Cathedral of Saint Demetrius

Home , Suzdal

MASARYKOVA UNIVERZITA FILOZOFICKÁ FAKULTA SEMINÁŘ DĚJIN UMĚNÍ

Lucie Lienerová

Bakalářská práce

Vedoucí práce:

prof. Ivan Foletti, MA, Docteur ès Lettres

Brno, 2021

I hereby declare that I worked on this bachelor’s thesis on my own and that I

used only sources listened in the bibliography.

______

At this point I would like to express my gratitude to all who supported me at writing of this thesis, who gave me advices, help and who provided me with materials necessary for its completion. First and foremost, I must thank to my thesis supervisor professor Ivan Foletti who supported my choice of topic, provided me with crucial recommendations and who devoted to the thesis a lot of time and effort. From the very begining, the most important for me and my research was the support of my mother who willingly helped my studying Russian language and who patiently translated with me literature written in Russian at the time when I was not able to do so on my own. Without her, my research would not even begin. Further, I would like to express my gratefulness to those who provided me with essential sources without which I would not be able to complete the thesis. In this context I own my big thanks to my father, to Ing. Andrey Maratovich Novik and especially big thanks to Dr. Igor N. Titov for his helpfulness. Big thanks belong also to my friends for their belief in my skills. I would like to mention particularly Galina Prokudina for her support in translating Russian and old Russian texts and terms. Finally, I must express my very profound gratitude to everyone who spent their time on corrections of my text and in this context, I own my big thanks to my friend Michaela Patrovská.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction ...... 1 2. The State of Research ...... 2 2.1. Summary……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..20 3. Architectural Description and Restoration Interventions ……………………………………………………22 3.1. Description of Architecture …………………………………………………………………………………22 3.2. Description of Relief Embellishment…………………………………………………………………….26 3.3. Restoration Interventions ……………………………………………………………………………………30 4. Dating ………………………………………………….………………………………………………….………………………..35 4.1. Dating of Architecture …………………………………………………………………………………………35 4.1.1. Contextualization …………………………………………………………………………………40 4.2. Dating of Relief Embellishment …………………………………………………………………………..48 4.2.1. Formal Analysis and Sources ………………………………………………………………..49 4.2.2. Contextualization …………………………………………………………………………………54 4.3. Dating of Mural Paintings ……………………………………………………………………………………57 4.3.1 Formal Analysis and Dating…………………………………………………………………….58 5. Contextualization and Iconography …………………………………………………………………………………..66 5.1. Andrey Bogolyubskiy and the Political Situation at the time of the Construction of the First Churches ………………………………………………………………………………………………………66 5.2. The Iconography of the Churches (1158–1167) ………………………………………………….69 5.3. The Iconography of the Saint Demetrius cathedral ……………………………………………..70 6. Conclusion ………………………………………………….…………………………………………………………………….73 7. Literary Sources and Bibliography ………………………………………………….………………………………….75 7.1. Chronicles …………………………………………………………………………………………………………..75 7.2. Reports from Archives …………………………………………………………………………………………75 7.3. Bibliography – Latin …………………………………………………………………………………………….76 7.4. Bibliography – Cyrillic ………………………………………………………………………………………….81 8. List of Images …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….87

1. Introduction

The cathedral of Saint Demetrius was built in 90’s of 12th century on the court of Vsevolod the Big Nest (1177–1212).1 However, the court itself has not preserved to our time and the cathedral, situated in the centre of city Vladimir above the river Kljazma, is nowadays standing solitary. In proximity to the edifice, we can find the Dormition cathedral and the Rozhdestvensky monastery.2 The edifice is based on the basic cross-domed ground plan, with a triple apse and four piers supporting a single cupola which remains firmly in the tradition of Byzantine church as adapted in early medieval Rus.3 In the contrary with this, its building method using cut limestones as masonry has not emerged at any area of Rus’ on such a scale as in the North- Eastern Rus’.4 The cathedral is distinguished by diverse carved relief motives which almost entirely fill up its outer walls. Although, the cathedral was and still is elaborately studied, there were not find satisfying answers on most of the questions regarding the origin of the relief embellishment and the mural paintings, the dating of its architecture and its overall iconography. In this thesis a study of the cathedral begins with the description of architecture, relief embellishment and restoration interventions. It further focuses on the dating of the architecture in relation to the formerly adjacent palace court. For finding analogies to carved reliefs and mural paintings, establishing their dating, and incorporating them to broader context will be employed the formal analysis. In order to determine the iconological interpretation will be, in the fifth chapter, the cathedral’s establishment putted into broader context of political activities on Kievan Rus’ since the end of 50’s of 12th century and iconography of its facades will be also examined in the context of palace buildings and visibility of carved reliefs.

1 In Russian terminology sobor means also the main or the great church in a town or in a monastery, it is translating as temple or cathedral, without regard whether it has a cathedra or not. Saint Demetrius cathedral does not possess cathedra. Miloslava Šroufková – Rostislav Pleský – Marta Vencovská, entry собор, Rusko- český a česko-ruský slovník, Praha 1988, p. 479; S.I. Ozhegov, entry собор, Slovar’ russkogo yazyka, Moskva 1981, p. 658. 2 I.I. Shulus – N.V. Kipriyanova – N.V. Myagtina – V.A. Chernirkina, Gubernskiy gorod Vladimir v posledney treti XVIII – pervoy polovine XIX, Ocherki povsednevnoy provintsial’noy zhizni, Vladimir 2008, p. 173. 3 Williem Craft Brumfield, A History of Russian Architecture, Seattle 2004, p. 46; Dmitriy Olegovich Shvidkovski, Russian Architecture and the West, New Heaven 2007, p. 31. 4 Brumfield (note 3), p. 44; Shvidkovski (note 3), p. 29. 1

2. The State of Research

There are not many comprehensive studies focused on the cathedral of Saint Demetrius, though essays concentrating on a single issue are more common. The façade iconography, the origin of relief embellishment and white stone architecture, these questions are all discussed in broader studies focusing on the building activity at North-Eastern Rus’. This chapter is introducing primary the studies focusing consistently on the Saint Demetrius cathedral.

In his series of historical books, Vasiliy Nikitich Tatishchev (1686–1750) states the origin for the unique architecture on North-Eastern Rus’, characterized by its relief embellishment, comes from the Holy Roman Empire. For its first preserved monument, Dormition cathedral, established in 1158 on request of prince Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174), he implies that the masters were sent from Frederic I Barbarossa (1152–1190), with whom Andrey was in friendship.5 Although he did not prove his claim with any sources, his statement is present from 19th century essays as well as in nowadays essays, as will be shown later.

Vasiliy Ivanovich Dobrokhotov (1814–1857) wrote a book in 1849 about the monuments in Vladimir, the Dormition cathedral and Saint Demetrius cathedral.6 He believed the cathedral of Saint Demetrius was established after Rozhdestvenskiy monastyr’, completed in year 1191, and was built in between years 1191–1197.7 Dobrokhotov assumed the edifice to be surrounded by the court buildings from the south and the north, which were connected with narrow passages, the same way as at Bogolyubovo court. He describes that the extensions, torn down in 1838–1839, were of the same kind as the cathedral.8 Furthermore, he delineates there were the same sculpted reliefs on one of the extensions as they are on the cathedral. Nevertheless, he supposed the extensions came from the era of Ivan the Terrible (1547–1584).9 He thought that the exterior relief embellishment depicted the words

5 V.H. Tatishchev, Istoriya Rossiyskaya s samykh drevneyshikh vremen, kn. 3., Moskva 1774, pp. 127, 487. 6 V.I. Dobrokhotov, Pamyatniki drevnosti vo Vladimire Klyazemskom, Moskva 1849. 7 Ibidem, pp. 139–140. 8 Ibidem, pp. 142–143. 9 Ibidem, p. 146. 2 of David; “Let everything that has breath praise the Lord”.10 He also believed that the murals, uncovered during restorations in 1838–1839, came from 15th century due to their similarities with the murals in Dormition cathedral painted by Andrey Rublev and Daniel Chorny in same century.11

In the same year, 1849, Sergey Grigor’yevich Stroganov (1794–1882) wrote his comprehensive essay on the Saint Demetrius cathedral.12 In his opinion, the churches at North-Eastern Rus’ could not have been built by Byzantine masters, as at that time, the anthropomorphic depictions on the facades of Byzantine churches were not allowed. He proposes a connection with the so called Lombardian school. Stroganov pointed out that the chronicles do not mention masters from Frederic I Barbarossa (1152–1190) and they only implied the masters were brought from “all the sides”.13 He set the date of the church between the years 1194–1197.14 There are no records in chronicles referring to its establishing. Under the year 1193, the chronicle states, there was a great fire in Vladimir which effected Vsevolod’s court, but the chronicle does not mention the cathedral. Stroganov deduces, Saint Demetrius was not constructed before the fire in year 1193. He dates the establishing of the church to the year 1194, when on 25th of October a son of Vsevolod (1177– 1212), christen Dmitriy, was born. He supposes the church to have been completed in the year 1197. On 10th of January, the relict of Saint Demetrius was placed in the church.15 He believed that the annexes surrounding the cathedral were constructed during the reign of Ivan the Terrible (1547–1584).16 Stroganov does not agree with Dobrokhotov about the meaning of relief decoration. He tends to explain the meaning of its iconographic programme in the connection with Saint Demetrius.17 Stroganov also supposed that the mural paintings were painted at the end of 14th century or at the beginning of 15th century.18

10 Dobrokhotov (note 6), pp. 140–141. 11 Ibidem, p. 147. 12 Sergey Stroganov, Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo Vladimire na Klyaz’me, Moskva 1849. 13 Ibidem, pp. 1–3. 14 Ibidem, p. 5. 15 Ibidem, pp. 4–5. 16 Ibidem, p. 13. 17 Ibidem, p. 9, 18 Ibidem, p. 12. 3

In 1899 Ivan Ivanovich Tolstoy and Nikodim Pavlovich Kondakov published a book called Russkiya Drevnosti v pamyatnikach iskusstva.19 They devoted several pages to the cathedral of Saint Demetrius.20 They state the same dating as Stroganov. On the basis of a record in a chronicle stating Vsevolod III (1177–1212) had not used masters from Nemets for the reconstruction of the church in Suzdal’, they stated the possibility Russian masters were working under the leadership of Greek master or other foreigner.21 They did not declare from which period should the annexes originate from.22 According to them, the relief in the east tympanum on the north façade is depicting Mother of God seating on a throne with Christ on her knees and four bending shepherd besides her. The meaning of the relief embellishment can be, to their mind, understood on the basis of the Dove Book Golubinaya Kniga.23 They interpreted the central figure as the king Solomon, not king David.24 According to their opinion, the prototypes for relief embellishment cannot be found in Italy. The prototypes for the church buildings at Vladimir- Suzdal’, which are made of white stone blocks can be found, according to them, in the city Halych, while the sculptural motives might have come from West, notably Hungary, Poland or Germany.25

At the beginning of the 20th century, Aleksey Aleksandrovich Potapov (1866–1901) already considered the cathedral’s extensions to be present with the main building. He assumed the architectural forms are homogenous with the cathedral, namely arcade row, which possess the same relief depictions. He implied the fact that these annexes were providing an access to choir.26

In the years 1881–1914 Vasiliy Vasilevich Kosatkin (1845–1914) was Saint Demetrius cathedral’s parson. He wrote down his personal notes about the cathedral and its history.27 He states the same dating (1194–1197) as Stroganov.28 At the same time, he mentions other

19 I.I. Tolstoy – N.P. Kondakov, Russkiye drevnosti v pamyatnikakh iskusstva, Sankt-Peterburg, 1899. 20 Ibidem, pp. 22–38. 21 Ibidem, pp. 22–24. 22 Ibidem, p. 25. 23 Ibidem, pp. 28, 30. 24 Ibidem, p. 31. 25 Ibidem, p. 38. 26 A.A. Potapov, Pamyatniki drevne-russkoy grazhdanskoy arkhitektury vo Vladimirskoy gubernіi, in: Trudy Vladimirskoy uchenoy arkhivnoy komissii, Kn. 6, Vladimir 1904, p. 55. 27 V.V. Kosatkin, Dmitriyevskiy sobor v gub.gor.Vladimire, Vladimir 1914, p. 11. 28 Ibidem, p. 4. 4 dating from a source of the year 1720, which describes the founding date to be the year 1191. He also mentions a second source from skazka – folk narration, which belonged to bishop Vladimir Platon (1745–1757), where the year of establishing is set as the year 6698 (1190). Kosatkin also thought that the cathedral’s extensions were constructed around 1548.29 Kosatkin interpreted the figures at the north façade as Prince Vsevolod (1177–1212) with his older son Konstantin on his knees.30 He supposed the murals to have been created by Greek masters, invited by Vsevolod III (1177–1212) between years 1194–1197, or by Russian painters trained by Greek masters. On the other hand, he assumes chronicles would mention Greek master, but finds no reason to record Russian masters, so he agrees that Russian masters most likely painted the murals. However, they must have been trained by Greek masters.31

In his essay form 1923, Neofit Vladimirovich Malitskiy (1871–1935) focused on the origin of the exterior reliefs.32 He created his essay mainly to differentiate the later reliefs from original ones and to determinate the period when later reliefs were added. He concluded that the facsimiles were created during restoration in 1838–1839 and highlighted some of them did not have any analogy to original reliefs.33 He noticed that the third group of reliefs, present at cathedral facades, were very similar in a style to original reliefs he assumed that they could not have been done by second group of restorers in 1838–1839.34 He had doubts and note that if the reliefs came from the extensions, then they could have been contemporary with the main church building. He did not believe the reliefs were originated in the era of Ivan the Terrible (1547–1584).35 Nevertheless, Malicki did not focused on the dating the extensions.

At the same year, 1923, Igor Emmanuilovich Grabar (1871–1960) focused on determining the founding date and the masters who had painted Saint Demetrius murals.36 He dated the murals to the years 1196–1197. He saw a resemblance of the style of Saint

29 Kosatkin (note 27), p. 15. 30 Ibidem, p. 6. 31 Ibidem, p. 12. 32 N.V. Malitskiy, Pozdniye rel’yefy Dmitriyevskovo sobora v g. Vladimire, Vladimir 1923. 33 Ibidem, pp. 28–30. 34 Ibidem, pp. 32–34. 35 Ibidem, p. 41. 36 I.E. Grabar‘, Freski Dmitriyevskovo sobora vo Vladimire, in: S. Abramov (ed.), Russkoye iskusstvo, no. 2–3, Moskva 1923, pp. 42–49.

Demetrius murals to Byzantine murals and mosaics dating from the Komnenos period.37 Grabar assumed that the leading persona, who was responsible for the composition and the most complicated parts of murals, was a Byzantine master. He supposed, this master had an assistant who painted the south vault and was a Russian origin. Grabar pointed out the fact that Vsevolod’s (1177–1212) mother was Byzantine princess, the headmaster could have come from Constantinople or he could have arrived to Vladimir while the grave stone of Saint Demetrius was transported from Thessaloniki in 1197.38 Even though he mentioned that there are murals resembling with those at Saint Demetrius cathedral, he did not state any analogy. He deduced that the mural paintings, which could be compared with those at Saint Demetrius, are yet to be found.39

More than three decades later, in 1959, Nikolay Petrovich Sychyov (1883–1964) was analysing all figures depicted at preserved murals as an attempt to identify individual masters and attach them to a specific “school”.40 As a result, he identified three masters. He disagreed with the opinion of Igor Grabar that there was a workshop working on the murals.41 He saw a close resemblance, in the terms of composition, to the murals in the Nereditsha church from 12th century and set the date of establishment of the Saint Demetrius murals up to the end of the 12th century.42 Sychyov assumes the masters to come from Byzantine, but not Constantinople or Thessaloniki. Instead, he assumes them to hail from Macedonia, since he saw a close resemblance with so called “Macedonian school”. He namely compared the frescoes with those at the church of Saint Panteleimon in Nerezi from the year 1164. To his mind, these murals were not painted by masters from Constantinople, but instead by a local Macedonian.43

In 1961, Nikolay Nikolayevich Voronin (1904—1976) published his book related to building activity on North-Eastern Rus’ of 12th–15th century.44 He devoted a whole chapter to

37 Grabar’ (note 36), pp. 42, 45. 38 Ibidem. 39 Ibidem, p. 46–47. 40 N.P. Sychev, K istorii rospisi Dmitriyevskogo sobora vo Vladimire, in: A.Kh. Gransberg – E.V. Zelenkova (edd.), Pamyatniki kul’tury, issledovaniye i restavratsiya, vyp. 1, Moskva 1959, pp. 143–177. 41 Ibidem, p. 161. 42 Ibidem, p. 150. 43 Ibidem, pp. 175–176. 44 N.N. Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi XII–XV vekov, Kn. 1, Moskva 1961. 6 the Saint Demetrius church.45 Voronin overtook dating of the edifice by Stroganov, but he also referred to the Annal of the Dormition cathedral in Vladimir, inscribed in 17th–18th century, which records the cathedral of Saint Demetrius to have been built in the year 6699 (1191).46 Voronin disagrees with the opinion claiming that the extensions were from 16th century, as he states that choirs disappeared in the architecture of 15th–16th century, so he does not think they would add new towers in 16th century for an old cathedral to provide an entrance to its choir.47 He deduced, the extensions to be present with the main building.48 Voronin states that most of the reliefs were not visible due to the walls of kremlin, nevertheless they were well visible for those who had access to the court – feudal lords. He saw the meaning of the embellishment in connection with feudal power and governing.49 In the scene depicting man with a figure on his knees and four other figures surrounding them, he recognised Vsevolod III (1177–1212) with his son and he determined the others, according to their dresses, to be princes. He states that, at the time of the cathedral’s construction, Vsevolod III (1177–1212) had five sons, which are, according to Voronin, depicted in the relief. In his opinion, Vsevolod III is holding his son Dmitriy born in the year 1194.50

In 1964, Vladislav Petrovich Darkevich (1934–2016) was engaged in the iconography of Vladimir- Suzdal’ churches, particularly of the church of Intercession on Nerl and Saint Demetrius cathedral.51 He highlighted the fact that the Kievan Rus princes were in chronicles commonly compared to King David, not excluding Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174) and Vsevolod III (1177–1212). He interpreted the figure of King David depicted at facades of Vladimir- Suzdal’ churches as personification of the ideal ruler. The beasts of prey are, according to him, personifications of power. Darkevich saw a parallel between King David, who had built Heavenly Jerusalem, and Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174), who relocated rulership to Vladimir and was building there.52 He regarded the figure of King David in

45 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), pp. 396–437. 46 Ibidem, p. 396. 47 Ibidem, p. 424. 48 Ibidem, p. 432. 49 Ibidem, p. 434. 50 Ibidem, p. 436. 51 V.P. Darkevich, Obraz tsarya Davida vo Vladimiro-Suzdal’skoy skul’pture, Kratkiye soobshcheniya Instituta arkheologii XCIX, 1964, pp. 46–53. 52 Ibidem, pp. 50–52. 7

Regensburg chronicles from 12th–13th century as being possible sources for iconography of Vladimir- Suzdal’ churches.53

In his book published in 1966, Igor Emmanuilovich Grabar (1871–1960) returned to the question of the murals at Saint Demetrius cathedral.54 The paintings at this cathedral are, according to Grabar, resembling the same scheme which can be seen in the murals of Staraya Ladoga church and Nereditsa church, both of which originate from 12th century.55 He supposed that the work on murals could have started in the year 1196, when the cathedral could have been already completed in the terms of architecture. He saw a similarity between murals at Saint Demetrius and those at Nereditsa church. He deduced that the murals at Neredtisa church (which were painted in 1199) have been done after the Saint Demetrius murals. As the result, he presumes the murals at Saint Demetrius were painted between the years 1196–1197.56 Grabar persists in his earlier believe that the murals were primarily painted by a Greek master with a Russian helper and a workshop of mural painters.57

In his book from the year 1969, Vagner Georgiy Karlovich (1908–1995) has focused also on the relief embellishment of the Saint Demetrius cathedral, namely on distinguishing of original reliefs from later added.58 He highlighted that the figure, identified as king David, in contrary with those at the church of Intercession on the river Nerl, does not have any inscriptions. And so, for him, this figure cannot be unequivocally determined as king David. Vagner saw a difference between this figure and those at the church of Intercession in the terms of attributes. The object hold by the figure at the Saint Demetrius cannot be, according to Vagner, identified as a Psalter but more likely as a musical instrument or a scroll.59 And so, Vagner interprets this figure as a king Solomon rather than king David.60

53 Darkevich, (note 51), pp. 49.–50. 54 I.E. Grabar‘, Freski Dmitriyevskogo sobora vo Vladimire na Klyaz’me, in: Igor Grabar’, O drevnerusskom iskusstve, Moskva 1966, pp. 47–67. 55 Ibidem, p. 53. 56 Ibidem, pp. 55–56. 57 Ibidem, p. 67. 58 G.K. Vagner, Skul’ptura Drevney Rusi: Vladimir, Bogo lyubova. XII vek., Moskva 1969, pp. 232–271. 59 Ibidem, p. 250. 60 Ibidem, p. 254. 8

In the year 1975 was published an article by Aleksandr Vasilyevich Stoletov (1896– 1966).61 He focused on the architectural forms of the Saint Demetrius cathedral and the origin and dating of its extensions. The base for his research were the report from the last restoration in the years 1941–1952, the designs of the cathedral and its ground plan form the first half of 19th century and contemporary witnesses.62 He concluded that to the cathedral from 12th century were added galleries with towers from the north and the south and parvise-nartex from the west. He states that the character of relief decoration namely the row of arcades, which were on the towers, are very similar to those founded at the cathedral in Suzdal’ (1222– 1225) and at Yuryev-Polsky (1234), he assumed that the extensions at the Saint Demetrius cathedral occurred in the 30’s of 13th century.63 According to charred stone blocks on north side it is, in his opinion, possible that the extensions were added after the fire and he believes it was the fire in 1229. According to Stoletov, originally was an entrance to the choir gallery provided by wooden towers with stairs or by passages, connected with the court, which completely burned after the fire in 1229.64

In the year 1976, Vagner Georgiy Karlovich (1908–1995) informed about new findings relating the question whether in the centre of each façade is depicted king David or king Solomon.65 During cleaning of the facades in the year 1974 inscriptions “ДА ВЪ“ (David) were found on both sides of the central figure.66 Thus, he concluded that at all of the facades of the Saint Demetrius cathedral is depicted King David, not King Solomon.67

In the year 1981, Svetlana Mikhaylovna Novakovskaya-Bukhman made observation of the cathedral and stylistic analysis of its relief decoration from former extensions. She confirmed the conclusion of Aleksandr Vasilyevich Stoletov that the annexes originated in the 13th century.68 In the contrary, she is of the opinion that the reliefs from the Saint Demetrius

61 A.V. Stoletov, K istorii arkhitekturnykh form Dmitriyevskogo sobora v gorode Vladimire, in: E.A. Shulepova (ed.), Voprosy okhrany, restavratsii i propagandy pamyatnikov istorii i kul’tury, Moskva, 1975, pp. 114–141. 62 Ibidem, pp. 114–116, 121. 63 Ibidem, pp. 120–121. 64 Ibidem, pp. 121, 128. 65 G.K. Vagner, Ob otkrytii reznykh nadpisey sredi fasadnoy skul’ptury Dmitriyevskogo sobora vo Vladimire, in: A.V. Artsikhovskiy (ed.), Sovetskaya arkheologia I, Moskva 1976, pp. 270–272. 66 Ibidem, p. 270. 67 Ibidem, pp. 271–272. 68 S.M. Novakovskaya-Bukhman, K voprosu o galereyakh belokamennykh soborov Vladimirskoy zemli, Kratkiye soobshcheniya Instituta Arkheologii AN SSSR CLXIV, Moskva 1981, p. 50. 9 cathedral are stylistically closer to those at the cathedral of the Nativity of the Theotokos in Suzdal’ (1222–1225) than those at Yuryev-Polsky (1234). So, she assumes that the annexes were constructed in the 20’s of 13th century.69

In their essay from 1988, Magdalina Sergeyevna Gladkaya and Aleksandr Ignatyevich Skvortsov followed the researcher of Neofit Vladimirovich Malitskiy from the year 1923 and focused on determination of origin of each of the cathedral’s reliefs.70 They concluded that the original reliefs, made at the end of 12th, are stylistically close to those at the church of Intercession on river Nerl.71 The later reliefs, created in years 1807–1838, are exact or approximate copies of original reliefs.72 The second sort of reliefs, which were removed from the extensions destroyed during restoration in 1838–1839, were supposed to come from 16th century.73 Researchers as well as Stoletov and Novakovskaya-Bukhman compared these reliefs with those from the 13th century edifices like the cathedral in Suzdal’ (1222–1225) and the cathedral in Yuryev-Polsky (1234). They came up with the same conclusion as Stoletov and states the annexes emerged after the fire 1229.74

In the article from 1994, Aleksey Mikhaylovich Lidov developed an idea about the connection between the 12th–13th century churches from Vladimir-Suzdal’ region and the depiction of Heavenly Jerusalem.75 He partly builds upon the theory of Vladislav Petrovich Darkevich. Lidov believes, that to depict Heavenly Jerusalem is the main sense of the relief decoration which was carved on facades of Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches. He supports his claim on a base of the Ezekiel's vision and its comparison with existing edifices. He interprets the carved faces as cherubs which were on the all walls of the Heavenly Jerusalem and in the case of the church on river Nerl as seven Heavenly Spirits. Lidov highlights that the analogies can be found in the decoration of liturgical objects from 11th–12th centuries.76 The figure of King

69 Novakovskaya-Bukhman (note 68), p. 50. 70 M.S. Gladkaya – A.I. Skvortsov, Periodizatsiya rel’yefov Dmitriyevskogo sobora vo Vladimire, in: A.I. Komech – O.I. Podobedova (edd.), Drevne russkoye iskosstvo: Khudozhestvennaya kul’tura X – pervoy poloviny XIII v., Moskva 1988, pp. 307–329. 71 Ibidem, p. 311. 72 Ibidem, p. 325. 73 Ibidem, p. 313. 74 Ibidem, p. 322. 75 A.M. Lidov, O simbolicheskom zamysle skulpturnoy dekoratsii Vladimiro-Suzdal’skikh khramov XII–XIII vv., in: O.E. Etingof (ed.), Iskusstvo Rusi, Vizantii i Balkan XIII veka, Sankt-Peterburg 1994, pp. 26–29. 76 Ibidem, p. 27. 10

David is, according to Lidov, an archetype of Christ as well as representation of prince Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174). On the base of the King David’s iconography, Lidov assumes that crucial for understanding of the figure in the context of New Jerusalem is the theme of last theophany of King/tsar.77 He also believes that reliefs were carved by Romanesque masters.78

As a result of conference 800 лет Дмитриевскому собору во Владимире, held between the days 26th–29th of September 1994 in Vladimir, the compendium: Дмитриевский собор во Владимире: к 800-летию создания was published in 1997.79 This book is divided into thematic parts, beginning with essays focusing on architectural and dating issues. Following are the topics related to sculpted reliefs of Saint Demetrius cathedral. Further described are problematics associated with cathedral’s mural paintings. The compendium is concluded with the essays focusing on medieval icons and reliquaries connected with Saint Demetrius and seals of Vsevolod III. For this state of research, I have chosen to discuss the contribution of Tatyana Timofeyeva, who is focusing on the dating of the cathedral, the next essay is focused the Saint Demetrius cathedral as a reliquary and was written by Gennaldiy Viktorovich Popov. Further ensues the essay about the relation between Vladirmir-Suzdal’ architecture and Saxon architecture written by Henrich Nickel. Subsequent is the research of mural paintings by Olga Sigizmundovna Popova, followed by the restoration report of murals done by Balygina, Tsejtlina and Nekrasov. I do not mention the other articles because they are rather descriptive or general or they are not related to the cathedral.

Tatyana Petrovna Timofeyeva casted doubt on the dating of the Saint Demetrius cathedral.80 To her mind, the fact that the chronicle mentions in the year 1193 only the court and not the cathedral itself is not enough convincing argument that the edifice has not been constructed yet. The word “court”, according to her, could include the church as well.81 In the year 1191, on 2nd of May, the relicts of SS Boris and Gleb were brought to Vladimir. Vsevolod’s elder sons were Boris and Gleb, Boris was born in the year 1187 on 2nd of May and died the following year. Timofeyeva propose to leave the date of prince Dmitriy’s birth (25th of October

77 Lidov, O simbolicheskom zamysle...1994 (note 75), p. 28. 78 Ibidem, p. 29. 79 E.S. Smirnova (ed.), Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo Vladimire: k 800-letiyu sozdaniya, Moskva 1997. 80 T.P. Timofeyeva, K utochneniyu daty Dmitriyevskogo sobora, in: E.S. Smirnova (ed.), Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo Vladimire: k 800-letiyu sozdaniya, Moskva 1997, pp. 38–41. 81 Ibidem, p. 39. 11

1194) as the establishing date of the cathedral and suggests the 2nd of May of 1191 as a real establishing date.82 Moreover, she states the church might be named after Vsevolod III (1177– 1212) himself, christened Dmitriy, not after his son. The scene of Vsevolod III with his son is, according to Timofeyeva, merely symbolical portrait and hence does not have to depict living Individuals. Timofeyeva proposes that the scene depicted five sons of Vselod, two of which were already dead at the time of the cathedral construction.83

Gennaldiy Viktorovich Popov looks on the cathedral of Saint Demetrius from two perspectives; as a cathedral with stunning façade iconography and as a cathedral-reliquary for relicts of Saint Demetrius from Thessaloniki.84 Popov describes the act of placing the relicts of St. Demetrius into the Vladimir as putting St. Demetrius cathedral almost on a same level with the main martyrium of the saint, turning Vladimir into the “second” Thessalonica. According to Popov, depiction with Christian motives more represented compared to others. He sees an an embodiment of Heavenly Jerusalem, as described by Ezekiel, in the embellishment, as well as a transformed idea of “Solomon’s construction activity”.85

Henrich Nickel, in his article belonging to the same volume as the two aforementioned, focuses on the decoration of Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches and its parallels with Saxon architecture.86 Nickel states that there were strong diplomatic connections between the Holy Roman Empire and the west lands. He believes that the closest analogy to the reliefs of Vladimir- Suzdal’ churches can be seen in the church of St. Servatius in Quedlinburg abbey in Saxony-Anhalt.87 In his opinion, the churches in Vladimir- Suzdal’ can have several resembling features with Romanesque architecture, such as archivolt portals, however, there are also features that cannot be compared to Central Europe nor Byzantine architecture, such as lions with mouth in a shape of horizontal “eight” figure.88 Moreover the churches also have certain

82 Timofeyeva, K utochneniyu daty (note 80), p. 38–39. 83 Ibidem, p. 39–40. 84 G.V. Popov, Dekoratsiya fasadov Dmitriyevskogo sobora i kul’tura vladimirskogo knyazhestva na rubezhe XII- XIII vv., in: E.S. Smirnova (ed.), Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo Vladimire: k 800-letiyu sozdaniya, Moskva 1997, pp. 42– 56. 85 Ibidem, pp. 46–47. 86 N.L. Nickel, Vezugsmotive dersächsischen nmanischen Bauornamentik zu den Schmuckmotiven der Vladimir- Suzdaler Architektur, in: E.S. Smirnova (ed.), Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo Vladimire: k 800-letiyu sozdaniya, Moskva 1997, pp. 81–92. 87 Ibidem, p. 89. 88 Ibidem, p. 91–92. 12 traits typical for Armenian or Georgian architecture. In the terms of the ground plan, he states that there is almost no resemblance between Vladimir- Suzdal’ churches and those at Saxon. To Nickel, it is possible the builders of Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches were familiarized with the architecture of Saxony, however, it cannot be proved. He deduces that the record from Lavrent’yevskaya chronicle, stating the masters came from all the sides, is authentic.89 Another article from compendium was written by Olga Sigizmundovna Popova, who focused on the mural paintings in Saint Demetrius cathedral.90 She does not see any close analogies for the murals from the Byzantine production of that era. The most related mural paintings are, according to her, the late antique decoration at Hosios David in Thessaloniki.91

In the same publication, Lyudmila Porfiryevna Balygina, Mariya M. Tseytlina and Aleksandr Petrovich Nekrasov (1927–2007) focused on the history of restorations of Saint Demetrius murals and comparison of their chemical composition with other monuments.92 They concluded that the murals in Saint Demetrius cathedral differ from other old Russian murals from 12th century. They do not exactly state the base composition of Saint Demetrius murals, nevertheless, they mention the base of Vladimir- Suzdal’ murals in general, which was composed of calcic substances. They state the calcic-carbon mixtures were also used on the murals made by Andrey Rublev in the Dormition cathedral and in other murals from 15th–17th century and hence deduced these masters overtook the method of plaster preparation from Vladimir masters of 12th century.93 They mention that the murals used to be brighter. White moulds, which were identified as salts occurring due to the usage of DDT dispersion, emerge on their surface. They state that the surface of murals is washed away because of unprofessional cleaning of paintings, done probably in 50’s of 19th century.94

89 Nickel (note 86), p. 92. 90 O.S. Popova, Freski Dmitriyevskogo sobora vo Vladimire i vizantiyskaya zhivopis’ XII. v., in: E.S. Smirnova (ed.), Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo Vladimire: k 800-letiyu sozdaniya, Moskva 1997, pp. 93–118. 91 Ibidem, p. 105. 92 L.P. Balygina – M.M. Tseytlina – A.P. Nekrasov, Issledovaniye i restavratsiya nastennoy zhivopisi XII v. v Dmitriyevskom sobore, in: E.S. Smirnova (ed.), Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo Vladimire: k 800-letiyu sozdaniya, Moskva 1997, pp. 120–127. 93 Ibidem, p. 124. 94 Ibidem 13

Another fundamental text dates from 1997: Aleksey Mikhaylovich Lidov followed his own essay from 1994 about the importance of Heavenly Jerusalem in Vladimir-Suzdal’ Rus.95 He believes that most of the questions relating to the iconography of Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches can be answered in the Vision of Ezekiel. 96 Lidov agrees with Darkevich on the fact that Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174) could be comparing himself with King David. The sculpted reliefs were, according to Lidov, a part of an important ideological intention of Bogolyubskiy.97 Lidov assumes that such iconographic program with no precedents in byzantine tradition could appear only in the time of weakening of the supervision from the side of Orthodox hierarchy. He puts this situation in relation to the conflict of Andrey with Constantinopolitan patriarchate at the time of the construction of first churches. Lidov believes that the impulse for this embellishment could have come from liturgical objects, depicting the Heavenly Jerusalem.98 He supports his argument with archaeological reports stating the churches were embellished with gilded copper. Lidov concludes that these churches were in fact liturgical objects “Jerusalems” constructed in a huge scale.99

In the year 2002, was published an article wrote by Anatoliy Mikhaylovich Vysotskiy (1944–2002).100 He reacted on the theory of Alexey Lidov, particularly the article from the year 1994.101 He studied ancient literary sources, which describes the Heavenly Jerusalem or the Temple of Solomon.102 Vysotskiy pointed out that in none of the Old Testament books are written that “there were carved depictions”.103 He highlighted that the theses about sculptural decoration of the Ezekiel’s Temple is based on later source, the Richard of Saint Victor's Commentary on Ezekiel and its illustrations.104 Vysotskiy concluded that the theory of Alexey

95 Lidov, O simbolicheskom zamysle...1994 (note 75), pp. 26–29. 96 A.M., Lidov O simvolicheskom zamysle skul’pturnoy dekoratsii vladimiro-suzdal’skikh khramov XII—XIII vv., in: O.E. Etingof (ed.), Drevnerusskoye iskusstvo. Rus’, Vizantiya, Balkany. XIII vek, Sankt-Peterburg 1997, pp. 172–184. 97 Ibidem, p. 176. 98 Ibidem, p. 178. 99 Ibidem, p. 181 100 A.M. Vysotskiy, Khram Iyezekiilya kak istochnik naruzhnogo skul’pturnogo dekora Vladimiro-Suzdal’skikh khramov XII—XIII vv. Sic et non, in: O.E. Etingof (ed.), Drevnerusskoye iskusstvo. Rus’ i strany vizantiyskogo mira. XII vek., Sankt-Peterburg 2002, pp. 255–263. 101 Lidov, O simbolicheskom zamysle...1994 (note 75), pp. 26–29. 102 Vysotskiy (note 100), pp. 255–257. 103 Ibidem, pp. 257–258. 104 Ibidem, p. 259. 14

Lidov is not supported by texts of Sacred tradition or the Holly Scriptures.105 He assumes that more plausible the theory that the sculpture decoration of Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches were dependent on the descriptions of the Solomon’s Temple.106

In essay from the year 2004, Gladkaya dealt with the question whether the facades of Saint Demetrius were originally painted with colours.107 She highlights that the chronicles mention roof with gilded copper and gold-plated dome, but they do not mention the colour of the facades.108 According to her, from the texts as well as from the archaeological observations, it is evident that the churches from the era of Yuriy Dolgoruky (1113–1157), Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174) and Vsevolod III. (1177–1212) were not painted with external colours. From the same observations, it is apparent that these edifices were commonly painted in 16th century.109 She mentions that the cathedral was repainted in colours in the years 1804–1806 to 1890, from which the remains are still visible. According to Gladkaya, the cathedral was not supposed to be painted.110

In 2005, Oleg Mikhaylovich Ioannisyan wrote an article concerning the architectural sources of the Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches build in the era of Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157– 1174).111 He perceives the Vladimir-Suzdal’ stone architecture from 1140s–1150s as the same architecture found at Halych. But from the 1150s, the architecture becomes, according to Ioannisyan, independent on Halych. He states that the relief embellishment peculiar for buildings ordered by Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174) has no precedent in Kievan Rus.112 To his mind, the appearance of relief decoration is related to architecture of Lombardian masters. The motive of arcades at North Italian churches, especially at the basilica of San Michele

105 Vysotskiy (note 100), p. 260. 106 Ibidem, p. 261. 107 M.S. Gladkaya, Byli li iznachal’no pokrasheny rel’yefy Dmitriyevskogo sobora vo Vladimire?, in: K.I. Maslov (ed.), Issledovaniye i konservatsiya pamyatnikov kul’tury. Pamyati Leonida Arkad’yevicha Lelekova (1934– 1988), Moskva 2004, pp. 174–179. 108 Ibidem, p. 174. 109 Ibidem, pp. 175–177. 110 Ibidem, p. 179. 111 O.M. Ioannisyan, Romanskiye istoki zodchestva Vladimiro-Suzdal’skoy Rusi vremeni Andreya Bogolyubskoto (Germaniya ili Italiya?), in: M.A. Orlova (ed.), Vizantiyskiy mir: iskusstvo Konstantinopolya i natsional’nyye traditsii. K 2000-letiyu khristianstva. Pamyati Ol’gi Il’inichny Podobedovoy (1912–1999), Moskva 2005, pp. 31– 69. 112 Ibidem, pp. 31–35. 15

Maggiore in Pavia, was, according to him precedent for row of arcades at the Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches. But mostly, he sees analogical forms to the architecture of Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174) in the Modena cathedral.113 The relief sculpture at Modena cathedral, particularly the sculpted consoles at south façade, are, to his mind, analogical with reliefs at Vladimir-Suzdal’. He supposed that masters, who worked on Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches and who were sent from imperator Frederick Barbarossa (1152–1190), came from Italy.114

Magdalina Sergeyevna Gladkaya devoted her dissertation from the year 2006 solely to the relief decoration of the Saint Demetrius cathedral, analysis of its original layout, history of its restoration interventions and interpretation of particular motives and whole compositions.115 She turned her attention also to the composition of the north façade located in east tympanum. She disagreed that the scene depicts Vsevolod III (1177–1212) with his sons and points out that the rulers were usually at this period depicted with beard. Gladkaya interprets this arrangement as “the elder bows down in front of the younger” which, according to her, revokes the destiny of Joseph and David. Like them, Vsevolod III (1177–1212) was sent to exile by his older brother Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174), he was also the youngest son of Yuriy Dolgoruky (1113–1157) and became the head of Monomach’s dynasty. Thus, Gladkaya interpreted the smallest figure as Vsevolod III and the figure on throne as Andrey Bogolyubskiy after whom Vsevolod III gained the power.116 She highlighted that the iconographical aspects of the main figures in tympanums shares striking similarities which allows to consider that despite of different context these figures always represents metaphorically Vsevolod III (1177–1212) himself.117 In total, she interprets the decoration of the cathedral as finding the way to the Kingdom of Heaven, but also identifies several other themes in its embellishment.118

113 Ioannisyan, Romanskiye istoki (note 111), pp. 47–49. 114 Ibidem, pp. 55, 64. 115 M.S. Gladkaya, Rel’yefy Dmitriyevskogo sobora vo Vladimire: opyt kompleksnogo issledovaniya (dissertation), Gosudarstvennyy institut iskusstvoznaniya federal’nogo agenstva po kul’ture i kinematografii, Moskva 2006. 116 Ibidem, pp. 141–149. 117 Ibidem, pp. 162–171. 118 Ibidem, p. 221. 16

In the article from 2006, Petr Leonidovich Zykov was trying to clarify, on the base of excavations in the years 2003–2004, the questions regarding the date of the cathedral’s construction, its extensions, and the palace ensemble.119 From the excavations is, according to him, apparent that both fundaments, from the cathedral as well as from the extensions, were established simultaneously, but the walls of cathedral were constructed first. The fact, that the extensions had carved reliefs stylistically dated to first half of 13th century Zykov explains on the modification of a part of the south gallery fundament, which differs from the others in composition, and its restoration might happened in the 13th century.120 During excavations were found remains of previous construction, set as a palace building, located on the south from cathedral, which was partially built up by cathedral’s south gallery, and of which fundaments differs from that of the cathedral and galleries.121 From these facts Zykov assumes that this palace building was probably constructed even before the cathedral and might originates from the era of Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174).122 In the cathedral were found traces of a strong fire which Zykov connects not with a fire in the year 1193 but in the year 1185 and proposes the establishing date of the cathedral to the years 1183–1184 and the date of its completion to the year 1192 when the Rozhdestvensky monastery was established.123

In his article from 2012, Alexey Lidov commented on the critique which Anatoliy Vysotskiy expressed ten years earlier.124 Lidov believes that the decoration of the Heavenly Temple was perceived in the Orthodox tradition as one of the most authoritative images and so, there is little doubt that Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174), would not be familiar with the text of Ezekiel.125 He states that theologians from Abbey of Saint Victor as Richard and Andrew were, in their commentaries on Ezekiel’s vision, proceeding from commentary of Saint Jerome

119 P.L. Zykov, Novyye materialy o komplekse postroyek Dmitriyevskogo sobora vo Vladimire, in: A.L. Batalov (ed.), ΣΟΦΙΑ. Sbornik statey po iskusstvu Vizantii i Drevney Rusi v chest’ A.I. Komecha, Moskva 2006, pp. 181– 198. 120 Ibidem, p. 187. 121 Ibidem, pp. 187–192. 122 Ibidem, p. 197. 123 Ibidem, pp. 195–196. 124 A.M. Lidov, VIDENIE KHRAMA I GRADA: O iyerusalimskoy simvolike skul’pturnykh ikon na fasadakh russkikh khramov XII-XIII vekov, Cahiers du Monde russe LIII. n. 2/3, 2012 pp. 301–318.; Vysotskiy (note 100), pp. 255– 263. 125 Lidov, VIDENIE KHRAMA (note 124), p. 314. 17 from the beginning of 5th century.126 He assumes that the illustrations of Richard’s commentary were known to masters working for Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174) as they were part of a culture in which they were thinking about the symbolical meaning of Ezekiel’s vision.127 Lidov highlights that the theme of Theophany, which appears on the facades of Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches, is dominating in the Romanesque sculpture of that time.128 Lidov stands for his claims and does not changes anything on his theory from 1997.129

In his study from 2017, William Craft Brumfield presented the importance of the development of photography on Russia’s architectural history.130 He gives an example of Prokudin-Gorskii’s photography depicting the service building with its heating system and belfry, installed in 1883, as a valuable and precise information about the condition of the Saint Demetrius cathedral before the revolutionary cataclysm. To the question of the roots of Saint Demetrius cathedral relief embellishment, Brumfield states that it is possible for the Vsevolods artisans to have adapted and combined elements from several sources.131 He mentions that certain of the plant and animal carvings are associated with motifs in Physiologus and their function seem to be primarily decorative. According to him, it is possible to read the facades as a text by the prince, whose authority is sanctioned by God, by the Orthodox Church and its saints, and by the legendary rulers of antiquity.132 He proposes that the fromerly destroyed library, which was established in Vladimir by brother of Vsevolod Mikhail for Greek manuscripts, presented a source for the iconographic motifs of Vsevolod’s own psalm in white stone.133

In her essay from the year 2018, Olga Evgenyevna Etingof focused on the murals in Saint Demetrius and their analogies.134 She points out the connection between Vladimir and

126 Lidov, VIDENIE KHRAMA (note 124), p. 314. 127 Ibidem, p. 316. 128 Ibidem, p. 317. 129 Ibidem, pp. 301–312. 130 William Craft Brumfield, The Cathedral of St. Demetrius in Vladimir: Sources, Form and Documentation, Theory and History of Art n. (1/2), 2018, pp. 29–48. 131 Ibidem, pp. 39, 45. 132 Ibidem, pp. 40–41. 133 Ibidem, p. 47. 134 O.E. Etingof, Eshche raz ob izuchenii khudozhestvennykh svyazey Vladimira i Fessaloniki v kontse XII veka, in: Nadezhda Nalimova, Makedoniya-Rim-Vizantiya: iskusstvo Severnoy Gretsii ot antichnosti do srednikh vekov, materialy nauchnoy konferentsii, Moskva 2018, pp. 142–165. 18

Thessaloniki. According to chronicles, Vsevolod III (1177–1212) was six years in exile at Constantinople.135 Before he took over a rulership in Vladimir, Vsevolod III (1177–1212) arrived at Thessaloniki to pay homage to the relicts of Saint Demetrius.136 Etingof sees a resemblance of Saint Demetrius murals with those at the church of Hosios David from Thessaloniki, painted in 1160–1170, and those at the church on mount Chortiatis, end of 12th century. She assumes that the murals could have come from the same artistic sphere. She presumed the murals at Saint Demetrius were painted by Thessaloniki masters.137

One of the most up to date studies, from the year 2020, was written by Antonina Andreevna Kartashova, Sergey Andreevich Kartashov and Mikhail Romanovich Morozov. They focused on the compositions of the north façade east tympanum and the south tympanum of the west façade.138 The composition, which was interpreted firstly as Vsevolod III with his sons, they reinterpreted as Vsevolod III on the knees of Yuriy Dolgoruky (1125–1157), not Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174), surrounded by his elder brothers Mstislav, Vasilko, Mikhail and possibly Svyatoslav, according to researchers, they all come from second marriage of Yuriy Dolgoruky (1125–1157).139 They support their claims with the iconography of figures and similarities between the life of king David and Vsevolod III (1177–1212).140 The reassessed also the interpretation of the west façade and its south tympanum. In the medallions they see the three livings sons of Vsevolod III (1177–1212), around the year 1191, and above two angels two at the time dead sons, Boris and Gleb.141 The thus interpret the whole tympanums of the west façade as the donation of the throne to the Vsevolod’s dynasty.142

135 Etingof (note 134), p. 150. 136 Ibidem, p. 151. 137 Ibidem, p. 159. 138 A.A. Kartashova – S.A. Kartashov – M.R. Morozov, Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo Vladimire - monument knyazhetskoy vlasti Vladimiro-Suzdal’skoy Rusi, Arkhitektura i sovremennyye informakhionnyye tekhnologii LIII no. 4, 2020, pp. 74–99. 139 Ibidem, pp. 79–82. 140 Ibidem, p. 79. 141 Ibidem, p. 85. 142 Ibidem, pp. 87–88. 19

2.1. Summary

One of the main topics of studies from the half of 19th century to the beginning of 21st century was the origin of the church’s extensions, which were torn down during restoration in 1838–1839. Since the second half of the 20th century, it was taken for granted that the extension originated in the 13th century and were built after the fire in 1229 or around the 20’s of 13th century. Nevertheless, the archaeological excavations in the years 2003–2004, showed that the extensions had the same fundament as the cathedral and so most plausibly originated in the end of 12th century. The cathedral itself was commonly dated between the years 1194–1197, until Tatyana Timofeyeva proposed new dating between the years 1191– 1197 and Petr Zykov with even earlier dating to the years 1183/1184–1192. There have been several theories regarding the sources for relief embellishment of Vladimir-Sudal’ churches. Since Tatishchev stated that the masters were sent from emperor Frederic I. Barbarossa (1152–1190), it has been generally accepted and most of the scholars are looking for the origin in the Western European architecture from the beginning to half of 12th century. Predominantly, researchers searched for analogies in Germany, particularly Saxony, and the discussion has stopped on Northern Italy, tangibly at Modena cathedral and basilica of San Michele Maggiore in Pavia. It is rather likely that even more theories regarding the iconography of façade relief decoration were expressed. The literal sources were generally searched in Old Testament in Vision of Ezekiel, in the Book of Dove or Physiologus. Furthermore, the impulses for the relief embellishment were also sought in feudal power and governing. In the case of dating of relief embellishment, it was mostly concluded that there are three groups of reliefs on the facades of saint Demetrius cathedral: from end of 12th century, those built between the years 1838–1839 and those coming from extension from 13th century. There is still debate about the meaning of the Saint Demetrius tympanum scenes. The discussion regarding the mural paintings in Saint Demetrius cathedral was conducted mainly around the dating, the identity of masters and the analogies. The theories considering the identification of the handwriting begun around the beginning of 20th century and were no longer developed after 70’s of 20th century. There is no general agreement on how many masters were working on murals and from which location had their leading persona descended, however, it was predominantly assumed the masters were sent from Thessaloniki with relicts of Saint Demetrius. Coherently, the analogies can be found in the circle of

Thessaloniki painting workshops. Some of the first theories regarding the dating of murals stated, they come from the end of 14th century until the beginning of 15th century. Since the beginning of 20th century, this is no longer taken into an account and the mural paintings are considered to have originated concurrently with the building.

3. Architectural Description and Restoration Interventions

3.1. Description of Architecture

The edifice is set on a plane of natural elevation. Its structure is composed out of single building of almost cubic form with tripartite facades and single dome cupola. Square ground plan, divided into cross shape by four piers, is on eastern end prolongated by three apses; larger centre apse and smaller lateral apses. On the opposite western end, there is a choir gallery.

1/ Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius, end of 12th century, from left image: view of the west and the south facades.

West, north and south facades are carrying the same characteristic features. They are divided by three blind stepped arcades bore by columns with a base, smooth shaft, and a Corinthian capital. Blind arcades follow the inner space segmentation, particularly the main cross inscribed nave, and so the central blind arcades are of larger scale then the lateral ones. There is a narrow elongated stepped window in the upper central part of each blind arcade. The blind arcades are intersected by a row of small arcades terminated with consoles; this row

22 follows the level of inner choir gallery. Archivolts portals with Corinthian capitals are in the centre of each central blind arcade. The drum of cupola, supported by pendentives bore by pilasters, is separated by sixteen blind arcades with eight narrow elongated windows. Above its blind arcades is a row of zig-zag motive with lion head in its centre, and above that is a row of dentil followed by a row of arcs. There is a cross at the top of the cupola. The western façade has, in contrary with north and south facades, one small narrow window under the row of arcades in the centre of each of the lateral blind arcades.

2/ Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius, end of 12th century, from left image: view of the east and the north facades. Three apses, each terminated with semi cupola, appearing from its façade on the eastern side. Their most distinctive feature is the row of arcades set almost entirely under the cupola. In the space between, there is a row of dentil and a row of Corinthian leaf motive. This row of arcades is different, because every third column is not ending with console, but is instead elongated to the ground. Located in between elongated columns are three windows on the main apse and one by one at laterals.

3/ Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius, end of 12th century, view of the south facade.

Only in the registers on west, north and south facades there is around 566 stone carved reliefs.143 They depict themes from Old and New Testament, figures of saints and prophets, birds and animals, hunting scenes, animal fights, mythological creatures, human faces, plants and floral and ornamental motives. These three facades are, from row of arcades upwars, entirely filled with reliefs no larger than a scale of stone block on which they are carved. Their common feature is a hieratic figure of King David sitting on a throne which is situated in the zakomara – round tympanum of central blind arcades. In the lateral tympanums on north façade are scene such as Vsevolod III with his sons and Deesis composition. On the west façade south tympanum are three saints in medallions with two angels above them. On the south façade, the baptism of Christ and the Ascension of Alexander the Great to the Heaven are depicted. Fully filled with reliefs, depicting animals and saints in medallions lined with floral and ornamental motives, is also the drum. At cathedral’s facades, there are distinctions between rendition of reliefs, notably their height, plasticity, and rate of detail. The whole cathedral is almost united with whitish colour of limestone, there is no plaster on the walls. The roof is of dark greenish colour and the cupola is gold-plated. The

143 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 432. 24 remains of previous polychromies can be found in the row of arcades. The edifice was built with the use of polubutovaya – semi-double constructing technique, when an empty space between two parallel stone walls is filled with chalcid mortar with stone shards.144 The natural sources of light are the aforementioned narrow windows, situated at each side.

4/ Detail of the Last Judgement, end of 12th century, mural paintings, Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius, view of central vault north side.

Plaster was removed from all the interior walls except vaults under the choir gallery at which murals has preserved. There are scenes from the Last Judgement depicted in the central vault. The first row is composed of siting apostles with opened books and angels above. In the south vault is a depicted Mother of God in the paradise, the Bosom of Abraham, Peter the Apostle leading the faithful to the paradise and angels announcing the Last Judgement. The technique used for mural paintings was determined as fresco-secco.145 The inner space of cathedral is nowadays largely without an embellishment and, on the contrary to the exterior, the reliefs with motives of lying lions can only be found on the abacus of four piers. The inner space of ground floor is opened, divided only by four pilasters, while the only separated space is the choir gallery on second floor.

144 Kosatkin (note 27), p. 3. 145 Balygina – Tseytlina – Nekrasov (note 92), pp. 124–125. 25

Since 1917 the cathedral ceases to belong to the Church and since 1919, it has gained a status of a monument.146 Because of this, the liturgies no longer take place at the church and its inner space is almost empty of any objects liturgical or devotional images.

3.2. Description of Relief Embellishment

The overall number of reliefs on Saint Demetrius cathedral’s facades nowadays reaches number 1300. The text range of this thesis does not allow me to describe each one of them. The relief placement uses a hieratic perspective. The largest figure is King David, situated in the central tympanums of north, west, and south facades. It cannot be omitted, that the cathedral was enclosed by the walls of kremlin, one of the visible parts were mainly the depictions in the tympanums.147 It is apparent that the tympanums are the central points. For these reasons I will apply my attention primarily to them. Subsequently, the characteristics of repetitive motives on cathedral’s facades will be presented to show dissimilarities in relief embellishment. The most prominent figure, King David, is on each of the facades is surrounded by smaller depictions representing plentiful crowds of animals together with leaf motives and saints, these depictions also fill the whole register. On the south façade, figure of King David is fingering on a dove flying down from small throne or altar with cross. The upper scene is

146 A.I. Aksenova, Iz istorii Dmitriyevskogo sobora: opyt i perspektish, in: E.S. Smirnova (ed.), Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo Vladimire: k 800-letiyu sozdaniya, Moskva 1997, p. 9. 147 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 435. 26 framed by two bearded figures representing prophets or evangelists sitting on a throne with book or scroll in their hands and nimbus around their head.

6/ King David seating on a throne with scroll, end of 12th century, Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius, from left: central tympanum of the south façade, central tympanum of the west façade.

The gesture of King David is the same for all the facades, on west façade, he is pointing at an angel who is horizontally flying to the right while looking downwards where also his hands are led. It seems like the angel is in a gesture of crowning but does not hold any object. Four smaller figures are above on the sides from King David, two of them on right and left. These figures portrait angels guiding saints with halo and an object in their hands, they are approaching King David and an angel above the scene. On the north façade, Kind David points at birds or doves above him, he is surrounded by crowds of animals leading towards him. Repetitive are here the representations of gryphons standing on a lying animal under them.

The tympanum of side blind arcade on south east side represents ascension of Alexander the Great to the Heaven. He is portrayed seated on a chariot drawn by gryphons. Gryphons are also surrounding the central depiction. Opposite to this depiction, in the north eastern tympanum of side blind arcade, there is the representation person seating on a throne with one smaller figure on its knees and four others surrounding them. Behind them are small

27 birds possibly eagles. There is no other sculpted relief above the depiction as is usual. Under the dominating figures on throne is depicted a lion, under the kneeling sons there is represented gryphon on one side and beasts possibly wolfs on the other.

8/ From the left: side tympanum at the west façade north corner, side tympanum at the west façade south corner, Vladimir, the Saint Demetrius cathedral, end of 12th century, Vladimir, from left: side tympanum at west façade north corner, side tympanum at south façade south corner.

Left from the central blind arcade on west façade there are depicted two saints in between two beasts in the tympanum of side blind arcade. Under them is portraiture of two lions connected into one head. At the same façade, in south side blind arcade tympanum, there are two large figures of knee bending angels turned to each other. Behind their back are two smaller figures in beseeching gesture. Under portraiture of angels are three medallions with saints. Left from the medallions is depicted Saint Nikita Besogon, which gives intercession to widows and orphans, healing to the sick, and delivers from demons. The iconographic type of the saint beating the devil belongs to the eldest.148 With his left hand he holds small Isaac and in the right upper corner is a small hand pointing at Abraham. On the other side there is a saint or prophet seating on a throne while reading from a scroll or a book.

9/ Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius, end of 12th century, from left: detail of the side tympanum at the south façade west corner, detail of the central tympanum at the south façade.

148 D.I. Antonov, “Besa poymav, muchashe…”. Izbiyeniye besa svyatym. Demonologicheskiy syuzhet v knizhnosti i ikonografii srednevekovoy Rusi, Drevnyaya Rus’. Voprosy mediyevistiki XXXIX, no. 1., Moskva 2010, pp. 67, 71. 28

One of those most repetitive motives on cathedral’s facades are lions with intertwined tail under their hind legs and mouth in a shape of lying figure eight, birds with or without outstretched wings, gryphons with tail under their hind legs and with or without an animal under them and plants with five stems. From a comparison of two tympanums at same façade on south side we can see distinctions at representations of same motives. Mainly, the reliefs in the left picture are flatter, linear, schematic, and created with bigger sense for symmetry. On the opposite side, the reliefs in the right picture are higher, more rounded, and shaped, the figures seem to be more dynamic.

The two so far omitted tympanums are on the south and north façade opposite to each other. The tympanum at south façade west side depicts Baptism of Christ and the tympanum of north façade west side represents the Deesis. The figures in scene depicting baptism are strikingly smaller compared to most of central compositions in tympanums. Conspicuous is also the differences between this relief and surrounding anthropomorphic, animal, and floral depictions, which are flatter, more linear and in detail adorned. The depiction does not fit compositionally in between other reliefs on the tympanum. Apart from the execution the representation gives the impression of naiveness or even incorrigibleness. Its naiveness and execution makes this representation not fitting for both, group of flat decorative reliefs and rounded higher reliefs.

To sum up, on the facades of Saint Demetrius cathedral can be seen three groups of relief embellishment, they vary in rendition one from another.149 First group is distinctive by rounded forms and higher relief, these characteristics are typical for most of the tympanum

149 Malitskiy (note 32), pp. 28–34.; Gladkaya – Skvortsov (note 70), pp. 311–313. 29 scenes. Another group of reliefs can be characterised by low relief, linearity, and schematic character. Representatives of the last group are specific with impreciseness in execution and naiveness in representation.

3.3. Restoration Interventions

Present appearance of Saint Demetrius cathedral is certainly distant from the original form it possessed at the end of 12th century. Primarily, the cathedral was part of larger complex consisting of court buildings, out of which none has been preserved to our time.150 The cathedral was not only surrounded by these buildings, the edifice was bounded through the passages leading to its choir gallery with the palace ensemble. These passages provided an access enabling the Prince to enter the cathedral from his palace.151 In this chapter I aim to present some of the main restoration and rebuilding interventions that have left its mark on the Saint Demetrius cathedral appearance. According to archaeological excavation done between the years 2003–2004, the fundament of galleries was established simultaneously with that of the cathedral, but the cathedral’s walls were probably erected before those of the annexes.152 That is to say the north wall was charred from fire while the extensions were not, which was also one of the reasons why they were torn down.153 One of the excavations was done also in the interior of the cathedral and it showed traces of strong fire which afflicted the edifice in the process of construction and presumably not finished with vaults.154 This conclusion rises a question why if both cathedral and extensions originated in the 12th century the charged stones were not replaced even in that period and why no traces of fire were found on the fundament of annexes? According to a witness of Vasiliy Dobrokhotov was one of the annexes decorated with relief embellishment.155 These carved reliefs have been preserved and were by several

150 The first mention of Saint Demetrius cathedral as being built on Vsevolod III court, comes from Lavrent’yevskaya chronicle: PSRL 1, Sankt-Peterburg 1846, p. 184.; For further description about the placing of court buildings see: Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), pp. 429–430. 151 For the discussion about the function of towers as passageways to court palace see: Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 422.; Potapov (note 26), p. 55.; Dobrokhotov (note 6), pp.142–143. 152 Zykov (note 119), p. 187. 153 Stoletov, K istorii arkhitekturnykh form (note 61), p. 121. 154 Zykov (note 119), pp. 194–195. 155 Dobrokhotov (note 6), p. 146. 30 researches dedicated to 20’s or 30’s of 13th century.156 From observation of the cathedral and study of 19th century designs of the cathedral, Svetlana Novakovskaya-Bukhman came with conclusion that it was the north tower which was embellished with reliefs.157 However, from the results of excavations in 2003–2004, it was the west part of the south gallery fundament which was made out of different masonry tufa and probably appeared after reconstruction in 13th century.158 Thus, a first significant restoration which enriched the cathedral’s extension of a new reliefs dates to the 13th century. However, if the reason for this intervention was not the fire in 1229, how was previously believed, then the right motives are still unknown. After a next fire in the year 1536, several changes were made to consolidate the edifice.159 It was necessary to place a new roof, from this period originates a shed roof, also the shape of dome was changed into onion. These rebuildings can be associated with tsar Ivan the Terrible (1547–1584) who also requested to build in galleries from 13th century side chapels – pridely with altars, the south dedicated to Ioann Predtecha, meanwhile the north to Nikolay Chudotvorets.160 At the same time, refectory was added to the edifice from the west side.161 On 30th of October 1719 the edifice caught fire again. According to the witness, everything inside the chapel of Nikolay Chudotvorets, including prestol – altar, was incinerated.162 The tetrahedron of cathedral was in bad condition, notably its north façade, and it was necessarily to cover parts with brickwork. Subsequently, new roof needed to be placed, as the previous wooden was burned down. It is this period that the cut roof shape comes from. At this time, the windows in central registers of blind arcades were changed into rectangular shape. Due to this, encircled reliefs were damaged.163 Unfortunately, circa fifty year later, the cathedral was again affected by fire.164 Church representatives gave evidence of the bad state of preservation, in which the cathedral was at the beginning of 19th century, to a parson, and ober-prokuror – the Chrief

156 Stoletov, K istorii arkhitekturnykh form (note 61), pp. 120–121.; Novakovskaya-Bukhman (note 68), p. 50.; Gladkaya – Skvortsov (note 70), p. 322. 157 Novakovskaya-Bukhman (note 68), p. 50. 158 Zykov (note 119), p. 187. 159 M.S. Gladkaya, Restavratsiya fasadnoy rez’by Dmitriyevskogo sobora v 1838–1839 gg, in: E.S. Smirnova (ed.), Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo Vladimire: k 800-letiyu sozdaniya, Moskva 1997, p. 60. 160 Stoletov, K istorii arkhitekturnykh form (note 61), p. 123.; Kosatkin (note 27), p. 15. 161 Gladkaya, Restavratsiya fasadnoy rez’by (note 159), p. 60. 162 Kosatkin (note 27), p. 15. 163 Gladkaya, Restavratsiya fasadnoy rez’by (note 159), p. 60. 164 Kosatkin (note 27), pp. 15–16. 31

Procurator of Svyateyshiy Sinod – The Most Holy Synod, Aleksandr Nikolayevich Golitsyn. After that, eight thousand roubles were spent on repairs.165 The restoration works were held between the years 1805–1807. One of the most significant interventions is the construction of second belfry above the south tower and the renovation of first belfry. During the building of porches on North and West side the roof was changed again and the sitting saints, with eighteenth century features, have appeared on west façade in row of arcades.166 The present state of the cathedral is a result of subsequent “restoration” which took place between the years 1834–1847. According to witness of Vasiliy Kosatkin, who was the parson of Saint Demetrius, on 13th of October 1834, tsar Nikolaj I (1825–1855) visited Vladimir and pointed out the inappropriacy of the cathedral’s extensions. He ordered to tear them down and return the cathedral to its initial form.167 In the 1835, the Gubernskaya Stroitel’naya Komissiya determined the cathedral to be originally constructed without extensions.168 The reasons were the distance of annexes to the building, the distinctions of reliefs and the fact that the white stone blocks of tetrahedron were charred from the fire while the blocks on annexes were not.169 As a result of this “restoration”, towers and galleries form 13th century were torn down together with later extensions. At this time, the north vault under the choir gallery was brought through to enable the construction of inner stairs.170 The works on these demolitions of annexes were completed in 1839.171 Afterwards, cracks have emerged, and it was necessarily to consolidate the ceiling and dome with iron bars. Later, it was considered that the extensions also served as buttress.172 After this, the works on conservation of relief embellishment began. Blank places remained on the walls where the towers were attached to cathedral building. The east façade, which did not possessed annexes, was the least damaged.173 To fill up the missing parts, around 171 reliefs saved from annexes were used, nevertheless, this was not enough and so around 471 new reliefs were cut.174 The row of arcades is mostly completely created out of

165 Kosatkin (note 27), pp. 15–16. 166 Gladkaya, Restavratsiya fasadnoy rez’by (note 159), p. 60.; ГАВО. Ф. 556. On. 1. Д 1399. Л. 32–35. 167 Kosatkin (note 27), pp. 19. 168 Gladkaya, Restavratsiya fasadnoy rez’by (note 159), p. 66.; ГАВО. Ф. 556. On. 1. Д. 1399, Л. 69. 169 Kosatkin (note 27), p. 19. 170 Stoletov, K istorii arkhitekturnykh form (note 61), p. 117. 171 Gladkaya, Restavratsiya fasadnoy rez’by (note 159), p. 62.; Kosatkin (note 27), p. 20. 172 Kosatkin (note 27), p. 21.; Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 426. 173 Gladkaya, Restavratsiya fasadnoy rez’by (note 159), pp. 68–69.; ГАВО. Ф. 445. Оп. 1. Д. 690.Л. 1,3. 174 Ibidem, pp. 70, 72.; ГАВО. Ф. 564. On. 1. Д. 95. Л. 1.; ГАВО. Ф. 556. Оп. 108. Д. 1593. Л. 6.; ГАВО. Ф. 445. On. 1. Д. 690. Л. боб. 32 new reliefs with combination of reliefs from annexes. The most intact is the arcature row on eastern façade and one part on north façade under the west side register of blind arcade.175 The embellishment of church’s facades was variegated with new topics, such as fight scenes, figures of priests, five new figures of martyrs and prophets. Reliefs with no previous analogies were also created, coming out of the craftsmen’s fantasy, such as Sirins, Griffons with human face, the Deesis composition and the composition with baptism, both in tympanums, which were badly damaged.176 On 10th of August 1841 conduction of diocese ordered to beat off old plaster from all walls and to smooth uneven stones. Two years later, on 30th of June, were on west side of cathedral under two layers of plaster at the choir gallery vaults found remains of mural paintings.177 After their discovery, mural paintings remained in the then state of preservation until 90’s of 19th century, when they were, due to emerging cracks, repaired and partly repainted.178 Already in 1918 was this restoration marked as a larger problem than the cracks itself, due to the fact there was used a cement on the murals to consolidate the cracks. In the next years, there were done some cleaning works, disinfections and removing of moulds in murals.179 Anther fundamental restoration was held in 1954, during these interventions by Moscow restorer Ovchinnikov and his apprentice, was used a dispersion DDT. According to researchers after this restoration, on the paintings appears a white layer of salts which has not been there before.180 20 years later, during architecture-restoring works, was definitely damaged the balance of temperature and humidity in the cathedral.181 In the following years were repeatedly made observations and conservations, because the paintings were falling into pieces and on their surface again emerged salts and moulds.182 According to researchers, murals used to be brighter and their surface is washed away in the account of unprofessional cleaning of paintings done probably in 50’s of 19th century. 183

175 Gladkaya – Skvortsov (note 70), pp. 316–321. 176 Gladkaya, Restavratsiya fasadnoy rez’by (note 159), pp. 77–78. 177 Kosatkin (note 27), pp. 23–24. 178 Balygina – Tseytlina – Nekrasov (note 92), p. 120. 179 Ibidem 180 Ibidem, p. 124. 181 Ibidem, p.121. 182 Ibidem, p. 122. 183 Ibidem, p. 124. 33

The restoration interventions in the 20th century were mostly done to avert the cathedral’s disrepair. The monument was in a bad state of preservation already in 30’s of 20th century, when Nikolay Voronin intend to do excavations around the Saint Demetrius cathedral, it was not possible due to its poor condition.184 In the 1932 the iconostas was dismantled. The wrong temperature mode in the building caused humidity, mildew and multiplied its structural deformations in the form of cracks, appearing predominantly in the southwest part of the building.185 In the 1937 begun works on filling the cracks and replacement of cracked stones. From the 1946 begun the cleaning of inner walls from the oil paintings from 19th century, later it emerged that the layer of painting had protective role to the white stone blocks.186 During the observation of the architecture was found out that the cathedral is leaning over to the southwest.187 The restoration works with aim to consolidate the cathedral were done in the years 1941–1952.188 In the 70’s–80’s of 20th century the attentions aimed to the temperature-humidity mode in the building. The structure of white stone blocks was disrupted due to appearing of salts on its surface.189 Later it was concluded that the source of salts were the stone blocks itself and the works done in the 70’s–80’s of 20th century made the state of the cathedral even worse. In the 1976–1977 was replaced old iron roof with new copper one.190 However, until the end of 80’s of 20th century none of the main problems were solved and the cathedral was still in bad state of preservation.191 Restoration works were again restored in the 90’s of 20th century and to the year 2004, the state of cathedrals preservation was stabilized.192

184 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 426. 185 T.P. Timofeyeva, Arkhitekturno-restavratsionnaya istoriya Dmitriyevskogo sobora v XX veke (1919-2000 gody), in: A.A. Bondarenko – V.L. Melnikov (edd.), Mezhdunarodnaya nauchno-prakticheskaya konferentsiya «Rerikhovskoye naslediye» Tom IV: Okhrana kul’turnykh tsennostey: peterburgskiye traditsii, Sankt-Peterburg 2009, p. 349. 186 Ibidem, pp. 350, 352. 187 Ibidem, p. 351. 188 A.V. Stoletov, Inzhenernoye ukrepleniye i restavratsiya dmitriyevskogo sobora vo vladimire, in: Sh.E. Patiya – P.N. Maksimova (edd.), Praktika retavratsionnykh rabot, sbornik 2, Moskva 1958, pp. 35–62. 189 Timofeyeva, Arkhitekturno-restavratsionnaya istoriya (note 185), p. 352. 190 Ibidem, pp. 353–354. 191 Ibidem, pp. 354–355. 192 Ibidem, p. 355. 34

4. Dating

4.1. Dating of Architecture

In the contrary with large number of ecclesiastic buildings, in the case of Saint Demetrius cathedral the chronicles do not mention the exact dates of its establishment and completion. In the year 6720 (1212), according to Lavrent’yevskaya Letopis’, the Prince Vsevolod the Big Nest died. The chronicle mentions Saint Demetrius cathedral at this conjunction as one of the edifices ordered by him. Specifically, as an edifice built on his court and with gravestone of Saint Demetrius, which was brought from Thessaloniki to Vladimir, placed in it.193 A few pages earlier, the same chronicle states that on 10th of January [1197] the gravestone of Saint Demetrius was brought from Thessaloniki.194 This led researchers to consider the fact that the cathedral might have been completed before the relicts were placed in it.195 Three theories about its establishment date emerged. First of them, done by Stroganov in 1849, states the years 1194–1197.196 The second, presented by Timofeyeva in 1997, states a date 1191–1197.197 The author of the third theory is Zykov, he believes that the cathedral was constructed between the years 1183/1184–1192.198 This theory quite differs from the previous ones and in my opinion the author came to the conclusion, opposite to previous theories, on the base of insufficient findings. Thus, I would like to start with examining of his theory and come to possible dating of the Saint Demetrius cathedral. Zykov base upon the fact that the cathedral was afflicted by fire in the process of its construction.199 A fire has affected the town in the years 1185, 1193 and 1199.200 He accepted the hypothesis that the cathedral was finished before the relicts were placed in it (1197), so he excluded the fire in the year 1199.201 But he also excluded the fire in the year 1193 because

193 PSRL 1, Sankt-Peterburg 1846, p. 184. 194 Ibidem, p. 174. In the chronicle it is mentioned under the year 6704 (1196), but the record begins with 27th of May, thus it continues until the next year when mentioning the 10th of January, or could the record be added later? 195 Dobrokhotov (note 6), pp. 139–140.; Stroganov (note 12), p. 5.; Tolstoy – Kondakov (note 19), pp. 22–24.; Kosatkin (note 27), p. 4.; Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), pp. 396–398. 196 Stroganov (note 12), pp. 4–5. 197 Timofeyeva, K utochneniyu daty (note 80), pp. 39–41. 198 Zykov (note 119), pp. 195–196. 199 Ibidem 200 PSRL 1, Sankt-Peterburg 1846, pp. 165, 172, 174–175. 201 Zykov (note 119), p. 196. 35 of the later chronicle which states the establishing date of the cathedral to the year 1191. The whole reason why he thinks the cathedral was not constructed around the fire in 1193 is that the date 1191, according to him, is not possible to connect it with it.202 What is problematic is that he proposes the establishing dates 1183 or 1184, so around two years before the fire, which is the same length as in the case of the date 1191. In the contrary with the fire in the year 1185, the same chronicle mentions, that the fire has in the year 6701 (1193) also afflicted particularly the palace court, which was fortunatelly “избавленъ” – got rid / was rescued from the fire.203 If the cathedral and its galleries with towers would be already finished to this date, we could expect that the fire which afflicted namely the court would leave its mark on the cathedral, but the charred stones were not found on the extensions.204 To sum up, I am of the opinion that Zykov did not sufficiently defended his theory and I disagree with the conclusion that the cathedral was established around the years 1183 or 1184. I would like to further elaborate on this. That is to say that the different theories also raise a question about the usual length of time necessary for construction of ecclesiastical edifices with similar dimensions and proportions at 12th century Vladimir-Suzdal’ Rus. One of the closest examples, the Dormition cathedral, was build according to chronicle in between the years 6666–6668 (1158–1160).205 Even before it was reconstrued by Vsevolod III (1177–1212) in 1185–1189, the structure was larger than Saint Demetrius cathedral and according to Timofeyeva herself, already with five cupolas.206 If the construction of a larger structure built out of the same material took around two years, why should we expect the construction of Saint Demetrius cathedral took longer time? What role in the foundation of Saint Demetrius cathedral played the court palace if any? When Nikolay Voronin made excavations around the cathedral, there were not found any remains of foundations.207 However, to the south from cathedral was found an intact stratum from 12th century, without remains of architectural structures but with huge amount

202 Zykov (note 119), p. 196. 203 About the fire in 1185 see: PSRL 1, Sankt-Peterburg 1846, p. 174. About the fire in 1193 see: PSRL 1, Sankt- Peterburg 1846, p. 172: „Въ лѣто 6701. Бысть пожаръ въ Володимери городѣ, мѣсяца iюля въ канунъ святою мученику Бориса и Глѣба, въ полъночи зажжеся и горѣ мало не до вечера, церквiй зигорѣша 14, а города половина погорѣ, и княжь дворъ Богомъ и святое Богородица изотяша, дѣда его и отца его молитвою святою, избавленъ бысть оть пожара.“ 204 Stoletov, K istorii arkhitekturnykh form (note 61), p. 121. 205 PSRL 1, Sankt-Peterburg 1846, pp. 149–150. 206 T.P. Timofeyeva, K voprosu o pyatiglavii Uspenskogo sobora Andreya Bogolyubskogo vo Vladimire, in: Materialy krayevedcheskoy konferentsii 2004 g., Vladimir 2005, pp. 27–34. 207 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 429. 36 of bricks in shape of plinfa – flat brick.208 He assumed the southern wing was built out of plinfa and put this his belief into relation with construction of Knyaginin monastyr’, which was also built out of flat bricks in around years 1200–1201.209 Nevertheless, Voronin did not compared these two building materials.

11/ Schema of the town Vladimir in the 12th–13th century.

According to L’vovskaya chronicle the fortress of Vladimir with church of Saviour were established by Vladimir Monomakh in 6616 (1108).210 The town of Vladimir was divided into three parts: Pecherna, Old Town and New Town, which were connected through gates.211 From the plan of the town Vladimir from 12th–13th century done by Voronin, is apparent the cathedral of Saint Demetrius is together with Dormition cathedral and other ecclesiastical

208 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 430. 209 Ibidem 210 PSRL 20, Sankt-Peterburg 1910, p. 103.; Yu.A. Limonov, Vladimiro-Suzdal’skaya Rus’, Leningrad 1987, p. 20.; Michal Téra, Kyjevská Rus: Dějiny, kultura, společnost, Červený Kostelec 2019, p. 321. 211 Téra (note 210), p. 353. 37 buildings in the part of the city, which was constructed in the era of Vladimir Monomakh (1113–1125). Voronin assumed the church of Saviour was part of court complex and presumably was originally standing on the place where new church of Saviour was built in 1164 and again in 18th century.212 The location, where the church of Spasa – Saviour built in the 1164 stood, (in the town schema marked by number 1), is located outside of the fortifications constructed in the era of Vladimir Monomakh (1113–1125). In the 1953 excavations were made around the church of Saviour reconstructed in 18th century. Voronin assumed the church was built out of bricks, but no remains of foundations were discovered around the edifice.213 How would it make sense to construct fortifications but built palace court outside of it? If the remains of plinfa founded in stratum from 12th century belongs to the era of Monomakh (1113–1125), it might be possible that Vsevolod III (1177–1212) established Saint Demetrius cathedral on originally Monomakh’s palace court. Apparently, most of the court buildings were not constructed out of the same material as the cathedral, we can thus assume they do not come from the same period or there was another reason why they were built out of different materials. A hypothesis about the period and the circumstances, when and from which source the flat brick architecture emerged on Vladimir-Suzdal’ Rus, was presented by Oleg Ioannisyan.214 He states, it is possible that the whole place court at Vladimir was built out of plinfa. He thinks the brick architecture emerged in around 90’s of 12th and the masters were sent from prince Rurik Rostislavich (1194–1202, 1205–1206, 1207–1210).215 Nevertheless, Ioannisyan as well did not compared the bricks in the shape of plinfa founded around Saint Demetrius cathedral with those used on later churches. Before Vsevolod gained a power in 1177, several rulers have resided in the town Vladimir.216 It is assumed that Yuriy Dolgoruky (1125–1157) had built a church of Saint Georgy, possibly with a residence, in the town.217 Its original location is determined to be outside of

212 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 42.; P.A. Rappoport, Russkaya arkhitektura X–XIII vv. Katalog pamyatnikov, Leningrad 1982. p. 56. 213 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 44. 214 O.M. Ioannisyan, Stroitel’nyye arteli Vsevoloda III i ego naslednikov, in: E.S. Smirnova (ed.), Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo Vladimire: k 800-letiyu sozdaniya, Moskva 1997, p. 21–37. 215 Ibidem, p. 24. 216 Téra (note 210), p. 357. 217 A.Yu. Karpov, Yuriy Dolgorukiy, Moskva 2007, p. 275. 38 the Old Town (number 2 in the schema) on the place, where later constructed church of Saint Georgy is standing.218 To my mind it can be assumed the court complex in the Old Town Vladimir was standing already before. If this residence was not constructed in the reign of Vladimir Monomakh (1113–1125) or Yuriy Dolgoruky (1125–1157), it is quite likely, that it was constructed in the era of some of Vsevolod’s brothers Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174) or Mikhalko Yuryevich (1174–1176) who also gained the power in Vladimir.219 This conviction is confirmed also on the base of last excavation in the years 2003–2004, which uncovered the remains of foundations of a rectangular stone building predating the Saint Demetrius cathedral.220 Zykov assumed it might come from the era of Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174), however, he did not provided any analysis of this foundations with other edifices ordered by him.221 He also expressed a presumption that the remains of flat bricks, founded during excavations conducted by Voronin on the south-east from the cathedral, could have belonged to the court buildings built during the era of Vsevolod III (1177–1212) or his ancestors.222 But again, he did not provided any analysis of this masonry.

From mentioned above is apparent that there is not any exact datum of cathedral’s establishment and its completion. Moreover, its construction has plausibly not been dependent on the completion of the palace court. Nevertheless, I would like to try to determine its date of establishment and completion. Assuming that right the fire in the year 1193, from which had been the court rescued, left its mark on the uncompleted cathedral, we might come to a conclusion, analogous to that of Zykov, and thus that the cathedral was established in between the years 1191–1192.223 Vsevolod III (1177–1212) was born in the year 1154, altogether with his birth was established the town Dmitrov, the name of both was associated with the Saint Demetrius from Thessaloniki.224 Forty years later, on the 25th of October in the year 1194, was born a son of

218 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 92.; Rappoport, Russkaya arkhitektura (note 212), pp. 56–57. 219 Téra (note 210), p. 357. 220 Zykov (note 119), pp. 196–197. 221 Ibidem 222 Ibidem 223 Ibidem 224 Karpov (note 217), p. 276.; PSRL 7, Sankt-Peterburg 1856, p. 60. 39

Vsevolod III christened Dmitriy.225 According to the logic of some researchers was the year 1194 the year of the cathedral’s establishment regarding the birth of the son, who was christen after the same patron as Vsevolod III himself, the cathedral and the town.226 I am of the opinion that the year 1194 was not the establishing year, but the year of the cathedral’s completion. I therefore believe that the act of christening the son of Vsevolod III Dmitriy at that time was not coincidental. On the other way around the same process, which happened when Vsevolod III had been born was repeated, with the difference that now was given the same name to the son and to the cathedral.

4.1.1. Contextualization

The Cathedral of Saint Demetrius is not solitary architecture of its kind. Ecclesiastic and, to a lesser extent, also profane buildings of the same execution method originate from 12th century and were constructed in the region of Vladimir-Suzdal’ Rus. These edifices built out of white limestone blocks are united also by similar ground plan, tripartite facades division and alike architectural elements. The edifices from second half of 12th century are moreover noted for their relief embellishment.

Two of the oldest preserved white limestone churches which do not possess carved reliefs but share the same ground plan as the cathedral of Saint Demetrius, are the church of SS Boris and Gleb in Kideksha and the Transfiguration cathedral at Pereslavl’-Zalesskiiy.227 They are dated to the end of reign of Yuriy Dolgoruky (1125–1157).

225 PSRL 1, Sankt-Peterburg 1846, p. 173. 226 Stroganov (note 12), pp. 4–5.; Tolstoy – Kondakov (note 19), pp. 22–24.; Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo- Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 396. 227 Bibliography on SS Boris and Gleb church: Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), pp. 67–76; Rappoport, Russkaya arkhitektura (note 212), p. 60.; Vl.V. Sedov, O konstruktsii v zhertvennike tserkvi Borisa i Gleba v Kidekshe, Rossiyskaya arkheologiya III, 2018 pp. 134–140.; Vl.V. Sedov, Belokamennyye sarkofagi v arkosoliyakh tserkvi Borisa i Gleba v Kidekshe, Kratkiye soobshcheniya instituta arkheologii CCLV, Moskva 2019, pp. 287–307. Bibliography on Transfiguration cathedral in Pereslavl’-Zalesskiiy: Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), pp. 77–90; S.D. Vasilyev – K.I. Ivanov, Pamyatniki zodchestva XII veka v Pereslavle-Zalesskom, Moskva 2004.; Vl.V. Sedov, Spaso-Preobrazhenskiy sobor v Pereslavle-Zalesskom i tserkov’ Petra i Pavla v Smolenske dva varianta sinteza drevnerusskoy i romanskoy arkhitektury, in: M.A. Orlova (ed.), Drevne-russkoye iskusstvo, Vizantiyskiy mir: regional’nyye traditsii v khudozhestvennoy kul’ture i problemy ikh izucheniya, k yubileyu E.S. Smirnovoy, Moskva 2017, pp. 227–240. 40

12/ Kideksha, the church of SS Boris and, 1152–1157, from left: view of the west façade and the south façade.

The church of SS Boris and Gleb, is located near confluence of the river Nerl and Kamenki and around 4 km far from the centre of town Suzdal’.228 The establishment of this building is commonly dated on the basis of the dating in the chronicle Letopis’ po Tipografskomu spisku to the year 1152.229 Mostly, as its founder was considered Yuri Dolgoruky (1125–1157).230 But recently, new hypothesis, which builds upon the executed excavation in the 2011–2012, states the church was completed in 1157 and the son of Yuriy Dolgoruky, Boris Yuryevich (1149–1159), could participate on the commission.231 The nowadays appearance of the edifice is a result of larger renovations which took place in 60’s of 17th century and in 80’s of 18th century.232 The building is surrounded by later extensions from 18th century.233 Originally, the church had a semi-circular vaulted ceiling.234 The building had three entrances and prolongated narrow windows which were walled up, but their traces are still visible. The original passages providing an entrance to inner choir gallery have not been preserved.

228 Rappoport, Russkaya arkhitektura (note 212), p. 60. 229 PSRL 24, Sankt-Peterburg 1921, p. 77. 230 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), pp. 67–76. 231 Sedov, Belokamennyye sarkofagi (note 227), pp. 287, 293. 232 Rappoport, Russkaya arkhitektura (note 212), p. 60. 233 Ibidem; Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 67. 234 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), pp. 72–74. 41

13/ Pereslavl’-Zalesskiiy, the cathedral of Transfiguration, 1152–1157, from left: view of the west and the south facades.

The second preserved building, cathedral of Transfiguration, is in Pereslavl’-Zalesskiiy, town which is around 130 km remote from both Vladimir and Kideksha. Even though the cathedral has undergone several restorations, since the first one in 1403 to the last one in 1891–1894, it is much more preserved than the church of SS Boris and Gleb in Kideksha.235 Its dating to the year 1152 has been made on the basis of the dating in Letopis’ po Tipografskomu spisku.236 Nonetheless, other chronicles states the date 1157, and so Nikolaj Voronin tend to date the cathedral between the years 1152–1157.237 In contrast to the division of the churches made by Voronin, Valentin Sedov presume that the Transfiguration cathedral was constructed before the SS Boris and Gleb.238 He support his claims by comparing both churches and their components with churches which were subsequent.239 Including the same ground plan and building method, these edifices also share similar tripartite division of facades with Saint Demetrius. The most striking difference is that neither

235 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 77. 236 PSRL 24, Sankt-Peterburg 1921, p. 77. 237 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 89. 238 Sedov, Spaso-Preobrazhenskiy sobor (note 227), p. 240. 239 Ibidem, pp. 238–239. 42

SS Boris and Gleb nor Transfiguration cathedral have carved relief motives as Saint Demetrius cathedral. Nevertheless, the Transfiguration cathedral possesses some decorative elements. The three apses have arched frieze with dentil above it and the drum is on its top enriched with row of zig zag motives and dentil.

14/ Bogolyubovo, the North tower, 1158–1165, from left: view from the west side and view from the east side with later constructed church of the Nativity of the Virgin.

According to chronicles, prince Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174) has established in 1158 palace court on the place named Bogolyubovo.240 In the original literary sources it is not written when was the construction completed.241 The centre of whole complex was the church of Nativity of the Virgin.242 On the basement of archaeological excavation was assumed the complex was completed in the year 1165.243 From the whole complex has preserved to nowadays only north tower which used to be connected with the church. In the 17th century was at the top of this tower added a belfry.244 The church itself has collapsed in 1722, couple of years after hegumen of the monastery Ippolit (1684–1695) ordered architectural works in

240 PSRL 4, Sankt-Peterburg 1848, p. 10. 241 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 202. 242 Rappoport, Russkaya arkhitektura (note 212), p. 57. 243 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 258. 244 Vl.V. Sedov, Lestnichnaya bashnya v Bogolyubove (po materialam raskopok 2015 goda), Kratkiye soobshcheniya instituta arkheologii (KSIA) CCXLIX, Moskva 2017, p. 131. 43 the edifice which included the removing of its choir gallery.245 In the half of 18th century was on the basement of previous church constructed a new one, which is standing until nowadays.246 The tower in Bogolyubovo shows example of court palace architecture at 50’s to 60’s of 12th century. There were employed some of the architectural elements which have been seen od Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches since the era of Yuriy Dolgoruky (1113–1157). The row or arcades is not embellished with carved reliefs although, the church itself most likely was. During the excavations around the church were found remains of three angel faces and three lion masks.247 Provided that, Vsevolod III (1177–1212) used the same workshop as Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174) we might assume, that if Vsevolod III has built a new or added buildings to palace court at Vladimir, they could have the analogous forms.

15/ Vladimir, the Dormition cathedral, 1158–1160, 1185–1189, from left: view of the east and the west facades.

The first preserved building with carved relief motives like Saint Demetrius cathedral is the Dormition cathedral in Vladimir. The cathedral was established, according to the Lavrent’yevskaya chronicle, in the 1158 on request of the prince Andrey (1157–1174).248 The same chronicle mentions the completion of the cathedral in 1160.249 The cathedral burned in 1185, when the whole city was affected with fire, and was restored in the 1185–1189 at the command of Vsevolod III (1174–1212).250 It was believed that the original building was single

245 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 208. 246 Ibidem, p. 210; Rappoport, Russkaya arkhitektura (note 212), p. 57. 247 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 214. 248 PSRL 1, Sankt-Peterburg 1846, p. 149. 249 Ibidem, p. 150. 250 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 150. 44 dome structure with six pillars and was enlarged after restoration with new naves from the west the south and the north and with addition of four more cupolas.251 It was thus assumed that the restoration was in fact construction of a new church. However, Tatyana Timofeyeva have recently questioned this theory and presented a new explanation which states that it is possible that the cathedral had five cupolas even prior to the fire in 1189.252 The cathedral has undergone several restorations, mainly between the years 1888– 1891 when the helm shaped cupolas were made, the main part of the walls was reworked, the portals were moved, and the significant part of the relief decoration was removed and replaced with remakes.253 Even after its restoration history and distinct differences in a ground plan, the Dormition cathedral and Saint Demetrius cathedral both possesses substantial similarities in architectural components. The flat lopatki – pilaster strips, dividing the cathedrals facades, culminating into blind arches, are at both edifices enriched with columns with Corinthian capitals. There are carved stone reliefs with human faces on the sides of the windows. The arched frieze, already present at Transfiguration cathedral, was prolongated with columns of the Corinthian capitals ending with consoles in the shape of animals or human faces. The portals are stepped arched with carved floral motives in the same order as in the case of Saint Demetrius cathedral. In contrary with Sain Demetrius, the depiction of King David has not been preserved, or was not even present at first place, on the facades of the Dormition cathedral.

The structure most resembling Saint Demetrius cathedral is the church of Intercession on the river Nerl, located at Bogolyubovo about 15 km from Vladimir. For some researchers the two edifices resemble each other on such a large scale that Stroganov assumed the church of Intercession on Nerl to be a model for Saint Demetrius cathedral.254

251 S.V. Zagrayevskiy, Uspenskiy sobor vo Vladimire: nekotoryye voprosy arkhitekturnoy istorii, in: S.V. Zagrayevskiy – T.P. Timofeyeva (edd.), Pamyati Andreya Bogolyubskogo, Moskva–Vladimir 2009, pp. 95–96; Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 150. 252 Timofeyeva, K voprosu o pyatiglavii (note 206), pp. 27–34. 253 Zagrayevskiy (note 251) pp. 96–97. 254 Stroganov (note 12), p. 4. 45

In contrary to previous edifices, the date of its establishment is not stated in any contemporary source.255 Its construction can be date in between the years 1165–1167.256 From the very beginning, the church was a monastic.257

16/ Bogolyubovo, the church of Intercession on the river Nerl, 1165–1167, from left: view of the west and the east facades.

Comprehensive restoration works took place in the year 1803. During these works, the cupola coverage was replaced with an onion shape dome.258 Another restoration was held between the years 1859–1860. During this period, the extensions were torn down. Shortly after in the year 1877, new rebuilding was executed. The decision was approved by clerics, the works were done without familiarity of archaeological administrative authorities. The remains of medieval murals in the dome were destroyed.259

255 A.V. Sirenov, Kogda byla postroyena tserkov’ Pokrova na Nerli?, in: A.A. Meshchenina – R.A. Sokolov (edd.), Prizvaniye - istoriya sbornik nauchnykh statey k 55-letiyu professora Yu.V. Krivosheyeva, Sankt-Peterburg 2010, p. 118; Vl.V. Sedov, Tserkov’ Pokrova na nerli i sobor v Modene, Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta VIII. no 3., Moskva 2019, p. 164. 256 P.A. Rappoport, Drevnerusskaya arkhitektura, Sankt-Peterburg 1993, p. 264. 257 Sedov, Tserkov’ Pokrova (note 255), p. 165. 258 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 150. 259 Ibidem, p. 150. 46

The edifice has common ground plan composed from cubic form with one dome, three apses and cupola situated on the dome. It has tripartite facades divided by stepped blind arcades. Together with the Dormition and Saint Demetrius cathedral, it has columns of the Corinthian capitals, row of arcades, stepped arched portals decorated with floral motives and carved relief embellishment in the round tympanums. Similar to the Saint Demetrius cathedral it has a figure of king David in the central blind arcade on the north, the west, and the south facades. The carved reliefs are more frequently represent than in the case of Dormition cathedral, but still not nearly as is the case with the facades of Saint Demetrius. There is a difference between the reliefs of both edifices. In the more raised and three-dimensional relief embellishment at church of Intercession are depicted mainly gryphons, lions, birds, and human faces, which are rarely represented at Saint Demetrius cathedral.

17/ Yuryev-Polsky, the cathedral of Saint Georgy, built in year 1234, from left: view of southwest corner and southeast corner.

The last ecclesiastic building built out of white stone blocks and strewn with carved reliefs still standing to this day is in Yuryev-Polsky. Originally, there was a church by Yuriy Dolgoruky (1113–1157) built on its place around the year 1152. The structure used to have more in common with the edifices such as the Transfiguration cathedral in Pereslavl’-Zalesskiiy and SS Boris and Gleb in Kideksha.260 In the year 1234 the church of Saint Georgy was, on the request of Prince Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich (1246—1248), replaced with newly build cathedral of Saint Georgy.261 Unfortunately, the dome collapsed in the 1460’s and was restored in the

260 N.N. Voronin, Vladimir, Bogolyubovo, Suzdal’, Yur’yev-Pol’skoy, Moskva 1967, p. 263. 261 Ibidem, p. 264; N.N. Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi XII–XV vekov, Kn. 2, Moskva 1962, p. 68. 47 year 1471 by architect Vasiliy Dmitriyevich Ermolin. Since that the cathedral has undergone several restorations.262 The current structure is composed of cubic form with single massive dome, and three porches prolongating the portals at the south, the north and the west facades. Even there we can find places fully covered with reliefs.

To sum up, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius shares so striking similarities with edifices built by Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174), their stylistic relation cannot be questioned without difficulties. Saint Demetrius belongs thus to a well-established and documented regional tradition. On the other hand, there are apparent differences that assures, the ecclesiastical buildings were not constructed in the same decades. What makes the saint Demetrius cathedral different from the churches from 50’s and 60’s of 12th century is the appearance and frequency of facades relief embellishment. It is thus plausible to assume that after a first generation establishing the architectural patterns, in a second generation, to which Saint Demetrius cathedral belongs, the local school was adopting waster decorative apparatus.

4.2. Dating of Relief Embellishment

The carved reliefs are inherent part of Saint Demetrius cathedral’s architecture, despite they are bound to its facades, they come from different periods. About the fact stating new reliefs were added on the facades testify the archival reports and witness of contemporaries.263 Disparities amongst individual reliefs are noticeable also on the basement of stylistic analysis. We can assume where have been used the facsimiles from 19th century when we think of the places, where annexes were connected to the outer walls, and the fact their destruction

262 V.V. Kavelmakher, Krayeugol’nyy kamen’ iz lapidariya Georgiyevskogo sobora v Yur’yeve-Pol’skom (k voprosu o tak nazyvayemom Svyatoslavovom kreste), in: O.E. Etingof (ed.), Drevnerusskoye iskusstvo. Rus’, Vizantiya, Balkany. XIII vek, Sankt-Peterburg 1997, pp. 185–190. 263 Dobrokhotov (note 6), pp. 142–143.; ГАВО. Ф. 445. Оп. 1. Д. 690.Л. 1,3. 263 Gladkaya, Restavratsiya fasadnoy rez’by (note 159), pp. 70, 72.; ГАВО. Ф. 564. On. 1. Д. 95. Л. 1.; ГАВО. Ф. 556. Оп. 108. Д. 1593. Л. 6.; ГАВО. Ф. 445. On. 1. Д. 690. Л. боб. 48 damaged facades. Insofar as we want to focus on the carved reliefs from undamaged walls, the method how to determine their period of origin depends on stylistic analysis.

4.2.1. Formal Analysis and Sources

To find analogies for the carved reliefs at the facades of Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches, I have studied the contemporary medieval art, but unfortunately, there were not found any satisfying parallels.264 On the other hand, some conclusions were made. To my mind the Vladimir-Suzdal’ carved reliefs share more characteristics with carved reliefs of byzantine origin from Staraya Zagora and Kiev, dated to 11th century, than with those from Western Europe from 11th to 12th century.

If we compare relief depicting two horsemen with horsemen from the Saint Demetrius, we see huge distinctions, in the terms of rendition. They are of different scale and the height of Two Horsemen relief is unified and flatter. Both carvers had different sense for proportion and a detail. These are for me characteristics which clearly confirms that both carved reliefs did not come from the same period and were not created by the same person. Even though, they share striking similarities regarding the iconography.

264 Bernhard Rupprecht, Romanische Skulptur in Frankreich, München 1975.; Dorothy F. Glass, The sculpture of reform in north Italy, ca 1095-1130: history and patronage of Romanesque façades, Surrey 2010.; Zygmunt Świechowski, Sculpture romane d'Auvergne, Clermont-Ferrand 1973.; Nicholas Melvani, Late byzantine sculpture, Turnhout 2013.; André Grabar, Sculptures byzantines du moyen age. II, (XIe - XIVe siècle), Paris 1976.; Nina Iamanidzé, Les installations liturgiques sculptées des églises de Géorgie: (VIe-XIIIe siècles), Turnhout 2010.; A.L. Yaakobson – Yu.A. Tamanyan, Armyaanskaya arkhitektura v Krymu, Erevan 1992. 49

19/ Left image: Lion, 11th century, carved relief, Staraya Zagora. Right image: Detail of the Saint Demetrius cathedral façade, end of 12th century, carved relief, Vladimir.

Opposite to the previous example, the relief representing a lion was found in Staraya Zagora, town in Bulgaria.265 The relief from Staraya Zagora is completely flat, we can see a great sense for carved details and ornamentality, which are the main distinctions in comparison with the Saint Demetrius relief. On the opposite, the proportion, arrangement, body shape and the face drawing share remarkable similarities with the Saint Demetrius relief. On a first glance, it might seem that the distinctions are larger than similarities. I agree there are many diverse not only in a rendition but also in a period of an origin as well as in the location. Nevertheless, if we look at the Western Europe, especially to Northern Italy, which was most recently presented as a centre of sources for the Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches architectural and carved reliefs, surprisingly we do not find closer parallels.266

20/ From the left: Detail of Modena cathedral consoles and detail of the main façade tympanum, between 90’s of 11th century and 80’s of 12th century, carved reliefs, Modena.

265 Grabar, Sculptures byzantines (note 264), pp. 72–74. 266 Ioannisyan, Romanskiye istoki (note 111), pp. 55, 64. 50

The tympanum arrangement of the Modena cathedral is resembling that at the church of Intercession on the river Nerl, but its sculptural decorations not at all. At first, there was employed a different kind of carved relief – haut relief. The carved reliefs of the Vladimir- Suzdal’ churches were created in rather bas-relief. At second, the sense for proportions and more broadly for mimetic depiction also differs. We can clearly see that the figures, animals and even the robes are much more mimetic in the case of Modena cathedral than in the Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches. The same can be said about the face of consoles. In the representation of faces is visible an intention for depicting the fascial expressions. This is completely missing in representation of Vladimir-Suzdal’ console’s faces which are symmetrical and rather symbolic.

21/ From the left: detail of the west façade main portal and the west façade detail, between the years 1130– 1150, carved reliefs, Pavia, the basilica of San Michele Maggiore.

Another monument, the basilica of San Michele Maggiore in Pavia, and its architectural forms and carved reliefs are also compared with those at the Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches.267 The churches relief embellishment was carved in between the years 1130–1150 and its iconography, especially at the eastern end, reflects the coronation function of this site.268 We see a different intention towards the artistic rendition of carved reliefs then at previously mentioned Modena cathedral. There is not apparent an effort for a mimetic representation, the reliefs are rather rendered in bas-relief and some of them were carved with a great sense for detail. What is problematic is that most of the figures, for example from the portal, do not find any analogies at the facades of Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches. The now hardly recognizable carved reliefs on facades of the San Michele Maggiore might use to be more similar to those

267 Ioannisyan, Romanskiye istoki (note 111), pp. 47–49. 268 Gillian Elliott, Representing Royal Authority at San Michele Maggiore in Pavia, Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte LXXVII, no. 2, 2014, pp. 145–147. 51 at Vladimir-Suzdal’. But apparently the smaller proportions of limbs and head with torso and overall roundness are not analogical.

To the best of my consciousness and knowledges none of the chronicles mentions that to Vladimir-Suzdal' region were sent masters from Germany or Northern Italy who would build local churches. Also, none of the researchers, who believe masters came from Norther Italy, have such a source. Only Tatishchev, without any prove or source, stated that masters were sent from Frederic Barbarossa I. (1152–1190).269 The Lavrent’yevskaya chronicle states, that when the Dormition cathedral in Vladimir was already completed it was decorated with icons and lavish stones and its dome was gild and also that on the will of prince Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174) came masters from “all of the lands”.270 The same chronicle states, that next year, the cathedral begun to be embellished with murals and the same year they were finished.271 What follows from the chronicle? These masters are mentioned at the completion of the cathedral not at its establishment, we do not know their profession, we do not know what “изъ всѣхъ земль” – from all the lands – exactly mean, we know that year later the cathedral was decorated with murals. I am of the opinion that nothing indicates that the masters were architects or builders, they were rather specialists on mural paintings, or any other work connected with indoor decoration of the cathedral. The only reference about “Нѣмець” – the one who does not speak – comes from the same chronicle, from the year 6702 (1194).272 It states, that in the year 1194, the church in Suzdal’ was renewed, then is described where was the edifice covered by lead, after this chronicler refers that [Vsevolod III (1177–1212)] did not ordered masters from “Нѣмець”, but finds masters working on other

269 Tatishchev (note 5), pp. 127, 487. 270 „Въ лѣто 6668. […] Того же лѣта создана бысть церкы святая Богородица, въ Володимери, благовѣрнымъ и боголюбивымъ княаземъ Андрѣемъ; и украси ю дивно многоразличными иконами, и драгимъ каменьемъ безъ числа, и ссуды церковными, и верхъ ея позлати. по вѣрѣ же его и по тщанью его к святѣй Богородицѣ, приведе ему Богъ изъ всѣхъ земль мастеры, и украси ю паче инѣхъ церквiй.“ PSRL 1, Sankt-Peterburg 1846, p. 150. 271 „Въ лѣто 6669. Почата бысть писати церквы въ Володимери Золотоверхая, а кончана августа въ 30.“ PSRL 1, Sankt-Peterburg 1846, p. 150. 272 „Того же лѣта, (1194/6702) мѣсяца семтября, обновлена бысть церкы святая Богородица въ Суждали, яже бѣ опадала старостью и безнарядьемъ, тѣмъ же блаженымъ епископомъ Иваномъ, и покрыта бысть оловомъ отъ верху до комаръ и до притворовъ. и то чюду подобно, молитвою святое Богородици и его вѣрою, а иже не ища мастеровъ отъ Нѣмець, но налѣзе мастеры отъ клевретъ святое Богородици и отъ своихъ, иныхъ олову льяти, иныхъ крыти, иныхъ извистью бѣлити […]“ PSRL 1, Sankt-Peterburg 1846, p. 173. 52 edifice and from his own.273 After this, the chronicle mentions that he found other masters for particular works. Again, the profession of these masters is not clear as well as their nationality. With reference to consultation with Mariya Tikhanova, Nikolay Voronin concluded that the term “Нѣмець” had not yet acquired the broad meaning of a “foreigner”, but it denoted the German proper.274 After the consultation with Mgr. Galina Prokudina, PhD student and philologist of Russian language, I have concluded that the term “Нѣмець” had acquired the broad meaning of a “foreigner”. As is apparent, when it comes to the question of masters working on the Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches from 50’s of 12th century, the opinions of specialist differ significantly. To my mind, it was not proved, on the base of formal analysis nor the records from chronicles, that the masters – particularly architects or builders, originated in Northern Italy. What I wanted to highlight by showing the carved reliefs from Kiev and Staraya Zagora was not that masters originated at these regions. I believe that the masters who had carved the reliefs in Vladimir-Suzdal’ had the same cultural and visual background as those who carved the two mentioned reliefs. The fact, that carved reliefs had not emerged on the facades of the Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches before the reign of Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174) does not proves, that local craftsmen were not able to carve such reliefs. I am of the opinion that they did not have any reason to do so before. In my conviction, after Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157– 1174) take over the rule in Vladimir-Suzdalian Rus', he brought with him an intention which he wanted to present on the facades of his churches. I thus agree with the opinion of Aleksey Lidov, who states that the relief embellishment of the Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches does not have straight analogies in the art of Christian world.275 I believe that the reason why these reliefs do not have straight analogies is that they cannot have straight analogies, they are answer of local craftsmen on the commission by the prince.

273 PSRL 1, Sankt-Peterburg 1846, p. 173. 274 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), pp. 330, 541. 275 Lidov, O simbolicheskom zamysle...1994 (note 75), p. 26.; Lidov, O simvolicheskom zamysle...1997 (note 96), p. 172. 53

4.2.2. Contextualization

In a view of my conclusions from the previous chapter, I put the relief embellishment of the Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches only into a context of local edifices. The oldest preserved reliefs, similar to those at saint Demetrius cathedral, belongs to the Dormition cathedral (1158–1160/ 1185–1189). The raised symmetrical reliefs with rounded shape occur on the cathedral specifically on consoles of row of arcades, on the sides of the windows and in the tympanums. They represent mostly lion masks and human faces or angels.

22/ Vladimir, the Dormition cathedral, 1158–1160 and 1185–1189, from left: view of the east façade arcature row and the north façade tympanums.

A few years later the visual side of carved reliefs changes a bit. The reliefs on the facades of church of Intercession on the river Nerl (1165–1167) are variegated with new depictions. There were added such motives like gryphons standing on beasts, lions with full body and birds presented usually above the lions in tympanums. Most distinctive, the figure of King David emerges. The appearance of consoles in row of arcades also differs with addition of a more intricated motives.

23/ Bogolyubovo, the church of Intercession on the river Nerl, 1165–1167, from left: detail of façade the carved reliefs and the west tympanum.

The need to fill the facades of churches with carved motives increased in the time when Saint Demetrius cathedral was constructed. The depictions are generally more vivid opposite to those at previously built churches. Here, they do not give the impression of iconic or symbolist presentation, but they look more dynamic as if they were part of a narrative.

24/ Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius, end of 12th century, from left: view of central apse and the central tympanum of the south façade.

Another monument which possesses relief embellishment is the cathedral of the Nativity of the Theotokos in Suzdal’. The edifice was built around the year 1222 on request of prince Yuri II of Vladimir (1218–1238) and was completed three years later, it is standing on the basements of church from the era of Vladimir Monomakh (1113–1125).276 In the contrast with hitherto presented buildings, this edifice was in 13th century built out of flat bricks and tufa.277 The cathedral collapsed around the year 1528 and the walls above its row of arcades were rebuilt from flat bricks.278 The relief embellishment has preserved on the row of arcades, in the south and the west portal and separately on the cathedral’s walls.279

276 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1962 (note 261), p. 19.; M.A. Orlova, O fasadnom dekore Rozhdestvenskogo sobora v Suzdale. K probleme rekonstruktsii, Vestnik PSTGU. Seriya V: Voprosy istorii i teorii khristianskogo iskusstva XXXVI, 2019, p. 48. 277 Orlova (note 276), p. 49. 278 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1962 (note 261), p. 19.; Orlova (note 276), p. 49. 279 Orlova (note 276), p. 49. 55

25/ Suzdal’, the cathedral of the Nativity of the Theotokos, around 1222, from left: view of the detail of row of arcades and detail of south portal.

What we see on the facades of Sant Georgy cathedral at Yuryev-Polsky is a massive invasion of carved reliefs. We can imagine that before the cathedral collapsed, it might have been fully covered with relief embellishment. Further, we can see that the sense for delicate details has increased also. These reliefs are in contrary with those preserved from previously mentioned edifices, more linear, flat, and intricate. Some of the reliefs continue on adjected carved blocks, this is something, that has not been seen on any other previous monument. Continuous ornamental floral motive extending to several stone blocks is something distinctive for this edifice.

26/ Yuryev-Polsky, the cathedral of Saint Georgy, built in year 1234, from left: view of the detail of façade carved relief embellishment and the carved reliefs around the portal.

If we compare carved reliefs placed on the facades of the Saint Demetrius cathedral from former extensions with those at cathedral in Suzdal’ or Yuryev-Polsky, we can clearly see similarities. The high of compared carved reliefs is almost the same, we can see how to bodies of animals are fulfilled with ornaments and how the shape of body and the head is similar. I

56 can confirm that carved reliefs from the Saint Demetrius former extensions were sculpted in the same decades with those at the cathedrals in Suzdal’ and Yuryev-Polsky.

From aforementioned examples is apparent that the carved reliefs on the facades of the Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches had undergone several changes since the first in the 50’s of 12th century to the 30’s of 13th century. The most evident modification is that the facades got rapidly filled up with carved reliefs and these reliefs itself gained more ornaments. During the decades there were also added new motives and some of the previous ones had vanished or were modified.

4.3. Dating of Mural Paintings

The mural paintings, uncovered on 30th of June in 1843 under two layers of stucco, were, according to a witness of parson Vasiliy Kosatkin, attributed shortly after by academic Solncev to 12th century.280 It was mostly accepted, only Vasiliy Dobrokhotov and Sergey Stroganov considered that the murals originate from the end of 14th or beginning of 15th century.281 The first reference about the decoration of cathedral walls with murals comes from Lavrent’yevskaya chronicle and belongs to the year 6720 (1212).282 Since the 80’s of 19th century the murals have undergone several restorations and series of partial repaintings.283

280 Kosatkin (note 27), p. 24. 281 Dobrokhotov (note 6), p. 147.; Stroganov (note 12), p. 12. 282 PSRL 1, Sankt-Peterburg 1846, p. 184. 283 Balygina – Tseytlina – Nekrasov (note 92), pp. 120–124. 57

During these interventions were analysed the samples of murals, nevertheless, the results rather determined the constitution of murals then the period of their origin.284

The preserved murals at Saint Demetrius cathedral are distinguished by rather static figures, in their faces are not written any strong emotions. Quite geometric drapery is characteristic by high contrast between linear and angular lights and shadows. The overall colours are distorted due to several interventions in the past.285 However, we can see that the predominant colours for the clothing are dark blues and greens, light and dark reds and yellow ochres. Even if the colours were originally brighter and more variegated, they were, as is apparent, probably mostly in the range of gloomy and dark hues.

28/ From left: Last Judgement detail of apostle, detail of central vault the north side, dated to the end of 12th century, Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius.

4.3.1 Formal Analysis and Dating

To better understand the context of the painting of the Saint Demetrius, it is worthy to present the mural paintings, attributed to the 12th century, which were found in all of the mentioned churches in the region Vladimir-Suzdal’. In the church of SS Boris and Gleb were uncovered fragments of murals in northern arcosolium by prof. Sychev and Varganov in 1946.286 According to Voroning, the edifice was not originally adorned with murals and these

284 Balygina – Tseytlina – Nekrasov (note 92), pp. 123–124. 285 Ibidem, p. 124. 286 Sedov, Belokamennyye sarkofagi (note 227), p. 290. 58 fragments belongs to the period of Vsevolod III (1177–1212).287 They depicts a two standing figures with haloes. On the vaults under the choir gallery in the Transfiguration cathedral at Pereslavl’- Zalesskiiy were preserved murals with the same arrangement of Last Judgement as is in the Saint Demetrius cathedral.288 There have been depicted sitting apostles with opened books on which were written their names and above them were standing angels.289 In the 1891– 1894, when the cathedral was going through restoration one of the chief, academic V. Syslov, was unsuccessfully trying to obtain funds for their necessary restoration. Unfortunately, in the end they were determined as not worthy to be restored and were not preserved to our time.290 This is also the case of cathedral in Pereslavl’-Zalesskiiy, fragments of mural paintings were preserved at the church of Intercession on the river Nerl until the restoration in 1877.291 They were situated in the cupola and, according to observations of researchers, depicted Christ the Saviour surrounded by archangels and cherubins.292 From already described monuments, fragments of murals from the era of Vsevolod III (1177–1212) have been preserved in the Dormition cathedral in Vladimir. Shortly after its completion in 6669 (1161), the painters begun to adorn the interior walls with murals.293 After the great fire in 1185 it was necessary to repair the cathedral and during the works it obtained new murals.294 The cathedral was painted again already in the 13th century, and in the year 1408, the murals of Last Judgement, with the same arrangement as is at the Saint Demetrius cathedral, were painted by Andrey Rublev and his helper.295 The mural paintings from the era of Vsevolod III (1177–1212) have preserved on several places.296 To the best preserved belongs the figures of prophets. We can see that the character of angular and geometric lights is very close to that at robes of apostles in the Saint Demetrius murals. Nevertheless, the

287 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 75. 288 Ibidem, pp. 80–82. 289 Ibidem 290 Vasilyev – Ivanov (note 227), pp. 12–13.; V.N. Lazarev, Iskusstvo Drevney Rusi. Mozaiki i freski, Moskva 2000, p. 269. 291 Rappoport, Russkaya arkhitektura (note 212), p. 59. 292 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 271. 293 PSRL 1, Sankt-Peterburg 1846, p. 150. 294 Ibidem, pp. 165–167.; L.P. Balygina – A.P. Nekrasov – A.I. Skvortsov, Vnov’ otkrytyye i maloizvestnyye fragmenty zhivopisi XII v. v Uspenskom sobore vo Vladimire, in: O.I. Podobedova (ed.), Drevnerusskoye iskusstvo. Monumental’naya zhivopis’ XI–XVII vv., Moskva 1980, p. 61. 295 PSRL 1, Sankt-Peterburg 1846, p. 196.; PSRL 25, Lenindgrad 1949, p. 237. 296 Balygina – Nekrasov – Skvortsov (note 294), pp. 62–63. 59 shading of robes at the Saint Demetrius is more moulded it has colour gradient, on the contrary, the robes of prophets at the Dormition cathedral are flat without any shades, but with delineating lines which are more visible than in the murals of the Saint Demetrius. If we look at the face of prophet Habakkuk, it seems to be close with some of the faces of angles, but there are no green shades which are one of the distinctive features of figures at the Saint Demetrius.

29/ Prophet Habakkuk and an unknown prophet, around the year 1189, fragments of mural paintings, Vladimir, the Dormition cathedral.

From the monuments on the territory of Rus’ the Saint Demetrius murals were compared also with those at Nereditsa church.297 The church itself was established on request of prince Yaroslav Vladimirovich (1197–1199) in the year 1198.298 It begun to be adorned with murals a year later.299 Unfortunately, most of the murals were destroyed in the end of World

297 Sychev (note 40), p. 150.; Grabar‘, Freski Dmitriyevskogo sobora...1966 (note 54), pp. 53, 55–56. 298 M.K. Karger, Novgorodskoye zodchestvo, in: I.E. Grabar’ – V.N. Lazarev – V. S. Kemenov (edd.) Istoriya russkogo iskusstva, Moskva 1954, p. 31. 299 V.N. Lazarev, Zhivopis’ i skul’ptura Novgoroda, in: I.E. Grabar’ – V.N. Lazarev – V.S. Kemenov (edd.), Istoriya russkogo iskusstva, Moskva 1954, p. 96. 60

War II, only few fragments remained.300 Paintings in their original form can be now studied only from photographs.

30/ Details of the Last Judgement, around the year 1199, mural paintings, Novgorod, Nereditsa church.

Also, at the Nereditsa church used to be a scene of the Last Judgment, but with a different arrangement. The character of robes lighting and shading is even closer to that employed at the Saint Demetrius. Contrarily, the drawing of faces is quite a lot different. The faces at the Saint Demetrius are more moulded with soft linear lights, which are used also on hair. While at the Saint Demetrius the face shading is interconnected, at the Nereditsa church lights, shades and skin colour are separated layers. Another monument of which murals were compared with those at the Saint Demetrius, is the church of Saint Georgy in Staraya Ladoga. The church also has the depiction of the Last Judgment of which the arrangement is closer with that at the Nereditsa church than those at the Saint Demetrius cathedral. There are no written records about the church’s establishment or the date of its mural paintings.301 According to archaeological research the monument was probably constructed in more phases since the half of 12th century.302 About the dating of its mural paintings, and with it connected construction of the build, exists antagonistic theories stating the period from

300 Lazarev, Iskusstvo Drevney Rusi (note 290), p. 276. 301 V.D. Sarabyanov, Georgiyevskaya tserkov’ v Staroy Ladoge, Moskva 2003, p. 8–9. 302 Ibidem, p. 8. 61

40’s of 12th century, around the 1165 and the 80’s or 90’s of 12th century.303 Also these murals undergone several damaging restorations and in 1849, most of them were scraped off the walls or covered with stucco layer.304

31/ Saint-Eustache and fragments of Last Judgement, second half of the 12th century, mural paintings, Staraya Ladoga, the church of Saint Georgy.

The character of its lights has something in common with lights on robes at the Saint Demetrius but not so much as in the case of previous examples. The composition of colours for painting is also different. There are almost no shadows and delineating lines, just lights and skin colour, due to this, the figures look flatter. The analogies for Saint Demetrius cathedral’s murals were also searched in the painting of 12th century outside of the Rus’, in Greece, particularly in Thessaloniki, and, on the other side, also in Macedonia.305

303 B.G. Vasilyev, K voprosu o vremeni sozdaniya fresok tserkvi sv. Georgiya v Ladoge, in: I.V. Antipov – I.A. Shalina (edd.), Iskusstvo Drevney Rusi i stran vizantiyskogo mira, Sankt-Peterburg 2012, p. 78.; Sarabyanov (note 301), p. 9. 304 V.N. Lazarev, Novyye fragmenty rospisey iz Staroy Ladogi, in: M.I. Artamonov (ed.), Kul’tura i iskusstvo drevney Rus: Sbornik statey v chest’ prof. M. K. Kargera, Leningrad 1967, p. 77. 305 Kosatkin (note 27), p. 12.; Grabar‘, Freski Dmitriyevskovo sobora...1923 (note 36), pp. 42–47.; Grabar‘, Freski Dmitriyevskogo sobora...1966 (note 54), p. 67.; Popova (note 90), p. 105.; Etingof (note 134), p. 159. 62

From the Macedonian mural painting can be, for comparison with the Saint Demetrius cathedral murals, mentioned the murals at the church of Saint Panteleimon in Nerezi or those at the church of Saint George in Kurbinovo. The older one, in the church of Saint Panteleimon, was, according to an inscription in marble architrave above the main entrance, decorated in September of the year 1164.306 The palette of dark hues has something in common with those colours used at the Saint Demetrius. Nevertheless, the Saint Demetrius murals are typical for purely white lights appearing on most of the robes, but this is missing in Nerezi. Here we can see that the colour of lights and shades corresponds with the overall colour of a particular material. So, for example, the purple robe has dark purple shades and lighter blue-purple lights. The character of drapery also differs from the Saint Demetrius. On one side, the shades of faces at the Nerezi church are done of green colour as they are at the Saint Demetrius. On the other, the faces are at the Nerezi church livelier more variegated and emotional. The drawing of the eyes also differs at both cases.

306 Olga Ovcharova, Images of the holy hymnographers in the iconographical programme of the church of St Panteleemon in Nerezi, Macedonia (1164), Al-Masāq XVI, No. 1, 2004, p. 131.; O.V. Ovcharova, Istoriya izucheniya fresok Nerezi (ikonograficheskiy aspekt), A.V. Zakharova (ed.), Aktual’nyye problemy teorii i istorii iskusstva II, Sankt-Peterburg 2012, pp. 108–116.; Vojislav J. Đurić, Byzantinische Fresken in Jugoslawien, Munich 1976, pp. 15–17; André Grabar, La peinture byzantine, Geneva 1953., pp. 141–143. 63

Another example of Macedonian mural painting, the church of Saint George in Kurbinovo, dates, according to an inscription on the back side of an altar, to the year 1191.307 In the drapery of mural paintings at Kurbinovo we can also see a high contrast between purely white lights and darker lines as in the Saint Demetrius. The character of lights is also closer to those at the Saint Demetrius than those at Nerezi, but the type of drapery differs, and some examples are rather distant than close in a style to the Saint Demetrius. In the contrast with the Saint Demetirus, at Kurbinovo are the figures and their faces slimmer and more elongated. Their hair and robes are much more detailly drawn. The drapery is in murals at Kurbinovo more tangled and dynamic. Also here are the faces shaded with green colour but, in the contrary, also with red. From the mural painting at Thessaloniki of 12th century, are with the Saint Demetrius murals compared those at Hosios David dated around 60’s–70’s of 12th century.308 The overall colour palette at Hosios David is resemble with that applied on the murals at the Saint Demetrius. In some draperies is again visible the hight contrast between lights and shadows, on the other side, the character of draperies and their lights again differs. From yet presented

307 Vojislav J. Đurić, Byzantinische Fresken in Jugoslawien, Munich 1976, pp. 17–19.; Lydie Hadermann- Misguich, Kurbinovo: les fresques de Saint-Georges et la peinture byzantine du XIIe siècle, Brusel 1975. 308 Vojislav J. Đurić, La peinture murale Byzantine: XIIe et XIIIe siècles, Actes du XV CIEB. Rapport et co-rapports IV, Athens 1976, p 172. 64 examples is the drawing of eyes in the murals at Hosios David the closest to those at the Saint Demetrius. Also, the shape of face, the rendition of neck and hands is almost similar.

From above mentioned is apparent that character of drapery rendition in the murals in the Saint Demetrius is closest with local mural painting. Nevertheless, the same cannot be said about the rendition of faces, they are closer to those in mural paintings at Thessaloniki. I disagree with the conclusion of Igor Grabar who highlighted that the murals at Nereditsa church were completed after those at the Saint Demetrius.309 I would say that the paintings at the Nereditsa church are visually flatter – not so shaded and more angular, as for the robes and faces. These are also the characteristic features of murals at the Staraya Ladoga church and partially those at the Dormition cathedral in Vladimir. From this point of view, I would rather say that the murals at the Nereditsa church were painted before those at the Saint Demetrius cathedral. On the base of the same arguments, I am of the opinion, that the murals at the Dormition cathedral, painted around 1189, were also preceding those at Saint Demetrius, which are more spatial and elaborated. So, I am of the opinion that the mural paintings of the Saint Demetrius cathedral do not originate in the end of 12th century.

309 Grabar‘, Freski Dmitriyevskogo sobora...1966 (note 54), pp. 55–56. 65

5. Contextualization and Iconography

The aim of this chapter is to show the relation between the political situation in the Kievan Rus’, particularly the purpose to constitute a new ideological and political centre, with the building of the first white stone architecture incorporating carved reliefs. In my opinion, to understand the iconographical meaning of the Saint Demetrius cathedral it is necessary to begin with the intention of the first churches built since the year 1158. The reason is that the striking parallels between these edifices allows us to assume that the creator of the Saint Demetrius iconography continued the already existing and verified ideological intention.

5.1. Andrey Bogolyubskiy and the Political Situation at the time of the Construction of the First Churches

In the year 1139, the death of Grand Prince of Kiev Yaropolk II (1132–1139) caused a more than fifteen years long struggle for Kiev, which did not raise the status of the city as the centre of the empire but led to its decline. The long strife caused disintegration of Kievan Rus’.310 During these times, the princes rather strengthened the importance of their own seats and centres. The formal exigencies were no longer accepted, and it showed that Kiev can be acquired only by a power.311 Yuriy Dolgoruky (1113–1157), who gained the power in Kiev again in 1155, made an effort to ensure the succession for his son Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174), but already in his father's life Andrey had left the Wester Rus’.312 He left to the North-Eastern Rus’ and constructed there his own principality, Vladimir-Suzldal’ before know as Rostov-Suzdal, with the centre in the town Vladimir.313 Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174) started to raise the town both in the terms of architecture and religious centre. Shortly after his election Andrey ordered to extend and fortify the town, the works lasted since 1158 to 1165.314 Only preserved monument from the

310 Téra (note 210), p. 329. 311 Ibidem, p. 330. 312 Ibidem; Karpov (note 217), pp. 311–313.; PSRL 1, Sankt-Peterburg 1846, p. 148. 313 Téra (note 210), pp. 330, 353. 314 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 114. 66 fortification, however in altered form, is the Golden gate topped with the church of the Deposition of the Virgin's Robe consecrated in 1164.315 Simultaneously with the fortifications, his residence in nearby Bogolyubovo was being built.316 Since the year 1158 to the 1160 the Dormition cathedral in the centre of Vladimir was built.317 After the old cathedral in Rostov has burned down, Andrey established in the year 1161 a new one which was completed next year, but unfortunately did not preserved to our time.318 Probably in between the years 1162– 1164 he ordered to construct in Vladimir a new church of the Saint Saviour and in between the years 1165–1167 the church of Intercession on the river Nerl was built on his will.319 As is apparent, Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174) endeavoured to make from Vladimir a city that would surpass Kiev. 320 A city, that would become a new centre for whole Rus'.321 Instead of the Saint Sophia cathedral in Kiev, he ordered to build the Dormition cathedral in Vladimir. Instead of the icon of Mother of God “Pirogoshcha”, he brought from Vishgorod to Vladimir the icon of the Virgin Theotokos later called Vladimirskaya.322 Maybe even more fundamental was his intention to make Vladimir independent on Kiev in the terms of orthodox hierarchy. To the first years of his activity on North-Eastern Rus’, when he was at Rostov, there are recorded conflicts between “locals” from Rostov and Suzdal’, citizens rather from feudal social class, with the bishop of Rostov, Nestor.323 The whole conflict was, according to chronicles, about the necessity to fast on Wednesdays and Fridays when on these days are feasts. Nestor left his cathedra in Rostov and went to metropolis in Kiev where local metropolitan Konstantin struggled to find a new bishop.324 In the year 1158 was sent to Rostov bishop of Greek origin, Leon. Less than a year later, he was forced to leave by the same “locals” as Nestor, but in contrary with him, Leon returned to North-Eastern Rus’.325 He was again expelled in the year 1162 together with brothers of Andrey from his father’s second marriage. Plausibly Andrey already at the time of first expel of Leon had a different bishop for the

315 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 132.; PSRL 1, Sankt-Peterburg 1846, p. 150. 316 Ibidem, p. 114.; Ibidem, p. 149. 317 Ibidem, p. 149.; Ibidem, pp. 149–150. 318 Ibidem, p. 187. 319 Ibidem, p. 197.; Sirenov (note 255), p. 118.; Sedov, Tserkov’ Pokrova (note 255), p. 164. 320 Téra, (note 210), p. 356. 321 Limonov (note 210), p. 55. 322 Ibidem, p. 48. 323 Ibidem, pp. 49–51. 324 Ibidem 325 PSRL 1, Sankt-Peterburg 1846, p. 149. 67 cathedra in Suzdal’ named Theodor.326 Theodor was probably addressed as a bishop in the 60’s of 12th century, nevertheless, he is mentioned like “vladyka” which refers he was not addressed as a bishop officially but by “locals”.327 The same practise remained in Vladimir- Suzdal’ for longer, in the year 1183, when the metropolitan Nikofor attempted to send to Rostov a new bishop, the bishop was immediately returned back to Kiev with the answer that in Rostov is already the bishop Luka elected by “locals”.328 Important role played also the cult of the icon Virgin of Vladimir, a splendid image brought from Constantinople, which was placed in the Dormition cathedral and strengthened the significance of the place. In the 70’s of 12th century emerged texts describing the miracles of the image and Andrey established together with Theodor many new orthodox feasts associated with Vladimir or the image.329 Probably the most courageous step of Andrey was the attempt to constitute a new metropolis with seat in Vladimir, which would be independent from the religious hierarchy on Kiev. Nevertheless, the answer from Constantinopolitan patriarch was negative.330 The whole dispute culminated into march on Kiev which happened in the year 1169, after the death of Rostislav II Mstislavich (1159–1167). The city was plundered but surprisingly Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174) had not done, what would be expected and did not move to Kiev, he remained in Vladimir and sent his brother Gleb Yuryevich (1169–1171) to the city instead oh himself.331 Even without gaining the Kievan throne, Andrey addressed himself as a Grand Prince. 332

To my mind, the written above text proves that the ambitions of the Grand Prince of Vladimir Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174) were huge and most of them did not have precedent in the then Kievan Rus'. It allows us to assume that the visual appearance of the ecclesiastical edifices, which he ordered to construct, also was a part of his representation. How he intended to prove that the city of Vladimir is in hierarchy of Kievan Rus’ above Kiev

326 Limonov (note 210), pp. 51–52.; PSRL 1, Sankt-Peterburg 1846, p. 150. 327 Ibidem, p. 53. 328 Ibidem, p. 54.; PSRL 2, Sankt-Peterburg 1908, p. 629. 329 Ibidem, p. 59; David B. Miller, Legends of the Icon of Our Lady of Vladimir: A Study of the Development of Muscovite National Consciousness, Speculum XLIII, no. 4, 1968, p. 660. 330 Limonov (note 210), pp. 56–58.; Téra (note 210), p. 356. 331 Ibidem, p. 59.; Ibidem, p. 356. 332 Téra (note 210), p. 356. 68 and should be the overall centre of Kievan Rus’ we might also expect he has not inserted less ambitions to his churches.

5.2. The Iconography of the Churches (1158–1167)

From the monuments depicting almost intact iconographical purpose of Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174) has to our time preserved the church of Intercession on the river Nerl. The dominant figure of all three facades is the King David. With the Old Testament King were commonly compared various princes of the Kievan Rus’.333 Especially with his qualities: “[…] who knows how to play the lyre. He is a brave man and a warrior. He speaks well and is a fine-looking man. And the Lord is with him.” (1 Samuel 16:18). “David reigned over all Israel, doing what was just and right for all his people.” (2 Samuel 8:15). “[…] foreigners cower before me; as soon as they hear of me, they obey me. They all lose heart; they come trembling from their strongholds.” (2 Samuel 22:45–46). “Then David said, “This is the house of the Lord God, and this is the altar of burnt offering for Israel.” Then David said, ‘The house of the Lord God is to be here, and also the altar of burnt offering for Israel. So David gave orders to assemble the foreigners residing in Israel, and from among them he appointed stonecutters to prepare dressed stone for building the house of God.” (1 Chronicles 22:1–2). We can thus assume that the figure of King David represents in the sculpture of the Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches the ideal ruler and great warrior, the constitutor of united country and the founder of the house of the God, but manly, the figure to whom Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174) could compare himself.334 Further, the churches ordered by Andrey were by contemporaries compare to the Solomon’s Temple.335 So, the carved reliefs on the facades of the churches ordered by him might represent the embodiment of Heavenly Jerusalem.336 The Heavenly Jerusalem is described in the Vision of Ezekiel, especially interesting might be the delineation of the inner sanctuary: “In the space above the outside of the entrance to the inner sanctuary and on the walls at regular intervals all round the inner and outer sanctuary were carved cherubim and palm trees. Palm trees alternated with cherubim.

333 Darkevich (note 51), pp. 50–51. 334 Ibidem, p. 52. 335 Lidov, O simvolicheskom zamysle...1997 (note 96), p. 176. 336 Ibidem 69

Each cherub had two faces: the face of a human being towards the palm tree on one side and the face of a lion towards the palm tree on the other. They were carved all round the whole temple. From the floor to the area above the entrance, cherubim and palm trees were carved on the wall of the main hall.” (Ezekiel 41:17–20).337 Even though, this description of the Heavenly Jerusalem provides explanation for many figures from facades of the church of Intercession on the river Nerl it does not clarify all of them. Nevertheless, together with the plausible interpretation of the King David’s figure it might provide ideological basements for the iconography of the churches ordered by Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174).

5.3. The Iconography of the Saint Demetrius cathedral

From the formal characteristics of the Saint Demetrius cathedral, it is evident that Vsevolod III (1177–1212) had fasten the ideological intent of his predecessor and brother Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1157–1174). However, it is also apparent that the creator of the iconographical content of the Saint Demetrius cathedral had further developed the original idea. As was already shown, the facades of the cathedral are filled up with carved reliefs of heterogenous motives. To focus on the meaning of each particular motive would be topic for another dissertation thesis. What interests me is the question whether this method is necessary. The excavations in the years 2003–2004 showed, that from the very beginning it was intended to construct white stone towers and galleries around the edifice.338 These annexes made impossible to see quite huge number of reliefs. From the south side, the cathedral was surrounded by the court.339 And its role on the visibility of the reliefs also played the kremlin constructed in 1194.340 Some of the reliefs, even in the tympanums, are so small, that they can be clearly identified only close distance. It all means that due to the extensions, the palace court building, and the kremlin were not visible the whole reliefs from the row of arcades on the north, the south, and the west facades, ale the whole registers where the towers were

337 The world “carved” is not used in every translations of the Old Testament, the translation used in this thesis is New Internation Version UK – (NIVUK) 338 Zykov (note 119), p. 187. 339 Ibidem, pp. 187–192. 340 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 434. 70 attached, and some of the reliefs of the south façade were noticeable only from the palace court. How would make sense to construct a cathedral and fill up all its facades with carved reliefs and then cover those reliefs with annexes? To all appearance, the meaning of most of the carved reliefs on the facades of the Saint Demetrius cathedral was not depended on their visibility, but their presence.341 The carved reliefs depicting the saints in medallions or riding a horse, and the fighting scenes which could recall the heroic figures from the Old Testament might had the protective and strengthening role. But mostly, the numerous depictions of lions and floral motives (palm trees) developed the idea of Heavenly Jerusalem, “From the floor to the area above the entrance, cherubim and palm trees were carved on the wall of the main hall.” (Ezekiel 41:20). In this context, the idea of Alexey Lidov that the row of arcades symbolises the walls of Heavenly Jerusalem with the carved images of citizens and guardians of the city, is to my mind more than legitimated.342 Without contradiction with the aforementioned opinion, the facades of the Saint Demetrius cathedral also became a place for the personal representation of Vsevolod III (1177–1212) himself. To my mind and in an agreement with other researchers, such scenes like the composition on the east tympanum northern facades were aimed to proof the rights of Vsevolod III for the throne, while also ascertained his identification with the King David.343 This claim is supported also by the fact that this scene was one of those visible from the walls of kremlin and thus, without an entrance to the palace court.344 While iconography of the Saint Demetrius cathedral facades shows the connection between Old Testament vision of Ezekiel and the monarchical representation of Vsevolod III (1177–1212), the inner space remains, to my mind, in the common iconography characteristic for the local churches. Even before that the facades of the Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches obtained their carved reliefs, the same arrangement of the Last Judgement was, according to eyewitness, employed at the Transfiguration cathedral in Pereslavl’-Zalesskiiy (1152–1157).345 As was already shown in the chapter focused on formal analysis and dating of murals, the

341 About and invisibility of the images in connection with imperial representation see: Beat Brenk, Visibility and (Partial) Invisibility of Early Christian Images, in: Gissele de Nie – Karl F. Morrison – Marco Moster (edd.), Seeing the Invisible in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages, Turnhout 2005, pp. 144–146, 152–154. 342 Lidov, O simvolicheskom zamysle...1997 (note 96), p. 173. 343 Kartashova – Kartashov – Morozov (note 138), pp. 79, 87–88. 344 Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi…1961 (note 44), p. 434. 345 Ibidem, pp. 80–82. 71 similar arrangement of the Last Judgement was employed also in such churches as Saint Georgy in Staraya Ladoga and Nereditsa in Novgorod.

6. Conclusion

One of the biggest challenges of this research was to cope with the vast literature which did not included only the Saint Demetrius cathedral, but in order to discuss also the question of origin of the carved reliefs and the iconography of its facades, it was necessary to focus also on the broader studies. The main struggle was in dealing with the conclusions of the former studies, which were on one side very turbulent and the interpretations differed considerably and, on the other, in some conclusions remained unchanged and not questioned. From this point of view, the main contribution of this thesis consists in bringing new perspectives to the widely discussed topics. Particularly, on the question of the cathedral’s dating, I have also considered the possibility of the dependence of the constructing period of Saint Demetrius cathedral on the palace court, while at the same time I have also taken into account the architectural history of the city Vladimir. Further I have highlighted the connection between the circumstances of the birth of Vsevolod III (1177–1212), in the year 1154, with the completion of the edifice. My conclusions are that the building period of the cathedral was independent on those of the palace court because both constructions did not originate in the same epoch. Thus, I have come with the new dating of the edifice into the years 1191–1194. The emerge of carved reliefs on the facades of the Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches was usually putted into connection with arrived of new building workshop on the area of principality. On the base of formal analysis and analysis, I have pointed out that the carved reliefs are very original in a style but shares similar features with local and byzantine production. I have come into conclusion that their existence on the facades of the churches is not connected with arrival of a new workshop, but with a new intention. In the thesis was showed that the ground plan, arrangement, and the building method were from some point a characteristic feature of a local North-Eastern Rus’ architecture. Nevertheless, due to the extent of this thesis, I have not taken into consideration all the new architectural forms which appeared on the facades since the year 1158. Thus, I must admit the possibility that the local building workshop could come into a contact with other craftsmen, objects or ideas and together they created a dialog which resulted into the Vladimir-Suzdal’ architecture of the years 1158–1234. But, from above mentioned characteristics, is to my mind obvious that these traits did not come in a form of a whole building workshop from Western Europe, because

73 edifices from this area does not share majority of forms which the Vladimir-Suzdal’ churches possess. I was also concerned in the dating of mural paintings and on the base of formal analysis I have pointed out that the murals might be younger than they used to be considered. Further I have taken into consideration the influence of original arrangement of the annexes, the palace court and the kremlin on the visibility and meaning of the carved reliefs. My conclusions are that it for many carved reliefs was not intended to be seen but to be present which significantly changed their importance. I thus hope that in this thesis were presented ideas, observations, and conclusions which can bring more light into the discussion and study of the Saint Demetrius cathedral and broadly of the Vladimir-Suzdal’ architecture of second half of 12th century. In this sense I believe that this thesis opened the discussion also for more researchers and will help as steppingstone for further studies.

7. Literary Sources and Bibliography 7.1. Chronicles

PSRL 1 – Полное собрание русскихъ лѣтописей, изданое по высочайшему побелѣнию Археографическою коммиссиею, Томъ первый, I. II. Лаврентиевская и Троицкая лѣтописи, Санкт-Петербург 1846.

PSRL 2 – Полное собрание русскихъ лѣтописей, изданое по высочайшему побелѣнию Археографическою коммиссиею, Томъ второй, I. II. Ипатьевская лѣтописи, Санкт-Петербург 1908.

PSRL 4 – Полное собрание русскихъ лѣтописей, изданое по высочайшему побелѣнию Археографическою коммиссиею, томъ четвертый, IV. V. Новгородскiя и псковскiа лѣтописи, Санкт-Петербург 1848.

PSRL 7 – Полное собрание русскихъ лѣтописей, изданое по высочайшему побелѣнию Археографическою коммиссиею, Томъ седьмый, Лѣтописи по Воскресенскому списку, Санкт-Петербург 1856.

PSRL 20 – Полное собрание русскихъ лѣтописей, изданое по высочайшему побелѣнию Археографическою коммиссиею, томъ двадцатый, Львовская лѣтопись, часть первая, Санкт-Петербург 1910.

PSRL 24 – Полное собрание русскихъ летописей, томъ двадцать четвертый, Московский летописный свод конца ХВ века, Типографская летопись, Санкт-Петербург 1921.

PSRL 25 – Полное собрание русских летописей, том двадцать пятый, Московский летописный свод конца ХV века, Лениндград 1949.

7.2. Reports from Archives

Archival reports from the State Archive in Vladimir Region/ Gosudarstvennyy arkhiv vladimirskoy oblasti

ГАВО. Ф. 445. Оп. 1. Д. 690.Л. 1,3. ГАВО. Ф. 445. On. 1. Д. 690. Л. боб. ГАВО. Ф. 556. On. 1. Д 1399. Л. 32–35. ГАВО. Ф. 556. On. 1. Д. 1399, Л. 69. ГАВО. Ф. 556. Оп. 108. Д. 1593. Л. 6. ГАВО. Ф. 564. On. 1. Д. 95. Л. 1.

7.3. Bibliography – Latin

AKSENOVA, A.I., Iz istorii Dmitriyevskogo sobora: opyt i perspektish, in: E.S. Smirnova (ed.), Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo Vladimire: k 800-letiyu sozdaniya, Moskva 1997, pp. 8–9.

ANTONOV, D.I., “Besa poymav, muchashe…”. Izbiyeniye besa svyatym. Demonologicheskiy syuzhet v knizhnosti i ikonografii srednevekovoy Rusi, Drevnyaya Rus’. Voprosy mediyevistiki XXXIX, no. 1., Moskva 2010, pp. 61–74.

BALYGINA, L.P. – NEKRASOV, A.P. – SKVORTSOV, A.I., Vnov’ otkrytyye i maloizvestnyye fragmenty zhivopisi XII v. v

Uspenskom sobore vo Vladimire, in: O.I. Podobedova (ed.), Drevnerusskoye iskusstvo. Monumental’naya zhivopis’ XI–XVII vv., Moskva 1980, pp. 61–76.

BALYGINA, L.P. – TSEYTLINA, M.M. – NEKRASOV, A.P., Issledovaniye i restavratsiya nastennoy zhivopisi XII v. v

Dmitriyevskom sobore, in: E.S. Smirnova (ed.), Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo Vladimire: k 800-letiyu sozdaniya, Moskva

1997, pp. 120–127.

BRENK, Beat, Visibility and (Partial) Invisibility of Early Christian Images, in: Gissele de Nie – Karl F. Morrison –

Marco Moster (edd.), Seeing the Invisible in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages, Turnhout 2005, pp. 139–

183.

BRUMFIELD, Williem Craft, A History of Russian Architecture, Seattle 2004.

BRUMFIELD, William Craft, The Cathedral of St. Demetrius in Vladimir: Sources, Form and Documentation,

Theory and History of Art n. (1/2), 2018, pp. 29–48.

DARKEVICH, V.P., Obraz tsarya Davida vo Vladimiro-Suzdal’skoy skul’pture, Kratkiye soobshcheniya Instituta arkheologii XCIX, 1964, pp. 46–53.

DOBROKHOTOV, V.I., Pamyatniki drevnosti vo Vladimire Klyazemskom, Moskva 1849.

ĐURIĆ, Vojislav J., Byzantinische Fresken in Jugoslawien, München 1976.

ĐURIĆ, Vojislav J., La peinture murale Byzantine: XIIe et XIIIe siècles, Actes du XV CIEB. Rapport et co-rapports IV,

Athens 1976, pp. 1–96.

ELLIOTT, Gillian, Representing Royal Authority at San Michele Maggiore in Pavia, Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte

LXXVII, no. 2, 2014, pp. 145–174.

ETINGOF, O.E., Eshche raz ob izuchenii khudozhestvennykh svyazey Vladimira i Fessaloniki v kontse XII veka, in:

Nadezhda Nalimova, Makedoniya-Rim-Vizantiya: iskusstvo Severnoy Gretsii ot antichnosti do srednikh vekov, materialy nauchnoy konferentsii, Moskva 2018, pp. 142–165.

GLADKAYA, M.S., Restavratsiya fasadnoy rez’by Dmitriyevskogo sobora v 1838–1839 gg, in: E.S. Smirnova (ed.),

Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo Vladimire: k 800-letiyu sozdaniya, Moskva 1997, pp. 60–80.

GLADKAYA, M.S., Byli li iznachal’no pokrasheny rel’yefy Dmitriyevskogo sobora vo Vladimire?, in: K.I. Maslov

(ed.), Issledovaniye i konservatsiya pamyatnikov kul’tury. Pamyati Leonida Arkad’yevicha Lelekova (1934–1988),

Moskva 2004, pp. 174–179.

GLADKAYA, M.S., Rel’yefy Dmitriyevskogo sobora vo Vladimire: opyt kompleksnogo issledovaniya (dissertation),

Gosudarstvennyy institut iskusstvoznaniya federal’nogo agenstva po kul’ture i kinematografii, Moskva 2006.

GLADKAYA, M.S. – SKVORTSOV, A.I., Periodizatsiya rel’yefov Dmitriyevskogo sobora vo Vladimire, in: A.I. Komech

– O.I. Podobedova (edd.), Drevne russkoye iskosstvo: Khudozhestvennaya kul’tura X – pervoy poloviny XIII v.,

Moskva 1988, pp. 307–329.

GLASS, Dorothy F., The sculpture of reform in north Italy, ca 1095-1130: history and patronage of Romanesque façades, Surrey 2010.

GRABAR, André, La peinture byzantine, Geneva 1953.

GRABAR, André, Sculptures byzantines du moyen age. II, (XIe - XIVe siècle), Paris 1976.

GRABAR’, I.E., Freski Dmitriyevskovo sobora vo Vladimire, in: S. Abramov (ed.), Russkoye iskusstvo, no. 2–3,

Moskva 1923, pp. 42–49.

GRABAR’, I.E., Freski Dmitriyevskogo sobora vo Vladimire na Klyaz’me, in: Igor Grabar’, O drevnerusskom iskusstve, Moskva 1966, pp. 47–67.

HADERMANN-MISGUICH, Lydie, Kurbinovo: les fresques de Saint-Georges et la peinture byzantine du XIIe siècle,

Brusel 1975.

IAMANIDZÉ, Nina, Les installations liturgiques sculptées des églises de Géorgie: (VIe-XIIIe siècles), Turnhout 2010.

IOANNISYAN, O.M., Stroitel’nyye arteli Vsevoloda III i ego naslednikov, in: E.S. Smirnova (ed.), Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo Vladimire: k 800-letiyu sozdaniya, Moskva 1997, pp. 21–37.

IOANNISYAN, O.M., Romanskiye istoki zodchestva Vladimiro-Suzdal’skoy Rusi vremeni Andreya Bogolyubskoto

(Germaniya ili Italiya?), in: M.A. Orlova (ed.), Vizantiyskiy mir: iskusstvo Konstantinopolya i natsional’nyye traditsii. K 2000-letiyu khristianstva. Pamyati Ol’gi Il’inichny Podobedovoy (1912–1999), Moskva 2005, pp. 31–69.

KARGER, M.K., Novgorodskoye zodchestvo, in: I.E. Grabar’ – V.N. Lazarev – V. S. Kemenov (edd.) Istoriya russkogo iskusstva, Moskva 1954, pp. 16–71.

KARPOV, A.Yu., Yuriy Dolgorukiy, Moskva 2007.

KARTASHOVA, A.A. – KARTASHOV, S.A. – MOROZOV, M.R., Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo Vladimire - monument knyazhetskoy vlasti Vladimiro-Suzdal’skoy Rusi, Arkhitektura i sovremennyye informakhionnyye tekhnologii LIII no. 4, 2020, pp. 74–99.

KAVELMAKHER, V.V., Krayeugol’nyy kamen’ iz lapidariya Georgiyevskogo sobora v Yur’yeve-Pol’skom (k voprosu o tak nazyvayemom Svyatoslavovom kreste), in: O.E. Etingof (ed.), Drevnerusskoye iskusstvo. Rus’, Vizantiya,

Balkany. XIII vek, Sankt-Peterburg 1997, pp. 185–190.

KOSATKIN, V.V., Dmitriyevskiy sobor v gub.gor.Vladimire, Vladimir 1914.

LAZAREV, V.N., Zhivopis’ i skul’ptura Novgoroda, in: I.E. Grabar’ – V.N. Lazarev – V.S. Kemenov (edd.), Istoriya russkogo iskusstva, Moskva 1954, pp. 72–283.

LAZAREV, V.N., Novyye fragmenty rospisey iz Staroy Ladogi, in: M.I. Artamonov (ed.), Kul’tura i iskusstvo drevney

Rus: Sbornik statey v chest’ prof. M. K. Kargera, Leningrad 1967, pp. 77–81.

LAZAREV, V.N., Iskusstvo Drevney Rusi. Mozaiki i freski, Moskva 2000.

LIDOV, A.M., O simbolicheskom zamysle skulpturnoy dekoratsii Vladimiro-Suzdal’skikh khramov XII–XIII vv., in:

O.E. Etingof (ed.), Iskusstvo Rusi, Vizantii i Balkan XIII veka, Sankt-Peterburg 1994, pp. 26–29.

LIDOV, A.M., O simvolicheskom zamysle skul’pturnoy dekoratsii vladimiro-suzdal’skikh khramov XII—XIII vv., in:

O.E. Etingof (ed.), Drevnerusskoye iskusstvo. Rus’, Vizantiya, Balkany. XIII vek, Sankt-Peterburg 1997, pp. 172–

184.

LIDOV, A.M., VIDENIE KHRAMA I GRADA: O iyerusalimskoy simvolike skul’pturnykh ikon na fasadakh russkikh khramov XII-XIII vekov, Cahiers du Monde russe LIII. n. 2/3, 2012 pp. 301–318.

LIMONOV, Yu.A., Vladimiro-Suzdal’skaya Rus’, Leningrad 1987.

MALITSKIY, N.V., Pozdniye rel’yefy Dmitriyevskovo sobora v g. Vladimire, Vladimir 1923.

MELVANI, Nicholas, Late byzantine sculpture, Turnhout 2013.

MILLER, David B., Legends of the Icon of Our Lady of Vladimir: A Study of the Development of Muscovite National

Consciousness, Speculum XLIII, no. 4, 1968, pp. 657–670.

NICKEL, N.L., Vezugsmotive dersächsischen nmanischen Bauornamentik zu den Schmuckmotiven der Vladimir-

Suzdaler Architektur, in: E.S. Smirnova (ed.), Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo Vladimire: k 800-letiyu sozdaniya, Moskva

1997, pp. 81–92.

NOVAKOVSKAYA-BUKHMAN, S.M., K voprosu o galereyakh belokamennykh soborov Vladimirskoy zemli, Kratkiye soobshcheniya Instituta Arkheologii AN SSSR CLXIV, Moskva 1981, pp. 43–51.

ORLOVA, M.A., O fasadnom dekore Rozhdestvenskogo sobora v Suzdale. K probleme rekonstruktsii, Vestnik

PSTGU. Seriya V: Voprosy istorii i teorii khristianskogo iskusstva XXXVI, 2019, pp. 48–65.

OVCHAROVA, Olga, Images of the holy hymnographers in the iconographical programme of the church of St

Panteleemon in Nerezi, Macedonia (1164), Al-Masāq XVI, No. 1, 2004, pp. 131–146.

OVCHAROVA, O.V., Istoriya izucheniya fresok Nerezi (ikonograficheskiy aspekt), A.V. Zakharova (ed.), Aktual’nyye problemy teorii i istorii iskusstva II, Sankt-Peterburg 2012, pp. 108–116.

OZHEGOV, S.I., Slovar’ russkogo yazyka, Moskva 1981.

POPOV, G.V., Dekoratsiya fasadov Dmitriyevskogo sobora i kul’tura vladimirskogo knyazhestva na rubezhe XII-XIII vv., in: E.S. Smirnova (ed.), Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo Vladimire: k 800-letiyu sozdaniya, Moskva 1997, pp. 42–56.

POPOVA, O.S., Freski Dmitriyevskogo sobora vo Vladimire i vizantiyskaya zhivopis’ XII. v., in: E.S. Smirnova (ed.),

Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo Vladimire: k 800-letiyu sozdaniya, Moskva 1997, pp. 93–118.

POTAPOV, A.A., Pamyatniki drevne-russkoy grazhdanskoy arkhitektury vo Vladimirskoy gubernіi, in: Trudy

Vladimirskoy uchenoy arkhivnoy komissii, Kn. 6, Vladimir 1904, pp. 49–79.

RAPPOPORT, P.A., Russkaya arkhitektura X–XIII vv. Katalog pamyatnikov, Leningrad 1982.

RAPPOPORT, P.A., Drevnerusskaya arkhitektura, Sankt-Peterburg 1993.

RUPPRECHT, Bernhard, Romanische Skulptur in Frankreich, München 1975.

SARABYANOV, V.D., Georgiyevskaya tserkov’ v Staroy Ladoge, Moskva 2003.

SEDOV, Vl.V., Spaso-Preobrazhenskiy sobor v Pereslavle-Zalesskom i tserkov’ Petra i Pavla v Smolenske dva varianta sinteza drevnerusskoy i romanskoy arkhitektury, in: M.A. Orlova (ed.), Drevne-russkoye iskusstvo,

Vizantiyskiy mir: regional’nyye traditsii v khudozhestvennoy kul’ture i problemy ikh izucheniya, k yubileyu E.S.

Smirnovoy, Moskva 2017, pp. 227–240.

SEDOV, Vl.V., Lestnichnaya bashnya v Bogolyubove (po materialam raskopok 2015 goda), Kratkiye soobshcheniya instituta arkheologii (KSIA) CCXLIX, Moskva 2017, pp. 131–150.

SEDOV, Vl.V., O konstruktsii v zhertvennike tserkvi Borisa i Gleba v Kidekshe, Rossiyskaya arkheologiya III, 2018 pp. 134–140.

SEDOV, Vl.V., Belokamennyye sarkofagi v arkosoliyakh tserkvi Borisa i Gleba v Kidekshe, Kratkiye soobshcheniya instituta arkheologii CCLV, Moskva 2019, pp. 287–307.

SEDOV, Vl.V., Tserkov’ Pokrova na nerli i sobor v Modene, Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta VIII. no 3., Moskva

2019, pp. 161–181.

SIRENOV, A.V., Kogda byla postroyena tserkov’ Pokrova na Nerli?, in: A.A. Meshchenina – R.A. Sokolov (edd.),

Prizvaniye - istoriya sbornik nauchnykh statey k 55-letiyu professora Yu.V. Krivosheyeva, Sankt-Peterburg 2010, pp. 114–118.

SHVIDKOVSKI, Dmitriy Olegovich, Russian Architecture and the West, New Heaven 2007.

SHULUS, I.I. – KIPRIYANOVA, N.V. – MYAGTINA, N.V. – CHERNIRKINA, V.A., Gubernskiy gorod Vladimir v posledney treti XVIII – pervoy polovine XIX, Ocherki povsednevnoy provintsial’noy zhizni, Vladimir 2008.

SMIRNOVA, E.S. (ed.), Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo Vladimire: k 800-letiyu sozdaniya, Moskva 1997.

STOLETOV, A.V., Inzhenernoye ukrepleniye i restavratsiya dmitriyevskogo sobora vo vladimire, in: Sh.E. Patiya –

P.N. Maksimova (edd.), Praktika retavratsionnykh rabot, sbornik 2, Moskva 1958, pp. 35–62.

STOLETOV, A.V., K istorii arkhitekturnykh form Dmitriyevskogo sobora v gorode Vladimire, in: E.A. Shulepova

(ed.), Voprosy okhrany, restavratsii i propagandy pamyatnikov istorii i kul’tury, Moskva, 1975, pp. 114–141.

STROGANOV, Sergey, Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo Vladimire na Klyaz’me, Moskva 1849.

SYCHEV, N.P., K istorii rospisi Dmitriyevskogo sobora vo Vladimire, in: A.Kh. Gransberg – E.V. Zelenkova (edd.),

Pamyatniki kul’tury, issledovaniye i restavratsiya, vyp. 1, Moskva 1959, pp. 143–177.

ŚWIECHOWSKI, Zygmunt, Sculpture romane d'Auvergne, Clermont-Ferrand 1973.

ŠROUFKOVÁ, Miloslava – PLESKÝ, Rostislav – VENCOVSKÁ, Marta, Rusko-český a česko-ruský slovník, Praha 1988.

TATISHCHEV, V.H. Istoriya Rossiyskaya s samykh drevneyshikh vremen, kn. 3, Moskva 1774.

TÉRA, Michal, Kyjevská Rus: Dějiny, kultura, společnost, Červený Kostelec 2019.

TIMOFEYEVA, T.P., K utochneniyu daty Dmitriyevskogo sobora, in: E.S. Smirnova (ed.), Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo

Vladimire: k 800-letiyu sozdaniya, Moskva 1997, pp. 38–41.

TIMOFEYEVA, T.P., K voprosu o pyatiglavii Uspenskogo sobora Andreya Bogolyubskogo vo Vladimire, in:

Materialy krayevedcheskoy konferentsii 2004 g., Vladimir 2005, pp. 27–34.

TIMOFEYEVA, T.P., Arkhitekturno-restavratsionnaya istoriya Dmitriyevskogo sobora v XX veke (1919-2000 gody), in: A.A. Bondarenko – V.L. Melnikov (edd.), Mezhdunarodnaya nauchno-prakticheskaya konferentsiya

«Rerikhovskoye naslediye» Tom IV: Okhrana kul’turnykh tsennostey: peterburgskiye traditsii, Sankt-Peterburg

2009, pp. 349–355.

TOLSTOY, I.I. – KONDAKOV, N.P., Russkiye drevnosti v pamyatnikakh iskusstva, Sankt-Peterburg, 1899.

VAGNER, G.K., Skul’ptura Drevney Rusi: Vladimir, Bogo lyubova. XII vek., Moskva 1969, pp. 232–271.

VAGNER, G.K., Ob otkrytii reznykh nadpisey sredi fasadnoy skul’ptury Dmitriyevskogo sobora vo Vladimire, in:

A.V. Artsikhovskiy (ed.), Sovetskaya arkheologia I, Moskva 1976, pp. 270–272.

VASILYEV, B.G., K voprosu o vremeni sozdaniya fresok tserkvi sv. Georgiya v Ladoge, in: I.V. Antipov – I.A. Shalina

(edd.), Iskusstvo Drevney Rusi i stran vizantiyskogo mira, Sankt-Peterburg 2012, pp. 34–41.

VASILYEV, S.D. – IVANOV, K.I., Pamyatniki zodchestva XII veka v Pereslavle-Zalesskom, Moskva 2004.

VORONIN, N.N., Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi XII–XV vekov, Kn. 1, Moskva 1961.

VORONIN, N.N., Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi XII–XV vekov, Kn. 2, Moskva 1962.

VORONIN, N.N., Vladimir, Bogolyubovo, Suzdal’, Yur’yev-Pol’skoy, Moskva 1967.

VYSOTSKIY, A.M., Khram Iyezekiilya kak istochnik naruzhnogo skul’pturnogo dekora Vladimiro-Suzdal’skikh khramov XII—XIII vv. Sic et non, in: O.E. Etingof (ed.), Drevnerusskoye iskusstvo. Rus’ i strany vizantiyskogo mira.

XII vek., Sankt-Peterburg 2002, pp. 255–263.

YAAKOBSON, A.L. – TAMANYAN, Yu.A., Armyaanskaya arkhitektura v Krymu, Erevan 1992.

ZAGRAYEVSKIY, S.V., Uspenskiy sobor vo Vladimire: nekotoryye voprosy arkhitekturnoy istorii, in: S.V.

Zagrayevskiy – T.P. Timofeyeva (edd.), Pamyati Andreya Bogolyubskogo, Moskva–Vladimir 2009, pp. 95–114.

ZYKOV, P.L., Novyye materialy o komplekse postroyek Dmitriyevskogo sobora vo Vladimire, in: A.L. Batalov (ed.),

ΣΟΦΙΑ. Sbornik statey po iskusstvu Vizantii i Drevney Rusi v chest’ A.I. Komecha, Moskva 2006, pp. 181–198.

7.4. Bibliography – Cyrillic

АКСЕНОВА, А.И., Из истории Дмитриевского собора: опыт и перспектиш, in: Э.С. Смирнова (ed.),

Дмитриевский собор во Владимире: к 800-летию создания, Москва 1997, pp. 8–9.

АНТОНОВ, Д.И, “Беса поймав, мучаше…”. Избиение беса святым. Демонологический сюжет в книжности и

иконографии средневековой Руси, Древняя Русь. Вопросы медиевистики XXXIX, no. 1., Москва 2010, pp.

61–71.

БАЛЫГИНА, Л.П. – НЕКРАСОВ, А.П. – СКВОРЦОВ, А.И., Вновь открытые и малоизвестные фрагменты

живописи XII в. в Успенском соборе во Владимире, in: О.И. Подобедова (ред.), Древнерусское искусство.

Монументальная живопись XI–XVII вв., Москва 1980, pp. 61–76.

БАЛЫГИНА, Л.П. – ЦЕЙТЛИНА, М.М. – НЕКРАСОВ, А.П., Исследование и реставрация настенной живописи

XII в. в Дмитриевском соборе, in: Э.С. Смирнова (ed.), Дмитриевский собор во Владимире: к 800-летию

создания, Москва 1997, pp. 120–127.

ВАГНЕР, Г.К., Скульптура Древней Руси: Владимир, Бого любова. XII век., Москва 1969, pp. 232–271.

ВАГНЕР, Г.К., Об открытии резных надписей среди фасадной скульптуры Дмитриевского собора во

Владимире, in: А.В. Арциховский (ед.), Советская археологиа I, Москва 1976, pp. 270–272.

БАСИЛЬЕВ, Б.Г., К вопросу о времени создания фресок церкви св. Георгия в Ладоге, in: И.В. Антипов – И.А.

Шалина (едд.), Искусство Древней Руси и стран византийского мира, Санкт-Петербург 2012, pp. 34–41.

БАСИЛЬЕВ, С.Д. – ИВАНОВ, К.И., Памятники зодчества XII века в Переславле-Залесском, Москва 2004.

ВОРОНИН, Н.Н., Зодчество Северо-Восточной Руси XII–XV веков, вып. 1, Москва 1961.

ВОРОНИН, Н.Н., Зодчество Северо-Восточной Руси XII–XV веков, вып. 2, Москва 1962.

ВОРОНИН, Н.Н., Владимир, Боголюбово, Суздаль, Юрьев-Польской, Москва 1967.

ВЫСОЦКИЙ, А.М., Храм Иезекииля как источник наружного скульптурного декора Владимиро-Суздальских

храмов XII—XIII вв. Sic et non, in: О.Е. Этингоф (ед.), Древнерусское искусство. Русь и страны

византийского мира. XII век., Санкт-Петербург 2002, pp. 255–263.

ГЛАДКАЯ, М.С., Реставрация фасадной резьбы Дмитриевского собора в 1838–1839 гг, in: Э.С. Смирнова

(ед.), Дмитриевский собор во Владимире: к 800-летию создания, Москва 1997, pp. 60–80.

ГЛАДКАЯ, М.С., Были ли изначально покрашены рельефы Дмитриевского собора во Владимире?, in: К.И.

Маслов (ед.), Исследование и консервация памятников культуры. Памяти Леонида Аркадьевича

Лелекова (1934–1988), Москва 2004, pp. 174–179.

ГЛАДКАЯ, М.С., Рельефы Дмитриевского собора во Владимире: опыт комплексного исследования

(dissertation), Государственный институт искусствознания федерального агенства по культуре и

кинематографии, Москва 2006.

ГЛАДКАЯ, М.С. – СКВОРЦОВ, А.И., Периодизация рельефов Дмитриевского собора во Владимире, in: А.И.

Комеч – О.И. Подобедова (ед.), Древне русское искосство: Художественная культура X – первой

половины XIII в., Москва 1988, pp. 307–329.

ГРАБАРЬ, И.Э., Фрески Дмитриевсково собора во Владимире, in: С. Абрамов (ед.), Русское искусство, no.

2–3, Москва 1923, pp. 42–49.

ГРАБАРЬ, И.Э., Фрески Дмитриевского собора во Владимире на Клязьме, in: Игор Грабарь, О

древнерусском искусстве, Москва 1966, pp. 47–67.

ДАРКЕВИЧ, В.П., Образ царя Давида во Владимиро-Суздальской скульптуре, Краткие сообщения

Института археологии XCIX, 1964, pp. 46–53.

ДОБРОХОТОВ, В.И., Памятники древности во Владимире Кляземском, Москва 1849.

ЗАГРАЕВСКИЙ, С.В., Успенский собор во Владимире: некоторые вопросы архитектурной истории, in: С.В.

Заграевский – Т.П. Тимофеева, Памяти Андрея Боголюбского, Москва–Владимир 2009, pp. 95–114.

ЗЫКОВ, П.Л., Новые материалы о комплексе построек Дмитриевского собора во Владимире, in: А.Л.

Баталов (ред.), ΣΟΦΙΑ. Сборник статей по искусству Византии и Древней Руси в честь А. И. Комеча,

Москва 2006, pp. 181–198.

ИОАННИСЯН, О.М., Строительные артели Всеволода III и его наследников, in: Э.С. Смирнова (ed.),

Дмитриевский собор во Владимире: к 800-летию создания, Москва 1997, pp. 21–37.

ИОАННИСЯН, О.М., Романские истоки зодчества Владимиро-Суздальской Руси времени Андрея

Боголюбското (Германия или Италия?), in: М.А. Орлова (ред.), Византийский мир: искусство

Константинополя и национальные традиции. К 2000-летию христианства. Памяти Ольги Ильиничны

Подобедовой (1912–1999), Москва 2005, pp. 31–69.

КАВЕЛЬМАХЕР, В.В., Краеугольный камень из лапидария Георгиевского собора в Юрьеве-Польском (к

вопросу о так называемом Святославовом кресте), in: О.Е. Этингоф (ред.), Древнерусское искусство. Русь,

Византия, Балканы. XIII век, Санкт-Петербург 1997, pp. 185–190.

КАРГЕР, М.К., Новгородское зодчество, in: И.Э. Грабарь – В.Н. Лазарев – В.С. Кеменов (ред.), История

русского искусства, Москва 1954, pp. 16–71.

КАРПОВ, А.Ю., Юрий Долгорукий, Москва 2007.

КАРТАШОВА, А.А. – КАРТАШОВ, С.А. – МОРОЗОВ, М.Р., Дмитриевский собор во Владимире - монумент

княжецкой власти Владимиро-Суздальской Руси, Архитектура и современные информахионные

технологии LIII, no. 4, 2020, pp. 74–99.

КОСАТКИН, В.В., Дмитриевский собор в губ.гор.Владимире, Владимир 1914.

ЛАЗАРЕВ, В.Н., Живопись и скульптура Новгорода, in: И.Э. Грабарь – В.Н. Лазарев – В.С. Кеменов (ред.)

История русского искусства, Москва 1954, pp. 72–283.

ЛАЗАРЕВ, В.Н., Новые фрагменты росписей из Старой Ладоги, in: М.И. Артамонов (ред.), Культура и

искусство древней Руси: Сборник статей в честь проф. М. К. Каргера, Ленинград 1967, pp. 77–81.

ЛАЗАРЕВ, В.Н., Искусство Древней Руси. Мозаики и фрески, Москва 2000.

ЛИДОВ, А.М., О симболическом замысле скулптурной декорации Владимиро-Суздальских храмов XII–XIII

вв., In: О.Е. Этингоф (ред.), Искусство Руси, Византии и Балкан XIII века, Санкт-Петербург 1994, pp. 26–29.

ЛИДОВ, A.М., О символическом замысле скульптурной декорации владимиро-суздальских храмов XII—XIII

вв., in: О.Е. Этингоф (ред.), Древнерусское искусство. Русь, Византия, Балканы. XIII век, Санкт-Петербург

1997, pp. 172–184.

ЛИДОВ, А.М., ВИДЕНИЕ ХРАМА И ГРАДА: О иерусалимской символике скульптурных икон на

фасадахрусских храмов XII-XIII веков, Cahiers du Monde russe LIII. n. 2/3, 2012 pp. 301–318.

ЛИМОНОВ, Ю.А., Владимиро-Суздальская Русь, Ленинград 1987.

МАЛИЦКИЙ, Н.В., Поздние рельефы Дмитриевсково собора в г. Владимире, Владимир 1923.

НОВАКОВСКАЯ-БУХМАН, С.М., К вопросу о галереях белокаменных соборов Владимирской земли, Краткие

сообщения Института Археологии АН СССР CLXIV, Москва 1981, pp. 43–51.

ОРЛОВА, М.А., О фасадном декоре Рождественского собора в Суздале. К проблеме реконструкции,

Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия V: Вопросы истории и теории христианского искусства XXXVI, 2019 pp. 48–65.

ОВЧАРОВА, О.В., История изучения фресок Нерези (иконографический аспект), in: А.В. Захарова (ред.),

Актуальные проблемы теории и истории искусства II, Санкт-Петербург 2012, pp. 108–116.

ОЖЕГОВ, С.И., Словарь русского языка, Москва 1981.

ПОПОВ, Г.В., Декорация фасадов Дмитриевского собора и культура владимирского княжества на рубеже

ХII-ХIII вв., in: Э.С. Смирнова (ед..), Дмитриевский собор во Владимире: к 800-летию создания, Москва

1997, pp. 42–56.

ПОПОВА, О.С., Фрески Дмитриевского собора во Владимире и византийская живопись XII. в., in: Э.С.

Смирнова (ед.), Дмитриевский собор во Владимире: к 800-летию создания, Москва 1997, pp. 93–118.

ПОТАПОВ, А.А., Памятники древне-русской гражданской архитектуры во Владимирской губерніи, in: Труды

Владимирской ученой архивной комиссии, Кн. 6, Владимир 1904, pp. 49–79.

РАППОПОРТ, П.А., Русская архитектура X–XIII вв. Каталог памятников, Ленинград 1982.

РАППОПОРТ, П.А., Древнерусская архитектура, Санкт-Петербург 1993.

САРАБЬЯНОВ, В.Д., Георгиевская церковь в Старой Ладоге, Москва 2003.

СЕДОВ, Вл.В., Спасо-Преображенский собор в Переславле-Залесском и церковь Петра и Павла в

Смоленске два варианта синтеза древнерусской и романской архитектуры, in: М.А. Орлова (ед.), Древне-

русское искусство, Византийский мир: региональные традиции в художественной культуре и проблемы

и их изучения, к юбилею Э.С. Смирновой, Москва 2017, pp. 227–240.

СЕДОВ, Вл.В., Церковь Покрова на нерли и собор в Модене, Вестник Московского университета VIII. no

3., Москва 2019, pp. 161–181.

СЕДОВ, Вл.В., О конструкции в жертвеннике церкви Бориса и Глеба в Кидекше, Российская археология III,

2018 pp. 134–140.

СИРЕНОВ, А.В., Когда была построена церковь Покрова на Нерли?, in: А.А. Мещенина – Р.А. Соколов (ред.),

Призвание - история сборник научных статей к 55-летию профессора Ю.В. Кривошеева, Санкт-

Петербург 2010, pp. 114–118.

СМИРНОВА, Э.С. (ед.), Дмитриевский собор во Владимире: к 800-летию создания, Москва 1997.

СТОЛЕТОВ, А.В., Инженерное укрепление и реставрация дмитриевского собора во владимире, in: Ш.Е.

Патия – П.Н. Максимова (ред.), Практика ретаврационных работ, сборник 2, Москва 1958, pp. 35–62.

СТОЛЕТОВ, А.В., К истории архитектурных форм Дмитриевского собора в городе Владимире, in: Э.А.

Шулепова (ред.), Вопросы охраны, реставрации и пропаганды памятников истории и культуры, Москва,

1975, pp. 114–141.

СТРОГАНОВ, Сергей, Дмитриевский собор во Владимире на Клязьме, Москва 1849.

СЫЧЕВ, Н.П., К истории росписи Дмитриевского собора во Владимире, in: А.Х. Грансберг – Е.В. Зеленкова

(ред.), Памятники культуры, исследование и реставрация, вып. 1, Москва 1959, pp. 143–177.

ТАТИЩЕВ, В.H. История Российская с самых древнейших времен, кн. 3., Москва 1774.

ТИМОФЕЕВА, Т.П., К уточнению даты Дмитриевского собора, in: Э.С. Смирнова (ed.), Дмитриевский собор

во Владимире: к 800-летию создания, Москва 1997, pp. 38–41.

ТИМОФЕЕВА, Т.П., К вопросу о пятиглавии Успенского собора Андрея Боголюбского во Владимире, in:

Материалы краеведческой конференции 2004 г., Владимир 2005, pp. 27–34.

ТИМОФЕЕВА, Т.П., Архитектурно-реставрационная история Дмитриевского собора в XX веке (1919-2000

годы), in: А.А. Бондаренко – В.Л. Мельников (ред.), Международная научно-практическая конференция

«Рериховское наследие» Том IV: Охрана культурных ценностей: петербургские традиции, Санкт-

Петербург 2009, pp. 349–355.

ТОЛСТОЙ, И.И. – КОНДАКОВ, Н.П., Русские древности в памятниках искусства, Санкт-Петербург, 1899.

ШУЛУС, И.И. – КИПРИЯНОВА, Н.В. – МЯГТИНА, Н.В. – ЧЕРНИРКИНА В.А., Губернский город Владимир в

последней трети XVIII – первой половине XIX, Очерки повседневной провинциальной жизни, Владимир

2008, p. 173.

ЭТИНГОФ, О.Е., Еще раз об изучении художественных связей Владимира и Фессалоники в конце XII века, in:

Надежда Налимова, Македония-Рим-Византия: искусство Северной Греции от античности до средних

веков, материалы научной конференции, Москва 2018, pp. 142–165.

ЯКОБСОН, А.Л. – ТАМАНЯН, Ю.А., Армяанская архитектура в Крыму, Ереван 1992.

8. List of Images

1/ Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius, end of 12th century, from left image: view of the west and the south facades. Photography: author

2/ Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius, end of 12th century, from left image: view of the east and the north facades. Photography: author

3/ Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius, end of 12th century, view of the south facade. Photography: author

4/ Detail of the Last Judgement, end of 12th century, mural paintings, Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius, view of central vault north side. Photography: author

5/ From the left: Mother of God and the Bosom of Abraham, Apostle Peter leading the faithful to the paradise, end of 12th century, mural paintings, Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius, the south vault. Left photography: author, right photography: Anton Skrobotov, CC BY 2.0, https://flic.kr/p/2jMUYmn

6/ King David seating on a throne with scroll, end of 12th century, Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius, from left: central tympanum of the south façade, central tympanum of the west façade. Photography: author

7/ From left: the figure seating on throne with on smaller on knees, the Ascension of Alexander the Great to Heaven, end of 12th century, Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius, from left: side tympanum at the north façade east corner, side tympanum at the south façade east corner. Left photography: M.S. Gladkaya, Simvolika i ikonografiya izobrazheniy belokamennoy rez’by Dmitriyevskogo sobora vo Vladimire: (kompozitsii, syuzhety, otdel’nyye obrazy i motivy), Vladimir 2019, p. 16. Right photography: author.

9/ Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius, end of 12th century, from left: detail of the side tympanum at the south façade west corner, detail of the central tympanum at the south façade. Photography: author.

10/ From left: Baptism of Christ, Deesis, end of 12th century, Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius, from left: the side tympanum at the south façade west corner, the side tympanum at the north façade west corner. Left photography: author. Right photography: M.S. Gladkaya, Simvolika i ikonografiya izobrazheniy belokamennoy rez’by Dmitriyevskogo sobora vo Vladimire: (kompozitsii, syuzhety, otdel’nyye obrazy i motivy), Vladimir 2019, p. 12.

11/ Schema of the town Vladimir in the 12th–13th century. Source: N.N. Voronin, Zodchestvo Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi XII–XV vekov, Kn. 1, Moskva 1961, p. 34.

12/ Kideksha, the church of SS Boris and, 1152–1157, from left: view of the west façade and the south façade. Left photography: Crossfire1983, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/48/%D0%A6%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2 %D1%8C_%D0%91%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%B0_%D0%B8_%D0%93%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%B1% D0%B0_%D0%B2_%D0%9A%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%88%D0%B5.JPG. Right photography: Ludvig14, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/64/Kideksha_Boris%26GlebChurch_192_5430.jpg

13/ Pereslavl’-Zalesskiiy, the cathedral of Transfiguration, 1152–1157, from left: view of the west and the south facades. Photography: author.

14/ Bogolyubovo, the North tower, 1158–1165, from left: view from the west side and view from the east side with later constructed church of the Nativity of the Virgin. Photography: author.

15/ Vladimir, the Dormition cathedral, 1158–1160, 1185–1189, from left: view of the east and the west facades. Photography: author.

16/ Bogolyubovo, the church of Intercession on the river Nerl, 1165–1167, from left: view of the west and the east facades, photography: author.

17/ Yuryev-Polsky, the cathedral of Saint Georgy, 1234, from left: view of southwest corner and southeast corner. Left photography: carlfbagge, CC BY 2.0, https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cc/SDIM9197_Saint_George_Cathedral_in_Yuryev- Polsky_%28%D0%93%D0%B5%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B3%D0%B8%D0%B5%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8% D0%B9_%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%BE%D1%80_%D0%B2_%D0%AE%D1%80%D1%8C%D0%B5%D0%B2- %D0%9F%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8C%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9%29._1230- 1234%3B_collapsed_and_rebuilt_in_15th_c._Northwest_view._%286350365444%29.jpg. Right photography: MDurymanov, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6b/St.George_cathedral.jpg

18/ Left image: Two Horsemen, around the year 1062, carved relief, Kiev. Right image: Detail of the Saint Demetrius cathedral façade relief, end of 12th century, carved relief, Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius. Left photography: André Grabar, Sculptures byzantines du moyen age. II, (XIe - XIVe siècle), Paris 1976, plate LXII, Right photography: M.S. Gladkaya, Restavratsiya fasadnoy rez’by Dmitriyevskogo sobora v 1838–1839 gg, in: E.S. Smirnova (ed.), Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo Vladimire: k 800-letiyu sozdaniya, Moskva 1997, p. 69.

19/ Left image: Lion, 11th century, carved relief, Staraya Zagora. Right image: Detail of the Saint Demetrius cathedral façade, end of 12th century, carved relief, Vladimir. Left photography: André Grabar, Sculptures byzantines du moyen age. II, (XIe - XIVe siècle), Paris 1976, plate XLIV. Right photography: photography: M.S. Gladkaya, Restavratsiya fasadnoy rez’by Dmitriyevskogo sobora v 1838–1839 gg, in: E.S. Smirnova (ed.), Dmitriyevskiy sobor vo Vladimire: k 800-letiyu sozdaniya, Moskva 1997, p. 75.

20/ From the left: Detail of Modena cathedral consoles and detail of the main façade tympanum, between 90’s of 11th century and 80’s of 12th century, carved reliefs, Modena. Left photography: O.M. Ioannisyan, Romanskiye istoki zodchestva Vladimiro-Suzdal’skoy Rusi vremeni Andreya Bogolyubskoto (Germaniya ili Italiya?), in: M.A. Orlova (ed.), Vizantiyskiy mir: iskusstvo Konstantinopolya i natsional’nyye traditsii. K 2000-letiyu khristianstva. Pamyati Ol’gi Il’inichny Podobedovoy (1912–1999), Moskva 2005, p. 41., Right photography: Dmitriy Olegovich Shvidkovski, Russian Architecture and the West, New Heaven 2007, p. 37.

21/ From the left: detail of the west façade main portal and the west façade detail, between the years 1130– 1150, carved reliefs, Pavia, the basilica of San Michele Maggiore. Left photography: LeZibou, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a5/Pavia_SanMichele_WestFacade_MainPortal_RightScul ptures.JPG. Right photography: youngrobv, CC BY-NC 2.0, https://flic.kr/p/53465e.

22/ Vladimir, the Dormition cathedral, 1158–1160 and 1185–1189, from left: view of the east façade arcature row and the north façade tympanums. Photography: author.

23/ Bogolyubovo, the church of Intercession on the river Nerl, 1165–1167, from left: detail of façade the carved reliefs and the west tympanum. Photography: author.

24/ Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius, end of 12th century, from left: view of central apse and the central tympanum of the south façade. Photography: author.

25/ Suzdal’, the cathedral of the Nativity of the Theotokos, around 1222, from left: view of the detail of row of arcades and detail of south portal. Left photography: author. Right photography: carlfbagge, CC BY 2.0, https://flic.kr/p/7mFyGt

26/ Yuryev-Polsky, the cathedral of Saint Georgy, built in year 1234, from left: view of the detail of façade carved relief embellishment and the carved reliefs around the portal. Left photography: Hotenia, CC BY-SA 4.0 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c2/%D0%93%D0%B5%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B3%D0%B8

%D0%B5%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%BE%D1%80._%D0%A4% D0%BE%D1%82%D0%BE_9.jpg. Right photography: NataliiaNovozhilova, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/df/%D0%AE%D1%80%D1%8C%D0%B5%D0%B2- %D0%9F%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8C%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9._%D0%93%D0%B5%D0%BE%D1%80%D 0%B3%D0%B8%D0%B5%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%BE%D1% 80%2C_%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BC%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B7%D 1%8C%D0%B1%D0%B0.jpg

27/ Left photography: The carved reliefs in the west tympanum on the north façade, first half of 13th century and the years 1838–1843, Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius, right photography: Detail of the carved relief at the column of the south portal, around the year 1222, Suzdal’, the cathedral of the Nativity of the Theotokos. Left photography: M.S. Gladkaya, Simvolika i ikonografiya izobrazheniy belokamennoy rez’by Dmitriyevskogo sobora vo Vladimire: (kompozitsii, syuzhety, otdel’nyye obrazy i motivy), Vladimir 2019, p. 12. Right photography: carlfbagge, CC BY 2.0, https://flic.kr/p/7mFyGt, changes: image cropped.

28/ From left: Last Judgement detail of apostle, detail of central vault the north side, dated to the end of 12th century, Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius. Photographs: M.K. Karger, Drevnerusskaya monumental’naya zhivopis’ XI–XIV vv., Moscow, Leningrad 1963, image number 37. Right photography: author.

29/ Prophet Habakkuk and an unknown prophet, around the year 1189, fragments of mural paintings, Vladimir, the Dormition cathedral. Left photography: O.E. Etingof, Eshche raz ob izuchenii khudozhestvennykh svyazey Vladimira i Fessaloniki v kontse XII veka, in: Nadezhda Nalimova, Makedoniya-Rim-Vizantiya: iskusstvo Severnoy Gretsii ot antichnosti do srednikh vekov, materialy nauchnoy konferentsii, Moskva 2018, p. 147. Right photography: L.P. Balygina – A.P. Nekrasov – A.I. Skvortsov, Vnov’ otkrytyye i maloizvestnyye fragmenty zhivopisi XII v. v Uspenskom sobore vo Vladimire, in: O.I. Podobedova (ed.), Drevnerusskoye iskusstvo. Monumental’naya zhivopis’ XI–XVII vv., Moskva 1980, p. 68.

30/ Details of the Last Judgement, around the year 1199, mural paintings, Novgorod, Nereditsa church. Photographs: M.K. Karger, Drevnerusskaya monumental’naya zhivopis’ XI–XIV vv., Moscow, Leningrad 1963, images numbers 56, 71.

31/ Saint-Eustache and fragments of Last Judgement, second half of the 12th century, mural paintings, Staraya Ladoga, the church of Saint Georgy. Left photography: Mortier.Daniel, CC BY-SA 4.0 via Wikimedia Commons. Right photography: M.K. Karger, Drevnerusskaya monumental’naya zhivopis’ XI–XIV vv., Moscow, Leningrad 1963, image number 79.

32/ Left image: The seating apostles from the Last Judgement, dated to the end of 12th century, mural painting, Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius, view of the north side of the central vault. Right image: Detail of Entry to Jerusalem, around the year 1164, mural painting, Nerezi, the church of Saint Panteleimon. Left photography: author. Right photography: Vojislav J. Đurić, Byzantinische Fresken in Jugoslawien, München 1976, images number, VII, VIII.

33/ Left image: Detail of Archangel Gabriel, around the year 1191, mural painting, Kurbinovo, the church of Saint George, view of the apse. Right image: Detail of the Last Judgement, dated to the end of 12th century, mural painting, Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius, view of the central vault north side. Left photography: Efkoski Bobi, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fb/Kurbinovo_4.JPG. Right photography: author.

34/ Left image: Detail of the Bathing of Jesus, around 1160–1170, mural painting, Thessaloniki, the church of Hosios David. Right image: Detail of the last Judgement, dated to the end of 12th century, mural painting, Vladimir, the cathedral of Saint Demetrius. Left photography: O.E. Etingof, Eshche raz ob izuchenii khudozhestvennykh svyazey Vladimira i Fessaloniki v kontse XII veka, in: Nadezhda Nalimova, Makedoniya-Rim- Vizantiya: iskusstvo Severnoy Gretsii ot antichnosti do srednikh vekov, materialy nauchnoy konferentsii, Moskva 2018, p. 147. Right photography: author.