In 1682, the former Suzdal priest and the enemy of the church reform of Patriarch Nikon Nikita Nikita Konstantinovich Dobrynin nominated in the first ranks of the Streletsky uprising ("Hovhanchy"). Supporters of an old rite, by the death of Theodore Alekseevich, conceived, relying on the Sagittarius, restore the "arreiled piety." On June 23, he, together with the "elders" and the Streetic elected elected, came to the palace with the requirement to convene a cathedral for parsing. Tsarevna Sophia Alekseevna and Patriarch Joachim agreed to arrange a dispute.

The main face of the dispute held July 5 in the Granovic Chamber was Nikita Dobrynin. The authorities were represented by the princes of Sophia Alekseevna, Maria Alekseyevna, Tatyana Mikhailovna, a widded Queen of Natalia Kirillovna, Patriarch Ioakim, bishops.

The dispute was stormy. The picture shows the climax of a dispute where good arguments no longer matter in the face of rough strength. In the center - Nikita himself, who in rage comes on the Gospel on the floor, next to him, the monk of Sergius with a petition, on the floor - Athanasius, Archbishop Holmogorsk, on the cheek of which Nikita "captured the cross." In anger, I got up from the throne of Tsarevna Sophia, irritated by the audacity of the splitters.

The debates did not come to any result. After reading the petition, it was decided to continue the debate on July 7. Dobrynin and his like-minded people, leaving the Granovic Chamber, said the native people of their victory. However, on July 7, the Archers who took the side of Sofia Alekseevna refused to protect the "old faith" and issued it. On July 11, Nikita Dobrynin was executed in Moscow for insulting the Tsarist Majesty. Old Believers recognized Nikitu Pipper of the Legal State. Orthodox hierarchs responded about him as a rough, harmful and ignorant splitter, giving the nickname "violating".

Nikolai Semenovich Leskov about the split and Nikita vomit:

"You want to know my opinion about the picture of Perov from the point of view of a person, a somewhat intelligent split history. I believe that from this point, the picture "Nikita Eat" is an amazing fact of artistic penetration.

We believed the split, and many still consider, the exceptional case of dark fanatics, on the one hand, and stubborn clergy - on the other. They seemed to argue about trifles, and these and trifles did not want to give up. And it turns out as if it is so that if the poles of the dominant church make sure that the split would have been at all.

There is nothing to say with this person and nothing to talk about, "he needs not concessions that prevent the conscience of believers, and he needs a shaking and fight for the predominance of his party. He is one and the leader, and the politician of all movement. Fanatics with him, of course, are, and extremely typical, very similar to idolaters; But this is all the tail that Nikita can lean into what direction he pleases. Let them twitch up icons and books, but he can all "get squeezed" if he wants.

Everyone is ruthless and calmly stand behind their anals of Inka. Two of them are still proven something, but very calm, and the third right is already attic. He thought about and, after hearing the arguments and concessions, he does not know whether it is worth arguing about? And nothing about, indeed, it would argue if it was the case of church, and not the case of a party of court intrigues, which produced such fighters like Nikita. Everything was heated by them and without them everything would come to the rest, in which the inhibition was shied, standing on the right behind the analog.

In these three figures, in Nikita, in Sofye and in the mischief ink, the whole drama is read. Obaw and, apparently, the trembling patriarch, transmitting a weak hand through the chain of his Panagi, will represent the church. Authoritative power without any strength of the life-giving idea. It can not be taken into account.

Understand the case only tired monk, Nikita Yes Sofya. The monk is still what to do - he will go, where is "more trapes", to the annelter or to the novers. The government, in the face of Sophia, clearly sees everything that the intrigue started a long-string with him and painted it with the sacred faith. "

Updated on 04/26/2016 by admin

"Nikita is drunk. The dispute about faith "- a picture of the famous Russian artist Vasily Grigorievich Pereova. The canvas was created between 1880 and 1881, but the story of which it narrates occurred on June 5, 1682.

In the center of the picture it turns out to be a simple Orthodox priest Nikita puffy, who came to the granovitu chamber of the Moscow Kremlin in order to take part in the dispute about faith. This dispute was taught by himself, but on persons present in the picture of the characters - the princes of Sophia, high-ranking priests and courtiers, clearly seen that claims to the church, as well as the Church itself, they are not interested.

Nikita barely blames the priests in complete ignorance in the fact that the holy feelings used by them are just words whose meanings they practically do not understand.

The priest is dressed in a simple risk, spidered by a piece of twine, on his head he has a black headdress, the position of the body semi-bent, in the hands - a scroll. Despite the fact that the person in the picture is in the slave pose, clearly seems that he is ready to fight for his beliefs until the very end.

The surrounding priest people are turned to the viewer back and stand on their knees, the exception is representatives of the highest clergy and the princess itself.

The picture is written in gloomy colors, it will be represented by the final moment of hot discussions. Persons of people tired, detached, it can be seen that everyone remained with her opinion.

The completion of this story was not shown by the artist. The very historical reality is depicted by a painter more than impartially, it is not visible on the canvas, what are the real feelings of the artist, it is not known how he belongs to what is happening.

From historical sources, it is known that Nikita would be poured out the winner of the dispute they are called. But the next day, after the events reflected on the canvas occurred, the rural priest was captured and executed on the orders of the reigning family.

The arguments of the mind were powerless before the use of physical strength and ignorance, from which many priests of the described history period really suffered, who do not have a diploma and understanding that they were pronounced, but to teach others.

opisanie-kartin.com

Vasily Perov. Dispute about faith

Well, here we are again in the hall of the artist Vasily Pereova. On us, I am looking at him from everywhere, famous for us since childhood. Well, who does not know the "Troika". "Prival hunters", "tea drinking in Mytishchi", and not only. But on one of the walls hanging a huge picture. She is even more than "three heroes" Vasnetsov, and not so much inferior to the "phenomenon of Christ the people" Ivanov. And, nevertheless, among other paintings in this room it is less known. Surprisingly. And it's not good.

But the artist wrote this picture, as if at lifting his creative path before his imminent death. He insert his soul in her, as any other picture. It said, you can say, his last word. And according to his thoughts, this picture would have to become the same public phenomenon as the picture of Ivanov became. And in the end, she today is not so much known from us.

True, he did not finish it. In details. But the main thought was expressed more than clear. Well, now ask yourself to be honest, whether you know, indeed, who was this old man with a goat beard with rage and frenzy even with fanaticism in the gaze in the center of the painting, proving something in front of the whole meeting in the hall. His name is indicated in the title of the picture, because it sounds like this, the name sounds like this: "Nikita is drunk. Dispute about faith. " And almost after all, everyone, I am sure that he will ask himself in bewilderment, and who is that such a way "and who these people gathered in this room? And what do they all want? What is the dispute at all?

And the dispute is very serious. This can be seen by the expression of opponents and for all their poses. And this dispute is clearly not over. For one of the sides. Because it is clear that the battle of verbal clearly goes to the destruction.

And at the bottom of the picture there is no annotation on this score. And therefore the people somehow indifferently passes by, even without trying to be in the essence of the revealed action. And you need to spit. Because the question is asked about that neither is essential for each of us. He dates back to the question of the meaning of life.

So the action takes place in the royal panes, in the grain chamber in the Kremlin, in the throne room. A woman raised from the throne is Tsarevna Sophia. And in his dispute, the group of the Streltsov Old Believers, headed by one of the expressants of their aspirations, is opposed, that is, the most eloquent and convinced leader of their movement - Nikita void.

No, this is not real name. His name was Nikita Konstantinovich Dobrynin. Easy - this is an offensive nickname given to him by the official church. He was a Suzdal priest. He accused the official church in ignorance and the empty use of holy spokes. And besides, he was also a brilliant orator and a polemicist. That is, thus "riveting", about which he sang another Vysotsky. And the fact that the raw - so who doubts this at one glance at this old man.

Raskolnikov - Old Believers came to the throne hall of the Grain Chamber to explain to the princess and prove their rightness in a decisive and uncompromising dispute. And the dispute across the visible reaches such an acute that there can be no question of any reconciliation here.

How did it happen? How they all reached their lives, so that it fell so in complete hopeless to find peace and peace in their hearts. And it happened after the split in our Orthodox Church. The most cruel in its entire history, the consequences of which are not overcome and to this day.

In truth, we, now living, even difficult to understand what the essence of this split is. Why so high tragic heat he reached at that time. That is, from the time when Patriarch Nikon began to introduce his church reforms to cruel and iron.

Well, the question arises, and what they were for reforms. Yes, nonsense somehow, say someone today. Well, you know. Without going into small details, the essence of them was as follows:

1 - All books are religious, and others seemed to have been there then, they corresponded. Printing has already existed, but not so that it is strongly developed. Well, it is clear, not all the correspondencers monks were too literate, attentive, and diligent in rewriting. Errors and LCDs were inflated into texts. It was necessary to rule them. The question was, for what samples to rewrite? According to Byzantine or Greek? And it was not exactly the same thing. Byzantine samples were more ancient. And they rewritten them on reform from the Greek samples.

2 - The word ISUS should have been written from now on as Isaus. That is, added one beak.

3 - a bubble cross the sign was replaced by three-line. Recall the boyar Morozov, which in the picture of Surikov in the sign of disagreement made a hand with two fingers.

4 - Powers need to be created from the knees, but in the belt.

5 - the goddes of led against the sun, and not through the sun.

6 - Alliluya's exclusion during worship need not twice, but three times.

7 - changed the number of prosphorated and prints on them. The prosfora is such a round-shaped loaf, consumed for the sacrament of the Eucharist and the commemoration of the living and the dead.

And this is by and large and that's it. And God's news is that. Well, what's the difference in how to fold the fins, blessing or autumning himself with a cross sign, how many times the word of Allylua is to say, what spelling in writing the name of Christ, which way to walk with a crusade and what is the progress with the seal on them? In the eyes of a modern man, even a believer, but not too burdened by knowledge of religious rigging, all this is some or even shamanism.

Where are the passion? And what else. How many victims, tortured, executed, burned on a fire or even who killed themselves in the fire in terrible gari themselves. Here, for example, they were barely beheaded on the frontal spot on Red Square on the same day after the dispute in the picture.

What is the essence of the dispute? If briefly, they wanted themselves with his comrades, wanted everything to be faithfully and its rituals, too, remained old, according to the Byzantine style. That is, as he retained to the fall of Byzantium and the arrival of the Turks. But after the Turks came, the Greek church has changed. Up to the point that priests began to wear
kamilka, the form of which goes back to the Turkish fez.

Well, where it is good. And why do we need this fez with all other proposed changes, the Old Believers decided.

And in the 17th century, the intercourse with the East and especially with the West is becoming more intense. And here in this trend, as they say now, we have to build and the church on the Greek samples, which have already been separated from the Byzantine traditions.

And the king himself Alexey Mikhailovich was a famous Grecoophile. He wanted to bring the Russian church in full unity with Greek. It turns out that Patriarch Nikon acted in full accordance with the royal will. And from here all cheese boron. And split.

In our eyes, it seems to be the case and the eggs are not worth it. Maybe yes, but only if it did not concern the saint himself, what is in us. That is, the souls. That is faith. It has every detail, even the smallest important. Because, if you remove or change the slightest solution, the existence of the whole building of faith is called questionable.

That is why the Old Believers came to the Granovitu Chamber to meet with the most important person at that time - printed Sofia, rentherable at its venance brothers.

And they came to her not enough. They came to demand with her worst. Thanks to the Archers, Sophia remained in the Kremlin regen with two pylovy brothers, and did not go to the monastery. Without them, Naryshkina would remain with the full power in the Kremlin.

They, Sagittari-Staroviers, after the first speeches felt themselves heroes and owners of the situation. Sophia has already used Sagittarov, one can say in the dark. She stood behind the first Streletsky Bunlet. That, merciless and meaningless.

And everything happened in front of the little Peter. He is only 10 years old. Child. His together with his brother semisradur Ivan is removed on the red porch. So they, no one touched them! And in front of them the roaring, drunk and furious crowd of fittings. She flooded the entire Cathedral Square. Armed crowd. And she came to alkalo blood.

This crowd saw both brothers and calmed down. Yes, the fool of Mikhail Dolgorukov came forward and began to yell on the Sagittarius by the most indecent words. And that's all! The spark blew the powder barrel. The fool himself was dropped down straight on the spears. And then they broke into the palace and began to run through all his corners - in the search for hated Naryshki. Found and killed. Digboiled on the spot. And all this in front of a ten-year-old child Peten. These terrible paintings stood in his eyes all his life. And he hated Sagittarov herself with hatred. Look at him in the painting "Morning Strelets", this look will tell you everything, all his hatred for those who bit on his power. He even chopped his head their heads personally. Without a fluttering hand.

Well, the Sagittarii rightly counted that only thanks to them Sophia remained with the authorities, remained in the Kremlin, and did not go to the monastery. Well, if so, they seemed little to get just thanks, which, as you know, do not put in your pocket. Among them were many Old Believers, and they considered it possible to demand a return to the former faith, without innovations Nikonovsky.

And Sofya, understanding all this, could not allow it. Because neither the church, nor Sophia herself could no longer abandon the decrees adopted by the Cathedral, which cursed the Old Believers. Because the cathedral has already acknowledged by the agers of heretics and betrayed them anathema. And then, this would mean the recognition of the wrongness and king of Alexei Mikhailovich, her father. Well, how to do it. And she more than clearly felt that Sagittarius was a serious and fighting force that it still should be feared.

But what would calm them, she agreed to the religious dispute with Sagittarius. Sagittarius sought publicity and openness, speaking today. Therefore, they suggested first to hold it on Red Square.

Patriarch such a publicity with a common was not needed at all. He insisted on the dispute in a closer circle. The pretext was such - they say, to be the princess and the Patriarch himself on the People's Square in confrontation with the mobile would be "shameful", that is, the cut.

Well, that's how we see in the picture. The official church was represented by the Patriarch Joakim, the Old Believers - Nikita would be drunk. Well, the whole dispute - the dispute has become quite expected. To a mutual charge of heresy and ignorance. And then to the swearing with the use of all the famous words. In the heat of the dispute of Nikita cracked his "opponent" Athanasius, Archbishop Kholmogorsk, a cross on the head. Look, as he sat down, holding the cheek.

And the dispute itself began with the humble words of the patriarch, in which, however, the threat was felt:

- For what reason came to the royal chambers and what you need from us.

- came to the kings and sovereigns to beat the man that the service of God was for old officials, - answered him no less humbly

"This is not your business," the answer was the answer. - Simpultures do not apply to judge the bishops. You must obey your church's mother. We have books corrected from Greek by grammar.

"We haven't come to talk about grammar with you," Nikita said, "and about church dogmas." Why on the liturgy you take the cross in the left hand, and the triple candle in the right. Is the fire honest cross.

- What it is. He has a bike with us. Do you remember, Nikita, as a blessed memory, our father, Holiness Patriarch and all the cathedral you brought the opposite. Now again, the same thing began. You are here all heretics. We do not want to listen to such mule.

And then she stated that they all diverge, and that they would have a decree later.

And the decree was. Easy was executed. The head of the old man, proving the rightness of the old faith, flew from the shoulders on the frontal spot the next day. Suffered for faith. Yes, if only he is alone.

And here I would like to speculate on one not very comfortable topic. which the current clerks do not like. They are offended by the Bolsheviks for the rude treatment of them during the revolution, for all the persecution and oppression they all have undergone. In Suzdal, I saw a modern icon depicting the depressed, the godmomertaries in Budenovo in the form of devils, creating all sorts of disgrace.

I have long considered all these disgraces, having a tough, ingenious, pictorial fantasy of an unknown artist. And at the same time I thought about what. So I climbed one thought. Bad ill thought: and how? And what did they create in those times with the same old-handers?

The big picture of Surikova "Boar Morozova" is just a small episode from a repressive war that fell into adherents of the old faith. By the way, they are not only as the unfortunate boyfriend drove into the walls of Moscow (in the picture near the walls of the Church Monastery), but also worry her hunger in imprisonment.

And not one. Here we see on the same picture her sister, Evdokia Urusov. She goes to the right of the sleigh, silently folding his hands. And she is also waiting for the same fate. And she will die from exhaustion. And previously also tortured them on the punch, thus achieving "to enjoy" and turn to the "true" faith. And 14 of their servants and burned alive at all in Srub.

I want to pay attention to another episode of suppressing the Bunt of the Old Believers. Namely, the story of the Solovetsky Monastery. What do we know about him? And we know about him, first of all, only the fact that Solovki became the first political camp, which did not want to take a new faith proposed by the Bolsheviks. That is, the communist faith. We told a lot of horrors about the life of the unfortunate on this island in the White Sea. Even a huge stone brought from this island and installed on Lubyanka in front of a well-known building. In edification. And there from time to time this stone is going to read lists of repressed in known years.

I ask myself, and where it would be necessary to put another stone from the same island as a tombstone of victims to the Old Believers.

Recall the story that is also associated with the same monastery, which is not like to remember the Church and those for whom Solovki are only a gulag and nothing more.

For the completeness of the picture, let the official church belonged to their dissidents on the issues of just cult rituals itself.

In 1657, the monastery sent new official books, and the monks and the monastery of the monastery were abandoned from them, and continued to carry out worship for old books. Yes, and began to write petitions in defense of old liturgical ranks. And this was already serious.

And then in 1667 a large Moscow cathedral took place. He betrayed Anathema even not looked forwarders, but old goods. And they sent a new rector of Joseph to the monastery, so that he was argued there. And the stubborn monks not only did not accept him, but they were driven out of disgust as heretic. And elected their archimandrite Nikarra. And this is quite serious. Syo action has already fallen under the definition of the riot.

And as a result, a response and predictable step from the ruling power. It was sent by the army to pacify the naughty monks. The monastery was besieged. At first, the siege was kept somewhere weakly and hesitantly. Everything was hoping that the stroke monks would fall. But over time, the situation has become increasingly harder. Gun went into the move.

The siege went long and stubbornly. For several years. Finally the monastery was taken. And then ... and then began executions. People and creepy. The next day. Sidelts - the monks cut the heads, they were burned, they were hanging on the trees, and they also treated in the banks. And also hung with iron hooks under the edge. And so they died. For what? And just for the fact that they wanted, as before, baptized with two fingers and walk by the sign of the sun.

And then the Solovetsky monastery became also a prison. Long before the Bolsheviks. Fortress on the island in the very student sea. Do not run out.

And who referred there? Who sat in the infamous prison?

And there were alone, who was unworthy of the authorities, for "religious criminal" imagine! Even the igumen of the Troitsko-Sergiev Lavra also visited there, the lack of sunelist. For what? For the fact that it was told for a poor church. And then after 17 years, there they began to link to the Solovki to link the pins, that is, Josephlanes. For what? But for this most complication, which they showed during withdrawal from churches of material values \u200b\u200bfor the needs of the starving Volga.

Refer to the monastery to the "Eternal Settlement" and much later after the fire of the split. Now, by decision of the Synod and the Secret Office. Who referred? The same splitters, and more Skobstsov, Explorer, Drunkards, Volnodims. Thus, the monastery coated his fanger of a tough prison long before the elephant (Salovetsky special purpose camp).

I dare to say that the question in the name of the picture was delivered incorrectly. Dispute about faith. And it should be noted that all the characters are paintings are the believers. Deep believers. They could not even think of themselves without faith in God. After all, they do not argue about the fact that there is God or not it. They argue about what movements to do and where and how to walk during the departure of the religious cult.

And the Bolsheviks materialists generally repelled the faith in God, whatever it is and whatever the evils take. And immediately the building of the new faith was erected. Faith in a bright future, that is, faiths in equality and fraternity, faith in the society of social justice, faith in the existence of a new community, very similar to what is promised to any religion on earth. Everything and the difference that all these religions and darkness of all sect promises a paradise life only after our earthly term, and the adepts of the new faith during it. That's all.

And in the eyes of the Bolsheviks, adherents of all other religions and sects were the same heretics. Religion - opium for the people. Drug and what to do with these drug addicts? Fight them. And reference, relatively speaking, in the same Solovki.

*****
In conclusion, I want to ask the main question. Actually, for only it, this article was conceived. He, this question is already asked in the title of the picture.

Faith - and that's what? I think this is the most important question in life. And a man who endowed with conscience can not ask him. Because it is the faith and makes a man man.

Vera is such a system of spiritual and moral values \u200b\u200bthat fills our lives. Which gives an answer to the eternal question, in which the meaning of life. Vera is not only God. I'm, for example, I do not believe in God. But this does not mean that I do not believe in anything. No believe. I believe in the conscience. And conscience is something something that will be the gloomy of God. God can and forgive, but the conscience is almost N Never.

And conscience also makes build our lives in accordance with what can be done in life, and what is impossible. Conscience is also God. And in this sense, Dostoevsky is completely right when he said that "there is no God (the same conscience) - and everything is allowed."

Vera. With a capital letter. And where she came from. And from the moment when a person realized and realized that he was mortal. And if so, then he immediately has the name and another, no less important. And in the name of what you need to live this our stay is our on earth. This long or not very time. No matter. This is how lucky as lucky.

But so I do not want to think that the term has ended - and that's all. And nothing further. Eternity and emptiness. We scattered at the atoms in the endless universe. Irretrievably. More these atoms will not gather. Well, I do not want to believe it.

And then the faith was born to the fact that the end of life is not the end at all. Because there is also a soul. And she is immortal. And she will still have a continuation. There, for the invisible limit. And there for this limit, the eternal life will be already. Where is the best than that that was in this world, which is all filled with suffering, struggle and pain.

And so everywhere. At all continents. Wherever the man who came to this thought would live. And in all peoples separated to the time before the time by the seas and oceans. Well, just everywhere. And everywhere it was believed that the world and each of us rules an unknown, eternal, the highest strength. That is, God. And everywhere he took various appeals. Yes, it was called too differently. And everyone had their own story. Very different stories.

And how people believe in different ways in different parts of the earth .. here, for example, Sikhi believe in God, who does not have a name at all. And God is absolute and God inside each of us. They believe in reincarnation. But believe that the soul is simply returning to the Creator.

And see what religion ancient Greeks came up with. And the ancient Egyptians. And what was the religion of the Aztecs. And how much you can remember the stories! Yes, just horror. And if you believe in another God, it means that you are incorrect and wrong. You heretic. Well, on the fire of you, like Jeanne d'Ark.

Even inside one religion there are those who believe in one God, but not because everyone. And if so, then you are a sectarian. And Atu you. And also on the fire. And how to live people on all our not so extensive land.

Well, all this, of course, is such. Maybe not appropriate. And if he is serious, that is, such an example of everyone's thought. It is that if you believe in God, then, it means that he is, whatever he is. And if you do not believe, then it is not.

I think it is not. So what should I do. But what. I believe still. I believe in my life. I am the heir to her. From the very first living unicellular, which appeared on Earth. And my belief and my duty is that it continues to the rising spiral of it never ended, even then, when I mislead it from it.

And I can not agree with one French king, who once said "APRES MOI LE DELUGE". That is, after me, at least a flood. No, our common cause is that this flood does not happen. And how to do it, and what you need to do for this, how we need to go for this is a completely different story.
.

Faith in life? And you know, we, with you, turns out, the unintellites.
Thank you very much for a very interesting and cognitive story.
P.S. By the way, I have a small material about the "Solovetsky Seat". True, he is not here. At the "School of Life", about which I somehow told you.

Yes, faith in life. Here is the only justification, and the meaning of life. Belief in God, whatever it is - it means not to believe in yourself. Do not believe, do not be afraid, do not ask - it seems to be the covenant, born in the criminal environment. And in fact, in it, the whole truth of life. And believe in your conscience. She will strengthen and direct. And punish it hurts, like no God. But, however, it should be remembered that conscience or there is or not. You believe - it means you are a person. You do not believe - and everything is allowed, as Dostoevsky said. But then the person in the full sense is difficult to call you too.

Portal Prose.ru provides authors the opportunity to free publishing their literary works on the Internet on the basis of a user contract. All copyrights of works belong to the authors and are protected by law. Reprinting works is possible only with the consent of its author, to which you can contact on its author's page. Responsibility for the texts of works The authors carry independently on the basis of the rules of publication and Russian legislation. You can also see more detailed information about the portal and contact the administration.

The daily audience of the portal Prose.ru is about 100 thousand visitors who are in total viewing more than half a million pages according to the attendance counter, which is located to the right of this text. In each column, two digits are specified: the number of views and the number of visitors.

Essay in the picture V.G. Perova "Nikita is drunk. Dispute about faith "

So the event of the end of the 17th century received publicity to the whole world. The plot described by the painter shows the unpretentiousness of society to change their established views, and even there is no hint of the ability to conduct a dialogue. It seems that the interests that are affected by the two sides threaten the calm of a society. Therefore, it is so zealously to defend them. Who wrote the artist? And what's the point he invested in the posture of the main characters, and those who surround them.

I liked the picture V.G. Perov for the fact that it can be considered long and carefully. Many different characters are depicted here, they met in the battle for their beliefs. It can be seen how the author puts forward the two main heroes of this scene, thanks to a simple reception - lighting. Princess Sophia and Nikita will be whipped are the most bright figures on the canvas. And in life, they turned out to be those who remember the story to the present day. The picture prompted me to look into different encyclopedias, to better get acquainted with the event that was captured. It was curious to know what happened a year when a young twenty-five-year-old princess came to power. And even though sofya's posture and talks about confidence and arrogance, but what followed after this meeting showed all its fear. The next day was the execution of violate.

Perov tried not to transmit his sympathies, this is noticeable with how carefully and accurately discovered the portrait of everyone who is depicted in the picture. You can easily read the character of any of them. But, at the same time, the canvas pours such emotional energy that I could not just see, move away and to forget indifferently. Before his eyes are already an elderly preacher who slewed people in his own words. The incredible power of his belief led some of his disciples with him, despite the fear of death. And those who are trying to oppose him, feeling the support of the powerful queen, proudly, with neglect of themselves.

The power of the picture in the exact description of the events and in how a small painter felt a moment. It was at that time, none of the characters shown in the picture could not behave anyway. Why is it so impressive this work.

Description of the painting V. G. Pereova "Nikita is puffed. Dispute about faith "

Picture of Vasily Grigorievich Perova "Nikita is drunk. The dispute about the faith ", written in 1880-1881, is an illustration of the famous historical event of the XVII century - the so-called" debate on faith ", which took place on June 5, 1682 in the Granovic Chamber of the Moscow Kremlin in the presence of Sophia's prison.

The main character of the work is the real historical personality - the former Suzdal priest named Nikita. He accused representatives of the clergy in ignorance and the empty use of holy spacing. Nikita was distinguished by special skill of the speaker and after the end of the "Rate of Faith," he came out the winner, but, despite this, Tsarevna Sophia ordered a grab of the rebar and executed what was fulfilled the next day.

The multifigure composition of the picture is characterized by a high complexity and an incredible depth of thoughts invested in her. It depicts the culmination of the dispute, where good arguments no longer matter in the face of rough strength. That is why in the center of the canvas you can see confusion on people's faces.

The captured Nikita will be frightened in a rage comes to the gospel on the floor. At his face, anger, intertwined with a sense of hopelessness and injustice.

Modern critics peroving noted that among the characters this picture, the master portrayed several excellent types. The artist depicted the historical scene so impartially that among the harmonious journey of images of objects and people it is impossible to notice his own attitude to what is happening. Does the author of the work sympathize Nikita or not? This artist on the canvas does not indicate.

Contrast of moods can be traced by looking at the amazing calm of the princes of Sofia and her suite. Perhaps, these feathers wanted to point to indifference to the power of people to the problems of true faith, describe the meaninglessness and impotence of any protests against state power.

In addition to the description of the painting V. G. Pereova "Nikita is emanating. A dispute about faith, "on our site there are many and other descriptions of paintings of various artists, which can be used both when preparing for writing an essay in the picture, and simply for more complete acquaintance with the work of the famous masters of the past.

Children's portfolio - download free templates. Recommendations for the preparation of portfolio in kindergarten. Portfolio templates for kindergarten 3-5 years. The structure of the children's portfolio of 3-5 years for kindergarten. [...]

Found among the vagrants. "
With a complete release of the column, you can find the archive of the heading "Do you know".

date [edit Code]

It would be nice to clearly indicate the date of the event - July 5, 1682 (and then in the article Nikita will be poured although it is said about this date, but it is not very emphasized, it is not striking). Kirill-Hod (OK) 19:36, March 3, 2017 (UTC)

• Do you see the template at the very top articles? Wait, an article in work - if any gaps remain after the end of work, I will be glad to discuss ... - Adavyd (OKD.) 20:27, March 3, 2017 (UTC)

Zimenko [edit Code]

A huge picture "Nikita Eat" (1881) is also small, although a number of images and here are expressive, especially the expressive figure of the Old Believers, the passionate dry person of which with an acute, sharply outstanding the beard angry is angry with the opponents of the True Faith. The artist himself painfully felt the imperfection of his last paintings. He constantly processes them, in the rumming of irritation cuts on the part of the completed options. However, other works are often exposed to the same fate (for example, sketches for the painting "on the grave of the Son"). Perov with a chagrin notes that his talent weakens: he can no longer express what makes it plotting.

Zimenko Vasily Grigorievich Perov. 1834-1882.//moskva, Leningrad. -1948.- State Publishing House "Art". - 43 s. - p.42. -15000. Editor A. Leonov.

Zotov [edit Code]

The historical canvases of Perov - "Pugacheva Court" (2 options) and Nikita violated (1881) prepared the appearance of Surikov in art. Perov for the first time in our painting approached the image of the people's population of the past. Worried crowds of people occupied the main place in these paintings. Stasov found the relationship of Nikita vigorous Perova with the images of the Raskolnikov and most of all with the older Dosfence, derived Mussorgsky in Hovhanchye. Numerous drawings and pencil sketches Perov speak of the initial plans of his famous paintings, his creative quest, about its unfulfilled canvases. These are his "Parisian walk", "travelers", "Drawing Teacher", "Eastern", "Walloki-petitioners", "Spore about faith" and many others.

• Thanks for the information from Zimenko's books and Zotov, I will try to use it. The article is still being finalized, only a bot is a mark ... - Adavyd (OKD.) 20:48, March 21, 2017 (UTC)

Three women [edit Code]

By the way, next to Sofia three women's figures: one (girl) stands, the other two are sitting, and the one is probably servant. - Sulia 70 (OK.) 18:17, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Is it worth it to the right of Sofia? It seemed to me that this was a man ... although everything could be ... - Adavyd (OKD.) 19:50, April 28, 2017 (UTC) on the left hand of it - behind the throne. - Yulia 70 (OKD.) 20:49, April 28, 2017 (UTC) Yes, I mean it / her and meant. Right - from the point of view of the viewer. - Adavyd (OKD.) 20:52, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Motherland (magazine) [edit Code]

• Antonenko S. We have not come about grammar with you to speak ... Starbers and power on the canvas of Vasily Pereova // Motherland. - 1996. - №10. -FROM. 40-43.
  • Thanks for the link. I managed to find a scanned log on the network. Interesting article, I will try to use. - Adavyd (OKD.) 20:13, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Belongs to the State Tretyakov Gallery?[edit Code]

By editing the phrase "belongs to the State Tretyakov Gallery (Inv. 407)." Cuts eyes. First, to the question "who owns the picture", I would first of all replied "Perov" (authorship) or "RF" (property). Gallery she, too, in some sense belongs, but correctly say "is in the gallery", "enters into the collection", etc. As for "(Inv. 407)," then not the reader is obvious that such an inv. In the literature sometimes write "Inv. No, "which looks ugly, but a little clearer. But we have no task to save paper, and it is recommended to use full writing words (see VP: Sokr)) (Move the cursor to the word) - I believe that this is quite enough. About "belong" - exactly belongs. Authorship - Perovskoye, and belongs to someone who owns, - Perov, then his heirs, then Tretyakov, then the gallery. Sometime I used a longer option - "is part of the meeting," but he did not like some colleagues, in particular, Ghirlandajo. "Located" or "exhibited" - worse, because it can sometimes be taken to the exhibition in some other place. - Adavyd (OKD.) 19:35, November 22, 2017 (UTC)

• The gallery, as far as I can judge, there is no ownership of the painting, and therefore the picture does not belong to it. "It is part of the gallery assembly", and also "belongs to the meeting" "enters the collection" - quite correct options. State Museums never approve in publications that the items belong to them, it is usually said about the membership of the Assembly or Collection, and this is not by chance. - (OK.) 20:16, November 22, 2017 (UTC)
  • Well, thanks, I do not mind "belong to the meeting," changed in the article. - Adavyd (OK.) 20:26, November 22, 2017 (UTC)

The picture shows the dramatic moment of the "dispute about faith" - the historical event of the Moscow University of the Moscow University of 1682, whose two hundred councils planned to complete the work on the web. The debate was held on July 5, 1682 in the Granovic Chamber of the Moscow Kremlin. The composition of the painting is based on the opposition of the right-hand side, where the group of Raskolnikov-Struprocessants led by the Suzdal Priest Nikita Vniply, and the left side, where the power of the property - Tsarevna Sophia Alekseevna, Patriarch of Moscow Joamakov, Archbishop Holmogorsk Afanasius (loved) and others.

Contemporaries highly estimated a number of figures on the canvas, especially in his right part, which was more worked out by the artist. The writer Nikolai Leskov noted that the "picture" Nikita Eat "is an amazing fact of artistic penetration," and the critic Vladimir Stasov wrote that Perov "not only one crowd, worrying, rebellious, rattling storm, but also soloists, colossal foils" . In Soviet times, the historical works of the late period of Creativity Vasily Pereova, including Nikita Epusiness, were subjected to sharp criticism, and his views on history and religion were considered as reactionary. At the same time, the role of Perov in the creation of the concept of a historic hero was recognized, ready to give his life for convictions, and historicism was noted, permeating the entire structural structure of the canvas.

History

Vasily Perov worked on the picture "Nikita is drunk. The dispute is about faith "- the largest in size from all of his cloths - in 1880-1881. Art historian Olga Lyascovskaya believes that, most likely, work on the web was started earlier, in the late 1870s, since "the magnitude of a complex picture herself required many years of work." Apparently, Perov wanted to coincide with the end of the work on the web to the two hundredth anniversary of the events depicted on it, which happened in 1682. When writing a picture, the artist used information from the novel by Evgeny Karnovich "At the height and for a share: Tsarevna Sophia Alekseevna", which was published in 1879. According to some information, in the process of work on the Persian, his student Alexander Novokoltsev helped his student.

In the article about Perov, included in the 13th volume of the "Russian biographical dictionary", the historian of art Alexey Novitsky informs some information transferred to him by Elizabeth Egorovnaya, a widow artist. The idea of \u200b\u200bcreating a picture "Nikita Eat", most likely, appeared at Perov under the influence of his communicating with the writer Pavel Melnikov-Pechersk, with whom the artist repeatedly discussed the problems associated with the history of the split. In particular, Melnikov-Pechersky provided Perov portraits that were needed to write the left side of the picture. According to information from the same source, to take up the writing of such a large canvas Perov convinced the artist Ivan Shishkin. Perov for a long time was looking for a suitable simulator for Nikita void and eventually "found such among the vagrants."

In September 1880, Perov in his Moscow workshop visited the artist Ivan Kramskaya. Later, already from St. Petersburg, Kramskaya wrote Paul Tretyakov: "I was at Perov, I saw the picture" Nikita Eat "and found himself, and, most importantly, the picture, much better than expected. There are heads positively good. " Mention of this canvase and in the memoirs of the artist Mikhail Nesterov, who described how students of the intensive class of the Moscow School of Painting, Distribution and Architecture, in which he taught Perov, went to him to the name: "The students met the birthday officer with his wife, invited to the workshop, Where in the whole wall stood "violated", and on the other "Pugachevs" "(I had in mind the picture" Court of Pugacheva ").

In the last year of his life, Perov had a lot, and, according to Alexei Novitsky, the picture "Nikita Eat" turned out to be the "swan song of the artist", which "worked on her even when he had already been able to keep his brushes in her hands." Nevertheless, the canvas remained unfinished. The historian of art Nikolai Sobocheko wrote that Perov remained unhappy to many in the picture, especially in her right side, and "I plunged a lot to rewrite here on-Novo, and death prevented him to fulfill this intention." On May 29 (June 10), 1882, Vasily Perov died from Chakhotka, and in the same year the picture was acquired from his heirs to Pavel Tretyakov.

The picture was not shown at exhibitions during the lifetime of the artist, who, after the exit in 1877, almost did not participate in exhibition activities in exhibitions in 1877. Nikolai Sobyko reported that the artist Mikhail Botkin was able to persuade Perov to send Nikita Epusing (together with the "First Christians in Kiev") to the All-Russian industrial and art exhibition, which opened in Moscow on May 20, 1882, a few days before the author's death. The picture, called "Nikita is drunk (from the times of the princes of Sofia Alekseevna)," really appeared in the exhibition catalog, but for some reason it was not exhibited there.

In 1883, the canvas was included in the catalog of the posthumous exhibition of works of Perov, held in St. Petersburg: according to one sources, it was exhibited there, and in others - no. Be that as it may, during the exhibition, some experts got the opportunity to get acquainted with the picture "Nikita Eat". In particular, the artist Vladimir Osipov (student Pavel Chistyakova) expressed the following opinion about this work Perova: "What are the wonderful things of his youth, what kind of goodness of the statement. A two-jammed canvas depicts a grain ward. The mass of figures, the most extreme, the composition is intricate, the stains are absolutely no, - but the types come across successful, the picture is only submarines. "

According to the catalog of the Tretyakov Gallery, the picture "Nikita is drunk. The dispute about faith "appeared before the audience at the exhibition held in 1933-1934 in Moscow, and then at the 1934 exhibition in Leningrad. Both exposures were devoted to the 100th anniversary of the birthday of Perov and took place in the buildings of the State Tretyakov Gallery and the State Russian Museum, respectively. The "Nikita Nikita" canvas also took part in the exhibition of the works of Perov dedicated to the 150th anniversary of the artist's birth. This exhibition took place in 1984-1985 alternately in Moscow, Leningrad, Kiev and Minsk.

Plot and Description

The scene of the picture is based on the "dispute about faith" - the historical event of the time of Moscow University of 1682, also known as Hovhanshchina. After the death of Tsar Fyodor Alekseevich, which happened on April 27, 1682, the struggle for the power between the boyars of Miloslavsky and Naryshkin aggravated. Tsarevna Sophia Alekseevna decided to take advantage of the dissatisfaction of the Streltsov, who spoke on the side of Miloslavsky and executed a number of representatives of the genus of the Naryshkin and their supporters. As a result of this, Streletsky Bunt Sofya Alekseevna was announced at the revenue at the juvenile kings Ivan and Petra, and Prince Ivan Andreevich Khovansky was appointed head of the Celebration Order. At the same time, feeling the weakness of the central authorities, the Raskolniki-Stroobrokens, whose representatives gathered in Moscow and preached their views in the Sagittaking shelves, and also offered to hold an open theological dispute on Red Square. The leader of the Raskolnikov - opponents of the official church was the Suzdal priest Nikita Dobrynin, the nickname would be straightened. Despite the support of Khovansky, the open discussion of the Old Believers did not succeed, but on July 5, 1682, the Spore about the faith was held in the Granovic Chamber of the Moscow Kremlin, held in the presence of Sophia Alekseevna and Patriarch Joachim.

Fragments of the picture "Nikita is drunk. Dispute about faith "

In front of the entrance to the grain ward, on the red porch, the splitters collided with priests that were not allowed into the room; In the planned sweat, it was pretty and nicknamed by Nikita himself, whom one of the priests grabbed her hair. The arrogant Sagittarius dispersed the fighting and conducted the splitters to the place of dispute. In the "History of Russia from ancient times", Sergei Solovyov described them as their arrival: "With noise, the splits in grain and put their nations and candles, as in the square; They came to claim the old faith, destroy everything innovationsAnd they did not notice what an unprecedented innovation met them in the Granovic Chamber: there is some women at the royal place! Tsarevny-girls are open before all the people, and one princess fills everything! " According to Solovyov, on the throne next to Sofia Alekseyevna, her aunt Tatyana Mikhailovna was sitting on Tatyana Mikhailovna, and Ring in the chairs - Queen Natalia Kirillovna and Tsarevna Maria Alekseevna.

Patriarch Joakim asked the Old Believers, why they came and what their requirements were. Nikita answered Nikita: "We came to the kings-states to beat the man about correcting the Orthodox faith, so that they gave us their righteous consideration with you, new legislants, and so that the Church of God were in peace and harmony." The Patriarch objected that they did not stick to them to correct anything in church affairs, since they still did not touch the grammatical mind. " In response, Nikita said: "We have not come about grammar with you to talk, but about church dogmas!" Next, he tried to object to the Archbishop of Holmogorsk Athanasius, but they poured jumped to him with his hand raised, saying: "What are you, leg, are you put above? I'm not talking to you, but with Patriarch. " Sagittarius pulled off Nikita from Athanasius, and Sofya got up and began to say: "Do you see that Nikita does? In our eyes, the bishop beats, and without us it would have been killed. "

That moment of this dramatic confrontation, when the dispute was changed by violence, and depicted feather on his canvas. A little relevant center of the painting, with a cross in hand - Nikita is drunk. To the right of him - the monk of Sergius with the petition. On the floor, putting a hand to the cheek, at which Nikita "captured the cross", lies the Archbishop of Athanasius. In the left side of the canvas - Tsarevna Sophia Alekseevna, who stood up from his throne, angry with the bold behavior of the splitters. Next to her - Patriarch Joacim, to whom Nikita is rushed. In the depths depicted by Prince Ivan Khovansky. Standing on my right hand from Sofia Young boyar - apparently, Prince Vasily Golitsyn.

Tsarevna Sophia - a young woman in brocade clothes - stands out by his royal posture and proud look. It is fearlessly, she looks wide open eyes on a crowd of scalders, "with the expression of a cold," managed "anger, which is so distinguishes its mental state from the state of void." Comparing with the picture of Ilya Repin "Tsarevna Sofya Alekseevna a year after conclusing it in the Novodevichy Monastery ..." (1879, GTG), art historian Nonna Yakovleva noted that the Perovsky image of the princess Sophia is "a peculiar antitiza Repeinsky: there is the same power of character, but noble ; It is discerning and light even in anger "; "She stands over the fight, humming it." Art historian Olga Lyascovskaya wrote that women's figures turned out to be weaker than just, noting that, perhaps, he was going to still work on the image of Sofia.

From the side of the Raskolnikov Starovarov, the main acting person is Nikita violated - "confused, softened, with a sticking acute beard, in the image of which" the topic of fanaticism, devotion to the idea of \u200b\u200bself-destruction sounds. Art historian Leonid Dietershs noted that the figure of a puffy "One might be a whole picture"; According to him, "In the whole of the Russian school, painting can not be found another, similar to it, where it is so amazingly correctly solved the character of this fanatic split." Easy is depicted as a leaving of the people, from a poor provincial clergy. He is dressed in a darned contractor, under whom his thin shoulders are visible, and the priest in it gives only hopeful to the neck of the Epitrohil. On his legs - Lapty and Onuchi, he comes to the new-fold "corrected" book. He is all in motion - he holds the eight-spin cross with one hand, and the other was answered back, as if preparing to strike. Perov worked a lot and over images of other splitters, among whom critics noted the images of the priest standing on the right with an icon in their hands, an old man pointing to the scroll, as well as the row of the splitter, which is shining at the right edge of the Square.

The attitude of the author of the canvas to the image created by him, Nikita Voiding remains unclear - the impression is created that the artist is an impassive viewer of the events depicted by it. In this fight "It is clear one thing - the intrinsicness of the parties, the uselessness of the dispute and at the same time the impotence of protest against state power." The picture shows the "desperate duel of strong characters, which can be resolved only by the disaster - the death of the main character." So it happened in reality: Sophia could not come to compete with the existence of an opponent-preacher, so fanatically devoted to his ideas and beliefs, and soon after the "dispute about faith" Nikita was barely seized by Sagittarius and beheaded.

Sketches and etudes

In the design of the works of Perov, published by Nikolai Sobyko in 1899, five drawings were mentioned, created by the artist during work on the picture "Nikita Eat", as well as "heads from there, 2 sheets" (all of the indicated sketches and etudes dated 1880). According to the information given, most of these drawings was owned by the artist Vladimir Pereov (son of Vasily Grigorievich), and a smaller part - in the Moscow Collection of A. I. Balk. One of the graphic sketches was subsequently transferred to the Collection of the Tretyakov Gallery - "Nikita is drunk. Spore about faith "(paper on cardboard, pencil, 15.3 × 23 cm, 1880).

The list, compiled by Nikolai Sobyko, also mentioned a picturesque sketch for the painting "Nikita Eat", dated 1881 and who was "from the city of Sorokumovsky, in Moscow" (apparently, was meant by one of the representatives of the famous merchant dynasty of Sorokumovsky).

Reviews and critics

In Soviet times, the historical works of the late period of creativity Vasily Pereova were sharp criticized, and his views on history and religion were considered as reactionary. In addition to Nikita Pepling, "his other picture was also mentioned in this row -" Pugacheva Court "(1875, State Historical Museum). In the monograph on Perov, released in 1934 by the century from the birth of an artist, art historian Alexei Fyodorov-Davydov called these paintings unsuccessful and eclectic and wrote that the interpretation of the split in Nikita is to vomit to the same degree reactionary as the interpretation of the peasant revolution in His picture "Court of Pugacheva". Together with Perov's Fedorov-Davydov criticized and supported his Nikolai Leskov, who liked the representation of the splitters in the form of blind fanatics and intrigues, and Sofia - as an personification of the "wise and powerful state-owned self-adjustment." Noting that the pictures of Perov belong to the most psychologically in Russian historical painting of the 1870s, Fedorov-Davydov wrote that "psychologist, everything is increasing in the work of Perov, by the end of his life becomes an instrument of expression of the reaction content."

Art historian Vladimir Obukhov noted that, working on the images of Nikita vigorous and his comrades, Vasily Pereov showed himself as one of the creators of the concept of a historic hero - "an active responsible for each act, ready to give his own life for the belief." The dignity of the paintings of Obukhov attributed "historicism, which is imbued with its entire figurative structure." He noted that in the picture "Nikita violated" historical character is present not only in the situation, but also in the images of Streltsov, Monks and Raskolnikov - "These are not rearranged actors, but lively and psychologically reliable historical types." The main disadvantage of the cloves of Obukhov considered the "complete absence of living copyright intonations", the painted position of the artist in relation to what was shown in the picture - positive phenomena are calmly stated, and in relation to the negative parties there is no direct condemnation. Among other disadvantages of Obukhov mentioned the stiffness of painting, "some compositional disorder", as well as the conditionality of the images of some characters - in particular, the princes of Sophia and the Archbishop of Afanasia.

Discussing works on historical and religious topics, written by Perov in the last decade of his life, art historian Vladimir Leniashin noted that in general they did not receive due appreciation in artistic circles. As an exclusion, Lenya led the opinion of the artist Nikolai Ge, who believed that during the transition from an ordinary genre to religious, and then to the historical talent of Perov "developed, and he climbed higher and higher." Highly appreciating the paintings "Court of Pugacheva" and "Nikita will be frowning. The dispute about faith, "Ge noted that Perov" moved to history and made only two things that did not finish, but who were huge meaning. " According to Lenya, "Do not overestimate these works, should not be bypassed their attention."

Notes

Literature

• Antonenko S. G. "We have not come about grammar with you ..." Old Believers and power on the canvas of Vasily Pereova // Motherland. - 1996. - № 10. - P. 40-43.
• Vereshchagin A. G. Some problems of historical painting V. G. Pereova // Soviet artistic. - 1988. - № 24. - P. 212-238.
• Dieterichs L. K. V. G. Pereov. His life and artistic activities. - St. Petersburg. : Typography Yu. N. Erlich, 1893. - 80 s.

The dispute about faith ended for Nikita Dobrynin by accusing to state treason and behead. Vasily Perov. Nikita is drunk. Dispute about faith. 1881. GTG

In the Tretyakov Gallery it is impossible not to notice the huge picture of Vasily Perova "Nikita is emanating. Dispute about faith. " In the center of the composition, the figure, not causing sympathy: an elder with a frenzy, insane expression on the face - the priest-Strover Nikita Dobrynin. This is a caricature, biased image. That is what - "vigorous" - he was called new facilities. Destroy a person by providing him with a degrading label - old as the world tradition. At the church cathedral of 1666-1667, 350 years ago, Nikita Dobrynin was cursed.

Meanwhile, Dobrynin appears in front of a benevolently tuned researcher as a bright thinker, the author of wonderful polemical texts, read the cleric with the peaceful arrangement of the soul. At least so approved the Old Believer historian Fedor Melnikov.

As for the artist Perov, then a specially critical attitude towards the annelter, he was unlikely to have, depicting caricature and ministers of the official church, as in the "rural cross procession at Easter." Inaccurate understanding of the Old Believers and Boyruck of Morozov, Vasily Surikov's brush, gives and "Fewing Morozov". The great work of the painter is hammer by fanatic. But Morozova had a high spiritual system, which was talking about the prominent connoisseur of Starina Alexander Panchenko. "The dispute about the faith" and "Boyarnya Morozov" contribute to the delusion, showing the old workers by stubborn, who defended the secondary details of the rite.

The beginning of the sorrowful path

Dobrynin's birth date is not installed. But it is known that when Patriarch Joseph (1642-1652), he, being a priest, has already been engaged in the editing of liturgical books together with famous clerics Avvakum Petrov, Stefan Vonfatiev and others.

The main thing is Dobrynin was the ministry at the Nativity of the Voroditsky Church of Suzdal. Relations with the Suzdal Archbishop of Stefan did not have the way, since Stephen, according to Dobrynina, was not only a state criminal, but also heretic. The reform of the Patriarch Nikon, adopted by a majority of bishops, has already been marked in all its scale, and Dobrynin did not agree with her, differing critical attitudes towards hierarchs. Therefore, I told the king Alexei Mikhailovich that Stephen, serving in the temple, during the "trix", holds a cross not in his right hand, and left, definitely neglecting the symbol of Christian salvation. It was not enough for him, and he condemned the archbishop right in the temple, causing confusion of believers.

Protest cost him expensive: he paid to the renunciation of service. But the struggle continued, sending a new pendant to the top with the list of Schedule of Stephen.

The petitions Dobrynina were not in vain, and at the church cathedral of 1660, the Personal case of Stephen, who asked Catoryans about forgiveness. The Cathedral was exiled a hierarch to the monastery under the beginning of the "Good Starta" (the monasteries were used as prisons). But Tsar Alexey Mikhailovich rose to Stephen's defense. At the same time, Dobrynina should be accused, and he was sent "under the Grad Court" "for false arms," \u200b\u200bas his prosecutors stated. As for the cathedral, he excluded Dobrunin from the Church.

Six years later, she turned to Alexei Mikhailovich: "I, the Marslemen of yours, Liturgy does not serve and without communication between God's secrets ... I dare, and for all summer was afraid of the death hour. We led, the sovereign, the bishops of God's soul to resolve. "

From 1660 to 1665, he lived, probably in Suzdal, reflected on church reform, with which she still did not agree, came at times to Moscow for the preaching of his ideas. As for Suzdal, the special sermon was not required here: the locals in the old days.

From under his pen, new petitions come out - the reaction to the Nikonov reform. Each thoroughly thought out, read by like-minded people, corresponded. The "great" his petition, in the amount of 178 pages, contained a particularly agitated appeal: "The Great Sovereign ... He was concerned with the Cathedral reasoning to judge what we were to follow ... or the current Novovodnaya and Morning Nikonian Book, it's also declined from the Slave thief and the enemy of Christ Arseny-Chernez (Arsenia Sukhanova, one of Nicon's assistants. - "NGR") ".

In 1878, Professor Nikolai Subbotin issued this petition, and one can judge its features. She is strong in apologetics. The syllable is clear, understandable, rather light and even flexible. Despite its emotional heat, not found in it. The author analyzes the facts, preferring logically verified evidence. Presentation of the teachings of the Old Believers has seven years old.

Meanwhile, a new church cathedral was approaching. Dobrynin stated in the petition, which is ready to submit to the Cathedral decisions, seeking church unity and leaning towards a reasonable compromise. He was waiting for the cathedral, hoping that his doubts would be attended about new liturgical books.

But the petition turned into his arrest at the end of 1665 - early 1666. In February, the 1666th Cathedral was finally opened. It was a special year in the spiritual life of Russia and Europe, the expectations of light-consultation were distributed. In a sense, these fears came true, albeit not for all mankind, and for Russian old workers, the hopes of which were collected and the countdown of violent persecution and suffering began.

On May 10, according to the results of a two-day investigation, San Sana's Dobrynin was signed and cursed. And before there were interrogations and admits. But, despite the threats, he did not change his views, turning from a peaceful preacher in an old Adept of the Starny.

The church cathedral disappointed not one Dobrynin. Solutions were draconic: older workers were subjected to curses and anathemas, opening the perspective of the church split. Opponents of the Cathedral Definitions Corrected on Brutal Caras: cutting slices of ears, noses, removal of languages, cutting off hands, beating with beef cores, imprisonment in prisons, etc. Truly sadistic measures!

The Cathedral approved the glory of the "Great" Mental Dobrynin. The named "Rod of the Board" was written by Simeon Polotsk, a member of the Nikonovsky "Novodela". In 1667, "Wand" was printed. The text concerned no longer practical issues that worried older, but dialectical subtleties. By that time, Dobrynin was already languishing in the Ugreshsky monastery, not far from Moscow, where the flames of Avvakum's fiery protopopus. I tried to express Dobrynin and Metropolitan Gaza (Jerusalem Patriarchate) Paisius Ligarid, but his work was not printed.

In some sources, it is argued that on June 21, 1666, Dobrynin declared his "heart crushing", in response to which, continuing the work, the Cathedral told him in all crowded places of Moscow, promising forgiveness.

It is believed that on April 21, 1667, not wanting to "die outside the fence of Christ", he returned to the Lono of the Church. San, however, he did not return.

In the 1670s, the church power again subjected to Dobrynin "Promit", emphasizing the multimetable nature of his life. That was the time of big change. In 1679, Opponent Dobrynina Archbishop Stefan was also deprived of Sana.

Dispute to life

I am convinced that the people are tuned against the Patriarch Nikon, Dobrynin took a course on public debate about faith, not doubting the opportunity to win. Particularly calculated on the Sagittarov, who, together with his governor, Ivan Khovansky performed for the old days.

The possibility of the debate was opened in 1682 after the death of Tsar Fyodor Alekseevich, when they believed in the compliance of the new government, headed by the minor kings Ivan and Peter. And yet the time was alarming. Already suppressed the uprising of Solovki monks - Nikon's opponents, Morozov's opponents suffered, and Eddokia Urusov, executed the bishop of Kolomna Pavlo, Avvakum Protopopopa, other vinegers of antiquity. In the eyes of the Old Beloviers, two - Khovansky and Dobrynin are now dominated.

Dobrynin put forward the idea of \u200b\u200ba new cathedral. He was already in 60, and he had a rich experience of discussions and the struggle for his views.

On the morning of April 23, a group of old workers led by Dobrinine, holding the cross, appeared to Khovansky. Stopped at the "red" porch and were accepted. Dobrynin conveyed to the Khovansky petition. Facing not crowned Ivan and Peter, as well as the Patriarch Ioachim (Savelov), she contained a request for the Cathedral - public debate on faith, a request like a requirement.

Knowing that behind the back of Dobrynina crowd of like-minded people, the Patriarch was afraid of the debate, being not confident. Therefore, persuaded the kings to postpone the debate to the Wednesday, June 28. But for the resurrection, coronation was appointed, and Dobrynin wished the rite to commit for old books. Khovansky promised to achieve this.

On Sunday, prefabricating seven prosphoras - as much as the Old Believers take for Liturgy, Dobrynin came to the temple, where the coronation was to come, but did not come there. Khovansky as if the next washed. "Ice" and the cunning of the Patriarch, according to the Old Believers, part of the Sagittarius doubted the Starney: among them the "straight" stood. But, betraying Dobrynina before coronation, Khovansky still continued to support him. Although because of the "when" the cathedral did not open on June 28.

In the meantime, Dobrynned preached: "Wait, Orthodox peoples, for the true faith ..." And the debate was prepared: the team of Old Belovers became the Red Square. It remains to decide where the cathedral is held. Starbers pointed to the Kremlin Square near the Assumption Temple. On the dispute on the square asked Khovansky. But the Patriarch resisted, knowing what to achieve his easier in the sidelines.

July 5, it all started with worship in the Assumption Cathedral of the Kremlin. The service was deliberately delayed: the patriarch expected that at least part of the people would leave the square in front of the temple. And so, to the disappointment of older, applying all administrative resources available at its disposal, the Patriarch reached his: the debate was appointed in the Granovic Chamber. Moreover, by order of Joachim, the texts with Dobrynin's chinds were trying to distribute.

And here the granuitu ward was opened. The old workers who fell there were put on their own, holding burning candles in their hands.

The cathedral opened under the start of the princes of Sophia, which later managed the country on the rights of regent. At first, Patriarch performed, trying to prove that the creators of the church reform did not bring anything from themselves. Hierarchs were more silent. Dobrynin's speech "On the correction of the Orthodox faith, in order to be the Church of God in the world and unity, and not in the separation and mute", many shocked. Patriarch did not find the counterproofs and called Dobrynina "Epion".

Meanwhile, the Old Believers were increasingly inspired. They read their petition about the errors in new books. Tsarevna at the same time, interrupting the reader, made critical statements. Old Believers were not silent. Special exaltation caused the question of triplers. Having folded the fingers, the old workers, as a team, threw up, shouting: "Sita, Sita, Tako, Taco ..." Sofya, Patriarch, all opponents of the Old Believers were stunned. More than all - Archbishop of Athanasius (loved). Perov depicted it sitting on the floor. It is this moment the dispute is captured on the artist's canvas.

In the meantime, the evening came, and the cathedral was dissolved by announcing it to the continuation of July 7. Under the bell tall, the Old Believers came out of the Kremlin chambers, hardly the triumph.

However, having enlisted with the support of stallers, subjected to bribery and spawn, the government did not continue the debate. Moreover, Dobrynina grabbed, putting into the qvital on the skate yard. And on July 11, leading to the Red Square, he was announced a sentence as a state criminal and in the second hour in the afternoon cut off his head. The remains were thrown into the dogs. For cruel measures told the patriarch. Khovansky also executed.

The successors of Patriarch

The executions and persecution of the Old Believers did not stop in 1682. Motat reminiscent of the words of Feodosia Morozova: "Is it a Christianity, herself a man's scean?" In the persecutions of the Old Believers, the official clergy surpassed the state: perseverance, omble, irreconcilability. Mass evidence is provided by archival materials. Moreover, the history of the persecution lasted several centuries.

In 1840, the Bishop of the Synodal Church of Anatoly (Martynovsky) wrote: "Here (in the Yekaterinburg county. -" NGR ") again the police managed to grab ... Skolkolnik - exactly dangerous criminal. But the police were restrained by the clergy. "Kyshtym splitters are sampled through the correction, which he patronized," the next Ekaterinburg vicar was crushed.

"Correction is a patron saint. Oh, corrections, corrections! " - An Archbishop Perm Arkady (Fedorov) was reigned under Nicolae I. Another time he scolded the governor and his officials: "Oh, the local secular authorities! Time would be to know and benefit the service for the Fatherland, "understanding the cruelty to the annexers under the" service ".

Amazing intolerance to the vigors of the Starna showed the successor to Fedorov Archbishop Neophyte (Sosnin), thereby refuting in the eyes of historians the image of a benevolent elder, which Soskin showed fishing fishing racks in the "trifles of the bishoe life." When in 1862, the case of the arrested Old Believer Bishop Gennady (Belyaeva) and the Minister of Internal Affairs decided to transfer the case to the Yekaterinburg County Court, Sosnin was indignant: "What will the court do? He will discuss like a runaway spanner, subjected ... Job and refuse the previous place of residence ... It is impossible ... it will be possible to fix the case when the guilty breaks out of the hands ... "Efforts of such as Sosnin, an old-supplied bishop did not break free, hitting the Suzdalskie, where he intended to worry .

The dispute about faith continued. But he continued not in a word, and the sword, where he began. The cruelty of persecution of the Old Believers could not leave indifferent many historians. And today, many began to think that repentance should be brought for theseracy - like repentance for the inquisition and other black pages of the past, which the Roman high priests do not get tired.