I. Жизнь св. Димитрия до 1688 г

Birth, upbringing, environment - Education - Demetrius' tonsure and the position of the then clergy - Ordination to the hierodeacon and hieromonk - Departure for Chernigov and the "Irrigated Fleece" - Trip to Lithuania and Bishop Theodosius Vasilevich - Stay in Slutsk and the position of Orthodoxy in Lithuania - Return to the homeland and life in Baturin - Relocation to Kyiv and the beginning Chet-Minei – Annexation of the Kyiv Metropolis to the Moscow Patriarchate – Sermon on the anniversary of Gisel’s death – Secondary abbess in Baturyn and the new hetman Mazepa. In December 1651, in the town of Makarov, 40 versts from Kyiv 3, along the Zhitomir highway, a son, Daniel, the future Saint of Rostov 6, was born to an ordinary Cossack of the Makarov hundred of the Kyiv regiment 4 Savva Grigorievich Tuptal 5 and his wife Marya Mikhailovna. Savva Tuptalo came from the noble family of Savich 7 and stood in Makarov, after the Peace of Belotserkov, by order of Bogdan Khmelnitsky and his colonel Anton Zhdanovich 8. Little Russia was still under the Polish power, but the hetman was already drawn to Moscow: so in 1650, the Kanev colonel Savich traveled to Moscow from Bogdan 9 . Both Daniel’s father and mother, not yet old people 10 , were distinguished by great piety, according to Dmitry himself, and life itself contributed to this: continuous wars raged throughout Ukraine, a year after Daniel’s birth there was a severe pestilence 11 , and it is known how religious feeling intensifies in times of public disaster. In the very year of birth of the future saint there was the Radivilov War 12: Hetman Jan Radzivil, after the battle of Berestechko, approached Kyiv with the Lithuanian army and burned Podol. One must think that life in Makarov was not calm either. In 1654, Centurion Tuptalo was at the Pereyaslav Rada, and in 1660 he moved to Kyiv under the high hand of the Great Sovereign of Moscow, with the same rank of centurion. In Kyiv, he had three daughters: Pamphilia, Fevronia, Paraskeva, who later took monastic vows and were successively abbess of the St. Nicholas Jordan Monastery they founded 13. We know nothing about the saint’s childhood: of course, the greatest influence was exerted by his religious mother, since his father, “the honor and glory of the Zaporozhye army,” was rarely at home. As for the impressions of the external environment, there is nothing to say about the natural beauty of Kyiv and the surrounding area. Let us present modern testimonies of foreigners and Russians who traveled around Ukraine, about the city itself and its inhabitants. The streets of Kyiv were irregular crooked alleys, the houses were built according to the Moscow model, side by side, low in one tier, illuminated by a torch instead of candles, and were surrounded by orchards of cherry and almond trees; in the Dnieper there was an abundance of fish, the inhabitants traded in bread, furs, wax, honey, lard and salted fish, drank terribly, strictly observed fasts - this is what Boplan recorded in his notes. Paul of Aleppo, archdeacon of Macarius, Patriarch of Antioch, who saw Kyiv in 1654, talks about tall, cleanly planed houses, stone palaces of Poles and Jews, about the domes of churches, burning with gold and beautifully painted inside, about the abundance of gardens and fish 15. Elder Leonty (1701) also praises Kyiv: there are gardens everywhere, there is a place to walk... on Podol there is a lot of dirt, but the structure is patterned... there in the morning the archers go to trade... (Little Russians) are meticulous likhomaniacs, and they have many miraculous icons, and the writing seems different from painting. Their heartfelt faith is great in God and the nobles are pliable to the poor, but the taverns ultimately ruined them 16. Tuptala’s house was located on Podol, “on the parade ground of Nekdys Saltanovsky,” between the Florovsky convent and the Pritisko-Nikolaevskaya church 17. Dimitri received his initial education at home at 18 and in 1662, at the age of 11, he learned to write in Slavic 19. Meanwhile, the “military carelessness” did not stop. During Vygovsky’s betrayal, Yu.N. Baryatinsky hanged up to 3,000 people along the roads to Kyiv and after Sheremetev’s captivity in 1660, he proposed to flog and burn 150 20 versts to the west of Kyiv. In the same 1658, Vygovsky’s Cossacks burned the Kiev settlement on Lybid, and the townspeople hid in the city and on ships on the Dnieper 21. In 1661, Baryatinsky plundered the property of the Pechersk Monastery, and the military men fled from Kyiv without receiving their salaries 22. The Kyiv monks were at enmity with the bourgeoisie over lands, had relations with the Poles and denounced each other to the Moscow governors and officials; the townspeople quarreled with the Cossacks 23; Bishop Methodius, who lived in Kyiv, quarreled with Bishop Lazar Baranovich, was cursed, and then forgiven by the Patriarch of Constantinople, acted against the hetman for Moscow and reconciled with him, betraying Moscow; the white clergy was at enmity with the black; in parish churches they commemorated Methodius, in monasteries - the patriarchs and Lazar Baranovich 24; the governor of Kiev (Lvov) was old, incapable of military affairs, in general, in the words of the same Bishop Methodius (in 1665), “you will not find anything except tears, thinness and theft in Kyiv” 25. The first impressions of the saint’s childhood were difficult. Daniil Savich, having learned to read and write, was sent to the Kiev Brotherhood College Monastery, where the new rector, the famous writer Ioanniky Galatovsky, built new buildings, opened classes for rhetoric and taught in them himself 26. The guardian Methodius 27 also patronized these schools. Upon entering the college in 1662, Daniel witnessed the ceremonial presentation of the newly acquired miraculous icon of St. Our Lady of Brethren to the new church of the college 28. The miraculous discovery of the icon, on which a Tatar drowning on the Dnieper survived by swimming, should have had a strong effect on the development of mysticism in the soul of Daniel 29. We know almost nothing about the college, even about its appearance. There were pillars for bells in front of the lattice gates. In the refectory chamber there was an image of the Lord, tempted by Satan, the Good Samaritan, etc., that’s all our information 30. Judging by later news (c. 1673), the state of the college was unenviable. “There is little order and little science in schools. This is because Pallas will be cold without bread (friget sine Cerere Pallas), as we read in the letter of his grace Fr. archpastor. There are no portions for teachers to reinforce them, the table is often bad (trapeza blaha), teachers do not have the most necessary things, and this arouses in them more sorrow than zeal in science. Some of the brethren, looking at the elder, do not often knock on church thresholds, and this is done due to the lack of order 31.” The teaching system since the time of Mogila has been scholastic. We will talk about it later in this essay. Daniel distinguished himself in poetry and oratory, of course, thanks to the rector, the author of the famous “The Key of Understanding with Science Album in the Way of Compiling the Kazan,” which by that time had already gone through two editions in 1659 and 1660. In 1665, during the invasion of Doroshenka, the college was completely destroyed 32 and resumed only in 1669: and so Daniil had to study for only three years (1662–65). Whether he studied there subsequently, under rector Varlaam Yasinsky, before the secondary destruction of the college in 1671, we do not know. What the school gave Daniel we will see later when analyzing the works of the saint 33. Poor health, which finally changed in old age, an innate inclination towards a quiet contemplative life, deep religiosity, supported by surrounding circumstances, perhaps a sense of personal insecurity, forced Daniel, with the consent of his parents, to settle in the ancient Kirillovsky Monastery, fortified by nature itself, lying on a picturesque mountain, about three miles from Kyiv, and then on July 9, 1868 to take monasticism with the name Demetrius, from Abbot Meletius Dzik 34. The need to explain into what environment and under whose leadership the seventeen-year-old monk fell forces us to make an involuntary retreat. During the then troubled era of Ukraine, the clergy took a large part in political affairs. Through the Kyiv monks, according to our 17th-century plenipotentiaries, every deed can be carried out in harmony and depraved and come into meekness 35 . The sympathies of the Little Russian clergy at the time of the annexation of Little Russia were divided: the lower, white, parish clergy were drawn to Moscow, the higher, black, looked more at their own benefits. Researchers explain this role in two ways: S. M. Solovyov 36 says that the highest Little Russian clergy, accustomed to playing a prominent role, independent of anyone except the distant Patriarch of Constantinople, treated Moscow unkindly, anticipating future dependence on the Moscow Patriarch. N.I. Kostomarov explains this hostility not by the ambition of the rulers, but by a reluctance to everything Moscow, supposedly rude and barbaric 37 . Both opinions, which are not mutually contradictory, were accepted by S. A. Ternovsky 38 . Be that as it may, the discord of the clergy and the dislike of monasticism towards Moscow are facts that do not require proof. At the time when Bogdan swore allegiance to Moscow, Metropolitan of Kiev Sylvester Kossov never beat his forehead about it and did not seek royal mercy for himself 39 . In 1654, Archimandrite Gisel of Pechersk, sent by the Metropolitan to the Tsar, submitted a petition to confirm the rights of the Little Russian clergy: about not removing them from the authority of the Patriarch of Constantinople, about not sending Moscow clergy to Little Russian clergy positions, etc. 40. During Vygovsky’s betrayal, the clergy and, at their head, Metropolitan Dionysius Balaban, who had already disliked Moscow before, went over to the Poles and managed to negotiate for themselves the right to sit in the Senate, with a voice equal to the Catholic prelates 41 . The Moscow government, of course, did not recognize Balaban, and Lazar Baranovich was appointed temporary guardian of the Kyiv metropolis in October 1659. But Lazar at that time was a supporter only of political, and not spiritual, subordination to Moscow. He petitioned for a metropolitan decree 42, and one must think that in response to inappropriate requests, Moscow replaced Lazar and in his place on May 5, 1661 appointed Bishop Methodius 43 as guardian of the metropolitanate. The latter settled in Kyiv, to the great displeasure of the black clergy, and, through the machinations of Balaban, was cursed in 1662 by the Patriarch of Constantinople; The king himself tried to lift the curse 44. We have already cited the news of Paisius Ligarid (dated February 4, 1663) that Methodius was not commemorated in the monasteries at all, but the patriarchs and Lazarus were commemorated. Before the Nizhyn Rada (June 18, 1663), the abbots of the Kyiv monasteries and among them Gizel, Galatovsky and Dzik, orphaned after the death of the shepherd (Balaban who betrayed Moscow) sheep, as they call themselves, composed a letter to Hetman Samk - the enemy of Methodius and Bryukhovetsky and the foreman of the Zaporozhye army, with complaints about Methodius, who accused them of treason before Moscow and became their great destroyer and enemy 45. But Methodius and Bryukhovetsky were in power, and Samko, for imaginary or real treason, was executed 46. In the same year, 1663, on May 10, in Korsun (in Polish Ukraine), Balaban’s protégé, Bishop of Belarus (from August 3, 1661) 47, Joseph Nelyubovich-Tukalsky, the enemy of his colleague in the diocese, Methodius, was elected clergy to the Kiev metropolis. In the denunciation of Anatoly, the hieromonk of Mezhigorsk, we read: in 171 (1663) the metropolitan (Balaban) in Korsun died, and the Kyiv authorities sent the elder of Pechersk with letters to that Duma and elected the bishop of Mogilev from White Rus' to the metropolis, who betrayed the great sovereign, and those traitors Theodosius Safonovich and Meletius Dzik Kirillovsky 48. The Polish government captured the named Metropolitan Joseph and kept him in captivity until 1667. Meanwhile, Methodius’s relationship with the Kyiv black clergy has changed for the better, and he begins to quarrel with his friend Bryukhovetsky. In February 1665, Methodius himself, having heard about Bryukhovetsky’s request to appoint one of the Moscow saints as Kyiv metropolitan, 49 acts in concert with the Kyiv abbots, including Dzik, appears with them to the Kyiv governor Sheremetev and shouts with great rage: if something happens, what to be in Kyiv to the Metropolitan of Moscow, and not according to our election of old, let the great sovereign order us all to be executed, rather than what we should do... when the Metropolitan arrives, we will all lock ourselves in the monasteries... in Smolensk, Archbishop Filaret took away all rights from the clergy, calls everyone of the Gentiles... it is better for us to accept death than for the Metropolitan of Moscow 50... In March of the same year, the abbot we mentioned, Meletius Dzik, comes to Moscow to argue about the election of a metropolitan according to the ancient times 51. Moscow promised to talk with the Patriarch of Constantinople 52. In 1667, after the Truce of Andrusovo, Bryukhovetsky again wrote to Moscow: it is necessary to send a Russian metropolitan to Kyiv... the clergy in Little Russia are double-minded and look at both sides... and under the Metropolitan from Moscow there will be no vacillation, double-mindedness and disorderly conduct 53 . At the same time, Tukalsky, released in 1667, persuaded Doroshenko in Chigirin to succumb to the Moscow sovereign, in the hope of being confirmed as the metropolis of Kyiv for this 54. Bryukhovetsky's revolt began in January 1668, and he was killed in June of the same year. Methodius was captured by Tukalsky, but fled to Kyiv and again began to zealously denounce the Kyiv archimandrites and abbots, including Meletius Dzik, accusing them of criminal relations with Tukalsky and Doroshenka 55 . Tales were taken from the abbots. Note that the interrogation took place almost during the tonsure of Dimitri Savich (in July 1668). Abbot Meletiy Dzik testified that from their monastery “it was not possible to buy bread on the side and worked in the field to attract robbers... and before the Dormition, on Thursday, Doroshenkov’s Cossacks took 8 oxen and 4 horses, and he, with the knowledge of the governor, wrote a sheet under an open seal, and the monk was sent to Doroshenka, so that the animal would be given and wrote to Tukalsky about intercession and nothing else” 56. During the interrogation, the monk, the monastic housekeeper Ezekiel, also returned and brought a letter from Doroshenka to the Kyiv governors, accusing Methodius of treason. The letter was written as if Doroshenko knew who was being interrogated in Kyiv, and what they were interrogating about: apparently, Meletius had relations with Doroshenko and Tukalsky not only about oxen and horses. Methodius was exiled to Moscow and died there, and the abbots of Kiev, including Dzik, received praise from the sovereign for their loyalty 57. From this short essay, the then sympathies of the black clergy in general and in particular the views of Meletius Dzik are sufficiently clarified. One must think that Demetrius, a monk of Meletius and a person close to him 58, who lived in the same monastery, shared the beliefs of his mentor, was a champion of the independence of the Little Russian church and did not particularly like the Moscow state. These conclusions gain even more plausibility from a review of Demetrius's subsequent life. On March 25, 1669, Demetrius was ordained a hierodeacon by Joseph Nelyubovich-Tukalsky, Metropolitan of Kyiv, unrecognized, as we have seen, by either the Moscow state or Poland 59. This dedication took place in the city of Kanev, which, we note, was under the rule of Doroshenka, in the ancient Kanevsky (12th century) monastery, in the cathedral church of the Assumption, under Archimandrite Job Zayonchkovsky († 1676) 60. What kind of person was this unrecognized metropolitan? Joseph Nelyubovich-Tukalsky was truly “a glorious zealot of Orthodoxy, the holy faith, an unshakable eastern pillar,” as Archimandrite Gisel of Pechersk called him: with his initial activities in Lithuania, in defense of Orthodoxy 61, with his imprisonment in Mirienburg and immediately after his release, with a bold prohibition to ring the bells in Vilna, during the transfer of the body of the false martyr of the Uniate Kuntsevich, he won the general sympathy of the Orthodox Little Russians 62. “The townspeople and Cossacks, and especially the black peoples, on both sides of the Dnieper, dearly love and honor the Metropolitan and Doroshenko... Archimandrite Pechersk and Tukalsky have great love between each other and among the people,” wrote our commissioner Tyapkin, January 5, 1669, Afan. Laurel. Ordyn-Nashchokin 63 . On March 1, 1669, Tukalsky was confirmed in the rank of Metropolitan of Kyiv: by a charter from Patriarch Methodius of Constantinople, it was ordered that he be the shepherd of the archbishop - Metropolitan of Kyiv, Galicia and All Russia, Exarch of the See of Constantinople, Bishop of Belarus, Archimandrite Leshchinsky" 64. Joseph worked for his recognition in Moscow, trying to persuade Doroshenka to submit to the great sovereign; Innocent Gisel also petitioned Moscow for the same purpose in March and April 1669, “as a man who is more honest and well-known in his teachings and exploits from ancient times” - there was only one answer: “for certain measures, it is impossible for him, Joseph, to go to Kyiv and be in the metropolis” 65. Apparently, in Moscow they have not forgotten how Tukalsky, in 1666, allowing the inhabitants of Mogilev to swear an oath, wrote: from all the oaths of bishops who are not in charge, especially those from Moscow, to my diocese, I allow those who are disobediently tearing themselves into pieces,” 66, nor how, taking away the bishop’s mantle from a prisoner Methodius, Joseph (according to the false or imaginary testimony of the same Methodius) ordered to say: you are not worthy to be a bishop, because you accepted ordination from the Moscow Metropolitan” 67 . Baranovich, although he wrote that he never dreamed of acting against Tukalsky 68, also intrigued against him before the tsar, not wanting to lose control of the clergy of the eastern country of the Dnieper 69. Let us assume that Tukalsky did not remain in debt, he intrigued against Moscow, but he, as a patriot and Orthodox Christian, could not sympathize and did not sympathize with Doroshenko’s alliance with the Turks 70 and died, bitterly complaining about Doroshenko for the misfortunes of his homeland. And so this is who Demetrius received initiation from, despite the fact that it was easier to initiate from Lazar Baranovich or from Paisius, Patriarch of Alexandria, who served in Kyiv on September 14, 1669 71 . Of course, this was facilitated by Meletiy Dzik, abbot of Kirillov 72, a supporter of Tukalsky, as we indicated above. Two days after the dedication, Tukalsky, a very poor man, presented a gift to Doroshenka - the village of Stayki of the Kiev Brotherhood College 73. It is very likely that this gift was accepted by the same Meletius. All these relationships prove that Dmitry shared the general views of the black clergy and their hostility towards Moscow. We have no information about what Dimitri Savich did after his initiation in Kanev until 1675 74 . His life in general terms says that he lived in the Kirillov Monastery, was distinguished by piety, read a lot, wrote and composed “commanded from the abbot or from other high authorities” 75. But in the original edition of Dmitry’s diary, a short chronicler, news about the Turks, the capture of Kamenets and the surrender of Uman were recorded for the years 1672 and 1674, which makes us think that these events were mainly of interest to Dmitry 76 . Then, in 1670, the Poles of Colonel Piva’s detachment captured Dmitry’s father, Savva Tuptal, near Byshev, 6 miles from Kiev, and subsequently in 1673, Hetman Jan Sobieski released him from the convoy with sheets to Doroshenko, “and what those sheets were written about, he didn’t seem to know Savva, but he spoke to Doroshenka and Tukalsky, and they seemed to only say: God grant that the faith of Christ may be everywhere.” 77 These data involuntarily lead us to assume that Demetrius, like his father, participated in relations with Tukalsky, if not lived with him 78 . Be that as it may, in 1675 (the year of Tukalsky’s death), we meet Demetrius already in the Gustynsky monastery. This monastery near the city of Priluk, located on an island formed by the Uday River, burned down in 1671 79, but on July 28, 1674, with the blessing of His Grace Bishop Lazar. Chernigov, the ktitor of the church, Hetman Ivan Samoilovich, built a new stone church of St. Trinity 80. In 1675, May 23, St. Spirit, the day after the church monastic holiday, which was accompanied by a fair, Demetrius was ordained as hieromonk by Lazar Baranovich 81. One must think that here too the matter could not have happened without the assistance of Meletius Dzik: he was on the same good terms with Lazar as he had once been with Tukalsky, who was dying at that time 82 . In turn, Lazar, who was now negotiating with Doroshenko, probably changed his views on Tukalsky, who on his deathbed persuaded Doroshenko to submit to the king 83, wrote him several laudatory epitaphs 84 and could not have anything against Tukalsky’s protege - a man who, like his abbot Meletius Dzik 85, was already distinguished by his gift of speech. Demetrius was made a preacher of Lazarus 86 and settled in Chernigov, where he remained until July 31, 1677 (more than two years) 87, preaching not only in Chernigov, but also in other churches of the diocese 88. Lazarus was a grumpy, stingy, grumpy, even vindictive man - it’s worth looking through his letters. In general, mercy did not occupy a prominent place in Baranovich’s character 89 . This is indirectly confirmed by the saint himself: one day, during Lent, on the week of the veneration of the cross, having left Matins and preparing to serve in the cathedral (for the Right Reverend also served), Demetrius dozed off and saw himself in a dream at the altar, in front of Baranovich. “Vladyka suddenly became angry with me,” says Demetrius: and “he began to torture me greatly and made many speeches in his anger that were useful to me!” the saint adds with humility 90. We don’t think that such an archpastor would have an easy life 91, although from the outside life in Chernigov was calmer than in Kyiv: due to constant wars with the Poles, and with the Tatars, and among themselves, terrible desolation set in there, the residents abandoned everything and moved to the suburban regiments and generally to the royal lands 92. In Chernigov, Dimitri had to witness how Lazar begged great and rich favors in Moscow for his sermons, communicated with Doroshenka, worked for the non-ceding of Kyiv to the Poles (January 1675), published his “Nowa miara starey wiary” (1676) against Catholics, anathematized the city of Starodub (1676), which was terribly burned in May of that year, convened a council in Kyiv (in May 1677), quarreled with Hetman Samoilovich (1677), tried Adamovich (1677) 93. The first work that has come down to us, “The Irrigated Fleece,” dates back to this period of Demetrius’s life. This is a description of miracles from the miraculous image of the Mother of God in the Chernigov Trinity-Ilyinsky Monastery. We will not dwell on its scholastic composition. It was written by Dmitry at the behest of Lazar, probably in 1675–77, but published in his absence in 1680 94. Baranovich greeted Demetrius with the following verses, printed in the 1683 edition: Cos' mial na sercu, tos' na Runo wylał Sam cie Duch Swięty w tey pracy posilał. Iego oblubienicy żes Runo wystavił, Duch swoiego rozumu do ciebie przystawił, Piękne Runo pisaniem pięknym jes' oros'il. Od panny wezmiesz oco bys' ją tylo prosil. Panna nac' rzecze Panska u mu łaska, Idącemu do Nieba dwoiaka to laka (staff). Tibi dilectissimae ovi Agnum et Ovem aeternam te pascentem pastoraliter precor. Lazarz Baranowicz Archiepiscop. Czernihowski Nowogrod. at wszystkej Siw. (Siweriae?) manu propria (page 12 vol.). In the month of July (31st) of the cold year 95 1677, Demetrius, having asked for dismissal 96, left for Lithuania to venerate the icon of the Mother of God of Novodvorskaya, painted, according to legend, by St. Peter, Metropolitan of Moscow and All Russia 97. The Novodvorsky Assumption Orthodox Monastery in Pinsk district, among the Pinsk Uniate diocese, was subordinated to the Belarusian bishop, who was considered the vicar of the Kyiv metropolitan 98. Joseph Tukalsky, with a charter from Korsun dated 1656, appointed Abbot of Kyiv Mikhailovsky, Feodosius Vasilevich, as the governor of Slutsk 99. Dimitri struck up a close acquaintance with him. We know the following about Feodosius himself. He enjoyed the patronage of Khmelnitsky and played an important role during the annexation of Little Russia to Moscow 100. He changed the last one in 1655. In 1659, for the most part, Metropolitan Dionysius Balaban lived in his Slutsk monastery 101 and even established a consistory, in the manner of the Kyiv one, which was patronized by the owner of Slutsk, Prince. Bohuslav Radziwill 102. In 1669 Vasilevich was consecrated bishop of Belarus, but also retained the rank of Slutsk archimandrite. His constant concerns about his flock are visible from his letters of 1660 and 1661 103. Theodosius worked to increase his possessions 104, built new churches 105 and took away old ones captured by the Uniates: so he took away the Uniate church in 1666 and from the Basilians the Spasky Molevsky monastery in 1674 106. In 1664, Theodosius was suspected in the case of the then imprisoned Tukalsky, but was acquitted 107. In 1667, he intended to go to Kyiv to the Pechersk archimandrite for papers for a controversial case with the priest Shpolsky about the estates of Dyatlovichi and Lyublinets, for which he asked for guides, Polish dragoons, in view of the robberies in Polesie 108. In 1670, he received a copy of the charter for the Belarusian bishopric to Joseph of Tukalsky, with confirmation of the rights of this charter 109. In 1676, he was accused by some Pechersk monks of embezzling money from Pechersk estates in Lithuania. Theodosius wrote from Krakow to the Archimandrite of Pechersk and asked Lazar Baranovich for mediation 110. And subsequently Vasilevich communicated with Doroshenka and the Kyiv spiritual authorities 111. It is clear that Vasilevich did not like the Moscow government and always gravitated towards Poland, although he was a zealous Orthodox pastor 112. Demetrius arrived in Novodvor with Mr. Buchinsky on August 13 and venerated the icon in the old church 113. On the morning of August 13, on the eve of the church holiday, Theodosius Vasilevich and the entire clergy solemnly transferred the icon to the new church. Early in the morning, the elder of the Vilna brotherhood of St. Spirit about. Clement Trizna, later in 1679, after the death of Theodosius, Bishop of Mogilev 114. Before the procession of the cross, Demetrius was presented to the bishop at the altar, and he walked in the procession next to the bishop's preacher, Fr. Khomentovsky, who then delivered a sermon, and after him the bishop celebrated the liturgy. On the church holiday, August 15, Vasilevich again served the liturgy, and Fr. Paskevich Minsky 115, delivered at the same liturgy by the hieromonk. Both days the bishop had receptions for the clergy with rich refreshments, at which Demetrius was also present. August 16 Fr. Nikodim Beletsky, abbot of the Tsepersky monastery (since 1676), subordinate to the Vilna monastery, announced the miracles that occurred during the procession 116; probably on the same day Demetrius left Fr. Trizna, in Vilna because on the 18th week after Pentecost (which will fall on August 18), he already preached a sermon in the Vilna Holy Spiritual Monastery 117. Another sermon was preached on the 23rd week, which was September 22nd. Both of them were not preserved before us 118. Demetrius could have had connections with the Vilna brotherhood and Theodosius Vasilevich due to the fact that Joseph Tukalsky, who appointed Demetrius, was himself once (1654–1661) the elder of the Vilna monastery before Vasilevich, and as Metropolitan of Kiev, remained the ruler of this monastery, removed from the jurisdiction of the Belarusian bishop. In addition, the abbot of the monastery after Joseph was the already mentioned Pachomius Savich, a namesake and probably a relative of the future saint 119. Here Demetrius met the governor, Fr. Jonah Dubinsky, and preacher Ilarius Goslavsky. Around November 14, Vasilevich arrived in Vilna, and on November 24 both of them went to Slutsk, where on December 6 Dimitri settled in the Transfiguration monastery 120. The main monastery of the city of Slutsk, and the seat of the archimandrite, was the Trinity Monastery; the monasteries that belonged to him were: Preobrazhensky fraternal monastery in Slutsk itself (wooden, founded in 1600), Starchitsky in Slutsk district (founded subsequently, after 1678), Nikolaevsky Grozovsky in the same place, etc. Dimitri became a fraternal preacher and spent a whole year in these works 121. The founder (or not the ktitor?) of this fraternal monastery was a certain John Skochkevich, a Slutsk philistine, of course, a relative of the former Slutsk archimandrite Bartholomew Skochkevich (1649–1653), who became the benefactor of Dmitry himself 122. Slutsk, the main city of the principalities of Slutsk and Konvalsky, belonged to Catholics - the Radzivils, but represented a strong Orthodox center for the fight against the union and put up wonderful fighters in the person of its archimandrites and other clergy, like Archpriest Andrei Muzhilovsky 123. So in 1659 Janusz Radziwił's Orthodox wife, Maria, daughter of the Wallachian ruler, contributed 4,000 zlotys to the Slutsk monastery 124. In the same year, 1659, the Russian clergy was dismissed from the panshchina and the work of the courtiers, but these decrees were not carried out and further we see little good for Orthodoxy 125. The Uniate authorities had jurisdiction over all citizens of the Greek religion, which of course weighed heavily on the latter 126. In 1668, one Jesuit priest presented to Polish government officials a project for the destruction of the Greek-Russian religion in Russian regions belonging to Poland 127. In 1670, the Vilna Uniates spoke about the Orthodox: these de-schismatics want to open the gates and bring in the Cossacks with Tukalsky, or Muscovites, as they did in 1655 with their clergy, meeting the enemy entering the city with spiritual songs 128. In 1671, a Bernardine monastery appeared in Slutsk. In 1672, Ludvika Radzivilovna, having married the Margrave of Brandenburg, brought a printing house to Slutsk from Keidan, probably for heterodox propaganda 129. In the same year, orders were issued to extend the union 130. In 1673 King Michael gave Magdeburg rights to all citizens of Slutsk, but at the same time in Minsk he forbade Orthodox Christians to be members of the city magistrate 131. In 1674, the Uniate Bishop of Pinsk Markian Belozor selected churches returned to the Orthodox 132. At the same time, Jan Casimir ordered the Vilna magistrate to assist in the defense of the union, according to the requests of the Uniate Metropolitan Kolenda 133. Dosifei, Patriarch of Jerusalem, in a letter dated May 20, 1678, praises the Orthodox for their steadfastness during Uniate persecution and consoles them with the hope of “the wisdom and generosity of the quietest king.” If the Uniates, he says further: they say unite with us, you say: I have unity with the apostles, - and if you want union, be despondent with us. At the end, the patriarch promised to lobby in Constantinople to send an exarch to Poland 134. Strong persecution of Orthodoxy occurs at that time in Polotsk, thanks to the same Kolenda 135. This information sufficiently outlines the situation of the Orthodox and justifies the complaints (back in 1670) of Metropolitan Joseph of Tukala, who wrote: “holy blessings have become scarce in the Lithuanian land” 136 . The Jesuits in 1678 137 at the invitation of the pleban of Mogilev, priest Zelyanovich, tried to propagate the union with “Kazaniyas” 138: this means was probably used in Slutsk, and Demetrius’s sermons inevitably had to serve as a response to it. It was not for nothing that Lazar called the Slutsk Church militant 139. Again, they have not survived to us, but that Demetrius was not a stranger to polemics can be proven by his own handwritten extracts of the provisions on the union of Theodosius Vasilevich and the books of the saint’s library 140. The Slutsk brotherhood had relations with Chernigov, since Lazar Baranovich, back in 1670, corresponded amiably with Vasilevich, recognized him as the vicar of the Kyiv metropolitan, called him “the wondrous candle of the Eastern Church,” and tried to make peace with the Pechersk archimandrite 141. Now, after the death of Tukalsky, Theodosius himself, the deputy of the Kyiv metropolitan, found himself canonically subordinate to Lazarus, as the guardian of the Kyiv metropolitanate. Abbot of the Slutsk Brotherhood Fr. Mokrievich traveled to Chernigov and on December 28 brought letters from the Chernigov colonel Vasily Dunin-Borkovsky, who, in the name of the hetman, demanded the return of Dmitry, and from Fr. abbot of Mikhailovsky (formerly Kirilovsky), Meletiy Dzik 142, but in Slutsk they valued the gifted preacher: they kept him with requests and promises, and to Kyiv, to someone unfamiliar with the brotherhood, M. Dzik was sent on January 10, 1678. Khristinich with letters of petition. On February 16, the merchants brought a second letter from Colonel Borkovsky from Chernigov announcing the hetman’s desire for the return of Dmitry. On February 20, letters from Meletius Dzik (in Polish) to the brotherhood and Dmitry were received, and gifts were received to the latter: particles of the relics of St. Varvara (resting in the St. Michael's Monastery), from Meletius himself, and some book in a rich gold binding with silver clasps from Fr. Arseny, monk Mikhailovsky. Dzik allowed Dmitry to remain “from himself and from the monastery” (which means Dmitry was transferred to the St. Michael’s Monastery) for a time and so that it pleased him. And if there was no need for the monastery, he promised to allow him to stay longer. 143 A particle of the relics of St. Barbara, Dmitry placed it in the fraternal church, to the Savior’s image 144. Only on March 3, with the same Chernigov merchants, Dimitri’s response letters were sent to the Chernigov colonel and abbot Dzik. We don't know their contents. Meanwhile, on March 11, Theodosius Vasilevich died on his estate in Lublin, under the New Court 145 and another acquaintance of Dimitri, Fr. Serapion Zamarevich died there around 18, and on Friday, November 29, Dimitri’s benefactor, Skochkevich, also died. At his funeral, Demetrius gave a speech on the topic: “How did John end his course,” “for which he was given 6 lacots of good Dutch linen.” He delivered another sermon over the tomb of Vasilevich 146. His Eminence Vasilevich was buried by the Greek Metropolitan Macarius Ligaridi and Archimandrite of Ovruch (then Slutsk) Feofan Krekhovetsky only on October 23, in the Dzientsilovichi estate, where Demetrius was probably also present. Probably at the same time, Demetrius met Fr. Innocent of Monastyrsky, abbot of Lubelsky 147, who later played such a prominent role in the controversy about the transubstantiation of St. Darov. Dimitri became so acquainted with Metropolitan Macarius, who arrived in Slutsk on August 1, that Fr. Clement Trizna, abbot of Vilna, sent Fr. Jonah Dubinsky with a letter of petition (in Polish) for the elevation of Isaiah Bai to the rank of hieromonk and the elimination of “obstacles that have come up in his production” 148. Demetrius, living in the fraternal monastery, also visited the monasteries subordinate to the fraternity: Grozovsky (May 9 on the church holiday) and Starozhitsky 149 (July 14 and September 22 for the veneration of the miraculous icon of B.M.) with oo. Olaikevich and Goslavsky, former preacher of Vilna, abbot of Minsk. Having buried his patrons, Dimitri left in January 1679, on the 29th, from Slutsk, through the Berezina to Chernigov 150. What did Dimitri take away when he returned from Lithuania? He, of course, thoroughly studied the Polish language and Polish morals, became thoroughly acquainted with the Roman Catholic doctrine, Latin Polish writers and Polish clergy. Here he could also see with his own eyes the sad situation and precarious future of Orthodoxy in Poland and consciously turn his sympathies to the Muscovite state, which had not developed sophisticated external institutions, but was distinguished by relatively sufficient religious tolerance for all confessions of that time - the time of the atrocities of the Thirty Years' War, the Dragonades, the final expulsion of the Moors and the blood feuds of the Puritans with the Independents and Cavaliers 151. There is no need, however, to conclude that these sympathies for Moscow could extend to the Moscow clergy: Dimitri, like all Little Russian clergy of that time, was not particularly disposed towards them 152 . On February 6, Dimitri arrived in Baturin to Hetman Samoilovich and was received by him very cordially. Dimitry Samoilovich could have seen back in the Gustynsky monastery, and the military judge Meletiy Vuyakhevich also probably remembered Dimitry at Tukalsky, when he was a clerk at Doroshenka. The hetman was good with Demetrius: the saint himself calls him his benefactor. He easily spoke with Dimitri and, probably, subsequently sought his appointment as abbot in Baturin after Gugurevich 153. For now, Dimitri settled in the Krupetsky Baturinsky Nikolaevsky Monastery, whose abbot was Theodosius Gugurevich. In general, the attitude of the clergy towards the hetman was very good at first: the hetman himself, a popovich by birth 154, was a pious man 155 and had a special zeal for the Church of God, and especially for decorating it with candles 156 and loved to have verses written to him and brought to him, which, of course, was what the learned monks did 157. He even thought about becoming a monk himself 158. But, as he grew richer 159, his pride also increased, not only with the Cossacks, but also with his clergy. Clergymen, even very significant ones, had to stand before him with their heads open. In church he never approached St. gifts, but demanded that they be offered to him and his sons. He considered meeting the priest a misfortune. He himself was a popovich, but rode in a carriage with great pomp and pomp (pomp) and was distinguished by his greed (greed). Kazakov did not allow Serdyuki into the courtyard, and the priest for several days could not get an appointment with the hetman, no matter what his need was 160. Here, at the hetman's court, Dmitry managed to get to know better the representatives of the Moscow state and their rights. In February 1680, Dimitri was offered the position of abbot of the Kirillov Monastery, through a deputy from the brethren, Father Mercury, but Dimitri refused: according to rumors, it was not entirely safe in Kyiv, due to the incessant attacks of the Crimeans. In 1680, in December, Demetrius noted the appearance of a huge comet 161 in Diariya. In 1681, on March 5, Abbot Dmitriev Gugurevich sent a petition to Moscow with a request to accept from him to the treasury, of course, for money, one hundred books of hours, one hundred psalters, one hundred grammars and ten trefoloi 162. Around that time (in Lent), an old acquaintance of Demetrius, Innocent of Monastyrsky, who was elected (in March) abbot of Kirillovsky, came to Kyiv from Lithuania. That same year, in April, Dimitri witnessed great celebrations in Baturin in view of the conclusion of the Bakhchisarai peace. The hetman hugged the envoys, thanked them for their love for their clerk Rakovich, and bowed for the fact that they had come to see him and thereby glorified his hetman’s honor among the Little Russian people. To celebrate, the hetman threw a big feast; Cannons thundered in front of Baturinsky Castle during toasts, and music played throughout the entire dinner 163. Then, on April 12, Demetrius began to write a new diary 164, perhaps out of a desire to write the history of his time. In August, in the Baturinsky monastery, the Serbian Metropolitan Pocheka 165 consecrated a new stone church built by Samoilovich. So calmly and quietly the life of Dimitri Savich went on until he was chosen as abbot of the Maksakov monastery instead of Jeremiah Shirkevich, who died on August 10, 1681. On Sunday, September 4, Dimitri was at Lazar's for a decree with a letter from the hetman. Baranovich, although he did not get along with the hetman, 166 however, knew his strength, received Dmitry very kindly, wished him, like Dmitry, to receive a miter, treated him to lunch, and on the 5th, giving out a letter, presented him with his own staff. But in Maksakov, Demetrius remained abbot for only five months (September 9, 1681 - February 7, 1682). On February 7, Dzik, abbot Mikhailovsky, died, Theodosius Gugurevich was transferred to his place, and Dimitri was appointed to Gugurevich’s place in the just abandoned Baturinsky monastery, of course, at the request of Samoilovich 167. The time of the first abbess of Demetrius (March 6, 1682 - October 26, 1683) in the Baturinsky monastery flowed monotonously. The monastery was located seven miles from Baturin. The city itself, lying on the left bank of the river. Seimas, was not distinguished by its beauty and buildings. The Kremlin was made of earth, and Moscow guards of Streltsy 168 were located at the city gates. In his diary, Dimitri noted only tonsures and the days of death of his acquaintances. Numerous tonsures show that the Baturinsky abbot enjoyed great respect at that time: on March 4, 1682, he tonsured the priest of the Baturinsky castle, Fr. Petra. On October 26 of the same year, he tonsured a certain Gabriel, who a month later (November 24) was ordained a hierodeacon by the Bulgarian Metropolitan Melchizedek 169 who was passing through Baturin. Demetrius wrote an epitaph for Judge General Ivan Domontovich, who had built a stone church in the Baturinsky Monastery, who died at the end of September 1683. It is placed next to the portrait of Domontovich above his grave in the same church, to the left near pillar 170. The monotony of the quiet monastic life was broken by the arrival (October 8, 1684) of Bishop Gideon Svyatopolk-Chetvertinsky of Lutsk, who had fled from Lithuania from the oppression of the Uniates. He stopped in Baturin and almost with Demetrius himself. In December of the same year, Patriarch Joachim of Moscow sent Gideon 10 rubles 171, and at the same time a letter from the kings was sent to Constantinople to the Patriarch of Constantinople on the affairs of the Western Russian Church. The affairs of the Little Russian hierarchy were not in an enviable position. There has been no Metropolitan of Kyiv since the death of Tukalsky. In Poland, after the unsuccessful Lublin Congress in 1680 to reconcile the Orthodox with the Uniates and Catholics, persecution of the Orthodox began. Bishop of Lviv Joseph Shumlyansky, administrator of the Kyiv diocese, was a Uniate, although he tried to hide it 172, and composed satirical songs about Samoilovich, who opposed the alliance of Poland and Russia against the Crimeans and Turks 173. Archbishop Baranovich, the only Orthodox bishop on this side of the Dnieper, was decrepit from old age and was at odds with the hetman. The hetman, due to hostile relations with Baranovich and out of a desire to please Moscow, began to petition the Moscow Patriarch Joachim about the election of a metropolitan to Kyiv. Already in September 1683, the patriarch promised the hetman to petition the kings for the election of a metropolitan - on the one hand, in view of the infirmity of the administrator of the metropolitan Lazarus, who ordained several clergy in one liturgy contrary to canonical decrees, on the other hand, in view of the invasion of many Greek and other lands by bishops “witnessed by no one and without the blessing of the most holy patriarchs serving without permission and supplying" 174. Moscow, of course, was guided by a natural desire to concentrate in its hands both spiritual power over the region, which was still under the rule of the Patriarch of Constantinople, and by the fear that in Poland, from where Joseph Shumlyansky sent out “charming” sheets about the superiority of the Kyiv metropolitans over the Moscow patriarchs, they would not rush to install their own metropolitan in Kyiv, and perhaps even a secret Uniate 175. It was almost because of these negotiations that they wanted to make Archimandrite Innocent Gisel of Pechersk Metropolitan, but he died on November 18, 1683. The hetman turned again to the Moscow patriarch and asked for his blessing to elect a new archimandrite. The patriarch for the time being left the election to the brethren themselves and promised in advance to ordain the chosen archimandrite 176. Despite such compliance of the patriarch, this was still the first step towards the subordination of the Little Russian church to the Moscow patriarch 177: he was equally unpleasant to both the higher and lower clergy. National pride, the habit of independence in church affairs, and both were offended. The conciliar, elective principle itself was apparently subject to restrictions, and it was still strong among the clergy, who chose the rulers, and in the lower class, who chose priests for their “parachvii.” The Little Russian clergy, who in general did not particularly get along with the arrogant hetman, hastily elected Varlaam Yasinsky, abbot of Kiev-Nikolsky, as archimandrite, and Lazar, without asking either Moscow or Constantinople, dedicated him at the end of 1683 - beginning of 1684. The Patriarch approved this election, after long requests, only in February 1685, delaying this approval for almost the entire 1684 with negotiations with the hetman on the election of a new metropolitan. The letter to Varlaam was given very mercifully, with the intention of persuading him in favor of installing a metropolitan and “pleasing to Moscow” and the Moscow patriarchs. Varlaam’s position before this letter was not very pleasant: he was threatened by the already famous Bishop of Lvov Shumlyansky, who wanted to be elected archimandrite of Pechersk or at least seize the property of the Pechersk monastery in Poland, just as he seized the estates of Bishop Theodosius Vasilevich 178. Meanwhile, Demetrius, whether due to unpleasant negotiations with Moscow or for other reasons, left the abbess on October 26, 1683, and on April 23, 1684, at the invitation of Varlaam, who had not yet been approved by Moscow, he moved to Kyiv, this, as Maksimovich put it, Russian Jerusalem, and settled in the Kyiv Lavra. Apparently, Dmitry was bored with an uncertain life and with bitterness, recording the death of his friend Paisius Gladky, he exclaims: “God knows where I am destined to lay my head” 179. The Lavra at that time was distinguished by great wealth. There were iron gates leading into it, surrounded by guards. Churches (23) and other buildings were painted on the outside (as they are now) with frescoes. The domes glowed with gold. The cells, beautiful and clean, with wide windows overlooked separate gardens. Each cell had three rooms and three doors with patterned iron locks. Each room was painted with oil paints, figures and landscapes, furnished with tables and sofas, and the stoves were made of colored tiles. From the side of the monastery towards the street there were two beautiful gardens, and in them were hedges of a plant like yellow jasmine, with berries similar to grapes (akrist-agrest? i.e. gooseberries), vineyards that produced good red wine, and masses of walnut, apricot and mulberry trees 180. The clothes of the monks, who were distinguished by their cleanliness, consisted of a greenish cassock and a hood with a plush edge with wide edges, which, when folded back, resembled the hoods of Capuchins and Jesuits. There was a large book depository at the monastery. The archimandrite himself was a learned man, a great lover of “organist singing” 181 . Kyiv was generally the center of South Russian learning. If Kyiv, this Russian Paris, as if from a reasonable head, does not give an answer, the matter will fall silent forever, Baranovich wrote in 1670 182 . In this situation, Dimitri calmed down from the abbot’s worries. In the great church they still show the icon of Anthony of Pechersk, before which Demetrius prayed 183. Here he took upon himself the obedience that glorified his name - compiling the lives of the saints 184. This work was started by Peter Mogila 185. In view of the destruction of lists of Russian lives during the Tatar era and later the Union, both lovers of soul-saving reading and monks for reading at meals had to turn to Polish and Latin books of the lives of St. father, often disagreed with the spirit of Orthodoxy. Mogila ordered the Greek handwritten lives of the saints from Athos to Kyiv by Symeon Metaphrastus 186, but did not have time to complete his undertaking 187. Lazar wrote Żywoty s'więtych, but aroused great ridicule from the Poles 188. Innocent Gisel seriously began to work, for which he asked Patriarch Joachim to send mena to Moscow. The books were sent in 1680 through Varlaam Yasinsky, but in the cursive list of the Typographical Library and were sent back due to the “difficulties of cursive writing” 189. We don’t know whether Gisel managed to do anything. Now Varlaam himself took up this matter with other clergy, and Demetrius was appointed the main worker. He began work on May 6, 1684 190. Meanwhile, church unrest continued. The hetman, having become related to Gideon Svyatopolk-Chetvertinsky, already known to us, petitioned in Moscow for his election as Metropolitan of Kyiv. All the Kiev clergy hated the hetman. That is why in February 1685, the Likhuds who came to the Mezhyhirya Monastery, summoned by the Moscow Patriarch, walked past Kyiv to Baturin, from where, having received a permit (dated March 6) from the hetman, they went to Moscow 191. Meanwhile, Moscow demanded the convening of a council to elect the Kyiv metropolitan. Lazar Baranovich sent out invitations to the council in Kyiv on June 29, 192, but he himself did not appear at the council and did not send anyone from his diocese. The Bishop of Lutsk also did not appear. At the council in the St. Sophia Church, the majority were secular people and supporters of the hetman; We meet between them the military captain Ivan Mazepa and the Chernigov colonel Dunin-Borkovsky. The Council initially refused to choose a metropolitan, considering itself incompetent 193 , but the hetman’s representatives insisted on their own, and Gideon Chetvertinsky, a benefactor of the hetman, was elected metropolitan 194 . Varlaam protested against this election: Demetrius also reacted unfavorably to this event: it was an unauthorized invasion of a foreign diocese by the Moscow Patriarch. A notice was sent to the Patriarch of Constantinople Dionysius when the deed had already been done, and he gave himself a letter of release, but Dositheos, the Patriarch of Jerusalem, acted differently. This is what Dositheus wrote to the kings 195: “Even if you have the diocese of Kyiv as your own, it’s not something you can boast about... it is not proper for Constantinople to give this alone, since the patriarchs have taken care of the matter of the church, otherwise they themselves cannot give or take the dioceses alone, but it is fitting to give them together to the four patriarchs...” and further “one should not have asked for this for money, but simply for the sake of faith and the benefit of the faithful, not like now, when the most honest messenger (clerk Nikita Alekseev, and, it seems, priest, Ivan Lisitsa) informed us: if we give a letter, he will give alms, but if we don’t give, he won’t give.” Demetrius wrote the word “see” twice in his manuscript against these expressions. Further, Dositheus writes: “there is fear from here, that someday they will not obey the Kyiv Metropolitan, who was not consecrated by the Patriarch of Constantinople, who are also Orthodox in Ukraine and Poland, and schism and word-wrangling will begin, and even worse than this.” Demetrius notes: “as if you had guessed that this would happen and you prophesied involuntarily” 196. This, of course, is an allusion to the claims of the Uniate Joseph of Shumlyansky, who still styled himself the administrator of the Kyiv diocese, and to other unrest in the diocese 197. Further citing the words of Joachim’s letter that Archimandrite of Pechersk should be elected “according to our measure, blessing, according to the custom of their ancient council, and let him take the dignity of the degree and priesthood from us; without our measure of command, for the sake of any misfortunes, the Metropolitan of Kiev and other bishops should not elevate their dignity to that degree,” Dimitri notes: “look not kindly at us and against the stauropegial letters” and below, “look against the Moscow privileges in consecration” 198. Demetrius also made extracts from Palinodia about the Kyiv metropolitans and by whom they were appointed 199. In addition to Savich’s patriotism, we also note the opinion about the superiority of the conciliar power of the patriarch over the power of one patriarch. This ancient Russian Orthodox opinion, developed by the Little Russian Church during the period of union and the separation of the gentry's higher clergy, was also carried out in the church life of that time: we see constantly free elections of abbots, archimandrites and even metropolitans 200. The feeling of love for his native Little Russian church is also visible in other marks of Demetrius in the same manuscript. Dosifei wrote later: “the essence of the people in Rome and Poland from the Latins was taught and the archimandrites and abbots of the monastery read inappropriate wisdom in the monasteries and wear Jesuit necklaces (are they hoods?) ... so that the pious custom in Moscow would be preserved according to the ancient charter, so that there would not be abbots and archimandrites from of the Cossack family, but Muscovites in Moscow and in the Cossack land, may they not be corrupted (by Cossack morals)... henceforth the churches of the righteous.” Dimitri remarked: “Isn’t this an appendage from the translator?” and further: “I don’t know why you won’t force me?” 201. These notes, in connection with the above, sufficiently characterize the political views of Demetrius for this period, and we will turn to a further review of his life. By 1684 there was news about Demetrius's father, centurion Savva Tuptalo, who, of course, had visited his son in the monastery before 202. Even earlier, Dimitri’s acquaintance, Abbot Kirillovsky Innokenty Monastyrsky, became a neighbor of Dimitriev’s father: on January 12, 1684, for a thousand zlotys, he bought himself a place in Podol - with a large house and garden 203. On May 1, the archimandrite received General Gordon, who greeted Yasinsky in Latin, mentioning Gisel’s favor. He responded in kind. At the end there was a great treat, which probably included Demetrius 204 . On May 19, Trinity, there was again a great celebration in the Lavra, to which many people gathered 205. On June 3, a stone refectory (Refectorii) was laid in the Lavra, and General Gordon 206 was at the celebration. Also in 1684, Dimitri met Stefan Yavorsky, who later became his closest friend 207 . Yavorsky composed a eulogy for Yasinsky this year - Hercules post Atlantem infracto virtutum robore honorarium pondus sustinens (i.e. Yasinsky after Gisel) 208. In the Lavra, Demetrius apparently became an official preacher: Varlaam himself calls Demetrius in 1689 a skillful and prudent preacher of the word of God 209; in his own handwritten copy of the sermon delivered on February 24, 1683 in the Lavra in commemoration of the burial 210 of Innocent Gisel, he notes that this pyramid was built by the labor of the sinful hieromonk Dimitri Savich, at the hour of the executioner of Pechersk 211. This first of Demetrius's sermons, which has come down to us, was delivered in the presence of the Kyiv governor Sheremetev, Gordon and all foreign officers 212. Built on a strictly scholastic model, this speech in its artificiality is on a par with the works of Galatovsky and Radivilovsky. The preacher builds a pillar or pyramid, likening Gisel himself, the pillar of the church of God, to the pillar of Solomon's church. The pillar of Solomon's church was made of copper and gold. Copper and gold are symbols of patience and constancy in good deeds, and the late archimandrite was distinguished by these qualities, who during the thirty years of his abbotship had to see Ukraine exhausted by wars, the Lavra surrounded by enemies, the brilliance of infidel swords and the attack of mental wolves on his spiritual flock. Then the preacher compares the deceased archimandrite with the pillar of Daniel, which was distinguished by its constant novelty and served as a burial place for kings. This constant novelty corresponded to the constant generosity of the deceased, and to the buried kings of the Medes, Parthians and Persians - sins from the world, the flesh and the devil, mortified by piety. Your nostrils are like a pillar, your neck is like a pillar, your breast is like a pillar, it is said in the Song of Songs: this was said to vain, proud and money-loving people, but the deceased was not such a person as to build his nostrils like a pillar, for the sake of human glory, etc.; he was distinguished by faith, hope and love, as can be seen from his writings, pious life and good deeds to his neighbors. Then, having found the Church of Solomon - the Pechersk monastery, the gilded walls - the rules of monastic life, the cherubim - the clergy, the golden vessels - the cathedral fathers, the copper sea - obedience, on the oxen - novices, the preacher points out the current pillar of the monastery in the person of the high in God, the most exalted by his grace, Mr. Father Archimandrite (Varlaam), who replaced the previous pillar - o. Gisela. On that pillar there were also signs: golden sands of teaching, with which the deceased caught verbal fish, bringing them to reason (being a mentor in the college), golden lilies of charity to the poor, who “have somewhere to sit, but have nothing to eat,” and gilded apples of good deeds. The crown on the pillar is made up of the fathers singing the dirge. Having made inscriptions on the pillar and pointing out Gisel’s affection for Varlaam, the preacher concludes the word with eternal memory.” We deliberately retold this word in detail to show that Demetrius was not at all alien to the scholasticism of that time. The sermon itself is compiled according to the recipe of the “Key of Understanding” 213. In addition to preaching, Demetrius eagerly began writing the lives of saints. How fascinated he was by them and how vividly he imagined them is evidenced by his touching story about two dreams of St. Barbara and St. Orestes 214. Demetrius was so fascinated by the writing of the lives that he, writing at night, sometimes went to bed without undressing, only an hour before Matins, which he attended very regularly. On March 21, the clergy buried the wife of governor Sheremetev; Of course, Demetrius was also at the funeral 215. On April 5, Gordon was also at the Lavra: he was called to consult what to do with the cave church, which began to settle 216. These visits were repeated and, probably, Dimitri met Gordon. We already talked about the choice of a metropolitan at the beginning of July. On November 8, 1685, Gideon was consecrated in Moscow 217 as metropolitan of Kyiv, and on December 14 he was released to the diocese, and he was given a rich carriage, upholstered in velvet, with metal carved decorations and six brown horses 218. However, they didn’t stop there. In 1686, expensive gold vessels with enamel were sent to the St. Sophia Cathedral, on behalf of Tsars John and Peter and Princess Sophia, and the Metropolitan himself was given a gift of a golden altabass saccos and a miter studded with rubies and emeralds with a bluish diamond; in the inscription on them Gideon is called Metropolitan of All Russia 219. Returning, the Metropolitan stopped in Baturin 220. In January 1686, Varlaam Yasinsky went to Baturin to introduce himself to Metropolitan, and with him Dimitri Savich. The hetman and the metropolitan persuaded Demetrius to accept the secondary abbess at the Baturinsky monastery. Demetrius returned to Kyiv and attended the metropolitan's solemn service in St. Sofia, and on February 4 said goodbye to the hospitable Lavra 221. But even as abbot, Demetrius did not abandon his previous work on the lives of the saints. Both the new metropolitan and the hetman took part in this matter. The latter wrote to Moscow to both the Patriarch and Prince Vas. You. Golitsyn, as we will see, the great patron of Little Russian scientists, with a request to send the great Chet-Minea 222 located in the Assumption Cathedral (Milyutinsky). The books were sent 223. In the same year, on April 23, by order of his elders, Dmitry went to Glukhov and founded the stone Church of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary 224 there. The extensive correspondence of the Patriarch of Jerusalem Dosifei with the tsars, the princess, the patriarch, the metropolitan and the hetman about the affairs of the Little Russian Church 225 dates back to the same time (April). Apparently, not all the clergy recognized Gideon as a properly appointed metropolitan, and a whole series of letters from the patriarchs were needed to calm down the “disputes of the subordinates,” which, as we have seen, Demetrius also noted in his manuscript 226 . Meanwhile, in Moscow, on April 26, they concluded an eternal peace with Poland, and Kyiv with its border cities was finally ceded to Russia 227, and at the same time they began to prepare for the agreed march to the Crimea. Around April 23, 1687, Samoilovich left Baturin, not thinking that he was leaving him forever, and on May 30 he joined V.V. Golitsyn with 50 thousand Cossacks 228. The campaign ended unsuccessfully, the hetman was accused, a denunciation was made against him, signed by Mazepa, Borkovsky and others. The hetman was replaced in July, and Mazepa, a man pleasing to V.V. Golitsyn, was elected instead. The metropolitan, now deprived of his main patron Samoilovich, received complaints from Bishop Lazar Baranovich, Joseph Shumlyansky and others 230. At the same time, he had to work with the hetman to protect the Orthodox in the Polish regions from oppression. They wrote to the Metropolitan about this from Galich and other places: falsehoods and persecutions are being committed and rights and freedoms are being violated. The Metropolitan also sent “vyznavytsy” for identification. Mazepa wrote to Golitsyn on December 16, 1687 and asked to send an embassy to the Grodno Sejm 231. It is clear that the new hetman, already distinguished by his piety before, will also take part in spiritual affairs. And indeed, Mazepa, when he was hetman, built a lot of churches, forbade the monastery tax-paying peasants to free themselves by being assigned to the Cossacks 232, patronized schools 233 and supported scientists. It was not without reason that the Latinists of that time praised him in verse 234. We find similar praise for Mazepa for church charity in the prefaces of the Chernigov Poluustav of 1703 and the Mirror of 1705. 235 Perhaps this charity stemmed from the fact that Mazepa’s mother Maria was a nun, and later the abbess of the Pechersk Ascension Monastery and lived in Baturin, the hetman’s residence 236. Numerous contributions from Mazepa are scattered throughout the Little Russian churches: in the Kiev St. Sophia Cathedral there is a sakkos he contributed 237; in the Lubensky Mgarsky monastery there are two magnificent gospels 238; in 1701, as the builder of the Pereyaslav Ascension Monastery, he donated there the famous Peresopnitsa Gospel 239. In 1700, the interpretation of Gregory Dvoeslov on the book of Job 240 was transferred to his account. In 1708, a gospel in Arabic was published in Aleppo at the expense of the hetman 241. These virtues of Mazepa are even mentioned in contemporary verses composed on the occasion of his betrayal 242. Of course, such a hetman-patron of scientists should have also patronized our saint; this is what actually happened, as we will see. Meanwhile, Demetrius did not abandon his work on the Chet-Mineas and even compiled an index in September 1687 to facilitate the work 243. Another fact that interested Demetrius was the news of the new false messiah Shapti Zephi 244. At that time, another question was brewing in the internal life of the Russian state, the question of reform and its direction. This question was closely related to another question about the cultural influence of Little Russia and its clergy in Great Russia. We will turn to these questions, especially since the life story of St. Demetrius at this time was closely connected with the then Little Russian church and cultural movements. Adj. I. Sochin. St. Dm. I, 457, gives only 8 versts. At least that's how it was in 1650. “Kievsk. Star. " 1882, VII, p. 196. In Makarov, according to Fr. Lebedintseva Ave., there is still Lake Tuptalovskoye. Innocent Tuptalo, Bishop of Podolsk, was mentioned in 1596. Markevich, “Histor. Malor." I, 78. The surname Savich is found quite often (Mark. V, 170, Hiltebrandt “Vilensk. Ruk. V.” 1871 p. 53). We know the family of the Savich lords in Volyn, around 1618 (Soch. Maksimovich, I, 211), hetman Grigory Savich Cherny in 1630 (ibid. p. 243), Ivan and Semyon Savich in 1687 (Collected State Grammar and Dog., IV, 560), archim. Feofil Savich, who brought Adrian’s letter to Mazepa on May 26, 1693 (Head of Academic Sciences, F. No. 84), the same name later, in 1709 (Sudienko, “Materials for Russian History,” K. 1855, II, p. 299). In Kyiv there is still a surname called Savichs, who consider themselves relatives of the saint. Tuptalo, it seems, is Savva’s personal nickname: the saint signed himself Savich everywhere, and not Tuptala, and that’s what he’s called in the documents. That Savva Tuptalo was of a noble family is evident from his frequently encountered portrait: on it we find a coat of arms - a noble red shield, with an image like a Greek delta and with a cross on top (“Moscow Landmarks.” Tromonina, M. 1845, p. 32, “Kiev. Star.” 1882, VII, separate edition of the portrait of Lebedintsev Ave., 1881, etc.). The same image on the seal of a handwritten letter to St. Dmitry at the sacristan's Rostov. Yakovl. monastery o. Gabriel. To the Synod. hands No. 1061, l. 35, the family of St. Dmitry, Metropolitan of Rostov is recorded: Savva, Maria, Gregory, Paraskeva, Maria, Michael, Hieromonk Theophan, Paraskeva, Theodosius, monk Hilarion, nun Alexandra, monk Athanasius, Hierodeacon Parmen. “Kievsk. Eparch. Vedom"., 1868, No. 16, p. 607. “Acts of South and West Russia,” III, 476. Op. Maksimovich, volume I. p. 223. The father (b. 1599 † 1703) is 52, the mother (b. ca. 1619 † 1689) is about 32 years old. Op. I, 479. Adj. I, Belozersky “Yuzhnorus. summer." K. 1856, 23. Adj. 1. In Op. I, 458, Vojvodina (!), which forced the author of op. "St. Dmitry”, M. 1849, p. 1 talk about the relationship of the Radzivils to Makarov, etc. Wed. Beloz. "Southern years", pp. 22 and 64. "Kyiv. Star.”, 1882, VII, 196. Testament of Paraskeva, ibid. VIII, 383. St. Nicholas Monastery was located near Kievsk. Kirillovsky. Boplan, “Description of Ukraine”, St. Petersburg, 1832, pp. 3–4. View of the Kyiv Lavra in an engraving of 1651 in “Monuments”, ed. Kievsk. comm. for dil. other acts, vol. I, K. 1848, appendix. “Collection of materials for the historical topography of Kiev” K. 1874, pp. 73 and 86. Travels of Macarius by Paul of Aleppo, 3, VI, 13 et seq. "Russian Archive", 1863, pp. 40–42. Wed. Maksimovich I, 537 Filaret. Review, 1884 p. 245. "Kyiv. Star.”, 1882, VIII, 383, "Kyiv. Eparch. Ved.,” 1868, No. 16, p. 609; Petrov, “Description of the head of the church museum of Kiev. Spiritual Academician,” K. 1875, I, 185–186. This house, which once belonged to Colonel Chesnok, has survived to this day. "Kyiv. Star.” 1882, III p. 196. It is one-story, stone, with vaults. Other information was placed in No. 3935 of “New Time” dated February 11, 1887. Researchers of Russian antiquity recently discovered a three-story house in Kyiv, the first owner of which was the father of St. Demetrius of Rostov - Savva Tuptalo. The construction of the house is cruciform. Well-preserved ornamentation has been discovered on the interior walls of the house. "The Life of St. Dmitry", M. 1863, p. 2. Karpov, “Crit. developer review source before history Little Russia related”, M. 1870, p. 176. Soloviev, “Ist. Russia", XI, 40. “Monuments Kyiv. Com." II, 154. Karpov, “Kievsk. Metropolis and Moscow government during the unification of Little Russia with Great Russia." M. 1876, III, p. 61, (separate reprint from “Prav. Review” 1875). Sumtsov, “Ioanniky Galyatovsky”, K. 1885, p. 20. Klimovsky, “Ioanniky Galyatovsky”, Vilna, 1884, p. 12. Cf. “Letters of Lazar Baranovich”, Chernigov, 1865, pp. 32 to 37. Erroneous with the author, “St. Dm. R.”, M. 1849, p. 5, named rector Fr. M. Dzik. In Askochensky’s “Belotserkovskaya Conversation” K. 1857, p. 7, I. G. was directly named rector of Kyiv in 1663. Wed. "The Wanderer", 1868, I. About the icon, see Askochensky. “Kiev with its oldest school, the Academy,” I, K. 1856, pp. 209 and 346. “Collection. mater. top Kiev", page 98. Words from the “Lamentations of the Kiev-Brotherly Monks” of the late 17th century. “Kievsk. Star." 1884, X, 355. Askochensky, I, 201. Bulgakov, “History of the Kiev Academy” K. 1848, p. 47. Let us note that the opinions of researchers about the non-involvement of our author with scholasticism are unfounded, as well as the comments that he did not go beyond rhetoric: there were no classes further. Life 4. App. I. Sochin. I, 458. Meletius Dzik (Dzek), who, as we will see, played an important political role, became abbot of Kirillovsky in 1658; during the stay of rector Galatovsky in Lithuania (1667–69) he was in charge of the destroyed Kyiv college, perhaps he had previously taught there and met Dmitry, in 1677 he received the abbess of Mikhailovsky, died on February 7, 1682 (Oc. I, 468, “Letters of L. Baranovich,” 27 and 76). In 1676 he received a parade ground as a gift from Khanenka (Petrov, “Op. director of the Kiev Academician,” 185). In 1677, he participated with Galatovsky in the trial of Archpriest Adamovich (“Acts of Yu. and Z. R.”, XII, p. 848). “Acts of South and West Russia,” VI, 245. “History of Russia”, vol. XI, 22; XII, 38. "Bogdan Khmelnitsky" II. 67. “Archive of the South-West. Russia", I, V. Kyiv. 1873, preface pp. 30–31, 35. Met. Macarius explains the evasiveness of the higher clergy with fear of the Poles “I. R. Ts.” XII, 58 et seq. Soloviev, X, 288. Cf. Letter from Bogdan dated March 27, 1657 (according to Macarius May 27, 1654) to Nikon in defense of Kossov. "Acts of Zap. Russia", vol. V, p. 98. Cf. Readings by O.I. and D.R. 1860, II. 5 pp. 1–8 (letter from the Chernobyl archpriest and report from the Pechersk monk Macarius). Macarius "I. R. Ts.” XII, p. 77. “Acts of South and West Russia,” X, 705–765, 741 and 774. Soloviev, X, 292. Karpov, “Critical. review”, M. 1870, p. 86. His article “Right. Ob.”, 1871, IX, 315. Gadyach articles. Soloviev, XI, 37. Karpov, “Kievsk. Metropolis", III, 56. Chistovich, "Essay on the history of the Western Church", II, 137. "Acts of Yu. and Z.R.", IV, No. 36. Macarius "I. R. Ts.” XII, 542 et seq. “Acts of South and West Russia,” V, 27, June 1660 “Acts of South and West Russia,” V, 103. Soloviev, XI, 4. Karpov, III, 135–137. Methodius was also subject to the curse of Nikon, imposed on Pitirim, who ordained him. Macarius, "I. R. Ts.” XII, p. 570. The message itself in Chernigov. Lip. Ved.,” 1858, No. 26 and in Karpov, III, 61. Soloviev, XI, 141. Karpov, III, 100. The confirmation letter for the Belarusian bishopric to Joseph, the eldest of Vilnius, is dated 1662. In 1670, a copy of this charter was issued to Archimandrite Feodosius Vasilevich of Slutsk. “Historical and legal materials from the register books of Vitebsk and Mogilev.” Vitebsk, 1879 X, 485. About the strife over the second contender Anthony of Vinnitsa, see Macarius “I. R. Ts.” XII, p. 581. Evgeniy “Op. Kiev-sof. Cathedral" page 190. Moscow arch. in. business Certificates of Malor.; No. 181 (XI, 18, St. 2). “Acts of South and West Russia,” VIII, 15. Kostomarov, “Ruin” (“V. E.”, 1879, V, 29. Ist. mon. vol. XV, p. 106). Karpov, III, 127. Soloviev, XI, 183. Kostomarov, “Ruin” (“V. E.” 1879, V, 35. Ist. mon. XV, 144). Karpov, III, 130. Soloviev, XI, 185. Karpov, III, 143. “Acts of Yu. in Z.R.”, vol. IV, p. 162. Karpov, III, 160. Soloviev, XII, 17. Soloviev, XII, 40. Karpov, III, 173. Kostomarov, “Ruin” “V. E.”, 1879, VIII, p. 597, East. m. XV, 232). “Acts of South and West Russia,” vol. VII, 73. Soloviev, XII, 40. Karpov, III, 185–187. “Acts of South and West Russia,” VII, 120, December 18, 1668. I conclude this closeness based on the following circumstances: 1) Demetrius calls Dzik “my most reverend abbot” (recording the year of his death), but he does not mention other abbots in that way; 2) M. Dzik blesses the traveling Dmitry with relics, corresponds with him and, already being the abbot of the Mikhailovsky M., allows Dmitry to stay in Slutsk (Oc. I, 461), but so that Dmitry would like this. Sochin. Maksimovic, II, 312–319. The following fact can testify to Tukalsky’s energy as a defender of Orthodoxy against union. In 1646, being the abbot of the Kupyatitsky monastery, he personally beat Hieromonk Botsevich because he accepted the union and went to complain to the Lutsk Uniate bishop. This is what Tukalsky said: “a zdrayco, szalbierzu, unicie, ty do Ianowa jeżdził, a tam juz unitem zostaé's y duszę swoię do piekła zaprzedales! potzeba cię sprzątnąs zeby ludzi nie zaraźał.” Acts, ed. Vilen. Arch. Com., vol. III, p. 49. We will understand this jealousy when we remember what the Uniates did to the Orthodox. The manuscript of Tukalsky’s teachings was once in the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra, but in 1886 I no longer found it (Eugene “Description of the Kiev Soph. Cathedral,” p. 196). Arch. Nikolai “Description of the Minsk Diocese” St. Petersburg. 1864, pp. 56, 146. etc. Notes of Abbot Orestes in “Archeogr. Vilna collection”, vol. 2, V. 1867, pp. XIX, XX, XXII and 5, LXXVII etc. Wed. vol. 7, p. 127. “Acts of Southern and Western Russia,” vol. V. “Acts of South and West Russia,” vol. VI, p. 245. Ibid. vol. IX, p. 1 and “Acts of the Zap. Russia", V, 114. “Acts of South and West Russia,” VIII, 130 and 135. Kostomarov. “Ruin” (“V. E.”, 1879, VIII, 627, Ist. mon. XV, 275). "Archeogr. Vilen. collection", Vilna, 1867, II, 79. Soloviev, XII, 40. Karpov, III, 178. Soloviev, XII, 91. Chistovich, “Essay on the history of the Western Russian Church,” II, 144. Compare “Letters of L. B.”, 126. Soloviev, XII, 97, 118, 137; XIII, 235. “Acts of Southern and Western Russia,” vol. IX, 40. Doroshenko in July 1669 “dared” to give Kanev to the horde. In general, Tukalky was very unhappy at this time. Lit. Ep. Ved. 1869, p. 429. We know what the Turks did in Kamenets with the churches and how they threatened to march to Kyiv. Solovyov, XII, 130. Here is what the modern psalm says about this: Whoever wants to get sick of the back // Rubbing his eyes will loosen, // What has become of the first // Our century is not enough: // For the hetman Doroshenka // Ukraine has become empty; // Everything in his riots // It came to everyone: // The Churches of God were deserted, // The monasteries were ruined, // The land was desecrated // Through the Turkish tribe... // .... // And he himself Doroshenko // Brings tears from his eyes, // Sees his tribe enslaved... // ... // And the Turkish king lived in that plan // As if he had ruined Kyiv // The Churches of God they are fighting... // Gruntov will ruin them // There are mosques there. (Manual Und. No. 1098, sheet 60 vol.) “Acts of South and West Russia,” IX, 66. In addition to Meletius, the former rector of Dimitriev, Ioannikiy Galatovsky, also had relations with Tukalsky: G. participated in the selection of Tukalsky in Korsun (“The Wanderer,” 1868, I); the 1669 edition of “Messiah Pravdivago” contains (although Tukalky did not particularly like Galatovsky) after the preface the blessing and praise of Metropolitan Tukalsky. Sumtsov, “Ioan. Gal.”, 48 and 56. Let us also note that a certain Pachomius Savich, the abbot of Tukalsky in Vilna, in the Holy Spiritual Monastery, was probably a relative of St. Dmitry. Chistovich, II, 258. “Russian monuments. antiquity Zap. gub.”, Batyushkova, vol. VI, p. 79 (article by V. G. Vasilievsky “History of the city of Vilna”). "Monuments ed. Kievsk. comm. for analysis of ancient acts". Kyiv, II, 1846, pp. 227 and 232. Shtelin's absurd news dates back to 1672 that Dmitry Rostovsky, skilled in stargazing, together with Simeon of Polotsk, by the position of the stars on the night of May 30, 1672, learned about the birth of a great man (Peter I) and compiled his horoscope. Shtelin, “Anecdotes about Peter V.” M. 1830, II, p. 113. Rus. West. 1842, IV p. 258. Moskvityanin, 1842, No. 1 p. 58. Ustryalov, “History of kingdoms. Petra V." St. Petersburg, 1858, I, p. 4. Krekshin mentions only Polotsk (Sakharov “Notes of Russian People.” St. Petersburg, 1841. p. 8). Metropolitan Eugene says that the basis for this fable was a notebook with fortune-telling found in the saint’s papers (Dictionary of Spiritual Writings I, 137). It is interesting to compare the names of St. Dmitry and Polotsky. Questioning speeches on November 14, 1673 by the Cossack Savva Tuptala. “Acts of South and West Russia,” volume XI, pp. 328–330. Wed. "Simbirksky collection", book. I, 1845, p. 51. M. Arch. M. In. D. letters Malor., No. 228. Gisel dated January 10. 1672, writes that everything from Beer is “in great insurance and trouble.” Soloviev, XII, 99. Kostomarov, “Ruin” (“V. E.”, 1879, IX, 37). Much could be explained if the assumption were true that Savva (Prokopovich), the centurion of the Chigirin ambassador Doroshenka, who was present in 1668 at the murder of Bryukhovetsky and subsequently the general clerk, was a relative of the Savichs, as mentioned in the diary and synod (see above p. 1) Feofan Prokopovich (“Acts of South and West Russia”, VIII, 57). However, the “Wieliczka Chronicle”, II, 163, instead of Savva, names the centurion of Bratslav Drozdenko. By 1675, based on the news of Dmitrevsky, cited by F. A. Koni, the presentation of Dmitry's plays at the theater of A. S. Matveev (Russian stage 1864, II, 148, III, 2). In 1675, “The Repentant Sinner,” “The Resurrection of Christ,” “The Great Martyr Demetrius” were given, and in 1677, “The Dormition of the Virgin Mary,” “The Nativity of Christ,” and “The Proclamation of Judgment on Jesus of Nazareth.” The degree of reliability can be judged simply because Dmitry is called “Archimandrite of Novgorod-Seversky.” This news is not even in Nosov’s “Chronicle of the Russian Theater”. M. 1883. "Readings by O.I. and D.R." 1848, II. “The Gustyn Chronicle”, pp. 38 and 62. Ibid, p. 63. “Kiev Antiquity”, 1882, XI, p. 604. Op. I, 453. The idea that L.B. was at the consecration of the church has no particular basis (“St. Dmitry,” M. 1849, p. 9). At Evgeniy Op. K. Sob. p. 196, Chistovich, II, 145 and 146 and Askochensky, I, 207, the year of death is erroneous - 1676 (July 26th). In Ambrose, “Historical Russian Hierarchy,” I, 61, Petrushevich, “Consolidated Galician-Russian Chronicle” (1600–1700), Lvov 1874 p. 180 and in Wieliczka, II, 384, – 1675. Meletius was a judge in the sensitive case of S. Adamovich for Lazar (“Acts of Yu. and Z. R.”, XII, p. 848. Solovyov, XIII, 244). “Letters from L.B.”, 206. Cf. Petrushevich, p. 166. Wieliczka II, 384. Cf. ridicule of B.'s rhyming mania in Colloquium lubelskie, W. 1680 p. 66. Bulgakov. “East. Kievsk. Acad.", 85. Author of the book “St. Dmitry,” page 7, suggests without evidence that Dmitry was invited to fight the Uniates and Latins. This is incredible because Dmitry was too young (24 years old) to study the extensive polemical literature that already existed and make his contribution to it, and most importantly, there was no particular need for a new polemicist in Chernigov. Sumtsov, "L. B.”, pp. 144–146, 157. The opposite opinion is held by V. Stroev, “Lazar Baranovich” (“Chern. Eparch. Izv.” 1876). It is curious that Lazarus, himself a preacher and writer of the “Lives of the Saints” (in verse, in Polish), nowhere mentions Demetrius and his menaion brothers. Kostomarov, “Ruin” (“V. E.”, 1879, IX, 15, Ist. mon. XV, 301). “Chronicle of the Samovidets” K. 1878, pp. 134 and 141. This publication is known only at the direction of Sopikov, I, No. 1057. To the polemicist of the 17th century. Hierodeacon Damascene knew only the 1683 edition. I used the 1683 edition, the second (p. 6 “the second is being published”). In the first edition there were no conversations, moral teachings and butts attached to each of the 24 miracles (p. 6, ed. 1683). “It is appropriate for Your Holiness to accept my wretched fleece (obedience, I say): out of obedience, as You commanded me, for the honor and glory of the Most Honest Cherubim and the Most Glorious Seraphim, I wrote this small book according to my strength” (p. 5). The name of the author is recognized from the poems: Izh E in Rune in Ogda transformed // M ati s O tvorshago NA with everything X here written // Soulfully AND THOUGHT I TU book in RI METE // MYSELF is attentive And to others about Reading. // In case of typos, it is said that their fault is “the inconsistency of the publisher of this little book, who stood further in a different obedience. Having completed the typographic work, come and make the most necessary corrections.” But one place seems to indicate that Dmitry did not participate in the first edition. Namely, in the afterword, reminiscent of the most ancient Russian afterwords, the writer says: “forgive me if I have been rude and have written unkindly in some way: an ignorant person is simple and unscientific, the same as the first who composed this and that is not of his own... like a bee from various greens collects honey into one hundred.” Therefore, what is said above can be attributed with equal right to 1683. "Chronicle of the Samovidet." K. 1878, 133. Op. I, 459. In the same year, 1677, when Demetrius left Chernigov, abbot Meletiy Dzik was transferred from the Kirillovsky monastery to Mikhailovsky. That the dismissal of Dmitry Baranovich was a somewhat strange matter can be concluded from the fact that subsequently Baranovich remains silent, while the hetman demands the return of Dmitry from Lithuania; Demetrius himself does not take the call very joyfully and, not paying attention to the hetman’s letters, remains in Lithuania for another 10 months, and goes not to Kyiv to the abbot, but to Baturin to the hetman, who did not like Lazar (Oc. I, 461–465. Letters of Lazar, 187. Solovyov, XIV, 27, 31). We don’t know when the bishop’s missal, written with the blessing of the Right Reverend Father Lazar Baranovich in the Spassky Monastery of Novgorod-Seversky on August 6, 1665, came into the possession of Demetrius. The missal is decorated with pretty good pictures: so on the fol. 181 at the ceremony of consecrating the banner with a howl for battle, a church is depicted with a bishop, hetman and Cossacks; on l. 238 image of I. X. with verses: Effigiem Christi semper dum transis honorâNon tam effigiem, sed quern designat adora, Non hunc ut Christum, sed Christum Crede per istura. (Hand. Syn. Bible No. 271 with the entry of St. Demetrius). Life, page 7. Article “St. Demetrius in Western Russia" in "Litovsk. diocesan Ved." 1871, p. 851, presents a paraphrase of the work “St. Dimitri" M. 1849. Arch. Nikolai, “Description of the Minsk Diocese,” p. 68. “Arch. Vilen. collection,” V., 1870, VII, 107. Letter from Vygovsky to F.V. about his resettlement to Lithuania from Zaporozhye. On Vasilevich’s activities until 1659, see Macarius “I. R. Ts.” XII, 98–102,553. Colloquium Lubelskie 1680 pp. 68. Karpov, 76. Additions to page 21 – In 1663 Aug. 13. Vasilevich is the representative of the Bishop of Lvov Shumlyansky, during the election of a successor to Metropolitan Balaban, and on December 3 he was declared vicar of the Kyiv Metropolis. Archive of the South-West Russia IV, 23. Chistovich, “Histor. zap.-Russian churches," II, 188. “Arch. Vilens. collection.”, B, VII, 1870 pp. 118–19. “Arch. Vilens. collection,” VII, 124 (in 1664). “Arch. Vilens. collection,” VII, 121 (in 1663). “Arch. Vilens. collection,” II, XXV and “Arch. collection Wil.”, VII, 132. “Arch. Wil. collection,” VII, 127. Sama tylko oyca Tukalskiego sprawa in sinistram mnie niewinnego trahit i podaje opinionem. Jan-Kazimir suspected Vasilevich of indignation of the people (Arch. Nikolai 114). “Arch. Wil. collection." VII, 136. Odważam się samaż pod Kiów do samej na ten czas Moskiewskiej granicy dobieźec i tam J. M. oyca archimandrytę Pieczarskiego przy którym te sprawy zostaią do siebie z Kjiowa evocare. Upon the death of F.V., these estates were given to the bishop. Shumlyansky. Petrushevich, 191 East. legal mater. from act. books Vit. and Mogil. V. t. X. p. 485. “Letters from L.B.”, p. 175. Biegł znowu wczoraj (in 1667) zakonnik nasz od króla J. M. z listami do Kiiowa y do kazakòw... Zadnieprzy też kozaky z Moskwą się wadzą a zDoroszeńkiem znoszą.Wtych dniach spodziewam się pewnei particularium wiadomosci z Ukrainy które do W. X. M. (B. Radziwila) odeszlę, a sam tu na resolucyię oyca archimandryty Pieczarskiego z gotowoscią w drogę ku niemu poczekam (Ibid. VII, 137–138). Chistovich, II, 188. His merits, on this side, served as the theme for a whole panegyric that has come down to us in the original. Among the manuscripts of Imi. Publ. Bible (Polish, F. XIV, 37) I found: “Panegiryk albo przywitanie y wiersze z emblematami w czes'c wysoce w Bogu przewielebnemu iego mosci oycu Theodosemu Wasilewiczowi archymandrycie Słuckiemu namiesnikowi metropoliey kiiowskej w Wielk. Xięstw. Litews. Michaiłowickiemu, Dzieciełowickiemu, Hrozowskiemu ihumenowi. Zastawiasz sie za Swiętnice Pańką tui officii diligentissimus praeses y nie tylko w sczypliwe mocno znosisz persecutiones ale y cum nefandis hostibus proavis mę'znum dimicas sercem (l. 2 vol.). Pamiętne będzie y collegium Kiiowohyleanskie prac y starania Przewielebnosci waszey... będzie wykrzykac' sławą odwaznę twoię y na seymowych expeditiech lubotoslowne gesta (l. 3)... My – tuo pastorali regimur caduceo, infima sodalitas nostra... zeby ne tulko Minervam ale by y całe Vilnensis coeli culmen imo totius orbis z swoiemi ozdobami pod twoie sie podkładało nogi. The individuals who submitted the eulogy can be judged because they have just lost: protektora jas'niewielmoz 'nego J .M. pana Alexandra Ogińskiego kasztellanaTrockiego, - i.e. teacher of the Vilna fraternal school. The manuscript is decorated with gold, patterns and drawings of a miter, a staff, a book, a heart and a cross - (parts of Vasilevich's coat of arms), which are sung in Polish poetry, especially for the fact that Vasilevich - obronie cierkow, staiąc za iej wolnos'ci (l. 11). Vasilevich receives similar praise in the dedication of Galatovsky’s Messiah Pravdivago. Probably Jan Askold, then a poet. Petrushevich, St. years. page 196. This is how King Jan Sobieski mocked the newly installed bishop, thanks to Uniate intrigues: Rux vero vocavit tum (Clementem) ad se, etille coram rege stetit tanquam piscis mutus. Tunc rex ad Tryznam affatur: Ave sacrum chrisma, panie Tryzna, czy zdrowa twoja schisma? (story by L. Kishka). Arch. Nikolai. “Description. Min. eparch.”, p. 88. Subsequently, the abbot of the Minsk Peter and Paul Monastery, Fr. Peter Paskevich-Tolokonsky was an archimandrite of Vilna. Wed. Collection of documents on Latin propaganda, II, Vilna, 1867, p. 100. Op. I, 460. Arch. Nicholas, p. 125. Chistovich, II, 177. Apparently, Catholic propaganda was intensifying in Vilna at that time. This is how I explain to myself the fact that in 1675 the Vilna Uniate shoemakers confirmed the decision to allocate the third penny from the income of the workshop in favor of the Uniate monastery and forbade the schismatic shoemakers to send Orthodox religious services (“Arch. Vil. Collection,” p. X, 293. Compare “Acts of the Arch. Vil. Comm.”, vol. I, p. 235). In the collected works, part II, there are sermons preached on these Sundays, but already in Moscow in 1701. The first date is in the printed edition, the second I borrow from the manuscripts. Titova, No. 100 l. 260. The text from the Song of Songs is given according to Jerome's translation. Manuscript Growth. Yakovl. Mon., No. 8, l. 220 rpm Chistovich, II, 158. Evgeniy “Op. Kyiv. Cathedral" 190. This Pachomius Savich is known for his activities in 1663, when he kept Stefan Shitik in Orthodoxy ("Monuments of Russian antiquity of the Western Gubernia Empire", VI, 99). In the sacristy of the Vilna monastery, Demetrius’s things are preserved, but which ones are not indicated (“Lit. Eparch. Vedom.” 1869, p. 1289). "Life", 7. Op. 462 “about being Demetrius for sowing the word of God in your hearts” (letter from Dzik to the Slutsk brotherhood). “Life”, 8. In the Slutsk monastery synodikon there is a family of Dimitri Skochkevich. Arch. Nikolay, 112. This is how the famous Trifon Korobeinikov describes Slutsk in 1593: Slutsk is a smaller city than Kolomna: wooden, and near the city there is a fort for city business, and in the fort there are trades (and the master's courtyard) and (tenants') courtyards with 200, and with the settlement there are more than Rostov; and under the city under the wall there are two rivers Vesya (Ves) and Slun, and those rivers converged above the village about a mile away, on the Moscow side; and under the city there is a river with the Moscow River, and under the city there are ponds... and in the suburbs and the city and the trades, that city of Slutsk, the city of Minsk, is larger and better... at the gates and in the prison there are collars and archers with towels (handles); a foreigner will not be allowed into the prison without telling him (Uvarov’s manuscript No. 560 of the former Tsar’s No. 389, discrepancies according to my manuscript No. 70). Arch. Nicholas, 140 and 111. She († 1660) is buried in it. Petrushevich, St. years. 130. Memory rus. Art. zap. lips imp. VI, 81. Pam. other letters 1880, II (Lileev. Description of black hand.) p. 176. Cf. appearance of the privilege of depriving the Dizunites of the magistracy in 1668 “Ist. legal mater. act. book Vitebsk." VI, 1875, p. 257. "Monuments of Western lips." VI, 80. Balinski Starożytna polska III, 674. Samuel Oskierka sędzia Ziemski mozyrski fundowal Bernardynów w Sluckie. However, later in 1686 she worked to protect the rural clergy from oppression. Arch. Nikolay, 115. “Archive of the South-West. R." I, V, 807. Arch. Nicholas, page 35. Also in Mogilev in 1667 (“Arch. Vill. collection” II “Notes of Abbot Orest”, XXII). “Acts of pitchfork. com." VIII, p. 132. “Archive of Y.Z.R.” I, V, 807. “Archive of the South-West. R." I, V, pp. 13, 22, 24, 28, 30. “Acts of Yu. and Z.R.”, p. 255. In Chistovich, II, 246–1675, but in “Zap. abbot. Orestes" (“Arch. Vill. collection,” II, XXV) – 1678. Addition to page 27 – For further persecution of Orthodoxy, see Simashkevich, Roman Catholicism and its hierarchy in Podolia. Kamenets II. 1872, p. 262; Zamyslovsky, Relations between Rus' and Poland under Tsar Theodore Alekseevich (J.M.N.P. 1888, p. 471, No. 2); Antonovich in the preface to Arch. IO.-Z. Russia, vol. II, part 2, XIX Kyiv 1888; and Vestnik Zap. and South-West. Russia 1862, I, p. 17. “Letters from L.B.”, p. 105. In the handwritten manuscript of St. Demetrius (“Synod.” No. 146, l. 179) we find the following note, interesting for characterizing the views on the union of both Demetrius himself and Vasilevich. Theodosego Basilewicza episcopa Bialoruskiego te cztery propozycyé probantur et deducuntur: 1) Rus przyęła krzest od patryarchi Konstantinopolskiego disunita. 2) Rus disunita przed Floren''skim synodem za Kasimiérza króla do korony accessit. 3) Rus disunita y po Floren''skim synodzie została y tem corporacyia y potwierdzenie praw zostało. 4) 'Ze Rum po Floren''skim sypodzie áz do nowey Uniej była disunita y tey debentur dignitates et jura. In Demetrius's library there were the following works of a polemical nature: Questions and answers to the Orthodox with a papezhnik with an acrostic poem at the beginning: preserved Italian (Synod., No. 942, cfr. Russian history bib. IV, 1). Desiderozus Sakovich, Note on Hypatia about the Cathedral of Florensky, Book on Faith, Prawdziwa wiara Gisel (“Muscovite”, 1855, November, No. 21–22. “Yar. Gub. Ved.”, 1855, No. 23–25); Palinode of Kopystensky (Gorsky, VI, p. 330) from the books of Hieromonk Dimitry Savich, unworthy Archimandrite Eletsky of Chernigov; in his Notata per alphabetum (Synod. Hand., No. 187, l. 174–185) a whole essay Concordia discors dominicarum orthodoxae ecclesiae cum Romana (which gospels are read on Sundays by Catholics and Orthodox Christians) is preserved. “Letters from L.B.”, 105, 145, 174, 175. Additions to page 28 – During Demetrius’s stay in Vilna, there were disputes between the Roman Catholic Chapter and Bishop Patz. Przyalgówski Zywoty biskupów wilenskich. Petersburg 1860, p. 27, 33, 38, 53. Adj. I, Op. I, 463. in the notes to Darius, the compilers put the city of Lublin, which, of course, is incorrect. Op. I, 464–475. "St. Dmitry,” M. 1849. p. 11. The sermons have not reached us. Wieliczka. "Chronicle", II, 487. Op. I, 466. There is no Lyubelsky monastery, it is probably the same as the Dyatlovitsky-Preobrazhensky monastery. Op. I, 464. August 29th. Arch. Nicholas, pp. 70 and 121. Probably when it was laid by Feofan Krekhovetsky. Old man - Old man. The author of the essay “St. Dmitry”, page 11, in vain separates them. We are talking about civil government, and not about the attitude of the clergy to schism and foreigners. Diary of St. Demetrius is written in Polish. So, in 1679, the Pecherki monks got themselves the Trubetskoy monastery “having sent away the Moscow monks.” In 1680, they “visited” the Svensky Monastery near Bryansk (“Letop. Samov.”, 152). We will look at this competition further below. Wieliczka, III, 14. “St. Dmitry", M. 1849, p. 43. “Fees. mat. topographic Kyiv." 1874, p. 109. Wieliczka, II, 409, 414, 428, 434, 438, 409 and III, 9. Buchinsky dedicated his eulogy “Chigirin” to him. Gordon's Tagebuchv. Posselt II, 21. And his wealth was truly enormous. So he had silver: 77 cups, 60 mugs, 91 large dostans, 105 smaller ones, etc. See the inventory of his property, very interesting for studying the then domestic life, in the “Russian Historical Library”. St. Petersburg 1884, pp. 950–1204. “Chronicle of a self-witness”, K. 1878, pp. 169–170. Wieliczka, III, – 517. Adj. I, op. I, 466. Not a word about relations with Dzik during this time in Diariya: perhaps unrest and hostilities near Kiev interfered with this, perhaps some cold relations arose, although Dzik subsequently bequeathed 2 ducats to Demetrius as a memorial for his soul. M. Ar. Min. In. D. Letters Malor., No. 413–398. Op. I, 458. See below p. 364 “Letters from L.B.”, 187. Soloviev. XIV, 27, 31. Russian archive. 1863, I–II, pp. 34–35. Travel Art. Leontia. Op. I, 469–470. This hierodeacon Gabriel was the same Gabriel Filippovich, the cathedral clerk of the Kyiv Lavra, for whose ordination as a presbyter Varlaam Yasinsky subsequently petitioned Patriarch Joachim. Arch. S.-W. Russia. I, V, pp. 91. 213 and 216. The publishers of Diarius are in vain to see in one of the tonsures of Theophanes, the famous Feofan Prokopovich. Filaret, Historical and statistical. described. Chernig. dioceses.III, 281. Gordov reports that Gideon took all his silver, dishes, horses and servants from Poland. Chistovich, II, 310. Kojalovic, Lithuanian Church Union. II, 229, 236, 422, 435, 440. Antonovich, Essay on the state of the South Russian church in the 17th century. in Monographs, vol. I, and Archives of the South-West. Russia. I, IV, preface. Cfr. Wieliczka, II, 503–509. Petrushevich, Summary let., pp. 234, 226, 254, 267. Collection of Scientific. Lvov, 1868, p. 82. Archive S.W. R. I, V, pp. 35–40. In addition to the Pocheki of M. Serbsky, Melchizedek of Bolgar, Macarius Ligaridi, who we met, we can also point out Arseny of Bolgar (c. 1672) (Sinb. Collection. M. 1845, p. 8), Pankratius of M. Greek (c. 1679) and Sophrony of M. Filipopolsky and Dramsky (Petrushevich, Code. years., pp. 195 and 328). On the incorrect initiation of candidates, see Kronika miasta Lwowa, p. 85. (Manager. Sel. past. 1860, p. 292). A general description, far from flattering, is from Kapterev, “The nature of Russia’s relations with the Orthodox East in the 16th and 17th centuries.” M. 1885, pp. 152–220 et seq. Cfr. Ternovsky, “Study of the Byzantines. history, etc." I, K. 1876, pp. 103–111. Soloviev, XIV, 5–7. Archive of the South-West R. I, V, preface p. 94, etc.; We referred to this excellent article by Ternovsky above. “Archive of the South-West. P." I, V p. 212. Ibidem, preface p. 89. Ustryalov, History of Peter the Great. I, page 141. Archive of the South-West Russia. I, IV, pp. 72, 76, in the preface by V. B. Antonovich, pp. 17 and 30. Op. I, 471 – 2. “Life”, page 8, says that Demetrius, having left the abbess, “lived in a monastery, in solitude.” Abolensky. The Moscow state under Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. K. 1876, p. 104. Description of Kyiv in 1654 by Paul of Aleppo, Archdeacon Macarius of Antioch. Collection of materials for history. topography of Kyiv. K. 1874, p. 56. Of course, the Kiev Lavra has changed a little to this day, not just until 1684. The journey of Elder Leonty (Lukyanov) in 1701. Ibid., p. 120. Cfr. Russian Archive 1863 “Letter from L.B.”, p. 117. Memorial book of the Kiev province for 1857, p. 67. Preface to Volume I of Chet-Minya 1689 Stroev, Description. book Tolstoy, p. 345. Maybe Mogila was busy with moral reading for the Kiev-Pechersk brethren. Cfr. S. T. Golubeva, Petr Mogila. K. 1883. I, pp. 320–331, 362. Additions to page 38 – The Lives of Metaphrastus were known in Ukraine in a 16th-century manuscript. Vladimirov. Review of South Russian and Western Russian monuments. K. 1890, p. 36. Archive of the South-West R. I, V, p. 277. In Dobryansky, Described. hands Vilen. Public Bible p. 131, the chet-mena in Belarusian are indicated in the list of move 1669, but unfortunately I could not use them. Colloquium Lubelskie 1680, Nakladłi swiętych niebytych nigdy do Prolohow Ruskih and, as an example, St. Anthony the Roman is given. Adj. I. According to Diarius in June (Op. 1, 471). Mečec Dukhovny. Kazan, 1866, p. 34. Moscow Arch. M.I.D. Certificates of minors. No. 466 (482). Secret articles about this were published in Arch. South-West P. I. V, p. 56. They clearly show with what disgust the Kiev clergy treated the Moscow spiritual order. Op. I, 472. Gordon’s story is curious, which the researchers did not use. He reports that Yasinsky, even in the elective metropolitan charter (Wahl-Instrument), placed articles about the privileges of Archimandrite Pechersk (Gordons, Tagebuch v. Posselt. II, 99). We read this document in a manuscript that belonged to Saint Demetrius with his own handwritten notes in the margins. Hand. synod. bib. No. 146, l. 233 and 238 vol. Archive of the South-West R. I, V, pp. 147–157. About this embassy, ​​in addition to what was published in the South-West Archive. P. I, V we can also report the following testimony in the autobiography of Parthenius Neboza, Metropolitan of Laodicea, a person with whom we will meet later. “Last [zrchd - 7194] year, your envoy Nikita Alekseev was sent from this royal autocratic throne to Constantinople, to the Patriarch of Constantinople Cyrus Dionysius, and with him was the interpreter Russian man Abraham and from Ukraine Ivan the Fox; and when they came to the Holy Patriarch, then I happened to see Ivan the Lisitsa according to our previous acquaintance with him, and the envoy Nikita asked Ivan about me, and having learned about me, he managed his business, for which he was sent: to take letters from the Holy Patriarch about the Kyiv Metropolis, so that it would be assigned to this Russian royal throne, and for the Church of John The Forerunner, about whom V. Ts. P. V. beat his forehead. Archbishop Ananias of Sinai, and about everything, he always helped as much as possible, and we escorted his envoy to the patriarch and from the patriarch - and escorted him to the most pure church of St. Sofia." In conclusion, Parthenius left with an envoy to Russia. Hand. I. P. B. Pogodina No. 1745, l. 6.Cfr. Yar. Ep. Ved. 1861, no. 4. Hand. syn. bib. No. 146, l. 238 rev. Archive of the South-West R. I, V, pp. 180 and I, 4 passim. These sacra of the patriarchs to Metropolitans Balaban and Tukalsky Συστατικἀ as Pavel of Aleppo calls them, i.e., letters of independence of the management of the Lavra, were the subject of trouble even for the hetman who tried, of course, by calculation, to approve them in 1686 (Arch. South-West R. I, V, p. 140). Hand. synod, bib. No. 146, l. 246, 248 and 324. Levitsky. The main features of the internal structure of the Western Russian Church (Kievsk. Star. 1884, VIII, pp. 630, 644, 650, 654). Hand. syn. bib. No. 140, l. 239 rev. Den 20 November 1684 kam der Sotnik Tuptala, welcher auf Kundschaft war ausgeschickt mit der Nachricht zurück dass gegen 400 Tartaren... 4 Meilen von Kiew worden (Gordon, Tagebuch. II, s. 46). He seems to have retired in 1685. Cf. Gordon, II, 68, which talks about the activities of the new Kiev centurion Ignatius Grigorievich. Kyiv. diocesan Ved. 1868, p. 609. Petrov. Description Kiev hands, I, 185 Gordon, Tagebuch, II, 21. Proceedings Kyiv. Spirit. Academician 1864, January, p. 51. Op. Maxim. III, 709. In Demetrius's sermon in memory of Gisel (Op. III, 597), there is also a comparison of Gisel with Atlas. Archive of the South-West R. I, V, p. 278. Innocent died on November 18, 1683. If we accept his burial in February 1684, then Demetrius’s expression “in the year after his burial,” i.e., February 24, will be understandable. 1685.Cfr. Philareta, Review of spirit. lit. St. Petersburg 1884, p. 203. We also encountered a significant distance between death and burial at the death of Theodosius Vasilevich. It seems that the matter is not about committing the body to the earth, but only about the solemn funeral of the already buried, which sometimes happens even now in the absence of a priest. Instead of embalming at that time, corpses were filled with wax. Synod. bib. hands No. 146, l. 143. This sermon is also in Ukrainian in Titov’s manuscript No. 100, fol. 365, and in a distorted Russian translation is placed in the works of St. Demetrius, III, p. 574 Den 24 begab sich der Bojarin mit allen Officieren nach den petcherischen Kloster, wo das Andenken des verstorbenen archimandriten Innocentius Gisel gefeiert wurde (Gordon. II, 65). It is interesting to compare this work with identical Polish panegyrics like the book Naruszewicza. Meta felicitatis, quam illustriss. Paulus Joannes Sapieha, comes in Bychow, palatinus vilnensis, genere, gestis, honoribus, morte attigit, proposita et illustrissimis dominis comitibus Casimiro Joanni Sapieha, Benedicto Paulo Sapieha, Francisco Paulo Sapieha, Leoni Sapieha, moestis tanti parentis filiis, almæ universitatis vilnensis S. J. nomine dicata. Vilnæ, 1666., or Palatium immortalitatis ab architectante æterna sapientia ilustriss. Andreæ Trzebicki, antistiti cracoviensi, Severiæ duci, in regali collegio cracoviensi SS. Petri et Pauli apostolorum, S. J. longe munificentissimo religiosarum ædium erectori, positum. Crac. 1672. In addition to school, Demetrius could acquire acquaintance with scholasticism by listening to other preachers. At the same time (in December 1684) Demetrius received, according to the will of Fr. Jacob of Olonetsky's book Hortus pastorum, scholastic. manual of homiletics. (Op. I, 472). Op. I, 472 and 478 (August 10 and November 1685). A travel permit to Moscow was issued to Gideon on October 8, 1685. M. Arch. M.I.D. Letters small., No. 477 (493). Our acquaintance Innokenty of Monastyrsky also traveled to Moscow with the Metropolitan. Evgeniy, Description of Kiev-sof. Cathedral, page 82. Evgeniy, Description of Kiev-sof. cathedral, pr. p. 85. Evgeniy, Description of Kiev-sof. Cathedral, pp. 51, 52, 53. Op. I, 473–474. A mention of Demetrius’s father dates back to this time: Savva Tuptalo, the centurion of Kiev, received in 1686 part of the bridge toll collected for travel across the river. Irpen near the town of Mostishcha (Kiev Star. 1882, VII, p. 196). Here is an authentic letter to Golitsyn, indicated in Melodika (St. Petersburg, 1844, p. 229). By the grace of God, the great Sovereigns, Tsars and Grand Dukes John Alekseevich and Peter Alekseevich of all Great and Lesser and White Russia, autocrats and many states and lands of the eastern and western and northern fathers and fathers and heirs and sovereigns and holders of Their Royal Most Serene Majesty, the royal great seal and state great embassy affairs, guardian, neighbor boyar and governor of Novgorod, Prince Vas. You. To Golitsyn, my gentle gentleman friend and benefactor, you will receive all the best if you wish, I send my heartfelt greetings. The spiritual people who sing here in Little Russia, who are diligent about their own and about human salvation, have conceived the task of copying the book of the lives of the saints, who have pleased God for centuries, and as for their conception, they will require the books of men of honor for the best study of all things, of which there are none, but are found at the most holy and most blessed Cyrus Joachim, Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia and the northern countries, at the throne church of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary. At the request of these spiritual persons, in agreement with the Right Reverend Metropolitan, I am writing to the Most Holy and Most Blessed Patriarch, asking for the Father’s permission, that some spiritual books be read out to our persons (given for reading), if not for everyone for a whole year, then for a period of time (at least) for four months: September, octovria, noevria and decembri, and I vow to take your books in my hands and inspect them, so that after they have been read, they will be sent back intact to his patriarchal dignity; since this matter is for the praise of God and the salvation of Christian Orthodox Christians, so I ask your princes of greatness, please, with your high intercession and report to Their Royal Majesties, honor our request so that the most holy books are not given to us for a while; Pray and repeat to your prince your greatness, I grant me your merciful prince's greatness and beneficence. Given from Baturin on March 4th to the fate of your princess, you are a great friend and happy to serve. John Samoilovich. hetman of the Tsarsk army. Most Holy Velich. Zaporozhsky. Moscow Arch. Min. In. Del. Certificates are small. No. 502 (486). Archive I, V, pp. 142–164. Archive of the South-West P. I, V, p. 186. Ustryalov, I, 168. Shchebalsky. The reign of Princess Sophia. M. 1S56, p. 97. Chronicle of a self-witness. K. 1878, p. 166. Vasily Borkovsky, a great lover of church splendor and an acquaintance of Dmitry, now general of the transport, helped Mazepa achieve hetmanship. There is news that after the deposition of Samoilovich, Golitsyn offered the mace to Borkovsky for 10 tons, but the convoy officer refused out of stinginess, and Mazepa bought the hetmanship, taking money from Borkovsky for this (Kyiv. Star. 1883, VII, 515). Wed. Mazepa's letter to Golitsyn with a parcel of 10 thousand. Ustryalov, I, 356. Archive of the South-West R. I, V, pp. 151 and 271. Moscow Arch. M.I.D. gram. small 518 (500). Russian Conversation 1859, V, p. 104. Young man for 1844 St. Petersburg. 1844 p. 178. Maksimovich. Op. II, 92 and III. Evgeny. Description Kiev-sof. personal pp. 147 and 206. Kievsk. Antiquity 1883, IX, 132. Labirinthus in laudem Mazepæ explicitur. 1691 in hand. Kiev-sof. Cathedral No. 10 (451). Pekarsky. Science and literature under Peter V, pp. 83 and 115. Ivanov. Description state archive of old affairs M. 1850 p. 330. In 1689, Mazepa thanked V.V. Golitsyn for the gifts sent to his mother, the abbess (Moscow Arch. M.I.D. gram. minor. St. 79. No. 7). In 1697, the patriarch blessed Abbess Maria Mazepina with an image in a carved frame (Zabelin. Materials for the history of architecture and art. Moscow I, 1884 p. 132). See Acts East. V, No. 164, where the letter of grant to Abbess Maria Mazepina dated January 27 is placed. 1688 Evgeny. Op. Kiev-sof. personal page 53. Kievsk. Star. 1882, XII p. 606. Maksimovich. Op. III, 662. See also the studies on the Peresopnytsia Gospel by Dumitrashkov and Zhitetsky. Hand. Ak. Sciences F. No. 15 on 1294 pp. under the title: Interpretation of Gregory Dvoeslov on the book. Job for the happy possession of His Royal Majesty of the Zaporozian army of both countries of the Dnieper, the hetman of his blatant mercy, Pan Ivan Stefanovich Mazepa, at his expense and at his expense, this spiritual book was transferred to the salvation of him and all who honor and benefit from it. This book was preserved in the monastery of St. Nicholas in the Krupitsky Baturinsky monastery. The fate began and ended [and ψ – 1700] July [ki – 28] day. Severn. Bee 1853, X 178. Poor oh poor! what have you done now! // The mad apostate hetman has appeared, // The demons have united more firmly in union, // The enemy's saint Mazepa has been created! // Every time I remember his many good deeds, // Even the decorations of his predecessors to the churches, // About the monasteries of the needless dependents, // About the poor orphans of the zealous cares, // Behold, I ask everyone, someone he cursed, // Firmly embraced by the demon in the captivity of the mind, // Given by God and the Tsar rather than the authorities, // With the Swede, he is ready to perish mentally! // Whenever I think of a profit, I marvel, // I am alien to the aerial ones that I bartered: // A former zealot, now a persecutor of the church, // Riding before the army, and a destroyer of that one! // I’m not exactly surprised, // But having seen his destruction // On the Mazepov coat of arms, a cross-shaped horned // Shirama and zayuz (?) are cursed with demons, // For this, he once deserved the abyss; // Oh, poor, poor, soon flowing to the bottom // Riders quickly and all those soaring soon! // And God execute all those who do such things, // Already for the glory of the first and dearest // ... to mark the damned and all the evil // Oh, what a terrible miracle: everything, the bunchuk and the mace, // Fell into the hellish (bottom?) Destroy your head! (Ruk. I.P.B.O. XIV No. 16 l. 64 vol.). We found this index in the manuscript of the Kyiv Lavra No. 161 (oblong format - folded sheet). It is called: “Onomasticon of the names of all saints with a prologue according to the alphabet of those collected.” Roku 1687 center centevria.” The index of the names of saints is arranged alphabetically and by month, with the designation: venerable, martyr, etc. The titles have a note: bene hoc. The nearest publication of the prologue was in Moscow in 1677. Cash 38 – “How many souls from the female sex were saved in a courageous form: virgins, widows and husbands (ten names in total). Only escaped from the female sex in a courageous manner; not a single one has ever been saved in a female form.” The same article is in hand. synod. No. 811 l. 2 and Titova. On l. 39 – Ancient Roman calendar for the whole year and various mnemonic verses for remembering the Kalends, Ides and Nons. Dimitri copied for himself extrakt z niektorego listu który z Alkairu z Egiptiej w tym roku dnia 31 stycnia (January) 1687 przez zacnych kupcow teraz z niemeckiego na polsky prziniesony. (Synod. No. 146 and 187 vol.). Abbot Orestes also talks about the false messiah in 1670. This messiah Sapsay Gershonovich (1667–1670) was captured in Turkey and brought to the Sultan; He was flayed and hanged. (Arch. Collection. Vilen. II page XXIV). Ioaniky Galatovsky also mentions him in his Messiah the Truthful. About the very personality of Sabbateus Zevi (born 1641), see the work Jost'a Geschichte des Judenthums und seiner Sekten indicated by Pr. Sumtsov.