I. Канонизация святых в Русской церкви от начала христианства в России до Макариевских соборов 1547-го и 1549-го годов

Over the centuries of its existence, the Russian Church canonized a certain number of saints, and was guided by certain general rules and observed certain general orders: this determines the content of the history of the canonization of saints in the Russian Church. Firstly, a list of Russian saints should be given, in which private information about individual cases of canonization, as far as we have this information, would be provided; secondly, those general rules and procedures that were guided and observed by the Russian Church in individual cases of canonization must be set out. Now we will do this in our study, and we will arrange the list of saints - partly in the chronological order of their canonization, since this chronology is known, and partly in the chronological order of their lives. But for the convenience of readers, which can also be called the benefit of the matter, we allow ourselves, in relation to general rules and procedures, to act in such a way as to state them twice. It will be much more convenient for readers to get acquainted with particular cases of canonization if they have some general idea of ​​the matter in advance, and therefore we, postponing a detailed and thorough presentation of the general rules and procedures that guided and observed the Russian Church in the matter of canonization, until the end of our study, we will preface the list of saints with a brief summary of these rules and procedures. The general rules and procedures that guided and observed our Russian Church in individual cases of canonization of saints are the following. 1. The basis for canonizing deceased ascetics of piety was the glorification of the ascetics with the gift of miracles, either during life, examples of which are known, or, as was most often the case, after death. In the Greek Church, as we said above, there were several whole classes of ascetics, for whose canonization there were other grounds besides or in addition to glorification with the gift of miracles. But for us, this glorification of the gift of miracles constituted the only common basis for considering as saints ascetics of all classes or for all ascetics in general. As for the ascetics of those classes, for whose canonization in the Greek Church there were grounds other than glorification by the gift of miracles, in our country only a few individual ascetics from among these classes, representing an exception to our general rule, were canonized on the same grounds as in Greece. 2. In relation to the vastness of the territory of honor, the ascetics who were considered saints were divided into three classes: local in the narrowest sense of the word, local in the broadest sense of the word and general or church-wide, i.e. those who were assigned a celebration only in the very place of their burial - in a monastery or at a parish church (there are several examples of which) - those who were assigned a celebration in one of their own diocese, and those for whom celebration was assigned throughout the Russian Church. 3. The right of local canonization, both in the narrowest and in the broadest sense of the word, belonged to the diocesan bishop, under the condition, as one must think, if not in both cases, then, at least in the second case, permission from the head of the Russian Church, the metropolitan - the patriarch; the right of general or church-wide canonization now belonged to the aforementioned head of the Russian Church, which was the metropolitan - the patriarch. 4. The process of canonization, which constituted the canonization process, so to speak, consisted in the fact that the subject authority, if it was not an eyewitness of the miracles performed at the tomb of some ascetic of piety, was informed about these latter and that the authority was one way or another convinced of the justice of the report. 5. The very veneration of sainthood consisted in the fact that on the day of the saint’s dormition or the day of the discovery of his relics, or on both days, an annual church celebration of his memory was appointed. 6. To celebrate the memory of a saint, a service to him was needed, and it was equally necessary that his life be written (existed). The highest authority saw to it that the services, with the prologue reading or synaxarium included in them, were compiled “in their likeness,” that is, that they correspond to the required form and that they were more or less satisfactory in their literary qualities; and sometimes the highest authority, not limiting itself to services, extended its concerns to lives (as was the case on its part in the person of Metropolitan Macarius). 7. The very rite or the very celebration of sainthood or canonization consisted in the fact that on the appointed day it was performed in the church in which, under or near which the bodily remains or relics of the deceased ascetic were located, a solemn divine service was performed by a more or less numerous council of specially convened surrounding clergy with a representative of the subject authority or with the authority itself at the head and in the presence of a deliberately notified and invited layman the surrounding population. 8. The bodily remains or relics of deceased saints were opened and contributed from the ground either before they were canonized, or simultaneously with this, or after this. In the first case, this was done in the hope of glorifying bodily remains or relics through the gift of miracles; in the second and third cases, the purpose of this was to make the relics an object of honor and worship as a shrine. 9 . In addition to the veneration of saints - local in both senses and general, we also had “veneration” of the deceased ascetics of virtue, which constituted, so to speak, the lowest degree of their cult against veneration. If the deceased ascetic was buried in a church, then a tomb or shrine was placed on the floor of the church above his grave (actually, a cenotaph, which means an empty coffin that does not contain a body, and the name used to designate empty coffins that served as monuments - κενοτάφιον); if he was buried outside the church, then a small chapel was placed over the grave and in the chapel there was also a tomb or shrine (and if the relics of the deceased ascetic were opened, then they were kept in the shrine, tightly closed in it); in both cases, the tomb or shrine was covered with a shroud and a candle was placed in front of it. At the tomb, memorial services were sung for the deceased, and, sometimes, due to abuse, even prayers were sung for him. Such veneration of the deceased ascetics of piety was sometimes simply popular and, as arbitrary, in some cases met resistance from the clergy, sometimes it was permitted or directly prescribed by the church authorities, which for some reason did not find it possible to canonize the deceased and at the same time wanted that with the offering of prayers for him, veneration would be given to him to some extent. These, in brief, were the general rules and procedures that guided and observed our Russian Church in individual cases of canonization of saints. The veneration of saints from ancient times to modern times has been the same for us, so for this reason there are no periods in its history that would be determined by its internal content 61 . According to the external existing facets, the review of particular cases of canonization should be divided into four sections; this is, firstly, the time from the beginning of Christianity in Russia to the Makariev Councils of 1547 - 1549; secondly, the now mentioned Makarievsky Cathedrals; thirdly, the time from the cathedrals to the establishment of St. Synod, and fourthly, from the establishment of St. Synod to this day. We turn to the list of saints for the first indicated division of time. In the list, as we said above, we will provide information about the canonization of individual saints, as far as we have this information and as far as we know it. But in the notes we will provide information about the relics of saints, as far as we have this latest information. When in your speeches we do not support ourselves with quotations, then we will need to understand this in such a way that we take information from the lives of these saints. In those cases where saints are celebrated on the days of their death, which is the majority of the time, we will not add after indicating the day of death that the celebration takes place on the same day, but will leave this to the reader to understand. 1 and 2. The first saints of our Russian Church were the passion-bearers Boris and Gleb, by Christian names Roman and David, the sons of the Baptist of Rus'. book Vladimir, who suffered death at the hands of their brother Svyatopolk. Boris's body immediately after his murder, near Pereyaslavl, on July 24, 1015 or 9 days after the death of his father, was brought to Vyshgorod (located 14 versts from Kyiv up the Dnieper) and buried near the church of St. Vasily; the body of Gleb, killed near Smolensk, on September 5 of the same year 1015 or a month and 12 days after his brother, was first buried at the site of the murder 62, and then, by order of Yaroslav, when he, having defeated Svyatopolk, sat on the grand-ducal throne, was transferred to the body of Boris in Vyshgorod. The discovery of the relics of the passion-bearers and the establishment of a celebration for them is read in the legends about them by the monk Jacob and St. Nestor 63. We will hand over Jacob, whom Nestor reproduces only with insignificant and unimportant digressions. “Many did not know that the holy martyrs, holy passion-bearers Roman and David were laid to rest in Vyshgorod; but the Lord did not allow such a treasure to remain hidden in the ground. In the place where they lay, sometimes we saw a pillar of fire standing, sometimes we heard the singing of angels, and the faithful people, hearing and seeing it, marveled and glorified God and came to pray in that place, and many strangers came from other lands - and some believed, having heard (the stories) about it, and others did not believe, but considered it a lie, as the apostle says about the cross: unbelief To those who are perishing there is foolishness, but to those who are saved by faith the power of God is 64... One day, close to the place where the saints were buried underground, the Varangians came, and when one (of them) entered (the grave of the saints), the fire that suddenly came out of the coffin scorched his feet, about which he, jumping out (from the fire), began to talk, showing his scorched and burnt feet to his comrades. After this, they did not dare to approach close (to the grave of the saints), but they prayed (at her) with fear. Not long after this, the church of St. Basil, where the saints were lying, and the people came running 65 and since the church was burning (the fire in the church started) from above, they took everything out (from it) - icons and vessels, and nothing burned, only one church (that is, only the walls of the church). They reported all this to (Grand Duke) Yaroslav, and (Grand Duke) called Metropolitan John and told him everything about the holy martyrs, his brothers, and (Metropolitan) was “terrified both in doubt and (more so) in boldness (and) in joy towards God.” Having left the prince, he gathered his cathedral priests and all the clergy and ordered them to go “with crosses” (in a procession of the cross) to Vyshegorod. And they came to the place where the saints lay, and Prince (Great) Yaroslav was with them, and they erected a “cell small” (small chapel) in the place where the burnt church stood. The archbishop (i.e., the metropolitan, whom Jacob calls either metropolitan or archbishop), coming with crosses, performed all-night singing in that cell. The next day, the archbishop went with crosses (to the place where the most venerable bodies of the saints lay), and, having prayed, he ordered the earth to be dug up over the tombs of the saints. During the digging, incense emanated from their (the passion-bearers') holy tombs. Having dug them out, they brought them out of the ground, and Metropolitan John and the priests, filled with fear and love, proceeded to open the coffins of the saints, and (having opened the coffins) they saw a glorious miracle: the bodies of the saints did not have any ulcers, but were completely whole (“the bodies of the saint had no skin, and everything was intact”), and their faces were as bright as (the face of) an angel, so that The archbishop and all the people who felt the great fragrance were amazed. And having brought (the coffins) into that “church” that was erected on the site of the burnt church, they placed them on top of the ground on the right side.” Soon two miracles took place at the tombs of the saints: one youth, who had a dry and crumpled leg on which he could not walk and which he replaced with a forged wooden leg, received healing, and one blind man received his sight. The miracles were reported to Grand Duke Yaroslav. “Hearing about them, Prince Yaroslav glorified God and the holy martyrs and, calling the Metropolitan, joyfully told him (about what was reported to him - the prince). When the bishop heard about this, he praised the Lord and gave the prince good, godly advice to build (in honor of the saints) the best church possible. And the prince was pleased with his advice, and built a large church with five roofs, and painted it all and decorated it with all kinds of beauty. And Metropolitan John and Prince Yaroslav and all the clergy and people went with crosses, and brought the saints (coffins) to the church and consecrated the church and ordered to celebrate the holiday of the month of July on the 24th day, on which blessed Boris was killed - on this very day the church was consecrated and the coffins of the saints were transferred.” During the liturgy, through prayer to the saints, one lame man was healed, which miracle was seen by the prince, the metropolitan and all the people. “After the liturgy, the prince invited everyone to dinner - both the metropolitan and the priests, and they celebrated the festival as it should be, and (the prince) distributed a lot from the estate to the poor, orphans and widows” 66. In the story you have just conveyed of the discovery of the relics of Saints Boris and Gleb, and the establishment of their feast, it is not entirely clear to us why the relics of the saints were discovered before the establishment of the feast for them or before they were canonized. Rev. explains to us what is not entirely clear to us. Nestor, whose end of the story about the discovery of the relics reads: “I took the holy race, carried it into the previously mentioned cage 67, placed it on the right side of the country, and having performed the holy service, I departed, glorifying God, and let the man-loving God show that the truth is, even as I promised, as glorifying (Him) to glorify.” (1 Samuel 2:30). In the words: “and may the philanthropic God show,” etc. Rev. Nestor lets us know; that the motivation for the discovery of the relics of Boris and Gleb before establishing the celebration was the hope and aspiration, or, so to speak, the hopeful aspiration that God would glorify the relics by working miracles. At the graves of the princes, immediately or soon after their burial, signs began to occur that testified that they had found grace in the eyes of God, like His saints. But the signs that were performed were not recognized as sufficient to formally proclaim them saints with the establishment of a festival for them - and so, in the hope that God would glorify the relics of the passion-bearers with miracles, which would give the right to formally rank them among the saints, they opened the latter. This discovery of the relics of Boris and Gleb was not our first such discovery, although they themselves were our first saints. Even Grand Duke Vladimir discovered and transferred the relics of his grandmother St. to the Tithe Church. Olga, and, as most likely should think, was guided by the same impulse that Nestor points out. Vladimir and Yaroslav, no doubt, did not themselves invent this custom of opening relics in the hope of glorifying the latter with miracles, but borrowed it from the Greeks. We cannot point out examples and evidence from the contemporary history of the Greek Church; As for the later church, Barsky says about the well-known custom of Athos to dig up the bones of the dead from the ground three or four years after death and put them in a special repository (kimitirium), that this is done for the purpose, “and for the time being, if God wants to glorify anyone virtuous, to reveal a certain fragrance on them (the bones)” 68 . The relics of Boris and Gleb were discovered after the fire of the old church and before the construction, of course - without waiting for the construction of the new church, as one must think, in order to eliminate the inevitable trampling of their graves during the construction of the new church. The whole thing, deviate somewhat from the way it was conveyed by Jacob and Nestor, as if it should be presented this way. Immediately after the fire of the old church of St. Vasily, where the bodies of the princes were buried, it was decided to build a new church of the same kind, and in order to eliminate the inevitable trampling of their graves, it was decided to open their relics, for which they now had the above-mentioned impulse, and place them before building the church in a small cell or chapel. But during the construction of the church, two miracles were performed from the relics: then it was decided to establish a holiday for the passion-bearers and to dedicate the church, which had been built in the past, in the name of St. Vasily, to themselves - the passion-bearers. Jacob and Nestor do not say that after the establishment of the annual celebration of Boris and Gleb, a service to them was written; This last we know the language of the service itself, in the inscription of which it is stated that it is the creation of John, Metropolitan of Russia 69, and which, therefore, having been written by Metropolitan John himself or someone else on his behalf, was prepared more or less soon after the establishment of the celebration. The stories about Boris and Gleb, as saints, were written (by Jacob and Nestor) not immediately after the establishment of the celebration by him, but quite a considerable time after this. The celebration of Saints Boris and Gleb was established not locally, but throughout the church. As the first Russian saints, they were recognized as patrons of the Russian land and for this reason, in the pre-Mongol period, their memory was celebrated very solemnly, being ranked among the great annual holidays of the Russian Church 70. 3. Our third saint after Boris and Gleb was St. Theodosius of Pechersk, who died on May 3, 1074. In the Pechersk Monastery itself, the memory of Theodosius as a saint began to be celebrated, in all likelihood, immediately after her death, and in any case, only a few, a few, years after her: Nestor wrote his life of St. Theodosius until the year 1091, for he does not yet speak about the transfer of the relics of the saint from the cave to the church, which took place in this last year, but in the approach to his life it is read about Theodosius that “we are now celebrating the day of his Assumption, and we are creating a memory.” We don’t know whether the reverends began at the tomb. Theodosius performed miracles immediately or shortly after his death; but he was awarded by God the gift of miracles during his lifetime, and this latter could serve as the basis for the monks of Pechersk to begin the celebration of his memory as a saint immediately or shortly after his death. In the year 1091, as we said above, the relics of St. Theodosius, having been dug out of the ground in a cave, the place of their burial, were transferred to the monastery church (founded by Theodosius himself before his death, but the building was completed and consecrated only in 1089) and placed in the vestibule of the church on the right side. In 1108, a general celebration of St. Theodosius throughout the Russian Church, but the celebration is not complete, but only, so to speak, partial. 71 In the chronicle, under the indicated year 1108, it is read regarding this: “In this year, God put it in the heart of Theoktist, abbot of Pechersk, and began to inform the prince (great) Svyatopolk (Izyaslavich), so that he would inscribe Theodosius in the senanik, and, having been glad, he promised and did, commanded the metropolitan write it in the synodik and commanded it to be written in all the bishops, and all the bishops joyfully wrote it down and commemorated it (var. and commemorate it) and at all the councils.” By synodikon we should mean a list of saints who were commemorated at the festive lithiums in the prayer: “Save, O God, thy people,” and the assimilation of the name of the synodik or memorial service to the list should be explained by the fact that in ancient times at the festive lithiums after the saints the living and the dead were commemorated (as can now be commemorated) or the synodikon was read as a memorial service 72. And thus, under the inscription of Rev. Theodosius in synodics for all bishoprics should include the inclusion of his name in all bishoprics in the lists of saints commemorated at festive litias, for the purpose, as indicated, so that in all bishoprics he would be commemorated at these litias along with other saints commemorated 73. Why the abbot of Pechersk sought from the Grand Duke only that the name of Theodosius be ordered to be included in all dioceses in the lithium synodics (lists of saints), and not that all dioceses be commanded to celebrate the day of his memory, in other words, why the abbot sought the establishment of a general or widespread celebration of Theodosius, partial or private, we cannot say positively. Regarding the probable, we think that in Greece at the end of the 11th - beginning of the 12th century, only a very few of the most famous ones from the rank of saints to which Theodosius belonged became universally revered saints, and that for this reason the abbot of Pechersk did not find it possible to seek universal reverence for Theodosius in the proper sense of the word. Did the abbot of Pechersk himself come up with that particular method of universal veneration that he was looking for for the saint? Theodosius, or took it from the example of the Greek, we also cannot say. As for general veneration in the proper sense of the word, through the celebration of the day of remembrance, one must think that there was no new order regarding it from the ecclesiastical and civil authorities, but that over time it was adopted by the venerable. Feodosia by itself. In this history of inscription Rev. Theodosius in the Synodics of Lithium for all bishops, it seems puzzling that the abbot of Pechersk addressed the request for the inscription of Theodosius not to the metropolitan, but to the Grand Duke, and that the Grand Duke ordered the Metropolitan and the bishops to inscribe Theodosius. If we were to assume that the chronicler accurately conveys the matter, then it would be necessary to say that the abbot of Pechersk assimilated to the Grand Duke a right that did not belong to the latter, and that the Grand Duke appropriated to himself the right of a metropolitan and allowed himself illegal coercion in relation to him. But we think that there should be an inaccuracy in the chronicler's reporting of the matter - that the abbot sought an intercession from the Grand Duke with the Metropolitan and that the Grand Duke, for his part, fulfilled precisely this request of the abbot 74. 4. If our information is reliable, then the fourth Russian saint should be Nikita, Bishop of Novgorod, who was one of the ascetics of Pechersk and died on January 30, 1108. Polycarp, in his letter to Akipdin, which forms the second part of the Patericon of Pechersk 75, says that Nikita, during his lifetime, being the bishop of Novgorod, performed many miracles and that in Novgorod he was revered with the saints: “performed many miracles..., and now with the saints we honor his saint and blessed Nikita”... If Nikita really became famous during his lifetime as a miracle worker, then one might think that his veneration in Novgorod with the saints or the local celebration of him there began immediately after his death. However, then, more or less long before the half of the 16th century, this celebration of him as a saint ceased in Novgorod and in 1558, as we will discuss below, it was again established for him. 5. In all likelihood, the Equal to the Apostles Vela should be placed in fifth place among our saints. book Olga, who died on July 11, 969 76. Her grandson led her. book Vladimir took her relics out of the ground, which, as we noted above, was our first case of discovery of relics, and transferred them from the unknown place where they were buried to the Church of the Tithes. Vladimir’s hope, with which he, in all likelihood, transferred the relics to the church, that the Lord would glorify them with the gift of miracles, was not fulfilled before his eyes, 77 but then, at an unknown time before the invasion of the Mongols, God glorified the relics with the gift of miracles and Olga was canonized. That the basis for her canonization was the miracles that began or happened at her tomb, and not her title of Equal-to-the-Apostles, this is undoubtedly confirmed by our information about the reading of canonization. book Vladimir. If she (Olga) had been canonized as an Equal-to-the-Apostles, then Vladimir, who was Equal-to-the-Apostles, so to speak, to a greater extent than she, would have been canonized along with her, for he was not only the forerunner of the general baptism of Rus', but its very culprit. Meanwhile, we positively know that he led. book Vladimir was not canonized during the pre-Mongol period and was not canonized precisely because no miracles happened at his tomb. The source of information regarding the fact that the celebration was led. book Olga was established in the pre-Mongol period, are three copies of the Serbian prologue that have survived to this day, dating back to the 13th-14th centuries, which were copied from the Bulgarian original, which in turn was copied from the Russian original. In these lists one reads legends about the Russian saints of the Kyiv region, the celebrations of which were established in the pre-Mongol period 78, and among other legends there is a legend about St. Olga, in conclusion, her prayers are asked for those who honor the day of her repose. Ancient service of St. Olga doesn’t know: maybe it didn’t reach us, or maybe it wasn’t written, so the celebration before the appearance of the now famous service, which was written in the middle of the 15th century, was performed without a special service, according to the general minimum 79. 6. Mstislav Vladimirovich, but with the Christian name Theodore, son of Vladimir Monomakh, Grand Duke of Kiev, who died on April 14, 1132 according to the Laurentian Chronicle and on April 15, 1133 according to the Ipatian Chronicle. In the now mentioned Serbian prologues 80 one reads a legend about him under the day of his death, assigned by the Hypatian Chronicle, i.e., April 15th. It must be thought that more or less soon after his death it was established to commemorate him locally, in the most honest sense, at his tomb, which was located in the Kiev Feodorovsky Monastery, which he himself completed; and the basis for establishing the memory should be considered to be the miracles that were performed or performed at the grave, for the legend says that the death of the prince was marked by a miracle. The celebration of the memory of Mstislav, unknown in later times, probably ceased when the Feodorovsky Monastery, whose walls it was limited, ceased to exist; and the Feodorovsky Monastery ceased to exist, in all likelihood, with the invasion of the Mongols. 7. Igor Olegovich, by the Christian name Gabriel, by the monastic name George, Prince of Chernigov, grandson of Svyatoslav, great-grandson of Yaroslav, killed by the people of Kiev on September 19, 1147 on political suspicions. In all likelihood, it should be thought that in Chernigov, to which Igor’s body was transported in 1150, local memory of him began to be celebrated from the very minute of this bringing of the body, for God showed a great sign over him even before his burial and faithful people began to honor his memory as a saint from the very minute of his murder 81. In any case, we have evidence that he was celebrated as a saint in the pre-Mongol period 82. We cannot say positively whether his memory is being commemorated in Chernigov at the present time, but if we believe the evidence known to us, then it is happening 83. (Grand Duke Andrei Yuryevich Bogolyubsky, killed by conspirators from June 28 to 29, 1175. Judging by the fact that the chroniclers call him a martyr, equate him with Saints Boris and Gleb, pleasing him as a saint, turn to him with a prayer to intercede before God for the Russian princes 84, one might think that soon after his death a local celebration was established for him in Vladimir, or at least in the Vladimir Assumption Cathedral, in which he was buried. But in the absence of any indication of the existence of this celebration, it is more likely to understand the matter in such a way that it was not established and that the words of the chroniclers express either the people’s or only their own view of Bogolyubsky. 1702, which we will talk about below in its place, should be considered not as the restoration of the ceased ancient celebration, but as its establishment for the first time). 8. Anthony Pechersky. Rev. Anthony, the actual and actual founder of the Pechersk Monastery 85, to whom the reverend. Theodosius was a disciple, not only was he not canonized before this latter or together with him, but he was not canonized for quite a long time after. The only answer to the question: why was there no celebration of St. for a very long time? Anthony, is the one who, due to His unknown destinies, God did not want to glorify him with the gift of miracles (just as it was not good for him to reveal his very relics). The time of establishment of the celebration of the saint or his canonization may not be indicated precisely, but only approximately. In the Serbian prologues mentioned above, he is not present along with other Russian saints, and this should be taken as a decisive sign that when the Russian original of the prologues was compiled, which was no earlier than 1132 - 1183, his (Antony’s) memory did not yet exist, for in the prologues there is also such a private memory as the memory of Vel. book Mstislav Vladimirovich. But in the Patericon of Pechersk, which was written at the end of the first - beginning of the second quarter of the 13th century, he (Antony) is repeatedly called a saint, and this title in all likelihood should be understood as a real saint or formally canonized. Thus, the lamentation of Rev. Anthony's canonization or the establishment of the celebration of his memory should be attributed to the space of time between the second quarter of the 12th and the first quarter of the 13th century 86 . As for the basis or motivation for establishing the celebration, then, according to what was said above, the glorification of the saint’s tomb by miracles should be considered such a basis or such an incentive. 9 . Leonty, third bishop of Rostov, who died around 1077. After the discovery of his relics in 1164, when digging the foundation for a new cathedral, which was to be built on the site of the burned-out previous one, a local diocesan or local regional celebration was established for him by Bishop John of Rostov in 1190, and the day of celebration was set as the day of the discovery of the relics, which is May 23rd. In the tales of St. Leontius says nothing about the motive for which Bishop John established the celebration for him; but that such a motivation was the miracles that began to take place at his tomb, this is completely clear from the fact that along with his relics in the year 1164 the relics of his successor Isaiah were found and that Bishop John, having established a celebration for him, did not establish a celebration for his successor: no other reason for this can be assumed except that miracles began to happen with the relics of one, but not with the relics of the other. Having established the celebration of St. Bishop John wrote to Leontius, either himself or with the hands of someone else, and a service to him. Did the bishop ask permission from the metropolitan to establish the celebration of St. Leonty, in a positive way remains unknown; but with all probability it must be assumed 88. 10. Vsevolod-Gabriel, Prince of Novgorod, son of Mstislav Vladimirovich, who was mentioned above under No. 6, after being expelled from Novgorod, died in Pskov on February 11, 1138 (and is usually called Pskov after the place of his burial). Local celebration of the prince's memory in Pskov began either in 1192, when his relics, having been discovered, were transferred from the church of St. Demetrius, where he was buried, in the Trinity Cathedral, which he himself founded, since during this transfer, according to the assurance of his life, a miraculous sign followed, or from the year 1284, in which the first miracle was performed at the relics 89. In the Church Gazette, published under St. Synod, in the 46th No. 1898, the correspondence was printed: “The transfer of the relics of the holy prince Vsevolod - Gabriel from the Trinity Cathedral to the Annunciation Cathedral in the city of Pskov” in this correspondence we read regarding the relics: “Together with. the cathedral and city clergy (Reverend Antonin, Bishop of Pskov) quietly took out an ancient oak coffin with holy relics from a silver shrine and placed it on a prepared hearse in the middle of the Trinity Cathedral, and the silver shrine was transferred to the Annunciation Cathedral; The coffin of the saint of God looks like a long wooden box with a lid on large hinges, lined with iron hoops, entwined with wire, locked, with a seal,” page 1755, col. 1 fin. 11. Avramiy, the Bulgarian martyr, a Christian of a different non-Russian language, who suffered from the Bulgarians for the faith of Christ in 1229, was brought from Bulgaria to Vladimir Klazemsky in 1230 and was laid here in the Assumption Convent. Signs at his tomb began immediately after his death, and his bringing from Bulgaria to Vladimir can only be explained by faith in him as a saint, which is fully confirmed by the tone of the chronicler’s speech about him 90 . And therefore, with full probability it should be accepted that the local celebration of his memory in Vladimir or in one Assumption Monastery began from the very minute of bringing his relics to Vladimir 91. 12 and 13. Prince Mikhail Vsevolodovich of Chernigov and his boyar Theodore, who suffered martyrdom for their faith in the Horde from Batu on September 20, 1246. Since the prince and his boyar were not only passion-bearers in the sense that they suffered a violent death, but also martyrs for the faith in the true sense of the word, one must think that their local memory in Chernigov, where their bodies were transferred from the Horde more or less shortly after their suffering, began to be celebrated immediately following this transfer. The modern narrator of the martyrdom of the prince and his boyar assures that the Lord God glorified them with a great sign, as His saints, who suffered for Him and for the Orthodox faith, immediately after their heads were beheaded by Him 92. 14. The Baptist of Rus' led. book Vladimir Svyatoslavich, who died on July 15, 1015. Having been glorified and blessed for his great work of baptizing Rus', like the equal of the apostles and the second Constantine the Great, Vladimir was very soon canonized in a formal way, through the establishment of a celebration of his memory. The reason for this was that his relics were not glorified by God through the gift of miracles. The unknown author of the life of Vladimirov, written around the middle of the 12th century, among other things says, addressing the Russian people with reproach: “It is marvelous, how much good (Vladimir) has done for the Rusty of the earth, baptizing it; We, the peasants of existence, do not pay homage to this retribution: if he had not baptized us, then now we would have been deceived by the devil, just as our ancestors were destroyed; Yes, even if we had labored and prayed to bring a prayer to God on the day of his repose, God would have glorified our efforts towards him; for we deserve to pray to God, since we have known God” 93. The author of the life wants to say that if the Russian people had commemorated him on the day of Vladimir’s repose, then God, through their prayers, would have glorified him with the gift of miracles, and then he would have been canonized. That at the tomb of Vladimir, indeed, no miracles were performed, this is clearly evidenced by the monk Jacob, who, defending the memory of Vladimir from the reproach that he does not work miracles, says: “We are not surprised, beloved, if he does not work miracles after death: for many more righteous saints did not work miracles, but they are holy” 94, etc. Established there was a celebration of the memory of Vladimir more or less soon after 1240, and not in Kyiv or generally southern Rus', but in Novgorod. In the year 1240, on July 15, on the day of the death of Vladimir, the Novgorodians, under the leadership of their prince Alexander Yaroslavich Nevsky, won the famous victory over the Swedes at the confluence of Izhora with the Neva (a victory for which Alexander Yaroslavich received the nickname Nevsky), and whether on the initiative of Alexander Yaroslavich or the Novgorodians themselves, the memory of the famous victory, which took place on the day of Vladimir’s repose, and was immortalized in Novgorod by establishing a church celebration for the latter. We cannot accurately indicate the time of establishment of the celebration, but a modern biographer of Alexander Yaroslavich Nevsky, who died on November 14, 1263, writing more or less shortly after his death, makes it known that at the time of writing his biography the celebration had already been established 95. Since in Novgorod there could be no talk of miracles at the tomb of Vladimir, who in Kiev during the invasion of Batyevo, on December 6, 1240, was buried under the ruins of the Church of the Tithes, it is necessary to think that the celebration was established for him not as a miracle worker, but as an equal-to-the-apostles baptizer of Russia, and we could have in mind the example of Constantine the Great 96. 15. Grand Duke Alexander Yaroslavich Nevsky, who died in the schema, with the name Alexy, as we just said, on November 14, 1263. It must be thought that the veneration of his memory began from the very moment of his burial, for this burial was marked by a miraculous sign, which was witnessed by Metropolitan Kirill, who performed the funeral service for him, and about which, according to the chronicle, the metropolitan preached to everyone 97 . In 1380, as a result of a vision, his relics were discovered, from which miracles began to occur and, in all likelihood, then a local celebration of him was established 98. (Ryazan prince Roman Olegovich, who suffered martyrdom for his faith in the Horde on July 19, 1270. Since the prince suffered, in the exact sense, martyrdom for his faith (slandered by the khan for blaspheming the Tatar faith, he responded to the khan’s demand to accept this latter faith not only by a decisive rejection of it, but also by daring blasphemies against it), and, moreover, the most terrible death, and since the chronicles say about him that he “purchased for himself the kingdom of heaven with passion and received a crown from the hand of the Lord with his relative, the Grand Duke of Chernigov Mikhail Vsevolodovich, who suffered in Christ for the Orthodox Christian faith” 99: then one would think that a local celebration was established for him in Ryazan (not the present one, which, being then a suburb, was called Pereyaslavl Ryazan, and the then, which is now the village of Staraya Ryazan, located from the present Ryazan 50 versts down the Oka). But the absence of any indication of the existence of the celebration makes it more likely that it was not established, and the reason for this can be considered that the body of the prince, chopped up and scattered by the Tatars, was not brought to Ryazan 100. 16. Grand Duke of Russia, appanage prince of Tver, Mikhail Yaroslavovich, killed in the Horde, through the machinations of Moscow Prince Yuri Danilovich, on November 22, 1318. The modern legend about the death of the prince assures that this latter was accompanied by signs and wonders, and calls him a true martyr, who “was numbered among the saints and with his relatives Saints Boris and Gleb and with his namesake Grand Duke Mikhail of Chernigov and received an unfading crown from the hand of the Lord, his desire.” 101. Based on what has just been indicated, and mainly on the assurance that the death of Mikhail Yaroslavovich was already accompanied by signs and wonders, it is likely that one can think that local veneration of the passion-bearer martyr prince began in Tver immediately after his body was brought here. The relics led. book Mikhail Yaroslavich, buried in the Tver Cathedral, were found in 1632, while digging ditches for the foundation of the new cathedral church (Indication of the manuscripts in which the legends about the relics are read - from Barsukov in the Sources of Hagiography. About the transfer of the relics in the current year 1902 from the previous wooden shrine to a new silver-gilded one with a new one her directly for the relics with a cypress-metal coffin - in No. 26 of the Church Gazette published under the Holy Synod). 17. Metropolitan Peter. At the tomb of Peter, who died on December 21, 1326, miracles began to occur from the very minute of his burial, and it is necessary to think that local veneration of him in Moscow began from the same time. 13 years after his death, in 1339, his successor at the metropolitan see, Theognostus, established a church-wide celebration for him, to give him greater firmness and solemnity, which was desirable for the Moscow princes in political matters, he asked the Patriarch of Constantinople for permission. About the answer of Patr., preserved to this day. John Kaleki Met. We mentioned Theognostus more than once above in response to his request for permission to canonize Peter; see it in the Greek original with Russian translation in the appendices to the study. Celebration of the memory of St. Peter is celebrated three times a year: on December 21, on the day of his death, on August 24, on the day of the transfer of the relics in 1479 to the new (current) Assumption Cathedral and on October 5, on the day of the four Moscow saints 102. 18–20. Vilna martyrs Anthony, John and Eustathius 103 (by Lithuanian popular names: Kumets, Nezhilo and Kruglets), who suffered for the Christian faith under Olgerd in 1347. The compiler of the so-called Gustino Chronicle, which ends in 1597 and dates back to the first half of the 17th century, Sylvester Kossov in his Polish Patericon, published in 1635, and the Uniate writer Jan Dubovich in the essay: Hierarehia abo oZwierchnosci w cerki bozej, printed in 1644, claim that the celebration of the martyrs was established by St. Metropolitan Alexy 104, and the first says that the Metropolitan did this with the blessing of Patriarch Philotheus, and the latter assigns the year 1364 as the time of establishment 105. It may very well be that these witnesses are telling the complete truth, but since they are very late witnesses, one cannot rely on them with complete confidence. There is no doubt that the veneration of the memory of the martyrs in Vilna by local Christians began from the very time of their suffering, for, according to the evidence of their lives, a few years after him, and even under Algerd himself († 1377) and with his permission, Christians built a great church on the site of suffering, in which they placed a certain part of the relics of the holy martyrs, buried at the Vilna Church of St. Nicholas (they built a church in honor of the Holy Trinity, at which the famous Vilna Trinity Monastery was later formed. As for Olgerd, having condemned Anthony, John and Eustathius to death as his courtiers, who did not want to adhere to the same pagan faith with him and observe pagan customs, in general he was distinguished by complete tolerance towards Christianity, having two, one after another, Christian wives, allowing baptize his sons into Christianity and finally died as a Christian and even as a schema monk). And regarding the establishment of the celebration of martyrs as saints, we can say that their names appear in the monthly words of some liturgical books of the 15th century 106. The memory is celebrated on April 14th, which does not constitute the day of suffering of any of the martyrs (victims: Anthony on January 14th, John on April 23rd, Eustathius on December 13th), and refers to any event from the history of their relics, or there is a simple error that occurred as a result of something 107. 21. Dovmont or Domant, by the Christian name Timofey, Prince of Pskov, died on May 20, 1299. Local veneration of the memory began more or less soon after the death, if not immediately after it, and no later than in 1374, the real local celebration began, for in this year a church was erected in Pskov in the name of “St. Timothy, Prince Domant” 108. The relics of Prince Dovmont, unknown when they were discovered and located in the Pskov Trinity Cathedral, under which he was buried, lie in an oak tomb, which looks like a tall box of very simple workmanship, covered with a soundboard with an image of the prince; on three sides the tomb is surrounded by a simple iron grating, see gr. M. V. Tolstov’s book: Shrines and Antiquities of Pskov, M. 1861, p. 30 fin. and 34 fin. In 1746, Bishop Simeon of Pskov reported to St. Synod that in the closed coffin of Prince Dovmont a tin crab was visible, for example (approximately) an arshin in length, sealed with a black seal by someone unknown and when - in the Archives of St. Synod case 1744 No. 80, about unattested relics, l. 412 rev. 22. Varlaam Khutynsky, founder of the Spaso-Preobrazhensky Khutynsky Monastery, which is located 10 versts from Novgorod, died on November 6, 1192. They date the beginning of the local celebration of St. Varlaam in Novgorod by the end of the 13th century, but it seems more likely to date it back to the second half of the 14th century. The impetus for establishing the celebration was undoubtedly the miracles performed at the tomb of the saint, for he is the glorious Novgorod miracle worker. In Moscow they began to celebrate Varlaam in 1461, due to the fact that during the Grand Duke’s stay in Novgorod in the previous year 1460, he performed a great miracle with a youth of his (prince’s) retinue 109. The first known church in Novgorod, dedicated to the name of St. Varlaam Khutynsky, was staged in 1410, - Collection. years. III, 104. It is likely to think that this was the actual first church dedicated to the name of St. Varlaam and that the celebration of him as a saint began more or less not long before (Reverend Macarius, in his Archaeological description of church antiquities in Novgorod and its environs, dates the construction of the church in the name of St. Varlaam in the Khutyn monastery itself to the 14th century - part I p. 450, but does not indicate on what it is based, and as if the basis for this is only his own assumption). 23. Sergius of Radonezh, who died on September 25, 1392. Local celebration of Rev. Sergius in the Trinity Monastery itself, as most likely one should think, began immediately or within a very short time after his death, for he became famous as a great miracle worker during his lifetime 110. We don’t know whether a church-wide celebration was deliberately established for him or whether he became an all-Russian saint of his own accord, because of his great glory, but in 1447–48 he was already named among the great, very few then, miracle workers of the Russian land 111 . Celebration of memory - twice a year: on September 25th on the day of death and on July 5th on the day of the discovery of the relics 112. G. N. Barsukov in his famous work: “Sources of Russian hagiography” indicates the legend about the relics of St. Sergius of Radonezh, found in an 18th-century manuscript belonging to Prince. Vyazemsky, – col. 520. Believing that some unknown and real legend about the relics of St. Sergius, we tried to acquire a list from him (with the obligatory assistance of S.A. Belokurov). The legend turns out to be a word for the discovery of the relics of St. Sergius, which, between the brief attack and the conclusion, contains an extract from the Life of Epiphanius of St. Sergius about the discovery of the relics of Sergius and the construction of St. Sergius over his tomb. Nikon of the stone church (currently the manuscript in which the word is read is in the library of the Society of Lovers of Ancient Writing, a collection of manuscripts in the quarter of P. Vyazemsky Q II). The Abbess of the Moscow Passionate Monastery, Evgenia Ozerova, writes in her Notes that while she was in the Lavra on August 1, 1869, the head of St. Sergius, see in the Bartenev Russian Archive 1898 No. 8, p. 392 sub. fin. There is a legend about the relics of St. Varlaam Khutynsky, written in the middle of the 16th century, which says that the relics of the saint were inspected in 1440 and found incorrupt by Archbishop Evfimy Vyazhitsky, but that after the inspection they were again hidden under a bushel, see Archaeological description of church antiquities in Novgorod by the Venerable. Macarius, part I, p. 434 beginning, Shrines and antiquities of Veliky Novagorod gr. M. B. Tolstova, p. 187 fin. and Months of Saints, Rev. Demetrius, under the 6th of November according to the 2nd edition, cfr Descriptions of the manuscripts of the Solovetsky Monastery No. 544/266, – part II p. 277. 24. Dimitry Prilutsky, founder of the Spaso-Priglutsky Monastery, which is located 5 versts from Vologda (at the bow, i.e. the bend, the curvature of the Vologda River, from which the name), died on February 11, 1392. A local celebration for him in his monastery, in all likelihood, was established no later than the miracles that began to happen at his tomb, and these latter, according to records about them, began in 1409. By the end of the 15th century, from a local monastic celebration it turned not only into a local diocesan one, but also into a more or less all-Russian one 113 . 25. Elijah, in schema monasticism John, Archbishop of Novgorod, who died on September 7, 1186. In 1439, by a special dispensation of God, his relics were found, and he himself appeared in a dream to the then Archbishop of Novgorod Euthymius and called himself one of the saints. On this occasion, Archbishop Euthymius established a local celebration of his memory 114. By decree of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich and with the blessing of Patr. Nikon, the relics of Archbishop Elijah - John were transferred from the “dungeon” or from the underground crypt of the St. Sophia Cathedral, in which they had hitherto lay, to the top, into the cathedral itself, and at the same time a secondary celebration of December 1 was established - Collection. years. III, 191–192. 26 and 27. Prince of Novgorod Vladimir Yaroslavich, son of Yaroslav the Great, who died on October 4, 1052, and his mother Anna, who died in 1050. Under the same year 1489 as above, in the Novgorod Chronicles it is reported that Archbishop Euthymius gilded and signed and covered the coffins of the prince and his mother with covers and ordered them to be commemorated every summer or annually on the 4th day of October. As if the initial establishment of memory was the establishment not of celebration, but of commemoration 115, and that it turned from commemoration into celebration only later. If we accept this, then regarding the transformation of commemoration into celebration, one will think that the words we cited above, belonging to an unknown author of the life of St., had an application here. Vladimir: “yes, we would have labored and brought prayers to God on the day of his presentation, so that God would glorify our efforts towards him V17;”... If the archbishop established not a commemoration, but a celebration, then we cannot say anything about the reason for establishing the celebration, except that the prince was a ktitor or builder of the St. Sophia Cathedral, in which his relics rest 116. The relics of Prince Vladimir and his mother Anna, unknown when discovered, lay in the Korsun porch of the St. Sophia Cathedral until 1653, and in this last year, by order of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich and with the blessing of the patriarch. Nikon, transferred to the cathedral itself, - Collection. years. III, 191–192. 28. Prince of Novgorod Mstislav Rostislavich the Brave, son led. Prince Rostislav Mstislavich, grandson of Mstislav Vladimirovich, whom we talked about above under No. 6, great-grandson of Vladimir Monomakh, who died on June 14, 1180. His local memory in the Novgorod St. Sophia Cathedral, in which he was buried, was established unknown when, but it seems likely to think that more or less soon after the establishment of the memory of Prince Vladimir Yaroslavich and his mother Anna 117. The relics of Rostislav Mstislavich, Prince of Novgorod, discovered unknown when, lie in the St. Sophia Cathedral at autopsy, - Rev. Macarius Archaeological description of church antiquities in Novgorod, I, 70. 29. Kirill Belozersky, founder of the Belozersky Kirillov Monastery (named after him), which is located in the current district city of the Novgorod province Kirilov, 602 versts northeast of Novgorod and 37 versts southeast of the then city of the region Belozersk, died on June 9, 1427. Representing himself as the most famous ascetic of northern Rus' after St. Sergius of Radonezh, Rev. Cyril became a generally revered saint of the Russian Church, we do not know - after or without previous local veneration in his monastery itself, even more likely of St. Sergius, namely, together with him no later than 1447-1448 118. 30. Metropolitan Alexy, who died on February 12, 1378. We don’t know whether the church-wide celebration of his memory was preceded by a local celebration in the Chudov Monastery, in which he was buried, and was established by Metropolitan. Jonah at the end of 1448, immediately after his accession to the metropolitan see (which was on December 15 of that year), being his very first act as metropolitan 119. Celebration of the memory of St. Alexia is performed three times a year: on February 12, on the day of repose, on May 20, on the day of the discovery of relics, and on October 5, on the day of the four saints of Moscow 120. 31. Nikita, stylite of Pereyaslavl, labored and died unknown when - either at the end of the pre-Mongol period or at the beginning of the Mongol period. The establishment of a celebration for him should be attributed approximately to the half of the 15th century, 121 and the motivation for the establishment of a celebration should be considered the glory he acquired as a miracle worker, about which his life speaks. Commemoration of May 24th 122. 32–34. Prince of Smolensk and Yaroslavl Theodore Rostislavich, nicknamed Black, who reigned in Yaroslavl and died in the schema on September 19, 1300, and his sons: David, who died in 1321, and Constantine, who died unknown when, all three were buried in the Yaroslavl Spassky Monastery. Sometime before 1463, the relics of all three were discovered 123 and since they were bones, they were all placed in one coffin. It should be thought that the relics were opened for the reason that we indicated above, that is, in the hope of their glorification by miracles; but in 1463, the abbot of the Spassky Monastery and the priests of the cathedral churches of Yaroslavl, probably considering their aspirations in vain, decided to put them in the ground with honor or bury them. But when priests and laity came together to carry the relics into the tomb built for them, several miracles were performed from them: then they postponed their intention to bury them and left them standing in their original place. The miracles that began from the relics then went on in a continuous series, and they were reported to Bishop Tryphon of Rostov, to whose diocese Yaroslavl belonged, with the purpose, one must think, that he would establish a celebration for the new miracle workers. But the bishop, in the words of the legend about the glorification of the relics, “is overcome by unbelief, not in the name of faith (for miracles), imagining the magic of being.” Prompted by this unbelief, he sent his cathedral archpriest to Yaroslavl in 1467, “so he could look at the relics of the miracle workers and see if there would truly be healing from them.” The legend adds that the archpriest also did not believe, which makes it clear that unbelief was more or less common among the cathedral clergy bishop. Arriving in Yaroslavl, the archpriest announced that he had been sent by the bishop “to see the miracle workers, what will happen - whether they lie in the body, how much healing they do, whether hostility affects the deception of man.” However, when he wanted to inspect the relics of Prince Theodore and expose them from the cover, then, according to the legend, he was suddenly struck by a serious illness, from which he got rid of only after a long stay with the relics for tearful repentance of his sin. Bishop Tryphon, having heard about what happened to the archpriest, fell into relaxation, refused the see and ordered to be taken to Yaroslavl, to the Spassky Monastery, to the relics of the miracle workers, with whom he remained until his death (which followed on December 30, 1468), mourning his unbelief 124. A celebration was established for Prince Theodore and his sons, but whether it was general or local remains unknown. Based on what he said. book Ivan Vasilievich and Met. Philip († April 5, 1473) commissioned the hieromonk Anthony of the Spassky Monastery to write the lives of the new wonderworkers; they believe that a general celebration was established; but if the metropolitan himself established the celebration, then it does not necessarily follow from this that a general celebration was established, for the metropolitan could establish both a general and a local celebration in exactly the same way. It is more likely to think that a local celebration was established; only it really soon gained significant popularity, so that in the middle of the 16th century it was already recognized as a general celebration. Memory of all three: on the day of the repose of the father, September 19th 125 (and on the day of the transfer of the relics, March 5th). An unspecified place in the Degree Book about the relics of Prince Theodore and his sons, that they are dejected bones, is read in part I, on page 398 (The same in the Makaryevskaya Chet-Minea under September 19. “Dejected bones” resembles the expression of Chrysostom: δαπανηθέντα ὀστ ᾶ, see in Russian Appendix XX, in additional information about the relics of saints). The disbelief of Archbishop Tryphon and his entire clergy in the miracles performed at the relics of the princes, of course, was not without reason. This disbelief lets us know that at that time there were abbots who allowed themselves to resort to “fancy” miracles for the purpose indicated in the legend about the glorification of the relics, namely, for their own enrichment. 35. Savva Vishersky, founder of the Savvo or Savvino-Vishersky monastery, which is located 7 versts from Novgorod, on the Vishera River, died around 1460. In a very short time after the death of Rev. Savva showed himself to be a miracle worker, healing the abbot of his monastery from an illness, and when this was reported to the Archbishop of Novgorod Jonah († November 5, 1470), the archbishop, having come to the monastery and being at the tomb of the blessed one and performing a prayer service, “commanded to write the image of the saint on the icon, as well as the canon and other glory to the great and wonderful Lord God and our Savior Jesus Christ, who glorifies his saints even after his repose” 126, i.e., he established a local celebration of the saint in the monastery. Memory of October 1st 127. 36. Procopius of Ustyug, a holy fool for Christ, according to the evidence of his very little reliable life, he died in 1303, but in fact, it seems, he lived much later - at the end of the 14th - beginning of the 15th century. His veneration began on a private initiative. One “beggar man” who came to Ustyug from Moscow in 1458 ordered an image of him to be painted and, having built a small chapel over his grave, he placed the painted image in the latter for the veneration of those who came. The Ustyug cathedral priests and deacons reacted with hostility to this stranger’s self-will: they drove out the beggar, scattered the chapel and hid the image of Procopius. But in 1471, the Ustyug military people, who experienced the gracious help of Procopius during the campaign in the Grand Duke's army near Kazan, built a church in his name over his grave, from which time, according to the testimony of his life, and the holiday of his month of July began to be celebrated honestly and solemnly in Ustyug on the 8th day 128. The life does not say that the holiday was established by the diocesan bishop, which was the Archbishop of Rostov, but this must be implied, for without the bishop the church could not be consecrated (and the clergy of Ustyug, who shortly before swept away the chapel under the tomb of Procopius, of course, would not have allowed themselves and the laity such a very greater willfulness as the formal proclamation of the one who died for the saint and the establishment of real celebration) 129 . 37. Metropolitan Jonah, who died on March 31, 1461. On the occasion of the reconstruction of the Moscow Assumption Cathedral, on May 29, 1472, his relics were found, from which several miracles occurred on this occasion. On this occasion, a local celebration was established for him 130. 38. Isaiah, Bishop of Rostov, successor of St. Leonty, who died around 1090, whose relics were found simultaneously with the relics of Leonty in 1164. A local celebration of his memory was established in 1474 by Rostov Archbishop Vassian Rylo. In the later copies of Nestor’s life of Theodosius of Pechersk, to the words of the life about Isaiah that “for the sake of his good character (he) was quickly appointed bishop of the city of Rostov,” a postscript is read: “and there with the saints they honor him, for God has received the gift of miracles” 131. In this postscript, made after the establishment of the celebration of Isaiah, there should be an explanation of the reason why the celebration was established. Commemorated on the day of the discovery of the relics, May 15th. 39. Bishop of Rostov Ignatius, who died on May 28, 1288. A. N. Muravyov expressed the assumption, repeated after him by everyone, that the body of Ignatius, as a result of the miracles that took place during his funeral itself, was not buried, but was placed in the Rostov Cathedral in the very place where it still stands, and that thus he, Ignatius, began to be locally revered as a saint from the very minute of his funeral 132. But the assumption (very strange, despite the fact that it is repeated by everyone) is a consequence of a misunderstanding. The life of Ignatius says that when they carried his body to the church for burial, two pious nuns had a vision that he, the bishop, “rose from his bed in his hierarchical likeness, walked along the air and hundred mountains (above) above the church and blessed the people and the whole city, then descended onto the lower mosquito (vault), hedgehog before the altar, there he laid his body.” But this does not mean that the body of the bishop was placed on top of the floor of the church where his relics now lie (under the indicated part of the vault, opposite the northern doors of the altar), but it means that under the hollow church it was placed where the relics now lie on top of the floor, i.e. that the relics, after they were opened, were placed on the floor of the church above the very place in which they lay under the floor of the church before they were opened. That the bishop was canonized not very soon after his death is evident from his life. If he had been canonized from the very day of his funeral service, then his life would have been written more or less soon after his death. Meanwhile, in the life, which is very brief and very meager in factual information, it is clear that it was written more or less long after the death of the bishop (the life says that after the burial of Ignatius, “the life of this monk was not committed to writing until now”). From one charter of the Rostov bishop dated 1448, it is clear that in that year Ignatius had not yet been canonized (for in the charter there is only one Rostov saint, Leonty) 133 . From the story about one miracle of St. Leonty, it is clear that Ignatius was not canonized for some time after St. Isaiah, whose canonization took place, as we said above, in the year 1474 134. Ignatius appears as a saint in 1480 135. And thus his canonization should be placed between 1474 and 1480 and should be assigned to the same Archbishop Vassian Rylo as the canonization of St. Isaiah (in the Nikon Chronicle about the death of Ignatius it is written: “Ignatius, Bishop of Rostov, wonderworker reposed”; in the Novgorod 4th Chronicle it is written: “Ignatius, Bishop of Rostov, great wonderworker reposed”; the chronicles of Ignatius are called a wonderworker and a great wonderworker on the basis of his life. - When were his power remains unknown). 40. Arseny, Bishop of Tver, died on March 2, 1409. A local celebration for him in the Zheltikov Monastery he founded, in which he was buried, was established in 1483 by Bishop Vassian of Tver (from the Strigin-Obolensky princes) 136. The relics of Tver Bishop Arseny were found in 1483 - Philaret Russian saints, March 2nd. – A secondary celebration of July 2nd for him for the transfer of his relics (we don’t know if this is happening now) was established with the blessing of the patriarchs. Nikon, under Archbishop Lawrence of Tver, in 1655, see RKP. former Tsarskogo No. 123, l. 30. 41. Theodore, Archbishop of Rostov, who died on November 28, 1395, 42. Stefan, Bishop of Perm, who died on April 26, 1396, and 43. Euthymius, Archbishop of Novgorod, who died on March 11, 1458, appear in liturgical books as saints and are called saints in other monuments after 1475 or in the last quarter of the 5th century 137. Theodore was buried in the Rostov Cathedral; Stefan was buried in Moscow, in the former court Spassky Monastery, the current court Spassky Cathedral; Euthymius was buried in the Vyazhitsky monastery that formed his ktitorium: it is likely that local celebrations for each of the three began to take place in the now indicated places of their burial. Of these, we have positive information about Euthymius of Novgorod that celebrations for him began no later than 1494 138. 44. Avramius of Rostov 139 , who lived unknown when, in all likelihood - in the 14th century 140 , i.e., who was a contemporary of Rev. Sergius of Radonezh, and 45. Nikon of Radonezh, who died on November 17, 1427 or 1428, canonized as saints at the end of the 15th and beginning of the 16th centuries 141, and the memory of Abramia, thanks, as one might think, to the abundance in his life of the miraculous, very unusual in nature, from a local one soon became a general church one, and the celebration of Nikon was limited to Metropolitan. Macarius by the walls of the Trinity Monastery. 46. Macarius Kolyazinsky, founder of the Kolyazin Trinity Monastery, which is located in the current district city of the Tver province of Kolyazin, died on March 17, 1483. In 1521, while digging the foundation for the church, his relics were discovered, from which miracles began to happen. When it was reported to the leader. book Vasily Ivanovich and Metropolitan. Daniel about the miracles performed from the relics, led. the prince and the metropolitan summoned some who received miraculous healing at the relics to see them, and to verify the truth of the reports about others they sent Archimandrite Jonah to the Kolyazinsky Monastery of the Chudovsky. After the sovereign and the metropolitan were convinced that the miracles were not false, the latter, at a convened council, established a local celebration of Macarius 142. In the year 1700 of the relics of St. Macarius Kolyazinsky was transferred from the old shrine to the new one. The entry on the transposition of the relics says that a new shrine was “built” instead of the old one because the old shrine “has fallen into great disrepair and the relics of its wonderworker lie low and it is not only the female sex who can venerate the relics of his wonderworker, but also the male sex with need.” “In the (new) reliquary of the holy relics a cypress stool was made, and two azure damask mattresses quilted for both faces, and a pillow, and a small pillow of the same damask.” The measure of the new crayfish: length 2 arshins, 12 vershoks without a quarter vertex, width 13 vershoks, height arshins without a vertex. About the transposition of the relics, which was performed on September 18, 1700 by Sergius, Archbishop of Tver, it is said that the archbishop performed it with four archimandrites, “and (that) the other abbots and archpriests and priests and the entire sacred rank and the common people at that time were expelled (were) from the church and stood in the porch.” See in the Description of the Trinity Kolyazin first-class monastery of the Tver diocese, compiled by Alexei Lebedev, Yaroslavl, 1867, p. 53, note. (We also encounter news that the relics lay low in the shrines and that they were raised in them: on May 15, 1691, in the Moscow Archangel Cathedral, as recorded in the Charter of the Most Holy Patriarchs, “the relics of Tsarevich Dimitri were raised in the shrine (e) higher” - Vivliof. X, 281; in 1834 were raised or was it only intended to raise the relics of St. Sergius of Radonezh, about which in the letter of Metropolitan Philaret to the governor of the Lavra, Anthony, dated April 16, 1834, it is read: “So that the holy relics were raised and offered, this was never done in the Lavra; therefore, if you need to place them in a more convenient way, do this secretly with a few, with due reverence,” Letters from Metropolitan Philaret to the Governor of the Lavra, Archimandrite Anthony, part I (Moscow, 1877), p. 105. 47. Pafnutiy Borovsky, founder of the Nativity of the Theotokos Borovsky Pafnutiyev Monastery, which is located 3 versts from the city of Borovsk, Kaluga province, died on May 1, 1477. In 1531, Metropolitan. Daniel and the council of bishops “blessed the canon and the life of (Paphnutius) honor (in his monastery)” 143. 48 and 49. Savvaty and Zosima of Solovetsky, of whom the first died on September 27, 1435, and the second on April 17, 1478. The celebration of both was established at one time or another before 1540, for in this last year a chapel was dedicated to their name, built at one church in Novgorod 144. The relics of St. Savvaty of Solovetsky, who died in 145 not in the monastery, but in one village on solid ground, when they were transferred to the monastery in 1465, found incorrupt, in the monastery they were “buried” behind the altar of one of the churches of the monastery; then they were worn out from the bowels of the earth in 1566. See Historical description of the stauropegial first-class Solovetsky Monastery by Archimandrite. Meletia, M., 1881, pp. 11 and 36. The relics of St. Zosima of Solovetsky was carried out from the bowels of the earth in 1566, simultaneously with the relics of St. Savvatia (see above). In the month book, located in one collection of the Trinity Lavra of St. Sergius, which was written in 1487 (No. 761), among other Russian saints it is written: 50. Metropolitan Cyprian, who died on September 16, 1406, and 51. Isidor Tverdislov, holy fool of Rostov, died in 1474 (May 14th). In the month book of one church charter, written in the first half of the 5th century, the names of as many as 17 new saints are read, one of whom was probably celebrated locally and others of whom, belonging to the number of only the revered dead, were arbitrarily included in the month book either by the scribe of the manuscript we are talking about, or by the scribes of the manuscripts who, in relation to this manuscript, represented, so to speak, a genealogical series of manuscripts copied from one another 145. These saints, in the chronological order of their lives, are: 52–54. Prince of Murom Konstantin (Yaroslav) Svyatoslavich 146, who died in 1129, and his sons Mikhail and Theodore, who died unknown when (May 21), 55 and 56. Prince Peter of Murom, David in monasticism, and his wife Fevronia, Euphrosyne in monasticism, died in 1228 (both commemorated on June 25th) 147. 57 and 58. Avramiy of Smolensk, the first abbot of the Smolensk Theotokos, Avramiev by his name, monastery, who lived at the end of the 12th - beginning of the 13th century, and his student and biography writer Ephraim of Smolensk (both commemorated on August 21st), 59. Princess Euphrosyne of Suzdal, who lived in the first half of the 13th century, labored and died in the Suzdal Robe Monastery (Comm. September 25), 60. Nikolai Kochanov, the holy fool of Novgorod, who died on July 27, 1392, 61. Bishop of Rostov Jacob, who died on November 27, 1392, 62. Euthymius of Suzdal 148, founder of the Spaso-Evfimiyev Monastery, which is located in the city of Suzdal, Vladimir province, died on April 1, 1404, 63. Pavel Obnorsky or Komelsky 149, founder of the Trinity Pavlo-Obnorsky Monastery, which is located in the Vologda province, 15 versts from the city of Gryazovets, died on January 10, 1429, 64. Metropolitan Photius, who died on July 1st or 2nd, 1431, 65. Maxim, the holy fool of Moscow, who died on November 11, 1433, 66. Dionysius Glushitsky, founder of the Glushitsky Intercession Monastery (with two branches to it, so to speak), which is located in the Kadnikovsky district of the Vologda province, north of Vologda, on the Glushitsa river, died on June 1, 1437 150, and 67. Ephraim Perekomsky, founder of the Nikolaevsky Perekomsky Monastery, which is located on the western shore of Lake Ilmena, 25 versts south of Novgorod, died on September 26, 1492. From recent times, before the Macarius Councils of 1547–1549, two cases are known of the rejection by the highest church authorities of petitions for the canonization of two dead people, since the petitions were found by the church authorities not to be satisfied. The cases took place in 1539 and 1544. Hegumen of Pereyaslavl Daniel, the subsequent venerable one, being in Moscow in 1539, reported to Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich (we must mean: the boyars who ruled for the boy king, who was only 9 years old in 1539) and Metropolitan Joasaph that in Pereyaslavl at the church of St. Nicholas, which is at the city gates, lie in the ground the relics of a wonderful and holy man, Prince Andrei of Smolensk, whose relics previously lay in the church and were kissed with faith by those who came to it, for whom a service was previously performed with the singing of the canon and stichera and whose image was written on the icons - and asked the Tsar and the Metropolitan for permission to convene a sacred council in Pereyaslavl and open the relics prince The Tsar and Metropolitan gave the requested permission. Having convened a council of clergy, Rev. After the prayer singing, Daniel dug up the relics, and it turned out that “even if the body was involved in decay, it would be better to put it together without falling apart,” and without removing the relics from the ground, he sent a report to the king and the metropolitan. The Tsar and Metropolitan soon sent Chudovsky Archimandrite Jonah, whom we mentioned above, and Uspensky Archpriest Gury to Pereyaslavl. To Jonah’s question: “why did he open the relics and with whose permission?” Daniel replied that he reported the relics to the king and the metropolitan, from whom he received orders to open them, pointed to the icon of the monk (i.e., Prince Andrew), referred to the stichera and the canon to him, and presented the three who received his healing at the tomb. Jonah said to Daniel: “The lord metropolitan says that he does not know about this, nor has he commanded anything.” This sentence or this resolution of Jonah should be understood to mean that the Metropolitan allowed him to decide the matter in a favorable or unfavorable sense, depending on what he saw and what information he received, and that what he saw and the information he received was considered unsatisfactory. Distressed Rev. Daniel supposedly predicted that Metropolitan Joasaph, Archimandrite Jonah and Archpriest Gury would suffer the sorrows awaiting them, and the relics of Prince Andrei, putting them in a new coffin, were again buried with honor in the ground. One must think that Archim. Jonah, on the one hand, did not verify the reality of the miracles performed at the relics, and on the other hand, he recognized the historical information about Prince Andrei as unsatisfactory. As for this latest information, there were stories that the prince “for some sedition from the brethren left his fatherland and came to Pereyaslavl and at the Church of St. Nicholas the Wonderworker for 30 years as a sexton, I didn’t know him,” and that “when he reposed from this life to God, then he found on him a golden chain and a ring” and the little money he left behind written about himself - that the chain and ring, as they said, were taken by Ved. book Ivan Vasilyevich († October 27, 1505), who gave his ruga to the Church of St. Nicholas the Wonderworker for them, and the copy was lost sometime before the discovery of the relics. The compiler of the life of Prince Andrei himself does not give full faith to the current stories, for he says: “they still say about this Prince Andrei in the stories..., if the essence (of the story) is true, God alone knows” 151. Let's turn to the second case. Sometime before 1544, in the spring, a coffin with the bodily remains of an unknown person 152 was brought to the village of Borovichi, now a district town of the Novgorod province, located on the Meta River, who, having appeared in a dream to some residents of Borovich, called himself Jacob 153. The coffin with bodily remains or relics was placed in a specially constructed chapel, the residents of Borovichi began to have faith in the relics and miracles began to happen from them. In 1544, Archbishop Theodosius of Novgorod, probably summoned by a request from the residents of Borovichi to establish a celebration of Jacob as a saint, sent the cathedral Sophia priest and deacon to Borovichi “to look at the chapel of the relics of Jacoblikh and experience miracles with many people and priests.” Having received from the priest and deacon the “search” they had drawn up or the act of witnessing the relics and inquiring about miracles (it was dated July 2, 1544) 154, the archbishop asked Metropolitan Macarius what to do. The Metropolitan sent the archbishop a letter in which he ordered: to elect an abbot of the honest monastery, a priest and a deacon and send them “to bring those honest and holy relics to the new (new) churches that stood nearby (that is, the churches that stood near the chapel in which the relics of Jacob lay) Place the Descent of the Holy Spirit at the outside (side) doors (and) buried to serve.” Having received the metropolitan's letter, the archbishop sent to Borovichi (October 6, 1544) the abbot of the Antonov monastery Constantine, the cathedral priest and deacon and ordered them: “from the surrounding places, bring together the abbots and priests and deacons and gather together to sing a funeral service at the tomb of that Saint James and sing for the rest of your life, bring those holy and honorable and many-wonderful relics and place them near the new church of the Descent of the Holy Spirit near the outsiders at the southern doors, and above him here at the church, they are buried to serve in the cathedral, so that his relics will be in the ground before, and those of his honorable relics will be betrayed to the earth, and his relics will be on the top of the earth, and now they will be placed on the top of the earth, and the reliquary over the relics set it up and place it at its head, and build a tomb over it and serve a mass for it at the cathedral.” At the same time, the archbishop ordered the residents of Borovichi and surrounding places and the Borovichi priests: “and as abbot Constantine will set the time for you to bring the relics of him (Jacob), and by that time you would have prepared the days of the shrine and the shrine and the tomb and the candle to his tomb, and to bring the food of his honest relics, you children of the boyars and elders and ordinary people and all Orthodox peasants they went with their wives and their children and (every) age of pious people, and betrayed the holy relics honestly and reverently, with lights and alms, great is your strength; Yes, on which day the transfer of the holy relics will take place (it took place on October 23, 1544), and you would the abbots and priestesses of those places for the future on that day then direct the memory of the Venerable Jacob to commemorate the offering of his honorable relics every year, singing a requiem and mass, serve the cathedral for generations and generations to eternity.” Metropolitan Macarius did not allow the celebration of St. Jacob, despite the significant number of miracles that took place at his grave, as one must think, because there was absolutely no information about the past. Archbishop Theodosius, for his part, without establishing a celebration, orders that “veneration” be given to the monk, about which very important information is given to us on this occasion. We said above that in addition to the saints whose canonization is known to us in a positive way or whose canonization should most likely be accepted, there is also a fairly large number of deceased whose names are included in the monthbooks of some liturgical books and regarding whom one of two things must be thought, namely, either that they were also actually canonized or that their names, as revered deceased, were arbitrarily entered into the monthbooks by the scribes of the liturgical books. Of the above-mentioned deceased, called saints, we can only say about four that their names were arbitrarily included in the month books by book scribes, for we positively know about the later first establishment of celebrations for them or their first canonizations. These deceased are: Metropolitans Cyprian and Photius, for whom a local celebration was established in the Moscow Assumption Cathedral only in the later Synodal times; Maxim, the holy fool of Moscow, for whom a local celebration was established “in Moscow” by the council of 1547 (and there is no reason to assume that this was a confirmation of a previously established celebration, for the previous celebration could only be established by the metropolitan and there would be no incentive or reason to confirm the metropolitan to the metropolitan); Euphrosyne, Princess of Suzdal, who established the local celebration of Metropolitan. Anthony (1572–1581). As for the other listed deceased, called saints, most of them were canonized by the councils of 1547 and 1549, and about those of them who were canonized for the general celebration, there is a positive and complete reason to assume that they were canonized as general or church saints from local saints, and about those of them who were canonized for the local celebration, it can be assumed (on based on examples positively known to us), that after the initial canonization performed by local bishops, the obi were confirmed by the metropolitan with councils of bishops of the entire Russian Church. The time of canonization of some of the deceased remains unknown to us (Theodore, Archbishop of Rostov, Nikolai Kochanov and Isidore Tverdi Slova): but it can be assumed with equal probability that they were canonized after Metropolitan. Macarius, and the fact that they were canonized before Macarius. We will return later to the deceased, whose names are read as saints in the pre-Kariev month-books, but about whom it is unknown that they were canonized in the pre-Kariev time, and who were not canonized at the Makariev councils. Of the saints whose canonization we directly attribute to the continuation of time from the beginning of Christianity in Russia to the Macarius Councils of 1547–1549, only five or seven saints were established in a formal manner and, from the very beginning or a short time after the establishment of a local celebration, a church-wide or widespread celebration throughout the entire Russian Church; for all other saints, a local celebration was established in the narrowest or broadest sense of the word. 155 The five saints for whom a church-wide celebration was undoubtedly established from the first time, or soon after the establishment of a local celebration, are: Boris and Gleb, Theodosius of Pechersk and Metropolitans Peter and Alexy. Two saints, the formal ancient establishment of which a church-wide celebration can be assumed, are: Sergius of Radonezh and Cyril of Belozersky. But by the time of Met. Macarius became from local saints to all-Russian saints, in addition to the seven now named, fifteen more saints. In one of the editions of the life of Metropolitan Jonah, compiled under Metropolitan Macarius, a story is read about the councils of 1547 and 1549, and this story lists the saints who were celebrated throughout the Russian Church before Metropolitan Macarius. These saints, in addition to those indicated (seven), are the following fifteen: 1) led. Princess Olga, 2) led. Prince Vladimir, 3 and 4) Prince Mikhail of Chernigov and his boyar Theodore, 5–7) Prince of Yaroslavl Theodore with his sons David and Konstantin, 8–10) Bishops of Rostov Leonty, Isaiah and Ignatius, 11) Anthony of Pechersk, 12) Nikita of Pereyaslav, 13) Varlaam Novgorodsky, 14) Dmitry Prilutsky and 15) Avramy Rostovsky 156. Regarding these 15 saints, the question for us is: when and how did they acquire the universality of the Church or ubiquity. That the saints canonized for the local celebration were not forbidden to be venerated by anyone - that some of the saints canonized for the local celebration gradually acquired general veneration over time and achieved a greater or lesser degree of such general veneration, we spoke about this above. But for the 15 listed saints before the council of 1547 to all acquire complete general veneration - for this complete general veneration of all of them to be a decided and recognized matter, so that there is nothing to be said about it as a decided matter, this seems extremely doubtful and cannot be supported by any positive evidence 157. Meanwhile, Met. Macarius, by his complete silence about all of them at his councils of 1547 and 1549, makes us assume that by 1547 they were indeed all universally revered saints, as we see them later. Thus, it turns out to be necessary to assume a government order, a government act, with the help of which they were made or through which they were proclaimed to be universally revered saints: but we know nothing about this order or act. For our part, we find it probable to think that a government decree, in the form of a decree on behalf of the tsar or metropolitan, immediately preceded the council of 1547, for the tsar and metropolitan had the need to precede it with a decree of this kind. The council was supposed to decide which of the saints previously canonized for the local celebration should be made or proclaimed publicly celebrated, and the bishops had to come to the council with evidence of the rights to this general celebration of those saints whom they intended to propose to the latter: but so as not to needlessly collect evidence for the bishops, meaning by this evidence records of miracles, etc. information, so to speak, about the degree of miraculousness of the relics of this or that saint, they (the bishops) had to be warned about which saints it was not necessary to collect evidence, as those already recognized as generally revered. If we are not mistaken with our assumption, then perhaps someday the decree we supposed will be found 158. And the presentation of the matter by some, as if the canonization of Russian saints, which began with forms initially borrowed from the Greek Church, then gradually changed until it took on constant and definite forms that exist in it to this day, is a very difficult to explain scientific mirage, which has no basis in reality. It is said about Gleb’s body that it was thrown down “in an empty place, on a breeze, between two decks.” “In an empty place, on a breeze” means: not in the city of Smolensk, near which the murder took place, but in its field, in that very empty place where the murder was committed, on the banks of the Dnieper (down from Smolensk to the river or 5 versts, as one local writer shows - P. Nikitin in the History of the city of Smolensk, p. 15 fin., or much closer, half a verst from the outskirts of the city, located in this direction (Svirsky), as another local writer shows - the unknown author of the Historical and Statistical Description of the Smolensk Diocese, p. 210; “as if it is ripening” from the city, according to the chronicle, i.e., so that the place is visible from it: “ripely” meant in ancient times some specific, unknown to us, distance, see Materials for the dictionary of the Old Russian language by I. I. Sreznevsky. Sl. zreti). “Between two logs” is understood by many, if not most, to mean that the body was not buried in the ground, but was left to lie and roll on top of the ground between two logs. But to understand things this way seems extremely incredible and simply impossible. If the bodies of the prince’s killer had not been buried, then how would his former retinue not have wanted to do this, how would the inhabitants of Smolensk have left “a dead unburied body to lie in their field, and at that the body of the prince? In all likelihood, “between two decks” should be understood to mean that the body was buried not with proper honor (anywhere near the church) in a princely stone coffin, but with dishonor (in the field) in a common people’s wooden coffin, consisting of two decks, what wooden coffins were like in ancient times (and what they remain like among the schismatics to this day, see below, at the end of this part of the list saints, about the manifestation of the relics of Jacob Borovichsky). If it is said that the body remained unharmed by the beasts, then it goes without saying that buried not in a residential place, but in the wild, and buried very shallowly in the ground, as bodies were buried in ancient times, it could easily be dug up by beasts and, by moving the upper deck from the lower one, be devoured by them. If it is said that the body was “overthrown,” then the last expression must be understood in the sense that the body was thrown with dishonor by the murderers. The incongruity of understanding the matter as if Gleb’s body was left unburied lying on the field was recognized by book people of the 15th century, and one of them says in the monthly missal written by him: “and burying him (Gleb) in an empty place, from the city of Smolensk 2 fields,” see Description of the manuscripts gr. Uvarov, compiled by Archim. Leonid, part II. p. 13, no. 683. About which see our History of the Russian Church I, 1, ed. 1 pp. 618 and 620, ed. 2 pp. 746 and 748. 1 Corinth. 1:18: The word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to those who are being saved the power of God is. The author adds the words “by unbelief” and “by faith” to explain the apostle’s speech. In the original: “to shame,” which means to see (Evangel. Luke 23, 48). The legend of Boris and Gleb by the monk Jacob is placed with some corrections in the Degree Book, - 1, 184-214, and in modern times I will publish it three times: 1) Rev. Macarius in Christian. Read 1849, book. II. (according to the list, which does not read about the discovery of the relics), 2) Sreznevsky in the publication: Tales of Saints Boris and Gleb, - Sylvester's collection of the 14th century, St. Petersburg, 1860, and 3) Bodyansky in the General Readings. East. and Ancient 1870, book. I. Nestor’s life of Boris and Gleb was also published three times: 1) by an unknown person in the Orthodox. Interview 1858, book. I, 2) Bodyansky in Reading. General East. and Ancient 1859, book. I, and 3) Sreznevsky in the now indicated edition. According to Nestor’s printed lists, there is no mention above of placing a cage, i.e. in all printed lists this place is somehow omitted. The bones of Vladimir's brothers, dug out of the ground in 1044 and baptized (our History of the Russian Church I, 2, 371), were laid in the Church of the Tithes not in the sense that they were laid at autopsy, but in the sense that they were buried. Our History of the Russian Church I, 2, 429. Ibid. p. 335. – During the pre-Mongol period, Sts. In addition to July 24, Boris and Gleb were celebrated two more times: on September 5, on the day of the murder of the second of them, and on May 2, on the day of the double transfer of their relics from old churches to new ones, which is now discussed below. In some of the later calendars, their names are recorded as early as May 20, to which the transfer of the relics is erroneously assigned instead of May 2; The 11th of August, which is the day of transfer in 1191 of their dilapidated or old shrines from Vyshgorod to Smolensk to Smyadynya, the place of the murder of Gleb, where the monastery was built; On the 12th of August, mistakenly taken as the day of the murder of Gleb, see Rev. Sergius Complete Months of the East, vol. II. As for the present time, in the monthly words of the liturgical books, the memory of the saints is laid down once a year - on July 24th, and in the Monthly Words of All Saints, celebrated by the Orthodox Greek-Eastern Church, printed from St. Synod, their names are recorded under three days, except for the 24th of July under the now indicated 5th of September and 2nd of May. - Let's talk about the relics of saints. The church in their honor, built by Yaroslav, was made of wood, for some reason very soon fell into disrepair and Izyaslav Yaroslavich built another wooden church instead, into which the relics were transferred on May 2, 1072. About this transfer of relics in the chronicle it is written that the relics of Boris were brought to the new church in a wooden shrine and that after they were kissed in this shrine by the people, they were placed in a stone shrine - that the relics of Gleb in a stone shrine were brought on a sleigh, that they stood at the door of the church, but that when the people were ordered to cry out: “Lord have mercy,” they went and were put in place. And Nestor reports the following about this transfer of relics: “Metropolitan (George) did not believe that she was blessed; Having approached, opening the holy race, you saw it lying intact, and the church was filled with a good stench, then seeing the Metropolitan was horrified in his mind and turned to the east, raised his hand to heaven, and cried out: forgive me, Lord, for I have sinned by disbelieving your saints, and help my unbelief; Behold, I truly believe, for the nature of your passion-bearer is holy. Then, then, he began to take the hand of blessed Boris, lying with his might, and kissing him, applying it to his eyes and to his heart; Then bless the blessed prince Izyaslav with it, then his brother Svyatoslav, and leave one nail on his head to bless him, then again the God-lover Vsevolod, and then I will put your people in their place.” The words of Nestor, with which he explains how the Metropolitan could take Boris’s hand out of the shrine: “with relics lying down,” it was conceived that Boris’s relics were bones, for the word: “relics” in the most precise sense means: bones, and the phrase: “with relics lying down” is used precisely about relics, as about bones; see below about the relics of St. Theodosius of Pechersk and then at the end of the study general speeches about the relics. 43 years after Izyaslav Yaroslavich, a stone church was built in place of his wooden church, into which the relics of the saints were transferred on the same May 2, 1115. During this second transfer of the relics, a dispute arose between the princes - the builders of the church: Vladimir Vsevolodovich Monomakh and his cousins ​​David and Oleg Svyatoslavich. Vladimir wanted to place the reliquaries with the relics in the middle of the church, wanting to build a silver tower (turret) over them, and David and Oleg wanted to place them in the wall on the right side, in the mosquitoes arranged for them, referring to the fact that their father had appointed the relics to be placed here (Svyatoslav died on December 27, 1076 and it seems unlikely to think that the church, about the exceptional size of which nothing is said, was built over the course of 39 years: the Svyatoslavichs’ reference to their father seems to be a later insertion in the chronicle). To resolve the dispute, on the advice of the metropolitan and the bishops, the princes resorted to drawing lots, which were cast at the holy meal, and when the lot of the Svyatoslavichs was cast, they placed the crayfish with the relics in the wall, in mosquitoes. For this second transfer of the relics, an extraordinary multitude of people gathered in Vyshgorod, about which Noneh Jacob or his successor says: “there came together from all the Russian land and from other countries a great many people, and princes, all the bolyars and all the elders and governors of the whole Russian land and all the leading countries of all, and simply put - every multitude of that Beyash and every region and all the rich and poor, distressed and sick, as if the city was filled with everything and the city walls could not be taken.” Due to the extraordinary number of people, the relics could hardly be transferred, so Vladimir Monomakh ordered pieces of material and money to be thrown to the people in order to force them to flee somewhat (chronicles of Laurentian and Ipatian under the year 1115). The relics, transferred on May 2, were placed “in the places prepared for them in the wall of the church only on May 4 (Laurent years), and this must be understood in such a way that for two whole days people venerated them. Vladimir Monomakh magnificently bound the crayfish of the saints and the mosquitoes in which the crayfish were placed, with silver and gold, about which the Ipatskaya chronicle speaks briefly: “Volodimer shackled the crayfish with silver and gold and decorated the coffins with it, and also the mosquito forged with silver and gold,” and about which the monk Jacob or his successor speaks quite at length: “Having searched for the silver having carved the tables and saints after them (depicted, minted) and gilded, forged (i.e., bound the shrine with boards); the thief (the crayfish fencing with a canopy over it) arranges silver and gold with great crystal scatterings, possessing an abundance of gold; the luminary is gilded and on them place the guilt (unquenchable) with a bright burning light, and so decorate it with goodness, as I cannot say this trick in accordance with the wealth that comes from many things, both from Greece and from other lands, and say: nowhere is there beauty, but we have seen many saints” (i.e. so that many who came from Greece and from other countries said: we have never seen such beauty anywhere, although we have seen crayfish and many saints). During the Mongol invasion, the relics of St. Boris and Gleb are unknown where they are hidden or have disappeared, in which concealment they have remained since then until the present time. In 1108, when the abbot of Pechersk asked to lead. book Svyatopolk Izyaslavich about the fact that Rev. Theodosius was included in the Synodik, we, in all likelihood, did not yet have a Synodic of the week of Orthodoxy: one must think that we borrowed this Synodik from the Greeks not ourselves or directly, but through the Bulgarians, and the Bulgarians borrowed it from the Greeks only in 1210, see our Brief outline of the history of the Orthodox churches of the Bulgarian, Serbian and Romanian, p. 674 fin. And now a remark is being read here - in Greek euchology: μετὰ ταῦτα μνημονεύει, ὧ ν βούλεται, ζώντων καὶ τεθνεώτων; in the Slavic service book: “he also remembers what he wants, the living and the dead secretly.” These speeches of ours should be considered an amendment to what we say in the History of the Russian Church - I, 2. 336. There we meant the synodikon of the week of Orthodoxy because we did not at all mean the synodikon lithium. That it is really necessary to understand the latter, and not the former, this is evident, firstly, from the fact that the synodikon of the week of Orthodoxy is read only once a year, while it is said that “commemorate at all councils”; secondly, from the fact that in the synod of the week of Orthodoxy, it is not the saints themselves who are commemorated, but the defenders and champions of the Orthodox faith (and they are not prayerfully invoked, but eternal memory is proclaimed to them). As for the expression about the festive litias “at all cathedrals,” it means that these litias were celebrated only in cathedral churches (and large monasteries), cfr of our History of the Russian Church I, 2, 321 approx. (in villages they are still performed only very rarely). In the later history of canonization we come across one record of canonization, which states that the saint was inscribed in the church synodik and in which, under the Synodic, the lithium must undoubtedly be understood as a list of saints of the diocese, of which he was an ascetic and for the local celebration in which the saint was canonized, see below about Ven. Paisiya Uglichsky. At first, after the founding of the monastery, and in general in ancient times, the monks of Pechersk were buried not in the monastery itself, but in the caves that were, as are still located, near it, of which there were, as there still are, two. One of the caves is the one in which the monastery itself was conceived, the other is the one into which the Monk Anthony retired from the monastery conceived in the first cave for solitary asceticism with a few. Since the monastery, having been carried out of the cave to the top of the earth, was not placed near its cave, in which it was conceived and from which it was carried to the top of the earth, but was transferred to the Antonieva cave, the first cave was called the Far Cave, and the Antonieva - the Near Cave. The Monk Theodosius was buried in the Far Cave, which, after his name, is also called Theodosius Cave (just as the Near Cave, after the name of the Monk Anthony, is otherwise called Antonieva). The places for the burial of monks in caves were chambers or pechura dug in their side walls, niches, in general, recesses so spacious that the bodies of the deceased could be placed in them (in the Patericon of Pechersk, in the story of Polycarp about Mark the caveman, chambers are called places, which, randomly or non-randomly, fully corresponds to the Latin name of chambers in the Italian catacombs - loci loculi. The bodies of the deceased were placed in chambers, not in coffins, but without coffins in the same clothes. The chambers with the bodies placed in them were not covered with earth, as graves are covered with earth, but were left unfilled and only their mouths or openings were sealed in one way or another (that the chambers with the bodies were not covered with earth, this was evident from the aforementioned story about Mark the caveman, in which says that the earth that was dug out from the chambers was taken out of the caves; and also from the same story it is clear that the bodies were laid without coffins). Theodosius in the year 1091 and about their transfer from the cave and the monastery is read under the specified year in the chronicle, remarkable in that it belongs not only to a contemporary and eyewitness of the event, but directly to the person who acted, for the chronicler was precisely the monk of the Pechersk Monastery, who was entrusted by the abbot of the monastery with the task of digging up the relics of Theodosius. Here is a story read from the chronicle." In the summer of 6599 (1091), the abbot and the monkmen (Pechersky) made a decision: “it is not good for our father Theodosievi to lie beside the monastery (and) his church, after which he founded the church and the monkmen bought together”; The creator gave orders to build a place where his relics should be placed. And having arrived at the feast of the Dormition of the Mother of God in three days (August 12), the abbot commanded to destroy where the relic of him, our father Theodosius, should lie. I am a sinner who first witnessed his command, and I will say it without hearing it, but I am the leader about it. The abbot came to me and said to me: “I went to the Pechera to Feodosievi,” and I came with the abbot, not knowing to anyone, discerning where to dig, and marking the place where to dig, except for the mouth. The abbot spoke to me: “Don’t tell anyone, but tell him if you want to help him.” I built horns (picks) for seven days (on that day), and dug with them. And on Tuesday evening (August 12th) I took my only brother with me, not knowing anyone, and went into the oven and sang psalms and started digging, and having toiled for another brother, I dug until midnight, I toiled and, unable to dig, I began to labor, digging food for the country (to the side). I, taking up the bagel, began to dig ramen (intensely), and to my friend to rest (to rest here in the sense: to rest) in front of the cave and speeches: “strike the beat” (i.e., for matins), and at the same time (at that time) dug on the relics of Fedosieva (var. over the relics of Fedosieva); to him saying to me: “I hit the blow”, but to me I say: “I’ve already dug in.” As soon as I dug, I was overcome with horror and began to call: Lord have mercy. About the same (at the same time) seven hundred and two brothers in the monasteries, (waiting) for food, the abbot, hiding with no one (with anyone) to bring him (Theodosius) away, to the seeing stove. When you hit the beat, you saw three pillars, like arcs of zarna, and standing above the top of the church, where Theodosius was laid. At the same time, he saw Stefan, who was in his (Feodosievo) place as abbot (in the Pechersk monastery), at the same time he was a bishop (of Vladimir), seeing in his monastery (which was in Kyiv and was across the field from the Pechersk monastery) a great dawn over the Pechera; thinking that they were carrying Fedos, but he had been told earlier in the day alone. and taking pity on this, as if they had to carry it without him V17;, we all set off on horseback on a greyhound, taking Clement with us, putting him as abbot in his place, and walking, seeing the great dawn and, as if it was close, he saw many more above the stove, and he came to the stove and didn’t see anything, and the bottom came to the stove (inside caves), us sitting at his relics. When I dug, I sent a message to the abbot: “Come, let us take it out”, but the abbot came with two brothers, and dug with Velma and climbed and saw and the relics lying there, but the composition did not disintegrate (var. did not crumble) the besha and vlasi of the main ones attracted the byakha (dried to the head?). And she put it on the varimantya (large mantle) and carried it out in front of the cave. The next day the bishops gathered: Ephraim of Pereyaslavl, Stefan of Volodymer. Ioan of Chernigov, Marin of Gurgev, abbesses from all the monasteries from the monastery, came and people of good faith, and took the relics of Theodosieva with the dark and with the candles and brought them to the place V17; in his church in the vestibule on the right side of the month of August on the 14th day, on the fourth day, at the first hour of the indictment 14; and celebrate brightly on that day.” It is not entirely clear to us why the abbot wanted to dig up the relics of Theodosius secretly, when this matter was decided at the council of the brethren. The abbot ordered to dig past the mouth, that is, past the sealed hole of the chamber in which Theodosievo’s body was laid, as it seems probable to think, for fear that if the seal was broken, it might fall inside the chamber and damage the relics. When the chronicler says that he climbed into the chamber to see the relics, he makes it clear that the chamber was very deep, for otherwise he would not have needed to climb. Expressing the condition in which the relics of Theodosius were found: “videhom V17; lying with relics, but compose, do not disintegrate (did not crumble) besha,” the chronicler makes it known that the relics were bones (“compose”, i.e. compositions of bones: in the life of Prince Andrei of Smolensk, about whom below, it is said about his relics: “even if the body was involved in decay, be, but both compose together besha, did not scatter”). The stone coffin in which the relics of Theodosius were placed in the church, 50 years after the transfer of the latter, was bound with silver and gold by one of the deliberate admirers of the memory of the saint (George of the Thousand, son of Simon Varyag), who used 500 hryvnia of silver and 50 hryvnia of gold for this. - in the Patericon of Pechersk, the story of Bishop Simon about the creation of the monastery church. During the invasion of the Mongols, the relics of St. Theodosius suffered the same fate as the relics of Sts. Boris and Gleb. Until 1764, the place in the monastery church where the reliquary with the relics of the monk stood was not marked with anything, but in this last year a “cenotaph” was erected on the site, that is, a monument in the form of a tomb or reliquary with relics. - Metropolitan Evgenia Description of the Laurels, ch. XII, § 1 (Peter Mogila wrote to Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich in 1638 that he intended to arrange the coffin of St. Theodosius - Act. South and West. Ross. vol. III, No. 18, p. 29. but, probably, then for some reason he did not fulfill his intention). - Memory of Rev. Theodosius is celebrated throughout the Russian Church on May 3rd on the day of his repose, and in the Pechersk Lavra on May 3rd and again on August 14th on the day of the transfer of the relics. Metropolitan Platov, in the diary of his trip to Kyiv in 1804, writes that in the Pechersky Monastery he venerated the relics of St. Feodosia, - the diary was published by Snegirev in the appendix to his Life of Metropolitan. Plato; our place in the diary according to ed. 1856 p. 31 beginning Certainly. Platov was not told deceptively that the “cenotaph” contained the relics of St. Theodosius, but he himself does not express himself in an exact way (with a kind of exaggeration). See our History of the Russian Church, I, 1, ed. 1 p. 631, ed. 2 p. 761. In the memorial of the Russian great and appanage princes, sent in 1557 to the Patriarch of Constantinople Joasaph, Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich puts St. Olga is not included in the category of those princes and princesses who should be remembered at prayer services as saints, but those who should be remembered at funeral services, see the commemoration in the Reader General. East. and Ancient 1897, book. III, Mixture, p. 27. What did he lead? book Olga was not canonized or canonized by the leader. book Vladimir, this must be concluded from the speeches about her by the monk Jacob in Memory and Praise of Vladimir, our History of the Russian Church I, 1, ed. 1 pp. 210–211, ed. 2 pp. 241–242, and the chronicler under the year 969, which is the year of her death. Neither the monk Jacob nor the chronicler hints at all that in their time there was a celebration of the memory of Olga as a saint. And if both of them assure that Olga’s relics represented a whole or undestroyed body (“The venerable body of blessed Olga lies intact,” - James): then the discovery of similar whole or complete relics could precede by many, many years the formal canonization or formal canonization, which is discussed below. The well-known lists are: located in the Rumyantsev Museum - near the East. No. 319. in the Belgrade Public Library, see Glasnik book. XVI, p. 34 sqq, and in the former Khludov library, in Popov’s Description No. 189. The legends read in the lists are: about St. Boris and Gleb, about Rev. Theodosius of Pechersk, about St. Olga and about the blessed (Grand) Duke Mstislav Vladimirovich, about whom is now in the text and the celebration of whose memory could only be established in the pre-Mongol period. The legend about Olga ends with the words: “Don’t stop loving Him (God) for those who honor the day of your (your) repose.” - at Vostok. and in Glasn. There is also a fourth list in the former Norov library, see Issue 1 of the II book of Scientific Notes of the Second Branch of the Academy of Sciences, Description of manuscripts À. X. Vostokova, p. 102 fin. sqq., but there is no memory of St. Olga. Monk Jacob speaks of a window at the top of the tomb of St. Olga. For this window, see the end of the study in general speeches on the relics of saints. – After the testimony of the relics of St. Olga as a whole body belonging to the monk Jacob and the chronicler, we know later evidence, perhaps based on one of the ancients, which speaks of them as whole bones. In the New Chronicle, published in the ХVП book. Temporary General and Ancient, - page 10, reads: “Her (Olga’s) bones were found intact in the kingdom of her grandson Equal-to-the-Apostles Vladimir and Metropolitan Leonty.” Like the relics of St. Boris and Gleb and Rev. Theodosius of Pechersk, during the Mongol invasion, the relics were hidden in an unknown place. –11th of July, under which the memory of St. Olga, is taken to be the day of her death, but since the chronicle does not indicate the month and day when she died, it may be that this is not the day of her death, but some other one. In the mentioned three, with the addition of the indicated fourth. Ipatsk years. under the year 1147, 2nd ed. page 249 fin. There is a word on Cheese Saturday, when we commemorate the holy fathers, written before the Mongol invasion: in this word, Prince Igor is also mentioned among the Russian saints, see Vostok. in Rumyants. Music page 611. In the 1st edition of the Historical Dictionary about the saints it was said that “the church commemorates Igor on June 5,” which, being understood about the entire Russian Church, is unfair, because there is no church-wide memory of Igor; but in the 2nd edition it is said: “memory led. to. Igor is committed locally on June 5,” and one might think that the amendment was made on the basis of reliable information received. In the Chernigov Cathedral, the relics of the prince were placed not in the church itself, but in the tower, which was attached to the church on the western side and which was called the tower in ancient times - Ipatsk. years. under 1150, p. 288 fin. At present, probably since the same Mongol invasion above, the prince’s relics do not exist. Lavrent. chronicle under the year 1175, 2nd ed. p. 352, Academic. chronicle under the year 1238, p. 493, and Ipatsk. years. under the year 1175, 2nd ed. page 403. He died according to two contradictory testimonies of the Patericon of Pechersk (Simon about the creation of the church and about the architects) in the year 1072 or 1073, i.e. two years or one year before St. Feodosia. He calls Anthony a saint and, as if in the exact sense of the word, or a saint formally canonized, and the above-mentioned word on Saturday, when we commemorate the holy fathers, written before the invasion of the Mongols, the East. page 611. The relics of St. Anthony, as we said above, have never been discovered and still remain hidden, see about them Descriptions of the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra Metropolitan. Evgeniya Ch. XIV (And about the fact that other admirers at the end of the 16th century were shown the imaginary heads of Venerables Anthony and Theodosius in the Pechersk Monastery, unless the admirers themselves wrote, see Description of the Manuscripts of the Trinity Lavra No. 734). -Memory of the Venerable. Anthony in the Pechersk Monastery and in Kievan Rus in general has always been celebrated on May 7th, which is taken to be the day of his death; in the old Moscow calendar, it was written on the 7th of May, then, and for the most part, under the 10th of July (cfr Descriptions of the manuscripts of the same Lavra No. 245), and now, since the time of the Charter of Patr. Joachim 1682, - according to the Pechersk Monastery on May 7th. In the tales of St. Leontius is told that his relics were found in the form of a whole body, but now they are probably hidden from the time of the destruction of Rostov and its cathedral church there by the Poles on October 14, 1608, see the work of gr. M. V. Tolstova Ancient shrines of Rostov-Great, 2nd ed. page 33 beginning and 36 beginning.. One must think that before the now indicated destruction of Rostov by the Poles, the relics of St. Leontius, as well as the relics of St. Isaiah, lay in very rich crayfish, for there was a legend about these crayfish, stolen by the Poles, that they were golden and that the first of them was nine pounds, and the second - seven, see for example. Bychkov’s entry in the Description of Collections of the Public Library, 1, 5. That the crayfish were indeed very rich, this should also be concluded from the fact that there is an entry about them in the diary of Sapega, whose army took Rostov, namely - under the 25th of October (new style) it is read that during the capture of Rostov “the silver tombs of St. saints”, see extracts from the diary in Son of the Fatherland and Northern Archives of 1838, volume I, page 36. The relics of the prince, discovered in 1192, were closed under Peter the Great and have remained under wraps since that time, see Philaret in Russian Saints under the 11th of February. - Memory of Vsevolod - February 11, on the day of his death, and in Pskov also on November 27, on the day of the transfer of the relics. Lavrent. years. under 1229 and 1230, 2nd ed. page 430. In the Trinity Lavra Manuscript of the 17th century No. 810 there is an article: “Description of the Holy Cathedral Church of the Most Pure Mother of God of her honorable and glorious Dormition in the most eminent and pedigreed city of Vladimir and about the relics of the blessed Grand Dukes and Grand Duchesses and their children and Reverends. Maxim Metropolitan and the bishops of Vladimir, who is buried where and in which monastery and church their holy relics lie.” The article reads about Rev. Avramiy: “In the same (Assumption) monastery, on the left side, in the chapel of the Annunciation of the Theotokos, in the wall, in the stone coffin of the relics of the great martyr Abramiy of Bulgaria, his chains hang over the coffin, they are placed on the sick, who are losing their minds, and a prayer service is sung, after the prayer service is completed, many receive health,” l. 5 rev. See Rev. Makaria in East. V, 413 beginning, The relics of Mikhail Vsevolodych and his boyar in 1575 under Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich the Terrible were transferred from Chernigov to Moscow; placed here in the cathedral dedicated to their (Chernigov miracle workers) name, located above the Kremlin Tainitsky gates, in 1770, when it was proposed to destroy the cathedral, they were transferred to the Sretensky Palace Cathedral, and from this latter in 1774 they were transferred to the Archangel Cathedral, where they remain to this day, having now been located, probably since 1812 years, not at the autopsy, but under the hood, - Snegireva Monuments of Moscow Antiquity, p. 67 col. 1 fin. In the Outputs of the Sovereigns, printed by the Stroevs, it is written under September 20th, the day of memory of Prince. Michael, 1670 guide, that for the holiday (to the church in which the prince’s relics lay) the sovereign did not go out and that the relics were brought to the palace church, and a bed guard was sent for them, accompanied by a centurion and six archers, and that “they were carried by a singing clerk (implied: in an ark or box) - p. 583. Our History of the Russian Church 1, 1, ed. 1 page 20 ό, col. 1 fin., ed. 2 pp. 236, col. 1. Ibid. 1st ed. page 212 beginning, 2nd ed. page 243. See Lavrent. years. under the year 1263, 2nd ed. p. 455. – Accepting, on the one hand, that the celebration of Vladimir was established by Alexander Yaroslavich after the victory over the Swedes, and on the other hand, paying attention to the fact that in the service of Vladimir Kyiv is called a great city, which it ceased to be from December 6, 1240, when it was destroyed by Batu. I. I. Malyshevsky believes that the celebration of Vladimir was established between July 15 and December 6, 1240 (see his article: “When and where was the celebration of the memory of St. Vladimir first established,” published in the Proceedings of the Kiev Theological Academy of 1882, book I). Fully recognizing the wit of Mr. Malyshevsky’s guess, we cannot, however, agree with him. If Alexander Yaroslavich had decided to establish a celebration for Vladimir immediately after the victory over the Swedes, then for the first time it would have been celebrated only on July 15 of the following year, 1241, and in the service prepared for July 1241, Kyiv could no longer be called the great city. It follows from this that the name of Kyiv in the service as a great city cannot serve to indicate a later time for the establishment of the celebration, and that it should be explained differently (either in such a way that the service was written in the pre-Mongol period, before the establishment of the celebration of Vladimir, or in such a way that its post-Mongol author is transferred to the pre-Mongol period, to the time when Kyiv was a great city, only in his imagination, allowing himself creative license, see our History of the Russian Church I. 2. 339). Relics of St. Vladimir, consisting of some of his bones, were found in the ruins of the Tithe Church of Metropolitan. Peter Mogila in 1635, see the Description of the Kiev Pechersk Lavra by Metropolitan. Evgeniya Ch. XII, § 3. They are located in parts: the head in the great church of the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra; one jaw from the head in the Moscow Assumption Cathedral (sent by Metropolitan Peter Mogila to Tsar Mikhail Feodorovich, see in the Acts of Southern and Western Russia, vol. III Λ ® 18, p. 29. in which there is also about the discovery of the relics; according to the inventory of the Assumption Cathedral of 1701: “underbone with teeth,” - Russian. Library, published by the Archaeological Commission, vol. III. hand bone - in the Kiev St. Sophia Cathedral, - from Metropolitan. Evgeniya ibid. Collection years. V, 191, and VII, 164. See Rev. Makaria East. IV, 253. – Vel. book Ivan Ivanovich, in his spiritual will, written in 1356, left to his son Dmitry “the icon of Saint Alexander,” which most likely should mean the icon of Alexander Nevsky, see Collection. gram. and agreements I, 42. – The relics of Alexander Yaroslavich, buried in the Vladimir Nativity Monastery, in 1491, when there was a great fire in Vladimir that incinerated the entire city, “burned” in the burnt church of the monastery, – in Karami, vol. VI, approx. 629, year 1491, col. 100. and Nikon. years. VI, 128 (the latter says: “and the body of the great Prince Alexander Nevsky is burning”; but it is likely that “zgor” is a typo or typo instead of “ogore”). In 1723-1724, the relics (that is, the remaining part of them - Descriptions of documents and affairs of the Holy Synod, vol. III, col. 320) were transferred from Vladimir to St. Petersburg, to the Alexander Nevsky Lavra, where they are now located (removed from Vladimir on August 11, 1723, the relics were brought were in Shlisselburg on September 20 of the same year, but they remained in Shlisselburg until August of the next year 1724, ibid.). – Alexander Yaroslavich was supposed to be celebrated not on November 14th, the day of his death in Gorodets on the Volga, on the way from the Horde, but on November 23rd, on the day of his burial in the Vladimir Nativity Monastery. After the relics were brought to St. Petersburg and after they were placed in the Alexander Nevsky Lavra, which was on August 30, 1724, Peter the Great, by decree of September 2 of this year, ordered for the future to celebrate instead of the 23rd day of November on the 30th day of August, as the day of the conclusion of the glorious Peace of Nystad with Sweden in 1721, For this new celebration, on behalf of the sovereign, a special service was composed by Gabriel Buzhinsky. Under Peter II in 1727, the new celebration was canceled, and the service, as containing “disparagement of the high honor of the blessed memory of Tsarevich Alexei Petrovich,” was taken away (Decree of the Synod of September 18, 1727); Anna Ioannovna in 1730 (the highest decree of September 4, the synodal decree of the 15th of the same month) again ordered to celebrate the 30th of August, - Collection of Laws Vol. VIII, No. 5621, p. 324. - By Decree of St. Synod of June 15, 1724, it was strictly prescribed for the future to depict Alexander Yaroslavich not in monastic robes (as he was depicted, since he died in the schema), but in grand ducal robes, - Complete collection of orders and decrees for the department of Orthodox confession, vol. IV. No. 1318, p. 148. Nikon. years. III, 54, Voskresensk. and Sofiysk. 1st years in Collection years. V, 197, and VII. 170, Degrees, book. 1, 384. The Tatars, not wanting to hear blasphemous speeches from the prince about their faith, “cut out (his) tongue and covered his mouth with a cord, and began to cut him at the joint and hurl him in various ways, cutting off all the fingers at the feet and at the hands, and the lips and ears, and the other parts of the body, and as if only a corpse remained, they peeled off the skin from his head and stuck it on a spear.” - Nikon. years. The icon of Prince Roman was painted by icon painters, see Philaret in Russian Saints under the 19th of July, but many examples are known that icons were painted not of formally canonized saints, but only of revered deceased. - In 1812, on the day of the martyrdom of the prince on July 19, the famous victory over the French was won in the village of Vitebsk province, Drisna district, Klyastitsy, and therefore his image was written on the wall of the Moscow Cathedral of Christ the Savior - at Filar. ibid. – Recently, precisely since 1854, a local celebration of the prince began in Ryazan, which we will talk about below in its place. Resurrection and Sophia 1st Chronicles in the Collection. years. V, 214 and VII, 196, Nikon. years. III. 116. Relics of St. Peter were not opened by Metropolitan. Theognost, when establishing the celebration for him and for the first time, they were opened 133 years after the establishment of the celebration and 146 years after the death of Metropolitan. Philip 1st in 1472 on the occasion of the reconstruction of the Moscow Assumption Cathedral. The 2nd Sofia Chronicle makes it clear that the relics were bones - Collection. years. VI, 196, and the Nikon Chronicle, -VI 41, and the Resurrection Chronicle, in Sobr. years. VIII, 171–172, borrowing from the words of Pachomius Serbinus, which, by order of the leader. The prince and metropolitan wrote “unbelief for the sake of people (namely, that “whoever is not in the body is not holy to them” - Collection of years. VI. 196) make it known that the relics suffered from a fire that happened in 1382, during the invasion of Moscow by Tokhtamysh. In 1531 he led. book Vasily Ivanovich, probably in gratitude to Sts. Metropolitan Peter and Alexy, for their prayers to God for the granting of a son, John (who was born on August 25, 1530), ordered them to make new shrines - Peter, half-gold, with a gold top board, on which the image of the saint was minted and decorated with precious stones, and with silver side boards, Alexy - silver, with his gilded image on the top board (“For Peter the Wonderworker, mint the shrine in gold and decorate the image of the gold of Peter the Wonderworker with precious stones, and the countries around the shrine are silver; For Alexei the Wonderworker, I will make the entire shrine in silver and gild his image on the shrine”); into a new reliquary, which could not be made soon, the relics of St. Peter were transferred quite some time after the death of Vasily Ivanovich on May 5, 1538, about making cancer at Karamz. VII, 96 and approx. 311, and in the chronograph gr. Uvarova, according to Description. archim. Leonida No. 1362, l. 859 subfin; about the transposition of the relics of Peter at Karamz. VI, approx. 7. During the reign of Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich the Terrible, during the life of his wife Anastasia (1547–1560). The feast of the “manifestation of the relics” of Metropolitan was established on the 4th of August. Peter and the reason for the establishment of this holiday is read in the printed calendar of 1648: “St. Peter the Metropolitan appeared to the pious Queen Anastasia, without commanding anyone to open his coffin ever, and commanded her to seal the shrine with her seal, and ordered that day to celebrate this holiday.” In the New Chronicle, published in the XVII book. Temporary General East. and Ancient. p. 201, it reads under the year 1652 that “On the 9th day of September, the Church of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary was consecrated (after the alteration of the altar, to which two degrees were attached), and the relics of our holy father Peter, Metropolitan of Moscow and All Russia, the miracle worker, from the altar of the cathedral churches were moved to the limit of saints by the Apostle Peter and Paul" (in the current cathedral, completed in 1479, the relics of St. Peter were placed in the same place where they lay in the original cathedral, namely, at the wall of the southern section of the altar or altar. - Nikon. years. VI, 108 fin., Resurrection children. in Collected years. VIII, 202 and 203, see also inventory of the cathedral of the first half of the 17th century in the Russian Historical Library, published by Archeogr. III, coll, 298, 433, 517; We don’t know whether the relics were moved to their original place after 1652,” but in 1701 they were, as they are now, in the aforementioned chapel, which is against the wall with the altar, -Russk. Historical Library ibid., col. 846 fin.). In the manuscript of the Moscow Spirit. Academy No. 201, among various chronicle extracts it reads: “In the summer of 7162 (1654) on the feast of our father Peter, Metropolitan of Moscow and All Russia, on the 21st day of December, on the 21st day of December, His Holiness Patriarch Nikon with the metropolitans and archbishops and with the entire consecrated cathedral took out a coffin with relics from the reliquary, and it was placed among church, all Orthodox Christians kissed his relics with faith and heartfelt love, and after the litorgy the pack was quickly installed, the same as before,” l. 294. Later on the feast of St. Peter's relics were brought to the cathedral from the patriarch's potassium or from the sacristy - Vivliof. X, 120, 121, 122–123. 125. (In the inventory of the Moscow Assumption Cathedral of 1701, a reliquary with two parts of the relics of Metropolitan Peter is mentioned,” - Russian Historical Bibliography, published by Archeogr. Com. vol. III, col. 664: probably the reliquary, which had two slits on the top board through which the relics were visible, was built for the purpose that on the feasts of St. Peter offer it. i.e., the relics that were in it, for the people to kiss). In the History of the Moscow Diocesan Administration since the establishment of St. Synod, belonging to Nikolai Rozanov, we read the following about the relics of St. Peter after the French invasion “In May 1813, the Most Reverend Augustine reported to St. Synod, that before the enemy invaded Moscow, the cancer, in which the relics of St. Peter, Metropolitan of Kyiv and All Russia; was locked and sealed; but after the liberation of Moscow from enemies, with the testimony of his Eminence and many spiritual and secular persons, the shrine turned out to be open, in which St. the relics were found incorrupt and the hand of the wicked enemy did not dare to touch them. Representing this, the Right Reverend asked permission - the relics of St. Peter to leave open “as a testimony to everyone that wickedness not only could not deprive us of shrines, but moreover, according to the inscrutable destinies of God, involuntarily contributed to their greater glorification. The mourning inhabitants of Moscow, looking at the incorruptible relics of the saint of God, will be consoled in their sorrows and... touching them with the holy kiss, they will be revived with the hope that their short-term sadness will be rewarded with long-term and unbreakable prosperity.” The Holy Synod, by decree of the 28th of May, allowed the relics of St. Peter the Metropolitan leave open. Since then, the relics of the High Hierarch of the Moscow See, Peter Metropolitan, have rested in the Assumption Cathedral at the autopsy in the same place where they were previously hidden,” - part three, book II (Moscow, 1870), p. 27, § 7 (There is a printed speech by Augustine, delivered before the shrine of St. Peter, Metropolitan of Kyiv at the opening of it, - M. 1813). – As for the celebration of the four saints of Moscow, the feast of the three saints: Peter, Alexy and Jonah was established under Patr. Job in 1596, and the fourth saint, Philip, was added to the three in 1875. In the “Tale of Effective Orders” of the Moscow Assumption Cathedral, compiled in 1627 and published in Part VI of Vivliofika Novikov, the celebration of Metropolitan. Peter on the 4th of August is indicated: “the discovery of the relics of our holy father Peter, Metropolitan of All Russia,” - page 211. In order to celebrate the Vilna Martyrs, St. Metropolitan Alexy, this seems to us rather doubtful. St. could hardly Alexy to establish a celebration while he was on good terms with Olgerd and had Lithuanian Rus' under his metropolitan power, because to do this would mean on his part to inflict too great and a very serious insult on Olgerd. But hardly a moment of St. Alexy to establish a celebration even while he was in hostile relations with Olgerd and did not have Lithuanian Rus under his power, because, firstly, to do this at the indicated time would mean on the part of St. Alexy to make it difficult for himself to reconcile with Olgerd, which he, of course, did not want; secondly, to establish a celebration at the indicated time would mean to establish it for Lithuanian and for Muscovite Rus', but in order for St. Alexy established for Muscovite Rus' the celebration of Lithuanian or foreign martyrs to Moscow, this does not seem probable, and most importantly, we directly know that for Muscovite Rus' he established the celebration only at the council of 1549. It is more likely to think that the celebration of the martyrs was established in Lithuanian Rus' after it had its own special metropolis in 1458, and that later its establishment was adopted by St. Metropolitan Alexy out of a desire to give him significant firmness and authority. And if we consider it fair that the images of the Lithuanian martyrs are on the sakkos of Metropolitan. Photius (kept in the Moscow Synodal Sacristy): then we can assume that they were canonized by Metropolitan Photius, at the insistence of Lithuania - Vel. Princess Sophia Vitovtovna. The compiler of the Gustino Chronicle, which in the 2nd volume of the Collected Chronicles, speaks under the year 1355, - page 350. About Kossov and Dubovich, whom we do not have at hand, see Rev. Philaret History of the Russian Church, second period. § 22, 3rd edition, which we have at hand, p. 73, and Russian saints under the 14th of April, and Rev. Macarius History Russian. churches vol. IV, p. 256. See Rev. Sergius in the 2nd volume of the Complete Month of the East on April 14th, and at Rev. Macarius in History vol. IV, p. 260, approx. 371. We said that the martyrs were buried in Vilna near the Church of St. Nicholas and that some part of their relics was placed in the Church of the Holy Trinity, built on the site of their suffering. It is unknown when all the relics were then transferred to the Trinity Monastery, and around 1615, when there was a danger that the Trinity Monastery would be captured by the Uniates, which is what happened, the relics were transferred to the Vilna Holy Spiritual Monastery, where they remain to this day. In 1826, by decree of St. Synod, the relics, which were previously closed (?), were examined and solemnly opened - Rev. Philareta Russian Saints, April 14, Rev. Demetrius of the Month, same date, and Rev. Arsenia Chronicle of church events, 1826 (Reverend Philaret writes in one letter to A.V. Gorsky: “I happened to see the relics of the holy martyrs; hitherto the leg is a witness, like a broken leg,” see his letters to Gorsky, printed in Moscow, in 1885, No. 88, p. 223. - It is strange that Kulchinsky remained unknown about the transfer relics from one monastery to another and about their location in the second monastery, see ero Specimen Ecclesiae Ruthenicae according to the 3rd edition made by Martynov, b. 15, XIV Aprilis). Kulchinsky's original words are: Corpora sanctorum martyrum hactenus reperiri non posse, quamvis credantur delitescere, sub terra in horto nostri monasterii Vilnensis SS. Triadis. Collection years. VI, 184 fin. (story about the miracle itself - ibid., p. 320 fin.). - Relics of the Ven. Varlaam have never been discovered and still remain under wraps. In 1471 he led. book Ivan Vasilyevich, being in Novgorod, wanted to open them, but was prevented from doing so in a miraculous way (great smoke emanating from the wonderworker’s tomb), see 3rd Novgorod. chronicle in the Collection. years., III, 240 fin. sqq. Epiphanius, who wrote the life of St. Sergius, before the discovery of his relics or before 1422, in a word of praise would let him know more than once what was celebrated for him in the monastery. In a manuscript written in 1425, he is called a holy elder, and the scribe of the manuscript ends his afterword to it with a prayerful appeal to him - Lavrsk. RKP. No. 185, l. 365 oh b. – About the troparion and kontakion by St. Sergius, written before Pachomius Serbinus, who composed a complete service to him between 1449–1459, see Lavrsk. RKP. No. 362. See Collection. years. VIII, 121, under 1448, Collections of Charters and Treaties vol. I, pp. 139 and 152, Act. East. Vol. I, No. 43, p. 87. And by the previous time there was a third celebration, held in one Trinity Cathedral of the Lavra on August 14, on the day of the transposition of the relics of St. Sergius in 1585 from the old shrine to the new one, see Description. Synod. RKPP. Gorsk and He in ocmp. No. 400, l. 160 ο b., p. 382. Relics of the Venerable. Sergius was opened 30 years after his death, it follows. in 1422. According to the legend of their discovery, belonging to the above-mentioned Pachomius Serbinus, they were found incorrupt (“having opened the miraculous coffin, together with the fragrance and aroma of the spiritual, you will be filled with wonderful sight and tenderness, worthy, as not only the holy body of the saint was brightly preserved, but also his clothes, in which he was buried, were intact “Everything has no part in corruption, and water from both sides of the ark is visible, but the body of the saint and his robe are in no way touched.” The famous traveler of the half of the 18th century, Olearius, writes about the relics of St. Sergius and his student Rev. Nikon (under cover and attached to the relics of St. Sergius, obviously due to a misunderstanding): “The Russians say that even now they can show anyone the heads (Hirnschalen - skulls) of these saints with the brains incorruptible in them,” see Read. General East. and Ancient 1868 book. IV, p. 340. The power of St. Demetrius were not discovered and still remain under wraps. See the legend about the discovery of relics from Rev. Makaria in East. V, 362.-In the inventory of the Novgorod bishop's house of 1725 it is said that in the St. Sophia Cathedral, and the chapel of the Beheading of the Forerunner, on the right side, “there is a carved gilded wooden shrine, and in it there is an ark with the relics of our holy father John the Archbishop, the Wonderworker of Novgorod.” – Descriptions of documents and affairs of St. Synod vol. V. adj. col. CCCLXXV. Collection years. III, 183: “And make a memorial to them every summer.” Grozny, back in 1556, ordered that on the day of remembrance of the prince and his mother, memorial services should be sung for them, see Archaeological description of church antiquities in Novgorod by Rev. I, 82, and a memorial service was celebrated for one mother back in the Χ 5th century, - Description. Synod. RKPP. Gorsk and Nevostr. No. 399, p. 872. Grozny in 1556 also ordered that a memorial service be held for Mstislav Rostislavich on the day of his memory, see ibidd. See 2nd note to the paragraph about Rev. Sergius. - Relics of the Ven. Kirill were not discovered and still remain under wraps. See Synod Description. RKPP. Gorsk and Nevostr. No. 410, l. 410 rpm pp. 442 fin; in Jonah's charter at the end of 1448, printed in Act. East. vol. I, No. 43, as follows from its demolition with the Resurrection Chronicle, - Collected. years. VIII, 121, the name Alexy must be considered omitted by mistake. Body of St. Alexy was buried in the chapel of the Archangel Church of the Chudov Monastery, dedicated to the Annunciation of the Virgin Mary. His relics were found in an unknown exact way when, between 1431 and 1438, on the occasion of digging ditches for a new church, after the church he built and in which he was buried collapsed (From the Nikon and Resurrection Chronicles it follows that not the entire church, but only the chapel, for under the year 1501 these chronicles say that the Church of the Archangel in the Chudov Monastery was dismantled Michael’s miracle, “the Holy Metropolitan Alexei the Wonderworker began and performed it,” first chronicle: VI, 164 fin., second chronicle in Collected years VIII, 240 fin.). In 1483–1485, a refectory church dedicated to himself was built in the monastery, into which his relics were transferred. In the current Alekseevsko-Annunciation Church, built in the continuation of 1679–1686, in place of the now mentioned Alekseevskaya, the relics have been located since May 19 of the last year: for the transfer of the relics to the church, see Vivliof. X. 284 sqq. Above, speaking of St. Petre, we said that in 1531 he led. book Vasily Ivanovich ordered to make for the relics of St. Alexia, a new silver shrine with a gilded image of the saint on the top board; into this new shrine of the relics of St. Alexy was transferred, also after the death of Vasily Ivanovich, on February 11, 1535. - at Karamz. VII, approx. 11, mentioned above, in the speeches about St. Petre, Uvarovsky chronograph, in which there is an error - January instead of February, fol. 859, and Nikon. years. VII, 7. According to the assurance of the famous Arseny of Elasson, Boris Fedorovich Godunov (1598–1605) made a new silver-gilded shrine for the relics of St. Alexy, see article by A. A. Dmitrievsky; “Arseny, Archbishop of Elasson and his newly discovered memoirs”, published in the Proceedings of the Kyiv Academy of 1898, March, p. 369 (and one must think that the relics of St. Alexis were transferred to this shrine on February 17, 1600, as evidenced by the story read in the Tsarskogo RKP No. 744, fol. 172). About the desecration to which the relics were subjected in 1812 by the French, having been thrown out of the shrine by them and then suddenly being found in the church among various rubbish, see N. Rozanov in the History of the Moscow Diocesan Administration, part 3 of the book. 2, pp. 27–28. See Rev. Macaria East., VIII, 35, fin. The relics of St. Nikita is hidden. Since it is said that the relics lay “in a new coffin,” this seems to indicate that they were not discovered very long before 1463. The power book, we don’t know why, calls the relics of the princes not just bones, but dejected bones (“The Lord God sent His mercy on their dejected bones.” And by the integrity and integrity of the relics, which is spoken of by the news read in the Nikon and Resurrection Chronicles, in the Royal Chronicler and Karamzin, in view of the fact that the relics of all three were placed were in the same coffin and in view of the clear evidence of the Book of Degrees, obviously, one should understand about the integrity and integrity of the bones, regarding which see at the end of the study, in general speeches about the relics, the Nikon Chronicle, having spoken about the death of Prince Theodore, adds that many miracles came from him then,” - III, 96, but this assurance should be looked at as a simple conclusion of the chronicler from his time, which there is the 16th century, when, according to him, the prince gave “many miracles and countless healings to all who came with faith”). See Collection. years. VI, 185 and 186, also Degrees, book. I, 397 fin. But it must be said that along with the story we conveyed about the discovery of the relics of Prince Theodore and his children, there is brief news about the same discovery of relics, in which the matter appears differently. This news is read in the chronicles - Nikonovskaya, VI, 1, and Voskresenskaya, - Collected. years. VII Ι, 150, in the Royal Chronicler, p. 376 fin., also in Karamzin’s extracts from the chronicles, - vol. VI, approx. 629.col. S8, under the year 1463, there is the following: “In the summer of 6971 in the city of Yaroslavl, in the monastery of the Savior, the relics of the blessed Smolensk prince Theodore Rostislavich and his sons Konstantin and Davyd were found, under that church in the basement. everything is intact and unharmed; Archimandrite Christopher of that monastery took them from there with great honor and brought them to the church of the great Savior and put them in one coffin and put the new Chernechesk vestments on them, since he had reposed in the monastic rite.” In some calendars, under the 24th of August, it is written: “the entombment of the blessed Tsar Constantine Ulemtsi,” see Description of the Synod. RKPP. Gorsk and Nevostr. No. 388, page 318, and No. 410, page 443. Here, of course, is our Konstantin, the son of Prince Fyodor (for the title of Tsar acquired by him, see ibid.); but what his position in the grave is said to remain unknown (about the nickname Ulemets. However, not explained anywhere, see also in Karamz. V, note 120. in Vostok. in Rumyants. Muz. p. 719, col. 2, and in Novikov’s Genealogical Book, I, 114 beginning). In some calendars under the 24th of August - not the positioning of Constantine Ulemtsi in the tomb, but the transfer of his relics, see Rev. Sergius in the Complete Monthly Book of the East, I, 1st ed. 292 fin., 2nd ed. 354 fin. As for the nickname Ulemets (Ulemtsa, Ulemtso), they are in all likelihood Tatar, since Konstantin and his brother David were born Fyodor Rostislavich from the second wife of a Tatar woman (isn’t it a Russian diminutive from the Tatar ulema, ulem, which means: scientist, namely, a learned theologian or lawyer?) Life of Savva (Academic RKP. from Volokol. No. 640, l. 176 vol.). See Klyuchevsky in Old Russian Lives, pp. 277 and 387–388. According to Veryuzhsky, page 80, the military men of 1471 built a church not in the name of Procopius, but in the name of Boris and Gleb and the Great Martyr. George, and in the name of Procopius they built a church, with which the celebration of his memory began, the military people of 1495. – The relics of Procopius are hidden. See the 2nd Sophia Chronicle in the Collection. years. VI, 195 fin., and Resurrection Chronicle ibid., VIII. 171. The first chronicle says that St. Jonah “found his being whole”; the second chronicle says that “his nights (gained) all their purposes and were indestructible, for the flesh adhered to his bones and left him without moving.” In 1812, the year of the relics of St. Jonah is the only one of all the relics located in the Assumption Cathedral that remained untouched and their silver shrine undamaged. – N. Koganov, History of Moscow. diocesan management, part 3, book. II. page 24. – St. Jonah died on March 31st, but either when the celebration was first established for him or by the council of 1547, his memory was mistakenly placed on March 30th instead of March 31st. in the 18th century, in the Assumption (Moscow) Cathedral, it was celebrated on various days, as indicated by the king or patriarch (in the Exit of the Sovereigns the days of celebration are recorded: March 20, 30 and 31, April 1, 4, 16, 21 and 23. May 13 and June 6). In the Charter of 1682, we do not know why, his memory was moved from March 30 to June 15. Currently, St. Jonah Krona on June 15th: May 29th, on the day of the discovery of the relics, and October 5th, on the day of the four Moscow saints. Philareta Russian saints, May, 15th, approx. 139. For the first time, Muravyov expressed his assumption in Journey to Russian Holy Places, published for the first time in 1830, and then repeated it in the Lives of Saints. Act. Expedition vol. 1, no. 40, p. 81 (end of the letter). See the life of St. Leonty in Reading. General East. and Ancient 1893, book. IV, p. 30. See the message of Archbishop Vassian to Vel. book To Ivan Vasilyevich on Morning in the Collection. years. VIII, 213. See Klyuchevsk. page 181. See Rev. Makaria in East. IV. 260, Descriptions of the Solovetsky manuscripts, vol. II, p. 360, and Typogr. years, p. 340. Between the manuscripts of the Solovetsky Monastery, now located in the library of the Kazan Spirit. Academies; there is a service menaion written in Novgorod in 1494, and in this menaion between the new Russian miracle workers on the 11th of March - Euthymius, Archbishop of Novgorod, see Description of the Solovetsky Manuscripts, Part II. “No. 616 (518), p. 358. And in 1500, a church dedicated to the name of Euthymius was already built in the Vyazhitskozh monastery, - Rev. Makaria Archaeological description of church antiquities in Novgorod, I, 599. Relics before Avramiya of Rostov, unknown when opened, are being opened. In 1862, they were transferred from the previous shrine (built in 1772) to a new shrine, and the description of this transfer says that the coffin with the holy relics of the monk was lifted (taken out) from the old shrine and then, after he stood the all-night vigil in the middle of the church, and the next day was surrounded by the circle of the monastery, “it was lowered into a new shrine installed on the spot former", see the description of the Epiphany Avramiev Monastery, owned by A. A. Titov and having the title: "Rostov Epiphany Avramiev Monastery of the Yaroslavl Diocese", Sergiev Posad, 1894, p. 41 fin. sqq. See our History of the Russian Church I, 2. 641 sqq. We firmly remain with the opinion expressed there even now. And to support it, we will provide one more piece of evidence. Rev. Joseph of Volokolamsk, speaking in the 10th chapter of his charter about the miracle workers who shone in the Russian land, lists them in this order: Anthony and Theodosius of Pechersk, Sergius and Varlaam and Cyril and Demetrius and Dionysius and Abraham and Paul. By Abraham, Joseph undoubtedly means Abramius of Rostov, for there is no other Abramius whom he could mean, but placing him between Dionysius of Glushitsky and Pavel Obnorsky, of whom one died in 1429, and the other in 1437, obviously, he does not attribute him to ancient times, but refers precisely to that later time to which we attribute him. For Abraham, see ibid. p. 650, about Nikon - Lavrsk. RKP. No. 240, l. 580 and Academic. RKP. No. 231, l. 4 (Description of Archimandrite Leonidas. II, 335). About the relics of Macarius, the legend about their discovery says: “Taking (from the ground) the saint’s coffin with his body honestly and carrying it into the tomb, where it was built near the church, and performing holy singing over it with all the decorations and with lights, as it is fitting to give honor to the saints; after the funeral, they open his shrine and a great fragrance emanates from it, but I will not touch the dust of it, pricking it more than the body, as the saints saw his gray hair shining like the sun”... - RKP. Undolsk. No. 336, l. 26 and about. As the note made in the title of the canon of Paphnutius, composed by his student Innocent, says. - Academician RKP. from Volokodl. IV; 382, d. 244 vol., see also Klyuchevsk. page 207 fin. See Collection. years. III, 249 fin. Synodal RKP. according to the description of Gorsk and Nevostr. No. 888, l. 96 vol., p. 317. Relics of Prince Konstantin Svyatoslavich. Muromsky and his sons Mikhail and Theodore were found in 1553 (1555?) while digging ditches for the foundation of a new church - East. Jer. III, 358, Ratshin Complete collection of historical information, p. 31 beginning, Philaret Russian saints, May 21 (all three rest in one shrine in the Murom Annunciation Monastery, which was built by Grozny at the parish Annunciation Church, which formed the tomb of the princes). There is no life of Prince Peter and Princess Fevronia, but there is only, so to speak, a secular (semi-pagan) legend about them (printed in the first issue of Monuments of Ancient Russian Literature by Kushelev-Bezborodko, p. 29 sqq.) In the Laurentian Chronicle it is reported under the year 1228 that in this year, on the holy week of idleness, “David died (Prince) of Murom in the monastery and in the skime,” and then that “the same summer Svyatoslav (Vsevolodovich, Prince of Yuriev of Poland) released his princess on the advice of wanting her to go to a monastery, and will give her many allowances ... (and) go to Murom to the brothers and take monastic vows”: and it seems quite likely to think that V. accepts this too. O. Klyuchevsky, that in Prince Peter, by the monastic name David, one must see the Prince David of the chronicle, whose monastic name, on the contrary, was Peter, and in Princess Fevronia, by the monastic name Euphrosyne, the sister of the prince, unknown by name. David. The relics of St. Euthymius of Suzdal were found while digging ditches for the foundation of a new church in 1507, - East. Jer. IV, 99 fin. (in the palace Image Chamber there were under Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, as stated in the inventory of the chamber, “the relics of our venerable father Euthymius of Suzdal, two teeth in a silver gilded ark”, see the inventory of the chamber in the III book of the Reading. General History and Ancients for the current year 1902, p. 53 beginning). The relics of St. Paul of Komelsky were found in 1546 while digging ditches for the foundation of the church, but by order of the monk, who appeared to the abbot, they were immediately buried again - Archbishop. Philareta Russian Saints, January 10, 3rd ed. 1882, p. 51. Dionysius Glushitsky founded three monasteries: Pokrovsky Glushitsky and to it: 4 versts from it Sosnovetsky Predtechensky, which served as a cemetery for his brethren, and 2 versts from it Leontyevsky, designated for the prayer of women who were not supposed to enter the first two monasteries. The Leontief Monastery has not existed for a long time; and as for Glushitsky and Sosnowiecki, until 1680 the latter remained assigned to the first, and from 1680 until now, vice versa. - Relics of the Ven. Dionysius are kept under wraps in the Sosnowiec Monastery. The life of Prince Andrei, extracted from the life of St. Daniel (cfr. Klyuchevsk. p. 282 fin.), which, unfortunately, we have in a very illiterately written manuscript - Lavrsk. No. 696, l. 222 sqq., see also Degree Book, II, 230. “In the spring, I sailed on a river (ice floe) along the Msta river in a deck in the underwear, but not in the upper.” According to local legend or according to local later legends, Jacob was a layman - a peasant, a boatman or barge hauler by trade, accepted Christ for the sake of foolishness and was killed by thunder. About the relics of Jacob, the priest and deacon wrote in their search: “With the blessing of the Right Reverend Archbishop Theodosius the Great of Novagrad and Pskov and by his order, they looked at the deceased Jacob, and he lies in the relics: the head of the whole case and his flesh has dried to the bones, the left eye is full, and the right half is sunken, both lips are intact, and the left ear is full, and the right one lay down, in both countries the personal flesh pulled away from the cheeks and withered, and on the head and face the flesh dried up to the bones; the left hand up to the elbow with the bone up to the wrist with the body has withered and the nails and fingers are all intact; and the hand is blessed (?), and the right hand is up to the elbow with a bone, it has two fingers, and the others have fallen off, and on the fingers there is flesh and nails; and on the left side the ribs withered with the flesh; and the right countries of the ribs have fallen apart, two rib bones hold those breasts, and the other uds have all fallen apart, the bones lie exposed,” see Lavrsk. RKP. No. 654, which contains: the letter of Archbishop Theodosius in Borovichi, with the contents of the metropolitan’s letter to the archbishop written in it (which is not there), the act of witnessing the relics and a record of their transfer; now written about the relics - no. 83 and about.” diploma - l. 79 sqq. Rev. Joseph of Volokolamsk, at the beginning of the 10th chapter of his Charter or his Spiritual Letter (“Answer to the Lustful”), together with Anthony and Theodosius of Pechersk, Sergius of Radonezh, Varlaam of Khatyn and Kirill of Belozersky, names as glorified among the celebrated Russian saints Demetrius of Prilutsky, Dionysius of Glushitsky, Avramius of Rostov and Paul Obnorsky. See V. O. Klyuchevsky in Old Russian Lives, pp. 225, 241 and 462. As for Moscow itself, in the Followed Psalter, which belonged to Metropolitan. Daniel (1522–1539), -Academy, RKP. from Volokol. No. 149, the following Russian saints are located: 12 Feb. Metropolitan Alexy. May 3 Theodosius of Pechersk, May 14 Isidore Tverdislav (sic) of Rostov, May 15 Isaiah bishop. Rostovsky, May 23 Leonty eu. Rostovsky and Nikita Pereyaslavsky, May 28 Ignatius Bishop. Rostovsky, June 9 Kirill Belozersky, July 15 led. book Vladimir, July 24 Boris and Gleb, September 20 Prince Mikhail of Chernigov with boyar Theodore, September 25 Sergius of Radonezh, 22 Oct. Avramy of Rostov, November 6 Varlaam Khutynsky, December 21. Metropolitan Peter. It turns out to be necessary to assume some kind of government act, given just before the council of 1547 or earlier, also because otherwise it will remain inexplicable to us where the author of the life of Metropolitan. Ions. Admitting that it is extremely difficult to accept in fact, that by the time of Met. Macarius, the general veneration of all the mentioned 15 saints was established or introduced by itself; one would think that all of them were celebrated in the Moscow Assumption Cathedral, as in the cathedral church of the Russian Metropolis and as in the central representative church of the entire Russian Church, and that the practice of the Assumption Cathedral was the source of information for the author of the life. But we have the charter of the Moscow Assumption Cathedral of the first half of the Χ V Π century and this charter lacks four generally revered saints of that time (the charter is printed in Volume III of the Russian Historical Library, published by the Archaeographical Commission; it lacks: Jacob, Bishop of Rostov on November 27, Macarius of Kolyazin on March 17, Ephraim of Perekomsky on May 16th and Prince Olga on July 11th). The following Psalter has been preserved, as we said, to the present day. Daniel, who is separated from Metropolitan Macarius for only three years (deposed from the see in 1539, while Macarius was elevated to the see in 1542), and in this Psalter six names are missing from our list of 15 generally revered saints, namely: Vel. book Olga. Anthony of Pechersk, Dmitry of Prilutsky and Prince of Yaroslavl Theodore with their sons David and Konstantin. You might be interested in: