To the page “Scientific works”

To the main page


Prof. Dr. S.V. Zagraevsky

About scientific validity of hierotopy



S. V. Zagraevsky (C) 2017




Prof. S. V. Zagraevsky undertook a comprehensive analysis of methodology and applications of hierotopy and expressed doubts about its scientific validity and practical value.



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

and has not yet been edited.

So it can be used only for general introduction.



Hierotopy is determined by its founder A. M. Lidovy as creating "sacred spaces", considered as a special kind of creative activity, and special the area of historical and cultural research, which revealed and analyzed examples of this creativity. In A. M. Lidovouin hierotopy we are not talking about the General study of the sacred (what dedicated work, for example, P. A. Florensky), and historically specific human activities on creating a medium of communication with the higher world. Hierotopy can include a mystical component, but first and foremost is the process of conscious creativity, the formation of the sacral space by using architecture, images, rituals, light and even odors. In the framework of the hierotopical approach icons and other works of sacred art are examined not as isolated items and as components of hierotopical projects in their artistic and conceptual integrity and the temporal development of1.

This the term and the scope of its application was proposed by A. M. Lidovy in the early 2000-ies. Since then, under the leadership of A. M. Lidova there were several Russian and international symposia on hierotopypublished a number of collections of articles. Dedicated to hierotopy article in a significant number published in other collections (cm. literature in the notes to the this article).

From the beginning, occurred the first (and, unfortunately, not the most serious) problem of hierotopy – the lack of terminological definitions between the study of the subject and by the subject, that is, hierotopy A. M. Lidov calls themselves "sacred space" and the science of them. It generates confusion, observed, and participants in symposia at hierotopy. So, R. M. Shukurov offered to call hierotopy themselves "sacred space", and study them – hierotopical2. K. A. Shchedrin, on the contrary, offered to call hierotopy research, and space – hierotopical3. And I. P. Davydov, consideringhierotopy as a science, proposed to use this term for the phenomenological description of the sacred spaces, while the term "hierotopy" may be used to analyze the theoretical and philosophical aspects4.

We to avoid confusion we will in this article to talk about hierotopy only as the research object of these studies is "sacred space" – so we will call.

According to the original concept A. M. Lidova, scope of hierotopy was first of all the miraculous icons and relics5. But gradually, this area has expanded considerably. The participants of the symposia and the collections of hierotopy applied its principles to the temples6, the architectural complexes7, shrines8, landscape9, city10, country11, mythopoetic space images in fiction12, light in Church architecture13, the religious ceremonies and holidays14, folk traditions15, the description of aspects of the sacred in the Protestant culture16, the comparison of different cultures17.

And, for example, A. M. Lidov so, seriously and positively, spoke about one of the articles in the edited collection of them: "In the study (K. Blank from Princeton University – S. Z.) shows how their images of the sacred spaces form Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, in this absolutely not using the traditional system of description of the sacred Holy places – temples, churches and monasteries. Russian writers are modeling a new sacredness. For example, Dostoevsky's most sacred sometimes his novels become a dungeon, a basement pubs – there occur the culminating event of his novels"18.

We see indeed limitless area of potential applications of hierotopy. This immensity was celebrated, and A. M. Lidov: "it is Impossible to say that the problematic of sacred space in science was not discussed: different aspects of the topic affected by religious studies, philosophy, cultural studies, art history, archaeology, Ethnology, the study of folklore, Philology. However, they solved the problem of their disciplines, emphasizing a particular facet of the phenomenon, without trying to comprehend it as self-sufficient the whole"19.

But problems scientific positioning of hierotopy emerged in the first and seemingly most logical and justified field of application is the study of the miraculous icons and relics.

A. M. Lidov stated: "Our idea is not as a theoretical concept, but as a result of painstaking, and practical historical work in the study of the miraculous icons and relics that before the founding of our Center (apparently, it was about founded and led by A. M. Lidovy "Research center vostochnohristianskih culture" – S. Z.) has not been analyzed. It seems incredible, but to2000. in Russian not been any scientific work devoted to the relics as the phenomenon of culture. On reliquary written very much a little less about the iconography, but about the relics as a cultural phenomenon – nothing... Similar situation a little earlier has developed around the miracle-working icons. I long had to answer questions (which, however, do not ask): what in fact, have the miraculous icons and relics of history art? In the process of specific work on the reconstruction of this reservoir of spiritual life it became clear to us that the subject in the positivist sense of the word here no. The subject may be an icon of how a particular Board, but how to describe chudotvortsu the photo of the old copy and how it all it is possible to study from the point of view of traditional art history?"20

Do not need to "ask questions" to understand: "sacred space" formed is stored in the State The Tretyakov Gallery, Rublev "Trinity", a copy in the Trinity Cathedral of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, icon painting numerous stylization under this icon, "chudotvortsi" photos of this icon, and also old copies from these photos – it is impossible to examine as a whole without something "ephemeral, which under traditional positivist science may not be the subject of the research"21.

But let's to call a spade a spade: this is "ephemeral" is the faith of the Orthodox in the any icon elevates the thoughts and feelings of worshipers to The Lord duly consecrated a copy of Rublev "Trinity" has the same sanctity as the original, that the photograph of this icon streaming myrrh, photocopy – heals, etc. Without this "religious-mystical" component not do many research in the field of hierotopy22.

According to the traditional understanding of science, mysticism, i.e., unscientific phenomenon is called all that lies exclusively in the realm of faith and not subject to robust objective check scientific and practical methods. A. M. Lidov with this understanding do not agree , and formulates truly a revolutionary position: "In the Humanities, which was finalized in XIX century and in the methodological framework which we are still, in all fields of knowledge were bound to any specific visible material objects. Often I encounter error, which puts an equal sign between the positivist and scientific approaches. It is argued that we are studying objects, facts and artifacts, and what is beyond the apparent, the described material – it does not nothing to do with science. In my opinion, this is a false premise. And positivism to me seems largely a form of ideology, and if you want like this it is not paradoxical sounded, religious beliefs. That do not fit into the proposed scheme of science of the nineteenth century, then fell out of discourse... TAK from the field of scientific knowledge fell the sacred space"23.

But immediately the question arises: why? Do not previously been studied in the context of creating works of art and the architecture of any socio-political situation in the appropriate era, no biography and motivation of artists and architects, no biography and motivation churchwardens? Not simulated neither looked like these works of art in a particular era, or how they are perceived by the audience?

As the example written in the mid-twentieth century text Soviet classics in the history of architecture, laureate of the State prize of the USSR N. N. Voronin dedicated to Uspensky Cathedral, built Prince Andrei Bogolyubsky:

"Free and light space of the Church is striking first of all its height. Indeed, the Cathedral was equal to the height of the largest the construction of Ancient Russia – Kiev St. Sophia Cathedral. Apparently, this was also predefined assignment Prince Andrew: his new temple could not yield to the greatness Kyiv's sacred place. But he was smaller and its height was especially acutely felt. In addition, the architects have reinforced the effect of the comparative ease cross six slender pillars of the temple, as if without effort and tension load-bearing arches and the only Chapter of the Cathedral. From its twelve Windows, poured a streamlight, so what is depicted in the dome of Christ it seemed as if hovering in the air... The most important place in the altar screen, to the left of the "king's gate", held the Central Shrine and the relic of Vladimir and the Vladimir icon Notre Dame, taken by Prince Andrew from Vyshgorod. This icon (which now in the Tretyakov gallery) – a work of genius of the Byzantine artist amazing and now deep lyricism and emotionality. The painter depicted not an unapproachable "Queen of heaven", but full of human feelings of a young mother thin oval face, smallpink lips and wonderful eyes full of tender love for the child and sadness for his fate. This image, imbued with such warmth and humanity, no doubt made the strongest impression on the people of the XII century. The Prince richly decorated icon "vavav" it's a lot of gold, silver and precious stones...about the time of the feast of the assumption, opened the southern and Northern "Golden gate" of the Cathedral portals and between them on two "cords wonderful" hung sub-princes of precious vestments and fabric of the Cathedral sacristy. This "corridor", published and out of the temple, among the shaken wind colored fabrics went to worship the icon the flow of pilgrims – citizens and peasants. Under their feet, like a sparkling carpet stretched from the floor of the Cathedral colored majolica tiles. Artistic effect of the majestic temple multiplied his precious jewel... you Can imagine the strength of the impression whichcarried away the inhabitants of smoky huts and cramped dwellings of the great city Cathedral!"24

Or text a Soviet (and always very "ideologically") classic M. A. Ilyin written in the early 1960s, dedicated to Gothic cathedrals:

"Ancient legends have repeatedly appealed to the theme of the promised happy land, where man, freed from earthly misfortunes, the hardships and disease that could lead to eternal blissful life. Medieval Christianity placed great emphasis on the doctrine of Paradise. Paradise seemed time to a man actually existing. Here the teaching of the Church, worthy believers learn the highest spiritual happiness in communion with God. All these judgments gave rise to works which have created an idea about the promised ethereal human existence, and Gothic cathedrals. From afar over the seathe roofs of urban houses visible Gothic Cathedral, uplifted to the sky their towers. He as the lighthouse serves as a guiding landmark, guiding the movement on the tight and crooked streets of the old city to the town square, spread out in front of it. Initially difficult to understand the complex composition of the facade opens up to us Cathedral, striking abundance of details, elaborately carved stone.Huge arched portals, similar to niches arranged so that involuntarily want to enter the Cathedral, and a huge round the rose window above them, as if laced with cobwebs woven by the stone, and transparent galleries, and high Windows stretched up, and powerful pillars of the scapula, stretching from tier to tier, and unusual tower complex, like a crystal, the buildings, raised their spires to tens of meters. But the longer we stare at all these amazing parts, like made not of stone, but of some unusually strong material, the clearly comes to us the plan of the architect is to create a structure that, despite its large size, is designed to suppress a person, as it was in the architecture of Ancient Egypt, and to distract, to divert it from the surrounding everyday, Wake up and shake of his consciousness, sending it to a a particular purpose.And no matter how many times you have seen Gothic cathedrals, what would be a bustling and vibrant in its colors life had seethed at their walls all these unusual communities consistently produce the strongest impression looking at them, forcing the person to focus before you log in the cool gloom of their great, oblong hall"25.

But the text of another Soviet classic – N. And. Brunova. It's the end of 1920-ies:

"Architecture draws life, creating a shell over the movements people who are the core of architecture, with architectural forms. Monuments of architecture of bygone eras – shell, stripped of its content. To understand ancient buildings only in the case if possible filled to recreate their lives and to trace the thread that connects this life with architectural forms. The building, it is the imprint, the trace of human life. The structure of society is directly reflected in the architecture... In contrast to civil architecture, the monuments which served amestitelj the life of the individual or the individual classes, only the Church was intended for all layers of society, representatives of which also attended on worship and so became in a particular ratio to each other"26.

 These texts were the norm (more the sample) for the Soviet (i.e., according to A. M. Lidova, "positivist") history of architecture and, as we have seen, did not ignore nor the sacred role of the churches themselves, nor their social and urban context nor the inspiration of their architects, nor the feelings of the worshipers in them. And the fact that these texts it was written without declaring the personal religious beliefs of their authors as well as not impoverishes them, on the contrary, makes them more objective, balanced and convincing. Because faith some readers may be one, others – another, the author is there any that a scientific text should be very universaland, at least, not cause the ideological rejection of those readers who do not profess the faith of the author. This requires not any "positivist ideology", and elementary scientific ethics.

And how to describe and study what is "outside the visible described, material"? The paths can be different (for example, according to hierotopy – first of all the study of the creative process), but in any case, presupposes some the author's "religious-mystical revelation." Butno a scientist is not entitled to rely on such "revelations" because they can't to be the "ultimate truth" (or at least justified proof) even for believers. This is not a "revelation" John the theologian or of the prophet Muhammad.

And it turns out that the "superstructure" in the form of an act of faith in the fact that almost any the artifact is part of a certain "sacred space" (i.e., has a "higher otherworldly sense") is unproven, therefore, inconclusive, therefore, redundant, hence harmful, because overloads scientific text contradicts the "Occam's razor" – "should not multiply entities without need"27.

Note that there are still one Declaration A. M. Lidova, except inclusion in the "positivist" science elements "hereafter". Declaration this it is "positivist" and at first glance it looks impressive:

"We're trying historically to reconstruct what has been created by the minds and hands of the people and, accordingly, others can be known. We propose to introduce the Creator sacred space as a historical or historical-cultural figure who so far in our discourse was not. It is those who created the designs and shaped of the sacred spaces. And many of them we know. Most often they are introduced in a strange shared category of customers, although not all customers were the creators of sacred spaces. That the Emperor Justinian built St. Sophia, the Suger, the Abbot of the Abbey of Saint-Denis – the one who created the concept of the Gothic temple (his activities in detail to describe thanks to them also written biographies), the Patriarch Nikon, etc. hundreds and hundreds of specific people, activities and works which should be studied as such, with the understanding that they were engaged in very different things, but in General, their activities may be comparable with the activities of modern filmmakers that combine creative efforts masters of completely different backgrounds. In this sense, these people were artists, and it is unclear why they were omitted from the context artists and creators of images of sacred spaces, why they are excluded from the context of art history, traditional history of art is reduced only to the creation of the object? In other words, if you speak clearly and without unnecessary pathos, the works of artisans of various skill levels. This is another one of the challenges of hierotopy: to find a place for personalities"28.

But in fact, this the Declaration may look impressive only to those who do not know what huge volumes of scientific literature written about various aspects the activities of such "personalities" as Justinian, the Suger, Nikon and "hundreds and hundreds of specific characters", including builders, architects, and other prominent artists, which in any case not it was "excluded from the context of artists and creators of images of sacred spaces, from the context of the history of art." We are even in the notes will not to cite the relevant literature, it is too much. It's not even "hundreds and hundreds" and thousands and thousands of scientific papers published on a variety of languages in different countries.

No one disputes the fact, the relationships, influences, contexts, typological and stylistic paradigm socio-political and economic situation, the state of mind in society, the fate of wizards and other components of A. M. Lidov and his colleagues call "sacred spaces", and you should explore and individually and in combination. We must continue to study and destinies prominent creators, this one does not argue. But this study is much more effectively and convincingly carried out in the framework of traditional science, rather than with attracting some "mystical revelation".

And the terms to use any, it's not more than words. Personally, the author of this article, for example, the term "sacred space" is like, and if not for his "hierotopical" origin, I would be willing to use in their scientific works. For example, I studied Palace-temple complex of the Prince Andrey Bogolyubsky in the hierarchy29 or Basil III and Ivan IV in Alexandrov Sloboda30 also creating certain "sacred space", and reconstruction the original form of these complexes and to clarify the Dating is important for understanding the Genesis of these "spaces." The same can be said about the historical the topography of the city of Vladimir31, shapes of the heads (domes) in the ancient temples32, the organization of ancient construction of33 , and almost all the other topics of my scientific research.

Why I as a historian architecture is ready to accept the term "sacred space", but not the methodology of hierotopy, even if completely excluded from it "mysticism"? Let me explain.

Hierotopy – a very broad concept, covering the history of ancient architecture, and universal history architecture, classic and urban development and modern urban design. For example, if you wish, hierotopy and one of its key concepts – "spatial icon"34 we can now sum up all components of any monument, temple architecture – constructive and material possibilities of builders (in terms of hierotopy – "the creators of the sacred space"), personality builders and architects information about building the farm, repairs, the reconstructions and restorations, sense of style, ensemble, aesthetics, proportions, color, and architectural relationships and influence... in short, the whole enormous the set of factors that determines the nature and fate of the monument, and not only the construction era, but also later.

For example, it is well known the transfer of Patriarch Nikon of Moscow plan and basic typologistAI serusalimskaja Church of the Holy Sepulchre. It is well known and that this transfer had symbolicand the sacred meaning of35. And that will add to our knowledge about it transferring what we're after experts in the field of hierotopy36 consider the New Jerusalem as "spatial icons"?Almost nothing but spectacular term, because issues of design, organization of construction, building materials, rearrangements, the role of churchwarden, architect and member of the masters (i.e., all those who created the ensemble), style formation, decor, social environment, funding, formation of a monastery Posada, turning it into a modern city, etc. are successfully addressed in the framework traditional history of architecture and urban planning. And I mean Nikon, creating an architectural ensemble that last will be "spatial icon", did Nikon the idea of building "Moscow Palestine," the Lord in revelation, or the Patriarch made it up himself, on the basis of their Church's-political ambitions, moved God's hand of Nikon and builders, is questions of faith, not science.

Another example. M. S. Smooth in a compendium of issues of hierotopy, claims that the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl and the surrounding landscape was also "spatial icon"37. But a few years earlier E. Bakalov wrote that every Christian Church can be considered as spatial the icon38. So what is the fundamental scientific novelty of the article M. S. Smooth?

A V. Lepakhin suggested that the term "tonotopic", close to the "spatial icon", and the etymology,. "Tonotopic"is sacralization human space, conceivable as an icon. Considering the "sacred structure" of ancient Russian towns V. Lepakhin identified "a hierarchy of konotopov": the altar – temple – Detinets (Kremlin) of the city "Holy Russia" – "the heavenly Jerusalem", and the medieval Moscow were considered as of tonotopic ("spatial icon") of Jerusalem39. But this "religious-mystical" theory was developed by M. P. Kudryavtsev40 and G. Y. Mokeev41 and the fact that it is now being developed as part of hierotopy, did not bring nothing new, except terminology. And certainly not made it more convincing from the point of view traditional science.

We see that in fact hierotopy is "superstructure" over the story ancient architecture and urban planning. Is not this "add" is superfluous?

Of course, for some, it not extra though, because that gives you the opportunity wordy and nice to talk on abstract religious-philosophical topics. For example, for writing full-fledged research work on the history of a temple, monastery or the settlement is necessary to study significant amounts of historical data and the available scientific literature, conduct a field study of an object, to possess a number of special knowledge in the theory and history of architecture and urban planning. It's not easy, no wonder historians of architecture was never much. Not easyto verbalize aesthetic experience, which for scientific purposes is usually you want to disintegrate, and it is able to cope not every critic. And entry level study of the fate of the countries need own social and political disciplines... in short, to engage in traditional science is difficult, very difficult.

But to perceive something "symbolic" and "sacred" in any architectural and urban planning phenomenon, from the device of the foundations of the temple to the location of the settlements on the map country, and beautiful to write about their subjective impressions and experiences from this is a relatively simple and specialized knowledge generally not required.

And here we come to another one of the basic methodological problem of hierotopy. In the framework assumes that if a modern researcher sees that or another artifact or landscape "sacred space", the same way it saw the master and in ancient times, that is, we can simulate creative processes "creators of sacred spaces" based on our current views.

This approach is methodologically illegal, even if you type in this model the religious feelings and motives as "stabilizing factor" mankind's view of "sacredness". The fact that we can simulate the feelings and motives of people in the past, only based on our knowledge of their era, by definition, incomplete and episodic. And in the same era the religious feelings of people are very individual motivation and even masters, contemporaries could be completely different.

View on personality at least some of the most famous "creators of sacred spaces" in Russian architecture: Vasily Yermolin, Aristotle Fioravanti, Aleviz New, Fyodor Kon, Bazhen Cucumbers, Christopher Galoway, Pavel Potekhin, Ivan Zarudny, Domenico Trezzini, Vasily Bazhenov, Auguste Montferrand, Carl Rossi, Constantine Tone... are we to believe that they did, starting from the same ideas about the "sacredness"? No. And their patrons? Either. So, we have no right to approach their art with the common standards of the "sacredness"the more that knowledge about these standards can on the basis of our current understanding. It would be an assumption reducible to the fact that the hand of all these architects have moved some higher power – whether God, or the "collective unconscious". For the history of architecture is just as futile as to say, for example, that all of these architects were able to build temples. The latter at least provable practice (the temple cannot be build without proficiency in several architectural and building skills), and communication with the "collective unconscious" or God is nothing more than the unprovable thesis ofthe field of abstract philosophizing or the infamous "mystic of revelation."

Another significant the problem often faced by those engaged in hierotopysimilar to the problem faced historians of architecture and urban planning, is much more sharp.

The fact that the basis of any generalizations and theories in these areas are primary data obtained architectural archeology and source studies. And new discoveries that generate changes to primary data are forcing architects to rethink many of its General conclusions and theories. For example, in 1930-ies, when PN. Maksimov found under the riggings the ancient Cathedral Andronikov monastery42it was in the 1950-ies, when excavations N. N. Voronin opened the white-stone Bogoliubov walls43and galleries Church of the Intercession on the Nerl44, so it was in the 1960-ies, when BP Dedushenko set affiliation the existing Cathedral High-Petrovsky monastery creativity Aleviz the New45, as it was in 1980-ies, when V. V. Kavelmaherand T. D. Panova found on Sobornaya square of the Kremlin remains of the first the belfry of St John Climacus46, so it was in 1990-e years when excavations O. M. Ioannisyan opened in Rostov rubble Church of Boris and Gleb 1287 of the year47, as it was in the early 2000s years old when research T. P. Timofeeva,48 and of the author of this the article confirmed the hypothesis about the initial the five-domed Vladimir assumption Cathedral49.And after held in the Alexander Sloboda architectural and archaeological research VV Kavelmahera (1980-90-ies)50 and the author of this article (2000 years)51 to revise the had hardly not the whole theory of the origin of hip architecture, because it turned out that tent Trinity (now Pokrovskaya) Church in Aleksandrovo was built in 1510-ies and accordingly she, and not the Church of the ascension in Kolomenskoye (1529-1532)52, was the first ancient Church marquee.

And some of the above (and many other) architectural and archaeological source discoveries still are not universally accepted and debate. Therefore, historians of architecture, before confidently use these discoveries in his theoretical schemes, either have to wait for the results of those discussions or to participate in any of the parties.

And the problem is the following the level of "theoretical superstructure of the primary discoveries" – hierotopy – is even more serious as dealing its researchers are forced either to wait for the primary data (not only from archaeologists and the source researchers, but also from historians of architecture and urban development), or do General reasoning at the level of: "whenever there was built the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl – 1165 (according to N. N. Voronin53) or 1158 (S. V. Zagraevsky54 and T. P. Timofeeva,55), whether it was a detached temple (for N. N. Voronin56) or a Cathedral (for S. V. Zagraevsky57), still it forms the sacred a space having such characteristics."However, specialists of hierotopy you can generally ignore the shift of Dating or the presence of a monastery: indeed, why not go into details of architecture of archeology and source studies, if the "sacred space" form even pubs in the works Dostoevsky? Let the archaeologists and architectural historians studying the nature of archives, and those who are engaged in hierotopywill "skim the cream" and talk about "high matters".

And it turns out that hierotopy attracts a large number of researchers, not Dating, not find out, "what kind of brick behind which is a"58, not rekonstruiruet original, not restored, not studying the sources, not explore stereopathyand long-winded reasoning about "the sense of the sacred". Or coming up with new terms and discuss them.

In fairness, we note, in the collections of hierotopy published and a specialists in primary science. But in their work, or even missing terminology from the thesaurus of hierotopy59, or present, but if you replace the traditional (usually more simple) work is almost nothing to lose by60.

And all of the above topics more important, if we go from the history of architecture and urban planning to other fields of knowledge, which declared the use of hierotopy. Cultural studies, Ethnography, philosophy, art history, musicology, religious studies, political science, hermeneutics, literary criticism, odorology (science of smell) and many others. . – science less subject than the history of architecture, and, therefore, another theoretical layering over them, called hierotopy, is even more generalized, ephemeral and, ultimately, able to produce scientific advances only to the extent that it is within traditional scientific disciplines.

It may seem that hierotopy strengthens faith in people, as it usually comes from that because any artifact is "sacred space", set up by God. But for the believer, and everything on Earth and in heaven set up by God, so nothing new from the point of view of faith it was for not will provide. A realistic minded person expects from science first of all answers to the questions "what, who, where, when, why", and bulky conclusions of hierotopy it can make primarily that any work creates a "sacred space", and this simple idea lies in the realm not of scientific knowledge, and terminology.

We do not have the right to call hierotopy pseudoscience, as it does not aspire to global review findings in any of the traditional Sciences (as, for example, with the infamous "new chronology") and relies heavily the achievements of these Sciences. But and industry any of the existing scientific disciplines of it can not be called: for that, as we have seen, too versatile its subject too diffuse methodology, it is permissible (and often present) the elements of mysticism, and notalways associated exclusively with any one religious denomination.

From this it follows that hierotopy as "humanitarian knowledge" or "industry historical and cultural studies"61, i.e. hierotopy as a scientific discipline it is that can be carried out. To date, hierotopy terminology add-in, potentially applicable to almost any scientific and pseudo-scientific texts from "positivist" until "occult"62.

To use or not the terms offered by hierotopy – to solve the authors. For some, they may seem useful for someone (for example, for the author of this article) is unnecessary, is not free from copyright A. M. Lidova and his colleagues (respectively requiring additional references) and overloading the text.




1. Lidov A. M. Hierotopy. Spatial icons and images-paradigms in Byzantine culture. M., 2009. GL. 1. Hierotopy. Creation of sacred spaces as the form of creativity and subject of historical research. P. 11-38; Materials of the round table held "Center for Ukrainian and Belarusian studies of the" the history Department of Moscow state University on 26 November 2006. Cm. web site; Lidov A. M. Hierotopy. Create sacred spaces as a form of creativity and subject of historical research. In the book: Hierotopy. Creation of sacred spaces in Byzantium and Ancient Russia. M., 2006. P. 9-58.

2. Shukurov R. M. the Creation of sacred spaces. Two new publications // Byzantine annals, vol. 69, 2010. P. 370-374.

3. Shchedrin, K. A. Savva Storozhevsky Jerusalem // Hierotopy. Creation of sacred spaces in Byzantium and Ancient Russia. M., 2006.

4. Davydov I. P. of iconography – the iconics (critical analysis of episistomy Orthodox of ikonologii) // Vestnik pstgu. Theology, Philosophy, Vol. 2 (40), 2012. P. 49-58.

5. Leads A. M. Hierotopy. Creation of sacred spaces...

6. Gribunin N. G. Hierotopynew Testament the temple in the context of the Christian cult action // Questions of cultural studies: scientific and methodical magazine No. 8, 2008. P. 56–59.

7. Demchuk R. V. Sophia as hierotopical project // the Temple Sof have symbolic Proctor Rusi-Ukraini. Kiiin, 2008; Zelensky G. M. the New Jerusalem near Moscow. Aspects of the conception and new discoveries // the New Jerusalem. Hierotopyand iconography of sacred spaces. M., 2009. S. 745-773.

8. Seleznev A. G. Islamic cult complexes of Astana in Siberia as of hierotopy: sacred space and religious identity // Bulletin of archaeology, anthropology and Ethnography, No. 2 (21), 2013.

9. Milutin M. N. Sacred chronotope of the cultural landscape of the Russian North // Abstract of Cand. Diss. GL. 1: Hierotopy .; Sh. Tsuji. Creating an Iconic Space. The transformation of Narrative Landscape // Spatial icons. Performative in Byzantium and Ancient Russia. M., 2011. P. 627-642.

10. Kirichenko E. I. the Temple and the city. About meaningful and structural unity of the Russian sacred space // Hierotopy. Comparative studies of sacred spaces. M., 2009. P. 292-322.

11. Petrukhin V. Ya. hierotopy the Russian land and primary chronicle // Hierotopy. Create sacred spaces in Byzantium and medieval Russia. M., 2006.

12. Bgun O. the Image paradigm hristianskogo the temple at tworczosci Taras Shevchenko // Slavic literature ¡ kontekscie Susitna: Yes 900-Hodja Torile Turskaa I 200-Hodja Taras Scan: materialy XI Minor. Navy. cap. (Minsk, 24-26 Castres.2013 g.). Minsk, 2013. Part 1. C. 28-32; Mleczko , A. V. Hierotopy: The construction of sacred spaces in the novel by B. K. Zaytsev's "the House in Passy" (the pages of "Modern Notes")] / / Vestnik volgu. Series 8. Vol. 7. 2008. C. 78-93; Bychkov D. M. topography of the sacred plan in the artistic picture of the world agirman D. M. Balashova, "in Praise of Sergius" (hierotopical aspects) // Vestnik of ASTU. Social Sciences and Humanities. No. 2 (56), 2013. S. 91-98.

13. Godovanets A. Y. Icon of light in the space SV. Sofia Constantinople // Hierotopy. Spatial icons. Performative in Byzantium and Ancient Russia. M., 2011. P. 119-142.

14. Belyaev L. A. , Hierotopy of the Orthodox feast: on the national traditions in the creation of sacred spaces // Hierotopy. Comparative studies of sacred spaces. M., 2009. P. 259-269.

15. Frost, A. B. "Saints" and "scary" places. Creation of sacred space in the traditional culture // Tam. C. 270-291.

16. Dombrauskene GN Religious symbolism in hierotopy Protestantism // Bulletin of Moscow state University of culture and arts, No. 3, 2013. P. 223-227; Okocimski A. D. Holy water, the Protestant reformation and hierotopy // life-giving source. The water in hierotopy Christian world. M., 2015.

17. Isar N. Vision and Performance: A Hierotopic Approach to Contemporary Art // Hierotopy. Comparative studies of sacred spaces. M., 2009. S. 341-375; M. A. Chegodaev Hierotopy ancient Egyptian sarcophagusa // ibid. P. 18-37.

18. Materials the round table...

19. Lidov A. M. Hierotopy. Creation of sacred spaces...

20. Materials the round table...

21. Ibid.

22. For example, cm.: Lidov A. M. "the heavenly river" and hierotopy Byzantine Church // Life-giving source. The water in hierotopy and iconography of the Christian world. M., 2014. S. 52-60; Isar N. Byzantine Parthenogenesis as Hierotopy of Fluid Brilliance // Ibid. With. 64-66; Livanos N. The Protective Water and Miraculous Icons: an Aspect of Hierotopy onMount Athos // There also. P. 89-91; Sun.M. Rozhnyativ. Light is like water, the water and lighting effects // Tam . P. 116-119.

23. Materials the round table...

24. Voronin N. N. Vladimir, Bogolyubovo, Suzdal, Yuriev-Polsky. The book-guide to ancient cities of the Vladimir land. M., "Art", 1967. With 44-47.

25. Il'in M. A. the Basis for understanding architecture. M., 1963. S. 35.

26. BrunovN. And. About the choirs in the ancient-Russian architecture // Proc. Section of theory and methodology (sociological) RUNION. M., 1928. Vol. 2. With. 93-97.

27. "Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem" (Philosophical dictionary. SPb, 2001).

28. Materials the round table...

29. Zagraevsky S. V. Bogoliubov architectural ensemble of the end of 1150 x-beginning 1170-ies: the history and reconstruction of the Memory of Andrei Bogolyubsky. SB. articles. Moscow – Vladimir, 2009. C. 141-167; Zagraevsky S. V. Grand-Ducal castle in the hierarchy: the graphic experience of reconstruction // proceedings of the XVII inter-regional studies conference (April 202012.). Vladimir, 2013. T. 1. P. 296-312.

30. ZagraevskyS. V. A new study of architectural monuments of Alexandrov Sloboda. M., 2008; ZagraevskyS. V. Palace-temple complex of Vasily III in the Alexandrovskaya Sloboda and his place in typological development of the Tsar's estate of XVI century // proceedings of XV inter-regional studies conference (April 162010.). Vladimir, 2010. C. 346-369.

31. Zagraevsky S. V. Historical topography of pre-MongolVladimir. M., 2015.

32. Zagraevsky S. V. form of the domes (domes) of ancient temples. M., 2008.

33. Zagraevsky S. V. Some issues of organization of ancient building // Materials inter-regional studies conference (April 282011.). Vladimir, 2012. C. 292-302.

34. Lidov A. M. Hierotopy. Spatial icons and images-paradigms in the Byzantine culture. M., 2009. GL. 1. Hierotopy. Creation of sacred spaces as a form of creativity and subject of historical research. P. 11-38.

35. For example, cm.: Il'in M. A. the Stone architecture of the third quarter of the XVII century // History of Russian art. T.4. M., 1959. S. 162; Alferov G. V. on the construction activities of Patriarch Nikon // Architectural inheritance. No.18. M., 1969. P. 30-44.

36. Bobrov A. A. Saints and the healing power of Russia. M., 2014. S. 156-159; Zelensky G. M. the New Jerusalem near Moscow. Aspects of the conception and new discoveries // the New Jerusalem. Hierotopyand iconography of sacred spaces. M., 2009. S. 745-773.

37. Smooth M. S. Sacred waters in a spatial icon Of the intercession on the Nerl // life-giving source. The water in hierotopy and iconography of the Christian world. M., 2014. C. 112-115.

38. Bakalov , E. Hierotopy. New interpretive strategies in the study of sacred spaces // The Byzantine Annals, No. 71 (96), 2012. P. 319–325,

39. Lepakhin Vladimir Icon and iconicity. SPb, 2002. P. 155-171.

40. Kudryavtsev M. P., Kudryavtseva T. N. Russian Orthodox Cathedral. The symbolic language of architectural forms // "Symbols of the Russian hramostroitelstva – KB Swjtu", Spring, No. 17, 1995. P. 65-87; Kudryavtseva T. N., Kudryavtsev M. P. Red square – the temple under the open sky // "Moscow. 850 years." M., 1996, Vol. 1. 170 to 174 C.; Kudryavtsev, M. P. (published by T. N. Kudryavtseva). The third Rome // Tri Rome. M., 2001. P. 407-440.

41. Mokeev G. Y. As The Jerusalem Above. The embodiment of the character Gornji Jerusalem in the architecture of Russian cities. Cm. web site; Mokeev G. Y. Country – city Rus. Cm. web site

42. Maximov P. N. The Cathedral Of The Spaso-Andronikov monastery in Moscow // Architectural monuments of Moscow XV–XVII centuries. New research. M., 1947. S. 23.

43. Voronin N. N. The Architecture Of North-Eastern Russia XII–XV centuries M, 1961-1962. Vol. 1, p. 207.

44. Ibid. P.246.

45. Belyaev L. A. Ancient monasteries Moscow (con. XIII – the beginning. XV centuries), according to archeology. M., 1994. P.160.

46. Kavelmaher V. V., Panov Etc. Remnants of the white stone Church of the XIV in. at the Cathedral square of the Moscow Kremlin // the Culture of medieval Moscow XIV–XVII centuries M, 1995. P. 66.

47. Ioannisyan O. M., Torshin E. N., P. L. Zykov, the Church of Boris and Gleb in Rostov Great // Russian art. Rus. Byzantium. The Balkans. The XIII century. SPb, 1997. P. 232.

48. Timofeeva T. P. on the domes Assumption Cathedral of Andrei Bogolyubsky of Vladimir. In book: Materials studies conference2004. Vladimir. 2005. PP. 27-34.

49. Zagraevsky SV New the study of architectural monuments of Vladimir-Suzdal Museum-reserve. M., 2008. GL. 5.

50. KavelmaherV. V. Monuments of ancient Alexandrova Sloboda (collection of articles). Vladimir, 1995; Kavelmaher V. V. Antiquity Alexandrova Sloboda (collection of scientific papers). M., 2008.

51. Zagraevsky SV New the study of architectural monuments of Alexandrov Sloboda. M., 2008; Zagraevsky S. V. Trinity, now the intercession Church in Alexandrov Sloboda – first steepled Church of Ancient Russia. New research. Cm. web site

52. Pod'yapol'skiiS. S. Architect Petrok Small. In the book: Monuments of Russian architecture and monumental art. Style, attribution, Dating. M., 1983. P. 44.

53. N. N. Voronin took an unclear position in concerning the Dating of the temple. In his opinion, the Church of the Intercession was "the most perfect monument of the number of buildings of Prince Andrew, as if completing their pleiad" (Voronin N. N. The Architecture Of North-Eastern Russia... Vol.1. P. 264) but it's the relevant portion of the major work did not offered any Dating of the temple.Only through a lot of pages (ibid, p. 279) first found no reasonable date – 1165 year. Later, the researcher repeatedly mentioned this year as time end of stone constructionBogolyubsky (ibid., pp. 322, 335, 342). But the son of Andrei Bogolyubsky Izyaslav Andreevich died in autumn 1165, and during the winter Church of the Intercession in any way could not be built. Why Is N. N. Voronin, recognizing the faithfulness of the message "Life of Andrey Bogolyubsky" that the Church was built in memory of Izyaslav (ibid, p. 298), adopted as the date 1165 the year is unknown to us.

54. Zagraevsky S. V. To the question of reconstruction and date Church of the Intercession on the Nerl. In the book: The materials of the regional conference (20-21 April2007.). Vladimir, 2008. Vol. 2. S. 3-12.

55. Timofeeva T. P., Novakowska-Buchman S. M. Church of the Intercession on the Nerl. M., "Northern pilgrim". 2003.

58. Voronin N. N. The Architecture Of North-Eastern Russia... 1. S. 300-301.

59. Zagraevsky S. V. the early history of the Pokrovsky monastery on The Nerl. Cm. web site

60. So, according to the memoirs of V. Kavelmahera, said G. A. Makarov, restorer Novodevichy convent (cm. web site

61. For example, cm.: Chakovski HP Water in the Jerusalem Temple and ancient synagogues // Life-giving source. The water in hierotopy and iconography of the Christian world. M., 2014. Pp. 26-29; Sedov VLV.In. Bogoliubov kivoriy and its Byzantine counterparts. Pp. 110-111;

62. For example, cm.: Hruskova L. G. The Early Christian Basilica with a tripartite sanctuary: a baptisteryin the liturgical space // ibid.C. 42-44. The term "liturgical space" is found only in the title and is probably a response to the "sacred space" in hierotopy.

63. Lidov A. M. Hierotopy. Spatial icons...; Materials the round table...

64. "Occult science" – in one way or another theoretically teachings based on the belief in the supernatural is different and distinct claims for the effectiveness of their practical applications. "Occult "science is based on philosophical theory, and others. myths, folk experience and some scientific facts and methods (Philosophical dictionary. SPb, 2001).



© Sergey Zagraevsky

To the page “Scientific works”

To the main page