Placement of the electronic version in the open access made: http: // rostmuseum .median .ru. All rights reserved.

Placement in the RusArch library: 2006

E.N. Torshin

On the issue of plinth production in North-Eastern Russia

(based on materials from the excavations of the Church of Boris and Gleb in Rostov)

In the city of Rostov, since 1986, a search has been conducted for the Church of Boris and Gleb 1214 - 1218. 1 The church was founded in the courtyard of Prince Konstantin Vsevolodovich. This courtyard, shortly before the construction of the church, was apparently overhauled or even rebuilt after a fire in 1210 2. It can be assumed that the church of Boris and Gleb was part of a single ensemble of the prince's residence, like the well-known church in Bogolyubovo.

At present, to the south of the existing church of Boris and Gleb in 1761, in an excavation with an area of ​​80 m2, a layer of collapse of building materials of the pre-Mongol period was discovered. It consists of plinths, fragments of cement and lime-sand mortars. A fragment of the fallen wall of an ancient building was also found in this ruin. The masonry of the wall was made of plinth on a lime-cement mortar. The fragment is interesting in that it is the end of the wall and represents the arch and the filling of the tympanum of the zakomara.

Unfortunately, the foundation of this fallen wall was not discovered, as well as, in general, the foundations to the Mongolian structures of the princely court. Therefore, today we still cannot confidently name the building to which the considered fragment of masonry belonged. However, the information at our disposal about building materials allows us to draw preliminary conclusions about the place of the studied monuments in the history of the Plinthian construction of North-Eastern Russia, as well as about the links of this construction with the architecture of other lands of Russia.

The main building material of the church of Boris and Gleb and, possibly, the prince's court in Rostov was plinth. As a result of measurements of several hundred copies, its format was established: (23 - 26) x (16 - 17) x (4 - 5) cm. Deviations from the average format were rare and insignificant. Plinths of additional format (narrower) were not found.

Ceramic plinth dough has a bright, even pink color. In the fracture, it also has a uniform structure and color, which indicates a uniform firing. Burnt and unburned plinths are rarely found, but their number is extremely small (less than 5%). Fine sand is present in the dough as a softener; no large impurities are observed.

Attention is drawn to the nature of the molding of the plinths of the church of Boris and Gleb. Based on the molding methods, several groups of bricks can be distinguished:

1. The plinth is clearly shaped. Wood grain imprints (mold marks) are often visible on the side surfaces. At the top and bottom, on the lateral sides, there are protrusions - incrustations of ceramic dough onto the molding frame, which indicates that it was, apparently, collapsible. On the upper and lower planes of the plinth, thin parallel lines are visible - traces of chips, with which the rest of the dough was removed from the mold.

2. The plinth is very similar to the one that belongs to the first type, but the trimming of the remains of the ceramic dough was done only on the upper plane. On the lower surface, the prints of a rough board, sand, and small chips are visible. Clay sagging on the lateral sides is also observed only from above. A distinctive feature of these two types of plinths is the signs on the sides.

3. The plinth is less clear-cut. Grooved imprints are visible on its lower surface. The upper plane of this type of brick bears traces of chips, with which the remainder of the ceramic dough was removed from the mold. Sometimes these tracks appear as rather deep parallel lines. It is possible that such a plinth was molded in molds with a bottom.

As we can see, the difference in the methods of forming the plinth is quite significant.

Are plinths of these species found at other sites in North-Eastern Russia?

So N.N. Voronin noted that the plinth of the Assumption Cathedral, Knyagin's monastery has uneven surfaces with fingerprints on the upper and rough traces of a wooden form on the lower surface. The presence of other plinths was not recorded during excavations 3.

A rough texture was also noted on the plinth found near the Cathedral of the Nativity of the Virgin in Vladimir. Here one of the towers of the cathedral was built from plinths. Both of these signs were not seen on the bricks 4. It can be assumed that this plinth resembled a plinth of the third type from the excavations of the church of Boris and Gleb in Rostov.

Signs were also not found on the plinths of the Yaroslavl monuments. However, the brick of the Savior Cathedral and the Church of the Entry into Jerusalem by the nature of the molding resembles a plinth of the second type from the Borisoglebsk church. A fragment of a plinth of the third type (with grooved imprints on the lower surface was found in a single copy among the building materials originating from the Cathedral of the Savior.

Thus, we see that the methods of molding plinths, reconstructed on the basis of Rostov materials, are also noted on other monuments of Vladimir-Suzdal Rus, but almost nowhere these methods coexist simultaneously on the same building. Therefore, it is legitimate, in our opinion, to raise the question whether different methods of brick molding are not a sign of the handwriting of various groups of plinth philanthropists within a construction artel.

One group of plinth manufacturers could serve the construction of buildings near the Nativity Cathedral in Vladimir. (c. 1196), then the construction of the Cathedral of the Princess Monastery (1200 - 1202), the Church of Boris and Gleb (1214 - 1218) and the completion of the Cathedral of the Savior in Yaroslavl (until 1224).

Another group participated in the construction near the Dmitrievsky Cathedral in Vladimir (until 1197), the Church of Boris and Gleb, the Spassky Cathedral and the Church of the Entry into Jerusalem in Yaroslavl.

Why did both groups of donors work in Rostov? This can be explained by the large volume of construction. Researchers noted a significant concentration of construction personnel in the hands of Prince Konstantin Vsevolodovich. In addition, it is quite possible that not only the church of Boris and Gleb, but also the prince's palace was erected in Rostov from plinths.

The question of the origin of the groups of plinth philanthropists, as well as of the entire construction artel, which erected buildings from plinth in Vladimir-Suzdal Russia, remains relevant.

It has now been established that the builders came to Vladimir from Kiev, and that they come, possibly from the artel of the Kiev prince Rurik Rostislavich. This assumption is supported by the analysis of the political situation of that time, the peculiarities of the planning solution of churches, some elements of construction equipment (the foundation pit of the Spassky Cathedral in Yaroslavl) 5. However, the materials from the excavations of the church of Boris and Gleb in Rostov can introduce some clarifications into the outlined scheme.

So, the origin of the craftsmen can be indicated by signs on the sides of the plinth. Currently, about a dozen types of signs have been found on the bricks of the church of Boris and Gleb. Most of them are well known on the monuments of the Kiev-Chernigov architectural school and are widespread in Kiev, Chernigov, Smolensk, etc. These are signs in the form of the letter N, a round trident.

However, there are also signs of a more rare design.

These signs include, first of all, the image of a bident with teeth bent outward. Similar signs are known to us on the bricks of the Church of Paraskeva-Pyatnitsa in Chernigov, which confirms the Kiev-Chernigov origin of the Vladimir-Suzdal plinth artel. But it should be noted that very similar signs exist on the plinth of the Polotsk temple in Detinets. The image of a trident with the extreme teeth bent outward and a very short central one is often found here.

On the bricks of the Polotsk church in Detinets, there are also signs in the form of a trident with outward-curved extreme teeth and a long central one. An image of a similar trident was found on the side of one of the plinths of the Borisoglebsk church.

In addition, on the bricks from Rostov one can see signs in the form of a two-prong with a leg, elongated along the long side of the end part of the plinth. A sign of a similar type, but with a slightly different design, is marked on one of the bricks of the Trinity Cathedral on Klovka in Smolensk.

Thus, we can assume that one of the groups of plinth philanthropists came to Vladimir from Kiev, but it may have included craftsmen from Smolensk, where Polotsk builders also worked at one time.

The study of the plinths of the buildings of Vladimir-Suzdal Russia at the beginning of the XIII century allowed us, as we can see, to raise the question of the multicomponent nature of the artel that worked in this land. However, the formation of the artel took place in Kiev. Perhaps, it included craftsmen from various construction centers of Russia, but the history of the emergence of this artel should, in our opinion, become the topic of a separate study.

All library materials are protected by copyright and are the intellectual property of their authors.

All library materials are obtained from publicly available sources or directly from their authors.

Placing materials in the library is their citation in order to ensure the safety and availability of scientific information, and not a reprint or reproduction in any other form.

Any use of library materials without reference to their authors, sources and library is prohibited.

The use of library materials for commercial purposes is prohibited.

Founder and curator of the RusArch library,

Academician of the Russian Academy of Arts

The width of which was approximately equal to the length. It was used in the construction of Byzantium and Ancient Rus.

Plinth had a very different shape and rather impressive dimensions (up to 300x350x25 mm). Such bricks were easily molded, dried and fired. They were built from them using a thick layer of mortar, often equal in thickness to the plinth itself, which made the wall of the temple "striped". Sometimes, after several rows of plinths, a row of natural stone was laid. In Byzantium, plinth walls were almost never plastered.

In Kievan Rus, plinth was the main material for the construction of structural elements of buildings. In Vladimir-Suzdal Russia, plinth from the middle of the 12th century almost completely gave way to white stone, only secondary buildings were built from it. Since the end of the 15th century, molded bricks have been widely used in Muscovite Russia.

Literature

• Rappoport P.A.Construction production of Ancient Russia (X-XIII centuries). Science, St. Petersburg, 1994.
• Zagraevsky S. V. Yuri Dolgoruky and Old Russian white stone architecture. M., 2002.

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

See what "Plinfa" is in other dictionaries:

- (from the Greek plinthos brick) a wide and flat fired brick, used in construction in Byzantium and in the 10th-13th centuries. in Russia ... Big Encyclopedic Dictionary

- (from the Greek plinthos brick), a wide and flat fired brick, which was the main building material in the architecture of Byzantium and in the Russian temple architecture of the X XIII centuries. (Source: "Popular Art Encyclopedia." Ed. ... ... Art encyclopedia

Ex., Number of synonyms: 1 brick (29) ASIS synonym dictionary. V.N. Trishin. 2013 ... Synonym dictionary

- (from the Greek. plínthos brick), a wide and flat fired brick, used in construction in Byzantium and in the X XIII centuries. in Russia. * * * PLINFA PLINFA (from the Greek. Plinthos brick), a wide and flat fired brick, used in construction ... ... encyclopedic Dictionary

- (from the Greek. plinthos brick), a wide and flat fired brick, used in construction in Byzantium. Plinth was also used in the ancient Russian temple architecture of the 10th and early 13th centuries. (St. Sophia Cathedral, 1037, and the Church of the Savior on Berestovo, 1113 25 ... Construction vocabulary

Plinth- (from the Greek. plinthos brick) wide and flat fired brick, used in construction in Byzantium. Plinth was also used in the ancient Russian temple architecture of the 10th and early 13th centuries. (St. Sophia Cathedral, 1037, and the Church of the Savior on Berestovo, 1113 ... ... Architectural vocabulary

Plinth- (from the Greek πλινθος brick) wide. and flat fired bricks used in Byzantine. and Russian. architecture. Typical for Russian. the architect of the pre-Mongol period (late 10-30s of the 13th century). From bricks. late time is distinguished by its size. His … Russian humanitarian encyclopedic dictionary

- (from the Greek plínthos brick) a wide and flat fired brick used in construction in Byzantium (See Byzantium). P. was also used in ancient Russian temple architecture of the 10th and early 13th centuries. (St. Sophia Cathedral, 1037, and the Church of the Savior on ... ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia

J. is outdated. Thin slab brick as an ancient building material. Efremova's Explanatory Dictionary. T.F. Efremova. 2000 ... Modern explanatory dictionary of the Russian language by Efremova

P.A.Rappoport. Construction production Ancient Russia (X-XIII centuries)

Brick is the most common material in the construction business of Ancient Russia. It is therefore natural that brick technique has always attracted the attention of historians of ancient Russian architecture. However, the technological side of brick production has remained essentially completely unexplored. In works devoted to this issue, more or less significant data were provided only for the time starting from the 17th century, and only a few, moreover, often incorrect, information were known about the brick production of the pre-Mongol period. ( Konorov A.V. On the history of brick in Russia in the XI-XX centuries. // Tr. Institute of History of Natural Science and Technology. M., 1956. T. 7; Chernyak Ya.N. Essays on the history of brick production in Russia. M., 1957 .)

Meanwhile, recent archaeological studies of monuments of ancient Russian architecture and brick kilns, general outline a picture of brick production in Ancient Rus.

Brick molding. Since the construction of the first stone-brick building in Kiev at the end of the 10th century. and up to the Mongol invasion in the middle of the XIII century. the bricks used in Russia were in the form of thin and relatively wide tiles. In ancient Russian written sources, bricks were called the Greek word "plinfa" (variants - "plint", "plinth"). ( Since the XIV century. in Russia the term “brick” was also used. This word has a Turkic origin and penetrated, as some researchers believe, from the language of the Volga Tatars (Yunaleeva RA, Galiullin K.R. To the history of the word "brick" in Russian // Uchen. . language and lit. 1974. No. 1. P. 44 ). In the XIV century. the terms "plinth" and "brick" were used interchangeably ( Sreznevsky I.I. Materials for the dictionary of the Old Russian language. SPb., 1893. T. 1. Stb. 1209; 1902. T. 2. Stb. 965 ) This type of bricks penetrated into Russia from Byzantium.

Brick production, which at first glance seems to be a very simple matter, in reality requires special knowledge and a lot of experience. First of all, not all clay is suitable for making good bricks. In addition, in the clay, so that it does not crack during firing and has the necessary strength, there must be a certain amount of sand. Usually, pure clay is chosen for brick production, and sand is added artificially. The best clay is one that gives a linear shrinkage of 6-8% ( P.D. Gonchar The simplest ways to make bricks. M., 1958.S. 4 .).

Analysis of the bricks of ancient Russian monuments showed that during the entire XI century. kaolin clay was used for bricks, which sometimes had to be brought from afar. ( Kholostenko N.V. Architectural and archaeological research of the Assumption Cathedral of the Yeletsky Monastery in Chernigov // Cultural Monuments. M., 1961.Vol. 3.S. 63 .). Bricks made from such clay are usually not red, but pink, fawn or light yellow. By the end of the 11th century, apparently other types of clay were also used. In the XII century. local clay was already widely used for making bricks. Moreover, the variety of clays in the bricks of one site is a rare phenomenon. Sometimes in masonry there are two types of bricks, clearly made from two different types of clay. For example, in the Old Cathedral Church near Volodymyr-Volynsky, most of the bricks are red, but almost 30% are light yellow and white. The presence of bricks of two colors, red and light yellow, was also noted in the Annunciation Church of Chernigov. Yet more often than not, within the limits of each monument, bricks are homogeneous in composition of clay; apparently, for construction, clay was usually taken from one quarry.

The brought clay was kneaded in pits. After that, the molding of the raw materials began. To a certain extent, we can judge the molding system by the traces preserved on the ancient Russian bricks themselves. Obviously, the clay was stuffed into a wooden frame, and then the excess was cut off with a wooden knife (rule) to the level of the upper edge of the frame. Traces of this molding can be clearly seen on many bricks. The top surface of bricks is usually smooth and often has slight scratches along the long axis - evidence of the rule's sliding.

The underside of bricks is usually slightly rough; this is the imprint of the backing board that was lying on the forming table. The absence of a bottom in the mold frame is confirmed by the location of convex marks, sometimes found on the lower surface of the bricks. Signs imprinted in the same shape are located on the bed side in different positions, and sometimes they are so shifted to the side that we see the imprint of only part of the sign, while the rest of it has gone beyond the brick surface. (Marked, for example, on the bricks of the Borisoglebsk cathedral of the Smyadyn monastery in Smolensk). Such a position of signs could exist only in one case: if the form for the imprint of the sign was cut not on the bottom of the frame, but on a backing board.

Thus, it turns out that the frames for molding bricks did not have a bottom and, apparently, coincided in type with the frame-"span" used in Russia in the artisanal production of bricks until the 19th century. ( Krupskiy A.K. Brick production // Encyclopedic Dictionary / Brockhaus and Efron. SPb., 1895. T. 15, [book] 29. S. 133 .)

There are convex marks on the ends of the bricks. These marks, as a rule, are clearly executed, not blurred. If the shape for them was cut out in the side wall of the frame, the absence of blurring of signs indicates that the frames were detachable. (In ethnography, detachable frames are marked, pulled together with a rope ( Belavenets M.I. Clay studies; Brick production; Chikmarny method of forming a raw material for building bricks. SPb., 1903.S. 2 ) However, sometimes bricks have a slight curvature, and the smooth (top) side is always concave. Obviously, such a curvature could occur when the raw material was knocked out of the frame, which is possible only with a one-piece frame.

A detailed measurement of bricks molded in one frame (as evidenced by the coincidence of the marks imprinted on the ends) showed their difference in size: 1 cm in brick thickness and up to 2 cm in its length and width. Obviously, such an error was allowed by the primitive molding system itself, as well as the difference in drying and firing conditions.

It is known from ethnographic data that during drying, the raw materials were first laid flat, and then turned on the edge, after which they were stacked (or "banquets"). ( Semenov M.I. Brick buildings and brick production in the Almazov volost of the Balashov district // Saratov Zemskaya week. 1903. No. 12. S. 73; Experience in making bricks by hand. Omsk, 1957. .) The drying process lasted 10-14 days, but under unfavorable weather conditions it took a month. (In a document of the 17th century, it is noted: "And in bad weather, a brick does not dry ... and you cannot plant a damp brick in a furnace" ( Speransky A.N. Essays on the history of the Order of Stone Affairs of the Moscow State. M., 1930.S. 86 ). It is very likely that ancient Russian bricks were dried in about the same way, although, given their small thickness, they were unlikely to be placed on the edge. Slab Gothic bricks were stacked up to 10-12 rows. ( Tomaszewski Z. Badania cegl y jako metoda pomocnicza przy datowaniu obiektow architektonicznych // Zoszyty naukowe politechniki warszawskiej. Warszawa, 1955. N11 (Budownictwo), z. 4. S. 34; Wyrobisz A. Szedniowieczne cegielnie w wiekszych oszodkach miejskjch w Polsce // Studia z dziejow rzemioste i przemysfu. Wroclaw, 1961. T. 1.S.68 .) In the handicraft industry of the XX century. bricks in "banquets" were laid at a height of 6-8 rows. ( P.D. Gonchar Decree. op. P. 25 .) It is not known what kind of drying stacks were in Ancient Russia, but to some extent this can be judged by the imprints on the bricks themselves. It is obvious that in different construction centers the drying of raw materials was carried out in different ways. So, on the Kiev, Pereyaslavl, Grodno bricks there are prints of the feet of children, domestic animals and birds, traces of rain ( rice. one). Apparently, the raw materials were dried here on the ground in the open air. At the same time, there are no traces on the Smolensk and Polotsk bricks; judging by this, drying was carried out under a shed (probably in special sheds). In Smolensk, on the lower plane and on the edges of the bricks, several times it was possible to notice fabric prints; it is possible that during drying it was underlain under the raw materials, although ethnographic facts indicate that usually the drying area was simply sprinkled with sand. In Novgorod on bricks of the late XII-early XIII century. one of the beds always shows distinct grass prints. Sometimes on ancient Russian bricks there are fingerprints of a human hand - obviously, traces of transporting and laying raw materials.

The bricks were not molded all year round, but only during the construction season. This is clearly evidenced by ethnographic facts, according to which the brick molding season lasted from approximately May 20 to September 1, i.e. included about 900-1000 business days. (This was the length of the season in the 19th century ( Rochefor N.I. Illustrated Landfill. Pg., 1916.S. 295; Krupskiy A.K. Brick production. P. 134 ). Even in the post-revolutionary years, the brick-making season in Russia lasted no more than 3.5 months ( V. G. Yagodin Brick production. M .; D., 1930.S. 47 ). There is no reason to believe that in the XII century. the season was longer ( Trades of the rural population of the Pskov district. Pskov, 1888.S. 58; Study of handicrafts in the Saratov province. Saratov, 1913. Issue 5. P. 22 ). It is most likely that the bricks required for the construction of a small temple were harvested in one season, but for large buildings it may have been necessary to make them for two or even three seasons in a row. Judging by ethnographic data, an experienced craftsman made up to 1,500 pieces of raw material per working day. (Study of the handicrafts of the Saratov province. P. 23. According to other sources, one molder with two auxiliary workers made 2500 pieces per day ( Weber K.K. A practical guide to brick production. SPb., 1893.S. 107 ). However, the data of the 17th century. indicate a much lower productivity: only 2,000 bricks per molder per month. ( Speransky A.N. Decree. op. P. 87 .).

It should be noted that in the process of drying and firing, the bricks are significantly reduced in size. Therefore, in order to obtain a fired brick of the required size, it was necessary to make the forming frame slightly larger in size. Obviously, the craftsmen took into account some empirically found coefficient of clay shrinkage. (At the end of the 10th century, during the construction of defensive ramparts, raw masonry was used. These unfired plinths are larger in size than the fired ones used at the same time in Kiev construction. It is very possible that the difference in dimensions in this case corresponds to the percentage of shrinkage during firing ( the size of raw materials see: Rappoport P.A. Essays on the history of Russian military architecture of the X-XIII centuries. M .; L., 1956.S. 78,80,84,88 ). When choosing a format, the craftsmen, of course, determined the size of the raw brick, and not the size of the fired brick. In the XVIII century. by the size of the raw brick, the standard of the brick was even determined ( E.V. Karaulov Stone structures, their development and preservation. M., 1966.S. ​​8 ) At the same time, they had to be especially careful that the resulting brick was not larger than the intended size, since any increase in the format entails a complication of the firing process, therefore, a deterioration in quality. In addition, the increase in the size of the brick makes the work of the bricklayers more difficult. ( The advantages of a reduction in the format of bricks were not forgotten in the 20th century either: "With smaller bricks, the drying and firing of raw materials proceeds more evenly, why the quality of bricks increases significantly ... the work of carriers and masons is facilitated" (Lakhtin N. brick // Construction industry. 1929. No. 2. P. 160; see also: B. Venderoe What is preferable in construction - to reduce or increase the size of the brick // Ibid. P. 156 ). This, however, does not exclude the presence of an opposite trend related to the interests of the customers, since the increase in the size of the bricks provided a number of economic advantages. Therefore, the intervention government agencies sometimes it led to an increase in the standard size of bricks, as was the case, for example, with the introduction of the “great sovereign brick” at the end of the 16th century. ( Rappoport P.A. Russian hipped roof architecture of the late 16th century // MIA. 1949. No. 12.P. 294 ) Naturally, therefore, in the manufacture of the molding frames, the craftsmen introduced, as a rule, the minimum shrinkage coefficient, which was usually somewhat less than the actual shrinkage coefficient. As a result, the brick format tended to decrease gradually. (Reducing the size of bricks is also characteristic of Byzantine architecture ( see, for example, the dimensions of bricks given in the work of E. Reusche: Reusche E. Polychromes Sichtmauerwerk byzantinischer und for Byzanz beeinflusster Bauten Siidosteuropas. Kbln, 1971 ). In Georgia from IV to XVI century. the length of the bricks was reduced by about 10-15 cm ( Dzhgamaya D.K. Building ceramics of feudal Georgia. Tbilisi, 1980.S. 94-98 )

Firing bricks. Archaeological study of ancient Russian brick kilns began relatively recently. True, already in 1891 in the village. A tent near Staraya Ryazan, two brick kilns were discovered (the vaults of the kiln and its walls are well preserved - ( See: Tr. Ryazan is scholar, archir. kamis. per. 1891 Ryazan, 1892.Vol. 6.P. 43 .). A.V. who examined them. Selivanov reported that a description had been made and that the drawings had been removed. Unfortunately, neither the description nor the drawings have reached us. The absence of genuine kilns forced one to judge the firing mainly by the bricks themselves. The similarity between brick production and pottery production allowed researchers to look for traces of brick kilns among the remains of conventional pottery-type kilns. Meanwhile, the idea has long been expressed that the very mass production of brick production should have caused the use of other, more complex and much larger furnaces. Indeed, already the first genuine brick kiln, discovered by excavations in 1949 in Suzdal, turned out to be unlike ordinary ceramic furnaces (Fig. 2). ( Varganov A.D. Kilns XI-XII centuries in Suzdal // KSIIMK. 1956. Iss. 65.S. 49. In 1946 M.K. Karger unearthed a large structure on the estate of St. Sophia Cathedral in Kiev, which he interpreted as a brick kiln (see: Karger M.K. Ancient Kiev. Moscow; Leningrad, 1958, vol. 1, p. 458 ). However, soon V.A. Bogusevich convincingly showed that this structure could not be a brick kiln, but represents the remains of a bath ( see: Bogusevich V.A. Sporuda of the XI century at the courtyard of the Metropolitan of Kiev // Archeology. 1961 T. 13, p. 105 ) Unfortunately, the oven has not been studied enough and therefore many of its details remain unclear. The Suzdal oven is cut into the slope of the left bank of the river. Stoves. It is rectangular in plan; the outer size is approximately 3.4 x 4.5 m. There are six partitions across the furnace, with an opening in the middle part covered by an arch - the main furnace channel. The height of the partitions is 1.2 m; they are covered with a horizontal brick platform, which forms a rectangular hole above each channel section - a duct. Only the lower furnace chamber has survived, and from the upper furnace chamber, fallen blocks of masonry were found. The walls and partitions are made of bricks and mud. The thickness of the side and rear walls is 32 cm, and the thickness of the middle one is 60 cm. The firebox has not been preserved. The inner surface of the walls is slagged from the action of strong fire, and the outer ones are raw. Obviously, the kiln was made of raw materials that were fired during its operation. The size of the oven bricks is 4 x 20 x 32 cm, but there are also larger ones - 4 x 20 x 37 cm, and in the arches, on the contrary, smaller ones - 3 x 19 x 28 cm.The thickness of the horizontal joints of the clay mortar is 3-4 cm. The inner space of the kiln turned out to be clogged with clay and a cultural layer. Fragments of unused bricks were found nearby - apparently the products of this oven. The thickness of the bricks is 3.5 - 4 cm, the sides of several fragments are 32 and 37 cm. On the slope of the opposite bank of the river, traces of a second, probably similar furnace, were found. The Suzdal stove, apparently, dates back to the time of the construction of the Monomakh Cathedral, i.e. to the turn of the XI-XII centuries.

Rice. 3. Brick kiln in Kiev. Reconstruction by V.A. Kharlamov	Rice. 4. Brick kiln in Smolensk on the Protoka. Axonometry
Rice. 5. Brick kiln in Smolensk on the Protoka. View from the west	Rice. 6. Brick kiln in Smolensk on the Protoka

In 1974, two furnaces were excavated in Kiev, almost next to the Tithe Church, to the northwest of it. ( Kilievich S.R. Detinets of Kiev XI-first half of the XIII century. Kiev, 1982.S. 74 .) The first has a rectangular shape: 4.8 x 4.0 m ( rice. 3). The outer, better preserved walls are very thick - about 1 m. Only the combustion chamber is partially preserved; it is double, divided along the oven by an inner wall. The outer walls of the kiln are composed of four rows of raw materials on clay mortar, and the inner partition is made of two rows. The dimensions of the two chambers of the furnace are 2.7 x 0.9 and 3.0 x 0.9 m. The height of the walls of the combustion chamber reaches 1.3 m. No traces of the burning chamber were found, but there is no doubt that there must have been a flue here. The bottom of the furnace and the inner surface of the walls of the combustion chamber are slagged, and the entire body is calcined to red to a depth of 40 cm. At 3.5 m north-west of the first furnace, the remains of the second were discovered, apparently exactly the same, but more destroyed. The raw bricks from which the ovens are built have a size of 6.5-7 x 25-27 x 28 cm, and in the outer walls - 6.5-7 x 28 x 39-40 cm. Nearby were found stuck together blocks of defective bricks - apparently, the remains of products. The size of the bricks is 2.5 x 24 x 28 cm. C.R. Kilievich dates the excavated furnaces to the end of the 10th century, i.e. construction time Church of the Tithes... The basis for this dating is the coincidence of the levels of the daytime surface of the furnace and the church, the determination made by the archeomagnetic method, as well as the size of the bricks. Unfortunately, not all of these arguments are indisputable, since the size of the bricks practically does not coincide with that of the Church of the Tithes. Dating of the excavated furnaces to the end of the 10th century. so far remains not fully proven, although very likely.

In 1980, at the estate of the Sofia Reserve, to the northeast of the cathedral, during excavations, fragments of a brick kiln were uncovered, apparently similar to a furnace near the Tithes Church. ( Totskaya I.F. On the question of construction production in Ancient Rus // Tez. chernig. region scientific method. conf., dedicated. 20th anniversary of Chernihiv. architect-ist. reserve. Chernigov, 1987. S. 28.) Not far from the stove in 1946, during the excavation of the bathhouse, a large pit (more likely a ravine) was discovered, filled with defective plinths. The literature also mentions another small furnace, opened near the St. Sophia Cathedral (New in the archeology of Kiev. Kiev, 1981. S. 348). However, this kiln, judging by the products found in it, served for firing large vessels, not bricks. The bricks in the kiln were obviously used as supports for fired vessels.)

In 1951, a different type of furnace was discovered in Chernigov. ( Bogusevich V.A.Archaeological excavations in Chernigov in 1949 and 1951 pp. // Archaeological monuments of the URSR. 1955.Vol. 5.P. 10 .) On a slope near the bank of the river, the lower part of a round kiln was excavated, which had an outer diameter of slightly more than 5 m. The walls of the kiln were made of bricks on clay mortar. The average size of bricks is 2.8 x 27 x 35 cm. The thickness of the walls is one brick, i.e. slightly more than 30 cm; these walls have been preserved in places up to six rows of masonry. From the side of the slope to the river, the furnace had a mouth about 1 m wide. Inside the furnace, the remainder of one transverse brick wall was revealed. Judging by the size and nature of the bricks from which the furnace is built and which were found inside it and nearby in the rubble, it belongs to the end of the 11th-beginning of the 12th century.

The most complete information about the design of Old Russian brick kilns was obtained in Smolensk. Stove tracks have been encountered here many times. So, in 1931, the remains of one furnace were found on the right bank of the Mavrinsky brook (earlier - the Malaya Rachevka river). ( Archaeological find in Smolensk // Working way (Smolensk). 1931.29 Aug. No. 198; Message GAIMK. 1932, No. 5-6. P. 86. ) Unfortunately, no drawings of this furnace have survived, and it is impossible to understand its design from the description. How such a kiln worked and whether it was really a brick kiln, and not some other, is unclear.

In 1962, during excavations of the cathedral on Protoka, about 160 m south-west of its ruins, the remains of a furnace were discovered. In 1963, this furnace was excavated ( rice. 4-6). (Yushko A.L. Brick kiln at the end of the 12th century. in Smolensk // Culture of Ancient Rus. M., 1966.S. ​​307 .) It turned out that not one furnace existed here, but three, successively replacing one another in the same place - the upper, middle and lower furnaces are cut into the northern slope of the hilly ridge.

The upper oven is round in plan; its diameter is 4.2 m ( rice. 7). The outer wall of the kiln is made of raw bricks laid in one row with the long side along it. The masonry was made on clay mortar. The thickness of the seams is 3-4 cm. The maximum height of the preserved part of the wall is 0.5 m. The furnace is fenced off inside with seven transverse bridging walls, the distance between which is 15-20 cm. In contrast to the outer wall, the bridges are made of baked bricks laid with the long side across them. The thickness of the joints of the clay mortar in the lintels decreases upward, and the two upper rows of bricks are laid dry. The main combustion channel, formed by arched openings in the middle of each bulkhead, runs across the entire furnace across the bridges. The width of the arches of this channel is about 70 cm. The bottom of the furnace was covered with a layer of ash (3-6 cm) and burnt to a depth of 9 cm. The bottom rose slightly to the side walls. In the northern part of the furnace, on the line of the main furnace channel, there was a mouth covered with an arch 0.45 m wide. In front of it there is a narrow channel bounded by adobe walls, preserved to a height of 0.8 m. The bricks of the upper furnace are of two types; the vast majority of them are 3-3.5 x 16-5-17 x 26-27 cm, and a small number - 3 x 145 x 25-25.5 cm.

Rice. 7. Upper brick kiln in Smolensk on the Protok	Rice. 11. Brick kiln in Smolensk on the street. Pushkin. Cuts: 1 - doors; 2 - sand; 3 - burnt brick; 4 - clay; 5 - burnt clay; 6 - brick battle; 7 - raw brick; 8 - brick; 9 - kiln products (bricks); 10 - ash; 11 - under the oven; 12 - clay solution; 13 - fired clay solution; 14 - mainland.

The upper kiln was not built on mainland soil, but on the ruins of another kiln of the same type. Between the furnaces there is a layer of clay 6-10 cm thick.The middle furnace is slightly smaller in diameter than the upper one (3.15 m), and the direction of the channels and bridges of these furnaces does not quite coincide ( rice. eight). The outer wall of the middle furnace is composed of raw materials lying with their long side along the wall, and near the mouth - of raw materials turned across the wall. The kiln had six bridges, which, unlike the upper kiln, were not made of fired bricks, but of raw bricks, although fired bricks are also encountered. The size of the bricks of the middle kiln is equal to the size of the bricks of the church on Protoka. The signs on the bricks of the kiln and the cathedral also coincide. Thus, there is no doubt that the middle oven functioned during the construction of the cathedral on the Protoka. ( About the cathedral on the Protok see: Voronin N.N., Rappoport P.A. The architecture of Smolensk XII-XIII centuries. L., 1979.S. 300.)

Under the middle furnace, the remains of another, lower one, lying directly on the mainland ( rice. 9). It has survived very poorly and was only partially opened. The kiln was built exclusively of raw bricks, and in size they are the same as the bricks of an average kiln. The coincidence of the dimensions of the bricks, the size and position of the mouth and the main furnace channel allows us to conclude that the middle furnace was built in the process of repairing the lower one. During this repair, obviously, the bottom of the furnace was slightly raised and the lintels were shifted.

In 1972, in the western part of Smolensk, on the slopes of the Churilovsky ravine (Pushkin St.), the remains of a brick kiln were also discovered. In 1973 this furnace was excavated (Fig. 10-12). ( For the publication of this oven see: P.A. Rappoport. From the history of construction production in Ancient Rus // Zograf (Beograd). 1982. No. 13.P. 49.) It had a round shape with an outer diameter of 4.2-4.3 m. The outer wall of the furnace was built in a pit dug in the mountainside, after which the space between it and the mainland soil was filled with clean clay. The wall consists of two layers, each made of halves of bricks. In the inner layer, the bricks are weakly fired, 3-4 cm thick and 18 -19 cm wide. In the outer layer, tightly adjacent to the inner layer, the bricks are raw. In both layers, a clay solution (i.e. clay with sand) serves as a binder. The wall of the furnace is not strictly vertical, but has a curvature: from below, to a height of about 1 m, it slightly expands, above it begins to narrow in an arc-like manner. The thickness of the wall is about 30 cm: in some places it has survived to a height of 1.6 m.The bottom of the furnace is earthenware, burnt to a depth of about 6 cm. at the marks reaches 40 cm. Inside the furnace, in the direction perpendicular to the firebox, there are seven bridging walls. They are made of fired bricks with dimensions 3.5 -3.8 x 17.5 -18 x 25.5 -26 cm. The masonry was made with clay mortar, but the top three rows of bricks were laid dry. The thickness of the lintels is one brick length, the height is 1.0-1.1 m. The distances between the lintels range from 15 to 30 cm, but initially, when the lintels were not deformed, these distances, apparently, did not exceed 20 cm. In the middle of each lintel there is an arched the opening is 75 -95 cm wide, 60 -80 cm high. The openings are located approximately one against the other, forming the main combustion channel. At the bottom of the furnace lay a layer of ash (12-25 cm), and above it - a layer of fine brick chips (8-10 cm). On top of these layers, the remains of the kiln were filled with pure red clay, pieces of raw and burnt bricks, with more clay in the middle of the kiln, and almost exclusively bricks along the edges. The bricks of the furnace channel arches had surfaces that had melted to the state of clinker, and the clay solution between the bricks was burnt like a brick. It turned out that initially the side walls of the lintels were coated with clay. By the time of the excavation, the lintels turned out to be strongly inclined and noticeably damaged in the upper parts. One of the arches (in the fourth lintel) was cut back in antiquity, as evidenced by the presence of an additional lower arch supporting it. The furnace firebox is completely destroyed by the late pit.

During the excavations, it turned out that the above-described furnace was built on the remains of another, similar one. The size of the furnaces and their position are the same, but in the northern part (near the mouth) the upper furnace stood half the thickness of the outer wall inward from the position of the lower one. The latter was only partially folded, after which it was filled with clay and fragments of bricks, among which even whole specimens were found. Remains of the bottom furnace's furnace have survived: large stones, apparently lying at the base of the furnace, and between them there was a lot of ash and burnt clay. On the sides of the destroyed firebox, large pits from the pillars were found, also probably related to the structure of the firebox. The bricks of the lower kiln do not differ in format from the bricks of the upper one. During excavations, between the lintels of the upper furnace, several stacks of bricks were found, which fell through, apparently during its destruction ( rice. thirteen). These are the remains of unselected products. The size of the bricks is 3.2-3.8 x 17-5-18-5 x 24-245 cm. Narrow bricks with a semicircular end were also found in the rubble - for laying out small semi-columns. Almost all of these bricks are weakly fired.

The kilns excavated in Smolensk in 1963 and 1973 are located in different parts of the city and, judging by the formats of their bricks, are not entirely simultaneous. The stove on the Protoka was built at the end of the 12th century. and rebuilt at the very beginning of the XIII century, while the oven on the street. Pushkin was built a little later, apparently around 1230.

Rice. 14. Brick kiln in Chernigov

In 1984, a complex of five furnaces was discovered in Chernigov on the banks of the river. Strizhen at the lake. Mlynovische. ( O. V. Schekun New plinfov and alluvial complex of the Chinese XII century in Chernigov // Persha Chernigivska oblasna naukova conf. s is. arts and crafts, priest. XXVII s'izdu KPSS: Abstracts. dopovidey. Chernigiv, 1985.S. 104; Shchekun A.V., Kuznetsov G.A. Works in Chernigov // AO 1984 M., 1985. S. 329.) The ovens are located in one line, at a distance of about 2 m from one another. Two best-preserved ovens examined ( rice. 14). They are cut into the ground by 0.7 m, rectangular (4.8 x 4.6 and 4.1 x 3.6 m), separated inside by a wall running along the furnace. The mouth width is 0.8 m. The thickness of the outer walls is up to 0.9 m. The furnaces are made of plinth on clay. The plinth size is 26-30 x 17-24 x 3.5-4 cm. Raw bricks have survived in the outer walls. In the collapse, fragments of arched ceilings of furnace channels and vents were found, connecting the preserved lower chambers with the upper ones, which were not preserved. The authors of the excavations date the furnaces to the second half of the 12th century.

The Old Russian brick kilns identified so far can be divided into two groups, two independent types. One type includes the Kiev ovens and the Chernigov ovens at Mlynovische; to the second - all the rest. Kiev stoves are built on flat terrain and therefore have very thick walls. Inside, they are divided into two combustion chambers. The width of the chambers was such that they could not be covered with a flat brick hearth, but undoubtedly ended with a vaulted ceiling through which air vents had to pass. Chernihiv furnaces also had a division into two combustion chambers, a vaulted ceiling with vents. All other ovens are fundamentally different. There are thin walls everywhere across the furnace, through which the main furnace channel covered by arches runs along it. It can be noted that this type of furnace is presented in two options. One of them is the Suzdal furnace, which has a rectangular shape, and above the transverse walls - underneath of horizontally lying bricks. Another option is presented by the Smolensk furnaces and, judging by the plan, apparently also the first Chernigov one. In this embodiment, the furnaces are round, and the upper surfaces of the transverse walls served as the bottom of the burning chamber. The furnaces are cut into the slope, and therefore their walls are rather thin.

Comparison of Old Russian brick kilns with those of neighboring territories gives grounds to conclude that both types identified in Russia had a wide territorial distribution. So, several furnaces of the XI-XII centuries, intended for firing tiles, were excavated in Kherson ( Jacobson A.L. Ceramics and ceramic production of medieval Taurica. L., 1979.S. 155; 2) Medieval Chersonese. M .; L., 1950.S. 155.). These ovens are pear-shaped or oval in plan. Their walls are made of adobe, and outside they are lined with stones. Walls are placed across the furnace, through which the main furnace channel covered by arches passes. On the territory of Crimea, a fairly significant number of furnaces of a different type were discovered, intended for firing amphorae and dating back to the VIII-IX centuries. ( Yakobson A.L. Ceramics and ceramic production ... pp. 39-56.) They are rectangular, have two longitudinal combustion ducts and a hearth with round vents. The furnace is known, apparently, of the 10th century. in Madara (Bulgaria). ( Rashenov A. Peshch for clay products in Madara // Madara: Digging and teaching. Sofia, 1936. Book. 2.P. 25.) It is cut into the ground, rectangular with transverse bridges, through which two parallel furnace channels covered with arches pass. The kiln underneath here is composed of horizontally placed bricks.

Furnaces similar in design were also widespread in the territory that was part of the Golden Horde. Thus, a brick kiln, which functioned at the turn of the XIII-XIV centuries, was excavated in the ancient Saraichik. ( Patsevich G.I. Brick kiln in the ancient city of Saraichik // KSIIMK. 1957. Issue. 69.S. 111.) Here, the transverse walls were so close to each other that their upper surface could serve as the bottom of the firing chamber. A rectangular oven of the 14th century, measuring 3.0 x 2.5 m, uncovered in Bolgar. ( Khovanskaya O.S. Pottery of the city of Bolgar // MIA. 1954. No. 42. P. 366.) She, apparently, had a bottom of horizontally lying bricks, resting on the transverse walls. Two furnaces, representing a single industrial complex and dating back to the turn of the XIII-XIV centuries, were discovered in medieval Belgorod. ( Kravchenko A.A. Industrial complexes of Belgorod XIII-XIV centuries // Antique Tyra and medieval Belgorod. Kiev, 1979, p. 115.) They are built into the remains of antique residential buildings. Their walls are made of adobe on clay mortar, and the space between the walls and stone walls of ancient buildings is filled with earth for thermal insulation. The stoves are rectangular, measuring 2.7 x 2.6 and 3.1 x 2.7 m. The furnace channel, covered with arches, runs along the stove. Under the burning chamber is lined with clay slabs and has round vents. In the end wall of the burning chamber, the opening of the loading passage (65 cm wide) has been preserved; through this passage, the oven was both loaded with products and removed after firing. According to the researchers, the kilns were used for firing bricks, tiles, pipes and other building materials. A larger rectangular kiln (4.5 x 3.0 m), with six transverse walls, was excavated in Old Orhei. ( Polevoy L.L. Urban pottery of the Prut-Dniester region in the XIV century. Chisinau, 1969, p. 87.) Through the transverse walls along the furnace, there was also a furnace channel covered with wide arches. There is no information about the structure of the upper chamber (burning chamber). The kiln was used for firing bricks and dates back to the 14th century. In the same place, slightly smaller ovens for firing dishes were found, which had a round shape (up to 1.6 m in diameter) and only two transverse walls. Remains of a kiln for firing building ceramics (including, apparently, bricks) dating back to the 9th-10th centuries, were excavated in the monastery complex near the Great Basilica in Pliska. ( Vitlyanov S. Zastopanskii image of the manastir at the Golyamata basilica in Pliska // Archeology (Sofia). 1984. No. 2-3. S. 97-99.) The stove is square, with rounded corners, made of bricks and stones; the size of the sides is about 3.5 m. The bases of the longitudinal and transverse walls have been preserved.

Furnaces specially designed for firing bricks have been studied in significant numbers in the territory of Central Asia. Stoves dating back to the 11th-12th and 13th-15th centuries are known here. ( Pruger E.B. Brick-burning production of medieval Merv // TYUTAKE. 1969.Vol. 14.P. 230-239.) These furnaces are rectangular, with five to seven transverse walls inside and one furnace channel passing through them, covered with arches. The size of the furnaces is usually about 3 m. The upper horizontal planes of the transverse walls served as the bottom of the burning chamber.

A review of brick kilns and large pottery kilns, approximately synchronous with ancient Russian kilns and located on the territory of Crimea, Bulgaria, the Golden Horde possessions and Central Asia, shows that these kilns are direct analogies to the kilns of Ancient Rus. Thus, brick kilns, almost identical in design, were used in the 10th-15th centuries. on an extremely vast territory of South-Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Researchers have already noted that this type of origin is associated with late antique traditions. ( Yakobson A.L. Ceramics and ceramic production ... p. 57.) At the same time, it turns out that the location of the ovens on a flat site or on a slope is not a fundamental difference, but is related to local conditions. If there was an opportunity to cut the furnace into a clay slope, this, of course, increased its thermal performance and reduced the cost of construction. But if there was no such slope nearby, the furnace was built on a plane, significantly increasing the thickness of the outer walls, or filling the space around the walls with stones and filling it with earth. The shape of the furnace is not a fundamental difference either - rectangular or round, since the same shape of the furnace is known for both the one and the other, and sometimes even intermediate ones - approaching a rectangle with rounded corners. A more significant difference is the presence or absence of a special hearth with round vents. In those furnaces that were undoubtedly specially built for firing bricks, and not amphorae or other utensils, the top surfaces of the walls or bricks lying horizontally on these walls served as a hearth. Furnaces with round vents passing through a vaulted hearth were mostly intended for burning vessels, not Kirichi. It is very possible that such a division was not unconditional and the bricks were fired in kilns of both types. But still, from this point of view, the furnaces excavated in Kiev near the Tithe Church, like those in Chernigov, on Mlynovische, are close in design to the furnaces for burning large vessels.

Wherever possible, furnaces were built close to the construction site. This is how the ovens were installed in ancient Smolensk. However, not in all cities it was possible to organize the molding and firing of bricks on or near the construction site. Therefore, in Chernihiv, the stoves are located somewhat at a distance, outside the city boundaries. In Suzdal, the stove is also outside the detinets, but at the outlets of good clay. The exploration carried out in 1976 in Polotsk showed that here, judging by the finds of unused and unburned bricks, the area of ​​the brick-burning production was located opposite the Detinets, on the right bank of the Dvina - in the area of ​​Yakimansky Posad. In Ryazan, furnaces are located near the village. Shatrishche - 2 km up the Oka from the ancient city. It is noteworthy that where the stoves were located far from the construction site, they are located so that the brick could be transported by water.

Among the ancient Russian brick kilns, studied by excavations, two Smolensk ones are the best preserved ones. However, even they do not provide all the necessary information for the reconstruction of the firing process. Nevertheless, an analysis of the design of these kilns is combined with a few late medieval written sources, as well as ethnographic materials on the artisanal baking of bricks in the 19th century. allows you to understand the main features of the operation of such furnaces.

First of all, it is obvious that with a long combustion channel and relatively high bulkheads, long-flame fuel should have been used, i.e. ordinary firewood. By the way, wood fuel up to the beginning of the XX century. continued to be considered the best for these purposes. ( Weber K.K. Decree. op. P. 214; V. G. Yagodin Decree. op. P. 50; P.D. Gonchar Decree. op. P. 36.) Heat (i.e. hot gases) spread through the main combustion channel and through the transverse channels between the bridges, creating the temperature required for firing.

Since, unlike the Suzdal furnace in Smolensk, there is no special hearth above the lintels, it is obvious that the upper planes of the lintels themselves served as the hearth of the furnace. The spaces between the lintels were no more than 20 cm wide; therefore, if the mud bricks were placed on the edge across these channels, then they should not have collapsed. Nevertheless, apparently, the bottom row of fired bricks was also wedged so that they would better hold and would not fall into the channels between the bridges. Such wedged bricks, poking upward in the channels, were found during the clearing of both Smolensk furnaces. This bottom row of bricks created a grate on which the products to be fired were laid. (Such a grate was, for example, revealed in a furnace of the end of the 18th century, uncovered by excavations in the Kostroma region ( Kuznetsova M.Yu. Excavation of a brick kiln in the village. Selishche // AO 1975 M, 1976.P. 71.) Probably, for better firing, the rows of fired raw materials were placed on the edge, and bricks of one row were placed perpendicular to the bricks of the neighboring one or “in the tree”. A stack of bricks found in the 1973 kiln channel, which clearly fell into this channel when the bridges were deformed, testifies to a certain order of laying. Here all the bricks were poking upwards: one brick across the channel, several parallel bricks along it, then again one brick across. It is very possible that the rows of adobe, standing on the edge, alternated with rows lying flat. (So, for example, judging by the remains of the products found, the raw materials were placed in the oven serving the construction of the Church of the Tithes ( New in the archeology of Kiev. P. 336). Raw materials for roasting were laid in the same way in the 19th century. Poltava potters ( Zaretsky N.A. Pottery in the Poltava province. Poltava, 1894, p. 68)

Roasting was a rather complicated process, in which a not very high temperature was first created in the furnace, and then it was raised to 800-950 °. After the firing was completed, they waited for the furnace to cool down, which took at least a week. ( In the Life of Euphrosnya of Polotsk, a miracle is described, thanks to which the bricks were obtained for the completion of the construction of the temple: “... the cave is full of burnt piles of burnt, and already cold, strong zelo”. It is specially noted here that the bricks were already cooled down, i.e. immediately suitable for construction (Demetrius. Book of the lives of the saints. May. 23 May. Kiev, 1700) The entire cycle of the furnace - from loading to unloading products - in the XIX century. lasted about two to three weeks. Krupskiy A.K. Brick production. P. 142; Semenov M.I. Decree. op. P. 73; V. G. Yagodin Decree. op. S. 60.)

When the oven is in operation, hot gases must escape into the upper opening. This hole had to be large enough so that it was possible to load and unload products through it. (In a rectangular kiln at the turn of the XIII-XIV centuries, excavated in Belgorod, there was a special hole in the end wall for loading. This passage had no traces of firing; obviously, after loading, the hole was covered with clay ( Kravchenko A.A. Decree. op. P. 121) It is very possible that the oven did not have a vaulted top at all, and its walls were raised to a height corresponding to the height of the rows of loaded products, i.e. no more than 3 m above the level of the upper platform of the jumpers. Even in the 19th century. in handicraft production, they preferred to build stoves with an open top, without a vault. ( Weber K.K. Decree. op. P. 229.) In this case, the bricks of two or three upper rows were laid flat close, so that they served as a kind of roof over the rest of the products. These bricks were usually covered with a thin layer of sand or slag. To protect from the rain, a wooden canopy was placed over the stove. ( Stoves under a wooden canopy are clearly visible, for example, in the drawing by S. Remezov, at the turn of the 17th-18th centuries. (see: Goldenberg L.A. Semyon Ulyanovich Remezov. M., 1965. Fig. after p. 56). Similar furnaces were used in Western European medieval construction practice ( Atszynski M. Technika i organizacja budownictwa ceglanego w Prusach w koncu XIV i w pierwszej polowie XV w. // Studia z dziejov rzemiosla i przemyslu. Wroclaw, 1970 T. 9.S. 65)

Reconstruction, at least in the most general terms, of the process of functioning of the Smolensk brick kilns allows us to make an approximate calculation of their productivity. As you know, when installing bricks on the edge, there are free spaces between them so that hot gases can cover the raw material from all sides, so about 400-500 pieces could be placed in one row in the oven. Height in brick kilns of the XIX century. it was recommended to lay no more than 25 rows of raw materials, and for the most part - much less, only 16-18 rows. Thin bricks of the 12th century (plinth) yielded much more easily to deformation, and there is no doubt that these bricks could not be laid in many rows, like block bricks. If we assume that the kiln was loaded with plinth to a height of 10 rows, it turns out that in the Smolensk kiln it was possible to simultaneously burn up to 4-5 thousand bricks. The season of operation of brick kilns could last a little longer than the season of molding raw materials - up to 150 working days. (Weber K.K., op. Cit. P. 132.) Considering that the kiln cycle was about 2.5 weeks, it can be assumed that each kiln was used 8-10 times per season and could thus give up to 50 thous. bricks. The number of bricks required for the construction of a fairly large church (for example, the cathedral on the Protok in Smolensk) is slightly less than 1 million pieces. And since a lot of scrap was obtained during firing, 1200 thousand pieces can be considered an approximate amount. (According to the norms of Russian handicraft production of the 19th century, when making and firing bricks, then 20% of the marriage was allowed ( Rochefor N.I. Decree. op. P. 295). According to information in 1847, out of 100 thousand pieces of raw materials, 80 thousand suitable bricks were produced ( Konorov A.V. Decree. op. P. 209). Polish researchers believe that when firing bricks of Gothic buildings, the marriage was about 1/6 ( see, for example: Wyrobisz A. Op. cit. S. 79). When firing plinths, the percentage of rejects should have been even higher.) Therefore, in order to ensure the construction of a temple of average size, no less than 10 furnaces of the same type as excavated in Smolensk had to work simultaneously for two seasons. The Suzdal furnace is slightly smaller in area than the Smolensk ones, and, therefore, its productivity should also be slightly lower. (However, according to A.D. Varganov's data, in the Suzdal kiln, about 5 thousand pieces of raw materials could also be fired simultaneously ( see: A.D. Varganov. Decree. op. P. 50)

Signs on bricks. Many Dnevner Russian plinth bricks have signs. Their classification was proposed by I.M. Hozerov. ( Khozerov I.M. Signs and hallmarks of bricks of the Smolensk architectural monuments of the most ancient period // Nauch. Izv. Smolen, state un-that. 1929.Vol. 5, no. 3.P. 167.) According to his terminology, all convex images (both on the ends and on the bedside of bricks) are called signs, and images pressed in with the help of a stamp are called stamps. In addition to this classification, L. A. Belyaev proposed to introduce the term "marks" to denote signs drawn by a finger or some instrument on the bed side of a brick before firing it. ( Belyaev L.A. From the history of ancient Russian construction craft // Problems of the history of the USSR. M., 1973.S. 439. Belenitsky proposed a different terminology: a sign - an image made with a finger or a tool; stamp - stamp imprint; graffiti - an image made after firing (see: Belenitsky V.L. Brands and signs on bricks of the 12th century from the church of Dmitry Solunsky in Pskov // SA. 1971. No. 2. P. 272, note 2). This terminology is less convenient than the one proposed by I.M. Khozerov, since almost all images found on Old Russian bricks (both convex and depressed), in this case, fall under one concept - stamps.) All these signs are different not only in drawing and technique of execution, but also in the breadth of distribution in various building centers of Russia. Moreover, as it turned out, they are also different in purpose.

The most widely used signs were on the ends of bricks ( rice. 15, 16). They were used in Chernigov, Ryazan, Smolensk, Polotsk, Grodno architecture. A large number of such signs, recorded during the study of numerous monuments, both preserved and excavated, attracted increased attention of researchers. Such signs were considered as signs of property, as personal marks of masters, and finally, as signs of customers. However, a comparison of the signs with the process of making bricks led to the conclusion that in reality these signs are production signs. They marked the top brick of each pile of raw materials ("banquet") in order to determine the day of forming the pile or the batch intended for simultaneous firing in the oven. ( Rappoport P.A. Signs on the plinth // KSIA. 1977. Issue. 150.S. 28.)

The signs on the ends of bricks in the overwhelming majority of cases are located on the short end, although they are also found on the long end. It was noted (very rarely) the presence of such bricks on which signs are located on two ends: opposite short ones or on a long and short one. All signs are convex, without being pressed into the brick dough, and of course they are made with an imprint of a wooden form - a matrix. If the matrix was cut out on the wall of the frame itself, then there is no doubt that the frame had to be detachable, since otherwise the sign would be smeared when the raw material was knocked out of it. The wall with the cut out mark could be removable, that is, it could be inserted into the frame only when the brick with the mark was formed. However, the clarity of the molding of the plinth with a large area of ​​their bedded surface and low thickness makes one think that the frame could not be detachable, but rigid, connected at the corners in a spike or lock. Under this condition, the possibility of placing the matrix of the sign on the wall of the frame is excluded. In this case, one has to assume that a separate bar with a matrix cut out on it was put into the frame. When knocking out the raw, the bar fell out with it, ensuring the safety of the convex sign. After use, the plank was probably cleaned or even washed, so that the next time it was filled with clay, it would again give a clear impression. The size of bricks with signs, as far as you can see, does not differ from the sizes of bricks without them. Therefore, if the sign was cut on a separate bar, then the forms for bricks with signs were made specially longer by the thickness of the bar, which ensured an equal size for them and ordinary bricks.

There are bricks on which the same sign, unconditionally imprinted with one matrix, is found both in a straight and inverted position. This can be explained by the overturning of the bar with the matrix or the frame itself, which did not have a bottom. According to the observations of I.M. Khozerov, bricks were used in masonry, as a rule, in a position opposite to that in which they were formed, i.e. bottom side up. Proceeding from this, Khozerov suggested depicting signs during publication as they were located in the masonry, and not as they were formed. However, apparently, it is more expedient to bring the images of all signs in the position that they had during molding. In this case, it is necessary to give an image not only of the sign itself, as Khozerov did (and all researchers before him), but also of the entire end of the brick, since not only their drawing, but also the position they occupy on the end is important to determine the identity of signs. As for the exact pattern of the signs, it just can vary somewhat even if the signs were imprinted from one matrix, because after the matrix was molded, it was necessary to clean it from adhering clay and this was not always done with the same thoroughness. As a result, signs were obtained that coincided in design and dimensions, but had different line thicknesses and a different degree of print clarity.

The percentage of bricks with marks on the ends is unclear. In no case was it possible to make accurate statistical calculations of the ratio of the number of bricks with and without signs. It is possible that it was different in different monuments. An approximate calculation of the number of signs can be made on the surviving sections of the walls of the excavated buildings. So, in the Cathedral of the Trinity Monastery on Klovka in Smolensk, on the inner surface of the northern wall of the northern vestibule, 9 signs for 200 bricks were recorded. Considering that signs did not play any role in the masonry and the bricks were equally often laid with signs both on the facade and inside the masonry, it can be assumed that approximately the same number of signs are here on the side of the bricks that is invisible from the outside. In addition, bricks with a long side facing the facade should be excluded from the count, because in Smolensk, signs are found in the overwhelming majority of cases on the short side. As a result, it turns out that with such a calculation, the signs should have been located on about 18 bricks out of 150 - 12%. In the masonry of the apse of the same temple, a similar calculation reveals a slightly smaller number of bricks with signs - only 8%. A special dismantling of a small fallen block of masonry at the southwestern corner of the cathedral on the Protok in Smolensk yielded 17% of bricks with signs (5 plinths out of 30).

The number of characters imprinted from one matrix is ​​also unknown. About 40 identical marks have been registered. In reality, there were probably much more of them. It is noted that the same signs are more often found on the same section of the building. Apparently, this is due to the fact that on this site of the construction, one batch of bricks was used, marked with the same signs. So, in the Smolensk Cathedral on the Protok there are signs that were mainly found in the masonry of the southern chapel, others - in the masonry of the northern, still others - in the southern part of the western wall of the gallery, etc. In the Church of Peter and Paul in the wall of the stairs leading to the choir , one of the signs is fixed 17 times.

On the ends of the bricks, there are both very simple signs (for example, one dash) and rather complex ones in design. In the lower part of the buildings, usually more simple signs were used, and higher - more complex ones. Obviously, as the bricks were made, the signs gradually became more complex in order to avoid their repetition.

Rice. 19. Sign on the bed side of the brick. Polotsk. Church on the Moat

Among the signs on the ends there are "princely" ones - probably the personal signs of the prince-customer ( rice. 17). They are found in small numbers, apparently only from one drawing in the monument. It is possible that such a sign was used to mark a batch of raw materials associated with a specific day or event (the birthday of the prince or something like that). There are also signs in the form of letters, sometimes several together. In one case, in the Dormition Cathedral of Old Ryazan, a sign was found in the form of an inscription in a mirror image - "Yakov tv ..." (probably "worked"). ( Mongayt A.L. Old Ryazan. M., 1955.S. 88.) Apparently, this is the name of the master molder. The activity of the master in kneading clay and molding raw materials was obviously defined by the term “create”. ( See: V. Dal 'Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language. SPb., 1882. T. 4. S. 405 (to create - "dissolve or dilute in a slurry, knead or knead").

It should be noted that in almost all monuments one can see signs that are very similar in design, but differ in small details, size or location on the brick, which indicates that they were imprinted from different matrices. We, naturally, should consider such signs as different variants. At the same time, their proximity gives reason to believe that the masters, when carving images on the wooden wall of the frame, had one drawing in mind. Determining when it was conceived to make the same sign, and when different, although similar, is not always easy. Therefore, if the number of variants of signs (i.e. signs imprinted from different matrices) found during excavations can be calculated quite accurately, then the number of different drawings is mostly determined approximately.

The total number of different signs used when molding the bricks of one building was quite significant. Of course, in no case do we know their true number, since in excavations it is possible to study only the lower parts of the brickwork, and in the surviving buildings such a calculation is all the more impossible. The largest number of variants of signs is noted in the cathedral on the Protok in Smolensk - here there are 214 of them, if we take images imprinted from different matrices for different signs, even if the drawing coincides. If signs similar in design, imprinted from different matrices, are counted as one, then the total number of signs found in this temple will be about 130. Since only the lower parts of the walls and pillars have survived from the building of the cathedral, it can be assumed that in the whole structure at least 200 characters of different designs were used.

The Cathedral on the Protoka is one of the largest monuments of ancient Smolensk architecture; in most monuments the volume brickwork was smaller, and, consequently, the number of characters was also somewhat smaller. It can be assumed that the total number of different signs on the ends of bricks used in each individual monument of Russian architecture in the 12th century was approximately 100-200, and sometimes, perhaps, somewhat more.

In some cases, it is possible to note not only the closeness of the pattern of signs on the bricks of various monuments, but also their direct coincidence, i.e. impression from one matrix. It is clear that we are talking about characters that are quite complex in design, since the coincidence of simple characters can also be accidental. The presence in different monuments of signs, imprinted from the same matrix, could take place only if, after the completion of the construction of one building, when setting up the production of bricks for the next building, they used the preserved plaques with signs carved on them. Naturally, such preservation of the matrices presupposes the work of one and the same master-molder and, therefore, testifies to the chronological proximity of these monuments.

The marks on the bed side of the bricks have a completely different character. They are, as a rule, rather large, often complex in design, convex, embossed in a wooden shape, and in some cases even imprints of wood fibers of this shape can be seen on the bricks. All signs are on the underside of the bricks, i.e. on the one that, when forming, is located on the backing board. Obviously, the matrix was cut on this one; chalkboard. On the other hand, in masonry, such signs are almost always found on the upper side of the bricks. All marks were found in random places of the masonry and were covered with mortar, i.e. did not play any role in the construction of the building. Such signs are known only in several monuments of ancient Russian architecture. So, their presence is noted on the bricks of the Tithe Church in Kiev, the Savior Church-tomb in Pereyaslavl, the Assumption Cathedral in Vladimir-Volynsky, the Church on the Moat in Polotsk, the Church of Dmitry Solunsky in Pskov and the Church of the Annunciation in Vitebsk. In Smolensk, signs on the bedded side of bricks were found in the Borisoglebsk Cathedral of the Smyadyn Monastery, the Church of Peter and Paul, on bricks found during excavations near the eastern side of the modern cathedral, i.e. originating, apparently, from that part of the Cathedral of Monomakh, which was completed under Prince Rostislav. Thus, except for the Church of the Tithes (end of the 10th century) and the Church of the Savior in Pereyaslavl (end of the 11th - beginning of the 12th century), all other signs refer to monuments erected in the first half and middle of the 12th century.

In terms of content, these are mostly princely signs, different in all monuments, i.e., apparently, the personal sign of the prince-customer ( rice. 18, 19). (Rappoport P.A. Construction artels of Ancient Rus and their customers // SA. 1985. No. 4. P. 87.) In addition to the princely, there are other signs on the bricks. On the bricks of the Church of the Tithes, there are signs in the form of Greek inscriptions, unfortunately not readable due to their fragmentation. The inscription is also on the brick from the Church of the Savior in Pereyaslavl.

Convex signs on the bedside side of bricks are known not only in Russian, but also in Byzantine architecture, where they were used at least from the 4th century. ( Mango S.A. Bizantine brick stamps // Amer. Journ. Archeology. 1950. Vol. 54. P. 19.) Among them there are names, monograms, inscriptions. Most researchers of Byzantine architecture believe that these are mainly signs of customers or donors. Signs, obviously, also played some kind of counting role, since there are only about 1% of bricks. Thus, the bricks of the Church of the Tithes testify to the continuation of the Byzantine tradition in Russia to place on the bedded side a convex sign with the name (or, in this case, with the generic sign) of the suzerain. Obviously, a similar pattern was observed in some cases and later, until the middle of the 12th century.

Rice. 20 Brick with a stamp. Smolensk. Church on Bolshaya Krasnoflotskaya street	Rice. 22. Brands. Cathedral of the Spassky Monastery in Novgorod-Seversky
Rice. 21. Brick with stamps. Smolensk. Cathedral on the channel	Rice. 23. Marks on bricks. Chernigov. Borisoglebskaya church. According to N.V. Holostenko

The third type of images found on ancient Russian bricks is stamps ( rice. twenty). They are registered on the bricks of a number of monuments in the Smolensk and Polotsk lands. In Smolensk, hallmarks are found only in monuments dating back to the 40s to 70s. XII century; in later buildings, as a rule, there are no hallmarks. As a single exception, one stamp was found on the brick of the church on Bolshaya Krasnoflotskaya street and one - in the cathedral on the Protok. In the same cathedral on Protoka, several bricks were found, the bedding side of which was entirely covered with a pattern made from stamps ( rice. 21). In Polotsk, the hallmarks are known in the Great Cathedral of the Belchitsk Monastery, and one brand was found on the brick of the tower. There are also stamps on the bricks of the Church of the Annunciation in Vitebsk. In addition to these monuments, stamps were found on the bricks of the Spassky Cathedral in Novgorod-Seversky ( rice. 22).

Many hallmarks of the same design were found in several copies - one imprint on a brick. But there are also bricks on which a number of identical brands are placed, usually located haphazardly. For example, in the Smolensk pillarless church in Detinets and the Borisoglebsk cathedral of the Smyadyn monastery, one can find both one imprint of some stamps on the brick, and a larger number of them - up to 10. On the brick of the same pillarless church, one stamp was repeated 5 times and another stamp was imprinted twice.

Brands are always located on the upper bedding side of the brick. They do not have a definite fixed position on the surface: completely identical marks on different bricks are usually located in different places - mainly in the middle part of the brick, but sometimes close to the edge. In the same way, the depth of the marks fluctuates, even those that are completely identical in design. Finally, some of the hallmarks are pressed into the brick with a slight slope, i.e. their bottom is not parallel to the plane of the brick bed. All these circumstances indicate that the stamps were applied to the raw material by imprinting with a stamp, which was pressed into the brick by hand. There is no doubt that the impression was made after the clay was cut from the top surface of the brick. The punching tool was obviously a stick (probably made of a horn) with a specially machined end. The stamps, as a rule, have a small diameter - from 1.3 to 3.5 cm. They are mostly round or oval, although there are also more complex shapes.

There are cases when hallmarks, imprinted with one stamp, were found on bricks of different monuments. So, for example, two hallmarks from a pillarless church are undoubtedly identical to the hallmarks of a tower built at the same time as this church.

THEM. Khozerov gives examples when in Smolensk, patterns from stamps were placed on the sides of curved bricks intended for laying out arcatures. ( Khozerov I.M. Decree. op. S. 178, 179.) Thus, a stamp for imprinting stamps could, apparently, sometimes be used to apply decorative motifs to bricks. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that the main purpose of the stamps is still different, not decorative. The stamps located on the bedding side of the bricks were visible only when the bricks had not yet been used in masonry. Only a few assumptions can be made about the purpose of the marks. Most likely, certain lots of bricks were marked with stamps. The relatively small number of marks, much less than the number of marks on the ends, indicates that these parties were quite large. Perhaps this is how the number of bricks required for the entire load of the furnace or some part of it was noted. Or maybe a certain number of bricks were simply marked with a stamp, and this was a mark of the count of the raw materials made, i.e. control of the amount of harvested products.

Another type of signs is labels, i.e. signs, execution with some kind of instrument and even just a finger on the bedside side of the brick. They were in use in Chernigov and partly in Kiev (Assumption Cathedral of the Pechersky Monastery). According to the drawing, the marks are quite simple: they are stripes, crosses, sometimes letter-like images, and sometimes images reminiscent of princely signs (Fig. 23). Marks are also found on bricks with marks on the end. Thus, marks and end marks could not replace each other; it is obvious that their functions are not identical. The number of bricks with marks is usually significantly less than bricks with marks on the end. In the Chernigov Borisoglebsk Cathedral, where the marks are especially numerous, it was noted that the curved bricks of the same type for the most part have the same type of marks. In the same monument, an observation was made that the same type of marks are often concentrated on one section of the building. It is very likely that the labels played the role of counting signs, i.e. performed the same function as the hallmarks.

Finally, there is another type of signs, known from the bricks of two building centers in Russia - Pereyaslavl and Vladimir-Volynsky: parallel stripes applied to the bedside side of the brick with some kind of comb-type tool. These stripes, as a rule, have wavy outlines, much less often - rectilinear ( rice. 24). Often "combs" stripes cover the entire surface of the brick (continuous corrugation); they are always directed along its long side. Usually, "combs" are very diverse both in the distance between the lines and in the "step" of the waves. Instances with such "combs" make up about about 5% of the total number of bricks in the building. It is very possible that this type of signs is industrial and by design it coincides with the signs on the ends, which were not used in Pereyaslavl and Volyn. In addition to Pereyaslavl and Volyn, "combs" were also found on the bricks of the Assumption Church in Podil in Kiev. (Similar "combs" are found on ancient Roman bricks ( Rupp E. Bautechnik im Altertum. Munchen, 1964. Taf. 103)

Sometimes on the bedded side of the bricks there are drawings scratched with a stick on wet clay. The episodic nature of the appearance of such drawings indicates that they did not play any role in the process of making bricks or in construction. These are the fruits of the amateur creativity of "plinth philanthropists", which are of interest not from the production and construction side, but only as examples of folk art ( rice. 25).

Assortment of bricks. The assortment of bricks of ancient Russian monuments, i.e. the set of types and shapes of bricks, as well as the percentage of types, are extremely poorly studied. It is difficult to do this in the surviving monuments, because the bricks in the masonry are far from always possible to measure. In those cases, when they were opened by excavations, the set of types of bricks and their percentage does not always correspond to what took place in the whole building before its destruction. Often in the process of clearing the territory, the remnants of the collapsed upper parts of the building were taken away somewhere. Therefore, in excavations, sometimes some types of bricks, used mainly in the upper parts of the structure, may not be found at all, not to mention the fact that the quantitative ratio of various types of bricks found may be completely random.

As far as can be judged from the fragmentary data available, the set of bricks of the Church of the Tithes consisted mainly of rectangular specimens. The most common size was 30 x 35 cm with a thickness of 2.5 cm, but there were both narrower bricks (24 x 35 cm) and square (31 x 31 cm). Narrow "halves" bricks, 15-16 cm wide, were also used. In addition, a small number of bricks with semicircular and triangular ends, as well as slightly trapezoidal, were found.

The most detailed assortment of bricks was studied during the dismantling of the ruins of the Assumption Cathedral of the Kiev-Pechersky Monastery. ( Kholostenko M.V. Assumption Cathedral of the Pechersk Monastery // Old Kiev. Kiev, 1975.S. 117.) There were collected about 2,800 complete specimens belonging to nine different types. Of course, there is no complete certainty that all these bricks belonged to the original building of the cathedral, and not to the areas of its repairs and rebuilding, but nevertheless, an analysis of the material obtained gives grounds to judge the assortment of bricks of the cathedral. The size of the bricks fluctuated over a very wide range. So, wide rectangular specimens, which make up about 80% of all found, have dimensions from 27 x 28 to 35 x 40 cm. However, about 70% of these rectangular bricks, i.e. more than 55% of all measured bricks of the cathedral have a size that fluctuates very slightly: 21 x 29 x 34-36 cm.About 10% of all bricks belong to another version of rectangular - narrow, with a width of 15 to 19 cm.Slightly more than 2% of bricks represent a very special type that is not found in other monuments of Russian architecture - narrow bricks with an extended semicircular end. All other types make up a very small percentage - each type is no more than 1.5% of all found bricks.

A different assortment of bricks in the Chernigov Borisoglebsk Cathedral. ( Kholostenko M.B. Studies of the Borisoglebsk Cathedral in Chernigov // SA. 1967. No. 2.P. 192.) Here, along with rectangular bricks (of normal width and narrow), there are narrow ones with a semicircular end, trapezoidal ones with a slightly rounded side and segmental ones with a cut off top, used for laying out half-columns on facades. In addition, this monument contains several types of curved bricks - a complete set required for making an arcature belt. The range of bricks of the Kiev St. Cyril Church is very close ( rice. 26).

Analysis of the range of bricks of the Smolensk architectural monuments of the XII century. showed that here in all monuments ordinary rectangular bricks make up at least 70% of the total, in addition, up to 20% of bricks are represented by narrow rectangular specimens and only about 10% are curved bricks of various types.

The range of bricks of Smolensk monuments has changed very significantly along with the change in architectural forms in the 80s. XII century Before that, the set included bricks, from which powerful semi-columns were laid out on the facades; they were in the form of a segment with a truncated top ( rice. 27). Since the 90s. XII century such bricks were no longer used, but bricks with a semicircular end appeared in a fairly significant number, which served to lay out thin semi-columns on beam pilasters ( rice. 28). However, the correct semicircular shape in such bricks is found only in rare cases, usually bricks have a strongly flattened rounded end ( rice. 29). Most of these bricks in width correspond not to the main, but to the narrow type of rectangular bricks of this building, although in some buildings wide bricks with a flat-rounded end were also widely used. Together with bricks for semi-columns, bricks of the usual size were often used, but with one rounded corner, i.e. in the form of a quarter circle. Trapezoidal bricks are found in relatively small numbers in the excavations, which were used, apparently, mainly for laying out door frames and window openings. For the arrangement of ornamental belts of the curb and denticles, ironing bricks were used - narrow, with a wedge-shaped end. Usually they were molded completely independently, as evidenced by a similar brick of the cathedral on the Protok in Smolensk, which had a convex zigzag sign on the long side. But sometimes, judging by the finds in the ruins of the church at the Okopnoye cemetery in Smolensk, such bricks were made in the form of a raw plate with cutting it for breaking into three or four ironing bricks. In a very small number, there are also arcuate curved bricks, which apparently served for laying arcature belts to the edge.

The range of bricks in the monuments of Novgorod architecture is much less diverse. Here, in essence, only rectangular bricks were used. At the same time, a small part of the bricks had a much smaller width than ordinary bricks of the same monument, i.e. represented "halves". Narrow bricks with a triangular end, which were used for laying teeth, are also found in very small numbers. The exception among the Novgorod monuments is the Pyatnitskaya church, the set of bricks of which is much more diverse and corresponds to the range of not Novgorod, but Smolensk churches.

Rice. 28. A set of bricks for the church on Voskresenskaya Hill in Smolensk	Rice. 29. A set of bricks for the Cathedral of the Spassky Monastery in Novgorod-Seversky
	Rice. 30. Laying pilasters. Smolensk. Church on Malaya Rachevka

In the architectural monuments of ancient Pereyaslavl, all bricks were rectangular, and the overwhelming majority had a normal width, and some were narrow bricks. The only exception is a civil building (probably a bathhouse), where various curved bricks were found. The range of bricks from the Kiev and Chernigov monuments of the late 12th - early 13th centuries is extremely diverse. ( rice. thirty).

Careful measurement of a significant number of bricks in each monument makes it possible to discard random deviations and establish what were the main dimensions of the bricks used in the masonry. At the same time, as a rule, it turns out that one standard covers the vast majority of all bricks (at least 60-70%) and is, therefore, the leading, basic size for a given building. This basic dimension is usually determined with an accuracy of no more than 2 cm, since it should be borne in mind that an imperfect molding and firing system gave just such fluctuations in size, not to mention more significant random deviations. ( In order to determine the basic brick format of the site under study, it is necessary to measure a significant number of bricks. Then, according to these data, a graph is constructed that reveals the main format and its deviations (for more details see: Rappoport P. A. Method of dating monuments of ancient Smolensk architecture according to the brick format // SA. 1976. No. 2. P. 83). Unfortunately, until very recently, most researchers did not build such graphs and did not use statistical data on the percentage of different options for brick sizes. Therefore, the formats of bricks presented in publications are often inaccurate, and sometimes even simply incorrect.)

Comparison of the basic dimensions of bricks of different monuments shows that there is a certain pattern here: the younger the monument, the smaller its bricks. The reasons for the gradual and very uniform reduction in the size of bricks are undoubtedly associated with a particular system of forming and firing. Until now, these reasons have not yet been fully elucidated. (It is very likely that, when starting the construction of the building, the craftsmen took as a sample the format of the fired plinths used by them at the previous object. consequently, the fired plinths were also slightly smaller.) The systematic reduction in the size of Old Russian bricks makes it possible to determine the construction time of the structure by the format of the bricks. So, the bricks of the buildings of the XI century. have, as a rule, a length of 34 to 38 cm. a width of 27 to 31 cm. In the monuments of the XII century. the bricks are smaller: length from 29 to 36 cm, width from 20 to 26 cm. Finally, in the monuments of the end of the XII-first third of the XIII century the length of the bricks is from 24 to 29 cm, the width is from 17 to 21 cm. The thickness of bricks in ancient Russian monuments ranges from 2.5 to 5 cm, and it is difficult to trace a certain pattern in the change in thickness.

Of course, the transfer of brick molding to the hands of another construction artel, perhaps even a change of master could introduce noticeable fluctuations in the change in their size, which did not correspond to chronological evolution. And yet, in most cases, on the basis of measuring bricks of dated buildings, it is possible to create a scale of resizing, which allows determining the time of construction of undated monuments with a sufficiently high accuracy. ( Rappoport P. A. 1) The method of dating the monuments of ancient Smolensk architecture according to the brick format. P. 83; 2) Archaeological research of the monuments of Novgorod architecture // Novgorod historical collection. L., 1982. No. 1 (11). S. 197; Demicheva N.N. Study of the monuments of Novgorod architecture of the XII-early XIII centuries. according to the data on the evolution of the brick format // SA.1984. # 1. P. 220.) These scales are different for different ancient Russian construction centers. It should be noted that in some construction centers the evolution of brick sizes was more uniform, in others - less. But in general, in the monuments of architecture throughout the territory of Ancient Russia, the change in the size of the bricks was quite uniform.

In the scientific literature, it was suggested that, along with the plinth in Russia, already in the XII-XIII centuries. a block brick was also made, which was used together with a plinth. In fact, block bricks of Romanesque origin first penetrated Kiev from Poland in the very last pre-Mongol years. Squared bricks together with plinths were used only in those cases when buildings that were built earlier were repaired with them. ( Rappoport P.A. About the time of the appearance of block bricks in Russia // SA. 1989. No. 4. P. 210.) Examples include the Assumption Cathedral of the Pechersky Monastery, the Kiev Rotunda, the Cathedral of Michael in Pereyaslavl, restored shortly after they suffered. And during the earthquake of 1230, in addition, plinths of a narrow format were sometimes mistaken for block bricks, i.e. “Halves”, especially if they were unusually thick (for example, in the Novgorod Cathedral of the Antoniev Monastery and the Old Ladoga Cathedral of the Nikolsky Monastery - more than 7 cm).

Of course, the study of brick production in Ancient Rus is just making its first steps. With the further development of this question, more essential data will undoubtedly be obtained both for the history of Old Russian construction technology and for Old Russian architecture.

The maximum number of different designs of signs on the bedded side of bricks recorded in one monument is four (in the Borisoglebsk cathedral of the Smyadyn monastery). Almost all signs are found not in one, but in several copies. The total number of bricks with similar marks is very small, apparently no more than 1-2% of the total number of bricks in the monument. P.A.Rappoport. Construction production of Ancient Russia (X-XIII centuries).

P.A.Rappoport. Construction production of Ancient Russia (X-XIII centuries).

Ancient historyantique brick

Few building materials could rival clay in antiquity. Its development by man lasted more than one millennium. The age of the oldest objects made of baked clay, found in Slovakia, at a Paleolithic site, is about 24 thousand years. Fired clay products are referred to as "ceramics", and the most important product in pottery is brick. Fired brick has been used in construction since ancient times. An example of this is the Egyptian buildings erected in the third and second millennia BC. Brick as a building material is mentioned in the Bible: “And they said to each other: let us make bricks and burn them with fire. And bricks became for them instead of stones "(Old Testament. Genesis. Ch. 11: 3). Brick was of great importance for the architecture of Mesopotamia and Ancient Rome, where arches, vaults and other complex structures were laid out of it. In Egypt and Mesopotamia, they knew how to burn bricks as far back as three millennia BC. Gradually, the raw brick was replaced by the ceramic one. This is due to the low water resistance. Ceramic bricks were more reliable and durable. It turns out by firing raw. According to the data left by Herodotus, during the time when King Nebuchadnezzar ruled Babylon (VI century BC), this city was one of the largest and most beautiful in the world, which is largely due to ceramic bricks. In describing the prototype of the Tower of Babel, a seven-tiered temple, Herodotus noted that the temple was faced with blue glazed bricks. The city-state of Ur, located in Mesopotamia, was surrounded by a wall of adobe bricks, the width of which was 27 meters. Ur was the capital of southern Mesopotamia at the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC. e. Brick had a peculiar shape in the Ancient East. It wore the shape of an earthen bottle and looked like modern loaves of white bread. The most common form of the oldest brick was a square with sides of 30-60 cm and a thickness of 3-9 cm. Such bricks were used in Ancient Greece and Byzantium, and they were called plinth, which means "brick" in Greek.

The history of the creation of old bricks in Russia

The appearance of bricks in the 10th century in ancient Russia was due to the Byzantine culture. It began to be widely used since the end of the century. The secret of brick making was brought with them by Byzantine builders, who came with priests, scientists and other craftsmen after their baptism in 988. The tithe church in Kiev became the first brick building in ancient Russia. Construction of the first brick houses in Moscow was produced in 1450, and the first brick factory in Russia was built in 1475. Previously, brick was produced mainly in monasteries. It was used during the restructuring of the Moscow Kremlin in 1485-1495. An example of this was the construction of the Kremlin walls and churches, which was carried out under the guidance of Italian craftsmen. In 1500, a brick Kremlin was erected in Nizhny Novgorod, 20 years later, an identical one was built in Tula, and in 1424, in the Moscow region, the Novodevichy Convent was built.

The architects of ancient Russia widely used plinth 40x40 cm in size and 2.5-4 cm in thickness. For example, the construction of St. Sophia Cathedral in Kiev took place using such a plinth. Its shape and dimensions are explained by the simplicity of molding, drying and firing of "thin" bricks. A characteristic feature of plinth masonry is rather thick mortar joints with interlayers of natural stone after several rows of masonry. Plinth was used in Russia until the 15th century. It was replaced by the "Aristotelian brick", which is similar in size to its modern counterpart. Over the centuries, the shape and size of a brick has been constantly changing, but the main criterion has always been the convenience of a bricklayer working with it, so that the size and strength of the hand are commensurate with the brick. For example, according to Russian GOST, the weight of a brick should be no more than 4.3 kg. The standards for modern bricks were established in 1927 and remain so to this day: 250x120x65 mm. Each of the faces of the brick has its own name: the largest is called "bed", the long side is called "spoons", and the smallest is called "poke". The assessment of the quality of building materials under Peter I was very strict. One of the easiest ways to check the quality of bricks was to dump all the batch brought to the rack from the cart, and if more than three pieces were broken, then the whole batch was rejected.

The first brick building in St. Petersburg is considered to be the chambers of the Admiralty Councilor Kikin. They were built in 1707. Later, in 1710, the house of Chancellor G.P. Golovin was built on Troitskaya Square. Then the palace of Tsarevna Natalya Alekseevna, who was the sister of Peter I, was built in 1711. In 1712, the summer and winter palaces of Peter I were built. From 1710 to 1727. the Menshikov Palace was built - the first large brick house in St. Petersburg. The palace was rebuilt many times, but, nevertheless, it retained its original appearance. Now it is used as a museum and is a branch of the State Hermitage Museum.

Already in the 18th century, manufacturers were ordered to brand their bricks in order to identify the scammers. In 1713, by order of Peter I, new brick factories were built near St. Petersburg. Each of their owners was tasked by the emperor to produce as many bricks as possible. Craftsmen for work were collected from all over Russia. Also, according to the decree, it was forbidden to build stone buildings in other cities of the country under the threat of confiscation of property and sending into exile. This point was written specifically in order to leave bricklayers and other craftsmen without work, in the expectation that they themselves would come to build up Petersburg. Anyone who entered the city had to "pay" the fare with the bricks he brought with him. There is a version that Kirpichny Lane was so named because at its location there was a warehouse of bricks taken for the entrance to the city.

Brick making techniques continued to be primitive and time consuming until the 19th century. The brick was molded by hand, it was dried only in the summer, firing took place in floor ovens, temporary huts, which were laid out of dried raw bricks. The middle of the 19th century was marked by the beginning of the active development of the brick industry, as a result of which modern factories appeared that produce bricks of our time. Brick has been and remains the most popular building material for various structures, be it simple fences, luxury villas or multi-storey buildings. Due to the variety of colors and shapes, brick buildings always have a unique look. Ease of use, strength and durability of this building material will keep it among the leaders among building materials for a long time to come. Today, more than 15,000 combinations of sizes, shapes, surface textures and brick colors are produced in the world. Solid and hollow bricks, porous ceramic stones with increased heat-shielding properties are produced.

Russian tsarist brick of the second half of the 19th century usually weighed about 10 pounds, or about 4.1 kg, and had dimensions of 26-27x12-13x6-7 cm.The old building bricks of the civil and religious buildings of Kolomna, built in the late 19th - early 20th century, have such dimensions. centuries Modern standard brick received its dimensions in 1927 and remains so to this day: 250x120x65 mm. Russian GOST requires that the weight of a brick does not exceed 4.3 kg. Each face of a brick has its own name: the largest one, on which a brick is usually laid, is called a "bed", the long side is called a "spoon", and the small one is called a "poke". A brick, laid with its long side along the wall, forms a masonry in half a brick, a number of such bricks in a complex masonry are called spoon bricks. If the brick is laid with the long side across the wall, the row will be called butt row. Versts are the extreme rows of bricks that form the surface of the masonry. The versts located on the side of the facade are called external, and those facing the premises are called internal. All old bricks, laid between the inner and outer versts, are called backing bricks, or backing bricks.

Historically, it so happened that ceramic bricks in the general history of the construction industry of world practice have found a reliable niche for their use, in which they play an important and leading role to this day. Today, no one dries ceramic bricks on a fire and is not responsible for the quality of the bricks produced with their own heads. From the middle of the XIX century. the active development of the brick industry began, which resulted in the emergence of modern brick factories. Nowadays, more than 80% of this building material is produced by year-round enterprises, among which there are large mechanized plants with a capacity of over 200 million pieces. in year. The number of types of modern bricks is difficult to imagine, it is so wide. Today, more than 15,000 bricks are produced in the world in combinations of shapes, sizes, colors and surface textures. A variety of colors and shapes gives buildings a unique look. Brick remains the most popular construction material for everything from simple fences to luxury villas and multi-story buildings. The brick is easy to use, strong and durable. Currently, the company produces solid, hollow bricks, porous ceramic stones with increased heat-shielding properties. Solid bricks are used, for example, for building a foundation, and light hollow bricks are used for laying walls. This ancient and at the same time modern material has not lost its relevance today.

In Egypt, people learned how to bake bricks as early as 3 millennia BC, which is confirmed by the writings of the manuscripts. Due to the low water resistance, the raw brick was replaced by the more durable ceramic brick, which is obtained by firing the raw brick. In the images preserved from the time of the pharaohs, you can see how bricks were obtained and how buildings were built from them. In fairness, it must be said that the difference between the construction sites of that time and the present is not very great. Only the correctness of the masonry of the walls was checked by the ancient Egyptians with a triangle and the bricks were worn on rocker arms, and the principle of building buildings has remained since then practically unchanged.

Plinth is a building material that in the old days was almost the main one for the construction stone houses and other structures. When and in which countries was it used? And is it used in modern construction?

Plinth is ...

The term comes from the Greek word plinthos, which translates into Russian as "brick" or "slab". Plinth is a building material that was most popular during the 9th-13th centuries. Especially in the vastness of Byzantium and Kievan Rus. Temples, dwelling houses, defensive and engineering structures were erected from it. Sometimes plinth was also used as a roofing material.

So what is plinth? It is flat and wide which is close to a square in shape. Plinth is much thinner than modern standard brick and is much wider than it. Thanks to this form, it was possible to significantly increase the seismic resistance of the bearing walls of old buildings.

Plinth in the history of architecture

Plinth in Ancient Russia is the main building material. It can be seen in the monuments of ancient Russian architecture that have survived to this day. Among the most striking examples of such buildings, the following stand out:

• Golden Gate (Kiev).
• Saint Sophia Cathedral (Kiev).
• Church of the Tithes, foundation (Kiev).
• Pyatnitskaya Church (Chernigov).
• Church of John the Baptist (Kerch).

In Byzantium and in Russia, plinths of 300 x 350 x 25 mm were most often used. It was made of clay. Initially, the blanks were dried for about two weeks in dry wooden molds, and then they were fired in special ovens. During the construction of plinth walls, a thick layer of cement mortar was used, which was often equal to the thickness of the building material itself. Thus, the erected wall became "striped".

Analysis of ancient architectural monuments showed that kaolin clay was most often used to make plinths. Bricks from it turned out to be pink, fawn or pale yellow. Around the middle of the 12th century, plinth began to yield its dominant place in ancient Russian architecture to white stone. And by the end of the 15th century, it was finally replaced by molded bricks.

Plinth in architecture and construction

You might be surprised, but plinth is also used in modern construction. True, it is not nearly as wide as it was a millennium ago. Slabs of modern plinths usually have the same dimensions: 30 x 35 x 2.5 centimeters. Most often they are made on the basis of ordinary sand and cement (in a ratio of 1: 5). In this case, the use of reinforcement is not encouraged. Iron bars can rust over time and damage the "body" of the plinth itself.

How are plinths laid? One edge of this building material will be slightly flattened. This is to prevent moisture and water from outside from getting under the plinth. With this beveled edge, the material should be laid out, forming a kind of slightly protruding visor.

Plinths are laid "dry" or with the help of additional tightening elements. In this capacity, a metal hairpin or a special extra strong wire can act. When laying blocks, plinths do not recommend using silicone-based sealants.