Dr. Sergey V. Zagraevsky
The issues of early history of Intercession cloister on the Nerl
On the basis of architectural, archaeological and documentary information Professor, Dr. Sergey Zagraevsky shows that Church of Intercession on the Nerl, founded in 1158 by Andrei Bogolyubsky, was not a detached temple in the pre-Mongol time, but the cathedral of an extraordinarily beautiful and at the same time strongly fortified monastery, which stood on the paved artificial hill, surrounded by water and having white stone walls.
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.
untimely deceased V. Emelina
Of the early history of monastery at the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl1 the documents are not known nothing but messages of late (the beginning of XVIII century) "the life of the Saint and Grand Prince and Martyr Andrey Bogolyubsky G.", which, after reports about the construction of Prince of the Church of the intercession reads: "and the monastery of the monk with her sadela"2. All other documentary details about the Pokrovsky monastery at the mouth of the Nerl are already in the life of the monastery in XVI–XVIII centuries (at the end of the XVI century, the monastery is mentioned among the Patriarchal house of the monasteries in the second half of the XVII century took place a short prosperity, in 1764, it was abolished)3.
The researchers of the XIX – first half of the twentieth century trusted the message "Life" and believed that the monastery was founded together with the Church Of the intercession on the Nerl, and its structure was located near this temple4.
Originally trusted "The life" and N. N. Voronin, mentions about the Foundation of Andrei Bogolyubsky Prince Pokrovsky monastery in Chapter 10 of his major work "Architecture North-Eastern Russia XII–XV centuries", dedicated to the Church of Boris and Gleb Kideksha5. However, in Chapter 20 of this work, devoted to the Church of the Intercession on The Nerl, the researcher changed his point of view and believed that the white stone Church of the intercession was detached "parade" Church, surrounded by solemn an open arcade, which "marked" the entry in the Vladimir-Suzdal the Principality by the rivers6 who were "the Church" whether victorious campaign against the Bulgars, whether the deceased son Andrew, Izyaslav7 (graphic reconstruction of N. N. Voronin8 is shown in ill. 1). Accordingly, the researcher did not assume the existence near the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl in the pre-Mongol time any of the monastery and did not reflect on his reconstruction (ill. 1) no buildings, except the temple itself.
Il. 1. Reconstruction of the original form of the Church of the Intercession on The Nerl (according to N. N. Voronin)
In the end we reconstruction N.N. Voronin see the unprecedented number of Ancient Russia architectural and town-planning solutions:
– the great stone Church, surrounded by an open arcade;
– the great stone Church, openly standing outside any fortifications and not having at least easy fencing;
– the great stone Church, set in the lowlands of the floodplain fill on an artificial hill;
– the great stone Church, not having a radius of
Relative to the first of the above solutions N. N. Voronina, the author of this study shown in the relevant scientific works9that actually the galleries around the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl had the character not of an open arcade, and enclosed porch, that is was quite common for Ancient Rus ' phenomenon aiming extension, insulation of the temple and building it in the ensemble the surrounding buildings (such galleries were Vladimir Dmitriev and Christmas cathedrals and many other churches).
All the rest proposed N. N. Voronin unprecedented architectural and urban planning solutions have become stereotyped and, until recently, was never delivered questioned10.
But any reconstruction, offering an unprecedented solution, should have undisputed architectural, archaeological and documentary grounds as the argument "by analogy" in this case is not valid due to the lack of analogues. In the case of the reconstruction of the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl by N. N. Voronin (see Il. 1) we see a number of very controversial issues.
First, N. N. Voronin denied, not questioned, but simply ignored the message "Life of Andrey Bogolyubsky" that Prince "resident monks in front of her (the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl – Sz) Adela". And the researcher quoted the text11, and led surround philosophical and theological conclusions about the "main entrance" Pokrovskogo khrama12, and trust a number of other "Lives" (in particular, about the erectiontemple in memory of Izyaslav Andreevich13 "in one year"14).
Secondly, the arrow Nerl and the Klyazma by Andrei Bogolyubsky in any case was not a "front gate" Vladimir-Suzdal Principality was believed N.N. Voronin15. Such "the gate", it could only be the beginning of the XIII century, when Grand Prince Yuri Vsevolodovich, who won the lower reaches of the Klyazma and Oka and opened a safe passage to the Principality from the Volga. In the middle of the XII century these lowlands possessed eternal the enemies of the Rus, the Bulgars.
The main trade routes in The Vladimir-Suzdal land in the middle of the XII century there were two: South-West (from Kiev) and the North-West (Novgorod). The first lay through Moscow, the second – through Tver. Moving from Moscow on the Yauza, and then down the Klyazma, the travelers first came to Vladimir, and then the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl. And moving from Tver on the Volga, then up the Nerl Volzhskaya, then down on the Nerl river Klyazma, first in Pereslavl-Zalesskiy, then to Sochi and Suzdal, in Bogolyubovo then, and only then – to the Church of the Intercession. Accordingly, "front gate" of the Principality could be the arrows of the Moscow and Yauza river or the Volga andTvertsa, but not of the Klyazma and the Nerl.
So, the Church Cover was not at the entrance of the Principality and not on the crossroads of important trade ways, and on one of the turns the river road on the far edge Principality, with a troubled "bulgaruaplaces" side16.
Thirdly, the Church Cover, being on the "bulgariavarna" the far edge of the Vladimir-Suzdal Principality, in the interpretation of N. N. Voronin was not protected. Not only from attacks by the Bulgars and other external enemies, but from "blasphemers" – thieves.
Fourth, in the absence any additional buildings near the Church of the Intercession had no place to live and relax pictu Church, moreover, nowhere even to put household equipment.
Fifthly, it is necessary remember that the date of the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl, according to the analyzed the author of this study and T. P. Timofeeva, Chronicles, is 1165 (N. N. Voronin17), and 115818. And if in 1165, in the most favorable period of his reign, Andrew Bogolyubskii at least theoretically could build any unprecedented "ceremonial temples-monuments", 1158 – the beginning of his reign – it is very unlikely.
Sixthly, there is question: if the monastery near the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl was founded by Andrew The pious, when he could be based on a very uncomfortable place, almost annually flooded floodplains?
Archaeological studies have shown that the active economic activities in the territory around the Church was carried out in the XVI–XVII centuries and in pre-Mongol times19. IN THE XVI century the monastery already existed, so most likely its the basis of a previously the beginning of the XIII century. But none of the Russian princes pre-Mongolian, except for Andrew Yu didn't treat Bogolyubov and scenery as something so special to spend huge forces and means at its really an unprecedented accomplishment, the most striking examples which are the construction in the direction of the Klyazma and The Nerl artificial hill, and in the hierarchy – the white stone of the walls20.
Seventh, the area the artificial hill under the Church of the Intercession
excessively large. For construction on this hill temple with a
porch it would only take 2-3 acres, measurements also, the author of this study in 2013
showed that the total the area of the hill is approximately 23 acres (North side –
Il. 2. Plan the artificial hill under the Church of the Intercession on The Nerl. The author's reconstruction.
The later the crust of the hill unlikely: as we have shown above, in the history of the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl after Bogolyubsky did not have periods such prosperity to spend large-scale earthworks that are comparable in complexity with the construction of large stone temples22.
Against the possibility later sprinklings said and quite correct form of the hill, which slopes to still, despite the anthropogenic impact and frequent floods, represent in terms of almost straight lines, and greatly disturbed only the South-East corner. The hilltop also still quite smooth.
In connection it remains only to Express surprise that N.N. Voronin, not finding when his archaeological studies no later sprinklings of the hill and having adequate idea of its form (a"truncated pyramid with a slightly rounded corners"23), not only led to his capital the work of its size in the plan, but also showed him in the reconstruction (ill. 1) much smaller than it really is.
Untimely deceased in 2014 Vladimir architect V. K. Emelin, of blessed memory which is devoted to the study, in 2011, published an article24. in which they tried to resolve contradictions in the position N. N. Voronin regarding excess of the sizes of the artificial hill, and built the Church of the Intercession in the open, unprotected and flooded the place.
VK Yemelin believed what is an artificial hill in the direction of the Klyazma and the Nerl was built not only and not so much for building the Church of the Intercession, it "the walled city", the main temple which was the Church of the intercession. And later in this "city" (when the researcher did not specify) was a monastery.
According to the reconstruction V. K. Emelin (Il. 3),
this hill originally had the form correct square, the size of which the researcher is not cited, but
thought that it stood
a square wooden fortress with a size of 46 x
Il. 3. Reconstruction of a fortress at the mouth of the Nerl (for V. K. Emelin)
Just note that on a number of we cannot agree with V. K. Emelin.
First, it concerns absolutely correct – the square – shape of the hill. The reasons for this are the following:
the hill below the Church The cover is not completely bulk, height and its artificial
–.erosion by the waters of the rivers do not could leave almost straight (i.e. artificially sozdannye) line slopes, which we now see (as we have said, suffered only the South-East angle);
on the slopes of the preserved the pre-Mongol white stone Vysotka, open archaeological research N. N. Voronin26 (Il. 4).
Il. 4. White stone vimetco artificial hill open excavations N.N. Voronin.
Secondly, the wooden "Taras" width
Thirdly, the white stone of the hill vimetco covers not only its slopes, but the top27. And it becomes unclear why it was put on this exquisite (and very expensive) virostko bulky and unaesthetic wooden "Taras".
Fourth, the size this "walled city" is too small to consider it a city, is only in the broadest sense, any fortified settlement. It probably could not name the town, and "progressive strengthening" Bogolyubov – a big city, performed by Andrei Bogolyubsky capital functions28.
But in any case, the story of ancient urban planning is not knows nor so small cities (even Lyubech "castle" Vladimir Monomakh was about 5 times more), no "advanced fortifications", which has no features besides serfs. Monasteries with the functions "advanced fortifications", i.e. "monasteries-watchmen", there are many29. But, as we have said VK Yemelin believed that the monastery was in the "walled city" inAndrey Bogolyubsky was not30.
Fifth, it is unclear why it was Andrei Bogolyubsky of white stone to build a magnificent temple in such a small town or purely utilitarian "progressive strengthening".
Sixth, V. K. Emelin, as he and N. N. Voronin has not denied, and ignored the message "Life of Andrey Bogolyubsky" that Prince "the abode of the monk in front of her (the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl – Sz) Adela".
But the main idea V. K. Emelin that Andrey Bogolyubsky built on an artificial hill at the mouth of the Nerl river is the fortress, deserves careful attention. Only it was not just a fortress, and the monastery at the Church of the Intercession, i.e. Basil. About it directly and clearly says "Life of Andrey Bogolyubsky", the message which in this case we can fully trust because it allows all these contradictions31.
As we have said, "monasteries-watchmen" in the ancient architecture, there are many. About at the same distance as from the Pokrovsky monastery of Bogolyubov, were Pechersk from Kiev, Antonii – from Novgorod, Andronicus and Danilov – from Moscow, Belchitskom and Ephrosinya – from Polotsk, Archangel Michael, from Tver, Medynski – from Smolensk, Pokrovsky and Euthymius – Suzdal, etc. I. S. Krasovsky, 1-2 km – the most typical distance from cities to suburban monasteries32.
We believe that Pokrovsky monastery was a typical example of the old "defense monasteries" whose relations with the state, as we showed in special study33, in the most General case looked in the following way.
The state (in this case, in the face of Prince Andrey Yuryevich):
– fully or partially funded the construction of buildings and fortifications defence of the monasteries;
– gave this monastery "feeding" of the land, villages and fields (which was equivalent financing).
lived in these buildings;
– carried out the liturgical functions (useful for States in the ideological purposes);
– managed monastic lands and villages (performing beneficial for the state administrative functions);
– supported the strengthening of the monastery in good condition;
– when necessary placed in the monastery of the garrison state;
– fully or partly contained the garrison;
– in case of siege, if the monastery was male (what about pre-Mongol Pokrovsky monastery most likely), fought with the garrison.
Consider the question of what was the strengthening of the Pokrovsky monastery by Andrei Bogolyubsky. As we have said, version V. Emelina on wood "Tarasov" we can not accept, because they would occupy a huge space, and they would have to lay directly on vimetco white stone of the hill.
Our position on this the issue is that the walls were white stone, and in nearby Bogolyubovo34. N. N. Voronin during their archaeological research found in the North-Western corner of the artificial hill of rubble Foundation, the purpose of which it is difficult to define and even it was assumed that they could be used for a stone cross or any statues35. We believe that it was the Foundation of the white stone walls.
However, white stone wall of Pokrovsky monastery was hardly high and thick as any case they were much stronger hypothetical wooden
"Tarasov" and stood over quite high and steep slopes (the total height of the hill
above the water's edge – about
White stone gutter, discovered by excavations N. N. Voronin,38, was to divert rainwater or melt water from beneath the white stone walls, and in this case, these the chute was much more important than for water drainage just with the area around the temple, as suggested by N. N. Voronin39: unfenced square water could go would be gravity, but the wall prevented her, and then it was necessary gutter. On the other hand, white stone walls were a great protection from the river floods.
High the complexity of white stone building in
comparison with wood, and brick40,
I think, in this case, the large role played since almost simultaneously with the walls
of the Pokrovsky monastery was erected and the Church of the Intercession, and nearby
in the hierarchy, is the white stone Church of the Nativity The virgin, the Prince's Palace of white
stone and white stone, the same walls, length of which exceeded Pokrovsky 6-7
times (1,2–1,5 km41 against
How many gates had The Pokrovsky monastery, we don't know. The monastery's inventory of 1763, mentioned wooden "Holy gate"43, but where were they and were there on their the site of the previous white-stone gate, unknown44.
At all times the number of the fortress gate was mainly determined by the balance between the following requirements fortifications:
– gate could not be too much, as they reduced the reliability of the fortifications and demanded additional protection;
– gate could not be too little, as they allowed the defenders to make sorties.
How this balance was provided in the pre-Mongol Pokrovsky monastery, you can only build assumptions. The original gates of the monastery could go to Bogolyubov, and to the Klyazma and the Nerl.
Did the Church Cover her galleries-porches built into the system of fortifications,
as suggested V. K. Emelin45? Unlikely: the Church is removed from the edge of the hill
· Soon just, the Church just stood inside the walls, and her gallery-the porch was the same connected with the surrounding monastic buildings, such as gallery-the porch Vladimir Dmitrievsky Cathedral – with the surrounding Palace buildings. No no doubt that the Pokrovsky monastery by Andrei Bogolyubsky had the whole complex required for its activities buildings. Perhaps ruins it pre-Mongolian stone buildings was observed by V. I. Dobrokhotov46.
Where did the white stone wall of Pokrovsky monastery, is clear: their fate is in the long period of desolation Bogoliubov neighborhood in the XIII–XVI centuries repeated the fate of its white walls and the palatial building of the hierarchy. The white stone, the more well-treated, was him of great value, and if the temple – the "house of God" – the locals still usually shy apart, abandoned fortifications and civil buildings were the source of limestone, is widely used for cellars and also burned for lime. The destruction of monastic buildings and walls (atthe loss of their defensive functions) could be involved in the Church and the government – because the surrounding temples is also needed stone. Thus, in 1784 the Church authorities was given and only by a miracle is not implemented permission for the demolition of the Church of the Intercession on the rocks47.
Finally clarify the early history of the Pokrovsky monastery can only new archaeological research with the potential to clarify the original appearance of the fortifications and buildings of the monastery. But now we can already draw some conclusions.
The date of Foundation Pokrovsky monastery on the Nerl, we can assume 1158 – Chronicles date the Intercession Church, was its Cathedral. Prince Andrey, basing in the the beginning of his reign at the mouth of the Nerl white stone monastery with magnificent the temple, solved two important tasks:
– covered side traditionally hostile to Russia Bulgar approaches to Bogolyubov (Nerl) and Vladimir (Klyazma) is a potent fireproof strengthening;
– made pleasing to God thing that at all times the Foundation of the monastery.
This cloister was to impress his contemporaries that white was not only the Church of the Intercession and not only walls, but even an artificial hill covered with white stone vimothy. Whether it was in the monastery any wooden buildings, or it was completely white stone, we don't know. But the wooden building is not absolutely necessary spoil the external appearance of the monastery: they could be plastered, whitewashed, and even lined by quadras.
But if the dome of the Church Cover was also covered with gold (which is very likely, given the ambitions of the Prince Andrew)48, the monastery was a truly enchanting sight.
In the special scientific labour49 the author of this study based on the analysis of the chronicle information showed that Andrey Bogolyubsky got his nickname not the name of the city hierarchy, and in connection with their "God-loving" personal qualities and deeds (and then in honor of the Prince, was named the city). And base extraordinarily beautiful and at the same time strongly fortified Pokrovsky monasterycould not contribute to the honorary nickname of the Prince.
1. Still definitely not proven nor that it is Andrei Bogolyubsky established in Russia the feast of the Intercession of the virgin, nor the fact that the first is devoted to the feast of Church was the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl (N. N. Voronin in his major work took it without any evidence, see: Voronin N. N. The architecture of North-Eastern Russia XII–XV centuries. M., 1961-1962. Vol. 1. S. 300). Documentary evidence on this subject exist, and the Chronicles speak about this temple as dedicated to the virgin Mary (K example, see: the first Novgorod chronicle senior and Junior nagged. Ryazan,2001. P. 467). Accordingly, in the pre-Mongolian time the Church of the Intercession could to have more dedication (this question is considered here: Timofeeva Etc. The architecture of the time of Andrey Bogolyubsky // to the memory of Andrei Bogolyubsky. SB. articles. Moscow – Vladimir, 2009. P. 12-82.). But since this question is for this study is unimportant, for simplicity we will assume that the Church Cover and respectively arranged in front of her, the monastery was called and when Andrey Bogolyubsky.
Also for simplicity, we will refer to the Church of the Intercession it on the Nerl Church in accordance with its current status, and not the Cathedral, which during the existence of the monastery was the temple.
2. Shirinov A. V. The Life Of Andrew Bogolyubsky. In the book: The Memory Of Andrei Bogolyubsky. SB. articles. Moscow – Vladimir, 2009. P.228.
3. Voronin N. N. The Architecture Of North-Eastern Russia XII–XV centuries. M., 1961-1962. Vol. 1. S. 300..
4. For Example, N.. Artleben and K. N. The Tikhonravov believed that the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl in the pre-Mongolian time on three sides surrounded by towers, with which was connected the door to the choir of the temple (Artleben N. A. The K. N. Tikhonravov. Ancient Suzdal-Vladimir region, preserved in the monuments of architecture. Vladimir, 1880. P. 50). He took the message of "the Life" and V. I. Dobrokhotov (Dobrokhotov V. I. Ancient city of Bogolyubov and monastery with its surroundings. M., 1852. P.7).
5. Voronin N. N. Decree. CIT. vol. 1. P. 68.
6. Ibid. S. 300-301.
7. Ibid. S. 298.
8. Ibid. P. 299.
S. V. TO the question of reconstruction and date of the Church
of the Intercession on the Nerl // Materials regional
conference (20-21 April
10. ANDsecond this study also previously subjected to position N. N. Voronin proper critical analysis and believed that the Church Cover was a separate "main temple" and that of the monastery it does not (for example, see: Zagraevsky SV Yuri Dolgoruky and old white-stone architecture. M., 2001. GL. 3, p. 13).
11. Voronin N. N. Decree. CIT. vol. 1. P.262.
12. Ibid. P. 297-299.
13. Ibid. S. 285, 298.
14. Ibid. P. 284.
15. Ibid. S. 300.
16. Unfortunately, the author of this study took the assertion that the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl standing at the intersection important trade routes and "issued" the check to the Principality by the rivers, without critical evaluation (for example, see: Zagraevsky S. V. TO the question of reconstruction and date of the Church of the Intercession on The Nerl...; Zagraevsky SV New study of architectural monuments of Vladimir-Suzdal Museum-reserve...)
17. N. N. Voronin took an unclear position in concerning the Dating of the temple. In his opinion, the Church of the Intercession was "the most perfect monument of the number of buildings of Prince Andrey, as if completing their galaxy" (Voronin N. N. Decree. CIT. vol. 1. P. 264), but it the relevant section of his major work did not offer any the Dating of the temple (ibid.). Only through a lot of pages (ibid, p. 279) first found no reasonable date – 1165 year. In the future the researcher repeatedly mentioned this year as the time of the end of stonethe construction of the pious (ibid., pp. 322, 335, 342).
But Izyaslav Andreevich died in autumn 1165, and in over the winter Church of the Intercession could not be built. Why N. N. Voronin, recognizing the faithfulness of "Life of Andrey Bogolyubsky" on that the temple was built in memory of Izyaslav, adopted as the date 1165 the year is unknown to us.
18. Details about the date of the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl, see: Zagraevsky S. V. TO the question of reconstruction and the Dating of the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl...; Zagraevsky SV New the study of architectural monuments of Vladimir-Suzdal Museum-reserve...; Timofeeva Etc., Novakovskaya-Buchman S. M. Church of the Intercession on the Nerl. M., 2003.
19. Voronin N. N. Decree. CIT. vol. 1. P. 299.
20. For more information, see: Zagraevsky SV Bogoliubov the architectural ensemble of the end of 1150 x – beginning
1170-ies: the history and the reconstruction of the Memory of Andrei Bogolyubsky. SB. articles. Moscow – Vladimir, 2009. C. 141-167; Zagraevsky SV Grand-Ducal castle in Hierarchy: the experience of graphic reconstruction //
proceedings of the XVII inter-regional
studies conference (April 20
21. The measurements were performed using the computer the program "Google Earth".
22. The height of the bulk of the hill is about
It's only spreading. Approximately the same was the extraction of soil. And as for meadows, the soil had to be brought from somewhere from a distance (probably from the high Bank near Bogolyubov), was significant and labor costs for transportation (for simplicity equate them to the sum of extraction and loading). A total of about 5000 person-days.
Expenditures for the construction of the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl amounted to about 11,000 person-days (see: Zagraevsky SV Yuri Dolgoruky and old white-stone architecture... GL. 2, p. 3). But this white stone and richly decorated Church of the Intercession, and labor costs for conventional brick Church would be much smaller.
23. Voronin N. N. Decree. CIT. vol. 1. S. 282.
24. Emelin V. K. Reconstruction of the fortress of Andrew Bogolyubsky at the mouth of the Nerl river // proceedings of
the XVI inter-regional studies conference (28
25. Voronin N. N. Decree. CIT. vol. 1. S. 282.
28. For more information, see: Zagraevsky S. V. To a question about the capitals of North-Eastern Russia: Pereslavl-Zalesskiy
when Yuri Dolgoruky, Bogolyubovo by Andrei Bogolyubsky // Proceedings of the XX
inter-regional studies conference (April 17,
29. For more information, see: Zagraevsky S. V. To a question of old Russian military monasteries and churches // proceedings of
the XVIII international
studies conference (April 19,
39. Emelin V. K. The Decree. Op.
31. "Life of Andrey Bogolyubsky", written in 1701 year (Shirinov A. V. the Life of Andrew Bogolyubsky...) is
late in the document relative to the time of Prince Andrei Yurevich, and cannot be
considered as historical source, as it contains a number of internal
contradictions, and unequivocally refute the facts, and unconfirmed local legends. In
various scientific papers tell us at the time had to disavow and the
legend of the founding Bogolyubov in connection with the stop of the horses carrying
the icon of the virgin (see: Zagraevsky S. V. TOthe
question of the origin of the nickname of Prince Andrei Bogolyubsky and
the name of the city hierarchy // Proceedings of the XVIII international
regional conference (19 April
· But this does not mean that "Life" does not might contain adequate information. For example, we have shown the correctness of his reports on the construction of the Church of Intercession "in one year" (see: Zagraevsky S. V. TOthe question of reconstruction and the Dating of the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl...). In this work we show loyalty posts about the founding of the Church of the Intercession monastery. And in this regard we can assume that the source of the illogical and unsubstantiated analysis used for the construction of the Church white stone of legend that the Church of the Intercession was built from the "collect and dualities of the Bulgarians exported stones for buildings in the Vladimir Cathedral of the assumption of the blessed virgin Mary Church and other desyatyy part, which at the command of him (Andrew – Sz) in the placeotegem bivaju" (more on this legend reviewed: Zagraevsky SVTO the question of reconstruction and date Church of the Intercession on the Nerl...) is that the fortified convent of the intercession was built primarily "against the Bulgars".
32. Krasovskii, I. S. Some features the urban planning structure of Kyiv the middle of the XII century Architectural heritage. M., 1976. No. 25.
33. For more information, see: Zagraevsky S. V. To a question of old Russian military monasteries and temples...
34. For more information, see: Zagraevsky SV Bogoliubov the architectural ensemble of the end of 1150 x – beginning 1170-ies: the history and reconstruction...; Zagraevsky S. V. the Grand Prince's castle in Bogolyubovo: experience graphic reconstruction...
35. Voronin N. N. Decree. CIT. vol. 1. S. 282.
36. Emelin V. K. The Decree. Op.
37. Voronin N. N. Decree. CIT. vol. 1. S. 282.
40. For more information, see: Zagraevsky SV Yuri Dolgoruky and old white-stone architecture... Application.
41. For more information, see: Zagraevsky S. V. To a question about the capitals of North-Eastern Russia: Pereslavl-Zalesskiy when Yuri Dolgoruky, Bogolyubovo by Andrei Bogolyubsky...
42. Voronin N. N. Decree. CIT. vol. 1. P.235.
43. TSGADA. F. 280. Op. 3. D. 411. "The inventory of the Vladimir County Bogolyubov won the monastery of the intercession."
44. V. K. Emelin put the "Holy gates" on his reconstruction on the North side (see Il. 3), but no reason for this not seen, as V. I. Dobrokhotov, which refers to V. K. Emelin, wrote about the remains to the North of the white stone Church of the Intercession buildings ("the eleven Steps in from the North-East corner (the Church of the intercession – S. Z.) visible a base of white and wild stones some probably the ancient building"), and not wooden gate (Dobrokhotov V. I. the Decree. CIT. p. 84.).
45. Emelin V. K. The Decree. Op.
46 Dobrokhotov V. I. The Decree. withPTS. P. 84.
47. Voronin N. N. Decree. withPTS. Vol. 1. S. 301.
48. For more information, see: Zagraevsky SV Color solutions of the domes of ancient Russian temples // Architect. The city. Time. Materials annual international scientific-practical conference (Veliky Novgorod Saint-Petersburg). Vol. XVII. SPb, 2014. P. 24-36.
S. V. TO the
question of the origin of the nickname Prince Andrei Bogolyubsky and the name of the city hierarchy
// proceedings of the XVIII international
studies conference (April 19,
S. V. Zagraevsky © 2016
© Sergey Zagraevsky