To the page “Scientific works”

To the main page

S. V. Zagraevsky

Saint George Cathedral in Yuriev-Polsky.

Questions of architectural history and reconstruction

Published in Russian: Заграевский С.В, Вопросы архитектурной истории и реконструкции Георгиевского собора в Юрьеве-Польском. М.: Алев-В, 2008. ISBN 5-94025-097-1.

Annotation

The research of Professor S.V. Zagraevsky is devoted to the masterpiece of ancient Russian architecture - St. George Cathedral in Yuriev-Polsky. A number of issues of architectural history of the Cathedral, a refined version of the reconstruction of its original appearance are developed. It is proved that Svyatoslav, Prince of Yuriev-Polsky, was himself the architect of this unique Cathedral. The date of unpreserved Trinity chapel of St. George Cathedral is ascertained.

This publication is a donation of the author to Yuriev-Polsky historical, architectural and art museum.

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

PREFACE

Yuryev-Polish historical-architectural

and art Museum

In the city of Yuriev-Polsky is an outstanding monument of old Russian architecture which is considered to be the pearl of the Vladimir-Suzdal land - white-stone Cathedral of St. George's.

This temple was built in 1230-1234 years the Holy Prince Svyatoslav and Vsevolod-carved white stone from the base to the head. St. George's Cathedral largely determine the future development of the architecture of Ancient Russia, in particular, his model was built the first stone Church of the Moscow Uspenie Cathedral 1326-1327 years.

Even after the collapse and restructuring in the XV century St. George's Cathedral is a delight and admiration for the grandiose plan, the amazing talent of the ancient masters.

Is not the first century Church is in the focus of attention of researchers of the pre-Mongolian architecture of North-Eastern Russia. Offer readers the work of Professor SV zagraevsky develops and complements the scientific views of such outstanding scientists as PD Baranowski, Dpotop, N.N. Voronin, H. Wagner, AV century, Kavelmaher.

Yuryev-Polish historical-architectural and art Museum is proud of its subordinate masterpiece of old Russian architecture and is making every effort to preserve and further study.

Director of the Museum

N.A. Egorov

I

Dating questions of St. George's Cathedral

and Trinity chapel

In 1230 Svyatoslav, Prince of Yuriev-Polsky, destroyed the Cathedral of St. George, built by Yuri Dolgoruky in 1152¹: "Prince Svyatoslav in Urgeu collapsing the Church of the Holy Yuri will newer stone, tako also be collapsed and polomalsya, uje be created his grandfather Yurga Volodimirec and Saint great sacred"².

Archaeological survey in 2001 found that the Church of 1152 was not in place of the existing St. George's Cathedral³and , therefore, the old temple was pulled down not because of the beginning of works on construction of new, and for any other reason (perhaps the Church is indeed "collapsed and broke" in connection with the low quality of its construction). Accordingly, we accept 1230 as the date of beginning of construction of the Cathedral Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich, but only conditionally: a new Church could begin to build both before and after the destruction of the old.

In 1234 the construction of the new St. George's Cathedral was completed: "Blessed Prince Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich triumphed Church in St. George Holy Martyr George and decorate W"⁴.

Yermalinskaya chronicle under 1471 year reports: "In the city of St. George in Polish visited the Church of the Holy stone George, and the chapel of the Holy Trinity, and Rezan on Kameni, all of you, and razvalilis all to the ground, on the orders of Prince Vasilii Dmitriev (Yermolin - SZ) those churches gathered all iznova and set as before"⁵. Accordingly, the most probable time of the destruction of the temple - the beginning-middle of the XV century.

After recovery in 1471 from the Cathedral survived years 1230-1234:

- from the West - the first tier of the porch and the Northern half of the wall to the top of a column-type belt;

- from the East - cap apses;

- from the South - the porch and the adjoining wall (closer to the corners they survived only until the cap);

- from the North porch and the most significant part of the walls of the Cathedral (at the Central and Western fence survived column-type belt).

Thus, we have about the Cathedral 1230-1234 years sufficiently large volume of information. It was a four-column forechurches, trehapsidnoy temple (Fig. 1 and 2), built of white stone of average quality. The arches were made of porous tuff-like limestone⁶wall zabutovany cobblestones on lime mortar⁷.

Fig. 1. St. George's Cathedral. View from the North-East.

Fig. 2. St. George's Cathedral. The plan (by N.N. Voronin).

Chetverikov (without apses and chapels) is almost square in plan (length - 13.5 m width - 14 m). The side of the omphalos - 4.7 m. The essential difference between the plan of St. George Cathedral from other pre-Mongolian churches of the North-Eastern Russia - what dome box "extend"aisles narrowed, and the pillars were originally not a cross, and a square (read more about it we will talk in paragraph (4).

The arches of the Cathedral opened inward. Research PD Baranowski and Pinboliada revealed in the upper middle part of the Western wall facing the interior of the Church laid arched doorway⁸ and it proves that the Western porch was bunk, and the second tier was also open inside of the Cathedral. Apparently, this story has played the role of the chorus, as other choir in the Church was not⁹.

As was arranged entrance to the second tier of the West porch of St. George's Cathedral, unknown to us, since no stairs in its walls, in contrast to the Western porch of the virgin Nativity Cathedral in Suzdal (1222-1225 years), studies have found¹⁰. Perhaps there ascended the wooden stairs inside the temple.

The Foundation of the Cathedral significantly wider walls, has a trapezoidal cross-section, above, were laid from roughly shaped blocks of blocks of white stone, bottom - of rubble on lime mortar. The depth of the bottom part of the basement is about 1.5 m; the upper part was elevated above the surface and after the device of Foundation was covered to the level cap aboveground parts. Thanks to this device the foundations of the building were on an artificial hill with the height of about 1 m¹¹.

Attic base Cathedral in Yuriev-Polsky has a strong stem, as well as base of the virgin Nativity Cathedral in Suzdal.

From the northeast to the St. George Cathedral was built small Trinity chapel, conditionally shown (no shading) in Fig. 2. In this chapel (more precisely, in the outer arkosolii the Eastern parts of the North wall of the Cathedral) was buried Prince Svyatoslav, who died in 1252¹².

Chronicle dates Trinity chapel does not have. K. Romanov believed that it was built simultaneously with the completion of the construction of the Cathedral in 1234¹³. N.N. Voronin referred to the construction of the chapel to 1234-1238 years¹⁴.

But we cannot agree with such an early Dating of the chapel for a number of reasons.

First, cloropropionamidina "Gothic" portal sign in Trinity chapel of the North porch of the Cathedral (Fig. 3 and 4) is significantly different from other portals George's Church, it did the master completely different school. Processing of the stone, which laid thrust of this portal is also completely different than the other portals of the temple. The stone is covered with a network of cuts, similar to a small incision under the plaster.

Fig. 3. Portal Trinity chapel.

Fig. 4. Breakthrough portal Trinity chapel (NN Voronin).

VP Vygolov believed that the master portal Trinity chapel was VD Yermolin¹⁵but we cannot agree with the researcher, as Yermolin had not paid any attention to creating "their own" decoration on the temple: the most cloropropionamidina details of his created when the rebuilding of the temple were simple arcs on the apses. We must support the position of Voronin, who believed that the master of the portal Yermolin could not be¹⁶.

As we have seen above, the master of the portal could not be any of the masters of the Cathedral 1230-1234 years. Therefore, we must conclude that the portal chapel was built much later the temple, although earlier in 1471.

Secondly, the violation porjadovki wall of the vestibule and portal chapel, as well as a significant increase in the base of the portal relative to the floor of the Cathedral (on these facts drew attention VP Vygolov¹⁷) also suggests that the portal was built in the wall of the vestibule much later construction of the Cathedral.

Third, archaeological research AV Stoletov showed that the Foundation of a chapel was built differently than the Foundation of the Cathedral (of tuff-like limestone yellowish color on the weak solution)¹⁸. This is also evidenced by the large time lag between the construction of the Cathedral and the chapel (in particular, AV century was dated the chapel of about 1265 year¹⁹).

Fourth, if the Trinity chapel was built in 1230-ies, he could not be a temple-tomb, as Sviatoslav died in 1252. A construction of the temple-tomb during the life of the Church (as the tombs of Egyptian pharaohs) for the architecture of Ancient Russia is not typical.

Fifth, the construction of small outer aisles also unusual for ancient architecture of the pre-Mongol period.

Sixth, Kavelmaher showed that the inscription on the targets set Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich cross (possibly belonging to the scene of relief composition of "the Crucifixion with bystanders", traditionally called "Svyatoslavova cross"):

- in ancient times was not on the facade of the Cathedral (where it was placed in their reconstructions H. Wagner and N.N. Voronin - see item 3, Fig. 8 and 10), and the Trinity chapel;

- modern construction Trinity chapel;

- was written on his "cornerstone"²⁰.

This inscription shows absolutely unreal date - 1224 year²¹. Such a serious mistake in the date could appear only in the case of a label "to recall", i.e. many decades later, and this is additional evidence in favor of the late Dating of the chapel.

The inscription on the set of the cross is shown in Fig. 5, the composition of "the Crucifixion with bystanders" - in Fig. 6.

Fig. 5. The inscription on the targets set by Svetoslav cross (stored in the Lapidarium St. George's Cathedral).

Fig. 6. Relief song "the Crucifixion with bystanders" (stored in the Lapidarium St. George's Cathedral).

Based on the foregoing, we can assume that the Trinity chapel was built much later St. George Cathedral, in fact - later the death of Svyatoslav in 1252. Perhaps the funeral Sviatoslav initially was in a different place (for example, inside the Cathedral - on the other side of the wall of the same North-Eastern parts)and then was transferred to this chapel.

Thus, we have adopted the date of Trinity chapel - not earlier 1252 and not later than the end of the XIV century.

Stories and embossed plastic compositions, which was decorated with St. George's Cathedral and that after the restoration of the temple VD Yermolin become one of the greatest mysteries in the history of the ancient Russian monumental art, beyond the scope of this study²². We note only that the thread has been implemented in two stages: the first includes the manufacture of blocks with high reliefs (before installing them into the wall), the second - performance on the already completed the walls of "carpet" thread.

K. Romanov believed that initially were intended only relief, and "carpet" thread was not included in the original concept²³. N.N. Voronin challenged this view, believing that the development of the decoration of churches from the middle of the XII to the beginning of XIII century foresaw increasing amount thread²⁴.

We can show that the truth, as is often the case, is in the middle between these points of view.

The tendency to increase the volume of threads in the pre-Mongolian architecture of North-Eastern Russia, of course, took place, and in this we must agree with N.N. Voronin. But we can not agree with KK Romanov that the original idea of the sculptural decor of the St George Cathedral included only high relief. In fact, carving stones laid in wall - it is very difficult and risky: in the case of marriage to be extracted from the stone masonry and replace the other.

Apparently, churchwarden, examining built and decorated with reliefs St. George's Cathedral, considered it not enough "elegant" (without the "carpet" thread temple was decorated with much more modest Vladimirsky Cathedral of St. Demetrius), and decided to make the Church more - "carpet" - decor.

Probably, the work on this kind of decoration was delayed until winter 1237-1238 years (coming to Russia Batu Khan), as evidenced by incomplete thread on the South wall of the Western porch.

II

About the architect of St. George's Cathedral

We can assume that the St George Cathedral is the only pre-Mongol building of North-Eastern Russia, who we do know the name of the architect. According to the Tver chronicle, Prince Svyatoslav "be master of himself"²⁵.

N.N. Voronin challenged the validity of the message of the chronicler, assuming that compiler Tver arch could be in Yuriev-Polsky, where his eye had caught the modern Cathedral of the inscription on the wall of the temple, reporting on the targets set by Svetoslav cross, and from this the chronicler made wrong conclusions²⁶.

As we mentioned in paragraph 1, Kavelmaher showed that the inscription on the act of Svyatoslav in ancient times was in the late Trinity chapel. Accordingly, the researcher explained that the chronicler could not so grossly mistaken and had other data about the authorship of Svyatoslav against the temple. Version Kavelmahera further confirmed by the fact that if this was even an inscription on the wall of the Cathedral, then read it would be hardly possible, since it would be located too high (see Fig. 5, 8 and 10).

Therefore, we must unconditionally accept Chronicles the message and to Svyatoslav master of St. George's Cathedral. This position is indirectly confirmed by the historically called the most admired story wall composition of the Crucifix with " - Sviatoslav cross" (see Fig. 6).

Kavelmaher believed that the Prince was the head of all construction areas: "the architect, who elevated the building, the artist-bearer of ornaments and organizer of the farm was a churchwarden of the Cathedral, the son of Vsevolod the Big Nest, Yuryev Prince Svyatoslav"²⁷.

In principle, one of these "titles" - architect, artist or organizer - alone would be enough for the chronicler could rightly say Svyatoslav "be the master himself. But in favor of the version that the Prince was just an architect, said the following considerations.

First, although the word "master" in Ancient Rus and had a very broad meaning²⁸but the mention of a name of master in the annals usually meant it architect²⁹. Remember the "master Peter" (St. George's Cathedral in Yuriev monastery in Novgorod)³⁰, "master Cow of Yakovich with Lubani street"³¹ (Cyril Church in Novgorod), "master and artist Peter Myloneha"³² (wall at the Vydubitsky monastery in Kiev), "master of Aleviz Fryazino"³³ (11 churches at the Moscow Posad).

Secondly, in favor of the fact that the architect of St. George's Cathedral in Yuryev-Polsky was the Prince himself (i.e. Amateur), shows that the temple stood about two hundred years. So the imminent collapse of the pre-Mongolian temple, not exceeding a limit of reliability, some for the white-stone Church architecture in the times of Yuri Dolgoruky (area SPLA - up 200 square meters, the side of the omphalos - up to 6 m³⁴), has no analogues: the top is similar in size to the Church of Boris and Gleb in Kideksha, fell or was demolished in connection with the emergency condition) to more than 500 years after construction³⁵.

N.N. Voronin offered a different explanation for such a short historical fate of the St George Cathedral. The researcher gave unpreserved pre-Mongolian and the first post-Mongol³⁶ temples stepped arches and Gothic tower-shaped top, making a conclusion that such conclusion had low constructive reliability and led to a rapid destruction of Church buildings³⁷. Accordingly, step arch and "Gothic" top assumed N.N. Voronin in St. George's Cathedral in Yuryev-Polish³⁸, the first assumption Cathedral of Moscow³⁹, The Nativity Cathedral in Suzdal, Rostov assumption Cathedral and Yaroslavl Printania temples beginning of the XIII century ⁴⁰.

The question is whether in these churches (especially in St. George's Cathedral) higher arches, we can solve it, using the method K. Romanov and N. Voronin: attraction for matching architectural forms not only the previous or contemporary Church monuments, but also the later Church buildings erected under direct or indirect impact⁴¹.

That the temple 1230-1234 years in Yuriev-Polsky significantly influenced the development of the post-Mongolian architecture of North-Eastern Russia, is proved, above all, that his model was built such a "landmark" the Church, as the first assumption Cathedral in Moscow (1326-1327 years; the reconstruction of the Cathedral of the author of the study, see figure. 14)⁴². This temple, as was shown by the author, had higher arches⁴³. Had such an arch and churches abroad of the XIV and XV centuries in Zvenigorod assumption "on the Town" (see Fig. 13, 16) and the Nativity of the virgin in the Savvino-Storozhevsky monastery.

Kavelmaher noted that found and installed on St. George's Cathedral VD Yermolin twelve capitals and in pre-Mongol times were on the same mark and, therefore, the Church could not have reduced the corner of compartments⁴⁴. Based on this, the investigator questioned the existence of St. George's Cathedral high arches.

But the temples with stepped arches does not necessarily belonged to the type of the Cathedral of the Andronikov monastery in Moscow (1425-1427 years) with reduced angular compartments: the temple could seem like Zvenigorod churches where arches increased, but the capitals, crowning pilasters, aligned at the same height. N.N. Voronin in his reconstruction of the St George Cathedral is rightly portrayed capitals that way⁴⁵ (see Fig. 8).

It is also important to note that the reconstruction of temples in the "towering", "Gothic" style (including with stepped arches) matches took place during the XII-XV centuries, the General trends of convergence architecture of Russia with the architecture of the Romanesque-Gothic Europe. So, H. Wagner wrote that the temples "towering" type have a dynamic striving upward, and it is possible that if the development of "high-rise" architecture was not interrupted by the Mongol invasion, then Russia would have known something akin to Gothic⁴⁶.

Thus, we follow NN Voronin believe in the existence of the St George Cathedral high arches.

But we cannot agree with the researcher that such structures were not sufficiently reliable. The reasons for such opposition few.

First, enable the Yaroslavl Printania temples beginning of the XIII century in historical destinies of white stone building and do follow NN Voronin on this basis, any General conclusions about their reliability seems to be inappropriate due to the huge differences in a constructive properties plinfy and white stone.

Secondly, the Rostov Cathedral of the assumption of Andrei Bogolyubsky, who had neither high arches, or "towering" top, fell even faster George's Cathedral, standing only 42 years.

Thirdly, the Savior Cathedral Andronikov monastery, which had higher arches, stood for a long time (about four years), and collapsed due to "force majeure" - the fire of 1812.

Fourth, the vaults of aisles in the case of high arches are loaded not only from the side (as in the "classical" system of arches at the level sets aisles, where raspor arches is passed to the pillars and arches aisles almost horizontally), but from above. Therefore, stepped arches gives a more even distribution of load on the drum at the quadrangular elements (and, consequently, their increased structural strength)than the "classic" scheme.

So, although we accept the hypothesis Voronin's "towering" completion of a number of temples XIII-XV centuries (in particular, of St. George's Cathedral), we have to state that such a conclusion could not significantly influence the reliability and durability of monuments. The presence of high arches and "Gothic" top did not clarify the question of why the historical fate of the Cathedral in Yuriev-Polsky was so short.

Consequently, there is only one version, which we have advanced above: the imminent destruction of the St George Cathedral was because it was building an Amateur architect - Prince Svyatoslav.

What exactly could contain errors Sviatoslav what its architectural innovations fatally affected the historical fate of the temple, we talk more in paragraph 4.

But, as we shall see, what happened to the temple in the early to mid XV century, still cannot accurately be called a disaster.

K. Romanov believed that it was a disaster, i.e. the head and the arches collapsed, pulling him walls⁴⁷. This view was supported by N.N. Voronin⁴⁸ and H. Wagner⁴⁹.

Kavelmaher stuck on this occasion a different position, believing that it could collapse only the head, possibly, not entirely. As evidence of this researcher led the survivors in the interior of white stone reliefs⁵⁰. But then the Cathedral has long stood without a dome, water fall under facing, the latter has deteriorated from sprouted trees and extremely harmful for the white-stone buildings Russian climate (especially numerous cycles of freezing-thawing), and this, according to Kavelmahera, gave Ermolino formal right to disassemble almost all of the Cathedral and collect it again⁵¹.

Unlike Ermolin - Saviour of the sculptural decoration, which gathered the Church from the wreckage (interpretation Voronin and Wagner), - Yermolin in the interpretation Kavelmahera appears a kind of barbarian, not doujinshis at dismantling fix the initial position of the stones and the right to reproduce it.

But the position of Kavelmahera contrary to the chronicle, which unambiguously States that the Church is "collapsed", and Yermolin his collected iznova"⁵².

Probably, in this case, the truth is once again between the two polar points of view. We will present our own vision of the situation.

As rightly observed Kavelmaher, initially, in whole or in part, fell only head. In support of the position of the researcher we can cite the following observation: the preserved part of the walls is almost no "esperti", i.e. have no outward tilt (as, for example, in the Church of Boris and Gleb in Kideksha or in the Vladimir the Cathedral of St. Demetrius). Consequently, under the weight of the head differed only pillars, and the construction of walls remained intact.

But after the fall of the Chapter of the Cathedral stood without it many years (maybe decades), water got into the cladding, and the influence of climate on the white-stone architecture bore fruit: collapsed exterior cladding is on the scale mentioned Voronin and H. Wagner. This gave the chronicler right to assert that the Cathedral and the chapel "razvalilis all to the ground."

In this regard, we agree with the assumption that Yermolin did not understand the value of the sculptural decoration and unreasonably sorting out some wall-to-column-type belt, and some - to the cap. We are obliged to follow NN Voronin "pay tribute to the work of VD Ermolina, in General, extremely carefully neglected to restore the ruins of ancient buildings"⁵³.

But we must agree with VV kavelmaherom the fact that the crash of St George's Cathedral to say is not entirely justified. It was more gradual, but very rapid (within a few years or decades) destruction.

III

The problems of reconstruction of the original appearance of the Cathedral

Let us consider various options of reconstruction of the original appearance of St. George's Cathedral, the following researchers:

1. Dfacom⁵⁴ (1940-s, Fig. 7);

2. N.N. Voronin⁵⁵ (1950-ies, Fig. 8);

3. G.Kvarnera⁵⁶ (1960-ies, Fig. 10);

4. AV Stoletov⁵⁷ (1960-1970-s, Fig. 11);

5. The author of the study (2000-ies, Fig. 12).

Some proportions and architectural features of a number of preserved temples of North-Eastern Russia and various options of reconstruction of the St George Cathedral in the Appendix.

Consider the order of all offered researchers variants of reconstruction of the temple.

1. Dpotop in its reconstruction (Fig. 7) led the ratio of the height of the drum and height of the rectangle to the proportions of the Cathedral of St. Demetrius, although the drum because "pushed" omphalos of the St George Cathedral is a bit wider. The proportions of the quadrangular were middle between the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl and the Dmitrievsky Cathedral. Step arch, whose presence in the temple of St. George, Polish, we confirmed in paragraph 2, in the reconstruction DP Sukhova missing.

Fig. 7. St. George's Cathedral. Reconstruction DP Sukhova.

In total on reconstruction DP Sukhova we see the "standard" pre-Mongol temple, with the only difference that the apse in it the same height (which is more typical for post-Mongolian time), and under the drum is rather strange pedestal with pliers completion.

In General, this reconstruction is good enough, but does not take into account the evolution of architecture in the beginning of XIII century, which we discussed above, and which brings St. George's Cathedral to "sign" of the post-Mongol temples.

2. N.N. Voronin, rightly considered significant impact of the temple in Yuriev-Polsky on post-Mongolian architecture, tried to bring a number of features of its reconstruction (Fig. 8)⁵⁸ to Zvenigorod assumption Cathedral "on the Town" - entered higher arches, lowered the square and pulled the drum. St. George's Cathedral in NN Voronin became much more "towering", and Demetrius, and the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl.

Fig. 8. St. George's Cathedral. Reconstruction Voronin.

But the drum in the reconstruction Voronin turned stretched beyond measure - it was significantly higher than the drums, not only pre-Mongolian churches, but the assumption Cathedral "on the Town". To bring the overall proportion of its reconstruction to the proportions of post-Mongol temples, the researcher was forced to greatly reduce the quadrangle (naturally, at the expense of the second tier, as the height of the first known for certain). But even despite this decline, the overall proportions of the temple by NN Voronin was much more extended up than the Cathedral "on the Town".

We cannot agree with the fact that, according to the reconstruction Voronin, St. George's Cathedral had a drum four-sided pedestal trifoliynym completion. There are several reasons.

First, the involvement of the researcher as a possible model for St George's Cathedral churches trifoliynym completions bushels (Paraskeva churches in Novgorod, Chernigov, Michael the Archangel in Smolensk, the Euphrosyne Cathedral in Polotsk) is hardly appropriate. The main thing in any reconstruction - selection of adequate analogues, but not listed temples white stone, and Printania, and they have totally different architectural forms that have no affinity with surviving the first tier of the St George Cathedral. Accordingly, we have no reason to believe that the top of the Cathedral in Yuriev-Polsky was similar to riding these temples, and that St. George Cathedral was as "draw up", as these temples.

And with the first tier of other white-stone cathedrals of Vladimir-Suzdal and Moscow Principality XII-XV centuries, the first tier of the St George Cathedral is similar. Therefore, we can attract as analogues only temples of North-Eastern Russia. And in these temples trifoliynoe completion of facades to start the construction of churches with groin vaults (i.e. until the end of the XV century⁵⁹were not applied.

Secondly, we cannot accept the view Voronin that trifoliynoe completion of a Large Zion of Vladimir assumption Cathedral (Fig. 9), the top of which (the work of Moscow artists) dated by 1486⁶⁰ that corresponds to a hypothetical trifoliynogo completion of St. George's Cathedral in Yuryev-Polish⁶¹ and the first assumption Cathedral in Moscow⁶².

Fig. 9. Great Zion assumption Cathedral in Vladimir.

The fact that St. George's Cathedral collapsed for many decades to production of Zion in 1486, and the Cathedral of the assumption 1326-1327 years was dismantled in 1472 - for 14 years until 1486. Even if these churches were indeed trifoliynye completion, it is unlikely that the "historical memory" of the Moscow jewelers has been so long. It is hardly lawful to approach the masters of XV century by the standards of our time, when the destruction of the monument of architecture is so extraordinary and tragic event that can be picked up in the works of decorative art. IN XV century there was no concept or on the protection of monuments of architecture, nor to perpetuate their memory. Accordingly, for craftsmen of that time much more likely to focus not on the ancient and the modern samples.

The author of this study showed that the Le trifole in Zion reproduced completed and cathedrals, destroyed many years before its manufacture, and "landmark" princely temple, built shortly before 1486 and had considerable resonance among old masters, Church Trifon Naprudnom⁶³.

Third, AV century found in the Lapidarium of Yuriev-Polsky white stone fragments, formed a certain angle architectural object octagonal shape. The researcher took them to the drum of the St George Cathedral and reconstructed it as octagonal⁶⁴. Further, analyzing the reconstruction of the researcher, we see that these fragments were not related to the drum, and to octagonal pedestal. But in any case, according to these archaeological discoveries, about processed by the square pedestal Le trifole question.

From all this it follows that the pedestal drum George's Cathedral in Yuryev-Polish was not square, and had no trifoliynogo complete.

Concluding the consideration of reconstruction Voronin, note that the researcher is introduced in the reconstruction of the apse uneven, more typical of the pre-Mongolian period.

3. G.Kvarner took the reconstruction Voronin⁶⁵only slightly lowered clearly overvalued drum (however, the drum, and the General proportions of the temple was still too stretched upwards). Chetverikov remains very low, with disproportionately reduced the second tier (Fig. 10).

Fig. 10. St. George's Cathedral. Reconstruction Wagner

Some people believe that H. Wagner was determined by the height of the second tier, based on their plot relief reconstruction. But in fact the situation is the opposite - according to the testimony Kavelmahera, one of the main problems of the researcher was hosted reliefs on unconditionally accepted them small area of the second tier, N.N. Voronin proposed⁶⁶. In the end, on St George's Cathedral in the reconstruction Wagner left very little space for those reliefs, which have not survived in the destruction of the temple were either ignored VD Yermolin (and such reliefs hardly was substantially less than the surviving).

Note also that H. Wagner unduly narrowed window⁶⁷ and refused shaped window frames. Apse remained uneven. For unknown reasons (probably because of the error draftsman) were excluded from the reconstruction of water cannons.

4. AV century rightly refused to Le trifole under the drum (Fig. 11). The second tier of the researcher raised, bringing its chetverik almost to the proportions of reconstruction DP Sukhova. The drum on the reconstruction Wagner was lowered. Thus, the vertical proportions of the St George Cathedral has become much more relevant and closer to Zvenigorod assumption Cathedral.

Fig. 11. St. George's Cathedral. Reconstruction AV Stoletov.

But the researcher, as we have said earlier, took them to found corner blocks certain architectural object octagonal shape to the drum of St. George's Cathedral. Accordingly, the drum in the reconstruction AV Stoletov significantly increased in diameter and was octagonal⁶⁸. But octagonal drums met only in the architecture of the Byzantine provinces⁶⁹ and we showed above that, since surviving the first tier of the St George Cathedral is similar with other churches of Vladimir-Suzdal and Moscow Principality XII-XV centuries, we can attract as analogues only Church building in North-East Russia.

Consequently, we may assume that these white stone fragments were not related to the drum, and to the base of St. George's Cathedral, i.e. octagon was not drum and base.

The Windows in the reconstruction AV Stoletov were slit, although it was profiled frames.

As we mentioned in paragraph 1, the researcher was Trinity chapel dated of about 1265 year⁷⁰ and quite rightly did not portray him in his reconstruction of the Cathedral at 1230-1234 years.

The top of the apses researcher returned to the same level (though not in all variants of its reconstruction⁷¹), but, unfortunately, gave the apse is absolutely inadequate hypertrophied column-type belt in conjunction with arcature.

5. The author of this study, taking possession of St. George's Cathedral stepped arches (see item 2), took as the basis for reconstruction Voronin and Wagner, although with a fairly substantial additions and corrections (Fig. 12).

Fig. 12. St. George's Cathedral. Reconstruction of the author.

We increased the second tier of the temple and lowered the drum (bringing the total proportion of the temple to the assumption Cathedral "on the Town"), led the apse to the same height, were returned to the Cathedral and water cannons were removed from the Central parts of the inscription on the act of Svyatoslav, which, as shown by Kavelmaher, was at Trinity chapel⁷². The window in our reconstruction correspond to the reconstruction Voronin.

In accordance with grounded us in paragraph 1 Dating Trinity chapel, we have excluded it from our reconstruction of the original form of the Cathedral.

Drum diameter, we left as it was with Voronin and Wagner, but the pedestal in our reconstruction, in accordance with the above interpretation of the archaeological discoveries AV Stoletov, octagonal.

And wosmognosti pedestal can not lead us to the idea that the post-Mongolian architecture borrowed from St. George's Cathedral is not only higher arches and General "towering"but the corbel arches under the drum.

To substantiate the existence of corbel arches in St. George's Church, we can Polish the following provisions.

First, "just" to make complicated octagonal pedestal would have no meaning, since it with earth almost not visible.

Secondly, the architectural and archaeological research PN Maksimov and Bagnava showed that eight of keel corbel arches under the drum were at the Zvenigorod assumption Cathedral "on the Town"⁷³ (Fig. 13), and research Neemrana, that such innovative features were on the virgin Nativity Cathedral of the Savvino-Storozhevsky monastery⁷⁴.

Third, based on the analysis of ancient images and results of archaeological research, the author shows that the keel corbel arches originally had two churches of the beginning of XIV century - the Church of the Nativity of the virgin in Gorodnya Tver region⁷⁵ and Staro-Nikolsky) Church in Mozhaisk⁷⁶;

Fourth, in early 2000-ies the author regardless of the interpretation of the archaeological discoveries AV Stoletov, solely on the basis of the analysis of development of architecture of North-Eastern Russia the end of the XIII-the first third of the XIV century, was reconstructed with eight keel corbel arches under the drum built on the model of St. George's Cathedral, the first Cathedral of the assumption in Moscow⁷⁷ (Fig. 14).

Fig. 13. Assumption Cathedral "on the Town" in Zvenigorod. Reconstruction Bagnava.

Fig. 14. Assumption Cathedral 1326-1327 years in Moscow. Reconstruction of the author.

Accordingly, we in our reconstruction of the St George Cathedral is located on a pedestal under the drum eight of keel corbel arches.

In accordance with the latest data on the forms of the domes of ancient Russian temples⁷⁸ we changed the shape of the covering of the dome of St. George's Cathedral with helmet (appearing only in the XVII century as "antique stylization") on a simple cupola floor "Byzantine" type with under-cross stones and a small cross, accepted in Ancient Russia until the appearance in the late XIII century onion domes (in particular, in the Moscow Cathedral of the assumption 1326-1327 years has probably been onion dome, which is reflected in our reconstruction is shown in the Fig. 14).

Concluding the discussion on the original appearance of the temple 1230-1234 years in Yuriev-Polsky, one cannot but recall the words Voronin: "the proposed scheme reconstruction of the St George Cathedral is nothing more than a graphic expression of our hypothesis, the working outline for future research"⁷⁹.

IV

Architectural innovations in St. George's Cathedral

Now that we have clarified the original appearance of the St George Cathedral, you can try to understand what it might contain errors architect, Prince Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, which led to the relatively rapid destruction of the temple.

In Fig. 15 shows the plans of six four-column temples of North-Eastern Russia, in Fig. 16 - sections four of them.

Fig. 15. The plans of some four-column temples of North-Eastern Russia:

1 - Transfiguration Cathedral in Pereslavl-Zalessky;

2 - Church of the Intercession on the Nerl;

3 - Demetrius Cathedral in Vladimir;

4 - St. George's Cathedral in Yuryev-Polish;

5 - the assumption Cathedral "on the Town" in Zvenigorod;

6 - the virgin Nativity Cathedral of the Savvino-Storozhevsky monastery.

Fig. 16. Incisions some four-column temples of North-Eastern Russia:

1 - Transfiguration Cathedral in Pereslavl-Zalessky;

2 - Church of the Intercession on the Nerl;

3 - Demetrius Cathedral in Vladimir;

4 - assumption Cathedral "on the Town" in Zvenigorod.

In Fig. 15 shows that the plan of St. George temple differs significantly from plans Spassky, Pokrovsky and Demetrius. The pillars and walls of the Cathedral in Yuriev-Polsky relatively thin, dome box "extend", on the walls is not important design element - the shovels, and the pillars have crossed himself, greatly increasing their reliability. We also note that, unlike all the previous temples of North-Eastern Russia, the SPLA St George Cathedral choir there are no opposing raspor Western pillars and, therefore, play an essential role in strengthening the churches.

In General, given the low reliability of the white-stone building in comparison with plinthite⁸⁰, St. George's Cathedral even when you look at his plan gives the impression of a rather "risky" buildings.

When looking at the reconstruction of the Cathedral (Fig. 12) the impression of "risk" is further enhanced. On thin square pillars and unfortified blades wall weighs heavy drum, decorated with kokoshniks, create significant additional weight.

In Fig. 15 shows the plans of Zvenigorod churches abroad of the XIV and XV centuries, with an equally heavy drums with innovative features. It is seen that the assumption Cathedral "on the Town", unlike George's Cathedral, very thick walls and pillars. At the Church of the Savvino-Storozhevsky monastery of these design elements "ease", but the wall is significantly tilted inwards, creating a very stable pyramidal silhouette of buildings and are actually buttresses for themselves. This is quite different, much more sophisticated level of construction equipment in comparison with the pre-Mongol churches.

There is another important factor that could lead to a relatively rapid destruction of the temple in Yuriev-Polsky. In Fig. 16 see sections Cathedral of St. Demetrius and the assumption Cathedral "on the Town". We see how thin the vaults aisles at the first temple, and how thick the second.

In this regard, we may assume that, in addition to the General "riskiness" of construction, error Prince Svyatoslav as the architect was that the thickness of codes aisles was not close to the assumption, and the Dmitrievsky Cathedral. The fact that codes of aisles structurally very important: they play the role of the arc-boutants, transmitting raspor drum from the arches and pillars on the most stable elements of construction - walls. And if these codes are too thin, they instead to send traffic, deform themselves, and the pillars had nothing to prevent "break" under the weight of the drum.

In justification of Sviatoslav as an architect say that in St. George's Cathedral of the role played by three buttresses of the porch. But, apparently, their resistance to spreading out the heavy drum and kokoshniki with all of the above structural risks turned out to be insufficient. The construction of the later another "buttress" Trinity chapel - also could not reverse the current emergency. In addition, the wall could not be deformed - a drum for the fall was enough strain pillars and arches aisles (most likely the process of destruction of the temple we showed in paragraph (2).

Thus, we can conclude that such a short historical fate of the St George Cathedral led to the use therein of a number of architectural innovations associated with serious structural risks.

Hardly a professional architect, who had nearly a century of experience in the construction of the white stone churches in the North-Eastern Russia, bearing personal responsibility before the churchwarden, clergymen and citizens would undertake the building of such an unreliable design. Hence, it is "risky" architectural innovations in St. George's Cathedral is an additional argument in favor of authorship is the local Prince, does not have sufficient professional and responsible only to himself.

And yet let's pay tribute to the talent Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich: the result of its construction and creative activity in Yuriev-Polsky became an architectural masterpiece, though, standing only about two hundred years, but in many respects predetermined the development of the North-Eastern Russian architecture of the XIV-XV centuries, and perhaps a later time.

APPLICATION

Some proportions and distinctive features

number of surviving temples of North-Eastern Russia

and various options of reconstruction of St. George's Cathedral

The table used the following notations and methods of payment:

1. The height of the rectangle is calculated from the level of the surface time of construction of the temple to toe zakomaras.

2. The length of the quadrangular calculated without apses.

3. The boundary between the first and second tier is the top column-type or ornamental belts.

4. The diameter and the visible area of the drum are calculated without taking into account the thickness of kokoshniks and Le trifole.

5. The height of the drum is calculated together with the height of the visible part of the pedestal.

6. Legend analyzed churches and reconstructions:

1 - St. George's Cathedral. Reconstruction DP Sukhova;

2 - St. George's Cathedral. Reconstruction Voronin;

3 - St. George's Cathedral. Reconstruction Of Wagner;

4 - St. George's Cathedral. Reconstruction AV Stoletov;

5 - St. George's Cathedral. Reconstruction of the author of the study;

6 - the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl;

7 - Demetrius Cathedral in Vladimir;

8 - Uspensky Cathedral "on the Town" in Zvenigorod (we consider it as the main example of post-Mongolian architecture, because of all the surviving temples of North-Eastern Russia XIV-XV centuries, it forms the most traditional).

7. Legend ways to design the pedestal under the drum:

0 - registration is absent;

1 - Le trifole;

2 - kokoshniks.

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
The ratio of the height of the drum to the height of the quadrangle	0,55	0,75	0,71	0,64	0,62	0,42	0,53	0,62
The ratio of the length of the square to its height	1,1	1,27	1,27	1,17	1,18	1,0	1,16	1,19
The ratio of the height of the second tier to the height of the first tier	0,6	0,47	0,47	0,64	0,61	0,87	0,79	0,61
The ratio of the height of the drum to the height of the first tier	0,88	1,13	1,06	1,0	1,0	0,87	1,0	1,0
The external diameter of the drum to the side of the omphalos	1,27	1,27	1,27	1,35	1,27	1,34	1,32	1,25
The ratio of the visible area of the drum to the visible area of the quadrangle	0,22	0,29	0,27	0,3	0,25	0,18	0,22	0,28
The ratio of the diameter of the drum to the length of the quadrangle	0,4	0,4	0,4	0,46	0,4	0,39	0,41	0,44
The ratio of the height of the apses to the height of the quadrangle	0,88	0,92	0,92	0,88	0,9	1,0	0,9	0,82
Having stepped arches	no	Yes	Yes	no	Yes	no	no	Yes
Design methods pedestal under the drum	0	1	1	0	2	0	0	2

NOTES

1. Dating justification of the temple of Yuri Dolgoruky in Yuriev-Polsky, see: SV zagraevsky. AndPology Rostov chronicler (to the question about the Dating temples Yuri Dolgoruky). Abstracts. In the book: Materials of the regional conference dedicated to the centenary of the birth of N.N. Voronin (19 April 2004.). Vladimir, 2004. C. 15-26; SV zagraevsky. Yuri Dolgoruky and old white-stone architecture. M., 2002 (hereinafter - Zagraevsky, 2002). C. 35;

2. PSRL 1:455.

3. Archaeological research, K. Romanov (in the book: Voronin. The architecture of North-Eastern Russia XII-XV centuries. M., 1961-1962. Vol.2, S. 69) and AV Stoletov (AV century. Materials for the reconstruction of St. George's Cathedral 1152. the city of Yuriev-Polsky. In the book: The culture of ancient Russia. M., 1966. C. 263-267) showed that the Foundation of the Cathedral consists of two zones, the lower of which is made of cobblestones, and the upper made of white stone. Accordingly, researchers believed that the lower part of the basement belonged to the Church of 1152. Based on this AV century was reconstructed temple Dolgoruky as forechurches (AV century. The decree. cit., S. 266).

In 2001 archaeological research in the Cathedral VP Glazov, P.L. Zykov and M. ioannisyan (VP Glazov, P.L. Zykov, M. ioannisyan. Architectural and archaeological research in the Vladimir region. In the book: Archaeological discoveries 2001. M., 2002). Researchers have confirmed that the Foundation of the Cathedral consists of two zones, the bottom of which was determined by K. Romanov and AV Stoletov as the Foundation of an earlier Church of 1152.

Indeed, the Church of 1152 was built simultaneously with the Foundation of Yuriev-Polsky (PSRL 24:77), i.e. from any earlier building stones with frescoes in its foundations couldn't be (however, it remains unclear what was to lay fragments of frescoes in the cobblestone the foundations of the temple of Svyatoslav). Forechurches (AV Stoletov) temple is also absolutely not typical for architecture of North-Eastern Russia since Dolgoruky.

Excavations in 2001 also found that the pillars of the building 1230-1234, in the lower part have strip foundations. Themselves dome square pillars (which preceded the researchers attributed to the rebuilding of the Cathedral VD Yermolin), based on the characteristics of stratigraphy, refer to the Cathedral 1230-1234, Interesting feature, according to observations Wppath, P.L. Zykov and M. ioannisyan, is that the space of the South porch at the level of the lower zone of the Foundation has an open doorway into the interior of the main volume.

Thus, the argument that the lower part of the basement belonged to the Church of 1152, there is only one: if the temple Dolgoruky was located in another place, it is unclear why it took to pull it down, as essentially "worn out and broken" less than 80 years old stone Cathedral was unlikely, and new construction it did not stir. But this situation is still understandable possible low quality of construction of the first temple.

In any case, the location of the Cathedral 1152 remains open, and the solutions require new archaeological research.

4. PSRL 1:460.

5. PSRL 23:159.

6. Kavelmaher. The cornerstone of Lapidarium George's Cathedral in Yuryev-Polish (to the question of the so-called cross Svyatoslavovom). In the book: Old Russian art. Rus. Byzantium. The Balkans. XIII century. SPb, 1997. C. 192.

7. Voronin. The decree. cit., so 2, S. 69.

8. Ibid., C. 79.

9. Ibid., C. 80.

10. Ibid.

11. VP Glazov, P.L. Zykov, M. Ioannisyan. Architectural and archaeological research in the Vladimir region. In the book: Archaeological discoveries 2001. M., 2002

12. Voronin. The decree. cit., so 2, 74 S..

13. Ibid., C. 75.

14. Ibid.

15. VP Vygolov. Architecture of Moscow Rus middle of the XV century. M., 1988. C. 88.

16. Voronin. The decree. cit., so 2, S. 75.

17. VP Vygolov. The decree. cit., 89 S..

18. AV century. Review on the book: H. Wagner. Sculpture of Vladimir-Suzdal Rus, Yuriev-Polsky. M., 1964. In the book: Soviet archeology, № 2, 1967 (hereinafter - Stoletov, 1967). C. 275-276.

19. Ibid.

20. Kavelmaher. The decree. cit., S. 193.

21. Ibid., C. 192.

22. Reconstruction issues, stories and songs relief sculpture of St. George's Cathedral is devoted, in particular, the following scientific works:

K. Romanov. To the question of technique of reliefs of the Cathedral of St. George in, Yuriev-Polsky. In the book: Seminarium Kondakowianum. So 2. Prague, 1928;

Voronin. The decree. cit., so 2, S. 72-105;

H. Wagner. Sculpture of Vladimir-Suzdal Rus, Yuriev-Polsky. M., 1964;

Amidov. On the symbolic idea of the sculptural decoration of the Vladimir-Suzdal churches of the XII-XIII centuries In the book: Old Russian art. Rus. Byzantium. The Balkans. XIII century. SPb, 1997. C. 172;

Amiyaki. The temple of Ezekiel as a source of external sculptural decoration of the Vladimir-Suzdal churches of the XII-XIII centuries, Sic et non. - In the book. Old Russian art. Russia and the countries of the Byzantine world. XII century. SPb, 2002. C. 255.

23. K. Romanov. The decree. cit.

24. Voronin. The decree. cit., so 2, 84 S..

25. PSRL 15:355.

26. Voronin. The decree. cit., so 2, s.

27. Kavelmaher. The decree. cit., S. 193, 185.

28. PA Rappoport. Construction production of Ancient Rus X-XIII centuries St.Petersburg, 1994. C. 127.

29. Note that there is a narrow understanding of the architect as the author of the project and "wide" - as the coordinator and organizer of the construction. Which of these understandings have invested in the word "master" Chronicles, of course, we never know.

30. Novgorod III chronicle (PSRL, so 3) under 6627 (1119) ,

31. Novgorod I chronicle senior and Junior nagged (M-Leningrad, 1950) under 6683 (1196) ,

32. Ipatiev chronicle (PSRL, so 2) under 6707 (1199) ,

33. PSRL 8:254-255.

34. Zagraevsky, 2002. C. 82.

35. The author showed (see Zagraevsky, 2002, S. 107-109)that the first Moscow churches (the assumption Cathedral 1326-1327 years, the Cathedral of our Saviour on the Bor 1330, the Archangel Cathedral 1333), not exceeding a limit of reliability, were destroyed in the late XV-early XVI century due to design errors, but only because they were erected in the centre of the future capital of a unified Russian state and quickly stopped "to meet the objectives of the" growing city and the growing great power.

Naturally, any idea about the monuments of architecture in the XV-XVI centuries were not available, and as soon as the financial possibilities of the temples, under the pretext of "disrepair" demolished and in their place to build something more "prestigious". As is known, the concept of "decay" is very loose. Moreover, sometimes the "decay" is achieved by artificial means, first in many years there is a deliberate savings on the repair, and then requesting funds for a complete rebuilding of the temple, in fact, deteriorated.

The only real catastrophe can be considered the drop top with the Church of the Nativity of the virgin (1393) in 1479, and there is a suspicion that the Church is simply not repaired properly after the "accident" 1454 and 1473 years and brought before the fall. And all the other "short-lived" white stone temples of Moscow XIV and XV centuries, beginning likely to suffer the fate of "artificial ageing".

On the outskirts of Moscow temples were less likely to be victims of ambition of the secular and ecclesiastical authorities, and stood for a long time. The Cathedral of the Epiphany monastery for "Mart" stood for almost 400 years and died in a fire, the Cathedral of the Andronikov monastery albeit with a loss, but survived to our days, in Mozhaisk temples of XIV-XV centuries stood up to the XIX century, and in Zvenigorod, they stand still.

36. In this study, the word "post-Mongol" we mean "posleputinsky" (after the winter 1237-1238 years).

37. Voronin. The decree. cit., so 2, 109 S..

38. Ibid., 102 S..

39. Ibid, 104 S..

40. Ibid, 109 S..

41. Ibid, 104 S..

42. For more information, see: SV zagraevsky. The architecture of North-Eastern Russia the end of the XIII-the first third of the XIV century. M., 2003 (hereinafter - Zagraevsky, 2003). C. 41-43.

43. Ibid., C. 106-108.

44. Kavelmaher. The decree. cit., S. 196.

45. Voronin. The decree. cit., so 2, S. 105.

46. G.Wagner. About the uniqueness of style formation in the architecture of Ancient Russia (return to the problem). In the book: Architectural heritage. Vol. 38. M., 1995. C. 25.

47. Voronin. The decree. cit., so 2, p.71.

48. Ibid.

49. G.Wagner. Sculpture of Vladimir-Suzdal Rus, Yuriev-Polsky. M., 1964 (hereinafter - Wagner, 1964). With 90-97.

50. Kavelmaher. The decree. cit., S. 197. About the reliefs, located in the interior, see: Voronin. The decree. cit., so 2, S. 78.

51. Personal interviews with VV kavelmaherom. 2001.

52. PSRL 23:159.

53. Voronin. The decree. cit., so-2, 72 S..

54. Ibid., C. 103.

55. Ibid., C. 105.

56. Wagner, 1964. C. 90-97.

57. A. Stoletov. St. George Cathedral city of Yuriev-Polsky XIII century, and its reconstruction. In the book: From the history of restoration of monuments of culture. M., 1974 (hereinafter - the century, 1974). C. 112.

58. Voronin. The decree. cit., so 2, 106 S..

59. SV zagraevsky. Architectural history of the Church Trifon Naprudnom and origin groin vault. M., 2008 (hereinafter - Zagraevsky, 2008).

60. Voronin. The decree. cit., so 1, S. 157.

61. Ibid, so 2, S. 105.

62. Ibid., C. 156.

63. Zagraevsky, 2008.

64. Kavelmaher. The decree. cit., S. 196.

65. It should be noted that, according to eyewitnesses, on Lazarevskoye readings at the end of 1980-ies H. Wagner reported that its reconstruction trifoliynogo complete the top of the St George Cathedral was not quite correct. However, no new variants of reconstruction of the researcher is not offered.

66. Kavelmaher. The decree. cit., S. 196.

67. It drew attention Kavelmaher (Kavelmaher. The decree. cit., S. 196).

68. If one looks at the drawing AV Stoletov, quality is poor, you may notice that the bottom of the drum depicted octagonal, and the top - round. This design is not realistic. If to consider, that the drum of AV Stoletov was round, it becomes clear why the pedestal consists of two levels: the tetrahedral and octahedral. Anyway, Kavelmaher, commenting reconstruction AV Stoletov (Kavelmaher. The decree. cit., S. 196), believed the octahedral drum of AV Stoletov.

69. Kavelmaher. The decree. cit., S. 196.

70. Stoletov, 1967.

71. Photographs reconstruction AV Stoletov, given in this work Kavelmahera (Kavelmaher. The decree. cit., S. 196), the apse of the same height, and the reproduction of reconstruction AV Stoletov in his indicated work (Stoletov, 1974, 112 S.) different height.

72. Kavelmaher. The decree. cit., S. 193.

73. BA Ognev. Assumption Cathedral in Zvenigorod and on the Town. In the book: MIA of the USSR, № 14, 1955.

74. Ni Bruno. Sava's Cathedral-Storozhevsky monastery near Zvenigorod. In the book: Proceedings of ethnographical and archaeological Museum I MSU. M., 1926.

75. Zagraevsky, 2003. C. 80.

76. Ibid., C. 87.

77. Ibid, 107 S..

78. For more information, see: SV zagraevsky. The form of domes of ancient Russian temples. M., 2008.

79. Voronin. The decree. cit., so 2, 107 S..

80. Zagraevsky, 2002. C. 24, 80-109.

© Sergey Zagraevsky

To the page “Scientific works”

To the main page