The Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society and its activities over the past quarter of a century. Issue I. Russian institutions in the Holy Land before 1889

Contents Chapter 1. Russian institutions in Palestine to maintain Orthodoxy and improve the life of Russian pilgrims until 1889 Chapter 2. Formation of the Orthodox Palestine Society Chapter 3. Orthodox Palestine Society until its merger with the Palestine Commission The historical note presented to the attention of readers covers a relatively short period of time in the life of the Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society - only a quarter of a century from the date of the opening of its activities (1882–1907). The period under consideration should, however, be recognized as very important for the entire subsequent history of the Society. During this time, it has already received its strong organization, won itself an honorable place among similar foreign Societies, and attracted sympathy and trust among persons who have one or another relationship with it. The initial history of the Society is full of lively and, one might say, exciting interest in the complex vicissitudes that the Society experienced from the first moment of its inception, when, immediately after official recognition, it had to ardently and with great tension of moral and material forces defend even the very right to exist. The history of the Society does not lose interest even later, when it energetically decided to carry out the tasks it had outlined, bearing in mind the glory of the holy Orthodox Church, the honor of its dear homeland, the good and benefit of the Russian Orthodox people. It is hardly necessary to say here that the period of the Society’s life we ​​are considering, insignificant in scope, is very close to our time. Therefore, it is very difficult for the compiler of the note to maintain objectivity and complete impartiality, necessary for any historical work, since the initiators, creators, first leaders and main figures of the Society have either just passed into eternity, and the mortal remains of these unforgettable workers are barely covered with earth, poured by friendly grateful hands, or are still happily alive and living among us. Under such circumstances, a truthful judgment by a historian is a matter of the distant future, and the inclination of the sympathies of the compiler of this note towards one or another of the figures of the Society is natural, quite understandable and, we hope, excusable. But all this does not in the least prevent the living figures of the Society from having a historical note for the past first quarter of a century of its existence. On the part of these figures, as eye-witnesses and living direct witnesses to the tireless and energetic work of figures of great memory for the Society who have already completed their careers in life, it is quite natural to express a reverent tribute of gratitude and deep respect for their labors and in the presented, albeit in general terms, review of their activities over the past quarter century, to draw for themselves encouraging, comforting, edifying and even guiding lessons in future. Remembering the days of the ancient Societies and learning from them is useful for current leaders also because from this review it will be clearly possible to see the ardent faith of the leaders of the first hour in the greatness and holiness of the task undertaken by the Society, natural hesitations, indecision and even wrong steps on the path of their good impulses and ideal aspirations, and at the same time their hobbies, errors and one-sidedness in activity, on the one hand, and on the other - the vitality and productivity of the Society under, apparently, even the most unfavorable external and internal circumstances. Remembering the ancient days of the Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society is very edifying for every Orthodox Russian person who passionately loves his homeland and sincerely values ​​the interests of the Orthodox Church. In the past life of the Society one can find touching and touchingly enchanting examples of how Orthodox Russian people from the Tsar to the last faithful meet and unite in feelings of deep faith and ardent love at the precious three-day bed of the Life-Giver Christ. Crowned pious Russian Monarchs, members of the Imperial family, glorious bishops of the Russian Church, faithful servants of the royal throne - princes and boyars, well-born nobles, clergy, eminent merchants, citizens and farmers - all of them are animated by the same desire to honor the Holy One with their zeal. The coffin and contribute to its splendor and decoration. With complete readiness and amazing unanimity, all these persons strive to provide material assistance to those chosen ones - compatriots, who have the greatest happiness of seeing St. The coffin and the famous holy places of Palestine, as well as to the native Christians in order to maintain Orthodoxy among them, donating some hundreds and tens of thousands of rubles to this godly holy cause, and others the last penny of their labor. Consequently, a historical note on the activities of the Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society over the past 25 years will constitute one of the bright pages in the history of holy Orthodox Rus' and its peaceful crusader procession to the Holy Sepulcher. With a feeling of complete satisfaction and even not without admiration, we can testify that the cause that the Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society is called upon to serve from the very first days of its humane activities met with the full and ardent sympathy of the Monarch-Liberator Alexander II, unforgettable in the annals of Russian history. Entrusting the management of the affairs of the Palestine Committee, the creator of many buildings still existing in Jerusalem, inherited by the Society, the magnanimous Monarch deigned to pronounce the following significant words to its first chairman, Secretary of State, Prince Obolensky: “C'est une question de coeur pour Moi” - This is for Me a question of the heart. And the magnanimous Monarch-Liberator remained faithful to these heartfelt words throughout his life in his relations with the Holy Land and with everything that is in one way or another connected with it, and bequeathed them to his crowned successors - Tsar-Peacemaker Alexander III and the now safely reigning Sovereign Emperor Nicholas II, who in their royal hard labors did not forget about the Holy Land for a minute. The imperial family gave from its midst very many pilgrims to the Holy Sepulcher: Grand Dukes Konstantin and Nikolai Nikolaevich, Konstantin Konstantinovich, Sergei and Pavel Alexandrovich, Alexander Mikhailovich, Grand Duchesses Alexandra Iosifovna and the August Chairman of the Society Elizaveta Feodorovna. The crowned wife of Emperor Alexander II, the ever-memorable royal Grandmother of our adored Sovereign, although she personally was not honored to be a pilgrim to the Holy Sepulcher, but, bearing the name of one of his first admirers, Mary Magdalene, she mentally gravitated towards him all her life, and was considered in all fairness to be the “Benefactor” and the first powerful patroness of the Holy Land, and did so much to maintain Orthodoxy in it, that in all fairness she has earned herself, until the end of time, the prayerful memory of the inhabitants of Palestine and Syria in the wonderful Church of Gethsemane on the slope of Olivet, created for the support of Her Most August Children. His royal care for St. She handed the Earth, as if from hand to hand, to her beloved royal Son, the ever-memorable and unforgettable founder and first Chairman of our Society, His Imperial Highness Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, and with him to His faithful companion in life and to the Life-Giving Sepulcher, the August Chairman of Grand Duchess Elizabeth Feodorovna, always warmly “sympathetic to the goals of the Society” and “took its interests to heart.” The Orthodox Palestine Society with the indicated humane goals is not a new phenomenon in the life of the Russian people. It had predecessors: the Russian Orthodox Spiritual Mission, the Palestinian Committee and the Palestinian Commission. These predecessors acted in Palestine with almost homogeneous tasks, pursued the same goals and even used the same material means. The Palestinian Society was created, organized and began its activities under the direct influence of one of them - the Palestine Commission, lived and acted for several years next to the latter, until it took all Russian affairs in the Holy Land into its strengthened hands. Therefore, we would hardly be fair if in our note we were silent about these predecessors, who also left a rather valuable property inheritance to the Palestinian Society. In compiling this note, we used the archives of the former Palestine Commission and the Palestine Society, as well as personal correspondence between V.N. Khitrovo with Archimandrites Antonin Kapustin and Leonid Kavelin, with the Consul General in Beirut K.D. Petkovich, Count E.V. Putyatin, Countess O.E. Putyatina, M.P. Stepanov, D.D. Smyshlyaev, S.D. Lermontov and others. Since the archives of the Commission and the Society have not yet been described, when citing documents we either do not make any references, or limit ourselves to accurately indicating the dates of the document or letter in the text itself. Annual reports of the Society and a memorandum by V.N. Khitrovo: “Orthodoxy in the Holy Land - 1889, intended for the Heir Tsarevich (the now reigning Sovereign Emperor) - the only almost printed manual that we had. May 8, 1907 St. Petersburg. Chapter 1. Russian institutions in Palestine to maintain Orthodoxy and improve the life of Russian pilgrims until 1889 The pilgrimage to the Holy Land of Orthodox Russian people began with the adoption of Christianity. This difficult feat, which was the lot of some chosen ones of the Russian people, as the fruit of their personal initiative and high religious disposition, fell with all its weight on the shoulders of the pilgrim. Both on the way to the Holy Land and on the spot in St. In the city of Jerusalem, the Russian pilgrim was left to his own devices and it was up to his natural resourcefulness and resourcefulness to create a more or less favorable environment for himself. The Greek Orthodox clergy, the Jerusalem Patriarchate - the main owners and constant stewards of the sacred shrine precious to the Christian - the Holy Sepulcher Church - were the only trustees and guardians of the Russian pilgrim, and took upon themselves, as if out of compassion and out of a sense of Christian brotherly love, to care for his material and spiritual needs in a distant country unknown to him, among people alien to him. The Russian government, the spiritual authorities, and even more so the Russian people had little interest in the life of our pilgrim in the Holy Places. As for maintaining Orthodoxy among the natives and caring for the shrines of the Orthodox East, their beautification and inviolability on the part of the infidel Hagarians, both the Russian people and the Russian government recognized for themselves the only possible way - the transfer of monetary or material alms - icons and liturgical accessories, or through visitors from the East and in particular - Jerusalem envoys - archimandrites and abbots, or through our special embassies in the East. But this was the situation only until the end of the first half of the last 19th century. The strengthening of Catholic and Protestant propaganda in Jerusalem unexpectedly awakens a keen interest in the Holy Land and the state of Orthodoxy in the East among our government. “The misfortunes of the Christian Church (in the East,” wrote our Vice-Chancellor Count K.V. Nesselrode in June 1842 in his most comprehensive report, “depend not only on Muslim rule, they are also caused by: 1) the desire of Catholics and Protestant missionaries to spread their religions; 2) the insufficiency of the moral and material means of the Greek clergy to prevent their harmful proselytism.” “Our government recognized as useful” for the good of the Orthodox Church at that time “the presence in Jerusalem of a trustworthy, educated person from the Russian clergy” - a hieromonk or an archimandrite, but not above this rank, but, for “various political reasons,” found it more expedient to send “this educated person from the Russian clergy,” in the form of a “test measure,” however, “not publicly,” only “as fan." Very happily, the choice of our government settled on our ever-memorable orientalist, Archimandrite Porfiry Uspensky. On April 26, 1843, he found himself in the role of an involuntary “admirer” of the Holy Sepulcher and a person “reliable and educated from the Russian clergy,” having received 1,500 rubles for his trip to Jerusalem. “from the sums of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs allocated for Asian affairs 1.” Although arch. Porfiry’s direct task was not to take care of our pilgrims and to improve their life in Jerusalem, but all his attention was directed to “figuring out on the spot what measures would be most convenient to take to maintain Orthodoxy,” which, by the way, was then understood by our government narrowly and one-sidedly only “in maintaining the Greek Church,” but, as an educated and observant pastor, he could not help but pay attention to the sad situation of our pilgrims in Jerusalem. In his detailed reports to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, he made many ardent and weighty comments in their defense, persistently recommending to our government, in the interests of our pilgrims, to establish a Russian spiritual mission in Jerusalem. This idea was received very sympathetically in St. Petersburg. On February 11, 1847, the State Chancellor submitted to the approval of the Sovereign Emperor Nikolai Pavlovich a note on the establishment of a Russian spiritual mission, which was fully approved by the Sovereign. The initiator of the mission, Arch. Porfiry, who received this appointment on July 31, 1847. Although the instructions charged the head of the mission with the duty of showing the Greeks “an example of our splendid service”, and “even little by little transforming the Greek clergy, elevating them in their own eyes”, and “attracting to Orthodoxy and establishing in it those local elements who constantly waver in their faith under the influence of agents of different confessions”, but he himself, to deep regret, was again placed in the position of a modest person in Jerusalem "admirer" of the Holy Sepulchre. In order to fulfill the serious tasks assigned to him by the government, along with maintaining himself and his retinue, in official terminology, also “admirers,” Arch. Porfiry received only seven thousand rubles a year and a lump sum of 4,578 rubles for the establishment and travel to Jerusalem. 35 k. Of course, it was not possible to keep our first mission incognito, and it was received in Jerusalem very solemnly. They began to look at our first chief of mission there correctly, as a “diplomatic agent of the Russian state.” The Patriarchate allocated the Arkhangelsk Monastery for the residence of our mission, temporarily transferring it to the management of its head. The scientist and head of the mission, already quite well acquainted with the East, fully understanding that to carry out the difficult task recommended to him in St. Petersburg - “to transform the Greek clergy” was not only beyond his strength, but also positively impossible for him, he decided to get along with the Greek clergy, turning a blind eye to many of its ugly vices, and to devote all his leisure time, all his free time to academic desk studies, involving all the members of the first mission in this, depending on their talents and inclinations. In this regard, the success of our first mission is beyond any doubt. As far as the available mission forces and funds allowed, arch. Porfiry Uspensky tried to perform solemn services in the Arkhangelsk Monastery, which attracted not only Russian pilgrims, but even natives. In relation to the latter, acting in the spirit of the instructions he had received, Archimandrite Porfiry fervently surrendered to the idea of ​​reviving this morally humiliated people dominated by the Greek clergy. For this purpose, he assigned 12 young natives to the Greek theological school, opened by the patriarchate at his insistence, to train them as educated rural shepherds; At this school, the catechism and Arabic literature were taught in Arabic by an Arab specially invited from Beirut, Fr. Spiridonium; in the parish schools of Jerusalem, Arab teachers were appointed to teach children to read and write Arabic; outside Jerusalem, they opened similar schools in Lydda, Ramle and Jaffa and a school for Arab girls in Jerusalem itself; in the printing house established by the patriarchate in the St. Nicholas Monastery, at his insistence, they began to print books in Arabic (Catechism and Apostle), etc. The instructions of Archimandrite Porfiry, as we said, did not include a paragraph directly addressing the need for the head of the mission to pay attention to improving the life of your pilgrims, but Arch. Porfiry, on his own initiative, out of love for mankind and innate humanity, did not remain indifferent and indifferent in this direction, especially since the difficult living conditions of the Russian pilgrim in Jerusalem attracted his attention even on his first trip here. In order to subject our pilgrims to the vigilant supervision of the mission and to destroy some shameful vices among them, Arch. Porfiry resettled Russian pilgrims from the Catherine Monastery to Feodorovsky, and placed the pilgrims in his Arkhangelsk Monastery, raised before our government the question of opening a Russian hospital, instead of the cramped Greek one, and about appointing a Russian doctor and confessor Hieromonax from the Russians, argued for the need to establish an independent consulate in Jerusalem, separate from the general Beirut consulate, to which he was subordinate and Jerusalem, so that in its person our pilgrims would have a close, strong defender of their interests, they would encourage the patriarchate to arrange a more comfortable home for the Russian spiritual mission in the garden of the patriarchate, etc. The destruction of Abdallah's harem on the roof of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, which was seductive for Russian pilgrims, the repair of the dome over the Holy Sepulcher, energetic counteraction to Catholic propaganda with Valerga, a famous Latin patriarch and figure in Syria and Palestine, at the head, friendly relations with the Armenian patriarchy and the Coptic patriarch, patronage of the Abyssinians and Syroyakovites - all these are direct results of the activities of our first “secret” mission under the command of Archimandrite Porfiry Uspensky. Finally, the very idea of ​​​​forming a private society to maintain Orthodoxy and improve the life of our pilgrims in the Middle East, which was presented relatively long ago to the consciousness of enlightened people in our fatherland, who personally learned from experience all the unsightly sides of both, such as. A.N. Muravyov and A.S. Norov, resulted from Archimandrite Porfiry in a lively conversation and under his strong pen later in the notorious “Book of My Genesis” in certain forms and almost in the same volume that was destined for it somewhat later by the Orthodox Palestine Society. The Crimean War interrupted the fruitful and very diverse activities of our first mission. 2 Its chief, Arch. Porfiry, and members of the mission were recalled to Russia. At the end of this unsuccessful campaign for us, it was decided to immediately equip a second spiritual mission, but on August 16, 1857, it was no longer Archimandrite Porfiry who was appointed its head, but a young inspector of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, Doctor of Theology Kirill Naumov, with the elevation to the rank of Bishop of Melitopol. The report to the Sovereign Emperor on this matter gives very detailed and extremely interesting explanations of this appointment. “The role of humble observers is now no longer possible for our mission,” says the most submissive report to the Sovereign Emperor on the matter of establishing a second spiritual mission. – We need representation in the East, of course, not political, but ecclesiastical, which neither the Turks nor the Franks, who have their own patriarchs and bishops in the Holy City, can deny us. While our influence was strong, we could still hide it (sic) so as not to arouse envy, but now that it has weakened in the East, we, on the contrary, must try to at least outwardly show it, so as not to fall in the opinion of the Orthodox population, which still believes us from old memory. The Ministry finds it necessary to place a bishop at the head of the Jerusalem mission instead of an archimandrite. This, in the opinion of the ministry, would make a strong beneficial impression not only in Jerusalem, but also in Constantinople, because they had never seen a Russian archbishop there, nor the magnificent rites of our worship.” In defining the purpose of our second Jerusalem mission, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs pays special attention to maintaining Orthodoxy among the natives. “Until now,” says the all-submissive report we have already quoted, “we have looked at the church in Syria and Palestine through a Greek prism, because its entire highest hierarchy consists of Greeks, although the entire national element is purely Arab in two patriarchates: Jerusalem and Antioch, and even partly in Alexandria, for outside the monasteries and main cities, worship is performed there only in the language Arabic The Greeks, just like among the Slavs of Turkey, are not tolerated here not only by the people, but also by the priests, and meanwhile, all our alms are showered for the most part on the Greek hierarchy. Our goal, our desire should be to reconcile the warring tribes of the East. For the Russians here are equally loved by the Greeks and the Arabs of the same faith, not to mention the Slavs, and even the heterodox Latins and Armenians, Copts, Syrians and Chaldeans willingly draw closer to us, shunning the Greeks as their inveterate enemies. This itself should indicate to us what we should primarily pay attention to in the East, namely: we must reconcile the warring parties and support the Arabs so that they are not lured into the union by the good deeds of the Latins...” “The establishment of a hospital at our spiritual mission and the free distribution of medical benefits are necessary,” but “in any case, it will probably be more useful to entrust this subject to our spiritual mission upon its arrival in Jerusalem 3.” The goals and objectives of our mission were outlined in great detail in 16 points of special instructions developed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Holy Synod for guidance to the head of the mission. “The main attention of the mission” was also paid here to the “poor Arab clergy.” “A lot can be done with very small aids,” says paragraph 4 of this instruction, because Arab churches are located in huts and have almost no utensils. A little more splendor would have tied the Arabs themselves to their worship, especially now that we have given the opportunity for the formation of Arab priests in Russia. If out of the six titular bishops living in Jerusalem, at least one was elected from the Arabs, and the patriarch could be persuaded to do so, then this would already be an important step towards restoring the dignity of this tribe and renewing Orthodoxy in it.” The instructions advise the head of the mission to “improve the Greek and Arabic schools in Jerusalem”, “set up an Arabic printing house”, “print liturgical and dogmatic books”, “extend his actions” to the Patriarchate of Antioch by restoring schools “in complete decline”, distributing books and alms, monitoring “the actions of the Greek patriarch, not always favorable to the Arabs”, for which he is recommended to travel to Damascus, Mount Hasbeya and the Sidonian seaside,” maintaining schools and almshouses with “monetary benefits” in the Alexandrian Patriarchate, even taking care of the imaginary “restoration (sic) of the Sinai monastery and the establishment there of a completely unnecessary school for the education of “the so-called monastic slaves,” or nomadic Bedouins. According to the same instructions, the head of the mission maintains “friendly relations” with the Greek clergy in Jerusalem, “the best relations” with the spiritual authorities of other faiths, “good relations” with the Armenian Patriarch and establishes relations with the Jacobites and Chaldeans in Syria and the Copts in Egypt. This is how much extraneous concerns are entrusted to the head of the mission, and therefore, naturally, he could not have enough time for other duties closer to him. Regarding our pilgrims, the instructions only note that “moral supervision of the worshipers should primarily rest with the head of the mission, so that he does not arouse temptations with his behavior.” If we also mention the projected Russian hospital - an almshouse in the Monastery of the Cross, where clean air will help medicine,” about a hospital that, with the existence of “humane-loving Latin institutions,” was entrusted to “the special care of the head of the mission,” however, not without the intention of showing that “something similar was done on our part,” then we will exhaust all the protective concerns of our government directed towards this aspect of the activities of the second mission. The second mission was allocated for all these grandiose and difficult to calculate tasks, however, only 14,650 rubles. per year of maintenance 4. Upon his arrival in Jerusalem, Bishop Kirill very energetically set about fulfilling the tasks entrusted to him, and immediately became convinced that it was not easy for him to complete even one third of them. “For the first time,” he wrote in 1858 to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in his report, “what could be done was done, threatening the Greeks with the temporary presence of Prince Obolensky and General Isakov, as witnesses of all the inconveniences for our pilgrims, I finally managed to convince the patriarch not to interfere with me setting up a hospital, albeit a small one... We ordered the installation of frames in the windows, bought the necessary things, found kind people who accepted They took care of the household, found servants and transferred the sick, two of whom seemed to be waiting for the consolation of dying in a dry and bright room, living for several days, blessing God for their meager peace and preparing for death. Until now, we are still in a state of deliberation, the Greeks - whether to take money from us for a rented apartment, and I - whether they will take it, which is what I certainly want. But I took the hospital under my exclusive control, and no matter what, I will not allow this beginning to remain without consequences. The present sick are provided with benefits for their needs from the funds that the mission has at its disposal by the grace of Her Majesty "... "In material terms, blessed be the name of the August benefactors!" - Bishop Kirill exclaims in another place in his report for the same 1858. “One of the most important initial tasks of ours here,” Bishop continues to develop his plans. Cyril in the same report, is to liberate our mission and fans (maybe fans first, and then the mission) from the power of the Greeks. The Patriarch really wants to hold the mission as close to his chest as possible in order to lull us to sleep in his arms: hence the readiness not only to give up the house now occupied by the mission for our apartments, but also to build a house to house the consul, which is already being discussed in the Patriarchate.” In order to improve the life of our pilgrims in Jerusalem, Bishop Kirill admits: 1) “it is absolutely necessary to have our own hospital and hospitality house in Jerusalem, if not yet a special room for the mission, in order to free ourselves from the tutelage of the Greeks,” and 2) “we need to have a consul in Jerusalem, which, according to his own motives, the Patriarch of Jerusalem is also working on. He may think that if two officials clash in Jerusalem, it will be convenient for him to fish in troubled waters. I, for my part, hope that our affairs, both in relation to the patriarchy and in relation to pilgrims, will go best when we find the means to directly influence both the political and the moral, which are not quite conveniently associated in one person, especially in a person of clergy, obliged to pave the way for rapprochement with the Eastern clergy and Eastern Christians 5.” It is not superfluous to note here that Bishop Kirill considers the same measures: 1) the establishment of a strange reception house and hospital in Jerusalem, 2) the establishment of a consulate in the most important points of the East from Russians and certainly of the Orthodox confession, and 3) an unofficial school as important factors for “modest counteraction” on the part of Russia and the influence of non-believers with the aim of maintaining Orthodoxy among the local native population. “As for the restoration of the Arab clergy, the establishment or improvement of theological schools, at the present time, in addition to the pleasant information about the curiosity and talent of the local young people, I can present to your Excellency,” writes Bishop Kirill in his 1858 report to Prince A.M. Gorchakov, very fairly and amazingly aptly, “one of my convictions is that the breeding ground for future national shepherds and archpastors of the East can still be one patriarchy is Antioch or, perhaps, Alexandria, and Jerusalem - in no case, due to some curse invented by the patriarchy against the Arabs 6.” Coming from this basic view of the tasks of our government and our mission in St. Land and Syria in relation to one of the essential issues - the maintenance of Orthodoxy, Bishop Kirill refuses to maintain public schools in Palestine as a useless matter, recommends “paying attention and funds” “to preparing teachers, and, if possible, female teachers or creating Orthodox-Arabic literature for the future,” limiting for now to “supporting schools in those places in which there are already or are being undertaken schools of other faiths” in order to “contrast our own” and, according to indication of experience, to interfere with the “enterprises” of the enemies of Orthodoxy. He looks completely differently at the Patriarchate of Antioch, in which, in his opinion, “there is something to do and much can be done.” “He himself, with his meager funds, gives “minor donations” to churches in Dar Psalina, Kaffarina, Zahle, Jub-Dzhenit, Selim and other places, for schools in Irbin, Rashey, etc., “supports the construction of the Orthodox church in Syra, arranges premises for the Seleucian metropolitan in Zahle, which, in his opinion, is extremely necessary, creates a school in Tripoli, takes on the support of a catechism teacher in the Beirut school, acquires a plot of land in a village near Beirut with the goal of eventually establishing a “central Russian-Arab school, which constitutes an urgent need for the region,” negotiates with the patriarch and trustees of schools in Damascus about the structure, management and methods of maintaining local schools “in the form of future humane-loving enterprises,” in Damascus he profitably acquires a house on occasion, sends benefits to the Belement monastery and the Sednai monastery for women, and even dreams of creating a central Russian-Arab school in Lebanon. “There will always be more students,” Bishop Kirill concludes, “than we need, and for the first time there will be a need for teachers, and after that the school itself will supply them to us 7.” In addition to taking care of the hospital for Russian pilgrims, Bishop Kirill hired two private houses in Jerusalem for two Easters for worshipers who needed special “care” and had “comfortable premises” in 1858 for “more demanding fans” who did not put up with the inconveniences of the Greek Jerusalem monasteries. From all of the above, it is clear that our first two ever-memorable figures in the Middle East - Bishops Porfiry Uspensky and Kirill Naumov well understood the tasks they had taken on - to support Orthodoxy and serve for the benefit of their compatriots - pilgrims, energetically, persistently and not unsuccessfully fought against the surrounding unfavorable circumstances, and if they did not achieve those positive and tangible rich results that were rightful from them If our fatherland expected, bearing in mind their talents and characters, then their grateful successors on the same path, we are sure, will always remember them with a kind word of gratitude and will not for a moment forget that these figures left the stage through no fault of their own. Archimandrite Porfiry interrupted his activities on the occasion of the Crimean War and was not appointed again to his former place due to different views on our representative in the East, Chancellor Prince A. M. Gorchakov and Chief Prosecutor St. Synod of A.P. Akhmatov. The activities of Bishop Kirill met unexpected obstacles from an apparently random figure in the East, but who had strong outside support and fielded fighters of remarkable intelligence, rare willpower and remarkable self-esteem. On August 3, 1856, the still active “Russian Society of Shipping and Trade 8” arose in St. Petersburg, which set itself the goal of displacing the hitherto existing “Novorossiysk Steamship Expedition” on the Black Sea, which maintained constant communication between our ports of the Black and Azov Seas, as well as Constantinople and Galati, and to create competition in the Mediterranean Sea with rich steamship lines. companies Societe maritime de Messageries imperiales and Austrian Lloyd. Since the mentioned shipping companies transported to Jerusalem, by the way, annually “several thousand fans of almost all Orthodox faiths,” which brought them “great benefits,” the founders of the said Society were an experienced sailor, aide-de-camp, captain of the 1st rank, N. A. Arkas, who became famous for his extensive enterprises for the development of the shipping company. on the Volga N.A. Novoselsky, together with his titled allies - shareholders, in view of the “special importance in the calculations of the shipping company,” decided to establish direct communications between Russia and Palestine, and through that “worshipful wanderings of the Russians to St. in places to become significantly more frequent and make it a permanent phenomenon,” admitting, however, that it was necessary to first study the living conditions of pilgrims and create, as far as possible, secure living conditions for them “in such a remote region 9.” At the direction of the late Grand Duke Admiral General Konstantin Nikolayevich, who was close to the affairs of the Shipping and Trade Society, he was sent, under the guise of a private traveler, “to collect the necessary practical materials” at the end of 1857, an official of special assignments of the Maritime Ministry, now a living member of the State Council, State Secretary B. P. Mansurov, as his contemporary, the late pilgrim V. Kaminsky characterizes, “a young man, full of intelligence, quick thoughts and caution” 10. Returning to St. Petersburg after a trip to Judea and Galilee in 1857, he presented the Grand Duke with a very interesting, detailed report, printed in a small number of copies on December 24, 1857 11 and later rewritten with large abbreviations into a book entitled: “Orthodox Pilgrims in Palestine,” which, obviously, was intended to serve as a guide for our pilgrims to Palestine. Here are the main points of this report: “The interests of our government in the East coincide with the benefits of the Russian Shipping and Trade Society, and that this latter can serve as the best and surest instrument for fulfilling what the dignity and benefit of the Russian Church require.” For this purpose, the Society first of all needs to “create new sources for the acquisition of funds for the provision of our church affairs in Palestine”, and then, contrary to the plans of our Chancellor, Count Nesselrode, “to bring our intervention in the East into such a non-political form as to disarm our opponents” and “to discard for the time being thoughts of political and religious propaganda in relation to strangers.” Not particularly counting on the state treasury and the Holy Synod, which could “participate financially in supplying future Russian institutions in Palestine with the funds necessary for them,” and promising only about “20,000 rubles” from the Shipping and Trade Society. per year" B.P. Mansurov quickly and easily finds the necessary funds in an inexhaustible source - in the "mass of voluntary alms", in the "sympathy of private individuals for charitable and religious causes", which cannot but "earn the patronage of the Russian Sovereign." Thus, “without difficulty” the acquired funds come, according to this report, to the disposal of people distinguished by “personal dexterity”, with an inevitable share of “personal arbitrariness”, and enjoying “complete unlimited confidence in all the details of the financial matter.” At the disposal of “large sums from private sources,” according to B.P. Mansurov, “it is much better not to include them in the official reports of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but to provide the disposal of them to the company’s shipping company office, whose reporting is simpler and more correct 12.” “Our intervention in the East” could be put “in a non-political form”, and the whole issue, according to the report, would even be “simplified” by giving it a “speculative” commercial character. Let's take as an example our government's concern for fans. The Shipping and Trade Society solves it in all its details simply and with obvious benefit for itself. “Society at its first steps encounters issues of worship, derives monetary benefits from them,” writes B.P. Mansurov in his report, “and is forced not to neglect them, because by doing otherwise, it harms its own affairs and cedes victory to dangerous rival enterprises. Thus, the Society is completely led into all the interests of worship and by the force of things is forced, for its own benefits, to seek the same results that our government must seek for state purposes; from such a like-minded desire, both will benefit, but the government even more than the Society, because the latter must certainly sow for the harvest and make donations, in which the former may find it difficult (sic). In a word, through the Society the government can acquire almost for nothing what has cost it sacrifices.” Here are the reasons for this, which, in our opinion, are not without strangeness. In Jerusalem, for example, the urgent need for an independent consulate to protect the interests of our pilgrims has long been recognized. The Shipping and Trade Society is ready to willingly “accept part of the necessary expenses,” but with one condition, that the Jerusalem consul combine in his person “the title of consul with the title of chief agent” of the Society, in order to “make the patronage of diplomacy more effective” for himself. The Society promises to provide him with a “large allowance” for this and is ready not even to consider him “an obvious agent of the Society and a participant in a speculative enterprise.” For a consul-agent, further, a decent house is needed in Jerusalem. Society is not averse to building it, however, with money donated by the Russian people, and if this cannot be done, then it is ready to share the costs of this house with the government. “It is now necessary and much more profitable to purchase a building in Jerusalem for the consulate and together for the shipping office,” the report says. This is necessary for society, as evidenced by the existence in Jerusalem of the offices of the Austrian Lloyd and the French Messageries. Thus, the costs of purchasing a building for the consulate and office can be divided between the government and the Society, if, however, they cannot be turned into fees (sic) in favor of worship institutions, out of respect that all of the above is arranged for our fans, and charitable institutions can be combined with the named institutions "... “The shelter for Russian admirers should be arranged so that each of them has his own corner, if not his own separate room, so that families can be placed together, and that there are special apartments for travelers of the highest class... It is necessary to form a house church in the shelter, especially for the hospital that will be located there. The entire hospitality establishment should be entrusted to the management of a spiritual superior under the main leadership of the head of the mission and the Russian consul: then the shipping society should also participate in its management, both to give the shelter a less political and more commercial character, and because the Society will participate to a significant extent in the maintenance and construction of the building.” “So that different figures in this field help in achieving a common goal and cannot argue among themselves about the superiority of rights and power,” B. P. Mansurov plans to separate the business of managing shelters between them. “Political patronage and assistance in matters of civil public life, according to him, will be the responsibility of the consul, care for the morality and religious activities of the fans should lie under the direct responsibility of the spiritual mission, and finally, care for the material needs and welfare of the fans will be entrusted to the spiritual mission together with the agency of the shipping company, for in this aspect of the matter lies his own benefit and a duty more accessible to him.” “The main management of the affairs of the Society” in Jerusalem “responsibility to this last” is assigned to the consul, who, therefore, shares his rights and power with only the head of the mission. From “commercial calculations” the Shipping and Trade Society sets up agency premises in Constantinople, Smyrna, Beirut, Alexandria and Caif, and at the same time, as if at the same time, in these premises it allocates places for hotels of fans, for Russian churches, apartments for consuls and vice-consuls - agents of the Society, etc. In Beirut, for example, “by this means one of the desires of our government will be simply and easily achieved” “the spiritual mission extended its influence to the Patriarchate of Antioch.” Trying to give a “non-political form” to the actions of our government everywhere, B.P. Mansurov not only completely closes it in the East with the newly born Shipping and Trade Society, but for some reason, completely incomprehensible to us, tries “and in St. Petersburg, if possible, to mask the role of the government in new activities,” “to clothe the whole matter in St. Petersburg in the form of a private charitable enterprise, formed at the direction of the commercial benefits of the Shipping Society, but patronized by the government for the sake of for a godly purpose and for the sake of his sympathy for the successes of the Society.” Thus, a new factor in our Russian activity in the Orthodox East - the Russian Society of Shipping and Trade - becomes contrary to the views of our government and the spiritual mission sent by it as its agent. This new factor, instead of giving strength and significance to our government in the East, “showing it at least outwardly,” is trying to “mask” it, bring it into a “non-political appearance,” shading it and covering it up with not always plausible commercial or “speculative nature” appearances. The high apostolic feat of serving the mission in order to maintain the declining Orthodoxy among the downtrodden population of Arab natives in unfavorable living conditions and serving their compatriots imbued with the spirit of evangelical love in order to improve their lives in Jerusalem, while fulfilling their crusading pilgrimage, again, in a way incomprehensible to us, are artificially intertwined and confused with material calculations, monetary benefits, and speculation. It is not surprising, therefore, that between the old leaders in the East and the new ones, from the very first steps, not only could agreement and the desired unanimity “in achieving a common goal” not be established, but a severe and even compromising enmity flared up among Russian leaders, which, unfortunately, does not stop even in our days... B.P. Mansurov's report on his trip to Palestine with the above views on the activities of the Shipping and Trade Society received full approval in St. Petersburg, and his views began to be put into practice with decisive persistence. At the beginning of 1858, by order of the Highest Command, the “Palestinian Committee” was established, headed by the Sovereign’s brother, Grand Duke Admiral General Konstantin Nikolaevich, and the executor of the Committee’s intentions and plans and their energetic conductor in life was B. P. Mansurov, who had gained the full, unlimited trust of the Grand Duke and was considered on the Committee a categorical judge and expert on Palestinian affairs. Sovereign Emperor Alexander Nikolaevich, taking to heart the interests of the Holy Land and the fate of Orthodoxy in it, personally entered into all the details of the plans and intentions of the Palestine Committee and sanctified all their details with his Royal approval. The first and main task of the “Palestine Committee” was, quite naturally, to find “new and special financial sources that could be used to improve our financial situation in the East and the entire situation that determines our importance there in front of witnesses of our activities.” Such “new special sources turned out to be, as the Grand Duke wrote in a rescript to the Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod and the Metropolitan of St. Petersburg in 1859. “a simple and true” means, tested more than once, “appeals made by the church to the people, to arouse the heartfelt religious and natural sympathy of the mass of the people.” “The readiness of the Russian people to widely respond to the heartfelt calls of the government for a holy cause,” the members of the Committee reasoned quite rightly, “has been proven too often for one to doubt its success when it comes to Jerusalem, a charming name that finds a warm echo in the soul.” every Christian. But for successful action on the masses, from whom we should expect the desired offerings, one indispensable condition is needed: the cordiality and warmth of the call itself and the expression by those calling themselves of love for the undertaking. A cold and formal appeal, of course, would remain fruitless.” And indeed, the call for charity from private individuals exceeded all the expected calculations of the Committee members and was crowned, according to their official recognition, with “remarkable success.” From the Committee’s reports published in the academic “Mesyatseslov” for 1863 and 1864, we see that from March 1858 to October 15, 1863, “private donations were collected” to improve the life of Orthodox pilgrims in Palestine and from other sources 1,003,259 rubles. 34 k. It would not be superfluous to note here that from the generosity of the Sovereign Emperor Alexander Nikolaevich, 500,000 rubles were donated to the Committee. 13, tax farmers of different provinces 75,000 rubles, chamberlain Yakovlev 30,000 rubles. and the Society of Shipping and Trade, “which volunteered to help the said cause,” 30,000 rubles, but not annually, as stated in the report of B.P. Mansurov, but in a lump sum, and, moreover, “with a contribution of the entire amount over three years.” This is the “sacrifice” that the Russian government, according to Mr. Mansurov, “supposedly could have made it difficult” for the Palestinian cause and which the Society was now generously bearing, expecting a “bountiful harvest” for itself in the future... But random one-time donations from pious people to the members of the Committee did not seem to be a strong enough guarantee for the success of the extensive undertaking they were undertaking in Palestine to purchase land, to build charitable institutions for pilgrims, Russian churches, a hospital and to maintain them in the future in a proper decent form, and therefore they turned to the research of new “permanent sources.” Such sources were, with the Highest permission, by order of the Holy Synod, special circles established at the end of 1838 in all churches of the Empire to collect alms to improve the life of Orthodox pilgrims. “These fees, according to the Committee’s plan, were to serve both as an allowance for replenishing the capital collected for the production of all buildings, and as a permanent source for the future for the maintenance and development of Russian hospitality institutions, without turning to the state treasury for this item.” And in this regard, the Committee, regarding the expected amount of annual fees, according to a conservative calculation, expected to receive at least 54,000 rubles annually. But in reality, these hypothetical calculations were not only justified, but even exceeded expectations, especially if we take into account that the first years of the Committee’s existence coincided with the era when “the great peasant reform was officially being prepared and carried out, and as a result, the economic condition of the entire mass of the peasantry was subject to a difficult crisis.” From the mentioned circle fees for the first five years from 1859–1863, the Committee received 295,550 rubles. 68 k. and another 9,079 p. 55.5 k. for the last three months of 1858, when these fees were opened. Thus, during the first five years, the amount of club fees averaged 59,110 rubles. per year 14. Having thus provided itself with “solid and reliable sources” of funds, the Palestinian Committee immediately opened its activities in Palestine. “Since the embarrassing situation of Russian pilgrims, according to the report of 1860, requires urgent measures for improvement, and the same difficult conditions are found not only in Jerusalem itself, but also in Ramla, Jaffa, Nazareth and Kayfa, i.e. in those places between which worshipful wanderings to holy places constantly turn, then, 1) without wasting time and in order to gain an indication of experience for the future, it was decided to set up in the designated five localities temporary hospitality institutions in rented premises, supplying these houses with the necessary furniture and utensils, which will be transferred to permanent shelters,” and 2) for the mentioned purposes, as well as to acquire “sufficiently extensive land” nearby and in Jerusalem itself for the construction of all the buildings required to house worshipers and the spiritual mission” and to draw up detailed plans and projects on the spot, it was decided, after the head of the affairs of the Palestine Committee, Prince Obolensky and General Isakov, had personally visited Palestine, to send there a deliberate expedition led by B.P. Mansurov, as he was already well acquainted with the needs and requirements of our pilgrims. This expedition was to include the architect Academician M.I. Eppinger, “who spent three years studying ancient Orthodox buildings in the East and especially on Mount Athos,” his assistant academician V. A. Dorogulin, Archimandrite Porfiry Uspensky, who, however, separated from the expedition for scientific research on Mount Athos in the local libraries, and others. This expedition was replenished in August 1858 with a new active member, an official of the maritime ministry, never “involved in Palestine, or ecclesiastical, or eastern affairs 15” by V.I. Dorogobuzhinov, who was sent to Jerusalem as an agent of the Shipping and Trade Society with the rights of a Russian consul and began to exercise his duties only on September 20 of the following 1859 16. Since Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich and his wife Grand Duchess Alexandra Iosifovna were expected to arrive in Jerusalem, the Committee entrusted those sent with the indispensable duty of preparing everything necessary for the arrival of Their Highnesses and, if possible, improving the life of our pilgrims. First of all, the so-called Coptic Khan against the nunnery of Greater Panagia was adapted to accommodate 220–270 women, the house of Mnemar and Mufti on the Passionate Path, the first for 60 men, and the second for worshipers of the “higher classes”, the house of Hasan near the monastery of St. Kharlampy - for 30 men, an Armenian house near the Austrian consulate also for 30 men, the house of Megmet - Ali - Effendi - for the Russians who arrived to build buildings. 17 Then hospices were established in Jaffa, in Ramla with food, and in Nazareth and Kaifa with food. Having done this, B.P. Mansurov and his companions set about finding both inside the city and in the surrounding areas suitable, quite convenient, plots of land for the construction of the planned vast charitable Russian institutions with the Cathedral of the Holy Trinity in their center. Negotiations were conducted, according to B.P. Mansurov, starting in 1857, “during the whole of 1858 and more than half of 1850,” and with great difficulties and obstacles on the part of the Turkish government, 18 but the final choice and purchase of the favorite place for Russian buildings was decided to be left to the discretion of Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich. B.P. Mansurov and his employees found in Jerusalem, as is known, the representative of the Russian government in Jerusalem in the person of the head of the second spiritual mission, Bishop Kirill, who, as can be seen from his report of 1858, at first greeted the new leaders in Palestine very cordially. With B.P. Maisurov he “entered into a trusting and good relationship from the first time” and in the simplicity of his heart he even considered their “mutual personal feelings to be good.” He “got along with the agent of the Shipping and Trade Society and Consul V.I. “concessions” and agreed with his opinions on the part of the latter, he began to dream that they “will act in harmony.” However, ep. Kirill “did not hide from himself the possibility of some reasons for misunderstandings” “in the two-faced nature of his activities 19.” But from what has been said above, it is already clear that these new figures in Palestine did not want to have any serious business communication with the envoy in Jerusalem “accredited,” so to speak, by the Russian government. They decisively and deliberately did not allow him into their midst, trying to do all their business without him and even sometimes, as if in defiance of his plans and intentions. Hence, quite naturally, complete antagonism and irreconcilable, tempting for both our own and foreigners, long-lasting enmity arises between our Russian leaders in Jerusalem. “I don’t know,” writes Bishop Kirill in a report for I858, “what we will reach next, but now our affairs in Jerusalem are not going very well.” “It turned out that the question was about the principle itself, about representation in Jerusalem, about the significance of the consul in connection with the bishop, the head of the mission.” “As an agent of the Society, Mr. Dorogobuzhinov no longer walks the same road with me, we are not under the same command, we are not doing the same thing, and if we do the same thing, then with completely different types, which is even worse.” “Merger of titles in one person, Mr. Dorogobuzhinov did not destroy in him the differences in aspirations for service in two departments: the beginning of our real division is here, and this division will not end either with a change of persons or with the passage of time "20..." The agency of the Society of Shipping and Trade in Jerusalem, a city neither seaside nor commercial, is so anomalous that it itself cannot help but feel in a rather awkward position - without comrades, without business. The only business that she can learn for herself is this efforts for future Russian buildings for the mission and fans: she seized on this matter jealously, “trying to secure it as an exclusive property for herself.” 21 The ever-memorable Metropolitan of Moscow Philaret paid attention to this confusion in his time and found that the concentration of funds “collected for charitable institutions” and the construction of the church, premises and hospitals “belongs more to the spiritual mission than to the Shipping and Shipping Society.” trade.” But from this, however, the situation in Jerusalem did not move forward one step and did not become any better. Bishop Kirill attached to the mentioned report for 1858 a private letter dated February 10, 1859, written “with boundless power of attorney and with complete frankness” to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Prince L. M. Gorchakov. In this letter, with excessive detail and vain frankness, he outlined all the vicissitudes of his personal clashes with Mr. Dorogobuzhinov, not suspecting that the letter would be transferred by his ill-wishers into the own hands of the Sovereign Emperor, who deigned to put the following note on it: “I will wait for my Brother to write to me.” On April 28, Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich with his august wife and son Nikolai Konstantinovich landed on the coast of Palestine in Jaffa, and the next day they were solemnly greeted in the Holy Sepulcher Church, in front of a huge crowd of people, by Patriarch Kirill. 22 The most august admirers settled for a temporary stay in the patriarchate in the so-called “Porfiry” house or mission house. The Grand Duke, who stayed in Jerusalem for ten whole days, devoting his time to pious pilgrimages to holy places, at the same time, in fulfillment of the Highest will, personally entered into all the details of the issue of purchasing a plot of land for the construction of our charitable institutions, examined the plot of land planned for acquisition on Meidam Square, and approved the choice and approved both the purchase of this place and the structures designed on it. By the end of December 1859, the purchase of land was completed and the following areas were in the hands of the Palestine Committee 23: 1) Meidam 24 area of ​​15,709 square meters. fathom, located on the high ridge of the strip dividing two small caravan roads - Jaffa and Nabluz; 2) Mamilla (or St. Babyla) at 3,000 sq. soot (15,614 sq. meters, price 140,000 francs), located opposite Meydam, across the valley, on the other side of the Jaffa road: 3) two plots at the Damascus Gate Engemi or Birajie (12,809 sq. meters, price 230,000 francs) and Komsi 25 for growing gardens and vegetable gardens and 4) a fairly large plot land in Gornaya (5,918,092 sq. m. or more precisely 6,204 sq. s., priced at 2,000 francs), located near the ruins of the house of St. Prophet Zechariah and Elizabeth. According to the official reports of the Palestine Committee, 54,813 rubles were spent on the purchase of all lands in Palestine during the years from 1858 to 1863. 63 k. 26 According to B.P. Mansurov’s calculations, a square fathom of land in Jerusalem cost us 2 rubles. 25 kopecks, which price they still admit is “regrettably high, as a result of obvious extortion.” 27 “The Turkish government,” the report says, “having learned of the desire of the Russian Sovereign Emperor to show new concern for the welfare of his subjects and, after the recent war, cherishing the maintenance of good agreement between both powers, not only immediately gave the necessary permission (firman) for the acquisition of the necessary lands and the construction of all the desired buildings, but also donated for the mentioned purpose a plot of government-owned empty land adjacent to the area that we acquired by purchase.” 28 In relation to the head of the spiritual mission, Bishop Kirill, the Grand Duke was extremely kind and attentive throughout his stay in Jerusalem, giving him two of the highest awards - a precious panagia and the Order of St. Anna 1st degree. There was no talk of disagreements between the head of the mission and Mr. Dorogobuzhinov in the presence of the Grand Duke. When leaving Jerusalem, Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich even recommended “not to do anything without agreement” with the head of the mission. Obviously, under the influence of these signs of high attention and the highest awards, Bishop Kirill perked up and wrote enthusiastically to his relatives in St. Petersburg on August 7, 1859: “I want to make it a rule in the future - to take advantage of the conveniences of my current position and from time to time make forays and walks. There is a wide field for this here: I look at Egypt, they ask me to visit Cyprus, they don’t invite me to the Lebanese Mountains, where many have started a lot, but they also left a lot to our share, just so as not to tie our hands.” “As long as the opportunity to serve the church shines ahead,” he says in a letter dated September 24 of the same year, “I will not exchange my holy work for any department. Trouble? But this is the sweetness of life - in the struggle: this is the sign of the holiness of the matter - in the enmity of the devil. 29 But the pleasant impressions gained from the stay of the royal guests in Jerusalem began to gradually disappear, and sad reality began to take over with all the petty worries. The advice of the Grand Duke - “not to do anything without agreement” with the head of the mission not only did not have the desired and, one might believe, beneficial for the success of our cause in Jerusalem practical result, but turned out to be just simple politeness, which the executors of his will completely ignored. So B.P. Mansurov, upon his departure from Jerusalem, ordered, as Bishop Kirill wrote on August 16, 1859 to the director of the Asian Department E.P. Kovalevsky, that “Mr. Dorogobuzhinov took from me the hospital I had built with the money of the Empress.” This was done simply, without any notifications or advance notices. "G. Dorogobuzhinov entered the hospital, described the things, ordered the employees to contact him, and that was the end of the matter.” He appointed a woman as the caretaker of the hospital, not without whims and some peculiarities, even according to V.P. Mansurov, A. A. Golikov. When Rev. Kirill asked to deliver to him an inventory of the hospital’s belongings and to send him a box of surgical instruments, “addressed to the spiritual mission” from Her Majesty’s office, then Mr. Dorogobuzhinov sent him the inventory and a box of tools, but “prudently kept the keys to the box for himself.” “Now,” Ave. Kirill declares in his regard, “I don’t even know where to turn with questions on matters: Mr. Mansurov announced to me that I can express my opinions on the worship case only through His Excellency and Mr. Dorogobuzhinov, but Mansurov is not my boss, and his unfounded demands do not seem to me to be law. Dorogobuzhinov, in turn, points me to the Palestinian Committee, about which neither I nor he himself have yet received written notifications. What are you going to do? 30. There was, therefore, an urgent need to accurately and clearly delineate in Palestine the spheres of activity of the head of the mission and the consul and their mutual relations to each other. By the journal definition of the Palestine Committee of December 11, 1859, approved by the Sovereign Emperor, these relations were established by special rules, which in theory were recognized as the guiding principles of our leaders in Palestine, but in practice then caused a whole series of misunderstandings and clashes, which sometimes led to the need to even resort to the force of the consular cavas. These are the rules: “The duty of the Russian spiritual mission in Jerusalem is to entrust the moral and spiritual edification of the entire Russian flock, church representation, the production of divine services, the management of mission affairs, pastoral supervision of our fans and all the moral conditions of their life, participation with advice and instructions in the affairs of charity for our pilgrims, transmission of their comments to the consul on this subject and assistance to him in improving the life of fans. Subordinate all Russian hospitality establishments in Palestine to the authority of the civil authorities, i.e., the Russian Imperial Consulate, whose responsibilities include all political, diplomatic, civil and police representation and administration, all acquisitions of lands and houses, all economic management of shelters, hospitals and buildings on the basis of instructions from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs" 31 . In addition to these delineating rules in the spheres of action of the head of the mission and the consul, as direct consequences of the Grand Duke’s stay in Jerusalem, and the former misunderstandings between the two representatives of Russian power in the East, one should also recognize the removal of V. I. Dorogobuzhinov from Jerusalem in the middle of 1860 and his replacement by the real consul K. A. Sokolov from the diplomatic officials of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Following his death, which soon followed, Sokolov was replaced by A. N. Kartsev, a former consul in Romania. For all this, Bishop Kirill was not allowed by B.P. Mansurov and his collaborators to participate in the discussion of projects for the creation of Russian charitable institutions and in monitoring their construction, and his entire role in this regard was limited to his presence on August 30, on the name day of the Sovereign Emperor, at the foundation stone of the cathedral church in honor of the Holy Trinity, and then only as an assistant, since the vicar was to be present at the church celebration Patriarchal Meletios, Metropolitan of Petra-Arabia. It goes without saying that the bypassed and offended head of the mission had only one consolation left - to severely criticize the actions of the construction commission and its main figures, and thereby unwittingly create around himself in Jerusalem an atmosphere of all sorts of gossip and idle talk among our pilgrims and the Holy Sepulcher clergy, who always sought to maintain rough relations between Russian representatives of the authorities. Conceived by the Palestinian Committee of charitable institutions in Jerusalem and began construction on a plot of land of 900 square meters. fathom, surrounded by a stone fence, outside the city, in the center there should have been a cathedral in the name of St. Life-Giving Trinity. On the right side is his house for the Russian spiritual mission of Russian monks who come to worship. On the top floor of the house, in addition to corridors, staircases and terraces, according to the design, there were built an apartment for the bishop, the head of the mission, his deputy, three apartments for hieromonks, three for hierodeacons, an apartment for a dragoman, three rooms for choristers and a room for servants. On the ground floor there is a house church in the name of St. Queen Alexandra for 350 people, a room for kavas, a library, a store for sacred items, 12 rooms for singers and visiting monks, a refectory, a buffet, a kitchen, a bakery, a pantry and a room for servants. On the left side of the cathedral is a welcoming house for 300 worshipers, which, according to the original design, contains, on the top floor, an apartment for the senior caretaker, 10 rooms - each for 5 people, 5 rooms - each for 11 people, four rooms - each for 12 people, a reading room, a terrace and a washroom. On the lower floor there is a junior caretaker's apartment, 8 rooms - each for 2 people, 17 rooms - each for 5 people, one room for 12 people, a refectory, a common kitchen, a buffet, a common bakery for fans and a storeroom for provisions, a servant's room, a storeroom for provisions, a storeroom for the things of fans and washrooms. On the eastern side of the square, behind the altar of the cathedral, across the garden, there is a women's shelter for 500 admirers, on the upper floor there are 8 rooms - each for 3 people, 4 rooms - for 4 people, 8 rooms - for 5 people, 2 rooms - for 8 people, 16 rooms - for 12 people, a reading room, a terrace and washrooms, and on the lower floor: a vestibule, corridors, rooms for senior and junior caretakers, 9 rooms - for 3 people, 2 rooms - for 4 people, 8 rooms - for 5 people, 2 rooms for 8 people, 12 rooms - for 12 people, a reading room, a refectory, a kitchen, a buffet, a servant's room, a pantry for provisions, a pantry for clothes of fans and a washroom. On the right side of the women's shelter there is a bathhouse, a laundry room, barns and a stable. Along the same line, closer to the gate, is a house for guards. Opposite the service premises, a two-story house for visiting members of the noble class is proposed. On the upper floor there are 4 rooms with one room, 4 rooms with four rooms, a maid's room, a bathroom and a storage room; on the lower floor: 9 rooms - one room, two rooms - three rooms, a maid's room, a kitchen, a bathroom, a storage room and external porches. In front of the pilgrimage shelters, it is planned to plant gardens, arrange ponds and dig 6 new cisterns in different places of Meydam Square. On the gate overlooking the Jaffa road, the words should be inscribed: “Strange beh and vvedoste me” (Matthew 15:35). Behind the mission house, in parallel, there is a hospital with 60 beds. “The peculiarity of the building, according to the official report, is the formation in the middle of the house of two large longitudinal halls or galleries, which eliminate the need to open windows in the wards, but give patients the opportunity to always breathe fresh air, walk and stroll under protection from the heat of the sun. In these same halls, from time to time, home worship can be held for the sick, and those who are able can gather daily for common prayer, to listen to soulful readings, to do manual work, etc.” On the top floor of the hospital, in addition to the hall, there are 8 wards for the sick, two rooms for the sick of the noble class, rooms for nurses, a bathroom; on the lower floor: a canopy, stairs, a common room, a doctor's apartment, a room for a nurse, a pharmacist's apartment, a pharmacy, a laboratory, a material room, an operating room, two rooms for patients, a linen closet and corridors; the hospital also has a special garden and a cistern 32. This is the initial design of our charitable institutions in Jerusalem, but during their construction, we had to make very significant reductions and cuts in it. So, by September 1, 1862, from March 1858, according to official data, only a stone fence wall of 900 fathoms, a house for watchmen, a house for services, in the living rooms of which accommodated the builders of Russian buildings, a large water pool and 6 cisterns 33 were completely rebuilt, and by October 15, 1863, according to reports, “completely rebuilt” the building for the mission with the church of St. is listed. Great Martyr Queen Alexandra, a two-story hospital for 60 people and a men's shelter, but already on one floor, for 300 people, was nearing completion, and by the spring of 1864, a women's shelter, also on one floor, but still for 500 people, was to be completed, and the cathedral in the name of the Life-Giving Trinity was roughly completed. “This matter, that is, the completion of the buildings, according to the report, must be rushed so that by Easter 1864 Russian worship could begin in the already completed house of the spiritual mission” 34. According to the official report published in the Academic Monthly Book for 1864, the expenses of the Palestine Committee for the construction of Russian charitable institutions and for the maintenance of temporary hired shelters and a hospital in the period from the autumn of 1858 to October 15, 1863, i.e. over five years, expressed in the following figures: For the purchase of land in Palestine……………………………………………………….54.8l3 p. 6Zk. For the establishment and maintenance of temporary shelters in Jerusalem, Jaffa, Ramle, Kayfa and Nazareth………………………………………………………………………………………………………….61,714 rub. 60 k. For the establishment and maintenance of the hospital……………………………………………23,960 rub. 68 k. For construction work……………………………………………………………………...733,910 rub. 64 k. For bank expenses for transferring amounts to Jerusalem at the rate…………..49,586 rub. 43 k. For the production in St. Petersburg of various items for Russian buildings in Jerusalem, from the amount assigned for this, 24,860 rubles………………………………………………………………………………12,060 rubles. 85 kopecks. For delivering them to Jerusalem and insuring them from the amount of 5,324 rubles. 3 k……………..2,864 rub. 82 k. For artistic works for the Church of St. Queen Alexandra…………………..1,275 rub. 00 k. For correspondence and postage………………………………………………………..135 rub. 34 k. The balance by October 15 in cash amounts was 63,737 rubles. 35 k. During the period from 1862 to the spring of 1863, work was carried out to decorate and prepare for the consecration of the church in the name of St. Queen Alexandra and expressed themselves in the following figures: For an oak iconostasis………………………………………………………………1,720 rub. 00 k. For the construction of the altar, altar, lecterns, gratings, frames for icons, various cabinets and other church accessories………………………………………………………..2,525 rub. 00 k. For icons in the iconostasis………………………………………………………………500 rub. 00 k. Furniture for the altar………………………………………………………………………………………700 rub. 00 k. Chandelier, chandeliers and bronze lamps………………………………………………………7,337 rub. 20 k. 3 bronze gilded crosses on the dome of the cathedral…………………………………..4,611 rub. 80 k. Cast iron gratings for the cathedral, house church and mission house………………RUR 7,416 00 k. All church accessories were made in the Byzantine style, according to the drawings of M. I. Eppinger, and received the approval of the Sovereign Emperor. The icons were painted by academicians Vasiliev and Ksenofontov and the famous icon painter V.P. Poshekhonov, and the artists Vasiliev and Poshekhonov, “moved by their heartfelt participation in the work begun in Jerusalem, brought the icons they painted as a gift to the church being built.” From persons who wished to remain anonymous, elegant silver-gilded church utensils were donated - a gospel, an ark, a cross, a spoon, a dish, a cup, etc. For the delivery and forwarding of the named items for the Jerusalem Church of St. Queen Alexandra from St. Petersburg through London, Gibraltar to Constantinople on the English steamer "Era" and from there to Jerusalem on the new steamship of the Russian Shipping and Trade Society paid 4,259 rubles. 91 k., for insurance of 30,000 rubles. all 138 boxes – 1,064 rub. 82 k., for correcting these items damaged on the road, for installing them on site by 3 craftsmen deliberately sent to Jerusalem - 842 rub. 44 to 35. Having chosen a suburban plot of land along the Jaffa road as the site for the establishment of Russian charitable institutions, the builders and leaders of the Palestine Committee initially encountered a number of objections from the Russian people regarding the expediency and suitability of constructing these buildings outside the city limits and, as it seemed at that time, in a place remote from the main shrines of the Holy City. “Many,” writes the chief builder of these buildings, B.P. Mansurov, “did not believe in the possibility of attracting Russian pilgrims to shelters located outside the city. Fearing that these rumors could reduce sympathy for the project planned in Palestine” and “to calm all those who at that time strongly condemned for their determination to build all Russian establishments outside the city limits, the executors of the Highest will and destiny of the sovereign, Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, had to look for the acquisition of some good plot in St. City, not for the obligatory construction of a consulate house on it,” but with the goal of “providing the opportunity, if necessary, to establish, as close as possible to the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, such a courtyard in which both the Russian spiritual mission and our fans could find temporary shelter, during those hours of the evening from early morning, when the city gates were not yet unlocked, and the Church of the Holy Sepulcher was already closing. Such a temporary shelter was necessary only in view of the then strictly observed procedure for locking the city gates from sunset to sunrise. When this order was abolished by itself, and this followed sooner than expected, the aforementioned shelter and farmstead became unnecessary” 36. For this purpose, on the instructions of the architect Pierotti, a small plot of land was acquired near the main Jerusalem shrine, i.e., the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, which belonged to the Coptic priest George, 140 square meters. fathom. To round up this plot, up to 271 sq. m. were subsequently purchased at various times. fathom 37. For the purchase of this wonderful plot of land, which contained the valuable remains of the famous basilica of Emperor Constantine at the site of the Discovery of the Cross of Christ, and in 1883, as it turned out, after careful scientific excavations carried out at the expense of the late chairman of our Society, Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich and with the assistance of the Society, which discovered, until then hidden under a layer of garbage, a significant threshold through which the Lord I. Christ passed for suffering and the ancient gates, 30,691 rubles were spent at different times. 47 k. This amount also includes 6,641 rubles, used by the Committee for clearing the site, excavations and for the construction of a wall of “recent masonry” and another wall “on an ancient platform”, for fencing the Russian site from the neighboring land of the Avraamievsky Monastery and a gate for removing garbage to market street 38. At the Russian site near the Church of the Resurrection, scientific excavations were carried out in 1864 by the famous French archaeologist Count Vogüe, and in 1865 by the no less famous English Palestine scholar and archaeologist Wilson, and the first discovered a Byzantine arch, and the second even discovered a passage under this arch. “Cleaning the dungeons, according to the official report, required long work and great expenses, because here there was a mound of ruins and centuries-old garbage, more than five fathoms high.” Therefore, the excavations that began in 1859 were temporarily suspended with the hope of “producing according to the means,” which did not appear soon, only thanks to the generosity of the first August Chairman of the Palestine Society in 1883. The builders of Russian charitable institutions in Jerusalem strained every effort to not only finish them and make them inhabitable by the spring of 1864, but even “to begin Russian worship in the already completed house of the spiritual mission” by Easter of this year. True, in reality they did not completely succeed, but B.P. Mansurov solemnly stated in official documents that “by 1864, all the work begun in Jerusalem was completed; As a result, it turned out that everything was completed earlier than expected and cheaper than the approved estimates.” The fact is that in execution the builders significantly deviated from the original plan. Thus, both shelters for men and women found themselves without second floors, which they do not have to this day, although the number of fans that were supposed to be placed in them remained the same; the two-story “hospital house for visiting persons of the noble class” was not put into practice, instead of which there was a rather clumsy house, given over to the premises of persons in charge of buildings, and in December 1863, when it was decided to transfer the consulate from the city to the center of the Russian colony, this house was doomed to a radical alteration as an apartment for the consul and to the addition of a tower above it for a clock and for hanging the consular sign flag. “The spacious Russian bathhouse, the lack of which, according to the report, was so often felt by all our pilgrims” 39, remained on paper only as a pium desiderium and was realized, to the true pleasure of the Russian people, almost 25 years later, already when the Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society came into force. The reason for these cuts to the original plan for our buildings was the lack of funds that were needed for the construction of a grandiose Russian cathedral in the name of the Life-Giving Trinity. As for the success of the buildings, there is no doubt, because the main builder of Russian charitable buildings, M. I. Eppinger, considered them so complete that on May 1, 1864, he left Jerusalem, transferring minor finishing touches to the hands of his assistant architect V. A. Dorogulin. Thus, in Jerusalem, the eagerly awaited opening of Russian charitable institutions was approaching, the relocation of the spiritual mission to the house intended for it and the solemn consecration of the house church in the name of St. Queen Alexandra, and with him the buildings themselves. But the leaders of the Palestinian Committee were in no hurry to accelerate these events and waited until the end of July. All the time, from the date of the appointment of the new consul A. N. Kartsev to Jerusalem until the end of 1863, was used by Palestinian leaders and their main, most devoted agent, the Jerusalem consul, to remove from Jerusalem the independent and energetically persistent head of the mission, Bishop Kirill, by all means and to deprive him of the opportunity to settle in new Russian buildings, where he, relying on official instructions given to him from Petersburg, and the promise and statements of the Committee would undoubtedly require active intervention in the internal life of our pilgrims, which these figures feared like fire. Having received very detailed instructions and advice in St. Petersburg and having secured the strong support of our ambassador in Constantinople N.P. Ignatiev, A.N. Kartsev, incited by his new friends in Jerusalem, the builders of our buildings, led a fierce polemic against Bishop Kirill, for which powerful support was provided by insinuation, malicious slander, absurd Jerusalem gossip and incredible rumors. In a whole series of his official reports to St. Petersburg and private letters to the ambassador in Constantinople, in which “smart, cautious, capable of charming the head of the mission with archpastoral virtues,” Kartsev did not hesitate to call “a man with acting abilities,” an alcoholic “to the point of delirium tremens,” a “buffoon” who surrounds himself with “Arab comedians and women,” he managed to discredit Bishop Kirill so much that on his report dated May 19, 1863 to the Asian Department, the Sovereign Emperor, who took our affairs in Palestine to heart, put the following resolution: “It is extremely sad if all this is true. But rumors would be enough not to leave him in place.” The fate of the ill-fated Bishop Kirill was thus decided. Neither the protection of our Ministry of Foreign Affairs, “for political reasons” and on the basis of reports from their agents, “who did not find the presence of the Bishop of Melitopol in Jerusalem at the head of the mission unnecessary, much less harmful,” 40, nor the most flattering reviews of him from the Greek Patriarchate and the residents of the city of Jerusalem, with the qadi at their head, could keep this remarkable and much-promising figure in the Orthodox East in his place. By decree of June 22, 1863, he was recalled from Jerusalem to Rossio and settled in the Kazan Spassky Monastery, where, under the impression of the moral upheavals and undeserved grief he suffered, he peacefully, although very prematurely, ended a life that promised so much and which, except suffering, gave him nothing... It is worthy of full attention on our part that in a report dated May 19, 1863 to the Asia Department, Consul A. N. Kartsev, as if in passing, without any direct relation to the essence of the matter, allows himself to make the following remark regarding the moral qualities of the future desired head of our mission in Jerusalem. “I would consider,” he writes, “it would be more useful for the unity of our actions and Russian interests” in Palestine to appoint not a bishop, but an archimandrite, as the new head of the spiritual mission, known not only for his mental abilities, but also for his kind, honest behavior and strict exemplary life 41 . Undoubtedly, this cherished thought of the Committee was suggested to A.N. Kartsev, and in it he looked for a way out of the supposed and expected clashes with the head of the mission, the bishop, and hence the great troubles that resulted for himself personally and for his future diplomatic career. The idea of ​​the Jerusalem consul found sympathy in the Holy Synod and was seriously discussed in it. In a note with a project for managing charitable institutions in Palestine, forwarded by the decree of the Holy Synod of March 12, 1863 to the conclusion of Metropolitan Philaret of Moscow, the head of the mission is outlined in very modest terms. “The main qualities that will be required from the rector of the hospice monastery in Jerusalem should be, we read in this note, strict piety, strength of character, ability to deal with the Russian common people and experience in monastic management. From such a clergyman there is no need at all to demand either pompous scholarship, or the ability to endure the conditions of sociability with foreigners, or even knowledge of Greek and Arabic. The abbot will deal exclusively with Russian worshipers within the Russian monastery. Consequently, the main condition is the ability to manage worshipers and households on the same basis as is done in monasteries in Russia. All local relations with the Greek clergy and the Jerusalem authorities will remain the domain of the diplomatic representative, i.e. consul, and partly the head of the spiritual mission.” 42 Metropolitan Philaret, although he presented in St. The Synod had a “dissenting opinion” regarding these rules, but in its demands regarding the merits of the future head of the mission, it obviously did not want to disagree with the main figures of the Palestinian Committee, who were embarrassed by the “too high hierarchical rank of the head of the Jerusalem mission.” Therefore, when they asked his opinion about the future successor of Bishop Kirill, he recommended the Optina hieromonk Leonid (Kavelin, from the nobles of the Kaluga province, a former guards captain), “with undoubted dignity, he passed monastic life in a monastery, mainly known for spiritual improvement” (i.e. Optina), and had already served for some time (from September 1, 1857 to May 20 1859) in the Jerusalem mission under the command of Bishop Kirill. By decree of November 29, 1863, Fr. Leonid Kavelin was appointed head of the mission with the elevation to the rank of archimandrite, but he went to Jerusalem only in the spring of the following 1864, 43 both from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and from St. Synod, he was supplied (February 27, 1864 from the minister and March 23 from the Synod) with the most detailed instructions. Since the most important provisions of these instructions served as guiding rules for our spiritual mission throughout the entire period of its existence in Jerusalem, and even recently, when (in 1891) the question of correcting the instructions for the head of the mission was raised, the Holy Synod did not recognize the possibility of radically changing it, but only slightly supplemented it with some new rules brought to life by the circumstances of the time - then we, at least in general terms, need to become more familiar with the content of these instructions. 44 “By order of the government, the care of new buildings to provide shelter for our pilgrims, the supervision of all buildings erected for this purpose, as well as care for the material needs of pilgrims,” the ministerial instructions say, “are entrusted to special persons, at the discretion of the Palestine Committee. The imperial consulate, by the very essence of its duties, communicates with local authorities, takes care of the safety and interests of our subjects, resolves disputes that arise between them, etc. Then the range of actions of the spiritual mission consists, in addition to conducting divine services and satisfying the spiritual needs of our subjects, as well as those Orthodox of all nationalities who would turn to the head or members of the mission for this, in maintaining friendly relations with the local clergy, in transferring according to their belongings those sent from Russia donations, as well as in assisting our consulate in those cases when it turns to the mission.” St. The Synod, repeating in many respects the demands of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and sometimes excessively expanding the range of actions and influence of our spiritual mission far beyond the boundaries of the Jerusalem Patriarchate, stops, among other things, in clarifying the question of how the head of the mission is obliged to share with the consul the concerns for fans. “Sharing concerns about Russian fans with the members of the mission under your jurisdiction, you, we read in the instructions of the Holy Synod, should try to incite them to a reverent way of behavior through spiritual edifications, advice, suggestions and examples of your own life. In the event that one of the admirers, having allowed themselves to live an obviously seductive life, completely despises your pastoral warnings, then all you have to do is warn the consul in confidence about this.” In the internal management of the mission, “You, as the head of the mission, are entrusted with monitoring the behavior of the persons attached to it, distributing duties and activities among them, and generally guiding them; therefore, it is your responsibility to eliminate the displeasure that arises between them, if any, to sort out their complaints and make impartial, legal satisfaction.” Having well mastered these and other basic principles that were to guide the new head of the mission, Arch. Leonid tried to talk with B.P. Mansurov, already known to him from his initial service in Jerusalem, who at that time held all Russian Palestinian affairs in his hands, in order to receive from him, so to speak, unwritten instructions. Here, however, he had to make sure that his appointment to Jerusalem was not received entirely favorably by our leaders of the Palestine Committee. It would seem that in the person of Arch. Leonid amazingly combined “strict piety”, and “firmness of character”, and “the ability to deal with the Russian common people”, and “experience in monastic management”, which was the focus of the leaders of the Palestine Committee, and “learning”, or more correctly, love of science and, thanks to a good knowledge of the languages of French, German, English, partly Greek and Latin, South Slavic dialects and the Polish language, even “the ability to endure the conditions of sociability with foreigners,” which was supplied to his predecessors by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Therefore, arch. Leonid should have been considered a completely desirable and sought-after candidate for the difficult post of head of the Russian mission in Jerusalem, but at this time, obviously, this was not what the leaders of the Palestinian Committee wanted and were looking for in Jerusalem. After a lively conversation, B.P. Mansurov directly stated about. Archimandrite Leonid that he knows what is needed in Jerusalem, and that, in his opinion, peace and silence will be established there only when the head of the mission is a priest with 12 children 45. The architect is no better. Leonidas had a meeting while passing through Constantinople and with Patriarch Kirill of Jerusalem, whom he, on behalf of the Holy Synod, was obliged to invite to the upcoming consecration of the house church in the name of St. Queen Alexandra or, as a last resort, ask him to order the governor, Metropolitan Meletius, to replace the patriarch at these celebrations. Patriarch Kirill, who assisted Arch. Leonid received full attention at the reception, and in a letter to the Holy Synod regarding his appointment, he even expressed joy; in a private conversation with the rector of our mission in Constantinople, Archimandrite Antonin, who later entered this review of the patriarch into the official paper, he expressed that this appointment “will not do any good” in Jerusalem 46 . Under such unfavorable circumstances for him, on May 12, 1864, Arch. Leonid arrived in Jerusalem, having with him 2 hieromonks and one hierodeacon and 6 singers, for whom a regent was later called from Russia, and settled right on the Russian buildings in a completely prepared mission house. By the time the third mission was installed in Jerusalem, since the Highly approved Palestinian Committee had already completed its task, i.e., had built the proposed charitable institutions in Jerusalem, and since its august chairman, after leaving for Warsaw as governor, had ceased his connection with the Committee, the chairmanship of which then passed to the Minister of Public Education Golovnin and even for some time, from March 28, 1863, to B.P. Mansurov, his existence in the future was considered pointless. In April 1864, it was replaced by the Highly Approved Palestine Commission, which was attached to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The members of the Commission, by the Highest order, were appointed as a representative from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the director of the Asian Department, as a representative from the spiritual department - the Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod or his comrade and personally a former member of the Committee, well informed in our Jerusalem affairs, B. P. Mansurov. As an inheritance from the Committee, the newly established Palestinian Commission received, along with documents, a capital of 56,532 rubles. 14 ½ k., of which 20,700 rub. in 5% state tickets and money 35,832 p. 14 ¼ k. Since the composition of the Commission was extremely limited and its main members - the director of the Asian Department and the chief prosecutor of the Holy Synod, in addition, had on their hands many matters that directly depended on them, B. P. Mansurov now became, in fact, for almost 25 years, the only powerful arbiter of all matters relating to Palestine. Excellent familiarity with the conditions of life and life in the East, personal frequent communications with prominent figures there, amazing energy, stubborn persistence in defending his views and beliefs, diplomatic resourcefulness and the ability, if desired, to charm and tie the person he needed to himself - all this made B.P. Mansurov a persistently energetic, independent and almost categorical manager in Jerusalem in our charitable institutions and authoritatively irreplaceable member of the Commission in St. Petersburg, where his extensive resolutions, comments, assumptions, etc. were listened attentively by other members who had never seen the East, stereotypically repeating: “With the opinion of B.P. Mansurova agrees so-and-so.” The Jerusalem consul, builders, workers, caretakers and employees in the shelters and hospital were entirely dependent on B.P. Mansurov, took into account his will, his opinions and orders and sought his approval and support. For the residents of Palestine, accustomed to attributing such advantages of power and honor only to the pasha, B.P. Mansurov was truly “Mansur Pasha,” as the natives called him. During the entire existence of the Palestine Commission, he had at his disposal a very limited office, consisting of a clerk, who received a salary of 25 rubles at first, and then 50 rubles until the end of the Commission’s closure, and a clerk with a salary of 25 rubles. The first task of the Palestinian Commission in Jerusalem was to consecrate the church in the name of St. Queen Alexandra and in the fall to open charitable institutions to receive Russian fans. The responsibility to prepare the church for consecration was assigned to the new head of the mission, Arch. Leonid, who, immediately upon arrival, transferred the mission from the Arkhangelsk Monastery, where it had humbly lived until then, to a new spacious building built for it, and scheduled the consecration of the church for July 28. Due to the patriarch’s refusal to attend this significant celebration in the life of the Russian colony in Jerusalem, his deputy Meletius, Metropolitan of Petra-Arabia, was invited, who consecrated the church in front of a huge crowd of people, not only Orthodox, but even non-Orthodox. The celebration ended with a hearty lunch for both honored guests, workers and pilgrims. The stewards spent a total of 664 rubles on these celebrations, along with preparations for the consecration of the church. 56 ¼ k. or 13,291¼ piastres, which B.P. Mansurov rightly recognized as “remarkable frugality” 47. The main builders, architects Eppinger and Dorogulin, received the following ranks and orders, junior architects Pozdnyakov and Granovsky, caretaker Levitov and vice-consul Marabuti - orders, other employees on the buildings, at the personal discretion of B.P. Mansurov, received monetary awards from 3,000 rubles assigned for this by the Commission, and workers - medals. The chief manager B.P. Mansurov himself was at the height of bliss and did not skimp on praise for his closest employees. Regarding Mr. Eppinger’s report for the first third of 1864, he wrote the following to the Commission’s clerk, Melnikov: “I looked at this report and was very pleased with it, because here the expenditure figure is less than what I calculated on May 1. Things are, therefore, very successful.” When considering consular reports for the May and September thirds of the same 1864, B.P. Mansurov, addressing the director of the Asian Department P.N. Stremoukhov, notes: “Reporting of the city. The consul is so brilliantly good that there does not seem to be the slightest reason, in my opinion, for any remark; on the contrary, one cannot help but give full justice to the remarkable thrift and rare prudence with which A. N. Kartsev conducted a complex business under unfavorable and emergency circumstances.” “I intend to give my present message an official form, because I wish and consider it my duty to leave in the affairs of the Commission evidence of complete respect for the precious and useful care of the Consul.” The main owner of Russian charitable buildings, Consul A.N. Kartsev, was absent from Jerusalem until December 1864, and at the celebrations of the consecration of these buildings, his role was played by the secretary of the consulate T.P. Yuzefovich. With the arrival of pilgrims in Jerusalem at the beginning of the pilgrimage season, the doors of both shelters hospitably opened for them on our buildings, and the bustling pilgrim life took on its usual order. The new head of the mission, Fr. Archimandrite Leonid, due to the nature of his persistent, decisive character and his rigoristic monastic views, relying on the instructions given to him from St. Petersburg and taking advantage, in the absence of a consul, of the rights of an autocratic owner, decided to regulate the pilgrimage life in our shelters and especially in the women’s shelter according to the holiness of the place and the importance of the feat voluntarily accepted by each pilgrim, and to subordinate it “to his constant and vigilant supervision.” His spiritual daughter, Mother Magdalene, who was appointed caretaker of the women's shelter, expressed his complete readiness not to allow anything contrary to Christian duty and conscience in the place entrusted to her management (as the boss). But these intentions of the rigorist head of the mission did not please the Russian builders of charitable institutions. “Gentlemen serving here, according to Arch. Leonid, express their firm intention not to tolerate among themselves even one more or less silent witness to their actions.” Party of the Dissatisfied Fr. arch. Leonid was strengthened by quite strong and important supporters - the Mazaraki spouses, from the local inhabitants. Doctor Mazaraki, a family doctor and a close friend of the patriarch, occupied a position at our hospital with a salary of 2,250 rubles. (subsequent Russian doctors enjoyed a salary of only 1,500 rubles), with a ready-made apartment and heating. With the arrival of the new head of the mission, who had with him, as a dragoman, the Arab Sarruf, who had completed a course at our medical-surgical academy, thanks to idle conversations in Jerusalem, Mr. Mazaraki began to be afraid of competition in the person of the mentioned Sarruf and willingly went over to the side of the ill-wishers of the new chief, having, thanks to his closeness to the patriarch, had a huge influence on the coldness of the patriarchy’s attitude towards our mission at that time. The role of secretary and correspondent in this party was played with irreplaceable success in the matter of drawing up denunciations and complaints by V. N. Kaminsky, the author of “Memoirs of an Admirer of the Holy Sepulcher,” an extremely painful person, biliously irritable and pettyly proud. Being out of work, V.N. Kaminsky lived in Jerusalem and managed to gain the trust of B.P. Mansurov and A.N. Kartsev so much that they allowed him to settle on Russian buildings for nothing, far from the complete completion of the construction of Russian charitable institutions. Now, in gratitude, he paid them for this with his easily moving pen. All the persons we indicated, who lived in Russian buildings and were in one way or another dissatisfied with the head of the mission for various reasons, tried to win over to their side some members of the mission and singers, who had their own reasons to be also dissatisfied with the arch. Leonid. New mission members recruited by arch. Leonid accidentally and without due diligence on his part, at the first stages of his stay in Jerusalem, they entered into disputes with him - one (Hieromonk John), due to his youth, was not allowed to fulfill the duties of a confessor, due to restrictions on his rights, and the other (Hierodeacon Arseny), a graduate of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, out of false pride, who did not want to submit to the authority of his superior, who did not have any theological degree. The singing missions did not put up with his imperious and somewhat stern tone, which demanded unquestioning monastic obedience from his subordinates in everything. Architects V. A. Dorogulin and M. F. Granovsky and his comrades, in order to rally and unite those dissatisfied with the established order, often organized gatherings of mission singers at the buildings in the evenings “with the singing of songs and romances” and “abundant drinking bouts”, at which they, without much difficulty, even managed to develop a plan for joint hostile actions against the head of the mission. All that remained was to wait for the right moment to begin action. Such a moment was recognized as the return of Consul A.N. Kartsev from St. Petersburg to Jerusalem, who undoubtedly received instructions on how to behave in relation to the new head of the mission, and with all his heart wanted to remove him and replace him with a “simple hieromonk.” Alarmed by the slander from his like-minded people and friends that the new head of the mission was severely condemning his not entirely impeccable moral behavior, as well as the behavior of his secretary, A. N. Kartsev, with his characteristic ardor, seized on the false idea of ​​​​annoying the arch. Leonidas, and then remove him completely from Jerusalem, in exactly the same way as he did with Bishop Kirill, and therefore he imprudently accepted a complaint against his boss from the hands of the mission members and even began to guide them in further actions. Thus began the ill-fated unrest in the Russian spiritual mission, during which the present members of the mission refused to obey their boss, took away the church keys from him, began to dispose of church property without control and did not even allow their rector to serve... The consul followed with a denunciation to Constantinople and St. Petersburg “about the reprehensible actions of Archimandrite Leonid. But the matter is not limited to this, so to speak, domestic scandal, and the patriarch is also drawn into this sad story. During the absence of the arch. Leonidas from Jerusalem, on the occasion of his journey for confession and spiritual consolation with the once famous Serbian elder Joasaph, a monk of the monastery of St. Savva the Sanctified, secret reports of Fr. were stolen from his apartment with a selected key. Leonid to St. Petersburg, concerning some of the moral sentiments of the patriarchy, and were transferred to the patriarch. And hitherto, thanks to the influence of Doctor Mazaraki and his previously formed prejudice against Archimandrite Leonidas, the patriarch, who had not treated him particularly favorably, now, with the receipt of documentary data in his hands, became directly hostile towards him. Upon his return from the Lavra, Archimandrite Leonid was not only received very coldly by the patriarch, but the latter recommended him to abstain from priestly services and, contrary to the long-established custom in Jerusalem, did not invite the disgraced archimandrite to participate in the solemn litanies and services in the Holy Sepulcher Church during the entire period of Lent, and even on the first day of Easter... Among the people, among numerous Russian pilgrims, this fact did not go unnoticed, and everyone openly started talking about the formal prohibition of Archimandrite Leonidas from the priesthood by the Patriarch of Jerusalem... The Patriarch did not consider it possible to hide his incorrect relationship with the head of the mission and wrote a special message to St. Petersburg to the Holy Synod on April 13, 1865. Accusing completely unfairly Arch. Leonid in “disorderly” and even “disorderly behavior” and bringing, “with mortal sorrow” in his “fatherly heart,” to the attention of the Holy Synod even that he “forbade his eminence to take part in sacred acts performed in all-holy places,” Patriarch Kirill asked the Holy Synod, “in its prudence and prudence,” “to put an end to such a bad state of affairs, replacing the said Archimandrite Leonid with some other person,” and did not forget to recommend the “fatherly love” of the Holy Synod and his well-wishers, members of the spiritual mission, allegedly “undeservedly suffering” - Hieromonk John and Hierodeacon Arseny. This whole extremely regrettable story and especially the “unmerciful” patriarchal message made a very “unpleasant” impression in the Holy Synod, and a long correspondence began with the patriarch on this matter, lasting until 1868, in which our ambassador in Constantinople N.P. Ignatiev was to take an active part. In particular in relation to the arch. Leonid and to settle matters in general in our mission in June 1865, at the suggestion of Ambassador N.P. Ignatiev, the Holy Synod decided to send the rector of our mission in Constantinople, Arch. Antonina (Kapustina). Archimandrite Antonin, “serving with signs of dignity and with the hope of a more significant and more useful service,” as Metropolitan Philaret put it about him, arrived in Jerusalem on September 11, 1865, having been instructed by the highest spiritual authority to carefully investigate the sad history in the spiritual mission, talk with the Patarcharch of Jerusalem and temporarily replace Fr. Archimandrite Leonid, transferred, by order of the Holy Synod, to Constantinople, also to temporarily perform the duties of the rector of the church at our embassy, ​​until the investigation into him is completed and an opportunity is found to create a satisfactory way out of this incident for the honor of the Russian Church. This uncertain difficult situation for both of our leaders in the East, Archimandrites Antonin and Leonid, lasted quite a long time and ended only in 1869, when Fr. arch. Leonid was appointed abbot of a first-class monastery in Russia, called “New Jerusalem,” and Archimandrite Antonin was finally approved as head of the mission in Jerusalem 48 . The death in 1868 of Metropolitan Philaret of Moscow, who did not want to make any concessions to the Patriarch of Jerusalem and in every possible way protected the prestige of the Russian Church in the eyes of the Eastern clergy, also played an important role in resolving this sensitive issue. An important obstacle to the slow resolution of this issue was the fact that the report to the Holy Synod “about disorders in the Jerusalem spiritual mission” by Arch. Antonina was not without hesitation and even some partiality. “Acting modestly and peacefully,” wrote the prudent Metropolitan Philaret about the proposed sending to Jerusalem for the mentioned purpose of Arch. Antonin, - will he decide to say some firm words to the patriarch in order to resolve his prejudices against the arch. Leonid and the consul to explain to him the incorrectness of accepting the denunciations transmitted from him and the investigation” 49. And in fact, Archimandrite Antoninus, who went to Jerusalem with a definite plan to merge the Jerusalem spiritual mission with the Constantinople one and agreed to be the rector of the mission 50, but to live in Constantinople, as an apocrisiary under the ecumenical patriarch, tried to conduct the investigation in a conciliatory spirit, sparing in every possible way each of the warring parties. Thanks, of course, to this, he achieved the point that when the question arose about a successor to Fr. arch. Leonida, then arch. Antonin, as such, “had no difficulties for himself either on the part of the consul or on the part of the patriarch” 51. Having remained in Palestine and finally established himself in a new place, having behind him the experience of his previous service and the support of the Constantinople ambassador N.P. Ignatiev, who was sincerely disposed towards him and highly valued him, Arch. Antonin began studying church affairs in Jerusalem: he became close to an intimate friendship “with the great simpleton in Christ Jesus” Patriarch Kirill, vigilantly followed the successes of Catholic and Protestant propaganda, paid serious attention to the humiliated native Arab clergy, patronizing them in every possible way, studied the monuments of Byzantine writing stored in the book depositories of Palestine, and was keenly interested the life and situation of our pilgrims at the Holy Sepulchre. In relation to Russian pilgrims, Arch. Antoninus at first ardently began to guide them in a distant foreign land, printing for them “Instruction for the worshipers of the Holy Sepulcher, after reading the great canon”, “Instruction for Russian admirers in Jerusalem before confession”, etc., but then, when his rapprochement with our pilgrims aroused the suspicions of the main owner of Russian buildings, the consul, who inspired or even “ordered the caretaker of the women’s shelter to inform him whenever one of the members of the mission will come to the shelter,” 52 and when the main managers of the Palestine Commission directly pointed out to him that he could only “assist the Imperial Consulate” and should not manage pilgrimage shelters, then for a peaceful modus vivendi he tried to learn the principle of complete non-interference in the internal life of our charitable institutions. “Missions,” Fr. wrote in one correspondence. arch. Antonin, - no one has given either the right or the duty to lead the fans visiting Holy places... If a spiritual mission now hints at its suitability for shepherding our verbal flock in the meadows of the Holy Land, both its own and others will undoubtedly equate it to a wolf.” 53 But it’s not in Fr.’s character. Antonina was also completely passive. Refusing to serve his compatriots on the buildings in Jerusalem, he began to intensively buy up plots of land that were in some way important to his fans, and to set up shelters for them. So, at the end of 1868, he acquired the so-called Oak of Mamre, near which, on a piece of land purchased later, he planted a beautiful vineyard and built an excellent two-story pilgrimage shelter on the top of the mountain, almost comfortably furnished, even for pilgrims spoiled by life. In 1870, near the site of the Ascension of the Lord, he bought a vast plot of land on the Mount of Olives, on which he first planted a garden of olive and fig trees, and then built a beautiful church with a majestic bell tower, in which its builder found his eternal rest. “From above, an observer can see it in full view, according to Fr. arch. Antonina, the Dead Sea, and Transjordan, and with the help of binoculars in clear weather, even the blue of the Mediterranean Sea" 54 . A two-story house with a museum of those objects that were found on Olivet during excavations, extensive pilgrimage shelters and many other buildings, with a shady garden and flower beds, complement the indicated Russian buildings on Olivet. In 1880, on a site owned by the Russian government in Gornaya, Fr. Antonin set up a shelter for pilgrims, opened a Russian school, and began building a church in the name of the Kazan Mother of God, near which a little later a Russian women's community was created, settled in houses buried in a forest of olive trees and in numerous vineyards. The one-story shelter in Jericho, which began construction in 1875, was expanded in 1885 with funds (10,000 francs) from the Grand Dukes Sergius and Pavel Alexandrovich with the addition of a second floor, and thus became a luxurious shelter for our pilgrims visiting the Jordan and places of interest lying in the vicinity of this sacred river. At our house, located next to the ancient tower of Zacchaeus, there is now an extensive palm garden and a vineyard. On a piece of land called "Muscovy", in Jaffa, Fr. Antonin planted a beautiful garden, built a house for the summer stay of the head of the mission, and created a church in the name of the Apostle Peter, consecrated in 1893, a year before the death of the builder. From its high bell tower there is a beautiful view of the entire Jaffa valley, surrounded by palm and lemon gardens, and the necropolis of St. Tabitha, who was resurrected by the Apostle Peter. In 1866, Arch. Antonin, in contrast to the successes of the Catholic mission and diligent work for the benefit of the education of the local Arab Orthodox population of the Latin Patriarch Valerga, decided to create an Orthodox school, and for this, with the funds of the late Empress Maria Alexandrovna, who until her blessed death did not stop giving a substantial financial subsidy for the maintenance of this school 55, acquired a fairly significant plot of land in the village of Bet Jala, neighboring Jerusalem. There he first settled Mrs. Bodrova, who, on her own initiative, was engaged in training Jerusalem girls and not without success: the children, to the surprise of Fr. arch. Antonin, who visited her shelter, had good prayers read and sung in Russian. The purpose of this translation was expressed by him in his diary on November 17, 1865 in the following somewhat proud exclamation: “Let’s put a mine under Sua eminenza!” A small boarding house later appeared here, and when in 1888 Count Orlov-Davydov donated 5 thousand rubles, architect. Antonin expanded his boarding school and formed it into an educational closed educational institution, a breeding ground for teachers for other Orthodox schools in Palestine and Syria. In this matter, the Palestine Society also provided him with an indispensable service, which later took over this boarding house, since in a letter dated August 5, 1886, all plots of land in Bet Jala were brought to the arch. Antonin as a gift to His Imperial Highness Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich. With the funds of Countess M.V. Orlova-Davydova, he purchased a plot of land in Bethlehem. In addition to all of the above, Arch. Antonin acquired one plot in Kafr Kenna, now seized by the Latins by court decision, two in Tiberias, bearing the names: a place with columns and a place with baths, purchased with forged documents, and therefore almost hopelessly lost by us, in the same place with vaults, a plot of ad-Dabbi in the village. Siloam at the northern end of the village and there is another section of Karm-al-Bad, in Ain-Karim the sections of Vara-al-Khos and al-Wara, transferred according to the spiritual will of Fr. arch. Antonina, into the lifetime possession of Mrs. Apostolidis, with the right to transfer them after death to any female person and, only after the death of this person, becoming the property of the Russian church in Ain Karim, a plot of land Kerm-ul-Kharab or Kabur-ul-Enbiya, on the southwestern slope of the Mount of Olives, with the “caves of the prophets”, purchased in 1882, etc. The total value of all real estate property of the architect Antonin, denied by him according to his spiritual will to the Holy Synod, according to rough calculations, extends to a million rubles. All these land acquisitions about. arch. Antonin in Palestine stemmed from his ardent desire to be the master and owner in the Holy Land, on the one hand, and on the other, not to miss the favorable opportunity to stand in the way of the Catholic and Protestant missions, who set out to buy up everything remarkable in some respect in Palestine. “I,” wrote Arch. Antonin V.N. Khitrovo in 1879, - perhaps unlike many of his brothers in spiritual craft, abandoned all height and breadth of his life career and clung with his whole being to one goal - to establish and consolidate the Russian name in the Holy Promised Land so that we would not be only guests in it, but to a certain extent masters, for the consolation of our own and for the fear of others in faith and spirit" 56 . He expressed the same thing in his diary when he wrote about his intention to create a school in Bet Jala. There was one more motivation for Fr. arch. Antonin to the acquisition of land plots and the establishment of pilgrimage shelters on them. The Palestinian Commission, which took upon itself the obligation to take every possible care to improve the life of our pilgrims in the Holy Land, focused all its attention on Jerusalem, limiting itself to the construction of shelters in Ramleh, Nazareth and Kayfa and not paying the slightest attention to the needs of our pilgrims, “which were incessantly asserting themselves,” among which, undoubtedly, should be included the long absence of shelters in Jericho and Hebron, where our pilgrims they were forced to look for accommodation for the night either with Muslims who were hostile to them, or to sleep in the open air. It is worthy of note that the Palestine Commission itself not only understood these urgent needs well, but also openly admitted that it “did not direct its activities to the development of Russian institutions in Palestine and to the advance satisfaction of the needs that were constantly asserting themselves.” The justification for it was the need to direct all attention and all resources to the completion of the Trinity Cathedral. “Having begun to fulfill its task in April 1864, say the leaders of the Commission, with free capital of 64,000 rubles. (or rather, even with 56,532 p. 14 ½ k.), the Commission had to use all its funds during the first three years exclusively for the interior decoration of the Cathedral of St. Life-Giving Trinity and to supply it with all the necessary items for worship 57 The Commission and its August Chairman, Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, encouraged this, finding that “it is incompatible with the dignity of Russia and not in accordance with the will of the Sovereign Emperor to leave unfinished the church built by the Russian government with donations from the entire Orthodox Russian people.” And indeed, from the files of the former Commission it is clear that the bronze gilded royal doors ordered to the foundry of Genke and Pleske back in 1863 with funds donated (in the amount of 6,000 rubles) for this item by the family of the August Chairman were completed, but before getting to the place in Jerusalem, they visited the world exhibition in Paris in 1867 and the international exhibition in St. Petersburg in 1870 58. Icons for royal doors for 300 rubles. performed by the famous artist N.A. Koshelev. The oak iconostasis, first ordered from Mr. Porokhovshchikov, was made by the master of the Okhtensky suburb N. Leontyev, according to the drawings of the architect Dmitriev, for 4,350 rubles, the silk curtain for the royal doors of blue color, 42 ¼ arshin, was ordered from Lyon and cost 274 rubles. 62 k., 8 lamps were made for the seven-candlestick altarpiece donated by Lukyanov at a cost of 25 rubles. 60 k., multi-colored glass according to Eppinger’s design - from St. Petersburg at 320 rubles. a round window in the altar with an image of the Holy Spirit costs 175 rubles, bronze lamps for icons - 2,450 rubles, for the interior painting of the church with glue and oil paints with accessories and materials, 4,410 rubles were paid. 60 k., covered with five cathedral domes with lead - 4,106 rub. 86 k., for a marble floor inside the church (white and gray colors and red for frames) - 3,902 rub. 56 7/8 k., for a stone throne and altar 189 p. 34 3/8 kopecks, for plain and frosted glass and for carpentry work 639 rubles, for the sacristy 2,328 rubles. 50 k., for furniture for the cathedral 1,876 p. 89 ½ k., for the altar icons of the Ascension of the Lord and the Transfiguration, painted by the artist Academician Vasiliev, 800 rub. and for the frames for them 500 rubles, for finishing the carpets donated by the ladies’ circle with the wife of B.P. Mansurov at the head, 200 rubles, for lubricating the lead-colored six stone vaults, for installing drainage channels and slopes on the church terrace with repeating the work due to damage to the original lubricant, 502 rubles, for laying a stone sidewalk 70 rubles. 15 k., 59 for a hearth with an iron fireplace 81 rub. 10 rubles, for a pipe for draining water from a washbasin 14 rubles. 65 k., for a marble pedestal 67 rub. 86 ½ k., for the transfer of the patriarchal seat from the house church of St. Queen Alexandra and for a new stone platform for him 85 rubles. 37 k., for correcting three doors of the cathedral 162 rub. 32 k., for the entrance closed narfix 893 rub. 85 k. and for the glass for him 95 r., for the bars on the stone porch 151 r. 47 ½ k., for alterations to the bell tower in order to correctly place the donated and purchased bells, 591 rub. 10 k., for good 4,000 rub., for its delivery 429 rub. 55 k. and for additional work on hanging it 268 rub. 1 1/2 k., and for the iron bars in the altar window 100 rubles. The arrival of Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich the Elder in Palestine on September 25, 1872 prompted the Palestine Commission to speed up the completion of the cathedral and set October 28 as the day for its solemn consecration. The celebration of the consecration of the church, as promised at its foundation, was performed by Patriarch Kirill in concelebration with the Bishop of Gaza, Nazareth, Lida and Tiberias and numerous clergy, in the presence of Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich, Duke Eugene Maximilianovich of Leuchtenberg, princes Alexander and Konstantin Petrovich of Oldenburg, General D.I. Skobelev and other honored guests. The consecration ceremony ended with a dinner at the consulate for the Grand Duke, his companions and retinue, for the patriarch and higher clergy, at the mission for the lower clergy and in shelters for fans. It is remarkable that, despite such a significant influx of distinguished guests on the day of the consecration of the cathedral, the Palestinian Commission allocated only 875 rubles for the consecration celebration, but according to the consul’s report for the month of October, it even appears that, on the occasion of the consecration of the Church of the Holy Trinity, they spent only 12,709 ½ piastres or 635 rubles. 47 ½ k. The dinner for the lower clergy and pilgrims cost 805 p., and the dinner for the higher clergy and the retinue of the Grand Duke, obviously, was arranged at the expense of the latter. 60 Turning now to the fate of Palestinian charitable institutions, we must note that in this regard, as the Palestinian Commission itself frankly admits, we see complete immobility for almost the entire existence of this institution. The reasons for this should be considered her excessive caution and lack of faith in the cause that the Commission was called to serve, and in the always ardent love of the Russian people for the Holy Land. Forgotten were the completely significant and completely true words of the former chairman of the Commission, Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, expressed in a letter to A. M. Knyazhevich dated March 14, 1859, that “the most reliable and solid cause pleasing to God is the one that is based on the heartfelt and natural sympathy of the richest of all capitalists - the masses of the people.” The main figures of the Commission developed “suspicious caution” and excessive concern for the “future black day”, which, thank God, never came for the Commission. But all this taken together created an extremely sad long-term preservation of the status quo of 1864 for the development of a good cause. in the situation of our charitable institutions in Palestine, although at the same time it served, however, “to form reserve capital in her hands of about 130,000 rubles.” 61 In fact, in the very year of the completion of the construction of hospitality institutions near the Holy City of Jerusalem, according to the Commission, “the number of Russian pilgrims coming to the Holy Land already exceeded the number of places that our shelters could have.” 62 Of course, in view of this, it would be necessary first of all to finish the second floors above the men's and women's shelters, as suggested in the project, and to complete the construction of a shelter for pilgrims of the upper classes, but in reality something simply incredible happens. The building “for the noble class” is given to the apartment of the owner of the building - the consul, and fans of this class, men, are given space in a men's shelter and women - in a women's shelter, calling them “shelters of the first category.” The disruption of our shelters and embarrassment of fans, however, did not stop there. In 1864–1865, the hopeless and helpless position of the consulate to satisfy this just desire of the vast majority of its compatriots, despite all its readiness, increased even more. “Our shelters are designed for 876 fans of both sexes: in the men’s shelter there is room for 408 people and in the women’s shelter for 468 people. Meanwhile, “in view of savings”, “in order to gain room for 50 or 60 fans,” it was recognized that it was necessary to “close 1st category women’s shelters.” 63 In 1866, to even greater amazement, an apartment for the secretary of the consulate was set up in the same women’s shelter, although this encroachment on the women’s shelter was at one time strongly rebuffed by B.P. Mansurov, who defended the inviolability of this shelter. 64 The "great lack of space" for male admirers in 1866 and 1867 forced the Consul to place them in the corridors. In addition, in 1866, on the occasion of the “excessive severity of winter for Palestine”, “to save space”, it was considered beneficial to replace the iron beds ordered from Marseille with wooden bunks, which were then used during 1867-1889. finally replaced the hitherto used iron beds, both in men's and women's shelters. These expenses, thanks to the donated timber transported to the construction site after the completion of the dome on the Holy Sepulcher Church, cost only 242 rubles. 47 k. Despite, however, the indicated crowding in the men’s shelter, on the occasion of the marriage of the dragoman of the spiritual mission Sarrouf, “almost half of one front of the men’s shelter” was allocated for the latter’s apartment, with the construction of a “special entrance with a vestibule.” In 1867, B.P. Mansurov tried here too to restore “the broken conditions of convenience, rationally designed for a large number of fans.” 65 But all these measures should be recognized as palliatives and not eliminating the existing evil. The number of fans grew year after year in Palestne, and the premises continued to maintain their murderous status quo. From this resulted, one might say, the unbearably difficult situation of our pilgrims in Patestina, deceived in their hopes of having shelter in Russian buildings. The number of fans for the holiday of St. Easter in I883 was, according to consul V. A. Maksimov, no less than 2,500 people. “It is impossible to avoid overcrowding under these conditions, especially if we take into account that at least 20 rooms (sic), initially intended for pilgrims, have long been occupied by employees at shelters, the spiritual mission and the consulate. However, the latter accommodated one postman in it, occupying two rooms. “In rooms for 18 people, now, according to the same report, there are from 25 to 37 people; in one room designated for 20 people there are 35, in a room for 8 there are up to 14 people. Kitchens are turned into housing for fans” 66. There was, therefore, an urgent need to get out of this extremely difficult and, as the experience of 1883 showed, when the mortality rate in our buildings from intermittent fevers and typhus reached 14%, and the morbidity rate - up to 9 people a day, 67 dangerous situation by placing our pilgrims outside “Russian buildings in private apartments hired with funds from the Commission. Once again the Greek monasteries, severely condemned by the Palestine Committee in 1859 as unsuitable for the residence of our pilgrims, became almost the only refuge for many of them, and our pilgrims were also forced to pay quite dearly here. “The lack of space in our hospitality houses puts the consulate, says a report in 1870, into the unpleasant necessity of sending the female fans who come today to Greek monasteries, where they are forced to pay very dearly for bad and cramped accommodation,” and where “the abuses of Greek monks or abbots of these monasteries are clearly revealed.” 68 Later, the consulate came up with the idea, at the height of the pilgrimage season, at the expense of the Palestine Commission, to hire monastery cells for our fans and paid the Patriarchate for them in 1886, for example, 400 rubles, in 1888, for 468 fans, 936 rubles, and in 1889, for 967 fans, 1934 rubles, i.e. 2 rubles per person. But even in Greek monasteries our fans could not always find the desired shelter. Visiting houses or khans and the basements of city houses often also served as a refuge for them. Consul V. A. Maksimov found it “expedient to hire premises in visiting houses (khans) in advance for the surplus of fans.” In 1883, the consul rented two rooms and two basements for 100–120 fans for one month for 22 Napoleons, and by 1884 he was preparing premises for 250 people for the pilgrimage season. 69 But even with these exceptional measures, there were still cases when, for example, in 1883, up to 200 people “had no shelter” and were placed by the consul “with great difficulty” in private houses 70. In such exceptional cases, barracks were set up, tents were placed in the courtyard of Russian buildings, and in 1885, at the suggestion of V.N. Khitrovo, felt Kyrgyz tents were donated by the Palestine Society. It should, however, be agreed that in these random temporary shelters, with continuous long rains and strong gusty winds, with the exception of felt tents, our pilgrims refused to go for the night, and “the tents stood empty” 71 . There was, therefore, an urgent, urgent need to think seriously about expanding our shelters in Jerusalem. And in 1884, on February 26, Consul Kozhevnikov sent to the Commission a project for adding a second floor above the women’s shelter. 72 Although this project was submitted to the Commission for consideration not without the knowledge of the Director of the Asian Department I. A. Zinoviev and B. P. Mansurov, it, however, was not implemented in practice, and the Commission decided to avoid difficulties in a way that they had not dared to do before, that is, to make an attempt on the inviolability of the building of the spiritual mission. Finding this building “luxurious” and extremely large for the mission, the Commission decided, after 20 years of untouchable existence, to turn the largest half of the upper floor and part of the lower, with the exception of the southwest corner, into a noble shelter, with 24 rooms above and below, and to arrange an apartment here for the secretary of the consulate. This plan, after some objections from Fr. Archimandrite Antonin, was executed on March 11, 1885, and from November not only nobles, but also all Russian pilgrims who could pay 1 ruble began knocking at the newly opened noble shelter. per day per room. 73 The prudent Commission this time remained true to itself: it did not make an emergency appropriation for the adaptation of the mission premises into a noble shelter and limited itself to some minor crafts and alterations, and not to major repairs of an already quite old building. The result, as one would expect, was a rather meager, to say the least, noble shelter unworthy of its name. “With the transfer this year of a first-class shelter to a new premises, previously occupied by a spiritual mission,” writes D.N. Bukharov, Consul of Jerusalem, in his report to the Commission, “both its internal appearance with dilapidated plaster and faded paint, and especially the furnishing of the rooms, most of which do not even have stoves, represents a lack of the most necessary comfort. All the equipment had fallen into complete disrepair, some of it into complete disrepair; on the lower floor, due to the increase in space, there are no beds, linen, mattresses, pillows, no mats to cover the damp stone floors: there are not enough washbasins and other most necessary items. Many of the rooms are so damp that staying in them during the rains turns out to be positively harmful for pilgrims... and caused quite fair complaints, which I was powerless to help. With the amount allocated for repairs, I will be able to make only the most urgent external corrections, such as: installing new frames to replace those that have decayed into dust, correcting, if possible, smelly latrines, filling up leaking roofs, fastening drainpipes” 74, etc. And the truthfulness of this bleakly difficult description of the internal and external state of the so-called noble shelter, and, consequently, of all the buildings of our hospice building, can be fully believed, especially if we make at least a cursory review of everything that was undertaken by the Commission to improve our charitable buildings over the space of more than 20 years, from the time of their construction in Jerusalem. The Palestine Commission in 1884, admiring, not without reverent emotion, our Jerusalem buildings and paying “a great deal of respect and gratitude to Academician Eppinger,” the builder of the buildings, loudly testified with admiration that “within 20 years no major major renovation was required.” 75 And indeed, if we do not mention the repair of terraces on all buildings in 1867 for the amount of 4000 rubles, 76 about painting with oil paint doors, windows and iron in all houses and iron pipes for stoves for the amount of 1969 rubles. 84 ½ in the same year, 77 on the construction of a stone wall separating the courtyard of the women’s shelter from other institutions “in order to make it easier for the caretaker of the shelter to supervise the order therein and for compliance with the rule according to which male admirers should not have entry into the shelter without the knowledge of the caretaker and her special permission,” for the amount of 93 rubles. 92 k. in 1869, 78 about alterations in the women's shelter, in the laundry, in the same year, 79 about greasing the terraces, about painting the wooden parts of the buildings a second time and about correcting the tanks in 1871 in the amount of 447 rubles, 80 about altering the large, iron-clad, eastern gate of our fence wall in 1884 in the amount of 72 rubles. 18 ¾ k., 81 about the installation of frames in the noble shelter and the purchase of furniture to replenish the inventory for this shelter in 1888 in the amount of 163 rubles. 88 k, 82 then in the official data of the Palestine Commission until the very end of its existence we do not find any other large costs for the maintenance and repair of the buildings of our charitable institutions, yet other insignificant crafts in the shelter really do not deserve mention. In excessive frugality and concern for the future “black day”, one should look for an explanation for another extremely sad phenomenon of our godly buildings in Jerusalem - this is their unbearable unsanitary condition, which led to despair not only the occasional inhabitants and owners, but even innocent neighboring inhabitants and the local Turkish authorities. “Due to the emergence of a whole quarter of a European character around our possessions, we,” said B.P. Mansurov in 1884 in a report to the Holy Synod, “lost the opportunity to freely throw out and transport to the crevices of the empty plane that surrounded us all the sewage accumulated in our shelters. Both our neighbors and the local government have already begun to demand that we radically remove sewage so that the air in our neighborhood is not contaminated.” 83 But in the words of B.P. Mansurov, the true situation of our buildings in sanitary terms is softened. According to the reports of Dr. Reshetillo, dated October 19, 1883, available in the Commission’s files. Consul Kozhevnikov, and this last November 8 of the same year to the Commission, this unsanitary condition is depicted in horrific colors. In the old days, “having no neighbors, the question of cleaning garbage pits and latrines did not present us, according to Mr. Kozhevnikov, with any particular difficulties, since sewage was erupted through small canals from the area of ​​our buildings directly into the field surrounding us. At the same time, holes were dug on our own land, inside the fence, and were also filled with sewage from latrines, after which, of course, these holes were filled with quicklime and filled with vitriol.” At the present time, the conditions of our life and situation have completely changed: Russian shelters are surrounded on all sides by residential buildings and streets and roads, and the number of fans, increasing annually, reaches already during Lent, by Easter, up to two thousand people and even more. Thus placed in the impossibility of spewing sewage into empty fields, as was done before, we also cannot dig new holes in the fence of our shelters, for the amount of sewage has increased in a significant proportion... Carrying sewage in bags on donkeys, as we are forced to do now, presents many inconveniences, and sometimes even becomes impossible.” Consul Kozhevnikov, therefore, “the only way out of the predicament” recommended to the Palestinian Commission “breaking through a canal and connecting it with the city sewer,” the project of which, drawn up by the Greek architect-engineer of the Turkish service Franghias, was submitted to its discretion. The commission, “due to limited funds,” did not find it possible to agree to the construction. 84 Then another five years passed and the unhygienic condition of our charitable institutions “deteriorated” even more. March 12, 1888 Consul D.N. Bukharov, drawing before the Commission the general unsanitary state of our buildings, writes about the women’s shelter in particular the following: “sewage from this shelter seeps through the wall, threatening it with death and, flowing out into the street, contaminates the air, which arouses fair complaints from neighboring residents and prompted a statement from the local governor and the chief doctor of the English colony.” The construction of a “rational sewerage system”, according to the 1883 project of the engineer Frangia, is again recognized as “urgently and, moreover, necessary in the shortest possible time”, with the difference, however, that “due to the increase since 1883 in the value of material and labor, the initial estimate drawn up by him of 175 thousand piastres should be increased by approximately 15%, which forms an amount of 200 thousand piastres, i.e. two thousand Napoleons or 40 thousand francs” 85. A year after this, the new consul V.A. Maximov, repeating almost verbatim the report of his predecessor and having in his hands complaints from neighbors: the English Bishop Blyth, the chief financial Turkish official and the Turkish governor, begs the Palestinian Commission to “hasten as much as possible with the discussion” of the sewerage project for the city of Frangia and to “send the necessary credit to begin work without wasting time,” in order to thus resolve the “long overdue” issue and “has been exciting for a long time from various parties to the complaint,” and at the same time, “to reduce the evil, at least to save the lives of the children of our neighbors.” 86 Engineer Frangia agreed to install the main wire and the necessary buildings on the buildings for 36,867 francs or 14,744 credit rubles, counting 8 rubles in each Napoleondor. credit But it was already too late to “rush”: the days of the Palestine Commission were numbered, and in August 1889, having ceased to exist, it transferred its buildings and capital of 223,705 rubles to the Imperial Palestine Society. in tickets and cash 30,908 rub. 68 k., as well as the actual implementation of the “long overdue” issue to eliminate the grave evil. The status quo in Russian charitable institutions had a very difficult impact on providing them with sufficient water. And there were cases when the water issue even threatened to “become a disaster.” The built cisterns, during the construction of buildings, at first not only supplied Russian pilgrims with sufficient quantities of water and satisfied all the necessary needs of the buildings, but there was even an excess of water, which was sold to local residents until 1866, when the Jerusalem governor Izzet Pasha installed a city water supply from Solomon's ponds. 87 In the first years of the existence of our hospitality establishments, the sale of water generated quite significant sums, which were usually counted as “local income”, namely: in 1865 - 493 rubles. 81 ¼ k.; in 1866 - 238 rubles. 77 ½ k. and in 1867 156 r. But then, when the number of our pilgrims in Jerusalem increased significantly, and when some Jerusalem winters were without rain, such as in 1870 and 1888, the water issue at Russian buildings in Jerusalem greatly worried those in charge of them and “inspired serious concerns.” In 1870, Consul Kozhevnikov recommended that the Palestinian Commission “allow our admirers and admirers, as well as others living in our establishments, to purchase water for themselves at their own expense by purchasing from fellahs engaged in the sale of water brought from various distant sources,” but the Commission, in order to avoid “hostility and displeasure” on the part of pilgrims, allocated 500 rubles for the purchase of water. gold, which, however, did not have to be used, thanks to “unexpected heavy rains that began in February of this year.” 88 In 1888, Consul Bukharov, in order to eliminate the water “disaster,” recommended limiting the influx of pilgrims, but the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, as Chairman of the Commission, recognized it as the most “expedient” to expel pilgrims from Jerusalem, buy water at the bazaars for “all the wealthier” pilgrims and give free water available in the tanks “possibly economically” only to the poorest of them. But this time, “heavy” rain, which also fell unexpectedly on April 16, prevented the impending “disaster.” The urgent need and “really important need” - “the expansion of our reservoirs and the construction of new ones in view of the doubling of the number of Russian pilgrims and the expectation of their further profits” 89, was recognized very well by the Palestine Commission back in 1884, but no new work was undertaken in this direction, obviously, again due to its inherent “suspicious caution.” The only aspect of the life of our charitable institutions in Jerusalem attracted special attention and aroused persistent concerns on the part of the Commission - this was the cultivation of gardens at our buildings. “As an important article for the future of the colonies, gardens during buildings, “to revive” them, were recommended to the special attention of the managers of buildings, and “savings” for the cultivation and maintenance of gardens was not only not encouraged, but was directly regretted. 90 “The expense will probably pay off later,” wrote B.P. Mansurov in 1870. “In the beginning there may be difficulties and failures, but this should not be difficult in view of the future benefits” 91. But optimistic hopes and significant expenses for this item of the estimate, for example, in 1865, 1,000 rubles were allocated for gardens, and 600 rubles for the gardener and his workers. and in 1877-78, when the Russian-Turkish war was going on, and when our shelters in Jerusalem were empty, being under the German flag, a Greek gardener and four workers were kept in the gardens, 92 - were not fully justified. Our buildings, which occupy a vast area, have not achieved any particular “revival” in this regard, unless we take into account the rather decent gardens at the consular house and at the hospital. And the failure in this regard is all the more strange since the city garden and the garden of the “Sergius Compound” located near our buildings are very abundant in the desired greenery, so necessary in the hot and dusty Jerusalem. And in the internal life of our hospice establishments in Jerusalem, it seems that the same notorious status quo played a fatal role. Otherwise, it is difficult to explain to oneself why, for example, the matrons of our shelters, who exert a tremendous influence on the life of our pilgrims in Jerusalem, with all their inconsistency and blatant abuses on their part, not only retain these warm places for themselves, but, in full view of everyone and under the cover of those in power, commit the most blatant fraud of simple pilgrims. In the affairs of the former Palestine Commission, the activities of two sisters, St. Petersburg bourgeois Maria and Nadezhda Tikhonov, who left behind a sad memory for a long time in Jerusalem, are depicted with particular relief. Maria Tikhonova was the caretaker of a women’s shelter, and her sister Nadezhda Tikhonova was in charge of a first-class shelter in the area for almost ten years from 1875–1884. “The city of Jerusalem, according to V. A. Maksimov, who temporarily managed the Jerusalem consulate, is filled with stories about the abuses of the Tikhonov sisters. All of them are explained by the Tikhonov sisters’ inclination towards acquisition, “acquisition,” Gogol would say.” Under the pretext: “you must have a reward for your work,” the Tikhonov sisters “lured” and even extorted from our pilgrims “scarves, towels with Russian embroidery, mushrooms and other products brought by these admirers” as gifts, “imposed” on them almost by force “an expensive, comparatively stupid book by the former Russian abbess Smaragda,” expelled from Jerusalem in 1879, by order Holy Synod, entitled: “Reflections on the Holy Land”; In the name of the consul, pocket-squeezing fans were moved from good, dry rooms to worse, damp rooms, etc. “The long stay of the Tikhonov sisters in Jerusalem, their short acquaintance with many of the Holy Sepulcher fathers” opened up for them an outside source for “acquisition”, for “the services that both of them provided, often to the detriment of our fans,” to the Holy Sepulcher clergy, having for this a blind “tool” in the person of their clever “confidante” Marfa Bavykina, who served for some time under their leadership in Russian charitable institutions as a bellhop and removed from service for exploiting our pilgrims 93 . Services to the Holy Sepulcher clergy of these “Meger Nikolaevnas,” as the late Fr. Archimandrite Antonin, extended so far that one of them, according to a pencil resolution “not included in the journal” of one of the members of the Palestine Commission dated May 8, 1884, was even a participant in the case of the Metropolitan of Bethlehem (Anfim) and the admirer Sysoeva,” which Jerusalem spoke loudly about at one time and about which there are traces in the archives of our consulate in Jerusalem 94 . Only this last vile circumstance helped our Jerusalem pilgrims free themselves from the caretakers who were extremely harmful to their existence in Jerusalem and “seemed necessary” to Mr. Maximov’s predecessors. The Palestinian Commission, represented by B.P. Mansurov, called upon to take care of improving the life of our pilgrims, recognized Mr. Maksimov’s truthful and unpleasant report as a “personal issue” and avoided considering the “essentials” of the “local squabbles in Jerusalem” described in his report, fearing the alleged “weakening of the power and responsibility of the consul,” on which “good order in our institutions” depends. 95 Closely related to the question of the caretakers of our religious institutions in Jerusalem are the questions of a guide for pilgrims visiting venerable places in Jerusalem and its environs, and about mail, or, more correctly, about the delivery of simple and especially monetary correspondence to them, as questions that are most directly related to the life of pilgrims in Jerusalem. An intelligent guide who knows the holy places has always been an urgent need for our pilgrim. Even the notorious pilgrim of the 12th century, Abbot Daniel testified that “it is impossible without the leader of good and without a tongue to experience and see all the holy places,” that from his “bad income” he gave to those leading the good all the holy places in the city and outside the city, so that all the good things were shown to him, as they were.” 96 This situation has remained the same for our pilgrims almost to this day. Unfortunately, the “leaders” in Palestine often turned out to be our compatriots of dubious morality. There are very ugly data in the files of the former Palestinian Commission about the corridor worker Marfa Bavykina, already known to us, as about an exploitative conductor. This energetic “confidante” of the caretaker Maria Tikhonova, according to V.A. Maksimov, “after many suggestions” to remove herself from the duty of guiding pilgrims, did not want to do this, even at the time when Fr. Antonin, hieromonk of the Russian tonsure Mitrofan, but “continued to go with new fans to holy places under the pretext of helping the weak, but in fact to spread superstitious rumors among them, which was done for selfish purposes for the payment she received from some Greek monasteries. 97 Quite interesting facts are that since 1873, the duty of a guide for pilgrims was officially performed by the so-called “starostoy” of Russian people who had lived in Jerusalem for a long time and knew the holy places of Palestine, with a salary of 9–10 rubles a month; 98 Because of the conductor, constant and rather sharp clashes arose between the consul and the head of the mission. Recognizing the “fan’s guide to St. places important in their influence on the mind and heart of our compatriots" and for the mission with a direct "beneficial educational influence on the people" Archimandrite Antonin wrote on March 6, 1884 to the Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod K.P. Pobedonostsev filed a complaint about interference in this worship and, in all fairness, missionary matter, without which the mission “as a spiritual institution cannot exist,” and asked that, through his comrade and member of the Palestinian Commission, the Chief Prosecutor “insist on the return of the Palestinian Spiritual Mission, as fully competent, the right to lead worshipers to holy places, without the interference of the consulate, the patriarchy and anyone else, unless on the initiative of itself missions. 99 But this letter with a complaint reached its intended destination only in 1887 and did not have any good consequences, and in 1886, Consul D.N. Bukharov ordered that pilgrim caravans, no less than 10 people, go to see St. places “under the direct command of the Kavas” and other persons at their disposal, and the fans were “obliged to unconditionally obey all the demands and orders of the Kavas,” although the services of the latter were rewarded by them “with a certain payment on special tickets.” 100 This order of things, of course, could not be considered completely normal, and the Orthodox Palestine Society in 1887 assumed the costs of maintaining a guide for pilgrimage caravans from clergy, as the Society chose the supernumerary priest of the Kharkov diocese, priest A. Anisimov, author of the book “Travel Notes of a Russian Pastor about the Sacred East” (Izyum, 1886). O. Anisimov, although “perhaps not sufficiently prepared for such activity,” nevertheless enjoyed “the sympathy of our pilgrims and made a “very gratifying impression” on them. 101 The indicated lack of preparedness about. Anisimova was one of the reasons that Fr. Alexander very soon left his difficult post and in 1888 left Jerusalem. After this, and, it seems, forever, the pilgrims were left without pastoral leadership with only their “brothers” - the Kavass... We cannot count Fr. Hierodeacon Terenty and the still living former member of the mission and the energetic organizer of our Olivet shelters, Abbot Parthenius, who temporarily performed, on behalf of Fr. arch. Antonina, the duties of the spiritual guide of pilgrims... correspondence to pilgrims is described in strong colors by the talented pen of the late traveler Dr. A.V. Eliseev, 102 in the files of the Palestinian Commission there are indications only that the Turkish mail delivered correspondence not only incorrectly, but often with theft of contents in packages. In 1884, a certain Mrs. Timofeeva received a letter from her husband, in which, instead of 300 rubles sent to her by her husband, “there were some three yellow pieces of paper.” 103 Irina Guryanova appealed to the Commission for reimbursement of 50 rubles “sent by relatives and not reaching its intended destination,” and her petition was granted 104. In the diary of Fr. Archimandrite Antonin on October 29, 1884, it is recorded that his dragoman Yakub Halebi delivered him a package from the post office “promising” 400 rubles. but, upon opening the package “with broken seals,” it turned out that it contained “one hundred, and not in money, but some kind of sheet from the St. Petersburg Tula Land Bank” and a “torn” attitude of the Palestine Society... Thus, based on all of the above, comparing two Russian factors - the spiritual mission and the Palestinian Commission with its trustee, in the person of the Jerusalem consul, called by the Highest will to complement each other and to mutual joint friendly activities in the Orthodox East for the benefit of the Orthodox Church and for the glory of the Russian people, we see that between them during the entire period of the activities of the Palestinian Commission there was complete discord, distrust of each other and the desire to damage the good reputation so much that the need for the continued stay of one of them in Jerusalem is greatly doubted. On the one hand, the Palestinian Commission, which has behind it the powers that be, relies on the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Holy. The Synod has an inexhaustible source of funds - popular sympathy, continuously expressed in donations through circles established for this purpose in churches since 1858 "to improve the life of Orthodox pilgrims in Palestine" and on the other hand, the Spiritual Mission, not only without outside support, but even recognized by the powers that be as an unnecessary luxury, always fearing for its existence, remains without secured capital and financial sources, with a modest content of 15 thousand rubles, and even without the people necessary for active work. And with all this, the difference in the activities of both far from equivalent factors is striking. For 20 years, in defiance of glaring necessity, “in the position of charitable institutions in Palestine,” the Palestinian Commission stubbornly maintained the status quo of 1864, and out of “suspicious caution,” in order to form “reserve capital” for a rainy day, calmly doomed our pilgrims to the sad necessity of lying in the corridors and under the bunks of our shelters, or, even worse, to seek shelter in abandoned once damp and cold Greek monasteries, Turkish dukhans and even dirty basements... The fully clarified “important needs” of our institutions: the addition of second floors over shelters, underground sewerage, the expansion of reservoirs and hospitals, the construction of Russian permanent shelters in Nazareth and the improvement of the life of Russian pilgrims, needs that even cause “murmur” of the latter remain, with few exceptions, only pia disideria of the Palestinian Commission, paper good intentions and do not translate into reality. The modest and materially poor spiritual mission operates completely differently at this time. “In view of the homeless situation of our fans visiting St. places outside of Jerusalem, and the complete inaction of our consulate (as an attorney of the Palestine Commission) in relation to finding means to eliminate it, I,” wrote Archimandrite Antonin on July 5, 1878, “for about ten years I have already been engaged in the establishment of worship shelters in various places consecrated by Christian tradition, such as: in Gorny, at the Oak of Mamre, on the Mount of Olives, in Jericho... in which with the help With the blessing of God, he succeeded in the private charity of his God-loving compatriots in the most desirable way, resorting to the means of maintaining shelters, in addition to his meager donations, and the regular amount determined for the maintenance of the mission.” It is clear after this that among Russian Palestinian pilgrims, intelligent Russian people interested in the state of Orthodoxy in the East and our successes there, the activities of the Palestinian Commission throughout its existence were subjected to merciless criticism, severe condemnation and, according to the frank consciousness of the Commission itself, even caused a fair “murmur” on the part of many, while the modest spiritual mission at the same time aroused feelings of complete amazement and sincere gratitude and the warmest sympathy from the outside. pilgrims, often acquiring powerful apologists and intercessors among persons strong in speech and even in official position. Unforgettable for our mission will be the names of Count E.V. Putyatin, the former Minister of Railways P.P. Melnikov, the late Secretary of the Palestine Society V.N. Khitrovo, the famous doctor A.V. Eliseev and others, who worked a lot in word and deed for our mission and even retained for it the right to exist, which the Palestine Commission and the enemies of the mission sought to take away from it. It is clear, after this, that sad conflicts and misunderstandings could not help but arise between the Commission and the Mission, following the same path. The Consulate, as a manager on behalf of the Commission and its trustee, in order to maintain its authority, was sometimes forced to resort even to the armed force of its cavas and quite often enter into bickering and clashes with the mission and its chief. “Was there even one moment in which I could flatter myself with the thought,” Archimandrite Antonin wrote in 1879 to B.P. Mansurov, the main representative of the Commission in the East, “that your Excellency has not forgotten me, value me as before, and give me justice in my, invariably the same aspirations and efforts - to defend, consolidate and, as far as I can, glorify the name of Russia in my close circle activities in the Holy Land. How did the Palestine Commission look at my service here during all these difficult and mostly sorrowful years for me? Sorry for the truth, it's unkind. This look of hers from my personality was transferred, of course, to the entire mission, and then it was transmitted to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and, what is most regrettable for me, to the Holy Synod itself. During the entire time that P. N. Stremoukhov was in charge of the affairs of the Asian Department and the Palestine Commission, every day I could expect the closure of the innocent institution over which I was in charge. It would be in vain for me to begin to find out what my fault was and why I, having served for 15 whole years in various embassies and under many envoys with a reputation as a person not incapable of doing business, suddenly found myself in Jerusalem almost a “stone of temptation” and, in any case, not a precious stone, but a cobblestone that any consul can push around. Only once did one of the business people here let it slip, telling me as a lesson that neither he nor anyone else is to blame for the state of affairs here, that it is not this or that person who is at work here, but the system. I heard about this fatal system when I was still at the Constantinople embassy and - I admit my weakness (sic), going here to a new position, I set myself with the illusory thought of breaking the system that was killing our common cause, namely, with my direct, sincere and seemingly friendly attitude towards persons and things, to achieve the abolition of the harmful division of people into friends and foes. And in fact, I seemed to be exactly suited for this task, having been a stranger in rank for so many years, having been one of my own in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the service. What prevented success? Sorry again - according to the general saying, nothing but your personal antipathy to the mission... In order not to run into anyone in the political, or in the church-canonical, or even in the missionary field, I limited myself to the purely worshipful meaning of my mission and found a way, through territorial acquisitions and the establishment of Russian shelters in different places, to establish it both stronger and more weighty and, perhaps, even more brilliantly than ever before in Palestine. Could the “system” forgive me for this? I'm not a child to believe this. But I appeal to you, the most excellent Boris Pavlovich, “an honest and sincere man,” what sin did I commit before the fatherland, the Tsar, and God, that I began to acquire into the property of Russia what remained, by God’s providence, valuable in the Holy Land, not captured by Catholics, Protestants, Armenians, Jews? Indeed, in any other Christian land such a zealot would be showered with praise in the extreme. And here I am, having served the Russian society and the Russian Church with faith and truth for 14 years, and with me a man worthy not only of praise, but of a brilliant reward, whose intelligence, tact, courage and incorruptible honesty, not to mention selfless devotion to Russia, have achieved such incredible results - the humble dragoman of the mission (Yakub Halebi) - not only are not appreciated, but are subjected to fierce persecution by his consul." 105 Although occasionally, there were sadder events in the life of our mission in Jerusalem. The consul sometimes had a desire to positively discredit the spiritual mission and its head in the eyes of the Russian people, using for this purpose all the means at his disposal: printing “sweetly self-praising correspondence from Jerusalem with “frantic attacks” on the head of the mission, compiled “in the consular office,” but signed by persons of like mind with the consul, such as, for example, a certain Vagabond Chernyshev, who was known as “Russian Prince” in Jerusalem, the Holy Sepulcher Archimandrite Epiphanius Mateos (the latter’s malicious article was published in the Moscow newspaper “Vostok” dated October 31, 1879) and the former official at the Holy Synod A. Ushinsky. Along with this, criminal indifference and even patronage was noticed on the part of the consul in the dissemination of the pamphlet published by Mr. Dobrynin (pseudonym), in the form of a novel, under the title: “Pace Pasha and his consorts. Mosaics, cameos and miniatures from curious excavations in the slums of the Holy Land. St. Petersburg 1881." Of all the charitable institutions in Palestine, the Russian hospital, built in 1862 and 1863, received the greatest attention and concern from the Palestine Commission, as one might expect. “The plan for our hospital, as Boris Pavlovich Mansurov claims, was drawn up on the model of the best hospital in the East at that time, Smyrna, built by the Dutch, with some even improvements and adapting to Palestinian conditions.” This plan, submitted for approval by the St. Petersburg medical authorities in 1860, earned “full approval.” Doctor M. M. Kastorsky, sent by our government to Baghdad, on his way back to Russia through Jerusalem, at the invitation of V. P. Mansurov, who was in Palestine at that time, “who had the honor and joy of being the founder and creator of our Jerusalem hospital,” examined the latter on March 26, 1885 and gave a generally excellent review of it. “When entering it, according to Dr. Kastorsky, one is struck by the neatness and cleanliness of both the room itself and everything that directly concerns the patients themselves, such as clothes, linen, all kinds of utensils, etc. Such cleanliness and neatness could compete with first-class exemplary hospitals. The mournful sheets turned out to be in perfect order; the dressings on the surgical patients were applied in compliance with a strict antiseptic method: the medications and prescriptions prescribed to the patients are in complete agreement with the latest physiological and pharmacological data.” “Both regarding food and regarding the treatment of the sick by the sisters of mercy, I,” writes Mr. Kastorsky, “when interviewing the sick, other than expressions of gratitude and contentment on their part, I heard nothing else.” All medicines for our hospital in Jerusalem have been received for over 20 years from the famous French company “Pharmacie centrale de France” through Marseille, with complete accuracy and always conscientiousness and excellent quality. G. Kastorsky recommended “possible savings and reasonable savings” when discharging them, in order to reduce expenses on this item by purchasing locally such substances as lard, almond oil, etc. With regard to surgical instruments, which are expensive, it was found not only their abundance, but also excessive luxury. “It is unlikely,” says Mr. Kastorsky, “in all the well-maintained medical institutions of St. Petersburg, such instruments as a blood transfusion apparatus, a gastric lavage apparatus, etc. The same can be said about the enormous number of different forceps for pulling out teeth, listed among the necessary instruments in the draft estimate for 1866. Such instruments, of course, are useful, but they are already a luxury of the hospital.” Such an excellent review of the state of our hospital is all the more curious because the Palestine Commission, according to B.P. Mansurov, always sought to reduce expenses even under this article, so that in 1880, according to the estimate, no more than 200 rubles were allocated for supplying the pharmacy with medicines. per year. From B.P. Mansurov, however, repeatedly made reports to the Commission that in “hospital business it is impossible to put cost savings in the foreground.” The “corridor system” of his plan was recognized as a major shortcoming of our hospital in Jerusalem by Dr. Kastorsky and “persons not belonging to the class of doctors” in 1885. “Incoming patients, according to Mr. Kastorsky, inevitably had to be placed on the same floor (third) of the building, in rooms separated from one another by partitions and in the middle of the floor, by a common corridor of 2 ½ (or rather 3 fathoms below and slightly more than 3 fathoms at the top) fathoms wide. Taking into account that the largest contingent by type of incoming sick fans are those affected by malaria, consumption, or those infected with various types of typhus, and that other patients, not with contagious diseases, should be placed on the same floor under the above-mentioned conditions, it is not difficult to see that such a distribution of patients contradicts all the rules of hospital hygiene.” True, somewhat late, 20 years later, and only after the difficult experience of 1883, the unsatisfactory plan of our hospital and its builders was recognized. Back at the end of September 1884, B.P. Mansurov “with special insistence” wrote to the Commission “about the need to urgently build a separate building for contagious patients,” but he was denied the funds to carry out the much-needed construction.” Willy-nilly, we had to turn to the search for private funds, which appeared thanks to the enlightened assistance of the late Moscow Governor-General, Prince V.A. Dolgorukov, who collected the required amount from Moscow philanthropists - merchants. On February 22, 1885, B.P. Mansurov, in a telegram to the director of the Asian Department P.A. Zinoviev, asked for permission to “start immediately” the department of the hospital in view of the fact that the time was favorable and to prepare the hospital for the fall. Somewhat earlier, the highest permission was requested - to name the department of our hospital for infectious patients “Prince Dolgorukov’s ward.” Permission was given, but without the right to name the department “the chamber of Prince Dolgorukov.” On March 9, the foundation stone for the ward for infectious diseases took place, which was completed in October of the same 1885. 106 It is impossible not to mention here that at our hospital in 1881, work was carried out to build a special bathroom department, for which funds donated by Mr. Filippov and the hereditary honorary citizen Stakheev, in the amount of 978 ¾ rubles, were spent. gold. Unfortunately, work in this direction, according to Consul V. A. Maksimov, “did not bring any benefit.” The pump purchased at an expensive price for raising water from the tank did not work, the water supply began to leak, and the devices for raising water to the second floor turned out to be unusable, so that whenever there was an urgent need to give the patient a bath, “the bath was brought into the ward, where water carriers carried water in furs or lowered the patient to the lower floor to the laundry.” Consul Maksimov in 1883 petitioned the Commission with funds donated by the Master of the Horse of His Majesty, Count Stroganov, for the necessary improvements in the shelters, in the amount of 12,000 francs, to repair the bathroom department of the hospital and build a glacier with a cellar for storing ice, in order to give the doctor “two powerful healing powers and make his hospital an exemplary institution in all respects in Palestine,” 107 but from the affairs of the Commission it is not clear that this was the desire of the consul satisfied. And in matters of improvement and internal regulations of our “grand” hospital in Jerusalem, the Palestinian Commission acted almost the same as in relation to the spiritual mission, that is, constantly interfering in the internal life of the hospital and creating a brake on the successful performance of the most important functions by those to whom the hospital was entrusted. Of the many facts, we will point out a few to characterize this aspect of the activities of the former Palestinian Commission. In 1885, Dr. Kastorsky, in his report, described in very unattractive terms, for example, the pharmacist of our hospital in Sardin, who did not have “any documents for any pharmaceutical title,” and stated that he was struck by the clearly visible extreme disorder in the two rooms reserved for the pharmacy.” The “founder and creator” of the Jerusalem Hospital, B.P. Mansurov, took this review of doctor Kastorsky to heart and spoke before the Commission as an ardent apologist for his favorite Mr. Sardin, considering this review to some extent a personal insult. “Can I really,” wrote B.I. to the Commission? Mansurov, “could he have been so blind and inattentive that for 6 ½ months he did not see the disorder that was now found by Doctor Kastorsky during that half hour (sic) that he could devote to the pharmacy?” B.P. Mansurov, speaking from the most excellent side about Mr. Sardin, as “the founder of our pharmacy, who has been in charge of it for 21 years with such an excellent reputation in Jerusalem that “it is considered almost the best,” and that “no disorder has ever happened” in it, which could be evidenced by all the Russian consuls, who recognized Mr. Sardin “for an exemplary pharmacist and a person deserving the most complete trust,” “not only pronounces any condemnation against Mr. Sardin, but very confidently and strongly certifies him from the most excellent side in all respects.” “Dr. Reshetillo may have, according to B.P. Mansurov, his own reasons for leaving in the shadow the merits of the pharmacist Mr. Sardin, but it is the duty of the Commission to rise above petty personal issues and give everyone their due in fairness.” Thus, the employees in the hospital, with all their shortcomings, remain invulnerable, since they have gained the favor of the “creator and founder of the hospital,” who took to heart not the interests of a charitable institution, but the private interests of the persons serving in it and who put their personal pride above the business or institution itself. In particular, Mr. Sardin has always enjoyed the sympathy and patronage of B.P. Mansurov. Having received a decent remuneration of 1,200 rubles from the very beginning of the hospital’s existence. met., four rooms with heating in the building of a women's shelter, as an apartment in kind, Mr. Sarden was often awarded monetary awards and insignia (two orders) and in his role in the Russian hospital in Jerusalem he imagined himself so highly that he decided to criticize the orders of his closest superior, the hospital doctor, accusing the latter before the consul that “the treatment system adopted by Mr. Reshetillo requires constant large quantities of quinine." In 1881, the allocation for the pharmacy was therefore reduced from 300 to 200 rubles. per year. 108 Upon retirement, Mr. Sardin in 1886 received a pension from the Commission in the amount of 300 rubles. per year. Here's another example. On October 19, 1883, Dr. Reshetillo submitted an extensive memorandum to Consul Maximov, in which, among many measures aimed at improving the life of our pilgrims in Jerusalem, she recommended, among other things, the establishment of baths and taverns for fans. “In recent years, according to Dr. Reshetillo, many Jewish taverns have opened near Russian buildings, where a hungry admirer inevitably ends up and where he finds temptation in vodka, which promotes drunkenness between fans. Setting up your own tavern would distract the masses from the taverns. 109 There were objections from the consul, allegedly arising “from difficulties of a material and moral nature.” “The construction of premises for the tavern,” the consul wrote to the Commission, the giving of the latter for exploitation, if there was one, the tendency of our pilgrims-common people to sacrifice all the money they bring with them to holy places, enduring in the name of the suffering of the Savior all kinds of hardships combined with dry Lenten food, represent such obstacles that, in my extreme understanding, make the seventh paragraph (about the tavern) inapplicable.” 110. But even more strange was the consul’s criticism of the doctor’s orders regarding the nutrition of patients in the hospital. Wanting to “put an end to the whim that some patients, close to recovery or exposed to external and even internal minor diseases, allow themselves in relation to food,” the consul asked Dr. Reschetillo “to regulate hospital nutrition in accordance with the funds at our disposal on the basis of those introduced into Russian clinics of the civil and military departments. At the same time, it might be necessary, if this does not conflict with successful treatment, to take into account the desire of our patients for lean food, as well as the characteristics caused by patients of non-Russian origin and nationality.” Dr. Reschetillo drew up a detailed schedule based on “hygiene”, dividing “hospital food into healthy, medium, weak and emergency (emergency) portions, determining the approximate amount of food for each patient.” The hospital table was divided into a fast one, consisting of soup, cabbage soup or borscht and porridge or pasta, seasoned with vegetable oil, and a fast one, consisting of the same dishes, but boiled with beef or lamb of various varieties and seasoned with fasting butter, or from dairy products, and in emergency cases - chicken or hen. For the sick, in addition to tea and coffee, they served kvass prepared at home, and, as prescribed by the doctor, local wines - white and red, both light and strong. No matter how simple and natural the hospital doctor drew up the required schedule of meals for the patients, Consul Maksimov found it, however, unsatisfactory and even allowed himself to criticize it. “Unfortunately,” he wrote to the Commission on December 17, “Mr. Reschetillo’s note is not distinguished, as it seems to me, by either strict thoughtfulness or hospital hygiene and does not have the proper diagrams for portions. Thus, a liquid hot dish (soups, cabbage soup and borscht) is included, as far as I know, in each of the clinical portions, the conditional numbering of which expresses the individual state of the body. In our doctor’s portions, this last side disappears and the list of them looks like some kind of tavern “menu”. At the same time, it lacks a very important help that constitutes the usual food of local residents - this is a garden vegetable, so diverse in the south, often easily digested by the stomach, and which we could grow without any expense in our buildings almost everywhere, not excluding the empty space adjacent to the back door of the hospital. A vegetable such as okra is often recommended to the sick by European doctors, in Turkey instead of chicken; Mutton and lamb, seasoned, constitute the favorite food here, which is at the same time easily digested by the stomach. Eating a piece of meat with bread in the evening before going to bed, instead of some liquid-like dish, will, it seems to me, burden the stomach, which every prudent physician should avoid.” Mr. Maximov took his objections so far that he demanded from the Palestine Commission that “the rules for feeding our patients, drawn up by Dr. Reshetillo, be checked by “more medically competent persons” in the Medical Department,” where these rules were submitted on April 19, 1884 for review. But the Department wisely avoided examining them in detail, recommending that “when resolving this issue, one should take into account local conditions and be guided by the brochure: “Considerations of the Commission established by the Board of Trustees of Public Charity Institutions in Moscow on the issue of improving the food supply of the elderly and sick in institutions under its jurisdiction.” 111 Speaking about the Russian hospital in Jerusalem, we cannot, finally, not touch on the issue of the nurses who served there, since both the “creator” of the hospital and the Palestinian Commission attached very important importance to this issue and were very interested in it. “The staff in charge of the shelter should, of course,” wrote B.P. Mansurov in 1857, “a physician, a pharmacist, a nurse, etc. In addition, a necessary condition for success will be the establishment of a community of sisters of mercy, which is extremely easy in our fatherland due to the general religious mood of Russian women and the small participation of females in industrial affairs, as is the case in Western countries. The Sisters of Mercy are of such great importance in the East and have such a beneficial effect on the local population that they alone could serve as an extremely important instrument of political and religious propaganda... It would be unforgivable on our part not to use such an important tool for establishing Russian influence in the East, especially since it is much more accessible and convenient for the government to call women for God-pleasing service in lands that are precious to every Orthodox Christian than to find spiritual and secular ranks for this significant number of officials. Even the expenses for sisters of mercy will be much more moderate, because they would go to Palestine as nuns, or women who have renounced worldly benefits, appointing themselves only to serve God, and not thinking about official careers.” 112 But in the early days of our hospital’s existence, there was no need to think about establishing a “community of sisters of mercy,” and the noblewoman A. A. Golikova, “a very, very proud woman, spoiled and accustomed to power,” was appointed its caretaker, and the duties of sisters of mercy were performed by hired Russian fans who lived for a long time in Jerusalem. But the idea of ​​inviting real sisters of mercy to our hospital in Jerusalem was not abandoned by either the Palestinian Commission or the “creator and founder” of the hospital, B.P. Mansurov. Therefore, when the patroness of the women’s Pokrovskaya community, the late Grand Duchess Alexandra Petrovna (monastically Anastasia), expressed her readiness in 1880 to send the sisters of the community she patronized to Jerusalem, B.P. Mansurov joyfully accepted this readiness and began to make every effort to implement Her Highness’s intentions as quickly as possible, encouraging the Palestinian Commission in every possible way to do so. “For the Commission,” wrote B.P. Mansurov, “it will save costs, with a significant improvement in care, since the nurses will cost the Commission very little.” 113 For the first time, three sisters were assigned to be sent to Jerusalem at once: M.I. Radugina, O.I. Loshina and O.N. Alekseeva, in order to thus avoid the need to “keep hired nurses in the hospital.” The conditions for their departure, at the request of the Grand Duchess, were worked out as follows: 1) one-time travel money from St. Petersburg to Jerusalem based on the calculation of the actual cost of travel and food along the way; 2) constantly - 5 rubles. (in gold) per month for each sister of shoe money and 3) in kind - an apartment (i.e., a room in a hospital), board and heating. Sisters should not be entitled to a salary. The nurses must be completely subordinate to the doctor. Upon the arrival of the sisters of mercy in Jerusalem, Consul Kozhevnikov, having introduced them “to the essence of the duties ahead of them,” introduced them to Archimandrite Antonin, asking for his blessing, and handed them over to the doctor. The latter appointed two of them “to be on duty in the hospital wards, also performing other duties,” and assigned Sister Alekseeva “to the position of caretaker, adhering, of course, to the same conditions under which the former caretaker A. A. Golikova was,” and at the same time announcing that the Commission was “seeking means to have permanent nurses at the hospital.” The commission, however, did not find it possible to agree with the doctor’s order regarding the distribution of responsibilities of the sisters, since “the management of the economic part of the hospital granted to Sister Alekseeva puts her in an exceptional position over the other two sisters” - and introduced “complete equality” between them. In 1883, two sisters, having completed their turn and received 500 rubles. for travel expenses, they went to St. Petersburg, and to replace them two new ones came to Jerusalem - Shishkina and Grigorieva. In 1883, at the request of Consul Maksimov, for the holidays of R. X. and Easter, the Commission decided to issue “reward money to each in the amount of two months’ maintenance in accordance with the custom adopted by the Intercession Community.” The reason for this petition lies in the fact that “sisters of mercy are the only persons who serve us without a salary, and meanwhile, being in a foreign land, they must maintain their modest toilet in full working order.” The same consul introduced a special procedure - “daily hospital management” and assigned the responsibility of the senior nurse to buy meat from the Turks, send it to the doctor for examination and deliver daily information about the condition of the hospital to the consulate. In 1886, Shishkin’s cross, left in Jerusalem for the second three-year anniversary, received money and 10 rubles for equipment. in the month of shoes, in order to “reward such a useful and experienced mistress of our hospital.” The work of all sisters in general is often certified by the Commission as “selfless and invaluable.” 114 But if you take a closer look, the cost of maintaining nurses in Jerusalem, with their frequent changes, turns out to be no cheaper than maintaining the previous caretaker and nurses. The indisputable winners were only the Russian patients, but not the Commission, which, without achieving savings under this article, did not receive mercy and “an important instrument of political and religious propaganda” in our sisters. Chapter 2. Formation of the Orthodox Palestinian Society The idea of ​​​​forming a private society for the purpose of maintaining Orthodoxy in the Middle East, as we said, has long been presented to the consciousness of people enlightened in our fatherland and who had the opportunity to become closely and personally acquainted with the state of the Orthodox churches in the East. Our famous travelers to the East A.N. Muravyov, A.S. Norov, 115 His Eminence Porfiry Uspensky and others thought about this. “Let’s form a Society to help our Eastern brothers,” Archbishop spoke with passion and fervor. Porfiry, before his lady-in-waiting A. F. Tyutcheva, in full confidence that his thoughts will be brought to the attention of the loving and humane Empress Maria Alexandrovna, “let’s make it so that all of us, rich and not rich, will contribute at least two or three kopecks and no more than a ruble to the cash register every year; we will have a lot of money for them. 116 Let us establish a main spiritual mission in Constantinople under the command of a bishop or archimandrite; she, receiving money from our Eastern Society, 117 will build churches, schools, almshouses, hospitals, wherever needed, and will help the poor and especially those who suffer innocently, that is, of course, the Arabs. 118 But this idea received its real implementation only after the Holy Land was visited by an enthusiast who loved it with all his soul and heart, the unforgettable secretary of the Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society V. N. Khitrovo. “How often, as a child,” wrote V.N. Khitrovo on July 12, 1871, “having finished the daily obligatory reading, with my late mother, of three chapters from Holy History in the evening, I dreamed about Palestine, about the places of pilgrimage of the patriarchs, about Jerusalem. How often on long winter evenings, huddled close to my dear family, I listened to her stories about the Holy Land. How often, with the faint flickering of a lamp, reading, in front of my mother’s icon case, prayers for the coming sleep, my eyes stopped at the mother-of-pearl cross standing out among the dark faces of the images, brought once upon a time by a Russian pilgrim, and my thoughts were again transported somewhere far, far away to the East, to Jerusalem, to the Holy Sepulcher, to Golgotha. Many years have passed since then. It has not become unforgettable, a lot has been experienced and re-experienced, no longer as a child, not as a young man, by chance, completely unprepared, not even as a pilgrim, but as a simple traveler, with only the memories of childhood, I now stood at the side of the ship and watched as the pictures drawn only by a child’s imagination became reality. 119 Having carefully looked at everything that was happening before his eyes in Palestine and being done there by the Russian people, a random visiting tourist, despite his short stay in Jerusalem, gave everything a proper assessment and guessed what the root of everything was, and where to look for a way out of the present sad state of Russian affairs in Palestine. “If among the memories of the Holy Land there is still room for memories of people,” wrote Arch. Antonin V.N. Khitrovo in 1877 on February 3, “then they entirely belong to you, to whom we were obliged when inspecting and worshiping the shrines of Jerusalem.” Upon returning to the fatherland, V.N. Khitrovo, having taken away the brightest impressions from his trip to Palestine, did not want to part with them for a minute, but began to increasingly devote his leisure time and the time remaining from his credit service in the Ministry of Finance to the pleasant memories he had experienced, refreshing and fueling the love for Palestine that had kindled in him by constantly reading works of pilgrimage literature and scientific works about the Holy Land. “For me, from the very return from Palestine,” writes V.N. Khitrovo in the already quoted letter to the arch. Antonin, - my favorite cherished dream was to set foot on the shores of the Holy Land again, but this time not only as a pilgrim, not as a simple tourist, but consciously prepared to give myself an account of everything I saw. But years passed after years, circumstances turned out differently than expected, and dreams remained dreams. But, nevertheless, time was not wasted. I began to collect, as far as I could, the Palestinian library, get acquainted with research, especially English, where I often came across your name, and was struck by the poverty of our Russian Palestinian literature. In the same autobiographical, highly interesting letter, Vasily Nikolaevich already expresses his desire to take on the work of publishing into the world a pilgrim of the 18th century, still unknown in print. Ippolit Vyshensky, later made public by Archimandrite Leonid (Kavelin), to begin, with the help of his wife, who knows French very well, to translate Russian pilgrims into this language, and speaks of the “extreme need” to “familiarize the Russians with the translation of the few (at that time, of course) Greek and Byzantine pilgrims.” He recommends that the last work be undertaken by Fr. arch. Antonin, as an excellent expert in the Greek-Byzantine language. But Vasily Nikolaevich’s intentions are not yet exhausted by these plans. More grandiose and complex plans swarm in his head. He is presented with tasks that were almost impossible for that time. “In general, given the religious, political and scientific movement that has recently been noticed in the West towards Palestine, our Russian indifference, according to V.N., is positively outrageous. And indifference does not come from reluctance, but from ignorance of the matter and from not knowing how to take on it. It often occurred to me: why don’t we form our own Palestine Committee - not an official one, sitting in who knows where and doing who knows what, but a private one, like the “Palestina exploration fund”, with the goal of studying the Holy Land, familiarizing Russia with it, maintaining Russian fans and the Russian element in Palestine, acquiring wonderful plots of land, publishing scientific works and especially a good guidebook. It seems to me that the present time is perhaps the most convenient for the implementation of such an assumption. Our influence in the East is greatly shaken and needs new strength to maintain it. Regarding money and donations, I am not afraid: they will be and will be in significant numbers; What is missing, what is difficult to find, are people, people and more people. What do you say to my proposal? Do you find it doable or not? These are the questions that I will ask you not to refuse me an answer to.” A man who has seen a lot in his life and experienced many disappointments and sorrows, a man of severe critical analysis and cold skepticism, Arch. Antonin hastened to answer the questions posed, but in a tone of complete distrust of the dreams of his warm-hearted correspondent, doubts about their feasibility in practice and their practical real benefits. “Aren’t you complaining in vain, most venerable Vasily Nikolaevich,” wrote Arch. Antonin on March 19 of the same year - on Russian indifference to the Holy Land. It is a good idea, of course, to form a Russian “Palestinian Committee,” as you call it, scientific, archaeological, political and philanthropic. But do you think that we will be able to carry out the matter without noise and boasting, without discord and sneaking and, in the end, without anyone’s official command? The Committee is not a Committee, but something of this kind has long been announced among us, and precisely in our St. Petersburg - under the name of the “Eastern Brotherhood,” conceived back in 1871. I learned about him in 1875 and, I confess, from the first news about him I did not believe in him. A lot of words (and even in bad verse), but nothing meaningful, practical! Some kind of twilight fantasy, without an appearance, without a name or patronymic. What I feared most finally came to the surface. On July 8, 1876, in a letter to me from St. Petersburg, the “Eastern Brothers” already asked me: “under what conditions can one receive the Jerusalem Order of the Holy Sepulcher.” Sapienti sat. No longer, for God's sake, not the Committee. Enough is enough for us with one unspeakable “Palestinian Commission”, running something about which it has no idea. It is useful for us (and almost the only suitable and accessible) private activity of real vocations of the cause, for whom even if we look for a lantern at the beginning, it will still be less funny than if we begin to become Eastern in the hope of receiving a non-existent order.” Almost simultaneously with the same question that concerned him, Vasily Nikolaevich turned to another of our Palestinian figures, who has even more right than Arch. Antonin, to look sadly and pessimistically at our affairs in the Orthodox East, to Archimandrite Leonid Kavelin, who at that time held the post of rector of the New Jerusalem first-class monastery. “I’m still tinkering with the idea of ​​setting up a hired Palestinian Committee here,” wrote V.N. Arch. Leonid, - with the aim of familiarizing Russia with the Holy Land, scientific study of it, supporting pilgrims, acquiring land, maintaining our influence. If it could be placed under the good protection of any of the members of the royal family, or any of the metropolitans, I believe that there would be no shortage of funds, and subsequently it would be possible to add to it the attributes of the present official Palestine Committee (obviously, the Palestine Commission), as well as its funds. What do you think about the possibility of forming such a Society, and can it be successful? There will still be some scientific benefit.” Archimandrite Leonid gave an even less reassuring answer. “I wish you success in your useful labors in describing the Holy Land,” Fr. wrote to Vasily Nikolaevich. archimandrite March 1, 1877, - but I do not share your plans for strengthening and maintaining our influence there. But I have neither the time nor the desire to expand on this in writing, although, according to the Apostle, I will say: he who is tempted knows all the news (about this), but let him who is not tempted try it if he wants.” After such disappointing answers from those “experienced”, for whom, apparently, the question of a private Society for the study of Palestine, maintaining Orthodoxy and helping fans should have been an urgent and vital question, since it concerned the matter for which one of them once served, and the other stood at this time in this very matter, a person with a less strong character and not as energetic and persistent as the late Vasily Nikolaevich was, would have given up and put the question aside would be ad calendas Graecas, but that was not the initiator of the Palestine Society. “In my life I have always adhered to that rule,” he admitted on December 19, 1878 to Arch. Leonid, - if the goal I am striving for seems right to me, then I stubbornly try all the means to achieve it and, only when I am convinced that it is unattainable, do I give up pursuing it. I apply the same principle to my other goal (the first goal is the people's 120 credit) to the Palestinian Society. Here, however, my efforts turned out to be less successful, at least I can’t say anything yet about the final results. The trouble in this matter is that I know less about these figures than about financial figures. I don’t know who to turn to here for support and advice, and in this search, time is passing by. But I have not lost not only hope, but also the deep conviction that in the near future I will be able to implement such a Society. And confidence in success, they say, is half of success.” “I am not discouraged,” writes Vasily Nikolaevich Arch. To Leonid in another letter of 1879, March 30, - I don’t despair, on the contrary, perhaps I have never had so much energy, but time, time and more time, that’s what’s missing. I gave up secular pleasures, if they ever existed for me, a long time ago, almost from school, my meal time is reduced to a minimum, all that remains is sleep, and this is terribly difficult and exhausting for me, because it is the only thing that restores my strength. I can’t give up any business, the one I would like to do, but the rest are all so near and dear to me that giving up on it is like cutting off a finger, and which one is more painful to cut off? Often and very often the words of the Savior come to my mind: Martha, Martha, you worry and worry about many things... Yes, this is true, and I would calm down if I had a greater gift for making proselytes. I don’t believe that there are no people in Rus'. You have to admit either that you are fighting with ghosts in which you alone see reality, or that you do not know how to find helpers. All this is chatter and conversation all around, but when it comes to action, to work, you stand alone, but alone, even if you’re smart, you can do a little.” Circumstances, however, begin to take a favorable turn for the earliest possible implementation of the idea of ​​​​creating a Palestinian Society, and its opponents at first unexpectedly become not only advocates, but also energetic drivers for its rapid implementation. From the very appearance of the Palestinian Committee in Jerusalem, which was later replaced by the Palestinian Commission, as we already know, extremely difficult living conditions were created for our spiritual mission in Jerusalem. Misunderstandings and quarrels between these institutions, called to life for the same purpose - for the success of the Russian cause in the East, intensified so much and took on such a sharp character that in the Palestine Commission in 1879 the idea matured to achieve at all costs the destruction of our spiritual mission in Jerusalem. It was decided to reward the Jerusalem consul with the title of “general” and to have a simple hieromonk under him, instead of a mission, to satisfy the spiritual needs of our pilgrims. With such a petition, the Palestinian Commission addressed St. Synod, and the matter of closing the mission even came to the attention of the Sovereign Emperor. This news about the intention of the Palestinian Commission to interrupt the thread of life of our ill-fated mission in Jerusalem, which brought Orthodoxy and the Russian people many undoubted benefits during its 30 years of existence, made a heavy, one might say, depressing impression not only on the head of the mission and his closest collaborators, but also on everyone who had the opportunity and opportunity to closely and without prejudice observe on the spot the activities of our mission at this time. It goes without saying that the ardent champion and warrior of the Holy Land, the late Vasily Nikolaevich, could not be indifferent to her. Having written a passionate apology for our mission to the Holy Synod, he hastened to express the “tender feeling of human participation” and Arch. Antonin, who especially needed such participation at this time, wrote a letter to him. Now the skeptic Archimandrite Antonin began to clearly understand how the private Palestine Society could be useful to him, an activist in the Orthodox East. In a response letter to V.N. Khitrovo dated January 23, 1879, he himself returned to the idea of ​​such a Society, which he had rejected two years ago. “Russian Palestine Society,” wrote Fr. Antonin, what would be better if he managed to get together? But, do you believe, most venerable V.N., that it will be formed, and if it is formed, will it be able to exist for many years in a row, and will it be able to do many things no worse than Das heilige Land or Der Palastina-Verein? It’s not that I don’t sympathize with the idea of ​​​​forming such a Society, but I’m afraid that by forming it, we will disgrace ourselves. A precedent for such an undesirable phenomenon can be the activities of our other Societies, which arose from the idea of ​​a scientist. For example, our Archaeological Society, still adorned with the name of the Imperial Society, is barely audible. The Odessa Society of History and Antiquities would have completely died out if, fortunately, it had not found an active secretary and now chairman. We will not be able to maintain a lively interest in a dead subject for long. This seems to me beyond doubt... However, having enlisted the help of such workers as you, A. A. Olesnitsky, S. I. Ponomarev, Ave. Porfiry, Fr. arch. Leonid, Fr. arch. Sergius (publisher of Mesyatseslov), Fr. arch. Amfilohiy, Savva Ave., Ave. Filaret (of Riga), fathers Dyukov and Karashevich, I.P. Melnikov, D.D. Smyshlyaev, N.P. Kondakov, A.D. Ushinsky and many others, you know our Orientalists and ancient scholars better than me, you could really risk making a cry to the Russian intelligentsia with an invitation to add, whoever wishes, his honest name to the list of guardians of the Holy Land, not obliging no one to make any regular monetary contribution to the Society's treasury and only considering him an obligatory subscriber to the Society's periodical, if one follows (this is what Die Deutsche Morgenlandische Gesellschaft does). It goes without saying that, in view of the non-existent fund for starting a periodical, another invitation can be made to the entire Russian society for donations for this particular subject, opening the section “on the honorary membership of the Society.” One can hope to acquire many such honorary members-donors. I believe that the majority of sufficient admirers who have once visited the Holy Places of Palestine will respond sympathetically to the invitation to make an arbitrary one-time donation to a cause that is glorious, desirable, gratifying and, of course, pleasing to God for all. The Patron of the Society must be begged to deign to be Her Imperial Majesty the Sovereign Empress, who has been benefiting the Holy Land with annual monetary benefits for more than 20 years. Their Imperial Highnesses the Grand Dukes Konstantin and Nikolai Nikolaevich will also, of course, not refuse to decorate and honor the projected Society with their names. Then the venerable names of our former ambassadors and envoys in the East, ambassadorial secretaries, consuls, etc. will appear. A rather long perspective of names opens up. What then? Without hesitation, and “having blessed and crossed yourself,” print an appeal appropriate to the circumstances (war, peace, liberation of slaves, renewal of the East, the intrigues of the West, the hopes of Orthodoxy, the task of great Russia, the position of the great Russian Church in the universality of Orthodoxy, the dawn of the close unity of all believers under the shade of the Calvary Tree of the Cross in rebuffing unbelief, etc., etc.) to Russian lovers of Christ, prefacing him with the verse of the psalm: If I forget you, O Jerusalem, my right hand will be forgotten. And in the image of this right hand, without hesitation, put under this appeal your honest name, the name of Mr. Olesnitsky, the name of Mr. Ponomarev, now three names, mine, mostly unspoken (A., A. A. Solodyansky, Sol, Opestov-Alexandrov, A. and B. Zagorodkin et tutti quanti) and although Mr. Polivanov, as the representative and heir of the name A.S. Norova. Five names of these true and testified saints are enough. It would be nice to immediately show off the name of Porfiry, but getting his consent to do so is not so easy. However, if there is a need for him, I could ask him for it.” Regarding Vasily Nikolaevich’s intention to publish the “Palestinian Collection”, arch. Antonin in a letter dated April 10. 1879 writes the following: “Good morning! I am not averse to contributing to the replenishment of its pages with everything that comes across in foreign Palestinian literature of interest, transmitting it in an accurate translation with critical and all other notes. I feel quite capable of this kind of work. There will be enough material for this work for more than one year. Das heilige Land has many articles suitable for this matter. I cannot promise you anything original for the first time, such as, for example, an account of the successes of the papacy or Protestantism in the Holy Land. Correspondence of this kind, in the manner of Catholic and Protestant, may, of course, appear in the Collection from time to time, but at first we need to be careful so as not to irritate the geese. “If we start publishing the Pilgrim Department, wouldn’t it be better to start (as Tobler directed) with the most ancient ones? Unfortunately, I do not have at hand the most important, most recent commentaries on the ancient pilgrims of learned men to use them in footnotes to the text, as required by any scholarly work. Of course, the pilgrims department will have its own count of the pages in your Collection. Shouldn't we even print them as “appendices”? Subsequently, a separate book would be compiled from them. “Shouldn’t we open a special section (also with a special page count) in the Collection under the heading: “Palestinian Patericon.” I would very much like, for the edification of our admirers, who often do not know what to do with an abundance of idle time, to publish in chronological order a Palestinian Hagiology, starting, for example, with Abraham and going through the entire series of prophets, apostles, martyrs, saints, etc., who lived in the Holy Land, with chronological, topographical and all other notes. There is nothing to think about here. Take ready-made articles, translate them, or just reprint them, and the publication will grow and multiply and fill the Russian land! You can insert illustrations in places in our publication for greater effect.” As for the environment surrounding Vasily Nikolayevich, in which he moved during all this time, it showed not only indifference to the plans and intentions that worried him, but revealed downright criminal apathy and even fear of touching such sensitive issues as the Orthodox East and its vital interests. “It’s true,” admits V.N., as if in the spirit of his beloved arch. Leonid in a letter dated January 13, 1880, - you struggle, lose your temper, fuss around in the midst of general apathy and sometimes, oh, how often, you give up and are overcome by, I won’t say despair, but simply the consciousness of your powerlessness. How often do you have to cry out: Lord, show me the way, where I will go. And I would like to do a lot, but much more, even if it’s small, so that the consciousness would remain in my heart: you did something good, useful; look, he just stirred up a storm, didn’t please anyone, but it seemed like a good and useful thing. Or maybe everything is for the better, and God leads humanity in His inscrutable ways, of course, more accurately than all our imaginations; we, who dream of taking upon ourselves the protection of Whom - Him, the Lord of everything visible and invisible, are nothing. On the other hand, it hurts, it hurts unspeakably, from the impoverishment of love for one’s neighbor, this unbelief, this pursuit of the trifles of worldly life. I would like to say a lot, a lot, a lot of advice, but what can you do with pen and paper? What can I tell you about my cherished thought about the Holy Land? I hoped that I would please you with good news, unfortunately, hope remained hope, and I think that in matters of personality and high-ranking personalities, I am afraid that the matter will not be completely lost. I returned to St. Petersburg from the Caucasus (I traveled on behalf of the Ministry of Finance) at the end of August and found such complete apathy here that I can assure you, dear Fr. Governor, I have never seen anything like this in all 25 years of my service. Whatever you talk about, there is only one answer: “Oh, have mercy, leave it, be silent, is now the time to do anything. This is silence, but not the silence of a summer day, when all around is peace and quiet, and God's grace, where you feel life even in dead silence, but the silence of a lifeless desert. I beat myself up, banged around, I saw that nothing could be done, and I decided, postponing all worries until the joyful morning, to work on the “Palestinian Collection” in my office with my loved ones. But even among this general apathy, Vasily Nikolaevich unexpectedly still found one faithful and reliable ally, and the work of opening the Palestine Society quickly moved forward, to a happy and long-desired end. Let us, however, speak in the words of the highly curious, already quoted by us, letter from V.N. Khitrovo to the governor, Arch. Leonid. “Suddenly, we read in this letter, suddenly everything started spinning, everything began to fuss (if I say this, apply it only to what is closest to me, surrounding me, and on the question of Palestine). This whirlwind turned out to be, you will even smile if you know him, and I will name him for you, Count E.V. Putyatin, who had just returned from Jerusalem, where he spent Easter last year. If I knew him before, it was only by name, and therefore I was extremely surprised by his visit. The fact is that he was in Jerusalem at the very height of the bickering between the consul and the head of our spiritual mission, saw his bleak situation and came to St. Petersburg to defend both the mission and even more Archimandrite Antonin, and turned out to be more of a royalist than the king himself. In the summer, he saw the Empress before she went abroad, and he managed, at least, to suspend the implementation of the Highest decree that had already taken place in May last year to reduce our Jerusalem mission to the level of a simple abbot of the church, located at the consulate, which was supposed to be elevated to a general one on this occasion. The meaning of Putyatin’s words to me was approximately the following: I am too 70 years old, I am a member of the State Council, and that is why I cannot do much of what you can do, and therefore let’s unite together and act together. In other words, where to go, who to ask, where to put in a word, the count took it upon himself; whether I would have to write, that was entrusted to me. You can imagine how happy I was to have such an ally, who, despite his age, still amazes with his energy and liveliness. From several very lengthy conversations that I had with him, I was convinced that in particulars we disagreed. So, for him the most important thing is the preservation of Fr. Antonina is in place, for me the preservation of our spiritual mission. 121 But one should not argue about this at first: preserve Fr. archimandrite in Jerusalem, to preserve the mission "... "Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, as Putyatin told me, was prejudiced against the mission, and then he decided to try to interest the Grand Duke Tsesarevich (later Emperor Alexander III). But then a whole series of failures happened, as if combined together, which again pushed the matter back to its previous unfavorable place. Firstly, the illness of the Empress, secondly, Gorchakov’s entry into the management of the ministry, thirdly, the appointment of Novikov as ambassador to Constantinople, fourthly, Putyatin’s wife fell ill with smallpox and died. This last circumstance was especially disastrous, because when the heir sent for Putyatin, he could not go, since he had smallpox in the house, and transferred the whole matter into the hands of K.P. Pobedonostsev. You may know him, I only know him once. I saw it and find it difficult to answer whether he will be there and whether he will want to help our cause. I say that all these failures were all the more regrettable for me because my hopes were rosy. Saburov, who was first appointed ambassador to Constantinople - my lyceum comrade, Girs, the manager of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, homo novus and wants to please everyone, while Gorchakov does not want to hear about Palestine, and finally, Novikov, it seems, does not care at all about Orthodoxy, which, in his opinion, only serves to increase correspondence. What was to be done? I had to go back to my den again. But even here I could not remain calm, I went to Mansurov and wanted to get from him some information about the history of our mission. He doused me with a tub of cold water, and the end of his speech was: “Sit, be silent, we are doing and will do everything that can be done for Palestine, it is not necessary and impossible to do better than this.” There was nothing to do, having had a slurp, I had to drive away from him too.” V.N. Khitrovo was highly recommended to Count E.V. Putyatin by Archimandrite Antonin. A close acquaintance with the count undoubtedly brought enormous benefits for the success of the cause for which V.N. had hitherto stood almost alone, changed the views of the highest St. Petersburg society on him, which had hitherto treated V.N. Khitrovo, in the best sense of the word, with prejudice, and gave several strong allies both in word and official position. Of these, in first place after Count Putyatin, in all fairness, one should put a man of high statesmanship and a convinced honest guardian of the good and interests of the Orthodox Church, Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod K. P. Pobedonostsev. “I was also happy about the new appointment,” wrote V.N. Khitrovo Arch. Leonid May 21, 1880 regarding the appointment of K.P. Pobedonostsev as Chief Prosecutor - the most important thing is that the connected positions were separated and, therefore, one will not be subordinate to the other, but for that I am losing another ally - this is Count Putyatin, who left here for a long time, and at his age for a long time often means forever. I personally owe it to him that they relatively stopped looking at me as an adventurer, like a Palestinian concessionaire who wanted to gain some personal benefit, and this attitude towards me took away my last desire to conduct business. I speak frankly, without Count Putyatin, if I continued to study the Holy Land, it would be for myself personally, and not for others. When leaving, the count handed me over to the new chief prosecutor, but he, pointing above his hair, says that he is overwhelmed with work, and that he has no time for Palestine now. And I understand this, and I myself thought that there was no point in raising this issue before the fall, and then God will give it.” “The appointment of a new chief prosecutor,” says V.N. in a letter dated March 5, 1880 to Fr. arch. Leonid, - gives me hope for the future, but only then will I praise the day when evening comes, and my link, Count Putyatin, is more than 75 years old. Mansurov was very uncomfortable with this appointment, and he repeated to me several times that now nothing can be done with the Synod.” A new, albeit temporary ally of V.N. Khitrovo was A.V. Golovnin, the former Minister of Public Education. “This is a person against whom they seem to have something, but he could never get to the reasons. Meanwhile, I personally,” wrote V.N. to Arch. Antonin 14 Oct. 1879 - of course, I recognize him as the only statesman of our time and as a remarkably intelligent person who still retains all the heat and ardor for affairs, especially those in which he previously took part.” He turned to the assistance of this statesman. “I turned to him,” explained V.N. in a letter to the arch. Antonin on October 22, 1879, - because both Count Putyatin and Mansurov usually ended the conversation with the words: you need to consult with A.V., what A.V. will say, and that kind of thing. I have known Golovnin for a long time, back from the Naval Ministry, if not intimately, then at least to such an extent that he will not greet me like a rogue from the street. The result of the conversation, very warm and cordial, unfortunately, was negative. Here are his main conclusions: the Sovereign will leave the matter to its own legal course, leaving the decision to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Empress will be in Cannes until spring, Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich is far from being in the same position as he was for 20 years, and cannot intervene directly in the matter under the fear of completely ruining it, he himself, Golovnin, is out of work and has nothing in common and does not want to have with the powers that be.” From what is said below, it will be clear that in Golovnin there was a very energetic supporter of the “Palestinian issue” who took it to heart. 122 Among the reliable allies of V.N. Khitrovo should be counted P.P. Melnikov, Archpriest I.V. Rozhdestvensky, somewhat later Adjutant General D.S. Arsenyev, educator of the Grand Dukes Sergius and Pavel Alexandrovich, Colonel M.P. Stepanov and others. In order to unite all his like-minded people and allies into one whole, to unite them more strongly and to make them more interested in the cause for which V.N. stood up, he decided to write a special memorandum or note for them. “I share it,” he said in a letter to the arch. Antonin dated October 22, 1879 about this note - into two parts: what has been done and what to do. In the first part, I examine in some detail what has been done in the Holy Land by Catholics and Protestants over the past 25 years. To this follows a detailed appendix or list of all Catholic and Protestant institutions in Palestine and Syria. I believe the list is quite detailed and correct. Then I imagine what the Russians have done in the same time. In the second part: what to do, I insist on the need to leave the spiritual mission unchanged for now, and subsequently increase and strengthen it. Then review the structure of Palestinian affairs to a special commission chaired by Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, and, finally, my long-time hobby: the formation of the Palestinian Society with 3 goals: 1) to acquaint Russian society with Palestinian affairs and maintain its interest in the Holy Land; 2) try to improve the moral life of Orthodox fans with good leaders and guides, and, finally, 3) maintaining Orthodoxy among Arabs.” “I’m afraid,” adds V.N., “that the note is somewhat harsh, but if you don’t put strong colors, then the picture won’t amaze you, but if it’s sharp, it’s not exaggerated, it’s not too much.” “The note was written in 24 hours,” admits V.I. in a letter to the same arch. Antonin dated January 16, 1880 - and therefore may not be as detailed as it should be, but in general terms, in general terms, I believe that it is correct. In any case, she achieved one goal, for she convinced the count not to refer the matter again to the Palestine Committee.” The matter of the Palestine Society began to take, apparently, an unexpectedly favorable turn. “They accidentally offered it to me,” wrote Arch. Leonid V.N. in a letter dated January 13, 1880, - to make a public report in the “Society of Lovers of Spiritual Enlightenment.” Society is not attractive to me, but a drowning man clutches at a straw. I wanted to interest the public in Palestine and there was no other weapon in my hands. The subject of my report was “The situation of Orthodoxy in the Holy Land in the last 40 years.” The essence of this report is in part 1 of the note I sent you, but what was written here on two or three sheets has to be spread over 20 or 30 sheets. This thought accidentally turned out to be so important that it brought me into contact with Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, who turned out to be so kind to me that all the members of the Society’s council in turn considered it their duty to get to know me. This all happened at a council meeting, where I had to pass the preliminary exam 123 and explain the subject of my report in brief but clear words. The Grand Duke noted that the report promised to be extremely interesting, which, of course, was repeated crescendo by everyone else, and then it was decided to admit me to the report at the end of January or at the beginning of February, of which I would be notified in a timely manner. This was before the holidays, but still no word or breath about the day, but they know about the report. Meanwhile, I sat down to it and in a month I mastered the introduction - Latins and Protestants. Now we still have to deal with the Greeks and Russians, but there are simply no materials. I collected what I could collect, but it’s a drop in the ocean. I'll try to extract what I can. The fact is that the subject is close to me and what the mind does not convey, I hope the heart will convey. The premise of my report is this: this is what the Latins and Protestants did in the Holy Land at the age of 40, and these are the results they obtained; That's what the Greeks and Russians did - a step back rather than forward. Throw St. We Russians cannot afford the land, because we cannot reject the religious and pedagogical significance for the people of our pilgrims and because to be indifferent to Orthodoxy means to be indifferent to everything that is holy in the heart of a Russian person... But I return to my meeting with the Grand Duke. In the State Council, he called Mansurov over and told him so much about my report that Mansurov, who knew nothing about it, at 6 o’clock in the evening, straight from the Council, galloped up to me asking questions: what and how? I had a 3-hour conversation with him again... He acted on me like a nightmare. I know that having him against me is, if not dangerous, then, in any case, not beneficial, not for me, but for the cause. I felt that this conversation would determine whether he would take me as his assistant, or whether he would see me as an adversary. And, unfortunately, the date ended with this last thing. Maybe if I had expressed my desires less categorically, I would have turned out to be his assistant, and then he could see what to do. I believed that compromises, to a certain extent, do not suit this issue and can only have a detrimental effect in the future. All this now comes to mind; at that very moment the conversation was heated and lively.” In a letter to Archimander. Antonin dated January 16, 1880, V. N. Khitrovo sets out in detail the entire interesting conversation between him and B. P. Mansurov, which took place already in the latter’s apartment on January 9 of this year. “On Wednesday 9, when I came to him (i.e., B.P. Mansurov), this letter says, he began with the fact that it seemed to him that a wave had now risen on the Palestinian issue, that this wave should be taken advantage of, that he believed that after my report he would also say a few words, namely: what to do? And therefore he would like to know what I would say, so as not to disagree with me. I answered him that my report did not say a word about what to do, that it was awkward for me to say this in a public meeting, and that then, in essence, I could not understand why he should enter the podium and say: what to do? I don't see any practical results from this. Then he categorically asked me the question: what do I want? Three things, I answered: firstly, leaving our spiritual mission for now in the position it was at the present time, and in the future a return may be to the assumptions of 1858; 2nd, a precise and clear distinction between the secular and spiritual missions and the provision of this latter, if not official, then official representation of Orthodox Rus' before or with the Jerusalem Patriarchate, and 3rd, the formation of a private Palestinian Society that could maintain interest in Russia in the Holy Land, help our fans and, finally, conduct anti-propaganda against the Latins and Protestants. He and I talked about this for three hours straight. His arguments were as follows. I will try to explain them to you in detail, so that you, knowing what he thinks and where he stands, would conduct your conversation with him accordingly. Experience of 20 years proved the impossibility of the existence of a spiritual mission: there was not a single priest who treated the matter with love. Immediately, upon appointment to Jerusalem, the question of salary and crosses arose. Kirill lied to such an extent that even then he declared the impossibility of the mission’s existence as it was intended. As for the arch. Antonina, here is the first letter I received from him for 15 years (here he took out your last letter and handed it to me). In 1864 I was out of favor, he did not honor me with a single word, but now he writes. Take it and read it. What are you afraid of? We don’t call it a mission, but it remains the same. In order not to offend her, we elevate the consul to general, appoint Kozhevnikov, and the arch. Antonin is very happy about this. (In general, Kozhevnikov seems to enjoy Mansurov’s special favor). And why come back? This matter is decided and signed. Illarionov was young and did not know how to behave: the sooner he was recalled, the better. As for the Society, what will you do without money, and where will you get the money? There is little hope for training camp. Well, let’s say: if you collect money, what will you do with it? Start schools? Who will give you permission? Turkish government? No. And the Greek Patriarchate? Believe me: the only thing Orthodoxy can do is support the Jerusalem Patriarchate, and it can only be supported and tied down with money. Just give me permission, and I will now find you 60 thousand annually. Knowing that they receive money from us, they will work with us. What is the Arab question? Today they are Orthodox, tomorrow they are Catholic, the day after tomorrow they are Orthodox again. We need to stick to patriarchy. As long as it exists, Orthodoxy and our influence will exist. Mansurov's speech and thoughts come here. “When, after all my objections and comments, he did not yield a single step, I only had to ask the following question: “You are telling me that not a single one of my assumptions is feasible. Your arguments did not convince me, as I see, and neither did mine. Now all I have to do is ask you: what do you want from me?” The answer was: “Nothing. However,” he continued, “maybe we won’t meet at a public meeting.” I have family matters: the question of the life and death of those close to me, which requires my departure abroad not today or tomorrow, and this will be decided these days.” This ended our conversation." After the described conversation between Vasily Nikolaevich and B.P. Mansurov, the latter went abroad, writing a letter to Khitrovo with the following significant postscript: “I sincerely wish you success, both the kind you want and the kind I’m thinking about.” It turned out that B.P. Mansurov, having received a business trip, went to Jerusalem to settle relations between the mission and the consulate. But the one who constantly maintained within himself “the holy fire, which made it possible to live among all the apathy that surrounded him,” could not calm down and continued to probe the waters in order to favorably resolve the issue that worried him. After a meeting with Count E.V. Putyatin with Chief Prosecutor K.P. Pobedonostsev, Vasily Nikolaevich learned from a letter from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, shown to him by the Chief Prosecutor, that “the renaming of the mission to superiority is caused by the very essence of the matter and 20 years of experience, but, however, the final resolution of this issue is suspended until it is clarified on the spot by a specially sent person, which has already been followed The highest command." In view of this, naturally Vasily Nikolaevich waited for news from Palestine. “Now, dear Fr. Archimandrite,” writes V.N. Khitrovo in the same letter, “the matter is not with us in St. Petersburg, but with you, if indeed Mansurov is coming to you. His look, as far as I was able to explain, is what I described to you above. He is angry with Illarionov. As for you, excuse me for being frank, if you show him, he will make peace. I admit that it’s hard, but it’s worth it. It seems to me - and I submit my judgment for your consideration - that under these circumstances the most important thing is to preserve the name of the mission and not allow it to be renamed into an abbot. I say this because once the name has been preserved, over time it will be possible to return again to the question of rights and obligations; once the name is destroyed, oh, how difficult it is to restore it. Therefore, I would only press on this, proving how much such a renaming would affect the Latins and Protestants, and besides, this was to admit to himself a mistake he made for 20 years. It should be explained to him that the point is not in the name, but in the instructions defining the rights and responsibilities of the head of the mission, that this instruction is a secret, and therefore unknown to anyone except close people. What's in this manual? You waive all rights and obligations in advance, but stand by the title for the reasons above. I repeat that the instructions that will have to be obeyed can always be changed; the name or title is another matter. I think that he is unlikely to particularly stand for changing the name; he is afraid of the Empress and especially the Tsarevich, whose participation he senses, although he does not know the details, does not know how far this latter will go and how interested he is. If you agree with me and this succeeds, I do not despair of the future; on the contrary, I even think that his stay will be useful, because I believe that you will be spared Illarionov.” Family, unfavorable circumstances among Vasily Nikolayevich’s two main allies: Count Putyatin (death of his wife) and Golovkin (serious illness of his mother) and the excessive accumulation of important church and state affairs among K. P. Pobedonostsev slowed down the matter of Palestine so much that V. N. Khitrovo began to think that his “current campaign was a complete fiasco.” Such a pessimistic, close to hopeless despair, mood of V.N. Khitrovo was greatly helped by the fact that the matter with the report on Palestine in the Society of Lovers of Spiritual Enlightenment apparently died out. “From it, I believe,” wrote V.N. Khitrovo to Fr. to Governor Leonid on February 9, 1880 - nothing will happen either. At least I haven't heard anything about him. Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich fell silent, Kireev fell silent, the Society for Spiritual Enlightenment fell silent. I stood for it because there is an opportunity for about 500 people, and maybe even the Grand Duke, to present in a sequential order with facts and conclusions what you could never tell them in a fragmentary conversation. Let these high-society ladies and gentlemen listen to Lord Redstock; let them listen at least once to the truth about the Holy Land. I could print it, but they won’t read it. I have written a report... This report, if it were successful, I would like to repeat in Moscow, in the Missionary Society, or in the Society for Spiritual Enlightenment, where they would have recognized it as possible to do it and where more sympathetic listeners would have gathered. But this hasn’t been possible yet, and now I don’t even bother.” However, V.N. Khitrovo’s anxiety was sometimes replaced by moments of joy. “If I could re-read my correspondence with you over this winter,” admitted V.N. Khitrovo in a letter to Arch. Antonina dated March 12, 1880 - then there were such leaps from joy to sadness, from despair to hope, that one could suspect me of the most sanguine temperament, and meanwhile, I did not know or know about this quality or shortcoming. But the fact is that, indeed, in my 25 years of activity, I have never had to make such leaps, much less experience such unexpected surprises as this year in Palestinian affairs.” On March 23, 1880, in the hall of the Imperial Geographical Society at the Chernyshev Bridge, at a meeting of the St. Petersburg department of the Society of Lovers of Spiritual Enlightenment, the supposed reading of V. N. Khitrovo’s abstract under the title: “Orthodoxy in the Holy Land” took place, and this reading was divided into two abstracts: 1) “On Protestantism and Latinism and the future of heterodox communities in the Holy Land” and 2) “About the Patriarchate of Jerusalem, about Russia in the Holy Land and about the significance of the Holy Land for Russia.” The second reading took place on March 30. “Are the listeners satisfied with me,” wrote V.N. Arch. Antonin on April 6 of the same year - I don’t know. I have received flattering reviews, but who would scold the author to his face. Yes, the question does not at all come down to good or bad, but to what impression they will make. From a formal point of view, I should be pleased. Starting from Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, members of the State Council, senators, director of the Asian Department Melnikov and the Prussian agent, who attended both readings, and therefore listened to me willy-nilly, the audience was selective, and if I could complain about anything, it would be the lack of spiritual ones, of which there are many, many five or six.” Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, who was present at the meetings, after carefully listening to the reading, gave an attestation, which was reported by V.N. Khitrovo in a letter to Arch. Leonid in April 1880 in the following words: “You painted a difficult, but, unfortunately, I must admit, true picture.” We know evidence of a deep impression from the readings of V.N. Khitrovo and from other sources. “Last Sunday,” A.V. Golovnin wrote to V.N. Khitrovo on March 23, 1880, “I could not attend your reading and gave my entrance ticket to P.I. Solomon, who, like many other people, was delighted with your conversation. I turn to you with the most humble request to give me a ticket for next Sunday, for which I will be sincerely grateful.” The letter from Golovnin that we quoted is important for the history of our Society, and therefore we consider it useful to cite its further text here. “Returning herewith the draft charter of the Palestine Society, I allow myself to convey the following thoughts: 1) That under current circumstances the project can only go through with the most energetic assistance of the Tsarevich. Is it possible to hope for this - only Count E.V. Putyatin and K.P. Pobedonostsev can say; When we meet, I’ll explain another difficulty that I experienced the other day in a somewhat similar matter. 2) That the project should have been previously discussed in a meeting of several sympathizers: Count E.V., P.P. Melnikov, B.P. Mansurov, V.I. Dorogobuzhinov and K.P. Pobedonostsev. 3) The draft charter should have been drawn up much shorter, giving the Society a less complex structure and a much more modest appearance, and calling it the “Society for Benefiting Orthodox Churches and Pilgrims in the East.” There is no limit on the number of members. The charter of the Geographical Society, which you praise, was drawn up with my participation, and I was the first secretary of the Society, but it seems to me that the charter for the Palestine Society, more modest, is not suitable. If the Society develops, it will be easy to add a few articles. For all these reasons, I think that I was mistaken in imagining that it was possible to carry out the charter this spring, and that it would have to be postponed until the fall. I confess that this pains me very much, because many of us will probably not have long to live and act, and therefore we should not put off and put off good undertakings. For the success of this business, it would be desirable to attract a number of young people who could continue what they started, but where to get them? Unfortunately, due to a number of years of illness, I had no acquaintances among young people. Sincerely devoted Golovnin.” “Both of your lectures, recently given to Russian society about Palestine,” wrote Arch. Antonin on April 30, 1880, upon receipt of the readings in copy, were eagerly awaited by me here, greeted with love and hope and read with admiration. This is a real scientific, factual, diplomatic and... poetic abstract about what has become known about a subject of paramount importance in the spiritual life of our people. Contrary to your invitation, I refrain from any clumsy remarks on the elegant sculpture of your artistic hands. I pray to God that it, like many other of our deeds, will not turn out to be empty talk, but a calling message to the liturgy (translated: people’s cause) of the great Russian Land, for which the question of the Orthodoxy of the Holy Land should be the most, so to speak, burning one and not leaving its political field of vision.” But V. N. Khitrovo could not be satisfied with his external success alone and the wonderful impressions received from the entertaining essay about the Holy Land by high-ranking listeners and expected from him practical results for the matter that captured his entire being. “What did I want from these readings? - he wrote to the arch. Antonin in the month of April on the 6th. “They were conceived when the question of the mission was far from resolved. I wanted to use reading to defend it. I had to do them when the question of the mission was successfully resolved. Then I wanted to express frankly to someone who should know the real state of affairs, and I succeeded. I was accused of being too diplomatic. This accusation is not entirely fair. I don’t like to express myself harshly at all and I don’t know how. Moreover, he looked at my reading not as an end goal, but only as a means. If you look at reading as a goal, then it would be a very brilliant fireworks display and nothing more, and I don’t have a Chinese weakness for fireworks. So, until there are no consequences, I look at my report only as fireworks. If something comes out, then only it will be possible to say whether it will be useful or not. Вопрос: что же дальше? Вытекал и вытекал из самого доклада. I did not give an answer to it, but waited for it to be given to me, and, at the end of the report, it was given to me by the Grand Duke in a quarter-hour conversation. I outlined the essential things that came to my mind - good or bad, you be the judge, and the next day I wrote it and sent it to him. Это составляет 3-ю часть моих чтений, вам посылаемых. This 3rd part is still a secret, and I am sending it to you only so that you can express your opinion about this to me frankly, so that if they have consequences, I will know what to defend and what to concede. Будут ли иметь последствия? - that’s the question. Если нет, осенью я опять подыму звон с Божией помощью!» There were, however, those who were dissatisfied with the readings, and among them, first of all, one should put B.P. Mansurov, who found that V.N. Khitrovo “exaggerates the spiritual mission and belittles the consuls.” But in reality, the main reason for his dissatisfaction lies in the fact that the lecturer “didn’t even mention him or the Palestine Commission.” 124 Now strengthened in the thought that “we are nothing more than an instrument in the hands of God,” V.N. Khitrovo fell silent for a while with the Palestinian question. “Now you can’t talk about the case with anyone,” he admits. arch. Leonida, “everything fell asleep until October.” What brought him joy was the thought of the possibility in the near future of repeating the journey to the Holy Land, which nine years ago had left an indelibly deep mark on his soul, in order to check himself on the spot and talk there personally with the people he needed. Fr. supported him in this intention. arch. Antonin, who painted his secondary journey with tempting colors. “On your previous visit to Palestine,” he wrote to V.N. Khitrovo on August 5. 1880 - you were haunted here by the sultry summer and the very, so to speak, heart of summer, putting its burning and blinding color on everything. I am not overjoyed at the fact that your intended second visit to the Promised Land will fall in the fall. That is, first of all, I couldn’t be happier that I will have the rare pleasure of seeing you here, showing you everything worthy of your attention, and talking with you about everything, and then, of course, I cannot help but admit that the month of October is the most suitable time for such an excursion. This month, rain is still rare, and sultry khamsin occurs for several days in a row. But, generally speaking, this is the most favorable time for traveling through the Judean mountains. I would consider it best for you to land in Beirut, but only in order to visit Balbec and Damascus. I would not recommend traveling overland from Damascus to Nazareth. Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich and his retinue chose this very path, but I remember that no one was happy with this. On October 9 (old style), you can sail from Beirut and disembark at Kaif, having notified our vice-consul there, Mr. Selim Khoury, by telegraph from Beirut of your arrival. He is an excellent (sic) man who will take you in a carriage (6 hours) to Nazareth, and then hire you riding horses to Cana of Galilee, Tiberias, Tabor, Sebastia, Samaria and Jerusalem. Having stayed here, you can spend December on Egypt, and in January you can even visit India to escape the very cold caresses of your fellow winter. You will arrive in Beirut from Tsar-grad either on a Russian or on a Lloyd's steamship, depending on which one turns out to be more suitable for your term, which should fall at the end of September. We, too, are going with the consul to Balbec and to Nazareth, and, perhaps, even to Egypt itself, but our preparations will not escape the long box. If at one time you had notified me from Constantinople by telegram about your departure to Beirut, perhaps I (alone or with the consul) would have kept you company, since I have been dreaming of Balbec for 15 years, and I have an urgent need to go to Nazareth or Tiberias itself without delay, for even on the Gospel “face of Galilee” the mission has already acquired real estate property, and more than one... But it’s too early to make noise about this.” The planned trip of V.N. Khitrovo together with his wife Sofia Dominikovna was made under the most favorable circumstances. “You can tell the whole journey 125,” V.N. Khitrovo wrote to Archimandrite Leonid on February 15, 1881, “in two, three pages, but who will convey all the experiences and impressions... That I am satisfied - of course, there can be no discussion about this. I prayed well and a lot, although the first impressions are still inferior in this respect to the first trip, either because a repetition is never as fresh as the first visit, or because now I was somehow more looked after and surrounded by me than on the first. Finally, I knew more, looked more consciously at my surroundings, heard more, and where there are people, there is evil. Then I found everything human in a much worse form than even I had prepared for, and my report only suffers from the fact that it was written in too rosy a light. I found the patriarchy in a very unprepossessing state. If it were not part of the church, then I would ask: why say much about a dead, decaying corpse? The Patriarch himself is a good person, and nothing more, but what surrounds him, and I’ve seen enough of them, is below any criticism, I’m not talking mentally, but morally. The patriarch's concern for the local Orthodox population is reduced to zero, and the situation of this latter is more than bleak. It’s not for me to describe it to you. You saw him better and closer than me. One thing I can add is that it has worsened significantly compared to what it was with you. There are no schools, and it’s better not to talk about churches. The only concern is how to take more money for intrigues, and the goal of these intrigues is to achieve the patriarchate, and by plotting against each other, it turns out, no one will achieve their goal. Here everyone asked me about Nicodemus of Moscow. He was here before the holidays and turned everyone's heads, starting with the Heir. I doubt that he will achieve the patriarchate: they hate him in Jerusalem, in Turkey they see him as a Russian man, and I, finally, find that he is not suitable, because he knows Russia well, and therefore cannot have the appropriate fear of it. Yes, this is a matter of the future, although, as it seems, not particularly distant. A strong intrigue is being waged locally against the current patriarch, which will play out as soon as the income from the Bessarabian estates is returned to them, which, it seems to me, will not be slow. Recently, such an incident occurred in Jerusalem. Anthimus of Bethlehem wrote a letter to Count Putyatin, in which, complaining about the Patriarchate, he sought to have all the money sent directly to him. This letter was intercepted in the patriarchate and Hierotheus exiled him to the Lavra of St. Sava, as I believe, at the instigation of Epiphanius, his current alter ego, and who wants to be the ruler of Bethlehem. Whether Hierotheus had the right to make this link, I don’t know; it seems to me that he did, but in reality it turns out that he didn’t. Anfim immediately went to the Lavra, and there was an uproar among the brotherhood. Here Kozhevnikov intervened, I don’t know why, and took Anfim’s side. The Patriarch was confused and retrospectively drew up a resolution of the synod on the exile of Anthimus, but only the Bishop of Sebastia signed it. Seeing that things were not going well, he sent Anthimus the order to return to Bethlehem, but he replied that he would return only through Jerusalem and then by order of the synod. The brotherhood, taking advantage of this discord, drew up a constitution, the main articles of which were that the patriarch had no right to dispose of money or places, and this constitution was presented to the patriarch. He was completely at a loss: to accept means to renounce all power, if not to accept, he will be deposed. I left Jerusalem in this situation... I found relative silence on the Russian buildings. Both of our representatives are afraid of each other and observe all the formalities prescribed by politeness, but in their souls, inside their hearts, they do not have any trust in each other and live separate lives. Kozhevnikov is the ideal of a petty person, never able to distinguish between the important and the petty: the question of the patriarchy or local Orthodox Christians and the gossip of the caretaker of any shelter are of equal importance for him, especially when his pride is affected. He doesn’t see any further walls of Russian buildings. But this is redeemed, at least, by the human attitude towards our fans, and we are grateful for that, although we must admit that this too is being done somehow ineptly, like a general. I found Father Archimandrite very old, and he was going down a steep slope. The 16-year struggle had tired him out too. It seems that all he wants is to be left to die calmly on the spot, which I think, judging by his painful state, will not take long to happen. He is now occupied almost exclusively with his shelters. And, indeed, to be fair, he did miracles with them. He will never finish them, and so death will find him, but it is very desirable that he finally establish his shelters in the Mountain and on the Mount of Olives.” “As for our buildings, we started on a grand scale and, as always happens, unfortunately, with us, we stopped there. Now they sit and figure out: is it possible to save money here, or not to spend it there? In general, I came sad from Jerusalem, it’s sad because you see how it’s all falling apart and no one cares about it, and not just one, but dozens of non-religious buildings are rising nearby.” During his sea voyage, between Alexandria and Naples, Vasily Nikolaevich wrote two letters - to A.V. Golovnin and Konstantin Petrovich Pobedonostsev. “The Patriarchate of Jerusalem,” he wrote to Fr. Archimandrite Antonin, conveying to him the contents of letters to the named dignitaries - does not represent a single outstanding person, is in decay; he needs to be taken and held in iron mittens, and these mittens can only be his income from his estates in Russia. Divide the 240 thousand that constitute the income from these estates per year into 5 parts: leave one part for management, land payments, etc., return 3/5 to the patriarchate at its direct and uncontrolled disposal, and finally, use 1/5 for churches and schools under the control of a special council of representatives from the local population, the Greek clergy, you (i.e. Arch. Antoninus) and the consul.” Having stated the unsatisfactory situation of the Orthodox population and the need for quick help for them, the desirability of adding second floors to shelters to accommodate pilgrims, regarding the mission V.N. says in the same letter: “Currently I have found peace and quiet, and God’s grace, but in general this situation is unthinkable and impossible. The spiritual mission should be everything, and the de facto consul should only be its secretary... Pobedonostsev wrote at length about the Palestine Society. Finally, I wrote to both (Golovnin and Pobedonostsev) that you personally do not want anything, do not ask for anything, but that you have 3 concerns: 1) that they leave you quietly in Jerusalem, 2) that they give you 1,500 rubles from the funds of the Palestinian Committee. a year in gold for the maintenance of shelters, and, finally, 3) what will happen to your shelters when God pleases to recall you, and, in addition, 4) so ​​that a place is allocated on Russian buildings for your garden.” 126 Upon returning to St. Petersburg, V.N. tried to see A.V. Golovnin, B.P. Mansurov and K.P. Pobedonostsev. The latter received him “remarkably kindly, kept him for about an hour and asked him about everything in detail.” The idea of ​​the Bessarabian Holy Sepulchre's proceeds “fell in love with him very much,” and K.P. Pobedonostsev instructed him to “compile a note about this.” Konstantin Petrovich reacted very favorably to all his other plans regarding the mission, expressing regret that he personally did not know Fr. arch. Antonin and, judging by his correspondence, “formed an opinion of him as a bilious person.” Regarding the novel “Peis Pasha” 127 and to the question: “what is true in the history of the archimandrite?” V.N. Khitrovo replied: “He is an archimandrite, which means a monk, he is 65 years old, he has been suffering from stone disease for 10 years. Here are three reasons that make me look at this story as malicious, unacceptable slander.” When parting, Konstantin Petrovich expressed the hope that Vasily Nikolaevich would not refuse to tell him his opinion when “any question arises” regarding Palestine. The meeting with A.V. Golovnin was dry. “He, according to V.N., somehow systematically avoided talking to me about Jerusalem. So, seeing that he was not doing this by accident, but with a preconceived purpose, I, of course, did not force myself to repeat it twice, took my hat and said goodbye.” The meeting with the general from Palestine, as V.N. jokingly called B.P. Mansurov, was more cordial than one could expect. “I don’t love him,” V.N. confesses in a letter to the arch. Antonina - moreover, I don’t recognize any special abilities in him, but I have to admit it. that I love talking to him about the Holy Land. He is the only one here who speaks about this subject with animation and with some knowledge.” V. N. Khitrovo was pleased with the result of this conversation, since with a lack of premises for fans, with laudatory reviews of the architect. Antonina and his concerns about shelters for pilgrims, with the need to pay 1,500 rubles. B.P. Mansurov readily agreed to these withdrawals from the Palestinian Commission and others. The conversation began to take a somewhat “delicate direction” when V.P. Mansurov asked V.N.: “Does Arch. Antonin to transfer the lands he acquired into the name of the government? V.N. could not satisfy his inquisitive interlocutor on this extremely interesting, but sensitive question. However, he made it clear that if “all these buildings and places remain at the complete disposal of uncontrolled” Fr. Antonina, then “there is hardly any difficulty in finishing this question.” From this conversation V.N. came to the conclusion that the “shares” of Fr. arch. Antonin and B.P. Mansurov “increased significantly.” The question of the shelters in Jaffa, Ramle, Nazareth and Kayfa and their “partial uselessness,” to V.N.’s surprise, did not meet with “strong resistance,” as he expected, and even the maintenance of the shelter in Ramle cost 750 rubles. B.P. Mansurov was ready to give in in favor of Fr. Antonina. In general, V.N. was “satisfied” with the conversation so much that he decided to convince his interlocutor to go to Palestine for the benefit of the matter 128 With the letter we outlined, V.N. had to be sent at the same time to the arch. Antonin and another letter in which he ardently urged the latter not to respond in print to the novel “Pace Pasha”. “I just read the article “Modernity” by Dobrynin, which, by the way, came out as a special book,” wrote V.N. Khitrovo arch. Antonin. “I couldn’t read such abomination.” She reminded me of the pamphlets that were once written about Napoleon III and especially about Eugenia. But after reading it, I became even more convinced,” he wrote in one of his previous letters on the same occasion, “that he was right in allowing himself to advise not to object to it. A decent person is not able to answer in the same tone, but she shouldn’t answer seriously, and she can’t answer slander. Well, you must agree, how will you answer, that such conversations or such events have never happened. Moreover, the writer groaned and killed himself. The book is written so dirty that, I repeat, not a single decent person will believe it. Even if the masses reach it, they will not understand anything about it. And the end will completely confuse them: when did this happen, and did it ever happen? Is it true that the head of the mission has gone crazy? It never happened, which means the whole book is nonsense. Finally, who will be impressed, that perverted, undereducated part of the metropolitan public, which indulges in scandals and reads Zola novels to the point of stupor, but dissuade, and especially try to teach it, because this is pure fiction, for which not a minute is worth wasting. To show that you have recognized yourself, not only to answer, to enter into polemics, but this is all that the writer wants, and the first rule of every war: do not do what your enemy wants. And in this struggle, the writer of such a lampoon will always emerge victorious; he has nothing to lose and will have the last word. The articles and book did not make any noise. “The Voice” recommended reading to anyone who should, who should treat it with contempt, and in a month there will be no mention of it. Any objection will again raise a storm. Tu te faches, done tu es fautif, they will say. You will tell me: it’s good for you to speak, you are not offended, what is it like for Kozhevnikov? You're right. It's sad, but nothing can be done about it. Either they challenge the writer to a duel, then bearing all the consequences, or they beat him on the street, or at home, if they can, or they remain silent. Neither the first nor the second is inconvenient for any of the affected persons to do; the third remains, and I believe the most prudent” 129. This letter from V.N. to Archimandrite Antonin was undoubtedly a healing balm for his soul, deeply indignant 130 and extremely embarrassed by the vile act against him by his ill-wishers. “There is nothing to do, but it’s a pity that fate is in the form of Your Excellency, and another superiority that goes beyond the limits of human thoughts, that is, God Himself,” admitted Fr. Antonin, in a letter to V.N. dated February 4, binds my hands and restrains my tongue from a public slap in the face of a person, before which the glory of the Pace Pasha brochure would fade forever. Do you think, Your P-vo, I would not be able to do this in such a way that a person would not be able to appear in any of the St. Petersburg salons again. I hope that I could do it without impersonating either an archimandrite, or Antonin, or... But why talk about it. It doesn’t matter, because I won’t write anymore. And so, may God, the avenger of the just and the orphaned and the pure in heart, who have been disgraced for nothing, write down the life of my denigrator with such a fiery writing, from which the self-proclaimed fire (“Don’t joke with fire!”) will turn into stinking smoke. The worthless libertine found something to denigrate me with - in the most pure, holy, praiseworthy and even patriotic matter, the charity of completely helpless and almost literally naked orphans, who even before my arrival in Jerusalem were already considered Russian, because they were transferred by their grandfather (or great-grandfather) of blessed memory, Metropolitan Meletius, for education in a “Russian school, then maintained by the late E.F. Badrova, and from then on, who were under the constant supervision of a spiritual mission, so that their late father, dying, swore to me not to let the unfortunate little ones (from one to seven years old) die. His last words to me were: “My children are your children.” Even if he had not asked me about this and in such a striking tone, I, as the head of the mission, which was reputed, so to speak, to be the official benefactor of the poor in Jerusalem (for I had in my hands the “charitable sum of the late Empress”), of necessity, would have turned out to be the representative and nurturer of the entire family, I repeat, which was already considered as if Russian, and after the death of Bishop Meletius (also considered one of our own and Russian in our worshipful world) left without any kind of charity. The Patriarchate gave him some kind of basement for housing and bread, and the mission (i.e. I) supplied them with clothes. But the memory of the poor man’s dying request soon suggested to me the idea - to take the maintenance of the orphans entirely on myself, that is, on my own salary, which still turns out to be somehow sufficient for this, and for 12 years now I have been jealously making sure that I do not spend half a wig on my adopted children from anywhere except my cash register, caressing myself with the thought that although this may be completely pure and selfless, my donation will speak for me at the Last Judgment of God. Black chef (i.e. Chernyshev) found here children already at an age, older girls, precisely those who lived with Badrova and were brought up under her influence completely Russian, almost brides, of course poor, without any dowry, raised in solitude and monastically, knowing only their home (outside the city allocated free of charge by the Patriarchate), the Russian church and a festive visit to me, during which I have the opportunity to observe them from the mental, moral and, most importantly, economic side. That's all that could be presented to the pure and unpreoccupied attention of all the Chernyshevs. And you know what our ascetic vaudevillian turned everything into! He'll get lost completely!" The unsatisfactory state of affairs of the Jerusalem Patriarchate due to a clash with Metropolitan Anthimus led to the deposition of Patriarch Hierofey, and the arrival in St. Petersburg of the representative of the Jerusalem Patriarch in Moscow, Archimandrite Nicodemus, who managed to win over both our Court and quite a few of the high-ranking officials, who, not without lust, looked at this dexterous and handsome Archimandrite as a future our desired successor to Patriarch Hierotheos. With the arrival of the arch. For Nicodemus, the question of the Bessarabian estates venerated at the Holy Sepulcher was put forward, on which V.N. Khitrovo was forced to focus his attention. Arch. Nicodemus decided to “seek the return of all 240 thousand, of which 1/5 should be left for administration, 3/5 uncontrolled to the patriarch and 1/5 for the Orthodox population of Palestine. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs agrees to something else. Counting out 110 thousand rubles for various subjects, including management, it proposes to transfer 4/5 of the remaining 130 thousand rubles without control to the patriarch. 131 V.N. Khitrovo, at the request of K.P. Pobedonostsev, gave him a note on this subject, in which he spoke as follows: “The estates are annexed to our state property, the Holy Sepulcher brotherhood is paid an annual annuity, determined from now on until the exact figure of 240 thousand rubles is determined. credit per year, from here 15 tons will be spent on various duties, the remaining 225 tons are divided into five parts: 4/5 or 180 tons. are given uncontrollably to the patriarchy as long as it listens to us and does not leave the service, and 45 tons for the local population at the disposal of a special Council made up of local residents, the patriarchy and both of our representatives. 132 In view of the desire of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to delimit the spheres of activity of the consul and the head of the mission and to make the land plots of the mission known, simultaneously with the first note, Vasily Nnkolaevich submitted another note, as well as the charter of the Orthodox Palestine Society, and on the first issue V.N. stated categorically that “two things are desirable: the restoration of our mission within the framework of 1857 and the closure of the Palestine Commission” 133 . In general, at that time the mood in St. Petersburg was extremely apathetic. Now is not the time - this is the only answer to all questions,” admitted V. N. Khitrovo arch. Leonid. 134 On March 1, 1881, a terrible, stunning event took place in the life of our fatherland - a regicide unparalleled in our history, and all topical ordinary issues were pushed aside. “Heavy, like a nightmare, numbness,” writes V.N. to the arch. Antonina, this is what we have experienced and are experiencing. It’s as if the thread of life has been broken and there is complete ignorance ahead: you feel that you need to start something new, but what is unknown. Everything we are used to, everything we have gotten used to, seems to have disappeared somewhere and we have to take on a different life. It’s as if we have outlived ourselves and are starting to live with a generation that does not understand you and which you, of course, do not understand. Chat, chatter and more chatter. Everyone wants to solve world issues and everyone recognizes only their own as the only good. This is what we are experiencing, and I am afraid that the time will come when we will still recognize what we are experiencing as good. One speaks the truth, at least for me, it’s Aksakov, but this is the voice of one crying in the desert among the buffoon’s intoxicated dance of the raging. We have greatly angered God that He punishes us like this... In the midst of all this, not only to write, but also to do, not only to do, but also to think, at least I was not able, as if caught in the middle of an unknown path by impenetrable darkness.” “We are worried, believe me,” admitted V.N. Khitrovo in a letter to Arch. Antonin dated June 27, 1881 - we are experiencing a difficult time, which you in Jerusalem cannot even dream of, not because everything is going for the worse, but simply because we have become lazy and have not worked hard. They lived quietly, calmly, asleep, and then the master got up early and began to crack his whip, everyone jumped up and rushed about, sleepy. Well, all this will work out, and in winter I expect that we will completely wake up, but I don’t know if the master is energetic, but he acts energetically. God bless him." During this difficult, sorrowful time, from the events of Jerusalem, one should, however, note the new arrival of Arch. Nicodemus to St. Petersburg, allegedly under the pretext of a petition to return the Caucasian estates to the patriarchate and receive from Bessarabian revenues instead of 2/5 - 4/5, which petition was considered in the Committee of Ministers and was then resolved in a favorable sense, but in reality, undoubtedly, in order to prepare for ourselves in our government spheres support in the event of his candidacy for the throne of the Apostle James, instead of Hierotheos, whose position is on The throne of Jerusalem was greatly shaken at this time. “I think,” wrote V.N. to the arch. Antonin on June 29 - if he (i.e. Arch. Nikodim) in Jerusalem (where he went from the Caucasus supposedly for consecration) sees the ground for himself, he will stay, if not, he will return to Moscow to wait for better days. In any case, this is a serious candidate for the future patriarchate. That is We will defend Hierotheus to the utmost, but if he dies, then Nicodemus will be the natural candidate, and we can even add that he will be strongly supported.” A ray of light that illuminated the sad picture of a gloomy reality and revived the best dreams that had already been buried was in these mournful days the touching pilgrimage of the Grand Dukes Sergei and Pavel Alexandrovich, after suffering severe moral upheavals on March 1, who wished to find consolation at the Life-Giving Tomb in prayer for the dear heroes of their existence, the pious parents of the Sovereign Alexander Nikolaevich and Empress Maria Alexandrovna, who was keenly interested in Palestine and helped it a lot from their royal bounties. The Grand Duke Konstantin Konstantinovich was also a companion of the great princes. Their Highnesses' stay in Jerusalem lasted 10 days, from May 21 to 30, and was spent in continuous prayers at the Holy Sepulcher and on Calvary and in visiting landmarks in Jerusalem and its environs, and made a deep impression both on the August travelers and on everyone who had the good fortune to see them. After “a conversation with Their Highnesses alone in their room, directed to the discussion of various points of Gospel history, Arch. Antonin significantly notes in his diary: “The pure, good and holy souls of the Princes captivated me. This is undoubtedly, She, the high Lover of God and the humble Christian, raised and preserved them as such for the delight and praise of all who are zealous for the spirit, heaven, and God. Peace to Her spirit." “From the distinguished guests of May,” wrote Arch. Antonin came to V.N. already on July 3, 1881 - everyone here is delighted. Regardless of their royal family and position, these are the best people I have ever seen in the world. May the grace of God be with them and in them forever! They charmed me with their purity, sincerity, friendliness and deep piety in the spirit of the Orthodox Church. We stayed here for 10 days, from May 21 to May 31, and spent half the nights of this period at the Holy Sepulcher in prayer. From their generosity, I also received a significant contribution to my buildings. Give grace according to the word of the Gospel.” The trip of the Grand Dukes Sergei and Pavel Alexandrovich greatly interested Vasily Nikolaevich Khitrovo, who wanted to benefit from it for the cause to which he devoted himself and attached himself with all his ardent soul. He wanted to have the most detailed information about this journey from his constant Palestinian correspondent, Archimandrite Antonin. “Now to you,” wrote V.N. Arch. Antonin on June 29, - for God’s sake, tell me: what impression did the great princes make from Palestine, and what impression did they make on you? What is the impact of their stay in particular for you and your institutions? After all, this is a shame and disgrace: Russian grand dukes go to Jerusalem, stay there for two weeks and not a word is written in Russian newspapers, as if it is forbidden to talk about it. This is not fiction, but fact. About the Austrian prince they almost watched every step, but about the Russians there was only news: they left Piraeus for Jaffa, returned to Piraeus from Jaffa. In addition to the general interest for me and the news about this in general, I am especially interested in Sergei Alexandrovich. I have heard a lot of good things about him and I place my last hopes on him. And these hopes are as follows: by the fall, I hope, they will return back, that is, the great princes, and not hopes. By the fall, volume I of the Palestine Collection will finally be ready. I will introduce him to Sergei Alexandrovich and try to convince him to become the head of the Society. Once this succeeds, then all the Palestinian issues will come to light, and little by little we will try to resolve them all to our satisfaction. If this fails, then I can’t do anything, and regarding Palestine I will at least have to fold my arms. It is also important to know what impression Arsenyev made, and if you can, find out; there is strength in it. Here's everything for you - the past, the present and the future. There is little in the past, no more in the present, and only hope in the future.” “A vague hope,” writes V.N. to Archimandrite Leonid on June 26, “remains for the return of the great princes who visited the Holy Land. If the impression they made is good, then Sergei Alexandrovich in particular can do something. If the impression has been erased by Europe, then hope remains only in God.” Answering V.N.’s question, Archimandrite Antonin, in a letter to him dated August 26, gives quite reassuring and encouraging information. That the great princes “will agree to be members of your cherished Society or the Palestinian Commonwealth, that’s what I mean,” writes Fr. Archimandrite, I have no doubt. Palestine deeply touched their pure and good souls. That's true. Hurry to convey to them your Palestinian views and thoughts. It doesn’t hurt to forge here either, while the metal is still soft... Seize another moment. Their Highnesses have an excellent leading personality - Colonel Mikhail Petrovich Stepanov. Get along with him. I was, so to speak, captivated by him.” Finally, the long-awaited first edition of the “Palestinian Collection”: “Orthodoxy in the Holy Land” appeared, and Vasily Nikolayevich, through Chief Prosecutor K. P. Pobedonostsev, presented his book to the Sovereign Emperor, saying: “I do not wish either gratitude or a gift, but only that this presentation would give me the opportunity to ask for preliminary consent to the establishment of the Palestine Society.” At the same time, he went to Tsarskoye Selo to see D.S. Arsenyev, asking him to give 2 copies of the same book to Their Highnesses. “Arsenyev received me,” writes V.N. to Archimandrite Antonin on October 7, “rather restrainedly, but kindly, he took the copies, and my personal presentation, by mutual agreement, was decided to be postponed until my return. But where he got a little excited was in describing the warm, pleasant and good impression that the Holy Land, Jerusalem and especially you made on the great princes. This conversation ended our date. Following this, I received a letter from him with gratitude from the Grand Dukes and with an invitation to introduce myself to them upon my return (that is, from a trip abroad). From him I went to Mikhail Petrovich Stepanov. We talked with him for almost an hour, and I was convinced that the Holy Land had acquired one more admirer, and he spoke about you so warmly, with such respect and love that he surpassed me, and that’s a lot to say. Indeed, as you wrote, he is the sweetest person and, in my opinion, he can help many, and therefore stick with him and from time to time warm up his heat and love. You can be sure that I will not use this to do this. Summing up what I have heard so far, I have written my hymn of praise. The impression made by the Holy Land on the great princes is indeed great, warm and good. They are filled with admiration and vying praise from you. Thank God, dear Father Archimandrite, if only this heat does not cool down, and in 1882 God will help to complete what was started in 1858 and, perhaps, more successfully. I told Pobedonostsev about the proposal to put Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich at the head of the Society. He approved. I also told Arsenyev about this. He began to talk about what the Catholic powers would say. But I interrupted him, saying that this was just a thought now, and that he would allow me, upon my return, to talk in detail at my leisure. He not only agreed, but even asked me to notify him when I returned. So, until January, when I think of being in St. Petersburg... Whether I will find the same fervor in January, God knows. Support him with Stepanov, who made the most cordial impression on me.” Upon returning from London to St. Petersburg, for the Christmas holiday, Vasily Nikolaevich again took up Palestinian affairs. “Having returned and visited Pobedonostsev, I,” says V.N. in a letter to the arch. Antonin on March 25, reminded him that he had had the draft charter for a year already. In response to this, he instructed me to consider it together with Mordvinov. All this was done, and on January 2 the charter was officially presented to him.” The charter of the Society was submitted with the following letter: “With the permission of your Excellency, I have the honor to present the draft charter of the private Orthodox Palestine Society. In the personal conversations with which you were pleased to honor me, as well as in writing, I allowed myself to express to you my deep conviction of the necessity and benefit of establishing such a Society. Returning from the Holy Land, I became even more aware of the need for such a Society, since much in Palestine cannot be done by direct government intervention and can easily be achieved by a private Society or government through such a Society. Regarding the external organization of the Society, as you deign to see, I have taken as a model the statute of the Imperial Russian Geographical Society, which was most practically processed during the almost 30-year existence of the Society. I consider it my duty to draw your Excellency’s attention to the purpose expressed in the draft charter of the Orthodox Palestine Society and to some of the particulars that I outlined as useful for the success of the matter. The goal of the Society (Article 1) is to help our fans and maintain Orthodoxy. These two goals also determine the third, publishing, as a means of introducing and maintaining public interest in the shrines of the East. It must be confessed that the pursuit of all three goals of the Society depends on its financial resources, but I believe that, even with small funds, it will be difficult to give priority to one or another of these goals. And it seems to me, even with limited funds, it will be necessary to divide the income of the Society equally for each department of the proposed departments (Article 21). The branches themselves are necessary so that the Society does not direct its activities exclusively towards one goal only. Limitation on the number of members (Art. 14) I have accepted as a means for quickly recruiting the Society, and if this article is unsuitable in practice, it becomes completely safe with the following note. Finally, the establishment of a special sign for members of the Society who made a one-time contribution (Article 31), similar to similar signs of St. Nina and the Red Cross, I suggested on the grounds that it would provide the Society with a certain capital from persons who attach importance to such signs. In any case, I leave all these questions to your discretion, and no matter how you consider it useful for the matter to resolve them, I submit in advance to your decision. For me, the establishment of such a Society is important only in the sense that in it, in my opinion, a center of worshipers of the Holy Land will be formed, which can provide assistance in a common cause that is dear to us - the benefit of the church.” At this meeting with K.P. Pobedonostsev, as stated in V.N.’s letter to Fr. Antonin, “there was a conversation that lasted an hour, which boiled down to the fact that I would have neither money nor people, and that the charter would remain an empty letter. However, in order to please me, he sets things in motion, but for this it is necessary that I collect the signatures of persons who want to establish the Society, since I am the only one who signed the charter. There was nothing to be done, I had to take back the charter, draw up subscription sheets and distribute them to my patrons, the first of whom, of course, was Count E.V. Putyatin. He, with his characteristic ardor, took him to Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, invited him to sign and notified me that he was pleased to accept the chairmanship of the future Society. Arsenyev repeated the same thing to me during our meeting, but with doubts about how to formalize the matter. Meanwhile, a little earlier, the solemn consecration of Nicodemus (as Archbishop of Tabor) took place. I was there. A few days later, Nicodemus appears to me in full dress uniform, straight from the Emperor, with the announcement that the Emperor has approved the establishment of the Palestine Society, and that we now need to begin drawing up a charter. What charter? - I ask. “It’s been ready for a long time, it’s been presented for a long time, and I won’t write another one.” Not entirely satisfied, however, during his meeting with Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, he told him about the Society and in response to this he also received consent. Regarding the Society, of course, we could not help but disagree. His only goal was to collect money through the Society and send it to the Patriarchate. You see that we could not agree, and he is sulking at me. Well, God be with him: this makes me neither warm nor cold. Meanwhile, Arsenyev demanded a charter from me to present to the Grand Duke and notified that the Grand Duke would receive me one of these days. That was the end of the matter. I presented the 2nd issue. Not a sound, not a breath. Stepanov keeps telling me that the Grand Duke is very busy. Meanwhile, February, part of March passes and I have already collected up to 30 signatures, and yet the charter is not returned to me. Seeing that time was passing, I began to pester about returning. Everyone tells me what the Grand Duke wants to convey to me personally. Finally, on the fifth week, I receive it sealed in an envelope without any note. As if on purpose, on the same day I received a letter from Pobedonostsev, beginning with these words: “I’m perplexed why you still haven’t presented the charter.” Then I crossed myself and the next day presented the charter with signatures to Pobedonostsev, and I went to Moscow on business. Without me, an invitation came from the Grand Duke. 135 Upon my return I used it. On the third day, Tuesday, the Grand Duke received me very graciously. He spoke about you with special feeling, spoke about Jerusalem with remarkable cordiality and nothing more. I can say that he systematically did not say a word about the Society. As I took my leave, I allowed myself to express the hope of seeing him at the head of the Palestine Society. “Of course, of course, we will talk about this with you later.” “Having presented (the charter) to Pobedonostsev, I visited Melnikov (the director of the Asian Department) before leaving, so as not to irritate the geese, since the charter would be sent for the conclusion of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. From talking with him, I drew the following conclusion: if possible, they will not allow it, if not possible, they will try to cut it down, so that there will be nothing left of it. Whether I will continue to fight, or how much, I don’t know. I know one thing, energy disappears and you begin to doubt: aren’t you really spending it on, I won’t say impossible, but not useful in the sense: is Society really necessary and useful? What will happen next, I repeat, I don’t know. The results for the winter season have been summed up, and you see that they are coming down to zero.” “Man proposes, but God disposes, says popular wisdom, and this comes true in the Palestine Society,” writes V.N. Khitrovo in a letter dated April 22, 1882 to Arch. Leonid. – My last letter to you was far from encouraging in this regard. Since then, the most kind consent of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been received, today the written consent of Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich to accept the title of chairman, if the consent of the Sovereign Emperor follows. Opposition was met from where I least expected it, from members of the Holy Synod, who saw in the Society a dirty trick for our spiritual Jerusalem mission. Tomorrow they will finally discuss it, and I hope that they will agree to the Society’s approval. Konstantin Petrovich is extremely kind in this regard and carries out the work within a month, which is said to be unprecedented in the annals of the Synod. Things were going so fast that I barely had time to run in, stop by, and bow to whoever needed to be seen. One thing, I relied on the members of the Synod, I didn’t run ahead, and they laid a dirty trick on me for our spiritual mission. In view of the consent of the Grand Duke, I had to organize the Council and manage future affairs sooner than I expected. During the first conversation, the Grand Duke wished to familiarize himself with the list of founders 136, the proposed list of honorary members and the composition of the management, and very kindly made a proposal that I take the position of vice-chairman. I categorically refused this, and out of habit of telling you everything frankly, not even out of humility, but out of a deep consciousness that I am not fit for this place, firstly, due to my position in the world, and secondly, due to my book, thanks to which I am recognized as a Hellenophobe. Whether I really am one or not is another question, but my name alone at the head of the Society would arouse the suspicion of all Greeks and would only serve to the detriment of the cause itself, which is dearest to me. Was it not out of petty pride that I bothered about him? I explained all this to the question: who do I propose to be vice-chairmen? I mentally crossed myself and called Filippov. He named it not without an internal struggle. There could only be two candidates - Mansurov and Filippov. It was you against the first, and me against the last. A meeting with Mansurov the day before convinced him even more of the danger of placing him at the head of the Society. It must be said that he was the first one three years ago when I opened my mind to the idea of ​​establishing a Society, asking for his assistance. He said a lot of pleasantries and, in the end, refused under the pretext that this was not appropriate for him, and that my idea was nothing more than a figment of a heated fantasy. Moreover, until last year, for two years, during repeated dates, this phrase, varied in different ways, did not leave his lips. With all my petitions about Jerusalem affairs, he listened very sympathetically and warmly and did absolutely nothing. At Golovnin’s request, I wrote him a long letter from Jerusalem about the state of affairs there, which he showed to Mansurov. It earned him only the harshest criticism. In view of all this, when I began to act last year, I didn’t say anything to him, and the circumstances turned out to be such that, perhaps with some assistance on my part, we did not meet with him this winter. And then the other morning he came to me, declaring his claim that I was starting a Palestinian Society and did not remember about it. In response to my reminder of the previous one, I hear the objection that I did not understand him, that it was only thanks to him and his words that the Society was held in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. To this I gave him a list, where he was among the proposed members. This calmed him down somewhat, and he immediately began to tell me that he was definitely going to go to Jerusalem this spring, that this was now necessary, since otherwise he could not speak authoritatively about the Holy Land. God knows that I am not speaking against him out of offended pride. I give him full justice that the sacred flame for the Holy Land shines within him, but over the past 20 years he has done nothing for Jerusalem. Moreover, against his will, the mission was saved last year. Not with love, but with some kind of bitterness, he always spoke against these monks. I repeat, the last meeting made a more than difficult impression on me, 137 and I couldn’t bring myself to name it. I know Filippov far less than Mansurov. I first met him two years ago. But he showed so much sympathy for the implementation of the Society, he always treated it, or rather its idea, with a warm heart. I knew that he was an inveterate Hellenophile, but he is, first of all, Orthodox, he knows the state of affairs and, above all, the persona grata of all the patriarchs, and this will be more than necessary to start the business. Whether all this is sincere, without knowing the person, I cannot judge. But, if I put up a banner, then I prefer Filippov to Mansurov. This is something definite, precise and bearing exactly the character that I wanted to give to the Society. To the Hellenophiles Filippov and Mansurov, since he also counts himself among them, we will contrast the Hellinophobes Khitrovo and Stepanov. 138 So, the vice-chairman is Filippov. I turned out to be his assistant. Personally, I would rather be a secretary, but they wanted to do me a favor, and it was no longer appropriate to refuse. The secretary is supposed to be Stepanov, who is attached to the Grand Duke, a young man who is not prepared, but who has brought out a warm love for the Holy Land from her visit and is ready, at least, to work for it with love, and this is our job, with God’s help, to develop from him a future useful Palestinian worker. Three Council members remain. I named Mansurov, professors V.G. Vasilievsky and I.E. Troitsky. One is a representative of the University, the other is a representative of the Theological Academy. I feel that I should have named a clergyman, but, unfortunately, I don’t know anyone here in St. Petersburg. All this has been approved by the Grand Duke for now, but I have been instructed to talk about the same thing with Konstantin Petrovich. I’m waiting to see what will be decided tomorrow, and then on Saturday or Monday I’ll go to Pobedonostsev. If everything goes well, I think that the Highest Confirmation will follow on May 3, and on May 21, the day of Equal-to-the-Apostles Constantine and Helen and the anniversary of the Grand Duke’s arrival in Jerusalem, I think I will begin the Society with prayer. The closer you get to the goal, the more fearful you become. If you fail, by God’s permission, may His holy will be done, but if you fail because of your inability to get down to business, or from ignorance, it will be extremely regrettable. Bless, deeply respected and much-loved Father Viceroy, both me and the work that is beginning, may it serve both the benefit of Orthodoxy and the benefit of Russia.” “Regarding funds 139 I,” wrote V.N. to the arch. Antonin on April 29, - I don’t know, but I’m somehow confident in them: we won’t find hundreds of thousands, but there will be tens of thousands. But, as I wrote: it’s not about money, but about people and love for the business. May the Lord God send them to us.” The program for the opening of the Society is set out in the letter to Arch. Antonin. “On this day,” writes Vasily Nikolaevich, “we plan to serve a prayer service and have the first meeting under the chairmanship of the Grand Duke. My request to you on this matter is this. If you consider it possible, it is advisable that you also serve a prayer service at the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem. May He help us, through collective and unanimous efforts, to work for the glory of the church and for the good of our dear Orthodox Rus'. It would also not be a bad thing if you, and perhaps together with the consul, sent the Grand Duke a telegram of greeting, remembering the past year. In any case, I will preface you with a telegram in advance. If Kozhevnikov doesn’t want to, meeting diplomatic obstacles, send them alone. This will please the Grand Duke.” “The society was opened, as expected, on May 21,” V.N. reported to Archimandrite Antonin on June 6, “and very solemnly and very homely. 140 Very solemnly in view of the fact that Grand Dukes Sergei Alexandrovich, Nikolai Nikolaevich and Grand Duchess Alexandra Iosifovna were present, then Pobedonostsev and about 20 founders. Homely in relation to the fact that they did not make speeches and limited themselves to the election of honorary members and then officials, namely: vice-chairman T. I. Filippov, assistant chairman of your humble servant, council members B. P. Mansurov, V. G. Vasilievsky and I. E. Troitsky, treasurer of Fan der Fleet and secretary M. P. Stepanov.” “Everything, it seems, turned out well, but at the same time,” adds V.N. in a letter dated May 23 to Archimandrite Leonid, “the Greeks remained Greeks. It was desirable for us that, in the form of a fraternal feeling of unity, a prayer service would be served by His Eminence Nicodemus, and that on this day a prayer service would be served at the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem, and that the patriarch would send a welcoming telegram to the Grand Duke. Nicodemus sent a dispatch the night before that it could not be, but from the dispatch Fr. Archimandrite, I realized that the patriarch refused the prayer service and greeting. It won’t be easy to deal with them.” The solemn service in Jerusalem was conducted by the mission with the consulate already on the night of May 22 on the occasion of the death of the Empress Maria Alexandrovna. Neither the consul nor the patriarch decided, for diplomatic reasons, to welcome the nascent Society. Only o. arch. Antonin made an exception, and his telegram read: “Felicitations cordiales pour ouverture Society. Voeux respectueux a hauts membres. "Rien sur commande ducale." Antonin. The Grand Duke answered it very cordially, recalling his days of the past year on May 21 and 22 in Jerusalem. In St. Petersburg, Greek Archimandrite Neophytos Pagida was invited to a prayer service at the opening of the Society. “Mansurov, according to V.N. in a letter to the architect. Antonin on July 6, certainly wanted to give a speech of praise to the Palestinian Committee (sic). Therefore, I had to cancel all speeches. I don’t even mention the little things anymore. I will only say that I breathed freely when it was all over and, returning home, found your welcoming dispatch, for which I offer my sensitive gratitude. The celebration is over, and we have to get down to business. As I put it: we have put an end to the beginning and we must begin the beginning of the end.” Chapter 3. The Orthodox Palestine Society until its merger with the Palestine Commission At the opening of the Society, the Council included, as we know, vice-chairman T. I. Flippov, assistant chairman V. N. Khitrovo, members of the Council B. P. Mansurov, V. G. Vasilievsky, I. E. Troitsky, treasurer N. F. Fan-der-Fleet and secretary M. P. Stepanov. According to § 51 of the charter, B.P. Mansurov left the Council in May, and in January 1884 T.I. Flippov and V.N. Khitrovo resigned, and the duties of the vice-chairman, at the request of Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, were assigned to F.P. Kornilov, while the position of assistant chairman remained vacant. “We have a change of ministry in the Palestine Society,” wrote V. N. Khitrovo, arch. Leonid January 19, 1884 “Filippov came out, or rather he was asked to come out. He became impossible in Society, standing completely apart. He did not understand this, or rather did not want to understand, and waited until the Grand Duke asked him to resign from the title of vice-chairman. To achieve this, there was nothing to start, you will say, recalling our conversation. What to do, but I’ll still say: the second candidate (V.P. Mansurov) would be worse. But, knowing your disposition towards me, do not be upset by the second news. I also resigned my title for many reasons: 1) to gild Filippov’s pill, 2) to anoint the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, for which, thanks to Nikodim and Filippov, I had become something of a scarecrow, and finally, thirdly, while I was an assistant, it was constantly repeated here by everyone in every way: Society is Khitrovo, and this is not only inconvenient, but also harmful. All this prompted me to insist on my resignation, especially since, forgive me this pride, I am still deeply convinced and feel that I remain the soul of the Society even now. The Grand Duke and the Council are more in solidarity with me than before. In Filippov's place, the Grand Duke appointed F.P. Kornilov (privy councilor and member of the State Council), a completely respectable man, who in his twilight days became attached with all his soul to our cause. And then? - you say. Further, nothing has changed, and the only person who created the disharmony has been removed.” Vasily Nikolaevich Khitrovo joined the Council as a member instead of B.P. Mansurov. As assistant secretary or etc. Deputy secretary, at the suggestion of M. P. Stepanov, burdened with various affairs on behalf of Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, S. D. Lermontov was elected, who in March of the same year, due to the departure to Odessa of N. F. Fan-der-Fleet, the treasurer of the Society, who resigned, first temporarily accepted this position in the Society, and then on March 19 he was elected to this title as a general meeting. The duties of the Secretary of the Council at this time were often performed by V. N. Khitrovo, who in 1889, in February, after refusing the title of Secretary of M. P. Stepanov, took on the duties of Secretary of the Council at the request of Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich and then carried them until the end of his life. “We have had another change in the Society,” says V.N. in a letter to Arch. Antonin dated March 28, 1889 - this is the appointment of me on February 28, quite unexpectedly, as secretary of the Society in the place of Stepanov, whom we will elect as assistant to the chairman. For me, this is somewhat from priests to deacons. But here, at least, I am not only responsible, but also able to give orders. So I answered the Grand Duke, who began to apologize for demoting me: “Your Highness, at least appoint me as a watchman, I will still do the job, and if it goes well, I will not worry about the position.” M.P. Stepanov, having received “deep and sincere gratitude” from the Council of the Society for performing the duties of secretary of the Society free of charge from the day of its opening, was elected assistant to the chairman by the general meeting, in which title he remains to this day, taking a very active part in all the affairs of the Society. “With the permission of our August Chairman, M.P. Stepanov, who was its secretary from the very founding of the Society, resigned this title, it is said about this change in the Society’s report for 1889. If it is generally difficult to conduct any complex business, as our business seems to be, then it is especially difficult to bring to life and conduct a new business. For seven years we saw Mikhail Petrovich constantly busy with our business and we must admit that we avoided many pitfalls thanks to his foresight. As we part with him as secretary, we sincerely hope that he will continue to be sympathetic to the cause that is dear to us and, in many cases, to lead us as before. Therefore, we are firmly confident that we have foreseen your desire, proposing him for election to the appointed, according to the charter, but not filled position of assistant chairman, as well as for election to our honorary members, and we allow ourselves to ask you, in addition, to express to him at this meeting the deep and sincere gratitude of the Society for the seven years of work he has undertaken.” As for his appointment to the position of secretary, V.N. expressed it in the mentioned report as follows: “Having accepted with a feeling of the most devoted gratitude this new sign of His Highness’s gracious trust, I did not consider myself entitled to refuse this title, just as a sentry does not dare to refuse when he is placed in a dangerous post. But this sentry is strong in the knowledge that in a moment of danger or need he will be supported; for this support, when needed, let me ask you.” Almost simultaneously with these changes, due to “a serious illness,” on April 16, 1889, he resigned the title of treasurer and S. D. Lermontov, receiving from the Society for his seven-year work on the Society, in addition to “deep and sincere gratitude,” in the form of an allowance, and “the annual salary he received,” not earlier, however, than “on full acceptance of the treasury part from him.” At a meeting on January 8, 1883, it was decided, according to the charter of the Society, “to open branches in the shortest possible time” under the Council of the Society, which took place on March 21, when the following were elected chairmen of the branches: D. F. Kobeko - scientific publications and research, F. I. Kornilov - benefits for pilgrims and P. A. Vasilchikov - maintaining Orthodoxy. Simultaneously with the organization of the Society, there was also the attraction of as many members as possible to its composition, in order to increase the monetary income of the Society. A means for this was the establishment of a special sign, which, after its approval by the Chairman of the Society, was submitted through Chief Prosecutor K. P. Pobedonostsev for the Highest approval with the following letter from Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich: “Article 29 of the Highly approved Charter of the Orthodox Palestine Society established special signs for all honorary members and for those of the full members and employee members Societies that, instead of making an annual contribution, made a one-time contribution. Having approved the drawing of these signs now drawn up in the Society, I forward it to Your Excellency with a request to submit it to the Most High Sovereign Emperor for his consideration and approval.” On June 12, 1882, the design of the sign was approved by the Sovereign Emperor and, at the request of the office of the Chief Prosecutor, information about it was reported to St. To the Synod and the Governing Senate “for publication and placement in the collection of legislation and the design of the signs itself.” Warm sympathy for the humane goals that the Society outlined for itself and the Highest approved sign 141 really had their effect and the number of members of the Society began to increase noticeably. On March 3, 1883, when the number of honorary members, according to the charter, was already legal, and all vacancies were filled, a resolution was passed: “In view of the fact that the Society has the only opportunity to partially thank individuals who are sympathetic to its goals - by offering them the title of honorary members, and that sympathetic attention to the Society has far exceeded the reliability of those who drew up the charter, to offer members of the Society at the future general meeting, on the basis of the charter, an increase to 100th number of honorary members." This proposal was put into practice by the Society on May 27, 1885; it was considered useful to increase the number of full members, since their number also reached the norm determined by the charter - 200 people. In order to disseminate as much as possible detailed information about the emergence of the Society and its goals and objectives among the mass of the Russian population, the Council of the Society made an order at the very first meeting to notify sparhial bishops, governors-general, leaders of the nobility, chairmen of zemstvo councils and in general persons “known for their sympathy for Orthodoxy in the East” about the opening of the Society and to ask for assistance in its goals with feasible donations.” For the same good purpose, the “arrangement of public meetings and spiritual singing” was considered useful, for which the August Chairman, through the Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod, “sought the Highest permission”, printing in the most widespread newspapers in Russian society “Svet”, “Golos”, “Novoye Vremya”, “Moscow Vedomosti”, “Saratov Diary”, “Church Bulletin” and the calendar of “Novoye Vremya” information about the Society and lists of donations received by it. At a meeting on April 25, 1883, the “Church Bulletin” and “Moskovskie Vedomosti” were even elected “as permanent bodies of the Society” for such information and statements. Setting up mugs at churches and cemeteries was a new, very useful measure for raising funds for the needs of the Society. In St. Petersburg in January 1883, a special commission for circle collection of donations was organized, consisting of chairman M. N. Parunov and 14 members. For this commission, M. N. Parunov developed special instructions, approved by the Council. This commission ordered 10 icon cases with the image at the top of their holiday of the Exaltation of the Cross of the Lord 142 and with the inscription: “Bless the Lord from Zion and see the good of Jerusalem,” from the merchant Egorov, who 500 rubles. received money from the commission, and the remaining 500 rubles. donated to the Society as a membership fee. In March 1883, the blessing of His Eminence Metropolitan Isidore of St. Petersburg followed for the installation of these mug-cases in 10 capital churches, including at three cemeteries. A member of the commission, priest Obolensky, placed a temporary zinc mug in St. Isaac's Cathedral, near the miraculous icon of the Most Holy Theotokos, promising to replace it with a mug with a large icon case, “corresponding to the splendor of the church.” Mugs for collecting donations, by decision of the commission, are taken out through a messenger from the office, and money is poured out of them in the presence of a member of the Council, five members of the Society, in turn, and the secretary. In addition to St. Petersburg, similar collection circles were set up in Orenburg by K. Ya. Klyushnikov, in Kyiv by I. A. Bogolyubov with the assignment of supervising them to Archpriest I. T. Ekzemplyarsky (later Archbishop of Warsaw), in Moscow by Archpriest G. G. Sretensky, in Taganrog by I. I. Tchaikovsky and in Riga – P.V. Ragotsky. Sometimes chapels were also built to strengthen the collection of donations: in 1883, workers of a new paper spinning mill built a chapel on the bridge over the Obvodny Canal, opposite Borovaya Street, which was later rebuilt by Ya. F. Frolov; in the same year, M. N. Parunov raised a question, which, however, did not receive a practical solution, about the construction of a chapel in the city center in the form of the Chapel of the Holy Sepulcher in the Church of the Resurrection. In 1880, retired private Evgraf Loginov Ilyin donated a chapel to the Society in the village of Zagorye, Lozhgolovskaya volost, Gdovsky district, with the condition that the donor should live at this chapel, and the worship in it with the sale of candles belonged to the local clergy. The founders and first leaders of the Palestine Society, obviously, had little faith in the assistance in the propaganda of the new Society and its apostolic tasks from the spiritual and secular administration, and therefore wanted to entrust this mission to private people living in the provinces, but who ardently sympathized with the goals and objectives of the Society and were ready to help its success with all their might. This is how “agents” or authorized representatives of the Society appear: in Moscow A. N. Ferapontov, I. N. Lodyzhensky, in Kyiv Professor A. A. Olesnitsky, prot. P. G. Lebedintsev and I. T. Ekzemplyarsky, in Perm D. D. Smyshlyaev, in Samara V. L. Davydov, in Novgorod D. V. Pirozhnikov, in Polotsk P. M. Kaznacheev, in Vyatka Archpriest S. N. Kashmensky, in Kazan V. I. Zausailov, in Astrakhan N. V. Savrasov, with Kozelshchansky women's community Count V.I. Kapnist, in Alatyr N.K. Gortalov, in Novocherkassk A.I. Zolotarev, in Kapustin-Yar (Astrakh province) V.I. Ryzhkov, in Blagoveshchensk M.I. Karaulov, in Chita I.V. Makhov and others. D. D. Smyshlyaev, who subsequently worked very hard for the Society in Jerusalem and left a grateful memory in its chronicles, entered the Council on September 24, 1884 with a proposal to allow in the cities of the Empire “to establish departments of the Society, allowing them to collect donations, accept annual contributions from members and help familiarize the local society with the Holy Land and the activities of the Society.” The proposal was met with pleasure, the rules were developed at a meeting of the Council on November 22 and, through the Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod, they were presented “with a petition for approval in the prescribed manner.” The vice-chairman of the Society, F.P. Kornilov, dated December 1, 1884, No. 685, wrote the following on this matter: “The general meeting of the Orthodox Palestine Society at a meeting on October 18, in order to disseminate information about the Society and strengthen its material resources, decided: to petition for the Society to be given the right to open its departments in the cities of the Empire. The Council of the Orthodox Palestine Society, having drawn up on this basis a draft of additional articles to the Charter of the Society, Supremely approved on May 8, 1882, has the honor to present the said draft of the amendment to the Charter at the discretion of Your Excellency, humbly requesting your order to approve it in the prescribed manner.” On March 7, 1885, K. P. Pobedonostsev notified the Council of the Society that “The Sovereign Emperor, according to the most submissive report, on the 2nd day of this March, His Highest deigned to approve the draft additional articles drawn up by the Council of the Orthodox Palestine Society to the charter of this Society regarding the opening and actions of the departments of the Society.” On March 25, a message from the Chief Prosecutor was heard, and all authorized representatives of the Society were notified of the subsequent Highest approval of the departments by circulars, and the public - through the newspapers “Governmental Bulletin”, “Svet” and “Church-Public Bulletin”. All the measures we indicated were undoubtedly important both for the popularity of the Company and for attracting funds to its cash desk. The popularity of the Society increased so much that in “monetary terms” back in 1883, “more than expected,” 143 it “exceeded” 30 thousand. The donors were not only high-ranking officials and eminent merchants, but even entire peasant societies. So in 1885, a gathering of peasants from the Podberezskaya volost of the Novgorod province donated 30 rubles to the Society. and undertook to contribute annually a penny from his soul, which will amount to 33 rubles per year. 77 kopecks, and in 1886 these same peasants increased their donations to 2 kopecks per capita. Even people of the Jewish faith were registered as members. 144 But the surest way to provide for the Society financially was recognized - and absolutely rightly so - to attract the entire Russian people to donate to the needs of the Holy Land by establishing plate collections in churches. At a meeting of the Council on March 29, 1885, V.N. Khitrovo raised the issue of “petitioning permission throughout Russia to collect plates in favor of the Society two days a year, on Good Friday after Vespers and on the eve of the Exaltation after Vespers, so that part of the collection would be sent to the Palestine Commission.” Upon approval of this assumption by the August Chairman, the corresponding petition was sent to the Holy Synod, which, through the director of the office of the Chief Prosecutor, in a letter addressed to M.P. Stepanov dated August 23, 1885, reported that the Holy Synod is authorized to “collect in the churches of those localities where the Society will have its own representatives or branches, so that this collection is made once a year on the Feast of Entry of the Lord to Jerusalem, and that half of the proceeds be given to the Palestine Commission." On this occasion, a special commission was formed from the following persons: Fr. G. G. Sretensky, abbot Meletius, o.o. Archpriests V. Ya. Mikhailovsky and A. A. Pavlovsky and Count N. F. Heyden, who, having discussed the collection procedure, developed the following provisions on December 31, 1885: 1) To ask His Imperial Highness the August Chairman to contact the diocesan bishops about the organization of this collection through the deans and church elders. 2) Ask about. Archpriest V. Ya. Mikhailovsky compose a sermon, which is printed in the appropriate number of copies and sent to the consistory, as well as the inscriptions for the dishes. 3) In St. Petersburg, Moscow and areas where the Society has authorized representatives, contact church elders and rectors with special letters on behalf of the Society. 4) Contribute 10% of the collected amount to parish charities or trustees. In the first year, after the synodal resolution, the palm tax reached 129,551 rubles. The Palestinian Society, in accordance with the developed rules for its expenditure, distributed it as follows: for the collection of 2,239 rubles. 79 k., 10% allocated for the formation of capital for scholarships in Russian religious educational institutions for natives of Syria and Palestine and 5% for the remuneration of the office for labor and collection costs. Half of the collection was transferred to the Palestinian Commission. To the bishops who delivered a collection of over 1000 rubles, and to the rectors of city churches - over 100 rubles. and rural - over 50 rubles, gratitude was expressed from the Council. The largest sums were delivered by the dioceses of Moscow, Samara, Chernigov, Stavropol, Kursk, Kherson, Tambov and Oryol. On December 10, 1886, at a general meeting it was stated that the final result of the collection was not yet clear, but that it “exceeded the expectations” of the Society. “This money, collected in pennies, proves, according to the report, how sensitive the Russian people are to everything that concerns Orthodoxy, Jerusalem and the Holy Land. 145 In 1887, the willow harvest reached 111,942 rubles. 9 k., and in l888r. - 89,620 rubles, and its distribution was made according to the practice of previous years. Thus, starting from 1886, the willow collection became almost the main resource for the activities of the Orthodox Palestine Society in all three of its branches. The conceived private Palestine Society finally received real implementation; a dream cherished for many years by the best Russian people became a reality, and the initiator and organizer of this Society was now faced with the need to speak thoroughly and frankly to his like-minded people regarding his plans and intentions, which were presented to him over the space of many years, in achieving the goal he persistently pursued. V.N. Khitrovo and told his cherished desiderata in a special note sent out by him almost on the eve of the opening of the Society. We consider it necessary to acquaint our readers with the curious contents of this note, since it clearly and definitely expresses both the program of future activities of the Palestine Society, and how ideally the late V.N. Khitrovo viewed his mission in the Orthodox East. “I deeply believe that Russia is still so rich that if other needs are satisfied,” says V.N. Khitrovo in his note, “it will find both the means and the people to take care of that country, where He has given us eternal life. In this conviction and believing that a certain institution is necessary so that all sympathizers can gather both for the exchange of thoughts and for joint action, I considered, first of all, the establishment of an Orthodox Palestine Society to be necessary. Its charter outlines both of its main goals, namely: improving the spiritual and material situation in the Holy Land of: a) the Orthodox and b) our pilgrims. By the word Orthodox, I here mean those 20 or 25 thousand Orthodox natives who now form the flock of the Jerusalem Patriarchate. But, speaking about them, I consider it my sacred duty to solemnly stipulate that by this I do not mean either arousing the spirit of nationality in general, or the local Orthodox against the Jerusalem patriarchy. I am not talking about this latter because I do not consider anyone other than the Ecumenical Council to have the right to interfere in its affairs, and because by serving in favor of Orthodoxy and the Orthodox in the Holy Land, I think that the Society thereby serves the Patriarchate of Jerusalem. The funds of the patriarchate are sufficient for the existence of the Holy Sepulchre brotherhood, for the protection of holy places from the encroachment of non-believers, but they are not sufficient to protect the flock entrusted to it from similar encroachments, and this is precisely what the efforts of the Society should be aimed at. Can the Society go on this path on its own without nampaxama? In my extreme conviction, no. Moreover, I am personally deeply convinced that regarding the improvement of the spiritual and material situation of local Orthodox Christians, the Society should adopt as its motto: to go only hand in hand with the Jerusalem Patriarchate. Many doubt the possibility of such an agreement. I'm not one of them. It seems to me that going hand in hand with the patriarch is possible under the following conditions, stated approximately like this: Among the responsibilities of the patriarchy is concern for the position of its flock. Due to financial difficulties, the patriarchy cannot fulfill this duty. The society, with its consent, will partly take upon itself the defense of these responsibilities. Of course, the pariarchy may not express its consent or may demand uncontrolled disposal of the Society’s donations. But in the first case, the sums of money will be used for other purposes of the Society, such as: improving the life of Russian pilgrims, publications and scientific research; in the second case, this is the least that a donor can demand, so that his donations go exactly to the item for which he donates them, and his control in this case is necessary. I think that with such a categorical formulation of the question, patriarchy, sympathetically or not, will go hand in hand with Society. The work of this latter will subsequently inspire confidence in itself in this regard, that it does not concern the Holy Sepulcher brotherhood, does not interfere in its internal affairs, and does not stir up the flock against the shepherd. It is important for us to preserve the Orthodox from the heterodox... For the local population, the most significant, most necessary need is public schools. These schools are remarkably cheap in the Holy Land. The annual cost of such a school for 100 children will not cost more than 500 rubles. There are up to 60 localities with an Orthodox population in Palestine, including 20 with an Orthodox population of less than 100 people and 10 with a population of more than 1,000 people. To organize and conduct school business, it seems to me possible to borrow the method that was already in use when we did not recognize the Patriarch of Jerusalem. In Jeruealim - for Judea, Samaria and Transjordan and in Nazareth for - Galilee, school councils could be formed, in the first of them, under the chairmanship of nampiapxa, from two members of the Holy Sepulcher brotherhood, two natives (at the choice of the local community), the head of the spiritual mission and the consul general; 146 in Nazareth - presided over by the local metropolitan, two natives and our consular agent in Caif. These councils can be entrusted with determining the area where to establish schools, identifying teachers, monitoring the conduct of teaching in them and revising them. The actual expenditure of the amounts and monitoring that they reach their destination should be the responsibility of the Company’s agent. Simultaneously with this establishment of public schools, it is necessary to pay attention to the following issue, which also has educational significance. In Palestine there are two industries, very widespread, but in a very poor state of development: mother-of-pearl 147, wood carving, and wood mosaic. By giving 4-5 young people the opportunity to improve in this industry, it will be possible to lay the foundation for its significant development. Subsequently, if the Society’s funds become significant, it will be possible to begin establishing a vocational school, 148 the need for which is really felt. Turning then to our pilgrims, it seems to me that their needs, which the Society is called upon to satisfy, can be divided into material and spiritual. Some of them are satisfied by the Palestine Commission, and the concern of the Society should, in my opinion, begin where the concern of the Commission ends. The scope of the Commission's activities is very sharply outlined by the walls of Russian buildings in Jerusalem. Behind these walls, its activities hardly extend, and this is the field in which the Society can show its concern. Focusing on material needs, the Society must help not only in the Holy Land, but also in Russia itself. Giving cash benefits to each pilgrim, as has been suggested more than once, will only serve as a bonus to incite pilgrimage, which should be avoided at all costs. The benefit could rather be expressed in a reduction in railway fares, as was done for travel on the steamships of the Russian Society from Odessa to Jaffa. 149 I will try to clarify my assumptions. In 3rd grade from St. Petersburg to Odessa the fare is 31 rubles. 8 kopecks. Let's assume that, by agreement with the railways, it will be possible to reduce the tariff for fans by half, then travel from St. Petersburg to Jaffa and back will cost only 56 rubles, and the ticket must be valid for at least a year. But in order for such a deduction not to be used for travel between Russian cities, it would be necessary to establish the issuance of such tickets only to those who can immediately pay the cost of a ticket to Jaffa and back. There are (not many) such fans coming from St. Petersburg, a few more from Moscow, but most importantly from Kyiv. Assuming that all pilgrims travel this way, this reduction will be about 18 thousand rubles. per year, which, of course, for railways, especially the above-mentioned ones, is nothing more than a drop in the bucket. Regarding the Holy Land, it must be borne in mind that the Russian buildings accommodate only 800 people, while the number of worshipers during the worship period reaches 2,000 and, therefore, about 1,200 do not find shelter in the Russian buildings. Of course, if the Palestine Commission, from the funds available to it, were to erect second floors on our pilgrim wings, then the Society would only have to worry about housing 400 pilgrims. For now, it seems to me, his responsibility should be to build on 1,200, and this could be done by arranging, although for a part, from felt Kyrgyz tents that can easily fit in the vast courtyard of Russian buildings, or by hiring special premises inside Jerusalem, but rather and more expediently by petitioning the Palestinian Commission to immediately begin building the second floors. Finally, the amount now allocated for the adaptation of the needy pilgrims on the spot, only 600 rubles, is so insignificant and insufficient that it needs to be significantly increased, putting it at the direct disposal of the head of our spiritual mission. Our pilgrims are even more helpless spiritually. It is a shame to say that a Russian pilgrim who wants to buy a gospel in his native language in Jerusalem is forced to buy it in a London Bible shop. From their very departure from Odessa until their return to their homeland, they have no other leaders than random scoundrels. 150 How best to arrange this part—whether in the form of special leaders of pilgrimage caravans, or in the form of monastics sent to the Holy Land specifically for this purpose—I cannot decide at this moment to finally decide. To achieve these two goals, which the Society must never lose sight of, a necessary means is to familiarize the Russians with the Holy Land and interest it. For this, it is necessary for the Society to engage in publishing activities and, as far as possible, to promote scientific research and research. Publishing activities in relation to the Holy Land have the difficulty that they have to appeal differently to different sections of the reading public. Thinking about this, I came to the conclusion that these varied tastes could be satisfied by the periodically published "Bulletin of the Society", 151 consisting of the necessary articles on topography, archeology and history of the Holy Land, correspondence on the current situation, book reviews and a bibliographic index. To this Bulletin, which could be published once every two months, in books of 5 printed sheets, books for popular reading on the same subject, Russian travel and more significant scientific writings and research could be attached as an appendix. Among such applications, there is, by the way, one whose necessity I cannot help but draw attention to. This is a publication of the Orthodox guide to the Holy Places of the East. The need for it is felt all the greater because heterodox guidebooks are little by little completely erasing the Orthodox traditions. Equally important are scientific studies or surveys and excavations on site. The names of Jerusalem, Jordan, Bethlehem and Nazareth are so loud that every scientific discovery made in the Holy Land loudly spreads throughout Europe, and therefore among us. Thanks to Western scientists, there is hardly anything left to inherit on top of the Holy Land; it remains, as far as possible, to achieve what is still hidden by the earth and in this regard, one might say, the Holy Land represents almost untouched soil. I will point out, for example: a Russian place adjacent to the Church of the Resurrection and to this day littered with centuries-old garbage. Its excavation is of great interest for determining the location of the original basilica of Constantine; in addition, on this site stood the Crusader church of St. Mary Latin, the ruins of which lie buried underground. Our Russian place at the Damascus Gate, perhaps, hides the ruins of the church of St. the first martyr Stephen, created at the site of his stoning. But these learned inheritances through excavations and expeditions are also necessary because they have a huge influence on the native population. If we add to all these expenses the inevitable expenses of the Office, then the total annual budget of the Society will be determined approximately as follows: for Orthodox natives .............50,000 rub. our fans...................... 20,000 rub. publications and research................ RUR 15,000 Office................................... 15,000 rub. This figure is enormous and it will take a long time before the Company’s income increases to it. I cited it as a maximum, beyond which I would even find it difficult to spend, but, dreaming about the activities of the future Society, I never wondered about it, and it would be extremely mistaken to assume that, without having it, without disposing of it, it is not worth doing anything at all. It seems to me on the contrary, no matter how small the Society’s budget turns out to be, and I strongly doubt that at first it will reach 10 tons, rubles, we should start acting and act as soon as possible. In this case, two plans of action are presented: either choose one activity and initially devote all the forces of the Society to it, moving sequentially to the next, or from each ruble received, allocate 50% to the Orthodox natives, 20% to our pilgrims, 10% to publications and research, and 15% to the office. I leave it to the Society to decide which of these two systems of activity to choose. Personally, I would go for the second, not knowing which type of activity I have planned to give preference to, since they all constitute an urgent need. In concluding, I can only add that no matter how important money is, they, in my opinion, hardly constitute the main thing in the work ahead of the Society. You can do a lot with little when there is love for the work, and may God help the Society to find this love in its members.” To the plans and intentions outlined here with minor abbreviations and developed by V.I. Khitrovo in his note, we have relatively little left to add. Answering the arch. To Leonid’s question about why he didn’t take B.P. Mansurov as vice-chairman, who “would have sold, so to speak, the Palestine Committee” (sic), V.N., in a letter to him dated May 23, 1882, explains the reason why he generally shuns the matter of improving the life of pilgrims, leaving him under the responsibility of the Palestine Commission. “As for the Palestinian Committee (sic),” he writes, “two reasons forced me not to touch it. Firstly, so as not to irritate the geese. I would not have been able to destroy it and transfer it to the Society, and I would only have failed to realize the Society itself. I could only act consistently, with some success, over several years, namely, to persuade the Committee at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to be transferred to the Holy Synod, then, when the Society has already become stronger and has declared itself, to transfer to it from the Holy Synod all the duties of the Committee. Who tells you that this is not my ultimate thought and goal. 152 But whether it will succeed, and to what extent, and when—that is what I leave entirely to God’s discretion. Secondly, taking over the responsibilities of the Palestinian Committee now would not even be beneficial. For society, the 32 thousand it receives per year is barely enough to meet its needs. They would demand more from us, and we would have to spend from our own means, so to speak. Currently they have about 130 thousand capital. I hope to induce them to spend this money for the pilgrims, i.e. build out the second floors on the worship outbuildings, etc. When they put everything in order, then we can think about the reception, but until then they won’t give the money, and we would have to build everything on our own. Now, instigated by the establishment of the Society, Boris Pavlovich became restless, and in August he went to the Holy Land to decide what and how to do. In general, I think that at the present time it is better for the Society not to touch the question of fans for now, leaving it to the Committee and only inciting it. I'm talking about material needs. The spiritual ones will still remain in our care.” “We will limit ourselves, as far as we can, to opening two or three schools this year,” writes V.N. Khitrovo to Archimandrite Antonin on June 6, 1882, “in order to show that we are up to something and to somewhat cheer up the local population. Open schools, if possible, in Galilee, this is further away from the Patriarchate, which will interfere nearby, and this is further away and interests it less, thus moving from north to south. When there are 20, 30 such schools, it will be possible to start an Orthodox gymnasium, but for now take 2-3 Orthodox Arabs and educate them here. Regarding money, we are still in the fog; we need to make do with whatever God sends for another two years. Next year we need to ask for patronage of the Sovereign’s Society, and in two years we can start asking for a subsidy; until then, to stutter about it would mean spoiling the whole thing.” But regarding the Company’s funds, circumstances are beginning to take a very comforting turn. “No appeals or appeals have been made yet,” says V.N.’s letter dated August 12, 1882 to Arch. Leonida, however, received 2 thousand from Major General Voloshinov, unknown to me, and 1 thousand from the Eminence Platon of Kyiv. All this confirms my deep confidence that, with God’s help, we will not need money, but people, people and more people.” “With God’s help, things are progressing,” V.N. writes to him on December 31 of the same year. “The money is coming in, and it’s quite significant.” The trouble is the lack of people, both here and locally. Much could be said, my only consolation is that not a single case goes without a hitch, and, as you know, there are many such knots in the Palestinian case. They hurt, but it’s good if they don’t tear out your eyes. The main thing is to put things in order in Jerusalem, it seems that while you have to leave it for a while, you won’t break through the wall with your forehead, and it turns out somewhat, according to the Russian proverb: if you pull out your head, your tail will get stuck and vice versa. Lack of patriarchy, quarrels between the archimandrite and the consul, all this makes everyone angry, everyone bumps heads, no one listens to anyone, and as a result, complete chaos. The Palestinian Commission does not want to hear about the transfer of Palestinian affairs to the Holy Synod, about the restoration of the mission, but in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs everyone conducts their own diplomacy. All this, to top it all off, confirms that our Society is an extra authority. In a word, you have to bend down, do your work little by little and firmly believe that if this is God’s work, then it will not be lost. But all this taken together takes up so much time that I positively become insolvent in business. Well, yes, “having picked up the tug, don’t say that it’s not strong.” The maintenance of Orthodoxy in the Middle East, according to the plan indicated and already known to us by V.N. Khitrovo, should occupy one of the first places in the activities of the Orthodox Palestine Society. At the first stages of its existence, the Society had to devote both resources and attention to this task, preferably before its other goals and objectives. According to the statement of the Secretary of the Society, the August Chairman was pleased to express that “even this year (1882) the Society announced its activities in all three departments” and, in particular, to “immediately begin opening schools in the Holy Land.” The Society Council allocated 300 rubles. per year “to open a school in the village of Nazareth or Acre metropolis” with deportation for now to Beirut in the name of Consul General K. D. Petkovich 150 rubles. The latter recognized the possibility of establishing a school in Mzhdel (in Galilee) on the road from Kaifa to Nazareth, and asked the Society to restore the church in this village, which was in ruins. The society allocated him 1000 rubles, but under the condition of asking the consul for permission from the Nazareth Metropolitan. On February 12, 1883, it was decided to open two other schools in er-Ram and in Kefr Yasif or Abu Senan with an allocation of 300 rubles for the first and 400 rubles for the second. In addition, benefits were provided at the request of Arch. Antonin, Arab Orthodox school in Jerusalem from 300 to 500 rubles, residents of the village. Yafa near Nazareth for school and church 200 rubles. and, at the request of the consular agent S. K. Khoury, 200 rubles were allocated for the school in Shajar. The educational and pedagogical activities of the Society at the very beginning encountered a number of very serious and completely unforeseen difficulties, the elimination of which required very energetic efforts on the part of the Society. At the head of these obstacles, in all fairness, we must put a change on the patriarchal throne in Jerusalem, as a result of the unexpected death in June 1882 of His Beatitude Patriarch Hierotheos, a good man, but spineless, and therefore long ago intended to be removed from the patriarchate by the Holy Sepulcher clergy. One of the prominent successors of the deceased was Archbishop Nicodemus of Tabor, who ruled the Jerusalem courtyard in Moscow and had long dreamed of taking the place of Patriarch Hierotheos. Patriarch Nicodemus, thanks to his innate remarkable intelligence, dexterity and insinuation in dealing with people, without any connections, quickly passed through all the lower obediences in the Holy Sepulchre brotherhood and rose to an honorable and influential position under the patriarch - dragoman, and at the end of the 60s received in all respects the enviable position of manager of the Holy Sepulcher Bessarabian estates. Here he learned the Russian language well and became well acquainted with Russia. When Patriarch Kirill, a Russian supporter, was deposed from the throne of the Apostle James, and the Russian government confiscated all income from the indicated Bessarabian estates, the presence of managers from the eastern monasteries and churches within Bessarabia became unnecessary. Finding himself out of work, the clever, very resourceful and insinuating Archimandrite Nikodim strains all his efforts to reconcile the Holy Sepulcher brotherhood with Patriarch Kirill, in order to through this obtain from the Russian government at least part (2/5) of the previous income in favor of the Holy Sepulchre. His efforts in this direction are crowned with complete success, and Arch. In 1879, Nicodemus, as a reward from the Patriarchate, received an equally honorable position in Moscow - rector of the Jerusalem courtyard. The new Archimandrite of the Holy Sepulchre, with his courtesy, extraordinary accessibility and beautiful appearance, not only charmed Muscovites, but also tried to stock up on reliable friends for himself in St. Petersburg, just in case, and, moreover, not only among the residents of the capital, but also in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and even at the Court. Using his connections and the services of friends who are ready to make the greatest sacrifices in the name of Jerusalem, Arch. Nicodemus skillfully raises a second time the question of the return of St. The coffin of the other 2/5 of the income from Bessarabian estates, leaving only 1/5 of this income in the hands of the government for administration and local educational needs. In 1880, this new attempt ends happily in favor of St. Sepulchre, and Arch. Nicodemus, in gratitude for his labors, had already demanded from the Patriarch of Jerusalem that he be elevated to the rank of Metropolitan of Petra of Arabia, and when this failed, he agreed to accept the title of Archbishop of Tabor, but under the condition of his consecration in St. Petersburg, which took place there in the spring of 1881. The popularity of Nicodemus as Archbishop of Tabor, given the above-mentioned natural external and mental merits, has now significantly increased in Russian society, and they naturally began to look at him as a possible candidate for successor to Patriarch Hierotheus, which in turn, as we said, he had been strenuously striving for for a long time. The unexpected death of Patriarch Hierotheus from a fall from a horse left the patriarchal throne of Jerusalem vacant. And, despite the most energetic opposition from the Holy Sepulcher clergy, who elected as patriarch the young, 39-year-old, intelligent, educated and strong-character Archimandrite Photius Peroglou (now Patriarch of Alexandria), the Turkish government and the Greek Athenian press, with the strong support of our Ministry of Foreign Affairs through the ambassador in Constantinople, the patriarchal throne eventually fell into the hands of the archbishop Nicodemus of Favor. Having achieved his cherished and passionately desired goal and intoxicated by the signs of universal attention that were shown to him in St. Petersburg at our Court by the Russian ruling hierarchs, high secular dignitaries and the Russian people, who arranged solemn meetings for him everywhere during his journey from St. Petersburg to Odessa, Patriarch Nicodemus left Russia, which had blessed him, with the undisguised, obvious intention of wiping him off the face of the earth. everything and everyone that and who stood in his way in one way or another. Among his ill-wishers and even enemies, he included, among other things, the newly born Orthodox Palestine Society and the Russian spiritual mission, which had already had a venerable history in Jerusalem, headed by its ever-memorable head, Archimandrite Autonin. “Instead of seriously considering and ensuring the future of the Jerusalem Patriarchate, according to V.N. Khitrovo, Patriarch Nikodim, traveling around on visits to members of the St. Synod, hit the table with his fist, repeating only one thing: that he will not set foot on the shores of the Holy Land while Archimandrite Antonin is the head of the Russian spiritual mission in it, and until he closes the Orthodox Palestine Society.” 153 Patriarch Nicodemus had some reasons to be dissatisfied with the Palestine Society and its main figures. “If they choose Nicodemus (as Patriarch),” confessed V. N. Khitrovo arch. on July 30, 1882. Antonin, the situation becomes twice as difficult. The Society cannot forgive me, and the main thing is that I cheated it. It was like this: he and I talked more than once about the Society. He had an idea to organize something like a brotherhood of St. A coffin with an honorary chairman - the patriarch, with an actual one - him, which would collect money and send it directly through him to Jerusalem. In other words, the Society would only be a collector of money for the patriarchy. And he spoke to the Emperor about this Society of his and came to me with the Emperor’s consent to the Society. Thanks to this agreement, applied to his idea, I applied it to the Society, and it came to fruition. This is what he cannot forgive me for, so during his last stay he even avoided meeting with me.” The Palestine Society thus found itself in a delicate and difficult situation at the very beginning of its activities in Palestine. “One thing is unpleasant for me,” wrote Arch. Antonin on July 11, V.N., “that it (i.e., the election of Npkodim as patriarch) took us by surprise, at the very opening of the Society, where we, so to speak, are just beginning to breathe, we cannot yet say a word for or a word against.” “I saw Nikodim while traveling (on my way to Saxon Switzerland in the summer of 1882 to improve my health),” reported V.N. Arch. Antonin. – He is already a perfect patriarch and is completely confident in his election. I am afraid of him in Jerusalem, even, if you want, more than Photius 154 and Epiphanius (Metropolitan of Jordan), and I am afraid of him because he got into the soul here of Girs, and, if you want, Pobedonostsev - I’m not even talking about small fry. And even before he leaves for you, he will cause a lot of mischief here, and even when he arrives he will bombard you with various things, which neither Photius nor Epiphanius will dare to do... Listen to him - he will break the entire Holy Sepulcher brotherhood. A sinful man, he answered his rosy hopes with skepticism, that he would suddenly die, or end his days in the Hulks. This seems more likely to me. Nicodemus thought and answered: “No one like God.” We will also dwell on this saying: whoever lives will see. His non-appointment, in my opinion, would have been better because the patriarchy would then have had in him a sworn enemy and, therefore, an ally for us. But they will choose him, such a storm will rise against him that God forbid he can cope with it, and not mess with us.” Having settled on this calming thought, Vasily Nikolaevich began to be less anxious about the candidacy, and then the election of Nicodemus to the throne of the Apostle James, and, in the end, even found benefits for the Palestinian cause in the removal of Archbishop Nicodemus from Moscow to Jerusalem. “I have no information either from Jerusalem or from St. Petersburg,” wrote V.N. from Saxon Switzerland to Archimandrite Leonid on June 14, 1883. “According to the latest information, Nicodemus had the greatest chance of becoming a patriarch. You already know my opinion about him, but I somehow began to look at this election more calmly, having come to the conviction that sooner or later we will have to enter into an open struggle with the Greek clergy. This is a bit (reminiscent) of Russia’s attitude towards Germany or Austria. And in this struggle, Nicodemus is no more terrible than the other. Here in Moscow we had an enemy who, with Filippov and Mansurov in his pocket, was up to something that I still couldn’t figure out. Most likely this is silent opposition until the patriarchal question plays out: one had to fight against this silent opposition in trifles and trifles, putting the whole matter on one’s shoulders. The choice of the patriarch, especially Nicodemus, will lead to purity, and this is still easier when he is not here, but in Jerasulim. Filippov and Mansurov will be left without a leader, at least the closest one, and Nicodemus will, first of all, have to fight the Holy Sepulchre brotherhood, and then he will attack the spiritual mission. Destroy her, expel her from the Holy Land - this will be his first campaign. Archimandrite Antonin was introduced by me, yes, I think he knows this better than me. So, if there’s anything we can do, it’s champion the mission.” “Someday, at my leisure, I will (set out) in writing or tell orally everything that I experienced this month,” wrote V.N. Arch. Leonid October 17, 1883. “There were more than once moments when I took up my pen to officially renounce all solidarity and connection with the Society. I thank God that, remembering our motto: “I will not be silent for the sake of Zion and for the sake of Jerusalem I will not rest,” I did not do this. The Patriarch left more than bewildered by all the honor shown to him and, apart from this honor, brought nothing with him. He did no harm either to the Society, or to me, or to the spiritual mission, or to Archimandrite Antonin. Moreover, his undisguised hostility towards us all served to a certain extent in our favor. He over-salted in this regard and thus did not achieve his goal. And now from afar we will still fight. God knows, I didn’t impose myself on this fight and didn’t cause it, but for my part I won’t let myself be swallowed.” “I don’t write much about Palestinian affairs,” notes V.N. in a letter dated November 10, 1883, “you can’t agree otherwise, you’ll negotiate something else... The least of all worries me about this matter, which I consider to be God’s. Whether it succeeds or not is all in His holy will. We are nothing more than blind instruments in His hands.” In St. Petersburg, obviously, they understood well that the appointment of Patriarch Nicodemus to Jerusalem promised many complications and troubles for the Russian cause in Palestine. “On the third day,” wrote Arch. Antonin to Vasily Nikolaevich dated September 8 from Jaffa, - received a benevolent letter from Konstantin Petrovich Pobedonostsev, in which he advises me to get along with the new Palestinian sun, and to put all petty pride in a long box for now. Glad to try. And what kind of patriarch here was I not on good terms with? Kirill considered me his son, Hierotheus his friend. Even the poor Procopius, although, at the instigation of the communards on the cross, demanded from our Synod that I be recalled from Jerusalem, he constantly treated me with love and trust, which he rarely honored anyone with. I treated every patriarch here more sincerely and more friendly than any of the Svyatograd residents, who were constantly and certainly infected with some kind of selfish maxims. If Nikifor had been patriotic, we would have had a bosom friendship!” In view of this, peace and forgiveness to all his opponents and annoyers were instilled in the new patriarch in Russia by all the well-wishers of the arch. Antonin and who really cared about the successes of the Russian cause in Palestine. This should explain, firstly, the fact that through his clients, Patriarch Nicodemus, as reported by Arch. Antonin On September 28, V.N. Khitrovo, even before his appearance in Palestine, tried to bring to the attention of the obstinate and restless Russian head of the mission, Arch. Antonin that “His Beatitude forgives all my mistakes under him and everything that I wrote and printed against the Holy City people and against the Greeks in general, which caused a cooling between him and my insignificance, and, secondly, a direct order from Constantinople from Ambassador A. I. Nelidov - to live in harmony with the new patriarch.” Arch. Antoninus, regarding this order from Constantinople, notes: “This means the formidable ruler of “all Palestine, Syria, Arabia” and so on. has no indispensable intention to put my head on the block and only orders me to keep my hands at my sides” 155. Thirdly, even during his first personal meeting in Jerusalem with Archimandrite Antonin, the new patriarch behaved very correctly all the time and showed full attention to him on his part, without in any way showing his dislike towards him. “We had the best relationship with the new patriarch from the first moment of our meeting in the “city of peace,” wrote V. N. Arch. Antonin January 15, 1884 - His Beatitude greeted me in the most friendly manner outside the city on December 22, on the solemn day of his arrival here. And then, with every new meeting, he never ceases to show me exquisite attention and, as it were, genuine favor. How to explain this and how durable it all is, I cannot say. There have not yet been any intimate explanations between us. We have never had the chance to be two of us, face to face. The first steps of the government of the new Beatitude promise, contrary to early assumptions, good things, according to the general belief." But in St. Petersburg they were very distrustful of these good relations between the patriarch and the arch. Antonin and were even quite embarrassed by this. Vasily Nikolaevich wrote on February 15, 1884 to Arch. Antonin: “The more affectionate the patriarch, the more dangerous, in my opinion, and I think, I think I’m not mistaken, that he is waiting for an opportunity and will bide his time. Unfortunately, he breaks all ties with the Palestinian Society." Arch. In a letter to Leonid from the same day, V.N. remarked: “I cannot help but admit that, rejoicing in all this, I will praise the day when evening comes.” And it turned out that Vasily Nikolaevich was right in his doubts, because the patriarch’s friendly relations with our mission did not last long. Arch. Antonin soon became a positive scarecrow for the patriarch, and extremely strained relations were established between him and the patriarch, which were not interrupted almost until the patriarch’s resignation and his retirement on Fr. Halki. In his relations with the Orthodox Palestine Society, Patriarch Nicodemus was even less consistent. From the moment of his election to the see of the Apostle James, he began, as we said, to look at him with extreme suspicion and further hostility. The school activities begun by the Society in Galilee and partly in Jerusalem itself, for the new patriarch, served as the closest reason for displeasure and very sad misunderstandings between him and the Society. Having opened its first three schools in Galilee, the Society naturally recognized the urgent need to have an agent to whom the management and management of these schools could be entrusted. In search of a suitable person to act as an agent of the Society in Palestine, V.N. Khitrovo turned to his intimate friend Archimandrite Leonid. “The need to have an agent in place is beginning to become more and more noticeable,” V.N. wrote to him on February 1, 1883, “and meanwhile finding such a person is becoming more and more difficult, due to unfamiliarity with local conditions. You brought us out of this predicament, therefore we trust you. You say it’s suitable, and we say the same.” The chosen one of Archimandrite Leonid turned out to be a native of Damascus, a third-year graduate of the Moscow Theological Academy and hitherto with honor holding the position of head of the teachers' seminary in Nazareth, A. G. Kezma. With this appointment for V.N. Khitrovo it was necessary to touch upon the resolution and some practical issues, when A.G. Kezme especially needed “to be not privately, but officially placed under the auspices of our Beirut Consul General.” In a quoted letter to Archimandrite Leonid, V.N. Khitrovo writes: “There are three ways known to me: 1) accepting Russian citizenship, this is possible if he has lived in Russia for at least 3 years; 2) to be appointed to the service officially by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs - this is impossible, and 3) to be appointed privately by a dragoman or an assistant dragoman at the Beirut consulate, I think it is possible, but you need to contact Petkovic. You can answer more easily and categorically regarding the content. This is what we can give now: 600 rubles. papers per year salary, 300 rubles. travel also per year. This will be about 12,000 piastres, 150 rubles. on the way to Beirut and, perhaps, we will get him a free space in Nazareth, where, I think, he will have to establish his main apartment for the first time. Subsequently, when our funds increase or his work increases, we do not refuse an increase... Do us an invaluable service by sending such (an agent), but hammering into him that he will have to be wise, like a serpent, and gentle, like a turtle dove.” A month earlier, namely on January 19, V.N. Khitrovo, in a letter to Archimandrite Leonid, outlined a detailed program for the initial activities of the new agent in Palestine. “At the present time,” he wrote, “we need a person there who, without getting carried away, would throw all national illusions out of his head, would first of all travel around all the Orthodox villages within the Holy Land and truthfully report what he finds, then he would take direct charge of all our Orthodox schools in the villages, so that he would be something like an inspector of public schools. He will receive money, to the best of our ability, from our Consul General in Beirut and report it to him. He must visit these schools at least twice a year and each time report what he saw. For the first time, I think, he will have to settle in Nazareth and establish his main apartment there. So, I think, a year or two will pass, then we will see how God will help with the funds, then we will have to think about a secondary educational institution - where, in Nazareth or Jerusalem, or another place - time will tell, and we will have to head such an institution if he is able to put it.” A. G. Kezma, after meeting him personally, both V. N. Khitrovo and the Secretary of the Society M. P. Stepanov were “satisfied”, who, based on the flattering recommendation of the venerable Fr. Archimandrite Leonid, took it from the hands of the latter, as V.N. Khitrovo put it in a letter to him dated February 28, 1883, “with his eyes closed.” “A very good young man,” V.N. wrote to Archimandrite Antonin on February 7, 1883, recommending A.G. Kezma, but I’m afraid he’s young, and most importantly, he will be pecked in the Holy Land by both the Greeks and Turks, and even their own. That’s how to fence it off - that’s the question.” “He is young, inexperienced, shy, and these are his shortcomings,” V.N. Khitrovo says about him in a letter to Fr. Antonin on June 13, - but there is a desire to do something, and then God will give it. We have to involuntarily rely on Petkovich from Beirut, who is still with all his heart towards us and is ready to help us, not loving the Greeks.” The new Patriarch of Jerusalem Nicodemus, from whom A.G. Kezma decided to ask for blessings before his departure from Moscow to Palestine, reacted to the choice of the Society, however, not sympathetically and, as Archimandrite Antonin testifies in a letter to V.N. Khitrovo dated November 16, 1883, advised A.G. Kezma “until his arrival, sit in Jerusalem and not begin his activities in spirit of the mandate given to him by the Palestine Society." By virtue of this order, A. G. Kezma, upon arriving in Jerusalem through Beirut and some Galilean villages, where he went to fulfill the assignment entrusted to him by the Society - to collect statistical data on the number of Orthodox in these villages, on local schools, on the activities of heterodox propaganda here, etc., in anticipation of the arrival of the new patriarch, he temporarily settled in Jerusalem in a public school as a teacher of general history. But his peaceful stay at this school was disrupted by the following incident. “On the 12th in the morning,” Archimandrite Antonin writes about him from V.N. Khitrovo on November 16, 1884, “the city. The consul (Maksimov) called the makeshift professor and announced to him that a request had been made about him to our Constantinople embassy from the Grand Vizier, as a result of the denunciation of the local pasha. The alarmed young man immediately turned to me with a question: what should he do and what should he do? The consul told him that the local authorities, in addition to the consulate, could seize him and send him to Constantinople, as happened somewhere in the former pashalyk of the Danube with a certain Wendt. We were also talking about Gorgai, when the consul himself came to see me... The consul told about the unexpected story with Kezma. Kaymakam of Liddo-Remli reported to Reuf Pasha (governor) about a certain mysterious Russian emissary, who, on his journey through Remli and Lydda, collected various information from local Christians, and Reufik took pains to immediately report the incident in Porto... G. Kezma said that when he was in Remli and Lydda, he absolutely did not give any reason for the conclusion about him as an emissary, but about him here in the Patriarchate they knew long before his arrival, and as soon as he set his foot on the Holy Land, his friend’s scratch came! The embassy, of course, replied in Porto that you never know who travels around the world and is curious to find out this and that in any place, however, Mr. Consul demanded from Mr. Kezma that he completely renounce the order given to him by the Society and even gave him a signature in that, handing him the instructions given by the Society, which he presented with his comments to the embassy. Society for its new members from the Palestinian metropolitans, about whose fate in the same letter from Fr. Archimandrite Antonin says the following: “He handed over the diplomas and crosses to the Metropolitans of Nazareth and Ptolemais to the city consul, probably at the request of this latter, the consul will open a file about them at the embassy, ​​and the latter will demand from the Porte the right and permission for the rulers to be members, accept diplomas and wear decorations.” The narrated fact served as a reason for Consul V.A. Maksimov to correspond about Kezma with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ambassador A.I. Nelidov and the Palestine Society. In particular, the former head of the Asian Department I. A. Zinoviev, now ambassador to Constantinople, presented to the Society the mission of Mr. Kezma as extremely careless in political terms. Expressing regret that our Constantinople embassy was not warned about this order from the Kezme Society and was thus deprived of the opportunity to “dispel suspicions that the activities of the Palestine Society could inspire in the Turks,” I. A. Zinoviev wrote on November 9, 1883, among other things, that “this order is of a political nature and is one of the most difficult and delicate. Not to mention the prejudices and opposition that are prescribed by Mr. Kezme’s activity should cause a stir among non-religious communities; we should not forget that the Turks themselves have for some time been extremely unsympathetic to the interference of foreigners in the matter of public education and usually see political intentions in this interference.” This is the first thing. Secondly, this instruction does not indicate the duties of the Society’s representative in relation to the Patriarch of Jerusalem. “According to the centuries-old order existing in Turkey, says the same letter from I. A. Zinoviev addressed to T. I. Filippov, the eastern hierarchs were also granted political power over their coreligionists. The matter of public education falls directly within their jurisdiction and, therefore, any interference in this matter, in addition to an agreement with the spiritual head, constitutes a violation of prerogatives, which the latter cannot compromise without damaging his dignity in the eyes of not only his flock, but also the Turkish authorities. Likewise, the Patriarch of Jerusalem will not be able to look at this matter differently, unless Mr. Kezma will ignore him, and this will inevitably lead to regrettable bickering between the patriarch and the representative of the Orthodox Palestine Society.” Thirdly. “Only a person, according to I. A. Zinoviev, who has more experience and a well-known position can successfully combat these difficulties. It is difficult to assume such experience in a person of Mr. Kezma’s age, who, despite being a natural Syrian, is not able to inspire due respect for himself in the local Turkish regions. These latter will probably look at him as a Turkish subject and will not, perhaps, consider it necessary to be particularly shy with him, unless they are convinced that he is enjoying government assistance from Russian consular agents.” Fourthly, and finally, the mission of Mr. Kezma, according to I. A. Zinoviev, undermines the prestige of the Jerusalem consul, since “providing the consulate general in Beirut with control over the activities of Mr. Kezma in the area of ​​the Jerusalem consulate constitutes a violation of the consular charter.” In view of all this, the Consul of Jerusalem, offended by the violation of his powers, also recommended for his part A. G. Kezme “not to start anything before the arrival of Patriarch Nicodemus in Jerusalem,” and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs even “to diligently refrain from any attempts to establish schools until the clarification of those points of the program prescribed to him, which, in the opinion of both the embassy in Constantinople and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, may respond unfavorably not only on the interests of the Society itself, but also on our political influence in Syria and Palestine” 156. The Palestinian Society, responding to a question raised by our Constantinople embassy on this incident, drew attention to the overly exaggerated importance that the Imperial Embassy in Constantinople gave to A. G. Kezma, recognizing him as the representative of the Orthodox Palestinian Society in the Holy Land. Neither the Society nor A.G. himself ascribed such significance to him. Kezma did not take it upon himself. Until now, A.G. Kezma was only a correspondent sent by the Society to collect the statistical information necessary for this latter, and even subsequently, if the assumptions about the organization of schools in Palestine were realized, he would be nothing more than a trusted representative, but in no case a representative of the Society” 157. In the end, the Society gave the reassuring assurance that “nothing should be done within the boundaries of St. Earth otherwise than with the blessing of His Beatitude, the Patriarch of Jerusalem, and with the permission of the Imperial Embassy in Constantinople, and even officially developed the procedure for the Society to maintain Orthodoxy in the Holy Land in the following points: 1) The Orthodox Palestine Society acts in the Holy Land only through its authorized representative and with the blessing of the Patarcharch of Jerusalem. 2) The approved instruction to our commissioner, upon approval by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Council of the Society communicates through this ministry for the attention of our ambassador in Constantinople and our respective consuls. 3) All information obtained by the authorized representative of the Society is reported by the latter to our consul, in the area of ​​\u200b\u200bactions of which the information was collected. The consul forwards the commissioner's report, with his comments, to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which forwards it to the Council of the Society. 4) The society decides what it can do, and transmits its decision on this to the commissioner through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. 5) Within Russia, the Society, as far as possible, educates the Orthodox inhabitants of the Holy Land and tries to place them in seminaries, theological academies and other educational institutions.” 158 In a special “instruction to the authorized representative of the Orthodox Palestine Society”, in appendices No. 5 to the minutes of the Society’s Council, its activities in relation to local authorities – spiritual and secular, Turkish and Russian – are set out in the most detailed way. But in general, V.N. Khitrovo was dissatisfied with the whole story with Mr. Kezma and considered his first trip to Galilee “not a success.” “It would be possible to conduct the matter secretly and achieve results,” wrote V.N. Khitrovo arch. Antonin on December 19, 1883 - and then, although a storm would arise, the deed would be done. They wanted to conduct the case openly, the result could not be doubtful.” “Kezma, in any case, will not remain in Jerusalem: either he will operate in Nazareth, or in Beirut, and most likely in Russia. We will not open schools either in Jerusalem or in its immediate surroundings; there will be too much friction with the Patriarchate; one thing we will do is support the Ansurov school until it comes under the control of the patriarchate, and this will be the first thing Nicodemus does. Then, in Galilee, we would open schools and a secondary school, most likely in Nazareth, but Nicodemus would never agree to this, or would demand that the money go through his hands. We will not agree to this. Then there will be only one thing left, and I think the most practical thing - to set up a school here (i.e. in Odessa), prepared for 10 or 20 boys, natives of Palestine, for the seminary and other average Russian institutions. If it goes well, in 7 or 8 years we will annually graduate from 10 to 20 boys who will little by little form our contingent in Palestine. It’s quiet, it’s slow, it’s still a drop in the ocean, I don’t argue about that, but it’s not our fault that we don’t act differently. One thing I can tell you positively is that the Greeks will not see a penny of our money.” V.N. Khitrovo absolutely did not believe in favor of the written instructions and that the Society’s schools in Palestine would receive the permission of the patriarch, but hoped that sooner or later the time would come when Patriarch Nicodemus would cool down in his zeal and try to establish a more favorable modus vivendi with the Palestine Society, and for this, of course, it was necessary to wait for time and not sit idly by, doing nothing. At this time, Vasily Nikolaevich’s thoughts turn to Beirut and to the local Consul General K. D. Petkovich, who willingly offers his services in setting up schools, helping and patronizing them. Understanding very well that the Society “financially lives on the big names of Jerusalem and the Holy Land, therefore the funds received can only be used for them,” V.N. Khitrovo is talking about establishing a school in Beirut with a boarding school for Palestinian natives, with Kezma at the head of this school. “We can spend,” writes V.N. Khitrovo K.D. Petkovich on March 26, 1884, - for the Beirut school up to 5,000 rubles, adding to this the 1,200 rubles received by Kezma, and 800 rubles, which will probably remain free from the closure of our schools by Nicodemus, will amount to 7 thousand per year.” “I think, says V.N. Khitrovo’s letter to the same consul dated July 25, 1884, that Kezma will be capable of managing such a boarding school, especially under your supreme supervision; in any case, you need to impress upon him what he should try to do. Such an order is not news to him. This was discussed with him, and he took it upon himself. The whole difference is that the boarding school and the entire independent school in Nazareth were supposed to be entrusted to him and, in addition, the supervision of the other schools, of course, was under your auspices.” A.G. Kezma, who was met extremely unfriendly in Jerusalem and did not receive the patriarchal blessing, under the pretext of organizing family affairs, in view of the death of his father, left Jerusalem and the Ansurov school, which on March 1, 1884, at the request of Patriarch Nicodemus, “joined the patriarchal school” with all the students and teachers who had hitherto constituted its staff,” with 10 members of euphoria 159 at the head, and went home to Damascus, and from there to Beirut to a local Arabic school to teach Russian there for the time being. “According to K. D. Petkovich, from the first day he had 25 students who expressed a desire to learn the Russian language.” 160 From this first failure in planting schools in Palestine, V.N. Khitrovo, however, did not fall into despair, but very clearly imagined future prospects and the imminent possibility of a change in the sympathy of the Jerusalem Patriarch towards the Society. “Whether he (i.e., Patriarch Nicodemus) succeeds in restoring the authority of the patriarch in Jerusalem or not, in other words, so frightening here, whether he manages to break the Holy Sepulcher brotherhood, or it breaks him, I,” writes V.N. Khitrovo to K.D. Petkovich on June 25, 1884, “are inclined to the latter. He hits them in the pocket, and this is the most sensitive thing for them. Of course, Hellenophilism is important for them to a certain extent, but only to hide their plutophilism. Therefore, they calmed down for the time being. But this is the usual fate of the Patriarch of Jerusalem, which in this respect has many similarities with Poland. Just as here each generation considers it its duty to test its strength with a new indignation, so here there is a lull after each election. The money is spent, then a new accumulation of money begins, and when they have enough money, they try to overthrow and elect a new patriarch in the hope of getting into his place. The confiscation of funds, which Nicodemus began, is, firstly, only a palliative measure, since they will try to circumvent it whenever possible, and secondly, a measure that absolutely incites hatred against him, and which is tolerated only by counting on generous and rich handouts from Russia. Once they stop, a comedy or tragedy will unfold. In view of all this, he should not have neglected the Palestine Society. Firstly, it is here, and secondly, it is still more tenacious than the patriarch. All this seems so clear to me that I am convinced that when Nicodemus sobers up somewhat, a certain modus vivendi will be established between us and him, but which one depends on the circumstances and the case. I also can’t say: when? We need to let Nicodemus calm down and let us get stronger. We are watching closely and, believe me, we will take advantage of the first opportunity, but for now we have nothing to do in Palestine. Asking for permission and blessings means going to a sure refusal, which only aggravates the relationship, which is already strained. We can only ignore him for now, just as he ignores us, and therefore the notorious instructions and instructions to our agent, which you received and which were invented and composed in the ministry, I, and I suppose I’m not alone, consider one of the thousands of documents composed in our ministry, and which are destined to remain paper to deceive future historians.” It did not take long to wait for the “opportune moment” in the change of the patriarch’s feelings towards the Palestinian Society. V.N. Khitrovo was immediately informed about this change by his permanent correspondent, Arch. Antonin in a letter dated June 13, 1884 “More than once the patriarch who was allegedly offended by you has solemnly declared,” wrote Fr. arch. Antonin, - that he has nothing in his heart against the Society, that he is glad of its existence, that he himself was the first to give you the idea of ​​​​establishing it and that he is ready to go hand in hand with it. What is required for this? Apparently the most empty thing: an official document to him (of course, signed by the chairman) in any sense, kind, form, etc. If only he could see that he is known, recognized, honored and revered as a patriarch, as the kyriarch of the country, in a word, not just as Nicodemus, but in a manner of speaking as the autocrat of the Holy Land... I think so because, perhaps, it would be opportune for the Society to find some reason to enter into correspondence with His Beatitude. He himself will not be the first to do this, even out of fear of the Athenian press, which has already called him, for no reason whatsoever, the blind organ of our Hellenic-ruining Society. The blessed one chatted or seriously expressed his thought that he would gladly submit to control on our part, because he did not want to reveal or see anything in secret. Let, he says, there be a permanent verification commission for the expenses of the Holy Sepulcher, in which let the Russian consul and the archimandrite sit, and anyone else from the Russian government, he doesn’t care. If only things were going well. But, of course, there will be no place here for any dark Kezma or Selim Khouri himself. We should grasp such a liberal view of the patriarch on the difficult task of putting things in order here, and actually achieve the establishment of a mixed verification (I don’t think at the same time an administrative) commission. Somehow the Society got along with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Let both talk together about the usefulness of the said commission.” V.N. Khitrovo did not miss this “opportunity”, but took advantage of it to establish peaceful relations with Nikodim. He personally had many reasons for this, and besides, both the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Constantinople embassy wanted this rapprochement. “The Ministry of Foreign Affairs constantly pestered us,” wrote V. N. Khitrovo arch. Antonina on November 14, 1884, - to ask for a blessing. Without him, or rather, without this formality, we could not do anything on the spot, that is, in the Holy Land. This was also supplemented, as it seemed to me, by the advice of you and Countess Olga Evfimyevna, which, in my extreme understanding, boiled down to this: bow, what is it worth to you? Indeed, there was no reason to stop the matter with a bow, but it was necessary, first of all, to determine how much I personally could negotiate. That is, after last year’s abuse of me, has the anger towards me subsided or not, and will they listen to me, and 2nd, what is the state of affairs of the patriarch. This is the motive of my letter. I received a reply telegram to him. She showed me two things: 1) they will listen to me and 2) the patriarch’s affairs are bad. Subsequently, I learned that the telegram was caused not so much by my letter as by Nelidov’s letter to the Patriarch, copies of which I carry with me and in which the ambassador (times are changing, and we are with them) completely reprimands the Patriarch for his attitude towards our Society, 161 in which the Emperor is interested and behind which all of Russia stands. (Oh, if only all this were so!) The same remark or reprimand was made to your general (i.e., Consul Kozhevnikov). “On the other hand, Boris Pavlovich’s completed trip also did not remain without some influence. I don’t particularly trust him, I also know the instructions given to him, which concern two points: firstly, to increase the accommodation for pilgrims and, secondly, to sort out the relationship of the consul to the head of the spiritual mission. This second point, knowing Boris Pavlovich, particularly bothered me because I knew his view of the mission, which he was unlikely to change, and when he returned he would say: I saw, I know. It is necessary to have a counterweight to it, which could also say: I saw and I know. And I believe that now only I could be such a counterweight. But all these circumstances would hardly have hastened my trip, I would even have believed that my presence in Jerusalem, after Boris Pavlovich’s departure, would have been even more useful, and most importantly, I think that it would have been easier for the patriarch, and now he will not know whom to please, but as they say: man proposes, but God disposes. At the end of September, a dispatch was received from Ilyinsky from the Grand Duke: “Can Khitrovo go now?” I answered that I could. The matter was explained by the construction of Gethsemane. Probably, the Emperor reminded that it was time to end this matter. Previously, I insisted that this construction, under your direct supervision, be entrusted not to a Russian architect from St. Petersburg, but to a local one. The Grand Duke remembered this and wanted to instruct me to talk about it with you and, with your consent, with Chic, who, according to the church plan already approved by the Sovereign, was supposed to draw up an estimate, and then carry out the laying itself. But when they began to look for the plan, it turned out to be lost to the Grand Duke. Grimm, who compiled it, refused to restore it, and then I was ordered to wait in Jerusalem for a new plan. But, knowing our procedures, I told myself that if the plan had not been sent, and therefore the estimate itself had not been drawn up, then, by agreement with you, in any case, make the laying, and then the estimate, upon receipt of the plan, entrust Shik and him with the construction under your supervision and supervision. I took advantage of this same opportunity to make some progress and the proposed construction on the excavated site (near the Church of the Resurrection). What I wanted, I, unfortunately, did not succeed. I had to work differently. The Grand Duke approved the plan, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs allowed construction according to it. This means that, with God’s help, we will lay it down too. As for negotiations with the patriarch, I don’t have much hope for them. We know each other too well and, more importantly, we are too far apart from each other for an agreement to take place. We and I are generous in respect, but we won’t say that in terms of money. The Patriarch's proposals to establish an ephoria under his chairmanship of you and the Consul General do not meet with sympathy from either the Grand Duke or our ambassador, much less from me personally. I doubt that the patriarch would go for anything else. We will listen, we will see, and if we accept the impossibility of an agreement, then, in my opinion, that will be beneficial, because then we will try to transfer our activities to a different ground. What should we do? Regarding this alleged trip of V.N. Khitrovo to Palestine, we have another interesting letter addressed by him to his intimate friend Archimandrite Leonid. “I’ll tell you a secret,” he wrote on October 15, 1884, “that if God wills it, I’m thinking of moving to the Holy Land in January. The situation of Nicodemus in Jerusalem is getting worse every day and it is no longer I, but he, who wants to see me and talk to me about how much he can rely on our Society. So my premonition is partly coming true that the time will come when he will be convinced that I will be the only person in St. Petersburg who is favorable to him and the Patriarchate. But a strange feeling has taken possession of me since negotiations about my trip began. You know that I want to be in Jerusalem, but going there for secular affairs somehow disgusts my soul. Who will return and who will give me the impressions of my first stay in the holy city, where I was there as a simple admirer. God's will be done! In the Palestinian cause, I look at myself as an instrument in the hands of God, and I thank Him for this, and therefore I deeply believe that if the journey succeeds, then His holy will.” The third trip to Jerusalem by Vasily Nikolaevich and his wife took place, as expected, in December. Despite the late season, when frequent storms prevail at sea, the fears of sea motion, which he and his companion found difficult to bear, were not justified. This time Vasily Nikolaevich made his way to the Holy Land on a “long round trip” in comparatively favorable weather. The purpose of such a “tiring 23-day, almost hopeless stay on the ship,” according to V.N., was “deliberately to get acquainted with the path of our pilgrims.” “The results of this more than three-week stay, he admitted in an extensive letter dated December 23, 1884 to M.P. Stepanov, did not pass without a trace. I became acquainted with almost all the pilgrims, and there were up to 200 of them traveling with us, and, frankly speaking, I fell in love with these dark, unrequited people even more. How much need, deprivation, and how much faith and love! What are we in comparison to these voluntary passion-bearers? They transported me to the times of the Crusaders, especially when in the evening choirs of 50 or 60 people formed for spiritual singing for the coming sleep. There was something indescribably poetic in this singing of sacred hymns in their native language, somewhere in the middle of the night, far from their homeland. The prayer destroyed the distance: it was thought that this was not near Myra Lycia, but somewhere in the vicinity of Moscow. How many times have you gone out on deck at night, looked into the hold and seen the signs of the cross, the prayers of many in front of an icon with a lit candle. Oh, my good friend, there are still many good, very good people!” Due to the ill health of his wife, V. N. Khitrovo interrupted the waterway and landed in Beirut, intending to see K. D. Petkovich here, whom he, in one of his letters to him (dated March 26, 1884), called the “stone wall” of the Society and a man “without ingratiation and without a second thought devoted to the cause of the Palestine Society.” In the simplicity of his heart, V.N. thought that “you won’t find a second Konstantin Dmitrievich, moreover, even if you drive along the entire coastline, you won’t find it.” “He alone could and did stand guard on the spot, V.N. certifies him in the same letter to M.P. Stepanov, exposed slander, going on the attack at the first opportunity, and thereby supporting our position. We didn’t know how many intrigues and slander, and I learned for the first time how many accusations there were, and on the other hand, how many things that reached us turned out to be poof, invented to intimidate us.” “As long as Petkovic is in Beirut, we can rest easy and if he can say a word or give us assistance, he will do it.” Here, in Beirut, Vasily Nikolaevich had a meeting with his loser - “agent” A.G. Kezma, who was “read a full course on how to act in both cases,” that is, if the patriarch’s blessing to open schools is given, and if it is not given. Having visited Mr. Kezma’s Russian class with 13 students at a local school, V.N. called his classes “fun,” but not useless for his future teaching activities. The meeting with Gabriel, Metropolitan of Beirut, who lived in Russia for a long time and spoke Russian, obviously did not leave deep impressions, since there are no comments about them in the letter. From Beirut, six days after his arrival, V.N. Khitrovo went to Baalbek to view its ruins and to Damascus to see the patriarch, the 80-year-old elder Hierotheus, and get acquainted with the patriarchal school, which was well established pedagogically. The meeting with Agapit, the bishop of Gauran, who spoke excellent Russian, made a deep impression on Vasily Nikolaevich. “Where,” he notes in a letter to M.P. Stepanov, “in the Patriarchate of Antioch, we would be received with open arms, unlike the one in Jerusalem. Here the Arab element is extremely strong: out of 8 bishops, 6 are Arabs, the remaining 2 are Greeks, and even then they are titled, not actual. A little help and the Arab element would have triumphed. But will there be this help? That's a question. We will spend all our energy on Nicodemus. And what selfless love for Russia and faith in it!” Only five days were spent on this trip. Upon returning to Beirut, despite “fear of horses and complete inability to ride and even stay in the saddle,” V.N. decided to go to Jerusalem by land through Tire, Sidon, Nazareth and Napluz. The weather was excellent all the time, and the travelers had to stay in heavy rain only for the last two hours of the journey, when entering Jerusalem. The motivation for this “greatest physical sacrifice,” as V.N. calls his cavalry journey, was an ardent desire to visit the Galilean schools opened by the Society. “I visited three of our schools: in Kefr-Yasif, in Rama and Mzhdel,” writes V.N., “I not only visited, but also examined all the hundred boys who studied there. Kefr-Yasifskaya turned out to be the best, followed by Mzhdelskaya, and then Rame. The school in Rameh, where there are more than 60 of them, is the best in terms of success and therefore in the abilities of teachers, but in terms of the number of students, the first is in the other two, in Kefr-Yasif and Mzhdel, about 20 each. I couldn’t visit the school in Shajar; I had to go completely to the side and lose two days. In essence, it should not be different from the rest. What can I tell you about them? In fact, they exist and up to 120 boys study in all of them - this is a fact. Moreover, our schools are not only no worse than the patriarch’s, but the commission that inspected the schools on behalf of the patriarch in August or September of this year found our Mzhdel school the best of all those examined, and thus we could be satisfied. But if we take these schools without any comparison, and each one separately, then we must admit that they stand at a very low level. To give an idea of ​​how the teaching proceeds, I will say that in sequential order the children are given the primer, Psalter, Octoechos, Gospel, Bible, Fared (Arabic poet) and a collection of stories to read. It would seem that someone who has completed the primer and the Psalter can read everything up to and including the Bible. Nothing happened, and only those who have reached the Gospel can read the Arabic spiritual book fluently. I have happened to see boys who read the Octoechos fluently and could not read the Psalter or that part of it that they did not go through. This is explained (by the fact) that reading itself is learned by cramming. Those pages of the Psalter that they have gone through, they read fluently; next to the page, but which they have not memorized, they can barely make out. The literary language begins in the same order with Fared and continues with a collection of stories; only the one who reads this latter can read the entire Fared, but the one who reads the first 10 pages of Fared cannot read the 11th and 12th pages of the same Fared, much less a collection of stories. Regarding writing, the progress is better and the system itself is more expedient: they start on a slate board, then on a tin board (diluted with lime) and, finally, on paper (of course, this gradualism is a matter of saving on paper). Then comes arithmetic, and the first four rules are known almost firmly and consciously. As for the Law of God, or rather the Catechism, geography and grammar, all this is taught even before Fared, and all this is known perfectly if you ask questions in the book, but if you ask the question not according to the book or in a breakdown, and the whole class becomes confused. Obvious and complete hollowing without any not only development, but also effort towards this latter. There is no concept of history, even sacred history. What can I tell you about the notorious French language taught in Ramais? I can’t say that this is a myth, because there are three or four students who not only read, but also write. The result is that they get used to and recognize the Latin alphabet and learn a few words. To summarize, it should be admitted that in these schools under this system they actually learn to read, write, the first 4 rules of arithmetic and prayers, all in Arabic. The French language is pure poof and nothing more. But even so, I would find that these schools, like the original rural ones, achieve their goal, if we add the title of Sacred History and if they had books to read, in the absence of which they have to forget reading itself very soon or switch to reading Catholic and Protestant books... “In Kefr Yasif, I found a complete disintegration of the Orthodox community into two camps, hostile to each other, and for which, unfortunately, we, or, what is the same, our agent, i.e. Selim Khouri, are partly to blame. Here's the thing. There was a patriarchal school in Kefr Yasif. The village asked Agapius, the former Metropolitan of Ptolemais, to give them a second teacher who knew French. Agapius refused, and they made the same request to Selim Khuri. This last one actually hired and sent. This was the first mistake, because they don’t go to someone else’s monastery, and especially not to someone else’s school, with their own rules. Of course, the patriarchal school or the now deceased Agapius did not accept him. Then Khuri and a hired teacher opened our school and lured almost all the students from the patriarchal school. Seeing this, Agapius hired a second teacher for the French language and began to lure him into his school. Most of them did this, and the village was divided into 2 camps, and we were left with less than 20 students. Obviously, the continuation of such a struggle and such poaching is extremely harmful, opening the door to Catholics and Protestants. I pointed this out to Selim Khoury and the elders of the hostile camps in a conversation with them. It seems that he reconciled them, but he was convinced of the need, in view of the impossibility of closing the patriarchal school, to close ours, but in order not to undermine confidence in us, promising the elders to pay them an annual subsidy in the amount of what we currently spend on the school, so that this subsidy would exclusively go to the school under our control in the form of an amount for hiring an additional teacher, for purchasing the necessary supplies, or for the construction of a building for the school, or, finally, if the patriarch does not pay teachers' salaries. This is my guess, because for now everything remains the same until our Council decides on this. Almost the same story is repeated in Shajar, but I was not there and don’t know the details. In Rame and Mzhdel, our schools are the same and therefore there are no difficulties yet.” In Nazareth, after worshiping local shrines, V.N. tried to get to know the local Metropolitan Niphon closely, about whom he says that, in his opinion, this is “the most sympathetic of the entire Holy Sepulcher brotherhood,” and that from him “there will be no denunciations or slander, but, of course, you cannot count on help.” Under the influence of these pleasant and calming impressions, Vasily Nikolaevich wrote to M.P. Stepanov his thoughts regarding future Nazareth schools. “Both ours and the patriarchal schools, and indeed all Orthodox schools,” he says in this letter, “suffer from one thing - the complete absence of any national teaching. If you saw these teachers and their utter lack of development, you would be astonished as I was; I have never seen anything like it in my life. 162 This is explained by the complete absence of an educational institution for their preparation. But there are no teachers, you also understand that no teaching is possible, and no matter what we spend on schools, even if we could open them in all the Orthodox villages of this region, it would be relatively wasted money. Therefore, it seemed to me absolutely necessary to leave our schools in Mzhdel and Rama, to replace our schools with annual subsidies, as written above, in Kefr Yasif and Shajar, in order to avoid a clash with the patriarch. But then to open a full boarding school (boarding school) in Nazareth for 10 or 15 of the most capable boys, both ours and the patriarchal schools, it makes no difference, put it under the leadership of Kezma (if the patriarch’s consent had followed this, I would consider my order completely fulfilled), annually graduate from it (of course, not earlier than two years later) six or seven teachers, and the best one will be your scholarship to the Russian seminary. In addition, a girls' school could be opened in Nazareth if a suitable teacher could be found here or even in Russia. And then go on strike. I say in Nazareth, firstly, because it is further from Jerusalem, secondly, because the metropolitan will not oppose us, thirdly, no matter what the ministry says, but in reality all of Palestine up to Naplouse inclusive is included in the jurisdiction of Petkovich, and fourthly, I have a combination regarding the premises (i.e. in our house for pilgrims), which, however, is insignificant Now, let’s talk when we meet.” Back on January 8, 1883, the Council of the Society allowed, at the request of the residents of the village of Mzhdelya, “to allocate 1000 rubles for the restoration of the church, but only if the Metropolitan of Nazareth enters on this subject with an official petition to our Consul General in Beirut,” and for the village of Yafa, near Nazareth, to allocate 200 rubles for the restoration of the church and school. The church in Mzhdel was to be built in honor of St. Sergius of Radonezh, angel of Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, in memory of his stay in the Holy Land; Therefore, the Society did not skimp on funds for this church. On April 25 of the same year, the Council of the Society allocated an additional sum of 300 rubles for the restoration of this church, and on September 24, it was decided to prepare an iconostasis, utensils and vestments for it in Russia and, through the Grand Duke Chairman, to ask for the blessing of Patriarch Nicodemus for its consecration, in the presence of Vasily Nikolaevich, which blessing was already received from the patriarch for the latter’s arrival in Nazareth. “The next day after the meeting (with Metropolitan Nifont) I visited Mzhdel,” wrote V.N. Khitrovo in his first letter to M.P. Stepanov, “and on the way, Yafa of Galilee, where we restored the church and school, or rather, the school building. A story came out with the iconostasis in Mzhdel. All the things from St. Petersburg, as you know, were sent back in September, but some kind of confusion occurred, and they arrived in Beirut with me on the same ship. Petkovich immediately sent them to Khuri, and I found them all in Mzhdel in unpacked boxes. But the tree for the iconostasis turned out to be unfinished, and this is mea culpa. In the summer, when Khuri sent the size of the iconostasis to order images, he also sent an estimate for the iconostasis itself. We put aside the permission to spend on this and the money itself until the images were made, and when they were made, we forgot about it. Therefore, it is clear that Khoury could not begin its construction. Fortunately, time has not passed, and now it will be easier to work according to the images. The church is good and I liked it. Completely corresponds to what is needed." “The question also touched on additional support for the priest, I resisted, but in the end I’ll have to agree to it.” Upon arrival in Jerusalem, the next day, December 20, V.N. Khitrovo, accompanied by Consul V.F. Kozhevnikov, presented himself in a solemn audience to Patriarch Nicodemus, who called V.N. his “old friend and buddy” and “greeted him in a speech as an angel of peace.” After reading the letter from Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, presented to V.N. Khitrovo, the patriarch said loudly: “His Highness was pleased to fulfill my wish. With all my heart I bless the Palestinian Authority; May the Lord God help him in his labors for the benefit of the church.” The Patriarch, according to V.N. Khitrovo, “conducts himself with importance and dignity, which the late Hierotheus, who received me in this very hall, never thought of. There is more pomp and prestige than there was, that’s true, but I’m very afraid that this is external tinsel hiding the same rottenness as 4 years ago. His position was far from strengthened. I will say more: it has not strengthened at all. He is supported not by intelligence, not by energy, but simply by external importance, which impresses (for how long, I don’t know) the far from intelligent members of the Holy Sepulcher brotherhood. I cannot hide the fact that in the next two services that I had to attend - the 21st in the Church of the Resurrection, on the occasion of the anniversary of his accession to the throne, and the 25th at night in the Bethlehem den, more than half were said in Russian, which I had never thought of doing before. I spoke above about his notorious schools. Rural churches and clergy are in the same position as I saw them. They say that you can do little in a year. True, mais pour pouvoir c'est peu de vouloir, il faut encore savoir, et ce savoir je crins fort qúil lui manque. Wait and see. I also can’t say anything about how successful my further negotiations will be, and if I manage to wrest his consent to both schools in Nazareth and to Kezma’s blessing, I will consider myself happy and having fulfilled my order completely in relation to him.” From the patriarch directly, V.N. Khitrovo went on a visit to B.P. Mansurov, who, taking advantage of the patriarch’s hospitality, settled not in Russian buildings for the entire time of his stay in Jerusalem, but in the so-called Porfiryevsky or mission house in the garden of the patriarchate. The conversation focused on issues that greatly occupied both Palestinian leaders: about the Society, about the buildings at the Gevsiman site, excavations at the site near the Church of the Resurrection, etc., and therefore took on a highly aggravated and personal character. Consul Kozhevnikov all this time, in the words of V.N., “was between a rock and a hard place and did not know, sur quel pied danser.” By May, V.P. Mansurov, according to V.N. Khitrovo, was supposed to present a number of his projects in St. Petersburg. “We need to be ready for this time. This is the decisive and final battle. If we overcome, I firmly believe in the future of the Society. May God help that the Grand Duke will be the chairman of the Palestine Commission before his arrival. This is the salvation of the whole matter. Beg, beg him. After all, Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich was the chairman, why shouldn’t he be?” On December 22, the Patriarch paid a visit to V.N. Khitrovo and apologized to him that at the audience at the Patriarchate he did not have his Society sign on himself, making the excuse that he “does not have permission from the Turkish government” for this. After Christmas, at a second business audience, which lasted 2 hours and was distinguished by the patriarch’s exquisite courtesy towards his guest, the patriarch and V.N. Khitrivo worked out the following points of agreement: 1) Society without the blessing of the patriarch does not arrange anything in the Holy Land. That is, whether we want to open a school, build or repair a church, we must first communicate with the patriarch and, upon receiving his permission, we proceed. It's long, but there's nothing to do. 2) We transfer the churches to the disposal of the diocesan authorities, once they are brought into proper form. 3) All internal regulations of schools: hiring, maintenance of teachers, premises, method of teaching are left entirely to us. The Patriarch has the right to audit or control them and informs us about what follows (this last point was not precisely defined. I will try to place it in the letter to Nelidov, because otherwise it would seem to prejudge the issue of the Patriarch’s dismissal of teachers, which cannot be allowed). 4) We write directly to the patriarch, and the patriarch also communicates with us. 5) The Patriarch allowed to re-establish a women's school in Nazareth and a men's boarding school in Ramallah (we will talk about this latter later). “Seeing that everything was going well,” V.N. Khitrovo tried to raise the sensitive issue of the blessing of A.G. Kezma. To V.N.’s surprise, the patriarch, having praised Kezma as “a quiet and modest young man,” not only willingly agreed to accept him and bless him, but even volunteered to entrust him with the work of “translating several folk books into Arabic.” 163 There is nothing surprising, therefore, in the fact that V.N. Khitrovo was at the height of bliss due to his unexpected and so easily achieved successes. “If I were vain,” he writes in a letter dated December 29–31, 1884 to S.D. Lermontov, “I could start with a trumpet voice, heralding complete triumph. But I counted so little on it that I ask myself now after success: did I do something stupid?” Regarding some discrepancies with the patriarch - about the place for the teachers' boarding house in Ramallah (near Jerusalem), and not in Nazareth, as was desired by V.N. Khitrovo, about the observation of mixed euphoria over schools and about the agreement receiving the force of an obligation for both parties - V.N. this time, in order not to spoil things, I did not consider it necessary to protest energetically.” Time and personal foresight were left to smooth out disagreements and omissions and turn things in the direction desirable for the Society. Regarding the third order, concerning the foundation of the royal church in Gethsemane in memory of the late Empress Maria Alexandrovna, after choosing a place, the patriarch expressed his precautionary readiness to personally consecrate the foundation of this church, which was to be built, according to Grimm’s plan, by the local architect K. Schick and under the direct supervision of the arch. Antonina. The laying ceremony took place on January 21, 1885. The good results of the peace treaty between the Society and the Patriarch were felt in a very short time. On January 18, I885, the Council of the Society became aware that the patriarch had taken under his patronage the church of St. Sergius, built by the Society in the village of Mzhdel, and the Council of the Society allocated 600 francs for additional work on the production of the iconostasis for this church. On March 13, the Council decided to close schools in Kefr Yasif and Shajar, with an allocation of 100 rubles. to the sheikhs for school needs in Kefr Yasif. On March 11, the church in Mzhdel was consecrated. On March 29, according to the report of P. A. Vasilchikov, it was decided, with the blessing of the patriarch, to open a girls’ school in Nazareth, appointing M. S. Savelyeva as its head with a salary of 2,400 francs, with two assistants with a salary of 2,600 francs, counting the total cost of the school at 2,000 rubles. The premises for this school were indicated in the house of the Russian Nazareth worship shelter, owned by the Palestinian Commission, which willingly gave this school shelter with official consent on September 8 for No. 51. On October 23, the priest in the village of Mzhdel from March 1, 1885. a salary from the Company of 4 rubles was assigned. per month. At the same meeting, a report was heard from the teacher of the Mzhdel school that “representatives of His Beatitude,” Archbishop Spiridonius and Archimandrite Gerasim Yared, visited the school, “examined the students and expressed their pleasure.” On December 23, at the proposal of the Secretary of the Society, His Beatitude Patriarch Nikodim was allowed to “allocate 12,000 rubles exclusively for the needs of churches and schools, adding 164 here and 3,000 rubles.” Lenivov, issued to the patriarch earlier, but only 15,000 rubles, but on the condition that the expenditure of this money “was made in agreement with the consul D.N. Bukharov,” 165 who replaced the deceased V.F. Kozhevnikov. Since this last decree sharply diverges from V.N.’s solemn promise - not to give a single penny into the hands of the patriarch, we find it necessary to explain it by citing here the entire letter of the August Chairman dated June 23, 1885 to Patriarch Nicodemus. “I bring to Your Beatitude my deep gratitude,” this letter says, for the trust expressed in your two letters dated April 5 of this year, with which you addressed me on matters relating to the Holy Sepulcher. You can be sure that to serve, to the best of my ability, the Holy Mother of Churches is a heartfelt need for me, and I am ready, by all means in my power, to bring you all possible assistance in your good and enlightened works to maintain Orthodoxy in the Holy Land. Two years of the management of your Beatitude by God of the patriarchate entrusted to you, by their very tangible good fruits, prove that apparently the blessing of God rests on you. I place all my trust in the Lord, that He will not leave you in the future with His favor and will strengthen you in your holy field. From Your Beatitude's letter regarding the need to build churches in Palestine, I see that you currently lack 16,000 rubles for this purpose. Having at my disposal, as Chairman of the Orthodox Palestine Society, 3,000 rubles, donated by one of the members of the Society, for the exclusive purpose of building and restoring an Orthodox church in the Holy Land, 166 I am happy to take this opportunity to ask Your Beatitude not to refuse to favorably accept the said money at your disposal for the construction of a church in one of the villages mentioned in your letter, and I ask Your Beatitude to notify me whether you agree to this proposal, and, if you agree, where exactly do you intend to build a church with the above donation, so that I can inform the donor about this and order the immediate sending of 3,000 rubles in your name. As for the remaining 12,000 rubles, I immediately, upon receipt of your letter, turned to the Chief Prosecutor of St. Synod with a petition for permission to issue you the above-mentioned money from the amounts of the Holy Synod. 167 The aforementioned generous alms on the part of the Society and its August Chairman are followed by a whole series of other offerings and signs of gratitude to Patriarch Nicodemus, who apparently decided to use the favorable moment both for himself personally and for the Patriarchate within the widest possible limits. “Having received your letter dated July 13 of this year,” Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich wrote on September 11, 1885, “I am especially pleased to express to you sincere gratitude from myself and from the Orthodox Palestine Society, which is under my chairmanship, for the blessing you gave to open a men’s school in Nazareth under the supervision of A. G. Kezma. as well as for the sympathy with which you reacted to the appointment of M. S. Savelyeva as head of the girls’ school. Ms. Savelyeva has already left for Nazareth, where it is planned to open a school on the day of the Intercession of the Most Holy Theotokos. 168 I hope that Your Beatitude will not abandon in the future the work we are starting with your archpastoral blessing. The Orthodox Palestine Society considered itself especially happy to fulfill the desire of Your Beatitude by taking upon itself the production of items necessary for the church of the monastery of St. John the Baptist, also on the Jordan, and for the Naples church, named in the list attached to your letter... In addition to my dispatch of last August 23rd, sent to your letter of July 31st, I consider it my pleasant duty to once again repeat to Your Beatitude my sincere gratitude for the opportunity that you brought me - to make my contribution to the holy cause of decorating the Nativity Scene of Our Savior. I hope that the icons 169 I ordered will be completed in full accordance with their high purpose - to decorate the shrine where the Sun of Truth was incarnated and from where it shone. Unfortunately, it turned out to be impossible to produce the icons within a month, as you desired, but I hope that you will receive them before the great holiday of the Nativity of Christ.” “At the same time, I consider it my duty to add that on icon No. 6, on the sides of the image of the Nativity of the Savior, I ordered, without changing the size of the icon, to also paint the faces of my angels and my wife, the saints of St. Sergius of Radonezh the Wonderworker and the Righteous Elizabeth. I am quite sure that Your Beatitude will appreciate the religious feeling that guided me in this case.” Regarding this grand-ducal gift, we consider it worth noting that the icons for the Nativity Scene not only did not find a place for themselves where they were intended, but also even caused strong protests from the Catholic clergy, who saw in this gift a violation of the notorious status quo 170... And Patriarch Nicodemus could not help but foresee this when he turned to the Grand Duke with a request, but, obviously, he was counting on something else (monetary donation), where the notorious status quo would remain completely and intact. All the subtle expressions of attention and courtesy on both sides that we have described continued, however, very briefly, and an explosion of new misunderstandings between the Patriarch and the Society could be expected every day. “Outward reconciliation ensued between the Palestine Commission and the Palestine Society (which was facilitated by the appointment of Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich as chairman of both institutions), wrote V. N. Khitrovo, architect, on February 5, 1886. Leonidas, but what is even more significant is that reconciliation took place in Jerusalem; The same reconciliation took place between Nicodemus, Antoninus and Girs, who all quarreled before the holidays. We, who look deeper into this matter, will not get carried away and recognize the calm. God grant that it’s not before the storm.” And the expectations of the storm were fully justified, but it broke out first of all over the head of Fr. arch. Antonina. The Patriarch made a complaint to the St. Petersburg Metropolitan Isidore about Arch. Antonin and the entire mission in the person of its members, who allegedly “were mistaken in actions that did not correspond to the Divine commandment of love, trampling on his patriarchal rights and completely contrary to the sacred canons.” The accusations concerned members of the mission correcting the spiritual needs of Russian pilgrims, for example, burials, weddings, etc., serving prayers and liturgies at the Oak of Mamre, in the church on the Mount of Olives, etc. Among the criminal acts of Fr. arch. Antonin was concerned, by the way, with a “big scandal,” according to the patriarch, which consisted in the fact that he called his church on Olivet the Church of the Ascension. “Since on St. On the Mount of Olives,” says the patriarch, “although in ruins there is an ancient sacred basilica (sic), in which there is an all-honorable place, on which, according to the teachings of the church, the ascension of our Savior followed and on which the imprint of the Holy One is kept (sic), and where we make a bloodless sacrifice, then no one is allowed to change the sacred tradition, nor to erect another church on the same holy. Mount of Olives in honor of the Ascension of the Lord, just as the same thing is not allowed in Jerusalem to erect a church in honor of Passionate Golgotha ​​or the Resurrection; but nowhere in all of Palestine is there a similar church with a similar name. Archimandrite Antonin introduced an innovation worthy of reproach, arbitrarily calling the building he built on St. The Mount of Olives Church is the Church of the Ascension, and thus tries to change the sacred and irrefutable tradition about the places where the most honorable shrines are located.” For Fr. arch. Antonin the disgrace of the patriarch befell the Palestine Society and V.N. Khitrovo. The reason for it was a letter from Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich dated December 24, 1885 to Patriarch Nicodemus, in which, among various other requests, there was, among other things, one request that he did not like very much. “There is one circumstance that cannot but be recognized as essential for the spiritual needs of our pilgrims in the Holy City,” wrote His Highness. – Having achieved their aspirations, it is understandable that they want to pray to their hearts’ content, listening to the prayer words in their native, familiar language, but they almost never succeed. They, of course, can listen to the service in Russian in the Trinity Cathedral on Russian buildings, but the Trinity Cathedral for our fans is not the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, not the Bethlehem Den, not the burial cave of the Mother of God, meanwhile, at these particular shrines, it seems to them, their prayer is more likely to reach the throne of the Most High. It is impossible not to note that, since Your Beatitude ascended the patriarchal throne, words of the church language that are familiar to us began to be heard more often under the arches of the Church of the Resurrection, but patriarchal services are rare, and then in most cases they have to listen to the service in an incomprehensible language. It occurred to me to turn to Your Beatitude with a convincing request to allow the Russian clergy once a week, on designated days, to celebrate the Divine Liturgy at the Holy Sepulcher, in Gethsemane and Bethlehem. I dare to think that such a resolution would only serve to promote unity and love, so desirable in the Orthodox Church. If Your Beatitude respects my request, then the Orthodox Palestine Society will with particular pleasure accept the payment of the money due for the divine service to the patriarchal treasury.” Regarding this letter, the Patriarch brought a written complaint against the Society to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which forwarded a copy of the Patriarch’s letter to Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich. In explanation of the above-mentioned request of the August Chairman, M. P. Stepanov wrote on March 6, 1886 to the director of the Asian Department I. A. Zinoviev that “with his petition, His Highness did not mean to encroach on the rights of the nampiarchy or insult it, and allows himself not to lose hope that the patriarch will find it possible, as a personal favor to His Highness, to console the religious feelings of our pilgrims and will bless once a week in the above-mentioned Holy Places a divine service in Church Slavonic. As for the payment for the liturgy, there can be nothing reprehensible in this, since there is a fee for ordering dinners.” In order to get out of this delicate situation in which Patriarch Nikodim put himself, for the misunderstandings that arose, he placed the blame entirely on V.N. Khitrovo, to whose intrigues he attributed the letter and the desire of the Grand Duke expressed in it. On July 14, 1886, from Hamburg, where he retired for treatment and rest, V.N. gave a dignified, curious answer that had autobiographical significance. “A lot is attributed to me,” wrote V. N. Patriarch - which I not only did not think about, but which is even contrary to my sincere convictions. All the troubles from Russia that befall the throne of Your Beatitude are indiscriminately attributed to me and my malevolent, unsolicited interference. On the contrary, even the little consolation that Russia brings to your archpastoral heart seems like a victory snatched from my hands. The Almighty, to whom the recesses of the human heart are open, sees how fair such judgments are. I repeat that I truly feel the blessing of Your Beatitude, for it proves to me that you do not fully deign to share those bitter prejudices against me, from which my soul grieves to death. Believe, Your Beatitude, in my heartfelt filial respect for you and my love and devotion to the work to which I have devoted weak labors for too 15 years. I could and can make mistakes, as is typical for every person, but I never resorted to untruth or slander and served, as much as I could, selflessly to a cause from which I saw the benefit of the Holy Church. Many of my works turned out to not achieve their goal, and even more were distorted and reinterpreted by circumstances, but to Your Beatitude, as a spiritual person, as a hierarch of the church, I can say with a clear conscience that I never acted to the detriment of Jerusalem and the Holy Land. I dare to assure Your Beatitude that the gracious attention that You were pleased to show me in Moscow belongs to the best and most cherished memories of all my Palestinian activities. I deeply regret that the distance between St. Petersburg and Jerusalem is so great that it makes it impossible to resolve misunderstandings with frank oral explanations when they arise, but I believe and trust in the Lord God that He will not allow untruth to triumph and maybe not soon, when I am already before His terrible throne, He will count me as a small merit and my selfless attachment to the Church, His Holy City and throne Your Beatitude." In these misunderstandings of the Society with Patriarch Nicodemus, the new consul D.N. Bukharov, successor of the late V.F. Kozhevnikov, played a significant role. D. N. Bukharov, a naturally talented man with a kind, gentle soul, was, however, not alien to the very serious shortcomings inherent in many talented Russian people, and besides, he was nervous, irritable and subject to severe seizures. Met by the Society at the post of Jerusalem consul with hope and bright hopes, D.N. Bukharov, having in his hands a specific instruction from his immediate superiors - to counteract all the initiatives of the Palestinian Society, was unable to maintain his position and was unable not only to develop for himself an independent program of activity in relations with the Palestinian Society, but, due to the above-mentioned properties of his hot-tempered character, sometimes even became in opposition to the Society, entered into personal clashes with its leaders in Jerusalem and often, so that only to insist on his own, accepted and supported, to the detriment of the Society, the side of its antagonists - the Patriarchate and the Holy Sepulcher clergy, and even the Turkish local administration. All this, taken together, with his serious illness and sweeping features of the Russian character, not tolerated in such a fighting place as Jerusalem, in full view of the whole of Europe, made D.N.’s further stay here. Bukharov were impossible and he, at the insistence of the Chairman of the Society, Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, was transferred to the post of Consul General in Stockholm, where he soon ended the days of his multi-rebellious life. And, despite all the misunderstandings and roughness in relations with the patriarch that we have described, the pedagogical educational activities of the Palestine Society during the years 1886–1887, however, continued to make noticeable progress in Palestine and follow the intended path forward. Opened on October 3, 1885, the girls' school in Nazareth immediately won the full sympathy of the local population, which gave up to 85 students to this school in the first year of its existence. It receives, at the suggestion of V.N. Khitrovo, a serious organization and becomes the subject of special attention of the Society: a harmonium is sent here to entertain children and teach them to sing, and a sewing machine is sent here to teach needlework. Additional expenses are added to the initial cost estimate and their figure reaches 2,400 rubles. The original premises of the school in the house of Kafar-Tanus, who received 400 francs as a reward, due to its cramped conditions, are abandoned and a more spacious one is found, and from January 1887, by order of D. D. Smyshlyaev, an increase of 400 rubles is allocated for the maintenance of the school. The school organized a special Gospel reading class on Mondays for visiting adult women. It should be noted, however, that the success of this school at first was greatly contributed to by the very energetic headmistress M.S. Savelyeva, who left her service in Nazareth in 1888 and was replaced by S.M. Bakunina, who later brought a lot of grief to the Society. On September 3, 1886, a boarding school for training rural teachers was opened in Nazareth. The consecration of the boarding house was solemnly performed by Bishop Niphon of Nazareth. A. G. Kezma, who had long been designated by the Society for this position, was appointed head of the boarding house. Students were admitted to the boarding school after testing in knowledge of Arabic reading and the 4 rules of arithmetic, six poor orphans as full boarders and 5 inmates aged 12 to 14 years. Two of them were students of the Mzhdel Russian school, and the rest were students of the patriarchal school. On May 24, 1886, at the request of A.G. Kezma, an additional 1175 francs were allocated for the maintenance of the boarding house. The premises for the boarding house served as the former premises of the girls' school. In 1886, Archimandrite Antonin transferred the girls' school he founded in Beit Jala to the jurisdiction of the Orthodox Palestine Society, which was the intention of Fr. the archimandrite cherished from the very foundation of the Society. All lands acquired by Fr. archimandrite, and the buildings on them were presented as a gift to His Highness Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, as the beloved Son of the late Empress Maria Alexandrovna, with whose generous donations this school was created and maintained for a long time. The Palestine Society intended to appoint M.A. Cherkasova as head of this school, “who wanted to devote herself to teaching in Palestine” and “who lived for three years as a missionary in Japan” with “very good certification,” but Fr. did not agree to this appointment. arch. Antonin, and her place was given to M.I. Glebova 171 with a salary of 960 rubles, with one assistant with a salary of 400 rubles, and with the issuance of 600 rubles to both. and for the establishment of a school and the headmistress’s apartment, 400 rubles. The former teacher was an Arab, appointed here by Arch. Antonin, received a pension of 100 rubles from the Society. per year and the right to lifelong residence in one of the wings of the school. At the end of 1886, M. I. Glebova, due to poor health, left the school, and was appointed to her place, at the suggestion of the August Chairman, A. O. Selivanov. In 1887, Count S.V. Orlov-Davydov donated 5,000 rubles to the Beit-Jal school. with the requirement, however, that a second floor be built above this school. O. arch. Antonin was instructed by the Society Council to develop a plan for this construction, which was implemented already in 1890. M. A. Cherkasova, not accepted by the arch. Antonin at the Beit Jal school, sent by the Council to the disposal of K. D. Petkovich as a teacher of the Russian language at the Beirut girls' school. 172 “For the Russian teacher in Beirut (instead of A.G. Kezma), we,” wrote V.N. Khitrovo to Consul K.D. Petkovich on February 20, 1887, “are still looking for a suitable candidate. In any case, we hope to provide it to you by May. In his last letter to you, Mikhail Petrovich wrote about our proposal to send at your disposal, in addition to a Russian teacher, a Russian teacher. We have a very suitable person for this and would be glad to put her to good use. At first, she could only teach Russian at a girls’ school in Beirut, and after 6 months of such teaching, look around and familiarize herself enough to figure out the main thing, how to set up her own girls’ school, should there be a need for it. Where? In Beirut, Acre, Kaif or Jaffa, time will tell. It is also important for us in case, due to some circumstances, we would have to replace our teachers in Nazareth or Beit Jala. And these teachers, knowing that there was a ready substitute for them, would not be so picky. This woman is middle-aged, experienced and energetic, although she is also reproached for her stubbornness and lack of endurance. What to do - you won’t find angels.” The characterization of M.A. Cherkasova made by V.N. Khitrovo is confirmed by K.D. Petkovich, who received her very kindly and at first made a lot of efforts to ensure that she was comfortable in all respects in her new place. “After much search and hassle,” a house was rented for a school for incoming girls for 4,500 piastres, and an Arab teacher who knew a little French was found to be M. A. Cherkasova’s assistant. “We will see her activities in teaching,” writes V.N.K.D. Petkovich, “whether she will respond to the financial sacrifices made by the Palestine Society.” The results turned out to be quite satisfactory, and on October 28, 1887, K. D. Petkovich reported to V. N. Khitrovo, “that the school is going well and there are more than 100 students in it, many of whom study in Russian.” In the same 1887, K. D. Petkovich inaugurated a school for boys in the village of Amiun in Lebanon and allocated funds for it in the amount of 1000 francs. per year. In the fall of 1887, a school for visiting girls was established in the village of Beit Sahur (shepherdess) near Bethlehem, and the former teacher of the Beit Jal school, Maria Daoud, was appointed as a teacher there. Supervision of the school was entrusted to A. O. Selivanova. At the request of K. D. Petkovic, on December 23, 1886, 2,400 francs were allocated to subsidize the ephoria of Damascus schools. In 1887, the Society sent him to the East in order to get acquainted with non-religious institutions and our open schools. With. V.P. Kulin, as an “experienced” person and “dedicated his entire long career to teaching” (letter from V.N. to K.D. Petkovich, March 27, 1887). The Palestine Society developed provisions on scholarships at the Holy Synod in honor of K. P. Pobedonostsev for theological seminaries and the Theological Academy, and for 1888–1989. Georgiy Halebi, a student of the Nazareth boarding school, was appointed a scholarship holder of the Society for education at the Neva Theological Academy. He successfully completed the course of study at the Academy, then for some time occupied the place of a teacher in the Nazareth boarding school and now serves as a dragoman, in the place of his uncle Ya. E. Halebi, a famous figure and employee of the arch. Antonina, at our Jerusalem spiritual mission. In the same year, Rafail Tarazi and Mikhail Yafet were sent to the Kyiv Theological Seminary for education. To complete the review of the activities of the Palestine Society in the department of maintaining Orthodoxy in Palestine, we should mention its subsidy in 1885 of 4000 rubles. arch. Antonin for the completion of the construction of the church on Olivet, about the transfer of 10,000 rubles to him. for the same item, donated by Countess N.A. Stenbock-Fermor, and 1000 rubles. for the construction of a church near the Oak of Mamre by the former pilgrim Modest, Bishop of Nizhny Novgorod and Arzamas, and the Balakhna merchant of the 1st guild Iv. Nozdrinsky, about the donation of bells in the churches of Hama, Homs and Mzhdel and about the opening of a collection for Russian churches of old church vestments of church utensils that have gone out of use for the churches of Palestine and Syria. Given the above-mentioned relations of the patriarch to the Society, it would seem that there should have been no talk of mutual services and assistance between them. But on the throne of the Apostle James, the brother of the Lord, was sitting at that time a man whose mood and thoughts could at any moment change in a completely opposite direction. This is how we explain the almost incredible fact under the given circumstances of Patriarch Nicodemus’ appeal to the Palestine Society on January 17, 1887 with the following telegram addressed to Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich: “Do not refuse emergency aid in cash, for our need is great. Patriarch Nicodemus." The answer was, as one would expect, negative: “To Patriarch Nicodemus. The expenses facing the Society make it impossible to come to your aid now. Sergey". But the needs of the patriarchate at this time were so urgent and the position of the patriarch in the department was so critical that Patriarch Nicodemus could not be satisfied with this categorical refusal, and he decided to knock on the same door, but from a different direction. On April 10, 1888, Patriarch Nikodim wrote a letter to the commissioner of the Palestine Society in Jerusalem, D. D. Smyshlyaev, with a request to “borrow from one of the Russian credit institutions for a low interest, with repayment in 37 years, the amount of 400,000 rubles so that “the current interest on capital and the repayment percentage will be paid by the Patriarchate annually through the Asian Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.” affairs, from income from belonging to Bessarabian estates.” D. D. Smyshlyaev brought the patriarch’s request to the attention of the Council of the Society, and thus began the rather long story of this failed, but very profitable for the patriarchy, loan, a story briefly told by V. N. Khitrovo in his letter from Naples to the ambassador to Constantinople A. I. Nelidov. “Upon receipt of this request,” he wrote on July 21, 1888, “the Council of the Society, knowing the sad situation in which the Patriarchate finds itself, most importantly in view of the financial situation, which His Beatitude Patriarch Nikodim has been unsuccessfully struggling with for 3 years, and realizing that this financial situation stems primarily from disorder in the economy than from a real lack of money, and that at present Patriarch Nikodim among the entire Holy Sepulcher brotherhood, he seems to be the only person most worthy to sit on the Jerusalem patriarchal throne, therefore, the streamlining of his financial circumstances will give him the opportunity to successfully fight against the brotherhood and strengthen his position, and finally, that without this money, sooner or later he will have to leave the patriarchal throne, leaving it to the mercy of parties that can lead to the final ruin of the patriarchy. With all this in mind, the Council of the Society, with a full desire to come to the aid of His Beatitude, Patriarch Nicodemus, reacted quite sympathetically to the request of His Beatitude. “The burden of the financial situation of the Patriarchate lies primarily in the difficult conditions on which numerous loans were concluded. The Society puts their figure at up to 1 ½ million rubles, although the Patriarchate recognizes, as it turned out from further negotiations, only 800 thousand rubles. Assuming even this last figure, although the Society still considers the first figure more correct than the second, the average interest paid on these debts by the Patriarchate is 15% per annum or 120 thousand rubles per year, and, moreover, puts the Patriarchate in complete dependence on the Jews of Jerusalem 173 and the Phanariotes of Constantinople, with whom these loans were concluded. To correct the financial situation, it was therefore necessary to pay the debt from 15% to 5% with ½% repayment per year. It is obvious then that the Patriarchate, instead of the currently paid 120 thousand rubles, would have to pay only 44 thousand rubles and 76 thousand rubles a year, which would immediately increase its annual funds, not to mention the relief from the release of the current mutual sellers. In view of the above, the Society responded to His Beatitude’s proposal that a new loan of 400 thousand rubles. is unlikely to bring significant benefit to the Patriarchate, but will only increase its current debt with a new loan without any benefit, only as a temporary palliative measure. Therefore, the Society is forced to refuse any participation in a loan of 400 thousand rubles, but offers the Patriarchate the entire amount of 1 ½ million rubles necessary to repay all existing debts of the Patriarchate, and this amount is offered at 5% per annum and with the longest repayment. With this combination, the Patriarchate immediately increased its annual income by over 100 thousand rubles, precisely the figure about the lack of which His Beatitude constantly complained. Thus, the Patriarch of Jerusalem acquired an annual income of 100 thousand rubles, was freed from the hands of his creditors, put the financial situation of the patriarchate in order and would have a free hand to fight against his opponents. “His Beatitude, having received this proposal from the Society, reacted sympathetically to it and expressed his consent. Then the Society had to find means to fulfill the desire of His Beatitude. Of course, first of all, it seemed simplest to conclude such a loan from the Imperial Government, but in view of the current financial difficulties of this latter, and most importantly in view of the constant delays and difficulties in payments on previously concluded loans, it was unthinkable to expect success from such an assumption. Moreover, with such a loan, there will be annual requests from the Patriarchate for delays in payments, hope for fulfillment and disappointment in their failure to fulfill them. What remained was then an appeal to private St. Petersburg and Moscow bankers. But this combination hardly seemed convenient, even if it was possible to implement it, because, firstly, the amount of interest in this case increased significantly, and secondly, the Patriarchate passed from the hands of Jerusalem Jews, familiar to it for a long time, into the hands of St. Petersburg Jews unfamiliar to it. At the same time, I cannot hide the fact that once this path had been paved, the Patriarchate would not have stopped at this loan: the first would have been followed by subsequent ones, and from them, in the end, the Patriarchate would have fallen into final ruin. In this state of affairs, the Society had only one thing left: to offer His Beatitude these 1 ½ million rubles on its own behalf, leaving it to itself to find the means necessary for this in one way or another. It offered such a loan from itself to His Beatitude. But Your Excellency is well aware that the Society does not have such free funds of its own, and therefore it had to offer conditions that, on the one hand, guaranteed those who entrusted their sums to the Society, on the other, which guaranteed the Society that the sums given to them would go exclusively to the payment of already existing debts of the patriarchy, and would not increase their amount with a new unproductive debt. Therefore, the conditions set by the Society, when offering a loan of 1 ½ million rubles, boiled down to the following: 1) payment of interest and repayment is guaranteed from income from the Bessarabian estates, 2) the debt obligation is signed not only by the patriarch, but also by the synod, 3) the loan figure is determined by the figure of all current debts of the patriarchy with the addition of 100 thousand rubles. or 200 tr. for the necessary emergency expenses of one year, 4) The Society issues money only upon presentation of debt obligations of the Patriarchate and only for their payment, 5) The Society guarantees itself the fulfillment of the Patriarchate’s obligations regarding the Society by collateral of the Patriarchate’s estates located within Turkey and Greece. 174 Having secured the amount required for the loan in the amount of up to 1 ½ million rubles, the Council instructed me, together with the representative of the Society in Jerusalem, to negotiate with His Beatitude about this matter. Upon arrival in Jerusalem, these conditions were proposed to His Beatitude, and it was indicated to him that such matters were possible only if they were conducted in secret, without unnecessary ranting about them. His Beatitude agreed to this, after listening to an explanation of all the proposed conditions. But two days after that, I don’t want to find out under the influence of what reasons, he offered his counter-conditions, which consisted in the fact that he borrowed 800 thousand rubles and guaranteed them with income from the Bessarabian estates, did not accept any other conditions, and that he would not go under the leadership of the Palestine Society. As, in addition, I had reason to be convinced that the secrecy of this loan on the part of His Beatitude was not fulfilled, I considered it useful to stop all further negotiations on this issue, with deep regret that the only path to salvation was rejected by His Beatitude, although with the consolation that this path was offered to him by the Orthodox Palestine Society. It offered him the streamlining of the financial situation of the patriarchate, an annual increase in his income by 100 thousand rubles, without reprimanding or demanding anything for himself personally. In this case, talking about some kind of leadership of the Palestinian Society is as unreasonable and ridiculous as talking about some Russian patriarch in Jerusalem or about the proposal of the Palestinian Society to rebel local residents against the Greek clergy. I left the patriarch and the patriarchate in the saddest and most hopeless situation. For me, the question of the deposition of His Beatitude, unauthorized or forced, is only a matter of several days, many months. The deposition will lead to unrest, the outcome of which will, in any case, be more than sad, for one must inevitably admit that each heir will turn out to be worse than His Beatitude. The Seminary of the Cross, the hospital and all rural schools are locked. The dissatisfaction of the local Orthodox population has increased to its maximum, and its explosion will not be long in coming. To look for the reasons for this displeasure in the incitement of the Palestinian Society is more than ridiculous, I would even say criminal. It should be sought, first of all, in the impossibility of the action of the Greek clergy and in the propaganda of other faiths, which open the eyes of the local Orthodox population to all the outrages being committed.” The expected loan of Patriarch Nicodemus from the Palestine Society, which promised the Patriarchate to extricate itself from the heavy debts weighing on it, mostly with 12 annual interest, and the long-term strong position of the patriarch himself at the See of Jerusalem were undoubtedly the main motivating reasons why Vasily Nikolaevich was forced to undertake his fourth trip to the Holy Land on May 17, 1888. Such a complex financial issue could only be resolved on the spot, with personal relations filled with trust on both sides. But next to this, although important and promising a lot of good things for the future of both the Patriarchate and the Society, there were other equally serious reasons for this journey, which flowed directly from the activities of the Palestine Society or were in one way or another connected with it. Church in the name of St. Mary Magdalene in Gethsemane in memory of the late Empress Maria Alexandrovna, founded by V.N. Khitrovo during his previous visit to Palestine, was nearing completion. “Outside is Grimm’s plan,” wrote V.N. Khitrovo M.P. Stepanov on June 6, 1888, - executed to perfection and done so well, taking into account all the masonry work, which you realize only after seeing, that you inevitably have to give full honor and glory to Frangia, who would have been an outstanding architectural performer even in St. Petersburg. With what miracles he forced Arab workers to carve stone patterns they had never seen before - simply a miracle, and for this alone, even if there were minor mistakes, Frangia is worth bowing low to him.” “The idea of ​​painting the inside of the church was brilliant. The church suddenly went from cold to warm and cozy.” During the construction of the church, “mistakes were inevitable,” and V.N. recommends that they be brought to the attention of the Grand Duke so that with their “unexpectedness” they could not “amaze and make an unpleasant impression on him.” V.N. insisted on the need to finish the descent at this church with terraces, which should, in his opinion, be “planted with dark cypresses” and various kinds of trees and a Russian cemetery should be built on them, and between the trees 5–10 houses should be built for watchmen and “old servicemen.” This plan by V.N. received permission in a positive sense, as is known, only recently. Although the Russian farmstead under construction was of serious interest to V.N., since it could not be ready for the arrival of the Grand Duke, he naturally focused all his attention on his brainchild - on the schools of the Society, because now for the first time, one might say, he saw these schools already in full swing and, therefore, only now had the opportunity to judge their successes and the correctness of their organization. While still in Odessa, he entered into a relationship with A.I. Yakubovich, who served as a doctor on the ship “Chikhachev”, and, due to “a favorable impression and considering him modest, quiet, very not stupid, with the desire to do what he could,” he accepted him into the service of the Society as a teacher of the school being opened in Nazareth for visiting children, with a salary of 200 francs, and his wife - a medical assistant, with a salary of 50 francs, and the head of an outpatient clinic for sick students of the Society's schools. In Beirut, after meeting with D. D. Smyshlyaev, V. N. Khitrovo went straight to M. A. Cherkasova’s school and outlined his enthusiastic impressions of this school in a letter to M. P. Stepanov. “I,” wrote V.N. Khitrovo, I was traveling with a certain prejudice, but, dear friend, what I saw exceeded my expectations. It was about 8 am. Marya Alexandrovna found herself in the church, the door was locked, there were 2-3 girls in the yard, early students. We sat down on the resting place (sic), the girls came up. One of them has a familiar binding with a cross. That's great. Let's not waste precious time. I open the book - the Russian Gospel. Can you read? - I ask the girl. “I can,” he answers. And he reads the whole page without hesitation. I was even amazed. Meanwhile, Marya Alexandrovna arrives. While we were drinking coffee, we were arguing, that is, she expressed her points, I expressed mine. But then they called for prayer, which means all the children had gathered. We went to the classroom. I asked M.A. not to do exams, but to teach the class as on an ordinary weekday. There were up to 120 children. It is enough to say that out of 120 girls, 20 read Russian, translate from Russian into Arabic and from Arabic into Russian, of course, with hesitations, but only minor ones; the groups, divided into 4 classes, are in all stages from learning to make the sign of the cross and learning Arabic prayers to the senior class above. The only guide is the Russian and Arabic Gospels. They learn to read and write on it. In addition, only arithmetic is taught. And all this in nine months! These successes were even greater when I subsequently visited the Beit Jal school. Here, out of 70 girls, barely 4 - 5 can read monosyllabic Russian words, from Arabic it is no further than Beirut, that is, they can read, but there may also be 10 - 15 girls, the rest are in warehouses. The notorious system of bones with Arabic-Moscow letters turns out to be a pouf. But what is most striking is the difference in treatment of bosses in Beirut and Beit Jala. There she is purely a mother, the children treat her lovingly, Marya Alexandrovna treats them even more lovingly, the same attitude exists between Marya Alexandrovna and the teachers. Here Adelaida Olimpievna plays the role of a strict, classy lady... My father, the archimandrite, and I made the following compromise: with the money of Count Orlov-Davydov, we build the second floor and give this entire part to a boarding house, and in the back we build a building for visiting children with a special entrance using our funds.” Regarding the Nazareth schools, V.N. Khitrovo, in a letter to M.P. Stepanov dated June 22, 1888, reports no less comforting news. “I’ll start with Kezma’s boarding house. I examined it in detail, took examinations of the Divine and Russian Laws, walked with the students and, as far as possible, got to know them. As for what has been completed, this is a relative matter and can be claimed when the program is installed. The examination of the Law of God took place in Arabic, in the presence of the Metropolitan. I can only say that they answered quite fluently, in their own words (not in slang), and, as it turned out, answered my questions intelligently. I personally conducted the Russian exam. Each student read in Russian and Slavic (the New Testament was taken for the exam), then translated the Russian reading into Arabic, grammatical Russian analysis, translation from Arabic into Russian. At the end, a page of Russian was dictated to them; everyone had from 2 to 6 mistakes. You see that the exam was carried out thoroughly. The results were more than satisfactory. The theoretical knowledge of the Russian language turned out to be quite good and even, one might simply say, good, but the spoken language or practical part is lame. And this is understandable, because they have no practice, and in this regard, the arrival of a Russian teacher will, I think, be more than useful. But what I liked most of all was Kezma’s treatment of the children, their restraint. In this regard, you can be quite satisfied. And in this regard, I have high hopes for the Kezmin boarding house.” “It is much more difficult for me to express an opinion about Savelyeva’s school. The school exists without a special system, but about 200 girls actually study there: some get married without finishing the course, others are in their senior year, well, as long as they want, the little ones enroll, go to work, and enroll again. I repeat that no time is wasted: children learn to read, write in Arabic, the Law of God and the 4 rules of arithmetic. The worst of all, if you like, is the Russian language, and this is because Savelyeva is not particularly pedagogical, and she is busy with a lot. She enters houses, knows almost everyone, she reproves the metropolitan, argues with the kaymakam, people come to her from neighboring villages. Unaccustomed to seeing energy in a woman, the Nazarene residents yield to her energy, as well as to power, and her personal influence is irreplaceable. Of course, on the other hand, this scattered nature of her, the desire to embrace everything, to do everything, of course, partly harms the school. But, in general, this influence is especially fruitful for us, and the results achieved in three years are truly amazing. This energy becomes all the more amazing when, as I had to experience, it has to live, for example, in relation to food, so our undemanding peasant would think. She rendered no less services to the hospice house, which turned from a barn into a decent building.” V.N. Khitrovo presented Savelyeva with the badge of a member-employee for her efforts. He says about the Mzhdel school that the 15 boys there “are learning something, well, thank God.” He was not able to visit the school in Rame. Having looked closely at the school systems in various places in Galilee and Syria, V.N. Khitrovo decided to unite them,, if possible, bring those working in them closer together and subject them to one common control, for which purpose he organized a congress of all Palestinian school leaders in Jerusalem. “All the schools, with the exception of Beit-Jal, turned out to be better than I expected,” describes the school congress V.N. Khitrovo in a letter to M.P. Stepanov dated June 18, 1888, “but each of them conducted business according to its own program, according to its own system. It is advisable to bring them to the same denominator, and this is the reason why I invited all the bosses to come to Jerusalem. Moreover, the intention was still different: to bring them together, to bring them closer to each other and to introduce them to Countess O.E. Putyatina, to whom they would be handed over. I invited Kezma to be present for the question of Arabic teaching. Cherkasova, accompanied by her older teacher and two girls, as an example of her system (whom I wanted to show Father Antonin and other teachers), came with us from Beirut at the same time. Since the Russian buildings were full, I placed them in a nearby hotel. On June 27, Savelyeva and Kezma arrived by land from Nazareth, and Selivanov on June 28 from Beit Jala. If we add to this Fr. Sretensky and his sister, and Dmitry Dmitrievich and me, then you will see that many of our Palestinian leaders have gathered. Dmitry Dmitrievich arranged a common meal for all of us in the dining room of our courtyard, for which we gathered at 1 and 7 o’clock and never sat down with less than 12 people. On the 29th, in the presence of Countess Putyatina, I gathered all the teachers and Kezma and opened the first pedagogical congress in Jerusalem. Firstly, I told them that the Grand Duke thanks them all for their labors, knows all the difficulties with which they have to fight, and hopes that they will continue to work with the same self-sacrifice on our common cause. Secondly, I conveyed the will of the Grand Duke that His Highness was pleased to appoint Countess Putyatin as the general head of all our women’s schools in Palestine and Syria, to whom from now on they should all contact both personally and in writing, as well as submit their reports, both monetary and pedagogical, and thirdly, that we need to establish a common program for the meeting of the Grand Duke.” Meetings of the congress took place on June 30, July 1, 2, 3 and 4 from 3 to 5 o'clock in the evening and, despite some rough edges arising from the affected pride of the advantages of one or another person, in general the congress ended successfully, and the activists of the Palestine Society in the pedagogical field, with the exception of A. O. Selivanova, the head of the Beit Jal school, who resigned from her position and handed over the school temporarily to her assistant, a very pretty girl, Maria Hoddat, and returned calmly to their places, retaining the right for the time being to run the schools the way they had run them before that time. The question of the costume of teachers and bosses was resolved as follows: for summer, dresses of gray color, and for winter, black, cut by our sisters of mercy. In relation to the boys' schools, it was decided to strengthen the position of the boarding house in Nazareth and, for this purpose, to purchase a place outside the city so that it could be built on it by September 1, 1890, since renting private premises for the boarding house was expensive. By the way, a project was planned to create a vocational school from the boarding house over time; it was decided to work for the Palestinian Commission to cede the site it owned in Nazareth, so that, having purchased two adjacent plots, build a hospice house and a girls’ school on it. In view of the difficulties of the Patriarchate to maintain its school in Nazareth, which had up to 200 students with 6 teachers and was nearing final closure, V. N. Khitrovo decided to ask the patriarch’s blessing to open the Society’s men’s school in Nazareth, subordinating it to the supervision of A. G. Kezma, so that the children would not go to Protestant and Catholic schools. “I will allow this to happen in Nazareth,” notes V.N. Khitrovo in a letter to M.P. Stepanov, “I don’t consider myself entitled, especially since, having in our hands the entire Orthodox female population, we cannot allow the male population to be betrayed to the Gentiles.” The Patriarch agreed to open a men's school, but asked for 6,000 rubles for this to finish the church in Rame, to which V.N. Khitrovo had to agree. Finally, a men's school was also scheduled to open in Beit Jala, due to the fact that a Protestant men's school had opened there. General supervision of men's schools was entrusted to D. D. Smyshlyaev, to whose name from that time money and parcels were sent by the Society. In September and the first days (1–6) of October, the Grand Dukes Sergei and Pavel Alexandrovich and the August Chairman of our Society, Grand Duchess Elizabeth Feodorovna, traveled to Palestine in order to attend the consecration of the Gethsemane Church of St. Mary Magdalene, built in memory of the Empress Maria Alexandrovna at the expense of Her Most August Children. The royal pilgrims took advantage of this opportunity to venerate the holy places not only of Palestine, but also of Galilee, and carefully examine all the institutions of the Palestine Society, taking a keen interest mainly in the state of the Society's schools in Beirut, Mzhdel, Nazareth and Beit Jala. The arrival of Their Highnesses to Palestine and Syria was a bright holiday for the entire population and left an indelible deep impression on the souls of the children. The distinguished visitors graciously talked with the teaching staff, kindly asked questions to the students and, leaving the schools, generously presented everyone with gifts and money. 175 During the Grand Duke's stay in Jerusalem, Patriarch Nicodemus resumed his speech about a loan from the Palestine Society. The company agreed, but the terms of the loan remained the same. Now, however, there was strong opposition to the patriarch in his synod in the person of Anthimus, Metropolitan of Bethlehem, and Nicephorus, Metropolitan of Petra-Arabia, three members of the synod who, according to the patriarch, “wrote such accusations against us that at another time could have caused beheading or some other terrible execution.” 176 Patriarch Nicodemus, indicating the reason for this “resistance” in the “desire to complicate the patriarch for goals, mainly ambitious,” at the same time hoping “for the high patronage of the magnanimous Monarch” and recalling the “mighty approving words” of the Grand Duke, who did not allow the “thought of leaving” the throne for him, asked the Grand Duke in a letter dated November 17 1888 “to arrange the proposed loan on the basis of a majority of votes” (9 versus 5), and, for his part, did not find the slightest obstacle to concluding a loan on the basis of a majority of votes, for the common law and the general decrees existing everywhere and the importance of the members of the Patriarchal Synod, who have only an advisory vote, contribute to a favorable solution to this issue.” 177 The Palestine Society, through M.P. Stepanov, asked the Ambassador in Constantinople A.I. Nelidov: “Is it possible to recognize as legal, or rather, to what extent will the Imperial Government recognize as legal, the non-unanimous resolution of the Jerusalem Synod, and whether legal certification in Turkey of the debt obligation of the Patriarchate is really necessary. 178 At the same time, F.P. Kornilov addressed questions to the Asian Department regarding the same case. “For the Palestine Society, the decision of the Patriarchal Synod, either unanimously or by majority vote, asked F.P. Kornilov and I.A. Zinoviev, does not have any special significance when concluding a loan. Of decisive importance for the Company, when making this loan, is the consent of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to withhold from the income from the Bessarabian estates inclining to the Holy Sepulchre, that part of it that will be used for the annual payment of interest and repayment until the loan is fully paid off.” “I consider it my duty to notify your Excellency,” A. Zinoviev wrote confidentially on May 10, 1889, in response, “that all previous loans to the Jerusalem Patriarchate were made only upon the expression of consent to them by the Patriarchal Synod in its entirety, and that the Ministry in no case considers itself to have the right to decide on the question of to what extent the resolution on loan, signed only by some members of the synod, although in the majority. In view of the prevailing turmoil in the depths of the Jerusalem church and the antagonism that exists between the patriarch and some members of his synod, one cannot but fear that such a resolution may be protested by the synodal members who are in opposition, and the ministry cannot accept responsibility for the consequences of such a protest. In this case, I consider it obligatory to draw your attention to the fact that, in the opinion of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, assistance in obtaining a loan can be provided to the Patriarch of Jerusalem only if we obtain at least a moral guarantee that the loan will be used to pay off debt obligations previously concluded by the Patriarchate at significant interest. Without this guarantee, the loan will not achieve its goal and can only aggravate the financial difficulties of the Patriarchate, in which case the Imperial Government may be forced to make significant sacrifices in order to prevent the complete insolvency of the Patriarchate, which will have an extremely disastrous effect on its moral charm.” After such a response on behalf of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, there could no longer be any talk of a loan from the Company. Changes in the terms of the loan made by the Patriarch on January 10, 1889, with a notification that the Turkish government “found that this loan is not only not harmful, but very useful and profitable, and objections from the Society dated June 15, 1889 to changes in the terms of the loan with the obligation to accept “at its own expense” schools not all, as the patriarch assumed,” but only some and “according to the pedagogical means with which it can dispose”, subordinating them “in a pedagogical sense to the Society and its agents in Palestine and retaining the appointment and dismissal of teachers in them - all this remained only on paper as evidence that the Palestine Society never refused to come to the aid of the Church of Zion in difficult times with great self-sacrifice, and it was not through its fault that good intentions were paralyzed from that side where only support and sympathy could be expected. His Beatitude Patriarch Nicodemus, thus left by everyone to the mercy of fate, was forced to take his last decisive step - to abdicate the throne, having secured himself well with a lifelong agreement with the patriarchy, which followed in a very short time (October 19, 1890). From the life of Palestinian schools during the time we are considering, we can note only a few more or less significant facts: the sending of P. N. Ushakova and S. Bakunina to the disposal of Countess Putyatina, of which the first was intended for the Beit Jal school, and the second for the Nazareth school, the printing of the Sacred History in Arabic by A. G. Kezma in Beirut with drawings for 400 rubles. allocated by the Society, permission boarders of the senior classes of the Nazareth boarding school to teach Russian in a school for boys, developing a program for a boys' school, issuing an allowance to S. K. Khoury of 40 francs for a girls' school in his house in Kayf and raising the issue of a school for visiting boys, appropriating 1,000 francs in an annual allowance for a school in Zahle, the seat of Metropolitan Gerasim (Yared), and "recognition as useful" senior class boarders in Nazareth from June 15 to July 1 and from September 1 to 15, visiting the environs of Nazareth and Jerusalem, with the costs of these school trips being allocated “to the general balances from the maintenance of educational institutions.” The maintenance of churches during this time was expressed by the allocation of 1,000 rubles. from the amounts donated by A. N. Lenivov for the iconostasis for the church in Cana of Galilee, which was visited by the Grand Dukes Sergei and Pavel Alexandrovich and the Grand Duchess Elizaveta Feodorovna, in principle with a promise of help in the construction of the bell tower of the Church of the Resurrection, the assignment of 1,000 rubles. for the purchase of a bell for the cathedral church of St. Photinia in Smyrna, “in memory of the visit of Their Highnesses to Smyrna and the reception they gave there” and the decision “this year” to begin finishing the church in Rama, despite the fact that the costs for it were estimated at 17,000 rubles. Benefits for Russian Orthodox pilgrims and care for them in Palestine, according to a previously worked out program known to us, in the early days of the Society’s existence were entirely entrusted to the Palestine Commission, which had significant financial resources and was in charge of our hospices in Jerusalem. The Palestinian Society found it premature to compete in this field with its oldest comrade, who had about 20 years of experience behind him. This is how one should explain the fact that out of the Company’s capital of 15,059 rubles. 99 rubles, collected by him in the space of time from May 21, 1882 to March 1, 1883, only 159 rubles were spent on the Russian pilgrims. 7 k. The Society set itself the goal, first of all, to make the path to St. as easy as possible. Land for our poorest pilgrims through cheaper travel tickets both on Russian railways and on the ships of the Russian Society of Shipping and Trade, transporting our pilgrims to Palestine, although this side of the Society’s activities did not meet with sympathy or approval either from the authoritative members of the Society - Archimandrites Antonin and Leonid, or from our Constantinople embassy, who feared the development of vagrancy among the Russians parasite people. In these types, the Society entered into relations with the railway administrations and the Ministry of Railways and petitioned for possible concessions on tickets, first of the third class, and then even on tickets of the first and second classes, and achieved a very significant discount of 50% and 30%. At first, similar concessions were made to the Moscow-Kursk, South-Western, Kozlovo-Voronezh-Rostov and Kursk-Kyiv roads. Subsequently, in the same way, it was possible to enter into an agreement with other Russian railways and establish the so-called “pilgrimage books”, and entrust their sale, at least in the points of greatest movement of pilgrims, in Voronezh, Moscow, Kyiv and Odessa, to authorized or agents of the Society. However, the attempt to arrange the sale of “pilgrimage books” in the Trinity-Sergius Lavra was initially met with distrust, as “propaganda” of the Society, and even prompted clarification from V.N. Khitrovo. “We are out of this business,” he wrote to Arch. Leonid on February 1, 1883, - we don’t get anything but trouble, and we don’t want to force books on him. It is absolutely enough if pilgrims know that such books exist and where they can be obtained.” During his trip to Jerusalem, V.N. Khitrovo could personally verify the benefits of books. “They thank a lot for the books,” he wrote to M.P. Stepanov on November 21, 1884, “they hope a lot in Jerusalem. They know me as a pilgrim too and nothing more. Almost no one knows about the Palestine Society, but everything is attributed to the Tsar's Brother. He cares about us. And I can assure you, this is not one, not two fans, but hundreds with whom I had to talk. I pretend that I haven’t even heard of the books, but they show me, demand an explanation, and it all comes down to this: This is how the Tsar’s Brother takes care of us. Thanks be to God!” Further care for the pilgrims consisted of arranging a shelter for them in Odessa, where they sometimes had to live for a long time in order to obtain a foreign passport and to wait for an urgent ship going to Jaffa. Hospitable apxpriestly house and farmsteads of Russian monasteries on Mount Athos: St. Panteleimon, ap. Andrew the First-Called and Elijah the Prophet have long served here as shelters for our pilgrims going to the Holy Land and Athos. Since the shelter of the bishop's house was not distinguished by the conveniences of the premises and hospitality, most of the pilgrims found refuge for themselves in the mentioned hospitable Athonite courtyards, sometimes using here such amenities that many of them could not boast of even at home, in their native village. Our pilgrims had the same comfortable shelter at the Athos Panteleimon Metochion in Constantinople, about which the late V.N. Khitrovo gives an enthusiastic review. “The Panteleimonovsky courtyard delighted me,” he wrote to M.P. Stepanov on November 21, 1884. – One thing I can say: God grant that at least something approximate would be arranged on our buildings in Jerusalem: clean, tidy, a lot of light and air. Although the Panteleimon Monastery is not included in the circle of activities of our Society, nevertheless, not only cannot we ignore it, but, on the contrary, we must support it and assist it with all our forces. Such a monastery in the Holy Land (if possible!) would be everything we could expect and desire. This is a Russian wedge, and also the only one driven in the East. Of course, not so much the monastery itself, but its representative, Fr. Archimandrite Macarius. Unfortunately, I couldn’t get to Mount Athos, so I had to settle for Fr. Paisius († 1906), his representative in Constantinople, known to everyone for more than 15 years. If there was such an agent in the Holy Land, we would be completely at peace.” Consequently, it was completely unnecessary for the Society to enter into competition with the already established and fully achieving its goal of receiving our pilgrims in Odessa and Constantinople. An exception in this regard, and quite by accident, was made only for Taganrog. In 1887, a member of the Society, A. I. Pogrebenko, brought to the attention of the Council of the Society that a certain V. A. Ishchenkova expressed her readiness to donate real estate belonging to her in the city of Taganrog to the benefit of the Society, but with the indispensable condition that a hospice for fans be built in it. Ishchenkova’s donation was accepted by the Society with gratitude, but since for the same purpose the Taganrog City Duma had already allocated site No. 6 near the steamship pier, it was decided to build on this last site and have two rooms under the hospice, one for V.A. Ishchenkova, and the other for the manager Pogrebenko. At the same time, the Society assumed the lifelong maintenance and burial of Ishchenkova, assigning income from the property of Mrs. Ishchenkova, who was elected as a full member, for this purpose. Supervision of the construction of the hospice and drawing up plans for it free of charge, under the leadership and close participation of the Taganrog authorized representative of the Society I. I. Tchaikovsky, was taken over by S. I. Gushchin, and the famous marine painter I. K. Aivazovsky brought as a gift for the hospice the image of the Savior walking on the waters (2 ½ are. height and 1 ½ width), for which an icon case was built for 250 p. A certain T.K. Volgina donated to the same orphanage icons of the Savior and the Mother of God (1 ¾ x 1), a gospel, a cross and a censer for the hospice chapel. The Council of the Society allowed to supply the chapel with a circle of liturgical books and to make an additional frame for the icon of the Savior. The Society spent very significant amounts of money on setting up a shelter for 40 pilgrims in Taganrog and renovating the house of V. A. Ishchenkova, and only by 1890 could it be brought into a more or less satisfactory state, but even after this time, the Taganrog shelter often attracted the attention of the Council of the Society and required new and sometimes significant funds. Given the presence in Odessa of well-maintained Athos farmsteads, in which, as noted above, pilgrims found all the necessary amenities for a temporary stay, the Society’s attention should therefore have been directed to other aspects of pilgrimage life. So, for example, at the request of the pilgrims, before boarding them on ships for departure to Palestine, it was established to first serve in the seaside church of St. Nicholas the Wonderworker, and since 1884 in the Assumption Church, closest to the courtyards of the Athos monasteries, a farewell prayer with a payment of 3 rubles to those who perform it. every time, and in total up to 156 rubles. per year. Then the Odessa Commissioner Fr. Archpriest A. N. Kudryavtsev was instructed to compose a “parting word” and distribute it by printing among pilgrims. This word spoke about the purpose of the pilgrimage, the decorous pastime on the way to the Holy Land and during the entire stay there. To give literate pilgrims the opportunity to get acquainted with the shrines of the Orthodox East, where they were heading. The society opened the competition in 1883. to compile a “Guide to the Holy Land for Orthodox commoners and pilgrims” and entrusted its compilation to the famous spiritual writer Archpriest V. Ya. Mikhailovsky. 179 Wanting to make it quite affordable for every pilgrim and to reduce its costs of printing it, the Society procured 1000 rubles. for its publication from the Palestinian Commission. Fearing the development of idleness among our pilgrims in the Holy City and various kinds of vices associated with it, which are harmful to morality, the Society wished to encourage them to read religious and moral books in their free time from worship and visiting. For this purpose, with the assistance of Fr. Archimandrite Antonin, it decided to set up a warehouse of books of spiritual and moral content at the mission and organize their sale. In 1882, 1,222 books of various contents, worth 152 rubles, were sent to Palestine. 50 k. The demand for these books turned out to be very significant and, according to the Society’s report for the first year of its existence, books worth 90 rubles were sold. In 1883 this good deed was slowed down by the death of monk Joseph, the guide of pilgrims, to whom Fr. arch. Antonin and the sale of books, but then it picked up again and continued quite successfully for some time. In 1884, the Society sent 2 copies to Jerusalem. Chetiy-Minea "for reading by pilgrims in the men's and women's departments of the hospice house." At the opening of the Society, it was assumed that the urgent urgent need for the addition of second floors above the pilgrimage shelters, well recognized by the Commission, would be resolved in a positive sense and, moreover, in a very short time, but time passed, and the urgent need remained unsatisfied. With the opening of the Society and the reduction in the cost of travel to the Holy Land, the number of pilgrims increased very significantly, and at the same time the need to expand our shelters in Jerusalem became even more urgent, which not only turned out to be impossibly overcrowded, but, what is most sad of all, we had to refuse accommodation to many of our pilgrims. The Palestine Volens Nolens Society had to retreat from its original intention: “to begin its concern for pilgrims where the concern of the Commission ends” and take into its still fragile hands this difficult and even unbearable task for itself at that time, with its extremely limited financial resources. In order to “comprehensively become familiar with the needs and life of Holy Sepulcher pilgrims,” in January 1883 the Society sent the famous traveler Dr. A.V. Eliseev to Palestine, giving him the order to “make the journey in the company of admirers and live their lives on the spot” as a “simple pilgrim.” The fruit of this business trip was A.V. Eliseev’s detailed report on the trip, read at a meeting of the Society on October 18, 1883, and then his wonderful, detailed book “With Russian Pilgrims in the Holy Land in the Spring of 1883,” which at one time had outstanding success among readers and has not lost interest to this day. At the meeting of the Council on February 9, 1884, undoubtedly, under the influence of the said report of Dr. Eliseev, at the proposal of Vice-Chairman F.P. Kornilov, it was decided on the issue of expanding our hospitality institutions for the Society to take the initiative. “Without having in mind that the Palestine Commission should begin at its own expense to eliminate the unfavorable conditions (their insufficient space and unfavorable hygienic conditions, due to the lack of baths, latrines and sewers) of the existing strange houses, the Palestine Society wrote to the Commission on February 12, 1884, either by expanding them and introducing the necessary devices into them or by constructing new houses, the Council The Orthodox Palestine Society decided to offer its assistance to the Palestinian Commission by allocating funds for this subject in the amount of up to 50 thousand rubles, on one of the following two conditions, at the discretion of the Commission: 1) Or transfer this capital to the Commission on loan with an annual payment of 6% and repayment within ten years. 2) Or our Society will take over the production of the necessary buildings and fixtures on a site owned by the Russians, but on the condition that guesthouses, both those that will be built again and others existing on this site, be transferred to the economic management of the Society.” This proposal, submitted to the conclusion of B.P. Mansurov, was rejected by the Palestinian Commission on the following grounds. “The Palestine Commission,” says the response to the Society dated May 27, 1884, constantly bearing in mind the needs now indicated by the Council of the Orthodox Palestine Society, would have long ago completed all the above-mentioned structures if their construction had only cost 50 thousand rubles, which the Commission could have produced from the amounts at its disposal; but since the expenses planned by the Council of the Society should cost about 200 thousand rubles, as can be seen from the letter of a member of the Palestine Commission, State Secretary B.P. Mansurov, to whom in 1860 the Highest was entrusted with the main supervision of all the buildings then being carried out at the currently existing hospitality institutions, then, since the 50 thousand rubles offered by the Orthodox Palestine Society for this subject are insufficient, the Palestinian The commission, according to the journal resolution of May 8, cannot accept this loan. As for the transfer of Russian hospitality institutions to the management of the Orthodox Palestine Society on any terms, the Palestinian Commission cannot even enter into a discussion of such a proposal by the Council of the Palestine Society. The existing hospitality establishments have been a government institution for more than 20 years, recognized as such by the Turkish government. As a result of this, the proposal of the Council of the Orthodox Palestine Society, set out in the second paragraph of the relationship dated February 22, No. 147, is in direct contradiction with the letter and meaning of all the Supremely inscribed constituent acts, on the basis of which the Palestinian Commission was formed under the Asian Department, namely: to examine all Russian institutions in Palestine.” Having suffered a complete failure in these good intentions and impulses to improve the accommodations for our pilgrims in Jerusalem, the Palestine Society found it “not useless to try another, cheaper way of accommodating them, namely in Kyrgyz felt tents. “If we are able,” says the Society’s report for 1885–1886, to put up to 100 such tents in the vast courtyard of Russian buildings, then we will provide space for a new 700 pilgrims; on average, they will all cost us approximately 20 thousand rubles with delivery, and annual repairs will cost no more than 4 thousand rubles. Maintaining people who know how to place and remove them, as well as monitor their serviceability, will cost up to 1200 rubles, and finally, the interest on the capital expended is 1000 rubles. The total annual expense will thus be up to 6,200 rubles; if you then take 1 ½ p. from pilgrims. per month, then you will see that all our annual expenses will be covered by 180. In 1885 in winter, it was decided to carry out an experiment with two tents donated to the Society (a gift from Prince Shakhovsky), but this experiment turned out to be completely unsuccessful, since the tents were recognized only as “a help for a short time for a strong influx of pilgrims, serving as premises for those of them who, due to their years and habits, can endure a more severe environment” 181. Thus, we had to again seriously think about arranging comfortable accommodation for our pilgrims and find funds for their construction. The successful resolution of this difficulty was facilitated by the palm tax authorized by the Holy Synod in 1886, which gave the Society a significant influx of funds, and the trip to Palestine at the beginning of 1886 for pilgrimage purposes by D. D. Smyshlyaev, the Perm authorized representative of the Society 182 . The august chairman, Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, entrusted D. D. Smyshlyaev with several assignments before leaving for Jerusalem, the execution of which was the moral responsibility of the Society. In 1885, fellow member A. N. Zhuravlev contributed 1,500 rubles to the Society. “for setting up a teahouse in Russian buildings in Jerusalem and 2000 rubles. for the “construction of a bathhouse and laundry”, full member priest S. Troitsky - for the establishment of the same teahouse 100 rubles. Since the Palestine Commission, to which the Society sent this donation, did not find it possible to immediately begin to fulfill the wishes of the donors, the Palestine Society has already taken the initiative in this good deed through its proxy. Having familiarized himself with the structure of teahouses in Russia, D. D. Smyshlyaev ordered a Novikov water-heating apparatus at the end of March 1886, and from the second of April, to the general joy of all pilgrims, the apparatus, placed near the cistern opposite the men's shelter on Russian buildings, began to produce from 300 to 400 buckets of boiling water per day. This apparatus was purchased at the expense of Mrs. Balikhina, who donated 650 rubles, and Soboleva, 150 rubles, and the former even wanted to provide capital and fuel costs for the said apparatus, which, by the way, required very little.” Jewish teahouses, which existed near our buildings and often served as a great temptation for people of weak will, found themselves without visitors and ceased to exist. Since, due to the lack of clean water, drains for dirty water and the lack of a suitable place to build a bathhouse and laundry on government buildings, the execution of the order regarding the Russian bathhouse was postponed for a while, D. D. Smyshlyaev entered into an agreement with the owner of the patriarchal baths near the Gethsemane gate, who found it possible to give the bathhouses for the use of Russian pilgrims twice a week for 40 centimes or 10 kopecks per person. The time for washing was scheduled from 5 a.m. to 5 p.m., and presumably between 500 and 600 people were supposed to wash during this time. The disembarkation of our pilgrims ashore in Jaffa was accompanied by outrageous extortion and blatant mockery from the local Arab boatmen against the naive simplicity and some timidity, due to the novelty of the position in an unfamiliar place, of our simple pilgrims. In order to save the latter from these difficult scenes of brazen robbery, through the agent of the Russian Shipping and Trade Society in Jaffa, V.N. Timofeev, D.D. Smyshlyaev, an agreement was reached so that the boatmen would charge each pilgrim a certain fee of 25 kopecks, and the van drivers, who previously transported luggage and pilgrims before the opening of the railway, would charge 1 ruble for the journey to Jerusalem. 75 kopecks. The Society then entered into negotiations with Mr. Timofeev on the inclusion of these fees in the cost of pilgrimage books, with a corresponding increase in the prices of these books. Postal communications with Jerusalem, which had long been subject to criticism and were accompanied, as we know, by material damage for our especially poor pilgrims, were settled significantly for the better in 1885. “The situation of the post office in Jerusalem, as Dr. Eliseev told us, is in disgraceful shape, and therefore even in Odessa,” wrote V.N. Khitrovo to M.P. Stepanov on November 21, 1884, “we had to pay attention to it. Frankly, my acquaintance with it led me to the sad realization that this part was even worse than I had imagined. It turns out that all money packages (contrary to the most basic concepts of postal principles) are not accepted by Russian society from the Odessa post office except by checking (by cutting the envelope) the cash and then the open package with money travels to Jerusalem. Obviously, this alone already gives rise to all possible abuses, not to mention the fact that postal secrecy, which should be inviolable, is violated in the most official way. Dear V.F. Kozhevnikov found nothing better than to imagine that the whole point was to have his own official in Jerusalem to distribute money letters, and then a bargaining (indecent, in my opinion) began between the consul and Russian society about the maintenance of this official: the first demands 120 Turkish liras, and the second gives 40 Napoleons. It seems to me that the point is not at all in more or less money, but in the order itself. The consul is responsible for his official and therefore, in the event of a complaint against him, of course, he tries to shield him, and thereby himself, while complaints against his official are brought by our pilgrims, in most cases illiterate, to the consul, who can immediately send him away. It is then clear how such complaints are brought, how they are sorted out and what results they give. In view of this, I insisted on two things: either that Russian society should have its own agent for distributing monetary correspondence in Jerusalem, or the need to have a special postal official there, dependent on the Odessa post office. On the first N.F. Fan der Fleet does not agree at all, saying that the Society has no right to have its agents outside the ports (sic), secondly, then it will have to have a postal official in Jerusalem, but this is a long story: firstly, negotiations with the postal department - this will still be arranged, but, secondly, negotiations with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs - this will be more difficult. In any case, this will have to be taken up immediately, upon returning to St. Petersburg, having collected more information about the same issue in Jaffa and Jerusalem, but this must be arranged.” In view of the described inconveniences, in the Council of the Society in October 1885 it was decided: to recommend that pilgrims address their monetary correspondence and parcels exclusively to St. Petersburg in the name of the Society, which, through its authorized representative in Odessa, Fr. Archpriest A.N. Kudryavtsev and will send them by mail addressed to D.D. Smyshlyaev in Jerusalem with the exact names of the addressees. The money addressed to Fr. Archpriest Kudryavtsev directly, in case the addressee was not found in Jerusalem, according to the resolution of the Council in 1886, were kept with him for one year, and then transferred for safekeeping to the Society. But the most important result of D. D. Smyshlyaev’s trip to Jerusalem should be recognized as the happy acquisition in his name in May 1886 of a plot of land of 100 square fathoms (mulk) adjacent to Russian buildings from the Turkish citizen Musa Soliman Tannus. V.N. Khitrovo enthusiastically welcomed such a valuable acquisition in Jerusalem in a letter dated May 15, 1886 to Arch. Leonid. “You can congratulate us, and including yourself, this letter says, landowners in Jerusalem, where we recently acquired a place near our Russian buildings. Now our hands are untied regarding pilgrims. We don’t need to constantly ask for permission for everything and also constantly receive refusals; what we will do will be decided with the arrival of Smyshlyaev, and now we are complete masters and are able to show what we want and what we are capable of.” D. D. Smyshlyaev, on the spot in Jerusalem, decided, with the help of the architect Frangia, to draw up a project for a new courtyard for 418 “fans” of ordinary people, a few wealthy ones, to house employees of the Society, an office, a dining room for 3rd class pilgrims, which could also be a hall for religious readings, a kitchen for 1000 people, a bathhouse, a bakery for baking during the season (from October to April) 10,500 pounds bread, hot water, laundry, cellars, three barns and stables. In the section for wealthy pilgrims it is proposed to arrange a dining room, a buffet and a living room, connecting them with the rooms with a covered gallery, for the common people - 9 chambers for 38–59 people with wooden sofas for two persons, and in the eastern building there are 14 rooms, for two persons each. 183 Three cisterns and a garden with a flower bed complete the planned project. The entire building, except for the 1st class dining room and services, is two-story. The cost of construction is set at 100,000 francs. With these projects, D. D. Smyshlyaev went to St. Petersburg in July and made a detailed report to the Society Council, which “found all the orders of D. D. expedient and in agreement with the assumptions of the Society,” expressed to him “deep and sincere gratitude” and asked “to accept the title of Commissioner of the Society in Jerusalem with an allowance of 600 francs per month and, in view of the expressed agreement, “to go again in the shortest possible time to Jerusalem to complete what he started.” As for the construction of the courtyard and the services attached to it, it was decided at a meeting on June 11, 1886, “to begin immediately, applying the plan drawn up by the architect Frangia, to the construction of the proposed” buildings, starting, first of all, with the economic part of them, and then for the accommodation of noble and ordinary pilgrims, as far as the funds allocated by the Society in the amount of up to 60,000 rubles allow.” Returning to Jerusalem on September 4. D. D. Smyshlyaev, upon receiving permission from the local authorities, began work on October 5 and on October 29 arranged the ceremonial laying of the new compound of the Society. Work continued non-stop until December 5, when the winter rains arrived. During this time, holes were dug for a large cistern and a cellar, a foundation was laid for the walls of the eastern building, a temporary building was built on Russian buildings for a water-heating apparatus, there was also a forge for making iron brackets for fastening stones during masonry and for other needs on Russian hospice buildings and in the northern fence wall of Russian buildings there was a gate to connect the Society’s site with our hospice establishments. After a second trip to Russia at the end of December 1886, when the construction estimate was increased to 278,710 francs, and upon returning to Jerusalem, work continued from March 1887 to January 1, 1888. During this time, a large cistern and a basement were completed under the southern building, a cistern for the bathhouse, laundry and watering of the garden was roughly completed, cesspools and latrines were built, basements for storing coal, the lower floor of the eastern building with a gate in the northeast and the lower floor of the eastern building was built, a 3rd class dining room was finished, floors were laid in the service room, in the lower floor of the room, originally intended for fans of the 1st class, and then converted for fans of the 3rd class, beams for the ceilings were laid, the construction of 2 barns with a clothes drying room was completed, a bathhouse and laundry were roughly completed, and on the eastern corner a tower with a staircase to the platform was built from white and pale pink stone, from which a magnificent view of the outskirts of Jerusalem opens. Thus, the most difficult and expensive work on the construction of the courtyard was completed. The difficulty of the work lay in the fact that the material for the buildings, for the sake of cheapness, was mostly purchased abroad: iron beams in Belgium, brick in Italy, window and door fittings in Marseille and Odessa. All furnishings for the farmstead were purchased in Trieste, where in 1888 the builder of the farmstead, D. D. Smyshlyaev, was specially sent. The proposed installation of sofa beds in 3rd category rooms, according to local prices, turned out to be “too expensive”, and the sofas were replaced with iron beds. Changes were also required in the building plan itself. In 1887, on May 27, D. D. Smyshlyaev asked for permission to build the second floors above the dining room, buffet and living room of the 1st category in order to build a library of works about Palestine, and D. D. donated both his library on Palestinian studies and the museum of Palestinian antiquities. Permission followed, and 380,000 francs were allocated for these changes. In 1888, work continued, but was still far from finished. V.N. Khitrovo, who visited Jerusalem this year, in a letter dated June 6, 1888, gives very comforting reviews about the metochion. The photographs that were constantly sent to the Society and clearly told its members about the growth of the structures being erected, in his words, “partly give an idea about it. I will say one thing: it is much better than the photographs. I regret one thing, that the Grand Duke will not see them completely finished. On the day of our departure to Nazareth, the first pilgrim, Countess Putyatina, fit into them, which I was extremely happy and pleased with.” In the new courtyard, D. D. Smyshlyaev set up a temporary canteen for the leaders of Palestinian schools who had gathered for the congress in Jerusalem, and then he himself moved here for permanent residence. But in general, work on the buildings proceeded slowly, due to a lack of hewn stone, some unfavorable atmospheric phenomena (lack of rain), and mainly due to frequent clashes and troubles with Consul D.N. Bukharov, which greatly interfered with the correct progress of the buildings. The completion of our buildings was supposed to be completed by the pilgrimage season of 1889. “I received your letter dated July 20,” wrote D. D. Smyshlyaev to M. P. Stepanov, - but I’ll calm down when Bukharov definitely leaves here for Stockholm, but while he’s here, a lot of bad things can still be expected from him. In general, I am very exhausted, and therefore I will just wait for the Grand Duke, and then I ask you to dismiss me from the post of authorized representative of the Society in Jerusalem, because I no longer have the strength to continue the fight against the enemies... I was sick, I forcibly wrote this letter. The consul did not order my servant to be allowed into government buildings even to collect my letters from the post office. I cannot continue to endure this situation and once again I ask you to dismiss me after the departure of the Grand Duke, i.e. in October.” And indeed, we know that, thanks to his nervous and impressionable character, which made his stay in Palestine unbearable, Dmitry Dmitrievich, upon completion of the buildings, left Jerusalem and on October 7, 1889 returned to his native Perm, where he died on November 15, 1893, mourned by his admirers who passionately loved the Holy Land. The very fact of his removal from Jerusalem was recognized by one of his constant admirers, V.N. Khitrovo, as a major loss for the Society. “Bukharov is here and whether he is going to Jerusalem, I don’t know,” he wrote to Arch. Leonid back on December 18, 1887 - Smyshlyaev is here, about whom I also cannot say whether he is returning to Jerusalem. This is a major loss for us. What will you do? I don’t undertake to replace him, nor can I abandon what I started in Jerusalem. It makes absolutely no difference to me whether Bukharov returns or not. I believe that, starting from Dorogobuzhinov and ending with Bukharov and through a long line of their heirs, they are all alike, and from all of them you will not get any benefit not only for us, but for the Russian cause in general... The Jerusalem commissioners are a different matter for us: you will send someone who will not clear up the mess later. With God’s help we will fight until we have enough strength.” The society, imbued with an ardent desire to resolve in every possible way the issue of guides from clergy and to promote, perhaps, the best and correct organization of moral and religious readings for the people, recognized in 1885 it was necessary to petition for strengthening the composition of the Russian spiritual mission in Jerusalem, since none of the existing members of the mission could be entrusted with these duties. It was supposed, by the way, to attract to Jerusalem those who had completed the course at the Kazan Theological Academy in the missionary department, so that the latter would begin their practical work in the Holy Land among our compatriots. “Increasing the spiritual mission for now by 2 supernumerary members, with their content from the Palestine Society and being under your exclusive subordination,” wrote M. P. Stepanov on February 5, 1887, Arch. Antonin, - was crowned with success. With your consent, priest Alexander Anisimov has been nominated for one of these places. It would be desirable to replace the second member as soon as possible. According to your assumption, the senior supernumerary member is assigned a salary of 1000 rubles per year. gold, second 750 rub. gold and 250 rub. on their travels. At the same time, I consider it my duty to express to you the wishes of His Imperial Highness, which stipulate such sacrifices on the part of the Society. Both supernumerary members should be primarily used for spiritual conversations and readings with pilgrims: they should accompany them to all shrines, or at least to the gates of the shrines. It should be strictly instilled in them that they should not touch or interfere with any monetary settlements, and even more so that, under pain of immediate dismissal, they should not dare to take money or any things from pilgrims for their benefit. Since they are in complete and direct subordination to you, permission for them to perform or not to perform demands will depend on you, but I consider it necessary to inform you that Fr. Alexander Anisimov was informed that he would not do the required thing. Since, I repeat, both supernumerary members serving to increase the mission are completely subordinate to you, the benefit that the Society expects from them will depend on your supportive assistance. The Society does not consider itself entitled to correspond directly with them or convey to them your wishes, and therefore hopes that you will direct them to fulfill the purpose for which they were sent. Their main duty is that during the pilgrimage period, from September 15 to Lazarus Saturday, every week, for 2 hours, in a certain place, they read sacred history for the people for one hour, the history of the first centuries of Christianity and the lives of saints, and for another hour a description of the Holy Land and other Eastern and Russian shrines. In any case, I have no doubt that you will use every effort to arrange this new business as best as possible and do not refuse, through your intercession, to make it easier for the supernumerary members during their first time in the Holy City.” Readings for pilgrims were organized by the Society in view of the fact that the evenings of fans, unoccupied with anything, are spent mostly in gossip and empty chatter. Giving them some kind of mental food for these particular hours was more than desirable. In addition, these readings could partly impart to the fans a knowledge of sacred and church history that few of them had ever heard. The readings were illustrated, with the aid of a magic lantern, by misty pictures, a collection of which, over 700, was acquired by the Society for this purpose. The Society’s demands from these readings were quite modest: “if even one out of a thousand fans takes away something useful from what they hear, then this will pay off the work and expenses of these readings.” Unfortunately, the late Fr. looked at this matter differently. arch. Antonin, to whom Fr. Anisimov did not like going to Jerusalem as a supernumerary member of the mission. Fr. Antonin refused him room within the mission and, thanks only to the efforts of D. D. Smyshlyaev, Fr. Anisimov found shelter in the new compound of the Palestine Society. Apparently, he did not fully sympathize with Fr. Archimandrite and readings by Fr. Anisimov and his performance as a guide for pilgrims. “Performances with a magic lantern with explanations and readings,” says Fr. Anisimova architect. Antonin in a letter to V.N. on January 20, 1888, - they are going well 184. O. Anisimov diligently leads fans (as one would expect), but he came under criticism for persuading them in the classic way: “not to give the Greeks money.” For these works, Fr. Anisimov, at the request of the Society, was awarded a pectoral cross by the Holy Synod. This award, undeserved, in the opinion of Fr. Archimandrite Antonin, Fr. Anisimov, further aroused the latter’s dislike for his supernumerary member, in whose place Fr. arch. Antonin preferably wanted to see either a fan of Fr. Hierodeacon Terenty, “a living, active fellow, who has already led (at Bukharov’s invitation) fans around St. places, scolded by the patriarch for this... and even suffered a ban from the priesthood” 185, or although the venerable and hardworking Fr. hieromonk (now abbot) Parthenius, much loved by the late Fr. Antonin, but completely unsuitable for this duty due to his education. Dislike of Fr. the head of the mission, troubles with the Patriarchate and the Greek clergy, and perhaps “unpreparedness” for the difficult and difficult responsibility of a spiritual leader for a man not in his first youth, prompted this “best” reader to leave Jerusalem. “Unfortunately, with all its efforts,” the report of 1888–1890 says regarding the readings in Palestine and the guidance of pilgrims, the Society has still not been able to attract a good reader from among the clergy to the work.” O. Anisimov was replaced in 1889–90. monk Theodosius, and in his place the hieromonk of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra, Fr. Michael with the right to live in the new courtyard and with the obligation to conduct religious and moral readings, but with exemption from leading pilgrims according to St. places. “As for driving fans,” wrote Arch. Antonin M.P. Stepanov July 19, 1890, - then with the currently existing order thereof, the presence of a clergyman in this case is nothing more than a humiliation for this latter, therefore, we would consider, until the organization of this matter, to completely refrain from appointing a clergyman when driving fans, being content for the time being with the control of secular persons,” i.e., cavas in the service of the Society. Fr. Mikhail, however, did not stay long in Jerusalem and in January 1891 transferred the duties of the leader of the conversations to the same Fr. Theodosius, whom he was called to replace... The Society did not even overlook such needs of the daily life of pilgrims as the confiscation of items purchased by them in Palestine (for example, icons, paintings, drawings, etc.) by the Odessa customs administration. The society petitioned the Minister of Finance “to soften the inspection” of the luggage of our pilgrims upon their return to their homeland. The Book of My Genesis, vol. I, p. 128. Sib. 1894 A detailed description of the activities of the architect. Porfiry in Palestine, see our essay entitled: “Bishop Porfiry Uspensky, as the initiator and organizer of the first Russian spiritual mission” in Jerusalem and his services for the benefit of Orthodoxy and in the study of the Christian East” (On the occasion of the centenary of his birth). St. Petersburg 1906 Published. Imp. Right Palest. Society. Archive of the Holy Synod in the office of the Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod for 1857 No. 373. Mission report for 1858. Case of the Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod for 1858, No. 389. Mission report for 1859. Chancery file. Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod. This society, following the example of the Russian-American Company, was placed under the Highest patronage of His Imperial Majesty. Some paragraphs of the charter of this Society, which has existed for 50 years, are quite interesting: § 16. “In order to encourage and support the methods of such an extensive enterprise, still the first in our fatherland, the government makes to the Society, from the day of the opening of its operations, for 20 years, a per-mile payment in the following amount: in the first ten years for each mile traveled by the Society’s steamship vessels along the lines of communication below: between Odessa, Constantinople, Athos, Smyrna, Rhodes, Beirut, Jaffa and Alexandria - 3 rubles each. 22k... During the second ten years, this fee is reduced annually by 5% from the indicated figures, so that in the last, i.e., the 20th year, it will be only 50% of the original amount. After the expiration of the 20-year period, the Company is given the opportunity to ask the Government for its continued existence on the same or other grounds...” § 18. “In addition to the above-mentioned per-mile payment, the government issues 64 thousand rubles for the necessary repairs of steamships for 20 years from the date of opening of the Company... § 23. The Company's fixed capital is 6,000,000 rubles, divided into 20,000 shares of 300 rubles each. each. § 24. To encourage the Company and speed up the opening of its activities, the government takes 6,670 shares for a total of 2,000,100 silver, of which one half is contributed immediately upon approval of this charter, and the other after a year. At the same time, in order to provide the Company with greater benefits, the government cedes in favor of it the entire dividend that will be due on the said shares during the first five years from the foundation of the Company.” Morsk. Collection 1856 No. 12, Oct., pp. 60–65. V. P. Mansurov. Orthodox Worshipers in Palestine, pp. 2–3. St. Petersburg 1853 Memoirs of a devotee of the Holy Sepulchre. Rk. bib. Imperial Right Pal. Society. Part II, l. 37–38. The Grand Duke sent this report to Arch. Porfiry Uspensky with a request to “read and communicate to him with complete frankness your thoughts on all the subjects contained in it, as well as indications of the measures that our government should take now, in order, as much as possible, to make it easier for Orthodox Russians to fulfill the pious feat and in order to arouse in a larger number of people the desire to venerate the shrines of the Lord.” Arch. Porfiry fulfilled the wish of the Grand Duke and sent his “response to recent news from Zion” to the Grand Duke through Mansurov on January 6, 1858 (Book of My Genesis, part VII, pp. 144–145. St. Petersburg, 1901). In the Monthly Book of 1864, a donation from the Sovereign is listed as only 100,000 rubles, but in the journal, or rather in the appendix to the journal of the Palestine Commission dated May 8, 1884, written by the hand of V.P. Mansurov, the above large figure of the Highest Gift is called. This donation was caused by an appeal from Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich through a special letter from Palermo on February 2. (March 8) 1859 to A. M. Knyazhevich. “I know too well the current predicament of the State Treasury, this letter says, therefore, my intention cannot bother the Sovereign Emperor with such a petition, the satisfaction of which would be a burden for the treasury, but the work undertaken in the East can bring such abundant and good results for our church and for our political influence that, without any doubt, it is more than beneficial for the government not to refuse for this some insignificant donation, with which the whole charitable work was outlined at once to the glory and benefit of our fatherland.” The letter concludes with a request to “pay warm and cordial attention to this subject” and “to help fulfill the Christian desire of His Imperial Majesty.” Palestine Commission Affairs 1884, No. 44. V. N. Khitrovo. A week in Palestine, St. Petersburg, 1876, p.62. “We have appointed the day September 20,” writes Consul Dorogobuzhinov in a report dated September 28, 1858 addressed to the ambassador in Constantinople, Privy Councilor Butenev, “to raise the flag of the Russian consulate, unprecedented in Palestine. After the mass celebrated at Golgotha by the Most Rev. Kirill, Bishop of Melitopol at 10½ o’clock in the morning, several the compatriots who were here gathered with me, and his Eminence began to perform a prayer service, at the end of which at 11 o’clock the flag rose with the joyful cries of the people who filled the street and terraces of my house. In an instant, the foreign consulates flowered with their flags, and 21 shots from the Turkish fortress echoed sympathetically in our hearts. The French consul again appeared in full form to express with his congratulations the sincerity of the relations between both of us. governments." Report on measures taken to improve everyday life rights. pilgrims in Palestine, pp. 57–65. St. Petersburg 1860 B.P. Mansurov. Basilica imp. Constantine in the Holy City of Jerusalem. M. 1885, pp. 2–29. Prot. F. P. Titov, Ave. Kirill Naumov, Bishop of Melitopol, pp. 400–402, Kyiv, 1902 Case according to the Chancellor, Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod of 1858 No. 889. Arch. Savva. Collection opinions and reviews of Metropolitan. Philaret for Rights Affairs. churches in the East, p. 378. St. Petersburg. 1886. St. Petersburg Vedomosti, 1859, No. 180. Here, day after day, the stay in Jerusalem of Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich and his wife is described in detail. The lands acquired by the Palestinian Committee in Jerusalem fall into several areas: 1) The old farmstead, consisting of: 1) a plot of land sold on June 16, 1857 by Antonin Lanzo to Count N.A. Kushelev-Bezborodko; 2) from a plot sold on March 31, 1859 by Ermeta Pierotti to the Imperial Consul Vladimir Dorogobuzhinov; 3) from the plot sold on September 4, 1859 by Haji Musa Tanus to the Imperial Government; 4) from a plot sold on December 29, 1859 by the banker Bergheim to the Imperial Consul Vladimir Dorogobuzhinov and 5) from a plot sold to him on October 3, 1860 by the monk Nikifor. These plots are also joined by the plot donated to the Imperial Government by the Turkish government. 2) In the north-eastern corner of Jerusalem, a plot was purchased in September 1857 from Seid-Magomed ben-Asi through the Greek monk Vissarion by consul V. Dorogobuzhinov. 3) At the new gates of Jerusalem there are two plots purchased from Jebral-Gargur by the former dragoman of the consulate M. Shehashiri. 4) At the Damascus Gate: 1) plot purchased in March 1859. from Jebral-Gargur in the name of b. dragoman M. Shekhashiri and 2) at Yuseyav Gainem on December 4, 1859 by consul V. Dorogobuzhinov. 5) On the mountain called “Little Galilee”, a plot of land sold by Yegor Khalebi to the head of the mission, Bishop Kirill of Melitopol. 6) Near the Mamilla pond, a plot was sold on June 31, 1857 by Kablan-Dakhdey to Count N.A. Kushelev-Bezborodko. 7) In Ann-Karim, a plot sold on September 3, 1859 by Jebral-Gargur to the dragoman of the consulate M. Shekhashiri. 8) In Nazareth purchased: 1) a large plot in the name of the consular agent S. Khoury and 2) a smaller plot from Khalil-Hakim in the name of the former consular agent in Kayf K. Averino. 9) In Kaifa, a plot of land acquired on June 4, 1864 from Ilya Abud and Ode Hamar through the city of Averino in the name of the Imperial Consul. 10) In Turan, a plot of land acquired in the name of S. Khuri. According to the inventory of the Consul General in Jerusalem A.G. Yakovlev dated June 7, 1897, the entire plot of land now occupied by our charitable institutions and bearing the name Muscovy, according to the plan, contains 71,687 square meters. meters and costs approximately 3,953,000 francs. The buildings located on this site belong to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Holy Synod and the Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society. Place "Khamsi" or "Meres-ul-Asali" in 3,436 sq. meters, valued at 176,000 francs, is occupied by a house for the offices of the secretary, full-time and non-staff dragomans of the Consulate General. The place is administered by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Report on measures taken to improve Russian life. Orthodox Worshipers in Palestine, pp. 53–57; Monthly Academician Ed. For 1863, p. 53. Monthly Academician ed. for 1863, pp. 64–65; for 1864 p.3 (appendix). B.P. Mansurov. Basilica imp. Constantine in the Holy City of Jerusalem, page 29. Report on measures taken to improve the life of Russian Orthodox worshipers in Palestine, pp. 50–51. Bishop's handwritten letters. Kirill was brought to his family by Prof. Archpriest F. II. Titov, to whom we offer deep gratitude for them. Prot. Titov.. Ave. Kirill Naumov, Bishop of Melitopol, former rector of the Russian spirit. missions in Jerusalem, pp. 416–418. Cases of the Palestine Commission 1884 No. 44 l. 74. Sn. The case of the arch. Holy Synod 1859 No. 4214. Report on measures taken to improve the everyday life of rights. Russian pilgrims in Palstine, pp. 67–68 and explanations of the detailed plans of the buildings pleasing to God in the appendix. Monthly book for 1863, ed. Academician Sciences, pp. 62–63 app. Ibid., 1864, p.2 appendix. Academician Monthly book for 1864, pp. 3–5. App. B. P. Mansurov. Basilica Imp. Constantine in the Holy City of Jerusalem, pp. 22–23. Our place near the Church of the Resurrection consists of: 1) a plot of land acquired by consul V.I. Dorogobuzhinov on September 3, 1859 from the Coptic priest George and his brother Rizk, sons of Thomas; 2) from a plot acquired by consul V.I. Dorogobuzhinov on September 26, 1859 from Mohammed-ali-Khazhdi, 3) from a plot purchased from Metropolitan Meletius of Petra-Arabia on June 5, 1861 by the imperial consul K.A. Sokolov and the head of the mission, Bishop Kirill of Melitopol, and 4) from a plot sold on December 1 1861 by the same metropolitan to Bishop Kirill. B. Mansurov: Imperial Basilica. Constantine in the Holy City of Jerusalem, pp. 25, 26, 29, 33. Report on measures taken to improve Russian life. right pilgrims to Palestine, p. 69. The case of the arch. Holy Synod 1857 No. 4214. Archive of the Holy Synod for the Office of the Chief Prosecutor 1863 No. 160. Arch. Savva. Assembled. Opinions and reviews of M. Philaret on matters of rights. churches in the East, p. 401. A detailed biographical sketch of the life and work of the architect. Leonid Kavelin in the Orthodox East - in Jerusalem and Constantinople, compiled by us on the basis of unpublished documentary data, is to be published especially in the near future. The original instructions are kept in the files of the Holy Synod and our mission in Jerusalem. Copies of them are available in the papers of the Imperial Chancellery. Right Societies in the case of the architect. Leonida Kavelin. From a letter from the arch. Leonid to V.N. Khitrovo dated April 9, 1879. In a report to the Holy Synod in 1865 “about the incidents that happened in the Jerusalem spiritual mission since the return of the consul” and in a letter to Metropolitan Philaret dated August 20, 1866, a conversation with B.P. Mansurov is conveyed as follows: “I see that things will only go well in Jerusalem when in your place there is pawn". (Case of the architect of the Holy Synod of 1865, No. 3156; Christ. Reading, 1900, part I, p. 226). The case of the arch. Holy Synod 1865 No. 3156. Palestine Commission Cases 1864 No. 80 (original). It is worthy of attention that the certificate in 1872, during the consecration of the cathedral in the name of the Holy Life-Giving Trinity, showed the expenditure of 1864 at 14,630 pisatres or 731 ½ rubles. (Palestine Affairs. Commissions 1872 No. 28, l. 213–216). For more details, see my essay “Head of the Russian spiritual mission in Jerusalem, Arch. Antonin (Kapustin), as an activist for the benefit of Orthodoxy in the East and in particular in Palestine.” St. Petersburg 1904. Arch. Savva. Collection of opinions and reviews, m. Philaret affairs pr. ts. in the East, p. 440. Citizen 1874 No. 51, p. 1291. Church Vestn. 1885 No. 4, p. 239. Church News. 1881 No. 9, p. 6. The last donation of the “incomparable Empress,” as Fr. Archimandrite Empress Maria Alexandrovna, consisted in 1881 of 161 pounds sterling, 5 shillings and 10 pence (letter from Arch. Antonin to V.N. Khitrovo dated March 26, 1881 From a letter from the arch. Antonina to V.N. Khitrovo dated January 23, 1879 Affairs of the Palestine Commission, 1884, fol. 81st. Ibid. 1865 No. 4. l. 181–182. Most of the money is counted in Turkish piastres or churyuks, counting 20 piastres in our ruble. (See Cases of the P-skaya K-siya 1871 No. 15, l. 207–218). Cases of the Palostine Commission 1872, No. 23, l. 213–216. Cases of the Palestine Commission 1884 No. 44, l. 81–82. Ibid. 1869 No. 67 (original). Cases of the P-Commission. I884. No. 12. Ibid., 1883, No. 17, l. 20–22. Ibid., 1883, No. 43, l. 1–3. Ibid., 1883, No. 17, l. 20–22. Palestine Commission Affairs 1886, No. 42. Cases of the Palestine Commission 1884, fol. 80. Ibid., 1867 No. 11, l. 353–355, 361; 1868 No. 12, l. 121–124. Cases of the P-skaya K-ssia 1884 No. 44, l. 80. Sn. A. V. Eliseeva. With Russian pilgrims in the Holy Land in the spring of 1884, pp. 158–159. Cases of the Palestine Commission 1883 - 1889 No. 17, l. 3–6. 31–33. Ibid. 1869 No. 13, l. 231–233. Sn. Message Imperial Right Palest. General vol. XI. pp. 320–324. The city water supply, however, did not last long and deteriorated. In 1874 it was repaired, but after 11 years it fell into disrepair again and since then no attempts have been made to restore it. Palestinian affairs. Commissions 1870, No. 16. Ibid. 1884, No. 44, l. 85. Ibid. 1869, No. 58 (original). Cases of the Palestine Commission 1884, no. 35, l. 6–11. Right Palest. Collection, cent. 3 and 9, pp. 4–5, St. Petersburg. 1885. Cases of the Palestine Commission 1884, fol. 14–15. Ibid. 1863, No. 24, l 78–79, 18, 86. Cases of the Palestine Commission 1887, No. 35. L. 16–17 Letters from Countess O. E. Putyatina to V. N. Khitrovo dated March 8 and April 5, 1888 A. Eliseev. With Russian pilgrims in the Holy Land in the spring of 1884, pp. 184–195. Affairs Palest. Commission 1884 No. 39. This letter is kept in copy in the Imperial library. Right Palest. Society. Affairs of the Palestine Commission 1885 Right there. 1884, No. 35, l. 1–3. Palestine Commission Affairs, 1881, No. 24 (outcome). Cases of the Palestine Commission 1884, No. 36, l. 1‒10. Report 1857, l. 149‒150. Affairs Palest. Commissions 1880, No. 62, l. 109‒110. Affairs Palest. Commissions 1880, No. 62, l. 109‒195. The Book of My Genesis, Part III. 449. St. Petersburg, 1896. C. pp. 451‒452. Almost something similar was said about the resources of the future Society by one of the main figures of the subsequent Palestinian Committee and the Palestinian Commission, B. P. Mansurov. “If each of the 50,000,000 Orthodox Christians,” he says, “brings even one kopeck for the benefit of a common, sacred and good cause, then from such an insignificant alms the amount of 500,000 rubles, i.e., 2 million francs, will be poured out annually, and if everyone donates two kopecks annually, then from here the sum of a million rubles or 4 million francs will be added annually, i.e. that is, the amount of donations that the West is now bringing, after so many efforts to reach these sizes. Let everyone calculate how many people there are in Russia for whom donating one ruble a year to a holy cause is a completely unnoticeable expense, and yet each of these donors will replace a hundred or fifty poor or careless people, for one cannot help but realize that there will be many such people.” (B.P. Mansurov. Orthodox fans in Palestine, pp. 105‒106). In the draft copy of the charter, the Palestine Society was called by this name. The Book of My Genesis, part VII, 71. St. Petersburg. 1901; n. Part III, 449, 451‒452. V. N. Khitrovo. A week in Palestine. From travel impressions, pp. 3–4. St. Petersburg, 1876 Work on public credit distracted V.N. even from the thought of the Polestinki Society. “My goal,” wrote V.K. Arch. Leonid - still the same Russian Orthodox people. His financial situation is hopelessly bad. With God's help, after 7 years of work, it was possible that at least 200 thousand exclusively peasants, thanks to the established savings and loan partnerships, can save from 2 to 3 million rubles. per year. This is a drop in the ocean for our 80 million, but it is still the first step. Now I was busy with another issue - giving the peasants the means to acquire land. So far, things are going quite well, but only God knows whether it will be possible to carry it through to the end.” (From a letter from V.P. Khitrovo to Arch. Leonid, December 12, 1878). “I sincerely express my gratitude for the project you delivered,” wrote Count E.V. Putyatin on December 15, 1879, without knowing the name, patronymic and rank of V.N. Khitrovo, “I find it in its overall composition very satisfactory, I only dare to believe that it would be more expedient to rearrange the main articles that seem to me forward before the less important ones, and would very much like to meet with you somewhere for more detailed explanations. The fact that my wife has smallpox prevents me from visiting friends in their houses and also receiving them at my place. This circumstance also deprives me of the opportunity to introduce myself to the Heir, and I propose to convey all explanations with him to K.P. Pobedonostsev with a request to petition for the retention of the mission in Jerusalem, for the transfer of the sums collected from churches to the patriarch by the head of the mission, and not by the consul, which hitherto served as the main reason for intrigue and for reducing the proper weight of our clergy in the eyes of the Greeks.” On March 14, 1880, Count Putyatin, who had already met V. personally. N., wrote the following to him: “By forwarding to Your Excellency the note sent to me by Archimandrite Antonin, I do this for your acquaintance with it, and not for the initiation of an already completed case. In his letter to Fr. The archimandrite asks me, if a possible opportunity arises, to transfer it to the Sovereign Heir and the Sovereign Emperor Himself, which, after a second review of the case, could most likely serve to his detriment. Before his departure, Mr. Kogeviikov visited me and insistently insisted that he would try to live in peace with the archimandrite, and not contradict him, as his predecessor did. I also saw our Constantinople ambassador, Mr. Novikov, while passing through St. Petersburg, who promised to provide his patronage to Fr. Antonin. Taking the entire course of the matter, it cannot be denied that it worked out much better than could have been expected, although the completely desirable was not achieved. The other day I saw K.P. Pobedonostsev; he repeated to me that if something doesn’t interfere again, the Sovereign Heir will call me to him. Of course, I will not talk to him about a matter that has already been resolved, but if the opportunity arises, I will try to explain the project for the formation of a Society to maintain Orthodoxy in the Holy Land under His or the Empress Tsesarevna’s patronage. With your ability and diligence to implement such a project, with the help of God, it can put an obstacle to the success of foreign propaganda.” Welcoming the opening of the Society, Count Putyatin wrote on August 30, 1882: “The day you chose, May 21, could not be better suited for the opening of the first actions of the Society, and the Lord will help Russia to do all possible good, no less than other states, in favor of the oppressed Orthodox Arab population of Palestine.” We find it necessary to cite here in full one letter from Golovnin, written at the beginning of 1880 to V.N. Khitrovo and closely related to the establishment of the Society: “Count Putyatin gave me your note on the establishment of the Palestine Society. I expressed to him and B.P. Mansurov my fullest sympathy for your wonderful thought. There is no doubt that viribus unity can be achieved much more than separately, even without knowing each other. Society will immediately bring together people who have the same views, the same direction. In my answer to Evfim Vasilyevich, I added that, in my opinion, he rightfully belongs to the title of chairman in such a Society and representative before the government. “Actually, I allow myself to convey the following thoughts to you: Count Putyatin should, on behalf of many, ask the government for permission to establish the Society and present a draft charter. Persons of the Imperial family can be elected as honorary members, but not as chairmen, because the Ministry of Foreign Affairs will oppose this. Persons whose sympathy you can be sure of and who were present and could be the founders: Count E.V. Putyatin, B.P. Mansurov, P.P. Melnikov, N.V. Isakov, V.I. Dorogobuzhinov, K.P. Pobedonostsev, N.P. Stoyanovsky (both, it seems, were not in Palestine), Archimandrite Leonid Kavelin, Hieromonk Vitaly (Juvenaliy) Polovtsev and the main figure, organizer of everything V.N. Khitrovo. You can be sure of the sympathy and assistance of the Heir, the Grand Dukes Konstantin Nikolaevich, Nikolai Nikolaevich, in whose palace you, of course, know the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, and Alexandra Iosifovna. The last one was in Jerusalem. The enemies and opponents of the cause will not be people, but apathy, indifference, laziness, and contempt for religious beliefs. The energy of Vasily Nikolaevich must overcome these elemental forces, Your Golovnin.” According to a letter to the arch. Antonin on January 16, 1880, V.N. Khitrovo received a special invitation from the Grand Duke to come to him and “in an almost hour-long conversation” he learned from the latter “essentially two things, that no one knows this matter better than Mansurov, and then displeasure appeared against Putyatin, who if he gets something into his head, you won’t budge him.” From a letter from V.N. Khitrovo to architect. Leonid May 5, 1880 “We left Moscow,” wrote V.N. Arch. Leonid on February 15, 1881 - in early October through Kyiv, Constantinople, Alexandria and Jaffa and prayed already on October 22 at the Holy Sepulcher. The move, despite the late hour, was carried out by sea so safely that all the time we could very calmly not only read, but also write in the cabin, and this is a lot to say... You can imagine, knowing my long-standing aspirations, how I felt when I saw Jaffa, the shore of the Holy Land and the Judean mountains in the distance at the dawn of a beautiful day. Jaffa has changed a little, except that all the walls are hidden and in their place stretches something like a European boulevard. There are no more horses or donkeys to move. You are going to the Holy City in a spring carriage, something like a charabanc. The Germans started this. In Latrun there was a hotel called “Maccabees”, in view of El-Ali, where there was, remember, a small coffee shop in the fresh air - the hotel of the “Jewish monks”, maintained by a Jew. The road is decent everywhere, highway. Following the example of previous fans, when we climbed the last mountain, I kept preparing my wife and told him that now we would see Russian buildings, the walls of Jerusalem, and behind them the dome of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher. They got up, got off the carriage, and I couldn’t believe my eyes: I couldn’t find either one, or the other, or the third. Some buildings unfamiliar to me stretched left and right. Subsequently everything was explained. Three versts beyond the Jaffa gate, where there used to be vacant lots and here and there gardens, is now a whole suburb with wide streets and a continuous row of houses. The majority belongs to Jews, whose emigration to the Holy City is enormous. Almost the same thing you see in front of the Jaffa gate in front of the Damascus gate. Between them, the tomb of the kings and the Russian buildings, there is also an almost continuous mass of buildings. None of the gates of Jerusalem are now locked at night or on Fridays. The Church of the Holy Sepulcher itself is open from dawn to 10 o'clock in the afternoon and from 2 to dusk. Jerusalem is not the only place where such changes have occurred. The surrounding area is also being settled. On the Mount of Olives there are large Catholic and our Russian buildings. In Bethlehem we drive between almost continuous rows of stone fences. After spending a week in Jerusalem, we went as usual on horseback through Beitin, Nablus, Samaria, Nazareth, Tabor to Tiberias. From here via Kafr Kenna, Sefuria to Kaifa and Carmel. From Carmel along the seashore to Kessari, from here we turned to Lydda, and from Lydda along the ancient Roman route through Qubeibe and Nebi-Samvil to Jerusalem. This entire journey took 16 days. The weather was excellent all the time, and in Tiberias in early November it even reached 24º at night. After resting a little in Jerusalem, we also went to Gornaya, Beit Jala and Bethlehem. This ended our travels around the area. We did not go to the Jordan, to the Lavra of St. Sava and to Hebron, the weather was deteriorating, but I still wanted to see Jerusalem and talk with those living in it. On November 24 we left Jerusalem. A Palestinian downpour followed us to Jaffa, and from Jaffa to Port Said we ran into a storm. Instead of taking 16 hours to move, we did it in 42 hours and were glad, glad when we got to Port Said. From here, through Cairo, Alexandria, where the sea was again favorable to us, we reached Naples, from where on December 19 we found ourselves in St. Petersburg. Letter from V.N. Khitrovo architect. Antonin dated January 12, 1881 This novel bears the following title: “Pace Pasha and his consorts. Mosaics, cameos and miniatures from curious excavations in the slums of the Holy Land." St. Petersburg. 1881. Its author calls himself Yu. Dobrynin, but this is undoubtedly a pseudonym under which he hid his real name. Arch. Antonin considered the author of the novel to be the Jerusalem consul Illarionov and an admirer of Chernyshev, but these are only guesses and assumptions about. Archimandrite Antonin, factually unproven. In this novel, the bright personality of the head of the mission, Arch. Antonin and his activities in Palestine in favor of maintaining Orthodoxy and in the interests of our pilgrims are portrayed not only from a negative side, but also by the most unscrupulous selection of facts from his intimate private life, in order to discredit Fr. Archimandrite in the eyes of Russia and Russian readers. The title was given to this novel because the late Fr. arch. Antonin had the habit, when combing the strands of his long gray hair on his head, to place them in front like Jewish sidelocks (hence: Pace Pasha), the resemblance to which was especially striking when the archimandrite was seen in an ordinary home environment or in his study, when he covered his head with a skufa. Letter from V.N. Khitrovo to architect. Antonin Jan 1 1881 Letter dated January 1, 1881 “The book,” admitted Fr. Antonin., deeply outraged the quiet and bright flow of my life, which people who dealt with me were repeatedly surprised by, which I spoke about without the slightest boasting, attributing it exclusively to my phlegmatically lazy, sluggish temperament. The shameless attacks on me by this man-devil do not allow me to completely calm down. I’m dying to answer “the madman in his madness,” according to the advice of my wise compatriot at my place of residence.” (Letter from Arch. Antonin to V.N. Khitrovo dated February 24, 1881). Letter from V.N. to the architect. Antonin dated January 12, 1881 Also dated February 8, 1881. Ibid., February 4, 1881. Letter dated February 15, 1881 On March 16, 1882, D. S. Arsenyev wrote to V. N. Khitrovo: “Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich invites you to come to him at the Winter Palace tomorrow, Wednesday, March 17, at 5 p.m. Please accept, I ask you, the assurance of my true respect, devotion and heartfelt sympathy for your wonderful thoughts and works for the development and strengthening of Russian Orthodoxy in the Holy Land.” †His Imperial Highness Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich. His Imperial Highness Grand Duke Mikhail Mikhailovich. Arsenyev, Sergey Vasilievich. †Bibikov, Evgeniy Mikhailovich. †Vasilievsky, Vasily Grigorievich. †Venevitinov, Mikhail Alekseevich. †Volotskoy, Vladimir Vladimirovich. †Heyden, Count, Nikolai Fedorovich. Golenishchev-Kutuzov, Count, Arseny Arkadyevich. †Dolgoruky, Prince, Sergei Alexandrovich. Dokhturov, Vladimir Sergeevich. Ermolov, Nikolai Sergeevich. †Isakov, Nikolai Vasilievich. †Cantacquaen, prince, Mikhail Rodionovich, Count Speransky. †Korsakov, Sergei Semenovich. Kochubey, Prince, Viktor Sergeevich. †Lermontov, Sergei Dmitrievich. †Lisyansky, Platon Yurievich. Lodyzhensky, Nikolai Nikolaevich. †Lodyzhensky, Ivan Nikolaevich. Mansurov, Boris Pavlovich. Mitskevich, Arkady Nikolaevich. Mosalsky, Prince, Vladimir Nikolaevich. Olesnitsky, Akim Alekseevich. Orlova-Davydova, Countess, Maria Vladimirovna. †Ostrovsky, Mikhail Nikolaevich. †Ponomarev, Stepan Ivanovich. †Putchtin, Count, Evfimy Vasilievich. Putyatina, Countess, Olga Evfimievna. †Sarruf, Fadlalla Ivanovich. †Sivokhin, Efrem Nikiforovich. †Smyshlyaev, Dmitry Dmitrievich. Snessarev, Nikolai Appolonovich. Stepanov, Mikhail Petrovich. †Sundi, Ilya Anastasevich. †Troitsky, Ivan Egorovich. †Fan der Fleet, Nikolai Fedorovich. †Filippov, Tertiy Ivanovich. Khitrovo, Alexander Mikhailovich. †Khitrovo, Vasily Nikolaevich. Khitrovo, Sofia Dominikovna. Sheremetyev, Count, Sergei Dmitrievich. †Shirkov, Valerian Valerianovich. †Feoktistov, Evgeniy Mikhailovich. In a letter to Fr. arch. Antonin on April 29 is even told this: “In the end, he expressed that he was ready to join the Society even as a scribe. I responded to his entire tirade by saying that I had always recognized his merits for Palestine, and that it would now be easier for him to carry out all his good intentions in the Palestine Commission, that the Society was being created precisely to do what the Commission did not do, and that if the Society did not want the Society to take over what belonged to the Commission, then let the latter do something. Pointed to the 2nd floors of worship shelters, etc. We parted as great friends and have seen each other twice since then, and the master has completely changed, and sings something completely different: how good and how useful the mission is, etc.” In the same letter to Fr. To Antonin V.N. Khitrovo adds: “Well, let’s fight and it will come out. God willing, there’s a golden mean.” “100,000,” writes Fr. arch. Antonin to V.N. Khitrovo on May 31, - a lot for his eyes, not even rubles, but francs. Turn it down, otherwise you might scare honest people who are not very spoiled and, so to speak, enchanted by the glory of the figures who preceded them in the Palestinian field.” Obviously, V.N. dreamed of funds for the Society of 100,000 rubles. The minutes of the 1st general meeting on May 21, 1882 read as follows: “The Orthodox Palestine Society, upon receipt of the Society’s charter approved on May 8 of this year, with the permission of His Imperial Highness Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, who expressed his consent to accept the title of chairman of the Society, decided: on May 21 of this year, at 2 o’clock in the afternoon, to open its actions, as stated All founding members of the Society have been notified in advance. After the service in the palace church of His Imperial Highness Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich the Elder, a prayer service was performed by the rector of the Greek church in St. Petersburg, Archimandrite Neophytos, co-served by priests Vinogradov and Meshchersky, in the presence of Their Imperial Highnesses - the Chairman of the Society, Grand Duchess Alexandra Iosifovna and the Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich the Elder, all former members of the founders of the Society were honored to be presented to Their Imperial Highnesses. Following this, in the hall adjacent to the church of the palace of His Imperial Highness Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich the Elder, on behalf of His Imperial Highness the Chairman of the Society, founding member T. I. Filippov opened the meeting with a proposal to request the following persons to accept the title of honorary members of the Society: Their Imperial Highnesses Grand Dukes Sergei and Pavel Alexandrovich, Konstantin Nikolaevich, Grand Duchess Alexandra Iosifovna, Grand Dukes Konstantin Konstantinovich, Nikolai Nikolaevich the Elder, Mikhail Mikhailovich, Duke Eugene Maximilianovich of Leuchtenberg, Prince Alexander Petrovich of Oldenburg, Prince Konstantin Petrovich of Oldenburg, Hierotheus, Patriarch of Jerusalem, Isidore, Metropolitan of St. Petersburg, Macarius, Metropolitan of Moscow, Plato, Metropolitan of Kyiv, Nicodemus, Bishop of Tabor (former Patriarch of Jerusalem), Bishop Porfiry (Uspensky), Archimandrite Antonin (Kapustin), Archimandrite Leonid (Kavelin), Archimandrite Juvenal (Polovtsev), Arsenyev D. S., Vlangali A. G., Girea N. K., Golovnina A. V., Dolgorukova Prince V. A., Ignatiev Count N. I., Kozhevnikova V. F., Mansurova B. P., Novikova E. I., Olesnitsky A. A., Ostrovsky M. N., Pobedonostsev K. P., Putyatin Count E. V., Filippova T.I. and Khitrovo V.N. The General Meeting, unanimously agreeing with the proposal of T.I. Filippov, decided: to ask His Imperial Highness the Chairman to notify the above-mentioned persons about this, and also to send a congratulatory telegram to His Imperial Highness Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich on the occasion of his namesake day.” This was followed by the election of council members and candidates for full members were identified. On March 6, 1884, the General Staff clarified that military members of the Society could wear the Highest approved badge of the Society, but not otherwise than each time with the permission of the superior authorities, which is generally given “to accept and wear complained-about foreign orders.” The painting master Erofeev refused money in the amount of 157 rubles for painting these images and painting the mugs. 50 k. From a letter from V.N. Khitrovo to architect. Leonid January 19, 1888 Duct. meeting Council 1887 No. 46. Report 1885–1888, pp. 156–157. The famous Palestinian figure, Arch. Leonid, who knew “the Jerusalem case from personal experience, clearly and in detail.” “I have to repeat it again,” wrote Arch. Леонид В. Н. Хитрово 18 мая 1882 г, – что комбинацию: греки, консул и начальник миссии в деле заведения и управления проектируемых вами школ считаю положительно вредной для столь дорогого Общесту дела, в котором хорошее начало – существенно необходимо и половина всего дела. Комбинацию: греки и консул, предложенная мной при настоящем положении нашего дела в Иерусалиме, считаю единственно возможной для начала, потому что если греки и будут хитрить по обычаю, желая неуспеха ненавистному им, в принципе, делу (боясь русских, приходящих к ним с такими дарами), то опаснее, что неудача дела повредить излюбленному ими консулу, которого они считают своим, все это устранит (sic) их от таких тайных козней, к которым они не постыдятся прибегнуть, если бы на его месте был другой, а равно и тогда, если в управлении школами будет иметь участие нелюбимый ими начальник русской миссии. In a word, only with this combination: the Greeks and the consul, there is a chance that the Greeks will fear God, be ashamed of the people and take care of the consul, the person they need. That is why I pointed out this combination to you... Since the consul in relation to the Greeks and the Palestinian Commission has to be considered an inviolable person, then in the case of a combination: the Greeks, the consul and the head of the mission, what will undoubtedly happen is in which the cunning Hellenes always had sure success. All their tactics will be aimed at creating a quarrel between the consul and the head of the mission and washing their hands of us: “You see, it’s their fault, and we have nothing to do with it.” That is why, responding to your note with complete frankness, I expressed my opinion that given the current state of Russian affairs in Jerusalem, in my extreme understanding, for the head of the mission, official participation in the establishment and running of schools for Arab youth is unsafe, as personally for Fr. Antonina, and for the matter itself, i.e. He said the same thing that he would have said on his own behalf if he had been in this place.” Note from the arch. Antonina: “In mother-of-pearl and mosaic production, we, as managers, will certainly save the day. Every effort should be made to teach capable Arab women icon painting in Russia - not at the Academy of Arts, of course, but at icon painting institutions in Moscow, Kiev and others.” Note from the arch. Antonina: “Russian vocational schools are hopeless in the region. Europe is too close to it and no competition with it is possible. But it doesn’t matter if you try.” According to the arch. Antonina, this “promises the Society a burden, without which, no less than now, everything will go well in our worshipful world. Society will fulfill a sacred and truly patriotic task if it finds a way to reduce the influx of our Kalik travelers here, who return here two, three or more times almost every year, especially from fans who become obedient organs of various scoundrels here. This and the previous article constitute the most sore points in our worship work.” “Against the plague of Athonite and various other leaders and inhabitants who raid Jerusalem during the season of worship, God grant that the Society finds some real and decisive remedy. Each of them has in his pocket, just in case, a Turkish teskere (teshkir in their name). And even without him, they know how to insinuate themselves into all the holes and cracks here, under the cover of the patriarchy and our privileged girls living in the city.” Note Arch. Antonina. His own. “Yes, nothing will help clarify the matter like the Messenger.” “You will understand,” wrote Arch. Leonid V.N. May 18, 1882, - which of the two people I recommended to you Mansurov as the manager of the funds of the Palestine Committee. Perhaps, I thought, he himself would come to the conviction of the need to merge these two institutions into one for the obvious benefit of the holy cause. Is it really possible, I’ll say it now, not in a secret way, now that the dawn of a new day for the ill-fated Russian Jerusalem case is visible in the formation of the Society, to explain to the August Chairman of the Society that it is time, long time ago; in order to direct the Russian cause to Jerusalem, it is necessary, firstly, to bring to one denominator the seven-fold influence on this cause, even in St. Petersburg. And this would be only the beginning of the correction of a holy cause, lofty, but as corrupted as only the most fierce opponents of a cause could wish for, about which I feel positively incapable of writing anything in the future.” Orthodoxy in the Holy Land. From a report to His Imperial Highness the Heir Tsarevich, now safely reigning Sovereign Emperor Nicholas II, 1890, p. 44. Regarding the election of Photius the Small as Patriarch of Jerusalem, V.N. sent Arch. Antonin on October 17, 1882, the following curious lines: “For you, this choice is undoubtedly more difficult than others. But if you choose between Nicodemus and Photius, for us Russians, I think this latter is still better. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs would have given us up hands and feet, and what’s more, it would have run for a rope to tie them both together. Well, let’s fight against Photius.” Letter from the arch. Antonina to V.N. Khitrovo November 16, 1883 Meeting journal Council No. 13, appendix I. From a letter from the arch. Antonina to V.N. Khitrovo dated March 3, 1884 Letter from K. D. Petkovich to V. N. Khitrovo dated March 3 of the same year. “Fully recognizing that the matter of education of the Orthodox population of Palestine is included, as stated in the confidential letter of the Minister of Foreign Affairs to the Ambassador in Constantinople, within the circle of actions of the Patriarch of Jerusalem, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs finds, however, that the assistance of the Palestine Society could bring significant benefits in this regard, and that therefore the Society should not be deprived of the opportunity to take part in this. There is no doubt that the personal qualities of the current patriarch serve as a completely reliable guarantee that, if the funds donated by the Society are placed at his full disposal, these latter will receive a completely expedient purpose. But the past of the Jerusalem church proves, unfortunately, that not all the predecessors of His Beatitude Nicodemus treated with the same attention to the spiritual needs of the Orthodox population, which is why there is reason to fear that later, in the event of a less worthy person ascending the patriarchal throne, the cause of public education may again find itself in the disappointing situation in which it has more than once found itself and which served as the main reason for the influx of Orthodox children into numerous heterodox schools, where Children who became stronger in the rules of their faith either became indifferent to Orthodoxy, or were completely converted to Catholicism and Protestantism. It would seem that the participation of the Palestine Society, whose funds are constantly increasing, thanks to the trust it acquired in Russia, and which would act on the basis of a maturely thought-out program established in agreement with the Jerusalem Patriarchate, could greatly contribute to the elimination of these unfavorable conditions and that over time the Society could turn into a very effective weapon for combating heterodox propaganda. “These circumstances prompt me to turn to Your Excellency with the most humble request to favor, in the way that you recognize as the most convenient, to provide the assistance that depends on you to the Palestine Society in this matter, to draw the attention of His Beatitude Nicodemus to the above considerations and try to convince him of the benefit of providing the Society with the opportunity to contribute through its means to the proliferation of Orthodox schools and the improvement of both the moral and material conditions of their existence.” It is recommended that Ambassador Nelidov “explain” to the Turks “the groundlessness of the suspicions that the assumptions of the Palestine Society inspire in them, in which the Porte apparently sees a government institution.” “Our interests in the Holy Land, as is well known, are exclusively Orthodox and religious in nature; they are completely alien to any political intentions, and the Turks would, apparently, have more reason to be suspicious of the activities of heterodox propaganda, the rapid success of which deserves really serious attention.” The Palestinian Society was finally asked to pay attention “to the need to refrain from any undertakings in the Holy Land pending receipt of your considerations and conclusions.” A.I. Nelidov sent an extensive letter to the Patriarch on August 18, 1884, in which, expressing regret about his failed trip to Jerusalem, he also touched upon the purpose of this trip. “The thought has been occupying me for a long time,” writes A.I. Nelidov, - to establish on more correct and expedient grounds the pilgrimage of our compatriots to the Holy Land, to contribute to raising the moral level of Russian pilgrims and to alienate those of them who unworthily undergo sacred worship and, by their example, can serve as a temptation for others. It always seemed to me necessary to find means of more careful observation and spiritual discipline over them. In this field, the assistance of the Orthodox Palestine Society recently established in Russia can bring great and significant benefits. Having provided Russian pilgrims with the material opportunity and relief to visit Holy Places, it can easily become concerned with improving the moral conditions of our pilgrimage.” Moving on to the activities of the Palestine Society for the benefit of educating the population of Syria and Palestine, i.e. on the organization of schools and possible clashes in this matter with the patriarch, as the head of the church, A.I. Nelidov repeats almost verbatim the letter of confidence from the Minister of Foreign Affairs to him, portraying this aspect of the Society’s activities in the most tempting prospects and as an undoubted “service to the activities of the patriarch himself.” “The private initiative of the Society, research carried out by its agent on the spot with the exclusive purpose of becoming familiar with the state of the school affairs of Orthodox and non-Orthodox institutions, can clarify many local needs and, without burdening the patriarchal treasury, bring secret assistance, either by financial assistance to the most needy schools or by delivering funds for the establishment of new schools where the population is not able to found and support them themselves, or where the machinations of heterodox propaganda threaten to attract Orthodox pupils to their institutions. This private activity of the Society, going with the official activity of the Patriarchate and subordinate to it (sic), can, it seems to me, only serve to help it, and if it is conducted carefully and wisely, without unnecessary noise, in accordance with local conditions, with the requirements of time and circumstances, it should not arouse either the suspicions of the local authorities, or anyone’s fundamental envy and hostility, except, of course, the constant ill will of the original enemies of Orthodoxy. Therefore, the Palestinian Society and the Russian high society that sympathizes with it are quite confident in the favorable support that Your Beatitude will be pleased to provide to such a program of action for the Society, set on such conditions. – Your Beatitude is well aware of the patronage provided to the successes of the Orthodox Palestine Society by the Sovereign Emperor, and the active participation in its actions taken by its August Chairman, Sovereign Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich: without a doubt, the sympathy with which enlightened circles in Russia in general reacted to the founding and goals of the Society will not escape your attention. It seems to me that in addition to the direct benefits that could flow from the well-directed actions of the Society, which could serve, to a certain extent, as a counterbalance to the vigilant activities of similar societies of other faiths, it should also be useful for the Jerusalem Church to maintain unity with the Russian Royal House and the Russian people, through the provision of sympathy and attention to their dear, God-loving and generally beneficial enterprise. Since, by agreement with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the general direction of the Society’s actions among the local population is made dependent on the instructions of our agents, and the highest supervision over them is provided to the embassy entrusted to me, then, Your Beatitude, you can be sure that in these actions it is impossible to manifest any aspirations that are incompatible with that awareness of the true position and needs of the Jerusalem Patriarchate and that sympathetic respect for it, with which, as you well know, the Imperial Government of Turkey is deeply imbued.” The latter has no need to fear the activities of the Palestine Society, since it “is not at all looking for the spread of Russia’s political influence, nor its patronage over the local population, but only for the preservation of this latter in the faith of its fathers and the civil conditions of existence created for it by the circumstances with the spread of Orthodox education among them. Moreover, by subordinating its actions to the permission and blessing of Your Beatitude, it places itself in complete unity of action with the spiritual power of the patriarchy, not at all wanting, however, to assign any responsibility to it to anyone, but only providing it with its wise instructions to guide it on the true path and remove it from errors and errors that may occur in its undertakings. Under such conditions and with my personal observation of the direction of the Society’s actions, I flatter myself with the hope, deeply respected and honored archpastor, that Your Beatitude will not refuse me my humble request to show the actions of the Orthodox Palestine Society your saintly favor and give those sent from it for the purpose of helping local schools and the secret collection of some information on this subject. archpastoral blessing for this godly enterprise. For each of these actions, your blessing will be especially sought through the medium of the consul general of our city, who is closely known to you. Kozhevnikov." “It is extremely desirable for me, in view of the position of the Society in Russia, the participation in its success by the Sovereign Emperor, the royal family and the Imperial Government, as well as the obvious benefits that can arise from the good direction of its actions for Orthodoxy, to contribute to the establishment between it and the patriarchy of moral and sympathetic relations, completely consistent with the unity of the goal served by the Orthodox Church and to the service of which the Russian Palestine Society strives.” It must be assumed that under the influence of the influence on the Palestinian Society from the ministry, at the meeting on February 9, it was decided: “to ask the Consul General in Jerusalem to petition His Beatitude Patriarch Nicodemus for a blessing for A. G. Kezma to tour the Orthodox villages of Palestine. Inform A.G. Kezma with an order.” In a letter to K.D. Petkovich dated February 10, 1885, Vasily Nikolaevich, however, speaks well of the teacher of the Kefr-Yasif school and even recommends that he be transferred to a crowded school in Rame. From a letter from V.N. Khitrovo to M.P. Stepanov dated December 31, 1884 The Patriarch’s “warm gratitude” to the August Chairman for this donation was communicated to the General Meeting of Members of the Palestine Society (Report for 1885‒1886, p. 173). December 10, 1886, and the Patriarch informed the Society that the money went to churches in Jebel Ajloun, Zebabde, Ramallah and Burkina (a church fence was built), to farmsteads in Salta and Madeba and to schools in Tandoi-Endi Hussun, Zebabde, Yafa, etc. The desire of Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich is that part of the money would go to the construction of the church in Rame, was not fulfilled by the patriarch (Report 1886‒1890, p. 167), and then, when the Society began to build this church, it had to deal with great difficulties on the part of the patriarchy and the Turkish authorities (ibid., p. 171). Journals of meetings of the Society Council for 1885, Nos. 23, 25, 26, 29, 30, 32. Moscow resident A. N. Lenivov donated 3,000 rubles. for the construction of a church in the Holy Land, where it does not exist. According to the patriarch's proposal, such a church should be built in Hussun beyond the Jordan. From the letter of Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich to the Patriarch dated December 29, 1885, it is clear that “the Society could come to his aid in such a charitable cause as the construction of an Orthodox church in the Holy Land.” According to a message from the Grand Duke on December 24, 1885, there were already 120 girls enrolled in the school and the education was “going well.” Eleven icons were donated for the Nativity scene, 6 for the Naplous Church, church utensils for the same church and the Monastery of the Forerunner on the Jordan.” Regarding these grand-ducal icons, we find some data in the secret report of the manager of the Russian-Imperial Consulate A.P. Belyaev to the Ambassador of Constantinople A.I. Nelidov dated October 11, 1888 No. 411. “Due to the almost refusal by the Catholics (consent was given on difficult, at least, and at the same time incredible conditions) to allow His Beatitude Nicodemus to replace the old ones with new ones icons standing around the Star of Bethlehem, this report says. His Imperial Highness Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, who had long ago expressed an indispensable desire to receive the aforementioned icons, expressed his displeasure at the behavior of the Catholics, which was mainly the reason for the non-acceptance of the Custod. The fanaticism, the strongly developed hostility towards the Orthodox and the restlessly inventive mind of this guardian of Catholic interests in St. The Earth has created not only enemies for him in the person of representatives of other religions, but even the Catholic Patriarch in Jerusalem himself, His Holiness Vincent Bracca, who deserves to enjoy universal respect here, is unfriendly towards him.” “This is a sincerely religious woman,” characterizes V.N. Khitrovo to M.P. Glebova in a letter to Arch. Leonid on August 22, 1886, - with the holy fire of desire to bring all possible benefit to Orthodoxy and the Holy Land. Do not refuse to bless her for the difficult feat she is undertaking.” Journals of Meetings. Council 1886 No. 33, No. 37, No. 38, No. 40, No. 41, No. 43, No. 44, No. 45, No. 47, No. 48, No. 51. Precisely defined debts: to Jerusalem bankers I. Frutiger and Co. 647,000 francs and M.D. Berkheim and son 46,400, banker Zarifi in Constantinople 130, 540 francs. And other persons 114, 158 francs. 50 pp., and a total of 800, 506 francs. 50 s. From a letter from V.N. Khitrovo to M.P. Stepanov from Jerusalem dated July 18, 1888, it is clear that V.N. Khitrovo “does not insist” on this point. The Council of the Society allocated 475 rubles to M.P. Stepanov for schools. 2 k. 1894 rub. 73 k. and for gifts to educational staff 1230 rub. From a letter from Patriarch F.P. Kornilov dated January 31, 1889 From a letter from the Patriarch to Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich dated November 17, 1888. From a letter from M.P. Stepanov to A.I. Nelidov dated January 16, 1889 O. Mikhailovsky to check his guidebooks, on the advice of Arch. Antonin, undertook a trip to Palestine in 1888 at the expense of the Society. Report Rights Palest. General For 1885–1886, pp. 16–18. St. Petersburg 1886 See more about him in the brochure: “In memory of D. D. Smyshlyaev.” Reprint from Permsk. governor led 1893, Nos. 100 and 101. According to the 1885–1886 report. “the shelter is designed for 15 rooms of the 1st category and for 450 ordinary pilgrims” (p. 170). The readings opened on December 20, 1887 in the 3rd grade canteen at the Sergeevsky Compound and attracted up to 600 listeners for the first time, the number of which then began to decline. Letter from the arch. Antonina to V.N. Khitrovo November 11, 1887