with a predominantly vertical, rather than horizontal, silhouette. In some cases their
facades were more orderly than the“Moscow baroque,”but still very detailed, with
rounded corners, oval windows, elaborate window surrounds. In other examples,
such as the Fili Church outside of Moscow (1690–3), Naryshkin baroque was
exuberantly decorative, with balustrades ornamented with statuary (unheard of in
Orthodox churches), multiple staircases, and profuse pilasters outlining windows
and structural lines, bespeaking Catholic influence through Ukraine.
These styles moved across empire. In Kazan, for example, the seventeenth-
century Church of St. Varlaam retains a simplicity unlike the ornate Moscow
baroque of the time, causing some to suggest the influence of more austere Tatar
mosque architecture. As Russia moved towards steppe and Siberia in the seven-
teenth centuries, it entered few urban centers save its own fortress towns. Little
indigenous architecture, certainly not in stone, vied for the symbolic skyline, so
Russia’s imperial presence was easily recognizable. Wooden forts were the most
common, but stone churches made the biggest statement. Russian conquest,
provisioning, and settlement of Siberiaflowed through the towns of the Northern
Dvina and Kama river basins and into the Perm lands. This vibrant northern area—
rich in salt and mining, conduits of fur trade—generated a distinct and influential
architectural style. Here the Stroganov family enjoyed monopolies in trade, salt,
and mineral production over a vast territory of the upper Kama. Patronizing music,
Figure 6.5Moscow’s St. Nicholas Church in Khamovniki (the Weavers’District) (1679–82)
demonstrates the“ship”profile of church ensembles that became common as a result of
Patriarch Nikon’s prohibition of the“tent”shape on churches. A tall tent-roofed bell tower at
the west entrance links to a cubical four-domed church in a long horizontal line. Its exterior
decoration displays the Moscow baroque. Photo: Jack Kollmann.
144 The Russian Empire 1450– 1801