Dmitrievsky A. A. Mitra. (Historical and archaeological essay)

Symbolism

The miter adorns the clergyman, since during the service he depicts King Christ, and at the same time reminds of the crown of thorns with which the Savior was crowned. In the Orthodox Church, when putting a miter on a bishop, a prayer is read: “ Put, Lord, on your head a crown and from other stones...

", as in the celebration of the sacrament of marriage. For this reason, the miter is also understood as an image of the golden crowns with which “the righteous in the Kingdom of Heaven are crowned at the wedding feast of the union of Jesus Christ with the Church”[1].

An archpriest is the rector of a church and a priest rolled into one

Admission to archpriesthood is subject to the following conditions:

• the applicant must usually be the rector of the temple;
• the dedication is conducted by the bishop;
• it is not necessary to go through the priesthood level if the patriarch ordered to ordain a deacon as an archpriest.

High Priest

the same as the archpriest. That is, the senior priest

The High Priest is still a priest, so he retains all of his typical duties:

• perform six sacraments: baptism, confirmation, communion, marriage, repentance, consecration of oil;
• communicate with parishioners: teach, explain, exhort, help, share grief and joy;
• have qualities such as openness, self-detachment, goodwill;
• fully participate in the life of the parish.

As the rector of the temple, the archpriest has the following duties:

• represents the parish in resolving legal issues;
• presides over the Parish Council;
• is responsible for the proper conduct of divine services in accordance with the church charter; organization of sermons; religious and moral education of parishioners;
• organizes social, educational, charitable and other activities of the church;
• may suspend the execution of decisions on issues of an intra-church, doctrinal and canonical nature in order to coordinate everything with the diocesan bishop;
• leads the parable (parish ministers);
• monitors the proper maintenance of parish records;
• conducts official correspondence on behalf of the church;
• coordinates with the diocesan bishop the decisions of the parish meeting;
• submits reports and minutes on the activities of the parish to the diocesan bishop;
• performs other functions stipulated by the Church Charter and the employment contract;
• bears canonical, disciplinary, administrative and criminal liability for violation of his duties and abuse of authority.

Miter for the Orthodox

Historically, the miter in the East symbolized imperial power: it is believed that, like the sakkos, the Patriarch of Constantinople began to use it in his vestments after the fall of Constantinople in 1453[2]. The practice of using the miter by the Patriarch of Alexandria has a more ancient history[3]. In the middle of the 17th century, both in Muscovite Rus' and among the Greeks, this practice spread to all bishops (previously, Russian bishops wore a bishop's hat with a trim).

In modern practice, the miter is worn by bishops, archimandrites, as well as married priests, to whom the right to wear the miter is given as a reward for special merits. Priests awarded the right to wear a miter are called mitered. On the miter, small icons are placed on the sides - Jesus Christ, the Mother of God, John the Baptist and some saint or holiday; and one icon at the top - the Trinity or Seraphim.

Before the reforms of Patriarch Nikon, the Russian Church used miters in the shape of a hemispherical hat with a fur trim, which have been preserved to this day by Old Believer bishops. In the Russian Church until 1786, the miter was part of the liturgical vestments of the monastic clergy - archimandrites and bishops. In 1786, the first case in the history of the Orthodox Church occurred of awarding a miter to a representative of the white clergy[4]. Then Empress Catherine II bestowed a miter on her confessor, Archpriest Ioann Pamfilov. However, before 1917, cases of representatives of the white clergy being awarded miters were extremely rare. There are known facts when the abbots of large monasteries were awarded the right to wear a miter during divine services[5].

In the modern Russian Orthodox Church, the bishop's miter, as in Greek churches, is crowned with a small cross. Until 1989, miters crowned with a cross were worn only by the patriarch and metropolitans; at the end of December 1988, the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church established the custom of wearing a miter crowned with a cross for the entire episcopate[6]. The head of the Russian Ecclesiastical Mission in Jerusalem, elevated to the rank of archimandrite, also wears a miter with a cross when serving in the churches of the Ecclesiastical Mission[7].

In some Local Orthodox Churches, only the primate of the church has the right to wear a miter with a cross.

A type of Orthodox miter is the crown miter, which has a toothed crown above the lower belt (usually 12 petals). The miter-crown was the main type of miter until the 18th century[8].

• Miter of Saint Chrysostomos Metropolitan of Smyrna.jpg

  Miter of St. Chrysostomos of Smyrna

• Mitra mirozh.jpg

  Miter of the abbot, 19th century, from the Mirozhsky monastery. Pskov Museum

• Mitra gedeon.jpg

  Miter of Kyiv Metropolitan Gideon (1685, Moscow Kremlin workshops)

• Drevnosti RG v1 ill091a – Mitra Nikona.jpg

  Miter of Patriarch Nikon, 17th century

Comments

1. Catherine
   :

   10/06/2019 at 15:44

   Good afternoon. You write that “White clergy are parish priests who reserve the opportunity to acquire a wife or are already married.”

   Read also:  The Beatitudes. What is their meaning and difference from the Old Testament commandments

   But the priest does not leave any opportunity for himself to get a wife, since he can only marry before being ordained. If a priest has already accepted his rank, he has no right to marry. As a rule, unmarried priests take monastic vows, and those who want to get married do so strictly BEFORE their ordination.

   Answer

   admin

   :

   10/14/2019 at 04:46

   Thank you for your comment! Checked and corrected

   Answer

By leaving a comment, you accept the user agreement

Miter for Catholics and Protestants

In the Catholic Church, the miter (infula [9]) is part of the liturgical vestment of the highest clergy: bishops, archbishops, metropolitans, cardinals and the Pope. According to the law of the Roman Catholic Church, miters can only be worn by bishops or priest-prelates with “true jurisdiction” (lat. vera iurisdictio

). According to the Apostolic Letter "Pontificalia insignia" of Paul VI, the right to wear the miter is enjoyed by the following prelates who do not have episcopal dignity: legates of the Roman Pontiff, abbots and prelates having jurisdiction in a territory separated from any diocese, apostolic administrators, apostolic prefects and vicars apostolic. Previously, the right to wear the miter and use other signs of episcopal dignity (pontificals) could be associated with a title that did not imply jurisdiction, or be granted as a special privilege.

The modern miter consists of two parts, with the frontal and occipital parts of the head, each of which has a conical shape at the end. At the back of the miter are two ribbons, symbolizing the Old and New Testaments. Historically, the shape of the miter has undergone significant changes: in the 10th century it looked like a conical cap with a sharp end; by the 12th century it took on the form of a crown with two points on the temporal parts of the head, and from the end of the 12th century on the forehead and back of the head. By the 17th century, the miter had acquired its modern form[10]

In historical times, Catholics had three types of mitres:

• simple miter (lat. mitra simplex
  ) made of white silk or linen without any decoration;
• precious miter (lat. mitra pretiosa
  ), decorated with gold embroidery and precious stones;
• golden miter (lat. mitra auriphrygiata
  ) made of gold-colored fabric or white silk fabric with gold, silver or colored embroidery.

After the reforms of the Second Vatican Council, two types of mitres remained:

• simple miter: white for bishops, moiré-white for cardinals; worn in most cases;
• decorated miter: miter with gold embroidery; worn on major church holidays.

Greek Catholic hierarchs, archimandrites, protoarchimandrites and mitred archpriests wear miters in the same shape as those used in the Orthodox Church.

Old Catholic, Anglican and some Lutheran churches use mitres of the traditional Western form. The right to wear the miter in these churches belongs exclusively to bishops.

• Bischof-fuerst-cannstatt-2004.jpg

  Roman Catholic Bishop in Miter

• Miter decor tissé scene chretienne cluny.JPG

  Miter from Cluny Abbey

• Saint Eloi ordination.jpg

  Laying of the miter on Saint Eligius

• Jan Babjak SJ.jpg

  Jan Babiak, Metropolitan of the Slovak Greek Catholic Church, performs the service

Archpriest is the highest representative of the white clergy

Traditionally, clergy in Orthodox Christianity are divided into two large groups: black and white clergy.

The black clergy are monks, that is, those who have taken a vow of celibacy. Representatives of this large group can undergo all three degrees of clergy:

• deacon;
• priest;
• bishop.

From among the black clergy come: patriarchs, bishops, hieromonks, archimandrites, metropolitans, etc.

The vestments of the archpriest, in the photo - Father Vladimir (Golovin)

White clergy are ministers who are married and have children. An interesting nuance: they can get married only without having yet been invested with either the deaconate or the priesthood.

Representatives of this group are limited in the church hierarchy to two levels:

• deacon;
• priest

Theoretically, a representative of the white clergy has the opportunity to go further - to become a bishop, but on condition that he takes monastic vows. For example, if his wife dies, nothing will prevent him from making such a choice. After all, remarriage is prohibited for white clergy.

The church hierarchy is shown in this table:

As we see, at the same level among the white clergy are the mitred archpriest and the protopresbyter. There is no fundamental difference between them and the archpriest. Each of them is a “senior priest.”

Protopresbyter

senior protorey

However, technically, a protopresbyter is a “senior archpriest,” because for him the miter is not a reward, but an accessory to the rank.

Protopresbyter is the title of the rector of a patriarchal church; therefore, there are few such priests - only those who held the corresponding position at different times.

The archpriest is the senior priest, above him in the white clergy is only the protopresbyter

But let's return to the archpriest. In ancient times, he had another title: archpriest. But they don't call it that anymore. The word “high priest” is also sometimes used.

The title of archpriest is known from Kievan Rus.

Mithras in non-Chalcedonian churches

In the Armenian Apostolic Church, miters, similar to the Greek ones and close in shape, are worn by priests and archimandrites. The miter is certainly crowned with a cross and on the front is decorated with the image of the Shepherd with a lamb or the image of the Savior. Bishops and Catholicos wear miters, similar to Catholic ones, but different from modern Western models.

• Error creating thumbnail: File not found

  Archbishop of the Ukrainian Diocese of the AAC Grigoris

• Error creating thumbnail: File not found

  Priest of the AAC in the Donetsk region Ter Usyk

In the pre-Chalcedonian churches of the West Syriac (Jacobite), East Syriac (Assyrian), Coptic and Ethiopian traditions, bishops wear mitres similar to the Greek ones.

Other meanings

In Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome, “mitra” (ancient Greek μίτρα, lat. mitra

) was the name of an eastern headdress (a type of turban), which was worn mainly by women, as well as dandy men. A typical "ethical" context for the miter, for example, in Cicero:

As for Publius Clodius, he, who previously wore saffron-colored dresses, a miter, women's sandals, purple armbands and a breastplate, from the psalter, from vileness, from debauchery, unexpectedly became a supporter of the people[11].

— Cicero. We are talking about the answers of the haruspices XXVIII, 44, 6

Notes

1. [www.magister.msk.ru/library/bible/comment/nkss/nkss17.htm Robes of the Clergy (Clergy Handbook)]. - M.: Publishing Council of the Russian Orthodox Church.
2. [www.sedmitza.ru/text/556834.html Features of the liturgical vestments of the Patriarch in Rus']. [www.webcitation.org/6CbG27o29 Archived from the original on December 2, 2012]. See Note. 5.
3. A. A. Dmitrievsky. [azbyka.ru/dictionary/12/mitra-all.shtml Mitra]. [www.webcitation.org/6CbG3PxBq Archived from the original on December 2, 2012].
4. [st-sobor.belnet.ru/N_mitra.htm Mitra](inaccessible link - history
   ). [web.archive.org/20050501050319/st-sobor.belnet.ru/N_mitra.htm Archived from the original on May 1, 2005].
5. [www.valaam.ru/ru/patericon/903/ Hegumen Mauritius (website of the Valaam Monastery)]. [www.webcitation.org/6CbG4lrIJ Archived from the original on December 2, 2012].
6. Journal of the Moscow Patriarchate. 1989, no. 3, p. 7.
7. [www.patriarchia.ru/db/text/551935.html REGULATIONS ON AWARDS OF THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH]. [www.webcitation.org/6CbG5On1n Archived from the original on December 2, 2012].
8. “Handbook for a clergyman” (Vol. 4, Moscow Patriarchate Publishing House, 2001. pp. 146-147
9. Infula (lat. infula
   , “bandage”) was originally the headdress of Roman priests in the form of a high bandage. Later it became synonymous with the miter in Catholicism.
10. “Mithras” // Catholic Encyclopedia. T.3. M.: 2007. Art. 459—461
11. …P. Clodius a crocota, a mitra, a muliebribus soleis purpureisque fasciolis, a strophio, a psalterio, a flagitio, a stupro est factus repente popularis.

Miter. Historical and archaeological essay

The article is published based on the text published in the journal “Moscow Diocesan Gazette”, No. 4-5, 2003, which, in turn, was taken from the journal “Guide for Rural Shepherds”, Kiev, 1903, No. 11. Mentioned in the text “ Editorial Notes" belong to the editors of "MEV". — Liturgica.Ru

We now place a miter001 on the head of each bishop during divine services, which is called a cap002 everywhere in the Official of the Bishop's Office. This head adornment of our bishops became an accessory of their rank in relatively recent times, which explains the very significant fact that all the most ancient and recent ranks of consecrations not only of the bishop, but also of the metropolitan and even the patriarch, the ranks of the Greek, South Slavic and our Slavic Russians, written, early printed, and even now used in liturgical practice in the East and here in Russia, remain completely silent about the miter. As if the miter is not even considered part of the episcopal vestment. An exception in this regard is provided by the ranks of southern Russian liturgical monuments, which speak not only of the miter and its placement on bishops during consecration, but even when elevated to the rank of archimandrite003. Despite all this, in the practice of the Greek Church, the Patriarch of Alexandria, and following his example later, some other eastern bishops, began to use a head adornment during worship, which was called the miter004. Simeon of Thessalonica, a writer of the first half of the 15th century, clearly speaks about this. Answering the question: “why, except for the Patriarch of Alexandria, do bishops and priests serve with their heads uncovered and that it is better to serve with their heads uncovered,” our exegete writes: “With an uncovered head, all eastern hierarchs and priests, with the exception of the Patriarch of Alexandria, perform sacred rites not according to humiliation of any kind, but according to the most sublime and especially sacred word, which the God-speaking Paul offers as a teaching, calling Christ our head, and us His members, and that those who honor our Head Christ should have their heads open during prayer. And not only for this reason, but also because the person being consecrated accepts ordination with his head open, and must therefore pray and perform sacred acts as he was ordained. The hierarch, in particular, since he is being consecrated, has on his head the words given to God, that is, the Holy Gospel, and should not have another cover on his head at the time when he is performing the most divine (mysteries). But perhaps someone will say: the Patriarch of Alexandria, who has a sacred veil on his head (ιερον επικαλυμμα), and very many others, according to ancient tradition, do not act piously?

I do not say this, for those who act in this way have an ancient tradition as an excuse, but it is better - the most legal. In fact, the legitimate (Old Testament) bishop wore a mitre (κιδαριν) on his head, which was also called a miter (μιτραν), just as the bishops who wear it like to call it (οι περιτιθεμενοι ιεραρχοι φ ιλουσι καλειν) (i.e. currently) . Perhaps they have it in the likeness of the crown of thorns of the Lord or the sovereign who was on His head. But, however, since they take off their miter at the most important times of sacred rites, this shows that the tradition of Blessed Paul is more important, for the image of the crown of thorns is depicted by the cutting of the hair on the head of the initiates when performing the sacred seal... It is more important, of course, to pray and perform the sacred rites with an open head, and this should not be neglected, especially in the most important times.”005 In his answers to Gabriel, Bishop of Pentapolis, Simeon of Thessalonica returns once again to explaining the question of why the Patriarch of Alexandria and the Pope of Rome perform divine services in a miter, and other bishops with an open head, and points out for the first the reasons for imitation of the attire of the Old Testament high priest and the resolution of the council, who allowed him, due to illness, to put a miter on his head, remaining with the same explanation of the symbolic meaning of this attire, and for the Pope of Rome - the basis in the chrysobulus or deed of gift of Tsar Constantine to Pope Sylvester006. In the next 21 answers, he again explains the importance of the custom of performing divine services for bishops with an open head, for which the Holy Gospel, which reclined on their head at the time of consecration, should be considered the miter. From these considerations, the exegetes of divine services in the Orthodox East of the XIV-XV centuries. the conclusion clearly follows that he personally did not use miters during divine services, and to his other colleagues and contemporaries, for example, Bishop Gabriel of Pentapolis, he recommended preferably to adhere to the more common custom in the East and, in his opinion, more legal - to perform divine services with an open head without miters

And, indeed, we see in the practice of the Orthodox East that not only in the 15th century, but even in the 16008 and 17th centuries, Eastern hierarchs did not use mitres during worship, with the exception of patriarchs009. Our traveler to the East at the beginning of the second half of the 17th century, the famous elder Arseny Sukhanov, describing the consecration of Metropolitan Neophytos of Bethlehem in Jerusalem, says, among other things, the following: “But (the Patriarch) did not give him a sakka and a hat, because all metropolitans serve in sakkas, and with the patriarch in vestments (sic), and no one has hats and no one dares to wear them except the patriarch”010. “The metropolitans were all in sakkos,” writes the same Arseny Sukhanov about the patriarchal service on Great Friday, without noticing the above contradiction in his words regarding the use of sakkos by the metropolitans of Palestine, “but no one wears all the caps, except for the Patriarch, anywhere, and no, they never did. And the Metropolitan of Nazareth beat the Sovereign with his forehead, as if he had a hat that was worn out, and so that the Sovereign would grant him orders to make a new one, and the Sovereign's hat of Nazareth, having arrived, gave it to the Patriarch, and the sakk was all alone. But in Nazareth there were no hats from the beginning, and now they won’t wear them. And the Patriarch took her, they said, and pledged her. And with us, the Nazareth served with the Patriarch and without the Patriarch without a hat.”011 In “Taktikon, who is the Official of how the Greeks maintain church rites and singing,” describing the service of the Patriarchs of Alexandria, Jerusalem and Antioch, he says that before the Liturgy they “put down their hats, saying: The Lord reigned, and was clothed with beauty; the Lord was clothed with strength, and girded; for establish the universe, which does not move, always now and ever and unto ages of ages. Amen"012. In the work of the same author, compiled after the appearance of the “Proskinitary” (after 1653) and known under the name: “On the Greek rites in brief,” on the issue that interests us, it is said in a calmer tone, without any polemics, and therefore closer to the truth: “ And not many archbishops and metropolitans wear the saint’s caps, which were given to them by the ancient pious kings, but others (all metropolitans and bishops) are without hats. They don’t have a single archimandrite (in a hat)”013. Based on the above excerpts, it is clear that in the East in the second half of the 17th century, the same order began to be established regarding the wearing of mitre-crowns by bishops, which is observed to this day. That is, all Eastern patriarchs enjoyed the right to wear mitres, but, paying respect to the seniority of the occupied throne, when serving together, they did not put mitres on everyone, but only the oldest of them by position014. Metropolitans and bishops receive the miter from the head of the patriarch at the end of the Liturgy, but not at the consecration itself, and use it during divine services in their diocese and when they take precedence in divine services. In the presence of their patriarch, they do not wear mitres, but cover their heads with a kamilavka with a fleur-like basting.

As for the form of the eastern miter, then, without going into deep research about the form of the ancient Alexandrian miter, which, due to the lack of positive data, is not easy to determine015, in resolving this issue we can focus our attention primarily on what was accepted throughout the East, and with For a long time, it has been called a crown (κωρονα) or a crown (στεφανος). Indeed, the oldest eastern miter known to us, now kept in the skevophilakium of the Lavra of St. Athanasia on Athos and reputed in legend for the crown of the Byzantine emperor Nikephoros Phocas (963-969), ktitor of the Lavra, belongs, according to the definition of academician N.P. Kondakov, to the 16th century016 and represents the shape of the crown of the later Byzantine emperors, i.e. a high cap with a rim around the head and with a curve at the top017. The second patriarchal miter,018 now accepted in the practice of the Alexandrian Church, the use of which, according to legend, was introduced from ancient times, differs little in its form from the miter-crown. It was quite natural for Greek national pride, after the fall of Constantinople in 1453, to place the crown of non-existent emperors on the head of its Ecumenical Patriarch, the main and only guardian of the interests of Orthodoxy and nationality itself in the entire Muslim East, especially since even earlier, in the heyday of the Byzantine empires. From the hands of the emperor, the patriarch received such signs of royal dignity as dalmatica or sakkos, lor or omophorion, etc.019 In this form of crown, the miter from Constantinople passed to other eastern patriarchs and bishops, and in 1653, at the request of Patriarch Nikon, a lover of Greek order, and to us in Russia020, replacing in our liturgical practice the previously existing form - miter hats.

As for the time when the miter in the form of a cap or cap appeared in our church liturgical practice, then, due to the lack of positive data021, it is difficult to say with accuracy. It is unlikely, however, that we will be making a big mistake if we attribute the time of the appearance of mitre caps as a liturgical accessory to the 15th century, because with such significance these main decorations appear among our bishops, undoubtedly, in the 16th century022 and continue into this time even to some honorary archimandrites. It is possible to assume that the custom of laying mitres by some bishops in the East, noted by Simeon of Thessalonica, also influenced our liturgical practice, in which hitherto bishops outside the church used head decorations in the form of caps, which from that time received the meaning of belonging to the episcopal rank. At least, the acts of the Moscow Council of 1674 make it clear to us that the fathers of this council were not alien to the idea of ​​us borrowing the miter from the Orthodox East, following the example of the Eastern patriarchs. “The miter, having the image of the cross of the cross023, is said in the acts of this council regarding the patriarchal miter, in the likeness of the most holy Greek Patriarchs, in sacred rites, according to the custom of the saints of the Eastern Church, like the great Saint Cyril of Alexandria, who covered his head with withered gold, when the Saint and Your representation to the Third Ecumenical Council; and exalted, according to the statute of the Equal-to-the-Apostles, the holy great king Constantine, who was to Saint Sylvester, and like Theophilus of Alexandria (more correctly, Jerusalem) Patriarch, King Basil (976-1025) Porphyrogenitus placed a diadem, and in the church he commanded to be adorned with the laws”024. The rules of the same cathedral established that metropolitans should have a “gold or silver-plated, gilded hat,” and that archbishops and bishops should have a “silver-plated hat”025.

From the editor:

In the “Handbook for a Clergyman” (Vol. 4, Moscow Patriarchate Publishing House, 2001, pp. 146-147) we read the following about the miter. “The modern miter is a tall, solid cap, richly decorated with brocade embroidery, velvet, beads, precious stones and icons, gradually tapering to a rim around the head. The miter acquired such shape in the 18th-19th centuries. Before this, Russian miters were similar to the different forms of the crown of the Byzantine kings of the late period of the empire. Sometimes the rim of the miter was a geared crown.

According to the testimony of Theodore Volsamon, Patriarch of Antioch (12th century), and Blessed Simeon, Archbishop of Thessalonica (15th century), the miter in the form of a crown - a rich royal headdress - was first worn in the 4th century. in the undivided Church the Popes. Then, at the Third Ecumenical Council (431), St. Cyril of Alexandria, representing Pope Celestine, put on a miter-crown as a symbol of this. And until the 12th century. Such miters in the East were worn only by the Patriarchs of Alexandria, then they began to be worn by the Patriarchs of Constantinople. Other representatives of the churches, metropolitans and bishops wore miter-bands (crowns) of a simple ancient pattern, hoods or hats. Russian bishops also wore miter hats, like princely ones, trimmed with fur, decorated with embroidery and icons. Such miter hats appeared in our country in the 15th century. Before this, Russian saints did not know any other headdress other than the hood. In the middle of the 17th century. miter-crowns also appear in the Russian Church, and since 1705 the miter has become the headdress of not only bishops, but also all archimandrites. By decree of Emperor Paul I of December 18, 1797, the miter was given as a reward to especially honored archpriests.”

Until relatively recently, in the Russian Orthodox Church, only His Holiness the Patriarch and metropolitans wore miters crowned with a cross. At the end of March 1988, during the Pre-Conciliar Bishops' Conference, a desire was expressed to bring the tradition of wearing mitres in the Russian Orthodox Church into conformity with pan-Orthodox practice. On December 27, 1988, His Holiness addressed the Holy Synod with a letter in which he proposed to establish a uniform model of a miter crowned with a cross for all bishops (and not just the Patriarch and Metropolitans). At the same time, it was proposed to preserve the tradition of wearing a miter without a cross for archimandrites and archpriests awarded this award. The Holy Synod adopted a positive resolution on this issue at a meeting on December 27-28, 1988 (See: Journal of the Moscow Patriarchate, 1989, No. 3. P. 7).

001 The name miter (μιτρα), given to the head ornament of our bishops, is borrowed from the book of Exodus (28:37; 29:6). 002 Bearing in mind this name and the form of our ancient Russian miter, adopted by bishops before Patriarch Nikon, prof. HER. Golubinsky expresses the following consideration regarding its origin. Among our bishops, he says, it was customary (has become a custom) not to happen in every skufya, but to have deliberate skufyas for this purpose, specifically for divine services. Since the skufia were removed from the head during the service, in order not to put them flat and flattened, which is very unrepresentative, but to put them on, they began to make them (the liturgical skufia) on a hard lining, so that they took the form of caps. They began to be made from expensive materials, decorated with simple jewelry and icons, and thus our bishops began to have special liturgical caps, which were then enlarged to the size of caps, and these caps, then caps, are our current miters. Skufi, transformed by placing a hard lining into caps, remained as such, that is, small caps until the end of the 16th century. (such, for example, is the miter of Patriarch Job, 1595, in the Moscow Patriarchal Sacristy. See Archimandrite Savva. Index of the Moscow Patriarchal Sacristy. 4th edition. M., 1863. P. 13. Plate V, picture 22) . after that, they were somewhat increased in size and, while maintaining the skuf-like shape, became caps, as they began to be called (E. E. Golubinsky. History of the Russian Church. Vol. I, half II. pp. 234-235). If, of course, we mean the worship of our bishops outside the church, during religious processions and solemn processions, and moreover, under our harsh climatic conditions, since in churches, following the example of the Orthodox East, our bishops performed divine services in ancient times, undoubtedly with an open head, then the need for a miter hat for them in this case is beyond any doubt: our ancient miter hats stood not only on a cotton satin lining, but were also trimmed with ermine fur at the bottom, in order, of course, not only to give them beauty , but also make them warm for the head and ears. For the same purpose, sometimes headphones were placed under mitres (A. Dmitrievsky. Patmos Sketches. From a trip to the island of Patmos in the summer of 1891. Kyiv, 1894. pp. 200-201). Brocade, satin, altabas (thick silk fabric with an ornament or background made of gold or silver thread, a type of brocade - editor's note), isorbaf (Archimandrite Savva. Index of the Moscow Patriarchal Sacristy. P. 2, Explanatory Dictionary) and other materials from which our sacred vestments were arranged in, formed the outer shell of these mitre caps. Over time, in view of their liturgical use and out of deep respect for the episcopal rank, miter hats began to be decorated with gold beads with images of saints, garnished with pearls and trimmed with precious stones. Such a miter hat has already become a precious church utensil, an accessory of church sacristies, and could be used during divine services in the temple even with great convenience, especially in winter, in our cold churches with the terrifying northern frosts. And, indeed, in the 16th century, the miter cap or “cap” (Description of manuscripts of the Moscow Synodal Library. Section III, Part II. P. 96) became an integral liturgical accessory for all bishops, and from the middle of this century it adorns the head already and some honorary archimandrites. But this is where our agreement with the venerable professor on the issue of the origin of the miter cap, the history of which, as we believe, ends within our Fatherland at the end of the first half of the 17th century, is limited to. Approve together with prof. Golubinsky that “the Greeks borrowed hats from us in the 17th century, giving them the shape of the crowns or crowns of their emperors, which these latter had in later times, preceding the capture of Constantinople by the Turks” (History of the Russian Church. Vol. 1, half II, C 235), we do not consider ourselves entitled. The facts known to us do not support this assumption. From the words of Simeon of Thessaloniki it is clearly clear that in his time, in the first half of the 15th century, miters in the East were worn not only by the Patriarch of Alexandria, but already by many other bishops (Mign. Patrol/Curs. complet. T. 155. Col. 717). Consequently, the form of the miter in the East at that time had already been developed (these are the miter-crown of the supposedly Emperor Phocas and the miter of the Patmos skevophilakia, preserved to this day in the skevophilakia of the Lavra of St. Athanasius), and in the 16th century the Greek bishops had no need to borrow the miter-hat from us in Russia. The miter of the Eastern patriarchs in its appearance and decorations was sharply different from our bishop's cap, and at the beginning of the 17th century. has already perplexed our zealots of antiquity and experts in church ritual. “And he had a hat,” notes an eyewitness to the service of the Patriarch of Jerusalem Theophan with the Russian metropolitans and archbishops in Moscow in 1619, “without an edge, the cloaks were nailed on black velvet, like a crown gilded, and the stones were planted, and there were no saints, except for a cross hammered at the top , and by country there are four cherubim and seraphim” (Readings at the Society of Russian History and Antiquities at Moscow University. M., 1883, Book II, department II. P. 166). This is the first thing. Secondly, the eastern bishops and patriarchs who came to us in Rus' for alms in the 16th-17th centuries willingly accepted miter hats as gifts from kings, metropolitans and patriarchs and even asked for these gifts (Relations between Russia and the East on Church Affairs. St. Petersburg, 1858, Part I. P. 88, 101), but they were not used during worship, but, in view of their material value, were sold to the Jews as collateral (Orthodox Palestine collection. Issue 21 [Vol. VII, issue III]. P. 82; Greek affairs in the Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs St. 33, file No. 16), or they were redone. Our miter hats with sable edges in the East were not suitable for the climate. Not being able to dwell here in detail on the question of the origin of our miter-hat shape, we, however, allow ourselves to express, in the form of an assumption, an idea about its origin, and somewhat different from the above considerations on this subject by Prof. Golubinsky. Taking a closer look at the form of the Old Russian episcopal miter, preserved in monuments (Archimandrite Savva. Index to the Patriarchal Moscow Sacristy. P. 13, Table V, No. 22), and comparing it with the form of the Grand Duke’s hats, as they are known from ancient icon images of saints Russian princes (Antiquities. Archaeological Bulletin, published by the Moscow Archaeological Society. M., 1867, January-February. P. 3-4, figures 1, 2 and especially 3 and 4; Antiquities of the Russian State. Department II. P. 47) Saints Vladimir, Boris, Gleb and others, one cannot help but see great similarities between both. The similarity between the caps of grand-ducal and episcopal mitres in ancient times was so great that scientists consider the ancient “cap” preserved to this day, in the sacristy of the Novgorod St. Sophia Cathedral, to be both a “grand-ducal” cap and a bishop’s miter-cap (Antiquities of the Russian State. Section I. P. 150. Section II. P. 24; Archimandrite Macarius. Archaeological description of church antiquities in Novgorod and its environs. M. 1860. Part P. P. P. 358). Didn't the same thing really happen to our ancient miter-cap that happened to the Greeks with the miter-crown? If the latter was a copy of the crown of the Byzantine emperor of a later time, then our miter-hat was not based on the grand-ducal’s cap, with which the similarity in shape can hardly be denied? Did our bishops not receive this head adornment from the heads of our pious princes, who deeply revered the episcopal dignity? 003 In the “Decree on how to install a bishop” of 1650, Bishop Dionysius Balaban, we read the following: “Then the ordainer will take the miter from the holy meal, and if there is an unconsecrated one, giving it to one of the bishops present in the right hand, he blesses it in the shape of a cross... and sprinkling it with sacred water ( after reading the prayer), those who assist him and the rest of the bishop give him a kiss, and after kissing it, they place it on his head, saying to the ordainer this: “Lord our God, in Thy name we place on the head of this archbishop and Thy warrior the mitre of these hands of us unworthy servants.” Yours, and pray to crown him with the glory and honor of the bishop, and deign him to be a helmet of salvation and confirmation, in victory over all that opposes the truth of Thy Holy Gospel, to eradicate the opposing power of the devil all the days of his life. For You are the strength and strengthening of Your servants, and to You we send glory to the Endless Father with the Only Begotten Son and the All-Holy Good and Life-giving Spirit, now and ever” (Manuscript of the Library of the St. Sophia Cathedral of Kyiv, No. 77. L. 65v - 66v). Almost in the same expressions the bishop reads the prayer when placing the miter on the head of the archimandrite: “We pray that you crown him with Your highest blessing and deign to be for him a helmet of salvation and affirmation, and in victory against all the wiles of the devil and the enemy of Your truth all the days of his life” ( Ibid., L. 34). 004 The shape of the mitres or headbands of the Alexandrian Patriarchs of ancient times can be seen in the images of Saints Athanasius and Cyril of Alexandria. See Cardinal Albani in his Menologium Graecorum jussu Basilii imperatoris. Urbini, 1737. Pars II. R. 116. 005 Mign.. Patrol. Curs. complete. T. 165. Co1. 716-717; See the Scriptures of the Father and Teachers of the Church. T.Sh.S. 23-25. 006 For detailed evidence regarding the forgery of this chrisovul, see Prof. A. S. Pavlova. Collection of unpublished monuments of church law. St. Petersburg, 1898. pp. 54-92. 007 Mign.. Patrol. Curs.. complete. T. 155. Co1. 872-873. 008 “Greek bishops do not know the use of rings, and, says Jacob Goar, they do not wear mitres (nec mitras ambire), but the legates of the East from Pope Gregory X, according to the custom of Latin bishops, were decorated with tiaras, mitres and rings, as Pachymer testifies” ( Ευχολογ..Goar. R. 258). 009 Patriarch Joasaph II of Constantinople in 1557 asked Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich to send a new miter for patriarchal service in Constantinople. See Relations between Russia and the East on Church Affairs. Part I. P. 88. 010 Orthodox Palestinian collection. Vol. 21 (Vol. VII, issue III). P. 73, footnote on P. 263. 011 Ibid. P. 82. 012 Ibid. P. 254. 013 S.A. Belokurov. Arseny Sukhanov. Ed. 2nd. M., 1894. P. 114. 014 This should explain the fact that our envoy Boris Blagovo, who observed in 1585 in Constantinople the joint service of three patriarchs - Constantinople, Alexandria and Antioch with nine metropolitans and six archbishops, saw a miter on only one The Patriarch of Alexandria gave this explanation for this fact. “And they name him in father’s place and put him above all the patriarchs” (Relations between Russia and the East on Church Affairs. Part II, p. 149). 015 E.E. Golubinsky. History of the Russian Church. T. I. floor. P.S. 231-232, approx. 3.; See Roemische Qartalschrift fuer christliche Alterthumskunde und fuer Kirchengeschichte. 1899. Heft. 2-3. S. 92-102; Taf. VI. 016 N. P. Kondakov. Monuments of art on Mount Athos. SPb. 1902. P. 242. “It is quite similar to the sakkos (according to legend, of dubious quality, made from the military cloak or mantle of Emperor Nicephorus Phocas) and even, according to our guess, says Prof. Kondakov, perhaps, is the same vestment with him, a miter, as if it was the crown of the same emperor from the same Lavra sacristy, shown to everyone on the feast of the monastery on July 5. The miter is contemporary with the sakkos or made a little later than it. The reason why the Lavra monasticism settled on it in their desires, of a purely Greek nature, to have a real sign of the historical friendship of the emperor with the first abbot of the Lavra, lies in a small detail of this miter: along its bottom, also worn out, there is sewn metal, very rough and made of gilded silver aureole. It has a plaque in the shape of an eagle, decorated with diamonds and cut diamonds. The corolla is made of leaves curved along the trump, and their design seemed to us to have nothing to do with antiquity. We cannot vouch for all the details of our description, but even the brocade of the miter seemed to us bad and late, like this whole legendary story is a straight fable invented in the last century for pilgrims.” 017 D. V. Belyaev. Byzantina. E. II. pp. 292-293 and approx. 1. 018 See the image of this miter from Bishop Porfiry Uspensky in his atlas: Christian East. Egypt and Sinai. Types, essays, plans and notes for travel. St. Petersburg, 1857, table. III; See Archimandrite Savva. Index to the Moscow Patriarchal Sacristy. pp. 14-15. Table III, fig. 23. 019 It seems to us that kundurs, or shoes with golden eagles embroidered on them, were used during divine services by the patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch, as our elder Arseny Sukhanov says (Orthodox Palestine collection. Issue 21 (vol. VII, issue III ) P. 254, note 1), they also switched to the vestments of the patriarchs from the costume of the Byzantine emperors. 020 Christian reading. 1881, No. 11-12. P. 795, approx. 1; Archimandrite Savva. Index to the Moscow Patriarchal Sacristy. pp. 15-16 and table. III, fig. 25-27; Antiquities of the Russian state. M., 1849. Dept. I. S. 124-132. 021 Currently, three mitres are known, which by tradition date back to the 11th-12th centuries: one is located in the Novotorzhsky Borisoglebsk monastery of the Tver diocese and is attributed to the Monk Ephraim, archimandrite and founder of this monastery († 1053) (Antiquities. Proceedings of the Moscow Archaeological Society. Vol. VII , issue 1. P. 27, note; See Church Iedomosti. 1902, No. 43. P. 1525-1526; Orthodox Interlocutor. 1902, Book X. P. 462-465), and the other two in the Novgorod Sophia cathedral, one of which was on St. Nikita in the tomb allegedly in 1108-1550, and the other is recognized as the “grand duke” (Archimandrite Macarius. Archaeological description of church antiquities in Novgorod and its environs. M. 1860, Part II. P. 357-358; Antiquities of the Russian state. Section I. P. 150; Section II. P. 240. If we could calm down on this legend, then the question of the time of appearance in our liturgical practice of mitres in the form of “caps”, reminiscent the form of an ancient skullcap, worn, according to the assumption of Prof. E. E. Golubinsky, by our clergy in the pre-Mongol period of our historical life (History of the Russian Church. T. I, half. II. pp. 232, 234-235) and much later, would have been resolved in the most positive way. But, unfortunately, there are good reasons to doubt the dates that are established by tradition regarding the time of origin of the named Metropolitans. We have the most general information about the miter of the Venerable Archimandrite Ephraim (if we believe the legend), and, according to the existing description (Antiquities. T. VII, c. I. P. 27, note), it is very difficult to judge the antiquity of this miter. We can only say that this miter in its origin is no earlier than the 16th century, since Russian archimandrites, as is known, began to decorate their heads with mitres only in the second half of the 16th century. This miter is made of silk fabric with an ermine edge, which also does not prevent it from being attributed to this time. We have more data to judge the miters of the Novgorod St. Sophia Cathedral. The first Novgorod miter, in the form of a blue grodetur (grodetur or set is a very dense, one-color dark fabric, each warp thread of which is covered with two weft threads - editor's note) cap, trimmed with ermine fur, with small crosses and two cherubs embroidered on it in gold and seraphim with the inscriptions: “cherovim, seraphim”, lay on the head of St. Nikita allegedly from 1008 to 1558, i.e. until the time of the discovery of his relics. But the fact is that at the same time in 1558, his staff (sic!) was found in the saint’s coffin, made of three honeysuckle sticks, with carved three apples and carved images on a walrus bone, with which its crossbar and upper part are decorated saints, such as St. Peter of Moscow, Leontius of Roston and St. Sergius of Radonezh (Antiquities of the Russian state. Dept. I. P. 157). It is clear, therefore, that this staff, attributed by local tradition and church inventory also to the 11th century, can in no way be dated to the time of the death of St. Nikita. Scientists who describe Russian antiquities quite rightly date the present staff, or rather its decorations, to the 15th or even the first half of the 16th century, and are ready to consider them the fruit of the zeal of either Archbishop Euthymius II (1429-1458), or even the famous Macarius (1526-1540), subsequently the All-Russian Metropolitan (Ibid. p. 158). One can therefore, and quite rightly, doubt the chronology of other objects found in 1558 in the tomb of St. Nikita. It is quite natural to consider them a sign of saintly jealousy and respect for the holy Bishop Nikita on the part of the same Novgorod rulers of the 15th-16th centuries. The shape of the miter does not at all contradict this very probable assumption. As for the other miter cap, which the describers of Russian antiquities call this: “an ancient grand-ducal or bishop’s hat of Novgorod” (Ibid. Section II. P. 24) and which, being wooden, round in shape, lined with scarlet satin with gold embroidered on it , silver and silk Deesis, two angels and cherubs, with a gilded wooden cross in a wooden circle, trimmed at the bottom with ermine fur (Archimandrite Macarius. Archaeological description of church antiquities in Novgorod. Part II. P. 358: Antiquities of the Russian state. Section II. P. 24), then this cap, as can be seen from its names, is of dubious origin and can hardly be recognized as the ancient miter of the Novgorod rulers. But, despite the lack of material data to resolve the issue that interests us, prof. HER. Golubinsky, in his “History of the Russian Church of the Pre-Mongol Period”, devoted a lot of space on its pages to the question of “the head covering” of our bishops during divine services “in ancient and old times” (T. I, half. II. pp. 230-236 ), and the compilers of the “antiquities of the Russian state” (Olenin, Solntsev, S. Stroganov, M. Zagoskin, Yel. Snigerev and A. Veltman), apparently, have no doubt in the origin of our bishop Mitra from ancient times. “Among the Holy differences, the last ones say, Mitra from ancient times (sic!) In our country, she served as a decoration of not only bishops, but even some archimandrites” (sic!) (Antiquities of the Russian state. Department I. 122). In particular, on the form of the form of the episcopal mitra in Russia, they write the following: “Meanwhile, as in the Christian East, under the rule of Latins and Mohammedan, the external differences of the Hierarier San were changed. The Russian curity and near Yarm Mongolsky kept them inappropriately, in the form in which (?) They were accepted from the Byzantine church ”(ibid.). From what we said above and in this case, and on the basis of historically undoubted evidence we have given, one can see how much the considerations we have noted here on the issue of the origin of the episcopal mitra and its forms deserve attention, and whether this issue can be considered, with existing cash data, At least close to a positive decision. 022 Service Manuscript XVI century. Moscow Synodal Library, No. 366 (680). L. 47 (Description of the manuscripts of the Moscow Synodal Library. Department. Sh, part I. S. 96); A. Dmitrievsky. Archbishop of Elasson Arseny and his historical memoirs. Kyiv, 1899. P. 86; Σαθα βιογραφ. σχεδιασμα περι του πατρ. Ιερεμιου β. Εν αφιν. 1870. σελ. 48, 52, 76; Archimandrite Savva. The pointer of the Moscow Patriarchal Ridnitsa. S. 13; Christian reading. 1879, No. 11-12. S.569. 023 Mitru with a cross upstairs in 1686 was “heated” to wear the Kyiv Metropolitan (description of the Kiev-Sofievsky Cathedral and the Kyiv hierarchy, S. 200 and addition, P. 101) “For the sake of the country's usual”. 024 Archimandrite Ambrose (Ornamo). The history of the Russian hierarchy. Part I. S. 328. 025 Ibid. S. 332,335.

Excerpt characterizing Mithra (headdress)

“There are so many prisoners these days, almost the entire Russian army, that he probably got bored with it,” said another officer. - Well, however! This one, they say, is the commander of the entire guard of Emperor Alexander,” said the first, pointing to a wounded Russian officer in a white cavalry uniform. Bolkonsky recognized Prince Repnin, whom he had met in St. Petersburg society. Next to him stood another, 19-year-old boy, also a wounded cavalry officer. Bonaparte, galloping up, stopped his horse. - Who is the eldest? - he said when he saw the prisoners. They named the colonel, Prince Repnin. – Are you the commander of the cavalry regiment of Emperor Alexander? - asked Napoleon. “I commanded a squadron,” answered Repnin. “Your regiment honestly fulfilled its duty,” said Napoleon. “The praise of a great commander is the best reward for a soldier,” said Repnin. “I give it to you with pleasure,” said Napoleon. -Who is this young man next to you? Prince Repnin named Lieutenant Sukhtelen. Looking at him, Napoleon said, smiling: “II est venu bien jeune se frotter a nous.” [He came young to compete with us.] “Youth doesn’t stop you from being brave,” Sukhtelen said in a breaking voice. “Excellent answer,” said Napoleon. - Young man, you will go far! Prince Andrei, who, to complete the trophy of the captives, was also put forward, in full view of the emperor, could not help but attract his attention. Napoleon apparently remembered that he had seen him on the field and, addressing him, used the same name of the young man - jeune homme, under which Bolkonsky was reflected in his memory for the first time. – Et vous, jeune homme? Well, what about you, young man? - he turned to him, - how do you feel, mon brave? Despite the fact that five minutes before this, Prince Andrei could say a few words to the soldiers carrying him, he now, directly fixing his eyes on Napoleon, was silent... All the interests that occupied Napoleon seemed so insignificant to him at that moment, so petty seemed to him his hero himself, with this petty vanity and joy of victory, in comparison with that high, fair and kind sky that he saw and understood - that he could not answer him. And everything seemed so useless and insignificant in comparison with the strict and majestic structure of thought that was caused in him by the weakening of his strength from the bleeding, suffering and the imminent expectation of death. Looking into Napoleon's eyes, Prince Andrei thought about the insignificance of greatness, about the insignificance of life, the meaning of which no one could understand, and about the even greater insignificance of death, the meaning of which no one living could understand and explain. The emperor, without waiting for an answer, turned away and, driving away, turned to one of the commanders: “Let them take care of these gentlemen and take them to my bivouac; let my doctor Larrey examine their wounds. Goodbye, Prince Repnin,” and he, moving his horse, galloped on. There was a radiance of self-satisfaction and happiness on his face. The soldiers who brought Prince Andrei and removed from him the golden icon they found, hung on his brother by Princess Marya, seeing the kindness with which the emperor treated the prisoners, hastened to return the icon. Prince Andrei did not see who put it on again or how, but on his chest, above his uniform, he suddenly found an icon on a small gold chain. “It would be good,” thought Prince Andrei, looking at this icon, which his sister hung on him with such feeling and reverence, “it would be good if everything were as clear and simple as it seems to Princess Marya. How nice it would be to know where to look for help in this life and what to expect after it, there, beyond the grave! How happy and calm I would be if I could now say: Lord, have mercy on me!... But to whom will I say this? Either the power is indefinite, incomprehensible, which I not only cannot address, but which I cannot express in words - the great all or nothing, - he said to himself, - or this is the God who is sewn up here, in this palm, Princess Marya? Nothing, nothing is true, except the insignificance of everything that is clear to me, and the greatness of something incomprehensible, but most important! The stretcher started moving. With each push he again felt unbearable pain; the feverish state intensified, and he began to become delirious. Those dreams of his father, wife, sister and future son and the tenderness that he experienced on the night before the battle, the figure of the small, insignificant Napoleon and the high sky above all this, formed the main basis of his feverish ideas. A quiet life and calm family happiness in Bald Mountains seemed to him. He was already enjoying this happiness when suddenly little Napoleon appeared with his indifferent, limited and happy look at the misfortune of others, and doubts and torment began, and only the sky promised peace. By morning, all the dreams mixed up and merged into the chaos and darkness of unconsciousness and oblivion, which, in the opinion of Larrey himself, Doctor Napoleon, were much more likely to be resolved by death than by recovery. “C’est un sujet nerveux et bilieux,” said Larrey, “il n’en rechappera pas.” [This is a nervous and bilious man, he will not recover.] Prince Andrei, among other hopeless wounded, was handed over to the care of the residents. At the beginning of 1806, Nikolai Rostov returned on vacation. Denisov was also going home to Voronezh, and Rostov persuaded him to go with him to Moscow and stay in their house. At the penultimate station, having met a comrade, Denisov drank three bottles of wine with him and, approaching Moscow, despite the potholes of the road, he did not wake up, lying at the bottom of the relay sleigh, near Rostov, which, as it approached Moscow, came more and more to impatience. “Is it soon? Soon? Oh, these unbearable streets, shops, rolls, lanterns, cab drivers!” thought Rostov, when they had already signed up for their holidays at the outpost and entered Moscow. - Denisov, we’ve arrived! Sleeping! - he said, leaning forward with his whole body, as if by this position he hoped to speed up the movement of the sleigh. Denisov did not respond. “Here is the corner of the intersection where Zakhar the cabman stands; Here he is Zakhar, and still the same horse. Here is the shop where they bought gingerbread. Soon? Well! - To which house? - asked the coachman. - Yes, over there at the end, how can you not see! This is our home,” said Rostov, “after all, this is our home!” Denisov! Denisov! We'll come now. Denisov raised his head, cleared his throat and did not answer. “Dmitry,” Rostov turned to the footman in the irradiation room. - After all, this is our fire? “That’s exactly how daddy’s office is lit up.” – Haven’t gone to bed yet? A? How do you think? “Don’t forget to get me a new Hungarian at once,” Rostov added, feeling the new mustache. “Come on, let’s go,” he shouted to the coachman. “Wake up, Vasya,” he turned to Denisov, who lowered his head again. - Come on, let's go, three rubles for vodka, let's go! - Rostov shouted when the sleigh was already three houses away from the entrance. It seemed to him that the horses were not moving. Finally the sleigh took to the right towards the entrance; Above his head, Rostov saw a familiar cornice with chipped plaster, a porch, a sidewalk pillar. He jumped out of the sleigh as he walked and ran into the hallway. The house also stood motionless, unwelcoming, as if it did not care about who came to it. There was no one in the hallway. "My God! is everything alright? thought Rostov, stopping for a minute with a sinking heart and immediately starting to run further along the entryway and familiar, crooked steps. The same door handle of the castle, for the uncleanness of which the countess was angry, also opened weakly. One tallow candle was burning in the hallway. Old man Mikhail was sleeping on the chest. Prokofy, the traveling footman, the one who was so strong that he could lift the carriage by the back, sat and knitted bast shoes from the edges. He looked at the opened door, and his indifferent, sleepy expression suddenly transformed into an enthusiastically frightened one. - Fathers, lights! Young Count! – he cried out, recognizing the young master. - What is this? My darling! - And Prokofy, shaking with excitement, rushed to the door to the living room, probably to make an announcement, but apparently changed his mind again, returned back and fell on the young master’s shoulder. -Are you healthy? - Rostov asked, pulling his hand away from him. - God bless! All glory to God! We just ate it now! Let me look at you, Your Excellency! - Is everything all right? - Thank God, thank God! Rostov, completely forgetting about Denisov, not wanting to let anyone warn him, took off his fur coat and ran on tiptoe into the dark, large hall. Everything is the same, the same card tables, the same chandelier in a case; but someone had already seen the young master, and before he had time to reach the living room, something quickly, like a storm, flew out of the side door and hugged and began to kiss him. Another, third, same creature jumped out of another, third door; more hugs, more kisses, more screams, tears of joy. He couldn’t make out where and who dad was, who was Natasha, who was Petya. Everyone was screaming, talking and kissing him at the same time. Only his mother was not among them - he remembered that. - I didn’t know... Nikolushka... my friend! - Here he is... ours... My friend, Kolya... He has changed! No candles! Tea! - Yes, kiss me! - Darling... and then me. Sonya, Natasha, Petya, Anna Mikhailovna, Vera, the old count, hugged him; and people and maids, filling the rooms, muttered and gasped. Petya hung on his legs. - And then me! - he shouted. Natasha, after she had bent him to her and kissed his whole face, jumped away from him and holding onto the hem of his Hungarian jacket, jumped like a goat all in one place and squealed shrilly. On all sides there were eyes shining with tears of joy, loving eyes, on all sides there were lips seeking a kiss. Sonya, red as red, also held his hand and was all beaming in the blissful gaze fixed on his eyes, which she was waiting for. Sonya was already 16 years old, and she was very beautiful, especially at this moment of happy, enthusiastic animation. She looked at him without taking her eyes off, smiling and holding her breath. He looked at her gratefully; but still waited and looked for someone. The old countess had not come out yet. And then steps were heard at the door. The steps are so fast that they couldn't be his mother's. But it was she in a new dress, still unfamiliar to him, sewn without him. Everyone left him and he ran to her. When they came together, she fell on his chest, sobbing. She could not raise her face and only pressed it to the cold strings of his Hungarian. Denisov, unnoticed by anyone, entered the room, stood right there and, looking at them, rubbed his eyes.