The article is devoted to the analysis of conspiratorial activity of the Decembrist M.P.Bestuzhev-Rjumin. The author describes the moment when the Decembrist joined the conspiracy, his relations with the main members of the Southern Society. In the opinion of A.H.Benckendorff, an investigator in the Decembrists' case, the young revolutionary was “the demon of propaganda”. The author believes that this characterization is correct. The article refers to the negotiations of Bestuzhev-Rumin with the Polish Patriotic Society and the Society of United Slavs.

The article deals with the situation of intercultural interaction, which is defined through the need of world development to gather into a single humanity not by joining in one cultural tradition, but in recognition of the unity of different traditions, which, as it turns out, need each other on the principle of complementarity. This is how two great writers, Victor Hugo with his novel Les Misérables and the great Russian writer F.M. Dostoyevsky, who liked the novel that expressed the national spirit of France, but touched Dostoyevsky with the theme of the "restoration" of human dignity – not only in the strictly legal (formal) plane, but also through the realization that any formal law always needs also justice of moral order.

The article is devoted to the intellectual search of Russian conservatives in the late 1870s – early 1880s. It is about the understanding the nature of the political crisis at the end of the reign of Alexander II, as well as the prospects for overcoming it. In essence, this refers to the folding system of ideas that formed the intellectual basis of the government policy of the times of Alexander III. Disputes continue in historiography whether the transformations carried out in those years can be interpreted as counter-reforms. The author disputes this point of view. If we keep in mind the goal-setting of the authors of that time, their mood, then it would be more accurate to talk about the ideology of counter-revolution, which was shared by many representatives of bureaucratic spheres.

The review article considers one of the ideas of A. V. Karavashkin's book “Power in Medieval Russia. Semantic levels of polemical texts” (2021) are conventional models that interpret the relationship between the ruler-tormentor and his victim. The opposition of the martyr to the pagan tormentor is expressed in denunciation, the attitude of the martyr to the Christian tyrant is expressed in meek acceptance of death. A. V. Karavashkin traces the evolution of these two models, which manifested itself, in particular, in endowing the Christian tyrant with the signs of an apostate and in portraying the victims as accusers of his crimes. The article shows that the two models are combined in the New Testament narrative about the murder of Stefan the First Martyr and that in reality the figure of the Christian tormentor correlates with pagan kings and apostates in the monuments of the Borisoglebsky cycle. It is traced how Prince Andrei Kurbsky implements the paradigm of exposing the tormentor in his messages to Ivan the Terrible.

This article examines the functions of the name of the biblical first-killer Cain as a precedent for the depiction and naming of Svyatopolk the Accursed in the monuments of the Borisoglebsk cycle. The naming of Svyatopolk "okan'ny" (the Accursed) is based on the principle of paronymic attraction (rapprochement with the name Kain, to which the semantics of rejection and extreme sinfulness is ascribed, as it were). It is shown that the functioning of the lexeme okan'ny in these texts is different: in Nestor's "Reading about Boris and Gleb" it is used in relation to Svyatopolk mainly in the nominative, not in the attributive function and as if it becomes his name and at the same time turns into the occasional equivalent of the name Kain. The almost complete refusal of Nestor from using his own name Svyatop'lk / Svyatopolk, apparently, is associated with his sacred connotations (the root "holy"). It can be traced how in the later Old Russian literature the very name Svyatopolk / Svyatopolk becomes a precedent.

The author considers one of differences between “The Lay of Igor’s Campaign” and the Kievan annalistic story; “the Lay” presents Khan Konchak as Igor’s main opponent while the Chronicle presents Khan Gzak in the same role (and obviously in reality it was Khan Gzak) was Igor’s opponent and this fact is recorded in the Chronicle). The author demonstrates that the substitution is connected with the “Lay”s author strove to transform Igor’s failure into symbolic victory. If in the part of “The Lay”that is devoted to events preceeding Igor’s defeat and captivity the code of the herois code is used, then in the subsequent part that relates event upon that the code of fairy tale is used, as if Igor was killed in the battle and if he resurrected from the deads’ domain thus putting Konchack who captured Igor to shame while Vladimir, son to Igor, walks Konchack’ daughter from her father. In contrast to the annalistic story that recorded historical facts “The Lay of Igor’s Campaign” redefines the facts pursuant to principles of mythopoetics. Irrespective of the fact whether “The Lay of Igor’s Campaign” originally was a monument of oral literature or it was created in the written form, it is the author’s text, and the author has given the new meaning to the folklore traditions.

The author examines the basic premise of the modernism’s religious and philosophical conception. This conception was formed as the personalistic ideology that maintained personal rights in the metaphysical sense. Good and evil are not alienated from a person; they are derived from a person that looks for his/her place in theomachy. Modernists considered the absolute freedom as the highest, supreme manifestation of a new religion. However, this absolute freedom of a person inevitably brought about dualism which created the situation of a permanent choice between two celestial images, the good and the evil, because the “midst” was considered to be the genuine evil; the “midst” did not represented or manifested the pure quality neither of the good nor the evil. The evil rests in the collective principle, in the mob, and it is precisely the principle that oppresses a human creature and makes him/her restricted and not free. The “new religion” dramatic effect consisted in the fact that while modernists sought for the One Whole, for the God they put the absolute freedom of a person above all else. But this freedom did not allow substantiating the religious monism.

The article considers direct experience as a fact of self-consciousness of the ancient Russian masters of the word. In addition to authoritative sample texts, ancient and medieval Russia was able to appreciate personal evidence, links to the author’s acquaintance with the subject of the image. Travelers, rhetoricians and preachers used direct experience as an important suggestive setting, which allowed to give the work credibility. This technique was used in different genres in order to engage the reader in the proposed circumstances. The reception function is considered on the example of the works of hegumen Daniel (XII century), monk Thomas (XV century), protopope Avvakum (XVII century).

The article is devoted to the cultural-historical types of pre-Petrine Russia. The author considers them as an example of three confessions, reflected in ancient Russian literature. Prince Igor, the hero of the annalistic tales and “The Tale of Igor's Campaign”, repents as a representative of the entire princely family. Ivan the Terrible – as a sovereign, the head of the house and family. Protopop Avvakum – as a sovereign person in his direct approach to God, now speaking for himself personally, recognizing his individual responsibility. Thus, we are studying three different cultures, three meanings and life-worlds, which replaced each other in Russian history: 1) Ancient Russia; 2) Medieval Russia; 3) Russia of early Modern age. The article reinterprets the theory of cultural-historical types of N.Danilevsky. According to the author, the culturalhistorical types serve not only to distinguish between civilizations and the peoples that are in their orbit, but also to define the internal periodization of each specific culture. Inside each culture its own cultural-historical types may reveal, and even different cultures.

A historian-specialist in the Middle Ages addresses the 20th century subjects. Initially as a researcher of historiography, of the world that surrounded historians of the Stalin’s period, and later on as a researcher of culture, ideology, literary criticism, and artistic manifestoes. That is unusual path and this path characterizes scientific exploration search of A.L.Yurganov, expert in Russian Medieval culture and at the same time a researcher of culture, humdrum and everyday background of the past age. Now the author of the new book (collection of articles written in various years) is preoccupied with the general sense meaning of the intellectual history that, as a peculiar world, stems from the everyday life world. This world was common for people who occupied one side and for those who held totally opposite positions. The reviewers muse over the method employed by the historian in the new book and over the peculiar point of the 20th century cultural history.

With publication of Marx's manuscripts and excerpts including his extracts from numerous books on natural science and mathematics as a part of MEGA (Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe) a new stage begins in studies of Marx's philosophy, political economy and methodology. The sources of Marx's philosophical method can’t be focused on German classical philosophy only and his method of research can't be reduced to materialistic dialectics alone. Marx was in mainstream of scientific life of his epoch in whole. His research approach was influenced not only by philosophy, but also by methodology of classical political economy and natural science as well. Admitting the theorization methods of the XIX century science Marx reasoned consonant with the naturalists of that era. That fact predetermined the destiny of alienation concept in the Capital, which became irrelevant as key element of Capital’s structure.

The article deals with the old Russian literary culture taken as the aggregate of techniques and speech-and-behavioral tactics that had been developed in the early days of the East Slavic art of writing. The 17th century as transitory period in the Russian culture history was distinguished with the unprecedented innovativeness. The South Slavic influence was replaced with the West Slavic influence and a stream of new translations including translations of secular fictional texts gushed in the Russian literature. Conventional symbolic and pragmatic ways of the reality cognition was replaced with scholastic rationalism. Yet traditions remained to be respected and significant. The long-established archaic still asserted itself. The connection with conservative literary custom was wide-spread and universal. This thesis is proved by examples of three famous monuments of the transitory period literature: “The Life of Yulianina Lazarevskaya”, “The Latukhinskaya genealogic book” by Tikhon Makar’evski and the epistolary heritage of Patriarch Nikon.

Many people still believe that the history as the science has begun to change accents in its approach to analysis of the past exclusively due to heroic, self-sacrifice conduct of the Annals school representatives of the French historiography or due to efforts of only foreign historians and has started to become, in the first place, a sphere of human beings study and only later the study of society. Meanwhile the process of the history animation included efforts of many generations of foreign and Russian historians, philosophers and representatives of many other branches of social sciences. However, the paradox is that until recently we have known about foreign scientists more than about our countrymen. Today, with good reasons we may maintain that the picture of the Russian science achievements in respect of anthropological, social psychological approach to analysis of the historical past is dramatic and impressive. The task of this article is to disclose some important aspects of this historiographic process.

The article deals with the Russian modernism’s fate in connection with WWI that disturbed the Russian people’s habitual life. Paradoxically, principal figures of the modernist culture did not consider this disturbance of habitual peaceful life as an exclusively negative event. The war was not its own reason and cause, it was just a consequence of problems the humankind had accumulated. The war is the crisis, internal, spiritual crisis that requires resolving. At the same time the war provided an opportunity to transform a person’s inner world. That was the first step to later transformation of the outer world in its relation to a person. Literary and philosophical experience of the modernism fulfilled itself out and demonstrated that the crisis was present not only in the humankind but within the modernist current itself. The modernists debated the issue of whether the modernism would retain the Individual personal perspective of the Individual’s self-assertion as its constituent basis or the pristine Slavophilist myth of the Orthodox state interests of which were supreme in conditions of war and the crisis of modernism consisted precisely in this issue.

The split of modernism lied in divergence of opinions in respect of the state appeared within modernism during WWI. Some modernists began to profess the highest value, the Orthodox State, while other modernists maintained (as they had maintained earlier) that the highest value was any individuality that was the beginning of everything and constituted reality. Two forces encountered in one movement but the outcome of this collision was determined not by adversaries’ arguments but by the harsh reality of defeat in the war. The Russian people did not endure hardships and that was the outcome of the internal conflict that tore the modernism down. Neither Orthodox State nor the national identity rose above itself in an attempt to transform the world upon new, just grounds. Destruction of the empire became the destruction of the Russian modernism that had acquired its form and essence during the First Russian revolution of 1905–1907. Yet a seed that fell in the earth will, without fail, spring into the new life because the spirit of individuality, the immortal spirit that seeks for the metaphysical beginning of and justification of life in despite of melancholy and pessimism cannot die.

The article analyzes the genealogical culture of the Russian nobility after October 1917. It is noted that the process of its loss occurred simultaneously regardless of the place of residence of the nobles, but the reasons for this were different: sociocide in the USSR and assimilation in emigration. There was a devaluation of kinship as part of family life, a significant part of the information about the origin and kinship ties was lost, the boundaries of the ancestral memory were reduced, terminology was simplified, the role and place of kinship in the system of interpersonal relations between the nobles changed. In the USSR, the noble lineage was concealed in order to avoid repression, and in emigration among the nobility the value of family ties with foreigners increased. In general, the loss of the estate genealogical culture occurred by the beginning of the 1960s.

The author examines the Christian and pagan ideas about the otherworld and their influence on the literature of Ancient Russia. Common understanding of the problem did not exist. Disputes about heaven were based on different interpretation of another world. The Antioch concept and Neoplatonic concept had the greatest influence on Russia. Apocryphal images of heaven and hell were widespread in the Old Russian literature. They had strong influence on the disputes about heaven. Russian ideas the other world were formed on the basis of Orthodox, apocryphal and pagans ideas about post-mortem existence.

Bibliography in French devoted to the Russian religious piety, to foolishness for Christ in particular is in many respects based on works by the Russian Orthodox community. The life and creative development of Elisabeth Behr-Sigel (1907−2005), the French researcher who adopted the Russian Orthodoxy and studied history of the Orthodox church and the Russian theology are the most vivid example of the thesis. Her study of the Russian spirituality based on G. Fedotov's conception, has not lost its relevancy for French readers up to now.

Basing his study on proceedings of exegetes, apocryphal books, the ancient Russian writings, and folklore the author investigates two extremities of the Medieval understanding of the paradise: paradise was understood as the phenomenal historical reality and as the noumenal entity. Exegetes-textualists' conception of the earthly paradise negated the conception of the earthly paradise from the Christianized Neo-Platonism positions. Ambiguousness of the situation is interpreted with trends of the problem understanding by the popular consciousness taken in due account. Impact of pre-Christian notions on apocryphal images of the paradise is demonstrated. Images of the other world divided from this world by the water barrier are referred to archetypical images. Such images received their second life in works of Vassily the Wanderer. Vassily’s opinions are estimated in comparison with the strict Orthodox works of the medieval Russian book culture. The author comes to the conclusion that the naïve adherence to the nature confronts with the impeccable in doctrinal terms conception of the ideal heavenly paradise as the supra-sensual world devoid of specific features. Scenic understanding of the heavenly paradise was transferred into the early medieval Russian literature through descriptions of saint visionaries' travels to the Heaven. The author suggests interpreting vivid images of the paradise that were offered in the non-canonical books as the sensual allegories of the future indescribable blessing.

The paper addresses the problem of evolution of the holyday’s conceptual structure from the19th Russian culture to the Soviet culture of the 1920−1930th. The author describes the two basic models representing the «ideal type» of holyday, and reveals how this models correlate in the late Russian and the early Soviet culture. The main methodological result of the paper can be characterized as the bringing out the way to map the late Russian culture onto the early Soviet one, given the concept of holyday as example.

The author deals with study of ancient Russia miniature pictures contained in the Facial chronicle code of Ivan the Terrible. This is the unique memorial of the Russian Middle Ages. In 2004 «Acteon» publishers made the first facsimile publication of the Facial code. Dozens volumes and 16 thousand miniature pictures that illustrate the world and the Russian history were presented and became available in many Russian and foreign libraries. Now access to the first (and subsequent) volumes of the Facial Chronicle Code (in e-version) is possible only by virtue of Internet. It should seem that the publication guaranties knowledge. But it is not so: the sign nature of miniatures is to be in reconstructed for understanding their content. The issue concerns the experience reconstruction of the unknown language specific to the Russian culture. This language has determined the way of text and artistic image «reading». One of the main problems of the article is the study of an ancient Russian artist’s horizon of freedom. Whether this artist was not free in his creative work or he was a creator of his own artistic world?

The author deals with two strategies of rhetoric narrative in the Russian saints' hagiographies written by Medieval scribe Epiphany the Wise at the turn of the 14th and 15th centuries. The heritage of this Moscow Rus author is considered in the broad context of the literature culture of Medieval and early Modern Russia. Rhetoric poetics has never disappeared. Taking its origins in the antique times it kept to be alive during the Middle Age, in the 18th century, in the epoch when classicism burst into blossom, and in the 20th century literature. The rhetoric poetics is connected with extra-literature purposes and tasks as strongly as no other formation of literary culture is and serves to substantiation and propaganda and clear-cut ideological principles and values.

This paper addresses the comparative analysis of the two famous Russian treatises Domostroi and Junosti chestnoe zertsalo to account for the transformations of the basic attitudes to everyday life from 16th to 18th cent. In order to implement that the author is developing a special methodology rest on revealing the categories of «pivot meaning». The gist of the analysis can be formulated as follows: the rationalization and the secularization of Russian culture turn out the two main directions of cultural evolution.

The idea of tsar as an autocrat whose God-blessed reign is rooted in his God-chosen dynasty, was fully formed in Russia in the 16th century. Still at the end of the century, after the death of Feodor Ivanovich who left no successor, the model collapsed. The new ritual and symbolical system of choosing the tsar was rapidly created. This step signified the radical shift of notions that concerned the origins and the system of reign. The article is focused on this new model and the way it influenced the culture of the 17th century.

The author investigates the role the notion of law played in the Decembrists' ideology. The semantics of the notion is examined in the first part of the article while the second part of the article deals with defining of the notion’s place in the Decembrists' Weltanschauung: notions that are semantically connected with the notion of law are identified and a system of basic Weltanschauung notions of secret societies' members is reconstructed. Ideology of the Decembrists is examined in the third part of the article on the basis of the system obtained. In particular, emergence of monarchy limitation and serfdom abolition ideas is considered.

In XX century «memory» became a point of special reflection and investigation. This article examines the concept of memory and its implications in culture of early XX century. It reviews the use of this term in the most important modernist texts and questions the functions of memory both in discourse and practices. The 1st World War gave rise to the modernist doubt in utopian ideals of Enlightenment Project and indicated the break with rationalism. This turn was closely engaged with new cultural understandings of memory. War gave rise to doubt in validity of memory (idea on which there were based main norms and realizations of truth and verification in different situation, in everyday life and theoretical framework, in both bureaucratic and private practices). Many authors came to one paradoxical conclusion: «memory» is oblivion, memory not recalls but deforms past, it substitutes for reality, memory deprives people of time and free will. The concept of «memory» was converged in XX century with the problem of temporality and people identity. This article analyzes how «memory» was entangled with new cultural practices.

This paper pursues a study devoted to «memory», its representations and cultural function in inter- and past-war periods. At that time the phenomenological program enjoyed wide popularity among a new generation of intellectuals started the «linguistic turn». One important consequence of this intellectual movement was the powerful criticism of the linguistic nature of memory. In the center of criticism were the linguistic mechanisms that deform the representations of current events, pack the «reality» in cultural accepted patterns and clichés, bended to social pressure. The intellectual tradition returned to lost since antiquity discussion of social nature of «memory» and social function of reminiscences. There was one main idea: social experience kept in a language transforms individual experience, alienates and appropriates individual impressions, disciplines and subdues to general social rules, sets to see imagined objects lacking in reality and to be oblivious of the present. This representation of «memory» became very popular. The criticism of social conformity became entangled in culture with antiwar protest and resistance movement. A new generation of intellectuals set the task to disclose memory-occupier and to show utopian «new world» — world in which memory would lose its social function.

The author analyzes the role of Darwinism in the present day spiritual culture and demonstrates the logic of Darwinism emergence, regular and inevitable character of its emergence and subsequent development. It is emphasized that the theory of evolution is the product of ‘systemic way of thinking'. Such way of thinking combines poorly with the ‘object-centered' thinking which is peculiar for ordinary conscience. The author investigates processes that take place in the contemporary Russian ordinary conscience.

The author considers V.N.Toporov’s works dedicated to study of the ancient Russian hagiography and demonstrates continuity of Toporov’s approach in respect of G.P.Fedotov’s approach and fundamental differences of Toporov’s approach from investigation of hagiography practiced in historical and literary studies. V.N.Toporov’s method is seen as an example of original philosophical (historiosophical) discourse, as an experience in the sphere of ideal text reconstruction, reconstruction of the ‘super-myth’ created by the world and about the world. In a more narrow way it is an attempt to re-create and reconstruct the psychological image, spiritual and internal personality of a saint. In its core assumption and in many specific interpretations that do not imply the strict verification this approach is fundamentally different from methodology of so called Tartu-Moscow school to which V.N.Toporov is usually assigned.

Antichrist is the key figure of the apocalyptical prophecies, the last and the main enemy of the Church. In the East and the West of Christian world the sinister «son of devil» drew attention of many authors and painters. Since the first centuries A.D. there have appeared different ideas about the nature and appearance of the Enemy. The iconography of Antichrist has embodied an array of variable interpretations. He was depicted as a seven-headed monster, dappled Beast, seductive young man, imperious ruler. His visual images include gestures of sorrow, triumph, fury, desperation or fear. In Russian icons, frescos and miniatures multiple figures of Antichrist spread rather late, starting from the second half of the XVIth century. The article is focused on the semiotics of these diverse images. In the first part, which is published in this issue, the author reviews Muscovite Rus' eschatological tradition and early Christian texts that have influenced Russian iconography of the Enemy.

Antichrist is the key figure of the apocalyptical prophecies, the last and the main enemy of the Church. In the East and the West of Christian world the sinister «son of devil» drew attention of many authors and painters. Since the first centuries A.D. there have appeared different ideas about the nature and appearance of the Enemy. The iconography of Antichrist has embodied an array of variable interpretations. He was depicted as a seven-headed monster, dappled Beast, seductive young man, imperious ruler. His visual images include gestures of sorrow, triumph, fury, desperation or fear. In Russian icons, frescos and miniatures multiple figures of Antichrist appeared rather late, starting from the second half of the XVIth century. The second part of the article, which is published in this issue, is focused on the semiotics of these images. The author reviews European visual tradition of the Enemy and compares it to Russian iconography and «textual portraits» of Antichrist.

This article on the essential teaching of great German mystic Meister Eckhart (c.1260−1328) is the result of many years of personal study. The article introduces to his anthropology and his scholastic theory of ecstasy and is divided into three chapters. The first chapter is an overview of heretical studies of man («Le Mirouer des simples ames» of M. Porete, anonymous «Schwester Katrei» etc.) from the 13−14 centuries which had an influence on Eckhart’s theology. The second and third chapters are a description of Eckhart’s study of ecstasy, that have in the author’s view a lot of common traits with the theological teaching of Byzantine theologian Gr.Palamas. The reseach is aimed to find a common approach to the comparison between German and Byzantine theology and mysticism of the late Middle Age.

In article one of the challenges in the history of philosophy and divinity — a problem of occurrence and evil existence is investigated. On a considerable quantity example Slavic medieval texts it is shown, how the problem of occurrence of evil in the world dared. The great attention is given Palee Sensible and a legend about falling of Satanail thanks to which representations of our Ancient Russian ancestors about the evil nature were formed. In conformity with tradition Ancient Russian scribes interpreted evil as «non-existence» which did not enter into a plan of the Creator about the world. On concrete texts it is shown that angrily it is not involved in an order of things that it not independent ontologic essence, and result of distortion of life and the spiritual conditions of people connected with it. Malicious and the sin which has come with it in monuments of Ancient Russian writing are considered as «illness» of free will which owing to a human nature is inclined to accept its phantom for good. Are reconstructed based on bible postulates dogma installations according to which evil is considered as a reality only in consequences strong-willed actions of the created subjects which contrary to a divine plan and give existence to evil in the world.

The article introduces the life and creative work of Kirik Novgorodets (1110 — no earlier than 1156/58), the outstanding Russian scientist and thinker of the 12th century. The author demonstrates that Kirik’s creative work represented a glaring and multifaceted phenomenon. The author analyzes facets of Kirik’s talents in mathematics, calendar, theology, philosophy and investigates the scientific and philosophical content of «Study of numbers» and theological and ethical aspects of «Raising the questions». Kirik as the author of these works is considered in the article not just as an outstanding scientist but as a major religious philosopher, a representative of the theological rationalism tradition in Ancient Rus thought as well. The author of article comes to the conclusion that the scientist and thinker from the Great Novgorod belonged to a group of Russians who attained the European level of education. Kirik by far surpassed his times.

The article reproduces a series of the little known literary and epigraphic sources. On the basis of these the author reconstructs peculiarities of the earliest stage of the Russian Church organization. Taking Lucas Jeedyata’s activities and writings as an example the author analyzes the set of actions aimed at establishment in Ancient Russia of the church organization independent of Byzantine Empire’s church. Lucas is considered to be a fellow-champion of Metropolitan Ilarion. Together they provided the substantiation for the sovereign ideology of independent state authority and the Church independent of Greeks. The author comes to the conclusion that there were certain contradictory tendencies in relations between the Priesthood and the Temporal Power that resulted in abrupt vacillations of Yaroslav the Wise that ended up with the autocephaly closing down.

The author reproduces and comments a set of little known book and epigraphic sources that are used as the basis for a detailed reconstruction of the most ancient phase of the Russian Church organization history. A set of measures aimed at assertion of the church organization autonomous from Byzantium is analyzed by the example of activities and creative works of Lukas Jidyata. The author appraises Lukas as the ally of Ilarion, the autocephalous Metropolitan. Lukas and Ilarion jointly substantiated the sovereign ideology of independent state power and of the Church independent of Greeks. The author concludes that there were contradictory tendencies in interrelationships of the Body of Priesthood and the Temporal Power that resulted in acute fluctuations of Prince Yaroslav the Wise that ended with the autocephaly winding down.

The article deals with analysis of ideological and religious aspects of Metropolitan Ilarion’s «The Word on the Law and Grace». It is demonstrated that the work’s core meaning were historical philosophical contemplations of the thinker. His attention is focused on the progress of the universal history while the Russian history is considered as an integral part of the world history which is rich in its own achievements. According to Ilarion, the Russian people passes through two phases of development much as all other peoples do: the pre-Christian phase (infantile period of imperfection) and the Christian phase (which is Grace-filled and opens the way to salvation). The Russian Metropolitan expresses his profound patriotic idea of the young Russian people’s predestination for its junction opens prospects for performance of great exploits. From standpoint of equality in faith Ilarion condemns old Christian peoples' claims to superiority. At the same time Ilarion does not deprived of pride for glorious pre-Christian past of Rus. The baptized Rus became the true inheritor of this glory. Against this background Ilarions condemns claims to national and religious uniqueness. Overall Ilarion’s doctrine is appraised as the doctrine of state independence and of historical optimism.

The cult of Michael the Archangel is one the central elements of Medieval Russian religiosity. The first of archangels played an important role both in strictly orthodox ecclesiastical teaching and syncretic popular beliefs / magical practices. He was regarded as a vanquisher of the Devil in the first days of Creation, the Satan’s most powerful enemy in this world, principal protector of humans against the ruses and attacks of demons, demon-slayer and angel-exorcist. Common to the Christian East and West, this set of beliefs and corresponding practices wasn’t, however, uniform in various parts of the Christian world and depended on the cultural context of every region. The present article proposes to trace the history of Michael the Archangel as demon-slayer and protector against the Devil in Medieval Russian culture. It will also analyze the rapports between the cult of Michael and the cults of other saints — demon fighters and the possible ties between the syncretic demonology of so called «zmeeviki» and the demonological motifs in hagiography.

The article deals with revelation of ‘The new Middle Ages' notion which attracted the general attention upon publication of N.A.Berdyaev's book ‘The new Middle Ages' (Berlin, 1924). Florenski used the term somewhat earlier in texts that have been published recently. Florenski argued that there were rhythms in history and this rhythm was the rhythm of replacement of the Medieval culture with the Renaissance culture. After the Renaissance epoch and after the culture of the Modern times which developed the Renaissance culture the epoch of the ‘new Middle Ages' follows. Florenski guessed the characteristics of the ‘new Middle Ages' in the reality which surrounded him. All Florenski’s sympathies were in favor of the Middle Ages outlook. He thought that his own outlook was correspondent to the Russian Middle Ages style of the 14th and 14th centuries. Florenski supposed that the Renaissance culture crisis began in the late 19th century and the twilight epoch of transition to the ‘new Middle Ages', transition from the darkness to the light started. Florenski saw the specific omen of the ‘new Middle Ages' in growth of apocalyptical moods: his coevals already spoke of destruction of nature and crisis of culture, of depletion of the Earth’s bowels, of revolt of elements, of contamination of the air and the waters, of terrible earthquakes. Florenski sought a deeper return to the Middle Ages. It is interesting to think the contemporary life in Florenski’s terms: the Middle Ages, Renaissance, the Modern time, the new Middle Ages.

Faith is one of history’s motors. At the same time history of the faith itself is inadequately investigated so far. Faith is not identical to religion. This notion embraces not only what people believe in (in God, saints, after-life) nut all diversity of individual and collective practices that embody this belief. Faith is a social and psychological process. In different societies people believe differently. J.-C. Shmitt, the French Historian is a specialist in the history of Middle Ages. His subject is Middle Ages. History of faith he plots is not merely history of Catholicism, institutes if the Church, sacraments and rites. He tries to understand what did it mean to believe in Middle Ages. Author raises a series of fundamental questions. What was the role of faith in medieval society? What were specific mechanisms of new beliefs' dissemination and of the Church control of the faith? Was there any place for religious doubts in the medieval culture?

Initiators of the February Revolution confessed that they had «desired» quite different result. However the positivist style of mentality aimed at «result» inevitably brings about the same tune: «We wanted the best but events too their regular course». Overcoming of utopist mentality style might be expected only with the change of generations at the political forestage. Failure of evolutionary development caused even greater triumph of utopianism. Not the change of «political regime» but profound changes in culture, way of thinking, tonality of human relations had to occupy the higher priority positions in program of actions. These changes would, in the long run, transform the «political regime». But such program could be advanced only by personalities of another caliber.

The review is devoted to creative works of Alexander Aizenstat, a contemporary artist from Jerusalem. Every visitor of his exhibition will see a spontaneous narrative, a meta-story of a nation’s destine, of spiritual life secrets as well as of what is close not just to the artist’s milieu but what is in consonance with the destiny of the Motherland, the country the artist is connected to by his biography, by his creative work and by his religious activities. However there is no need to indulge in interpretation, second-guessing, play of imagination and to transform associations into a well-thought-out scheme. As it is the case with any authentic creative work Aizenstat’s pictures demand an explanation but at the same time they are elusive for description with the subsequent interpretation of images' meaning. Let what is expressed by the language of painting be the property of the pictorial arts. Any translation, any verbalization will not help to a spectator because Aizenstat’s works, despite their intimate connection with the Jewish tradition, do not put a claim to be just an encyclopedia of symbols. The author of the review writes about religious and moral panhuman intentions of the artist whose creative work is formed by belonging to the supreme spiritual intentions of the traditional culture.

The article deals with two strategies of interpretation of medieval sources. The author does not subscribe to the theory put forward by Ricardo Picchio, the Italian Slavicist who studies so called «Biblical thematic key» of the ancient Russian texts. According to Picchio, the original context of hidden quotations from the Holy Scripture allows prompt and precise defining of a work’s idea and deciphering its author’s implicit intention. However such methodology does not bring about the genuine verification of a study’s conclusion and is based on an interpreter’s abused discretion. The only way to reconstruct a medieval scribe’s thought is to analyze his text as the unity of expressive and meaningful components. The article provides readers with examples of such interpretation.

In mid-17th century Czar Alexei Mikhailovich and his closest confidants found themselves at the crossroads. Medieval Russia turns out to be increasingly obsolete against achievements of the West. The church reform was conceived for «moral correction» of ecclesiastic affairs. Learned monks headed by Epiphanius Slavinetzki were invited to Moscow to carry out the conceived program. However the Czar was utterly dissatisfied with Greeks and in 1660s invited «Latinists», graduates of Kievo-Bratski college. Simeon Polotzki was the leader of this group. The struggle for the spiritual predominance at the Czar’s court between two trends («Greek» and «Latin» ones) gradually transformed into the struggle for the future cultural position of Russia. The author investigates epistemological aspect of the confrontation. According to the author, two discourses are revealed in texts and documents of that epoch. One discourse is predominantly allegoric while the other one is syllogistic. The first discourse was embedded in the Russian medieval ecclesiastic and popular tradition. The other discourse was brought in by the «Latinists» ands represented «new thinking» of a sort. The power which desperately needed church people and officials who were able to think clearly gradually leaned towards the second discourse. This discourse allowed Russian intellectuals in the next, 18th century to fall into dialogue with Enlightenment and to implement the basic reception of the European philosophy of the Modern time.

The Russian school philosophy of law emphasizes the fact that by virtue of legal norms that by perforce are to be laid down with the «axe-cut precision» people are able to provide for regulation of the social life just at the lowest level where a person agrees to act like an automation-machine. Rights of the «humane in a human being» can be protected only by a more powerful system which, alongside with the law, also includes morality and religion. Therefore the liberal slogan «the supremacy of law» is a cheap politics which mislead people. In Russia the greatest contribution to understanding and recognition of non all-sufficient nature of the legal system was made by P.I.Novgorodtsev and his disciples among whom the best known are I.A.Il'in and B.P.Vysheslavtsev.

The idea of the «Teutonic captivity» under which the Russian philosophy fell was expressed by Sobolev. Later on this idea was subject by some critical revaluation by I.F.Shapovalov. According to the author of the comment, the assertion that German philosophical ideas exerted a one-sided and sinister influence on the Russian intelligentsia that was unable to get free of the way of thinking which was alien to the Russian soil is to be rethought considerably. It is quite evident that the fact of captivity cannot be denied. But was that captivity really the Teutonic' one, i.e. were shallow and vapid rationalistic opinions of the Russian intelligentsia the results of the passion the Russian intelligentsia felt precisely for the German philosophy? On the contrary, the German is to be considered as an ally of the Russian religious and philosophical reflections in its struggle against common place rationalism and doctrinarianism. The author sees the origins of the intellectual paradigm wedded to speculative ideas and ready-made intellectual prescriptions exactly in the French tradition, in the French positivism of the 19th century in particular.

Russian culture has always tended to focus on literature. In Russia, classical literature promoted the growth and development of thought. Even in philosophy, the best results were obtained where research was connected with the arts. Thus, if Russia wishes to be a worthy participant in the international philosophical process, she should use her strengths by focussing primarily on study in the humanities.

«…Ife», the para-poem performed in the end of April, 2004, at «Na doskakh» («On the planks») theater served as the cause for organization of the «roundtable». The chief of the creative center and the stage manager of the theater opened the discussion and indicated the problems to be discussed. Is the theater nowadays capable to create new forms of the social being? What phenomena, processes, events of modern Russia can and ought be reflected? What is the aim of such reflection? Can the theater form a new elite, identify a social stratum which has ability to unite itself and prevent the society from enthropy and disintegration? Social scientists, writers, lecturers of Moscow higher education institutions, librarians took part in the discussion.

The author notes that Father Georghi Florovski accepts the authentic loyalty not to the letter but to the spirit of the patristic Tradition as the criterion of philosophical and theological thought’s soundness. Artistic taste, sense of style help a mind to find right direction in the spiritual domain but only the Divinely presence can serve as the criterion of the Truth in this domain. Florovski understands the religious dogma not as some formal logical definition but as a description of the real historical event, i.e., of descent of the Holy Spirit upon participants of the Church.

Just a few persons know of forecasts of Russia’s future that were done by the Russian conservatives long before collapse of autocracy. As the author demonstrates, Konstatin Leontieff whose works were many times republished and still is unread was by far more deep and far-sighted than his (and some our) contemporaries. Being aware of inevitability of the social revolution Leontieff tried to find in Socialism some conservative traits and to combine it with the monarchy with the framework of Orthodox religion. Leontieff proposed to settle the social issue by the existing authorities without changing the established social and economic order. Leontieff planned to devote a special work to Socialism but died before he could carry out his intention and his followers (one may wonder whether he had genuine followers) proved to be less original. Leo Tikhomirov was one of a very few of those who understood but did not accepted 'conservative Socialism' annunciated by Leontieff. «Patriarchal» defenders of autocracy depleted themselves in their struggle against the Socialist idea and did not understand a concealed typological affinity to Socialism. Affinity which, besides all other things, implied presence of the common enemy presented by liberalism and capitalism.

The author tries to clarify the situation around Leo Tikhomirov and elucidate, from a new angle, his role and place in the political life of Russia. Peculiarity of Tikhomirov’s position was determined, first of all, by the fact that in the revolutionary camp he was perceived as a «conservative» of a sort because he advocated traditional values while in the monarchist camp he was perceived as a «revolutionary» — and not just by the label attached by ill-wishers but due to his inner conviction in necessity of serious transformations, decisive movement along the path to construction of the ideal monarchy. This image of «the conservative revolutionary» made him repugnant to contemporaries. Though Tikhomirov really and essentially was «a man of Alexander III reign» he might be called a fore-runner of the European (German) conservatove revolution and of the Russian Eurasians. Leo Tikhomirov’s destiny reflected complex and contradictory tendencies of the Russian social and political thought development. As a prominent ideologue, talented publicist and very attentive, sensitive observer Tikhomirov left a rich literary heritage.

The lethal convulsions or birth labors? Disputes about the end of the historical science at the beginning of the 21st century. Since Herodotus' times of history is understood as Histories Apodexis, i.e., as «presentation of events» either made preferably by a witness or based upon reliable evidence. However its emergence as a science took place rather lately and was determined by two events: formulation of sociological laws and isolation of study of sources as the basis of Histories Apodexis in the 19th century. In the last third of the 20th century the foundations of historical cognizance were shattered by «linguistic upheaval» and the «postmodernist challenge». These phenomena caused the crisis of «the science of history». The author deals with manifestations of the crisis (the emerged discretion of the historical knowledge, the «linguistic turn» and the «post-modernist crisis») and with other attempts to overcome the crisis practiced today. Of these attempts the author pays the particular attention to critique of postmodernism, emergence of new methodological directions, development of historic hermeneutics as the most perfect of these directions, the contemporary state of historic positivism and reasons for its stability. The author offers his own scenario of historical science development: a schism will occur in the corporation: a part of historians will follow principles of Histories Apodexis and interpret standards of their profession in the positivist spirit while a narrow strata of professional scientists will form gradually. This second group will be able to develop new scientific standards applied to the historical studies and investigations

The essay is devoted to comparison of the Christian spiritual doctrine and R.Steiner's doctrine. The author investigates the fundamental discrepancies of the two creeds. In the first place, it relates to the Gospel's religious essence as Steiner understood it. S.Bulgakov concludes that Steiner's doctrine has nothing in common with the «deepening of Christianity». In fact, Steiner's doctrine becomes the substitute for Christianity, the anthroposophic distortion of the traditional dogmatics. R.Steiner's cult based on ideas of non-Christian Oriental mysticism proves to be a «religious fake». Within Steiner's doctrine there is no place for any of the most sacred for Christianity «treasures of the faith». The peculiarity of the doctrine S.Bulgakov subjects to criticism consists of the fact that Steiner makes a system of the occultism. However, the appearance of scientific approach and understanding in this case conceals one of the most dangerous delusions, «the superstition of our days»

The author analyzes reasons for popularity of the theory advanced by L. Goumiliov who suggested that every ethnic group at some early stage of its development is motivated by and is driven by an ability to suppress the instinct of self-preservation in order to achieve some aim which sometimes may be a quite illusionary one. Besides analysis of reasons for the theory’s popularity the author provides a survey of possible theoretical sources which the theory may have in the humanitarian thought. The author also discusses the mutually single-valued correspondence between the «passion-like» movement of a society and an individual who has psychological inclination and striving for such movement. Thus, Goumiliov provided a straight answer to the question put by the best minds of the humankind. Among the Western spiritual predecessors of Gumiliov the author points out Hume, Schweizer, Bergson and Nitsche while Tolstoi, Dostoevski, Rozanov and Veresaev are mentioned among Goumiliov’s Russian predecessors. Goumiliov’s theory is meticulously compared to M. Weber's theory of charizma. The author comes to the principal conclusion: Goumiliov’s theory is irrefutable for it belongs to historiosophy and it can be applied when appropriate or it can be ignored altogether.

The article is devoted to the 100-year anniversary of the first Religious-philosophical assembly held on November 29 (December 12), 1901, in Saint-Petersbourg. The author traces the Assemblies' pre-history and notes that these gathering marked a shift in the intelligentsia’s moods from positivism, materialism and atheism to idealism and religion. The «new religious conscience» phenomenon is described and movements in poetry, musical art, politics that evolved in parallel to the «new religious conscience» are mentioned. The Religious-philosophical assemblies were meetings of God-seeking Russian intelligentsia and representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church. Assemblies were presided by Serghi (Stargorodski, then a bishop and would-be Patriarch). The Church was represented by so bright personalities as archimandrite Antonin (Granovski), Bishop Innokenti (Usov), protopresbyter I.L.Yanyshev, hieromonk Mikhail (Semenov), righteous M.A.Novoselov, V.A.Ternavtsev, professor A.I.Brilliantov, A.A.Kireev, V.M.Skvortsov et al. On behalf of the intelligentsia «The Merezhkovskis' circle» (D.S.Merezhkovski, Z.N.Ghippius, D.V.Filosofov, N.M.Minski, A.V.Kartashev, V.V.Rosanov) proved to be influential at the Assemblies. Discussions arouse around such themes as «Excimmunication of Leo Tolstoi», «The Church and the authority», «Freedom of conscience», «The Christian marriage», «Christianity and violence», «Is the dogmatic movement possible?», «N.Gogol and Father Matthew». The Assemblies made a tremendous contribution to improvement of apologetics samples of which were given by many «Church people» who took floor at these meetings. Bishop Serghi’s appeal for unity of the Church and the intelligentsia remains to be important even a hundred years later.

In contradistinction to A.J.Toynbee, O.Spengler and S.Huntington, the author maintains that the civilization is the culture's "body" while the culture is the civilization's "soul". Russia's main search for the idea consists in overcoming of the gap between the civilization and culture and the principal aim of the country consists not of becoming a part of the West or achieving and defining its essential difference from the West but, in collaboration with the West, to create an universal human supranational civilization which is the only alternative to the dissociation of civilizations. According to the author, "the society of culture" is the sole acceptable model of the global civilization.

The Eurasian idea which emerged as a reaction of the Russian national conscience to upheaval of 1917 in Russia involved in its orbit prominent figures of the Russian culture and aristocracy who emigrated from Russia. The proponents of the Eurasian idea were distinguished by a clear understanding of the fact that the power of Russia was determined by its culture while a habit to pay attention to external achievements of civilization (in an attempt to catch up with the West) would lead to a gross undervaluation. That, in its turn, made Russians doomed to the blind imitation of foreign samples and models. All that would bring about the degradation of culture. The proponents of the Eurasian idea saw the Russian culture creators' irresponsibility, their predisposition to imitation, their inability to evaluate the Russian originality properly as the principal cause of the Russian revolution. The Eurasians did not accept changes of the political order or fundamental ideas if these changes were not accompanied and even caused by cultural changes.

“Faith and Reason of Soloviov’s philosophy”, the article by G. Florovski which is published here contains the criticism of V. Soloiov’s religious philosophy. The author who assessed spiritual phenomena with the exceptionally high criteria asserted that Soloviov was a liberal permeated with the utilitarianism of 1860s. As the author insists, liberalism is intolerable in a theologian. The author admitted unquestionable merits of Soloviov including Soloviov’s success in making religious themes worthy of discussion, in arousing religious sentiments and in rehabilitating Christianity from accusations of political and social reaction. The author emphasized that the further development of the Russian philosophy was possible not along Soloviov’s lines but along the lines that would mean overcoming Soloviov’s positions.