To the page “Scientific works”

To the main page


Prof. Dr. S.V. Zagraevsky


The Church of the Holy Trinity, now of the Intersession of the Holy Virgin, –

the first stone hipped roof temple of Old Russia



Published in Russian: Заграевский С.В. Троицкая, ныне Покровская, церковь в Александровской Слободе – первый каменный шатровый храм Древней Руси. Новые исследования. Электронная публикация: электронная научная библиотека «РусАрх», 2014 г.




Generalized architectural, archaeological and annalistic evidences in favor of Dating hipped Trinity (now Intercession) church in Alexandrov Sloboda by 1510-s are provided. It is confirmed that this church was the first ancient stone hipped-roof temple.



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.



The monuments of ancient architecture of the Alexander Settlement attracted the attention of scientists throughout the twentieth century, and the most extensive and fruitful research on this unique the architectural complex of the XVI-XVII centuries are associated with the name kavelmahera1. In 1980-1990-ies he conducted a series of excavations and soundings revealed fundamental fact: in the Settlement during the reign of Vasily III, 1510-ies, in one building the period were erected following extant temples together with all the complex of Palace chambers:

- Pokrovsky, now Trinity Cathedral (Il. 1; in the future, we will without reservation to call it Pokrovsky);

Trinity, now Pokrovskaya Church (ill. 2; in the future, we will without reservation to call it Trinity);

- Assumption Church (ill. 3);

- the Church of Alexei Metropolitan (ill. 4; 1710 - Crucifixion tower). During the reign of Ivan Terrible - the following construction period Sloboda - she was built the pylons and was built on its top. Further, for simplicity, we will call Crucifixion belfry in its present form, and the Church of Alexei Metropolitan - pillar building inside her2.


Alexandrovskaya Sloboda. Pokrovsky (now Trinity) Cathedral.


Il. 1. Alexandrovskaya Sloboda. Pokrovsky (now Trinity) Cathedral.


Alexandrovskaya Sloboda. Trinity (now intercession) Church.


Il. 2. Alexander Sloboda. Trinity (now intercession) Church.


Alexandrovskaya Sloboda. Assumption Church.


Il. 3. Alexandrovskaya Sloboda. Assumption Church.


Alexandrovskaya Sloboda. Crucifixion tower.


Il. 4. Alexandrovskaya Sloboda. Crucifixion tower.


The basis for Dating these temples by Vasily III - the first construction period Sloboda - was the message "Trinity chronicle, speaking about the completion of the Grand-Ducal court: "Summer 7021 October 3 in Sergieva the monastery of Osnova gate kirpichnyy, and on Vortech in the name of St. Sergius of Chudotvortsa. Summer 7022 (1513 - Sz) November 28 Holy there was crkvi GREVENA in Klementyev. Then years December 1 ssna there was crkvi Cover stay BCI in a New village Alexandrovska. Toggi W cnsi great and the courtyard vshel (my italics - Sz). Then msca December 15 ssna there was crkvi kirpichnyy in Sergieva monastery on Vortech sty Sergius, and small her aspy Mitrofan Kolomna Yes Abbot Pamba and ssna was cnsl great"3.

Kavelmaher, Dating all these temples Sloboda one construction period - 1510-mi years - noted materials (brick and white stone) similar conditions, homogeneous binder, identical connecting iron, mixed masonry technique, proximity stylistics the first temples of the Alexander Settlement to the style italianicious the Kremlin cathedrals of Ivan III and Vasily III,4, single italianicious "graphic" style of Russian court architecture XVI century, with the use of the same, clearly unified, units and parts - trough panels, sets of profiles plinths crowning rods and caps. Laying all the temples were originally the open character is not painted and not bleached, tinted white gesso only some made of brick elements. All speakers white stone elements were bonded with the same type of brackets. All the temples (for with the exception of the pillars of the Church of Metropolitan Alexei) were built with aisles and adjacent chambers of the Palace, and the Trinity and assumption - even with cellars. In the interest of all ensemble of false basement storey porch and false with a belfry received and the Church of Metropolitan Alexei. Differed buildings among themselves only by the scope and quality of the overlying "fragiskos" thread, however Kavelmaher noted a single style of this thread (except ornamental belts of the Pokrovsky Cathedral, copied from the Trinity Cathedral The Trinity-Sergius Lavra)5.

Reasoning Kavelmahera about the involvement of the construction of the first temples Sloboda was fairly accepted by all researchers as a comprehensive6, although the Dating of the first temples Sloboda 1510 mi years and challenged next researchers on the basis of formal-stylistic theories7. The proof of the correctness of the position kavelmahera devoted special scientific works of the author of this study8, but here it only makes sense briefly list the main arguments in favor of Dating the first temples Sloboda 1510-ies.

First, it is necessary to clarify some of the intercession Cathedral - stone or wood - it is told in quoted message "Trinity chronicle. There were four buildings (the gate of the fortress of Troitse-Sergieva Lavra, the Church in the village Klementyev, gate the Church of St. Sergius of Radonezh in the monastery and Pokrovsky Cathedral in Alexandrov Sloboda). In three listed buildings building material, and very accurately (brick building called it a brick, and not collectively, "stone", this is usually done in the Chronicles), but relatively the most important of listed buildings - the Pokrovsky Cathedral great-backyard - Oh the material doesn't even say anything.

Of course, just forget to make the necessary clarification to the building material princely temple the chronicler could hardly. Much more likely that such clarification and not required - the same as was required clarification with respect, for example, construction materials of the assumption Cathedral of Aristotle Fioravanti, Arkhangelsk Cathedral of Aleviz New or the Trinity Cathedral of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra. What the main Cathedral of the Grand-Ducal residence, the Alexander Settlement was stone, it was clear the "default". Thus, we are obliged to believe that the message "Trinity chronicle says about consecration in 1513 it stone of the Cathedral of intercession.

Secondly, held in 2005 author of the study of visual-tactile construction analysis the technique showed in the intercession Cathedral, Trinity and assumption churches, churches Metropolitan Alexei, we see the "soft", "warm" masonry, characteristic brick buildings of the Moscow Kremlin of the turn of the XV and XVI centuries, and the Cathedral of St. Peter the Metropolitan of vysokopetrovsky monastery (1514-1517 years). Typical mortar - with extremely high binding capacity, with a very low content of lime sand and other impurities. Numerous white stone ornaments and Settlement, and the Kremlin were carved so that it seems as if stone "breathes". In the Cathedral of St. Peter the Metropolitan brick decor, and Settlement, was covered with gesso "under the white stone".

Unlike above-mentioned buildings, Crucifixion tower built of "dry", "overheated" bricks, crumbling easily a solution with a high admixture of sand. Similar brick at a similar solution, built the Cathedral of the Intercession on the Moat. White stone decor Crucifixion bell also carved, as at the Cathedral of the Intercession on the Moat, - hard, geometric, "dry".

And Crucifixion the bell tower and the Cathedral of the Intercession on the Moat builders used along with iron bonds of wood. In the churches of the Intercession, Trinity, assumption and Metropolitan Alexei Alexandrovskaya Sloboda all connections made entirely of iron high quality9.

Thirdly, the bell tower Alexander Settlement, as we have noted, was built for two construction periods. This is proved by the following provisions:

and style, and the performance of the decoration, and masonry, and mortar of the Church of Alexei Metropolitan Crucifixion and the bell completely different;

- examination of the author this study in 2005, the second tier of the Church of Metropolitan Alexei showed the Windows of the second level was given (and very carefully) another form before building the walls of the future Crucifixion bell. It is very doubtful that in the decade or two after construction would be required significant work to give Windows a fundamentally new form;

- familiarization with the soundings V. Kagelmacher made in places of an adjunction of pylons Crucifixion the bell tower of the facades of the Church of Metropolitan Alexei, shows that at the moment building pillars of the Church of Metropolitan Alexei was time to "grow into the ground about half a meter. Theoretically it could happen within a relatively short time (in the case of targeted sprinklings of ground), but in this the case is extremely unlikely, as we will see below that about the same the cultural layer had time to rise and around Trinity Church by the time of its construction Western extension;

- soundings V. Kagelmacher inside stair projection Crucifixion bell is seen that the junction of walls and pylons Crucifixion the bell tower on uncovered by probing the fragments of white stone plinth and obliviscence brick decor of the Church of Metropolitan Alexei traces weathering, which could not manage to appear in a decade or two.

Of the above it follows that between the erection of the Church of Metropolitan Alexei and Crucifixion the bell went a considerable time, much longer than ten to fifteen years. Thus, these buildings should be attributed to two different construction periods. For all time of existence of Alexandrov Sloboda as residences Moscow rulers such periods there were only two - 1510-e and 1560-1570-ies. Hence, we must include the Church of Metropolitan Alexei to 1510-s, and Crucifixion tower - to 1560-1570.

Fourthly, after the construction of the Trinity Church to its Western facade was added additional new section, which consisted, like the preceding, from the chamber, Podkrepa and the basement (house was completely rebuilt in 168010). Kavelmaher led convincing arguments in favor of the fact that these additions were built much later (not less than a few decades) after Trinity temple:

- unlike the two old sectional volumes, a new section was given a different planned decision (square, blocked in the direction North-South torispherical arch cellar; dual, split longitudinal wall of the basement) and a different interpretation of the volumes;

- seliga dismantled in 1680 vault chamber reached the Church of the cornice and cut into it;

- a new section was laid on other than Trinity Church, mark (at the time of its construction around the temple has formed a cultural layer up to half a metre thick);

- extension belonged to lower culture construction11.

Consequently, there is the situation is similar to that discussed above in connection with the restructuring of the Church of Alexei Metropolitan: we are obliged to refer the building West of the house with cellar and the basement to the second construction period Sloboda, and the construction of the Trinity the Church is to first construction period, i.e. 1510 years.

Thus, we have independent documentary, architectural and archaeological data on the construction in 1510-ies of the Pokrovsky Cathedral, Trinity Church and the Church of Metropolitan Alexei. Note - these data are mutually independent, i.e. in respect of each of these temples is based on its own system of evidence.

Let's not forget the fact, V. V. Kavelmaher regardless of all the above data showed that the temples Cover Trinity of Metropolitan Alexei and the assumption were built in one construction period. This argument, unlike all previous ones, cannot be called self-sufficient, but unambiguous Dating 1510 mi years at least one of the first temples Sloboda (and even more than three, as we saw above) it gives as unambiguous Dating of this time and all other temples.

All of the above gives us the right to believe that the Dating of the first temples Sloboda 1510 mi years proved redundant, very large by the standards of ancient history architecture.

S. S. podjapolsky wrote that Dating monuments of Alexandrov Sloboda 1510-ies "is contrary to established the views on the development of architecture of Moscow Russia of the XVI century"12, "negates almost all of the existing views on the development of architectural types and stylistics of Russian architecture of the XVI century"13. Perhaps approval S. Podyapolsky too dogmatic, but in the main he he was right: in accordance with the Settlement discoveries Kavelmahera many established views on Russian architecture of the XVI century should be revised. (However, to the alteration or even complete revision of its position in accordance with new architectural, archaeological and documentary data should be ready every historian of architecture).

In addition to subject review the local theory and the history of ancient architecture (unusual for the beginning of the XVI century Cathedral with two adjacent chapels, the device portals with curved side walls in the form deployed scrolls, panels with a characteristic angular wedges, primitive classic profiles, no descrepancy cornice pilasters, etc.)14, there is one global question about the first ancient stone Terem temple. The first Church marquee in Russia was not considered as such until research kavelmahera the Church of the ascension in Kolomenskoye (1529-1532), built in 1510-ies of the Church of the Trinity in Alexandrov Sloboda. Accordingly, this type of temple to which owned by Trinity Church, which is close to the traditional, with three apses, with the quadrangle, completed horizontal thrust of the Church is transferred to faces of the octagon, formed in early XVI century.

A later date the Church Ascension compared to Trinity Church in any case does not diminish the value of the Kolomna monument to Russian architecture. In this temple along with tent were applied wall pylons, which allowed to build a huge a building of great proportions, with a unique architecture. Trinity Church on compared to ascension "landed" and, as has been shown and Kavelmaher15, imperfect in engineering terms (ill. 5). And this is an additional argument for the Dating of the Church in the Settlement 1510 mi years since Ivan IV pays stone Church the construction of special attention, which has built such masterpieces as the Cathedral of the intercession on the Moat, the Church of the beheading of John the Baptist in Djakova and many others could not be built in their primary residences in Aleksandrovskaya Sloboda - "ugly and regressive" the Palace temple.



Il. 5. Trinity Church. Cut (V. Kavelmaherom).


To quote what I wrote about Trinity Church kavelmaher16: "The proposed assignment the Church of the Trinity to the first decades of the XVI century undermines, at first glance, the most fundamentals of the theory of Russian tent-roofed architecture. But is it really strict and perfect this theory? So, the first stone Church marquee in Russia is considered with for some time the famous "substitute" the Church of the Trinity at the Palace Church Of the ascension, built by the same warden and with that same purpose - in as the cold Palace of the temple in his new residence near Moscow. The construction was carried out with unprecedented scope and enormous material costs. Built the Church, believed to the researchers, outstanding Italian architect Pietro Francisco Anibal (Petrok Maly in 1529-1532 In history. Russian architecture of the left temple piece, from the point of view of its formal perfection the one and only. However, the process of construction stone tent churches in Moscow due to a number of circumstances interrupted. "Mass" construction tent churches resumed only in 50-ies of the XVI century. - at once, spontaneously, in a remarkably advanced and perfect form, nothing to do, however, with the Church of the ascension does not already have. The gap with new construction a constructive idea and plasticity of the alleged prototype is somehow possible to explain it, but how to explain perfectly Mature, "sustained", self the form of a new series of monuments? Because if we follow this theory, it turns out what almost the first twenty years after the break were built masterpieces as the Central tent, the pillar of the Cathedral of intercession on the Moat (1554-1561 years) and not come down to us petertravel Boris and Gleb Cathedral in Staritsa (1557-1561.). You can, of course, to assume that both buildings are built of genius Barma "comrades". But then who was building another tent masterpiece - not reached us the Church of St. Sergius on the Trinity-Epiphany compound in the Kremlin (1558 g.)? Or not so impeccable from the point of view of form, but surely made tent reliquary-Shrine of Abraham of Rostov in Avraamieva Epiphany the monastery in Rostov the Great (1554 g.)? And who created constructively rude, but defiantly daring hip-cross design of the Spaso-Preobrazhensky Cathedral Solovki? Who built two-column kristopole-hipped Annunciation the Cathedral in the castle Stroganoff in Solvychegodsk (1557 g.)? And then how to understand the evidence source for the building of the Cathedral of intercession "chapels" - "different samples and transfers"? If we accept this theory, have to admit that Russian builders had no previous experience in the construction tent churches! It's flattering to national vanity, as it implies the our architects the ability to brilliant spontaneous creativity, but it's "bad the theory". Meanwhile, the architectural forms of the Cathedral of intercession on the Moat not go back to Church of the ascension in Kolomenskoye (the latter only applies Vampilov and architraves), but primarily to two pillar monuments Alexandrova Sloboda - domed Church of Metropolitan Alexei and hipped Trinity Church. If Trinity Church, as many think, too late monument, it is in comparison with the intercession Cathedral, the ugly and regressive phenomenon. Such the sentence is the history of architecture (twentieth century - S. Z.). However, the monument too fresh and original, too awkwardly naive to just be creative failure of an unknown Italian architect. But because his methods of Dating for the absence of others should be strictly archaeological".

It is the "archaeological" the argument and was in recent years put forward by the supporters of the "classical" theory the Genesis of the old Russian tent-roofed architecture. According to this argument, the main volume of Trinity Church was built in 1510-ies, in the first construction period Settlement, but the hipped roof was built in just under Ivan the terrible17.

However, we called this the argument that appeared in the twentieth century, "archaeological" only conditionally: no any architectural and archaeological research is not based. For the first time this possibility was admitted (at least not excluded) by V. Kavelmaherom in one of his earliest works, however, in the future the researcher clearly were in favor of the simultaneous construction monument:

" researchers realized that the incompatibility of the "late" tent with enough obvious signs of "early" and even "very early" architecture. As a result scientists began to make cautious assumptions about possible two construction stages in the life of the monument. The latter, who for some time was divided this point of view, was the author of this article, printing and speaking out about the likely lay a tent in the oprichnina period of Settlement18. However, in the study of the monument with scaffolding this hypothesis has disappeared by itself: Trinity Church all, from cellars to skufia dome, built during the two to three construction seasons. It is extremely solid and very good surviving in his household monument"19.

But Kavelmaher in his works did not specify exactly how he identified denouement of the monument. This created an information gap to fill and which is intended the present study.

Theoretically, there are two options of what could be Trinity Church originally completed instead tent: this is a round dome on a circular drum, as in the Church of the Dormition of Ivangorod the beginning of the XVI century, and the octagonal dome without the drum, as in the Cathedral of St. Peter Metropolitan 1514-1517 years in Moscow vysokopetrovsky monastery. In both cases, the diameter of a hypothetical initial dome of Trinity Church needs about 7 meters. In the first case, the hypothetical basis the drum could be over or under the top round the cornice, crowning the quadrangle, in the second case, the hypothetical basis of a dome - over or under the upper octagonal cornice directly instead of the existing tent (ill. 6).



Il. 6. The interior of Trinity Church. The upper part of the square, the octagon and the tent.


In 2011 the author of this research with the kind assistance of the management and staff the Museum "Alexandrovskaya Sloboda" held high the stairs Naturno examination of the upper part of the quadrangle and the tent of Trinity Church. This survey showed the following.

First, and above and below any of the three cornices crowning the square (octagonal top, below round, below again octagonal, see ill. 6) any signs of shifting no. Under the upper cornice of the only visible signs of specific construction of reception (in order to strengthen the octagon, a would to withstand the enormous weight of the tent, lintels of the Windows of the octagon were not made of brick and large white-stone blocks (ill. 7), and since the dimensions of these blocks did not correspond to the dimensions of the bricks, builders in some cases filled the void the same blocks and unevenly laid bricks - yl. 8).



Il. 7. The interior of Trinity Church. White stone lintel above the window of the octagon.



Il. 8. The interior of Trinity Church. White stone blocks under the eaves of the octagon.


Simple and rough (on C. S. Asa, "primitivization"20) profiles of all three eaves (ill. 6) so similar that it is impossible not to conclude that their belonging to the same masters. The walls themselves eaves is solid and in no way violated.

In order to ensure the correctness of these observations, the author roofs with Western Commerce held a additional examination of the outer masonry of the upper part of the quadrangle and of the octagon under the tent. This examination also revealed no traces of resurfacings. Technology of masonry and profiles of exterior cornices are fully consistent internal (ill. 9).



Il. 9. Trinity Church. Fragments of the upper part of the quadrangle, the kokoshnik and the octagon.


Secondly, in the interior Trinity Church was held visual-tactile analysis free of frescoes masonry tent and the octagon. Additionally, the interior was inspected masonry the lower parts of the quadrangle (in the polling kavelmahera, Il. 10), and the outside, from the roofs of the Western chamber, is the octagonal and the upper parts of the quadrangle.



Il. 10. Trinity Church. A fragment of the lower part of the quadrangle. Sondage Kavelmahera.


The analysis showed that tent, and octagon, and the quadrangle of Trinity Church and with internal and external the sides are folded in identical technique of masonry:

- brick in all these parts the temple is large, almost equal in size: the average size of 7 x 12 x 28 cm, tolerance on width and height 1 cmlength - 2 cm. (Note that much tougher modern standard industrial brick too, which is rather large tolerance up to 0.5 cm21);

- uneven masonry, often unsystematic (ill. 7 and 8);

- in all these bricks parts of the temple are very high quality, optimum firing;

- the solution in all these parts of the temple are very high quality, with high content of lime.

This technique of masonry completely identical to the masonry of the Church of Metropolitan Alexei and the Pokrovsky Cathedral, analysis of masonry which was conducted by the author in 2005 and 2011 (ill. 10, 11), the only difference is the brick on the "front" of the West facade of the Cathedral of intercession laid more systematically and more accurately sized (tolerance does not exceed 0.5 cm width and height, 1 cm by length). And this technique the beginning of the XVI century is very significantly different from the masonry of later construction of Settlement periods - the era of Ivan the terrible and the 1680-ies. In 2005 year (as we have said above) was examined masonry pylons and tent Crucifixion bell, and found that Crucifixion tower built of "dry", "overheated" brick, crumbling easily (literally under your fingers) the solution with a high admixture of sand. Research conducted by the author in 2011 year, showed that such an "overheated" brick and equally low quality a solution of annexes XVII century to the Trinity Church - Western and dossal chambers. In the latter case, the average size of a brick a few more used in the sixteenth century - about 8 x 14 x 30 cmwith less tolerance - 1 cm across all dimensions.



Il. 11. The Church Of Metropolitan Alexei. A fragment of masonry.



Il. 12. Pokrovsky Cathedral. A fragment of the Western façade.


In General, studies 2011 year confirmed research findings 2005 that the laying of the first and subsequent construction periods of the Alexander Settlement differs greatly by period and almost identical within the same period. And masonry quadrangle, the octagon and the tent of Trinity Church unambiguously classifies them first construction period - the beginning of the XVI century.

Thus, new studies of the tent of Trinity Church in Alexandrov Sloboda showed that he modern its the main volume, built in 1510-ies. Therefore, based on the data architecture and archaeology is the fact that this Church - the first ancient stone tent-roofed Church, not subject to revision.




1. Detail see: kavelmaher Century Monuments of ancient Alexandrova Sloboda. A collection of articles. Vladimir, 1995; Kavelmaher Centuries Of Antiquity Alexandrova Sloboda. Collection of scientific works. M., 2008.

2. About the original view of the Church of Metropolitan Alexei details see: Zagraevsky SV To the question of reconstruction of the Church of Metropolitan Alexei 1510-ies in Alexandrov Sloboda. M., 2007. The material is on the website

3. PRS RSL. F. 304. Ed. Chr. 647. L. 4,4 about.

4. Kavelmaher Century Monuments of ancient Alexandrova Sloboda... S. 7, 17, 24-29; Kavelmaher Centuries Of Antiquity Alexandrova Sloboda... S. 26, 32, 59-64.

5. Kavelmaher V. Monuments of ancient Alexandrova Sloboda... Pp. 8-11; Kavelmaher Vladimir Antiquity Alexandrova Sloboda.... P. 26-30.

6. Podjapolsky S. On the Dating sites Alexandrova Sloboda. In the book: Works The Central Museum of ancient Russian culture and art named after Andrei Rublev. Art and culture of Moscow and Moscow region XIV-early XX centuries. A collection of articles. T. 2. M., 2002. S. 163, 165, 176, 180.

7. Podjapolsky S. On the Dating sites Alexandrova Sloboda S.... 163-180; A. L. Batalov Moscow stone architecture of the end of XVI century. M., 1996; A. L. Batalov The monuments of Alexandrov Sloboda in the context of development of Russian architecture of the XVI century. In the book: Zubovsky reading. Vol. 3. Strunino, 2005. P. 30-37.

8. Zagraevsky SV To the question of the Dating and authorship of the monuments of Alexandrov Sloboda. In the book: Zubovsky reading. Sat. articles. Vol. 3. Strunino, 2005. S. 69-96; Zagraevsky SV New study of architectural monuments of Alexandrov Sloboda. M., 2008.

9. Kavelmaher Century Monuments of ancient Alexandrova Sloboda... P. 8; Kavelmaher Centuries Of Antiquity Alexandrova Sloboda.... P. 26.

10. Kavelmaher Century Monuments of ancient Alexandrova Sloboda... P. 37; Kavelmaher Centuries Of Antiquity Alexandrova Sloboda.... P. 68.

11. Detail see ibid.

12. Podjapolsky S. On the Dating sites Alexandrova Sloboda... P.162.

13. Ibid. P. 180.

14. Detail see Zagraevsky SV To the question about the Dating and authorship of the monuments Alexander settlement...; Zagraevsky SV New study of architectural monuments architecture of Alexandrov Sloboda...

15. Kavelmaher Century Monuments of ancient Alexandrova Sloboda... P. 43, 70.

16. Ibid. S. 70.

17. For example, in a presentation edition of "Alexander the Kremlin. To celebrate the 500th anniversary of the Alexander Of the Kremlin. 1513-2013" (Vladimir, 2013) on page 19 States: "the Most probable version about rebuilding the monument of the XVI century in the 70-ies, when Ivan IV added more luster and brilliance Sloboda and when painted the temple."

18. Kavelmaher Century Monuments of ancient Alexandrova Sloboda. In the book: Information courier of the Moscow organization of the Union of architects of Russia. 1991. No. 7. S. 18.

19. Kavelmaher Century Monuments of ancient Alexandrova Sloboda... P. 24.

20. Podjapolsky S. On the Dating sites Alexandrova Sloboda... P. 232.

21. For example, see


© Sergey Zagraevsky


To the page “Scientific works”

To the main page