Характеристика цегли княжої доби у працях В. А. Богусевича

• Veröffentlicht in: Археологія і давня історія України
• Datum: 2022
• 1. Verfasser: Махота, О.О.
• Format: Artikel
• Sprache: Ukrainian
• Veröffentlicht: Інститут археології НАН України 2022
• Schlagworte: Наш ювілей
• Online Zugang: https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/187623
• Назва журналу: Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
• Zitieren: Характеристика цегли княжої доби у працях В. А. Богусевича / О.О. Махота // Археологія і давня історія України: Зб. наук. пр. — К.: ІА НАН України, 2022. — Вип. 2 (43). — С. 41-49. — Бібліогр.: 14 назв. — укр.

Стаття присвячена внеску В. Богусевича у вивчення цегли княжої доби з території Києва, Чернігова, Путивля, Остра та інших міст. Проаналізовано його праці присвячені архітектурно-археологічним дослідженням пам’яток України ХІ—ХІІІ ст. Виокремлено інформацію про параметри плінфи та деякі критерії, на які спирався дослідник для визначення датування цегли княжої доби. Volodymyr Bogusevych researched various monuments of archeology, art and architecture of the IX— XVII centuries. He can be attributed to the constellation of scholars who laid the necessary vectors for studying the laws of architecture of the Princely Age. The methods of architectural and archeological research developed by V. Bogusevych still helps scholars to study the monuments of stone architecture. V. Bogusevych made a significant contribution to the study of one of the main structural material of the palace and temple architecture — the plinth. Having started his academic path in this direction along with the most famous experts in plinth (M. Karger, P. Rappaport and M. Kholostenko), he developed his own method of dating bricks of the Princely Age. However, V. Bogusevych did not pay proper attention to the coverage of the signs by which he dated the plinth. Judging by the works of V. Bogusevych, most likely it was its size. Also there is a tendency in his works to date the bricks by presence of marks and end marks. He collected a large collection of branded plinths from Kyiv, Chernihiv, Ostra and Putivl and has repeatedly participated in discussions about the possible purpose of the signs. Analyzing the works of V. Bogusevych, we can conclude that he developed his terminological and conceptual apparatus in the study of plinth gradually. It was not until the 1950s that in his papers the word «plinth» appeared next to the word «brick» to denote this type of building material. This was influenced by joint work with professional architects Yu. Aseev and M. Kholostenko. After all, it is in joint work with them that the use of these terms can be traced. Of course, modern research methods have advanced significantly in the study of plinths and sometimes refute the conclusions of the scholar. But the source base of brick sizes and signs on it significantly influenced the development of modern methods of attribution of plinths and is an extremely valuable source for future generations of researchers of bricks of the Princely Age.