Порядок вступления иерархов на кафедру в домонгольской Руси и вопросы хронологии первых митрополитов Киевских
Vologda was the third largest construction centre in Russia in the mid-17th — early 18th centuries, however no particular architectural school emerged there. The fi rst buildings in Vologda were associated with masters who had worked in Yaroslavl, Kostroma and Galich. Churches in the “divnoe uzoroch’e” (marvelously ornate) style were built with the help of masters from Moscow. The modest churches of the early Petrine time were also associated with Volga and Ustyug regions. Reproducing forms of the local uzoroch’e style, these churches’ design timidly appeals to the forms of the Naryshkin baroque.
The article deals with the Byzantine background of the crisis in the Russian Church which unfolded in 1156–1169 and was caused by the introduction of new rules of fasting and asceticism by the Greek bishops under the leadership of metropolitan Constantine I of Rus'. The article begins with a close look at the controversies that shook the patriarchate of Constantinople in 1040s–1060s, and were caused by, at first, inaction, and later by decisive actions of emperor Manuel I Comnenos. A close study of these controversies sheds light on the struggle of the two ecclesiastical parties, both composed mostly of former and current deacons of Hagia Sophia. The first of these parties sought to preserve the status quo in the Orthodox Church as it took shape under the first Comnenoi emperors, particularly in relation to the fasting discipline that conformed to the old Studite tradition. This party was represented by Patriarchs Cosmas II Atticus and Nicholas IV Muzalon, metropolitan Eustathius of Dyrrhachium, and by such intellectuals as Michael of Thessalonica, Nicephoros Basilakes, Soterichos Panteugenes, and possibly by John Tzetzes. The other party sought to revise the rules of fasting and asceticism, seeing it as a return to the ancient "apostolic" norms, while being guided by the reformed monastic tradition (i. e., of the so-called "Evergetine Reform Movement"). Among its supporters, one can count the patriarchs Michael II Kourkouas and Theodotus II, such prominent officials as Leo Hicanatus and John Pantechnes, deacon Basil-"Bagoas", metropolitan of Ephesus, George Tornikos, and metropolitan of Rus', Constantine I. In their mutual struggle, these parties used all possible means and took turns in deposing the patriarchs who did not share their views, denouncing their opponents as heretics and persecuting them, if such opportunity arose. The second of these parties was especially successful in using these means. At last, at the 1156–1157 Church councils of Constantinople, the second party succeeded in dealing the final blow to their opponents, which allowed Constantine I and his followers to impose without reservation the new rules of asceticism in Rus'. However, after the 1166 council, when Manuel I started to be inclined towards the ecclesiastical union with Rome, those who just a decade earlier celebrated victory became subject of persecution. In particular, this change in policy could have been the reason for sending Constantine II of Kiev to Rus', if one is to understand this appointment as an honorary exile. Since 1170s the situation in the Oecumenical patriarchate changed yet again, and the influence of the former ecclesiastical party fades into history.
The present article continues the investigation of the Soqotri verbal system undertaken by the Russian-Soqotri fieldwork team. The article focuses on the so-called “weak” and “geminated” roots in the basic stem. The investigation is based on the analysis of full paradigms (perfect, imperfect and jussive) of more than 170 “weak” and “geminated” Soqotri verbs.