(in the same font as the first prefaces)
Preface to the 3rd edition
This third edition is a vivid example of the conditions under which even purely scientific, semi-astronomical, semi-historical studies have to be written in Russia today, if the author seeks to say a new word in them in that area of stagnation and stiffness which is called modern monastic Orthodoxy, which remains the same as it was under the author of the Apocalypse.
Not even three years after the publication of Revelation in Thunder and Storm, he had already been persecuted in the same traditional ways that were practiced in the Middle Ages. After the first attempts at "purely scientific criticism", a purely "spiritual polemic" was quickly launched against me, i.e. attacks of an exclusively profane nature, which the reader can personally familiarize himself with according to the instructions in the fourth appendix to this edition.
This is understandable.
All attempts of "scientific criticism" have not yielded any results so far, as the astronomical foundation of my book remained unshakable, and the monotonous, like drops of water seeping through a dilapidated rotten roof, references of my opponents to non-existent in manuscripts, but only in printed collections of the XVII-XVIII centuries, the works attributed by unknown persons to Origen, Tertullian and other writers of the first four centuries, as if they had mentioned the Apocalypse even earlier than the date I had indicated for them, turned out to be completely useless, since one of the main purposes of my book is to discover their falsity. All these references only reminded me of that decrepit bishop who, in response to an atheist's statement that there is no God, triumphantly replied, "in that case, who are the holy cherubim praising?"
And here, as the third phase of the struggle with my unpleasant book and the questions raised in it concerning the apocryphal nature of many Bible prophecies, is first the petition of the holy synod to the committee of ministers to forbid me to give public lectures on this subject, and then to forbid the book itself. I do not know how the first petition ended; I did not receive any prohibition from the government, but I was immediately subjected to a private prohibition to give a lecture in Moscow, from the governor of Moscow, and therefore I myself temporarily stopped lecturing on this subject. A petition to ban the book itself, which, as reported in the newspapers, was made last year, was unsuccessful. Here my opponents had too high an estimate of their power and influence, and therefore failed.
But that did not stop them at all. The book, which was not banned, was mysteriously put on the banned list. Going into one of the bookstores I suddenly learned that all the copies of the 2nd edition of "Revelation" that were available there had recently been sold, in fact, as well as in other provincial stores, because it, this edition, was included in the "Index of books and magazines withdrawn from circulation since September 17, 1907".
Compiled for the information of booksellers by Inspector Bernov. On my statement that this is a mistake or forgery to stop the distribution of my book, I was told that for bookstores it is indifferent, as the provincial administration uses the same index, and stores can not know whether there is really a mistake.
What was left to do under such circumstances? - It was useless to publish in the newspapers because of their ephemeral nature; a lawsuit against the press inspector could only reward the material damage caused to the author and publisher, but it would not reward the ideological losses caused by the fact that the distribution of the book, which had been very rapid up to then, immediately stopped and out of 15,000 copies of the 2nd edition about 5000 were suddenly left under permanent sequestration in the warehouse, although the interest in the book at that time had already gone beyond the Russian language: it was published in Polish in a translation by Paul Sterling and in Latvian in an abridged version by Deiman.
Under such circumstances, as the publisher telegraphed to me, there was only one way out: to immediately issue the 3rd newly supplemented edition, for which the copies remaining under sequestration were to be used by re-brochuring, since the main text in all editions remains unchanged, due to the absence of serious objections from critics. Only such a new edition, as it has not yet been included in the list of authorized editions, can be distributed in Russia at present.
And so this third edition differs from the first and second only in the appendices, where I have given new facts to confirm my conclusions. Then it differs by an important correction in the text concerning the reference in the book of "Bishop Victorinus" to Hanserich, the leader of the Vandals, which at once proves the falsity of this ancient writer, especially when cited in my refutation (see p. 321).
Nikolai Morozov
September, 1909.
I mean it shouldn't even depend that much on personal ability to search things in the internet, Google should spew out a few useful links right away.
