Archival activity during the folding period

On the future of the Russian people

Above, I presented a fairly clear evidence “by the contrary”, which allows us to talk about the need to abandon all three imposed ideologies. But it is one thing to admit it in words, and quite another to put it into practice. Alas, at present we are not ready to restore the Autocracy and return to our historical, God-ordained world role. And how much it will take to restore true Russian national identity is still known.

At the same time, on the political horizon, another transition to socialism is clearly outlined, but this time, to the national, and not to the international (communist). What will be the reason for this transition, and what are the signs that it is being deliberately prepared - the crown of the head for a separate consideration. Here I will simply state my vision of what awaits us after this transition.

A very simple scenario awaits us, similar to the one that was applied in Germany in the middle of the last century. We know perfectly well how it all ended, what was left of the German people as a result, and what level of independence the German state has had since then.

It is also important to understand that in any case there will be a transitional period and within its framework events may occur that were not planned by manipulators-political technologists.

In the conditions of the fragmentation of Russian lands, binders were preserved

the threads that served as the basis for the future association:

it is a common language, legal norms, the Orthodox faith,

as well as weak economic ties between individual principalities.

Finally, the political factor was extremely important.

The need to unite for the sake of liberation from foreign

From the first half of the XIV century. initiative and leading role in

unification of all Russian lands move to the Northeast. On the

second half of the 15th - early 16th centuries. have to complete

unification of lands around Moscow. The basis for the construction of a new

states laid down the despotic traditions of northeastern Russia.

The basis of the power of the Moscow prince was Moscow

the boyars, and his rights were completely dependent on the sovereign. For the great

prince of Moscow "and all Russia" recognized the right of free

will, he possessed the fullness of the legislative and

executive power.

Sovereign Treasury, which served as a nationwide administrative

body, is gradually becoming a de facto state

office, from which organs were later separated

branch management - orders.

The documents of the Grand Duke were kept in the Treasury.



Since the end of the 90s. 15th century documents are withdrawn from the state

Treasury and transferred to a separate state archive, history

whose activity falls mainly on the period of existence

Russian centralized state.

In the XVI century. there is a strengthening of the state, which was formed

in the form of a monarchy with a strong supreme power.

At the heart of the organization of public administration in the considered

period was the unity of the judicial and administrative

authorities. Until the middle of the XVI century. formed and operated two nationwide

departments: the White Palace and the Treasury.

The White Palace was in charge of the personal lands of the Grand Duke, headed

his courtier (or "butler"). The functions of the Palace included

and management of individual branches of the princely economy.

As new lands were annexed to manage them,

local "palaces", for example, the Kazan Palace (after

annexation of Kazan), etc.

The Treasury Court (Treasury) was in charge of financial matters, as well as

the state archive and the state seal.

Gradually, with the increase and complexity of the functions of the state

management, it became necessary to create special

institutions that led the military, foreign,

litigation and other matters. So, in the middle of the XVI century. arise

standing orders with their states,

internal structure and special office work.

Of the large number of orders created in different years,

several main groups can be distinguished, united in the direction

activities:

the first group - the military (Discharge, Local, Streltsy,

Pushkarsky, Armory);

the second group - palace orders, in charge of individual

branches of the grand ducal, and then (since 1547) royal

farms (Kazenny, Konyushenny, Huntsman, Falconer, Bed);

the third group - foreign relations with foreign powers

(Ambassadorial order);

fourth group - financial, fiscal orders to collect

taxes and taxes (Order of the Grand Parish);

fifth group - judicial and police orders (Rogue, Kholopy,

Zemsky);

the sixth group - court orders that were in charge of the court

in certain territories (Moscow, Vladimir,

Dmitrovsky, Kazansky).

The number of orders was constantly increasing, which was due

with the expansion and complication of the functions of the centralized

states.

Significant changes in the XVI century. happened in the organization

churches. In 1589, the patriarchate was established - the highest authority in

Orthodox Church.

Under the patriarch in the XVI century. a special "court" arose with its official

persons. Through this apparatus, the patriarch carried out the general

management of church affairs and property of the church.

Documentation preserved in the archives of churches and monasteries,

can be conditionally divided into two groups: religious and economic,

made up the majority.

At the beginning of the XVII century. as a result of the Polish-Lithuanian and Swedish

interventions, church archives were seriously damaged.

Therefore, to judge their former composition in our days can only be

surviving inventories and copy books (copies from the most

important documents). In addition, in the archives of churches and monasteries

documents of secular feudal lords were kept, confirming their rights

to own land, peasants and other property.

The system of local government at that time was complex. By

zemstvo reform 1555 -1556. court and tax collection were transferred

under the jurisdiction of "starosts" who were elected by townspeople (city

residents) and black-haired peasants (who were not

in serfdom, but belonged to the state).

The Sudebnik of 1550 entrusted the "local administration" (headmen,

sotsky, tenth) the obligation to keep "marked books",

in which the property status and duties were fixed

population (fees to the state treasury). In addition, on

places in counties divided into volosts, disputes often arose

situations related to property and land rights.

Thus, the life of the "province" was reflected

in the documents of local institutions. Unfortunately, before our

days, only small fragments of these documentary complexes have survived,

lost not only as a result of wars and natural

disasters, but also in no small part due to careless storage.

In connection with the growth of feudal landownership, the distribution of owned

the state (the “blacks”) and the royal palace (the “palace

≫) land in local and patrimonial possession of great importance

acquired the relevant documentation. So

in the estates of secular and spiritual feudal lords (especially monasteries),

as well as in public institutions, as central

(orders), and local (prikaz voivodship and sezny huts),

copies and notebooks of acts were compiled.

In the notebooks were registered acts establishing

forms of dependence of peasants on landowners (≪regular and

loan records≫), acts on debtors earning interest

from a loan in the economy of landowners (≪service bondage

The development of the feudal economy led to the complication

functions of patrimonial management, and consequently, to the complication

current paperwork in the feudal estate. Yes, they appear

income and expense books and other types of documents.

In the XVI-XVII centuries. in government institutions

business system. The clerk's office (office) consisted

from clerks and clerks who kept all the order documentation.

There was a "column" form of order clerical work,

developed and a special style of writing - cursive.

Columns were called ribbons of paper 15–17 cm wide and of various sizes.

lengths that had several gluings. On the front side

the main text was applied to the column, and the reverse side served

for applying various marks, in addition, the scribe after

completion of the case, he put "certificates", i.e. indicated his name, and the clerk

or the clerk, who "performed" the case, fastened the column with a "clip",

i.e., he put down the letters of his name and title on the places of gluing. Such

the system allowed to protect the document from forgery or loss

in case of column splitting.

In addition to the column, other forms were used in orders.

documents - notebooks (several sheets sewn into one spine),

charters (separate most important government

decrees or private transactions).

Gradually, in the work of orders, there was a division in storage

originals and copies of documents.

Initially, the archives in the orders were located in cramped, unsuitable

premises - "kazenkakh". However, after the strongest

fire in Moscow in 1626, which destroyed a large number of

wooden buildings, including those where

orders, a special stone building was built in the Kremlin

building, which housed the surviving archives of orders. Further

it was here that documents began to arrive for storage from

Moscow orders.

A characteristic feature of the work of the archives of this period was

the fact that documents that have lost their practical significance, as a rule,

were kept in the office along with the current office work,

those. document repositories have not yet become independent

structural divisions of institutions.

For the history of archival affairs of the Russian centralized state

of particular importance is the Royal (or state)

archive, which in the XVI century. occupied a central place among the repositories

written materials.

Duma clerks supervised the current affairs of the archive. Documentation

in the archive were stored in boxes, each of which contained

letters, books, notebooks, columns, and in some - archives of former

independent lands.

Conventionally, the archive could be divided into two groups of materials:

confiscated in the reunited lands (spiritual letters of the great

and specific princes) and arising in the course of activity

state institutions (documents on the history of internal

and foreign policy of the Russian centralized state).

Materials were deposited in the Tsar's archive starting from the 14th century, including

including documents of abolished institutions and the most important documentation

16th century At the end of the XVI century. most cases from the Tsar's archive

was transferred to the archives of the Posolsky Prikaz. At the beginning of the XVII century.

(during the Time of Troubles) documents that were previously part of the Royal Archives

suffered greatly as a result of the military intervention.

And the peasants. The use of methods of non-economic coercion, the combination of supreme power with land ownership is characteristic. From the point of view of Marxist theory, feudalism is a socio-economic formation that replaces the slaveholding and precedes the capitalist.

See also

Notes


Wikimedia Foundation. 2010 .

See what "Feudal Monarchy" is in other dictionaries:

    Feudal monarchy is a form of government in which the economy is dominated by agricultural production, subsistence farming dominates, there are two main social groups: feudal lords and peasants. The use of methods is characteristic ... ... Wikipedia

    The period of weakening of the central power in the feudal states due to the different duration and effect of decentralization, due to the strengthening of large feudal lords in the conditions of seignioral organization of labor and military service. New ... ... Wikipedia

    Peter I the Great, 1st Emperor of All Russia Forms of government, according to ... Wikipedia

    Medieval France France during the Middle Ages. This period in the history of France begins in 476. The end of this period in Russian historiography is usually dated to 1640 (the beginning of the English bourgeois revolution), which in France is almost ... ... Wikipedia

    Feudal fragmentation is a period of weakening of central power in feudal states due to decentralization, which is different in duration and effect, due to the strengthening of large feudal lords in the conditions of a senior system of organization ... ... Wikipedia

    MONARCHY- (from Greek monarchos = monos - one archos - ruler) - a form of government in which state power belongs to one person holding the position of monarch (for example, king, king, shah, emir, kaiser) in the order of succession to the throne. Distinguish… … Encyclopedic Dictionary of Psychology and Pedagogy

    Feudal reaction and counter-reformation in Europe- Background counter-reformation Despite the fact that feudalism in Europe in the XVI century. powerful blows were dealt, the forces of feudal reaction were still very significant, and the feudal system had not outlived itself. Therefore, after the first arguments suffered from the bourgeois ... The World History. Encyclopedia

    - (Eng. Anglo Norman Monarchy) or the early Norman period is the period in the history of England that began after the Norman Conquest in 1066. Usually the Anglo-Norman period is limited to the reign of the kings of the Norman dynasty ... ... Wikipedia

    Forms of government, political regimes and systems Anarchy Aristocracy Bureaucracy Gerontocracy Demarchy Democracy Imitation democracy Liberal democracy Will present ... Wikipedia

    Forms of government, political regimes and systems Anarchy Aristocracy Bureaucracy Gerontocracy Demarchy Democracy Imitation democracy Liberal democracy ... Wikipedia

Books

  • Feudal Monarchy in France and England in the 10th-13th Centuries, Ch. Petit-Dutailly. The book of a major French historian C.-E. Petit-Dutailly (1868-1947) is dedicated to the development of royal power in two states of the Middle Ages, France and England, in an era when Western…
  • Feudal monarchy in France and England in the 10th-13th centuries. , Petit Duthailly Charles. The author reveals the features and differences of both monarchies and at the same time shows the similarities and borrowings in the field of legislation and administration from one bank of the Channel to the other. But…

DOMOSTROY

1. Patriarchal-severe and inert family life (by the name of the old Russian code of everyday rules).

2. A good owner, organizer of order in his house.

USEFUL BOOK

"Domostroy" amazes us today with an almost improbable spirituality of even the smallest everyday details. "Domostroy" is not just a collection of advice; a grandiose picture of an ideally churched family and economic life unfolds before the reader. Orderliness becomes almost ceremonial, a person's daily activity rises to the height of church action, obedience reaches monastic rigor, love for the king and fatherland, home and family acquires the features of a real religious service.

"Domostroy" was created in the first half of the reign. The authorship of the final text is associated with the name of the associate and mentor of Ivan the Terrible, the Annunciation priest Sylvester.

"Domostroy" consists of three parts: about the attitude of the Russian people to the Church and royal power; about intra-family dispensation; about the organization and management of the household.

“Fear the king and serve him by faith, and always pray to God for him,” Domostroy teaches. - If you serve the earthly king with truth and fear it, then you will learn to fear the heavenly King ... ". The duty of serving God is at the same time the duty of serving the tsar, who embodies Orthodox statehood: “The tsar... do not try to serve with lies and slander and deceit... do not wish earthly glory in anything... do not repay evil for evil, nor slander for slander ... do not condemn those who sin, but remember your sins and take care of them tightly ... "

Domostroy has everything. There are touching instructions "how to love and protect and protect and obey the children of the father and mother and give them peace in everything." There are arguments that “if God gives a good wife to someone, dearly, there are stones of great value.” There are practical tips: “what kind of dress to wear and arrange for every wife”, “what kind of garden and gardens to drive”, “how food is served at the table all year round” (details about what is in a meat-eater, and what is in what post). There are instructions on the order of the household prayer rule for the whole family - "as a husband with his wife and household in his house pray to God." And all this - with that simplicity, thoroughness and quiet, peaceful unhurriedness, which unmistakably testifies to a concentrated prayer life and unshakable faith.

WOMAN'S LOOK

Domostroy - a set of rules for the behavior of a city dweller, by which he had to be guided in everyday life, a monument of secular writing of the 16th century. Authorship and compilation work are attributed to the archpriest of the Annunciation Monastery in Moscow, confessor of Ivan the Terrible Sylvester. When compiling the code, Russian (“Izmaragd”, “Chrysostom”, “Instruction and Punishment of the Spiritual Fathers”) and Western (Czech “Book of Christian Teaching”, French “Paris Master”, Polish “Life of a Respectable Man”, etc.) “instructive collections". For gender history, sections of Domostroy XXIX, XXXIV, XXXVI are of particular importance, concerning the upbringing of children (including teaching girls to needlework, and boys to do "male" household chores) and relations with his wife, "the Empress of the House", as the author of Domostroy calls the hostess. Domostroy taught women “how to please God and husband”, how to observe the honor of the clan and family, take care of the family hearth, and manage the household. Judging by the Domostroi, they were real housekeepers, supervising the procurement of food, cooking, organizing the work of all family members and servants (cleaning, providing water and firewood, spinning, weaving, tailoring, etc.). All members of the household, except for the owner, had to help the “empress of the House”, completely obeying her. In relations with the household, Domostroy recommended that the owner be a "thunderstorm" for his wife and children and severely punish them for their offenses, up to "crushing the ribs", or "whipping with a whip for fault depending." The cruelty of relations with a wife and children, prescribed by Domostroy, did not go beyond the morality of the late Middle Ages and differed little from similar edifications of Western European monuments of this type. However, Domostroy got into the history of Russian social thought precisely because of the odious descriptions of the punishments of his wife, since he was repeatedly quoted in this part by Russian raznochintsy-publicists of the 1860s, and then by V. I. Lenin. This explains the unfair oblivion of this most valuable monument until the last quarter of the 20th century. At present, the expression "house-building customs" has retained a clearly expressed negative connotation.

FEMALE LOOK-2

... The argument of foreign researchers in favor of the theory of “terem seclusion” is that during the period of strengthening the grand ducal, and then the royal power and increasing the power of the boyar-princely aristocracy, women remained aloof from these processes and did not receive the right to independently rule, self-realize, and even travel without a male escort.

This conclusion was made on the basis of a number of works of the sixteenth century. - "Domostroy" of the Annunciation archpriest Sylvester and notes of foreigners about Russia. But can these monuments be considered reliable historical sources? Sylvester expressed his idea of ​​the place of women in society and the family; foreigners, who hardly communicated with Russian people, could only have the most superficial idea of ​​​​the position of local women. For example, when they saw that a noble person was traveling on business surrounded by an honorary retinue, they could conclude that she did not have the right to travel alone. Foreigners could also biasedly assess the presence of female and male halves in Russian houses. This was not due to the isolation of women, but to the division of responsibilities in the family. The woman was engaged in the upbringing of small children, provided all household members, including servants, with clothes, linens and took care of their cleanliness. All women had these duties, regardless of their social status. But the noble and rich hired servants, needlewomen, porters, nurses, mothers and nannies for children, while poor commoners did everything themselves. But the husbands never interfered in these women's affairs, giving the spouses freedom of action.

AUTHORSHIP

Sylvester (beginning of the 16th century - until 1568), a native of the Novgorod prosperous commercial and industrial environment, was close to the Novgorod archbishop Macarius, after whose election as metropolitan he moved to Moscow and from 1545 became archpriest of the court Annunciation Cathedral in the Kremlin. He participated in the preparation and implementation of the state and cultural reforms of that time, including the compilation and editing of such important monuments as the Sudebnik of 1550 and Chet'i-Minei. In his political views, Sylvester is close to non-possessors, he opposed the enrichment of the church, defended a strong state power - autocracy; it became a political platform for rapprochement with representatives of the towering nobility (in the form of other New Dealers such as Alexei Adashev). "Ostuda" of Ivan IV to Sylvester began after the boyar "mutiny" of 1553, in which Sylvester took an evasive position; since he was associated with Vladimir Staritsky, the main antagonist of Ivan IV, he had to "voluntarily" take a haircut in the Kirillo-Belozersky monastery (under the name of Spiridon). The final disgrace befell Sylvester in the spring of 1560, after the death of Empress Anastasia, who favored him. The further circumstances of Sylvester's personal life are little known and are controversial, even the time and place of his death is not known. A major political figure and writer, in the last years of his life he was engaged only in the correspondence of books, some of which have survived.

"Domostroy" of the "Sylvester edition" is the main work of the writer; he edited and partly supplemented the Novgorod collection of similar content that was in the lists.

FROM THREE PARTS OF HOUSE-BUILDING

6. How to visit in monasteries and in hospitals and in dungeons and any mournful (“drink, feed, warm”)

In monasteries, and in hospitals, and in deserts, and in dungeons of prisoners, visit and alms and forces of all necessary give, they demand, and see their misfortune and sorrow and every need, help them as much as possible, and everyone is sorrowful and poor and necessary and do not despise poverty, enter feed your house, feed it, warm your clothes with all love and a pure conscience with those merciful God and receive freedom, and make an offering to the churches of God by your parents who have passed away, and in the house I feed them, do alms to the poor and you yourself will be remembered by God.

(In the monastery, and in the hospital, and in seclusion, and in the dungeon of prisoners, visit and alms that they ask, give according to your ability, and look into their misfortune and sorrow, and their needs, and, as far as possible, help them, and all who are in sorrow and poverty, and the needy, and the poor, do not despise, bring into your house, give drink, feed, warm, welcome with love and with a clear conscience: and by this you will earn God's mercy and receive forgiveness of sins; also your parents commemorate the dead with an offering to the church of God, and arrange a commemoration at home, and give alms to the poor, then you yourself will be remembered by God).

20. Praise for wives (“if God grants a good wife”)

If God grants a wife to goodness, there is a stone of great value, such a one will not lose self-interest from goodness, makes her husband all the goodness, having found a wave and flax, do it with your hand, it’s like a ship I’ll buy from afar, it takes wealth in itself and rises from the night and gives a brush to the house and the work of the slaves, from the fruit he planted his hand, heaving a lot, girding his loins tightly, he will establish his muscle for work and teach his children, so is the slave, and her lamp does not go out all night, she stretches out her hands on the useful one, but she affirms her lacti on the wrong , but mercy stretches out fruit to the poor, but gives to the poor, her husband does not care for the house, her many different robes are embellished with her husband and herself and the child, and her household, but the husband is always in the host with the noble and sits down with the well-known nobles, honest quickly, and prudently conversational understands as if doing good, no one will be crowned without difficulty, for the sake of good, the husband is blessed and the number of his days is purely, the wife of good makes her husband glad and fill his years with peace, the wife of good part of the good in the part of those who fear the Lord, let it be, the wife of her husband honestly doing, keeping the first commandment of God will be blessed, and the second from the person is praised, the wife is kind, and passionate and silent, there is a crown for her husband, the husband will wear his good wife from his house, blessed are such wives, husband and years of their fulfillment in the goodness of the world, for a good wife, praise to her husband and honor.

(If God grants a good wife, better then a precious stone; such a self-interest will not deprive her of goodness, she will always arrange a good life for her husband. Having collected wool and flax, do what you need with your own hands, be like a merchant ship: from afar it absorbs wealth and arises from night; and she will give food to the house and the work of the servants, from the fruits of her hands she will greatly increase the wealth; having girded her loins tightly, she will establish her hands for the work and teach her children, like servants, and her lamp will not go out all night: she stretches her hands to spinning wheel, and her fingers are taken by the spindle, she turns mercy to the poor and gives the fruits of labor to the poor - her husband does not worry about the house; will gather with nobles and sit down, honored by all friends, and, conversing wisely, knows how to do good, for no one is crowned without labor. about; let a good wife be a good reward to those who fear God, for a wife makes her husband more virtuous: firstly, having fulfilled God's commandment, she will be blessed by God, and secondly, she will be glorified by people. A kind wife, and industrious, and silent - a crown to her husband, if a husband has found his good wife - he brings out only good things from his house; blessed is the husband of such a wife, and they will live their years in a good world; for a good wife praise her husband and honor).

54. In the cellar and on the glacier, take care of everything (“both mushrooms, and caviar, and fruit drink”)

And in the cellar and on the glaciers, and on the cellars, bread and kolachi, cheeses, whitened eggs, and onions, garlic and all kinds of meat, fresh and corned beef and fresh and salted fish and fresh honey, and boiled meat and fish jelly and all the stock of estomoi, and cucumbers and cabbage, salted and fresh, and turnips, and all kinds of vegetables, and mushrooms, and caviar, and rosols, and fruit drinks, and apple kvass, and lingonberry water, and flask wines, and all kinds of combustibles and all kinds of meads, and sycheny and plain beers, and braga, and all that to the key keeper to know, and how much was put on the cellar, and on the glacier and cellar, and everything would be counted and marked, what is completely, what is not quite, and marked, and recorded, and how much of what will be given to where by order of the sovereign and how much what would it be if everything was in the account, it would be something to say to the lord, and give an account of everything, and everything would be clean and covered, and not stale and moldy, and sour, but frya wines and sychennaya perevara, and all the best drink to keep in a cellar behind a castle, and he himself would go there.

(And in the cellar, and on the glaciers, and in the pantries, bread and rolls, cheeses and eggs, sour cream and onions, garlic and all kinds of meat, fresh and corned beef, and fresh and salted fish, and unleavened honey, and boiled food, meat and fish , jelly and any food supply, and cucumbers, and cabbage, salted and fresh, and turnips, and all kinds of vegetables, and mushrooms, and caviar, and ready-made pickles, and fruit drinks, and apple kvass, and lingonberry water, and dry and strong wines and all sorts of meads, and mead-based beer, and plain, and home brew - all that stock to be in charge of the keykeeper. what is not completely, and recounted, and written down, and how much of what and where the keykeeper will give by order of the master, and how much of what will be sold - and that would be all in the account, there would be something for the master to say and give an account of everything. everything is clean and covered, and not suffocated, and not moldy, and not sour. and follow them).

2.1. "Domostroy" priest Sylvester

The positive attitude towards capital on the part of those in power and influential strata in general, which began in Kievan Rus, continued in Muscovite Rus. Here, the initial predisposition to the activity of commercial capital soon turns into an apology for a large domestic economy, i.e. in an apologia for the boyar way of life, in praise of the boyar patrimony. The wealthy classes of Muscovite Russia frankly preach gradual accumulation and enrichment. It clearly resulted in a number of characteristic monuments. Ahead of others is a valuable monument of the 16th century, the famous "Domostroy", a work by the Moscow archpriest Sylvester. In this characteristic work, as in a mirror, the worldview of the 16th century and that typical class ideology of the boyars, which expressed the interests and aspirations of the most important class of Muscovite Russia, the class of large landowners, were fully reflected.

The economic policy of Domostroy is not complicated. Petty details relating to household chores affect the entire everyday life of a wealthy household. Here are the rules of the “reasonable and conscientious life” of family members and servants, instructions on the order in which meals are served and the preservation of dishes and dresses, supplies, etc. The main principles are economy, thrift and thrift. Expenditures should be consistent with the means, "every person, rich and poor, judge himself and sweep." Without this - "great dishonor", "reproach" and "reproach". The main management of the house lies with the mistress, a caring and tireless leader of the house.

The "Domostroy" includes a special, last chapter, called the Small Domostroy, which concludes Sylvester's instruction to his son Anfim. This, apparently, is the only genuine part of the composition of the priest Sylvester himself, the rest is a compilation compiled for a wealthy Novgorod house of the 15th or 16th centuries. By its nature, "Domostroy" comes closest to the medieval French "house building" - "Instruction of the French bourgeois to his son." "Domostroy" is a monument to a closed household. He does not know the national economy as a whole at all. The material life of the subjects then constituted another branch of the ruler's personal economy, who, following the example of all medieval princes, regards the country as his personal estate. Therefore, "Domostroy" could only be a set of rules for domestic economy, the principles of which, like the principles of private economy, are antagonistic to social and economic interests. At the same time, Domostroy gives us a picture of a large, closed and self-contained semi-feudal economy, in which needs are already developed to a considerable extent. What kind of small-scale peasant farming was in this era is not visible from this monument. "Domostroy" does not know the peasantry at all; its rules are not suitable for rural economy, but only for the housekeeping of the "chosen ones", for the big landowner. Only a prince and a great boyar, having the gluttonous mood of a future serf-owner, the "father" of large estates and many households, could draw wisdom from the teachings of the Moscow archpriest. "Domostroy" is a typical expression of the class ideology of a Russian medieval landowner.

In terms of its content and the nature of the presentation, Domostroy is a simple summary of practical recipes and not without cunning advice, imbued with the spirit of petty hoarding and anxious suspicion, which are confidentially presented to close people in a moment of frankness by a clever exploiter, a representative of the era of primitive accumulation. Purely economic questions occupy in "Domostroy" 23 chapters of the third part - "on the structure of the brownie", which is about one third of the entire book.

"Domostroy" is not old: the oldest list of its first part, according to paleography, belongs to the first half of the 16th century, and only the second was written, perhaps a century earlier. Its tendencies point to the same: Domostroy is true to its era - it is bureaucratic and bourgeois. Its first half was compiled, as can be seen from the instructions of a specialist researcher, at the beginning of the 16th century or at the end of the 15th century and, moreover, by an ardent supporter of the strengthening of the royal power of the Muscovite state; the second was written no later than the 15th century by a wealthy Novgorodian, who exchanged the disturbing liberty of the vechevik for the well-fed calmness of the royal serf. Judging by a significant number of lists, the Moscow nobility read Domostroy, but in the St. Petersburg era it was already completely forgotten. Again, this monument became known from the time of its first printing, i.e. since the 1840s, after which Domostroy was reprinted several times.

So, "Domostroy" is a typical example of the Moscow autocracy and all the tendencies of pre-Petrine Russia, which were fundamentally alien to the aspirations for political freedom and any citizenship.

“The image of education,” says Fletcher 5 , “which is alien to any thorough education and citizenship and recognized by the authorities as the best for the state and completely consistent with the form of government,” imposed its indelible sadness on everything, at the same time strengthening the contrast with the West. And indeed, in that era when the bold thought of a European was already formulating a lofty social ideal, at a time when many of the battle mottos and theses of modernity were becoming popular in the West, our “best people” reverently repeated the dubious positions of the wretched and hypocritical wisdom of servile scoundrels.

So, "Domostroy" is a monument of the transitional era. Of course, it cannot be called a “monument to the economic ideology of the urban handicraft economy,” as Professor M.N. Pokrovsky 6; this essay expounds the ideology of the leader of a large subsistence economy, from a closed, oikos turning into a commercial and industrial one, which was the first arena for the accumulation of commercial capital. Sylvester is the direct predecessor of the future Russian mercantilists, he is the ideologist of large rural landownership, already gravitating towards the market, where its “surpluses” are realized. Primitive accumulation, from which the development of the first stages of commercial capital begins, from that time on is introduced into the thickness and course of Russian life.

2.2. Philaret's Theory of the Third Rome and Nationalist Reaction: The Birth of Mercantilism

As already mentioned, "Domostroy" established only the ideology of a separate isolated feudal-boyar economy, but did not yet rise to an understanding of national and nationwide tasks. As the Muscovite state grows and strengthens, new, already national tasks are also put forward, especially since, in essence, they represented only an expansion of the boundaries of the economic unit: from the boyar's estate to the grand ducal, royal estate, in which the principles of management and the psychology of awareness were the same. The Grand Duke of Moscow, and then the Tsar of All Russia, considered himself as the personal owner of his land, his patrimony. The idea of ​​central historical authority and historical mission, brought by the Byzantines who arrived with Princess Palaiologos, who became the wife of Tsar John III, appears and strengthens. The emerging monarchy sought to defeat its feudal rivals, gain a foothold on the wealthy masses, the prototype of the European bourgeoisie, and create its own economic and political ideology.

This was reflected in the anonymous tales of the 15th century “On the Kingdom of Babylon” and “On the White Klobuk”, which contained a deep historical and philosophical meaning for that time. Here, not only statehood was realized, but Russian statehood was exalted, idealized and brought to the level of world historical magnitude, which has its highest tasks. The latter appeared as a result of the fall at the end of the 15th century of Constantinople, once the world center and at the same time the main center of the Eastern Church. With the transfer of the religious center to Moscow, the idea naturally arose of political continuity, and, consequently, of Moscow inheriting world domination from Byzantium. This idea formed the basis of a whole series of new ideas of a historical-philosophical and, moreover, ultra-nationalist nature, and received literary expression in the messages of the monarch Elder Philotheus, who outlined a whole historical-philosophical theory about Moscow as the “Third Rome”. Elder Philotheus is a major historical figure who appeared in Russian history at the very beginning of the 16th century. Elder Philotheus was a hermit - a monk of the Pskov Eleazarov Monastery, who developed in a definite and confident form the idea of ​​pan-Russianism and the election of God by Russia. These views are set out in three of his letters - in general, he wrote a lot and willingly - addressed to the Grand Duke of Moscow Vasily Ivanovich, to the important Pskov clerk Misyure-Munekhin and to the Moscow Tsar Ivan IV (the Terrible). The aforementioned epistles, now published, were written by Elder Philotheus with the aim of interceding for his fellow Pskovites, who lost their political independence in 1510. The former free and commercial city, which, like Novgorod, had an independent republican physiognomy, was now oppressed by Moscow governors, centralist bureaucrats. Philotheus's letter to the clerk Misyura - Munekhin had, among other things, the purpose of speaking out against the "heretics" - astrologers, or "stargazers", and against the Latians in general, and also to stand up for Orthodoxy, which Philotheus considered himself a faithful guardian. Philotheus believes that the destinies of both people and nations are determined and directed by the providence of God, the source of world truth on earth according to the providence of God and according to the predictions of the prophecies (Daniel and others), old Rome, the great center of the first world empire, fell. Rome fell into the heresy of Apollinaris and served the liturgy on unleavened bread, i.e. changed the orthodox church. The "Second Rome", Byzantium or Constantinople, also did not keep the covenants of religion: it betrayed Orthodoxy at the 8th Council and entered into a union with the Latins. As a result, the Second Rome fell and "became the property of the grandchildren of Hagar." Only the glorious cathedral church of the Assumption of the Mother of God in Moscow, the God-saved city of "everything new and great Russia," remains unharmed. This is the Third and last Rome, "the third and indestructible kingdom of the Rameans." The Third Rome is a Russian shrine, shining throughout the universe with its piety, brighter than the sun. The Third Rome is the last center in the historical existence of mankind. There will be no fourth Rome. In the consistent course of the historical life of peoples, all Orthodox Christian kingdoms fell and merged into one Russian kingdom, the last world kingdom, after which, at the end of the world, the eternal kingdom of Christ will come. Thus, for the first time, the idea of ​​the world vocation of Russia was formulated, foretelling by the providence of God the future of the Russian church and the Russian state. This idea of ​​the world greatness of the Russian kingdom is expressed in the following words: “In all under heaven there is a single Christian tsar and holder of the reins of God’s saints. The One Holy Ecumenical Apostolic Church, instead of the Roman and Constantinopolitan ones, is located in the God-saved city of Moscow.”

This formula has become very popular. Moscow is called the Third Rome in all the most important acts of that time: both in the letter on the establishment of the patriarchate in Russia, and in the message of the first Moscow Patriarch Job to the Georgian Tsar Alexander, and in a number of others. The idea of ​​the Third Rome already creates a certain direction and outlines a certain program, even more - it obliges.

Elder Philotheus, in his message addressed to the Grand Duke of Moscow, Vasily Ivanovich, points to the worldwide nature of his power. “Yes, your power, pious king, as if the whole kingdom of the Orthodox Christian faith descended into your one kingdom, you alone are the king in the whole heavenly Christians.” But this extraordinary mission of the Muscovite tsar must proceed in conditions of severe morality. “It is fitting for you, king,” Philotheus says further, “keep this with the fear of God. Fear God, who gave this to you: do not trust in gold, in wealth, in glory; all this is gathered here and the lands will remain here. Moscow, according to Philotheus, is the last world monarchy in the history of mankind. With this idea, even, rather, with this theory in Moscow they were very worn. It was important as a vivid symptom of the realization of statehood, as the first sprout of national feeling.

2.3. The first theorist of bureaucratic monarchism Ivan Peresvetov, the ideologist of the local nobility

There is an assumption about Peresvetov that he is a mythical collective person, but if he really existed, then he was a native of Lithuania, who traveled and wrote a lot. In any case, what was called "Ivanets Semyonov, son of Peresvetov" is a typical spokesman for the ideas and interests of the nobility, i.e. economically small and medium land holdings. The latter is closely connected with the autocracy, which in that era rests on the service nobility and naturally struggles with its political constraints, i.e. with the boyars. Hence the fiery hatred of the ideologist of the nobility Peresvetov for the boyars.

Peresvetov outlined his ideas in a number of works, of which the most valuable is The Tales of Tsar Constantine. Here the author praises the East and sees an instructive example of political wisdom in the East. His hero is the Turkish sultan. The boyars and nobles, according to Peresvetov, always "sat like snakes" and kept on numerous servility. If, according to Peresvetov, the bonded ones are released, then the boyars themselves can be weakened. That. he is an opponent of slavery, believing that "man can only be a slave to God." In freedom, in his opinion, personal courage is manifested, a quality so necessary "for the defense of the state."

In the era of Peresvetov, the economic crisis ruined the boyars, and in Russia there was a natural struggle for workers. The nobles, meanwhile, were paid land, not salaries. And the ripening consistent bureaucratic centralism demanded payment for labor with salaries, and not with land. This salary was supposed to compensate merit, not origin. The boyars did not correspond to all this. "Nobles," says Peresvetov, "there are many, but there is little benefit." Such, in his opinion, befits "to give fire and other fierce deaths, so that evil does not multiply." Our preacher of the monarchy, supported by the petty nobility, did not leave behind the thoughtful and complete theory of absolutism, which we see in Jean Baudin. He is unfavorably different from his European counterpart, who understands that autocracy can become a source of enslavement and humiliation of the country, and knows the limits of autocratic power. His monarch obeys the "laws of nature" that provide his subjects with "natural liberty". Such a system, in his opinion, is a royal monarchy. The lack of freedom for subjects to dispose of their person and property is another system for organizing the eastern monarchy, which is available in ancient Persia and Muscovy. We have the lowest and most negative form in the third system, the system of tyrannical monarchy. Here, all the laws are simply violated. Religion is an assistant to the monarch in governing the country, but it often disagrees with the truth, and the truth, Peresvetov explains, is “above faith.” Such is the ideology of the Moscow publicist, who does not know that in the West the core of his ideas is developing into a theory of limiting autocratic power.

3. SPECIFIC FEATURES OF RUSSIAN ECONOMIC THOUGHT

The history of the development of Russian economic thought is characterized by the following specific features. Firstly, the spirit of social and economic reformism is inherent in most of the works of Russian economists. This is explained both by the internal conditions of the country's development and by the strong influence of Marxism on all currents of Russian economic thought since the second half of the nineteenth century.
Secondly, for the majority of Russian economists, the peasant question and the whole range of related socio-economic problems is of particular importance.
Thirdly, Russian economic thought has always attached great importance to public consciousness, ethics, the active role of politics, in other words, to non-economic factors. We can name a number of Russian traditions and features that will help you better understand the specifics of Russian economic thought. It is well known that in Russia, unlike in Central and Western Europe, Roman property rights based on a well-organized base of legal codes did not receive legal recognition. It was there that the centuries-old culture of private property developed such a quality of the economic personality as economic individualism and economic rationalism. In Russia, for many centuries, the economy was based not on private property, but on a peculiar combination of communal use of land and the power of the state, acting as the supreme owner. This had a significant impact on the attitude towards the institution of private property, leaving a corresponding moral and ethical imprint on it. Russian people tend to believe that "a person is above the principle of property." It is no coincidence that in the Russian mentality the idea of ​​"natural law", which is the basis of Western European civilization, was replaced by the ideals of virtue, justice and truth. This defines Russian social morality and economic behavior. And therefore the phenomenon of the "repentant nobility" is a purely Russian feature. Another Russian tradition is a penchant for utopian thinking, the desire to think not in realities, but in images of a desired future. This is also connected with the tradition of relying on “maybe”, dislike for accurate calculations, strict business organization. A characteristic feature of the Russian mentality is also the desire for catholicity (the voluntary association of people for common actions, regardless of property and estate inequality) and solidarity, which are realized in collective forms of labor and ownership of property.
As for Russian economic traditions, despite their diversity, over the centuries they have evolved around two axial lines: the traditions of statehood and the traditions of community. Centralized regulation and social guarantees are the most important forms of their manifestations. As for the traditions of small and medium-sized businesses, in pre-revolutionary Russia, as a nationwide tradition, they were just emerging. On the other hand, large-scale entrepreneurship has existed since ancient times and gravitated from the very beginning to the treasury - the princely, and then the state.

CONCLUSION

So, the lag of Russia's social development from Western Europe also affected the development of its economic thought, although it is worth noting that this gap was gradually narrowing. Thus, the ideas of mercantilism, which had been formed in the West since the 15th century, began to spread in Russia only in the middle of the 17th century, during the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich. Their guide was A. Ordin - Nashchokin. However, the concept of mercantilism did not become dominant in Russia due to the insignificant role of foreign trade in its national economy.

Changes in the economic life of the emerging single centralized state - Muscovite Russia - caused, as always and everywhere, a twofold attitude: one part of the population welcomed innovations that led to rapprochement with novelty and, ultimately, with the West; others condemned the new and strove to retain the old life, to return to it, in a word, to the old forms. Rationalist sects - the heresy of the Strigolniks and the heresy of the Judaizers, and later the ideological position of the "Zavolzhsky elders" is the monk Vassian Kosoy (Prince Vasily Ivanovich) Patrikeyev, a student of Nil Sorsky and an associate of the enlightened Maxim the Greek. He stood for the secularization of monastic property and demanded a humane attitude towards dissidents. For correcting books, he was convicted in 1531 and exiled to a monastery. A different position is held by the more numerous conservative camp, the so-called "Josephites" led by Metropolitan Daniel and Joseph Volotsky, to whom Priest Sylvester's "Domostroy" ideologically adjoins.

The publishing house "Tsar's House" published the book "Domostroy - the Great Book of the Great Country". As an afterword, an essay by our regular author, the historian Leonid Bolotin, was published in it. This essay can be seen as an objection to an essayVictor Aksyuchits "Falling into the turmoil and exit from it. Tsar Ivan the Terrible and Josephism.

The sixteenth century can rightly and should be called the Golden Age of Russian National Literature. It is customary to talk about Russian Literature as a phenomenon in the sense of exclusively artistic works - poems, poems, short stories, novels, short stories, fables, tragedies, comedies - about reading undoubtedly useful, instructive, with great educational value, but at the same time entertaining, fascinating that excites the reader's fantasy and imagination. But is the life of words, first inscribed by hand, and then typographical, limited by this alone? letters spread around the world?

Speaking of the word, and especially of the literary word, one must always remember that in the depths of its nature each alive human word in extreme smallness, but directly likened Word-God - our Lord Jesus Christ, since our human literature, in contrast to the wordless world, and there is one of the main expressions of the fact that man was created according to image and likeness God's (Genesis 1:27). The Holy Righteous John of Kronstadt testified in this way to the connection of God the Word with the words of human speech: “Feeling warmth and your breath in yourself, remember the Word of God as a Person; when speaking the word, remember the Personal and Living Word of God; and acting with your mind, remember the great Mind - God, from Whom every mind and everything that is wisely created. That is why the living human word is so expressively- in addition to sounds and direct mental meaning, the word in some wonderful, supernatural way also carries a visual image.

Unfortunately, most of the purely secular researchers of the Russian National Literature of the 16th century, expressing their love and respect for our written heritage of that time quite sincerely, still cannot avoid looking top down, the point of view, as if from the "height" of the undoubtedly great works of Russian Literature of the 19th century. Many scientists consider the old period as a kind of "childhood" of Russian literature. Such an arrogant tenderness, a sincere condescending look at the works of the 16th century as at tombstones, at literary monuments, is fraught with a distortion of the real perspective, a diminution of the true spiritual dignity of native speech, the existence of which lies outside the “patterns” of primitive evolutionism, progress. Many of the spiritual peaks reached by Russian National Literature in the 16th century were never conquered again in subsequent centuries.

In the 17th century, tendencies were already intensifying towards a simplified imitation of non-Orthodox foreign samples, primarily Polish (through Little Russia), but also German, English, Latin too. At the same time, on the one hand, European “carnival” (according to M. Bakhtin) laughter, laughter, scoffing penetrates into Russian literature, on the other hand, eloquent mannerism, stylistic redundancy or bureaucratic inertness, soullessness. Civilizational imitation is further enhanced in the 18th century due to the derogation of national identity in our literature, therefore according to some spiritual and national indicators one can speak not of “progress”, but of degradation in Russian literature.

What compels us to look at the literary heritage of the 16th century is not top down, a down up? Such a point of view turns out to be more scientific, methodologically accurate, since it reveals the authentic, deep meanings of the ancient works of the Russian Word.

The construction of new, more powerful and extended red-brick walls and towers of the Moscow Kremlin under the Grand Duke Ivan Vasilyevich in 1485-1495 marked a fundamentally new stage in the state building of Russia, which in the distant outskirts acquired its clear boundaries and raised a single Capital Center above all specific cities. The new Kremlin bastions have become a kind of architectural icon of the spiritual fence of the entire Russian State as the New Jerusalem. Already under this mighty protection, nationwide Russian literature rapidly developed in the 16th century, the diverse works of which are also constituent parts of state building and original creation of the vital, spiritual structure of the Russian people.

Russian literary XVI century begins with the "Illuminator" of St. Joseph Volotsky, a work that freed the Orthodox Russian spirit and mind from the captivity of the Jewish heresy. In the same years, Saint Spyridon-Savva wrote to the Grand Duke John Vasilyevich the "Message about the Monomakh's Crown", which contains a legend about the origin of the Grand Duke Rurik from Prus - a relative ("brother") of the Roman Emperor Augustus Caesar.

In the years 1516-1522, a disciple and relative of the Monk Joseph (Sanin), the Monk Dositheus (Toporkov) Volotsky, relying on the rich library of the Volokolamsk Monastery, created the first "Russian Chronograph", in which World History was first described with full inclusion in it of the events of Russian History.

In the years 1523-1524, the monk of the Spaso-Eliazarov Monastery, the Reverend Philotheus of Pskov, in a letter to the deacon Misyur Munekhin, for the first time sets out his spiritual insight: Moscow is the Third Rome.

Under Grand Duke Vasily Ioannovich, through the efforts of St. Daniel of Moscow, in 1526-1530, a monumental annalistic vault, which later received the everyday scientific name "Nikon Chronicle", given by the owner of the manuscript, Patriarch Nikon. To create this collection, ancient lists of all-Russian and specific annals, documents, stories and legends about revered icons, Saints and heroes were brought to Moscow from different cities and monasteries of Russia. From this diverse material, the metropolitan scribes brought together Russian Antiquity from its beginnings to the 1520s. Russian History was restored, again woven into a single canvas, disheveled into separate strands, first by the appanage, and then by the Tatars.

In 1529, in Novgorod, Archbishop Macarius (Leontiev) began to collect the original version of the Russian Great Readings of Menaia, where the Lives of the Saints, legends about icons, stories from general church history, instructive words and many other spiritual works, which together compiled the first Russian church encyclopedia. Having become the Metropolitan of Moscow, Saint Macarius creates more extensive Kremlin Great Honored Menaions.

The spiritual book building of St. Macarius of Moscow was crowned with the creation of the “Degree Book of the Royal Genealogy” and the multi-volume “Royal Personal Chronicle Code”, the final design of which was completed after the death of St. Macarius by his disciple, St. Athanasius of Moscow - Confessor of the Holy Blessed Tsar-Great Martyr John. In this spiritual and educational, encyclopedic activity of Saint Macarius, a creative synthesis of the ancient Novgorod and relatively “young” Moscow literary schools was accomplished.

It was on this delightful basis in its universality and on the works of St. Maxim the Greek that the diverse literary and liturgical creativity of the Holy Great Martyr Tsar John Vasilyevich the Terrible, in the monks of Jonah, unique in all world literature, grew, in which the understanding of the meaning of the Kingdom and the Church in the Divine Dispensation reached unprecedented heights Theological and sovereign thought.

In this magnificent literary constellation of the 16th century, the book called Domostroy, at first glance, occupies a rather modest, private place.

The Church Slavonic word "domostroy" itself is a direct similarity to the Greek word "economy", or in church tradition - "economia". In church literature, there is an expression “economical theology”, which, firstly, refers to the dogmatic theology of the Holy Trinity, and secondly, to the creation of the universe and man by God the Word, to the very order of the world (John 1, 1-18 ).

But even long before the birth of Christ providentially in the Greek language, in Greek philosophy, there was a process of formation of subtle speculative, generalizing concepts, which later became the perfect tool of Christian Theology. Ancient wisdom also formed the concepts of “economy”, “economy”, which, on the one hand, denoted the broadest principles of rational management on a state scale, on a policy scale, and on the other hand, considered private issues of housekeeping proper.

Many hexameters in Homer's Odyssey are devoted to deliberate homeownership and home economics. Hesiod wrote about practical management in detail in Works and Days. The ancient Greek playwright Euripides also paid attention to the correct home arrangement.

The great Athenian sage Socrates believed that the household, like government, should be included in the circle of compulsory subjects of philosophical education. A student of Socrates, the philosopher and commander Xenophon wrote the dialogue "Economy", the name of which is translated into Russian as "Domostroy". In Xenophon's Domostroy, the philosopher Socrates, in his unique dialectical manner, on many historical examples and his own everyday experience, convincingly proves the importance and necessity of everyday understanding of current economic problems:

“I once noticed that from the same occupation, some are extremely poor, others are extremely rich. This surprised me terribly, and I decided that it was worth seeing what was the matter. I began to observe and found that this is quite natural: whoever does business somehow, he, I saw, suffers a loss; and whoever takes care of it with intense attention fulfills it faster, easier, and more profitable. If you want to learn from them, and if God is not against you, then I think you will become a resourceful person.

It is significant that Socrates, being in a pagan environment an elemental (not according to the Holy Scriptures) apophatic Theologian, believing in the Unknown God, in the One Creator God, points out to the interlocutor the importance of the mystical factor, Divine favor for a profitable business.

The treatise "Domostroy" is also known from another great ancient philosopher - Aristotle, however, it is more often translated into Russian as "Economics". There is also a chapter in Aristotle's "Polity" - "Economy". Despite a different tradition of translating these names, this does not change their house-building essence. The economic treatises of Xenophon and Aristotle were later translated into Latin by Cicero himself and enjoyed success with ancient Roman readers; they were repeatedly quoted by Virgil, Theophrastus, Philodemus.

Already at the time of Christianity in Constantinople, in the Roman Empire, a number of works were created both on the broad problems of the economy, and on housekeeping and family organization already in connection with Christian piety. Many Western European medieval treatises based on the tradition of Xenophon, Aristotle, and other ancient writers were also devoted to prudent and God-fearing housekeeping and housekeeping.

The Russian "Domostroy" had its spiritual predecessors in Russian literature. First of all, it is necessary to name the “Izbornik of 1074” by Grand Duke Svyatoslav and the completely original, magnificent, unsurpassed work of Russian didactic literature - “Instruction of Grand Duke Vladimir Monomakh to his children”, compiled by the Russian Sovereign at the beginning of the XII century.

Russian literary historians, who have studied about forty manuscripts, both entitled Domostroy and containing texts common with Domostroy, believe that the most complete Sylvester edition of Domostroy of the mid-16th century was based on the works of Novgorod and Moscow that have not come down to us. books of the 15th - the first half of the 16th centuries, dedicated to Orthodox housekeeping, in the writing of which both clergy and literate lay people took part, directly familiar with the most ancient literary traditions, dating back both to the ancient Xenophon's "Domostroy" and to the ancient Tsargrad already Orthodox protographers. Thus, the Russian "Domostroy" is included in the circle of world philosophical, economic and didactic literature.

But with all the variety of sources of the Russian "Domostroy" - it is a completely original, independent work of Russian National Literature of the middle of the 16th century, filled with both the sovereign Theology of that time, the Theology of the new state building, and living, everyday Russian speech and folk wisdom.

Russian "Domostroy" in the works of domestic historians of our literature is emphatically characterized as a secular work, in which the spiritual component has only a subordinate, official meaning. This, in our opinion, erroneous assessment is due to the fact that the teachings of "Domostroy" are addressed to the layman, and a significant part of the text is related to the description of the way of life. But such an assessment, so to speak, “mechanical”, “quantitative”, does not take into account the strategic meaning, the highest ideal of this unique purely spiritual work, which really goes beyond the typological genre series of proper church literature.

The attitude to the spiritual component of the Russian "Domostroy" as something brought in from outside, additional does not allow us to see the author's creative synthesis, as a result of which everything mundane, everyday, everyday in this work is completely subordinated to the heights of the Orthodox Russian spirit ... Here the Russian spirit, here Smells like Russia! And first of all, by no means spicy pickles, beer, bread dough, cabbage soup, onions and well-fed belching, but incense, wax, oil, the pure spirit of Great Lent and Paschal Joy, the light prayerful breath of Holy Russia!

The full title of the work: “The book, spoken by Domostroy, has useful things in itself, teaching and punishment to every Christian - husband, and wife, and child, and slave, and slave”, - already indicates the religious dignity of the reader to whom the treatise is addressed. Teachings and orders are given not only to the owner of the house or the father of a large family in general, but to "every Christian."

A number of initial chapters of Domostroy correspond to the spiritual target designation of "every Christian". The first chapter is a strict instructive blessing of the father of a large family to an adult son, his wife, their children and household members. The style itself, the form of blessing, in terms of genre, resembles both the prayer read at confession, and the state oath, and the legal contract, and the spiritual testament, and above - the Biblical Testament: “I bless az, a sinner name and I teach, and I punish, and I admonish my son name, and his wife ... "The creator of" Domostroy "thinks on a large scale, statesmanship, he creates a sample close in meaning to the spiritual canon for wide, widespread, repeated use. Hence the chased severity of the wording and these "names".

The one who blesses spiritually obliges those who are blessed with obedience to this order by the highest authority: “give an answer on the day of the Last Judgment.” Blessing resembles home, more - generic oath, which is also expected for subsequent generations of heirs. Here one immediately sees a hierarchical level, which is by no means reducible to a home economics manual. The spiritual goal of this book, which should become generic, passed down from father to son, from son to grandchildren, from grandchildren to great-grandchildren, is immeasurably higher: to build Russian family life for many generations ahead according to the highest Christian ideal.

Russian Literature of the 11th-16th centuries, in its pictorial and compositional-semantic techniques, largely relied on the canons of iconography. The scale of figures, objects, events, their location in the Orthodox icon corresponded to their significance in the spiritual hierarchy. So here in the center - at the beginning of the text, above the entrance to the literary space - God, the Divine, ecclesiastical, religious are depicted large and categorically, and everyday, earthly, material - according to the degree of their semantic significance. But even the smallest third-rate details are drawn clearly and simply - without emotional expression, dynamism, in spiritual simplicity, with a contemplative look. Details are subordinated to Divine service in the broadest sense of this concept as a chaste human being.

The following brief chapter points to the likening of the book “Domostroy” to documents of state dignity: “How Christians believe in the Holy Trinity and the Most Pure Mother of God and the Cross of Christ and the Holy Heavenly Powers and all the Holy and honest and Holy Power and worship them.”

All the most important state documents, letters of Sovereign Church Councils and the Sovereign Duma, chronicles in the XV-XVII centuries began with spiritual beginnings, which secular historians of ancient Russian sources call the conditional term "Theology". In their analysis, secular scientists, as a rule, limit themselves to this definition, without going into the content of such spiritual beginnings, considering them to be something formal and therefore not deserving of special attention. However, a careful examination of state charters of the 16th-17th centuries shows that their “Theologies” invariably focus on the Orthodox confession of the Most Holy Trinity, on the Divinity of the human nature of Jesus Christ, on the confession of the Ever-Virgin Mary as the Mother of God, on the veneration of the Cross, Holy Icons and Holy Relics.

This is explained by two main reasons.

First of all, sovereign cutting off from the consequences of the heresy of the Judaizers, whose adherents rejected both the Most Holy Trinity, and the divinity of Jesus Christ, and the true dignity of the Mother of God and mockingly mocked the veneration of the Cross of Christ, Holy icons and Holy relics.

Secondly, Starting from the capture of Constantinople by the crusaders at the beginning of the 13th century and from the time of the Holy Blessed Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky, Holy Russia was threatened from the outside by Catholic expansion, followed by a distortion of the dogma of the Holy Trinity, a violation of Its inseparability and equality by the Catholic introduction of the filioque confession. It is no accident that the hero of the Battle of the Neva in 1242 went to the battle of Chudsk on the ice against the Catholic knights-crusaders with the motto: "For the Holy Trinity!"

In line with such sovereign letters, the author of Domostroy also supplies this instructive text with a similar beginning-theology. Just as the Russian Tsardom in its charters testified that it is the guardian, the sovereign stronghold of Orthodoxy on a universal scale, so every Russian family, in its small measure, should become the guardian of the paternal faith, its Orthodox dogmas: “It is fitting for every Christian to know how to live according to God in the Orthodox faith of the Christians: first, from the bottom of your heart, believe in the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit - in the inseparable Trinity, and believe in the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and call the Mother of God who gave birth to Him, bow down to the Cross of Christ with faith, as if on the Lord has wrought salvation for all men. And honor the icon of Christ and His Most Pure Mother and the Holy Heavenly Incorporeal Forces and all the Saints honor, as Love Himself.

Thus, the dogmatic Divine economy of the Most Holy Trinity is determined by the yardstick for family life, and for domestic life, for housekeeping. Orthodox leavened patriotism of Russia is opposed here unleavened cosmopolitanism of the Catholic West.

A number of subsequent chapters - 3-6, 8-15, 22-25 can be called a kind of home Church Charter. Their names speak for themselves: “How to partake of the Mysteries of God and believe in the resurrection of the dead, and look forward to the Last Judgment and touch every Holy thing”, “How to love God with all your soul, so also have your brother and fear of God and have a mortal memory”, “How honor the hierarchical ranks, as well as the priestly ranks and the miniscule ranks, ”and so on.

A special place among this “church-statutory” section is occupied by the seventh chapter: “How to honor and obey the Tsar and the prince in everything and to repent of every ruler and serve them in truth in everything, to the great and to the lesser, and to the sorrowful and weak to any person be, and pay attention to yourself about this.

Here it is again emphasized that the existence of the Russian family is by no means a private, individualistic, self-contained existence - it is an integral part of the state life of Holy Russia, the family is the basis, the support of the Russian State.

The author of Domostroy calls for the most reverent attitude towards the Anointed of God: “Be afraid of the Tsar and serve him by faith and always pray to God for him and do not speak falsely before him, but with submission answer the truth to him as to God Himself, and obey him in everything, if you serve the earthly King with truth and fear him, you will learn to fear the Heavenly King.

And in the following chapters, the need for obedience to the Tsar is repeatedly mentioned, about the spiritual duty of loyal subjects to pray for the Tsar-Sovereign, for the Tsarina and for Their Children-Heirs.

The state dignity of the head of the family and his wife is repeatedly emphasized by the fact that in the “Domostroy” of the Sylvester edition they are called “sovereign”, “sovereign” more than one hundred and thirty times and derivatives of these words are used in relation to them. After all, for all households they are not just masters, owners of property, elders, but patrons, teachers and judges, punishing, merciful and favoring. In the vivid pictures of the Russian "Domostroy" the Holy Russian patriarchal tradition of ancient times from the epic Holy Prince Vladimir the Red Sun reveals itself.

Thus, the compiler of Domostroy comprehensively depicts the Russian patriarchal family not only as Small Church, which is a general provision in Sacred Tradition, but also how Small Kingdom.

In the light of the patriarchal tradition, a very important spiritual and ideological stratagem of "Domostroy" - the fatherland - is highlighted. For the author, primacy from tsa, that is, that from whom everything happens both physically, and legally, and spiritually, no doubt. The writer does not specifically defend the truth that is obvious to him and his readers. Economical Theology of the Most Holy Trinity - the Son of God, from From born, the Holy Spirit, from From outgoing - simply excluded the very possibility of a different look at the father of the family, the family and society as a whole. The positivist and then materialistic, but in fact atheistic fable about the primacy of the “matriarchy” was simply unknown to the people of that era. The paramount hierarchical dignity of the father and paternity pervades the entire text of Domostroy from beginning to end. Here is the spiritual, tribal basis of both Russian paternalism and Russian patriotism.

In our time, when the Family Code and other laws repeatedly talk about motherhood, about “maternity capital”. Fatherhood is mentioned only once or twice and, “naturally”, in second place after motherhood. This is evidence of the deepest spiritual disease of modern society. And in the coming years, the healing of this disease on a national scale is not expected. But modern Orthodox Christians must remember the family ideal, based both on Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition, and on the patriarchal ancient Russian tradition. Without a deep reverence for fatherhood and through it the Fatherland, it is also impossible to revive spiritual patriotism, sacrificial patriotism, which is fundamentally different from corporate “patriotism”, based on serving personal and corporate interests, on selfish love for oneself in one’s native land: here both the “patriotism” of a cat, and "patriotism" of a criminal godfather, and the last refuge of a scoundrel.

"Domostroy" in no way humiliates, does not belittle the importance of mothers and wives, as many Russian writers tried to present already in the 19th century. But the Christian family, as the original bond of the Orthodox Kingdom, is unthinkable without reverence for the Fatherland, fatherhood, courage in its true sacrificial dignity. The sacrificial service of the father - the sovereign of household consists in the highest responsibility before God to serve the cause of not only the personal salvation of the soul for Eternal Life, but in every possible way to contribute to the salvation of the souls of the wife, children and all household members in the Kingdom of Heaven.

In one of the editions of Domostroy, the preface says: “... In this book, you find an instruction from some about the worldly structure, how to live as an Orthodox Christian in the world with wives and children, and with household members, and punish (instruct) and teach them , and to save with fear, and to vex (protect) with a thunderstorm, and in all things to protect them in spiritual and bodily things, to be clean, and in everything to be guard over them, and take care of them as if about your ud (member of the body). Lord of the rivers: you will be wallpaper in one flesh. The apostle of the rivers: if one soul suffers, then all suffer with it. Likewise, you do not worry about yourself alone, but also about your wife, and about your children, and about others, and about the last household members. For all are connected by one faith to God: and with this good diligence, have love for all who live according to God, and have an eye of the heart (have), looking to God. And you will be chosen as a vessel, carrying not only yourself to God, but many. And you will hear: a good servant, you will be faithful in the joy of your Lord.

The royal law, according to the Scriptures: love your neighbor as yourself(James 2:8).

At the time of a covert departure from the Marxist-Leninist - destructive for the state - communist "dogma" in the ideology of the socialist "state" (in quotation marks, because without the Sovereign), it began to be declared that the family is the main, basic cell of society and the "state". The crafty reception of the official ideology of "developed socialism", however, did not resolve the deep-seated contradictions between the godless worldview and the mystical nature of family, marriage, fatherhood, motherhood and childhood. But in a formal message, Soviet ideologists returned to the main, power-forming provisions of Domostroy.

The book "Domostroy" is a very important part of the church-state ideology of the Autocratic Orthodox Kingdom, which was built in Russia during the 16th century. The actual everyday component of this work, in which we find amazingly beautiful and original pictures of the patriarchal way of life of the exemplary Russian House, deeply dear to all of us, is entirely subordinated to this lofty national goal.

The treatise on Russian family life occupies its worthy and very important place among such spiritual and sovereign program works and documents of the era as the Tsar's Sudebnik of 1550, the Russian Chronograph, the Tsar's Chronicle Code, the Great Kremlin Menaia, "The Degree Book of the Royal Genealogy", "Stoglav", "Illuminator", various Cathedral and Royal Establishments.

It is significant that the very ideal concept of “Holy Russia”, which we habitually assimilate both in our antiquity under the Holy Equal-to-the-Apostles Grand Duke Vladimir Svyatoslavich, and in the times of the Holy Blessed Grand Duke-Martyr Andrei Bogolyubsky, and in the era of St. Alexis of Moscow, Reverend Sergius of Radonezh and Holy Blessed Great Prince Dimitry Donskoy, in fact, owes its appearance, formulation to the activity of the Holy Great Martyr Tsar John Vasilyevich the Terrible and St. Macarius of Moscow in the middle of the 16th century. It was the Makariev Councils, which glorified for general church veneration a whole host of Russian Ascetics of Piety, that brought to life this spiritual ideal - Holy Russia, an ideal that, of course, applies to all times of Russia-Russia, starting with Askold's Baptism under Patriarch Photius, and to Russia coming.

Holy Russia was created by the Providence of God, but in helping the Lord it was created and is being created. works of faith(James 2, 14-26), the earnest faith of our ancestors, the deep faith of our contemporaries, who are still unknown to us - prayer books for us and our Fatherland. A vivid image and example of the creative deeds of faith is the Russian "Domostroy", showing us the Face of Holy Russia through patriarchal family, home life.

This is what is hidden from the layman's eye on this truly great book! But the hidden in the ages without great difficulty is revealed to every loving heart of a believing Russian person. God is love!

memory of St. Maximus the Greek

NOTES


John of Kronstadt, Holy Righteous. About prayer. Extracts from diary notebooks for 1856-1862. M., Father's House, 2007. S. 249.

This passage is written under the influence of a conversation about Old Russian Literature with my friend, Doctor of Philology Alexander Vadimovich Gulin. In the process of this explanation, I borrowed the following thoughts from A.V. Gulin. The principles of "age development" - "childhood", "youth", "maturity" ... - are not applicable to the historical laws of the existence of the literary language, the content and form of literary works. Such an "age" approach inevitably leads to the idea of ​​"old age" and "death" of national literature. Russian Literature from the moment of its inception and development in the 11th-12th centuries revealed itself in such works as “The Sermon on Law and Grace” by St. Hilarion of Kyiv, “The Tale of Bygone Years” by the Monk Nestor the Chronicler, “Instructions of the Grand Duke Vladimir Monomakh to his children”. They are the undoubted peaks of the national spirit and national culture, and yet they were not preceded by any "development", "evolution", literary "childhood". They are products of a creative spirit common to all eras.

Xenophon of Athens. Domostroy. Ch. 2, § 16.

The words "slave" and "slave" are not about one should attach importance to the disenfranchised estate, known from the history of ancient Babylon, Egypt, Greece and Rome. Here we are talking about workers, serving the owner of the house on one basis or another, whether hired (in "Domostroy" refers to the salary of servants), or as permanent household members and servants, but not about the "living thing" of the times of the slave-owning system. There was no “slavery” and even “serfdom”, known for the shameful century in the history of the Russian Empire from 1762 to 1861, at the time of the creation of the Russian Kingdom and the writing of Domostroy.

The “hurtful” definition of Russian patriotism by “kvass” is now associated with kvass by everyday consciousness. But this bread drink is not exclusively Russian, since ancient times it has been in use among numerous Finno-Ugric and some Baltic peoples of Russia, not as borrowed from Russians, but as their own, original. In the course of the controversy between Russian Slavophiles and Westerners, who gravitated toward ecumenism, it is obvious that the definition of "leaven" was associated with the Orthodox dogmatic canon of the celebration of the Divine Liturgy at leavened bread , and not on unleavened bread, like the Catholics. Moreover, in Orthodox Russia, the Catholic tradition was spiritually associated with Jewish unleavened bread, with Easter matzah. Hence and leavened patriotism, that is, Orthodox, spiritual patriotism.

Here is the numbering of chapters according to the Sylvester edition of Domostroy.

The concept of the primacy of "matriarchy" is based on hypotheses. First of all, on the tendentious interpretation by positivist archaeologists, positivist ethnologists of small sculptural artifacts of primitive antiquity as central cult objects (“mother goddesses”, “primitive Venuses”). In fact, these artifacts had a utilitarian pornographic purpose and had nothing to do even with pagan cosmogony. Secondly, on the unproven hypothesis of the supremacy of the female priesthood in Mycenaean Crete. Thirdly, as for the ancient Greek myth about the country of the Amazons, which is the only written “evidence” of the existence of “matriarchy” recorded in antiquity, then this false myth was refuted by ancient writers, who explained that the Amazon warriors were only part of a completely patriarchal Scythian civilization. Of course, the hypothesis of evolutionism could not do without the creation of an animal and semi-animal period, when the hypothetical "hominids" and then primitive people "did not know" the institution of marriage, but lived in mumps, and therefore supposedly only motherhood could physiologically guarantee ancestral succession. But mankind from the day of the creation of Adam and Eve knew both what marriage is and what fatherhood is, communicating with the Heavenly Father.

Stated according to: Domostroy. Series: "Literary Monuments". SPb., Nauka, 2005. S. 8.

In fairness, it should be noted that pointing out the importance of the church-sovereign dignity of the Russian “Domostroy”, including it in a number of listed spiritual and state works of the 16th century, is by no means a “new word” in the study of this work. And the most attentive researchers of the Tsarist time - such as I.S. Nekrasov, A.V. Mikhailov, A.A. Kizevetter ( Nekrasov I.S. Experience of historical and literary research on the origin of Domostroy. M., 1873; Mikhailov A.V. On the issue of the editions of Domostroy, its composition and origin // Journal of the Ministry of National Education. 1889. Book. 2, 3; Kizevetter A.A. The main trends of the Old Russian Domostroy // Russian Wealth. 1896. No. 1. S. 39-52), and scientists of our era - such as academician D.S. Likhachev, a prominent St. Petersburg philologist, historian of the Russian Language V.V. Kolesov, paid attention to this. For example, V.V. Kolesov denotes the significance of the influence of such a historical and literary context of the 16th century on the form and content of Domostroy ( Kolesov V.V. Domostroy as a monument of medieval culture // Domostroy. Series: "Literary Monuments". SPb., Nauka, 2005. S. 307-308). However, even in the most benevolent interpretations of the Russian "Domostroy" this influence is not seen as the main and constructive, but as a factor that distorts the folk protographs of economic, household literature: "Domostroy suffered the fate of all Novgorod-Pskov literature: what was not directly burned on Red Square, then it is completely redone, sometimes with a distortion of the main idea of ​​​​the work. The literary activity of [St.] Macarius and his collaborators was such a "reshaping" of the rich literary tradition that had developed in Novgorod, in order to please the autocratic interests of Moscow ”( Kolesov V.V. There. S. 326). Thus, the main merit of the book is turned into its "flaw" by a purely journalistic, non-historical, non-scientific method. Suffice it to say that at the time of Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich the Terrible and Saint Macarius, the Moscow city toponym "Red Square" did not exist in Moscow. The area to the east of the Kremlin was called Torg. The name "Red Square" appeared in May 1613 in connection with the meeting of Tsar Mikhail Feodorovich Romanov. For His procession from the Neglinnye (later Resurrection) Gates of Kitay-Gorod to the Spasskaya Tower, a high wooden platform covered with red cloth was built. Since then, the Kremlin Trade became known as the Red Square.