In memory of A. S. Pavlov

(Read in the Church Law auditorium before the start of the lecture on September 2) Sacred duty and grave necessity prompt us to preface the course of our science with a sad preface: on August 16, A. S. Pavlov, who dedicatedly worked for 40 years in the science of Church Law, passed away. No matter how natural it may seem to an outside observer of human lives, death at his age, especially years of hard work and struggle with all sorts of adversities: nevertheless, to those who knew the deceased closely and understand the significance of his scientific works, this death seems to be the cruelest enemy of science, which with its unexpected attack caused destruction in it, causing losses that are unlikely to be compensated, at least in the near future. As recently as February of this year, the deceased, who apparently felt great, may have been under the influence of the difficult task of publishing his last work that had just been completed (Nomocanon with a large breviary. M. 1897. A newly revised edition), in a friendly conversation with us, informed us of the following immediate intentions: during his stay in St. Petersburg, where he was invited as the chairman of the examination committee, by the way, to finally check in the local libraries his copy of Stoglav’s list and to begin a new edition of the last and other unpublished monuments of Russian church law of the 16th and 17th centuries, and then to begin publishing his course of church law. A serious illness and an unexpected death destroyed this destiny: who and when will restore this destruction?! The rather significant mass of the deceased's published scientific works contains a relatively insignificant part of the unusually extensive stock of knowledge that he collected throughout his entire professorial service. What natural talent and what powerful energy were required to accumulate this vast learned wealth! And who will now open for science this treasure, access to which death has closed, as if with its mysterious key! Yes, the science of Orthodox Church law must now admit that in the person of the deceased it has prematurely lost the same prominent representative of its own as it recently lost in the person of the Western European learned lawyer and Byzantine scholar Tsachary von Lingenthal. Comparing this name with the name of the late A.S. Pavlov, we are in no way afraid of the reproach of any exaggeration regarding the scientific significance of the latter in comparison with the former. Quite the opposite. We do not know, and we hope they will not point out to us, another name in the field of science of Orthodox Church law that would, in character, method of scientific work, energy and talent, come closer to the name of our Byzantine canonist A. S. Pavlov. The similarity and, so to speak, scientific equivalence of both scientists, once connected by personal scientific friendship, is revealed from the following comparison. Both worked primarily in the historical field of law: Z. von-Lingenthal in the field of Byzantine civil and church law, A. S. Pavlov in the field of Byzantine-Slavic-Russian church law. A strictly scientific critical edition of a richly annotated text of previously unpublished or poorly published monuments of Byzantine and Slavic-Russian law - this is the truly great and eternal merit of both! To what extent does science owe to Z. von Lingenthal such classical publications as “Εκλογη” Πρόχειρος Νομος and the entire publication Collectio librorum juris graecoromani ineditorum; to the same extent, it owes such classical publications to A. S. Pavlov as the Nomocanon with a large breviary (old and new editions), “Books of the Law” (with their parallel: the Agricultural Charter of Leo the Isaurian), “Monuments of Russian canon law of the XII-XVI centuries, etc. To what extent does science owe Z. von-Lingenthal the coverage of history Byzantine church-civil law, which before it was very dark and confusing; to the same extent, science owes to A. S. Pavlov the illumination of the history of the Slavic-Russian nomocanon (general and penance), which was hitherto so dark and confusing that our scientist had to solve questions that, according to his predecessors, “cannot be solved” 1). As much as science owes to Z. von-Lingenthal the clarification of the dogma of civil Byzantine law in his famous “History of Greco-Roman civil law (ed. 1864, 1877 and 1892), it also owes to A. S. Pavlov the clarification of the dogma of Russian marriage law in a remarkable study entitled: The fiftieth chapter of the Pilot’s Book, as a source marriage law." The scientific works of these learned friends are completely homogeneous in method. This is a comparative-critic-bibliographic method. Its application to scientific works requires, first and foremost: a) wide acquaintance with published and especially handwritten monuments of law and b) a thorough historical-critical study of them in a variety of individual editions and variants, not to mention commenting on their content. To what extent A. S. Pavlov had knowledge of the handwritten sources of his science, i.e., monuments of Byzantine, Slavic, Old Russian and New Russian law (Synodal Archive), this is partly known, although his already published works make it quite clear: oral conversations with him on the subject led us to the conviction that his knowledge in this regard was almost comprehensive. Closely familiar with the treasures of this kind in domestic libraries, museums and archives, A. S. Pavlov was well aware of foreign treasures of this kind. He devoted his trip to Western Europe (in 1867) exclusively to the study of manuscripts of canon law, independently supplementing existing catalogs and descriptions with direct acquaintance with the originals, established acquaintances and relations with the administrations of the libraries he visited, and thanks to this, after - throughout his service at Moscow University, he maintained relations with them. And often, without leaving Moscow, he received from abroad certificates, copies, even original manuscripts necessary for his scientific works. In view of this, it will not be a mistake on our part to say that such a knowledgeable and deep expert on the sources of Orthodox law has never existed before. Here lies the basis of the scientific friendship of A. S. Pavlov with Z. von Lingenthal: the latter was deeply interested in the question of the fate and significance of Byzantine law among the Slavs: but on his own he was not able to satisfy this interest, due to ignorance of the Slavic and Russian languages; Meanwhile, this question was the main task of the scientific works of A.S. Pavlov, and here the famous Western European Byzantine scholar found such a competent learned friend that he could not find anywhere else. In his publishing and author's works on the history of law, A. S. Pavlov, like C. von Lipgenthal, was unswervingly faithful to the comparative historical-critical method. Excellent knowledge of languages, not to mention classical, Byzantine and Modern Greek and Western European, extensive skill in Slavic paleography, deep knowledge of Byzantine and Old Russian history gave him the opportunity to navigate and resolve the most difficult issues of church law, in the masses of Greek manuscripts, the most diverse mixed composition, to find the originals of not only Slavic, but even Latin translations-monuments (hitherto revered originals), establish historical and literary dependence and continuity of editions of the monument, indicate text variants, and illuminate its content with deeply scientific comments. Yes, from the pen of A.S. Pavlov published such publications and such studies that were certainly imprinted not only with the character of classical scholarship, but also with the character of freshness and novelty: each of his scientific works on the history of law was in its time a scientific discovery. A characteristic feature of the deceased’s scientific works was the desire for a comprehensive study of the subject and completeness: it was not in his spirit to raise only a question, or to illuminate it from some sides, leaving it to others, or postponing further research until more favorable circumstances: he sought to exhaust the question in full, to the end. This is the reason why a relatively small part of his work made it into print. The mass of what was being prepared for printing remained constantly waiting to see the light of day, simply because it was necessary to make some inquiries in one or another manuscript, which was not at hand at the moment and the publication was postponed. When asked why not release it, and in this form, having made a decent reservation and inviting the reader to fill in what was missing, the deceased answered: “I’m quite old for others to correct me.” This trait in the character of the deceased, which did not reflect favorably on the quantity of his works, had a beneficial effect on their quality: completely finished works came out of the press. This is their classic, eternal meaning: they will be republished, because there will always be a need for them, but republished in the form in which they came from his pen: re-examination of what he has researched will not result in anything new, unless an unusually lucky chance gives the researcher the discovery of hitherto hidden fresh material. It is clear from this how premature the death of A. S. Pavlov was in the interests of science: how many more years he still needed to live solely in order to complete the works he had already prepared! No matter how regrettable the deprivation for science caused by the premature death of A. S. Pavlov may be, no matter how bitter the feeling of this seemingly cruelly unjust loss may be, it should not and cannot obscure a certain sublime and joyful mood arising from the depths of the soul, reconciling even with the destructive power of death itself. His moral personality, even in the face of death, appears so powerful and definitely strengthened that death itself is apparently powerless to erase it and remove it from among the living. No matter how insignificant the mass of his published works is compared to that which could have been published, however, it is so large and, most importantly, integral that it is able to ensure his communication with us for a long time, communication with the most precious traits of the moral character of this husband. Through his works he will live with us in the best moments of our lives, in moments of immersion in scientific pursuits. True, we will no longer see his majestically beautiful appearance, worthy of being captured by an artist’s chisel, we will not hear his loud voice, living, energetic speech; but let us meet face to face with this ardent enthusiast of science, who forgets everything for the sake of its pure interests; We will no longer meet this ardent champion of science and the bold denouncer of its profanation; Let us not enjoy a conversation with this extremely simple, most humane person in his manners, alien to all pompousness, vanity, flattery and lies: death has taken all this from us! But she is powerless to take his creations from us; and they irresistibly attract us, because they are as perfect as they are necessary for us and, in addition to their scientific content, involuntarily restore to us the sympathetic image of a learned giant, who, without leaving his learned office, gives the most thorough, detailed reports regarding the ancient monuments of law of Greece, Italy, ancient Rus', Georgia, the Balkan and Danube Slavs! They involuntarily restore in our minds the majestic image of a husband who, solely through his personal labor and talent, created for himself the position of a person before whom everyone who respects his human dignity feels obliged to bow with respect. And how much elevating, comforting and strengthening in this image is a person who has set himself the goal of going to the end through honest, learned work in order to gain the right to respect and sympathy among his neighbors and with a clear conscience, saying goodbye to life, to say to the Creator and Creator: “Lord, you betrayed five talents to me: behold, these other five talents were acquired by them.” (Matt. 25:20). - On the other hand, how much in this majestic image of restraining, moderating impulses of vanity, the search for hasty scientific fame, hasty scientific generalizations, frivolous judgments, noisy or rattling lots of idle talk!!... At present, there is a widespread opinion that science, like progress in general, is advanced not by individual scientific authorities, but by a collective mass of units, that pygmies and dwarfs, with their ant-like work, move science and life forward, as well as outstanding individuals. This is true - and long live the learned pygmies and dwarfs! But it will be a misfortune for them if, at least from time to time, the giants do not put their labor into their painstaking work: their forward movement both upwards and in breadth will take too long, and too much debris will accumulate in their building materials. They will not have the strength to lift stones to raise and expand the foundation; there is not enough depth and breadth of vision, as well as moral courage, to separate and throw away unnecessary ballast: giants are needed here. Among the few giants of our science is A. S. Pavlov. May his memory be eternal! May His majestic image always serve as stimulation and protection for us in our labors aimed at cognizing the light of truth and righteousness. There is a custom, not long ago, but it seems to have already been grafted onto our social life with great success - to honor the deceased by standing up. I do not find it convenient to follow this custom in the present case. As an expression of official-cold politeness, it is too meager and meaningless for the memory of L. S. Pavlov. He was a deeply convinced Christian and wanted nothing more in relation to his neighbors than Christian-brotherly communication with them. In particular, he sought such communication with our Academy and valued it. It is with deep joy that I state the fact that the Academy, for its part, reciprocates this even now, as it responded before: yesterday’s memorial service, celebrated for him in the academic church, in your numerous presence, undoubtedly testifies that this Christian fraternal communication with the deceased was not broken by his death. I hope that it will continue to exist, especially on the basis of science, I hope because it is necessary: ​​for without studying the works of Pavlov, the study of Orthodox Church morality in its modern state cannot proceed successfully. He etched his name so deeply into the tablets of our science that continuous communication with him is inseparable even from our own scientific interests. Therefore, instead of getting up, it’s better to sit tight (of course in due time) to the creations of A.S. Pavlov. Rosenkampf, Review of the Helmsman's Book in Historical View, ed. 2, page 57: “It is impossible to solve this problem, because we do not have the original that was sent from Bulgaria to Russia.” - The problem was solved with complete scientific thoroughness by A. S. Pavlov in his: The Original Slavic-Russian Nomocanon.” You might be interested in: