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

The second half of the 13th century was the time of wide renovation of churches in Rome and other cities of Central Italy. The attributions of these monuments are still under discussion by historians of art. In the last decades, these questions have been studied through the prism of the historical situation and the assessment of commissioners’ infl uence on the creative process. The topic of this article, by contrast, is the personal contribution of the artist to Christian artwork. In the history of Italian duecento, the names of the masters of Roman school — Jacopo Torriti, Philippo Rusuti and Pietro Cavallini — are the most important ones, because they paved the way to the art of the new era, i.e. the Renaissance. These masters creatively reconsidered and refi ned the artistic experience of the past, they appealed to liturgics and theology, made use the full range of painting techniques, the result of which was that they were able able to objectify highly complex concepts in their works. The city of Rome in the late 13th century, with its continued classical tradition and persistent connections with Byzantium, with the high-educated clerical commissioners and their unlimited fi nancial resources, turned out to be exactly that point in time and space where such monuments could appeare. This article provides a historical, iconographic and stylistic analysis of the mosaic composition Coronation of the Virgin, made by Jacopo Torriti in the apse of Santa-Maria Maggiore in 1292– 1296, where such a concept as an “artist-author” or “artist-creator” was perfectly reflected.

13th century Italian art, Proto-Renaissance art, medieval art, Jacopo Torriti, Santa Maria Maggiore, Coronation of the Virgin, Roman mosaics

1. Belting H. (2002) Obraz i kult. Istoria obraza do epokhi iskusstva [Likeness and Presence. A history of the image before the era of art]. Moscow (in Russian).
2. Andaloro M., Romano S. (2018) “L’immagine nell’abside”, in M. Andaloro, S. Romano (eds) Arte e iconografia a Roma. Da Costantino a Cola di Rienzo. Milan.
3. De Blaauw S. (1994) Cultus et Decor. Liturgia e architettura nella Roma tardoantica e medievale. Citta del Vaticano.
4. Franchi A. (1990) Nicolaus papa IV 1288–1292 (Girolamo d’Ascoli). Ascoli, Piceno.
5. Gardner J. (2013) The Roman crucible: the artistic patronage of the papacy: 1198–1304. Munich.
6. Gardner J. (1993) “Pope Nicholas IV and the decoration of Santa-Maria Maggiore”, in J. Gardner. Patrons, painters and saints. Aldershot.
7. Glatzer Wechsler, J. (1975) “A change in the iconography of the Songs of the songs in 12th and 13th centuries Latin Bibles”, in Texts and Responses: Studies Presented to Nahum N. Glatzer on the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday by His Students. Brill Archive, pp. 73–93.
8. Kempers B. (1994) Painting, Power and Patronage: The Rise of the Professional Artist in the Italian Renaissance. London.
9. Kessler H., Zacharias J. (2000) Rome 1300: On the path of the pilgrim. London.
10. Kinney D. (2002) “The Apse Mosaic of S. Maria in Trastevere”, in Reading Medieval Images. University of Michigan, pp. 19–26.
11. Kitzinger E. (1982) “The Arts as Aspect of the Renaissance. Rome and Italy”, in Renaissance and renewal in the twelfth century: Papers presented at a Conference marking the 50th anniversary of the publication of Charles Homer Haskins's “Renaissance of the twelfth century”, Cambridge, Nov. 26–29, 1977. Harvard University Press, pp. 637–670.
12. Krautheimer R. (1980) Rome: profi le of a city, 312–1308. Princeton.
13. Lidova M. (2010) “The Earliest Images of Maria Regina in Rome and Byzantine Imperial Iconography”, in Niš and Byzantium. The Collection of Scientific Works VIII. Niš, pp. 231–243.
14. Pace V. (2016) “Il XIII secolo: da Innocenzo III (1198–1216) a Bonifacio VIII (1294–1303)”, in M. D’Onofrio (ed.) La committenza artistica dei papi a Roma nel Medioevo. Roma.
15. Parlato E. (2000) “La processione di Ferragosto e l’acheropita del Sancta Sanctorum”, in G. Morello, G. Wolf (eds) Il volto di Cristo. Milano.
16. Romano S., Andaloro M. (2012–2017) “Pittura medievalе a Roma: 321–1431”. Vol. 5. Il Duecento e la cultura gotica: 1198–1287. Vol. 6. Apogeo e fine del Medioevo: 1288–1431. Milano.
17. Thunø E. (2015) The Apse Mosaic in Early Medieval Rome: Time, Network, and Repetition. Cambridge.
18. Tomei A. (1990) Iacopus Torriti, Pictor. Rome.

Golubeva Irina

This article gives a stylistic analysis of Karelian icons of the 15th — 16th centuries. Expeditions carried out in Karelia in the 1960–1970s by employees of the Russian Museum, Tretyakov Gallery, and Petrozavodsk Museum of Fine Arts discovered few, but unique monuments of church art of the early centuries. This group of icons was studied by prominent Russian scholars who carried out considerable research into this part of Old Russian heritage. By the 1980s, academic interest in early icon painting gradually waned, and later icons came to the fore. This circumstance was due to the need for reconstructing the full picture of the development of icon painting in the region. Therefore, for objective reasons, the authors of the fi rst scientifi c research did not consider the issue of stylistic succession. Today, an updated look at the monuments of the 15th and 16th centuries makes it possible not only to systematise the most important features, but also to state the idea of their further development in the late icon painting of Karelia. An analysis of empirical material showed that the infl uence of Novgorod was stronger than that of Moscow. This was determined by the policy of the capital regarding the territory, which was carried out indirectly through Novgorod.The strengthening of the northern borders favourably aff ected the economy and culture of Old Karelia. Strengthening cultural ties with the border regions of Vologda and Arkhangelsk signifi - cantly updated the icon painting of Karelian areas with new traits. Besides, the activities of local isographers of peasant origin formed a specifi c scenic approach and thanks to it the northern icons became recognisable. New features touched the composition, colour, drawing, some technological methods. The circle of the most revered saints was determined: these are Prophet Ilias, St. Nicholas, Theotokos. The structure of the iconostasis was also elaborated, this primarily aff ected the deisus and local rows. The painting was reduced to a simple colouring of forms without careful study, a cursory drawing, and sometimes it resembled techniques borrowed from wood carving. As a result, in the early icons, despite various infl uences, a unique picturesque manner was developed, which was subsequently refl ected in the later icon painting of the region.

peripheral lands, Karelian icon painting, oldest icons, stylistic continuity, influence of Novgorod and Moscow, artists of peasant origin, techniques of icon painting, colour, composition, vestments

1. Nikulina E. (2018) “Obraz Sviatitelia Lazaria v ustnoi i ikonopisnoi traditsii Drevnei Karelii. K postanovke voprosa” [The image of St. Lazarus in the oral and icon-painting tradition of Old Karelia: Raising the quiestion”]. Muzykal'nyi zhurnal Evropeiskogo Severa, 4 (16), pp. 38‒47 (in Russian).
2. Pokrovsky M. (ed.) (1930) Pistsovye knigi Obonezhskoi Piatiny: 1496 i 1563 gg. [Cadastres of Obonezhskaya Pyatina: 1496 and 1563], in Akademiia nauk SSSR. Arkheografi cheskaia komissiia, 1. Leningrad (in Russian).
3. Platonov V. (2011) “Ikonopis′ Olonetskoi zemli” [Icon painting of Olonets land], in Drevnii Olonets [Ancient Olonets]. Petrozavodsk, pp. 109–124 (in Russian).
4. Platonov V. (2018) “Khudozhestvennoe nasledie Karelii: drevniaia ikonopis′ Obonezh′ia i Zapadnogo Belomor′ia” [Artistic heritage of Karelia: ancient icon painting of Obonezhye and western White Sea littoral]. Petrozavodsk (in Russian).
5. Putsko V. (2019) ““Severnye pis′ma” kak istoriko-kul′turnoe iavlenie XIV–XVII vv.” [“Northern letters” as a historical and cultural phenomenon of the 14th — 17th centuries]. Riabininskie chteniia — 2019. Petrozavodsk, pp. 311–314 (in Russian).
6. Smirnova E. (1967) Zhivopis′ Obonezh′ia XIV–XVI vekov [Painting of Obonezhye of the 14th — 16th centuries]. Moscow (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.

The article is dedicated to the dating and attribution of Archangel Michael Church in Riga iconostasis side doors, which have been known to scholars since the end of the 19th century, but are not systematically studied and, as a result, appeared to be forgotten. Meanwhile, these monuments are still located in the Riga church. Due to the information contained in the Inventory of Pskov uyezd 1585–1587 as well as in several other sources, it is possible to confi rm the earlier suggested hypothesis of the origin of these doors from St. John the Theologian Church of Krypetsky monastery near Pskov, and to trace their history up to the present day. These icons depict rare scenes, such as The Eulogius’ Vision, On a Jewish Boy, Saved by the Virgin from an Oven, The Divine Liturgy and Wisdom has Built its House. On the basis of stylistic features, a conclusion has been made that Archangel Church doors were made by Pskov artists. Since the date of construction of St. John the Theologian Church is known (although there are some discrepancies), as well as thanks to the method of stylistic analysis and comparing these works to a wide range of Pskov icons, it is possible to date the altar doors to the middle of the 16th c. and to place them in the artistic context of the Metropolitan Makariy era.

Divine Liturgy, Eulogius’ Vision, Wisdom has Built its House, Pskov icon, Krypetsky monastery, iconostasis side doors, 16th century icon

1. Andreichuk I. (2018) “Ikonografi ia sokhranivsheisia altarnoi rospisi tserkvi Blagoveshcheniia Pskovo-Pecherskogo monastyria (XVI v.)” [“Iconography of the Preserved Altar Mural of the Annunciation Church (16th century) of Pskovo-Pechersky Monastery”]. Vestnik PSTGU. Seriia V: Voprosy istorii i teori khristianskogo iskusstva, 30, pp. 66–77 (in Russian).
2. Banga V., Levina M., Tipane A., Zilgalvis J. (2010) The Heritage of Religious Architecture and Art in Riga. Riga.
3. Frantsuzova E. (ed.) (2002) Goroda Rossii 16 veka. Materialy pistsovykh opisaniĭ [Cities of Russia of the 16th century. Materials of scribal descriptions]. Moscow (in Russian).
4. Krastelev M., Piterskii S., Pankova M. (2011) “Irinarkh”, in Pravoslavnaia entsiklopediia [Orthodox Encyclopaedia], vol. 26. Moscow, pp. 413–416 (in Russian).
5. Kvlividze N. (2005) “Videnie Evlogiia” v rospisi sobora Rozhdestva Bogoroditsy Ferapontova monastyria” [“The Vision of Eulogius” in the frescos of the cathedral of Nativity of Theotokos at Ferapontov Monastery], in Drevnerusskoe i postvizantiiskoe iskusstvo. Vtoraia polovina 16 — nachalo 17 veka. K 500-letiiu rospisi sobora Rozhdestva Bogoroditsy Ferapontova monastyria [Old Russian and Post-Byzantine Art. The second Half of the 15th — beginning of the 16th century. The 500th anniversary of painting of the cathedral of the Nativity of Theotokos at Ferapontov Monastery]. Moscow, pp. 294–301 (in Russian).
6. Lagunin I. (2002) “Krypetskii Ioanno-Bogoslovskii monastyr′. 500 let istorii” [Krypetsky St. John’s the Theologian Monastery. 500 years of history”]. Pskov. Nauchno-prakticheskii, istoriko-kraevedcheskii zhurnal, 16, pp. 31–55 (in Russian).
7. Lagunin I. (2002) “Krypetskii Ioanno-Bogoslovskii monastyr′. 500 let istorii” [Krypetsky St. John’s the Theologian Monastery. 500 years of history]. Pskov. Nauchno-prakticheskii, istoriko-kraevedcheskii zhurnal, 17, pp. 63–81 (in Russian).
8. Lagunin I. (2004) “Krypetskii Ioanno-Bogoslovskii monastyr′. 500 let istorii” [Krypetsky St. John’s the Theologian Monastery. 500 years of history”]. Pskov. Nauchno-prakticheskii, istoriko-kraevedcheskii zhurnal, 20, pp. 43–56 (in Russian).
9. Lifshits L. (2000) “Sofi ia Premudrost¦ Bozhiia v russkoi ikonopisi” [Sophia, God’s Wisdom, in Russian iconography], in Sofiia Premudrost′ Bozhiia. Vystavka russkoi ikonopisi 13–19 vekov iz sobranii muzeev Rossii [Sophia, God’s Wisdom. Exhibition of Russian icons of the 13th — 19th centuries from collections of Russian museums]. Moscow, pp. 9–17 (in Russian).
10. Sedov V. (1996) Pskovskaia arkhitektura 16 veka [Pskov architecture of the 16th century]. Moscow (in Russian).
11. Shalina I. (2016) “Obraz Blagorazumnogo razboinika na bokovykh vratakh pskovskikh ikonostasov” [The image of the Good Thief on the side gates of the iconostases of Pskov], in Iskusstvo khristianskogo mira, vol. 13. Moscow, pp. 339–358 (in Russian).
12. Shalina I. (2008) “Pskovskie monastyrskie ikonostasy 16 v.: sostav i ikonografi cheskie osobennosti” [Pskov monastery iconostases of the 16th century: composition and iconographic features]. Trudy Tsentral′nogo muzeia drevnerusskoi kul′tury i iskusstva imeni Andreia Rubleva, vol. 3. Ikonograficheskie novatsii i traditsiia v russkom iskusstve 16 v. Sbornik statei pamiati Viktora Mikhailovicha Sorokatogo [Proceedings of the Central Museum of Ancient Russian Culture and Art. Vol. 3. Iconographic innovations and tradition in Russian art of the 16th century. A collection of articles in memory of Viktor Mikhailovich Sorokaty]. Moscow, pp. 267–283 (in Russian).
13. Shalina I. (2003) “Vrata s “pritchami” kak simvolicheskiĭ vkhod v Dom premudrosti” [“Doors with Parables” as a symbolic entrance to the House of Wisdom], in Drevnerusskoe iskusstvo. Russkoe iskusstvo pozdnego srednevekov,ia: 16 vek [Old Russian art. Russian art of the Late Middle Ages: the 16th century]. St. Petersburg, pp. 269–293 (in Russian).
14. Skobkareva D., Turilov A. (2015) “Krypetskii vo imia apostola Ioanna Bogoslova muzhskoi monastyr′” [St. John’s the Theologian Krypetsky Monastery], in Pravoslavnaia entsiklopediia [Orthodox Encyclopaedia], vol. 39. Moscow, pp. 146–152 (in Russian).
15. Tvorogov O. (1985) “Izmaragd osobogo sostava iz sobraniia Undol¦skogo” [The specific composition of “Izmaragd” from Undolsky’s Collection], in Problemy izucheniia kul′turnogo naslediia [Issues in studying cultural heritage]. Moscow, pp. 151–154 (in Russian).
16. Vasileva O. (2012) Ikony Pskova [Pskov icons], vols 1–2. Moscow (in Russian).

Onufrienko Maksim

The article discusses some iconographic features of a widespread image of Theotokos, the Consolation of All the Affl icted, to which belongs the icon from the Church of the Nativity of Theotokos in Vologda, restored in 2019. Based on the study of a large group of icons from the collection of Vologda State Museum-Preserve of Architecture, History and Decorative Arts, the authors point out a number of component characteristics of local cultural tradition: the arrangement of the affl icted within clear, horizontal divisions; the placement above the upper division of frontal, half-length figures of angels with unrolled scrolls; the presence in the lower left corner of one or two images of the affl icted in a lying position. The iconographic variants widespread in Vologda were likely formed in the time of Peter the Great. They are not related to the famous Vologda miraculous images, which probably became well-known in a later period. The stylistic peculiarities of the icon from the Church of the Nativity of Theotokos, published now for the fi rst time, suggest attribution to Ivan Grigoriev Markov, the famous Vologda icon-painter of the early 18th century. His artistic legacy includes sixteen signed icons that serve as benchmarks for the attribution of his other works. The article includes material on the history and peculiarities of the icon’s restoration, the restorer’s observations regarding the technical painting methods, and the creative individuality of the master.

Theotokos the Consolation of All the Affl icted, iconography, stylistic particularities, Vologda icon painting, icon painter, Ivan Grigoriev Markov, restoration

1. Bilanchuk R., Preobrazhensky A. (2017) “Vologda i vologodskaia ikonopis′ v kontse XVI — tret′ei chetverti XVII veka” [Vologda and icon painting of Vologda at the end of the 16th — third quarter of the 17th century], in Ikony Vologdy kontsa XVI–XVII veka [Vologda icons of the late 16th — 17th centuries]. Vologda; Moscow, pp. 5–66 (in Russian).
2. Komashko N. (2004) “Bogomater′ Vsekh skorbyashchih radost′” [Theotokos Consolation of all the Afflicted], in Antikvariat [Antique shop]. Moscow, pp. 22–34 (in Russian).
3. Vinogradova E., Kozneva L., Fedyshin I. (2018) Vologodskii ikonopisets Ivan Grigor′iev Markov: issledovanie i katalog proizvedenii [Vologda icon-painter Ivan Grigoriev Markov: a study and catalogue of works]. Vologda (in Russian).

Vinogradova Elena

Kashoid Mikhail

This article is the first to raise the question of the place and role of poetics of Russian spiritual verse in the historical dramas by M.P. Mussorgsky Boris Godunov and Khovanshchina. The first steps of scientifi c understanding of the spiritual verse tradition and the study of the history of its carriers, kaliky perekhozhie (‘wandering minstrels’), are highlighted. Chronologically, scientifi c experiments, primarily those by F.I. Buslaev and I.I. Sreznevsky, directly preceded Mussorgsky’s work on his opera masterpieces. The choir of Kaliky perekhozhie in the Prologue of Boris Godunov is Mussorgsky’s fi rst appeal to this tradition. In the article, choir is analysed comprehensively. Attention is drawn to diff erent levels of its verbal text content, and diff erent hypotheses of its interpretation are proposed. Based on the analytical observations by B.V. Asafi ev, the article explains the meaning of the rhythmic formula of the chorus as a leithrhythm of the opera that unites folk scenes, but also extends to the portrayal of Tsar Boris. An opinion is expressed about the special role of the Kaliky choir in the opera Boris Godunov as a metaphorical epigraph. The role of poetics of the spiritual verse and its specifi c samples in the formation of the Khovanshchina, as well as the historical atmosphere of folk musical drama, are noted. In Boris Godunov, the composer eff ectively solved the aesthetic problem of historicism, the meaning of the symbols of church culture. In Khovanshchina, religious performances are folklorised and shown through an important aspect of the national consciousness, which off ered even more space for the composer’s creative refraction of the spiritual verse specifi city at different levels of musical style and drama. As a conclusion, an opinion is proposed about the signifi cant infl uence of the spiritual verse genre on Mussorgsky’s creative consciousness, which determined its subsequent interpretation in the Russian musical art.

Mussorgsky, Russian spiritual verse, kaliky perekhozhie, Boris Godunov, Khovanshchina, dramaturgy, poetics

1. Asaf′ev B. (1954) “Orkestr “Borisa Godunova” Musorgskogo” [Orchestra in Musorgsky’s “Boris Godunov”], in B. Asaf′ev. Izbrannye trudy [Selected works], vol. 3. Moscow, pp. 32‒67 (in Russian).
2. Fedotov G. (1935) Stikhi dukhovnye: Russkaia narodnaia vera po dukhovnym stikham [Spiritual verse: Russian folk faith with spiritual verse as an example]. Paris (in Russian).
3. Levashev E., Teterina N. (2011) Istorizm khudozhestvennogo myshleniia M. P. Musorgskogo [The historicism of the artistic thinking of M. P. Mussorgsky]. Moscow (in Russian).
4. Mussorgsky M. (1971) Literaturnoe nasledie. T. 1. Pis′ma. Biograficheskie materialy i dokumenty [Literary heritage. Vol. 1. Letters. Biographical materials and documents]. Moscow (in Russian).
5. Mussorgsky M. (1972) Literaturnoe nasledie. T. 2. Literaturnye proizvedeniia [Literary heritage. Vol. 2. Literary works]. Moscow (in Russian).
6. Murasheva N. (2012) “Istoriografi ia termina “Dukhovnyi stikh”” [Historiography of the term “spiritual verse”]. Izvestiia PGPU im. V.G. Belinskogo, 27, pp. 338–342 (in Russian).
7. Pavlinova V. (2019) “Muzykal′nye dramy M.P. Musorgskogo v svete russkikh liturgicheskikh i antichnykh teatral′nykh koordinat” [Musical dramas by M. Mussorgsky in the light of theatrical dimensions of Russian liturgy and classical antiquity]. Vestnik PSTGU. Seriia V: Voprosy istorii i teorii khristianskogo iskusstva, 33, pp. 114–133 (in Russian).
8. Protopopov V. (1987) Istoriia polifonii. Tom V [History of polyphony. Vol. V]. Moscow (in Russian).

Pavlinova Varvara

*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.

This article attempts to examine the origins of public liturgical singing in the Eastern Christian Church and to trace the continuity of this tradition in the church singing practice of Russian Orthodox Church in the 19th and 20th centuries. Particular attention to the topic of historical ties is due to the fact that the form of public liturgical singing after a long period of extinction began to actively develop in Russia at the turn of the 19th — 20th centuries. This is evidenced by materials of the Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church of 1917–1918, which were a response to the activities of Brotherhoods, Societies and individual clergy, for example, archpriest Nikolai Smirnov, priest Nikolai Kurlov and others. The study showed that the requirements both for the quality of liturgical singing in general and for the singers themselves in different eras are largely similar. Thus, even the holy fathers paid attention, fi rst of all, to the spirit and character of church singing, regardless of its form. Whatever it may be — national or professional choirs — it should strive for simplicity and prayer. In early Christianity, as well as in the Russian Empire, public singing at church carried the function of uniting people, fi ghting against passions, teaching people the basics of the Christian faith.

public liturgical singing, church singing, Local Council of Russian Orthodox Church of 1917–1918, hegumen Seraphim (Kuznetsov), deacon Vasily Ponomarev, priest Nikolai Smirnov, priest Nikolai Kurlov, archpriest John Voznesensky, Ivan Alekseevich Gardner

1. Dashevskaya Z. (2012) “Obzor deyatel’nosti Bratstva Sviatitelei Moskovskikh Petra, Aleksiia, Iony I, Filippa (1909–1917)” [An outline of work of the Brotherhood of Moscow Saint Hierarchs Petr, Alexy, Iona I, Philip (1909–1917)]. Vestnik Sviato-Filaretovskogo instituta, 5, pp. 131–150 (in Russian).
2. Emel’ianova O. (2020) “Narodnoe bogosluzhebnoe penie kak massovoe iavlenie v Moskve i Sankt-Peterburge v nachale XX veka” [Public liturgical singing as a frequent phenomenon in Moscow and St. Petersburg in the early 20th century], in Sbornik statei po materialam Vserossiiskikh nauchnykh chtenii, posvyashchennyh B. L. Iavorskomu (26–28 noiabria 2019 g.) Saratov, pp. 76–89 (in Russian).
3. Filaret (Gumilevskii), archbishop (1995) Istoricheskii obzor pesnopevtsev i pesnopeniia grecheskoi tserkvi [Historical outline of church singers, and church singing of the Greek church]. Troitse-Sergieva Lavra (in Russian).
4. Gardner I. (2004) Bogosluzhebnoe penie Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi. T. II. Istoriia [Singing of the Russian Orthodox Church. Vol. II. History]. Moscow (in Russian).
5. Gardner I. (1969) “Neskol’ko soobrazhenii ob obshchem penii za bogosluzheniem” [Some thoughts on public singing during church service]. Pravoslavnaya Rus'. Dzhordanvill', 10, pp. 3–6 (in Russian).
6. Grigorieva V. (2018) Drevnerusskie pesnopeniia Bozhestvennoi Liturgii svt. Ioanna Zlatousta [Old Russian chants of St. John Chrysostom’s Divine Liturgy]. Moscow (in Russian).
7. Khvatova S. (2010) “Upravlenie obshchenarodnym peniem v pravoslavnom khrame” [Conducting public singing in an Orthodox church]. Vestnik Adygeiskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriia 2: Filologiia i iskusstvovedenie, 2, pp. 185–190 (in Russian).
8. Kinstler A., Kornilov A. (2019) “Deyatel′nost′ episkopa Afanasiia (Martosa) vo glave severogermanskogo vikariatstva (1946–1950 gg.)” [Activities of the North German vicariate of Russian Orthodox Church Abroad in time of Bishop Afanasy’s (Martos) offi ce (1946–1950)]. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia II : Istoriia. Istoriia Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi, 87, pp. 108–123 (in Russian).
9. Krivushin I. (ed.) (2013) Eusebius of Caesarea. Tserkovnaia istoriia [Church history]. St. Petersburg (in Russian).
10. Nepochatova M. (2014) “Tserkovno-gosudarstvennye otnosheniia v Estonii v 1944–1953 gg.” [Church-state relations in Estonia in 1944–1953]. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia II : Istoriia. Istoriia Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi, 60 (5), pp. 18–33 (in Russian).
11. Rusol E. (2002) Pomestnyi sobor Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi 1917–1918 goda o tserkovnom penii [Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church of 1917–1918 on church singing]. Moscow (in Russian).
12. Shuvalova Y. (2017) “Pamiatniki Pervoi mirovoi voiny v Rossiiskoi provintsii (po materialam Permskoi eparkhii)” [Monuments of World War I in Russian provinces (with Perm′ diocese as an example)]. Manuskript, 6/1 (80), pp. 208–212 (in Russian).
13. Skabalanovich M. (1993) Tolkovyi tipikon [Explanatory Typikon]. Moscow (in Russian).
14. Tumanov A. (2017) “O nekotorykh izmeneniiakh v klirosnoi i bogosluzhebnoi praktike Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi v XX veke” [On some changes in kliros and church-service practice of the Russian Orthodox Church in the 20th century]. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia V: Voprosy istorii i teorii khristianskogo iskusstva, 27, pp. 122–134 (in Russian).
15. Voznesensky I., protopriest (1987) “O vsesoslovnom uchastii naroda v tserkovno-bogosluzhebnom penii i o poryadke etogo peniia” [On the participation of all ranks of society in church liturgical singing and on the order of this singing]. Pravoslavnaya zhizn’, 3 (447), 15–24 (in Russian).
16. Zverev S. (ed.) (2002) Russkaia dukhovnaia muzyka v dokumentakh i materialakh [Russian spiritual music in documents and materials]. Vol. III. Tserkovnoe penie poreformennoi Rossii v osmyslenii sovremennikov (1861–1918); Pomestnyi Sobor Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi 1917–1918 gg. [Church singing in the post-reform Russia characterised by contemporaries (1861–1918); Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church of 1917–1918]. Moscow (in Russian).

Emelianova Olga