“… So leave unnecessary disputes,
I've already proved everything to myself"
(V. S. Vysotsky. "Farewell to the mountains")
They say that every family has its own "skeletons in the closet", that is, certain hidden facts of the biography, which, if made public, can cause significant damage to reputation. Maybe the British have it that way, because it was they who invented this idiom, but in our families the corpse of a mother's lover is nonsense. But as for history …
Sometimes the collapse of ideas becomes a real catastrophe, which in its scale and tragedy of consequences is comparable to the defeat of a state in a war. This is well known to most of my compatriots from the example of the collapse of the Soviet Union, when overnight we lost everything: Faith in the triumph of socialism, Hope for a communist future and Love for the heroes of the revolution, who, as it turned out, shed blood in vain for the ideas imposed by a handful of sectarians who turned pseudoscientific reflections on the hegemony of the lumpen proletariat in the new religion.
Therefore, finding the truth for many is often not only useful, but also harmful. For example, sometimes it happens that the search for justice in the process of rehabilitating their "innocently repressed by bloody Stalin" ancestors results in a personal tragedy, which not everyone is able to survive without loss. When fair anger gives way to pain of disappointment and burning shame due to the disclosure of all the circumstances that were taken into account by the Soviet court when passing the guilty verdict.
And you know, usually for those who require the authorities to remove the "Secret" stamp from all criminal cases of the Soviet era, I recommend not to rush and first decide for themselves whether they are ready to find out the WHOLE truth about their ancestors. After all, it is highly probable that the grandfather or great-grandfather of the "seeker of justice" was not just an "enemy of the people", but a real monster who killed people with his own hands. Maybe for someone, in fact, it would be better to continue to believe that his relatives were convicted unlawfully, by malicious libel or by mistake? Perhaps it is better to continue to be delusional than to learn the cruel truth that can destroy the familiar world?
I think that for the majority this is the only reasonable way. But there are also many for whom the truth is dearer; those for whom the bitter truth is definitely better than the sweet lie. True, whatever it may be, it rarely or never leads to tragedy.
Promotional video:
It was a forced lyrical introduction. And the reasons why I considered it necessary to talk about this will become clear from the following. The fact is that this article destroys some foundations on which the pride of most of my compatriots for the achievements of our ancestors who were able to build one of the most impressive creations of mankind - the city of St. Petersburg, is based. But I would like to anticipate the accusations against me of especially zealous patriots who will try to hang the label “having nothing holy whistle-blower, trying to belittle the glory of the victories of our great ancestors …
I do not intend to offend anyone, but to belittle and even more to deny other people's merits is also not my method. Immediately, I want to reassure everyone and swear that the discoveries made do not in any way call into question the greatness of Russian architects of the nineteenth century. The current situation only clearly demonstrates the harm that unscrupulous politicians inflict with their lies, who generously pay for the works of historians who interpret facts and events to please the current moment, in order to extract maximum benefit in the interests of the ruling elite of society.
It is interpretations, and not the events and artifacts themselves, that mislead us. Nobody faked Montferrand's column on Palace Square! They just invented a fairy tale for us about the creation of this masterpiece. But the result of the lie in its consequences turned out to be an order of magnitude more harmful than the most daring analyst-forecaster could have assumed.
One of these consequences has become a fierce polemic that has not subsided on the Internet and in the pseudo-scientific environment for the past two decades. It became especially intense in the last twelve years, when a huge number of enthusiasts, thanks to the development of information technologies, gained access to information that was previously the property of a narrow circle of specialists and scientists.
But now, in my opinion, it is possible to separate the warring parties in corners and put a fat point on this issue. From now on, there is nothing more to argue about. Irreconcilable enemies: supporters of the "geopolymeric version" of the creation of the Alexandrian pillar, "turning theory" and even "traditionalists" - can reconcile and sit down at the table to shake hands and try to learn to listen to the opponent with respect. I'll tell you a secret that the first, second, third and all others (panspermists, ufologists, esotericists, etc. - in the remainder) all this time were ridiculed by those whose immediate job responsibilities include monitoring the safety of the cultural heritage of St. Petersburg.
Scientists, builders, architects, restorers, etc., with a total number of several thousand people, being experts in their fields, have long had no illusions about the true origin of the Alexandrian pillar because they thoroughly know its design. How else? And, of course, they cannot even hear, without laughter, the stories about how Samson Sukhanov, commissioned by Auguste Montferrand, cut a whole piece of granite weighing more than one thousand tons on the Karelian Isthmus. But to no less extent they are amused, and sometimes even annoyed by the versions of the "alternatives" on this topic. Because they KNOW, and do not believe or suppose. How was one of the main symbols of St. Petersburg created? The main story lies ahead. I'll start in order.
Skeleton One: Kazan Cathedral
On January 26, 2019, my friend, geophysicist Dmitry Gorkin, and I made a report at the "Club of Seekers of Reliable Knowledge La Do Ga" on Bolshoy Sampsonievsky Prospekt in St. Petersburg. And the next day, thanks to the opportunity, they decided to spend it profitably for the business and devoted it to a detailed examination using non-destructive testing devices to study objects that cause controversy regarding the technologies used to create them.
The simplest devices at our disposal were an ordinary household tape measure with a magnet and a telescopic inspection flashlight with a flexible arm for inspecting inaccessible places of complex structures and internal cavities, as well as for checking flat surfaces for the curvature of their surfaces (also equipped with magnets).
More complicated devices at our disposal turned out to be a laser ruler and a dosimetric sensor based on a Geiger counter, synchronized using a special application with a smartphone.
And the most difficult tool that we used to reveal the structural features of buildings and structures hidden inside was a semi-professional miniature infrared thermal imager.
The first device that turned out to be in demand in our study was a dosimeter. On the way from Vosstaniya Square to the Kazan Cathedral, we decided to examine the granite blocks that make up the embankment of the Fontanka River and Anichkov Bridge. Visual inspection of the structure of the rock at the sites of damage to the surface of one of the pedestals of the sculptural group of P. Klodt "The Conquest of the Horse" showed that most likely the material from which it is made is natural granite.
It consists of red and brown feldspars (about 60%), thirty percent quartz, and the remainder (about 10%) consists of various impurities, the most characteristic of which, observed without a microscope, is mica. On the cut, coarse grain is clearly distinguished.
The level of radioactive radiation, recorded by the dosimeter, turned out to be on the verge of permissible, 50.4 μR / h. Let me remind you that the norm is from 5 to 25 μR / h, and sixty is recognized by medicine as dangerous to health.
Of course, an artificial stone, even if it is made of natural, cannot possess such powerful radiation. Therefore, I can state with full responsibility that for the construction of the Anichkov Bridge, real natural granite was used, and the density and strength standard for Karelian granites. It crumbles even with his bare hands, and even more so with a knife, with which Dmitry decided to test the stone for strength right on the bridge.
The verdict is merciless. This rapakivi (Fin. Rapakivi - "rotten or crumbling stone") - a rock of acid composition, a kind of granite.
Just don't think that the entire Fontanka embankment is built of exactly the same stone. We are responsible only for those samples that cause the least doubt and have been examined by us personally.
But our first significant goal was the Kazan Cathedral. In previous articles, I have repeatedly drawn attention to the fact that the external supports made of gray stone (facade columns), in all likelihood, are not hewn from whole pieces of natural stone. This assumption gave rise to heated discussions and controversies among the readers, and even became the basis for direct accusations of illiteracy, ignorance of the history of the construction of St. Petersburg and even deliberate falsification of facts.
And this despite the fact that even the official reference books report that the front columns of the Kazan Cathedral are made up of separate blocks, and the seams between them are worn out with the so-called "Riga alabaster". Now I have all the arguments I need to put an end to all speculation and gossip.
We know from traditional sources that the main building material in the construction of the colonnade and decoration of the Kazan Cathedral was the Pudost stone, which was mined near Gatchina, in the village of Pudost. It bears a resemblance to the Italian travertino stone, and, characteristically, extracted from the ground, it “hardens quickly”.
But let me … How does this stone "harden"? Are stones liquid? We begin to deal with this puzzle and find out the following:
NOTES:
- Pleistocene - according to traditional geology, the era of the Quaternary period, which began 2.588 million years ago and ended 11.7 thousand years ago.
-
Calcareous tuff.
About half of the chemical composition of this rock is calcium carbonate (CaO). In addition to it, there are impurities of oxides of silicon, iron, aluminum and other elements. By its structure, the stone is rather soft, many pores are formed in it, due to which it is easy to machine.
In terms of physical and mechanical properties and geological origin, the mineral is located between marble and limestone.
Its bulk density is 2740 kg / m3 (like rapakivi granite).
Porosity 8.2%, (30 times higher than that of rapakivi granite) The
percentage of water absorption is 1.7%.
The compressive strength is 47 MPa (this is 1.5 times less than that of rapakivi granite).
The frost resistance index is within 50-600 freeze-thaw cycles (like rapakivi granite and even higher).
The surface of the stone in contact with air hardens.
The main disadvantage of this mineral is the low water resistance of some of its varieties and high sensitivity to acids.
It turns out that, in fact, this is not a stone at all, but lime slate formed from bottom sediments, which is very easily processed immediately after extraction, and then crystallizes with long-term access of oxygen and evaporation of water and acquires all the properties of a stone. And, in general, looking at the material from which the facade columns of the Kazan Cathedral are created, any more or less savvy builder will certainly say that they look very much like modern reinforced concrete structures made of heavy concrete of the D2500 brand (porosity 6-12%). Well, how did they get their current look?
It would seem that in all encyclopedias the answer to this question already exists, because the Pudost stone was allegedly chosen for construction and decoration because it is characterized by a condo, rough rustic look, deliberately emphasized primitive, suggesting the idea of antediluvian antiquity. Inducing fantasies about antiquity associated with half-naked men with laurel wreaths on their heads and sandals on their bare feet, who eat with their hands, because they have not yet invented spoons, but at the same time read scrolls with emperors' edicts at their leisure, looking at them through magnifying glasses in bronze rim …
It turns out that there is almost no information on how exactly this "colonial" megacomplex was created. Neither true nor false, none at all. It is only known that the same ubiquitous self-taught Samson Sukhanov was in charge of the team of masons who hewed out all the columns from the "Gatchina travertino". It's not funny anymore. They could have come up with a new character of some, well, at least a talented student from among the apprentices of the famous stonecutter, as they invented for other, abnormally prolific, genius authors. God bless them, with the writers. They could not even count the number of columns of the cathedral.
According to some sources, there are 136, according to others - 96, according to the third - 182 pcs. I confess that Dmitry Gorkin and I did not meticulously recalculate all the pillars, so I will quote the figures taken from the Visit-Plus Tourism and Travel website, since this is one of the few resources on which a single table contains information not only about sizes, but and on the weight of the details of the structure, as well as on the number of elements of each type with their group breakdown:
- The length of the Kazan Cathedral from west to east is 72.5 meters, from north to south - 57 meters.
- The total number of columns forming the colonnade and portico is 136.
- The colonnade from the side of Nevsky Prospekt consists of 94 columns.
- The portico on the south side of the cathedral has 20 columns.
- The portico on the west side has 12 columns.
- Column weight - 28 tons.
- The height of the outer column is about 14 meters.
- The lower diameter of the column is 1.45 meters, the diameter of the column at the top is 1.1 m.
- The maximum height is 71.6 meters.
- The dome diameter is over 17 meters.
Let's try to ask a question and independently answer whether the bast shoes with chisels and mallets could have made 136 columns with a total weight of about forty thousand tons and a volume of more than 12,000 cubic meters of the quality that we have in a few years? How many were there, these unknown miracle stone cutters? Even if you believe that S. Sukhanov was a genius, this does not automatically mean that all the members of his team, who had just broken away from the plow, suddenly turned into unsurpassed masters of stone-cutting art right on the construction site, studying on the job!
Until now, there have been no clear answers to the following questions:
- Where exactly did the processing of the stone quarried near Pudost take place?
- How was it delivered to the construction site?
- What technological scheme was used to assemble the columns, and most importantly, to install them?
- What kind of tools and equipment were used in the production of stone cutting and installation work?
They are trying to convince us that the stones for the construction of St. Petersburg were transported on carts and sleighs. According to the information contained in various sources, the maximum load that the sobs and sledges (horse-drawn vehicles used at the beginning of the nineteenth century on the territory of the Russian Empire) could withstand did not exceed one hundred poods (1638 kg.). But this is in some cases. An ordinary cart cannot carry more than five hundred kilograms, and an army wagon cannot carry a maximum of 750. This means that only the delivery of the blocks from which the columns were assembled should have required, according to the most conservative estimates, about 50,000 trips. And this is far from all the transport needs of such a gigantic construction site as the Kazan Cathedral. Nobody countedhow much additional stone was mined for the manufacture of other building parts and for wall cladding.
In general, there is nothing fantastic about it. In ten years it is quite possible to cope with such a task. True, for this it is necessary to have a sufficient number of horses, freight carts, charioteers, grooms, horsemen, blacksmiths, carriage craftsmen and an army of all those who maintain and maintain everything. Especially if you imagine that at that time there were already paved roads. Only a desperate optimist-historian who, in his entire life, has never left a dusty office into the fresh air, can believe that on the narrow wooden wheels of sobs and wagons it is possible to carry such weights through the swamp.
But the columns could not be engaged for all ten years, from the moment of the beginning of geodetic and mine surveying work to cutting the red ribbon for a brass band. How much is unknown, but definitely not ten. Maximum six or seven years for everything they had. The rest of the time, preparatory work was to be carried out first, and then the final and final ones, already on an almost finished building, with columns installed in a capital image.
And this already raises serious doubts about the veracity of the version of historians about an army of thousands of uneducated peasants armed with hammers and chisels. These doubts force people with independent critical thinking to ask questions and look for answers on their own, since those who, in accordance with their duties imposed by the profession, do not have answers to the questions asked. They prefer to "find" more and more new "confirmations" of the voiced once crazy version. For example, the site "Walks in St. Petersburg" reports:
Where does the information come from? At the end of the article located at the address, there are a number of links to the sources used, the most "ancient" of which is dated 1981. It is clear that it was not supposed to write anything about the "damned tsarism" at that time, but the article also contains a number of allegedly quotes from foreign tourists from "enlightened Europe". They very clearly illustrate the conjectures of Soviet historians and are called upon to confirm the theses, which for any sane person seem to be complete absurdity. Well, for example:
These inventors, apparently, never licked an iron swing in the yard in the cold, otherwise they would have known what threatens the "amazing workers" carrying lanterns with their teeth in fifteen degrees of frost. The praise of the eye of the Russian serfs touches, but does not explain how you can make flutes (longitudinal milling on columns) fourteen meters long with your hands without deviating a single millimeter to the side. Not on any of the columns. And all without chips and flaws. With chisels? By eye? Oh well..
Even a layman should understand that in order to make such a product, a phenomenal eye is not enough. Adaptations are needed here. At least, a carriage with a cutter moving along the guides along the column axis along the outer contour.
The picture shows modern equipment for processing stone columns, but the principle of operation of such devices remains unchanged. It does not matter how the cutters are rotated, it is important that without a machine, even with a manual drive, it is impossible to make columns with instrumental precision. And we have columns of exceptional instrumental precision. And the traces of the impact of a rotating mechanical instrument on the columns of the Kazan Cathedral are quite obvious:
Moreover, the nature and quality of the grooves make it possible to put forward the assumption that they were left by a cutter on a column rotating in a lathe. Everything is the same as in modern production, only the quality level is much lower here. Exactly the same applies to flutes.
These grooves could only be left in two ways:
- A rotating wheel moving along the axis of the stone column along the special guides of the machine.
- A fixed profile moving along a column made of not yet hardened material, also along special machine guides.
In this case, it is not so important for us which of the two methods was applied. The main thing now is that we know for sure:
In the manufacture of the columns of the Kazan Cathedral, technologies of machine-tool mechanical processing of materials were used.
The very construction of the columns is also not a secret. The last doubts were dispelled after their examination using a thermal imager. Anticipating criticism, which will surely come from the lips of specialists who refuse to recognize the data obtained with this device, I have to explain:
Yes, when drawing up expert opinions of this nature, only data obtained with the help of devices for carrying out non-destructive testing, certified specifically for these purposes, are legally valid. The results of thermal imaging control are generally not considered when assessing the integrity of building structures.
However, let me remind you that operational research aimed at finding places where you should generally look for something is most often performed with this particular device. Its main advantage over ultrasound scanners is the ability to simultaneously remotely inspect the entire structure that needs to be examined.
Operational research can be compared to checking an egg to see if it is boiled or raw. If it rotates easily and for a long time on a flat surface, then it is boiled, and if it stops after one - one and a half revolutions, it means it is raw. And this simple manipulation allows you to determine which of the two eggs should be opened. So is the thermal imager: it only helps to determine the direction of the search. In order for its data to be useful and reliable, it is enough to conduct research at a time when the entire structure has not had time to completely warm up or cool down.
Our case was ideal, because the air temperature was about minus seventeen, but the sunlight that illuminated the columns, which until then were in the shade, created temperature differences in different parts of the structures. So, in cavities, due to cold air, and in places of occurrence of materials with thermal conductivity different from the environment, the temperature differs significantly, and this gives a completely objective picture on the monitor, allowing you to see the structure of the object under study in detail.
It is now quite obvious that all the columns consist of separate segments with an average height of about sixty-five centimeters. The joints between them are not filled with mortar, but with sheet lead. All this is confirmed by visual inspection:
In addition, in some sections of the columns, the lead spacers between the stone segments even retained traces of the rotating cutting tool.
When the image is enlarged, it is clearly seen that the grooves left by the cutter in the manufacture of flutes go along the entire length, crossing the horizontal lead gaskets at right angles.
The same picture shows the structure of the material itself from which the column is made. There is practically no doubt that this is not a natural stone, but an artificial one, because it has a filler of rubble and cavities in the form of cavities, which are almost inevitably formed in any kind of concrete. In addition, outside, between the longitudinal grooves selected by the cutter, the stone is absolutely homogeneous, has no cavities or foreign inclusions, but it has a completely obvious texture, which usually occurs when using a solution of a sufficiently viscous consistency, comparable in plasticine in plasticine.
Repair traces of flaws.
It is believed that this is not just grouting of caverns and chips, but the remains of plaster, which could have been used to cover the columns initially. The version is very interesting, but I think that if the plastering of the columns had been planned, we would have seen them with her today. But they would look exactly like those that are believed to be carved from natural marble or granite monolith.
Also, at the junction of two segments of the column, in the areas adjacent to the lead gasket, there are traces of the once foam material. Without the results of his laboratory analysis, I would not say anything for sure, but I would venture to suggest that these are remnants of a lime mortar or the very same grout “Riga alabaster”.
So! The totality of all of the above makes it possible to put an end to the endless dispute about whether the columns of the Kazan Cathedral are cast or carved out of solid natural stone. The first skeleton gave evidence on the basis of which it can be established that
The proven fact is the following:
The front columns of the Kazan Cathedral in St. Petersburg are prefabricated unreinforced structures, consisting on average of 21 sections 60 - 65 cm high and 145 - 111 cm in diameter, separated by gaskets of 0.5 cm thick lead sheet and bonded with lime mortar.
Based on the proven fact, the most likely hypotheses for the production technology of these columns can be considered:
- The installation of the columns on site was carried out by installing raw or pre-processed raw blocks in the quarry, followed by mechanical processing using special devices and tools.
- The columns were cast on-site into segmental formwork, again, with subsequent processing and finishing using fixtures and special tools.
One way or another, it doesn't matter. The main thing is that the stone cutters had nothing to do on Nevsky Prospekt. The construction of the columns was the prerogative of purely concrete workers and plasterers, but by no means the wards of Samson Sukhanov.
Now let's go inside the temple. Or not a temple? No, it cannot be considered a temple by definition, since it even officially has the status of a cathedral. And the cathedral is, as the name suggests, a meeting place for a large number of people. For what true purpose is another question. The main thing is that this is not a cemetery. After all, only cult buildings in the place where the dead are buried are called a temple.
The second question is whether it is Orthodox. Of course no. Despite the fact that it has the status of a cathedral of the Russian Orthodox Church. For some reason, against the background of the battles for preventing the transfer of St. Isaac's Cathedral to the jurisdiction of the St. Petersburg Metropolis, no one noticed how and when the former Museum of Atheism, imperceptibly, quietly without dust, suddenly became a cathedral and is now not part of the territory of the Russian Federation.
The next point is also very controversial: what does this structure have to do with religion in general? In Christian architecture, as in any monastic charter, there are unshakable canons. But, looking at the Kazan Cathedral, not a single Orthodox even thinks that there is a Christian temple in front of him. We see an exclusively secular institution of the municipal type, decorated with pagan antique symbols. Yes, any airport in Russia looks more like a Christian religious building than the Kazan Cathedral!
The explanation of the origin of the name itself - "Kazansky" is also absurd. The official legend says:
Have mercy! Peter I? The swearing man and seditious man, whom the churchmen themselves call the "Antichrist" to this day, ordered to bring the icon of the Kazan Mother of God to his home? Yes, it's easier for me to believe that he could open the first fan-club of the Moscow Dynamo in St. Petersburg.
Anyway. It is important for us to find out something else: what are the inner columns of the Kazan Cathedral. Here we will only talk about the columns. So much and in such detail have been written about other miracles of the Kazan Cathedral that there is no point in repeating. So:
The four main pillars of the cathedral, which distribute the main load of the middle part with the dome, arches and sails (marked in red in the diagram), are, according to the information available, prefabricated structures.
They are assembled from blocks of Finnish marine granite rapakivi, but outside they are plastered and painted to match the color and pattern of the granite. ("By the will of reason and feelings. St. Petersburg - Helsinki: two Orthodox cathedrals." A. G. Bulakh, 2016).
This is how it looks in place:
In fact, they are columns, since they have the same functions as all other vertical structural elements of a building, however, architecture has its own canons, according to which only certain types of structures are considered columns:
Having put yourself in the shoes of the builders of the cathedral, it is easy to imagine that they had a great temptation not to philosophize, but to build all the supports, regardless of classification, in the same tried and tested way. Personally, that's exactly what I would do. Why "fence the garden", take risks, waste time and money on the development of complex stone-cutting technologies, if you already have experience in building the main supports of the middle part? It is much more profitable to build according to the established template, and the appearance and shape of the columns of the side-altars can be given whatever you want.
The main (western) side-chapel of the Kazan Cathedral.
Inside the temple there are 56 columns of the Corinthian order, made of pink Finnish granite, with gilded capitals. The interior of the cathedral is divided by monolithic granite columns into three corridors - naves. The central nave is four times wider than the side naves and is covered with a semi-cylindrical vault.
Although, of course, there is no sufficient reason to assert that, after all, these columns were not manufactured in another way, including using a lathe. Moreover, in the Academic Garden of St. Petersburg there is a very similar column, which is considered a "spare", made in case any of those that were made for the western aisle of the Kazan Cathedral is damaged during transportation or installation.
This legend is now believed to be true, although there is reason to believe that this is just an assumption. As you can see, her capital is completely different, which, however, is not the main thing. The proportions are different (the narrowing upward is more noticeable), and the color is also different.
But let's evaluate the quality of manufacturing of the main pillars of the cathedral with those standing nearby. It didn't even take a laser ruler to make sure they were plastered with a solution that mimics natural granite. There was enough natural light to see that the quality of the vertical surface was far from ideal.
Natural monolithic granite, especially so high-quality polished, cannot flake off and bulge with such layers. This can be seen even in the photo with not very good sharpness. But such trifles are not striking for a layman. Another thing is the multiple traces of repair of round supports, which complement the main ones.
Vertical cracks on additional supports:
Such cracks cannot form in monolithic granite. These are not automotive glass, where cracks are drilled at the ends to prevent the crack from growing. Rocks of igneous origin tend to burst through and through. That is, if these columns were made of whole pieces of granite, then they would not crack, but burst, disintegrating into separate parts. This is exactly how it is mined in quarries: it is enough to cause a crack in one part of the monolith so that it spreads to the entire depth, and the whole piece breaks off completely. Granite is not metal or plastic, which crack gradually.
Well, the end of the study was the inspection of "granite" rectangular columns, which are also located in the middle of the cathedral. Here without comment:
The conclusion here may be the only one:
The columns are made of concrete conforming to the patterns common to the level of technology used at the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, followed by decorative plastering imitating natural granite. They did the same with the columns as the "restorers" of the Transfiguration Cathedral in Chernigov did, just the opposite.
In Ukraine, brick was laid on marble, genuinely antique columns, giving them the appearance of "ancient-Russian-Russian", in accordance with the historical paradigm prevailing in the USSR, and the builders of St. Petersburg pseudo-antiquity were quite modern for them, concrete and brick columns dressed in ancient Greek outfit. Everything is in full accordance with the order issued from above.
The main result of the interrogation of the first skeleton can be considered a completely new, previously unheard of conclusion:
The Kazan Cathedral, which we have today in St. Petersburg, was not built at all in 1811, as is officially believed, but at the earliest - in the nineties of the nineteenth century. The manual labor of stone-cutters during construction was used extremely limitedly, only as an addition to the technologies of machine processing of stone on turning and milling machines, as well as concreting and plastering using mortar imitating natural stone.
All. The skeleton's interrogation is over. On the bottom line of the protocol, he left a note: “It is written down correctly from my words. I have read it. I have no comments or additions. And the signature: Kazan Cathedral.
On my own behalf, I will supplement the interrogation protocol with two interesting facts that have nothing to do with the Case, but may be useful in the future.
1. At least one of the interior elements of the Kazan Cathedral is in fact very ancient and, most likely, antediluvian. Here he looks like an eyesore, clearly discordant with the environment. Made with the greatest skill, but in a deplorable state of preservation. They dug it out somewhere and decided that if you build it into the interior, the visitors will believe that the entire cathedral is just as ancient.
2. Few people know that the hand of the Apostle Andrew the First-Called is kept here. Here she is in a special ark:
The inscription in the original language attracts attention. Only the name "andrea" is readable enough, and the first words are not even clear in what language.
But now the time for operational investigative actions has expired, and it is time to begin the interrogation of the second witness. We leave for St. Isaac's Cathedral …
Continuation: "Interrogation protocol No. 2. St. Isaac's Cathedral"
Author: kadykchanskiy
The article was co-authored with a researcher at the Institute of Terrestrial Magnetism, Ionosphere and Radio Wave Propagation. N. V. Pushkova (IZMIRAN), geophysicist D. S. Gorkin