To the page “Scientific works”
Dr.
Sergey V. Zagraevsky
The
issues of early history of Intercession cloister on the Nerl
Published in Russian: Заграевский С.В. Вопросы ранней истории Покровского монастыря на Нерли // Материалы ХХII межрегиональной краеведческой конференции (21 апреля 2017 г.). Владимир, 2018. С. 307–322.
Annotation
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.
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.
Light memory
1.
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
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
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.
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.
2.
Untimely deceased
in 2014
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
part –
–.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 "
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 "
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).
Monks:
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
about on
·
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.
The date of Foundation Pokrovsky monastery on the Nerl, we can assume 1158 –
Chronicles date the
– covered side traditionally hostile to Russia Bulgar approaches to
Bogolyubov (Nerl) and Vladimir (Klyazma)
is a potent fireproof strengthening;
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.
NOTES
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
Also for simplicity, we will refer to the Church of the
Intercession it on the
2. Shirinov A. V. The Life Of Andrew
Bogolyubsky. In the book: The Memory Of Andrei Bogolyubsky. SB. articles.
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.
5. Voronin
N. N. Decree. CIT. vol. 1. P. 68.
6. Ibid. S.
300-301.
7. Ibid. S. 298.
8. Ibid. P. 299.
9. Zagraevsky
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.
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
April
25. Voronin
N. N. Decree. CIT. vol. 1. S.
282.
26. Ibid.
27. Ibid.
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,
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.
38. Ibid.
39. Ibid.
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.
49. Zagraevsky 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
To the page “Scientific works”