At the Hyperion bookstore, engineering historian and author of the blog “Moscow through the eyes of an engineer” Ayrat Bagautdinov gave another lecture on architecture “What should we build a temple?”
Using the example of the Kremlin's Assumption Cathedral, St. Basil's Cathedral and the Bell Tower of Ivan the Great, Airat Bagautdinov told the audience about how churches are built in the capital. From an engineering historian, guests learned where to get white stone and how to make bricks. Read the lecture notes below.
- About the first Assumption Cathedral
- The first Assumption Cathedral, made in stone, appears completely different from how we are used to seeing it today. It was built under Ivan Kalita. In 1326, Metropolitan Peter founded the Assumption Cathedral. We don't know what he looked like.
- They called in master stonemasons and sent them to the city of Vladimir to see that church and remove the measure from it. Of course, an example was the outstanding monument of Vladimir architecture - the Assumption Cathedral. And so our architects go to Vladimir on horseback. They are taking measurements of the existing monument, a copy of which they are going to build in Moscow: “We saw the temple of the Most Pure One, we were very surprised at its beauty and majesty, and measured its breadth and height.” After which they return to Moscow and begin preparing the construction site.
The Sofia Chronicle tells us who the builders of this temple were: Russian masters Ivashka Krivtsov and Myshkin. They were, apparently, direct producers of work or foremen. But still, the contractors were more senior people Vasily Dmitriev and Ivan Golova Vladimirov. And there was a quarrel between them, a dispute, as a result of which Vasily Dmitriev abandoned the outfit.
- Vasily Dmitriev is not a random figure. This is the first documented Russian architect named Ermolin. The chronicle is called Ermolinskaya because there is an assumption that it was he who wrote this chronicle, which is why it was all written in a slightly offended tone.
He was not so much an architect-builder as an architect-restorer. First the Kremlin. Now the year is 1471 - he is engaged in the reconstruction of the famous St. George Church in Yuryev-Polsky, which also dates back to the mid-12th century, had dilapidated by that time and was actually rebuilt.
- Krivtsov and Myshkin supervise the construction of the cathedral. But, apparently, the years of the Mongol yoke took their toll. Krivtsov and Myshkin failed to cope with such important work. It must be said that they did not take a literal copy of the Assumption Cathedral in Vladimir, but tried to make our cathedral larger in order to establish the priority of Moscow over Vladimir, by one and a half arshins, that is, by almost one and a half meters, the dimensions were larger in both width and length. The temple collapsed.
- Ivan the Great menacingly watches the picture of the collapsed Assumption Cathedral. And what does he order to do? He sends messengers to Rome for experienced craftsmen and sends them to Pskov for the local stonemasons, who were also quite experienced. Let us recall that the Pskov territories were almost not affected by the yoke, and they maintained a high level of technological development even under the Mongol-Tatars.
The Pskovites come and tell Ivan the Great this. They praised the work, but they blamed the lime: it’s liquid, they say, you dissolved it, “otherwise it’s not sticky.” Too much sand. The Pskovites, in modern terms, carried out an examination, but refused construction. Therefore, we began to wait until the master murol Aristotle Fioravanti came to us in 1475.
- The fact that he was invited to build the Assumption Cathedral is quite strange. At home, he was engaged exclusively in engineering work. He was from Bologna and in 1455 he moved the bell tower of the Church of Maria Maggiore. From 1468 to 1474 he served at the court of Duke Jean Galeazzo Sforza, who brought the Renaissance to Lombardy, who built for himself the famous palace Castello Sforzesco. Officially, the architect of this castle is the famous Italian architect Antonio Filarete.
1475 The first thing Fioravanti does is order to dismantle the existing cathedral, or rather, the remains of the Krivtsov and Myshkin Cathedral, in order to build a new one in its place. He laid out the same church in this way: he placed three trees (it looks most like a tripod, with the help of which you sometimes heat up water in a vat on a hike), and put their upper ends together, and hung oak beams across the middle of them on the tents, and the end He bound him with an iron hoop, and broke the rocking thing. That is, it was just a battering ram on a tripod, with which he broke the walls.
He picked up some of the walls from underneath and, replacing the logs, put everything on the logs. As one layer of facing masonry was broken and destroyed, he placed wooden logs here, which continued to bear the load from this wall. When these logs were placed around the entire perimeter, they lit them at once. And when all the logs collapsed at the same time, the wall immediately lost support along its entire perimeter and collapsed.
And finally he gets down to construction. “He ordered ditches to be dug again and oak stakes to be beaten.” That is, he first drives piles into the ground and then builds a white stone foundation on top of the piles.
Then Fioravanti goes to Vladimir. And this is one of my favorite moments in the entire Sofia Chronicle. “I went to Vladimir, looked at the Most Pure Church, praised the work and said: “Some of our masters are the work.” More than 300 years later, Fioravanti saw in the Assumption and Demetrius Cathedrals, which seemed completely Russian to us, the hand of Lombard architects. There is a version that Barbarossa sent architects precisely from Lombardy Aristotle decided to build from plinth.
- In 1479 the church was completed: “That church was very wonderful in its majesty and height, and lightness, and ringing, and space.” The columns in the Assumption Cathedral are round, unlike the columns of the traditional Russian cross-domed church.
The church was built in a ward manner. Cross-domed churches, traditional for Rus', borrowed from Byzantium, had an almost square shape in plan. And usually the central nave was somewhat wider in order to accommodate the dominant central drum above it. Smaller drums were installed in the corners, as was the case in the Assumption Cathedral, or there were none at all, as in this temple
What happened in Europe? In Europe at this time, the dominant type of temple was the basilica - a temple consisting of three or more naves. The hall type of the temple has several naves, also of different widths, the central ones are wider, and the side ones are narrower, but their height is the same. This was the main feature. The Assumption Cathedral became just such a hall-type temple, which was completely uncharacteristic for Rus'.
- The most typical vault for Rus' is a cylindrical or box vault. It is essentially an elongated arch. Other popular vaults are built, one way or another, on a combination, at some intersection of a box vault.
Another common vault, quite familiar to us, is the cross vault: two intersecting half-cylinders. And the closed vault is also two intersecting cylinders, in fact, they just have everything superfluous cut off, and the segments of the two cylinders form those same four petals, closing at one point.
The Assumption Cathedral becomes the first church after many centuries to again use cross vaults, rather than the simpler box vaults that began to be built everywhere during the Mongol invasion.
- The Assumption Cathedral is the first cathedral in which, after a long break, cross vaults are used, in which metal rather than wooden anchors are used to compensate for horizontal thrust, in which brick, good lime-sand mortar, even smooth backfill masonry are used, in which piles are used as foundations, that is, mechanization methods are used during construction and much more.
- The first recorded brick building in Moscow dates back to 1473, that is, two years before the events described - these are the chambers of Metropolitan Gerontius. But how they got bricks back then is unclear. There were no factories. At least they are not described in any source.
But the first plant, documented, was built by Aristotle Fioravanti. “He ordered the lime to be stirred thickly with hoes, and when it dries in the morning, it is impossible to split it with a knife.” Fioravanti introduces the technology of very high-quality slaking of lime in order to increase its astringent properties.
- Once upon a time, the sea roared on the territory of the Moscow state. This sea is now called Myachkovskoe. It received this name already in the 20th century from the names of the villages - Nizhneye and Verkhnee Myachkovo, where the stone known as Myachkovo limestone was mined.
Where Vladimir and Suzdal are located, the limestone lies quite deep - 400 meters. Of course, at that time it was impossible to dig to such a depth, so it was mined where it was easier to do it, where there was a horizontal strip. At this point the limestone comes to the surface. This is just the Moscow region: Pakhra, Myachkovo, Podolsk, Zvenigorod, Volokolamsk.
White stone was exported from here in ancient times, when Moscow, perhaps, did not yet exist.
It could be mined using closed or open methods. In particular, at the Syana quarries. - A large number of famous buildings in North-Eastern Rus' are made from Myachkovo limestone located near Moscow. This is the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl, this is the Dmitrievsky Cathedral in Vladimir, this is the Nativity Cathedral in Suzdal. And once upon a time our white-stone Moscow Kremlin was also made of it.
- It is a lightweight material, soft, which means it is easy to mine. They mined it simply with a pickaxe and a crowbar. It serves as a natural waterproofing - it does not allow water to pass through, paradoxically. It has good frost resistance. It does not absorb water, which means, unlike brick, it cannot be destroyed in winter, when the water in it freezes and increases in volume.
- It would be more correct to call it the Church of the Intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Monument in honor of the capture of Kazan. Actually, let’s turn to the chronicle: “That same fall, the 54th year in the yard, Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich ordered the erection of a temple to the Most Pure Queen of the Mother of God of her honest and glorious Intercession with chapels about the Kazan victory.”
What is important for us is this remark: “And before this, in the same places there were churches with a moat.” That is, the temple was not built like this all at once, but first it was built as a single-altar Church of the Intercession of the Mother of God, that is, not nine churches, but one small wooden church. There were also churches next to it, and as you probably know, if you demolish a church, then in the place where its consecrated altar was located, you must either put a cross, as we often see when we travel along the outskirts of Russia, or put another church .
This is where this multi-throne Church of the Intercession on the moat comes from; nine temples were built on the site of former wooden churches and the central Church of the Intercession in honor of the Kazan victory. Why is the temple in honor of the Kazan victory - the capture of Kazan happened from October 1 to 2. This date then fell on the day of the Intercession of the Mother of God. It was decided that it would be inappropriate to build a wooden church in honor of such an event, and that it should be rebuilt in stone.
- For a long time it was not known who these people were. At the end of the 19th century, one of the researchers of the history of St. Basil's Cathedral finds a 17th century chronicle in which names are named. This was the first source that named the names of the builders “according to the river Postnik and Barm.” And since Kuzmin found this source, the debate has not stopped about who they are: Postnik and Barma. Were they different people or the same person? Some of them may be Italian. In general, there is still no clear understanding of who built it.
The same researcher discovered another chronicle, Piskarev’s so-called chronicler, where a slightly different formulation is found: “And the master was Barmas comrades.” No Faster is mentioned here anymore. This brought even greater confusion into the matter of unraveling the authorship of the Church of the Intercession on the moat.
If we don’t know anything at all about Barma other than these two chronicle references, then we know a little more about Postnik. A man named Postnik Yakovlev was sent to Kazan in 1556 to build the Kazan Kremlin to replace the destroyed Tatar one, which was made of wood and earth. This is weird. In 1555, construction of the cathedral began, and suddenly in 1556 it was sent to Kazan. How could he be the builder of the cathedral? Some researchers find a compromise version here. They say that maybe he started building, then gave the task to his people to build, and he himself went to Kazan. Maybe, maybe not.
- In 1559, on the Day of the Intercession, October 1, the chapels were consecrated. The cathedral was built in the traditional color scheme for the architecture of the times of Ivan the Terrible, that is, it was whitewashed and had gilded domes, and it acquired its modern appearance already during the time of Alexei Mikhailovich. The bell tower now is not at all the same tented bell tower, also characteristic of the times of Alexei Mikhailovich. Initially, it was like a Pskov belfry, which tells us that Pskov craftsmen were involved in the construction.
Another loss - once at the base of the central tent of the Church of the Intercession there were such small candles, small domes, which were subsequently lost, unfortunately. It was decided not to restore them during the restoration.
- The Church of the Intercession on the Moat actually consists of nine separate temples. The central pillar is the Church of the Intercession on the Moat in honor of the capture of Kazan. Four more temples are located on the sides of this peculiar square, and four slightly smaller ones are located in the corners. Many of them are consecrated in honor of saints, whose celebrations coincided with some major events related to the six-month siege of Kazan.
The pillars are connected by a brick gallery. Somewhere the brick gallery is simply covered with a box vault, and somewhere – an engineering miracle – a flat ceiling.
And the last engineering detail - all nine pillars rest on a single basement, as it is called at the temple, but we are not even interested in a single basement. The walls in the basement are massive enough to support the load. That is, the basement together with the foundation (let’s make this analogy) is approaching what is called a box foundation today.
- The Church of the Intercession on the Moat has become somewhat more modest in terms of engineering innovations, but here, too, the suspended decorative ceiling, perhaps not so much in engineering as in architectural terms, is absolutely interesting, as well as the slab foundation dating back to the beginning of the 16th century, which will be there next time used only in the construction of Stalinist high-rise buildings. 450 years passed between St. Basil's Cathedral and the widespread use of such foundations.
- The idea of a tent first appeared in architecture in 1532 in Kolomenskoye, in the Ascension Church, which was built, most likely (although this is still a controversial point), by the Italian master Petrak Maly. In this sense, the tent is a rather irrational structure, since as we release the stones, we shift the center of gravity of the inclined wall, and it, of course, tends to fall and collapse inward. That is why it is necessary to make the tents so high that the walls are steep enough for them to still hold up.
- The advantage of the vault may be that it is easier to lay, although this causes unnecessary consumption of bricks - you have to pay for everything. Why is it easier to lay - there is no need to cut stones, they are simply laid with an overlap and, probably, also because it is very steep, precipitation does not linger on it. Therefore, it does not support virtually any load other than its own weight. But its steepness leads to unnecessary consumption of material.
I think that the transition to tent coverings from traditional vaulted ones was rather a tribute to fashion. More of an architectural detail than an element justified from an engineering point of view. In this sense, Patriarch Nikon was a warrior for rational engineering; when he prohibited the construction of tented churches, he nevertheless gravitated towards domed ones.
- A dome is also an arch, only wrapped around its own axis. It works almost exactly the same as an arch. It is built of brick, and people are already using it almost everywhere. Only the foundation and basement floors are built from white stone, that is, basements, roughly speaking, since limestone does not conduct water well, it is a natural waterproofer. Therefore, those parts of buildings that are in the ground, and therefore come into contact with groundwater and precipitation, are made of it. Moreover, this tradition was preserved until the revolution.
- Construction of the bell tower begins in 1429. Three years after the foundation of the Assumption Cathedral under Ivan Kalita, not far from it, the Church of John Climacus was founded, as the chronicler says, “like the bells.” At that time there were no bell towers as usual to us, and churches were often built in the drum of which the same arched openings were built, into which bells were mounted. The Church of John Climacus was such a church. In 1505, on the site of the old Church of St. John the Climacus, it was decided to build a new church, already pillar-shaped.
In 1505, John the Great, John III, dies. His son Vasily III ascends the throne, and it is in honor of the patron saint of his father that he decides to rebuild and ennoble the Church of St. John the Climacus. Built by architect Bon Fryazin. Apart from the construction of the Church of St. John the Climacus and the bell tower of Ivan the Great, we know nothing more about it.
- When it was completed it had a slightly different shape than it does today. According to the fashion of that time, the church was built of brick, as usual, but some of the blades were highlighted with whitewash, and the walls, most likely, were also plastered, and painted over the plaster, and the paint was cut into brick.
The walls where they take less load were thinner, and where they take more load they were thicker.
- Plaster performs not only a decorative function. Plaster also protects the brick from the effects of atmospheric precipitation, so it was necessary to plaster it anyway, but I wanted to have a brick texture, so they already painted it over the plaster.
- They begin in 1532. And the architect Petrak Maly, already known to us, is engaged in the reconstruction. Its first recorded mention in chronicles was in 1532. He rebuilds the Assumption Church, now known to us as the Assumption Belfry.
Both the Assumption Belfry and the Filaret Annex were blown up during Napoleon's retreat from Moscow in 1812, and then rebuilt. What we see today looks exactly the same and is a recreation, although 200 years have passed and can be considered a historical monument. But in the original, only the form of the Church of St. John the Climacus was preserved, known to us today as the Ivan the Great Bell Tower. It was built at the beginning of the 16th century, soundly, firmly, thickly, with huge margins of safety, as engineers would say. She survived the explosion.
- We tend to consider this form more like a bell tower than a temple. Perhaps one of the prototypes was a chapel. Even for a bell tower, this form was unusual, because bell towers were then built in the form of belfries, in the form of walls with bells. One of the first belfries in the form of a single pillar was the chapel in Novgorod, built in the middle of the 15th century.
About how Krivtsov and Myshkin went to measure the Vladimir Church
About how vindictive the first Russian architect was
How to measure Moscow's priority in arshins
What Pskov experts blasphemed and praised
About the collapse of the works of Krivtsov and Myshkin and about the sharp eye of Aristotle
About the architectural features of the Assumption Cathedral
On the revival of cross vaults during the construction of the Assumption Cathedral
About innovations used during the construction of the Assumption Cathedral
About bricks of unknown origin and the appearance of more viscous lime
About how white stone is and where it is mined
About famous buildings made of Myachkovo limestone
About methods of extracting limestone and the advantages of its use
About St. Basil's Cathedral and its predecessors
About the controversy surrounding the personalities of Barma and Postnik
About how unusual the cathedral looked before
About the nine pillars and single basement of St. Basil's Cathedral
About what St. Basil's Cathedral and Stalin's skyscrapers have in common
About unstable tents
About the fashion for hipped ceilings and the features of vaults
About why the dome is an arch, and the reason for using white stone on the ground floors.
About Vasily III's tribute to his father, Ivan the Great
About the original appearance of the bell tower of Ivan the Great
About the functional features of plaster
About the first reconstruction of the Church of St. John Climacus
About where the round shape of the temple came from
The temple on Russian soil has long been, and to this day, the center of church life and Orthodox culture. Many temples have been preserved on the territory of Russia, some were erected in ancient times. Today we will talk about how temples were built.
Wooden temples
In 988, under Prince Vladimir, the Baptism of Rus' took place, and the very next year Greek architects arrived from Constantinople to Kyiv, who founded the first stone church. It was the holy Prince Vladimir who became the first Russian Christian prince who gave a decree that after the baptism of the people and the Russian land, architects began to cut down churches in Russian cities.
This is how wooden temples began to appear. But the most ancient chronicle sources claim that wooden churches in Rus' were built long before Epiphany. Wooden temples have always been easier to build than stone ones, since the material for construction was more accessible. Moreover, wooden architecture has long flourished in Rus' and Slavic craftsmen built temples almost by eye, without using precise measurements and complex architectural plans.
Stone temples
However, after Epiphany, the first stone churches began to appear in Rus'. In 989, the year after the Baptism of Rus', Greek architects who arrived from Constantinople in Kyiv laid the foundation for the first stone temple of the Old Russian state - the Church of the Tithes.
This church was erected by the holy Equal-to-the-Apostles Prince Vladimir on the site of the death of the first martyrs Theodore and his son John. During the construction of the Tithe Church, it was the largest Kyiv temple. From the chronicles, information has reached our days that the Tithe Church was called “marble”, since the interior of the temple was richly decorated with marble.
In 996, the construction of the Tithe Church was completed and the temple was solemnly consecrated. The long-standing tradition of donating to the temple convinced Prince Vladimir to donate tithes to the erected church, after which it was remembered in the chronicles as Tithes.
After the construction of the first stone church, other stone churches began to be built. It is important that it was in the image of the Church of the Tithes that the subsequent main churches of Russian cities and monasteries were built.
Where were the temples built?
Together with the Baptism of Rus' and the beginning of the construction of churches on Russian soil, a new life began. For a long time, on the site of a future settlement, and primarily a city, architects were looking for a special place to build a temple - not every land was suitable for this. First of all, the builders were looking for land that was not swampy or too dry for construction.
Moreover, the temple had to be built in a prominent place, in the main part of the settlement, so that every resident could reach it. The temple was necessarily built on an elevated, “red” place, which meant the most beautiful one.
So, first of all, the temple was built, and only after that a settlement began to grow around it. The church occupied the most important role in the life of Russian people, living both in cities and in villages.
People gathered in church for services on Sundays and other days; the Russian people always went to church on great church holidays. There, in the churches, children were baptized, newlyweds were married and funeral services were held for deceased relatives.
Moreover, thanksgiving and petitionary prayers were served in churches, and public meetings gathered near the temple.
Architecture and construction of temples of Ancient Rus'
The main type of construction of an Orthodox church is a cross-domed one. It was this type of temple that dominated the architecture of Ancient Rus'. It was this type that was erected the first stone church - Tithes.
From ancient times to this day, in Rus' and in modern Russia, temples and cathedrals have been built and restored according to the construction projects of cross-domed churches. The technique of constructing stone cross-domed churches was borrowed by the architects of Ancient Rus' from Byzantium.
Since the first churches after Epiphany were built by invited craftsmen, their work laid the foundation for the tradition of building churches under the influence of Byzantine architecture. However, soon, when Russian architects themselves began to build stone churches, their own, traditionally Russian, local style was added to the Byzantine style, which remained forever in Orthodox churches.
Since churches in Rus' played a vital role for Orthodox people, all the best was collected to decorate the churches. Temples were decorated with gold and precious stones. One of the most valuable elements of each temple were the icons, which were painted by talented icon painters.
Churches in Rus' were also built from bricks, but before that, in most cases, plinth was used for construction.
Russian craftsmen adopted plinth masonry from Byzantine builders. And until the 15th century, plinth was mainly used in the construction of churches in Rus'.
Plinth is a fired brick with approximately equal sides. Its size was usually 40x40 cm in length and width. The thickness of the brick was 2.5-4 cm, and the brick itself was light pink. Usually the plinths were held together with a thick layer of mortar, giving the building a striped appearance.
The mortars that were used for the construction of the temple, connecting the rows of plinths, were a mixture of lime, sand and crushed brick. It is known that more people built from plintha in the south of Russia, and in the north, closer to Kyiv, they preferred stone.
Later, at the end of the 15th century, a new material appeared in Rus' - brick. These are molded bricks, reminiscent of modern ones. Since such brick was cheaper and much more accessible than stone, it became widespread for the construction of temples.
The brick was fired by the builders, and a special sign was placed on it, indicating the classification of bricks for laying in a specific place of construction.
Meanwhile, wooden temples also did not stop building. However, the architecture of wooden churches also changed. All over Rus' they began to build single-domed churches, erected by builders on a powerful, massive square.
Each temple took a different amount of time to build. The simplest temple could take about a year to build, while more complex ones could take more than six years. Everything depended on the number of craftsmen building the temple.
Wooden churches in Rus' were built faster, since wooden architecture had long been developed in Rus'. The construction of stone and brick churches required more time; for example, the Church of the Tithes took about seven years to build. Other temples with more complex designs and expensive materials could take more than ten years to build.
The small temple was erected by builders and craftsmen, of whom there were at least 10-12 people. Much more craftsmen, about thirty, were invited to build large temples.
To whom were the temples dedicated?
Temples in Ancient Rus' were dedicated to the Life-Giving Trinity, Christ the Savior, the Mother of God, as well as numerous saints. Moreover, many churches were dedicated to great church holidays - the Intercession and Dormition of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Ascension of the Lord and many others.
Soon, in Ancient Rus', a tradition arose of erecting monument temples in places where particularly important, memorable events took place - military victories, great battles or the deaths of those who laid down their lives for their faith and the Fatherland.
Video
Video: Vladimir Budko
The famous colorful Church of the Intercession on the Moat, one of the main attractions of Moscow, was erected in 1555-1561 to commemorate the capture of Kazan by Russian troops in 1552. It was consecrated in honor of the holiday of the Intercession because the attack of Russian troops on Kazan began on this very day. We are accustomed to perceiving the cathedral as one, but in fact it consists of ten independent churches. Hence the bizarre, unique appearance of the entire cathedral, or, better said, the temple complex.
Initially, there were nine churches, with the central one dedicated to the Protection of the Virgin Mary, and the remaining eight to a specific holiday or saint, on whose day one or another memorable event occurred related to the siege of Kazan. In 1588, a church was added to the complex over the burial place of the famous Moscow Blessed Basil, and this is the only one that has the right to be called, in the strict sense of the word, the Church of St. Basil.
So, we will talk about the Intercession Multi-Church Cathedral, as it was built in 1555-1561. In many books, even in our time, you can read that its construction was carried out under the supervision of two masters - Barma and Posnik. There are, however, versions that the construction was supervised by unknown Italian masters. But it has no documentary evidence and no argumentation, except for the unusual appearance of the cathedral. N.M. Karamzin rashly called the style of the Intercession Cathedral “Gothic,” but this is absolutely incorrect from an art criticism point of view, and only the authority of the “first Russian historiographer” allows some to still insist on the foreign authorship of the original St. Basil’s Cathedral.
Where did the idea come from that the construction was supervised by two masters?
In 1896, priest Ivan Kuznetsov published an excerpt from a handwritten collection then kept in the Rumyantsev Museum. This collection was compiled no earlier than the end of the 17th - beginning of the 18th century. It contains “The Legend of the Transfer of the Miraculous Image of Nicholas the Wonderworker,” which was a royal gift to the Intercession Cathedral. This late legend says that Tsar Ivan the Terrible, soon after the capture of Kazan, erected seven wooden churches around a larger, eighth, stone one, near the Frolovsky Gate (i.e., from the 17th century, the gate of the Kremlin’s Spasskaya Tower). “And then God gave him two Russian masters, nicknamed Barma and Postnik, who were wise and suitable for such a wonderful work.” This information about the “two masters” was taken for granted by most historians.
But the legend, which reinterpreted the old legend, was not a chronicle text. In addition, let us recall that the expression “by nickname” in the Russian language of that time, as now, meant only a person’s nickname, and not his own name. A barma could be called a skilled craftsman, since barma are mantles on the clothes of kings and spiritual dignitaries, richly and variously decorated and requiring skillful and careful execution. Posnik, or Postnik, is a proper name. Therefore, it is not logical that in the “Tale” the first master is named only by a nickname without a name, and the second - only by a name without a nickname.
More reliable can be considered the text from the “Russian Chronicler from the beginning of the Russian land to the accession to the throne of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich,” written in the first half of the 17th century, that is, much closer in time to the event of interest to us. In it we read: “In the same year, by order of the Tsar and Sovereign and Grand Duke Ivan, a church was started, promised for the capture of Kazan in honor of the Trinity and the Intercession..., and the master was Barma and his comrades.” Only one architect is named here, but, obviously, not due to ignorance of the name of the second master (Posnik), but because it was the same person.
Subsequently, another source was found indicating that the names Posnik and Barma actually refer to one, and not two, individuals. It follows from it that the manuscript of the Code of Laws of 1550 belonged until 1633 to the monastery solicitor, the Moscow serviceman Druzhina. Druzhina was the son of Tarutia and the grandson of Posnik, who had the nickname Barma. The matter seems completely clear: two mythical masters, one of whom was called Barma, and the other - Posnik, are united into one historical person - Posnik (this, of course, is not a baptismal name, but something like a modern surname) nicknamed Barma, which meant that this a person skilled in crafts.
Moreover, the architect Postnik of that time is known for the construction of a number of other buildings, namely: the Kazan Kremlin, St. Nicholas and Assumption Cathedrals in Sviyazhsk. However, this fact, brilliantly proven back in 1957 by the domestic archaeologist N.F. Kalinin, are still ignored by many historians and art critics who, out of habit, talk about Barma and Postnik as the two builders of the Intercession Cathedral.
Today we are told that the famous Cologne Cathedral in the German city of Cologne was supposedly built over several hundred years, (construction of the Cologne Cathedral in the Middle Ages. On the left is an unfinished tower with an overhanging wooden crane. Taken from).
It is believed that construction began in the Middle Ages, allegedly in the 4th century AD. . Then the cathedral was allegedly rebuilt many times, and nothing has survived from these “early cathedrals” today. The Gothic cathedral began to be built on this site allegedly in 1248. They even name the exact date: August 15, 1248. It is further suggested that the construction was "substantially" completed in the 16th century, around 1560. Then this huge medieval cathedral was supposedly only partially restored and slightly renovated, but overall its appearance changed little (modern view of the Cologne Cathedral. City of Cologne, Germany. Taken from).
How valid is this point of view? When was the cathedral we see today built? Are we really seeing a medieval building, the main part of which was created in the 13th–16th centuries?
The figure reproduces a diagram from the technical brochure, clearly showing which parts of the cathedral consist of medieval masonry and which were built in the last two centuries. The full title of the brochure is: “Gefahr fϋr den Kölner Dom. Bild-Documentation zur Verwitterung. Auszug aus dem Kölner Dom- Lese- and Bilderbuch. Professor Dr. Arnold Wolff”, the brochure is intended for specialists interested in the details of conservation and restoration of stone structures. Printed in Cologne and can be obtained inside Cologne Cathedral.
What can be seen from this map-scheme of the cathedral? The oldest masonry, namely the masonry of 1248-1560, is shown in the diagram with horizontal shading. All other masonry, depicted in seven other ways - oblique shading, dotted, etc. - date back to an era later than 1826!
Chronology of the masonry of Cologne Cathedral. Taken from the technical brochure “Gefahr fϋr den Kölner Dom. Bild-Documentation zur Verwitterung. Auszug aus dem Kölner Dom- Lese- and Bilderbuch. Professor Dr. Arnold Wolff. We received this brochure in the Cologne Cathedral itself. It is amazing that the oldest medieval masonry from 1248-1560, that is, the horizontal shading in the drawing, makes up only a small part of the modern building. In fact, this is only half the foundation of the cathedral. Yes and even then. this surviving medieval foundation consists of two parts, quite far apart. The rest of the masonry, that is, the vast majority of the volume of the modern building, appeared here only at the beginning of the 19th century! In particular, the diagram completely lacks masonry from the era of 1560-1825. Does this mean that in the era from 1560 to 1825, that is, about two hundred and fifty years, no work was carried out at all? Or did they not lead to a noticeable change in the structure of the cathedral walls?
Thus, German historians and archaeologists tell us quite unequivocally that the cathedral that we see today was actually completely built in the 19th century! But in this case, on what basis does Scaligerian history assure us that before our eyes is a medieval temple? Perhaps someone will say: well, let the cathedral be almost entirely created in the 19th century. But it almost certainly reproduces the medieval original that stood on this site since the 13th century.
What are the grounds for such a hypothesis? - we will say. Are there authentic medieval drawings depicting Cologne Cathedral earlier than the 17th century? It seems that there are simply no such original drawings dating back to the 17th century. In any case, in the same brochure by Arnold Wolf there is only an engraving from 1834-1836 depicting the Cologne Cathedral. Interestingly, it shows a cathedral very similar to the modern one. In the album on p. 21 is shown, apparently the oldest, only an engraving from 1809 depicting the cathedral. In our opinion, this only means that the construction of the cathedral in its modern form began only in the 19th century. Which, in fact, is what the masonry diagram we presented above states. Construction began around 1820 and was largely completed around 1835. That is about 15 years. An engraving from 1834-1836 recorded the last stage of the creation of the temple. Then, in the 19th and 20th centuries, it was actually restored and rebuilt several times, but its appearance changed slightly.
There were probably some traces of an ancient building on the site of the modern Cologne Cathedral. After all, the drawing shows some mysterious masonry in some parts of the foundation, supposedly dating from the era of 1248-1560. However, from the same diagram it clearly follows that this ancient medieval masonry was used, among other things, as a building material during the subsequent construction of the cathedral in the 19th century. Take another look at Fig. 49. The left tower of the cathedral in its lower part is lined with stones of the 19th century, between which in some places there are stones of the 13th-16th centuries! And the upper half of this tower, like, by the way, the second tower, was entirely created only in the 19th century. Thus, the ancient medieval building, which was on the site of the modern Cologne Cathedral, was dismantled in the 19th century, and its material was used to construct a virtually new building.
So, we would like to ask historians and archaeologists the following questions.
1) Are there any authentic medieval drawings depicting Cologne Cathedral, or the building that stood in its place earlier than the 17th century?
2) Is it true that the modern Cologne Cathedral is “similar” to the medieval temple that stood here earlier than the 19th or 18th century? Our hypothesis: if some kind of temple stood here, it was not similar to what we see today. For example, it was significantly smaller.
Why are there no noticeable traces of masonry from 1560-1825 in the walls of the modern Cologne Cathedral? Doesn't this mean that construction actually began only in the 19th century? On the site of some small building from the 13th-16th centuries. By the way, how reliably is the masonry dating back to the 13th-16th centuries dated? Or maybe these stones were placed here much later, say, in the 17th-18th centuries? By the way, let’s ask another interesting question: how exactly do modern archaeologists date a fragment of stonework? How do they know that a given stone was placed in the wall of the cathedral in such and such a year, and not in some other?
In conclusion, let us make a general remark about the strange duration of construction of many famous buildings of the European Middle Ages. According to Scaligerian history, they took a very, very long time to build. For many hundreds of years. For example, Strasbourg Munster. At one time it was the tallest building in Europe. We are told that construction began allegedly in 1015, and was completed only in 1275. It turns out that it took 260 years to build. Erwin von Steinbach's tower, under Münster, supposedly took 162 years to build. The historian Kohlrausch reasonably notes “... therefore, the entire building (of Münster - Author) took 424 years to build.” Almost half a millennium!
Kohlrausch could not pass by the supposedly very long construction of the Cologne Cathedral. Apparently. Realizing that such a strangely long duration needs to be explained, he writes the following: “Cologne Cathedral, founded in 1248... construction lasted 250 years. such slowness,” Kohlrausch theorizes, “is explained by the fact that thousands of images are carved on its stones.” As we begin to understand, the point is not in the images, but in the incorrect Scaligerian chronology, which artificially extended the construction time for many centuries.
A.T. Fomenko. “Four hundred years of deception. Mathematics allows us to look into the past.” – M.: Astrey; AST; Vladimir: VKT, 2010. – 350 p.
For almost 55 years now, the Spaniard Justo Gallego has been building the cathedral with his own hands, without the help of builders, architects or even cranes. Justo independently attaches every detail of the cathedral to the building, and assures that faith in God can help him complete this grandiose structure.
"When I started building the cathedral, everyone around me thought I was crazy. They didn't believe that I could be so committed to my work. Well, I proved them wrong." Justo Gallego Martínez began construction of the cathedral on October 12, 1961, the feast day of Our Lady of Pilar. This was his personal promise to God. For some time before this date, Justo was seriously ill with tuberculosis. On the one hand, he almost despaired of waiting for recovery, and on the other, he believed that God would not leave him. And then he promised that if he managed to recover, he would build a cathedral in honor of the Virgin of Pilar.
“When I look at the cathedral, I am filled with joy. This is the most visual proof of what faith can inspire. I have never studied architecture, I am a simple worker. I don’t need anything materially. I don’t need money either. I got rid of everything, even from my home. It’s unlikely that the cathedral will be finished in my lifetime; there’s still so much to do. I only hope that after my death, someone will take care of my cathedral. And let me be buried here, in the cathedral.”
Finishing the cathedral will be quite problematic, since Gallego keeps the plan of the building exclusively in his head, and even then, this plan sometimes has to be changed, depending on Gallego’s capabilities and his inspiration. For construction, Gallego uses recyclable materials, partially purchasing them at relatively low prices, and partially accepting them as gifts from construction companies. The columns, for example, only look durable from the outside - they are actually made from gasoline drums.
Sometimes Gallego is helped by his nephews, sometimes by volunteers, but for the most part he does all the work himself. Every day he starts his work at 6 am and works until late at night. Naturally, people wonder where he gets the money for construction. Some of it is covered by private donations, but Gallego mostly spends the money he receives from renting inherited land.
Gallego is building a cathedral on his own land without official building permission, without the blessing or support of the Catholic Church. After several documentaries were made about this cathedral and Gallego’s dedicated work, tourists began to come here to the town of Mejorada del Campo. And although not all residents approve of the construction of this cathedral, Gallego continues to work on its creation today.
