The protopope in ancient Russia and his canonical status (based on the materials of the monuments of church law of Russian origin)

The article analyzes the mention of Protopop George in the life of Abraham of Smolensk as the senior priest of the Smolensk Cathedral when describing the events that took place at the turn of the XII–XIII centuries. However, the hagiographic genre and the preservation of the source in the lists of the XVI century make us wary of this information. A reliable chronological indicator of the existence of the office of the protopope is its mention in the chronicles when describing the events of the XIV century. The references of the protopopes in the epistles from the Metropolitan formulary of the first third of the XVI century are also considered, giving general ideas about their status as appointed priest-leaders responsible for organizing citywide processions and for the consecration of churches. The duties of the protopope are specified more clearly and in detail in the Stogave, the most important monument of church law in the middle of the XVI century. Such were the supervision of the city clergy, including its elected representatives in the person of the popov elders, in case of their misconduct – reporting them to the bishop without the right of an independent court, issuing anti-fines for new churches, professional mentoring of newly appointed priests. The financial foundations of the existence of the protopopes and other clerics who served in their temples are also considered. Concrete examples show that the presence of a protopope was not a prerequisite for the cathedral status of the temple. The identification of protopopes and Popov elders, which is sometimes found in historiography, is also refuted. An analysis of Archdeacon Paul of Aleppo's narrative about the church life of Russia, an independent source in the middle of the XVII century, shows the fundamental effectiveness of the norms of the Stoglav regarding the formal status of the protopope in the Russian Church a century later. As holders of the highest office for the white clergy, the protopopes, being financially dependent on the sovereign, enjoyed great weight in society.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
St Tikhons University Review
Published
2025-02-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.15382/sturii2025122.11-27
Primary Topic
Discourse Analysis and Cultural Communication
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The protopope in ancient Russia and his canonical status (based on the materials of the monuments of church law of Russian origin)

Dmitry Davidenko
St Tikhons University Review
Discourse Analysis and Cultural Communication
article

The protopope in ancient Russia and his canonical status (based on the materials of the monuments of church law of Russian origin)

Dmitry Davidenko
article en

Abstract

The article analyzes the mention of Protopop George in the life of Abraham of Smolensk as the senior priest of the Smolensk Cathedral when describing the events that took place at the turn of the XII–XIII centuries. However, the hagiographic genre and the preservation of the source in the lists of the XVI century make us wary of this information. A reliable chronological indicator of the existence of the office of the protopope is its mention in the chronicles when describing the events of the XIV century. The references of the protopopes in the epistles from the Metropolitan formulary of the first third of the XVI century are also considered, giving general ideas about their status as appointed priest-leaders responsible for organizing citywide processions and for the consecration of churches. The duties of the protopope are specified more clearly and in detail in the Stogave, the most important monument of church law in the middle of the XVI century. Such were the supervision of the city clergy, including its elected representatives in the person of the popov elders, in case of their misconduct – reporting them to the bishop without the right of an independent court, issuing anti-fines for new churches, professional mentoring of newly appointed priests. The financial foundations of the existence of the protopopes and other clerics who served in their temples are also considered. Concrete examples show that the presence of a protopope was not a prerequisite for the cathedral status of the temple. The identification of protopopes and Popov elders, which is sometimes found in historiography, is also refuted. An analysis of Archdeacon Paul of Aleppo's narrative about the church life of Russia, an independent source in the middle of the XVII century, shows the fundamental effectiveness of the norms of the Stoglav regarding the formal status of the protopope in the Russian Church a century later. As holders of the highest office for the white clergy, the protopopes, being financially dependent on the sovereign, enjoyed great weight in society.

St Tikhons University ReviewVol. 122
Openalex Percentile: Top 94%
Discourse Analysis and Cultural Communication
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

The protopope in ancient Russia and his canonical status (based on the materials of the monuments of church law of Russian origin) — Dmitry Davidenko · St Tikhons University Review (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS