Karamzin fire in the Bolshoi Theatre. Through fire and destruction: how the Bolshoi Theater survived, no matter what

During the six years of reconstruction, the Bolshoi managed to preserve the main thing - its troupe. And also to expand the circle of directors - today Kirill Serebrennikov, Yuri Lyubimov, Dmitry Chernyakov, Vasily Barkhatov work for the main theater of the country.

What's "new"?

The main stage of the Bolshoi was finally opened to the audience, the first premiere was held - the opera "Ruslan and Lyudmila". And what else will the main theater of the country please us with next season? What performances will be transferred from the New Stage to the Old, historical one?

E. Vratova

In the opera, the next high-profile premieres will be productions of Richard Strauss's The Rosenkavalier and Pyotr Tchaikovsky's The Enchantress. Musical Director of the Bolshoi Theater Vasily Sinaisky says that all new productions are absolutely diverse and even unexpected for the Bolshoi Theater stage. “It is necessary that the audience look not only at the new interiors,” jokes the chief conductor of the theatre. Boris Godunov by M. Mussorgsky, Turandot by G. Puccini and The Fiery Angel by S. Prokofiev will return to the main stage.

November 18, 2011 will see the premiere of the ballet "Sleeping Beauty" by the famous choreographer Yuri Grigorovich. This is his third edition of The Sleeper at the Bolshoi. The choreographer worked with the world famous Italian stage designer Ezio Frigerio. The main roles of "Sleeping" are prima, State Duma deputy and young mother Svetlana Zakharova and the new premier of the Bolshoi, American dancer David Holberg. The performance is a bright, ceremonial, real "reference book" of architecture and costume history of the 17th and 18th centuries. “The backdrops were painted in Italy,” says set designer Ezio Frigerio. “A special technique of theatrical painting was applied, which only Italians know - two Italians, to be absolutely precise.” Sleeping Beauty's costume designer is Franca Squarciapino, Oscar winner for her work in Cyrano de Bergerac. Also, the audience will soon be presented with "Jewels" - a ballet by George Balanchine in three parts.

The performances of The Nutcracker, Swan Lake, Corsair, Pharaoh's Daughter, Giselle will be transferred to the historical stage. There will be evenings in memory of choreographer Roland Petit and ballerina Marina Semyonova. It will celebrate on a large scale the Great Anniversaries of its two masters - choreographer Yuri Grigorovich and director Boris Pokrovsky. And in total, in the 236th season, the Bolshoi plans to show its beloved audience 356 performances.

Next - Mariinsky?

The reconstruction of the Bolshoi Theater took six years. In my opinion, the new building of the Mariinsky Theater takes longer to build. Why is Peter unable to master the modernization of his theater?

V. Osinsky, Tver

It is assumed that the "Second Stage" - this is how the new building is called - will open at the end of 2012. But already in May, during the Stars of the White Nights festival, acoustic tests will be held here. “We have to make sure that in terms of sound this building will be a pleasant sensation,” says Valery Gergiev, artistic director of the Mariinsky Theatre. Recall that the international competition for the construction of the Mariinsky-2 was won back in 2003 by the French architect Dominique Perrault. However, the project did not pass the technical examination, and the contract was terminated.

"Surprise" presented the soil - at the bottom of the pit there was a swamp. More than 22,000 piles had to be driven into the ground. Mariinka-2 is being built according to the project of Canadian architects. The cost of the new building will cost the federal budget more than 19 billion rubles. For comparison: 21 billion rubles were spent on the Bolshoi.

Moscow was at a glance
Visible from the fire tower.
Fire!
The horses flew headlong,
Like a flame, they themselves are hot.

On Lent on March 11, 1853, the Mother See was agitated by a rumor about the fire of the Imperial Bolshoi Theater. Crowds of people poured into the center of the city on Theater Square. There, in the abyss of fire, the creation of the architect Beauvais, infinitely dear to Muscovites, perished.

And it all started in the early morning, when the streets, covered with light snow, were still deserted, but ordinary theatrical life had already taken up in the Bolshoi: carpenters were setting up scenery for the evening performance on the stage; the stokers, having finished with the furnaces, put candles in large chandeliers; the elderly caretaker of the theater Talyzin completed his morning tour of the auditorium, stage and other premises, and then went to a hydrotherapy establishment. He returned to the theater at about nine o'clock and, heading to the box office, he heard a loud cry: "Fire! Fire! The theater is on fire!" Talyzin rushed headlong onto the stage, but this path was closed: the entire right side was on fire, the backstage, the curtain, and the scenery ignited. Nobody put out the fire. All the scene workers, assistant driver Timofeev, duty non-commissioned officer Andreev fled in a panic. Talyzin rushed off to save the affairs of the office and the box office - no one bothered to call the firemen. The nearest team was located in the Tver police station, a few minutes' walk from the Bolshoi Theatre. On its high-rise tower, day and night, in heat and cold, there was always a fireman, vigilantly looking around the surrounding houses and streets. At ten o'clock in the morning, the guard at the watchtower saw the appearance of smoke on the roof of the theater and raised the alarm. A few minutes later, a horse-drawn fire wagon flew out of the open gates of the fire station with a ringing and roar, turned around at the governor-general's house and rushed towards Okhotny Ryad. A red flag hoisted on the watchtower - a signal to collect all parts for a big fire.

The departure of the firefighters on alarm was an impressive and beautiful sight, although not safe for the townspeople. Sparkling with dazzling copper, an unstoppable avalanche rushed to the place of fire horse carts, sweeping away everything in their path. The streets and squares were filled with an alarming rumble, the clatter of sparkling horseshoes, the ringing of bells, the snoring of lathered horses, the shrieks of wagons, the screams and groans of passers-by. In front of the fire wagon, a rider (leap) galloped dashingly, with a piercing sound of a trumpet, instilling alarm in the oncoming ones and clearing the way for the horse wagon, sparkling with copper. Behind him flew, harnessed by a pair of magnificent trotters, the light sleigh of a mustachioed fireman with a furman on high goats. Following the fire-master, four furious horses galloped, as if through air, a heavy line with a team of tall axemen. And then, biting the bit, dropping white flakes of foam, mighty horses in sparkling harness raced a whole string of winter carts with heavy filling pipes, hooks, ladders, barrels of water. On the swiftly sliding wagons, calmly, like fiery gods, stood, stretched out in the front, firefighters in copper helmets, dressed in dark tight semi-caftans, girded with glossy black belts and sword belts. The sun played victoriously on axes and helmets with crests, a heavy embroidered banner floated overhead in the wind. Woe to the one who hesitated to get out of the way of the firemen: under the hooves of wildly galloping horses, injury or death awaited him. When the firefighters rolled up to the theater, their brilliant appearance immediately dimmed - they turned out to be completely powerless in front of the flaming colossus, their "fire-extinguishing tools" turned out to be so imperfect and primitive.

The first report of the incident appeared in the press on the pages of the 32nd issue of Moskovskie Vedomosti on March 14, 1853: “Upon the arrival of firefighters, the inside of the theater burned, masses of fire and smoke flew out of the windows and onto the roof thereof, and, despite all the efforts of the firefighters there was no way for the teams that had gathered at the scene of the fire to cease fire and even weaken its strength; the entire interior of the theater building, except for the side halls, and the mezzanine and rooms on the lower floor, which housed the office, cash desk and buffet, completely burned down.

The eyewitness is a famous writer and an inimitable master of oral stories from folk life I.O. Gorbunov recalled: “On March 11, the Bolshoi Moscow Theater burned down. The fire started in the morning. It was snowing a little. I was on this fire. It was strange to watch how the firefighters with their "syringes" circled around this giant in flames. The fireman, firemen, firefighters furiously shouted in hoarse, bestial voices: "Meshchanskaya, pump!"

The fire chimneys of the Meshchanskaya section begin to shoot a jet of water from their sleeve, as thick as an index finger. They shake it for two or three minutes - there is no water.

Water! - shouts the fireman. - Sidorenko! I'll bury in the coffin!

Sidorenko, black as coal, bulging his eyes, turns the barrel.

Sretenskaya! Watch out!

Audience, pull back!

No one is moving, and there was nowhere to move: everyone is standing at the walls of the Maly Theater. The private bailiff ordered it so, for his own amusement. He stood, stood, and thinks: "Let me shout!" - and shouted ... Everything is better ...

Twin-cylinder piston pumps had a marked effect on firefighting tactics. With this type of pump, water could be ejected up to 10 meters away. Productivity 100-200 liters per minute. Despite their technical imperfection, until the end of the 19th century, filling pipes were in service with Russian fire brigades as the main "fire-extinguishing tool."

Back, back! Pull back! - in a politely contemptuous tone, the elegantly dressed adjutant of Count Zakrevsky shouts, assuming the role of a policeman. Everyone stands silent. The adjutant begins to get angry.

I'll order everyone to fill with water now! - the adjutant gets excited.

Water is now a hundred rubles bucket! It’s better to order the kiyatra to be poured, - is heard from the crowd. Laughter.

Feat Marina

Vasily Gavrilovich Marin, a peasant in the Yaroslavl province, was in Moscow passing from St. Petersburg, where he was engaged in roofing work. He witnessed how three carpenters of the theater, fleeing from the fire, jumped out onto the roof. Two of them rushed down and "killed themselves on the pavement to death", and the third - the carpenter Dmitry Petrov - remained on the roof, where he was threatened with imminent death. The fire brigades did not have the means to help him. Marin, leaving the crowd, volunteered to save the dying man. On the stairs, immediately given to him by firefighters, Marin climbed to the capitals of the columns of the main entrance, then climbed onto the drainpipe and from it on a pole gave the dying man a rope. Petrov, fixing the end of the rope on the roof, descended along it to the drain, and then down the stairs to the ground.

Two fantals nearby, you can't get enough of them. They drive to the Moscow River for water. How soon will you appease such a fire! Look look! Wow!

Capacity: 60 buckets (700 liters). Water from fire barrels was poured into special bulk boxes (boxes) of filling pipes, which did not have devices for sucking water from natural water sources.

The roof collapsed, sending up a myriad of sparks and a cloud of thick smoke.

And the giant burns and burns, exposing huge fiery tongues from the windows, as if teasing the Moscow fire brigade with its "syringes". By eight o'clock in the evening, both the authorities, and the firemen, and the horses were exhausted and stood.

The limited technical means of fighting the fire made it necessary to combine extinguishing operations with the simultaneous dismantling of neighboring buildings and structures in order to limit the spread of fire. Most often, after the deafening commands and the dashing swearing of the brave firemen - "Swing, break, do not argue!" Ashes and smoking ruins of houses remained at the scene. Such work was usually performed by axemen, who rode on open linear passages.

Another eyewitness to the fire testifies: “A strong fire lasted about two days, and the entire fire ended at least a week and a half later.

After the fire, the interior and the auditorium presented a sad and at the same time majestic picture of complete destruction. It was a charred skeleton, but the skeleton of a giant, inspiring involuntary respect. These remains spoke loudly of the past glory, the former greatness of the Bolshoi Theater."

In Russia in the 19th century, according to far from complete data, more than 30 theaters and circuses burned down.

Gorbunov, in his story, calls inlet fire pipes (manually operated pumps) "syringes", which formed the basis of the armament of the Moscow fire brigade, which consisted of 17 fire departments, with a total number of 1560 personnel. Tentatively, we can assume that at least 50 fire pipes were concentrated on the fire, but there was not enough water in the theater area, it had to be transported from the Moskva River, the icy banks of which turned out to be difficult for horse-drawn barrel passages to fill the barrels from the holes.

Such devices were widely used in the last century for the organization of gas and smoke protection.

Later, in 1892, in Moscow, according to the project and under the supervision of engineer N.G. Zimin, a 108 verst water pipe was built, on which fire hydrants were installed, which immediately increased the efficiency of fire extinguishing.

The difficulties of firefighting were associated not only with the difficulty of delivering water, but also with poor roads. There was a smooth wooden end road only on a small section of Tverskaya Street, near the house of the Governor-General. The rest of the streets were paved with uneven cobblestones, and the outlying streets and lanes of Moscow were buried in mud in spring and autumn. The winter snow was not removed from the streets, deep depressions and potholes were formed, along which heavy sleigh carts of firefighters advanced like boats on sea waves.

In the summer, the rapid run of horse-drawn fire moves on iron tires along the cobblestone pavement produced an unimaginable knock and rumble, glass trembled in the windows, cupboards with utensils shook, and the townsfolk rushed to the windows or ran out into the street to see the firefighters rushing. The beauty and power of the fire wagon was horses. Each fire department was proud of its horses, which were diligently looked after. Aesthetic perfection and outward splendor equestrian fire carriage of the Moscow fire brigade reached in the 60s of the nineteenth century.

The Moscow police chief at that time was N.I. Ogarev, an old cavalryman and a passionate lover of firefighting. He arranged for the delivery of very good horses to the fire departments of the city. It was impossible not to admire them - they were so beautiful, frisky and well-fed. Ogarev twice a year visited Voronezh and Tambov horse fairs and factories, chose the best horses, brought them to Moscow, where he personally distributed them to fire departments and constantly monitored their departure. It was to him that the Moscow fire brigade owed the selection of horses by color: each part had horses of a strictly defined color, and Muscovites learned from a distance which fire brigade was rushing to the fire on alarm.

But back to 1853. Soon after the fire of the Bolshoi Theater, on the orders of the Governor-General of Moscow, Count Zakrevsky, the most rigorous investigation of its "root cause" was carried out. Most of the witnesses interviewed testified that the fire started in a closet located on the right side of the stage, under the stairs leading to the women's lavatories. In the closet were kept various tools and things of theatrical carpenters and joiners. In the same closet, the assistant stage engineer Dmitry Timofeev kept his warm clothes. In the morning, on the day of the fire, preparing for the evening concert, he opened the closet door to put a sheepskin coat, and, seeing fire in it, shouted: "Fire! Fire!", Then he rushed onto the stage. Several workers ran to his cry, but they failed to put out the fire.

Such machines created water pressure 8-10 times greater than hand pumps, which allowed the water jet to hit a distance of up to 36 meters. They were able to draw water directly from reservoirs, making it unnecessary to bring water to the fire site. The performance of the most advanced models reached 2000 liters per minute. Steam engines had a number of specific features that hampered their practical use: they had to be taken out on special heavy horse-drawn carts, which were not very suitable for off-road conditions at that time, it took a considerable time to heat up the steam pump, and it was ready to supply water to the hoses no earlier than after 15-20 minutes, i.e. when the required steam pressure was created in the boiler, therefore, sometimes the steam pump was heated up on the way to the fire, moreover, the introduction of steam pumps in Russia was hindered by their extremely high price.

The testimonies of Talyzin and other employees testify that the theater had a fairly reliable fire protection system for that time. It included: a metal curtain separating the stage from the auditorium, fire water supply and firemen on duty. But these fire safety measures, unfortunately, functioned only during performances, and the fire started in the morning, when there were relatively few people in the theater.

Here are some interesting details: the internal fire hydrants were powered from a metal tank installed on the stage grates. During the fire, the tank burst, water flooded the blazing stage, which caused a lot of smoke. Thick clouds of black smoke enveloped not only the burning theater, but also the surrounding houses "to the point that candles were lit there. It was difficult to determine the color and hair of the horses near the fire." And further: "The firefighters, who began to act, at first got too excited and began to throw musical instruments, pianos, and furniture into the street through the broken windows, which could have been preserved."

Despite the fact that the first fire escape appeared in Moscow back in 1823 (it was made specifically for the Moscow fire brigade in the workshops of the St. Petersburg fire station), operations to rescue people from the upper floors and from the roofs of burning buildings due to bulkiness, low maneuverability and the insufficient height of the stairs very often ended tragically.

But back to finding out the cause of the fire. Manager of the Moscow Imperial Theatres, famous composer, author of the opera "Askold's Grave" A.N. Verstovsky wrote in a private letter: “The stoves were heated at five o’clock in the morning, and by eight o’clock all the chimneys were inspected and closed. that, while examining them at the site of the fire, and as far as it was possible to see the stoves, pipes, and hogs, they did not crack.

Turning to the surviving documents of the investigative case, we see that, despite the strictest investigation, it was not possible to establish the root cause. The fire was regarded as a natural disaster, "in which no one was found guilty, and the case, on the instructions of Count Zakrevsky, was consigned to oblivion."

The loss caused to the treasury by the fire was estimated at 8 million rubles. Along with the beautiful building of the theater, a precious wardrobe burned down, including the richest collection of expensive French costumes. Few people remembered the seven artisans who died during the fire.

For more than three years, the inhabitants of Moscow were deprived of the opportunity to enjoy the art of the Bolshoi Theater troupe. Only on August 20, 1856, revived by the architect A.K. Kavos, the theater hospitably opened its doors, revealing its dazzling splendor to the audience. To this day, the State Academic Bolshoi Opera and Ballet Theater majestically rises on Theater Square.

Director of the Bolshoi Theater Museum in an interview with the portal "History.RF" - about the difficult fate of the famous scene.

To this day, the Bolshoi Theater is considered one of the largest opera and ballet theaters not only in Russia, but throughout the world, and its building is one of the most beautiful sights in Moscow. But few people know that a completely different building once stood at this place on Theater Square.

The predecessor of the Bolshoi Theater was built by the architect Christian Rozberg in 1780. A three-story brick building with white stone details and a plank roof settled on the right bank of the Neglinka River, and its main facade overlooked Petrovka Street. This is where the name came from - the Petrovsky Theater (later it was called the Old Petrovsky or the Bolshoi Petrovsky Theatre).

It was the first public musical theater in Moscow, where not only opera and ballet were staged, but also various public events were constantly held. The building stood for 25 years, but in 1805 there was a major fire in it, and the troupe had to give performances in private homes.

On January 18, 1825, a new building was solemnly opened on the site of the burned-out Petrovsky Theater, erected according to the project of the architect Osip Bove. In 1853, this building, unfortunately, also burned down, but this fire was the last for the Bolshoi.

What the “precursor” of the famous theater looked like, for which secular fashionistas and merchants came there, as well as the causes of the very first fire and how the audience fled because of a giant crack in the wall, Lidia Kharina, director of the Bolshoi Theater Museum, told us.

Ruin and plague: where did the entrepreneurs of the Bolshoi disappear?

Lidia Glebovna, tell us where the Bolshoi Theater comes from? Is there any specific date that is considered to be his birthday?

We have a date on the poster - March 28 (17th - according to the old style), 1776. This is the day of receiving the "privilege" for the maintenance of the theater in Moscow, Prince Peter Urusov. But this is not the first "privilege" in the history of this theater. The assignment of the very first "privilege" and the creation of the troupe took place in 1766. Documents about this date were found and published by professor, historian Lyudmila Mikhailovna Starikova, who studies the 18th century. The first troupe was created by Nikolai Titov (a retired military man, the first director of the Moscow Theater. - Note. ed.) and received state support. Titov lasted three years - it is very expensive to maintain the theater. He gave his "privilege" to two Italians - Chinti and Belmonti. But then a plague attacked Moscow ... One of the entrepreneurs, Chinti, became infected and died. To defeat the plague, Count Grigory Orlov was sent to Moscow. He quarantined the city and stopped the spread of the disease. Catherine the Great then generously rewarded Orlov for saving the Fatherland.

- Into whose hands did the theater then pass?

After the death of both entrepreneurs, the "privilege" was transferred to another foreigner, also an Italian, by the name of Grotti. But Grotti could not stand it for a long time - a lot of money was needed (for the maintenance of the theater. - Note. ed.). Then the “privilege” was transferred to Urusov, but, since its term was ending, he turned to the empress with a request to receive a new “privilege”. Catherine set a condition for him: “You will have the main“ privilege ”, no one will put obstacles in your way, but you must build a building for the theater.”

- And where was the theater located before that?

Prior to that, for ten years the troupe performed in different buildings. The first was the Opera House on the Yauza, which subsequently burned down. Then the troupe performed in private houses: in the house of Apraksin on Znamenka, in the house of Pashkov, in the Manege on Mokhovaya. Alterations of buildings went on endlessly, so, of course, it was very difficult: a special room was needed for the theater. Having received an order from the empress, Pyotr Urusov found a partner, bought the worst land in Moscow - junk (waste land - soil used for crops. - Note. ed.), today this place is called Theater Square. The area there was swampy, since the Neglinka River flows nearby. Nevertheless, it was here that the construction of the first building of the theater began.

Ladies flipped through fashion magazines, merchants made deals

- Urusov led the theater for a long time?

At some point, he also could not stand it and transferred the "privilege" to his companion - the Englishman Michael Madox, who was finishing the construction of the theater. In 1780, on Petrovka Street (hence the name Petrovsky. - Note. ed.) opened the first building of the capital's theater. It was the largest theater building in Moscow. It was perfectly adapted, the creators thought of everything very well. By the way, this building was used not only to stage performances, but also to hold all kinds of public events.

- Which for example?

For example, eight years after the opening, a dance hall was built in the theater, and masquerades and balls began to be held. There were also special rooms where ladies could leaf through magazines about French fashion during the day, and merchants could drink tea and conclude some kind of contract. That is, it was a house open to everyone around the clock. But if there was a severe frost, then the performances were canceled, because the building inside was not heated, especially in the area of ​​​​the stage. As you understand, the artists mostly wear open, light suits, so they were very cold.

By the way, about the artists: who then played in the theater? Did the troupe consist of free people or were there also serfs?

You know, unlike St. Petersburg, the artists of the Moscow theater were civilians. At the same time, some of the artists were bought, but they did not become serf actors in the service of the state, they became free people! But at the same time there were certain, very strict rules. For example, if you wanted to get married, then you had to write a paper so that you were allowed to marry such and such a citizen. Everyone thought about not losing the artist, so the control was quite tight. But all members of the troupe had a decent income, the artists were taken home by carriage. Therefore, of course, it was good to work in the theater.

- Is there any information about the performances of that time? What was played, what was interesting to the audience?

Our museum is just dealing with the history of the Bolshoi Theater, so I can say that they staged Mozart, Rossini ... And, of course, they tried to do something domestic, so all kinds of alterations of Russian folk songs and so on often appeared. It must be said that, first of all, the theater, of course, was musical and operatic. Although the artist in the XVIII century did everything: he sang, and danced, and recited. He seemed to be out of character.

After the fire, they immediately remembered the mayor

- How long did the Petrovsky Theater exist?

Until 1805. Then, as the documents say, a fire broke out in it because of someone's negligence: either they forgot a candle in the area of ​​​​the stage, or they did not turn off the lamp. And the theater is always wooden inside! Here they immediately remembered the mayor, who constantly showed displeasure at the fact that the stairs were narrow, and under them there were some kind of warehouses. Because of this, he, of course, scolded the administrators of the Petrovsky Theater.

But it didn't seem to save him from trouble. Did the fire completely destroy the building?

The fire was very strong, it could be seen even in the village of Vsesvyatsky - today it is the area of ​​\u200b\u200bthe Sokol metro station.

- But after all, the building, as I understand it, was quite high?

Not so high. It was a three-story stone building with a plank roof, it was not even particularly decorated in any way. But the dance hall was very beautiful: there were 24 columns, 48 ​​crystal chandeliers, it was very elegant, but it all burned down.

- After that, the theater began to roam again?

Yes, private houses have begun again. In 1808, a new building was built for the theater, completely made of wood. It stood on Arbat Square - where the monument to Gogol by the sculptor Andreev is now located. It was the only building in Moscow built by Karl Ivanovich Rossi, the chief architect of St. Petersburg. But in 1812, the Patriotic War began. When our troops retreated, Rostopchin (Fyodor Vasilyevich Rostopchin - Moscow mayor and governor-general of Moscow during the Napoleonic invasion. - Note. ed.) ordered to burn Moscow, and the first thing that was set on fire was precisely the Rossi Theater. So he burned out again.

Once, during the performance, there was a crash ...

As far as I know, after that a new building was built, but it also perished in a fire in 1853. The modern building of the Bolshoi Theater was designed by Albert Cavos and was repeatedly reconstructed, but there have been no more fires since then. Tell me, did any of the original elements of architecture and interior decoration that were still in the Petrovsky Theater survive to this day?

There was a fire on this very spot, that is, on Theater Square, twice: in the Petrovsky Theater and in a building designed by Osip Ivanovich Bove. In all buildings, the old foundation has always remained. The theater building was slightly enlarged, but at the same time everything that could be saved was used. After Beauvais, a lot of things remained: for example, we still have the same columns that were erected in 1825, made of white sandstone. The Moscow Kremlin was built from the same stone. Of course, we, Muscovites, are pleased. In addition to the columns, walls are partially preserved in some places. The collapse, of course, was very strong - the entire back of the rear stage was generally blown to smithereens. Well, as I said, the foundations remained. But they became a new trouble for the theater already in the 20th century. Due to the fact that the foundations are old, the building began to sag. In addition, it was affected by dampness. Now there are no problems - the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation helps, and before that there were problems with the building back in the 19th century.

- Were they also connected with the fire?

No, not with the fire, but with the foundations. Although the Neglinka flows through pipes, the place is still low, so the foundations were washed away. And once, right during the performance, a strong crack was heard: the right wall of the theater cracked from top to bottom. This caused the box doors to jam and the audience on the right side had to crawl over to the left side to evacuate. It was in 1902, and the theater was then closed for half a year. In the Theater Museum named after A. A. Bakhrushin, photographs have been preserved that show how repairs were carried out, new stone foundations were brought under the walls. In order for the theater not to collapse, some losses had to be incurred: for example, the wardrobe of the stalls was covered with earth. But we managed to save the building!

FIRE AND RESTORATION OF THE BUILDING BY ARCHITECT KAVOS

For twenty-eight years, the Bolshoi Petrovsky Theater adorned Moscow and was its pride. On a cloudy frosty morning on March 11, 1853, a fire broke out in the theater from an unknown cause. The fire started on the stage, in a closet under the wooden stairs leading to the artists' restrooms. One of the workers, in need of tools, opened the door to the closet, from which flames burst out. It instantly spread to the scenery, the curtain and began to spread rapidly inside the theater. On the stage at that time there were classes with seventy pupils of the children's theater school. Only thanks to the resourcefulness of two ministers, it was possible to lead out and save the children rushing about in fright. Seven workers - joiners of the theater - died in the fire.
The flame quickly engulfed the entire building (Fig. 47). A strong wind fanned the flames of the fire. Soon there was a huge puff of smoke above the building, which was clearly visible from the far ends of Moscow. Long tongues of flame flew out of the windows.
“It was terrible to look at this giant in flames,” contemporaries recalled.
The fire raged with particular force on the stage and in the auditorium. The temperature was so high that the cast-iron columns that supported the mezzanine bed melted (recollection of the director of the Maly Theater Solovyov). Despite the frost, the snow melted all over the area.
The complete helplessness of the Moscow fire brigades, which did not have high ladders and traveled to the Moscow River for water, was revealed. By two o'clock in the afternoon, all the internal premises of the theater were burned out. A strong fire lasted about two days, the whole fire lasted over a week. The view of the dying theater made a terrible impression. “When it burned,” recalls an eyewitness, “it seemed to us that before our eyes a dear person was dying, endowing us with wonderful thoughts and feelings.”
The death of the Bolshoi Petrovsky Theater was marked by the release of popular prints, lithographs, scarves with the image of a burning theater and a description of the heroic deed of the Yaroslavl peasant, roofer Vasily Marin. Arriving for the first time in his life in Moscow and running to the fire, he saw how three artisans of the theater, jumping out of the window of the upper floor onto the roof of the pediment of the portico, rushed along it, looking for salvation from the flames that surrounded them. Two of them, having come to despair, rushed down and crashed to death, the third took refuge from the smoke and heat in a place on the roof from where the wind blew the flames. Choking on the smoke, he screamed for help. It was impossible to get off the roof - there were no high stairs.
Marin volunteered to save the dying man. He was given a ladder that only reached the capitals of the columns. From there, along the drainpipe, which cracked and bent under his weight, he climbed to the ledge, on a pole gave the dying man a rope and helped him down.
The fire destroyed all the wooden parts of the building, that is, all the interiors of the theater. Only the charred stone walls and columns of the portico have survived. The roof over the entire building collapsed, all the outer cornices fell. Only the side halls and the lower floor, where the buffet, offices and cash desks were located, survived the fire.
The sketch made after the fire (Fig. 48) shows that most of the stone walls survived, only the arch of the back wall of the stage collapsed, which caused the top part of the back facade to fall. The figure also clearly shows preserved cast-iron brackets protruding from the wall surrounding the hall.
All theatrical property, cars, valuable collections of costumes perished in the fire (including the rarest collection of caftans embroidered with gold and silver of Catherine's nobles, a precious collection of unique musical instruments, part of a wonderful theater library, scenery, props, etc. The cost of everything that died, not counting the building and property owned by private individuals was estimated at about a million rubles, but Muscovites were even more oppressed by the consciousness of the loss of such a wonderful theater.
Shortly after the fire, a closed competition was announced for the construction of a new theater building. It was attended by Professor K. Ton, the architect of Moscow theaters A. Nikitin and the chief architect of the imperial theaters A. Kavos. Previously, they carried out a survey of the destroyed building. A specially formed commission for the consideration of projects at the General Directorate of Railways and Public Buildings chose the project of A. Kavos. May 14, 1953 this project was approved.
An estimate was made for the restoration and reconstruction of the Bolshoi Theater, but the Crimean War that began soon after prevented the restoration of the building. Only in 1855 was a temporary roof built according to the project presented by Kavos. On May 3, 1855, the general project of Kavos for the reconstruction of the theater was approved. On May 17, work began, but they only fully unfolded after the conclusion of peace.
Albert Kavos (1800 - 1863), son of the composer and conductor of the St. Petersburg Bolshoi Theatre, academician of architecture and chief architect of the imperial theaters, was known for his restructuring of almost all the largest theaters in Russia. At the beginning of his practical activity, he was an assistant to the architect C. Rossi in the construction of the Alexandria Theater. This largely determined his future activities. Feeling a penchant for theatrical architecture, Kavos was mainly engaged in the alteration and reconstruction of the largest theaters in St. Petersburg and Moscow. He deeply studied this area of ​​architecture and became one of the best experts on the acoustics of theater halls. In 1847, Cavos published in Paris "Guidelines for the construction of theaters. Cavos rebuilt the Mariinsky Theater in St. Petersburg (from the circus he had previously built), the Bolshoi Kamenny Theater of the architect Tom de Thomon, the Mikhailovsky, Alexandria, and the wooden Kamennoostrovsky. In addition to theaters, he rebuilt the Main St. Petersburg Post Office and built several mansions.
Considering the interiors of theaters remodeled by Kavos, it should be noted that he created the style of architectural decoration of the theater that was characteristic of that time. Being a good draftsman, but not having much talent and taste, Kavos had the ability to please the desires of the court. His work reflects the decline of Russian architecture that began in the 40s of the 19th century.
In his works, Kavos took little account of the architecture of the theaters he was remodeling and unceremoniously changed them to his liking. Most of the theaters he remade are surprisingly monotonous in architecture.
The architecture of Kavos is a heavy, monotonously scattered abundance of gilding and stucco. This is the same, with small variations, the decoration of the royal boxes, an elaborate combination of cupids, cartouches, kokoshniks, volutes, etc.
At the same time, all the theaters rebuilt by Kavos have greatly improved in terms of acoustics and visibility from various locations. The capacity of theaters has also increased. This was a big step forward in the development of the Russian theater, making it the leading theater of that time in this respect. Kavos had great connections at court and, with the help of patronage, easily defeated his rivals in the competition for the restoration of the Bolshoi Theater in Moscow.
More interesting from an architectural point of view was the project of K. Ton (Fig. 49). It is interesting in its grandiose side porticos, somewhat reminiscent of the famous project of the Bolshoi Stone Theater in St. Petersburg, architect. Quarenghi. Basically, the schemes of the old foyer and auditorium were preserved. The interpretation of tiers in height, parapets, orders (caryatids of the benoir, mezzanine arcades and colonnades of various heights in tiers of lodges) is varied. The completion of the hall with a dome of significant curvature cannot be considered successful either from the point of view of its acoustics or from the point of view of its composition.
The restoration of the theater began with the excavation of the ruins. At the end of May 1855, the reconstruction of the building itself began. All work was led by Kavos together with the architects Nikitin and Stelno. Work continued until the winter when Kavos received an order to visit all the best theaters in Europe in order to select the best theater system, as well as the engine room. Accompanied by the chief mechanic, Kavos toured the Brussels theater under construction, as well as Berlin, Dresden, Paris and other theaters. "But I didn't find anything remarkable," Cavos wrote.
The terms for the restoration of the theater were given extremely short. Restoration work went so fast that after a year and four months they were mostly sooty. The sum of all expenses amounted to 900,000 rubles. “The hasty renewal of the building of the Bolshoi Theatre, the lack of funds and some patronage, which the architect Cavos used in his position, had an unfavorable effect on the restructuring of the theater building, and the original building of the architect Beauvais was significantly damaged both from the outside and from the inside.”
Construction work was carried out of poor quality, which affected many years later. A number of design errors were made. In general, the work was not brought to full completion. The upper part of the building - the third floor (artistic restrooms) remained unfinished. Outside, the appearance of completeness of the restoration of the building was created.
On August 20, 1850, the grand opening of the restored theater took place. Bellini's opera "The Puritani" was on. Again, newspapers and magazines described the splendor of the building restored from the ruins, the perfection and luxury of its interior decoration, the comfort and beauty of the auditorium. Newspapers emphasized that the new theater building eclipsed all the best European theaters.
Turning to the analysis of the architectural appearance that Kavos gave to the Bolshoi Theater, one should first of all note the lack of that integrity and harmony that were inherent in all elements of the Mikhailov-Bone building. Looking at the building of the Bolshoi Theater, we admire this beautiful structure, its general composition, its colossal scale, the distribution of the masses of the building, its articulations, the majestic portico, the huge auditorium, etc. In other words, we are attracted to the building of the Bolshoi Theater by the outstanding merits of architecture , created by Mikhailov-Bové.
The changes made to the architecture of the Bolshoi Theater by Kavos come out on closer and more detailed examination of the building. There is a lot of success in the architectural decor developed by Kavos, but still it does not have the integrity and beauty that distinguished the Mikhailov-Bové Petrovsky Theater.
While admiring the building of the Bolshoi Theatre, we cannot but notice the shortcomings that exist in its architecture. Basically, this is the unsuccessful execution of some details and rough decor, the low artistic qualities of which are explained not so much by the lack of taste in Kavos, but by the general decline of architecture during this period. However, it should be remembered that the shortcomings of the reconstruction of Kavos are only a particle of that beautiful whole that we associate with the words "Bolshoi Theatre". Numerous, in a number of cases, unsuccessful alterations of Kavos could not violate the main artistic merits of the building, captivating by the grandeur and monumentality of the architectural image.
Kavos did not immediately find those final architectural forms that are still visible at the Bolshoi Theater building. During the design process, he initially made two options, still relatively close to the old Beauvais architecture (Fig. 50 - 53). In both versions (kept in the Museum of Architecture (Academy of Architecture of the USSR), the front slope of the roof of the upper part of the building has not yet been replaced by the upper pediment. The columns of the portico have the same Ionic threads. In one version, signed by Kavos (Fig. 52), the front wall of the upper volume is indented up to the corridor surrounding the auditorium.In another version (fig. 50), not signed by Kavos, but by all indications belonging to him, on the rear facade there is a pediment and columns, the same height as on the front facade.In both versions, the upper the pediment is present only on the rear facade.
After the fire, only the outer walls and columns of the portico remained from the old Petrovsky Theater. Reconstructing the building, Kavos sought to make the outer facade more beautiful: as he himself writes, to decorate it most elegantly. The strict and expressively restrained attire of the old Petrovsky Theater no longer satisfied the new tastes, it seemed poor and boring.
Kavos' desire to make the outer facade more beautiful was also accompanied by a desire to increase the volume of the entire building. Kavos increased both the overall height of the building and the size of individual parts, details of the facade (the height of the columns, pediment, sculptures, entablature, etc.). In the reconstruction project of Kavos (fig. 55), the total height of the building was increased from 36.9 m (near Beauvais) to 43.5 m, the height of the main portico - from 23.5 to 27 m. The height of the columns was increased accordingly from 15 to 16 m The height of the walls of the lower volume has been increased from 23.5 to 26 m, the sculptural group of Apollo - from 5 to 6.5 m, etc. In reality, while carrying out his project, Cavos deviated from these dimensions and did not depart so much from the original dimensions of the Mikhailov-Beauvais building (Fig. 83-86). The total height of the existing building of the Bolshoi Theater is 40.7 m, the height of the portico is 24.5 m, the height of the columns of the portico is 14.8 m, the height of the auditorium is 19.7 m.
As already mentioned, Cavos introduced a number of new, not entirely successful architectural motifs (Fig. 58) both outside and inside the building. Instead of a gentle slope roof, softly completing the building, Cavos introduced a second pediment, which changed the proportions of the crowning volume and the general silhouette of the theater. The upper pediment monotonously repeats the lower one. Its densely rich thyme
first of all, it attracts attention with its relief, thereby introducing anxiety into the composition of the facade.
The criticism of contemporaries about the technique used by Kavos cannot be considered unfounded, despite the fact that the appearance of the existing Bolshoi Theater familiar to us
with two pediments is not perceived by us as an architecturally contradictory composition. The duality of photons of the Bolshoi Theater is obvious. Cut off at a sufficient distance from each other in height and therefore completely visible, they argue with each other, which reduces the architectural significance of the pediment of the entrance portico.
But the biggest failure of Kavos was that he unrecognizably altered and degraded the wall with the arch and sculpture of Apollo. In an effort to decorate this wall as richly as possible and "hide the heaviness of proportions from the general colossality" or, as he himself writes, "in order to mask the infinity of the general proportions", Kavos destroyed the arch-writing and filled the entire steppe with pilasters, windows, arcades. divided into five separate parts. The middle, wider one has five windows framed by one flat arcade. The side windows are arranged in pairs. The side parts are divided by one pilaster, while at the corners and along the edges of the middle part there are two of them. The entire plane of the wall turned out to be crushed and fragmented. The former plaster group of Apollo, which stood out so well against the dark background of the arch, died during a fire and was filled with foam by a quadriga cast from red copper according to the model of the sculptor Klodt. Placed on a heavy pedestal, it was strongly pushed forward, to the very edge of the ridge of the roof of the portico, so that the front legs of the rearing horses protrude in front of the pediment (Fig. 105, 110).
This interesting, though not new solution (remember, for example, the Alexandrinsky Theater of Rossi in St. Petersburg) had a peculiar effect, enhancing the compositional significance of the portico and the visibility of the magnificent sculptural group. However, in the new production, the quadriga of Apollo, being the main decoration of the theater facade and expressing the essence and purpose of the building, still does not have that support and connection with the rear facade of the wall, does not have that strong symbolic conditionality, as it is It was in the Old Petrovsky Theatre.
The side parts of the façade, on the sides of the portico, whose smooth surface in the former building of Beauvais was enlivened only by square rustication, at Kavos lost their background character, subordinated to the portico. On the edges of the walls, Cavos laid pilasters of a similar order to the portico. In the middle of the walls appeared huge false windows in heavy frames, repeating the motif of windows located under the portico, and bas-relief panels at the top of the attic (Fig. 108, 111). The wall itself was shattered by larger and coarser rust.
The sculptural frieze that ran along all the walls around the building was destroyed, and a new one was introduced, but only on the front facade. On this new frieze, the images of children supporting heavy garlands were replaced by lush floral ornaments (Fig. 103). The juicy wide strip of the former cornice that crowned the whole building and the modules that supported it, with wreaths between them, Kavos, in accordance with the division of the upper wall with pilasters, replaced it with a complex and dryly profiled entablature (Fig. 90, 6).
After the fire, only the trunks of the columns remained from the portico. Instead of the pediment of the old theater, low, flattened and light, Cavos erected a new one, different in character - higher and more massive, which was largely justified by the monumental quadriga crowning it, located directly above the tympanum of the pediment. A bas-relief was placed in the tympanum - flying "geniuses" with a lyre (Fig. 104), which beautifully filled the plane of the pediment.
In his reconstruction project, Kavos outlined the height of the columns at 16 m (a whole meter higher than the old ones), but in reality they were only 14 m 80 cm high. Instead of the Ionic order of the former portico, Kavos introduced an order close in design to the composite one (Fig. 92 -104).
Pilasters were superimposed on the inner wall of the portico, corresponding to the columns. The bas-relief above the windows was replaced by a row of rectangles filled with theatrical masks (Fig. 112). Semi-circular windows, formerly decorated with ornamented archivolts and thin balusters at the bottom, now received a more magnificent decor in the form of pilasters on consoles, sandriks and balusters, which are rather heavy in shape. Niches with sculptures of muses 3.5 m high appeared on the previously smooth walls, against the extreme intercolumns (Fig. 106 - 107).
As a result of alterations, the inner wall of the portico, while retaining a clear rhythmic layout and good proportions of openings, nevertheless lost in the subtlety of the architectural decoration, which well expressed the interior of the portico.
The side facades of the theater (Fig. 60, 91), as well as the main one, were redesigned by Kavos mainly in the direction of enriching them with architectural decoration, which violated the noble simplicity and integrity of the original design. But due to the fact that the entire compositional and tectonic basis of the construction, created by his predecessors, was preserved, the side facades of the theater make a strong impression even in their present form.
According to the alteration of the main facade, five large arched windows of the upper volume were destroyed. Instead, their wall received 13 pairs of small narrow windows, separated by pilasters. The small windows of the attic floor of the main volume were slightly enlarged and framed by a continuous strip, passing alternately from the bottom of one window to the top of another.
The solid strip of bas-relief that adorned the middle of the side façade and thus effectively distinguished its central part was replaced by a number of separate rectangular bas-reliefs with theatrical masks, the same as in the main portico. The balconies on the second floor, which served as umbrellas over the entrances, were also replaced by deep rain canopies supported by crudely patterned cast-iron columns with lanterns between them. Kavos did not find, however, an organic combination of these canopies with the monumental architecture of the facades.
In the same character as the main and side facades, the rear facade was also redesigned (Fig. 61, 85, 89). In addition, a one-story stone shed was attached to it for a scenery warehouse.
The absence of the necessary subtlety and elegance in the architectural decoration and profiling of details introduced a certain monotony and dryness into the architecture of the theater facades overloaded with decorations.
If, when restoring the external appearance of the building, Kavos had to reckon with its dimensions, relief, windows, with all the preserved architecture of the old theater, then when reconstructing the interior of the theater, which had almost completely died, he could show great freedom. In addition, Kavos believed that the old theater did not have the main qualities of this type of building and that its "serious flaws" required "good reconstruction." On this "foundation" he significantly changed the nature of the architecture of the interior of the theater and especially the auditorium.
But even here, in constructing the interior of the theater, its main premises, Kavos, being bound by the existing structure of the building, which predetermined the main spatial construction, still could not get away from the legacy of Mikhailov-Beauvais.
Comparison of the old auditorium with the new one (Fig. 57) indicates their difference in architectural interpretation and, at the same time, some closeness of the new hall to the second version of Beauvais in terms of basic dimensions and spatial composition.

During the reconstruction of the auditorium, Kavos sought, first of all, to correct its acoustic and optical shortcomings, and to increase its size. and also decorate it most magnificently.
Being one of the greatest specialists in theater construction and an outstanding expert in acoustics, Kavos paid special attention to creating the best form of the auditorium for acoustics. Therefore, when reconstructing the theater, Kavos significantly changed the shape of the hall. Considering the former curved wall of the auditorium to be unsuccessful acoustically due to its expansion compared to the proscenium and at the same time wanting to enlarge the hall, Cavos broke the inner wall of the hall along the entire perimeter, badly damaged by fire and survived only up to the 4th floor, and erected a new wall of the hall, increasing it by narrowing the corridors. This new wall, moved by 2.5 m, Kavos gave a different curvature and gave a smoother outline, destroying the extension compared to the proscenium (Fig. 56, 63, 64).
Thanks to this reconstruction, the shape of the auditorium of the Bolshoi Theater has changed significantly. Comparing the old hall of the Petrovsky Theater with the new one (Fig. 56), we see that, having retained the former shape for the rear semicircle of the hall (only slightly increasing its radius), Kavos straightened the side parts of the curved hall that approached the stage. At the same time, Kavos expanded the portal arch of the stage. Thus, now, after reconstruction, the curve of the boxes approached the stage almost in a straight line and smoothly passed into the side walls of the portal. This greatly improved the acoustic and optical properties of the new hall of the Bolshoi Theatre. Comparison of the Mikhailov-Bové auditorium with the reconstructed Cavos hall allows us to draw the following conclusions: the dimensions of the hall designed by Cavos have changed little, with the exception of the length, which was increased mainly due to a reduction in the depth of the proscenium; the width remained almost the same.

The space increased by the corridors was occupied by the outward lodges. The height of the hall remained almost the same.
As in outdoor architecture, Kavos did not immediately find the final composition of the auditorium. This can be seen from the above options for his project in the collection of the Museum of Architecture of the Academy of Architecture of the USSR (Fig. 50-53). At first, its architecture was still close to the old hall of Mikhailov-Bové. In the first variant, there are no front lodges, the corridors surrounding the auditorium are still wide. In another version, the decor of the royal boxes and the entire hall is more modest and stricter.
When comparing both halls, the old auditorium of Mikhailov-Bone seems taller and slimmer (Fig. 57). Contemporaries also testify to this. “When you enter the stalls and the curtain has not yet been raised, the theater hall will certainly seem to you smaller than it was before the fire. But this is nothing more than an optical illusion, resulting from its amazing proportionality.
The reason for this "optical illusion" lies in a different interpretation of the composition of the "wall" of the Kavos auditorium, its division into tiers. Kavos greatly reduced the height of the plafond, lowered the mezzanine and divided the entire height of the hall into equal tiers. The height of the lodges and parapets became the same for all tiers.
Nearly all of the new space gained from the reduction of the corridors was used for front lodges. According to Cavos, the old lodges were not deep and wide enough, he replaced them with new ones (Fig. 76), which combined the so-called French and Italian types of lodges. The "French" type of lodges are balconies supported by corbels (or columns) and separated by an internal partition. The entrance to them leads directly from the corridors. The peculiarity of these boxes is that the entire box and the audience in it are completely visible from the hall. The Italian type of boxes is, as it were, separate rooms, devoid of a front wall overlooking the auditorium and usually decorated with curtains and draperies that cover the box from the auditorium. The advantage of this type of box is that spectators who do not want to be seen from the auditorium can attend the performance and remain invisible, covered with curtains. This type of box was once used in the Old Petrovsky Theatre.
In the new auditorium of Kavos, the boxes were divided into two halves by a partition: the front - a balcony protruding forward, open on all sides, supported by a console hidden under the floor of the box, and the back half, i.e. the front box and the form of a separate small office, closed from the hall drapery. The avanlozha was furnished with sofas, a mirror, and a table. All together, as Kavos writes, it was "very comfortable and pleasant."

For that time, it was undoubtedly a new, successful technique that created great convenience (of course for the “chosen public”) when visiting the theater with a whole family or company.
The entire inner "wall" of the hall was a large front of boxes with strongly emphasized, extended horizontal tiers and a continuous rhythm of piers and draperies (Fig. 68, 113). The center of the entire composition of the "wall" was the middle royal box. Along the edges were located side letter boxes (for the royal family and the ministry of the court, as well as for the directorate of the theater). Both the central and letter boxes, two tiers high and six meters wide, were supposed to be the most richly decorated elements of the hall, according to Kavos.
There was NOT a central royal box in Beauvais' project: it was placed in the left, towards the stage, letter box. True, a central box was soon arranged, but what it represented is completely unknown. Cavos noted the shortcomings of these lodges: the stairs to them were on the side, there was no vestibule, "... the box had no salon, it was narrow, just like the achanlozha, it seemed more like a corridor than an imperial box", "the stairs in them were not only defective, but not very decent in a building of this type.
Of course, the central position of the royal box and its size gave more solemnity to the entire hall. The box was somewhat pushed forward in relation to the plane of the tiers (Fig. 77, 115). Below it was supported by two bent atlases. Two pairs of double twisted columns carried sculptures of boys supporting a heavy pediment with a coat of arms in the middle, topped with an ornate curved cornice. The canopy of the box protruded slightly in front of the gently sloping arch that carried it, decorated with lush draperies, intertwined cords, tassels and braids. The letter boxes were almost the same, only twisted columns were placed wider in them, and the top of the box and the pediment above it were broken into three faces (Fig. 77, 117). In both cases, the impression of some heaviness and architectonic ambiguity will be created. Much better they were presented in the first version of the draft, signed by Kavos.
When altering the parterre, Kavos replaced the inconvenient entrance steps with a more comfortable gentle ramp. Behind the armchairs, where there used to be a gallery, he arranged an amphitheater, with a corridor through the back. The stalls after the reconstruction received two side and one middle aisle and had 17 rows with 420 seats; the amphitheater behind the parterre had 150 seats. The entire auditorium accommodated 2,300 people and had 16 boxes in the benoir, 30 boxes each in the dress circle and the second tier, 20 boxes each in the third and fourth tiers, and a fifth tier gallery.

The orchestra was advanced six meters in depth by reducing the proscenium (it used to be strongly advanced into the stalls), expanded up to the letter box and lowered by one meter so as not to block the stage for the spectators of the stalls, as was the case in the old theater. All this provided much better visibility of the stage.
The ceiling and the new hall became much flatter than before (Fig. 79 - 81). This greatly improved the acoustics of the hall. Contrary to the instructions that ordered to make the plafond, as well as the parapets of boxes and galleries in the Bolshoi Theater being restored, made of metal, Cavos made them wooden, referring to the low acoustic properties of metal and citing the example of Rossi's Alexandrinsky Theater, where the metal plafond caused poor resonance.
In order not to worsen the acoustics, Kavos made the plane of the ceiling almost horizontal with slight roundings at the edge, without any stucco. The entire surface of the painted plafond is divided by complex, decorated with ornaments and carvings, frames into ten separate sectors filled with images of nine muses with Apollo (Fig. 119 - 120). Muses soar against the blue sky. The ceiling painting is of low quality, sugary in execution and sharp in tone.
A large chandelier (Fig. 82) with three rows of candles was hung in the center of the plafond (in the old theater the chandelier was much smaller and had two rows of candles). Many bronze sconces attached to the sides of the tiers enhanced the illumination of the hall. Their light, splitting and refracting in crystal pendants, gave the hall an elegant, festive look.
Initially, lighting was produced by lamps in which olein (oil) burned. This was inconvenient, since the glass often broke, fell down, and the chandelier had to be raised to fix it during the performance itself. Only much later was gas lighting introduced (in a chandelier and a ramp). On the most solemn occasions and on festive days, stearin candles were lit. The chandelier was hung very inconveniently, as it obstructed almost the entire stage to the spectators of the upper tiers sitting behind it.
Professor of historical painting Kozroya-Duzi was commissioned to write a new curtain on a plot from Russian history. He presented three sketches, from which a sketch was selected depicting the solemn entry of Prince Pozharsky through the Spassky Gate into the Kremlin after the expulsion of the Polish invaders from Moscow. The curtain was made with meticulous attention to detail. Critics of that time wrote: “... the only reproach is his too distinct performance. This is no longer a decorative painting, content with the general effect, but rather a real picture, finished in every detail with a true love of art. The most demanding eye will not find in her a single feature that
would have been carried out hastily or carelessly. This replacement of the former curtains with their conditional symbolic emblems and attributes of art - lyres, wreaths and Apollos - such curtain-pictures with historical plots is characteristic.
The decoration of the hall was done with extreme splendor. The basis of the color composition of the hall was the combination of crimson silk of the draperies of the boxes with gold covering almost all the decorations of the hall (ornament, stucco molding, parapet carving, etc.). The crimson silk of the drapery of the boxes created a bright purple background in all tiers.
The front side of the parapets of the tiers of lodges (Fig. 116, 118) shone with various gilded carvings, which seemed even brighter on a large field. Later, the entire plane of the parapet was gilded, so that the carving superimposed on it, extremely elaborate in design, merged into one common, illegible, brilliant strip of the barrier.

The parapets were made somewhat curved in order to make it more comfortable to sit in the front row. Comfortable furniture was made of polished oak, with crimson velvet cushions.
The auditorium even now makes a strong impression with its clear and regular construction, harmonious proportions. This impression of the solemn and majestic architecture of the hall of the Bolshoi Theater does not disappear even after a closer examination of the decor reveals its heaviness and rudeness.
Of note are the very important improvements Cavos made to the new Auditorium. In addition to the above-mentioned change in the form of the hall and the construction of new walls, Kavos, with the help of a number of specially taken measures, further improved the acoustic conditions in the auditorium. The plafond was lowered, the walls of the hall at a distance of two fingers from the stone were covered with a wooden panel, the round ceiling, also wooden, was made like a guitar, had a special
"deku" and was completely made up of small pieces. As a result of all these changes, the auditorium of the Bolshoi Theater has become one of the best in the world in terms of its acoustics.
The great Russian actress A. V. Nezhdanova told in her memoirs how, speaking for the first time on the stage of the Bolshoi Theater, she was confused when she saw the vast expanse of the hall in front of her. The modest young singer thought: “What a strong voice you need to have to fill his huge space!” “I didn’t know,” she continues, “the magical qualities of the acoustics of this hall, I didn’t know that the lightest, barely perceptible sounds are perfectly audible in all its most remote corners.”
The visibility of the stage has also been improved. By lowering the orchestra that blocked the stage from the stalls, widening the stage portal, making the curve of the hall more gentle, and directing the walls of the boxes more steeply towards the stage, Cavos, thanks to all these measures, achieved much better visibility.
Other interiors of the restored theater have also changed. The magnificent wide corridors that surrounded the auditorium from the outside but completely replaced the foyer in size in all tiers, capable of freely accommodating the entire audience of the tier and coming from below, according to Kavos, were "... unsatisfactory in proportion not only against the rules of construction, but also against common sense. Their width was 7 arshins, height 3.5 arshins. These proportions did not allow to make a vault, moreover, these proportions made the corridors gloomy and look like catacombs.
As a result of the reconstruction carried out by Kavos (arrangement of the front louvres), these corridors were reduced to 4 arshins wide, which, according to Kavos, was sufficient for "easy circulation." Narrowed corridors now lost
their former meaning of capacious ring foyers and turned into ordinary passages intended for communication between boxes.
In the Bolshoi Petrovsky Theatre, the corridors of all floors approaching the stage ended with staircases that served as an addition to the main semicircular staircases. Kavos destroyed them, leaving the semicircular stairs unchanged. Instead, he provided stairs isolated from the corridors, facing the side facades and designed for convenient communication with the complex of premises serving the stage (artistic and service) developed by Kavos. He managed to do this only by significantly shortening the side vestibules and side foyers - the masquerade halls of the second floor (Fig. 56). This "minimal", in his words (five sazhens, or 10.5 m in reality), reduction of the halls changed their elongated proportions and made them more static.
Thanks to the alteration of the stairs, the public now got to the gallery only through a special, separate staircase. End-to-end communication stopped until the topmost
floors. The gallery audience was cut off from the rest of the theatre. And this was not an accidental phenomenon, this was the result of ignoring the interests and neglect of the poorest part of the audience.
In order to make the aisles and rooms associated with the letter boxes more grand, Cavos increased their size, introduced wide staircases and second salons to the vestibule. Complicated even more by further alterations and additions, all this heaping of walls and stairs worsened the communications connecting the theater premises, created inconvenience for the public and was dangerous in terms of fire. Cavos also redesigned the main staircase leading from the main vestibule to the main foyer (Fig. 56). Previously, in the Bolshoi Petrovsky Theater, these stairs began with one wide flight (Fig. 28, 29) and then divided into two narrow flights that ran along the side walls of the vestibule. Passages to the corner halls of the second floor were made above the middle wide march. Kavos, instead of the lower wide and upper narrow marches, made all the marches the same, narrowing their total width, and from the space thus vacated along the side walls (1.5 m wide) made passages to the corner halls of the second floor. Now, to get into the corner halls, you need to go through a long one, sandwiched between the wall
and the balustrade of the stairs, the passage that goes around the entire march and the entire landing of the stairs (Fig. 69).
In the vestibule, Kavos replaced the severe, strong Doric order and coffered vaults with less expressive pilasters and a heavy rusticated wall (Fig. 72).
The lower wide corridor under the stalls was covered with earth, which served as a wardrobe for the audience of the entire theater (Fig. 62). Instead, wardrobes were built in the corridors of all floors. To make it easier for the audience to enter the stalls, Kavos made a direct entrance to it from the vestibule. He divided the entire ascent from the vestibule to the stalls into three separate marches: one at the entrance to the hall, the second - in the thickness of the vestibule wall in the doors opposite the main entrance, and the third - directly in front of this wall. Cavos replaced the steps at the side entrances to the parterre with gently sloping ramps.
The whole huge space above the auditorium and the main foyer was occupied by the scenery hall. The trusses above this hall, supporting the entire roof of the building, were made of wood (Fig. 75). This was dangerous in terms of fire and contrary to the instructions that ordered them to be made of metal, but the violation of the prescription was justified by saving the allocated funds. The ceiling of the scenery hall was not insulated, which made it impossible to work in the hall and led to repeated repairs in subsequent years.
In the same way, the decoration of the upper parts of the building above the mezzanine side foyers was not smoked. The restrooms of the artists supposed there were not made; builders limited themselves to temporary boardwalk on wooden posts; costume warehouses were placed here.
The huge stage of the Bolshoi Theater remained unchanged, with the exception of the depth, which was reduced by 5.5 m due to the proscenium.
In the side walls of the stage, instead of eight narrow arched openings, which served to connect the stage with neighboring rooms, supply scenery and serve the stage, four arches, much wider and higher, which created great convenience for working on the stage.
The rear part of the building was freed from interfloor ceilings and turned into a rear stage, which significantly increased the decorative possibilities of productions. The slope of the stage floor (the “tablet” of the stage) has become more gentle than in the old theatre.
Outside, at the rear facade of the building, a one-story stone extension was erected - two covered courtyards for storing scenery, with an arched gate and a rather steep ramp to raise the scenery to the stage.
Despite the fact that Kavos cared about fire-fighting measures and the comfort of the public, much in its reconstruction still left much to be desired - and later served as a cause for concern for the administration, such as the wooden stairs to the artists' lavatories located on the stage in extremely flammable conditions.
Particular attention was paid by Kavos to the creation of maximum amenities for the privileged public of the stalls, benoir and mezzanine, as well as to the premises serving the royal family. Visitors to the upper tiers entered the theater from the side facade through small lobbies and rooms.
Despite a number of improvements, still insufficient care was taken in relation to the organization of the backstage part of the theatre. “Watching the theater building from the side of the facades and inside the magnificent hall,” wrote engineer I. I. Rerberg, an excellent connoisseur of this theater who did a lot to improve it, “we don’t even imagine what kind of inconvenience the artistic staff and workers of the stage experience.” Only after the Great October Socialist Revolution were many of the shortcomings of the reconstruction of Kavos eliminated.
Summing up the results of this reconstruction, we have to say that it largely changed the clearer and more integral character of the architecture of the Petrovsky Bolshoi Theater Mikhailova - Beauvais, especially in terms of architectural decoration and details. At the same time, during the reconstruction, the theater acquired a number of qualities that it lacked before. The acoustic and optical conditions in the auditorium were incomparably improved, as well as the parts serving the theater, equipped with the latest technology of that time - the stage, workshops, engine room, decoration shop, etc.
It should be especially emphasized that Cavos nevertheless retained the main compositional advantages of the excellent building of Mikhailov - Beauvais. Thanks to them, the building of the Bolshoi Theater is still an exceptional building.
Not to mention the grandiose scale of the building, the monumentality of its masses, the expressiveness of its colonnade - all these qualities that stop the attention of any spectator, not to mention its external appearance, so well known to everyone, the theater auditorium is admired by everyone. The vast space of the hall amazes the viewer with the scope and strength of the constructive solution, captivates with the brilliance and luxury of decoration. The bright, festive coloring of the hall (a combination of gold and purple that has become traditional for the Bolshoi Theater) creates an unusually spectacular impression and captivates with its exceptional elegance. The huge depth of the hall filled with streams of electric light, the colossal stage, which takes the viewer's gaze into the endless distances of scenery - all this, even without the action of music and singing, creates a unique spectacle, makes visiting the Bolshoi Theater unforgettable.

And the biggest suspicion is the date of birth itself. Why? Here is an example... In 1925, the Bolshoi Theater widely celebrated its centenary, that is, it counted its foundation since 1825. However, 25 years later, in 1951, the theater, having gained years of age, celebrated its 175th anniversary.

240 or 250?

And the whole point is what date is considered the foundation of the theater. The current Bolshoi is the third theater building (1780, 1825, 1856). After all, in fact, the history of the Bolshoi Theater is the history of fires. Mansions burned, new ones were built in their place. And this is not surprising. Getting acquainted with the history of almost any theater building, everywhere you can find information that in such and such a year the building was on fire. The main cause of the emergency was, of course, lighting - first candles and oil lamps, and then gas jets. So the theatrical and office premises of the theater, where the costumes, scenery, props were stored, were just a powder keg, which is just waiting for that same fatal spark to appear ... Therefore, the date of birth of the hero of the day directly depends on which of these three buildings we we consider it a real Bolshoi Theater (all of them are actually built on the same foundation). These disputes are still not over. But first things first.

March 28, 1776 - this is the date emblazoned on every ticket. It was on this day 240 years ago that the Moscow Provincial Prosecutor, Prince P.V. Urusov, single-handedly received the privilege to maintain the Russian theater. The privilege was issued by Catherine II, and thanks to her, Urusov was exempt from tax, but was obliged to “build at his own expense in five years, as directed by the Police, a theater with all accessories, stone, with such external decoration that it could serve as an ornament to the city, and moreover home for public masquerades, comedies and comic operas. This document is recognized today as a birth certificate.

However, modern researchers do not agree with this. In fact, according to their calculations, this year the theater should celebrate its 250th anniversary. Professor L.M. Starikova found documents that showed that Urusov’s privilege was far from the first ... Starikova also named the name of the first director appointed in Moscow to manage a public theater - this is Colonel Nikolai Sergeevich Titov. It was he who received a wooden theater building on the Yauza near the Lefortovo Palace, which was called the “Big Opera House on the Yauza”, or the Golovinsky Theater. In this very place on February 21, 1766, the first performance of the future troupe of the Bolshoi Theater was shown. So there is every reason to call the date of birth 1766. However, like people, changing the date of birth of theaters is not so easy.

Therefore, let us return to Urusov. This man, although he loved the theater, was rather far from it. That is why he invited himself an assistant - a foreigner, Mikhail Maddox, an "equilibrist", a theater mechanic and a "lecturer", who demonstrated various kinds of optical devices and other "mechanical" miracles.

As we remember, the main condition for the privilege was the construction of a new building for their own money. Fulfilling the obligation, the co-owners purchased from Prince Lobanov-Rostovsky a house with land on Bolshaya Petrovsky Street in the parish of the Church of the Savior on Copies. This land at that time was the worst in Moscow - a low, swampy bank of the Neglinka River, constantly flooded with water. It was there that the first building of the theater was erected on piles. Until the completion of the new construction, performances were staged at the Opera House on Znamenka until February 26, 1780, when the fire destroyed the theater “due to the negligence of the lower servants”.

The troupe at that time was small and instead of the hundreds of artists and attendants who work in the theater today, there were only 13 actors, 9 actresses, 4 dancers, 3 dancers with a choreographer and 13 musicians.

This is what the Bolshoi Petrovsky Theater looked like before the fire.

Fictitious Curse of the Plague Cemetery

In the same year, a few days before the fire on Znamenka, the Moskovskiye Vedomosti newspaper published a message: “The office of the Znamensky Theater, always trying to please the respectable public, through this announces that a stone house is now being built again for the theater on Bolshaya Petrovsky Street near Kuznetsky bridge, which will end by the opening, of course, this year 1780 in the month of December. So what is this place on which the Bolshoi Theater was built?

Recently, some artists have heard that the theater was built on the site of a plague cemetery. It is by this circumstance that they explain a whole series of unpleasant and criminal events that the theater had to endure quite recently. Is it so? For clarification, I turn to the head of the Bolshoi Museum, Candidate of Art Criticism Lidia Kharina.

Those who tell this should read the documents better, Lidia Glebovna tells me. - I can say for sure: there could be no plague cemetery here! When I looked at the plans of the 18th century, I saw that where the theater now stands is the Lobanov-Rostovsky lands. It was private property. Why did they buy this land? After all, they did not buy the cemetery land - this is impossible. We have an Orthodox country, burials were made at churches. There was a church of the Savior on Copies nearby. But in private estates, and even with swampy terrain, there could not be any graves. In addition, special cemeteries outside the city were organized for plague burials.

What was in this place before the Bolshoi? There is an assumption that part of the walls of the Lobanov-Rostovsky house, which burned in 1773 and stood “without a ceiling and a roof,” was included in the new construction of the theater. Those. already after the plague in Moscow, according to the conclusion of the police architect Karin, it is known that there was a house that burned down.

Nothing has changed in 240 years

A large three-story stone building is being built by the tailor's son, the architect Christian Ivanovich Rozberg. Maddox, who by this time had bought the privilege from Urusov, became the sole owner, and on December 30, Moskovskie Vedomosti reported the opening of the Petrovsky Theater, overlooking Petrovka Street. Actually, hence the original name (later it will be called the Old Petrovsky Theater). On the same evening, the audience was given a performance that included "Prologue to the opening of the Petrovsky Theater", and with it a large pantomimic ballet "Magic Shop", staged by L. Paradis to the music of J. Starzer, and "Wanderer's Dialogue to the opening of the new Petrovsky Theater » works by Ablesimov.

“This huge building,” the Muscovites informed the press, “built for popular pleasure and amusement, accommodates one hundred and ten boxes, not counting the galleries.” These lodges, of the Italian system, were located in several tiers and were completely isolated from each other by solid partitions. They gave up, and each of the owners furnished the box according to his own taste, upholstered with damask, pasted over with wallpaper, brought his own furniture. The picture was - you can't imagine more colorful. In addition, visibility, as now from some lodges, left much to be desired. But such is the Italian system. “You can’t see anything from one half of the places, you can’t see anything from one third of the other half” ... In general, nothing has changed in 240 years!

In addition to the auditorium, there were many places in the building where the audience could relax during intermissions and even dance after the end of the performances. Here were the old and newly built "masquerade halls", "card room", several "coal" offices, where those who did not want to tempt fate at the green card table retired, but could, for example, negotiate with a partner.

Not only operas and ballets were staged here, as they are now, but also dramas. Both “masquerade parties” and “verb bazaars” were held here.

Swamp with frogs

Gradually, Maddox began to have financial difficulties, and on October 22, 1805, before the performance of the opera "The Dnieper Mermaid" "due to the negligence of the wardrobe master" a fire broke out in the theater near the stage.

So, as choreographer Adam Glushkovsky writes, “from 1805 to 1823, burnt stone walls stood on Petrovsky Theater Square, in which birds of prey lived. And among them was a swamp in which there were many frogs. In the summer, in the morning and evening, their cries were heard from there for a long distance.

In 1806, as the same Glushkovsky notes, the theater "was taken with the troupe into the department of the treasury for debts." The wanderings of artists began. And in 1808, the famous Karl Rossi built for this troupe a new temporary theater building on the Arbat, approximately in the place where the “sitting” monument to Gogol is now located. The theater was completely wooden, on a stone foundation. This first and only building in Moscow by Rossi already accommodated up to 3 thousand spectators and became the first building that was set on fire when the French approached Moscow in 1812.

In 1816, the Commission for Buildings announced a competition for a project, the prerequisite of which was to include the walls of the charred Maddox Theater in the new building. Funds were allocated, but they turned out to be less than the first draft made by Andrey Mikhailov suggested. So the plan needed to be redone. She was entrusted to Osip Bove.

The theater was opened on January 6, 1825. At the opening, the prologue "The Triumph of the Muses" written specially for the occasion in verse (by M. Dmitrieva) was performed with choirs and dances to the music of A. Alyabyev, A. Verstovsky and F. Scholz, as well as the ballet "Sandrillon" staged by a dancer and choreographer F.V. Gyullen-Sor invited from France to the music of her husband F. Sor. The Muses triumphed over the fire that destroyed the old theater building, and, led by the Genius of Russia, whose role was played by the twenty-five-year-old Pavel Mochalov, they revived a new temple of art from the ashes. The building made a stunning impression on Muscovites. And although the theater was really very large, it could not accommodate everyone.

By the way, the name "Big" appeared just then. Indeed, in terms of size, the theater was considered the largest building in Moscow (with the exception of the Senate) and the second in Europe after La Scala in Milan. But then they said this: "The Bolshoi Petrovsky Theater."

Mysteries of the quadriga of Apollo

“Even closer, on a wide square, rises the Petrovsky Theater, a work of the latest art, a huge building, made according to all the rules of taste, with a flat roof and a majestic portico, on which rises the alabaster Apollo, standing on one leg in an alabaster chariot, motionlessly driving three alabaster horses and looking with annoyance at the Kremlin wall, which jealously separates it from the ancient shrines of Russia! - the cadet of the hussar regiment Mikhail Lermontov wrote enthusiastically about the architectural features of this building in his youthful essay “Panorama of Moscow”.

Indeed, the main decoration of the theater was considered to be the sculptural composition of the chariot of Apollo, located in the arch and made of alabaster. Yes, yes ... Not everyone knows about it, but the second building of the Bolshoi Petrovsky Theater also had its own "quadriga"! “The sculptural group crowning the portico, in contrast to its profile location at Mikhailov’s, was placed frontally, and the quadriga of soaring horses, restrained by Apollo, thus seemed to rapidly break out of the arch.” So, in any case, we read in the book on the history of this structure of the researchers A.I. Kuznetsov and V.Ya. Libson.

But let's reread Lermontov. In his description of the horses, Apollo has three! The sculptural group with 3 horses is also mentioned on the official website of the Bolshoi Theatre. However, in numerous drawings of contemporaries, we will see the image of a quadriga, i.e. chariot drawn by four horses! Riddles again...

The building stood for almost 30 years, but in the early morning of March 11, 1853, a fire broke out again. Even the ingeniously invented fire extinguishing systems of Bove did not save. They just didn't get turned on. People jumped from the roof. Thank God, they managed to save the boys' choir - 40 people. The theater burned for 3 days! In fact, only 8 columns remained from it, which were inherited by the next building. This is the oldest part of the current Bolshoi Theatre.

Kavos forever

The author of the building, which we call today the Bolshoi Theater, was Albert Cavos. He was born in the family of a composer and conductor, "director of music" of the imperial theaters, Katerino Cavos, and this circumstance subsequently predetermined the narrow specialization chosen by the architect - the architecture of spectacular buildings. In 1836, Kavos rebuilt the Stone Theater in St. Petersburg. In 1859 he rebuilt the interior of the Mikhailovsky Theatre. The last work of Kavos is the rebuilding in the same year of the Mariinsky Theater in St. Petersburg from the circus building built by him in 1847-1848.

Under what conditions did Kavos build his brainchild? In March 1855, Emperor Nicholas I died. Since the coronation of the new emperor always took place in Moscow, and the coronation celebrations and festivities took place in the Bolshoi Theater, the building had to be restored in a short time. And already on May 14, 1855, the Kavos project was approved.

Big became even higher - 10 floors up. The auditorium also became a tier higher. It acquired other colors - it became white and gold with red and crimson draperies. There were many windows upstairs. At one time there was even an open gallery!

Well, what is the Bolshoi Theater without the Apollo chariot? And instead of the old one, which died in a fire, Peter Klodt created a new quadriga with Apollo, now known to the whole world, from a metal alloy coated with red copper. Naturally, Apollo also had a fig leaf at that time, hiding his manhood and lost somewhere at the beginning of the 20th century, along with a wreath that the solar god held in his hand, and a buckle. So in Soviet times, the Bolshoi Theater Apollo appeared in all its natural glory and was depicted in this form on banknotes. And only in our puritanical times, namely 6 years ago, after a recent reconstruction, the buckle, wreath and leaf were returned to their rightful places.

On August 20, 1856, in the presence of Tsar Alexander II, Bellini's opera I Puritani opened the building that we today call the Bolshoi Theater.