Architectural authenticity of the Carpathians: a past in which we lost part of our identity

Before studying the building traditions of a particular region of the country, we should ask ourselves: do we know what modern Ukrainian architecture as a whole is? If a foreigner suddenly asks a Ukrainian to talk about it — to highlight characteristic features and find similarities and differences with the architectural face of other European countries — will the latter be able to do this? Hardly.

How come we don't have a clear idea of the modern building code of our own country? Perhaps the reason is that we are not very familiar with its origins - Ukrainian ethnic architecture. While the sliding partitions of Japanese dwellings and the sharp geometric outlines of Norwegian houses are known all over the world, and the modern architecture of Japan and Norway is an organic stage in the evolution of the building traditions of these countries (for what is the uncompromising severity of the outlines of the iconic Aker Brygge in Oslo, as well as the expressive character of the world-famous Tokyo Metropolitan Government Building, every feature of which indicates the country of origin), most Ukrainians do not even know that our ancestors built not only from clay and straw, and their houses were not at all simple and primitive.

And even vice versa: the key feature of a typical folk house is utilitarian practicality, because every detail of such a dwelling had to be useful for the household of the residents.

One of the most striking "strictly rational" examples of the vernacular ethnics of Ukraine is the Carpathian wooden houses. Mountain dwellings functioned as a survival machine in difficult conditions: all its elements helped to solve the everyday tasks of the owners. For example, a fence with a roof was supposed to protect against thieves, strong winds and snowdrifts, stoves were arranged so that smoke was trapped under the ceiling and thus smoked meat, and a high roof was needed to preserve hay, necessary for feeding numerous sheep and horses - the main wealth of mountain farms.

Next, we will tell you about the secrets of folk construction in the three ethnic zones of the Carpathians - Lemko, Hutsul and Boyko. Local household architecture has many common features, because the economy of the ethnic groups living in the mentioned regions was similar: logging and hunting, breeding cattle, sheep and horses, making cheese. The difference was only in the accents - the severity of the economic conditions changed depending on the height of the village: Hutsuls lived at an altitude of more than 1500 m, Boykos - from 200 to 1000 m, and Lemkos - from 100 to 800 m.

The homesteads of these ethnographic groups have the following typical features: wooden walls; a high roof made of straw or shingles - a place to store hay for numerous livestock; small windows to preserve heat; a covered gallery - a place to relax, very convenient in a rainy climate, when the owners do not want to spend all their time in the house, where it is always semi-dark.

Hutsuls, Boykos and Lemkos also traditionally built without nails: the parts were fastened with wooden elements - chops or tibras. In the mountains, where you can simply cut down another tree in the neighboring forest if the existing material is not enough, while you have to pay for nails, this was more than rational. Another constant feature of mountain estates is the attraction of farm buildings to human habitation: premises for horses, pigs, cows and domestic poultry were attached to the house or even converted into one of the household premises, in particular, the stable was one of the "rooms" of the Lemko house.

Regarding the differences, let's look at each region separately.

Lemko hut

The traditional Lemko dwelling is a house made of wooden beams, surrounded by zagats - additional thin walls made of boards. In the gap between them and the main walls, hay and straw were stored, necessary for the numerous livestock of a typical mountain economy, which also contributed to the thermal insulation of the dwelling. A similar role was played by a high, four-pitched thatched or shingle roof, in the cavity of which hay was also stored.

Another important feature of the Lemko dwelling is its resemblance to a train car: with a width of 6–7 meters, such a structure could be up to 20 meters long. This culture had a tradition of placing most of the household premises in one building, namely from 4 to 7 rooms: a hut (living space), a pantry, a boisko (a room for threshing grain, which also served as a barn), a stable with a separate entrance and several additional pantry rooms. The decision to save space was very practical, because the Lemkos lived at relatively low altitudes and focused not only on livestock breeding, but also on growing heat-loving crops, and there was always a shortage of flat areas suitable for this purpose in the mountains.

As for the appearance, each of the mountainous regions had its own aesthetic traditions associated with its location: the dwelling was decorated with those materials that were the cheapest in a particular area. The Lemkos were engaged in salt production, so they painted the walls of their huts with a mixture of crushed brick and brine - the mass had a rich brown color, which contrasted beautifully with the snow-white stripe under the roof.

Boykovskaya hut

Boyko villages were located at an average altitude - higher than Lemko villages and lower than Hutsul villages, so the homes of local residents were a mix of solutions borrowed from their neighbors. Mykhailo Markovych, a local historian and researcher of wooden architecture, notes: ethnographers who studied local architecture noted that in the Boyko area one could see three types of residential buildings made of wooden beams:

• a three-part hut with 2–4 living rooms, on the facade of which there was an open gallery, and the walls were hidden by a third under the slope of the roof (a variant similar to Hutsul housing);
• a three-part house with two living spaces and a closed gallery on one, two, three or four sides;
• a hut with a gallery of any type — closed, open on one or more sides, which housed all residential and utility rooms: a pantry, a hut, a hayloft, a barn, a stable and shops (a variant similar to Lemko housing).

Mykhailo Markovych adds: the main distinguishing feature of Boyko houses is the ratio between the roof and the walls of 3 to 1. At the same time, the roof was mostly four-pitched and supported by carved columns of the gallery. By the way, the carvings on the elements of the porch were the only decoration of such a dwelling - unlike the Lemkos, the Boykos did not paint their dwellings.

Hutsul hut

If the Boyko and Lemko buildings have soft outlines, reminiscent of Shevchenko's blond hut, which wandered into the mountains and became more rugged and adapted to local conditions, then the Hutsul dwelling is a product of the mountains that has never heard of the plain. Such houses were distinguished by sharp, as if graphic, outlines and had a distinct visual rhythm - it seems that they were drawn with a black, sharply sharpened pencil.

Hutsul houses were distinguished by sharp, as if graphic, outlines. These structures are characterized by a distinct visual rhythm - it seems that the hut was drawn with a black, sharply sharpened pencil.

The high density of buildings, characteristic of the Lemkos and Boykos, is also not characteristic of Hutsul architecture. The inhabitants of the highlands were mainly engaged in forestry and cattle breeding, so they did not need to save land suitable for gardening and never combined all the premises under one roof; the layout of the Hutsul building was very simple: a hall (hall), a room and a pantry. The latter could serve as a kitchen or an additional living room for a young family that had separated from their parents.

Outside, on the side opposite the door and gallery, there were shelters — utility rooms that shared a wall with the hut. Such proximity allowed the temperature on both sides of the wall to be raised by at least 3–5 degrees.

In front of the house, a covered gallery, traditional for mountainous areas, was added. The attic of this structure rested on square carved columns - if there were few of them, the elements were additionally strengthened with struts with decorative carvings, because an unfortified roof would not withstand the thick layer of snow typical of the local winter. On one side, the gallery rested against the fence, and on the other - against the gate, decorated with a row of through-openings so that one could see who was asking for permission to enter the yard. In the mountains, where there were many robbers and the estates were located at a fairly large distance from each other, this detail was important.

Hutsul architecture was unique not only in terms of construction, but also in terms of technique. The traditional building material for the Lemkos and Boykos, wooden beams, could not be fitted as tightly as was necessary to retain heat at an altitude of more than 1500 m above sea level, so the locals built their homes from prostes - boards of the same length, which were made by cutting spruce in half and planing the side of the blank that was to be placed inside to a completely smooth state. The use of prostes made it possible to achieve two important goals: such details formed a denser wall that retained heat well, and also perfectly drained water, thereby protecting the house from mold and rot.

The Hutsuls also used many other solutions that additionally protected the house from the harsh mountain climate. The most common of them was the filling of the holes between the grooves and the logs with a mixture of clay and straw with the addition of bran. Also, the building was traditionally built on a stone foundation, which was supposed to smooth out the irregularities of the mountain surface and insulate it from cold and moisture, and the floor was made not of earth or clay, as on the plain, but of wood.

The roofs of local houses were covered with shingles and shingles, as straw would not last long on the rainy and windy heights. Often the slope dropped almost to the ground, which made it easy to free the roof from the thick snow cover.

The windows of the dwellings were of a size determined by the severity of the mountain frosts and by superstition: they had to be small enough so that the devil could not crawl into the house. For additional thermal and devil insulation, the windows were also reinforced with clay and metal bars, which ultimately helped to protect the dwelling from thieves and wild animals.

The windows of the houses had a size determined by the severity of the mountain frosts and superstition: they had to be small enough so that the devil could not crawl into the house.

Of course, the bars alone were not enough for this purpose, so the main distinguishing feature of the Hutsul building tradition was the grazhda — a manor house with a paved courtyard and a fence with a roof, which contained all the outbuildings and residential buildings: they were as if behind a fortress wall. Depending on the size of the family, not one, but 2–5 separate buildings with their own sets of outbuildings could be hidden behind the protective “wall”.

The castle is a response to the challenge of the mountains. The high fence protected the owners and livestock from wild animals, mountain winds, snowstorms, and thieves.

The castle is a response to the challenge of the mountains. High walls protected the owners and livestock from wild animals, mountain winds, snowstorms and thieves.

Mykhailo Markovych, a local historian and researcher of wooden architecture, is sure that the first closed courtyards appeared in the Carpathians back in the 15th century: "The first manor houses were built half a millennium ago. Structurally, they are similar — and this is the opinion of a number of scientists — to Etruscan dwellings and English defensive structures. These estates did not immediately become settled: at the early stage of the development of the Carpathians, they were transported from place to place on sledges, depending on economic needs. And only later, when people established permanent settlements in the mountains, manor houses turned into stationary "fortresses"."

It was at this stage that the typical appearance and set of farm buildings of the grazhda were formed: shelters, a shed for a cart and a plow, a woodshed and a cage, as well as an external gate with a slope and a roof on two sides. In some cases, the grazhda could be unclosed or have an imperfect shape - especially if it faced a stream.

Vadym Nazarenko, head of the Carpathians exposition department at the Open-Air Museum in Pirogov, believes that the appearance of the first grazhdas in the 15th century is theoretically possible, but doubtful: "People began to climb the mountains only after these lands were captured by the Polish Kingdom. The first high-altitude villages grew on the basis of kolyba - temporary dwellings built by shepherds and loggers. The first official mention of grazhdas dates back to the 16th century." The expert adds: a kolyba is an analogue of a lowland kuren, but if kuren were built from branches and earth, then kolyba were full-fledged wooden dwellings.

Mykhailo Markovych: "The first castles were built half a millennium ago. Structurally, they are similar — and this is the opinion of a number of scientists — to Etruscan dwellings and English defensive structures."

Wooden churches - a time machine of Ukrainian sacred architecture

The last surviving examples of Lemko, Boyko and Hutsul residential architecture have long since become tourist attractions and museum objects. In particular, such estates can be seen in the Open-Air Museum in Pirogov. However, in the Ukrainian Carpathians there is a cluster of vernacular architecture that continues to function in its traditional role: wooden churches. And although the technique of building such structures has been lost, all the existing churches - and there are more than a hundred of them here - are in excellent condition.

Researchers emphasize: the first thing to note when talking about the ancient temples of the Carpathians is that the tradition of building sacred objects from wood cannot be considered Carpathian in itself. Mykhailo Markovych explains: during the times of Rus', such churches were common in all regions of Ukraine. And although over time, durable materials (stone, and in the 21st century - concrete) replaced wood, even today in most regions there are still (or very recently) a few wooden temples still functioning.

For example, in the Kyiv region, this is the St. Michael's Church in the village of Kozhukhivka, Fastiv district, and in Kharkiv, there is a stone church of St. John the Theologian, built on the site of an older wooden church. There were even two such buildings in the industrial Donetsk region - the Church of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary in the village of Andriyivka, Volnovakha district, and the Holy Ascension Church in the village of Novotroitske, Pokrovsky district.

Unfortunately, numerous invasions of wild tribes of the East - first Mongol, and then Muscovite, led to the almost complete destruction of wooden churches on the flat territory of Ukraine. And all the specimens that "survived" until the 20th century were destroyed by the Soviet occupiers - during the time of the Ukrainian SSR, a program of targeted liquidation of traditional Ukrainian churches was in effect. The monuments that survived even then are now suffering from hostilities: in particular, two of the four churches mentioned in the previous paragraph - the Donetsk ones - were destroyed due to Russian shelling.

Thus, the Carpathians can truly be considered a reservation of wooden sacral architecture in Ukraine. Mykhailo Markovych explains that even specimens dating back to the 15th century have been preserved here: "In the West of the country, they did not disappear simply because the governments of the countries that for a certain time included these lands - Hungary, Poland, Austria-Hungary, Romania and Czechoslovakia - did not destroy local architecture. The Center and the East were less fortunate. However, many modern brick churches in the plain regions of Ukraine were built on the basis of old wooden log cabins."

Nowadays, wooden Carpathian churches exist on the same architectural plane as brick ones. The latter, for three centuries now, have been a formidable competitor to them: in the 5th–XNUMXth centuries, when the tradition of building brick churches reached the mountains, wooden ones began to decline. "Communities grew, and if a new church was built next to an old one, the first one simply became unnecessary. However, the cultural value of the old buildings was so great that foreign patrons began to save them. I know of at least XNUMX cases when such churches were transported from Transcarpathia to the Czech Republic. At that time, these lands were within the borders of one country - Czechoslovakia."

Mykhailo Markovych adds: such a move was not unusual, because in the mountains a sacred building was considered an object of purchase and even donation. Some traveling churches managed to visit two or three villages during their existence: “One of the most famous “tourist churches” was built in the village of Ploske in the Svalyavshchyna region, then moved to the village of Kanora and finally to Kyiv to the Open-Air Museum in Pirogov.”

Over time, distinct ethnic "church" styles were formed in certain ethnic regions: Middle Hutsul, Boyko, Lemko, and Gothic (aka pseudo-Gothic Marmaros).

The buildings were transported on sledges: they were disassembled into individual logs, and then reassembled and decorated with details characteristic of a particular region. Many churches in this way ended up in Transcarpathia from Galicia and Boykivshchyna. This tradition contributed to the fact that styles and technological finds characteristic of certain ethnic areas also traveled from place to place.

Mykhailo Markovych explains that initially the churches of all ethnic regions of the Carpathians — Hutsul, Boykiv, and Lemko — had similar stylistic features: "Only the design of the roof and tower depended on local preferences: a large tower above the nave and small towers on the western side and above the altar — in the Hutsul region, or a large tower above the western part of the church — in the Boykiv and Lemko regions. These could also be details characteristic of the Marmarosh region — an ethnic region that is now partly in Ukraine and partly in Romania: a tower with a low roof — above the altar, which passes into the nave, and from the outside — into a high western spire."

Over time, distinct “church” styles emerged in individual ethnic regions: Middle Hutsul, Boyko, Lemko, Baroque, and Gothic (aka pseudo-Gothic Marmaros). According to Mykhailo Markovych, churches in the Middle Hutsul style are distinguished by their cross-shaped base.

The "pure" Lemko style is characterized by the fact that the church necessarily has a gallery of carved columns that hold the roof, and the front tower rises sharply upwards and ends with a Baroque dome. The roof has different heights: from low above the altar to medium height above the nave and a high spire on the western side. At the same time, the vaulting seems fragmentary - the transitions from height to height are represented by log cabins: "Such is the church from the village of Kanora and the Shelestivska church - the latter is now located in Uzhhorod. A unique building of this style was also in Medvedivtsy in the Mukachevo region - in the 1920s it was transported to Prague, where it, unfortunately, burned down."

The researcher adds: Boyko churches are distinguished by the architecture of the roof - it is always stepped, and the part of the ceiling above the nave is always higher than the other fragments. From the outside, the outlines of the structure resemble a Christmas tree. Bright examples of this style can now be seen in Transcarpathia in the villages of Verkhniy Studeny and Uzhok.

Gothic churches and a tall Gothic spire above the babinets, under which there is a gallery with carved columns: such structures can be seen in the valleys of the Tisza River in the Khust, Mizhhirya, and Tyachiv regions.

Baroque churches resemble Gothic churches in layout, but differ from the latter in that they have a tower that ends with a dome with an extension and a crown and additional decor. Examples of the style can be found in the Mizhhiria region, in particular in the villages of Bukovets, Roztoka, Pylypets and Podobovets.

Nowadays, in the Carpathians, you can see both “pure” examples of the above-described stylistic canons and various combinations. Mykhailo Markovych explains: craftsmen often borrowed details they liked from their neighbors. “The work of each specialist was unique, because they built in this way not because the academic style required it, but because the soul of the artist always strives to bring something new. After all, there were no clear frameworks, which is only worth the fact that construction was carried out by eye: ropes and sticks were used as measuring tools. The difference in the length of the walls could be 30 centimeters…”

Is preserving the wooden churches of the Carpathians a mission possible?

Today, the tradition of building wooden churches is lost - there are no records of the construction techniques, and the last craftsmen who possessed the ancient knowledge have already died. And although according to common sense this should have made the temples of the Carpathians inviolable, the opposite has happened: the monuments that still function are under threat.

The troubles of the Carpathian churches did not end there: a dangerous idea is currently spreading throughout the region that a wooden church must be covered in silver, purple, or gold sheet metal.

The problems, explained Mykhailo Markovych, began with the appearance in Transcarpathia at the beginning of the 20th century of a new confessional "player" - Orthodoxy, which led to interfaith confrontation in some villages.

"It often happened that villagers who converted to Orthodoxy decided to take the church from their former co-religionists. This led to a dispute, which often resulted in the loss of the church. This happened in the village of Verkhniy Bystry, in the Mizhhirya region. After the court decided to return the church to the Greek Catholics, it was burned down the next day."

The troubles of the Carpathian churches did not end there. Currently, the idea is spreading throughout the region that a wooden monument must be covered with silver, purple, or gold-colored sheet metal: "Sometimes people collect crazy money just to destroy the most valuable thing in their village, an ancient temple... Metal retains condensation, so wood covered in sheet metal deteriorates much faster. Often, structures distorted by metal are also "finished" with domes-"onions" characteristic of the architecture of Russian churches. I agree with the opinion of some researchers that this idea could not have come from nowhere: it is part of a targeted campaign to destroy Ukrainian culture."

The onion baths with a thin "neck", the researcher noted, are not typical of the traditional folk architecture of the Carpathians. For Ukrainian religious buildings, traditional Byzantine forms are typical - rounded and pear-shaped. In Transcarpathia, the towers - towers - of churches were topped with spires and crowns.

Mykhailo Markovych adds: it will not be easy to correct the situation, but certain steps in this direction have already been taken. "It is important to convey to the locals that, for example, tourists will come more often to those villages where they can see an authentic church without tin. Our efforts are already yielding results. We also have cases of restoration of old religious buildings - in several villages the roofs were completely freed from tin, and in another one they were covered with new shingles."

Returning to the roots is a leitmotif that has been gaining strength for almost three and a half years. The techniques and styles used in the construction of vernacular architecture are a rich source of inspiration and solutions that, when adapted to modern realities, can become for us a point of connection between the lost tradition of the past and the present. And also - the basis for creating a recognizable image of modern Ukrainian architecture.