Bishop Porfiry (Uspensky)

as the initiator and organizer of the first Russian spiritual mission in Jerusalem, and his services to the benefit of Orthodoxy and in the study of the Christian East 1 (on the occasion of the centenary of his birth) Bishop Porfiry (Uspensky) (1804–1904) September 8, 2 of the past year (1904) marked exactly one hundred years since the birth of our famous traveler Porfiry Uspensky, Bishop of Chigirin, vicar of the Kyiv metropolis, abbot of the Kyiv Golden-Domed-Mikhailovsky Monastery, initiator and organizer of our first spiritual mission in Jerusalem and author of many works on the Christian East. All these epithets give us quite sufficient grounds in this solemn meeting to take upon ourselves the courage to offer to your enlightened attention our best word about this outstanding figure for the benefit of Orthodoxy and a very prolific researcher of the historical destinies and monuments of ancient times, dear in many respects, mysterious and tempting for us to this day, the Christian East. We now consider it quite timely to depict, at least in general terms, the life full of seething energy, tireless perseverance and the most varied adventures of the ever-memorable hero of the day, since, despite the twenty years that have already passed since his death, the many works of his prolific pen published after it and, especially, his curious autobiographical notes entitled: “The Book of Genesis mine,” we still do not have in print a more or less complete and coherent biography of His Eminence Porfiry Uspensky, in which this personality would receive a well-deserved, and, if possible, correct assessment. Taking upon ourselves this task, we, however, are well aware of the difficulty of its implementation, especially in our present position - a public speaker, and therefore we apologize in advance to our listeners for the defects of our speech and ask their favorable indulgence if we burden their enlightened attention with some particulars and details in the story about the numerous vicissitudes in the life of our famous orientalist. The homeland of our orientalist was, as he put it, “humble” Kostroma 3, the parish of the Assumption Church, in which, at the moment of his birth, at the request of his pious mother, “the royal doors were opened” 4. Alexander Matveevich Uspensky († in 1827), the father of the Right Reverend Porfiry, occupied the modest position of psalm-reader at the said parish church. His Eminence Porfiry himself, in his extensive autobiographical notes, pays very little attention to his father and reports very meager biographical information about him. “My father, when I was still a youth,” writes St. Porfiry, took me to the Assumption Cathedral; and here I, standing in the corner of the altar, heard the little singers, before the entrance of the bishop into the church, singing: “Open for me the gates of righteousness; when we enter, let us confess to the Lord” (Ps. 117:19)” 5. “I have loved painting since early childhood,” notes Rev. Porfiry about his aesthetic upbringing. - When I was in my eighth year, then my father, the psalmist of the Kostroma Cathedral 6 of blessed memory, Alexander Matveevich, drew me captured French guards who were driven to Kostroma in 1812, and I redrew them through transparent paper and admired my child’s work. At the same time, my father bought me drawings on paper of our generals on horseback and the French fighting with us under them. And I redrew these drawings on oiled paper, sticking them to the glass... The ability and passion for painting remained with me. This passion manifested itself in me during my trip to Italy, so much so that, living in Venice, Padua, Milan, I don’t want to see anything other than paintings and picture churches” 7 . Once again he remembered his father about the speech in Moscow. “When I was a little boy, my father sometimes asked me: “Kostya, do you want me to show you Moscow?” “I want you to show me Moscow,” I babbled and jumped for joy. Then he lifted me by the churches (head) with both hands and said: “Well, you see?” “I see, I see!” – I shouted, kicking my legs. Yes, in the family, praying with my mother, I got used to honoring the Russian Tsar, and while playing and having fun, I heard about Moscow and wanted to see it” 8. The low position of his father in the church clergy does not allow us to assume that Alexander Matveevich could be considered a wealthy person: he, in the words of St. Porfiry, only “was never a beggar” 9, having his own house with a garden and a piece of daily bread from the parish. “I spent the golden years of my youth,” St. Porfiry writes about this house, “in the bright room of my parents’ house, decorated with images of the fate of sweet-faced Joseph, ugly Aesop, sweet-tongued John of Damascus and the holy places of Jerusalem, and there I memorized the lessons of human philosophy and frank theology and composed reasoning and first sermons. An unforgettable little place where no one else has been, except God and my two sisters” 10. Therefore, it is not at all surprising that, after the death of Alexander Matveevich, his mother and daughters found themselves in the position of “the poorest” 11 and in “great need” 12, and the care of them fell entirely on the shoulders of St. Porfiry. “For them,” admits Pr. Porfiry, “I renounced the world so that they might be rich from my poverty,” in order to dry up “the flow of their tears,” to save them from “hunger poverty and severe suffering” 13. On the contrary, Ave. Porfiry devotes a lot of attention to his mother, Daria Stepanovna, who died at a very old age († 1865), and paints her before us with the highly sympathetic features of a good Christian woman. Daria Stepanovna was a simple woman who completely shared the beliefs and views of our commoners on “brownies, goblins, rising from the graves of the dead.” “My mother,” writes St. Porfiry, “once told me that she saw a fever in a blue short sundress with bare legs, the same one that came to shake and torment my sister Lyubov” 14. Daria Stepanovna combined deep religiosity with childish naive faith. “My own mother,” we read in his notes, “was very pious, and from an early age she raised me in strict piety and taught me to pray to God, as she herself prayed, heartily and reverently 15. I knew the morning prayers and the prayers for bedtime by heart and read them to myself even when I was already studying at the academy, where at that time the students did not pray all together in their busy chambers. The sweetness of prayer was the favorite sweetness of my soul” 16. The mother of St. Porfiry loved pilgrimages to monasteries, made them annually and often took with her the future orientalist St. Porfiry. “My mother,” according to St. Porfiry, “went to the Rostov-Yakovlevsky Monastery every year and there she entrusted me to the love of St. Demetrius the Wonderworker" 17. “In my youth, I had a great desire to go with my mother to the Igritsky and Babaevsky monasteries on pilgrimage” 18. The same devout mother tried to instill other good Christian skills and habits in her beloved son. “It used to be, my mother,” notes St. Porfiry, “when she saw that I was dropping bread crumbs on the floor, she would immediately bring me to reason, and another time she would punish me so that my head would remember the gift of God” 19 . Therefore, it is not at all surprising that St. Porfiry calls his mother “his first helmsman” 20 and devotes many pages to her in his writings, imbued with feelings of tender filial love and deep gratitude 21 . Raised by a pious mother, St. Porfiry undoubtedly received a lot of good things from her, but he also shared some of the shortcomings of her naive worldview 22 . The ancient churches, their austere iconography and splendid worship had a profound effect on the impressionable soul of the child and left an indelible mark on his entire life. When looking at the stern and dry faces of the saints, “I,” notes St. Porfiry, “remembered my childhood: it used to be that in the ancient trees in my homeland the faces of the saints did not so much frighten me as warn me against pranks; Whenever I look at them, they still look at me menacingly. I run towards the church, and Saint Nicholas looks there too; I go in the other direction, and he sees me there too. I close my eyes, I can hear him, he says: “Look, Kostya, don’t be naughty, study and be smart, pray to God and obey your father and mother.” Sometimes he will confirm to me all the commandments and all the good instructions of my parents and teachers. At first I was very afraid of St. Nicholas, and then I got a little used to him and it seemed that sometimes he looked at me more kindly. Such was the effect of harsh church painting on my little innocent soul” 23. An excellent knowledge of church hymns and a love of worship were instilled in St. Porfiry from childhood. “Almost every evening I sang all-night vigils in my cell alone,” notes the bishop. Porfiry about the last years of his Moscow life (1888), - from childhood he knew by heart stichera, dogmas, troparia, irmos, etc. and so on. to the Vzbranaya Voivode" 24. His most childhood games were often nothing more than a reproduction of church services in the company of his sisters. “In my youth, I loved to dress my sisters as deacons, serve mass with them and bless them with both hands,” confesses St. Porfiry. “Noticing this, my grandmother Daria used to say to me: “Kostenka, you will be a priest, an archpriest, and a bishop.” 25 Religious upbringing in a family consisting of women predisposed the impressionable soul of a gifted child to everything mysterious and developed in him from a young age a love of solitude. With love, he went “to the forest to pick mushrooms, where the darkness, silence, mysterious echo and sky, barely visible above the tallest pines, enchanted me to the point that I,” says St. Porfiry, “to the call of my dear one to go home, often answered: “It’s too early.” In my youth, my inclination towards solitude was so great that everyone called me a monk” 26. But with these good habits, some superstitions were also adopted from the mother. “Walking to the Zaprudnenskoye School past the cemetery, I,” confesses St. Porfiry, “was afraid of the dead chasing me” 27. The family of Alexander Matveevich and Daria Stepanovna Uspensky consisted of their only son, the future orientalist, Bishop Porfiry, and two daughters: the eldest Lyubov Alexandrovna Lapshina and Serafima Alexandrovna Nikolaevskaya, who survived even after the death of Bishop Porfiry and lived in her own house in her homeland 28 . Regarding the death of his elder sister, September 10, 1845, Ave. Porfiry notes: “My sister and I were the same age as my mother, and we loved each other. The deceased was very pious, strict in her rules and house-building" 29 . Between all members of the Uspensky family there always reigned a rare mutual affection and ardent love, 30 which is then transferred to the younger descending generation of this family. Porfiry not only raised the niece of Serafima Alexandrovna’s second sister, Margarita Borovskaya, Ave., but gave her in marriage with a ten-thousand-dollar dowry 31 , and then, out of 15,000 rubles for manuscripts sold to the Imperial Public Library, he gave her another 5,000 rubles. 32. According to his spiritual posthumous will, he gave up a thousand rubles to his own sister, and the winning ticket to his own niece Yu. A. Bornovolokova 33 . It hardly needs to be added that St. Porfiry was the favorite and pride of the whole family. In moments of everyday failure, which often fell to his lot, St. Porfiry suffered, first of all, not for himself, but for his relatives. “When I remembered,” wrote Ave. Porfiry in 1847, amid his misadventures in St. Petersburg, “about my poor mother and about my sister and her Margasha, for whom I renounced the world so that they would be rich in my poverty, then the thought of a stream of their tears, of their hungry poverty, of their grave suffering, of their unbearable pain from the dull and cruel talk about me human, this thought, too heavy, like a sharp stone, fell on my heart and, rising, fell again and squeezed out all the blood from it and then fell from a great height and crushed it to pieces.” 34 In difficult moments of his life, he therefore hurried to his family to rest his soul in the circle of his loved ones and those who loved him. “I will soon leave here for Kostroma,” wrote in May 1857 to His Serene Highness Princess V.P. Wittgenstein, née Euler, maid of honor to Grand Duchess Elena Pavlovna, dejected under the weight of the cross. Porfiry, - for a meeting with my elderly mother and my relatives. I desperately need their love in my present bleak state. Among them I will not look upon myself as excluded from society. Not in the Lavra, but in my parental home, the youth of my soul will be renewed, like an eagle, in which my pious mother knew how to instill the fear of God, chastity, kindness and patience” 35. St. Porfiry visited his “dear homeland” even in the declining years of his life (in 1872) in order to see his sister and niece and “find a warm place for himself,” “where it would be better to settle down for peace” 36. How and where St. Porfiry learned to read and write, he does not have exact information about this. But he almost speaks of his initial training when, while in Ramallah in Palestine in 1844, a memory of the old sextons in Russia and the way they used to teach reading and singing accidentally surfaces in his mind: Az pricks the eye, Buki bugs, Lead the cockroaches, Verb stumps, Good knuckles, They ask to eat, etc.” “Jump, jump onto someone else’s bridge,” is a refrain by which the student could sing correctly “God is the Lord and appear to us,” etc. “Mother-like fox, passion-bearing hares, martyred wolves, desert-dwelling bears, living in dens, sucking their paws, pray for our souls to be saved.” Similar to this stichera, “I cried to the Lord” in the first tone is sung.”37 However, other forms of teaching literacy did not exist in Russia until the second half of the 19th century, and the Dyachkovsky system of teaching is still remembered by many of us to this day 38 . Be that as it may, but, with a happy natural memory, Konstantin Uspensky in his ninth year was already ready to enter theological school. “I visited the Kostroma suburb of Zaprudnya,” writes St. Porfiry about his trip to his homeland in 1872, “where in 1813 there was a seminary with a school for youngsters until it burned down. There in September of this year my father took me, nine years old, to study. There they accepted me into the so-called information center; and then the boys ordained me to the title of student, hitting me with their elbows on the back and with their fists. it hurt so much on the back of my head that I cried. Not a single log remained from my information room and from the seminary itself. There was a shady birch grove in which the seminarians amused themselves with various games, but it was all cut down and eradicated. Now the stone church in which the ancient image of the Savior Made by Hands is honored and in which the seminarians prayed has survived. restored inside and decorated very well by local manufacturers "39. From the school period of life at pr. Porfiry also recorded memories of “how the auditor Archimandrite Philaret, with a star on his chest, gave us grammarians the task of translating into Latin: “Come, let us worship our King God,” and I translated it like this: “Venite, adoremus Regem nostrum Deum”, how in the Epiphany (now female) monastery I climbed 40 hidden passages on its thick walls from tower to tower and wrote here in pencil in Greek: “Ἐν άρχη ην ό Λόγος, “Αξιόν βστιν ώς αληθώς μακαρίζειν σε τήν Θεοτόκον "41. Endowed by nature with a beautiful treble voice, he sang in the seminary choir, and later was a regent there and even directed two choirs, thanks to which he knew church singing very well and, later in the rank of bishop, was always passionately concerned about church singing 42 . Admired by his voice, the director of the bishop's choir wanted to take Konstantin Uspensky into the bishop's choir, but his mother energetically opposed this, fearing to spoil the gifted young man 43. St. Porfiry provides little information about seminary education. “My most favorite sciences,” he says, “were history and philosophy. Of the sacred persons, the beautiful Joseph was my soulmate. I loved telling his dreams to my father, mother, sisters, and aunts. When studying ancient languages, I did not particularly like Latin, but the Greek word was tightly fused with my extensive memory. Such signs foreshadowed my future destiny." 44. Undoubtedly, the gifted teacher of the Greek language Feodor Pavlovich Moskvin, later Arseny, Metropolitan of Kiev, who provided great services for the career of Bishop Porfiry 45, and the teacher of eloquence and poetry Vasily Ivanovich Gruzdev (in 1820) had an influence on the awakening of love for learning the languages of Greek and Latin. 46. But for the most part, Porfiry was very dissatisfied with his seminary and even academic teachers. “The mentors of seminarians and academicians for the most part,” he writes, “are ill-informed and sluggish, and those who are more playful and free-thinking give them the beginnings of false knowledge and destroy in them the faith planted by their pious mothers. Whoever of them has natural eloquence, constrained by school forms and rules, is either numb, or does not have a strong influence on society, which can be enchanted, captivated, saved not by artificial arias and syllogisms, but by a natural, living, fiery word, noisy like an oak grove, fragrant like a flower garden, a reasonable, heartfelt word, one in which one can hear the deep knowledge of humanity the heart and spiritual needs of society. But do our seminarians and academicians, separated from society, have such knowledge?” 47 After completing the seminary course (1818–1824), he became a “teacher of Greek to children in the city of Makaryev, on Unzha,” i.e. to the lower department of this theological school. “Here I drew,” notes St. Porfiry, “a view of the monastery in which the theological school was located and various animals from one Russian book were redrawn.” 48. St. Porfiry dreamed at this time about the place of a priest in the female Apostolic monastery, but “Abbess Susanna,” he notes, “when I introduced myself to her as a candidate for the priestly place vacated by her, she rejected me because of my beardless and mustacheless youth" 49. Youth and the habit “from a young age to a solitary life and to academic pursuits” 50 prompted Konstantin Uspensky to strive to continue his education at the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, where in 1825 he entered the VIII course, with the assistance of his seminary teacher and fellow countryman F.P. Moskvin, at that time bachelor and hieromonk Arseny 51. "In the academic church “They clothed me, still young,” says Bishop Porfiry about himself, “in a mantle, a doll and sandals” 52 . “I willingly took monastic vows in the twenty-fifth year of my age (i.e., September 15, 1829) in the inviolable purity of virginity.” 53. On September 20, Father Porfiry Uspensky was ordained as a hierodeacon, and on September 25 of the same year as a hieromonk. Thus, a long-cherished dream was fulfilled - to be a performer of the Mysteries of Christ and an active participant in Christian worship, which he loved from early childhood. “The spiritual sweetness that you felt in yourself after communion with the Holy Mysteries,” writes Archbishop Porfiry in 1857 to Princess Wittgenstein, “is understandable to me.” In the golden days of my virgin youth, after confession and communion, I was so united with Christ that all day and evening I sang various prayers, so that not a single sinful thought would darken my soul. This holy effort of the will, obedient to the grace of Christ, will be remembered by God when the soul appears before His throne" 54. At the St. Petersburg Academy, Hieromonk Porfiry studied philosophy in Latin 55 in the years from 1826–1827, but no longer had the same love for it. “I once loved philosophy,” Bishop Porfiry frankly admits, “but I left it because it was stupid, rebellious and harmful. Now I love faith. This beauty is a very sedate, strict, chaste and sublime girl. Living with her is calm, pleasant and useful." 56 However, he did not acquire faith from the lectures of the professor of theology - "the much-learned mentor of his Archimandrite Innokenty Borisov, who taught that after our resurrection we will fly, and that for this the hair under the armpits of our hands will be transformed into wings. You know, this professor of theology did not remember the famous commandment: not to add anything of your own to what is said in the Holy Scripture; but he fantasized in front of us, the young-minded. He flaunted his German scholarship and neologism at the department.” St. Porfiry calls his lectures “chatter.” Sympathies about. Porfiry Uspensky, apparently, was most inclined at this time to study history and antiquities, but even this love was hardly formed in him under the influence of academic lectures. The teaching of history at the Academy, at least by the civilian bachelor A.I. Raikovsky, is presented in his autobiographical notes in a comic form. “It happened,” writes St. Porfiry, “Bachelor A.P. Raikovsky asked me, for example, about the reasons for the fall of the Carthaginian Republic, spitting in advance near his pulpit and then calling me by my nickname: “Uspensky!” Uspensky rose slowly, pondering the reasons, and answered: – The first reason is the delicacy of morals and luxury. - No, sir! This is not the first reason, but the fourth,” the bachelor corrected me, amused by the smile of my comrades. – The second reason is the poor decorum of the mercenary troops. “This is the third reason,” said the mentor, striking the air with his index finger. – The third reason is internal disagreement, characteristic of every popular government. - Great, sir! But this is the second reason. My forehead was already sweating; however, having strained myself, I blurted out: – The fourth reason is the superiority of the Roman-European genius over the African, in the words of the poet: “Andax Japbeti genus Jgnem fraude mala gentibus intullit!” - Excellent, sir! Excellent, sit down! Then the bachelor once again spat on the floor and continued to flaunt even more” 58 . Bishop Porfiry did not like “the skeletal history of the church, which is read both in theological seminaries and academies,” which he “drilled at the time” and instead of which he wanted to see “the philosophy of church history” 59. It is not at all surprising, therefore, that St. Porfiry, as we have already seen, was very dissatisfied with the state of science in our seminaries and academies, admits that spiritual enlightenment in general is “not brilliant” 60 and about himself directly and categorically declares: “I learned little from the seminary and academy, and what and what I know now (i.e. in 1884), I acquired all this while studying in my cell” 61. But no matter how small the results obtained from school are, they still cannot be considered insignificant. First of all, from here our orientalist took away religious education - a life-giving force 62, “excellent knowledge of the Greek language,” which was useful to him in the East 63, sufficient familiarity with the Latin language, in which, on occasion, he could even explain himself 64 and excellent knowledge of the French language 65, the conversation in which “surprised” the Russian envoy to the Porte A.P. Butenev and his companions, “who did not expect a French word from a Russian monk" 66 , "an academic habit" - "to think about the subject" about which he was going to write, "and to present it thoroughly, comprehensively and clearly" 67 , and even the very love of scientific pursuits from a young age 68 as an "enthusiastic lover of the light" of science 69 . It can hardly be denied that the school did not pass without a trace in the development of his “damask, integral” character. “There are people,” writes St. Porfiry, “who, like a damask saber, are extremely well tempered. Bend them into an arc, they will not be crushed. And I use damask steel of the same tempering. God alone can crush me, but none of the people" 70, "I am not a half-hearted person, I not only believe, but also love, and hope: my word is deed; holy thought and holy desire bring my will into motion according to them. I am a person of integrity: I set myself a goal and go towards it cheerfully. On the way, God accompanies me with His verb: “Do not be afraid, my child, I am with you. And I am not mistaken" 71. “My nerves are weak, but my will is strong. In the sandy deserts of Thebaid and Nitria, I was exhausted from the heat, thirst and fatigue, but where I was going, I got there because I wanted to be there. This means that someone else, a powerful one, is wearing the weak mesh of my nerves.” 72 “I am a monk,” Archimandrite Porfiry boldly declares to Count Protasov, “but by upbringing and education I am not prepared for the desert” 73 . Upon completion of the academy course in 1829 with the degree of a senior candidate, with the right to receive a master's degree, after a year of serving as a teacher, Hieromonk Porfiry Uspensky was assigned to the 2nd Cadet Corps as a teacher of law, where, however, he did not remain for long, and in 1831, on September 2, he was transferred as a teacher of law to the Odessa Richelieu Lyceum. “Odessa,” Marazli wrote to the Greek city mayor on Oct. 18. 1883, Bishop Porfiry, is my favorite city. In it, 43 years ago, I taught at a lyceum and seminary, often preached the word of God, was the confessor of many aristocratic families, and was even the first to admit young Bulgarians to the seminary” 74 . “This city,” notes Bishop. Porfiry, “there is, as it were, the sun around which I am destined to revolve” 75. In 1833 Fr. Porfiry was awarded a gold pectoral cross from His Majesty's office, on May 1, 1884 he was appointed rector of the Odessa second-class Assumption Monastery and on May 20 the same he was elevated to the rank of archimandrite, and in 1837 he was determined to be present in the Kherson spiritual consistory. With the transformation of the Richelieu Lyceum in 1838, he had to take over the teaching of theology, church history and canon law. In the same year, 1838, on July 18, Fr. The archimandrite was appointed rector of the Kherson Theological Seminary and professor of theological sciences, in which position he held until 1840, i.e., until the time of his appointment to serve abroad. At present it is still premature to judge the professorial activity of St. Porfiry, since the numerous courses on various branches of theological knowledge preserved in manuscripts, which, by Bishop’s own admission, are not without. Porfiry, “originalities”, which “he did not read from others, but invented himself, studying Jesus in the Gospels” 76, but which, according to those who saw these courses, can be recognized as “subjectivism” 77, after their publication, will undoubtedly shed a lot of light on the original in many respects view of their author on various points of Orthodox theology and in this initial period of his scientific and literary activity. But, be that as it may, even at this time in the career of St. Porfiry, his extraordinary natural talents and scientific activities have already found a fair assessment among the highest authorities and in various scientists and charitable societies. In addition to the pectoral cabinet cross, upon leaving service at the Richelieu Lyceum, Arch. Porfiry was awarded the Most Merciful Royal Favor for his service here, and on April 29, 1840 he was added to the Order of St. Anna 2nd degree. In 1838, architect. Porfiry was elected director of the Odessa Trustee Committee, on March 24, 1834, the Kiev Theological Academy elected him to its correspondents, on October 21, 1885, he was appointed a member of the Odessa statistical committee, and on April 23, 1839, he was elected a full member of the Odessa Society of History and Antiquities. Service in Odessa had a tremendous influence on the further professional and scientific career of Ave. Porfiry. Here he made friendly acquaintances, which later served as very solid drivers towards achieving his goals and often gave him moral support and spiritual joy in difficult moments of life, and hostile ones, which slowed down his good impulses and seriously interfered with his life's path. Of these acquaintances, in the first place should be put his rapprochement to intimate friendship with Alexander Skarlatovich Sturdza, “an intelligent man,” according to St. Porfiry, “a truly Orthodox Christian, an ardent patriot, a thoughtful and florid writer” 78 . “Zealous for the good of the Orthodox Church in the East,” “an old and experienced diplomat in business,” A. S. Sturdza sent the inquisitive thought of Bishop. Porfiry to study the Christian East and warmly and energetically supported our learned orientalist in his works and efforts, helping him to get closer to such influential persons close to the Court, “good Christians,” such as Countess Tyzenhausen, T. B. Potemkina and Baroness Cecilia Fredericks, who provided him with more than once important services with their influence 79 . No less important influence on the career of Bishop Porfiry was his rapprochement with the Novorossiysk and Bessarabian Governor-General Count M. S. Vorontsov (1856), who “loved him dearly” 80 . In the house of Count Vorontsov, he taught children the Law of God 81. This rapprochement aroused the dislike of the famous exile Magnitsky, against whom “my Odessa friends warned me,” confesses Bishop. Porfiry, as if from the plague, and who, seeing my coldness towards him, did not love me, and even in my sermons he found reproaches for himself (which I did not think about). This man was friends with Count Tolstoy (he was the mayor under Vorontsov for a short time, later the chief prosecutor of St. Synod) and, together with him, condemning Vorontsov’s management and writing a denunciation against him to Emperor Nikolai Pavlovich, told him that I was not Orthodox, that I was an esprit fort et seeptique (a freethinker and a skeptic) and not an ascetic” 82. Among other acquaintances in Odessa, which were not broken almost until the last days of the life of our learned orientalist, worthy of mention is his friendship with the Odessa archpriests M.K. Pavlovsky, a former professor of theology at Novorossiysk University, Π. E. Kazansky and others 83. Here, in Odessa, Ave. Porfiry studied colloquial Modern Greek, which brought him enormous benefit in his subsequent travels in the East, and in which he even wrote not badly 84, and became acquainted with the Italian language so satisfactorily that he not only read books in this language, but also “without the slightest difficulty” understood colloquial speech 85. Finally, thanks to frequent travels from here out of curiosity and for scientific purposes, for example, in 1836 to the Crimea and around the same time to Bessarabia, Ave. Porfiry acquired a passion for distant travel, which gave his name great fame in science. At personal request 86, in 1841, arch. Porfiry Uspensky was appointed rector of the church at the Imperial Russian Mission in Vienna, where he left St. Petersburg on May 3. “While at the Viennese embassy, ​​I,” writes Ave. Porfiry, “during my leisure hours, I studied the most ancient monuments of Pelasgian, Roman, and Saradin architecture from books” 87 . Here, in Vienna, he studied the hitherto unknown German language 88, which he later could even speak 89. From here he traveled along the Dalmatian coast from Trieste to Cattaro, getting acquainted mainly with the life of the southwestern Slavs and monuments of their writing 90. Archimandrite Porfiry Uspensky's service in Vienna was short, about a year and a half. On August 8, 1842, he was recalled from Vienna to St. Petersburg 91 and, returning through Krakow and Warsaw, he learned of his new assignment to Jerusalem, which was suggested, as one might think, by his Odessa friend and zealot for Orthodoxy in the East A. S. Sturdza 92 . The unexpected appointment to the East for Archimandrite Porfiry was caused by the following circumstances and motives. Before 1840–1841 of the past 19th century, the holy places in Palestine did not want to recognize any interests in Russia, despite the fact that the attraction of the Russian people there, almost from the first days of Christianity in our fatherland, was great and constant. The official patron of our many pilgrims to Palestine appeared only in 1839, when a Russian consulate general was established in Beirut, Syria, with Palestine subordinate to him. But this indifference to the interests of Orthodoxy and their compatriots gives way in our Ministry of Foreign Affairs to anxiety when an Anglican-Evangelical bishopric was established in Jerusalem in 1841 on July 7-19, and when Protestants and Catholics, hitherto relatively indifferent to the shrines in the East, begin to show energetic activity in the matter of propaganda among the inhabitants of Syria and Palestine. Concerned about the movement that had begun in the East, our Vice-Chancellor Count K. IN. Nesselrode, in his most humble report of 1842 in June, wrote, among other things, that “unfortunately, the disasters of the Christian Church (in the East) do not come from Muslim rule alone; they are also caused by: 1) the desire of Catholics and Protestant missionaries to spread their religions; 2) the insufficiency of the moral and material means of the Greek clergy to prevent their harmful proselytism. When discussing measures that could be taken by the Russian government to support the Greek Church, the presence in Jerusalem of a trustworthy and educated member of the Russian clergy was considered useful. This idea has remained inactive until now for fear of arousing the suspicions of the Porte and the envy of other Christian powers. But now its implementation becomes more and more necessary, especially since the appointment of a Protestant bishop to Jerusalem with the present actions of Anglican missionaries. The benefit that could come from the presence of a Russian clergyman in Jerusalem would be the following: 1) for him, by his very rank, it is more convenient for him than for a secular person to delve into all the circumstances relating to the Orthodox Church; 2) this would have provided the Greek clergy with the participation of the same-faith Russian Church; 8) the Greek clergy would receive approval and moral support through that, and, finally, 4) the Russian clergy could be the closest intermediary between the Holy Synod and the Jerusalem clergy, convey to them advice and suggestions for the benefit of the Orthodox Church, have, at least superficially, observation of the beneficial use of those collected in Russia for the Holy Spirit. A coffin of sums, etc. One cannot help but admit that the main departure of a clergyman to Jerusalem also has its own inconveniences, which may stem partly from various political considerations, and partly from the mistrust and personal views of the Greek higher clergy. Therefore, in the first case, we could limit ourselves to a, so to speak, test measure. For this purpose, it would be necessary to choose a meek, prudent, reliable hieromonk or archimandrite, but not higher than this rank, and send him to Jerusalem as a worshiper. Upon arrival there, he could, fulfilling all the duties of a pilgrim, try to gain the trust of the local clergy, gradually delve into the situation of the Orthodox Church, figure out on the spot what measures would be most convenient to take to maintain Orthodoxy, report this to the Russian government through our consul in Beirut and, under the guidance of this latter, make, on occasion, some useful suggestions to the Greek clergy on his own behalf and with fraternal love, while trying to convince him of the pious complicity of the Highest Court with our fellow believers. When experience indicates that the stay of a Russian spiritual agent in Jerusalem can actually bring significant benefit to the Orthodox Church, then, depending on the circumstances, it will be possible to extend his stay there under some pretext and provide more positive instructions regarding the further course of action. Until that time, it is necessary that he consult with our consul on everything, for the latter is more familiar with the political circumstances, with which spiritual matters must be coordinated” 93 . It was in the role of such a forced “admirer” and “a trustworthy and educated person from the Russian clergy” 94 that Archimandrite Porfiry Uspensky found himself in 1843 on April 26 with tasks that, according to his own consciousness, he “neither thought nor guessed” 95, although he secretly cherished the dream of a pilgrimage to Jerusalem for quite some time. “If you,” said Arch. Porfiry to the Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod, Count A.N. Protasov, - please send me to Jerusalem, I will go there with the greatest desire. I am pleased to fulfill the assignment entrusted to me and together satisfy the long-standing needs of my soul. I also went to Vienna with the intention that, after three or four years in the service at the embassy there, I would go to Jerusalem to venerate the Holy Sepulcher. And so, God’s Providence arranged the circumstances of my life in such a way that it combined my vow with the instructions of the government. I submit to the will of the Lord, reverently before it. But perhaps I have become an unworthy instrument of power (an allusion to the Chief Prosecutor’s threat to report to the Emperor about Archbishop Porfiry’s reluctance to go to the East). “And so, do with me as you wish, but still, after some time, I will ask you for permission to go to Jerusalem, where my heart and science draw me” 96. But this sending to Jerusalem arch. Porfiry took place, however, after more than seven months of red tape 97, thanks to complications in our relations with Turkey due to the expulsion from Serbia of Prince Mikhail Obrenovic and his uncle Ephraim Obrenovic, which almost entailed the departure of the Imperial Mission from Constantinople 98. In the month of May, “Serbian affairs ended peacefully” 99, and the question of sending Arch. Porfiria moved forward of his own accord to the queue. Both in the Asian department (Director L. G. Senyavin), and in the Holy Synod (Chief Prosecutor Count Protasov), and our envoy in Constantinople Titov began to work hard for the departure of Arch. Porfiria to her new assignment. Naturally, the archimandrite sent to the East had a desire to receive precise instructions that could guide him in his activities, but he was denied this, stating: “You will receive all the necessary instructions regarding your actions in the East from the envoy Titov, and then verbally. And now, first, we ask you,” added director L. G. Senyavin, “to listen to the following advice: “Fulfill all the duties of a pilgrim strictly and precisely.” “Do not surround yourself with any mystery, but also do not let anyone know that you are sent by the government.” “Try to gain the trust and love of the Eastern clergy and, taking advantage of their favor, gradually learn the real needs of the Orthodox Church in Palestine, and the spirit, efforts, means, successes or failures of the Catholics, Armenians and Protestants there.” “For God’s sake, don’t make any orders there. Your main duty is to collect correct information about the state of the Palestinian church and discuss on the spot what measures should be taken for its maintenance and welfare.” “You will write a report about it in Constantinople, after returning from Jerusalem, and present it to the envoy, who will forward it to us with his opinion. I advise you to show him your draft report and talk with him about those subjects about which he will judge differently than you. He knows better than you the church and political affairs in Turkey, and therefore his judgments will serve as a verification of your opinions. However, we do not constrain you. You can write a report as you wish, based on your observations." 100 It hardly needs to be added that all these “preliminary advice” from the director of the Asian Department L. G. Senyavin were made in the spirit of the already well-known report of Vice-Chancellor Count Nesselrode to Sovereign Nikolai Pavlovich, well known in its entirety and by Arch. Porphyria 101, and therefore the latter was not completely satisfied. Arch. Porfiry openly expressed that he was “embarrassed by the secret of his embassy” 102 as a “private person” 103. “Is it possible to change my role,” asked the archbishop. Porfiry L.G. Senyavina, - and send me to the East on behalf of our church? But, alas, in St. Petersburg they were afraid to agree to this and decided in advance to send “a trustworthy and educated person from the Russian clergy” in the role of an “ordinary admirer” and, even worse, in the more humiliating role of a “secret agent of Russia” 104. Having asked permission for himself, with reservations, to begin compiling a brief history of the four patriarchates and to travel to Egypt and Sinai, Arch. Porfiry, one might say, completely exhausted the goals and tasks that he had to fulfill in his role incognito from the Russian government in Jerusalem. It is remarkable to what extent at that time they were afraid to boldly and openly act as a defender of the interests of Orthodoxy and their national interests in the East; the best example of this is the fact that money in the amount of 1500 rubles. for travel expenses of the arch. Porfiry, according to the report to the Sovereign, are appointed not “from the state treasury, in order to avoid publicity, but from the sums of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs allocated for Asian affairs” 105. On Saturday - his “lucky day” - May 23, 1843, Arch. Porfiry from St. Petersburg to Odessa 106, from which he received the opportunity to move further to the East on September 20, and arrived in Syria - to the goal of his aspiration - only on October 23, on Saturday. “In the Christian East, the first country that I had to survey,” greets Arch. Porfiry’s entry here was Syria, washed by the Mediterranean Sea. I first set foot on its shore, in the pier of the local city of Beirut, in 1843, on October 23, the Sabbath day. Then now I had not yet reached my fortieth year from birth, and my forces, physical and spiritual, were in perfect harmony. My soul thirsted for new knowledge, accurate and multifaceted, and at the same time was filled with inspired confidence in the success of my inquisitive journey through the unknown East” 107. The purpose of the visit to Beirut, according to the instructions given back in St. Petersburg, was “a meeting with our consul Basili, who is well aware of the affairs of Syria and Palestine” 108 and “under whose leadership” was placed the “meek, prudent and reliable” archimandrite - an admirer at the Holy Sepulcher, aptly nicknamed by the archbishop himself. Porfiry “spies of the East” 109. About his new “leader” - the Consul General in Beirut, he, without “offending”, declares that “he does not have the art of attracting hearts to Russia and to himself with love, subtlety and tenderness of treatment, prudence and decency. He is too commanding and even impudent. Fear is his weapon” 110. “The consul himself,” the archbishop describes him. Porfiry is a dark, thin widower with gray hair, witty, educated, ambitious, irritable, tender to his children and cold to everyone else; speaks a lot, quickly, fluently, intelligently, entertainingly - this is a mottled bird with a tuft and a pleasant voice" 111 . Later, several arch. Porfiry changed his opinion about Mr. Basili and even calls him his friend 112. “Having left Beirut, I,” writes Arch. Porfiry, crossed Mount Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon among the clouds gaping with lightning fire and pouring rain, and arrived unharmed in Damascus on the 29th day of the same month. The local Patriarch Methodius, unforgettable and beloved by me to this day, received me with that cordiality, with that gullibility and frankness and with that expectation of benefit from my spying on long-suffering Syria, which from the first minute of our mutual kiss of the saint gave rise to complete sympathy for him in me. I stayed with him like a son with his father. There was no end to our business speeches, questions and answers 113. Business conversations concerned the heavy dependence of the Antiochian patriarch on the ecumenical; the Russian consul Basili, who delves little into the actual needs of the Syrian church and the tactlessness of his behavior; schools in the patriarchate and assistance for this matter from our Sovereign, the Holy Synod, etc. " 114. Here is the arch. Porfiry received in Arabic a curious list of the Antiochian patriarchs from the Apostle Peter to Daniel, ordained in 1767, compiled by the priest Michael Brek, translated and printed later by Arch. Porfiry in “Proceedings of Kiev. spirit. Academy" for 1874, part II. In order to get acquainted with the state of the monasteries of the Patriarchate of Antioch, with the life and religious life of the natives, in the form of scientific curiosity in general, Arch. Porfiry from Damascus went to the Saidanai convent and to the ancient monastery of St. Thekla, and, having visited the Uniate monastery of Sergius and Bacchus and the Latin monasteries around the Saidanai monastery, returned back to Damascus, with painful impressions in his soul from the squalor and neglect of the holy churches here and from the rudeness and ignorance of not only the lower clergy, but even the local bishops (for example, Metropolitan Jacob of Seleucia). From Damascus arch. On November 14, Porfiry, accompanied by the Patriarchal Archimandrite, headed north to Balbec to inspect its ruins, from there he moved to Lebanon and, along the road near the sea, finally reached Jaffa on December 17. And on this journey, Arch. Porfiry pursued the same goals that he outlined when traveling to monasteries near Damascus - getting acquainted with the life of crowded monasteries, such as St. George in Lebanon and Balmand, and such sparsely populated ones as St. George in Tripoli, where he found only one abbot; with the position of the higher and lower clergy; clarify for yourself the mutual relations between the clergy and the laity; inspection of churches that are poor to the point of poverty, etc. December 20, 1843 arch. Porfiry arrived in Jerusalem. Notified of his arrival, the Greek clergy came out to meet him, which he, however, “with a torn heart,” refused, heading to the Feodorovsky Monastery, where Russian pilgrims usually stopped to live. The Greeks, who had prepared a room for the guest in the Patriarchate, were unhappy with his refusal. Even before the appearance in Jerusalem of Arch. Porphyry, the local Greek clergy looked at his arrival here with extreme suspicion, “placing a curse on each other if any of them decided to change the secrets of their government and life and declare them” to him 115, and now this distrust has increased to the last degree. Rumors began to circulate in Jerusalem that Arch. Porfiry was sent here as Russian consul 116. It is not surprising that the state of mind of the arch. Porphyria was extremely difficult. “It’s hard for me here in Jerusalem,” he writes in his diary on February 2, 1844, “my heart hurts, my mind is constantly angry at the disorders of human society, there is no consolation either from people or from nature” 117. The state of mind of our “involuntary pilgrim” did not change even after, when, for pilgrimage and scientific purposes, he began to travel from Jerusalem to Bethlehem, to the Jordan, to Galilee, to Judea and to the monastery of St. Savva the Sanctified, when he had a wide opportunity, through direct personal observations and rumors, to get acquainted with the licentiousness of the morals of the Holy Sepulchre clergy and monks living in monasteries, with the pitiful degraded position of the rural clergy, especially among the native Arabs, with the squalor and poverty of Greek and Arab churches, with the absence of more or less comfortable schools for literacy, with a lot of all kinds of intrigues and tricks in the environment corrupted Holy Sepulchre monasticism, etc., etc. It is natural, therefore, that the soul of the arch. Porphyria was indignant at everything she saw and heard, and from his pen extremely bilious philippics 118 addressed to the Greek ruling clergy poured out onto the pages of his “book of existence” - the diary 119. “I am an axe,” says Archbishop Porfiry about himself, “and I lie at the root of a rotten tree. Truth and truth force me to discover all the abominations here." 120. Surveying the church in Medjedel and finding extreme disorder in it, Arch. Porfiry exclaims: “The Lord will thunder with his wrath against the careless epitropes 121 of the patriarch and at himself, Christ fled from them." about the dirt in the church of the village of Magula, - and in the depths of my soul I said to them: anathema. Truly, these governors are worth excommunication from the church and deprivation of the bishop’s rank for extreme negligence of the flock, selfishness, greed and unbelief” 123 “If the churches in other villages are even worse than this one (i.e., Yafa near Nazareth), then I,” noted Archbishop Porfiry. to my companions, I will pay my eyes off” 124. In contrast to this, Arch. Porfiry to the downtrodden Arab clergy and in general to the Christian Arabs, despised by the Greek clergy 125. “At lunch,” writes Arch. Porfiry, defended the Arab people before the governors, praising their courtesy, hard work, honesty and firmness in the faith... During the second millennium, the Arabs firmly maintained the Orthodox faith, despite the persecution of the Mohammedans, and despite all the darkness of their shepherds. Their childlike simplicity with which they pray in their churches, which have almost nothing resembling the house of God, is amazing. All these churches are in such a pitiful condition, they are kept in such untidiness, and the priests are so dark and so negligent in fulfilling their duties that I cried while viewing their churches. But I don’t blame the dark Arabs for this because no one in the world thinks about their enlightenment and salvation, because the Greek clergy despises them and considers them worse than stinking dogs, forgetting that the Palestinian church lies not in a man-made church, but in souls baptized into the death of Christ” 126. “I admired the courtesy of the Arabs,” notes Arch. Porfiry is in another place - and thought favorably of these people. It contains strong germs of freedom, equality, unanimity, righteousness, sedateness and strictness of rules and morals. With such qualities and with a better government, this people would achieve a high degree of human social perfection. But it’s a pity that this eagle is not allowed to soar by the heavy lead tied to its head and wings” 127. Arch. Porfiry generously distributes money to the Arabs 128, recommends giving passage to the highest degrees of the church natural Arabs 129, asks the Arab Abraham Dzhegshenu to become a Russian agent in Gaza to maintain Orthodoxy there and to protect Russian pilgrims going to Sinai and returning from there 130, etc. However, arch. Porfiry was not alien to the awareness of the shortcomings of this people. “For an Arab, money is not a demigod, but a god. Say to an Arab: hello, and he will immediately say: baksheesh,” 131 - he notes about their greed, which, in his opinion, gives reason to consider them unreliable sons of the Orthodox Church. “In the Arab tribe,” writes Arch. Porfiry, - without any doubt, the embryos of spiritual education and Protestantism lurk, due to the nakedness of rituals, for which you do not need to pay priests money, due to the cheapness of constructing churches without iconostases and, especially, due to generous charity - Protestant society may appeal to the Arabs. Papists and Protestants - these are the future leaders in the East! Can the Greek clergy, almost defenseless, unloved by the natives and expending 132 their enormous income on the useless purchase of empty lands and houses, on endless trials and gifts to the Turks, resist their onslaught? The struggle of the Greeks with Catholics 134 and Armenians 135 in holy places occupied the attention of the arch. Porfiria seriously and instilled in him several plans for resolving these relations, plans, in theory, although unrealizable, but, nevertheless, not devoid of sincerity and readiness to resolve this difficult question for a pious person about modus vivendi 136 on St. places. With the Armenians, in particular, Arch. Porfiry managed to establish friendly relations 137. But amid the complexity of his tasks entrusted to him by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Holy Synod, Arch. Porfiry never for a moment forgot his main task - to prepare solid ground for the future permanent mission in Jerusalem. Already at the very beginning of 1844, on January 7, less than a month after arriving in Jerusalem, Archimandrite Porfiry, in a series of notes under No. 14, wrote in his diary: “to establish a Russian mission in Jerusalem: a) for the visible unity of the churches of Jerusalem and Antioch and Russia, and for mutual information; b) to monitor the spending of money sent from Russia; c) to monitor Russian fans" 138. d) to supply all rural churches in Syria and Palestine with icons. The mission should have icon painters and an icon painting school; e) to accept and send alms from Russia to designated places, because now they do not do this; f) to observe where - in which villages - the Arabs converted to Mohammedanism from Christians and where they remember the former Christianity, where they have reverence for our saints, etc., so that with the future triumph of Orthodoxy, they can begin missionary work and conversion to the Christian faith from these villages; g) for giving useful advice in the organization of public schools and seminaries and academies, nor the patriarchy itself. h) Set up a Russian mission on the Mount of Olives or, at least, in the monastery of St. Cross or Elijah the prophet. i) To purchase the Mount of Olives and to build a monastery on the site of the Ascension of the Lord, collect voluntary alms in Russia. There will be many of them" 139. But the intentions of the Russian government and the plans of Fr. Archimandrite Porfiry was not to the taste of the Holy Sepulcher clergy, who until then had no control over themselves. The Almighty at that time in the Patriarchal Synod, who served, in the words of Fr. arch. Porfiry, instead of feeding for the local synod, monk Anthimus was the first to speak out on this issue. “Appointing a spiritual Russian mission here would hardly be useful,” said Fr. Anfim arch. Porfiry. – For if any quarrel occurs between the Greek and Russian clergy, then this will cause temptation among the breed; Perhaps the enemies or the mob will say that either the Russians or the Greeks are heretics and do not agree with each other in opinions and rules. Moreover, in the event of any political upheaval, for example, in the event of a war between Russia and Turkey, suspicion and even persecution will fall on the clergy of the Holy Sepulchre. “They will kill us and burn the church,” said Anfim, “just because the Russians will live with us.” Later the same Fr. Anthimus confessed to Hierodeacon Gregory, a companion of Arch. Porfiry that “the local synodals have long been trying to ensure that there is no Russian mission here, for they are afraid: a) that all Orthodox Slavs will go to the Russian church and look to the Russians as a model (here there is a fear of deprivation of income and influence on the Slavs), b) they are afraid of the discovery of abuses, c) they are afraid that the patriarch will be returned to his place, d) they are afraid that Russia will little by little put down its paws on Palestine" 140. Metropolitan Dionysius of Bethlehem, who was at odds with the holy tombs, spoke with greater and even excessive frankness on the same issue. “The Patriarch and the Synod not only do not want, but even fear the Russian mission like the devil of incense,” admitted Arch. Porfiry, this Metropolitan, for the following reasons: 1. It is necessary to part with 14-year-old cocoons and convert the patriarchy from a harem to a monastery. 2. They fear that the Bulgarians will unite with the Russians and be deprived of income. Bulgarians will preferably go to the Russian church. We will lose income and influence on the Bulgarians and other co-religionists, excluding the Greeks. 3. In the event of a war between Russia and Turkey, the Russian spiritual mission exposes the local patriarchate to life-threatening danger, and the church to destruction or transferring it into the hands of Latins or Armenians” 141. But the desire to see a Russian spiritual mission in Jerusalem was always so great among the arch. Porfiry that he, who mercilessly condemned the licentiousness of the morals of the Holy Sepulcher clergy and in his frank diary devoted a lot of pages, full of fire and prophetic jealousy, to this dark side of the Eastern clergy, now, after such a frank confession of Metropolitan Dionysius, is even ready, to our surprise, for the broadest concessions. “I,” writes Arch. Porfiry, - refuted these objections, presenting to the Metropolitan that the Russian spiritual mission for the first time would turn a blind eye to the cocoon and various abuses, until they gradually cease by themselves, due to the spillover of worthy enlightenment in the local clergy; that she would not take away any income from the local clergy, without intervening either in confession or in correcting the needs; that in the event of a war between Russia and Turkey, the danger from the mission established with the consent of the Sultan is the same as the danger from our Beirut consulate. There had been wars before, but neither the church nor the local clergy were exposed to danger. And our mission in Jerusalem would be useful in word and deed, i.e. interceding with local authorities for the Orthodox people, serving as a model and example of spiritual life, giving true direction to public schools” 142. “True Orthodox education of the local spiritual youth,” Arch. Porfiry, - could only be generated by a Russian spiritual mission. Both bishops and Arab children would study together with our young choristers. A seminary at our mission with additional academic courses would be an excellent breeding ground for future preachers and teachers in Palestine." 143 The idea of ​​establishing a permanent spiritual mission in Jerusalem was obviously not shared by our Consul General Basili, who recommended a place for it in Lebanon. “It would be best to organize a Russian spiritual mission in Lebanon,” said Consul Basili, during a personal meeting with Arch. Porfiry on the way back to Constantinople, from where it could act on Palestine. Because according to the rules of the Lebanese principality, Russian monks could buy land for themselves and build a monastery anywhere, without the permission of the Porte, as the Jesuits and Lazarists did. Lebanon is a crucible of religious preaching and action for Catholics and Protestants. Here there should be a center of activity and Orthodox mission” 144. Occupied by arch. Porphyria and other issues related to the holy places of Palestine, for example, the repair of the dome over the Holy Sepulcher 145, income from the Holy Sepulcher and donations flowing here from Russia 146, etc., but as much as was possible for a visiting pilgrim, that is, by chance and through questioning. Having thus understood for himself all the goals and objectives that the government outlined for him and which arose for him personally, for reasons of a purely scientific nature, Arch. Porfiry considered his further stay in Palestine to be over this time. Moreover, his planned trip to Trebizond via Dearbekir and Erzerum was not allowed to him by envoy Titov 147. Arch. Porfiry began to prepare to return to Constantinople, and only the internecine war between the Arab tribes over the daughter of Daud, who did not want to marry a relative of the Gerontissa of Lida Archbishop Cyril, a relative who did not have a good reputation, delayed him. Arch. was involved in this case. Porfiry, who, with his authority as a Moscow archimandrite, resolved it safely. 148 Arch. Porfiry, who vainly sought the honor of serving the liturgy at the Holy Sepulcher and at Golgotha ​​149 and received this right only before leaving, but as a concelebrant with the Archbishop of Gaza 150, parted with the Greek Holy Sepulcher clergy peacefully. On August 3, the Jerusalem Synod in its full assembly placed on him a golden pectoral cross, on a purple ribbon, with part of the life-giving tree 151, and on August 7, Arch. Porfiry left Jerusalem, heading through Jaffa, Earmil, Acre, Tire and Sidon to Beirut, for a farewell meeting with the Consul General and to board a ship going to Constantinople. In Constantinople arch. Porfiry arrived on September 1 and immediately began to compile reports on the Palestinian churches for the envoy Titov 152. He spent the months of September and October on these reports, and the following months—November and December—to prepare for a trip to Egypt and Sinai, to read “various writers about the land of the sun and the fate of Christianity in it” and to wait for permission from St. Petersburg for this trip 153. At the time we are describing in Constantinople, Arch. Porfiry was an eyewitness to the death of the Patriarch of Jerusalem Athanasius and the instigations that began on the part of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, aimed at eliminating Hierotheos, Archbishop of Tabor, appointed successor by the deceased patriarch, from being a candidate for this throne, and in his place to elevate one of the members of the Patriarchal Synod. The intervention of our envoy Titov in this matter and assistance to him from the arch of Jerusalem, knowledgeable in the affairs of Jerusalem. Porphyry had an undeniably important influence in eliminating the Phanariot intrigues, although the Russian supporter, Archbishop Ierotheos, was not elected to the Jerusalem see, which went to Cyril, Archbishop of Lida 154. In January 1845, Arch. Porfiry went on his permitted journey through Egypt, to Sinai and to the Nitrian monasteries in Libya. On February 2, he left Alexandria for Cairo, and from there on a hired barge, for 1,900 piastres per month, along the Nile, with the aim of visiting Memphis, Karnak, Luxor, the hundred-gate Thebes, Lake Meridov and other places, to examine the ancient ruins and get acquainted with the life of modern inhabitants - Coptic Christians, and, mainly, to view the numerous Coptic monasteries here. This trip lasted two months and was described by him in his “Book of My Genesis” “concisely.” April 2, arch. Porfiry returned to Cairo, and on the 19th he went overland on camels on his first trip to the Sinai monastery. The journey continued until the end of May (29th) and, from the point of view of the tireless traveler, was not fruitless. “The desire of my heart has been fulfilled,” notes Arch. Porfiry in his diary on May 18, when leaving the Sinai monastery. “I saw the divine Sinai and prayed at the places where God appeared to the shepherd Moses and the prophet Elijah, tremblingly thinking about my own appearance before Him on the day of the Last Judgment. My heart's desire has been fulfilled. I honored the honest suffering of the most holy bride of Christ, the Great Martyr Catherine, and before her sacred shrine I asked the Lord to afflict my soul, betrothed to Him. My heart's desire has been fulfilled. I recognized the cedars of Christ that flourished in the deserts of Sinai. Their fragrance heals me" 155. Two days of respite in Cairo after this difficult journey, and the tireless arch. Porfiry swings again on a camel, heading to the Nitrian monasteries in Libya. “I recognized God’s chosen ones fleeing in the valleys of Sinai. “Now I am going to the Nitrian desert,” he notes on the 1st day of June, on the day of his departure from Cairo, “where the blessed men of old labored in order to imprint their right teaching in my heart and be jealous of their holy life” 156. This difficult journey to Thebaid and Nitria lasted no more than two weeks 157. June 20, arch. Porfiry left Cairo, and on 25 he said goodbye to Egypt and the Nile. "Goodbye Egypt. Goodbye Nile, I won’t forget you,” 158 exclaims Arch. Porfiry. From Egypt by ship arch. Porfiry headed to Constantinople, but in Sira, due to the plague that was in Egypt, he had to endure quarantine for 14 days, from June 28 to July 11, and eight days, from June 12 to 20, to wait in the city of Ermupol for a steamer going to Constantinople. Here is the arch. Porfiry, however, did not stay long and on July 30 he left on the Austrian steamer “Count Kolovrat” for Thessaloniki, and from there by land on horseback, on August 8 - to Mount Athos on his first scientific journey 159. Arch. Porfiry came to Athos with full faith in “his lucky star” 160 and with the intention of collecting “undoubted materials for the true history of St. Mountains" 161. For this purpose, there he “copied chrisovuls 162 of Greek, Russian, Serbian, Bulgarian and Wallachian and Moldavian princes, letters of the Patriarchs of Constantinople and other ancient acts, everywhere examined monuments of church architecture, sculpture and icon painting and listened to church singing 163, copied Slavic and Greek inscriptions on monastery buildings and tombs of ancient Hellenic times, on crosses and icons,” etc. 164. But justice requires saying that the conditions for classes within the specified goals for arch. Porfiry's situation was not entirely favorable: the Athonite monks treated his mission with distrust and suspicion, and often either hid the desired documents from him or outright refused him them. Indignation of the arch. Porphyry on the Athonite monks was therefore natural. “Reverend fathers,” our orientalist spoke to the members of the Karey Protat, “your Holy Mountain is the praise of Orthodoxy, Russia respects it! But, respecting her, she wants to know her story. How can you write this story when you are stingy, very stingy in giving us your ancient scriptures! Could you give them to me for reading and correspondence, because I am an Orthodox archimandrite, I know the Hellenic language thoroughly and ardently wish to inform everyone of the fate of the notorious and chaste Athos. But for some reason you love us little, and prefer to us the French and English, who respond to your personal greetings with hypocritical respect, and after parting with you, they despise and even ridicule you. Recently the Frenchman Minas visited you and toured your libraries, but you carried him in your arms. Recently, Grigorovich, a professor at the Russian university, visited you, but you showed him something and in the Simon-Peter Monastery you said: give this Jew something to eat and let him move on. I don’t understand: how did we give rise to your dislike towards us? Russian blood was shed for your freedom on the fields of Moldavia and Wallachia, in Bulgaria and beyond the Balkans, in the waters of Chesme and Navarino. The Russian Tsar does not allow the Moldovans to take away your rich estates, without which your monasteries can only beggar. What will happen to you when he finds out about your coldness towards us? Think about it" 165. But even after such heated speeches addressed to the Athonite elders, on this “black day” they did not become more favorable towards our traveler. Instead of the desired "Tragos", in Protata he was given some white paper and a sealed Christmastide with the charters of John Tzimiskes and Constantine Monomakh 166, sealed with three seals. Stubborn perseverance, indestructible willpower and love for the cause, however, eventually triumphed over all these difficulties. On November 14, 1845, in view of the end of the year and the time of his permitted business trip, asking “for an extension for another year, both for studies on Mount Athos and Constantinople, and for returning to Russia,” arch. Porfiry reports very comforting information about the results of his journey around Mount Athos to the envoy Titov. “To this day, I have reviewed 167,” he writes, “and rewritten about 200 documents to compile the history of Athos: this number includes only the royal chrisovuls, patriarchal letters, the affairs of the main administration of Svyatogorsk and monastery charters, and does not include the lives of the saints of Athos, inscriptions on buildings and historical notes on books... Based on these everyday descriptions, Athos will be presented to the attention and judgment of a high leadership in its true form, in its natural chiaroscuro and with the expression of its thousand-year life and actions in the field of the militant Church of Christ, and together with various sorrows and disasters and temptations” 168. A “severe” illness under the shoulder blade of the left arm and aching in the right leg prompted the arch. Porphyria temporarily interrupted his scientific studies on Athos and went to Constantinople to “be treated with dry baths of oats, heated and heated for a long time in a closed cauldron without water in it and releasing moisture from itself” 169. On January 26, 1846, through Ermilia and Kalamaria, where he had never been before, from Hilandar arch. Porfiry headed by land to Thessaloniki, and from there on January 31 by steamship to Constantinople 170. Here, from the envoy Titov, he learned that “Chief Prosecutor Count Protasov seemed wild about his request for permission to continue academic studies on Mount Athos throughout the year,” but at the same time added that the request would be reported to the Synod and that he would “be given a reprieve and the summer months” 171. Arch. Porfiry was not satisfied with such a statement and on February 12 convinced the envoy to petition him for a deferral for a whole year, “showing him the special importance of the multifaceted study of written memories and man-made monuments located in the local monasteries” 172 . On March 8, the envoy of Titov gave permission to go back to Athos 173, and arch. Porfiry, through Thessaloniki and overland along the same road, returned back to Hilandar on April 4 to celebrate Easter with the Bulgarian elders on April 7 and head to Esphigmen, where “Mistress Science was waiting for him” 174. In the month of May, in the Vatopedi Monastery, Arch. Porfiry received “an impressive order from the north to hurry back to St. Petersburg.” “I admit,” he notes on this occasion, “that he boiled me the first time. But as soon as I thought that my northern authorities were waiting for me to entrust me with an important matter, i.e. the establishment of this spiritual mission in Jerusalem under my leadership, it ceased to boil” 175. Upon receipt of the order to return, Arch. Porfiry thoroughly examined the Pantokrator monastery, the monastery of Xylurgu, the Stavronikitsky monastery, Kutlumush, and Karakal. Lavra of St. Athanasius of Athos a second time, at the invitation of the elders, who promised to show him the “ancient scriptures”, Iver and Kareya with the cathedral, painted by the notorious painter of the 16th century. Panselin, and the Protat library. “As for the rest of the monasteries,” notes Arch. Porfiry, - the monasteries of Xenofsky, Dohiarsky, Kastomonitsky and Zografsky, at least superficially, due to the lack of free time, which must be devoted to the return trip to the fatherland through Wallachia and Moldavia. Without seeing these monasteries and without reading their ancient epistles, I cannot begin to compose the history of Kareya and Protat. This work of mine is postponed until another time. Conscientiousness, not enriched with all the necessary materials for this work, forces me to do this” 176. The reason for his slowdown on Mount Athos, after receiving the order to return to Russia, is the arch. Porfiry explained in a letter dated July 13, 1846 addressed to the director of the office of the Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod, K. S. Serbdnovich. “Envoy V.P. Titov notified me in a letter dated April 27,” writes Arch. Porfiry, - that since the main goal of the assignment given to me in the East has been achieved, then, in the opinion of the Holy Synod, there is no need to delay the time of my return to Russia. As a result of this notification, which I received on May 8, I decided to stop my academic studies on Mount Athos and visit the monasteries I had not seen for one pilgrimage. But when rumors about my imminent departure began to spread there, then these monasteries began to invite me to them, either in writing or through special messengers, and one of them, namely Dochiarsky, even sent his ancient acts to the Russian monastery, so that at least here I could consider them. It was easy to notice that the people of Svyatogorsk valued my research into their history, unknown to them, due to their inability to read half-rotten charters, written in an unusually intricate and abbreviated manner. I weighed their value and decided to devote May and June to reviewing the ancient acts in the remaining monasteries. During this time, I read, rewrote or noted the acts of Lavra, Caracalla, Stavronikita, Pandocrator, Vatopedi, Kutlumush, Xenophus, Dohiar, Zograf and Kastamonit. Unfortunately, I did not have enough time to read the remaining acts and inscriptions of the Khilaldar monastery, from which I left last January, as you know, due to illness. But I hope to fill up this gap in the picture of Athos through correspondence with the Hieromonk Hilarion of Hilandar” 177. June 1, enriched with a variety of materials, arch. Porfiry left St. Mount Athos and went overland to Thessaloniki, and from there by ship to Constantinople, from which, with the permission of the envoy, on June 23, he went to Moldova and Wallachia on an Austrian ship. “I was drawn there,” writes Arch. Porfiry, “there is a need to round out my concepts about the monasteries and their estates that belong there to the Holy Sepulcher, Sinai and Athos” 178. The traveler, who was looking for the improvement of his health, upset on Athos, and who wanted, at least with a “fleeting glance,” to survey “the state of the mentioned principalities,” hoped that “the high authorities would not exact from him the loss of several days” 179. If we exclude the time from July 26 to July 30, spent in quarantine in Brailov, then the entire scientific journey through Moldova lasted, indeed, no more than two weeks, i.e. from August 2, when arch. Porfiry arrived in Bucharest on the 15th of the same month, when he went to Moscow 180 via Chisinau and Odessa 181. “For thirty-six days, from August 20 to September 25, I stayed in Odessa,” our orientalist writes in his diary, “with my old and good friends and enjoyed that peace, during which my weak body grew stronger, and my mighty spirit prepared to present the East in its light and shade to the Holy Synod.” Here, in Odessa, to the Society of History and Antiquities, he donated 550 coins of Greek, Roman, Persian and others, including 7 gold, 109 silver and 434 copper, various Egyptian antiquities, among which are especially remarkable: the mummy of a woman from the Theban catacombs and a large papyrus, written inside, with a clay seal on it from the same catacombs 182. September 25th arch. Porfiry went to Moscow through Nikolaev, Kremenchug and Kharkov. Meetings with Archbishop Innocent in Kharkov and, especially, with Metropolitan Philaret in Moscow and conversations with them about the Eastern churches are filled with deep interest, both for the characterization of our ever-memorable orientalist, Archimandrite Porfiry, and because in these conversations a very concise outline of the state of the Christian churches in the Orthodox East at this time is presented. “Today I have been honored,” writes Arch. Porfiry on October 10 about his meeting with Metropolitan Philaret - to see his seraphim face and tell him about God's churches in the burning East. It was a pleasure for me to speak to his mind and heart, and I spoke freely, clearly and with inspiration” 183. October 19, Saturday (happy day), arch. Porfiry arrived in St. Petersburg and immediately the tone of his speeches turned from enthusiastic to plaintive and even deplorable. A number of disappointments befell him from the very first day of his arrival in the capital. “I, a toiler, did not find a special cell in the Alexanderevsky Lavra,” and they did not “give me the old corner at the Mitrofanievsky courtyard, which I asked from Mr. Serbinovich” 184. “So the fatherly authorities take care of their chosen one, whom they themselves sent to the East!” exclaims Archbishop Porfiry. “The birds of the sky have their nests, the animals of the forest and the field have their lairs; even the worms have their burrows. I alone do not have my own corner.” Chief Prosecutor Count Protasov, beyond expectations, “received coldly” the arrival 185 and advised him to write “reports” “quickly” and present them “in parts” 186. The director of his office, Voidekhovich, although he said a lot of pleasantries, Archpriest Porfiry did not believe them, stating in his diary that he “still lays down softly, but sleeps hard” 187. Senyavin treated the newcomer kindly and asked about the reward he desired, but in the further conversation about the consuls, Arch. Porfiry offended him and was forced to read the following maxim to himself: “Once again my right heart was not in harmony with my mind” 188. Upon arrival in the capital, Arch. Porfiry, who in the East made “considerable contributions to monasteries and monastery churches, including thirty Coptic ones, gave alms to poor priests and beggars, helped various fans who suffered misfortunes on the way, and ill-fated Arab families in Jerusalem, bought the information he needed at a high price” 189, naturally found himself without funds and asked the chief prosecutor to give him a “salary 1000 rubles for the May third of this year and henceforth to issue it in the same manner, in accordance with the definition of the Holy Synod,” but he was refused this, saying: “foreign salary cannot be continued in Russia.” “Therefore,” said Serbinovich, “we suggested giving you 1000 rubles for the whole year.” Link arch. Porfiria’s response to the fact that he spent the third of May abroad was not successful 190. Arch. Porfiry began to report on his journey, but the lack of decent accommodation, cohabitation with cell attendant Ivan, and lack of funds so much that he had nothing to pay even for new boots 191 prevented him from serious work and forced him to think about money. An attempt to borrow 500 rubles. St. Petersburg Metropolitan Anthony's appeal for help to his vicar Nathanael not only was not crowned with the desired success, but led to a whole series of offensive comments and notations for the requester. In particular, the Metropolitan spoke to Arch. To Porfiry the following: “They have been waiting impatiently for your work for a long time. I would advise you to hurry. You yourself know that people here like results that come early and quickly,” and recommended writing reports “briefly” 192 . For arch. Thus, “dark” days arrived for Porfiry. Among the adversities of everyday life from the lips of Arch. Porfiry breaks out not only complaints, but also groans filled with cowardice. “Apparently the honored archimandrite is valued here no more than a squeezed lemon, no more than a rag... However, even a rag is sometimes treasured... “Vladyka,” admits Arch. Porfiry to Vicar Nathanael, I confess to you that here sometimes the thought occurred to me to throw away my cowl and cassock and run wherever my eyes were looking. Now I am ashamed of my cowardice and make amends for this sin with my vocal repentance” 193. But after bad weather comes a bucket. And in the life of the arch. Porfiry’s “dark” days gave way to more or less prosperous ones: he was given two drier and more spacious rooms to live in the Lavra, and on December 30, a decree was received on the assignment of a salary from May 1 from 3000 salary and 500 rubles. in a lump sum, a decree about which the recipient declares that he “wept” it 194. Since the mentioned decree stated that the arch. Porfiry “from now on is a member of the St. Petersburg diocese,” then the spiritual consistory decided to assign him to the brotherhood in the Sergius Hermitage. This was the cause of new grief for the arch. Porfiry, who in his diary gives space to the following curious lines about his involuntary departure into the desert: “I don’t like a half-hearted, negative existence in the desert now that life can bear juicy and fragrant fruits. I love a solitary cell and in it to pray for the peace of the whole world, but from this cell I wish to visit my neighbors living in the world. to be comforted by their faith and good deeds, to speak to their ears and hearts, to be enriched by all-round knowledge, to see and, if possible, tame the waves of the sea of ​​life, to serve humanity with one’s own strength and even with one’s suffering” 195. To find out his situation, under the influence of the new blow of fate he experienced, arch. Porfiry went to the Asian department to see director Senyavin, who not only took part in his “misfortune”, but also obtained something pleasant from Count Protasov for the arch. Porfiry’s confession that he “is needed by the Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod every single day” 196. During a personal meeting with the latter the next day (January 9, 1847), Count Protasov reprimanded the archimandrite for his complaint to “strangers,” meaning Director Senyavin, and convincingly asked him to hurry up with the reports. “If everyone wrote as slowly,” Count Protasov added, “as you write, then state affairs would stop,” and recommended that, instead of history, he submit “A Note on the Present State and Needs of Orthodoxy in the East” 197 . A meeting with envoy Titov, who was in St. Petersburg at that time, and his phrases: “I hope to see you again in the East. You will not give up your promise to work there again,” they completely reassured him 198. On October 15, a report on the Syrian church was presented to the Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod, on the 17th of the same month - a historical note about the hierarchical schisms in this church, on March 15 - a brief historical note on the past fate of the Sinai monastery, on March 20 - on the current state of this holy monastery, on April 14 - the Sinai case about the prohibition of the Alexandrian patriarchs from the Sinai to perform divine services in their Cairo courtyard, called Juwaniya, and on May 3 - a note from the Sinai Monastery on various issues 199. All these notes and reports, after some corrections, went as intended. On February 11, 1847, “State Chancellor Count Nesselrode had the good fortune to submit to the discretion of the Sovereign Emperor Nikolai Pavlovich a note drawn up, by prior agreement with the Synodal Chief Prosecutor Protasov, on the proposed orders on the subject of establishing a Russian spiritual mission in Jerusalem. On the 11th day of February, His Imperial Majesty was pleased to give the highest approval to the assumptions contained in this note and to order Count Nesselrode to enter into further relations with the Chief Prosecutor about the election of persons who should constitute the spiritual mission in Jerusalem, as well as about finding sources from where the amount required for the departure of this mission, for its annual maintenance, for the organization of it could be obtained sacristy and for other expenses" 200. On July 6, at the request of K. S. Serbinovich, arch. Porfiry wrote a note about sending clergy to Jerusalem and installing them there and expressed a desire to appoint Hieromonk Theophanes, a bachelor of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, as a “pious man” to the newly formed mission. The architect himself. Porfiry, without receiving an official appointment to be the head of the mission, at that time was engaged in the statistics of Athos, an index of legal acts stored in the monasteries of the Holy Mountain 202. On July 31, the expected determination of the architect finally took place. Porfiry as the head of the newly established mission. “Today, the Holy Synod, in fulfillment of the will declared to it by the Chief Prosecutor, says the secret decree No. 8658, determined: 1) to send to Jerusalem the same Archimandrite Porfiry, who was already used to collect information about the state of the Orthodox Church in the East, so that he would be in Jerusalem not as a Russian abbot, but as a Russian pilgrim, provided with permission and a formal recommendation from the Russian ecclesiastical superiors; 2) at the same time, also send as worshipers one hieromonk and two young people who have completed a course of science in secondary or higher theological educational institutions, who would have knowledge of Greek and one of the newest languages ​​and were distinguished by good behavior; 3) order (Novgorod and St. Petersburg) Metropolitan Anthony to provide Archimandrite Porfiry with a letter of recommendation to the Patriarch of Jerusalem, in which it would be explained that this archimandrite, having visited the eastern shrines, wished to return there and stay at the Holy Sepulcher for several years, to which St. the All-Russian Synod blessed him with pleasure and took advantage of this opportunity to release with him the hieromonk and two devout and inquisitive spiritual youths who shared this godly desire; as a result of which the archimandrite and his companions are recommended to the patronage of the patriarch and the Holy Sepulcher brethren with a request to facilitate their temporary residence in Jerusalem, to allow them to perform divine services in the Holy Sepulchre, and generally to accept them in accordance with those feelings of mutual love, trust and brotherhood that have always existed between the Russian and all Eastern churches; 4) allow the metropolitan to provide Archimandrite Porfiry with the holy antimension, and entrust the Economic Administration under St. to make the necessary sacristy and church utensils for him. To present the proper consideration to the Synod; 5) to determine the range of actions of this archimandrite in Palestine, in accordance with the purpose of his appointment, give him instructions, on the basis of the Highest approved note; 6) for the maintenance of Archimandrite Porfiry and the persons sent with him, as well as for the needs associated with their stay in Jerusalem, assign seven thousand silver rubles per year, and a lump sum of 4,578 rubles for travel expenses. 85 k. in silver according to special orders to the account of the spiritual department, exactly half the amount for maintenance, i.e. 3500 rubles. ser. to the account of printing capital, and half of the amount for travel expenses, i.e. 2289 rub. 18 kopecks ser. to the account of the amount determined by the list of government expenditures for extraordinary expenses for the spiritual department, from the amount of 20,000 rubles. ser., regarding the release of the other half from the state treasury 203, grant His Excellency the Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod to refer to the State Chancellor for Foreign Affairs" 204. By a new decree of the Holy Synod of August 21, it was decided that “the bachelor of the Theological Academy, cathedral hieromonk Theophan and the students of the St. Petersburg Seminary Solovyov and Krylov should be sent abroad to worship the Holy Places, allowed to accompany Archimandrite Porfiry, who is leaving for Jerusalem, and to be with him there as admirers and to carry out the assignments specifically assigned to him by this instruction. By a decree of the same date, the full-time minister of the Odessa second-class monastery, Ivan Budzemsky, in accordance with the request of Archimandrite Porfiry, was allowed to “stay with him for the entire duration of his stay, the archimandrite, abroad” 205. September 15, arch. Porfiry first became acquainted with the contents of the “special instructions given to him” mentioned in the above decrees 206 from the director of the Asian department L.G. Senyavin. This instruction is very interesting in its content; it clearly speaks, on the one hand, of the complete misunderstanding of the compilers of its church affairs in the Orthodox East, and on the other, of how timidly and hesitantly powerful Russia acted here as a defender of the interests of Orthodoxy before the Eastern War of 1855–56. We get acquainted with the details of this curious instruction from the note of B.P. Mansurov, submitted in 1857 to Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich and printed in a limited number of copies. The purpose of establishing the Russian spiritual mission in Jerusalem, according to this note, was: 1. “To have in Jerusalem, as the center of the Orthodox confession in the East, representatives of the Russian Church and an example of our splendid service.” 2. “To transform little by little the Greek clergy itself, to elevate it in its own eyes as much as in the eyes of the Orthodox flock.” 3. “To attract to Orthodoxy and establish in it those local folk elements who constantly waver in their faith, under the influence of agents of different confessions, and too easily deviate from Orthodoxy, due to distrust of the Greek clergy and the unreasonable behavior of this latter.” “At the same time,” says Mr. Mansurov’s note, “despite the pompous title given to Archimandrite Porfiry of the head of the spiritual mission, he was strictly charged not to give himself and his comrades any character other than worshipful, not to interfere in any way in the affairs of the Greek clergy, to limit himself to offering advice if possible, not to interfere in the everyday affairs of our pilgrims, and in general to try in every possible way not to arouse the suspicions of foreign agents, so as not to give rise to rumors about any secret intentions of Russia” 207. Arch. Porfiry, of course, well understood his false position as the head of a secret spiritual mission in Jerusalem and subsequently called this first mission of ours in Jerusalem, with the harshness characteristic of his pen, downright “stupid and sheepish” 208, and therefore, when discussing the “instructions”, he was more interested (Book of My Genesis, VII, 126-127) not in her intractable advice and wishes, but in his own personal thoughts and plans 209 that he formed while he was in Jerusalem for the first time. It is not at all surprising, therefore, that he accepted his appointment as head of this mission not only with joy, but even, one might say, with delight. A whole series of troubles and moral torments he experienced in St. Petersburg, which rained down on him undeservedly and too painfully aggravated the wounds of his pride, and a passionate attraction to the East 210 and, in particular, to Palestine, which he really wanted to study comprehensively, and a good start to which study he had already made on his first trip there, can serve as a sufficient explanation of this delight from his new assignment. “And so my star shone again in the sky,” he greeted with these words the receipt of the decree on his appointment as head of the first mission in Jerusalem. “Once again the Lord calls me to a holy work in Jerusalem, a considerable task, greater and better than the work that I could do in our spiritual department according to my rank and title. I go there with joy, with self-sacrifice and with hope in God’s help” 211. “I like to live in Jerusalem, where I am the master of my mind, my will, my time and my work,” 212 he notes on another occasion. “Zion is my second fatherland, and it is dear to me no less than the first,” declares our orientalist, “because I work by the sweat of my brow for the sake of God and my neighbors, and because here my soul is enchanted by the constant gains of knowledge and great hopes, which God knows, and I am His child...” “Here God is my father, the world's wise men are my brothers; sciences are my sisters; books are my friends. Here we do not disturb my peace, my freedom is perfect” 213. “On the way to the fatherland, I was already thinking,” confesses Arch. Porfiry, about returning to Jerusalem" 214. Having received from the Metropolitan an antimension “for priestly service in holy places” 215, a letter of recommendation to Patriarch Kirill of Jerusalem 216 and from the Economic Administration at the Holy Synod two corded books for keeping records of the expenditure of amounts for the travel of members of the mission and for their maintenance in Jerusalem 217, Arch. Porfiry “with joy, devotion to the will of God and with the hope of his successful work in favor of the Palestinian church,” on October 14, 1847, together with his companions, left St. Petersburg 218. Before leaving here, Arch. Porfiry submitted brief notes to director Senyavin: about the benevolence of the rulers of Moldavia and Wallachia and the Russian kings of the Sinai monastery; 2) about their estates in Wallachia and Moldavia; 3) petition of the Sinai Brotherhood; 4) a description of the Athonite monasteries, and 5) an inventory of their estates in Wallachia and Moldavia and Russia 219, and on the way to Jerusalem, already in Constantinople, he compiled brief notes about the churches of Alexandria-Egypt, Antioch-Syria and Palestine and, through the envoy Titov, forwarded them to St. Synod with the addition of three acts on the Archbishop of Sinai from the manuscript of the Jerusalem Patriarchate 220. The delay in the books and the sewing of cassocks, cassocks and half-cassocks for all members of the mission caused some slowdown in Odessa (from November 8 to 21), business in Constantinople (November 23 - January 28, 1848), the journey by steamship to Beirut and from there on horseback through Sidon and Tyre, and the trip to the Carmelite monastery took quite a long time, and Arch. Porfiry arrived with his companions in Jerusalem only on February 16, taking temporary residence in the Holy Sepulcher Monastery of Sts. Tsars Constantine and Helena in the cells of the ruling Patriarch Kirill, when he was still the Archbishop of Lida. Patriarch Kirill greeted the members of the mission as “the father of his own children,” and promised to do everything he could for them 221, which he brought to the attention of Metropolitan Anthony of St. Petersburg 222. The archbishop was greeted very cordially. Porfiry members of the Patriarchal Synod and the Holy Sepulcher clergy; the Arab priests joyfully congratulated him on his arrival; Armenians and Catholics, and even the main producer of cases in the local Turkish court, Megkeme, visited him through representatives. Regarding these visits, notes Arch. Porfiry that this proves that “in Jerusalem no one considers me a pilgrim to the Holy Places, but everyone recognizes me as a diplomatic agent of the Russian state. Apparently, you can’t hide an sew in a bag” 223. On February 24, Patriarch Kirill announced that he was giving the Arkhangelsk Monastery to the Russian mission “for temporary residence with the condition that worshipers of the clergy from all Orthodox tribes be accommodated in the cells unoccupied by us” 224 . On August 16, the blessing of the patriarch and the synod was sought to move the mission to this monastery, and on August 17, the consecration of the new premises and the transfer of new residents to it took place. “I,” writes Arch. Porfiry about the accommodation of the members of the mission - settled (on the top floor) in five rooms with two corridors with them on the northern line (side) of the church dome, hieromonk Feofan and the translator - on the western line, student Krylov - adjacent to the reception room on the southern line from the dome, student Solovyov - in the north-western corner of the monastery, in three cages, of which one looks like a piano, my servant Ivan – adjacent to Solovyov on the western line. On the lower floor, under the reception room, our dining room was built and next to it there was a kitchen with a room for the cook, and under the housing of the translator and the hieromonk, two rooms were saved for the hierodeacon and the dear guest. The remaining cells on the lower floor were assigned to Russian worshipers of the clergy. This is our premises,” exclaims the archbishop. Porfiry, - cramped, low, wretched, stuffy! Without stoves, but with windows... All our cells, the dining room, the reception room, the upper room and all the services were supplied with the necessary things and were decorated decently and modestly. And thrift, with frequent checks of the integrity of all things and with strict orders to everyone, even servants, to pay their value in case of loss or damage, preserved all the property of the mission without damage. All our hired servants were Orthodox Arabs from honest families. Each of them was assigned his own task and at his own time, in order to prevent confusion and quarrels between them. Sufficient salaries for them, treatment of them as members of the household and not as slaves, and order in the household kept them on mission, and they served us faithfully, honestly and con amore - with love. “Common tea drinking in the reception room, a common breakfast and a common lavish meal in the dining room with grape wine ordered from Marseilles were offered at certain hours with prayers. Everyone came to the elegant table in decent clothes. Saturation of the body was combined with nourishment of the soul. During tea, breakfast and lunch, there were always learned conversations in Arabic 225, Greek and French 226, so that the living room or dining room served as a school of linguistics and various knowledge. As for hospitality, it was consistent with local customs and circumstances. We rarely gave dinner parties. But Greeks, Arabs, Syrians, Copts, Englishmen and Russian admirers often shared their meals with us. “The door of my cell,” writes Arch. Porfiry,” was always wide open in the exact sense of the word. But I received everyone who came to me, as a rule, at three o’clock in the afternoon, so that the morning and pre-dinner time would not be lost for science and monastic silence, and so that in moments of rest from studies one could talk more calmly, politely and profitably with one’s guests or petitioners. An exception to this rule was made only for the rulers of Jerusalem and the European consuls, but they also respected this rule and complied with it.” “We all received the salary in our own hands and put it in our pockets. And since there was nowhere to spend it due to the troubled living conditions, each of us had significant savings of penyazi (money). I ordered a lot of books from Europe, but for all that I was not poor. “Scientific studies contributed to the degree of our life” 227. What kind of activities these were, we learn from the notes of the architect himself. Porfiry in his “Book of My Genesis.” “Hieromonk Theophan,” he writes in November 1848, “continued to study the languages ​​of modern Greek and French and translated seven patriarchal letters about the Sinai monastery. Student Peter Solovyov compiled short biographies of the martyrs of the Palestinian Church and translated from Latin the rite of the general liturgy of the Sirian-Jacobites (from the edition of Renedot) and from Greek the letter of Patriarch Dositheus on the Georgian monasteries in Jerusalem in 1699 and the letter to the Catholicos of Imereti, Kir. Gregory, in 1701 (Book my existence, III, 337–340). Student Nikolai Krylov compiled short biographies of the martyrs of the Alexandrian-Egyptian Church and translated from Greek: 1) letters of the Alexandrian Patriarch Paisius to Emperor Alexei Mikhailovich and to the All-Russian Patriarch in 1670; 2) a modern letter of gratitude from Egyptian Christians to the same sovereign for the benefits they provided to the Alexandrian church; 3) half of the confession of faith of the named patriarch and 4) the liturgy of Basil the Great among the Copts” 228. We hardly need to mention the scientific works of the head of the mission himself - they are beyond any doubt. With his collaborators, Arch. Porfiry often undertook scholarly excursions through Palestine and Syria and even traveled to Egypt and Sinai, everywhere involving them in his scholarly studies, and P. Solovyov served him as a life draftsman, whose drawings fill many of our orientalist’s works and his albums 229 . To complete our acquaintance with the internal life of the mission, we find it useful to dwell a little on understanding the nature of the personnel of our first mission, that is, the employees of the arch. Porfiry and his relationship to them. We know about the students Solovyov and Krylov that, when they were appointed to Jerusalem, both of them were completely unknown to their new boss, 230 but their subsequent joint residence in Jerusalem showed that for the modest position of the silent first mission, which pursued more scientific goals than practical ones, it was hardly possible to make a better choice. Student Nikolai Krylov, his stern boss attests, “was with me, as the head of the spiritual mission, as a reader and singer, obliged, however, to engage in scholarship under my leadership. His talents were not brilliant, but diligence and perseverance increased his knowledge. And chastity, modesty, silence, patience, frugality were the distinctive qualities of his soul. He compiled a catalog of my books, and with this work he did me a great service." 231 From the above we can see that in his scientific studies, St. Porfiry used his “diligence and perseverance” with enormous results, even in the first year of his stay in Palestine. Π. A. Solovyov, archpriest of the Church of the Intercession in St. Petersburg (later), was a true “favorite” of the arch. Porfiry, a “friend” 232, “drew him everything that was ordered”; I “behaved like a righteous man,” being sincerely disposed to my former boss until a very old age 233. The most prominent member of the mission was, of course, Hieromonk Theophan, later the rector of the St. Petersburg Academy and the reclusive Bishop of Tambov. He was appointed to the mission at the request (motu proprio) of Arch. Porfiry, who knew him 234 and was aware of his mystical mood 235, but chose him for his mission perhaps mainly not because he was also aware of his artistic talents: the ability for turning, painting and bead embroidery 236, which he needed, cherishing the idea of ​​​​a school of icon painting on a mission for the Arabs. But the complete opposite of characters, views and inclinations, at the very first stages of their joint existence in Jerusalem, gave birth between the boss, Arch. Porfiry, and his subordinate, Hieromonk Feofan, misunderstandings and such rough relations that the latter refused for some time to carry out scientific assignments of his boss and even insisted on submitting his resignation 237. “My soul is upset by your conversations with us,” 238, the mystic by nature, Hieromonk Theophan, directly and frankly declared to his boss in explanation of his disobedience and intention to leave the service in Jerusalem 239. Arch. Porfiry, however, managed to persuade his closest collaborator from this intention, and he, having come to his senses, remained in Jerusalem. Later, when arch. Porfiry and Hieromonk Theophan got comfortable with each other, got to know each other better, the relationship between them was so friendly that they traveled together to Sinai and the monasteries of Sts. Anthony and Paul of Thebes, to Athens and Italy, and, upon returning to Russia, Arch. Porfiry petitioned his superiors to award Hieromonk Theophan the Order of St. Anna 2nd degree 240, and the latter, in turn, made favorable reviews in St. Petersburg about his former boss 241. Generally about arch. It should be said to Porfiry that he was a caring and zealous boss for his subordinates 242. The splendid worship of the mission was one of its first tasks, in order in this case to serve as a model for the Greeks and to influence the minds and hearts of the native Arabs and foreigners. “We performed divine services on Sundays and holidays,” writes Arch. Porfiry, - in the Church Slavonic language, according to the church charter, decorously and in relation to the Greek rite, so that mass began very early. At the beginning of it, there were entire psalms “Bless” and “Praise the Lord for my soul,” and at the great exit, during the cathedral service, the exclamation was uttered: “May the Lord God remember you all in his kingdom,” first on the northern side of the church, then on the western and southern and, finally, in the middle of it, the most pious Sovereign with his entire family, our Holy Synod and the patriarch were prayerfully remembered Jerusalem Since local Christians, honoring the icon of the Archangel Michael in the monastery we occupied, were accustomed to listening to mass in their native language on Mondays, this custom was not only supported, but also turned into a reason to console them with the payment of a salary (34 rubles). per year) to the Arab clergy and the permission to ring the monastery bell, which our co-religionists in Jerusalem have not been granted since ancient times” 243. Liturgical supplies and a sacristy for the mission church were sent from St. Petersburg. “Festive icons are portable,” the archbishop gives his review of them. Porfiry – not very good. The twelve silver lamps are very beautiful and remarkable in their elegant simplicity. I really liked the crimson velvet on a gold field with flowers and crosses for a full sacristy. We will be very elegant in such vestments. On the Savior’s shroud, the wound from the spear is actually painted on the left side, as my co-worker, Hieromonk Theophan, informed me about this” 244. For the prophetic splendor of worship in the church of the mission, Arch. Porfiry invited Hierodeacon Melchizedek, who “voluntarily arrived from Athos and decided to serve almost free of charge,” who for four years “served diligently” and “lived God-loving and modest,” using only a free table, a room and a meager remuneration from the personal funds of the head of the mission from the mission. An attempt to include this necessary person in the mission failed, and when the Holy Synod “plunged the mission into deplorable and severe poverty” and, on the occasion of student Krylov’s departure from Jerusalem, stopped “sending her a full table salary,” then Arch. Porfiry was forced to completely send him away with little reward and even in the winter 245. Arch. Porfiry was well aware that the composition of the mission was small, and unsuccessfully asked to send a Russian hieromonk, a reader and two elders from the cenobitic hermitages 246, that “without a Russian golden-domed church and without a red tower” there could be no splendid church service, but volens-nolens put up with the sad reality and suppressed the bitterness of this consciousness. But the person who had the opportunity to familiarize himself on the spot with the sad state of our mission in this regard, B.P. Mansurov, paints it for us in the darkest colors. “In the Arkhangelsk Monastery set aside for the mission to live in, there is a church,” he writes in his note addressed to Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, “but it fully bears the imprint of the degraded position of Orthodoxy in the East, like the entire monastery, which bears this very incorrect name. Church of St. Church of the Archangel Michael is dilapidated, dark, poor, ugly and, in addition, so small that 25 people can hardly fit in it, and cathedral services cannot be performed in it at all. Access to the church is not free because entry into the monastery depends on the gatekeeper and the local Greek observer. It is impossible to expect splendor in the rituals and appearance of worship in this church, and one should not count on outside parishioners, for the Greek clergy has always tried and is trying to remove their flock from the beneficent and selfless influence of our church... Moreover, it must be borne in mind that there are no Arab parishioners in Jerusalem proper, for the Arabs live in villages, come to St. There is only hail on major holidays, when ceremonial services take place, in which our mission has to participate in the Greek church.” “With regard to the participation of our mission in the service at the Holy Sepulcher and on Golgotha, which was set as the task of our mission by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the instructions of the Holy Synod, it should be noted,” says the note we quote, “that the actual structure of the general worship of different confessions at these shrines is far from being such that the arch. Porfiry could satisfy the expectations or desires of the government that sent him. Christians do not have free access to the Church of the Holy Sepulcher. This, to our grief, has been established for a long time and is not even disputed at the present time... Serving in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher was impossible for our mission because for this it was necessary to live in the church and serve instead of the Greeks, which they allow occasionally, but cannot allow forever. On Sundays and holidays, when in St. Many pilgrims gathered in the church, arch. Porfiry had to either participate in the conciliar Greek service, or, refusing this, serve the liturgy at his monastery; therefore, it was precisely at the gathering of the people, when it would be possible to attract the masses to us, by comparing our service with the Greek, it was then that our mission should have completely left the stage or merged with the Greeks in their conciliar service” 247. To improve the life of our pilgrims in Jerusalem and protect them from moral depravity, Arch. Porfiry convinced the patriarchy to transfer pilgrims from the Catherine monastery to the Feodorovskaya monastery, and placed the pilgrims (Book of My Genesis, V40;P, 130-133) who lived in this latter monastery in his Arkhangelsk monastery 248. Since the hospital established by the Patriarchate for Russian fans in the Catherine Monastery was small and had a Greek doctor, Mazaraki, who did not speak Russian 249, then Arch. Porfiry raised before the Russian government the question of the need to establish a hospital at the mission specifically for Russian fans and about the appointment of a special hieromonk as a confessor. “Archimandrite,” according to B.P. Mansurov, - presented his idea in such strong and convincing terms, so clearly expressed the need to urgently come to the aid of the emerging shortcoming, that not only the government, but even a wealthy private individual, it seemed, could not indifferently hear what one of the representatives of our church in the East was saying, and should have decided to make donations for the sake of feelings of philanthropy and preserving the dignity of the Russian name, which the arch. Porfiry. They asked for a one-time assignment of 1,800 rubles and an annual addition of 4,000 rubles to the mission staff. This idea was supported by both Consul General Basili and our envoy in Constantinople, despite everything in St. Petersburg it was left without consequences for purely economic reasons” 250. We have already seen how fatherly and friendly the kind, albeit spineless Patriarch Kirill, the Synodals and the Holy Sepulchers greeted our first spiritual mission led by Arch. Porfiry. These peaceful, friendly relations were preserved later and for all subsequent times 251. The advice from St. Petersburg “not to interfere in other people’s affairs” 252 and his bitter experience, taken from his first trip to Jerusalem, with the promise to look at many phenomena in the life of the local clergy “through his fingers,” made it so that in his diaries we no longer see those speeches full of fire and moral disgust about the debauchery of the morals of the Greek clergy, which permeate the first two “Books of My Genesis.” The position of the Russian spiritual mission in Jerusalem and the local Greek clergy was established, according to B.P. Mansurov, very quickly and approximately in this form: “hosts and modest tolerant guests appeared in front of each other, and for these latter the rule expressed in the proverb took full force: “they don’t go to someone else’s monastery with their own rules” 253. The arch became completely different. Porfiry to the native Arab clergy and in general to the Orthodox Arabs of Syria and Palestine. Having declared himself an ardent Arabophile, even during his first stay in Syria and Palestine, and was greeted with joy by both the clergy and the people of the Arab tribe on his second visit here, Arch. Porfiry, with deep faith in the full possibility of implementation in practice, planned to revive this humiliated downtrodden people and elevate the Arab clergy in the eyes of the flock and especially the dominant Greek clergy. As a means for this, he chose the establishment of a theological school like the Chalkin school near Constantinople, with the teaching of Arabic in it and the admission of native students to the school. This thought of his, arch. Porfiry persistently indoctrinated the Russian Consul General and the ruling Patriarch Kirill, on whom the establishment of this school mainly depended 254. “Patriarch,” writes Arch. Porfiry, on March 26, 1849, expressed his firm intention to establish, with my help, a theological school for the education of rural priests. Therefore, in our triple council (i.e., together with the consul), it was decided: 1) to call Fr. Spiridon for teaching catechism and Arabic literature; 2) give him accommodation in one of the Holy Sepulcher houses and a salary of 10,000 piastres a year and 1,000 piastres for travel; 8) invite 12 young Arabs from the Palestinian dioceses for the first time and place them in a prepared house. “I was delighted,” adds the author of the project, “from Patriarch Kirill. On the actual day of the resurrection of Lazarus, the resurrection of the Palestinian church began. This day is a solemn day in my life" 255. On June 14, 1849, the planned school was opened in the monastery of St. The grave, in the presence of all the clergy and the patriarch 256. In 1852, it was decided to expand the school and move it to the Cross Monastery near Jerusalem 257. The initiator of this school, arch. Porfiry, who recommended setting up a bath at the hospital and an examination room 258. Patriarchal School in the Monastery of the Cross near Jerusalem. On February 3, the board of school trustees was opened, in which, after Fr. Dionysius Kleovul, the rector of the school, took the place of honor and the arch. Porfiry. The purpose of its establishment is “to give life, movement and order to all schools that are located within the Palestinian church” 259. At the very first meeting of the newly established school board, Arch. Porfiry drew attention to the fact that in the parish school the students achieved very little, that the way of teaching them was not suitable and that, in his opinion, it would be more expedient to divide the school into four separate classes, instead of two, and appoint two more mentors, so that one would teach the children Arabic reading and writing, the other would improve them in both, and the third and fourth would teach all other lessons. The proposal was accepted and two new teachers were elected - the son of the late teacher Farah with a salary of 2,400 piastres, the brother of the Arab priest Michael with a salary of 3,000 piastres, and the salary of the other two Fr. Barnabas up to 4,200 piastres and Hannah Nuclei up to 3,600 piastres. At the same time, it was decided to give a monetary allowance to the wife of the late teacher Farah, to which the patriarch agreed reluctantly, promising to help the widow secretly, “so that other Arab widows would not demand undeserved help from him.” Arch. Porfiry gave the son of Farah's widow 400 piastres from his personal funds. “I,” says the arch. Porfiry, in his diary on the occasion of this first meeting of the board, kept in deep secret his diplomatic intention to enlighten and elevate the Orthodox Arabs at any cost. I felt sorry for them. They bore a double yoke: Turkish and Greek. They had to be released. How? Through enlightenment, for the Savior said: “The truth will set you free (John 8:32)” 260. At the second meeting of the school board, it was decided to prepare shoes and linen for 21 pupils of the patriarchal school, draw up a schedule of teaching hours in the parish school, ask the patriarch to subordinate the patriarchal printing house to the management of the board and appoint a teacher in Lydda with a salary of 2,400 piastres 261. Archimandrite Porfiry himself personally traveled to Lydda, Ramla and Jaffa to negotiate with the residents of these areas about the speedy opening of schools authorized by the patriarch 262. At one of the subsequent meetings, the proposal of the arch. Porfiry to accept the method of teaching children introduced in the Jerusalem parish school and in all other Arab parochial schools under the jurisdiction of the Jerusalem Patriarch, “for the sake of the unity of education.” “My seeds,” exclaims the archbishop on this occasion. Porfiry, - fall on good soil. God will increase them" 263. In 1853, at the insistence of Arch. Porfiry, the issue of incoming students of the theological school was resolved, but under the condition of having patrons from the Holy Sepulcher clergy, donating funds either from their personal or from the Holy Sepulchre treasury for their maintenance in the amount of 30 piastres per month 264. This, of course, required the expansion of the school, which was done, according to the instructions of the arch. Porphyria 265. In August 1853, year-long tests took place at the school, at the end of which the students came to thank their caring ephor. “I,” says Fr. Porfiry, “earned this respect because, with his unrelenting insistence, he dressed them decently, improved their table, provided them with educational books and remodeled their premises so that they were now both spacious and cheerful” 266. The architect dreamed. Porfiry to create a church-archaeological museum at the school to collect Palestinian fossil and non-fossil antiquities, coins, manuscripts, icons, etc. But this dream did not come true, since “the tombs, according to the author of the project, were accustomed to sitting in the dark” 267. To my great consolation, Arch. Porfiry in 1854. On February 14, he listened in Arabic to a sermon in Arabic by the Bethlehem priest Elijah, studying at a Jerusalem school, in the Church of the Resurrection of Christ. “So, this is a school,” notes Arch. Porfiry, - for the first time, the preachers of the Word of God were expelled" 268. There was an attempt by the arch. Porfiria opens a school in Jerusalem for girls. “Like mothers,” he convinced the Patriarch of Jerusalem, Metropolitan Meletius and Archimandrite Nicephorus for this holy work, “they pass on to their children their piety, their virtues and their spiritual knowledge; and their traditions and instructions are so deeply rooted in children’s hearts that no false teaching can subsequently uproot them. Therefore, the greatest attention must be paid to the pious education of girls - these future mothers. Fathers, no matter how well they know their faith, being engaged in crafts and work, do not have time to take care of the spiritual nurturing of their chicks. And mothers, constantly being with their children at the hearth of the home, can feed them with the brush of the Word of God in timely and untimely times.” At first, those who were convinced escaped with deep silence, but the speaker remained with full faith that his words would “sink into their souls” 269 . Indeed, later a school for Arab girls was opened. 270 Dreams of the revival of the Arab tribe through enlightenment passed on to the arch. Porphyria sometimes goes straight to utopia. While he was in Sinai in 1850, in a conversation with the dikey of the monastery, he considered it a “truly good, useful and glorious” matter for the monastery to establish a school for the children of Sinai Bedouins, called “defenders of the monastery,” who consider themselves “kings of the desert” and disdainful of settled life and peaceful hard work. However, the plan of this Bedouin school is interesting to characterize the personality of the drafter. “I would,” says Arch. Porfiry, - built this school on the other side of Sinai, in the wooded and abundant valley of Ledzha, in the ruins of the monastery of the forty martyrs, and would have done even more: he would have begun to teach literacy and crafts to the children of monastery slaves, establishing for them a small school in the form of a nomadic camp, i.e. under the chambers, in the same valley or in another similar place... Begin to better supply the local widows and orphans and those Arabs who enter the monastery to serve; lure their children under craft tents with soft bread and fatherly care for them. In this way you will revive and reshape them" 271. But behind all that, arch. Porfiry, it must be said truthfully, had every right to say about himself: “God has vouchsafed me to be the beginning of the spiritual education of two Orthodox peoples, Arab and Bulgarian. So, no one will say about me: he walked the earth idly" 272. In close connection with the question of the revival of the Arab people and schools for their education, there is also the question of opening a printing house under the Jerusalem Patriarchate for printing all kinds of books in Greek and Arabic. The idea of ​​​​establishing such a printing house belongs to our Archimandrite Porfiry 273. On October 26, 1852, the printer Lazaridi 274 arrived, in November paper, ink and letters were brought for the planned printing house and machines were expected 275, and on February 14, 1854, the first two books in Arabic - the Apostle and the Catechism - were already published, the explanatory Psalter of the Jerusalem Patriarch Anthimus was printed in Greek 276, and was prepared for publication by comparing the Greek text with the Arabic. Colored Triodion 277. The Patriarchal Printing House was opened in the Jerusalem Monastery of St. Nicholas 278 in the lower housing. Distributing 500 piastres annually to the poorest Christians in Jerusalem, Bethlehem and Bethlehem (the village of shepherds) before the feasts of the Dormition of the Mother of God, the Nativity of Christ and Easter 279, sending Easter bread, cheese, eggs and money to prison in Jerusalem, five piastres to each of the Bet Jal Christians accused of clashes with the minions of the Latin Patriarch Valerga, who tried to firmly establish himself in Bet-Jala 280; a project to help Arabs in dire need by establishing a loan bank, at least with an insignificant capital of 30,000 piastres for the first time, issuing small loans at an interest rate of no more than 5 piastres and allowing payment in kind: sheep, wood and sheep oil, eggs, chickens, wool, etc.; providing this bank with the capital of the Patriarchate or a subsidy of the Russian government of 1,000 rubles. 281; creating an orphanage for Arab children and teaching them crafts 282, supplying the seven poorest rural churches with a sacristy 283, etc., etc. - these and many other benefits and projects for the benefit of the revival and enlightenment of Arab Christians in Palestine eloquently tell us about the ardent, sincere love that our first head of the Russian spiritual mission in Jerusalem had in his heart for this downtrodden and humiliated people. Rejoicing at his success in establishing Palestinian schools for Christian Arabs and his other undertakings in their favor, Arch. Porfiry, however, did not delude himself about their strength and durability. "God bless! - he exclaims, looking at the school in Lydda, - dawn has appeared among the local Arab tribe. But for how long? This question is difficult for me: I don’t want to answer it. My business is to prepare the soil and sow, but the cultivation of the seeds depends on God." 284 From the above, we already know that the sending of the involuntary “Russian admirer” to the East by Archimandrite Porfiry the first time and then the second time was determined, first of all, and mainly by the successes of heterodox propaganda in Syria and Palestine and the establishment of the Anglican-Evangelical episcopate in Jerusalem, therefore the clash of our “Russian admirer”, according to the secret of the head of the spiritual mission in Jerusalem, as with representatives of this heterodox propaganda, and its results in the local Arab settlement, was very natural and even inevitable. In the first place, however, first of all, we must put the clashes of arch. Porphyria with Catholic propaganda and its representatives, since our first spiritual mission came to Jerusalem at the very height of the organization and first successes of this propaganda and was present, as an eyewitness, at those bloody clashes between Orthodoxy and Catholicism in holy places and, in particular, in Bethlehem 285, which later served as the closest reason for our difficult Sevastopol war and forever since then our spiritual mission and even Our Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society has acquired the combative character with which they conduct their educational work in Syria and Palestine, standing face to face with a strong enemy of Orthodoxy capable of all kinds of tricks... Our mission in Jerusalem had already seen a lively struggle between Orthodoxy and other faiths here and understood and was well aware that the Greek Orthodox Church with its own means was powerless to fight the well-organized propaganda of other faiths 286 . By the time our first spiritual mission appeared in Jerusalem under the guise of “modest Russian pilgrims,” Latin propaganda, hitherto led only by Franciscans who had established themselves in St. places since the 14th century, and the Carmelites, who settled on Mount Carmel in 1821, unexpectedly received powerful support in the person of the newly created Catholic Patriarchate, which appeared here, at the request of Pope Pius IX, in response to the establishment of a Protestant bishopric. The Mesopotamian missionary Valerga 287 was placed at the head of the Catholic Patriarchate of Jerusalem, who, with his amazingly energetic and persistent activities in favor of the Catholic Church, left behind such a great memory that his name is not forgotten in Syria and Palestine to this day. The arrival of this invincible willpower and perseverance of a Catholic figure in Palestine, by a strange coincidence, coincided with the arrival here for the second time of Arch. Porphyria. Representatives of Orthodoxy and the Russian Church and Catholicism exchanged mutual visits, with Arch. Porfiry did not fail to paint a portrait of the Catholic Patriarch for his readers: “tall, thin, blond, handsome; His reddish beard is long to the waist and, as can be seen, is groomed very carefully” 288. Patriarch Valerga started the matter of establishing his residence in the Orthodox village of Bet-Jale 289, near Jerusalem, fought with the inhabitants of this village 290 and the Greek Orthodox clergy 291 and when, with the support of the French consul Botta 292, he finally established himself, he began the construction of a Catholic academy here 293, which once caused enormous harm to Orthodoxy in East. In the person of the arch. Porfiry, the Catholic Patriarch met an opponent of his propagation activities, and therefore, at the first opportunity, he tried to escort him out of Jerusalem, as the culprit of all the sad incidents due to his installation in Bet Jala 294. “I am a Latin,” the archbishop notes about himself. Porfiry – was not to his liking” 295. About his relationship with other nationalities and heterodox faiths in Jerusalem, Archimandrite Porfiry expresses himself as follows: “The Abyssinians, Syrian-Jacobites and Copts saw me as their intercessor. The Armenians respected me 296 ... The English Bishop Gobat was alienated from me, but I didn’t want to get to know him, because I really didn’t like his theft, and he stole Orthodox souls and drove them into his pickaxe, in which there is not even a Crucifix, but there are two black marble tablets with the Ten Commandments, as if he were a rabbi, not a bishop” 297. In particular, regarding the Coites or Ablesians and Syro-Jacobites, Bishop Porfiry’s intentions went much further than platonic love for them and simple friendly communication: in the recesses of his soul a burning desire burned to unite them with the Orthodox Church. For the intended purpose, arch. Porfiry ransomed an Abyssinian from captivity, who received the name Frumentius of Jordan in holy baptism in the Jordan River 298. “The English Bishop Samuel Gobat, the Latin Patriarch Valerga, the Franciscan and Greek monasteries, the American Barkel, even the Jewish rabbis, everyone here is engaged in the spiritual prayer of people, and I, writes Bishop about himself. Porfiry, decided to become their catcher and accidentally bought himself a fishing rod - a small Abyssinian from the Bet-Jal Orthodox Christians for 125 silver rubles, with the intention of baptizing him, training him and, if God wills, sending him to Abyssinia as a priest for the local Orthodox Greek merchants, who had long since lost their shepherd" 299 . Later, as we will see below, Bp. Porfiry deliberately traveled to Egypt to unite the Coptic patriarch with the Orthodox Russian Church. As for the Syro-Jacobites, the good relations that began in Jerusalem with the followers of this faith under the first head of the Russian spiritual mission in Jerusalem took on a rather lively character under his successor, Bishop. Kirill Naumov 300 and ended successfully only before our eyes in 1898 on March 25. With the participation of Archimandrite Porfiry in the cases of the repair of the dome over the Holy Sepulcher 301 and the destruction of the Turkish harem 302 of Abdullah on it, one might say, exhausts, one might say, the entire sum of the tangible practical results of his stay in Jerusalem. Dreams of an arch. Porfiry about his own house for the Russian mission 303, attempts to purchase at a cheap price the necessary plot of land inside the city 304, transfer of the matter of building a house for the Russian mission into the hands of the Jerusalem Patriarchate and other failures cannot, however, be attributed to the first head of the Russian spiritual mission in Jerusalem. “Arch. Porfiry, writes B.P. Mansurov in his justification on this point, convinced by the need for our mission to have a decent building belonging to it, managed to arrange everything on the spot in such a way that we would only have to build a house in accordance with our needs, the land was given by the patriarchy without difficulty and, therefore, it was possible to acquire it for Russia and lay the foundation for a Russian charitable institution in Jerusalem. As an intelligent and, of course, conscientious person, Arch. Porfiry studied this matter in detail, became convinced of the necessity and profitability of the enterprise and urgently petitioned in St. Petersburg for its establishment. Meanwhile, the Greek church administration did not like this matter. He did not want to see Russia in Jerusalem as the master of anything, and not as his guest; but out of decency it could not resist the arch. Porfiry, content with the fact that he did not come to St. A city with money and authority, and that the business he has conceived is not yet true if it requires correspondence for 4,000 miles. This matter dragged on for two years; our government, leaving aside trust in the arch. Porfiria, and the fact that he alone was the judge of local necessity, asked him incessantly: is it possible to get the same thing, but cheaper? “Meanwhile, while we were bargaining, the Greek clergy knew how to raise various difficulties for the establishment of Russian property in Palestine, and the matter ended with our diplomacy removing the possibility of having our own establishment in Jerusalem under the pretext that the Porte would be concerned about this, and that it was more convenient to let the patriarch himself build for us the secretly proposed arch. Porfiry's house. Thus, even before the war, Russia was afraid to disturb the Porte by building a modest monastic monastery, when neither France, nor England, nor Austria were afraid at the same time to build large institutions in Jerusalem” 305. The house, conceived according to the thoughts of the architect. Porfiry, and built at the expense of the patriarchy, was finished just before the Sevastopol war, and the initiator of its creation was not able to live in it 306. In this house, after the end of the war, the Russian consulate general and our second spiritual mission in Jerusalem were located 307. The rest of the six-year stay in Jerusalem was spent by the arch. Porfiry on scientific excursions in Palestine and Syria and scientific studies in his study in the Arkhangelsk Monastery. “There are people here,” writes Arch. Porfiry - very boring. The Greeks are uneducated, the Armenians and Franciscans are not friends of the muses, the consuls are busy with themselves and the Jews. So, involuntarily, you sit in your cell and read or write something. On my desktop, along with printed books and my own manuscripts, lies my diary. This is a neighbor who absorbs light and darkness, darkness and cold, sweetness and bitterness. This is the prerogative of memory, which draws from nature: and therefore in his drawings one can see the small near the great, the ugly near the graceful, the worldly near the sacred, and the funny together with the important” 308 . “The Arkhangelsk Monastery, where we lived and worked,” notes Arch. Porfiry about the homework of all members of the mission - was like a hive in which each bee produced its own honey, some its own honeycomb.” 309 “Whoever has no worldly connections and cares,” writes Arch. Porfiry was already in Russia; it was good for him to live in the Holy Land. There, sacred places, in place of sinful society, nurture reflection, repentance and prayer. And travel always enriches the imagination with fresh pictures. Mountains, hills, valleys, rivers, fields, deserts and ruins there proclaim the past, in which, as in a mirror, the procession of God, His miracles, punishments, bounties and gifts of grace are visible.”310 Scientific works of the architect. Porfiry relate either to the history of the Eastern Orthodox patriarchates and churches: Sinai, Georgian, etc. 311, or to the history of those churches that the archbishop dreamed of uniting with the Orthodox Church. Porfiry, for example. Coptic The essay on the doctrine, worship, rites and rules of church decorum of the Egyptian Coptic Christians was completed in Jerusalem on April 7, 1854 312, and, in the preface to this book, the author among other things wrote: “I compare the Coptic church with an olive branch, broken off from its main trunk and tilted down, so, however, that its bark is still connected to the bark of an ancient olive tree and absorbs its juices. Only God knows when this branch will grow together with its native trunk” 313. For reasons of scientific curiosity, Arch. During his second stay in Jerusalem, Porfiry did not limit himself to scientific excursions in Palestine and Syria, which were subordinated to his observation and scientific review, but also undertook distant trips in 1850 - to Egypt and from there to Sinai, having all his Jerusalem employees as companions. “The desire to pray where God called his Son from Egypt,” writes Arch. Porfiry, “to acquire new knowledge and test the previous ones, to relieve my colleagues from the boredom and languor of a monotonous life and to expand the range of their concepts, this desire is irresistible” 314. The journey began on March 18 and headed to Alexandria on an English steamer. Here, stock up on “information about the Orthodox Church in Egypt”, on April 4, on a sailing boat along the Mahmudiye “water conduit” and along the Nile arch. Porfiry and his companions went up to Cairo, where he spent seventeen days “in pilgrimage (on the occasion of Easter time), in evening interviews with the patriarch (Hierofei) and in scientific and artistic studies” 315, both in the patriarchal library and in the Sinai courtyard of Juvania. Having received “letters of guarantee” from the Coptic Patriarch on April 24, Arch. Porfiry and his companions sailed on a boat along the Nile to Bush, where he had a meeting with Abbot Daoud, later the Coptic Patriarch Cyril, who was given to him as a guide, by order of the Coptic Patriarch, for the entire duration of his journey to the monasteries of St. Anthony the Great and etc. Paul of Thebes. From Bush to the named monasteries and back, the “difficult” journey through the sultry desert, in the suffocating khamsin wind, was made on camels, and it lasted from May 3 to May 18, and three days were used (May 6–8) to stay in the monastery of St. Anthony and two days (10–11) to see the monastery of St. Pavel of Fiveysky. Arch. returned to Cairo. Porfiry May 23 and lived here until June 1, reading the manuscript about Patriarch Nikon of the Gaz Metropolitan Paisius and other documents related to Russian church history. June 4, arch. Porfiry set off on camels on a second journey to the Sinai monastery, which lasted until the 1st of August. “The duty of service, with which, in the opinion of Arch. Porfiry, the waste of precious time is incompatible” 316, prompted him to leave the monastery almost on the eve of his church holiday, after intensive book studies in the library. The return route to Jerusalem was difficult and unsafe through the deserts of Sinai and Idumea, in “tattered shoes and worn-out clothes” 317, through a country “few visited” 318. August 13, arch. Porfiry and his companions arrived in Hebron, and on the 17th of the same month, “after a four-day quarantine in Hebron and after five months of wandering “through the wide expanse of the East and collecting honeycomb, more or less fragrant, depending on the quality of the flowers found” 319, he “with the greatest joy” returned to Jerusalem. In view of everything that has been said, B.P. Mansurov’s remark is certainly true that the architect. Porfiry, “due to lack of means to act otherwise (in Jerusalem), devoted himself to devotional asceticism and learned works, in which he found both consolation and an occupation that corresponded to his character and inclination. Arch. It was not without reason that Porfiry, for himself and for the learned world, spent several years in Palestine and other countries of the East 320. Second six-year stay in Jerusalem by Arch. Porfiry did not pass for him without some grief. A severe, painful eye disease and other ailments of his generally weak body prompted the arch. Porfiry to seek relief from his ailments, first in 1850 in Constantinople for six months 321, and then in Russia, in Kyiv (from November 25, 1851 to March 22, 1852) 322, instead of Vienna and Italy, where he asked the Holy Synod and where he was not allowed entry. Inattention of the highest authorities to the worker and temporary newcomer from the East to Kyiv arch. Porfiry, who brought the latter to the sad consciousness of “nothing to live with” 323, caused him a lot of grief and moral torment. “There is nothing to live with” sensitively responded to the mood of the spirit of the arch. Porfiry was often in Jerusalem, since the salary assigned to him was often delayed for a long time in St. Petersburg 324. The allocated amounts, according to B.P. Mansurov, “were sent so late and untimely that the mission was almost always without money and in a very difficult situation” 325. Arch. Porfiry therefore often had to limit himself and those around him in the necessary needs and, with heartache, reduced the already very limited number of members of his mission 326. No less painful for the head of our first mission in Jerusalem were the constant disputes between the Greeks and Catholics over the possession of holy places and, in particular, because of the theft by Catholics of the star in the Nativity Scene 327 from the birthplace of the Savior and over the right to own the keys to the northern doors of the Nativity Scene 328 - disputes that often led to bloody clashes between representatives of Orthodoxy and Catholicism in front of the members of our spiritual mission 329 and which later served as the reason for the cessation of diplomatic relations between Russia and Turkey and the sad need for our first spiritual mission to leave Jerusalem, On October 13, 1853, the Austrian consul Pizzamano notified the arch. Porfiry about Russia’s declaration of war on Turkey and that, on behalf of the Russian Consul General, he was taking the mission under his protection for six months 330, and on October 18 a firman about the war was read in the Holy Sepulcher Church 331. Left without proper guidance from his superiors, Arch. Porfiry hesitated as to whether he should go to Greece and wait for orders there, or remain with complete “lack of money” in the Holy City 332. Arch. was sent. Porfiry sent a request in this regard to the director of the Asian department N.I. Lyubimov, 333 but events followed their own order. On October 31, the Arkhangelsk Monastery was transferred to the management of the patriarchal governor 334; January 13, 1854 arch. Porfiry announced to the members of his mission that he “can no longer support them with his own means” 335 and that they must leave Jerusalem, adding in response to their pleas to go with them to Athens that “the captain of the dying ship is the last to leave it.” On May 8, I left Jerusalem with Fr. Feofan, Solovyov and 18 pilgrims, and finally, the head of our spiritual mission himself, Arch. Porfiry 336, leaving in Jerusalem during his absence the library and all the things that belonged to the mission, in the hope, of course, of a quick return here 337. Arch. Porfiry with the above-mentioned companions on an Austrian steamer headed from Jaffa through Alexandria, Smirda and Sira to Piraeus and Athens for a “cursory examination of the notorious antiquities there,” under the guidance of the “distinguished, intelligent, learned Hellenist” arch. Antonin, rector of the Russian embassy church and his future successor in charge of the spiritual mission in Jerusalem 338. After a short stop in Athens, on the same Austrian ship via Zakynthos, Corfu and Trieste arch. Porfiry went on a trip to Italy. Visiting the cities of Venice, Padua, Milan, Ancona, Loretto, Rome, Livorno, Pisa, Florence and Genoa, arch. Porfiry studied “fine arts - architecture, sculpture, painting” in the oldest Italian churches and in numerous art galleries of the named cities 339. In Rome, in particular, arch. Porfiry, of his own free will, asked for an audience with Pope Pius IX, who received our traveler in ordinary attire with the Order of St. Anna, on the neck, but without the archimandrite cross. After kissing the pope's hand stretched across the table, Arch. Porfiry exchanged several phrases with him about the union of churches and about the hierarchical position in the clergy and his companion Hieromonk Theophan, who was present at this audience 340. Having lost hope of visiting Turin with the notorious shroud, which was wrapped around the most pure Body of Christ, since the arch. Porfiry did not find the mark of the Sardinian envoy; he went from Genoa through Navarre, Milan, Venice, Trieste and Leibach to Vienna. Here is the arch. Porfiry talked quite openly and freely with our envoy to the Austrian emperor, Prince A. M. Gorchakov. In this conversation, which later had an important influence on the future career of the arch. Porfiry, the latter touched upon our canonical and church-practical “differences” in comparison with the Eastern Church. “Greeks,” the archbishop said. Porfiry, - faithful to the teaching of the Gospel, prohibit any sworn oath, except she-she-nor-nor; and in our country, contrary to the Gospel, the oath of oath has been legalized, and what else? I swear by Almighty God, instead of before Almighty God. In the Greek Church, marriages are performed within distant degrees of kinship, and in our case, within close ones. We accept Catholics and Protestants into the fence of our church without rebaptizing them, and the Greeks again baptize them as heretics. For a long time now we have not had annual councils of bishops, commanded by the rules of the universal church, but the Greeks often have such councils, although they are under the yoke of other faiths. The Greeks very strictly observe those church rules that set the age of 30 for ordination to the priesthood and 25 to the deacon, and it is forbidden to elevate priests to the rank of priest, but is commanded to elect priests from all classes; In our country, only priests are ordained to the priesthood and deaconate, and even those are very young, which repels schismatics from us. According to one of the principles of church government, there is a single episcopate throughout the entire universal church, and therefore each bishop is responsible for the integrity of Orthodoxy not only in his own flock, but in the flocks of other bishops. Such circular responsibility is possible and beneficial only when all bishops would observe each other, the Greeks for ours, and ours for the Greeks, through their spiritual envoys to the patriarchs and rulers of the autocephalous churches, which envoys were anciently called apocrisiaries, i.e., those in charge. Where are these messengers? There are none. Our secular embassy in Constantinople is also in charge of church affairs in the East, but its interference in these affairs is contrary to church diplomacy, according to the code of which the apocrisiary should not be an excellency, but a high reverence or eminence. It would behoove us, who are free and not poor, to observe such a code, but no one here thinks about it. Another principle of church government says this: the legislative power of the church, concentrated in ecumenical councils, is strength and good. Where is our legislative focus, centralisatioB legislative? Our Holy Synod is an executive power, but not a legislative one. In ancient times, legislation was passed by ecumenical councils. Ecumenical conciliar legislation is still necessary today. For example, an ecumenical council would remove the curse from our co-religionists and schismatics, which pushes them away from us; he would introduce monotonous worship everywhere, somewhat disjointed by inept corrections of church books; he would bless Christians to fast, according to the word of the Gospel, if you want to fast. But, unfortunately, state authorities here and there are guided by a special principle: divide et ischrega. These are the ecclesiastical reasons for the reluctance of the Greek hierarchs towards us.” It can be assumed that there would have been no end to these speeches if Prince Gorchakov, on whom this conversation made a “strong impression,” had not interrupted them with a sharp exclamation: “enough, enough” 341. In Vienna, arch. During his visit here, Porfiry examined the Belvedere art gallery and, mainly, the paintings in it by Dutch painters 342. November 28, 1854 arch. Porfiry left Vienna and went through Warsaw to St. Petersburg, where he arrived on October 2. The first meeting with Metropolitan Nikanor of St. Petersburg was characterized by inhospitability. The Metropolitan “dryly” asked the arch. Porfiria: “Why did he go to Rome?” and then “despotically” added: “but you were not allowed to go there” 343. Chief Prosecutor Count Protasov was interested in the audience of the arch. Porfiry was with his father and received the latter coldly. The director of his office, Serbinovich, greeted him no better. Kindness and greetings, purely friendly, arch. Porfiry found only the manager of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs L.G. Senyavin, having become convinced, and not for the first time, from bitter experience that two gentlemen cannot work 344. Housed in two “dirty cells” of the Lavra, Arch. Porfiry, on behalf of the Metropolitan, had to take upon himself the trouble of checking the translation of the canons for the Lord's holidays, made under the editorship of Prof. St. Petersburg Theological Academy E. L. Lovyagin, and translate the French book by Abbot Michon “A New Solution to the Question of Holy Places (in Palestine).” The second order was carried out by Arch. Porfiry, with the help of Hieromonk Theophan and student P. Solovyov 345, and the first, which aroused the displeasure of the editor and members of the committee established by the Metropolitan, was not completed. Arch place Porfiry, to whom no thanks were given for this “corvée” 346, was occupied by arch. Zephaniah, later bishop. Turkestan. December 8, 1854 arch. Porfiry presented to the director of the Asian department N.I. Lyubimov his report on the scientific studies of the spiritual mission for 1853, and on January 21, 1855 the same report for 1854. On January 29, Hieromonk Feofan, at his request, was assigned to the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, student Soloviev was appointed to the place of priest on Malaya Okhta, and the former head of the mission, Arch. Porfiry was awarded for special labors and merits a lifelong pension of 1000 rubles, and all these persons last received their due salary in the Asian department on April 4 347. Our first spiritual mission in Jerusalem thus ended its official existence. The head of our first mission, Arch. Porfiry, who completed the assignment entrusted to him within the limits of the instructions given to him, both according to his own consciousness 348 and according to the feedback of other persons interested in the fate of this mission of ours 349, quite satisfactorily, could naturally expect a reward for himself from the highest authorities, but in reality in St. Petersburg a whole series of griefs that were very sensitive to his pride awaited him. We have already seen that Metropolitan Nikanor and the Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod, Count Protasov, greeted him very coldly. Their successors, Metropolitan Gregory of St. Petersburg and the new chief prosecutor St., treated him even worse. Synod Count A.P. Tolstoy. The latter revived his antipathies towards Archimandrite Porfiry, which he had developed back in Odessa under the influence of Magnitsky’s slander against him, and now, by interviewing companions and former employees of the head of the first mission 350, he tried to collect new facts not in favor of his high moral purity. A trip to Rome 351 to see the pope and eating fast food in Jerusalem 352 are the new points of accusation against him. “I, an orphan, am being judged and condemned by Tolstoy’s mind, and for what? - asks the arch. Porfiry in his diary. - Because he ate quick food where there were no fish, no mushrooms, no berries, and where the holy apostles taught that food will not bring us before the Lord. Neither the weakness of my health, nor my contemplative life, from which I recognize in myself the existence of a soul rather than a body, nor my gifts and knowledge, nor my works and merits, nor the petition for me of several dignitaries, amazed at Tolstoy’s pharisaism, is respected. Eating a few drops of a quick soup where there is nothing else to eat is recognized as the greatest crime” 353. “If it is said about me as the sweetest Jesus,” writes the Most Serene Princess E.P. Wittenstein Arch. Porfiry in 1857, September 7, - I am a poisoner and a wine drinker and a friend of sinners and tax collectors, then I take upon myself this disgrace, just as a rock on which fragrant cypresses (fruit-bearing trees) grow takes on a muddy wave. But if, in fact, they consider me not firm in Orthodoxy and unable to represent our church in the East, because I am not convinced of its correctness, then they are cruelly mistaken. I was born, grew up, matured, grew old and will die under the shadow of the Russian altar, my love for the Fatherland and the Tsar is fiery. My union with my dear Church is indestructible. My convictions in her correctness are clearer than in anyone else” 354. Due to the above misunderstandings and complaints, Arch. Porfiry, naturally, could not receive deserved retribution from the Metropolitan and Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod. Arch. Porfiry, for example, had long cherished in his soul the dream of “being the rector and professor of the Academy” 355, but they preferred him to the hieromonk Theophan, who was under his command, about whom Arch. Porfiry, in a letter to Princess Wittgenstein, expresses himself as follows: “qui n’a d’autre mérite qu’ un extérieur compose” 356, and who received this place only at the insistence of Chief Prosecutor Tolstoy, who read his “pious letters” to Princess Lukomskaya 357. His attempt to ask for himself, and even with the assistance of high-ranking officials, the position of rector of the church at the Imperial Russian Mission in Rome was not crowned with success 358. When in 1856 the question of forming a second spiritual mission in Jerusalem was again raised, Arch. Porfiry was directly passed over for appointment. The Chief Prosecutor of the Synod, Count Tolstoy, gave preference to the Hierodeacon of Optina Hermitage Yuvenelius (Polovtsev), later Archbishop of Vilna, as “a great faster and man of prayer for our souls” 359 . The new chancellor, Prince Gorchakov, recalling his conversation with Archimandrite Porfiry in Vienna before the Sevastopol War, now directly announced to him: “I did not dare to elect as a representative of our church (in Jerusalem) a person who is not convinced of its rightness” 360. As the head of this mission, Chancellor Prince Gorchakov proposed to appoint the Odessa vicar Polycarp, who once occupied the place of rector at our embassy in Athens, but who, however, had not declared himself in any way in his past foreign life 361, but who had gained a reputation as a pious man and even a saint 362 in the eyes of Count Tolstoy, Count Putyatin and others. In St. Petersburg, however, they well understood that Bishop Polycarp, designated to be the head of our second spiritual mission, “does not have that strength of mind and will, that sharpness, that insinuation and that gift of speech that is needed in the diplomatic field” 363, and therefore it was decided to give him the already experienced experience of Arch. Porfiry, who was promised as a reward “to be in Jerusalem after Bishop. Polycarp" 364. This modest appointment of Arch., announced in St. Petersburg. Porfiry, as he himself puts it, as a “highly reverend uncle” under the “eminent boy” 365, had an effect on persons disposed to the arch. Porfiry and even himself personally had a “calming and even joyful impression” 366. July 13, 1857 “with me,” wrote Arch. Porfiry To Princess Wittgenstein, there were two joys: one was about my appointment to Jerusalem as Polycarp’s assistant, which was announced here, and the other was about the continuation of your friendly correspondence with me. My first joy can still turn into sadness if the Supreme Power does not for some reason approve my appointment to the Holy City, but the second will remain in me, like the fragrance in a tree refreshed with honey dew” 367. The appointment of the arch. Only Bishop Polycarp was dissatisfied with Porfiry in this modest role, declaring sharply that “he does not need a vizier.” “But if he is not a sultan, then I am not a vizier,” notes the archbishop about this offensive epithet. Porfiry. I am a priest of the Most High God, and I will not allow him or anyone to call me anything else.”368 Ep. Polycarp, however, did not receive an appointment to Jerusalem, and at the same time the matter of sending an archbishop there was upset. Porfiry as his assistant. The architect himself. Porfiry explains this change to the tactlessness of Bishop Polycarp, who allegedly asked Prince Gorchakov for 300,000 rubles. for the needs of the Palestinian church, “his insanity” and “his inability to deal with affairs in the East” 369. But in reality there were completely different reasons for this. The fact is that, after the unexpected appointment of Hieromonk Feofan Govorov as rector of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, the young and handsome inspector of the same Academy, Archimandrite Kirill Naumov, who did not receive the rectorship, “despite his talent and learning (he is a doctor of theology), firmness in Orthodoxy and impeccable life” 370. The offended man found strong patrons and defenders in the person of his closest relative, the court Archpriest Naumov and the royal confessor Protopresbyter Bazhanov 371, who, not wanting to put him in a subordinate and humiliating position in relation to the new rector, after the intention of some to remove him from St. Petersburg to Constantinople as rector at the local embassy 372 failed, nominated Arch. Kirill as the head of our second spiritual mission in Jerusalem in the rank of Bishop of Melitopol, which appointment took place on August 16, 1857 373. Arch. Porfiry was thus left without an appointment and far from “his favorite cause - the resurrection of the Arab Orthodox people and the return of the Syrian and Palestinian Uniates to the fence of our church” 374. Quite naturally, his state of mind at that time was depressed and his mental balance was lost. “My memory,” the archbishop describes his state of mind at this time. Porfiry to his friend Princess Wittgenstein was attacked and upset. My thoughts collide with each other. My area of ​​thought is like a battlefield where people mutually kill each other. All my passions are excited. Everything about me is a mess. The world has been taken away. My poor soul seems to be divided, torn, mortified and killed by the bloody war that is taking place within it. Oh, a cruel war, and more cruel and painful to endure than can be expressed. I have neither the strength nor the courage to resist anything. All my plans, all my hopes, all the support that supported me until now, everything has been taken away, all that remains is dry and without any inclination devotion to the will of God. What should I say? All that remains is to wait that perhaps the Lord will be merciful and descend into my hell” 375. “I don’t regret that I wasn’t sent to Jerusalem,” the archbishop consoles himself. Porfiry, - for I was forewarned by numerous dreams about my separation from the holy places and the brothers there in the Lord; and a certain mysterious voice speaks within me that God will spare me, so that it is not with me, zealous and compassionate, that the fall of the patriarchal thrones in the East begins - a fall that is inevitable after the taking away from them of rich estates in Moldavia and Wallachia, greedily watched by 376 natives. But I grieve that they do not give me any higher position and thus dishonor me in the eyes of ours and the eastern clergy 377, who know my name very well. “It is better for me to die,” I say with the Apostle Paul, “than to suffer someone to take away my praise.” I grieve that I am being pushed away from the Church, the Fatherland and the throne, which I can serve in word and deed wisely, truly, con amore 378. I grieve that I was condemned without trial by some infallible popes and cut down to the living, shady, fertile root. I just can’t get used to looking at myself as a roadside stump that will touch every wheel greased with tar. Cowardice is not akin to me, but taking pleasure in one’s own martyrdom is also unpleasant.”379 “I,” notes the arch. Porfiry on a different occasion about his state of mind in a letter to the same princess Wittgenstein is a tree from which, however, tears flow” 380. But even among the suffering and grief of Arch. Porfiry, to his benefit, knew how to maintain devotion to the will of God. “However, the very depths of my soul,” he wrote to Princess Wittgenstein, “are not disturbed, because in it there is reasonable devotion to the will of God.” “How good it is to live in God! - he exclaims. “From Him the soul borrows immutability and contentment amid the incessant excitement of opinions and everyday affairs and among the sorrows caused by failures and the deceitfulness of our calculations and hopes” 381. This devotion to the will of God supported the arch. Porfiry the energy necessary to continue his scientific work, even at a time when he, by his own admission, was “crushed under the weight of the cross” 382. At this time, he prepared for publication a description of three travels: in Sinai and Egypt, a discussion about the mysterious writings on the cliffs of Sinai and a statement of the doctrine, worship and church rules of the Egyptian Coptic Christians 383, several reports were written on the scientific and artistic activities of our spiritual mission in Jerusalem over the past years 384, a collection of prayers was compiled for the sisters of the Holy Cross community 385 and many other scholars were completed orders received by the arch. Porfiry received the favor and patronage of the highest persons, for example, Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, Grand Duchesses Elena Pavlovna, Maria Nikolaevna 386 and Empress Maria Alexandrovna 387 and honorary election to membership in the Imperial Archaeological Society 388. The closeness and attention of the now named persons of our reigning house and, especially of them, the favor of Grand Duchess Elena Pavlovna and Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, Arch. Porfiry is obliged, first of all, and mainly, to his friend, Most Serene Princess E. P. Wittgenstein, née Euler, maid of honor to Grand Duchess Elena Pavlovna. These high-profile acquaintances later had a tremendous influence on his future career. Grand Duchess Elena Pavlovna brought Arch. Porfiria even chose him as her confessor, who wrote a special confession for her in French 389, repeatedly gave him scientific and literary assignments 390, invited him to her Oranienbaum to improve her health, giving him, instead of the “Lavra prison,” her wonderful country “eden” 391, “spoke with him openly on many issues of religion and church life in the Orthodox East and took part in his fate 392 when in St. Petersburg the Metropolitan, Prince Gorchakov and Count Tolstoy treated him with prejudice. As for his acquaintance with Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, it served as the reason for his new trip to his beloved East for scientific purposes and for quite a long time. After the appointment of Bishop Kirill of Melitopol as head of the mission in Jerusalem, in St. Petersburg they wished the out-of-work scientist Archimandrite. Give Porfiry a position as rector at our mission in Athens. Our envoy in Constantinople, Titov, convinced Arch. Porphyry accepts this appointment, saying: “The Greeks need you as a multilaterally educated person; you can travel around Greece and supplement your information about the Christian East.” But he resolutely refused to go there voluntarily and yielded only to the order, directly declaring that he would go there “sad, sad, tormented” 393. Moscow Metropolitan Filaret initiated a petition in the Asian department for the appointment of arch. Porfiry to Constantinople as rector of our embassy church 394, and the latter willingly accepted this place, but they preferred another 395 to him here. The unexpectedly difficult question of the fate of Archimandrite Porfiry Uspensky was resolved by itself and to general satisfaction. In 1857, on behalf of Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, B.P. Mansurov was sent to Jerusalem to collect various information that could be useful to the Russian shipping and trade society in arranging the correct and, as often as possible, transportation of pilgrims from Russia to the holy places of Palestine 396. Having become familiar with the needs of our pilgrims, St. places and activities of the architect. Porfiry in Jerusalem in this direction, during his two-time stay there, B.P. Mansurov in a special note to His Imperial Highness gave, as we already know from the above quotes from it, a very approving review of the activities and personality of the arch. Porphyria. This flattering review and the favorable rumors about him from the grand duchesses that reached the Grand Duke prompted him to give instructions to the arch. Porfiry write a note about our actions in the East and, especially, in Jerusalem, indicating the desired measures 397. In 1858, on January 6, the order of the Grand Duke was carried out 398, and it decided the fate of the arch. Porphyria. In the same year, in February, Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, at a special meeting on the 24th, which was attended by Prince Gorchakov, Brock, Norov, the synodal chief prosecutor, director of the Asian department Kovalevsky and Mansurov, decided, among various other issues tending to improve the life of our pilgrims, to send a temporary expedition to the East led by B.P. Mansurov and among its members enable and arch. Porphyria 399. The latter accepted this decision with joy: “So, I will go to the East. God bless! Thanks to the Grand Duke! Thanks to Mansurov" 400. But due to circumstances, B.P. Mansurov had to go to Paris for a while, and Arch. Porfiry, while waiting for him, was forced to live idle for some time in Odessa 401. This prompted the latter to take a second trip to St. Mount Athos until the time when B.P. Mansurov’s expedition arrives in Constantinople, and when he has the opportunity to join it. In the decree of the Holy Synod regarding the journey of Arch. Porfiry was told: 1) that he “with pious and learned affairs and to take from Jerusalem his remaining property and library” was going to the East for a period of one year, that he would “collect scientific information about church architecture and painting with the addition of descriptions of church utensils, libraries and archives” and that “in Egypt he would resume his relations with the Coptic clergy, whose attention to our church was attracted during his last trip,” that he a student of the St. Petersburg Theological Seminary Blagoveshchensky is given as a novice and that he is assigned 1,500 rubles in addition to the salary received from spiritual and educational capital for travel expenses, and the student of Blagoveshchensky is given 402,750 rubles." 403. On May 8, 1858, Archbishop said goodbye. Porfiry with the northern “capital with these words: “Farewell, Peter, you wiped my sides” 404 and through Moscow, Kharkov, Elizavetgrad, Nikolaev and Odessa headed to Constantinople. After a short stop here for a meeting with our envoy A.P. Butenev, Ecumenical Patriarch Kirill, Patriarch Kirill of Jerusalem, the head of the Khalki Theological School, Metropolitan Constantine Tibaldo, and the Sinai Archbishop Constantius on the island of Antigone, on May 21, on the Austrian steamer "Istanbul" I left for Thessaloniki, and from there on horseback, visiting on the way the monastery of St. Anastasia the Pattern Maker and the diocesan city of Yerisso, with his companion arrived on July 1 on St. Mount Athos to the Esphigmen Monastery 405, standing almost on the border of Macedonia. From Esphigmen, arch. Porfiry headed to Russik, where he this time lived from July 25 to October 9, leaving for three days (from August 7–10) to explore the southwestern side of Athos, i.e. the Molyvdub ridge, Stavrolakka, the ruins of Frankokaster, the Andronicus Tower and the island of Mulyani, from there in mid-October I went to Kareya to look at the artistic works of Sevastyanov, who lived in the Russian St. Andrew's monastery and was engaged in removing traces from Panselin's frescoes in the Protat Cathedral. From October 18, we have a letter from Arch. Porfiry to Princess Wittgenstein, in which he describes his state of mind on Mount Athos at this time: “I feel good here so far. My health is secure. I am warmed by two suns - visible and invisible. All the forces of my soul are fine. I don’t know boredom, I have forgiven my enemies, I love my friends, I don’t rely on people, I trust in God and pray to Him fervently, and I go about my business diligently: I study carving, sculpture, architecture, icon painting and church singing, and most of all I read ancient books written on leather” 406. Under the influence of a careful examination of paintings in the Kareya Cathedral, reading manuscripts in the libraries of Russik and in the limits of St. Forerunners at the Protat Cathedral, arch. Porfiry further introduces his correspondent to the results of his discoveries in the field of Greek church singing and the study of the texts of Holy Scripture in its entirety. From Karei arch. Porfiry moved to Kutlumush on October 24 and stayed there until November 21, from there he went to Iver, but along the way he stopped at the monastery of St. Panteleimon to find out “when and by whom this seclusion was founded, in what condition it is now and whether there is anything remarkable in it” 407. Artistic and scientific studies in Ivere, which lasted until February 25, were this time accompanied by the happy discovery of 16 conversations of Patriarch Photius, and among them, especially interesting were his two conversations on the occasion of the Ross invasion of Constantinople. With this find, arch. Porfiry, by his own admission, “came into such delight that his whole being leaped with joy. And there was something to rejoice at! - he adds. “After all, I, looking for valuable pearls in the East, came across two diamonds, which few people knew about, and many, very many, had not even heard of, and which I wanted to find and wanted so much that, after discovering them, I would not want to be considered a more happy accident in this world of God” 408. These precious finds were immediately shared from Iver by Arch. Porfiry with Princess Wittgenstein and Chief Prosecutor of the Synod Count A.P. Tolstoy. Both letters were sent on January 1, 1859 409 . From February 4 to March 26, arch. Porfiry spent time in Kareya in the konak of the Russian Panteleimon Monastery, continuing to study again the painting of Panselin and modern Athonite painting, getting acquainted with the technical terms of iconography from local zographs, which made it difficult for him, when translating Erminia Dionysius Furnoagrafiot into Russian. The translation of this Erminia was completed here 410. From Karei arch. Porfiry sent a letter to the Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod with a reminder of the reward of his companion Annunciation 411 and of the “deferment of his stay in the East for five months, from May 26 to October 26,” which he asked for while he was still in the Iversky Monastery, on January 31, 1859. In this petition, he outlined the reasons for the postponement in the following form: “In the field of knowledge and fine arts, adopted by the Holy Church, much has been researched by me, re-learned, understood and raised to the level of the principles of Orthodoxy, the understanding of which determines the beneficialness of the multifaceted activities of the clergy in the Catholic Church. But some of my research, information and thoughts about the forces of faith, speech or school, law and art operating in this church must be verified and supplemented, as in St. Mount Athos, and in other places indicated to me by the Holy Synod. And for the complete completion of this occupation, to which my special work in Egypt is attached, I do not have enough time, assigned to me this time for my stay in the East” 412. From Karei arch. Porfiry moved to Russik after March 4 and on the 16th of the same month, on the bratzer “St. Mitrofan”, with his companion and monk Nikon, set off, with a fair wind, to the Sikian pier. From here he rode mules to the city of Thessaloniki, where this time he lived for eight days, studying the ancient Thessalonica churches and monuments of sculpture and painting. A scientific trip to the village of Peresteri 413 was undertaken from Solun. “I am leaving from Thessaloniki,” wrote Arch. Porfiry to Princess Wittgenstein, March 22, 1859, to the Meteora monasteries. They say that they are built on pillar-shaped cliffs, rising separately in the middle of the field, and that everyone is lifted there in nets. I'll fly there like an eagle's flight. It is curious and pleasant to see the new sky, new mountains and valleys and these strange abodes. I would like to die, at least several times in my life, like a bird, to flutter in a net that will be dragged to heights measured at 30 and 40 fathoms and at the same time pray to the Holy Mighty... After the pilgrimage in Meteora, I will stop by the Olympic Monastery. If circumstances allow me to see the ancient monastery, admire the beauty of the Tempean Valley and climb to the top of the Thessalian Olympus, where the winds no longer blow and smooth out the cherished words that the pious and brave traveler draws there on the sacrificial ashes” 414. The plan of his journey, outlined in a letter to Princess Wittgenstein, architect. Porfiry accomplished this completely. The journey to the Meteora monasteries lasted from March 31 to May 8, and in the Stefanovsky monastery he had to celebrate St. Easter, but without the right to take part in the priestly service, since he did not have a “letter of guarantee” from the ecumenical patriarch 415. But with the exception of this “chagrin,” which was the result of his own “rashness,” the general reception in the Meteora and Ossolympic monasteries in Thessaly by Arch. Porfiry was quite pleased, as well as the scientific results of this trip. “In all Greek monasteries,” writes Arch. Porfiry in the Elaeson Monastery of the Olympian Mother of God, at the end of the journey - the monks receive me like brothers. The same reception was given to me in the monastery about which my word begins. This means that my guardian angel appears before me where it is inconvenient for me to be, and instills goodwill towards me in everyone. Taking advantage of this location, I carefully examined the monastery that sheltered me, copied all the inscriptions in it, examined the wall paintings, saw handwritten books and bought some of them; Moreover, he whitewashed the patriarchal and royal charters; in a word, he did his job as it should” 416. The journey to the Ossolympic monasteries lasted from May 9 to May 24, ending with a trip to the monastery of St. Dionysius on classical Olympus 417. Wanting to complete the study of Athos, arch. Porfiry hastened to return to St. Mountain, where, through Thessaloniki and Kalamaria, he arrived on June 6, 418. During a short but pleasant rest in Russika, after a difficult journey through Thessaly, arch. Porfiry sent a letter to the Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod, Count Tolstoy, outlining the results of this trip and asking for “monetary benefits” 419. June 15 on the boat of the arch. Porfiry left Russik for neighboring Xenof, where he stayed until the 20th, and moved from there to the next monastery of Dochiar for four days. From July 24 to July 17, arch. Porfiry studied in Zograf, from July 17 to the end of August - in Hilandar, and the month of September was devoted to his scientific studies in the monasteries of Kastamonite and Vatopede. On October 2, a trip was made to the Serai or Russian St. Andrew's monastery for a second meeting with Sevastyanov, on October 7 he left from here to the Pondokratorsky monastery for scientific studies, which lasted until October 17; October 17 and 18 arch. Porfiry spent time in the Little Russian monastery of St. the Prophet Elijah, on October 19 he surveyed the ruins of Xylurgu, spent the next three days in book studies at the Stavro-Nikita monastery, on October 22 he arrived at the konak of the Russian Panteleimon Monastery on Karei to once again examine the frescoes of Panselin, and on October 23 he returned to Russik, in which, by his own admission, he spent time “sitting by the sea, waiting for good weather from St. Petersburg,” to January 12, 1860 420 . “The mood of my ardent soul was not right,” writes Arch. Porfiry at this time. “But her angry ardor was tempered by self-control, which is very effective for me.” And with self-control, my studies continued. I outlined half the description of my trip to Thessaly based on my travel notes and took an active part in finding the most convenient pier for our trading ships near Mount Athos” 421. The reason for this lies in the failure to receive a response to letters sent on June 14–16 from Zograf to the comrade of the synodal chief prosecutor, Prince S. Urusov, with requests: 1) for a second postponement of his stay in the East until April 26, 1860, 2) for the deportation of 1,000 rubles to Mount Athos by the semi-imperials. salary and 1,000 rub. pensions from May 1, 1858 to May 1 of the current year, 1859 and 3) on assigning him to the position of 422. In a letter dated October 28, 1859 from Russik to our Serene Highness Princess Vntgenstein, Arch. Porfiry explains in detail the reasons for this “unpleasant mood of his soul.” “In the East I was given the task,” writes Arch. Porfiry, this is a complex and important matter. I perform it with ardor, with complete dedication, tirelessly, intensely, intelligently, overcoming fears from earthquakes, which have already shaken Athos 17 times during my time here. All the elders here are amazed at my patience and the power of God, which is accomplished in my weakness. And here in St. Petersburg, how do they repay me for my faithful and diligent service? Listen to what. Before leaving for the East, without my request, I was given 1,500 rubles. for expenses there and back for one year, and the seminarian sent with me was given 750 rubles. We were both pleased with this favor. But abroad it soon turned out that we would not have this money for a year due to the high cost of everything. Then I asked for gold for my friend on his way back to Russia. They again gave him a small amount, but they didn’t send me a penny, while he spent hundreds, and I spent thousands (mine). Isn't this offensive? True, I did not ask for an allowance, but even without my request it should have been given according to business tact, according to a simple syllogism: “after all, what is expensive for a seminarian is not cheap for an archimandrite.” Where is the logic? And isn’t it hard to depend on people who serve as priests without philosophy with one chief prosecutor?” “The authorities were pleased to delay my stay abroad with the seminarian for five months. And so, for this time they credited him and sent him that small fraction that I mentioned above, but I was not given a single half-ruble, as if I were feeding on air and traveling on the rays of the sun. Isn't it offensive?..." “From St. Petersburg they put in a good word for Sevastyanov to the sacred General, who runs the Athos monasteries, but they didn’t mention me. Isn't this offensive? I asked whoever was needed to request a letter of guarantee from the Constantinople Patriarch to the said Community. But, as a joke, he sent a letter of hospitality here, asking the people of Svyatogorsk to accept me as an honorable pilgrim. Is this what I need? However, even without the help of princes, on whom God did not tell me to rely, I achieve my goals, because the guardian angel appears before me in every monastery and speaks a good word about me to the souls of the saints.” “I asked whoever was needed to seek my most merciful permission to bring my library to Odessa, which our first mission in Jerusalem used for six years, to bring it past the local censorship committee. And they answered me that the Minister of Public Education does not find it possible to allow the issuance of my books and even my manuscripts without censorship inspection. Who am I? Herzen? Strauss? Voltaire? Indian pariah? Have mercy - I am a man of God and a people’s man, I am a faithful son of the Orthodox Church and a faithful subject of the Sovereign, who helped the aforementioned mission with my own library.” “I ask whoever is needed to send me my legal salary and pension, but I can’t wait for that either, as if someone wants me to groan out loud to the entire Orthodox world in the East. But what will happen when my groan changes there into the roar of a lion? “I remind those who need it that it was commanded from above to give me a position, and that I do not know where to lay my head, while all the worms in Russia have their own holes. And they respond to me with praise for my talents and knowledge, as if I could use them to sew a tent for wandering at the gates of the Lavra or the Synod, and in addition they say that my fate requires special considerations. This is what I have lived to see after 30 years of diligent and faithful service to the Church! - to the point that they start thinking about me! Let's see what they come up with" 423. Persons who loved the arch. Porfiry and those who are sincerely disposed towards him, such as. B.P. Mansurov, Princess Wittgenstein, advised him to “be careful and lenient with demands,” but Arch. Porfiry, in response on October 30, 1859, exclaimed: “Ah! and you are against me, not knowing that I am freely giving all of myself and all of mine to the one about whom I said that he wants to put my lamp in Sevastopol 424. I don’t know how to be more lenient with the demands... and to those pushing me away from priestly service in Russia I say: “Set me in my cell and don’t come to me while God himself is visiting me” 425. “My patience has run out,” the archbishop noted in his diary. Porfiry on the 12th of January 1860, - I decided “at random” to go to Constantinople, and from there to Jerusalem “for my belongings and books.” But on the ship, already with Russik in mind, from the captain he received 196 half-imperials, which he had been expecting for so long. “So,” exclaimed the arch. Porfiry, I’m rich. I have something to go to the Holy City with” 426. February 3, arch. Porfiry left Constantinople, and on the 19th of the same month, “joyfully” he entered Jerusalem for the third and last time, where he was greeted with open arms by his old friends - the Patriarchal Viceroy Meletius, Metropolitan of Petra of Arabia, and other members of the Patriarchal Synod and the Holy Sepulcher clergy. The meeting of the archbishop was cold and restrained. Porfiry with his successor, the head of the Russian spiritual mission, Bishop Kirill of Melitopol. Having examined “his belongings” in the Arkhangelsk Monastery and found them intact, Arch. Porfiry expressed warm gratitude to the guardians and, as a sign of gratitude, donated to the Patriarchate all the dishes he had purchased at his own expense during his stay in Jerusalem 427. House of Bishop Porfiry in Jerusalem. In Palestine this time, Arch. Porfiry stayed for five months, devoting them to studies, mainly with manuscripts in the patriarchal library, in Bethlehem, in the monastery of Sava the Sanctified and in the Monastery of the Cross. He did not ignore the monuments of painting and Christian art in all the named places. He gives the most enthusiastic review of his last stay in Palestine both in his diaries and in a letter to Princess Wittgenstein. “I stayed in Jerusalem for five months,” he writes on August 24, 1860 from Odessa to Princess Wittgenstein, “so long because I diligently read the ancient manuscripts there, and rewrote one of them in full. Pearls are not quickly mined from the bottom of the sea. The local patriarch gave me a magnificent room in his house. His governors, one might say, cherished me. I myself enjoyed the fruits of my previous labors, having found there in good condition an Aravo-Hellenic printing house, a patriarchal school, and schools for boys and girls, all of which were established not without my assistance. Should I tell you about the spiritual, gracious, heavenly sweets that I tasted at the foot of the Cross on Calvary and at the Holy Sepulcher? I’m talking about this because you are my friend, to whom my heart is open. It was sweet for me there, when I fell like a drop into the Source of life and, unaware of either space or time, felt within myself the inexhaustible current of eternal existence. It was sweet for me when I prayed there to the Savior without words and confessed to the Judge with only sighs. It was sweet for me when I was there, sad, deplorable, despondent, and suddenly received such devotion to the will of God, such firmness of spirit and such a reluctance towards dreams and self-made well-being that I will hardly ever be at odds with God, Who alone, as the treasure of the good, can give me all the blessings, and without Whom I can gain nothing except mistakes, sorrow, fear, grumbling and disasters. Oh, no matter what you say, being in holy places and worshiping God there in spirit and in truth is joyful, useful, and saving.”428 While he was in Jerusalem, Arch, Porfiry received, through our consul Dorogobuzhinov, an allowance of 130 semi-imperials from the Holy Synod, permission to introduce manuscripts, books and icons belonging to him into Russia without censorship from Prince Urusov, and permission to postpone the stay for himself and his companion Blagoveshchensk in the East from him 429. Unspoiled by the attention of higher authorities, Arch. Porfiry attributed these successes, however, not to himself and his personal merits, but to the intercessions for him of his “friend” Princess Wittgenstein. “You are not an obstacle to me in anything,” Archbishop wrote to her from Odessa on August 23. Porfiry, – and I’ve seen quite a bit of good from you. I don’t know how you managed to change the attitude of some of the capital’s dignitaries towards me from unfavorable to favorable, but you managed 430. Since my complaints were heard in your mansion, my affairs have become better. Sending my money went smoothly. An allowance for my travel expenses was given. The Emperor allowed me to bring my library to Odessa without censorship, and it is already here. Now I am comforted, encouraged, strong. It remains to establish my whereabouts, arrange my union with our church, give scope for my activity, encourage me to speak to minds and hearts, provide me with opportunities, reasons, incentives to improve myself in the art of the arts, that is, in the management of souls, according to the rules of the kingdom of God, and help me convey to the light the pearls, crins, grapes, and ears of corn that I have collected in the East. I love science, I honor the arts, I ask for action, I want fame. Let them understand and appreciate me, it is not me, but God’s gifts and God’s powers in me. However, may God’s will be done in everyone, in me and in everything” 431. From Jerusalem arch. Porfiry returned on August 12 directly to Russia in Odessa. This return to the fatherland is not entirely clear to us: the assigned scientific and diplomatic tasks have not yet been completed to the full extent intended; in the money of the arch. Porfiry did not feel any particular urgent need at this time; His health was apparently in satisfactory condition. It remains to be assumed that he was attracted to Odessa by concern for his “belongings,” or, rather, for his precious brainchild - a library of manuscripts and books with ancient icons, sent to Russia and requiring more or less reliable shelter until the time when the permanent place of residence of its owner was clearly determined. Therefore, as soon as this library was installed in the premises of the Odessa ruler, on September 16, 1860, Arch. Porfiry sends a petition to the Chief Prosecutor Count Tolstoy with the expression “of the desire to complete his studies on Mount Athos within three months” 432. From a petition dated March 17, 1861 to the same Count Tolstoy, we learn that the plans of the architect. Porfiry's plans at this time were much broader than a three-month journey around Mount Athos: he also intended to visit Egypt. “Our Holy Governing Synod in 1858 instructed me,” says this last petition, “by the way, to resume relations with the Coptic clergy in Egypt. The fulfillment of this assignment was delayed for a long time by my other obligatory labors in the East. But I did not lose sight of him and, taking advantage of the new leave abroad given to me at the end of last year (i.e. 1860), I decided to go to Egypt for a meeting with the Coptic ruler and for friendly negotiations with him about the renewal of the union of the Egyptian-Ethiopian church governed by him with the Orthodox Catholic Church, and about the place and title that he could have, becoming one of the Orthodox hierarchs. This determination of mine was strengthened by the need to revise the manuscripts of the Patriarchal and Sinai-Juwanite library in Cairo and the business codes of the Alexandrian patriarchs, and to improve my health, upset on the harsh Mount Athos, where I was exhausted by a fever that renewed three times last year” 433. On October 26, permission was received for a three-month vacation abroad, and on November 18, Arch. Porfiry wrote about his journey in his diary like this: “tomorrow I’m going by boat to Constantinople, and from there I’ll go first to Egypt, then to Athos” 434. After stops in Constantinople (November 21–30), Smyrna (December 2–6), Beirut (December 10–12) and a one-day stay in Jaffa, from where he wrote a letter to Jerusalem to Bishop Kirill of Melitopol with a request to send the translator of our mission, Fadlallah Saruf, to Cairo for ten days, to conduct negotiations through him with the Coptic Patriarch 435, Arch. Porfiry arrived in Alexandria on December 14, and on the 24th of the same month he was already in Cairo and stopped at the local Orthodox Patriarchate for a temporary stay. Coptic ruler Cyril, well acquainted with the arch. Porfiry on his journey in 1850 to the monasteries of St. Anthony the Great and Paul of Thebes, having heard about his arrival in Cairo, paid him a visit on the next day of the Nativity of Christ and thereby forced him to pay him a visit on the third day of the holiday, in a very solemn atmosphere. On both of these dates the arch. There was no substantive conversation between Porfiry and the Coptic patriarch, since Arch. Porfiry was awaiting the arrival of the translator he desired from Jerusalem, which, however, was denied to him, despite even the repetition of this request from Cairo. But the plans of the arch. Porfiry's proposal to unite the Coptic Church with the Orthodox Church was not destined to come true. During a review of the Coptic school, at the invitation of the Coptic Patriarch Kirill, on December 29, both the host and the guest, Arch. Porfiry. The latter, however, escaped with a slight illness and on January 8, 1861 even moved to Juvaniya to examine the Sinai manuscripts stored here, and the Coptic Patriarch Kirill fell seriously ill and died on January 18. “I was destined to resume our relations with the Copts,” notes arch. Porfiry, it is not destined to renew their union with our church 436. However, I think and hope that this important work will be continued later by St. Synod through other enlightened and zealous spiritual leaders" 437. Having completed his studies on manuscripts in Juvania and the Patriarchate (from February 17 to 21), Arch. Porfiry went to Alexandria to inspect the local Christian catacombs, where he lived until March 8, and then on the Austrian steamer “Italy” he went for a short time to Constantinople, from there to get to Athos by Easter, where he arrived on April 22, Holy Saturday 438. The purpose of his visit here this time was mainly to inspect the monasteries and cells he had never seen before. “In many of them,” says Arch. Porfiry, there are small churches, even ancient ones. You will not lose money if you visit these cells. In another they will sell you an old manuscript, even a very good one and useful for expanding accurate knowledge; in another you will see ancient icons and photographs from wall paintings; in the third you will see how Athonite icon painters paint images” 439. Travel to St. Woe from Russik arch. Porfiry began on April 29 from Kareia: here he examined the cell of the icon painter Hieromonk Macarius, the cell of the monk Dionysius Firnoagrafiot near the Protata Cathedral, which at that time belonged to the monk Meletius, the cell of the icon painters Joasatheev, who understood to him the meaning of many technical names of the Greek Erminia, and carefully reviewed the murals again in the Protat Cathedral, attributed to the artist Panselin. From Karei arch. Porfiry made trips to Caracalla, to the Lavra of St. Athanasius of Athos and to Iver and returned back to Karea. Having then visited the Russian monastery of St. Andrew the First-Called and having completed his “intense” scientific research, book and art, on July 26 he returned back to Russik to rest and in order to say goodbye forever to his dear Athos 440. The wandering life in a foreign land eventually became boring for the arch. Porfiria and he were drawn to their homeland, to rest and peace. The unknown of the future and the uncertainty of the situation regarding his place of service worried him, but now, after a number of trials, he looked into the future calmly and was ready for anything. Under the influence of such a state of mind, a wonderful letter to Princess Wittgenstein poured out from his pen. “I believe that I won’t see you for a long time,” wrote Arch. Porfiry from Russik June 28. – They want to stop me in Odessa until the end of my academic studies. So be it! I feel good, and everywhere you are inherent in my soul. I eagerly await the order for my settlement in Odessa. I'm tired of traveling around the world and living among the stokers of hell. I'm tired of bothering my superiors about showing me a place to stay, and it is inexpressibly difficult to remind him that there is a supreme court over him too - the court of the high priests of the Eastern Church. Now I'm not myself. No matter how they treat me, I am ready for anything, ready to walk in chains, go out in seclusion, shine for the world, enjoy freedom of spirit. True, in this readiness or determination of mine there is something red-hot and hard, but this admixture will cool and soften over time under the influence of grace and rational will, just as the lava of a fire-breathing mountain cools and softens under the influence of warm light and rain, so that it subsequently produces ants, flowers, olives, grapes, cypresses" 441. Homogeneous in content and on the same day, a “letter” was sent to the chief prosecutor of the Holy Synod, Count A.P. Tolstoy 442. July 15, 1861 arch. Porfiry, saying: “Farewell, blessed Athos. I will not see you again, but I will take all your best with me” 443, through Thessaloniki, Volo, Smyrna and Constantinople he headed to Odessa, where he arrived on August 13, staying in a hotel, but not in the bishop’s house, “where there is nothing to sleep on, where the servants will not give a drop of water and where there are many other inconveniences” 444. To St. Petersburg, arch. Porfiry arrived on October 22 and found shelter on the 28th “in the spacious and warm apartment of the Lavra housekeeper” 445. Here, from a letter from the Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod, who did not find him in Constantinople, he learned, not without pleasure, that “The Holy Synod fully appreciates his merits and proposes to organize his service in Russia in the most worthy manner after his long and fruitful learned travels” 446. However, in fact, the arch. Porfiry soon became convinced that “in St. Petersburg they lay softly, but sleep hard” 447, and that for three whole years he still had to languidly wait for a change in his fate for the better, and, in the end, he owed it not to the Chief Prosecutor of St. Synod to Tolstoy, “who promised a lot and did nothing” for him 448, and not even to his successor A.P. Akhmatov, but to his personal merits - linguistics and fraternity with the Kyiv Metropolitan Arseny. Architectural services Porfiry in St. Petersburg for more than three years, from the end of 1861 to the beginning of 1865, was used by the Holy Synod, and persons of the reigning house, and high-ranking officials when scientific information or competent special judgments on issues of archeology, paleography, etc. were required. Thus, in 1862, he presented his conclusion on the “Guide to Church Painting” 449, having checked it with the original of Hieromonk Dionysius Fournoagrafiot and made many corrections in it, in view of the deviations made by Didron, who published this manual. This order was carried out at the request of Grand Duchess Maria Nikolaevna, chairman of the Academy of Arts 450. In the same year, by order of the Empress Maria Alexandrovna, Arch. Porfiry had to give his opinion on the merits of the Four Gospels, written on parchment in 1272 and presented to Her Majesty by James, Patriarch of Alexandria 451. Another essay was written for the empress: “The Holy Scriptures for Christian Women” 452. During the "six weeks" a note was drawn up entitled; “The Christian East - the ecclesiastical and political state of Abyssinia from ancient times to the present day,” which the new chief prosecutor of the Holy Synod, A.P. Akhmatov, instructed him to write. In view of the rapprochement between this church and our Orthodox Church that began at that time through the mediation of Bishop Kirill of Melitopol, the head of our mission in Jerusalem 453. In connection with this order, there is another note of his entitled: “Russia’s participation in the fate of Abyssinia” 454. The same Chief Prosecutor was presented with a note with an opinion on the Sinai handwritten Bible, handed over to Tischendorf for printing in Leipzig 455. This Bible was then printed in the same year in the amount of 300 copies and distributed to various persons, as designated by His Majesty. Arch. Porfiry received a copy of it from the Empress “as a sign of attention to enlightened activities” 456. On his own initiative and for the sake of scientific curiosity, arch. Porfiry studied the Greek Profitology of the 10th century, taken for a period of one year from the Solunsky monastery of Valantion-Chaush and returned through the Asian department as belonging 457, and conducted a lively written debate with the architect. Antonin Kapustin, rector of the church at our embassy in Constantinople, a controversy that began in Odessa in 1861 on the issue of “the notorious painter Panselin” 458. In the following years (1863 and 1864), such complex official orders from the arch. Porfiry did not have one, and therefore chose his occupations according to his inclinations and sympathies. At this time, he was intrigued by the Paris manuscript of a certain Elpius Romey about the characteristic facial features of the saints, which he persistently sought to obtain through the archpriest of the Russian Parisian church Vasiliev 459. For Grand Duchess Elena Pavlovna, his spiritual daughter, he wrote a Confession in French, 460, and in connection with this, on her instructions, a book: “Confession of a Penitent Sinner,” published in Kyiv in 1866 461. About his scientific studies of this time, Arch. Porfiry writes: “I am hampered by the great wealth of materials for science obtained in the East, which at the time it thought, spoke, and wrote quite a lot. I barely have time to develop these materials systematically. When I get bored, for example, with the study of heresies, I take up history. When I get tired of it, I venture into the field of theology. I’ll stop theology and start comparing ancient sacred texts or studying the history of fine arts. And so and so my time flies, and it carries me away to that line beyond which there is no longer time, but there is eternity” 462. “My life,” he notes on the same occasion at the end of 1864, “is still not enviable. I sit in my cell like a recluse, I work like a silkworm. My Photius (i.e., conversations regarding the Ross invasion of Constantinople) is being published. Athos is being developed. Meteors are at rest. My other activities are as the kids grow up. Fate is not smiling on me. Peter wiped all my sides. However, my spirit is cheerful" 463. For the publication of scientific works of the arch. At this time, Porfiry was allocated 600 rubles from the funds of the Holy Synod. 464 In 1865, on February 5, arch. Porfiry was elected by the Holy Synod to the vacancy of vicar of the Kiev diocese with the title Bishop of Chigirin and approved by the sovereign, and on the 14th of the same year his consecration was carried out 465. Thus, the long-cherished dream of the arch., both in dreams and in reality, was fulfilled. Porphyry to be a bishop 466. Quite interesting for us is the explanation of the motives for which Metropolitan Arseny of Kiev chose Arch. Porphyria. “You are a pagan,” the Metropolitan said, smiling, to his new vicar. - So, you will write letters on my behalf, to whomever you have to write, in Greek and French. I bought myself a Greek and a Frenchman.” Apparently, Bishop Porfiry complacently accepted this frank confession of his new boss, getting off with a pun: “Exactly so. I am a Greek, but not a crafty person, I am a Frenchman, but not blown away by the wind” 467. And indeed, Bishop Porfiry provided Metropolitan Arseny with undoubted services in his correspondence with the famous Parisian priest Vladimir Guette, with the Eastern patriarchs, etc. 468 Be that as it may, one thing is certain that Bishop Porfiry was “pleased with his appointment” 469. “God rewarded me,” writes Bishop Porfiry to his fellow Academy member, Bishop Zephanius of Novomirgorod, who sent a fraternal and friendly greeting with an appointment to Kyiv, “for my labors and for my patience, I dare say, no small amount. Praise and thanks be to Him, the righteous and merciful. I am very pleased with my fate. The calm of heaven reigns in my soul. My life flows smoothly, like the quiet Dnieper flows. I have a case. I serve science as best I can" 470. The thirteen-year period of Bishop Porfiry's stay in Kyiv in the rank of Bishop of Chigirish should, in all fairness, be recognized as the most fruitful period of the “exhibition of the Christian East in parts” 471, since most of the publication dates back to this time in the light of his most important and multi-volume works on the study of the Christian East 472. At the same time, the academic journal “Proceedings of the Kyiv Theological Academy” opened its pages very hospitably for him. Having surrendered to his cherished dream - to see his scientific works in print, Bishop Porfiry sincerely wished to stay longer in this “quiet haven” (as he called Kyiv) in order to comfortably “unload”, and he was not without anxiety and fear about rumors about his moving somewhere in the province to an independent department. “My life in Kyiv flows like the Dnieper, quietly, without storms, without worries. Only one thing worries me,” he wrote to his friend Princess Wittgenstein on August 7, 1868, “this is an undesirable movement anywhere. Really, I don’t want to move after twenty years of wandering around the world, during which I, against my will, boarded a ship almost more than 50 times 473. Rumor, this old and not always true newspaper, appoints me first to Minsk, then to Perm. But such appointments are unpleasant for me, especially since I have children. They are printed in Kyiv. And in some wilderness, who will see them? My ship entered a quiet harbor. Let him stand here longer and unload. This desire of mine is understandable to you, my friend, when you, from your own experience, know how sweet homelessness is after a long and difficult journey, etc.” 474. In the interests of science, in order to find a “peaceful shelter” and a “warm place” for himself, he made a deliberate trip to his homeland in Kostroma in 1872, so that, having asked for leave to rest, then “in solitude, serve another service to our holy church” 475. “My zealous service to the Church, the Tsar and the Fatherland,” says Bishop. Porfiry in the early seventies - never burdened me. But in the depths of my soul I was always aware of the desire for peace from all official affairs to a contemplative life and to academic studies. This desire was strengthened in me by my duty to introduce many, many to the Christian East, which I studied and studied for many years, on instructions from my highest authorities. Deciding to fulfill this duty, I thought where it would be better for me to settle down for peace and, remembering my homeland, I thought of visiting there and finding a warm place for myself.”476 However, such a “place of peace in his dear homeland” was not found, and Bishop Porfiry returned to Kyiv “with nothing,” or rather, “with the idea of looking for another place for peace,” 477, which he outlined in 1874 in the Golden-Domed-Mikhailovsky Monastery, which he managed, in a special wooden house, built at his own expense in the abbot’s garden, but with the same fact that, after death him, this house becomes the property of the monastery 478. For some reason, the Holy Synod did not respect the bishop’s requests. Porfiry and directed him to carry out the proposed construction in Feofaniya, the country dacha of the vicar bishop, which, due to its distance from Kyiv (14 versts), he did not find at that time a convenient place of residence 479. This “offensive” and incomprehensible refusal of the Holy Synod to Bishop. Porfiry took it as an indication that “it is not the will of God” that he should calm down from official affairs, when he retained all the strength needed for vigorous and broad activity” 480. The memory of the people of Kiev still preserves memories of the Right Reverend Porfiry as an armchair worker, a bookish man, a saint, although not without some original originalities in his views and judgments on many ecclesiastical and life-practical issues 481 , but as a reverent performer of church services 482 , an expert and lover of church singing, concern for the best staging of whom, in the monastery entrusted to his care, sometimes even the boundaries of moderation were crossed 483, as the builder and decorator of the church of the Golden Dome Monastery and monastic services 484. To this day, the beautiful vicar’s chambers in the St. Michael’s Monastery remain a monument to his “innate love for everything beautiful and the desire to build differently from the way others are built,” causing surprise among many and costing their creator only 3,000 rubles, which he took for this from the sums of the vicariate 485. However, the toiler Bishop Porfiry failed to find a “peaceful shelter” for himself in his beloved Kyiv, and willy-nilly he had to “move” again, and this time to the heart of Russia, to white-stone Moscow, where he would lay down his weary, painful bones. On August 28, 1876, the “benefactor” Metropolitan Arseny, with whom Bishop Porfiry “lived peacefully and prosperously for a little over eleven years,” died. In his place was appointed the elderly Tver Archbishop Philotheus, an ascetic ascetic and a man withdrawn into himself. From the first meeting, cold, strained relations were established between the new metropolitan and Bishop Porfiry 487, which served as the reason for distrust of each other 488. A significant share of the blame for this should, however, be attributed to Ave. Porfiry himself, whose oddities of character and obstinate antics 489 attracted the attention not only of those who stood close to him in Kyiv (for example, Governor-General Prince Dundukov-Korsakov, some members of the spiritual consistory, etc.), but also in St. Petersburg. According to the firmly established principle with him: “I’m going, I’m not whistling, but when they come, I won’t let you go,” 490 Bishop Porfiry, as he himself admits, sometimes had “conflicts” with the synodal chief prosecutor and the St. Petersburg metropolitan 491, and others. Therefore, he could constantly expect his transfer from Kyiv to somewhere else. On December 31, 1877, the Sovereign approved the report of the Holy Synod on the existence of Bishop Porfiry as a member of the Moscow Holy Synod office in excess of the staff, with his dismissal from the Chigirin suffragan see and his stay in the Moscow stauropegial Novospassky Monastery, which on December 14 of the same year was entrusted, according to the definition of the Holy Synod, to his management 492. Bishop Porfiry did not like this move to our mother-throne Moscow. “For a long time I was consumed by sadness,” he writes about this move, “that fate transferred me from Kyiv to Moscow, where I found myself like a large bird in a small cage. If I hadn’t been able to sing about the Christian East in it, I would have been petrified by mournful boredom. But in the minutes, hours, days of this continuous and tireless singing, I forgot all my sorrow and, having become accustomed to forgetting this, stopped complaining about my fate and humbled myself under the strong right hand of God, sometimes, however, asking and begging him to grant me complete peace and complete independence from people in a solitary cell, in which there would be no one except Him, Otradnoe, and except me, busy with what I love to do” 493. “I don’t belong in Moscow,” Bishop Porfiry admitted after six years of staying there. - Petty matters in the Synodal office keep me busy... The printing house is far from me, and they print books slowly and poorly. The draftsmen and photolithographers take money from me in advance, but they do whatever I need, carelessly. I don’t have any acquaintances” 494. All this taken together encouraged Bishop Porfiry to look for a place of residence that was more suitable and convenient in all respects. In 1882, he asked to take the Kherson department in Odessa or Zhitomir; in 1883 - again to Kyiv to the place of the Chigirin bishop, to the Alexander Nevsky Lavra and to the Kiev-Mikhailovsky Monastery or to the Feofanievsky monastery for retirement, but not one of these desires of Bishop Porfiry was not only satisfied, but to many requests addressed to the metropolitans, he was not even deigned to receive an answer 495. Willy-nilly, he had to live out his short life in Moscow, which he did not love. If the time of stay in Kyiv ep. Porfiry can be considered the heyday of his scientific and literary activity and the “exhibition” of the Christian East par excellence, then his Moscow period of more than six years of life can be called the liquidation of this activity, summing up the results of his long, very fruitful and full of a wide variety of adventures life. At this time, as can be seen from the above excerpts from his “Book of Genesis,” in his Moscow cell “continuously and tirelessly” he sang his favorite song “about the Christian East” and, feeling that he would not be able to finish singing it as he would like, he, in the 77th year of his life, on September 8, 1881, cried out to the eternal God: “God, give me another twenty years. I have a lot of scientific work” 496. “God, more creative than the ages and my creator! - he cried out three months before his death. “I beg You, prolong my life, so that I can finish everything that I have planned” 497. In Moscow, he cared a lot, as he confessed to us personally, when we met him 498 , to complete during his lifetime his rich memoirs 499 , which have now been published, with the participation of the Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society and with the assistance of the Imperial Academy of Sciences, in eight books entitled: “The Book of My Genesis.” At this time, Ave. Porfiry was seriously and constantly occupied with the thought of the fate of his precious handwritten and multi-volume book library (7,000 books). In 1879, he offered his manuscript library to the Minister of Public Education, Count D. A. Tolstoy, and in 1881 to another minister, Saburov, for Tomsk University for 30,000 rubles. 500 But both ministers were indifferent to this proposal. In the end, the bishop's handwritten library. Porphyria was acquired by the St. Petersburg Imperial Public Library in 1883 for 15,000 rubles. silver 501. “For a collection that is now hardly possible to compile, says the report of this library, 15,000 rubles were paid. The acquisition of such a wonderful collection and for such a relatively modest sum can be attributed to the sole desire of Ave. Porfiry to leave his collection in Russia, since he responded to the repeated offers from foreign libraries and amateurs with a constant refusal” 502. It was much more difficult to arrange for him his extensive printed library. After proposals to the Chief Prosecutor of St. Synod of K. P. Pobedonostsev to purchase for 20,000 rubles. for the Annunciation or Orenburg Seminary, to Mogilev Bishop Vitaly, the famous rich man Polyakov (in 1883) for a student dormitory at St. Petersburg University, to the mayor of Odessa to the Greek Marazl for 28,000 rubles. for the city library, to the Bulgarian abbot in Odessa for Bulgaria for the same price, to Minister I.D. Delyanov for Tomsk University for 21,000 rubles, Π . P. Demidov (in 1884) for 20,000 rubles. for St. Petersburg University, to Metropolitan Isidore of St. Petersburg for the same amount for the Yakut Theological Seminary 503, bishop's library. Porfiria remained unsold until his death. “I’m not looking for wealth,” wrote the bishop. Porfiry in 1884 to the rich man Π. L. Demidov, offering to purchase his “very multi-volume library, systematically compiled from the best works of the human mind that are not now found” 504, for St. Petersburg University, I wish to serve science, I will think about your celebrity in posterity” 505. In the underlined words of Bishop. Porfiry, undoubtedly, hinted at the benefits of this library for science in general and, partly, that he wanted to “use the proceeds from the sale to publish all his works with expensive paintings” 506. “From the very beginning of the current (i.e. 1885) year,” Bishop notes about himself. Porfiry in his diary, - I began to unscrew myself... I am undergoing treatment, but the drugs do not help. However, this illness does not prevent me from pursuing my studies. I continue her sop amore" 507. “When, with God’s help, I finish all my planned and begun works,” he writes on March 17, i.e., a month before his death, “then I will say with special pleasure: Exegi monumentum aere perennius (Horat. carm. 1, III, Od. XXX), i.e. I have erected a monument to myself that is more eternal than copper” 508. But his wish was not destined to be fulfilled, and on April 19, 1885, Bishop Porfiry died after a serious (stone) illness, and, one might say, with a pen in his hand. After his death 509, he left his will clearly and definitely expressed in his spiritual testament 510, which once again testified to the whole world how ardently and selflessly he loved science. The first four clauses of this curious will read as follows: 1. “I bequeath my library of seven thousand books to the Holy Governing Synod at its disposal 511 if it is not purchased by the Yakut Eminence for his seminary.” 2. “I transfer the history of Athos, printed, and travels on the Mountain to the Synodal Shop for sale in favor of the printing synodal capital, from which I at one time received the contents of 512.” 3. “The capital of twenty thousand rubles, kept in the office of the State Bank in Moscow and in addition four thousand rubles, which the Imperial Public Library owes me for the purchase of my manuscripts, I bequeath to the Imperial Academy of Sciences, with the most humble request for interest on this capital (24 thousand) to gradually publish my works, namely: the end of the history of Athos in two parts, legal acts of Athos monasteries, Greek, Slavic and Latin inscriptions on buildings and things there, types of Athos monasteries, their architecture and painting there, a trip to Italy with paintings, a trip to Thessaly with paintings, sacred painting in the East and West with paintings, of which several dozen have already been lithographed in the amount of 300 copies, the Edenic peoples, historical relations of churches: Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria and Constantinople with the Russian Church and other church trifles, finally, my biography, from 1841 to 1885, with payment to the editor for his work from interest on my capital.” 4. “Icons in vestments and enamel, three panagias and two crosses were bequeathed to the Novospassky Monastery, and I bequeathed a collection of ancient oriental icons to the Archaeological Society at the Kyiv Theological Academy, as well as various Jerusalem items I bequeathed to the same Society. In addition, I also bequeath to all four Theological Academies samples of book painting for each Academy separately” 513. The resting place of the mortal remains of Bishop. Porfiry serves in the Catherine Church of the Moscow Novospassky Monastery, where, by the will of the deceased, the following inscription was made on the marble slab of the monument: “Here lay in eternal rest the Right Reverend Bishop Porfiry Uspensky, the author of many works on the Christian East. Pray for him" 514. Ave. Porfiry Uspensky was, undoubtedly, no stranger to a very high opinion “of the gifts given to him by God” and often complained that he “had no room” for them, and that “his wings were tied up by evil fate” 515. “Everyone knows my advantages,” he writes about himself, “over other clergy, such as: multifaceted scholarship, practical knowledge of the languages ​​of Modern Greek, French and German, ability for diplomatic affairs, ability to gain the trust of Eastern hierarchs, and most of all, enlightened zeal and love for such a holy cause as maintaining Orthodoxy in the East” 516. And justice requires recognizing that the following high-priced qualities are truly “integral and, in all fairness, belong to him: “from a young age” the desire “for scientific pursuits” 517, which developed from him “a disinterested worker of science and an enthusiastic lover of its light” 518 and even a “martyr” of it 519, a happy ability for linguistics, which opened up for him the opportunity to draw a wide variety of information from “the best works of the human mind” in all European languages, amazing for outside observers diligence and rare perseverance in studies, with a “non-heroic body” and frequent physical ailments and illnesses 520. The basis of this amazing and very fruitful scientific zeal of his lies, first of all, innate curiosity. “On a journey,” says the bishop. Porfiry, there is nothing more pleasant than visiting a place whose history goes back almost to the first days of the world, renewed after the Flood. There, memories of past times, enjoyment of present life, anticipation of future life merge into one whole and give the soul the fullness of existence, truly eternal, if eternity is a combination of the past, present and future” 521. The consciousness that he works where “where no one has been or seen anything,” and that he, therefore, is the first in the face of ancient monuments with scientific requests for them, on the one hand, and on the other, that he, like a hardworking bee, collects the knowledge he has acquired in his native hive in his dear fatherland - Russia 522, then moves all his forces of the soul, directs them to the knowledge of “divine and human objects” 523, makes him capable of steadfastly enduring all failures and hardships and steadily moving towards the once intended goal, even if this requires denying himself the very first essential needs. “Whoever read the voluminous works of the late archpastor,” said Bishop in his farewell speech over the coffin. Porfiry, the Right Reverend John, abbot of the Simonov Monastery, former Aleutian, who has no reason to suspect of any special affection for the deceased, since during his lifetime there were clashes between both hierarchs 524 - he can himself notice how through all his writings runs like a thick golden thread his complete, unremitting love for his homeland, as a citizen of Russia, and his love for Eastern Orthodoxy, as son of the Eastern Orthodox Church. Wherever he is, whatever he is doing, his life, his thought, his soul lives in Russia and for Russia and for the Russian Church, like a bee from flowers, he collects the nutritious and sweet juice of theological learning” 525. “Poverty is not a vice, but it is not perfection either,” Bishop once wrote. Porfiry. “It is very disliked by science, because it deprives it of acquiring the rarities of nature, created by God for the benefit and adornment of man” 526. Realizing this well, St. Porfiry, also out of love for science and for his fatherland, during repeated travels around the East, where it was convenient and possible, with blessings, and where difficulties were encountered, even without blessings, he collected precious manuscripts 527 and ancient icons 528 in his travel suitcases, in order to later make them the property of the scientific treasuries of his dearly beloved fatherland. But quite often, for the same reasons, he, denying himself what he needed, used his own meager funds to try to make expensive purchases of certain ancient and scientifically valuable objects, manuscripts and books, from which he later formed a rich library, a very valuable collection of manuscripts in various Eastern languages ​​and a one-of-a-kind collection of rare Eastern icons. For the same reasons, all this scientific wealth, either free of charge or for very “modest” monetary rewards, moreover, assigned by the owner for the most part for the publication of his scientific works about the Orthodox East, came to Russian scientists and scientific auxiliary institutions. He was not tempted by the tempting opportunity to sell his rich collections abroad for a higher price... As a scientist, St. Porfiry Uspensky was not a narrow specialist, but tried to try his naturally remarkable powers, one might say, not only in all types of theological knowledge, but also in many other branches of human knowledge, having almost nothing to do with theology or quite distant. Having a special love for historical research from an early age and being primarily engaged in the history of the Christian Church in the Orthodox East, Bishop Porfiry wrote theological treatises at the same time, diligently, persistently studied and compared the texts of Holy Scripture, intending even over time to publish its correct text, was interested not only in monuments of Christian art 529, but even dreamed of “raising Christian painting to the level of science” 530. The study of the religion and rituals of the Copts 531, the rituals of the Greek and Syrian churches 532 led him to a happy idea, which, however, remained unfulfilled in practice, to compile a special collection: “Divine services of the Church of Constantinople” 533. Reading manuscripts of liturgical music 534, stichirarion, menaion, triodeum, etc. 535, enriched him with information about the history of Christian hymnography and provided material for his interesting article “stichirary pyits” 536. Monuments of preaching literature 537 and church jurisprudence 538 interested the inquisitive orientalist to the same extent. Sometimes a lot of attention was paid to the study of manuscripts on medicine 539, on classical literature 540; Egyptian writings and hieroglyphs 541 etc., etc. were not ignored either. Such an amazingly versatile scientific activity is explained, first of all, by his ability to “multiply himself so that Porfiry alone sometimes triples, and sometimes works like a gear” 542. This skill was expressed in practice by the fact that sometimes, for example, in Jerusalem, while traveling around Mount Athos, he involved all his employees and companions in scientific studies. The work in a quantitative sense, of course, was detracted from this, and everything done by this worker amazes and amazes now everyone who begins to study his multi-volume editions, but the qualitative significance of these works of his undoubtedly leaves much to be desired, especially in our time. The lack of a serious scientific school in them, thanks to the still rather weak training at the Academy, the desire to reach everything “with one’s own mind” and based solely on one’s own personal research, also affected the scientific merits of his discoveries and research. Much that constitutes an elementary truth for a specialist, for others. Porfiry at one time seemed like news and even a revelation, and in his writings, in many pages, he sometimes writes useless and boring treatises on subjects that are generally known and of little interest. Scientifically valuable monuments are sometimes entrusted for copying to copyists and companions with little experience in paleography and, due to lack of time, often not even checked with the original by the orientalist Bishop himself. Porfiry 543. All this and much more now explains for us the reason why this naturally talented and amazingly persistent and painstaking orientalist, who did a lot for the history of the Christian East, not only did not come close to his grandiose desire to “rattle throughout the whole world” 544 and achieve “European” glory 545, but, in the end, was only forced to console and delight himself with a modest statement: “my name is known in scholarship world" 546, among French, German 547, Greek 548 and Russian scientists 549. In particular, in relation to church archeology, according to the review of academician N. P. Kondakov, bishop. Porfiry “did not declare himself a sworn archaeologist in the East,” but, nevertheless, in his works he “surpassed” Western scientists of his time “in their critical attitude to the subject and outlived them in their meaning among subsequent generations” 550. Poverty, a chronic, one might say, lack of funds also played an important role in the wide popularity of the works of the learned orientalist and his very name among certified scientists, both in Russia and abroad. If he had had these means in his time, and, undoubtedly, most of the works of the prolific pen of St. Porfiry would have seen the light not only in our days, but during the lifetime of our orientalist. The significance of these same scientific publications and works of his thirty to forty years ago, without any doubt, was immeasurably higher than 551 and his venerable name would undoubtedly create such a respectable fame, which to acquire in our time, after the publication of very many similar works in different languages, and, moreover, fulfilled in accordance with all scientific modern requirements, is quite a difficult matter. And in science the saying also has its force: Mutantur tempora, mutantur et mores 552... But, if regarding the scientific significance of the numerous works of St. Porfiry on the history of the Christian East, there may still be some disagreements in judgments and their assessment, then his works for the benefit of maintaining Orthodoxy in the East, for which he was born and which he dearly loved, are beyond any doubt and deserve the deepest gratitude from his compatriots and those for whose benefit they were, first of all, directed. Favorite thing pr. Porfiry Uspensky - “the resurrection of the Orthodox Arab people”, inherited from our mission to the Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society, continues with the persistence of the latter and is now bearing good fruit, covering Syria and Palestine with numerous male and female nurseries of enlightenment, supplying the clergy and schools with enlightened figures from the natives, brought up in the spirit of this idea, and helping everyone by available means to raise this people from the humiliation and persecution 553 in which this people had previously found themselves, thanks to the privileged position of Greek nationality in the East. “The present order of our affairs” 554 in Jerusalem, whether we talk about the establishment of our consulates and mission in Jerusalem, or about the improvement of the life of our pilgrims and the leadership during the performance of their feat 555 - all this is largely due to the energy and perseverance of St. Porfiry, which our Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not refuse him in his time. The very idea of ​​​​forming a “Palestine Society” first ripened almost even in the head of St. Porfiry. “Let’s form a society to help our eastern brothers,” he said in 1857 in front of his maid of honor A.F. Tyutcheva, in full confidence that his idea would be brought to the attention of Empress Maria Alexandrovna, so that all of us, rich and not rich, would all annually contribute at least two or three kopecks and no more than a ruble to his treasury for everything: we will have a lot of money for them... Spiritual mission, receiving money from our Eastern society, he will build churches, schools, almshouses, hospitals wherever needed, and will help the poor and especially those who suffer innocently” 556. Our Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society 557 is the Eastern Society, designed by Ave. Porfiry, and clearly fulfills the tasks specified by the first head of the Russian spiritual mission in Jerusalem, and therefore gratitude to the memory of the venerable initiator and organizer, both on the part of the Society and the Russian people who benefit from the fruits of his thoughts and labors, is quite natural and undeniable. Speech delivered in abbreviation at the annual meeting of the Kiev department of the Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society on April 10, 1905. “On this day,” writes Arch. Porfiry September 8, 1854 In his diary, the fifty-first year of my life has arrived. I prayed in the church of the Lazienki Palace and asked God to extend my life, bless my soul and bless me for further work.” (The Book of My Genesis, part VI, pp. 344–345. St. Petersburg, 1900). “Tomorrow,” he notes under September 7, 1881, I will turn 77 years old. That’s how many the Eternal gave me!” (Ibid., vol. VIII, p. 538. St. Petersburg, 1902). The Book of My Genesis, V, 362. St. Petersburg. 1899. Ep. Porfiry, second journey. according to St. Mount Athos, p. 1. M. 1880. Book of my Genesis, VIII, 125. This contradiction belongs to St. Porfiry. Book of my Genesis, V, 385; n. Second put. According to St. Athos. Grief, page 1. The Book of My Genesis, V, 385–386. Ibid., III, 56. St. Petersburg. 1896. Ibid., IV, 189–190. St. Petersburg 1896. Sn. I, 559. St. Petersburg. 1894. Ibid., III, 109, 128; VIII, 398. Book of My Genesis, III, 47. To characterize the worldview of the mother of St. Porphyry, the “prayer song to the sun”, adopted by the latter from his mother, can also serve. Here's the song: Your kids are sitting on a pebble, They already eat crackers and crumbs. And they are not abandoned (III, 256). Faith was instilled in St. Porfiry’s mother and “grafted into the soul during the hours of kneeling prayer, which happened to be performed on the same floorboard with her. With this faith you will not thirst forever.” (First trip to the Sinai monastery in 1845, p. 9. St. Petersburg 1856. Sn. First trip to Athos. Monastery and monasteries, part I, p. 169). Book of my Genesis, VIII,122; First trip to St. Mount Athos, part I, dep. I, p. 169. Kyiv. 1877. Book of my Genesis, VIII, 533. Travel around Egypt and to the monasteries of St. Anthony V. and etc. Pavel of Fivey in 1850, p. 58. St. Petersburg 1856. Book of my Genesis, III, 52. Ibid., I, 278, 317, 559; III, 47, 52, 56; IV, 219, 224, 232. Fortune telling according to the Gospel is undoubtedly a legacy of this upbringing. “In our family,” writes Bishop. Porfiry, my sisters, relatives and cousins, and I myself, when I was studying at the seminary, we all often made our own riddles, and looked for the answer in the Gospel, which always relied on our heads.” Travel. in Meteorsk and Osso-Olympic mon. in Thessaly, p. 177). The Book of My Genesis, II, 141–142. St. Petersburg, 1895. The Book of My Genesis, VII, 170. St. Petersburg. 1901. First journey. to Afonsk. mon. and monasteries in 1845, part I, department. II, p. 341.. Book of my Genesis, I, 465, 559; II, 488; VII, 170; VIII, 319–320; Let's go. the first to Athos. mon. and monasteries in 1845, part I, department. P, page 341. Book of my Genesis, VIII, 441.. Moscow. Church Led. 1885, No. 27, p. 435. The Book of My Genesis, NI, 128 Theologian. News. 1904, book XI, pp. 120–121 Book of my Genesis, VIII, 318, 319, 321 He accidentally recalled his “children's alphabet” in 1845 (Ibid., II, 488). 0 his ability for dizzying journeys across the rooftops and flights from there to the ground, ep. Porfiry remembers other cases as well. “As a child,” he writes, he used to play with his sisters in the nooks and crannies, without any fear he would climb the logs of the hut and the adjacent bathhouse onto their sloped roofs, quickly run up them to the chimneys and sit behind them so as not to get me wet, and when he got bored here, he would jump from any roof straight to the ground.” (Travel to the Meteora and Osso-Olympic monasteries in Theslia, p. 145) The Book of My Genesis, VIII, 319–320. First journey. to Afonsk. mon. and monasteries, part I, dept. I, p. 17. “The ever-memorable V.I. did not think. Gruzdev, what am I, writes Arch. Porfiry, in view of Athos, in the dense forest of Kission, I will repeat the verses of Virgil, which he ordered us to memorize firmly. And while I was memorizing them, I didn’t think that they would ever amuse me. And they made me laugh! 0, the sweetest classicism! Without you, even in the Kholomunt dense forest, I would be bored or scared.” (Ibid., 13). The Book of My Genesis, VIII, 94–95. Ibid., 325. “Teaching is my passion.” (Ibid., II Ι, 141). Ibid., 83, 361; Sn. page 442. Traveling around Egypt and Mon. St. Antonia is great. etc. Pavel of Thebes in 1850, p. 259. Book of my Genesis, IV, 346. Theologian. Vestn. 1904, book. IX, p. 117. Book of my Genesis, VI, 190. Let's go. the first in Afonsk. mon. and monasteries, part I, dept. I, page 93. Book of my Genesis, IV, 218. Ibid., VII, 349; Patriarchate of Alexandria. T. I, p. 402. St. Petersburg. 1898. – It is worthy of note that the late Metropolitan of Moscow Philaret regarding this edition of Bishop. Porfiria put it this way: “It would be desirable to know if he knows what he is asking for?” (Arch. Savva. Collected opinions and review. Philaret, Moscow Moscow on educational and church-state issues. vol. additional, p. 558. Sib. 1887. Theologian. News. 1904, kp. IX, p. 121. The Book of My Genesis, VIII, 500–501. First travel. to Athos. mon. and monasteries, t. I, dep. I, page 169. Second way. according to St. Afonsk grief, p. 12. M. 1880. Book of my Genesis, III, 132. Book of my Genesis, II, 487. Ibid., VIII, 523. Bishop Porfiry also patronized Greek youths seeking education in Russia. “Today is 4 days (September 1846), he writes in his diaries, a well-intentioned Greek young man, Dimitri Gumalikov, arrived from Constantinople from Constantinople, and I introduced him to the local seminary and entrusted him to the attention and guidance of mentors. Glory to the Lord for this good deed!” (Ibid., III, 27, 48, 50, 107, 142; IV, 211; VIII, 283, 524: First trip to Athos. monasteries and monasteries, part II, section II, p. 303. Book of my Genesis, III, 50. P. A. Syrku. An inventory of the papers of Bishop Porfiry Uspensky, donated by him to the emperor. Academy of Sciences by will. St. Petersburg 1891, p. 291. St. Porfiry himself calls his “previous professorial information, during a trip to Mount Athos in 1846,” “meager.” (First journey to Athos. mon. and monasteries. M. 1880, part II, department II, pp. 129, 213). The Book of My Genesis, V I, 308. Book of my Genesis, 1,126; III, 218; First journey. to Athos. mon. and monasteries, part II, dep. II, p. 297; Let's go. in meteor. and Osso-Olympian monasteries in Thessaly in 1859, p. 269. St. Petersburg. 1896. Book of my Genesis, III, 253; V, 246; Perv. travel to Athos. mon. and monasteries, part I, dept. I, page 16. Book of my Genesis, III, 117; V, 317, 318. The motive of the request is the restoration of shaky health, due to which the arch. Porfiry was forced to ask the Chief Prosecutor Count Protasov for “temporary dismissal from his professorial position at the Kherson Seminary with retention of salary.” (The Book of My Genesis, I, 133). Ibid., 158; III, 628. “The envoy (V.P. Titov), ​​writes Ave. Porfiry in 1843, talked to me about something in Greek, German, French, probably to test my linguistics.” (Ibid., 1, 158). Reported Imperial Right Palest. General 1895, February, p. 34. The architect himself. Porfiry calls this departure to Jerusalem obligatory. First journey. to Athos. mon. and monasteries, part II, dep. I, page 167. The Book of My Genesis, I, 105. The Book of My Genesis, I, 119. Ibid., 125–126, 127, 137. Proceedings Kievsk. spirit. Academician 1874, part II, p. 346. The Book of My Genesis, I, 124. Proceedings Kievsk. spirit. Academician 1874, II, 348. The Book of My Genesis, I, 675. . Proceedings Kievsk. spirit. Academician 1874, II, 346–347. The Book of My Genesis, I, 219–221. Ibid., 355; Sn. 379, 420. The Book of My Genesis, I, 447 Greek “representative” (editor’s note) The Book of My Genesis, I, 437. consumable (editor's note) The Book of My Genesis, I, 650–651. lat. way of life, diplomatic term “temporary agreement” (editor’s note) Ibid., 455, 586, 591, 606; II, 87–89, 311, 331. On the issue of Russian pilgrims, Arch. Porfiry wrote the following: 1) “not to let admirers and admirers leave Russia together, so that they do not get to know each other on the way; 2) note their behavior in the local monasteries and notify the Holy Synod with a special report; 3) assign responsibility for the spiritual to the bishops, and for the secular - to local civil and military commanders; 4) for example, send violent people to Russia in shackles and keep them in monasteries as prisoners, depending on their crimes; 5) take money at the border and send it to Tsar-Grad to pay for ships; 6) make it a rule not to bury Russians soon after death, but to wait three days; 7) establish a dean monk from among the Russians and a confessor; 8) bishops and local civil authorities should monitor the worshipers when they collect money for the Holy Sepulcher, for it happens that they do not give it, and 9) it would be better to stop such collections, and announce to those who want to donate that they secretly send rich and poor donations to the bishops, and these to Jerusalem.” (The Book of My Genesis, Part I, pp. 361–362). “Pay vigilant attention to Russian fans who come to Jerusalem two or three times. They bargain and live extremely insanely, especially from the clergy.” (Ibid., p. 360). 0tche arch. Porfiry issued “written rules” for pilgrims and pilgrims, the observance of which he demanded from bishops. (Ibid., p. 361). The Book of My Genesis, I, 359–360.. Ibid., I, 355, 454, 675. Ibid., 383, 457, 609–610, 612, 678679, etc. Two reports were presented: “one on the state of the Palestinian church and on measures to maintain it, and the other on the disputes between the Greeks, Latins and Armenians over St. places and ways of establishing peace here; By the way, it was indicated by me, adds the arch. Porfiry, the need to establish a Russian spiritual mission in Jerusalem.” (Book of my Genesis, II Ι, 57–58). Obviously, the opinion of Consul Basili Arch. Porfiry did not share and indicated the place for our mission only in Jerusalem or Constantinople. Book of my Genesis, II, 435 The first trip to the Sinai monastery in 1345, art. 261. St. Petersburg. 1856. Book of my Genesis, II, 435; Travel to the Nitrian monasteries in Libya in 1845, p. 5. Kyiv. 1869. The Book of My Genesis, II, 455-482; For a detailed description of this journey, see the book: “Journey to the Nitrian Monasteries in Libya in 1845.” This journey was suggested to him by Archimandrite Anatoly from Athens, who was in Jerusalem in 1844. “It would be very useful to send from Russia to Mount Athos,” he said, “some archimandrite as an apostle of the Russian church to bring the Russian clergy closer to the Greek, to straighten the order of teaching in the Athonite monastic school and, if necessary, to intercede for the monasteries before the Constantinople mission." “I,” added the archbishop. Porfiry, who fully agreed with his opinion, foresaw great benefits from this for Orthodoxy. I will certainly outline this measure in my report.” (The Book of My Genesis, I, 656). Perv. travel to Athos. mon. and monasteries, part II, dep. II, p. 5. Chrysovul - (Greek, literally - golden seal) A charter, a decree, in the Byzantine and South Slavic states, was distinguished by a special design. (editor's note). Book of my Genesis, III, 57. First journey. to Athos. mon. and monasteries, part II, dep. II, p. 3. Reviewed by me in detail and clearly, wrote Arch. Porfiry in this petition, only eight monasteries and two monasteries.” (First journey to Athos. monasteries and monasteries, part I, part II, p. 152). First journey. to Athos. mon. and monasteries, part I, dept. II, pp. 152–153.. Ibid., part VI, department. I, page 149.. Ibid., 232. Here we find a detailed presentation of the scientific results of the trip to St. Mount Athos arch. Porphyria. Ibid., part II, department. P, page 108. Ibid., 312, 300–301, 302. Book of my Genesis, III, 46 Book of my Genesis, III, 100. Book of my Genesis, III, 125. For the details of this note, see Genesis III, 142. The Holy Synod, through Count Protasov, in September asks Chancellor Nesselrode to ask the Emperor for half of the funds for the maintenance of our mission in Jerusalem from the state treasury. The Chancellor agreed to this petition, and the Emperor approved his report in this sense. (The Book of My Genesis, Part III, p. 156). The Book of My Genesis, Part III, pp. 149–150. The Book of My Genesis, Part VII, pp. 126–127. When discussing the instructions with director Senyavin, architect. Porfiry asked only the following questions, apparently not directly related to the points of this instruction: 1) “Can the mission now entrusted to petition for the appointment of two young Jerusalem Arabs to the St. Petersburg seminary to study icon painting? 2) can she eventually open the sale of our church books to Bulgarians and Arabs in Jerusalem? 3) will the Ministry of Foreign Affairs take care of strengthening the fate of the members of the mission entrusted to me after the end of their service in the Holy City?” (Book of My Genesis, III, 159). “And so I go to the East, for which my mother gave birth to me,” writes the archbishop about himself. Porfiry. (Second travel to the Holy Mount Athos. M. 1880, p. 3, previous; Book of My Genesis, part III, p. 453). “Who am I like? – asks the arch. Porfiry. An eagle soaring in the sky. - Eagle! Where are you going? - To the north. - Why are you looking south? “That’s where my nest is.” (The Book of My Genesis, III, 51). “The pilgrim travels along the fish road. Where is he going? – asks the question of the arch. Porfiry. - To the Holy Land. What is hidden in his heart? Joy and sadness. What is he happy about? About acquiring a pearl of great price. What kind of pearl is this? Knowledge of God. What is he sad about? That he was not given the means to benefit God’s churches and to unite them.” (Ibid., 190–191). Book of my Genesis, III, 622. Understanding well that “ignorance of the local language is, as it were, an enemy of curiosity” (Book of My Genesis, I, 149), the arch. Porfiry began to study Arabic (Ibid., III, 218, 220, 448) and encouraged his companions to study it (Ibid., p. 339). For this purpose, by the way, he kept an Arabic language teacher from Damascus, Fadlalu Saruf (Ibid., 507), who at the same time performed the duties of a dragoman or translator “in relations with the Arabs” (Ibid., V, 158) always with “commendable zeal,” for which he was awarded, after five years, a monetary reward of 500 rubles. (Ibid.). The French teacher was the Sardinian Albengo (Book of My Genesis, V, 168) The Book of My Genesis, III, 337–340. Book of my Genesis, III, 265. Second way. to Sinaisk. mon. in 1850, p. 240. St. Petersburg. 1856. The Book of My Genesis, V40;PI, 507; VII, 13. Book of my Genesis, VII, 148. Ibid., III, 159; IV, 382. The Book of My Genesis, III, 338–339. Ibid., 381–382; Sn. III, 156. The Book of My Genesis, VII, 130–133. Book of my Genesis, III, 231. Tamzhe, PI, 447–448, 579. Ibid., VII, 275; Vogoslov. Vestn. 1905, book. IV, p. 695. Second way. to the Sinai Monastery. in 1850, pp. 87, 91. Book of my Genesis, IV, 211. The Book of My Genesis, IV, 272. Book of my Genesis, IV, 141. The Book of My Genesis, V, 172. Book of my Genesis, III, 940. Ibid., 219–220, 232, IV, 100, 305 Ibid., V, 154–155, 161, 163, 165, 168, 208; VI, 309. The Book of My Genesis, V, 166,167–168. Ibid., III, 183, 226; V, 154. Ibid., III, 218, 511; IV, 304. Examples of friendly relations towards the Armenians in the “Book of My Genesis” are numerous, I, 87–89, 311, 331; III, 180, 260, 361, 581; IV, 333. The Book of My Genesis, V, 215. Prof. Prot. F. II Titov. Rev. Kirill Naumov, Bishop of Melitopol, former rector of the Russian spiritual mission in Jerusalem, pp. 309–317. Kyiv. 1902. Book of My Genesis, IV, 300; V, 124, 173. Ibid., IV, 274, 280; V, 205. On his first trip to Jerusalem, Arch. Porfiry, the secretary of the synod, monk Anfim, suggested to him “that Russia should buy a huge, almost empty, place behind the house of the Gethsemane archimandrite, known as the nosocomion of Queen Evdokia. But I,” notes the arch. Porfiry was silent and didn’t say anything to him. In his opinion, it is necessary to pay 500 thousand piastres for this place" (Book of My Genesis, Part I, p. 612). The amount is actually insignificant. The Book of My Genesis, VII, 136–137. Ibid., IV, 262–264, 294, 297, 299; V, 133, 135, 212. Book of my Genesis, VII, 137. Book of My Genesis, IV, 90. Ibid., III, 183, 357, 363. Ibid., IV, 213; Doctrine, worship, order and rules of church deanery of Egyptian Christians (Copts), p. 311. St. Petersburg. 1856. Doctrine, worship, order and rules of church deanery of Egyptian Christians, p. 1. Traveling around Egypt and to the monastery. St. Anthony the Great, etc. Paul of Thebes in 1850, p. 1. Second trip to Sinai mon. in 1850, pp. 185, 203, 237. Book of my Genesis, VII, 140. Book of my Genesis, III, 625. Ibid., IV, 137, 144, 145. Ibid., III, 121; IY, 370; V, 139, 212. The Book of My Genesis, V, 161. Ibid., V, 218, 248; VI, 135; VII, 1; Theologian. Vestn. 1904, IX, 107. The Book of My Genesis, VI, 245–246. The Book of My Genesis, VI, 315–317. Book of my Genesis, VII, 2. Proceedings Kievsk. spirit. Academician 1867, IV, 140. The Book of My Genesis, VII, 7–17. Book of my Genesis, V, 215; VII, 44, 87. . During my journey, writes Arch. Porfiry, there, in distant Petersburg, they imagined that in Rome he had become a Catholic” (Book of My Genesis, V, 198). Book of my Genesis, I, 390, 603; III, 204; VI, 249; Theologian. Vestn. 1904, book. IX, p. 118; book X, page 244. Book of My Genesis, VII, 46 – It is worthy of complete amazement that the same chief prosecutor Count A.P. Tolstoy, who condemned Arch. Porfiry for eating fast food, looked at a similar fact completely differently when he personally visited Jerusalem. “Together (with Count A.P. Tolstoy) we dined with the patriarch,” Bishop Kirill Naumov wrote on November 18, 1862 from Jerusalem to St. Petersburg to his relatives. It was nice to have the count witness the attention and consideration with which the local hierarchy treats me. And it’s even better that the count is Count Al himself. Petrovich, in response to my remark about meat food, eclipsed that even if the rule for monks not to eat meat was established everywhere, an exception should be made for Jerusalem, because there is nothing to eat here. This is how times pass and concepts and phrases change. (Prot. F.I. Titov. Ave. Kirill Naumov, Bishop of Melitopol, pp. 421–422, note 2). Theologian. Vestn. 1904, X, 244–245; Book of my Genesis, VII, 91. Book of my Genesis, VII, 120. Theologian. Vestn. 1904, IX, 121. (French “one whose only merit is appearance” - editor’s note) Book of my Genesis, VII, 90, 148; Theologian. Vestn. 1904, IX, 121–122. Book of my Genesis, VII, 21, approx. 1. Book of my Genesis, VII, 45. Book of my Genesis, VII, 243; Theologian. Vestn. 1904, X, 243–244. Book of my Genesis, VII, 74, 77; Theologian. Vestn. 1904, IX, 114. The Book of My Genesis, VII, 84, 90. Theologian. Vestn. 1904, IX, 126–127. Book of my Genesis, VII, 89; Theologian. Vestn. 1904, X, 241. Theologian. Vestn. 1904, IX, 122, The Book of My Genesis, VII, 90. The Book of My Genesis, VII, 92, 94. Theologian. Vestn. 1904, IX, 109. The Book of My Genesis, VII, 69. Theologian. Vestn. 1904, IX, 115, 116, approx. looked after (editor's note) Whether this was so at the time we are describing, we cannot say, but subsequently, after the publication of the first two “Books of My Genesis” by Arch. Porfirya, “Neologos”, the most influential of the Greek Constantinople newspapers (1894, No. 7465 of July 8), on the basis of old and very dubious information about the personality of Bishop Porfiry, not only recognized him as a lampoon of the “Jerusalem Greek world”, but even as a shield in Orthodoxy, in which reference was actually made to the Russian Holy Synod. (Comm. Imperial. Rights. Palest. General. 1895, February, pp. 71–72). lat., “with love” (editor’s note) Theologian Vestn. 1904, IX, 114. The Book of My Genesis, VII, 74–75. Theologian Vestn. 1904, IX, 122. Theologian Vestn. 1904, X, 241. Book of my Genesis, V ΙΙ, 17, 70. On her instructions, “instructions for Russian artists when visiting St. Mount Athos" (Book of My Genesis, V40; II, 158) and his work on the iconographic originals of Dionysius Fourno-Agrafiot (Ibid. 159–163, 170). “Inexorable fate has already brought me closer to the Great Ones,” writes Arch. Porfiry to Princess Witgeshchein February 20, 1858, Alexander, Maria, Elena, Konstantin and Maria are five bright stars” (Theological Vestn. 1904, X, 246). 882), 59, 21, 16, 18–20, 2B, 37, 73; VII, 99. Book of my Genesis, VII, 52 Ibid. 16, 18–20, 28, 37, 73; Vogoslov. News. 1904, IX, 120,127; X,242 Book of my Genesis, VII, 99; Theologian. Vestn. 1904, X, 245; IX, 127. The Book of My Genesis, VII, 69–70; Theologian. Vestn. 1904, IX, 109. The Book of My Genesis, VII, 96. Ibid., 94, 95, 107, 157. Book of my Genesis, VII, 125. Ibid., 157. “This day was God’s day for me, joyful.” (Arch. Porfiry. Second journey to the Holy Mount Athos. p. 3 M. 1880). Book of my Genesis, VII, 164. N. A. Blagoveshchensky was at that time under the arch. Porfiry, as a draftsman from life and ancient artistic objects, a reader when comparing manuscripts with printed books, and occasionally even a copyist of manuscripts, earned with his “behavior and obedience” the full approval of his “elder” (Book of My Genesis, VII, 175, 188). Mr. Blagoveshchensky himself left a legacy in literature with the book: “Among the pilgrims. Observations and notes during a trip to the East" (2nd ed. St. Petersburg, 1872), written not without literary merits, but tendentiously - with the aim of ridiculing the internal monastic life of the Holy Mountain residents. This book appealed to the taste of the secular reading public and went through two editions with success, but it brought the inhabitants of Athos, who cordially welcomed the author of the book and the architect, into their monasteries. Porfiry, who undoubtedly shared his observations and knowledge of monastic life on the Holy Mountain with his companion, had a lot of offensive grief, which at one time caused a protest even in the press. The book by N. Blagoveshchensky, which in many ways complements the information of the arch. Porfiry about his travels in the East at this time, undoubtedly, cast some shadow on the personality of the arch. Porfiry, who repaid with ingratitude for the warm welcome and numerous very obligatory services of the elders and simple monks... To our deep regret, in the memory of the inhabitants of the Holy Mountain, Arch. Porfiry and his companion Blagoveshchensky N.A. are identified and everything that is in the book of the latter is attributed to the arch. Porfiry, about whom one can still hear reviews on Mount Athos that are not entirely favorable and even insulting to the memory of this venerable worker of science... The Book of My Genesis, VII, 168–169. Second trip to St. Mount Athos. page 3 Ibid., 12–28; Book of my Genesis, VII, 173. Theologian. Vestn. 1904, X, 247; Book of My Genesis, VII, 184. Under August 5, arch. Porfiry writes in his diary about his state of mind: “I blossomed on Athos. Different knowledge, like rainbow rays of light, enlightens my receptive soul. The beauty of the local nature enchants and enriches my imagination. The strict and correct life of the Svyatogorsk ascetics edifies and corrects me, the damned. Their congregational prayers, like waves, lift my soul to heaven. My food and drink here are seasoned with the purest mountain air and the life-giving warmth of the light. It seems to me that I feed more on the rays of the sun and moon than on the plants of the earth. Athos is my paradise. Here I am a blessed man: I do not follow the advice of the wicked and I do not stand in the path of sinners” (Book of My Genesis, VI Ι. 176–177). Book of my Genesis, VII, 186. The Book of My Genesis, VII, 190–191. Ibid., 195; Theologian. Vestn. 1904, X, 250–252. The Book of My Genesis, VII, 201. Arch. Porfiry petitioned for the city of Blagoveshchensk for a reward in the amount of 120 half-imperials (Book of My Genesis, VII, 188, 201) and his petition was respected (Theological News. 1904, X, 259). The Book of My Genesis, VII, 198–201. Travel to the Meteora and Ossolimpian monasteries in Fesualia in 1859, pp. 3–45, St. Petersburg. 1896. Theologian. Vestn. 1904, X, 257–258; Journey into a meteor. and ossolimpiysk. mon., 2. Journey into a meteor. and ossolimpiysk. mon., 109, 114. Travel. in meteor. and ossoolympiysk. mon., 310. “We went to Olympus,” writes Blagoveshchensky, with a decisive desire to climb to its very top, but this desire was not destined to come true. We were assured that before August, climbing to the top is almost impossible - the climb is steep and tiresome beyond belief; many ravines and abysses are covered with snow, so that new snow often falls and covers old tracks.” The trip to Olympus was limited to a trip to the monastery of St. Dionysius, standing in one of the mountain gorges at an altitude of 6,000 feet. (Among the pilgrims. 2nd ed., pp. 361–362). Travel. in meteor. and ossoolympiysk. mon., 348. The Book of My Genesis, VII, 214–222; Second journey. according to St. Mount Athos, 29–270. The Book of My Genesis, VII, 220. Theologian. Vestn. 1904, V, 259–261. This refers to the secret intention of Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich to found an oriental academy in Sevastopol and appoint an arch. Porfiry as her superior in the rank of bishop. An intention that was not realized in practice. (The Book of My Genesis, VII, 102). Theologian. Vestn. 1904, X, 263. Book of my Genesis, VII, 222. Theologian. Vestn. 1905, IV, 694–695; The Book of My Genesis, VII, 274–275; Sn. 226–228. The Book of My Genesis, VII, 270–271, 272, 274. “You want to get involved with illustrious officials,” wrote Arch. Porfiry to Princess Wittgenstein from Jerusalem Apr 7 1860, obviously having little faith in the success of her intercession. They are polite to you, but they will hardly forgive me for the fact that my cries were heard in the grand ducal palaces. Your great kindness caused me a small harm. But I forgive you. Be calm, just don’t show my letters to the Pharisees or scribes in the future. Can I help you with my intercession before them, when I am destined to serve my neighbors through my suffering? Let neither you nor me be upset by these words of theirs: “bureauciatie est une grande puissance en Rnssie, et il n’est pas faoile de satisfaire tous les desirs de pauvre Archimandrite” (Theological Vestn. 1905, IV, 691). Theologian. Vestn. 1905, IV, 694; The book of my existence. VII, 278. The book of my existence. VII, 277. Patriarchate of Alexandria. Collection of materials, research and notes related to the history of the Alexandrian Patriarchate, part I, 385, St. Petersburg. 1898. The Book of My Genesis, VII 278. Ibid., 296; Patriarchate of Alexandria. 385–386, 411–412. Moscow Metropolitan Filaret looked at the planned task of uniting the Copts and at the same time the Armenians with the Orthodox Church differently, finding in the reasoning and actions of the arch. Porfiry has a lot of mistakes. Regarding the death of the Coptic Patriarch Philaret, Metropolitan. Moscow, noted: “Isn’t the Holy Synod spared from difficulties by the fact that the imaginary peacemaking of Archimandrite Porfiry was stopped, and this was not by the Most Reverend Cyril (of Melitopol, who did not give a translator to Fadlall Saruf), but by the providence of God, who cut short the life of the Coptic patriarch and destroyed the hope of Archimandrite Porfiry” (Arch. Savva. Collected opinions and reviews of Philaret, Metropolitan of Moscow and Col., on educational and church-state issues, vol., pp. 559 – 569). Subsequent events, however, show that the “peacekeeping” of Archimandrite Porfiry was not completely ineffective. The Coptic Church, as we know, was not averse to raising the issue of unification with the Orthodox Church again in the seventies of the last century, but our diplomacy at that time avoided resolving it. However, Metropolitan Philaret did not have the best opinion regarding the conversations of Arch. Porfiry with the Armenian Bishop Gregory on the issue of uniting the Armenian Church with the Orthodox (Ibid., 556–557). The Moscow saint expressed a curious view on this matter and on the personality of Arch. Porphyria. “It is very likely,” wrote Metropolitan Filaret on May 11, 1861 in the Holy Synod, “that the projects of the architect. Porfiria is no longer a secret for the East. And intensely making friends with the non-Orthodox, praying at the throne of the Armenian Church, listening to the Coptic Patriarch, along with the singing of verses from the liturgy, the singing of a French sonnet, before the Orthodox of the East, does he not represent the Russian Church in his own person in a vague form (Ibid., 561-562). Patriarchate of Alexandria. Collection mat., research. and notes relating to the history of Alexander. patr., I, 385–401; The Book of My Genesis, VII 300–347; He. Arch. Savva. Assembled. opinions and feedback. m, Fidareta, supplementary volume, 556–562. The Book of My Genesis, VII, 362–372. Ibid., 373; Second journey. according to St. Mount Athos, 376. The Book of My Genesis, VII, 273–388. Theologian. Vestn. 1905, IV, 697–698. The Book of My Genesis V40;II, 273–388. Book of my Genesis, VIII, 1. Arch. Porfiry published this work of his under the title: “Erminia and instructions in the art of painting,” compiled by the hieromonk and painter Dionysius Fournot-Agrafiot 1701–1733. (Works. Kiev spirit. Acad. 1868, II, 269–315; III, 529–570, VI, 494–563; XII, 355–445). The book of my existence. VIII, 11, 15, 23, 33. Ibid., 32–33, 53. This work was published in St. Petersburg. in 1864 with the addition: “and the biblical rarity of the Empress Maria Alexandrovna.” The Book of My Genesis, VIII, 21–22. This work was published in Proceedings Kyiv. spirit. Academician 1866, III, 305–344; IV, 556–604; V, 3–32; VI, 142–167. Ibid., 29. Published in the same magazine for the same year, VIII, 415-440 The Book of My Genesis, VIII, 27–28, 34. This note, entitled: “Opinion about the Sinai manuscript, containing the incomplete Old Testament and the entire New Testament, with the epistle of the Apostle Barnabas and the book of Hermas,” was published in St. Petersburg. 1862. For an interesting review of M. Philaret about this note, see Arch. Savva in his “Collected. opinions and reviews of M. Philaret", vol. V, part I, 365–373, St. Petersburg. 1887. Book of my Genesis, VIII, 51. Letters were also published in the Proceedings of the Kyiv Ecclesiastical Church. Academician for 1867, X" 120–164; XI, 266–292. The Book of My Genesis, VIII, 40, 46–47. Ibid., III, 57; V, 200–201; VI, 310. Book of my Genesis, VIII, 84. The Book of My Genesis, VIII, 104–107. See “list of printed works of Bishop Porfiry, compiled by P.A. Syrk in the appendix to his book: “Description of the papers of Bishop. Porfiry Uspensky, donated by him to the Emperor. Academician Probate Science,” pp. 402–407, covering the years 1865–1878. Bishop Porfiry accurately calculated the number of his voyages and determined them at 46. (Book of My Genesis, V40;II, 393). Book of my Genesis, VIII, 119, 319. Book of my Genesis, VIII, 319. The Book of My Genesis, V40;III, 326. Ibid., 14, 127, 223–224,260–265, 271, 359. Ibid., 40, 122–126, 497. Ibid., 272–275,220–221, 498, 450. The Book of My Genesis, V40;III, 361. The Book of My Genesis, V40;III, 526. The Book of My Genesis, V40;III, 514 The Book of My Genesis, V40;III, 514–516. Book of my Genesis, VIII, 538. A. Dmitrievsky. Funeral Ave. (Porfiry Uspensky and prof. m. spiritual. Academy Iv. D. Mansvetov, p. 3, note 1, Kiev. 1886; On. The Book of My Being, V40; PI, 548, 549. Book of my Genesis, VIII, 517. Brief review collected. hand., belonging etc. ep. Porfiry, now kept in the Imperial. public Bibl., p. V, St. Petersburg. 1885. The Book of My Genesis, VIII, 518–525. A very touching description of the last days of Bishop’s life. Porfiry and his peaceful Christian death are given to us by his family physician M. Bondyrev, who was present at the last breath of the Right Reverend. Ep. Porfiry died sitting on an armchair against the wall of the bedroom, opposite the front door, facing east and holding a cypress cross in his hands; in front of him, kneeling, was holding in his hands a candlestick with a burning wax candle, the monastery novice Fyodor Radin, and a little to the side to the right, hieromonk Fr. Theodore (now hegumen) read the waste bill. The deceased hierarch was dressed in full bishop's vestments, but sewn, by personal order, during his lifetime, not from brocade or silk, but from simple white canvas, trimmed along the edge with a blue silk ribbon instead of braid and with white porcelain buttons along the edge of the sakkos. A skufia with a basting instead of a miter is worn on the head. “For the dead, according to St. Porfiry, as the venerable doctor conveys them, such vestments are quite enough, but metals, especially precious ones, are so difficult to extract from the earth that burying them back into it is a sin.” (Soulful. Reading. 1904, 1, 687–688). The rector of the Danilovsky Moscow Monastery, Arch. Amphilochius (later Bishop of Uglich, Vicar of Yaroslavl). At the invitation of this executor, Bishop. Porfiry, according to Mr. Vondyrev, “began writing a spiritual will and distributing his property, which mainly consisted of books and manuscripts. Day after day, before my eyes, all the bishop’s property was sorted out, put into chests and cabinets, which were then locked, sealed, and paper labels with the number that corresponded to the number of the spiritual will and indicated the destination were stuck on them. “During my repeated visits,” this eyewitness notes, it seemed to me that a person was getting ready to go on a long journey and was thoroughly packing his belongings so that later it would be easier to understand the house upon arrival and the place.” This entire library has now entered the Moscow Synodal Library and serves as an indispensable scientific tool for all scientists studying the manuscripts of this Russian ancient repository. This clause of the will testifies to the inherent ep. Porfiry of gratitude to his benefactors and well-wishers. Moscow Church Gazette, 1885, No. 27, p. 435. Book of my Genesis, VIII, 535. The Book of My Genesis, VII, 80–81. Ibid., II, 219: III, 141, 525. Ibid., III, 48, 363, 384, 395, 401, 404, 509, 592; First journey. according to St. Mount Athos, part II, department. II, p. 4. Second Journey to the Sinai Monastery, pp. 229–230. “Why am I wandering for so long? asks the bishop. Porfiry answers: “Perhaps in order to, like a bee, bring beautiful honey to his native hive. I am God’s bee, and Russia is my hive” (Book of My Genesis, I, 466; See Second Journey to the Sinai Monastery, p. 237). The ardent patriotism of his bishop. Porfiry proved it beyond doubt in his works. (Ibid., I, 13, 43,235, 466; III, 88–89; VII, 44; Second Journey to Sinai Mon., p. 50; Travel to Egypt, p. 221). Second trip to the Sinai Monastery, p. 1. Book of my Genesis, VIII, 526. Moscow. Church Vedom., 1885, No. 18, p. 324. Second Journey to the Sinai Monastery, p. 145. Book of my Genesis, VII, 261; VIII, 509; First journey. in Athos Monasteries, part I, section 11 p. 456 Second Journey to the Sinai Monastery, p. 164. Book of my Genesis, II, 486; III, 79; IV, 64; VII, 222–225; VIII, 76; First journey. to Athos. mon. and monasteries, part I, pp. 115, 229; Second way. to Athos. mon. page 16. First trip to the Athos monasteries. and monasteries, p. 17. The fruit of his “warm desire to compose the history of eastern icon painting and even elevate this art to the level of nauli” is his dying article: “Zographical chronicle of Athos and my judgment about the painting there” (Yaten. in general. lyub. spiritual. enlightenment. 1884. No. 9–10, pp. 217–255. Book of my existence, III, 458. Book of my Genesis, II, 327. Ibid., I, 265, 267; III, 19, 70, 167,425; V, 182, 213; VIII, 102,184, 346, 651. Second journey. to Athos. mon. and hermitages, pp. 47, 49; First journey. to Athos. mon. and monasteries, part II, dep. II, p. 206. It is worthy of note that the first liturgical scroll was read by him only in 1843 (The Book of My Genesis, Part I, p. 201). The Book of My Genesis, Part VII, pp. 184–185; Theologian. Vestn. 1904, book. X, pp. 247–248; First journey. to Athos. mon. and monasteries, part I, dept. I, pp. 72–73. First journey. to Athos. mon. and monasteries, part II, dep. I, cgr. 379–449. Proceedings Kyiv. spirit. Academician, 1878, book. IV, pp. 3–47; book V, pp. 213–279; book VI, pp. 502–530; book VII, pp. 65–78. This includes his articles entitled: “Preachers in the four eastern patriarchates and their sermons in the Slavic lands.” (Works. Kiev spirit. Acad., 1879, nos. 8–11; 1880, nos. 1–2,4, 7 and 9). Book of my Genesis, VII, 81. First journey. to Athos. mon. and monasteries, part I, dept. I, pp. 128–141. Ibid., part I, department. II, pp. 219–247; Part II, Dept. I, pp. 170–206. Ibid., part I, department. I, p. 141; Second way. in Sinai mon. page 51 Book of my Genesis, VI, 253. History of Athos, part III, Monastic Athos, section 1, p. 265, *note. Kyiv. 1887. Book of my Genesis, III, 458 Book of my Genesis, VIII, 522. “Scholars in Austria and Germany, Miklosic, Müller, Erman, Tafel, have been impatiently waiting for me since 1847,” says Bishop. Porfiry, - publications of Athonite acts, a short list of which was printed by me that year and translated into German. These acts, unanimously recognized here and abroad as the most necessary aid for the study of Greek-Byzantine law, are already being prepared by me (in 1857) for publication”... (Book of My Genesis, VII, 81; Sn. Π.A. Syrku, Description of the papers of Bishop Porfiry Uspensky, p. 399). “My testimony was picked up by the German and French press and gave rise to the opinion that Kutlumush was founded by the Christianized Turk Kutulmish.” (First journey to the Athos monasteries and monasteries, part II, section II, p. 235). The popularity of St. Porphyry in German literature was greatly facilitated by his polemics with K. Tischendorf about the Sinai Bible. Εκκλησιαστική Αλήθεια 3 885, 15 Μαΐου, τευΑ ’ σελ. 45; Νεολόγος No. 7465, 1884 έτ ., 8 Ί ουλίοο . Many Russian learned societies, universities, theological academies, appreciating the scientific works of St. Porfiry, had him among their honorary members (Book of My Genesis, Part VIII, pp. 510–513), and on September 15, 1869, St. Petersburg University awarded him honoris causa (lat. Honorary Doctor) the academic degree of Doctor of Hellenic Literature. He moved forward slowly in his diocesan service and ended his career by receiving the Order of Anna, 1st degree, on March 31, 1868 Monuments of Christian art on Mount Athos. Page 4–5; St. Petersburg 1902. His own. Icons of Sinai and Athos. collections. Page 1; St. Petersburg 1902. We will point here to a review of St. Porfiry by one of his contemporary, the late head of the Russian spiritual mission in Jerusalem, Arch. Antonin, who did not like to lavish praise left and right indiscriminately. Corresponding with the late Secretary of the Imper. Pal. General Β. N. Khitrovo back in 1877 on the issue of the “Palestine Collection” that was supposed to be published, Fr. arch. Antonin, naming the names of future employees, adds: “It would be nice to immediately show off the name of Porfiry, but it will not be so easy to secure his consent to do so. However, if there is a need for him, I can ask him about it,” (Letter to V.N. Khitrovo, 1877, March 19). Lat., “Times change, and we change with them” (editor’s note). In the draft draft of the charter, the Society called itself that. “Charter of the Orthodox Eastern Society” or Charter of the “Orthodox East” society. (From the case on the formation of the Imperial Palestine Rights Society).