Професійні майстерні на “килимовій мапі” України XVII-XVIII ст.: факти, міфи, гіпотези / Ukrainian Kilim and Carpet Workshops in the XVII th and XVIII th centuries: facts, myths and speculations

Halyna Kohut

The author attempts to recreate the geography of kilim and carpet production in Ukraine during the XVII th and XVIII th centuries. On the basis of historical documents the author aims to differentiate the actual workshops from those which are questioned or fictional, but were mentioned in modern bibliography. Of particular note among the leading Ukrainian kilim and carpet production centres which functioned during XVII th and XVIII th centuries, are the workshops of: Murat Jakubovych in Zamost’ (now found in Poland), the Koniecpolski family in Brody (Lviv region), Hetman Pavlo Polubotok in Mykhajlivka (Lebedyn district of Sumy region), the Bukhari family in Ivanopil (Chudniv district of Zhytomyr region), and Hetman Kyrylo Rozumovskyj in Baturyn (Bahmach district of Chernihiv region). The article also includes wide bibliographic references on Ukrainian kilims and carpets

Related Papers

Археологія і давня історія України, вип. 3 (44)

2022 •

Lesia (Леся) Chmil (Чміль), Viktor Vietrov

The paper is devoted to the characteristics of materials obtained during the research of the remains of the 19th century pottery kiln discovered in Medzhybizh village, Khmelnytskyi region. Medzhybizh pottery has been known since the 17th century, and the documents of the pottery workshop date back to the 18th—19th centuries. Also at the beginning of the 20th century A. Prusevich carried out an ethnographic survey of the pottery of this center. The researcher noted Medzhybizh as one of the significant centers for the production of the glaze pottery. In 2018, a pottery kiln was discovered in the central part of the town during protective archaeological excavation. Probably it can belong to the class of heating-technical structure with vertical or mixed (horizontal-vertical) flow of hot gasses. The kiln was filled with a large number of fragments of defective ceramics and semi-finished products.According to technological characteristics almost all pottery are made of red or brown ferruginized clays. The molding mass is quite thin, without visible impurities. Dark brown, red, white, and green paints were used for the decoration of products as well as transparent, colorless, green, and brown glazes. Many fragments are burnt and deformed. According to their functional purpose the vast majority of finds are pots, pans, bowls and plates. Semifinished products of painted bowls and plates make up the bulk of products. These are vessels after the first firing, without glaze, covered with white or red engobe. A significant part of them is painted in the techniques of rizhkuvannja and fliandrivka. A group of vessels made in the sgraffito technique, unusual for Podillia, also stands out. They are decorated with plant motifs, two fragments have images of birds. A similar completed bowl made in the sgraffito technique, was discovered in 2017 on the territory of the castle. On the outside surface it contains the inscriptions in Hebrew. This may indicate other bearers of pottery traditions who arrived in Medzhybizh at the beginning of the 19th century and worked on their technologies for quite a long time. This research allows us to draw conclusions about the high level of pottery in Medzhybizh in the 19th century, the mass production of fliandrivka technique red clay bowls as well as the existence at that time of the tradition of making pottery in the sgraffito technique which was obviously brought to the region from the south or southwest. In the main features of the forms and ornamentation of ceramic dishes the similarity with the pottery of the Middle Dnieper region can be traced though there are also significant distinctive features that characterize the pottery of Podillia at this time.

Terra artis. Искусство и дизайн. № 2. С. 18–35

2022 •

Vasily Matveev

Мозаики opus sectile появились на Руси как заимствование из византийской архитектуры. Первый случай их использования - выкладка из ценных пород камня в первом каменном храме - Десятинной церкви, которая была выполнена в лучших традициях константинопольской архитектуры VIII-X вв. В XI – н. XII вв. доминировали мозаики, выполненные в технике инкрустации, при которой кусочки смальты вставлялись каменные плиты. Основной декоративный мотив таких выкладок-переплетенные круги-повторял такой же мотив в синхронных мозаиках Константинополя. С к. XI в. получают широкое распространение мозаики opus sectile, сложенные из керамических плиток. Использование керамики для мозаичных выкладок характерно для византийской периферии, примеры чему можно найти в памятниках по берегам Черного моря от V до X вв. На территории Руси керамические наборные полы получили чрезвычайно широкое распространение. Первые выкладки подражали ранневизантийским, достаточно большая их часть-синхронным византийским полам. И, наконец, во 2-й пол. XII в. появились мозаики с фигуративными изображениями, не имеющими себе аналогов, которые являлись высшей точкой развития полов opus sectile на Руси. Изначально заимствованная из Византии техника мозаик opus sectile на Руси получила чрезвычайно широкое распространение и не только подражала, но и выработала свои, уникальные произведения, не уступающие по художественной ценности лучшим полам храмов Византии. The opus sectile mosaics appeared in Rus’ as borrowing from the Byzantine architecture. The first episode of its usage was a layout of decoration stone in the first monumental building – The Tithe Church, which was performed in the best traditions of the Constantinople architecture of 8-10-th centuries. The 11-th century and beginning of the 12-th centuries was the epoch of domination of mosaics of the incrustation type, when the pieces of smalt were inserted in the stone plates. The intertangling of circles – the main motive of decoration – was a replication of Constantinople’s mosaics of that time. From the end of 11-th century opus sectile mosaics, made of ceramic tiles, became widely spread. Ceramic tiles for mosaics layout were used in churches of the Black Sea coasts, which can be called a Byzantine periphery, from the 5-th century. In Rus’ itself the ceramic floors were widely used. The first layouts were the imitation of early Byzantine works, the considerable part of them was contemporaneous of the Byzantine floors. And, finally, in the second part of the 12-th century the mosaics with the figurative motive (which was exceptional for that time) appeared, and they became the culmination of the development of opus sectile floors in the Rus'. So, the opus sectile technique of mosaics, firstly borrowed from the Byzantine, became widespread in the Rus’, and not only was an imitation of classical motives, but also created its own unique samples of style, which can be comparable to the best Byzantine floors concerning the value of art

І Ь І . - . 2002. VISNYK LVIV UNIV. Ser. Art Studies. 2002. № 2. P. 132-142 . 2. . 132-142 745.52(477) “16/17” А Е А ” А Е А“ XVII-XVIII .: , Е А , алина ь ь , . , 38, 79011 ь , , : 8 0322 76 14 82, e-mail: kohut_ua@yahoo.com / ґ V - V ., . ( ( .), .), .) ( :“ .) ” V - V , : , ) – , . , є . , ’ : ’ . є , […] […], . 72-72 ., 2002 є , , є . XVII-XVIII – © , ”( є , , ” [2, - “ , є 1537 ., ь , . є є , . 1673 , є – , є , ( є ( ), . є , є . є є […], .]. є . , , [1, c. 44-45, 74, 154-155, 220, 222, 316]. XVI . -“ ”, є “ ь І Д ь […], […], […] […] […], ь […], є , “ ” є XVII-XVIII . , “ “ ь )” [3, ( . , . XVII-XVIII . “ ” , є . . . ( . 133 … , , [3, . 11]. ” . . . ь . 11], ) 1. є є , , – . , . (XVII , .), . . “ ”: “ “ , ”, , , [5, c. 5], XVII-XVIII . є ” “ ”” . ” “ “ є , XVII-XVIII , є є . Є . . є є XVI . , , є . XVI . “Turquoy carpett of Norwiche work” ( ’ . “ є [6, s. 280-281, 229]. . XVII . . , , ) (Savonnerie) є , (Aubusson). , , ) [6, s. 280]. XVI . . XVII . ” XVI . 2 , “more Turcico” ( . є , . [Arch. Nieświeskie w Warszawie. Księga gospodarska Anni 1750. (Kopje rozporządzeń gospodarskich i prawnych ks. Michała Kazimierza Radziwiłła). – T. II; T. III (1756-1761)]. . [4, s. 6-9] 2 . є , . , , , , 1616 . 135 є (3 “ ”, 18 “ ь ”, 43 “ ь ”, 12 “ ь ”, 53 “ ”) [7, s. 212]. , , 1623 . 288 , :“ ь ”, “ ь ”, “ ”, “ ”, “ ” [8, s. 95]. 1 . 134 , , 24 1585 ., , . .1 20- є , , 1605 .) “more Turcico” , . , , , . ( 1585 є , , є “ , XVI-XVII , . . , . є є 2 ” , . , , . , , – , ( , є , . , ) . , , є , . XVII . , . , , [11, s. 35-36]. є Perside” ( [13, s. 71-72]), , . 1643 . є (1646 .) , є 1659 . [12], ), “peristromata” ( “ac si in ipsa . , , . . , . , , , [9, s. 81], 1698 . – , , XVII 3 ’ . ( . 1-3). . , , 1 , 1692 . , є . T. IV. є . є - , є. O [5, c. 5]. : Archiwum Jana Zamojskiego. – Kraków, 1948. – S. 407 [9, s. 69]. 2 1588 ., ”, є , 3 , “ .№ 15. “ , ”. [10, . 132]. . , , “ ” 135 … є . , ’ 1 . , . , XVII , “ ( “ є ) [14, c. 3], “ ь ” ”( , ) [16, c. 1056], ) [17, c. 5] . , . XVII – . XVIII . . 124 [14, c. 3]; 143 [16, c. 950-1204]. 1724 . “ ”, є , ’ 2 [18, c. 1-90]. “ ...” є 101 , . є є . , . XVII-XVIII . ь ь ” “ ь ) [15, c. 39-45], “ ь ”( ”“ , . - , , ”( . ” . “ , [18, c. 48]. . ь ”: “ ь , , [...] 17. 2” [18, c. 48-49]. : ”, “ ` ь”, [18, c. 50]. , , 1“ ”. , 2 -“ ” : “ “ ь 1” [18, c. 44,48]. “ ь ”, є –“ ; “ , , , , “ 3 “ ” 2”, є , . , , , , . є 1 , . , . . , 2 , 3 1917 . . , “ . . ( . 5) 3. ” [19, , . . . № 21899 ( , . є , . . 129]. 1918 .. [5, c. 7]. -959). , . [14, . 4]. 1913 . . . 136 , . , , . ’ . 1678 . , , , є , . , , [20, c. 12]. , ` . , . . , . “ є . [10, c. 140]. є , ” , , , XVIII . , , ’ “ ” 1, – є 1772 є . , (1629-1682 ’ . XVIII є .), (1682-1704 . .), . [3, . 11]. є . 2. .) (1704є , 1704 . – , . , , є , 5- . . , . , XVIII 3 .- . . . є XVII – , XVII . XVII-XVIII , . є , , . є 4 ’ є XVIII c ., . . , (“ є ”) , ( ’ ) ( . 4). , : . ґ , ґ , . XVIII 1751 .) Państwowych Zbiorach Sztuki na Wawelu ( ), . № 1726. , 1 . XVIII . ’ : , , [9, s. 78-81], . . . 3 є . , “ , , . , , , є [...]” [9, s. 99]. 4 Muzeum Narodowe w Krakowie; Zamek Królewski na Wawelu; Muzeum Narodowe w Warszawie; Zamek Królewski w Warszawie. 1 2 є . ( . , “ ” 137 … [9, s. 78-79; 21, s. 439]. , . XVII [22, s. 366; 23, s. 155,156]. 35 , . [24, . 22]). . ( 1773 .). , , “Dzienniku Handlowym” , 1786 . ( , . ’ ( 1698 . “ ”) , , , [24, . 22]. . , . ( s. 9; 26, s. 46]. , . .) [25, , , , ” “ 1 , . , [29, s. 248; 30, s. 878; 31, s. 135], . , [33]. ’ “ . , ґ ” . 2). , ( 1787 . ’ : , “Labori et diligentiae” [33, s. LXIV]. є . . . , є 1795 ., “Tapis” ( ) : “un tapis d table, fason de haute-lice, sans envers fait par Opana Polonais a Wianuspole” ( , , , ) [26, s. 47-48]. є , , , : “un tapis dito, fason de haute lice, sans envers fait par Opana Polonais a Wianuspole” ( , , ) [34, s. 135]. , . , , , ( ?) . . “ . ”. 1 . , : . . [27, s. 167] є [28, , . c. 40]. 2 [32, . 445]. , [3, . 11], . , . . 138 , ’ , . 1791 . “ , , [33, s. LXIV]. є , ” є , . . XVIII ( , . . . “ ”, є . 1751 . . .) “ ”. “ ”, , [35, s. 354-355]. . ’ , , ь , “ ( .) [25, s. 9], . є . , ” , “ , 1780 . [30, s. 44]. є . ” є , . XVIII . , . . XVIII . , , [36, . 71]. , , . 1756-1761 . [37, . 204]. Є. . ’ є , . 1766 . : “[...] , ь” [38, . 188- ь, ь , , , 189]. 1803 . – , [39, . 443]. ’ XVIII , . XIX ” . . є ., “ “ ( ” .), , ь “ , , : “ . [...] ь” [41, . 170]. є “ ь . є ь , ” [40, . 238]. . 1817 . : . . , , . ь є , , ь є, , ” . , ( . .), “ . ” 139 … ( .). 1 – “ “ ...” ” . 500 є – є . . . , [40, . 239-240]. є , , , , . “ ” , . XVIII , . “ ” “ ( 1738 . – є . , “ . ” є , (Rzewuski). . ”. 31 ) “ . “ 13.01.1739 ., 7”. . є , , , є “ -“ . ” є є є , XVIII є . є . . XVIII . . XVIII - є – , , 1730 . є, ь”, , - 20 “ ”. , , “ ” . ” , . є , 1769-1776 ) , 1 є . [43]. . . “ 4). ( ., , ”. ( , . , , . , XVIII . є . -“ . XVII-XVIII . ), ., . ( . ., . . . є “[...] , 1/6 – є, XVII- ., . ., . 1 ” , . . : ( , ) ” [42, . 135]. . 140 . . XVIII є ., є . ’ є , , . є , ( - ) ., , . , , , . є “ . . . ( ” “ ” . .), . “ XVII-XVIII “ ” . ( . 6). ”, , . “ ” , . , , . –––––––––––––––––––––––– 1. / . . . 2. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. . . - . 389 ( . 1. 3. 4. . .Є. ; . . – ., 1989. .- . ). . 20. . . (XVII – . XX .). – ., 1966. Mańkowski T. Materiały do dziejów manufaktur tkackich Michała Kazimierza Radziwiłła Rybeńki // Prace Sekcji Historii Sztuki Towarzystwa Naukowego Wileńskiego. – Wilno, 1937. – T. II. ь . .– , 1925. Great carpets of the World. – New York, 1996. Lubomirski J. T. Regestra skarbca ksiąt Ostrogskich w Dubnie, spisane w roku 1616 // Sprawozdania do badania historii sztuki w Polsce. – Kraków, 1900. – T. VI. Łozinski Wł. Prawem i lewem. Obyczaje na czerwonej Rusi w perszej połowie XVII wieku. Kraków, 1960.– T. 1. Mańkowski T. Polskie tkaniny i hafty XVI-XVIII wieku. – Wrocław, 1954. ь Д. . ( ) // . – . – ., 1927. Mańkowski T. Sztuka islamu w Polsce w XVII i XVIII wieku. – Kraków, 1935. Cursus gloriae III et Excell. Dni Dni Alexandri in Koniecpole Koniecpolski, Palat. Sendom (iriensis) S. R. I. Princiois etc. ad posthumam memoriam Panegyrico adumbrat. et inter lugubres exequias, ad feralem urnam VIII cal. dec. 1659 luci “ 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. ” 141 … publicae exhibitus opera M. Stan. yznowski Phil. Dris et profess. Almae Acad. Cracoviensis apud viduam et Haeredes Chr. Schedel. Cracoviae 1659. Krygowski-Lemberg T. Pollenteppiche (Polnische Knüpfteppiche). // Orientalisches Archiv. – 1911-1912. – № . . // .– : . . , 1926. – . 3. – . 1. . . . // . – 1888. – . . № 15 // , .– , 1884. – . 8. . i ( ). – , 1928. // ь .– , 1862. – . . 3. – V. .– , 1995. // . – 1901. – . 73. [ , , ]. – . 12 Rychlewska M. Kobiernictwo // Zarys historii włókiennictwa na ziemiach polskich do końca XVIII wieku. – Wrocław-Warszawa-Kraków, 1966. Stępowska K. Polskie dywany wełniane // Sprawozdania komisyi do badania historyi sztuki w Polsce. – Kraków, 1912. – T. 8. Biedrońska-Słotowa B. Kobierce z polskich manufaktur (Próba podsumowania) // Tkaniny artystyczne z wieków XVIII i XIX. Materiały sesji naukowej w Zamku Królewskim na Wawelu (21 marca 1991). – Kraków, 1997. Markiewich M. Historia polskiej tkaniny do XIX wieku // Tkanina polska. – Warszawa, 1959. Salski J. Sztuka i kultura polska na Litwie i Rusi. Wystawa retrospektywna zorganizowana przez wydział zabytków t-wa Stra y kresowej. – Warszawa, 1921. Szuman S. Dawne kilimy w Polsce i na Ukrainie. – Poznań, 1929. Swieykowski E. Zarys artystycznego rozwoju tkactwa i haftarstwa objaśniony zabytkami Muzeum Narodowego w Krakowie. – Kraków, 1906. Urbański A. Z czarnego szlaku i tamtych rubie y. Zabytki polskie przepadłe na Podolu, Wołyniu, Ukrainie. – Warszawa, 1928. Kołaczkowski J. Wiadomości tycząnce się przemysłu i sztuki w dawnej Polsce. – Kraków, 1888. Słownik geograficzny królewstwa polskiego i innych krajów slowiańskich. – Warszawa, 1884. – T. V. Polski słownik biograficzny. – Wrocław-Warszawa-Kraków-Gdańsk-Łód , 1984. – T. XXVIII/1. Słownik geograficzny królewstwa polskiego i innych krajów slowiańskich. – Warszawa, 1888. – T. III. Pamiętniki Jana Duklana Ochockiego. – Warszawa, 1882. – T. I. – S. 145; Wyjątki z pamiętników Seweryna Bukara, jako dodatek do J.I.Kraszewskiego. Pamiętniki Jana Duklana Ochockiego. – Warszawa, 1882. – T. III. – S. 298-299. . : Sprawozdania z posiedzeń Komisji historii sztuki za czas od 1 stycznia do 31 grudnia 1897 r. // Sprawozdania komisji do badania historii sztuki w Polsce. – Kraków, 1900. – T. 6. . 142 34. Inventaire general des meubles et effets mobiliers qui sont dans le chateau de Varsovie, fait en mars 1795 / Generalny inwenrarz mebli i innych ruchomości znajdujących się w zamku Warszawskim, sporządzony w marcu 1795 roku. – Warzawa, 1997. 35. Słownik geograficzny królewstwa polskiego i innych krajów slowiańskich. – Warszawa, 1895. – T. XIV. 36. . . – . 2. XVIIXVIII . – , 1922. 37. . ’ // . . – ., 1927. – . . 38. . . . // . – 1888. – . 23. 39. ь . . . – . 1. – , 1882. 40. . // . – 1892. . 36. 41. 1817 . // . .– , 1870. – № 2. 42. . // . , . – IV. – ., 1898. 43. . - . 181. - . 2. . № 803. є , , , , , , , 1769-1776 . UKRAINIAN KILIM AND CARPET WORKSHOPS IN THE XVII th AND XVIII th CENTURIES: FACTS, MYTHS and SPECULATIONS Halynа KOHUT Lviv Academy of Art, Art Studies Deppartment 38, Kubiyovycha str., 79011 Lviv, Ukraine, Phone/fax: 8 0322 76 14 82, e-mail: kohut_ua@yahoo.com The author attempts to recreate the geography of kilim and carpet production in Ukraine during the XVII th and XVIII th centuries. On the basis of historical documents the author aims to differentiate the actual workshops from those which are questioned or fictional, but were mentioned in modern bibliography. Of particular note among the leading Ukrainian kilim and carpet production centres which functioned during XVII th and XVIII th centuries, are the workshops of: Murat Jakubovych in Zamost’ (now found in Poland), the Koniecpolski family in Brody (Lviv region), Hetman Pavlo Polubotok in Mykhajlivka (Lebedyn district of Sumy region), the Bukhari family in Ivanopil (Chudniv district of Zhytomyr region), and Hetman Kyrylo Rozumovskyj in Baturyn (Bahmach district of Chernihiv region). The article also includes wide bibliographic references on Ukrainian kilims and carpets. Key words: kilim, carpet, workshop, design, weavers. 21.01.2002 6.02.2002 № . 133 140 14 5

RELATED PAPERS

RELATED TOPICS

Log In

Професійні майстерні на “килимовій мапі” України XVII-XVIII ст.: факти, міфи, гіпотези / Ukrainian Kilim and Carpet Workshops in the XVII th and XVIII th centuries: facts, myths and speculations

Професійні майстерні на “килимовій мапі” України XVII-XVIII ст.: факти, міфи, гіпотези / Ukrainian Kilim and Carpet Workshops in the XVII th and XVIII th centuries: facts, myths and speculations

Related Papers

RELATED PAPERS

RELATED TOPICS