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

The article discusses the tendency to depict the saints anargyroi near the burial places in Byzantine churches. The purpose of the study is to establish possible factors in the formation of such programs. The methodology is comprehensive: the results of iconographic analysis are compared with data gleaned from historical researches and liturgical studies. In the previous literature, the iconographic tendency under study was considered mainly on the basis of Serbian monuments of the 13th to 14th centuries and in the light of literary sources relating the facts of miraculous healings at tombs. In the present study, attention shifts to the ensembles of the period of the Komnenoi and the Angeloi — from the frescoes of Bachkovo to the murals of Panagia Krena in Chios (1197). It is suggested that the inclusion of the images of saintly healers in the decorations of burial sites was stimulated by the texts of the funeral services, such as the ancient prayer Ὁ θεὸς τῶν πνευμάτων καὶ πάσης σαρκός (God of the spirits and of all flesh), on the one hand, and the participation of physicians from the hospital at the Pantokrator monastery in Constantinople in the posthumous commemorations on the tombs of John II Komnenos (1118–1143) and members of his family, on the other. The last factor seems to be most important, and it is given special attention. It is shown that the participation of doctors in memorial services in the monastery of Christ Pantokrator was the result of the intersection in this place of two initially unrelated trends — the growing interest in medicine and increased attention to burials and funeral rites on the part of Komnenian ktetors. In turn, this concern in regard to death and posthumous commemorations is linked to certain aspects of the so-called Evergetine reform movement.

anargyroi, the depictions of saintly healers, iconographic programs of Byzantine funerary churches, paintings in arcosolia, Pantokrator monastery in Constantinople, funeral rites, commemorations at tombs

1. Angold M. (1995) Church and Society in Byzantium Under theComneni, 1081–1261. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2. Brodbeck S. (2010) Les saints de la cathédrale de Monreale enSicile. Iconographie, hagiographie et pouvoir royal à la fin du XIIe siècle 9(Collection de l’École française de Rome, 0223–5099; 432). Rome: École françaisede Rome.
3. ChristodoulouTh. St. (2005) Ē Nekrōsimi Akolouthia kata tous cheirografouskōdikes 10ou– 12ou aiōnos. Thira: Thesbitēs publ. (in Greek).
4. Đorđević I.M. (2008) “Mileševa et Sudenica”, inStudije srpske srednjovekovne umetnosti (Biblioteka Jazon 16). Belgrade: Zavod zaudžbenike, pp. 224–243 (in Serbian).
5. Đorđević I.M. (2008)“St.Sava and the Painted Programme of Mileševa. The Funerary Concept of theProgramme”, in Studije srpske srednjovekovne umetnosti (BibliotekaJazon 16). Belgrade: Zavod zaudžbenike, pp. 244–256 (in Serbian).
6. Filipovoć D. (1983) “Sarkophagdes Erzbischofs in der Demetriuskirche des Patriarchats von Peć”. Matica SrpskaJournal of Fine Arts, 1983, vol. 19, pp. 75–94 (in Serbian).
7. Gerov G.P. (2021) “On the 12th and 14thCentury Frescoes in the Bachkovo Church-Ossuary”, in Zakharova A., Ovcharova O.,Oretskaia I. (eds.) Art of the ByzantineWorld. Individuality in Artistic Creativiry. A Collection of Essays in Honourof Olga Popova. Moscow: State Institute for Art Studies, pp. 72–95 (inRussian).
8. Grishin S. (1978) “LiteraryEvidence for the Dating of the Backovo OssuaryFrescoes”. Byzantina Australiensia, 1978, vol.1, pp.90–100.
9. KandićO. (1990–1991) “Signes funéraires dans l’église dumonastère de Mileševa”. Communications of the Institute for the Protection ofCultural Monuments of Serbia – Belgrade, 1990–1991, no. 22–23, pp. 103–111 (in Serbian).
10. Kazhdan A. (1984) “The Image of the MedicalDoctor in Byzantine Literature of the Tenth to Twelfth centuries”. Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 1984, vol. 38, pp.43–51.
11. Kolarova V. (2003)“The Ossuary Church of the Bachkovo Monastery”, in Bakalova E. (ed.) The Ossuary of the Bachkovo Monastery. Plovdiv: Pygmalion, pp.28–52.
12. LifshitsL.I. (2015) “Painting of the Second Half to the Late 12th Century”, inLifshits L.I. (Executive editor) Istorija russkogo iskusstva v 22 tomakh[History of Russian Art in 22 volumes], vol.2, part 2: Iskusstvo vtorojpolovuny XII veka [Art of the Second Half of the 12th Century]. Moscow:State Institute for Art Studies, pp. 140–305 (in Russian).
13. Lukashevich A.A. (2008)“Zaupokoinoe bogosluzhenie”, in Patriarkh Moskovskiī i vseia Rusi Aleksiī II (gen. ed.). Pravoslavnaia entsiklopediia [OrthodoxEncyclopedia], vol. 19. Moscow: Tserkovno-nauchnyī tsentr “Pravoslavnaia entsiklopediia” [Churchand scientific centre “Orthodox Encyclopedia”], pp. 666–669 (in Russian).
14. Magdalino P. (1993)The Empire of Manuel I Komnenos,1143–1180. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15. Magdalino P. (2013) “The Foundation ofthe Pantokrator Monastery in Its Urban Setting”, in Kotzabassi S. (ed.) The Pantokrator Monastery in Constantinople (Byzantinisches Archiv 27). Boston/Berlin: Walter de Gruyter Inc, pp. 35–56.
16. Mango C. (1966) “TheHermitage of St. Neophytos and its Wall Paintings”. Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 1966, vol.20, pp. 119–206.
17. Marinis V. (2016) Deathand the Afterlife in Byzantium: The Fate of the Soul in Theology, Liturgy, andArt. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18. Marković M. (2016)“On the Trail of Unique Solutions — Serbian Art in the 12th Century”,in Vojvodić D., Popović D. (eds.) ByzantineHeritage and Serbian Art. Vols. I–III. Vol. II: Sacral Art of the Serbian Landsin the Middle Ages. Published on the Occasion of the 23rdInternational Congress of Byzantine Studies.Belgrade: The SerbianNational Committee of Byzantine Studies; P.E. Službeni Glasnik; Institute forByzantine Studies, Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts, pp. 165–181.
19. Mavrodinova L.N. (1995) La peinture murale en Bulgarie médiévale jusqu’à la fin du XIVe siècle.Sofia: Editions académiques “Prof. Marin Drinov” (in Bulgarian).
20. Menologium Basilii II, available at: URL: https://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Vat.gr.1613 (16.02.2022).
21. Oretskaia I. (2018)On the Style of the Bachkovo OssuaryFrescoes. Zograf, 2018, vol. 42, pp. 37–54.
22. Ovcharova O. (2020)The Frescoes of Nerezi (1164) and theByzantine Painting of the 12th Century. Moscow: “Indric” (in Russian).
23. Pennas Ch. (2017) The Byzantine Church of Panagia Krena inChios: History, Architecture, Sculpture, Painting (Late Twelfth Century).Leiden: Alexandros Press.
24. Pentcheva B. V. (2006) Icons and Power: The Mother of God inByzantium. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.
25. Pivovarova N.V. (2002)Freski tserkvi Spasa na Nereditse vNovgorode: Ikonograficheskaia programma rospisi [Iconography of the Frescoes ofthe Church of Christ the Saviour on Nereditsa in Novgorod]. St. Petersburg:Dmitrii BulaninPubl. (in Russian).
26. Popović D. (1985) “TheTombstone of Archbishop Sava the Second in the Church of Saint Apostles in the Patriarchate”.Matica Srpska Journal of Fine Arts, 1985, vol. 21,pp.71–90 (in Serbian).
27. Popović D. (1991) “Le tombeau del’archevêque Danilo II”, in Djurić V.J. (rédacteur) L’archevêque Danilo II et son epoque. Colloque scientifiqueinternational a l’occasion du 650e anniversaire de sa mort, Décembre1987. Reçu à la VIIIe séance de la Classe des sciences historiques le 19octobre 1988. (Academie serbe dessciences et des arts, colloques scientifiques, volume LVIII) (Classe dessciences historiques, volume 17). Belgrade: Academie serbe des sciences etdes arts, pp. 329–344 (in Serbian).
28. Popović D. (1992) The Royal Tomb in Medieval Serbia (Facultyof philosophy, Institute of art history, studies 9). Belgrade: Faculty ofphilosophy, Institute of art history, Institute of the Protection of CulturalMonuments of Serbia, Institute for the Study of Culture Among Serbs,Montenegrins, Croats and Muslims-Priština (in Serbian).
29. Popović D. (2019) “TheSerbian Royal and Archiepiscopal Tomb in the Middle Ages: New Insights andInterpretations”, in Maksimović L., Pirivatrić S. (eds.) The Kingdom and the Archbishopric of theSerbian and Maritime Lands of the Nemanić Dynasty. Thematic Proceedings inHonor of the 800th Anniversary of the Declaration of the Kingdom andthe Autocephalous Archbishopric of All the Serbian and Maritime Lands. Acceptedat the 7th meeting of the Department of Historical Sciences, held on25 September 2019. Belgrade:Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Serbian Committee for Byzantine Studies,pp. 355–381 (in Serbian).
30. Rodley L. (1985) Cave Monasteries of Byzantine Cappadocia.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985.
31. Sarab'ianov V.D. (2012)“Zhivopis' serediny 1120-kh–nachala 1160-kh godov”, in Lifshits L.I. (Executive editor) Istoriia russkogo iskusstva v 22 tоmakh [History of Russian Art in 22 volumes], vol.2, part 1: Iskusstvo 20–60-kh godov XII veka [Art of the1120s to 1160s]. Moscow:State Institute for Art Studies, pp. 158–335 (in Russian).
32. Sarab'ianov V.D. (2016)Spasskaia tserkov'Evfrosinievskogo monastyria v Polotske [The Saviour’s Church of St Euphrosyne’s Convent in Polotsk]. 3rd ed. Polotsk: Spaso-Evfrosinievskii zhenskiimonastyr' v gorode Polotske Polotskoi eparkhii Belorusskoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi[The Convent of the Saviour and St Euphrosyne in the city of Polotsk of thePolotsk diocese of the Belarusian Orthodox Church].
33. Starodubcev T.(2018) Holy Physicians. Cult andRepresentation in the Eastern Orthodox Medieval World (University of Belgrade,Faculty of philosophy, Institute of art history, studies 14). Belgrade:University of Belgrade, Faculty of philosophy, Institute of art history;Služebni glasnik (in Serbian).
34. Šuput M. (2000) “Lessources constantinopolitaines de l’architecture de Saint-Nicolas de Kuršmlija”,in Kalić J. (rédacteur). Stefan Nemanja –Saint Simeon Myroblite. Histoire et tradition. Colloque scientifiqueinternational. Septembre 1996. Reçu à la VIIe séance de la Classe des scienceshistoriques le 30 septembre 1998 (Academie serbe des sciences et des arts,colloques scientifiques, volume XCIV) (Classe des sciences historiques volume26). Belgrade: Academie serbe des sciences et des arts, pp. 171–179 (inSerbian).
35. Thomas J.Ph. (1994)“Documentary Evidence from the Byzantine Monastic Typica for the History of theEvergetine Reform Movement”, in Mullett M., Kirby A. (eds.) The Theotokos Evergetis and Elevenfth-Сentury Monasticism. Papers of the Third BelfastByzantine International Colloquium, 1–4 May 1992(Belfast Byzantine Textsand Translations 6.1). Belfast: Belfast Byzantine Enterprises, pp. 246–273.
36. Thomas J.Ph.,Constantinides-Hero A. et al. (eds.) (2000) ByzantineMonastic Foundation Documents. A Complete Translation of the SurvivingFounder’s Typika and Testaments: 5 vols. (Dumbarton Oaks Studies 35).WashingtonDC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection.
37. Tsarevskaya T. (2011) “The images of Holy doctors and the ‘Healing’ aspect of veneration of S.Nicholas in Myra in the medieval Novgorod”, in Biserka Penkova (ed.) The Boyana Church between the East and theWest in the Art of the Christian Europe. Proceedings of an International conference,Sofia, 16—17 April 2010. Sofia: National History Museum, The BulgarianAcademy of Sciences, pp. 126–136.
38. Tsitouridou A. (1985) The Church of the Panagia Chalkeon (Guides of the Institute for BalkanStudies 7). Thessaloniki: Institute for Balkan Studies.
39. Vassits M. (1928) Žičai Lazarica: studije iz srpske umetnosti srednjeg veka [Žiča and Lazarica:Studies on Serbian Art of the Middle Ages]. Belgrade: Izdavachkaknjižarnica G. Kona, 1928 (in Serbian).
40. Velkovska E. (2001)“Funeral Rites According to the Byzantine Liturgical Sources”. Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 2001, vol. 55, pp.21–51.
41. Vinogradov A., Zheltov M.(2019). “The Church Politics of the Patriarchate of Constantinople under ManuelI Komnenos, and the Crisis in the Metropoly of Rus’ (1156—1169)”.ISTORIYA.vol.10, no. 9 (83), available at: URL:https://history.jes.su/s207987840006961-6-1/DOI: 10.18254/S207987840006961-6 (16.02.2022)
42. Vojvodić D. I. (2005) Wall Paintings of the Church of Saint Achilleos in Arilje.Belgrade: Stubovi culture (in Serbian).
43. Wolford T. (2019) “‘To Each According to theirNeed’: Medical and Charitable Institutions in the Pantokrator Monastery”, in Saghy M., Ousterhout R. (eds.) Piroska and the Pantokrator. Dynastic Memory, Healing and Salvation inKomnenian Constantinople (CEU MEDIEVALIA 19). Budapest–New York: CEUDepartment of Medieval Studies & Central European University Press, pp. 195–223.
44. Zheltov M. Kanony Velikoi Subboty [Canons for GreatSaturday], available at: URL: http://www.bogoslov.ru/text/399242.html (16.02.2022).
45. Živković M.P. (2019) The Oldest Wall Paintings of the Church of the Mother of God in theStudenica Monastery and Their Renovation in 16th Century. DoctoralDissertation. Belgrade: University of Belgrade, Faculty of philosophy (inSerbian).

Ovcharova 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 article deals with the images of fish and snake in the architectural decoration of the Christian churches in Caucasus in 10 – 14 centuries. The theme of the dragon fighters is not in the focus of the research. The research is dedicated to the images of snake (without paws and fangs, in contrast to dragon-snake) when represented in heraldic position, in the scenes of the prophet Jonas devoured by the sea-monster and in isolated position. It is also dedicated to the image of the fish. The earliest representations of the snakes and dragon-snakes appear on the facades of the Christian churches in Caucasus as early as the Xth century on the territory of the Northern Caucasus and Georgia. Later they are turned in hybrid creatures, dragon-snake (with paws and fangs, sometimes covered with fish scales). Two heads of snake on the earliest representations as well as cirсles on its body underline the apotropaic meaning of the image. The appearance of the snake (not the dragon-snake) on the territory in question could be explained by the influence of the local archaeological culture (Cobano-Colchis). Being represented on the facades of the Christian churches they function as apotropaia. The appearance of the isolated images of fishes in the architectural decoration could also be influenced by the local archaeological culture. The way of the sketching the scales on its body (on the relief from Anacopia) proves its biological identification as trout (the widest spread fish in the mountains of Caucasus). The image of the fish carved on the facades of the Christian churches could also have apotropaic function.

apotropaia, architectural decoration, snake, dragon-snake, relief, Caucasus

1. Azizian A.Zmeepodobnie ornamenti ne keramike Shengavitskoj kulturi [Snake-like ornamentson the ceramic of the Shengavit culture] // Vishap nastike skazki I realnosti [Vishaps on the frontier of the reality andfairy-tale]. Erevan, 2019. P. 274 – 281. (in Armenian).
2. Aladashvili N. Monumentalnajaskulptura Gruziji: figurativnije reliefi V – XI vv. [Monumental sculptureof Georgia: figural reliefs of V – XI centuries]. Moskva, 1977.
3. Bazeian K. Zmej-drakon v armianskoj vishivke XVIII – XIX v. [Snake-dragon in Armenianembroidery of the XVIII – XIX centuries]// Vishap nastike skazki I realnosti [Vishaps on the frontier of the reality andfairy-tale]. Erevan, 2019. P. 333 - 334. (in Armenian).
4. Vadbolsky M. Geraldicheskajasimvolika Gruziji [Heraldic symbolism in Georgia]. Tbilisi, 1980.
5. Gagloity R. H. Onekotorih kultah (barana, kozla, loshadi, ribi), dominirujutsih na territorijiUyznoj Osetiji v pozdneantichnij i rannesrednevekovij periodi (poarheologicheskim materialam) [About some cults (ram, goat, horse, fish) thatdominate on the territory oft he Southern Ossetia in the Late Antique and EarlyMedieval periods (on the archaeological materials)// IzvestjiaYugo-osetinskogo nauchno-issledovatelskogo instituta im. Z. N. Vaneeva [Proceedingsin the Southern Ossetia research institute named after Z. N. Vaneev]. Vip.XXXVI. Tschinval, 2000.
6. Gevorkjan A.Izobrazenije zmei-vishapa na drevnej bronze [Representation of vishap-snake onte ancient bronze]// Vishap na stike skazki I realnosti [Vishaps on thefrontier of the reality and fairy-tale]. Erevan, 2019. P. 289-293. (in Armenian).
7. Golan A. Mif Isimvol [Myth ans Symbol]. Moskva – Ierusalim, 1994.
8. Davidova G. Zmeja varmjanskoj narodnoj meditsine [Snake in Armenian folk medicine]// Vishap nastike skazki I realnosti [Vishaps on the frontier of the reality andfairy-tale]. Erevan, 2019. P.206 - 214. (in Armenian).
9. Dudochkin B. N. Obizobrazeniji „kita“ proroka Joni v rospisi Andreja Rubleva I Daniila 1408 vUspenskom sobore Vladimira iv miniaturah Evangelja gruppi Hitrovo [About imageof “ketos” of the prophet Jonas in frescoes of Andrej Rublev and Daniel of 1408in the cathedral of Dormition in Vladimir and in the miniatures of Hitrovogroup]// Neizvestnije proizvedenija. Novije otkritija. Sbornik nauchnihstatej k ubileju Muzeja imeni Andreja Rubleva [Unknown masterpieces. Newdiscoveries. Collection of scientific articles to the jubilee of the Museum ofAndrej Rublev]. Moskva, 2017.
10. Engibaryan N.Drakon-zmeja v urartskoj ikonografiji [Dragon-snake in Urartu iconography]// Vishapna stike skazki I realnosti [Vishaps on the frontier of the reality andfairy-tale]. Erevan, 2019. P. 295 - 303. (in Armenian).
11. Engibaryan N. Zmeinij ornamentna keramike epohi bronzi I zeleza Armeniji: II tisjatseletije - nachalo I tisjatseletija do n.e. [Snake ornamenton the ceramics of the Bronze and Iron Age in Armenia: II millennium – I millenniumBC]// Vishap na stike skazki I realnosti [Vishaps on the frontier of thereality and fairy-tale]. Erevan, 2019. P. 282 - 288. (in Armenian).
12. Endoltseva E. Y. Arhitekturnajaplastika Abkhaziji v period Abkhazskogo tsarstva (VIII – XI vv.) [Architecturaldecoration of Abkhazia in the period of the Abkhazian kingdom (VIII – XIcenturies)]. Moskva, 2020.
13. Endoltseva E. Y., SkakovA. Y. Zoomorphnije obrazi v arhitekturnoj plastike Kavkaza 9 – 11 v. [Zoomorphicimages in architectural decoration of Caucasus in 9 – 11 centuries]// Vestnikpravoslavnogo Svjato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Voprosi istorijiI teoriji hristianskogo iskusstva [Bulletin of the orthodox humanitarianuniversity of Saint Tikhon. Questions of history and theory of Christian art].Vip. V: 37. Moskva, 2020. P. 9 – 28.
14. Makalatija S. Istorijaetnographiji Megreliji [History of ethnography of Megrelija]. Tbilisi,1941.
15. Mepisashvili R.,Tsintsadze V. Arhitektura nagornoj chasti istoricheskoj provintsiji Gruziji– Shida-Kartli [Architecture of the mountain part of the historicalprovince of Georgia – Shida-Kartli]. Tbilisi, 1975.
16. Mikaelyan L. Obraz drakona-zmejav sculpture Armeniji X – XIV vv.: ikonographija I simvolicheskije aspekti v kontekstehristianskoj kulturi [Image of the dragon-snake in the sculpture of Armenia X –XIV centuries: iconography and symbolic aspects in the context of the Christianculture]// Vishap na stike skazki I realnosti [Vishaps on the frontierof the reality and fairy-tale]. Erevan, 2019. P. 396 - 410. (in Armenian).
17. Mikaelyan L. Sh. Dveipostasi obraza drakona-zmeja v srednevekovoj plastike Armeniji X – XIV vekov[Two hypostasis of the image of dragon-snake in medieval plastic of Armenia X –XIV centuries]// Mezdunarodnaja konferentsija. Iskusstvo i kulturaSrednevekovija: nesledije i perspektivi osmislenija. Tezisi dokladov. Sankt-Petersburg, 26 –31 oktjabrja 2020 [International conference. Art and culture of theMiddle Ages: heritage and perspectives of rethinking. Abstracts of papers. Saint-Petersburg,26 – 31 October 2020]/ ed. S. V. Maltseva, E. Y. Stanukovich – Denisova, A. V.Zakharova. Sankt-Peterburg, 2020. P. 232 -243.
18. Pogosyan A. O voprosahproishozdenija I tipologiji klassicheskih vishapagorgov [About questions oforigins and typology of classical vishapagorges]// Vishap na stike skazki Irealnosti [Vishaps on the frontier of the reality and fairy-tale]. Erevan,2019. P. 323. (in Armenian).
19. Pogosyan S.Zmeeobraznije uzori v armjanskom natsionalnom kostume I ukrashenijah[Snake-like ornaments in Armenian folk dress and in jewelry]// Vishap nastike skazki I realnosti [Vishaps on the frontier of the reality andfairy-tale]. Erevan, 2019. P. 343 - 344. (in Armenian).
20. Skakov A. Y. Obrazi zmei,ljagushki I ribi v mifologiji drevnego naselenija Kavkaza (kobano-kolhidskaja kulturno-istoricheskajaobsnost epohi rannego zeleza) [Images of snake, frog and fish in mythology of theancient population of Caucasus (Cobano-Colchis cultural historical community ofthe Early Iron Age)]// ALLON. K 60-letiju zasluzennogo dejatelja nauki RYO professoraY. A. Dzitsojti: collektivnaja monografja (Moskva 2021 – Tshinval 2021). Kollektivnajamonografija. [Allon. To the 60 jubilee of the honored personality ofscience of the Republic of the Southern Ossetia professor Y. Dzitsojti:collective monograph (Moscow 2021 – Tschinval 2021). Collective monograph]/ ed.A. Skakov, I. Skakova. Moskva, 2021.
21. Chibirov L. A. Traditsionnajaduhovnaja kultura osetin [Traditional spiritual culture of Ossetians].Moskva, 2008.
22. Bovini, G. Repertorium der christlich- antikenSarkophage. I. Rom und Ostia. Textband und Tafelband/ G. Bovini, H. Brandenburg. Wiesbaden, 1967.
23. Dadiani T., Khundadze T., Kvachatadze E. MedievalGeorgian Sculpture. Tbilisi, 2017.
24. Hakobyan Z., Mikayelyan L. The Senmurv andOther Mythical Creatures with Sasanian Iconography in the Medieval Art ofArmenia and Transcaucasia// Fabulous Creations and Spirits in Ancient Iran.Proceedings of a Workshop held on May 3d 2016 at the Near Eastern Department,University of California, Berkley. Bologna, 2018. P. 39 – 77.
25. Kuehn S. The Dragon in Medieval EastChristian and Islamic Art. Leiden – Boston, 2011.
26. Vanderheyde C. La sculpture byzantine du IXau XV siècle. Contexte.Mise en oeuvre. Décors. Paris, 2020.
27. Yacoub M. Splendeurs des mosaïques de Tunisie. Simpact, 2002.

Endoltseva Ekaterina

*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 frescoes on the subjects of the life of St. Francis in the choir of the main Franciscan church in Montefalco were painted by Benozzo Gozzoli in 1452. For a long time they remained poorly studied, and the program of the cycle was unclear. Studies of the end of the XX century indicate a steadily increasing interest in the artist's work, including his monumental paintings in Montefalco. The subject of this article is to clarify the program design of the chapel, which probably belonged to Fra Jacopo of Montefalco, a Franciscan theologian and rector of the church. The appearance of rare plots, atypical for earlier and later Franciscan cycles in Italy, and a careful analysis of each composition in connection with the literary tradition of the Franciscan order, allowed us to more fully substantiate that the idea of "Francis as another Christ" (Franciscus alter Christus) was consistently carried out in the chapel program. The cycle executed by Gozzoli includes twelve fresco compositions and a stained glass window. All of them represent twenty episodes from the life of St. Francis from his birth to his ascension to heaven, which are accompanied by explanatory comments in Latin. Many of the scenes are multi-episode, reflecting the passion for storytelling in the middle of the XV century and the desire to bring all the details and details necessary to explain the plot. The analysis of the compositions in comparison with hagiographic literature allows us to conclude that the compilers of the program mainly relied on three main texts about the life of the saint: the first and second lives of Thomas by Chelan, as well as the Great Legend by St. Bonaventure. The choice of subjects and the overall design of the chapel emphasize the living ministry of the saint, and also reflect another, more important by this time, Franciscan idea – the glorification of Francis as another Christ. The depictions of scenes telling about the birth, childhood and about the early years of Francis' life, appearing in the pictorial tradition for the first and last time, make this painting cycle truly unique.

15th century Italian art, early Renaissance art, monumental painting, Montefalco, Benozzo Gozzoli, St. Francis, Franciscanism

1. Boschetto A. (1961) Gli affreschi diBenozzo Gozzoli nella Chiesa di San Francesco a Montefalco. Milano:Istituto Editoriale Italiano.
2. Cole [Ahl] D. (1996) Benozzo Gozzoli. New Haven &London: Yale University Press.
3. Cole [Ahl] D. (1996) “Benozzo Gozzoli’s Cycle of the Life of SaintFrancis in Montefalco: Hagiography and Homily”, in S. Sticca (Ed.), Saints: Studiesin Hagiography, Binghamton, NY: Medieval & Renaissance Texts and Studies,pp. 191-213.
4. DanilovaIrina E. (1970) Ital'yanskaya monumental'nayazhivopis' (rannee vozrozhdenie) [Italian monumental painting (the early Renaissance)]. Moscow: URSS (InRussian).
5. Filarete. (1999) Trattatodi architectura. Moscow (Russiantranslation).
6. FontiFrancescane. (1986) Assisi (Russian translation).
7. Jakobusde Voragine (2019) Legenda Aurea. Moscow (Russian translation).
8. H. W. van Os. (1974) St. Francis of Assisi as a Second Christ in EarlyItalian Painting. Netherlands Quarterly for the History of Art, 1974, No. 3/Vol. 7, pp. 115-132.
9. KovalchukLada I. (2019) “The “tramezzo” in Early Franciscan Churches in Italy”, ActualProblems of Theory and History of Art, (2019) vol. 9, pp. 513-524 (In Russian).
10. Lavin M. A. (1990) The place ofnarrative. Mural decoration in Italian Churches 431–1600. Chicago, London.
11. Luchinat C. A. (2006) “Benozzo Gozzoli”, in The Great Italian Painters from the Gothic tothe Renaissance, Florence, pp. 561-639.
12. Lunghi E. (2010) Benozzo Gozzoli a Montefalco. Assisi:Editrice Minerva.
13. Morgen R. (1956) Tradizione religiosa eRinascimento nel ciclo degli affreschi francescani a Montefalco. Florence: Sansoni.
14. Nessi S. (1961) La vita diS.Francesco dipinta da Benozzo Gozzoli a Montefalco. Roma: MiscellaneaFrancescana.
15. Nessi S. (2001) La vita – Le operecon le immagini degli affreschi a Montefalco. Perugia: Quattroemme Srl.
16. Padoa Rizzo A. (1972) Benozzo Gozzoli pittorefiorentino. Florence.
17. Roettgen S. (1996) Italianfrescoes. The early Renaissance 1400 – 1470. New-York: Abbeville presspublishers.
18. Smirnova Irina A. (1987) Monumental'naya zhivopis' ital'yanskogoVozrozhdeniya [Monumental paintingof the Italian Renaissance]. Moscow: URSS (In Russian).
19. VasariGiorgio. (2010) Zhizneopisanie naibolee znamenityh zhivopiscev, vayatelej i zodchih[The Lives of the Most Excellent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects]. Saint Petersburg (Russian translation).

Kulikova Elena

The history of Byzantine chant goes back many centuries. The modal system of Octoechos, that regulates most of liturgical compositions, emerged even before the appearance of the musical notation in the chant books, and then continuously developed. Over the centuries, this octomodal system absorbed a lot of divergent influences, so Byzantine and post-Byzantine modes appear as a fusion of archaic, classical and modern features. After a detailed study of the modal content of the fourth authentic mode, the authors reconstruct its melodic image and its evolution from the classical Byzantine period to the samples of the later Greek tradition. The present study is based on different sticheras of the hebdomadal and annual liturgical circles taken from the middle-Byzantine Sticherarion of the 12th to the 14th century, from post-Byzantine versions of the Sticherarion by the 17th-century authors Chrysaphos the Younger and Germanos of New Patras, and from collections of selected chants: the Anastasimatarion of Chrysaphos the Younger (17th century), the Doxastaria of Iakovos the Protopsaltis and Petros Peloponnesios, the Anastasimatarion of Peter Peloponnesios (18th century). The middle Byzantine evidence points to the special place of the fourth authentic mode in the octomodal system, as possessing a peculiar modal content: while other authentic modes have a third-fifth structure of the main cadences, in the fourth authentic mode the main cadences are arranged in a second relation. This trait impacts also the melodic formulas of the chants. Over the centuries, this peculiar feature has been preserved in the mutual relationship of the main cadences of the fourth mode. Accordingly, the melismatic enrichment of older versions of Sticheraria took place, but the main characteristics of the mode remained unchanged, in spite of the addition of supplementary modal cadences. The modal particularity of the fourth authentic mode may be explained by the combination of several modal components: the archaic features, inherited from pre-octomodal forms, merged with later elements and were embedded into the classical modal system.

Byzantine medieval chant, chant manuscripts, Sticherarion, middle byzantine musical notation, byzantine neumes, melodic formulas, mode, modulation, short sticheraric melos, Post-Byzantine chant

1. Aleksandrou M. (2010). Exegesis and transription of Byzantine musi. The brief Introduction tothe Problem. Thessaloniki.
2. Adsuara C. (1995). “KalophonicSticherarion Sinai gr. 1251. Introduction and Indices“. Cahier de l’Institue du Moyen Age Grec et Latin. 65, p. 15­–58.
3. Anastasimatarion argon and syntomon (1995).Athens (in Greek).
4. AntoniouS. (2004). The Heirmologion and the tradition of its melos. Athens (in Greek).
5. Chatzigiakoumis M. (1999). The Church Μusic of Ηellenism, afterthe Fall (1453-1820). Athens (in Greek).
6. Chrysanthos (1832). The Great Treatise of Music. Trieste(in Greek).
7. Doksastarion (1836). Constantinople(in Greek).
8. Jung A. (1984). “The Settings of the Evening and MorningPsalms According to the ManuscriptSinai1255“. Cahier de l’Institue duMoyen Age Grec et Latin, 47, p. 3-63.
9. Kritikou F. (2013). “TheEmbellishment of a Sticherarion Chrysaphes the Younger as a Phenomenon ofRenewal of Byzantine chant“.Traditionand Innovation in Late and Post Byzantine liturgical chant, Proceedings of theCongress held at Hernen Castle 2008. Eastern Christian Studies 17, p.215–260.
10. Kujumdzieva S. (2001) “Studying the Octoechos:from the Octoechos to the Anastasimatarion“. Paperread at the XX International Byzantine Congress, Paris, 19-25 August, 2001.Publications No. 3, p. 122-129 (http://musicart.imbm.bas.bg/p/en_kujumdzieva1.html. Дата обращения: 24.04.2022);
11. Neon Anastasimatarion (1820).Bucharest (in Greek).
12. Raasted J. (1958). “SomeObservations on the Structure of Sticherariain Byzantine Rite“. Byzantion. 28, p. 529–541.
13. Raasted J. (1995). “KoukouzelesRevision of the Sticherarion and Sinai Gr. 1230“. Laborare Fratres in unum: Fesrschrift Laszlo Dobszay zum 60. Geburtstag, s. 261–277;
14. Gertsman E.V. (1994) Peterburskii teoretikon[St.Petersburg theoretikon]. Odessa (In Russian).
15. Shkolnik I. (1994) “Archaic features of the Octoechos in ByzantineStichera”. Musica Antiqua EuropaeOrientalis. X/1, p.201 – 215.
16. Starikova I.V. (2019) “Razvitiemelizmatiki v vizantijskoj i drevnerusskoj pevcheskih tradiciyah: opytkomparativnogo issledovaniya“ [Τhe development of melismatic in Byznatine and OldRussian Chant: An Attempt of comparative study]. Vestnik PSTGU. Seriya V, 34, p. 25–36 (in Russian).
17. Stathis G. (1979). “An Analysis ofthe Sticherarion Τον ήλιον κρύψαντα by Germanos,Bishop of New Patras. The Old Synoptic and the New Analytical Method ofByzantine Notation“. Studies in EasternChant, 4, p. 177–277.
18. Stathis G. (1993). The manuscripts of Byzantine Music. Mount Athos.Athens (in Greek).
19. Strunk O. (1977) P. “Lorenzo Tardoand Jis Ottoeco Nei MSS. Melurgici“. Essays on Music in the Byzantine World,p. 255-267.
20. Strunk O. (1977) “The Notation ofthe Chartres Fragment“. Essays on Music in the Byzantine World, p. 68–111.
21. Syntomon Doksastarion (1820). Bucharest(in Greek).
22. Tillyard H. (1970) Handbook of theMiddle Byzantine musical notation. Copenhague. (Monumenta MusicaeByzantinae: Subsidia, vol.I).
23. Troelsgard C. (2003) “A List of SticherarionCall-Numbers of the Standard Abridged Version of the Sticherarion. Part I (TheCycle of the Twelve Months)“. Cahier de l’Institue du Moyen Age Grec et Latin, 74, p. 3–20.
24. Troelsgård Ch. (2011) Byzantineneumes: a new introduction to the Middle Byzantine musical notation.Copenhagen. (Monumenta Musicae Byzantinae: Subsidia, vol.IX).
25. Tyurina O.V. (2020) “Stihira Rozhdestvu Bogorodicy “Neplody bezchadenaAnna” v drevnerusskoj i vizantijskoj tradiciyah. Evolyuciyapesnopeniya-mnogoglasnika” [Sticheiron for the Nativity of Theotokos “InfertileChildless Anna” in Old Russian and Byzantine Singing Traditions. Evolution of aPoly-Modal Hymn]. Vestnik PSTGU. Ser. V:Voprosy istorii I teorii khristianskogo iskusstva. 39, p.42 – 60 (in Russian).

Starikova Irina

*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.

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 scientific concept of "open text" (U. Eco) is applicable to various humanities, including musical medieval studies, primarily to ancient Russian singing manuscripts. The liturgical purpose does not contradict the introduction of additions and corrections in the syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic fields of them at all stages of the work, as well as after its completion. The updates ("ponowlenija") affect on the one hand, the structure of each manuscript, on the other – its hymnographic and singing texts highlighted for consideration in this article. They relate directly to the notated texts, which in their original presentation (without updates) appear as complete chants, and open, if we consider all the updates introduced into it later by the author of the manuscript or subsequent masters. At the same time the completeness of the chant and its openness do not contradict each other; both variants can be chosen for performance. In the article, the features of the plaintext are considered on the example of the manuscript of the 16th century of the collection of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra of the Russian State Library No. 420, demonstrating the active work on it of both the author and subsequent masters. The introduction of new elements concerns, in addition to the structure of the manuscript, the writing out of variants of the hymnographic text, the inclusion of new chants in place of existing or absent ones from the author of the manuscript; the use of unusual neumes, not characteristic of znamenny notation in general; the designation of "superfluous" chants; the "programming" of improvisational updates, in particular, in the genre of the "Mnogoletija (Perennial). Many aspects of additions and transformations allow us to speak about the active creative work of the masters with ancient Russian hymnographic and musical texts, the openness of which provided an infinite wealth of chants.

open text, manuscript, singing book, notation, renewal, variation, improvisation

1. Aleksandrina Alexandra V. (2020) "Pevcheskie rukopisnye knigi XV–XIX vekov Troice-Sergievojlavry. Nauchnoe opisanie"["Singinghandwritten books of the XV-XIX centuries of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra.Scientific description"]. Moscow: Lepta Kniga Publ. (in Russian).
2. Bezuglova Irina F. (1988) "Marginalii v rukopisnyh knigah Kirillo-Belozerskogomonastyrja kak istochnik po istorii russkoj muzykal'noj kul'tury" ["Marginalia inthe Handwritten Books of the Kirillo-Belozersky Monastery as a source on theHistory of Russian musical culture"] in Issledovanijapamjatnikov pis'mennoj kul'tury v sobranijah i arhivah otdela rukopisej iredkih knig: Sb. nauch. tr. Red. N.A.Efimova. Leningrad: GPBPubl.,pp. 51–57 (in Russian).
3. Findejzen Nickolaj F. (1928) "Ocherki po istorii muzyki v Rossii sdrevnejshih vremen do konca XVIII veka". ["Essays on the history of music inRussia from ancient times to the end of the XVIII century"]Moscow-Leningrad: Gos.izd-vo. Muzsektor Publ., vol. 1 (in Russian).
4. Guseinova Zivar M. (1990). "Rukovodstva po teorii znamennogo penija XV veka (istochnikii redakcii)" ["Manualson the theory of znamenny singing of the XV century (sources and editions)"],available at: Drevnerusskajapevcheskaja kul'tura i knizhnost'. Problemymuzykoznanija 4. Red. N.S.Seregina. Leningrad: LGIK Publ. pp.20–46 (in Russian).
5. Guseinova Zivar M. (2013) "Pervichnye i vtorichnye tekstynotirovannoj rukopisi" ["Primary and secondary texts ofthe notified manuscript"], available at: Muzykal'naja arheografija-2013. Sb.statej. Sost. N.V.Zabolotnaja. Moscow: RAM im Gnesinyh, pp. 83-100. (in Russian).
6. Hedzhinjan Lyn. "Otricanie zakrytosti" ["Denial ofcloseness"]. Podg. k publ. i per. s angl. Arkadija Dragomoshhenko. Filosofskij zhurnal, 2011, vol. 6, pp. 78-85 (Russian translation).
7. Jeko Umberto. (2016) Rol' chitatelja. Issledovanija posemiotike teksta [Lector in fabula. Lacooperazione interpretativa nei testi narrativi]. Moscow: ACT Publ. (Russian translation).
8. KostjuhinaLjudmila M. (1962) "ZapisiXIII-XVIII vv. na rukopisjah Voskresenskogo monastyrja" ["Records of the XIII-XVIIIcenturies on the manuscripts of the Resurrection Monastery"]. Arheograficheskij ezhegodnik za 1960god. Pp. 273–291 (in Russian).
9. Lihachev Dmitrij S. (1971) "Pojetika drevnerusskoj literatury" ["Poetics of Ancient Russian literature"] Leningrad,Khudozhestvennaya Literatura Publ. (in Russian).
10. Lotman Jurij. M. (1992) "Ritorika" ["Ritorika"], in Lotman Ju. M. Izbrannye stat'i v treh tomah. Stat'i po semiotike itopologii kul'tury [Selected Articles: in 3 volumes. Vol. 1. Articleson Semiotics and Topology of Culture]. Tallinn: Aleksandra Publ., pp. 148−161 (In Russian).
11. Parfent'evNickolaj P., Parfent'eva Natalia V. (2013). "Mnogoletija v chest' carja MihailaRomanova v demestvennyh raspevah masterov usol'skoj (Stroganovskoj) shkoly" ["Perennials in honor of Tsar Mikhail Romanov in the solemnchants of the masters of the Usolsky (Stroganov) school"] available at: Vestnik JuUrGU. Serija «Social'no-gumanitarnye nauki».2013. vol. 13, # 2. pp. 112-115 (in Russian).
12. PozhidaevaGalina A. (2000). "Iz istorii demestvennogo raspeva XVII v". ["From the history of the divine chant ofthe XVII century"] in Germenevtika drevnerusskojliteratury / RAN; Institut mirovoj literatury im. A.M.Gor'kogo; Obshhestvo issledovatelej DrevnejRusi. Moscow: IMLI RAN Publ., vol. 10, pp. 482–516 (in Russian).
13. PuckoVasilij G. (1998) "Mnogoletija russkim knjaz'jam porukopisjam Kirillo-Belozerskogo monastyrja" ["Long-termgreetings to Russian princes from the manuscripts of the Kirillo-BelozerskyMonastery"] available at: Kirillov.Kraevedcheskij al'manah. Vyp. 3. Vologda: Legija Publ., pp. 50–55 (in Russian).
14. Rukopisi XVI –XX vv. i knigi kirillicheskoj pechati iz sobranija Instituta istorii SO RAN. ["Manuscriptsof the XVI - XX centuries and books of Cyrillic printing from the collection ofthe Institute of History SB RAS"]. Sostaviteli: N.D.Zol'nikova, A.I.Mal'cev, T.V.Panich,L.V.Titova), available at: https://arran.ru/images/nd/mus/75/article2.pdf(28.12.2021). (in Russian).
15. Tihomirov Mihail N. (1960) "ZapisiXIV-XVII vekov na rukopisjah Chudova monastyrja" ["Records of the XIV-XVIIcenturies on the manuscripts of the Chudov Monastery"]. Arheograficheskij ezhegodnik za 1958god. Pp. 11–36 (in Russian).
16. Uspenskij Nickolaj D. (1971) "Obrazcy drevnerusskogo pevcheskogo iskusstva". ["Samples ofancient Russian singing art"]. Leningrad: Muzyka Publ. (in Russian).

Guseinova Zivar

*According to ISCED 2011, a post-doctoral degree called Doctor of Sciences (D.Sc.) is given to reflect second advanced research qualifications or higher doctorates.

The heyday of the art of polychoral composition in European musical culture falls on the middle of the 17th century. The style originated in the churches of western and central Italy. It united a whole generation of young Polish composers educated in Venice and Rome. One of them is the famous Polish composer Mikolaj Zielenski. In musical style Zielenski follows the traditions of late Renaissance polyphony. His compositions mark the beginning of a long period of influence of Italian style on Polish music. Until today the question remains open, where the composer got acquainted with the Venetian technique of writing multi-choir music. The composer could master the polychoral style without leaving Poland. The polychoral style was then very widespread thanks to the activities of Italian musicians throughout Europe.All of Zielenski 's works known today were published in Venice in 1611. The first of these, Offertoria totius anni, includes multi-choir compositions similar to Giovanni Gabrieli's Sacrae symphoniae. The collection contains 55 compositions, the last of which is the Magnificat for three choirs. Mikolaj Zielenski 's Magnificat can be considered a classical composition for three choirs. In terms of stylistic and compositional features, it follows Italian traditions, in connection with which it is often compared with Giovanni Gabrieli's Magnificat.The history of polychoral style is one of the most interesting pages in the history of European musical culture. The Venetian style influenced the music of Central and Eastern Europe, including Russian musical culture.

musik of Poland, Baroque music, Mikolaj Zielenski, Giovanni Gabrieli, polychoral compositions, antiphon, Magnificat

1. BroughDelma(1989) Polish Sevententh-Century Church Miusc.With Reference to the Influence of Historical, Political, and Social Condition.New York & London
2. Dunicz Jan J. (1936) Do biografjiMikołaja Zieleńskiego. Polski Rocznik Muzykologiczny, II
3. FederhoferHelmut (1980) Giovanni Valentini. [in:] Sadie S. The New Grove Dictionary ofMusic and Musicians. Bd. 19. Macmillan, London 1980
4. Howard Deborah, Moretti Laura (2009) Sound and Spacein Renaissance Venice: Architecture, Music, Acoustic. New Haven, London
5. MalinowskiWładysław (1981) Polifonia Mikołaja Zieleńskiego. Kraków
6. Patalas Aleksandra. (1998) Twórczośćkapelmistrzów polskich Wazów. A. Pacelli, G. F. Anerio, M. Scacchi. Doctoraldissertation, Jagiellonian University, Kraków
7. Przybyszewska-Jarmińska Barbara (2002) TheHistory of Music in Poland,tom III: The Baroque, part 1: 1595-1696. Warsaw, Sutkowski
8. Schwider Damian J. (2009) MikołajZieleński: ein polnischer Komponist an der Wende des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts. München 2009
9. Starowolski Simonis (1627) ScriptorumPolonicorum Hecatonias; seu centum illustrum Poloniae Scriptorum elogia etvitae. Venedig
10. Szczepańska Maria (1935) O dwunastogłosowym “Magnificat” Mikołaja Zieleńskiego z r. 1611. Polski rocznikmuzykologiczny (I)
11. SzweykowskaAnna - Szweykowski Zygmunt (1997) Włosi w kapeli królewskiej polskich Wazów.Kraków, Musica Iagellonica
12. Zieleński Mikołaj (1966-1978) Offertoria totius anni. 1611 in Venice by Giovanni Vincenti. Restored editionpublished in three volumes, Kraków
13. Zieleński Mikołaj (1989-1991) Communiones totiusanni. 1611 in Venice by Giovanni Vincenti. Reconstruction and scholarlytranscription published in two volumes, Kraków

Viskova Irina

*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 devoted to the “podnosnoy” with the view of the Likhvin Dobryi Monastery of Intercession of Theotokos near Kaluga from the collection of the Andrey Rublev Central Museum of Ancient Russian Culture and Art (CMAR): the dating of the monument is specified, its typology is determined, the iconography and style are characterized. Due to the information about chronology of construction transformations carried out in the monastery it is possible to date the icon with the time range of 1818-1832. The lower dating limit is based on the stylistic features of this icon are formed by influence of architectural drawing from 1818. The upper limit determined due to the typological characteristics of the icon as a gift (testimonial icon) for a special important person in memory of the solemn consecration of the renovated monastery ensemble in 1832. The typological characteristic of the monument as a special gift is supported by a number of iconographic and typological analogies. The iconographic program of the icon shows the principles of compositional constructing of "podnosnoy" (tray) and "razdatochnyy"(handout) icons: the pictorial surface is divided into two parts; at the bottom a panoramic view of the city or monastery placed, and at the top of it there are celestial patrons. Taking into account the administrative dependence of the Likhvin Dobryi Monastery from the Kaluga diocese and comparing the icon with a number of dated works close to it in style, it was possible to place them in the circle of works of the Kaluga icons and artistic context of Empire era. A number of these analogies constitutes a separate stylistic line of this regional artistic tradition: it is distinguished by delicate coloring, sentimentality and classical restraint.

Likhvin Dobryi Monastery of Intercession of Theotokos, Kaluga icon painting, “podnosnaya” icon, iconographic program, icon painting of the 19th century, architecture in icons, classicism

1. Altunin, G. Zavarihin S. (2019).“Istoriia formirovaniia arkhitekturnogo ansamblia Likhvinskogo PokrovskogoDobrogo monastyria” [“The history of the formation of the architecturalensemble of the Likhvin Pokrovsky Dobriy Monastery”], in Tula Local LoreAlmanac. No. 16, pp. 152-162 (in Russian).
2. Buzykina Iu. (2011). “Obrazsviashchennogo grada i monastyria v russkoi zhivopisi Pozdnego Srednevekov'ia:XVI - pervaia polovina XVII veka” [“The image of the sacred city and monasteryin Russian painting of the Late Middle Ages: XVI - the first half of the XVIIcentury”]. PhD theses in history of art: Moscow State University. Moscow (inRussian).
3. Buseva-Davydova I. (2019). “Russkaiaikonopis' ot Oruzheinoi palaty do moderna: poiski sakral'nogo obraza” [“RussianIcon Painting: From the Armoury Chamber to Art Nouveau: The Search of theSacred Image”]. Moscow: BuksMart, pp. 131-135 (in Russian).
4. Fal'kovskii N. (1947). “Istoriiavodosnabzheniia v Rossii” [“History of water supply in Russia”]. Moscow; Leningrad:ed. Ministry of Public Utilities of the RSFSR (in Russian).
5. Furman R. (1991). “Do іstorіїzhivopisnoї maisternі Sofіis'kogo monastiria v Kiєvі” [“The history of thePainting studio of the Sofia Monastery in Kiev.”]. Obrazotvorche mystet-stvo. Kiev.No. 3. S. 15 ̶ 17 (in Ukranian).
6. Goncharov Yu and others (auth.comp.) (1998). “Ural'skaia ikona: Zhivopisnaia, reznaia i litaia ikona XVIII –nachala XX v.” [“Ural icon: Picturesque, carved and cast icon dated XVIII - thebeginning of XX century”]. Yekaterinburg: Ural University press (in Russian).
7. Guseva A. and others (comp.) (1981).“Ukrainskie knigi kirillovskoi pechati XVI-XVIII vv.: katalog izdaniikhraniashchikhsia v Gosudarstvennoi biblioteke SSSR imeni V. I. Lenina: Vyp. 2,t. 1: Kievskie izdaniia 2-i poloviny XVII” [“Ukrainian books of the Cyrillicpress of the XVI–XVIII centuries: catalog of editions stored in V. I. LeninUSSR State Library: Issue. 2, vol. 1: Kiev editions of the 2nd half of the XVIIthcentury”]. Moscow (in Russian).
8. Ivannikova A., Dobrovol'skaia L.(auth. of the articles) (2021). “Sviatoi blagovernyi velikii kniaz' AleksandrNevskii. Obrazy i simvolika: katalog vystavki” [“Holy Blessed Grand Duke AlexanderNevsky, Prince and Saint: Imagery and Symbolism: exhibition catalog”]. StateHermitage Museum; St. Petersburg: Publishing House of the State Hermitage (inRussian).
9. Kliuchevskaia E. (2012). “Iz istoriipravoslavnogo iskusstva Kazanskoi eparkhii v XVIII – nachale XX vv.” [“From thehistory of Orthodox art of the Kazan diocese in the XVIII - early XXcenturies”], in Orthodox interlocutor: Almanac of the Kazan TheologicalSeminary issues. 1(22)-2012. Kazan: Kazan Seminary, pp. 146 ̶ 161 (in Russian).
10. Komashko N. (2006). “Russkaia ikonaXVIII veka” [“Russian icon of the XVIIIth century”]. Moscow: Agey Tomesh, (inRussian).
11. Komashko N. (comp. and auth. of thearticle) (2019). “Lestnitsa v nebo. Ikony iz sobraniia Viktora Bondarenko”[“Stairway to heaven. Icons from the collection of Viktor Bondarenko”]:exhibition catalog. Moscow: Central Museum of Old Russian Culture and Art.Andrey Rublev (CMAR) (in Russian).
12. Kondakov N. (2004). “Russkaia ikona”[“Russian icon”]. Vol. III. Part one. Foreword. L. Niederle. Moscow: Culturaland educational fund in honor of People's Artist Sergei Stolyarov (in Russian).
13. Krylov Nikita and others (ed.)(2004). “Religioznyi Peterburg” [“Religious Petersburg”]. State The RussianMuseum. St. Petersburg: State Russian Museum (in Russian).
14. Mil'chik M. “Verkol'skii monastyr' vikonografii XVII ̶ XVIII vv.”[“Verkolsky monastery in the iconography of the XVII ̶ XVIII centuries”].Monuments of culture. New discoveries. Yearbook 1986. Leningrad, 1987, pp.487-496 (in Russian).
15. Nechaeva T., Chernov M. (2012). Iconpainting [in Kaluga]: XVIII ̶ XIX centuries. In art. "Kaluga and Borovskdiocese". Orthodox Encyclopedia. Moscow: Church and Scientific Center"Orthodox Encyclopedia", vol. 29, S. 620-623. (in Russian).
16. Nechaeva T., Chernov M. (2010). “"Pisanv Kalugi…". Kaluzhskie ikony XVIII–. XIX vekov” [“"Painted in Kaluga...". Kaluga icons XVIII– XIX centuries”]. Antiques. Art and collectibles.No. № 11(81), pp. 14 ̶ 66 (in Russian).
17. Poliakova O. (author-comp.) (2006).“Arkhitektura Rossii v ee ikone: goroda, monastyri i tserkvi v ikonopisiXVI-XIX vekov iz sobraniia Muzeia-zapovednika "Kolomenskoe"” [“Thearchitecture of Russia in its icon: cities, monasteries and churches in theiconography of the XVI-XIX centuries from the collection of the KolomenskoyeMuseum-Reserve”]. Moscow (in Russian).
18. Preobrazhensky A. (2010). “Ktitorskieportrety srednevekovoi Rusi. XI – nachalo XVI veka” [“Donor Portraits ofMedieval Russia: XIth - Early XVIth Centuries”]. Moscow: Severnyi palomnik (inRussian).
19. Putsko V. (1993). “Ikony sizobrazheniiami kaluzhskikh sviatykh” [“Icons with depictions of Kalugasaints”], in Tausend Jahre Taufe Russlands: Russland in Europa: Beiträge zuminterdisziplinären und ökumenischen Symposium in Halle (Saale) 13-16. April 1988/Edit. by Hermann Goltz und Axel Meissner. Aufl. 1. Leipzig: EvangelischeVerlagsanstalt, 1993. (in Deutsch).
20. Putsko V. (2000). “Ikony 2 pol. XVIIi 1 pol. XVIII vv. iz khramov Kalugi” [“Icons of 2nd half XVII and 1st halfXVIII century from the temples of Kaluga”], in Kaluga in six centuries:materials of the 3rd city local history conference; comp.: V. Dyachenko.Kaluga, pp. 331 ̶ 342 (in Russian).
21. Putsko V. (2005). “O kaluzhskoiminiatiurnoi ikonopisi XVIII - XIX vekov” [“About the Kaluga miniature iconpainting of the XVIII th – XIX th centuries”], in Kaluga in six centuries:materials of the 5th city local history conference. Kaluga: Polygraph-Inform,pp. 319 – 329 (in Russian).
22. Putsko V. (2005). “Bogomater'Zhivonosnyi istochnik v kaluzhskoi ikonopisi XVIII veka” [“The Mother of Godthe Life-Giving Spring in Kaluga Icon Painting of the XVIII th Century”], inKaluga in Six Centuries: Proceedings of the 5th City Local History Conference.Kaluga: Polygraph-Inform, pp. 346–347 (in Russian).
23. Putsko V. (2009). “Ikona BogomateriKazanskoi, chto v Kaluge” [“Icon of the Mother of God of Kazan, in Kaluga”], inIssues of history, culture and nature of the Upper Poochie: materials of theXIII All-Russian scientific conference dedicated to the 200th anniversary ofN.V. Gogol. Kaluga: Polygraph-Inform, pp. 172 – 177 (in Russian).
24. “Russkie monastyri: iskusstvo itraditsii” [“Russian monasteries: art and traditions”]. St. Petersburg: PalaceEditions (1997)(in Russian).
25. Tarasov O. (1995). “Ikona iblagochestie: Ocherki ikonnogo dela v imperatorskoi Rossi” [“Icon and Devotion.Sacred Spaces in Imperial Russia”]. Moscow: Progress, Tradition (in Russian).
26. Tarasova N. (2019). “Pochitanie svt. Nikolaia Chudotvortsa vKrasnokholmskom Nikolaevskom Antonievom monastyre” [“To the Question ofVeneration of St. Nicholas the Wonderworker in Krasnoholmskiy NikolaevskiyAntoniev Monastery in XVIth — XVIIth Centuries”], in “Nachalo”: Journal of theInstitute of Theology and Philosophy. Vol. 36. S. 187-198 (in Russian).
27. Tsarevskaya,T. (2021). “Izobrazheniia novgorodskikh sviatitelei v "kel'e Ioanna"Vladychnoi palaty: vremia i obstoiatel'stva poiavleniia 1558” [“Images ofNovgorod Saints in the “John’s Cell” of the Episcopal Chambers in VelikyNovgorod: The Time and Circumstances of Their Appearance 1558”]. Part II (end),In Bulletin of the sector of ancient Russian art. No. 1(5), pp. 110 ̶ 126 (in Russian).

Golubev Valentin

This publication is part of a comprehensive study addressed to the architectural heritage of the Vyatka province during the reign of Nicholas I. This article highlights the features of temple architecture. Based on the analysis of eleven church projects, the tendencies and trends in the architecture of the Vyatka province of the second quarter and the middle of the 19th century are consistently examined.The study is based on an extensive body of archival sources identified during the work in the Russian State Historical Archive in the period 2019-2022, as well as materials from the periodical press of the 19th - early 20th centuries, photographs and postcards of the early 20th century, published in open sources. The presented archival documents have an undoubted source study potential, primarily for conducting fundamental scientific research in the field of art history, as they present the features of the artistic process in the architecture of the province.The materials are scattered, but they allow creating a complete picture of the evolution of the architecture of the Vyatka province in the first half of the 19th century. Thanks to the introduction of the mentioned documents into scientific circulation, it becomes possible to clarify the actual construction data of some individual objects, stylistic and structural details, the proposed appearance of buildings and evaluate the diversity of the architectural heritage of the Vyatka province. Many documentary materials are introduced into scientific circulation for the first time.

Architectural heritage of the Vyatka province, temple architecture, project, designing, style, composition, classicism

1. Bertash, A. V. (2017) Russkoe hramostroitel'stvo serediny XIX – nachala XX vv. v ocenke dorevoljucionnyh i sovetskih istorikov arhitektury: k istoriografii voprosa. [Russian church building in the middle of the 19th - early 20th centuries. in the assessment of pre-revolutionary and Soviet historians of architecture: to the historiography of the issue] Hristianskoe chtenie. No 5, pp. 183–197. (In Russian).
2. Borisova, E. A. (1979) Russkaja arhitektura vtoroj poloviny XIX veka. [Russian architecture of the second half of the 19th century] Moscow: Nauka, 320 p. (In Russian).
3. Gil'dina, T. A., Kurochkin, M. V. (2020) Arhitekturno-prostranstvennoe ustrojstvo uezdnyh gorodov Vjatskoj gubernii (na primere Sarapula i Malmyzha).[ Architectural and Spatial Structure of the District Towns of the Vyatka Province (on the Example of Sarapul and Malmyzh)] Universitetskij nauchnyj zhurnal. No 57, pp. 171–183. (In Russian).
4. Gil'dina, T. A. (2021) Arhitekturnoe svoeobrazie goroda Malmyzha Vjatskoj gubernii.[Architectural originality of the city of Malmyzh, Vyatka province] Universitetskij nauchnyj zhurnal. No 62, pp. 100–113. (In Russian).
5. Zhurin, A. N. (2108) Imperator Nikolaj I i dvojstvennost' v russkoj arhitekture ego vremeni. [Emperor Nicholas I and duality in Russian architecture of his time] Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Kul'turologija i iskusstvovedenie. No29, pp. 83–88. (In Russian).
6. Departament gosudarstvennogo hozjajstva i publichnyh zdanij (1824) Sobranie planov, fasadov i profilej dlja stroenija kamennyh cerkvej s kratkim nastavleniem kak o samom proizvodstve stroenija, tak i o vychislenii potrebnyh k tomu materialov; pri chem prilozheny i ob#jasnitel'nye chertezhi vazhnejshih chastej zdanij, s oznacheniem razmera onyh dlja prakticheskogo upotreblenija. [Collection of plans, facades and profiles for the construction of stone churches with a brief instruction both on the production of the structure itself and on the calculation of the materials required for this; Moreover, explanatory drawings of the most important parts of buildings are also attached, with a designation of their size for practical use.] St. Petersburg, [4], 40 p., 104 drawings. (In Russian).
7. Ton, K. A. (1838) Proekty cerkvej, sochinennye arhitektorom Eja Imperatorskogo Velichestva professorom Konstantinom Tonom. Dopolnenie. [Projects of churches composed by the architect of Her Imperial Majesty Professor Konstantin Ton.] St. Petersburg, 12 p.
8. Ton, K. A. (1838) Cerkvi, sochinennye arhitektorom Ego Imperatorskogo Velichestva professorom arhitektury Imperatorskoj Akademii hudozhestv i chlenom raznyh inostrannyh akademij Konstantinom Tonom.[Churches designed by the architect of His Imperial Majesty, professor of architecture at the Imperial Academy of Arts and a member of various foreign academies Konstantin Ton.] St. Petersburg, 70 p. + 17 drawings. (In Russian).

Gildina Tatiana

*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.

Kurochkin Mikhail