To the page “Scientific works”
S.
V. Zagraevsky
Savior
Cathedral in Andronikov Cloister.
Questions of architectural history and
reconstruction
Published in Russian: Çàãðàåâñêèé Ñ.Â. Âîïðîñû àðõèòåêòóðíîé
èñòîðèè ñîáîðà Ñïàñà Íåðóêîòâîðíîãî Àíäðîíèêîâà ìîíàñòûðÿ. Ì.: Àëåâ-Â, 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
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.
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.
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.
Fig. 2. Reconstruction of the Saviour Cathedral (PN
Maksimov).
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.
Fig. 4.
Reconstruction of the Saviour Cathedral (by L. David, BL
Altshuller and Asa).
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
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
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.
Fig. 6. Spaso-Preobrazhensky
Cathedral in Pereslavl-Zalessky.
Fig. 7. Church of the Intercession on the Nerl.
Fig. 8. Demetrius Cathedral in
Fig. 9. Assumption Cathedral "on the Town"
in Zvenigorod.
Fig. 10. The virgin Nativity Cathedral of the Savvino-Storozhevsky monastery in Zvenigorod.
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).
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 -
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
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
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.
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.
Fig. 16. The Cathedral of the Nativity monastery in
Moscow.
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
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
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
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.
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.
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
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
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
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.,
3. Ibid., C. 362.
4. Ibid.
5. Archbishop
Sergius (Spassky). Historical description of the Moscow Spaso-Andronikov
monastery. M., 1865. Reprint ed.: M.,
6. Amiraslanov.
History of Russian architecture. M.,
8. News of the
Imperial archaeological Commission. Vol. 61
(Questions restoration, vol. 17). St. Petersburg,
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,
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.
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
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
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
16. This question
was first expressed V. kavelmaherom (notes Kavelmahera in the fields decree. works of David L., BL Altshuller, S. Podyapolsky).
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.
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,
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
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,
29. Information
obtained on the Internet forum http://www.icon-art.info.
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
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.,
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
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
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 ¹ 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
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.
36. Tashiyev, M.A.Ilyin. The decree.
cit., S. 194-195.
37. Ulyanov,
38.
Tashiyev, M.A.Ilyin. The decree.
cit., S. 194, 195.
39.
Voronin. The architecture of North-Eastern Russia XII-XV centuries. So
40.
Tashiyev, M.A.Ilyin. The decree.
cit., S. 195.
41. VG Bryusov. A
opponents. In Ukr.: "Questions of history",
¹
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).
45.
Ulyanov,
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.
50.
Altshuler. White stone
reliefs of the Saviour Cathedral Andronikov monastery and the problem of Dating
of the monument. Century kN.: Medieval Russia. M.,
51.
Ulyanov,
54.
Wagner, 1980, S. 187.
55.
Wagner,
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.
58. Information obtained on the Internet forum http://www.icon-art.info.
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
These results og Ulyanov and interpreted several different ways:
"Stratigraphy pit size 5.5 x
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 ¹ 14102/33-2816 from
10.07.1996,
63. Internet forum http://www.icon-art.info.
64. Zagraevsky.
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-
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
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
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.,
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.
88. It should be
noted that, according to the
Ognev
BA, mA Il'in, H. Wagner, Kavelmaher,
89. VG Bryusov.
Controversial issues biography of Andrei Rublev. In Ukr.:
"Questions of history", ¹
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
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
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,
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
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
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
According
to legend, during the return from Constantinople in 1356 Archbishop Alexy was
in a severe storm in the
The
place of establishment of the monastery could be supervised Prelate during one
of his trips to the Horde with the application for the
That
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
Grandiose
reconstruction of
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
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
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
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
9 March
1993, the day of the First and second finding of the head of John the Baptist,
at the level of
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
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,
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
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
In
February-may
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”