general information
and territorial coverage
Parish books in the State Archive of the Kostroma Region are stored in fund 56 - "Collection of metric books of churches in the Kostroma province."
A significant part of the metric books are in poor physical condition and are not issued to the reading room; most metric books are available for viewing in electronic form on a local computer in the reading room.
Territorial composition
Vologda province- Nikolsky district (territory of the Pavinsky district of the Kostroma region), Totemsky district (Soligalichsky district of the Kostroma region),
Vyatka province- Kotelnichsky district (territory of Ponazyrevsky district, Kostroma region),
Kostroma province- Buysky district, Vetluzhsky district, Galichsky district, Kineshma district, Kologrivsky district, Kostroma district, Makaryevsky district, Nerekhta district, Soligalichsky district, Chukhloma district.
Fund 56 consists of 21 separate inventories:
Op. 1. MK churches of Kostroma district (now Kostroma district of Kostroma region) (1851 - 1919)
Op. 3. Parish books of churches in Kostroma and Kostroma district (now Kostroma) (1847 - 1918)
Op. 4. Parish books of churches of Galich, Makaryevsky, Chukhloma districts of the Kostroma region) (now Antropovsky district) (1849 - 1915)
Op. 6. Parish books of churches in Makaryevsky district, Kostroma province (now Makaryevsky district) (1867 - 1919)
Op. 7. Parish books of churches in the Kostroma district of the Kostroma province (now Kostroma district) (1865 - 1917)
Op. 8. Parish books of churches of Galich and Kineshma districts of Kostroma province (now Ostrovsky district) (1854 - 1926)
Op. 9. Parish books of churches in Buysky, Galichsky and Kostroma districts of the Kostroma province (now Susaninsky district) (1850 - 1919)
Op. 10. Parish books of churches in Buysky, Galichsky and Kostroma districts of the Kostroma province (now Sudislavsky district) (1853 - 1931)
Op. 11. Parish books of churches of Kostroma and Nerekhta districts of Kostroma province (now Krasnoselsky district) (1812 - 1918)
Op. 12. Parish books of churches in Kostroma and Nerekhta districts of Kostroma province (now Nerekhta district) (1782 - 1922)
Op. 13. Parish books of churches in Kologrivsky district, Kostroma province (now Kologrivsky district) (1870 - 1917)
Op. 14. Parish books of churches in Nikolsky district, Vologda province (now Pavinsky district) (1848 - 1921)
Op. 15. Parish books of churches of the Galich, Soligalich and Chukhloma districts of the Kostroma province (now Galich district) (1850 - 1919)
Op. 16. Parish books of churches of the Soligalichsky district of the Kostroma province and the Totemsky district of the Vologda province (now Soligalichsky district) (1867 - 1922)
Op. 17. Parish books of churches of the Vetluzhsky district of the Kostroma province and the Kotelnichsky district of the Vyatka province (now Ponazyrevsky district) (1871 - 1922)
Op. 18. Parish books of churches of Kologrivsky and Makaryevsky districts of Kostroma province (now Neysky district) (1864 - 1919)
Op. 19. Parish books of churches in Vetluzhsky district, Kostroma province (now Pyshchugsky district) (1868 - 1919)
Op. 20. Parish books of churches in Vetluzhsky district, Kostroma province (now Sharya district) (1861 - 1921)
Op. 21. MK churches of Buysky, Galichsky and Soligalichsky districts of the Kostroma province (now Buysky) (1851 - 1934)
It is not difficult to trace the attitude of the state to the Church in the USSR on the basis of archival data. However, identifying the church's position in relation to the Soviet state seems to be a much more difficult task. This is due to the inaccessibility of church archives. The analytical article by Alexander Onishchenko is devoted to the difficulties that accompany researchers of the modern period of the history of the Russian Church.
The Archival Fund of the Russian Federation is divided into state and non-state archives[i].
The State Archive unites not only a corpus of documents of various types, reference literature, indexes and inventories, but also the working team of the archive and researchers. Archives employees, most often people with higher education, are undoubtedly specialists in their field. Non-state archives are most often less organized in their structure; the documents stored in these archives are not systematized, not cataloged, and sometimes not even described. Although it should be noted that in terms of the content and nature of information, non-state archives are perhaps more interesting for researchers, since they contain not only dry office documents, legal acts, official correspondence, but also photographs and personal letters, unpublished diaries and memoirs. Non-state (departmental) archives include the archive of the Moscow Patriarchate, and other archives of Synodal institutions, diocesan archives, private archives of bishops and clergy.
Special difficulties accompany researchers of the modern period of the history of the Russian Church. In the Soviet era, such a large religious organization as the Russian Orthodox Church was, of course, controlled by state authorities. In the Council for the Affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church, as in the Council for Religious Affairs, record keeping was carried out at a high level; there were regular transfers of files from the archive of the Council for the Affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church to the Central State Archive of the RSFSR (later to the State Archive of the October Revolution). But since the activities of the bodies that oversaw the issues of religious organizations in the USSR were classified as “Secret”, a certain part of the archival documents is now inaccessible to researchers, since they are classified.
Thus, although not fully, it is possible to trace the attitude of the state to the Church in the USSR. To do this, you only need to obtain permission to work with open funds of the State Archives of the Russian Federation (F. 6991). To the credit of the employees of the State Archives, it should be noted that even today documents from government bodies continue to be declassified, albeit in minimal portions.
Unfortunately, we know the other side of the issue, such as the church position in relation to the Soviet state, the reaction of believers and the episcopate to the ongoing historical events only from the official printed organ of the Church - the Journal of the Moscow Patriarchate.
The ZhMP, undoubtedly, is of great importance for the study of the history of the Russian Church, but official church documents, appeals to the authorities, telegrams, journals of meetings of the Holy Synod, transcripts of conferences cannot be replaced with archival documents. For the researcher, the primary interest is resolutions, internal documents, photographs and other sources that allow a specific historical issue to be examined from a variety of perspectives. In addition, official documents, as a rule, are also subject to numerous edits, which cannot but be interesting.
Unfortunately, church archives today are closed to researchers, both secular and religious educational and research institutions. It seems that such a position cannot be maintained for long, and church archives must cease to be terra incognita for historical science.
First of all, the introduction into scientific circulation of even a small part of church documents can serve the Russian Orthodox Church well in all the variety of tasks facing it today. The experience of past generations, of bishops who led departments during times that were not the most favorable for the Church, can be useful to today’s generation of young bishops, clergy and clergy. And with a competent historical analysis of documents, one can find answers to many questions that will face the Church in the near future. History, as we know, is cyclical in nature, events repeat themselves, even if the circumstances of perception of a particular historical fact change.
The researcher does not necessarily have to work with personal documents; rather, on the contrary, documents of a general church nature are of particular importance. Under this condition, it is unlikely that the personality of any famous bishop or his actions aimed at preserving the position of the Church in the Soviet state will become a reason for his condemnation by modern church circles.
In addition to the official archival funds of the Moscow Patriarchate and other Synodal structures of the Russian Orthodox Church, there are other archives of other church organizations, such as theological schools of the Russian Orthodox Church, archives of monasteries and diocesan administrations. Unfortunately, the situation with these archives is even more complex.
The archives of theological schools of the Moscow Patriarchate could tell a lot about the revival of theological seminaries and academies in the USSR, about the approval of programs, about the first students, teachers, and the prospects for the development of theological institutions. But there are no archives of theological schools as such. Most often, there is some room where the personal files of students and teachers are stacked in a chaotic manner. The situation is no better with the diocesan archives. Since the staff of the diocesan administration is limited, the archivist is not allocated to a separate staff unit. The archive is handled by the secretary of the diocesan administration, and most often by a clerk, who is not able to conduct the current office work of the diocesan administration and at the same time engage in archival work related to the inventory of archival files, the compilation of indexes and other work that is extremely necessary for the preservation of documents reflecting the functioning of the diocese and the work of the bishop .
By the way, the diocesan archives for the most part contain not only official documents, but also private archives of the bishops who led the diocese, photographs, personal correspondence and other interesting documents, not only concerning the activities of the ruling bishop, but also the secretary of the diocesan administration, dean fathers and clergy of the diocese , employees of the diocesan administration, the bishop's house and theological schools, etc.
While church archives are closed to researchers, Church historians have to be content with the little that is published today as separate books. Most often this is memoir literature, which today is almost the only historical source; Through memoirs, the authors not only describe historical facts, but also express their personal attitude to what is happening. Among the most successful attempts to characterize and at the same time describe the events of history in the 20th century are the memoirs of Metropolitan Cornelius (Jacobs) of Tallinn and All Estonia. It is impossible to ignore the prepared and published collections of documents on the history of the Russian Orthodox Church and specific dioceses, as well as the analysis and reflections of the authors on the role and position of the Church in the modern period, which is based on the study of discovered documents.
In any case, all the works published recently are nothing more than a small fraction of what is necessary for a modern researcher to form an objective idea of the position of the Church in the USSR.
The full or at least partial opening of church archives will make it possible to look from a different position at the issues of the existence of the Church in the USSR, at the situation of believers in the Union republics, at the formation of the staff of clergy of a particular diocese. Many problems of the relationship between the Church and the state, which today are overgrown with legends and tales, will be destroyed as soon as the general public gains access to archival funds.
We can say with confidence that nothing shocking or compromising will be found in the departmental church archives; on the contrary, it seems that a detailed study of church documents will shed light on the personalities of many church workers who made a lot of efforts to preserve church communities and other religious organizations in the USSR in hard time. We will be able to come into contact with the events of recent history, which are still the locus desperatus for modern historical science, both ecclesiastical and secular.
It seems prudent and completely justified to give the advantages of working in church archives to church historians, since one cannot discount the ethical aspect, namely the formation of personal characteristics of people associated with the activities of the Church in the USSR. Whatever archival sources reveal to us, the attitude of us, living in the modern conditions of the formation and approval of a radically new church course, should be respectful towards those representatives of the Church, who were almost all, without exception, bishops, clergy and clergy of the difficult century of the past.
Page 1 of 2
Kostanov A.I.
Archives of the Russian Orthodox Church in the Far East (XVII - early XX centuries)
The spread of Orthodoxy in northeast Asia and the Pacific Islands, which began in the mid-17th century, is associated with the development of these territories by Russia. This is how it has been since the baptism of Rus', wherever Russians appeared, first of all they built a temple, around which life, both spiritual and secular, began.
The history of Russian statehood, the entire system, way of life and culture of Russian life is inseparable from the history of Orthodoxy in our country. The manifestations of this relationship are varied. This explains, in particular, the increased public attention to the activities of the Russian Orthodox Church, which has accumulated enormous documentary and book wealth over the past centuries. This is the basis for a wide range of research interests in the history and state of the source base of the Russian Orthodox Church, its archival and library collections, formed both in the pre-revolutionary period and as a result of the activities of Soviet institutions during the period of persecution of the Church and the establishment of total control over it.
Over the past decade, researchers from the Far East, including historians, museum and archival workers, clergy, and representatives of the local history community, have actively participated in the study of problems in the history of the Russian Orthodox Church. The bibliographic index “Christianity in the Far East”, recently published by FENU staff, includes 448 scientific works published since the 80s of the 19th century. to 1999 1
Meanwhile, the development of this issue continues both in Russia and abroad. This is evidenced by the subsequent materials of the international scientific conference in Vladivostok (April 19-21, 2000) published. 2
and regional scientific and practical conference in Khabarovsk (October 24-26, 2000). 3
________________________________
1
Christianity in the Far East: Bibliographic Index / Compiled by: M.B. Serdyuk, L.V. Odintsova, E.A. Bebneva. - Vladivostok: DVGU Publishing House, 2000. P. 5-49
2 Christianity in the Far East. Proceedings of the international scientific conference. Vladivostok: Far Eastern State University Publishing House, 2000. - Part I. - P. 260; Part II. - P. 104.
3 Spiritual life of the Far East: Materials of the regional scientific and practical conference. -Khabarovsk: Publishing house. House "Private Collection", 2000. P. 320.
_________________________________
The emerging multi-vector approach and genre diversity of scientific publications (monographs, books, brochures, scientific and popular science articles, reports and messages, reviews of archival and library collections, etc.) allow us to talk about the formation of a modern historiographical base for the history of Orthodoxy in the Far East. In turn, this is expressed in identifying a number of key problems that make it possible to determine the prospects for further research. One of these problems is, of course, the study of the documentary base, which allows us to comprehensively illuminate the role of Orthodoxy in the life of the population of the region.
The article brought to the attention of readers is devoted to the archival aspects of this problem, including an assessment of the state of archival funds formed in the activities of the Russian Orthodox Church in the Far East, as well as the history of their formation. This task is relevant both for academic researchers and for practicing archivists, who are equally interested in tracing the fate of the most significant archival complexes, identifying the scale of losses of historical sources and identifying ways to compensate for documentary gaps in the church history of the Far East.
It should be noted that archivists have long been making attempts to understand the complex of problems associated with the preservation and scientific use of archival funds of church origin located in state repositories of Russia. One of the first steps in this direction was taken on June 1, 1992, when in the conference hall of the Moscow Patriarchate, on the initiative of the Russian Society of Historian-Archivists, a round table meeting was held on the topic: “Participation of archives and the Church in the preservation and use of historical and cultural heritage of Russia". 4
Large-scale work began, culminating in the creation of two interarchival indexes on the documentary funds of the Russian Orthodox Church. 5
They give a general idea of the geography of church archives in the Far East, which are now located in a number of federal and regional (regional, territorial) state archives. This is due to the fact that over the course of three and a half centuries, the church structure of the Far Eastern outskirts of Russia has changed repeatedly, which inevitably affected the structure of archival funds and the composition of documents that have reached us.
4
See: Archives and the Church - ways to cooperation (from the verbatim report of the round table meeting) // Bulletin of the Archivist. - 1992. - No. 4(10). - P. 42-84; No. 5(11). - P. 43-61; Starostin E.V., Sidorova N.Yu. Church archives of Russia. (Experience in creating a directory) // Bulletin of the Archivist. -1993. - No. 11(13). - pp. 96-100.
5 History of the Russian Orthodox Church in documents of the federal archives of Russia: An annotated directory-index. - M., 1993. P. 681; History of the Russian Orthodox Church in documents from regional archives of Russia: An annotated directory-index. - M, 1995. P. 397.
__________________________________
In Russia, church archives have traditionally been distinguished by a high degree of systematization of documentary complexes. Back in the 16th century. The Moscow Metropolitan House - the central institution of the Russian Orthodox Church (before the establishment of the patriarchal throne in Moscow in 1589) - developed various samples of documents, compiling from them manuals and forms, which clearly showed “how to write from the saint to the viceroy”, “how to write vacation pay to the priest and other bishoprics,” “how to write a letter to the abbot,” etc. Church officials and clerks were often hired to work in the offices of secular rulers. The Patriarchal Archive was the largest Russian medieval repository of documents. Moscow patriarchal house at the end of the 16th century. and throughout the 17th century. administratively, it was a single complex system of various institutions, being in fact a semi-autonomous structure that existed parallel to the Russian state system. In the 17th century, which became the era of the conquest of Siberia, several orders were in effect under the Patriarchal House, similar in structure and functions to state administrative institutions. The archive of the Patriarchal House was a complex of storage facilities containing extremely diverse current and ancient documentation.
With the abolition of the patriarchate under Peter I, the extensive command system of the Patriarchal House was destroyed, and its institutions were disbanded and subordinated to secular state institutions. The previously unified archive of the House also disintegrated. A significant part of his documents ended up at the disposal of the Holy Synod, forming the Synodal Collection of Scrolls and Letters. Everything else was transferred to individual government institutions, in particular, the College of Economy. Currently, the bulk of the order documentation of the Patriarchal House is distributed among several funds of the RGADA, and the Synodal Collection belongs to the Department of Manuscripts of the State Historical Museum. 6
A similar system of office work was formed in some of the largest dioceses. In 1621, the Siberian Archdiocese was founded with its center in Tobolsk. The rapid growth of the archive of the Tobolsk Bishop's House is evidenced by the composition of the "copy book", which includes only for the period 1621-1626. 108 different documents related to the House, which by no means exhausts the composition of the entire archive. 7
_______________________________
6 Volodikhin D.M. Archives of the Russian Middle Ages. - M., 1996. P. 5-17,19
7
Right there. P. 20.
_______________________________
As is known, in the process of developing Siberia and the Far East, the Russian Orthodox Church not only expanded its sphere of influence through the Christianization of local peoples, but also performed an important state function, which at the third All-Russian Missionary Congress, held in Kazan in 1897, was formulated as follows Thus, “Orthodoxy should have an educational influence on the development and strengthening of the principles of monarchism and the ideas of nationalism in the people’s self-awareness.” 8
Therefore, the state not only provided all possible assistance to Orthodoxy in the Far East, but also through the Synod (from the 20s of the 18th century) constantly controlled the activities of the Church.
________________________
8
Skvortsov V.M. On the church-social and state significance of missionary work: Speech before the start of the meeting of the 3rd All-Russian Missionary Congress in Kazan. - Kyiv, 1897. P. 3.
________________________
A mass of documentation from all the dioceses of Russia and foreign missions (China, Japan) flocked to the Synod. Therefore, in his archive, which is now part of the RGIA in St. Petersburg, several valuable sets of documents were formed (fond 796 - the office of the Holy Synod; fund 797 - the office of the chief prosecutor of the Synod, etc.). They comprehensively cover the activities of the Russian Orthodox Church in the Far East, but a detailed description of them would force us to go beyond the chosen topic. In this case, it is more important for us to talk about the fate of the lesser-known and studied church archives of the Far East.
The main sets of documents characterizing the activities of the Russian Orthodox Church in a specific territory were formed in diocesan administrations (ecclesiastical consistories). In essence, consistories were a purely bureaucratic type of institution of a “spiritual department”, within the structure of which a large office operated and an archive was formed. Most consistories had an independent position of “archivist”. Both clergy and ordinary officials served in consistories. But it is precisely thanks to them that modern historians have at their disposal fairly complete funds of spiritual consistories. It should be taken into account that over the course of three and a half centuries, the church structure of the Far Eastern lands has changed repeatedly, which was reflected in the structure of archival funds and the composition of documents that have come down to us.
At the end of the 17th century. Russia was divided into 24 dioceses, of which the most impressive in terms of territory was the Siberian (Tobolsk) diocese, headed by an archbishop and later a metropolitan. It originally included the churches of the Far East. Its huge archive is still located in the Tobolsk branch of the state archive of the Tyumen region (f. 156, 36407 d., 1721-1919). 9 In 1725, to administer the churches and monasteries of Eastern Siberia, another diocese was established under the supreme authority of the bishop of Irkutsk and Nerchinsk, with its seat in Irkutsk. He was in charge of the churches of Okhotsk, Kamchatka, Russian America, as well as the Beijing spiritual mission. The consistory archive of the Irkutsk diocese is much smaller than the Tobolsk one, but also very impressive, stored in the state archive of the Irkutsk region (f. 50, 12602 d., 1725-1919). 10 Historically, it is supplemented by documents of the Irkutsk Bishop's House, selected in the RGADA from the collection "Cases with a famous title (f. 1390 - Irkutsk Bishop's Order, 28 days, 1740-1742). 11
In 1840, the Kamchatka diocese was formed under the leadership of the Bishop of Kamchatka, Kuril and Aleutian. Its documentary materials are fundamental for studying the history of Orthodoxy in the Far East and Russian America. The location of the bishop's residence changed several times. First it was Novo-Arkhangelsk on the island of Sitkha, then the port of Ayan, the city of Yakutsk and, finally, from I860 - the city of Blagoveshchensk. Therefore, the archives of the Kamchatka diocese turned out to be very scattered and are currently located in the cities of Vladivostok, Blagoveshchensk, Yakutsk and Khabarovsk. In addition, after the sale of Alaska to the United States in 1867, a significant part of the diocesan archive ended up outside Russia.
The surviving large documentary complexes of the Kamchatka Ecclesiastical Consistory are located in the Russian State Historical Archive of the Far East (f. 1009, 2081 days, 1812-1923. This fund also includes documents of the Annunciation Diocesan Council) and the State Archive of the Amur Region (f. 4,834 days, 1798-1923). 1922). A small archival fund of the Kamchatka Ecclesiastical Consistory, consisting of scattered files and documents, was also formed in the State Archives of the Khabarovsk Territory (f. 7-i, 5 d., 1859-1891). 12
In addition, in Yakutsk, in the National Archive of the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia), a relatively small part of both the consistory archive of the Kamchatka diocese (f. 227,216, 1856-1910) and documents about its activities presented in the church funds were deposited Kolyma region and Chukotka. 13
__________________________________
9
History of the Russian Orthodox Church in documents from regional archives of Russia: An annotated directory-index. - M, 1993. P. 595.
10 State Archive of the Irkutsk Region: Guide. - Irkutsk, 1975. P.74.
11 Central State Archive of Ancient Acts of the USSR: Guide: In 4 volumes - M, 1997. - Vol. 3. - Ch. 1. - P. 725.
12 Central State Archive of the RSFSR Far East: A brief inter-archival reference book (on the funds of the same name in the central, regional, regional archives of the Far East). 1758-1982 - Tomsk. 1992. P. 14.
13 A brief guide to the funds of the Central State Archive of the YSSR with branches (1701-1985), - Yakutsk, 1985. P. 39-42.
______________________________________
Since January 1, 1899, the church organization of the Far East has undergone changes. The Kamchatka diocese was reorganized. The city of Vladivostok, a number of territories of the Primorsky region, as well as the island of Sakhalin, which were part of it, were separated into an independent Vladivostok diocese, headed by the Bishop of Vladivostok and Kamchatka (the center is the city of Vladivostok). The former Kamchatka diocese began to be called Blagoveshchensk, and its bishop - Amur and Blagoveshchensk (diocesan center - the city of Blagoveshchensk).
The archive of the Vladivostok spiritual consistory is presented quite fully in the collection of the Russian State Historical Archive of the Far East (f. 244, 3344 d., 1857-1922). 14 As for the archive of the Annunciation diocese, already in Soviet times it turned out to be disunited. Most of it is also stored in the Russian State Historical Archive of the Far East (f. 757, 4040 d., 1893-1922), and a fairly large array of documents is located in the State Archive of the Amur Region (f. 29, 1403 d., 1899-1922) . 15
______________________________________
14
Central State Archive of the RSFSR Far East: Guide. Pre-revolutionary period. -Tomsk, 1961. -T. I. - P. 233-
15 Central State Archive of the RSFSR Far East: Brief interarchival reference book... P. 14.
Even with a general acquaintance with the passport data of the archival funds of the Kamchatka, Vladivostok and Blagoveshchensk spiritual consistories, attention is drawn to the discrepancy between the extreme dates of the documents stored in them and the actual chronological framework of their existence as fund-formers. This suggests that for a long time the archival funds of consistories were divided and moved arbitrarily, often under the influence of external circumstances that were not always favorable for the preservation of documents.
Diocesan administrations (consistories) were subordinate to the Synod and, on their territory, were in charge of the affairs of churches and monasteries, and resolved all issues related to the “spiritual department.” They conducted the main correspondence with the Synod and representatives of the “secular authorities” - governors, governors, mayors, etc. Numerous decrees, circulars, instructions came from here, and numerous reports flowed here from church parishes and monasteries. Therefore, their archives accumulated a very important array of historical sources, diverse in species composition. The consistory funds contained decrees and manifestos of emperors on a wide range of issues related to the activities of the Russian Orthodox Church; decrees and circulars of the Synod, correspondence of bishops with representatives of government authorities (governors general of Eastern Siberia and the Amur region, military governors of regions of the Far East, heads of districts, etc.) on missionary activities, on the construction of churches, the opening of parish schools, the collection of yasak from the natives, statistical reports on the state of churches, etc.; annual reports of ecclesiastical boards and reviews of the state of affairs in dioceses; service records of clergy, reports, reports, petitions of priests and missionaries; descriptions, plans, estimates and statements for the construction and reconstruction of churches; parish books and books of marriage searches, passport books and marriage documents, subscriptions given upon acceptance of Orthodoxy by persons who previously belonged to a schism or other religions, etc.
It must be emphasized that some materials from the collections of spiritual consistories go far beyond the scope of purely historical and church issues. They contain a lot of information on the history of public education, the ethnography of small nationalities of Siberia and the Far East, and about historical and cultural monuments. For example, one of such sources, which has not only scientific but also enormous practical value, is metric books. At first glance, this is a fairly simple type of document containing records of baptisms, marriages and deaths. But in research practice, the use of church registers can be multifaceted. In generalized form, data on fertility and mortality allow us to trace the dynamics of demographic processes in individual localities and regions. Records of the baptism of “foreigners” provide detailed insights into the missionary activities of Orthodox priests.
Parish books are the most complete and reliable genealogical source, the main feature of which is its mass and, most importantly, all-class nature. All other genealogical documents refer, as a rule, to a specific class. The metric books cover the overwhelming majority of the population, and since the marriage of an Orthodox Christian with a person of another religion, the baptism of children born to them also took place in Orthodox churches, then, accordingly, the circle of persons mentioned in this source expands even more.
Metric records are widely used in the development of genealogical problems and the fulfillment of requests of a socio-legal nature in the practical activities of state archives. They allow you to clarify the dates and biographical information of individual personalities when working on name indexes, reference books, dictionaries, when preparing monographs, articles, etc.
When reviewing the archives of the Russian Orthodox Church in the Far East, it is necessary to take into account that the administrative boundaries and church structure of the region throughout the 19th - early 20th centuries. geographically did not always coincide. Therefore, the archival funds of the Kamchatka, Vladivostok and Blagoveshchensk spiritual consistories, although they are the main ones for the Far East, but their sources almost do not cover the Kolyma Territory and Chukotka, which in 1869 were transferred to the independent Yakut diocese (the center is the city of Yakutsk). It was in charge of churches that had previously been subordinate to the Irkutsk and, since 1840, Kamchatka spiritual consistories. They contained old archives and libraries dating back to the era of Russian pioneers. For example, the Lower Kolyma Church, as the focus of missionary activity (Saint-Kelsky and Elombala missionary camps), at the beginning of the 20th century was the custodian of a rich collection of church books (including ancient ones), icons and paintings. Her archive contained “papers” from the mid-18th century. (royal manifestos, consistory messages, missionary diaries, clergy registers, etc.). There was an equally valuable archive in Sredne-Kolymsk. 16 In general, the church archives of the northeastern part of the Far East, through which the main stream of Russian colonization of the region passed in the second half of the 17th - early 19th centuries, are much “older” than in the Amur region, Primorye or Sakhalin. The same can be said about the church archives of Transbaikalia, allocated to a separate diocese in 1894. Its diocesan administration was located in the city of Chita.
The earliest church documents in the Far East date back to at least the second half of the 17th century. They have not reached us, but their presence and content sometimes reflect later sources. So, in 1742 or 1743, in response to J. Lindenau’s request: “Have there never been any attacks from foreigners before...”, the answer came: “... There is no news about this in the archives of the office of the Okhotsk port, but Only at the Okhotsk Church in the Synodikon (and there is a commemoration) about the Tungus killed from the local lamas and Okhotsk Tunguses in different years is mentioned, namely, 52 people were killed in the year 170 on the Yudoma and on the Ina and Okhota rivers of Yakut servicemen, in 178 . - 66 people, in 186 - on the Urak River - 87 people, in 188 on the Yudoma River, the steward Danilo Biblikov and 62 servicemen, and all 268 people." 17 This is a message about the Synodikon of Okhotsk with a description of the events of 1662-1680. quite remarkable. Having reached the Pacific Ocean, the Cossacks brought this tradition - “klikati” to their fallen comrades, “eternal memory” along with those who suffered for Orthodoxy.
________________________________________
16
Sergeev I. Archive of the Kolyma Territory // Archival business. 1926. - No. VIII-XIX. P.116.
17 Quote by: Lindenau Ya.I. Description of the peoples of Siberia (first half of the 18th century).-Magadan, 1983. pp. 157-158.
In Siberia, this tradition originated under the first Tobolsk Archbishop Cyprian, at whose command a synod was drawn up for the “murdered” associates of Ermak. Having assumed the Tobolsk See in 1621, Cyprian was looking for an opportunity to canonize local ascetics and saints popular among the people, seeing in this one of the ways to fulfill his main mission - the Christianization of the annexed pagan region. 18
In general, there are very few early sources on the history of church colonization on the eastern outskirts of Russia, because Siberian monasteries were not distinguished by wealth. This was noted by N.N. Bakai, referring to two royal letters sent in 1622 to the Verkhoturye voivode, about providing assistance to the monasteries: Nikolsky for men, and Pokrovsky for women, in which “there were no images, books, or bells and nothing to exchange with.” This partly explains why monasteries did not become centers of chronicle writing in Eastern Siberia and the Far East. The point is really not that in the 17th century. Chronicles were a fading genre of historical narration, but the fact is that “the founders of the Siberian monasteries had to encounter completely unprepared soil for their labors and at first endure many hardships.” 19
And yet, the Cossack campaigns of the 17th century. there were contemporary chroniclers from among the ministers of the Church. This is confirmed by a fragment of a manuscript discovered in 1954 in the Department of Manuscripts and Rare Books of the Library of the Academy of Sciences. It describes one of the first campaigns to Kamchatka by Luka Morozko and Ivan Golygin in 1695-1696. According to B.P. Polevoy, the author of the manuscript, compiled from the stories of the Cossacks, is the priest of the Yakut Cathedral Church of the Holy Trinity, Yakov Stepanov, who served in Anadyr. By the way, it was Father Jacob who first delivered to Yakutsk an unprecedented “letter on paper from foreign hands” - a document written in Japanese hieroglyphs. 20
The traditions of Russian chronicle writing were preserved in some monasteries in Eastern Siberia for a very long time. This, in particular, is evidenced by the recently published “Historical Description of the Ambassadorial Spaso-Preobrazhensky Monastery of the Irkutsk Diocese...”, dated 1806-1807. 21
_________________________________________
18
Skrynnikov R.G. Siberian expedition of Ermak. - Novosibirsk, 1986. P. 16.
19 Bakai N.N. A general overview of the most important acts related to the history of the colonization of Siberia at the end of the 16th and 17th centuries. - Krasnoyarsk, 1891. P. 12-13.
20
Polevoy B.P. New information about the discovery of Kamchatka. - Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, 1997. -
Part 2. -S. 53-61.
21
Historical description of the Ambassadorial Spaso-Preobrazhensky Monastery of Irkutsk
dioceses // Russian pioneers in the Far East in the 17th-19th centuries. (Historical and archaeological research). -Vladivostok, 1998.-T. 3. -S. 70-82.
___________________________________________________
Although, strictly speaking, this, of course, is not a chronicle, but rather a “historical description” (i.e., a genre of scientific writing characteristic of the second half of the 18th - early 19th centuries), compiled in 1806-1807. based on information gleaned from archival
of this monastery of papers." 22 This does not diminish its importance as a source, since many monastic archives have not reached us. By the way, from similar “secular” descriptions it is known that other monasteries in Transbaikalia had rare documents from the time of their founding. For example, in the archives of the Trinity Selenga Monastery, built by decree of Tsar Fyodor Alekseevich and the blessing of Patriarch Joachim, two letters of the Siberian Metropolitan Paul “with the prescription of the patriarchal and royal commands” were “originally” kept. 23
The remoteness of Far Eastern churches from diocesan centers affected the state of their archives, which were rather poor in materials not only from the 17th century, but also from the beginning of the 18th century. Considering this circumstance, it is worth paying attention to the documents of the Kamchatka spiritual board, now included in that part of the archive of the Kamchatka spiritual consistory that is located in Blagoveshchensk in the funds of the State Archives of the Amur Region. Firstly, they allow us to trace in more or less detail the history of church archives in the Far East in the 19th century. Secondly, it was here that documents from the very first years of the Church’s activity on the Pacific coast of Russia were deposited. Many vicissitudes of the history of the Far East were reflected in the fate of this unique collection of documents, the earliest of which apparently dated back to the early 20s of the 18th century, when a spiritual government was established in Kamchatka, subordinate to the Irkutsk spiritual consistory. Over the next hundred years, a considerable archive accumulated in Petropavlovsk, which was in a rather neglected state.
It should be noted that the Irkutsk bishops were demanding of church office work. One of the first such documents is an instruction from the Irkutsk Spiritual Consistory to the Kamchatka Spiritual Board dated October 12, 1831. It sets out the archbishop’s resolution on the report of the embassy Archimandrite Theodorit with an order “for the mandatory fulfillment of all monasteries, abbots, spiritual boards and deans under the direct jurisdiction of the Consistory ". The reason for this was the carelessly drawn up report of Father Theodoret, which caused the displeasure of the bishop, who ordered “to order circularly, so that from now on all papers to the Consistory and to me should be written on a whole sheet: for the contrary means disrespect for the authorities.” 24
_______________________________________________
22 Sannikov A.P., Bychkov O.V. Commentary on the historical description of the Ambassadorial Spaso-Preobrazhensky Monastery // Russian pioneers in the Far East in the 17th-19th centuries. (Historical and archaeological research). - Vladivostok, 1998. - T. 3.- P. 83-88.
23 Description of the Irkutsk governorship in 1792. - Novosibirsk, 1988. P. 85.
24 GAAO. F. 4. Op. 1. D. 25. L. 1-1 vol.
________________________________________________
Subsequently, similar orders from the bishops were followed more than once, but locally, far from the Irkutsk authorities, they were not always carried out.
As in secular institutions of that time, individual priests showed concern for the preservation of old papers. In October 1834, the dean of Petropavlovsk, Archpriest Prokopiy Gromov, on his own initiative, ordered “to bring the disorganized Kamchatka spiritual administration of the Archive into legal order.” The order was carried out by board member priest Vasily Sizykh (in other documents - Father Vasily Sizykh - A.K.). The work of initially organizing the archive took him more than a year. In his report to the dean, Father Vasily reported that all the affairs of the Kamchatka spiritual government “from 1720 to the present year 1836, were sorted out according to the types of materials filed.” 25 A draft inventory of cases was also compiled, which, unfortunately, could not be found.
In all likelihood, the first attempts to scientifically use the church archives of Kamchatka date back to this time. It is known, for example, that the Petropavlovsk Archpriest Gromov corresponded with the outstanding historian of Siberia P.A. Slovtsov and repeatedly sent him historical information, as well as copies of documents from the spiritual government and other local archives. It was a large and labor-intensive job for those times. In one of the letters from P.A. Slovtsov wrote to him: “...How far you are abandoned; I received the letter dated October 15, 1837 in July 1838 - at a time when my manuscript about Siberia was in the printing house and this was the reason that I did not use the information in your letter reported. This can be rewarded in the 2nd book, which I have not yet taken up. I humbly ask you to notify: 1) (if possible) what is the name and how far is the hill near which Pavlutsky fell from the former Anadyr prison; ) who commanded Kamchatka after Pavlutsky, and is there a register of the commanders who came to replace each other...; 4) I read in a foreign book that the Kuril Islands were acquired by Russia around 1770, can this be explained by circumstances and persons; those who participated..." 26 As we can see, the scientist’s questions (some of them sound very modern) to his Kamchatka correspondent required thorough work with sources, and answering them required studying a lot of archival files.
_______________________________________________
25 GAAO. F. 4. Op. 1. D. 215. L. 9-9 vol.
26 Quote by: Bakai N.N. In memory of P.A. Slovtsov as a historian of Siberia. - Krasnoyarsk, 1918 From 10
________________________________________________
Today, most documents on the history of the Russian Orthodox Church are part of the Archival Fund of the Russian Federation and are stored mainly in federal archives, museums and libraries. These materials are available to researchers, but documents from modern institutions of the Russian Orthodox Church are extremely rarely introduced into scientific circulation. Experts express concern about the degree of completeness of their preservation, the lack of a single coordinating center in this matter, the degree of preparedness of documents for working with them and their accessibility for researchers. The editors of the magazine "Domestic Archives" asked clergy, church historians and researchers working with documents on church history to express their opinions on this issue. The materials of the round table were published in the new issue of the magazine "Domestic Archives" (2007. No. 4).
M.I. Odintsov, Head of the Department for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience of the Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights in Russian Federation, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor: In accordance with the nature of the existing by the beginning of the 20th century. relations between the Russian state and religious organizations, maintaining church records and preserving materials on the activities of church institutions was a responsibility for all religious organizations. This is precisely what predetermined the fact that we have a huge archival fund concerning the religious life of Russia. Many diocesan bishops of the Russian Church, realizing the importance of preserving historical evidence, demanded that church parishes, monasteries and religious educational institutions constantly take care of church archives and include in their composition not only official materials, but also a wide variety of other information about church life. For example, we can refer to the works of the famous church and public figure, Metropolitan of Novgorod Arseny (Stadnitsky). For decades, Vladyka carefully collected documents and materials with which he worked and which he received from numerous correspondents. His huge personal fund, now stored in the GARF, is an inexhaustible storehouse of information on the history of the Russian Church in the 19th–20th centuries. He demanded the same approach to archival materials from his subordinates wherever he happened to serve.
After the revolutionary events of 1917, in the new state-church relations, official documentation of state significance (primarily acts of civil status) migrated from church funds to state archives, and the remaining part, recognized by the state as “unnecessary”, due to this circumstance remained in church institutions. Wars, revolutions, anti-religious ideological campaigns, redrawing borders between states and within states have had a negative impact on the composition of church archives - much has been lost irretrievably.
But let’s also give credit to those unmercenary people of the 1920s and 1930s who, by hook or by crook, managed to convince some of the state repositories to accept the “priest’s documents.” Thanks to them, we, for example, can see, read and explore the original materials of the Local Church Council of 1917–1918. Efforts to preserve materials about church life and such representatives of the Bolshevik elite as V.D. were extremely useful. Bonch-Bruevich, P.A. Krasikov A.V. Lunacharsky, P.G. Smidovich.
It’s a paradox, but the “saviors” of many church documents were also all kinds of punitive, controlling or ideological institutions of the Soviet era. It is clear that this was done solely from pragmatic aspirations, but this documentary layer often turns out to be the only source of our information about religious life in the USSR. Such, for example, is the fund of the Council for Religious Affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church (later - religious cults), stored in the GARF and containing tens of thousands of priceless documents.
The destruction of the USSR again had a detrimental effect on church archives, dooming them to division and loss.
The accessibility of church archives is not a problem of today. Suffice it to recall how difficult it was sometimes for Russian historians who turned to church topics to “penetrate” not only the archives of existing church institutions, but also the funds of state archives containing information on state-church relations necessary for their research. Often, numerous certificates, permits, approvals, and inspections were required. Likewise, in the Soviet era, the archives of church institutions or other institutions in contact with them were in state storage facilities in “closed” storage and were actually inaccessible. Only the last two decades have significantly changed the situation, and researchers can work with these materials. And we must thank again and again all the archivists who preserved documents on the history of our Fatherland.
The Soviet period aggravated the problem of archives of existing religious institutions. They were not in demand by the state; There were no private archives where they could be placed, and as a result, their fate largely depended on the personal initiative and desires of specific church officials. It can be argued that by the end of the Soviet period there were practically no such church archives.
The fate of archives at religious centers, including the Moscow Patriarchate, developed somewhat differently. In the post-revolutionary period, they all started from scratch, since documents and materials that previously belonged to them were requisitioned during various repeated searches. Gradually, a new body of documents was formed, which was completely closed to secular researchers. This situation continues today, when almost every church has an archive of this kind. Obviously, the question has arisen about developing rules according to which these archives could be transferred to state repositories.
Archimandrite Makariy (Veretennikov), Master of Theology, Professor of the Moscow Theological Academy, laureate of the Makariev Prize : Archives and the materials contained in them are the repositories of our memory, our heritage, present and future. Initially in Rus', archives existed at princely residences, bishops' departments, monasteries, churches, boyar estates, etc. Office materials that were no longer in immediate use were set aside and stored separately. Later they emerged as independent, primarily government institutions. At the same time, the established tradition of careful and careful recording and storage of documentation was continued. The fate of church archives was affected by trends in domestic politics.
After the revolution, the Church lost its land, and then the function of recording the civil status of the population; the relevant documentation was transferred to government agencies, and the range of church documents narrowed. The subsequent persecution of the Church and the clergy led to the massive destruction of church documentation. The surviving church documents in the archives are only a small part of the church records collection. It should be noted that the preservation of documentation, “evidence”, in subsequent times in an environment of constant repression was quite dangerous. Then repressive measures against the Church weakened, but ideological oppression continued and did not weaken until very recently. However, life went on and found a certain reflection in the documents. But the Church was more often staffed by people who had reached retirement age, whose “education” the authorities were less involved in and worried about less. True, the professionalism of such personnel could leave the best, but in the conditions of the survival of the Church this was quite acceptable. The condition of church archival materials depended on the qualities of the personnel through whose hands they passed.
With the beginning of perestroika, a dialogue between the public and the clergy arose. In January 1988, at a meeting of teachers and students of the Moscow Theological Academy and the Historical and Archival Institute, the question of the state of church archives was raised. Today we can talk about the archives of parish churches, monasteries, religious educational institutions, dioceses and central church institutions. To what extent they are formed depends, first of all, on the duration of the institutions themselves. There appear to have been no instructions from the central government on this issue. In theological educational institutions, in the curricula, if this issue is mentioned, it is mainly in a historical context.
B.L. Fonkic, corresponding member of the Academy of Athens, member of the International Committee on Greek Paleography, honorary doctor of the University of Thessaloniki. Aristotle, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor: I think that almost 50 years of experience in studying Greek manuscripts and documents, work in libraries and museums of Moscow, St. Petersburg, Kiev, Lvov, Venice, Vatican, Florence, Munich, Berlin, Athens, Athonite monasteries, Oxford, London, Paris, Madrid, Sofia and many others allow me to say a few words about Greek manuscript books and documents kept in the monasteries of the Christian East.
Almost 65 thousand Greek manuscripts of the 4th–19th centuries, thousands of documents from the Byzantine and post-Byzantine periods of Greek history have survived to our time. Almost half of the Greek manuscript books (probably about 30 thousand) are located in various repositories of the Greek world (within the borders of the four eastern patriarchates); as for documents, apparently at least 90% they belong to the Greek monastic archives and are located both in Greece itself (Athos, Meteora, Patmos, Thessalonica, etc.) and in Sinai, Palestine, and Cairo.
If all the manuscript funds concentrated in the state repositories of Europe have long been available for study, then the monastic collections of the Greek area, whether handwritten books or documents, to this day remain essentially inaccessible for their scientific development, for systematic work on them . Of course, the situation that existed in the 19th century has long since changed significantly for the better: many monastery libraries and archives are now well equipped; if you wish, you can even get a microfilm or other copy of any material, which is being (or is planned) in some places ) cataloging of funds. But with all this, even in places that seem to have been developed by science for a long time, a specialist may be faced with the reluctance of the custodians to open their funds, give out the necessary materials, or generally show at least something. In our community there is a well-known case when in the 70s. XX century The Sinaiites refused to give 17 manuscripts of Gregory Nazianzus to the famous Belgian scientist Jacques Noret for his work. I myself, despite all my connections and acquaintances in the Greek scientific world, encountered refusals (and the “explanations” of the reasons were at the level of outright lies) in Meteora, on Patmos and even on the Holy Mountain.
The situation is somewhat easier when you are interested in handwritten books. If it comes to documents, then you can come across obstacles that a lifetime will not be enough to overcome. Suffice it to recall the background to the publication of the “Archives of Athos” by French Byzantinists! There are storage facilities that are closed to anyone for decades. For many years now, for example, the Lavra of St. Afanasia on Mount Athos does not want to allow specialists to study its funds.
Everything would be fine if the owners themselves wanted and knew how to research and catalog manuscripts and documents. But this almost never happens! At best, outside specialists are brought in, but this rarely leads to a positive result.
It seems to me that it is impossible to overcome the current situation - at least in the coming decades: there are no forces in Greek society that would be interested in this - neither among secular figures of science and culture, nor, especially, among the Orthodox Church.
E.V. Starostin, Chairman of the section on problems of documents of church archives of the Central Council of the Russian Society of Historian-Archivists, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor: The Russian Orthodox Church has made a huge contribution to the development of the economic, socio-political, spiritual and cultural life of Russia. Entire centuries of our history would have turned out to be a continuous blank spot if the historical monuments that emerged from the bowels of the Russian Orthodox Church had not been preserved. Generations of the living, at a minimum, should be grateful to the unknown guardians of our common historical and cultural heritage.
In the pre-revolutionary era, the Russian Orthodox Church created an effective document storage system: church ancient depositories, consistory and diocesan archives functioned in the cultural centers of the country, and theological academies collected excellent collections. At the beginning of the 20th century. In Russian government circles, the issue of creating a central church repository on the basis of the Archives of the Holy Synod was seriously discussed. After 1918 the Church lost a lot. Over time, of course, the state needs to return its documentary heritage to the Russian Orthodox Church in the form of originals or copies, but only if it ensures decent storage and the possibility of use. The first steps of the Church in this direction after the collapse of the USSR are not very encouraging: if church hierarchs understand the importance of preserving historical and cultural heritage, they leave it until the Greek calendar. A modern archive is expensive, and even more expensive is the training of qualified personnel and the maintenance of the structure of archives as carriers of the cultural spiritual memory of the people.
Positive changes are certainly taking place: record keeping in church institutions and the current storage of documents have been restored; the process of reconstructing local archives is underway; The Patriarchal Library in St. Andrew's Compound, along with publications, began to accept church funds; the archives of the KGB and other repressive bodies were studied to identify documents about the new martyrs; two directories-indexes of archival documents on the history of the Russian Orthodox Church appeared; at the Orthodox St. Tikhon's University for the Humanities since 2001, students have received educational services in historical and archival studies; the CS ROIA section held the first international conference on the archives of the Russian Orthodox Church in 2003; The Institute of History and Archives has opened a specialization in church archives and is preparing to publish the 1st volume of a guide to documents of the Russian Orthodox Church preserved in the state archives of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus. The publication of this substantial almost thousand-page publication, in the preparation of which archivists from three Slavic countries participated, will hopefully serve to intensify the vital work of preserving our historical memory.
Priest Andrei Dudin, head of the Vyatka Diocesan Archive (VEA): In our diocese, the archive was recreated by decree of Archbishop Chrysanthus of Vyatka and Slobodsk on August 31, 1998.
It’s nice that the topic of preserving the archival heritage of the Russian Orthodox Church is once again relevant. Initially, it seemed that it consisted only in the lack of management of the archival fund of the Russian Orthodox Church, but the study of complexes of documents from the offices of different dioceses showed that the archival issue in the Church is a matter of the future. The vast majority of dioceses have been conducting their office work since the 1960s; it was insignificant in volume, so the office can handle this complex quite well. Over time, when the volume of diocesan records increases, the problem of storing and recording archival heritage will become more acute. In our diocese, it has already been resolved: the office stores documents for 10 years and transfers them to the VEA, diocesan parishes and departments of diocesan administration submit documents every 5 years, Vyatka Theological School - annually. This is the basic principle of compiling our archive. In addition, at the annual diocesan meeting, the head of the archive makes a special report in which he points out the shortcomings in this work in the parishes and ways to eliminate them.
Today there are 15 thousand units in VEA. archives, 47 funds, including early printed and handwritten books of the 16th–20th centuries. Most of the documents relate to the post-revolutionary period. This is not accidental, since the overwhelming majority of church archives, including the archive of the Vyatka Spiritual Consistory, after the closure of the diocese in 1936, were transferred to the State Archives of the Kirov Region. Among the most interesting are documents about repressed priests and laymen of the Vyatka land; a photographic fund constantly replenished with the help of parishioners, which contains over four thousand photographs of the clergy, churches of the diocese, and services from the end of the 19th century to the present.
VEA conducts excursions to the temples and monasteries of the city, takes part in pilgrimage trips, and the annual Trifonov educational readings. Archive staff prepare publications on historical topics in regional periodicals and the diocesan newspaper, exhibitions in museums and exhibition halls not only in the Kirov region, but also in other cities of Russia, in particular in Moscow, Vologda, Kostroma.
In 2007, as part of the 350th anniversary of the Vyatka diocese, the archive is preparing two exhibitions. On August 2, the exhibition “Vladyka Veniamin Tikhonitsky” will open, dedicated to the 50th anniversary of the death of this prominent hierarch of the Vyatka Church. Another exhibition will open in October in the building of the regional museum of local lore and, as fully as possible, will present the treasures of the funds (more than 300 exhibits) of the diocesan archive.
The archive pays significant attention to updating the material and technical base. In 2008, BEA will celebrate its 10th anniversary. The first guide to the archive's holdings is being prepared as a gift to researchers. Work in this direction continues.
V.F. Kozlov, head of the department of regional history and local history of the IAI RSUH, candidate of historical sciences, associate professor: The problem of accessibility and use of archival documents about the history and fate of churches and monasteries is becoming increasingly relevant today. Since the early 1990s. Only the Russian Orthodox Church has been given tens of thousands of churches and chapels, which have to be restored, collecting material for this in archives, libraries and museums. Communities are also faced with the task of writing and publishing a complete history of the temple and parish, organizing a current archive, and sometimes a simple museum exhibition.
It is known that almost all major archives of the Church, soon after the revolution of 1917, were transferred to state archives, i.e. were practically nationalized. Nevertheless, the documentation stored in state archives (funds of central, diocesan and parish church institutions - the Holy Synod, educational and charitable institutions, consistories, boards, committees, individual monasteries and churches) is not only accessible to researchers, but is also provided with scientific reference apparatus. The main problem that arises in this regard is the often high cost for communities of copying church documents for the needs of the temple, creating their own archive, museum, etc. Parishes should be given the right to widely copy former church documents at the cost of paper and consumables.
The same right should be given to the Church in the person of its parish and monastic communities when copying documents from institutions (administrative departments, church tables, cultural commissions, committees, etc.) stored in state archives that were involved in the 1920s–1980s. supervision of churches, repair and restoration work and storage of movable monuments (restoration workshops, museums, etc.). In the context of the almost complete cessation of documentation by churches of their life during the Soviet era, the funds of the above-mentioned state institutions often retain unique information about the last years of the life of the temple, its closure, and the fate of the property. Modern parishes should also have advantages in using these documents.
The problem of accessibility of visual sources – drawings, plans and, of course, photographs – is especially great for churches being restored. So, for example, for copying photographs in the photo library of the GNIMA named after. A.V. Shchusev (the funds of the Moscow Archaeological Society and the Central State Restoration Workshops) demand an exorbitantly high price from parishioners, as well as other categories of researchers. Modern church parishes have suffered greatly from state atheism in certain times, and they should be provided with the most favorable conditions for using documents stored in state archives.
At the same time, the modern Russian Orthodox Church has many archival problems. We have almost “lost” the 20-year history of the revival of churches and monasteries - perhaps one of the most vibrant and interesting periods in the history of the Church. The overwhelming majority of parish communities do not systematically record the events of their modern history, therefore many issues of the formation of communities, the transfer of churches to believers, repairs and restoration, beautification, and the organization of parish life remained undocumented. Modern parish reporting will leave history with dry, brief and rather boring reports. Perhaps we need to recall the obligatory practice before the revolution of keeping detailed church chronicles in each parish.
Temples and monasteries are playing an increasingly important role in the modern sociocultural life of cities and villages, regional history, and the development of the local history movement. The organization of systematic documentation of church and parish life and close cooperation of the Church with central and regional archival institutions is the most important common task. By the way, such cooperation could also be aimed at archival processing and introduction into scientific circulation of materials about the activities of the Church after 1917 that are still inaccessible to researchers. Such work has already begun in several regions.
Archpriest Boris Danilenko, director of the Synodal Library of the Moscow Patriarchate, candidate of theology: The fate of church archives in modern Russia worries many experts, and for good reason. Before the revolution, the archival work of the Russian Orthodox Church, or more precisely, the Office of the Orthodox Confession, was brought to its proper height. When in our time we talk about an exemplary church archive, the first thing that comes to mind is the archive of the Holy Synod, which until recently was located in the bowels of the Russian State Historical Archive in St. Petersburg in the Synod building. Unfortunately, this archive has not been accessible to researchers for several years now. The Synodal Archive, meanwhile, was not only a model in terms of systematization and preservation of unique documents, but also an example of the stability of archival storage. From the moment of its creation until the first years of the new millennium, it was located in the same place, known to every church scientist, every Russian historian-archivist.
The Synodal Archives contains materials relating to the construction of churches and monasteries in the 18th–20th centuries: elevations of facades made in ink and watercolor with a special artistic gift. Many of the archive files contain truly unique information regarding the biographies of Russian hierarchs. Without knowledge of this archival collection, it is impossible to talk about the materials of the Study Committee and Orthodox spiritual missions, personal collections of church scholars and unfinished publishing projects.
Anyone who had the good fortune to work with synodal documents in the building on Senate Street opened old cardboard folders with signatures made in purple ink by the unforgettable K.Ya. Zdravomyslov, the last head of the Synodal Archives, can say without exaggeration: “I am involved in the Synodal era.” These folders stood on ancient shelves made many decades ago, no one dared to disturb their order and harmony... One could only be amazed that neither the First Imperialist War, nor the October Revolution, nor the Great Patriotic War, nor the Siege of Leningrad, nor the repressions of 1930 -1950s, neither the “Khrushchev thaw” with its atheistic frosts had any impact on the fate, or more precisely, the location of this church treasure in the cultural space of the city on the Neva. Nowadays, the Synodal Archive, like the entire RGIA, has been moved to a new location, and one can only console ourselves with the hope that a little time will pass and we, as before, will be able to use its treasures.
Of course, working conditions in the archive were bad. I remember how, five years ago, being there on frosty winter days, I was amazed at the resilience of the archive workers: they, wrapped in down scarves, worked at a temperature of thirteen degrees. They looked like January bullfinches... And it was difficult for the researchers themselves to work in poorly heated rooms, but first of all it is worth bowing to the heroism of the archive employees, continuers of the work of their pre-revolutionary predecessors. They became almost the only opponents of moving the archive.
I believe that a terrible mistake was made. Every place has its own genius. And, of course, the Synodal Archive also had a genius loci. Did he survive? Probably, each of the researchers who worked with the documents of this collection has the right to both personify such a genius and deny the very fact of his existence. But this is a personal matter... But none of us has the right to so treacherously dispose of the fate of the most significant church archive in Russia! Apparently, in a hurry, they again forgot about the scientific community - historians, philologists, theologians, in a word, about all those who know a lot about archival matters...
The future fate of the personal archives of modern Orthodox hierarchs, clergy, and church scientists is also a question about which we have to worry today. In Russia, even in the last century, a certain culture of the epistolary genre was alive. People wrote letters to each other. There are unique collections that include correspondence between church hierarchs, church scientists, representatives of the white and black clergy and simply the Russian intelligentsia with clergy. Suffice it to recall, probably, the best collection in this regard by N.N. Glubokovsky, stored in the Plekhanov House, in the branch of the manuscript department of the Russian National Library. People wrote to each other because they did not have the opportunity to speak “mouth to mouth” and could not meet in person. These letters contained everything: stories about what happened in the scientific, academic and church world, and reactions to certain events in pre-revolutionary Russia. The most intimate thoughts were entrusted to letters, which were sometimes framed in the form of entire essays, essays... But time passed, and everything changed. First the telephone appeared, then the Internet, and, probably, after several decades, it will no longer be possible to speak about the work of modern humanities scholars in general and theologians in particular based on the materials of their correspondence. It seems to me that now our letters are of a purely clerical, notification nature. Even in the church environment they usually have no scientific significance. The discussion of this or that event does not take place in the form familiar to our predecessors - in the best case for later researchers, it comes down to electronic correspondence. It is difficult to find a written message that has emerged within the last year that sheds light on a particular research question in a field such as church history. The exception is international correspondence. Sometimes scientists still entrust their most intimate thoughts to notes and letters, turning to distant colleagues. But this is most likely a kind of tribute to the conspiracy theories of past years.
One of the problems of modern church archives is that they, like their sister libraries and museums, arise spontaneously. There are no church-wide regulations on the need to create them at diocesan administrations, monasteries, religious educational institutions and, especially, parishes. Where there are proactive and sufficiently professionally trained specialists, something happens. There are, thank God, good examples. Of course, “due to official necessity”, sooner or later office archives appear in all church institutions. But an organized “archival space” still does not exist in the Russian Orthodox Church. Dialogues are needed: dialogues between people who work as church scholars in secular archives, in secular manuscript collections, and between specialists who, representing the interests of government agencies and certain secular institutions, work or want to work with church materials. It seems to me that joint conferences, meetings, and dialogues are rarely held.
Recreated in 1987, the Synodal Library of the Moscow Patriarchate has become a “quiet haven” for some collections of church documents of interest to researchers. We are currently preparing a number of collection descriptions for printing. The collections of the Synodal Library, including its archival part, are available to all categories of readers. By the way, we took the principle of accessibility as fundamental even at the initial stage of the library’s activities.
Concluding what has been said, I would like to note that we, church people, would like to see in the activities of state archival institutions of modern Russia a model that can be imitated without fear of accountability before God and people.
During genealogical research, there comes a time when all relatives have been interviewed, online directories have been viewed, and only a search in the archives can help in further research of the genealogy. If you are looking for information about your ancestors born in Tsarist Russia, registries can help you.
Metric book (obsolete) - a register, a book for the official recording of acts of civil status (births, marriages and deaths). Registries of parishes were kept in Russia before the revolution in church parishes by the clergy or special civil officials. After the revolution, they were conducted only by government officials. The metric book was calculated for a year. It consisted of three parts:
- "about those who are born." In addition to the serial number, the first part indicated the date of birth and baptism, place of residence, class affiliation, first and last name of the father, gender of the newborn and the name given to him. Sometimes it was indicated which of the priests baptized the child and where this ceremony took place - in the parishioner’s home or in the church. At the end, results could be given about the number of births per year.
- "about those getting married." The second part of the metric book also contained the serial number and date of the marriage. Information about the age of the bride and groom could be provided.
- "about the dying." The original section of the third part contains information about the place of residence of the deceased, his class status, first and last name, age and cause of death. The second and third parts also summed up the results for the year.
After the adoption in 1918, the “Code of Laws on Acts of Civil Status” were repealed and replaced by act (or register) books in the registry office. After the revolution, registry books were transferred to the registry office, and only subsequently to the archives.
To find the registry book you need, you must determine the church parish of the locality you are interested in. Refer to the reference literature of the 19th - early 20th centuries. Next, you should identify the parish church where your ancestors were baptized. Using archival reference books, find which archive stores the metrical registers of the church you are interested in. Write down the number of the fund, inventory and file.
In the archive, find the metric books of the specified church for the corresponding year of birth or marriage. If these years are unknown, you will have to look through several books for different years.
The section “about marriage” may indicate the age of marriage, the full names and patronymics of the parents, their place of residence, class and religious affiliation. The latter allows you to continue the search for their parents in the registers. This is how we get another generation of our ancestors.
Good luck with your search,
FamilySpace team.
