To the page Scientific works

To the main page

 

 

Prof. Dr. S.V. Zagraevsky

 

Organization of production and processing of white stone in ancient Russia

 

 

Published in Russian: .. . .: . ., 2008. . 528.

 

 

Annotation

 

This scientific study investigates all aspects of the work of ancient masters with white stone the most important and most prestigious pre-Mongol building material of North-Eastern Russia. Mining, processing and transportation of stone in Ancient Russia are studied and confirmed experimentally. Special attention is paid to the ancient quarries near Moscow.

 

 

Attention!

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.

    RUSSIAN VERSION

 

 

1. General provisions

 

Usually, the white stone is understood light Carboniferous limestone (Carboniferous period of the Paleozoic era), lying in the Central regions of the European part of modern Russia (Fig. 11), but it is often referred and Sandstone and dolomite, and Volga limestone Permian age, and numerous kinds of limestone, travertine and alabaster, occurring in Transnistria. Hence, a broader definition of white stone - as any good for treatment, white-yellowish stone with non-shiny surface, not marble. However, in this study we will pay most attention to the extraction and processing of white stone in its narrow sense - as the Carboniferous limestone deposits in the Central regions of the European part of modern Russia.

 

Map of the middle occurrence of deposits in the Central part of Russia.

 

Fig. 1. Map of the middle occurrence of deposits in the Central part of Russia.

 

First of all let us look at some provisions indicating the importance of white stone, not only for ancient architecture, but also for the history of Ancient Russia.

In Byzantium the Church construction was carried out from plinfy or in mixed technique - "opus mixtum"; stone built only in certain suburbs of the Byzantine Empire, and then only because the mountains and deserts were clay firing plinthite. Plinthite or mixed was the construction of Kiev, Novgorod, Pskov, Polotsk, Smolensk, Chernigov, Pereslavl South, Vladimir, Volhynia and all other ancient lands, except for the Galician and Suzdal2.

In the Galician Principality white-stone construction began in 1110-1120-ies, in Suzdal - in 1152. In the pre-Mongol period 95% of the buildings in Suzdal land and 100% of the buildings Galician Principality was built of white stone3.

According to calculations provided by the author in the book "Yuri Dolgoruky and the old white-stone architecture", white stone building was about d4. Reliability of buildings, built of white stone, in the Russian climate was significantly lower Printania5. Often sung in the popular literature white color of the stone was not his advantage: the white-stone building in a few years after the construction was dull gray from the smoke ovens and frequent fires, and the practice of cleaning them appeared only in the XIX century.

Thus, the white stone as a building material lost to plinthite (and especially brick) on all indicators.

But in the XII century, when Russia began white-stone building, the Byzantines had been weakened and is not constitute any meaningful force in the international arena. And in Western Europe the construction of various types of stone during romanik, early and high Gothic expressed state power and Imperial ideology6. The vast majority of the Romanesque cathedrals and castles in the heart of the Holy Roman Empire - Germany - were stone, brick there was built only minor construction of a civil nature and small provincial temples. In Northern Italy Romanesque churches, as a rule, were built of brick, but either were made of stone (the Cathedral in Modena), or such facing is stipulated, but for various reasons is not placed (the Cathedral of San Ambrogio in Milan) or was not made completely (the Church of San Michele in Pavia).

Western European example and made Galician, and then Suzdal princes go to white stone building is expensive and unreliable, but "Imperial". The direct predecessor of white stone temples of Ancient Russia was a huge Romanesque Cathedral in Speyer (Speyer) - the tombs of the emperors of the Holy Roman Empire" (very likely that there were "trained" the first old Russian masters "stone cases)7.

Thus, the prestigious white stone building became a "business card" of two dynamic principalities and Halych, and Suzdal. In order to build "on-Imperial", Galician and Suzdal princes spared neither effort nor money. Galich in the middle of XIII century was absorbed by Poland and Lithuania, but the Suzdal land became the basis for future center

This is of great importance for the white-stone building in Russian history. It has become one of the main components of the process of entering Ancient Russia among the major European powers8- the process , for a long time interrupted only by the Mongol invasion.

It is noteworthy that even in the hardest times of the Mongol yoke old Russian builders not switched on cheap and reliable plinthite, and continued to build exclusively "European" white stone. And, apparently, it was one of the factors that allowed the great Principality of Suzdal, who "ulus" Horde, not to lose their spiritual independence, reset hated yoke and be reborn under a new name - the Moscow Rus9.

And only in the end of XV century, when the masters of the Western European Renaissance completely switched to a much more reliable, cheap and practical brick construction, expression of state power and Imperial ideology in the stone lost its meaning. Then, and in Russia there was a widespread adoption of bricks.

The last big old white-stone Church was the assumption Cathedral in Moscow (1475-1479). However, all critical structural elements (arches, drums, round pillars and Eastern wall of the apse) Aristotle Fioravanti laid brick.

Further white stone churches in Russia continued to be built, but only sporadically and mostly near the quarries. But the widespread use of white stone has not stopped, since it was widely build the Foundation, basement and had hewed elements of architectural decor. For these purposes, not "afraid" to lie in the ground and perfectly workable white stone bricks fit better.

 

2. Exploration of quarries and mining regions

 

So, in 1152 in Suzdal white stone building began. Yuri Dolgoruky (beg. 1090 x-1157, reigned in Suzdal with 1113 (possibly with 109610), Grand Prince of Kiev, in 1155) built five churches - in Pereslavl-Zalessky, Vladimir, Suzdal, Yuriev-Polsky, and Kideksha.

Before starting the construction, it was necessary to carry out a reconnaissance of the sites for future quarries.

That in the land of Vyatichi along the Oka river, Moscow, pahry and Gums - there are huge deposits of stone, most likely, has been known since the time of colonization of this land in the XI - the beginning of XII century (by Yaroslav the Wise and Vladimir Monomakh). The main transportation was carried out on rivers and their banks could be seen numerous exits stone. Could be known about the deposits on the Volga near Staritsa. But it was very far from the major cities of Suzdal Principality - Rostov, Vladimir, Suzdal and Pereslavl-Zalessky.

Yuri Dolgoruky, starting in his Principality white-stone building, could not be interested in the huge additional costs of transporting the stone to several hundred kilometers. Accordingly, the Prince could not give the masters of the task to find a white stone as close as possible from the place of future construction.

The idea of where in the North-Eastern Russia was regions theoretically possible quarrying, gives a modern geological map11 (see Fig. 1). Note that this map is recommended to be treated with great caution, as the admission in the 20-30 m in the unevenness of the upper layers of deposits of white stone and 30-50 m over uneven terrain, ravines and river valleys can lead to error in the determination of the depth of the stone to 80 m. Therefore, the data of this card are very approximate.

But in the twelfth century, of course, no one even approximate data about available begin to see the depth of coal deposits. And you can imagine how many unsuccessful exploratory excavations were done until Suzdal "geologists" not convinced that high-quality stone you cannot get closer than several hundred kilometers.

Hence, the exploration of the quarries started at least a few years before 1152.

Where was the first ancient quarries, so far we can speak only approximately.

In 1950-1960-s were conducted micropaleontological tests showed the affiliation of stone temples Dolgoruky myachkovsky the horizon of coal deposits12. Consequently, the stone was mined in the South-West of the Principality, close to Moscow.

The main pre-Mongolian trade route linking Kiev, Chernigov, Novgorod and Suzdal (in this way and there was Moscow), was held on the Oka, Moscow river, Yauza, and then through fiber to the Klyazma13. In fact, Moscow was a frontier town, South which begins "neutral territory" (Kolomna up to 1300 belonged to the Ryazan Principality - vassal of Chernigov, almost always hostile Suzdal).

Hardly Suzdal princes quarried stone away from the protected trade routes, in the uninhabited forest region between Moscow and Oka, where lived not yet fully conquered tribes of the Vyatichi. Yes, and the distance of transportation of stone in the case of removal from the main trade route increased.

Therefore, the most likely region for production of white stone in the middle of the XII century are facing to the river environs of modern villages of Upper and Lower Myachkovo is closest to Suzdal mining area, where high-quality stone lies close to the surface.

In this case, the average distance from the quarry to the construction sites were: conventional (straight) - about 250 km, in fact (river) - about 500 km.

In addition to the results micropaleontological analyses 1950-1960-s, there are other reasons that the production of building materials for the first white stone churches of Suzdal land could not be held in other regions:

- Staritsa is further away from the major cities of Suzdal Principality (about 400 km straight along the rivers 800);

- mined whether qualitative%480 km on the rivers).

- distance from Zvenigorod and Mozhaisk to the major cities of Suzdal land was even more than from Dorogomilovo;

- from Kasimov (in the middle of the XII century - Gorodets Meshchersky) direct trade route in the main city of the Principality was not - was hampered by impassable swamps Meshchersky. Therefore, to carry the stone still had to go through the mill, and the path was even longer than that from Myachkovo;

- in the area of the modern localities of Kovrov, Melekhov and Sudogda quality limestone located at a considerable depth (in Milehovska career, according to the observations of the author of this book, not less than 30 m), and the old quarry there is unknown. Besides, this region in the middle of XII century was virtually uninhabited, and was "neutral territory" with much more serious enemy than Chernigov - Volga Bulgaria.

Further quarrying regions grew with the increase of the territory of the great Principality of Suzdal, then Tver and Moscow great Principality and then the centralized Russian state.

So, in the South-West of Suzdal land in pre-Mongol times likely to promote the quarries of Myachkovo toward modern Podolsk and Domodedovo, because this "neutral" region increasingly tended not to Ryazan, and to ever-increasing Vladimir.

Apparently, the region Carpets - Melekhovo - Sudogda became available for quarrying after joining Suzdal Principality of Nizhny Novgorod (the beginning of the XIII century). Perhaps, Nizhny Novgorod white stone churches were built from Kovrov stone, although it is more likely for these purposes quarries in the area of Kasimov, where high-quality stone lies closer to the surface.

After the accession in the beginning of XIV century to the Moscow Principality Kolomna, Serpukhov and Mozhaisk available for Moscow stone miners was all a vast region bounded by the Oka, Moscow river and the Nara. With the conquest of the second half of the XIV century Borovsk, Tula, Kaluga and Tarusa this region in the South-West of the Grand Duchy expanded from Nara to Ugra.

Tver at the time of its state%D

And since the beginning of the XVI century at the disposal of the old Russian stone miners were zaoksky territory.

Until mid XV century stone building in Russia was held only the princes, who sponsored stone temples in towns, in villages, and monasteries. Accordingly, the quarrying was only the state, since the monopolistic customer development of private entrepreneurship is unlikely.

And only with the private (mid XV century boyar, since the beginning of the XVI century and merchant), a stone building could appear and private (nobles, merchants and artisanal) quarries.

 

3. "Efficiency" of miners

 

The vast majority of white stone buildings of the Ancient Rus was built in the half-rubble technique (of hewn white stone built two walls-facing internal and external; the space between them is backing, i.e. filled with rubble - stone fragments, fragments plinfy (brick) and cobblestones; then filled with lime mortar).

Accordingly, since the XII century stone was quarried for treatment (for wall masonry, decoration etc.; in the future we will call such a stone commodity), and bottles, and lime.

Today methods of Dating ancient quarries with a precision of at least a century does not exist, and a conditional term "the old quarry" in our time may be marked with the development and Ancient Russia, and the Russian Empire XVIII-XIX centuries. Yet, given the General understanding that the methods of extraction of stone with XII and XVIII century has changed is not so essential, we can make some observations on the reconstruction of extraction of stone in Ancient Russia.

First of all it should be noted that the stone was quarried in open and closed methods.

Layers of commodity stone interbedded substandard, and develop them more convenient and more efficient private way - horizontal. When producing marketable stone open method proved requires a lot of additional work to remove the upper layers that, in the absence of mechanization difficult. Accordingly, the remaining development in the form of vertical pits are likely to belong to a later time (not before XIX century).

On the lime in Ancient Russia has always required a lot more rock than trademark use. The reasons for this are the following:

- from the white stone churches about one-third the thickness of the walls were backing (see above), up to 80% of the foundations - white stone bottles, shed lime;

- a lot of lime (and on the foundations - lime, but bout) in the XII-XV centuries demanded popenoe construction, which did not stop, although plinfy at this time mostly not built temples, and

from the end of the XV century a massive brick building required a huge amount of lime, and on the foundations - lime, but the bout. Commercial white stone on the basement, architectural decoration and very few white stone churches were required many times less.

Stone extraction at lime was conducted by the open way - careers. The proof is a huge number of non - bout, which filled up the old quarry: because it was not necessary to pull out to the surface debris generated during the development of commodity seams, stone lime was extracted in other places that could only be career (probably pull out of the ground stone for lime was not economically feasible).

Stone extraction at lime closed method to avoid purchase under a large quarry land14 typical of later times. In old Russia, when the quarries were mostly (and to the XVI century - exclusively) state, such "tricks" were useless.

Antique career now almost impossible to find: they had the appearance of deep grooves in the river banks and within a few decades after the cessation of development is completely overgrown, becoming inconspicuous ravines. A quarry XII-XVI centuries might well survive. Furthermore - each of the known major ancient systems (Article15, Kaminska16, Nemerinsky17, Byakovskoy18, Cherepkovskaya-119, Seltsovsky20 etc) could theoretically include the development of the times of Ancient Rus. But, as we have said, methods of Dating quarries with a precision of at least a century to date does not exist.

A huge number of non - bout in the old quarries allows to reconstruct a number of important aspects of quarrying.

There is a stereotype that the development of stone in Ancient Russia was held by tunnels and galleries21, and missed bout fit along them. According to this position, the average width of the tunnel (drift) with booth - about 1.4 m, no boot - up to 8 m22. But recent research has shown the following: if the old quarry near Moscow to delete the entire bottle, then drifts almost does not remain23. The old quarry will become a huge halls workings with randomly scattered monolithic columns, left in order not crumbling ceilings (the idea of this picture gives "Column halls" in Article quarry). In many cases (where the distance between the columns was too big) bottles played a role and further strengthening of the ceiling.

Therefore, tunnels in the quarries are very different from drifts, for example, in the coal mines. If in the past the tunnels are the result of primary production strata, but in the old quarry is most often the passages left in abandoned the bout24.

The bout was also often laid on the floor (the layer of rubble crumbs on the floor of stol%25), leaving the minimum altitude for commercial haul stone - about one and a half meters.

Thus, the number of non - bout in the old quarry is about 80-90% of the volume of the extracted stone. This is the reality: only 10-20% of stone turned out to trade.

Be aware that even with such a rigorous selection of ancient stone quarries was exported, processed only a rough draft - in the form of shapeless lumps. "Half-clean" and "clean" process that required special stone masons (other qualification than the miners), was done at the construction site. This is proved by the following provisions:

- delicate and responsible work of stone treatment (making of straight angles and perfectly smooth surfaces) hardly could be effectively carried out in the darkness and dampness;

- organization of stone treatment in the quarry would interfere with work of miners;

- unified blocks of stone in Ancient Russia was not (their sizes range from HK to HH cm, often in the masonry of the same building). Accordingly, the required adjustment of stone in place. The same applies to well-treated details of architectural decoration - they were also treated at the construction site, sometimes already in the walls of the building, as the ornament of St. George's Cathedral in Yuryev-Polish;

- treatment of just chipped off (respectively, melted stone almost identical stone, brought to the construction site (respectively, relatively dry). The latter is as flexible and as easy to work in all directions26;

- numerous finds in the quarries hewn stone fragments belong to a later time (XVIII-XIX centuries), when a high degree of unification of building blocks and components of decor was possible to create "operating reserves" to meet the needs of a variety of potential buyers. Accordingly, the quarry was used as a warehouse of finished goods;

the%

During the processing of a stone at the construction site of another 20-30% of the total was spent in the bottle and lime. Thus, the "efficiency" of the old Russian stone miners in breaking down and processing of commercial white stone was about 10%. This once again confirms the enormous complexity of white stone development compared to the much more simple and cheap brick (plinthite) production.

 

4. Production of white stone

 

Given all the above, the process of quarrying in Ancient Russia is seen as follows.

Both open and closed development was carried out by high river banks - it was more comfortable and to explore the stone, and access to commodity formations and ship blocks, bottles and barrels with lime in the boat (in summer) or in a sledge in winter. Inputs could be approximately in the middle between the top of the slope and the water edge.

As we mentioned in paragraph 3, punching sign from above, with smooth surface, extremely inconvenient huge additional work and at penetration substandard layers, and pulling the stone out along a steep slope or on a vertical shaft, and transportation of stone to the place of loading in the boat. Accordingly, we may assume that in Ancient Russia, this method was not used.

Quarried stone in winter and in summer. Under the ground the temperature is almost constant in every season (5-10 degrees Celsius). At surface mines in the cold season lit bonfires, which solves two problems: heating workers and the increasing fragility of low-quality stone used in lime.

Most likely, the stone lime usually fired near the quarries. Chemical formula of lime-burning:

CaCO3 = CaO + WITH2 with the absorption of heat.

i.e. when the firing carbon dioxide and remained quicklime. Received quicklime fit in the barrel (to protect from moisture) and transported to the construction site. However, it is possible to carry the rubble for their firing on the building site, although the transport of stone for his subsequent burn irrational, as if Obi

Further on-site lime extinguished in the so-called "making wells" pits (the walls of these pits were usually covered with wooden boards to prevent the mixing of lime ground). Chemical formula of lime slaking:

CaO + N2O = CA(OH)2 with the evolution of heat ("boiling").

Requiring a particularly high-quality lime (for example, for plastering frescoes), in order to fully slaked lime kept in "making wells" pits from several weeks to several months.

Slaked lime mixed with sand and other ingredients (straw, wood and coal, crushed ceramics, plaster etc) and put the solution into the walls, foundations etc. where slaked lime dried ("grappled"), highlighting the water and re-forming limestone.

Chemical formula dry hydrated lime:

CA(OH)2 + WITH2 = SASO3 + N2O.

Sometimes, to accelerate the "seizure" near the walls lit bonfires, which served as sources of not only heat, but also carbon dioxide27. In the Foundation, where the air was closed, lime grappled very slowly (sometimes for decades), which negatively affect the reliability of the buildings.

Let us turn to the issues of production quality (commodity) stone in Ancient Russia.

In search of commodity layers of stone miners were loose (talus) layers of rock beneath the cliffs by the open way - by ditches or moats grinding "28 (excavated stone could be used for lime). When you find a seam, deepened in the closed method.

As we saw in paragraph 3, the development of stone privately in Ancient Russia usually was almost complete excavation of the layer, not the sinking of long drifts. Apparently, in this case the understanding of ancient masters of rationality (minimizing the distance to the exit) coincided with the modern. Accordingly, the formulation had in plan view uneven "bubbles", "inflated" from the entrance. The diameter of such a bubble could be from several dozens to several hundreds meters, as in the largest known ancient systems (Article, Byakovskoy, Cherepkovskaya-1). As the number of these "bubbles" were connected with each other and created a fairly complex form of output.

In the halls to support the ceiling is usually left "column" of the monolith with a span of 5-10 m (sometimes up to 30 m29). Behind the booth carefully put them immediately, leaving it passes for transportation of stone - haulage galleries and W is%830). Most entrances to the rooms, tunnels, where production was halted completely piled bout that in our time makes it difficult to explore.

 

Drift in the quarry "anniversary".

 

Fig. 2. Drift in the quarry "anniversary".

 

Conditional plan Kamenskoy quarries.

 

Fig. 3. Conditional plan Kamenskoy quarries.

 

The total length of the known drifts in Byakovskoy the quarry is about 60 kmin Article about 19 kmin Cherepkovskaya-1 - about 14 kmin Kamenskoy - 10 km31.

The height of the bottom (Fig. 4) and, accordingly, drifts, depending on the power of commodity formation ranged from 1.5 to 4 m32. Commodity layers could have less of a thickness of less 1 m (as in Podolsk quarries), but for convenience of transport tunnels in these cases was made higher than the faces33.

 

Abandoned quarry face in the "jubilee".

 

Fig. 4. Abandoned quarry face in the "jubilee".

 

Was used sparingly and, in all likelihood, only in a rock fall-hazardous places (for example, under the cracked ceiling). Widespread need for this fix was not a stone monolith much stronger than wood. As we indicated in paragraph 3, the role of further strengthening the ceiling is often played and neatly arranged behind the booth (Fig. 5)

 

Boot from the ceiling in the quarry "jubilee".

 

Fig. 5. Boot from the ceiling in the quarry "jubilee".

 

It should be noted that some ancient quarries virtually no waste dumps (as bottles on the surface is usually not imposed), and this makes them difficult to find. The same can be said about the ancient quarries: their piles were formed only from random debris and ash from the furnaces, which burnt lime.

About the tools that were used by the miners, there are many legends, up to the fact that you used the "ancient Egyptian" method - driving in the gap (or pre-done indent) wooden wedges, which then poured water that they have swelled and "ripped" a block of stone.

Perhaps in Ancient Egypt, where the builders of the pyramids had no iron tools, and the climate is extremely dry, with water pouring method of wooden wedges could give good results. But in Ancient Rus, a wholly-owned quarries humidity, the swelling wedges with water pouring very doubtful. Even if wedges were harvested and dried in advance, they still managed to be at least partially dry until they were carried to the place of manufacture. And the time, this method takes too much.

Based on the above General considerations and the experiment conducted with the participation of the author of the study in 2006 in Article quarry34actually breaking commodity stone in Ancient Russia can be reconstructed as follows.

The stone was mined mainly in layers, as breaking stones on the edges of layers (ie, fractures) are much easier.

Starting to work with monolithic wall, stone miners primarily punched under the "ceiling" (i.e. under the bed which was going to leave untouched) wide cavity depth of about half a meter and a width to the top then you could drive a crowbars and wedges. Punched the cavity of rough stone just broke up. Sometimes (depending on the specific conditions of production), similar cavity could penetrate and in the middle of the wall, and below35.

Then, by setting the width future units, punched ("hollowed out") vertically on all height of a wall of a deep (more than half the depth of the block36) indent (Fig. 6). Because the white stone of a very viscous and elastic, not applied in rare heavy blows into the monolith, and multiple and mild, mostly no "hacking"and "cutting" (i.e. not at right angles to the plane).

 

Unfinished old generation in the slaughter Article quarries. In the top right corner of the picture there is the upper chamber, in the middle - VERTIC

 

Fig. 6. Unfinished old generation in the slaughter Article quarries. In the top right corner of the picture there is the upper chamber, in the middle - vertical indents.

 

Depth indents been driven by the need to further break out of the unit (if likened to breaking the block separation of the paper, then indent played the role of perforation). Consequently, too small indent would not be allowed to break the block, too deep lead to excessive labor costs.

And the upper chamber, and the indents were made blunt instrument - pick, "picks", hacks or crowbars, but could be used and chisels, beaten with hammers.

Then the top started to break the blocks. After punching the upper cavity and vertical indents the next block was attached to the monolith only two surfaces - back and bottom. If the lower surface caught on the boundary layers, one had only to pull back as the bottom easily hanging out with the drive there wedges. If not, then it was necessary for the indents on the lower surface, to block held only on the back.

At successful coincidence of circumstances on the back of the unit could also be a vertical crack in the monolith, and then break off the block itself. But, as a rule, had to block on the rear surface break off, and this, as the experiment showed, it was a major problem of miners.

We must assume that when breaking off of the back surface in the course of walking and wedges, and crowbars, and chisels. They were "slipped" from above, was killed in a few places as possible deep and breaking block (Fig. 7). You probably had pre-rock the block wedges, chisels and crowbars and from the sides. In these cases could require access to the unit not only from above, but from the side, and then had to penetrate cavity, similar to the top, and sides of the block.

 

The block, broken off in the experiment, 2006

 

Fig. 7. The block, broken off during the experiment 2006.

 

As further breaking the blocks in the slaughter (the second block on the top, third, etc.; following numbers of blocks vertically etc) gap between the rear surface of blocks significantly simplified, as the top and side appeared more space for off Lomov, driving wedges and even punching Kyle indents on the back surface.

If the height of commodity formation horizontally (respectively, the face height) were considerably higher than human height, for convenience of work on calving upper blocks the production normally were "stepping stones" (had got the upper blocks, standing on the bottom left neukrotimy from the previous layers vertical)37.

According to the "task status" of 192938, normal working hours at the break of white stone was 0.82 man-days per cubic meter. The results of this experiment approximately39 confirmed the adequacy of these standards. However, it should be noted that the final figures for the volume of labor actually produced commercial white stone should be applied with a coefficient of 10 (as we showed in paragraph 3, the "efficiency" of miners was approximately 10%).

 

5. Transportation and processing of stone

 

Broken blocks commodity stone stone miners were pulled out of the quarries, harnessing horses in small truck or small in the old quarries survived many traces of such trucks - Fig. 8, 9). Then blocks were loaded onto boats (in summer) or on sleigh (in winter) and transported to the construction site.

 

Traces of trucks or scrapers on the floor drift (quarry "anniversary")

 

Fig. 8. Traces of trucks or scrapers on the floor drift (quarry "anniversary")

 

Traces of trucks or scrapers at the turn of the roadway (Article quarry)

 

Fig. 9. Traces of trucks or scrapers at the turn of the roadway (Article quarry)

 

Military boats and riding horses belonging to the Prince and used in wars, for transportation of stone did not fit. Accordingly, the organization of transportation of stone required to attract a large number of additional personnel, not less valuable than the miners or stonemasons, - the owners of horses and (or) cargo boats. It could be either Sait the%B

It is possible and the purchase of horses and boats specifically for the needs of construction.

Forced "mobilization" of vehicles could be used only in exceptional cases, as a wealthy peasant or a merchant man, requiring respect and fair pay. Otherwise, the horse "sick" and will not go anywhere, but the boat "accidentally run aground". And supervisors at each kilometer of the route cannot be delivered.

"Ordinary" peasants, attracted by the Prince to serve the labor service, could only be used for auxiliary operations not requiring qualifications.

Accordingly, the transportation of stone from the quarry to construction sites was the most difficult part of the construction. In the pre-Mongolian time (with an average leverage the supply of stone in 500 km - see item 2) transport accounted for about 85% of labor costs of white stone building40in the post-Mongol41 (with an average shoulder haul in 50 km) - about 50%42.

At the construction site of the stone was unloaded, stockpiled, selected by size and subjected to "half-clean" and "clean" processing.

For blocks treatment of white-stone blocks (blocks intended for wall masonry) at the construction site was used tesovic (small hammer with pointed ends), Tesla (similar to a chisel and a boaster (like a scraper with a rounded end). Some stone masons and semifinished", and even "pure" of stone instead of all the above instruments used a small axes43. To cut blocks began only in XVIIfirst century.

One end of each wall of the block is usually left untreated (or rather, processed "semifinished"). Blocks were placed in untreated brickwork inside that provides good coupling with the wall filling.

At various times, the stone was treated differently.

Thus, the surface of the pre-Mongol blocks covered with the characteristic grooves - traces of instruments that were treated with a stone. Blocks were cut and fitted very accurately, and they were laid in the lining very small amount of the solution.

At the end of the XIII century to the first third of the XIV century due to the difficult economic conditions of the Mongolian yoke on clean steel processing to save and put the blocks in the clutch processed "semifinished" - only roughly Obelya surface, not even trying to get quite right angles. This Church was built on the site of ancient Settlement in Kolomna, St. Nicholas Church in Kamenskoye, first Success%44. This technique required the use of rubble when laying blocks in the lining to secure the stones before pouring (the so-called "podschebnivanie"). Due to large gaps between the stones filling was carried out with the thick fluid. However, details of architectural decoration at this time continued to be treated relatively smoothly and accurately.

In the end of XIV century the old Russian masons returned to the pre-Mongol technology of blocks treatment is almost perfectly exact, with the grooves of the tools. Later, these grooves became less and less visible and by the end of the XV century have disappeared completely.

Kvadra XVI-XVII centuries handled very smoothly. Probably, they were subjected to additional grinding sand (which is rubbed on the surface of wood or iron "float"). Masonry became more smooth (it is often referred to as "dry"), it began to be used blocks of almost equal size.

In conclusion, we emphasize again that the white stone of Ancient Russia had enormous historical significance. He was not just a building material, it was an expression of state power and Imperial ideology. And all the huge complexity of the production and processing of white stone (in the masterpiece of Russian literature of the beginning of XIII century - "the Prayer of Daniel the exile" - is a proverb: "Lapse is the stone of Dolomiti than evil wife teaches") is more than was justified by the exceptional importance of the white-stone building of the state prestige of Ancient Russia.

 

NOTES

 

1. L.Izvarina, Aminjanov. White stone suburbs. M., 1989. C. 7.

2. In our time of the Principality of Yuri Dolgoruky is usually referred to as the Rostov-Suzdal, and the Principality of Andrei Bogolyubsky, Vsevolod the Big Nest, Konstantin and Yuri Vsevolodovicha - both of Vladimir-Suzdal. In this study, for simplicity, we will use a total of pre-Mongol name of North-Eastern Russia - "Suzdal" or "Suzdal Principality" (land etc). Speaking about the city of Suzdal, we will clarify what we are talking about it.

3. SV Zagraevsky. Yuri Dolgoruky and old white-stone architecture. M., 2002 (hereinafter - Zagraevsky, 2002). It contains the rationale for the Dating of the beginning of white stone building of Yuri Dolgoruky 1152.

4. Zagraevsky, 2002. C. 141.

5. Ibid., C. 91-99.

6. Ibid., C. 72.

7. Zagraevsky SV ANDPology Rostov chronicler (to the question about the Dating of temples Yuri$%2004.). Vladimir, 2004. C. 15-26.

8. Zagraevsky, 2002. C. 67.

9. SV zagraevsky. The architecture of North-Eastern Russia the end of the XIII century to the first third of the XIV century. M., 2003 (hereinafter - Zagraevsky, 2003). C. 112.

10. Whalebones. Vladimir-Suzdal Rus. Essays on social and political history. Leningrad, 1987. C. 20.

11. L.Izvarina, Aminjanov. The decree. cit., S. 7.

12. P.V. Florensky, Solov'eva M.S. White stone white-stone cathedrals. In Wurns.: "Nature", 9, 1972. C. 48-55; Voronin. The architecture of North-Eastern Russia XII-XV centuries M, 1961-1962. So 1, 106 S.; Luislavena, Aminjanov. The decree. cit., S. 24.

13. Ie cosmology. The history of the city of Moscow. M., 1905. Reprint ed. M., 1990. C. 16.

14. VA Kisses, Ivities. Podolsk and surroundings. M, 1999.

15. Quarry near the village of SIMA Domodedovsky district, Moscow region.

16. Quarry near the village of Kamkina Domodedovsky district, Moscow region (popularly called "Jelly" because of high humidity and blur the floor).

17. Quarry near the village Meshcherin Leninsky district, Moscow region.

18. Quarry near the village Bykovo venevskaja district, Tula region.

19. Quarry near the former village Cherepkova Staritsa district of Tver region (in everyday life usually called "Dolobetskiy").

20. Quarry near the village Seltso Staritsa district of Tver region.

21. Galleries are usually called the horizontal straight line output that appears on the surface. Drifts - any side branch of the entrance tunnel, which has no outlet to the surface.

22. LI Zvyagintsev, A. M. Viktorov. The decree. cit., 114 S..

23. Information courtesy of Y.A Molotovym and AP Degtyaryov.

24. Wagalulu noted that, in contrast to earlier stages of development, when the miners moved into "rooms" ("broad front"), in the nineteenth century began to delve into the monolith on separate sites, engaging the production of tunnels and galleries. This layer still chosen almost completely. Probably, this method provides more rapid development with better capacity ceiling.

25. In the thick layers of rubble crumbs on the floor drifts author kindly pointed participants in the Internet forum www.caves.ru.

26. The author of this book 2 September 2006 in Article quarry trim found in the bottom of a small block, soaked with water. Later, the author found near Domodedovo career shapeless stone (possibly lying there in the first year), dried it, and September 15, 2006 was subjected to the same treatment. Noticeable difference between the Tesco water-soaked%2

27. Information kindly communicated AP Degtyaryov.

28. Seegraben, Assoluto, Mushin. The history of Stripping works in Moscow region (1970-90 years), the practice of finding and opening of underground cavities. In the book: SPELESTOLOGY Yearbook ROS 1999. M., 1999.

29. Information kindly communicated AP Degtyaryov.

30. The original map is available on the web site AP Degtyarev: http://d21.chat.ru.

31. Modern revised data provided ya Dolotova.

32. Information kindly communicated ya Dolotova.

33. Information kindly communicated ya Dolotova.

34. E.xperiment production of white stone in Ancient Russia was held in Article quarry September 2, 2006. The participants of the experiment: Duplenskiy, Khabibov, Wagalulu, mV Zheleznov, SV zagraevsky, GA Izotov, Ivelaw, Ulatov, Pay, Shishmanova. The discussion of the results of the experiment, see on the Internet forum http://www.caves.ru.

35. The fact that the primary cavity could break not only at the top of the wall, the author kindly pointed Khabibov.

36. That indent were made not on the depth of the block, the author kindly pointed mV Zheleznov and GA Izotov.

37. To this author kindly pointed SB Gusakov and A. Yu Mishin.

38. Nige Rochefort. Illustrated by engaging position. Ed. 1929.; Voronin. The decree. cit., S. 326.

39. Lack of qualified participants of the experiment as of miners , to a certain extent offset by great enthusiasm.

40. Zagraevsky, 2002. C. 141.

41. In our study, the post-Mongolian time, we will understand "possibities" - after the winter 1237-1238 years.

42. Zagraevsky, 2003. C. 115.

43. So, Kavelmaher, the father of the author of this book, in 1950th years worked belokamenschikom, in free time carved out of absolutely dry white stone small metal axe almost the exact model of the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl height 0.5 m. The author when experimental treatment units also enjoyed such a hatchet.

44. Zagraevsky, 2003. C. 88.

 

Moscow, 2006.

Sergey Zagraevsky

 

To the page Scientific works

To the main page