16. Ancient Rus and the Great Steppe, Gumilev
XV. Heterodoxy and Heterodoxy. 92. ANCIENT GODS AND NEW DEMONS; Here is much detail on the variations of Paganism and how they interacted with Orthodoxy, not seen elsewhere..
Paganism has many faces. Christianity quickly triumphed in Kiev, with difficulty - in Novgorod and very slowly in Rostov and Murom, where the Slavic population was a small minority. The ethnic diversity of the northeastern outskirts of the Kiev Kaganate contributed to polytheism, i.e. the worldview of super-tolerance, when they honor not only their tribal god, but also neighboring ones, maybe they will help.
This kind of polytheism was known in the ancient Near East, where Chaldeans, Arameans and Jews sought to bring worship not only to their god, but also to neighboring Baals, Molochs and Astartes in order to enlist their help and lure them to their side. Then genotheism flourished, i.e., the worship of one's own god. Monotheism was preached only by some prophets who had a lot of trouble for it.[1] A similar picture can be seen on the outskirts of Russia. An unknown author of the XIV century reports that the two-believers "are not Christians, but believe in Perun, Horse, Mokosh, Sima, Regla, Pitchfork" - a total of thirty gods. "They pray to the fire and call it Svarozhitsem..." [2] This enumeration shows that here is not a harmonious hierarchy of the Olympic pantheon, but an eclectic combination of several half-forgotten traditions. Perun is a Lithuanian god who fought with Christ until the XIV century.[3]. Chorus- the sun (Persian. Khurshid) is a legacy of ancient Mithraism. Pitchforks are the spirits of the dead, and the others are generally unknown, although, apparently, they were known and revered in the XI-XII centuries.
But these were "disputes in heaven", and they materialized "below", on our earth. In those years, when the golden domes of the cathedrals of St. Sophia rose in Kiev, Chernigov and Novgorod, in Rostov, at the Chudsky end, there was an idol of Beles, the patron saint of cattle and wide pastures - it was a deity of the Mithraic cult. Christian bishops Theodore and Hilarion fled Rostov from the fury of the Merians. Theodore was successful only in a settlement near the Slavic city of Suzdal. The successor of the fugitives, St. Leontius, was captured during a sermon. He was killed after long torments around 1070, but his successors St. Isaiah, etc. Abraham achieved success by converting many Merians to Orthodoxy.
Slavs were equally reluctant to accept Orthodoxy. At the beginning of the XII century. Vyatichi killed the missionary Kuksha. On the south-eastern outskirts, only Kursk was a Christian city, and Mtsensk, Bryansk, Kozelsk adhered to paganism, their conversion dates, very approximately, to the middle of the XII century.
The situation was even more complicated in Murom, where Orthodoxy argued not only with persistent paganism, but also with Muslim propaganda coming from the Great Bulgar. Only by 1092, the Spassky Monastery was built near Murom, and then a line of Chernigov princes reigned in Murom. But the surrounding Mordovia remained hostile to Christianity.
And finally, in the north, the Zavolotsky chud, who inhabited the country of Biarmia, or Great Perm, zealously defended the temple of Yomala from the Norwegians and from the Novgorodians. Before 1318 paganism defended itself from Christian preaching, and everything changed only in the XIV century. Then "Holy Russia" appeared on the site of the former sacrificial trees.
In the XI century. Orthodoxy suddenly found a new unexpected enemy. The teaching of the Magi differed from syncretism, widespread in northeastern Russia until the XIV century. The Magi first appeared in Suzdal in 1024. They stirred up the people against women, attributing to them the famine that happened at that time. Then, with the same sermon, the Magi in 1077-1078 passed from Rostov to Beloozer and killed many women. Their last performance was in Novgorod in 1223, but the people seized and burned them, whereas in the XI century it was the people who defended the Magi from the princes.
The principle of the Magi's teaching was written down by the boyar Jan. They said: "God, having washed, wiped himself with a rag and threw it on the ground, and then the devil created (apparently from a rag. - L.G.) a man, and God put his soul into him" [4]. To the question: "What are your gods?" - the magi pointed to the devils depicted on the icon, and claimed that these gods reveal secrets to them.
It is curious that the false monk, met by Rubruk in Mongolia in 1253, also considered the body (i.e. matter) to be the creation of the devil, and the soul to be embedded in the body by god.[5] This dualism, unlike other dualistic concepts, goes back to Manichaeism, but rather to blasphemy, but cannot be compared with naturalistic cultures - the veneration of the forces of nature - and even with the cult of ancestors. No, this is a crystallized, thought-out anti-system, according to psychology, but by no means dogmatically reminiscent of the actions of the inquisitors Sprenger and Institoris, although the latter stood on the position of monism, claiming that the devil regularly serves the throne of God.[6]
93. DUALITY
Byzantine culture, i.e. Orthodoxy and book education, in the XI century. broke the open resistance of militant paganism - the teaching of the Magi in Novgorod and Rostov land, but only in cities and fortified monasteries. The people skillfully avoided teaching someone else's faith. He had his religions, his cults, his deities. And precisely because there were several of them and they were unlike each other, the result of the ideological struggle of Christianity with paganism was a foregone conclusion.
Orthodoxy had a well-thought-out organization, enjoyed the support of the authorities and gave its adherents access to world culture, captivating Russian passionaries who sought honors and elevation in the structure of their ethnopolitical system - a monolithic state created by Vladimir Monomakh and his son Mstislav the Great [7]. Well, the simple Slavs - harmonious in their psyche and level of knowledge - had to tell fortunes, and get rid of night ghosts, and negotiate with the goblin so that he would not frighten the cattle grazing in the forest, and appease the soul of the Navi ancestors. Therefore, having won a political victory, Christianity in Ancient Russia could not cope with the ancient worldview, although the latter was declared superstition. But the Russian priests themselves believed in the existence of evil spirits, not at all deviating from the principles of their religion, because both demons and Satan are mentioned in the Gospel. As a result, the struggle against paganism, i.e. popular beliefs, was sluggish, although not without results.
The habitual, philistine idea of Slavic paganism as a life-affirming worldview is more than wrong. B.A. Rybakov convincingly showed that the term "paganism" arbitrarily combines three different cults: the ancient cult of ancestors-spirits hostile to living people, i.e. vampires [8]; the cult of elemental spirits, probably a variant of Mithraism; the cult of Perun, reformed in the ninth century in the Baltic Sea basin. This last cult was widespread among wandering Varangian warriors in Lithuania, among the Prussians and the Polabian Slavs.[9] In Russia, he could not stand the rivalry with Christianity, much older, because the Goths were baptized in the IV century, and in the West the sanctuary of Svyatovit was destroyed by the Germans at the end of the XII century. Consequently, this third cult was an episode against the background of the history of Eastern Europe, although its role in the events of the IX-XI centuries was by no means small.
Mithraism, a truly life-affirming religion that spread from the Chinese Wall to the Atlantic Ocean, gave way to Christianity, Islam and theistic Buddhism. Its story is a special topic, which we will not touch on. Much more important is the problem of ancient beliefs, which has not yet been solved and, apparently, cannot receive a satisfactory solution.[10] However, it is unacceptable to neglect it. And here's why.
The population of Eastern Europe in the tenth century was motley, but inactive, which made it possible for the Kievan princes to unite a huge territory by conquests. The inability of the Finnish, Ugric, Baltic and even Slavic tribes to resist shows that most of them were relics of ancient ethnogenesis, which had become accustomed to each other. Figuratively speaking, these ethnic groups were not children, but old men. Even the youngest of them - Radimichi and Vyatichi - had at least 5OO years behind them, and considering the incubation period - 1000 years. Therefore, their worldviews, once original, became similar to each other, which gave rise to unite them into something whole, and in fact - mosaic.
Christian authors have hypothesized the origin of diverse paganism from the collapse of the Tower of Babel and the mixing of languages.[11] The desire to find a way to construct sustainable buildings allegedly caused a phenomenon that received the name of a construction victim among folklorists and ethnographers. People were immured alive in the foundations or walls of castles and city fortresses.[12] Our peasants in the XIX century. when laying a house or housewarming killed a rooster, lamb or other animal [13] in honor of the goddess of the Earth [14].
Reading this, one remembers with gratitude the Roman Emperor Theodosius I, who forbade sacrifices in order to stop the "killing of innocent animals."
However, our ancestors surpassed the Greeks and Romans. They used it as a "construction victim"... children! "There is a legend about Novgorod: when Slavyansk was desolate and it was necessary to cut down a new city, then the people's elders, following an ancient custom, sent messengers in all directions before sunrise with instructions to capture the first living creature they met. A child came across; it was taken and laid at the base of the fortress, which is therefore called the Detinets"[15]. The same horrors took place in Germany and Britain [16], and in Russia and Bulgaria before the XIX century. unbaptized infants were buried under the threshold of the hut [17].
This terrible belief, an echo of a forgotten religion, most likely one of the unknown demon cults of antiquity, it would seem that in our enlightened time it should not have had followers. But, alas, this is another mistake of the optimist.[18]
94. "NAVI CHARMS"
Christianity was difficult to take root in Kievan Rus, but even more difficult among the Slavic tribes conquered by the Kievan princes. The military victory over the Slavic pagans - Vyatichs was won by Vladimir Monomakh, but the spiritual or, more precisely, ideological victory was kept waiting until the XIV century. In Russia itself, in the narrow sense of the word (Kiev, Chernigov, Pereyaslavl), the dual faith existed for a long time. A certain lover of Christ wrote: "I cannot tolerate Christians who live in two faiths and believe in Perun, Chorus and other gods"[19]. But both the Perun (lightning) and the Chorus (sun) Christian missionaries and princes coped, the magi-worshippers who sacrificed women to evil spirits were killed, but the most ancient cult - the veneration of the spirits of the dead - survived until the XX century.
These spirits - navii - demanded a little from living people: treats on Maundy Thursday and a heated bathhouse with prepared towels: ash and ashes were scattered on the floor of the bathhouse, and the next day they found traces similar to chicken on the ashes, which they saw as proof of a visit to the bathhouse by the dead - "they came to us to wash." Of course, the priests claimed that demons came, but, most interestingly, they did not question the fact. After the bathhouse was prepared for the navies and steam was given, people did not enter there until the next day. The whole ceremony was by no means burdensome.
Naviy's treats were demanded, but also very modest: a jug of milk, a plate with meat and milk, bread, salt. All this had to be put under the very roof of the courtyard, and preferably on the roof in strict secrecy. Naviy were extremely pleased and said: "We were like Bulgarians, we were like Polovtsy, we were like Chudis, we were like Vyatichi, we were like Slovenes, we were like other lands, we could find no people for this good and honor and obedience, like these people"[20].
Based on the selection of ethnonyms, the publisher of the text "On fasting to the ignorant for 2 weeks", from where this quote is taken, dates the text to the XI-XIII centuries, although he indicates that bloodless sacrifices to the spirits of the dead lasted until the XX century. Christians considered the navies to be demons, and the donors to be uneducated people (ignorant), but we are more interested in something else: the variety of cults that we unite under the common name - paganism. Not only the Polovtsians, who revered the Eternal Blue Sky - Tengri, Muslim Bulgarians, Finns (Chud), but also Slavic tribes - Slovene Novgorod and Vyatichi - had their own cults that did not unite them in any way in the face of the advancing Orthodoxy. That is why Christianity, which had a "rigid system" in its composition - a church organization supported by the authorities, went from victory to victory.
However, this movement was slowed down by the insincerity of many ministers of the church, as narrated by the "Word about False Prophets", presumably dating from the XIII century.[21] Although the essay is a compilation [22], but the very fact of stating the problem, namely non-compliance with Christian prohibitions in behavior, fascination with divination and magic and participation in orgies, clearly shows that the crisis of worldview in Russia in the XIII century was an actual phenomenon, and the Christian faith competed with everyday atheism [23].
The phase of obscuration often approaches gradually. Here and there, painful symptoms appear indicating ailments that are at first easily curable, then penetrate deeply into the social organism and, finally, paralyze it. The presence of several cults in one state system, i.e. stereotypes of behavior, did not in any way lead to the strengthening of the social system, especially with a decrease in passion tension. Another happiness for Russia was that the introduced Christianity did not give rise to chimeras after all; it would have been a purer end than the Khazar one. And why did it not arise?
The difference between the Khazar and Kiev kaganates in terms of ethnic contact was that strangers came to Khazaria, and other people's ideas were transplanted to Russia. D.S. Likhachev called this variant of ethno-cultural contact "transplantation" - the transplantation of thoughts, knowledge, ideas, considerations, etc., but not people! Individual Greek scientists who came to Kiev Sofia and occupied the chair there were lost in the mass of Russians, who had also been baptized for a long time and were equally intelligent. Training was easy for Russians, and family ties facilitated any kind of activity. Bishops and priests were the same locals as pagans - magi, sorcerers, healers, warriors, merchants, princes. The ethnic formation of Orthodox and pagans went synchronously, as a result of which syncretism - a phenomenon of the sociosphere - did not affect the natural process of ethnogenesis. The general decline in passionarity first reduced the intensity of religious conflicts, and then led to mutual tolerance, especially since paganism and Christianity in Russia have sprouted into each other. A peculiar variant of ideology was created, called double-belief, but it was retained for centuries due to the loss of antagonistic contradictions. Well, they began to call the Navies demons, but nothing in the life and outlook of the Slavs has changed!
Although, perhaps not; the introduction of the Greek faith and culture led to some complication of the system, i.e. played the role of a negentropic impulse. Where paganism stood - among the Polabian Slavs - the Germans won at the end of the XII century. And where complex systems were created - in Russia, Poland, the Czech Republic - the German onslaught was stopped. Thus, the "navi charms" played a small, but positive role for Slavic ethnogenesis. Therefore, the churchmen gave up on them, destroying only those cults that practiced blood sacrifices, i.e. varieties of Satanism.
As for the household needs of the population, the appeal to sorcerers was sometimes allowed, for example, to cure frequent illnesses. However, the doctor of that time was not called a sorcerer, but a healer, i.e. a knowledgeable specialist.
The church was stricter about divination, because the existence of demons was considered so obvious that communication with them was considered not as superstition, but as a double belief. "If anyone goes to the magi divination dividing or knots emlet repetition - opetimia before 40 days, and bow 300 for a day, and then 2 summers about bread and water, after leaving the help of the Highest, goes to the demons, believing in charms, pleasing the demons" [24]. The motive for the punishment is clear, but let's remember that in France and Germany, a bonfire was waiting for the guilty person for the same actions.
So, they survived everyday beliefs and skills, the legacy of forgotten cultures, all their opponents: theology, scholasticism, positivism and scientific atheism. Now the difference with antiquity, perhaps, is only in the fact that sorcerers began to be called psychics.
Demonology is a constant phenomenon, independent of formations and the level of civilization. There was a case when one female employee took time off from work to visit the grave of a close relative at the Novodevichy Cemetery in Moscow. While she was taking time off from her superiors, buying flowers and driving across Moscow, dusk was falling. She showed the document and went to the grave... and got lost. A citizen came across her, she asked him the way. He explained, but it was confusing. She asked him to take her to the grave: "It's getting dark, and I'm afraid of the dead." He kindly led her along paths and dead ends and suddenly, over his shoulder, asked: "Can you explain to me why people are afraid of us?" - "Ah!.."
It is not important for us whether it is a myth or an event. I ask the reader to imagine himself in the place of this lady; then he will understand what "demonology" is. After all, these stories, regardless of their authenticity, are the ethnography of our time, which unites us, the people of the XX century, with all our ancestors, contemporaries of our ancestors, and thus with all mankind. Ethnography is a humanitarian science. It describes not what exists in reality, but what a person perceives and reacts to. And the described case will not leave indifferent even a trade union member who pays contributions on time.
95. LONELINESS
So, the coexistence of two worldviews, seemingly irreconcilable, in ordinary life did not entail tragic consequences due to the tolerance characteristic of the old, i.e. lost excessive passionarity, ethnic groups. The presence of a variety of views and tastes did not prevent the two-believers from plowing the land, building towers, forging swords and chain mail. Russia of the XII century was a rich, cultured and relatively populous country, and the political tasks that arose before the princes were so simple that they easily solved them with the help of their intelligent advisers - boyars and bishops who studied in Constantinople not only theology, but also diplomacy. And they were able to teach there.
But if everything was so good, then why did the Russian land disappear from the political map of the world after 100 years? The proximity and even identity of the dominant ideology of ethnic groups does not lead to their merging, although it brings their cultural appearance closer. Orthodoxy did not make the Greeks Russian, as well as vice versa, but disposed them to each other. The bloody wars on the Black Sea stopped in the XI century, and Vladimir Monomakh's attempt in 1116. the return of the old lands of the streets at the mouth of the Danube ended in complete failure, and it is difficult to say whether there were military clashes there, or the voivode Ivan Voitishich pulled back his troops without a fight, having established that the Greeks were much stronger than him.
When the Kievan kagant ceased to unite the Russian land, sovereign principalities began to join European coalitions. In the 40s, Kiev entered into an alliance with Hungary against Byzantium, and the Galician and Rostov-Suzdal principalities - with the Greeks against Kiev and Hungary. In the 60s, Kiev entered into an alliance with Byzantium, and Yaroslav Osmomysl Galitsky, together with Hungary, supported the famous adventurer Andronik Komnenos. Russian monks were becoming more and more numerous on Mount Athos, and a Russian quarter appeared in Constantinople, but all this was a diplomatic game, and not a break in cultural ties. Russians and Greeks lived amicably, but separately.
It is considered to be the era of the Komnenos the golden age of Byzantium. Outwardly, it really is. Wars were won, culture was in full bloom, Constantinople, according to the crusader chronicler, concentrated 3/4 of the wealth of the whole world, and the remaining quarter was scattered across all countries. But from the standpoint of ethnology, everything was much worse.
The three great Komnenos conquered and feasted at the expense of accumulated wealth. They did not mobilize their compatriots to defend the borders, but hired Varangians and Franks in the infantry, Pechenegs and Cumans in the cavalry, and Genoese and Pisans in the navy. Emperor Manuel was surrounded by French knights and ladies. Even the empress was a Frenchwoman - Maria of Antioch.
Therefore, the ties of Russia with Byzantium by the end of the XII century acquired a slightly different character. There was nothing to quarrel about, and there was no need to be friends. The contact became not emotional, but speculative. But this is also natural with the decline of passion tension in both countries.
It got even worse in the age of Angels. These incompetent rulers have lost not only Bulgaria, but also the respect of the Orthodox Slavs. In the XIII century, only memories of the idea of the commonality of Greek-Russian culture, lost in 1204, remained.
The contact of Russia with co-religionist Georgia was somewhat different. In 1185-1186, Tsarina Tamara was married to Andrei Bogolyubsky's son Yuri, whom his uncle, Vsevolod the Big Nest, deprived of his inheritance and compensated him with a luxurious dynastic marriage. But Prince Yuri Andreevich, an energetic, talented, but rude man, showing courage and talent as a commander, simultaneously combined the Russian vice - drunkenness - with the eastern, unnatural. Tamara could not stand it and sent her husband to Constantinople, richly providing for him. However, Yuri Andreevich drank the money quickly, returned to Georgia through Erzurum and raised an uprising. The most surprising thing is that almost half of Georgia sided with him, which means they considered the applicant their own. Tamara won. The Georgian princes surrendered and brought George of Russia himself. Tamara let him go to Russia, but the Suzdal princes were adamant and did not accept Yuri. Then he married the Polovtsian Khatun, in 1193 he came to Arran and with the help of the local ata-bek again invaded Georgia, but was defeated and disappeared. Ethnic contact did not take place.
The situation was more complicated with Romano-Germanic Catholic countries, including Slavic Poland. Even friendship at the ethnic level could not be realized here, despite the political alliances mentioned above. Russians considered Greeks, Georgians, Karelians, Izhora as their own, but not Swedes, Germans, French, Italians, despite the insignificance of differences in theological dogmatics, in subtleties inaccessible to the overwhelming mass of the people, and the nobility. The feeling prevailed over the philosophical understanding, as, indeed, in the West.
Catholics did not consider Greeks, Bulgarians and Russians to be co-religionists, and this alienation, which first manifested itself in 858-867, turned into a religious war against the Orthodox 300 years later. There was no benefit from this war to either side; its meaning was not clear even to scientists who were contemporaries of the events.
Metropolitan John IV (1080-1089) wrote to Pope Gregory VII (1073-1085): "I do not know how the temptations and stumbling blocks on the divine path occurred and why they are not corrected? I can't quite marvel at what an evil spirit... the enemy of truth and the opponent of unanimity, alienates your brotherly love from the whole Christian flock, instilling that we are not Christians. But at first, we always considered you Christians... although you differ from us in many ways"[25].
The pope in 1075 approved Izyaslav as the "Russian king" on some special conditions, which he did not dare to entrust to parchment. He wrote that his two ambassadors "will verbally explain to you what is and what is not in the letter"[26]. There can be little doubt that the secret speech was about submission to the papal throne and a break with the Greek patriarchate. But Gregory VII died in exile, and Izyaslav, after the death of his rival brother, returned to Kiev in 1077. There was no need for Western help.
And what would have happened if the Germans, Hungarians and Poles had put their protege on the golden table of Kiev, shows in the example of Galich, captured by the Hungarians, where an Orthodox bishop was expelled during the short reign of Hungarian King Coloman, churches were converted to churches, and the people were forced to Latinism.[27] Only the bold attack of Princes Daniil and Mstislav Udaly returned both political and religious freedom to Galich. Contact with the papacy was clearly not possible.
In fact, the failures of Catholic propaganda among the Slavs were due to two reasons: the Latin Bible was incomprehensible to the Slavs and Prussians, and its translations were not allowed; therefore, persuasion was replaced by coercion, and Adam of Bremen beautifully said about the latter in his "History of the Church", written around 1070: "The Baltic Slavic tribes, no doubt, long ago they would have been converted to the Christian faith if it had not been prevented by the greed of the Saxons, whose soul feels more desire for tithes than for the conversion of pagans. They first outraged the newly converted Christians in Slavonia with greed, then, having subdued them, brought them to revolt with cruelty and now, seeking only money, they do not rejoice about the salvation of those who would like to believe"[28].
This is the answer to the letters of Metropolitan John IV to Pope Gregory VII, who heroically corrected the mores of the Western church, but was powerless against natural phenomena, including ethnogenesis. In the XII century. the passionate tension of Romano-Germanic Europe reached an acmatic phase, and Slavic and Greek Europe had already lost its former energy, even passed the inertial phase and lived only at the expense of accumulated wealth and traditions. However, wealth was being squandered, and traditions were being forgotten; the fall of Constantinople and the foundation of Riga were nearing.
Russia was more fortunate than the Western Slavs and Greeks. Those and others covered her with their bodies, and the princes of Rurik at home could calmly settle personal scores and devastate their own country in strife; as for theological disputes with Catholics, the Russians avoided them, knowing full well that it was not about theology, but about war. And it began in the XIII century, when a crusade was declared against Orthodoxy (see Chapter XXII).
The Europeans were advancing systematically. In 1204, the French and Venetians took and plundered Constantinople and Thessalonica, but in 1205 they were stopped by the Bulgarians and Cumans, after which the Latin Empire and the "Overseas Land" (Palestine) went on the defensive and were liquidated at the end of the XIII century.
Germans and Swedes were drawn to rich Novgorod, but it was saved by Alexander Nevsky in 1240-1242. During this half a century, the newborn Mongolia has coped with its steppe opponents: the Merkits, Cumans and Bulgarians, but has not even made an attempt to gain a foothold in the Russian land. The Mongol troops left Russia in 1241. The chronological coincidence of the Catholic pressure on Orthodoxy and the passionate push in Mongolia is accidental.
For twenty years, the Russian land, which had split into eight "semi-states", essentially sovereign states - a superethnos based on a gradually forgotten tradition - was alone, surrounded by enemies and lost friends. But not only that, most of the population of Russia was hostile to the order, which was based on Orthodoxy, princely authority and all-Russian patriotism. They were stubborn pagans and hypocritical double-believers. They paid taxes, but they had no love for state principles. The princes could not exist without them, but it was more than dangerous to rely on them. The Mongols and Germans found among them helpers who did not consider themselves traitors, because they obeyed the princes involuntarily. And it is not surprising that the Russian land fell apart in the XIV century. The Novgorod Republic became an incomplete member of the Hansa, the Lithuanians took the Kiev land, almost without resistance, and the Zalessky suburb found salvation in alliance with the Golden Horde, which defended its subjects. Loneliness is the surest way to disappear. But this process of ethnic obscuration began after the defeat of Kiev, 33 years before Batu's campaign, and not as a result of the Mongol raid, the size of which is exaggerated in subsequent historiography.
But was it possible that the way out, which liberal historians of the XIX century dreamed of in hindsight, was rapprochement with the West and the culture there, which developed very rapidly? To answer, it is necessary to give a generalization of the European thought of the XII century, at least extremely concise. Only in this way can one grasp the difference in the structure of thought of the East and the West, which gave rise to the great schism of the XI century.
96. PERPLEXITY
The situation of Western Christianity in the ninth century was much more complicated than that of the East. In the East, all philosophy could be learned or dispensed with, and in the West, reason was offered as a tool of knowledge, i.e. one's own opinion, and it is not so easy to make it up. And even if you make it up, it is even more difficult to agree with the opinion of a neighbor or his cure, and any disagreement threatens trouble. And then, the opinion that has already been drawn up requires linking with each new information. Information in those days was constantly received, although it was most often unreliable. The stories of travelers contradicted the usual ideas about the structure of the world, legends - the Bible, Christian preaching - the usual pagan cult. It was easiest to dismiss all these plots, but the growing passionarity pushed people of the IX century to search for a worldview, a search that is never approved and is called God-seeking. But this activity is not a whim, but an indicator of the passionate tension of the era.
Medieval god-seekers found clues to the mysteries of existence without leaving their hometowns, because eastern wisdom itself flowed to the West. She carried the answer to the most painful question of theology: God, who created the world, is good; where did evil and Satan come from?
For the vast majority of people who were part of the Christian ethnic groups of the Middle Ages, complex theological problems were incomprehensible and unnecessary. However, almost all Christians had a need for an organic, consistent worldview, even those who practically did not believe in the dogmas of religion and certainly did not think about them.
The nature and system of the worldview had a practical meaning - the separation of good and evil and the explanation of what is evil. For the medieval layman, this problem was solved simply: by contrasting God with the Devil, i.e. by elementary dualism. But this was opposed by theologians, monists, who claimed that God is omnipresent. But if so, then God is present in the Devil and, therefore, bears moral responsibility for all the tricks of Satan.
To this, thinking people objected that if God is the source of evil and sin (even if the devil is the direct executor), then there is no point in honoring him. And they cited texts from the New Testament, where Christ refused to compromise with the Devil who tempted him. The supporters of monism responded to this with the theory that Satan was created by a pure angel, but became indignant and began to do evil out of self-will and pride. But this concept is incompatible with the principle of God's omniscience, which should have provided for the nuances of the behavior of his creation, and omnipotence, because, having the opportunity to stop the outrages of Satan, he does not do this. Therefore, the theologians put forward a new concept: the Devil is needed and performs the task assigned to him, and this essentially meant a compromise between God and Satan, which was convenient for people indifferent to faith, but unacceptable for sincere believers. There was a search for a solution, and hence heresy.
In 847, the learned monk Gottschalk, developing the concept of Blessed Augustine, came up with the doctrine of predestination: some people were "doomed" to salvation in paradise, and others to condemnation in hell, regardless of their actions, but according to God's foresight by virtue of his omniscience. This opinion was quite logical, but then there was no need to do anything for the sake of their salvation and, conversely, it was possible to commit any crimes, referring to the fact that they were foreseen by God at the creation of the world. Gottschalk's sermon caused a sharp outrage. The bishop of Cologne, Rabanus the Moor, imprisoned him in a monastery. In 849 on this occasion, a controversy arose, in which John Scott Erigena took part, who stated that there is no evil in the world at all, that evil is "me / he" (Greek), i.e. the absence of being [29], therefore, the problem of good and evil was generally eliminated from theology, and thereby not abolished only theoretical, but also practical morality.
Erigena's opinion was condemned at the local council in Balans in 855. The Council "rejected the Scottish porridge with contempt", i.e. Erigena's teaching, which was qualified as "the theses of the devil, not the truths of faith"[30]. But in both versions, evil, both metaphysical (Satan) and practical (crimes), was rehabilitated. Gottschalk considered divine foresight to be the source of evil, and Erigena suggested taking obvious evil for good, since God does not do evil.
So, theoretically, the problem of good and evil has reached a dead end, and practically the Roman Church has returned to the teaching of Pelagius about salvation by doing good deeds. This decision was by no means a conscious departure from the views of St. Augustine, but rather instinctive, perceived intuitively and gave practical results - natural morality. But if Pelagianism satisfied the demands of the masses, it did not remove the question of the nature and origin of evil and Satan, mentioned repeatedly in the New Testament. Uncertainty disturbed the inquisitive minds of young people of all nations and classes.
Not that they were looking for ways of enrichment or social reconstruction in philosophy and theology, no, they needed a consistent worldview that would combine their life experience with the tradition and level of knowledge of that time.
It was just that rare case when broad sections of the population, lost in ideological contradictions, turn to scientists to get an answer from them to their questions. This is a kind of "fatal moment", often lasting for decades, when an ethnic group makes for itself a choice of a path from which it does not leave for a long time, sometimes until its very collapse or fracture. Then philosophical knowledge acquires a public sound, and if not, everyone understands the complex theological argumentation, then the conclusions are clear to everyone.
But these creative periods are always dangerous, because the search for the truth can often lead to a trap of lies. In such epochs, neighbors with an established culture and ideology let their ideas germinate through the body of a maturing, but immature ethnic group. Ideological metastases give rise to chimeras, in which anti-systems often arise, which are always difficult to cope with. Such a situation arose in the Carolingian Empire in IX and proved fraught with serious consequences.
97. DOGMAS, THOUGHTS AND DEEDS IN THE WESTERN WORLD OF THE IX-XII CENTURIES.
Official church theology has been extremely passive for a long time, apparently simply not knowing how and what to object to the advocates of predestination. By the end of the IX century. [31] the spiritual and secular society of Europe, from top to bottom, was in a state of complete moral decline. So, Pope John XII (955-964) arranged a harem of corrupt women in his palace, hunted, dragged, drank and even gave feasts with pagan rituals, libations in honor of the ancient gods and Satan [32]. The classical traditions were not yet completely forgotten, but it did not help. Many priests were illiterate, prelates received appointments due to family ties, theological thought was crushed by literal interpretations of the Bible that corresponded to the level of ignorant theologians, and spiritual life was shackled by the statutes of the Cluny monks, who persistently replaced free-thinking with good morals. In that era, all energetic natures were either mystics or libertines.[33] And there were many more energetic and passionate people at that time than was required for everyday life. That's why they tried to send them to Palestine to liberate the Holy Sepulchre from Muslims with the hope that they would not return. However, it was a political way out, but not an ideological one.
The dialectical counter-analysis described here was not relevant outside of the "Christian world". Orthodox Greeks, Muslims - Arabs and Berbers, pagans - Slavs and Balts - solved problems of conscience either on the basis of tradition or by moral intuition. They were unlike Western Europeans and did not want to be like them. Therefore, completely different collisions arose in the east of Europe. From there, the Manichaeans-Cathars came to the West.
The Cathars identified the evil creator god of the world with the god of the Old Testament - Yahweh, changeable, cruel and deceitful, who created the material world to mock people.[34] But here the medieval Christian immediately asked the question: what about Christ, who was a man? Two answers were prepared for this: an explicit one for the converts and a secret one for the initiates. It was clearly explained that "Christ had a heavenly, ethereal body when he moved into Mary. He came out of it as alien to matter as he had been before... He had no need for anything earthly, and if he apparently ate and drank, he did it for people so as not to suspect himself before Satan, who was looking for an opportunity to destroy the Deliverer." However, for the "faithful" (as the members of the community were called. - L.G.), another explanation was offered: "Christ is the creation of a demon: he came into the world to deceive people and prevent their salvation. The real one did not come, but lived in a special world, in the heavenly Jerusalem"[35].
Enough details. There can be no doubt that Manichaeism in Provence and Lombardy is not just heresy, but anti-Christianity and that it is further from Christianity than Islam and even theistic Buddhism. However, if we move from theology to the history of culture, the conclusion will be different. God and the devil in the Manichaean concept have been preserved, but have changed places. That is why the new confession has such a great success in the XII century. The concept itself was exotic, and its details are familiar, and replacing the plus with the minus for the perception of God-seekers turned out to be easy. Consequently, any protest, any rejection of reality, which was indeed very attractive, could find expression in the change of the sign. In addition, the Manichean teaching was divided into many directions, attitudes, worldviews and degrees of concentration, which was facilitated equally by the passionarity of the converts, which allowed them not to be afraid of the fire, and the justification of lies, with which they not only saved themselves, but also inflicted disastrous blows on their opponents.
For the sake of the success of the propaganda of their teachings, the Cathars often changed their appearance, penetrating into cities and villages sometimes as pilgrims, sometimes as merchants, but most often as artisan weavers; because it was easy for a weaver to get to work and make the necessary connections, without being noticed himself. This is not a class anti-feudal movement of the masses, but a disguise of members of an organization united by the "power of the Manichean "pope" who lived, as they said, in Bulgaria.
The Albigensian teaching for the masses allowed treachery and deception in matters of faith and did not prescribe suffering for religious beliefs. Sometimes merging with Catholics, then standing out from them, the Cathars did not allow themselves to be tracked down... That is why a separate institution was required in Catholic institutions, which would make it possible to distinguish Catholics by necessity from sincere Catholics.[36]
While dualistic teaching, more precisely, naturophobia, was food for extremely high-level minds, it remained harmless to the geographical environment. Dreamers and thinkers who have tried to find a consistent understanding of existence arouse the reader's sincere sympathy.
When we read that in 1022 The clerics of the Catholic Church in Orleans - the confessor of King Robert and Queen Constance Stephen, the scholastic Lisa and the chaplain of a Norman nobleman, Arefast, Heribert - were betrayed by the said Arefast, who, pretending to be a supporter of heresy, having betrayed the trust of thinkers, denounced them to the king and acted as a witness for the prosecution, our sympathies lie on the side of the victims of betrayal.
Gullible dreamers were burned, but this cruel measure was condemned by many princes of the church. Bishop Vason of Luttikh spoke about the repression as follows: "God does not want the death of a sinner, but his repentance in life. He is in no hurry to judge him, but waits with patience. Bishops should imitate the example of the Savior... Instead of putting heretics to death, we should limit ourselves to excluding them from communication with the faithful, and protecting these latter from their influence" (1043-1062).[37]
The latter failed to be implemented. The Gnostic teaching attracted many French and Belgian aristocrats and a lot of commoners to its side. In the eleventh century, the moral decay of the churchmen was associated with religious tolerance, although the latter was not the fruit of charity, but laziness and indifference to the work of service. The desire of the prelates to have thoughtless and uninitiative people as assistants led to the fact that numerous passionaries sought refuge in sects, and sub-passionaries were a heavy ballast for the church. It couldn't end well.
When, under the influence of neighboring cultures, a split of the field occurs in the ethnic system, then harmful "bacteria" creep into the gap, as into an open wound, and interfered with natural healing. This is a general rule, and so it was in Europe XI-XII centuries.
It started with Spain. In 1031, the Umayyad Caliphate, the stronghold of the Jews in the West, fell. The "tribal leaders" who replaced the Arab caliphs (Muluk attawa'if) were by no means disposed to the favorites of the overthrown dynasty. The only exception was Grenada, which was then called the "Jewish city"[38], and Jews fled from other Muslim rulers to Castile. There they were willingly accepted, because the reconquista was in full swing and the Spaniards needed to replenish the troops and the urban population. Jews were granted many important privileges, including the right to a ghetto. This was a very big concession, because the kingdom's laws did not apply to the ghetto-eligible neighborhoods; Jews living in the ghetto were judged according to their own laws, by their own judges, which gave them virtual impunity for crimes against Christians and for promoting skepticism that undermined faith in Christian dogmas.
The example of the Castilian kings was followed by the French - Louis VII and Philip Augustus, and after them the Aragonese, English, Sicilian and other crowned kings. As a result, the general mood of the society of that time was "far from Christian, but rather skeptical and indifferent"[39]. Only free peasants, rural clergy and small feudal lords resisted the authorities, but their hands were tied by the heresy hanging over them, whose representatives in the XII century moved from words to deeds, using the support of kings.
From the X to the XIII century. the teachings of the Cathars and Patarenes developed unhindered. In Italy, where the feudal lords were oppressed, the Patarenes were kept in the cities. Around 1163, there were more Patarenes in Milan than Catholics, and their activity was higher - for example, an archbishop was killed in the cathedral during a sermon. In 1184, Verona was full of Patarenes, so that the exiled Pope Lucius II did not find refuge in it, and Catholics prevailed in the city, shouting: "Death to the Patarenes and Ghibellines!" [40]. From the cities where this slogan could be implemented, the Patarenes fled to France or to Toulouse, because the counts of Toulouse had all the highest positions in the hands of Jews,[41] who patronized the Cathars. And we should not forget that by the XII century the nobility of Languedoc and Provence consisted of descendants of large landowners who bought latifundia in the IX-X centuries, i.e. rich Jewish slave traders-Rachdonites who promptly converted to Catholicism.
Having converted to the new faith, these nobles, descendants of merchants who called themselves weavers, behaved more and more actively. In the "Annals" of Barony under 1183 The "coterelli" who operated in France are described as follows: "They set fire to churches, caught priests and pious people, took them with them, tortured them and at the same time told them with laughter: "Sing, sing, singers!" These words were accompanied by slaps and blows with thick sticks. The same "coterelli" robbed churches, viciously threw the body of the Lord out of golden vessels on the ground and trampled this shrine with their feet"[42]. In essence, this entry contains a description of the incubation period of the Albigensian war, which began long before the call for a crusade against heretics was announced, and as always, the search for the culprit in unleashing the war does not yield results.
So, Western Europe in the XI-XII centuries was much less monolithic in cultural, religious, and political terms than in the XIX century. There is nothing to be surprised at. The development of civilization is a process of equalization, similar to that carried out in ancient Hellas by the late Procrustes. At the population level, this process is delayed up to 1200 years. So, if we discard 800 years from our time, it is easy to imagine the mosaic of medieval Europe. It was "an age of arbitrariness and lawlessness"[43].
Well, here is the answer to the question posed above. To join the West, it was necessary to decide: which one? To the Albigenses of Toulouse? To the popes of Rome and their allies, soon called the Welfs (in Italy, the Guelphs)? To the emperors who hoarded the looted wealth in the castle of Trifels? That was the choice, because such provincial towns as Paris, London, Toledo, Barcelona did not count.
But the contacts should be mutual. Was it possible to persuade the pope to give up priority in all autocephalous churches and the right to refuse oaths, forgive sins for money and own rich lands? The Papists were merciless to the Greeks and to the Polabian Slavs - Lyutich. To make contact with them was like death! But that was a full half of Europe!
And the German emperors of the Franconian and Swabian dynasties and their supporters - the Ghibellines? These talented and cruel generals relied on unscrupulous adventurers, paying them with Jewish money received from the rich ghettos of the Rhine cities. Their regime was based only on force and partly on diplomacy. They dealt with heretics even more cruelly than the Papists, and in the capture of Sicily, the treachery and ferocity of Henry VI compromised the German nation in the eyes of the Italians and the French.
And the Teutonic Order, which had just captured Prussia and threatened to become the vanguard of the "onslaught to the east", was the creation of the imperial party, just as the Templars were the Papal party. And which of them was worse for the neighbors, I can't say.
Well, there's nothing to say about the Albigenses. Their goal was the annihilation of the "evil world", and Christians and pagans alike wanted to preserve and beautify it. Therefore, the preaching of negativism could have been successful in Bulgaria at that time, but not in Russia.
98. RUTHLESSNESS
The akmatic phase of ethnogenesis, in other words, the passionate overheating of the system, is a difficult and tragic epoch not only for those who are inside the superethnos, but even more so for their neighbors. The fact that knights and men-at-arms sought to conquer, regarding them as feats, is understandable, but thinkers - scholastics and heresiarchs - pursued similar goals, with the difference that they combined political aggression with intellectual aggression. It is difficult to say which was harder for the enslaved Slavs, Celts, and soon the Greeks: the loss of property and freedom or violence against souls? Therefore, they resisted desperately. Only Henry VII was able to conquer Ireland in the XV century; until that time, Byzantium lasted, which preferred the sultan's turban to the papal tiara. And the Russian cultural tradition has survived, despite the internal disintegration and transformation of the ethnos. How and why? This will be discussed in detail below.
However, the grandiose aspiration of the Romano-Germanic superethnos to world domination, which destroyed all ethnic groups that could not defend themselves, could not but have an impact on those who managed to resist. The whole history of Russian-European (in the ethnological sense) contact for a thousand years is reduced to the penetration of "civilization" [44] into "culture". In the political aspect, it was the desire for territorial seizures, repulsed by the Russians, and in the ideological aspect - the spread of ideas, views, assessments, tastes, in short, mentality. Its reflection was not always successful, because the offensive of the West went on steadily, systematically and uncompromisingly.
And finally, may the reader forgive the author for a chronological digression... When at the end of the XVII century. Westernism, assimilated by the Romanov dynasty, triumphed in Russia, there was a violent clash between the directions: Sophia and Golitsyn were fascinated by Catholic Europe - Austria and Poland, and Peter - Protestant - Holland.
Both did not bring anything good. Golitsyn, serving Austria, was defeated at Perekop, and Peter, being an ally of Protestant Saxony, was defeated at Narva, which is why the war dragged on for 21 years instead of two or three years.
The Seven Years' War, started by Russia in alliance with France and Austria, ended with the death of Elizabeth Petrovna. The 180∞ degree turn under Peter III eliminated all the fruits of the victories of Russian weapons. And then the ideological descendants of medieval "weavers" - "masons" - crawled into Russia. There is no room here for a detailed analysis, much less an assessment of these phenomena of contact at the superethnic level, but for the dynasty such freedom in choosing political sympathies to taste turned out to be tragic.
No, Princess Olga, Yuri II and Alexander Nevsky were not stupid, who sent German missionaries from the Russian land so as not to enter into a useless dispute with them. But was communication with the Muslim and steppe East constructive in the XII century? Let's not jump to conclusions.
99. CORRUPTION IN THE MUSLIM WORLD
If the Christian West, with all the above-described troubles, retained opportunities for further development, then the Muslim East lost them in a similar situation, because at the end of the XI century it turned into an ethnic chimera. The Abbasid caliphate was saved from its own heretics by foreigners - Seljuk Turkmens, who restored the predominance of the orthodox confession - Sunnism - in Iran and Syria conquered by them. Mesopotamia and Asia Minor.
But this prosperity did not last long. The Seljuk Sultanate collapsed from internal wars, first in the west, and then in Iran, while the Turks, who settled among the Arabs and Persians, did not merge with them into a single ethnic group. Therefore, the Muslim world of the XII century should be considered as a chimeric integrity. The population there was united by brute force, not by systemic ties of complementarity. The power passed into the hands of the Gulyams, mainly of Turkic origin, but who broke away from the Turkic steppe world. It goes without saying that the power of Muslim proselytism has fallen to zero. Conversion to Islam ceased to seem desirable to the nomads, and therefore the Muslims had to retreat before the Kipchaks and Oguzes.
The Kara-Kitai (Kidani) conquered the Central Asian mesopotamia, the Georgians won a number of victories over the Seljuk emirs. By the beginning of the XIII century, the phase of fracture, i.e., a decrease in the passionate tension of the system, led the Muslim world to premature old age, or the phase of obscuration, the way out of which was unpredictable.
But here's what's curious: at a time when nomadic Turks and Orthodox Greeks, Georgians and Russians repelled Muslim culture, it was greedily absorbed by the Crusaders, although it would seem that they were supposed to be the worst enemies of Muslims. From the point of view of ethnology, this fact is easily explained. The Byzantine culture had already crystallized and did not need changes. This is a feature of the inertial phase of ethnogenesis. The nomads, the descendants and heirs of the Huns, have already squandered the creative forces bestowed on people by excess energy. Ethnic groups have grown old, i.e. we have reached homeostasis, and this state is conservative and hostile to any changes. It can only be broken by a new passionate push, which happened in the XIII century, when the Mongols appeared.
And the French, Italians and Spaniards were in an akmatic phase, i.e. in a constant passionate overheating, which made their behavioral structure plastic and pushed them to receive not only military booty, but also knowledge, skills and philosophical concepts. The West lost the war in Palestine, but enriched its spiritual culture, expanded its horizons, and came out of the war with a profit.
And the nomads, who defeated both Muslims and crusaders, could not perceive high culture in the XIII century, because they did not need it. They made do with a natural worldview, which at that time ceased to be religious, but it cannot be called atheistic either. The most appropriate name is demonology, but this term needs to be deciphered.
100. DEMONOLOGY
The level of religious consciousness - the cult - and the level of passionate tension of the ethnic system are mutually conditioned. To create an original system of worldview requires not only a doctrine, but also the ability and the energy to perceive it, and this is not available to all members of the ethnos. However, the passionate elite, having accepted this or that teaching, introduces it into a stereotype of behavior, thereby involving the masses of ordinary people who may accept the doctrine without criticism in the accepted mood. This applies not only to sedentary ethnic groups with written language, but also to nomads who transmit valuable information orally for memorization, which is perhaps more effective, since it is more personal.
But already at the end of the akmatic phase (at the beginning of the break), the interest of ordinary people, (i.e. weakly passive), their interest in complex ideological problems weakens, and finally, there remains only a set of views that have, from the point of view of the layman, practical significance. Theology turns into natural philosophy, and religion into demonology, because every normal forester is afraid of meeting with a goblin or a water spirit, and a steppe dweller is afraid of kara-chulmus and albast - a killer spirit crushing those sleeping in the steppe by the fire or piercing them with long copper nails (dzheztyrnak).
These are the spirits of nature, not conquered by man, but the spirit of the deceased is even more terrible: the Russians have a mermaid, the Turks have an ubur (ghoul), sucking the blood of people who were close to the deceased during their lifetime. And since many people either saw these monsters or felt them before they died due to spells or the sudden intervention of neighbors, there was no doubt about the presence of pathogenic creatures that cause heart attacks, anemia, or paralysis. But after all, we have recently stopped doubting the existence of viruses, although they can only be seen through an electron microscope on the screen, and not directly.
Naturally, the recognition of the presence of numerous harmful creatures caused a desire to defend against them, which was beyond the power of simple hunters and herders. Specialists were needed to deal with hostile and invisible demons. In Turkic they were called "bakhsi", in Slavic - healers, in modern academic jargon - shamans. The latter name really takes place among the Tungus-Manchus, but its meaning is different, as well as the origin brought from India, and the teaching of shamanism - a complex system of mystical atheism (the theory of the multilayered universe and divine election [45]) - is not connected with the worldview of the West Siberian Turks and Ugrians, as well as with the polytheism of the Buryat "black faith"[46].
Paganism is even more diverse than theism, but this problem would lead us away from our topic, so let's leave it. What is more important is that in ancient times these peoples had religions: sometimes an original dualism, which was based not on antagonism, but on synthesis, complementarity, and sometimes borrowed from preachers. Khormusta was given to the Uighurs by the Manichaeans, Mitra came from the Saks to the Mongols, Uch Yduk (Trinity) is the legacy of the Nestorians.[47] But these cults interested the steppe dwellers at a time when the akmatic phase was turning into inertia, and with the triumph of homeostasis, those who wanted to seek faith for themselves turned either to Orthodoxy, or to Islam, or - on the eastern edge of the Steppe - to Buddhism and Bon (ancient Tibetan religion). The culture of the Turks of the X-XII centuries was eroded in the same way as their former statehood: and this was a direct consequence of ethnic entropy - the natural loss of passionarity.
But this decline did not concern demonology. For a person who is in homeostasis, it is not the complex constructions of theologians and philosophers that are important, but the reality surrounding him, even if he does not understand it scientifically. For him, a mistake is within the legal tolerance; clarifications for him are often meaningless hindrances. That is why the signs are so stable, going back to the ancient forgotten knowledge, although distorted by the destructive Chronos, but preserved in fragments even in the urbanized world.
And another thing is no less significant: the localization of demonological systems. The terrible demons of the inner part of the Eurasian continent are unknown in England, where the un-dead are called "little people" - elves and fairies dancing on moonlit nights in the heather thickets, and the spirits of the dead do not suck the blood, but frighten the inhabitants of ancient castles. Scandinavians are afraid of trolls, capable, according to ancient mythology, of defeating the gods of Valhalla. The Chinese distinguish five degrees of demons: yar is a ghost, mo is an amorphous evil force, tui is the spirit of the deceased, guai is the spirit of the elements, shen is an analogue of the Olympic deities. And werewolves on the outskirts of the continent are different: in China - foxes, in Germany - wolves.
Hence it is clear that demonology has no points of intersection with either theology or philosophy, and therefore cannot be preached to an ethnic group living in a different landscape region, and, therefore, is not relevant for the problem of interethnic contacts. Demonological concepts are learned only by immigrants from the aborigines, like any skills of adaptation in a new landscape.
NOTES
[1] See: Turaev B.A. History of the Ancient East. Vol. II. St. Petersburg, 1913. pp. 92- 104.
[2] Gumilevsky F. Decree. op. p. 45.
[3] The last defender of Perun was the Grand Duke of Lithuania Algirdas, but his children and nephews were baptized (see ibid. pp. 40-43).
[4] Gumilevsky F. Decree. op. p. 53.
[5] See: Journey to the Eastern countries of Plano Carpini and Rubruk. p. 157.
[6] Sprenger Ya. and Institoris. Hammer of Witches.pp.159-161.
[7] From the Congress of princes in Lyubech (1097) to the death of Mstislav and the fall of Polotsk (1132) (see: History of the USSR. Vol. 1. P. 584).
[8] See: Rybakov B.A. Paganism of the ancient Slavs.M., 1981.S.15-17.
[9] Ibid., pp. 19 and 25.
[10] See: Vetlovskaya V.E. Dostoevsky's creativity in the light of literary and folklore parallels. "Construction victim"//Myth - folklore - literature. LD 1978. p. 103.
[11] See: Fraser J. Folklore in the Old Testament. M.;L., 1931.pp.137-138
[12] See: Zelenin D. Totems-trees in the legends of the rituals of European peoples. M.;L., 1937. p. 3.
[13] See: Nikiforovsky M. Russian Paganism. St. Petersburg., 1875.P.38.
[14] See: Afanasyev A.N. Poetic views of the Slavs on nature. Vol. 2. M., 1868. p. 83.
[15] Cit. by: Vetlovskaya V.E. Decree. op. p. 104.
[16] See: Veselovsky A.N. From the history of literary communication. St. Petersburg, 1872. pp. 305-307.
[17] See: Afanasyev A.N. Decree. op. T. 2. P. 113; Vol. 3. M., 1869. p. 237,799.
[18] V.E. Vetlovskaya (Decree. op. P. 107-113) shows that N.A. Nekrasov stood on the ground of paganism when he wrote: "The case is solid when blood flows under it," and F.M. Dostoevsky replied that the welfare of the whole world is not worth the death of one innocent child. And finally, the image of V. Belinsky - Kolya Krasotkin builds liberalism on the death of Ilyusha Snegirev, an innocent victim of his own innate nobility.
[19] Galkovsky N. The struggle of Christianity with the remnants of paganism in Ancient Russia//3pisks of the Moscow Archaeological Institute. Vol. XVIII. M., 1913. p. 1.
[20] Ibid. pp. 5-7.
[21] Ibid., p. 56.
[22] The following is an excerpt from the "Works of John Chrysostom" Vol. 8. Book 2. P. 706 (see: Galkovsky N.Decree, op.C.56-58).
[23] "... and the baptized themselves do not believe in Christ" (There same. p. 67).
[24] "Rules of the Holy Fathers" (see: Prokhorov G.M., Rozov N.N. List of books by Kirill Belozersky//TODRL. XXXVI. L., pp. 376-377).
[25] Gumilevsky F. Decree.soc.T.1.P.97.
[26] Ibid. p. 101.
[27] Ibid., p. 103.
[28] Ibid., p. 61.
[29] See: Arsenyev I. From Charlemagne to the Reformation. p. 62.
[30] Ibid. pp. 64-65.
[31] N.A. Osokin (Decree. Op. Vol. II. p. 167) gives the exact date - 891.
[32] See: Weber G. Universal History. Vol. 6. pp. 79-80.
[33] See: Osokin N.A. Decree. Op.T.I. S.170-173.
[34] See: Arsenyev I. Decree. op. p. 87.
[35] Osokin N.A. Decree. op. p. 194-195.
[36] Ibid. p. 23.
[37] Arsenyev I. Decree. op. p. 77.
[38] Muller A. The history of Islam. Vol. IV. 1896. p. 167.
[39] Arsenyev I. Decree. op. pp. 144-145.
[40] See: Osokin N.A. Decree. op. pp. 175-178.
[41] See: Schipper And. Decree. Op. pp. 175-178.
[42] Arsenyev I. Decree. op. p. 103.
[43] Weber G. Decree. op. Vol. IV. p. 383.
[44] At the beginning of the XX century, this term was understood as mechanical knowledge (not only technical) that did not form an ethnopsychological warehouse (mentalitet).
[45] See: Sternberg L.Ya. Election in religion//Primitive religion in the light of ethnography. L., 1936.
[46] See: Banzarov D. Black Faith. St. Petersburg, 1891; Gumilev L.N. Ancient Mongol religion//Reports of the GO USSR. Issue 5. L., 1968. pp. 31-39. See.:
[47] Gumilev L.N. Nestorianism and ancient Russia//Reports on ethnography of the Geographical Society of the USSR. L., 1967. p. 8.
.