St. Tikhon’s University Review. Series V: Problems of History and Theory of Christian Art
St. Tikhon’s University Review V :1 (21)


Demidova Mariia
DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturV201621.9-28
Renaissance work of art as one medieval has a complicated structure. The magnitude of masterpiece depended not only of formal correspondence with antic art or of its plastic worth, but also of its semantics. This article is the attempt to demonstrate this by the example of one historic event, momentous for French Renaissance culture — the Entry of Henry II in Paris in 1549. This traditional royal ceremony going on the diffi cult politic setting was very splendid and had one intricate program. The most prominent humanists and artists were engaged to arrange these celebrations. The translator Jean Martin was responsible for decorations along on the course of royal cortege. He invented arcs and others constructions to prove the dignity of French regal power. An impressive arsenal of news symbolic meanings was involving in this project — ones descending from Vergil’s poetry, others from treatise of Vitruvius, from Sebastiano Serlio’s books or from “Hypnerotomachia Poliphili” by Francesco Colonna and “Emblematum liber” by Andrea Alciato. The main monument of festivities the Fontaine of Innocents, only one carved in stone, emphasized the God’s blessing to French King.
the Renaissance art, the Entry of Henry II in Paris, regal power, Fontaine des Innocents, arc de Mars in Reims, creative principles, semantics, architectural symbolism, temporary decoration, arcs, obelisk, nymphaeum, coronation, anointing.

1. Semushkin A. V. Jempedokl (Empedocles), Moscow, 1994.
2. Bryant L. M. The King and the City in the Parisian Royal Entry Ceremony: Politics, Ritual and Art, New York, 1987.
3. Burnard Y. 1974 “La première identification de la moissonneuse gallo-romaine sur la “Porte de Mars” à Reims”, in Actes du 95 Congrès national des Sociétés savants, Paris, 1974, pp. 85–92.
4. Cooper R. 1999 “Jean Martin et l’entrée de Henri II a Paris”, in Jean Martin. Un traducteur au temps de François I et de Henry II. Cahiers V.-L. Saulnier, Paris, 1999, vol. 16, pp. 85–112.
5. Du Colombier P. Jean Goujon, Paris, 1949.
6. Gébelin F. 1924 “Un manifeste de l’école néo-classique en 1549: l’entrée d’Henri II a Paris”, in Bulletin de la Société de l’Histoire de Paris et de l’Île de France, 1924, vol. 51, pp. 35–45.
7. Godefroy T. Le ceremonial François, Paris, 1649.
8. Guillaume J. 2003 “Le Louvre de Henri II: une architecture “impériale””, in Henri II et les Arts. Actes du colloque international, Paris, 2003, pp. 343–353.
9. Le Moёl M. Le sacre des rois de France, Fontenay-sous-Bois. 2000.
10. Lefèvre F. 1974 “Bref apercu sur l’historiographie de la “Porte de Mars” à Reims”, in Actes du 95 Congrès national des Sociétés savants, Paris, 1974, pp. 75–83.
11. Lefèvre F. La Porte de Mars à Reims, Paris, 1985.
12. McFarlaine I. D. The Entry of Henry II into Paris 16 June 1549. Binghamton, New York, 1982.
13. Miller N. 1968 “The Form and Meaning of the Fontaine des Innocents”, in The Art Bulletin, 1968, pp. 270–277.
14. Pauwels Y. 1998 “De Sagredo à Serlio: La culture architecturale d'un “ymagier architecteur””, in Bulletin Monumental, 1998, vol. 156/2, pp. 137–148.
15. Pauwels Y. 2001 “Propagande architecturale et rhétorique du sublime: Serlio et les “joyeuses entrées” de 1549”, in Gazette des Beaux-Arts, 2001. Mai, pp. 221–235.
16. Picard G. 1974 “La “Porte de Mars a Reims””, in Actes du 95 Congrès national des Sociétés savants, Paris, 1974, pp. 59–73.
17. Sanchi L. A. Les commentaires de la langue greque de Guillaume Budé. L’œuvre, ses sources, sa preparation, Génève, 2006.
18. Sauron G. L’histoire végétalisée. Ornement et politique à Rome, Paris, 2000.
19. Uetani T. 1999 “Elements biographiques sur Jean Martin”, in Jean Martin. Un traducteur au temps de François I et de Henry II. Cahiers V.-L. Saulnier, Paris, 1999, vol. 16, pp. 13–32.
20. Zerner H. L’Art de la Renaissance en France. L’invention du classicisme, Paris, 1996.

Demidova Mariia

Grigor'eva Veronika
DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturV201621.29-38
In the work the treatment of kinovarnaja note « хcе » — «Christ» is given. The note meets in a number of marked singing manuscripts of the middle of the XVIIth century and settles down in the same row with kinovarnye marks. On the basis of the analysis of the sources containing the given note, and also other ordinary singing manuscripts it was possible to define it music-scale character and to establish that on the value it is identical to the stepenaja mark « ». The reference to the musical-theoretical context of the epoch, Old Russian musical managements has allowed to reveal a source of the note: it is the third line of the index made by Ivan Shajdur for demonstration of the stepennye marks. It is the fragment of the litiynaja stihera of the Ascention of the Lord.
Old Russian church singing, the Old Russian theory of music, kinovarnye marks, notes.

1. Vorob'ev E. E. Rannie pamjatniki teorii pomet. Rukopis' (Early Memorials of Notice Theory. Manuscript), Nizhnij Novgorod, 2004.
2. Gusejnova Z. M. «Izveshhenie» Aleksandra Mezenca i teorija muzyki XVII veka (“Disappearing of Alexandr Mezenc and Musical Theory of XVII Century”), Saint-Petersburg, 1995.
3. Grigor'eva V. Ju. «Kniga inoka Iosifa Lovzunskago, ego znameni i pomety». Pevcheskie Prazdniki XVII veka. Publikacija i issledovanie pamjatnika (“Book of Monk Joseph Lovzunskij, His Notices”. Song Feasts of XVII Century. Publication and Study of Memorial), Moscow, 2014.
4. Grigor'eva V. Ju. 2015 “Osmyslenie zvukorjada v drevnerusskoj muzykal'noj teorii” (Comprehension of Scale in Old Russian Musical Theory), in Muzykal'naja arheografija, Moscow, 2015, vol. 2.
5. Shabalin D. S. 2003 “Pevcheskie azbuki Drevnej Rusi: Teksty” (Song Alphabets of Old Russia: Texts), in Materialy i issledovanija po drevnerusskoj muzyke, Krasnodar, 2003, vol. 1.

Grigor'eva Veronika

Labazova Anna
DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturV201621.39-48
The present article is devoted to research of church services to the Candlemas of the icon of the Mother of God «Vladimirskaya» represented in the manuscripts of the Russian State Library, collection of Razumovsky No. 65, 66. Three dates of celebration — May 21, June 23 and August 26 — are appointed for the celebration of various events regarding to the icon of the Mother of God «Vladimirskaya», however, duplicates of church services at the collection of Razumovsky are connected with one festival — Candlemas of the icon. Church services to the Candlemas of the icon of the Mother of God «Vladimirskaya» from these manuscripts are most complete and vivid among the known for today according to the musical and poetical point of view. Duplicates of church services on May 21 and June 23 represent various editions of the same poetic text and form up to three various editions of a single musical-poetic composition inside the order of church service. Therefore the dublicates of the church services on May 21 and June 23 in this work are considered separately from the order of service on August 26. In each of the duplicates we consider the structure, analyze the poetic of the text, distinguish types of chants and the presence of different editions. Among the services themselves revealed the existence of common texts, determined the degree of independence of each church service, analyzed poetic and musical content of the sticherons, the issue of the multichantness in church services is touched upon.
icon of the Mother of God «Vladimirskaya», manuscripts of the collection of Razumovsky, Stichirarium, church services, structure, musical-poetic version of the text manuscript, type of chant.

1. Pljuhanova M. B. 2011 “Ikona Bogomateri Vladimirskoj v letopisnyh i bogosluzhebnyh tekstah” (Vladimirskaja Icon of God Mothe in Chronicle and Service Texts), in Moskovskij Kreml' XV stoletija, Moscow, 2011, vol. 1, pp. 281–295.
2. Seregina N. S. 1987 “Otrazhenie istoricheskih sobytij v stihire o Temir-Aksake i v drugih pesnopenijah Vladimirskoj ikone i problema avtorstva Ivana Groznogo” (Reflection of Historical Events in Sticheron about Temir-Aksake and in Others Songs for Vladimirskaja Icon and Problem of Authorship of Ivan the Terrible), in Pamjatniki kul'tury: Novye otkrytija. Ezhegodnik. 1985, Leningrad, 1987, pp. 148–164.
3. Seregina N. S. Pesnopenija russkim svjatym (po materialam rukopisnoj pevcheskoj knigi XI–XIX vv. «Stihirar' mesjachnyj») (Songs to Russian Saints (according to Manuscript Song Book of XI–XIX Cent. (“Month Sticherarion”)), Saint-Petersburg, 1994.
4. Shhennikova L. A. 2005 “Vladimirskaja ikona Bozh'ej Materi” (Vladimirskaja Icon of God Mother), in Pravoslavnaja jenciklopedija, Moscow, 2005, vol. 9, pp. 8–38.

Labazova Anna

Vinogradova Elena
DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturV201621.49-58
This article contains an analysis of stylistic and iconographic peculiarities of a restored in 2015 “Crucifixion” icon. The icon was created in 1708 by a famous Vologda painter Ivan Grigorievich Markov. He worked formally close to miniature painting and often used narrative scenes. However this icon reveals a new faset of artist's work. The “Crucifixion” stands out from other Markov’s icons because of its monumental size and uncommon composition elements, which appear in the Vologda icon painting school in the late 17th — early 18th Centuries.
Vologda icon painter, a family of icon painters, stylistic and iconographic peculiarities, author's signature.

1. Suvorov N. (ed.) Opisanie Vologodskogo kafedral'nogo Sofijskogo sobora (Descripyin of St. Sophia Cathedral of Vologda), Moscow, 1863.
2. Dmitrievskij I. Istoricheskoe, dogmaticheskoe i tainstvennoe iz’jasnenie Bozhestvennoj Liturgii (Historical, Dogmatical and Mystical Explanation of Divine Liturgy).
3. Buseva-Davydova I. L. 2003 “Ikona «Raspjatie Hristovo»” (Icon “Resurrection of Christ”), in «I po plodam uznaetsja drevo…»: Russkaja ikonopis' XV–XX vekov iz sobranija Viktora Bondarenko, Moscow, 2003, pp. 305–316.

Vinogradova Elena

Zherdev Vitalii
DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturV201621.59-70
The article discusses the history of one of the first fundamental monuments of Russian Orthodox presence on the German soil — funeral church of Grand Princess Catherine Pavlovna Romanova, Queen of Wurttemberg. Design competition of the church is traced, representing the concept from neo-Gothic to classic style. Gallery of artists who participated in the project’s competition and directly involved in the creation of an artistic ensemble of the temple is expanded. Architects: D. Salucci, D. Thuermer, J. Knapp, H. Huebsch, L. von Klenze. Sculptors: B. Thorvaldsen, J. Dannecker, J. Leeb, J. Zwerger, T. Wagner. Special attention is paid to the iconostasis, made in Russia. Stylistic features of his images and decor are considered. Weighted synthesis of architectural forms, sculpture, decorative arts and painting presented, as a result, a significant monument of Romanticism.
Orthodox church of St. Catherine in Stuttgart, Grand Princess Catherine Pavlovna, mausoleum, D. Salucci, sculpture, B. Thorvaldsen, J. Dannecker, iconostasis, Classicism, Romanticism.

1. Antonov V. V. et al. Russkie hramy i obiteli v Evrope (Russian Churches and Monasteries in Europe), Saint-Petersburg, 2005.
2. Iisus Hristos v hristianskom iskusstve i kul'ture XVI–XX v. (Jesus Christ in Christian Art and Culture of XVI–XX Cent.), Saint-Petersburg., 2000.
3. Mal'cev A. P., protoierej. Germanija v cerkovno-religioznom otnoshenii s podrobnym opisaniem pravoslavnyh russkih cerkvej (Germany in Church-Religious View with Detailed Description of Orthodox Russian Churches), Saint-Petersburg, 1903.
4. Muter R. Istorija zhivopisi ot Srednih vekov do nashih dnej (History of Painting from Middle Ages till Today), Moscow, 1902, vol. 2.
5. Uspenskij L. A. Bogoslovie ikony (Theology of Icon), Moscow, 2001.
6. Fedorchenko V. I. Rossijskij imperatorskij dom i evropejskie monarhii (Russian Emperor House and European Monarchies), Moscow, 2006.
7. Florovskij G. 1932 “O pochitanii Sofii Premudrosti Bozhiej v Vizantii i na Rusi” (About Worship to Sophia God Wisdom in Byzantium and Rus’), in Trudy 5-go S'ezda russkih akademicheskih organizacij za granicej, Sofia, 1932, vol. 1, p. 321.
8. Barnard M. R. The Life of Thorvaldsen Collated from the Danish of J. M. Thiele, London, 1865.
9. Fandrey C. Giovanni Salucci: 1769–1845; Hofbaumeister König Wilhelms I, von Württemberg, Stuttgart, 1995.
10. Seide G. Die russische Kirche zum Ehren des Hl. Nikolaus des Wundertäters, München, 1989.

Zherdev Vitalii

Nyebolszin Antal
DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturV201621.71-84
In ordinary usage the word “apocalypse” often means catastrophes and fi nal perdition. Frequently readers understand this way also the last book of the Holy Scripture. Such a view of it is an embarrassing mistake. The greek word “apokalypsis” means “revelation” and does not hold any negative sense. A revelation can concern the most favorable things. This is completely true relating to the Book of Revelation. This book tells about the people of God in communion with its Saviour whatever happens around. The positive values, one of which is the beauty, are here necessarily in the foreground. The beauty is present both in the imagery of the book and in its well proportioned literary structure. First, in the Apocalypse the beauty marks the realm of holiness — here belong the images of God, Christ and heavenly beings. But faithful human beings as well can partake of this beauty by virtue of their unity with Christ realized in martyrdom or in liturgical worship of Him. The beauty, however, characterizes also the ungodly powers (the great whore Babylon), but only in the sense of usurpation of the creative ability, which is given by God to the intelligent creatures, and using it in their own sinful interests. To break with the world of this ungodly beauty is an absolute demand of the Apocalypse of John.
Apocalypse, Book of Revelation, beauty, literary structure of the Apocalypse, dualism, imagery of the Apocalypse, light, martyrdom, worship of God and the Lamb, abuse of beauty, luxury.

1. Kassian (Bezobrazov) ep. 2003 “Carstvo kesarja pered sudom Novogo Zaveta” (Kingdom of Caesar before Judgment of New Testament), in Kassian (Bezobrazov) ep. Da priidet Carstvie Tvoe: Sb. statej, Parizh, 2003, pp. 157–187.
2. Nebol'sin A. S. 2010 “Metody interpretacii, jeshatologija i struktura Otkrovenija Ioanna Bogoslova” (Methods of Interpretation, Eschatology and Structure of Revelation of John), in Vestnik PSTGU. Ser. I, Moscow, 2010, vol. 3/31, pp. 55–74.
3. Aune D. L. 2008 “The Apocalypse of John and the Problem of Genre”, in Aune D. L. Apocalypticism, Prophecy, and Magic in Early Christianity. Collected Essays, Grand Rapids, 2008, pp. 39–66.
4. Bauckham R. The Climax of Prophecy. Studies on the Book of Revelation, Edinburgh, 1993.
5. Bauckham R. 1993 “The Economic Critique of Rome in Revelation 18”, in Bauckham R. The Climax of Prophecy. Studies on the Book of Revelation, Edinburgh, 1993, pp. 338–383.
6. Beale G. K. John’s Use of the Old Testament in Revelation, Sheffield, 1998.
7. Beale G. K. The Book of Revelation. A Commentary on the Greek Text, Grand Rapids, Cambridge, 1999.
8. Biguzzi G. Apocalisse. Nuova versione, introduzione e commento, Milano, 2005.
9. Biguzzi G. 2005 “Giovanni di Patmos e la cultura ellenistica”, in Bosetti E., Colacrai A. (eds.) Apokalypsis. Percorsi nell’Apocalisse in onore di Ugo Vanni, Assisi, 2005, pp. 100–105.
10. Biguzzi G. I settenari nella struttura dell’Apocalisse. Analisi, storia della ricerca, interpretazione, Bologna, 1996.
11. Biguzzi G. 2006 “Is the Babylon of Revelation Rome or Jerusalem?”, in Biblica, 2006, vol. 87, pp. 371–386.
12. Biguzzi G. 2000 “La trama narrativa e l’impianto letterario”, in Parole di vita, 2000, vol. 45, pp. 13–19.
13. Callahan A. D. 1995 “The Language of Apocalypse”, in The Harvard Theological Review, 1995, vol. 88, pp. 453–470.
14. Charles R. H. The Revelation of St. John, Edinburgh, 1920.
15. Collins A. Y. 1980 “Revelation 18: Taunt Song or Dirge?”, in L’Apocalypse johannique et l’Apocalyptique dans le Nouveau Testament, Leuven, Gembloux, 1980, pp. 185–204.
16. Collins A. Y. The Combat Myth in the Book of Revelation, Missoula, 1976.
17. Doglio C. 2001 “Lo splendore della novità. L’Apocalisse come rivelazione della bellezza”, in Parola, Spirito e Vita, 2001, vol. 44, pp. 143–158.
18. Kirby D. J. Repetition in the Book of Revelation. Diss (Ph.D.), Catholic University of America. Washington, D.C, 2009.
19. Lambrecht J. 1980 “A Structuration of Rev 4. 1 — 22. 5”, in L’Apocalypse johannique et l’Apocalyptique dans le Nouveau Testament, Leuven, Gembloux, 1980, pp. 77–104.
20. L'Apocalypse de Jean: traditions exégétiques et iconographiques. III–XIII siècles. Actes du colloque de la Fondation Hardt, 29 fé vrier — 3 mars 1976, Genève, 1979.
21. Lichtenberger H. 2009 “Rom, Luxus und die Johannesoffenbarung“, in Beiträge zur urchristlichen Theologiegeschichte, Berlin, New York, 2009, pp. 479–493.
22. Lohmeyer E. Die Offenbarung des Johannes, Tübingen, 1926.
23. Meer F., van der. Maiestas Domini. Théophanies de l’Apocalypse dans l’art chrétien, Città del Vaticano, Roma, Paris, 1938.
24. Meer F., van der. Apokalypse. Die Visionen des Johannes in der europäischen Kunst, Freiburg im Breisgau, 1978.
25. Mondati F. 1997 “La struttura generale dell’Apocalisse”, in Rivista Biblica, 1997, vol. 45, pp. 289–327.
26. Moyise S. The Old Testament in the Book of Revelation, Sheffield, 1995.
27. Ozanne C. G. 1965 “The Language of the Apocalypse”, in Tyndale House Bulletin, 1965, vol. 16, pp. 3–9.
28. Pattemore S. 2002 “Repetition in Revelation: Implications for Translation”, in Bible Translator, 2002, vol. 53, pp. 425–441.
29. Pérez Márquez R. A. L'Antico Testamento nell'Apocalisse: storia della ricerca, bilancio e prospettive, Assisi, 2010.
30. Provan I. 1996 “Foul Spirits, Fornication and Finance: Revelation 18 from an Old Testament Perspective”, in Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 1996, vol. 64, pp. 81–100.
31. Réau L. Iconographie de l’art chrétien, Paris, 1957, vol. 2/2.
32. Satake A. 1980 “Inklusio als ein beliebtes Ausdrucksmittel in der Johannesapokalypse”, in Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute, 1980, vol. 6, pp. 76–113.
33. Schuessler-Fiorenza E. 1977 “Composition and Structure of the Book of Revelation”, in Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 1977, vol. 39, pp. 344–366.
34. Strand K. A. 1978 “Chiastic Structure and Some Motifs in the Book of Revelation”, in Andrews University Seminary Studies, 1978, vol. 16, pp. 401–408.
35. Takács Gy. Jelenések könyve. Exegézis, Paulus Hungarus — Kairosz, 2000.
36. Thompson S. The Apocalypse and Semitic Syntax, Cambridge, 1985.
37. Toribio Cuadrado J.F. Apocalipsis: Estética y teología, Roma, 2007.
38. Unnik W. C., van. 1970 “Mia gnome, Apocalypse of John XVII. 13, 17”, in Studies in John, Leiden, 1970, pp. 209–220.
39. Unnik W. C., van. ““Worthy is the Lamb”. The Background of Apoc 5”, in Mèlanges bibliques Béda Rigaux, Gembloux, 1970, pp. 445–461.
40. Unnik W. C., van. 1963 “A Formula Describing Prophecy”, in New Testament Studies, 1963, vol. 9, pp. 86–94.
41. Unnik W. C., van. 1949 “De la Règle Mete prostheinai mete athelein dans l’histoire du canon”, in Vigiliae Christianae, 1949, vol. 3, pp. 1–36.
42. Vanni U. La struttura letteraria dell’Apocalisse, Brescia, 1980.

Nyebolszin Antal

Rybakova Nadezhda
DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturV201621.85-94
The article has carried out the research on harmonization of old singsongs which were presented in the competition of the Society of church singing lovers in Moscow. The results of the competition were published in the journal “The experience of transposition of old church hymns for chorus” in 1887. The special transpositions by Weichental and Komarov, which were awarded a prize in the competition, and also the works by Kashperov were studied as a part of the Society’s work, whose primary aim was to rejuvenate the old traditional Russian singing and establish the right view on Church singing and spiritual music development. In order to meet the competition’s requirements and fi nd the most appropriate way of harmonization for Old church singsongs, the composers used special approaches of chorus elaboration for their transpositions which were diff erent from common choral style of harmonization of Church singsongs which was based on classical tonality. The common feature of all the competition’s transpositions was the desire of the composers to make the intonation-rhythmical and harmonized nature of choral score similar to the old singing. As a result, the individual voices sounded freer, softer and more agile and their combination ended in formation of uncommon accords which appeared within the harmony basis on Diatonic scale, namely, on church scale. Despite the opinions of the Society’s members that these compositions were not regarded as an excellent example of harmonized old church singsongs, they became an important milestone on the way to creating the Russian style of spiritual music.
Society of church singing lovers, harmonization, traditional style, competition, znamenny chant.

1. Bogomolova L. M. 1990 “Istoriografija izuchenija ustnoj tradicii v kul'tovom pevcheskom iskusstve” (Historiography of Study of Oral Tradition in Cult Singing Art), in Iz istorii muzykal'noj zhizni Rossii XVIII–XIX vekov, Moscow, 1990, pp. 97–107.
2. Gardner I. A. Bogosluzhebnoe penie Russkoj Pravoslavnoj Cerkvi (Service Singing of Russian Orthodox Church), Moscow, 2004, vol. 2.
3. Plotnikova N. Ju. 1992 “Voskreshenie drevnosti” (Resurrection of Antiquity), in Moskovskij zhurnal, 1992, vol. 6, pp. 33–36.
4. Plotnikova N. Ju. 2005 “Vsenoshhnoe bdenie” (Pannychis), in Pravoslavnaja jenciklopedija, Moscow, 2005. T. IX. S. 679.
5. Potemkina N. A. Bogosluzhebnoe penie v nachale i konce XX veka (Service Singin in Begin and End of XX Century), Moscow, 1999.
6. Rahmanova M. P. 2002 “Obshhestvo ljubitelej cerkovnogo penija: Vstup. stat'ja”, in Russkaja duhovnaja muzyka v dokumentah i materialah, Moscow, 2002, vol. 3, pp. 190–231.

Rybakova Nadezhda

Beliaev Leonid
DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturV201621.95-108
The article draws the attention to the rich and bright but not well studied collection of the elements of Church buildings of Moscow (mainly of the late Medieval period). It was collected at the 1920th — 1930th by the prominent Russian specialist in the fi eld of restoration P. D. Baranovskij. The architect struggled to save the remnants of the numerous Church buildings under the process of their demolition by the Soviet regime. As a result, Baranovskij succeeded to create the unique museum of “spolia”. A few buildings were preserved almost intact, such as the Lions Gate. The rest of buildings were represented by the decorative elements (the Red Gate, the Tower of Sucharev etc.) and/or by the gravestones (by the way, the cemetery of Kolomenskoye itself). Some examples of stones were analyzed by mineralogists and art historians, but mainly they are still neglected. The short description of the main items of the collection as well as the survey of the publications are given.
Museums of architecture, limestone, minerals, geology, architectural carving, tombstones, the Lions Gate, the Red Gate, the Tower of Sukhov.

1. Alekseev A. S., Zav'jalov S. M. 2014 “Alebastrovyj sarkofag patriarha Nikona: sostav i vozmozhnye istochniki” (Alabaster Sarcophagi of Patriarch Nikon: Content and Possible Sources), in Anthropology & Archeology of Eurasia, Summer 2014, vol. 53/1: Unburying the Past, pp. 125–131.
2. Beljaev L. A. Russkoe srednevekovoe nadgrobie. Belokamennye plity Moskvy i Severo-Vostochnoj Rusi XIII–XVII vv. (Russian Medieval Headstone. Whitestone Slabs of Moscow and Northern-Eastern Rus’ of XIII–XVII Cent.), Moscow, 1996.
3. Beljaev L. A., Kapitonova M. A. 2013 “Pogrebenie patriarha Nikona v Voskresenskom Novo-Ierusalimskom monastyre: Issledovanija 2012 g.” (Bury of Patriarch Nikon in Ressurection New-Jerusalem Monastery. Studies of 2012), in Rossijskaja arheologija, 2013, vol. 4, pp. 117–125.
4. Borisenkova A. A. 2006 “«L'vinye vorota» iz sobranija Gosudarstvennogo muzeja-zapovednika «Kolomenskoe»: rekonstrukcija pervonachal'nogo oblika i voprosy proishozhdenija pamjatnika” (Lion Gates from Collection of State Museum-Reserve “Kolomenskoe”: Reconstruction of Original View and Questions of Origin of Memorial), in Arhitekturnoe nasledstvo, Moscow, 2006, vol. 46, p. 96–106.
5. Brusencov O. A., Fat'kov A. M., Jaganov A. V. 2015 “Nahodki zagotovok belokamennyh izdelij iz raskopok selishha Bol'shoe Savrasovo v 2013 g.” (Finds of Blanks of Whitestone Works from Excavations of Village Bol'shoe Savrasovo in 2013), in Arheologija Podmoskov'ja: Mat-ly nauch. seminara, Moscow, 2015, vol. 11.
6. Burov V. V., Isakova T. N., Florenskij P. V. 2009 “O proishozhdenii izvestnjaka soloveckih nadgrobnyh plit konca XVI — nachala XVII v.” (About Origin of Limestone of Soloveckije Headstone Slabs of End of XVI — Begin of XVII Cent.), in Soloveckoe more: Istoriko-literaturnyj al'manah, Arhangel'sk, Moscow, 2009, vol. 8, pp. 115–117.
7. Dan'shin B. M. Geologicheskoe stroenie i poleznye iskopaemye Moskvy i ee okrestnostej (prigorodnaja zona) (Geological Building and Minerals of Moscow and Its Environs (Suburban Zone)), Moscow, 1947.
8. Zvjagincev L. I., Viktorov A. M. Belyj kamen' Podmoskov'ja (Whitestone of Moscow Region), Moscow, 1989.
9. Levina T. V. 2006 “Belokamennoe nadgrobie XV — nachala XVIII veka. Sobranie muzeja-zapovednika «Kolomenskoe»” (Whitestone Headstone of XV — Begin of XVIII Century. Collection of Museum-Reserve “Kolomenskoe”), in Beljaev L. A. (ed.) Russkoe srednevekovoe nadgrobie XIII–XVII vv.: Materialy k svodu, Moscow, 2006, vol. 1, pp. 82–90.
10. Novakovskaja S. M. 1986 “Kamenotesnoe delo Vladimiro-Suzdal'skoj Rusi v XII–XIII v.” (Stonemason Business of Vladimiro-Suzdal'skaja Rus’ in XII–XIII Centuries), in Sovetskaja arheologija, 1986, vol. 3, pp. 72–83.
11. Rappoport P. A. Stroitel'noe proizvodstvo Drevnej Rusi (X–XIII vv.) (Building Industry of Old Rus’ (X–XIII Cent.)), Saint-Petersburg, 1994.
12. Rejtlinger E. A. 1964 “Belyj kamen' postroek Drevnej Rusi” (Whitestone of Buildings of Old Rus’), in Priroda, 1964, vol. 4, pp. 79–82.
13. Speranskij A. N. Ocherki po istorii Prikaza kamennyh del Moskovskogo gosudarstva (Essays on History of Department of Stone Business of Moscow State), Moscow, 1930.
14. Florenskij P. V., Solov'eva M. N. 1972 “Belyj kamen' belokamennyh soborov” (Whitestone of Whitestone Cathedrals), in Priroda, 1972, vol. 9, pp. 48–55.
15. Beliaev L. A., Kapitonova M. A. 2014 “Patriarch Nikon’s Alabaster Sarcophagus Composition and Possible Sources”, in Anthropology & Archeology of Eurasia, Summer 2014, vol. 53/1: Unburying the Past, pp. 63–84.

Beliaev Leonid

Kovalev Andrei
The article highlights issues specific genre characteristics copyright spiritual music in the works of Russian composers of the second half of the 19th — early 20th centuries. an example of choral cycles Vigil Tchaikovsky, Rakhmaninov, A. T. Grechaninova. Purpose — to show the nature of the refractive index in the individual composition creativity canonical bases singing succession Vigil service in the use of traditional chant, and general construction of choral cycle. The methodology of work is determined by the specifics of the genre sphere of Russian sacred music and is based on the provisions and terminology of the liturgy (the science of worship), as well as scientific categories of domestic musicology. The basis of the scope of choral intonation cycles Vigil Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninov up banners, Kiev and Greek chant that brings together these works with singing tradition. However, the nature of harmonization chant, especially in the choral cycle Rachmaninov displays that work in the sphere of vnebogosluzhebnuyu genre. Choir cycle A. T. Grechaninova does not contain exact quotations of the chant, but in the musical fabric of his works certainly felt reliance on liturgical melos. Characteristic feature of the organization of choral cycle of Tchaikovsky is the inclusion of immutable chants along with a variety of life forms of everyday singing osmoglasiya that reflects the desire of the composer to hear his music in the walls of the temple. Vigil Rachmaninov includes nearly all immutable chants Sunday service. Canticles of Vespers performed peace and tranquility, which brings this part of the cycle to the nature of Orthodox worship. Chants Matins different scale, the composer is widely used means of expression of secular music. Choir cycle Vigil A. T. Grechaninova built on the gradual development of solemn praise topics that most clearly expressed in terms of tone. Thus, in each of these works differently manifested ratio of elements associated with the canonical-liturgical singing foundation and individual creative thinking composers, proximity to the tradition, or vice versa, away from it.
liturgical-singing, liturgy, genre, spiritual music, choral cycle, harmonization chant, is famous for painting, Greek painting, Kievan chant, small chant.

1. Kovalev A. B. S. V. Rahmaninov i tradicionnye zhanry russkoj duhovnoj muzyki: Issledovanie (Rahmaninov and Traditional Genres of Russian Spiritual Music: Study), Tambov, 2015.
2. Pashkova M. 2004 “Vsenoshhnoe bdenie A. T. Grechaninova” (Pannychis of A. T. Grechaninov), in Paisov Ju. I. (ed.) Tradicionnye zhanry russkoj duhovnoj muzyki i sovremennost': Sb. statej i issledovanij, Moscow, 2004, vol. 2, pp. 195–205.
3. Protopopov Sergij, prot. 1901 “O hudozhestvennom jelemente v cerkovnom penii” (About Art Element in Church Singing), in Bogoslovskij vestnik, 1901, Fevral'.
4. Rahmanova M. P. 1997 “A. T. Grechaninov“, in Istorija russkoj muzyki, Moscow, 1997, vol. 10A: 1890–1917-e gg., pp. 170–216.
5. Rahmanova M. P. 1990 “Ogromnoe i eshhe edva tronutoe pole dejatel'nosti” (Huge and Else Hardly Touched Field of Activity), in Sovetskaja muzyka, 1990, vol. 6, pp. 67–74.

Kovalev Andrei

Vaneian Stepan, archpriest
Famous W W's «Abstraktion und Einfühlung» (1908), whose 1st chapter is presented here in Russian translation, has received its status of a cult text of artistic avant-guard of the 20th century thanks to its daring reconsideration of traditional aesthetic concepts of the 19th century. Instead of «Einfühlung» or «empathy», «abstraction» has become the key concept. Instead of the focus on picturing, geometrism and «crystallization» have been stressed; instead of the feeling of life — the overcoming of «the human» in creative work. The former is a sign of natural, pre-human existence, whereas the latter is an overcoming of the dependence on natural existence. The former corresponds to an early stage of the human evolution, the latter, by contrast, is a testimony of maturity and modernity. The analysis of this conceptual pair allows to conclude that the abandoning of legitimate, psychologically justified 'empathy' for the sake of 'abstraction' is an attempt to form the basis of independence — not only for artistic, but also scholarly activity. This means art history gains its autonomy at the same time as it receives an autonomous subject to investigate — the independent work of art, free of natural attitudes. Thus Worringer's text becomes a manifest of artistic-historical concreteness, as well as artistic-actual abstraction.
Wilhelm Worringer, the psychology of artistic creativity, abstraction, perception-empathy, the origin of art, artistic avant-garde and classic art, naturalism, style, ornament and architecture.

Vaneian Stepan, archpriest