DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.47325#0387
384
Leonid A. Beliaev
sion, it dates approximately from the 1340-s to the early 15th century; depending on
the information sources we choose: unreliable written documents or the results of
archaeological investigations, again not always very precise.
However, at the present time, this interval is quite appropriate as long as it cor-
responds in general to dating of other monuments. The most important results of these
excavations are that they have confirmed:
1) The dating of the cathedral within this period:
2) The simultaneous construction of both foundations of the cathedral and its
altar screen.
Our excavations revealed the remains of the foundations of the northern, south-
ern and western walls, of the central apse and of four pillars. The basement between
them was deliberately filled in with small pieces of limestone mixed with lime and
sand. Even more ancient layers were discovered underneath. However, no one stone
was found at any level higher than the ancient floor. Among the substructures at this
level we were able to identify a structure between two eastern pillars, which was essen-
tially moved further west than the “facades” of the pillars. However, according to our
observations, it had no continuation w ithin the aisles (Fig. 3).
The structure was very similar technologically to other foundations: roughly
hewm stones and small stone pieces, which were stuck together by lime-mortar.
However, its level did not correspond to the walls or to the pillars: it was much small-
er and was literaly “hanging” in the layer of crumbled limestones which filled the
basement. The general elevation of the structure was about 80 cm with average stone
size of about 30-35 cm high. The east-west dimension of the bottom of the first row
was 160 cm. Compared with the western "facades” of the eastern pillars, the first row
was extended to the west for about 60 cm and formed a kind of a step about 25-27 cm
in width. The dimension of the second row was about 120-130 cm and it was extend-
ed to the west for approximately 35 cm.
The w estern sides of the stones were hewn thoroughly. The surface of the whole
structure was very straight. The eastern surface of the structure, conversely, was rough-
ly done. The eastern sides of the stones were not hewn. The surface looked explicitly
like a background one. The northern part of the structure was destroyed by a later
building. However, in front of the northern pillar we were able to identify the remains
of stones without any mortar, which corresponded to the level of the structure in the
central nave. We can suppose that the similar structure existed in front of the southern
pillar as well.
In our first publication we have supposed that this structure was the foundation
of a stone altar screen. Now I would like to broaden and develop this hypothesis with
some, yet not numerous, parallels. First of all. we should mention the cathedral of
Archangel Mikhail in Staritsa, which was thoroughly studied archaeologically by
N. N. Voronin. There he found a structure that undoubtedly served as the foundation of
the stone altar screen. The foundation was “splitting” between the pillars and was sim-
ilar to the structure which was mentioned above4. Secondly, let us recall the conclu-
sions made by Betin and Sheredega about the remains of architectural decoration,
which might belong to the old altar screen, in the cathedral of Sawino-Storozhevskii
Leonid A. Beliaev
sion, it dates approximately from the 1340-s to the early 15th century; depending on
the information sources we choose: unreliable written documents or the results of
archaeological investigations, again not always very precise.
However, at the present time, this interval is quite appropriate as long as it cor-
responds in general to dating of other monuments. The most important results of these
excavations are that they have confirmed:
1) The dating of the cathedral within this period:
2) The simultaneous construction of both foundations of the cathedral and its
altar screen.
Our excavations revealed the remains of the foundations of the northern, south-
ern and western walls, of the central apse and of four pillars. The basement between
them was deliberately filled in with small pieces of limestone mixed with lime and
sand. Even more ancient layers were discovered underneath. However, no one stone
was found at any level higher than the ancient floor. Among the substructures at this
level we were able to identify a structure between two eastern pillars, which was essen-
tially moved further west than the “facades” of the pillars. However, according to our
observations, it had no continuation w ithin the aisles (Fig. 3).
The structure was very similar technologically to other foundations: roughly
hewm stones and small stone pieces, which were stuck together by lime-mortar.
However, its level did not correspond to the walls or to the pillars: it was much small-
er and was literaly “hanging” in the layer of crumbled limestones which filled the
basement. The general elevation of the structure was about 80 cm with average stone
size of about 30-35 cm high. The east-west dimension of the bottom of the first row
was 160 cm. Compared with the western "facades” of the eastern pillars, the first row
was extended to the west for about 60 cm and formed a kind of a step about 25-27 cm
in width. The dimension of the second row was about 120-130 cm and it was extend-
ed to the west for approximately 35 cm.
The w estern sides of the stones were hewn thoroughly. The surface of the whole
structure was very straight. The eastern surface of the structure, conversely, was rough-
ly done. The eastern sides of the stones were not hewn. The surface looked explicitly
like a background one. The northern part of the structure was destroyed by a later
building. However, in front of the northern pillar we were able to identify the remains
of stones without any mortar, which corresponded to the level of the structure in the
central nave. We can suppose that the similar structure existed in front of the southern
pillar as well.
In our first publication we have supposed that this structure was the foundation
of a stone altar screen. Now I would like to broaden and develop this hypothesis with
some, yet not numerous, parallels. First of all. we should mention the cathedral of
Archangel Mikhail in Staritsa, which was thoroughly studied archaeologically by
N. N. Voronin. There he found a structure that undoubtedly served as the foundation of
the stone altar screen. The foundation was “splitting” between the pillars and was sim-
ilar to the structure which was mentioned above4. Secondly, let us recall the conclu-
sions made by Betin and Sheredega about the remains of architectural decoration,
which might belong to the old altar screen, in the cathedral of Sawino-Storozhevskii