Krizhanich policy summary. The idea of autocratic power in the treatise Yu

Yuri Krizhanich (c. 1618–1683) - writer, historian, philosopher; Croatian by nationality, by his social status - a native of the noble family of Krizhanich-Sheblyushsky. Graduated from the Zagreb Catholic Seminary. Studied jurisprudence and theology in Vienna and Bologna. At the end of 1640 he entered the Jesuit College of St. Athanasius in Rome. From September 1642 - a priest, in 1642 he was elevated to the rank of missionary, doctor of theology.

A significant part of Krizhanich's life is connected with Russia. In October-December 1647 he was in Moscow as an interpreter at the embassy of the Commonwealth to Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. After that, he tried to convince the Congregation of the prospects of promoting the church union in Russia. In 1658, steward Ya.N. Likharev to Moscow. In Moscow, he turned to the tsar with a petition asking for permission to work in Russia as a historian-chronicler and translator. He was enrolled in the service in the Order of the Grand Palace. In 1660, on behalf of the tsar, he began work on the grammar of the Russian language. In 1661, for some unknown reason, he was exiled to Tobolsk. Here he continued to work on philosophical, economic, historical works. In 1676, after the death of Alexei Mikhailovich, Krizhanich was returned to Moscow and appointed as a translator to the Posolsky Prikaz. However, he was not allowed to work. In 1678, he left Russia with the Danish embassy and in the spring of 1678 took monastic vows in the Dominican monastery in Vilna, achieved a transfer to Rome, but was detained in Warsaw and sent as a priest to the army of Jan Sobieski. Killed in a battle with the Turks near Vienna.

Among the statesmen of Russia with whom Krizhanich met and talked - A.N. Trubetskoy (the largest military governor of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich, who actually sent Krizhanich in 1659 to the tsar); B.I. Morozov (actual head of government in the first years of the reign of Tsar Alexei); okolnichey F.M. Rtishchev (one of the closest people to the sovereign, a member of his Middle Duma). In addition, Krizhanich was familiar with the famous thinker of the 17th century, Simeon Polotsky, who partly expressed the official, court ideology, the teacher of the royal children (including the future Tsar Fedor Alekseevich). During his stay in Siberia, Krizhanich met with N.G. Spafarius, in 1675 sent to the embassy to China; with the head of the Russian schism - Archpriest Avvakum Petrov, with the historian of Siberia S.U. Remezov.

One of the most famous works of Y. Krizhanich: "Politics". Written in 1663-1666 in Tobolsk. A characteristic feature of this work is its language: it is not identical to any of the Slavic languages of that time, it is artificial, created by Krizhanich himself. This language is often called "pan-Slavic". It is based on the Church Slavonic, folk Russian and literary Croatian languages. The creation of a "pan-Slavic" language is one of the manifestations of Krizhanich's idea of a political, religious and cultural unification of the Slavic peoples.

First, a few words about the terms of Yu. Krizhanich, and, in particular, about Yu. Krizhanich's attitude to the term "king". The fact is that in the second half of the 17th century the title "king" was so entrenched that it practically did not cause doubts either among the representatives of the state elite or among the subjects. Meanwhile, there were also opponents of such a title of the Russian sovereign. One of them was Yuri Krizhanich. Interpreting the term "king" itself, Krizhanich expressed a number of judgments. First, by "King of kings" one should only mean Jesus Christ. The ruler who appropriates such a title for himself dares to appropriate to himself the glory of Christ, the eternal and only King[s]. "There is not and cannot be a single person higher than the King, and no dignity and greatness in the world is higher than the Royal dignity and greatness."

At the same time, Krizhanich called the title "tsar" a foreign title and condemned Ivan IV for neglecting the "Slavic name king" when taking the title. At the same time, Krizhanich believed that the title "king" does not mean any power, since it is the generic nickname of the Julius (Caesar) family. In this case, the terms "king" and "caesar" were equated by the author with each other. Speaking about Julia, Krizhanich noted that he was the first Roman autocrat, a native of the Roman boyars, who at one time lived under the rule of Roman general rule. The rank (position) of Julius was the position of emperor. Based on this, Krizhanich concluded that the title "king" is older and more honorable than the title "tsar" ("caesar"), and believed that the Russian tsars should be officially recognized that they were previously called the royal title "due to a mistake translators", but they should be called "kings" and their descendants. At the same time, "king" is the owner of complete autocratic power, in contrast to "king", since "king" is the generic nickname of Julius, who did not have such power.

At the same time, Krizhanich criticized the fact that in addition to the title "king" several "lower titles" were written in the title of the sovereign, such as "grand duke", "self-owner", "ruler", "owner", etc.

Indeed, in the 17th century, the royal title was a complex structure, combining real and imaginary claims of Russian autocrats for a certain political status and territory.

Speaking about the political preferences of Y. Krizhanich, it should be noted that it was in the "Politics" that the question of the methods of government was most fully covered in this period. The author, following the ancient authors, singled out such methods of government as self-rule, boyar rule, general rule (civil rule) as "methods of good government." Krizhanich considered one of the main criteria for good governance to be such a state in which all estates are satisfied with their lot.

In contrast to the good, "corrupted methods of government" were characterized. The worst of these methods, according to Krizhanich, was tyranny ("mandom"). In addition, he attributed the gynecarchy (female rule, more precisely, the rule in which a woman has the right to inherit the royal throne) to an unconditionally corrupted government; xenarchy (foreign rule, rule in which a foreigner rules).

Krizhanich also found ways to prevent these methods of government, offering the king to take an oath to his subjects, in which, on the one hand, he would oblige himself to deprive his daughters of the right to the throne; on the other hand, it will give subjects the right to disobey a foreign king if, in case of some misfortune, he succeeds in seizing the throne.

In addition to the corrupted forms of government listed above, in various sections of the "Politics" the author ambiguously assessed boyar rule and general rule. If initially they were declared "methods of good government", then later the author, developing the idea, came to the conclusion that general dominion (posad rule) becomes anarchy, anarchy, in which the whole people is rampant and every last person wants to be a sovereign; boyar rule can also become corrupted, turning into an oligarchy (low power), when a few people illegally seize dominance and rule unrighteously.

Considering tyranny to be the best form of government, and tyranny the worst, Krizhanich, however, was well aware that it was tyranny that could turn into tyranny. Because of this, these two forms of government became the subject of the author's main attention and reasoning.

The main advantage of self-rule, in his opinion, was that it is like the power of God, since God is the first and true self-owner of the whole world. (At the same time, every sovereign king in his kingdom is the second self-owner and God's deputy after God). The positive features of self-rule were determined by the fact that under it universal justice is observed; the consensus among the people is better preserved; there are opportunities to protect the state from any danger. In defense of self-rule, the fact that this is the most ancient method of government, which usually persists longer than any other method of government, also spoke.

Krizhanich repeatedly emphasized the idea that self-rule is good because it is easy to correct the mistakes and flaws of government under it, because. everything that the self-owner orders is carried out without delay. Under autocracy, there is only one lord who controls the life and death of his subjects, and not many, each of whom can kill a peasant with impunity. With self-rule, the system of tax collections is also better; there are only monopolies of one sovereign, there are no monopolies in every boyar town and village, this system is less ruinous for the population.

One of the examples of self-rule Krizhanich considered the reign of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, which the author repeatedly compared with the Polish rule, each time coming to the conclusion about the advantages of the Russian system and order. From the comparison of specific states, those controversial advantages of self-rule also followed, among which Krizhanich named the absence of strangers on the territory of the state, the inability for representatives of the noble estates to go to other countries (to wander around the world), which, according to the author, is extremely harmful. In addition, Krizhanich considered the preservation of the Orthodox faith, which opposes heresies, to be dangerous and harmful for any state, as an important achievement of Russian self-rule.

Tyranny, according to Krizhanich, ranks first among the sins, because of which the king becomes vile to God and people. A tyrant is a robber who is not afraid of either trial or punishment, an executioner without a judge and without law, a man who has rejected everything human. The path to tyranny lies through the greed of the king, in which he turns from a shepherd for his subjects into a wolf for them.

Contrasting the king with the tyrant, Krizhanich saw the difference in the fact that the king rules for the benefit of himself and his subjects, while the tyrant, not caring about the common good, cares only about his own self-interest.

The main thing that a tyrant does is predatory (ludoderskie) laws. The author refers to them the introduction of unfair taxes, trade duties, farming, the distribution of taverns, vile requisitions, etc. Until such laws are adopted, the king may be a tyrant, but the political system in his kingdom will remain a fair government. If such laws are introduced, then the king himself will be a tyrant, and he will make his heirs the same, and the state system will turn from royal power into tyranny. From the reasoning of Krizhanich it is clear that this problem is also facing Russia. The task of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich was to correct the laws inherited from the tyrannical (ludoder) reign of Ivan the Terrible. A significant place in the "Politics" is occupied by proposals for the correction of unjust laws.

An important issue in Krizhanich's reasoning about self-rule is the question of the compatibility of self-rule and the privileges of subjects. However, Krizhanich, first of all, saw these privileges not in the political, but in the socio-economic sphere. Discussing the privileges under autocracy, Krizhanich noted: there are three ways: where there are immense, unnecessary privileges leading to the death of autocracy and the onset of anarchy; where there are no privileges and when autonomy falls, the time of tyranny comes; and the middle way, in which commensurate, just privileges are given, preserving and strengthening true sovereignty.

Yu. Krizhanich was one of those thinkers who claimed the divine origin of autocratic power. In the "Politics" Y. Krizhanich wrote that "all legitimate kings were appointed not by themselves, and not by people, but by God." "The ruler is the vicar and servant of God, and the judge of the evildoers." Based on the fact that the king is God's anointed, Krizhanich concluded that "the king is not subject to any human laws. Nobody can judge or punish him."

Meanwhile, since "God is the king of all the earth", the king is "the true master of his kingdom" only in comparison with "other mortal people", "but in comparison with God, the king is not a master, but a servant of God", "placed over people, to rule and guide them."

Arguing about the divine origin of royal power, Krizhanich holds the idea that "God gives power to kings through people." He also names the ways of such "mediation": 1) through a prophet; 2) through election by the people; 3) by inheritance; 4) by means of weapons.

Both ideas ("on the origin of royal power from God" and "on the giving of royal power by God through people") lead to the idea that the king's power cannot be unlimited, the king cannot cater to his whims, do "whatever he pleases ". In his reasoning on this topic, Krizhanich cites a number of proofs. 1) If the king is the viceroy of God, then he cannot rule at his own discretion, but rules at the discretion of God - the true owner; 2) If the people elect the king, then the people cannot give him such complete power, under which the king robbed, robbed and ruined the people; If any people gave exorbitant power to the king, then this people did so under duress; 3) If the king rules by heredity, then he cannot have more rights than his predecessor or early ancestor, whom the people chose as their first king, had; Moreover, the hereditary king cannot make laws that would be contrary to God's commandment, natural honor and justice; 4) If the king rules by military victory, then he does not have any power that would be contrary to the Divine and natural law, because. no law can be higher than God's law.

Given that, according to Krizhanich, the people do not have the right to judge and punish even an unjust sovereign, in cases where the royal power establishes unjust laws (turning into tyranny), the punishment for the king follows from God. As an example of such a punishment, Krizhanich cites the fate of Ivan IV and Boris Godunov. In the first case, the kingdom was taken from the family of Ivan. In the second, when Boris did not correct Ivan's unfair laws, God sent him a rival in the person of Grigory Otrepiev, a "defector - defrock".

Although the people cannot judge the king, they have the right to ask him to correct the unjust laws of the previous reign. Krizhanich believed that all the deeds of each king (legislation, grants and seizure of estates or estates, after his death, should be evaluated by the people's diet, which should ask the new king to correct those laws that are contrary to the people's good).

Krizhanich's attitude to the already established mythology of the origin of tsarist power in Russia is interesting. In particular, Krizhanich called the legend about the origin of the Russian tsars (Vladimir the Great or Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich) from Augustus "a stupid lie", referring to the fact that the Augustus family ended in Augustus himself, who did not have a son, but only the stepson of Tiberius, who ruled after him. Krizhanich believed that Tsar Ivan had enough antiquity and glory of his kind, so as not to "seek glory in the false and all peoples ridiculed and spat upon fables about the family of Augustus." In addition, unlike many predecessors and contemporaries, it was Yu. Krizhanich who criticized the legend, especially extolled by Russian official ideology, about Monomakh sending royal regalia to Prince Vladimir.

Without refuting the very authenticity of this event, the author believed that "Monomakh, with the help of this cunning, dishonored our people," since whoever wants to be a king must ask for this honor from God, and not from some higher person than himself ". Krizhanich saw a way out of this situation for the Russian tsars in being crowned a second time, but already with the Russian crown, and thereby finally eliminating all the gifts and regalia of Monomakh. "The one who calls our kingdom "the third Rome" is not our friend - wrote Krizhanich, believing that such heredity is a reason for the wrath of God, all ruin and all evil. The reason, in his opinion, lay in the fact that the destruction of the Roman kingdom, its name and the Roman coat of arms became ill-fated, cursed, cursed and promising failure. Referring to God's prophets Daniel, Ezra, Paul, the Apostle John, the holy fathers, Krizhanich also interpreted the essence of the prophecy itself that there would be four kingdoms in the world one after another, which would persecute the Church of God. The last of them - Roman - will be the most powerful and cruel, and it will be destroyed by Jesus Christ. The one who tries to revive the kingdom destroyed by God will openly oppose God. No one can restore what Christ destroys.

Name: Politics

Genre: ancient Russian literature, analytics

The year of publishing: 1965, Science (under the editorship of Academician M.N. Tikhomirov); 1997, New World.

In 1663, Krizhanich began to write in the common Slavic language the main work of his life - the treatise "Conversations about Possession" or "Politics". In his treatise, the author carefully analyzes the economic and political situation in Russia, characterizes the role of trade, crafts and agriculture, emphasizes the role of the army in maintaining state independence. Krizhanich points to the need for cultural development, opposes admiration for foreigners.

Krizhanich's book is addressed to all Slavs, but above all to the Russian monarch. It is in the monarchy that he sees the most suitable form of government, ensuring the unity of the people and state stability. He considers the king to be the vicegerent of God on Earth, his power is sacred. Addressing the king, Krizhanich speaks not only about the rights, but also about the duties of the ruler to the people. The king must be modest, wise, calm, righteous, faithfully observe divine laws and "not believe strangers." Krizhanich sharply condemns the cruelty of Ivan the Terrible. In general terms, the formula of a successful Russian state proposed by Krizhanich can be represented as follows: Self-rule (Autocracy), Orthodoxy, Estates. Krizhanich considers it wrong for Russia to appropriate the "dubious glory of the Third Rome", including the term "tsar", the coat of arms with a double-headed eagle, because they come from Rome.

In the field of economics, Krizhanich is guided by the most advanced views for that time. He emphasizes that ruinous taxes on peasants harm the economy, and advises encouraging talented artisans. Krizhanich's idea about the danger posed by bureaucracy sounds unusually relevant today. As for the issues of religion, here Krizhanich finally rejects the Unia and calls for the strengthening of Orthodoxy. The ultimate goal of the "Politics" is to show how to rule the state so that all people in it are happy, so that the Russian people become "the most glorified among the peoples" and lead all the Slavic peoples. The general criterion for the reasonableness of economic reforms for Krizhanich is the wealth of his subjects. Krizhanich considers agriculture, crafts, trade and the national economy to be the basis of the wealth of his subjects.

In addition to a lot of information about Russia (including Siberia) of the 17th century, the book contains discussions about the political and cultural customs of the Old World. While reading, you learn about the origin of many words, for example: "tool" - because it is made of ore; "Poles" ("clearing") - because they adhered to the law of the Spartan Lycurgus, which forbids building fortified cities in order to avoid cowardice to hide in them and meet the enemy immediately in field. The author would call the current liberals and Western admirers the term "xenomania". And from the description of the following customs, it becomes clear where the word "kid" came from (not at all from the Jewish "pots", as they say today):

In ancient Rome, boyar sons did not just move from (number] young men to the category of warriors, but the commander gave the young man a military belt, and this was a sign that he was no longer a boy, but a Roman warrior and horseman. Among the Croats, you can still hear such an expression " Pasany Vitez, or better to say, “Pasany Yunak.” But who the Croats had these belted knights and how they were appointed, I cannot say.

Such a verbal somersault from the past in our time is not at all surprising if you know that Krizhanich already then proposed to reform the grammar of the Russian language (the book "Russian Language"), almost to the same extent as it was carried out in the 20th century.

There are also many comments of a methodological and cognitive nature. For example, the classification scheme for a field of knowledge, as it seemed to the intellectuals of the 17th century

Throughout the book, Krizhanich stigmatizes the Germans, whom he suspects of establishing secret world domination over European monarchies. And not at all the Jews, who, together with the Armenians, gypsies and Scots, are classified as wandering peoples. However, he states that the Jews have achieved great influence in Poland. The Germans are also guilty of blasphemy and slander against the Russians - an entire chapter is devoted to the analysis of the "works" of German historians and ethnographers of that time (so Lomonosov is not the first in this matter). However, he admits that the Germans have the best developed crafts, thanks to their vocational education system, which is described as follows:

1) Each craft has its own squad and its headman. They have the right or power to resolve mutual disputes relating to [their] trade: for example, if the master does not pay the worker for his work, or if they dishonor each other.

2) Each student is obliged to study to the very end with one teacher and serve him as a gift for two or three years or more, as much as is required for each craft.

3) Having finished his studies, the student must take from the squad a written certificate [that] he served faithfully, worked the allotted time and learned the craft. Then he will be called an apprentice and will have to travel through the cities to see and taste the art of many other masters.

4) Arriving in some city, the apprentice must appear before the headman of his craft. The headman will show him a place to live and notify his brothers if anyone needs a worker, and the one who needs [a worker] will accept him. If no one needs him, they will not allow him to live in this city and will soon be sent [further].

5) If an apprentice wants to become a master and keep his shop or yard and not help another master, but work for himself, then he will have to show evidence of his learning and tell about his journey, and make some especially skillful product in his own way. part, referred to as "proof of craftsmanship", and the craftsmen will review the item and approve it. And he will arrange a feast for them, and give so much money to the general treasury, and receive from them a written certificate of skill. And then he will be able to work in his shop and hang a board with an inscription or a sign on the wall of his house so that it is known which craftsman lives there. and if any warrior knows the craft, then he is not subject to the artisans' council, but can work without his permission.

6) No one dares to offend artisans and forcibly drive them to work. No ruler forces them to work for him for nothing.

In general, it is an amusing political and economic analytics of 350 years ago, and to this day has not lost its relevance in many aspects.

Read online (1997 edition)

Download from roottracker, DjVu (1965 edition, recommended)

Bologna and Rome. He was a missionary priest, advocated the union of the Catholic and Orthodox churches and the unity of the Slavic peoples, led by Russia, in the name of resisting the Ottoman offensive against Christian Europe. In 1647 and 1659 visited Ukraine, and in 1659 arrived in Moscow. The work was written in 1663-1666. in Tobolsk, where the author was exiled by Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. The manuscript of the work of Yuri Krizhanich published in this edition is stored in the Central State Archive of Ancient Acts in Moscow and is part of the famous collection of the Synodal Library.

For more than two hundred years, the works of Yuri Krizhanich lay in oblivion on the shelves of the Moscow archives, until they were discovered by the Russian literary historian and Slavophile P.A. Bessonov. He was the first to reveal to readers the name of Krizhanich and who defined him as "a zealot for the reunification of churches and all Slavs." For more than a century, disputes over the name of Krizhanich continued, until in 1983, on the 300th anniversary of his death, the International Symposium in Zagreb was held, which initiated the reprinting of his works and unanimously appreciated his contribution to the consolidation of the Slavic peoples.

Being a propagandist of the idea of uniting the Slavs, Yu. Krizhanich created his work in the "all-Slavic language", which is a mixture of Church Slavonic, Russian and Croatian languages. The translation of "Politics" by Y. Krizhanich into Russian was carried out for the first time for this edition. In its previous edition, which was published over 100 years ago thanks to P.A. Bezsonov, only a few were translated, as he wrote in his afterword to "Politics", "foreign, non-Slavic and semi-Russian expressions" ("The Russian state in the middle of the 17th century, v.2, M., 1860, p1). According to the analysis of the Dutch linguist T. Ekman, who was engaged in selective statistics of word usage in the Politics, the share of words inherent in all Slavic languages is about 59% in the text, the share of Russian and Church Slavonic words is about 10%, Sero-Croatian words are about 9%, Polish - 2.5%, etc. Krizhanich's "Politics" cites many passages from the Bible, writings of Catholic theologians, ancient authors, chronicles, etc. The language of Krizhanich's manuscript is very peculiar, and the manner of its presentation is unusual.

The book is an important source on the history of Russia in the 17th century. It also touches upon philosophical, ethical, state-legal, economic problems.

The activity of Yuri Krizhanich (1618 - 1683) has long attracted the attention of researchers - historians, philosophers, economists, literary critics, linguists and others, who gave the most controversial assessments of his writings. Some researchers were ready to see in the works of Krizhanich a real program of reforms, which was subsequently carried out under Peter I, considering Krizhanich as a kind of predecessor of Peter.

Other authors considered Krizhanich's bitter arguments about various kinds of disorder and abuse in Russia of his time as a pamphlet directed against Russia and the Russian people. Some of them even went so far as to state directly that Krizhanich was a hater of the Slavic peoples and the Russian state, although in reality all of Krizhanich's activities were imbued with the idea of a community of Slavic peoples and an ardent love for the Slavs.

In fact, both the enthusiastic praise of Yuri Krizhanich, who allegedly outlined the future reforms of the early 18th century, and his accusations of hostility to Russia and other Slavic peoples are equally unfounded.

The views of Krizhanich have nothing in common with the great-power ideas of pan-Slavism in the 19th century. His works and his theories must be considered within the framework of his time. The plan he proposed for the revival of the Slavs was determined by the historical situation of the middle of the 17th century, and it can in no way be artificially adapted to later theories. In the work of Krizhanich, the needs of his homeland, languishing under a foreign yoke, the claims to the world domination of papal Rome and the complex problems of Russia, which was entering a new period of its history, were intertwined. Krizhanich died ideologically inspiring and defending the Slavic world in the fight against the Turkish invaders.

The main work of Yuri Krizhanich published in this book, known under the conditional title "Politics", was written during the years of the author's life in Tobolsk, where he was exiled by the tsarist authorities. Tobolsk at that time was a remote, but in its own way large center, the main place of government in Siberia. It was of considerable importance for trade with the Siberian peoples and the peoples of Central Asia, with the "Bukharas". It was a place where people were exiled for various political reasons. Exiles in Tobolsk in the second half of the 17th century. were in a special position and constituted, as it were, a kind of colony connected directly with the voivodship office. Krizhanich himself tells about his meetings with exiled people - Russians and foreigners, often noting the dates of his meetings and conversations. time writes just 173 years (instead of 7173).

A subtle observer, a far-sighted researcher Yuri Krizhanich in his "Politics" gives a lot of such information about Russia and especially about Siberia in the 17th century.

But, of course, the main significance of the "Politics" is not that it is one of the most important sources for understanding Russian life in the 17th century. Krizhanich stands before us as the greatest writer of his time, as a herald of Slavic unity. He, as it were, continues to develop those ideas that the famous humanist of the 15th century came up with in Serbia at one time. Konstantin Kostenchsky. And, one must think, this is not accidental, since the lofty ideas of uniting the Slavic peoples were natural within the borders mainly of Serbia and Croatia, which were under a foreign yoke and a constant threat of attack from the north and south. Krizhanich’s views on the position of the Slavic peoples are striking and unusually broad for their time, especially on the position of Ukrainians and Russian “Lutor and Calvin countries”, Protestants) - he tried to protect from communication with the Slavs, because he saw the results of the “Germanization” of the Western Slavs of the Western neighbors Slavs - “Germans” (in addition to the Germans, he also included Danes, Dutch, British, Swedes, i.e. residents - Poles and Czechs. With the eastern and southern neighbor - the Ottoman Empire - he called for an uncompromising struggle: the Ottomans and the Crimean Turks were considered by him as the main opponents of the Slavic world.Russia was to lead the liberation struggle of the Slavic peoples against the Ottoman Empire, and it was this struggle that was to become the primary task of the foreign policy of the Russian state.The leadership of Russia in the community of Slavic peoples, according to Krizhanich, should was also manifested in the rescue of the Western Slavs from the oppression of the policy of "Germanization", with than the decisive role in this matter Krizhanich again assigned to the Russian Tsar. It was he who was supposed to “correct and clarify the Slovenian language in books, with suitable sensible books for these people (i.e. Slavs - L.P.) to open their smart eyes.”

To fulfill his plan, Krizhanich turned to Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, "advising to become the head of the Slavs and, above all, to raise the mental level of their own Russian people." But, probably, the tsar did not like some of the ideas of Krizhanich and, in particular, about the merger of the Catholic and Orthodox churches, which caused him to be exiled to Tobolsk.

In his writings, the thinker deeply and carefully analyzed the reasons for the linguistic and ethnic proximity of the Slavs and created a peculiar and harmonious theory of Slavic unity. In the spirit of his era, he tried to substantiate with theological arguments the need for the unity of all Slavs in a common family. At the same time, he not only substantiated and proclaimed the idea of Slavic unity, but also tried to outline those necessary economic, political, cultural and religious measures that would ensure that the plan was successfully implemented. A clear embodiment of his principles was "Politics" - the main generalizing work, in which the idea of \u200b\u200ball-Slavic unity became one of the main topics.

Krizhanich is an apologist for autocracy, "perfect self-rule" as the best government, completely superior to any other: with "self-rule" it is easy to correct all mistakes, shortcomings and perversions and introduce good laws. The sovereign - "self-owner" is like a god on earth, and only God judges him. But autocratic rule should not be bad, tough, cruel, or tyrannical, as were the reigns of Ivan the Terrible and Boris Godunov. A righteous sovereignty can turn into tyranny if unjust laws are introduced. Unlimited power is contrary to divine and natural law. Krizhanich was sure that the time might come in Russia when the whole people would rise up against the "godless", "luboder" laws introduced by the tsars Ivan the Terrible and Boris. To prevent this from happening, he advised to limit the omnipotence of the "servants of the king" by laws, to establish new, better legislation. A great contribution to Russian political thought was Krizhanich's arguments against the centuries-old political mythology in Russia, in particular, against the legend about the origin of Russian princes from the family of Augustus, as well as against the concept of "Moscow - the third Rome". It should also be noted that Krizhanich rejected the authenticity of the chronicle legend about the invitation of the Varangian princes by the Novgorodians.

The political thought of Krizhanich, with its focus on streamlining the autocracy in Russia through the laws, was basically a progressive thought, moreover, it was significantly ahead of the historical time in which Russia lived in the 60s. XVII century But she was not alien to a certain penchant for xenophobia, hostility towards the West, although in principle Krizhanich was not anti-Western and advised the tsar to adopt from other states everything “well established”, especially in legislation, believing that what laws are, such is the order of things in state.

Author's Preface

1. In these books, the conversations and instructions of some famous writers who wrote about political affairs (that is, about royal, state and national concerns and crafts) were translated: namely, Philip Comin, Paolo Paruta, Justus Lipsia and others.

Philippe Comigne was a Parisian boyar, a dumnik of two French kings6 and an ambassador to various sovereigns. Consider him a fair politician and political writer.

Paolo Paruta was a Venetian boyar and dumnik and wrote commendably about politics.

Lipsius was a philosopher and a man of great reason. His books are very famous.

And Maxim Faust wrote books about the treasury and about money, and about ores. He gives useful reflections and instructs how to collect the treasury with a just and genuine benefit and with honor for rulers, and without oppression of subjects.

2. Also from various other books, it is written here about what is appropriate for observing the honor of the royal name and majesty. What is the opinion of other peoples about this glorious kingdom. What they write about him in their books. What is praised and what is not praised, and how can we understand their accusations and respond to them if the opportunity arises, during embassies or somewhere else.

How neighboring peoples usually deceive this glorious state. How should they be dealt with during embassies, in negotiations in commercial matters and in war; how to protect themselves from their incessant deceptions and cunning, through which they take possession of all the fruits of this land and the wealth of all the people.

3. Therefore, it speaks of trade, handicrafts, agriculture or plowing, and all kinds of trades that serve to enrich the state treasury and the welfare of the people.

About the strengthening of the kingdom, about the multiplication of forces and about all sorts of military crafts.

About the observance of honor and dignity - something that you absolutely need to know, but, it seems to me, has never been said before.

About laws and customs, and about the rule of law: how it is violated over time. How to preserve good orders, and eradicate bad ones.

About ailments or about the troubles of the people

4. St. Ambrose (book 1, comm. 5 to ch. 7 from Luke), speaking of the dead man whom the Savior resurrected in Capernaum, said this: all human bodies are pulled to the grave. After all, they say that our body consists of four primordial things - that is, of earth, water, air and fire. Since they are all hostile to each other and harmful to each other (for dry always fights with wet, and heat with cold), they cannot be at peace, and their connection cannot be lasting. That is why in our body, because of such a disagreement between its parts, there is always a struggle, it grows weak and needs daily food support. If food and drink (and sometimes healing) did not renew its strength, it would quickly fall apart and die.

In the same way, every state consists of many contradictory parts, which, by their disagreement and struggle, harm it and lead to its decline or ruin. That is, all the time, imperceptibly, either one's own bad laws, or foreign violence or cunning, which, like ailments, affect the state, and it decays and smolders, and needs constant reinforcement.

5. Illnesses or folk diseases arise for various reasons:

1) If the kingdom falls under the power of other peoples, like the Polish one, where foreigners rule.

2) If it will be necessary to pay tribute to any other people.

3) If in contracts, in trade and in other matters, our people will be deceived by cunning by neighboring peoples and impoverished.

4) If there is no fair trial and justice, if the villains freely act evil, and the strong offend the weak.

5) If in the kingdom there will be greedy people and godless laws or strife and resentment, because of which people will always have to live in sorrow and sigh and long for change.

6) If there is any failure in our affairs, because of which the whole people will suffer loss and reproach, evil glory and blasphemy.

6. All this brings evil to the people, from which the sovereign's care must always protect; and care must be taken to expel these diseases from the state body by any means. A good ruler is not content with keeping the state in its former state, but always strives to make it richer, stronger, more worthy, and certainly happier. And whoever does not try to improve his state, undoubtedly worsens it, because it cannot remain in one state for a long time, but becomes either better or worse. The improvement and strengthening of the state depends much more on good legislation than on the expansion of frontiers and the conquest of new countries.

7. Before his death, Tsar Adrian told his boyars: "I received the city of Rome in brick, and I will leave it in marble." According to the conditions of that place and time, he did well. But the ruler who could say: “I received a state infected with bad orders, but I leave it endowed with good laws” would have done much better and gained greater fame.

8. Philip - the prince of the Czech state in the German land - used to say: “A good state structure is known by three things:

firstly, on good roads - if there are good bridges and it will be possible to walk around the country without fear of thieves and other dangers;

secondly, in good money, if trade does not suffer from bad money;

and thirdly, by good courts - if it will be easy for everyone to get a trial and a speedy justice.

This prince really said well, but, however, he did not name everything that was needed, but only the most basic. For, in addition to these three concerns, the rulers also need other crafts, which we, with God's help, will describe here to the best of our ability.

Essay division

9. Jeremiah says: “Let not the wise man boast in his wisdom, the strong in his strength, the rich in his riches. But he who boasts, boast that he understands and knows me, says the Lord ”(Book of the prophet Jeremiah, 9.23).

With these words, the prophet teaches: first of all, you need to give glory to God, that is, to know him and love and glorify him with good deeds. At the same time, he speaks of three things for which the world is famous and in which he honors his happiness - that is, about wealth, strength and wisdom. But he considers worldly glory to be vain and fatal for souls, if they strive for it alone and at the same time forget God. But for those who are faithful to God, these things are not harmful, but, on the contrary, are good and much useful and necessary and are the gifts of God.

That is why we will divide this essay into three parts and talk about the wealth, strength and wisdom of the sovereign.

Some General Remarks on Piety, Wealth, Power, Wisdom, and Honor

10. In the above words of the prophet, it is said about the four pillars of the state: about piety, wealth, strength and wisdom. Piety strengthens the soul and prepares eternal bliss, while the rest strengthen the body and bring bodily bliss to those who use them correctly and in moderation.

11. But, to surprise and great misfortune, hardly anyone actually seeks what is best and most important of all, that is, piety and eternal bliss. And the whole world is looking for wealth, power, wisdom and glory, and thinks about these things incessantly and immeasurably. But a great multitude seek them in unrighteous ways, and many do not know what these things are.

12. The wealth of the ruler lies not so much in his gold and silver treasury, but in the crowdedness [of his country]. Not the richer king who has more gold, but the one who has more people. For the Scripture says: “In the multitude of the people is the greatness of the king, but in the absence of people - the shame of the sovereign” (Proverbs, 14.28).

13. Strength lies not so much in the vastness of the state and in the impregnability of fortresses, but in good laws. Under cruel orders, the best land remains empty and sparsely populated. With measured orders, even a bad land can be crowded and densely populated.

14. The sovereign's worldly wisdom is based on two rules: “Know thyself. Don't trust strangers." For just as ordinary people are deceived by ordinary people, so kings are deceived by kings, and entire nations by other nations. Only that person will not be deceived who is incredulous. Consider it an eternal truth that no one ever does any good for the sake of his neighbor, but always for his own sake and for his own reasons. And so the one who believes in people is deprived of what he hoped for. Especially - our people, because the reason for all our grave common troubles is that we do not know ourselves, but we believe strangers.

15. Some people see the glory, honor and dignity of the sovereign in three things: 1. To brag to strangers with beautiful expensive clothes, a magnificent army, the sovereign's silver and treasury; 2. Give the same strangers, ambassadors and merchants large rich gifts; 3. To keep many of the same foreigners, idle and unnecessary, on a large salary, only for the sake of the glory they bring.

But those who think so are bitterly mistaken and deceive their sovereigns. That glory is vain when they sea their own to feed strangers. Neighboring peoples do not praise this, but blaspheme and ridicule it.

16. There is no glory to the king that foreigners will receive rich gifts from him (except for some necessary cases). But that is his glory, in order not to be outwitted in bidding and in contracts.

17. There is no glory to the king that many foreigners will gorge themselves and get drunk with him. After all, these bread-eaters themselves, overeating and drinking, scoff at such orders, and other people even more so. But the king will be glorious if his own subjects are rich and worthy. The more worthy subjects the king rules, the more he is revered. A king who wants to be especially honored must elevate the dignity of his princes and boyars.

18. Oh, how mistaken are those who think that the dignity of the sovereign depends most of all on the wealth of the treasury, even if the state is poor. The dignity of a sovereign depends on nothing so much as on the wealth of his subjects. Where the subjects are rich, there the sovereign can wage war as much as he wants. And where only the treasury is rich, and the whole country is miserable, there will soon be no strength.

Part 1 ABOUT GOOD

1. The methods of increasing the state treasury are well known to all people in the world and are applied everywhere, so that it is impossible to invent anew anything that would not have hitherto been customary among people. As Ecclesiastes says; "Nothing is new under the sun, and no one can say: this is new" (Ecclesiasm, 1.10). It would be better to unlearn some of the old [methods] than to find new ways to increase the treasury.

However, it is worthy of surprise that in every case new advice causes doubt, dissatisfaction and is easily condemned, and only when collecting the treasury is nothing so new, unrighteous, godless and shameful as not to be accepted.

2. I will not invent new ways to increase the treasury, but I will only say that some methods and crafts are unrighteous, dishonest and false, or lead not to enrichment, but rather to impoverishment. And then I will tell you how to use fair, honest and useful ways and save [them].

3. Bad ways are these:

First, alchemy or the manufacture of gold is a demonic fornication, as a result of which people hope to make gold and silver out of copper. From time immemorial, countless people have worked and are working on this, but not a single ruler has yet received so much from alchemy that he could feed at least one warrior, and not a single alchemist has created a single drop of gold from copper and has not derived any benefit for himself without assistance devil or without deceiving other people.

2. Minting or pouring coins: when they are looking for profit from minting coins and minting bad money. This method is not only unrighteous and full of sin, but also very deceitful: it seems to be profitable, but it is unprofitable and harmful. Forever and ever, even the ruler cannot receive a single coin from re-minting without suffering a hundredfold damage.

Physicians have a remedy called "the measure of despair" (Remedia desperata). When the doctor considers the patient to be dying, he cuts off some part of his body, or cuts the body and sews it up again, or heals it in another way, but in such a way that the patient either recovers or dies from the treatment itself. The minting of worthless money is like this deadly "measure of despair." And just as the "measure of despair" is used only in extreme need, when there is no other means, so worthless money cannot be minted without extreme need. And this must be stopped as soon as possible, because if this continues for a long time, then the people will become the same as with the sick, to whom the doctor would open the vein and not bandage it: all the blood would flow out, and the person would die. So it is with the people - all wealth (called the second blood) will flow away from the people.

3. Merciless requisitions, cruel orders, monopolies, tavern affairs and any excessive and merciless burdening of subjects. It is rightly said: "Do not do to another what you do not want to endure yourself."

4. And the worst thing and ruin for a country is foreign trade, that is, when some king allows foreign merchants to stay or live in his state, keep warehouses and shops and trade throughout the country. For they everywhere buy our goods cheaply and reveal to their foreign countrymen all our secrets, not only in trade, but also in state secret affairs. They are destroying our own orders and planting their corrupt, destructive customs in our people and lead us into temptation and ruin our souls - and for all this the king will have to answer to God.

In a word, these merchants are the cause of immeasurable troubles for the body and for the soul. And there is no benefit from them, except for some gifts, which they give to the king or boyars. But these gifts are nothing to count, for [foreigners] take out of our country ten thousand times more wealth than they themselves give us.

And in difficult times they take their goods out of the state and thereby cause a great dearness in the state. And domestic merchants, together with us, endure evil and good and do not send their goods to other places due to the fact that copper money has been introduced.

And even worse, when these foreign merchants are not independent masters, but servants and clerks of other, richer merchants (which are all Germans who trade in Russia); For they themselves, with their servants, feed themselves and grow rich at our expense, and send their masters our goods, which can be bought at the cheapest price and at the cheapest time, and above all they send them an annual agreed quitrent in money or goods. And by means of this cunning, they force this glorious state without any need and for no one knows what to pay tribute or yasak to their Englishmen, Brabantians and Hamburgers.

And now these Germans have made themselves known to us well: they bought up the entire fur treasury for copper money, and then brought it back to Russia and lowered it for a pittance for silver, and thereby caused the royal treasury and all the people an incalculable loss.

Oh, good sir, never trust a wolf if he wants to fatten your lambs, and for all eternity do not believe that a foreign merchant will bring you any benefit. After all, it cannot be that your wealth has been increased by one who himself goes around all the lands and seas, devotes his whole life to wandering and perilous dangers for the sake of money and looks more greedily at silver than a wolf looks at lambs.

The one who throws a fishing line into the water hopes to pull out a fish. He who sows grain into the ground hopes to reap it ten times more. And if a foreign merchant brings you, the sovereign, or your boyars a silver glass or some other gift, then he will undoubtedly take out of your land and eat up a hundred times more wealth. Baruch, therefore, spoke the truth: "If you let a stranger in, he will ruin you."

Not all that glitters is gold; Not everything is useful that seems useful. Some trades seem useful, but turn out to be completely harmful. There is wealth that does not enrich, but, on the contrary, ruins.

Such works are called just when we derive all the benefit that can be obtained from our land and from neighboring peoples, by reasonable, God-fearing or merciful and good means, and not by stupid, cruel or vile ways.

Empty income: to take something and give twice or more for it - such are the incomes from warehouses and foreign merchants living in our country.

Unrighteous income comes from farming, from minting coins, etc.

Bad income - from small, insignificant and worthless things.

"The root of all evil is greed," says Paul. Greed and vanity are for states

Scylla and Charybdis, that is, disastrous cliffs. All evil and tyrannical orders flow from them.

Royal sirens are flatterers, astrologers, alchemists and coiners or inventors who invent benefits from the pouring of coins and from other unrighteous and painful methods for collecting the treasury for the people.

Every income is unreliable, obtained without labor and sweat, or without the expenditure of sufficient time, or unrighteously, or in a cruel or shameful way. All secure income must be based on toil and sweat, increased gradually and patiently, and received justly and honorably.

Excessive luxury brings sickness to the body, immoderate wealth creates poverty: that is, excessive collections for the treasury are followed by desolation of the country. Moderation brings the best returns.

In a kingdom that is poor and sparsely populated, the king cannot have secure wealth. In a rich and populous kingdom, the king cannot be poor.

Whoever fishes in moderation will always find something to catch in the pond. And the one who catches all the fish from the pond clean one day will have nothing to catch next time.

The honor, glory, duty and duty of the king is to make his people happy. After all, kingdoms are not made for kings, but kings are made for kingdoms.

Where the laws are good, the subjects are happy and foreigners want to come there. And where the laws are cruel - there their own subjects yearn for a change of government and often change if they can, and strangers are afraid to come. Oh, sovereign, manage people so that they do not want change.

5. We spoke about bad, false, unworthy and dishonorable trades: that is, about alchemy, about minting coins, about extortions and about the admission of foreign merchants.

And the good and laudable methods of acquisition are those by means of which the treasury is replenished justly, godly and honestly, without vile greed, without fierce requisitions and without unbearable and inhuman burdening of subjects.

And there are three such methods and crafts: agriculture, craft and trade - they are called black crafts or crafts of black people6. And the fourth craft is the economy or the general device, and it is the basis and soul of all the others. They are called profitable trades.

6. In a poor kingdom, it is impossible for a king to be rich. And if any [king] dreams of becoming rich, then he could be much richer if his kingdom were rich. Therefore, if the king himself wants to get rich, then he must first take care that there is an abundance of all sorts of things in the kingdom and cheapness. And this the king can achieve (as far as it is possible in his state) if he achieves that people with all diligence and zeal begin to engage in agriculture, crafts, trade and the national economy.

Polina Yesieva

YURI KRIZHANICH

This book is a reprint of the main work of the outstanding Slavic educator Y. Krizhanich (1617-1683). He received his theological education in Zagreb, Bologna and Rome. He was a missionary priest, advocated the union of the Catholic and Orthodox churches and the unity of the Slavic peoples, led by Russia, in the name of resisting the Ottoman offensive against Christian Europe. In 1647 and 1659 visited Ukraine, and in 1659 arrived in Moscow. The work was written in 1663-1666. in Tobolsk, where the author was exiled by Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. The manuscript of the work of Yuri Krizhanich published in this edition is stored in the Central State Archive of Ancient Acts in Moscow and is part of the famous collection of the Synodal Library.

The book is an important source on the history of Russia in the 17th century. It also touches upon philosophical, ethical, state-legal, economic problems.

A subtle observer, a far-sighted researcher Yuri Krizhanich in his "Politics" gives a lot of such information about Russia and especially about Siberia in the 17th century.

But, of course, the main significance of the "Politics" is not that it is one of the most important sources for understanding Russian life in the 17th century. Krizhanich stands before us as the greatest writer of his time, as a herald of Slavic unity. He, as it were, continues to develop those ideas that the famous humanist of the 15th century came up with in Serbia at one time. Konstantin Kostenchsky. And, one must think, this is not accidental, since the lofty ideas of uniting the Slavic peoples were natural within the borders mainly of Serbia and Croatia, which were under a foreign yoke and a constant threat of attack from the north and south. Krizhanich's views on the position of the Slavic peoples are striking and unusually broad for their time, especially on the position of the Ukrainians and Russian "Lutor and Calvin countries", Protestants) - he tried to protect from communication with the Slavs, because he saw the results of the "Germanization" of the Western Slavs of the Western neighbors Slavs - "Germans" (in addition to the Germans, he also included Danes, Dutch, British, Swedes, i.e. residents - Poles and Czechs. With the eastern and southern neighbor - the Ottoman Empire - he called for an uncompromising struggle: the Ottomans and the Crimean Turks were considered by him as the main opponents of the Slavic world.Russia was to lead the liberation struggle of the Slavic peoples against the Ottoman Empire, and it was this struggle that was to become the primary task of the foreign policy of the Russian state.The leadership of Russia in the community of Slavic peoples, according to Krizhanich, should was also manifested in the rescue of the Western Slavs from the oppression of the policy of "Germanization", moreover We eat a decisive role in this matter, Krizhanich again assigned the Russian Tsar. It was he who was supposed to “correct and clarify the Slovenian language in books, with suitable sensible books for these people (i.e. Slavs - L.P.) to open their smart eyes.”

Yuri Krizhanich(1618-1683) was born in Croatia, graduated from the Zagreb Theological Seminary, then the Hungarian Theological Croatian College in Vienna and the Hungarian-Bulgarian College in Bologna. From 1640, Krizhanich lived in Rome, where he graduated from the Greek Collegium of St. Athanasius. During the years of teaching, Krizhanich masters the knowledge of ancient and modern Western European languages, acquires a fundamental education in theological and secular sciences (philosophy, history, jurisprudence, mathematics, astronomy, etc.). His dream is missionary activity in Russia in order to achieve the commonwealth of the Slavic peoples under the auspices of the Russian state with a single Uniate church. In 1659, he entered the service of the Russian Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich by order of the Great Court, and in 1661, following a slanderous denunciation, he was exiled to live in Tobolsk and returned to Moscow only in 1676 by order of Tsar Fyodor Alekseevich. In 1678 he forever left the borders of the Russian state. Living in Moscow, and then in exile in Tobolsk, Krizhanich collected a large and interesting material about various aspects of Russian reality. In Tobolsk, he wrote "Conversations about Politics", known in historiography as the treatise "Politics". Acquaintance with the political orders of European countries allowed him to conduct a comparative analysis and present a forecast for the further development of Russia, taking into account the experience of state and legal construction already accumulated by other peoples.

In "Politics" Krizhanich considered a wide range of problems: economic (industry, agriculture, trade); social (organization of the estate structure of society) and political and legal (essence, origin and purpose of the state, classification of forms of government, correlation of justice, law and law, judiciary, foreign policy). His analysis consists of critical remarks and a positive program outlining the necessary changes.

In "Politics" a lot of attention is paid to the study of questions about the origin of the state, its goals and objectives.

The divine essence of the supreme power is indisputable, for "all legitimate kings are set not by themselves, but by God." Krizhanich defends the position of the divinity of the person of the bearer of supreme power. "The king is like a certain God on earth...".

The goal of the state Krizhanich defines as the achievement of "common benefit" for all members of society. "The king's duty is to provide piety, justice, peace and abundance ... faith, justice, peace and cheapness. These four things every king must provide for his people, and for this God made him king." Following Aristotle, Krizhanich divides all existing forms of government into three correct and three incorrect; the latter are perverse variants of the former. Three are correct: perfect self-rule (absolute monarchy); boyar rule and general rule or posad rule (of the republic). Self-rule is opposed by tyranny; boyar rule - oligarchy and general rule - anarchy.

The best form of these is "perfect. self-rule." It was this form that the "Hellenic philosophers" and holy fathers preferred, since it ensures the existence of justice, harmony among the people and the preservation of peace in the country to the greatest extent. "Self-rule is the oldest in the world and the strongest government." "Every true king is in his kingdom the second after God, self-owner and viceroy." This is how the thinker sees the reign of "our Tsar, Sovereign and Grand Duke Alexei Mikhailovich of All Great, Little and White Russia, autocrat", which "because it is immensely respected, successful and happy because it has perfect autonomy."

All administration of the state should be concentrated in the hands of the supreme ruler. On behalf of the latter, Krizhanich calls: “Let no one convene any diets and cathedrals without our decree ... Let not a single city appoint any elders, nor governors, nor chiefs by its own power, and our orders must appoint all city elders and judges " .

On the throne, Krizhanich prefers to see the king-philosopher. He considers it obligatory for the ruler to have knowledge; it is also good when the whole nation has knowledge, for "wisdom was created by God not without reason, but in order to be useful to people." It is especially necessary for kings, since they do not have the right to learn from their own mistakes, which are fraught with consequences not only for themselves, but for the whole people, who usually pay for their mistakes. The thinker characterizes Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich as a wise and learned person and expresses the hope that under the "noble rule of this pious tsar and great sovereign" Russia will be able to cast off "the mold of ancient savagery, learn the sciences, establish laudable relationships and achieve a happy state."

He usually uses the terms "slavery" and servility "synonymously. Like contemporary Western European thinkers, he distinguishes between two types of slavery: social (serfdom) and political (citizenship). Krizhanich condemns serfdom, arguing that true freedom can only be in such a country where each person uses his labor and disposes of his property.Of all types of bondage, the thinker recognized only bonded servitude, considering it a voluntary expression of the conscious will of the individual.

Krizhanich considers political slavery (citizenship) as a form of unquestioning obedience to the supreme power, noting that being a slave of the king and the people is a glorious thing and is one of the types of freedom, besides, it is the duty of every citizen and expresses honor, not humiliation.

The thinker is sure that with "perfect self-rule" "all errors, shortcomings and perversions" are easily eliminated. He clearly favors hereditary monarchy. The succession to the throne should take place "according to the fatherland" (ie, pass to the eldest son in the family, who is specially prepared for this mission). Women and foreigners should be prohibited by law from inheriting the throne. It is necessary to pass a law that the oath, oath and cross-kiss to a foreign king in all cases will be considered invalid. Inheritance is preferable to elections, from which there are many troubles, atrocities, deceptions, since many unworthy people achieve power by cunning. Elections are usually associated with strife, conspiracies and wars, rather they are suitable for "common dominion", and for "self-rule" hereditary perception of the throne is more suitable.

An absolute monarch must be an enlightened ruler, not a tyrant. Krizhanich defines tyranny as "ludodom" and, with references to Plato, Aristotle and Cicero, gives a detailed criticism of tyrants and tyrannical governments. "A tyrant is a robber... And in our language a tyrant is called a ludeer... tyranny is the worst shame for kings." Tyrannical rule is defined as domination, in which the ruler does not care about the welfare of the people (the state does not achieve its goal), pursues personal interests, and violates "natural" laws. But only God can punish such a ruler, not people. The divine essence of power does not allow the people "to curse the king, even if he is unjust, no one can punish the anointed one or raise a hand against him. For the king is the anointed one and the saint of God." The argument for denying the people's right to rebellion is the famous biblical text: "Do not touch my anointed ones."

Krizhanich puts forward the amount of guarantees by which it is possible to prevent the transformation of "perfect self-rule" into tyranny. First of all, this is the presence of a philosopher-monarch on the throne, then the adoption and observance of good laws corresponding to divine and "natural" (natural) institutions, for "good laws are best opposed to the thirst for power", and, finally, the normative regulation of all estates and ranks in state, according to which for each class will be defined duties in relation to the whole of society.

The duty of an enlightened monarch is to take care of the welfare of the country. First of all, it is necessary to take care of the development of crafts and the regulation of trade. The Russian state is "wide and immeasurably large, but it is closed to trade on all sides." There are few "markets" in the country, and merchants have few privileges, and they often suffer losses in competition with foreign merchants. The state needs to intervene and eliminate this injustice, since unprofitable trade with other countries should not be allowed. For example, export of "raw material" is unprofitable for Russia. It is necessary to learn how to process raw materials and "ready-made things to sell abroad." Some of our goods are a national treasure: "... fur, elk skins, caviar, honey, flax, etc. ... they must be sold to foreigners in such a way that they themselves do not lose, but that some certain amount is established : how much and what kind of goods can be allowed to be taken out of the country each time ... ".

The state should also plan the distribution of crafts among cities, taking into account natural conditions: "... the proximity of forests, flax, wool, iron and all kinds of materials ...". It is necessary to show every possible concern for the use of natural resources. In agriculture, "to use the land in such a way as to ... take from it the fruits that it can only disfigure."

In order to ensure economic well-being, the commercial and industrial estates should be given moderate "slobodins", and for this, cities should be given a certain independence in managing their affairs. It would be useful to establish city self-government bodies in them, consisting partly of officials appointed by Orders, and partly elected by the urban population. Craftsmen should be given the right to "unite in their squads", and peasants - to ensure the freedom of labor. .

Such "freedoms", according to Krizhanich, are also a guarantee against the transformation of the monarchy into tyranny and will keep the ruler "from the worst lusts."

But the main and basic guarantee against tyranny is the presence in the state of good laws and control over their implementation. If there are good laws in the state, and the estates and ranks know their rights and obligations, then "all the subjects are happy and foreigners want to come to this country", and where "the laws are cruel, there their subjects yearn for a change in government and often change if they can .. What are the laws - such is the order of things in the state. " Predatory laws always and everywhere give rise to disorder.

Justice for Krizhanich is identical to the law. Here he follows Aristotle and the Byzantine tradition, according to which "the law takes its name from justice." Krizhanich makes serious demands on the activities of the legislator. To draw up new laws, it is not enough to know all the laws and customs of your country, but it is also necessary to study the laws of "long-term states" (for example, the laws of Solon, Lycurgus - in antiquity and the modern laws of the French kings) and borrow their experience.

All officials in their activities must strictly follow the law, otherwise "whether the king is even an archangel, if his servants are not limited by good laws ... they cannot be prevented from committing widespread and innumerable robberies, insults and all kinds of looting." But he puts his monarch-philosopher above the law. "The king is not subject to any human laws and no one can condemn or punish him ... Two bridles bind the king and remind him of his duty: this is the truth or the commandment of God (here in the meaning: "divine" and not "positive" law. – N. 3.) and shame before people". The king himself is a "living law" and "he is not subject to other laws than the Divine." And finally, directly and unambiguously: "The king is above all human laws."

Russian laws Krizhanich considers extremely cruel. "Because of the laws of ludoders, all European peoples unanimously call the Orthodox kingdom tyrannical ... And besides, they say that tyranny here is the greatest." Therefore, he strongly hints at the need to mitigate the sanctions of contemporary Russian legislation.

Krizhanich touched upon issues related to the organization of justice. It is interesting to note that when presenting this topic, he did not avoid traditional models, resorting to contrasting the negative practice in the Russian state with a positive example allegedly existing "in the Turkish kingdom." So, as an instructive example, Krizhanich told how the Turkish Sultan Bayazet, who had many venal judges, “brought out” the “unrighteous” court, and he even intended to gather them all in one house and burn them, but he was advised against, drawing attention to their value. vocational training; then the sultan decided, in order to eradicate vicious judicial practice, to establish good salaries for all judges and thereby put an end to bribery. "And since then, the courts of the Turks judge better and more righteously than anywhere else in the world." These reasonings are almost identical to the thoughts of I.S. Peresvetov, in which the Turkish Sultan also "concocted all his judges with his royal salary so that they would not be tempted to judge wrongly."

Krizhanich also proposes some measures to streamline the judicial system. The highest court should be the Boyar Court, which should resolve serious criminal cases, and entrust the consideration of civil and petty criminal cases to any one judge "from among the boyars." Writ judges are appointed by the tsar or the government, and in the localities, judicial powers are handed over to governors and city judges chosen by the townspeople.

The proposals on the judiciary are not specific, but some ideas about the need to introduce a collegiate composition of the court, deciding all cases by a majority vote, are certainly progressive, as are the provisions on locally elected courts.

In determining the course of foreign policy, Krizhanich adhered to the orientation traditional for Russian political thought. He repeatedly insisted on the need to establish good neighborly relations with the surrounding countries. The ruler is obliged "to keep peace with peaceful people, not to offend anyone, to enter into alliances with peoples like himself." It is always more important for the state to preserve its own than to acquire someone else's. "Every king should take care of peace and tranquility for his people." Krizhanich does not exclude the possibility of waging just wars in order to protect the independence of the country, therefore he believes that the state should have a large and strong army with good and "diverse" weapons. Warriors serve for pay and are provided by the state with everything necessary, and people who are well-versed in military affairs and well-read in military history are appointed to military leaders. Moreover, "the path is not closed" to the highest military positions even for ordinary people who are able to show themselves worthy of such an honor. "The king will make him first a commander or governor, and then a boyar ...".

Krizhanich proposes to establish rules for the conduct of just wars. War should not be started without sufficient reasons and "without the announcement of its cause through a messenger." Under no circumstances should ambassadors be detained or killed. When forming an army, national rather than mercenary troops should be preferred.

The whole sum of Krizhanich's views paints us the image of a man of the new time. He lives and works at the turn of the century, having a good idea not only of the paths already traveled by Russia, but also of the future prospects for its economic and political development. In his "prospect-projects", as V. O. Klyuchevsky noted, "the reforms of Peter the Great are already visible."

Portal for the student. Self-training

Author's Preface

Part 1

ABOUT GOOD

YURI KRIZHANICH

RELATED ARTICLES