5 (100%) 3 votes

The exhibition has ended in Moscow “Canon and outside the canon”, dedicated to the architecture of modern temple building. On this occasion, we are duplicating a previously rewritten sketch about new trends in this area from modern architects and an extremely informative article about the history of Old Believer temple construction from the magazine “ Burning bush" The magazine itself, which became the prototype of the Old Believer Thought website, can be downloaded at the end of the article: it was one of our most successful issues!

CURRENT ON THE TOPIC

*****

To digest culture shock Based on what we saw, we offer the readers of our site the most valuable material from our parishioner, artist and architect Nikola Frizin. This article was written by him in 2009 specifically for the magazine “Burning Bush”, which was published by an initiative group of Rogozh parishioners within the framework of the Youth Affairs Department of the Russian Orthodox Church.

Ways of Old Believer temple construction

Nikola Frizin

Every reader knows that a Christian church is a house of prayer and a house of God. But can everyone say why the temple looks like this, and what an Old Believer temple should ideally look like?

Throughout Christian history, although church architecture existed, it was not regulated in strict canons, as happened with worship, hymnography, and icon painting. Architecture initially seemed to “fall out” from the canonical field. It was not determined by a complex system of rules and canons.

From the emergence of the Old Believers to late XIX centuries of Old Believer architecture proper did not exist because there was no need for any special correctness of architecture. Few requirements general were presented only to the internal structure of the temple, paintings and icons. However, there is something elusive in Old Believer churches that distinguishes them from any other...

In this article, the author examines the legacy of the Old Believers in the field of temple construction of the 17th–19th centuries and the prospects for its development in our time. It is interesting that the author gives quotes from temple building researchers specifically from the 20th century.

And the development of the “historical style” occurred in the 20th century, and the heyday of Old Believer church building occurred precisely in the 20th century. That is, only in the last 100 - 170 (since the times of eclecticism) years has the problem of the identity of Russian temple architecture in general arisen - even in the community of architects. The Old Believers accepted this problem only after the possibility of building churches appeared at the beginning of the 20th century. The points of perception of tradition at the beginning of the 20th century are very well covered by the author.
Will the tradition begun a hundred years ago be accepted, or will temple building return to its original indifference? More likely it will be both.

A. Vasiliev

In the last 15-20 years, for the first time since 1917, Old Believers have had the opportunity to build churches. Temple construction is not a big deal; few communities can afford such an expensive undertaking. However, some temples have been built and more will probably be built. In the hope of the emergence of new Old Believer churches, one can ask the question: what modern churches should be like, how they relate to the Old Believer and Old Russian tradition. To understand this, it is useful to look back, to see what modern Old Orthodox Christians inherited from their ancestors in the 17th–19th centuries, what from the pre-schism period, and what, in fact, this heritage is expressed in.

In Byzantium, from which Christianity came to Rus', a perfect temple interior was created, ideal for prayer and worship. The main type of church, centric, cross-domed, had a deep symbolic and theological meaning, and maximally corresponded to the characteristics of the sacrament of the Liturgy performed in it.

In any temple, the space created by the architect dictates a certain course of action for the person in it. The main spatial motif of the centric Byzantine and Old Russian temple is the antechamber. The centric church is most consistent with Orthodox worship and faith itself.

Outstanding art critic A.I. Komech wrote about Byzantine cross-domed churches: “He who enters the temple, after taking a few steps, stops without being prompted by anything to actually move. Only the eye can trace the endless flow of curvilinear forms and surfaces running vertically (a direction not available to real movement). The transition to contemplation is the most essential moment of the Byzantine path to knowledge.” The Byzantine temple interior carries the idea of ​​eternity and immutability; it is perfect and strict. There is no development in time or space; it is overcome by the feeling of accomplishment, achievement, stay.

In Byzantium, a perfect temple interior was created, ideal for prayer and worship. The main type of church, centric, cross-domed, best suited the characteristics of the sacrament of the Liturgy performed in it
Interior of the Church of Hagia Sophia in Constantinople (now Istanbul)

In such a church, a Christian stands in prayer, like a candle in front of an image. Each person praying is not moving anywhere, but is facing God. The temple is the earthly sky, the center of the universe. The temple space stops the person praying, takes him out of the vain, rushing and running world of everyday life, and transfers him to an ideal state of heavenly peace. No matter where a person stands in such a temple, space “centers” him, he finds himself in the center of the Universe and stands before God. He stands there himself, and he himself listens to the word of God, and he himself turns to Him in prayer (although at the same time he is among the same people praying and prays with them). In some churches, space even “compresses” a person on all sides, does not allow him to move, completely focusing his mind on the contemplation of the heavenly world, evokes a feeling of reverence and trembling of the soul, a person almost physically experiences being in the house of God. Temple, man and prayer are in amazing harmony. We can say that the temple space is formed by prayer, and vice versa, it itself determines the nature of this prayer and the entire course of action of the person praying.

This is the ideal of the temple that Byzantium and Ancient Rus' gave. The architectural forms correspond to the nature of the worship service in it. But since there is nothing permanent and immovable in the earthly world, it is difficult to maintain the perfection once achieved. The departure from the ideal of the ancient Christian temple and the degeneration of principles began long before the schism. In the middle of the 17th century and later, the situation in temple architecture, from the point of view of the correspondence of the temple architecture to worship, was far from ideal. Under these conditions, Old Believer temple building arose.

Old Believer art and literature began to take shape simultaneously with the emergence of the phenomenon itself called Old Belief. Since the split of the Russian Church, the guardians of ancient Orthodoxy had to justify their separation from the New Lovers and give their spiritual life (often in exile, in new uninhabited places) material embodiment. That is, to write liturgical and apologetic books, icons, make church utensils, and also erect buildings for prayer and the celebration of the sacraments - temples, chapels or prayer houses. This is how Old Believer art appeared.

In large centers of Old Believer life - on Vygu, on Vetka, in Guslitsy, etc. art schools, who inherited and developed primarily the traditions of Russian art of the 17th century, but at the same time did not shy away from modern artistic trends imported from Europe. Some of these schools have received national significance. For example, Vygov cast icons, remarkable in beauty and quality of execution, also called “Pomeranian casting,” spread throughout Russia. Book design, icon painting, wood carving, and church singing reached high perfection.

Among the church arts that flourished in the Old Believer environment, architecture was not the only one. That is, the construction of temples and chapels existed, but this construction was not constant, systematic and professional activity, which is what architecture is. Temples and chapels were built when circumstances permitted, rarely and not in all places where Old Believers lived.

With such meager temple construction, neither the Old Believer architectural school nor a set of traditions for the construction and decoration of temples was formed. There is no set of signs by which one could say with complete certainty that the temple (or chapel) possessing them is definitely Old Believer, and that it cannot be New Believer, Catholic or anything else.

Panorama of the Old Believer Vygov hostel, which existed for about 150 years and was destroyed by punitive operations during the reign of Nicholas I
Fragment of a wall sheet " Family tree Andrey and Semyon Denisov" Vyg. First half of the 19th century

The Old Believers’ lack of their own architectural traditions can be explained simply: the Old Believers were almost always forbidden to build temples and chapels. For common prayer, they mostly gathered in prayer houses - buildings without external signs of a temple. However, prayer rooms often had no internal signs, other than an abundance of icons and candlesticks. It was much easier to set up a prayer room in your own home or public building, indistinguishable from a barn in appearance, without external “signs of schism” than to build a temple or chapel. Much less often, it was possible to build chapels and very rarely - full-fledged churches. The rarity of churches is explained not least by the absence or small number of priests and, accordingly, by the rarity of the Liturgy. For prayer in the secular rite, chapels without an altar were sufficient.

The Old Believers could build something resembling a temple in appearance either with the connivance of local authorities (in the event that the authorities turned a blind eye to it), or without asking permission, but somewhere in the impassable wilderness, where no authorities could go. won't be able to reach it. But a temple of more or less significant size and decoration can arise only in a fairly populated area or settlement, and in a secret and remote monastery a large church is not needed. In addition, if you need to hide from constant persecution and persecution, you cannot take a church or chapel with you, like an icon or a book.

It is completely pointless to build a temple, which requires large financial outlays and organizational efforts to construct, and then immediately hand it over to be desecrated by the persecutors. For these reasons, the Old Believers engaged in architecture in rare moments when circumstances were favorable for it. There were no architects of their own due to their almost complete uselessness and impossibility of engaging in professional activities, if such architects suddenly appeared. Thus, we have to state: Old Believer architecture does not exist as a separate direction in Russian architecture.

Almost all wooden architecture of the Russian North of the 18th-19th centuries. is largely Old Believer. Although wooden Old Believer churches are almost unknown, and all the famous northern churches were built by New Believers, their forms are absolutely Russian, inheriting and developing Orthodox pre-schism traditions in architecture. Chapel in the village of Volkostrov

Nevertheless, although Old Believer architecture was not created in an explicit form, in some areas the Old Believers had a strong influence on the New Believer environment, in particular on the appearance of the churches built by the New Believers. First of all, this concerns the Russian North. A significant part of its population were Old Believers who were priestless, while the other part, although formally belonging to the Synodal Church, practically largely adhered to the old church and national customs. Including in architecture. Thus, almost all wooden architecture of the Russian North of the 18th–19th centuries. is largely Old Believer.

Although almost no wooden Old Believer churches are known, and all the famous northern churches were built by New Believers, their forms are absolutely Russian, inheriting and developing Orthodox pre-schism traditions in architecture. At this time, throughout the country, baroque and classicism brought from Europe dominated in church building, introducing Protestant and Catholic features into religious consciousness and aesthetics. In the North, until the middle of the 19th century, wooden architecture developed in a purely national (Orthodox) direction.

In the scientific literature, it is customary to explain this by the remoteness of the North from the cultural and economic centers of the 18th–19th centuries and by traditions that were mothballed for this reason. This is certainly true, but the Old Believer influence, the high authority of the Old Believers and the traditions of Vyg, in our opinion, played an important role here.

This was the situation in the North: wooden chapels and temples were built in the national tradition.

In cities, due to the lack of their own architectural traditions, the Old Believers were forced to build in the forms that were around them - in the architecture of their time. The well-known desire of the Old Believers to follow the traditions of their ancestors and antiquity was difficult to implement in architecture. Already in the 18th century, traditions in stone architecture were largely forgotten, and due to the lack of architectural history at that time, architects and clients - enlightened representatives of the Old Believers - had a very approximate and mythical idea of ​​ancient and primordial forms.

Love for antiquity was expressed in the desire to reproduce vintage forms in their then understanding. WITH late XVIII century, “national” trends periodically arose in Russian architecture - romanticism, historicism. They were popular with Old Believers customers, who tried to order churches in the “national style” that existed at that time. Examples include the churches of the Transfiguration Cemetery and the Church of the Nativity of Christ at the Rogozhskoye Cemetery. They are built in the national-romantic direction of classicism.

An abundance of elaborate carved details, red and white painting, pointed arches and other signs of Gothic – this is exactly how ancient Russian architecture was imagined by architects of the late 18th – early 19th centuries. Major architects – V. Bazhenov and M. Kazakov – paid tribute to her passion. This is how her customers saw her too. But “pure” classicism did not frighten merchants and community leaders. Confirmation of this is the Intercession Cathedral of the Rogozhsky cemetery.

The main cathedral church of the Old Believers-Priests in Rogozhskaya Sloboda. Built in 1790-1792. It is believed that the author of the temple was the architect M.F. Kazakov. Before the restoration of the Cathedral of Christ the Savior, the Church of the Intercession at the Rogozhskoye cemetery was the most extensive of Moscow churches.

Some churches of the late 18th – mid 19th centuries. built in the Baroque tradition. This architecture was widespread mostly in the provinces. These are the churches in Novozybkov.

During the period of the XVIII – XIX centuries. the construction of churches was unsystematic, temples were rarely erected. Therefore, it is difficult to identify any general features and trends in the Old Believer architecture of that time.

Only after the granting of religious freedoms in 1905 did mass Old Believer church building begin. The forces that had accumulated over decades of secretive existence rushed out, and during the 12 years of the “golden age” hundreds of temples were built throughout the country. Many of them were built by professional architects. It was during this period that one can speak, if not about specifically Old Believer architecture, then at least about its Old Believer features that were formed then.

It is possible to identify several trends, or paths, of Old Believer architecture of that time, which, in general, coincided with the development of all Russian architecture.

Eclecticism

The dominant style in Russia throughout the second half of the 19th century was eclecticism. This style was very common, existing from the 1830s until the 1917 revolution. Eclecticism replaced classicism when it had exhausted itself. The architect is given the right to choose the style, direction of work, as well as combine elements from different styles in one building.

An architect can build one building in one style, and another in another. Such an arbitrary combination of heterogeneous features in a work of art is usually recognized as a sign of decline, degradation of the corresponding movements or schools.

There are wonderful buildings in eclecticism, but basically eclecticism is a creative dead end, the inability to say one’s own word in art, the absence of path, meaning, movement and life. Approximate reproduction of forms and details from different styles, their mechanical connection without internal logic.

By and large, the same person cannot work in different styles, but works in one. Style cannot be faked. As the poet said: “As he breathes, so he writes...”. And the style of the era was eclecticism - a kind of impersonality and mishmash. They worked in it, and no decoration borrowed from the wonderful styles of the past could save them from the emptiness inherent in eclecticism.

Pseudo-Russian style, historicism

In Russian church architecture, including Old Believer, one thing was very popular
One of the eclectic trends is historicism, also called the pseudo-Russian style. It appeared in the 1850s, and received special development in the 1870-80s, when interest in national traditions in art.

The model was mainly taken from Russian architecture of the 17th century - the so-called “Russian patterned design”. But only external forms were reproduced according to the concept of them at that time. But this idea was still quite vague. And although some factual knowledge about ancient buildings had been accumulated, there was no understanding of the essence of this architecture. Architects and artists brought up on classicism did not perceive a fundamentally different architecture. The principles of constructing space, forms, details and volumes were the same as in the eclecticism prevailing around them. The result was buildings that were dry and devoid of expressiveness, although outwardly intricate.

Historicism played a positive role in the second half of the 19th century, and by the beginning of the 20th century, that is, by the time of the massive construction of churches by the Old Believers, it had completely outlived its usefulness and looked somewhat anachronistic. At this time, historic buildings were rarely built and mostly in the provinces. Although it was high-quality, it was cheap architecture, with a touch of official patriotism, and it employed not first-class architects or simply artisans. Some churches were maintained in pure historicism, maintaining a certain “purity of style” and using only pseudo-Russian motifs, but in most others, pseudo-Russian features were mixed in the most incredible way with classical, Renaissance, Gothic and others.

The former Old Believer Trinity Church of the Belokrinitsky community of the city of Vladimir. Construction in 1916 was timed to coincide with the 300th anniversary of the House of Romanov, architect S.M. Zharov. Operated until 1928. Since 1974 - a branch of the Vladimir-Suzdal Museum, the Crystal Foundation. Lacquer miniature. Embroidery".

Trinity Church turned out to be the last religious building of Vladimir. Residents call it “Red” because it is made of red brick in the so-called cross masonry. It combines many styles in its architecture, and, rather, belongs to pseudo-Russian. The red color and upward direction are reminiscent of the bonfires on which adherents of ancient piety were burned.

As a similar example of this style, we can cite the Historical Museum and the Upper Trading Rows (GUM) in Moscow. In the 1960s, they wanted to demolish the church, but the public, with the active participation of the writer V. A. Soloukhin, opposed it, and it was converted from a dormitory into a crystal museum.

"Byzantism"

In addition to the “Old Russian” motifs in historicism, there was a “Byzantine” direction, which was as unrelated to Byzantium as the pseudo-Russian direction to the architecture of Muscovite Rus'. The Church of the Intercession was built in the “Byzantine style” on Novokuznetskaya Street in Moscow.

Modern

Copying external forms and details without understanding the essence of ancient Russian buildings did not give the expected effect of reviving national forms and traditions in art. All this soon became clear to the architects, and they moved away from direct copying of ancient monuments. And they took the path not of copying, but of creating a generalized image of an ancient Russian temple. This is how the Art Nouveau style appeared, in particular, Art Nouveau of the national-historical direction, which is also sometimes called the neo-Russian style. One of the main principles of form-building in modernity was stylization: not literal copying, but identifying and emphasizing the most characteristic features of ancient buildings.

Baroque, classicism and eclecticism (closely related to historicism) are not the most suitable styles for an Orthodox church. The first thing that catches your eye in these styles is the completely non-Christian, unnecessary decoration in the temple, dating back to pagan antiquity and in no way reinterpreted by Christianity.

But the non-Christian decor inherent in styles imported from Europe is not the biggest problem. The space and volumes themselves were far from Orthodoxy. Attempts to combine the principles of constructing an Orthodox liturgical space with the canons of classicism are, as a rule, unsuccessful. In some churches built in pure classicism, according to the priests (New Believers), it is frankly inconvenient to serve.

Classicism, as a style oriented towards antiquity, uses certain forms that arose mainly in ancient times. In classicism there are no traditional forms and compositional techniques for an Orthodox church. The ancient Greeks did not know the dome, but in Christian architecture the dome is the most important, one might say, iconic thing. Classicism is a very rational style, but Christian architecture is in many ways irrational, just as faith itself is irrational, based not on logical constructions, but on Divine Revelation.

How to rethink such an irrational form as the church dome in classicism? What would an apse look like in classicism, protruding beyond the rectangular, clear and logical volume of the temple? How to arrange five chapters in classicism? Russian architects found answers to these questions, but from a Christian point of view they are completely unsatisfactory.

Both historicism and eclecticism created space and detail on the same classical basis. And ancient Russian architecture is fundamentally non-classical. It does not use an order system. It has internal harmony, logic, clarity and hierarchical subordination of parts, coming from antiquity, but externally, in details, the order is almost not manifested.

An attempt to revive the medieval principles of constructing architectural form and space was made by Art Nouveau architects. It was from this desire that the style arose. He contrasted eclecticism with integrity and organicity, unity and purity of style in every detail and in the principles of creating space.

The best architects of the country worked in the Art Nouveau style. It was to them that the richest Old Believer communities and philanthropists tried to commission temple projects. This is how the bell tower of the Rogozhsky cemetery appeared, which can be considered a masterpiece of architecture of the early 20th century and one of the most beautiful bell towers in Moscow. Its features can be discerned in a number of other Old Believer bell towers, built later by less outstanding architects. Apparently, the customers recommended that they focus on the building they liked. The facade of the bell tower is decorated with relief images of fabulous birds of paradise: Sirin, Alkonost and Gamayun.

The architect I.E. built many wonderful churches for the Old Believers. Bondarenko. Authored by the most outstanding architect of Moscow Art Nouveau F.O. Shekhtel owns a temple in Balakovo (now transferred to the Russian Orthodox Church). The St. Nicholas Church on the Belorussky Station Square and the Sretensky Church on Ostozhenka were built in the same style.

1. 2. 3.

2. Church of the Holy Trinity in Balakovo(Saratov region) architect. F.O. Shekhtel 1910-12 Contrary to historical justice, transferred to the Russian Orthodox Church MP.

3. Old Believer Church of St. George the Victorious(village Novo-Kharitonovo, at the Kuznetsov factory)

St. George's Church with a ceramic altar was built for the centenary of the victory over Napoleon at the expense of porcelain makers Kuznetsov, the main care of which was provided by Ivan Emelyanovich Kuznetsov. It should be noted that during the church reforms of Patriarch Nikon, hipped-roof churches were recognized as inconsistent with the “church order,” and their construction was prohibited since 1653, with the exception of the construction of hipped-roofed bell towers. But the Old Believers considered this architecture theirs.

Moscow. Church of the Presentation of the Vladimir Icon of the Virgin Mary on Ostozhenka. 1907-1911 arch. V.D. Adamovich and V.M. Mayat

Church of St. Nicholas the Wonderworker at Tverskaya Zastava- Old Believer temple; built on the site of a wooden chapel on Tverskaya Zastava Square.

Church of St. Nicholas the Wonderworker at Tverskaya Zastava. Construction of the temple began in 1914, consecrated in 1921. Architect - A. M. Gurzhienko.

The first design of the temple was carried out by I. G. Kondratenko (1856-1916) in 1908 by order of the Old Believer merchant I. K. Rakhmanov, who owned a plot on the spit of Butyrsky Val and Lesnaya Street in the style of white-stone Vladimir architecture. For Kondratenko, who built dozens of apartment buildings, this was his first project in temple construction. The project was then approved by the city government, but construction was postponed for unknown reasons. Six years later, the community called on another architect - A. M. Gurzhienko (1872 - after 1932), who completed a completely different project. For Gurzhienko, a specialist in road work and reconstruction of old buildings, this was also the first temple project.

Probably, by the time Gurzhienko was called, the zero cycle had already been completed, since the external outlines of the building exactly coincide with Kondratenko’s design. But the temple itself is made in the style of early Novgorod architecture, approaching the historical Church of the Savior on Nereditsa, while inside it is pillarless (in Kondratenko it is six-pillared). The temple's tented bell tower also imitates Novgorod belfries. Construction during the First World War was financed by P.V. Ivanov, A.E. Rusakov and others. At that time, near the Tverskaya Zastava there were two more large churches in the Russian style: the Cathedral of St. Alexander Nevsky (architect A. N. Pomerantsev, 1915) on Miusskaya Square and the Holy Cross Church at the Yamsky schools (1886). Both were destroyed.

By the beginning of the 20th century, researchers of ancient Russian architecture had achieved serious success; they discovered and studied a large number of monuments of ancient Russian architecture of different schools and periods. On the basis of this knowledge, a movement arose in architecture, inheriting the principles of historicism, but at a new, much more advanced level of understanding. Architects tried to build a temple in some ancient “style” (Novgorod, Vladimir-Suzdal, etc.), reproducing details and some compositional techniques with literal accuracy. The accuracy was such that some elements could not be immediately distinguished from the ancient ones. There was no longer any eclectic jumble or fictitious details, everything was done with archaeological precision. It was more difficult or even completely impossible, for various reasons, to reproduce the temple space and structure in a similar way.

Church of the Intercession and Dormition of the Virgin Mary on Maly Gavrikov Lane in Moscow. 1911, architect. I.E. Bondarenko

Architects never dared to copy literally any ancient temple - that would be plagiarism. Therefore, they tried to create something of their own in the “ancient style”, copying details and hanging them on own composition volume. But details ancient temple do not exist on their own, they grow organically from the internal space, they cannot be torn off and stuck on another wall. They have their own logic and meaning that is unclear to us now. A inner space It was precisely this that turned out to be overlooked by the architects. The result is one external appearance of an ancient Russian temple, a form without content, although sometimes very impressive, and also interesting for us to study now.

Since Old Believer art is very characterized by the desire to copy forms consecrated by antiquity, be it churches or icons, some customers did not fail to turn to architects who professed such a literalist approach.

The clearest example is the Church of the Assumption on Apukhtinka, built on the model of the Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin. Thus, during the period of mass Old Believer temple construction from 1905 to 1917, two main styles dominated, as in the architecture of the whole country - eclecticism and modernism (in their national-historical version). Then, as we know, the opportunity to build temples disappeared, and with it the temple-building traditions in architecture, and in many ways the old school of architecture itself, disappeared.

Old Believer Assumption Cathedral on Apukhtinka at the time of closure in 1935 and in the early 2000s (dormitory)

Dulevo. Old Believers are like builders of Orthodox churches: this temple was built in 1913-1917, the Kuznetsovs helped the construction by allocating land and giving an interest-free loan. The predecessor of this temple, a wooden church in the name of the Holy Apostle and Evangelist John the Theologian in Dulevo was built in 1887 through the efforts of the Kuznetsovs’ confidant Anufriev and the help of Kuznetsov

Read more about the temple construction of the Kuznetsov porcelain makers.

XXI Century

15-20 years ago the situation in the country changed once again. The oppression ended, and believers of various hopes began to build churches again. Orthodox Christian Old Believers also took up this to the best of their ability.

And then the question arose: what should these temples be like? This question is equally important for the New Believers, and since they more possibilities, then it received great development from them. Tradition, knowledge and concepts were so lost that at the competition announced in the late 1980s for the design of a temple for the 1000th anniversary of the baptism of Rus', some works were submitted without altars.

Soviet architects did not know why, in fact, the temple was needed; they perceived it as some kind of external decoration, a sign, a monument, and not as a place for celebrating the Liturgy.

In the late 1980s - early 90s, New Believer historian and publicist V.L. Makhnach said that the interrupted and lost tradition of temple building would resume at the breaking point, that is, the revival would begin with the Art Nouveau style and other trends that existed in 1917. And he turned out to be right.

In modern Russian temple construction we can see all these trends - for the most part, either ridiculous eclectic churches are being built, or more stylistically pure ones, oriented towards the Art Nouveau tradition. The path of copying ancient buildings and trying to work in some kind of “Old Russian style” has not been abandoned either. In this direction, today the Siberian Old Believers are building a cathedral in Barnaul in the forms of Vladimir-Suzdal architecture.

Now, as at the beginning of the 20th century, the main motto of temple construction is “return to the roots,” to classical antiquity. At the beginning of the 20th century. The “Novgorod-Pskov style” was taken as the ideal. Both the Old Believers of the “Golden Age” and the scientists of that time considered him a model.

E. N. Trubetskoy in his famous work “Speculation in Colors” wrote: “... the temple personifies a different reality, that heavenly future that beckons, but which humanity has not yet achieved. This idea is expressed with inimitable perfection by the architecture of our ancient churches, especially those of Novgorod." At the same time, it was not explained why the Novgorod churches were better than all the others; nothing concrete was given to substantiate this idea.

The fact is that at the beginning of the 20th century, Novgorod and Pskov churches were mostly preserved in almost their original form. There were many of them, they represented two powerful architectural schools of the 14th–16th centuries. Monuments of other ancient Russian schools of the same period were not so widely known and numerous. All early Moscow churches were rebuilt beyond recognition. Almost nothing remains of the Tver school. The Rostov school was greatly rebuilt and survived only on the periphery of the Rostov colonization of the North. Pre-Mongol churches of Kievan Rus were also rebuilt in the spirit of Ukrainian Baroque. The Belozersk school was not known at all. The Vladimir-Suzdal churches were more or less preserved and had been restored by that time. But they are so far removed in time from Moscow Rus' that they might not be perceived as their own, relatives. In addition, it is much more interesting to stylize the powerful sculptural forms of Novgorod and Pskov architecture in modernism than the refined and weightless motifs of Vladimir-Suzdal.

The architects tried to take into account all the Old Believer canons and made the temple in the style of ancient architecture.

The wooden domes for the temple in Novokuznetsk were made by a master from Altai. They were lined with aspen, which will later darken in the sun and look like old silver. This is an old approach: I didn’t want to make gold and attract attention, but I wanted people to be curious,” says Leonid Tokmin, curator of the temple’s construction.

Nowadays, again, apparently according to established tradition, Novgorod motifs in temple construction are increasingly popular. At the same time, the efforts of architects, both modern and modern, are aimed mainly at giving the temple an “Old Russian” appearance. Simply put, a kind of theatrical scenery is created, although it often has outstanding artistic merits.

But Christian worship takes place inside the church, and not outside. And in good Christian architecture, the appearance of the temple directly depended on the internal space, was shaped by it and fully corresponded to it. But for some reason, no attention is paid to the creation of a truly Christian space in the spirit of an ancient Russian temple.

I would like to believe that, having achieved serious success in stylizing the external appearance of the temple, the architects will move on to the next stage of the revival of Orthodox architecture. It seems that an appeal to the origins, to classical antiquity should be not only in the temple decoration, but most importantly - in space-planning solutions. It is necessary to comprehend and create a modern version of the temple space based on the achievements of ancient Russian and Byzantine architects.

Nikola Frizin,

Old Believer magazine " Burning bush", 2009, No. 2 (3)

We invite readers to familiarize themselves with the electronic version of this issue of the magazine. It turned out to be one of the best and contains a lot of useful information.

PDF version of the magazine Burning Bush:

How can I get to New Martyrs of the South West East Activities of the parish Catechesis Social work Sunday School Theological courses Missionary Youth organization Teaching OPK Ascribed temples Temple of Peter and Fevronia Church of the Resurrection Divine services News Optina Pustyn History of Optina Pustyn Prayer of the Optina Elders Stories about Optina Sunday Gospel and the Apostle Spiritual life The true life of man Pilgrimage Films about shrines Travel stories Pilgrimage Service "Nazareth" Issues of catechesis About the temple with love House of God Remembrance of the Dead Divine services Sacraments of the Church Churching Questions and answers Help Wanted

Calendar

The end of persecution in the 4th century and the adoption of Christianity in the Roman Empire as the state religion led to a new stage in the development of temple architecture. The external and then spiritual division of the Roman Empire into the Western - Roman and Eastern - Byzantine, also influenced the development of church art. In the Western Church, the basilica became the most widespread.

In the Eastern Church in the V-VIII centuries. The Byzantine style developed in the construction of churches and in all church art and worship. Here the foundations of the spiritual and external life of the Church, which has since been called Orthodox, were laid.

Types of Orthodox churches

Temples in the Orthodox Church were built by several types, but each temple symbolically corresponded to church doctrine.

1. Temples in the form cross were built as a sign that the Cross of Christ is the foundation of the Church, through the Cross humanity was delivered from the power of the devil, through the Cross the entrance to Paradise, lost by our ancestors, was opened.

2. Temples in the form circle(a circle that has neither beginning nor end, symbolizes eternity) speaks of the infinity of the existence of the Church, its indestructibility in the world according to the word of Christ

3. Temples in the form eight-pointed star symbolize the Star of Bethlehem, which led the Magi to the place where Christ was born. Thus, the Church of God testifies to its role as a guide to the life of the Future Age. The period of the earthly history of mankind was counted in seven large periods - centuries, and the eighth is eternity in the Kingdom of God, the life of the next century.

4. Temple in the form ship. Temples in the shape of a ship are the most ancient type churches, figuratively expressing the idea that the Church, like a ship, saves believers from the disastrous waves of everyday voyage and leads them to the Kingdom of God.

5. Temples of mixed types : By appearance cross-shaped, and inside, in the center of the cross, round, or rectangular in external shape, and inside, in the middle part, round.

Diagram of a temple in the shape of a circle

Diagram of the temple in the form of a ship

Cross type. Church of the Ascension outside the Serpukhov Gate. Moscow

Diagram of a temple built in the shape of a cross

Cross type. Church of Barbara on Varvarka. Moscow.

Cross shape. Church of St. Nicholas the Wonderworker

Rotunda. Smolensk Church of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra

Diagram of a temple in the shape of a circle

Rotunda. Church of Metropolitan Peter of the Vysoko-Petrovsky Monastery

Rotunda. Church of All Who Sorrow Joy on Ordynka. Moscow

Diagrams of a temple in the shape of an eight-pointed star

Ship type. Church of St. Dmitry on Spilled Blood in Uglich

Diagram of the temple in the form of a ship

Ship type. Church of the Life-Giving Trinity on Sparrow Hills. Moscow

Byzantine temple architecture

In the Eastern Church in the V-VIII centuries. has developed Byzantine style in the construction of temples and in all church art and worship. Here the foundations of the spiritual and external life of the Church, which has since been called Orthodox, were laid.

Temples in the Orthodox Church were built in different ways, but each temple symbolically corresponded to church doctrine. In all types of temples, the altar was certainly separated from the rest of the temple; temples continued to be two - and more often three-part. The dominant form in Byzantine temple architecture remained a rectangular temple with a rounded projection of altar apses extended to the east, with a figured roof, with a vaulted ceiling inside, which was supported by a system of arches with columns, or pillars, with a high domed space, which resembles internal view temple in the catacombs.

Only in the middle of the dome, where the source of natural light was located in the catacombs, did they begin to depict the True Light that came into the world - the Lord Jesus Christ. Of course, the similarity between Byzantine churches and catacomb churches is only the most general, since the above-ground churches of the Orthodox Church are distinguished by their incomparable splendor and greater external and internal detail.

Sometimes they have several spherical domes topped with crosses. An Orthodox church is certainly crowned with a cross on the dome or on all domes, if there are several of them, as a sign of victory and as evidence that the Church, like all creation, chosen for salvation, enters the Kingdom of God thanks to the Redemptive Feat of Christ the Savior. By the time of the Baptism of Rus', a type of cross-domed church was emerging in Byzantium, which unites in synthesis the achievements of all previous directions in the development of Orthodox architecture.

Byzantine temple

Plan of a Byzantine temple

Cathedral of St. Stamp in Venice

Byzantine temple

Cross-domed temple in Istanbul

Mausoleum of Galla Placidia in Italy

Plan of a Byzantine temple

Cathedral of St. Stamp in Venice

Temple of Hagia Sophia in Constantinople (Istanbul)

Interior of the Church of St. Sofia in Constantinople

Church Holy Mother of God(Tithe). Kyiv

Cross-domed churches of Ancient Rus'

The architectural type of Christian church, formed in Byzantium and in the countries of the Christian East in the V-VIII centuries. It became dominant in the architecture of Byzantium from the 9th century and was adopted by Christian countries of the Orthodox confession as the main form of the temple. Such famous Russian churches as the Kiev St. Sophia Cathedral, St. Sophia of Novgorod, Vladimir Assumption Cathedral were deliberately built in the likeness of the Constantinople St. Sophia Cathedral.

Old Russian architecture is mainly represented by church buildings, among which cross-domed churches occupy a dominant position. Not all variants of this type became widespread in Rus', but buildings from different periods and different cities and principalities of Ancient Rus' form their own original interpretations of the cross-domed temple.

The architectural design of the cross-domed church lacks the easily visible visibility that was characteristic of basilicas. Such architecture contributed to the transformation of consciousness ancient Russian man, leading him to an in-depth contemplation of the universe.

While preserving the general and basic architectural features of Byzantine churches, Russian churches have much that is original and unique. Several distinctive architectural styles have developed in Orthodox Russia. Among them, the style that stands out most is the one closest to Byzantine. This Toclassical type of white stone rectangular temple , or even basically square, but with the addition of an altar part with semicircular apses, with one or more domes on a figured roof. The spherical Byzantine shape of the dome covering was replaced by a helmet-shaped one.

In the middle part of small churches there are four pillars that support the roof and symbolize the four evangelists, the four cardinal directions. In the central part of the cathedral church there may be twelve or more pillars. At the same time, the pillars with the intersecting space between them form the signs of the Cross and help divide the temple into its symbolic parts.

The Holy Equal-to-the-Apostles Prince Vladimir and his successor, Prince Yaroslav the Wise, sought to organically include Rus' into the universal organism of Christianity. The churches they erected served this purpose, placing believers before the perfect Sophia image of the Church. Already the first Russian churches spiritually testify to the connection between earth and heaven in Christ, to the Theanthropic nature of the Church.

St. Sophia Cathedral in Novgorod

Demetrius Cathedral in Vladimir

Cross-domed Church of John the Baptist. Kerch. 10th century

St. Sophia Cathedral in Novgorod

Assumption Cathedral in Vladimir

Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin

Church of the Transfiguration in Veliky Novgorod

Russian wooden architecture

In the 15th-17th centuries, a significantly different style of temple construction developed in Russia from the Byzantine one.

Elongated rectangular, but certainly with semicircular apses to the east, one-story and two-story churches with winter and summer churches appear, sometimes white stone, more often brick with covered porches and covered arched galleries - walkways around all walls, with gable, hipped and figured roofs, on which they flaunt one or several highly raised domes in the form of domes, or bulbs.

The walls of the temple are decorated with elegant decoration and windows with beautiful stone carvings or tiled frames. Next to the temple or together with the temple, a high tented bell tower with a cross at the top is erected above its porch.

Russian wooden architecture acquired a special style. The properties of wood as a building material determined the features of this style. It is difficult to create a smoothly shaped dome from rectangular boards and beams. Therefore, in wooden churches, instead of it there is a pointed tent. Moreover, the appearance of a tent began to be given to the church as a whole. This is how wooden temples appeared to the world in the form of a huge pointed wooden cone. Sometimes the roof of the temple was arranged in the form of many cone-shaped wooden domes with crosses rising upward (for example, the famous temple at the Kizhi churchyard).

Church of the Intercession (1764) O. Kizhi.

Assumption Cathedral in Kemi. 1711

Church of St. Nicholas. Moscow

Church of the Transfiguration (1714) Kizhi Island

Chapel in honor of the Three Saints. Kizhi Island.

Stone tented churches

The forms of wooden temples influenced stone (brick) construction.

They began to build intricate stone tented churches that resembled huge towers (pillars). The highest achievement Stone hipped architecture is rightfully considered the Intercession Cathedral in Moscow, better known as St. Basil's Cathedral, a complex, intricate, multi-decorated structure of the 16th century.

The basic plan of the cathedral is cruciform. The cross consists of four main churches located around the middle one, the fifth. The middle church is square, the four side ones are octagonal. The cathedral has nine temples in the form of cone-shaped pillars, together making up one huge colorful tent.

Tents in Russian architecture did not last long: in the middle of the 17th century. Church authorities prohibited the construction of tented churches, since they were sharply different from the traditional one-domed and five-domed rectangular (ship) churches.

Tent architecture of the 16th-17th centuries, which finds its origins in traditional Russian wooden architecture, is a unique direction of Russian architecture, which has no analogues in the art of other countries and peoples.

Unlike Catholic churches, which were built in accordance with the artistic style dominant at the time of construction, Orthodox churches were built in accordance with the symbols of Orthodoxy. Thus, each element of an Orthodox church carries some information about who the temple is dedicated to, about some features of Orthodoxy itself, and much more.

SYMBOLISM OF THE TEMPLE

Temple shape

• Temples in the form cross were built as a sign that the Cross of Christ is the Foundation of the Church, through the Cross humanity has been delivered from the power of the devil, through the Cross the entrance to heaven has been opened.
• Temples in the form circle, as a symbol of eternity, they speak of the infinity of the existence of the Church, its indestructibility.
• Temples in the form eight-pointed star symbolize Star of Bethlehem, who led the Magi to the place where Christ was born. In this way, the church testifies to its role as a guide in human life.
• Temples in the form ship- the most ancient type of temple, figuratively expressing the idea that the Church, like a ship, saves believers from the disastrous waves of everyday voyage and leads them to the Kingdom of God.

• There were also mixed types temples connecting the above forms.

The buildings of all Orthodox churches always end with domes, which symbolize the spiritual sky. The domes are crowned with crosses as a sign of the redemptive victory of Christ. The Orthodox cross erected above the temple has an eight-pointed shape, sometimes at its base there is a crescent moon, which has many attributes assigned to it symbolic meanings, one of which is the anchor of Christian hope for salvation through faith in Christ. The eight ends of the Cross mean the eight main periods in the history of mankind, where the eighth is life of the Future Age.

Number of domes

The different number of domes, or chapters, of a temple building is determined by who they are dedicated to.

• Single-domed temple: the dome symbolizes the unity of God, the perfection of creation.
• Double-domed temple: the two domes symbolize the two natures of the God-man Jesus Christ, the two areas of creation (angelic and human).
• Three-domed temple: the three domes symbolize the Holy Trinity.
• Four-domed temple: the four domes symbolize the Four Gospels, the four cardinal directions.
• Five-domed temple: five domes, one of which rises above the others, symbolize Jesus Christ and the four evangelists.
• Seven Domed Temple: seven domes symbolize seven Sacraments of the Church, seven Ecumenical Councils, seven virtues.
• Nine-domed temple: nine domes symbolize nine ranks of angels.
• Thirteen-domed temple: thirteen domes symbolize Jesus Christ and the twelve apostles.

The shape and color of the dome also have a symbolic meaning.

The helmet shape symbolizes the spiritual warfare (struggle) that the Church wages against the forces of evil.

Bulb shape symbolizes the flame of a candle.

The unusual shape and bright colors of the domes, such as that of the Church of the Savior on Spilled Blood in St. Petersburg, speaks of the beauty of Paradise.

Dome color

• The domes are turning golden at temples dedicated to Christ and twelve holidays
• Blue domes with stars indicate that the temple is dedicated to the Blessed Virgin Mary.
• Temples with green domes dedicated to the Holy Trinity.

TEMPLE STRUCTURE

The diagram of the building of an Orthodox church presented below reflects only the most general principles of temple construction; it reflects only the basic architectural details inherent in many temple buildings, organically combined into a single whole. But with all the variety of temple buildings, the buildings themselves are immediately recognizable and can be classified according to those architectural styles to which they belong.

Absida- an altar ledge, as if attached to the temple, most often semicircular, but also polygonal in plan, it houses the altar.

Drum- a cylindrical or multifaceted upper part of the temple, over which a dome is built, ending with a cross.

Light drum- a drum, the edges or cylindrical surface of which is cut by window openings

Chapter- a dome with a drum and a cross crowning the temple building.

Zakomara- in Russian architecture, a semicircular or keel-shaped completion of a part outer wall building; as a rule, it repeats the outlines of the arch located behind it.

Cube- the main volume of the temple.

Bulb- a church dome resembling an onion in shape.

Nave(French nef, from Latin navis - ship), an elongated room, part of the interior of a church building, bounded on one or both longitudinal sides by a number of columns or pillars.

Porch- an open or closed porch in front of the entrance to the temple, elevated relative to ground level.

Pilaster(blade) - a constructive or decorative flat vertical protrusion on the surface of a wall, having a base and a capital.

Portal- architecturally designed entrance to the building.

Tent- a high four-, six- or octagonal pyramidal covering of a tower, temple or bell tower, widespread in the temple architecture of Rus' until the 17th century.

Gable- completion of the façade of a building, portico, colonnade, enclosed by roof slopes and a cornice at the base.

Apple- a ball at the end of the dome under the cross.

Tier- horizontal division of the building volume decreasing in height.


Bell towers, belfries, bells

Bell tower- a tower with an open tier (ringing tier) for bells. It was placed next to the temple or included in its composition. In medieval Russian architecture, pillar-shaped and tent-shaped bell towers are known, along with belfries of the wall-shaped, pillar-shaped and chamber type.
Pillar-shaped and tent-shaped bell towers can be single-tiered or multi-tiered, as well as square, octagonal or round in plan.
Pillar-shaped bell towers are also divided into large and small. Large bell towers are 40-50 meters high and stand separately from the temple building. Small pillar-shaped bell towers are usually included in the temple complex. The currently known versions of small bell towers differ in their location: either above the western entrance to the church, or above the gallery in the northwestern corner. Unlike free-standing pillar-shaped bell towers, small ones usually had only one tier of open bell arches, and the lower tier was decorated with windows with platbands.

The most common type of bell tower is the classic single-tier octagonal hipped bell tower. This type of bell tower became especially widespread in the 17th century, when hipped bell towers were almost an integral part of the Central Russian landscape. Occasionally, multi-tiered tented bell towers were built, although the second tier, located above the main ringing tier, as a rule, did not have bells and played a decorative role.

Under the influence of Western European culture, baroque and classical multi-tiered bell towers began to appear in large numbers in Russian monastery, temple and city architectural ensembles. One of the most famous bell towers of the 18th century was the large bell tower of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, where four more tiers of bells were erected on the massive first tier.

Before the appearance of bell towers in the ancient Church, bell towers were built for bells in the form of a wall with through openings or in the form of a belfry-gallery (ward belfry).

Belfry- this is a structure built on the wall of a temple or installed next to it with openings for hanging bells. Types of belfries: wall-shaped - in the form of a wall with openings; pillar-shaped - tower structures with a multifaceted base with openings for bells in the upper tier; ward type - rectangular, with a covered vaulted arcade, with supports along the perimeter of the walls.

Information taken from the site

In Moscow, as part of the Orthodox architecture festival “House of the Lord,” projects of modern churches were presented.

How much church architecture has changed in Russia, how traditions are combined with innovations, and why most festival projects will be impossible to implement: architect Mikhail Kesler, chairman of the Union of Architects’ Commission on Religious Buildings, told Russian Planet about this.

— As a person who has been involved in church architecture for more than 25 years, what can you say about the projects submitted to the competition?

— At this exhibition you can see what is happening in our church architecture today. We see a variety of directions here - both traditional solutions and innovative ones.

There are two troubles in today's Orthodox church building. Or a retrospective project that simply reproduces the style of past times, more often - Old Russian period: Pskov, Vladimir, without adapting it to the conditions of our time, and often even spoiling it. We are people of a different century and cannot do exactly the same as our ancestors did; we even have a different mentality. Or the project, on the contrary, too deliberately avoids traditional forms. There is a clearly visible tendency among young architects to do something “not the way it was before” at all costs. And often this is to the detriment of the established symbolism, and does not take into account a certain set of elements that are important and carry meaning. There should be nothing arbitrary or ad hoc in the temple.

— Are there any established canons in church architecture, such as, for example, in church fine arts?

— It’s better to call it a canonical tradition. Indeed, over time, some time-tested samples and solutions became canon. But this is not a repetition. Rublev, looking at the icons created before him, created something new. The same thing applies to temple building. Any tradition develops with an eye to previous experience.

Here, for example, is a project by one of the architects. Pay attention to the offset windows: why did the author do this? This is a whim, which I already spoke about, a desire to do in spite of. This decision is not justified. This is the problem with our young architects. They are not taught to understand the key things of temple architecture, they are not involved in church life and have little knowledge of the history of Orthodox architecture, and this is not only about Russian temple construction, but about Orthodox architecture in general.

Young people are now instilled with only one thing: the desire to stand out at any cost, to be different from everyone else, to deny previous experience. Being original is not a bad thing, but often it comes at the expense of not just tradition, but common sense.

— Should an architect be a churchgoer?

- This is the key question. It is useless to engage in church building without being a church person. The architect must know how worship takes place, how parish life flows, where everything should be located, how auxiliary premises should interact with the church. This is all unfamiliar to an outsider. Modern church designs make it very clear whether the architect is a churchgoer or not.

— Do architectural trends influence Western Christian tradition on modern Orthodox architecture?

— Many architects often copy the modernist techniques of Western Catholic and Protestant culture. It looks at least unusual. But in those conditions this is justified, since Catholics have a different liturgy, they have a completely different Christian worldview. This philosophy, of course, is expressed in visible, architectural forms. Therefore, it is important that the architect who builds an Orthodox church is himself an Orthodox person, knows the history of both Russian and world Orthodoxy well, and reflects this worldview through his work.

— If we can outline modern Catholic or Protestant architecture, then what about modern Orthodox architecture?

— It hasn’t worked out yet. Yes, there are attempts to modernize the old, there are other attempts to do the opposite. This is the wrong motive, not Orthodox. Since the 1990s we have lived in an era of liberalism. Everyone can express themselves as they wish, personal opinion is the main thing, no authority. In church construction there is now complete eclecticism: some have modernism, some have traditions, some don’t know what. This is the spirit of liberalism that reigns everywhere in our country - in economics, in politics, in all of our lives, including in architecture. Maybe someday we will be able to select some samples that will be perceived by the general consciousness as the best, and we will decide that we will move in this direction, but for now we are far from that.

- What's stopping this?

“Perhaps this expresses a certain inertia of our consciousness.” We are too accustomed to traditions and are afraid to move away from them. And I think that in many respects this is correct. This protective position is useful at times when there are too many centrifugal forces. If you start the process of renovationism in architecture, it can rock the entire church life.

— How does the Church behave?

“Unfortunately, the other side speaks out little on this topic. Architects are essentially stewing in their own juice, but we need to know what the Church thinks. We have no idea what her formula is for approaching modern architecture. For example, in the Vatican the hierarchs gathered and decided: anything is possible! And they were allowed to follow the directions dictated modern Art. Yes, this led to unbridled modernism, to situations where you don’t immediately understand that this is a temple or shopping mall. But this was the official, clearly stated position of the Church.

— Not only architects participate in this festival. For example, the festival was opened by Bishop Mark, curator of the church construction program in Moscow. So, does the Church still take part in the dialogue?

— The situation is changing, but slowly. Indeed, when Bishop Mark took charge of the program, it was possible to turn the situation around and abandon, for example, standard projects in favor of individual ones. By the way, one of the tasks of the project competition within the framework of this festival is to find solutions that could be used for the “200 temples” program. And another positive initiative - recently, by resolution of the Synod, a special department for architecture was organized under the Russian Orthodox Church. Until then, it didn’t exist, and we, architects, simply had no one to appeal to.

— How to find a balance between unrestrained modernism and retrograde?

— Architecture is still business card nation. We have one language, one faith. It brings people together. The same can be said about architecture. Any form carries a symbolic load associated with the dogma of Orthodoxy. And if it is unchangeable, then in principle these forms are also unchangeable. That is why little has changed in temple architecture in 1000 years. To be honest, we have no stability at all in Russia, and the Church is the only place where order, hierarchy, vertical power, etc. are preserved. Therefore, such an element, not so important, it would seem, is architecture, this is also such a moment of stability, orderliness, following traditions. It seems to me that for the sake of their preservation we can put up with reproaches of inertia and conservatism. New is good when everything else is good and strong.

And if we talk about temple decoration... In fact, only the external decor is dictated by style. Sometimes it is imposed by Western Baroque or Renaissance, but remove the shell, the colonnades, and you will see an ordinary cross-domed temple. We must carefully preserve all this, protect the canonical tradition, but at the same time move forward.

—What do you think a modern Orthodox church should be like?

— I don’t really like the word “style.” I prefer the formula for building a temple taking into account its tasks. There is no need to try to make a church “in some style,” but you just need to make an Orthodox church.

You choose the place where it will stand, this place will dictate the architecture and solutions. Then you take into account the views and lifestyle of the local community - what people do in the parish, how many children are there, what kind of social work they do there, and, based on this, decide what buildings you will need. In fact, to build a good temple, you don’t need to invent anything. It is enough to know the traditional forms, their symbolism and build the temple as needed in a given place, taking into account the aspirations of a particular community. Then all the churches in Russia will be Orthodox, traditional and at the same time completely different and unique.

TEMPLE ARCHITECTURE

Temple architecture occupies an exceptional place in architecture. Based on the same principles and methods of construction, church buildings are strikingly different from civil buildings.

Even the most best samples secular buildings - luxurious palaces, cannot compete in beauty and grandeur with grandiose temples, which in any culture were considered the apogee of the development of the art of construction.

One cannot but agree with this when admiring the architecture, for example, of the majestic St. Isaac's Cathedral in St. Petersburg or the almost fabulous St. Basil's Cathedral in Moscow. Temple architecture embodies the best aspirations of the human spirit.

Many temples, due to their beauty, grace and monumentality, are not only the main attractions of cities, but can also lay claim to being their historical symbol. For example, the ancient Russian city of Vladimir is unthinkable without the Assumption Cathedral, and Sergiev Posad near Moscow is unthinkable without the temple complex of the Holy Trinity Lavra of St. Sergius.

The architecture of the temple does not express the usual desire to organize a residential and comfortable space (which we see in civil architecture), but an attempt by man to express his path to God through monumental architecture. Temple construction is full of symbolism, as an expression of the faith that encourages a person to dedicate his best creation to his Creator.

Temples in Rus' were built in different styles: from wooden architecture to the majestic Empire style. But an invariable feature of Orthodox churches is its symbolic compliance with the Orthodox faith. In architecture, this was expressed in the form of church buildings, which, as a rule, at the base of the foundation have either a Cross as a symbol of salvation, or a circle as a symbol of eternity, or resemble a ship as an ancient symbol of the Church, saving its children in the raging sea of ​​worldly passions.

Church architecture is an integral component of Russian culture. However, it is not only in Russia that wonderful examples of temple architecture are presented. For example, Russian Orthodox Church abroad has amazingly beautiful churches: this is the majestic St. Alexander Church in Paris, which writers from abroad loved to visit, and the Cathedral of New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia in Munich, strict in its brevity, and the Holy Trinity Monastery in Jordanville.

A temple differs from secular buildings not only in its rich symbolism and elegance of architectural forms; a church building is, first of all, a meeting place for the soul with God, a special place state of mind- prayers. By visiting a temple not only in your native land, but also while on tourist trips abroad, you become familiar with the rich spiritual culture of Orthodoxy.

Temple architecture, of course, is a special area of ​​architecture in which the invisible soul of the craftsmen who decorate the temple and inside is present. At all times, the most important stage in the construction of temples was interior wall and ceiling painting. The subtle artistic taste of the fresco masters, coupled with a reverent attitude towards the theme of the work, ultimately created real masterpieces of church painting, which to this day serve as a standard for human spirituality and self-awareness.

THE FORMATION OF TEMPLE ARCHITECTURE

The Lord, who created man from the dust of the earth, gave him the opportunity to recognize Himself in the entire universe surrounding man. According to the words of the Apostle Paul, “His invisible things, eternal power His and the Godhead... are visible through the consideration of creation” (Rom. 1:20). The all-wise Creator introduces man into the world He created as into a beautiful temple, in which “everything that breathes praises the Lord” (Ps. 150:6).
In the pagan understanding, the temple was, in the narrow sense, the dwelling of some “deity.” This revealed the limitations of paganism, which did not comprehend that God, being above all material things, simultaneously resides in the whole world.

Christianity, which became the dominant worldview in the Byzantine Empire from the 4th century, did not take the path of destroying the architectural achievements of antiquity: the Church only processed the experience accumulated over centuries in the light of Christ’s Truth. Christianity was preached as far as possible without violating established local traditions and way of life. The first buildings in which prayer meetings and divine services of ancient Christians took place after gaining freedom of religion were basilicas.

The basilica is a typically Roman type of building. These structures were erected in the centers public life ancient cities and were the places of its concentration. Here, decisions of the city authorities were announced, legal proceedings were carried out, stock exchange transactions were carried out, trade deals were concluded, and business meetings were scheduled. The fact that Christian services were transferred to buildings with these functions suggests that the Church, after legalization on a state scale, is entering the very center of public life. Ancient Christians began to prefer the basilica also because buildings of this type were never used for ritual pagan purposes.

The layout of the basilica is fully consistent with the order of Christian worship: the interior space of the building is usually divided by two rows of columns into three parts (naves); the western apse, unlike similar structures of pre-Christian times, is usually absent, and a transverse nave (transept) is attached to the eastern apse to expand the altar; The central nave is much higher and wider than the side nave, in addition, it has additional lighting due to two rows of windows in the upper part. The right nave is reserved for men, the left for women, as required by the ancient charter of the Church; the bishop is given a central place, and in pre-Christian times the same place was usually occupied by the judge. These observations indicate the social structure of the Church. In contrast to the pagan understanding of the temple as the house of “deity,” the Christian temple is a place of worship, “domus ecclesia” - the home of the Church as an organization of believers. Great importance acquires interior decoration Christian church: the walls protect believers from the outside world, revealing the spiritual world through frescoes and mosaic images, and all attention is directed to the holy altar, where the Sacrament of the Eucharist is celebrated. In the 4th century, the construction of basilica churches took place mainly in the East.

Along with basilicas, buildings of the centric type occupied an important place in ancient Christian architecture: mausoleums, baptisteries, temples. Ancient Christian mausoleums were a direct continuation and development in new conditions of the architecture of late antique mausoleums of the beginning of the 4th century. The upper volume of these structures was initially divided by deep niches, and subsequently by windows, due to which a new architectural element- a light drum that served as a supporting base for the dome.

From the first centuries of its existence, the Church of Christ established the custom of celebrating the Sacrament of the Eucharist at the places of suffering of the holy martyrs. In the 3rd-4th centuries, over the burial places of the holy martyrs, Christians began to build temples (martyriums), which in appearance resembled ancient mausoleums; At the same time, there was a tendency to transform burial structures of pre-Christian times into Christian churches.

At the same time, the formation of the architecture of churches of the cross-centric type took place. The earliest of the buildings of this kind is the Temple of San Lorenzo, which has survived to this day, built in the 70s of the 4th century in Milan. This is a square structure in plan, with semicircular apses attached on each side, which gives it a peculiar cross shape. Although some architectural analogies can be traced in some buildings of late Roman times (for example, individual rooms of palace complexes and baths), however, in the appearance of this type of temple one cannot help but see the desire of Christian architects to apparently glorify the Honest and Life-giving Cross of Christ - an instrument of human salvation and a symbol of eternal victory over death and the devil.

The idea of ​​a Christian temple as a reflection of the Kingdom of God, where everything comes from Christ and returns to Christ, was subsequently fully embodied in the unsurpassed masterpiece of the 6th century - the Cathedral of St. Sophia in the city of Constantinople, which became the basis for the formation of the Christian architectural canon for many centuries. The achievement of this ideal was preceded by many years of creative search by church architects, evidence of which are centric churches, in which the main idea of ​​the Cross of the Lord as the focus and basis of the entire Christian worldview is clearly visible.

Middle Ages and temple architecture

The life of a medieval person is closely connected with the earth. The aesthetic element is widely developed in his culture. This is the type of person who is self-sufficient, integral. In the heroic epic, in the epics, we see strong natures, whose words do not diverge from deeds, they are spontaneous, sincere; with what more people has power, the more responsibility he bears. The culture of the Middle Ages was not based on personality. People live by norms intended for the whole group. Freedom is a negative category; it is understood as self-will. These features of thinking were reflected in architecture, primarily temple architecture.

In the Russian Middle Ages, processes took place that were in many ways similar to European ones. In Europe, the Middle Ages began with the destruction of the monuments of Antiquity - in Rus', pagan art was anathema. Latin language stays in catholic church language of worship - Orthodox worship is conducted in Church Slavonic (modified Old Church Slavonic) language (this is important because cultural values of previous eras are available primarily to people close to the church). Christianity is gradually becoming the dominant ideology, and both in Europe and in Russia this process goes from south to north.

It is not a purely national peculiarity that Russian art of the Middle Ages was formed in the collision of two structures - patriarchal and feudal, and two religions - paganism and Christianity. The same thing is happening in Europe: dual faith, especially in the north and west, the gradual transition of pagan deities into the category of lower, demonic ones (and in our country the functions of the old gods were more often attributed to saints).

The Russian Middle Ages begins with the baptism of Rus'. It is difficult to overestimate the significance of this event. Together with Christianity, Rus' adopted certain cultural foundations from Byzantium. In particular, stone architecture, examples of which were taken from Byzantium, began to meet new state and ideological tasks. A type of cross-domed church was created there, the basis of which is a rectangular room with four or more pillars in the middle, dividing the internal space into nine parts. The center of the temple is the space under the dome, where light penetrates through the windows in the drum. Adjacent to the under-dome space are cells covered with cylindrical vaults, forming a cruciform base of the plan. The corner parts are covered with domes or barrel vaults. The entire central space in the plan forms a cross. The dome appears in Byzantium in the Justinian period, even before the cross-dome (Sophia of Constantinople).

The canopy system on the sails is also formed there. On the eastern side of the building there are three faceted or semicircular apses. The middle one houses the altar. In the western part there is a room on the second tier - the choir. The transverse space in the western part is called the porch, narthex.

However, relying on the traditions of Byzantine art, Russian masters created their own national art, its forms of temples, wall paintings and iconography, which cannot be confused with Byzantine, despite the commonality of iconography.