To the page Scientific works

To the main page

 

 

Sergey Zagraevsky

 

Jury Dolgoruky and ancient Russian white stone architecture

 

 

Published in Russian: .. . M.: -, 2001. ISBN 5-94025-014-9

 

Introduction

Chapter I. White stone and brick

Chapter II. Galich, Caucasus and Volga Bulgaria

Chapter III. Suzdal masters and Romanesque

Chapter IV. The limit of reliability

Chapter V. Sculpture decoration

Conclusion

Applications, notes

 

Chapter V.

Sculpture decoration

 

Attention!

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

and has not yet been edited.

So it can be used only for general introduction.

     RUSSIAN VERSION

 

 

I

 

We will not analyze the plots and plastic sculptural decoration is not in vain in the beginning of the book we have separation of the decor are of two types (ornamental and zooantropomorfny) and this further.

We will try to analyze the reasons for the emergence of Suzdal decor ornamented type in the Yuri Dolgoruky, zooantropomorfnogo - with Andrei Bogolyubsky, and a widespread return to the ornamental type in the post-Mongol period.

With regard to ornamental decor of the Church Yuri, all may seem simple enough - decor was minimal and played the role solely of architectural ornaments, as in many other Russian principalities, and in lesser Poland363.

But the question arises, greatly complicating the situation: why do we not see in Dolgoruky no attempt to create zooantropomorfnogo decor? Masters of Frederick Barbarossa came only to Andrei, but the master George, as we saw in paragraph (10 sec. 3, were familiar with the European experience and could easily have let shyly and awkwardly, but try to decorate their temples "Imperial"and not "in Malopolska.

To answer this question, we have, as in the investigation of the causes of the transition to a white stone, to apply the principles of historical and motivational model. But we already have a lot to understand the specifics of the pre and post-Mongol North-Eastern Russia, so this task is a little more simple.

So why such a short period of time - between 1156 and 1158 years - a transition from ornamented type of decor to an entirely new way to Suzdal - zooantropomorfnogo?

To study this question the most important fact is that the appearance zooantropomorfnogo decor has gone beyond a simple decoration of the walls of temples and invaded the province of Church dogma. Moreover, in the scope of secondary importance (as a matter of practice posts when Fyodor, the candidate for the bishops of Andrei Bogolyubsky364), and in the centuries-old "stumbling block", the Second Holy commandment: "do Not make yourself any graven image that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Do not worship them and do not serve them..." (ex. 20:4).

Probably not worth it to consider in detail the history of iconoclasm - these issues have received more than adequate coverage in the literature, including in theological studies of the author of this book365. For us it is important that even after the victory of the veneration of icons, "legalized" the Seventh Ecumenical Council in 787, the West and the East (specifically, the Pope of Rome and the Byzantine patriarchs) on a number of issues of the veneration of images of one mind not reached, moreover, these differences have become one of the basic elements began in the eighth century centuries-old process of separation of churches, which ended "schism" of 1054366.

The formal aspect of the problem is quite complicated, confusing and overgrown with many legends.

"Iconoclastic" the Council of 754 was held without representatives of the Pope - the papacy was consistent and bitter opponent of iconoclasm.

"Ekonomicheskii" the Council in 787 was held in Nicaea during the actual breakup of Rome and Constantinople, and it turned out that the Cathedral was attended by only two of the papal legate, and their legitimacy in the future constantly questioned. It was even said that the Cathedral forcibly brought two Roman priests of the lowest rank, who happened to be at that time in Constantinople367.

Be that as it may, Pope Adrian I found the solution of the Cathedral, which allowed us to declare his universe368. In 794 Charlemagne convened in Frankfurt, its Cathedral, which defined a neutral attitude to any of the images369.

But the image image strife. No wonder in the Byzantine VIII century movement called "iconoclastic" - all his pathos was directed against icons, and stable tradition of the sculptural decoration of temples on the East never had.

And so it happened that in the "ekonomicheskom" the decree of the Seventh Ecumenical Council370 remaining "gap" - sculptural images. Consequently, the General anathematisation "iconoclastic" cathedrals, based on the Second Holy commandments, for sculptures were never revoked. In any case, the "universal".

This has created a sculpture dogmatic ambivalent situation, and gave (and still gives) the Orthodox Church and the opportunity to resolve, and prevent zooantropomorfny sculptures at its discretion.

 

II

 

The Byzantine Church tradition consistently favored the ban zooantropomorfnogo decor of the Church.

Note - Byzantine. Examples of sculptural decoration in Sofia in Constantinople371 here is irrelevant - they belong to the VI century, when Constantinople was the capital of the Byzantine and Roman Empire. Justinian (ruled 527-565), as it is known, has restored the Empire almost old boundaries, completely destroying the Goths and vandals372. It is no wonder that the Western (Roman) tradition of the sculptural decoration of churches in the unity of Church and state penetrated to the East, with the first "desert fathers" are more prone to external asceticism.

In addition to the aggravation of iconoclasm problems of compliance with the Second commandment of the Holy questions of admissibility of the sculptural image (as icons) do not put373.

After the iconoclastic uprisings in Byzantium disappeared round sculpture374. Inside the temples there were carved icons375but we may not refer them to the sculptural decoration, first of all "obligated" to be on the facades of temples.

Note AI Komech that we know very little about the Byzantine facade and, consequently, they could be carved icons376 that is absolutely true. But all the same applies to such icons zooantropomorfnomu decor is hardly possible - the latter concept is much wider. And in any case it is safe to say that the vast majority of Byzantine carved decorations do not belong to the Romanesque style that we see in the churches of Western Europe, and Vladimir-Suzdal land.

Note that the Cathedral of St. Mark's in Venice with rich sculptural decoration was built by Greek masters377and it shows that in most of Byzantium the absence of such decoration was not due to lack of masters, and Church tradition.

The history of the Russian Orthodox Church knows the times and the heyday of the temple sculptures, and the prohibition of "idols". For example, the Big Moscow Cathedral 1666 decided that the temples carved can only be crucified378. In 1722 the Synod forbade "to have icons in the churches carved and izdolblennye, sculptured" and ordered "weights to the images and any smithy not append". In 1832 was a complete ban of the Synod of the temple sculpture379 (however, did not start run everywhere).

And in the Catholic countries of the West, as we know, sculptures never disappeared, although voting against him were heard not only during the reformation, but in the Middle ages. For example, Bernard of Clairvaux in 1124 wrote the work "apology Wireline, Abbot of St. Theodoric:" What makes funny monsters in the galleries, before the eyes of the brothers engaged in reading?.. Here you can see several bodies with one head or multiple heads on one body. Here you can see the four-legged monster with tail like a snake, there is depicted a fish with the head of a four-legged. 380.

All of the above determined the complexity and uniqueness of the situation with the sculptural decoration of the Vladimir-Suzdal region in the XII - beginning of XIII century.

 

III

 

Since the Soviet era in art history and history of architecture entrenched tradition of interpreting images of Church art and architecture in accordance with stylistic Genesis, artistic taste, economy, politics and many other factors, except for one: a direct and immediate influence of the Church in the person of local priests, bishops and senior hierarchs.

But in the XII century the Church was already engaged in reading the second thousand years of its existence. If to count from V century, when it became a closed hierarchical system with an established base of dogmatic and regimented rituals, there are about seven hundred years is too short period.

And if in III-IV centuries service could happen in any buildings (including the catacombs), in the XII century architectural and stylistic features of the temples were already and the Orthodox and the Catholic Church is no less important part of the ritual and canonical truths"381 than , for example, the shape and color of the priestly vestments.

The indecisiveness of the Russian Metropolia in pre-Mongol times dictated particularly strict approach to the subtleties of Church architectural style, as any more or less serious innovations had to agree with the Patriarch of Constantinople.

In paragraph 10 of the main 3 we are told that the strategic decision to build in Russia "European", most likely, was taken under Vladimir Monomakh. But while the Orthodox and Catholic churches were in close contact during the Crusades, and "romanization" of architecture, initiated by the Grand Duke, hardly raised serious objections from the Greek hierarchy. Besides the great power of Monomakh enjoyed undisputed authority not only princes, but also in the Church.

Therefore, it is not surprising emergence of Romanesque (zooantropomorfnogo) sculptural decoration on Boris and Gleb Cathedral in Chernigov382built probably in Monomach times. At the same time began and "romance" facades in Volyn Principality383. Most likely, and Galitsky (Przemysl) princes in the end 1110-s - early 1120-ies the blessing of the Metropolitan of white-stone building was given a relatively easy - the Grand Duke was still Vladimir Monomakh.

But Yuri Dolgoruky, having spent many years of exploration quarries, began to build their temples already in absolutely different conditions of relations with the Church. In order to fully characterize this relationship, formed in the middle of the XII century, we must remember the hierarchical structure of the Church organization in Suzdal.

At the time, and George, and Andrew, and Vsevolod of Vladimir and Suzdal (meaning no edge, and the city) dioceses were not, and the Church leadership in the Vladimir-Suzdal Principality was made Bishop of Rostov384. The diocese of Vladimir appeared only when Yuri Vsevolodovich - in 1214385.

Version A. Limonov that in the sixties of the XII century in the city of Suzdal was Bishop386that seems unreasonable. Although the words "Leon Bishop not popravte postavila the Suzdal, Nestor Piscopo Suzdalskoe juusu"387 and belongs to the Vladimir chronicler, but speaking of Suzdal, he still had in mind the entire region - Suzdal land called "Suzdal" and within the region. In the city of Suzdal in the pre-Mongolian time there was no Bishop, and Vladimir, as we have seen, he appeared only at the beginning of the XIII century.

In the cities, which were not centers of the dioceses were "Bishop's deputies"subordinate to the Bishop388. At the opening of the new temple was required Episcopal blessing389it was required and the approval of the priest, even though the candidate may nominate churchwarden - in this case, Prince390. The churchwarden could initiate the offset unwanted priests, but, again, it required the consent of the Bishop.

Bishop of Suzdal land (or, more precisely, Rostov diocese) from 1137 to 1156 years was a Greek Nestor. Clement, who was elected Metropolitan in 1147, left Nestor Bishop. Undoubtedly, the Yuri Dolgoruky and Metropolitan Kliment (protege391 and true ally392 Izyaslav Mstislavich) were enemies, and the fact that Clement did not change the Bishop of Rostov, is very important for us, as the Metropolitan had the right to do it any more or less plausible pretext at any time.

Based on this fact, we may assume that Nestor was in the role of "bridge" between Yuri and Clement, and leaning to the side of the Prince, and the Metropolitan. The latter is proved by the fact that Dolgoruky, occupying a Grand buffet, in 1155 got rid Clement393and in 1156 initiated offset Nestor new Metropolitan Constantine394. Just sent from the Byzantine Greek Constantine, naturally, without the insistence of the Grand Duke would not have made such a hasty decision to remove the Bishop of Rostov.

You can imagine the complexity of the role that had to play Bishop Nestor in the late forties - early fifties, but, apparently for political reasons, George and Clement deliberately aggravated the situation. In the end, Clement (actually Izjaslava) was in the hands of a strong trump card - the enemy's excommunication from the Church, but such a glow of their struggle is not reached.

However, Dolgoruky was in a very difficult situation. Spending huge efforts and means of exploration quarries and construction of cathedrals, he risked not receive the blessing or the Kiev Metropolitan or Patriarch of Constantinople, which would mean the failure of the Rostov Bishop to bless already built temples and therefore catastrophe for the princely policy.

In this regard, the complete absence of the temple of Yuri of any attempts to create zooantropomorfnogo decor is absolutely logical explanation: that was a compromise between the Prince and the Church.

Even "neobizantyne" material is white stone - could not cause censures of the Church hierarchy. They can "tolerate" the General Europeanization of architecture, initiated by the Grand Duke Monomakh - with him, they would hardly dare to argue. They could not "see" Romanesque elements in the construction of minor princes were minor problems of scale. But for the worst and most dangerous enemy - Dolgoruky - any "concessions" could not be.

Therefore, we may say that the final compromise is agreed Metropolitan (respectively, and the blessing of the Bishop) for the construction of Suzdal white stone churches - was a major victory Dolgoruky. Despite the fact that the Prince had to make concessions in the decoration.

N.N. Voronin wrote: "If you think Yuri's temples built of brick, they will differ little from the modern buildings of the ancient Rus ' in the sense of lack of "romance" features"395. In point 1 of the main 3 we saw that the Romanesque features from the first white stone churches of Suzdal land is still present, and they expressed to strengthen the "towering" and a number of decorative techniques. This is much different churches and Yuri from Kievan Rus from Byzantium. But these fundamental differences, of course, were not.

Fundamentally, that was made the chief of "breakthrough" - Dolgorukogo temples were built not of brick and white stone.

 

IV

 

Andrey Bogolyubsky took the next important breakthrough: he has the blessing of the Church on the introduction of Suzdal architecture is sculptural zooantropomorfnogo type.

Relations Andrei Yurievich with the Orthodox Church can be called even more strained than Dolgoruky. If the latter had active enemy in the person of Metropolitan of Kiev, Bogolyubsky was in conflict not only with the Metropolitan, but also by the Patriarch of Constantinople.

The new Bishop of Rostov, the Greek Leon arrived in the diocese in 1158 and immediately fell victim ambitions Andrew (without the knowledge of the Prince of the Rostov and Suzdal are not likely would have dared to expel Bishop396). The Bogolyubsky had its own candidate for this post - "Lord" Fedor. But after a long struggle with the Patriarch (there was even a threat of excommunication397) Prince was forced to give in and give Fedor the court of Kiev Metropolitan.

We will not go into the details of this struggle and to understand the sea of slander, which the parties have built on each other. It is important that in the end Bogolyubsky suffered tangible defeat in 1169 Leon returned to Rostov Department and held it until the mid eighties.

Bogolyubskii demanded the establishment in its territory the new metropolis, but the Patriarch in 1162 refused to bless398. Andrew was denied and the canonization of Leontius, and the last was made only in 1190, already Vsevolod399.

But along with these lesions Andrey won several important victories. One of them is the right of the Prince's own (without the knowledge of the Bishop) to appoint and remove priests in their temples, receiving the blessing of post factum400.

And another victory, much more interesting to us, - introduction zooantropomorfnogo (romance) decor.

Look at what the political background of this victory took place.

The papacy has in X-XI centuries feelers for a possible transition of Russia to Catholicism401. Known to the Embassy of the popes to many Russian great princes, with the most successful were the talks with the son of Yaroslav the Wise - Izyaslav402.

In the XII century the papacy significantly increased, its credibility rose after the concordat of Worms in 1122403. In 1177 even Frederick Barbarossa, forgetting his ambitions, was forced to admit Alexander III eligible dad404.

Very typical letter of the Kyiv Metropolitan John to Alexander III explaining some of Orthodox dogmas (written, most likely, in 1160), which concluded that "the Whole tan AZ John, khudyi Metropolitan Rusky, and all that which is beneath you, Clerici are the people. Kiss as you others like us, o Holy bishops of Episkopi and Abbots, and others like us blagochestivaya tserkovniy people. The Grace Of St. Spirit be with thee, and with all thy might. Amen"405.

And the fact that Andrew Bogolyubsky, being "offended" by the Patriarch of Constantinople, was developed relations with the Catholic Church, it is natural - it is admitted even E.E. Golubinsky406. Submission Andrei Novgorod407 gave to these relations convenient "ambassadorial way, and in 1169 took place the official negotiations of the Grand Duke with the ambassadors of Alexander III408.

In this political situation becomes clear position of principle Andrei not only in regard to the continued building of white stone, but in the decoration of churches European sculptural decor.

And because during his reign Bogolyubsky repeatedly came to compromise with the Orthodox Church (for example, in 1169 he "gave" Fyodor and took Leon), we can with enough confidence to make such a conclusion: the blessing of the Church Romanesque zooantropomorfnogo sculptural decoration Suzdal churches was one of such compromises.

And it was not only about the bas-reliefs and high relief, which could be attributed (though with a "stretch") to images on the plane, that is to icons409. At the time Andrew came and volumetric sculpture - lions-cannons410, "watch lions" (Fig. 27), cups and poultry411.

 

 

Carved stones from the excavations Noortlaan the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl.

 

Fig. 27. Carved stones from the excavations Noortlaan the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl.

 

 

Thus, we do not see any "progressive penetration" (Vneshnemu)412 Roman sculptural decoration on Suzdal churches. "Watershed" between the ornamental and decorative types zooantropomorfnym clearly lies between the last temple of Yuri and the first temple of Andrew.

Perhaps the task blessings Romanesque decor in Suzdal facilitated the "precedent" Monomach times - Borisoglebsky Cathedral in Chernihiv, which was exactly zooantropomorfnogo white-stone decor413 (of course, if such a decoration has not appeared at the temple, and later towards the end of the XII century).

Note that the definition of "watershed" significantly affects the Dating of the assumption Cathedral in Galicia. By NN Voronin, is 1157, the date of establishment of the Galician eparchy414. But hardly "a little Prince Yaroslav Osmomysl and just appointed Bishop dared to decorate the temple zooantropomorfnym decor, without precedent, which in this case were built by Grand Prince - Bogolyubsky. Consequently, we may postpone the date of the Cathedral for several years later. However, there is also likely option to install the decor of the Cathedral a few years after its construction.

As several of Kiev zooantropomorfnyh reliefs attributed to the XI century415then you have three choices of their origin:

- they can be made in the XI century in Europe somewhat later (XII-XIII centuries) brought to Kyiv and erected on the temples;

- they could make in the XI century by the local masters, but they were originally installed on secular buildings - the Orthodox Church has never been prohibited even in Constantinople416;

- they can be manufactured and installed at the Kyivan Church during the "Europeanization" of architecture at Monomakh, i.e. in the beginning of XII century.

In connection with the presence of such a "watershed" between the ornamental and zooantropomorfnym decor is necessary to touch upon approval Boris Rybakov about the "duality of religion", as manifested in the old Slavic pagan motives of the sculptural decoration of the Vladimir-Suzdal churches417, about the close relationship of the images of this decor with "the Word about Igor's regiment"418.

Indeed, "the duality of religion" in the XII century took place, it has a place in our time - many superstitions, "o beware," "evil eye" and jumping over the fire on Ivan Kupala also fall under this definition. But with the penetration of the walls of the temples of ancient Slavic pagan motifs (including relevant images of "Words") is difficult to accept.

As rightly observed by Karamzin, "the Word about Igor's regiment" written in the XII century, and no doubt a layman: for a monk will not allow myself to talk about the gods of the heathen, and to attribute them to the natural action"419. Indeed, a layman, relatively free of Christian doctrine, can use any image line, including those associated with the ancient folk beliefs (unless, of course, he did not set out to create works in the Church literature).

But sculptures installed on Christian churches, in one form or another, had to undergo Church censorship, and all the "paganism", expressed in the lions, eagles, Griffon and "the ascension of Alexander the great, had to find some (albeit strained) Foundation in religious dogma.

The same applies to the impossibility (at least formally) the term "duality of religion" in jewelry crucifixes, icons, and chandeliers420 - these items were also held a kind of ecclesiastical censorship, otherwise the clergy had no right to consecrate them. And the fact that Christian images, displacing pagan idols, often themselves objects of idolatry (for example, in the XVI century statues Paraskeva were staged at the wells in order to "water purification"421), Christianity has nothing to do.

 

V

 

It is anticipated objection concerning decoration of Suzdal churches: one thing - the image of God and king David, and quite different - lions, eagles, griffins, centaurs, scenes of hunting, fighting beasts and the ascension of Alexander". Perhaps, the Church dogma could live with lions - still in the Scriptures they were symbols of power, strength, and power (Dan. 7:4), and even the Word of God was like unto Ricany lion (job 4:10-11). Griffin, as a synthesis of the lion and the eagle, perhaps, too, had some theoretical chances of "dogmatism".

But this objection can be answered as follows: indeed, it is difficult to argue with the fact that the decor of the Suzdal churches (and Roman) has many pagan motifs. Only the roots of these motives are not old Church Slavonic and old Persian and Greek.

In the IV century BC Alexander the great campaigns joined last one term - Hellenism.

In turn, the Hellenistic culture was perceived by Ancient Rome, and then turned out to be very attractive to medieval Europe - it is quite consistent with Imperial ambitions and the rulers and the Church422.

And papocaesarist", and "strong" felt nostalgia for the mighty empires of the ancient world, and this nostalgia was reflected not only in theology423but in Church art.

But in the pursuit of "sovereign" characters in the art of the medieval Church was faced with a very "uncomfortable" situation: emperors-Christians (Konstantin, Theodosius I and Justinian) embodied already not the power of the Empire, but rather its decline.

To portray emperors from Trajan to Diocletian was "too" - the Church still could not forgive the persecution of Christians (although the author of "the Word about Igor's regiment" - lay - mentioned ages "Troyan"424 were in the order of things). Even Caesar Augustus (perhaps thanks to revelations Suetonius425) were for the Church too odious figures, besides them absolutely logical follow Tiberius and Caligula. And in any case, the official symbols of Ancient Rome, who put Christ, Peter and Paul, was traditionally incompatible with the Christian.

But Alexander of Macedon, not stained with the "notorious crimes, not destroy the Jewish prophets and brought to Judea (and indirectly - in the Scriptures) Hellenism, was quite acceptable figure. No wonder the Western tradition it is called Alexander the Great426.

The result was that in the middle ages "dominant" symbols of Hellenism (griffins, centaurs etc) is quite peacefully coexisted with Orthodox Christianity, do not pretend to be a full part of sacred Tradition, but without falling into dogmatic prohibitions. Hence the abundance of these characters in the sculptural decoration and Justinian, and Romanesque churches. "Postikonoborcheskaya" Byzantium, as we saw in paragraph 2 of this Chapter, had other sculptural tradition, but, for example, in the Byzantine Church manuscripts, there are many images and griffins, and elephants427.

Turning to Vladimir-Suzdal, say: perhaps we have no right to call Yuri Dolgoruky and Andrei Bogoliubsky "strong", but this trend will undoubtedly present - already Vsevolod the Big Nest, this definition is quite suitable.

Consequently, the Vladimir princes were interested in the image is not pagan idols and not folk beliefs428as symbols of his power, Dating back to ancient empires429. Therefore, on the walls of their churches and there was the whole gamut of "ruling" Hellenistic motives (from the "Eastern" elephants and griffins to "Greek" centaurs and Alexander of Macedon).

And Suzdal clergy generally a blessing of Metropolitan sculptures, are unlikely to resist "dominant" category in the Hellenistic interpretation.

 

VI

 

But the question still remains: how did manage to find the canonical basis for the premises of secular images (scenes of hunting and fighting beasts, ktitorskih portraits and the like) on the walls of the Orthodox churches?

We may assume that the most likely way was this: without going into dogmatic details, refer to the tradition of the Catholic Church.

Given the rapprochement of the Orthodox and Catholic churches, which began at the initiative of John Comnenus in 1124430 and lasted until the fall of Byzantium, the references to Catholicism to Orthodox bishops in no case were not "taboo". Moreover, it was not about the main "stumbling block" - "Filioque"431 and an ambiguous situation, more related to tradition, rather than with dogma.

The Catholic tradition, as is known, admitted even decoration icons, frescoes and facades of Church donor's portraits. These portraits we are likely to see on the walls of the Vladimir-Suzdal churches432. As for the "pagan" motifs in the decoration, in the West of much more churches meet and acrobats, and mermaids, and even these idols with huge Dildo433.

But in Europe all accommodation raznoobraznaya animals, devils, chimeras and idols subject to strict symbolic rules, based at the Catholic scholasticism ("Bestiary"434 is just one of many hundreds of books, which regulates the rules and symbols images, and even in the Catholic Church were not so many specialists, who knew these rules435).

And in the Vladimir-Suzdal hardly anyone was able to analyze the Western theological works on the sculptural decoration of churches (and even more to use any "books samples", about which wrote V.N. Lazarev436). Most likely, the entire complex Romanesque symbolism ignored - there was a General reproduction of Romanesque art and ideological purposes. Even if the number of temples decor makes visiting European masters (the possibility that we considered in paragraph 13 of the main 3), it is unlikely they were experts in scholasticism, and is unlikely to bring a relevant literature or consultant theologian.

Most likely, Russians, and "invited" the wizard had a General idea of what rules were made to the decor in the West, and every time he developed a unique iconography for each temple in close contact with the Prince, Bishop, and architect.

Therefore, researchers and experienced tremendous difficulty restoring whole iconographic program of the sculptural decoration of the Vladimir-Suzdal region. This problem is still the subject of scientific disputes437 and, frankly, its principal solvability questionable. Iconographic program, most likely, not even for individual churches, not to mention of Suzdal in General. What would be the master or create decor - Suzdal or European - had a relatively "free art", with an emphasis on the sovereign-Hellenistic motifs in General attributed to Catholic theology, but it is absolutely unique.

However, for our study is important first of all that zooantropomorfny sculptures Suzdal churches is not rooted in the local paganism, but only in the European romanik. N.N. Voronin in connection with this said about the motives of medieval manuscripts and images associated with foreign tissue"438but now we can clarify that it was the Church bookishness, not Orthodox, and Catholic.

But the iconography of Roman influence is practically not affected, in the pre-Mongolian time, she remained quite Byzantine439. And the "Golden gate" of the Suzdal Nativity Cathedral of the virgin of the XIII century Byzantine technique performed in the "Golden covering on copper440, and images on them correspond to the iconic plastic441. And the churches Basilica type in the Vladimir-Suzdal and has not appeared.

Apparently, against the penetration of Catholicism, the Orthodox Church was a "limit of concessions".

 

VII

 

So, we have considered the main issues appear in Suzdal in the middle of the XII century ornamented, and then zooantropomorfnogo sculptural decoration.

The end of XII-beginning of XIII century were marked by the strengthening and development of Romanesque architectural trends, Yuri Dolgoruky and finally "legitimized" with Andrew.

The world political situation contributed to this.

Pope innocent III (1198-1216) in the West called "the wonder of the world". He managed to raise the prestige of the papacy to unprecedented heights, distribute Papal almost all Central and Northern Italy, and "gracious" king of England, Portugal, Denmark and Poland to the Kingdom as a County. When the "Holy Roman Empire" were both elected to two of the Emperor, the Pope shifted Otto and "appointed" by Friedrich II442.

As Byzantium, at the beginning of the XIII century it virtually ceased to exist. The process of disintegration of the Empire was sharply accelerated in the last Komnina in 1180th years, and in 1204 the crusaders took Constantinople and created the so-called "Latin Empire".

Vsevolod the Big Nest in his strong great power and a General weakening of the influence of the Orthodox Church communicated with Metropolitan of Kiev in quite imperious tone. On the occasion of sending the Rostov eparchy of the Greek Nicholas he wrote the Kiev Metropolitan: "Not isbrae this (Nicholas - SZ) the people of the land of our wire with, but as thou put Ino Kamo you fit, there is the same here, and I put the Onions"443. And Metropolitan Nikifor "unwillingly great Vsevolod"444 put Luke, Abbot of the Saviour at Berestove, the Rostov diocese.

In 1190 the successor Luke was John, the spiritual father Vsevolod, and Metropolitan already't mind445.

In the architecture of this time, which, as at all times, very closely reflects the economic, political and social processes in the country, we see the trend had continued and Yuri Vsevolodovich - strengthening the role zooantropomorfnogo decor.

The only exception here is the assumption Cathedral of the Knyaginin monastery with decor ornamented type, but this statement cannot be considered unequivocally proven.

Back in the fifties of the XX century N.N. Voronin believed that and the Cathedral of the Nativity monastery had decor ornamented type, and very strict446. But in the sixties, he explained that zooantropomorfny decoration on the temple were present: archaeological research has found a lion reliefs carved and water cannons447. It was later found and volumetric sculpture448. H. Wagner even considered this temple Baptist churches of the beginning of the XIII century in Suzdal and Yuriev-Polsky449.

Today, therefore, there is no absolute certainty not only in the absence of zooantropomorfnogo decoration in the assumption Cathedral of the Knyaginin monastery, but even that was a brick Church. Anyway, its construction is of white stone is very likely in connection with research and M. ioannisyanom Playcom the beginning of the XIII century Cathedral in Suzdal, which showed that the walls instead of backing were built of brick and then faced with white stone450. The same could not be built and the Cathedral of the Knyaginin monastery.

In this regard, no "two trends - the ecclesiastical and secular" (N.N. Voronin451) in the architecture of Vsevolod we do not see. Bishop John was absolutely obedient to the great-Prince and in no case did not attempt to "return to the traditions of Kiev. Just in some temples decor was richer than in other poorer, and the reasons for this, most likely, were purely economic.

The latter refers not only to the decor is part Vsevolodova Palace was built of "undesirable", but cheap bricks452, the stronghold is of white stone in combination with tuff453and even the stairs were made of wood454.

Probably brick temple construction Konstantin Vsevolodovich in Rostov and Yaroslavl was due to reasonable savings. After complete recovery struck in 1204 in the assumption Cathedral in Rostov in white-technology Constantine could not, and this was done only with his brother Yuri - 1231455.

And zooantropomorfnogo decor, along with the white-stone construction equipment native Vladimir-Suzdal churches with European, in the end of XII - beginning of XIII century steadily evolved. As is known, the highest point of this development was the last major pre - Mongol temple-St. George's Cathedral in Yuryev-Polsky.

The more interesting question of why zooantropomorfny decor in the post-Mongolian time with Russian churches disappeared.

 

VIII

 

The majority of leading Russian researchers disagree on Dating sites, agree on the fact that in the early post-Mongol times zooantropomorfny decor of the Church were present.

So, N.N. Voronin, relying on indirect evidence (fragments of carved stone found on the Volga river, and miniatures of the Tver list of Hamartolas), made a conclusion about the probable presence of such a decoration on the Saviour Cathedral in 1290 in Tver456.

H. Wagner, questioning zooantropomorfny decor in Tver457, asserted its presence on the hypothetical Demetrius Church in Moscow, Dating back to 1290 mi458 and supposedly dismantled in 1326 in connection with the construction of the assumption Cathedral459.

V. kavelmaher denies the existence Demetrius Church in the Moscow Kremlin and attributes found fragments zooantropomorfnogo decor to the XVII century460. But it dates "Gorodische" the Church in Kolomna first half of the XIV century, perhaps at times Yuri Danilovich461. And at last, too, was zooantropomorfny decor, though made in a slightly different technique than in pre-Mongol times462 (Fig. 28).

 

 

 

Fig. 28. The relief of the "Gorodische" Church in Kolomna.

 

 

Therefore, we provide reasonable assurance can be concluded that in one form or another zooantropomorfnogo type in the end of XIII-XIV century temples have been.

Perhaps today cannot be regarded as fully proven that the Moscow Dormition Cathedral 1326-1327 years was only decoration ornamented type. But four years later was built the Church of the Saviour on the Bor, and there was ornamental decor with much more likely463.

In the future we zooantropomorfnogo decor anywhere on the temples not meet until the time of Ivan III, when the Spassky gate of the Kremlin in 1464 was put carved statue of St. George464that, however, can only very tentatively called zooantropomorfnym decor.

As we saw in paragraph 2 of this Chapter, to such decoration may not be assigned and a few carved crucifixion of late XIV-early XV centuries465. And as for the statue of St. Nicholas do not know whether she was in the XV century, is set in any temple466.

Thus, we may say it is about the disappearance zooantropomorfnogo of the motives of the temples in the early fourteenth century, and it is of great interest for the study because, as in the case of beginning and termination of the white-stone building, we in the literature see only state this fact.

So let us in accordance with our principles will try to answer the question why zooantropomorfny decor in the beginning of XIV century disappeared from Moscow temples.

"Degeneration" masters of sculptural decoration in the Mongol invasion and subsequent destruction can not be a convincing explanation of this situation, as the art of impossible "cut"or "kill". The author had to talk about it in connection with the capture of Rome by barbarians in the V century467, you have to say now.

The most that could happen in Russia - a "coarsening" technique of sculptural decoration because of the lack of masters necessary experience (building still become less). Perhaps that is what we see on the bas-relief of the "Gorodische" Church in Kolomna (Fig. 28) and on fragments of ornamental decoration of churches in Moscow beginning of XIV century (Fig. 30).

The political side of the issue we discussed in paragraph 14 mainly 4 and saw the cultural orientation of Russia in Europe after the Mongol invasion not only weak, but has become even more urgent. And in Europe at this time there has been an unprecedented flowering of Gothic decoration468.

Temples to the architectural elements of Gothic architecture built in Russia with the highest development of Russian "dostanova" Gothic reached in the Trinity-Sergius and Spaso-Andronikov monasteries (see item 1 of the main 3) - hence, even the Orthodox Church has not tried to go back to the Byzantine architectural forms and techniques of construction.

But "European" decor disappeared.

Even assuming that there was any objective reasons for its disappearance (General laws of cultural development, the change of artistic taste), fully and universally gap in such a short period 1320-s - zooantropomorfnogo decor could not.

So we should search for subjective reasons, and it in the conditions of political dictatorship of the princes could only be a policy decision at the state level, where the master could not disobey - because it was not on the easel, and a monumental sculpture.

In other words, could be a ban on zooantropomorfny decor.

Taking this into account at the beginning of this Chapter, the most likely that the ban followed the initiative of the Orthodox Church.

 

IX

 

Let us try to understand why the 1320's of European decor could be banned.

In the world at that time was the following: Byzantium, despite the restoration of political independence in the first Palaeologus, was extremely weak and solved the problem entirely of their own survival.

And Catholicism was not as strong as before: in 1291 was completely lost "Holy Land", and in 1309 the French king Philip IV started 69-year-old "Avignon" popes.

Therefore, the roots of the ban on zooantropomorfny sculptures must be sought not in the global political situation, and in Moscow itself.

And in the future capital of Russia in 1325 event occurred, without which may not be its elevation: a "good and pious" (in the words Yesenberlina469) Ivan Danilovich Kalita he transferred his chair Metropolitan Peter.

Of course, the decision to move the Department does not take a month or two. Peter moved to Moscow earlier 1325470, that is not to Ivan Kalita (whose "goodness and pious", however, also very doubtful), and to Yuri Danilovich.

And the elder brother Kalita was not distinguished by any "kindness", or "pious", and, according to nm Karamzin, "the qualities of a black soul deserved universal hatred, and barely outwards on the throne inheritance, vile deed expressed contempt for the Holy laws of humanity"471 - we are talking about the assassination of Constantine Ryazan.

Later Yury Danilovich succeeded in intrigues at the court of the Khan Uzbek472 initiated and participated in the murder of the Horde in 1319 his main rival, Michael Yaroslavich of Tver473. The latter received from the Orthodox Church the title of St. Martyr. So was his undoing Yuri Danilovich Church, in theory, should have been cursing par with Svyatopolk the accursed.

But Metropolitan Peter, in 1313 who had gone to the future of St. Michael Martyr in the Horde, in the early twenties he moved to his murderer.

Compares two dates: Dmitry Mikhailovich (son of Michael of Tver) avenged his father and killed Yury Danilovich November 21, 1325, and also in orde474. This news could not manage to get the Horde to Moscow before December. And Peter officially transferred to the Department in 1325, and is unlikely to happen in December, during the mourning for the slain Prince. So most likely that this event (the transfer of the Department) took place during the reign of Yuri Danilovich.

You can imagine how much effort it cost Danilovich "poaching" of Peter. Certainly the Metropolitan was a "financial interest", but hardly the case was only that. Important was the outside - the creation in Moscow of sight "true Orthodoxy. This is confirmed by the fact that the successor of the deceased in the year 1326, Peter, Greek Theognost, in 1328 also came to Moscow475.

It is unlikely that Metropolitan Peter, being from the "Europeanized" Galician-Volyn land476, has been an outspoken opponent zooantropomorfnogo sculptural decoration. But either he or Theognost, or Patriarch himself could directly or indirectly Express displeasure about the "devil" decor pre-Mongol Vladimir-Suzdal churches, and Danilovic, of course, did not dare to play such a decoration in Moscow. Too much in the Prince's policy depended on, which will be appointed by all the Russian bishops, and such "insurance" from the Prince was quite natural.

And only when Ivan III, in his undisputed great power, the Church again began to appear a kind zooantropomorfnogo sculptural decoration - at least three-dimensional carved icons.

 

X

 

Everything said about the relationship Danilovich and Metropolitan, of course, only a hypothesis, but the fact remains: in the beginning of XIV century gone an entire branch of Russian architecture and monumental sculpture - zooantropomorfny sculptures.

Here as a confirmation of our vision of the situation is an example: back in paragraph 1 of the main 1, we noted that the pre-Mongolian style ornamental decor is different from the post-Mongol (Fig. 1 and 2). And now we can clarify: ornamental decoration similar to the post-Mongol (Fig. 30), although executed several thinner, we have seen yet on the St. George's Cathedral in Yuryev-Polish at the beginning of the XIII century (Fig. 29).

 

 

 

Fig. 29. A fragment of decoration of St. George's Cathedral in Yuryev-Polsky.

 

 

 

Fig. 30. A fragment of decoration of the Church of the Saviour on the Bor.

 

But together with ornament on the St George's Cathedral was attended by images of people and animals, and so the overall decor of this we refer to zooantropomorfnomu type. And in the 1320's of images of people and animals disappeared, and ornament was to him the Church "dogmatic claims" could not have had.

In this regard, is very significant that VD Yermolin, restoring the St George Cathedral in 1471, did not put a single stone with zooantropomorfnym decor in the altar apse (Fig. 31). That before the destruction of the temple decor of this on the apses was (at least in the bases of columns column-type belt), say the analogy with other walls of St. George's Cathedral477and Demetrius Cathedral, the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl.

 

 

 

Fig. 31. The decor of the altar apse of St. George's Cathedral in Yuryev-Polsky.

 

 

In the beginning of XIV century, as we have seen, zooantropomorfny decor was directly or indirectly are prohibited, but in the 1470's already process was gradual "legalization", in Russia already was brought statue of St. Nicholas478, the Kremlin has already been installed surround carved icon of St. George.

And yet, apparently, was a compromise VD Ermolina with the local Church authorities: since the great Prince ordered to restore the Cathedral "as before"479, the latter agreed to the General reproduction of the historical appearance of the temple together with the "idols", but "Holy" - altars - defended.

Concluding the topic of the sculptural decoration of churches, say the following: looking at the heyday of the "Russian Gothic" in the architectural forms of the temples of the XV-XVI centuries (the Trinity Cathedral of St. Sergius and the Andronikov monasteries, hip architecture), you can only surmise what masterpieces of monumental sculpture we lost because of the ban on zooantroponoznyh decor in the beginning of XIV century.

 

Conclusion

 .

Sergey Zagraevsky

 

Introduction

Chapter I. White stone and brick

Chapter II. Galich, Caucasus and Volga Bulgaria

Chapter III. Suzdal masters and Romanesque

Chapter IV. The limit of reliability

Chapter V. Sculpture decoration

Conclusion

Applications, notes

 

To the page Scientific works

To the main page