Saint Michael, first Metropolitan of Kiev. Mikhail of Kyiv and all Rus'

Ephraim (Metropolitan of Kyiv)

In the 14th century, for the first time in ancient Russian literary practice, a saint’s life was created. This is a hagiobiography of Metropolitan Peter, an outstanding church figure who contributed to the rise of Moscow among other Russian cities.

Peter became Metropolitan in 1305. And despite the fact that his candidacy was proposed by the Galician Grand Duke Yuri Lvovich, almost immediately after his initiation in Constantinople he went to North-Eastern Rus'. Here he, being involved in the struggle between princes Mikhail Yaroslavich Tverskoy and Yuri Danilovich Moskovsky for the great reign, took the side of Moscow. Probably for this reason, and also due to the fact that the protege of the Tver prince George did not receive the metropolis, Peter was accused by the Tver bishop Andrei of the sin of bribery. On this occasion, in 1310 or 1311, a Council was held in Pereyaslavl-Zalessky, at which most of the clergy spoke out against Peter, but with the support of the Moscow prince Ivan Danilovich Kalita, he was acquitted. In 1313, Peter was honorably received into the Golden Horde, where he received confirmation of the old benefits for the clergy, as well as a new one, namely the right of metropolitan court over all church people in all cases, not excluding criminal ones. Throughout his entire primacy, Peter consistently took the side of the Moscow princes in their struggle with the Tver princes. Moreover, in the 20s of the 14th century he gradually moved to Moscow, and not long before his death he announced that he wanted to be buried in Moscow. With his blessing, in August 1325, Prince Ivan Danilovich founded the Assumption Cathedral in the Kremlin, similar to the Vladimir Church of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary. However, Peter was not destined to consecrate this cathedral. On December 21, 1326 he died. Very soon, miracles of healing began to take place at his tomb, so that already at the beginning of 1327, on the initiative of Ivan Danilovich of Moscow, Metropolitan Peter was locally glorified as a saint.

Undoubtedly, it was in connection with this act that the first biography of St. Peter was compiled. According to V.O. Klyuchevsky, this happened no later than August 1, 1327 - the day of the consecration of the Assumption Cathedral in the Kremlin. The life was written by the Rostov Bishop Prokhor, a protege of the Metropolitan. His name is indicated in the title of some copies of the work: “The Repose of Peter, Metropolitan of All Rus'; and this is his reading, the work of Prokhor, Bishop of Rostov.” At the end of the text, it is said about the participation of Ivan Kalita in this matter: “Prince Ivan, having written those miracles, sent an ambassador to the city of Volodymyr to the holy cathedral...”. Subsequently, on the occasion of the all-Russian canonization of St. Peter in 1339, it was partly revised. So, on the basis of Prokhor’s work, the initial edition of the Life was compiled, known from copies starting from the 15th century.

This work is written in a new, comparatively literary manner: very simple, concise, without any verbal intricacies. At first, Prokhor says that Peter was born to “a peasant parent.” At the same time, he notes that before Peter’s birth, his mother had a wonderful dream about him. Then Prokhor briefly talks about Peter's childhood, youth and monastic life. Prokhor dwells in more detail on the metropolitan installation of Peter, while he also notes the miraculous facts. So, the Holy Mother of God herself helped him, and Patriarch Athanasius foresaw by the fragrance in the church that it was Peter who was overshadowed by the grace of God. Prokhor also writes in detail about the trial of Peter in Pereyaslavl, and places the blame for this trial on the Bishop of Tver Andrei, in whom the devil put it in his heart to send blasphemy against Peter to the Patriarch of Constantinople. Prokhor attributes Peter's transfer of the metropolis from the city of Vladimir to Moscow to the initiative of Peter himself: having visited many cities, he saw that this particular city was “pure in meekness in humility, called Moscow.” The Life tells in detail about the death and burial of Peter and his posthumous miracles, in particular, about the appearance to a certain Gentile that Peter, during the funeral procession, sitting on his bed, blessed the whole people. “So God glorified the land of Suzhdal with such a saint, and the city called Moscow, and the blessed Prince John, and his princess, and his children...”

Artistically, this initial biography of Metropolitan Peter is undoubtedly inferior to many literary works of the 11th-12th centuries. However, from an ideological point of view, it is remarkable that it reflected the fact of the actual transformation of Moscow from the capital of a small principality into an all-Russian national center: while telling about the first Moscow saint, the Life at the same time tells about the Moscow prince Ivan Kalita.

This ideological beginning of the Life was subsequently highly developed by Metropolitan Cyprian, who twice turned to its plot and created two new literary works on the theme of the life of St. Peter.

Metropolitan Cyprian lived in a completely different era, when Moscow, especially after the victory over the Horde on the Kulikovo Field, had already firmly established its role as the political and spiritual center of Rus'. Probably, then an urgent need arose among the people to express feelings of gratitude to the patron saint of Moscow. One must also think that Cyprian, when starting to revise the original edition of the Life of Peter, was guided by personal motives, for, undoubtedly, he saw in the life of his predecessor many parallels to his own destiny.

Originally from Bulgaria, Cyprian, before his arrival in Rus', was first a resident of the Studite monastery, and then labored on Mount Athos. In December 1375, Patriarch Philotheus Kokkin of Constantinople ordained him Metropolitan of Lithuania and Little Rus', and under the still living Russian Metropolitan Alexy. This caused dissatisfaction with the Moscow Prince Dmitry Ivanovich, who had his own protege - Archimandrite Mikhail-Mitya of the Spassky Monastery. In the summer of 1378, after the death of Alexy, Cyprian tried to take the high priestly throne in Moscow, but the prince did not allow this. Then, in 1380 in Constantinople, after the unexpected death of Mityai, the little-known Pimen was elected Metropolitan of All Rus', so Cyprian had to be content with his previous title. However, in Lithuania, he diplomatically contributed to the victory of Dimitri Ivanovich over Mamai in the summer of 1380, and also found support in Moscow from the most authoritative church figures - the spiritual inspirers of the struggle for the unification of Rus' and its liberation from Horde dependence, Sergius of Radonezh and Theodore Simonovsky. Therefore, in May 1381, he was nevertheless called to Moscow, but not for long: after the invasion of Tokhtamysh, during which Cyprian showed cowardice, the prince removed him and sent his new protege, Suzdal Bishop Dionysius, to Constantinople. The latter was ordained as the primate of the Russian Church. But he never returned home: in the spring of 1384 he was captured in Kyiv, where the disgraced Cyprian was, and died in captivity. Pimen remained in Moscow as metropolitan. Only after the death of Dmitry Donskoy, under his son Prince Vasily, in March 1390, Cyprian finally firmly established himself in Moscow as Metropolitan of Kiev and All Rus'. In this capacity he lived his last sixteen years.

So, Cyprian’s appeal to the life of St. Peter was not accidental. He recognized himself as his successor and considered him his patron. By revising the original edition of the hagiobiography, Cyprian significantly enriched it with new facts and gave it a completely new sound. Most likely, Cyprian undertook this work during his first stay in Moscow. As a result, a new text appeared: “The month of December on the 21st day. Life and life and small confession from miracles like the saints of our father Peter, Archbishop of Kiev and All Rus'. Copied by Cyprian, the humble Metropolitan of Kiev and All Rus'.” A large number of copies of this monument have been preserved, with the earliest dating back to the end of the 14th century.

He prefaced the biography of Peter with his own introduction, in which, reflecting on the righteous, he recalls the words of the Psalmist: “The righteous live forever, and their reward is from the Lord, and their building is from the Most High.” When a righteous man is praised, people will rejoice. It is proper to praise the righteous. Realizing his weakness, Cyprian, however, begins a difficult task for him - the story of one of these righteous people. Complementing the information about Peter's childhood, he provides details about his studies: it turns out that at first the boy studied without desire and success, which greatly saddened his parents. But one day a certain man in holy robes appeared to him in a dream. He touched his tongue with his hand and blessed the boy. After this, Peter quickly excelled in his studies.

Cyprian paid great attention to the monastic works of Peter, emphasizing his virtue: “in the monastery he was always a mentor in all obedience and to the brethren without laziness, serving not as a man, but as God himself. And your image was good to all for virtuous living with humility and meekness, and silence." Therefore, by reasoning of the mentor, he was ordained first to the rank of deacon, and then to the rank of priest. Cyprian prefaces the story of Peter’s founding of the Ratskaya monastery with the remark: “It is not worthy for such a person to even go through all the degrees and then sit on the teacher’s seat.”

In the story about the icon-painting activity of Peter, Cyprian introduced a description of this creative process: “It is a custom in many: as soon as he remembers a beloved face, he turns to tears from love. The divine saint creates from these spherical images to the prototypes of the mind.” . It is possible that Cyprian personally saw, knew and highly appreciated the original works of Peter, and among them, perhaps, the image of the Virgin Mary, presented to Metropolitan Maxim. In any case, he talks in detail about how the icon was created, how Abbot Peter gave it to Metropolitan Maxim when he met him, and how the saint rejoiced at this gift.

In contrast to the Initial Edition of the Life, Cyprian talks in detail about the appointment of Abbot Peter to metropolitan. At the same time, he emphasizes that during the time of the ascetic, the land of Volyn was glorious and rich. Not only the Volyn prince, but the whole country knew about Peter’s virtue. Cyprian also reports about the desire of the Volyn prince to create an independent Galician-Volyn metropolis and about his conversations about this with Peter: “And this is done for many days, when the prince himself spoke to Petrov, and when the boyar and his advisor sent to him." In secret from the ascetic, he wrote to Constantinople about his desire to see the Ratsky abbot on the holy throne.

Remembering Peter’s rival Gerontius, Cyprian cannot contain his indignation: “But someone, an abbot of Gerontius, dared with his arrogance to attain the order of priesthood, although he did not know that “every gift from above is, coming from God, the Father by light!” by sea to Constantinople. But for Gerontius, the journey turns into a test. Cyprian very figuratively describes the storm in which he found himself: “Gerontiev’s unfortunate voyage happened, for the storm was great and the sea rose. And against the wind from the bow of the ship, the great ship was in need, and the great waves were moving. Petrov’s ship is quiet and cool, like a marshmallow, and capable of the wind.”

The new Life tells in much more detail about the conflict between Peter and the Tver Bishop Andrei, first of all, about the Pereyaslav Cathedral. At the same time, Cyprian gives a caustic characterization of the Tver bishop: “being easy in mind, and lightest in mind.” He introduces Peter’s response speech into the text, in which he invites the council to depose him, so that the resulting unrest will calm down: “Marry me, and the rumor from you will subside!”

Cyprian also talks in more detail about the metropolitan’s attitude towards Moscow and the Moscow prince: Peter visited Moscow more often than other places, and here, on his initiative, the Assumption Cathedral was founded. At the same time, the hagiograph, in contrast to the original edition, reproduces Peter’s prophetic speech about the future of Moscow to the prince: “If you listen to me, your son, and build the temple of the Most Holy Theotokos in your city, and become famous more than other princes, and sons, and carry your sons into your generations, and the city will be glorious in all the Russian cities, and the saints will live in it, and “his hands will rise up against the blankets of his enemy,” and God will be glorified in it. And my bones will also be placed in it.”

Next, Cyprian supplements the information from the original edition about how Metropolitan Peter was canonized. Thirteen years after the letter from Prince Ivan Danilovich was read in Vladimir about posthumous miracles at the saint’s tomb, Metropolitan Theognostus reported this to Patriarch John XIV of Constantinople. The latter sent a decree on the canonization of Peter to Moscow. The text of this decree is read in the work of Cyprian.

In conclusion, the compiler of the Life recalls his own history of being appointed metropolitan and his own ordeal in Constantinople, testifying at the same time to the miraculous help provided to him by Saint Peter: “At that time I was in Constantinegrad for thirteen months. lying then on the Tsar's City. The sea is trembled by the Latin, but the land and land are possessed by the godless Turks. And in such a sanctuary, an inconvenient illness attacked me, as if I could barely live. But I barely died within myself, and called for help Saint Peter, saying to his face: Servant of God and servant of the Savior... if it pleases you to reach your throne and worship your tomb, give me help and relief from illness. Believe that from this hour of illness they have ceased to be unbearable... Then the great noble and great prince of all Rus' Dmitry will receive us with joy and honor."

Thus, the biography of Metropolitan Peter created by Cyprian is distinguished by a rare property for the medieval literary tradition - autobiography. Wherever possible, Cyprian, talking about Peter, notes the similarity of his fate with his own: Prince Mikhail of Tver did not recognize Peter for a long time, while Cyprian was not recognized by Prince Dmitry of Moscow for a long time; The protege of the Tver prince Gerontius was put forward against Peter's candidacy for metropolitan, while Cyprian's competitor was the protege of the Moscow prince Mityai. Apparently, these parallels served Cyprian as a means of justifying his own right to the metropolis, as well as a means of justifying the right of exclusively the Patriarchs of Constantinople, without the intervention of Moscow secular authorities, to choose and appoint Russian metropolitans.

In literary terms, the Life he created is a skillful work of literature, within the framework of which a simple factual detail of the original edition of the Life (“ He was born as a teenager and was 7 years old when he began to learn this grammar, soon he acquired the skill of all wisdom") turned into a religiously significant description: “When I am born as a child,” writes Cyprian, “and when I reach the seventh year of age, I become a parent and learn; but for the teacher I adhere to him with diligence, but the child does not teach in a hurry, but inertly and in every possible way immutably. And about this there was no small sorrow for his parents and no small amount of vanity for himself and his teacher, but as if in a dream, the youth of a certain man in holy robes came and stood over him and said to him: Open your mouth, my child. But when I opened it, the saint’s right hand touched his tongue with his right hand, and I blessed him, and as if I had filled his throat with some sweetness, he became aroused as a child, and saw no one. surpasses and precedes the time of all his peers.

At the end of the 90s of the 14th century, under Grand Duke Vasily Dmitrievich, Metropolitan Cyprian of Moscow and All Rus' turned for the second time to the ascetic life of his predecessor in the department, St. Peter. As a result, a new literary work appeared - the Word of Praise, like the saints of our father in the hierarchy of the great miracle worker Peter, Metropolitan of All Rus'. It is known so far from a small number of lists from the 16th century. This work is a skillfully carried out - on the basis of the previous text - synthesis of panegyric and hagiobiography. Accordingly, the entire text of the work is divided into two parts - the Word itself and the Life. The main content and property of this new text are rhetorical passages of praise. Most likely, it was intended for a solemn pronouncement in the Assumption Cathedral of the Most Holy Theotokos, on the day of remembrance of St. Peter (December 21).

In the first section of the work, Cyprian discusses the reason that prompted him to turn to the life of his holy predecessor, and about his inability to tell about it in a worthy manner. Here he, in addition, talks about the slander of Peter by the Tver Bishop Andrei, as well as about the miracle with Amos, whose arms were shortened, and about the miracle with the young woman, whose eyes had grown out of her body. Then, recalling the Gospel parable about the workers and the vineyard, the author claims that the divine Peter did not come to Christ’s grapes at the eleventh hour, but from the first hour, from a young age, he served the Lord day and night. The introductory part ends with praise to Metropolitan Peter and a prayer, before which Cyprian calls on the listeners: “Let us also come on this all-honorable feast of the great bishop Peter, who rejoices more, in songs and singing, rejoicing, we crown him with a bow and, falling down, we pray.” And more than once he further points out that this Eulogy was written by him for a holiday - in memory of the saint.

In the second part of the Homily, Cyprian used the text of his earlier biography of Metropolitan Peter, but noticeably shortened it. Thus, he removed the story about the youth Peter’s vision of a man in holy robes, and removed the response speech of Patriarch Athanasius to Gerontius when he arrived in Constantinople. There is no story about the Pereyaslav Cathedral in the Word (it is only mentioned in the first section), and the author’s autobiographical passages are also omitted. Cyprian consistently supplements the given facts with laudable lines. Here is how, for example, Cyprian talks about the dream of Peter’s mother on the eve of giving birth: “If something bad had happened before he was born. Even though he was in the womb of matter, the vision was like this of his mother: I thought she was afraid of a lamb trembling in her hand, in the middle of its horn the tree grew blessedly and was overlaid with many flowers and fruits, and in the middle of its branches there were many shining lights and fragrant fragrances. branch! Blessed of nature and blessed are the parents who were honored to be such a youth. Honestly, the mother of the blessed youth was awakened and perplexed about what would happen, or that there would be an end to such a vision. Moreover, even if she had not imagined it, the end was revealed with surprise. With such gifts God has given his saint "Enrich us! Tell us, O land of Velynsk, where you will find such inexhaustible wealth! Where did such a lamp come from and grow! Truly, then, flourish the fruit of piety and the vine of reverence! Oh, blessed art thou indeed, land of Velynsk, for such a gift has been granted to you!"

In his Eulogy, Cyprian subjected all the factual material of his first essay on Peter to literary processing in accordance with the requirements of his chosen genre. If the style of the Life only approaches the style of “twisting words,” then the style of the Word is typical of this literary manner. This is an alternation of rhetorical exclamations, rhythmization of the text, a combination of epithets, comparisons, cognate words: Peter is a branch of virtue of piety, Peter is an apostolic zealot, Peter is an ecclesiastical affirmation... We saw the patience of the pillars, we saw a spiritual treasure, we saw a deserted upliftment... etc. These properties provided the work with a solemn and festive character. It is obvious that Cyprian attached a very special importance to literary form, endowing it with symbolic semantics.

Thus, praising Peter, he reaches the highest degree of emotional intensity at the end of the work - in an anaphoric chain of 15 “praiseworthy” sentences:
"/1/ Rejoice, radiant sun, most sacred to the bishop, Our Father Peter, driving away the darkness of sin from those who honor you with love! /2/ Rejoice, enlightenment of the Russian land! /3/ Rejoice, multiplying the herd of verbal sheep! /4/ Rejoice, friend of God's revelations ! /5/ Rejoice, intercessor of the sad, who resort to the race of your relics! /6/ Rejoice, unstoppable dawn, enlightening everyone with piety! /7/ Rejoice, for you pour out streams of healing from the ailments of various possessed people! /8/ Rejoice, having surprised everyone with miracles and banners the world and the darkness of sin have been driven away! /9/ Rejoice, honey-bearing treasure, upon whom Christ came, you brought joy and glorified the whole Russian country! /10/ Rejoice, decorate your church with the light of God’s understanding! /11/ Rejoice, preacher of truth and kindness, teacher ! /12/ Rejoice, fragrant tree, fragrant with the great love of all for Christ! /13/ Rejoice, for you are adorned with great kindness, and with this vision in the likeness of an angel! /14/ Rejoice, solid foundation of the glorious city of Moscow, which you preserved through intercession from your enemies hated, as a true shepherd laying down his soul for the flock of Christ! /15/ Rejoice, abounding in wisdom, both as an animal treasure, and besides this, all uncleanness and carnal desire!”

It is remarkable, however, that this passage is immediately followed by a passage similar in numerological structure - an appeal to Peter, which is also a chain of 15 synonymous names for Peter:

“But /1/ prudent and /2/ helpful Father to the bishop, /3/ Saint Peter, /4/ sweet food for souls, /5/ sweet beer, /6/ sweetest bee for the churches, /7/ book food, /8 / the sobering cup, /9/ the salt of words, /10/ the oil that softens lamentation with wisdom, /11/ the harp of piety, /12/ the nozzle of punishment, /13/ the riches of poverty, /14/ the cry of repentance, /15/ the faithful servant of the Lord, I How can I praise you according to your worth, having a unclean mouth and an unclean tongue!

The structure of these fragments, as if supporting or justifying each other, seems completely unusual and unexpected (for it would be more common to observe its duodecimal basis, characteristic, for example, of the hairetisms of ikos as a hymnographic form). However, it is quite understandable if we take into account St. Peter’s special veneration of the Most Pure Mother of God. In fact, according to the Life, he painted the image of the Mother of God "Petrovsky"), and according to legend, two more icons - "Novodvorskaya" and "Assumption", Peter himself was honored with the miraculous help of the Mother of God; On his initiative, Prince Ivan Kalita founded a stone cathedral in Moscow on the site of a wooden one in honor of the Dormition of the Mother of God, and then this cathedral became the tomb of Peter himself. Probably, the indicated Mariological context of the life of St. Peter allowed Metropolitan Cyprian to use the fifteen-decimal structure instead of the usual duodecimal structure to praise him. Thus, it is known that the sacred semantics of the biblical number 15 was most clearly and clearly manifested precisely in the cult of the Mother of God - in church-historical tradition and apocryphal tales about her life and death, in eortology and worship, in the prayer practice of the Middle Ages and even - reflexively - in hagiographic literature.

The correctness of the conclusion about the numerological nature of the given text fragment is confirmed by the literary and stylistic habits of Cyprian, which he repeatedly demonstrates in the space of the text of the Word of Praise, and also partly in his earlier version of the life of Peter. It is obvious that in this way - through number writing - the writer consciously sought to convey additional information about his great predecessor.

As for the Life, Cyprian’s numerological preferences are expressed in it, as in the Word of Praise, in the form of constructions. Here, for example, is a passage about the founding of the Ratsky monastery by Peter: “/1/ Set out from the monastery and /2/ go around the deserted area, and /3/ silently find a place on the river, called Rata, and make a home for yourself /4/ make friends, and he puts down much labor /5/, and adds sickness to sickness /6/, and sheds sweat /7/ And the church /8/ rises up in the name of our Savior Jesus Christ, and cells /9/ he sets up to stay with the brethren who come to him ". As you can see, the support of this construction is made up of 9 verbal predicates, which are distributed according to semantic gradation in three syntagmatic triads. The first triad (1-3) is devoted to the choice of location, the second (4-6) to its development, the third (7-9) to Peter’s personal efforts. Such a “matrix” construction, as is known, is the norm of the style of “weaving words” and in this case constructively embodies “ordered gradualism,” or its sacred essence. However, in the Life itself, Cyprian rarely uses such a technique and at the same time hardly sets himself any pragmatic goals.

A word of praise is a completely different matter. The author of this text, firstly, really likes to use fivefold constructions. At the same time, he implements them in different ways and in combination in the form of alternation or chains (strictly ordered parallelism) or syntactic members of the same type, or lexemes-epithets, or lexico-syntactic repetitions:

“For there is a day of joy and gladness. /1/ when a man is righteous and honorable to accept the end of his life, /2/ when he sees the peace of his labors, /3/ when, leaving sorrow behind, joy is to come, /4/ when, leaving the earth and all earthly things , and goes to heaven, /5/ when he leaves men, and settles with the angels and is vouchsafed to see God.

On this day our father and teacher, shepherd and mentor, reposed in the eternal life, /1/ wondrous among the saints, /2/ the most sacred Peter, /3/ the former sanctuary, /4/ the laborer and /5/ of the lands of Russia: /1/Peter the noble branch of piety, /2/ Peter the apostolic zealot, /3/ Peter the church establishment, /4/ Peter the heretical denouncer, /5/ Peter the preacher of piety.”

"/1/ O most praiseworthy time! /2/ O good wife! /3/ O blessed birth! /4/ O holy generation! /5/ O honorable root, good branch! Blessed are you and blessed are the parents of such a child."

“But blessed Peter bore neither one nor two burdens, but accepted the service of all the brethren. /1/ We saw the breaking of pillars, /2/ we saw spiritual treasure, /3/ we saw great labor for a laborer, /4/ we saw hard adamant, /5/ We saw the desert education, truly glorifying God to our saint and giving us so much strength!”

“Behold is to us /1/ an apostle and preacher, behold to us /2/ a shepherd and a teacher, behold to us /3/ a leader and a ruler, behold to us /4/ a wall and a fence, /5/ our great praise and our fear of God.”

For a small work, such as the Word of Praise, the indicated fivefold constructions are a too often and noticeably repeated literary device. Obviously, it was not only used consciously, but also with some meaning, pragmatically. And truly, this meaning is determined by the symbolic meaning of the number 5 - its connection with faith in the reunification of humanity and the Creator, accomplished through the Son of God, and in the mysterious unity of each Christian personally with the Savior Jesus Christ, which takes place in the Holy Eucharist and Communion through the mediation of the clergy. Reflecting on the best clergyman and first hierarch in the Russian Church, the pre-elected Servant of God, Metropolitan Cyprian naturally relied on the fivefold structures in those very passages that abstractly expressed the idea of ​​service and mediation in the name of Holy Unity inherent in the life of St. Peter.

The fact that the writer consciously used constructive number writing and at the same time implied certain semantic information is revealed quite clearly upon careful examination of another fragment of the Word of Praise, associated with the famous prophecy of St. Peter regarding the need to erect a stone Assumption Cathedral in Moscow. The basis of the syntactic structure of this appeal to the Moscow prince Ivan Kalita is made up of 8 predicates (and, accordingly, 8 syntagmas):

“If you listen to me /1/ and build the temple of the Most Pure Mother of God /2/ in your city, you yourself /3/ will become more famous than other princes, and your sons, and your grandchildren throughout generations and generations; and this city /4/ will be more glorious in all the cities of the Russians; and the saints /5/ will live in it; and /6/ his enemies will lift up his hands on the blanket; and /7/ God will be glorified in him; and also my bones /8/ will be placed in him.”

This Metropolitan Cyprian transferred this fragment from his earlier text about St. Peter and reproduced it almost literally. But this speech is based on the text of the Initial Edition of his biography, according to which the holy predecessor of Cyprian speaks briefly and without predicting anything: “May the stone church of the Holy Mother of God be built in your city.” It is remarkable that Cyprian, developing this short speech in his first version of the Life of Peter, used an eight-fold constructive basis. But what is even more remarkable is that, having transferred Peter’s own version of the speech into the Word of Commendation, Cyprian supplemented it with his own rhetorical commentary, stating the complete fulfillment of the prophecy, and this commentary consists of exactly 8 questions:

"/1/ Well, won’t we see the prophecy of this saint? /2/ Didn’t all this happen? /3/ Didn’t the word about you end, O glorious city of Moscow? /4/ Didn’t the countries and land spread yours? /5/ Didn’t your hand rise up on the shoulder of your enemies? /6/ (Did you not) see the truth that was not false? / (Didn’t it) come true that was said: “And I will give miracles in the mountains of heaven”? /8/ Isn’t it a miracle This and more is human nature, but the Most Reverend Divine Saint Peter despised the short-lived and fleeting life of this according to the revelation of God?

The constructive symmetry and isomorphy of prophecy and commentary are obvious. And again, the octal form chosen by Cyprian for these two passages seems appropriate from the point of view of the coincidence of their abstract content and the symbolic significance of the number 8. Indeed, the semantics of the number 8, as is known, is associated with ideas about salvation in Christ and eternal life. And this meaning is completely consistent with the general idea of ​​the fragments under consideration regarding the Divine predestination of the political and church victory of Moscow in the Russian land and Rus' outside. The only guarantee of this victory is the construction of the stone Assumption Cathedral, and it is Peter who foresees this future victory, that is, metaphorically, the stone of confession on which the Savior promised to create His Church, so that “the gates of hell will not prevail against it” (Matthew 16:18) . By the way, in the Service to Peter, Metropolitan Cyprian interpreted his name and its meaning for Moscow and Rus' in exactly this way - according to one of the troparions of the 9th song of the canon of thanksgiving to the saint: “Peter the Hierarch, praise to our land, give you the foundation of your church Christ and a strong pillar and immovable forever. Keeping and watching our city immovable, we will not be cursed for ever and ever." However, the stone, or more precisely petra (rock), is a symbolic sign of Christ and, therefore, a sign of steadfastness and eternity. Accordingly, the eightfold structure of the passages linked together is a hint of the eternal meaning of both the prophecy of St. Peter and its actual implementation in the era of Cyprian.

This writer is considered the founder of such a cultural phenomenon in Rus' as the “second South Slavic influence.” The development of a special expressive-emotional style of “weaving words” was associated with it in Russian literary creativity of the late XIV-XV centuries. As for Cyprian, in his own literary work the said style was most clearly realized precisely in the Word of Commendation to St. Peter. Apparently, the number writing he used should be considered in the context of this style. This technique, along with other techniques characteristic of the expressive-emotional style, allowed the writer to secretly and pragmatically reveal the sacred meaning and character of the primate ministry of Metropolitan Peter.

Cyprian's skill was brilliantly expressed in the fact that under his pen the “weaving of words,” that is, the intensification or condensation of symbolic images and thoughts, took on symbolically significant numerological forms. The “ineffable silence” of the latter gave the text in the eyes of those who understood, in addition to beauty, greater semantic depth and value.

So, the hagiographic texts of Metropolitan Cyprian, dedicated to St. Peter, are undoubtedly his most striking works in literary terms. Cyprian's other works - letters, epistles - are more significant in church-historical terms. In addition, the translation works of Cyprian are also important for church culture. Thus, he introduced into the practice of the Russian Church new editions of the Service Book, the Gospel, the Apostle, the Triodion and other liturgical books, but above all, the new charter of Divine services, the charter of St. Savva the Sanctified, Jerusalem. Undoubtedly, a significant replenishment of the Old Russian library with books brought from Constantinople, Athos and the Slavic lands is also associated with his name.

Metropolitan of Kiev and All Rus', Greek of Constantinople by origin, appointed Russian metropolitan in Constantinople at the end of 1327 or beginning of 1328, d. March 11, 1353 Arrived in Rus', probably in 1328, first in the Volyn land, ... ... Large biographical encyclopedia

Metropolitan of Kyiv and All Rus'. He was the abbot of one of the southern monasteries. In 1242 (1243) he was elected to the Kyiv Metropolis. Around 1246-1247 he was ordained Metropolitan of Kyiv in Nicaea by Patriarch Manuel II of Constantinople. Metropolitan... ... Large biographical encyclopedia

Metropolitan of Kiev and All Rus', spiritual writer. F. was from the Peloponnese. Having entered the monastery, he was sent to Constantinople to the emperor and patriarch and came to the capital at a time when the ambassadors of the Russian Grand Duke were there... ... Encyclopedic Dictionary F.A. Brockhaus and I.A. Efron

Metropolitan of Kyiv and All Rus'. From 1417 to 1433 Bishop of Smolensk. Taking advantage of the fact that after the death of Metropolitan Photius there was no metropolitan in Rus', Gerasim, either by his own will or by the will of the Lithuanian prince Svidrigailo, was under the rule of... ... Large biographical encyclopedia

Metropolitan of Kyiv and All Rus'. He was the abbot of the Goritsky Assumption Monastery in Pereyaslavl Zalessky. In 1379, among the three archimandrites, he accompanied the archimandrite of the Moscow Novospassky Monastery Mitya († 1379) to Constantinople for... ... Large biographical encyclopedia

Metropolitan of Kyiv and All Rus'. Greek by origin. Since 1035, Metropolitan of Kiev and All Rus', according to the Hypatian Chronicle, was installed in Kyiv by Patriarch Alexius the Studite of Constantinople in 1038. In 1038 he consecrated the Holy Church in Kyiv... Large biographical encyclopedia

Metropolitan of Kyiv and All Rus'. Greek by origin. Born in Thessalonica. Until 1437, he was abbot of the monastery of St. Demetrius in Constantinople, participated in the emperor’s embassy to the Basel Council of the Catholic Church (1434), where... ... Large biographical encyclopedia

Metropolitan of Kyiv and All Rus'. There is information that he came to Russia from Greece (from Nicaea), where the Patriarchs of Constantinople, expelled from Constantinople by the crusaders in 1204, then lived. However, as the Laurentian Chronicle narrates,... ... Large biographical encyclopedia

Metropolitan of Kyiv and All Rus'. Greek by origin. In August 1161 he was appointed Metropolitan of Kyiv and All Rus'. Died on August 22, 1163. Literature: Stroev P. M. Lists of hierarchs and abbots of monasteries of the Russian Church. St. Petersburg,... ... Large biographical encyclopedia

Books

• St. Alexey, Metropolitan of Kiev and All Rus', mourner of the Russian land, V.B. Reproduced in the original author's spelling of the 1894 edition (publishing house Uralsk, Ural Military Vedas). IN…
• Saint Alexy, Metropolitan of Kiev and All Rus'. Biography of Metropolitan Alexy (in the world Elevfery Fedorovich Byakont; between 1292 1305, Moscow February 12, 1378, Moscow) Metropolitan of Kyiv and All Russia, saint, state...

Metropolitans of Kyiv and All Rus' (988-1305)

Based on the book: Shchapov Ya.N. State and Church in Ancient Rus'. M. Science, 1989. Appendix I.
Compiled by A. V. Poppe. Authorized translation from German by A. V. Nazarenko.

[Michael]
[Leon (Leonty)]
1. Theophylact, 988 - until 1018
2. John I, before 1018 - approx. 1030
3. Theopemptos, around 1035-1040s.
[Kirill]
4. Hilarion, 1051 - 1054
5. Ephraim, 1054/1055-ca. 1065
6. George, approx. 1065-approx. 1076
7. John II, no later than 1076/1077 - after August 1089
8. John III, summer 1090-before August 14, 1091
9. Nikolai, approx. 1093-to 1104
10. Nikephoros I, December 18, 1104 - April 1121
11. Nikita, October 15, 1122-March 9, 1126
12. Michael I, summer 1130-1145
13. Klim (Kliment) Smolyatich, July 27, 1147 - early 1155
14. Constantine I, 1156-1158/1159
15. Theodore, August 1160-June 1163
16. John IV, spring 1164-1166
17. Constantine II, 1167-1169/1170.
18. Michael II, spring 1171 - ?
19. Nikephoros II, before 1183-after 1201
20. Matthew, before 1210-19 August 1220
21. Cyril I, 1224/1225-summer 1233
22. Joseph, 1236-?
[Peter]
23. Cyril II, 1242/1247-November 27, 1281
24. Maximus, 1283-6 December 1305

The following brief characteristics of the archpastors of the Russian Metropolis within the Byzantine Church are limited, as necessary (due to the state of the sources), to their official actions; The author tried to use the most important historiography as completely as possible, albeit critically, but in the item-by-item bibliography it is indicated only selectively. The Kiev era in the history of the Russian church is covered chronologically. After the death of Metropolitan Kiril II, the last metropolitan of Kiev proper, as a result of the transfer of the metropolitan residence to the north (first in Vladimir-on-Klyazma, then to Moscow) and the founding of a new metropolis in Galich (in 1303), the decline of the unified church organization of all eastern Slavs

Our essays are the first attempt to give a concise history of the Russian Church of the Kyiv era in the person of its metropolitans. Already from the chronological table it is clear that between 1121 and 1236. The Kiev Metropolis was empty in general for about 26 years, since even under favorable conditions the new metropolitan almost always arrived in place no earlier than a year later. Therefore, we have the right to believe that throughout the Kyiv era, the Kiev see was vacant for at least half a century, which, on the one hand, weakened the leadership of this church, and on the other, indicates its internal strength. Scarce data from sources does not allow us to write real biographies of metropolitans, which would reflect not only their official actions, but also their personal lives. So, for example, we know virtually nothing about the period of life of the Kyiv metropolitans (who, with the exception of two reliable exceptions, were Greeks) before their installation as metropolitans; and only isolated episodes are known from their activities as the head of the Russian church. Therefore, E. E. Golubinsky, all of whose profundity was appreciated only in our century, in his fundamental “History of the Russian Church” did not dare to give biographies of the metropolitans of the pre-Mongol era (which, however, benefited the first volume) and began a chronological review of Russian church history by years of metropolitan rule with the biography of Cyril II. This experience also faces the difficulty that to this day there is not even a generally accepted list of Kyiv metropolitans. The list we offer excludes all dubious names, which, however, are discussed in detail in the notes whenever possible. The list includes 24 metropolitans, 23 of which were known earlier, while one (Michael II) was discovered by us for the first time. Six metropolitans who appeared in historiography - Michael and Leon (tiy) (at the turn of the 10th-11th centuries), Cyril (1040s), Dionysius and Gabriel (beginning of the 13th century), Peter (c. 1244) - are not included in our list. list for unreliable data about them.

[Mikhail] and [Leon (Leonty)]

According to the established in the 16th century. tradition, the first Metropolitan of Kyiv was supposedly a certain Michael, who was succeeded by Leon (Leonty). The source of this tradition is the so-called church charter of Vladimir I, which dates back to the 12th-13th centuries. According to this monument, Michael was a contemporary of Vladimir and the Patriarch of Constantinople Photius, which, in turn, gave rise to the opinion that Michael was the anonymous bishop who was sent by Photius to Rus' in 867.

The appearance of the name Michael in the church charter is explained by the fact that in the Tale of Bygone Years, under the year 988, there is an instruction on faith, allegedly taught to the newly baptized Vladimir. It is nothing more than an abbreviated translation of the creed, compiled in the first half of the 9th century. Mikhail Sinkell. The compilers of the church charter perceived this “instruction” as written for the sake of Vladimir and, thus, concluded that the author of the creed was also the first Russian metropolitan.

[Leo (Leonty)]

As the second or even the first Russian metropolitan at the end of the 10th century. They also called Leo (Leonty), who supposedly had a department in Pereyaslavl. The reason for the emergence of this legend, which finally took shape in the 16th century, was also one of the editions of the 13th century. church charter of Vladimir, in which Leo appears as a contemporary of Patriarch Photius. The very name of Leo, as one of two contenders for the title of “first” Metropolitan of Rus', was drawn, it seems, from the title of the treatise on unleavened bread “Leo, Metropolitan of Pereyaslavl in Ρωσία.” However, this treatise could not have appeared before 1054, and its author was Lev, the titular metropolitan of Pereyaslavl in the 1060-1070s (the Pereyaslavl bishopric was temporarily a titular metropolis).

1. Theophylact

1. Theophylact - the first metropolitan of Kiev attested by sources, was transferred to the metropolitanate of "Rosia from Sebaste in the Byzantine province of Armenia Second under Emperor Basil II (985-1025). It is highly likely that the said Theophylact should be identified with the anonymous metropolitan of Sebaste, who , being a supporter of Vasily II, was forced to leave his metropolis during the civil war at the beginning of 987. If this is so, then we can assume that in the fall of 987 Theophylact, on behalf of the emperor, went to Kiev, where he facilitated the conclusion of an agreement with Vladimir I. Thus This created the prerequisites for the Christianization of Rus', and Theophylact headed the new Russian metropolis, which initially consisted of four bishops: Belgorod, Novgorod, Chernigov and Polotsk. He assumed the see, probably in 988, and remained there for an indefinite time, but ceased occupy it until 1018

2. John I

2. John I is the second reliably attested Metropolitan of Kiev. A small lead bulla with the inscription “Io(anni) mi(t)ropo(liti) “Rosias” has been preserved, which V. Laurent, based on epigraphic features, most definitely attributed to the turn of the 10th-11th centuries. In both hagiographic works about Saints Boris and Gleb , anonymous Legend and Nestor's Reading (i.e., according to the tradition recorded in the second half of the 11th century), John I is titled either “archbishop” or “metropolitan,” i.e., he acts as the head of the Russian church in the first years of the reign of Yaroslav the Wise (after 1019). This circumstance allows us to assume that it was John I who was the Kiev archbishop referred to by Thietmar of Merseburg in his story about the events of 1018 (VIII, 32). John I is also considered the author of the oldest service in honor of Saints Boris and Gleb; however, since this liturgical work is textually connected with both of the above-mentioned hagiographical monuments, it could only have appeared at the time of the canonization of the martyred princes in 1072 or after it. Apparently, John I became metropolitan before 1018 and was so , at the latest, until the mid-30s.

3. Theopempt

Theopemptos - became metropolitan after 1030, perhaps around 1034, given his very likely connections with the entourage of Emperor Michael IV. In 1039 (May 12?) Theopempt took part in the re-consecration of the Church of the Tithes in Kyiv. In the middle of the same year he was in Constantinople, where he participated in the patriarchal synod. Probably, during the years of Theopempt's tenure at the cathedral, the fifth and sixth Russian bishops were founded in Yuryev on Russia (Cathedral of St. George) and in Pereyaslavl (Cathedral of the Archangel Michael). A lead bulla with the name Theopempta has been preserved. Byzantine-Russian conflict 1043-1046. was not at all obliged to have a negative impact on the activities of Theopemptus, since he presumably spoke out in favor of the anti-emperor George Maniak; in any case, the widespread opinion that during these years the Kiev department was empty is unfounded.

[Kirill]

Only from the 16th century. information appears about a certain Metropolitan Kiril, successor of Theopempt.

4. Hilarion

Hilarion is the first Russian-born Metropolitan of Kyiv. The story of his appointment is unusual. He was installed as metropolitan by Prince Yaroslav the Wise from the hieromonks of the Church of St. Apostles in Berestov, a princely residence near Kiev, was elected by a council of Russian bishops and in 1051 was dedicated and enthroned as the head of the Russian church in the Kiev St. Sophia Cathedral. The installation of Hilarion was carried out bypassing the rights of the Patriarch of Constantinople and represented an attempt by Byzantine (in this case Russian) monasticism to restore the ancient canonical rights of provincial church councils. At the same time, the legal subordination of Kyiv to the See of Constantinople was not at all questioned, so there is no reason to talk about any aspirations of the Russian Church towards autocephaly. A contemporary characterizes Hilarion as “a good man, bookish and fasting,” which was expressed in his “Sermon on Law and Grace,” which included Praise to Prince Vladimir (c. 1049). This literary work testifies not only to the theological knowledge, but also to the rhetorical and literary talents of its author, which suggests that Hilarion received higher education in Byzantium. Participating in the embassy to the French royal court (c. 1048), he also had the opportunity to get acquainted with Western Europe. During his reign, the stone church of the monastery of St. was consecrated on November 26, 1052 (1053). George in Kyiv, founded by Yaroslav. As for Hilarion’s participation in the work on the so-called church charter of Yaroslav, it is doubtful, since the monument itself dates back to a later time (XII-XIII centuries). The removal of Hilarion was apparently in connection with the restoration of the previous order of installation of Kyiv metropolitans and probably followed shortly after the death of Yaroslav in February 1054, since already in 1055 the Greek metropolitan Ephraim was attested.

5. Ephraim

Ephraim was Metropolitan of Kyiv from 1054/1055 to approximately 1065, being at the same time a member of the Imperial Senate with the high court rank of protoproedros (perhaps even protoproedros ton protosynkellon), as can be seen from the inscription on his lead seal. His trial of the Novgorod bishop Luka Zhidyata in 1055 is known. On November 4 of an unknown year, Ephraim re-consecrated the St. Sophia Cathedral in Kyiv. A common belief is that in the 11th century. there were two metropolitans with the name “Efrem”, based on a misunderstanding: the second Ephraim, although he was installed in Constantinople as a lifelong titular metropolitan, but as such occupied only the Pereyaslav episcopal see (in the 1070-1090s) and was never the metropolitan of Kyiv.

6. Georgiy

George became Metropolitan of Kyiv around 1065 and remained so until about 1076; as is clear from his three lead seals that have come down to us, he was also a member of the imperial senate and bore the court title of synkellos. At the head of the Russian hierarchy, on May 20, 1072, George consecrated the newly built church in Vyshgorod by Izyaslav and supervised the transfer and discovery of the relics of both prince-martyrs, Boris-Roman and Gleb-Davyd, i.e., the entire procedure of their canonization. From the 12th century Two works are attributed to George: one of canonical content (Commandment), the other of polemical content (Contestation with Latin), of which the first one is especially questioned today. The chronicle's report about George's stay in Byzantium in 1073 does not necessarily mean that his reign ended this year, since regular visits to the Patriarchate were the duties of metropolitans. There is evidence that it was George who ordained the first Rostov bishop and future martyr Leonty (the bishopric was founded between 1073 and 1076). No later than 1078, the department was already occupied by his successor John II.

7. John II

John II was considered until recently to be the uncle of the famous Byzantine poet Theodore Prodromus (according to A. Kazhdan and S. Franklin, the dates of life of both contradict this identification, as well as the assumption that John was his nephew’s tutor). He occupied the Kyiv metropolitan see from 1076/1077, where he died in the fall (winter?) of 1089. It seems that his first known action was the consecration of the Rostov bishop Isaiah, appointed by the Kiev prince Izyaslav after July 15, 1077. John founded two new bishoprics: in Vladimir of Volyn around 1085 and Turov in 1088. In November 1086, John participated in a meeting of the permanent synod in Constantinople. The last news about him is his consecration of the Cathedral of the Assumption of Our Lady of the Kiev Pechersk Monastery on August 14, 1089. At least the main part of the canonical answers belongs to John II (c. 1083/1084) and the answer to antipope Clement III (1084-1088), then how his authorship in relation to the Service to Boris and Gleb is questioned, although much suggests that this liturgical work was created by “a man of cunning books and scholars” (PVL under 1089). The attempt to attribute to John II also the translation of the Syntagma of the XIV titles (R. Pihoya) is untenable. The attribution of the surviving metropolitan seals with the name of John requires further research.

8. John III "Skopets"

John III “Skopets” was metropolitan in Kyiv from about the summer of 1090 “from one year to a year,” that is, less than a year. According to contemporaries, by the time he arrived in Kyiv, John III was mortally ill, so that by August 14, 1091, the Kiev see was again vacant (this can be clearly concluded from the chronicle’s account of the transfer of the relics of St. Theodosius of Pechersk). Probably, John III carried out the consecration of Bishop Marin of Yuryevsky. Unlike his predecessor, John III is characterized in the chronicle as “a man who is not bookish, but has a simple and spacious mind.”

9. Nikolay

Nicholas headed the Kyiv Metropolis between 1092 and 1104. His name is mentioned only in two chronicles. At the insistence of the nobility and citizens of Kyiv, Nicholas, together with the widow of the Kyiv prince Vsevolod, acted as a mediator between the rival princes in November 1097, which indicates a certain connection between the metropolitan and the social and political life of Rus'. In the summer of 1101, Nicholas again acts as a champion of inner peace. It is not entirely clear how right those who attribute to Nicholas the ordination of the Novgorod Bishop Nikita are; it is only clear that this last happened no earlier than 1089 and no later than 1096.

10. Nikephoros I

Nikephoros I arrived in Kyiv on December 6, 1104, was elevated to the see on the 18th of the same month (Sunday) and occupied it until his death in April 1121. He is considered the author of four works, which at first, apparently, were written in Greek and then translated into Old Russian: two letters to Vladimir Monomakh, one to Yaroslav Svyatopolchich, as well as a pastoral letter to all believers; the latter attribution cannot be considered proven, since Metropolitan Nikephoros II should also be taken into account. Nikephoros I contributed to the all-Russian spread of the veneration of Theodosius of Pechersk by adding his name to the synodik (1108); in addition, he took part in the transfer of the relics of Saints Boris and Gleb on May 2, 1115. It is known for certain that Nicephorus ordained the following bishops: Lazar (1105) and Sylvester (1118) of Pereyaslavl, Amphilochius of Vladimir-Volyn (1105), Mina of Polotsk (1105) , Theoktist of Chernigov (1113), Daniil Yuryevsky (1114), Nikita of Belgorod (1114), Kiril of Turov (1114) (not to be confused with the famous writer).

11. Nikita

Nikita arrived from Constantinople to Kyiv in the fall of 1122, was elevated to the see on October 15 (Sunday) and died in the metropolis on March 9, 1126. As a metropolitan, he consecrated the Vladimir-Volyn bishop Simeon in the spring of 1123 and the Pereyaslav bishop on October 4, 1125 Brand. The Pereyaslavl see was empty for two and a half years (after the death of Bishop Sylvester on April 12, 1123) due to the metropolitan’s refusal to meet Vladimir Monomakh halfway, who wanted to establish an independent see in Smolensk, where his grandson Rostislav sat and which then belonged to the Pereyaslavl diocese. Vladimir Monomakh, in turn, stubbornly refused to approve a new candidate for the Pereyaslavl department. Only after the death of Vladimir on May 19, 1125, his son Mstislav fulfilled the will of the metropolitan.

12. Michael I

Michael I was, according to custom, appointed and ordained in Constantinople and arrived in Kyiv in the summer of 1130. Already in November-December of the same year, he consecrated Nifont as bishop of Novgorod, and in 1134-1136. participated in the establishment of the bishopric in Smolensk. Only with great difficulty did Mikhail manage to put an end to the troubles surrounding the vacant Pereyaslavl see (1134-1141), which arose as a result of protests against the separation of the Smolensk land from the Pereyaslavl diocese; Mikhail was able to ordain the next Pereyaslav bishop Euthymius only in 1141. At a time of constant civil strife under the Kiev princes Yaropolk Vladimirovich (1132-1139) and Vsevolod Olgovich (1139-1146), Mikhail made unsuccessful attempts to mediate between the rival princes, although he was unable to avoid accusations of partiality. At the turn of 1134-1135. he was even imprisoned for a short time, which should have hampered his mediation activities. The Metropolitan's authority was also undermined by his efforts to support the pro-Byzantine policy of one of the coalitions of Russian princes (primarily Galician and Suzdal). Participation in disputes over the Kyiv table in 1145/1146. - the last thing we know about Mikhail’s political activities; at least, during the enthronement of Izyaslav Mstislavich on August 13, 1146, he was no longer in Kyiv. The assumption that Michael was removed by Izyaslav, who was hostile towards him, does not find confirmation, since the dispute over the replacement of the metropolitan see in July 1147 suggested that it was vacant. As an argument against the appointment of Klim Smolyatich, only Michael’s order from his letter to the bishops was used, that the Kiev metropolitan could be installed only with the consent of the Patriarch of Constantinople. Based on this message, one can guess that Michael resigned from the rank of metropolitan (signed off to the metropolis) during a crisis, the culprit of which, apparently, was himself. At the same time, he recalled the primordial rights of Constantinople in order to avoid complications with the appointment of his successor. Since Michael was on a canonical visit to Byzantium in 1145, perhaps the events that soon followed in Kyiv were one of the reasons for his refusal to return there. However, the burial of a certain Metropolitan Michael in the Kiev Pechersk Monastery could be considered as an argument in favor of the assumption that Michael I died in Kyiv. This is a burial place, according to a legend from the 16th century. , was attributed, however, to the legendary Metropolitan Michael of the 10th century, although he could equally well be attributed to the metropolitan of the 70s of the 12th century. Michael II. With all this, it is very difficult to explain why the Metropolitan was buried in the Pechersk Monastery, and not in the St. Sophia Cathedral.

13. Klim (Kliment) Smolyatich

Klim (Clement) Smolyatich, the second metropolitan of Russian origin, was appointed by the Kyiv prince Izyaslav Mstislavich, elected at a council of bishops by six votes to three and dedicated on July 27, 1147 in the St. Sophia Cathedral using the relics - the “head” of St. Clement of Rome. This attempt to break with the tradition of appointing Russian metropolitans in Constantinople is explained by the political bias of Clement's predecessor (Michael). The new prince of Kiev wanted to have an obedient instrument of his policy in the head of the Russian church. The confusion in Constantinople (after the scandalous patriarchate of Michael II Kourkuas and Cosmas II Atticus, the patriarchal throne was empty until the end of December 1147) contributed to the fact that the candidacy of Clement, a worthy and theologically educated man, was accepted with satisfaction by the majority of the Russian clergy. However, due to the fact that in the inter-princely struggle Klim sided with Izyaslav, his powers were recognized only in those lands that were in the sphere of political influence of the Kyiv prince. Under the leadership of the Novgorod Bishop Nifont and Prince Yuri Dolgoruky, an influential church-political opposition arose against Klim. Klim's attempts to win over the wavering (see, for example, his message to the Smolensk prince Rostislav) remained fruitless. There was a church schism: Niphon and other bishops who adhered to tradition found themselves directly subordinate to the patriarch. Klim's fate depended on the results of the struggle for the Kiev table. He was forced to leave the capital with Izyaslav on August 26, 1149, returned there in April 1151, and left Kiev again shortly after Izyaslav's death, in early 1155. Klim served in the St. Sophia Cathedral for the last time for about three months, after after December 22, 1158, Kyiv fell into the hands of Izyaslav’s son Mstislav. After the death of Metropolitan Theodore, the Kiev prince Rostislav turned to Constantinople with a petition to retroactively approve Klim as metropolitan, but this petition was not successful. As a writer, Klim is known for his epistle to the priest Thomas. Klim's theological erudition, knowledge of the Greek language, mastery of rhetoric, as well as competence in matters of church law suggest that he was educated at one of the highest schools in Byzantium (cf. his nickname “Philosopher”). Before his appointment to the metropolitanate, Klim asceticised at the highest level of monasticism - in the great schema - and in this capacity led the life of a recluse. The expression “zarub”, from where Izyaslav “brought” Klim to the metropolis, should be understood in the sense of “shutter”, as it clearly follows from the text of the chronicle (“brought him out of the zarub, he was a monk-skimnik”) and is fully consistent with the ascetic inclinations of the metropolitan. Thus, the discussion about whether Klim came from a monastery in the town of Zarub near Smolensk or Kyiv is groundless. Likewise, the nickname “Smolyatich”, which was interpreted in the sense of “from Smolensk” according to the place of birth or the location of the monastery, should rather be understood as a patronymic: “son or grandson of Smolyat”. The year of Klim's death is unknown; the references to 1164 are not confirmed in the sources.

14. Constantine I

Constantine I, ordained metropolitan of Kyiv in the fall of 1155 in Constantinople. The consecration of the new metropolitan occurred at the request of Yuri Dolgoruky, who captured Kiev in March 1155. On January 26, 1156, at a meeting of the patriarchal synod, Constantine gave a speech on the sacrifice of the indivisible Trinity during the Eucharist, which was recognized as fundamental on this issue. The fact that such an experienced theologian was chosen, who, moreover, in his own words, was familiar with Russia even before his appointment, indicates concern in Constantinople about the possibility of a schism. Constantine arrived in Kyiv in the summer of 1156 and immediately began the fight against the “disobedient”, in which he, however, was somewhat overzealous. Klim and his late patron Izyaslav were anathematized, and all of Klim’s activities as a metropolitan, including the dedication of church hierarchs to them, were declared invalid. All bishops who supported Klim were removed and probably even expelled; only after a written condemnation were the deacons ordained by Klim retroactively confirmed in their positions.

For an unknown reason, in the winter of 1156/1157, the Rostov bishop Nestor, who by no means belonged to the adherents of Klim, was removed, and the Greek Leon was installed in his place.

After the Novgorod bishop Nifont died in Kiev, awaiting the arrival of Constantine, on April 21, 1156, Arkady, who was elected in his place, had to wait more than two years for Constantine’s ordination, which occurred only on August 10, 1158. Constantine never managed to extend his jurisdiction to the entire ancient Russian territory; he was not recognized in Vladimir Volynsky, where Klim found refuge, and, perhaps, also in Turov. Constantine took a decisive step in establishing an independent bishopric on the territory of the Galician principality, which had previously been part of the Volyn diocese, and appointed Kozma as the first Galician bishop. Apparently, the strict measures taken by Constantine to improve the health of the church hierarchy became the cause of new conflicts. After Kyiv fell into the hands of Mstislav, son of Izyaslav, on December 22, 1158, Constantine was forced to flee to Chernigov. The danger of church schism was avoided by an interprince agreement in March 1159: it was decided not to recognize either one or the other of the opposing metropolitans and to ask Constantinople to install a new head of the Russian church. Soon after this, Konstantin died in Chernigov. The last will he expressed speaks of a confused state of mind: not considering himself worthy of burial, he ordered the Chernigov Bishop Anthony to throw his body outside the city walls to be torn to pieces by dogs, which was done. However, general indignation at such an unusual act forced Constantine to be buried in the Cathedral Church of the Transfiguration.

15. Theodore

Theodore was installed as Metropolitan of Kyiv at the request of the new Kyiv prince Rostislav (from April 12, 1159) in order to put an end to the troubles in church life (see Klim, Constantine I). The death of Metropolitan Constantine, which occurred at this time, facilitated the new appointment. Theodore arrived in Kiev in August 1160 and remained in office until his death in June 1163. Theodore acted as a mediator in the reconciliation of Rostislav of Kiev with the Chernigov prince in 1161. It is likely that Theodore also participated in resolving the controversial issue of fasting on the master's holidays (the so-called “Leontinian heresy”), for, contrary to the prevailing opinion, one should apparently proceed from the fact that “Vladika Theodore,” who defeated the Rostov-Suzdal bishop Leon in a dispute, is not Theodore, the favorite of Andrei Bogolyubsky, information about which appear only at the end of the 1160s and who, moreover, was never ordained, but the Kiev Metropolitan Theodore; the fact is that this dispute, as can be seen from a comparison of both chronicle texts, was supposed to take place in Kiev in 1161 or early 1162, when Bishop Leon, expelled by Andrei Bogolyubsky, passed through Kiev on his way to Byzantium, where his opinion was also refuted during public debate in the presence of Emperor Manuel I Komnenos.

16. John IV

John IV, Theodore's successor, occupied the metropolitan see until his death for two years (1164-1166). He was one of the first to be honored with the title of Metropolitan of “All Rus'”. Not all lead seals with the name of John are amenable to precise attribution, but some of them, on which John is titled church head ton nantian "Ros, most likely belong to John IV: after overcoming the church schism, John IV was the second metropolitan of Kiev after Theodore to extend his jurisdiction de facto "all Rus'." On March 28, 1165, John consecrated Elijah as bishop of Novgorod and in the same year bestowed upon him the title of titular archbishop. Thus, the Novgorod bishop became prototronos (i.e., the first of the suffragans) of the Kiev metropolis, which he had previously been Belgorod Bishop The circumstances surrounding the accession of John IV to the see are worthy of attention.

After Theodore's death in June 1163, when the question of his successor was discussed, there was talk of reinstalling Climus. A supporter of this decision, the Kiev prince Rostislav sent an embassy to Constantinople in the spring of 1164 to win over Emperor Manuel I Komnenos to his side. But news of the planned restoration of Klim reached the shores of the Bosphorus even earlier; here, without wasting time, they installed John IV as metropolitan and, together with the imperial embassy, ​​sent him to Rus'. In Oleshya, near the mouth of the Dnieper, an unexpected meeting of both embassies took place, after which they moved together to Kyiv. Rostislav, being confronted with a fait accompli, succumbed to the persuasion of the imperial ambassador, who also delivered rich gifts, although in his heart he was against John. The widespread opinion that the Kiev prince initially rejected John’s candidacy is based on an incorrect understanding of the words “not wanting to accept,” which, in the context of the chronicle narrative, should, however, be understood in the sense that Rostislav had no particular desire to accept the metropolitan imposed on him. Also unfounded is the opinion of V. N. Tatishchev, constantly revived in historiography, that during these negotiations, under the threat of church schism, it was possible to achieve Byzantium’s consent to the fact that in the future all candidates for the Kiev metropolis will be supplied only with the prior consent of the Kyiv prince.

17. Constantine II

Constantine II became, after the death of John IV, Metropolitan of All Rus': “tis pasis “Rosias”, as the legends say on two lead seals and one chryso-voule. Constantine arrived in Kiev in 1167 and remained in office probably until 1170. (cf. Michael II) Due to a strict interpretation of the need for fasts on Wednesdays and Fridays on the master's holidays, Constantine II and the Chernigov Bishop Anthony came into conflict with the influential Pechersk Monastery in Kiev, which reached its highest intensity on Christmas Day 1168, which fell on a Wednesday. when Constantine subjected the Pechersk abbot Polycarp to penance... This measure caused such irritation against him that the sack of Kiev by the troops of Andrei Bogolyubsky in March 1169 was considered as divine retribution for the “metropolitan untruth". Constantine also proved himself a strict judge in the case against the Rostov-Suzdal appointee (but not ordained) as bishop of Theodore, to whom Byzantine civil legislation was applied.Theodore, who sought the establishment of a new metropolis in Vladimir-on-Klyazma, did not want the installation from Constantine. At the same time, Andrei Bogolyubsky deprived him of his support. As a result, in the summer of 1169, by the verdict of Constantine, his tongue was cut off, his right hand was cut off and he was blinded. It can be assumed that the harsh course of Constantine II threatened the church-political interests of Byzantium, and therefore he was recalled by the patriarch. The opinion that Konstantin was of Russian origin (D. Obolensky) is not confirmed in the sources.

18. Michael II

Michael II, overlooked by historiography, occupied the Kyiv see, as can be established, in the 1170s. In the synodal decree of the Patriarch of Constantinople dated March 24, 1171 on taking the oath to Emperor Manuel I Komnenos and his son Alexios (II), born in 1169, among the 24 metropolitans present, the twelfth, in the proper sequence, is Michail "Rosias. This is worthy of trust. evidence was noticed more than a century ago, but was never seriously taken into account, since it was believed that Constantine II remained in the see at least until 1174, and besides, the named Michael is unknown to Russian sources.Yet the Hypatian Chronicle contains information that could be attributed to Michael. In the story about the occupation of the Kiev table by Roman Rostislavich, it is said that the Metropolitan and Archimandrite of the Pechersk Monastery, among others, came out to meet the prince who was entering the city. Since the Metropolitan is not named here by name, then, generally speaking, we can assume that we are talking about Constantine II, the last metropolitan named by name, namely in connection with the events of 1169. However, it should be taken into account that the chronicle is not a complete text, but a compilation, which is especially clearly seen in its chronological inconsistency. Thus, the mentioned entry into Kiev of Roman is dated back to 6682 (1174), while, according to completely reliable data, this prince occupied the Kiev throne already at the beginning of July 1171. The story comes from the chronicle of the Pechersk Monastery, brought up to 1182 and about 1200 partially used in the Kiev chronicle, although in this case with an incorrect dating: the compiler of the Kiev chronicle confused the year of Roman’s return to the Kiev table (1174) with the year of his first reign (1171). On the other hand, in the contemporary events of the Pechersk author’s story, neither the Metropolitan nor the Archimandrite were named. Of course, it is quite possible that Metropolitan Constantine II and Abbot Polycarp, who clashed in 1169, had already reconciled by that time or, despite the conflict, expressed their readiness to lead the Kiev clergy welcoming the new prince. At the same time, there is a detail in the story that allows us to doubt that it was Constantine II who was meant; the fact is that the abbot of the Pechersk Monastery is mentioned here for the first time as a bearer of the honorary title of archimandrite. As is known, the Kiev Pechersk Monastery was one of those monasteries that were under the special patronage of the princely power and were to a certain extent excluded from the jurisdiction of the metropolitan, enjoying self-government. Thus, it seems not unreasonable to assume that Polycarp received the honorary title of archimandrite directly from the patriarch. Since in 1168-1169. the dispute about the posts had hardly yet been resolved (for example, for supporting the metropolitan in this matter, the Chernigov bishop Anthony was even expelled from the city by his prince), then the participation of Constantine II in encouraging Polycarp is very unlikely. On the contrary, this latter should be understood, rather, as a gesture of disapproval of the policy of Constantine II in relation to the Pechersk Monastery. Although there was no unanimity in Constantinople on the issue of posts, they were well informed about the conflict in Rus'. Patriarch Luke Chrysoverg was inclined to lighten the fasts on the lord's holidays; In addition, he understood the significance of the Pechersk Monastery for the Russian clergy and appreciated its loyalty to the Patriarchate during the recent struggles within the Russian Church.

The new Patriarch Michael III (from January 1170) patronized monasticism and enjoyed its support, being an opponent of the union; he had every reason to maintain peace in the Russian Church and encourage a monastery devoted to Orthodoxy. As a result, his abbot received an advantage over other abbots of Russian monasteries; perhaps it was at this time, given the new title of abbot, that the Pechersky Monastery received the name of Lavra. Thus, it can be assumed that the honorary title of archimandrite, in which capacity Polycarp appears publicly for the first time during the celebrations in July 1171, was delivered precisely by the new metropolitan, who arrived in Kiev around June 1171 (this month is the most favorable time for travel by sea and Dnieper from Constantinople to Kyiv). It is unclear how long Michael II occupied the see, but here again it is necessary to recall the burial in the Pechersky Monastery of a certain Metropolitan Michael (see Michael I). If there is a historical grain behind this legend, then such a deviation from the custom of burying metropolitans in the Kiev Cathedral certainly indicates a close connection with the monastery, the beginning of which, perhaps, was laid by the fact that it was this metropolitan who gave the Pechersk rector the title of archimandrite.

19. Nikephoros II

Nikephoros II became Metropolitan of Kyiv before 1183 and remained at the see for at least twenty years. The first information about his activities dates back to 1183: On July 29 or August 5 of this year, Nikifor tonsured the newly elected abbot of the Kyiv Pechersk Monastery, Priest Vasily, into monasticism. Shortly before this, he consecrated the Greek Nicholas as the new bishop of Rostov in place of the deceased Leon, because of which his relations with the powerful Vladimir-Suzdal prince Vsevolod the Big Nest deteriorated, who demanded that the metropolitan approve the chosen one from “the people of our land,” i.e. .to approve the princely investiture. Nikifor, who initially opposed this, eventually yielded to pressure from the Kyiv prince Svyatoslav and on March 11, 1184, dedicated Vsevolodov's candidate, abbot of the monastery of St. Savior on Berestov Luka, the new Bishop of Rostov. The Greek Nicholas, who lost his Rostov see, received the Polotsk bishopric in the same year, where Bishop Dionysius just died. This experience helped Nikifor understand the situation in his metropolis and establish mutual understanding with the most influential princes. In 1194, Nikifor led the ceremony of enthroning Rurik Rostislavich to the Kiev table, which took place in the St. Sophia Cathedral. Nikifor skillfully reconciled the princes among themselves, and during one such mediation between Vsevolod and the Chernigov prince in the 1190s, he managed, with the support of the Kyiv prince, to establish a new, twelfth, bishopric in Ryazan. In 1189, Nikifor managed to attract the Russian princes to repel Hungarian interference in Galician affairs. In addition, it was Nikephoros who was probably the Russian archpastor who, according to the testimony of Nikita Choniates, in 1201/1202 encouraged the Russian princes to campaign against the Polovtsians who were ravaging Byzantium. At the request of Vsevolod, in 1190 Nicephorus ordained Bishop John of Rostov-Suzdal, and in 1197 Bishop Paul of Pereyaslavl; even earlier, in 1189, he consecrated Bishop Andrian of Belgorod. The Novgorod archbishops were also consecrated by Nikephoros: Gabriel (May 29, 1187), Martyrius (December 11, 1193) and Mitrofan (July 3, 1201). In the report about this last ceremony, the metropolitan is not named, but since the Kyiv chronicle in 1198, and the Novgorod chronicle in 1199, Nikifor is attested at the Kyiv see, it can be assumed that in 1201 he continued to head it. A large lead seal has been preserved, on which Nikephoros, like his predecessors, calls himself the Archpastor of All Rus'. The pastoral epistle that has come down to us also belongs to him (or his namesake Nikephoros I).

20. Matthew

Matthew became Metropolitan of Kiev before 1210 and died on August 19, 1220. Matthew was the successor of Nicephorus, who died, perhaps, shortly after 1201. In this case, he could have been consecrated by Patriarch John X Camather, who, after the fall of Constantinople, 1204 and until his death at the beginning of 1206 he resided in Thrace. On the other hand, it is quite acceptable to assume that as a result of the collapse of Byzantium, the Kiev see was empty for several years. If so, then Matthew could only be installed as the new Nicene Patriarch Michael IV Authorian, who took office in the spring of 1208, and arrived in Kiev no earlier than 1209. In historiography, there is sometimes a misconception that Matthew was appointed Grand Duke Vsevolod the Great Nest, although this assumption is based solely on the words of V.N. Tatishchev. Be that as it may, in 1210 Matthew, on behalf of the Olgovichi, arrived as an intermediary in Vladimir-on-Klyazma, where he was honored with rich gifts. Thanks to the reconciliation that took place then, Vsevolod the Big Nest was recognized as the eldest among the Russian princes. Vsevolod Chermny from the Olgovich family was able to again occupy the Kiev table, and his daughter married Vsevolod’s son Big Nest Yuri on May 15, 1211. Soon after the end of this mission, in the spring of 1211, Matthew ordained the new Novgorod Archbishop Anthony in place of Mitrofan, who was removed on January 23, 1211 by Prince Mstislav the Udal and the Novgorodians. After the death of Grand Duke Vsevolod the Great Nest in 1212 and the division of the principality between his sons, the old Rostov bishopric was divided into two: on November 10, 1213 (1214?) Matthew consecrated Pachomius, until then the abbot of the Petrovsky Monastery in Rostov, as bishop of Rostov. and at the beginning of 1214 (1215?) - Abbot Simon, once a monk of the Kiev Pechersk Monastery, as bishop of Vladimir of Suzdal. After the death of Pachomius, Kiril became the bishop of Rostov at the beginning of 1216. At the end of his life, Matthew had to once again deal with Novgorod affairs. As a result of political upheavals in the Novgorod Republic, Mitrofan, who had been displaced earlier, returned to Novgorod and at the end of 1219 again found himself at the see in Novgorod Sofia. However, Archbishop Anthony had no intention of voluntarily giving up his post, and therefore Novgorod decided to send both archbishops to Kyiv, leaving the metropolitan to choose between them. Matthew restored Mitrofan, who returned to Novgorod on March 17, 1220; but Matthew also showed “honor” to Anthony by making him bishop of Przemysl. Thus, the foundation of the Przemysl see, formerly part of the Galich diocese, should be considered as the result of an agreement between the metropolitan and the Galich prince Mstislav the Udal (from 1219), who patronized Anthony.

21. Kiril I

Kiril I was installed as Metropolitan of All Rus' by the Nicene Patriarch Herman II in 1224 and at the end of this year, accompanied by the Russian embassy, ​​he was “brought quickly” to Kiev, where he solemnly ascended the pulpit in the Kiev St. Sophia Cathedral on Epiphany (January 6), 1225. Kiril - the first Russian metropolitan, about whom it is reliably known that he was installed in Nicaea. The fact that the Kiev see was empty for more than four years indicates difficulties that may have arisen in the issue of the canonicity of the appointment to the Russian Metropolis. Cyril died in the summer of 1233 between June 10 and August 15. In 1226-1227, as in 1230, in full agreement with the Kyiv prince Vladimir Rurikovich, Kiril acted as a mediator in peace negotiations between the princes, which earned him great respect. The chronicler's remark that, along with his great erudition in the Holy Scriptures, Cyril also had a special gift of “teaching” also seems to indicate his social activity. Kiril's mutual understanding with Russian monasticism was manifested, among other things, in his participation in the annual celebrations dedicated to the celebration of the memory of St. Theodosius in the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery (which we learn about completely by accident, thanks to the fact that on the same day, May 3, 1230, an earthquake occurred). Kiril's concerns were aimed at strengthening the independence of the Russian church in relation to the princely power, as well as at its internal consolidation. The sources only briefly mention two councils, each of which was attended by five bishops and several abbots: one in Vladimir-on-Klyazma in March 1227 and the second in April 1231 in Kyiv. Another evidence on this topic is contained in the message of Patriarch Herman addressed to Cyril from 1228, where a warning is expressed not to ordain slaves to the priesthood, and bishops are required not to make ordination unless a free diploma is first presented. Princes, under threat of excommunication, are prohibited from interfering in the property affairs of churches and monasteries, as well as in ecclesiastical jurisdiction, the scope of which, according to the message, was extremely small. The contents of the letter were undoubtedly dictated to Patriarch Kiril, who sought, with the help of the authority of the patriarch, to eradicate abuses in the Russian Church. It seems that it was at this time that the church statutes of Vladimir and Yaroslav first received their written form. Probably, in connection with the church policy of Cyril I, one should also consider the legend on his seal: “Kipillos monachos eleo f (eo) u archiepiskopos tis m(it) popoleos Rosias.” It is remarkable that the Kiev Metropolitan here titles himself “Archbishop of the Russian Metropolis,” thereby wanting to indicate his supremacy in relation to all bishops who acted, according to this interpretation, within the limits of authority received from the Metropolitan. In other words, the Metropolitan sought to reduce the bishops subordinate to him to the role of his vicars (vicars). This policy seems very timely in the face of the fact that investiture on the part of the princes (i.e., princely appointments) increasingly made bishops independent church rulers in relation to the metropolitan, who was left only to ordain princely proteges. The political fragmentation of Rus' also narrowed the sphere of real power of the Kyiv metropolitans. Thus, the emergence of a tendency towards κηδεμονία πάντων (“care for everyone”), which is so characteristic of the church policy of Metropolitan Cyril II in the second half of the 13th century, apparently should be attributed to the era of Cyril I. During the reign of Cyril I the following bishops were consecrated : Mitrofan, bishop in Vladimir-on-Klyazma and Pereyaslavl, March 14, 1227 (in Vladimir-on-Klyazma); Spiridon, Archbishop of Novgorod, February 17, 1230 and Kiril (II), Bishop of Rostov, Yaroslavl and Uglich, April 6, 1231 (it is noteworthy that the bishops of Vladimir and Rostov are named not only by the location of their cathedral churches, but also by their residences appanage princes). Of the numerous literary works whose authors bore the name “Cyril,” several teachings, without proper grounds, are attributed to Cyril I.

22. Greek Joseph

The Greek Joseph was consecrated as Metropolitan of All Rus' by Patriarch Germanus II in Nicaea and arrived in Kyiv in 1236. However, we have no evidence of his activities. It is possible that during his time the establishment of the diocese in Lutsk occurred, which took place, in any case, until 1240. It is unclear whether Joseph retired to his homeland with the beginning of the second Mongol campaign against Rus' or died during the capture of Kiev on December 6, 1240. So or otherwise, until 1245 they could not send a new metropolitan from Nicaea, since from 1240 to 1244 the patriarchal throne was vacant.

[Peter]

A mysterious figure remains “quidam archiepiscopus de Russcia nomine Petrus... a Tartaris exterminatus” (i.e. “a certain Peter, Archbishop of Rus'... expelled by the Tatars”), who spoke in 1244 in the Roman curia, and in 1245 g. - in front of the First Lyon Cathedral with information about the Tatars, as evidenced by the source reflected in the Chronicle of Matthew of Paris and the Bertin Annals. Perhaps the title bishop (in the sense of an ordinary bishop) or archimandrite was misunderstood or translated? The last possibility is quite probable for the reason that before the 13th century. in Western Europe, the title archimandrita was also used in relation to archbishops. The assumption that we are dealing with a usurper of the metropolitan rank is not without probability.

The opinion that the Russian bishop who fled to Western Europe is the abbot of the Kyiv Spassky Monastery, Peter Akerovich, mentioned in the chronicles in 1230/1231, is nothing more than a hypothesis.

23. Kiril II

Cyril II led the Russian church for more than four decades (124?/1247-1281), during the most difficult era of the Mongol yoke. Cyril was first mentioned as installed, but not ordained, in 1242/1243, surrounded by the Galician-Volhynian prince Daniel. Being a nominal prince of Kyiv (from 1238/1239), Daniel then approved the candidacy of Cyril, who, perhaps, was of Russian origin; one must think that he had previously been elected by a council, in which bishops and abbots who were within reach took part. The idea of ​​the identity of the new metropolitan with the printer Daniel, who also bore the name Kiril, is just a hypothesis, although it has quite good grounds. Only upon Daniel’s return in the spring of 1246 from the Horde, where he went to pay homage to Batu Khan, did Kiril go to the patriarch (from 1240 to 1244, the patriarchal throne, as we know, was empty!) to be appointed to the Russian Metropolis. On the way to Nicaea, Cyril acted as a mediator in negotiations between Prince Daniel and the Hungarian king Bela IV, which ended with the conclusion of an alliance between these sovereigns. Since the Hungarian mission required time, Kiril’s ordination should be dated back to 1247. In the autumn of 1250, Kiril arrived in Suzdal, where in the winter of 1250-1251. The marriage of Daniel's daughter to the Grand Duke of Vladimir Andrei Yaroslavich takes place. Particularly striking is the mutual understanding and long-term cooperation of Kiril with Alexander Yaroslavich Nevsky, who received the title of Grand Duke of Kyiv in 1249 at the Khan's headquarters, and in 1252 the Grand Duke of Vladimir. Both statesmen were skeptical of the pope's proposals for union, considering resistance to the superior forces of the Mongols futile. As a result, they decided to accept Mongol rule and cooperate broadly with the conquerors. The first of the famous meetings of Kiril with Alexander Nevsky took place in 1251 in Novgorod, where Kiril, together with the Rostov Bishop Kiril, ordained the Novgorod Archbishop Dalmat. In 1252, Kiril led the celebrations in connection with the accession of the new Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky to the Vladimir table. At the end of 1256, both of them visited Novgorod again. Around the same time (1255-1258) a bishopric was established in Tver. In 1261 - 1263 Kiril stayed in Vladimir-on-Klyazma, where he ordained the Sarai bishop Mitrofan (Sarai is the capital of the Golden Horde) and the Rostov bishop Ignatius, and in November 1263 he participated in the solemn burial of Alexander Nevsky. Probably in Kyiv, in 1269, Cyril ordained Theognost, Bishop of Pereyaslavl Russian and Sarai; Following this, Theognost, on the instructions of the Metropolitan and Khan Mengu Timur, went to Constantinople to the emperor and patriarch. His stay in Constantinople on August 12, 1276 is documented (see “answers” ​​of the patriarchal synod). Accompanied by the newly installed bishop of Vladimir in Kyiv in 1273, the former Kiev-Pechersk archimandrite Serapion, Kiril arrived in 1274 in Vladimir-on-Klyazma, where he appointed him bishop of “Volodymer, Suzhdal and Nizhny Novgorod”. It was with this stay of Cyril in Vladimir that historiography associated that important metropolitan council, at which a resolution was adopted against abuses in the church and among the clergy, and also a collection of church regulations (nomocanon, helmsman's book) was officially approved, translated in the Balkans and sent to the metropolitan by the Bulgarian despot Yakov-Svyatoslav. This council, as was shown (Ya. N. Shchapov), took place already in 1273 in Kyiv. Based on this meeting, under the leadership of Kiril, a new Russian edition of the nomocanon was created. At the turn of 1275 and 1276. and throughout 1276, Cyril remained in Kyiv, where he ordained the new Novgorod archbishop Clement and Theognostus, the successor of the deceased Serapion of Vladimir.
In 1280/1281, Kiril once again visited the Suzdal land; here he investigated the accusations against the Rostov Bishop Ignatius and acquitted him. During this trip, Cyril died in Pereslavl Zalessky on November 27, 1281.

His remains were delivered to Kyiv on December 6 of the same year (about 1000 km of sleigh ride), where he was buried in the St. Sophia Cathedral, as the last Metropolitan of Kiev.

His successor Maxim (1283-1305), a Greek by birth, moved to Vladimir-on-Klyazma with his entire court and cathedral clergy in 1299 and was buried in the local Cathedral of the Assumption of Our Lady.

Kiril knew how to defend church interests before the Mongol khans. On August 1, 1267, Khan Mengu Timur issued him a charter (yarlyk), which contained guarantees of tolerance in religious matters, the clergy was exempted from various taxes, the inviolability of church real estate and objects of worship and benefits for people subject to the church were proclaimed.

From the text we can conclude that Kiril may have previously received such letters from the Golden Horde khans Batu (1237-1256) and Berke (1256-1266). Speculation that under Kiril supposedly weakened, if not completely interrupted, ties with Galich and Volyn are groundless. The silence of the sources on this matter is explained by their poor preservation. The fact that Rosia mikra, along with other Russian lands, remained under the jurisdiction of the Kyiv Metropolitan is evidenced by the following circumstance: the Russian nomocanon, developed under the leadership of Kiril, was adopted in the Volyn principality in its most ancient form; it was copied here in 1286. There is no basis for the assertion that Cyril transferred the metropolis to Vladimir.

Kiril is characterized by frequent trips to dioceses, and Vladimir simply became his residence during long stays in North-Eastern Rus'; especially in the period before the death of Alexander Nevsky (1263), Kiril ruled the metropolis from here, simultaneously managing the affairs of the vacant Vladimir see. Such actions by Kiril were a logical consequence of the theory of “trusteeship of all” that he adhered to. This theory was followed in the 13th and 14th centuries. and the Byzantine patriarchs, reserving the right to supreme supervision. Kiril thought of himself as a real bishop of the entire metropolis with the sovereign fullness of episcopal power, since the next highest rank church hierarch, the patriarch, was too far away. This view was expressed in the title that Kiril readily used: “Archbishop of All Rus'.” From this point of view, the bishops subordinate to him were considered as acting only by virtue of the powers vested in them by the metropolitan. In this sense, a special Vladimir bishop was not needed as long as Vladimir was often used by Kiril as a temporary residence. These views are also discernible in the Metropolitan’s address to the Rostov Bishop Ignatius (“brother and son”) or in the fact that Kiril, bypassing Bishop Clement, addresses directly the Novgorodians (“God has entrusted me with the archbishopric in the Russian land, you listen to God and me ").

Notes

Metropolitans whose names are enclosed in square brackets were not included in the list of metropolitans given by Y.N. Shchapov. The editors included these metropolitans in the general list without changing the numbering, and inserted information about them from the footnotes into the main text. – approx. ed.
Laurent V. Le corpus des sceaux de 1 "empire byzantin P., 1963. T. V, pars 1. P. 600. N 781.
Lives of the holy martyrs Boris and Gleb and services to them / Prepared. to the publication by D.I. Abramovich. Pg., 1916. (Monuments of ancient Russian literature. Issue 2). P. 19.
In the literature, due to a misunderstanding, it was repeatedly stated that Constantine allegedly ordered the arrest of Polycarp. However, the Old Russian “prohibition” corresponds to the Greek epitimia - “repentance, punishment” - and can mean, in the worst case, removal from office.
Here we need clarification regarding the names of Dionysius and Gabriel, who, starting from the 15th-16th centuries. found in the lists of metropolitans between Nikephoros and Matthew. Both of the oldest catalogs of metropolitans are of Novgorod origin: one dates back to the 20s of the 15th century. and only Dionysius knows; the second dates back to the mid-15th century. and already includes the name Gabriel. Not to mention the justification of the pause between the death of Nicephorus II and the installation of Matthew, the tradition that brought both names to us must be considered unreliable. The appearance of the name Dionysius between Nikephoros II and Matthew is very easy to explain if we take into account the method of compiling the catalogue: the compiler simply looked for the name of the next metropolitan in various chronicles. And in one of them he discovered Metropolitan Dionysius under the year 1210 (see Typographic Chronicle: PSRL. Pg 1921 T. 24. P. 85), where he is mentioned in the same context as Matthew in other chronicles; therefore, the mention of Dionysius is explained by a copyist error. It is more difficult to explain the appearance of the name Gabriel in the second catalogue, but here too the reason lies in the additions made by the compiler of the catalogue, who was not satisfied with the data in the chronicles and expanded the list with names that he found in other documents. In one of them he must have come across the name of some Metropolitan Gabriel (this was the name, for example, of the third Metropolitan of Galich in the first half of the 14th century). It is clear that the compiler could easily mistake the Galich metropolitan for the Kyiv metropolitan, although it is not entirely clear why in the catalog he is assigned to a time approximately a hundred years earlier. Perhaps in the middle of the 15th century. sequence of metropolitans of the 14th century. was so well known that the compiler had to find a place for Gabriel in the previous century.
In the literature, this Cyril is often called Cyril II, and Metropolitan Cyril II (1242-1281) respectively, Cyril III. Cyril I is considered to be the metropolitan with this name, placed in the metropolitan catalog of the 16th century. between Theopempt and Hilarion.
Historiography has repeatedly pointed out the attempt of the Volyn bishop Joasaph to “jump onto the metropolitan’s table,” as reported in the Ipatiev Chronicle. This deliberate usurpation was attributed to the years of the Mongol invasion (i.e. after 1237); however, one piece of news from the Novgorod I Chronicle, which was not paid due attention (NPL. P. 68 under 1229), allows us to date this event to another time. The Novgorod chronicler unequivocally states that among the candidates for the Novgorod see (around May-June) 1229 was the Volyn bishop Joasaph. Such a claim on the part of a hierarch occupying a different department would look very unusual, so it is logical to think that at that time Joasaph no longer occupied his original position. This assumption allows us to more accurately date the Volyn news. The chronicler, or rather, the prince's biographer, wanted to say that during the reign of Daniil Romanovich, that is, between 1216-1219 and 1264-1269, there were four bishops in Vladimir of Volyn, the first of whom was Joasaph. Further, from the text of the chronicle it is clear that Daniel appointed a certain John as the bishop of the city of Kholm, which he founded, whose predecessor was the Ugrian bishop, namely this same Joasaph, “who rode on the table of the metropolitan and for this reason the speed of his table was overthrown and the speed of the squeak was transferred to Kholm” ( PSRL T. 2. Stb. 739-740). The transfer of the see from Ugrovsk to Kholm should be connected with the installation, apparently around 1240, of John of Kholm as bishop, who occupied the see in the early 1260s. It is known that Daniel founded the Ugrian diocese while he was sitting in Vladimir of Volyn (see: Ibid. Stb. 842), i.e. before 1237/1238, but after 1229, as follows from Novgorod news about Joasaph. Based on these data, Joasaph’s career is restored as follows: from the monks of the monastery of the Holy Mountain under Vladimir of Volyn, he became the bishop of this city in 1219; between 1220 and 1224 he tried to occupy the empty metropolitan see. This attempt failed and ended with his removal from office (1225), probably after the arrival of the new Metropolitan Cyril I. Vasily, a monk of the same monastery of the Holy Mountain, became the new bishop of Vladimir of Volyn. At that time, Daniel did not yet have enough strength to resist the metropolitan’s decision, but Joasaph’s claim to the post of Novgorod archbishop in 1229 indicates that he did not abandon his ambitious plans and, moreover, enjoyed a certain amount of support from the secular authorities. Somewhat later, Daniel founded the Ugrov diocese, appointing his protégé as the first bishop. All this could have happened with the consent of Metropolitan Kiril or soon after his death (in the summer of 1233), in order to confront the new metropolitan with a fait accompli. Apparently, the death of Joasaph, which followed several years later, and the decision to transfer the bishopric to Kholm coincide in time.

Two large copies of such molyvdovuls have survived, which are still unanimously attributed to Metropolitan Cyril I. However, the candidacy of Cyril II cannot be excluded, because among the arguments in favor of Cyril I, only one is truly conclusive: both bullae were found during archaeological excavations of the “Princes of the Mountain” "(about 100 km south of Kiev, near the mouth of the Ros). As numerous finds show, this princely residence was destroyed during the Mongol invasion, i.e. in 1239/1240, or shortly after it.

The graffiti discovered in the Kiev St. Sophia Cathedral about the day of Kiril’s death makes it possible to place the sign differently than was done by A. N. Nasonov in his edition of the Novgorod First Chronicle in the message about the death of Kiril.

The meaning of the title prototronos, which is attached to Cyril in a letter to him from the Bulgarian despot Yakov Svyatoslav (1261 or 1270), is unclear: “. . I am writing to you, beloved by God, Archbishop Kirill Protophron. . ." Prototronos - episcopus primae sedis in the patriarchate, designated the first among the metropolitans, prototronos in the metropolis - the highest rank of bishop of this metropolis (in Kyiv this was the Novgorod bishop from 1165). Thus, the only possible assumption is that Cyril II was so named as the prototronos of the patriarchy, but such an assumption contradicts the traditional first place occupied by the Caesarea see in the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Otherwise, we could only be talking about a short-term increase in the rank of the Russian Metropolis (from 60th to first place?); Could this be explained, say, by the special position of the Nicene emperors and patriarchs or by the tendency to establish friendly contacts with the Mongols through the mediation of Cyril II? The assumption about prototronos as the bishop of the first table in the metropolis, i.e., Kyiv, would be desirable to be supported by data from other sources. In this case, one should proceed from the fact that Cyril II, who considered himself “Archbishop of All Rus',” used the title prototronos in order to emphasize his claim to guardianship of everyone. However, we must not forget that here the title was applied by the Bulgarian sovereign, who, thanks to his family ties with the Byzantine court, must have clearly understood its real meaning. We cannot exclude the possibility that Yakov-Svyatoslav borrowed the title from the intitulation of Cyril’s own message, although in this case both interpretations are possible.

He was sent to the great prince in Kor-sun by the Pat-ri-ar-khom of Tsar-Re-grad Nik-ko-la-em Khri-so-ver-g. From Kor-su-ni the mit-ro-po-lit arrived in Kiev together with the Great Prince Vla-di-mir. Mi-kha-il was a zealous race-pro-strat-ni-tel of Christianity; passing through vast countries, he planted seeds of the faith of Christ. Mit-ro-po-li-tu Mi-ha-i-lu at-pi-sy-va-yut construction Ki-e-in-Evil-to-ver-ho-Mi-high- catching the mo-na-sta-rya, and having arrived with him from Tsar-rya-gra-da mo-na-boor - the foundation of the mo-na-sta-rya Ki -e-in-Mezhi-mountain. Mi-ha-il took wherever he could build a church, set up priests and dia-ko-novs and nis-pro-ver-gal idols. Le-to-pi-si say that the people, attached to the ancient superstition, looked at the the wreck of their idols, and when their god Perun was thrown into the Dnieper, the crowd, running after their idol, screamed followed by: “Per-rune, you-you-bye!” i.e. “you-swim-wai”. Is-tu-kan, rushing through the waters, as if s-vis-ing the voices of those pi-ying towards him, moored to the shore at the very place where later, in the 11th century, a monastery was built and called Vy-du-bits-kim. St. Mi-ha-il died in Ki-e-ve; his relics are in the great cathedral Pe-cherskaya church open. In the above-pi-si, with his cancer on the lattice, there is an image that this saint died in 992, according to Gre-ben in the Ten Church; that under the Pe-cher-sky abbot Feo-k-ti-ste, his powers were transferred to An-to-ni-e-vu pe-sche-ru; and according to the presentation of the ar-hi-mand-ri-ta Ro-ma-na Ko-py and by the named decree of July 23, 1730, per-re-ne-se -we are on October 1 of the same year to the great church (Pe-cher-skaya). When St. Mi-ha-il is read to the li-ku of pleasers, unknown: to-la-gat on-dob-but, from the-s-m-re-ne-se-niy his relics in the caves, for in the list of pre-similar An-to-ni-e-voy caves he is also listed among Kal-no-foy -sky in 1638; and in the book of Aka-fi-stov with ka-no-na-mi, na-pe-cha-tan-noy in the Pe-cher-ti-graphy in 1677, in 9 pes- no, 1st verse The ancestor of the great fathers of Pe-cher-sky, having established his name, as it is to-day pe-cha-ta-et- I am in this ka-non; but in the general month he was not there, like other great Pe-cherskys. Already indicated by St. si-no-da June 15, 1762, May 18, 1775 and October 31, 1784 dose-in-le-but print services to the pre-similar: Mi -ha-i-lu, An-to-niu, Fe-o-do-siyu and so on to the miracle-do-creators of Pe-cher-sky in the books from-da-va-e-my Laurel-ti-by-gra-fi-ey, and by decree of St. Si-no-da on August 6, 1795, in-ve-le-but there was a co-thread and a detailed life-description of the sacred ti-te-la Mi-ha-i-la for placement in Che-ty Mi-not-yah. Mi-ha-il is the first Kiev mit-ro-po-li-tom. Some le-to-pi-si call him second, and the first is the Greek Leon-tiya or Leo-va; in the New-Gorod-Russian Le-to-Pemp-tse grew-writing mit-ro-po-li-tov na-chi-na-et-sya with Fe-o-pemp-ta (1037) . Until the 13th century, mit-ro-po-li-you lived for a hundred years in Ki-e-ve. The depletion of this city has left them behind the throne of the mit-ro-poly in Vla-di-mir on Klyaz-mu , and then, at the beginning of the 14th century, to Moscow, where they ruled the Russian Church until the establishment of the Pat- ri-ar-she-stva (1589). Mit-ro-po-li-you All-Russian names were first Ki-ev-ski-mi and all Russia. According to the establishment of the pat-ri-ar-she-stva of the Kiev mit-ro-po-li-you, according to their inclusion in the Russian hierarchy , for-ni-ma-li first place after pat-ri-ar-khov.

See also: "" in the text of St. Di-mit-ria of Ro-stov.

Prayers

Troparion of St. Michael, Metropolitan of Kyiv

Today the prophecy among the Apostles of the First-Called has been fulfilled:/ Behold, on these mountains grace has risen and faith has multiplied./ And who, through unbelief, was born/ was born in the Divine font/ and there was a people renewed,/ the royal priesthood, the holy language, the flock of Christ,/ to whom you appeared as the first shepherd Thou art,/ as having served first through Baptism./ And now, standing before the Lord Christ God,/ pray to all Russian sons to be saved:/ for you have boldness, as a hierarch of God and a clergyman.

Troparion of St. Michael

Today the prophecy in the apostles of the First-Called has been fulfilled, / for on these mountains grace has risen and faith has multiplied. / And from unbelief, which had become dilapidated / the divine font was born / and there was a renewal of people, a royal priesthood, / a holy language, the flock of Christ, / to whom you appeared as the first shepherd You,/ as you first served with Baptism./ And now, standing before the Lord Christ God,/ pray for all the sons of the Russians to be saved,// and have boldness, as a hierarch of God and a clergyman.

Kontakion of St. Michael, Metropolitan of Kyiv

The second Moses appeared to Russia, Father, / carrying the mental grapes from Egyptian idolatry / into the land foreseen by prophecy. / There will be, he said, the establishment of faith on earth, / and on the top of the Kiev mountains it will be exalted more than Lebanon / the fruit that nourishes the whole world. / Having tasted from the worthless ,/ let us please you, Michael, hierarch of God.

Kontakion of St. Michael

The second Moses appeared to Russia, Father, / carrying the mental grapes / from Egyptian idolatry into the land, foreseen by prophecy: / there will be, he said, the establishment of faith on earth, / and on the tops of the Kiev mountains it will exalt itself more than Lebanon / The fruit that nourishes the whole world, / from Having tasted something worthless, // let us please you, Michael, hierarch of God.

Prayer to Michael, first Metropolitan of Kyiv

Great and glorious holy archpastor and our father Michael, the first throne of the Russian country and enlightener, trustworthy intercessor of all Christian tribes before God, we pray to you: help us to be an imitator of your love for God, with which you were filled in your earthly belly. Enlighten our minds and hearts with the light of Divine teaching. Teach us to follow you faithfully and to diligently do the commandments of the Lord, so that we may be known as your children not only by name, but also by all our lives. Pray, Equal to the Apostles, hierarch, for the Russian Church, for your city and monastery, in which your saints rest incorruptibly, and for our entire Fatherland, look mercifully on all your faithful admirers who seek your help: be a healer to everyone in sickness, in sorrow and a comforter to the sorrowful, a helper in troubles and needs, and in the hour of death an intercessor and patron, so that with your help we, too, sinners, may be worthy to receive salvation and inherit the Kingdom of Christ. To her, the saint of Christ, if you are able to help us, and trust in your help, let us glorify the wondrous God in His saints, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, now and ever and unto ages of ages. Amen.

Canons and Akathists

Akathist to Saint and Wonderworker Michael, first Metropolitan of Kyiv

Kontakion 1

A vessel chosen from Christ God, you were sent to the Russian land and you enlightened our tongue with holy baptism to the Holy Hierarch Father Michael, who now stands before your Lord in heaven, to whom you pray diligently, to deliver your flock from all troubles and misfortunes, and we call to you:

Ikos 1

King of the Archangels and Angels, and Creator and Provider of all creation, show Your mercy to the people of our country, who walked in the darkness of idolatry, and you, Saint Michael, as an apostle ambassador, may you enlighten this with the light of true knowledge of God. And behold, by your teachings, even before the sacrifice of the demon, you now offer your souls to Christ. This hymn of thanksgiving is offered to you:
Rejoice, zealous planter of the faith of Christ.
Rejoice, thou who hast eradicated idolatry;
Rejoice, having abolished the demonic sacrifices.
Rejoice, light, shining from the east;
Rejoice, you who have dispersed the darkness of idolatry.
Rejoice, you who enlightened people with the teachings of Christ;
Rejoice, you who destroyed the idolatrous demands with the cross.
Rejoice, thou who has cultivated Christ's field well;
Rejoice, fruitful seeds on her, all appearing.
Rejoice, honey-melting lips of Christ;
Rejoice, euphonious flute of the Holy Spirit.
Rejoice, Michael, great hierarch, most glorious first throne of the Russian Church.

Kontakion 2

You, Saint Michael, saw the fruits of the labors of your preaching, the citizens of the glorious city of Kiev, listening to the truth of your teaching with all your soul and heart, believing in Christ the true God, turning away from vile idols and crushing them, some with reproach, swept into the river, in them besie: “For the cruelty of us,” I cry out. In vain is this, blessed father, you rejoiced in your spirit, gratefully singing to God: Alleluia.

Ikos 2

Having a divinely inspired mind, most wonderfully Father Michael, you taught people goodness with your divine teaching, and with the hunger of their souls, having nourished the words of the Gospel with bread, you brought this to Christ: Pray to Him, the saint, for those who praise you:
Rejoice, beauty of the Church;
Rejoice, goodness of the bishops.
Rejoice, shining light of Orthodoxy;
Rejoice, piety is the rule.
Rejoice, great teacher of the Russian people;
Rejoice, glorious perfecter of prophecies in the apostles of the First-Called.
Rejoice, primate of the face of the God-chosen Fathers of Pechersk;
Rejoice, equal to the apostles Cyril and Methodius.
Rejoice, you who gave birth to the twelve sons of Vladimir in the font of Baptism;
Rejoice, you who diligently served his entire land.
Rejoice, you who spread the faith of Christ;
Rejoice, you who have cast down the demonic charm.
Rejoice, Michael, great hierarch, most glorious first throne of the Russian Church.

Kontakion 3

By the power of your godly prayers, holy one, our forefathers helped us to believe in the One True God, to reject false gods and crush our spiritual idols: pride by humility, love of money by non-covetousness, fornication by chastity, anger by meekness, gluttony by abstinence, envy by goodwill, despondency by strong God's hope. Yes, having escaped spiritual peruns, we will be able to present ourselves to God, to Him you, Father, taught us to believe and sing unceasingly: Alleluia.

Ikos 3

Having the kvass of faith in Christ, my wife, the God-wise Princess Olga, is hidden among the Russian people. By you, by the will of the Almighty, you leavened all the dough of the Vladimir Empire, growing into the faith of Christ. For this reason, accept from our zeal worthy praise for you:
Rejoice, God's favor to Rus';
Rejoice, the prayers of Saint Olga have been fulfilled.
Rejoice, great adviser to the gloriously powerful Vladimir;
Rejoice, wise teacher of the newly chosen people of Christ.
Rejoice, by whom our kings and all the Russian people are saved;
Rejoice, in whom our bishops, priests and monastics boast;
Rejoice, through whom the poor become rich and glorified by God;
Rejoice, for through the faith of Christ the overworked elders will rest in heaven.
Rejoice, to whom the reposed infants cry “Hosanna in the highest”;
Rejoice, for the souls of the sons of Russians, like sparks, flow along a stem to heaven.
Rejoice, our land is a wonderful blessing;
Rejoice, consecration of the glorious city of Kyiv.
Rejoice, Michael, great hierarch, most glorious first throne of the Russian Church.

Kontakion 4

Having felt the storm crushing the idols, the demons cried out sobbingly: “Oh the cruelty of our wretchedness. As before we were revered by all, but now we are raising up the reproach of one stranger, who teaches people to believe in Christ, but to crush us, singing to the One God: Alleluia.”

Ikos 4

We hear in ancient times from the Divine Scripture, how the walls of Jericho fell, Joshua carried the ark: now we know how the idols fell to you, Saint Michael, who came to the Russian country. In the same way, we, your children, with you in the bright garment of Baptism, gratefully praise you calling:
Rejoice, thou who shone brightly on the mountains of Kyiv;
Rejoice, you have brought people from darkness to light.
Rejoice, thorns of polytheism that are greatly destroyed;
Rejoice, you who warmed our father with the warmth of the love of the Divine soul.
Rejoice, you who preached Christ the Son of God with your lips;
Rejoice, you who denounced idolatry’s wickedness with your fiery tongue.
Rejoice, you who taught our fathers to believe in the Triune God;
Rejoice, you planted the fruitful tree of Jesus' paradise.
Rejoice, for the Russian people have washed from you the water of grace;
Rejoice, for through you your spiritual comb has opened them in the holy font.
Rejoice; for by you, for the glory of God, many churches have been created;
Rejoice, for through you the monasteries of monks have been built together.
Rejoice, Michael, great hierarch, most glorious first throne of the Church of Russia.

Kontakion 5

The Great Vladimir, the God-blessed lamp of thee, Michael the God-wise, has brought to the Russian land darkened by idolatry, so that even here, by your coming, people will be sanctified and the true faith will be enlightened by the knowledge of the true faith, and in an Orthodox and God-pleasing manner they will offer up a song of praise to the Most Holy Trinity: Alleluia.

Ikos 5

Hearing the Patriarch of Constantinople, like Vladimir, receive the holy baptism, and like the forefather of the saints, he prayed: may the city send a wise teacher to Korsun and install that metropolitan of the Russian land, he rejoiced greatly and created a council with the consecrated cathedral, choosing you, holy one, to fulfill this great obedience. The Russian people met you and saw the reverent look of your face, and heard your gray-haired sweetness, saying:
Rejoice, our good mentor;
Rejoice, successor to apostolic power and honor.
Rejoice, glorious one among the bishops;
Rejoice, great in faith.
Rejoice, thou wise in their commandments;
Rejoice, most sweet in their teaching.
Rejoice, meek in disposition;
Rejoice, high in life according to God.
Rejoice, diligent steward of truth;
Rejoice, terrible accuser of falsehood.
Rejoice, for through your prayers we hope to escape eternal death;
Rejoice, for through your teachings we believe to acquire eternal life.
Rejoice, Michael, great hierarch, most glorious first throne of the Russian Church.

Kontakion 6

The preacher of the faith of Christ appeared in Novegrad, the sacred Michael, and came there, crushing idols, destroying temples, you baptized people, you built churches and appointed elders throughout the city and villages, teaching and admonishing people about brotherly love and Christian living, and all united lips and one heart with you will learn to sing to Christ God: Alleluia.

Ikos 6

You have shone, O Saint of Christ, like a bright star in our Fatherland, and you have completely suppressed the darkness of idolatry with the light of your Divine teachings. For this reason, for your sake, as an angel of God, the Russian people reverently call:
Rejoice, the beginning of our faith in Christ;
Rejoice, foundation of the Church of God in Rus'.
Rejoice, hierarch in preaching the word of the Gospel.
Rejoice, monk, on the path of a godly life, rule.
Rejoice, culprit of the righteous life of the laity;
Rejoice, crown minister of all who live virtuously.
Rejoice, thou who adorned thy soul with purity;
Rejoice, thou who leadest the path of temporary life in humility of spirit.
Rejoice, thou who shone brightly with good deeds;
Rejoice, you who have surprised people with many miracles.
Rejoice, for you gave a good word about your flock to the Chief Shepherd Christ;
Rejoice, for you have received righteous reward from His hand.
Rejoice, Michael, great hierarch, most glorious first throne of the Church of Russia.

Kontakion 7

Although the good God chose new people for Himself, He first brought the great king Vladimir into the knowledge of the Divine, who was illuminated by the intelligent radiance of grace in the holy font, He received thee as a shepherd by revelation from above, He brought to Rus' His sheep, who had gone astray in unbelief. By the same teaching and Baptism in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, having washed in this water, you brought you into the courtyard of Christ. Standing with them now before His throne, pray that He may grant us with you in heaven to bring a song to Him: Alleluia.

Ikos 7

We see your new apostle, Blessed Bishop Michael, flowing around the Russian land: for you have reached the city of Rostov, where you baptized a great multitude of people and taught them to believe in the Trinity, taught you piety and prudence, and erected many churches, presbyters and deacons to them You have established, and you have taught pious statutes to those who say to you:
Rejoice, thou who, by the grace of Baptism, crowned the head of Rus' with a diadem;
Rejoice, having betrothed our land to Christ through Orthodoxy, like a ring.
Rejoice, thou who hast clothed this in piety, as in royal purple;
Rejoice, Gospel of Christ, like the one who placed a golden hryvnia on her neck.
Rejoice, the Cross of the Lord has given her an invincible power;
Rejoice, all her Orthodox children adopted by Christ the Lord and His Most Pure Mother.
Rejoice, most luminous bridegroom of the Church;
Rejoice, glorious son of the Heavenly Father.
Rejoice, father of fathers, magnificent beauty;
Rejoice, shepherd of shepherds, all-praised kindness.
Rejoice, and prayer book of all generations of Russians;
Rejoice, companion of heavenly angels.
Rejoice, Michael, great hierarch, most glorious first throne of the Russian Church.

Kontakion 8

Wandering and wandering in the desert of idolatry, the son of the Russians, you were the guide to the promised land of the Reverend Father Michael, even if not for fourty years like Moses, but for four years you were the children of the people of the Kiev country, not with perishable manna, but with the true bread that came down from heaven, this food, like is Christ the Lord. Therefore we sing a song about you: Alleluia.

Ikos 8

Being all in God, you ever taught the archpastor to please your flock, your spiritual children, and begging you to prefer the love of Christ over nothing, but we are your spiritual grandchildren, we say to you:
Rejoice in Christ the Lord with all your soul and heart;
Rejoice, believe Him and love Him and teach us.
Rejoice, for you have pleased God greatly;
Rejoice, for you taught us the Divine law.
Rejoice, good and faithful servant of the Heavenly Lord;
Rejoice, the talent given to you is not hidden, but laboriously multiplied.
Rejoice, I will buy them a lot,
Rejoice, having received great praise from your Lord.
Rejoice, you who bowed your neck in humility under the good yoke of Christ;
Rejoice, you who bore the burden of the day and the wine in His grapes with zeal.
Rejoice, having received a denarius from Christ instead of the Kingdom of Heaven;
Rejoice, sweet one resting in the heavenly abodes after your labors.
Rejoice, Michael, great hierarch, most glorious first throne of the Russian Church.

Kontakion 9

All the Russian people, who first wandered through pagan polytheism, now through you, Saint Michael of God, have come to good instruction in the knowledge of God and in the holy font, having been delivered from the blindness of reason, glorify their only Creator, chanting to Him: Alleluia.

Ikos 9

Human flamboyance is not sufficient to glorify your labors and exploits, O Spirit-bearing Father, even as you have received it: so by faith you were jealous, just as you were jealous of the godless Hagarians, the Bulgarians and the Saracens, the husband of a certain Mark the philosopher, who sent a certain Mark the philosopher to preach and called people to Christ. Now we say to you:
Rejoice, like Elijah, jealous of the Lord Bose;
Rejoice, having given much joy to the spread of His holy faith.
Rejoice, you have labored for the glory of Christ;
Rejoice, you who brought His venerable name before the tongues.
Rejoice, having become like an apostle through your zeal for the teaching of Christ;
Rejoice, thou who imitate Christ himself in the salvation of human souls.
Rejoice, filled with Divine love;
Rejoice, filled with compassion for your neighbor.
Rejoice, destroy the pagan temple with thunder;
Rejoice, loud-voiced tympanum proclaiming the glory of the Divinity of Christ.
Rejoice, for now you have great boldness towards Christ;
Rejoice, for you stand before Her throne with inexpressible joy.
Rejoice, Michael, great hierarch, most glorious first throne of the Russian Church.

Kontakion 10

Desiring the salvation of the people and the good establishment of the Church, our most good shepherd, this one took great care to arrange everything for the Russian tribe of the newly chosen: you placed shepherds and teachers throughout the city and thus wrought a flock of verbal sheep, you yourself went to the Chief Shepherd Christ to reign in the great weeping and mourning of your flock and having moved Prince Vladimir, those who fall to your relics, calling out to God more pitifully: Alleluia.

Ikos 10

You were a faithful servant and servant of the King of Heavenly Christ God, Our Father Michael, and even if you rested in the sleep of death in the Lord, your holy body would not be involved in corruption, but it would appear as a cure for human ailments. In the same race of your upcoming relics, we prayerfully praise you: Rejoice, for through the incorruption of your body you are a light on earth; Rejoice, for with the holiness of your soul you shine in heaven. Rejoice, blessed illumination of the Russian country; Rejoice, wonderful decoration of this great temple. Rejoice, great intercessor of your city Kyiv; Rejoice, zealous prayer book of the Pechersk monastery. Rejoice, warm intercessor before God for all the children of the Orthodox Church; Rejoice, you are a speedy representative to all who call upon you for help. Rejoice, for through your godly life you enlighten us all like the bright sun; Rejoice, for you are surprising the whole world with your apostolic works. Rejoice, whose most honorable body, like fragrant cypress, smells fragrant in the Church of God; Rejoice, his holy soul, like a cedar in the paradise of Christ, flourishes in joy. Rejoice, Michael, great hierarch, most glorious first throne of the Russian Church.

Kontakion 11

With singing of praise we magnify you, Saint Michael of God, and the intercessor at the Throne of the Heavenly Master, your name is tea. Do not disgrace our faith, O good shepherd, but accept our prayers like a fragrant censer, and beg Christ to grant us a virtuous end of life and to dwell with you in Christ, so that we may hear your voice to Him for us: behold, I am the children, what you have given to me, O Lord, and to Him you and I will sing together: Alleluia.

Ikos 11

You were a luminous ray, God-wise Father Michael, who sits in the darkness of polytheism, guiding you to the Sun of Truth, Christ God, to whom we pray, in the light of His commandments we will always abide, bringing joyful singing to you: Rejoice, lamp of the Trisian Light; Rejoice, dawn of the Unsetting Sun. Rejoice, scorching idolatrous wickedness with fire; Rejoice, ignite the flames of heretical teachings. Rejoice, Saint, teach everyone that there is no other God except the Heavenly One; Rejoice, thou who teachest men, saying that there is no salvation outside the catholic apostolic Church. Rejoice, instruct in a godly life; Rejoice, show the way to the Heavenly Kingdom. Rejoice, guiding star to Christ; Rejoice in the path by which you have come to the true God. Rejoice, the gate of heaven is opened to the sons of the Russians. Rejoice, intercessor, who has established countless numbers of these there. Rejoice, Michael, great hierarch, most glorious first throne of the Russian Church.

Kontakion 12

The grace of God, after the passing of many, your holy incorruptible body was kept in the earth, in the Church of the Tithes, and as a valuable treasure to your flock, this is safe and sound, show this, as below your sacred clothes touch corruption: from here, by faith, understanding, as you stand before Christ and pray for those who worship you and those who sing to Him for your sake: Alleluia.

Ikos 12

Singing your holy and glorious life, Michael Equal to the Apostles, we honor your sacred memory, we praise your zeal for God, we extol your love for Christ and your neighbor. But you, oh most blessed father, do not disdain this humble singing: Rejoice, for you stand before the Throne of the Most Holy Trinity; Rejoice, for you pray to the Almighty for the whole world. Rejoice, for the archangels and angels sang the Trisagion in Heaven; Rejoice, for you are with the apostles in the heavenly abodes. Rejoice, for from the faces of the saints you interceded for our souls before God; Rejoice, for from the regiment of the saints you are promoting our salvation. Rejoice, for with the Most Pure Virgin Mother of God, you raise your most honorable hands to Christ for the peace of our Fatherland; Rejoice, for you continually beseech Him for the unification of people. Rejoice, heirs with the prophets and martyrs of the Highest Kingdom; Rejoice, one of God's paradise with all the saints. Rejoice, viewer of heavenly greatness and beauty; Rejoice, endless sweets and bliss of heaven to the owner. Rejoice, Michael, great hierarch, most glorious first throne of the Russian Church.

Kontakion 13

Oh, all-validated and wonderful miracle worker, our Father Michael, the first saint of the Russian country and the representative of all Orthodox Christians, accept this little prayer of ours, offered to you in praise, and with your prayers ask God for us in this time to live a quiet life and filled with virtues, and in the future life we ​​will be worthy to sing together with you in the Trinity to the One God: Alleluia.

(This kontakion is read three times, then ikos 1 and kontakion 1)