ABSTRACT
The statement that “history is written by the victors” conveys the difference between an actual event in the past and the historical record concerning it, which undergoes subjectivization, and often ideologization, mythicization and mystification. The lack of agreement among historians regarding the evaluation of breakthrough events is nothing unusual, but the extreme divergence of judgments, particularly among Russian researchers, sometimes gives the impression that one or another stance towards their native history is almost a consequence of their chosen worldview. Tendencies to idealize (or demonize) also concern the role of religion in Russian history and the evaluation of events such as the Christianization of Russia, the role of the Mongols in the formation of samoderzhavie (autocracy), the raskol (schism) brought about by Patriarch Nikon or the reforms of Peter I. Myths and notions about the past often seem to have greater significance than facts – in this case for reconstructing the influence of the religious factor.
