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

Although the sarcophagus No. 1957, 1011.1 is investigated in detail, to this day there are many questions in its study. In addition to the main problems facing the researcher in the study of early monuments the item has a unique iconographic solution: unlike other objects of this kind (3rd c.), the prophet Jonah, reproduced on the front wall, is represented awake. The authors put forward a number of hypotheses explaining this feature, but none of them is comprehensive. These aspects justify the choice of the monument as an object of study.A review of texts (2nd-4th cc.) and objects (3rd-5th cc.) showed that, probably, the Old Testament prophet is not literally represented in the relief, but rather an allegorical transmission of the theology of bodily Resurrection is presented. Although the early texts were only trying to comprehend the relationship between the image (εἰκών) and the Prototype (ἀρχέτυπον), nevertheless, perhaps understanding the images at that time could be more complicated and led to the formation of the theology of the image.

Keywords: early Christian sculpture, sarcophagi, the theme of the Resurrection, iconography, methodology, interpretation, image theory, modern art history

1. Anđelković J., Rogić D., Nikolić E. (2010) “Peacock as a Sign in the Late Antique and Early Christian Art”. Archaeology and Science, vol. 6, pp. 231–248.
2. Bédoyère G. de la (2006) Roman Britain: A New History. London.
3. Belousov A., Zhuravlev D., Kostromichev D. (2022) “Izobrazhenie proroka Iony na svetil’nike iz Khersonesa Tavicheskogo”. Problemy istorii, filologii, kul’tury, Moscow, vol. 1, pp. 66–89 (in Russian).
4. Brink L., Green D. (eds) (2008) Commemorating the Dead. Texts and Artifacts in Context. Studies of Roman, Jewish and Christian Burials. Berlin; New York.
5. Couzin R. (2018) “Invented Traditions: Latin Terminology and the Writing of Art History”. Journal of Art Historiography, vol. 19, pp. 1–29.
6. Davis S. J. (2000) “Jonah in Early Christian Art: Allegorical Exegesis and the Roman Funerary Context”. Australian Religion Studies Review, vol. 13 (1), pp. 72–83.
7. Dresken-Weiland J. (1998) Repertorium der christlich-antiken Sarkophage. Bd II: Italien, Dalmatien, Museen der Welt. Mainz.
8. Ermak E. (2018) “Ikonograficheskij dialog Vostoka i Zapada v skul‘pturnom oformlenii rannekhristianskikh sarkofagov III–VI vv.” in Materialy Mezhdunarodnoj nauchnoj konferencii “Rannij zheleznyj vek Evrazii ot rubezha er do ser. I tys. n.e. Dinamika osvoeniia kul‘turnogo prostranstva”, pp. 51–54 (in Russian).
9. Ermak E. (2018) “Na perekrestii pozdneantichnoj i rannekhristianskoj kul’tur. Rel’ef sarkofaga iz cerkvi Santa-Mariia–Antikva: opyt primeneniia kompleksnogo podkhoda k analizu skul’p tury III–IV vv.”, in Tezisy Mezhdunarodnoj konferencii molodykh uchenykh “Aktual‘naia arkheologiia 4: kompleksnye issledovaniia v arkheologii”, pp. 227–230 (in Russian).
10. Ermak E. (2017) “Obraz proroka Iony. Otrazhenie bogosloviia telesnogo Voskreseniia v ikonografii rannekhristianskoj skul’ptury”, in Ergastirij : sbornik materialov Vserossij skoj letnej shkoly po vizantinovedeniiu, pp. 23–33 (in Russian).
11. Grabar A. (1961) Christian Iconography: a Study of its Origins. A. W. Mellon Lectures in the Fine Arts. Princeton.
12. Jensen R. M. (2005) Face to Face. Portraits of the Divine in Early Christianity. Fortress Press.
13. Jensen R. M. (2011) Living Water. Images, Symbols and Settings of Early Christian Baptism. Leiden.
14. Kiilerich B. (2015) “The State of Early Christian Iconography in the Twenty-First Century”. Studies in Iconography, 2015, vol. 36, pp. 99–134.
15. Kuvatova V. (2019) “Vozmozhnye istochniki rannekhristianskoj ikonografi i sceny ‘Iona pod tykvennoj lozoj’”. Vestnik RGGU. Seriia Literaturovedenie. Iazykoznanie. Kul’turologiia, vol. 1, pp. 59–69 (in Russian).
16. Lawrence M. (1962) “Ships, Monsters and Jonah”. American Journal of Archaeology, vol. 66 (3), pp. 289–296.
17. Losev A., Asmus V. (eds) (2007) Platon. Sochineniia v chetyrekh tomakh. Vol. 2. St. Petersburg (in Russian).
18. Malcolm T. (ed.) (2004) A Companion to Roman Britain. Oxford.
19. Narkiss B. (1978) The Sign of Jonah. Papers Related to Objects in the Exhibition “Age of Spirituality”. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, vol. 18 (1), pp. 63–76.
20. Rice D. T. (2002) Byzantine Art. Moscow (Russian translation).
21. Rosenau H. (1961) “The Jonah Sarcophagus in the British Museum”. Journal of the British Archaeological Association, vol. 24 (1), pp. 60–66.
22. Stoliarov A., Shaburov N. (eds) (1994) Kvint Septimij Florent Tertullian. Izbrannye sochineniia. Moscow (in Russian).
23. Sushkova O. (2009) “I tykva, i pliushch, i loza vinogradnaia”. Cerkov’ i vremia, vol. 48, pp. 169–184 (in Russian).
24. Walker S. (1990) Catalogue of Roman Sarcophagi in the British Museum. London.
25. Weitzmann K. (ed.) (1979) Age of Spirituality. Late Antique and Early Christian Art, Third to Seventh Century. Catalogue of the Exhibition at The Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York.

Ermak Elena

An octo-modal hymn in Byzantine liturgical chant is a particular composition type, in which melody runs through all eight modes of the Octoechos. The paper discusses one of such hymns – Sticheron to the Dormition “Thearkhio neumati” as it appears in the Middle Byzantine singing tradition. This melodic version – “Standard Abridged Version” as it is called by Byzantinists – was widely spread in late 12th – 14th centuries and can be found in many manuscripts, written in the diastematic “round” notation that can be read and transcribed.The author presents a detailed study of different melodic and graphic features of the Sticheron: its notation, modal composition, melodic formulae and their cadences. The graphic version from Middle Byzantine manuscripts shows some peculiarity in using modal signatures (called in Greek tradition “martyria”). These signs, marking a modulation or a cadence on a secondary tone, are not obligatory in this version: their number and position change from one manuscript to another without affecting neither the melody of the hymn nor its modal composition. Study of melodico-modal features of the Sticheron reveals, on the other hand, significant similarity in modal and formulae content between authentic modes and their respective plagal modes. Therefore, in a larger sense, the composition of the Sticheron includes not eight, but four wholly distinctive modal sections. There are also other peculiarities: transposition of some melodic formulae; minor discrepancies the melody shows in different manuscripts; some elements of oral singing tradition surviving in the graphic version.In the Appendix to the article, the author presents the full transcription of the Sticheron from Middle Byzantine neumes to modern notation system.

Byzantine mediaeval chant, chant manuscripts, Sticherarion, Middle Byzantine musical notation, Byzantine neumes, melodic formulae, mode, modulation, poly-modal hymn, octo-modal hymn

1. Aleksandrou M. (2010) Exegesis and transcription of Byzantine music. The brief introduction to the problem. Thessaloniki (in Greek).
2. Zakhar’ina N. (1992) “Khudozhestvennoe vremya v drevnerusskom pesnopenii (na materiale osmoglasnika Uspeniyu Bogoroditsy)”, in Istochnikovedcheskoe izuchenie pamyatnikov pismennoy kultury: Poetika drevnerusskogo pevcheskogo iskusstva, pp. 99–124 (in Russian).
3. Zakhar’ina N. (1999) “Stikhira Uspeniyu Bogoroditsy ‘Bogonachalnym manoveniem’”, in Rukopisnye pamyatniki, 5, pp. 31–61 (in Russian).
4. Zakhar’ina N. (2002) “Evoliutsiia kompozitsii drevnerusskikh pesnopenii-osmoglasnikov znamennogo rospeva v 12‒17 vv.”, in Pevcheskoe nasledie Drevnei Rusi (istoriia, teoriia, estetika), pp. 185–205 (in Russian).
5. Preobrazhenskiy A. (1926) “Greko-russkie pevcheskie paralleli 12‒13 vv.” De musica, 2, pp. 60–76 (in Russian).
6. Raasted J. (1966) Intonation Formulas and Modal Signatures in Byzantine Musical Manuscripts. Copenhagen.
7. Shchepkina N. (2019) “Ikhosnoe stroenie osmoglasnika ‘Bogonachal’nym manoveniem’”. Muzykovedenie, 2019, vol. 1, pp. 40–46 (in Russian).
8. Stathis G. (1979) “An Analysis of the Sticherarion ‘Ton elion krypsanta’ by Germanos, Bishop of New Patras. The Old Synoptic and the New Analytical Method of Byzantine Notation”, in Studies in Eastern Chant, 4, pp. 177–277.
9. Strunk O. (1942) “The Tonal System of Byzantine Music”. The Musical Quarterly, vol. 28/2, pp. 190–204.
10. Thodberg Ch. (1964) “Chromatic alteration in the Sticherarium”. Actes du XIIe Congrès international d’Études Byzantines. Ochride. 10–16 septembre 1961, t. II, pp. 607–612.

Tyurina Olga

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

The iconography of Jesus Christ is one of the most relevant and, at the same time, the most difficult subjects to study. The formation of stable iconographic types of the Savior’s image went through a complicated path, going through various transformations, mainly related to the practical or liturgical function of icons. One of the most popular type, Pantokrator, has been realized in the panel painting of the Italian central region from the earliest times in the copies of the main Roman relic - Acheropita (Greek: Αχειροποίητα, the Image of Christ Not Made by Human Hands), which, as believed, had the same miraculous and protective power as an ancient icon. These copies, representing the image of the Savior on the throne (sometimes flanked by the parts of a triptych with the praying Virgin Mary and Saint John depicted) were largely produced for the churches of Rome and Lazio until the end of the 15th century. In the Renaissance, with its focus on individual religious practice, there is an increasing demand for small altars for home prayer, where artists implemented a new type of iconography, Veronica (Latin: Vera Icona, True Face), which (as well as Acheropita) was associated with the legend of the miraculous discovery of a relic and also endowed with a special protective power. Various interpretations of the illustrative images of the True Face in Italy and the artistic solutions found by the painters of Northern Europe finally lead to the formation and wide circulation in the Renaissance art of another iconographic variation - the Savior of the World (Latin: Salvator Mundi). This article discusses the pictorial and textual sources that determined the completion of the main iconographic types of Jesus Christ in Italian panel painting of the 13th – 15th centuries and with many of attracted samples studies the development of Savior’s iconography.

Iconography of Jesus Christ, Iconography of the Savior, Salvator Mundi, Italian Art, Religious Art, Renaissance Art, Art of 13th-15th century.

1. Andaloro M. (2018) “Dal ritratto all’icona”, in Andaloro M., Romano S. (eds) Arte e iconografia a Roma. Da Costantino a Cola di Rienzo. Milan, pp. 31–69.
2. Bacci M. (2006) “Epigoni orientali e occidentali dell’immagine di Cristo ‘non fatta da mano d’uomo’”, in Frommel C. L., Wolf G. (eds) L’immagine di Cristo: dall’acheropita alla mano d’artista. Dal tardo medioevo all’età barocca. Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, pp. 43–60.
3. Belting H. (2002) Image and Cult. The History of Image before the Epoch of Art. Moscow (Russian translation).
4. Dijk A. van (2013) “The Veronica, the Vultus Cristi and the Veneration of Icons in the Medieval Rome”, in McKitterick R. (ed.) Old Saint Peter’s, Rome. Cambridge, pp. 229–256.
5. Golahny A. (2013) “Italian Art and the North Exchanges, Critical Reception and Identity, 1400– 1700”, in Bohn B., Saslow J. M. (eds) A Companion to Renaissance and Baroque Art. New York.
6. Hand J. O. (1992) “Salve sancta facies: Some Thoughts on the Iconography of the Head of Christ by Petrus Christus”, in Metropolitan Museum Journal: Essays in Memory of Guy C. Bauman, vol. 27, pp. 7–19.
7. Harley-McGowan F. (2018) “Salvator Mundi: Visualizing Divine Authority”, in Berger T. (ed.) Full of Your Glory: Liturgy, Cosmos, Creation. Papers from 5th Yale ISM Liturgy Conference, June 18–21, 2018. Collegeville (Minnesota), pp. 88–115.
8. Kessler H. (2017) “The Literary Warp and Artistic Wet of Veronica’s Cloth”, in The European Fortune of the Roman Veronica in the Middle Ages. Exchanges and Interactions in the Arts of Medieval Europe, Byzantium, and the Mediterranean, pp. 12–31.
9. Kessler H., Zacharias J. (2000) Rome 1300: On the Path of the Pilgrim. London.
10. Parlato E. (2018) “Le icone in processione”, in Andaloro M., Romano S. (eds) Arte e iconografia a Roma. Da Costantino a Cola di Rienzo. Milan, pp. 69–92.
11. Romano S., Andaloro M. (2017) Pittura medievalе a Roma: 321–1431. Vol. 6. Apogeo e fine del Medioevo: 1288–1431. Milan. Stainer-Hutchins K., Watney S., Platt H. (2010) “A Rediscovered Prototype by Quinten Metsys: Christ Blessing with the Virgin in Adoration”. The Burlington Magazine, vol. 2, pp. 76–81.
12. The Great Italian Painters from the Gothic to the Renaissance. Duccio, Simone Martini, Pietro and Ambrogio Lorenzetti, Masaccio, Fra Angelico, Filippo Lippi, Benozzo Gozzoli. Complete Monographs. Florence, 2003.
13. Marchand E., Wright A. (eds) With and Without Medici: Studies in Tuscan Art and Patronage, 1434–1530. Aldershot.
14. Wolf G. (2000) “Dal volto all’immagine, dall’immagine al volto”, in Morello G., Wolf G. (eds) Il volto di Cristo. Milan, pp. 19–25.
15. Zchomelidse N. (2000) “The Aura of the Numinous and Its Reproduction: Medieval Paintings of the Savior in Rome and Latium”. Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome, vol. 55, pp. 221–263.

Golubeva Irina

The depiction of liturgical life played a crucial role in the Russian art of the 16th-17th century. There was a number of newly created scenes emerged at the time: Let All Human Flesh Be Silent, The Cherubikon, The Vision of St. Gregory the Theologian and Now the Powers of the Heaven. The rarity of the latter, provided by the only example kept in the State Tretyakov Gallery, caused a special interest for the study. The upper part of the composition is occupied by the image of Heaven, where the Savior sits in majesty in the center surrounded by the angels. In the lower part, the saint bishop celebrates the liturgy against the backdrop of the temple. The icon is inscribed with a quotation from a hymn sung at the Liturgy of the Presanctified gifts. We find a similar set of motifs in another scene known as A Saint Celebrates the Liturgy. The depictions of it carry other inscriptions: The Liturgy, A Saint Bishop Serves the Lord, etc., however, the composition itself seems precisely repeated. In the center of the composition, there is a saint bishop approached by the laypeople. In the upper part, the Savior within a mandorla is depicted surrounded by the Heavenly Powers. In other words, the core motif of a saint bishop in front of the altar which is considered a marker for liturgical scenes is supplemented here with the depiction of laypeople or saints coming and with the image of the Lord in Majesty. The use of the similar set of motifs indicates the parallel development of liturgical scenes in the Late Medieval Russian art. The semantics of the subjects A Saint Bishop Celebrates the Liturgy and Now the Powers of Heaven also coincide with other liturgical compositions. They express the idea of unity between believers and the Heavenly world and besides they clearly show the way to reach the Paradise through the liturgy.

Liturgy, icon painting, Medieval Russian Art, Now the Powers of the Heaven, Let the Mortal Flesh Keep Silence, The Cherubikon, liturgical subjects

1. Antonova V., Mneva N. (1963) Gosudarstvennaia Tretiakovskaia galereia. Katalog drevnerusskoi zhivopisi 11 — nachala 18 vekov, vol. 2, Moscow (in Russian).
2. Denisov D. (2019) “K voprosu o proiskhozhdenii ikonografi i Velikii vkhod v russkoi monumentalnoi zhivopisi khramov 16 — 1oi poloviny 17 veka”. Vestnik PSTGU. Seriia 5: Voprosy istorii i teorii khristianskogo iskusstva, 2019, vol. 33, pp. 62–76 (in Russian).
3. Felmy K. Ch. (1999) “‘Es schweige alles menschliche Fleisch’. Der Grosse Einzug und die ‘Schlachtung des Christusknaben’”, in “Die Weisheit baute ihr Haus”. Untersuchungen zu Hymnischen und Didaktischen Ikonen. Munich, pp. 251–291.
4. Komashko N., Katkova S. (eds) (2004) Kostromskaia ikona 13–19 vekov. Moscow (in Russian).
5. Kvlividze N. (2005) “Ikonografi cheskaia programma altarnykh rospisei moskovskikh khramov vtoroi poloviny 16 veka” in Vizantiiskii mir: Iskusstvo Konstantinopolia I natsionalÓnye traditsii, pp. 621–646 (in Russian).
6. Makhanko M. (2007) “K istorii siuzheta Sluzhba sviatogo Nikoly”, in Ot Tsargrada do Belogo moria, pp. 243–274 (in Russian).
7. Marković M., Stevanović B. (2018) “Slikani program u kupoli tsrkve Svetog Ɖorđa u Dobrilovini”, in Zograf. Chasopis za srednjovekovnu umetnost, 2018, vol. 42, pp. 209–229 (in Serbian).
8. Onufrienko M. (2020) “Nebesnaia liturgiia v monumentalnoi zhivopisi Makedonii 15–16 vekov”, in AktualÓnye problemy teorii i istorii iskusstva, vol. 10, pp. 829–844 (in Russian).
9. Onufrienko M. (2021) “Istoki ikonografi i Nebesnaia liturgiia v vizantiiskom iskusstve”, in Vizantiiskii vremennik, 2021, vol. 105, pp. 242–256 (in Russian).
10. Onufrienko M. (2021) “Novye liturgicheskie siuzhety v russkoi zhivopisi 16 veka”. AktualÓnye problemy teorii i istorii iskusstva, vol. 11, pp. 382–397 (in Russian).
11. Papamastorakēs T. (2001) O diakosmos tou troullou tōn naōn tēs Palaiologeias periodou stē Balkanikē hersonēso kai tēn Kypro [The Decoration of the Dome of the Churches of the Palaeologan Period in the Balkan Peninsula and Cyprus]. Athens (in Greek).
12. Preobrazhenskii A. (2017) “Monumentalnaia zhivopis Blagoveshchenskogo sobora”, in Vklad. Khudozhestvennoe nasledie Stroganovykh 16–17 vekov v muzeiakh SolÓvychegodska i Permskogo kraya, pp. 156–257 (in Russian).
13. Saenkova E. (2004) “O nekotorykh osobennostiakh ikonografi i Velikogo Vkhoda v drevnerusskom monumentalnom iskusstve”, in Iskusstvo khristianskogo mira, 2004, vol. 8, pp. 144–151 (in Russian).
14. Silkin A. (2009) Litsevoe shit’e Stroganovskikh masterskikh. Moscow (in Russian).
15. Spatharakis I. (1996) “Representations of the Great Entrance in Crete”, in Studies Byzantine Manuscript Illumination and Iconography. London, pp. 293–335.
16. Starodubtsev T. (2000) “Predstava Nebeske liturgij e u kupoli”, in Treća jugoslovenska konferentsij a vizantologa, pp. 381–415 (in Serbian).
17. Tsompanēs T. (1997) Ē megalē eisodos stēn eikonographia. Thessaloniki (in Greek).
18. Zheltov M. (2016) “Liturgiia prezhdeosviashchennykh darov” in Pravoslavnaia entsiklopediia, Moscow, vol. 41, pp. 263–278 (in Russian).

Onufrienko Maksim

The article is devoted to the study of one demestvenny polyphonic hymn: the "zadostoynik" for the Nativity of Christ (irmos of the 9th song of the festive canon, performed at the liturgy instead of the hymn to the Theotokos «It is truly meet to bless thee»); the history of its origin and existence is traced according to 11 singing manuscripts of the 17th - the first quarter of the 18th century, fragments of manuscripts and musical examples are given. In the light of the newly discovered aspects of the mutual influence of two styles of early Russian polyphony – troestrochy («triplets») and demestvo - the author wrote two articles in parallel in 2023: a more general “On the problem of interaction between the styles of early Russian polyphony in the 17th century (on the example of zadostoyniks)”, and the present one, dedicated to only one of the zadostoyniks - the Christmas one. The article describes all the cycles of demestvenny zadostoyniks in which there is a Christmas one, while building a historical picture of the change in forms and ways of recording demestvenny polyphony: in the form of a part of a separate voice in a separate book, in the form of a hook score of Kazansky (demestvenny) notation and in the form of musical notation scores. Analyzing demestvenny notation and transcripts, some of which were made by Evgeny Skurat, the author identifies 3 different chants of the Christmas zadostoynik: the main, parody variant, quoting the voice «put'» from a similar triplets chant, and a paraphrase variant using the initial motive "put' strochnoy" in solo “pochin demestvom”. The elite, court tradition of Russian polyphonic singing in its heyday mastered a new method of composing demestvenny scores using the technique of parody, counterfactual. In one of the variants of the chant, we see elements of an innovative polyphonic writing technique: imitation in augmentatio and in diminutio in all four voices of the score.

Early Russian polyphony, history of church singing art, demestvenny polyphony, triplets, "zadostoynik" of the Nativity of Christ, singing manuscripts, demestvenny notation

1. Bogomolova M. (2006). “Demestvennik”, in Pravoslavnaya entsiklopediya, Moscow, vol. 14, pp. 364–367 (in Russian).
2. Kondrashkova L. (2018) “Pevcheskiye rukopisi smeshannoy stilistiki kon. XVII — nach. XVIII v.: k probleme vzaimodeystviya partesnogo i bezlineynogo mnogogolosiya na grani epoch”. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Svyato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Ser. V: Voprosy istorii i teorii khristianskogo iskusstva, 2018, vol. 30, pp. 96–122 (in Russian).
3. Kondrashkova L. (2020) “Pochin”, in Pravoslavnaya entsiklopediya, Moscow, vol. 57, pp. 665–668 (in Russian).
4. Kondrashkova L. (2020) “Parizhskiy Demestvennik i yego mesto sredi istochnikov demestvennogo mnogogolosiya pervoy poloviny XVII veka”, in Drevnerusskoye pesnopeniye. Puti vo vremeni, vol. 8. St. Petersburg; Saratov, pp. 474‒495 (in Russian).
5. Smirnova E. (2017). Ranneye russkoye mnogogolosiye: istoriya, repertuar, mnogorospevnost’. St. Petersburg (in Russian).

Kondrashkova Lada

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

The stone Church of the Annunciation in the Spaso-Efimiev Monastery of Suzdal was known in the first half of the seventeenth century and, according to many researchers, had a two-tent completion. Subsequently, the monument was repeatedly subjected to alterations, and in the second half of the century it was completely rebuilt. According to the evidence of the restorers of the VSESRPW, only the foundation remains of the original structure. The peculiarity of the temple, historically developed, was its position inside the territory of the monastery. In the second half of the century, the walls of the monastery were rebuilt and expanded, as a result of which the gate temple acquired the significance of an independent building. It is also important to note the initial five-domed completion of the monument. The basis for this conclusion was the full-scale research of restorers, during which the foundations of the side chapters were found, which were not subsequently recreated.In this paper, the task is to study the modern appearance of the temple, without considering its original appearance. The main structural and decorative features of the building were studied in order to identify their sources, as well as distribution among the Suzdal temple construction, the place of the Annunciation Church in the line of development of the architecture of Suzdal and to clarify the time of the reconstruction of the temple, thanks to which it acquired a modern look.The structural features of the building include, in addition to the five-domed building, the absence of bypass galleries characteristic of gate temples of the second half of the century, which is probably due to the position of the temple inside the ring of walls. Three high apses also attract attention. The beginning of their spread on the Suzdal soil dates back to the 60s of the century, but the end of the century was marked by the predominance of single-apse buildings. The decorative decoration of the Annunciation Church is of particular interest. The laconic decoration of the drum uses triangular elements, probably borrowed from the decoration of the buildings of the monastery of the sixteenth century. The solemn southern facade of the main volume is highlighted with the help of window frames with set half-columns. The western casing of this facade has two rows of such columns, which finds the most complete parallels in Volga architecture. Attention is drawn to the casing of the apse window, which has a complex three-gable completion, which finds the most complete analogies among the buildings of the Vladimir region. Under the influence of the capital's monuments, the porch of the studied temple was decorated. It is important to note the numerous sources of the forms of the church, which, presumably, was influenced by the location of the monastery and its historical significance. The extensive possessions of the monastery in various regions, as well as contributors, among whom Prince Dmitry Mikhailovich Pozharsky is better known, are factors that also contributed to the borrowing of architectural elements. Based on the analysis, the most preferable is the attribution of the reconstruction of the Annunciation Church to the 1680s, which makes it possible to fit it into the time period of calm in Suzdal architecture before the active church-building of the end of the century.

gate temple, Suzdal, Spaso-Evfimiev monastery, uzorochye, Annunciation, restoration, five-domed, reconstruction, set platbands.

1. Arenkova Iu., Domshlak M., Mekhova G. (1989) Pamiatniki arkhitektury Moskvy. Zemlianoi gorod. Moscow (in Russian).
2. Arzamastsev I. (1981) Sretenskaya tserkov’ Vasil’evskogo monastyria v Suzdale. Passport of the compendium sector of the SIAS. Moscow (in Russian).
3. Arzamastsev I. (1993) Spaso-Evfi mievskiy monastyr’. Tserkov’ Blagoveshcheniia. Passport of the compendium sector of the SIAS. Moscow (in Russian).
4. Batalov A. (2008) “Evfi miev Suzdal’skii v chest’ Preobrazheniia Gospodnia muzhskoi monastyr’”, in Pravoslavnaia entsiklopediia, Moscow, vol. 17, pp. 361–374 (in Russian).
5. Batalov A. (2003) “K voprosu o datirovke sobora Spaso-Evfi mieva monastyria”, in Suzdal’skii Spaso-Evfi miev monastyr’ v istorii i kul’ture Rossii. Materialy nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii. Vladimir; Suzdal, pp. 40–50 (in Russian).
6. Gerchuk Iu., Domshlak M. (1976) Khudozhestvennye pamiatniki Verkhnei Volgi ot Kalinina do Iaroslavlia. Moscow (in Russian).
7. Dobrovol′skaia E., Gnedovskii B. (1981) Iaroslavl′. Tutaev. Moscow (in Russian).
8. Diubiuk E. (1924) Iz istorii solianoi promyshlennosti Kostromskogo kraya, vol. 1, Kostroma (in Russian).
9. Fekhner M. (1978) Velikie Bulgary. Kazan′. Sviiazhsk. Moscow (in Russian).
10. Il’in M., Moiseeva T. (1979) Moskva i Podmoskov’e. Moscow (in Russian).
11. Il′in M. (1970) Moskva. Moscow (in Russian).
12. Kirichenko E., Komech A., Koroleva A., Sterligov A., Shcheboleva E. (2000) Svod pamiatnikov arkhitektury i monumental’nogo iskusstva Rossii. Ivanovskaia oblast’, vols 2, 3. Moscow (in Russian).
13. Kisterev S., Timoshina L. (1998) Akty Suzdal’skogo Spaso-Evfi mieva monastyria. 1506–1608. Moscow (in Russian).
14. Krivonosov V. (2007) Borisoglebskii monastyr’. Arkhitekturnyi ansambl’. Moscow; Rostov (in Russian).
15. Mashtafarov A. (2015) “Kosmin Iakhrenskii (Iakhromskii) v chest’ Uspeniia Presviatoi Bogoroditsy muzhskoi monastyr’”, in Pravoslavnaia entsiklopediia, Moscow, vol. 38, pp. 269–279 (in Russian).
16. Mel’nik A. (1991) “O proiskhozhdenii kompozitsii nadvratnykh tserkvei s dvumia primykaiushchimi bashniami Rostovskogo Kremlia”, in Istoriia i kul’tura Rostovskoi zemli. Materialy konferentsii. Rostov (in Russian).
17. Mel’nik A. (1992) “O nekotorykh kompozitsionnykh priemakh ansamblevoi organizatsii Rostovskogo Kremlia”, in Issledovaniia pamiatnikov arkhitektury Rostova Velikogo, Rostov, pp. 46–51 (in Russian).
18. Mel’nik A. (1995) “O zvonnitse Borisoglebskogo monastyrya”, in Kolokola i kolokol’ni Rostova Velikogo. Soobshcheniia Rostovskogo muzeia, Yaroslavl, vol. 7, pp. 215–226 (in Russian).
19. Palamarchuk P. (1992) Sorok sorokov, vols 1‒4. Moscow (in Russian).
20. Libson V., Pod”iapol′skaia E., Al′tshuller B., D′iakonov M., Ignat′ev G. (1975) Pamiatniki arkhitektury Moskovskoi oblasti, vols 1, 2. Moscow (in Russian).
21. Pamiatniki usadebnogo iskusstva. Moskovskii uezd (1928), vol. 1, Moscow (in Russian).
22. Rudchenko V, Smirnov G, Sharmin P., Shcheboleva E. (2002) Pamiatniki arkhitektury Kostromskoi oblasti, vol. 4, Kostroma (in Russian).
23. Rutman T. (2008). Khramy i sviatyni Iaroslavlia. Yaroslavl (in Russian).
24. Sarab’ianov V. (2014). Istoriia arkhitekturnykh i khudozhestvennykh pamiatnikov Ferapontova monastyria. Moscow (in Russian).
25. Vagner G. (1969) Suzdal’. Moscow (in Russian).
26. Varganov A. (1971) Suzdal’. Ocherki po istorii i arkhitekture. Yaroslavl (in Russian).
27. Varganov A. (1983) “Arkhitektura suzdal‘skikh piatiglavykh khramov kontsa 17 — nachala 18 vekov”, in Pamiatniki istorii i kul‘tury, vol. 2, p. 209 (in Russian).
28. Vasil‘eva E., Masiel‘ Sanches L., Shevchenko E., Alekseev A. (2011) “Iosifov Volokolamskii (Volotskii) v chest‘ Uspeniia Presviatoi Bogoroditsy monastyr”, in Pravoslavnaya entsiklopediia, Moscow, vol. 26, pp. 91–122 (in Russian).
29. Vdovichenko M., Komech A., Koroliova A., Sedov Vl., Smirnov G., Sterligov A. (2004). Svod pamiatnikov arkhitektury i monumental′nogo iskusstva Rossii, vol. 1. Moscow (in Russian).
30. Voronin N. (1967) Vladimir, Bogoliubovo, Suzdal′, Iur′ev-Pol′skoi. Kniga-sputnik po drevnim gorodam Vladimirskoi zemli. Moscow (in Russian).
31. Zontikov N. (2003) Tserkov’ proroka Bozhiia Ilii na Gorodishche v Kostrome: k 350-letiiu vozvedeniia v kamne. Kostroma (in Russian).

Baturova Vera

Abstract: This article is dedicated to the history of the written form of the well-known church tune – the heirmoi of the Sunday canon of the 6th tone, from the manuscripts of XVII-XVIII centuries until present-day publications of the tune. While comparing different sources of this tune, differences in its variants were discovered, it was shown how the tune changed over time, as it was in different regions in the same time period – i.e., synchronic and diachronic methods of research were used in the study. For clarity, an analytical score of the heirmos of the first song of the canon was compiled, in which the similarities and differences of the tunes are visible, the tendency to reduce the melody of the tune over time. It is noteworthy that the chant has retained some similarity of variants in sources of different types: these are handwritten singing Obikhods, written in znamenny notation, and notolinear Irmologions that came from the Ukrainian and Belarusian lands; Synodal publications of Obikhod and the Octoechos of two editions: 1772 and 1890s, four-part singing editions of the early twentieth century and the present-day sources. In the reduced version of the melody of the znamenny chant, several melodic formulas have been preserved, which sound in a polyphonic presentation. The revealed similarity of the components of the chant in the sources of different times and localities allows us to speak about the continuity of the Orthodox liturgical singing tradition.

Orthodox liturgical singing tradition, irmos of the Sunday canon of the 6th tone, znamenny chant, Kievan chant, comparison of variants, singing Obikhods and Irmologions, znamenny notation, five-line notation, polyphonic presentation of the traditional chant, preservation of melodic formulas.

1. Grigoriev E. (2001) Posobie po izucheniyu cerkovnogo peniya i chteniya. Riga (in Russian).
2. Nikol’skij A. (2017) “Formy russkogo cerkovnogo peniya”, in Russkaya dukhovnaya muzyka v dokumentakh i materialakh, vol. 8. A. V. Nikol’skij i khorovoe dvizhenie v Rossii v nachale XX veka, Moscow, vol.1, pp. 413–514 (in Russian).
3. Potemkina N. (2008) “Starinnyj napev v sovremennom zvuchanii. Voprosy terminologii i struktury”, in Tradicionnye muzykal’nye kul’tury na rubezhe stoletij : problemy, metody, perspektivy issledovaniya. Materialy mezhdunarodnoj nauchnoj konferencii. Moscow, pp. 446–455 (in Russian).
4. Shabalin D. (2007) Drevnerusskaya muzykal’naya enciklopediya. Krasnodar (in Russian).

Potemkina Nora

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

I express my gratitude to the head and staff of the Faculty of Church Singing of the Orthodox Saint-Tikhon University for organizing the church singing section of the Annual Theological Conference and the opportunity to speak at the meeting on January 27, 2023.

This article analyzes the cult painting of Karelia of the XVII–XVIII centuries on the examples of hagiographic icons dedicated to St. Nicholas. It was in these monuments that an artistic variety of forms emerged, which represented a bizarre combination of new techniques and traditional archaic features. A significant role in updating the visual structure of icons was formed by the Baroque. In the design of architecture, in the technique of writing the open parts of the figure of the Saint, the desire to realize intricate elements was manifested, in particular, the S-shaped line became a marker of the "local" Baroque. Among the isographers, a more refined color, consisting of blue and pink shades, was recognized, and the landscape and the animal world began to play the role of the main subject of the narrative. Some changes have also taken place in the composition, they touched the direct perspective. In icons with folklore semantics, painterly-plastic unity was preserved. This idea was convincingly revealed in the color, the peculiar interpretation of the image of the Saint and the themes caused by the everyday impressions of the northern man. The experience of this study idea to expand the understanding of Karelian icon painting of the late Middle Ages. In contrast to the cult painting of the early period, in the works of the 17th-18th centuries, new trends had a significant impact on the style of icons. But despite this, archetypal artistic thinking and everyday practical experience allowed to save the pre-emptive right to further self-affirmation.

кarelian icon painting of the XVII–XVIII centuries, hagiographic icons, St. Nicholas, baroque, decorative and applied art, imitating nature features, stylistic interactions, archaic views

1. Ananyeva T. (1966) Obzor ikon XVII i XVIII vekov, vyvezennykh ehkspeditsiyami GRM za period s 1956 po 1965 gody. Leningrad, pp. 26–31 (in Russian).
2. Borisova V. (2023) Otrazhenie ehlementov povsednevnogo byta XVI–XIX vv. na ikonakh iz kollektsij muzeya-zapovednika “Kizhi” i Muzeya izobrazitel’nykh iskusstv RK. Available at: http//kizhi.karelia.ru (accessed 05.16.2023, in Russian).
3. Buseva-Davydova I. (1997) “Zapadnoyevropeyskiye istochniki russkoy ikonopisi i problema primitive”, in Lebedev A. (ed.) Primitive in fine art, 1995. Moscow, pp. 53–66 (in Russian).
4. Gippenreiter V., Platonov V. (1994) Garmoniya Vechnogo. Drevneye iskusstvo Karelii: fotoalbom. Petrozavodsk (in Russian).
5. Goleizovsky N., Yamshchikov S. (1966) “Zhivopis Drevney Karelii”. Iskusstvo, 1966, vol. 8, pp. 56–59 (in Russian).
6. Nikulina E. (2011) “Novye stilisticheskie cherty v severnoi ikonopisi na primere kolelktsyi ikon Muzeya izobrazitel’nykh iskusstv Respubliki Kareliya”, Vestnik Cherepovetskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. 2011, vol. 2 (30), pp. 136–139.
7. Nikulina E. (2017) “Obraz svyatitelya Nikolaya v ikonopisi i dukhovnykh stikhakh Drevnei Karelii (k voprosu o semanticheskikh formakh)”. Muzykal’nyi zhurnal Evropeiskogo Severa, 2017, vol. 4 (12), pp. 12–24 (in Russian).
8. Prigodina O. (2007) “Istoricheskie i kul’turnye svyazi Solovetskogo monastyr’ i Kargopolya”, in Koltsova T. (ed.) Nasledie Solovetskogo monastyria. Arkhangelsk, pp. 310–315 (in Russian).
9. Putsko V. (2019) “Severnye pis’ma kak istoriko-kul’turnoe yavlenie XIV–XVII vv.”, in Ryabininskie chteniya — 2019. Petrozavodsk, pp. 311–314 (in Russian).
10. Smirnova E. (1966) Zhitiynaya ikona Aleksandra Oshevenskogo iz Kemi Moscow; Leningrad, vol. 22, pp. 327–334 (in Russian).
11. Surkhasko Yu. (1985) Semeynyye obryady i verovaniya karel. Konets XIX — nachalo XX v. Leningrad (in Russian).
12. Yamshchikov S. (1972) Drevnyaya zhivopis Karelii: albom. Petrozavodsk (in Russian).

Nikulina Elena

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

In the article an attempt is made of clearing up the source of the North-East Tver region artistic culture flourishing in the 19th century that especially became strikingly apparent in church wall-painting. Beginning with the early 19th century the painters from the city of Yaroslavl were actively working in the Tver region and introduced various traditions of Yaroslavl into the fine arts. One of the characteristic features of the Yaroslavl painters’ language was the combination of Old Russian and West European devices in the classicism stylistic context that found a reflection in the Tver region monuments. At present the phenomenon of different trends coexistence in the beginning of the 19th century is well known in the specialized literature through the example of icon-painting. A similar occurrence took place in the monumental art but so far it hasn’t been investigated in the scholarly literature. The works of the Yaroslavl painters Banshchikov and Smirnov are preserved in the Resurrection cathedral in Kashin as a masterpiece of wall-painting without renovations or restorations. Through the example of the cathedral paintings the devices of the Yaroslavl painters are being analyzed, in particular the use of the rare Old Testament cycle in the painting programme created on the basis of the popular German engravings from Christoph Weigel Bible (1695). A comparison of the Yaroslavl painters’ style in the Korsun Icon of the Mother of God church in the village of Zelentsovo and a number of the North-East Tver region murals is carried out. The analysis of the interregional connections and the study of the Old Russian traditions firmness in the classicism period favour the deepening one’s knowledge about the view of the Russian art development in the first half of the 19th century. For the Yaroslavl region bordering the Tver region districts Yaroslavl as a strong monumental art centre became one of the main sources of the new artistic traditions.

Yaroslavl icon-painting, Resurrection cathedral in Kashin, Korsun Icon of the Mother,church mural painting of 19th century, wall-painting of God church in the village of Zelentsovo, Tver region wall-painting, C.Weigel Bible

1. Alekseyeva T. (1982) Khudozhniki shkoly Venetsianova. Moscow (in Russian).
2. Alitova R., Nikitina T. (2008) Tserkovnye stennye rospisi Rostova Velikogo i Rostovskogo uyezda XVIII — nachala XX veka. Moscow (in Russian).
3. Kirikov B. (1988) Kashin. Leningrad (in Russian.)
4. Komashko N. (2006) Russkaya ikona XVIII veka: stolichnaya ikona, provintsialnaya ikona, narodnaya ikona. Moscow (in Russian).
5. Komova M. (2012) Ikonnoye naslediye Orlovskogo kraya 18‒19 vekov. Moscow (in Russian).
6. Kuznetsova O. (2001) “Yaroslavl — iconopisnyi tsentr Novogo vremeni”, in Krasilina M. (ed.) Pozdnie russkie ikony 17 — nachala 20 veka. Moscow, pp. 75–86 (in Russian).
7. Makarova E. (2017) “Iz istorii yaroslavskoy iconopisi 18-go veka”. Verkhnevolzhskyi fi lologocheskyi vestnik, no. 4, pp. 127–132 (in Russian).
8. Nikitina T. (2017) “Monumental’naya rospis’ Kazanskoi tserkvi sela Kurba”. Arkhitekturnoe nasledstvo, vol. 66, pp. 81–91 (in Russian).
9. Pavlova A. (2021) “Ikonografiya i styl monumentalnoy zhivopisi Preobrazhenskoy tserkvi sela Nikola-Vysoka”. Arkhitekturnoye nasledstvo, vol. 75, pp. 79–101 (in Russian).
10. Pavlova A. (2022) Tserkovnaya stenopis severo-vostoka Tverskogo kraya v 19 veke. Moscow (in Russian).
11. Pavlova A. (2022) “Sintez tserkovnoy stenopisi i arkhitektury v klassitsizme i eklektike”, in Problemy sinteza iskusstv v istorii i 21 veke. Moscow, pp. 72–82 (in Russian).
12. Podushkov D. (2013) Khudozhnik A. G. Venetsianov v Udomelskom krae. Udomelskiye ucheniki. Vyshny Volochyok (in Russian).
13. Polushkina L. (2018) “Icony XVIII veka iz sobraniya Yaroslavskogo muzeya-zapovednika v kontekste tserkovnogo iskusstva Novogo vremeny”. Verkhnevolzhskyi fi lologicheskyi vestnik, no. 2, pp. 244–250 (in Russian).
14. Shemyakin A. (2012) Slovar masterov khudozhestvennykh remyosel Yaroslavlya 18–19 vekov. Yaroslavl (in Russian).
15. Yurieva T. (2017) “Simvolika izobrazheniya arkhitekturnogo prostranstva v drevnerusskoy zhivopisi”. Yaroslavskiy pedagogicheskiy vestnik, no. 3, pp. 285–292 (in Russian).

Pavlova Anna

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.