Вопросы истории и культуры

северных стран и территорий

------------------------------------

Historical and cultural problems

of northern countries and regions

 

Научные статьи

 

Искусствоведение

 

Evgeny Khodakovsky

(Saint-Petersburg, Russia)

 

Wooden church architecture on the northern borders
of the Moscow State: local traditions and the national context

 

In the year 1478 the vast territories of the Russian North, belonging to the Novgorodian Republic, came into possession of the Moscow state. The annexation of Novgorod lands was the greatest success of Ivan the Third, whose primary task was to unite the various Russian lands under the central authority of the Great Prince of Muscovy.

From this point on, Moscow’s leadership was underscored not only by political means, but also by the spread of completely new and typically Muscovite architectural forms—symbolizing the presence of centralized power—all over Russia. Here we encounter the first aspect of the relationship between the centre and periphery, which may be defined as an attempt to inscribe northern architecture into the national context. Thus, the adaptation or dissolution of local traditions in the face of strong outside influence becomes one of the essential questions of Russian late medieval art.

The Russian North has always been the most conservative area: it preserved the old Novgorodian tradition of nonconformism and showed relative independence from the rule of Moscow. For this reason the erection of stone cathedrals in Solovetsky monastery and the town of Kargopol in the mid-sixteenth century should be seen as a manifestation of the principal Moscow architectural trend of that period—I mean the expansion of five-cupola composition, which originated with the Assumption and Archangel cathedrals in the Moscow Kremlin. The multi-domed motif thus reappears in Russian architecture after the pre-Mongolian period of political unity, and in the time of Ivan the Third and his predecessors is emblematic evidence of the return of a strong centralized authority. In the sixteenth century, the image of the five-domed cathedral was associated with the main sanctuary of the Russian lands; it linked the North with the capital city and created a unified architectural and spiritual space. Indeed, towards the end of the seventeenth century several stone cathedrals, in imitation of specific Muscovite prototypes, were built all over the Russian north. These cathedrals formed a system of symbolic landmarks on the frontiers of the Muscovite state.

Here we must point to a second very important aspect of the history of the Northern Russian architecture of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. It is connected with the representation of the Russian Orthodox world along the European borders and on the trade route from the Barents Sea to the White Sea and the Northern Dvina River. Since 1553, when Richard Chancellor reached the Nikolo-Karelsky Monastery and traveled from there to Moscow and elsewhere, this maritime and river passage was the major route for commerce between Russia and European countries. Its importance becomes obvious if we look at maps of the period, which indicate this route with accuracy and precision. But at the same time, the Russian North was vulnerable to numerous plundering raids since the earliest times up to the twentieth century. The famous plan of European intervention compiled by Heinrich von Staden considered the White Sea coastline and the Northern Dvina as the quickest way of penetrating deeply into the heart of Russia. The Russian-Swedish war in the beginning of 1590s revealed the vulnerability of the Northern frontiers. Hence, the building programme of the Russian state in the North must be interpreted as having a defensive function as well. Certainly, the wide network of fortresses protected the Northern borders and coasts of the Muscovite state. But in dedications of Northern churches and cathedrals one may see also an appeal for celestial intercession. This pre-Mongolian tradition was revived in Kremlin architecture, since its central cathedral was consecrated to the Assumption of the Virgin, who has always been perceived as the primary defender and intercessor for Orthodox believers. The churches in the oldest Russian settlements on the White Sea coast – Varzuga and Kem, traditionally regarded by foreign invaders as their foremost targets – were dedicated to Assumption of the Virgin. The Kremlin Cathedral of the Archangel Michael has also a military and protective significance for the first city of the Russian land, and it explains the meaning of the name of City of Archangelsk, founded in 1584 to shield the northern entrance to the Russian state.

Thus, summing up the history of the Russian Northern architecture of the 16^th and 17^th centuries, we distinguish three main aspects of the manifestations of central power in the North: first, to bond the distant lands with the capital city not only politically and economically, but also on the mental level, by planting Muscovite architectural models on the Northern soil; second, to present the Russian world to Europe; third, to erect a spiritual fence to protect the holy frontiers with the help of celestial guardians.

The intensive introduction of new forms in the White Sea North also interfered with the development of the wooden church architecture. Although it had always been very conservative, we observe evident changes in its historical evolution beginning in the mid-seventeenth century. In the preceding decades the majority of the churches on the White Sea coast, dating between 1590s–1630s and dedicated to St. Nicholas, demonstrate very archaic compositions and constructions, such as the simple square framework, covered with a double-sloped cascade roof, in Kovda (1597). The church in Shueretskoe (1595) is based on the ancient cruciform floor plan, which traces back to earlier examples of the wooden architecture. After the Time of Troubles in the beginning of the 17^th century the traditional vertical composition of the previous period reappears in the tented-roof churches in the villages of Purnema (1618) and Maloshuika (1638), and, despite the dates when they were built, we analyze these monuments within the context of 16^th century art history.

The situation in White Sea wooden church architecture changes radically in the middle of the 17^th century. These alterations may be explained by the strong impact of regional stone architecture, which had conquered the wooden forms and shapes. From this point onwards, wooden buildings correspond to stone architecture. The principal tendency in the wooden architecture from the 1650s is characterized, first, by the inculcation of the five-domed formula, which coincides with edicts restricting construction of tented-roof churches; second, by the further elaboration of that formula into multi-domed wooden cathedrals.

The question concerning the source of such decisive modifications in traditional wooden architecture is of the great interest. We suppose these alterations were caused by the intense activity of Patriarch Nikon in the White Sea area. Nikon is well known for his campaign to accentuate the unity of the Russian and Greek churches and to raise the status of the Patriarch to the level of Tsar. From this point, the Monastery of the Cross on Kiy Island, founded by Nikon in 1656, may be viewed as a clear testimony to his political ambitions, since the configuration of the central three-domed Cathedral of the Exaltation of the Cross could have derived from the Cathedral of the Epiphany in the Moscow Kremlin. The secondary role in the monastery compound was played by the refectory church, covered by a wooden cube roof with five onion-shaped cupolas. This contiguity of stone and wood in the ensemble of the Cross Monastery on Kiy Island acquires a great significance for the history of wooden architecture, because in the course of these works, undertaken by Nikon, the idea of many-headed composition was transferred from stone into wood. It was a precedent that may have determined the arrangement of a number of wooden five-domed cube churches in the neighbouring area, i.e., the southern shores of the White Sea and Onega River. This group is presented by several monuments, demonstrating ambivalent features: the compact and simple square plan, peculiar for earlier architecture, and the picturesque stone-like five-point configuration of the roof, with its variety of forms and richness of decoration. The Ascension cube church from Kushereka (1669) was built just a few years after the Cross Monastery was erected; it was followed by St. Peter and Paul church in Virma and the ensembles on the Onega River. At the same time, the cube would have made it possible to increase the number of onion-shaped heads up to nine, as in the Church of Saint Nicholas in Berezhnaya Dubrava (1678). Thus, towards the end of the 17^th century the cube churches have already formed a very interesting set of wooden buildings, absorbing refined stone forms and rejecting the tented roof under ideological pressure. This chapter in the history of the Northern architecture reflects the general process of dissolving local traditions by infusing them into the broadest national context.

These strong impulses from centre to periphery, which were brought to the North by Nikon himself and his builders, affected the traditional wooden architecture not only on the shores of the White Sea, but in other regions as well. From the mid-seventeenth century, wooden architecture on the Dvina River also displays considerable modifications in the traditional image of the wooden church. Nikon’s restrictions concerning tented roofs were confirmed by his successors, and from the 1650s we began to observe completely new types of wooden churches on the banks of the Dvina River. The tented roof was replaced by various forms and configurations in the manner of wealthy and showy 17^th century stone architecture: these include the tier churches in Permogorie and Cherevkovo and the nine-point Church of Elijah in Chukhcherma (1657) near Kholmogory. Its picturesque composition was repeated in the neighbouring Epiphany church on Ukhtostrov (1681—1682). The only extant example of that group stands in Zaostrovie (1688). The flourishing of such multi-domed architectural composition must be explained also in the light of the charismatic personality of Archbishop Afanasy of Kholmolgory, whose work dominated the special period in architectural history on the Dvina River in the last two decades of the 17^th century. An adherent of Nikon, Afanasy pursued the Moscow-centered policy in the North. Intensive stone construction in Kholmogory was the archbishop’s main concern, and, as on Kiy Island, the central Transfiguration Cathedral in Kholmogory was based on the traditional Kremlin prototype. In Kholmogory and Kiy Island architectural development followed the same pattern: directed by specific Muscovite traditions and inspired by an outstanding personality, stone architecture influences local conventional wooden forms.

The last aspect to be focused on is the phenomenon of wooden multi-domed-cathedrals of the late 17^th century. The Kola Resurrection Cathedral was consecrated in 1684 by Nikon’s successor Patriarch Joachim and Archbishop Afanasy. The history of this remarkable building lasted until the year of 1854, when English ships deliberately fired on it. The image of the Kola cathedral evokes the description of the legendary oak Cathedral of Holy Wisdom, erected in 989 in Novgorod. The ancient pre-Mongolian type of a huge multi-domed “honestly decorated” (as the chronicles put it) edifice reappears in Russian late medieval architecture like its epilogue. The existence of this sophisticated formula in pre-Mongolian times and the 17^th century coincides with the strivings of the central authorities to manifest themselves in the subordinated lands and territories. At the same time, the configuration of the multi-domed cathedral corresponds to Greek currents in the Russian art of the pre-Mongolian epoch and the activity of Nikon and Afanasy in the second half of the 17^th century.

The large scale and heavenly beauty of the Resurrection Cathedral in Kola would have seemed to be inappropriate to a remote fortress with few inhabitants. But this disparity is explained by the function of the cathedral to represent the Russian Orthodox world on its Northern frontiers, since Kola was the first harbour of the Moscow state on the maritime route from Europe. The defensive purpose of the cathedral is also evident. It is worth nothing that its side-altars were dedicated to St. Nicholas, the patron of mariners and travelers, and to St. George, whose militant image was as the patron of the Orthodox people and was a heraldic symbol of Moscow. The defensive significance of such consecrations corresponds with the main towers of the Kola fortress, which were built at the end of the 16^th century and named after St. Nicholas and St. George. Hence, in the history of Kola we see a characteristic concordance of fortifications and church architecture, whose elements are closely linked by their general role as defensive shields.

The contemporary Cathedral of St. Michael Archangel in Shenkursk dates from 1681. Compared with Kola, its configuration is not so complicated, but it also belongs to the type of the grand cathedral with the multi-domed covering and minor domes on side compartments. In structure it is based on the traditional cross, which might have been inherited from the previous cruciform edifice of 1582. Nevertheless the cathedral in Shenkursk was certainly perceived as a modern building deliberately constructed in the “stone manner,” and hence it must be regarded within the whole group of high two-storyed stone cathedrals from the late 17^th century, such as those in Solvychegodsk, Ryazan, Pskov and Astrakhan.

In concluding our survey of Russian wooden architecture in the Northern lands of the Muscovite state we should emphasize the main aspects of the manifestation of the central authorities, which are:

1) The creation of models that represent the capital city in the remote parts of the state and along the main European trade route;

2) An attempt on the part secular and ecclesiastical authorities to diminish local features in order to create an integrated space, symbolizing the unity and consolidation of the state;

3) This policy was immediately followed by inculcation of the emblematic multi-point motif, which spread from the centre and made obsolescent such old local shapes, such as the tented roof and cruciform plan;

4) As a result, we observe the main tendency in the history of the Northern wooden architecture, which may be defined as its compliance to the image of a stone church. Due to this correlation, however, conservative wooden architecture acquired a great variety of fresh forms, technical methods and unique experience that would ensure the flourishing of Russian wooden church building into the 18^th century.

 

В статье рассматривается эволюция форм в деревянной архитектуре Русского Севера, начавшаяся с середины XVII в. и отражающая процесс утверждения на периферии Московского государства авторитета центральной власти, как светской, так и церковной. На примере Беломорского и Двинского ареалов раскрывается феномен возникновения многоглавых деревянных храмов, чье завершение ассоциировалось с каменными соборами московского Кремля. В контексте истории северного зодчества подробно освещается роль видных церковных иерархов – патриарха Никона и архиепископа Афанасия. В частности, появление распространенного в южном Беломорье и Нижнем Поонежье кубоватого типа связывается с архитектурой заложенного Никоном Крестного монастыря на Кий-острове. Отдельно анализируются Воскресенский собор в Коле и Михайло-Архангельский в Шенкурске, чей облик, впервые с домонгольского времени, свидетельствует о возвращении в соборную деревянную архитектуру многоглавия, то есть, той композиционной формулы, которая удивительным образом хронологически совпадает с периодами существования на Руси сильной центральной власти.

Иллюстрации к статье см. в Приложении 2.

 

© Evgeny Khodakovsky

 

 

Журнал создан в сотрудничестве с Министерством регионального развития Российской Федерации

 

 

Назад

При перепечатке оригинальных материалов обязательна ссылка на
«Вопросы истории и культуры северных стран и территорий»