Глава IX. Дело о русских иноках на Афонской горе

While attacks and slander against Russian monks on Mount Athos were limited only to the columns of local newspapers, the Turkish government treated them calmly, but when homogeneous accusations and, moreover, “from a reliable source” appeared on the pages of foreign official documents, further indifference towards them became impossible. It was necessary either to comprehensively investigate the behavior of Russian monks on Athos and refute the accusations brought against them, or to take the necessary measures to remove them from Athos. It was decided to ask the head of the Church of Constantinople, who held the Holy Mountain in spiritual dependence, for their opinion on their behavior, for which the Patriarch was invited to an audience with the Sultan. Patriarch Joachim II gave His Majesty the Sultan assurances of a completely reassuring nature on this issue. But for some reason the government treated these assurances of the Patriarch with distrust, since after the aforementioned audience his intention, discussed and approved even at the council of ministers, became known, to evict the Russian monks from Athos to Anatolia, to the Sumella monastery, located near Trebizond. In this sense, a proposal was sent to His Holiness the Patriarch so that he would implement the present government decision. Offended by the government’s distrust of his assurances, Joachim II made an objection to this proposal, stating categorically that he personally did not find sufficient reasons for this eviction of Russian monks, since “they, firstly,” wrote the Patriarch, “are your subjects, secondly, obedient children of the Church, and, thirdly, during the course of their life on Athos, they did not show any opposition to either the government or the Church. Therefore,” he concluded his objections with authority, “I cannot take responsibility for such an act. If the venerable government notices something about the Russians living on Mount Athos, or has any suspicion, then it can do as it pleases, which I do not dare to interfere with, but to justify the Great Church I will give the attitude of the Great Church.” The Patriarch will fulfill his threat immediately by submitting his resignation to the government. In his attitude, the Patriarch expressed, firstly, deep sorrow that, with all his desire to assist the venerable government in all its needs, it does not trust him, even after the assurances that he expressed to His Majesty the Sultan, as well as to high-ranking members of the Sublime Porte; secondly, that the government trusts slanderers and slanderers more, who can harm the state and cause it some new trouble and, thirdly, that, while explaining to the government, at the same time asks it to relieve him of the labors and worries that surround him in old age. Having submitted this petition, His Holiness, by the way, ordered his kapu-kekhai (the official of special assignments in relations between the Patriarchate and the government) to tell the Minister of Foreign Affairs confidentially that “the Russians living on Athos will not leave Athos, for they came to live on Athos, but not anywhere else in Turkey, for the Orthodox have a special view of this place, according to its holiness, as evidenced by its very name “The Vertograd of Panagia”, where the Mother of God gave special promises to those who live and entry is prohibited for women who serve as a stumbling block in another place - all of which attracts reverent Russians from the distant north to Athos, leaving their homeland, rank, wealth and everything close to their hearts only in order to acquire spiritual salvation for themselves in this distant corner. This is what attracted them to Athos, and not any other goals now attributed to them by slanderers. When the government decides to order them to leave, they will certainly, in turn, file a protest with the German embassy, saying that they were subject to the Turkish government as a result of their stay for religious purposes on Mount Athos and do not deny this citizenship, fulfilling the duties assigned by the government, but from this day on they declare themselves Russian subjects under the auspices of the German embassy, which, of course, will immediately receive them and then go with the Turkish government correspondence and new difficulties that could cause a lot of noise, and our government is already suffering a lot of attacks.” The minister took note of the Patriarch’s message and made a detailed report about everything to the Grand Vizier. A secondary council of ministers was convened, which decided to leave the Russians alone, but to appoint a special official and send him on a military ship so that he would investigate the true state of affairs in the place where the Russians live and give the government correct information about it. In addition, in view of rumors about some unrest among the Greeks, an order was added to take a closer look at the behavior of the Athonite Greek monks. To carry out this assignment, the government of Ziver Bey was elected by the government, and from the side of the Patriarchate, a member of the synod, Metropolitan Ambrose of Chios, as a member of the investigative commission of the Orthodox faith 217. His Holiness the Ecumenical Patriarch, even before this commission was appointed by the government, sent his nephew Metropolitan Joachim of Derkon as exarch to the Holy Mountain and instructed him to collect detailed information about those living on Athos with an exact indication of patronymic, rank, age and years of stay on the Holy Mountain, as well as to calm and stop the unrest and strife that was occurring at that time in the monasteries of Xenophos, Kostamonitsky and between Kropotam and Simono-Peter. It was not easy for the exarch to settle matters in the Greek monasteries, but it was almost more difficult for him to obtain lists of monastics in each of the Athos monasteries. For some reason, the Greeks considered this demand offensive to themselves and were slow in fulfilling it, although the exarch’s demand for lists was sent out circularly to all monasteries. They even complained about the Patriarchy to Mustafa Pasha, the mutesarifa of the city of Seres (civil governor), who arrived on Athos on a special steamer on July 19, while he was on Kareya on July 28. Here the Greek monks did not fail to point out that the Patriarchate handed over the monastery to the Russians, thereby introducing this element into Svyatogorsk society, which they did not want, and the very demand for lists was considered nothing more than the desire of the Patriarchate to protect the Russian Athonite monks. Pasha responded to the complainers: “the government, keeping in mind the Russians, does not fail to look at other elements of the Holy Mountain. The government in this case did a special honor to the Holy Mountain by demanding the lists not through a secular official, but through the Great Church, because an official would have arrested many for such persistent non-compliance long ago, and the exarch, as a spiritual person, condones these external disorders.” But even after this suggestion, the Greeks stubbornly refused to submit the lists through the exarch 218 to the Great Church and submitted them only through the Solunsky Pasha, which terribly offended Patriarch Joachim II. On September 8, in the morning, before the liturgy, a Turkish military steamer appeared in sight of Mount Athos. Russian monks of the monastery of St. Panteleimon, who were strongly impressed by the information received from Thessaloniki on August 29 about the terrible pogrom of their metochion and the imprisonment of the monks Hierodeacon Alexei, Schemamonk Adam and Glycerius who lived there (more on this later), became embarrassed. They assumed that it was the investigative commission on this Solunsky case that was on its way and that the monastery, like the courtyard, would be searched. They immediately sent a monk to the ship to find out who had arrived and for what purpose. According to information, it turned out that these were ministerial official Ziver Bey and Ambrose, Metropolitan of Chios, sent by the government to study the current state of affairs on Athos. The first demanded the kaimakam and the customs official Bikir Effendi, and Metropolitan Ambrose advised Fr. the abbot to serve the liturgy as soon as possible and come on board the ship for a meeting with him. At the end of the liturgy, Fr. Macarius immediately went to the ship, where he was received very favorably by those who arrived. The guests were invited to a dinner table in the monastery, after which they walked around all the buildings and institutions of the monastery, asked for lists of the monastic brethren and, saying goodbye to Fr. abbot, went to Kareya, and from there on a detour to the monasteries. The guests returned to Russik on the 14th. Ziver Bey was very kind and attentive to the fathers of the Russian monastery and apparently showed the contentment and good impression that he took with him from his trip to Athos, and since the weather was rainy and a storm was raging at sea, the guests lived in the monastery until the 17th of September. Representatives of the Russian monasteries of Andreevsky and Ilyinsky came here to show their respect to the government and explain that the goals of their stay on Athos were completely peaceful and had nothing in common with politics. On the 18th of September, another steamship from Thessaloniki arrived at Athos, on which two bishops arrived: Metropolitan Cyril Grevenon and Joachim, Metropolitan of Derkon, who was returning to Constantinople upon fulfilling the assignment entrusted to him by the Patriarch, and a musteshar (comrade of the governor). The fathers of the monastery greeted the new guests with the ringing of bells and a short litia in the church, since the arrivals were all Christians, and then treated them at the archondarik in the East. After the meeting, a lively business conversation took place between the metropolitans and both Turkish officials for quite some time. Then Ziver Bey and the Metropolitans of Chios and Derkon took leave of the monastery fathers and, at the sound of the bells, set off on a military ship to go to Constantinople. Father Macarius escorted the guests onto the ship and there he kindly said goodbye to them. Upon returning from the ship, a meal was offered to the newly arrived guests, after which the musteshar examined the library and some of the monastery buildings, and tried in every possible way to be polite to the fathers of the monastery in order to win them over. Musteshar reminded of the slander against the Russians and asked the fathers if they had any special complaints against anyone? The fathers responded in the negative, declaring that they mourned only the disagreements between the monasteries. The next day, after a long conversation with Fr. abbot, Musteshar went to Xiropotamus to begin his tour of the Holy Mountain from this monastery, and the metropolitan left for Kareya. On September 20, Metropolitan Kirill, in the Kareya kinot, presented a paper from the Great Church, which stated, firstly, that three metropolitans were being sent to the Holy Mountain, of whom Kirill Grevenon, to study affairs in the civil department and to collect information about Russian monks on Athos, and secondly, condemnation was expressed for indecent acts with Metropolitan Derkonsky in Xenophos and for failure to submit catalogs with the names of the monks and, thirdly, the hope was expressed that the Athonites would be more attentive to the real exarch. After going around the Holy Mountain, Musteshar returned to the Panteleimonovsky Monastery and lived, due to bad weather, from September 23 to 26. During all this time, he advised the elders to live in peace and harmony with other monasteries, to submit to the canonism developed by the Patriarchate, and in all other respects to be completely at peace, since he was personally convinced of their good intentions. On September 26, Musteshar, accompanied by numerous brethren and with bells ringing, left the monastery and boarded a ship to go back home. Thus ended all the investigations in the Russian Panteleimon Monastery, which assured the Turkish government of the complete trustworthiness of the Russian monks, since, according to the ironic but completely fair remark of the newspaper “Θράκη”, the investigators “did not find any other weapons in the monastery except liturgical books and prayer books and no less dangerous projectiles: beans, beans, lakhana (cabbage), Kolokifia (Demyanki) and olives, which constitute the winter reserves of Kalogers. The chairman, abbot, greeted the members of the commission with complete monastic complacency and found an irresistible argument to convince them that all the accusations against him and his brethren were completely unfounded. The commissions returned rewarded with a warm and hospitable reception from the monks of the Holy Mountain” 219. But not always and not everywhere, investigations on the suspicions of various Turkish commissions of inquiry ended so safely and without bad consequences for the Athonite Russian monks. The terrible pogrom of the Solunsky Athos-Russian metochion and imprisonment on August 29, 1877 of Fr. Hierodeacon Alexei and his comrades, as we mentioned above, serve as a clear illustration of this. In this last very regrettable case, the innocent monks were not without severe physical and moral suffering. This is how Fr. tells epically, but at the same time very touchingly, about all the circumstances of this event. Alexey in a letter dated February 20, 1878 to the late abbot Fr. Macarius. Until August 29, according to Fr. Alexei, he and his comrades lived in Thessaloniki calmly and in complete safety: they regularly received correspondence from Russia and carefully carried out all the monastic assignments entrusted to them. Slanders against the monastery and against the Russian monks on Mount Athos reached their ears, but they attached little importance to them, since they knew well where and from what source they came. The main agitator and insinuator against the Russian monks on Athos was a certain pro-abbot of the Xiropotamian monastery, Cyrus Procopius, who was living at that time on business at his monastery in Thessaloniki. He openly and unashamedly said that “there will not be a single Russian left; at any cost we will clear Athos of Russians; that the Russikovskys recaptured the monastery from the Greeks for nothing and that in Russika the abbot is turning over the entire Athos,” etc. In the last words, which we underlined, it was hinted, among other things, at the fact that in the dispute between the Xiropotamian monastery and Simono-Petersky over the cell of Odoid, the abbot of Russik, Fr. Macarius, in view of the justice of the cause and the established good relations between the monasteries, stood on the side of the Simono-Petrians. That is why, when Xiropotamus lost the case with the Simon-Petersky Monastery, Fr. Procopius, considering the culprit of all this to be the Russikovsky monks from the Russians and their abbot Fr. Macarius, in terrible anger at them, directly denounced the Russian monks to Thessaloniki Pasha. He told the latter that “hegumen of Russia Macarius is from the royal family, and that he is not an abbot, but an agent of the Russian imperial palace, that he lives not for salvation or monasticism, and likewise all his brethren, but to incite the uprising of peoples, Turkish subjects, especially the Slavs, and that they have a huge correspondence with Russia and with the Slavic committee, that all mail is received and sent by the Chuvals (i.e. e. bags) of letters that the Russians have in the monastery large reserves of military ammunition and many hidden commanders under a black cassock and large sums of money,” etc. This absurd denunciation had the desired effect, since the Solunsky Pasha (Circassian by birth) was very unfriendly towards Russians in general. Its result was the sending of a musteshar to Athos for a comprehensive investigation there in the monastery on this denunciation, as we said above, and the appointment of an investigative commission under the command of the musteshar’s brother here with the goal of seizing on the spot, in the Solunsky Athos-Panteleimon courtyard, the criminal correspondence and subjecting the main agitators and perpetrators of pan-Slavic propaganda to the strictest interrogation. On the evening of August 29, the said commission appeared in the courtyard of the Russian Panteleimon Monastery. The musteshar's brother and chief arrived a quarter earlier, fearing that the fathers would run away. Inquiring that the fathers were at home, he called Father Alexei for negotiations. But the true meaning of these negotiations was revealed immediately, because a whole crowd of military men appeared at the door of the courtyard. These were a gendarmerie colonel, two officers, a policeman and ten soldiers armed with cutlasses and revolvers. The musteshar's brother got right down to business. He demanded all correspondence, that is, letters from benefactors, donors and responses to them from the Athonite fathers. The demand was fulfilled immediately. The taken letters were collected in a scarf. But the commission members were not satisfied with this. Suspecting that the fathers were hiding the most important letters, members of the commission began a very thorough search of the internal living quarters and external outbuildings: they broke into chests, dulapas (supplies), table boxes, examined beds, stables, latrines, sheds, etc. But all efforts and efforts to find anything suspicious, such as, for example, hidden military weapons or secret letters, turned out to be in vain. However, the matter did not stop there. At the end of the search, the fathers were ordered to follow them for an explanation with the pasha. The fathers carried out the order and were escorted to the courtyard, where they had to wait for more than an hour for the pasha's arrival. When the pasha appeared, he asked everyone questions: who are you? and from where? and, having received answers, silently left. The fathers continued to stand in the yard. Night has fallen. “Night has already completely overtaken us as guests,” Fr. ironically remarks. Alexey in his letter. - The Turks and the Musteshar themselves expressed that we are their guests, and not under their guard, but God save every person from such hospitality! Finally, late in the evening, the fathers were led into the guard room where the guard soldiers were located. The fathers were suffocating from the tobacco smoke and stench. Lunch was offered, but the prisoners, despite their appetite, refused to eat. Coffee was served. Around midnight the fathers were transferred to the dungeon room where prisoners are received during the day. After spending the night in this room, writes Fr. Alexey, - we changed our minds a lot about our fate and all night we listened to the sound of the glands with which the poor prisoners - the Slavs - were shackled. These sounds did not allow us to sleep peacefully. The sad tone of the iron pierced our hearts. The next day we were already expecting something decisive about our fate, but it didn’t happen.” In this room, in terrible heat, stuffiness and stench, the fathers sat hungry for three whole days. It was difficult for them to get bread, but even if they did get it, it was not eaten “out of sorrow and tightness of heart.” Three days later, the fathers were taken away and temporarily placed in a real prison, in complete uncertainty about their fate. At the end of the week they were told that they would be tried by a military court, and on Saturday they were taken to the seraskiriat, but then they were put back in their original place. The trial did not take place allegedly because the judges went home. On Sunday they announced to the fathers that they would be sent to Constantinople for trial and investigation. At noon they were even escorted by 50 soldiers to the steamship pier and back to the prison for the reason that there was no steamship to Constantinople that day. On Monday morning Fr. Alexei and his friend were brought to trial before a commission of five members chaired by Mustechar Kostantinidis. Each of the accused was asked the following questions: who and where are they from? Why did you come from Russia to live on Athos? Who is your abbot? How much income does the monastery receive? - and so on. Here again it was announced to the fathers that they would be sent to Constantinople to be judged by the highest authorities and to have the correspondence taken from them translated into Turkish. Soon after the fathers were put under arrest, the monk Glycerius arrived in Thessaloniki from the Panteleimon Kalamari Metokh and, having learned about what had happened in the courtyard, turned to Thessalonica Metropolitan Joachim (now Patriarch Joachim III) for advice, but he advised Fr. Glykeria would like to go home as soon as possible, so as not to drink the cup that fell to the lot of his brothers. However, Fr. Glycerius was not satisfied with this conviction and, on the advice of some, went to the French consul to tell him about everything that had happened in the Russian courtyard. The consul received him kindly and immediately went to the pasha for an explanation. Pasha explained to the consul the reason for the imprisonment of the Athonite fathers, declaring them to be under suspicion of the government, and that they would be sent to Constantinople to the highest authorities with letters for them to read. From the pasha's response, transmitted by the consul, Fr. Glycerius realized that there was no hope for the liberation of his fathers. Then he decided to get a meeting with the prisoners through the Athos epitrope. But when the epitropes and Fr. Glycerius to the pasha, then he asked the latter: was it not he who complained to the French consul? When he gave an affirmative answer, the pasha remarked to him impressively: “Don’t you know the tsar’s local government and are turning to someone else’s? Who taught you? Father Glycerius replied that he did not remember who gave him such advice, and that he turned to the consul out of fear, wanting to help free his brothers. Pasha threatened him with prison if he did not name the adviser by name, but Fr. Glycerius stood his ground, and therefore was sent to prison on September 3, but not to the one in which the other fathers were imprisoned. He met the latter during the interrogation of Musteshar, in the presence of the Athos epitrope, when the prisoners, recognizing themselves as clear of all suspicion, asked the investigator, as people of the monastery, to give bail to the Athos epitrope. This request was refused, and the fathers, under escort, along with other prisoners, were sent to Constantinople. After a three-day voyage, the prisoners arrived in Constantinople, where they were met by a new convoy, which escorted them to the prison. “At our entrance,” writes Fr. Alexey about the prison - we were overcome with fear and trepidation when we saw chambers filled with prisoners, more and more Bulgarians. – In each department there are 50 prisoners all together; dampness, darkness, stench, louse, bedbugs and all sorts of bad things. Alas, the fate is hard! The royal food is bread and water.” Soon after their arrival, the prisoners were subjected to a second interrogation, similar to what was done in Thessaloniki. 40 days passed, during which they seemed to have forgotten about the prisoners: no one asked about them and as long as they were not disturbed. The fathers began to resolutely think about their approaching death. These gloomy thoughts were brought to them by bad rumors and newspaper news that reached them. So they heard that they were being sentenced to exile in Iconium, and in one Turkish newspaper they read that “four Russian monks were caught in Thessaloniki, who wanted to stir up Macedonia to revolt, but the careful Pasha of Thessalonica captured the rebels and brought them to Constantinople, where the tsarist government assigned them to hard labor.” On the 50th day of imprisonment, one of the fathers was asked by the prison warden to go on a date with someone. It turned out that the Kapu-kehai came to the prison from the Patriarchate and gave the prisoners a note, which said that the Patriarch was working for them and had the hope of releasing them soon. “What joyful lines these were! - exclaims Fr. Alexey. - What kind of angel of the gospel announced to us this joy - future freedom! With this news we have been a little strengthened in the spirit of hope for speedy freedom.” But a whole week passed and they seemed to have forgotten about us again. Rumors began to circulate again that we would be sent to Africa to some exiled monastery. “But here comes the 26th day of October,” writes Fr. Alexey. - A significant day - the feast of the Holy Great Martyr Demetrius of Thessalonica. At 9 o'clock in the afternoon we sat deep in thought, as if we were waiting for something. We tell which of us thinks something about our decision. Suddenly the castle keeper comes, approaches us and says: “Well, go.” We were so frightened that we became beside ourselves. He says: “Don’t be afraid, take all your clothes with you.” But we had very little of it. We were in a hurry, took it and followed him. Having gone out, we put down our clothes and were led upstairs to the vice-vizier, who looked at us with a smile and said in Greek: “Go, good hour!” Kapu-kehai and we bowed low to him and left. Leaving the room, as well as the gate, we shed tears of joy and went together with the kapu-kehai and his kawas straight to the Patriarchate, where His Holiness the Patriarch received us joyfully, fatherly and asked us about the misfortune that had happened to us, consoled us and taught us patience and trust in God. Then he advised me to stay a little in the Patriarchate for safety, but I told the bishop that we have a lot of lice and so on, the saint said: “Well, go to your brothers and fathers, let them rejoice at you.” We took a blessing from the saint and, accompanied by kavas, went to our courtyard, where we had a touching meeting with our fathers and brothers. The time was late, already night, but we, among our dear family in the Lord, gave thanks to the Lord God and the Most Pure Lady Theotokos and His Holiness Patriarch Joachim, the culprit of our release from prison. “Thank God for everything.” Fr. also suffered imprisonment, although not as long and not under such difficult conditions as the Solunsky fathers. Hieromonk Hilarion, who, while living in Constantinople, came under suspicion from the government. On the day of his departure from Constantinople to the Panteleimonovsky courtyard, some Turk appeared early in the morning and wished to see Fr. Hilarion. The frightened fathers, fearing something unkind, did not allow this meeting, saying that Fr. Hilarion cannot speak Turkish to him. Then the Turk asked the fathers: “Is it true that he is going to go today.” The fathers answered hesitantly: “Maybe.” Then he said: “Tell him that he will certainly be taken from the ship to the police. For this purpose, let him go to the ship earlier, so as to have time to justify himself from suspicions and catch the ship in time for its departure.” The fathers did not believe the secret messenger, but just in case they took the necessary precautions: all the things that they intended to send with Fr. Hilarion, they handed over the bill of lading, sent the mail through the official route, and not by hand, and Fr. Hilarion was taken to the ship long before the ship left. But the police were in no hurry and arrested Fr. Hilarion before the last whistle. The interrogation was immediately lifted from him: why did he come? Father Hilarion replied that he came here to go for treatment in Brussa with mineral waters, but he was advised not to go there because of the terrible heat. After Fr.'s explanation. Hilarion was imprisoned in the noble section of the prison, where he remained until the evening of the next day. With his liberation, Fr. Hilarion owes the same to the patron of the Russians, Patriarch Joachim, who, immediately after the arrest of Fr. Hilarion, was notified of the incident by the fathers of the monastery 220. In all likelihood, the same, if not more difficult, fate awaited the tireless worker, the steward of the monastery, Hieromonk Paul, whom the Solunsky Pasha recognized as “an energetic figure in the Slavic Committee,” if the Pasha, hostile to the Russians, had not been replaced and the San Stefano Preliminary Treaty had not been signed 221. But among these difficult wartime circumstances, which daily threatened the Russians on Athos with new and new troubles and anxieties, there were several episodes of a comic nature in the life of the Russian Panteleimon Monastery during this time. So, even before the start of the war, in June 1876, Fr. Melchizedek, who was in obedience in Taganrog under Fr. Malachi. Under the influence of newspaper rumors about the rampages of the Turks in Serbia and Bulgaria, absurd news began to spread that the Turks had attacked Mount Athos and allegedly massacred all the fathers. These rumors reached Fr. Melchizedek, who, after reasoning that the fathers were now worthy of martyr's crowns, but he was not, secretly, without asking, abandoned his obedience, boarded a ship and appeared on Athos in order to count himself among the martyrs. But imagine his disappointment when, upon arriving at the Holy Mountain, he saw all the fathers in good health. Instead of a martyr's crown on Fr. Melchizedek was imposed a forty-day canon on the rosary in the meal (the most severe punishment) by Fr. abbot, and at the end of it he was ordered to return to his obedience, but as punishment not on a steamship, but on a monastic ship. Another case dates back to the height of the war itself. After a long, tedious wait, Plevna was taken by the Russians. News of this quickly reached Athos, who was always keenly interested in events at the theater of war. The fathers rejoiced at this joyful news, and one schemamonk Trofim from the Bulgarians in his ecstasy went so far as to mock the Greeks, saying: “When the Russians come, we will kill you this way and that.” The Greeks complained to Fr. the abbot, who called Fr. Trofim to himself, made him a strict reprimand and prescribed a three-day canon on the rosary at meals. O. Trofim could not stand it and exclaimed: “Even if I last 40 days (the rosary), our beret!..”. After the capture of Plevna, the captivity of the army of Osman Pasha and himself, our military affairs went brilliantly to a quick end to the war. After a quick military campaign forward, our troops stood at the gates of Constantinople in the village of San Stefano and forced the Turks to ask for a truce. On February 19, the preliminary Treaty of San Staffa was signed and hostilities ceased. After Easter, a novice of the monastery and one admirer arrived from Odessa to Athos. The mail began to flow regularly. The singers were sent to Constantinople, but remained there for a long time without any work. Everything foreshadowed the imminent conclusion of complete peace, but the true heralds of it for the Russian monks on Athos were the officers of the Russian army in Philippopolis: state councilor Dr. Nikolai Feodorovich Mentin, surgeon Luka Yakovlevich Mibov and artillery captain Leonid Ludvigovich German, who completely unexpectedly arrived at the Panteleimon Monastery on a longboat, after a five-day voyage. The fathers, delighted by such a visit, made a royal welcome for their dear guests - the heroes of the ended war, with the ringing of bells, the lighting of chandeliers, etc. and treated them to glory. The guests lived on Athos for two days and managed to visit Zograf, Hilandar, Iver, Pandocrates and the Russian monasteries - Andreevsky and Ilyinsky, where they were received with honor and complete cordiality, and left, leaving behind the kindest memories in the hearts of the Athos monks. Soon the points of the peace Treaty of San Stefano were made public, from which the fathers of the Russian Athonite monasteries saw that they had not been forgotten by their benefactor and “ktitor” Count N.P. Ignatiev. Regarding Russian monks on Mount Athos, the agreement contained a very important article XXII, which read as follows: “Russian clergy, pilgrims and monks traveling or staying in European and Asian Turkey will enjoy the same rights, advantages and benefits as foreign clergy of other nationalities. The imperial embassy and the Russian consulates in Turkey are recognized with the right of official protection of both the above-mentioned persons and their property, as well as spiritual, charitable and other institutions in holy places and in other places. Athonite monks of Russian origin will retain their property and previous benefits and will continue to enjoy in the three monasteries that belong to them and in the institutions dependent on them the same rights and benefits that are provided for other spiritual institutions and monasteries of Mount Athos” 222. This article, which filled the hearts of Russian monks living on Mount Athos and mainly in the Russian monasteries, Andreevsky and Ilyinsky, with inexpressible joy, did not go unnoticed by the Greek and even European press. This article recognized Russian monasteries as independent of the monasteries on whose lands they settled and with which the monasteries had continuous misunderstandings, sometimes lasting for several years in a row. The newspaper “Ανατου άστηρ” expressed bewilderment regarding the three monasteries with monks of Russian origin, believing that the two monasteries meant the Hilandar and Bolgar monasteries, in which, according to the newspaper, “it became customary to perform divine services in Slavic,” and explained that the Athonite monasteries, no matter what nationality they belonged to, in the church sense submit to the Ecumenical Throne of Constantinople 223. The hostile “Θράχη” expressed complete bewilderment when reading this article. “Of the 20 monasteries existing on Mount Athos,” says the newspaper, “not one belongs to monks of Russian origin. If this, when signing the treaty, escaped the attention of Savfet Pasha, then can we really assume that it was not known to the Russian authorized General Ignatiev, who can know more than anyone else what kind of struggle was taking place only because of one demand of those living in the monastery of St. Panteleimon of Russian monks - elect a Russian-born abbot? And if it is only for the sake of the mere condescension of those in the Patriarchate that the election of Macarius was arranged, then it does not follow from this that this monastery belongs to monks of Russian origin. The very struggle undertaken then, the means used, violence, and finally, threats to achieve the installation of an abbot of Russian origin, show the completely opposite. And even those of our highest clerics who worked with such indiscriminate conscience for success and to put into action the desires of Russian propaganda, even they did not recognize the Russian monastery on Athos at that time. Even those themselves and those who were directly interested in this, then exposing the right to elect an abbot of Russian origin, did not dare to encroach on the right of domination, which they clearly proclaimed through their well-known local organ “Βυζάντις” and a special brochure. But if this is one of these monasteries, which San Stefano’s treatise turns into Russian, although it has already been proven by extensive and irrefutable evidence how and by what means gangs of Russian monks crawled into it, what other two monasteries are these, belonging to monks of Russian origin? Perhaps the monastery of St. Andrew, belonging to the Vatopedi monastery, and the monastery of the prophet Elijah, inhabited exclusively by Russians and belonging to Pandocrator? But § speaks of monasteries, not monasteries. We do not believe that the Russian commissioner does not know the difference between a monastery and a monastery. But here, apparently, lies the whole art of the strategic thing, with which Count Ignatiev, taking advantage of the ignorance of such things of the representative of the Sublime Porte, wanted to kill two game with one shot: to build the monasteries into monasteries and approve them as Russian property. Consequently, the plan that was sought by the envoy who was at the Sublime Porte was achieved by the election of Macarius, Patriarch of Cyrus Joachim and the erection - which was achieved in every possible way, but did not succeed - of the dike of the monastery of St. Andrew as abbot under Patriarch Anthima of Ephesus of blessed memory, apparently achieved complete success. Russian domination over Mount Athos will be complete in a short time! Otherwise it is impossible to explain § 22 of the San Stefano treatise concerning the Athonite monasteries.” Further, the said newspaper advises the Patriarchate to pay serious attention 224 to this “obvious violation of church and people’s rights,” “in view of the critical situation and surrounding circumstances,” to work “with prudence, even with the dignity of an ambitious nation and a clergy who understands their high mission,” and for this purpose to convene “a great national assembly that will judge what should be done.” In particular, the newspaper proposes to compose and submit a protest to the European powers about the appropriation of Athonite monasteries, subordinated only to the undeniable dominance of the Ecumenical Patriarchate” 225. The creator of the new Bulgaria, General Ignatiev, writes about the same XXII article “Νεολογός”, honoring the Chalkidiki peninsula as a spoke in the eyes of Bulgaria, despite the fact that it was completely separated from the mainland, he found a way to glorify it, defining in the treatise Russian patronage over members of the Russian Church in Athos and the chimerical, never-existent rights of Russian monasteries in the Holy Mountain. This feverish impatience of the general revealed to the world what kind of person he was and what kind of goals were aimed at by all those machinations in Constantinople called the “Bulgarian question” and “the question of the monastery of St. Panteleimon" and to "to which others were drawn as victims, and others criminally participated in them" 226. From such a narrowly national, hostile point of view, the Greek newspapers looked at Article XXII of the Treaty of San Stefano, always striving to defend the rights of Hellenism and the Greek Church, never trampled upon by anyone, and always extremely hostile and biased towards the Bulgarians and everything that could raise their political importance in the eyes of Europe. But the famous English diplomat Marquis of Salisbury understood the meaning of this article differently and very widely, who saw in it a violation of international relations and the interests of European powers interested in all parts of the Ottoman Empire. “This (i.e., after concerns about the population of Thessaly and Epirus) follows,” he writes in his circular dispatch dated April 1 (new style) 1878, “obligations for patronage of members of the Russian Church, of course, no less limited in scope than those articles of the Kaynardzhi Treaty on which the claims abolished in 1856 were based. Neither the Greek government nor the powers, for whom all parts of the Ottoman Empire are a matter of common interest, can look at such persuasion with pleasure. The general consequence of this part of the treatise will be the strengthening of the power of the Russian Empire in the countries and on the coasts where the Greek population dominates, not only to the detriment of this nation, but also of every country with interests in the east of the Mediterranean Sea" 227. It is not surprising that such an understanding of Article XXII of the preliminary peace treaty caused our late Chancellor Prince Gorchakov to rebut point by point in a special “circular to the Russian ambassadors in Berlin, Paris, London, Vienna and Rome dated March 28 (April 9), 1878,” or rather, in a special “promemory” to it. Of the 12 points of the “promemory,” point 7 is especially important and reads like this: “The next condition relating to patronage of members of the Russian Church was understood very poorly if it is likened to the Kainardzhi Treaty, canceled in 1856. The Kaynardzhi condition applied to the Greek Orthodox faith and could apply to all subjects of the Sultan professing this faith; The Treaty of San Stefano mentions exclusively monastic clergy and pilgrims of Russian origin and establishes in their favor only those rights, benefits and advantages that belong to clergy of other nationalities. After this, it cannot be considered fair to say that the totality of San Stefano’s decrees is capable of increasing the power of the Russian Empire in countries where the Greek population predominates to the detriment of this people and all countries with interests in the east of the Mediterranean Sea" 228. But despite such a categorical refutation of the misunderstanding of Article XXII of the San Stefano Treaty, English diplomats remained with their previous understanding of it. Therefore, at meeting 229 on July 4 (new style) 1878 of the Berlin Congress, the consideration of the mentioned article began with Lord Salisbury reading the proposed changes to this article for consideration by the congress to the following points: 1) “All inhabitants of the Ottoman Empire in Europe, whatever their religion, will enjoy complete equality of rights. They will be admitted to all public offices and honors and will be accepted as witnesses before the tribunals." 2) “All confessions will enjoy complete freedom; neither the hierarchical organization of the various communities, nor their relations with their spiritual leaders should encounter any restrictions.” 3) “Clerics, pilgrims and monks of all nationalities traveling or living in European and Asian Turkey will enjoy complete freedom of rights, advantages and privileges.” 4) “The right of official patronage is recognized for diplomatic representatives and consular agents of powers in Turkey, both in relation to the designated persons and their possessions, religious, charitable and other institutions in holy places and outside them.” 5) “The monks of Mount Athos will retain their possessions and former advantages and will enjoy, without any exception, complete equality of rights and prerogatives.” In submitting these paragraphs to the discussion of the Congress, Lord Salisbury made a note to them in which he explained that “the first two paragraphs of this proposal represent the application in the Ottoman Empire of the principles adopted by the Congress regarding Serbia and Romania; The last three paragraphs are intended to extend to the clergy of all nationalities the benefits of the provisions of Article 22, which specifically relate to the Russian clergy.” The changes proposed by Lord Salisbury to Article XXII of the Treaty of San Stefano were in principle approved by all powers, but in particular some changes and amendments were made. So, for example, the Turkish Commissioner Kara-Teodoripasha asks to look at the first point of the proposal not as something new, but as the principles that always guide his government. To prove his point, he reads a message he had previously received from his government. This is the message: “In view of the statements made at the Congress under various circumstances in favor of religious toleration, you are authorized to declare on your part that the opinion of the Sublime Porte in this case is completely consistent with the goal towards which Europe is striving. Its constant traditions, its age-old policies, the instincts of its population - everything prompts it to do so. Throughout the empire, the most diverse religions are professed by millions of the Sultan's subjects, and no one was constrained in their beliefs and in the performance of the rites of their confession. The imperial government has decided to support this principle in full force and give it all the expansion it requires.” Therefore, the Commissioner asked, if the English proposal were accepted by the Congress, that at least it should be stated that the principles in question were consistent with those by which his Government was governed, and that the Congress should add the following phrase, for example, in § 1: “According to the declarations of the Porte and the previous orders which it wishes to maintain.” Lord Salisbury did not object to this increase, but stated that although these measures were indeed found in the statements of the Porte, they were not always observed in practice. And in the same first paragraph, the Congress decided to throw out the special designation of Europe, due to the disputes of that “authorized Kara-Theodory Pasha about the word “in Europe” §§ 2 and 3 were adopted without changes. In § 4, the Turkish commissioners Kara Theodori Pasha and Mehmed Ali Pasha insisted on issuing the word “possessions”, relying on the 1868 protocol relating to the ownership of foreigners and excluding any special protection regarding real estate. If church real estate, subject by virtue of the protocol of 1868 to local jurisdiction, were, within the meaning of § 4, at the same time placed under the official protection of diplomatic representatives and consular agents, then great administrative and judicial difficulties would arise. Since the Turkish commissioners stubbornly defended their demands, the Congress agreed to their demand. Regarding the last line of § 4, the French Commissioner Wadington, recalling the rights acquired by France in the holy places, presents to the Congress the following wording, which should end § 4: “The rights acquired by France are preserved inviolably, and it is decided that no encroachment should be made against the status quo in the holy places.” This proposal was adopted unanimously. The Italian commissioner Ubri demands that in § 5 the words “monks of Mount Athos” be followed by the words “whatever their homeland may be.” This increase was passed by Congress. The proposal of the Marquis of Salisbury, thus revised, constituted Article LXII of the Berlin treatise, which reads as follows: “Since the Sublime Porte has expressed its firm intention to respect the principle of religious freedom in the broadest sense, the contracting parties take note of this voluntary declaration. In no part of the Ottoman Empire can difference of religion be a reason for the exclusion of anyone or the denial of legal capacity in all matters relating to the enjoyment of civil and political rights, access to public positions, official occupations and distinctions, or the exercise of various liberal arts and crafts. Everyone will be allowed, without distinction of religion, to testify in courts. Freedom and external practices of all worship are ensured for everyone, and no restrictions can be made in the hierarchical structure of various religious communities and in their relations with their spiritual heads. Clerics, pilgrims and monks of all nations traveling in European or Asian Turkey will enjoy the same rights, benefits and privileges. The right of official patronage is recognized for diplomatic and consular agents of powers in Turkey both in relation to the above-mentioned persons and their spiritual, charitable and other institutions in holy places and in other places. The rights granted to France are strictly reserved to her, and it goes without saying that the status quo in holy places cannot be subject to any violation. The monks of Mount Athos, no matter what country they are from, will retain their property and will enjoy, without any exception, complete equality of rights and benefits 230. Sending a copy of the “Berlin Treaty” on July 13 from Berlin addressed to Her Majesty’s Chief Secretary of State, Lord Salisbury attached a special dispatch to it, in which he very openly and not without complacency regarding Article XXII of the Treaty of San Stefano wrote the following: “Special protection granted to the clergy of the Russian religion (?) and for Russian monasteries on Mount Athos, and the right granted to the Russian government to participate in The development of institutions for the remaining parts of European Turkey was met with objections from Her Majesty's government, since this strengthened the power of the Russian Empire in those countries and on those shores where the Greek population predominated. These exceptional decisions were completely rejected" 231. Thus, at the Berlin Congress, all the hopes of the Russian monks on Athos in general and the Russian hermits in particular collapsed irrevocably; sweet dreams of becoming one of the twenty other independent Svyatogorsk monasteries and forever freed from that heavy and capricious dependence on monasteries of another nationality scattered like smoke in the wind, and the Russian Athonite monks were returned, so to speak, to the primitive state in which they were before the war. The “exceptional regulations” of the San Stefano Treaty, created by the benefactor and patron of Russian monks on Athos N.P. Ignatiev, “were completely rejected”, thanks to the persistence of English diplomats at the Berlin Congress, and therefore the suffering and positive material losses suffered by our compatriots - the Athos monks during the war, remained completely without any reward. The winners were monks of other faiths who had lost nothing, living or temporarily staying within the Ottoman Empire. There is no need to have a wide imagination to imagine how great the importance of the Russians on Athos would be if Article XXII of the San Stefano Treaty had received sanction at the Berlin Congress and three Russian anti-prosops would now sit in the Karean Athos protate, when now, with one (from the Russian Panteleimon Monastery) experienced and businesslike anti-prosop, who knows how to find allies in the anti-prosops of other monasteries of a different nationality, with the strong support of our Russian diplomacy in Constantinople, it is not insignificant. We borrow this information from a brochure sent to benefactors after the conclusion of peace in the spring of 1878: “On the state of Athos during the Russian-Turkish War.” We will often refer our readers to this brochure below. The exarch, by the way, advised Fr. Macarius will not be remembered at the Russian Imperial House service. Therefore, until the end of the war, the litanies were read like this: “For the pious and God-protected kings and princes, let us pray to the Lord,” “We also pray for the mercy of life, etc. of the patrons and benefactors of St. this monastery: Alexander, Mary” and the entire Royal House by name. Θράκη, from November 1877. From the report of Fr. Makariy antiprosop from July 3. from a brochure sent out to benefactors after the war. The full text of the “preliminary” legal agreement is published in the Government Gazette. 1878 No. 51. "Ανατογ άστήρ". No. 26. March 31, 1878 Θράχη. No. 1251. March 25, 1878. The Athos newspaper “Ηρμήξ” dated April 1878 writes the following about this article: “We are pleased to inform you that Θράχη’s comments on § 22 of the treatise of St. Stephen received special attention from the Patriarchate, and based on the certificates we received, the Holy Synod will take up this issue this week.” Νεολογός. No. 2715. March 27, 1878. A translation of this dispatch is published in Moskovskie Vedomosti. 1878 No. 80. The newspaper “Ηρμήξ”, reproducing on its pages this part of Lord Salisbury’s circular, refers Article XXII “to the Russian monks” on Athos. Right Vestn. 1878, No. 71. We borrow the translation of the minutes of this meeting from the Moscow Vedomosti. 1887 No. 187. Government Bulletin. 1873, No. 163. Moscow Gazette 1878, No. 176. You might be interested in: