НЕСТОР: Ежеквартальный журнал истории и культуры России и Восточной Европы. 2000. № 1: Православная церковь в России и СССР. Источники, исследования, историография ред. по И. В. Лукоянов, С. Л. Фирсов (review)

583 Ab Imperio, 1/2004 смогла придать противоречивым ориенталистским веяниям черты общественного мнения, а госу- дарственнический “ориентализм” был ситуативным и в мобилиза- ции этого мнения еще просто не нуждался. Ряд ключевых вопросов, остав- ленных на полях новаторской работы американского историка, несомненно, мог бы стимулиро- вать дальнейшие исследования. Было ли восточничество всего лишь эфемерным бесструктур- ным интеллектуальным веянием, породившим идеологические проблески в имперском сознании представителей элиты и угасшим вслед за “заходящим солнцем” Цусимы? Было ли оно лишь утопическим и компенсаторным элементом? Можно ли и нужно ли его эссенциализировать? Можно ли говорить о преемственности восточнических проектов, их языка и практики в позднеимпер- ской и большевистской России? Наконец, структурны ли вообще имперские идеологии? Вероятно, смещение фокуса на взаимодей- ствие внутри- и внешнеимпер- ской политики приблизит к от- вету на эти вопросы и подчеркнет преимущества отмеченных выше интеграционных тенденций в ис- следованиях по имперской исто- рии, если они, конечно, не будут исчерпываться попытками сим- плификации или деконструкции. Pavel STEFANOV НЕСТОР: Ежеквартальный журнал истории и культуры России и Восточной Европы. 2000. № 1: Православная церковь в России и СССР. Источники, исследования, историография / Главный редак- тор И. В. Лукоянов, ред. номера C. Л. Фирсов. Санкт-Петербург и Кишинев, 2000. 444 c. ISBN: 9975-9519-8-8. Church history, a reputedly scientific discipline in imperial Russia, plunged into obscurity after the Bolshevik revolution. It was still taught in the very few theological seminaries and academies still left open, but practically nothing was published to counter the spate of atheist propaganda . The 1988 jubilee and especially the demise of the Soviet Union in 1991 opened the long-closed floodgates . Many new church history books and collections of documents have been published since, especially dealing with the Russian church in the tragic 20th century, while older monographs have been reprinted or published on the Internet. New journals devoted to Russian church history have appeared but have yet to reach the quality or popularity of secular historical journals. The first issue of 2000 of the established Nestor journal published by the Saint Petersburg branch of the Institute of Russian History and 584 Рецензии/Reviews edited by S. L. Firsov is a notable addition to the increasing amount of new publications on the history of the Russian church. It is divided into five sections: Sources, Studies, Debut, Bibliography, and Reviews and Summaries. The volume opens with Firsov’s re-publication of the diary of Apolinarii Lvov, the head the synodal Library and Archive between 1891 and 1898 (pp. 9-164). The text was first published in 1930, but contained a number of omissions and errors. Like most diaries, it is a highly subjective text, which strongly criticizes officials with whom Lvov was in contact and is especially critical of deputy Ober Prosecutor Sabler. The diary, a remarkable document of its epoch, clearly reveals the stale atmosphere and the lack of good leaders in the Synod and in Russian society at large. It is full of precious snippets about the vicissitudes of church-state relationships, which were hardly perfect. Copious notes added to the text provided by Firsov are quite helpful and enlightening. The second contribution belongs to O. L. Fetisenko who publishes 18 letters exchanged between the eminent Russian philosopher K. N. Leontiev and his great admirer T. I. Filippov, a state official at the time of Tsar Alexander III (pp. 165-204). The letters date from 1879 to 1891. Their main topics were the fierce disputes waged between the Greek and Bulgarian churches in the Balkans and the goals of Panslavism. Strongly conservative and devout, Leontiev demanded adherence to church canonical law while his correspondent followed official Russian policy which became more pragmatic in the 1860s and envisioned autonomy, but not autocephaly for the emerging Bulgarian church. The next batch, published by Firsov, of documents covers four letters and protocols concerning the renovationist movement in the Russian church (pp. 205-236). In the early 20th century, the renovationist ranks were made up mainly of married and educated urban clergy which introduced notable reforms during the Moscow council of 19171918 . In the 1920s, the Renovationists received full support from the Bolshevik state while traditional believers such as those belonging to the Alexander Nevsky brotherhood (doc. 4) were tried in courts and sentenced. These documents help elucidate the poignant riddle of the Renovationists, most of whom were sincere and straightforward in their desire to rid the church of its imperial and antisemitic legacy. The Studies section begins with an article byA. E. Musin who reconsiders archaeological data (mainly graves and their artifacts) as a source of Russian christianization (pp. 239-262). According to his article, different types of burial do not neces- 585 Ab Imperio, 1/2004 sarily provide evidence for lingering paganism and the term dvoeverie is a literary invention adopted by Soviet propaganda. His evidence enhances the available literary information about the 10th -11th century in Russia which tends to be scarce. In his article “The All-Holy Synod and the Russian Bishops in the First Decades of Existence of ‘Church Government’ in Russia,” A. G. Zakrzhevky discusses the structure and prerogatives of the church’s ruling body after the abolishment of the Patriarchate in 1721 (pp. 263-274). His conclusions are pessimistic. The Synod was created by the state and served its interests. Devoid of any initiative and rights and turned into...