Prof. Dr. S.V. Zagraevsky. The apology of Rostov Chronicler (to the question of date of Jury Dolgoruky’s temples)

Prof. Dr. S.V. Zagraevsky

The apology of Rostov Chronicler

(to the question of date of Jury Dolgoruky’s temples)

Thesis

Published in Russian: Заграевский С.В. Апология ростовского летописца (к вопросу о датировке храмов Юрия Долгорукого). Тезисы. В кн.: Материалы областной краеведческой конференции, посвященной столетию со дня рождения Н.Н.Воронина (19 апреля 2004 г.). Владимир, 2004. С. 15-26.

Attention!

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

and has not yet been edited.

So it can be used only for general introduction.

INTRODUCTION

"At the same time George, Prince of Suzdal Se, and otvrzl God made him wiser eyes on the church building, and many churches postavisha Suzdalskoy of the country, and the Church placed the stone on Nerli, Holy Martyrs Boris and Gleb, and the Holy Saviour in Suzdal, and holy George's Volodimeri Kamen same, and Pereaslavl hail transferred from Kleschenia and laid large hail, and the church a stone in it dospe Holy Saviour, and do it w moschmi holy books and wonder, and Gergiev hail laid and its church dospe Kamen holy martyr George "1.
This famous message printing record for the year 1152 (MD Priselkov showed that the scribe lived in Rostov during the Dolgorukogo2) was first questioned NN Voronin, assuming that the chronicler, "summed up" construction of Yuri Dolgoruky, erected at 1152 on 1157 god3. M. Ioannisyan believes that the first construction of these built in 1148 (St. George's Cathedral in St. George's, Polskom4).
Argument against the Rostov Chronicle may be briefly expressed as follows: in the late 1140-1150-ies to Dolgorukiy came the team of Galich, until 1110-ies worked in Małopolska. This team in the Suzdal region was the only one, and for one in 1152, she was unable to build as many hramov5.
"Galician version of" justified by the similarity of construction equipment and decoration of Suzdal, Galician and Lesser hramov6.
The logical consequence of this position is that Dolgorukiy could only build the temple in a year - more than one gang would not have succeeded. Already in the works and N.N.Voronina7 O.M.Ioannisyana8 trend is such a method of dating the temples listed Rostov chronicler, and there is no doubt that future researchers will have more "evenly" distribute the dating of the five temples (including the Church of Our Saviour in Suzdale9 ) between 1148 and 1157 years. The number of possible options for such a distribution in the hundreds.
Of course, this is fertile ground to ensure that every researcher pre-Mongol Vladimir-Suzdal architecture could put forward its own version of the dating of temples George. But whether such a position is legitimate?

SECTION I

Here are the main arguments against the Galician version of "(that is, in fact we are beginning to express arguments in favor of the Rostov chronicler).

1. Construction of white stone was ten times more expensive than a brick (the calculations are given in the book "Yuri Dolgoruky and Old white-stone architecture" 10). Deposits of white stone (myachkovsky horizon sediments Carboniferous period ") a semicircle across Moscow from the southwest (Fig. 1), never going to Vladimir closer than 200-250 km in a straight line (and on the rivers, respectively, 400-500 km). Accordingly, the transport component of the cost of the white-stone building is very large. But even if we exclude from the calculation of the transport component, the construction of white stone is never twice as expensive as a brick.

Fig. 1. The scheme of distribution of the Middle sediments in the suburbs.

And why, even if the Jury had its collective farm and was forced to invite the team of Galich, his descendants continued building of white stone, three hundred years, and not passed onto a brick at the first opportunity?

2. Galich was far from western margins (Fig. 2), and Prince Vladimirka Volodarevich - the representative branches "princes rogue, besides it was a generation younger than Dolgoruky. Consequently, the probability of its effect on the Jury - a legitimate contender for the Kiev throne - and even more so in subsequent Suzdal and Moscow princes, who continued to build in the white stone for three hundred years, is negligible.

Fig. 2. Principality of pre-Mongol Russia.

3. Plans and dimensions Galician churches of the first half of the XII century completely different (Fig. 3). Lesser churches do not belong to A cross type.

Fig. 3. Plans Galician and Vladimir-Suzdal churches (by M. Ioannisyanu):
1 - Church of St. John in Przemysl;
2 - Church in Zvenigorod Galitsky;
3 - The Church of Our Saviour in Galich;
4 - Church on "Tsvintariskah";
5 - Transfiguration Cathedral in Pereslavl;
6 - Church of Boris and Gleb in Kideksha;
7 - George Church in Vladimir;
8 - Church of Deposition of the Robe on the Golden Gate in Vladimir.

Consequently, a single logic of hypothetical Malopolska-Galician-Suzdal Cooperative can not be traced.

4. Even if we assume that in Małopolska, Galich and Suzdal built one and the same hypothetical team, then do a half-century (1110-e 1150 e) it does not appear any competitors? And is it not strange that the work of such "superarteli" not reflected in the annals? Invite skilled craftsmen have been an extraordinary event (remember the masters "of all lands" and "from Frederick Barbarossa Andrei Bogolyubski, as well as an important reservation Vsevolodova chronicler, that the Big Nest is not looking for the" masters of the German ") 11.

5. The construction team consisted of at least 80 people (with their wives and children - more than 200 people) 12 and the passage of so many people (not gypsies or merchants, and valuable building frames) of Galich in Suzdal a distance of over 1300 km (as the crow flies, and the rivers more than 2500 km) through several hostile principalities highly unlikely. Any prince or governor could stop the gang and get to work for themselves. Or even to destroy, to prevent the enemy to build temples and fortresses.

6. In his book "Yuri Dolgoruky and Old white-stone architecture" 13 the author has established a philosophy: where the requirements for the timing and quality of construction allowed to use local talent, the princes, as a rule, preferred this option. Naturally, it is primarily about the "ordinary" builders (ie the vast majority artel). The architects, icon-painters, jewelers, other unique and highly specialized professionals to go from prince to prince and from town to town as often.
But when orders for the construction was not, local craftsmen to carry on any handicraft (mostly carpentry), and even the peasant labor. Moreover, the construction might not be their primary qualification. They were and remain urban artisans or farmers, and work on the construction gave them the opportunity to earn money and (or) to get the allotment.
With regard to the qualification "ordinary" construction, any Russian peasant, and in our time is capable of performing construction work is very broad profile, especially under the guidance of highly skilled masters. And on the most difficult part of construction - erection of arches and drums - know that this work was carried out on the wooden kruzhalam and formwork. Consequently, the main work turned out to carpentry, and the experience of such work in the ubiquitous wooden building in the XII century was enormous.
And let's not forget that in every city, except the temples and fortifications, were built many wooden and brick buildings, and often a civil nature, so that the need even for the professional builder to move from city to city and even from the principality to principality arose not As a rule, but as an exception.

7. Stocks of white stone in Suzdal was impossible to explore within a year or two.
Naturally, Yuri Dolgoruky was not interested in transporting stone for a few hundred kilometers, and where the deposits end Carboniferous period, Suzdal in the XII century could not know. You can imagine how many hundreds of test excavation was made. Stone certainly looking and under Pereslavl, Rostov, and under, and near Suzdal, Vladimir and under, and very slowly got to the distant suburbs - Moscow. And not for nothing that all the ancient quarries are located on the edges "myachkovskogo horizon" on the part of Vladimir, moved from "geologists.
Consequently, the "spontaneity" of the stone construction, allegedly forcing George to invite Galicia, also can not be an argument "against the Rostov Chronicle - in the case of" spontaneity "the prince simply would not be a white stone.
If Dolgorukiy "spontaneously" decided to build something, it could only lead brick building. For example, he could invite the masters of their ally Olgovich Svyatoslav of Chernigov (standing, unlike Vladimirka Galitsky, at the very top "of the prince's Ladder"), and to build instead of five white-stone churches fifty brick (ie, build, at least in extent of Novgorod and Smolensk).

8. Galich, deposits of limestone of various types, suitable for construction, are practically everywhere and come to the surface in many places (for example, along the Dniester River). The immediate neighbors were Galic Western European states - Poland and Hungary. Consequently, the architecture of Galich chronologically Romanik previously interpreted the Suzdal for objective reasons, not because of the presence in the first half of the XII century masters in Galich, and their absence in Suzdal.

9. If we accept the version of OM Ioannisyan to build (or at least lay the) St George's Cathedral in St. George's, the Polish in 1148, we will be forced to move away, respectively, and the inception of Yuryevskaya fortress dezavuiruya thereby message Rostov chronicler not only of the churches, but and on the fortresses.
Assume that the chronicler "summed up" and fortress built Dolgoruky. But why did he then not included in the "sum" the fortress in Moscow and Dmitrov? The list would have made far more convincing.

10. The famous "corporal" of Novgorod Dvorischenskogo Nicholas Cathedral, the speaker of the consecration of Archbishop of Novgorod Nifont certain "the altar of St.. George "in 1148, has a very dubious authenticity. This issue is devoted to a special study avtora14, here only makes sense to list the main arguments.
First, it is striking not quite typical of the church documents wording: "the sacred from Nifont Archbishop of Novgorod, Rostov, by order of Bishop Nestor. Even if we were talking about the clergy, directly under each other, would be more appropriate word "blessing". And then the bishop of one of the region "commands" to consecrate the bishop of another church in the region, not subordinate to him, either nominally or actually consecrated much earlier.
Secondly, the archbishop of Novgorod was founded only in 1165 (in this study the author examined this issue in detail), and the text on the board of the Hermitage Nifont named archbishop.
Third, in 1148, Bishop Nifont came to Yuri Dolgoruky. The Chronicle describes in detail all of what the Bishop of Novgorod, was engaged in during their stay in Suzdal zemle15, but neither of which the consecration of the St. George (and even more of such exceptional importance, as St George's Cathedral in St. George's in Polish) here is no speech.
Fourthly, there are signs of exposure to the document "artificial aging".
In this study the author has given the story of the origin of this document. It can be briefly expressed as follows: There is no doubt that in the XIII-XV centuries Vladimir-Suzdal, and then the Grand Princes of Moscow has repeatedly demanded that "indicate Novgorod his place." One such action and would be writing a document which shows that Bishop Nestor "commanded" the archbishop Nifont holy temple. Dated this paper was quite logical: in 1148 - a known date of arrival Nifont in Suzdal. In this case, it becomes easy to understand and answer the question of how the cards ended up in Novgorod: it was made specifically to be had been brought there from some of Vladimir and Moscow embassy.
Consequently, the document is stored in the Hermitage, not a sign of consecration of a bishop in 1148 Nifont a throne of St. George, and we can not rely on this text in the analysis of the historical situation, research on church history and dating of any temple or chapel.

11. Origin of the "Galician version of" refers to the end of the XIX century, when in accordance with the tenet of "Orthodoxy, nationality, autocracy," it was possible to recognize the influence of anyone, but not in Western Europe. A "version of the Transcaucasian influence", as permitted in terms of this dogma, even less justified than "Galician" (this is clearly demonstrated V.N.Lazarev16).
Under Stalin, Galich became part of the USSR, and the Galician version of "received an additional political weight. Therefore we can assume that the commitment of NN Voronin and VN Lazarev this particular version was largely forced (for example, at the end of life - in 1970 - VN Lazarev already wrote that the Galician architecture played a "mediating role" between the Western and suzdalskoy17).

SECTION II

Here are some additional arguments in favor of the Rostov chronicler.

1. If a team does not come Dolgoruky, and architect and a few skilled craftsmen (BA Ognev called them "University History" 18), they could organize the construction in several neighboring cities (Pereslavl, Suzdal, St. George's, Kideksha and Vladimir).

2. We note that in reality to Yuri did not even have "University History". In his book "Yuri Dolgoruky and Old white-stone architecture" 19 the author shows that there has been a direct influence on Dolgoruky "Holy Roman Empire, not a distant suburbs Galich, and through the nearest neighbor of Suzdal - Novgorod.
In this book put forward a version of internship opportunities Suzdal masters in Western Evrope20, but now the author is ready to be a direct analog of the temples of Yuri Dolgoruky not call Galicia and Malopolska built, and the Imperial Cathedral of Speyer (1029-1106 years, Fig. 9) .
All the arguments that may be cited as justification for similarities Lesser Poland, Galician and Suzdal churches (masonry walls and foundations, arkaturnye zone - see Fig. 4-8), are fully applicable to the imperial cathedral (Fig. 10). In the crypt of the cathedral at Speyer the author of this thesis was to find even a specific ornamental carving (Fig. 11), of which M. Ioannisyan pisal21 that it is not found anywhere except in Pereslavl (Fig. 5) and Lesser temples (Fig. 6) . Butovo foundations of the temple in Speyer-shaped in section and much wider walls, as in Galich, and in Suzdal. At the Imperial Cathedral, we see the curb, its walls taper upward ustupoobrazno (as in the temples Dolgorukogo), and even implemented sredokrestii A cross scheme krestchatymi pillars (Fig. 12).

Fig. 4. Arkaturny zone and the curb on the church of Boris and Gleb in Kideksha.

Fig. 5. Arkaturny belt, curb and carved shaft at the Holy Transfiguration Cathedral in Pereslavl.

Fig. 6. Carved cornice of the nave wall at collegiate St. Martin Opatov (photo M. Ioannisyan).

Fig. 7. Church of St. John the Baptist in Prandotsine. Detail of west facade (photo M. Ioannisyan).

Fig. 8. Andrzej church in Krakow. Detail of the eastern facade (photo M. Ioannisyan).

Fig. 9. Imperial Cathedral of Speyer. General view.

Fig. 10. Cathedral in Speyer. Detail of the eastern facade.

Fig. 11. Cathedral in Speyer. Carved tree above the pledged internal window in the crypt.

Fig. 12. Cathedral in Speyer. Plan.

Excellent pan-European significance of the imperial cathedral at Speyer and his chronological primacy on the temples of Małopolska, Galich and Suzdal suggests that the similarity of architecture of all these Slavic principalities has absolutely convincing rationale - shared origins.

3. The author of this thesis pokazyval22 that the only possibility of building craftsmen Dolgoruky hard coded upper limit on the size of the Suzdal churches (and all the subsequent history of old Russian architecture confirmed that the excess of "maximum security" white-stone's cross-buildings, some in the middle of the XII century, leading to accidents).
And if it came to Yuri worthy of the princely level of Western masters, this "limit" would be far more (for example, in the cathedral of Speyer span arches - 14 m, and the Worms Cathedral - 10 m).
Consequently, the arrival of Western masters to Yuri is unlikely, and there is only one option that care about the reflection in the Prince of Suzdal architecture of state power and ideology (this concern proved by the fact of the transition to the cost, but "imperial" white-stone building): Dolgoruky temples were built by local masters led by local architects, trained (internship) in Western Europe.
And this is all the more possible to conduct simultaneous construction of any number of cities - only to have the necessary resources.

4. After nearly two years in Kiev, Yuri was not short of money - not for nothing Kievites treated him as greedy. Undoubtedly, in the care of Kiev in 1151 (without hope of return - who could have foreseen the almost simultaneous death Izjaslava Mstislavich and Vyacheslav Vladimirovich?), Yuri "seized" the entire treasury. Perhaps his squad robbed citizens (this is confirmed by the fact that after the death of Yuri Kievites rushed to beat come with him Suzdal).
Consequently, Dolgorukiy could be built in Suzdal multiple temples, and the money he had on it were. And free land, which could awarded builders in the North-Eastern Russia, too, was enough.

5. Rostov chronicler makes semantic accent is on the date of the buildings - at the same time. Indeed, Yuri returned to Suzdal from Kiev at the turn of 1151 and 1152 years, and almost all of 1152 was in the Suzdal region. Means he had hopes for a return to Kiev there was no deposit of white stone had already been explored, and embarked on a massive stone fortress and construction in 1152, has a totally logical explanation.

SECTION III

So, we can fully trust Rostov chronicler and confirm the traditional date - in 1152 - as a reasonable base all five temples dating Dolgoruky.
But the question arises: is the date just laying the temples, or all the temples during this year have been fully built? I did so I Dolgoruky see their church completely finished?

1. Rostov chronicler clearly shows all the churches Dolgorukogo as a fully built in 1152. With regard to the temples in Kideksha and Yuryev-Polish chronicles give no other information.

2. Construction of the Transfiguration Cathedral in Pereslavl in the life of Yuri confirms the Book: "... to deck w wonderfully chyudnoy signature and holy icons ... 23.
By the year 1157 a number chronicle reports that Andrew "church skoncha, w is the Be Préjet his father founded the Holy Saviour Kamen ...». NN Voronin believed that we are talking about Pereslavl. If this is true (although this could be and about the Church of Our Saviour in Suzdal), then 1157 could be arranged in majolica floors, gilded head, and carried out other work, defined as the repair. Consequently, we have no right to question the message of Rostov chronicler of the full construction of the Transfiguration Cathedral (and the Church of Our Saviour in Suzdal) in 1152.

3. With George's church yard Dolgorukogo in Vladimir situation is somewhat more complicated. Chronicle Avraamki contrary printing, giving as the date of construction 1157 god24. NN Voronin this datu25, wanting to bring it possible to begin construction of new fortifications, Vladimir (1158), since, according to the researchers, the building of the Prince's court without fortification is unlikely, but in 1157 the new building could have "designed".
But Yuri, Prince of Suzdal in 1113 (or even 109,626) years, could not have a yard in Vladimir long before 1157. Nothing surprising in the arrangement of the Prince's court outside the "Pechernego (Monomachus) city is not: the court is extremely advantageous in terms of natural protection site (on a cliff between two ravines), and with a short" floor "of the court certainly had its own building. Perhaps the princes were forced to "distance themselves" from the townspeople any particular social situation in Vladimir: after all, and Andrew made a further residence in Bogoliubovo, and the court Monomakh with high probability is outside the city walls (perhaps even further court Jury).
And since Vladimir chronicle speaks of building a church in Georgia in 1153 and this date is significantly different from the date of Rostov Chronicle (we can talk about the finer points of reference of any works to the building or finishing), we accept the dating of the construction of the church as the year 1152.

4. Yuri Dolgoruky, laying in 1152 (probably in spring or early summer), all their temples, at the end of the year ("winter road") resigned in an unsuccessful campaign to Chernigov. At the turn of 1152 and the 1153's he returned to Suzdal. In early 1154 he again went on a campaign for the summer, probably come back, and the late autumn of this year went to a new campaign to Chernigov, then in early 1155 took Kiev, and died there in 1157.
So, Yuri was able to see their churches in 1153 and 1154, respectively. In 1153 they were already almost fully built (one year was the usual term for the construction of temples this size), and in 1154, perhaps even partially painted.

CONCLUSION

Along with an apology for Rostov, we are ready to become a chronicler of the apologists and Yuri Dolgoruky - certainly not on his personal or princely qualities, but only in the history of architecture.
Currently, about coming to Andrew Bogoliubsky masters from any area of the "Holy Roman Empire" are quite controversial. But regardless of where - from Germany (on A.I.Komechu27) or from Northern Italy (as O.M.Ioannisyanu28) - expected arrival of the masters of Frederick Barbarossy29, researchers are beginning history of so-called "Russian Romanik" not with George, and with Andrew. Similar positions and stuck N.N.Voronin30.
But we have to exclude any significant Galytsky impact "on the Suzdal's architecture and defining the Imperial Cathedral of Speyer, as direct sources of Architecture Jury has the right to assert that the so-called" Russian Romanik "(this concept is very conditional, because the Russian churches have preserved the Byzantine A cross scheme) began precisely with Dolgoruky, and architecture Bogolyubski in no case can not be viewed outside the context of architecture of his father.
Undoubtedly, the temples Andrew more "ceremonial" than the temples of Yuri, and the Assumption Cathedral in Vladimir, Rostov differ much greater size (impacted detrimentally nadezhnosti31). When Andrew first appeared and zooantropomorfny sculptural dekor32.
But the technique of construction, and general "towering", and decoration of temples Dolgorukogo allow us to speak precisely about the direct influences of Romanesque, ie the "Russian Romanik. As for the small temples George and the lack of them zooantropomorfnogo decor, in Western Europe, built many churches are smaller, and zooantropomorfny decor at the Imperial Cathedral of Speyer is extremely modest, fragmented and does not play any meaningful role in shaping the appearance of the temple . Similarly, the author of these theses pokazyval33 that in the middle of the XII century the Orthodox Church did not allow decoration Suzdal churches zooantropomorfnym decor.
Architecture Galic, although chronologically Romanik accepted it a little earlier in Suzdal, in the pre-Mongolian time, it was only a "side branch" of ancient architecture, and in the XIV century Galich became "a provincial" a province of Poland and into Russia never entered (except for a brief stay in the USSR).
A white-stone architecture of Yuri Dolgoruky not only marked the real beginning of the "Russian Romanik," but also defined the main directions of development of architecture of Vladimir-Suzdal land, Tver and Moscow Grand Duchy, and then the centralized Russian state.

NOTES

1. PSRL 24:77.
2. MD Priselkov. History of Russian chronicles XI-XV centuries. St. Petersburg, 1996. S. 120.
3. NN Voronin. Architecture of Vladimir-Suzdal. Proc. "History of Russian Art, Moscow, 1953. T. 1. S. 344;
4. M. Ioannisyan. On the early development of the Galician architecture. - Proc.: USSR. Brief Communications. № 164. Slavic-Russian archeology. Moscow, 1981 (hereinafter - Ioannisyan, 1981). C. 40.
5. Ibid.
6. Ibid. 41-44.
7. NN Voronin. Architecture of the North-Eastern Russia XII-XV centuries. M., 1961-1962 (hereinafter - Voronin, Architecture of the North-East Russia). T. 1, pp. 68, 89, 91.
8. Ioannisyan, 1981. S. 41-44;
M. Ioannisyan. Architecture of Ancient Galich and architecture of Małopolska. - In.: Acta Archaeologica Carpathica. Volume 27. Krakow, 1988. S. 187.
9. The hypothesis about the location of this temple on the site of the existing church of the Assumption in Suzdal Kremlin by expressing in the book.: SV ZAGRAEVSKY. Architecture of the North-Eastern Russia late XIII-XIV century began. M., 2003. S. 126.
10. SV ZAGRAEVSKY. Yuri Dolgoruky and Old white-stone architecture. M., 2002. (Next - Yuri Dolgoruky ...). S. 141.
11. PSRL 1:351;
VN Tatishchev. History of Russia. Moscow, Leningrad, 1964. Volume 3, pp. 244, 253.
PSRL 1:411.
12. The calculation is given in the book.: Yuri Dolgoruky ..., pp. 33.
13. Ibid. 38.
14. SV ZAGRAEVSKY. "Corporal" of Nicholas Dvorischenskogo Cathedral. M., 2004. Article posted on Web site www.zagraevsky.com.
15. PSRL 3:107.
16. VN Lazarev. Byzantine and Russian art. , 1978. S. 246
17. Ibid.
18. BA Ognev. Some problems rannemoskovskogo architecture. Proc. Architectural heritage, v. 12. M., 1960. C. 60.
19. Yuri Dolgoruky ..., pp. 55.
20. Ibid. 70.
21. M. Ioannisyan. On the history of Polish-Russian relations in the architectural end XI - beginning of XIII century. - Proc. Ancient art. Russia and the countries of the Byzantine world. XII century. St. Petersburg, 2002. S. 213.
22. Yuri Dolgoruky ..., pp. 62 and more.
23. A detailed analysis of the chronicle data presented in the book.: Voronin, Architecture of the North-Eastern Russia, v. 1, pp. 87.23.
24. PSRL 16:45.
25. Voronin, the architecture of the North-Eastern Russia, v. 1, pp. 91.
26. A. Limonov. Vladimir-Suzdal Rus. Essays on the socio-political history. L., 1987. C. 20.
27. AI Komech. Architecture of Vladimir 1150-1180's. Artistic nature and genesis of the "Russian Romanik. - Proc. Ancient art. Russia and the countries of the Byzantine world. XII century. St. Petersburg, 2002. S. 231.
28. M. Ioannisyan. Vladimir-Suzdal architecture and Lombard Romanik. Proc.: For the 2000 anniversary of Christianity. The Byzantine world: the art of Constantinople and national traditions. Abstracts of the international conference. St. Petersburg, 2000. S. 19-23.
29. Do not deny the usefulness of the discussions about tsentralnogermanskom or North Italian origin of the masters of Frederick Barbarossa, the author of this thesis considers the fundamental question of solvability of this doubtful. The fact that the differences between the plasticity of architectural and construction equipment cathedrals in central Germany and northern Italy are less dramatic than the differences between them and the churches of Vladimir-Suzdal land. Vary widely among themselves and themselves Vladimir-Suzdal churches. Consequently, any analysis of the origins of Western European architecture Andrew Bogolyubski give too coarse results are applicable to Germany, and Northern Italy.
Particular "hook" here may provide a method of historical and motivational model, at one time proposed by the author of this thesis (Yuri Dolgoruky ..., pp. 3): tsentralnogermanskaya architecture was pronounced "imperial" character, and commercial North Italian cities are built with a " merchant's "bias. In this regard, we can assume that for the imperial ambitions Bogolyubski still more likely it is an invitation to artists from Central Germany.
30. Voronin, the architecture of the North-Eastern Russia, v. 1, pp. 334.
31. See Yuri Dolgoruky ..., pp. 75-76, 85-86.
32. See ibid, pp. 113-138. By what was said in the decree. cit. must add that it was unlikely a coincidence that the "watershed" between the conservative decor temples George and lush decor zooantropomorfnym temples Andrew proleg for 1158 - 6666 by chronology "of creationism." Apparently, the rigid position of the Russian church on sculpture - "idols" - could soften after the collapse of the eschatological expectations that have occurred this year.
33. Ibid. 120.

To the page “Scientific works”

To the main page