All lightly reading people have heard that the economic leap in Russia at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries is associated with the names of the Ryabushinskys, Rakhmanovs, Kuznetsovs, and Morozovs.

There are several times fewer of those who know that these are all families of Old Believers. And very few people are ready to realize that the Old Believers are not ultra-conservatives who deny progress for the sake of the path to the kingdom of heaven. Starover, professor of history, deputy director of the Moscow Theological School of the Russian Orthodox Old Believer Church, Alexey Muravyov, identified the main advantages of the Old Believers' management model.

Hard work and efficiency

There is a point of view among economists that hard work as an idea of ​​the Old Believers ultimately becomes a brake on the economic model, because labor-intensive production is preserved. In fact, the Old Believers were and are well aware of the rules of efficient production and have always been able to calculate this efficiency. The idea of ​​hard work is slightly exaggerated when the Old Believers are looked at from the outside, because their production, both before and now, is subject to absolutely the same laws of economic feasibility. The only difference is that the Old Believer consciousness, compared to the average temperature in the hospital, is more modernized. Of course, there is the idea that a Christian should view work as a good thing. On the one hand, in the Christian worldview, work is a curse, on the other hand, work is a person’s duty, which he must always perform with the utmost conscientiousness. Therefore, the Old Believers, like any fundamentalists, say, old Protestants in America or Europe, of course, were distinguished by their hard work, frugality and everyday moderation. And this was an important advantage before the industrial revolution.

Modernization based on the old faith

At the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century, Old Believer capital served as the basis for large business projects, in which there was already very little Old Believer involvement. The recently published book by Elena Yukhimenko “The Rakhmanovs” about the famous family of merchants - Old Believers - shows that in general the Old Believer families - the Ryabushinskys, Rakhmanovs, Kuznetsovs, at the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th century, represented a fairly advanced business elite, which had one of the main features of the modernization leap this time was fully realized: they clearly separated the life that takes place within the walls of the church from the rest. In this sense, the modernization revolution consisted in the separation of these spheres.

Therefore, for an Old Believer, modern restoration attempts at state Orthodoxy look ridiculous and archaic. The attempts of the church to regulate the state of everything in the world, to bless rockets, to sprinkle something like that at the cosmodrome, to light toilets, and so on, to act in the current secular society almost as an adviser to the President - this is pure archaic for us. Our modernization took place 150 years ago, so the Old Believer does business according to all European standards, and if in Europe they have proven that it is more effective to do it this way, then he will do it. That is why industrialist Alexey Vikulovich Morozov went to Germany and bought Krupp machines of the latest generation and invested in advanced production.

The industrialists - Old Believers - did not intend to make everything as straight and bast as possible. The fact that the Old Believers are supporters of everything that is dead, bast and archaic is a self-projection. A nostalgic new believer, dreaming of some special great Russia- he dreams of returning somewhere and does not know where - and creates a negative projection in which an Old Believer is a person who lives in the taiga, in the forest, as a subsistence farmer. In fact, an Old Believer is a Russian European, and the understanding of this was damaged by the revolution, when everything got mixed up and it became unclear where the ants were, where the bees were. Therefore, if we talk about Old Believer production, we must keep in mind that conscientious work is important, but it only makes sense in the context of all other economic priorities.

Social differentiation

The Old Believers, due to their isolation, learned well how to build useful barriers. They have a good understanding of the very idea of ​​a barrier, since a barrier is not necessarily bad, in many cases it is quite good, it allows you to maintain the distance necessary for comfortable interaction. An archaic model that we still see in places in the Caucasus: either you work with me, or you are a traitor. The Old Believers proceeded from the fact that “I don’t interfere with you, you don’t interfere with me, and this allows me to compete.” Do not crush someone, like Metropolitan Filaret Drozdov in the 19th century. He didn’t like the Old Believers, he called the police: put pressure on them, take them away, because they don’t live right. But the Old Believers proceeded from something else: there are Nikonians, we don’t interfere with them, they have their own lives, but we want them to leave us alone and let us develop on our own. This is the modernization scenario.

Community Benefits

Community organization is purely archaic. The community is built on collective responsibility, both in a positive and negative sense: the merits are shared, and the entire platoon is punished. But such a community is more difficult to put pressure on, because you are not putting pressure on one person, and due to the existing horizontal connections it does not yield. And due to a very strong horizontal organization to the detriment of the vertical, the Old Believer way of life was viable. Old Believers are people of the horizontal, not the vertical. In the vertical, everything is simple: you are the boss, I’m a fool, and the horizontal means that, of course, there are bosses, but we will still see what kind of people they are, maybe they are not suitable for us, and if they cannot even be replaced, then we can build such a horizontal organization in which they will have little influence on us.

Therefore, the Old Believers always elected their priests, elected their bishops, and if the bishop did something wrong, they did not say: “Oh, well, probably the Bishop is right, but we need to behave like this for obedience,” they said: “ No, this is not the same, and not just an everyday one, but a serious “wrong”, and we need to remove this bishop or retire him, or re-elect him.” This is a completely different type of religious organization, more advanced compared to the archaic crude vertical. In addition, historically, the Old Believers always tried to divide: we take this from the archaic, for example, mutual responsibility, but we do not take general responsibility, when everyone is responsible for everything and no one in particular for anything. In this sense, the Old Believers are capable of social division. Old Believers in Russia created in parallel a society more high level organization, and due to this it survived.

Foreign Old Believers

Where society as a whole remains rural, such as in Oregon, traditional communities remain, but such places are becoming fewer and fewer. Old Believer societies abroad generally followed the trend of New Believer societies - they turned into diasporas. And a successful diaspora in the assimilation model is a diaspora that has completely assimilated, but at the same time retained some of its independence. The better the diaspora lends itself to assimilation, the better. I have seen different diasporas abroad in different places, and in general, the model that is not built on assimilation turns out to be the most long-term for the majority, because the lifespan of a diaspora that is based on assimilation is two generations.

This is how most Orthodox communities abroad are structured. That is, the first generation retains social organization around the church, some ideological concepts taken from the past and religiosity, in the second generation ideological concepts taken from the past disappear, religiosity partially remains and the organization around the church remains, the third generation builds its social organization outside the church walls, values ​​​​taken from the past disappear and only religiosity remains, but they are already asking the question: why should we be Orthodox if there are Catholics all around? This is the standard path of diasporas. And in order to maintain continuity and tradition, a lot of effort has to be spent on maintaining community life. But still the process is inevitable. Where the fourth generation after emigration, when the community is built into the city, they do not understand the Russian language at all, and most importantly, they have no incentive, they do not understand why. Of course, it is easier to preserve the community tradition in rural areas - these are the Old Believers in shirts about whom documentaries are made.

Urbanization of the Old Believers

Now the main trend of the Old Believers is that they have actually ceased to be rural and peasant. Old Believers are part of urban culture, both in Russia and in other countries. Initially, the Old Believers settled in places that were allocated to them, living compactly and separately, but these villages had already ceased to be Old Believers, and therefore the idea - a church with houses around it - basically disappeared. Now Old Believers travel to that church from cities many kilometers away. And this is the urbanization of the Old Believers - this is an important point, because the Old Believers are organically tied to that type of urban culture with high degree reflections. Of course, community ties remain in the city. They can be a competitive, logistical advantage. You understand that your brother would rather buy from you than from someone else, simply because the degree of trust is greater. The Old Believers always had the principle of not deceiving their own people.

The authority of intellectuals

The main authority for Old Believers is books - scripture and tradition. And from here come public authorities - priests, bishops, mentors as a reasonably preserved remnant of the archaic hierarchy. Another thing is that they are controlled by society, which prevents the vertical from becoming absolute. Among the Old Believers, the absence of this absolute authority does not allow the development of an absolute vertical. And there is also a hierarchy of reprimands. IN Soviet time this word has become a dirty word, meaning mindlessly following what is written. And among the Old Believers, a reader is a person who has read a lot, is well-read, and corresponds to the modern concept of “erudite” or “expert.” This again follows from the fact that the main authorities are scripture and tradition, and if you do not know scripture and tradition, how can you talk about other things and teach someone. It is clear that, first of all, this authority was associated with religious teaching, but among modern Old Believers, knowledge itself is also highly valued.

The philanthropy of people from the Moscow Old Believer environment received wide coverage in research literature, which cannot be said about Nizhny Novgorod philanthropists. This topic deserves, in our opinion, the closest attention, if only because the memory of merchant generosity still lives in the popular consciousness, passed on from generation to generation.

The beginning of the twentieth century in Russia is called the “Silver Age”. This was a time of not only a rapid rise in industry and trade, but also a whole era in Russian poetry, art, and philosophy. This is a special stage for the Russian Old Believers, which received the opportunity to legally exist after the Highest approved position of the Committee of Ministers on strengthening the principles of religious tolerance, published on April 17, 1905, “On Freedom of Conscience” and the Rules “On the Procedure for Organizing Communities”, approved by P.A. Stolypin 17 October 1906. It was during this period that the Old Believer commercial and industrial dynasties especially clearly declared themselves. Moscow merchants-Old Believers are widely known for their contribution to both the economy and culture of Russia. At the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th century, medical clinics, aerodynamic and psychological institutes were built, geographical expeditions were organized, and theaters were created using funds from the Morozovs, Soldatenkovs, Khludovs, Guchkovs, Konovalovs, and Ryabushinskys. P.A. Buryshkin, a brilliant expert on merchant Moscow, identifies 26 commercial and industrial families that occupied first places in the “Moscow unwritten merchant hierarchy” of the beginning of the century, and almost half of these families were Old Believers. Charity was an important part of their broad and comprehensive social activities. “They said about wealth that God gave it for use and would demand an account for it, which was partly expressed in the fact that it was in the merchant environment that both charity and collecting were unusually developed, which were looked upon as the fulfillment of some divinely appointed debt." The patronage of people from the Moscow Old Believer environment has received wide coverage in the research literature, which cannot be said about Nizhny Novgorod philanthropists. This topic deserves, in our opinion, the closest attention, if only because the memory of merchant generosity still lives in the popular consciousness, passed on from generation to generation.

The traditions of charitable activities go back to the times Ancient Rus' and are inextricably linked with the ethics of medieval Christianity, which was adopted and observed by the Old Believer merchants. Let us remember that, according to the teachings of the church, charity is one of the obligatory manifestations of Christian love for one’s neighbor, expressed in free help and support for all those in need. Her main goal was to help others build their lives at the same level as a true Christian should live. Until now, among the Old Believers peasants, the traditions of “correct alms” are preserved and observed: it is best to give alms to children, soldiers and in prison; The greatest alms are those that are given secretly, not for the sake of pride. It is enough to mention the known fact of sending small sums of money in letters; Moreover, in the text of the letter the money sent is not mentioned; the alms given are indicated only by the alphabetic number written in the corner for the sole purpose of being sure that the addressee received the assistance (“D ruble.” - that is, 4 rubles).

The main centers and organizers of Christian charity in Rus' were primarily churches and monasteries, which, on the one hand, carried out extensive charitable activities, and on the other, were themselves often created and existed on donations from Orthodox Christians. Describing the life and customs of the Great Russian people, the famous historian N.I. Kostomarov noted that “in the old days, every wealthy person built a church, kept a priest for it and prayed in it with his family.”

The construction of the temple - the "house of the Lord", especially the stone temple, required considerable Money, which only a very wealthy customer could allocate, but it was regarded as his personal greatest contribution in the strengthening of Christianity and therefore ensured the investor long glory on earth and salvation in " eternal life". The first stone churches in Nizhny Novgorod were built in the 17th century at the expense of merchants, both Nizhny Novgorod and non-Nizhny Novgorod “guests”. They invited the best masters who created buildings that were original in style, beautiful in design and practical. In place of the wooden ones, stone churches were erected: Nikolskaya (1656), Trinity (1665); Gavrila Dranishnikov financed the construction of the Church of John the Baptist (1683), Afanasy Olisov - the Kazan Church (1687), the Church of the Assumption on Ilyinskaya Mountain (1672) and the Sergius Church in Petushki (1702).

Nizhny Novgorod “guest”, salt merchant Semyon Filippovich Zadorin is known for having carried out many stone works in Nizhny Novgorod; it was he who supervised the renovation of the Nizhny Novgorod Kremlin and financed the construction of the Transfiguration Cathedral. His name is mentioned in the life of Ivan Neronov. About the charitable activities of Semyon Zadorin and other Nizhny Novgorod merchants, this little-known but important source says this: “in that city [Nizhny Novgorod] ... from generous donors there was Simeon, nicknamed Zadorin; that pious man extended his mercy to the strange and wretched... Likewise, many other men... gave alms according to his strength... Also from the same alms... he created a new stone church of the Resurrection of Christ... and stone cells created a surrounding area, and built a monastery for girls...”

Throughout the 18th-19th centuries, Old Believers zealously preserved the ancient Russian traditions of church building and charity. The situation in a hostile “world” forced them to develop best qualities, such as hard work, enterprise, ingenuity. “Where the peasants are more prosperous, there is more division,” Melnikov-Pechersky argued in 1853. According to the statistics he cites in his “Report on the Current State of the Schism in Nizhny Novgorod province”, persons of the merchant class from among the Old Believers in the middle of the 19th century. there were: in Nizhny Novgorod - 84, in ten district cities - 207; which accounted for 18% of all Nizhny Novgorod merchants.

The traditions of merchant charity among the Nizhny Novgorod merchants-Old Believers were preserved until the revolution. Merchant charity was supported not only by the Christian moral principle, the desire to fulfill the duty of the haves in relation to the have-nots, but also by the desire to leave behind a memory. This idea was most clearly expressed by the famous Nizhny Novgorod merchant-shipowner and city mayor Dmitry Vasilyevich Sirotkin, ordering a mansion from the architects Vesnin brothers: “Build a house so that after my death it can be a museum.”

At the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries. The influence of the Old Believer merchants in Nizhny Novgorod is increasing, and the scale of their cultural and charitable activities is also increasing. Old Believers merchants build schools, shelters, hospitals, houses for their workers, help churches and monasteries, and invest considerable funds in the development of culture.

The Nizhny Novgorod 1st Guild merchant Nikolai Aleksandrovich Bugrov, the largest industrialist and financier in Nizhny Novgorod, enjoyed particular fame as a philanthropist. He preserved the capital acquired by his father and grandfather and not only significantly increased it, but also continued to donate to charitable causes started by Alexander Petrovich. N.A. Bugrov’s great services to the city were reflected even in a newspaper obituary, where he was called first of all “a major philanthropist,” and only then “a representative of the grain business.”

Back in the 1880s, the Bugrovs, father Alexander Petrovich and son Nikolai Alexandrovich, built at their own expense a shelter for 840 people, a widow's house for 160 widows with children, and also participated in the construction of the city water supply. In memory of this, there was a The “Fountain of Philanthropists” was erected with the inscription: “This fountain was built in memory of honorary citizens of the city of Nizhny Novgorod: F.A., A.A., N.A. Blinovs, A.P. and N.A. Bugrovs and U. S. Kurbatov, who with their donations gave the city the opportunity to build a water supply system in 1880, subject to free use of it forever by the residents of Nizhny Novgorod."

The prudent N.A. Bugrov did not have the habit of donating cash to charity - the source of funds for it was both income from real estate and interest from the “eternal” deposit. The houses and estates owned by Bugrov in Nizhny Novgorod served not only his personal interests. The income from the real estate that he donated to the city was used to help the poor and needy. So, in 1884, Bugrov donated an estate on Gruzinskaya Street and capital in the amount of 40 thousand rubles to the city for the construction of a public building that would generate an annual income of at least 2,000 rubles. This money was intended “annually, forever, as a benefit to fire victims of Semenovsky district.”

The same principle was used by Bugrov when financing the famous Widow's House, opened in Nizhny in 1887. In addition to interest on large capital (65,000 rubles) in the Nikolaevsky Bank, the shelter’s budget was replenished from income (2,000 rubles per year) brought in by Bugrov’s two houses on the street. Alekseevskaya and Gruzinsky lanes, which the merchant donated to the city. According to the proposal of Governor N.M. Baranov dated January 30, 1888, the Highest Imperial permission was given to assign the name "Nizhny Novgorod City Public Widow's House named after the Blinovs and Bugrovs" to the Widow's House.

N.A. Bugrov’s help to the starving people in the disastrous years of 1891-1892 looks large-scale and expressive, especially against the backdrop of the general, often formal, approach. He agreed to sell all purchased bread to the provincial Food Commission at the procurement price of 1 ruble. 28 kopecks per pood, i.e. completely giving up profit (at that time Nizhny Novgorod landowners kept bread prices at 1 ruble 60 kopecks). At the same time, many grain merchants limited themselves to only providing free storage space for the products collected by the Food Commission. The Saratov merchant Sabachnikov made an unfavorable impression on the zemstvo authorities in the Customs Volost, who undertook to feed the poverty-stricken village of Pomry until the new harvest for the amount of 10,000-20,000 rubles. Having arrived with his family to inspect the starving village, he was not moved by the sight of need and disaster and departed, supposedly to search for a more needy village in another district or province. About the true motives of this "philanthropist" archival documents keep silent. Against this background, the distribution of large quantities of flour to the Bugrov peasants looks very impressive. The memory of his help is still alive - the old residents of Gorodets - the descendants of those whom he saved from starvation - talk about it with gratitude: “Almost every week, during the famine, I distributed a tray of flour to the family. Yes, myself, my mother I saw him, he came, as if to control that everything was done as it should be, not hidden." .

The merchant N.A. Bugrov was not only famous for his participation in official charity events, but also actively helped his fellow believers, the Old Believers of the Beglopopov Consent. Taking advantage of his wealth and weight in society, even before the religious toleration reforms of 1905-1906. Bugrov organized Old Believer schools, almshouses, and financed monasteries. And they didn’t dare contradict him on this. In the State Archive Nizhny Novgorod region Many cases have been preserved confirming the powerlessness of the diocesan authorities to prevent the “schismatic Bugrov” from carrying out his plans. Bugrov promoted his projects, not stopping at the need to pay a bribe for the speedy advancement of the matter, or to flatter the pride of the “guardian” of the established institution, or not to tell the whole truth. The diocesan authorities had no choice but to allow Bugrov to open a charitable institution for the needs of the Old Believers “unlike other similar petitions.” The “petitioner” was too influential and powerful. Orthodox missionaries grumbled that, under the guise of almshouses, the “schismatic Bugrov” was setting up real Old Believer monasteries or monasteries, in which not only the weak and wretched from the Semyonovsky and Balakhninsky districts lived, but also hermits and hermits from different provinces, and thereby “strengthens the schism according to a plan he had thought up in advance." Explaining Bugrov’s desire to strengthen the positions of the Beglopopovites in the Nizhny Novgorod province, the district dean did not miss the opportunity to mention their merits in converting “schismatics to Orthodoxy.” The fictitious essence of their cheerful reports about the annual conversion of up to 10 “inveterate schismatics” is easily revealed when comparing Old Believer and church metric books, “paintings of those who have not been to confession” for different years. Formally observing the instructions of the Spiritual Consistory, in reality Bugrov knew how to ignore them with impunity - he equipped chapels and prayer houses, opened schools long before the official permission of his superiors.

Bugrov's co-religionists enjoyed special patronage in his homeland - in the village of Popovo, Semenovsky district and the nearby villages of Filippovskoye and Malinovskaya. He owned many houses here; his grain mill plant was located in Filippovsky. Under the patronage of his grandfather, Pyotr Egorovich Bugrov, there was a secret Old Believer monastery at the mill in the village of Popovo. And N.A. Bugrov carried out extensive stone construction in these places - he resumed the Malinovsky monastery, closed in 1853, in the 1880-90s. built a chapel and stone residential buildings there. In order to avoid obstacles from the diocesan authorities, in all documents the monasteries were called almshouses.

To care for the weak and wretched, in 1893-1894 Bugrov officially established an Old Believer almshouse in the village of Filippovskaya, intended to house 40 elderly and crippled women. The charter of the future almshouse was written on the model of the charter of the charitable institution of the merchant E.Ya. Gorin (Saratov) and submitted for consideration to the Minister of Internal Affairs Durnovo. Permission from above was received, but with instructions to remove the word “Old Believer” from the name. “The establishment of an Old Believer women's almshouse as a charitable institution” did not encounter any obstacles from the diocesan authorities. The Charter approved by the minister also did not allow the establishment of a church or chapel either inside or outside the almshouse. Financing - maintenance of those in need, repairs of buildings and other necessary expenses - was to be carried out through interest on a very impressive deposit of 80 thousand rubles made by Bugrov to the Nizhny Novgorod Nikolaev City Public Bank. It was also agreed that after the death of N.A. Bugrov, the almshouse “comes under the jurisdiction of the Nizhny Novgorod city public administration, to which this almshouse can be transferred during the life of the founder, if he wishes,” its trustee should be elected every three years from representatives of the Bugrov dynasty or the Blinovs, accepting the priesthood of the Old Believers. According to the Charter, “those in need in the almshouse are allowed to accept voluntary donations food products, but not otherwise than in the almshouse itself and with the knowledge of its caretaker."

In 1900, N.A. Bugrov established two more Old Believer almshouses: in the village of Malinova, Semenovsky district, for women, and in the village of Gorodets, Balakhninsky district, for persons of both sexes (about 30 people lived in Gorodetskaya, and 58 in Malinovskaya). In 1904, during the construction of a large stone building to replace the dilapidated wooden almshouse in the village of Malinovskaya, the residents were accommodated by Bugrov in two of his own houses in this village. The need to expand the almshouse was caused by dramatic events Russo-Japanese War, which left many infirm and elderly people without the care of their son-breadwinners.

Already after the reforms of 1905-1906. In the Malinovsky monastery, Bugrovy built a stone church, the design of which was developed by N.M. Veshnyakov in 1908. Residents recall that construction was completed by 1911.

Local residents have a legend associated with the construction of this building, which is still told in Filippovsky. “Before the revolution, Bugrov decided to build a church here. They laid the foundation, began to lay walls. And suddenly one priestless Vlas came: “Don’t build a church,” he says, “soon the devils will dance in it.” Nobody believed it. Then Vlas began to sleep at night dismantle the walls of that building. Yes, there were unequal forces, they built it. And after the revolution, a club was actually organized in that house." In 1937, by decision of the Commission on Religious Issues under the Presidium of the Gorky Regional Executive Committee, it was actually proposed to convert the church into a club. The club was not organized, but the basement of the empty church was used as a warehouse.

The merchant-trustee also paid attention to those who worked in his almshouses and cared for the infirm. For diligent and hard work, Bugrov rewarded those who went on vacation with a small house. One resident of Gorodets said that her grandmother devoted her entire life to the Bugrov almshouse, looked after the sick, prepared and carried food for them, and when she grew old and was no longer able to do the work: “she herself became weak, her back did not straighten, she just walked , bending down to the ground, as if looking for something,” - so Bugrov granted her family “a small house, but so beautiful; for good and faithful work.” In the village of Sitnikovo, Borsky district, Bugrov built several houses and a wooden school building for his workers, which have survived to this day.

The benefactor Bugrov also played an important role in the field of education. Advocating for the preservation of the traditions of the Old Believers, Bugrov believed necessary creation educational institutions proper level for children of Old Believers. In 1888, N.A. Bugrov opened an Old Believer school in his native village of Popovo, Semenovsky district, for the villages of Popovo, Belkino, Tyurino, Zuevo, Sitnikovo, Kuchischi, Shlykovo, Ploskovo, Filippovskoye. He justified the need for such an undertaking by the absence of two-class public schools in Semenovsky district, which in fact was not documented - there were enough schools. Another motive was dissatisfaction with the level of education of the children of the Old Believers, which was provided by female “craftswomen” who taught literacy in the Psalter. It was not customary for the Old Believers to send their children to regular schools, and Nikolai Alexandrovich himself received home education from the "craftswoman". On the recommendation of Governor N.M. Baranova, as “a completely trustworthy person, enjoying great trust and respect,” “unlike other similar petitions” and thanks to “special requirements,” Bugrov received official permission to open a school in 1889. But even a year before this, Bugrov’s school was functioning, in the sense that in it the “Saratov peasant” Parmen Osipov teaches hook singing to adults and children. The diocesan authorities tried to take charge of the school by sending priest Nikolai Fialkovsky to inspect it, whose comments about the lack of “religious understanding” of the students Bugrov only took note of. Later, the school was entrusted to the supervision of the Inspector of Public Schools, rather than the ecclesiastical department. The school was supported by interest on capital donated especially for this purpose by Bugrov. By January 1, 1902 There were 120 students: “all were children of schismatics from the provinces of Nizhny Novgorod, Kostroma, Samara and Saratov.” But in the same year Bugrov petitioned to expand the school, increase the number of students and teachers. He was gently reproached for the fact that he had already exceeded the permitted standards - he promised to teach only children from the Filippovsky parish, numbering up to 50-75 people, but recruited students from four provinces. But this time the request was granted.

At his own expense, Bugrov taught many children the art of singing. Thus, according to the memoirs of E.A. Krasilnikova, a pupil of the famous Komarovsky monastery, mentor Sergei Efimovich Melnikov mastered hook singing to perfection precisely thanks to the merchant Bugrov, living with him in Nizhny Novgorod. The Bugrovs paid special attention to the education of talented children. In particular, a scholarship was established in the city of Semenov for “a peasant boy with outstanding abilities” - the first to receive it was a student from the village. Khakhaly Nikolai Vorobyov in 1912.

Concern for fellow believers was also manifested in Bugrovy’s support for the handicraft lestovka industry in the city of Semenov, the traditional center for the production of these fabric Old Believer rosaries. They were sewn and skillfully decorated with beads and gold embroidery by belitsa and old woman from numerous monasteries. Bugrov bought ladders in large quantities and distributed it to the Beglopopovites.

Patronage of fellow believers in all spheres of life is a characteristic common feature for Old Believers-entrepreneurs, both large and medium-sized. Nizhny Novgorod Pomeranian Old Believers from the village of Korelskaya, Semenovsky district. in 1891, the famous Moscow manufacturer Savva Morozov helped in the construction of the prayer house - he donated 400 rubles for this building (with the construction of a chapel inside it with a “domed” ceiling). in memory of his deceased son.

The establishment of the Beglopopov prayer house was not so easy for the Semyonov merchant of the 2nd guild Afanasy Pavlovich Nosov (1828 - 1912). From 1892 to 1895 The Semyonov merchants Vitushkins, townsfolk Osmushnikovs, Kalugins, Pryanishnikovs, led by the merchant Nosov, sought permission to legitimize and expand the prayer house, which was organized by immigrants from the devastated in the 50s. Olenevsky Skete and kept ancient skete icons and shrines. Afanasy Nosov was a trusted representative of the Beglopopov Old Believers and in 1896 he nevertheless received permission to open a prayer house in the house of the bourgeois Rybina, and a year later - permission to build a new stone building, which was built at his expense. After the reforms of religious tolerance, Afanasy Pavlovich built the St. Nicholas Church with a bell tower in the center of Semenov, which has survived to this day. The name of the merchant Nosov is well known to the residents of the city of Semenov and is inextricably linked with the St. Nicholas Beglopopovsky Church, built after 1905 and better known as the “Nosov Church”.

Perseverance and perseverance, inherited from his peasant ancestors, helped Afanasy Nosov achieve his goals. Like his father, merchant of the 3rd guild Pavel Nosov, Afanasy was engaged in the spoon trade and traded in wood chips. According to the memoirs of a resident of Semenov B.P. Prorubshchikov, Nosov was well known by his father, Pyotr Kuzmich, who was hired as a worker and served, as Prorubshchikov put it, as a “boy” in one of the warehouses: “Nosov was simple, hard-working, not proud, like others. Well, like a peasant.” of himself. A shirt, bast shoes with "onuchs" [onuchs]. And there was a lot of money. Rich. Well, before we didn't have these "cans" [banks], now there are only these banks everywhere. And so Nosov will go on foot to Nizhny, to the “banka” [bank]. Previously, convoys used to go. He would attach himself to some convoy and go with the peasants. And no one knows what kind of person is going with them. They think he’s a peasant. And the money, my father said, he he hid it in the onyuchi: he would lay out the “kapyuchi” [bills] along his leg, wrap it in the onyuchi and go.” .

The merchant Afanasy Pavlovich Nosov was buried in the crypt at the St. Nicholas Church. But alas, in the 30s the church was given to a military unit, and “they made a gas storage facility in the tomb and the coffin with Nosov’s body,” according to Prorubshchikov, “was thrown straight into a landfill.”

At the beginning of the 20th century, merchant Nizhny claimed to be the “most important center of the split.” In the report of the Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod, K.P. Pobedonostsev, for 1900, this fact is especially emphasized, and explains such an “extraordinary revival” by holding Old Believer congresses. In 1907, the “Union of Old Believer Readers” was formed, the appeal of which stated that “in one year, up to 600 communities (parishes) were formed in the Old Believers on the basis of the new law.” In Nizhny Novgorod, annual “fair conversations” of reciters took place, under the chairmanship of the merchant N.A. Bugrov, two congresses of the “Union of Reciters” were held, and in August 1906 the VII All-Russian Congress of Old Believers was held, chaired by the already mentioned Nizhny Novgorod merchant-Old Believer D. V. Sirotkin.

Dmitry Vasilyevich Sirotkin came from an Old Believer family. The life of this man clearly illustrates the idea that the backbone of both the Moscow and Nizhny Novgorod merchants were people from Old Believer families, where the upbringing was very harsh, and the whole way of life formed a business person, not prone to idleness and vices. Sirotkin’s father was a peasant in the village of Ostapovo, Balakhninsky district, traded in wood chips and, having quickly become rich, became the owner of a tugboat.

The younger Sirotkin, having graduated from elementary school, worked with youth on the same tugboat, first as a cook, a sailor, then as a helmsman. Perseverance and intensive self-education helped Dmitry Sirotkin take his rightful place among entrepreneurs: in 1910, the merchant of the 1st guild of commerce, Advisor Sirotkin, became the managing director of the Volga commercial, industrial and shipping company. This man, the son of a peasant, attracted attention attention of his contemporaries. Here are a few details recorded in the memoirs of I.A. Shubin, who met him at the beginning of the century: “He was not so much stern as businesslike... He loved music very much, attended concerts. He organized many concerts himself and did a lot for the public who could pay. At the Nizhny Bazaar he organized literary and musical gatherings for the poor... They read our classics, poems, and the music was mainly by Russian composers..." In 1913, Sirotkin was elected mayor. Many good deeds should be credited to this man : under him the transition to universal primary education, the Peasant Land Bank was built.

The Nizhny Novgorod province, always famous for its folk crafts, gave birth to many talented craftsmen. For their proper training, Sirotkin created the KHOD school in Semenov - a school of artistic woodworking. The school building, built at the expense of Dmitry Vasilyevich, has survived to this day - this is house number 59 on the street. Volodarsky. According to the recollections of Semyonov residents, Sirotkin allegedly told the school organizer Georgy Petrovich Matveev: “Come and take as much money as you need. If you don’t take it, I’ll be offended by you.” .

Around 1907, at the expense of Sirotkin, a stone Old Believer church was built in Nizhny on Telyachaya Street (now Gogol Street), which, alas, was blown up in 1965. Old-timers remember how red brick dust hung in the air for two days after the explosion of the beautiful building . It should also be mentioned that one of Sirotkin’s apartment buildings in Kanavino remained for a long time the spiritual center of the Old Believers - until the mid-twentieth century, it housed a prayer house for the Old Believers-Spasovites.

Sirotkin left Nizhny Novgorod after the revolution, leaving not only a good memory of himself, but also almost all his wealth. The city keeps unique collections of porcelain, gold embroidery, and folk costume, collected by Dmitry Vasilyevich. Sirotkin’s dream of a house-museum also came true - his house on the Verkhne-Volzhskaya embankment now actually houses the Nizhny Novgorod Art Museum. But this did not happen after the death of the owner: Dmitry Vasilyevich was destined to live a long time and die in exile outside Russia.

Among the rich merchants-Old Believers of N. Novgorod and the province there were many collectors of books and icons. Thus, in Gorodets, a whole school of artists, scribes, and calligraphers is emerging, creating handwritten books and icons based on “ancient written” models and fulfilling orders from such experts and book lovers as Pyotr Alekseevich Ovchinnikov and Grigory Matveevich Pryanishnikov.

Pyotr Alekseevich Ovchinnikov (1843-1912) - Volga merchant and grain merchant, lived in the village of Gorodets, Balakhninsky district, Nizhny Novgorod province. He was a famous Old Believer figure, a member of the Council of the All-Russian Brotherhood of Beglopopovites. According to the memoirs of S.Ya. Elpatievsky, P.A. Ovchinnikov “collected antiquities - icons, but mainly old handwritten and early printed books,” collected everywhere - in Moscow, in the Arkhangelsk and Vologda provinces, traveled to the Volga region and the Urals, was especially interested Bulgarian manuscripts, which he “obtained through Old Believers living in Bulgaria and Romania and in Nizhny at the fair.” In the last years of his life, the merchant P.A. Ovchinnikov was also engaged in publishing activities, and, while in Moscow, he often went to the Rumyantsev Museum to compare the manuscript he acquired with those stored in the museum. The activities of P.A. Ovchinnikov were appreciated during his lifetime - he was elected a member of the Nizhny Novgorod Scientific Archival Commission.

Another collector of Russian antiquities G.M. Pryanishnikov (1845-1915) - “Balakhon merchant of the second guild”, merchant of textiles, trustee of the Gorodets Old Believer chapel - was known for his collections of handwritten and early printed books, ancient icons, coins, gold embroidery, small plastic art.

Pryanishnikov's collection included 710 icons of ancient writing, many silver crosses and panagias with enamel, 300 printed books, coins, including gold. It was from this collection that the icon of the late 14th - early 15th century "The Fiery Ascension of the Prophet Elijah, with the Mother of God Nikopea and bowed angels, with a life in 16 hallmarks" came to the Nizhny Novgorod Art Museum. This icon, unique both in time and place of creation, and in composition, is rightfully considered the pearl of the Nizhny Novgorod fund.

In the 1920s As part of the solution to the issue of preserving and protecting monuments of art and antiquity, the collections of merchants attracted the attention of “emissaries” and employees of the Rumyantsev Museum. Ovchinnikov's collection was first sealed by the Cheka, and a safe-conduct was given to Pryanishnikov's collection from the Rumyantsev Museum and the All-Russian Collegium for Museums and the Protection of Monuments of Art and Antiquities. The handwritten collections of Ovchinnikov and Pryanishnikov were subsequently transferred to the Rumyantsev Museum (now the Russian State Library). The Ovchinnikov fund now numbers 841 monuments, the Pryanishnikov fund - 209, and the oldest manuscripts date back to the 14th and 15th centuries.

The formation of these collections, which broadly represent the book culture of Ancient Rus', is a certain reflection of the increased cultural level of the Russian merchants - a problem in historical and cultural terms that has not yet been studied enough in Russian science.

The wonderful Gorodets calligrapher and miniaturist Ivan Gavrilovich Blinov worked on orders from Pryanishnikov and Ovchinnikov. creative heritage which consists of about a hundred face handwritten books, now included in the largest collections of Russia - the State Historical Museum, the Tretyakov Gallery, and the Russian State Library. Seventeen manuscripts of I.G. Blinov are in the Gorodets Museum of Local Lore: these are the works that he performed at the request of P.A. Ovchinnikov, who made sure that the artist’s creations remained in his homeland.

Extensive information covering the charitable activities of the merchants in Nizhny Novgorod is also contained in such little-developed sources as records on old printed books. So, for example, in the collection of the Nizhny Novgorod Regional Universal Scientific Library there are three books related to the name and activities of the same Semyon Zadorin: “Services and Lives of Sergius and Nikon” (M.: Pechatny Dvor, 1646), and two “Service Menaions” on July and August months (M.: Pechatny Dvor, 1646). In the margins of the first book one can read an entry from the 17th century. that “the guest Semyon Filipov’s son Zadorin bought this book.” The other two have identical records that the books belonged to Semyon Zadorin, and after the death of the merchant they were placed in 1664/5 by his brother Gregory in one of the Yaroslavl churches for the commemoration of the soul “for his brother, for the monk schema-monk Sergius and for all his parents" We find an identical entry in the “Service Menya” for the month of February (M.: Pechatny Dvor, 1646), which is stored in the collection of the Institute of Manuscript and Early Printed Books. These records not only complement the scant biographical information about the famous merchant-architect, but also allow us to understand what guided him in his life, what were his inner needs, and reveal his spiritual essence.

Merchant names are presented in 26 entries on books from the collection of the Nizhny Novgorod Library. Donating books to churches and monasteries in exchange for souls was a widespread form of charity. So, for example, an insert entry on the Service Menaion indicates that the book was donated to the Old Believer Church of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary for worship by the Semyonovsky merchant Nikolai Shadrin in 1865.

In the Old Believer families of the village of Eldezh, Voskresensky district, the books of the mentor of the Pomor community Nikifor Petrovich Bolshakov (“Grandfather Nikifor”), which were sent to him by the Old Believer merchant Kashin from Yaroslavl, are still carefully preserved. Memorials of the Kashin family are pasted on them and notes are made, such as: “This book... was donated to Nikifor Petrovich Bolshakov in memory and remembrance of the deceased parents of the Kashins according to the attached memorial.” And although Nikifor Petrovich died in 1931, the Old Believers of the Eldezh community commemorate the donors and still give out alms.

Thus, private patronage and charity, entrenched in the consciousness of the merchants as one of the value and behavioral stereotypes, acquired an unusually wide scope at the beginning of the 20th century. According to the materials of the All-Russian Congress of Charity Workers, held in March 1910, there were 4,762 charitable societies and 6,278 charitable institutions in Russia, with 75% of their budget coming from private charity, that is, from voluntary donations.

The charitable activities of Nizhny Novgorod merchants-Old Believers are evidenced not only by the architectural monuments of Nizhny Novgorod and the province (churches and buildings), but also by written sources and oral traditions existing in the Nizhny Novgorod region. Not only were they recorded in the popular consciousness real facts, but also ideas about the properties of merchant character and behavior.

One of the most frequently recurring themes is charity towards the poor and patronage of fellow believers. The legends about the establishment of a prayer house by the merchant Stepan Makarovich Seryakov in the village of Rastyapino, where “unquenchable candles stood day and night”, quite accurately reflect reality and are confirmed by archival materials; about the construction, at the expense of the merchant Nikolai Alexandrovich Bugrov, of a church in the Malinovsky monastery and a chapel in the “New Sharpan” monastery. Confirmed by published materials from local history researchers are legends about helping fire victims, whom Bugrov helped to rebuild, distributed money and flour: “When the Capes burned down, he fed everyone for 40 days for free. Every week I gave out a tray of flour.”

Almost a century has passed. The Old Believer cemetery of the village of Rastyapino was destroyed, in its place there are houses and dachas, but at the crossroads of the streets there was only one grave left, which is being looked after by local residents. A tombstone made of black marble has also been preserved with the inscription: “Under this stone is buried the body of the servant of God Stefan Makarovich Seryakov, who died on May 12, 1913, his life was 74 years, 9 months and 12 days, Angel Day on December 27.” The inscription on the other side of the tombstone explains to the ignorant the very fact of the special relationship to this monument:

"A parent left a fond memory,

caretaker of the poor, patron of orphans,

He welcomed strangers and beggars into his house,

He bequeathed this to his children."

This is what his namesake, Anastasia Aleksandrovna Seryakova, who turned 88 this year, told us:

“He was rich, but he helped everyone. He was a factory worker, he sold chintz or something, so he divided this chintz up: some for jackets, some for sundresses. Those who worked for him celebrated all the weddings themselves, giving them dowries. My grandmother kept telling me : “He’ll give it to the bride for linen, and he’ll give it to the bed.” Those who have a construction project go to Makarych, he gave it. He also had a little house in Rastyapin, he supported the elderly. The main thing is that he shared it with everyone, he gave it to everyone.”

The children of Stepan Makarovich, obviously, sacredly kept the behests of their father. Unfortunately, we do not yet have information about how their fate turned out after the revolution, but until that time they annually came to their father’s grave on the day of his death, commemorated him and distributed generous alms: “They came on horses, brought double-decker baskets of buns, and shared the money with everyone.” "We used to run there when we were little, and they would give us 20 kopecks or a loaf of bread. Sometimes my grandmother would drag me by the hand there, and there would be a line there. The children would come every year." . And a few years ago, apparently, the descendants of Stepan Makarovich Seryakov visited the grave and remembered him in accordance with modern custom: “They came in a black car, apparently they remembered him, they brought good vodka “Rasputin” and left it for others to remember. And so many people still do. as they walk by - and they will pray."

The tradition of “memorial days” organized for parents was widespread among the merchants. On the days of memory of his illustrious ancestor, Nikolai Bugrov organized “funeral tables”. Those in need flocked to the generously furnished tables on Gorodets Square to receive, in addition to food, silver ten-kopeck pieces.

The most popular image among both Old Believers and people of other religious affiliations in the Nizhny Novgorod region was and remains Nikolai Aleksandrovich Bugrov /1837-1911/ - the last representative of the dynasty of merchants-Old Believers Bugrov. It is noteworthy that in the legends, the character traits and actions of representatives of three generations of the clan - grandfather, father, grandson - merge into a single image of “Bugrov” - forming a kind of generic concept and forming a collective image, devoid of a personal name, since for the narrator it is not an essential detail. The image of the merchant Bugrov is endowed with the typical features of a savvy hero of a Russian everyday fairy tale. A clear example of this is the story “How the merchant Bugrov hired workers.”

“When hiring for work, the merchant Bugrov liked to test newcomers, and depending on their ingenuity and efficiency, he paid everyone differently. One day, a convoy with bread was driving through their village. He sent a worker:

He runs headlong. Found out. He comes running and tells the merchant: the convoy is going somewhere.

What is he carrying? - asks Bugrov.

I didn’t find out, I’ll catch up now and ask.

Again he runs after the convoy, finds out, comes running and reports:

The convoy is carrying rye.

How much do they sell?

I didn’t find out, I’ll run now.

Okay, now you won’t catch up,” says Bugrov.

Next time the convoy is on its way again. Bugrov sends another worker:

Go and find out where the convoy is going.

He caught up with the convoy, found out, and said to Bugrov:

The convoy is going somewhere.

What's your luck? - asks the merchant.

Wheat.

What is he selling for?

For so much.

Well done, says Bugrov and sets a price higher for him than for the first worker.

He asks:

Why do you pay someone else more and me less?

Bugrov answers:

You went for one thing three times, and he learned everything in one go."

Bugrov’s life is built by the people’s consciousness from beginning to end, the “gaps” in the biography are supplemented by legends. Folk memory explains the source of Bugrov's capital, based on legends about a robber who got rich dishonestly and repented. The consciousness of an ordinary man in the street did not find opportunities to accumulate wealth in a correct and honest way, guided by a simple statement: “If I live honestly and have nothing, then since he is rich and increases his wealth, that means he is stealing.” Rumors about the origin of family capital circulated among the people during Bugrov’s lifetime, and continue to this day.

Old-timers in the village of Filippovsky said that Bugrov led a gang that robbed carts of goods. Having killed his comrades, he appropriated all the booty from which his wealth came. This legend is based on the real traits of Pyotr Yegorovich’s grandfather, the founder of the dynasty, who in reality was not a robber, but was a peasant in the village of Popovo, Semenovsky district, but had a penchant for risky enterprises and quickly became rich, showing ingenuity and enterprise when correcting a landslide near the Kremlin.

The son, Alexander Petrovich Bugrov, multiplied the capital, not missing the opportunity to say a word. His name was listed among the buyers of stolen salt in a long process - the “Vederevsky salt case” of 1864-65. The handwritten satirical “poem” that was circulating at that time contained the lines:

If all the thieves are caught,

Bugrov will not escape either...

In order to earn forgiveness and avoid responsibility in this case, A. Bugrov proposed to supply city shelters with flour at unprofitable prices for ten years. His calculation that it would be unprofitable for the authorities to lose such a benefactor was correct.

People say: “If you’re not caught, you’re not a thief”; which does not in the least prevent people’s imagination from creating more and more rumors around any outstanding figure. And if you are caught... A.M. psychologically accurately explained this tendency. Gorky: “My grandfather told me that Bugrov’s father [Alexander Petrovich] “made money” by fabricating counterfeit money, but my grandfather spoke of all the major merchants of the city as counterfeiters, robbers and murderers. This did not prevent him from treating them with respect and even with "From his epic stories one could draw the following conclusion: if a crime fails, then it is a crime worthy of punishment; if it is cleverly hidden, it is a success worthy of praise." .

The charity of the grandson, who gave out generous alms, reinforced the folklore stereotype about the unrighteousness of acquired wealth and explained the good deeds by the need to repent: “Didn’t he atone for sins?”

In the villages of the Nizhny Novgorod region, they willingly talk about Bugrov’s sins, in particular, about his penchant for adultery, and as evidence of his generous gifts to former lovers, they show houses with three windows, which in Gorodets are called “ha-ha house”, and in the Seimas they point out a whole a street of similar buildings.

According to the missionaries of the Orthodox Church, Bugrov’s gifts were supposed to serve to “spread the schism”: “Bugrov and Blinov, fanatically raised in the spirit of schism in the Malinovsky hermitages, give girls to Gorodets for marriage, rewarding them with a decent dowry from 1,000 to 15,000 rubles, depending on the condition of the groom.” In other words, Bugrov increased the number of fellow believers in every possible way.

However, the popular consciousness immediately justifies this sin of Bugrov, explaining this to his unfulfilled family life. Moreover, the tribal peasant consciousness could not come to terms with the death of his three children and endowed him with an illegitimate son: “But Bugrov did not have wives, he only had concubines. And there were no children. There was only one illegal one, Severian, simply Everya. Every’s house still stands, there is a communal farm there.” The mythologized image of an Old Believer merchant, a native of peasants, turns out to be so close that he is also associated with the peasant suffering of the post-revolutionary years - “Every’s children and the whole family were shot.”

However, the Nizhny Novgorod archive contains the “Case... of the investigation marital status peasant Anokhin, the illegitimate son of N.A. Bugrov": many were not averse to collecting at least a small fraction from the richest merchant. The case indicates that N.A. Bugrov really had an illegitimate son, Dmitry Andriyanovich Anokhin, whom he did not recognize and tried in every possible way to humiliate , appointing him to the most insignificant positions “in the trading department.” Anokhin’s grandfather, Alexander Petrovich Bugrov, on the contrary, favored his grandson and, apparently, promised him a share of his capital.

Rumors about nuances personal life merchant Bugrov took root not only in the people's memory, but were also recorded by the most prominent writers and publicists of that time. V.A. Gilyarovsky indicates both Nizhny Novgorod and Moscow sources of such information. Such human weakness of the legendary merchant makes his image closer and more understandable to the Russian heart.

The religious affiliation of the Nizhny Novgorod merchants was particularly reflected in their attitude towards wealth and towards their neighbors, leaving an imprint on the specifics of charity. The Christian teaching about love for one's neighbor and helping those in need was entrenched and preserved most firmly among the Old Believers for a number of reasons. The need to survive in an ideologically alien, even hostile, environment forced the Old Believers to think in the interests of the entire community. Hence such close concern for the well-being of their fellow believers. It manifested itself both in mutual assistance and in the protection of the common interests of the Old Believers at the level of the entire state. Quite isolated in the 18th-19th centuries. and the community of Old Believers, persecuted by the authorities, most consistently and pedantically adhered to the norms of Christian ethics, norms of personal and public life developed in ancient times. Even now they strive to verify every step and deed in the Old Believer environment according to Scripture and Tradition, turning to the words of Chrysostom, Abba Dorotheus, and the articles of the Helmsman’s Book. Excerpts from “ancient printed” books are still a powerful argument when resolving issues about a second marriage, about military service, about receiving a pension, about attitude towards foreigners, and even about glasnost, as a national reality of recent years (“The Tsarev’s secret should be kept” - Old Believers quote about discussions in the press about personal affairs President). The strict way of family and social life requires the Old Believer to have a sober and critical view of the world, to follow moral standards and accepted rules - not to drink, not to smoke, not to indulge in fornication, to devote himself to raising children and caring for them. Compliance with strict norms, on the one hand, and the need to resist pressure from the authorities and the official church, on the other, have formed over the centuries the special character of the Old Believer - sober, literate, enterprising, responsible to loved ones and God. This allowed the Old Believers merchants at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. to enter the economic elite of Russia and realize their material and spiritual needs for the benefit of themselves and society.

Nizhny Novgorod merchants-Old Believers, who showed themselves in generous donations for the benefit of the city, for the needs of fellow believers and the poor, remind of themselves with architectural monuments, collections of books and icons, and, what is especially noteworthy, they live in folk traditions and legends passed down from generation to generation. Our ideas about the motives, methods and results of merchant charity are still approximate and fragmentary, since until very recently this phenomenon was almost not studied; it remains to be understood how significant the contribution of the Old Believer merchants, industrial and financial capital, and philanthropy to Russian economic life and culture is.

NOTES

Buryshkin P.A. Merchant Moscow. M., 1991. P.113.

See, for example: Bokhanov A. Collectors and patrons of art in Russia. M., 1989; Pozdeeva I. Russian Old Believers and Moscow at the beginning of the twentieth century // World of Old Believers. Vol. 2. M., 1995.

Institute of Manuscript and Early Printed Books (hereinafter referred to as IRISK). Archive of A.N. Putina. No. 77-146.

Kostomarov N.I. Home life and morals of the Great Russian people. M., 1993. P.42.

Filatov N.F. Nizhny Novgorod. Architecture of the 14th - early 20th centuries. N.N., 1994; Filatov N.F. Cities and towns of the Nizhny Novgorod Volga region in the 17th century: History. Architecture. Gorky, 1989.

Materials on the history of the schism during the first period of its existence. Ed. N.I.Subbotina. M., 1847. T.1. pp. 198-201, 256-258.

Melnikov P.I. Report on the current state of the schism in the Nizhny Novgorod province // Collection of NGUAC. N. Novgorod, 1911. T.IX. P.56-57.

Sharun N.I. Through the halls of the art museum. Gorky, 1985. P.4.

Adrianov Yu., Shamshurin V. Old Nizhny. N.N., 1994. P. 178.

Smirnova L.M. Nizhny Novgorod before and after. N. Novgorod, 1996. P. 1299.

State Archive of the Nizhny Novgorod Region (hereinafter referred to as GANO), f.2, op.6, 1887, d.1101.

Smirnov D. Pictures of Nizhny Novgorod life in the 19th century, Gorky, 1948. P. 166.

GANO, f.2, op.6, 1891, d. 1424.

GANO, f.570, op.559, 1888, no.21.

GANO f. 570, op. 559, 1894, no. 23.

GANO, f.2, op.6, 1893, d. 1802; f. 570, op.559, 1894, d.23.

GANO, f.2, op.6, 1904, d. 2644.

Agafonova I.S. and others. Malinovsky Old Believer Monastery and the problem of its preservation as a historical and cultural complex. //Monuments of history and architecture European Russia, N.N., 1995. pp. 208-216.

GANO, f.3074, op. 1, no. 262.

IRISK. Expedition materials. 1995

Smirnova L.M. Nizhny Novgorod before and after. N.N., 1996. P.238.

GANO, f.2, op.6, 1883, d.999.

GANO, f.570, op.559, 1888, no. 21.

IRISK. Expedition materials. 1996

Milotvorsky I.A. History of the settlement of Semenovsky district and the city of Semenov (1855-1937), manuscript (kept in the historical and art museum of Semenov, Nizhny Novgorod region). P.152.

GANO. f.2, op.6, 1891, d.1447.

GANO, f.2, op.6, 1892, d.1646.

IRISK. Expedition materials. 1996

GANO, f.1, op.1, d.170, l.19a. It should be clarified that these were not newly emerged, but legalized local authorities old communities.

Quote by: Adrianov Yu.A., Shamshurin V.A. Old Nizhny: Historical and literary essays. N. Novgorod, 1994. P. 193-194.

IRISK. Expedition materials. 1996

Elpatievsky S.Ya. Memories of 50 years. L., 1929. P.217-218.

Goryachev A.Ya., Goryachev V.A. Old Believers of Gorodets - guardians of Russian book culture // World of Old Believers. Issue 1. M.; St. Petersburg, 1992. P. 63.

Balakin P.P. About the Nizhny Novgorod school of icon painting // Notes of local historians. N. Novgorod, 1991. P. 198.

Galai Yu. Keep traces of history. Gorky, 1989. pp. 28-30.

Handwritten collections State Library USSR named after V.I. Lenin. Pointer. T.1. Issue 2. P.33, 183.

Books of Cyrillic printing of the 16th-17th centuries in the collections of the Nizhny Novgorod Regional Library. N. Novgorod, 1992. No. 181, No. 171, No. 175.

IRISK meeting. No. 49.

Books of Cyrillic printing of the 16th-17th centuries in the collections of the Nizhny Novgorod Regional Library. No. 95.

IRISK. Expedition materials. 1992

Buryshkin P.A. Merchant Moscow. M., 1991. P.25.

GANO, f.570, op.559, 1889, d.12a; IRISK. Expedition materials. 1995

Prilutsky Yu.V. In the Outbacks (Travel Impressions) // Complete. collection op. T.1. Semenov, 1917. P. 118; IRISK. Expedition materials. 1993, 1994

IRISK. Expedition materials. 1993

IRISK. Expedition materials. 1996

IRISK. Expedition materials. 1996

Adrianov Y., Shamshurin V. Old Nizhny, N.N., 1994. P. 178

IRISK. Expedition materials. 1995

Smirnov D. Pictures of Nizhny Novgorod life of the 19th century. Gorky, 1948. P. 132.

Smirnov D. Pictures of Nizhny Novgorod life of the 19th century. Gorky, 1948. P.126.

Quote Based on: Andrianov Y., Shamshurin V. Old Nizhny, N.N., 1994. P. 177.

GANO, f.570, op.559, 1894, no.23.

IRISK. Expedition materials. 1993, 1995

GANO, f.2, op.6, 1878, d. 929.

Gilyarovsky V.A. “Nizhny Novgorod stunner” // Collected works. in 4 vols. T.3, M., 1967. P.221-223.

IRISK. Expedition materials. 1993, 1996

Institute of Manuscript and Early Printed Books

The study was carried out with the support of the Russian Humanitarian Fund

(Traditional culture. M., 2001. No. 3)

http://irisk.vvnb.ru/Blago. htm

Russian Civilization

Famous Old Believer dynasties: Morozovs, Ryabushinskys, Guchkovs, Soldatenkovs, Khludovs, Konovalovs.
How is that? It didn’t fit in my head: a believer is a rich man.
What about the wealth of monasteries?
Did clergy leaders with expensive watches and expensive cars cause you irritation or bewilderment?

Why: everything for some, and nothing for others?
Did this question bother you?

I'm not an envious person. But still, it was not clear to me how the business giants of pre-revolutionary Russia correlated with the fact of their deep religiosity? However, there is a clear explanation.

First, let's remember the parable of the talents.

The parable of the talents is one of the parables of Jesus Christ, contained in the Gospel of Matthew and telling about the second coming:

“For [He will act] like a man who, going to a foreign country, called his servants and entrusted them with his property: and to one he gave five talents, to another two, to another one, to each according to his strength; and immediately set off. The one who received five talents went and put them to work and acquired another five talents; in the same way, the one who received two talents acquired the other two; he who received one talent went and buried [it] in the ground and hid his master’s money.
(Matt. 25:14-30) »
Upon his return, the master called the slaves to him and demanded from them an account of how they disposed of the money entrusted to them. He praised the slaves who used the money for business, saying, “Well done, good and faithful slave! You have been faithful in small things, I will put you over many things; enter into the joy of your master." The last one to come was the slave, who had buried the money in the ground and said: “Mister! I knew you that you were a cruel man, reaping where you did not sow, and gathering where you did not scatter, and, being afraid, I went and hid your talent in the ground; here is yours” (Matthew 25:24-25).

In response, the gentleman addressed him and those present with the following speech:
“You crafty and lazy slave! You knew that I reap where I did not sow, and gather where I did not scatter; Therefore, you should have given my silver to the merchants, and I, when I came, would have received mine with profit; So, take the talent from him and give it to the one who has ten talents, for to everyone who has it will be given and he will have an abundance, but from the one who does not have, even what he has will be taken away; and throw the worthless slave into outer darkness: there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (Matt. 25:26-30) »

How do agnostics perceive wealth and power? A means for life, for realizing plans, for comfort. An agnostic sees objects either as his own or as someone else’s, which either gives him the right to dispose of property at his own discretion, or does not give him such a right. Having received the right to dispose of wealth and power, an agnostic (and in his person I mean a person “not a believer”) makes such orders, guided by his morals, his rules for determining what is good and what is evil. And such a person can either start building hospitals and gardens or start sponsoring wars and selling drugs - it’s up to him to decide.

How does a believer perceive the material world? He sees his stay in this world as temporary, and the most important thing he sees is the cleansing of the soul from sin, so that at the end of this mortal path he can gain eternal blessings (well, and not fall into the fiery hyena). The world was created by God, and everything here does not belong to humans. The material world is those very “talents”, some five, some two, some one - given by the Master to his slaves, in order to ask later. A person on earth, by the will of the Lord, receives this or that property for temporary disposal, and how will he use these talents? The owner will ask. A believer manages according to the morality enshrined in the Gospel, and not according to personal preferences.
Here, of course, people can begin to get wise - how to understand what is written and how to understand this. Suffice it to remember that in the name of the Lord, women were burned at the stake and wars were fought, also in his name. People are much wiser...
To avoid this, just remember what you do with moldy food? You throw it away and wash the dishes, right? The same way one sees the wisdom of a person, which is poisoned by the mold of pride, vanity, and greed. To avoid poisoning, it is enough to wash your soul from reasoning according to your own understanding, and perceive knowledge and logic from the Gospel, which cannot be the subject of human thought, and are the source of pure knowledge. But that's a completely different story.

Thus, when disposing of temporarily entrusted material wealth or power, a believer does not seek personal gain, because he knows that these “riches” will remain in this temporary world. But being a temporary manager, he shows his spiritual maturity, which is what is said in the above parable.

ps: from the book of St. Ignatius Brianchaninov “Ascetic Experiences”

M. SOKOLOV: Good evening. On the air of “Echo of Moscow” and the TV channel “RTVi” “The Price of Victory. The price of revolution." Mikhail Sokolov is at the microphone. Today in our studio is Alexander Pyzhikov, professor of the Russian State University for the Humanities, Doctor of Historical Sciences. We are talking today about the Old Believers, or schismatics, in the era before and during the Great War. The initiators were the NRZB sponsors of the revolution, as some suggest. Actually, I will start with a general approach. Alexander Vladimirovich, official statistics gave the figure of 2 million schismatics in Russia. But in fact, what part of the population Russian Empire at the beginning of the 20th century was in different senses, trends, agreements of the old faith?

A. PYZHIKOV: Good evening. Of course, the issue of statistics of Old Believers is the most painful pressing issue in the study of this entire phenomenon of Russian history. It's not just important. As important as it is, it is also confusing. Because, of course, there are no reliable statistics about how many Old Believers were in our country at different times in history. To answer it, one must, of course, remember the decree of Peter I - this was the time of the first revision in 1716. That is, this is the first revision that described how many people are on the territory of the Russian Empire, then for the first time the question was raised of who would classify themselves as an Old Believers, as schismatics, as they said then. The result was that of those who participated in this census, in modern terms, 2% of the population called themselves Old Believers - 191 thousand people, a little more. This amounted to 2% of the population of the Russian Empire. Since then, from 1716 until the end of the 19th century, namely until the 1897 census, the census of the Russian Empire, which was carried out by decree of Nicholas II, this figure - 2% of the population - practically did not change. And 1897 gave the same results. In the “Religious affiliation” column, again, the same 2% of the population classified themselves as schismatics. Only the population of the empire increased and therefore it was no longer 191 thousand people, as in 1716, but already about 2 million people. But nevertheless, this is still the same 2% of the empire’s population. These are quantitative data. They tried to cast doubt on them. They tried to question them and find out what the real state of affairs in this matter was by the imperial power itself, namely Nicholas I. Emperor Nicholas I initiated and conducted large-scale geographical, as they were called then, statistical in spirit, studies regarding the community of the Old Belief. He checked big interest to this religious denomination that existed on the territory of the country, and they constantly told him that, of course, we are not talking about any 2% here, it is simply inappropriate to talk about this. Then Nicholas I had a reasonable question: how much exactly? Three, as they were then called, expeditions (commissions, expeditions, to use the terminology of those years) were organized selectively in the provinces of the central region - namely, to Kostroma, Nizhny Novgorod and Yaroslavl. These expeditions were organized by forces central office Ministry of Internal Affairs. It was the Ministry of Internal Affairs in those years that was the main ministry and was in charge of the affairs of the split. Why through the central apparatus? Because the data provided by local provincial authorities was known. They did not inspire confidence in the authorities. Therefore, in order to clarify the real true state of affairs, it was decided to send officials of the central apparatus, who were in no way connected with the local authorities, to give them the broadest powers in this matter, so that they could somehow clarify this issue.

M. SOKOLOV: So how?

A. PYZHIKOV: By the way, we were lucky. Historians are lucky. Because we have a very complete understanding of these commissions. Especially about the Yaroslavl commission, which was headed by Count Stenbock-Fermor, there was such a thing... A 27-year-old official of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the central apparatus, Ivan Sergeevich Aksakov, a future Russian writer and publicist known to everyone, worked on this commission. So, Aksakov wrote letters from there - from the Yaroslavl province - to his family back home, where he shared his impressions, which he had gleaned a lot there. By the way, these expeditions were not short-term. They lasted 2-3 years.

M. SOKOLOV: Alexander Vladimirovich, don’t be tormented. How many were actually counted for the provinces?

A. PYZHIKOV: These officials and the Ministry of Defense came to the conclusion that the figures that appear in provincial reports need to be multiplied by 11 times. But they made the comment: “Apparently, this does not reflect the true state of affairs.”

M. SOKOLOV: That is, apparently, the ratio remained approximately the same, that is, at least 25-30% actually belonged not to the Nikonian faith, but to the Old Belief...

A. PYZHIKOV: In 1897, when the census was carried out and the same 2% of schismatics - 2 million - were indicated, then a lot of articles immediately appeared in the Russian press of those years that began to comment on this. The articles were titled: “2 million or 20?” That is, again this is a tenfold, elevenfold increase. That is, even the increase, which was recorded in good faith in the Nicholas era (Nicholas I), has been preserved. Apparently, if we are to put an end to this issue, it must be said here in this way: if 2% is really of the population of the empire, and in general there were over 70% of Orthodox Christians in the Russian Empire, then, it seems to me, taking into account all those events that then happened to this empire - the fact that it ceased to exist allows us to talk about a figure of 35% of the population of the Orthodox who lived in our country.

M. SOKOLOV: Let me remind you that Alexander Pyzhikov, Doctor of Historical Sciences, is on the air of Echo of Moscow. We are talking about schismatics, Old Believers... The phone number for SMS so you can send your question is +7-985-970-45-45. Alexander Vladimirovich, didn’t the empire perceive the Old Believers as foreign agents? After all, as I understand it, the highest hierarchy, for example, of the priests, was outside Russia, but, in my opinion, in Austria-Hungary. Is that how it was?

A. PYZHIKOV: Yes. The white cornice is, of course, a well-known historical plot...

M. SOKOLOV: That is, they tried to control them all the time, so to speak, as such a suspicious community.

A. PYZHIKOV: Yes, especially the same Nicholas I, whom we just mentioned. He was generally preoccupied with various revolutionary ideas and movements that developed at that time and gained popularity in the West. Therefore, he was worried about everything that poses a threat to his throne, so to speak. And the Old Believers as well.

M. SOKOLOV: Okay. If we talk about, in fact, that part of the Old Believers who rose up, got rich, and so on... If you look at your book, you get the feeling that something interesting happened there, I would say, with morality at the end of the 19th century. After all, many Old Believers actually got rich with community money, with public money. And then it turned out that they privatized this common, so to speak, confessional property, and became merchants and factory owners. However, they seem to have retained their influence over their fellow believers, yes? Interesting, isn't this phenomenon? On the one hand, they seemed to have robbed them a little, but on the other hand they could influence them. How to explain this?

A. PYZHIKOV: Yes, indeed. This interest of Nicholas I in the Old Belief ended with the Old Belief falling under the harsh repressive pressure that he imposed. That is, he decided that since the matter here is dark and murky with this old belief, then it all needs to be destroyed. Nicholas I first of all tried to destroy the economic model, the economic model of the Old Belief. And rightly so, as you said, the economic model of the Old Belief was based not on private property, but on communal property. In our language, on public property. That is, such collective principles in economics. Why was this? Where did this come from? Why has it been preserved this way? It's very simple. Because the Old Belief was the losing religious denomination that was always subject to persecution and pressure. In order to survive in an environment that was alien to them, first of all, from a religious standpoint, then, of course, some kind of collective effort was required. Therefore, their entire development and the building of their lives did not occur around the establishment of the institution of private property, but around collective communal principles. That is, “all together must support life and preserve our faith.” Hence such conservation and glorification of such collective principles. All this really was in the Old Belief. On the part of the authorities, this was not revealed so clearly and clearly at first. This understanding came only in the mid-19th century. Again, it was Nicholas I and his officials who established this first. What happened? It turned out that Nicholas I decided to simply stop this practice and transfer everything to the normal, so to speak, rails of Roman law...

M. SOKOLOV: That is, register the property to private owners.

A. PYZHIKOV: Yes, everything is as it should be. That is, the heirs must inherit, there, the right of inheritance cannot be called into question by anything and everything else. Although there, inside this confessional Old Believer society, there was a different logic and other, so to speak, laws, if they can be called laws. The managers were not the owners. They were the managers of these enterprises. They were not the true owners. And they could not convey to someone if the children ceased, as it were, to be related to the faith or did not show the same business qualities as their parents. Now, in the mid-19th century, this model is completely broken under pressure from the authorities. And it is being normalized from the point of view of civilized civil law. The right of inheritance has been fully restored. And it must be said that these managers, who looked like owners in the first half of the 19th century to the authorities, quickly realized how this power press gave them advantages. What are the benefits? The benefits are simple. Dependence not on gentiles, but on imperial law, of course, seemed more promising. They quickly accepted these rules of the game that the authorities imposed. And, in fact, from the middle... More precisely, after the abolition of serfdom, already in the post-reform period, they completely integrated into the civil and legal field of the empire and became the same capitalists as those from St. Petersburg or the south or some others.

M. SOKOLOV: As I understand it, in Russia, somewhere towards the end of the 19th century, a fairly powerful Moscow group of merchants, manufacturers and people from the Old Believers appeared who found mutual understanding with the authorities, at least under Alexander III. On what basis did this mutual understanding arise at that moment?

A. PYZHIKOV: Of course, it appeared. You're right. This must be highlighted and said that this is such an integral and important feature of the history of the 19th century. Since the middle of the 19th century, the entire second half of this century is characterized by the fact that the most powerful economic player entered the economic arena - the Moscow merchant group. Why Moscow? This is not in the sense that it acted exclusively within the framework of Moscow. Moscow - this is something common noun. They lived in Moscow. But their factories, manufactories and enterprises were located throughout central Russia. This is a huge enclave. Center of Russia, Volga region. This Moscow group grew up absolutely on market conditions, absolutely without the help of the government, they did not ask for help and they did not think that there was any need to help anyone... They had their own interests - foreign, noble circles. So, this group, which grew up on confessional market peasant foundations, they all came from peasant backgrounds, semi-literate. Especially the first ones. This group began to lay claim to its rightful place in the Russian Empire, arguing that “We are, in fact, original Russian people. We are locals, we are not foreigners, we are not half-Germans, like this bureaucracy and so on. And we have the right, so to speak, to a controlling stake in the Russian economy. We are Russian people, we have this right.”

M. SOKOLOV: And, in general, it somehow fortunately coincided with the change in the official ideology...

A. PYZHIKOV: Of course. Alexander II seemed to be tolerant of them, but at a distance. Many facts speak about this. That is, he did not strive to meet them, but at the same time, of course, he stopped the practice that Nicholas I used. That is, these are diametrically opposite things. But he did not cooperate. There was such a quiet, friendly neutrality. With Alexander III the situation changes. And it changes very noticeably. We all remember that Alexander III was such a nationally oriented sovereign, so to speak... Alexander II, by the way, spoke French most of the time. With Alexander III the situation, of course, changes absolutely radically. It is nationally-emphasized. He relies on national forces, since the ideological course of Alexander III was ensured by the so-called Russian party, as it is called in history. This is a Russian party, which included Slavophiles, Aksakov, whom we mentioned, Samarin, Chizhov - this is such a businessman of the Slavophile spill, a group led by Katkov, who, naturally, also showed himself in the national field, Prince Meshchersky is a childhood friend Alexander III, who, so to speak, the branch of the Russian Party in St. Petersburg, as it was called, arranged...

M. SOKOLOV: The newspaper “Citizen”...

A. PYZHIKOV: Yes, the newspaper “Citizen”. And it was these people who gathered a different audience... Moreover, the writer Dostoevsky was there. He participated in these meetings. Melnikov-Pechersky, who wrote about the Old Believer epic in the forests on the mountains. That is, everything was imbued with such a national spirit.

M. SOKOLOV: Dostoevsky advised them: “Call the gray zipuns,” that is, “Turn to the peasantry, to the people”... They, the merchants, were called, people from the people...

A. PYZHIKOV: Well, it happened... This group, called the Russian Party, found an object worthy of applying its ideological views. Moreover, these merchants willingly went to this meeting, because they understood that not everyone at the top of that time was ready to cooperate with them. They understood everything perfectly. They were happy to play people who came from the people, who needed to be taken care of, whose business needed to be helped in every possible way.

M. SOKOLOV: They helped,

A. PYZHIKOV: Of course, they helped. Alexander III took a step towards them. In general, I even say in my book using this formulation that the Moscow Old Believer merchants represented a kind of economic branch of the Russian Party. They fed Katkov and Aksakov with economic ideas. What economic ideas? This is protectionism. Strict protectionism. Of course they helped. Alexander III agreed to this. His Minister of Finance is Vyshnegradsky, who was promoted to a key economic post through the efforts of Katkov, Aksakov, and Meshchersky instead of Bunge, whom they considered liberal and unworthy of responding to national ideas. Vyshnegradsky established the most powerful, it is known, protectionist customs tariff... The largest in Europe. And under the protection of his tariff...

M. SOKOLOV: That is, he closed the market and made their business opportunities more profitable?

A. PYZHIKOV: Yes, so that they become stronger, so that the internal economy becomes stronger, so that representatives of this internal economy can reach a new level. And they left. This is absolutely accurate. By the end of the 19th century, the Moscow merchant group became stronger than ever.

M. SOKOLOV: Alexander Vladimirovich, Nicholas II comes, so what? Is the situation really changing? The Empire begins to pursue a policy of partially open doors and the introduction of foreign capital. This, in fact, leads to a conflict between the Moscow Old Believer merchants and the gradualist authorities, right? That is, they are trying to change something... This was really the most fundamental question for them - there, on the customs tariff, on some kind of export duties, and so on?

A. PYZHIKOV: Yes. In the history of the Old Believer merchants there are 2 key points. We have already talked about one - this is the mid-19th century, when they, in fact, entered the civil field of the empire. And the second nodal point, which affected the fate of the entire Russian Empire, was the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century, associated with the change in the course of tsarism. What exactly was this change? Of course, the protectionist tariff was high, and it remained high. Finance Minister Witte, who had become finance minister by that time, naturally did not attempt to assassinate him. But he put forward the following idea, which he personified himself. The idea was to attract foreign capital in volumes unprecedented before. The logic was simple: “Russian merchants are good, no one says. But it can take a very long time to wait until they reach the required conditions when they grow up. We will be hopelessly behind the West. Therefore, you need to make a leap immediately. First of all, we need to open the gates for foreign capital here. Let them come here, equip production facilities, enterprises, make some industrial assets. This will allow you to make a leap forward. What about the merchants? Good, but let it wait.” That is, thereby indicating to them the second role. And they laid claim to the most important violin in the economy. And they were told that from now on there could be no talk of any first roles. This was very offensive for them because Witte started out absolutely as a person in the circles of Aksakov and Katkov. He was published in their publications, in their newspapers. His uncle - Fadeev - was the leader of the Russian Party, who wrote its manifestos and published them in circulation... They considered him one of their own and now this man (why did Witte have such a reputation as a chameleon) reoriented himself so much that St. Petersburg bankers led by Rodshtein, director of the International St. Petersburg Bank. This, of course, was just a slap in the face for the merchants that the person they considered one of their own treated them this way.

M. SOKOLOV: That is, it turned out that, as Alexey NRZB writes to us, that the conservatives turned into reformers and, it turns out, inclined towards such an active political position at some point, from which they shied away...

A. PYZHIKOV: The essence of the matter is absolutely right in this matter. I'll tell you a little more. Of course, when under Alexander III there was a renaissance of the Moscow merchants, even a renaissance of the Old Believers... Preobrazhenskoye and Rogozhskoye cemeteries felt better than ever... These are their spiritual centers. They were no longer financial arteries as before... Everything seemed to be going according to their scenario. And their policy, the policy of loyalty - crawling on their knees around the throne - is completely justified. Economic dividends are flowing into our hands. The Russian Party correctly formalizes these dividends and, so to speak, materializes them into specific policies. Everything is fine. But then, when Witte’s turn happened, which we are talking about, a turn towards foreign capital, the volume of which has never been seen in Russia... I will emphasize. Neither under Peter I, nor under Catherine II, this can even be said. This is in no way comparable. When such a new financial emphasis occurred, they realized that kneeling at the throne could not solve the issue. And the loyal spells to which they devoted all their time no longer work. Some other mechanisms are needed to get out of this situation, to somehow minimize their disadvantaged position in which they so unexpectedly found themselves.

M. SOKOLOV: So what? How did this bloc come about - on the one hand the merchants, on the other hand a certain zemstvo liberal-democratic movement. How did they find each other?

A. PYZHIKOV: The liberal movement, in fact, until the end of the 19th century was a rather pathetic sight. Even all those police sources who monitored and analyzed all this - they did not hide their irony towards this movement. They said that there are 10-15 people there who are capable of taking some decisive steps, the rest are just not serious, there are no fears. That's how it remained. Until the beginning of the 20th century, no one succeeded in trying to interest the merchants in some kind of liberal constitutional projects. This

The attempts were absolutely doomed. Now the situation has changed. The merchants quickly and actively began to look for new mechanisms. What new mechanisms? Mechanisms to limit autocracy and the ruling bureaucracy, so that there would be no such things as Witte did with them, so to speak primitively. These mechanisms were immediately found. They were already tested in Europe a long time ago, they bloomed there. This is what constitutional government is like. That is, all legal rights should be expressed not by the supreme will, but by the constitution, first of all. And the ruling bureaucracy should not have a monopoly on governance. That is, parliamentary forms should limit it in implementing policies. The merchants saw this mechanism and began to invest in it.

M. SOKOLOV: And which of the groups of the same Old Believers - priests, non-priests, whatever - turned out to be the most active in supporting these movements?

A. PYZHIKOV: This is a very important point, which is often overlooked. Namely, when we say “Old Believers”, “schismatics”, “Old Believers merchants” - this is not entirely correct. Because to be ideologically precise, you must always keep in mind which Old Believers are priests or non-priests. Of course, all we are talking about is this Moscow merchant group - the backbone of it was the priests, this is the Belokrinitsky hierarchy, which we mentioned. The main backbone of millionaires who grew up from a peasant environment - they were representatives of the Belokrinitsky hierarchy, that is, the Rogozhsky cemetery. There were only a few Bezpopovites there. There are very few of them in the first row of leading millionaires.

M. SOKOLOV: Well, we will continue our conversation with Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor of the Russian State Humanitarian University Alexander Pyzhikov about the Old Believers, merchants before and during Great War after the news release.

NEWS

M. SOKOLOV: On the air of “Echo of Moscow” and the TV channel “RTVi” “The Price of Victory. The price of revolution." Today our guest is Doctor of Historical Sciences Alexander Pyzhikov, author of the book “The Facets of the Russian Schism.” We continue our conversation about the role of Old Believers merchants in the changes that took place in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. Well, right off the bat I have a question. Alexey asks: “Which of the groups of Old Believers was most active already in revolutionary movement? And Alexey Kuchegashev wrote: “What connected Savva Morozov and the Bolsheviks?” Truly the most interesting figure. Apparently, maybe the brightest. Merchants appeared who sponsored not only the liberals and the zemstvo movement, but also the Social Democrats. Why?

A. PYZHIKOV: Firstly, the merchants had a special position in the opposition movement. Because we talked about how they ended up in this opposition movement. They invested in establishing the formation of a mechanism for limiting the ruling bureaucracy headed by the emperor, then their interest was immediately focused on all those who shared these ideas. These ideas always smoldered among the intelligentsia, zemstvo people, some third element...

M. SOKOLOV: I think the bureaucracy too.

A. PYZHIKOV: Yes. This is a special article. There, of course, yes. This is also a little-known page. But if now we are talking about the merchants, yes... That is, such different groups have always existed. Small groups. This is at the circle level. This never went beyond the circle level until the beginning of the 20th century. It always remained there. Therefore, when I looked at all these police reports on this topic in the archives, no one expressed any concern. This is absolutely true. But everything changed at the beginning of the 20th century. And according to these police reports, by 1903, one can feel that they were filled with anxiety. They feel that something has changed. What has changed? A fashion for liberalism and a constitution arose. This fashion arose in Russian society, primarily among the intelligentsia. Where? How did it happen? The answer here is very simple. The Moscow merchants have done one very significant thing since the end of the 19th century, which everyone knows about, but no one understands and they have now forgotten the purpose of this cultural...

M. SOKOLOV: Everyone was in the Tretyakov Gallery.

A. PYZHIKOV: Yes, a cultural and educational project, so to speak, initiated and paid for, most importantly, by the Moscow merchants. Prominent representatives of the Moscow merchant clan actually created this entire cultural and educational infrastructure, in modern terms. What I'm talking about? The Tretyakov Gallery, which was going... Let's not forget how it was going. She was going to spite the Imperial Hermitage. The Hermitage was filled with paintings by Western European artists. Here the emphasis was on our own people, on the Russians. And, in fact, this is the backbone of the Tretyakov Gallery. Then the theater is the Moscow Art Theater, the Moscow Art Theater is nothing more than the invention and implementation of a merchant’s idea. This is a very significant phenomenon. It goes beyond the boundaries of cultural life... It has survived the boundaries of 1905, 1917, and 1991. That is, how good and fruitful an idea it really was. The head of the Moscow Art Theater was, as you know, Konstantin Sergeevich Stanislavsky. Not everyone knows that this is the Old Believer merchant family of the Alekseevs. He is one of Alekseev’s relatives, who was even the Moscow city mayor in the capital city... The Moscow Art Theater circulated, carried liberal-democratic ideas. He made them fashionable. Gorky’s plays are well known to everyone... For example, “At the Lower Depths” is known to everyone - this is nothing more than the fulfillment of the order of the Moscow Art Theater, which asked Gorky to write something so democratic, touching the soul, and Gorky produced this play “At the Lower Depths”. There were all these premieres, which ended with huge sell-outs, and then demonstrations honoring Gorky and the Moscow Art Theater for making such a cultural product. Mamontov's operas, Mamontov's private operas, where the discovery of Russian culture shone - this is Fyodor Chaliapin. This is all Mamontov’s discovery. And what operas this private opera staged! What performances! “Khovanshchina” is an absolutely Old Believer epic that is unpleasant for the Romanovs. “Boris Godunov” is, again, an unpleasant page for the House of Romanov. Such tricky ideas were taken out and circulated to the public. That is, this infrastructure created such a liberal-democratic atmosphere. And many educated people from the intelligentsia immediately began to show interest in her. A fashion has emerged, as I have already said, for liberalism. But the Moscow merchants did not stop there.

A. PYZHIKOV: You said the right thing in your question, the radio listener is asking the question correctly. How are these revolutionary elements? That's right, because the merchants understood perfectly well that different respectable zemstvos of noble origin and knowledgeable professors were not enough - this was not enough to push through the model of limiting autocracy and ruling democracy. Yes, this is good, it is necessary, but it is not enough. It will be much more convincing if all these ideas sound against the backdrop of explosions, bombs and gunshots. Here they needed an audience that could provide this background. And the merchants occupied, as I said, a unique position in the opposition movement. It communicated with professors and zemstvo people, who were princes and counts, some of them... And it felt just as comfortable with those layers that could carry out these terrorist acts and something like that...

M. SOKOLOV: And Savva Mamontov? Was he an exotic character in this case?

A. PYZHIKOV: A normal merchant character. Why is he on everyone's lips?

M. SOKOLOV: Because such a tragic fate is suicide...

A. PYZHIKOV: In May 1905... There are different versions. Some say that he was killed, others that he shot himself. This can be found out...

M. SOKOLOV: The money went partially to the Bolsheviks.

A. PYZHIKOV: Of course, he communicated. Gorky testifies to this. But why do they say?.. Savva Timofeevich Mamontov...

M. SOKOLOV: Savva Morozov.

A. PYZHIKOV: Morozov, excuse me. Savva Timofeevich Morozov is such a bright character, you’re right. But the matter is not limited to them. This is not some kind of personal initiative of his. This is an initiative that was shown by a whole clan, this is a community of merchants. This is the merchant elite. There are many other names there. The same one that was mentioned, Mamontov, the Ryabushinsky brothers, who also did much more on this path than the same Savva Morozov. And then there are a lot of surnames. Moreover, not only from Moscow.

M. SOKOLOV: They write to us: “The Chetverikovs, Rukavishnikovs, Dunaevs, Zhivagos, Shchukins, Vostryakovs, Khludovs” - all this is one group, right?

A. PYZHIKOV: The Khludovs, the Shchukins, the Chetverikovs - this is all one group, this is the so-called Moscow group.

M. SOKOLOV: Alexander Vladimirovich, okay. A revolution took place, so to speak, they achieved the State Duma, achieved some limitation of autocracy, although the Duma did not control approximately 40% of the budget of state-owned companies and state banks, and did not have direct influence on the government either. That is, it turned out like this: we fought and fought, sponsored and sponsored, but there was no result. What happened before the First World War, again, with this group? What was its political activity, this Moscow merchant group, I would say?

A. PYZHIKOV: Of course, the Duma was established. In general, in my opinion, Nicholas II would have established this Duma anyway, only, of course, according to his own scenario, with his own logic, in his own sequence, which he planned to observe. But he didn't succeed. These turbulent events, especially in the autumn of 1905, are the so-called Moscow aggravation. The December uprising is highest point this exacerbation. The December armed uprising in Moscow disrupted this scenario.

M. SOKOLOV: Yes, when merchants purchased weapons for their workers.

A. PYZHIKOV: Yes. This is absolutely, as it were... I am absolutely not a pioneer here. Many authors pointed out that the entire strike wave in Moscow began with plants and factories that belonged to merchants. The mechanism is very simple. They paid wages, but said that you didn’t have to work that day. As you understand, there were a lot of people willing. Everyone was happy to participate in this. This was encouraged. This initiated this whole strike wave. This mechanism has long been discovered. Many scientists have written about this. In this case, I simply summarized most of what was written. Of course, not everything. So, the establishment of this Duma took place. Yes, the Legislative Duma. We have not yet applied for more. It was necessary to see how this new state mechanism would work. That is, it was necessary to test how it would function in action. Here, from the merchant clan, the famous Moscow figure Alexander Ivanovich Guchkov undertook to carry out this testing, so to speak. His position in the Moscow merchant class is special. He did not belong to the main backbone of this Moscow merchant class, namely to the Belokrinitsky hierarchy. He left the Feodosievo Bespopovsky Consent. But by the end of the 19th century he was a fellow believer. It was such a camouflage network, such an image. He was a fellow believer, although, of course, he treated Orthodoxy no better than his ancestors. It's clear. But this Guchkov Alexander Ivanovich is an active political figure. He advanced in 1905. He undertook to become a kind of leader who expresses the interests of the Moscow merchants in relation to the authorities, to the government, to St. Petersburg. He established a very warm and trusting relationship with Prime Minister Stolypin. This known fact. He convinced all these Moscow circles that he could make this model, which was pushed in 1905, work, work the way he would like, and he would be responsible for it. He heads the largest faction in the State Duma, the Octobrist faction, he has complete trusting relationships with Stolypin, so he can,

In our language, resolve all commercial issues.

M. SOKOLOV: But it didn’t work out.

A. PYZHIKOV: His first experience was positive in 1908. Still, Guchkov and the Duma were able to persuade Stolypin to stop initiatives to create a trust from metallurgical activities in the south, where foreign capital was at the core. This was a very big victory in 1908. Economic historians know it, I think they remember it. Then, of course, the slippage began. Feeling this, Guchkov decided to take an extreme step. He decided to head the third State Duma in order to gain access to the Tsar. He then received the right of permanent reporting to the emperor. He decided to use this right to influence him. And therefore, in 1910, from the leader of the largest faction, he became the chairman of the State Duma. But communication with the king did not work out. Specifically, Guchkov planned... He was convinced that he had persuaded the Tsar to appoint one character as Minister of the Navy. Nicholas II agreed, saw him off with a smile and appointed another - Grigorovich in 1911, after which it became clear to everyone what kind of influence Guchkov had, that it was close to zero, if any could be talked about here at all. After this, the merchants began to comprehend, realizing that this model would lead to nothing.

M. SOKOLOV: Alexander Vladimirovich, it turns out that somewhere in 1914 we see a real political aggravation by the summer of 1914, exactly similar to the same scenario in the summer before 1905 - practically the same slogans, strikes begin at various enterprises, Moscow in particular. What is this? That means they're back to their old ways again, right? Only by finding allies, as I understand it, also in the bureaucracy. A. PYZHIKOV: Here is the most interesting episode of our history tsarist empire, which for some reason falls out of the field of view of researchers. We just talked about Guchkov, that he tried to play some role as an intermediary between the government and Moscow business circles. All this ended in his complete political bankruptcy at that time. Then another character was found who took on this role with great success and reason. We are not talking about some person from the merchant class, but about one of the royal favorites, the favorites of the royal couple - the emperor and empress. I'm talking about Alexander Vasilyevich Krivoshein. This is an extremely interesting figure Russian history. What's interestnig? He moved up the royal bureaucratic ladder, moving very confidently and quickly. That is, it was a very turbulent career. She was provided by one of the tsar's close associates - Goremykin. This was the Prime Minister, the Minister of Internal Affairs. He provided patronage to Krivoshein. Krivoshein moved very quickly and ended up in Stolypin’s government almost right hand. But one detail is overlooked. Krivoshein was not just a tsarist bureaucrat. He married at the end of the 19th century the granddaughter of Timofey Isaevich Morozov, the very pillar, father of Savva Morozov, Elena Karpova, to be precise in her last name. And he became related to such a merchant clan, which was in the center of this entire Moscow bourgeoisie and Moscow merchant class. He became his own. And here we are, for the first time in Russian history, which did not happen throughout the entire 19th century, and there is no need to talk about an earlier time, we are witnessing a strange coincidence of circumstances that the Tsar’s favorite and his own man were among the Moscow merchants. It was precisely his special position in these power and economic structures that allowed him to become central in promoting the parliamentary project, that is, transforming the Duma from a legislative one into a full-fledged parliament in the Western sense of the word. That is, the Duma, which not only makes laws, but also influences appointments in the government, which governs. Krivoshein wanted to do this. The Moscow merchants, naturally connected with him by family ties, entered into a stronger alliance with him than with Guchkov. At that time, he had already moved into second or third roles, he is not visible. It was Krivoshein who undertook to push this from above. This is 1915. In 1914, before the war, it all started, it started successfully, Krivoshein took very successful steps to eliminate his opponents from the government. Of course, there was a corresponding strike fund in St. Petersburg. It all started again. Of course, other people were in charge here - this is the Social Democratic faction of the Duma “Trudoviki”, where Kerensky is already appearing. They were already led by representatives of the merchant class, in

In particular, Konovalov is a major capitalist, Ryabushinsky’s closest ally, a whole group ally... He is also a very prominent and respected merchant of Moscow. He was in touch, he was also a member of the State Duma, he was responsible for this direction. That is, this whole situation has become agitated again. In 1915, there were already war conditions, but nevertheless, due to the fact that there were failures at the front, it was decided to raise this topic again. Krivoshein started it...

M. SOKOLOV: That is, a progressive bloc was created from the right to actually social democrats in the Duma under the slogan of such a responsible government of people's trust. In fact, it turns out that you believe that it was the Moscow merchant group that stood behind him.

A. PYZHIKOV: In economic terms, if all this had worked out and been implemented, then in an economic sense the Moscow merchant class would have been the main beneficiary of this whole business. This is beyond any doubt.

M. SOKOLOV: Why didn’t Nicholas II make such a decision? On the contrary, he somehow turned his back, eventually dismissed Krivoshein, and went into confrontation. What was the point? The project was quite profitable during the war. They promised stabilization, complete mutual understanding with a virtually stable majority in the Duma. Why did he make such a suicidal decision?

A. PYZHIKOV: Here, after all, probably keywords- "During the war". This whole epic, the whole story with the progressive bloc, developed during the war. Nicholas II refused to make such political steps under military conditions. He believed that it was still necessary to first bring this war to a victorious end and then, on the laurels of the winner, return to this topic, but not before. It was precisely this sequence of actions that he advocated very firmly. And Krivoshein could not convince him. Krivoshein said that we need to do this, it will have a better effect on our military affairs and we will win faster. But Nicholas II believed that it was still better to lead the army. He became supreme commander just in August 1915. “This is now more timely than getting carried away with political combinations. Political combinations,” he believed, “will wait until the end of the war. We’ll return to them later.” In the meantime, he laid down his authority, which, by the way, Krivoshein did not advise him to do - to put his authority and his figure, his royal persona on the altar, that it was better to let the Supreme Commander-in-Chief, Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich, lead the troops. Even in case of failure, everything can be attributed to him. But Nicholas II decided that he would take it all upon himself, this was his duty. And he was completely committed to the military direction, which is natural during the war years. And he decided to leave all political combinations and political actions for later. But since Krivoshein and his allies from the government insisted, he was forced to part with them, so to speak.

M. SOKOLOV: Okay. Well, nevertheless, with the participation of the merchants, who are already familiar to us, military-industrial committees and working groups were created. The police, in particular, I see, considered them a network of conspirators, destabilizers and so on. But in their core activities they were not effective enough... What is your opinion? What kind of structures were these anyway? Were these structures that helped the army or were they structures that prepared some kind of political actions?

A. PYZHIKOV: During the war years, it was in Moscow that she was the initiator... Bourgeois circles, zemstvo circles initiated the creation public organizations to help the front. That is, the idea is that the bureaucracy cannot cope with its responsibilities, cannot ensure victory, so the public must get involved. Here in the person of the Zemstvo City Union and such a new organization... This is an invention of the First World War - these are military-industrial committees, where the bourgeoisie gathers its strength and helps the front forge victory. But let us note that all military-industrial committees operated with government funds. All this from the budget went to these military-industrial committees. They operated with these amounts, but naturally did not really want to report. Here, in addition to helping the front, so-called working groups arose under the military-industrial committees... Again, this is a signature sign of the Moscow merchants,

When the popular strata again came together to solve some problems that they needed to push through at the top. Such a fund was created. These working groups, so to speak, demonstrated the voice of the people in support of the initiatives being implemented by the merchant bourgeoisie. By the way, there are a lot of working groups... For example, under the Central Military-Industrial Committee - this is under the Central Military-Industrial Committee - they did very big things. With the help of the working group, the Putilov plant, which belonged to the banking group of the Russian-Asian bank, was sequestered. The Moscow merchants always opposed the St. Petersburg banks and tried to infringe on them as much as possible. Work groups contributed here even during the First World War. And of course, immediately before February 1917, all those memoirs that have been published and studied in emigration now allow us to assert that the working groups were truly a combat headquarters, I’m not afraid of this word, to undermine the tsarist regime immediately at the last stage. It was they who coordinated all actions together with the Duma in order to show tsarism that it was doomed.

M. SOKOLOV: Tell me, the Guchkov conspiracy, the military-merchant conspiracy, which many of your colleagues write about, allegedly against Nikolai and Alexandra Fedorovna - is still a myth or an unrealized possibility due to such a spontaneous start of a soldier’s revolt in February 1917.

A. PYZHIKOV: Of course, this is not a myth. The entire sequence of actions performed by the Moscow merchants convinces us that this was done consciously. For this there were different allies - Guchkov, Krivoshein... By the way, when the tsar dismissed Krivoshein in September 1915, they quickly forgot about him, the entire Moscow merchant class. He is already becoming a nobody for them. They are already completely determined to openly undermine the tsarist regime. And here the theme of Rasputin reaches its climax. It has been smoldering for so long, and now it is becoming a powerful tool with the help of which the royal couple is discredited. The soldiers' riot, yes, happened. This is in February 1917. There really was a soldiers' revolt. Of course, they created the entire atmosphere in which it could happen, but they hardly expected those consequences.

M. SOKOLOV: And lastly, perhaps, I would still like to look into what you have not yet written about 1917. Why were these people, who were so actively striving for power, unable to retain it?

A. PYZHIKOV: Well, yes. Firstly, February revolution 1917 ended in bankruptcy. It was replaced by the October one and further... Well, because after all, the liberal project that the Moscow merchants promoted - it suffered a complete collapse, it was a fiasco. That is, perestroika state life on liberal lines, constitutional, liberal, as they wanted and believed that this would help Russia did not completely come true. The masses turned out to be absolutely deaf to this liberal project, absolutely deaf. They didn't perceive him. They did not understand the charms that were obvious to the Moscow merchants, the political delights. The masses had completely different priorities, a different idea of ​​how to live...

M. SOKOLOV: That is, the same communalism and the same idea of ​​the old schismaticism?

A. PYZHIKOV: Yes. These deep layers... They lived in their communal, collective psychology. It was she who splashed out. The liberal project has become irrelevant here.

M. SOKOLOV: Thank you. Today the guest of the Echo of Moscow studio and the RTVi television program was Alexander Pyzhikov, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor of the Russian State University for the Humanities. This program was hosted today by Mikhail Sokolov. All the best.

A. PYZHIKOV: All the best.

M. SOKOLOV: Goodbye.

M. SOKOLOV: Alexander Vladimirovich, Nicholas II comes, so what? Is the situation really changing? The Empire begins to conduct politics partially open doors, introduction of foreign capital. This, in fact, leads to a conflict between the Moscow Old Believer merchants and the gradualist authorities, right? That is, they are trying to change something... This was really the most fundamental question for them - there, on the customs tariff, on some kind of export duties, and so on?

A. PYZHIKOV: Yes. In the history of the Old Believer merchants there are 2 key points. We have already talked about one - this is the mid-19th century, when they, in fact, entered the civil field of the empire. And the second nodal point, which affected the fate of the entire Russian Empire, was the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century, associated with the change in the course of tsarism. What exactly was this change? Of course, the protectionist tariff was high, and it remained high. Finance Minister Witte, who had become finance minister by that time, naturally did not attempt to assassinate him. But he put forward the following idea, which he personified himself. The idea was to attract foreign capital in volumes unprecedented before. The logic was simple: “Russian merchants are good, no one says. But we can wait a very long time until they reach the required standards, when they grow up. We will hopelessly lag behind the West. Therefore, we need to immediately make a breakthrough. We need to open the gates here for foreign capital first of all. Let them come here, equip production facilities, enterprises, make some industrial assets. This will allow them to make a leap forward. And the merchants? Good, but let them wait." That is, thereby indicating to them the second role. And they laid claim to the most important violin in the economy. And they were told that from now on there could be no talk of any first roles. This was very offensive for them because Witte started out absolutely as a person in the circles of Aksakov and Katkov. He was published in their publications, in their newspapers. His uncle - Fadeev - was the leader of the Russian Party, who wrote its manifestos and published them in circulation... They considered him one of their own and now this man (why did Witte have such a reputation as a chameleon) reoriented himself so much that St. Petersburg bankers in headed by Rodshtein, director of the International St. Petersburg Bank. This, of course, was just a slap in the face for the merchants that the person they considered one of their own treated them this way.

M. SOKOLOV: That is, it turned out that, as Alexey NRZB writes to us, that the conservatives turned into reformers and, it turns out, inclined towards such an active political position at some point, from which they shied away...

A. PYZHIKOV: The essence of the matter is absolutely right in this matter. I'll tell you a little more. Of course, when under Alexander III there was a renaissance of the Moscow merchants, even a renaissance of the Old Believers... Preobrazhenskoye and Rogozhskoye cemeteries felt better than ever... These are their spiritual centers. They were no longer financial arteries as before... Everything seemed to be going according to their scenario. And their policy, the policy of loyalty - crawling on their knees around the throne - is completely justified. Economic dividends are flowing into our hands. The Russian Party correctly formalizes these dividends and, so to speak, materializes them into specific policies. Everything is fine. But then, when Witte’s turn happened, which we are talking about, a turn towards foreign capital, the volume of which has never been seen in Russia... I will emphasize. Neither under Peter I, nor under Catherine II, this can even be said. This is in no way comparable. When such a new financial emphasis occurred, they realized that kneeling at the throne could not solve the issue. And the loyal spells to which they devoted all their time no longer work. Some other mechanisms are needed to get out of this situation, to somehow minimize their disadvantaged position in which they so unexpectedly found themselves.

M. SOKOLOV: So what? How did this bloc come about - on the one hand the merchants, on the other hand a certain zemstvo liberal-democratic movement. How did they find each other?

A. PYZHIKOV: The liberal movement, in fact, until the end of the 19th century was a rather pathetic sight. Even all those police sources who monitored and analyzed all this - they did not hide their irony towards this movement. They said that there are 10-15 people there who are capable of taking some decisive steps, the rest are just not serious, there are no fears. That's how it remained. Until the beginning of the 20th century, no one succeeded in trying to interest the merchants in some kind of liberal constitutional projects. This

the attempts were absolutely doomed. Now the situation has changed. The merchants quickly and actively began to look for new mechanisms. What new mechanisms? Mechanisms to limit autocracy and the ruling bureaucracy, so that there would be no such things as Witte did with them, so to speak primitively. These mechanisms were immediately found. They were already tested in Europe a long time ago, they bloomed there. This is what constitutional government is like. That is, all legal rights should be expressed not by the supreme will, but by the constitution, first of all. And the ruling bureaucracy should not have a monopoly on governance. That is, parliamentary forms should limit it in implementing policies. The merchants saw this mechanism and began to invest in it.

M. SOKOLOV: And which of the groups of the same Old Believers - priests, non-priests, whatever - turned out to be the most active in supporting these movements?

A. PYZHIKOV: This is a very important point, which is often overlooked. Namely, when we say “Old Believers”, “schismatics”, “Old Believers merchants” - this is not entirely correct. Because to be ideologically precise, you must always keep in mind which Old Believers are priests or non-priests. Of course, all we are talking about is this Moscow merchant group - the backbone of it was the priests, this is the Belokrinitsky hierarchy, which we mentioned. The main backbone of millionaires who grew up from a peasant environment - they were representatives of the Belokrinitsky hierarchy, that is, the Rogozhsky cemetery. There were only a few Bezpopovites there. There are very few of them in the first row of leading millionaires.

M. SOKOLOV: Well, we will continue our conversation with Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor of the Russian State University for the Humanities Alexander Pyzhikov about the Old Believers, merchants before and during the Great War after the news release.

M. SOKOLOV: On the air of “Echo of Moscow” and the TV channel “RTVi” “The Price of Victory. The Price of Revolution.” Today our guest is Doctor of Historical Sciences Alexander Pyzhikov, author of the book “The Facets of the Russian Schism.” We continue our conversation about the role of Old Believers merchants in the changes that took place in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. Well, right off the bat I have a question. Alexey asks: “Which of the groups of Old Believers was most active in the revolutionary movement?” And Alexey Kuchegashev wrote: “What connected Savva Morozov and the Bolsheviks?” Truly the most interesting figure. Apparently, maybe the brightest. Merchants appeared who sponsored not only the liberals and the zemstvo movement, but also the Social Democrats. Why?

A. PYZHIKOV: Firstly, the merchants had a special position in the opposition movement. Because we talked about how they ended up in this opposition movement. They invested in establishing the formation of a mechanism for limiting the ruling bureaucracy headed by the emperor, then their interest was immediately focused on all those who shared these ideas. These ideas always smoldered among the intelligentsia, zemstvo people, some third element...

M. SOKOLOV: I think the bureaucracy too.

A. PYZHIKOV: Yes. This is a special article. There, of course, yes. This is also a little-known page. But if now we are talking about the merchants, yes... That is, such different groups have always existed. Small groups. This is at the circle level. This never went beyond the circle level until the beginning of the 20th century. It always remained there. Therefore, when I looked at all these police reports on this topic in the archives, no one expressed any concern. This is absolutely true. But everything changed at the beginning of the 20th century. And according to these police reports, by 1903, one can feel that they were filled with anxiety. They feel that something has changed. What has changed? A fashion for liberalism and a constitution arose. This fashion arose in Russian society, primarily among the intelligentsia. Where? How did it happen? The answer here is very simple. The Moscow merchant class has done one very significant thing since the end of the 19th century, which everyone knows about, but no one understands and they have now forgotten the purpose of this cultural...

M. SOKOLOV: Everyone was in the Tretyakov Gallery.

A. PYZHIKOV: Yes, a cultural and educational project, so to speak, initiated and paid for, most importantly, by the Moscow merchants. Prominent representatives of the Moscow merchant clan actually created this entire cultural and educational infrastructure, in modern terms. What I'm talking about? The Tretyakov Gallery, which was going... Let's not forget how it was going. She was going to spite the Imperial Hermitage. The Hermitage was filled with paintings by Western European artists. Here the emphasis was on our own people, on the Russians. And, in fact, this is the backbone of the Tretyakov Gallery. Then the theater is the Moscow Art Theater, the Moscow Art Theater is nothing more than the invention and implementation of a merchant’s idea. This is a very significant phenomenon. In cultural life it goes beyond the framework... It has survived the framework of 1905, and 1917, and 1991. That is, how good and fruitful an idea it really was. The head of the Moscow Art Theater was, as you know, Konstantin Sergeevich Stanislavsky. Not everyone knows that this is the Old Believer merchant family of the Alekseevs. He is one of Alekseev’s relatives, who was even the Moscow city mayor in the capital city... The Moscow Art Theater circulated, carried liberal-democratic ideas. He made them fashionable. Gorky's plays are known to everyone... For example, "At the Lower Depths" is known to everyone - this is nothing more than the fulfillment of the order of the Moscow Art Theater, which asked Gorky to write something so democratic, touching the soul, and Gorky produced this play "At the Lower Depths". There were all these premieres, which ended with huge sell-outs, and then demonstrations honoring Gorky and the Moscow Art Theater for making such a cultural product. Mamontov's operas, Mamontov's private operas, where the discovery of Russian culture shone - this is Fyodor Chaliapin. This is all Mamontov’s discovery. And what operas this private opera staged! What performances! "Khovanshchina" is an absolutely Old Believer epic that is unpleasant for the Romanovs. “Boris Godunov” is, again, an unpleasant page for the House of Romanov. Such tricky ideas were taken out and circulated to the public. That is, this infrastructure created such a liberal-democratic atmosphere. And many educated people from the intelligentsia immediately began to show interest in her. A fashion has emerged, as I have already said, for liberalism. But the Moscow merchants did not stop there.

A. PYZHIKOV: You said the right thing in your question, the radio listener is asking the question correctly. How are these revolutionary elements? That's right, because the merchants understood perfectly well that different respectable zemstvos of noble origin and knowledgeable professors were not enough - this was not enough to push through the model of limiting autocracy and ruling democracy. Yes, this is good, it is necessary, but it is not enough. It will be much more convincing if all these ideas sound against the backdrop of explosions, bombs and gunshots. Here they needed an audience that could provide this background. And the merchants occupied, as I said, a unique position in the opposition movement. It communicated with professors and zemstvo people, who were princes and counts, some of them... And it felt just as comfortable with those layers that could carry out these terrorist acts and something like that...

M. SOKOLOV: And Savva Mamontov? Was he an exotic character in this case?

A. PYZHIKOV: A normal merchant character. Why is he on everyone's lips?

M. SOKOLOV: Because such a tragic fate is suicide...

A. PYZHIKOV: In May 1905... There are different versions. Some say that he was killed, others that he shot himself. This can be found out...

M. SOKOLOV: The money went partially to the Bolsheviks.

A. PYZHIKOV: Of course, he communicated. Gorky testifies to this. But why do they say?.. Savva Timofeevich Mamontov...

M. SOKOLOV: Savva Morozov.

A. PYZHIKOV: Morozov, excuse me. Savva Timofeevich Morozov is such a bright character, you’re right. But the matter is not limited to them. This is not some kind of personal initiative of his. This is an initiative that was shown by a whole clan, this is a community of merchants. This is the merchant elite. There are many other names there. The same one that was mentioned, Mamontov, the Ryabushinsky brothers, who also did much more on this path than the same Savva Morozov. And then there are a lot of surnames. Moreover, not only from Moscow.

M. SOKOLOV: They write to us: “The Chetverikovs, Rukavishnikovs, Dunaevs, Zhivagos, Shchukins, Vostryakovs, Khludovs” - all this is one group, right?

A. PYZHIKOV: The Khludovs, the Shchukins, the Chetverikovs - this is all one group, this is the so-called Moscow group.

M. SOKOLOV: Alexander Vladimirovich, okay. A revolution took place, so to speak, they achieved the State Duma, achieved some limitation of autocracy, although the Duma did not control approximately 40% of the budget of state-owned companies and state banks, and did not have direct influence on the government either. That is, it turned out like this: we fought and fought, sponsored and sponsored, but there was no result. What happened before the First World War, again, with this group? What was its political activity, this Moscow merchant group, I would say?

A. PYZHIKOV: Of course, the Duma was established. In general, in my opinion, Nicholas II would have established this Duma anyway, only, of course, according to his own scenario, with his own logic, in his own sequence, which he planned to observe. But he didn't succeed. These turbulent events, especially in the autumn of 1905, are the so-called Moscow aggravation. The December uprising is the highest point of this aggravation. The December armed uprising in Moscow disrupted this scenario.

M. SOKOLOV: Yes, when merchants purchased weapons for their workers.

A. PYZHIKOV: Yes. This is absolutely, as it were... I am absolutely not a pioneer here. Many authors pointed out that the entire strike wave in Moscow began with plants and factories that belonged to merchants. The mechanism is very simple. They paid wages, but said that you didn’t have to work that day. As you understand, there were a lot of people willing. Everyone was happy to participate in this. This was encouraged. This initiated this whole strike wave. This mechanism has long been discovered. Many scientists have written about this. In this case, I simply summarized most of what was written. Of course, not everything. So, the establishment of this Duma took place. Yes, the Legislative Duma. We have not yet applied for more. It was necessary to see how this new state mechanism would work. That is, it was necessary to test how it would function in action. Here, from the merchant clan, the famous Moscow figure Alexander Ivanovich Guchkov undertook to carry out this testing, so to speak. His position in the Moscow merchant class is special. He did not belong to the main backbone of this Moscow merchant class, namely to the Belokrinitsky hierarchy. He left the Feodosievo Bespopovsky Consent. But by the end of the 19th century he was a fellow believer. It was such a camouflage network, such an image. He was a fellow believer, although, of course, he treated Orthodoxy no better than his ancestors. It's clear. But this Guchkov Alexander Ivanovich is an active political figure. He advanced in 1905. He undertook to become a kind of leader who expresses the interests of the Moscow merchants in relation to the authorities, to the government, to St. Petersburg. He established a very warm and trusting relationship with Prime Minister Stolypin. This is a known fact. He convinced all these Moscow circles that he could make this model, which was pushed in 1905, work, work the way he would like, and he would be responsible for it. He heads the largest faction in the State Duma, the Octobrist faction, he has complete trusting relationships with Stolypin, so he can,

in our language, to resolve all commercial issues.

M. SOKOLOV: But it didn’t work out.

A. PYZHIKOV: His first experience was positive in 1908. Still, Guchkov and the Duma were able to persuade Stolypin to stop initiatives to create a trust from metallurgical activities in the south, where foreign capital was at the core. This was a very big victory in 1908. Economic historians know it, I think they remember it. Then, of course, the slippage began. Feeling this, Guchkov decided to take an extreme step. He decided to head the third State Duma in order to gain access to the Tsar. He then received the right of permanent reporting to the emperor. He decided to use this right to influence him. And therefore, in 1910, from the leader of the largest faction, he became the chairman of the State Duma. But communication with the king did not work out. Specifically, Guchkov planned... He was convinced that he had persuaded the Tsar to appoint one character as Minister of the Navy. Nicholas II agreed, saw him off with a smile and appointed another - Grigorovich in 1911, after which it became clear to everyone what kind of influence Guchkov had, that it was close to zero, if any could be talked about here at all. After this, the merchants began to comprehend, realizing that this model would lead to nothing.

M. SOKOLOV: Alexander Vladimirovich, it turns out that somewhere in 1914 we see a real political aggravation by the summer of 1914, exactly similar to the same scenario in the summer before 1905 - practically the same slogans, strikes begin at various enterprises, Moscow in particular. What is this? That means they're back to their old ways again, right? Only by finding allies, as I understand it, also in the bureaucracy. A. PYZHIKOV: Here is the most interesting episode of our history of the tsarist empire, which for some reason falls out of the field of view of researchers. We just talked about Guchkov, that he tried to play some role as an intermediary between the government and Moscow business circles. All this ended in his complete political bankruptcy at that time. Then another character was found who took on this role with great success and reason. We are not talking about some person from the merchant class, but about one of the royal favorites, the favorites of the royal couple - the emperor and empress. I'm talking about Alexander Vasilyevich Krivoshein. This is an extremely interesting figure in Russian history. What's interestnig? He moved up the royal bureaucratic ladder, moving very confidently and quickly. That is, it was a very turbulent career. She was provided by one of the tsar's close associates - Goremykin. This was the Prime Minister, the Minister of Internal Affairs. He provided patronage to Krivoshein. Krivoshein moved very quickly and ended up in Stolypin’s government almost as his right hand. But one detail is overlooked. Krivoshein was not just a tsarist bureaucrat. He married at the end of the 19th century the granddaughter of Timofey Isaevich Morozov, the very pillar, father of Savva Morozov, Elena Karpova, to be precise in her last name. And he became related to such a merchant clan, which was in the center of this entire Moscow bourgeoisie and Moscow merchant class. He became his own. And here we are, for the first time in Russian history, which did not happen throughout the entire 19th century, and there is no need to talk about an earlier time, we are witnessing a strange coincidence of circumstances that the Tsar’s favorite and his own man were among the Moscow merchants. It was precisely his special position in these power and economic structures that allowed him to become central in promoting the parliamentary project, that is, transforming the Duma from a legislative one into a full-fledged parliament in the Western sense of the word. That is, the Duma, which not only makes laws, but also influences appointments in the government, which governs. Krivoshein wanted to do this. The Moscow merchants, naturally connected with him by family ties, entered into a stronger alliance with him than with Guchkov. At that time, he had already moved into second or third roles, he is not visible. It was Krivoshein who undertook to push this from above. This is 1915. In 1914, before the war, it all started, it started successfully, Krivoshein took very successful steps to eliminate his opponents from the government. Of course, there was a corresponding strike fund in St. Petersburg. It all started again. Of course, other people were in charge here - this is the Social Democratic faction of the Duma "Trudoviki", where Kerensky is already appearing. They were already led by representatives of the merchant class, in

in particular, Konovalov is a major capitalist, Ryabushinsky’s closest ally, a whole group ally... He is also a very prominent and respected merchant of Moscow. He was in touch, he was also a member of the State Duma, he was responsible for this direction. That is, this whole situation has become agitated again. In 1915, there were already war conditions, but nevertheless, due to the fact that there were failures at the front, it was decided to raise this topic again. Krivoshein started it...

M. SOKOLOV: That is, a progressive bloc was created from the right to actually social democrats in the Duma under the slogan of such a responsible government of people's trust. In fact, it turns out that you believe that it was the Moscow merchant group that stood behind him.

A. PYZHIKOV: In economic terms, if all this had worked out and been implemented, then in an economic sense the Moscow merchant class would have been the main beneficiary of this whole business. This is beyond any doubt.

M. SOKOLOV: Why didn’t Nicholas II make such a decision? On the contrary, he somehow turned his back, eventually dismissed Krivoshein, and went into confrontation. What was the point? The project was quite profitable during the war. They promised stabilization, complete mutual understanding with a virtually stable majority in the Duma. Why did he make such a suicidal decision?

A. PYZHIKOV: Still, probably, the key words here are “During the war.” This whole epic, the whole story with the progressive bloc, developed during the war. Nicholas II refused to make such political steps under military conditions. He believed that it was still necessary to first bring this war to a victorious end and then, on the laurels of the winner, return to this topic, but not before. It was precisely this sequence of actions that he advocated very firmly. And Krivoshein could not convince him. Krivoshein said that we need to do this, it will have a better effect on our military affairs and we will win faster. But Nicholas II believed that it was still better to lead the army. He became supreme commander just in August 1915. “This is now more timely than getting carried away with political combinations. Political combinations,” he believed, “will wait for the end of the war. Afterwards we will return to them.” In the meantime, he laid down his authority, which, by the way, Krivoshein did not advise him to do - to put his authority and his figure, his royal persona on the altar, that it was better to let the supreme commander-in-chief lead the troops Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich. Even in case of failure, everything can be attributed to him. But Nicholas II decided that he would take it all upon himself, this was his duty. And he was completely committed to the military direction, which is natural during the war years. And he decided to leave all political combinations and political actions for later. But since Krivoshein and his allies from the government insisted, he was forced to part with them, so to speak.

M. SOKOLOV: Okay. Well, nevertheless, with the participation of the merchants, who are already familiar to us, military-industrial committees and working groups were created. The police, in particular, I see, considered them a network of conspirators, destabilizers and so on. But in their core activities they were not effective enough... What is your opinion? What kind of structures were these anyway? Were these structures that helped the army or were they structures that prepared some kind of political actions?

A. PYZHIKOV: During the war years, it was in Moscow that she was the initiator... Bourgeois circles, zemstvo circles initiated the creation of public organizations to help the front. That is, the idea is that the bureaucracy cannot cope with its responsibilities, cannot ensure victory, so the public must get involved. Here in the person of the Zemstvo City Union and such a new organization... This invention of the First World War is military-industrial committees, where the bourgeoisie gathers its strength and helps the front forge victory. But let us note that all military-industrial committees operated with government funds. All this from the budget went to these military-industrial committees. They operated with these amounts, but naturally did not really want to report. Here, in addition to helping the front, so-called working groups arose under the military-industrial committees... Again, this is a signature sign of the Moscow merchants,

when the popular strata again came together to solve some problems that they needed to push through at the top. Such a fund was created. These working groups, so to speak, demonstrated the voice of the people in support of the initiatives being implemented by the merchant bourgeoisie. By the way, there are a lot of working groups... For example, under the Central Military-Industrial Committee - this is under the Central Military-Industrial Committee - they did very big things. With the help of the working group, the Putilov plant, which belonged to the banking group of the Russian-Asian bank, was sequestered. The Moscow merchants always opposed the St. Petersburg banks and tried to infringe on them as much as possible. Work groups contributed here even during the First World War. And of course, immediately before February 1917, all those memoirs that have been published and studied in emigration now allow us to assert that the working groups were truly a combat headquarters, I’m not afraid of this word, to undermine the tsarist regime immediately at the last stage. It was they who coordinated all actions together with the Duma in order to show tsarism that it was doomed.

M. SOKOLOV: Tell me, the Guchkov conspiracy, the military-merchant conspiracy, which many of your colleagues write about, allegedly against Nikolai and Alexandra Fedorovna - is still a myth or an unrealized possibility due to such a spontaneous start of a soldier’s revolt in February 1917.

A. PYZHIKOV: Of course, this is not a myth. The entire sequence of actions performed by the Moscow merchants convinces us that this was done consciously. For this there were different allies - Guchkov, Krivoshein... By the way, when the tsar dismissed Krivoshein in September 1915, they quickly forgot about him, the entire Moscow merchant class. He is already becoming a nobody for them. They are already completely determined to openly undermine the tsarist regime. And here the theme of Rasputin reaches its climax. It has been smoldering for so long, and now it is becoming a powerful tool with the help of which the royal couple is discredited. The soldiers' riot, yes, happened. This is in February 1917. There really was a soldiers' revolt. Of course, they created the entire atmosphere in which it could happen, but they hardly expected those consequences.

M. SOKOLOV: And lastly, perhaps, I would still like to look into what you have not yet written about 1917. Why were these people, who were so actively striving for power, unable to retain it?

A. PYZHIKOV: Well, yes. Well, firstly, the February revolution of 1917 ended in bankruptcy. It was replaced by the October one and further... Well, because after all, the liberal project that the Moscow merchants promoted - it suffered a complete collapse, it was a fiasco. That is, the restructuring of state life on liberal, constitutional, liberal lines, as they wanted and believed that it would help Russia, did not completely come true. The masses turned out to be absolutely deaf to this liberal project, absolutely deaf. They didn't perceive him. They did not understand the charms that were obvious to the Moscow merchants, the political delights. The masses had completely different priorities, a different idea of ​​how to live...

M. SOKOLOV: That is, the same communalism and the same idea of ​​the old schismaticism?

A. PYZHIKOV: Yes. These deep layers... They lived in their communal, collective psychology. It was she who splashed out. The liberal project has become irrelevant here.