To the page Scientific works

To the main page

 

 

S. V. Zagraevsky

 

Savior Cathedral in Andronikov Cloister.

Questions of architectural history and reconstruction

 

 

Published in Russian: .. . .: -, 2008. ISBN 5-94025-094-7.

 

Annotation

 

The research of Professor S.V. Zagraevsky is devoted to the most ancient of survived architectural monuments of Moscow Savior Cathedral in Andronikov cloister. The problems of reconstruction of the original appearance of the temple, its date and the features of its architecture are studied. Special attention is paid to the critical analysis of theories of the existence of a more ancient stone temple on its place.

The Appendix contains the historical review of Savior-Andronikov Cloister and the description of its Holy relics, provided by the Savior Cathedral rector, Archpriest Vyacheslav (Savinyh).

This publication is a donation of Professor S.V. Zagraevsky to the Savior Cathedral in Andronikov cloister.

 

 

Attention!

The following text was translated from Russian original by the computer program

and has not yet been edited.

So it can be used only for general introduction.

  RUSSIAN VERSION

 

 

I

The problems of reconstruction of the Saviour Cathedral

 

The ancient white stone Cathedral of the Saviour in Andronik monastery because of the many reconstructions and renovations to the end of the nineteenth century had virtually unrecognizable form (Fig. 11). By 1763 the Church already existed sided stone porch with roznichnoy tent. Probably by this time have already appeared and the hipped roof of the main volume with the characteristic semicircular podvysheniyami above the middle of each facade2. Later, the porch was built and the third, the Northern side. In 1812 as a result of fire the top of the building collapsed, but already in the following year under the guidance of the architect. Zhukov was held its recovery. In 1848-1850, the Cathedral has undergone significant restructuring by the project architect. P.a. Gerasimov's contribution3 where the porch were completely dismantled, in their place new fortifications with two aisles in them (from the South - assumption of the virgin Mary, from the North of St. Andronicus), changed the decor of the facades of the Cathedral and arranged tent floor of the drum. At the same time or earlier4 the walls were pierced with large arched passageways connecting the Cathedral with side-chapels.

 

The Savior Cathedral before restoration 1959-1961 years. Photo and dig PN Maksimov.

 

Fig. 1. The Savior Cathedral before restoration 1959-1961 years. Photo and dig PN Maksimov.

 

And if in the middle of the XIX century, the memory of the fact that under the riggings contain the ancient Cathedral of the winter Palace, was still alive5, already at the turn of XIX-XX of centuries the most prominent researchers of ancient architecture (Amiraslanov6, Mevkii7, Por8, A.I. Nekrasov9) believed the Church was completely rebuilt.

In 1918 Grabar when searching for remnants of frescoes inside the Saviour Cathedral was discovered in the base of the walls of white stone10. In the 1920-ies the upper part of the Cathedral was examined PD Baranowski11. In the 1930-ies PN Maksimov comprehensively explored the temple and offered a variant of its reconstruction12 (Fig. 2).

In 1940-1950-ies the Church was investigated BA Ognev and offered his version of reconstruction13 (Fig. 3). In 1956-1959 restoration work was carried out under the guidance Gracenotea.

 

Reconstruction of the Saviour Cathedral (PN Maksimov).

 

Fig. 2. Reconstruction of the Saviour Cathedral (PN Maksimov).

 

Reconstruction of the Saviour Cathedral (BA Ognev).

 

Fig. 3. Reconstruction of the Saviour Cathedral ( BA Ognev).

 

In the late 1950-ies a group of authors MDTM under the leadership of David L. (Ludmila Altshuler, S. pod'yapol'skii, MD tsiperovich) managed to receive significant funding, which made full-scale reconstruction of the Cathedral14. Reconstruction of this group of researchers is shown in Fig. 4 and 5.

 

Reconstruction of the Saviour Cathedral (La David, BL Altshuller and LSA).

 

Fig. 4. Reconstruction of the Saviour Cathedral (by L. David, BL Altshuller and Asa).

 

The Savior Cathedral. General view after the restoration of 1959-1961 years.

 

Fig. 5. The Savior Cathedral. General view after the restoration of 1959-1961 years.

 

Complaints about the quality and scientific validity restoration 1959-1961 years is not much, but they are quite substantial.

The General negative attitude is the use of a number of structural elements (arches, arches, sails, the inner surface of the drum) brick. The attempt of the authors of reconstruction to justify the use of brick desire to visually identify the recovered items on the background of the remaining parts of the Cathedral (in their words, "to emphasize some of the arbitrariness of the created form"15) has no serious reason, as a significant part of the recovered fragments of the building still lined with gray limestone, very different from the original myachkovsky white stone and color, and the method of processing.

And it will be very annoyed if the use of brick, due to exceptional haste "disbursements" in the years 1959-1961, will ever be a reason for plastering the interior of the Cathedral, together with precious fragments of the original masonry.

As for the correctness of the full-scale reconstruction, there is first of all there are significant concerns associated with the shape and size of the Cathedral Chapter16: head even visually seems disproportionately narrow, elongated up and seemed to artificially set at the quadrangle.

This could be perceived visual illusion associated with a high quadrangular plenty keeled archivolt, but in parallel with this is the question and the number of corbel arches at the base of the drum. Indeed, it is easy to see that ten of corbel arches under the drum does not correspond to the eight headdresses on the pedestal and the eight Windows of the drum, breaking the Central symmetry of the composition of the building.

L. David, Altshuler and S. pod'yapol'skii involved as an analog drum desyatiokonny Trinity Cathedral of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra17 but on the pedestal of the Trinity Cathedral just four innovative features, and the discrepancy between the axes of corbel arches and Windows almost imperceptibly. But the discrepancy between the axes of different tiers of kokoshniks Saviour Cathedral immediately catches the eye.

But the question arises: why L. David, Altshuler and S. pod'yapol'skii put in the base of the drum is ten innovative features?

The researchers wrote that this amount was calculated on the basis of size of corbel arches (one kokoshnik, researchers were able to collect from the wreckage almost entirely, known for its thickness is about 25 cm width - about 160 cm)18.

But the difference in angles of ten and twelve innovative features for the ancient construction equipment is negligible (in the first case, the angle between the corbel arches equal to 144 degrees, in the second case - 150 degrees). Therefore, to understand the only surviving fragments, as kokoshniki was at the base of the drum, it is impossible.

Apparently, in the years 1959-1961 took place the following order of payments: first was hypothetically, by analogy (as we will show later, is not quite correct) with other monuments of old Russian architecture19, defines the lower outer diameter of the drum (about 5,4 m), then on this basis calculated in circumference, and then it was estimated, as kokoshniki can be put in the basement.

So first of all we have to see whether a defined diameter of the drum, and why it is so striking discrepancy Chapter quadrangle.

The basic proportions of the remaining white-stone single-domed churches pre Vladimir-Suzdal Russia - Spaso-Preobrazhensky Cathedral in Pereslavl-Zalessky (Fig. 6), the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl (Fig. 7), Dmitrievsky Cathedral in Vladimir (Fig. 8), and three churches, almost modern Spassky, - the assumption "on the Town" in Zvenigorod (Fig. 9), Bogoroditse-Rozhdestvensky in the Savvino-Storozhevsky monastery (Fig. 10) and the Trinity in the Holy Trinity-Sergius Lavra (Fig. 11) is given in Table 1.

 

Spaso-Preobrazhensky Cathedral in Pereslavl-Zalessky.

 

Fig. 6. Spaso-Preobrazhensky Cathedral in Pereslavl-Zalessky.

 

The Church of the Intercession on the Nerl.

 

Fig. 7. Church of the Intercession on the Nerl.

 

Demetrius Cathedral in Vladimir.

 

Fig. 8. Demetrius Cathedral in Vladimir.

 

Assumption Cathedral "on the Town" in Zvenigorod.

 

Fig. 9. Assumption Cathedral "on the Town" in Zvenigorod.

 

The virgin Nativity Cathedral of the Savvino-Storozhevsky monastery in Zvenigorod.

 

Fig. 10. The virgin Nativity Cathedral of the Savvino-Storozhevsky monastery in Zvenigorod.

 

Trinity Cathedral in the Trinity-Sergius Lavra.

 

Fig. 11. Trinity Cathedral in the Trinity-Sergius Lavra.

 

Above all, we pay attention to the fact that the temples, modern Spassky Cathedral, according to the proportions of most closely matches the reconstruction Bagnava (see Fig. 3). Significantly differ only in the ratio of the height of the pedestal to the height of the drum (in this respect, the Cathedral of the Andronikov monastery is unique) and the attitude of the upper diameter of the drum to the width of the square, at the level toe zakomaras.

The latter difference is due to the fact that the walls of all three churches of the late XIV-early XV century, survived in one piece, pyramidal tilted inwards. Respectively (in the cathedrals of the Trinity-Sergius and "on the Town" - under the same corner) narrowed upward and their drums. The wall is the Savior Cathedral (except for the lower two thirds of the outer wall of the middle apse - Fig. 12) vertical, but despite this, Ognev BA provided narrowing drum up. This position is supported by the researcher and the authors of full-scale reconstruction of 1959-1961 years (see Fig. 4 and 5).

 

Well seen that the slope of the middle apse of the Saviour Cathedral ends about two-thirds of its height.

 

Fig. 12. Well seen that the slope of the middle apse of the Saviour Cathedral ends about two-thirds of its height.

 

But this position is not sufficiently substantiated. The fact that the removal of a vertical stack to plumb and the construction inclined walls - two totally different construction methods. The second technology (construction inclined walls) is significantly more complex, requires much more skill craftsmen and forces in the process of building a "fetter" the temple of the formwork from the basement to the dome, both from outside and from the inside.

Pyramid slope walls of the square and the drum inside served two purposes: first, creating a sense of "aspirations" of the temple up (typical of the Western Gothic, modern temple20); secondly, provided its high reliability (sloping walls to provide uniform load distribution21).

Architect, built Savior Cathedral Andronikov monastery, achieved similar results much more simple and economical way: with vertical walls to reduce the corner compartments. Last, first, the efforts of the "Gothic" feel to reduce the mass of the building with height; secondly, began to play the role of buttresses and significantly improved the reliability of the temple.

Therefore, spend considerable forces and means for the construction of a conical drum churchwarden and architect Saviour Cathedral was no longer necessary. On the contrary - the vertical wall of the drum, parallel special archivolt of the side walls of the arms of the cross, emphasized the aspiration of building up.

In favor of this position is the fact that the outer wall of the middle apse inclined to only two-thirds of its height, and then its wall smoothly into the vertical (see Fig. 12). The inner wall of the middle apse vertical on all height. Accordingly, the compositional and stylistic choice conditioned seen that all the walls of the temple apse above the average (and hence wall of the drum) were also vertical.

Thus, the upper and lower diameter of the drum Saviour Cathedral, we take equal. But what size?

And here the question arises, who asked themselves the authors of full-scale reconstruction of 1959-1961 years22: a drum was standing on the inner ring pedestal or was pushed from him?

In many single-domed churches of North-Eastern Russia XII-XV centuries, about the nature of the completion of which we are aware, this indentation laying between the pedestal and the drum was present (Spaso-Preobrazhensky Cathedral in Pereslavl, St. Nicholas Church in Kamenskoye, the Church of the Nativity of the virgin in Gorodnya, Staro-Nikolsky Cathedral in Mozhaisk, Trinity Cathedral in the Trinity-Sergius). The largest margin - 30 cm - took place in the Trinity Cathedral of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra.

The authors of the reconstruction of 1959-1961, wrote that "the main argument in favour of an internal diameter of the drum Saviour Cathedral is equal to the side of the dome square was the philosophy of abstract methodological character on preferences, in the absence of undeniable data, follow the simplest geometrical pattern"23.

But that the drum has no indent from the pedestal, is actually just seems simpler: in this case the craftsmen had to emulate the indentation with profiled cornice (as in the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl, Dmitrievsky Cathedral in Vladimir is the assumption Cathedral "on the Town"). Apparently, avoiding this indentation was impossible24.

And to clarify, took place in the Saviour Cathedral a margin drum on the pedestal or not, we will already mentioned corbel arches at the base of the drum.

L. David, Altshuler and S. pod'yapol'skii, having calculated on the grounds of "abstract methodological character" drum diameter, approximately equal to 5,4 m, and placed in its Foundation ten kokoshniks, were forced to leave between the last significant distance (more than 10 cm), because otherwise the drum was even thinner, and between him and the pedestal'd have to do a conical transition, as in the temples of the end of XIII-the first third of the XIV century (the Church of the Nativity of the virgin in Gorodnya, St. Nicholas Church in Kamenskoye, Staro-Nikolsky Cathedral in Mozhaisk25).

It is clear that eight of corbel arches at the base of the drum Saviour Cathedral could not be: a drum would be even more subtle (or would have to significantly increase the distance between the kokoshniki). And if kokoshniki were twelve?

In this case, the external diameter of the drum was supposed to be about 6 m. In carried out in the years 1959-1961 reconstruction it was adopted for 5,4 m. Thus, the difference in 60 cm and gives a thirty-degree indentation of a laying from pedestal to the drum, which we see in the Trinity Cathedral of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra.

Twelve of corbel arches (just adjacent to each other, without ten gaps), which in this case we have around the drum, form with innovative features pedestal and drum Windows axial composition.

Consider the height of the drum Saviour Cathedral. From Table 1 shows that the ratio of the height of the drum to the height of the rectangle in the reconstruction of David L., BL Altshuller and S. Podyapolsky significantly overstated and has no analogues in the old white-stone architecture. The height of the drum on PN Maksimov, on the contrary, seems low (similar to the ratio of the height of the drum and the height of the square we can see only in the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl, but there bushel more stretched upwards).

Therefore, the preferred sees height drum proposed BA Ognev, and we in our reconstruction of the Saviour Cathedral (Fig. 13, 14 and 15) can take the position of the researcher, with the difference that the wall of the drum we believe vertical.

 

Spassky Cathedral (southern facade). Reconstruction of the author.

 

Fig. 13. Spassky Cathedral (southern facade). Reconstruction of the author.

 

 

Fig. 14. Spassky Cathedral (cut along the middle aisle). Reconstruction of the author.

 

 

Fig. 15. The Savior Cathedral. General view in accordance with the reconstruction of the author (montage).

 

Thus, in our reconstruction of the Saviour Cathedral height of the drum about 1.15 times less than in the reconstruction of David L., BL Altshuller and S. Podyapolsky.

The completion of the drum in our reconstruction onion dome is due to the fact that, as was shown by the author in a special study26the vast majority of heads of ancient temples, had onion shape, since the second half of the XIII century. Because the heads of the "sign" of the temples as possible were gilded, we photomontage our reconstruction (Fig. 15) depicted the head of the Saviour Cathedral.

Of course, reducing the height of the drum in 1,15 times, increasing its width 1.1 times the verticality of its walls and bulbous end can not substantially change has become a familiar image of the Cathedral of the Andronikov monastery. But in Fig. 13, 14 and 15 show that the Cathedral in our reconstruction seems more harmonious and monumental, without losing "Gothic" aspirations up.

The validity of our position on the size and proportions of the drum is confirmed by the presentation of two temples beginning of the XVI century, built under the direct influence (actually on the model) Saviour Cathedral Andronikov monastery: the cathedrals of the Nativity monastery in Moscow (beginning of the XVI century; Fig. 16) and the Dormition monastery in Staritsa (1530 year; Fig. 17)27. At these temples, we see the drums, similar in size and proportions of the drum Saviour Cathedral in our reconstruction.

 

The Cathedral of the Nativity monastery in Moscow.

 

Fig. 16. The Cathedral of the Nativity monastery in Moscow.

 

The Cathedral of the Dormition monastery in Staritsa.

 

Fig. 17. The Cathedral of the Dormition monastery in Staritsa.

 

Concluding the consideration of full-scale reconstruction of 1959-1961 years, not to mention one more dubious its position - the form of the stairs, shoot from three sides of the temple. The authors of the reconstruction wrote that "the remains of the South and West of the stairs was completely destroyed, but the North has remained the basis of the number of external degrees, reconfirmed that the staircase was tripartite, and has established its overall dimensions"28. But probably what the "base number of external degrees North of the stairs" was adopted early white stone masonry North porch or some other extension to the Northern facade: the number of blocks were present fragments of frescoes29. In the end of the stairs were too steep, and it is not surprising that in 1995 over the Western white stone stairs (which was used for the entrance to the Church) had to build a more flat wooden.

 

II

The architectural features of the Saviour Cathedral

 

So, according specified in paragraph 1 of reconstruction, the Cathedral of the Saviour in Andronik monastery - four-column, trehapsidnoy, single-domed Church. The length of the Church without apses about 15 m, with apses about 19,5 m, width - about 14 m. Side dome square - about 4.3 m. The average naves significantly wider than the side (the plan of the Church is shown in Fig. 18).

 

The Cathedral of the Andronikov monastery. Plan

 

Fig. 18. The Cathedral of the Andronikov monastery. The plan.

 

The temple is built of white stone of average quality in engineering the half-rubble masonry. Wall zabutovany ragged blocks of white stone and soft yellow Sandstone30.

The pillars of the Cathedral of the Spaso-Andronikov monastery have the form of a cross. They correspond to the internal and external shoulder, completed by the profiled cornice. On the top scale of the temple external shoulder fortunate same, than the lower, which underlines the elegance of the silhouette of the Cathedral.

Cathedral raised at a sufficiently high podium (1.5 to 2 m depending on terrain), and it also emphasizes the harmony of his silhouette.

Angular compartments covered torispherical vaults, a level significantly below the set of arms of the cross. Arches on a set of arms of the cross raised. Accordingly, both inside and outside the temple has stepped shape and looks "towering". Over the reduced corner of the compartments rise the middle part of the facade, and above them - even higher volume, educated supporting arches.

The Cathedral has a very complex system keeled zakomaras and keeled same innovative features. Gables crowning each of the volumes on all sides, and eventually their number on each side equal to five (not three as in the classical one-volume four-column cross the temple). In so many Gables, average volume, formed elevated supporting arches, has three-way finished. The pedestal is decorated with four large drum diagonal innovative features twelve (see item 1) of corbel arches are located in the base of the drum. In the end, there is a feeling that the top of the Cathedral literally "wrapped" by zakomaras and innovative features.

The apses are divided by pilasters, on their surfaces are thin rod. Middle apse rises over the side, the bottom two-thirds of its outer walls have a slight slope inside.

The drum of the Cathedral of the Saviour, as we saw in paragraph 1, the proportions, similar to the proportions of drums cathedrals of the Nativity monastery in Moscow (see Fig. 16) and the Dormition monastery in Staritsa (see Fig. 17). The decor of the drum Saviour Cathedral in the form of curb, crenate belt and columns was similar to the decor of the drums of the pre-Mongolian churches of Vladimir-Suzdal land.

Advanced portals of the Cathedral ended keeled archivolt and were decorated kanalirovaniya "wynikami". All three portals were white stone stairs, shoots, also emphasized the slender silhouette of the temple (on the form of stairs, we spoke to in paragraph (1)

Unlike other preserved temples of the end of XIV-the first third of the XV century (Zvenigorod assumption Cathedral "on the Town" - see Fig. 9, the Cathedral of the Savvino-Storozhevsky monastery - see Fig. 10, Trinity Cathedral in the Trinity-Sergius Lavra - see Fig. 11), the Cathedral of the Spaso-Andronikov monastery has no ornamental belts. Capitals blades, imposts portals archivolt zakomaras and kokoshniki have profiles, consisting of a set of simple calving, which in combination with attic profile cap creates the impression of integrity of the decor.

Wooden ties, unlike other preserved temples of the end of XIV-the first third of the XV century, in the Saviour Cathedral was not. Choir in the Church are not available.

The Windows of the temple of the Andronikov monastery distributed on the facade evenly and logically, have equal external and internal sunrises, their outer edges of slopes and arches are decorated with a profile in the form of fillet and two narrow grooves. Probably, the window in the middle fence Western facade has been replaced by a large round of Kyoto.

According to archaeological data31the foundations of the Saviour Cathedral have a depth of about 1.8 m from the level of the modern surface and about 3.5 m from the floor of the temple, stacked on izvestkovo-sandy solution of torn and robotising limestone blocks with the alignment layers of rubble.

Perhaps, the temple was a stone altar barrier (if the correct information about what excavations have revealed the remains of its Foundation)32. But definitively clarify this issue can only new archaeological research.

 


 

III

Was there a place Saviour Cathedral

earlier stone temple?

 

Let us consider the version of the architectural history of the Cathedral, advanced in the second half of the twentieth century Mailine33 and GK34and in our time developing og Ulyanov35. The point is that in place of the existing Saviour Cathedral in Andronik monastery earlier (in 1360-1370-ies) there was built a stone Cathedral (for simplicity we will call it a hypothetical stone temple).

Invites listed researchers hypothesis had to justify the existence of this hypothetical stone Church, can be divided into three groups: "documentary iconographic", "sculpture and archaeological and architectural and archaeological. Let's consider them in order.

Documentary information to substantiate the existence of a hypothetical stone Church was trying to attract mA Il'in36 and og Ulyanov37.

MA Il'in, referring to the Life of St. Sergius, wrote that Sergius was allegedly seen in the Spaso-Andronikov monastery white stone Cathedral, "praising" and "approved". Accordingly, the construction of this hypothetical stone Church was supposed earlier death of Radonezh in 139238 (existing Cathedral mA Il'in after N.N. Voronin39 dated 1425-1427 years40; the date of the existing Cathedral we discuss in detail in paragraph (4).

But this link Mailin on the Life denied VG Bryusov41: words that Sergius "praised and endorsed" the white-stone Cathedral, in any version of the Lives not only in Pachomios edition was written,"come and Svaty in the monastery and praise place and bless us"42.

In the miniatures of the Personal life of St. Sergius shows the existing stone Cathedral, which, in particular, showed Voronin43.

Og Ulyanov believed that njednokratna restructuring of the Saviour Cathedral was reflected in the altar Gospels. So, in "Andronik" gospel44 with output miniature "Christ in glory" calendar, according to researcher repeats the lack of Russian saints, the calendar of the Metropolitan gospel of St. Simeon the Proud, reproduced in the gospel 1357. The position of a number of paleographic (Mwiseneza, Tuboi and others)that the thumbnail postponed from earlier manuscripts, according to og Ulyanov, corresponds allegedly established during archaeological researches 1993 facts realignment of the Saviour Cathedral in 1371-1373 and 1424-1427 years45.

Whether installed during archaeological researches the facts rebuilding of the Cathedral, we discuss in detail below, and now we note that the fact that the accounts of repeat hardly fair to associate with hypothetical reconstructions of the Cathedral, and the possibility of transferring miniatures with an earlier manuscript itself is a hypothesis and cannot be the basis of evidence rebuilding of the temple.

And even if we followed og Ulyanov will accept the connection of the transfer of thumbnails with the rebuilding of the Cathedral, this too will not testify in favor of the existence of a hypothetical stone Church in place of the existing Cathedral, so as to readjust could wooden churches, and more often than stone.

In the hypothetical stone temple of the Spaso-Andronikov monastery also contacted the image to ordain Andronicus to the hegumen and the construction of the first Cathedral of the Saviour on the 8th stamp hagiographic icons Metropolitan Alexis (Fig. 19 and 20)46. But it is the mark of the specified icon can be an argument in favor of existence of life Alexei not a stone, and wood Saviour Cathedral, in this marking depicted with a gable roof, typical for the early wooden architecture. Other buildings of the monastery, which at this time were undoubtedly wood, as shown with gabled roofs. Stone temples on this icon shows absolutely different, and quite realistic.

 

Hagiographic icon of Metropolitan Alexei. The end of the XV-beginning of XVI century.

 

Fig. 19. Hagiographic icon of Metropolitan Alexei. The end of the XV-beginning of XVI century.

 

 

 Fig. 20. 8th stamp hagiographic icons Metropolitan Alexis.

 

Thus, any documentary or iconographic evidence for the existence of the Spaso-Andromkov hypothetical stone temple 1360-1370-s are not available. Moreover, the Life of St. Sergius of Radonezh so vividly describes the construction of the existing Cathedral many years after the death of St. Sergius ("By the time did in the monastery thereof, the former hegumen Alexander, student predominate Abbot Sava... Also another old man, his name is Andrey iconographer prestado... And cytori Savet goods with the brethren, and God pomogayu sozdast in the abode of its stone Church exceedingly red and podpisanie Cunami of its hands of akrasia in memory Otaci its this until now sees all the glory of Christ our God"47can you imagine how much attention would be paid to the stone Cathedral, if it was built at the very life of Radonezh. However, as we saw earlier in the Life of this says nothing.

Consequently, we may say that the biographical sources do not confirm the existence of a hypothetical stone Church of the Andronikov monastery, and refute it.

The second group of hypotheses, which we called "sculpture and archaeological", connected with the extracted during the restoration of the turn of the 1950s-1960s, from the backing of existing Savior Cathedral, white-stone details - the relief image of the soldier-slaying the serpent" (done in a very naive way - Fig. 21), the block with a relief of fish (Fig. 22), the block-raskraivat with the tripartite fine ornamental profile (Fig. 23), as well as eight other units with ornamental carving, including a fragment of a carved octagonal columns.

 

The blocks with the image of the soldier-slaying the serpent".

 

Fig. 21. The blocks with the image of the soldier-slaying the serpent".

 

 

Fig. 22. The block with the image of the fish.

 

 

Fig. 23. Ornamented rastrapovich.

 

MA Il'in48 and H. Wagner49 believed that these items came from a hypothetical stone temple of the Spaso-Andronikov monastery and were on their facades. But Altshuler said that on shape, size, composition and method of execution of these details could not relate to the facades, and believed their belonging to the altar barrier of the unknown Church buildings, not necessarily the pre-existing Spassky Cathedral50.

Og Ulyanov, supporting the point of view Mailin and Wagner, took clarification BL Altshuller regarding the location of these items on the altar barrier, but attributed them to a hypothetical brick temple and believed that the "warrior-seaborne" personified born on November 26 year 1374 Prince George (known as Yury Zvenigorodsky)51.

However, these carved details could belong to a hypothetical stone temple with only negligible probability, sufficient for their attribution. The reasons for this following.

First, L. David, Altshuler and S. pod'yapol'skii pointed to the absence of any evidence that in the brickwork of the existing Cathedral these parts were originally, but not subsequent repairs52.

Secondly, carved altar barrier, which could belong to these parts could be arranged in any building in any time, including:

- in any Church outside the territory of the Spaso-Andronikov monastery;

- at any later date on the existing Saviour Cathedral Church on the territory of the Andronikov monastery;

- the existing Saviour Cathedral.

Thirdly, as I thought Kavelmaher, these items could not only belong to any Church, but also any building of a civil nature53.

Fourth, the carved image of St. George can be associated with any icon of St. George (and not necessarily with the icon, it could be a self-sufficient artifact), and totally unprovable, that it was connected with the birth of a Prince. Especially not be proved that this Prince was just born in 1374, George: with the same "success" carved image of St. George can be associated with a birth in 1441 George "Junior", the second son of Vasily the Dark.

Fifth, H. Wagner generally doubt the identity of "warrior slaying the serpent" and George54 believing that the carved block is depicted churchwarden of the temple of Vasily Dmitrievich55.

Thus, we can not consider these items belong to a hypothetical stone temple of the Spaso-Andronikov monastery and use them as evidence of the existence of the temple.

Move on to the architectural-archaeological hypotheses. They are associated exclusively with the excavations conducted in 1993 in an existing Saviour Cathedral Andronikov monastery56.

Previous archaeological research was carried out on the monument GF senatovym (1956-1959) and MH aleshkovskii (1959-1960)57. For several reasons, these studies were not comprehensive (had the appearance of a set of holes) and excavations have not deepened more than 1.5 m58but if in place of the existing Cathedral was previously stone temple or any other stone building, and at that depth (especially considering the strong bias of the continent under the existing Cathedral) researchers would find many traces of the destruction of the previous building. However, nothing of the kind has yet been found59.

Consider information on the results of excavations in 1993, which, in the opinion og Ulyanov, revealed the presence of plinfyanogo Church, the existing pre Spassky Cathedral of the Andronikov monastery. Researchers believe that the excavation under the altar of the present Cathedral was traced a piece of the Northern apse of this hypothetical Church. The basis for such conclusions was allegedly discovered earthen base thickness of about 0.6 mon which, according to the researcher, rested Lezhnev wooden shed lime, and a thin layer plinfy60.

But first of all we note that during the examination of the excavation under the altar of the Saviour Cathedral author of the study in 2007 neither the timenor the ledge was not found. Probably, og Ulyanov took for them the remains of charred wood, over which was a thin layer not enough burnt and compacted clay, and above - a number of thin layers of heterogeneous (Fig. 24). Round shape of these balances, most likely, has served as a research base for its expressed the assumption that it was the apse hypothetical stone Church (unclear, however, how the apse could have such a small diameter - about 1 m).

 

Controversial archeological site in the excavation under the altar of the Saviour Cathedral.

 

Fig. 24. Controversial archeological site in the excavation under the altar of the Saviour Cathedral.

 

La Belyaev, na Krenke and Sz Chernov who examined the specified site in 1994 and 2000, believed that the excavations of 1993 opened some ddrevneishee construction, presents the pit and covered with planks and a layer of clay, and was likely heating system (furnace). At the same time, this structure, according to the researchers, is not served for cooking, and had some special function, so as to fill the hole was completely absent ceramics61.

We believe that Mr.purpose of this facility today it is hardly possible to take a final determination.

First, this building was located on the ancient monastic burial62. If after La Belyaev, na Krenke and Stharani take it earlier than the existing Savior Cathedral, it is unclear why the graves (indeed, revered) was set up economic construction.

Secondly, if we assume that building erected after the existing Cathedral, it is unclear why it might be necessary at the altar.

Thirdly, especially many questions arise in connection with the layering of this structure and the presence in it over a layer of charred wood layer is not enough burnt clay: it is unclear why it took to fall asleep furnace of clay, and then many thin layers of heterogeneous.

To address all these issues require further study and excavation of existing and new archaeological research. We may assume that this archaeological site is an informative source on the early history of the Andronikov monastery and Cathedral of the winter Palace.

But now the most important for us to note that any residue plinfy to shed lime wood ledge in that excavation is not clear.

But even if to assume, that they were in 1993 og Ulyanov found anywhere else in another place of excavation, and then for some reason or destroyed, this hypothetical find in no case can not be grounds for the assumption that on the site of the present Cathedral was previously plinthite the temple. We will show this.

Unfortunately, it remains unclear exactly how og Ulyanov linked earthen Foundation, shed lime wooden ledge and layer plinfy with hypothetical plinthite temple. Cited two possible options63:

- hypothetical plinthite the temple was without Foundation - only discovered by excavations in 1993 and spiked wooden Lezhnev earthen ground. Accordingly, found plinfa was lower layer of the wall;

- this hypothetical Church was full basement (which included layers plinfy), and excavations have revealed wooden Lezhnev the foundations and the lower layer of the Foundation.

In any case, we will consider both of these options in parallel.

First, we note that in the North-Eastern Russia temples of plinfy episodically constructed only in the pre-Mongolian time. In the end of XIII-beginning of the XV century, Church buildings were exclusively white stone (possible reasons for this, the author considered the relevant research64). Accordingly, the hypothetical discovery og Ulyanov claims to be a new word in the history of ancient architecture, and proof of the existence plinfyanogo temple must be very persuasive. But actually the situation is totally different - presents og Ulyanov facts, even if they actually took place, not confirm the existence of plinfyanogo, and wooden Church. This is proved by a number of the following provisions.

First, some found during the excavation of burials in 1993 (for this study unprincipled their number and identification65) covered building layers of existing Saviour Cathedral and may be more ancient. It is also likely that they were targeted at the temple, the pre-existing. But this in no way suggests that the temple, which may have been related to these burials was plinthite, he could be made of wood.

Secondly, we can assume followed og Ulyanov that his excavations have found traces of a fire in 1368, destroyed the first wooden Cathedral, built simultaneously with the Foundation of the Spaso-Andronikov monastery66. But it absolutely does not mean that the burnt the temple was built plinthite. On the contrary - the building of the stone (including plinfyanogo) temple in the XIV-the first half of the XV century was an event so extraordinary and demanded such a significant concentration of financial resources and manpower that it is impossible to suppose that this could happen "spontaneously," immediately after the fire. A monastery without the Church could not exist. Therefore, the traces of fire suggests that the temple was built around 1370 on the place of the burnt down, was not plinthite, and wood.

Third, if a hypothetical plinthite the temple was without Foundation, is only discovered by excavations in 1993 and spiked wooden Lezhnev earthen ground - the analogues of these structures we do not know neither in Russian nor in the world architecture67.

Fourth, if this hypothetical Church was full basement, which included layers plinfy, and excavations have revealed wooden Lezhnev the foundations and the lower layer of the Foundation, it is unclear, why and what for foundations were spiked earthen base (it turns out that the first dug Foundation ditches, and then before laying the Foundation for some reason partially covered). But if even imagine what the basis was somehow and for some reason, spiked, over the found fragments of the ledge and plinfy there should be one and a half or two meters of the basement, and a situation where this huge amount bout with many layers plinfy could disappear without a trace, looks absolutely unreal. Full sample of foundations is a lot of work, it is absolutely unnecessary, if the new temple is shifted relative to the old one (which probably took place in Andromkov). And in any case when a sample of foundations would be formed very large amount of debris, construction layers and powerful canal, and they no archaeological research has indicated.

Fifth, the dismantling of a hypothetical plinfyanogo Church (regardless of the design of its Foundation) was formed huge amount of rubble wall of the Cathedral, which could not detect archaeological research and 1950-1960-s, and 1993. Complete removal plinfy could not take place because its secondary use (unlike the white stone) is practically impossible. For example, in Suzdal from plinfyanogo Monomachus of the virgin Nativity Cathedral with its restructuring of tuff-like limestone and white stone in 1222-1225 there are not only huge amounts of debris, but whole littered Printania wall68.

Sixth, part plinfy the dismantling of a hypothetical plinfyanogo of the temple would have to get into backing the existing Saviour Cathedral. But plinfy in the rubble of no69.

Seventh, if in 1993 and was discovered thin layer plinfy on wood ledge (which, as we showed above, it is doubtful), it can only be assumed that found plinfa actually was a fragment of the wooden floors of the temple, and earth ground, and shed lime ledge - training under these floors. Lezhnev could also be part of the primary floor of the wooden temple, and shed lime them even at this stage (in fact, creating a very frequently used in Ancient Russia limestone floors70), and later on these sills have made plinthite (and if they were still without a solution, then paid a solution). Floors from plinfy known to us in Smolensk (Vasilievsky Church, the Church in Malaya Racice and Large Krasnoflotskaya street), Novgorod (Church on Peryni), Grodno (individual sections of the Lower Church)71.

Of all the above provisions that the temple, the pre-existing Spassky Cathedral of the Andronikov monastery, was not plinthite and not white stone, and wood, as rightly believed still Archbishop Sergius (Spassky)72.

 


 

IV

Dating questions Saviour Cathedral

 

Now, when we are convinced that the existing Savior Cathedral, the first stone temple of the Andronikov monastery, we can move on to issues of Dating him.

Chronicle dates Cathedral of the winter Palace is not. In the Life of St. Sergius of Radonezh, as we have noted in paragraph 3, States: "By the time did in the monastery thereof, the former hegumen Alexander, student predominate Abbot Sava... Also another old man, his name is Andrey iconographer prestado... And cytori Savet goods with the brethren, and God pomogayu sozdast in the abode of its stone Church exceedingly red and podpisanie Cunami of its hands , akrasia in memory Otaci its this until now sees all the glory of Christ our God"73.

Based on this biographical message Builder of the existing Cathedral Abbot Alexander called in the middle of the XIX century Archbishop Sergius (Spassky)74. PN Maksimov, given that the hegumen Savva died between 1410 and 1420 years, and Alexander - in 1427, dated stone Savior Cathedral 1410-1427 years75. PD Baranowski supported this date, narrowing it to 1420-1427 years76.

N.N. Voronin, emphasizing that the message of the life of Nikon of Radonezh of the painting of the Cathedral of the Andronikov monastery comes after reports of the murals of the Trinity Cathedral in the Trinity-Sergius Lavra77 even more narrowed Dating Cathedral of the Andronikov monastery - up 1425-1427 years78.

On this date Voronin was built architectural-stylistic continuity of the key monuments of Moscow architecture of late XIV-the first third of the XV century in the following way: the Church of the Nativity of the Theotokos in Moscow (1393)79, Zvenigorod assumption Cathedral "on the Town" (the turn of the XIV and XV centuries, Fig. 9)80the Cathedral of the Savvino-Storozhevsky monastery (the beginning of the XV century, Fig. 10)81, The Trinity Cathedral in the Trinity-Sergius Lavra (1422-1423 years, Fig. 11)82 and then the Savior Cathedral Andronikov monastery - according to researchers, "the most outstanding monument of architecture of the first half of the XV century"83.

Voronin noted that the forms of the Cathedral of the Spaso-Andronikov monastery find Parallels in the Trinity Cathedral of Pskov (1365-1367 years) and Pyatnitskaya Church of Chernigov (the beginning of XIII century)84but this did not affect its Dating, based on documentary evidence of the life of St. Sergius of Radonezh.

The researcher also noticed that the thumbnail of the Personal life of St. Sergius dedicated to the construction of the Savior Cathedral, next to the icon painter Andrei depicted Alexander Ephraim (Abbot after 1427)85. However, after analyzing the causes of the likely replacement of a name of Alexander on Ephraim, N.N. Voronin showed that the latter is hardly relevant to the construction of the Cathedral, and sense to focus on Ephraim the Dating no86.

S. pod'yapol'skii still believed the possibility of starting the construction of the Saviour Cathedral in Alexander and end when Ephraim87. However, their version of the Dating of the Church of the researcher is not offered88.

VG Bryusov analysed the different editions of the life of St. Sergius of Radonezh and showed that the message about the construction of the stone Saviour Cathedral Andronikov monastery under the hegumen Alexander first appeared in late Pachomios edition (1440-1459 years)89. On this basis, the researcher have denied the possibility of attracting quoted messages life of St. Sergius as the basis for Dating and believed that the stone Church was built during igumenstva Andronicus, at the beginning of 1390-s90.

There is no architectural arguments in support of its position VG Bryusov did not, and the reason for such an early date temple was only the message of the early editions of the life of St. Sergius of Radonezh, who spoke, was considered by the researcher, the construction of the stone Church in Andronicus: "And there was the abode of the exceedingly great, hedgehog and now visible is to cost us slim and honest, and the Church Kamena red and signed chudno exceedingly"91.

But in fact, in the above text is not a case that the stone Church was under Andronicus, and that it "and now visible there we have", i.e. existed at the time of writing the Life.

Consequently, the message Pachomius remains the only documentary source Dating Savior Cathedral, and later (after the discussion of architectural and stylistic grounds for determining the date of the temple) we will consider whether to trust him.

On the grounds of architectural-stylistic nature of the Dating VG brussov supported Altshuler92. Researchers believe that the decor of the drum Saviour Cathedral, unlike drums Zvenigorod temples and the Trinity Cathedral in the Trinity-Sergius Lavra near the pre-Mongolian churches of Vladimir-Suzdal Russia, and stepped composition of the temple of the Andronikov monastery dates back to the Holy Trinity Cathedral of 1365-1367 years in Pskov and Balkan architecture93. The researcher also followed by N.N. Voronin noted indirect impact on the composition of the Saviour Cathedral pre Chernigov, Smolensk, Polotsk temples, but, unlike Voronin, attracted by this influence as the basis for the early Dating94.

Thus, in the architectural and stylistic range of the key monuments of the end of XIV-the first third of the XV century Altshuler was taken to the Cathedral of the Andronikov monastery not final (as N. Voronin), and "opening" the role.

Indeed, the question of the attitude of the Saviour Cathedral to other Moscow monuments of his epoch (the Church of the Nativity of the Theotokos in Moscow, Zvenigorod temples, Holy Trinity Cathedral of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra) is very difficult, as absolutely fair PD Baranowski said, "this slim and remarkable monument is very different from what we know so far from the architecture of the early Moscow"95.

Characteristically, BA Ognev, doing fairly detailed analysis of stylistics, construction equipment and possible groups of masters of the Church of the Nativity of the Theotokos in Moscow, Zvenigorod churches and Cathedral of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, was not along with them to consider the Cathedral of the Andronikov monastery96.

We do not exclude the possibility of architectural-stylistic analysis of the Saviour Cathedral in the context of the review period (from the beginning of 1390-ies on 1427), but have to admit that any of the provisions of this analysis, environmental Savior Cathedral to the beginning or the end of this period, may be rebutted.

So, the assumption BL Altshuller that form Cathedral of the Andronikov monastery have roots in the previous architecture (the Holy Trinity Cathedral in Pskov, Balkan architecture, pre-Mongolian architecture Chernigov, Smolensk) and, accordingly, this temple should be attributed to the beginning of the period under consideration97 looks convincing, until we remember that under the direct influence (in fact, on the model of the Church of the Saviour was built two churches beginning of the XVI century - the Cathedral of the Nativity monastery in Moscow and the Cathedral of the assumption in Staritsa (see item 1, Fig. 16 and 17). Therefore sees no less logical to include the Cathedral of the Andronikov monastery time closer to the two temples.

Altshuler associated the construction of the "step" of the Saviour Cathedral, which has some compositional similarities with some modern churches of the Balkans, with the revival of Russian-Balkan contacts in the last quarter of the fourteenth century98. But PD Baranowski noted that many Serbian masters came to Rus ' and at the same time with Pakhomii the Logothete, in the first third of the XV century99and Ognev BA believed that South Slavic craftsmen built in 1422-1423 years of the Trinity Cathedral of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra100.

The presence of the choir in the Church of the Nativity of the virgin and the assumption Cathedral "on the Town" and their absence in the cathedrals of the Savvino-Storozhevsky, Andronicus and the Trinity-Sergius monasteries cannot serve as a basis for building a chronological series of these temples, as listed cathedrals with choirs - house, and without the choir of the monastery, and this logic is applicable to a given age regardless of the date of this or that Church.

Two Zvenigorodsky of the temple and the Holy Trinity Cathedral of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra have slope walls and drums inside (thickening of the lower parts of the walls of the temple and the walls of the drum, namely tilt their planes, both from the outside and in the interior). This complicated construction technique, which requires the highest level masters, has not received any development in old Russian Church architecture101. And because the Saviour Cathedral Andronikov monastery tilted only the lower two thirds of the outer wall of the middle apse (as in all interior walls vertical), this slope can equally well be considered the forerunner of the slope of the wall and drums in the temples of Zvenigorod and the Trinity-Sergius Lavra (in case of acceptance of the early date of the temple of the Andronikov monastery), and archaism (in case of later date).

"Staroslavenski" decor drum, compliance of the pillars of the blades, cross-like form of the pillars, relatively thick walls and pillars, dome square, apart not so much as in the Cathedral of the Savvino-Storozhevsky monastery, - all this, it would seem that relates the temple of Saviour to the beginning of the period under consideration. But at the Zvenigorod the assumption Cathedral there are not less than "archaic" leafy capitals and beam pilasters. It is also important that the Saviour Cathedral no wooden ties and ornamental belts, directly deriving from the column-type zones of the pre-Mongolian temples, and at the Zvenigorod churches and Cathedral of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra such ties and belts are. This argues in favor of a later date Cathedral of the Andronikov monastery.

From the above we can draw only one conclusion: the architectural and stylistic features the Savior Cathedral Andronikov monastery can be attributed either to the beginning of the review period (i.e. prior to 1390-s - not later than the date of the Church of the Nativity of the Theotokos in Moscow), or by the end of this period (i.e. to 1425-1427 years after the Trinity Cathedral of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, but not later than the date of death of the hegumen Alexander).

But if we return to the messages of the Life of St. Sergius of Radonezh, this finding will help us in Dating.

The fact that the construction of the Cathedral of the Saviour of the Andronikov monastery in the beginning of the review period means it Dating to 1393, the date of construction of the Church of the Nativity of the Theotokos in Moscow. But in fact, this means that the temple was to be built, or, at least, laid during the life of St. Sergius of Radonezh (date of death - October 8, 1392).

As we have said, VG Bryusov believed that the construction of the Cathedral of the Andronikov monastery under the hegumen Alexander was the invention of Pakhomii the Logothete102. But this position of the researcher is refuted by the fact that Pachomios wrote (or rather, edited) life is not Alexander and Sergei. Therefore, for the Logothete much it would be logical to include your hypothetical "fiction" to Sergius, to emphasize the role of the latter and in the stone construction in Russia, because during the life of Radonezh founded monasteries was not built any one stone of the temple103.

And because Pachomios still carried the construction of the Savior Cathedral to time Igoumenitsa Alexander, we can make a clear conclusion: Logofet wrote the truth and have reliable data on the construction of the temple of the Andronikov monastery.

Note also that if the stone Cathedral of the Spaso-Andronikov monastery was built or constructed during the life of St. Sergius, this significant fact is not conceded would be no revision of the Life, because they all describe in detail exactly recent years the activities of Radonezh.

Thus, in the construction of the temple of the Savior the Life of St. Sergius of Radonezh is a document worthy of full trust.

Therefore, we exclude the earliest date Cathedral (beginning 1390-ies) and accept biographical evidence about the construction of the temple of Alexander. And since, as we have shown above, the Cathedral was built, if not in the beginning, at the end of the review period (i.e. after the Trinity Cathedral of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra), we followed the NN Voronin Dating him 1425-1427 years.

Such a chronological and architectural-stylistic positioning the Saviour Cathedral fully confirms the words of Voronin that the temple of the Andronikov monastery became "the most important element in the formation of Russian national architecture of the XV-XVI centuries"104.

The Cathedral of the Saviour, "the Church Kamena exceedingly red", "decorated in memory of their fathers ' hands of Andrei Rublev, "until now sees all the glory of Christ is God"105. And our task is to continue to study this unique temple, the oldest preserved on the territory of Moscow106.


 

TABLE 1

 

The basic proportions of the remaining white-stone four-column temples of North-Eastern Russia XII-XV centuries and Saviour Cathedral Andronikov monastery (various reconstructions)

 

1- Transfiguration Cathedral in Pereslavl-Zalessky (Fig. 6);

2 - Church of the Intercession on the Nerl (Fig. 7);

3 - Demetrius Cathedral in Vladimir (Fig. 8);

4 - assumption Cathedral "on the Town" in Zvenigorod (Fig. 9);

5 - the Nativity Cathedral of the Savvino-Storozhevsky monastery (Fig. 10);

6 Trinity Cathedral of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra (Fig. 11);

7 - the Savior Cathedral Andronikov monastery. Reconstruction of the PN Maksimov (Fig. 2);

8 - the Savior Cathedral Andronikov monastery. Reconstruction Bagnava (Fig. 3);

9 - the Savior Cathedral Andronikov monastery. Reconstruction of David L., BL Altshuller and SP Podyapolsky (Fig. 4 and 5);

10 - the Savior Cathedral Andronikov monastery. Reconstruction of the author (Fig. 13, 14, 15).

 

 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

The ratio of the width of the square, at the level toe zakomaras to the width of the rectangle on the level cap

0,98

1,0

1,0

0,97

0,98

0,94

1,0

1,0

1,0

1,0

The ratio of the height of the drum to the height of the rectangle from the basement to the top of the zakomaras

0,43

0,36

0,45

0,5

0,47

0,49

0,38

0,48

0,56

0,48

The ratio of the height of the visible part of the pedestal to the height of the drum

-

-

-

0,2

0,1

0,18

0,7

0,41

0,38

0,43

The attitude of the upper diameter of the drum to its height

1,25

0,87

0,93

1,0

1,1

1,0

1,14

1,0

0,87

1,1

The ratio of the diameter of the drum from the top to its bottom diameter

1,0

1,0

1,0

0,97

0,95

0,94

1,0

0,95

0,97

1,0

The attitude of the upper diameter of the drum to the width of the square, at the level toe zakomaras

0,44

0,40

0,41

0,43

0,43

0,41

0,38

0,38

0,38

0,41

The ratio of the visible area of the drum to the visible area of the square from the basement to the top of the zakomaras

0,2

0,15

0,19

0,2

0,24

0,24

0,13

0,15

0,21

0,2

 

 


 

NOTES

 

1. PN Maksimov. The Cathedral of the Spaso-Andronikov monastery in Moscow. In the book: Architectural monuments of Moscow XV-XVII centuries. New research. M., 1947. C. 11.

2. L.Adavid, Altshuler, S. Pod'yapol'skii. Restoration of the Saviour Cathedral Andronikov monastery. In the book: Old Russian art. Sergius of Radonezh and artistic culture in Moscow XIV-XV centuries, St. Petersburg, 1998. C. 361-391.

3. Ibid., C. 362.

4. Ibid.

5. Archbishop Sergius (Spassky). Historical description of the Moscow Spaso-Andronikov monastery. M., 1865. Reprint ed.: M., 2003. C. 16.

6. Amiraslanov. History of Russian architecture. M., 1894. C. 113.

7. M.Cranovsky. A sketch of history of the Moscow period of Russian Church architecture. M., 1911.

8. News of the Imperial archaeological Commission. Vol. 61 (Questions restoration, vol. 17). St. Petersburg, 1916. C. 212.

9. A.I. Nekrasov. The emergence of the Moscow art. M., 1929; A.I. Nekrasov. The city of Moscow province. M., 1928. C. 17.

10. PD Baranowski. About the time and place of burial of Andrei Rublev. Report of a joint session of the Sector of architecture and the Sector of the painting of the Institute of history of arts of the USSR Academy of Sciences on February 11, 1947. In the book: Peter Baranovsky. Works, memoirs of the contemporaries. Comp. Y.A. Bychkov. M., 1996.

11. Ibid.

12. PN Maksimov. The decree. cit., S. 23.

13. BA Ognev. The variant of reconstruction of the Saviour Cathedral Andronikov monastery. In the book: Monuments of culture. Research and restoration. No. 1. M., 1959. C. 72-82.

14. L.Adavid, Altshuler and S. pod'yapol'skii wrote that the funds for carrying out large-scale restoration works on Andronikova the monastery, providing a full restoration of the Saviour Cathedral in 1959., were allocated in connection with the inclusion in the UNESCO program of celebrating of a hypothetical 600-year anniversary of Andrei Rublev (Ludmila Altshuler, S. pod'yapol'skii. The decree. cit., S. 361).

In 2006-2007, the administrators of the Internet forum http://www.icon-art.info IV Lebedev and IB sharenkov organized at a specified forum discussion on the history of the Saviour Cathedral Andronikov monastery. During the discussion it was noted that, according to estimates preserved, already in the end of 1957, a monument was opened to the public, and it has been allocated a very large sum - 215000 rubles. The basis for allocation of funds was published in 1956 in the newspaper "Pravda" open letter Mwilmeth, Voronin, Wpedians-Peretz and Dmitry Likhachev about the need to save the monument. These amounts were obtained by a team MDTM under the leadership of David L. who had dismissed the researchers, who previously worked on the monument (group of authors under the leadership Gracenoteathat engaged as consultants PD Baranowski, DP Sukhova and others).

It should also be noted that work on full-scale reconstruction of the Cathedral in the late 1950-ies were conducted in an emergency mode, the design was carried out in parallel with the priority restoration works. Already in 1960, was completed restoration of the main Church, in 1961, was completed drum. In subsequent years, were completed only portals that the "emergency" phase were recreated in plaster (Ludmila Altshuler, S. pod'yapol'skii. The decree. cit., S. 362).

Scientific results of this reconstruction is reflected in an article written nearly 40 years later (Ludmila Altshuler, S. pod'yapol'skii, decree. op). It should be noted that the main author of this article was SS pod'yapol'skii, since 1998, a La David had passed away, and Altshuler was seriously ill.

The reasons for this almost 40-year delay remains unclear, as the authors of the reconstruction never had any problems with writing scientific texts, nor with their publication. We can assume that the writing of the outcome of scientific work interfere well known in the end of XX century the differences between the researchers associated with a number of significant shortcomings in the work done. In this regard, reference is typical in this article (La David, Altshuler, S. pod'yapol'skii. The decree. cit., S. 361) that PD Baranowski passed in MDTM drawings of the temple of the XIX century (see Fig. 2 and 3) of some "unknown backup. Apparently, the question to ask PD Baranovsky on the origin of these drawings reconstruction was not possible. Kavelmaher recalled that when he said at a scientific conference that the reconstruction of the drum Saviour Cathedral was done wrong, L. David demonstratively left the hall (from the memoirs Kavelmaheracontained on the website www.kawelmacher.EN).

Known and differences among co-authors on the Dating of the Cathedral: Altshuler dated the temple 1390 mi (Altshuler. White stone reliefs of the Saviour Cathedral Andronikov monastery and the problem of Dating of the monument. Century kN.: Medieval Russia. M., 1976. C. 285), SS pod'yapol'skii inclined to the Dating of the Church around 1427 (Ludmila Altshuler, S. pod'yapol'skii. The decree. cit., S. 361).

15. L.Adavid, Altshuler, S. Pod'yapol'skii. The decree. cit., S. 383.

16. This question was first expressed V. kavelmaherom (notes Kavelmahera in the fields decree. works of David L., BL Altshuller, S. Podyapolsky).

17. L.Adavid, Altshuler, S. Pod'yapol'skii. The decree. cit., S. 376.

18. Ibid.

19. Ibid., C. 382.

20. For more information, see: SV zagraevsky. About the possibility of introducing into the scientific circulation and the possible contexts of use of the term "Russian Gothic architecture of Ancient Russia of the end of XIII-the first third of the XV century. M., 2007 (hereinafter - Zagraevsky, 2007). The article is on the web-site www.zagraevsky.com.

21. For more information, see SV zagraevsky. Yuri Dolgoruky and old white-stone architecture. M., 2002 (hereinafter - Zagraevsky, 2002). C. 86.

22. L.Adavid, Altshuler, S. Pod'yapol'skii. The decree. cit., S. 382.

23. Ibid.

24. Apparently, avoiding this indentation was impossible for practical reasons: in wartime, it could be arranged areas for possible defense (in the case of the forced use of the Church as "the main tower of a fortress"), and in times of peace such sites could get in for repair window-sill, pendants, chandeliers and other (see SV zagraevsky. The architecture of North-Eastern Russia the end of the XIII-the first third of the XIV century. M., 2003. Next - Zagraevsky, 2003. C. 51-53).

25. Dating justification of these temples, see ibid., C. 8-211.

26. SV zagraevsky. About the form of the domes of ancient Russian temples. Theses see in the book: Materials of the regional conference (April 14 2006.). So 2. Vladimir, 2007. C. 9-12. The full article, visit the Internet site www.zagraevsky.com.

27. The similarity in the composition of the Cathedral of the Nativity monastery in Moscow, the Cathedral of the Andronikov monastery pointed to many researchers, from PN Maksimov (PN Maksimov. The decree. cit., S. 30) to S. Podyapolsky (Ludmila Altshuler, S. pod'yapol'skii. The decree. cit., S. 375). Kavelmaher even called cathedrals of the assumption monastery in Staritsa and the Nativity monastery in Moscow "clones" and "remake" of the Cathedral of the Andronikov monastery (personal conversation with V. kavelmaherom, 2002.).

28. L.Adavid, Altshuler, S. Pod'yapol'skii. The decree. cit., S. 369.

29. Information obtained on the Internet forum http://www.icon-art.info.

30. L.Adavid, Altshuler, S. Pod'yapol'skii. The decree. cit., S. 363.

31. In 1993, in the altar part of the Saviour Cathedral was carried out archaeological research. A report on these excavations are in the Institute of archaeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences has not been granted, detailed (at least enough for analysis) archaeological information about their results have never been published. Unfortunately, around these excavations have developed a very unhealthy atmosphere and the results remained practically closed for the scientific community, so we and a number of other notes to this article, here are some of our available documents related to this research. In this regard, the author expresses his deep gratitude to the moderators of the Internet forum http://www.icon-art.info Ivebeen and Iberenova, organized on a specified forum discussion on the history of the Saviour Cathedral Andronikov monastery, which was presented a number of documents relating to these excavations (the author has refrained from comments concerning the stylistic peculiarities of these documents and ethics of some participants of the discussion on the specified Internet forum).

Some results of excavations in 1993 reported memo og Ulyanov (I. no. 58 of 4.03.1997, with the Director of the resolution Tsmiar GV Popova from 1.04.1997 year), the text of which was given at a specified Internet forum:

"on 9 March this year marks 4 years since the time of the uncovering of the Holy relics under the Holy see of the Church of the Vernicle in Andronikov monastery. On the basis of the resolution of His Holiness Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia Alexy II the Savior Cathedral rector priest Vyacheslav Savinykh requested in the Museum of the final inspection of the Holy relics. By this memo, prepared in response to this request, it is proposed to adopt as a scientific summary of the attribution discovered graves Venerable Andronicus and Sawa. The point of view of a representative of the Moscow Patriarchate Belyaeva S.A. evolved from the attribution of the graves of the heroes of the Kulikovo battle to the grave of the Monk Andrei Rublev, was found in the letter to the Director of the Museum from 20.07.1993, and the report on the Scientific-methodical Council of the Museum of 22.09.1995, This view was rejected as the authors of the project of restoration and David L. S. pod'yapol'skii (see minutes # 12 meeting on the archaeological work in the Saviour Cathedral from 31.08.1993 year)and a representative of the Institute of archeology RAS La Belyaev (see report dated 22.07.1993,). The opinion of the supervisor of archaeological work og Ulyanov about the ownership of the graves of the Venerable Andronicus and Sawa was outlined in a letter to the Director of the Museum in the name of his Holiness Patriarch Alexy II (Ref. No 50-01/08 from 12.03.1993 year), compiled them in history (with photofixing works)transferred 18.06.1993, Secretary of His Holiness O. Matthew Stadnyk and in the information letter with the scientific report on the work in the altar of the Saviour Cathedral in the name of the Bishop Arseny from 29.06.1993, in Addition, as the scientific interpretation opinion og Ulyanov were presented and approved at the meeting of the Scientific-methodical Council of the Museum of 26.06.1995, and at the meeting of the society of adherents of Orthodox culture (see resolution). Scientific publication of the proposed og Ulyanov attribution held in the academic Yearbook "Monuments of culture. New discoveries. 1995" (M, 1996) and in the scientific collection "Moscow cemetery" (M, 1996). Saint-Petersburg from 12 to 19.07.1995, and reporting documentation of the laboratory IIMK # 14102/33-2816 from 10.07.1996, in the Scientific archive of Museum); 3) developed guidelines for conserving archeological wood in the laboratory VNIIR (identified the unique characteristics of the Central deck with Holy relics under the Holy throne - see: report of the chemical research 1995. in the Scientific archive of Museum); 4) found the nearest analogy iron buckle from the Central deck in the archaeological collection of the Novgorod expedition of Moscow state University (buckle type II 8-14-1-13 of clearly stratified layer of the FOURTEENTH century); 5) joint Commission of leading specialists Grabar centre (Antoschenkov) and VNIIR fixed erroneous method Saalaev that resulted in the destruction of the decks (see: Protocol from 8.06.1995 year). Andronik monastery was founded OK. 1424 g. above the head of burial of the founder of the monastery of the Venerable Andronicus (+ 1373), as it was taken on the canonical tradition. At the device of the Holy see to the overall cancer were transferred only separate the upper part of the Holy relics of the Venerable Andronicus and Sava, while the lower part of the Holy relics remained intact and was not removed from the decks that in the order of the Church construction was allowed only in relation to the glorified saints of God. Thus, by this memo proposes finally examine found 9.03.1993, the Holy relics of St. Andronicus and Sawa. on March 4, 1997. Head of sector Ulyanov OG (signature)".

It should be noted that, according to the La Belyaeva, these archaeological research has discovered a fragment of an ancient necropolis, pre-existing temple, and pledged to the level of the continent pyramidal foundations of the Eastern pillars (L.A.Belyaev. Ancient monasteries of Moscow (con. XIII-XIX centuries. XV century), according to archeology. M., 1994. C. 189).

Be that as it may, in respect of the foundations of the Saviour Cathedral data of these excavations deserve some credit. Og Ulyanov on the results, wrote the following (the information obtained on the Internet forum http://www.icon-art.info):

"The Foundation of the Cathedral tape (probably for the remains of the Foundation of the tape between the Eastern pillars researchers have taken the remains of the Foundation stone altar screen, see note. 31 to this article - SZ), represented by laying robotising blocks of limestone for lime-sand mortar, with the alignment layers izvestkovo-sandy solution with a gravelly filler. In the surveyed construction of Foundation highlighted the following elements: 1. Two rows robotising blocks of limestone average size 35 x 40 cm a light grey izvestkovo-sandy solution. The solution is mainly malovlazhny (sometimes wet), fragile (easily destroyed by fingers). The thickness of seams of a laying 0.5-1.0 cm in places leaching masonry mortar joints made capacity of the soil to a depth of 3-6 see 2. Levelling layer lime-sand mortar light grey (white) colors, durable malovlazhny, with inclusions of gravel, quartz and metamorphic rocks, water-saturated fibers of wood ashes (remains of wooden formwork). 3. A series of jagged limestone blocks an average size of 40 x 45 cm on grayish-white izvestkovo-sandy solution is very strong and malovlazhnom. However, in the vertical joints of laying marked the opening of the cavity depth of about 50 cm and section 5 x 7 cmpartially filled containing sand and crushed limestone. The depth of laying the Foundation of the Central apse is 1.80 m from the surface of modern blind area". Og Ulyanov wrote, and that the depth of Foundation ditches is about 3.5 m from the floor of the Cathedral (see item 3 of this study).

Consideration of documents related to these excavations, we will continue to make further notes.

32. According to information obtained on the Internet forum http://www.icon-art.info, La Belyaev, at the request of the Directorate Tsmiar made a conclusion on the results of visual inspection archaeological pits dug in the Central apse of the Saviour Cathedral of the Spaso-Andronikov monastery, dated 22.07.1993, In conclusion, L.A. Belyaeva, in particular, noted: "In the Western part of the pit is undoubtedly the remains of the Foundation of the altar... Channeling backfill shows on one site stepped Foundation apse... the level of the ancient necropolis for inspection was unavailable" (extract from the note by the La Belyaeva from 20.07.1993, in the scholarly archive Tsmiar).

La Belyaev also wrote: "Open in 1956. altar barrier represented by a number of white-stone blocks, stretching tape solution between Eastern pair of pillars, but do not overlap, it seems aisles (?). The materials collected and reported og Ulyanov (L.A.Belyaev. Ancient monasteries of Moscow (con. XIII-XIX centuries. XV century), according to archeology. M., 1994. C. 264).

Og Ulyanov believed that the excavations have revealed the remains of strip Foundation between the Eastern pillars (see note. 31 to the present study).

The author of the study believes that in order to clarify the purpose of the Foundation between the Eastern pillars require new archaeological research.

It should be noted that Saalaev have suggested that, under the altar of the Cathedral was a white stone crypt, floor brick vault. In particular, Saalaev in his Memorandum to the Moscow Patriarchate and to the Directorate Tsmiar from 20.07.1993, wrote the following: "After departure OG Ulyanov on vacation, the dismantling of a dam consisting of a modern waste generated during repair and restoration works of the 50s and 60s of our century, on the site of archaeological works were discovered white stone walls, covered by a dome. On first impression, the room with white stone walls constructed simultaneously with construction of the main Church. Body of brick, in all probability, was partially destroyed during restoration work in the Cathedral in the postwar years. early Christian times to the new time, which was used for the burial of the well-known persons" (extract from the note by S. Belyaeva from 20.07.1993, in the scholarly archive Tsmiar; obtained on the Internet forum http://www.icon-art.info).

This conclusion is representative of the Moscow Patriarchate on the work in the Saviour Cathedral was considered at the meeting 31.08.1993, with the participation of David L., og Ulyanov, S. Podyapolsky, B. T. Sizova, VA Gorbunova, etc. According to the report submitted on the specified Internet forum, included the following: "David L.A. - raised the question of proving the existence of underground facilities. Pichugin A.D. - Expressed the wish to arrange the arrival of the altar room for religious rites. Ulyanov OG - To prepare the materials necessary to make pit stratigraphic fit. Today this, I have not. Please help the Commission to address the issue. Pod'yapol'skii S. there is No common set was not. To continue archaeological work to perform temporary wooden ceiling and flooring in the level of the existing floor apse, to prevent the shedding of soil in all areas of the excavation" (extract from the minutes 12 of the meeting on the archaeological work in the Saviour Cathedral from 31.08.1993, in the scholarly archive Tsmiar).

The survey author in 2007 the excavation under the altar part of the temple showed that over the walls of the crypt Saalaev, apparently, has adopted an internal surface of a laying of the podium of the temple, and for the arches - the remains arranged in 1865 heaters channel. The level of the ancient floor of the Cathedral is well traced by the stains of lime in masonry.

The author of this study is thanks to the Savior Cathedral rector Vyacheslav O. (Savin) for kindly providing the opportunity to review the excavation under the altar part of the Cathedral.

According to the author, this site is a valuable archaeological site, and want to retain it for further research.

33. Tashiyev, M.A.Ilyin. The disputed provisions of the new article about Andrei Rublev. In Ukr.: Questions of history, no 12. M., 1969. C. 194-197.

34. G.Wagner. From symbol to reality. M., 1980 (hereinafter - Wagner, 1980). C. 187.

35. OGUlyanov. The cycle of miniatures of the personal "life of St. Sergius of Radonezh" about the beginning of the Andronikov monastery. In the book: Monuments of culture. New discoveries. 1995. M., 1996 (hereinafter Ulyanov, 1996). C. 181-192. This version og Ulyanov was reflected in a number of publications (for example, see: GY Mokeev. Fedor - the wizard of the Holy Trinity. In the book: The person who believes in the culture of Ancient Russia. Materials of the international scientific conference on 5-6 December 2005. SPb., 2005).

36. Tashiyev, M.A.Ilyin. The decree. cit., S. 194-195.

37. Ulyanov, 1996. C. 191.

38. Tashiyev, M.A.Ilyin. The decree. cit., S. 194, 195.

39. Voronin. The architecture of North-Eastern Russia XII-XV centuries. So 2. M., 1962. C. 325.

40. Tashiyev, M.A.Ilyin. The decree. cit., S. 195.

41. VG Bryusov. A opponents. In Ukr.: "Questions of history", 11. M., 1970 (hereinafter - Bryusov, 1970). C. 202.

42. Nesterov. Ancient life of St. Sergius of Radonezh. M., 1892, Sep. II, S. 33.

43. Voronin. The decree. cit., S. 326.

44. SHM. The eparch. 436. Pargaman 1 (28,5x21,5). 291 l., cereals, half-uncial script.

45. Ulyanov, 1996. C. 191.

46. Messages on the Internet forum http://www.icon-art.info.

47. Nesterov. The decree. cit., Sep. II, S. 65.

48. Tashiyev, M.A.Ilyin. The decree. cit., S. 195.

49. G.Wagner. Spaso-Andronikov monastery. M., 1972 (hereinafter - Wagner, 1972). C. 16; Wagner, 1980, S. 186.

50. Altshuler. White stone reliefs of the Saviour Cathedral Andronikov monastery and the problem of Dating of the monument. Century kN.: Medieval Russia. M., 1976. C. 285.

51. Ulyanov, 1996. C. 191.

52. L.Adavid, Altshuler, S. Pod'yapol'skii. The decree. cit., S. 390.

53. Cm. the letter Kavelmahera "the uncovering of the relics in the Saviour Cathedral of the Spaso-Andronikov monastery on the Internet site www.kawelmacher.ru.

54. Wagner, 1980, S. 187.

55. Wagner, 1972. C. 16.

56. In a note. 31 and 32 of the present study, we have examined a number of documents related to the excavations of 1993. On the alleged discovery of the remains hypothetical stone temple they said nothing. According to information obtained on the Internet forum http://www.icon-art.info, the results of the excavations of the allegedly discovered remnants of a hypothetical Church reported og Ulyanov at the enlarged session of the Scientific and methodological Council Tsmiar 26 June 1995.

Extract from the minutes of this meeting, presented on the specified Internet forum, no doubt about the authenticity, but it has about the discovery of a hypothetical stone Church says nothing:

"Extract from the minutes No.1 dated June 26, 1995, the Scientific-methodical Council TSMIAR. Were PRESENT: Popov, GV, Ulyanov OG, A.I. Vedernikov, L. Stepanova, Podkopayeva V.M., Krivolutskii N. Denisov, N.V. Pavlov PU, Vandysheva L.V., Barseghyan T.V., Kurakin YU.N., Yatsenko A.N., Canines D.N., Gerasimov E.V., Chistyakov V., Morozov E.V., Gurova E.N., Soloviev K.A., Davydova H.E., Abramov D.M., gorodova M.S., Ageev V.V., YU.V. Dorofeev, IGOR Lebedev, Filippova M.A. (TSMIAR), Kloss BM (Institute of Russian history), Kuchkin V. (Institute of Russian history), pod'yapol'skii S. (MARCHI), Belyaev L.A. (Institute of archaeology), Makarova TI (Institute of archaeology), Turilov A.A. (Institute of Slavic studies), Kachalova I.G. (GMC), A.V. Ryndin (YIRAH), Gusev E.K. (TG), Naumenko GI (PCOIP), O. Yakovleva (PCOIP), Zhilkin M.V. ("Moscow journal"), Titov O.V. (Museum of "the Word about Igor's regiment"), Nitecki A.V. (artist-copyist), O. Boris Mikhailov (rector of the Church of Pokrov in Fili), Vyacheslav O. Savinykh (rector of the Church of the Vernicle), O. Leonid Kalinin (deacon of the Church of the Vernicle). Agenda: 1. Scientific report on the excavations in the Central apse of the Saviour Cathedral. LISTENED: Ulyanov OG - Head. sector of archaeology TSMIAR. On the excavations in the Central apse of the Saviour Cathedral. DECIDED: 1. To invite experts GOSNIIR (Alekseeva GI) and laboratory IIMK (Zaitsev GI) for examination of wooden decks with a view to a possible recovery of one of them. 2. To request a progress report from the representative of the Moscow Patriarchate Belyaeva S.A. and also to submit to the Patriarch of scientific justification for the attribution of 2 found graves venerable Andronicus and Sawa. Museum Director (signature) GV Popov. Scientific Secretary (signature) V. S. Miroshnichenko".

On the specified Internet forum was also presented a resolution of this meeting, but this resolution is doubt in its authenticity reasons:

- unusual for such a document language (read scientifically proven", "appreciate a scientific hypothesis," to support scientific interpretation");

- lack of signatures.

The author still believes it his duty to make the resolution to the readers:

"The RESOLUTION of an extended session of the Scientific and Methodological Council of the Central Museum of ancient Russian culture and art named after Andrei Rublev. on June 26, 1995. PP. 1 and 2, as well as the fact device throne directly above the head of one of the burials with the relics to support scientific interpretation of this burial as the tomb of the founder of the Andronikov monastery. 4. To bring to the attention of the special Commission of the Moscow Patriarchate headed by Bishop Arseny (Epifanova) received to date materials and scientific interpretation."

But even if this resolution and true, and Scientific and methodological Council "welcomed the scientific hypothesis of the existence of the original Church", an argument for the existence of a hypothetical stone temple this evaluation (even if adopted by a majority of votes) cannot serve for the following reasons:

- scientific theories, issues and hypotheses can not approve (or reject) with a vote on any, even the most authoritative academic Council;

- in the resolution says nothing about the fact that "the original temple was just a stone.

57. L.Engineers a.beliaev. Ancient monasteries of Moscow (con. XIII-XIX centuries. XV century), according to archeology. M., 1994. C. 189.

58. Information obtained on the Internet forum http://www.icon-art.info.

59. LABelyaev. The decree. cit., S. 189; Altshuler. The decree. cit., S. 291; Bryusov, 1970, C. 203; according to information obtained on the Internet forum http://www.icon-art.info, in a report in 1960 was unfair noted that all the underground space is filled with clean sandy soil of the continent (Archive tsnrpm. Code 3. Inv. No 3/362. L. 3).

60. As we have said in the note. 31, aboutthat on these excavations in the Institute of archaeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences has not been granted, detailed (at least enough for analysis) archaeological information about their results have never been published.

In publishing, 1996 og Ulyanov has described these findings in the following way: "If this were the first to identify unique and stratigraphy, allowing to trace in detail the history of construction of not only the existing Cathedral 1427., but the preceding stone temple 1357. A genuine discovery was finding under construction horizon of 20-s years of the XV century a considerable fragment of the ancient necropolis of the Spaso-Andronikov monastery. Thanks to the thorough archaeological researches 1993. it was found that within the Central apse of the Saviour Cathedral, to the East from the Holy see, at a depth of about 3 m from the modern floor surface lie four oak deck with traces of opening in the old days... All the graves are synchronized with the bedding first Saviour Cathedral time the monk Andronikos. At the same time, they are covered by layers of time building a stone Church in 1427." (Og Ulyanov. Ancient history of the necropolis of the Spaso-Andronikov monastery. In the book: Necropolis Moscow: history, archaeology, art, protection. M., 1996. C. 26).

These results og Ulyanov and interpreted several different ways:

"Stratigraphy pit size 5.5 x 4,25 m laid down in the altar at the depth of up to 3 mreflects the three stages of construction of the Savior Cathedral. The first stage was erected a wooden Church (consecrated on August 16 1357.), which preserved strip of burning wood, parallel to that of 2 box-tombs. Under a headboard of one of the graves was found cobbled small brick insufficient firing, rude moulding with large impurities in the test, a $ 4.5 x 10,5 x 20 cm. The second stage was held layout of the site after the fire (1368.?), filling with sand and construction (approx. 1370.) temple of time. Fragment of the Northern apse was traced through the earthen base thickness approx. 0.6 mon which rested Lezhnev wooden shed lime, and a thin layer plinfy. Radiocarbon Dating of samples archeological wood, obtained in the laboratory of the Institute (St. Petersburg), confirm the Dating of the construction. In this temple (the Savior Cathedral-2) were oriented 2 oak deck with expansion in the head and additional restriction "ship". In each of them lacked the top cover and the top of the remains, but remained single cut leather kaliga and leather Igumen belt buckle with an iron (the nearest analogy in Novgorod) - in the Central deck. In this temple of time you can link famous white stone reliefs found in the restoration of 1959-1960 in the secondary use. The phase III (1425-1427, was again held layout of the site and erected the current white stone Cathedral (the Cathedral of our Saviour-3), the Foundation of which was laid much deeper (the depth of Foundation ditches reaches 3.5 m from the floor) prior, so on the level of construction of horizon, there are several fragments of early ceramic material, including pen amphorae-korchahy (the nearest analogy in Kolomna). Compared to his predecessors, the white-stone Cathedral was removed during the laying of the C-In, probably due to the fact that his throne erected directly above the head of the Central deck" (og Ulyanov. Theses of the report at the meeting of the Scientific-methodical Council Tsmiar 26 June 1995. Information obtained on the Internet forum http://www.icon-art.info).

On the above text the date of consecration of the first Cathedral of the Andronikov monastery - August 16, 1357 - see: Ulyanov, 1996. The author is currently refraining from commenting on this date and expects to devote to the questions of the Foundation of the Andronikov monastery and consecration in its first wooden Church a special study.

Pon information obtained on the Internet forum http://www.icon-art.info, radiocarbon Dating of samples archeological wood, discovered during the research og Ulyanov pit in the Saviour Cathedral, was reflected in the report of the laboratory IIMK 14102/33-2816 from 10.07.1996,

61. L.Engineers a.beliaev, na Krenke, Sz Chernov wrote: "The study section of the cultural layer, building deposits and buried soils showed that they are helpful source for studying the early history of the monastery and the Cathedral. The oldest building, presents the pit and covered with planks and a layer of clay is likely heating system (furnace). At the same time, this structure has not served for cooking, and had a special function. Only this can explain the complete absence of ceramics to fill the hole. From the edge of one burnt oak planks was selected sample for radiocarbon Dating. gg... Filling the pit, covered with burnt timbers, was Zolotoy sandy loam (sand). In the middle of the fill contained much ash, and the layer acquired a pinkish hue. Here crushed stones. At the bottom of the pit was observed accumulation of coal. Burning them is happening in the pit, making the sand under the coals hot and acquired an orange color. Of coal from the bottom of the pit selected sample for radiocarbon Dating (GIN 11000), which showed the age 610 50 years, which corresponds to the calendar interval 1299-1403, 1334 g. within the 2nd-3rd Thursday. The XIV century and associated with the early stage of life of the monastery. After the death of heating buildings in a fire at his place became stuck layered material (sand, sandy loam). This could occur as the result of natural processes (aggradation), and in the result of human activities" (La Belyaev, na Krenke, SZ Chernov. Complex research in Andronik monastery and research in the area of St. Basil's Cathedral. In the book: Archaeological discoveries 2001. M., 2002).

62. Cm. note. 56 and 60.

63. Internet forum http://www.icon-art.info.

64. Zagraevsky. 2003. C. 90-92; Zagraevsky, 2007.

65. Cm. note. 31, 56 and 60.

66. Cm. ibid.

67. PA Rappoport. Construction production of Ancient Rus. St.Petersburg, 1994. With 62-73.

Note that this option position og Ulyanov similar position Fedorov, who believed that "examples of white stone masonry without foundations Dating from the second half of the XIV century, traced archaeologically in several places in the Moscow Kremlin" (scientific report on the architectural and archaeological observations on the territory of the Kremlin in 1972-1973 in the scholarly archive GMC, pit 23 and others). V.I. Fedorov believed that "from 60-ies of the XIV century to the beginning of the XV century, some structures built with wooden Lezhnev, the space between them soaked in lime mortar with cobblestone booth" (V.I. Fedorov. NS shelyapina "discovered" in the Kremlin hypothetical Demetrius Church, colossal Archangel and Annunciation cathedrals end of XIII century and unknown building of the XIV century without foundations. Because in those days, almost all researchers, it was clear that for the remains of the walls "great Kremlin respondentia buildings were taking the remains vybostok, floors and walls, hypotheses Fedorov and NS shelyapinoy not entered into scientific circulation.

On the Internet forum http://www.icon-art.info put forward a version that the same way - without Foundation - was built the Cathedral of the Chudov monastery in 1365: according Pakhomiev text of "the life of Metropolitan Alexy," when the rebuilding of the Cathedral of Archangel Michael in the 30-ies of the XVI century, "new Church starts state and the old Church dismantled and place of cleansing. And when did command kopete ditches in the Foundation of the new Church, inside the former byvshie Church uge razobratsa... the Ancient Church, uge razobratsa, if and more was everywhere, but a single platform having only on the ground wealthy" (the Life of the Metropolitan of all Russia, St. Alexy, composed Pakhomii the Logothete. SPb, 1877-1878, S. 204-205, 212-213). But Voronin rightly argued that United scaffold was named the floor, lying on the ground, ie the Cathedral 1365, in contrast to the Church of XVI century, had no basement (Voronin. The decree. cit., S. 181). Position Voronin supported VP Vygolov (VP Vygolov. On the original architecture of the Cathedral of the Chudov monastery. In the book: Medieval art. M., 1978. C. 74). Accordingly, to the foundations of the temple in 1365 (or the absence in this temple foundations) the message Pachomius had no relations.

In any case, the proof of a hypothesis (in this case, og Ulyanov) by any other unproved hypotheses (in this case Fedorov and others) untenable.

68. Ad Varganov. The history of Vladimir-Suzdal architecture. In Ukr.: "The Soviet Museum", 2, 1938; ad Varganov. To the architectural history of Suzdal Cathedral. XIIM, vol. 11, 1945. C. 99-101; ad Varganov. The new data to the architectural history of Suzdal Cathedral of XI-XIII centuries. In the book: CA, 4, 1960; ad Varganov. Story of a building. In the book: On the native land: people, history, life, the nature of the earth Vladimir. Yaroslavl, 1978. C. 21; M. Ioannisyan, P.L. Zykov, E. N. Torshin. The work of architectural and archaeological expedition in 1996. In the book: The State Hermitage Museum. Report of the archeological session for 1996. SPb, 1997. C. 57-60; P.L. Zykov. To the question of reconstruction of the Suzdal Cathedral of the end of the XI-the beginning of XII century In the book: Medieval architecture and monumental art. Rapporteuse reading. Theses of reports. St. Petersburg, 1999; V.M. Anisimov. History and architecture of ancient Suzdal Kremlin Cathedral. Vladimir, 2001. C. 20; V.M. Anisimov, T. Bachurina. Some data of complex investigations of the Suzdal Cathedral. In Ukr.: Restorer, 1 (8), 2004. C. 112.

69. L.Adavid, Altshuler, S. Pod'yapol'skii. The decree. cit., S. 363.

70. PA Rappoport. The decree. cit., S. 97.

71. Ibid.

72. Archbishop Sergius (Spassky). The decree. cit., S. 16.

73. Nesterov. The decree. cit., Sep. II, S. 65.

74. Archbishop Sergius (Spassky). The decree. cit., S. 16.

75. PN Maksimov. The decree. cit.

76. PD Baranowski. The decree. cit.

77. Life Of Nikon. Great Menaion the lives of saints, November, Ter. III. M., 1914. C. 2905-2906.

78. Voronin. The decree. cit., S. 325.

79. Ibid., C. 253-263.

80. Ibid., C. 290-298.

81. Ibid., C. 299-310.

82. Ibid., C. 311-320.

83. Ibid., C. 325.

84. Ibid., C. 337.

85. Ibid., C. 326.

86. Ibid., C. 326-330.

87. L.Adavid, Altshuler, S. Pod'yapol'skii. The decree. cit., S. 360.

88. It should be noted that, according to the La Belyaeva (La Belyaev. The decree. cit., S. 264), SS pod'yapol'skii before writing a review article on the reconstruction of the Saviour Cathedral (Ludmila Altshuler, S. pod'yapol'skii. The decree. cit.) supported the Dating VG brussov and BL Altshuller - 1390-years (see notes 89-92 to the present study). La Beliaev therefore referred to the report of S. Podyapolsky , co-authored with David L. and BL Altshuller at the conference "St. Sergius of Radonezh and culture of XIV-XV centuries" 13-15.10.1993. Apparently, at the time of writing this review article by S. pod'yapol'skii already inclined to Dating PN Maksimov and Voronin, but the co - BL Altshuller allowed him to write about it only indirectly (Ludmila Altshuler, S. pod'yapol'skii. The decree. cit., S. 360).

Ognev BA, mA Il'in, H. Wagner, Kavelmaher, La Belyaev and og Ulyanov not put forward their own versions of the Dating of the existing Saviour Cathedral, and tend to position PN Maksimov and Voronin.

89. VG Bryusov. Controversial issues biography of Andrei Rublev. In Ukr.: "Questions of history", 12. M., 1969 (hereinafter - Bryusov, 1969). C. 39.

90. VG Bryusov tied up his Dating Saviour Cathedral with the alleged by the base at the beginning of 1390-ies of the Andronikov monastery (Bryusov, 1969, S. 44), but this convincingly refuted mA Il'in, showing that within one to two years was impossible to build the monastery and the stone Cathedral in it. Usually these events are separated by time, but at the base of the monastery was built a small wooden Church (Tashiyev, M.A.Ilyin. The decree. cit., S. 195.). It should also be noted that VG Bryusov without reservations taken quite a controversial provision that in the beginning of 1390-ies Andronicus was still alive.

91. Nesterov. The decree. cit., Sep. I, S. 131.

92. Altshuler. The decree. cit., S. 290.

93. Ibid., C. 289.

94. Ibid. Note that currently in popular magazines sometimes found "compromise" date - the beginning of construction in 1390, completion in 1427.

95. PD Baranowski. The decree. cit.

96. BA Ognev. Some problems of the early Moscow architecture. In the book: "Architectural heritage". So 12. M., 1960. C. 60.

97. Altshuler. The decree. cit., S. 290.

98. Ibid.

99. PD Baranowski. The decree. cit.

100. BA Ognev. The decree. cit., S. 59.

101. The slope of the external surfaces of the walls inside are only the lower tier of the Ivan the Great bell tower (1505-1508 years) and Spaso-Preobrazhensky Cathedral in Solovki (1558-1566 years). In the bell tower of Ivan the Great architect Bon Fryazin bowed walls of the first tier in a purely utilitarian purposes - for the greatest stability under extreme pressure upper tiers with regard to significant additional loads encountered while swinging "okopnik" bells. As for the Transfiguration Cathedral in Solovki, then, apparently, he was regarded as part of the fortifications, and the tilt of its walls is approximately corresponds to the slope of the walls and towers of Solovki, Pskov, Izborsk and other Northern and North-Western medieval fortresses. This is confirmed by the fact that the walls of the Spaso-Preobrazhensky Cathedral is very thick walls of most of the other monastic buildings are also very thick and also have a slope inside. Consequently, the Solovki temple also implemented primarily utilitarian version of the slope walls.

In the temples of the same end of the XIV-the first third of the XV century, the slope of the wall has very different goals - increasing the interior of the temples and the creation of the "pyramidal" their silhouette (see Zagraevsky, 2007).

102. Bryusov, 1969. C. 39-40.

103. Altshuler believed that when the life of St. Sergius of Radonezh open excavations were built of white stone churches in Bobrineva and Staro-Golutvin monasteries (Altshuler. Monuments of architecture of Moscow Russia the second half of XIV-early XV centuries (new studies). The dissertation on competition of a scientific degree of candidate of architecture. As a manuscript. M., 1978), but the author of this study showed that these temples were built later - no earlier than the XV century (Zagraevsky. 2003).

104. Voronin. The decree. cit., S. 334.

105. Nesterov. The decree. cit., Sep. II, S. 65.

106. The Church of the Nativity of the Theotokos in the Moscow Kremlin, Dating back to the year 1393, survived only until the chorus sets under the Grand Kremlin Palace.

 


 

APPLICATION

 

The history of the Spaso-Andronikov monastery

and the uncovering of the Holy relics

 

Provided by the rector of the Cathedral of the winter Palace

Archpriest Vyacheslav (Savin)

 

Spaso-Andronikov monastery - one of the oldest in Moscow. The monastery, founded around 1360, the great Russian Saint Metropolitan Alexy with the participation and blessing of the monk Sergei of Radonezh, by the end of XIV-beginning of XV century became one of the spiritual and cultural centers of the Moscow state played a crucial role in the rise of Moscow and turning it into a "Third Rome" and "the second Jerusalem".

According to legend, during the return from Constantinople in 1356 Archbishop Alexy was in a severe storm in the Black sea. The Primate of the Russian Orthodox Church made a vow: if their salvation found in Moscow monastery, dedicating it to the Saint whose memory will be in that day. God by the grace of the travelers were at the shore 16, old style (August 29 new) - in celebration of the image of the Savior, the same one who has blessed Bishop Alexy, Patriarch of Constantinople, in front of him as a Saint praying in the time of storm. That is why, fulfilling his vow, Metropolitan Alexy monastery dedicated to the image of Edessa.

The place of establishment of the monastery could be supervised Prelate during one of his trips to the Horde with the application for the Moscow princes: on the high hill at a sharp turn Yauza before its confluence into the Moscow river. The stream flowing in the Yauza (enclosed in a tube in 1935) in memory of Constantinople Golden horn Bay was named the Golden Horn (the memory of it remains in the name of the shaft, the seafront and the lanes). Here converge two roads: one going through Taganskaya area to the South, in Kolomna, Ryazan and Tatar uluses (Bolvansky road); other way left for the East - Vladimir, Nizhniy Novgorod. This "Holy" crossroads, as it was called in ancient times were different and landscape beauties, whose crown and became the monastery of the Savior.

That Vladimir road came out of his Trinity monastery Abbot Sergius of Radonezh bless himself Spassky monastery and its Abbot - his beloved disciple Andronicus. Deep spiritual love linked God-bearing Sergius and the brethren of the newly-built monastery. Visibly expressed its venerable Andrei Rublev - "icon painter kinda Elvish, all superior in wisdom , Selina" - in the form of the Holy Trinity, written in praise of the father Sergius. Divinely wise elder than once visited the monastery his disciple. On this day in verst from the Spaso-Andronikov monastery is a chapel-prosa built on the site of farewell Sergius and Andronicus. In 1995 she returned to the Orthodox Church and is currently in effect.

In 1371 the great Prince Demetrius Ioannovich, accompanied by Metropolitan Alexy to the Horde, stopped here to pray. In 1380 by the Andronikov monastery were Russian troops in the Kulikovo field and here stopped before the solemn entrance to Moscow. The monastery was a thanksgiving prayer service and a panikhida for the repose of Nobleborn Russian soldiers who gave "the soul for its other own". Now on a place of burial of soldiers - heroes of the Kulikovo battle - is the construction of a memorial chapel in the name of the Holy Prince Dimitry Donskoy. This chapel was designed for purely prayers for the repose of the Russian warriors killed in battle.

Grandiose reconstruction of Moscow at the turn of the XV and XVI centuries, in accordance with its growing status was reflected in the monastery: in 1504 Confessor John III Spassky Archimandrite Mitrofanov building a brick meal (today - the oldest on the territory of Moscow). To the XVI century, applies to the construction of the gate Church of the Nativity of the MostHoly mother of God. The victory on Kulikovo field, which coincided with this holiday, was another clear belief in the intercession of the virgin, and Her dedication gateway churches - expression representation of the Mother of God how Good the Vratarnitsey, "the doors of Paradise to the faithful open", the Protector of Holy Russia.

The XVI and XVII century are under the sign of participation Spaso-Andronikovskaya archimandrites in all major state Affairs.

In August-September 1653 at the monastery for four weeks containing the famous dissenter Avvakum.

At the end of the XVII century the monastery was elected as the family tomb lopuhins by marriage with the reigning race. Evdokia Lopukhina was the first wife of Peter I.

The Church in the name of Archangel Michael, joined the ancient refectory, mostly built in 1694, but completed only in 1739. He became a new architectural dominant of the ensemble of the monastery. This is due to the diverse functions of the temple. He was to serve as a burial-vault of the kind Lopukhins (1st stage of construction), the praise of Archangel Mikhail - the patron Saint of Russian rulers (the Church in the 2nd tier), and to commemorate the namesake son and husband of Empress Eudocia of Metropolitan Alexis (the Church in the 3rd tier) and the Apostle Peter (the chapel of the Holy apostles Peter and Paul, adjoining the North wall of the refectory). III in a Royal line. Getting ready refectory, the Archangel Church deduced on a Central place in the ensemble and at the same time linking the entire architecture of the monastery from the right Bank of Yauza - this was a full view of Andronicus monastery.

Among those buried in the Archangel Church - Ustinov, and Theodore, the parents of tsarina Evdokia Lopukhina, nephew of Queen commander in chief of the VA Lopukhin, who was killed in the battle of gross-Egersdorf (1757), the Countess E. Golovkin (nee kN. Romodanovsky, 1702-1791) is a cousin of Empress Anna Ioannovna and others.

The bell tower, built over the Holy gates in 1796-1798 years (architect. R. Kazakov), completed the formation of the monastery ensemble (destroyed in 1931).

In the XVIII century the monastery became better known thanks to the necropolis. Here were buried Golitsyn, Golovin, Yusupov, Thick, Saltykova, Naryshkin - the color of the Russian nobility. In 1714 Peter I after the battle of Gangut released funds for the construction of the monastery, precisely because its churchyard were buried soldiers killed in the Northern war. A century later, here find the last resting place of the heroes of the Patriotic war of 1812. On the territory of the necropolis were buried grandfather "miracle heroes" Mailarchiva, P. Demidov - founder of the Yaroslavl Lyceum, C. Vasiliev is the largest benefactor of Moscow, who invested in the construction of the monastery more than 500,000 rubles, Vpopu - known Russian scientist-encyclopaedist, archaeologist and numismatist.

In the Saviour Cathedral are buried parents Alexeevna Anna Orlova-Chesmenskaya (in secret monastic tonsure nuns Agnes) - eminent philanthropist of the XIX century.

Since 1910, and before the closure of the monastery Abbot was Bishop (1921 - Archbishop Vladimir (Sokolovsky, 1851-1931) - prominent Hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church, the missionary scholar, the Church Builder, a patriot, a companion of Sainted Nicholas of Japan and Tikhon of Moscow.

Spassky Cathedral of the Andronikov monastery - a masterpiece of both Russian and world architecture. As convincingly showed the doctor of historical Sciences, Professor of N.N. Voronin, doctor of architecture, Professor SV zagraevsky, he erected in 1425-1427, respectively. It is the oldest surviving churches in Moscow.

For the creative thinking of the founders of the Cathedral is typical bold rejection of the cubic, the transformation of the architectural composition in a kind of tent "canopy". The width of the Cathedral is about half its height. Height of plinth is three times fit into the portal, five times square (the Central part), and twelve times the total height of the Cathedral. For fractional division, in turn, also subject to certain relationships. The art of Russian architects and lay in his ability to embody in stone harmony of the created world.

The size of the Saviour Cathedral was used as a module to determine the size of the later buildings. For example, the internal size of the refectory equal to the width of the Saviour Cathedral on the outer walls, the width of the gate is the size of the dome link Cathedral, the length of the southern monastery wall corresponds six lengths Cathedral, etc.

The Cathedral was painted by St Andrei Rublev and Daniel Black, but in the eighteenth century paintings were lost. Remained only two fragments of plant ornaments in the slopes of the altar window.

Already in the XVI century were venerated among the saints, the first four of the prior of the Spaso-Andronikov monastery, the monk Andronikos, Savva, Alexander and Ephraim, and the Holy icon painters Andrey Rublev and Daniil Cherny. All his relics repose in the monastery. The monk Andronikos and Sava Moscow, Andrei Rublev are a host of all Russian saints.

Spassky Cathedral was closed, along with the abolition of the monastery in the 1920-ies. He was inactive until 1990, when in agreement with residing on the territory of the monastery the Central Museum of ancient Russian culture and art named St. Andrei Rublev here were resumed. In 1991 the Church was registered by the parish, who led and still leads Archpriest Vyacheslav (Savin).

Clear the Saviour Cathedral immediately faced with a great inconvenience, as conducted in the late 1950s, the restoration had not prepared the temple for worship. No salt, the iconostasis, the Church is not heated, there was no Vatican, and even his old location was unknown.

To search the place of the ancient Throne in 1993 as a joint initiative of the parish and the Museum were organized archaeological research in the altar part of the Saviour Cathedral (from the Museum participated in the excavations og Ulyanov). Were removed a layer of white stone floor, part of blind area, made in 1950-ies, construction waste that time. 25 February 1993, on the eve of the feast of St. Alexis the Metropolitan of Moscow, were found two well-treated white stone blocks, similar to those from which the Cathedral complex. The stones resting on powerful limestone base, located at a depth of one meter from the floor (it was later established that during the excavation was completed level built in the 1860-ies of truck unit, located over the entire area of the Cathedral and covered in 1950-ies).

Though presumably it was like a Throne, but preserved in the altar on the pillars and walls of the apse hooks from the canopy over the altar this place did not match, so it was decided to continue. At depth 2.4 m in the ground layer were found human bone and remnants of wooden dust beside him. Obviously, it was a particle of the relics were kept in a wooden chest and laid in the base of the Throne.

9 March 1993, the day of the First and second finding of the head of John the Baptist, at the level of 2.95 meters was found preserved in good condition grobovina, knocked together from boards. With further clearing of the excavation opened another grobovina in a hollowed out of solid oak trunk deck. It contained the remains of the deceased with the elements of monastic clothing. Grobovina from boards at first seemed empty, but in the course of further work, it also remains were found - they were located on a deeper level.

It immediately became obvious that acquired the remains are the Holy relics. This was evidenced accompanied the opening of the wonderful phenomenon is the fragrance that it appeared and then disappeared for a considerable time.

Created for the occasion the Commission of the Patriarchate recognized the need to continue work and to increase the area of excavation the entire width of the Central apse. Then, in March 1993, with the blessing of Patriarch Alexis to work in the excavation was directed archaeologist Saalaev, senior researcher at the Russian Academy of Sciences, has repeatedly attracted to work with relics.

In the course of strengthening and clearing of the excavation were uncovered two burial: grobovina, in form similar to the previously found, located closer to the Foundation of the North side of the apse, parallel to the first grobovine, and the deck, as much as the first, but repeating it in shape and is located parallel to it, closer to the Foundation of the southern side of the apse. Grobovina also originally appeared empty, but in the course of further work, it might have been found. In the deck might have been discovered immediately.

In addition, in the first grobovine found preserved in good condition wicker monastic paramand and plesnitsy (funeral shoes) from the skin. In the first pack - leather belt with metal buckle and plesnitsy. In the second grobovine and deck preserved plesnitsy.

Doctor of historical Sciences Acctnumber and senior fellow Nusinova in 2000-2001 were held description, restoration and conservation of these things in the Department of archaeology and Ethnography of Zvenigorod historical-architectural and art Museum. According to Accutanekoa, paramand from the burial of its preservation knows no equal of all the previously acquired.

Thus, under the altar of the Savior Cathedral, the Holy relics were uncovered four monks buried in carved oak log and grabbing from thick boards. The scheme of the excavation shows that groboviny and deck are two pairs of parallel graves differently oriented in relation to each other. It can be assumed that was the uncovering of the relics of the venerable Andronicus, Sava, Alexander and Ephraim.

It is significant that the acquisition of the second groboviny and deck happened on the eve of an important event in the life of our parish: 4 January 1994, the site was visited by the Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia Alexy II. His Holiness welcomed the work of the parish, noted the high importance of the discoveries and the need for further detailed studies.

In the fall of 1994, the Holy relics of the two burials were examined by the Commission Institute of forensic medicine minzdravmedproma Russia under the leadership of doctor of medical Sciences, professors V.N. Zvyagin.

In November 1994 the Patriarchal Commission in its report, his Holiness noted the sharp deterioration of the relics and grobovin. Due to the extreme danger of the further stay of the relics of raw excavation, threatening them with full or partial loss, with the blessing of the Patriarch of the aforesaid Commission on 9 March 1995 the Holy relics were transferred into new ark and placed in the sanctuary, where they are present. To preserve the remnants grobovin and burial sites around each of them were built of brick sarcophagi, covered with marble plates.

Archaeological investigations were continued in may-June 2000. In these works participated doctor of historical Sciences La Belyaev, candidates of historical Sciences Sz Chernov and na Krenke, candidate of geographical Sciences al Alexander. During the three visits of the excavation were described profiles sections of the cultural layer has been studied buried soil samples for radiocarbon Dating. Radiocarbon Dating was carried out in the laboratory of the Geological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences under the leadership of LD sulerzhitsky.

In February-may 2003 in the North-Western sector of the excavation, about robotising limestone blocks the Foundation of the northeastern pillar, has been fully revealed and studied another burial. The work was conducted chief specialist of the Bureau of forensic medical examination Department of health of the government of Moscow Saanichton. Led by a group of members of the company "Russian historical necropolis" concluded: - found fossils belong to two men, aged about 50 and 70 years; the burial is the place; found in the burial two leather paramangaceramic vessel and Slippers in time manufacturing can be attributed to the end of the XIV- the first quarter of the XV centuries.

Geochemical analysis of skeletal remains in order to study their micro - and macronutrient composition was performed in the laboratory of the Institute of soil science of the RAS. Interpretation of results was carried out by candidate of geographical Sciences Pielegniarska. This work was done on the initiative of the rector of the Church in order to find out, whether was buried among persons who had contact with the paint (ie icon-painters).

In the course of the research, it was found that the power will most likely belong to the Holy monk painters Andrey Rublev and Daniel Black.

In August 2005, the temple has been constructed a new Throne. Upon completion of all works the floor in the excavation was made of bricks on the level of caps to ensure appropriate access to balances grobovin.

The most important and responsible task that stands before us now, is the continuation of the study and the Savior Cathedral, and found in it graves, and the history of the Andronikov monastery in General. Research of the doctor of architecture, Professor SV zagraevskydedicated Spassky Cathedral, makes a great contribution to the study of the temple and also stresses the need to continue the architectural and archaeological works primarily on existing excavation.

A masterpiece of ancient Russian architecture - the Cathedral of our Saviour - the need and the repair and restoration works.

The cherished desire of our parish is to witness and participant in a worthy continuation of these works. Would we have such a grace from God, or fate of the Cathedral and newfound sanctuaries have to solve the following generations - for all the Holy will of God.

 

Sergey Zagraevsky

 

To the page Scientific works

To the main page