This book by Prof. A. P. Lebedev is a logical continuation of his work on the history of the Byzantine Church in the ΙΧ-ΧΙ centuries. This was a very difficult period in the history of Byzantium. On the one hand, there was a decline in its political importance and the level of state life, and on the other hand, there was a period of rise in Byzantine culture and education (the so-called "Komnenos" and "Palaiologos" revival). A. P. Lebedev examines the internal life of the Byzantine Church in all its aspects: the relationship between the Church and the state in theory and in practice, the moral state of society in a given period, the state of Byzantine education, and the material and moral situation of the clergy. The vivid characteristics of the emperors and the patriarchs of Constantinople greatly enliven the study.

This work, like all the works of A. P. Lebedev, has a solid scientific basis in the form of Russian and foreign studies, and is based on a serious analysis of various sources. It is written in a lively scientific language and will be of interest both to specialists in the history of Byzantium and the Byzantine Church, and to a wide range of readers.

The publication is provided with indexes and the latest literature on the subject of research.

ru ExportToFB21, FictionBook Editor Release 2.6 19.07.2013 OOoFBTools-2013-7-19-9-26-1-813 1.0 Historical Sketches of the State of the Byzantine-Eastern Church "Aletheia" St. Petersburg 1998

Historical Sketches of the State of the Byzantine-Eastern Church from the End of the Eleventh to the Middle of the Fifteenth Century

From the beginning of the Crusades to the fall of Constantinople in 1453

I. A View of the Mutual Relations of the Greek and Latin Churches

The times of the Byzantine patriarchs Photius (in the ninth century) and Michael Cerularius (in the eleventh century) are quite rightly considered to be the epoch when the real division of the Church into Eastern and Western took place. But there is no doubt that this mutual enmity between the two sister churches would have subsided, would have been smoothed out, and in the course of time there would have arisen between them, if not unity, complete and complete, then at least more or less peaceful relations would have been established. But this was not destined to follow. The reason for this was the new and new clashes that took place in the mutual relations between the Greeks and the Latins during the rest of the existence of the Greek Empire in the twelfth, thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries. These circumstances not only did not contribute to the pacification of the enmity between the two above-mentioned Churches, but further intensified the mutual antagonism.

In looking at the history of the Eastern Church from the twelfth to the fifteenth centuries, i.e., before the fall of Byzantium, I would like first of all to explain what caused the progressive growth of the dislike of the Eastern and Western churches, and in what remarkable facts this is reflected.

One of the significant factors that contributed to this alienation of two kindred peoples, the Greeks and the Latins, was the Crusades, which began at the end of the eleventh century and lasted until the end of the thirteenth century. The Western Crusades brought the Greeks' dislike of the Latins to the highest degree of tension. First of all, these campaigns had the consequence that they flooded the Greek Empire with all sorts of entrepreneurs with economic tasks, immigrants from the West, who harmed the economic well-being of Greece.

It is not for us to inquire into what this depended on, only it is certain that from that time onwards industry, commerce, and capital passed into the hands of foreigners in the Greek Empire. It is true that even up to this time, especially the Venetians, had noticeably taken over commercial affairs in Greece; but from the twelfth century this became a kind of fatal law for the Greeks. Latins appeared in all the cities and towns of the Byzantine Empire; in Constantinople they occupied whole quarters. But what is worse of all: they were all moneyed people, who in the consciousness of their wealth looked with contempt at the Greeks. A Greek historian of the twelfth century (Kinnam) remarks about the Venetians: having the right to conduct trade without toll, without duty, they, "soon and immensely rich, became arrogant, began to treat (our) citizens as slaves, and treated in this way not only people from the lower classes, but also those who enjoyed great honors among the Greeks." [1] Another Greek historian of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries (Nicetas Choniates) speaks of the same Venetians in general: "They exchanged their native city for Constantinople in crowds and families, multiplied and grew stronger there, acquired great wealth and began to show insolence and pride, so that they not only were hostile to the Greeks, but did not pay attention to the royal threats and prescriptions. Their impudence surpassed all patience." [2] Of course, the Greek people could not cherish love and sympathy for the Latins, who had become rich at their expense and who were extremely conceited. This feeling could easily be mixed with the feeling of dislike that already existed among the Greeks as a result of the recent religious rupture between the Eastern and Western Churches. According to the customs of that time, when establishing each foreign trading post, first of all, a church was erected, then the square was smeared, houses, shops and shops were built. The trading post was something separate, closed, with a church in its center, where services were performed according to the customs and rites of the Western Church, where the liturgy was celebrated on unleavened bread, sang and read in the symbol: filioque, etc.3 How could one not feel the strongest hatred for these rich and proud Latins, because they, having their own churches, their own priests, without a doubt, looked upon themselves as the only true Christians in the community of heretics. On the other hand, the Latins in this case also had a reason to despise the Greeks even more, since the Greeks responded to contempt with contempt and avoided Latin worship. Thus, the influx of Latin foreigners to the East in the era of the Crusades was one, albeit small, but still a stumbling block, against which the religious unity of the Greeks and the Latins was more and more shattered. The main reason why the Crusades served to increase enmity between these Churches was, however, not in this, but in the barbarism, robbery and murder with which these campaigns of the Knights of the Cross accompanied the Greeks. The very first crusade terrified and numbed the Greeks. Could it be that these are our Christian brothers? This is the question that involuntarily came to the mind of every Greek when he saw the crusader hordes led by Peter the Hermit, Gottschalk. These advanced crowds of crusaders from the very first time persuaded the Orthodox against Western piety and piety. Their path was marked by such barbarism as the Greeks did not expect. The first crusaders were people who belonged to the lower, coarse, and depraved class of society. Of course, the Greeks, who bore the brunt of this campaign on their shoulders, had no time for the question: were they the best people of the West or the scum of society? They saw in them only villains who came from the West with the most sacred goals; hatred from these crusaders was transferred to the entire Christian West. In the opinion of the historian of the Crusades Michaud, the subjects of the Greek Empire suffered more from the first crusades than the Turks themselves from their first exploits. [4] True, the subsequent retinues of the Crusaders behaved incomparably better than their predecessors, but it was no longer possible to eradicate from the minds of the Orthodox people the prejudices against the Latins, represented by the first Crusaders. On the other hand, the leaders of the later crusader squads could not restrain the turbulent crowd and themselves keep within the limits of moderation. Many petty quarrels and skirmishes arose, and the result was that the Greeks saw in the Latins only people devoted to the deeds of darkness, blasphemously covering up the greatest crimes with the sign of the Cross. 5 It is not surprising, then, that the Crusades were, in the eyes of the Greeks, the greatest evil that the Latins ever declared themselves to be. As one modern Greek historian (Dositheus of Jerusalem) aptly put it, "the Crusades were holy war in the same sense in which leprosy is called a sacred disease." The Greeks wanted nothing more than that the end of these barbarian campaigns should come as soon as possible. Soon after the Latins flooded the East, the Greeks even clothed this desire, these hopes, in the form of a religious legend, recorded by a historian, a contemporary of the first Crusades. "During the reign of Emperor Alexios Comnenus in 1106, a comet appeared in the sky, going from west to east, it appeared for forty days and then disappeared. The emperor demanded that one of his courtiers (the prefect [6] Basil), who was considered wise, explain what the appearance and disappearance of this comet meant. The courtier, according to the historian, being perplexed, asked for time to think it over, and on the way he went to the church of St. John the Theologian and prayed. And when slumber fell upon him, he saw in a dream a saint dressed in sacred clothing, and to the proposed question about the comet, he replied that the appearance of the comet indicates an attack by the Latins (Celts) on the East, and that it disappeared indicates that the Latins will be exterminated." [7] It is evident that the Greeks of that time, wherever they happened, saw this or that indication of the hated Latins.

One of the most important facts of the first century of the Crusades, facts which made a strong and indelible impression on the Greeks, and which added more and more bile to the cup which the Greeks now drank from the Latins, was the deplorable event of the devastation, desolation, and desecration by Latin immigrants from the West of the most important among the Greek cities, Thessalonica, which was considered the "second eye of the empire." [8] This incident took place in 1185. At the capture of Thessalonica, the Latins expressed to a terrible extent the hatred with which they were filled with regard to the Greeks. The latter met here not with brothers in Christ, but with some fiends of hell. The Latins looked upon the Thessalonians as people rejected by God and condemned by Him to punishment. The Greek historian Nicetas Choniates presents us with a striking description of the atrocities of foreigners in Thessalonica. Let us listen to what he says: "It is not that they have robbed things, but that they have thrown the Holy Spirit to the ground. icons of Christ and His saints, trampled them underfoot, and if any decoration was found on them, they tore it off at random, and the icons themselves were taken to crossroads to trample on passers-by, or used instead of fuel when cooking food. Most intolerable and impious of all is the fact that some of them, jumping on the Altar, danced on it, jumped disorderly, singing some barbaric, most disgusting folk songs, and performed shameful things in the holy place. One of the leaders, sitting on a horse, rode into the church of the Martyr Demetrius. The myrrh flowing from the grave of this martyr was scooped up by the Latins with jugs and saucepans, poured into fish braziers, anointed their boots with myrrh, and used without any respect for other needs, for which oil is usually used. When the Orthodox gathered in church for divine services, the rude and impudent Latin soldiers did not leave those gathered in peace. They came to church at this time and, pretending to be praying, talked disorderly among themselves and shouted ugly, forcibly grabbed one of the worshippers by the throat, crushed them and thus interrupted the singing. Not only that, but some of them, pretending to sing along, shouted shameful songs or barked like dogs." [9] As for the everyday relations of the victors to the vanquished, the historian Nicetas Choniates tells such things that it remains only to keep silent about them. [10] In describing the occupation of Thessalonica by the Latins, the Greek historian, struck by this event, lavishes many of the harshest expressions, the most energetic exclamations, and concludes his speech with significant words, full of deep conviction and power, which fully explain the relations in which the Latins and Greeks found themselves towards the end of the twelfth century. we cannot unite in souls, although we are in external relations and often live in the same house." The historian calls the Latins "damned". [11]