Draft:Russian traditional wooden architecture

Russian traditional wooden architecture (in Russian ру́сское деревя́нное зо́дчество, russkoe derevyannoye zodchestvo)^{[Note 1][1]} is a traditional architectural movement in Russia,^[2][3] that has stable and pronounced structural and technical, architectural and artistic features determined by wood as the main material (folk wooden architecture, Old Russian wooden architecture).^[2][4][5][6] Sometimes this concept includes wooden buildings of professional architecture, eclectic buildings combining elements of folk architecture and professional architecture,^[2] as well as modern attempts to revive Old Russian carpentry traditions.^[7] It is one of the most original phenomena of Russian culture. It is widespread from the Kola Peninsula to the Central Zone, in the Urals and Siberia;^[8] a large number of monuments are located in the Russian North.

The structural basis of traditional Russian wooden architecture was a log house made of untrimmed wood. Wood carvings placed on structurally significant elements served as decoration. Among the traditional buildings are wooden cage, tent, step, cuboid and multi-domed churches, which together with peasant huts, khoromas, household, fortress and engineering buildings defined the image of a traditional Russian settlement.

The origins of Russian wooden architecture go back to ancient Slavic architecture. Since the Ancient Russian history the religious wooden architecture was oriented on the Byzantine canon and adopted the features of stone temples. The highest development of Russian wooden architecture reached the Russian North in the 15th-18th centuries. In this region the traditions were preserved for the longest time, but even there the architecture could not escape the significant influence of the dominant architectural styles of baroque, classicism, eclecticism. In the 19th century, the motives of the Russian wooden architecture were applied in the Russian style. The heritage of wooden architecture is rapidly disappearing. Only a few religious buildings date back to the 14th-16th centuries. The oldest preserved residential buildings date back to the 18th century. According to experts, at the beginning of the 21st century, the situation with the preservation of monuments is catastrophic.

Ethnographer K. Moshinsky wrote about the wooden age of the Slavs because,^[9] in their culture, wood occupied a special place and was used in almost any craft or occupation, including construction. The reason for this is not only the woodworking and its availability for the widest strata of the population but also the fact that it is easy to process, allows for quick building, and has low thermal conductivity. The importance of wood in construction and architecture increased with the settlement of East Slavs tribes to the north and northeast, where coniferous forests, most suitable for construction, grew abundantly. As for other materials, rocks in the forest zone of European Russia are found in the form of sandstone and limestone layers relatively deeply buried in the soil, only occasionally protruding on the banks of rivers, or in the form of boulders scattered in the forests, which were difficult to use as the main material for construction. In Russia, brick, was not known until the 10th century,^[10] but then for many centuries, it was used only for structures of exceptional importance due to the high costs associated with it.^{[11][12][13][14][15]}

Over time, the basis of wooden architecture for the Russians became the log cabin.^[16] It is not known exactly when the log cabin technique emerged, but it was familiar to the peoples of Northern and Eastern Europe back in the Bronze Age (perhaps even in the Neolithic). Apparently, in these cold regions, they appreciated the heat-saving properties of the log cabin in comparison with wooden framing. The development of log construction was facilitated by the spread of coniferous wood.^[17][18][19] In addition to Russia, log buildings are widespread in Central and Eastern Europe and Scandinavia. The log churches of Ukraine (Ukrainian wooden churches), the Carpathians (Carpathian wooden churches), as well as Finland and Sweden, stand out. In most other countries, wooden architecture is based on a frame structural system.^{[20][21][22][23]}

According to archaeological data, early Slavs dwellings were both entirely above-ground houses and buildings with a slight lowering of the floor level relative to the ground level, known as foundation pits. The former are known from excavations of West Slavic settlements in the territory of modern Poland; they were most often log houses (Sukow-Dziedzice culture). The latter occupied the south of the forest zone and forest-steppe on the territory of modern Belarus, Ukraine, and the southwestern regions of Russia in the 5th-10th centuries (Praga, Korchak, Penkovka, Ipotești–Cândești, later Volyntsevo, and Romensko-Borshchev cultures). Among them, there were both log houses and frame (frame-pillar) houses. In archaeology, the term poluzemlyanka (half-sod house)^[24] is used for them. Foundation pits of these dwellings had an average depth of 0.3-1.2 m and were usually square-shaped, oriented to the cardinal directions. The excavation areas varied from 6 to 20 m². There was a stove or a hearth in the corner of the room. Log walls were built of logs, less often of lumber, and were cut in the "lob" and "paw" methods. Frame walls consisted of poles and filling with horizontally laid laths (wattles could also be used). Sometimes the walls were coated with clay and/or covered with whitewash.^{[25][26][27][28]}

From the mid-20th century until recently, dwellings with a deepened floor were commonly reconstructed into one-chamber low “half-dwellings,” with the above-ground walls matching the slope of the excavation.^[29] By the early 21st century, however, the term poluzemlyanka^{[Note 2][30][31]} was deemed incorrect for any buildings with a buried floor.^{[29][30][32][33][34]} A new approach to reconstructing these dwellings emerged, suggesting that many originally had log walls set back from the foundation pit. The found frame-pillar constructions might have been remnants of recliners or benches along the walls, indicating that the dwelling's area was somewhat larger than the excavation itself.^[29][32] Additionally, some researchers suggest that two-storey houses existed as early as the 9th century.^[35]

Household buildings were similar to dwellings.^[27]

In the second half of the 1st millennium A.D., the Slavs gradually moved deeper into the forest zone and settled in the Pskov-Novgorod region. Excavations at the Pskov kurgans and Novgorod hills cultures revealed ground-level single-chamber houses with areas ranging from 12 to 20 m². These houses had clay and board floors, stoves in the corners, and log walls, with some featuring frame constructions combined with log walls. Most archaeologists identify these dwellings as typically Slavic.^{[37][38][39][40][41][42]} However, V. V. Sedov interprets them as evidence of Western Slavic influence,^[43][44] while E. M. Zagorulsky disagrees. Zagorulsky questions their Slavic origin, suggesting that the Slavs may not have settled in the Pskov-Novgorod region until the 10th century and possibly adopted building types and techniques from local Baltic and Finno-Ugric tribes.^[42][45] A. A. Shennikov proposed that the roots of the classical Russian log house trace back to the Dyakovo culture. Rectangular log houses were indeed common in the late period of the Dyakovo culture, alongside other types of buildings, and it is possible that these structures persisted before the arrival of the Slavs in the region. Similar houses were also found among the neighboring Balts of the late Dnieper-Dvinsky culture.^[46][47][48] By the end of the first millennium A.D., other forms of dwellings existed in the area, such as the “big houses” of Staraya Ladoga and buildings with central heating devices. However, with the onset of the new millennium, the diversity in house-building, which reflected the multi-ethnic nature of the region, diminished. The primary type of dwelling for the emerging Old Russian nation in the forest zone became a ground log house with a stove in the corner.^[38]

It is believed that temples were characteristic only of the Western Slavs, who built wooden structures with idols inside.^[49][50] In contrast, the Eastern Slavs typically revered natural objects, used sites for sacrifices, and employed burial mounds and sanctuaries (kapishcha) —round open areas with idols— as their cultic spaces. However, in Western Ukraine, remains of square-plan structures with log walls have been found, which some researchers interpret as temples.^[51]

During the formation of a unified Old Russian state, carpentry became an independent branch of production.^[52][53] Carpenters were organized into artels, and the names of the master craftsmen who led them were sometimes carved into the buildings.^[54]

At the city bazaars for wooden goods, it was possible to purchase not only building materials but also entire buildings in disassembled form. The high level of work organization is further evidenced by the practice of constructing "ordinary churches".^[52]

Small buildings and houses were often constructed by local residents, as almost every peasant was familiar with basic carpentry skills. In contrast, urban and many rural churches were designed by professional craftsmen specializing in religious buildings. However, in the North, even into the 18th century, some designs continued to use medieval methods. The distinction between professional wooden architecture and folk architecture is often quite vague.^[55]

Wooden architecture was closely linked with pagan traditions. Peasants protected their sacred and ritual values through building rituals. Certain trees were prohibited for construction, and there were designated "lucky" and "unlucky" sites for building.^[56][52] Special rites accompanied the laying of walls, construction of stoves, creation of openings, installation of matitsa, and settling into a new house. Carpenters were believed to have connections with otherworldly powers. While carpenters who built houses were associated with unclean connotations, those who constructed temples were imbued with divine significance.^[57][52]

Wooden residential architecture was represented by different types of dwellings: from small primitive buildings with a minimum number of openings and the simplest method of heating, which resembled wilderness hut, to huge northern houses — complexes, rich choirs, and even royal palaces decorated with rich carvings. The architectural techniques used in their construction were reflected in almost all other types of buildings.^[58][59]

The traditional Russian house is a log cabin, sometimes with board planking and covered with a two- or four-pitched roof. These houses of Russian peasants are prevalent in the northern and middle bands of the East European Plain and are common in the northern parts of South Russian regions, such as Bryansk and Oryol, and the northern parts of Kursk, Voronezh, and Tambov regions. With Russian colonization, this style spread to the Urals, Siberia, and the Far East. Log house building was adopted by many other peoples in Russia. In the South Russian regions, brick houses have recently become predominant.^[60]

Typological features of the traditional Russian peasant mansion include: the constructive and planning solution of the residential zone, the spatial relationship between residential and economic zones,^[61] the layout of the house, the number of rooms,^[62] the vertical structure of the house,^[63] and the type of heating (including smoke removal).^[64]

According to the structural and planning solution of the living area (the heated hut, historically known as an istba or iz'ba,^{[Note 3][65][66]} which refers specifically to the main living part of the peasant house,^[59] not to be confused with the concept of a hut as a house in general), in the 19th century, several types of constructive and planning solutions for the living area in Russian peasant houses are distinguished:^[61]

• The image of the most widespread types of huts in terms of structural-planning solution of the residential zone, formed by the 19th century.
• 
  Four-walled dwellings
• 
  Five-walled dwellings
• 
  Six-walled (twin dwellings without an alley)
• 
  Six-walled (twin dwellings with an alley)

• Four-Walled Houses: these are houses with a single heated room surrounded by four walls. They can be single-chamber (just the izba), two-chamber (izba plus cold porch), or three-chamber (izba, porch, and an additional room). More complex versions include various utility rooms.^[67][68][69]
• Five-Walled Houses: the izba is divided by a solid wall into two living spaces. The fifth wall can be located in the middle or offset from the center.^[70][71]
• Six-Walled Houses: these represent a combination of two log cabins. They can be:^[61][70]
  • Izba with an annex (a smaller log cabin attached to the main one).
  • Twin izba (two log cabins connected or with a passage, with a small space between them).
  • Crossed connection (two five-walled houses connected by a passage) and cross-shaped (izba divided into four rooms by intersecting walls).
• Classification of Peasant Homesteads Based on the Spatial Arrangement of Living and Utility Areas:^[72]
  • Northern Russian Type: Utility rooms are combined with the living space into one building under a common roof. Includes one-row, two-row, joined, L-shaped, and T-shaped connections.^[73][74][75]
  • Central Russian Type: Includes a covered single-story courtyard with options: three-row connection and detached courtyard. Also common are room-like layouts with various subtypes (Moscow, Pskov, Volga-Kama).^[76]
  • Southern Russian Type: The courtyard is open and rectangular, with the izba positioned parallel to the street, and the courtyard enclosed in plan with a large open space in the center.^{[77][78][79][80]}

From the point of view of vertical structure, several types of houses can be distinguished: a house with one ground floor; a house with a sub-cellar, which is a partially buried floor (often used for household purposes, less frequently for residential purposes), and an upper floor; and houses with two or more floors.^[63] In palace complexes, residential log cabins could reach a height of six floors.^[81] It is also worth noting a special type of residential construction — the dugout. These were not common dwellings even in antiquity, but they were built as temporary shelters during natural disasters, wars, and the development of new lands.^[29][82]

According to the method of heating (smoke removal), huts are divided into black (smoke) and white. In black huts, the smoke accumulated under the ceiling, warmed the room, and exited through an open door, window, or chimney — a wooden decorated chimney on the roof. Black huts were eventually replaced by white huts, whose stoves had chimneys.^[64]

Ancient Russian dwellings varied by region, with sunken-floor designs prevailing in the southern regions and ground-floor log houses widespread in the north. By the 13th century, dwellings with sunken floors became prevalent even in the forest-steppe zone.^[83] Significant changes occurred in the first centuries of the Old Russian state, such as the orientation of walls to cardinal directions becoming less obligatory.^[84] M. G. Rabinovich identified four types of internal layout.^[85] The relocation of ovens to the corner near the entrance in Central Russian and northern dwellings led to an asymmetrical facade composition.^[86] By the 10th century, two-chambered houses were already present in regions like Pskov-Novgorod and Kyiv,^{[87][88][89][90]} although most structures were one-chamber square huts, 4-5 meters wide.^{[91][92][93][94][95]}

Log cabins were primarily constructed from pine, less often from spruce, and rarely from hardwoods. These cabins were typically built without foundations, sometimes insulated with rubble piles, and floors were generally boarded, though some were earthen.^[31][96] While two-storey houses are mentioned, the majority of dwellings were single-storey, with windows either hollowed out or absent.^[97] Pitched roofs covered with earth are noted by the Arab geographer Ibn Rusta in the early 10th century, who described how the cold climate led to the construction of cellars with pointed roofs covered in earth:^[98]

The cold in their country is so severe that each of them digs a kind of cellar in the ground, to which they add a wooden pointed roof, resembling that of a Christian church, and cover it with earth. In such cellars, they move with the whole family, and, having gathered some wood and stones, they light a fire and heat the stones until they are red-hot. When the stones are red-hot, they pour water over them, causing steam to spread and heat the dwelling to the point where they take off their clothes. They remain in such dwellings until spring.

In the 11th-13th centuries, construction techniques in cities like Kiev and Novgorod evolved. In Kiev, frame-pillar dwellings and log houses with deepened floors were common, with a significant number of two-chamber log houses built during this period.^[99] The transition to houses on high podklets and full-fledged two-storey houses began in Veliky Novgorod during the 12th-13th centuries. Manor complexes like the one built in the 1150s, possibly belonging to icon painter Olisey Grechin, exemplify this evolution.^{[93][94][100]}

During the 16th-17th centuries, Russian architecture experienced intensive construction. Englishman J. Fletcher noted that wooden houses, typically constructed from dry pine, were more comfortable than stone or brick ones due to their warmth:^[101]

It seems that the Russians are much more comfortable with wood construction than with stone or brick because the latter are more humid and cold than wooden houses made of dry pine wood, which provides more heat. Providence has rewarded them with forests in such abundance that it is possible to build a decent house for 20-30 rubles or a little more even where there is little forest. However, wooden buildings are uncomfortable, especially because they can burn easily...^[101]

The 16th-17th centuries also saw the proliferation of complex multi-chambered mansions on undercrofts, connected by staircases and passages.^[102][103] By this time, the characteristic three-window facade composition of Russian huts had developed.^{[102][103][104]} Roofs were double-pitched, with variations depending on the region.^[105] By the 18th century, tower complexes, which had been a feature of rich houses in the 16th-17th centuries, began to disappear.^[106][107] The palace of Alexei Mikhailovich in Kolomenskoye, consisting of 7 choirs, is a prime example of the complex architecture of this period, featuring ornamentation similar to that found in stone architecture.^[108]

In the 18th and 19th centuries, there was a significant development of house building and estate planning.^[109] The facades of houses began to face the red line of the street, and closed courtyards - fortresses disappeared.^[110] At that time, the most popular houses were izba-linked and five-walled houses, which became multi-roomed due to partitions.^[111] From the 2nd half of the 19th century the peasants changed from three-chambered and four-walled houses to five- and six-walled ones.^[112] Single-row houses became common, and the vertical structure of houses varied from pozemnye huts to houses with undercrofts and two-story structures.^[113][114] Architecture in cities developed under the influence of common European styles such as Baroque, Classicism and Empire, which led to the stylization of wooden houses.^{[115][116][117]} Peasant cottages also underwent radical changes under the influence of the city and landed estates, especially in the north and the Volga region.^[118] In the late 19th century, eclecticism reached its peak, which, according to some experts, led to the collapse of the Old Russian wooden architecture culture, despite the fact that more than half of the towns consisted of 95% wooden houses.^[119][120]

In the mid-19th century, along with the discussions about the national style, professional architects began to show interest in wooden architecture. Its motifs were used by V. A. Hartman, I. P. Ropet and F. O. Shechtel, especially in Russian pavilions at international exhibitions, which impressed the foreign public.^[121][122] The decorativism of facades, characteristic of the followers of the Russian style of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, reached its peak in the works of I. P. Ropet. Ropet's style received mixed reviews, as the solutions that were successful for exhibitions and country buildings were not always suitable for urban development.^[123] A. V. Opolovnikov criticized the stylization in folk architecture for mechanical copying of forms, rather than for the use of aesthetic content.^[118]

In the 1920s and 1930s, rural housing consisted mainly of wooden cabins with improved planning.^[124] Such houses were also built in cities, including wooden apartment buildings.^[125] Some Soviet architects returned to pre-revolutionary traditions in their dacha designs, but over time it became apparent that wooden construction did not fit the new Soviet realities.^[126] By the middle of the 20th century, the tradition of wooden architecture was a thing of the past, giving way to frame, brick, block, and panel construction.^[127]

Modern wooden residential architecture in Russia is represented mainly by individual houses. Architects such as T. Kuzembaev, N. V. Belousov, and V. G. Kuzmin work in this direction. Some of them stylize their projects under the "Russian style", and others, like N. V. Belousov, combine modern architecture with tradition.^[128][129]

• 
  The Sergin House from Munozero (Karelia). An example of a northern house-complex of the 2nd half of the 19th century.
• 
  V. I. Smirnov's house in Nizhny Novgorod. 1890s. An example of the Russian style.
• 
  The Sergin house from Munozero (Karelia). An example of a northern house-complex of the 2nd half of the 19th century.

Agricultural buildings included threshing barns and sheep drying houses (ovens and rigs). These massive log structures did not strive for architectural expression. Sheaves were sometimes dried on open hangers.^{[130][131][132]} To store grain and flour, barns were built, characterized by a variety of architectural solutions: from small log cabins with a single-pitched roof to large two-story barns with a double-pitched roof. Some barns were built on poles to protect them from rodents. Later barns had sheds and frames.^[133][134] Hunting barns were small barns on high posts.^[135]

Water mills did not differ much in appearance from ovens and goumens, while windmills, which appeared in the 15th century in the Moscow region, were more substantial. Stolbovka mills are common in the north, and shatrovki in the central zone and the Volga region.^[136][137]

Bathhouses, which often had one room and a single or double-pitched roof, later received an anteroom and were placed far from dwellings.^[138][134] In the southern and Siberian regions, stables, haylofts, and barns were also built.^[73]

Urban facilities included stables, cookhouses, cellars, icehouses, and workshops.^[139]

Professional carpenters and bridge builders existed in ancient Russia. The 10th-century Great Bridge at Veliky Novgorod had a complex design with pentagonal stone-built log cabins as supports. The span between them was more than 17 meters. Such bridges were called row bridges. The most famous is the bridge over the Kena River in the Arkhangelsk region. Cantilever bridges were used on narrow rivers.^[140][141]

The walls of the wells were fixed with a log or a hollowed-out tree trunk. The mechanisms for lifting the tubs were usually a "crane" or a drum with a handle on which a rope was wound. A double-pitched roof was often built over wells with drums.^[142][143]

The oldest defensive structures in Russia included a palisade (tyn), barbed or woven fences, ramparts and ditches. Palisades were often supplemented with log structures for flooring. Large cities were protected by wooden fortresses consisting of log cells (gorodni) or double-row solid walls with cross sections (taras). Wall cells were filled with earth, stones or used as rooms. Log structures were also placed inside earthen ramparts on which walls were built. These walls had a roofed passage with a log bunker and loopholes. Probably as early as in the 12th century, overhanging log projections (obrams) were used, which became widespread in Russian defensive architecture. Steps with loopholes were intended for fighting. In 1237, after the invasion of the Mongol army, fortresses with higher and thicker walls, several rows of walls and several towers (vezhi, lancets, fires, pillars) of four, six or octagonal shape began to be built. Towers were practically absent in Russian fortresses before that. The height of the walls was usually 5.3-6.4 meters (tynov: 3.2-4.3 meters, sometimes up to 6.4 meters); width: 3.2-4.3 meters. Passing towers were of great height and served as compositional centers of fortresses. Remains of defensive architecture have been preserved in Siberia.^[144][145]

The desire to diversify the silhouette of settlements was realized in the construction of tall religious buildings. In churches, utilitarian requirements receded into the background, and they became the most expressive buildings, achieving a great variety of forms and images, while preserving the canonical three-part structure of the Orthodox temple: located on the axis from west to east vestibule (porch, refectory, porch) — the main (central) volume of the temple with a room for worshippers (naos, kafolikon) — altar. The naos dominates other volumes in height, sometimes it is supplemented by aisles. The aisles are pentahedral (later) and quadrangular (ancient) in plan, covered with five- and two-pitch roofs and barrels. There are several examples where the naos and the altar were placed in a single log cabin, divided externally by covering different heights.^[146]

An established classification of wooden temples is contained in the work of I. E. Grabar and F. F. Gornostaev. In it the temples are divided into 5 types according to the most expressive feature: cage, hipped, stepped, cubic and multi-domed. M. V. Krasovsky separately distinguished five-domed and domed churches. The principles of this classification have become generally accepted, they are used in almost all works on Russian wooden architecture. An alternative, more complex system of classification of temples and chapels was developed by V. P. Orfinsky and I. E. Grishina.^[147][148]

The main volume of the cell temples is rectangular in plan. They are close to the izba in their architectural and structural design, although there are also tall tower-like buildings.^{[149][150][151][152][153]} The simplest plan consists of a porch, a naos, and an altar. But more often it also has a narthex, a refectory, sometimes a gallery and aisles.^[154] Sometimes it is stated that the cage type of church has a two-pitch roof (including wedge, stepped, with politzes, beaded roof)^{[152][151][155]} although churches with four-pitch and eight-pitch endings are also attributed to the cage type. Tent belfries^[156][154] were built over the narthexes of some churches.

• Variety of cell temples
• 
  Church of Demetrius of Solunsk with simple two-pitched roofs. Staraya Ladoga (Leningrad Region).
• 
  The Church of the Savior in Fominskoye village with wedge roofs and a hipped belfry. Museum in Kostroma.
• 
  Vvedenskaya church with two parallel roofs over the naos with politzas. Osinovo (Arkhangelsk region).
• 
  Church of St. George the Victorious with stepped roofs. Yuksovichi (Rodionovo) (Leningrad region).
• 
  Kazan church with a beamed roof. Taltsy (Irkutsk region).
• 
  Church of St. Andrew the First-Called with a four-pitched roof. Solovki (Arkhangelsk region).
• 
  Resurrection church with an eight-pitched roof and a hipped belfry. Neklyudovo (Bor) (Nizhny Novgorod region).

Tent temples with a tent covering the naos differ from cage temples by their vertical composition and great height.^[157][158] Researchers distinguish the following subtypes of tent temples:^{[159][160][161][162]}

• A tent on a quatrefoil base. Such structures have not been preserved.
• Pillar temple: a tent on an octagonal base "from the ground" with a single sideboard of the altar. Similar structures have not survived.
• Pillar-shaped temple: a tent on an octagonal base "from the ground" with two outbuildings — the altar and the refectory.
• "Temple of Twenty Walls: a tent on an octagonal base "from the ground" with several outbuildings — altar, refectory, and north and south aisles.
• The tent stands on an octagonal base, which in turn is located on the central part of the baptized log cabin.
• Octagon on a quatrefoil: The octagonal base of the tent stands on a quatrefoil log cabin.
• Tent on a baptismal font: the tent is placed in the middle of a square and is flanked by the kokoshniks of the baptismal font. They are found along the Pinega and Mezen rivers.
• Multi-tent temples: 2 such objects have been preserved.

• Varieties of tent temples
• 
  Church of St. Nicholas of Myra from Novinki village with a hipped roof on the quatrefoil. Danilovskoye (Vologda region).
• 
  Church St. George the Victorious from the  Vershina village, octagon "from the ground" with two outbuildings and a gallery. Malye Korely (Arkhangelsk region).
• 
  Nativity church "about twenty walls". (Yakovlevskaya, Arkhangelsk region).
• 
  Dormition church, a tent on a baptismal base. Varzuga (Murmansk region).
• 
  St. John Chrysostom's church, octagon on a quatrefoil. Saunino (Kiprovo). (Arkhangelsk region).
• 
  Church of Archistratigus Michael with a tent on a baptized barrel. Yuroma (Arkhangelsk region).
• 
  Trinity church with five hipped roofs. Nyonoksa (Arkhangelsk region)

A tiered temple has a stepped composition of several tiers, i.e. log cabins placed on top of each other, each of which is narrower than the one below. This type is characteristic of Central Russia. Stepped temples could have different endings and different forms of steps in the plan. The most widespread sub-type is the quatrefoil with one or more octaves placed on it. Often there are temples where all the tiers are octagonal (characteristic of the northeastern regions of European Russia) or quatrefoil (characteristic of the northwestern regions). Tiered temples were completed with a single head on a hollow closed cover or in later times with a dome.^{[163][164][165]}

• Tiered, cube-shaped, domed and multi-domed temples
• 
  Quadrilateral tiered church of St. John the Baptist. Shirkov pogost (Tver region).
• 
  Tiered church of St. Nicholas of Myra from Vysokiy Ostrov village, octagon on a quatrefoil. Vitoslavlitsy (Novgorod region).
• 
  Cube church of Ascension in the Kusherka village. Malye Korely (Arkhangelsk region).
• 
  Church of St. Nicholas of Myra with onion-shaped covering (hollow). Zachachye (Arkhangelsk region).
• 
  Dome Vvedenskaya church. Boriskovo (Ryazan region).
• 
  The multi-domed Pokrovskaya Church. Kizhi Pogost (Karelia)

The cube-shaped temples include temples where the nave was covered with a cube on a four-sided base. There are known cases of cubes covering the aisles. The number (from one to ten) and location of onion chapters on such churches varied arbitrarily. They are characteristic of the Ponezh and the White Sea coast.^{[166][167][168]}

Temples covered with a naos dome are very rare in Russian wooden architecture. Sometimes they include temples with octagonal onion-shaped ends (puchinas), resembling a cube in their structure, characteristic of Povaozhye and Siberia.^{[169][170][171]} I. E. Grabar considered five-domed churches to be a "known approach" to multicapital churches. Temples with more than five chapters became one of the most striking pages of Russian wooden architecture. However, despite the apparent complexity of their composition, the layout is quite simple. On the basis of a few types of plans, complicating and supplementing them with corridors, galleries and refectories, raising buildings on basements and modifying the forms of coverings, the architects achieved greater diversity in volume and silhouette.^[172][173]

The spread of Christianity in Russia brought with it the need to build churches, which could not always be satisfied by stone buildings. Ancient wooden church architecture developed under the influence of stone architecture, defense and residential buildings. Already in the pre-Mongol period there were various solutions for the volume and construction of churches, such as square log churches and double log churches with a separate square log choir.^[174][175] The tripartite Byzantine altars were probably replaced by single apsidal altars soon after the Baptism of Russia.^[176] Archaeological finds and chronicle sources testify to elaborate octagonal and stepped endings. Old Russian wooden architecture adopted elements of stone architecture and reworked them for use in wood.^[177]

Cell temples are the earliest type, with roots in the Byzantine canon and local traditions such as cultic barns. These structures often had no dome and outwardly resembled residential buildings.^[178][179] An example is the Church of Rizopopologija from Borodav, built in 1485. The Church of Lazarus from the Murom Monastery is considered older, if its dating to the end of the 14th century is correct.^{[180][181][182]} Cell churches, in order to stand out, raised the height of the log cabin and changed the design of the roof, which can be seen in the Church of St. George in Yuksovichi in 1495.^{[183][184][185]}

Tent temples may have existed in pre-Mongol times and included various forms, such as tents on a quatrefoil base and column-shaped temples.^[160] Tents became an analog of the dome and were used to increase the area of the prayer room.^[186][187] The oldest surviving tent church is the St. Nicholas Church in Lyavla from the 1580s[233][234].^[188][189] Tent churches of the 16th century have a vertical composition and a full facade.^[190] In the 17th century, despite Patriarch Nikon's ban on the construction of tent churches, attempts to create multi-spherical and stepped churches continued.^[191] Cube-shaped churches began to appear in the mid-17th century, such as the Pyatnitskaya Church in Shuertsky in 1666.^{[192][193][194]}

Tiered temples, including nine-domed and multi-domed churches of the 18th century, also had significant development. Examples include the Church of Intercession in Ankhimov and the Church of the Transfiguration in Kizhi Pogost.^{[195][196][196]} These churches reflect the seventeenth-century tendencies toward high-rise and disjointed artistic form.

In the 18th century, wooden architecture continued to develop despite the influence of urban architecture and reforms. An example of the latter is the Church of the Dormition of the Theotokos in Kondopoga, built in 1774.^{[197][198][199]} At the end of the century, a late period began, characterized by respect for tradition and bold innovation at the same time. In the early 19th century, with the introduction of government decrees, traditional forms began to disappear and wooden churches took on an "urban" appearance. However, the construction of wooden churches continued in remote settlements, preserving elements of the old architecture.^{[200][201][202]}

Since the late 1980s, wooden church construction has resumed, with an emphasis on traditional principles, although modern structures differ from traditional examples.^[203][204]

Bell towers in Russian wooden architecture probably appeared in the 15th century with the spread of bells. The simplest of them were belfries in the form of crossbars on poles, which have not survived to the present day. Frame (pillar) belfries had 4, 5 or 9 supporting pillars, several open tiers and a hipped roof. They are almost not preserved. The most developed of them were in Pomorie and had a number of similarities with their northern European counterparts (inclination of the pillars to the center, cross struts). Log belfries became more widespread. Their construction includes, together with the log house, the pillars of the belfry inserted inside the log house. Most often they are six or octagonal from the ground or in the form of an octagon on a quatrefoil. The latter type was the most stable and was built until the end of the 19th century. The architecture of freestanding log belfries is based on the figurative characteristics of high-rise churches. Above the corners of the high quadrilaterals of some bell towers there were decorative kokoshniks. Since the second half of the 18th century, under the influence of urban architecture, the practice of combining a bell tower and a church in one building spreads.^{[205][206][207][208]}

A very common type of wooden religious buildings were chapels, which differed from churches by the absence of an altar. Chapels are architecturally close to churches, but have simpler solutions and are usually smaller in size. The most common are cage chapels with a simple two-pitch roof. Chapels with four- and eight-pitch roofs, hipped roofs, and stepped roofs are less common. Cage chapels on the western side were often supplemented with haylofts, large rooms resembling refectories, belfries. Cantilevered galleries were a common element: in cage chapels with a double gabled roof, the galleries were usually placed symmetrically to the longitudinal axis on one or three sides. Chapels with a central composition could have galleries surrounding the log cabin on all sides. The most ancient chapels have been preserved in Obonezhye.^[209][210]

Not only buildings, but also various small architectural forms were made of wood. Wooden sidewalks were widespread in cities. Grave crosses and other attributes of cemeteries were made of wood. The Old Believers of the North still have domovinas — gravestones cut down or made of planks. According to ancient beliefs, the spirit of the deceased dwells in the domovina, and therefore it is given forms characteristic of huts.^[211] Very similar to the tombstones are the crosses of worship and commemoration, which the Russians from time immemorial have liked to mark various points of special importance to them. Often they were placed as a vow or as a navigation sign. In the north they were placed under a canopy resembling an open chapel. Despite their small size, they play an important role in the village ensemble, reproducing various elements peculiar to wooden architecture.^[212] Palisades, fences and hedges were used as fences in the past. Very expressive are oblique hedges made of vertical posts and inclined poles tied to them.^[132]

In Russian art criticism, it is generally believed that wooden architecture is much more authentic and rich than stone architecture,^{[213][214][215]} and reflects the views of broad strata of the Russian people, especially the peasantry.^[216] The Russian art historian E. V. Khodakovsky considers it "the most Russian of all Russian art".^[217] The American Slavist W. K. Brumfield cites wooden architecture, along with constructivism, as the most significant achievements of Russian architecture.^[218] The Norwegian architectural historian K. Norberg-Schultz believed that Russian wooden architecture, despite its many "charming manifestations," was primitive in comparison with European architecture, since log construction does not allow such possibilities of design as the frame. He noted that the lively and fairy-tale look of Russian houses is given by the decoration of windows, doors, cornices, which is not related to the construction.^[219] It was the criterion of the relationship between artistic and constructive allowed A. V. Opolovnikov to distinguish from the "folk" Old Russian wooden architecture, in which the constructive and artistic are united, late style architecture, where wood is hidden by the finish and acts only as a material of construction, and eclectic buildings, combining elements of Old Russian architecture and style architecture.^[116] The latter two directions A.V. Opolovnikov evaluated negatively, although he recognized that they gave birth not only to "false in its ornamentation" buildings, but also very successful, for example, decorated with lace carving houses of the Volga region.^[220] The sphere of Russian wooden architecture can include modern attempts to revive old Russian carpentry traditions.^[7]

The book Russian Wooden Architecture (1942) emphasized the following features: a combination of delicate treatment of details with the power and simplicity of the main volumes; picturesque, asymmetrical arrangement of few and carefully worked openings; more detailed exterior treatment of residential buildings, particularly choirs, in comparison with religious objects; few planned solutions, structural and architectural forms; special attention of architects to coverings, their silhouettes, and proportions.^[221] A. I. Nekrasov wrote about log construction in space, stating that it does not spread on the ground and in this respect is static, and its beauty lies rather in its upward aspiration.^[222] The traditional volumetric-spatial composition is based on a picturesque combination of log cabins, subordinated to the requirements of convenience. Such is the palace of Alexei Mikhailovich. It is indicative that each log cabin had its own separate roof. The influence of Western architecture is associated with the connection of identical log cabins under a single facade and a common roof, as well as many other features of late wooden architecture. According to A. I. Nekrasov, what is late and non-Russian refers to “everything that grows [on the building] as decoration and as a revitalization of the uniform mass”, and of the original in architecture — only a cubic mass of cage with a system of covering.^[223][224]

The basis of old Russian proportioning was the ratio of the side of a square to its diagonal (carpenters checked the correctness of a square log cabin by the equality of its diagonals), and Russian length measures were based on the same ratio. The planned dimensions of the building were used to determine its vertical dimensions. In log buildings, the module is usually quite large, for example, the length of the log between the joints. However, in later buildings, a smaller module, such as a quarter of a log's length, is often found.^[225][16] Some researchers are convinced of the existence of curvatures in wooden architecture.^[226][227]

Ancient buildings are characterized by the connection of elements using mortises, dowels, studs, grooves, and dowels with minimal use of expensive metal parts. Small dwellings and farm buildings might have had no metal parts at all. These connections allowed for easy disassembly and replacement of building elements[295]. Many researchers note the conservatism and even primitiveness of the traditional Russian log cabin[286][296][297][298].^{[219][228][229]}

• Ащепков, Е. А. (1950a). Русское деревянное зодчество (in Russian). М.: изд-во и 2-я тип. Гос. изд-ва архитектуры и градостроительства.
• Ащепков, Е. А. (1950b). Русское народное зодчество в Западной Сибири (PDF) (in Russian). М.: Изд-во Акад. архитектуры. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2014-10-26.
• Ащепков, Е. А. (1953). Русское народное зодчество в Восточной Сибири (PDF) (in Russian). М.: Гос. изд-во литературы по строительству и архитектуре. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2014-10-26.
• Архитектурный путеводитель по деревянному зодчеству Русского Севера (in Russian). М.: Институт Наследия. 2018.
• Бломквист, Е. Э. (1956). Крестьянские постройки русских, украинцев и белорусов (поселения, жилища и хозяйственные строения) // Восточнославянский этнографический сборник / отв. ред. С. А. Токарев (PDF) (in Russian). Vol. XXXI. М.: Изд-во Акад. наук СССР. pp. 3–458.
• Бодэ, А. Б. (2010). Деревянное зодчество Русского Севера. Архитектурная сокровищница Поонежья (in Russian) (2nd ed.). М.: КомКнига.
• Бубнов, Е. Н. (1988). Русское деревянное зодчество Урала (in Russian). М.: Стройиздат. ISBN 978-5-04-184514-8.
• Горностаевъ Ѳ. Ѳ., Грабарь И. Э. (1910). Деревянное зодчество Русскаго сѣвера // Исторія русскаго искусства (in Russian). Vol. Т. 1. Архитектура. До-петровская эпоха. М.: Изданіе I. Кнебель.
• Громов, Г. Г. (1977). Жилище // Очерки русской культуры XVI века / под ред. А. В. Арциховского (in Russian). Vol. Часть 1: Материальная культура. М.: Изд-во Московского университета, 1977.
• Громов, Г. Г. (1979). Жилище // Очерки русской культуры XVII века / гл. ред. А. В. Арциховский (in Russian). Vol. 1. М.: Изд-во Московского университета.
• Громов, Г. Г. (1985). Крестьянское жилище // Очерки русской культуры XVIII века / гл. ред. Б. А. Рыбаков (in Russian). Vol. 1. М.: Изд-во Московского университета.
• Дмитриева, С. И. (2006). Архитектура и декор крестьянской усадьбы // Традиционное искусство русских Европейского Севера: этнографический альбом (PDF) (in Russian). М.: Наука. pp. 34–75.
• Забелло С. Я., Иванов В. Н., Максимов П. Н. (1942). Русское деревянное зодчество (in Russian). М.: Изд-во Акад. архитектуры.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
• Красовскій, М. В. (1916). "Часть 1. Деревянное зодчество". Курсъ исторіи русской архитектуры (PDF) (in Russian). Петроградъ: Товарищество Р. Голике и А. Вильборгъ. Звенигородская, 11.
• Лисенко, Л. М. (1987). Русское деревянное зодчество // Дерево в архитектуре и скульптуре славян / науч. ред. Г. Н. Бочаров. М.: Советский художник.
• Маковецкий, И. В. (1962). Архитектура русского народного жилища: Север и Верхнее Поволжье (in Russian). М.: Изд-во Акад. наук СССР.
• Максимов П. Н. (1959). "Глава третья. Деревянная архитектура XVII века". История русского искусства / под общ. ред. И. Э. Грабаря, В. С. Кеменова и В. Н. Лазарева (in Russian). Vol. IV. М.: Изд-во Акад. наук СССР. pp. 91–121.
• Малков, Я. В. (1997). Древнерусское деревянное зодчество (PDF) (in Russian). М.: Муравей.
• Мехова, Г. И. (1965). 6 Русское деревянное зодчество (in Russian). М.: Советский художник.
• Мильчик М. И., Ушаков Ю. С. (1981). Деревянная архитектура русского Севера. Страницы истории (PDF) (in Russian). Л.: Стройиздат, Ленинградское отделение.
• Некрасов, А. И. (1924). Архитектура // Русское народное искусство (in Russian). М.: Гос. изд-во.
• Ополовников, А. В. (1955). Памятники деревянного зодчества Карело-Финской ССР (in Russian). М.: Стройиздат.
• Ополовников, А. В. (1983). Русское деревянное зодчество (in Russian). Vol. 1. Гражданское зодчество. М.: Искусство.
• Ополовников, А. В. (1986). Русское деревянное зодчество (in Russian). Vol. 2. М.: Искусство.
• Ополовников, А. В. (1989). Сокровища Русского Севера (PDF) (in Russian). М.: Стройиздат.
• Ополовников А. В., Ополовникова Е. А. (1998). Дерево и гармония: Образы деревянного зодчества России: Кн. для юношества (in Russian). М.: Ополо.
• Орфинский В. П., Гришина И. Е. (2004). Типология деревянного культового зодчества Русского Севера (in Russian). Петрозаводск: Изд-во Петрозаводского государственного университета.
• Пермиловская, А. Б. (2013). Культурные смыслы народной архитектуры Русского Севера (in Russian). Екатеринбург [и др.]: УрО РАН: Правда Севера.
• Прохоренко, А. И. (1992). "Глава 1. Русское народное жилище". Архитектура сельского дома: прошлое и настоящее (in Russian). М.: Агропромиздат.
• Рабинович, М. Г. (1988). "1. Двор и дом". Очерки материальной культуры русского феодального города. М.: Наука.
• Раппопорт, П. А. (1975). Древнерусское жилище. Археология СССР. Свод археологических источников. Выпуск Е1-32. Л.: Наука.
• Русское деревянное зодчество. Произведения народных мастеров и вековые традиции / сост. и отв. ред. А. Б. Бодэ (in Russian). М.: Северный паломник. 2012.
• Русское деревянное. Взгляд из XXI века: в 2 т. (in Russian). Vol. 1. Архитектура XIV–XIX веков. М.: Кучково поле. 2015.
• Русское деревянное. Взгляд из XXI века: в 2 т. (in Russian). Vol. 2. Архитектура XIX–XXI веков. М.: Кучково поле. 2016.
• Сусловъ, В. В. (1889). О древнихъ деревянныхъ постройкахъ сѣверныхъ окраинъ Россіи // Очерки по исторіи древне-русскаго зодчества. СПб: Типографія А. Ф. Маркса. Средняя Подъяческая, № 1. pp. ru.
• Туманик, А. Г. (2009). Деревянное зодчество Сибири XVII — начала XX в // Историческая энциклопедия Сибири: в 3 т / гл. ред. В. А. Ламин (in Russian). Vol. V. 1. А—И. Новосибирск: Историческое наследие Сибири.
• Ушаков, Ю. С. (1974). Деревянное зодчество русского Севера (народные традиции и современные проблемы) (PDF) (in Russian). Ленинград: Знание.
• Ушаков, Ю. С. (2007). Народное деревянное зодчество // История русской архитектуры. М.: Архитектура-С.
• Ходаковский, Е. В. (2009). Деревянное зодчество Русского Севера: Учебно-методическое пособие / под ред. В. А. Булкина (in Russian). СПб: СПбУ.

• Иоаннисян, О. М. (1994–1996). Деревянные храмы домонгольской Руси // Успенская церковь в Кондопоге: сборник статей по материалам конференции (in Russian). Петрозаводск.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
• Колчин Б. А., Хорошев А. С., Янин В. Л. (1981). Усадьба новгородского художника XII в. (in Russian). М.: Наука.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
• Максимов П. Н., Воронин Н. Н. (1955). "Глава 3. Искусство русского централизованного государства. Деревянное зодчество XIII—XVI веков". История русского искусства / под общ. ред. И. Э. Грабаря, В. Н. Лазарева и В. С. Кеменова (in Russian). Vol. III. М.: Изд-во Акад. наук СССР. pp. 245–281.
• Максимов, П. Н. Деревянные церкви (1966). "Глава 9. Архитектура древнерусского государства (X — начала XIII в.)". Всеобщая история архитектуры в 12 томах / под ред. Ю. С. Яралова (отв. ред.) и др (in Russian). Vol. 3: Архитектура Восточной Европы. Средние века. Ленинград; М.: Стройиздат. pp. 528–529.
• Ковалевский, В. Н. (2002). Славянские жилища VIII-первой половины XI вв. в Днепро-Донском лесостепном междуречье. Диссертация на соискание учёной степени кандидата исторических наук (in Russian). Воронеж.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
• Максимов, П. Н. (1975). Творческие методы древнерусских зодчих (in Russian). М.: Стройиздат.
• Рабинович, М. Г. (1969). "Часть 1: Материальная культура". Жилище // Очерки русской культуры XIII—XV веков / под ред. А. В. Арциховского. М.: Изд-во Московского университета.
• Рабинович, М. Г. (1964). О древней Москве (in Russian). М.: Наука.
• Раппопорт, П. А. (1986). Зодчество Древней Руси (in Russian). Л.: Наука, Лен. отд.
• Моргунов, Ю. Ю. (2003). Сампсониев Остров. Пограничная крепость на посульской окраине Южной Руси в XI-XIII веках (in Russian). М.: Наука.
• Толочко, П. П. (1981). Массовая застройка Киева X—XIII вв // Древнерусские города / отв. ред. В. В. Седов. М.: Наука.

• Раппопорт, П. А. (1965). Древние русские крепости. М.: Наука.
• Крадин, Н. П. (1988). Русское деревянное оборонное зодчество. М.: Искусство.
• Косточкин, В. В. (1969). Крепостное зодчество Древней Руси. М.: Изобразительное искусство.
• Косточкин, В. В. (1962). Русское оборонное зодчество конца XIII — начала XVI веков. М.: Изд-во Акад. наук СССР.

• Бодэ А. Б., Зинина О. А. (2016). Традиционные русские плотницкие технологии. Работа с деревом, конструкции, архитектура (in Russian). М.: Институт Наследия.
• Жирнов, А. А. (1927). Крестьянин плотник-строитель (in Russian). М., Ленинград: Государственное изд-во.
• Милославский, М. Г. (1956). Техника деревянного зодчества на Руси в XVI‑XVII вв // Труды Института истории естествознания и техники АН СССР. Vol. 7. М.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
• Ополовников, А. В. (1974). Реставрация памятников народного зодчества (in Russian). М.: Стройиздат.
• Попов, А. В. (2007). Конструкции русских деревянных сооружений XVII-XVIII веков. Материалы выставки (PDF) (in Russian). М.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
• Подъяпольский С. С., Горшин С. Н. (1977). "Глава VI. Реставрация построек из дерева". Методика реставрации памятников архитектуры / под. общ. ред. Е. В. Михайловского (in Russian). М.: Стройиздат.
• Подъяпольский С.С., Бессонов Г.Б., Беляев Л.А., Постникова Т.М. (1988). Конструкции русского деревянного зодчества // Реставрация памятников архитектуры. М.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
• Самойлов, В.С. (2006). Строительство деревянного дома (in Russian). М.: Аделант. p. 384.

• Сыщиков, А. Д. (2006). Лексика крестьянского деревянного строительства. СПб: Филологический факультет СПбГУ.
• Шинаев, С. Я. (1992). Деревянное зодчество. Толковый словарь терминов и понятий (PDF). М.: Спецпроектреставрация.

• Авдусин, Д. А. (1989). Основы археологии (in Russian). М.: Высшая школа.
• Авдусин, Д. А. (1977). Археология СССР (in Russian). М.: Высшая школа.
• Байбурин, А. К. (1983). Жилище в обрядах и представлениях восточных славян (in Russian). Ленинград: Наука: Ленинградское отд-ние.
• Беловинский, Л. В. (2012). Жизнь русского обывателя. Изба и хоромы (in Russian). М.: Кучково поле.
• Всеобщая история архитектуры. Vol. 12. Книга первая. Архитектура СССР / под ред. Н. В. Баранова (отв. ред.), Н. П. Былинкина, А. В. Иконникова, Л. И. Кирилловой [и др.]. М.: Стройиздат. 1975.
• Жеребцов, Л. Н. (1961). Памятники народного зодчества Коми АССР (in Russian). Сыктывкар: Коми книжное изд-во.
• Заграевский, С. В. (2019). Три главных историко-архитектурных вопроса древнерусского шатрового зодчества (происхождение, первый каменный шатровый храм, запрет патриарха Никона). М.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
• Загорульский, Э. М. (2012). Славяне: происхождение и расселение на территории Беларуси (in Russian). Минск: БГУ.
• Ильин, М. А. (1980). Русское шатровое зодчество. Памятники середины XVI века: Проблемы и гипотезы, идеи и образы (in Russian). М.: Искусство.
• Киселёв, И. А. (2005). Архитектурные детали в русском зодчестве XVIII—XIX веков: справочник архитектора-реставратора (in Russian). М.: Academia. Archived from the original on 2020-03-03.
• Средневековая Ладога: новые археологические открытия и исследования / отв. ред. В. В. Седов (in Russian). Ленинград: Наука. 1985.
• Лисенко, Л. М. (1984). Дерево в архитектуре (in Russian). М.: Стройиздат.
• Византийское и русское искусство: для строительных факультетов высших учебных заведений (in Russian). М.: Издание Государственного универсального магазина. 1924.
• Некрасов, А. И. (1936). Древнерусское зодчество XI-XVII века. Очерки по истории древнерусского зодчества (in Russian). М.: Изд-во Всесоюзной акад. архитектуры.
• Нидерле, Л. (1956). Славянские древности (in Russian). М.: Изд-во иностранной литературы.
• Орфинский, В. П. (1972). Деревянное зодчество Карелии (in Russian). Ленинград: Стройиздат.
• Святилища / Петрухин В. Я. // Славянские древности: Этнолингвистический словарь: в 5 т. / под общ. ред. Н. И. Толстого; Институт славяноведения РАН. Vol. 4: П (Переправа через воду) — С (Сито). М.: Межд. отношения. 2009. ISBN 978-5-7133-1312-8.
• Русанова И. П., Тимощук Б. А. (2007). Языческие святилища древних славян (in Russian). М.: Ладога-100.
• Седов, В. В. (1979). Происхождение и ранняя история славян (in Russian). М.: Наука.
• Седов, В. В. (1995). Славяне в раннем Средневековье (in Russian). М.: Институт археологии РАН.
• Археология: Учебник / под ред. В. Л. Янина (in Russian). М.: Изд-во Моск. ун-та. 2006.
• Buxton, D. R. (1934). Russian mediaeval architecture: With an account of the transcaucasian styles and their influence in the West. Cambridge: University press.
• Cracraft, J. (1988). The Petrine Revolution in Russian Architecture. Chicago; London: The University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-11664-8.
• Weslager, C. A. (1969). The Log Cabin in America: From Pioneer Days to the Present. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press.

• Virtual museum of carved platbands
• Old Russian wooden architecture in the RusArch library
• Articles about Russian wooden architecture on the site Museum of Wood
• Personal site of restorer A. B. Bode Poetry of the Russian North about Russian wooden architecture
• Wooden churches and chapels on the site Temples of Russia
• Video channel Common Cause. Revival of wooden churches of the North on YouTube