MARCH, DANIEL - 161 religious encyclopedia mandeeans


Congregationalist; b. at Millbury, Mass., July 21,1816; d. at Woburn, Mass., Mar. 2, 1909. He was educated at Yale College (A.B., 1840) and Yale DivinitySchool, from which he was graduated in 1845, after having been principal of Chester Academy, Vt., and Fairfield Academy, Conn. He held successive pastorates at Cheshire, Conn.



Marcion, Marcionites

(1845 48), First Congregational Church, Nashua,

N. H. (1848 54), First Congregational Church, Wo­

burn, Mass. (1855 61, 1876 93), and Clinton Street

Presbyterian Church, Philadelphia (1861 76). After

1893 he was pastor emeritus of the First Congrega­

tional Church, Woburn. In theology he advocated

" practical, common sense interpretation of the Gos­

pel of Christ." He wrote Religion for Heart and

Home (Woburn, Mass., 1858); Walks and Homes of

Jesus (Philadelphia, 1866); Night Scenes in the

Bible (1868); Our Father's House (1869); Home

Life in the Bible (1873); From Dark to Dawn (1878);

Days of the Son of Man (1881); The First Khedive:

Lessons in the Life of Joseph (Philadelphia, 1887);

Morning Light in Many Lands (Boston, 1891).

Several of his works were translated into Swedish

and German.





Life (§ 1).

His System (§ 2).

Relation to Christianity and the New Testament (§ 3).

His Affiliations and Significance (§ 4).

His School and Sect (§ 5).

The facts of the early career of Marcion are dif­

ficult to establish, partly because of the tendency

of ecclesiastical writers, from whom information of

him is gained, to believe and report damaging stories

concerning heretics. The principal sources for his

life are the writings of Justin Martyr,

r. Marcion's Hippolytus, Irenaeus, Epiphanius, and

Life. Tertullian, and these writers are not

in entire accord. His birthplace is

given as Sinope, in Paphlagonia, on the Euxine, and

he is described as a shipmaster of Pontus. Tertul­

lian tells of his coming from Pontus (c. 140) and

joining the Christian community at Rome, in the

first warmth of his faith making them a present of

200,000 sestertii (Tertullian, " Against Marcion,"

iv. 4; Prcescriptio, xxx.; ANF, iii. 349, 257). He

speaks of his differences with the Roman commu­

nity, of his excommunication, of the return of his

gift, and of his attaching himself afterward to the

Gnostic teacher Cerdo (q.v.). According to the

same authority the Marcionites dated the time of

their master's separation from the Church 115

years and six months from the time of Christ

(" Against Marcion," i. 19; ANF, iii. 285). This

would be the autumn of 144. Justin in his first

apology written about 150 (chaps. xxvi., lviii.)

notices the great activity of Marcion. Irenaeus

(Hwr. III., iv. 3) speaks of Marcion's flourishing

under the episcopate of Anicetus (154 165) and

tells how Polycarp met Marcion and addressed him

as the

first born

of Satan (HBr. III., iii. 4, iv. 3).

These give the few certain facts in regard to Mar­

cion's life, his separation from the church in 144,

his study of Gnosticism, and his foundation of a

separate Christian community.

Of the genesis of Marcion's thought tradition

gives only a slight insight. He was a disciple of

Cerdo, and, according to Irenwus, Cerdo taught that

the God announced in the law and the prophets

could not be the father of Jesus Christ. The one

was known and the other unknown; one was only

just, the other good. On this basis Marcion erected and developed his idea of the complete and ab 

solute distinction between Christian­s. His ity and Judaism. His comprehen 

System. sive work bore the title " Antitheses,"

and was a semi dogmatic treatise contrasting contradictory sentences from the law and the Gospel. Tertullian made industrious use of this work in his reply to Marcion. Origen knew of it, perhaps, and also Ephraem, but Epiphanius and Hippolytus did not use it. Antithetical sen­tences were used as the chief arguments, but they were fortified by examples taken from other pas­sages. Marcion's teaching is especially remarkable for its lack of interest in metaphysical questions. It is certain, however, that he did not regard the Cosmos as the creation of the supreme God; it was the production of a demiurge. " Marcion has with the help of demons in all countries largely contributed to the expression of blasphemies and to the refusal to recognize as God the creator of our world. He acknowledges another God who because he is essentially greater has done greater deeds than the other " (Justin Martyr, I., xxvi; cf. ANF, i. 171). Marcion differs entirely from Valen­tinus in failing to discuss eons. Marcion's thought concerns itself entirely with the religious records of the Jews and the Christians. His demiurge is the creator and lord of all men, who has, however, a chosen people, and is the God of the Jews, the God of the Old Testament. Marcion's reading of the Old Testament convinced him that the principle of retributive justice found in the Old Testament could not be reconciled with that of love and good­ness as represented by the God of the new cove­nant (Tertullian, " Against Marcion," I., vi.; ANF, iii. 275). The creating God is just according to the maxim, "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth"; this maxim was expressly annulled by the good God (Matt. v. 38 39). The God of creation caused fire to come down from heaven, the good God in Christ forbade his disciples from doing this (II Kings i.; Luke ix. 54 55); stealing was encouraged by the God of creation of the Old Testament (Ex. xii. 35 36) and forbidden in the New; the creation God is neither omnipotent nor omniscient; he had to investigate what Adam was doing and find out what was going on in Sodom. The good God knows all things and is all powerful. The Old Testament with its ceremonial law and its low standard of morality is quite fitted to the creation God, but neither he nor his book should have recognition among Christians. Marcion did not employ the allegorical method of interpretation, he accepted the letter of the Old Testament with its miracles and its prophecies. He seknowledgod ths,t the creation God was to send a Messiah to collect the chosen people in his kingdom to rule over the whole earth and to exercise judgment upon heathen and sinners. It is at this point that the good God is introduced; before this he was unknown in the world of the demiurge who did not even suspect his existence, but the plan of the demiurge the good God could not allow to be carried out. He wishes to be merciful to sinners and to free all from the bonds of the God of the Jews. He determined



Marcion, Marcionitee

therefore to appear in the world in the person of

Christ, but Marcion took no interest in the nature

of the union between the two, though on this point

he must be called a docetist (see DocETIsaI; GNOS­

TICISM). In the Gospel of St. Luke Marcion made

an arbitrary change in the text in order to provide

for an immediate appearance of God in the world:

" In the fifteenth year of the Emperor Tiberius God

came down to Capernaurn and taught on the sab­

bath days."' In order to influence the Jews, Christ

attempted to adapt himself to their conditions,

calling himself the Messiah; but in all his activity

he showed himself the opposite of the demiurge;

while the demiurge only approved of just persons,

Christ called to himself publicans and sinners and

those who were weary and heavy laden. Accord­

ing to the law lepers were unclean; Christ touched

them. Elisha healed one individual by water;

Christ healed many through his word. The demi­

urge sent bears against the children in order to

avenge their mockery of Elisha; Christ bade chil­

dren to come unto him. The Messiah of the demi­

urge was sent to gather together the Jews of the

dispersion, Christ is to free all men. Judaism is

restricted to one people; all peoples furnish con­

verts to Christianity. Jewish hopes are concerned

with an earthly kingdom; Christ promises to his

own a kingdom heavenly and eternal. Only as

time went on did the demiurge understand the sig­

nificance of Christ's career. When he saw his law

being rejected he abandoned the Messiah to the

believers in the demiurge who crucified him. Here

again his victory over the good God was only ap­

parent. The dead Christ he sent down to Hades;

but Christ preached and found believers even there

who rejected the God of the Jews. The veiling of

the sun at the time of the crucifixion was the work

of the demiurge. The Messiah of the demiurge

has still to appear and will establish an earthly

kingdom to last 1,000 years, a realm opposed to

the heavenly kingdom of Christ where those who

have risen from the dead live and reign, released

from the impediment of matter after laying aside

their earthly bodies. But the good God continues

to be the God of love. Those who do not follow

him but cling to fellowship with the demiurge he

refuses to punish; he simply gives them over to

the demiurge in whose


they will burn. For be­

lievers in the heavenly father there is no judgment;

they exist in God's love and nothing seems more

inconceivable to Marcion than the notion of a Christ

returning for judgment.

In all these speculations there is one great funda­

mental thought, viz., the idea of the absolute orig­

inality and independence of Christianity. This was

brought out in Marcion's dispute with

3. Relation the Roman presbyters, in which he

to Chris  quoted from Luke v. 36 37, vi. 43. In

tianity and applying this to Christianity Marcion

the New indicated his conviction that its con­

Testament. nection with Judaism should be en­

tirely severed. For Marcion's New

Testament see CANON of SCRIPTURE, Il., 3, § 1.

His position was that the original Christian records

as they were handed down in the Church had either

been intentionally falsified or been written by men

to whom the spirit of Christ was foreign. The first place in his class of false apostles was occupied by Peter, James, and John, and he was careful to sup­port this position by citing the Epistle to the Gala­tians. For him Paul alone was the true apostle; yet he disregarded the Jewish elements in Paulinism. The favorite Pauline antitheses between the law and the Gospel, anger and grace, works and faith, flesh and spirit, sin and righteousness, death and life, were congenial to his thought and germane to his method. In Marcion's system the Gospel of the free grace of God in Jesus Christ is given so much weight that it caused him to view the Church conception of the Gospel as an unpermissible falsification.

As to whether Marcion was a Gnostic or not it must be said that in many different directions he was distinct from the Gnostics, whose orientalism was absent from his system. He was not inter­ested in religious philosophy, and reo 

4t His ognized no distinction between faith

Affiliations and gnosis. The Gnostic division of and Signifi  classes with different standards of con­cance. duct and different aims he did not accept, and the teaching concerning eons he entirely omitted. His work is chiefly im­portant from the point of view of Christian ethics. All works of the creating God, he affirmed, were to be rejected. He preached the strictest asceticism, denied the lawfulness of marriage, and issued strict provisions in regard to fasting (Tertullian, " Against Marcion," I., xxix., IV., xvii., xxix., xxxiv., xxxviii., xliv., etc.). The type of his propaganda also dif­fered from the Gnostics'. A purified church in which all were to have a place was his aim. He kept many of the church customs in their entirety, baptizing with water and with the trinitarian form­ula. He did not, however, distinguish between the baptized and catechumens (see CATECHUMENATE), but it was especially his strict asceticism which opposed an obstacle to the growth of his party. Marcion was highly reverenced in his communities, being called the most holy master. His antitheses were given a canonical position. His popularity and his wide influence over the masses made his work the gravest danger to the Church in the second century. He exerted a power never attained by the Valentinians and other Gnostic groups, and was especially dreaded by the orthodox. Possibly the baptismal creed of Rome was prepared to counteract his teaching.

Many of Marcion's followers did not adhere

strictly to his teachings. Some of them agreed

with their master in recognizing two principles,

others insisted that there were three. Apelles, the

Marcionite about whom most is known

g. His (Tertullian, Prcescrniptio, xxx.; ANF,

School iii. 257), seems to have engaged in

and Sect. magical practises and paid great atten­

tion to visions, to the utterances of

oracles, and to the prophetical revelations of a

woman named Philumene, his companion. He dif­

fered also from Marcion in his metaphysical inter­

ests. His rule of faith began with the words:

" There is one good God and one beginning and

one power unnamable " (Epiphanius, Hcer., xliv.

1 2). But he denied with the Marcionites that the

Xa r~ enkr ~onites THE NEW SCHAFF HERZOG 174

world was created by the good God. He taught a

fully developed system of angelic mediation, in

which there was a creative angel, a


angel, an

angel who spoke to Moses. The ancient authori­

ties differed as to the number of these beings in his

system. Apellea differed also from Marcion in his

Christology. Christ did not merely seem to have

appeared; in truth he took on flesh, he had real

flesh and body. He really appeared in the world,

and was truly crucified and truly buried and truly

rose again. But Apelles did not accept the virgin

birth of Christ, and according to him Christ had a

sidereal body. He agreed with Marcion as to the

origin of the Old Testament and its unsuitability

for Christians, the whole volume being unworthy

of credence. He wrote a book to show that what­

ever Moses had written about God was untrue. He

called the story of the ark a fable on the ground

that it could not have held more than four ele­

phants. The orthodox party accused him of pick­

ing and choosing according to his inclinations, to

which he replied by quoting Christ's well known

apochryphal saying "be ye skilful money changers "

(see AGRAPHA, 5). Altogether his teaching shows a

roturq to Gnosticism. Three other Marcionites appear

in early Christian literature, Lucian, Megethius, and

Mark. Some of these recognized three principles, a

good and evil principle in addition to the demiurge.

The only complete account of any late marcionite

system is found in the Armenian writer Eznik. He

speaks of three principles, of the creation being due

to a just God, while the creation God succeeds in

getting it into his power, and then forming an aW­

anre with Adam. Matter by itself produces dia­

bolical creation. This chaotic condition is'cured

by the supreme God sending his son from heaven.

Those who believe on him as he is revealed through

Paul are saved. Marcionite communities seem to

have been found especially throughout the East,

but also in the West. Their ardor in braving per­

secution was equal to that of the orthodox, and

Marcionite martyrs are frequently mentioned in

Eusebius. Near Damascus a description of a Mar­

cionite church has been found proving that in the

year 318 the Mareionites were allowed to worship

freely (P. Le Bas and W. H. Waddington, Inscrip­

tions Grecquea, Vol. iii. p. 582, no. 2558, Paris, 1870).

But a few years later the sect was prohibited by

Constantine (Eusebius, Vita, iii. 64). It disap­

peared earlier in the West than in the East, where

it lasted still for a number of centuries. Theo­

doret, for example, claims to have converted 1,000

Marcionites in eight villages (MPG, lxxxv. 1316),.

They were also numerous in Armenia. Perhaps

the Paulicians (q.v.) originated from the Marcion­

ites. (G. KRDGER.)

B raoaasrvZ: The principal sources, though indicated in the text, may be stated again here for convenience: Ter­tullian's " Against Marcion " (the main source), " Pre­scription against Heretics," " On. the Flesh of Christ," and " On the Resurrection of the Flesh," all in Eng, trawl. in ANF, vol. iii.; Justin Martyr, L, xavi., lviii.; Ire us, Has, I. Xcviii., IV., iii. sqq.; Hippolytus, Philoeophumena, VIL, nix.; Epiphanius, Bar., alii.; Philaster, Her., alv.; and Eenik, Germ. travel. from the Armenian, by J. M. Schmid, Vienna, 1900, of. C. F. Neu­mann, in ZHT, iv (1834).

The subject is treated in most of the works on GNos 

mccem consult especially the books by Neander. Be . Matter, Lipaus, Hamaok, Msnsel, and King  and in those mentioned in and under Docranrz, HxsTos: or (q.v.). A monograph in by H. U. Meyboom, Marcion en de Man cioniten, Leyden, 1888. Of the highest value is Harnaek, Geachichte, i. 191 197, 839 840, ii. 1. pp. 297 eqq., 591, ii. 2, pp. 537 eqq. et passim, consult index under Mar­cionites; also his Dogma, i. iii. paeaim, consult index; cf. 21VT, ria (1876), 80 120. Other references are A. Lipsius, Quellen der allmten Ketrergeechichte, Leipeio, 1875; A. Hilgenfeld, Die Keturpeechiehte des Urchrietentnums 2 vols., ib. 1884 86; idem, Cordon and Marcion, in ZWT, acv (1881), 1 37; F. Kattenbusch, Daa apostoliache Sym­bol, vol. ii. passim, Leipsic, 1900; R. Liechtenhan; Die Offenbarunp im Gnosticismue, pp. 3410, G5ttingen, 1901; A. C. McGiffert, The Apostles' Creed, New York, 1902; Schaff, Christian Church, 1482 eqq.; Neander, Christian Church, i. 458 473 et passim; Krager, History, pp. 77­82; DCB, iii. 816 824.

For Marcion's relation to the canon consult the works cited under CAxoN or ScarnTVamm, especially that of Zahn. Other works pertinent are: A. Hahn, Das Evanpelium Marciona in seiner urapranplichen Gestalt, KSnigsberg, 1823; G. Volkmar, Die Evanpeliurn Marcions, Leipsio, 1852• W. Sanday, The Gospels in the Second Century, London, 1876; [W. R. Cassels], Supernatural Religion, 3 vols., 1879. On Apellea consult A. Harnack, Do Apel• lie pnoai monarchioa, Leipsic, 1874; and TU, vi. 3 (1890), 109 120, xx. 3 (1900), 93 100.

MARCUS: Pope Jan. 18 0et. 7, 336, successor

of Sylvester. According to the Ltber pontif cilia

he was a Roman by birth, the son of Priicus, and

was buried in the cemetery of Balbina on the Via

Ardeatina. He may have been archdeacon during

the pontificate of Melchiades. The Liber portti­

ficalis attributes to him the provision that the pope

should be consecrated by the bishop of Ostia, and

states that he held two ordinations in Rome in the

month of December; but he did not live to see

that month. He built two basilicas, and received

large gifts from Constantine, of which a list is

given in the Leer ponttfcalis. The Pseudo­

Isidore attributes to him a reply to a letter from

Athanasius. (A. HARNACg.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Liber ponti*alia, ed. T. Mommsen, in MOM, Oeat. pont. Rom, i (1898), 73 74; B. Platina, Lives of the Popes, i. 75 77, ondon, n.d.; Bower, Popes, i. 54; DCB. UL 825.

MARCUS AURELIUS ANTOftINUS: Roman emperor Mar. 7, 161 Mar. 17, 180; b. at Rome Apr. 26, 121; d. probably at Sirmium (260 m. n. of Dyrrhachium, the modern Durazzo) Mar. 17, 180. He was the son of Annius Nerus, who died c. 130, and was adopted and educated by his grand­father, Marcus Annius Verus. As a child he en. joyed the favor of Hadrian, and became versed in philosophy at an early age. In 138 he was adopted by Antoninus Pius, whose daughter he married, ap­parently in 145, and the year after Antoninus as. cended the throne, Marcus Aurelius became consul for the first time. In 146 he received the tribu nician power and then became coregent though he did not bear the title imperator. Proposed as the successor of Antoninus, he was autocrator after Mar. 7, 161, He immediately made Lucius Verus coregent and placed him in charge of the Parthian war. He assumed the cognomens of Armeniacus shortly after 163 and Parthicus Maximus and Medi­cut in 166, the same year in which both emperors seem to have assumed the title Pacer potri,m. .In this. same year he triumphed over the Parthians,


Maroion Maroionitea

Marcus '~remita

and after crushing

the Marcomanni bore the cog­nomen Germanieus in 172, while three years later, after his expedition against the Iazygi, he termed himself Sarmaticus. In the latter year he made an expedition to Asia, returning by way of Smyrna and Athens, where he was initiated in the Eleusin­ian mysteries, and arrived in Rome in 176, when he celebrated a triumph over the Germans and Sar­matians. He then associated his son, Commodus, with him in the government, but in 177 both were called to Germany, and during this expedition Aurelius died, apparently of the plague.

Despite the fact that his reign was a period of almost unceasing war, Marcus Aurelius found time for literary activity. His philosophical standpoint was that of eclectic Stoicism, and the writings of Epictetus were his favorite reading; in religion he sought to avoid every form of folly, as he shunned all sophistry and pedantry in philosophy. His ideal of life and his efforts to attain it are given in his Meditations, but the extent of his knowledge of Christianity is uncertain. His view that the con­tempt of death manifested by the Christians was based on obstinacy was merely the general opinion of the philosophers of his period, and any apparent affinity between his Meditations and Christian thought is merely accidental and undesigned.

The position of the Church during his reign was practically what it had been under his predecessors, although local persecutions were more frequent and received encouragement in 176 by his stringent laws against superstitions and foreign religions. On the other hand he expressly confirmed Trajan's policy of pardon for all who should recant, and the tradi­tion of his policy toward the Christians in the early Church was accordingly twofold. The older view, represented by Tertullian and Lactantius, ignores the sufferings of the Christians under the " good " emperor or refers them to the machinations of evil counselors, while the later tradition, as given by Sulpicius Severus, Chrysostom, and Orosius, brands his reign as the age of the fifth persecution. The most trustworthy records of the condition of the Church at this period are: the account of the mar­tyrdom of Justin and his companions at Rome, written between 163 and 167; the Peregrinus Pro­teas of Lucian, composed shortly after 165; the letters of Dionysius of Corinth; the works of Me­lito of Sardis, especially his " Apology," written in the second half of the reign of Aurelius; the lost " Apologies " of Apollinaris and Miltiades, and the extant " Apology " of Athenagoras, composed in the closing years of the reign; the authentic so­count of the persecutions at Lyons and Vienne given by Eusebius, the most important and de­tailed source; the account of the martyrdom of Carp , Papylus, and Agathonice; and scattered references to the Christians in the fragments of the older anti Montanistic writers preserved by Euse­bius, as well as in the works of Lucian, Aristides, Fronto, and Celsus. It is evident, from these sources, that the persecutions became more numer­ous in the latter part of the reign of Aurelius, and that the rule laid down by Trajan was not always followed although the government sought to sup­press the disorders and thus issued decrees which

the Christians construed as acts of toleration. The

letter of Marcus Aurelius (usually appended to

Justin Martyr's first "Apology"; Eng. transl. in

ANF, i.187), dealing with the " thundering legion,"

is a forgery, though it may be based on a genuine

letter. According to this the army under Marcus

Aurelius was saved in the face of a vast army of

Germans by answer to the prayer of the Christians

in the shape of a refreshing rain which fell on

the Romans but was a withering hail as it reached

the Germans. The "thundering legion" long

bore this title, but did not derive its name from

this miracle. (A. HARNACK.)

BIBLIOGRAPBY: There is an excellent list of works in Bald­

win, Dictionary, iii. 1, pp. 365 366. The editio princeps

of the " Meditations " was by G. Xylander, Greek and

Latin, Zurich, 1559; best ed., by T. Gataker, London,

1643, Cambridge, 1652, Eng. transl., by George Lang,

London, 1880; late ed., by C. Cless, Berlin, 1900. Numer­

ous trausls. exist in English and continental languages.

Among the sources are the Vita by Capitolinue; Dion

Cassius, lxxi.; the letters of Marcus Cornelius Fronto (ed.

A. Mai, Milan, 1815, Rome, 1823); and the Letter of the

Churches of Vienne and Lyons, cf. Eusebius, Hist. eccl.,

IV., xiv. V., viii. The subject is treated in the works

on the history of Rome; in those on the history of phi­

losophy, e.g., by Ueberweg, Erdmann, and Windelband;

in those on the persecutions of the Christians, in the

works on the history of the early church; and in the

classical dictionaries. Lives are by J. Capitolin, Paris,

18.50; E. Renan, Paris, 1882, Eng. traneL, London, n.d.;

B. Gabba, Milan, 1884; P. B. Watson, London, 1884.

Consult further: L. M. Ripault, Histaire philosophique

de Marcus Aurelius, etc., 5 vols., Paris, 1830; M. E. de

Suekau, Ptude our MarfrAuTRe: ea vie et as doctrine,

Paris, 1857; A. No81 des Vergers, Essai our Afaro Aur~le,

Paris, 1860; M. KSnigsbeck, De atoiciamo Marci Antonini,

K6nigsberg, 1861; E. Zeller, Vortr&ge and Abhandlungen,

pp. 82 177, Leipsic, 1865; A. Badek, M. Aurelius An­

tonius a1a Preund and Zeitgenosse deg Rabbi Jehuda ha­

Nasi, Leipsic, 1868; F. W. Farrar, Seekers after God,

London, 1891; L. Alston, Stoic and Christian in the 2nd

Century. A Comparison of the ethical Teaching of Marcus

Aurelius with that of contemporary and antecedent Chris­

tianity, London, 1906; Schaff, Church History, ii. 326 330.
2010-07-19 18:44 Читать похожую статью
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • Контрольная работа
  • © Помощь студентам
    Образовательные документы для студентов.