent, on top level states. This is where the maximum strengthening of the role of the state and its shaky unity was required. And Christianity, as the main and universal unifying force in those days, helped this process. But it is impossible to assert that Rus' before the adoption of Christianity by Vladimir was a completely barbaric and dark country.

Well-known specialist in Russian chronicles A.A. Shakhmatov generally believed that the baptism of Rus' occurred even before the reign of Vladimir. After all, even before him, the Church Slavonic language and Bulgarian writing appeared here, which was reflected in treaties with the Greeks. Divine services in the Church of St. Elias were also performed in the Bulgarian language by clergy from Bulgaria. Rus' already knew Christianity through preachers Christian teaching, both from Byzantium, Bulgaria, and from Rome. There was no sharp division of Churches at that time.

S.F. Platonov pointed more to the economic reasons for the adoption of Christianity.

Most historians emphasize the violent nature of the baptism of Rus'. Many people who did not want to be baptized fled into the forests and killed both the priests and their own relatives who accepted the new religion. However, it would be a mistake to reduce the entire process of Christianization to state violence. The introduction of Christianity in Rus' was fundamentally different from the forced baptism of the pagans of the New World by the Spaniards or the Baltic states by the crusaders. The spread of a new religion in Rus' was not a persistent implantation of a foreign culture from outside; it was a natural and natural process. But it is worth remembering that the old and outdated - in this case paganism - always stubbornly resists the new. According to some scientists, the baptism of Rus' by Prince Vladimir was the completion of a major real reform in the spiritual sphere, comparable in its political consequences And overall value for Russian history with the transformations of Peter the Great. Firstly, Vladimir firmly established himself, unlike his predecessors, in Kyiv and made it the cultural, spiritual and political capital of the state. Secondly, the prince sought to politically unite all allied Slavic tribes with the help of a religion common to all. It is characteristic that the foundations of the new faith were established in Rus' in about 100 years. It took Norway and Sweden 150 and 250 years, respectively, although they adopted Christianity at the same time.

The state reform of Vladimir awakened the enormous spiritual potential of the people and gave impetus to the rapid development of the country. Along with Christianity, writing and book education in the Slavic language, accessible to all, came to Rus'. In Western Europe, at the same time, divine services and readings in Latin were established, which were owned by a very small part of society. With the adoption of the new faith, the civil and family life, new ones have appeared moral concepts and rules of behavior in society. The Church and its ministers sought to strengthen the political authority of the princes and give their power a sacred “sacred” character. This also contributed to the unification of the country and its further development.

Most historians are of the opinion that baptism played a positive role in state development Rus'. However, there are other, unconventional opinions expressed, in particular, by the historian I. Froyanov, whose views have always been distinguished by originality and even paradoxicality. He believes that Vladimir introduced Christianity in order to preserve the already collapsing East Slavic tribal union and maintain the dominant position of the strong Polyan tribe, primarily the Kyiv elite. This reform of Vladimir, according to Froyanov, cannot be called progressive, since it was introduced to preserve the old tribal orders. Meanwhile, paganism has not lost its Ancient Rus' his social and political perspective, and Froyanov considers the worldview of ancient Russian Christians to be largely pagan. Rus' became Christian only formally. The creation of an Orthodox state was still far away. Froyanov’s views are to a certain extent consonant with the latest conclusions of Russian specialists in the history of languages ​​and culture, pointing to a peculiar fusion and displacement of pagan and Christian ideas in the worldview of the ancient Russian population. However, this view is not generally accepted.

A group of historians led by A.T. holds radical views on this issue. Fomenko, who claims that Rus' has not lost anything, but has not gained anything from the adoption of a new religion. But that's another question.

The predominance of Christianity did not mean the complete disappearance of paganism. They sometimes write about the “dual faith” of ancient Russian society. Elements of paganism persisted in Rus' for many centuries, even leading to open speeches by pagan priests - the “magi”. But turning back to paganism became impossible.

The main objective reasons for accepting Christianity

So, why was Rus' baptized?

Today, modern historians name three main reasons for this:

• 1. Strengthening the role of the state, its elevation above the people, which came into irreconcilable contradiction with the communal pagan ideas of the ancient Slavs.
• 2. Incompatibility of the established state unity of heterogeneous pagan cults of individual East Slavic tribes, as well as non-Slavic peoples. This contradiction had to be overcome: a single state had to correspond to a single religious cult.
• 3. Pagan Rus' could not enter, as a full member, into any international unions and was doomed to political isolation, primarily in Europe, where they did not want to enter into dynastic marriages, or trade with pagans. Economic issues of the life of the state, issues of further development and preservation of Rus' as a united and powerful state capable of defending itself have already been touched upon here.

Talking about Baptism of Rus', the main event ancient history of our Fatherland, it should first be noted that this should not be understood as exactly the Baptism or Enlightenment that takes place on an individual upon his entry into the Church. This identification of the Baptism of Rus' leads to rather erroneous ideas about this historical event. Strictly speaking, the Baptism of Rus' was, first of all, an act of affirmation of Christianity, its victory over paganism in the political sense (since we are talking specifically about the state, and not an individual). From that time on, the Christian Church in the Kiev-Russian state became not just a public, but also a state institution. IN general outline The Baptism of Rus' was nothing more than an institution local Church, governed by the episcopate at local sees, which was implemented in 988 . (possibly 2-3 years later) on the initiative of Grand Duke Vladimir (+1015).

However, our story would be inconsistent if we did not first present the conditions in which Christianity penetrated and established itself in our country and what kind of religious world, namely paganism, Christian preaching had to face in Rus'.

So, the pagan cult of the ancient Slavs was essentially nothing strictly regulated. They worshiped the elements of visible nature, first of all: God willing(the deity of the sun, the giver of light, heat, fire and all sorts of benefits; the luminary itself was called Khorsom) And Veles (Hair) — to the bestial god(patron of flocks). Another important deity was Perun- the god of thunder, thunder and deadly lightning, borrowed from the Baltic cult (Lithuanian Perkūnas). The wind was personified Stri-god. The sky in which Dazhd-God resided was called Svarog and was considered the father of the sun; Why, God willing, was the middle name adopted? Svarozhich. The deity of the earth was also revered - Mother earth of cheese, some kind of female deity — Mokosh, as well as givers of family benefits - Genus And Woman in labor.

Nevertheless, the images of the gods did not receive the clarity and certainty among the Slavs as, for example, in Greek mythology. There were no temples, no special class of priests, no religious buildings of any kind. Somewhere on open places vulgar images of deities were placed - wooden idols and stone women. Sacrifices were made to them, sometimes even human ones, and this was the limit of the cult side of idolatry.

The disorder of the pagan cult testified to its living practice among the pre-Christian Slavs. It was not even a cult, but a naturalistic way of seeing the world and worldview. It was precisely in those areas of consciousness and worldview in which early Russian Christianity did not offer any alternative that pagan ideas persisted until modern times. Only in the second half of the 19th century. with the development of the zemstvo education system, these stable ideological forms were offered a different, more Christianized (as if school) form of ethnic and naturalistic consciousness.

Already in the ancient period, these persistent ideological categories were adapted by Christianity, as if transformed into Christian symbols, sometimes acquiring completely Christian symbolic content. As a result, for example, the name Khor(o)sa, symbolizing the sun as a kind of fiery circle ( good, colo) in the sky they began to call the round chandelier, emitting light in the church, located, by the way, under the dome, which also symbolizes the firmament in temple symbolism. Similar examples could be multiplied, which, however, is not the purpose of this essay; it is only important to ultimately give this phenomenon an adequate explanation.

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

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

The cult of ancestors was developed even more than the cult of visible nature among the Eastern Slavs. The long-dead head of the clan was idolized and considered the patron of his offspring. His name was originally from or squinting (ancestor). Vegetable sacrifices were also offered to him. Such a cult order originated and existed in the conditions of the tribal life of the ancient Slavs. When, in later times of pre-Christian history, clan ties began to disintegrate, and families became isolated in separate households, a privileged place sort of family ancestor stepped in - brownie, patron of the court, invisibly managing his household. Ancient Slav believed that the souls of the dead continue to wander the earth, inhabiting fields, forests, waters ( goblin, mermaids, mermaids) - all nature seemed to him endowed with some kind of soul. He sought to communicate with her, to participate in her changes, accompanying these changes with holidays and rituals. This is how a year-long circle of pagan holidays was created, associated with the veneration of nature and the cult of ancestors. Observing the correct change of winter and summer, the Slavs celebrated the days of the autumn and spring equinoxes with holidays carols(or autumn), welcomed spring ( Red hill), saw off the summer ( bathed) etc. At the same time, there were holidays about the dead - funeral feasts(table wake).

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

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

It would also be a mistake to imagine that the Baptism of Rus' “brought” Christianity to Rus'. Let us remember that this was only a political affirmation of the Christian faith and the Church in the lands lying along the famous caravan route “from the Varangians to the Greeks,” where Christianity could not but be known, if only due to the active socio-cultural exchange associated with international trade and labor market (chief education, military). What was pre-Vladimir Christianity and what were the sources of its penetration?

First of all, we should remember that for many years a Christian princess ruled on the Kiev table - St. Olga (945-969); if you still doubt the Christianity of Prince Askold (...-882). Already in the text of the agreement with Byzantium in 944 it is mentioned cathedral church St. prophet Elijah, and also, according to the chronicler, mnozi besha(were) Varangian Christians (The Tale of Bygone Years; hereinafter referred to as PVL). And if blessed Olga did not have time to attract her only son Svyatoslav to the faith, because... at the time of her adoption of Christianity (944) he was already quite an adult man, moreover, absorbed in a passion for military exploits, it is possible that she succeeded in relation to her grandchildren - Yaropolk and Vladimir, especially since the eldest Of these, Yaropolk was in her care until he was 13 years old, and Vladimir was still several years younger.

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

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

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

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

As a result, in Kyiv, along with traditional Slavic idols, the “Varangian” prince began to introduce the cult of the god of war and the thunderer Perun. This Baltic Mars, as it turned out, required, in addition to the usual worship, also human sacrifices. In 983, after a successfully carried out campaign against the Yatvingians (a Lithuanian tribe living in the region of modern Grodno), Vladimir decided to make thanksgiving sacrifices to the gods, to which the elders and boyars decided to cast lots for a boy and a maiden, and whoever the lot fell on would sacrifice. The youth's lot fell on the son of a Varangian, former Christian. He, of course, did not give up his son and locked himself in his house. Then the crowd came and tore them both to pieces - and the Russian land is defiled with blood, as the oldest chronicle (PVL) reports. The sources of that time did not preserve the names of our first martyrs and the places of their burial: and no one knows where you put them, but later saints call them - Theodore And John the Varangians(memory is honored on July 12).

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

It is difficult to say definitely what convinced Vladimir to give up his violent temper and accept Christ's faith. During the first years of his reign, he was not really distinguished by his good behavior; at least, the chronicle described him as a rather depraved young man. It should, however, be borne in mind that the chronicler deliberately described Vladimir before his conversion in especially gloomy tones in order to more clearly present the greatness of his moral transformation after Baptism. Be that as it may, as this often happens, by the age of 30 a man, especially having gone through a difficult military school, sometimes, looking back at his life, he sees in it not quite what it appeared to him before... Perhaps our enlightener had to experience something similar.

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

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

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

So, the chronicle begins the description of the Baptism of Vladimir with the plot of the “test of faith” by the grand ducal ambassadors in different countries, namely, observing where who serves God in what way. For us today this would seem very outlandish, for it is difficult to imagine knowing another faith by contemplating the external ceremonial of its services, not to mention being convinced of its truth. Moreover, was there any point in going overseas for Orthodoxy when in Kyiv itself there was a local rather large Christian community whose main temple (probably not the only one) was the Cathedral Church of St. Prophet Elijah on Podol, known since the time of Prince. Igor. Nevertheless, the chronicle legend forces Vladimir, a man, it must be said, of remarkable statesmanship, to be convinced by such a “test of faith” and on this basis to accept Baptism. At the same time, Vladimir gets to be baptized only after making a victorious raid on Korsun (Chersonese) in Taurida.

Such a legend, at odds with other sources, has long aroused distrust among historians, although no one, of course, accused the chronicler of making it up, since the event and the story are separated by a huge time period for that era. According to one of the most authoritative pre-revolutionary historians S.F. Platonov, in the chronicles of the early 12th century. Three different time, but completely reliable legends turned out to be united:

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

b) that Vladimir was struck by physical blindness, but after Baptism he miraculously regained his sight with both spiritual and physical eyes;

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

Let's start in order. As already mentioned, in 979 to the book. Yaropolk was sent a return embassy from the Pope, of course, with a proposal for the Baptism of Rus', but it found Vladimir, not Yaropolk, on the throne. It is possible that it was then that Vladimir’s answer to the Latin missionaries sounded, recorded in the chronicle: go back, for our fathers did not accept this(PVL) . This rhetorical passage of the chronicle, oddly enough, also has its own historical reason. As is known, in 962 the mission of the Latin bishop Adalbert, sent to Rus', failed due to the refusal of the prince. Olga to accept spiritual citizenship of the Pope. Words our fathers, thrown by Vladimir, in this case do not contradict the fact that we are most likely talking about the prince’s grandmother. Vladimir to Olga, for in the Old Russian language fathers parents were called in general (for example: Godfathers Joachim and Anna).

As for other missionaries, earlier sources are silent about them, as well as about the corresponding embassies for a kind of “test of faith” by Vladimir, which definitely should not have escaped the attention of at least the Byzantine diplomats, if they had really such an embassy was sent. However, it is not surprising that Vladimir, the monarch of the largest European power, was tried to be lured into his faith by both the Mohammedans and the Khazars, who were completely defeated by his father, who were actually left without a state at that time, and, even more so, by representatives of the Vatican. Several embassies of Vladimir to different countries are known, but for purely diplomatic purposes, and not for the sake of studying liturgical rites.

Special attention In connection with the legend of Vladimir's blindness, news of the pirate attack of the Black Sea Varangians in the 830s deserves. to the Crimean city of Surozh (modern Sudak). Then the main city church, where the relics of the local saint, Bishop, rested, was plundered. Stefan Sourozhsky. However, in the midst of the “triumph” of vandalism, as the Life of St. Stefan, the leader of the attackers was suddenly struck by paralysis (his neck was twisted by a spasm, which had a very painful effect). The Varangians, in fear, had to not only return the loot and free the captives, but also give a rich ransom before their king was freed from punishment. After what happened, the leader and his entire retinue received St. Baptism. Could something similar, albeit in a milder form, happen to our enlightener, so that he would consciously believe and lead his people to the right faith? Life names Vladimir Russian Saul: the latter also, before becoming the Apostle Paul, in bodily blindness knew Christ and received his sight in order to preach the Gospel to the pagans (see. Acts, chapter 9).

Finally, the last chronicle legend is of greatest interest and importance for us, since it contains, perhaps, the most difficult question - about the time of the Baptism of Rus' and the prince himself. Vladimir. Thus, “The Tale of Bygone Years” dates Vladimir’s acceptance of baptism under 988 year , however, mixing this event with the Korsun campaign and as a result forcing the prince. Vladimir to be baptized in Korsun and it was for this purpose that the campaign itself was carried out. However, earlier sources, for example, “Memory and Praise to Vladimir” by Jacob Mnich (late 11th century) and Byzantine chronicles say that Vladimir took Korsun for the third summer according to his Baptism. In fact, the baptized prince had no need to go to Crimea for Baptism. Such nonsense occurs repeatedly in PVL. For example, the adoption of Christianity by Princess Olga, according to the chronicle, occurs in Constantinople from the patriarch and none other than the emperor as his successors. Apparently, the court chroniclers of the 12th century. it was difficult to imagine the victorious Kyiv princes of the 10th century receiving St. Baptism without unnecessary pomp from a simple priest and, judging by the ambiguity of the data, quite at home (if Prince Vladimir was not baptized at all in childhood during the time of his grandmother, Princess Olga-Elena). But what then does the Korsun campaign have to do with it?

Another important circumstance is woven into this. In the mid-980s. external threats and internal rebellions put the Byzantine Empire in an extremely difficult situation. On top of that, in 987, an uprising broke out under the commander Vardas Phokas, who declared himself basileus (king). At the end of 987 - beginning of 988, the co-ruler brothers Vasily II and Constantine VIII were forced to turn to the Prince of Kyiv for military support against the rebels. Vladimir agreed to send a fairly large army to Byzantium in exchange for the emperors’ promise to marry his sister, Princess Anna, to him. As a politician, Vladimir thought impeccably - to become related to the Byzantine dynasty would mean to practically equate the Russian princes, if not with the Roman basileus, then at least with the great European monarchs of that time and significantly strengthen the world authority of the Kyiv state.

Already in the summer of 988, with the help of the Russian legions, the tsars managed to defeat the rebels, and in April of the following 989, they finally suppressed the rebellion. However, having gotten rid of mortal danger, the tsars were in no hurry to fulfill their promise - Princess Anna seemed to have no intention of going to distant “barbarian” Rus'. Having waited the entire summer of 989, Vladimir realized that he had simply been deceived... But in this case, it was no longer a question of strengthening the world authority of the Kyiv state, but of justification for the literal diplomatic slap in the face. It was here that Vladimir was forced to move troops to the Byzantine colonies and force Constantinople to fulfill its obligation (remember how 12 years earlier, Vladimir, being humiliated by the refusal of the Polotsk prince Rogvold to marry his daughter Rogneda, went on a campaign to Polotsk, the consequence of which was capture of the city and murder of Rogvold and his sons).

So, in the fall of 989, Vladimir, as the chronicle reports, having collected many of the Varangians, Slovenians, Chudis, Krivichi and Black Bulgarians, besieged the most important trading post of Byzantium in the Northern Black Sea region, the city of Chersonesos. Taking advantage of the winter storms on the Black Sea and, accordingly, the inability to receive reinforcements by sea from Byzantium, Vladimir took the city under complete siege and by May 990 forced it to completely capitulate. Moreover, Vladimir promised to lead the army to the walls of Constantinople itself... In the end, the Byzantine sovereigns could not withstand the forceful pressure exerted against them, and soon Vladimir was married to Princess Anna in the same Chersonese, and as a “vena” (ransom) for The city returned the bride to the emperors, establishing a beautiful temple in it (and to this day its ruins testify to the beauty and splendor of the shrine). However, he still took the Korsun clergy with him to Kyiv to help with further Christianization.

In addition, in the retinue of Tsarevna Anna, the bishops appointed to the Russian departments in Constantinople arrived. This is how the Kiev Metropolis began, which in a formal sense was the beginning of the Russian Church. Prof. HER. Golubinsky is right in his way when he proposes that the year 990 be considered the date of the Baptism of Rus'. However, in reality, the book Vladimir undertook “baptism” as the establishment of Christianity as the state faith in Rus', in fact, immediately after his personal appeal, that is, already in 988: Vladimir himself, and his children, and his whole house were baptized with holy baptism. (« Memory and praise to Vladimir" Jacob Mnich), the courtiers, the squad, the townspeople (of course, those who still remained in paganism) were baptized.

A completely reasonable question may arise as to who could be entrusted with the education of yesterday’s pagans and the prince himself, because the Greek clergy did not know the Russian language, and was very few in number. This issue is resolved in the context of cultural and political contacts of Rus' throughout the 10th century. The most significant direction of these contacts was associated with the First Bulgarian Kingdom (680-1018), where the heirs of Tsar Boris-Simeon, the first Christian ruler of Bulgaria (†889), ruled. It was the Bulgarian missionaries who carried out an active catechetical program in Rus' throughout this time, thus weaving their powerful northeastern neighbor into the orbit of cultural influence of the Ohrid Archdiocese (Patriarchy). At least, we do not know of a Greek metropolitan earlier than Theopemtus, who arrived in 1037 at the Kyiv See actually from the Patriarch of Constantinople.

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

Before the Korsun campaign, catechesis was only of a private nature (as before Vladimir), and probably did not go much beyond the walls of the capital Kyiv. The Korsun victory brought official approval to the Russian Church, and only then, on July 31, 990, did the people of Kiev hear the prince’s almost ultimatum call: If someone does not appear in the morning on the river, whether rich, poor, or poor... let him be disgusted with me(PVL).

Thus, in the Epiphany of Vladimirov, the Russian Church was born, and not so much churches or a new political mentality, but the great beginning of everything that is now associated with ancient Russian culture and spirituality, and not only ancient - in the words of historian L.N. Gumilyov: “the victory of Orthodoxy gave Rus' its thousand-year history.”

To the 1000th anniversary death of the great Prince Equal to the Apostles Vladimir, we publish a fragment from a four-volume book on the history of Russia authored by the practicing scientist Evgeny Spitsyn. The book will be out of print soon.

The problem of the Baptism of Rus'.

As Professor A.G. Kuzmin, one of the most thoughtful researchers of this problem, rightly noted, the process of the Baptism of Rus' cannot be viewed in an unambiguous way, trying to find only one source of the penetration of Christianity into Rus'. This process was much more complex, which was reflected even in the “Tale of Bygone Years” (PVL), which was not a single chronicle written by one chronicler, but a synthesized set consisting of different and multi-period chronicle and extra-chronicle sources. Therefore, debates on a whole range of problems still continue in historical science:

a) The problem of dating the Baptism of Rus'. The chronicle story itself about the “test of faith” and the Baptism of Rus' was placed not only in the PVL, but also in other sources later included in its composition, in particular in the “Speech of a Philosopher”, which belonged either to the pen of an unknown Christian theologian, or to the pen of Cyril the philosopher, “In memory and praise of Prince Vladimir” by Jacob Mnich, “The Sermon on Law and Grace” by Metropolitan Hilarion, “Reading about Saints Boris and Gleb” by Deacon Nestor and others. In all these sources, the story about the Baptism of Rus' was placed between 6494–6496. from the creation of the world, when Prince Vladimir became one of the participants in the dramatic events that took place at that time in Byzantium. The essence of these events was as follows. At the request of the Byzantine emperors Vasily II the Bulgarian-Slayers and Constantine YII, the Kiev prince signed an alliance treaty with them, which provided that: a) Vladimir would provide Constantinople with a military contingent to suppress the rebellion of two Byzantine commanders Bardas Skleros and Bardas Phocas, who wanted to take the imperial throne, and b) the basileus brothers, having violated an unspoken commandment, will for the first time marry off their porphyry sister Anna as a “barbarian,” but only on the condition that the pagan prince Vladimir accepts holy baptism. The Kiev prince fulfilled his duty as an ally to the letter, but the basileus brothers were clearly in no hurry to fulfill their obligations. Then Vladimir went on a campaign to the Byzantine province closest to him in the Crimea, where, after a many-month siege, he captured its capital, the city of Chersonesus, which in Rus' was called Korsun. After these events, Anna arrived in Crimea, married the Kyiv prince, and then returned with him to Kyiv, where Vladimir overnight overthrew the pagan idols and baptized all Kiev residents in the “Dnieper font.”

If we proceed from the assumption that all the authors of these works conducted their chronology according to the Constantinople era and the September style, then it turns out that these events occurred between 986–988. However, if we assume that at least one of these authors professed the old Byzantine era and the March style, then it turns out that these events occurred in 989–992. It is for this reason that in historical science there are still completely different dating dates for the Baptism of Rus'. In particular, a number of historians (A. Kuzmin, Yu. Braichevsky, M. Sverdlov) insist on an earlier dating of this event, and their opponents (E. Shmurlo, O. Rapov, Yu. Begunov) - on a later one. Although, the Russian Orthodox Church itself considers the official date of the Baptism of Rus' to be 988, which is reflected in all educational literature.

There is also a fairly popular version in the scientific literature that Kievan Rus was baptized for the first time significantly ahead of events, specified in PVL. In particular, referring to the “District Epistle” of Patriarch Photius, a number of Ukrainian and Russian historians (Yu. Braichevsky, V. Kozhinov) date this significant act no later than 867. However, as their numerous opponents correctly noted, during this period the conversation could have taken place : 1) either about the baptism of only part of the social elite of Ancient Rus', headed by the Kyiv prince (B. Grekov, V. Mavrodin, M. Levchenko), 2) or about the baptism Azov-Black Sea Rusov (E. Golubinsky, A. Kuzmin, E. Galkina).

b) The problem of the internal content of the Baptism of Rus'. Much more significant is the question of whether what version of Christianity was taken as a basis during the Baptism of Rus', since in the Christian world itself, long before the schism christian church into Orthodox and Catholic, there were quite a lot various trends, which differed from each other ideologically, structurally, and organizationally.

In particular, at the end of the 10th century. in the single Christian church there were as many as six patriarchates - Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, Constantinople, Rome and Orchid (Bulgarian), not counting dozens of other, smaller Christian churches.

As a rule, the solution to this issue was directly connected with different chronicle versions of the baptism of Vladimir himself, either in Korsun, or in Vasilyev, or in Kyiv, or in “another place”, trying to find an unambiguous answer to this extremely confusing question. Thus, some historians (V. Vasilevsky, V. Potapov, M. Levchenko), being supporters of the traditional “Byzantine axiom,” argued that Ancient Rus' was initially baptized according to the Byzantine (orthodox) rite. Other authors (A. Shakhmatov, M. Priselkov, A. Presnyakov) believed that the baptism of Rus' took place according to the Bulgarian rite, others (E. Golubinsky, N. Korobka) argued that our ancestors were baptized according to the Roman rite by newcomer Scandinavians, and still others ( N. Nikolsky, N. Ilyin, Yu. Begunov) looked for the origins of Russian Christianity in the West Slavic (Moravian) church, the fifth (M. Tikhomirov) put forward an original hypothesis about the possible crossing of our ancestors from the Bulgarian to the Byzantine rite, and finally the sixth (V. Kozhinov ) were convinced that Christianity came to Rus' from neighboring Khazaria.

However, as Professor A.G. Kuzmin correctly noted, the solution to this problem lies on a completely different plane, since it is necessary to understand why the ancient Russian chroniclers have such a strange discord of opinions. And he proposed to look for the answer to this question in the fact that initially in Rus' there were different Christian communities that professed different Christian beliefs, at the center of which lay a long-standing Christological dispute about the symbol of faith (felioque), i.e., the relationship between the three hypostases of the Holy Trinity: God the father, God the son and God the holy spirit.

In particular, Professor A.G. Kuzmin himself focused his attention on the fact that the famous “Korsun Legend” contained in the PVL reflected the heretical Arian creed that God the Son is only similar to God the Father and God the Holy spirit, which completely contradicted the canonical Nicene creed that God the Son is one in essence with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit. Another famous historian Professor M. Yu. Braichevsky saw a similar heresy in the famous “Speech of the Philosopher,” also part of the PVL, which contained the teaching of the Bogomilians (Paulicians), who, in fact, denied the very dogma of the Holy Trinity and the divine-human essence of Jesus Christ, arguing that he was only human.

And since the “Tale of Bygone Years” was a collection of different and different chronicle and extra-chronicle sources, the authors of which were representatives of different Christian communities, including monasteries, it reflected different “creeds” and different cosmic eras, about which mentioned above. In connection with this circumstance, we fully share the well-founded opinion of Professor A.G. Kuzmin that:

1) Initially, a fairly strong position in Russian Christianity was occupied by the traditions of the non-canonical Arian, including the Irish Church, brought to Rus' from Great Moravia by local Christians, who back in the 930s. were forced to flee from German missionaries who aggressively implanted the canonical (Roman) doctrine there. Wherein organizational structure The Irish Church, in the form of separate and independent Christian communities led by elected elders, where there was no hierarchy of clergy traditional for all other churches, organically overlapped with the traditions of the Slavic neighboring community itself, built on the same principle of self-government and election.

2) As is known precisely in Great Moravia and the Crimea, where large communities of different Rus existed, in the 860s. Two great Slavic enlighteners carried out their missionary activities - the famous “Thessalonica brothers” Cyril and Methodius. It was there that, having become familiar with some “Russian writings,” they created two Slavic alphabet- “Glagolitic” and “Cyrillic”, in which the first handwritten books would be written, including the Arian Creed. It is no coincidence that in 1060, after the division of the Christian Church into Orthodox and Catholic, the then Pope Nicholas II. in his special bull addressed to the Church Council in Split, he called one of the “Thessalonica brothers” - Methodius - a heretic.

3) It was from Korsun, which was always in religious opposition to its distant metropolis, that Vladimir took to Rus' the entire local church clergy, led by the “priest” Anastas, church utensils, icons and books, as well as the relics of St. Clement. It is to the cult of this saint and the cult of the Mother of God, and not the cult of St. Sophia, widespread in Byzantium itself, that the famous Church of the Tithes will be erected in Kyiv, the rector of which Anastas Korsunyanin will be the unofficial head of the entire Russian Christian church until the death of Vladimir and the death of Svyatopolk, after which he will leave to Poland, where Arian communities still exist.

4) Byzantine Christian orthodoxy will penetrate Rus' only under Yaroslav the Wise, under whom a separate Russian metropolitanate will be created within the framework of the Patriarchate of Constantinople and the first Russian metropolitan, the Greek Theopemtus, will be sent to Kyiv, and in Kyiv itself, Novgorod and Polotsk in honor of the Byzantine cult of Hagia Sophia pompous St. Sophia Cathedrals will be erected. At the same time, the Greek metropolitan will perform a rather strange rite of new consecration Tithe Church. At the same time, attempts by a number of modern authors (A. Poppe, Y. Schapov, A. Karpov) to find the first Russian metropolitans sent from the Patriarchate of Constantinople before 1037-1039. , do not seem convincing to us, especially since a number of supporters of this hypothesis (A. Karpov) themselves admit that “under Prince Vladimir, the role of metropolitans and other church hierarchs was extremely insignificant.”

5) Even after the establishment of Byzantine orthodoxy, throughout the entire period of the existence of Ancient Rus', representatives of different Christian communities coexisted in the grand ducal family itself, as eloquently evidenced by the following indicative fact: Vladimir Svyatoslavich (1015), Izyaslav Yaroslavich (1078) and Rostislav Mstislavich ( 1093), and in St. Sophia Cathedral- Yaroslav the Wise (1054), Vsevolod Yaroslavich (1093) and Vladimir Monomakh (1125). At the same time, Grand Duke Vladimir the Holy, unlike his murdered sons Boris and Gleb, will be canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church only after Mongol invasion, and not as a saint of Rus', but in the general cohort of other Russian princes, as a defender of the Russian land.

The process of the Baptism of Rus' itself took several decades and was sometimes accompanied by a lot of blood, as, for example, in Novgorod (990) and Suzdal (1024). But it was Ancient Rus' that became the main custodian of the Cyril and Methodius tradition, based on the principles of communal self-government and dual faith, which would then become the basis of all Russian Orthodoxy, which organically combined both the dogmas of Christian doctrine and ancient traditions Slavic-Russian paganism. It is no coincidence that many insightful researchers (N. Nikolsky, A. Kuzmin) emphasized the particularly bright and optimistic character of Old Russian Christianity, which knew neither extremes of religious asceticism and mysticism, nor a militant attitude towards those of other faiths. In addition, Russian Orthodoxy never knew military knightly orders, “with the sword and cross” converting pagans into true faith, and the first inquisitorial fires, with which Rome warmed up the entire Catholic Europe for centuries, will appear in Rus' only at the turn of the XY-XYI centuries, and not without the influence of the same Rome, whose prelates accompanied Zoya-Sophia Palaeologus as a wife to the widowed Grand Duke of Moscow Ivan III .

As for the Khazar version of the Baptism of Rus, which modern “Eurasians” actively insist on (V. Kozhinov), it is based on an obvious misunderstanding that arose as a result of their uncritical reading of the translation of the ancient Russian text of the PVL that was made D. S. Likhachev in 1950 and which was considered a classic for many years.

However, as Professor A.G. Kuzmin, who made his own translation of PVL in 1993, established, academician D. S. Likhachev famously made a banal fake . It was then, at sunset Stalin era, the future venerable academician, later depicted on television in the image of a handsome old man-intellectual, made a very small but fundamental edit to the text of the PVL, which dealt with the oath of the Russian squad (pagans and Christians) of allegiance to the Russian-Byzantine treaty concluded by Prince Igor in 944. In the original text of the PVL it was written like this: “and led the Christian Rus' to the company in the Church of St. Elijah, which is above the Ruchaem, the end of the Pasynche conversation, and Kozare: behold, the team of the church, many of the Varangians are Christians.” In the “classical” translation of the venerable academician-intellectual, this text of the PVL began to look like this: “and Russian Christians were sworn in in the Church of St. Elijah, which is above the Brook at the end of the Pasyncha conversation, where there was a cathedral church, since there were many Christians - Varangians and Khazars." Comments, as they say, are unnecessary.

However, it can be assumed that during his sleepless scientific vigils, Dmitry Sergeevich apparently remembered the distant times of his Masonic youth at the Space Academy of Sciences, for which, in fact, he thundered to Solovki. By the way, this is precisely why during the years of “Gorbachev’s perestroika” and “Yeltsin’s hard times”, when the fight against bloody Stalinism and red-brown fascism, and, in fact, with the historical memory of the people, will become the “guiding star” of Russophobes of all ranks and stripes, his exaggerated the authority of the “true Russian scientist and intellectual” will be raised to stratospheric heights, although in the eyes of many real scientists he will become a shameful symbol of unprincipled servility.

And one last thing. In Soviet historical science, where the dogmatic perception and interpretation of Marxism was almost the norm, the Baptism of Rus' was always justified exclusively from class positions, arguing that the emergence of feudalism in Ancient Rus' forced the ruling class to accept a new, class religion, which sanctified its domination over the entire dependent population of ancient Russian villages , churchyards and cities. However, even at the end of Soviet power, one of the most insightful medievalist historians, Professor O. M. Rapov, reasonably noted that in the slave-holding system of the most ancient state civilizations, the ruling class made do with a pagan cult, which means that this “classical” position of Soviet historiography is completely lost makes every sense and does not stand up to criticism.

I will try to give a short and slightly simplified explanation of the understanding modern researchers the history of the introduction of Rus' into the family of Christian nations, considered as one of the episodes in Russian-Byzantine relations. This is how the story is generally told.

In September 987, the rebel commander of the eastern Byzantine army, Bardas Phocas, declared himself emperor. The usurper, moving towards Constantinople, was recognized by all of Asia Minor. The legitimate Emperor Vasily II was threatened with disaster, and he turned to the Russian Prince Vladimir for help, sending an embassy to him, which arrived in Kyiv in the winter of 987/88. Since Vladimir had previously shown interest in Christianity, Vasily’s ambassadors were ready to discuss church and state affairs with him. The agreement reached between them provided Vasily with military support, in turn, Vladimir received the hand of the emperor’s sister Anna, but on the condition that he and his people convert to Christianity.

In the spring or summer of 988, a six-thousand-strong army of Rus arrived in Constantinople. At the Battle of Chrysopolis, as well as at the Battle of Abydos on April 13, 989, she decided the outcome of the matter, and the throne of Basil was saved. Russian soldiers remained in the service of Byzantium, and Vladimir and the inhabitants of Kyiv were very soon baptized. However, after the victory at Abydos, the emperor was in no hurry to fulfill his obligations to Vladimir. The established tradition prohibited offspring imperial family marry barbarians, and the purple-born bride did not want to go to Kyiv.

Outraged by this Greek duplicity, Vladimir decided to achieve his goal by using military force. He struck the Byzantine possessions in the Crimea and captured Chersonesus (Korsun) sometime between April and July 989.

Having lost Chersonese, forced to take measures to suppress the outbreak of a rebellion led by Varda Sklir, constantly disturbed by the hostile actions of the Bulgarians, Emperor Vasily decided to sacrifice his sister for political gain. Anna went to Chersonesus, where her marriage to Vladimir took place. The city was returned to the emperor as a weno (bride price). Vladimir and his purple-born wife departed for Kyiv, accompanied by a group of clergy to establish the Russian Church.

I have presented a general view shared by most historians. However, there are a number of differences in their opinions that are worth mentioning.

Some scholars believe that one of the conditions of the agreement between the emperor and Vladimir was the latter's demand that the church established in Kyiv have a special status. Distrust of the emperor only confirmed Vladimir's desire for the newly established Russian church to be independent of the Patriarch of Constantinople. Many assumptions about the initial organization of the Old Russian church have their source precisely in this thesis.

Others, trying to somehow reconcile the conflicting data about the place and time of Vladimir’s baptism, suggest that his adoption of Christianity took place in two stages: the first - preparatory (announcement, prima sigtiaiio) - took place during the stay of the Byzantine embassy in Kyiv and the second - the sacrament itself baptism - in Chersonesos after the capture of the city by Vladimir. This interpretation was dictated by a reluctance to ignore one of the contradictions in the existing evidence.

A number of scientists noted that the capture of Chersonesos was mainly associated with the opening of the Dnieper exit to the Black Sea for Rus'. Taken to its extreme, this hypothesis suggests that main reason The devastation of Chersonesos was the subjugation of the political and economic importance of this city as a Byzantine stronghold on the Black Sea coast and, thus, strengthening the position of Tmutarakan - the Russian outpost at the exit from Azov to the Black Sea.

Other scholars have expressed doubts about the date of the capture of Chersonesus by Vladimir before July 27, 989. The weakness of their point of view is associated with the use of unreliable and contradictory chronology of events available in ancient Russian sources, as well as with the assumption that the emperor would not have made peace with Varda Skler in October 989 if he had been at enmity with Vladimir, as a result of which he could not count for support from the Russians. The strength of their argument lies in the assumption that the enmity between the emperor and Vladimir due to Vasily’s reluctance to give Anna in marriage could only begin after the Battle of Abydos (April 13, 989), from which they conclude that the siege of Chersonesus began in July 989 , and the fall of the city occurred after October 989, most likely in early 990. Other researchers, taking into account that Chersonesos was taken before July 27, 989, suggest that Vladimir personally commanded the Russian army in the Battle of Abydos on April 13 of this year. They further believe that Vladimir, deceived by the promise to give him the purple-born bride, took Chersonesos on his way back home. As attractive as this hypothesis may be, it nevertheless overlooks the fact that Russian army remained in Byzantium.

A number of historians accept as a proven fact the visit of papal ambassadors to Vladimir in Chersonesus after its capture. But this embassy was an invention of the Moscow chronicler of the 16th century *, who, emphasizing that Vladimir’s decision to accept baptism according to the Greek rite was voluntary, let down historical basis under the proclamation of Moscow as the Third Rome.

* (Patriarchal, or Nikon Chronicle // PSRL, IX. St. Petersburg, 1862. Stb. 57, etc. This extensive historiographical compilation, compiled in the first half of the sixteenth century and containing many changes to the original text of the Tale of Bygone Years, is regarded by a number of modern historians as the main source, despite the fact that its author, an official historiographer, wrote his own text in the spirit of the ideological and political demands of Moscow rulers. It is worth mentioning here the remark of M. N. Tikhomirov that the reign of Ivan III can explain the special interest in Rome and the Roman Church in the old part of the Nikon Chronicle. See: Zimin A. A. Russian chronicles and chronography of the end of the XV-XVI centuries. Moscow, 1960. P. 20-21; Kuzmin A. G. On the question of the time of creation and edition of the Nikon Chronicle / Arch. hedgehog. 1962 (1963). P. 114.)

Some researchers, trying to establish the reason for Vladimir’s campaign against Chersonesus, put forward political and state considerations as such: Vladimir wanted to enter the community of Christian peoples and negotiate as an equal with the Byzantine emperor, but was too proud to ask Byzantium for the baptism of Rus'. At the same time, wanting to become related to the imperial house, Vladimir had in mind the international prestige of his state. Others prefer to talk about Vladimir’s indomitable sensuality: he so easily agreed to accept Christianity and conquered Chersonesos only in order to get the princess “born in the purple,” that is, in the scarlet chamber of the imperial palace. There are also historians who believe that the independence of the Russian church from Byzantium was so important to Vladimir that he conquered Chersonese so that the Korsun priests would evangelize his country (with the Archbishop of Chersonesus as overseer of the newly established Russian church).

This short review shows that the Korsun issue remains key to understanding Russian-Byzantine relations during the adoption of Christianity in Rus'.