Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T07:55:34.622Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Secularization of the Search for Salvation: The Self-Fashioning of Orthodox Clergymen's Sons in Late Imperial Russia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2017

Laurie Manchester
Laurie Manchester*
Affiliation:
Kathryn W. and Shelby Cullom Davis Center for Russian Studies, Harvard University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In recent decades, historians of prerevolutionary Russia have emphasized the diverse and complex nature of the group of educated Russians that has traditionally been referred to as the “intelligentsia.” In the existing historiography, there have been numerous investigations into various subgroups of the intelligentsia, including studies of noble intellectuals, students, women radicals, religious thinkers, ethnic elites, and members of political parties and of specific professions. The subgroup that contributed more to Russian professions and political movements than any other non-noble subgroup in both quantitative and qualitative terms is also the only prominent subgroup that has been neglected. The members of this neglected subgroup are Russian Orthodox clergymen's sons, referred to throughout this article by the Russian term popovichi?

Type
Articles
Information
Slavic Review , Volume 57 , Issue 1 , Spring 1998 , pp. 50 - 76
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies. 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

A version of this article was presented at the Historians' Seminar of the Kathryn W. and Shelby Cullom Davis Center for Russian Studies at Harvard University in 1997. I thank the Davis Center, the Harriman Institute, the International Research and Exchanges Board, the Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies, the Social Science Research Council, and the U.S. Department of Education for supporting the research that made this article possible. I also thank Gregory Freeze, Robert Geraci, Igal Halfin, Jochen Hellbeck, Marc Raeff, Andreas Schonle, Vera Shevzov, Elise Wirtschafter, Richard Wortman, and the participants in the Historians' Seminar at the Davis Center for their suggestions and helpful advice.

1. For discussions concerning the complex nature of the “intelligentsia,” see Wirtschafter, Elise Kimerling, Structures of Society: Imperial Russia's “People of Various Ranks” (DeKalb, III., 1994), 118–44Google Scholar; Otto, Miiller, Intelligencija: Untersuchungen zur Geschichte eines politischen Schlagwortes (Frankfurt am Main, 1971)Google Scholar. For examples of various studies on intelligentsia subgroups, see Marc, Raeff, Origins of the Russian Intelligentsia: The Eighteenth-Century Nobility (New York, 1966)Google Scholar; Brower, Daniel R., Training the Nihilists: Education and Radicalism in Tsarist Russia (Ithaca, 1975)Google Scholar; Engel, Barbara Alpern, Mothers and Daughters: Women of the Intelligentsia in Nineteenth-Century Russia (Cambridge, Eng., 1983)Google Scholar; Haberer, Erich E., Jews and Revolution in Nineteenth-Century Russia (Cambridge, Eng., 1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kornblatt, Judith Deutsch and Gustafson, Richard F., eds., Russian Religious Thought (Madison, 1996)Google Scholar; Balzer, Harley D., ed., Russia's Missing Middle Class: The Professions in Russian History (Armonk, N.Y., 1996)Google Scholar.

2. Although the colloquial term pop, from which popovich is derived, referred specifically to priests, I employ popovich to refer to the secularly employed sons of priests, deacons, and sacristans. This is in keeping with its broader meaning of “a person originating from the clerical zvanie [rank]” and with nineteenth-century colloquial usage. See Slovar' sovremennogo russkogo literaturnogo iazyka, 17 vols. (Moscow, 1950–1965), 10: 1295–96. Popovich was never employed as a juridical category. It is a more precise term than seminarians, since a minority of clergymen's sons did not receive a theological education and a small percentage of seminarians were not clergymen's sons. Although all clergymen's sons were technically popovichi as children, those who remained in the estate as adults were no longer referred to by this term after they became clergymen. While pop was often derogatory, the neutrality of popovich is attested to by the fact that popovichi used the term to refer to themselves. For several examples, see Blagosvetlov, G. E., Irinarkh Ivanovich Vvedenskii (St. Petersburg, 1857), 6 Google Scholar; “Iz shkol'nykh vospominanii byvshego seminarista,” Pribavlenie Vologodskikh eparkhial'nikh vedomostei, 1901, no. 18: 514; Giliarov-Platonov, N. P., Iz perezhitogo, 2 vols. (Moscow, 1886), 1: 297.Google Scholar

3. The closest the Protestant clergy ever came to being a “closed” social estate appears to have been in eighteenth-century Germany, when almost half the ministers in certain regions were pastors’ sons. Gunther Bormann, “Studien zu Berufsbild unci Berufswirklichkeit Evangelischer Pfarrer in Wurttemberg,” Social Compass, 1906, no. 13.

4. Calculated from Malitskii, N. V., lstoriia Vladimirskoi dukhovnoi seminarii (hereafter IVDS), 3 vols. (Moscow, 1900–1902), 3: 1–336.Google Scholar

5. See Laurie Manchester, “Secular Ascetics: The Mentality of Orthodox Clergymen's Sons in Late Imperial Russia” (Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, 1995), 56–58, 246–64, 422–28. For the fates of clergymen's daughters, see 120–31.

6. For census figures, see Statisticheskii vremennik Rossiiskoi imperii (St. Petersburg, 1866), 40–43. For the percentage of popovichi in prereform professions, see L. A. Bulgakova, “Intelligentsia v Rossii vo vtoroi chetverti XIX veka: Sostav, pravovoe i material'noe polozhenie” (Kand. diss., Leningrad, 1983), 53, 103. For the postreform period, see Ivanov, A. E., Vysshaia shkola Rossii v kontse XlX-nachale XX veka (Moscow, 1991), 224 Google Scholar; Leikina-Svirskaia, V. R., Intelligentsiia v Rossii vo vtoroi polovine XIX veka (Moscow, 1971), 154 Google Scholar; Frieden, Nancy Mandelker, Russian Physicians in an Era of Reform and Revolution, 1856–1905 (Princeton, 1981), 337.Google Scholar

7. Walter M., Pintner, “The Social Characteristics of the Early Nineteenth-Century Russian Bureaucracy,” Slavic Review 29, no. 3 (Fall 1970): 435.Google Scholar

8. Individual popovichi belonged to both the Kadet and Octobrist parties. For several examples, see Rossiiskii gosudarstvennyi istoricheskii arkhiv (RGIA), f. 1327, op. 1, g. 1905, d. 141 and d. 143; f. 1327, op. 1, g. 1907, d. 103; f. 1327, op. 1, g. 1913, d. 33b and d. 34 (biographical information on duma delegates). I am grateful to Argyrios Pisiotis for furnishing this data. Figures concerning their numerical contribution to revolutionary movements are based on a quantitative study of Deiateli revoliutsionnogo dvizheniia v Rossii, vols. 1–3, 5 (Moscow, 1927–1934); unpublished vols. 1–25 in the State Historical Library in Moscow (GPIB) and Otdel rukopisei Rossiiskoi gosudarstvennoi biblioteki (RGB OR), f. 520, k. 55, d. 1–2.

9. For several examples, see David, Joravsky, Russian Psychology: A Critical History (Oxford, 1989), 79 Google Scholar; Nahirny, Vladimir C., The Russian Intelligentsia: From Torment to Silence (New Brunswick, N.J., 1983), 29 Google Scholar; Leikina-Svirskaia, Intelligentsiia, 104. Joravsky presents Pavlov as an exception to the historiographical stereotype that he accepts.

10. Martin, Malia, “What Is the Intelligentsia,” in Pipes, Richard, ed., The Russian Intelligentsia (New York, 1970), 11 Google Scholar. For another example of a historian who emphasizes social mobility, see Abbott, Gleason, Young Russia: The Genesis of Russian Radicalism in the 1860s (New York, 1980), 121–22Google Scholar. For an example of Soviet historiography, see Shtrange, M. M., Demokraticheskaia Intelligentsiia Rossii v XVIII veke (Moscow, 1965)Google Scholar. On popovichi and the religious roots of Russian radicalism, see Nicholas, Berdyaev, The Origin of Russian Communism, trans. French, R. M. (Ann Arbor, 1960), 45–53Google Scholar. For a scholar who dismisses this thesis, see Philip, Pomper, The Russian Revolutionary Intelligentsia (New York, 1970), 63 Google Scholar. For an example of a recent scholar who employs Berdiaev's thesis, see Irina, Paperno, Chernyshevsky and the Age of Realism: A Study in the Semiotics of Behavior (Stanford, 1988), 204 Google Scholar. In his conclusions to a groundbreaking study on clerical activism, Gregory Freeze suggests a link between popovichi's secular roles and the “specific structure of their original subculture.” But he also limits his brief discussion to popovichi who were active in the revolutionary movement. Gregory Freeze, “A Social Mission for Russian Orthodoxy: The Kazan Requiem of 1861 for the Peasants in Bezdna,” in Marshall, Shatz and Ezra, Mendelsohn, eds., Imperial Russia, 1700–1917: State, Society, Opposition. Essays in Honor of Marc Raeff (DeKalb, III., 1988), 129 Google Scholar. Michael Confino has recently argued that the neophyte atheism of radical seminarians distinguished them from other radicals. He dismisses their contribution to radical movements, however, by concluding that the ethos of the intelligentsia was unaffected by non-nobles. Michael, Confino, “Révolte juvenile et contre-culture,” Cahiers du Monde russe et sovietique 31 (1990): 516–18.Google Scholar

11. For a discussion of the similarities and differences between these types of “human documents,” see Lidiia, Ginzburg, On Psychological Prose, trans. Rosengrant, Judson (Princeton, 1991), 9.Google Scholar

12. The term batiushka has a dual meaning. It is a colloquial name for father and also the familiar name used by parishioners to address their priest.

13. See Marc, Raeff, “Home, School, and Service in the Life of the Russian Nobleman,” in Cherniavsky, Michael, ed., The Structure of Russian History (New York, 1970), 213, 215Google Scholar; Andrew, Wachtel, The Battle for Childhood: Creation of a Russian Myth (Stanford, 1990), 96–108, 126–28Google Scholar; Jessica, Tovrov, “Mother-Child Relationships among the Russian Nobility,” in Ransel, David L., ed., The Family in Imperial Russia: New Lines of Historical Research (Urbana, 1978), 17–27.Google Scholar

14. RGB OR, f. 177, d. 50.66 (Fenomenov's autobiography).

15. For example, see Dom Plekhanova Rossiiskoi natsional'noi biblioteki (DP RNB), f. 102, op. 1, d. 1 (A. I. Brilliantov's autobiography), 1. 1; N. N “50-letie sviashchennosluzheniia protoiereia o. Nikolaia Stepanovicha Roznatovskogo,” Prihavlenie k Chemigovskim eparkhial'nym vedomostiam, 1907, no. 20: 713; Kriukov.skii, V. la., “Okolo Bursy,” Russkaia starina 144, no. 10 (1910): 54 Google Scholar; D. N. Dobrokhotov, “Avtobiografiia,” in Maksimov, A. N., ed., Sotrudniki “Russkikh vedomostei,” 1863–1913. (Moscow, 1913), 63.Google Scholar

16. N. A. Orlov, “Protoierei Aleksei Vladimirovich Orlov,” Vladimirskie eparkhial'nye vedomosti (hereafter VEV), 1905, no. 23: 29–30. For examples of similar statements, see A. A. Bunin, “Avtobiograficheskie Zapiski,” Voronezhskaia starina, 1904, no. 4: 290; Al'bov, M. N., “Avtobiografiia,” in Vengerov, S. A., ed., Kritiko-biograficheskii slovar' russkikh pisatelei i uchenykh, 6 vols. (St. Petersburg, 1897–1904), 1: 461.Google Scholar

17. I.I. Orlovskii, “Sviashchennik Ioann Mikhailovich Orlovskii (Nekrolog),” Smolenskie eparkhial'nye vedomosti, 1905, no. 10: 540–41; Aleksandr, Orlov, Moia zhizn' Hi ispoved’ (Moscow, 1832), 21 Google Scholar; M. Pavlovich, “Venok na mogilu v bozhe pochivshego protoiereia Mikhaila Savvicha Pavlovicha (1823–1905),” Volynskie eparkhial'nye vedomosti, 1905, no. 18: 592–93.

18. A., Voronskii, Bursa (Moscow, 1966), 15, 20Google Scholar. For a statement by another Bolshevik popovich on his father's influence, see Ostrovitianov, K. V., Dumy o proshlom (Moscow, 1967), 7 Google Scholar. For statements by populists, see Mamin-Sibiriak, D. N., “Iz dalekogo proshlogo,” in Sobranie sochinenii, 10 vols. (Moscow, 1958), 10: 203–4Google Scholar; Pribylev, A. V., “Avtobiografiia,” in Entsiklopedicheskii slovar’ russkogo biograficheskogo instituta Granat (hereafter Granat), 58 vols. (Moscow, 1927), 40: 344.Google Scholar

19. Popovichi further allied themselves with clerical patriarchy by expressing a preference for their grandfathers over their grandmothers. For several examples, see RGB OR, f. 356 (A. B. Derman), k. 3, d. 43 (Elpat'evskii's autobiography), 1. 2–2ob.; A. A. Dmitrievskii, “Pamiati zashtatnogo diakona Afanasiia Petrovicha Dmitrievskogo i ego suprugi Eleny Fedorovichy,” Astrakhanskie eparkhial'nye vedomosti, 1913, no. 30: 781; Mamin-Sibiriak, “Iz dalekogo,” 229–33; Sergei, Bulgakov, Avtobiograficheskie zametki (Paris, 1991), 17–18.Google Scholar

20. RGB OR, f. 356, k. 3, d. 43, 11. 6ob.-7ob., 21–24ob. Elpat'evskii's unpublished autobiography was written in the 1920s. For examples of fathers who read only theological literature, see Potapenko, I. N., “I. N. Potapenko,” in Fidler, F. F., ed., Pervye literaturnye shagi: Avtobiografii sovremennykh russkikh pisatelei (Moscow, 1911), 67 Google Scholar; S. I., Sychugov, “Nechto v rode avtobiografii,” Golos minuvshego, 1916, no. 1: 111.Google Scholar

21. A. I., Sadov, “Iz vospominanii o sel'skoi zhizni i shkol'nom byte 60–50 let nazad,” Deistviia Nizhegorodskoi gubernskoi uchenoi arkhivnoi komissii 16, no. 1 (1913): 4 Google Scholar. For other examples, see Pavlovich, , “Venok na mogilu,” 523–26; Ģiliarov-Platonov, Iz perezhitogo, 1: 167.Google Scholar

22. RGB OR, f. 356, k. 3, d. 43, II. 22–24ob. This law was initially introduced by Peter the Great. For a reiteration of the law in the late nineteenth century, see Prakticheskoe rukovodstvo dlia sviashchennosluzhitelei, 6th ed. (St. Petersburg, 1897), 92. No evidence has been discovered to confirm that a priest ever informed the police after learning of a parishioner's crime during confession.

23. Pavlovich, “Venok na mogilu,” 522, 593. See also Orlov, Moia zhizn', 21–22.

24. Rossiiskii gosudarstvennyi arkhiv literatury i iskusstva (RGALI), f. 904, op. 1, d. 17 (I. E. Tsvetkov's autobiography), 1. 8. See also Bulgakov, Avtobiograficheskie zametki, 15–19.

25. RGB OR, f. 356, k. 3, d. 43, 1. 20, and d. 46 (another version of Elpat'evskii's autobiography), 11. 54–56. For other examples of fathers burdened by agricultural labor who never complained, see Pavlovich, “Venok na mogilu,” 591, 595; Sadov, “Iz vospominanii,” 3–6.

26. Pavlovich, “Venok na mogilu,” 594. On meekness and modesty as general traits, see Orlov, Moia zhizn', 21–22; RGALI, f. 1708, op. 1, d. 1 (N. S. Karzhanskii's autobiography), 1. 1.

27. RGB OR, f. 356, k. 3, d. 43, 1. 23ob.; Sadov, “Iz vospominanii. “

28. RGB OR, f. 356, k. 3, d. 43, 1. 20. For other examples, see Kriukovskii, , “Okolo Bursy,” Russkaia starina 144, no. 10 (1910): 55 Google Scholar; Dmitrievskii, “Pamiali zashtatnogo diakona Afanasiia Petrovicha Dmitrievskogo,” 783; Tikhonov, V. A., DvadtsaV piat’ let na kazennoi sluzhbe, 2 vols. (St. Petersburg, 1912), 1: 3–7.Google Scholar

29. For several examples of noble radicals who did implicate their fathers, see N. F. Udilenev's autobiography in Granat, 40: 515; Peter, Kropotkin, Memoirs of a Revolutionist (New York, 1988), 50–51Google Scholar; Gertsen, A. I., Byloe i dumy, 3 vols. (Moscow, 1967), 1: 101.Google Scholar

30. For examples of such radicals, see Pribylev, “Avtobiografiia,” 347–48, 351–52; A. V. Gedeonovskii, “Avtobiografiia,” in Granat, 40: 58. For fathers who stood out for other reasons, see RGB OR, f. 356, k. 3, d. 43, 1. 23–23ob.; A. A., Tankov, “Zakonouchitel’ Kurskoi muzhskoi gimnazii prot. o. A. A. Tankov (1817–1904),” Kurskie eparkhial'nye vedomosti, 1906, no. 36: 685.Google Scholar

31. For one example, see the autobiography of M. P. Shebalin in Granat, 40: 614.

32. Orlovskii, “Sviashchennik Ioann Mikhailovich Orlovskii,” 536–40. For other examples of fathers who were amateur scholars or poets, see A. A. Izmailov, “Aleksandr Alekseevich Izmailov,” in Fidler, ed., Pervye literaturnye shagi, 32; A. V. Smirnov, “Avtobiografiia,” in Vengerov, ed., Kritiko-biograficheskii slovar', 6: 192; N. I., Subbotin, “V sem'e sviashchennika,” Moskovskie vedomosti, 1899, no. 355: 3 Google Scholar. Even fathers who lacked a formal education could be described as avid scholars. For example, see N. I., Nadezhdin, “Avtobiografiia,” Russkii vestnik, 1856, no. 2: 50–51.Google Scholar

33. Orlovskii, “Sviashchennik Ioann Mikhailovich Orlovskii,” 535–40. For other examples of fathers who had trouble with their superiors, see Sychugov, S. I., Zapiski bursaka (Moscow, 1933), 28 Google Scholar; Tikhonov, Dvadtsat'piat’ let na kazennoi sluzhbe, 1: 14–15. For other examples of fathers who were plagued by anxiety and aversion to hypocrisy, see RGB OR, f. 178, d. 7312 (Almazov's autobiography), 1. 130ob.; Orlov, “Aleksei Vladimirovich Orlov,” 10–12; Shashkov, S, “Avtobiografiia,” Vostochnoe obozrenie, 1882, no. 28: 11–12.Google Scholar

34. Orlovskii, “Sviashchennik Ioann Mikhailovich Orlovskii,” 538–40.

35. Shashkov, “Avtobiografiia,” 11–12.

36. I. M., Krasnoperov, “Moi detskie gody i shkola,” Vestnik vospitaniia, 1903, no. 6: 174–200Google Scholar. For other examples, see Biriukov, V. P., Ural'skaia kopilka (Sverdlovsk, 1967), 9 Google Scholar; Tikhonov, Dvadtsat’ piat' let na kazennoi sluzhbe, 1: 8, 14–17, 40.

37. Orlovskii, “Sviashchennik Ioann Mikhailovich Orlovskii,” 535, 538–40.

38. Sychugov, Zapiski, 28. For other examples, see Orlov, “A. V. Orlov,” 4; N. N., “50-letie,” 712; Orlov, D. I., “Avtobiografiia,” in Voinov, L. I., ed., Ocherk XXV-letnei deiatel'nosti vrachei vypuska 1878 goda imp. Mediko-Khirurgicheskoi akademii (St. Petersburg, 1903), 136–37Google Scholar.

39. For examples of the “otherworldly” clergyman in clerical obituaries, see “Protoierei Sergei Sergievich Gromov,” VEV, 1899, no. 13: 467–68; Fr. Beliaev, Fedor, “Ocherk zhizni protoiereia Mikhaila Gerasimovicha Sokol'skogo,” VEV, 1891, no. 3: 91–98Google Scholar. For examples of the “proto-intelligent” clergyman, see Florinskii, Fr. N., “Pamiati pochivshogo,” VEV, 1887, no. 19: 591 Google Scholar; Fr. Grammatin, D., “Paniiati o. Protoiereia goroda Shui N. I. Iakimanskogo,” VEV, 1917, no. 30: 286 Google Scholar. For examples of saints embodying traits associated with either the “otherworldly” or the “proto-intelligent” type, see the lives of Saints Zosima and Aleksei in Zhitiia svialykh Rossiishoi tserhvi takzhe iverskikh i slavianskikh i mestno chtimykh podvizhnikov blagochestiia, 12 vols. (St. Petersburg, 1859), 9: 17–18, 94.

40. Filaret, [Gumilevskii], Istoriia Russkoi Tserkvi (St. Petersburg, 1895), 6th ed., 389, 456–57Google Scholar; Fr. Bulgakov, N. A., Prepodobnyi Iosif Volokolamskii (St. Petersburg, 1865), 76–77, 215, 314Google Scholar; Arkhangel'skii, A. S., N. Sorskii i Vassian Patrikeev, ikh literaturnye trudy i idei v drevnei Rusi (St. Petersburg, 1882), 25–42, 274–83Google Scholar. This duality of models can also be traced to the contradictory stance that early Christianity adopted toward the temporal world. See Meeks, Wayne A., The Origins of Christian Morality: The First Two Centuries (New Haven, 1993), 13–14.Google Scholar

41. The secular roles that numerous clergymen performed included charity work and serving as schoolteachers, librarians, vaccinators, notary publics, ethnographers, missionaries, and duma deputies. For several examples of priests fulfilling these functions, see Gosudarstvennyi arkhiv Vladimirskoi oblasti (GAVO), f. 556, op. 109, d. 339, 1. 3ob.; f. 556, op. 1 l l , d. 906, II. 3ob.-4; d. 943, II. 99–100, 169; and d. 1059, I. 87 (parish service records from deaneries in Vladimir province, 1878, 1884, and 1898). For the besedy and sermons delivered in Vladimir province, see the archival citations just presented as well as GAVO, f. 556, op. 1, d. 1801 (reports to Holy Synod from local deans, 1856–57), II. 3, 20–22. For their importance, see Russkoe propovednichestvo, istoricheskii ego obzor i Vzgliad na sovremennoe ego napravlenie (St. Petersburg, 1871). For examples of these pastoral theology manuals, see Kirill, , Pastyrskoe bogoslovie, 2d ed. (St. Petersburg, 1854), 21, 23Google Scholar; Innokentii, , Pastyrskoe bogoslovie v Rossii za XIX veke (St. Petersburg, 1899), 70–71, 98–100, 383–84Google Scholar. On the church's role in charity, see Adele, Lindenmeyr, Poverty Is Not a Vice: Charity, Society, and the State in Imperial Russia (Princeton, 1996), 129–36Google Scholar. For an example of these attacks on Protestantism, see Bronzov, A. A., Nravstvennoe bogoslovie v Rossii v techenie XlX-ogo stoletiia (St. Petersburg, 1901), 107.Google Scholar

42. Startsy o. Paisii Velichkovskii i o. Makarii Optinskii i ikh literaturno-asketicheskaia deiatel'nost' (Moscow, 1909); Georges Florovsky, Puti russkogo bogosloviia (Paris, 1937), 387–401.

43. Iakov, , Pastyr' v otnoshenii k sebe i pastve (St. Petersburg, 1880), 43–116Google Scholar; Pevnitskii, V, “Semeinaia zhizn' sviashchennika,” Rukovodstvo dlia sel'skikh pastyrei, 1885, no. 23: 132–33Google Scholar; Fieri, V. I., Pravila nravstvennosti (St. Petersburg, 1847), 29–78Google Scholar. Although these manuals often referred only to the responsibilities of priests, deacons and sacristans assisted in performing pastoral functions.

44. On clergymen's need to strive for self-perfection, see Pamiatnaia knizhka dlia sviashchennika ili razmyshleniia o sviashchennicheskikh obiazannostiakh (Moscow, 1860), 11–25; Prakticheskoe izlozhenie, 125–29. On diary keeping, see R., P., “Vazhnoe Znachenie dnevnika dlia prikhodskogo sviashchennika,” Rukovodstvo dlia sel'skikh pastyrei, 1876, no. 16: 475–88Google Scholar. For Puritan practices, see Hambrick-Stowe, Charles E., The Practice of Piety: Puritan Devotional Disciplines in Seventeenth-Century New England (Chapel Hill, 1982), 186–93.Google Scholar

45. At Vladimir seminary the grade point average of seminarians who did not become clergymen was higher than that of seminarians who did become clergymen during every period between 1790–1900 except 1841–1850. IVDS, 3: 1–336. In 1874–1875, nine out of ten of the top students in the two graduating classes of Vladimir seminary left the clergy. GAVO, f. 454, op. 1, d. 446 (seminary records of student rankings), 11. 99–100.

46. For example, see Tikhonov, , Dvadtsat' piat' let na kazennoi sluzhbe, 1: 28–31Google Scholar; G. K., Bogoslovskii, “Chernigovskaia seminariia 50 let nazad (iz vospominanii b. seminarista),” Vera i zhizn1, 1915, no. 7: 77–78Google Scholar; Malein, I. M., Moi vospominaniia (Tver, 1910), 209 Google Scholar. These types of “external” explanations were offered by the church hierarchy and clergy to explain the exodus of popovichi. They also cited clerical poverty and the paltry social status of the clergy as motivating factors. Gregory, Freeze, The Parish Clergy in Nineteenth-Century Russia: Crisis, Reform, Counter-Reform (Princeton, 1983), 150–55, 164–71, 263–64, 325, 376–85.Google Scholar

47. For a discussion of clerical stereotypes, see V. A. Popov, Tipy dukhovenstva v russkoi khudozhestvennoi literature za poslednee 12-letie (Kazan', 1884).

48. For example, see Giliarov-Platonov, Iz perezhitogo, 2: 126; Otdel rukopisei Rossiiskoi natsional'noi biblioteki (OR RNB), f. 725, op. 1, d. 3 (G. K. Solomin's autobiography), 1. 27; Tikhonov, Dvadtsat’ piat’ let na kazennoi sluzhbe, 1: 14, 17; P. S., Kazanskii, “Vospominaniia seminarista,” Pravoslavnoe obozrenie, 1879, no. 9: 108 Google Scholar; Malein, Moi vospominaniia, 209.

49. Tikhonov, , Dvadtsat' piat' let na kazennoi sluzhbe, 1: 42–43Google Scholar. For other examples, see Mikhail, Vrutsevich, “Dukhovnoe uchilishche starykh vremen,” Russkaia starina 121, no. 3 (1905): 704 Google Scholar; P. V., Tsezorevskii, “Shestidesiatye gody v Dukhovnoi Seminarii,” Zvonar, 1906, no. 4: 250 Google Scholar; Gosudarstvennyi arkhiv Rossiiskoi Federatsii (GA RF), f. 102, op. 223, g. 1905, d. 1000, ch. 10, 1. 72; RGIA, f. 797, op. 96, d. 162, 1. 19–19ob. (declarations written by striking seminarians).

50. Muzei istorii religii (MIR), f. 13, op. 1, d. 1001 (I. M. Tregubov to M. I. Tregubova, 1887), 1. 10. For other examples, see Sankt-Peterburgskii filial Arkhiva rossiiskoi akademii nauk (PFA RAN), f. 849, op. 2, d. 30 (D. K. Zelenin's diary), 11. 301–3; RGIA, f. 797, op. 96, d. 162, 1. 26.

51. Giliarov-Platonov, Iz perezhitogo, 2: 126–32.

52. OR RNB, f. 725, op. 1, d. 3, 1. 70. For another example, see GA RF, f. 1721, op. 1, d. 135 (A. A. Teplov to Teplova, 190?), 1. 4.

53. DP RNB, f. 102, op. 1, d. 317 (Irodion Kholopov to A. I. Brilliantov, 22 April 1904), 1. 1.

54. GA RF, f. 102, op. 223, g. 1905, d. 1000, ch. 10, 1. 62ob.; A. G. Filonov [Borisoglebskii], “Iz zhizni starogo pedagoga,” Gimnaziia, 1890, no. 8/10: 650; Kazanskii, “Vospominaniia seminarista,” 108; Biriukov, Ural'skaia kopilka, 17.

55. Orlov, Moia zhizn', 22.

56. For several examples, see Mamin-Sibiriak, “Iz dalekogo,” 10: 254; Ostrovitianov, Dumy o proshlom, 20; N. I. Solov'ev, “Kak nas uchili,” Russkaia starina 100, no. 1 1 (1899): 381–88; N. G. Pomialovskii, “Ocherki bursy,” Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, 2 vols. (Moscow and Leningrad, 1935), 2: 195–98.

57. Quoted in Zhirkevich, A. V., Ivan Ivanovich Orlovskii (Vilno, 1909), 27 (Ivan Orlovskii to Zhirkevich, March 1909).Google Scholar

58. Bogoslovskii, I. A., Iz materialov po istorii podpol'noi biblioteki i tainogo kruzhka Vladimirskoi Seminarii (Kostroma, 1921), 1 Google Scholar. For other examples, see Evgenii, Greznov, Iz shkol'nykh vospominanii byvshogo seminarista (Vologda, 1903), 201 Google Scholar; D. I., Tikhomirov, “Avtobiografiia,” Bibliograficheskii ukazatel’ materialov po istorii russkoi shkoly, 1901, no. 11: 217.Google Scholar

59. On material deprivation, see Shchapov, A. P., Sobranie sochinenii (Irkutsk, 1937), 73 Google Scholar; Polisadov, G. A., Doma i v shkole (Vladimir, 1915), 11 Google Scholar; Bogoslovskii, “Chernigovskaia seminariia 50 let nazad,” no. 5–6: 79, 83. On corporal punishment and sadism, see A. G. Filonov [Borisoglebskii], Moe detstvo (St. Petersburg, 1864), 47; RGB OR, f. 178, d. 7312, 11. 6ob.-8; Elpidifor Barsov's response in Vengerov, ed., Kritiko-biograficheskii slovar', 2: 163.

60. Sychugov, “Nechto,” 124; Kazanskii, “Vospominaniia seminarista,” 18–19; Gur'ev, Mikhail, “Vospominaniia o moem uchenii,” Russkaia starina 139, no. 8 (1909): 362 Google Scholar; D. I., Pisarev, “Pogibshie i pogibaiushchie,” Literaturnaia kritika v trekh tomakh (Leningrad, 1981), 3: 50–116.Google Scholar

61. Kriukovskii, , “Okolo Bursy,” Russkaia starina 146, no. 6 (1911): 582 Google Scholar. For similar statements, see Sychugov, “Nechto,” 114; Kazanskii, “Vospominaniia seminarista,” 123.

62. This observation about the piety of adult popovichi is gleaned from the diaries and correspondence of numerous popovichi. In these texts many popovichi expressed their faith in the power of prayer and confession, made frequent reference to God and to scripture, and mentioned their regular attendance at church services. For examples of popovichi who were not employed in the clerical domain (such as professors at theological academies or seminaries) who made such statements, see Institut russkoi literatury (IRLI), f. 286, op. 1, d. 121 (A. V. Smirnov to V. A. Smirnov, 25 March 1897), 1. 1; GAVO, f. 622, op. 1, d. 12 (A. V. Smirnov to V. A. Smirnov, 189?), I. 4; RGALI, f. 904, op. 1, d. 16 (Tsvetkov's diary), 11. 15, 17, 40; RGALI, f. 716, op. 1, d. 125 (V. M. Vasnetsov to A. M. Vasnetsov, n.d.), 1. 27–27ob.; RGALI, f. 765, op. 1, d. 188 (M. S. Znamenskii to A. S. Znamenskaia, 1864), 1. 1. Not all popovichi who maintained their faith remained affiliated with the official church. Besides the above-mentioned case of the Tolstoian Ivan Tregubov, see the case of a Bolshevik popovich who was drawn to the Molokane sect. GAVO, f. P46, op. 1, d. 193 (Tikhomirov's memoirs), II. 11–12. On the piety of popovichi populists, see the prison diaries of Mikhail Novorusskii, in which he described his observance of Orthodox religious holidays and his desire to participate in the rite of confession (GA RF, f. 1733, op. 1, d. 2, II. 40, 44–45). For another example, see GA RF, f. 1721, op. 1, d. 135, 1. 21.

63. Biriukov, Ural'skaia kopilka, 15.

64. For example, see RGIA, f. 802, op. 9, d. 66 (bishop's report concerning Ekaterinoslav seminary, 1886), 1. 139; GA RF, f. 102, op. 223, g. 1905, d. 1000, ch. 10, 11. 16, 23; GAVO, f. 1294, op. 1, d. 9 (anonymous seminarian's diary), II. 16, 19; Kriukovskii, “Okolo Bursy,” Russkaia starina 146, no. 4 (1911): 446.

65. E. A. Preobrazhenskii, “Avtobiografiia,” in Granat, 41: 120. For other examples, see Al'bov, M. N., “Mikhail Nilovich Al'bov,” in Fidler, , ed., Pervye literaturnye shagi, 177 Google Scholar; M. M., Chernavskii, “Avtobiografiia,” in Granat, 40: 563 Google Scholar; Shashkov, “Avtobiografiia,” 12. For an example of a noble who heralded his parents’ atheism, see M. P. Sazhin in Granat, 40: 423. For an example of a non-popovich who claimed he became an atheist as a child due to parental abuse, see GAVO, f. P46, op. 1, d. 255 (P. I. Lebedev-Polianskii's autobiography), 1. 17.

66. Sychugov, Zapiski, 17 (Sychugov to V. F. Tomas, 14 December 1899). For examples of radical popovichi who resumed being practicing Orthodox believers, see MIR, f. 13, op. 1, d. 798 (N. M. Tregubov to I. M. Tregubov, 1917), 11. 14ob., 24, 27, 80; DP RNB, f. 194, op. 1, d. 1295 (M. N. Glubokovskii's obituary), 1. 2; Bulgakov, Avtobiograficheskie zametki, 25–35.

67. Sergei Solov'ev, Izbrannye trudy: Zapiski (Moscow, 1983), 233–34. For several other examples, see Golubinskii, , “Iz vospominaniia,” in U troitsy v akademii (Moscow, 1914), 709 Google Scholar; Kazanskii, “Vospominaniia seminarista,” 133; GAVO, f. 704, op. 1, d. 192 (S. N. Lebedev's confession), II. 95ob.-96.

68. For example, see Pomialovskii, “Ocherki bursy,” 2: 131; Vrutsevich, “Dukhovnoe uchilishche,” 696–97; GA RF, f. 102, op. 223, g. 1905, d. 1000, ch. 10, 1. 16ob.; GAVO, f. 1294, op. 1, d. 9, passim.

69. N. Smirnov, “Ateizm (Iz perezhitogo),” in Dukhovnaia shkola: Sbornik (n.d.), 137.

70. A. F. Kistiakovskii, “Avtobiograficheskii otryvok,” Kievskaia starina 48, no. 1 (1895): 6.

71. RGALI, f. 1027, op. 1, d. 3 (G. E. Blagosvetlov's petition), 1. 36ob. See also, Popov, M. R., Zapiski zemlevol'tsa (Moscow, 1933), 54–55Google Scholar.

72. Pavlovskii, A. D., “Avtobiografiia,” in Sbornik biografii vrachei vypuska 1881 goda imp. Mediko-khirurgicheskoi akademii (St. Petersburg, 1906), 157 Google Scholar. For other examples, see A. V. Peshekhonov, “Avtobiografiia,” in Maksimov, ed., Sotrudniki “Russkikh vedomostei,” 143; Pavlov, , “Avtobiografiia,” Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, 6 vols. (Moscow and Leningrad, 1952), 6: 441 Google Scholar; RGIA, f. 802, op. 16, d. 164, 1. 18; RGIA, f. 802, op. 10, g. 1905, d. 67, 11. 27–51 (seminarians’ petitions).

73. RGIA, f. 802, op. 9, d. 11, 1. 73ob.

74. RGALI, f. 904, op. 1, d. 16, 1. 15. On specific references to clerical calling, see GA RF, f. 102, op. 223, g. 1905, d. 1000, ch. 10, 1. 44–44ob.; Materialy dlia biografii N. A. Dobroliubova, Sobrannye v 1861–1862 gg. (Moscow, 1890), 1: 14 (N. A. Dobroliubov to Dobroliubovs, 9 June 1853); Bogoslovskii, “Chernigovskaia seminariia 50 let nazad,” no. 7: 78.

75. On parental approval and clerical attitudes toward vocational calling, see RGB OR, f. 356, k. 3, d. 43, 1. 27; DP RNB, f. 692, op. 1, d. 52 (A. P. Serebrennikov's inscription on his father's diary), 1. 2; Lazurskii, V. F., Professor A. F. Lazurskii (Odessa, 1917), 1–2Google Scholar; Greznov, h shkol'nykh vospominanii, 239–40. On a shift in parents’ attitudes, see Tsezorevskii, “Shestidesiatye gody,” 260; RGB OR, f. 250, k. 2, d. 1 (N. P. Rozanov's autobiography), 1. 17. For their correspondence to their parents on this issue, see Mamin-Sibiriak, Sobranie sochinenii, 10: 332 (D. N. Mamin-Sibiriak to N. M. Mamin, 1870); Materialy dlia biografii N. A. Dobroliubova, 1: 9 (N. A. Dobroliubov to Dobroliubovs, 29 August 1853).

76. Preobrazhenskii, “Avtobiografiia,” 121; Pribylev, “Avtobiografiia,” 345; Ostrovitianov, Dumy o proshlom, 16, 171; GA RF, f. 1733, op. 1, d. 2, 11. 16–17.

77. Fr. Khalkolivanov, Ioann, Pravoslavnoe nravstvennoe bogoslovie (Samara, 1872), 151–52Google Scholar; Bogoslovskii, N. G., Vzgliad s prakticheskoi storony na zhizn' sviashchennikov: Pis'ma otsa k synu (St. Petersburg, 1860)Google Scholar, 4; DP RNB, f. 253, op. 1, d. 307 (A. A. Dmitrievskii to V. A. Dmitrievskii, 3 June 1916), 1. 7. For other examples of popovichi referring to their sense of calling, see L. O., “Iz vospominanii Kazanskogo studenta,” in Pervyi shag (Kazan', 1876), 364; A. V., Barsov, “Avtobiografiia,” in Bibliograftcheskii ukazatel’ materialov po istorii russkoi shkoly, 1900, no. 10: 171.Google Scholar

78. RGB OR, f. 356, k. 3, d. 46, 1. 14. On the transfer of the service ethic among nobles, see Raeff, Origins, 168–69.

79. Lazurskii, Professor A. F. Lazurskii, 1; Tikhomirov, “Avtobiografiia,” 217; Sychugov, “Nechto,” 135. Between 1793 and 1900, 40 percent of the secularly employed graduates of Vladimir seminary became teachers; 13 percent became doctors. See IVDS, 3: 1–336.

80. RGB OR, f. 23, k. 1, d. 1 (S. A. Belokurov's curriculum vitae), 1. 2. For other examples, see Popov, Zapiski, 53; Tikhonov, Dvadtsat’ piat’ let na kazennoi sluzhbe, 1: 3; PFA RAN, f. 849, op. 3, d. 454 (N.? to D. K. Zelenin, 24 September 1906), 1. 1.

81. Bulgakov, Avtobiograficheskie zametki, 14–15; RGB OR, f. 356, k. 3, d. 46, 1. 53ob. For other examples, see PFA RAN, f. 849, op. 2, d. 1 (Zelenin's autobiography), 1. 24; RGB OR, f. 177, d. 50.66, 1. 1; Krasnoperov, “Moi detskie gody i shkola,” 197.

82. Solov'ev, Zapiski, 274. For other examples, see Giliarov-Platonov, Iz perezhitogo, 1: 151; N. N., “50-letie,” 705.

83. On use of the term cultural intermediaries, see Michel Vovelle, Ideologies and Mentalities, trans. Eamon O'Flaherty (Chicago, 1990), 114–25.

84. For example, see Giliarov-Platonov, Iz perezhitogo, 1: 203, 2: 125; Nadezhdin, “Avtobiografiia,” 55; L. O., “Iz vospominanii,” 364. A popovich who became a bureaucrat explained that he did not enter his profession by choice. Bogoslovskii, “Chernigovskaia seminariia 50 let nazad,” no. 7: 78–79. For a popovich's description of his parents’ objection to their son entering the military bureaucracy, see DP RNB, f. 253, op. 1, d. 1 (A. A. Dmitrievskii's autobiography), 1. 4.

85. Secularly employed graduates of Vladimir seminary entered bureaucratic professions in numbers larger than 10 percent only in the years 1841–1864 and 1883–1888; see IVDS, 3: 1–336. For figures on enrollment in specific faculties, see G. I. Shchetinina, “Alfavitnye spiski studentov kak istoricheskii istochnik: Sostav universitetskogo studenchestva v kontse XlX-nachale XX veka,” Istoriia SSSR 5 (1979): 118; Tomskii universitet: Kratkii istoricheskii ocherh (Tomsk, 1917), 148–52.

86. RGB OR, f. 356, k. 3, d. 46, 1. Mob. For a nearly identical example, see E. M. Ovchinnikov, “Avtobiografiia,” in Sbornik biografii vrachei, 143.

87. Max, Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, trans. Parsons, Talcott (New York, 1958), 80.Google Scholar

88. My definition of self-fashioning is drawn from Stephen, Greenblatt, Renaissance Self-Fashioning: More to Shakespeare (Chicago, 1980)Google Scholar. For a discussion of the dual process of discovery of self and community, see Caroline Walker hynum, Jesus as Mother: Studies in the Spirituality of the High Middle Ages (Berkeley, 1982), 106–9.Google Scholar

89. For an example of a scholar who posits this view, see Michael, Walzer, The Revolution of the Saints: A Study in the Origins of Radical Politics (New York, 1976)Google Scholar.