On our website, we can say there is already a cycle of posts about buildings filled up on the second floors, which we now perceive as the basements of old buildings. Although from an engineering and economic point of view, they are meaningless, especially in St. Petersburg with its regular floods in the past. Well, let's continue these discussions with the example of the following object.
pavelstepura wrote this comment:
The New Jerusalem Monastery in Istra has the Underground Church of Saints Constantine and Helena. Apparently, it just became underground after the disaster, and only then the monastery itself was built nearby. The depth is actually about seven meters. And the walls themselves are clearly on the embankment. And excavations are being carried out there, on the territory - it is clearly visible that there is a lot of stuff covered.
The monastery was founded in 1656 by Patriarch Nikon, according to whose plan the complex of the holy places of Palestine was to be recreated near Moscow.
Model of the monastery.
View from above.
An interesting building from the east:
Promotional video:
Underground Church of Constantine and Helena
From the east, the underground church of Constantine and Helena adjoins the main volume of the cathedral (in Jerusalem, a similar church was carved into the rock) - at the end of the 17th century it was a simple rectangular building with a flat roof surrounded by a baluster. The walls of the church rose 1.5 meters above ground level, it was crowned with one chapter, decorated with tiles
In the middle of the 18th century, a moat was dug to protect the building from groundwater, which was 6 meters deep in the ground. At the beginning of the 19th century, a tunnel was built through which water was diverted, and the moat itself was lined with white stone
The interior of the church was redesigned in the Baroque style in the middle of the 18th century.
Those. initially, this structure went into the ground at 6m! And it is absurd to bury a structure in the ground, and then dig ditches and do, judging by, hydraulic works.
Consider the monastery from this side:
Walls that go underground:
The moat is surrounded by a fence with white stone pillars. In the wikipedia it is said that in the middle of the 18th century, a moat was dug to protect the building from groundwater, which was buried 6 meters into the ground. Apparently, then they were surrounded by a fence made of limestone blocks. But what about the ban of Peter I on the prohibition of building from stone? The churchmen didn’t concern?
Inside. The huge difference in height from the level of the entrance and the stairs going down is understood.
Empress Elizabeth Petrovna's visit to the New Jerusalem Monastery. View of the Resurrection Cathedral from the south. 18th century engraving. The eastern part was already in the ground.
Photo of 1885-1895 Arranged a hedge. So that the moat does not rush to the pilgrims?
At the base of the walls are white stone blocks. Put higher - there was not enough material?
An annex at the entrance to the cathedral.
A text in Old Slavonic with the history of the monastery (posted to the right of the southern entrance to the cathedral). These are stone slabs. Hollowed out with a chisel? Not! It is extruded (or cut) with a tool on an unhardened surface. However, like all ancient tombstones, they were made according to the same principle.
Excavations on site.
The conclusion is that some points hint at the more ancient history of the monastery.
***
I'll post a small analogy addition:
This castle also went evenly into the ground? Or a foundation pit was dug, a castle was built and the goal was to make it easier for those who decide to take it by storm. For example, shoot from cannons with direct fire!
He was always so buried after a certain event. There is no smooth sinking into the ground.
Author: sibved
