The Artistic Culture of Central Asia and Azerbaijan in the 9th-15th centuries. Volume IV....

THE ARTISTIC CULTURE OF CENTRAL ASIA AND AZERBAIJANIN THE 9th-15th CENTURIES VOLUME IV

ARCHITECTURE

THE ARTISTIC CULTURE

OF CENTRAL ASIA AND AZERBAIJAN

IN THE 9th–15th CENTURIES

Volume IV

ARCHITECTURE

Samarkand - Tashkent 2013

INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR CENTRAL ASIAN STUDIES

The Artistic Culture of Central Asia and Azerbaijan in the 9th–15th Centuries. Vol. IV. Architecture.Samarkand—Tashkent: IICAS, 2013. — 280 p.

Project Manager: Sh. Mustafayev

Academic Editorial Board: K. Baypakov, Sh. Pidaev, A. Khakimov

In charge of the publication: M. Mamedov. R. Muradov

Authors:B. Glaudinov, M. Glaudinova (Kazakhstan)B. Amanbaeva, V. Kolchenko, K. Sataev (Kyrgyzstan)R. Mukimov (Tajikistan)M. Mamedov, R. Muradov (Turkmenistan)A. Arapov (Uzbekistan)J. Giyasi (Azerbaijan)

Translation into English: A. Ulko

This book is published as a part of the project “The Artistic Culture of Central Asia and Azerbaijan in the 9th–15th centuries”, carried out by the International Institute for Central Asian Studies. The objective of the project is to systematise the academic knowledge and data related to a wide range of items of the material and artistic culture of the 9th–15th centuries, including ceramics, architecture, glass making, toreutics and other forms of applied arts.

The publication is aimed at specialists as well as at the general public interested in the culture of the East.

The authors bear the responsibility for the choice and representation of facts and opinions contained in this publication which do not express the views held by UNESCO. The terms and materials used in the publication do not contain the view held by UNESCO in relation to the legal status of any state, territory, and city, zone of influence or borders.

ISBN 978-9943-357-13-6 (IICAS)

© IICAS, 2013

Photo on cover page: Kalyan Minaret. 12th century. Bukhara.

3

CONTENTS

To the Reader . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Foreword. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Kazakhstan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12B. Glaudinov, M. Glaudinova

Kyrgyzstan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55B. Amanbaeva, V. A. Kolchenko, K. A. Sataev

Tajikistan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92R. Mukimov

Turkmenistan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .131M. Mamedov, R. Muradov

Uzbekistan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159A. Arapov

Azerbaijan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216J. Giyasi

Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265

IllustrationsKazakhstan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33–42Kyrgyzstan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43–48Tajikistan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97–100Turkmenistan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .101–112Uzbekistan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161-176Azerbaijan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225-240

4

TO THE READER

Located on the crossroads of the largest Eurasian trade routes, Central Asia has connected the empires of Rome, Byzantium and Iran with China, India—with the countries of the Eastern Europe since the ancient times, facilitating cultural exchange and dialogue between the East and the West.

Powerful migration processes in the region, settling and assimilation of the peoples and tribes from the East, West, North and South of the continent influenced the formation of civilisations based on the symbiosis of different cultures, ethnic groups and religions, tolerance and common social mentality as well as on the absence of ethno-psychological obstacles to the perception and accumulation of cultural and technological achievements.

As a result, the Kushan Empire, the states of the Parthians, Hephtalites, Sogdians, the Konguy Confederation and the Turkic Khaganate appeared and prospered in this region in different historical periods.

Particularly well known in history is the period from the 9th to the 15th century, the time of the reign of the Samanid, Karakhanid, Seljukid, Genghizid and Timurid dynasties, which did not only support the commercial and economic relations between the East and the West, but also left behind the evidences of a unique Islamic culture. High productivity indices, monetary and trade relations and active international contacts resulted in the fast rates of urnbanisation and demographic growth. The political unification of the huge territory spreading from China in the East to the Balkans in the West and from the Volga Region in the North to the Central India in the South powerfully stimulated the processes of cultural integration.

The uniform Arabic language and the ideology of Islam spread all over the vast territories of the post-Caliphate Central Asia, Near and Middle East and Northern Africa and the active process of cultural exchange within the Islamic civilisation stimulated the development of a phenomenon known in Europe as ‘the Muslim Renaissance’. This period gave the world a group of brilliant thinkers, scholars, poets, philosophers and theologians who contributed to the world’s intellectual, scientific and cultural treasury.

Such remarkable achievements in the economy and the culture of the peoples of the Islamic world reflected in the variety of architectural décor, the amount and the quality of craftsmen’s produce and was conducive to the creation of masterpieces of art. A detailed study of the rich historical heritage of Central Asian peoples can help identify the individual, specific as well as the common trends in the development of the material culture of Central Asia and the Near East.

The archaeological and orientalist researches carried out in different Central Asian states over the last few decades have yielded significant academic results in various areas of the artistic culture of the time which, unfortunately, has not been adequately discussed or comprehensively studied even in the countries of the region. One of the less developed is the issue of cultural links and mutual influence between Central Asia and the Near East in the given period.

In the light of the above the International Institute for Central Asian Studies (a UNESCO institute) launched a scientific research project. The Artistic Culture of Central Asia and Azer baijan

5

To the Reader

in the 9th–15th century which involves wide-scale cooperation between the scholars of the whole region. The implementation of this project is aimed at the systematisation of materials in a wide range of the forms of applied arts and architecture of the 9th–15th centuries, the description of characteristic features and common trends in their chronological, historical and regional development and the identification of mutual links and influences in the development of the cultures of Central Asia and the Near East as well as the artistic contribution of a certain regional populace to the common treasury of the Eastern artistic culture. The most significant and characteristic directions of the studies of artistic culture encompass such forms of applied arts as ceramics, glass making, toreutics, textile manufacture, ivory carving and architecture.

I hope that this publication will be of interest to specialists as well as to the general public interested in the culture of the East.

Yours faithfully, Shahin Mustafayev, Director of the International Institute for Central Asian Studies

6

INTRODUCTION

The period from the 9th to the 15th century is rightly regarded as the time of the highest development of

the architecture of Central Asia and Azerbaijan, the time marked by the rise of the urban culture and

urbanised oases in the ancient centres of organised settlement, such as Merv, Samarkand, Kunya-Urgench,

Taraz, Termez and many others that had kept the evidence of their great past. They boast the perfection

of construction techniques and architectural décor as well as the commonality of architectural styles

and typology which was made possible by the cohesion between the different elements of the civilization

spread across the vast region from the Caspian to the Semirechye. This unity was supported first of all

by the Muslim religion and the Turkic-Persian language symbiosis based on the Arabic script.

The political history of Central Asia and Caucasus after the Arab invasion and conquest was highly

volatile. Despite the single name that the Arabs gave to the whole region, its subdivision into smaller

historic and cultural units lingered on for a long time. Yet, since the Ancient age, this part of the world

has always been a coherent, and in many cases, homogenous cultural environment full of similar

Zoroastrian temples or palaces and later – mosques, khanaka, mausoleums and caravanserais built

in one style or by the architects from one school. The natural borders of the region are the Tian-Shan

and the Pamir in the east, the Caspian basin in the west and the Iranian plateau in the south. The two

great deserts of the Kyzyl Kum and the Kara Kum dominate over the region. The oases that have been

developed since the Neolithic age, are located only in the narrow stretches of fertile land between the

mountains and the deserts, along the river basins of the two great Central Asian rivers, the Amudarya

and the Syrdarya. All these lands became the north-eastern area of the Middle Asian nucleus of cattle-

breeding and agriculture.

Obviously, this distinction is often very relative, in Azerbaijan and as in Central Asia and in the adjoining

Iran and Afghanistan one can identify similar construction techniques and architectural styles. This

is not at all surprising, as such cities as Baku, Tebriz, Balkh, Herat, Nishapur, Meshhed, Serakhs, Merv,

Amul, Bukhara, Samarkand, Khiva, Gurganj, Dehistan and many others were incorporated into the same

state-like bodies with alternating dynasties yet with the same spiritual and material cultural core.

The symbiosis of the pre-Islamic traditions and the Muslim canons has become the fertile ground

for the development of the arts, folklore and mythology of the peoples of this region. However, their

architecture is a much more integral phenomenon less related to their ethnographic and linguistic

differences. Architecture per se is based on far more fundamental principles than even religious affiliations.

These are physical and geographic features of the region, first of all, its relief and climate; then, the local

raw materials used in construction which determine the type of architectural structures and forms.

Finally, it is the level of economic development of the state which either facilitates progress or hampers

the development and growth of cities, monumental buildings and the masterpieces destined to live

through the centuries.

A new religion, Islam, becomes widely spread across Central Asia and Azerbaijan in the 8-9th centuries

and becomes hegemonic by the 10th century. The whole region is incorporated into the Arab Muslim

world; new ruling dynasties are established and new social relations emerge. As the result of these

developments, there appears a new type of cities and edifices with new functions. These can be roughly

subdivided into two large categories, namely the civic and the cult buildings. The former group includes

7

Introduction

various fortifications, palaces, castles (kyoshk), urban dwellings, baths (hammam) and caravanserais. The

latter incorporates mosques with minarets, madrassah, mausoleums and khanaka. Often all these four

types of building related to religious practice and education comprise a whole ensemble, an architectural

complex formed around a revered grave of a hole person, thereby uniting the orthodox Islam with Muslim

mysticism (Sufism) and its cult of the saints.

It is in the artistic décor of these monuments that we can follow the historic transition from the

pre-Islamic art to a completely new, more geometric and ornamental art of the high Islamic period in

Central Asia.

The decline of creative activity in the late 7th- early 8th century caused by the Arab invasion was

followed by the drop in the overall number of cities and towns. However, the old cities located at the

important commercial routes, continued to exist and even developed. The Arabs merely stimulated

the earlier process of the formation of rabads, commercial and craftsmen’s quarters near the walls of

shakhristans. The central streets of rabads were linked to the shakhristans’ gates and their structural

nodes were bazaars, market squares, sometimes under the roof, with adjoining caravanserais, public baths

and mosques. Rabads mostly contained craftsmen’s and street vendors’ dwellings, the houses of local

civil servants and other urban groups including the nobility. The walls erected around rabads signified

that they had become fully fledged towns. These walls were never as grand as those of the ancient cities,

which does not diminish their fortification value; on the contrary, they had a more complex and rational

defensive structure.

The planning of the Central Asian cities does not always strictly comply with the traditional tripartite

structure of a medieval city: citadel (ark, kuhendis), the town per se (shakhristan, medina) and the suburbs

(rabad). Each city had its own specific features. For example, the ark and medina of Merv in the 9-10th

century were nothing but ruins and its rabad was not a mere suburb but a prosperous town itself. In

Nisa life moved away from the Parthian settlement while Kushmeikhan had no rabad whatsoever with

fields starting just outside the walls of its shakhristan. Often it is impossible to draw a clear distinction

between the shakhristan and the rabad. The latter term is not to be confused with the similar word ribat,

which was used to identify border fortifications of the ‘fighters for the true faith’ erected by the Arabs in

the conquered lands. Almost each village had these and usually they were no more than a rectangular

open space 300 by 500 m surrounded by high walls with turrets and well-fortified gates. There were

the tents of an Arab garrison inside, and later appeared some clay huts of the local citizens. After the

Arabs were gone, the ribats served the locals as small fortresses on the border with the nomads’ steppe.

In the 10-11th century some such ribats developed into small towns which turned into large cities in the

11-12th century.

By the end of the 14th century Khorasan and Khorezm were subjugated by Tamerlane. The creation of

his state which spread across the whole of Central Asia and parts of the Near and the Middle East, the

Northern India and Caucasus saw huge numbers of artisans and craftsmen from the conquered countries

taken to captivity. These included architects (mimars), engineers (muhendis), experts in garden planning,

stone, wood and kashin engravers, calligraphers, potters to produce tiles, great numbers of various

workers. These measures ensured unprecedented development of architecture in the Mouverannhr,

Tamerlane’s motherland, but completely depleted such centres as Urgench and other old cities which

thereby lost their creative potential.

Architecture always precisely reflects the social significance of the object. A range of signs and

characteristics yield such information as the social status and objectives of the customer, how these

objectives were achieved, what were the customer’s later life and career, and what happened to his heirs,

8

The Artistic Culture of Central Asia and Azerbaijan in the 9th–15th centuries • Architecture

descendants and followers. In this, relatively precise mirror of social stratification, the edifices often

referred to as palaces, topped the hierarchical pyramid of any society.

In the academic literature the notion of a ‘palace’ has been defined for a long time, which means first

of all its functional purpose and not its multiple kinds of construction. While we do not intend to discuss

here the history of the palaces in Central Asia, we would like to focus on the main issues of this topic

which require attention not only from archaeologists excavating these edifices, but also from architects

who study them. Equally important is the contribution of orientalists who could identify the typical

features of social relations and ethnic and cultural traditions in different periods which were reflected

in a certain palace. It is quite obvious that the social structure and ethnic aspirations of the time are

concisely reflected in such kinds of building.

The palace is an architectural construction designed and built according to certain standards and social

function. First of all, it was the residence of a ruler or a nobleman, i.e. it accommodated an aristocratic

family or dynasty and often their servants. Secondly, the palace performed various representative

functions and was a venue of formal events such as receptions, banquets and so on. In this function the

palace could also be a venue for administrative and legal procedures. Thirdly, the palace performed some

ritual functions: it could contain sacral areas and objects, e.g. sanctuary, chapel and so on. The premises

of a palace could also contain the state’s treasury. Some believe that the mint could also be located on

the territory of the palace; however, taking into consideration the technological aspects of mintage it is

more likely to occupy the buildings adjoining the palace or located nearby.

These functions of a palace are carried out with the help of architectural zones of the building which

are combined in a single complex. These functions were not always concentrated in one edifice. A lot

depended on the status of the palace’s owner, on the degree of the state’s centralisation and its structure,

on the type of vassal relations in the society, and, finally, on the architectural traditions related to the

palace planning adopted in this state. Ethnic traditions also had their influence on the palace design. All

the above factors directly reflected in architecture.

Also, discussing palaces one should keep in mind that some edifices identified by archaeologists as

palaces, were only partially excavated. That is why in a few cases we deal with only some architectural

zones or their parts and not with whole objects. The excavated parts are considered outside their broader

context and their function can be identified only subjectively.

The lack of material evidence may cause confusion in identification of one and the same premises as

ritual or secular. One should also remember that there were some religious complexes that incorporated

different zones, e.g. ritual, living, household which may mean that some of the ancient constructions

identified as 0palaces could have been parts of religious complexes and vice versa.

One of the most important characteristics of palaces is their décor, and yet the buildings for public worship

were also carefully decorated. The most important difference lies in the visual programme appropriate for

the decoration of a certain building. However, in most cases we have to deal with mere fragments of décor

which do not give any idea of the whole picture and its programme and artistic objectives.

Many authors noticed that one of the most typical characteristics of the Arab-Muslim culture was

considerable unification in many fields, including architecture, its chief cause being Islam. By the late

9th – early 10th century local dynasties established in Central Asia and Azerbaijan and for them Islam

was no longer an innovation, but a part of the historic tradition.

The burial constructions in region developed along at least two lines, one linked to the burial tumuli of

the nomadic Turks, the other – to the Zoroastrian nauses (vaults where ossuaries were kept). These issues

9

Introduction

were discussed in specialist works and are also exemplified in this publication, which also analyses other

kinds of building important for the architecture of the 9th-15th centuries, namely public bath, caravanserai,

madrassah and khanaka. The most widely spread kind of construction, a regular urban house, is the

least researched owing to its ephemeral structure and few preserved examples. Nevertheless, thanks to

archaeological excavations we have some understanding of the living quarters of Central Asian cities,

towns and villages a thousand year ago.

The articles published in this book were written by different authors and have their own style and

narrative manner, but taken together they highlight the tendencies and the development of architecture

in a certain world region within strict chronological boundaries. The description of the monuments

focuses on their innovative or unique features. The publication should therefore be seen as an attempt

at an outline of a wide historical perspective of Central Asian and Azerbaijan architecture.

There are multiple unsolved and debatable issues in this field which generate lively discussions

among specialists. They are mostly related to the attribution of monuments, both chronological and

typological as well as to the genesis of certain planning techniques, 3D shapes and decorative motifs.

Although the database of sources of Central Asian architecture studies is sufficiently large, it continues

to be supplemented by new discoveries and developments in all the countries of the region.

Arab geographers of the pre-Mongol period left descriptions of prosperous towns and impressive

constructions in this part of the world, and later historians from Iran and other countries gathered a

lot of important data. Finally, for more than a century the architectural art of our ancestors has been

attracting special attention from Western, but most importantly, Russian scholars. In the last decades

new academic schools appeared in Almaty, Ashgabat, Baku, Bishkek, Dushanbe and Tashkent, all owing

much to the work of the Russian scholars. Their teachers and consultants were those who followed the

steps of Zhukovsky, Bartold and Semyonov and in the 1920-30s made a significant contribution to the

discovery of Central Asian and Caucasus antiquities, namely: A.Yu. Yakubovsky, N.B. Baklanov, N.M.

Bachinsky, A.N. Bernshtam, P. Denike, B.N. Zasypkin, M.E. Masson, G.A. Pugachenkova, L.S. Bretanitsky,

M.Useinov, A. Salamzade and others.

The foundation of the strategy for the study of architecture was laid by a collection of items collected

and analysed by specialists interested in certain historic periods and local topics. The theoretical base of

the history of the Western and Central Asian and Azerbaijan architecture was provided by a wide range

of different by highly informative analytical monographs and articles by I.F. Borodina, M.S. Bulatov, V.L.

Voronina, N.S. Grajdankina, V.A. Lavrov, L.Yu. Man’kovskaya, V.A. Nilsen, A.M. Pribytkova, L.I. Rempel,

S.G. Khmelnitsky and their colleagues and students.

Discussing their topics in their own way, the authors of this book touch upon the topics and the objects

described by the abovementioned scholars in great detail. New materials enabled to complement and

in some ways to correct earlier publications to present the development of architecture in the 9th-15th

centuries in a more objective way and to make the underlying principles and features of this development

more explicit and accessible.

The last but not the least important problem is the issue of preservation and conservation of historic

buildings. The protection of ancient monuments is inseparably and completely connected to the Russian

colonisation of the Caucasus and Turkestan. It is one of those innovations that were introduced to the

culture of the region in the second half of the 19th century and developed in the 20th century as a part of

the Soviet modernisation. As we know, the very concept of a monument with a certain social value and

the need to be protected as an object of specialist research and restoration emerged in the European

culture only in the 18th century as a result of the development of sciences. During that period for the

10


first time in human history, the principles of scientific systematisation that had been discovered in the

course of development of the natural sciences were applied to humanitarian subjects, such as history

and the history of arts.

The Muslim world was completely isolated from these conceptual shifts – there ancient buildings

were doomed to destruction after they lost their functional purpose and therefore, any value. Only sacral

objects, mostly memorials, were preserved, although they had never been (and even now are not) viewed

by the public as objects of specific cultural value, as objects of art of the past. Therefore the common

view was that it was possible, or, indeed, necessary, not only to repair, change and modify a historic

building according to the needs of the moment, but also to take it down completely. The new edifice

replacing the old one immediately acquired the same sacral status as the demolished object. Although

the officially declared policy of the today’s states of the region usually complies with the international

norms of protection and restoration, based on the so-called Western standards, it cannot shake the

traditional Weltanschauung of the Muslims. This worldview is deeply rooted in the medieval eschatology,

in the predominantly religious understanding of the world’s development from the creation of man to

the end of the world. Such understanding excludes the experience of history, of the evolutionary social

development, typical of atheism. Indeed, the development of scientific knowledge, including the history

of art, the growth of interest towards ancient buildings and their ruins, the development of archeology

and the history of architecture – all this is proportional to the level of secularisation of countries and

their people, who became the world leaders in the course of the recent history.

There is nothing strange about the fact that the citizens of the Orthodox Russia which expanded on

the territory of the Caucasus and Central Asia were the first to start protecting, studying and restoring

the monuments of the Islamic architecture. Obviously, their religion has nothing to do with this; those

enthusiasts were not very religious people born in the time of the spiritual crisis that overwhelmed Russia

in the late 19th century and created the context for the future revolution and the transformation of the

empire into an atheist state. They worked mostly in the most ancient cities with a high concentration of

historic monuments, such as Merv, Bukhara, Samarkand, Tashkent, Baku and others. However, in spite

of multiple calls from the Russian archaeologists and orientalists to ‘take steps towards maintenance,

protection from damage and embezzlement of monuments and ancient objects in the region’, despite

numerous associations and societies of amateur archaeologists, contrary to all the protective measures

taken by the colonial administration, nothing could prevent multiple cases of partial or often complete

destruction of medieval monuments of baked brick used for second-hand construction of the new

quarters in many Central Asian cities. For example, the premises of the Shakhrukh mosque and the

Alisher Navoi madrassah in the Old Merv, photographed by Professor Zhukovsky from Saint Petersburg in

1890, as well as many other buildings of the Timurid period, including its fortifications, were completely

disassembled in the early 20th century and only his photographs gives us some idea of what did these

monuments look like.

Dozens, if not hundreds of unique monuments of the Islamic period have remained only in the diaries

of European travellers, on the photos and engravings of the 19th-early 20th centuries. A lot of these are

hidden in inaccessible archives, lost in forgotten publications and are therefore withdrawn from the

academic context. Modern researchers, lacking access to these materials, often make mistakes in their

discussion of architectural monuments or give a knowingly incomplete picture of architectural history.

Finally, narrative and visual documents are necessary for the archaeological study of ruins, for their

conservation, and for the more and more frequently practised reconstruction of medieval constructions.

This can be a basis for the cooperation between experts from different countries and their Central Asian

11

Introduction

and Azerbaijan colleagues, the cooperation not only in theory but in practice. At this stage it exists only

in the field of ancient archaeology and not in the comparative history of the architecture of the region, not

in some real projects focusing on conservation and restoration of certain Islamic monuments. That is why

one of the objectives of this publication is to demonstrate the whole spectrum of the rich architectural

heritage of the six countries of the region through the eyes of the authors from these countries who know

what they are writing about not from some stories or books, but from a direct and life-long work with

these wonderful monuments.

Muhammed Mamedov, Ruslan Muradov

12

KAZAKHSTAN

The formation of the Karakhanid state the mid-10th century was an important step in the cultural development on the territory of Jetisu and Eastern Turkestan (Uighuria with the centre in the Kashgar city) with a relatively developed feudal structure adopting many social institutions of previous state formations. The basic occupation of the population of Kazakhstan in the Karakhanid period was extensive nomadic and semi-nomadic cattle-breeding. Simultaneously, the agriculture was actively developed in Southern Kazakhstan, in the valleys of the Syr-Darya, Arys and Badam rivers and also in Jetisu and Ili Valley on a smaller scale. The agriculture developed not only in river valleys, but also in piedmont areas of Central Kazakhstan. A large centre of irrigated agriculture in the 9-12th centuries was the Otrar oasis.

The site of Otrar with a rich historic past starting from the first centuries AD to the 18th century was the centre of the district, where monumental constructions including palaces were erected in the researched period on the Great Silk Road. One of early examples of palatial construction is the citadel of Keder city of the 6-12th centuries (the site of Kuyruk-tobe), which could have been the country residency of Kangar rulers and the capital of the Otrar district in the 10-11th centuries. The citadel placed in the centre of the city was initially a palatial construction; the evidence is its position on an artificial platform (10m high) made of clay blocks and mud bricks and a complex of

Otrar settlement.

13

Kazakhstan

dwelling and utility rooms surrounded by a bypass gallery and fortified by a wall with the outer segment-shaped towers [Baypakov, 1998].

There was a wooden ceiling on columns in the main hall 10x15m in size disclosed by excavations. A pyramidal-truncated tent with a light and ventilation opening in the apex - chorkhora, a structure widely spread on across the huge territory from Eastern Turkestan to the Mediterranean seashore, is believed to have been located in the centre. The wooden ceilings were decorated with geometric, botanical and zoomorphic ornaments. Thus, the paired pictures of sirens were discovered on the lintels and arches of entrances. The walls of palace were painted and decorated with frieze wooden panels with depicted gods. The building was burned, but the scorched boards somehow survived and it allowed clearing, conservation and lifting of nine boards placed opposite to the entry. The pictures of deities in decorative arches on thrones, of a besieged city and a marriage proposal were discovered there [Baypakov, 1998, p. 52-53].

The civic buildings of the Karakhanid period have almost totally perished on the Kazakhstan territory. Nevertheless, recently archaeologists have managed to disclose the remains of a country castle - keshk in Talas valley (А.N. Bernshtam in 1936), a palace complex (U.Kh. Shalekenov in 1976-78) and a winery (M. Eleulov in 1979) at the site of Aktobe, where the first capital of the Karakhanid state – Balasagun city was localised by U. Kh. Shalekenov. The castle-keshk named as Chul’-tobe excavated 36km to the North from Taraz was constructed on the traditional platform- stylobate (the 10th century) with narrow rooms covered by cylinder arches and it was rather archaic.

The palace complex in Aktobe (the 10-12th century) located in the citadel of city had a developed compound of rooms such as the main hall, living rooms, kitchen, prayer room, and so on. All in all there were 13 rooms of different purposes. Two iwans (vaulted hall, walled on three sides, with one end open) with columns were placed at the façade. The walls of the palace were panelled with large mud bricks 45x21x18cm in size used, perhaps, in the most important structural parts. The ornamental friezes of the palace interior are also quite interesting. The main part of the ornament is carved on raw clay plaster 1.5-3cm thick depending on the carving depth. The predominant form of ornamentation was a combination of botanical and geometrical patterns [Shalekenov 1980, p. 53].

The culture that began with the formation of the Turkic state of the Karakhanids on the huge space of Central Asia, Southern Kazakhstan and Eastern Turkestan was marked in the architecture of Kazakhstan by the flowering of the urban culture including the construction of new unknown types of buildings such as bathhouses and mosques and the origin of outstanding monuments of memorial art of building. A bathhouse in Old Taraz is very interesting [Baypakov, 1986. p.14].

In the course of the excavations at Old Taraz in 1938, Bernshtam carried out the archaeological research of the remains of a construction built of baked bricks which appeared to be a bathhouse erected in the 11th century [Bernshtam, 1940. p.178-180]. The building was rectangular (12.4x13.6m) in size including eight square rooms roofed by a dome. Each of the two compartments of bathhouse had a separate entrance. The main (northern) entrance led to the room for men, and a more modest hidden western entrance went to the room for women. According to T.N. Sennigova’s assumption, each part had a spacious changing room, a domed hall with baths and sauna placed above the fire box [Sennigova, 1972 p. 131]. Two berths with a seat have remained in what is believed to have been a changing room for men. A whole preserved bath 1.75x0.47m in size and a small bucket 0.40m wide and 0.26m deep placed along the southern wall were unearthed in

14


the south-western room for women. The water outlet channels were placed on the bricked floor. A.N. Bernshtam proved that the room had a dome ceiling and the transition from the tetragonal cupola base to the vault was carried out with the use of trumpet arches, and the building itself usually had several domes. The heating system of the bath house included the horizontal channels bricked and laid under the f loor and berths and the vertical clay pipes 20cm in diameter inserted into the blockwork [Bernshtam, 1940. p. 178-180]. The bath house is especially interesting in its structure and that it was the first disclosed building with a fresco. [Sennigova, 1972. p. 131]. According to Sennigova, the ornamental motif of the frescoes are similar, on the one hand, to the ornaments of the bronze medallions of Central

Kazakhstan from the 12th-14th century BC to the beginning of the 1st century AD, and on the other – to the decoration of palatial buildings and carved ganch. In general, this kind of ornament is rooted in the ceramics of the Bronze Age found at Betpak-Dala I (Dandybai, Begazy and Buguly) [Sennigova, 1972. p. 131].

The architectural features of the bath house in Taraz are unique for the region, and this makes the bath house stand out in the context of Central Asian culture. V.L. Voronina maintained that ‘if the bath house in Nisa coincided in planning with the type of Central Asian bath houses, which many features of planning are rather close to bath houses in the Crimea and Bulgar, then the bath house in Taraz is a unique one, both in planning and decoration. On the contrary, its shapes are closer to the antique, Turkic type like some Caucasian bath houses’ [Voronina, 1951. p. 133]. Such a conclusion was drawn, first of all, based on the two parts structure of the bath house of Taraz, which were not found in Central Asia yet; it can be accepted as a general evidence of the high level of culture and arts in the Karakhanid period in Southern Kazakhstan.

Starting from the 10th century the architecture of Kazakhstan was enriched by the construction of new types of social housing such as mosques in the settled areas. If initially the simple dwelling rooms were adapted for the purpose, afterwards the reports on construction of mosques appeared just with an increasing number of the Muslims. For example, Al-Makdisi wrote about the erection of the cathedral mosque (jami) in Keder. The remains of this mosque were unearthed by excavations at Kuyruk-tobe site identified as Keder. At the time of writing it has been the earliest mosque in Kazakhstan and the first excavated building of this kind [Baypakov, 1986. p.139]. The construction is a rectangle 36,5x20,5m in size measured by the external outline of walls; the building is supported by 50 columns (5 in short suite and 10 in long one), the base was covered with baked bricks 75x100сm in size, the column grid is 3.5x4.6m in size; walls are 1.5m thick. Their blockwork is the combined brickwork of square burnt (22x22x4.5сm) and mud bricks. This type of djuma mosque was further wide-spread in Central Asia (in Khiva, Urgench, Khazarasp, and so on.).

Taraz. Bath.

15

Kazakhstan

The construction of mausoleums became especially important in the Karakhanid period, when Islam was adopted as the state religion. The erection of mausoleums over graves of outstanding state and leading religious personalities became the universally recognised tradition. Also it became a custom (still existing) to make the will to be buried at ‘a saint’s feet’ or a famous ancestor and to construct mausoleums inter vivos. One-chamber mausoleums with the inner square room and a dome became traditional. V.L. Voronina, researching the origin of the centric design of the Samanid mausoleum, observed it as a result of transformation, reduction and fusion of the surface of the fortress façade with space of the gate. G.A. Pugachenkova saw the sources of this form in the planning design of early feudal, pre-Muslim Central Asian castle (keshk). L.A. Lelekov linked them with mausoleums of northern Tagisken (the 9-5th century BC), Uygarak, Chirik-Rabat (the 3rd century BC) and Khorezmian Koy-Krylgan-kala (the 4th century BC).

It is possible that the rite of ritual incineration of burial vaults taking place among different Indo-European people was connected with the cosmologic symbolism of burial constructions themselves 1. A tomb in Indo-Iranian and entire Indo-European mythology was interpreted as microcosm and correspondingly its planning was comprehended as a miniature reproduction of the Universe structure. Since the religious-mythological systems of ancient Indo-Europeans imagined the World structure (i.e., the Earth and the Heaven) as the circle and square with their common centre, then the planning of mentioned mausoleums of the Aral Sea area was the circle with an inscribed square (more infrequently, a square with an inscribed circle).

The same concepts were embodied in the architecture of domed tombs also combining the circle and square inscribed into each other in the later periods of the Antiquity and the Middle Ages. The semantics of image, being complicated and reconsidered anew at the new stages of historical development, still kept the original old meaning carried on through millennia. For example, the famous mausoleum of Sanjar during construction (the 12th century) was known as ‘the house of future life’ – almost in the same way as Rig-Veda describing a sepulchre. The connections of the Aral Sea area with Indo-Iranian peoples are revealed in the fact that the mud brickwork was adopted by Tagisken population from the South, from where the rite itself could be brought (e.g., from the territory of the culture of Gissar III). The symbolic aspect of the square is linked to Yima’s actions, establishing the order and overcoming the chaos, expressed in construction of square barrier of the Paradise – square Vara (the kingdom of Yima-G. B.), being the sacred barrier against the powers of Death and built as

1 Incineration imitated the universal fire at the end of the world and its subsequent resurrection. Such epic works as Ramayana, Edda, Mahabharata, Avesta, Eneida and others tell this story in their own way.

Babaji Khatun mausoleum.

16


the personification of the solar origin [Lelekov, 1976, p. 7.8,13].

The construction of heavenly dwelling, ‘the house of future life’ being not worse, than those, which the dead had, was a programme for the architects of the Karakhanid period. The memorial architecture of Kazakhstan was enriched by new types of mausoleums in the Karakhanid period. The new centric mausoleums with spherical or tent-shaped ceiling, with the drum or without were added to the earlier known turret mausoleums.

The most outstanding monument in the history of Kazakhstan architecture of the new Islamic period is Babadji-Khatun mausoleum (the late 10th – early 11th century) located just 28km from the Taraz city in the Aysha-Bibi settlement; it is the beginning of feudal architecture in Kazakhstan. The design structure of the mausoleum was the start for the new type of centric with tent ceiling. The architecture of the Babadji-

Khatun mausoleum, the next after the Samanid mausoleum, was founded on different design principles and it marked the new stage in development of architecture not only of Kazakhstan, but of the whole Central Asia.

The building is square; the internal room is 4,45x4,45m in size and its external outline is 6,78x6,78m in size; it is covered with double domes: internal one is semi-spherical, ribbed and external one is tapered-tent and corrugated. The mausoleum constructed on upland is oriented to the East with the main façade accentuated by a low parapet and hall-door thickening. From the point of view of architecture and arts, all three façades (apart from the western one) were similarly planned. The main arched recess with doorway in the main façade and window openings in the lateral one is placed on the axis of symmetry; two narrow arched recesses ended with two medallions of figured brickwork are built on each side from the main arched recess. All these architectural details are framed in U-shaped frame. The dented decorative string of paired bricks laid with angle out is placed above the frame and on the polyhedral drum of the tent. A part of inscription written in the naskh style is preserved on the parapet terracotta plates. T.K. Basenov held that the carved plates were placed in recesses [Vseobshaya istoriya… 1968. p. 62-63].

The western façade of mausoleum is smooth. The interior without clear division into a common tetrahedral cupola base and the octahedral cupola base is quite specific; the arched pendentives, which imposts are rested on lips-strip pilasters at the height of 1.37m from the floor level, are placed on wall corners of tetrahedral cupola base. The arched pendentives at the height of 3.8m form the rectilinear octahedron, from which the ring lining of the octagonal inner dome is started. It creates an integral, undivided space of the interior. Such a method of resolution of the under dome structure is extremely rare in the Central Asian architecture. The Babadja-Khatun

Babaji Khatun mausoleum. Plan.

17

Kazakhstan

mausoleum is remarkable for the strict simplicity of its shape, laconic decoration and the high quality of constructive works which enabled it to survive for centuries [Bernshtam, 1956, p. 91].

Evidently, it became possible owing to the use of the wooden links in the building structure in the impost which took the thrust and also because of the innovative structure of the dome with two shells, which was completely new not only in the history of Kazakhstan and Central Asia, but in the whole world practice. It should be noticed without exaggeration that it became the proto-type of so-called contemporary space frame and allowed creating the inimitable architectural and artistic aspect of such masterpieces of the world architecture in Kunya-Urgench as mausoleums of Fakhraddin-Razi (the 12th century), Tekesh (the 13th century) and Tyurabek-khanym (the 14th century) and in Samarkand – Guri-Emir (1404), Bibi-khanym mosque (the 15th century) and many others, with the high external dome almost always being the main specific feature in their design.

The role of dome as an important architectural form in design of buildings and their complexes has been clearly defined in the history of architecture of Central Asia. It is interesting that the alternating change of value of the portal (peshtak) and dome in the architectural design of monuments took place in the development of Kazakhstan architecture. A quite specific feature of architecture in the Karakhanid period is representativeness of the dome relative to the portal. The dome played the most important role in the look of a mausoleum. The portal was gradually accentuated in the design of mausoleums at the next stage. Therefore an architect of the Babadji-Khatun mausoleum strived to enrich the plasticity of the dome and to consolidate its dominating role in the monument design by making its form elevate to the sky and, thus, to express the need to strengthen the newly-acquired ideology of Islam. In other words, the dominating artistic role of the tent ceiling in the architecture of mausoleum is evident. The connection of the tent dome with the lower cubic dimension by a barely visible transition from the cube to ceiling is also important. The diameter of the drum was always equal to the width of the cubic base producing a whole monolith look of the Kazakhstan mausoleum.

The issue related to the origin of corrugated ceiling surfaces of the tent mausoleums is still unclear. The method of corrugation shared by Central Asian monuments and to a certain extent by the ones from the Western part for the Muslim world was also discovered by S.P. Tolstov in the mud bricked monuments of Khorezm architecture starting from the 5-7th centuries to early Middle Ages (the 10-12th century). The origin of the drum and a corrugated tent was a logical solution for architectural techniques traditional for Khorezm; apart from Khorezm, similar buildings were found in Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan. Thus, the portal mausoleums with faceted or corrugated drums and tents followed the long way of independent development in the northern areas of Central Asia from the 12th to the 14th centuries [Vseobshaya istoriya… 1968. p. 69].

The protruding eight-petalled rosette in the tympana of arch of Babadja-Khatun mausoleum, are quite specific or even unique. According to G.A. Pugachenkova, they were a part of the local Central Asian tradition which Aisha-bibi mausoleum.

18


became widely spread in the Karakhanid period. One of the earliest monuments of the Karakhanid period is Karakhan mausoleum in Taraz. It is a pity, but nowadays the mausoleum remains in a changed condition after an irresponsible reconstruction in the early 20th century, when not only decoration of mausoleum was lost, but also its planning was distorted. However, it is possible to obtain some reliable information about this monument and the art of the early Karakhanid period in general from a photograph made in the 1850s. [Dennike 1939, p. 15] T.K. Basenov and M.M. Mendikulov assume that the mausoleum was erected above the grave of the founder of the Karakhanid dynasty. It is possible to assume that it is the mausoleum of Karakhan – Satuk Bugra khan, therefore, the mausoleum was built in the 950s, and not in the 11th century, as M.E. Masson suggested [1950, p. 111-112]. The façade surface is marked out by the door opening of orderly proportions of overhead covers, a voussoir arch of rich plasticity and shape rested upon ¾ of column bricked with paired bricks. This arch was, obviously, rhythmically repeated in the smaller size, slightly below and deeper above the doorway and they in pair were not only functional, but design emphasis of the façade. An architect carried out an accurate modelling of other surfaces of the façade clearly divided into the lower, main and upper surfaces divided by thin lines of brickworks and appropriately ornamented. It should be noted that the Karakhan mausoleum is the first building preserved till the 20th century, where the terracotta and glazed

Aisha-bibi. Plan.

19

Kazakhstan

tiles (up to 30 varieties) were widely used to strengthen the artistic architectural expressiveness. The mausoleum was definitely designed and built to high architectural and artistic standards and provided a good precedent for the design of such a masterpiece of Kazakhstan as the Ayasha-bibi mausoleum.

The Aysha-bibi mausoleum drawing attention of wide range of researchers such as V.V. Bartold, V.A. Kallaur, A.I. Kastan’e, A.N. Bernshtam, G.A. Pugachenkova, T.K. Basenov, T.N. Sennigova and L.B. Rezina is situated close to Babadja-khatun mausoleum in the contemporary settlement of Aysha-bibi (Golovachevka) at the place of Medieval city of Djaviket. There are several legends about the mausoleum. Based on one of these, the researcher B. Tuyakbaeva dates it back to the 30s of the 11th century [Tuyakbaeva, 1989. p.127-128].

The measurements carried out in 1953 under T.K. Basenov’s supervision indicated that the Aysha-bibi mausoleum was square and 7.23x7.23m in size by outside perimeter (without projections of columns). The western wall and parts of northern and southern walls have survived to the presenttime and recently the monument has been completely restored.

The most damaged was the eastern wall, in the middle of which one can still see the remains of a doorway. The window openings in deep recesses, which lower parts are preserved in the northern and southern walls, are placed in the middle of the rest of walls. Basing on remained parts it is possible to see that the monument was covered with dome totally ruined now. It is proved by the changing thickness of walls from 160cm to 60cm and the remains of small corner trumpet arches at the height of 2.86m. Two flank three-quarter columns 86cm in diameter in the lower part and narrowing upward to 4.01m and the next funnel-like widening are placed in the western façade; nowadays the southern column is 6.93m high and the northern one is 6.18m high. A deep recess overlapped by the pointed arch, which voussoir archivolt rested upon the round column 32cm in size, is placed along the axis of the wall. The façade surface is divided into two parts by the level of imposts; the lower part is blind and the upper one is partitioned by the frame of the tympanum of the arch.

All façade elements are entirely covered with the carved terracotta tiles. Apparently, the mausoleum has survived without the three wall-façades and a ceiling 2. Obviously, the ceiling was destroyed long ago and no data on the shape of ceiling were found in the literature yet. The research carried out in 1953 indicated that the mausoleum had the socle and stone riprap and the three-ply walls were approximately 170cm thick. The basic constructive layer was the internal one with two bricks 25х25х4-5сm in size and external one with decorative terracotta tiles with square front ornamental surface 4-5cm thick with wedge-shaped projection.

The space between these layers was filled up with broken bricks and ganch mortar. All basic architectural, artistic and constructive elements were bound together by the wooden (juniper) links (carcass) laid in the brickwork with 60-80cm gaps between them [Basenov, 1981 p. 100]. It is easy to notice that the architect ran a certain risk using the fill-in method of wall erection, probably, being unable to find a different method of attachment of decorative tile to the wall. Some variations of this method, taking place in the construction practice of tribes of the Aral Sea area in the 1st millennium BC, urged the architects of the Aysha-bibi mausoleum to use this method which has not received any further development in Central Asia. However, since the 14th century this method has been developed and used in the architecture of Western Kazakhstan.

2 In 1949 the tiles were reinforced during reconstruction works.

20


The architectural and artistic quality of the Ayshi-bibi mausoleum is viewed by all researchers as one of the most exceptional on the territory of Central Asia. Judging by the ruined façade and also the scheme of restored look made by M.S. Bulatov [1976] the architecture of the mausoleum was perfectly designed and executed by an outstanding master who used all basic methods of architectural design in particular the feel of proportions and harmonies of parts and the whole, tectonics, scale, and so on. Almost square surface of façades is divided into two tires; the lower one was built without excessive fashion and the rectangular margin of tympanum above the pointed arch appeared on the upper one. The frames of this margin are filled up with plastic oval tiles that visually reliably work to move the static force away from the most vulnerable part of overlapping – the arched recess.

The architectural and artistic expressiveness of the mausoleum based on harmonic combination of all elements and their tectonic conception is strengthened by facing of all basic forms and surfaces of building with decorative terracotta tiles.

The originality of architecture of the Aysha-bibi mausoleum is even better perceived in comparison with other constructions of architectures of the Karakhanid period in other areas of the state. First of all, it should be noticed that the absence of plaster and wall facing in Central Asian architecture in the 11th century led to exceptional thoroughness of brickwork. The main means of artistic expressiveness was the decorative brickwork occasionally ornamented with geometric (rhombi, rings, parallelogram, and so on.) or free curvilinear figures carved on brick facets. Such a technique can be seen on the mausoleum of Alamberdar (early 11th century, near Kerki city, Turkmenistan), the middle mausoleum from the group of mausoleums in Uzgen (early 11th century), the mausoleum from the complex of Sultan-Saadat in Old Termez (the 11th century) and the mosque-namazga of Talkhatan-baba (1095, near Old Merv).

The evidence of an earlier variety of this method is that the carved terracotta tiles of the Aysha-bibi mausoleum are not differentiated in their purpose; they are used simultaneously as the constructive material, i.e., bricks and as the decorative means – facing tiles. Evidently, the architects of the Karakhanid period in the 12th century had perceived this method as an infringement of the constructive strength of walls and they used carved terracotta just for aesthetic purposes. The decorative motif of facing tiles is an evidence of the local origin of the architecture of the Aysha-bibi mausoleum. The lower part of the building downward to the arch base is faced with terracotta tiles with ‘pattern of four koshkar-muyuz radially branching from palmettos being the ornament well-known in the previous periods. The upper part of building could vary . The most wide-spread motif is the spiral rosette known as the imprinted stamps on

Ornament of the decor of the

mausoleum of Khoja Ahmed Yasawi.

21

Kazakhstan

the small clay tables of Taraz in the 6-8th centuries. Generally speaking, the decorative motifs ornamenting the building are originated in the culture of the Turk-Karluk period of Jetisu’ [Sennigova. 1968 p. 184-186].

Also noteworthy are T.K. Basenov’s deductions, that the principle of Kazakhstan decoration with a singular background, i.e., the presence of decoration and background (without additional carving against the second background), remains applicable to the Aysha-bibi mausoleum. The specific features of Kazakh arts such as the decoration with one background, variableness of scale and forms depended on natural size and shapes of objects and details, on which a pattern was applied, reversibility of decoration and other national features already appeared in the Karakhanid period. It is all about the architectural decor [Basenov 1957. p. 89].

The issues related to a medieval architect’s work in construction and the methods of harmonising of the architectural forms are important because of the high architectural and artistic quality of the building, which can be regarded as a good example for the architecture of memorial constructions not only in Kazakhstan, but in the whole Central Asia. The architectural analysis of the Aysha-bibi mausoleum proved that it could not have been built just in one modular grid; obviously, its project plan was carefully developed before construction. It is impossible to solve the issues related to the facing of elements and façade surfaces, location of tiles without breach of joints and dimensions, correlation and proportions of separate facing element in general without drafts.

The rudiments of portal in the architecture of memorial constructions of the Karakhanid period led to further development of portal-dome types of mausoleums since late 12th century and early 13th century in Kazakhstan and since late 13th century in entire Central Asia and abroad. In this respect the monuments of Central Kazakhstan are singled out in the first place.

Already in the mid-18th century captain P. Rychkov discovered the ruins of some constructions [Rychkov 1962, p. 514] in this area, which were surveyed by A.Kh. Margulan in late 1940s. It was the mausoleums of Bolgan-ana (on the right-bank Sary-Su, Janaarka region), Botagay (2km to the East from Kurgal’dja, Tselinograd province, Ayak-Khamyr (9km to North-West from Djezdy settlement, Jezkazgan province), and so on.

The latter one is dated back to the pre-Mongol period. The mausoleum is rectangular 10.16x8.10m in size with a square room 5.72x5.73m in size, the portal part projected 2m forth and the square burial chamber is covered with a spherical dome. The design of the mausoleum is distinguished in its originality in the history of Kazakhstan architecture, i.e., by a well-formed portal on the main façade. The portal of the Ayak-Khamyr is an example of an early, but already well-formed new type of a portal-domed mausoleum in Kazakhstan. The modular system, on the base of which the architects achieved some harmonious architectural forms in the mausoleum design, revealed by G.G. Gerasimov is an evidence of a high professional level of the Ayak-Khamyr mausoleum architecture. For example, the base for the module was the width of the door opening – 75cm, i.e. the length of three bricks or gyaz. The width of the main façade is 11 modules, lateral façade

– 13 modules, the height of the arch recess is 6 modules and its width is 2 modules, the height of preserved walls of lateral façades is 7 modules and the width of strips on façade is 1/3 modules.

The Mongol invasion interrupted the flowering of architecture across a vast area. The aftermaths of the invasion were first dealt with in the central, south-western and western regions with a more stable tradition of architecture and more favourable historical conditions. Tortkul (townships) were spread in the area of North-eastern Jetisu; they are divided into several types: together with large developed towns of the 8-14th centuries (Tal’khir, Almatu, Sumbe, Chilik, Saga-Bein, Kayalyk,

22


and so on) there were settlements of shelter type (Jaksylyk, Kok-Irim sites of the 10-12th centuries), groups of 2-3 fortifications (Sarydjas, Ayna-Bulak, Bije I), non-fortified sites and caravanserais. The sites of Koktal I and Koktal II are identified as caravanserais.

The site of Koktal I (Tas-Murun settlement, the Lower Ili River) is 60x60m in size, the remaining walls are 2m high and corner towers are 2.5m. The walls were also fortified by pillar wall towers (two on each side with a 20m gap in between). The driveway is located in the middle of south-eastern wall. The site of Koktal II is situated 500m to the North from the previous site. It is 150x110m in size and oriented at the cardinal directions. The fortress wall is fortified with corner and pillar wall towers (4 per each side) [Baypakov 2002, p. 35-36].

The towns of Southern Kazakhstan continued to develop; the fortified town of Sauran 13-17th century, being the former capital of Ak-Orda is one of the most distinguished among them. It is one of rare samples of a site, which water-supply was the system of kyariz (water-lifting system). Like in Southern Kazakhstan, the towns of Western Kazakhstan of the Golden Horde period (the 13-14th century) located on the main road connecting East and West were initially mere administrative settlements. The palaces of rulers and houses of the elite, around which the trade, handicrafts and farming suburbs appeared only later. These were Oguz towns of Kaynar, Imankara, Koykar, Ushkan, Bileuli and Kosoba (caravanserai), Golden Horde towns of Saraychik and Jaiyk. Particularly interesting are the ruins of Saraychik (Saraydjuk of the 13-14th centuries) on the Ural, one of the western towns of Kazakhstan on the way to Europe. The remains of a palace or a palace complex of the ‘khan’ type – a rich guest house - were unearthed in the place. Its town planning importance is emphasised by a well-organised open square in front of it.

The palace was built on the artificial elevation 2m high and its structure was formed by carcass of walls bricked of rammed earth blocks. The walls 6m high were made of mud bricks and fortified with corner towers. The main gate was designed like a portal; its façade decorated with baked bricks, alabaster décor and panels with carved patterns. Later the palace was widened by lateral wings symmetrically flanking the main building and the back annexe. The numerous dwelling rooms up to 40 in number were placed indoors [Tasmagambetov 2001, p. 46-47]. The plates of polychrome glass, inserted into the alabaster lattice-pandjara aimed for the window openings significantly adorning the palaces, mansions and the elite’s houses, were disclosed in Saraydjuk.

One of the branches of the Great Silk Road led to Dashti-Kipchak on the territory of Central Kazakhstan. One of the oldest centres of metal mining that was related the origin of stationary settlements in the Bronze Age was located in the area. Such towns, headquarters of nomadic rulers, winter camps and metallurgists’ settlements as Khan-Ordasy on the Aksu River, Karagach, Belen-ana, Juan-ana on the Sarusy River, Baskamyr, Ayakkamyr on the Jezdy River, Mily-Kuduk (near Jezkazgan city), Buzok (near Asatan city), and other, were situated in Ulytau Mountains, on the Sarusy and Kengire rivers in the Middle Age. The castles were erected in the area as well; one of samples is the Dombaul site, a square fortress with an earthen gate in the eastern wall.

The architecture of the fortified site of the Alasha-khan (200x115m in size) with massive corner towers and moat is quite specific. The site includes two fortresses, the bigger one (6,000 square meters in size) was used for the deployment of military garrison and the smaller one (3,528 square meters) was, obviously, the residency of a ruler. The fortresses are separated by the moat 3m wide and 3-4m deep and connected by a folding bridge. It is believed that yurts and tents were put up inside the fortresses [Margulan, 1951].

23

Kazakhstan

The specific features of the stationary palace constructions of the Mongol nobility can be observed at the site of Orda-Bazar being Djuchi-khan’s headquarters in Central Kazakhstan in the Kara-Kengir Valley. Djuchi-khan’s manor is a building with an area of 300 square meters in size with five living and utility rooms, in one of which an L-shaped sufa was unearthed to the right of the entrance [Baypakov 2005, p. 245].

The variety of the building for public worship with multiple supporting columns earlier introduced in memorial architecture was further developed in the Kayalyk mosque (the 13-14th century). It was a large building (32.6x26.7m in size), where 52 wooden columns on the stone bases (span is 3.5-3.7m wide) supported the simple flat-slab deck. The mihrab (niche in the Qibla wall) part of the mosque was separated by a barrier. The notable feature of the building is kan (heating pipes) inset into the mud bricked walls.

The largest building of public worship was the mosque in Otrar (the 14-15th century); it was 60x22m in size and oriented along the East-West axis. The western part of building was occupied by a mosque being the hall with 30 columns with span 3.7m wide. A large yard was located in front of it. The doorway was designed as the portal chartak with cylinder minarets at corners and flanking rooms.

The private manor of the new ruler of Deshti-Kipchak Djuchi-khan was situated in the Kengir Valley in Central Kazakhstan. The first mausoleum attributed to the new, Mongol, period, – the mausoleum of Djuchi-khan was built in 1228-1230 on the left bank of a river 45km from the contemporary Jezkazgan. The architectural, planning and spatial design of the mausoleum was based on the traditions of the previous period; also some new elements are visible in its architecture. The building is traditionally oriented along the South-West axis. The mausoleum is rectangular with two rooms; the main room is a square burial chamber (gurkhana) 5.10x5.20m in size covered with a spherical dome and the front room of ziaratkhan type is 2.96x2.26m in size covered with a close pointed vault placed in the portal recess.

The construction is bricked with red baked bricks 26x26x5cm in size on the low foundation of crushed bricks. The brickwork of arches, dome and tent is unusual with a use of ganch and clay mortars. The floor of the mausoleum is bricked; the dome is a double shell one: the internal one is spherical and external one is low and conical set on seventeen-sided starred dome, what is continuation of tradition of tent mausoleums, first of all, Babadji-khatun mausoleum. Nevertheless, the external semi-spherical dome was restored as a result of restoration of monument. The small corner arches in the tier of pendentives were used for passage to the polyhedral drum. The interior of mausoleum is simple and strict. The walls are completely smooth without any adorning decoration. Two small light openings 35x55cm were made in the base of dome at the height of 3.28m in lateral axis for illumination [Gerasimov, 1957 p. 24].

The design of the mausoleum is based on the type of portal-domed mausoleums and developed by the expansion of the portal dimension in combination with a conical dome and also increase of facing space by glazed turquoise tiles. The deep pointed recess 4.50m high on the main façade is framed with U-shaped deepened border initially faced with the glazed tiles 45x45cm in size. According to P. Ragulin, ‘the dome was also faced with the turquoise ceramics, which fragments were found around the mausoleum’ [Ragulin 1983, p. 52]. The evidence of a connection with the architecture of the Karakhanid period is the way how the archivolt of the recess rests upon the thin three-quarter columns. G. G. Gerasimov’s statement that ‘the arch (the arched recess of the main façade – G. B.) is not as orderly and delicate in its proportions and forms as the Ayak-khmyr

24


mausoleum, there is no ease and loftiness in it. On the contrary, it seems to be slightly heavy’ should be noted [Gerasimov, 1957 p. 18-19].

In some respect this decision of an architect is clear, if we concede that in this case it is not a simple portal recess, but the ground in front of the entrance replacing ziaratkhana of Central Asian memorial constructions. Perhaps, it is the reason of its large depth of 2.26m, simple and strict interior, where visitors had not to enter to, but just could bow down to the grave and stay on this front ground - ziaratkhana. It is the distinctive feature of portal-domed mausoleums of Kazakhstan in the next periods too. Thus, it should be noted that the architecture of the 6.88m-high Djuchikhan mausoleum was based on the experience gained in the Karakhanid period and innovative combination of monumental portal with a conical (tent) dome. As a result, beginning from the 14th century, the new design widely spread across Kazakhstan and Central Asia and deserved the commemoration of the notable khan.

The most monumental piece of architecture of Deshti-Kipchak of Ak-Orda period is the mausoleum of Alash-khan located in the middle f low of the Karakengir river (2km to the South-West of the Maltybay settlement, Ulytau district). The traditional design such as a rectangle composed of a square burial chamber covered with the spherical dome, with the ground in front of the entrance under the pointed arch of peshtak was developed in the Alash-khan mausoleum by construction of a 3.65m high gallery bypassing the room at the level of the under dome structure. The gallery consists of four chambers placed in corners connected by a small corridor 0.5m wide, 1.60m high, where the stairway with very high steps (up to 45cm), placed in the left pylon of portal, led to.

The upper round opening (96cm in diameter) of dome, four window openings 50x69cm in size in the under dome’s dioctahedral drum and six window openings 18x35cm in size are used to illuminate the room. The mausoleum is the largest memorial construction in Central Kazakhstan, its size is 9.73x11.91 by the perimeter, the diameter of the dome is 5.81m and the general height is more than 10m. The constructive structure of the Alash-khan mausoleum is an evidence of high skills of its architects. The building is placed on the foundation made of locally produced red baked bricks of a very high quality.

The durability of the used bricks gave enabled the builders to construct many parts without wood. For example, the dome and vaults (balkh) in overhead covers of rooms were built without a formwork by radial and voussoir brickwork. The use of wood was extremely limited. Only in rare case it was used as an incidental material, e.g. for the crosspieces of door and window openings, scaffolds and carcass for important parts of the building. The loam with added sand and gravel from the bank of the Karakengir river was used for the mortar of common brickwork and ganch mortar for vaults of arches and dome [Gerasimov 1957, p. 15]. The dome of mausoleum has been safely standing already for more than seven centuries owing to its carefully developed design. This can be seen in a precise understanding of the function of the dome structure and of the need to create conditions when the thrust power in the dome has to be securely compensated. For this reason an anonymous architect came up with a previously unknown, innovative and significant decision.

It is known that up to that moment the diameter of the dome erected above the square room was equal to the width of the square, but in the case the dome diameter is 5.81m at the width of a square burial room of 7.51m, i.e. the architect shortened it by 0.85cm from each side. The diameter of the drum by outer circuit is 5.91cm at the drum width of 0.90m. It means that the

25

Kazakhstan

dome by outer diameter almost fitted into the square room. Therefore the walls in the Alasha-khan mausoleum are more than 1m thick; they are also used as buttresses to compensate for the dome thrust and the charge of dome is supported by eight pointed arches and pylons formed by build-up of walls inward. Thus, the octahedron of the drum started directly from the foundation forming eight recesses 0.75m deep in the axes with a pointed end in the interior and the transition of the octahedron into the dome circle take place through imposts bricked in a quite specific way.

The mausoleum is attributed to the already well-known portal-domed type of memorial construction by volumetric-spatial characteristics, but its aesthetic aspects are designed with adaptation of some new methods. First of all it is the facing of outer surfaces, lateral and back walls with figured brickwork in the shape of ‘rhombi’, ‘triangles’ and the lateral surfaces of portal with ‘herring-bones’, accomplishment of façades with frieze and cornice and also the pointed recesses in the interior. The main façade is emphasised by a portal with a deep (2.04x3.24m) recess-antechamber covered with the cylindrical vault in the centre; its unusual semicircular archivolt resting on three-quarter hexahedral columns (like the Aysha-bibi mausoleum) placed in corners of a brick socle by sides of doorway. Like in the portal of the Ayak-khamyr mausoleum the entry recess of the Alash-khan mausoleum is framed with three U-shaped lines of decorated tiles with botanical and geometric patterns. The top of the pishtak is ended with the picturesque blue-green glazed frieze of octagonal stars and a simple cornice that consisted of two suites of figured edgewise brickwork and four suites of simple brickwork [Gerasimov, 1957 p. 16]. The same accomplishment took place in other façades of the mausoleum.

The type of portal-peshtak of the Alash-khan mausoleum and the dome too is different from the ones found in other mausoleums in Central Asia. It is as grandiose as in the monuments of Maverannahr (e.g. in madrasahs in Samarkand and Bukhara), but it is not screen-shaped like those ones found in Kyrgyzstan and partly in Khorezm. It is voluminous and expressive within reasonable limits at its simple forms and it was well harmonised with the aspect of monumental construction [Margulan, 1947 p. 66].

Most noteworthy are the outstanding knowledge and skills of the architect of the Alash-khan mausoleum which allowed him to create such a wonderful piece of art. They are seen in the dimensions of architectural details, their harmony in general and tectonics of its form. The portal of the main façade (judging by the mausoleum of Juzden) is monumental thanks to the well found proportions and the proportionality of the doorway, arch recess and the whole surface of portal and also orderliness of ornamental strips framing the arch span. The brick decoration of the lateral and rear façades is much wider, than in the Karakhan mausoleum and placed on the ‘free’ surface of wall shading tectonically and constructively its important parts such as socle, cornice and corner parts. The light bricks used for decoration well mark out this adorning decoration against the dark-red brickwork resembling pictures of ‘chiya’ and the latticed frame – kerege of Kazakh kiiz-uy.

The original base of three-quarter column on the main façade of the mausoleum is historically important. It was designed with the use of a quite specific and rare method of ‘apples’ composed of four hemispheres in the way that two middle ones form a sphere (‘apple’) limited by two extreme ones turned to the different sides and used as abutments for the ‘apple’ and the column.

The bases of the stone columns found in the destroyed mausoleums of Old Sayram and the bases of carved wooden columns from the Turkestan mausoleum of the 14th century may be similar to the ones found in Kazakhstan. Such a design of column bases was widely spread in Central

26


Asia. Unlike the memorial constructions of Kazakhstan built before and after the Alash-khan mausoleum, the interior of the mausoleum was designed with the familiarity of tectonics as means of architectural structure, but also with the knowledge of light arrangement. According to G.G. Gerasimov, the pointed arches of the inner recess and crosspiece arches in corners starting from the floor are similar in their proportions to the architecture of the best monument in Urgench – the mausoleum of Tyurabek-khanym (the mausoleum of the Sufi dynasty of the 14th century – G.B.). In the morning, when the sun rays fall through the upper round opening into the mausoleum and cut with the rays falling through the lateral openings of under dome drum, the rich play of light-and-shade with the smoky veil, through which the inner volume of building seems to be wider, than in reality and spherical dome more airy [Margulan, 1947 p. 67].

Three elements of the Alash-khan mausoleum rare for Kazakhstan mausoleums are still unclear in their purpose. They are the U-shaped bypass galleries built-in in walls at the level of under dome drum, two recesses 25x60cm in size in tympanums of inner corner arches opposite to the entry from the corner boxrooms of the upper bypass galleries and two pairs of intercrossing barling bails 67cm in crosssection set 50-60cm from the upper opening of dome. Some researchers believe that the latter element could serve some ritual purpose or could be used for the storage of religious accessory.

The U-shaped bypass gallery at the level of under dome drum of the Alash-khan mausoleum resembles the similar structure in the round mausoleum (the 3-2nd century BC) in Chirik-Rabat city on the Jana-Darya, where the bypass gallery of narrow corridor 0.50m wide connecting several rectangular rooms was constructed in the wall at the level of 7.25m. The same gallery was built at the level of under dome structure in the Samanid mausoleum in Bukhara (the late 9th century). A similar gallery was found in one construction at the Baba-ata site in Southern Kazakhstan (the 7-8th century). There are different opinions of researchers about the purpose of these structural elements. Perhaps, among them the most credible is M. Khojaev’s opinion that the location of the bypass corridor on the second tier was needed to erect a compact, monumental funeral or burial construction, which at the same time had to include the canonical elements of a temple such as the central hall and bypass corridor [Khojaev 1984, p. 63].

All given facts is an evidence that the architect of the Alash-khan mausoleum was aware of the ancient architecture of Central Asia together with vast knowledge of the theory of architectural structure, i.e. he was an educated specialist in his time. As a result he created the architectural piece of art distinguished in deep originality of its monumental, sound, rational planning and constructive design, delicate décor and its synthesis with architecture as a whole.

The Zhanseit mausoleum (its ruins are situated 2km to South-West from Boztumsyk settlement of Ulytau district) and the Syrlytam mausoleum (closed to Atbasar) should be mentioned among the biggest constructions of Central Kazakhstan of the 13th century. Perfectly ornamented ceramic tiles with geometric pattern of ‘shenjere’ type and botanical pattern of wonderful tracery and carving are evidence of high architectural and artistic level of these mausoleums.

In the 1220s the area of Southern Kazakhstan became a part of the Chagatai dominion. In the second half of the century the political and economical consolidation of the state provided the revival of cultural traditions of the Karakhanids. The architecture of this period can be characterised by two very interesting monuments such as the Daud-bek mausoleum (1262) and the Syrly-tam mausoleum (1279) on the Inkar-Darya. The former was constructed above the grave of Ulug-Bil’gya-Ikbal khan Daud-bek, a Turkic commander according to V.V. Bartold. The mausoleum

27

Kazakhstan

differs in its original and quite specific volumetric-spatial design. It resembles the type of rotunda open from all the four sides of the horizon.

A spher ica l dome w ith per fect brickwork and ganch mortar rests upon four pylons connected by the through pointed arches and the voussoir archivolt adjoining them from the outside started directly from the level of a low stone socle. The transition from the tetrahedron to the dome is made by the spherical pendentives, i.e. it is the new structure design providing a more perfect arch-dome system in the architecture of Kazakhstan and Central Asia in the 14-15th centuries. The Daud-bek mausoleum has almost no prototypes apart from, according to M.M. Mendikulov’s statement, the Aysha-bibi mausoleum with four through recesses in the massive walls designed as decorative elements [Mendikulov, 1981 p. 531]. The architecture of the mausoleum occupies an important place in the history of Kazakhstan architecture not only with its innovated design, but also with the rich plasticity of architectural forms. There are no decorative elements in the building. The brickwork of high quality is executed in a carefully composed pattern. Thus, the Daud-bek mausoleum is of the centric-dome type and can be regarded as a development of memorial constructions without portal of the Karakhanid period.

According to G.A. Pugachenkova, the Syrly-tam mausoleum on the Inkar-Darya of the late 13th century stylistically occupied the intermediate position between the mausoleums in Maverannahr on the one hand and ones in the Jetisu and the Fergana Valley on the other [Masson, Pugachenkova 1950, p. 130]. It is a square (10x10m in size by outline) single chamber construction (7.6x7.6 m in size) covered with ellipse-shaped dome with the light opening in the top and 11.5m high according to V. A. Kallaur’s data [Kallaur, 1896 p. 8]. The building is remarkable for its large volume. According to G. A. Pugachenkova, the Syrly-tam mausoleum (on the Inkar-Darya – B.G.) like the Babadja-khatun mausoleum and the Aysha-bibi mausoleum is the mausoleum for women, which was completely unheard of in Central Asia in the pre-Mongolian period. The building is bricked with the baked bricks 27x27x4.5cm and 23.5x12.5x4.5cm in size. The brickwork is very thorough and joints are so thin that it is impossible to identify what kind of mortar was used. The schematic draft of façade by Djanibekov indicates that the building was a portal mausoleum with a massive pointed dome which might have been a tent in the past. The upper part of the portal has

Daud-bek mausoleum. Plan.

28


fallen, its segmentations are formed by framing borders with alteration of decorated and simple brick lines; perhaps, the latter ones lost its white facing [Masson, Pugachenkova 1950, p. 130]. Thus, it is the portal-dome type of mausoleums, but, as M.M. Mendikulkov noticed, the portal has an undeveloped look and it is just a wall-screen raised above small thickness of wall of the main façade decorated by traditional means. The stable continuation of constructive methods of the previous Karakhanid period can be clearly seen in this monument [Mendikulov, 1981 p. 390].

Together with that, it is possible to concede that the design of the main façade was planned to outline the dominating purpose of the high pointed dome. For the aim the architect created the new type of portal-peshtak with rectangular projections raised at edges, which looked like flank towers with the use of vertical decorative lines of different terracotta plates and three-quarter round corner columns 40cm [Tolstov, 1977 p. 281] in diameter. The middle part of portal is lowered and the representative aspect of dome from the main façade is considered. The recess of the main entrance is 4m high and doorway 2.3m high [Masson et al., 1950. p. 40] is covered with the pointed arches and framed with traditional U-shaped line with inscriptions on ganch mortar. The interior is laconically designed; the basic adorning element is the corner benched-arched pendentives with the pointed arch under the drum and on low recesses placed in axis and also in places of passage from hexahedron to the circle of the dome. In general, according to S.P. Tolstov, it is a very refined building clearly formed around the vertical axis, the mausoleum of centric type with the original peshtak combining the principles of Kazakhstan and Maverannahr architectural school of the pre-Mongol period.

The largest monuments of monumental architecture of the 14th century are the Syrly-tam mausoleum on the Jana-Darya, the Tek-Turmas mausoleum, the Kok-Kesene mausoleum in Southern Kazakhstan, the Bolgan-ata mausoleum in Central Kazakhstan, the Shakpak-ata underground mosques, and the Kosmola mausoleum in Western Kazakhstan and also the Khadja Khoja Ahmed Yasawi mausoleum-khanaka in the city of Turkestan. The Syrly-tam mausoleum-khanaka on the Jana-Darya has survived only in the ruined condition, but the remains impress with their grandiosity and sublimity. The building is one of the biggest single chamber mausoleums in Kazakhstan and it is 10x15m in size by the perimeter. The design of the Syrly-tam mausoleum is almost identical to the plans of mausoleums in Central Kazakhstan of the 13th century, but the massive peshtak with small increase of width relative to the width of building is evidence of strengthened role of the latter ones. The second doorway from the opposite side is also an evidence of changes. The Syrly-tam mausoleum is not inferior to the mazars of Kunya-Urgench in its architectural forms.

It is covered with the baked bricks 24x24x5cm in size. The central entrance with a portal (it was almost completely destroyed) and the pointed arch were located in the southern wall. The pylons of the portal were decorated with the special facing voussoir bricks of a high quality. The portal was also decorated with an ornamental majolica stripe (now it is ruined, too). The arch of the portal was bricked of the alternating simple facing and turquoise glazed bricks. The space between pylons of portal was covered with the semi-dome on the honeycomb trumpet arches. The main room of the mausoleum was covered with a double dome made of baked bricks. The dome lay upon the hexahedral drum. The passage from the rectangular room to the hexahedral drum is the octagon formed of the pointed recess-trumpets in the corners of the room and the light (15cm deep) pointed recess in walls. The remains of window openings have been preserved in the drum [Tolstov 1977, p. 276]. Therefore, the design of the mausoleum was the portal-dome with the tent cover. According to I.A. Castagne, the mausoleum of Sarly-tam is 5.5 sajene (1 sajene =

29

Kazakhstan

2.34 metres) and walls are 12 sajene long. An Arab inscription was located on the façade above the outer door [Castagne, 1910 p. 25].

The Kosmola mausoleum built over a precipice on an elevated area of the western edge of Ustyurt plateau is extremely important as a landmark in the history of the Kazakh architecture. The construction is remarkable for its original planning and volumetric-spatial design. The octahedral shape with the portal and doorway in the southern side was used for the first time and bacame widely spread in the architecture of Kazakhstan, especially, in Western Kazakhstan. It should be underlined that the Kosmola mausoleum marks the beginning of the formation of the Western Kazakhstan architectural school, which blossomed in the late 18th – early 20th centuries.

The constructive design of the building is also marked with a innovative method that later became traditional for Western Kazakhstan. M. M. Mendikulov described this method as follows: the buildings were erected, as a rule, without foundation and socle (apart from the later mausoleums). Initially, the grass cover was removed; the coat of worksite was consolidated with manual ramming. One row of stone slabs was placed on such a base along entire perimeter of outer walls, above which two parallel suites of wall blocks were bedded and the space between them was filled up with refuses of construction materials and soil with clay mortar. The levelled three-ply suite of blockwork was imbricated with horizontal slabs providing the transverse strength of this structure. Thus, the ancient method of blockwork known already among the Scythians of Northern Black Sea area, the ancient Romans, in Early Medieval Armenia and Vladimir-Suzdal architecture of the 12th century, received a specific interpretation in Westernt Kazakhstan [Mendikulov 1982, p. 147].

Thus, the large octahedral (8.2m in diameter) Kosmola mausoleum was hypothetically covered by a tent-pyramidal dome. The photography of 1952 shows that the massive portal of the monument with a deep recess, a triangular stepped arch and a door opening covered with one huge slab made the building look like a real monument strengthened by a picturesque segmentation of wall with large abraded blocks 60-70cm high and horizontal slabs 12-13cm thick. It is necessary to notice that the design interaction of volumes of octahedron and portal is managed by an architect with high skills and these main forms of mausoleum are harmonically combined and clearly reproducing the image of nomadic dwelling, i.e. the yurt.

The population of Western Kazakhstan in Mangyshlak in conditions of hot climate preferred to construct subterranean mosques dug in solid rocks of ravine cliffs or slopes of chalk maintains. Nowadays, more than ten mosques of this type are known. The earliest of them is dated back to the late 12th century [Pervye russkie… 1963, p. 282-283].

The Shopan-ata subterranean mosque dated back by M.M. Mendikulov to the late 12th – early 13th century is attributed to the earliest monuments of subterranean architecture of Mangyshlak.

The mausoleum of Kosmola. Plan.

30


It is graved in the rock and is distinguished by its developed composition. A rectangular central hall (7.1x5.1m) is designed as the lounge-khanaka with two adjoining spacious rooms for pilgrims and a mosque room placed in the eastern side of the cave. Two burial chambers (of Shopan-ata and his daughter, according to legend) significantly deepened in the rock are included into the complex. The central hall is illuminated through a round light aperture and also with the help of a ventilation opening 1.2m in diameter. The rock walls of the whole complex of the mosque without any décor elements are roughly hewed. Evidently, such an austere atmosphere corresponded to the austerity spirit of mystics-hermits, one of which was, perhaps, Shopan-ata himself [Mendikulov 1987, p. 11].

The high level of subterranean architecture of Western Kazakhstan of the 14th century is demonstrated by the mosque of Shakpak-ata. The construction is graved in the rock cape and its planning is interesting: the shape of Latin cross oriented from East to West. Its main element is the central square (5x4.5m in size) hall separated from all four rooms by an elliptic arched wall supported by four corner three-quarter columns with a capital, without a base, but with an entasis. The significance of the hall is underlined by the dome cover and the light and ventilation opening (1.2m in diameter and 5m high) in the dome. The square protective construction built of the cut large rectangular blocks of malm-rock used, obviously, also as minaret (remains of spiral stairs are evidence) was erected above the mosque.

The upper part of the construction above the ground has not survived and the remaining walls are just 3.9m high, but, according to M.M. Mendikulov, it is possible to assume that

the pavilion was very high and the upper part of ceiling was, perhaps, a small tower-lamp like a simple top of a minaret. Three window openings arched with the voussoir pointed arches and now partly blocked are an indirect evidence of the once existing cover [Mendikulov 1987, p. 22-23]. The northern, southern and western rooms placed at the three sides from the central one are equal in size (4.5x4m) and the eastern one is 9m long. The northern and southern rooms are separated from the central hall by a slight rise of the floor (20cm); the ceilings in them are f lat unlike the ones in the central hall. Small recesses and chambers – carrels were graved in walls of the southern and eastern rooms and iwan was placed at both entries from East and West. The main entry is the eastern one connecting the mosque with the plateau surface. The mihrab in the mosque of Shakpak-ata is designed in the shape of an arched recess, which does not breach the sharia law and such design was common in local mosques where people often prayed for Shopan-ata mosque. Plan

31

Kazakhstan

the dead. Therefore, it is clear why this mihrab wall was richly decorated with the Koran suras, inscriptions of Sufi poems and the picture of open human palm with five fingers. The interior is remarkable for its laconic design. The impression of mystery and austerity is animated by round three-quarter corner columns (more than 2m high) with the developed variable capitals resembling the columns of hearths of the 4-7th centuries in Bagishamal [Pugachenkova 1948, p. 37] and arches in the central hall and also the arch recesses cut in rocks. A.G. Medoev maintained that the columns were not loaded with weight and that pure architectonics was their primary purpose. The architects displayed some creative courage and a sense of harmony. Graving the mosque in the subterranean monolith they acted as sculptors and not as builders. It is unique also as an architectural complex and as a medieval construction graved in the monolith, wholly preserved and discovered for the first time on the territory of Central Asia [Medoev 1969, p. 56]. This unique construction carved in a rock has the overall length of more than 17m in the east-western direction and more than 13m along the north-southern axis, width of 4.5m and height of 2m (apart from the central hall), and high stone tower-minaret placed on the highest point of the rock plateau. It can be justifiably regarded as the monument of mightiness, ideals, diligence and high culture of the nomadic society of Deshti-Kipchak. Perhaps, M.M. Mendikulov was right that Sufi community was unable to build this subterranean construction and the state helped to build the mosque [Mendikulov, 1987 p. 19]. Therefore, it is possible to assume that the Shakpak-ata mosque was erected as a generic regional building for public worship.

The town of Turkestan became one of the northern footholds of Tamerlane’s huge state in the late 14th century and it was actively developed in connection with the intensification of cultural exchange with the Deshti-Kipchak. It was supported not only by its important strategic position, but also by its location on the caravan roads leading from areas of Maverannahr into the Syr-Darya steppes. For sure, not ostentatious piety, but ideological and political reasons guided such a farsighted politician as Tamerlane to construct in this distant town a huge mausoleum-khanaka above the grave of famous Sufi teacher – Khoja Khoja Ahmed Yasawi; this monument rivalled the best buildings of that period in Samarkand in grandeur and splendour [Pugachenkova 1948, p. 40].

It is necessary to know at least some details related to the development of the site which has been only partially preserved, in order to imagine the origin of this piece of architectural art of Kazakhstan and Central Asia. Five columns disclosed by M.E. Masson and T. Mirgiyazov in different block mosques during the archaeological and topographical surveys in Turkestan city in 1928 are interesting; there are inscriptions (interpreted by M.E. Masson) on two of them. One of them included the ‘date of the 10th of safara, 753 of Hegira (i.e. the 7th of April, 1352) and another included the ‘date of 876 of Hegira (1470-1471)’ and also data on construction of ‘the mosque by the order of Emir Muhammad-bani-Buk, bani-Amir-Datkha; the graver is Isa’ [Pugachenkova 1948, p. 48].

G.A. Pugachenkova, researching the columns in details, wrote: ‘The stylistic similarity between two of them allows assuming the possibility of their belonging to one building. The characteristic feature of these columns are very different from some known Central Asian samples is that their lower part of trunk is thinned; the first one (1352) is not as thin as the rest of them. The comparison of columns from Turkestan city is a good illustration of evolution of the architectural forms during more than one century. The proportions are more monumental, decoration is placed on big surfaces, the vertical and horizontal segmentations are clear and balanced, the pattern design with the equidistributed geometric, botanical and epigraphic motifs

32


is complicated, the carving motifs are various and rich, the technique is virtuosic for the 12th century. In the columns of the late 15th century the proportions were refined, segmentation was made according to the principle of small scale horizontal divisions (leading to the lack of constructive separation of a trunk from a capital), the carving was f latter, the decoration motifs are simpler and detailed, but yet variable’ [Pugachenkova 1948, p. 50].

Therefore, the great samples of carved wooden columns are an evidence of the high level of development of architecture in the late 14th century in Turkestan city, where specific architecture, quite different from the traditional Sogdian forms, was created. The constructions with columns and the narrowing lower part of trunks form a specific local group, since the area of their spread is limited to Southern Kazakhstan, if the parallels in the world practice (the wooden columns of Knossos palace, ‘Lions’ gates’ in the treasure house

of King Atreus in Mycenae, the archaic architecture of the Caucasian peoples, and so on) are not taken into consideration. This unusual shape of the column ‘obviously, fitted with not only a quite specific aesthetic, but also with the pure practical purposes such as seismic (and not static) stability of the stand and decrease of free opening of girder at increase of its resting area on other one’ [Pugachenkova 1948, p. 48].

This type of columns, outdated by the time of their construction, survived in the religious architecture of the towns in the Syr-Darya area of Kazakhstan till, at least, the 15th century. The columns of the Arslan-baba mosque erected by Tamerlane’s order in Otrar in the late 14th – early 15th centuries are similar to those ones from Turkestan city in some aspects. V.L. Voronina, measuring and studying in details the two remaining columns from the old mosque of Otrar, which was built anew after the earthquake in the mid-18th century, wrote: ‘The first column is 3.49m high, the second one is 1.5m shorter, the decoration of the column is very restrained and limited to geometric motifs. The square capital is a specific feature of these monuments. In the architecture of the Middle Ages the columns with such a capital were few in number: the carved column in khanaka of Khoja-Khoja Ahmed Yasawi, the Zeravshan columns from Urmitan (the 11-12th century) and Rarz (the 15th century), the columns of mountainous Tajikistan of the 19-20th centuries, and so on. The columns of Otrar should be regarded as a special historic monument that comprises a distinct category of columns. The geometric clearness of details and strictness of decoration are combined in them. They throw new light on the data related to the wooden order in the history of Central Asia’ [Voronina 1975, p. 72-74].

The columns of Turkestan city are notable for the high level of craftsmanship; in order to understand its sources one may refer to ‘Sutumi-salamga’ poles – a place of greeting in the

Construction plan of Khoja Ahmed Yasawi.

33

Kazakhstan

Babaji Khatun mausoleum.

34


Karakhan mausoleum.

Dawud bek mausoleum.

35

Kazakhstan

Aisha-bibi mausoleum.

36


Portal of Aisha-bibi mausoleum.

Aisha-bibi mausoleum. Façade.

37

Kazakhstan

Rabia Sultan begim mausoleum.

38


Mausoleum of Khoja Ahmed Yasawi.

39

Kazakhstan

Doors of the mausoleum of Khoja

Ahmed Yasawi.

Ornamental design of the

mausoleum’s Khanaka.

Ornamental design of the mausoleum’s Khanaka.

40


Shakpak-ata mosque. General view.

Kumbez Aya-Khamyr mausoleum.

41

Kazakhstan

Bolgan-ana mausoleum.

Alash-khan mausoleum.

42


Dombauyl mausoleum.

Zhoshy mausoleum.

43

Kyrgyzstan

Burana minaret.

44


Architectural decor from the fortress Sadyr-Kurgan: carving on clay and terracotta

Stucco architectural decor from the Krasnaya Rechka settlement.

45

Kumbez Manas mausoleum.

Kyrgyzstan

46


Tash-Rabat caravanserai.

47

Uzgen mausoleum.

Architectural decor from the Burana

fortress: clay colored thread (1-2), carved

alabaster (3-4), terracotta (5-7).

Architectural decor from the settlement

of Kara-Dzhigach: glazed tiles (1-2) and

terracotta (3-9).

Kyrgyzstan

48


Uzgen minaret.

49

Kazakhstan

Caucasian and Tajik dwellings – supporting a ceiling ‘darbazy’, where the poles are endowed with special magic function connected to the cult of fire and hearth.

As we have already mentioned, the end of the 14th- early 15th centuries in Kazakhstan was marked by an impressive Khoja Khoja Ahmed Yasawi mausoleum-khanaka in the city of Turkestan 3.

The Turkestan complex has more than 30 rooms built for different purposes to underline the significance and sanctity of Khoja Ahmed Yasawi’s burial place.

The genius architect Hoja Husein al-Shirazi managed to materialise the ideology of Islam and reflect its moral-ethic regulations in architecture and to create the needed social-psychological atmosphere to preach Islam (mostly of its Sufi variety) by putting the sepulchre in the forefront and therefore underlining its leading role in the composition.

The mausoleum including three basic elements such as the central square room of gurkhana with sides 7.15m in size, ziaratkhana of almost the same size and the portal 13m wide above the external entrance is placed on the most honourable place called ‘gor’. There is an exit opening to all sides of the world marked by shallow recesses decorated with stalactites in gurkhana with the mortuary monument faced with pale green marble. The room is covered with a double shell dome; the inner pointed form is rested upon pendentives also decorated with stalactites and the outer ribbed one (with 52 ribs) stands on a high cylindrical drum with the wide line of epigraphic décor and friezes. The overall height of the ribbed dome is 21m [Nurmukhamedov 1980, p. 30-34].

3 Such classification of the complex, similar to Pugachenkova’s khanaka-mausoleum, apparently most fully reflects its typology in contrast to many scholars’ opinion, including Tuyakbaeva and Mendikulov, who labelled it mausoleum-mosque, as well as Nurmukhamedov and Zasypkin. Dobrosmyslov gives relatively full data related to the construction of this last building constructed by Tamerlane, which were taken from the book by Tamerlane’s contemporary historian Sharafeddin Ali Yazdi in his Zafar-name (The Book а Victories).

Mausoleum of Khoja Akhmed Yasawi.

50


The rest of rooms are placed in front of the doorway, at the pediment and by the sides of the mausoleum (therefore, it is more correct to regard this complex as a mausoleum-khanaka).

The largest room is jamaatkhana connected with gurkhana through ziaratkhana, which doors are notable for highly artistic carving and its khalka (steel ring) has an inscribed poem mentioning the name of the author of this piece of art: Izzaddin, the son of Tadjaddin from Isfahan and the date: 799 of Hegira, i.e. 1397 [Pugachenkova 1950, p. 91]. B.T. Tuyakbaeva offered a different interpretation ‘… Tadj-ad-din an-sakaba - foundry worker, chaser’ [Tuyakbaeva, 1989 p. 31].

The square room of the jamaatkhana is covered with the biggest double shell dome in Central Asia. It is interesting that the inner pointed dome 18.2m in diameter is the bearing dome for the external spherical dome being smaller in diameter and 36m

above the floor level. A huge bronze kazan (cauldron) (in reference to which the hall is named as kazanlyk) is placed in the centre of the hall and the inscription on it says that ‘it was cast by order of Tamerlane master Abdul-Aziz, son of master Sarvar ed-din from Tavriz in 10 shavval of 801 (in July of 1399) and is aimed to keep water’ [Dobrosmyslov, 1912 p. 137]. The mosque, kitapkhana, hudjra on two levels and askhana are placed to the South from the mausoleum and Big and Small aksarai, hudjra on two levels and kudukkhana are placed to the East.

The need to orientate the mihrab of the mosque along the south-western axis, i.e. in the direction of Mecca forced the architects of the mausoleum-khanaka to position its main entrance to the south-east. The most grandiose and majestic part in the complex is the portal of the main façade 50.4m wide with a huge pointed recess 57.0m high (higher and wider than the main body), 18m wide and 13m deep. Its monumentality is strengthened in contrast with a respectively small door opening placed deeply in the recess and two faceted corner towers flanking the portal. In general, the main façade is designed as opening outside and rhythmically sharply increasing pointed recesses; it demonstrates the metaphor of the doctrine of the sheikh-poet Khoja Ahmed Yasawi, spreading all over the world and radiating from within, from the ‘gardens of paradise’ (raudat - mausoleum). At the same time it is an image of a widely open embrace happily accepting people and inviting them to purification of the soul and perfection of the spirit.

The constructive design of mausoleum-khanaka is also very interesting. The engineering and technical methods are notable for their deep and scientific validity providing stability and longevity of the huge construction, while other great buildings of the Timurid period either have completely disappeared or are in ruins. Professor A.A. Shishkin, an expert in stone constructions, noted the astonishing insight of the builders constructing the complicated and huge complex in seismic conditions and on uneven bases. The simplicity and precision of the constructive scheme achieved by cutting the whole complex into eight constructively independent spatial blocks provided the long-term preservation and general stability of the complex even when the loess base of the complex

Kaldyrgach-biya mausoleum.

51

Kazakhstan

was frequently saturated with excessive humidity in the past. The cutting was carried out by six through and two blind corridors. This great engineering design is the evidence that the architect managed to embody and develop the achievements of the previous architecture of Central Asia in this outstanding monument.

In order to strengthen the artistic expressiveness of the mausoleum-khanaka the architects widely used ‘carving and bones, art processing of stones and metal, decoration, motifs genetically linked to people’s applied art’ in the interior [Dennike 1939, p. 8]. In the ornament we see ‘the elements derived from the art of Iran, later preserved in Central Asia and falling out of use in Kazakhstan. Along with these we see some elements of the Kazakh folk ornament in the decor and composition of the door’ [Mendikulov, 1981, p. 555]. It should be noticed that T. B. Basenov ascertained the facts of adoption of bases of local patterns, e.g., a pattern known as ‘tort-ayshik’ in the carving decoration of the door in the mausoleum-khanaka.

This is clear if we take into account that the invited architects could not ignore the local traditions of décor. However, partial adoption of the local art was carried out in such a complex and masked way that it is impossible to see the adoption without a special analysis. One important feature of the mausoleum-khanaka is its sheer complexity which should be interpreted in a wider context of the architectural traditions of the Central Asian Maverannahr architectural school. It is hard to find in Central Asia such type of constructions uniting such a range of room type, apart from the pre-Islamic civic constructions in Khorezm and Turkmenistan resembling the Turkestan complex only by their huge size.

In Kazakhstan, a palatial and religious construction of Akyrtas (the 7-8th century) near the city of Taraz, had such a complex purpose. The analysis of the functional structure of these complexes allows stating that in the area of interpenetration of the culture of nomadic and settled societies the erection of such large centres for religious and educational purposes as the mausoleum-khanaka of Khoja Ahmed Yasawi and Akyrtas was reasonable and such type of buildings should be attributed to traditions of the Northern Turkestan-Kazakhstan architectural school.

If it is true, then the following conclusions can be made in relation to the architecture of the mausoleum-khanaka: the complex is a result of organic combination and merging of artistic and constructive traditions of the architecture of Maverannahr with the traditional Kazakh approach to the organisation of the functional structure of buildings. It becomes evident if we pay attention to one important detail; the architect of the Khoja Ahmed Yasawi mausoleum-khanaka made the hardest decision to cover the djamaatkhana with such a big dome with due regard for local conditions, while in Central Asia such constructive element always remained an open yard. It is a clear origin of a new, previously unknown in Central Asia type of construction based on the local natural, climatic, social, economic and other conditions.

The upper part of the portal of the main façade remained incomplete by Tamerlane’s death and according to a legend it was developed further to its contemporary, but also incomplete condition by Abdullakhan, the Emir of Bukhara. Nevertheless, the main façade is majestic and monumental due to its large-scaled laconic forms even in such an incomplete condition.

Tamerlane intended to please the nomads with respect to their national shrine, to underline the spiritual unity of peoples professing Islam, to impress a susceptible nomad with the grandeur of the plan and to produce the image of the mighty empire with its construction. Such practical goals were implied in the construction of a first-grade monument of Central Asian architecture in outlying districts in the late 14th century [Masson, 1930].

52


Therefore, the characteristic feature of architecture of the Timurid period is the mutual enrichment of architecture of different regions in the huge state by penetration and merging of creative ideas and trends formed both in the capital centres being the main focus of cultural activities as well as in the outlying districts [Pugachenkova, 1978]. Generally, the erection of the mausoleum-khanaka of Khoja Ahmed Yasawi is a conclusion of the achievements of architecture in Central Asia at least up to the 15th century.

It is quite possible to state that certain traditions, e.g., the erection of dome above a square room has been known approximately since the 4th century BC, were developed in the architecture of Kazakhstan by the 15th century. Initially the domes in the corners of tetragon were rested upon special bricked poles, then since the

7-8th centuries upon trumpet arches occupying just a 1/5-1/4 of tetragon. Such structures weakly supported

the dome ring which had to be additionally deepened into walls.By the 9-10th centuries the under dome part becomes a regular octahedron with hardly visible

squinches. Shield-shaped pendentives and intersected arches allowing widening the spans and recesses and decreasing the centre of gravity of a building were introduced in the 13th century. Afterwards, the shield-shaped pendentives gave way in Central Asia to the elegant and rational cancellated pendentives, excelling the netted structures developed by the engineer V. G. Shukhov; however, the trumpet arches have not been forgotten and were still used in buildings of the folk architects [Masson, 1930]. In conclusion it should be acknowledged that the architecture of the Khoja Ahmed Yasawi mausoleum-khanaka greatly influenced the next stage of the development of popular architecture of Kazakhstan and remained the object of imitation for many centuries. For example, the mausoleum-mosque in the Baba-ata settlement in Karatau repeated the design scheme of the Turkestan mausoleum-khanaka in a slightly simplified way [Ibraev, 1981].

In the 15th century begins a new stage in the development of monumental architecture of Kazakhstan conditioned by establishment (in the mid-15th century) and development of the Kazakh khanate. The mausoleum of Kaldyrgach-biy is one of notable monuments of the early 15th century, continuing the traditions of the specific North-Turkestan architectural school.

In terms of its overall composition the mausoleum is attributed to the centric, portal-less, tent type with a pyramidal dome originated, according to G.A. Pugachenkova, from the grave constructions of the Turkic tribes that had once inhabited the northern area of Central Asia (Southern Kazakhstan – B.G.). The ‘tent mausoleums’ were widely spread in the 11-12th centuries, when the waves of Turkic migration from the Syr-Darya area hit Maverannahr, Khorasan, Azerbaijan, and other areas. This type of monumental architecture of baked brick had remained popular until the 15th century, but it survived in the traditions of the Kazakh and the Kyrgyz architecture up to the recent centuries [Pugachenkova 1950, p. 91].

Not only historical facts, but also the structure of the inner dome is dating the construction of mausoleum (note later than the early 15th century). The transitional system of the octahedron with

Abat-Baytak mausoleum.

53

Kazakhstan

the recess pendentives and intermediate shield-shapes pendentives was introduced in the Central Asian architecture in the late 14th century (the monuments of the Timurid period – the Khoja Ahmed Yasawi mausoleum-khanaka in Turkestan city, the Bibi-khanym mosque and mausoleum, and so on.). However, it was gradually replaced by a more complicated, but more perfect system of intersect arches and shield-shaped pendentives in the late 15th century [Castagne, 1911, p. 29].

The mausoleum of Bolgan-ana built 10km upstream of confluence of the Kara-Kengir and the Sarysu rivers in Central Kazakhstan (Jezkazgan province), the mausoleum of Abat-Baytak in the Beskop complex of landscape facie in the middle of the Uly-Khobda river of Aktubinsk province and also the mausoleum of Kok-Kesen built several years later than the mausoleum of Abat-Baytak stand out among numerous monuments of the 15th century. In 1901 V. Kallaur researched and photographed the remains of the beautiful mausoleum of Kok-Kesen of the 14-15th centuries, about which Abulgazi-khan wrote already in the mid-17th century. In 1914 the building collapsed and when A. Yakubovskiy researched the site in 1927, the mausoleum was preserved only as the abutment of the southern arch of portal and a heap of ruins [Yakubovskiy 1929, p. 154].

One of significant remaining constructions of the Turkestan complex – the Rabia Sultan Begim mausoleum was built in the late 15th century. The mausoleum continues the tradition of the memorial constructions of the Timurid period by its volumetric design. Initially it was an octahedral building with one chamber covered with a double shell dome. The external dome was placed on the high cylindrical drum very similar in its shape to the dome of the Khoja Khoja Ahmed Yasawi mausoleum. The only difference is that there are no ribs on the dome of the Rabia Sultan Begim mausoleum. Afterwards, four more rooms were added to the central octahedral hall. The main entrance turned to the mausoleum-khanaka (it is an unusual design which breaches the

Rabia Sultan Begim mausoleum. Plan. Rabia Sultan Begim mausoleum.

54


traditional Southern or Eastern orientation of mausoleums) is marked with the portal with a deep entrance recess covered with a high pointed arch. The transition to the dome in the octahedron was carried out with the help of arched pendentives. Like in the Gur-Emir mausoleum, the builders took into account the function of structures of this building; having the arch pendentives, they cut the corners of the cubic volume, because they were very massive due to the wall thickness and were not loaded [Pugachenkova, 1950 p.181]. Therefore the outer look of the mausoleum was that of an octahedron. The burial vault covered with a low dome rested upon eight low pointed arches was built under this central room.

In the architecture of mausoleum there is a tendency towards more elegant, vertical proportions both in exterior and interior achieved by the increased height of walls. The octahedron is faced with polished bricks. The drum is decorated with white-blue inscriptions and the turquoise dome with geometric ornament. The mausoleum is notable for its highly expressive silhouette and remains visible even in close proximity to the complex of Khoja Ahmed Yasawi. The architecture of the Rabi-i Sultan Begim mausoleum seriously influenced the development of Kazakhstan architecture in the next periods. As it is well-known, in the 16th century the architecture of Kazakhstan saw the development of various types of memorial and religious constructions with the centric composition, promoting the idea of centralisation and providing the strengthening of identity of the national feature of architectural monuments in connection with development of Kazakh khanate.

55

KYRGYZSTAN

TOWN PLANNING. The most part of the buildings described in this work is connected with towns. The

problem of appearance and development of towns is still far from being solved. Today we are only sure that

they had sprung up by the early 1st millennium BC in the south of the country, in the Fergana valley, while

in the north they appeared in the early medieval time. They reached the peak of their development in the

Karakhanid time (10th-early 13th centuries), followed by a rapid collapse of settled and urban life. By the

end of the studied period (15th century) Kyrgyzstan becomes a zone of monopolistic nomadic supremacy.

However, in the beginning of the studied period structural elements form and function in towns, which

even today we can easily identify in the topography of medieval sites: densely built shakhristans, suburbs

(rabads?) with isolated mansions, and long walls surrounding them.

The shakhristans of towns were not excavated in the Soviet period and in the recent times; not even those

of the sites of the Chuyskaya valley, which have been closely studied. The situation with the towns of south

Kyrgyzstan is the same. Excavations in the shakhristans of Uzghen are insignificant in area and do not present

a whole picture of its upspring and development as a town [Bernstam, 1998. p. 130-137; Zadneprovsky, 1960.

p 245-248; Goryacheva, 1983. p. 68-103]. Medieval Osh has been almost completely levelled by modern

buildings. However, the data obtained from archaeological observation along with the materials obtained

from pits laid in different parts of the city and written sources allowed the researchers to define its basic

structural elements [Galitsky, Ploskikh, 1987;

Buryakov, Gritsina, 2006]. The site of Karabulak

situated at the foothill of the Turkistan Range is

the only site in the Kyrgyz part of the Fergana

valley that is more or less studied. G.A. Brykina,

its principal researcher, considers it a small

town 5 ha in area, while others regard it as a

village [Mukimov, Mamajanova, 1990. p. 68].

With the large sites being so poorly studied,

villages, naturally, remain almost unexplored.

RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURE. In one

of his latest summary works S. Khmelnitsky

suggested dividing residential buildings of

the studied period into five types – palaces,

khasrs, mansions, middle class town houses

and houses of the urban and rural poor.

However, in this very work he admits that

very often distinctions between them are

quite dim [Khmelnitsky, 1997. p. 8]. This fact

is particularly true taking into consideration

that architects study residential architecture

only after the work of archaeologists, which

means that the buildings they study are often

The palace on the citadel of the Ak Beshim

settlement: hearth-fire in room 13 (1-2) and

plan (3) (Semenov, 2002)

56


found in such a bad condition that architects cannot

reconstruct coverings or décor, and even are not

able to define the layout of the constructions. In

our text we will simplify Khmelnitsky’s system

and attempt to describe a series of palaces and

mansions of Kyrgyzstan.

The Ak-Beshim palace. It is situated in the

south-western corner of the shakhristan of the

site Ak-Beshim (eastern part of the Chuyskaya

valley) on the ruins of the early medieval citadel

of the town, and forms the citadel’s upper, fourth

building period. It was studied in 1996-1998

by the Kyrgyz-Russian expedition under the

leadership of G. L. Semenov [Semenov, 2002. p.

11-43]. According to the reconstructions of the

poorly preserved and unexcavated eastern and

south areas made by the researcher, we can define

the Ak-Beshim palace as a court surrounded by

two rows of rooms. The size of the court was

21.5 m by 21.5 m. In the middle of each side were iwans with passages into the external row of rooms.

They were 4 to 4.5 m wide and up to 6.5m deep. Two steps led to their entrance. On each side of the

iwans there were two rooms, those in the northern side having individual exits to the court and in the

western connected with each other by a passage. The width of these rooms was 4 to 4.5 m, their length

up to 6.75 m; a number of rooms, mostly along the western side, had a rectangular shape. There was no

archaeological evidence to reconstruct the coverings. Rooms of the external row run along the walls

of the court. They were covered with vaults, which can be seen by the preserved fragments of cornices

of vaults. All the walls of the palace were well-plastered, in some places with ganch, however, with no

traces of decoration. The palace had mainly wattle-and-daub floors with several layers of coating. In

some rooms the floors were paved with mud brick. In room 15 the floor was covered with baked tiles,

30-33 cm by 14-15 cm by 3.5 cm in size, laid at an angle to the walls in alternating rows: tiles laid

lengthwise and those placed crosswise. Short sufas placed along one, two (L-shaped) or three walls

(U-shaped) indicate that a number of rooms were meant for living. Some of the rooms had in them

hearths and tandyrs, which probably served for heating, too. A hearth-fireplace, the most remarkable

heating construction, was found in room 13. A sewage system was constructed under the western iwan:

a well was made under the floor, 35 cm by 35 cm in size, laid with ceramic tiles (31 cm by 19.5 cm by

4 cm), where water from the court ran through a pipe (kubur).

The various techniques used in building the walls that have remained to the height of 40 to 130 cm, as

well as the different level of the bases varying by up to 50 cm, indicate that the building of the palace was

not a momentary act. Some walls were built of mud brick, 44-46 cm by 23-24 cm by 8 cm in size, laid in

alternating courses of stretchers and headers; they were 1.85 m thick and belonged to the external row of

rooms. Others were the walls of the internal row of rooms and were built of thin bands of pakhsa, in which

in a number of cases a belt of mud bricks ran. They were 80 to 120 cm thick. The external walls were built

of pakhsa blocks, which were eroded heavily by rainwater. Judging from the coins and other finds, the

author considers the palace functioned in the 10th-11th centuries.

Dwellings in the Krasnaya Rechka

settlement. Country palace (1), mansions

(2-6) house (7) (by: Kozhemyako, 1967

Goryacheva Peregudova, 1989).

57

Kyrgyzstan

The Krasnorechenskoye palace. The object which researchers called a country palace was situated

1 km south of the citadel of the site. The archaeological expedition headed by V.D. Goryacheva was studying

it in the late 70s and 80s of the last century [Goryacheva, Berenaliyev, 1979; Goryacheva, Peregudova, 1989].

The palace was built on the ruins of an early medieval castle-keshk (which remained practically unexplored)

that had been turned into a stylobate, and had four periods of functioning. The plan of the first construction

period reflects the idea of the architect that was brought to fruition at the first stage. The other stages are

connected with ‘improvements’ and repairs that gradually nullified the beauty of the concept. The palace

is almost square in plan, 33.7 m by 31.8 m, with the sides oriented at an angle of 27 degrees to the N-S and

E-W directions, like the majority of buildings in this site. It has two entrances – a broad one in the centre of

the south wall and a narrower one in the middle of the north wall, creating the object’s compositional axis.

In the centre of the palace is a spacious (16 m by 16.5 m) court, around which, along the perimeter of the

external walls, there are a number of rooms: single ones along the north, west and south walls and three

rooms interconnected by a passage along the east wall. Four symmetrical pits for columns were found 4 m

from the north wall of the court, which means that there was a shed in this part of the court. In a number

of rooms the walls were decorated with panels of fretted clay painted in monochrome colours. The largest

fragments display shallow fretwork, which forms the contour of an epigraphic or stylised plant drawing.

According to archaeological data, the palace was built in the 10th-11th century.

The palace in Sadyr-Kurgan. A monumental building of four rooms, above 200 square metres

in area, was attached to the external wall of the citadel. The walls consisted of wattle-and-daub belts

separated by a row of bricks and were supported by a 0.5 m stone base. Their present height is up to 3.5-

3.8 m. The thickness of the external walls is 1.5 m, the internal – 0.7-0.8 m. It was built and used in the

11th-12th centuries, and after a period of fall in the early

13th century it continued to function up to the mid or

late 14th century [Abetekov and others, 1968. p. 360;

Kozhemyako, 1969. p. 454-455].

The palace in Akchi. It was situated in the

Ketmen-Tyube valley, one of the largest valleys of the

Tien Shan. It was being studied from the archaeological

aspect in the second half of the previous century by an

expedition headed by Ye. Z. Zaurova. It was situated

in the centre of a small square (105 m by 106 m) site

bearing the same name. The construction occupied

an area of more than 700 square metres, where 25

rooms have been excavated. Its south part has not been

preserved. The plan of the palace had an expressed

axial symmetry, which was defined by the entrance,

a doorway from an entrance room into corridors a

little above 1 m wide running past and around the

iwan, by the very iwan and a passage in the form of

a lancet arch leading to the south group of rooms. A

square court (or hall? – V.K.) 7.6 m by 6.2 m in size

is a compositional centre of the plan; all the other

rooms are grouped around it. A square iwan (4.05-

4.13 m by 4.25 m) is situated at an elevation 35 cm

Akchy palace.

Plan (by: Zaurova, 1977).

58


high directly northward of the court. The entrance to the palace was in the centre of the north wall. It was

probably decorated with a projecting portal, of which the records say nothing; however, the remains of its

walls are seen on the schemes. The passage itself was 3.5 m wide, which is proved by the stones supporting

the pillars at the gates. Broad sufas (2.6 m and 3 m) were placed along the walls of the entrance room. To

the west of it there was a rather large room 4.5 m by 5 m in size, the most part of the area of which was

occupied by a sufa. Right here, to the right of a passage running along the south wall, there was a tandyr.

There were two large living rooms on each side of the court with an iwan. It should be noted that in one of

them there was a system of kans to heat the floor. Judging from the building material found in a number

of places, the palace had a flat wood covering supported from beneath by small boards covered by a layer

of plaster. The building was decorated with rich architectural décor found in four rooms. The architects

used various decorating technique: fretwork in ganch and raw clay, painting on plaster, stamped ceramic

tiles and others. The basic motifs were stylised botanical motif, including islimi, geometric and epigraphic

motifs. They were either built upon a straight square net or they were centric ghirikhs. Fretted clay and

ganch were painted in red, yellow, blue and green colours. According to the materials found, the researchers

date this palace to the 14th-15th century.

Manors. It happened so that towns within the limits of shakhristans have practically never been

put under regular archaeological studies. Only in Krasnorechenskoye site, in 1939-40, A.N. Bernstam

excavated small areas in both shakhristans [Chuyskaya dolina, 1950. p. 37-46], in 1960s, P.N. Kozhemyako

in Shakhristan I [Kozhemyako, 1967; 1989; 1989-a], in the mid 80s, B. E. Amanbayeva at the citadel of

Shakhristan II [Amanbayeva, 1989]. But the studied areas do not allow us to imagine layouts of individual

houses, not to mention streets and blocks. However, individual living objects near shakhristans, which S.

Khmelnitsky divides into kasrs, houses and mansions, and we following P.N. Kozhemyako unite them in

one group, have been studied.

The data obtained from the site of Susamyrskoye present quite a full picture of buildings around the

shakhristan of a medieval Kyrgyz town. Descriptions and a full-view plan allow us to make a clear notion

that mansions – isolated houses placed in the corner of a large court enclosed in a strong wall, were situated

around the shakhristan. They were located at some distance from each other in a certain order. Natural

conditions and the only layer of this monument allow us to make a visual reconstruction of the plans of

these living areas [Kozhemyako, 2007. p. 84-97]. Several similar mansions have been excavated in the site

Krasnorechenskoye by P. N. Kozhemyako [1967] and V. D. Goryacheva [1980]. All they belong to the same

period - the 11th-12th century. On the outside the living part of such mansion looked a monumental building,

almost square in plan with the side 15-20 m long. The entrance was in the middle of one of the walls and

was decorated with projecting pylons (an arch?, a pishtaq?). In a number of cases small decorative towers

were at the corners of the walls. The majority of mansions had similar layouts: a large square central hall

(with the sides 6.5-7.8 m long) on the main axis 1 and rooms going along the perimeter. In this aspect the

mansions from the site Krasnorechenskoye have the same principal layout as that of palaces, caravanserais

and, a little later, madrasahs. However, in reality in most cases the builders deviated from the ideal and the

central hall did not quite coincide with the axis, which direction was dictated by the local circumstances

and needs. An open wide corridor connected the hall with the entrance, which enabled S. Khmelnitsky

regard it as a type of iwan [Khmelnitsky, 1997. p. 109]. There was no strict order in the manner passages

in the other rooms were situated. Some of them were connected directly with the central hall, others

1 The plan of object 7 of the site Krasnorechenskoye excavated by V.D. Goryacheva, in 1996-1999, and given on page 63 is a summary of two periods; in the last period the initial layout was considerably changed.

59

Kyrgyzstan

passages went through adjoining rooms, third could be entered from the corridor. Often they ran along

one of the walls. In his reconstruction of the plan S. Khmelnitsky suggested a different, tripartite layout 2

[Khmelnitsky, 1997. p. 146-148, ill. 133]. Incidentally, a highly artistic decoration, the best preserved one

among the monuments of Kyrgyzstan, was found in this ruined mansion. On the wall of the south-west

room, right above the floor, a decorative alabaster panel with a shallow painted fretwork was discovered

in situ, while in a dump on the floor a fallen fretted clay frieze was found. It had probably been initially

situated in the upper part, just below the covering.

Ak-tobe of Talas. In 1960, P. N. Kozhemyako excavated a mansion south of the shakhristan of this

site, which is identified as belonging to the medieval town of Talas. The mansion was situated within the

first ring of walls and occupied an area of 60 m by 40 m, its sides facing the points of the compass. The

building was 14.3 m by 21-23 m in size and was situated in the corner of a well-fortified area. It functioned

for a long time, the final period of its existence being the 10th-12th centuries. At this very time another area

was attached to it from the eastern side, on which a court was built with small buildings along its northern

and eastern walls.

2 Excavated in 1963 by P. N. Kozhemyako, object 5 (house No 2) was greatly damaged by earth-moving machines. Only the south façade wall with fragments of four wall diverging from it, and the north-east corner that remain (fig. on page 63).

Stucco and alabaster architectural ornament of the Akchy palace (by: Zaurova, 1977).

60


Only the building itself has been excavated, with the walls having been preserved to a height of 2-2.5 m,

which means that there was a second floor. The first floor was composed of four rooms along one side of

a long corridor, which is typical of early medieval buildings. The inner and outer walls slant inward; their

thickness decreases with the height. The north and west walls of the mansion were part of the defense

system and were thicker (3.75 m and 2.3 m at the foot accordingly). They were constructed in the following

method: pakhsa was laid in layers in the planked mould, and on the outside the walls were covered with

ragged stone to a height of 1.5 m. The south wall has not been preserved. The eastern façade wall of the

building facing the court was built of square mud bricks. The external walls rested on a base of ragged

stone. In contrast to them, the internal walls stood on ground. They were built of a combination of clay (to

a height of 2 m) and large-sized mud brick (in the upper part, where the walls transformed into the vaulted

constructions). As the walls were in a good state of preservation, scientists could define the height of the

doorways and arches, built of mud bricks, which were laid flatwise in four rows outlining the contours of

the inner and outer curves. The curve of the arches is of two types: smooth, gently sloping, semi-oval and

high, almost parabolic. Judging from the dump, the second floor was built of mud brick. The walls of the first

floor were plastered and covered with painting, which is confirmed by fragments from the dump covered

with red, blue and yellow paints. According to experts, it could be a frieze made by means of engraving

on raw clay, situated on the surface of the wall and protected with a shed. Most probably, it was an iwan

supported by columns, which occupied the space between the building and the fence of the mansion. This

building has analogies in planning, construction features, format of brick and building technique with other

monuments in the Semirechye and other medieval regions of Central Asia [Kozhemyako, 1963; Goryacheva,

Peregudova, 1995. p. 57-58].

Manors at the upper Talas. Plans, graphic reconstructions of the estates at Ak-tobe

Talas (Tekabket) (1-3) and Ak-tobe Orlovsky (Kul) (4-5) (by: Goryacheva Peregudova,

1995).

61

Kyrgyzstan

Ak-Tobe Orlovskoye. A mansion-like building of the 10th-12th century has also been studied in Ak-

Tobe Orlovskoye, the suburb of another site of Talas which scientists identify as the town of Kul. It was

situated east of the shakhristan. It is a closed rectangular construction 25.3 m by 19.4 m in size, with blind

external walls 3 m thick. Inside, along the perimeter of the walls, were small rooms communicating with

the court 180 square metres in area through arches or iwans. There were three entrances to the building

from the outside: two were in the eastern wall (one of them having been blocked up later), and the third in

the northern end wall. At first all the walls of the building were built of pakhsa; in the second functioning

period, the partitions of mud brick appear inside the rooms. On the basis of the finds and layout the

construction is identified as a workshop connected with metallurgical production. This viewpoint is also

confirmed by the absence of domestic facilities, such as sufas, hearths, decorations etc [Bubnova, 1963;

Khmelnitsky, 2000. p. 274].

The site of Kara-Bulak. It is one of the most significant medieval monuments in the foothills of

south-west Fergana (Laylak region, Batken province). In the medieval period this region was located at the

junction of two historical and cultural regions – Ustrushana and Fergana. Residential complexes have been

excavated there, and their plan had a characteristic feature: they were divided by parallel walls into large

blocks of groups of rooms. Oblong rooms alternated with pairs of square ones. The building material used

was long-sized rectangular mud brick and pakhsa. In some places adobe plastering has been preserved.

Some walls might have been plastered with alabaster, which is seen from fragments of thin alabaster bars

found in the dumps of the rooms [Baruzdin, Brykina, 1962. p. 110]. The floors were mostly of wattle and

daub; in some places they are paved with well-smoothed, flat river pebble. Baked brick was used only in

facing hearths. According to researchers, some rooms could be covered with vaults, but generally they had

flat covering. Sufas, some of which were quite high, hearths and tandyrs (ovens) of different shapes, remains

of water-supply systems and refuse and household pits, as well as different numerous articles indicate that

they were living and utility rooms. The functioning of all the building periods takes place within the 12th

century [Brykina, 1974. p. 28-37].

PUBLIC ARCHITECTURE. Caravanserai is one of the most common types of public buildings

in Central Asia. Located along various routes of the Great Silk Road, they were not merely a place for

caravans loaded with goods to stay; they had a number of other functions as well. It happened so that in

the territory of modern Kyrgyzstan only those caravanserais located mainly in the Issyk-Kul depression

and the Inner Tien Shan have remained and studied. Some of them, such as the one situated on the bank of

the Manakeldy river, are well-known in the scientific literature and have become almost classic [Bernstam,

1998; Kozhemyako, 1968]. Others (e.g. Tash-Rabat) are not identified as caravanserais by some scientists

[Pantusov, 1902; Peregudova, 1991]. The information given below for the first time presented in a summary

work shows the unity of medieval caravanserais in the territory of modern Kyrgyzstan as a whole and the

uniqueness of each of them taken separately.

The San-Tash caravanserai. It is situated in the eastern part of the Issyk-Kul depression, in the

centre of a small valley of San-Tash, in the basin of the river Tyup. Although the monument was mentioned

in 19th-century publications [Arkheologhicheskiye …, 1879; Bartold, 1897. p. 61], it was properly described

by D. F. Vinnik only in the early 60s of the 20th century [Vinnik, 1968]. By the time it was studied its inner

surface had been covered with turf. No large scale excavation work has been carried out there. Only two

mines have been made in the north and south-east parts of the site. The description given below is based on

the analysis of the microtopography and the walls projecting in some parts, which are seen on the plan.

The object was built of rocks, laid in rows on a thick layer of alabaster. The external walls have remained

to a height of 2-2.5 m, rising considerably over the area covered with turf. That is why the local population

62


call this object a stone fortress. The caravanserai is

square in plan, with the sides 48 m long. Its sides

face the points of the compass. The only entrance

decorated with two projecting pylons was in the south

side. It was flanked by towers at the corners, with

one more tower in the middle of each wall, except

the south one. The internal buildings were situated

along the north, south and east walls. The central part

was occupied by a large court. The walls of a room

at the north wall have remained best, their present

height equalling that of the external walls. The size

of this room is 35 m by 6 m. The wall of the room in

the south-east corner has been preserved to a height

of 1 m and was 0.5 m thick. Judging by the finds in

the mines, all the walls were covered with alabaster,

which allows us to suggest the presence of painting

or fretwork. Baked brick was found in the dump (25 cm by 25 cm by 4 cm; 26 cm by 26 cm by 4.5 cm; 27

cm by 27 cm by 4.5 cm; 30 cm by 30 cm by 5 cm), which was supposedly used in the covering. Judging by

the found ceramics and the size of the baked brick, the San-Tash caravanserai appeared and functioned

in the Karakhanid time (10th-12th centuries).

The Sary-Bulun caravanserai. It is situated in the western part of the Issyk-Kul depression 9 km

south of the contemporary town of Balykchi, on the first terrace above the floodplain on the right bank of

the river Chu. It was studied in 1977, by an expedition headed by D.F. Vinnik, who defined this object as

an ‘iron smelting metallurgical centre’ [Vinnik, 1978].

The caravanserai is square in plan, 29 m by 33 m. The only entrance was in the middle of the south

wall. It was not excavated completely, however, according to microtopography, it has projecting pylons in

its construction. The external walls have remained to a height of 1.3-1.6 m. They are 2.2 m thick, narrowing

towards the top, with the thickness at the top of what remains not more than 1.7-1.8 m. The composition is

based on a large court (12.5 m by 14 m), situated on the central axis of the caravanserai. It is surrounded by

rooms on four sides: on the east, north and west sides the rooms go along the external walls in one row, on

the south side in two rows. A broad passage (9.5 m long, 2.7 m wide) connects the court and the entrance

construction. Mud brick sufas go along the walls of the passage, interrupted only by three passages into the

rooms. One of these passages leads into a group of five rooms (№ 15-19) that occupy the whole south-east

corner of the caravanserai, down to the court. The largest of them, No 19, 4.3 m by 5.75 m in size, served

as a hall. In the middle of the western wall was a doorway into the central passage, in the eastern, along

the northern wall, an entrance into a corner room (No 16), 4.3 m by 3.2 m in size; in the northern wall

there was an entrance into room No 17, 2.75 m by 3.2 m. From the latter passages along the southern wall

led to the two other rooms of this group: No 15 at the outer wall, 2.75 m by 2.5 m in size, and No 18, 2.75 m

by 2 m. This group of rooms was apparently the personal apartment of the owner of the caravanserai. In

the western wall of the central passage there are two passages into rooms № 21 (4 m by 4.5 m) and 22 (2.3

m by 3.8 m), which form a suite of rooms along the south wall, and into room No 20 (3.5 m by 3.6 m) that

adjoin the court. They were probably utility rooms. The apartments for the guests were grouped around the

court: in the corners along the western and, partly, the northern walls were one-room apartments (rooms

№ 1-6 and 10), along the eastern wall three-room ones (rooms № 11-14), and along the northern (rooms

Caravanserais: San Tash (1), Sarah-Bulun

(2), May Tor (3). Plans (by: Winnik, 1968

Winnick, 1978; Moskalev, 2005).

63

Kyrgyzstan

№ 7-9) were three-room apartments. Their walls rise to a height from 1.1 to 1.8 m, bearing no remains of

coverings. According to the researcher, the rooms at the western and northern walls were separated from

the court by blind walls, which have remained to a height of 0.5-0.7 m and which formed corridors, 1 m

wide, along these rooms. In our opinion, these are not walls, but barriers, over which one could see the

court, where goods were probably kept.

The inner walls of the caravanserai were made of wattle and daub, 0.8-1 m thick and covered with a

layer of clay plaster. In room 1 a sufa (?) 1 m high and 0.75 m wide was built of mud brick 38-39 cm by 18

cm by 8-9 cm in size. The account of the fill in a number (not all!) of the excavated rooms indicates that

mud brick was present in the dump. There is only one report, however, of baked brick found, 29 cm by

29 cm by 5 cm in size. Earthen floors with coating were everywhere except in the central passage at its

going out into the court, where the floor was covered by a strip of gravel 1 m wide. A layer of ashes and

charcoal 20-30 cm thick was found everywhere on the floor. However, it is not clear whether the layer

was a result of fire in the caravanserai or it is connected with the production activity of the iron-smelting

centre that was here in the last functioning period of the object. Judging from the plan, the thickness

of the walls and some building material found here, we can suppose that the caravanserai had a flat

covering built of wood poles or reeds plastered with clay, the organic parts of which have burnt out or

rotted away. It is hardly possible that there were domes or vaults. Judging from the found material, and

particularly ceramics, the Sary-Bulun caravanserai was built and functioned in the Karakhanid period

(11th-12th centuries).

The May-Tor caravanserai. It is situated at the upper course of the Naryn river, on the right bank

of the river May-Tor on the western slope of the Ak-Shiyrak massif in the Inner Tien Shan. It is, perhaps,

the most high-altitude of the caravanserais of the region known today, located in the alpine meadows

zone. It was discovered and studied in 1997-1999, by K.Sh. Tabaldiyev, O.A. Soltobayev and M.I. Moskalev

[Moskalev, 2005. p. 41-43].

When it was being studied, it was a totally ruinous object covered with turf. About one fourth of

its area was excavated during the study. The scientists consider that it was a square building 27 m by

27 m in size, its sides facing the points of the compass and its only entrance being in the middle of

the eastern wall facing the river. They based their conclusions on the microtopography data and the

found material. The façade wall was not stressed in any way: there were neither flanking towers nor

projecting pylons at the entrance. The central part was occupied by a court, on which living rooms

along the walls gave. The method used in the construction of the external walls 1.65-1.70 m thick was

quite original: the outer part was built of flat river stones and ragged shale on clay mortar, while on the

inside they were constructed of clay and tiny stones with gravel. The internal walls are thinner – about

70 cm. Their lower parts are built of stone, the upper ones of baked brick. To define archaeologically the

type of its covering is impossible. We can only see that the central corridor 2-2.2 m wide leading from

the entrance to the court was covered with a baked brick vault, which is evident from the excavated

construction fragments found on the floor. Judging from numerous ceramic items, fragments of glass

and four coins of the Karakhanid appearance, the May-Tor caravanserai was functioning actively in

the 10th-12th centuries.

The Manakeldy caravanserai (Chaldyvar) . The monument is situated in Ak-Tali region on the

bank of a river bearing the same name, a tributary of the river Ala-Buka, at an elevation of 2,500 m above

sea level. It was located on the route from the Fergana valley to the regions of the Inner Tien Shan, Issyk-Kul

and further to east Turkestan. Specialists who have studied it at different time of the last century offer two

descriptions of this construction in the research literature [Bernstam, 1998. p. 77-84; Kozhemyako, 1968].

64


The building is closed in composition, square in

plan, 64 m by 64 m in size, its corners facing the

points of the compass. It is built of combined mud

brick and pakhsa on clay mortar. The entrance was

in the middle of the northern wall and was decorated

with two rectangular pylons. At the corners of

the building there were towers; the façade wall

was covered with decoration in the form of semi-

corrugations, while in the centre of the other walls

there were projecting rectangular pilasters. An open

court 25 m by 25 m in size occupied the inner space

of the caravanserai. Along the walls ran two rows of

corridors, with square and rectangular living and

guest rooms between them. Each corridor had four

archways leading to the court and two to the mean

row. According to the reconstruction made by the

architect V. Ye. Nusov, there were 54 rooms, above

30 of which were covered with domes and about

20 with vaults. Stalactite trumpet arch is used in

the transitional zone between the tetragon of the

building and the dome.

According to their functions, the rooms can be divided into guest rooms, rooms for performing

religious rites, rooms for cooking and storing goods. In different parts of the outer corridor there were

found mangers for animals. In general, the composition of this construction with four iwans, a square

court and long storehouses-stalls makes it a classical specimen of caravanserai. However, some specialists

are confused by the nearly blind walls that surrounded the building instead of an open gallery typical of

caravanserais. This very fact prompted A. N. Bernstam to regard the corridors as defensive constructions

[Bernstam, 1998. p. 82]. S. Khmelnitsky explained the ‘three layers’ of the composition in a different

way: he supposed that the building had simply been reconstructed because of the lack of rooms for goods

and animals. As a result, the walls were substituted for the columns of the initial traditional iwans, thus

turning the whole space of the gallery into four isolated rooms. So, the iwans were made longer and

turned into closed living or utility rooms [Khmelnitsky, 2000. p. 198]. As to the time of its construction

there also are several points of view. A. N. Bernstam referred it to the early medieval period (6th-8th

century) and considered it ‘a military trading station of the people of Fergana, built by the hands of

masters from Tashkent and Fergana’ [Bernstam, 1998. p. 84]. P. N. Kozhemyako considered it to belong

to the Karakhanid period (10th-12th century), admitting, however, that the chronological boundaries

could be broader. After analyzing all the data – from the brick standards and types of covering to the

plan – S. Khmelnitsky made a reasonable supposition that the building was constructed in the 9th-10th

century. Analogies, situated mainly in Khorezm and Marghiana and belonging to the same centuries,

also corroborate his version [Khmelnitsky, 2000. p 200-201]. In conclusion we can suppose that the

construction was built in the Samanid time and continued to function actively in the Karakhanid period

and, perhaps, later.

Tash-Rabat. The building is situated in the western part of the At-Bashin valley, in the Tash-Rabat

gorge, along the river with the same name, at an elevation of 3,200 m.

Manakeldy caravanserai (by: Bernstam,

1997; Kozhemyako 1968, Nusov, 1963 8-10 -

photo Tabaldiev K.Sh.).

65

Kyrgyzstan

It is an almost square building with the length

of the walls 32.4, 32.4, 34.8 and 35.1 m measured

along the outside perimeter. The construction was

built on a specially prepared plot on the slope of a

mountain, its sides facing the points of the compass.

It is made of roughly worked shale slabs mined in

the neighbourhood. Its façade, flanked by the three-

quarter decorative towers, faces east. The only entrance

to the building is in the fronton of the arched niche

of the portal, projecting from the plane of the wall

almost by 3 m. A sufa made of stones went along the

main façade and the pylons of the portal. Two groups

of rooms can be distinguished in the inner plan of

the construction. The first of them connected with

the central entrance corridor consists of 14 rooms

and two lateral corridors. The other group consists

of 10 rooms with a square hall in the centre (room 15),

with sufas and three deep arched niches on the axes.

19 rooms are covered with domes; 18 of them have a

diameter of 1.5 to 3 m, and only one of them is 9 m

across. Ten rooms have arched ceilings with the spans

2.3 to 3 m; five of them are built with the use of ‘cut

bricks’, and the other five of voussoirs. Besides, two

rooms had flat coverings. Almost all the doorways

are covered with stone slabs, except for two entrances

on the main axis of the building, which are crowned

with arches built with the use of voussoirs. The walls

are constructed with the use of clay mortar, while the coverings with alabaster. The floors in the building

are of three types: the floors in the main corridor and the square hall are paved with stone flags, in square

rooms they are made of crushed shale, while auxiliary rooms and side corridors have clay floors. Skylights

in the domes and vaults illuminated the interior space. The interior decoration has not completely survived

and is presented by fragments of ganch plaster in some rooms, graphic fretwork and bas-reliefs, depicting

a row of arched niches in the sub-dome space of the square hall. Besides, moulded columns of a simplified

form were found there [Peregudova, 1989. p. 25]. Most probably, the walls outside were also covered with

plaster. Today their traces are seen on the portal, towers and the big dome.

The use of building material untypical of this region, the plan and, most important, the absence of

the court characteristic of caravanserais make this building original and produce various versions of its

attribution. The researchers are not unanimous in defining the date of its building and functioning. As

early as in the 80s of the 19th century, N. L. Zeland, a local historian, suggested that the monument could

be a Buddhist or Christian temple [Zeland, 1988. p. 22-27]. Later, N. N. Pantusov supported and developed

this viewpoint. In his work published in 1902, he called this construction a Christian ‘monastery which at

the same time provided help and shelter for the pilgrims’ [Pantusov, 1902. p. 15-23]. V. V. Bartold also paid

attention to this building. When speaking on the activities of the Mogul khan Muhammed, he noted that

the construction of the ‘famous building Tash-Rabat’ had been ascribed to him [Bartold, 1963. p. 513]. A. N.

Tash-Rabat caravanserai. The cuts, the

plan (by: Peregudova, 1989).

66


Bernstam, who studied this construction in 1944,

was the first who identified this building as a

caravanserai mentioned in Tarikhi-Rashidi and

dated it to the 15th century. At the same time,

he sees in the architecture of the building, and

particularly in the construction of the domes with

the skylights, an apparent nomadic influence,

considering the masters to originate from the

west Central Asian areas [Bernstam, 1997. p.

358]. G. A. Pugachenkova qualified Tash-Rabat

as a caravanserai combined with a mosque and

dated it to the first half of the 15th century; in

its architecture she saw the influence of the

medieval Indo-Afghan tradition. She explained

the considerable difference between the plan of

this construction and the layout of a conventional

caravanserai by climatic conditions of the

mountainous country [Pugachenkova, 1952. p.

213-218]. However later, in another work, she

agrees completely with Bernstam, attributing the construction to Muhammed-khan and speaking of

building traditions characteristic of the Kashgar school [Pugachenkova, 1976. p. 48]. Architectural and

archaeological studies made as part of the preparation of the object for restoration became the ground for

the change of its dating – the 10th-12th centuries [Peregudova, 1989. p. 48]. The archaeologists based their

viewpoint on the found material, particularly ceramic articles, while the architects appealed to the building

methods used and to the analogies, which are quite numerous [Peregudova, 1989. p. 21-28]. Later, on the

basis of structural and functional analysis, it was interpreted as a monastery-type house, the function of

which as a hospice was secondary [Peregudova, 1989. p. 65]. Nevertheless, the majority of scientists share

the viewpoint, according to which Tash-Rabat is a caravanserai serving a certain section of the Silk Road

in the remote region of Tien Shan.

To summarise the above given data on Kyrgyzstan it is necessary to note that all the medieval caravanserais

appear and function at the same period of time, in the 10th-12th centuries, with the exception of Manakeldy,

which was mentioned above. Their plan based on the axial symmetry with the central court and the row

of rooms around is very typical of that kind of buildings and has numerous analogies both in the Central

Asian region and far beyond its borders, in the whole Muslim world. While the building material used – clay,

baked brick and, particularly, stone (which was dictated by the available resources) – places them a little

apart from the regional context. Décor was found only in Tash-Rabat (fretwork on ganch) and Manakeldy

(painting with glue paints).

In civic architecture, public baths were one of the most significant achievements from the technical and

engineering aspects of the described period. As a rule, they were subterranean constructions, which made

it possible to keep the washing rooms warm. Usually, at the entrance was a changing room, then went an

intermediate room to get used to the high temperature, and only after that came rooms for completing the

principal stages of the bathing process – bathing, massage and rest. The regulation of heating and warming

the rooms and reservoirs was carried out with the help of a system of heating canals laid under the floor.

Warm air spread through passages, warming the floor, walls and sufas placed both along the walls and in

Tash-Rabat caravanserai. Exterior in 1960.

and the current state after restoration (1-

3- by: Nusov, 1963 Peregudova, 1989 4-6 -

photos by authors and K.Sh. Tabaldieva).

67

Kyrgyzstan

the centre of a hall. Water supply systems in the form

of canals and ceramic or sometimes bronze pipes-

kuburs conveyed water to the bath houses. Waste

water was discharged through a drain canal-tazar into

sewage wells. In Kyrgyzstan there are no bath houses

belonging to the Samanid time; the archaeological

ruins of bath houses discovered in different regions

of the country are referred to the Karakhanid and

Timurid periods.

The Burana bath house. For the first time

medieval complexes of bath houses in the territory

of Kyrgyzstan were mentioned in 1892, when N.

Pantusov and A. Fetisov were given a task by the

Russian Archaeological Committee and undertook

a study of Buran site. In their report they gave a

description of a building with the remains of heating

and sewerage systems, which they identified as a bath house [RAC, 1892, 1894. p. 74-75]. The remains of

another bath house were excavated in 1976, near the south-east corner of the central ruins of the same site;

the excavation of the object carried out by an expedition headed by D.F. Vinnik continued with intervals

till 1983. In the spring of 1996, B. Amanbayeva, one of the authors of this section, in collaboration with the

architect S. Ya. Peregudova, re-excavated, measured and photographed the construction.

It has a rectangular shape, 13 m by 16 m in size, oriented in the cardinal directions. Of the external

parts of the building the north and west walls are rather well-preserved; the south and east ones have

remained only to a half of their length. In the centre of the north wall is a fire chamber in the form of a

two-step niche 1.68 m wide and 0.58 m deep. The aperture of the fire chamber was 0.9 m high; over the

fire chamber there is a mouth of the flue of kubur. We know from D.F. Vinnik’s report that elements of a

subterranean heating system in the form of small brick posts 0.7-1 m by 0.25-0.35 m in size (preserved

to a height of 0.2-0-8 m) were found in the north and north-west parts of the building; the posts were

standing on a layer of clay and ashes. According to the scientist, they belong to the second functioning

period, what is apparently true. In general, nine rooms of small sizes and various functions have been

excavated. One of them, room № 7, is octagonal, with niches in the north and south walls with remains

of ganch plaster. In two other rooms (5 and 6) remains of round water reservoirs have been discovered.

In the last room a small ground was discovered, 0.85 m by 1 m, the surface of which was covered with a

thick layer of water-proof kyr plaster. The floor of one of the rooms (9) was paved with baked brick. Such

is the general description of the Buran bath house.

It is very difficult to identify the stages of its functioning. Most probably, there were two within one

chronological period (11th-12th centuries), which is testified by the analysis of the plan constructions along

with the found material, particularly ceramic items. As the excavations have not been completed, it is

difficult to identify the function of some of the rooms. However, it is most probable that room № 7 was a

bath room, rooms № 5 and 6 undoubtedly were connected with the collection of water, while the boiler

room was situated in the northern part of the building. There were not found any traces of the entrance.

Possibly, it was located in the eastern wall. Thus, the bath house dated back to the 11th-12th century was rather

small and, most probably, not public. This is also confirmed by its location near the cult and administrative

centre of the town, kumbezes and a minaret.

Tash-Rabat caravanserai. Interior (1 - by:

Nusov, 1963).

68


The Osh bath house. Archaeological

remains of another medieval bath house

erected in the early 11th century and existing

much longer than the one from Buran have

been found in the south part of Kyrgyzstan,

in south-east Fergana. It was located in the

medieval rabad of Osh, at the foothill of the

mountain Sulayman-Too. The study of the

object began in 1984, when in a foundation

pit meant for a pavilion the archaeologists

Ye.V. Druzhinina and Yu. A. Zadneprovsky

discovered remains of a construction, which

they identified as a 10th-12th-centuries public

bath house [Zadneprovsky, 1986. p. 416].

From the brief report by Yu. Zadneprovsky

and L. Gurevich kept now at the Institute of

History of Material Culture in St. Petersburg

we know that remains of about 15 rooms

of different size and function have been

excavated in an area of 500 square metres.

According to the observations made by the

architect L. Gurevich, there had been five

reconstructions of the building, which have

finally completely changed its initial design.

He also approximately outlined the plans of

three rooms [Zadneprovsky, 1986. p. 416]. In

1996-1997, B. E. Amanbayeva continued to study the object. The excavated remains of the walls and floors

belong to three main building stages. However, today it seems impossible to define the general interior

plan of the building for either of the stages because of many reconstructions.

The remains of the preserved external walls have different length. The following objects have been

excavated: a square hall with figured tiling; axial and diagonal passages into adjacent rooms, a part of

which were covered with water-proof plaster; a considerable quantity of baths of different size, seats and

niches; a fire chamber in the north part of the building; a hypocaust, main and secondary heat-conducting

canals, and ventilating pipes at their junction; a tazar along the north façade built in the form of an arched

tunnel. The entrance, most probably, was in the western side. Its location in this part can be explained

by the possibility to use maximally the light of day. This is also confirmed by the base of a round column

situated in the south-west corner of the building. A part of a water supply system of bronze pipes was found

in situ along the façade wall.

Judging from the format of the brick, the material items found and the use of bronze kuburs, the bath

house functioned in the post-Mongolian time. Thus, the excavated part of the Osh bath house allows us to

make a number of conclusions. A part of it was under the ground, and judging from its size and the number

of its rooms, it was a public bath house. The plan is quite random. The remains of water-proof plaster have

remained in a number of rooms. There is a certain system in the location of the baths, particularly in the

south part of the construction. The heating device consisted in small brick posts, heat-conducting canals

Osh bath. Structural elements and the plan (6).

69

Kyrgyzstan

and kuburs. Fragments of fretted terracotta tiles have been found in the dump; the plaster in some rooms

has traces of paint of different colour.

It is rather difficult to define the function of each room. However, we suppose that room 4 was

cool, moderate temperature could be in room 3, and room 5 could be a room for bathing, massage

and rest. As for the south rooms, they were meant for washing, which is testified by the water-proof

plaster carefully laid onto the floor and walls. The wide use of kyr facing and its colour, the baths of

various size, the tazar, the combination of posts, small canals and kuburs in the heating system – all

this makes it close to the bath house from Akhsiket (Uzbekistan) also situated in the Fergana valley

[Anarbayev, Akhrarov, 1991. p. 173-183]. It can also be compared to a number of other Central Asian

bath houses of the Karakhanid period. As to the dating, we can see two main chronological periods,

the 11th-12th centuries and the post-Mongolian time. In general, the coins and other material do not

contradict this version [Amanbayeva, 1998].

The Toru-Aygyr bath house. Probably, such was the function of the building in Toru-Aygyr on the

northern shore of Issyk-Kul, although D. F. Vinnik who had discovered and studied it identified it as a

brick and majolica production craft centre and dated it to the 14th century [Vinnik, 1974. p. 39]. However,

analyzing the plan and technical structure of the building, V. Goryacheva and S. Peregudova revised this

viewpoint and qualified the building as a bath house [Goryacheva, Peregudova, 1995. p. 61].

It was a rectangular construction 18 m by 36 m in size divided into several parts, its sides facing the points

of the compass. The boiler room is well-preserved.

There were also found rectangular reservoirs, the

bottom and walls of some of them covered with

glazed tiles. There remains a part of an octagonal

room with a square hole in the centre and sections

of ceramic kuburs near it. The floor of the room was

paved with baked brick, plastered with alabaster

and covered in some places with glazed tiles. A

room 10 m by 10 m in size built of mud bricks, with

the walls decorated with many-coloured painting

and the floor covered with glazed tiles adjoined

the building on the south.

We can finish the description of the medieval

bath houses with the following conclusions. In

the pre-Mongolian time hammams (bath houses)

were widely spread across the whole territory

of the country; after the 13th century the urban

culture fades and revives partly in the 14th-15th

centuries, which is connected with the military

expansion of Tamerlane and his descendents. In

this very period the Toru-Aygyr bath house at Issyk-

Kul was erected and functioned. Architectural

and technical methods used in building these

constructions indicate that the local masters had a

broad knowledge and followed the best traditions of

the Central Asian architecture. As for the building

Burana minaret.

Photos of 1915 (1), 1950 (2-3)

and the current state (4)

(1-3 - by: Goryachev 1985, Nusov 1963).

70


tradition of the hammams in the south of the country (the Fergana valley), it has not been broken until the

present time, what is testified by bath houses in Osh, Uzghen, Nohokat and others.

CULT ARTCHITECTURE. The 9th-15th centuries in Kyrgyzstan was the time when Islam was being

spread over the territory. The establishment of the new religion led to the appearance of specific architecture,

connected with the implementation of the prescriptions of the Koran (mosques and minarets), the preparation

of priests (madrasahs), the burial of aristocracy and clergy (mausoleums and kumbezes). Not all of the above

named categories reached our days, but among those that remain there are truly remarkable architectural

works. Only two minarets have remained in the territory of Kyrgyzstan – at the site Buran (Balasagun)

in the Chuyskaya valley and in Uzghen. Their building is connected with the Karakhanid period, when

the first of these towns was the capital of the country, and the other first the centre of the west part of

the khaganate, and then of the Fergana principality. Typologically they belong to free-standing one-level

minarets with an overhanging lantern.

The Burana minaret (Tower of Burana) was one of the first monuments in the territory of

Kyrgyzstan that captured specialists’ attention: a report on this monument was read at the fourth congress

of the archaeologists of Russia held in Kazan in 1877 [Raboty …, 1884. p. LXIV]. In the first descriptions

and photographs of that time, it was presented as a minaret situated on a small hill, with a cylindrical

trunk slightly narrowing towards the top with several ornamental tiers, which rested on an octagonal

base in a very bad state of preservation. In early

1920s, it became one of the objects protected by

the government of the Turkestan Republic, which

resulted in its architectural classification and in a

budget that was made up for the initial conservation

work on its base. The minaret remained in such

a condition for more than 35 years. In 1974, as

part of the restoration works, the archaeologist

D. F. Vinnik studied its foundations, base and the

adjacent area. He found out that the foundation

square in plan (12.3 m) and 5.6 m deep is built of

stones with a layer of baked bricks between them.

The upper parts of two sides – the eastern and

northern ones – were composed of five rows of cut

white stones 28-30 cm by 12-13 cm in size. On the

top the foundation is covered with baked brick; on

the western side the brick is smaller in size and laid

in the form of a ‘herringbone’, which testifies to an

ancient repair in the 11th century. Above it there is a

tetragon upon which the octagon of the base rests.

The sides of the base are slightly sloping; at the foot

they are 10.4 m long, at the upper part about 6 m

and 4 m high [Goryacheva, 1985. p. 50-51]. Today

they look like portals with very shallow niches

filled with geometric ornament. The area around

the niches is also filled with geometric ornament.

The trunk is decorated with horizontal ornamental

Uzgen minaret. Overview. Photos of 1880

(1) 1923 (2) 1953 (3) and 2009 (1-3 - by:

Shcherbina-Kramarenko, 1896 Bernstam,

1997, Nusov, 1963).

71

Kyrgyzstan

belts, of which only six have remained. At present it is 22 m high. There are various opinions as to the

initial height of the minaret; some consider it to have been above 40 m (B.N. Zasypkin), others that it was

about 50 m (A.M. Pribytkova). All the décor is completed with a standard brick projecting from the rest of

the brickwork by 3-4 cm, which creates an additional effect of contrasted light and shadow. It is based on

a rectangular grid and does not repeat itself on any part of the surface.

It is a common belief that the Burana minaret is one of the oldest minarets made of baked brick in Central

Asia. This viewpoint is substantiated by the outdated way in which the pressure of the trunk is relieved

onto its lower parts. There are sockets for a wood anchor in the transitional zone between the base and the

trunk – a method appropriate for mud brick constructions but redundant in this construction technique.

According to the character of the décor of the minaret, it can be dated to the late 10th century [Goryacheva,

1983. p. 32; Goryacheva, 2010. p. 137].

The Uzghen minaret. Today the construction consists of an octagonal base on a square stylobate, a

conic trunk and a lantern, which appeared after the restoration in 1923. Its present height together with the

superstructure is 27.4 m. The entrance to it was situated in the southern side of the base, from the direction

of the mosque. A spiral staircase with an arched ceiling goes upward to the lantern. It was illuminated

with the help of windows in the form of loopholes, two of which have remained to our days. The minaret

is built of baked brick 25 cm by 12 cm by 4.5-5 cm in size on ganch mortar. The stairs were also built of

brick. The sides of the base 5.15 m high have the form of rectangular niches with figured brickwork or of

relief brick ornament with the background filled with fretted stucco. The niches are enclosed in a brick

frame, which in its turn is framed in a row of faceted bricks. The trunk of the minaret is divided into 12

alternating broad and narrow ornamental belts; between them there were two horizontal rows of bricks

with a row of halves of vertical bricks between them. Three narrow belts in the lower part are made in

the form of various types of meander, which were wide-spread in the regional architecture in the 10th-11th

centuries. The ornament of the next belt of the same width consists of a combination of eight-point stars

and a complex figure of five squares. The last narrow belt is formed by a row of twelve leaved rosettes.

The lowest broad belt resembles the third ornamental belt of the Burana minaret, but is distinguished

from the latter by more complex figures and their being placed farther from each other. As a result, the

background assumed the form of interconnected broken crosses, upon which a ganch pattern in the form

uninterrupted stylised leaves was applied. Two other broad belts situated in the middle part of the minaret

have identical brick ornament, consisting of a slanting net made of bricks laid edgewise. The background

of the net is filled with a brickwork of horizontally laid bricks, in the centre of which there is a core of small

square bricks set edgewise. The static net and the clear rhythm of the vertical and horizontal bricks create

a distinct texture of these belts. Such motif and method were widely used in the monuments of Central

Asia in the 11th-12th centuries. The figured brickwork of other two broad belts lying above is made of pairs

of bricks laid at considerable intervals. In one of them vertical bricks with sides in the form of a bow are

inserted into the intervals. Such decorative method is also characteristic of 11th-12th-centuries monuments

[Bernstam, 1997. p. 335, ill. 42; Imankulov, 2005. p. 160-161]. According to researchers, there was an

inscription, now lost, in the second broad ornamental belt, like those on the minaret of the site Kurtly and

the Kalyan minaret in Bukhara. The latter dated back to 1127, has the most in common with the Uzghen

minaret as to the architectural elements and decoration [Menkovskaya, 1980. p. 123-124]. It should be

noted that it occupies an important place in the evolutionary row of the Central Asian minarets of this type,

characteristic of minarets from Maverannakhr and Fergana. Judging by other 11th-12th-centuries minarets,

its height could be about 40 m [Imankulov, 2005. p. 165-166] . As to the date of the construction of the

building, all the scientists unanimously consider that it was built later than the Buran minaret, and propose

72


different versions: the 11th century, between the 11th and 12th centuries and the 12th century. However, the

majority of the specialists refer it to the 11th century [Nusov, 1963. p. 41; Imankulov, 2005. p. 158; Denike,

1927. p. 15-22; Bernstam, 1997. p. 337; Goryacheva, 2010. p. 137].

Mausoleums. The tradition of the construction of mausoleums in Central Asia has deep roots and,

according to specialists in the history of culture, it is connected to local pre-Islamic burial constructions, as

well as Zoroastrian and Buddhist cult buildings [Nurmakhambetov, 1970. p. 108-120; Lelekov, 1976. p. 7-18;

Litvinsky, Sedov, 1984]. However, this tradition becomes particularly important in the Muslim period. Since

the 9th century, numerous mausoleums began to appear in countries where Islam was firmly established,

to immortalise the names of particularly honourable representatives of ruling dynasties and clergy.

In Kyrgyzstan the first mausoleums appear after Islam has been officially accepted by the Turkic

Karakhanid dynasty, that is, in the mid 10th century. The earliest of them are situated in the Talas valley,

within the limits or around Taraz, the capital of one of the principalities of the Karakhanid kaghanate (the

Karakhan, Aysha-Bibi, Babaji-Khatun and other mausoleums). Mausoleums in the Chuyskaya valley (the

site Buran) and Fergana (Uzghen, Shakh-Fazil) are built some time later. The latest of them, as regarded

in the limits of the chronological period under study, was built in Talas (the Manas kumbez).

The Burana mausoleums. Since the 19th century burials have been known to exist around the Buran

minaret. However, it was only in early 1970s that archaeological excavations headed by D. F. Vinnik that

were carried out as part of a programme of turning the site into a museum, revealed the lower parts of the

three mausoleums. Later, he discovered one more mausoleum in the other, north-west, part of the site 3.

The so-called first mausoleum is situated east of the minaret. It is an octagonal centric construction

of baked brick with a high, up to 1.8 m, base (which actually remains), up to 11 m in diameter and with

the walls 1.7 m thick. The base has smooth brickwork built of square brick 23 m by 26 m in size, on clay

mortar, with only the facing at the upper part made of paired bricks on ganch mortar. Originally the first

mausoleum was over 15 m high, had shallow arched niches in each of its sides and was covered with a tent-

like or sphero-conic dome. It had a rich decoration that reached our days in numerous small fragments –

painting and fretted stucco in the interior and fretted terracotta and figured bricks in the exterior. As to

its plan, the mausoleum does not find parallels in the neighbouring territories, but has them in Khorasan,

Azerbaijan and areas near the Caspian Sea, while in décor it is quite ‘local’ [Masson, Goryacheva, 1985. p.

53-54, 57; Goryacheva, 1983. p. 42; Goryacheva, 2010. p. 138].

The second and third mausoleums were situated to the north-east, their façades facing very closely the

town wall, washed away by the Burana river which flowed here later. According to the excavated constructions,

they were almost identical cylindrical rooms 10 and 10.5 m across with large (12 m and 14.7 m) portals

facing eastward. They are built of square baked brick, the same as the tower and the first mausoleum were

built of. The mausoleums are decorated on the outside with lancet arches, including through ones closed

by alabaster panjara lattices. According to the graphic reconstruction by Pugachenkova, they were covered

with a tent-shaped or sphero-conic dome on a round marked drum, the fallen remains of which have been

found in the second mausoleum. The portals were flanked at the corners by three-quarter columns and

decorated with figured brick and fretted stucco (?), which, according to researchers, were less graceful and

more monotonous than in the first mausoleum [Masson, Goryacheva, 1985. p. 55; Goryacheva, 2010. p.

138]. As to the plan and composition, according to V.D. Goryacheva, the closest parallels can be found in

3 V.D. Goryacheva who discovered its inner part considers the object a one-room mosque (Goryacheva, 2010, p. 138). However, its size, as well as discovered and undiscovered burials (including that in the very centre (V. K. ) we discovered during the implementation of UNESCO-Japanese Trust Fund project) contradict this interpretation.

73

Kyrgyzstan

Mashad, south Turkmenistan. The researchers date the three Buran mausoleums to the 11th-12th century

[Masson, Goryacheva, 1985. p. 57; Goryacheva, 1983. p. 42].

The fourth mausoleum was rectangular, a little larger in size (16.3 m by 14 m), and had an only entrance

in the middle of the eastern wall. To the north there was another monumental baked brick building situated

perpendicularly and almost touching with its corners the corners of the mausoleum, while mud brick walls

adjoined on the outside the lateral and back sides of the mausoleum. Judging from the archaeological data,

the exterior of the building was quite ascetic: no marked and/or decorated portal, and even no pylons at

the entrance! The inner space is vivified by trapeziform niches on the axes (including the entrance). The

interior is decorated with fretwork in alabaster, which covered, in our opinion, all the surfaces of the walls

and covering. Stylised planted motifs traditional for Islamic architecture are used in the ghirikhs, borders,

and fill the lancet and rectangular (on reconstruction) planes of the walls [Goryacheva, 2001; Goryacheva,

2010. p. 138, 239]. V. D. Goryacheva identifies four functioning periods in the activity of the object, and

considers the date of its building the 10th-11th century. In the second period, between the 11th and 12th centuries

fretted terracotta appeared in the decoration. The last phase belongs to the Mongolian time [Goryacheva,

2001; Goryacheva, 2010; p. 138, 239]. However, it should be noted that the walls of the mausoleum are built

of square and rectangular baked brick, which is a little thicker than in the above described monuments,

what may indicate that it could be erected at a later time, up to the 14th century.

Zulpukar. In the Kyrgyz part of the Talas valley, on the bank of the river Karakol 1.5 km south of the

village Aral, in an ancient cemetery stands the Zulpukar mausoleum. In 1988, specialists from the Institute

Zulpukar mausoleum. Plan and cross-section (1), the main (east) façade on the outside

(2) and the inside (3), re-use of decorative plates (4-5)

(1 - by: Goryacheva Peregudova, 1995).

74


of History of the Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz Soviet Socialist Republic examined and described

the monument [Goryacheva, Peregudova, 1985]. In 2003, the specialists from the Institute of History of

the Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz Soviet Socialist Republic examined and described it again; in the

same year K. Tabaldiyev (Kyrgyz State University) and R. Bozer (Turkey) also put the monument under

examination. According to a local legend, this construction was erected in commemoration of the battle

between Manas and enemies. This is the alleged place where the hero’s sword with a forked end – ‘Zulpukar’

(Arabic ‘Zulfakar’) – which went out of a sheath of its own accord, was broken. The Arabic name of the

sword known from the epic Manas was also given to the place where this legendary event had happened.

Now it is impossible to connect this monument with a burial place of a certain historical personality.

The building is centric in composition, open in structure, and almost square in form; its sides oriented

in the cardinal directions and each of the sides has a narrow doorways of different size. Arched entrances

80 cm and 130 cm wide on the long axis and 65 cm on the short one are placed at the end of arched niches

50-60 cm deep, the width of which ranges from 1.93 m to 2.3 m depending on the width of the entrances.

The size of the room is 4.24 m by 4.42 m. The tetragon of the walls passes into the dome through projecting

pendentives, made of stepped rows of bricks. The brickwork of the pendentives begins at a height of 2.5 m

from the floor; at present only six rows remain rising to 80 cm (20. 5).

The building stands on the foundation of worked stones; the walls about 4 m high are built of square

and rectangular baked brick (25-26 cm by 25-26 cm by 5 cm and 25-27 cm by 14-15 cm by 4.5-6 cm) on clay

mortar with some places filled with rubble and broken brick. The walls are 105-110 cm thick in the corner

piers and 55-60 cm in the niches. The lancet arches of the niches and doorways have fan-like brickwork and

10 cm heels projecting from the wall. Fretted terracotta tiles were laid under the heels of one of the arches

(probably, during one of the latest repairs) . Several fragments of similar tiles have been found at different

time near the monument. They could be fragments of decorative facing of the exterior walls. The main façade

does not project from the rest of the building and has a modest plastic form: an arched entrance and two

corner spades being, possibly, a part of a U-shaped framing. The spades are contoured by borders made

of rectangular bricks projecting from the wall. In constructing the wall over the entrance arch a method

characteristic of 11th-12th-century buildings is used: rows of bricks laid horizontally alternate with rows of

bricks set edgewise. The other three façades of the building are smooth, without partition. Initially, the

building was apparently covered with a hipped dome on a ribbed drum, the remains of which can be seen

now from the back façade. S. Ya. Peregudova based her dating of the monument on the following stylistic

features: the general architectural composition close to that of the 10th-century mausoleums – the Babaji-

khatun near Taraz and the Akhmed in Babe-Gambar; archaic pendentives and a fragment of combined

brickwork on the frontal façade built with the use of a ‘stretcher-header’ method characteristic of the 10th-

11th centuries; fretted terracotta tiles used in the arch; the technical quality of the walls, the outer surface

of which is built of brick [Goryacheva, Peregudova, 1995. p. 67].

The Uzghen mausoleums. Of the few mausoleums of that time remaining in Fergana three are

situated in the town of Uzghen, Osh province, in one of the medieval shakhristans of the town. In scientific

literature they are known under the names of the Middle, the North and the South. The mausoleums

were built not far from a mosque; their main façades in the form of portals occupying the whole width

of the wall face the direction of the mosque. They all consist of one room and adjoin one another. Their

rooms are connected with each other by passages in the lateral walls.

Russian scientists give the first information about them in scientific literature in the last third of the 19th

century [Fedchenko, 1872. p. 8-9; Severtsov, 1886]. For the first time the monuments of Uzghen received

examination and professional description in 1896 [N. Scherbina-Kramarenko, 1896. p. 57-59]. The Turkestan

75

Kyrgyzstan

circle of lovers of archaeology also paid attention to the complex in the very first year of its activity (1897).

Its members measured the minaret and defined its function as serving for the Friday mosque; they recorded

legends, made impressions from some of the kayraks and red the epitaphs and a part of the inscription

on the portal of the South mausoleum; they also gave a short historical account of the development of the

town [Protokoly…, 1897, supplements, p. 1-9].

In the Soviet time the objects were many times put under architectural, archaeological and art study.

Among specialists exploring these monuments are the architects B.N. Zasypkin, N.M. Bachinsky, V. Ye.

Nusov, the art historian B. P. Denike, the archaeologists M. Ye. Masson, A. N. Bernstam, D. F. Vinnik, V. D.

Goryacheva and others. Each of them made a considerable contribution into the studying of the architectural

complex, the results of which are reflected in their works [Zasypkin, 1927; 1930; 1954; Bachinsky, 1949;

Nusov, 1955; 1971; Denike, 1927; 1939; Masson, 1926; Bernstam, 1952; 1997; Vinnik, 1970; Goryacheva,

1983; 2010]. They were acknowledges as masterpieces and reflected in a number of publications by experts

in architecture, decorative art and epigraphics [Cohn-Winner, 1930; Rempel, 1961; Pugachenkova, Rempel,

1965; Pribytkova, 1973; Mankovskaya, 1980; Yakubovsky, 1947; Krachkovskaya, 1949; Nastich, Kochnev,

2004].

The Middle mausoleum is the earliest of them. It is also the largest of the buildings, on the outside having

a size of 11.28 m by 11.44 m, on the inside 8.4 m by 8.4 m, and with a height of 13 m. It is built of oblong

brick 30 cm by 15 cm by 4 cm in size; it stands on a foundation of 4 or 5 rows of stones bonded with clay

mortar. On the exterior, in all the four corners there are three-quarter columns 96-120 cm in diameter. As

to the number of entrances, specialists differ in opinion. Some consider there were initially four entrances,

two of which, in the south-west and south-east façades, were in the form of high portals; the doorway in

Uzgen mausoleums. Elevations, plan and overview appearance. Photos 1953 (2), 1960.

(3) and 2009 (1-3 - by: Nusov, 1963 Imankulov, 2005).

76


the north-east wall was blocked up in ancient time, and the partition being half as thick as the rest of the

wall, was turned into a niche covered with an arch [Goryacheva, 1983. p. 81]. They identify the building as

a ziarat-khana – a funeral mosque in the khazira complex (in an enclosed or open necropolis). Others are

sure that the only two main entrances indicate that it was a darvaza-khana, that is, the entrance to the

cemetery in the form of a pavilion; they also think a particularly respected mystic is buried here [Zasypkin,

1954. p. 34; Nusov, 1963. p. 26]. The third support the opinion about the funeral mosque and write about the

two equivalent entrances emphasised by portals and the third one – in the north-east wall – unstressed by

anything on the outside and blocked up later, while the doorway in the north-west wall was made out of a

mihrab after the North mausoleum had been built [Khmelnitsky, 2000. p. 92-93]. D. D. Imankulov stated

the last in time point of view, considering that ‘in ancient time the Middle mausoleum was a construction

with one entrance in the western portal, two doorways in the eastern façade and southern portal blocked

by panjaras, and one niche in the northern interior wall.’ This author admits there were two portals – in

the western and southern walls – but he holds that the latter served a purely decorative purpose, as the

building was situated on a hillside and was visible from the lower part of the town. To confirm his statement

he gives the southern wall of the South mausoleum as an example, which has the form of three decorative

doorways in the form of lancets [Imankulov, 2005. p. 77-78]. To summarise what was said above, we should

note that the most part of the researchers hold to the version about the two entrance portals in the south-

west and south-east, the blocked doorway in the north-east wall and the mihrab in the north-west wall,

which was later turned into a doorway communicating this building with the North mausoleum built in

1152. What kind of façade was the south-east one, now it is difficult to say; so let us focus our attention on

the partially preserved south-west façade that was reconstructed later. This richly ornamented side of the

mausoleum was a wide portal with an entrance in the form of an arched niche adorned with round and

rectangular richly decorated framings inserted in one another. At the corners of the entrance niche were

three-quarter columns supporting the archivolt of the lancet arch. The décor of the façade wall included

fretted plaster and a set of fretted polished bricks. The square room was covered with a dome resting on

trumpet arches with niches within an octagonal drum. Under the tier of the trumpet arches was a fretted

ganch frieze with small lancet and bell arches. The walls are built of bricks laid edgewise in pairs and

plastered with ganch; some seams in the brickwork are stressed with cuts forming a geometric pattern

in the form of vertical lines on the surfaces of all the walls. The questions connected with the dating of

the mausoleum have many times become the points of discussions between scholars. There are some

supporting the early building date of the 10th century (Khmelnitsky), a part of them are in favour of the 11th

century (Zasypkin, Kon-Viner, Nusov, Imankulov and others), while the third consider the 11th-12th century

the most appropriate (Goryacheva and others). There is also no consent about the person this mausoleum

was erected for. In Kon-Viner’s opinion, supported by some Soviet specialists, Nasr bin Ali, one of the first

Karakhanids, was buried there. However, this viewpoint is disputed by other scientists considering that there

are no grounds for this statement [Goryacheva, 1983. p. 95; Nastich, Kochnev, 2004. p. 265]. According to

the majority of the researchers, the mausoleum is a typical construction illustrative of the transition from

centric mausoleums to portal ones.

The North mausoleum was attached to the Middle in 1152. It is square in plan, with the outer walls 12.2

and 10.2 m long, including the three-quarter columns at the corners, and the inner ones 7.53 m and 7.57

m; its height is 12 m. Three of the columns belong to this building, and the fourth one was built in place

of an identical column of the Middle mausoleum. The column is built of bricks 28-29 cm by 14-14.5 cm by

4.5 cm in size. In the south-west, frontal part there are thick pylons supporting a projecting portal, which

consists of a deep entrance niche framed by rounded belts of figured relief brickwork and ornamentation.

77

Kyrgyzstan

The archivolt of the portal arch is faced with terracotta tiles, on which an inscription in Persian made in the

naskh script informs about the date of the building. The brick columns at the corners of the portal niche

are put in a case of blocks of fretted terracotta. The devices used in the decoration of the portal are quite

diverse. Stylised plant and geometric compositions consisting in deep fretwork in ganch are on the fronton,

soffit and lateral surfaces of the arched niche. A kufi inscription over the entrance reads the name of one of

representatives of the Ilek dynasty of– Alp Kutlug Tonga Bilga turk Togrul kara-khakan Khuseyn bin Khasan

bin Ali – who began building this burial vault for himself when he was alive. The interior of the mausoleum

is simple. The inner space is a cube covered with a dome resting on a small octagonal drum and a tier of

pendentives in the form of a regular octagon, the lower part of which is stressed with a shelf and a narrow

ledge. The mausoleum has two doorways in the western and south walls; there is a deep niche in the north

wall. Both the doorways and the niche are covered with lancet arches built of voussoirs. The walls and the

dome are built of bricks laid in a ‘stretcher-header’ system; however, in contrast to the Middle mausoleum,

they are not laid in pairs. The smoothly plastered walls were covered additionally with white ganch. The

North mausoleum differs from the earlier Middle mausoleum by more elegant architectural forms. The

same can be said about the ornament and figured brickwork. Both old methods known from the Middle

mausoleum and new ones including polished brick and fretted terracotta are used in the decorative facing

of the portal. The portal of this mausoleum is deservedly considered a sample of classic medieval portal

[Zasypkin, 1930; Bernstam, 1997; Nusov, 1963, and others] .

In 1186, another mausoleum – the South – was attached to the south-east façade of the Middle mausoleum.

It is much smaller than the two preceding buildings. The width of its portal is 8.7 m, the diameter of the dome

is 6.4 m and the height about 11 m. The construction is built of different-sized bricks, with the domination

of ones 27-28 cm by 13-14 cm by 4-4.5 cm in size. The composition of the main, western façade of this

North Uzgen mausoleum. Overview. Photos 1953 (2), 1960. (1, 3) and 2000 (4) (by:

Nusov, 1963, Imankulov, 2005).

78


mausoleum also consists of a deep entrance niche framed by rounded belts and ornamental bands. The

corners of the portal are also flanked by thick three-quarter columns, which are important constructions

taking the main load of the architrave cornice. The portal of this mausoleum repeats almost all of the

elements from the portal of the North mausoleum. The exceptions are the latticed and rounded belts, the

latter being very close to the niche to make its rectangular framing. All the other elements known from

the North mausoleum are performed here in accordance with the fretted terracotta, the material they are

made of. The interior of the mausoleum is a simple room, square in form, 6.4 m by 6.43 m in size, covered

with a dome on a tier of pendentives and niches with lancet arches; in the corners there are pendentives

with three small perspective arches. The pendentives and niches are enclosed in rectangular frames. The

mausoleum had no windows; it had three doorways and a shallow niche in the eastern wall. In the south

façade there are three niches covered with arches. The brickwork of the walls has a stretching bond; the

lancet arches of the pendentives and niches are built of voussoirs. The monochrome terracotta facing

of the portal of the South mausoleum is the richest ornamental treasury of the 12th century numbering

about 15 different motifs. The portal niche is framed with bands in which flat and relief fretted botanical

patterns blend with epigraphic and geometric ornament. The fretwork is presented by all possible types:

deep and flat, sometimes passing into engraving; there is two-level fretwork, large, monumental letters

and very delicate ones with tiniest elements. The accurate dating of the mausoleum makes the decoration

of the building even more significant. From the fragments of historical inscriptions on the portal we know

other two dates informing us about two representatives of the Uzghen branch of the Karakhanid dynasty

buried here: 17 June, 1185, and 27 February, 1187. One of them called a sipakhsalar, that is, the supreme

commander of the khakan’s army, had died before the building of the construction began and was, probably,

reburied later [Nastich, 2004. p. 260-268].

So, the above described Uzghen architectural complex consisting of three mausoleums and a minaret

is a landmark for the Central Asian architecture, as it shows the evolution of forms, décor and building

methods in the 10th-12th centuries.

The Shakh-Fazil mausoleum in the village of Safid-bulan, Ala-Bukin region, Jalal-Abad province, is also

a well-known monument of the 11th century. The history of its studying is connected with the artist and

architect N.N. Scherbina-Kramarenko, who published a short description of the mausoleum and sketches

of fragments of the building and the system of trumpet arches and pendentives, recorded local legends

connected with the monument, and who referred the erection of the construction to ‘Tamerlane’s time’

[Scherbina-Kramarenko, 1896. p. 50-53]. In the Soviet period architects, archaeologists and orientalists

many times made the mausoleum an object of their study. B.N. Zasypkin and B.P. Denike were the first

who understood its significance, giving it a detailed examination in the late 20s of the last century. They

defined the time of the construction as the 12th-13th century [Zasypkin, 1930. p. 67-73; Denike, 1939. p. 70

and others]. A.N. Bernstam also visited the monument. Comparing the legend given by N.N. Scherbina-

Kramarenko with the data from Jamal Karshi, he supposed that it could have been built in the late 13th

or in the early 14th century [Bernstam, 1997. p. 344]. In 1947-1951, B.N. Zasypkin examines the object

again, while Ye.N. Yuditsky photographs it. In his accounts the scientist gives a detailed description of the

architectural and artistic features of the monument, along with the building materials. Finding analogies

in the decorative and building elements of the Middle mausoleum from Uzghen, he suggested dating the

mausoleum to the 11th century when Sufism was spreading across Fergana [Zasypkin, 1954. p. 61-99]. N. S.

Grazhdankina referred the monument to the pre-Mongolian period. She based her conclusions upon the

data of the analysis of the building material. She considered that the interval between the building of the

mausoleum in Safid-Bulan and the erection of the North mausoleum in Uzghen is very small [Grazhdankina,

79

Kyrgyzstan

1963. p. 131-136]. G. A. Pugachenkova and L. I. Rempel also held to this dating, referring the monument to

the Fergana school and at the same time admitting its originality [Pugachenkova, Rempel, 1965. p. 223]. In

the 60s of the last century, during the preparation of a project of a partial conservation of the monument,

V. Ye. Nusov, after analyzing the building material and décor of Shakh-Fazil and other mausoleums in

Uzghen, came to a conclusion that ‘cult organisations built it before or in the 11th-12th century, in order

to promote spreading and establishing of Islam in this region’ [Nusov, 1963. p. 54]. In the mid 70s of the

same century V. D. Goryacheva wrote her works, where on the basis of the whole complex of the materials

– archaeological, architectural, epigraphic and folkloric - she dated this monument to the first half-mid 12th

century [Goryacheva, 1983. p. 132]. V. N. Nastich’s viewpoint looks particularly interesting, as in defining the

date of the construction he resorted both to the historical inscriptions and to numismatic data. According

to his version, correcting his and B. D. Kochnev’s opinion, the mausoleum was built for Muhammed bin

Nasr who died with his suzerain in a fight against the ruler of Barskhan, in 1062. Moreover, he supposed

that by that time Abbas, Muhammed’s son, had already been buried here, of which says the middle, largest

inscription of the interior [Nastich, 2004. p. 233].

The mausoleum is situated in a medieval cemetery in a settlement that sprang up in the late 9th-early

10th century, and is a part of the well-known cult complex Safid-Bulan, which has kept its functions to the

present time. In the 12th-15th centuries, there was a complex of buildings belonging to a Sufi community

and consisting of khanqas, mosques and mausoleums. Only one building has reached our days, known in

scientific literature as the Shakh-Fazil mausoleum. The monument is a centric domed one-room building,

its corners directing the points of the compass [Goryacheva, 2010. p. 143]. The squat square tetragon has

South Uzgen mausoleum. Overview. Photo 1953 (1), 1960. (2, 3) and 2000 (4) (by: Nusov,

1963 Goryachev, 1983).

80


a size of 11.7 m by 11.1 m on the outside and 7.84 m by 7.84 m on the inside, stands on a base 36 cm high,

made of stone and rubble, and is covered by a lancet dome resting on a high octagonal drum, the three-

stepped silhouette of which plays an important role in the composition of the monument. The total height

of the mausoleum is 15.5 m; the walls are 5.2 m high. It is built mainly of bricks 27 cm by 15.5 cm by 3.5

cm in size (however, there are bricks of other formats – 32 cm by 32 cm by 5 cm and 53 cm by 53 cm by

5-6 cm) on loess mortar, tez-ganch covering the seams [Nusov, 1963. p. 47-48; Imankulov, 2005. p. 102-

103]. The main, north-west façade of the building has three doorways opening on a court, from where a

path leads to the medieval necropolis. The central aperture, higher and wider than those at the sides, was

an entrance, while the other two served to illuminate the room. There is another window in the south-

west wall. According to some scientists, in ancient times a skylight in the dome could give additional

illumination to the room [Zasypkin, 1954. p. 168]. In the south-east wall there is a mihrab. At present the

building bears no exterior decoration, but the explorations made in the middle of the last century enable us

to suppose there was in ancient times [Zasypkin, 1954. p. 65; Nusov, 1963. p. 50]. The ascetic appearance

of the building contrasts with rich interior decoration, consisting in various fretted patterns on ganch

and painting. Decorative compositions covered all the surfaces of the interior, divided traditionally into

a tetragon, an octagon with trumpet arches with niches, and a dome. The ornamentation is presented

mainly by plant, geometric and epigraphic motifs. The graphic and relief fretwork on ganch blended with

applied and moulded fills. The plant and geometric compositions of the belts and medallions that did

not repeat were based on the geometry of circle and triangular net. There were also various patterns in

the form of bands: different braiding of straps, chains or ‘islimi’ motif. The ornamental decoration of the

interior consisted of the following components. The walls were adorned by a panel 1.7 m high consisting of

decorative festooned arches and vertical tracks, which were fretted graphically on the plaster. Above the

panel was a frieze with large medallions, which was separated from it by a narrow strip of an inscription

in Persian. Over the frieze was a broad epigraphic belt with large relief applied letters. The sides of the sub-

dome octagon were covered with niches and trumpet arches, framed by moulded ganch festoons. At the top

of the octagon there is the third epigraphic belt. Several more kufi inscriptions - extracts from the Koran

- run around the rosettes of the octagon and medallions of the frieze. The inner surface of the dome was

divided into eight parts by thin ornamental strips filled with botanical pattern. These flat twisted strips

crossed to form lancet arches and figures in the form of stars, going up to the skylight [Nusov, 1963; p. 52-

53]. The décor bears traces of thick layers of blue, dark-blue, yellow and red paint [Goryacheva, 1983; p.

129]. Thus, in composition, building methods and, particularly, in decoration this monument occupies a

special place in the architecture of Kyrgyzstan of the described period.

At that time, several mausoleums were also erected in Osh. Thus, Bartold mentions the mausoleum of

the emir Ziya ad-din Osman bin Yusuf bin Muhammad-tegin ash-Shashi, one of the last representatives of

the Karakhanid dynasty, who died in 1209, in Andijan, but was buried in Osh. According to Jamal Karshi,

around the mountain Barak (now Sulayman-Too) were graves of saints and the pious, including Khazret

Asaf bin Burkhiya, the vizier of Suleiman bin Daud, and his maternal uncle. In the present time over the

burial attributed to Asaf bin Burkhiya there is a mausoleum erected in the 16th century or later. During

the archaeological study of this mausoleum carried out as part of a restoration programme, a burial was

discovered under the floor in a brick sagana, with ruins of a thin wall (perhaps, a fence) adjoining the sagana,

which can be dated to the early 11th century. The Kichi-Mekke mausoleum that has not been preserved also

belongs to the pre-Mongolian period. When B. P. Denike was examining it in 1924, it was already in a very

ruinous condition. According to his description, it was a one-room building of baked brick, covered with

a dome, with a through passage connecting it with the Asaf bin Burkhiya mausoleum.

81

Kyrgyzstan

On the slope of the mountain, near the cemetery, were ruins of the Mekke-Ajaam mosque, which have

not been preserved to our days. According to Ye. V. Druzhinina, bricks of different time, among which

were those of the Karakhanid period, and fragments of fretted terracotta were found there, which may

indicate that it was built in the pre-Mongolian time, but was reconstructed later [Satayev, Bilibayev, 2007.

p. 20-21].

In the 15th century, the great Babur who knew Osh very well, will say many complimentary things about

its air and water, and inform us about three buildings of Sulayman-Too. The first of them was the khujra of

his uncle, the sultan Makhmud, standing right on the summit; the second was a khujra with an iwan built

by himself a little below the first building; the third was the Jauza mosque, situated between the mountain

and the city [Babur-Nameh, 1972, p. 18-19]. The mosque could probably be located in the place where the

Ravat Abdullakhan mosque built later is standing now. Thus we can see the continuity of the tradition of

building Muslim cult constructions at this place from the Karakhanid time to the Sheybanid period. As for

the buildings of the Timurid time, initially, the khujra of the sultan Makhmud built on the east summit of

the mountain and Babur’s khujra with an iwan placed below were, probably, meant only for solitude and

rest and, possibly, for observing the plain beneath [Abytov, 200. p. 28]. Later the building on the summit

became a mazar. Gradually, after a series of reconstructions, it acquired a different appearance, which

we know from the photographs of the 19th and 20th centuries. Sources give different information about its

function: a mosque, a mausoleum, a khujra; subsequently the popular tradition linked it with the name of

Babur. The initial appearance of Babur’s khujra is unknown, as it has not been preserved; the remains of

a foundation on the south-east ledge of the first summit may be in some way connected with it [Bernstam,

1950. p. 18]. The mosque was a small building with a portal and a dome, built of baked brick. The portal

was deep; in its niche was a heavy wood door decorated with fretwork. The room was illuminated via two

windows with lattices-panjara. The walls on the inside were plastered and decorated with fretwork on

white ganch.

In the Mongolian time (13th-14th centuries), mausoleums in the form of a monumental building continue

to develop in the north part of the country. We know of five mausoleums in the Talas valley belonging to

this time. Some of them still remain centric-type constructions. They practically have no décor and are

distinguished by reserved and even archaic architectural forms. Such are the mausoleums in the Kazakh part

of the Talas valley [Goryacheva, Peregudova, 1995]. The so called Manas Kumbez occupies a particular

place, representing the further development of mausoleums with hipped domes. The history of study of

this monument is connected with the names of outstanding scientists, among which are V. V. Bartold, M.

Ye. Masson, G.A. Pugachenkova, A. M. Belenitsky, A. N. Bernstam, B. M. Zima and others. The monument

is situated 12 km south-east of the town of Talas, near the south-west foot of the mountain Manastyn-

Chokusu. In the 40s of the last century, remains of a fortification in the form of a platform of rough stones

and a tower at the northern side were seen on this mountain. A stone (67 cm by 47 cm) was also found with

an Arabic inscription cut in it, which contained the date of its cutting (1341) and the name of the owner of

the fortification [Masson, Pugachenkova], 1950. p. 24-25]. Today contemporary stonework covers its ruins

repeating in parts their line.

The ’Manas’ kumbez is situated almost in the centre of a cemetery which had for a long time been very

popular among the people of the Talas valley. The general composition of the building consists in the

combination of three forms: the main cubic body covered with a double dome, spherical on the inside and

pyramidal and ribbed on the outside, and the façade wall in the form of a portal. Its sides face directly the

points of the compass; the only entrance is in the south side; in the lateral walls there are apertures with

decorative lattices-panjara. The mausoleum is 11 m high; each of its façades is 7 m long. The construction

82


is built on a plot evened for that purpose, and consists of one square room 4.38 m by 4.38 m in size. It has

no foundation and rests on a base of several rows of stone slabs. The walls are built of baked brick 23 cm

by 23 cm by 5 cm in size on clay mortar. The interior walls are covered with two layers of plaster: the inner

layer is clay and the outer ganch. The arches, trumpet arches, and inner dome are built of the same size

brick, but on alabaster mortar. The floor was apparently paved with baked brick over plaster of combined

clay and abode. The ruins of a dioctahedral ribbed drum around the inner spherical dome of the mausoleum

can be seen on old photographs published M.Ye. Masson and G.A. Pugachenkova. In addition, during the

excavation of the mausoleum they found facing bricks with one side cut at an angle of 60 degrees and which

probably served for facing the surface of the hipped dome. On the basis of these finds, calculations and

stylistic analogies G.A. Pugachenkova made a reconstruction of the kumbez with a covering in the form of

a pyramidal ribbed tent-shaped dome. The correctness of these calculations was confirmed by the works

carried out in 1968-1970, during which the top of the hipped dome, 56 cm high and 64 cm across, was found

near the west wall of the kumbez that had been left open in 1945 for making further studies [Pomaskin,

1972. p. 30]. Bricks with ornamented butt ends used for the decoration of a transitional belt between the

drum and the dome were also found here. Thus, the monument has been restored on the basis of scientific

analysis of real material; however, the hipped covering of the monument remains inacceptable for the

majority of the population of the valley. In the mass consciousness the kumbez lives as a building with the

inner dome and without the lost outer covering. That is why the proper governmental bodies receive from

time to time proposals to change the covering of the building.

The main attraction of the mausoleum is its artistically decorated portal in the south wall, covered all over

with terracotta tiles. The large corner pillars and small ones at the entrance niche are decorated in the same

way. The décor is distinguished by a harmonious combination of geometric, plant and epigraphic patterns.

The key elements of the portal composition

are two bands equal in width, containing

a religious and a historical inscription,

the latter having been deciphered partly

by V. V. Bartold (1899) and M. Ye. Masson

(1925). In 1938, A. M. Belenitsky proposed

a full version of deciphering. In 1943, on

the basis of epigraphic and historical

data, M. Ye. Masson makes changes to his

translation and corrects his own dating

[Masson, Pugachenkova, 1950]. Thus, today

scientists consider that, most probably, the

woman buried here died in the first day of

Ramadan, in the year of 734 of the Hegira,

that is, in the 6 May, 1334. This dating is

confirmed by the characteristic features

in the construction of the kumbez, as well

as by the fretted terracotta tiles with the

domination of plant ornamental motifs

used in decorating the building, and the

inscriptions performed in the lettering

naskh and flowering kufi surrounded by

Architectural decor Kumbez Manasa. (on: Nusov

1963, Pomaskin 1972).

83

Kyrgyzstan

botanical patterns. The analysis of the titles

and genealogy of the persons mentioned in

the epitaph showed that Kyanizek-khatun’s

father, a Chagatay emir of Abuk was a son of

the emir of Duva, close to the khan’ home

Khaydu. The excavations carried out in the

mausoleum in 1937-1938, by B. M. Zima

and A. N. Bernstam, showed that it had for

a long time been a burial place, and corpses

in lakhats preceded the ones buried in wood

coffins. As to their dating, there are several

points of view. The majority of the scientists

tend to consider the persons in mud and

baked brick lakhats the principal ones, for

whom the mausoleum was built. However,

as they were excavated and the excavation

process was not properly documented, it is

impossible to definitely answer this question.

The Ak-Beshim Christian complex.

Although the period of 9th-15th centuries

in Central Asia are commonly considered

an Islamic per iod, there were a lso

representatives of other religions living

in its towns, such as Christians. From

written sources we know that the Nestorian

metropolis of Kashgar and Nevaket appears

in that time. The Christian communities in

the northern regions around Tien Shan were

powerful, which is testified by a monumental

complex of churches excavated partly at the

site Ak-Beshim in 1998-2001 [Semenov, 2002. p. 44-114] 4. It consists of four parts and occupies an area

of 56 m by 42 m.

Each part consists of an altar room in the eastern side and an oblong room – the nave adjoining it from

the west. The altar rooms of parts A, B and C are almost square, in the form of the so called ‘open cross’;

in the last, northernmost part D built later than the rest, the altar room is rectangular in plan, adjoins the

eastern wall of the apse and is not very high – 10-20 cm; the elevation – altar – in parts A and D is oblong,

while in B it is almost square (it was not discovered in part C). Part A occupying the southern sector of the

complex is probably the earliest one. It has, like the other ones, an expressed axial symmetry. But unlike

the rest, it has a system of bypass corridors, separated by doorways, around the altar room (5 m by 5 m).

in the last functioning period the south bypass corridor was blocked and a winery was organised in the

4 The excavations were continued in 2000-2001and in 2006, by the Institute of History of the National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Kyrgyzstan headed by L.M. Vedutova (with the participation of V.A. Kolchenko). The material was not published.

Kumbez Manas. Overview, plan and cross-

section. Photo 1938 (1) 1970 (2) and 2000

(3) (by: Bernstam, 1997; Pomaskin, 1972

Goryacheva Peregudova, 1995).

84


south-east corner. The church hall consisted of three naves 25 m long each, separated by thick walls, each

of which had two doorways situated opposite one another. All the three naves were linked on the west by

doorways with a perpendicular corridor-like room (narthex-?). However, by the moment the complex was

being studied these passages had been bricked up. The aisles and bypass corridors were covered with box-

like vaults, built of cut bricks with slanting surfaces, which is testified by cornices remaining here and there

and excavated fragments of bricks placed in a specific manner above them.

It is more difficult to define the covering of the central nave. G.L. Semenov bases his version on 12

narrow vertical round holes (20-33 cm in diameter) found in the north and west walls and meant for

pillar constructions. The holes form six pairs, three on each side (at a distance of 1.34-1.38 from each

other) dividing the whole nave into four approximately equal square parts. G.L. Semenov considers that

these pairs of pillars supported arch walls, and the rest of the space was covered by four ‘balkhi-type’

domes [Semenov, 2002. p. 97]. On the other side, a long row of almost vertical bricks found in an edge

in the western part of the central nave indicates that there was a vaulted covering. In this case it is the

largest of vaults covering the span of 5.2 m! Part A was built as an independent part; its external walls

(except for the western one) were blind. But later, a passage to the northern nave was cut in the northern

wall. The composition of parts B and C situated to the north of A is a little simpler. Their altar parts have

no bypass corridors and the church halls are not divided into naves and, probably, have no coverings 5.

West of the altar of part B covered with a ‘balkhi-type’ vault there is the so called ‘big court’, and to the

north of it, behind a corridor with two pairs of arched passages there is a ‘little court’, the central axis of

which coincides with the axis of the altar room of part C. An original construction is situated on the axis

of the long corridor along the line of the altar rooms – an inserted vaulted ‘first floor’ only 1.20 m high

(with the walls preserved to a height of 3.5-4 m). Its entrance has the form of an ogee three-level arch

embedded deep into the body of the wall. Apparently, it was a crypt of some saint, which is confirmed by

bones found in the eastern part. The ‘second floor’ thus formed was blocked on the façade by a brick wall;

it could be entered through a hole in the next room [Semenov, 2002. p. 78]. All the walls of the complex

were covered with two or three layers of plaster, and in a number of rooms they were additionally covered

with alabaster. In the rooms of part A and the altar rooms in B and C traces of painting made mainly

with the use of glue paints were found. Moreover, gold foil was used in altar C! Altar B was painted with

frescos. Among fragments of paintings were found a flower rosette close to that from Dun Khuan and

epigraphic motifs.

The Christian complex was built with the use of medieval building technique: large pakhsa block (85-90

cm high), in a number of cases divided by a row of bricks; high cornices of the vaults of 6-7 rows of bricks;

passages and niches covered with vaulted arches of different types. However, the Karakhanid coins and

fragments of glazed ceramics indicate definitely that it was functioning in the 10th-11th century.

So, we have all reasons to assert that in general the architecture of our country, particularly in the post-

Karakhanid period, reached a very high level, in some periods even the highest for its time. Later, in the

Mongolian and post-Mongolian periods, monuments constructed in our territory become unimportant

and of merely provincial significance. Nevertheless, they no doubt can be included in the common Central

Asian context.

Then, it is necessary to study architectural décor, which in combination with the spatial volumes of

constructions makes their appearance unique.

5 This area has not excavated completely, therefore we cannot exclude a possibility of their being covered with a flat roof on wood supports. However, this purely logical conjecture wants confirmation by archaeological data.

85

Kyrgyzstan

ARCHITECTURAL DéCOR is traditionally regarded as a separate branch of artistic culture that is

as a variety of decorative and applied arts, the further development of which required specialisation of

craftsmen from artisans per se to the builders of workshops. Islam generated new types of architectural

constructions and ideologically sanctioned the leading position of this type of applied arts. Nevertheless,

artisans continued to depict living beings, both in tableware painting and in architecture. In this respect,

a ceramic slab with a printed relief image of a walking lion found in one of the residential houses in

Krasnorechenskoye site is of particular interest. A fretted ganch (alabaster) panel with stylised images of

horses made with the use of technique typical both of metallic items and ceramics was located on the wall

of another dwelling. This is another proof that the artistic style of the time showed itself equally in various

types of applied arts, including the use and stylisation of ancient zoomorphic subjects in the Muslim time.

Artists, potters and architects had in their arsenal several methods developed and widely used for the

construction of various forms of decoration.

Figured brickwork. Often masters decorated the smooth surface of a façade with a brickwork of bricks

set edgewise, creating a certain pattern. Thus the system of figured brickwork was born, which later involved

the use of baked brick. This method becomes the principal and favourite one among architects erecting and

decorating cult buildings of Kyrgyzstan. Figured brickwork was physically connected with the core body

of a wall and enabled artisans to create a new technique of decoration by introducing a linear geometric

ornament. This brick became a natural construction module, while figured brickwork was the favourite

method of decoration of monumental constructions. By laying bricks vertically, flatwise or making them

protrude from the surface of brickwork, the masters achieved various ornamental effects and the effects

of contrasted light and shadow, as well as plasticity and elegance. The Buran and Uzghen minarets are

examples of such brickwork. Their cylindrical trunks consist of several horizontal belts, each of which has

Ak-Beshim complex of Christian churches. Plan (1), cross-section (2) and graphic

reconstruction of the interior of the nave of Church A (3) (by: Semenov, 2002).

86


Architectural decor of the mausoleum of Shah-Fazil: samples of cornices (1-4), outlets

(5-17) (by: Imankulov, 2005)

87

Kyrgyzstan

its own ornamental pattern. The initial figured brickwork gradually developed into brick mosaic. It covered

the core body of the wall as well as facing, thus giving the masters a wide range of creative opportunities.

In the late 10th-early 11th centuries fretted figured bricks in the form of ‘bows’, squares, triangles, curls

of pearls and figured lion-shaped brackets begin to be widely used. In combination with figured brickwork

they gave the decoration of a wall a new flavour. This decorative device born in the 9th century (the Ismail

Samani mausoleum in Bukhara) became widespread in Maverannakhr and Khorasan in the 10th-12th centuries.

At first, small and thin brick was used, as it was easy to process; later, the brick was standardised. Apart

from the sawn bricks small fretted ones were used to make mosaic patterns and to pave floors. Some other

researchers of brick décor think that there was no such standard, and that only the ratio of the thickness

of the brick to the length of its side was the only thing that mattered. Among the patterns of brick décor

there are trellis made of composite bricks with fills of fretted plaster, or of sawn and polished figured bars

with tokens-symbols which the contemporaries understood well. Edges, borders, framings of niches and

panels are also built on the basis of a square grid or a chessboard. In devising patterns artists used the

following devices: mirrored objects, squares, rounds and other figures inscribed in one another; according

to Rempel, in the 11th-12th centuries, in contrast to the early medieval period, circular patterns (ghirikhs)

played only a secondary role. The second group of ghirikhs of composite bricks consists of geometric figures

on three- or four- sided grid limited by a square base. Such are the brickworks of the portals of the Uzghen

mausoleum, particularly of the Middle and North ones.

Architectural decor of Uzgen mausoleums.

88


Painting and fretting on raw clay and ganch was used, as a rule, in the interiors of buildings.

Unfortunately, they have survived only as fragments, which does not always allow us to restore

the type of a pattern and the location of painting. The fragments of plaster bearing a combination

of painting and fretwork are often found during excavations. Paintings were polychromatic, with

various botanical and geometric motifs. In the decoration of buildings masters used mineral paints

diluted in water with added adhesives. Fretting on ganch and clay was close to popular folk crafts

like no other type of architectural décor, being affordable, easy-to-process and impressive. It could

be presented separately and in combination with painting and brickwork. Almost all the discovered

10th-12th-centuries buildings at the Krasnaya river (Navekat) were decorated with fretted and

painted clay. In the palace (P-1) fretted plaster covered large areas of the walls, framed doorways

and wall niches, divided in a ‘decorative’ way panels, cornices, under dome constructions and other

architectural elements of the interiors, as well as covered parts of courts. They combined well with

wood elements, such as columns, sheds and frames, which also included fretwork (its weak traces

having been found on individual fragments of wood). Some fragments of plaster were found in situ

(room 12) at a height of 1 m over the f loor and on the soffit of an arched opening. The fretwork is

made in finely decanted raw clay, with a working layer of 0.5 cm to 2.5 cm thick. The adobe base has

remained under a layer of fretwork.

Piece of architectural decor from the Krasnaya Rechka settlement (1-10 by:

Kozhemyako, 1967).

89

Kyrgyzstan

Judging from the discovered specimens, the fretting

technique was quite varied – from engraving to deep

relief. The whole stucco was covered with white, yellow

and red paints. The largest fragment (35 cm by 40 cm)

was a fragment of a panel, on which a yellow frame was

drawn against a blue background and filled with red

volutes and two-leaf patterns. To stress the lines of the

pattern the artist contoured it with a groove. On other

fragments there are motifs of ‘running’ sprouts and

buds spread widely in medieval art. Large Arabic letters

made with yellow paint can be clearly seen on some

fragments, which indicates that strips of epigraphic

ornaments were included in the décor, decorating large

areas of the walls.

Borders of frames, niches and fr iezes are

covered with two- and three-layered fretwork.

They considerably excel the fragments of panels in

massiveness and thickness of the layer, being also

more finely performed. In 1981, at Excavation 7 in

Shakhristan 1, in the process of removal of the upper

tier of a ceremonial room of a residential building,

Amanbayeva discovered fragments radically different

in fretting technique and ornament from all others

found earlier. Fretwork on the fragments of a panel

was made in a thin grooved line in plaster 2-3 cm

thick. The ornament is geometric; the line divides the plane into rectangles, rhombi and triangles.

Medallions resembling ‘pine-apple’ fruit (the largest is 24 cm by 9.5 cm) in delicate foliage are of particular

interest. The surface of the fruit of two medallions is decorated with a net-like ornament of a combination

of hollow and full rectangles. The ornamentation of a third one was more complex, consisting of rhombi

and cuts of various sizes. The foliage is made of alternating grooves of various size and strips thickening

towards the end.

Right there, in the dumps, there were fragments of stylised ‘fish’; two of them remained undamaged (20

cm long and 10 cm wide). The ‘body’ of the fish is edged with two lines, while the caudal part is adorned

with three vertical notches; the surface is decorated with a ‘scaly’ ornament, and the circle of the eye is

outlined with a curved groove. The stucco has the traces of white, black, blue, red and yellow colours.

Very often fretted clay from the buildings at the Krasnaya river comes in combination with fretted ganch.

There was also alabaster coating imitating ganch and making drawings more contrast. Fretwork in clay and

alabaster usually occupied the upper parts of the walls and often complemented figured brickwork of brick

panels and wall painting, which blended well in the decoration of living rooms. Fretted clay as wall décor

of medieval buildings already becomes widely spread in towns of the Semirechye in the early medieval

time. However, this type of décor reaches the peak of its popularity in the late 10th-early 11th centuries. The

majority of fragments of fretted clay found in Kyrgyzstan in recent years also belong to this period. Apart

from the Krasnorechenskoye site, fretwork in raw clay covered with paints of different colour has been found

in the buildings of the Buran site dated back to the 10th-12th century. The considerable number of finds of

Architectural decor of the Akchy palace:

murals (1-5), pandjara (6), carving on

clay (7-9) (by: Zaurova, 1977).

90


fretted clay from Krasnorechenskoye and Buran sites in the latest decades confirms the conclusion made

earlier that the Semirechye was one of the regions where this type of décor was widely spread.

Fretted architectural terracotta. Methods of fretting in dried clay with subsequent baking (used in

producing tableware, tables-dastarkhans, small hearths etc.) served as a base for using fretted terracotta

in architecture and prepared ground for the rising of this type of decorative art. Fretted terracotta, like

alabaster, kept the plastic flexibility in ornament and the depth of fretwork, while it was a material as hard

as brick. For a long time they existed together, presenting the same ornamental motifs and character of

fretwork, thus showing that common artistic tastes were expressed in similar motifs irrespective of the

material masters had to work with.

In the 12th-14th centuries, in almost all of the buildings in Kyrgyzstan fretted terracotta becomes part of

their decoration. It combines well with figured brickwork and fretwork in alabaster, and later it substitutes

for ganch in cult buildings, as is seen in the Southern mausoleum in Uzghen (1186-1187) and in the Kyanizek-

Khatun mausoleum (the ‘Manas’ kumbez, 14th century). Ornamental motifs of the architectural decoration,

both in painting and in fretwork in ganch and terracotta, are quite manifold. Ghirikhs, complex figured

patterns which require from the master the knowledge of geometry, take the leading place among the motifs.

Botanical and floral motifs also become linear, losing their connection with the real flora. A blooming

sprout – islimi – becomes the favourite pattern; epigraphic ornament appears. Broad belts of inscriptions

are made in kufi, naskh and divani script in a combination with botanical ornament.

To copy an excerpt from the Koran was regarded a godly deed; however, it is not religious texts, but the

inscriptions of a secular character that occupy the leading position in the monuments of Kyrgyzstan. They

contained information about the person in whose honour the building was erected and the construction

date; however, the master usually did not write his name. Calligraphic inscriptions on the decorative facing

of mausoleums interlace with rich plant ornament. It is vividness, brightness, that artist sees in these

inscriptions, but on no account it is religious mysticism. All the décor of the buildings of Kyrgyzstan is

based on the effect of contrasted light and shadow. Medieval masters understood that fading light of day

or flickering from the weakest breath of wind chirags and candles make the colours of richly decorated

walls play. All this changed considerably the appearance of interiors and enriched the colour of interior

decorations. Ornamentation of the surfaces of walls was a common thing for the art of Kyrgyzstan and

some other regions of Central Asia, as nomads from time immemorial used fabrics with carpet patterns

to decorate yurts – their mobile dwellings.

Architectural ornament has much in common with motifs of contemporary ceramics and fabric patterns,

thus emphasising the affinity between applied arts and monumental decorative arts. The identity of

ornamental arts in ceramics, painting, fretted ganch and terracotta enables us to speak of the unity of the

artistic culture of the Semirechye and the Fergana valley. Since the 12th-early 13th centuries coloured glazed

bricks become part of decorative ornamentation of rooms. It is natural that when copying carpet patterns

from textile onto brick walls the artist could not be satisfied with mere lines of the pattern. Colours were

insufficient to make décor more expressive. Glazed brick made it possible to make a wider range of colours

in patterns, being at the same time a harder material than clay or alabaster. A room with floors paved with

composite glazed bricks laid in a parquet-like pattern was excavated in a palace complex at an archaeological

site near the village of Sadovoye. In a bath house from Toru-Aygyr, the ‘baths’ are faced with glazed tiles;

they were also found in great numbers in Tarsakent (Karazhigach), Taraz, Balasagun (Buraninskoye

site). All the above methods of architectural décor sum up the achievements of medieval masters and the

whole artistic culture, which is the highest manifestation of spiritual culture of urban (and partly rural)

populace in the 10th-13th centuries. Medieval architectural décor also mirrors the aesthetic ideas of the time

91

Kyrgyzstan

via ornamental motifs; however, the criterion of its significance is complex and diverse. It is the idea and

level of performance that are usually appreciated in painting, while in architecture such elements as panel,

column, decorated portal etc. are appraised according to the functionality of their construction, and to

their conformity with artistic integrity. That is why the aesthetic qualities in architecture cannot regarded

in isolation from a certain style of artistic culture of its time [Goryacheva, 2010].

To analyse architecture means to divide it into types and categories. It is an accepted tradition that

architecture is divided into residential, social, cult and industrial kinds. There are no doubt subdivisions

within this initial parting.

Speaking of architecture in relation to artistic culture, it is necessary, first of all, to focus on two aspects.

First, we should speak about architectural plans and compositions and about how buildings blend with the

surrounding landscape, where the features of the construction should also be considered. The latter were

conditioned by available building materials, traditions, skills and ‘schools’.

The building culture of medieval architectural monuments of Kyrgyzstan is very diverse. In constructing

walls architects used, perhaps, all known methods and techniques: mud and baked brickwork, stonework

of ragged and river stone; pakhsa (rammed earth), moulded and cut into blocks, as well as shaped in bands,

was also widely used. Mud and baked brickworks are common for the whole Central Asian architecture,

while the use of stone is apparently a strictly local feature, conditioned by the mountainous surroundings.

Coverings, particularly those in religious or ritual buildings of the 10th-12th centuries, also lie in traditions

of regional trends – domes of baked brick and vaults of mud brick. At the same time, there are quite a

number of buildings with flat coverings, such as a 14th century palace in Akchiye, which, in our opinion,

demonstrates a certain provinciality of the medieval architecture of Kyrgyzstan, particularly in the post-

Karakhanid period. Practically all the walls were plastered, very often with alabaster, which produced a

particularly neat appearance. Quite often they had additional decoration.

Summarizing overview of the architectural monuments of Kyrgyzstan in the 9-15 centuries, we can

reasonably argue that the overall architecture of our country, especially in Karakhanid period, was a very

high level, at times - even for the best of its period. Somewhat later, in Mongolian and postmongol periods,

monuments of our territory become secondary and provincial. However, they certainly indicate their

inclusion in a common Central Asian context.

92

TAJIKISTAN

While we are not going to discuss here the issues related to the inclusion of the peoples of Central Asia in the Caliphate, we will only note that the architecture of the period of the Arabic rule in Central Asia in the 8th-9th centuries rejects the synthesis of arts which earlier, in the early medieval time, had been widely spread. It proved to be a terrible loss for the culture and art of the Central Asian peoples. However, the Arab invasion did not bring any marked change into the development of architecture and town building in Central Asia, for the ancestors of the Tajik people already possessed ancient traditions in architecture and town building by that time.

In the 5th-8th centuries, many towns had not yet broken close links with the agricultural industry, and the castles-keshki expressed what was best in the architecture of that time, while the period between the 9th and 10th centuries is the time of blooming urban culture. New types of buildings - mosques with minarets, mausoleums, khaneqahs, madrasahs and others appeared, which resulted from the Islamic ideology that had become firmly rooted in the kingdom of the Samanids. Constructions appeared in close connection with the development of infrastructure, trade and education: caravanserais, bath houses, schools, canals, reservoirs, engineering and irrigational structures.

Strong as the architectural traditions of the preceding era had been, the difference between the architecture of Central Asia in the 9th-10th centuries and that of the pre-Islamic time is not in the change of planning or spatial schemes, but in the use of the baked brick, a new material in the monumental building. The high technical characteristics of the brick, its goldish-ochrous colour and the possibility of producing various rhythms and patterns of brickwork allowed the masters to reveal skillfully the aesthetic and mechanical features of the brick. The progress in the building technique was also conditioned by the use of ganch mortar, the quick cementation of which made it easier to build vaults and domes without scaffolding. The development of baked brick constructions, however, did not exclude mud brick building. Palaces, large mosques with courts, caravanserais and minarets were built of mud brick. Mud bricks were laid with the use of loess mortar. In the further development of constructions, e.g. domes, baked brick prevailed in building; however, mud brick showed its worth in a number of buildings.

Khulbuk, the capital of the cultural area of Khuttal, continued to be a major town of South Tajikistan in the 10th century. The area of the archaeological site is about 70 hectares. The citadel was situated in the south-west extremity of the site. Nowadays the contemporary settlement of Kurbanshaid occupies the most part of the territory of the ancient town.

The palace of the ruler of Khuttal, with a square court in the middle, was a place of interest in Khulbuk. The floor of the court was paved skillfully with baked brick; in the centre of it there was a deep well with a narrow mouth meant for sewage. A covered arcade with columns surrounded the court on four sides, the doors and windows of the palace opening into the arcade. The decoration of the walls and ceilings was particularly rich and beautiful. Just a small part of these decorations has remained: only little fragments of fretted painted alabaster. The total height of the portal was 13.25 m, width – 8.6 m, with the entrance 2.85 m wide. The portal of the pishtaq is U-shaped and consists of several belts: alternating full-sized and half-sized bricks; paired bricks set edgewise and forming the pattern leandra; special bricks with a Kufi inscription cut before baking; paired

93

Tajikistan

bricks. A three-quarter column supports the archivolt. The tympanum is decorated with brickwork forming a geometric pattern: crosshatch; a keystone over the door, made of bricks with a kufi inscription. The bricks form two rows, seven in each row. In contrast to the inscriptions around the frame of the portal having strict proportions, the letters on the spades are somewhat narrow and rather long. Generally, the portal looks monumental on the plane divided by rectangular and rounded pylons and buttresses. The graphic and then the real (2006) reconstructions of the portal entrance to the citadel of Khulbuk are remarkable, as it demonstrates one of the first examples of a portal in the Central Asian architecture; portal began to form after the 10th century, namely, in cultic buildings, such as the Arab-Ata mausoleum in Tim, the Mir-Said-Bakhrom mausoleum in Kermin and others. Among the sanitary and hygienic constructions we should note a brick canal under a floor and a central heating system also placed under a floor and consisting of interconnected ceramic pipes.

Another large archaeological site was found in the territory of Khuttal not far from the village of Sayod on the bank of the Panj. The rectangular (160 m by 130 m) citadel of the site is placed on an elevated platform and surrounded by a wide (8 m) moat. A number of dwellings of Sayod’s inhabitants have been studied; the dwellings define the appearance of a town house of Tokharistan in the 9th-10th centuries. Thus, the house of a town inhabitant (50 m by 50 m) consists of a square court (26 m by 26 m), surrounded by rooms square in plan. The court is partly paved with baked bricks forming a certain ornamental motif. The walls of the rooms facing the court are decorated with fretted stucco. The same décor was found in ceremonial rooms. The decoration of the sufas draws particular attention; on the front they are covered thickly with white alabaster, and with red paint on the sides. The floor of the rooms was paved with baked brick. A mihrab (a niche in the Qibla wall of a mosque indicating the direction of Makkah) in the western wall with the corners decorated with three-quarter fretted columns is a remarkable feature of the rooms. Usually, the rooms in a house form groups: a ceremonial hall in the centre, a kitchen, a room for ablution with an elevation and a small bath with a hole for sewage, and rooms with sufas.

In the 9th-10th centuries Fergana was a major, economically strong province of Maverannahr, with populous towns and villages, such as Khujand, Kand (Kanibadam), Samgor, Asht and others. Khujand consisted of three parts: kuhendiz, shahristan and rabad. The ruler’s palace was placed in the rabad, the prison in the Kuhendiz and the cathedral mosque was in the shahristan. The city stretched for 6-8 km in a straight line. The main canal that supplied the city with water flowed in the middle of the city. Cob houses were placed in clusters, many gardens and vineyards grew on its outskirts. The city was situated at the junction of the roads of Sogd, Chach and Fergana. According to Arab geographers, Khujand was a unique and the most beautiful city on the left

Palace in Hulbuk. Plan with

a partial reconstruction (by

Yu.Yakubov and E.Gulyamova).

94


bank of the Syr-Darya. For example, Ibn-Khaukal notes that Khujand is ‘…alone in its beauty among the provinces,’ while al-Mukaddasi writes: ‘Khujand is the city of delight; in this land there is no other city that is more pleasant; in the centre of it a river flows, and a mountain adjoins it, and sages and poets praise it.’

Not all the towns revive after the Arab occupation. Thus, the highly cultured town of Penjikent, the capital of the Sogdian province Panch in the upper course of the Zeravshan, was partly destroyed in 722-723, during the insurrection of the Sogdians. After that it continued to live until the 70s of the 8th century, and then it again fell into decay. However, some scientists

(such as Bartold) traced the resurrection of this town as a cultural and trade centre of the Upper Zeravshan in the 9th-12th centuries on a new place. Arabic and Tajik written sources of the 10th-12th centuries keep some information about it. The new town Penjikent appeared in the south-west part of the plain Dashti Mulloh on the left bank of the Maghian-Darya. According to the research of the archaeologist Eshonkulov, it consisted of a citadel that had appeared in the 7th century, and a large settlement (500 m by 350 m in size) enclosed in a fortified wall. According to medieval sources (al-Istahri), Penjikent had a cathedral mosque, the only one to the east of Samarkand. The ruins of a mud brick minaret in Dashti Kozi are all that have remained of it to our days. A cemetery adjoined the walls of the town. Finds consisting of baked bricks, shards of ceramics and glass vessels, grain-graters and millstones of watermills are a visual proof that Penjikent was a rich and developed town in the 9th-12th centuries.

Settlements and towns of the Gorny Badakhshan (Gorno-Badakhshan autonomous (province) of the Republic of Tajikistan) are also well-known. The famous traveller of the 13th century Marco Polo writes: ‘In this realm of narrow passages there are many inaccessible spots, and the people are not afraid of attacks of an enemy. Their towns and fortresses are on high mountains in inaccessible places.’ For example, strong fortified buildings with battle towers were constructed along the Great Silk Road (the Great Pamir Road), controlling the caravan routes in this part and repelling incursions of enemies. Big complexes consisted of three parts (a citadel and two grounds), and small ones of residential houses put very near each other. The only access inside the towers (tupkhona) in the form of a truncated pyramid was with the help of an accommodation ladder.

Local builders possessed broad knowledge in engineering, which enabled them to erect complex and monumental defensive buildings in mountain conditions. The fortress Yamchun (3rd-2nd century BC, 5th century AD, 10th-11th century AD) is one of the earliest fortification constructions in the Pamirs, its majestic silhouette towering up on a rocky ridge in Ishkashim region, Gorno-Badakhshan autonomous province.

Hulbuk. Zoomorphic ornament decoration of the

palace, 10-11th centuries.

95

Tajikistan

The Arabic influence was considerably weaker in Badakhshan because of its isolation by mountain ridges, and Islam has spread there only since the 11th century. For more than one hundred years Buddhism was one of the principal components of the cultural life of peoples of Central Asia, including Badakhshan. Pilgrims and preachers came from Kashgar, India and other places along the Great Pamir Road; Buddhist shrines were also built here. A monastery (4th-8th, 19th century) in the neighbourhood of the village of Vrang, Ishkashim region, Gorno-Badakhshan autonomous province, was built on the ledge of a rock and enclosed in a wall. In the eastern part of the complex were rectangular living rooms, in the western a stupa with a building. A cave-town with more than 100 cells (about 70 having been preserved to this day) was cut under the walls of the monastery and in a conglomerate on the opposite bank of the river Vrang-Darya. Doubled cells with an arch-like entrance, sufas at the walls and hearths in the floor were had a common entrance in the ceiling.

Caravanserais, stations and bridges were built for the convenience of travellers, some of them having been used up to the 20th century. In Dorkysht, Ishkashim region, Gorno-Badakhshan autonomous province, there was a pier (6th-12th centuries) near which were a residential area, a cemetery, an administrative centre, a bath house and the temple of fire.

Of the architectural monuments of Badakhshan fortresses and watchtowers (tupkhona) in the ancient Pamir principalities of Rushan, Shugnan and Vakhan are best studied. Medieval settlements are being excavated in the Western Pamirs. In particular, an alpine town of miners (11th century) was excavated at an elevation of 4,200 m above sea level near the ancient mine Kani Mansur in the upper course of the Bazardara, a tributary of the Murgab river. The village of more than 80 houses put very close to each other also had a caravanserai and a semi-circular sanctuary of fire. Bazardara town appeared in the 11th century in connection with a silver crisis in Central Asia.

Hence, in the 9th-10th centuries the towns of Central Asia are being rebuilt and growing in size. The living part of the complex of stone buildings Childukhtaron in Shakhristan region studied by

Hulbuk. Reconstruction of the palace of Khatlonshah, 10-11th

centuries. (by S.G. Khmelnitskiy).

96


Negmatov N. N. and Khmelnitsky S. G. may serve as an example of appearance of a residential house of the 9th-10th centuries. This is a many-roomed residential house of the centric type, square in plan, with a square hall in the centre and a suite of rooms around the principal axis of the vestibule-hall. The living part of seven rooms in this complex is related in its plan structure to many residential houses of Khorezm and Termez of that time. An effective stone front staircase leading to a flat wood roof is a unique element of the Central Asian architecture. The very principle of the organisation of the centric house draws our attention. In contrast to the houses of simple people which, built by their masters’ own hands, are not planned strictly around the central axis and have unparallel walls and disproportional rooms, the house of this type has a clear planning scheme, strict axial composition and a stressed central core. Such compositional planning of the seven-room house in the complex of Childukhtaron resembles in structure centric buildings of defensive character, in particular, a number of castles in Khorezm.

The residential architecture of a Karabulak settlement situated at the foothills in Ustrushana at the border with medieval Fergana (contemporary Laylak district of Kyrgyzstan) is a good example of a rural residential house of the studied period. The presence of closed and semi-closed rooms-vestibules with living rooms around them is a characteristic feature of the planning of residential complexes of buildings here.

As was noted before, the 9th-10th centuries was a period of change, when the development of towns of Tokharistan and Maverannahr had an unprecedented leap, caused by a new form of social ideology. However, the local architecture rejected foreign samples of cultic architecture and followed traditions of pre-Islamic building. This explains the fact that many temples of pre-Islamic cults were turned into Muslim mosques. The same phenomenon took place in Maverannahr, where the Arabs in the first years of their dominion used as mosques those buildings, the appearance of witch generally corresponded with the ideology of Islam. Thus, in many-columned halls a forest of columns led into the distance, producing an illusion of infinite space, which, in general, helped to create an atmosphere of meditation and religious ecstasy.

For example, the temple of ‘idols’ in Bunjikat is the closest to this image: the ‘posts-and-beams’ structure of the hall with wood ceiling and clay roof was added to its ‘arches-and-posts’ system

Graphic reconstruction by V.Bazhutin of the

entrance to the palace of Khatlonshah in Vose

district of Khatlon region, 10-11th centuries.

97

Tajikistan

Ancient city of Hulbuk, 10-12th centuries. Arch reconstruction of the fortress, 2006.

Hulbuk. Complete restoration of the corner tower of the palace. Photo 2006.

98


Khujand fortress gates. Reconstruction 1999.

Kulyab. Mausoleum of Mir Sayyid Ali Hamadoni. Photos 2008.

99

Tajikistan

Mausoleum of Sheikh Muslihiddin in Khujand after restoration. 12, 14-16th centuries.

100


Khujand. Mausoleum of Sheikh Muslihiddin. Photos 2008.

Mausoleum of Abdukadir Jeloni near Istaravshan. 15th century.

101

Turkmenistan

Khorezm. Izmykshir. (Zamakhshary). The city gates.

Merv. Shakhriyar-Ark. Divan.

102


Merv. Sultan Kala. The defensive wall.

Kunya-Urgench. Ak-Kala.

103

Dayakhatin.

Dehistan. In the foreground the minaret of Abu Jafar Ahmed.

Turkmenistan

104


Dehistan. Peshtak of the Khorezmshah mosque of Mohammed II.

105

Anau. Seyid-Jamal’ud-Din mosque.

Turkmenistan

Tympanum peshtak to the destruction of the building and the modern look

of the ruins.

106


Kunya-Urgench. Tuglug Timur minaret.

107

Merv oasis. Talkhatan Baba mosque.

Merv oasis. Geok gumbez mausoleum.

Turkmenistan

108


Merv. Mausoleum of Sultan Sanjar after restoration.

109

Kunya-Urgench. Mausoleum of Khorezmshah Il-Arslan.

Turkmenistan

110


Kunya-Urgench. Mausoleum of Khorezmshakh Tekesh.

111

Mausoleum of Meana Baba.

Turkmenistan

112


Kunya-Urgench. Ensemble of mausoleums of Najm ad-Din al-Kubra and

Sultan Ali.

Kunya-Urgench. Western façade of Tyurabek Khanum mausoleum.

113

Tajikistan

characteristic of court mosques of the Near East. In this case an applied projection with a niche on the western wall facing the direction of Mecca can be certainly explained as being a mihrab.

The following pre-Islamic traditions can also be traced in the architecture of a madrasah, the planning composition of which with a court and four iwans can be seen in ‘Ajinatepa’, a cultic Buddhist building of the 7th-8th century from Vakhsh district, Khatlon province, the Republic of Tajikistan.

Irrigational constructions in the territory of Tajikistan are among buildings that deserve attention. Thus, from the ancient times, the kariz (water duct) was used to carry water through subterranean galleries to arid grounds. The systematic study of ancient irrigational constructions in the territory of Ustrushana allowed us to reveal a number of large-sized remains of these works of the ancient engineers. Thus, there is a large kariz near the village of Kurkat in North Tajikistan. A rather new domed building forms the entrance of the kariz. The construction itself is a subterranean canal with vertical cleaning wells; the water passage is trapeziform in section. The cleaning wells have the form of a crater and are 40 m deep. When necessary, in some places karizes went along the slopes of terraces as open canals. Water to Bunjikat, capital of Ustrushana, Penjikent and many other ancient settlements was also delivered through canals and karizes. Thus, areas in the northern part of the Vakhsh valley were irrigated from the main canal Kafyr, which took its water from the river Vakhsh. Remains of the canal 4-5 km south-west of Beshkapa near Kurgan-Tyube, Khatlon province, are particularly effective. Here

it was necessary to lay the canal in a lowered land. Ancient builders made a huge earthen embankment and lay the canal on it. The total height of the dump of the canal is 8 m, the width of the embankment at the foot is up to 50 m, and the width of the bed of the canal is 13-15 m.

The presence of a branched network of irrigational system in the territory of Tajikistan testifies to a high level of irrigation and water supply business in the early medieval time.

Established traditions can also be seen in visual, architectural and decorative arts. In this connection it is necessary to note excellent specimens of wood architecture, which have been preserved in the Zeravshan settlements of Obburdon, Kurud, Fatmev, Urmetan, Iskodar and in the Isfara settlement of Chorkuh. The fretwork of the Zeravshan monuments (fretted columns, capitals, panels, mihrabs and other wood elements of the buildings) is mainly deep, relief, very finely and skillfully performed. Very deep-coloured and free plant and zoomorphic themes combine in the ornament of the columns, flexible stems and leaves, while

Sayed settlement. Situational scheme

of palatial houses of 9-11th centuries. (by

E.Gulyamova).

114


smooth lines of loops and knots twist fancifully. The ornament is concentrated mainly on the capitals of the columns, while their trunks are decorated with ornamental borders, and in some cases also with shelves. The columns from Obburdon and Urmetan, the richest in zoomorphic motifs, have on them stylised images of fishes, birds and animals, the ornament on the column from Fatmev entirely consists of plant motifs, while on the mihrab from Iskodar we can see geometric motifs and inscriptions. Generally, the zoomorphic ornament of the columns and capitals reflects conceptions and ideas of pre-feudal and pre-Islamic societies; that is, images of people’s mythology that had not yet been completely forced out by Islam.

The architecture of the 11th-13th centuries completed the renewal of the old style that had begun in the previous period, and created new and undying cultural, historic and artistic values. The 11th-13th centuries is the period of a gigantic break of the centuries-old order, which was prompted by the interference of Turkic tribes with their military feudal system. In the 11th-12th centuries the institution of feudal grants for service - ikta - spreads in Central Asia, which contributed to the development and final establishment of feudalism. In this period the development of crafts increases. The intensive growth of towns, commodity production and monetary trade for money were one of the most remarkable phenomena of the studied period. The towns of

Central Asia, and Tajikistan in particular, expanded and their population increased. The trade and craft part of a town gained particular significance, where this or that kind of artisan production concentrated around some points, for instance, bazaars. Even mountain regions were intensively involved in commodity-money relations (e.g. the region along the valley of the river Obihingow, a tributary of the Panj, or the region around Isfara).

The rapidly growing towns were a good condition for the development of architecture. The number of types of buildings increased, as well as their role in forming a town; therefore, the requirements for their artistic image also became higher. Many of the constructions of that time that have been preserved to our days are among the best works of Central Asian and world architecture.

Archaeological studying of many medieval towns of Tokharistan and Maverannahr allowed us to reveal typical features of towns of that time: expansion and erection of new defensive walls, development of bazaars and artisans’ quarters, the advanced communal services (the kubur water supply system, the subterranean sewerage system, the supply of hot water and the heating of bath houses and palace rooms, the paving of streets with stone, the construction of piers on navigable

Sayed settlement. Palatial houses:

A- city living house, 9-11th centuries.

B - town house with manufacturing

facilities, 9-11th centuries. (by

E.Gulyamova).

115

Tajikistan

Khuttalyan. Stucco decor of the Sayed palace in 7-8th centuries. (by E.Gulyamova).

116


rivers and many other things). In the 11th-12th centuries Khujand becomes one of the major towns of Central Asia. By that time the town is totally built up with palaces and ordinary buildings, gardens and vineyards. The population of the town increased together with the expansion of its territory; different types of crafts and trades continued to develop.

The building culture achieved a high level in the 11th-12th centuries. Mud brick and baked brick continued to be the principal building material. The mud brick construction continued to play an important role in a mass town building and exclusive role in rural building. Often even monumental buildings were made of mud brick and tiled with baked brick. However, baked brick dominates in monumental building. In the building of the 11th-12th centuries small-sized brick (22-23 cm) is no longer used and the size of the square brick grows to 25-27 cm by 25-27 cm. Clay mortar (loess) was still used for the wall construction, while ganch mortar became still more widespread as a component of brickwork in the seismic conditions of Central Asia.

In the 11th-12th centuries the building of fortresses surrounded by thick defensive walls continues. The fortress of Kalai-bolo in Isfara region may serve as an example. Built in the 4th-8th century and destroyed in the 10th century, it was considerably enforced and rebuilt in the 11th-12th century. In the rebuilding pakhsa (rammed earth) and mud brick were used, while baked brick on alabaster mortar was used in facing. The system of defense was enforced by two rectangular towers. The residential complex on the platform is totally rebuilt: a large ceremonial room and a court appear, and then two rows of adjoining rooms facing a common corridor. The rooms are covered with mud brick vaults. Window openings are filled with panes, pits for rubbish are dug and sewerage is made. The mouth of the pits-wells is strengthened with baked brick and covered with wood lids.

The majority of the preserved monuments of the studied period in the territory of Tajikistan belong to cultic architecture. The Khoja Mashad mausoleum in the settlement of Sayod is the most ancient and interesting monument of the 11th-12th centuries in the territory of Kabadian, ancient region of Tokharistan. Here the domes of two large buildings silhouette clearly against the blue sky. One of them – the eastern one – is dated back to the 11th century, the second - western – to the 12th; they are connected by an arch. The domes seem alike. Upon minute examination, however, we can see them have different forms, and the buildings below the domes also differ. The austere, majestic interior of the domed halls is illuminated through round holes in the tops of the domes. According to the plan, the monument has two square halls covered with a dome, their arches facing a vaulted iwan with remains of a portal. The axis of the vault-iwan is south-north oriented. The eastern domed building is built of baked bricks laid in the English bond and has a wide frieze along the upper part of the tetragon on three sides. On the south façade of the western building there are remains of rich decoration in the form of arch-like panels made of ‘herringbone’ brickwork and separated by spades, which was popular in the 11th-12th centuries. This arrangement consisted in a high decorative wall that went above the roof and was not connected with the main wall. Fretted terracotta details used here in the mihrab, in the insertions in the brickwork and in the decoration of the main façade find direct analogies in the Talhatan-baba mosque, the Khoja Nakhshron mausoleum and other monuments of the Central Asian architecture in the 11th-12th centuries. The other façades of the western building are lower and undecorated; the eastern building neither bears any details of decoration.

Local inhabitants call the Khoja Mashad a mausoleum; however, scientists’ research allowed them to define it as one of the earliest madrasahs which included an even more ancient mausoleum. Additional explorations helped to reveal a series of mud brick vaulted rooms-khujras, which confirmed the building was a madrasah: khujras around a court, iwans on its axes, domed rooms and corner towers.

117

Tajikistan

Among numerous monuments of Shakhrituz region, Khoja Durbad, a small mausoleum situated south of the settlement Sayod, also attracts attention. It is a short building, square in plan (the side is 724 cm long), built of baked brick. The main façade with traces of a portal faces eastward. The colour and texture of the brick, the artistic expressiveness of the undisguised brickwork define in a vast degree the appearance of the mausoleum. Despite the absence of fretted terracotta or any other decorative devices, the exterior of the mausoleum looks quite smart. This is achieved by the diversity of the brickwork, which consists in rows of bricks laid vertically and horizontally. Rectangular spades forming a characteristic plastic pattern on the outer sides of the tetragon also contribute to this. The inside of the mausoleum is octagonal in plan, while it’s square in plan on the outside, which is a characteristic feature of the mausoleum. Such planning is rare in the architecture of Central Asia. The octagonal form of the inner space allowed the builders to avoid complex subdomal constructions: the ‘arch squinches’ are lancet niches, and here they do not hang over the corners of a square room, but crown the diagonal facets of the inner octagon. Tectonically the interior of the Khoja Durbad is divided into three tiers: the lower part is the square, the middle is the octagon and the upper tier is the dome. The latter has brickwork in a sphero-conical pattern, with the bricks laid horizontally. To make the dome lighter, the masters built it three-stepped, its walls gradually becoming thinner towards the upper part, from two bricks in thickness at the foot to one at the top.

The Tillo Khaloji mausoleum in the south of Shakhrituz region, near the settlement of Ayvaj, is an example of monumental mud brick architecture in the period under study in the territory of Kabadian. The building (10.5 m by 10.5 m) is built of strong mud brick 26 cm by 26 cm by 5.5-6 cm in size. Arch squinches having wedge-like brickwork support the dome. Pockets for wooden supporting beams that go perpendicularly into the walls are seen on the sides of the four symmetrical entrances, on the inside and outside. They are placed at the level of the heels of the inner arched niches and a

Plan of Khoja Mashad mausoleum. (by L. Bretanitskiy).

118


little above them. Pockets for wooden supporting beams that go lengthwise into the walls are seen inside the niches, at the level of their heels. The rectangular portal niches on the façades go up to the level of the inner subdomal octagon. Researchers regard the mausoleum in Ayvaj as an intermediate stage between chortak and mausoleum with a cruciform plan.

The two Khoja Nakhshron mausoleums standing at a distance of 12 m from one another are also examples of decorative devices of the architecture of Central Asia in the 11th-12th centuries, based on the artistic means that open, undisguised brickwork can afford. The mausoleums comprise a complex of funeral buildings erected at different periods of time, which we know well from the materials of academician Litvinsky, and Khmelnitsky, doctor of study of art from Germany. Both the eastern and the western monuments are of the portal-and-dome type. The western mausoleum is built of baked brick (24-25 cm by 24-25 cm) with clay mortar. In plan it is a tetragon with a deep portal niche. The side of the hall is 8.1 m, the width of the vaulted niche of the massive portal between the two pylons is 3.8 m, the depth is 4.4 m; it means that it was a real iwan of which, unfortunately, only ruins have reached our days. At first the dome was supported by trumpet arches; later, after the dome had collapsed during a strong earthquake, the subdomal construction acquired a different form: in the 16th-17th centuries three-part squinches appeared with cells filled with ‘herringbone’ brickwork. Figured brickwork consisting in ornamental brick texture of beautiful ochrous colour is the main attention of the western mausoleum. The ornamental pattern both on the outside of the mausoleum and in the interior was made with polished facing bricks laid in different manner - in the form of a ‘herringbone’, ‘stair steps’ and others, where the centres of the rhythmically repeating ornamental figures are emphasised with deepened crosses with small terracotta squares inserted into them. Once the patterned facing covered not only the inner walls of the pylons of the iwans, but also the surfaces of the outer walls. The compositional analysis of the plan of the building showed that it was built on metric netting with a module equal to 73.6 cm.

The eastern mausoleum that has also reached our days in ruins was built of bricks of the same size (25-26 cm by 25-26 cm by 5.5 cm) with clay mortar. Ganch was used here only in facing the portal (as in the western mausoleum). The size of the domed hall is 6.7 m by 6.7 m. The portal consisted of two massive pylons with curvilinear contour on their sides and an arched niche square in plan, on the axis of which there was an entrance to the hall. According to Khmelnitsky, the curvilinear projections of the entrance portal were part of a minaret, built in into the thickness of the portal. The minarets rose above the portal and ended with domes. Such twin minarets were usual for Iran, Azerbaijan, for Asia Minor and Central Asia (e.g. a mosque from the site Anau in South Turkmenistan also had them).

Khoja Nahshron west mausoleum. Wall

peshtak (by S. Khmelnitsky).

119

Tajikistan

The surfaces of the walls of the eastern mausoleum were faced with polished bricks and terracotta elements arranged using different methods. There is an Arabic inscription in kufi style on the surface of the pylon of the portal made of sawn terracotta elements and decorated with stylised leaves and sprouts and insertions in the form of large heart-like figures. The closest analogy as in the style and decorative details is the 10th-11th centuriy Khoja Mashad madrasah-mausoleum in the settlement of Sayod in Shakhrituz region.

The Muhammad Bosharo mausoleum-mosque in the settlement of Mozori Sharif near Penjikent is one of the most well-known monuments of the 11th-12th centuries in the Zeravshan valley. In 1332, a portal decorated with fretted terracotta and coloured glazed tiles was attached to the building that consists of a central square domed construction with corner rooms. By the richness and fineness of the decoration it has no equal in the architecture of Central Asia and is a masterpiece of world significance. The portal of the Muhammad Bosharo demonstrates a new feature in the architecture of the post-Mongolian time: the introduction of intensive multicolour in monumental building with the use of majolica facing.

The Khazrati posho mir Khamza mausoleum has remained until our days as part of a large cultic complex created at different time. This is a small wood iwan (4 m by 4.75 m) open on two sides and on the other two enclosed in a wall. A dilapidated 12th-early 13th century construction is entirely enclosed within a new building with a portal, the date of 1321 of the Hijra (1903) inscribed in paint over the entrance. Two of the seven supports of the iwan are four half-columns, connected with each other by a post rectangular in section. The inner surface of the supports is covered with

fretwork of a stylised plant character with borders of pearls on the edge. Transverse beams rest on eight fretted figured corbels, which are supported in their turn by three purlins and a cob wall.

The fretted wood in Chorkukh opens a remarkable page in the history of art of the Tajik people, for it confirms that both at the Zeravshan and in the mountain valley of the Isfara the vestiges of the pre-Islamic ideology are still alive and the mythological zoomorphic images have survived here. Thus, the corbels 80 cm long are surprisingly like those from the Zeravshan. However, giving them the form of the Zeravshan corbels, the Obburdon carvers of Chorkukh make it more detailed and filled with ornament. The heads of the corbels ornamented with fan-like drawing, spiral and plant pattern lost resemblance to a bull’s head, only one of them reproducing the Sanghistona variant.

Mud brick minarets that have remained in the settlements of Ayni, Rarz and Fatmev testify the existence of early mosques in

MBAG. Badakhshan. Eastern Pamirs. Mining

town of Bazardara, 11th century. Plan. (by

M.A. Bubnova).

120


the upper course of the Zeravshan. These grand minarets erected in the 11th-12th centuries were inseparable elements of cultic buildings that have not reached our days. Of the three minarets the mud brick tower in the regional centre Ayni has been preserved best. Although it is basically the ruins that remain of it, one can rather clearly imagine the appearance of the minaret with a spiral staircase inside and a crown in the form an ordinary lantern with a dome and an arcade. Comparing the preserved part 10 m high and 3.7 m across at the foot (the trunk of the tower narrows gradually towards the top) with well-known Central Asian mausoleums, we can define its height as 15-16 m. Three ornamental belts that remain are composed of brick laid in rings edgewise, thus being moderate but noble decoration.

The minaret in Rarz was a part of an ensemble of buildings that comprised a huge mosque – namazgoh; therefore it was the largest of the three monuments. The height of the part of the minaret that has been preserved is about 9 m, with the diameter more than 5 m. The trunk of the tower is decorated with belts of mud brick laid edgewise and scallops. Judging from the diameter it has at the foot, the monument from Rarz was rather high, more than 20 m. No doubt, the high, slim profile of the minaret was a compositional accent not only of the cultic complex, but of the mountain settlement as a whole.

The third minaret at Fatmev is smaller in comparison with the other two and is in a worse state of preservation. But it complements the architecture of the former two ones with its intricate ornamentation of the decorative belt of bricks. Made from mud brick, the simplest building material, all the three monuments show the high professionalism of the ancient Tajik masters who could endow the round minarets with memorable forms, using but simple means of architectural composition.

Shugnan district of the MBAG. Fire temple in the village of Kafyrkala. Bogif. Plan. (by

M.A. Bubnova).

121

Tajikistan

The towns and settlements of the period of the Mongolian invasion and post-Mongolian resurrection in Central Asia do not keep any residential or civil buildings of that time.

In the mid 14th century Tamerlane, a son of one of the noble representatives of the Mongolian Barlas tribe, enters the political arena. Tamerlane created a huge empire in which together with Maverannahr and Khorezm vast areas around the Caspian Sea, the territory of modern Afghanistan, Iran, a part of India, Iraq, a part of the South Caucasus and a number of countries in Central Asia were included. While conquering civilised countries he at the same time tried to improve the regions in the centre of Central Asia which formed the core of his power. The centralization of the state authority in the 14th-15th centuries prompted the rise of trade and the bloom of crafts, which led to the growth of big cities and their turning into large economic centres. Thus, the Great Silk Road that went through Maverannahr was partly restored in Tamerlane’s time. Now merchants travelled from Iran to Sultania, after that they went to Khulbuk, Khujand and Samarkand via Herat and Balkh, and further passed to Mongolia via Taraz. Building in large cities was one of the national goals, and therefore new tasks were set before architects of creating broad roads and big market squares, and of building architectural ensembles in the most important parts of a city, in its squares and main streets.

The urban layout and appearance of Ura-Tyube that was ruled by representatives of the Timurid family is formed in the 15th century. In the late 15th century Ura-Tyube, renamed Istaravshan on the eve of the celebration of its 2500th anniversary, was visited several times by Ẓahīr ad-Dīn Babur, Tamerlane’s great-great-grandson who had lost the heritage of his ancestors in Central Asia, the author of the well-known memoirs Babur-nameh, and the founder of the Mogul Empire in India. It is in Babur’s memoirs that the town is mentioned for the first time under the name of ‘Uroteppa’. The high density of the town’s population placed the

Ishkashim district of the MBAG.

Buddhist monastery Vrang (4-8, 19th c.)

(by L.N. Dodhudova)

Ustrushana. Karabulak settlement. Plan

of the excavation, 10-12th centuries. A -

feudal castle, B - the residential part of

the settlement (by Brykina GA).

122


improvement of the living conditions in the town among the most important tasks. The inhabitants were supplied with water via running aryks (canals), subterranean conduits and wells. Hauzes (open pools) and sardobas (closed reservoirs) were constructed to make the water more accessible and to create freshening zones among the town blocks.

Found in the 5th century AD, Khujand still remained in the 15th century one of the major cities in the Fergana valley. Among the monuments of Khujand we should mention the two-chamber Tubakhan mausoleum built from baked brick in the early 14th century and decorated with fretted terracotta. The Khazrati Bobo mausoleum is also referred to the 14th century, where later a large cultic complex formed comprising besides the mausoleum various constructions of an old and a new mosques, and other buildings.

The large cultic ensemble of Sheikh Muslikhiddin begins to form in the 13th-14th century; according to Sharefeddin Ali Yezdi, the emir’s biographer, Tamerlane visited it in 1391-92. Here a two-chamber mausoleum of baked brick with a majestic portal decorated with glazed tiles was built instead of an initial 12th or 13th century vault with terracotta decoration and fretted wood panel. Subsequently the mausoleum had been rebuilt several times until in the 17th century it received the appearance which it has borne to our days. In the following centuries an ensemble is formed around the mausoleum comprising the constructions of the old and the new mosques, a minaret and a small cemetery.

In 1982, special scientific and restoration workshops of the Ministry of Culture of Tajikistan began restoration works in the mausoleum, when in the course of studying of the latest layers they made a research that helped reconstruct the initial appearance of the monument. At present the monument is completely restored and given its initial appearance, while the territory around the mausoleum is improved; so the large ensemble of public and cultic buildings is revived, in which new buildings, the Sheikh Muslikhiddin madrasah and the Sheikh Muslikhiddin mosque, were included, where prayers are held on Muslim holidays.

Several memorial buildings in Istaravshan erected in the 15th-16th century attract particular attention. The Sari Mazor mausoleum in the southwestern extremity of Istaravshan is one of them, around which an ensemble of medieval monuments is organised bearing the same name. Apart from the mausoleum, the Ajinakhona mausoleum, a community mosque and an ancient cemetery are situated here. The Sari Mazor mausoleum is a two-chamber domed building with two portals made of baked brick in the 16th century. The ziyoratkhona is a square domed room; four arched niches enlarge it and make it cruciform in plan. The arched niches of the portals are attached on

Shakhristan area. Kalai Kahkaha

1. Temple «idols», converted into

a mosque. Axonometric and

classification of posts. 7-9th centuries.

123

Tajikistan

the north and south sides; rectangular passages lead from the portals to a funeral mosque with a mihrab in the western wall where on the floor there are five gravestones. A passage in the middle of the eastern niche leads to a small square domed gurkhona with a big ganch gravestone. The domes of the room with the portals and the gurkhona are supported by arch walls and rounded squinches. Inside, the mausoleum is plastered with ganch. The portals are decorated with three rows of rectangular niches. There is a hatch on the outside of the western wall leading to the roof. Latticed tobadons are adjusted over the rectangular entrance passages.

There is a mihrab 1.84 m high in the centre of a deep arched niche in the western wall of the ziyoratkhona. The considerable depth of the niche caused the appearance of a brick addition on the outside, projecting a little out of the plane of the façade. The mihrab has a hemispherical ending filled on the inside with a belt of shallow arches-niches. In spite of its relatively small size (9.8 m by 9.8 m) the mausoleum looks monumental from the outside. The perfect combination of individual elements make the whole vault look surprisingly harmonious, even though the façades bear no decorative facing or other ornamentation. The very form with its aesthetic proportions contributes to the integral perception of the mausoleum from any direction. All this demonstrates the delicate taste of the creators of the mausoleum, who were doubtlessly familiar with the laws of proportions and harmony of architectural forms. Even the small gurkhona attached to the mausoleum from the eastern side

complements the appearance of the whole building. According to Khmelnitsky, one of those studying the monument, the two parts of the mausoleum were built at different time, which was characteristic of the cultic architecture of Central Asia. In this case the small gurkhona was the first construction built probably in the pre-Mongolian time when centric domed kiosks-chortaks were often constructed over graves. In medieval time, namely, in the 16th century, a funeral mosque with two portals was attached to the ancient vault, where later burials were made. Thus, the ziyoratkhona also became a gurkhona, where only the mihrab in the western wall indicates its initial purpose.

The Bobo-Tago mausoleum called sometimes the Bobo-Tago mosque is situated in the north-west part of the town of Istaravshan, on its outskirts. It is a two-chamber domed construction with a portal, erected in the 15th-16th century (in 1500 or in 1518), the iwan added in 1899.

The ziyoratkhona built of square baked brick 25-27 cm by 25-27 cm by 6-6.5 cm in size with the use alabaster mortar and covered with a dome is the larger of the

Ayni district.

Iskodar mihrab, 10-12th centuries.

124


Upper Zarafshan. Console of the Mavlono Muhammad Alis mazar in Sangiston, 10-

11th centuries. (by A.Muhtarov).

Upper Zarafshan. Carved wooden console

from the Obburdon mazar, 9-10th

centuries. (by A.Muhtarov).

Upper Zarafshan. Left: The capital of

carved wooden columns from Fatma, 10-

12th centuries. Right: A carved wooden

column at Kurut, 10-11th centuries. (by V.L.

Voroninoy).

125

Tajikistan

two rooms. Four niches enlarge the inner space of the mosque; two small cells and a stairway to the roof are made in the corner bulks of the walls. The portal with flat niches on the abutments faces southward. On the transverse axis in the western wall there is a mihrab, in the eastern a passage to the gurkhona with a simple gravestone. The dome of the ziyoratkhona is supported by arch walls with the help of reticular squinches, while the dome of the gurkhona rests on shield-like squinches. The portal and the exterior walls are plastered smoothly with ganch and have no ornamentation, while the doors, the entrance one and that leading to the vault, are wonderfully decorated with fretwork. Segmental arches covering all the doorways are a characteristic feature of the monument, and those forms, though not unknown, are quite rare in the Central Asian and Iranian architecture.

Interesting architectural monuments have been preserved in the neighbourhood of Istaravshan, the most remarkable of which is the Abdukodir Jeloni mausoleum located in the kishlak (village) of Pochingaki Gunbaz, 5 km south of Istaravshan. It is situated in the centre of an ancient cemetery enclosed in a fence. The entrance to the cemetery is made in the form of a small darvozakhona, that is, an entrance, or gate building. A strip of the cemetery 0.4 ha in area bordered on two sides with small kishlak streets is situated on an elevation over a say (valley).

The Abdukodir Jeloni mausoleum (Khoja Shaikh Ablukodiri Jeloni in full) is a small monumental brick building with a dome. It consists of a square room (3.7 m by 3.7 m) with four deep niches in the walls forming a cross in plan.

The mausoleum has four entrances that are decorated almost alike. Only the pishtaq of the south, main, façade differs slightly from the others: it occupies the whole breadth of the façade, is deeper, and decorated with three tiers of flat arched niches. All the four portals are as high

Shahrituz area. Khoja Durbad, 10-12th

centuries. Photo before restoration.

Upper Zarafshan. Mausoleum-mosque

of Muhammad Bosharo in the village

of Mozori Sharif, 12 and 14th centuries.

Facade, plan, cross-cross-section

(according to S.G. Hmelnitskiy).

126


as the roof, which makes the mausoleum resemble in appearance the 10th-11th centuries centric mausoleums.

The dome of this brick construction rests on arch walls, the corners of which are filled with three rows of shield-like squinches. In contrast to the austere exterior walls with bare brickwork, the interior of the mausoleum is attractive with its snow-white ganch décor being in a good combination with a reddish-brown panel, with the windows covered by excellent lattices-panjaras, the architectural ribs set against the arches and other elements. No doubt, excellent local masters created all this magnificence. The framed building of the ziyoratkhona was attached to the mausoleum much later.

In the 14th-15th centuries walls made traditionally of mud brick, pakhsa, and wattle and daub, as well as flat clay beamed ceilings dominated in the mass building, all these types having been successfully used in practice during a century. Improved constructions of baked brick, square in form, 24-28 cm by 24-28 cm by 4-6 cm in size, were being developed in monumental architecture. Stone was rarely used. The architects often used clay and even more often ganch as binding mortar. Wood was often used in anti-seismic bonds in the brickworks of walls and in a system of columns and beamed ceilings, with fragments of ceilings, doors, lattices etc covered with ornamental fretwork.

There are many monuments in the territory of Tajikistan, the vaults and domes of which demonstrate both the masters’ perfect knowledge in architectural composition and their delicate engineer’s intuition. Thus, the stepped squinch of the Muhammad Bosharo mausoleum (14th century) in the settlement of Mazori Sharif, Penjikent region, is a rare example for Central Asia. It is interesting that this simple type of subdomal construction in the form of rows of brickwork going in steps one after another was long ago used in mud brick constructions of the Ancient East. The Muhammad Bosharo presents another rare example of roofing – the flat truncated vault constructed in segments on the basis of vaults. The abutments of such vaults are built in vertical segments or in wedges within an angle of 30º. The central part is constructed in vertical segments. Actually, here we deal

Towns in northern Tajikistan. A. - Uratube; B. - Khujand.

127

Tajikistan

with a dome on rectangular base without squinches. The brickwork of the truncated dome in the Muhammad Bosharo mausoleum made in vertical segments is laid in the form of the so called ‘herringbone’, which resembles a parquet work pattern. It is well-bound and strong.

Time has not kept to our days any residential houses of the 14th-15th centuries, which comprised the majority of buildings in towns and villages, nor it has preserved palaces of rulers and rich townspeople. Only miniatures of the Timurid time allow us to have some notion about them. The houses usually consist of two storeys, with windows filled with lattices-panjaras and small balconies. The residents used the flat roof as a terrace for rest. A pool was built in the court, and columns with thin trunks supported the roofs of the iwans.

Picturing the interiors of residential houses the miniature painter usually depicts the sitting-room (mehmonkhona), and sometimes the bedroom. These are rich chambers, their windows and doors are open into a blossoming garden; an elevated sufa where a takhta (richly decorated seat) stands or carpets and cushions lie is often depicted in the farthest end of the mehmonkhona or a garden.

The brightest works of architectural genius of the 14th-15th centuries were concentrated in main cities of the empire; that is why it is Samarkand, Shakhrisabz and Herat that could give a clear visual impression of power and wealth of the feudal country. Provincial monumental building was not that massive; however, the architects brought original local features into their works. The Abdullatif mosque known also under the name of ‘Kok-Gumbaz’, which is situated in a quarter bearing the same name, in the western part of Istaravshan, is one of the most interesting buildings of the town. The main building is made of square baked brick; inside, it is a square room with four deep niches in the sides. Ornamented tiles remain on the walls and partly on the dome. The high cylindrical drum once crowned with a blue dome is an attraction of the mosque. The skillfully made fretted doors are

Stages of formation of the city of Khujand

(by T.Belyaeva).

Khujand. Tubahan mausoleum, 12 – early

13th centuries. Graphic reconstruction of

the facade by Mukimova Sayora.

128


also very attractive. Later the mosque was turned into a madrasah, the appearance of which now has the newly restored Kok-Gumbaz, one of the most interesting monuments of Istaravshan today.

The Sayd Amir Hamadani mausoleum was built in the 15th century in Kulyab; it consists of two rooms–a large ziyoratkhona and a small gurkhona. The former had three portals and a double dome; the outer dome has preserved a unique construction–a moulded ganch frame filled with bricks. The façades of the mausoleum were decorated with fretted bricks forming a complex relief pattern. Later, a number of domed and vaulted buildings were attached to the mausoleum, concealing its initial shape and forming a complex asymmetric ensemble. In 2006, the mausoleum was completely restored by the 2700th anniversary of Kulyab, which made it a place visited by a great number of pilgrims from around the country and from abroad.

The subterranean burial construction Khazrati Yusuf in Vakhdat region built in the 15th century is characteristic of the earliest vaults in the territory of Tajikistan, having no analogies among the monuments of the memorial architecture of Central Asia. The construction is unique in a number of features, such as the unusually large size of the vault, the convenient brick stairs under the high stepped vault, the absence of the surface room, and the burial under the floor, which contrasts with the majority of the vaults of Shakh-i Zinda in Samarkand, where people are buried on the surface of the floor.

Several mausoleums and mosques of Kabadian also belong to the period between the 12th and 16th centuries. One of the mausoleums, the Akmazar, is situated on the outskirts of the kishlak Chapari. It consists of a central square domed room and a portal niche crowned with an arch. On the outside this mud brick mausoleum has a stepped dome with a sharp top and a short portal as wide as the main façade. The original tectonics of the interior of the building deserves attention. It

Qabodiyon area. Ak-Mazar mausoleum,

14-15th centuries. Plans and levels (by

S.Hmelnitskiy and A.Muhtarov).

Qabodiyon area. Mosque in the village

Lilac-Yui, plans and levels, 14-15th centuries.

(by S.Hmelnitskiy and A.Muhtarov).

129

Tajikistan

is divided into three horizontal belts: a high tetragon, a tier of smoothly plastered pseudo-spherical squinches, and a dome with a bay of 5 m. An ellipsoid construction of bent wood ribs joined at the top, with the fill of mud brick, rests on the lower part of the double dome built of baked brick. According to the experts studying this monument, the brick dome of the Akmazar initially had a round hole in the top, which was later covered by a small framed dome.

In the kishlak of Laylak-Uya a mazar and a mosque remain, which, according to a legend, a local woman built at her own expense. This mausoleum-mosque Sayd Khoja consists of two rooms: a square gurkhona 460 cm by 470 cm in size and a rectangular funeral mosque. A rare method of constructing walls distinguishes the mausoleum: the walls are built of three layers of pakhsa up to the height of 2 m, over which run 5 rows of mud bricks. The dome has a strange construction. A system of brick arches over the corners rise to join on the axes of the walls and to make a complete vault called ‘balkhi’. Instead of joining at the axes of the walls and to complete the vault, the space between the corner arches widening towards the top is filled with common brickwork consisting of annular brick rows of irregular form, approaching the shape of a square with rounded corners. The similarity to a square increases towards the zenith of the dome where there is a small square hole. According to experts studying the construction, it is a rare attempt in Central Asia to unite two different types of covering constructions–the ‘balkhi’ vault and the dome with brickwork of annular rows of bricks. The mazar is dated back to the 11th-12th century, the mosque to the 14th-15th century.

Another monument situated near the previous one is also dated back to the 14th-15th century. It is an active mosque built of mud brick. The construction is rectangular in plan and consists of a single room divided into three parts by two pairs of rectangular projections. Arches resting on these projections mark the square central part of the mosque, covered with a dome on pseudo

Medieval monuments of Kabadian: A - Adobe mosque near the village. Nosir Khusraw,

14-15th centuries. B - Adobe Kuhna Masjid mosque near the village Nosir Khusraw, 14-

15th centuries. Plan B - Adobe clay mausoleum-mosque Said Hodge with. Lilac-Yui, 11-

12th centuries. Plan and cross-section (by S.Khmelnitskiy and A.Muhtarov).

130


spherical squinches and enlarged by two arched niches on the cross-axis. The symmetrical lateral parts connected with the central arch by a 4 metres span are rectangular in plan and covered with ‘balkhi’ vaults. The symmetric division of the main façade follows the symmetry of the inner space: a faceted mihrab, flatter than that inside; two wide and flat rectangular niches on both sides of the mihrab; further on the sides of the mihrab are two entrance arches on the axes of the lateral parts of the room. Generally, though the whole architecture of the building is quite modest, it is remarkably integral and expressive, which is caused by the accurate proportions.

A mosque in the settlement of Laylak-Uya in Kabadian dated back to the 14th-15th century is an example of a construction with double walls. The walls of this small building are as if two ‘cases’, one within the other: the outer case is made of mud brick, the inner of pakhsa. On the inside the building was covered with a dome on falsely spherical squinches in the central part, and at the shorter sides with arches contracting the space under the dome.

Thus, the consideration of some small buildings in the territory of Tajikistan, unpretentious both in appearance and in building constructions used, allows us to understand the specificities of the local architectural school in the 14th-15th centuries. Besides, these buildings are often a missing link in the development of the architecture of Central Asia, complementing the general picture of this development.

Architecture and town building of this period is based on succession of artistic and architectural traditions complemented by innovatory ideas and trends from foreign countries of the East. This mutual enrichment of the architecture by way of interpenetration and merging of creative ideas resulted in that new which raised the architecture of the 14th-15th centuries above the achievements of the preceding period.

Certainly, this integral stylistic trend showed itself most brightly in a few large urban centres we have mentioned above: Herat, Samarkand, Shakhrisabz, Turkestan and Merv. In provincial centres, such as Khujand, Andijan, Ura-Tyube, Balkh, Isfara, Kulyab and other towns we can see but weak reflections of the grand buildings of the time. However here, in the provinces, architecture has original features that give the buildings special colour. One of such constructions we have studied, the Sheikh Muslikhiddin mausoleum in Khujand, can be justly regarded as one of the brightest and most original buildings of Maverannahr. And there are thousands colourful buildings of this kind constructed in the 14th-15th centuries in the territory of Central Asia. It is they which glorify the whole Central Asian architecture with its great simplicity, giving at the same time inimitable originality and colour to the regional architecture.

131

TURKMENISTAN

In the 9th century the Arab caliphs’ rule over Turkmenistan agricultural area gave way to local feudal authorities. Since 821 the Takhirids were ruling Khorasan, later the Saffarids seized power and then came the Samanids, a Bukharan dynasty. The latter succeeded in uniting Khorasan, Khorezm and a number of other regions into the integrated centralized state that had been existed all the 10th century. It was rather a successful period for building activities in the entire region.

In the early 9th century Merv became the place of residence of Mamun, a caliph, and the second capital of the Arab caliphate it was a flourishing period in its history. There are no architectural monuments of that period, but it is known that Banu Mahan mosque was reconstructed in Gyaur-kala. The decay started after Mamun had left for Bagdad and the Takhirids had moved Khorasan governor residence to Nishapur. But Merv kept progressing westwards between Razik and Khurmuzfarra canals. A new part of the city (Sultan-kala) might have an external bypass.

In the 10th century, Merv bearing the epithet of ‘Shakhdjakhan’ (i.e. The Soul of Kings), rapidly started developing in the Seljuk period; and under Sanjar sultan (1118 - 1157) it was a capital of their huge state, the largest city in Central Asia and one of the largest cities all over the Islamic East (with the suburbs included its area reached 1800 hectares and its population size was up to 150,000 people). Considering that the majority of Central Asian towns reached 2000 – 5000 people on the average at the time, one may imagine the sheer size of Merv in the Seljuk period. It grew out of the former western rabad of Gyaur-kala on Madjan canal, where by the middle of the 8th century Abu Muslim had moved a governor’s residence, a bazaar and built a cathedral mosque.

At the time of the sultan Melik-shakh (1072-1092) a new mud-brick wall was constructed (or the old one was thoroughly rebuilt) around the rabad, the central square part of the Sultan-kala. A deep, 22m wide moat ran along the wall at a distance of 3m from it, while on the eastern side the wall was flanked by the Razik canal. About two hundred semicircular towers, 4m in diameter, with two-tier arched cells for shooters, were placed along the walls at a distance of 20-25m from one another. The walls were 10-12m high and 6m wide, with casemates and secret stairways inside. The slender walls and towers of the Sultan-kala were reinforced on the outside by thick mud-brick cases. The town gates, strong baked-brick constructions, were placed on the crossing axes, protruding some 15-20m from the line of the walls. The Firuza gates on the western side were discovered by archaeologists. It is a unique fortification structure with a labyrinth; its portico was faced on the outside by a decoration of 18 types of figured baked bricks [Khojaniyazov, Lunina 2001. P.59-74].

In the northeastern corner of the Sultan-kala there is a walled Shakhriyar-ark citadel of the Seljuk Merv. In its northern part there are adobe walls and arches that have remained from the barracks and the so called governor’s house is in the centre. Looking at its shapeless ruins now, one nevertheless may form an opinion about its design and constructional features. It was a two-storeyed building with a square four-ayvan (Ayvan is a terrace with a flat covering on columns or poles) inner yard; the building is built of the adobe brick, only its façade is faced with fashioned baked bricks. Almost all room ceilings are arched and square accommodations are domed. Gentle arches of yard ayvans are the subjects of concern. Next to it there are ruins of another adobe

132


construction consisting of an elongate and high arched hall with arched walls. Façades decorated with traditional crimped kyoshks, but the crimps are rather unusual: each semi-cylinder is parted by a flat face. Probably it was a divan, the place where the Council of State assembled.

Among the other identified and documented monuments of the 11th-12th centuries there is a remarkable country residential house called Porsi-kyoshk four kilometres westwards from Sultan-kala. Its brutal shape, the composition of single-type façades with slit-like loophole-windows and a planning structure with a central domed hall indicate about a steady tradition of Merv’s pre-Arabic castle architecture. A relatively good condition of the building let G.A. Pugachenkova represent rather an authentic graphic reconstruction.

Two similar country houses, though smaller in size, were found 500m away from the eastern wall of the Gyaur-kala and in a settlement near Chirkou-tepe north of Merv. Here we can see the ruins of a house named Yakkiper. Its façades are absolutely smooth, with only a belt of three rows of baked bricks dividing it into layers. The whole composition is simple and strictly adheres to the principle of centric planning. The methods of construction and decoration in the large rich houses are replicated in ordinary town buildings. A small two-room house in the Sultan-kala, with stepped arches typical of the Merv mud-brick architecture, and a two-storey residential house in the ceramists’ quarter of the Sultan-kala rabad, with a hall (mihmankhana) lit by two tiers of windows and covered with a dome, may serve as examples [Pugachenkova, 1958. P. 203-221].

At the Seljuk period Merv continued to grow in the northern and southern directions, along the canal Madzhan dividing the town into two parts. The residential areas and craftsmen’s quarters, bazaars and cemeteries that had sprung up there at the time of the sultan Sanjar were enclosed in pakhsa (rammed earth) defensive walls, known as the northern and southern enclosures. They are of a considerably lower quality than the walls of the Sultan-kala, are irregular in form and are flanked here and there by adobe towers. At that period the old shakhristan (Gyaur-kala) also continued to function: new residential blocks and craftsmen’s quarters appeared there, and a new cathedral mosque decorated with fretted stucco and figured bricks and having subterranean rooms was built in the centre, on the site of the first Friday mosque. The Shaim-kala, the fortified camp

Khurmuzfarra. Ruins of 9-10th centuries mosque.

133

Turkmenistan

of the Seljuk troops, was situated aside from the main town area, 1.5 km southeast of the Gyaur-kala. There were almost no stationary buildings on its square site 120 ha in area.

Whereas the layout of Merv can only be identified with the help of the analysis of almost bare landscape, the ceramists’ quarter excavated between the western wall of the Sultan-kala and the canal Khurmuzfarra allows us to talk about its plan with confidence. A compactly built area with numerous workshops with kilns was discovered there. In 1153 Merv was captured by the nomadic Guzes and violently pillaged. The anarchy that came following feudal wars for the possession of Khorasan, continued for several decades and all but stopped the building activity. And only when it was included in the state of the Khorezmshahs, the town recovered from the damage a little, but then was completely destroyed by the Mongols in 1221.

From the 10th century the towns of North Khorasan were rapidly urbanising. A distinctive feature of a ‘city’ is that it is supposed to have a cathedral mosque in it. According to this criterion there were few cities in the region, but the number of rural settlements increased. Their two most important construction elements are ribat (the symbol of the Arabs’ political power) and k’yoshk (the symbol of the local feudal nobility’s economical power). Both objects dominated the opposite sides of settlements extended along the densely built-up street up to some 2 km in length and along the main aryk (irrigation ditch in Central Asia). By the 10th century the quantity of such ‘long’ settlements ran to 6000. In this period Khorezm started reviving, this process revived the left-bank Kunyauaz, Izmikshir (Zamakhshar), Yarbekir, Shahsenem, right-bank Kavat-kala, Gul’dusun, etc., these settlements’ economic activity had almost stopped in the 4th century. Gurganj had rapidly been extending as it occupied an advantageous position on a crossing of trade routes running from south to northwest, to the Volga and eastwards to Mongolia and China. In the place of the dying Kyat Gurganj had become a capital of the entire Khorezm by 995 and was considered to be the

Pors-keshk.

134


second city in Central Asia after Bukhara- the brilliant capital of the Samanids.

The site of Gurganj has an approximate area of 640 hectares; the wall remains having the appearance of a bulwark some 10 kilometres in length are partly destroyed. The citadel known as Ak-kala is in the south-east corner of the former city is one kilometre in circumference. The citadel was fortified with massive two-metres-high adobe walls with towers; the Amu Darya flowed by its south wall. Dash-kala, a pre-Mongolian part of the city, occupied its south side. The city was growing northwards and crossed the line of the bulwark in the Golden Horde period.

Three of four city gates were located. According to medieval sources there were a great number of quarters and two government palaces of the 10th century, gardens of pleasure and a large canal crossing Gurganj as well. No traces of those objects have remained.

Only pinion walls have remained from numerous provincial town-fortresses of Khorezm they were the centres of the agricultural rustak areas. They represent a rare fortification system. In addition to main walls and towers, there is a second group of forward-type walls with autonomous line of bastions. A particular attention was given to the entrance: the concept of ‘labyrinth’ was developed and was strikingly displayed in Izmikshir (Zamakhshar) fortress next to the modern city of Dashoguz. Its adobe walls some 1.5 kilometres in length surround an improperly-shaped ancient site and have a row of binary towers; they also have two massive gate constructions from the north and from the south. In the 10th century after Kushan Kingdom had collapsed Rulers of Khorezm reconstructed abandoned fortresses of Yarbekir (a rectangle 250 x 220 metres) and Shahsenem (Suburn) is nearly of the same size, right on the border of a medieval oasis (both of the fortresses are 90 kilometres westwards and south-westwards of Dashoguz).

The archaeological site Shahsenem still rises up to 15m above the surrounding area, and is mounted atop a high artificial platform. There are remains of two rows of mud-brick walls with arrow-shaped loopholes and semicircular towers, a labyrinth at the gates and internal constructions. At the time when the Khorezmshahs’ state reached its highest peak, there was an expansive park complex 200m southwest of the fortress, with pavillions at the corners, propylaea and a single building on the central axis, which was probably the ruler’s country palace.

In the southwestern part of Turkmenistan, on the lands of ancient Girkania (Jurjan or Gorgan in the medieval times) there is a site of medieval Dehistan, also called Mashad-Misrian. The square shaped site is banked and encircled with a moat; the bank remains indicate two lines of walls. Inside and outside of the fortifications quarters, manufacturing buildings, dwellings, caravansaries and cult buildings of the 10th-early 13th centuries were partially excavated. The city that had been here had its golden age under Shahs of Khorezm, then was destroyed by the Mongolian invasion and finally collapsed due to an irrigation decline in the late 15th century. There are only several impressive ruins that have remained of its once splendid architecture.

Shahsenem.

135

Turkmenistan

The town dominated the life of the Central Asian society in the two last centuries of the pre-Mongol period. The development of crafts, trade and agriculture changed the appearance of towns, which grew in area and population and became more beautiful. However, we can call these settlements towns only for convenience, as the concept of a town altered considerably in the 11th-12th centuries: the wide spread of cathedral mosques could not serve to identify towns, while other criteria had not yet become generally accepted. There are not only difficulties connected with the localisation of towns known from written sources; sometimes it is not even clear where a town proper and where a conglomeration of expanded villages.

In the 10th century the urban people of the region comprised 20 to 25 % of the total population. In the most urbanised Merv oasis this figure is twice as big. The building area in the medium satellite towns of Merv (Khurmuzfarra, Sinj, Kushmeykhan, Harak and, probably, Gireng) was 100-150 ha (10-15 thousand people). The population of each of the other five towns in the Murgab delta is 3-5 thousand people. The towns of the valley at the foot of the Kopet-Dag (contemporary Akhal province), which were developing intensively in the Seljuk period, had the same parameters. These were, first of all, Abiverd, Shehr-Islam and Ferava, the re-established centres of oases, and Dehistan and Ahur situated further to the west. Tens of agricultural settlements were concentrated around the towns and were in close relation with them.

So far there is no evidence testifying to the rapid development of the agricultural centre Anau in this period; Nisa, however, revived and flourished, which was confirmed by al-Istahri in the 10th century, and later by al-Makdisi (Mukaddasi). The former described it as ‘a very pleasant town possessing large and fertile settlements in the moutains’. Nisa’s shakhristan (28 ha) grew on the territory of the Parthian town (New Nisa), which had earlier been almost completely deserted. Arab travellers told about 10 streets ending in 10 gates. The walled rabat also had 10 walls. Stone and brick foundations and fragments of the walls of residential and public buildings, among which there is a 12th-century bathhouse with coloured ornamental wall painting, are the only objects that have remained of a densely built town. As the bathhouse in Muslim countries was the most attended place after the mosque, its painting should not have had any images of living beings. A three-room namazgah mosque, strictly oriented towards the Kaaba, was situated outside the town on the slope of a mountain. Its walls were constructed of natural rocks, and the domed coverings

– of baked brick.According to al-Makdisi, Abiverd (the archaeological site Peshtak between the stations Artyk

and Kaahka) was richer and more fertile than Nisa. Its shakhristan was surrounded by a wall with rounded towers and a moat. A straight street connected the only gates of the town with the gates of the citadel. A monumental mosque with a portal and a dome was located almost in the centre; only one baked-brick abutment of the peshtak (portal) (hence the contemporary name of the site) of the mosque with a spiral staircase in the upper part remained in the 20th century. Its highly rich and diverse décor with complex ornamentation made of figured bricks with blue glazed tiles

Shahsenem.

136


and fretted stucco indicates the high artistic level of this unique 12th-century monument of the North Khorasan architecture. The expansive rabad, which included most of the craft workshops and main bazaars, was growing southward and westward.

Kufen (the site Chugundor 25 km north of the station Artyk) was another large town in the neighbourhood of Abiverd, occupying an area of 145 ha. An Arab mud-brick ribat, rectangular in plan, was the core of the town and became a citadel after it was reconstructed with the use of baked brick and was surrounded by a wall and a moat. There was no shakhristan here, and the rabad, the oval contour of which was enclosed in a wall with five gates, was the town proper, as it was in Merv. The residential blocks were divided by narrow streets (2.6m wide) and consisted of many-roomed houses, each room of which was meant for a special purpose. The windows had panjara (lattices) inserted in them.

Shehr-Islam (medieval Tak-Yazyr, 20 km north of contemporary Bakharden) also grew out of a small 8th-9th-century ribat, and in the 12th century occupied a territory of about 100 ha. Two citadels connected with each other with the main street were situated inside a rectangular shakhristan (280 x 740 m) enclosed in a wall. One of the citadels, kuhendiz, dominates spectacularly the whole site. A square hill in the centre of the southern wall, called ‘outpost’ by archaeologists, was a strong fortification building at the gates in the second half of the 12th century, when a new rabad had appeared and the shakhristan had been expanded southward and occupied a territory of 30 ha. An aqueduct in the form of an arched gallery stretched 20 km from the foothills of the Kopet-Dag to the town of Shehr-Islam. After the Mongol invasion the town continued to exist up to the 16th century.

The houses in Shehr-Islam were quite spacious, each having several rooms with cellars. They are characterised by a closed structure, used to isolate the houses from dirty streets. The normal

Abiverd. Detail of peshtak.

137

Turkmenistan

sanitary and hygienic conditions of the houses were maintained with the use of tashnau, water-absorbing rubbish wells and cesspools. Due to this system and the dry climate Central Asian towns looked better than European ones of the same period.

The public safety in the strong Seljuk state allowed town people to move to the suburbs, where they had more area and could afford a patch of farmland. That was how this type of house, which was found in Shehr-Islam, was characteristic of the late medieval time and survived to the 20th century, was forming. We can trace some disurbanisation of constructions there, when the urban house of a rabad neared the rural one. Durun (5-6 km east of Baharden) can be considered the second largest town in the Yazyr oasis. An ark (120 x 50 m) adjoined the shakhristan (9.6 ha) on the northeast. Although the walls of the shakhristan have not been preserved, it dominates considerably the surrounding area. Ferava (25 km from cobtemporary Gyzylarbat) is another former ribat, which had been placed against the nomadic Guzes on the border between Khorasan and Dehistan and had turned in the Seljuk time into a town 35 ha in area and with some large constructions, of which only two 11th-12th-century mausoleums still remain in a suburban cemetery, at the foot of the mountains.

MOSQUES AND MINARETS. The information about first mosques is available only from literary sources. Right after Merv was seized, the Benu-Makhan cathedral mosque was erected in the centre of the Gyaur-kala site. The mosque later became a part of the religious-memorial complex formed in the 10th-12th centuries. Here some brick work and the remains of a minaret were found. When the very first cathedral mosque became cramped, another one was erected by the city gate on the Razik canal. Then in the middle of the 8th century a mosque was built further west on the Madjan canal. By then the policy of the Arabs made Gyaur-kala almost desolate, the Arabs evicted inhabitants from reinforced shahristans. That is the way rabads (the commercial and handicraft suburbs at the walls of shakhristan) started developing where the urban life basically concentrated. The western suburbs of Gyaur-kala became a centre of future brilliant Merv. Under Abu-Muslim, an Arab governor, the house of government was built – a domical round building of the baked brick with 4 portals.

Another early mosque was swallowed by the sands near the archaeological site of Kishman (Kushmeykhan); however, there is still the base of a minaret about 6m across. The mosque in the town of Bashan in the Merv oasis had a similar minaret. Both of them were constructed of mud brick in the 10th century and in the following century were faced with baked brick. Spiral staircases rose between the annular outer wall and the inner post. The minarets might have had wooden tops. The mosque in Bashan has an absolutely new composition: the space adjoining the mihrab was stressed by an elevated arched covering once supported by strong pylons. Openings between them led to galleries running along the perimeter of the court. A mosque in Dandanakan (a medieval town between Serakhs and Merv) had a similar structure. The court was surrounded by a gallery that was bordered on all sides by a mud-brick wall and brick pillars 80 cm in diameter. The mosque was decorated with fretted stucco, which is found in the ruins of a later layer formed during the reconstruction of the building in the 11th century [Pribitkova, 1964. P. 185-194].

The above described mosques belong to the Arab type and are referred to as ‘covered mosques’ in written sources. However, the layouts of pre-Islamic Central Asian sanctuaries also had a ritual corridor going around the court, which means that we can talk about the synthesis of traditions, and, moreover, that the local traditions proved to be stronger than the Islamic architectural ideas. The big court surrounded by light columns was lost in the course of the comparatively rapid

138


Mihrab of the mosque in Dandanakan. Reconstruction (By A. Pribytkova).

139

Turkmenistan

evolution, and the usual composition with a hall surrounded by blind walls and covered with a dome in the centre began to dominate the architecture.

The oldest extant mosque in Turkmenistan is Mashad-ata (often called Shir-Kabir); the mosque is in the north-west of Turkmenistan. It is dated back to the 11th-10th centuries AC and represents the cubic content topped with a dome. The adobe brick measuring 25x25x6 cm, was a primary building material. In the 12th century, then in the 17th century the decayed building had been twice reconstructed. The whole of the mosque’s cubic body was covered with a baked brick case; a dome was made of the baked brick too. Repeated repairs and outbuildings have greatly changed the primary appearance of the mosque, but several fragments of the 10th century remain in the interior: a unique carved mihrab. It is made of fretted ganch and is considered a true masterpiece of this style common for the early Islamic architecture. This is doubtlessly the most spectacular part of the mosque remaining from the time of the construction of the mosque: three lancet niches inscribed in one another were once completely covered with fretting in the form of a combination of stylised plant and geometric ornaments and Arab inscriptions in kufi letters. Many art historians described the characteristic features of this mihrab in detail and even made attempts to put its forms and décor under comparative analysis. Architecture historians also dedicated quite a number of pages in their works to the mosque. In their unanimous opinion, the monument is dated back to the 9th century, which testifies to the local roots of its architecture, as the remaining Iranian mosques in the form of a single domed hall (‘kiosks’) cannot be dated before the 11th century. The dating of the Mashad-ata mosque is mainly based on the character of the decoration of its mihrab: the remaining 9th-10th-century monuments in Samarra, Cairo (Fustat and Ibn Tulun mosque) and Nain (Friday mosque) have a fretted stucco similar to that in the mihrab. Moreover, composed of three ‘perspective’ niches, the mihrab of the Friday mosque in Nain demonstrates the same compositional idea. And finally, such ornamentations from the Mashad-ata mihrab as the meandering pattern of the corner columns or the ‘spread wings’ motif obviously follow the Sassanian traditions.

The Mashad-ata has almost the same size as the Samanids mausoleum, another famous Central Asian construction of that period situated in Bukhara. And although the styles of these two monuments are absolutely different, they have a common plan: a centric domed building repeating the familiar images of pre-Islamic cultic constructions. The square hall of the Mashad-ata mosque (8.1 x 8.1 m) with walls about 1.5m thick is covered with a dome; the transitional zone between the walls and the dome is filled with trumpet arches of the perspective stepped type, serving as frames for the inner sections of the closed vault and filling the arched structures in the corners. This unusual method of decoration of the octagon’s diagonal facets is quite innovative. Mashad-ata.

140


Mashad-ata.

141

Turkmenistan

The tetragon is also atypical; each wall here has three high lancet niches 40 cm deep instead of one, some of which were through apertures in the beginning. The central niche in the southern wall is occupied by the above described mihrab, while today’s entrance is organised in the side western niche of the northern wall. The height of the building from the floor to the top of the dome is 11 m. In the 12th century a square (4.5 x 4.5 m) domed hall of baked brick was attached to the northeastern corner of the mosque – a minified and simplified copy of the architecture of the central hall: three niches in each wall and trumpet arches of the same type.

The court of the mosque and the remains of constructions along the perimeter were found in the course of 2009 excavations. Two upper construction periods typical for the evolution of the complex in the 11th-12th centuries were discovered. However, only the latest, upper horizon, when a group of buildings around sakhna (inner court), square in plan (11.7 x 11.7 m), was attached to the reconstructed northern façade of the mosque, has been completely studied. A reservoir (hauz) surrounded by small living rooms (hujra) and various utility rooms was excavated almost in the centre of the court. The base of a minaret 5m in diameter was discovered in the western part of the court; before it this minaret was not known. It was built of mud brick 26 x 26 x 5 cm in size laid in concentric circles and was faced on the outside with one row of baked brick. If the minaret was finished, it might have been, judging by the diameter of its base, from 20 to 30m high. The accomplished study made it clear that in the 10th-12th centuries the Mashad-ata complex was a provincial version of a khaneqah, a hospice or a Sufi monastery, adjoining the present-day monastery on the northern side [Muradov, 2011. P.314-337].

Two minarets 20m high still remain in Dehistan (the half of their initial height). The so called northern Abu-Jafar Ahmed minaret and the totally ruined mosque were built by Ali Bini Ziyad, an architect, in 1004 – 1005. The baked brick minaret represents truncated cone about 8 metres in base diameter. Its smooth surface is crossed by carved kufi inscriptions above which there is a wide belt of a geometric ornament. The second minaret is also of a round body shape (7 metres in the base diameter) was erected in the distance of 120 metres southwards almost 200 years later next to the corner of Khorezmshah Muhammed’s mosque (builders and décor makers are Huseyn ibn Muhammed an-Naka and Muhammed al-Huseyn an-Naka). Its smooth brickwork ended with a wide ornamental strip and a kufi inscription carved of bricks. Khorezmshah’s mosque was of a yard type with pillared galleries. Its main building had a shape of a square accommodation (10.35 x 10.35 metres) and a dome; only two pylons of 18-metres-high peshtak have remained. The peshtak decoration is a combination of the brickwork with a luxuriously ornamented interior made of intricately carved bricks and blue glaze insertions. Stylised botanical motifs are dominating in the decoration, and there are neskha inscriptions containing the names of the Khorezmshah and masters.

A developed portal-dome composition, the laconism of décor and the coloured tiling are characteristic features of the Dehistan style. Emotional saturation and expressiveness were achieved due to perfection of proportions and variety of size-planning solutions [Pugachenkova, 1951. P.193-221; Pribytkova, 1957. P.143-149].

On the border of Merv’s irrigation areas there was a city of Khurmuzfarra (the Large Kishman) where a uniquely planned mosque of the 9th-10th centuries existed. It was also built of the adobe brick and was spacious as it served as a large trading station. That is why there are only 8 rooms there; the rest of the area was occupied by three-, two-, and single-row stoa (a long roofed colonnade surrounding the yard from western, southern and eastern sides). Every section of stoa

142


(and a bypass corridor on the north side) was covered with a dome based on arch walls spanned between columns of a wide cross-section (1.3 x 1.3 metres); such 77 domes, the strict succession of columns and arches accentuate elegance and completeness of the architectural appearance.

The classical epitome of the artistic achievements of the period is the Talkhatan-baba mosque built in a small settlement 30 kilometres westwards from Merv in about 1095. This is a three-bayed arched-domed building of very small size (10m x 18m) with eastern façades arched apertures yard-directed. Then a central dome hall comes (7.3m x 7.3m) open full-width, the method characteristic of a namaz-mosque to widen the useful room when the mosque is crowded. The blind western façade is divided by pilasters into four equal parts. Between pilasters shallow arched niches stand on round columns. The construction is completely baked-brick-built. On façades and in the interior there is the virtuosic ornamented brickwork made of double bricks with ‘bows’ and other figured insertions. The homogeneity of the inner and outer décor creates an impression of the exceptional integrity of the building. The patterned mihrab is clearly visible through a wide aperture of a central hall. All of the constructions are exposed (no tiling or plaster), and are elegant, rational and of high quality [Pribytkova, 1955. P.77-110].

In the early 11th century under Khorezmshah Abu-l-Abbas Mamun rule the construction of the highest minaret of Central Asia started. Then for a long time the construction had stopped and had been finished only in 1321-1336 under Kutlug-Timur, a deputy of Golden Horde, this 62 metres-high-tower was named after him. Its orderly slender and conical shape (the diameter of the socle is some 12 metres and the diameter of the under dome drum is some 2 metres) is divided by narrow stripes of vertically placed bricks making an architectural rhythm, and then comes a wide belt with a kufi inscription. The minaret was formerly crowned by a wooden lamp; the beams radiating out of the placing are the only remains of the lamp. The spiral staircase with 145 steps leads to the top of the minaret, one could get to the stairs only from the roof of the mosque missing at present. The Kutlug-Timur minaret has no luxurious décor (unlike most Central Asian minarets of the 12th century), but excels them in terms of the constructive design, in the height and in the proportional symmetry; it represents the next stage in the development of this traditional type [Artemyev, Urmanova, 1999. P.126-136].

The bottom of the second large minaret (probably by a cathedral mosque) was found after the hill between Il-Arslan mausoleum and so called caravanserai had been excavated. The latter represents a peshtak of an unknown monumental building of the 14th (?) century; the peshtak has massive pylons and an almost square portal niche with an ogive. The walls are decorated with small carved fashioned bricks and a gir ikh hewn bricked with insertions of patterned blue-white-turquoise majolica (the décor is well-preserved in a vault plafond). Most of the researchers concur that the peshtak is too luxurious for a caravanserai and most probably belonged to a palace or a major madrasah.

Talkhatan-Baba mosque.

143

Turkmenistan

Within the area of modern Kunya-Urgench there is another one unusual construction which age is disputed. This is a khanaka of Nadjmeddin Kubra consisting of four domed accommodations: a vestibule, two meeting rooms and a gurkhana. A volume composition corresponds to the character of the planning with the main façade peshtak with slightly inclined pylons, an ogive and a stalactitic cornice. The entire peshtak surface was decorated with majolica tiles, although most of them have been gone, but the divani inscriptions have remained. And essentially flower-plant elements that are precisely typical for Khorezmian architectural ceramics. The inscription on the portal mentioning Kutlug-Timur helped to date the khanaka.

MAUSOLEUMS, personal burial vaults of the men who figured prominently in society, spread all over the Islamic world in the 9th-10th centuries. A composition of such burial vaults in Khorasan was borrowed from pre-Islamic cult constructions with a dome structure. The earliest Khorasan mausoleums collapsed long ago, but in the late 19th century some were identified by V.A. Zhukovskiy, a professor of St. Petersburg University. They noticeably differed from later monumental buildings of this type and represented small, square and strictly centric ‘booths’ with 5m-high sides, equally designed smooth walls with arched apertures in the middle. These are Akhmed, Abdullah ibn-Bureyda, Kiz-bibi mausoleums; an unnamed one is on Imam-baba cemetery (all of them are in the neighbourhood of Merv) and another unnamed mausoleum close to Amul’ shakhristan.

The Abdulla ibn-Bureyda mausoleum-chortak near the contemporary village of Vekil-Bazar stands apart from the rest of the mausoleums. Its façades still bear an epigraphic ornament in kufi letters made of cut brick. A broad strip of fretted stucco girdling the interior walls of the arch is filled with an inscription in neshi letters against the background of a plant ornament.

Kunya-Urgench. Peshtak of an unknown monumental building of the 14th century.

144


Stylistically it is kindred to the décor of the mosque in Dandanakan, which is quite explicable: both buildings were built by the architect Abu Bekr. The Chugundor-baba, a 11th-12th-century mausoleum, of large proportions and with a deep vaulted iwan and an octagonal marquee dome, was discovered at the western gates of Kufen in 1927, but was later lost. The iwan had a brick décor, and the interior was plastered with ganch and decorated paintings.

The decisive importance of these simple mausoleums appearing at the turn of the 11th century is that they explain the origin of developed central-domed monuments

of the Seljuk period. The most important stage of their evolution is Alamberdar (or Muntasir – the last of the Samanids) mausoleum in 12 kilometres the north-westwards from a modern city of Atamurat (the former Kerki). This is the largest construction in North Khorasan that has remained. It has the features that represent specific features of ‘golden age’ monumental architecture: of a great size in plan; the ornamental brickwork with fashioned carved bricks; the façade division into rectangles with arched niches; the portal projecting from the main body; the unity of architectonics and décor by accentuating the centricity of the building [Pribytkova, 1955. P.65-76].

The 11th century is marked by the creation of a powerful Turkmen state under the Great Seljuk dynasty that left a bright mark in history of the Middle East. The unique feature of the Seljuk architecture is the previously unheard of perfection of the brickwork, the appearance of complicated construction methods, and the luxurious wall ornamentation with decorative covering. Making of two- or even three-layered domed constructions was a significant breakthrough in the architecture.

In this period in Iran and Central Asia Serakhs’ architects corporation becomes well-known; they are invited from many towns of the Islamic East to take part in prestigious construction projects. Serakhs appeared in the 1st millennium AD and became a remarkable city surrounded

by massive pakhsa (adobe) pinion walls with towers and a moat in the 6th-7th centuries. It was a flourishing period of the city when the unique architectural school appeared here in the 11th-the 12th centuries. New military defences were being built from time to time and next to them a vast circummured shakhristan and outer rabads were growing.

Among the extant creations designed and built by Serakhs architects there are monuments located right in the oasis of Serakhs. One of the most impressive architectural monuments of South Turkmenistan (1024), the Abul-Fazl (its popular name is Serakhs-baba) mausoleum

Chartak of the mausoleum Abdullah ibn

Bureida.

Mausoleum of Abdullah ibn Bureida.

145

Turkmenistan

looks rather enormous though its dimensions are (15.4 x 15.4 metres in plan) . It has a double sphero-conical dome over a cubic construction; in the early 15th century they built the very advanced peshtak decorated with carved stucco with suls script inscriptions on a plant background. At that time the inner plafond was completely modified: the dodecahedron of arches and sails filled with moulded stalactites was made [Pugachenkova, 1951. P.234-240]..

The second most important construction in Serakhs, the Sheikh Lokman mausoleum situated on the Iranian bank of the river Tejen, is similar to this construction, differing from it, however, in the highly developed tall peshtak, which is a room of about the same size as the gurkhana. The ruins of the Sheikh Ahmed al-Ady mausoleum-mosque (popular name Yarty-Gumbez, 1098) with figured brickwork and inscriptions in kufi letters are situated not far from the Abul-Fazl mausoleum. It was a centric domed building with façades divided into three arches and with columns in the corners. The interior sub-dome construction is based on trefoil pendentives plastered with ganch. Unlike the previous two monuments, this building had no portal. The façade was decorated with an epigraphic strip in the kufi style, made of figured bricks.

The Abu Said Abul Hayr Mehnei mausoleum (popular name Meana-baba), constructed in the mid-11th century and representing a certain stage in the architectural development of the Khorasan mausoleums with portals and domes, is also situated near the Serah oasis. A tetragon on the outside slightly broadening towards the bottom lies at the base of the mausoleum’s composition. The entrance has the form of a projecting portal. The portal has obvious traces of two serious reconstructions. In the beginning the facial surface of the portal was laid in the manner characteristic of 11th-century architecture: the English bond with brick ‘bows’ inserted into it. In about the 14th century the surface of the portal was covered all over by ornamented Kashin mosaic. In the quality of glaze, laconism of colours, strictness of drawing, richness of ornamental motifs and the high level of performance, it is no worse, and in many respects even better, than the best examples of the mosaic art of that time.

The tetragon of the mausoleum includes a square hall, 10.5 x 10.3m in size. In the interior the walls have three tiers: at the bottom deep vaulted niches on the axes, a row of arches above them and trefoil pendentives under the dome. All the walls in the hall, as well as the sphere under the dome, are decorated most richly with ornamental painting, with the domination of floral and plant patterns, epigraphy and girihs with figured medallions. The tetragon is topped by a high drum supporting the dome, the latter consisting of two shells connected with one another by a hollow brick post. This ventilation post rises above the outer dome and has two apertures, one in the very top and the other, arch-like, in the space between the shells. The outer shell of the dome has

Mausoleum of Abu Said Abul Khair Mehne.

146


been repaired several times and may even have been re-laid. It is obvious that the structure of the outer dome is not original, as such rough form could appear neither in the 11th nor in the 14th century, particularly with the disproportioned post sticking out by 1.5 m. Apparently, the original outer shell rested on the post, which indicates the top of the former dome. On the other hand, the post might have been taller, which means that the dome also was higher.

In the late 15th-early 16th century a mosque, of which now remain only the foundation and the left pylon of the peshtak, was built opposite the Abu Said mausoleum, on the same axis. The Meana-baba architectural complex is one of the few monuments, where the development and degradation of the artistic and architectural culture connected with the historical and political events in the Middle East between the 11th and the 19th centuries can be traced. Despite the numerous repairs and reconstructions during one millennium, the Abu Said mausoleum has preserved its planning composition and, in part, its architectonics characteristic of the 11th-12th centuries [Mamedov, 2008].

The most significant construction of the Seljuk period is the Sultan Sanjar mausoleum in Merv (the architect is Muhammed bin-Atsiz as-Serakhsi). The mausoleum built in the middle of the 12th century (not later than in 1152) was a part of the architectural ensemble of imperial buildings dominating in the centre of the medieval capital (nowadays the site of Sultan-kala). Here was a palace of the Seljukids and a huge cathedral mosque that was adjoined to one of façades of Sanjar mausoleum. For the lack of facts it is impossible to remodel the appearance of the ensemble and identify the location of the mausoleum. According to ancient authors ‘…a blue dome that may be seen at one day’s march distance stands on it’ (Yakut al-Hamavi, the 13th century), ‘the largest building in the world’ (Rashid ad-din, the 14th century), ‘one of the greatest buildings of all kingdoms in the Universe, so strong that it will never go to ruin’ (Isfizari, the 15th century).

Even in its present condition the Sultan Sanjar mausoleum arouses admiration. It is a huge cube 27metres by 27metres crowned by a dome 17.28m in the diameter (an external dome covered with tiles has not remained). The under dome space is 36 metres high. In the upper part of the cube

Meana Baba mausoleum. Reconstruction of the eastern façade.

147

Turkmenistan

there is a gallery marked by a line of openworked spandrel arches on its façades. Figured sets of the baked brick and carved stucco with stylized plant and epigraphic ornament are used in the décor of the gallery. Mausoleum façades are homogeneous except for two of them are dumb and two have a high aperture on an axis. A graphical analysis detected modular mechanisms basing the system of progressively growing squares i.e. their sides and diagonals; these proportions were used in the planning, façades and section of the monument.

The interior geometrical and epigraphic wall paintings are made in blue and red on a white background. On its dome there is a constructive system of angles forming a geometrical interweaving with a figure of an eight-point star at the zenith. The construction of relieving arches and a double-shelled dome pre-empts the concepts of the builders of the Oljaytu-Khodabende mausoleum in Sultaniye (north-western Iran) by a century and a half; it is also 300 years ahead of Filippo Brunelleschi, a creator of the dome of the famous Cathedral of Florence.

According to researchers, the Sanjar mausoleum is the most mature and monumental implementation of a centric burial vault theme that developed in Khorasan building industry from the 10th-to the 12th centuries. The monument is in the category of the world architecture masterpiece; the image of the monument is an organic synthesis of function and artistic features. It is a concentration of the real architecture qualities: engineering inventiveness, composition designing accuracy, the unity of details in the architectural ensemble, the simplicity and harmony of the décor.

Certainly, the 2002-2004 restoration works changed the image of the ruined Sultan Sanjar mausoleum to which we had accustomed. First of all, all the traces of unprofessional repairs made in the former years were removed: the outer dome was reconstructed, and the lost parts of the fretted stucco along the whole gallery were recreated together with the ornamental painting in the interior of the hall. The changes in the appearance of this monument can be traced by photographs starting from the late 19th century. Its new aspect was created in conformity with every rule and requirement of the scientific restoration. The restoration of the mausoleum was not at all complete, and its present condition can in no way be regarded as the recreation of the appearance of the 12th-century monument. Many of its parts were just conserved because of the lack of documental facts, while others, such as the space above the gallery or the facing of the dome were not considered at all, as any forced decision could lead to irrevocable loss of identity [Mamedov, 2004].

Thanks to the extant Sultan Sanjar mausoleum, the location of the charsu was detected, but the known from medieval records cathedral mosque, the palace of the sultan, ten large libraries, an astronomical observatory, where Omar Khayyam used to work were not even located. The high level development of Merv architectural School is confirmed by the Muhammed ibn-Zeyd mausoleum built in the suburbs next to a ceramist quarter in 1112 – 1113. The cubic dimension of the burial vault is crowned by a vast dome. The adobe brick walls are faced with the baked brick; all the under dome constructions and the dome itself are made of the baked brick. The main façade is made in the shape of three arches with arched niches and border horizontal insertions above them. It is patterned with thoroughly polished small fashioned bricks and girikh. In the interior there are traces of the ornamented paintings (blue, black and red tones on the white background), the kufi inscription, figured placing of arched sails and rarely shaped multiblade mihrab covered with polychromatic paintings. In the later period the accommodations without any décor were added to the mausoleum, in 1937 its walls were covered with a baked brick buttress case.

148


The Hudaynazar-ovliya, another mausoleum of the first quarter of the 12th century situated 25 km north of the Sultan-kala, is close in style to the Muhammed ibn-Zeyd mausoleum. It also belongs to portalless centric mausoleums with figured baked brick lying at the base of its décor.

Gurganj (contemporary Kunya-Urgench) still has in it some monumental mausoleums built right before the Mongol invasion and a hundred years afterwards, at the time of the Golden Horde. The earliest of them, the Il-Arslan mausoleum (the other name Fahr ad-din Razi), is the oldest of the preserved buildings of the Khorezmshahs’ capital, is dated back to the mid-12th century, and, according to most of the specialists, ‘is one of the most prominent buildings of pre-Mongolian Central Asia combining unique technical and artistic features with the ideas and images of the future architecture that has not yet come into existence’. This high estimation explains the unfading interest in this monument demonstrated by almost all generations of researchers in the architecture of Turkmenistan and the whole Central Asia. The mausoleum has a crystal clear form and a simple composition: a cube, a dodecahedral prism of the drum and the outer dome in the form of a dodecahedral marquee. There is no octagonal tier, as the transition to the dome is accomplished through stalactite pendentives with four tiers of cells. The building is oriented to the points of the compass, with the entrance in the eastern side. The square plan (6.60 x 6.34 m) is complicated in the interior with four niches in each wall of the only room 3.5 x 3.6m in size. The dodecahedral drum is cut in the façades, on the axes, with rectangular windows, which in the interior open at the bottom of the inner spheroid dome.

Unlike centric mausoleums, the Il-Arslan has an emphasised eastern façade. It has no express portal, but the plane of the wall is divided into three deep arched niches, included in a common U-shaped frame, which forms a fine plastic composition on the façade. The most precious element in it is the wonderful fretted terracotta embellishing the frame and the tympana of the arches. It was performed excellently with the use of an extraordinary technique: instead of fretting on a damp clay plate or grinding an already baked brick, the most complex image was first drawn on

Mausoleum of Sultan Sanjar.

149

Turkmenistan

a 3-cm layer of clay covering unbaked facing bricks laid compactly on the ground. A relief image was made after the drawing, and then the whole composition was cut along the seams between the bricks and baked, after which it was reassembled on the façade. The dodecahedral dome of the Il-Arslan is the most ancient of the remaining pyramidal coverings in this region.

The Khorezmshah Tekesh mausoleum (other names Sherep baba and Geok Gumbez) has almost the same compositional elements, but is more monumental. It is situated 300m northwest of the Il-Arslan mausoleum. It has a square room (11.5 x 11.5), enlarged by spacious lancet niches with stalactite vaults, which have arched openings inside them. Above the square room there is an arched octagon, over which there is a dioctahedron decorated with small niches in the form of seven-blade concave shells. Then comes the inner spherical (not lancet, as is often supposed) dome. The mausoleum is distinguished with its size and the original upper part. Its exterior size is 18.5 x 18.5 m, the walls are 3.7m wide, the diameter of the dome is 11 m, the height from the floor to the foot of the dome is 12.5 m, and to the to of the inner dome – 18.5 m. The top of the outer conical dome was 30m high.

The ribbed drum is of particular interest, having no analogies in the Central Asian architecture and being very similar to those of the burial constructions of North Iran and Transcaucasia. It is distinguished by the rich plasticity of forms, which increase upwards: first, highly projecting dihedral ribs, and then two rows of stalactites between each pair of ribs, enclosed in frames of figured bricks. The effect is strengthened by concave panels between the ribs, framed by figured terracotta. Various losses and repairs made the mausoleum’s appearance poorer; however, this does not prevent us from estimating highly the original ideas, interesting artistic findings and constructive decisions from unknown masters, all of which testifies to their great skill.

The best known monument of Kunya-Urgench is the Turabek-khanum mausoleum (the 14th century); its elegance and monumentality combined with the unique spacious-planning composition and the magnificent décor. Art historians, Islam Art and Architecture historians unanimously admit the building to be an outstanding specimen of the World cultural heritage. It represents a pronounced portal-dome construction type, though in most cases the focus is only on the portal (the main façade) and not on the general composition; here, according to B.N. Zasipkin ‘the traditional portal blends extremely well with the tower-shaped burial vault’.

Behind the advanced high and deep portal there is a small domed vestibule with a small khudjra on the left and a winding staircase leading to the second storey on Mausoleum of Tekesh. Plan.

Mausoleum of Il-Arslan. Plan.

150


Turabek Khanum mausoleum. Interior view of the dome.

151

Turkmenistan

the right. On the main axis there is a hexahedral hall having an area of some 100 square metres, its walls are intensively decorated with carved kashin mosaic. An overturned spherical cup as if hovers, on the cup there is an elaborated mosaic panel – intensively coloured and crooked spatial girikh consisting of stars and polyhedrons with flower-plant ornamentation. The outer sides of the mausoleum are decorated with four deep and orderly arched niches; between the niches there are four large arched window apertures. On a high drum with twelve elongate apertures there was a blue glazed hipped roof dominating over the whole of the volume. That was a dome analogical to the dome of the Tekesh mausoleum. All the façades, including the drum and the portal were covered with ornamented tiles with sharp brick edges [Mamedov, Muradov, 2000. P.51-58].

There is another unusual building within contemporary Kunya-Urgench: the Najm ad-din al-Kubra mausoleum-khaneqah, situated in the kosh ensemble together with the Sultan Ali mausoleum built in a later period. It consists of four domed rooms: a vestibule (dehliz), two identical rooms 6 x 6m to the left and to the right of it (the left one containing 8 unpretentious burials), and a crypt (gurkhana) situated on the central axis (9.3 x 9.3 m). The last room once had a gravestone, which was placed, according to a legend, on the grave of the famous sheikh Najm ad-din al-Kubr (1145-1221), a theorist and practitioner of the Islamic mysticism, who founded a khaneqah and the Sufi community ‘kubraviya’ in Gurganj. The tomb was faced luxuriously with glazed faience panels. This is one of the best examples of the eastern majolica. A high tetrahedral prism decorated in the same manner stood beside the tomb, marking the place where the cut head of the sheikh, who died, according to a legend, defending Gurganj in a battle with the Mongols, was buried (or fell). The post and the cenotaph were shattered by the dome of the gurkhana, which collapsed in 1950; after that the fragments were cased in a temporary wooden sarcophagus. The lancet peshtak of the main façade is particularly expressive, its facial surface slightly slanting inward towards the top, crowned with a three-tier cornice with iraki stalactites, the cells of which consist of three parts of fretted terracotta. Between the cells are alternating groups of deep blue terracotta and majolica tiles, whose glaze was put in a special manner to produce a hoar-frost effect, that is, to make them look as if covered with hoar. All the surface of the peshtak was once covered with majolica tiles, most of which have been lost; however, Arabic inscriptions in the suls style and, most important, floral and plant elements characteristic of the Khorezmian architectural ceramics still remain (except one inscription).

The Sultan Ali mausoleum, built in the kosh ensemble with the Najm ad-din al-Kubr khaneqah, in the suburbs of Urgench, is a fine example of the level of building after the time of Kutlug-Timur. Its composition with a hexahedral darskhana and rectangular gurkhana imitates the Tyurabek-Khanym palace. The spatial composition consists of two portals on the main axis, with two coherent prisms, dodecahedral and octahedral, crowned with domes, being placed between them. The interiors are decorated with pendentives consisting of perspective cells, which is quite traditional for the 14th century. The building was not completed: it remained unplastered and undecorated, and on the whole was built rather carelessly of small bricks, which is indicative of the beginning of degradation in technique.

A cultic memorial ensemble, of which remain only 3 unnamed mausoleums and a mosque, formed in Vazir (archaeological site Devkesen). The main mausoleum, square in plan, with cut angles and with octagonal niches instead of them, is covered with a dome and has a high portal in the main façade and vaulted niches in the other ones. The dome rests on an octagon of pendentives, with transitional stepped brick corbels. The other two mausoleums are rectangular in plan and

152


built with the use of the same compositional and constructional methods. All three were built on one line parallel to the fortress wall. The mosque, now almost completely ruined, had an inner court surrounded by arched galleries on pillars. The walls and pillars were built of stone, while the domes and arches were made of baked brick. These monuments also bear no décor.

The Shemaha-kala, a pre-Mongol town partly restored in the 14th-15th centuries, is situated 10 km northeast of the site Devkesen. Two nameless mausoleums, one of which has a portal and a dome and resembles those described above in composition, while the other is quite unique, can be dated to the 14th-15th century. Like the Il-Arslan mausoleum, this one is a centric construction with an undeveloped portal, but with a stressed entrance.

Three mausoleums in Geok-gumbez (blue dome), a wilderness 70 km north of Merv, continue the development of the traditional type of one-room mausoleum with a portal and a dome in North Khorasan. They make up an ensemble of buildings placed on one line. The largest of them has a peshtak with a semi-cylindrical pendentive on the main façade, while the other façades are decorated with narrow niches on the walls. The dome rests on pendentives in the form of niches; the corners between them are filled with stepped brickwork and triangle stepped arches in the transition towards the dome. On the outside the dome was faced blue glazed bricks, which later fell. The second mausoleum has preserved only some part of the walls and a portal, analogous to the former, while the third one has only a strongly projecting peshtak.

The Askhabs Mausoleum (the Askhabs were Prophet Muhammad’s companions buried in Merv in the 7th century) is the only 15th-century ensemble that remains in Merv. In the Timurid times their graves were covered with marble slabs with marvelous fretted décor and were concealed by domed kiosks. The second building stage was marked by two adjacent baked-brick vaulted portals connected with each other by a narrow arch. They lead nowhere and cover nothing, being just a background for both graves. The monumental proportions and the polychrome facing with blue tiles are a reminder of the Timurid architectural achievements in Samarkand, Shakhrisabz and Herat. Afterwards the house of a guard, khujras for pilgrims and a sardoba were built near the ensemble.

There is also a series of small 12th-15th-century mausoleums in South Turkmenistan. The Parau-ata mausoleum in the site Ferava consisted in a square base supporting an octagon. A gently sloping spheroconic dome rested on the octagon. The mausoleum was built of baked bricks of different size on a stone base; the entrance was stressed with a projecting vaulted iwan. The Parau-bibi mausoleum, situated near the first one, is partly cut in a rock. Inside it there is a square ziaratkhana,

7m high, with cut corners, in which there are lancet niches. The dome is based on corbel-like pendentives with cells. The existence of a peshtak in this mausoleum makes this monument, together with the Parau-ata, similar to the Dehistan of mausoleums; however, all the other features are characteristic of the traditional Khorasan type.

CA R AVA NSER A IS. In the medieva l times caravans were the main means of international cooperation, and were patronised by governments, as they filled the trade market Mausoleum of Sultan Ali.

153

Turkmenistan

and supported economy. Special inns protected by blind walls and strong towers at the gates were built along all the main routes at a distance of 25-35 km from each other (a distance of one-day trip) to guard caravans and give them rest. Sometimes the inns were included in ribats (fortif ications for troops). Caravanserais within towns did not need defense and were built near bazaars, the main points of towns. Until the 9th century the functions of a caravanserai were often performed by the traditional living keshk, surrounded by a well-protected yard. The At-Tahlamaj in the sands of the Karakum desert, on the old road from Merv to Amul, may serve as an example. A two-storey keshk was built within a square yard (42 x 42 m), 2m away from the fence. Each storey had 9 identical rooms 9m in area, covered with domes based on trumpet arches. It had the appearance of that very corrugated house on a strong platform with slanting facets, resembling the old feudal castles only in form.

Two nameless 11th-12th-century caravanserais in the desert north of Merv, near Suli-depe, represent a unique type of a well-fortified inn. They are nearly identical, differing only in size and some details. Each consists of thick blind slanting pakhsa walls, up to 15m high, and a two-tier tower at the gates. The entrance and the plinths of the towers are faced with baked brick. The interior plan of these buildings was not excavated. A small inn in the medieval Bashan (site Gurtly-depe north of Bayramli) also has no analogies. The plinth and the details of facing are also made of baked brick, figured in part. A deep iwan in the northern part of the building faces the utility yard. The semi-cylindrical pendentive of the iwan is based on pendentives in the form of festoons. The khujras of the centric residential part of the construction have separate exits to the outside: this is a characteristic feature of a town caravanserai.

The type of inn the most characteristic of the Khorasan was formed by the late 11th century. The planning scheme of these rectangular or square, but always symmetrical buildings includes the inner court surrounded by rooms for guests, store-rooms and sheds for animals and forage. The ruins of two large caravanserais of this type lie in the southern and eastern parts of the site Dehistan, outside the fortress. Their walls, vaults and domes were built of mud brick, and only the foundation and some details of the facing were made of baked brick. The southern caravanserai had a fenced yard (52 x 56 m) in front of it, while the caravanserai proper (37 x 36 m) had thick blind walls with false loopholes, one tower in each corner and two towers on each side. The inner court (11.4 x 11.4 m) was faced by arched niches or iwans on wooden columns. Traces of an iwan were also found in the court of the eastern caravanserai. Its entrance is particularly express, having the form of a monumental pylon with an arched vault and being faced with ‘bows’ – decorative fretted brick.

The mud-brick 9th-century caravanserai in the site al-Asker 3 km from Kushmeyhan is organised in another manner: the court is surrounded by an enfilade of domed galleries, in which

Merv. Mausoleums of askhabs.

154


things and cattle were kept, while khujras (separate and adjacent) occupied only the southwestern part of the building. The construction was located within a densely built town block, and its main façade faced a large market place. Sometimes a separate yard was built for things, animals and food, as it was in the Akcha-kala caravanserai (second half of the 11th century) situated on the sand-covered ancient road from Merv to Amul. This lone ‘station’ is also distinguished by its proportions (150 x 80 m) and architecture. The blind outer walls of pakhsa are decorated with corrugation of a slightly unusual form: two round quarter-columns are separated by a blade with a slit or scar in the middle. The main façade has a massive peshtak with a lancet niche, which repeats itself on the entrance to the second court, while both courts are faced deep vaulted iwans situated on three axes (central and two transverse). The rooms were covered with domes; the transition from the square base to the dome via an octagon was accomplished with the help of trumpet arches. In some rooms the corner of each trumpet arch included a lancet arch with a festooned niche inscribed in it. Similar niches were placed on the axes of the walls. The trumpet arch of the building from Akcha-kala is in some way a mud-brick prototype of the more advanced trumpet arch in the famous Sanjar palace, while its appearance anticipates the Rabat-i-Malik, the most monumental caravanserai in Central Asia, situated between Bukhara and Samarkand.

Speaking of the early Seljuk architecture, one should pay close attention to Dayakhatin (its popular name is Baykhatin) caravanserai located not far from the left bank of the Amu Darya on the road from Amul’ to Khorezm 170 kilometres northwestwards of modern Chardjou. This is the most ideal caravanserai in Turkmenistan at the time of intensive East-West trade. The wall covering, the arch and dome bond is made of the baked brick.

The caravanserai layout is a square with each side of 53 metres. Accommodations separated by an arch gallery from the inner four-ayvan yard are located around the perimeter. External

Akcha kala caravanserai. Aerial photo.

155

Turkmenistan

corners are decorated with round towers. Two mutually perpendicular axes with middle towers on the outside and the inner yard entrance arch are also decorated with projections and arches. These planning and space composition features had been specified and developed in the Timurid architecture. The caravanserai entrance is accentuated by a high arched portal with large symmetric epigraphically ornamented panels on its both sides. Names of four co-workers of Muhammad: Ali, Omar, Osman and Abu Bekr are written on the panels with bricks.

The Dayakhatin caravanserai was built in the middle of a huge rectangular yard formed by a pinion wall. The corners of the fortress are also built in the shape of round towers. There are symmetrically located rectangular small towers in sections between towers except for the part in front of the portal. It was archeologically detected that the pinion wall was built in the 9th-10th centuries and is the remains of the Takhiriya ribat. In the late 11th century the Dayakhatin building appeared on its area. Constructional and style features of the caravanserai architecture are the remarkable example of architects’ skills of the ‘golden age’ of the Seljuk period [Pribytkova, 1952. P.92-106].

THE TIMUR ID PER IOD. A f ter Mer v was devastated by the Mongols, it took 200 years for the city to recover. It was reconstructed by Timur’s son Shakhrukh, a ruler of the independent state with the capital in Herat. In 1418 he ordered to populate Merv. Due to troubles with water supply the city was moved into a new place and built in 2 kilometres southwards of Sultan-kala. The remains of the Timurids Merv are known as Abdullakhan-kala. In 1454 – 1457 Mirza Sanjar, another representative of the Timurid dynasty, widened it up into the neighbouring area called Bairamalikhan-kala. Both sites are on one axis, have the right plan with diagonal axes pointing cardinals (four corners of the earth) are surrounded by fortified walls with semicircular towers every 25 – 40 metres and a moat. The gate of a fortress is of the baked brick and has the appearance of a developed portal with massive round towers and an entrance arch. Between them there was a main city street.

In the northern corner of the Abdullakhan-kala is a fenced lot where the ruler’s palace was situated. It is a double-storeyed rectangular (40metres x 45metres) adobe building with the inner yard (25metres x 30metres) and a very simple wall facing. Single-storeyed buildings, stables and other departments border on it. Southwestwards there is an ensemble consisting of the Shakhrukh mosque and the Khusraviye madrasah built thanks to the famous poet Alisher Navoi. Nowadays it does not exist, but the remains were detected by V.A. Zhukovskiy in the late 19th century.

Akcha-kala caravanserai. Plan.

156


Both buildings were made of baked brick and had no plaster on their façades; only the interior of the mosque was plastered with white ganch, which had on it geometric ornaments made with blue paint. The monumental peshtak of the mosque had a slim arch, the span of which was 6.5m wide and the height of which was 10 m; symmetrical lateral wings were attached to the pylons. An enfilade of one-storey rooms surrounded on three sides a large central hall covered with a dome on an octahedral drum. There was a pool in the court, on the axis of the entrance. The madrasah, which was situated from the southern side of the mosque, could be entered from this court. The Husraviye madrasah had a traditional plan (khujras around a rectangular court and two vaulted iwans on the axes). The

‘herringbone’ brickwork was used in the tympana of the main arch, however, this time it was not as sophisticated as in the 11th-12th centuries.

To the north of the Abdullakhan-kala fortress wall a charbag, a summer residence of Merve ruler, was set up. One could enter to it through the darvaza; in the distance of 28 metres strictly opposite there was a delicate front park pavilion usually called imarat (imarat means a monumental building in Turkmen). In this small adobe building there was the only one square and high accommodation, but two tiers of niches and small arches make a deceptive impression of a large scale. An orderly arched ayvan was located on the main façade.

In the neighbourhood of the Abdullakhan-kala some snow depositories still remain, which are huge, nearly conical adobe domes built right on the ground. Tightly packed snow covered with a pressed layer of yakhdan (Alhagi pseudalhagi) was stored in it. The exterior diameter of the largest one was 23 metres and the interior diameter was 17 metres. The layout was made in concentric circles gradually diminishing. The constructions date back to the 15th century but some of them could have appeared much earlier.

In the Timurid period monumental construction used to be carried out not only in Merv but in other cities of North Khorasan. In the early 20th century in Mekhna (Meana) there was a dilapidated mosque the building stylistically close to masterpieces in Samarkand; it is built in kosh style on the axis with the mausoleum of Abu Said Abul Khair (Meana-baba). The entrance was outlined by a high peshtak with a deep vault (about 5 metres); there is a shartak in the centre. The dome faced with blue glazed tiles leaning on a very elongate drum based on the octahedron of trumpets. In the interior of the central hall there is a stalactite cornice stressing the passage from the drum to the dome.

Among the few examples of Timurid architecture constructions in Turkmenistan, the most prominent one was a mosque of Seyid Jamal ad-Din in Anau; according to the inscriptions on the façade and in the interior, built under the rule of Abu-l Kasim Babur Bakhadur-khan of Khorasan

Dayahatyn caravanserai.

157

Turkmenistan

(1446 - 1457). The construction was financed by Muhammed Khudayot, a vizier, who chose the place by the grave of his father Jemal-ad-din from Anau. At that time it was a small town, which pinion walls were destroyed by the Mongols. The mosque was designed as a large religious complex and consisted of a ziaratkhana, a khanaka and a khudjra for pilgrims. The building composition is determined by the location on the falling relief next to the apex of the former fortress, the asymmetry of right and left wings, the free combination of domes of different sizes, the easiness of the interior space. Along three façades of the main building on a bent there was a basement level with khudjras, which flat roof reached the floor of the mosque and represented an open terrace. The square hall’s span is 10.5 metres and covered with a dome on four wall and trumpet arches. The walls inside were divided into three tiers: in the lower tier there were lancet niches open towards the terrace, the upper ones were niches-loggias. In the corners of the building the spiral staircases were located. They led to bypass galleries in the second and the third floors.

A vast vaulted aperture is on the northern side of the hall. The exterior of the hall represents an expressive portal with rich décor that was the centre of the yard composition. The portal was faced with the polished brick with blue tiles insertions and mosaic sets; its top was decorated by revak with seven apertures filled with pandjara. In the tympanum above the arch there was a unique mosaic image of two twisting dragons in front of apple blossoms; they face one another in a heraldic composition it is a subject that has deep ancient roots.

The eastern and the western clusters of the mosque constructions differ, though each had the so called darskhana, a square domed hal l spanning 3.6 m, rounded by two-storeyed galleries. Researchers were astonished by the exceptional variety of vaulted and domed structures applied there. Constructions were made of brick, and then were enriched and complicated by modelling of ganch plafonds. The development o f t h i s ‘ p l a s t i c ’ i n t e r i o r construction method reached its maximum expressiveness later in the Bukhara school of the 16th century. The system of crossing arches in dome constructions

Merv. One of the yakhdans.

Anau mosque.

158


was thoroughly mastered by craftsmen from Samarkand and Herat in the late 15th century; the system was not used in the Anau mosque, but its elements and principles are presented here. So, traditional tromps were practically ousted by complex – sailed floor systems. In later centuries the Anau mosque used to be partially reconstructed. The corner bottom khudjras were bricked up and became a base for two massive towers (3\4 of a circle in plan) with spiral staircases instead of the former ones remaining in the walls. In the late 19th century the building was seriously damaged due to soil settlements, earthquakes, and wars and totally collapsed in the devastating Ashkhabad earthquake that hit the city on 6 October 1948 [Pugachenkova, 1959].

159

UZBEKISTAN

The domination of urban culture is one of the defining features of the medieval civilisation in the Central Asian Interfluve. As this territory was one of the most urbanised in the whole Middle East, over two hundred towns were functioning there at that time. The starting point of the historical period under study is associated with the time of intense civilisational work in the 9th-10th centuries, when the peoples of Central Asia, integrating into the Islamic world, brought their cultural principles into it. The concluding phase (14th-15th centuries) coincides with the rise of the Timurid architecture. Although the historical and political processes in this region were quite complex, these seven centuries were the period when the Central Asian Islamic architectural traditions were established and developed on the basis of the heritage of the pre-Arabic time.

A large number of architectural monuments of the 9th-15th centuries, which have been preserved in the Uzbek land, did not only become an integral part of the Central Asian cultural landscape, but have also turned into its basic symbols. They are regarded as the civilisation’s important value of, not only locally, but also globally, and are deeply revered throughout the Muslim world. The central architectural complexes of Samarkand, Bukhara and Shakhrisabz, which have survived through centuries and have been included now in the UNESCO World Heritage List, were formed in this very period. The areas of medieval Sogd, Ustrushana, Khorezm, Tokharistan, and Fergana constitute a common cultural domain, which allows us to unite them in this article under the general name of Maverannahr 1 within the borders of contemporary Uzbekistan. Considering the genesis of architectural tradition it would be logical to identify the transitional period of the 7th-8th centuries, the early medieval period of the 9th-10th centuries, the classical (pre-Mongol) period of the 11th-early 13th centuries, the Chagatay (Mongol) period (1220-1370) and the Timurid period (1370–1500) 2.

1. THE TRANSITIONAL PERIOD OF THE EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHITECTURE (7TH-8TH CENTURIES)

The period before the Arab invasion (7th-early 8th centuries) is a time of the rise of the pre-Islamic architecture of towns, feudal castles (kyoshk) and temples in Central Asia. Having defeated the Sassanids in the mid-7th century, the Arabs then settled in Merv and made only occasional forays into Maverannahr. Therefore, up to the early 8th century the Central Asian Interfluve remained independent from the Islamic world. At the same time, town building and monumental architecture had developed a strong economic base of transcontinental trade along the Great Silk Road and the Indian caravan route. It was maintained by Sogdian trading houses and colonies located along caravan routes and by the nominal dependence of Sogdian principalities from China.

At that time monoliths of rammed clay characteristic of the ancient eastern architecture predominated in construction. That was how defensive walls put on the high platforms of the

1 Maverannahr – Arabic ‘that, which is beyond the river’, that is, beyond the Amudarya. Geographically only the right-bank part belongs to Khorezm. 2 Conveniently, 1220 is the year of Genghis-khan’s invasion into Maverannahr, 1370 is the first year of Tamerlane’s rule, 1500 is the time when the Timurids lost the key historic towns of Maverannahr – Bukhara and Samarkand, captured by Sheybani-khan.

160


Reconstruction of the plan of Bukhara in 9-10th centuries. (by A. Bolshakov; corrected

by E. Davidovich): 1 - Ark (citadel), 2 - shahristan, 3 - Registan, 4 - rabad.

Plan of Samarkand of 9-10th centuries.: 1 - preserved sections of the wall, 2 - the likely

direction of Devori-Kiyomat, 3 - southern border rabad, 4 - estimated for channels,

5 - streets, 6 - road. The numbers in circles: 1 - Afshin gates, 2 - Kuhak, 3 - Fenek, 4 -

Faruhshid, 5 - Gadavad, 6 - Isbisk, 7 - Suhashin, 8 - Mazar Abdi Darun, 9 - Mazar Abdi

Biruni.

161

Uzbekistan

Mausoleum of the Samanids. Late 9- early 10th century. Bukhara.

Magoki Attari. 12th century. Bukhara.

162


Kalyan Minaret. 12th century. Bukhara.

Chashma Ayub. 14th century. Bukhara.

163

Uzbekistan

Vabkent minaret. Late 12th century. Bukhara province.

Deggaron mosque. 11th century. Bukhara province.

164


Mausoleums of Sayf al-Din Boharzi and Buyankuli Khan, 15th century. Bukhara.

The Ulugbek madrasah, 15th century. Bukhara. Aerial view (about 1980).

165

Uzbekistan

Shahi Zinda memorial. 11-15th centuries. Samarkand.

Temurid’s Gur-Emir mausoleum. 15th century. Samarkand.

166


Amir Temur’s Juma mosque of. Early 15th century. Samarkand.

The Ulugbek madrasah. 15th century. Registan. Samarkand.

167

Uzbekistan

Ruhabad and Qutub Chahar Duhum mausoleum. 14th century. Samarkand.

Foundations of the Ulugbek's observatory. 15th century. Samarkand.

168


The interior of the of Ak-Saray mausoleum. 15th century. Samarkand.

Ishratkhana mausoleum-khanaka. 15th century. Samarkand.

169

Uzbekistan

The portal of Amir Temur’s Ak-Saray the palace. 15th century. Shakhrisyabz.

Kuk-Gumbaz Juma mosque. 15th century. Shakhrisyabz.

170


Crypt. Dor al-Siadat. Late 14 - early 15th centuries. Shakhrisyabz.

The mausoleum of Jehangir. Dor al-Siadat. 14th century. Shakhrisyabz.

171

Uzbekistan

Chillakhona Zayn al-Din Bobo Kuyi Arifani. 13th century. Tashkent.

Zangi-ata mausoleum. Late 14th century. Tashkent province.

172


Mausoleum of Yunus Khan. Late 15th century. Tashkent.

The mausoleum of Sheikh al-Hovendi Takhur. Late 14th century. Tashkent.

173

Uzbekistan

Mausoleum of Ak-Astana-baba. 10-11th centuries. Surkhandarya.

The mosque at the mausoleum of al-Hakimi Termezi. 11-12th centuries. Termez.

174


The necropolis of Termez Seyyids Sultan Saadat. 12-17th centuries. Surkhandarya.

Mausoleum of Mir Sayyid Bahram. Late 10th century. Navoi.

175

Uzbekistan

Headstone of Sayyid Ala ad-Din. 14th century. Khiva.

Headstone of Sheikh Zangi-ata. Late 14th century. Tashkent region.

176


Architectural decoration: Shahi Zinda and Ak-Saray palace. 14th century.

The decor of the mausoleum of 14th century. (Craftsman - Ali Nesefi). Samarkand.

177

Uzbekistan

citadel, castles of the dihkan nobility and temples were built. The heavy mass of clay did not give much inner space to the buildings and limited the constructions’ geometry to the simplest forms. Together with the inert clay, easier constructions of mud brick were gradually introduced, allowing for higher geometric diversity. Ceramic pipes began to be used in towns’ sewage. The pride of Samarkand was the aqueduct carrying water by means of a lead drain onto the hills of Afrosiab. Judging by the discoveries made at Varakhsha and Afrosiab, the art of decoration of inner mural spaces in palaces with fretted stucco and polychrome frescos reached a particularly high standard and rivalled that of the synchronous ornamentation and frescos in the Ommiad palaces in Syria, Palestine and Mesopotamia.

The first decades of the 8th century were crucial for the history of Central Asia, when Bukhara, Samarkand, Kesh, Nakhshab, Kuba and Khorezm submitted to the Caliphate. By the mid-8th century all the towns of Maverannahr were under the authority of the Caliphs’. Major towns became the centres of the Caliphate’s political influence and of dissemination of the Islamic religion. The Arab settlers stayed there to acquire a privileged position and to rule the region on behalf of the Caliphs; soldiers were also garrisoned there. At the same time, local aristocracy still kept its power over the region. In the 8th century numerous feudal castles continued to be a dominating architectural unit in the urban and suburban landscape. It is well-known that in the second half of the 8th century the bukhar-khudats maintained and reconstructed the famous palace in Varakhsha.

The transition towards the new religious worldview presented in the Koran and the establishment of the Muslim cultic practice continued through several generations and was accompanied by mass disorders on the confessional ground, the largest of which was the insurrection of Mukannah in the 760-770s. Up to the end of the 8th century Maverannahr remained a rebellious region, in which disturbances caused considerable damage to the craft and trade and disrupted the order of urban life. The Arabs’ advance farther to the east encountered fierce resistance and retaliatory raids from the nomadic Turks. Having to defend themselves, in the 8th-century Arabic rulers took active steps to consolidate a number of defensive lines, such as the wall Kampyr-Devor in the Bukhara oasis and Devori-Kiyomat, the outer wall of Samarkand. At the time of the governor Abu Muslim’s rule

Kirk-Kiz (Surkhandarya) plans for the first and second floor, 9th century.

178


(murdered in 755), Devori-Kiyomat had 360 fortified towers and enclosed an area of 400 ha, which was 30 times as large as the territory of Afrosiab’s shakhristan and its southern rabat. Thousands of fortified estates with castles were secluded within the wall. Abu Muslim built 12 gates in the places where roads crossed the defensive wall, and constructed a new palace in the citadel.

The incorporation in the political and cultural life of the Caliphate changed the principal norms of the religious life in the region: Islam claimed to be the dominating religion and to exert an absolute inf luence upon the social life 3. Settling in Central Asia, just as they did in Syria, Iran and Caucasus, at first the Arabs mostly adopted the architecture of ancient towns to the needs of the new authorities and the new religious format, avoiding construction of new buildings. The main Zoroastrian, Manichaean, Christian and Buddhist temples in towns were simply turned into mosques. A temple in the Ark and the Temple of Moon, both in Bukhara, as well as a temple in the citadel of Afrosiab and that on the site of the future Khazret-Khyzr mosque, both in Samarkand, suffered the same fate. All this resulted in architectural pseudomorphs, when old cultic architectural forms of Maverannahr were ‘filled’ with new contents – the mosque. As Islam had a negative attitude to the depiction of the divine, denying the very possibility of anthropomorphic imagery of God, the unacceptable sculptural entourage was removed from these temples, and the sanctuaries and altars of other religious traditions, including the altars of fire, were liquidated.

The mosque became a new type of temple – a public and open sacral space. As Islam insists on the advantage of the common prayer over the individual one, the mosque as a place of obligatory praying for the men of the Muslim community became its spiritual centre. To perform prayers five times a day it was necessary to build a large number of small communal mosques, which initially represented the Arab type of prayer house in the form of enclosed courts with iwans (halls walled on three sides and one end open) along the perimeter for praying in any weather. As the mosque did not have any realistic statues and images of the divine as objects of worship, mihrab, a niche in the wall facing the direction of Mecca, became the object of concentration of attention, where

3 Earlier the religious field there was essentially polyphonic, and the Central Asian culture was based on co-existence of various beliefs.

Dome Hall of Afrasiab (Samarkand), 8-10th centuries. Reconstruction by L. Rempel.

179

Uzbekistan

the prayer was addressed. Initially, mihrabs in Central Asia were made after the local praying niches in residential houses, having the form of an arch.

After Islam was established as a state religion, juma-mosque became the main urban temple, a place where the whole town community gathered every Friday to listen to the imam’s preach from minbar (pulpit) and then to pray. The first juma-mosque in Bukhara was placed in the Ark; however, in the late 8th century it already could not take in all the believers, which resulted in a new building constructed between the citadel and the shakhristan [Belenitsky, Bentovich, Bolshakov, 1973. P. 161]. Namazgoh was another type of mosque, where male believers from all over the town and its neighbourhood, including troops in the field, were obliged to gather on the holydays of Kurban-bayram and Uraza-bayram for the common prayer (namaz). Its initial architecture was an open place, which in the western part had a wall with a mihrab and a minbar, as well as with a shed for particularly respected persons. In Bukhara the first mosque of this kind was the Kuteyba Namazgoh built in the early 8th century northwest of the Ark. The character of the Namazgoh mosque and the principle of religious gathering and celebration several times a year were the amalgamation of the ancient sacral tradition, the celebration of Navruz in the open country temples Naubekhar, into Islam. Apparently, it is no coincidence that the first Namazgoh mosque in Samarkand was built opposite the Naubekhar gates, that is to say, in the very place where the Naubekhar temple had been situated before.

2. THE EARLY ISLAMIC PERIOD (9TH-10TH CENTURIES). In the 9th-10th centuries Maverannahr, now a part of a unified Islamic world, regained and

strengthened its position in the centre of the transcontinental trade between Europe, China and India. This stimulated a rise in the economic life and gave a new impulse to the development of towns as centres of handicraft and goods exchange. In the first centuries of Islam fortresses were restored and sardoba (reservoirs) and new caravanserais – trade stations, which also became places of dislocation for gazi detachments – were built along old caravan roads. To protect agricultural oases with large towns in the centre (Bukhara oasis, Samarkand) the boundary walls are strengthened and the towns

Mausoleum of the Samanids (Bukhara),

Late 9- early 10th century.

180


at the border with the steppe (Binket, Khorezm fortresses) are particularly well-fortified now.

Since the early 9th century, caused by the reconciliation following the grand uprising led by Rafi ibn Leys, there appeared a tendency to transfer power from Arab deputies to representatives of local aristocratic dynasties, who had adopted Islam. So the Takhirids, and from the mid 11th century the Samanids, firmly seized power and used the formal dependence from the Abbasid Caliphate to unite the lands of Central Asia into one state. In the Samanid country the first capital was Samarkand, and then, since the late 9th century, Bukhara gained the status of the capital of the state. Due to the natural distribution of water in the Khorezm oasis ruled by pre-Arabic dynasties, in the 9th-10th centuries the main cultural areas were situated in the northwest zone, the centre of which was

Kyat, and since the late 10th century – Gurganj. However, it was at that time that Khiva situated farther to the south became one of the major towns of Khorezm.

From that time the Central Asian Interfluve became one of the main centres of the Islamic East, where the long-continued synthesis of old culture with the new Islamic worldview began. The Central Asian intellectual tradition is now actively involved in the formation of the Islamic culture, the interests of which range from the translation of classical works of the Greek philosophy, mathematics, astronomy, geography etc., on the one hand, to the comprehension of the philosophical and cosmological contents of the Zoroastrian doctrine 4, on the other hand. In the first decades of the 9th century the caliph al-Mamun attracted to the court a group of scientists from Maverannahr, which later joined him in his transfer to Bagdad to make up the core of the scientific academy ‘Bayt al-Khikma’ (‘House of wisdom’). One of the main figures of the academy became Muhammad al-Khorezmi from Khorezm, a major mathematician, who is associated with the birth of a new type of mathematics based upon algebra and algorithmic thinking.

In the mid-9th century the Central Asian theologians, the imams al-Bukhari and at-Termizi, made a decisive contribution into the systematisation and selection of legends about the Prophet (khadis), and thus created their main canonical codes. Bukhara, Samarkand and Termez become recognised cultural centres of the Islamic East. The appearance of a number of ‘heretic’ Muslim doctrines, such as the Ishmaelite doctrine of the Karmatians, which even had an influence upon the Samanid court

4 In the late 8th-10th centuries the new codification and the record of such key Zoroastiran ‘texts’ as ‘Denkart’, ‘Bundakhishn’ and others are carried out in Iran.

Arab-Ata mausoleum (Samarkand province),

10th c. Analysis of the building (by M.S. Bulatov).

181

Uzbekistan

in the 940s, and the establishment of Sufism, a mystic branch of Islam, one of the founders of which was the sheikh Khakimi at-Termizi (died in 869), testify to a great intellectual freedom of the Muslim world.

Histor ians of architecture note the surprising fact that ‘not a single town appeared’ in Central Asia between the 8th and 10th centuries: almost all of the 300 towns known today sprang up either in the early medieval period, in the 5th-7th centuries, or before the Christian era. The fact that the number of towns remained the same [Khmelnitsky, 1992. P. 22] signifies the completeness of their territorial distribution and the balance with the rural environment of the agricultural oases. Arab geographers of the 9th-10th-centuries, in particular Ibn Khordadbekh, Kadama, Istakhri, Khaukal, at-Tabari, Makdisi and others left their written descriptions of the towns. When at-Tabari informs us about 3 towns in Khorezm in the early 8th century, and al-Makdisi – about 32 in the 10th century, it does not mean the foundation of new towns, but the revival of urban settlements that had earlier been deserted. The active growth of towns in the 9th-10th centuries was not based on the appearance of new towns, but on the expansion of old ones and on the increase of their population. At that time Bukhara became 15 times as large, Samarkand – 3-4 times, Binket – 20 times etc. [Bolshakov, 1970. P. 98-99].

By that time the aristocratic dihkans had lost their position of ruling nobility and, having turned into a social relict, came to serve the Caliphate rulers. Therefore, the once self-sufficient castles had become architectural relicts. Citadels and shakhristans with farmers’ castles, which had determined the model of the pre-Islamic town, were deserted and lost their significance. The trade-and-craft suburb named with the Arabic word ‘rabad’, with its bazaars, bathhouses, caravanserais, mosques and new holy places, began to play the leading role in the urban life. Trade and business life also moved there. Rabads were built up thickly and spontaneously, so that they inexorably encircled the ancient citadels and shakhristans at their side. This changed the structure of towns and, as a rule, required new rings of town walls to protect the rabads as well.

Samarkand grew beyond the limits of the shakhristan in Afrosiab, its rabad went down from the hills and began to spread southwestward. Ibn Khaukal, admiring the view of the town from the citadel in 977, noted a large number of then already deserted dihkans’ castles with high towers. At that time Kesh grew strongly, near the shakhristan of which the inner rabad with a cathedral mosque regarded as the second most beautiful after the Samarkand one was built [Shamsaddin Abu Abdullah Mohammad ibn Ahmad al-Moqaddasi, 1967, P. 282.], and then the outer one. In Bukhara, a new wall was built around the grown rabad in the mid 9th century, including both the old shakhristan and Ark. By the 10th century the rabad of Bukhara had grown five times larger, and in the late 10th century

The square sign of the mausoleum of the

Samanids

(Bukhara), late 9 – early 10th century.

182


it was also walled from the south. Paykend remained one of the largest towns of Maverannahr; its shakhristans occupied an area of 18 ha. Archaeological excavations revealed that caravanserais appeared there in the 9th-early 10th century. The citadel of Paykend had an area of 1 ha, was 20 m high and was enclosed in a wall with towers and an outer moat [Buryakov, 2006]. The port town Termez in the south reached the zenith of its development at the time of the Samanids, its ‘long’ walls enclosing a territory of about 900 ha. In the Tashkent oasis, Binket remained a strong town-fortress at the boundary with the steppe, its wall encircling the citadel, shakhristan and rabad 5. At the same time Kharashket (Kanka) with a large citadel surrounded with three rings of outer walls, retained the status af a large town. The central town in Fergana was Akhsiket, the defensive walls of which encircled the rabad, surrounding, in its turn, the old inner town.

In the 9th-10th centuries a large number of aristocratic palace buildings (keshk) in large towns were replaced by the palaces of absolute rulers. Thus, in Samarkand the Samanid rulers built a new palace in the territory of the shakhristan in addition to an old one in the citadel. In Bukhara the Samanids used to build palace complexes to the west of the Ark. Al-Istakhri noted the unsurpassed beauty of the portal of one of the palaces built there. It is known that amir Nasr II (914–943), the son of Ismail Samani, constructed in the same place a large palace with office buildings. The fact that this palace was destroyed by a series of fires testifies to its wooden base.

After the inclusion in the Caliphate, Maverannahr became a part of a common field of the Islamic culture, which declared a new worldview. In architecture, the emerging Islamic principle, dealing with the advanced architectural worlds of the Middle East, Mediterranean, Iran and Central Asia, was solving the task of self-determination and conversion of old spatial images, elimination of those formats which contradicted the new mentality and its aesthetics. The guidelines for that were created by the Islamic mission establishing a new order in the world, following the highest ethical

5 The pre-Arabic site at Minguryuk was strongly damaged by the Arab invasion, which led to the transfer of the town core to the northwest, to the site of the old town of modern Tashkent.

Signs of the mausoleum of the Ak-Astana-baba (Surkhandarya), 10-11th centuries.

183

Uzbekistan

norms of the Koran. Such Islamic thinkers as al-Kindi, Farabi and ‘Brothers of purity’ saw the connection between the harmony of the world, which ‘takes place in everything, [and] can be found in sounds, in the structure of the universe and in human souls’, and the supreme beauty as Allah’s attribute [Isskustvo …, 1974. p. 14]. The absolute of the image of Allah in the texts of the Koran, his ubiquity and essential ineffability in the human defined the search for the over-, extrahuman, the most abstract and symbolised language reflecting the order of things. He directed to the depersonalisation of the visual, to the loss of interest in the living nature, to the domination of generalised, universal graphic images.

A s a r e s u l t , ge ome t r y b e c a me t he principal graphic language of artistic forms: mathematically accurate geometric structures, having the ability to express the ideas of the beauty of the Universe. The geometric harmony with its principles of symmetry, proportion and commensurateness was equated with the perfection of the divine order of the world. The intellectual tradition of classical Islam appeared highly mathematic: the Islamic natural science systematised scientific disciplines, while the theology codified the Sunnah (sorted the Hadiths), the Muslim laws and others. Moreover, from the time of ‘Bayt al-Khikma’ a conceptual idea was established that the mathematic sciences, including arithmetic, music, geometry, the science on stars, optics and mechanics, is the ‘base of all other sciences’. According to Farabi’s medieval classification of sciences, building and architecture were included in mechanics, namely, in its branch called ‘statics’.

In M.S. Bulatov’s opinion, geometric harmonisation of space structures and architectural artistic forms became the reflection of this in the art of architects and ornamental painters [Bulatov, 1973]. The idea of geometric harmony became a theoretical conception of the Islamic architecture. It was embodied in a wide range of practical ‘geometric devices’, making it possible, following the harmonic canons, to proportion parts of architectural constructions and their ensembles. The concentration of attention upon these aspects ensured in the 9th-10th centuries a powerful rise of the applied geometry, a branch of the Islamic mathematics, which worked out the typology of abstract forms: the principle of creation of geometric figures and objects, calculation of their areas and volumes, of their proportions, transformations, sections etc [Mankovskaya, 1980]. Theoretical works were retranslated into practice via such works as ‘The book about what is necessary for craftsmen from geometric creations’ by Abu-l-Vafa Buzjani (840–918). Its practical embodiment in architecture became the birth of style and the many-sided development of the art of geometric

Mikhrab niche at the palace in

Afrasiab (Samarkand), 8-9th centuries.

Reconstruction.

184


ornament (girikh or arabesque) as the principal form of décor.

The mass construction practice of the early Islamic time was still based on the use of mud brick dried in the sun. Kyrk-Kyz , a large rectangular mud-br ick building performing the functions of a feudal mansion, a country palace and a trading house may serve as a sample of such mud-brick architecture. Its rooms and corridors were covered with vaults, domes of balkhi type.

However, starting from the late 9th-early 10th century, more expensive baked brick was used together with mud brick. The development of the production of baked brick was influenced, probably, by the West and reflected the distribution of certain common building standards within the Caliphate. The use of baked brick made it possible to use new architectural constructions, the main formats of which had by that time already been developed in mud-brick architecture. This involves, f irst of all, the f igured

brickwork in vaults and domes. Heavy low mud-brick domes were replaced by lighter and higher domes, which served as a dominating structure, the main embellishment of a building. The former single domed vaults were replaced by vaulted and domed complexes. A domed building excavated in Afrosiab may serve as an example of this. Domes built formerly on the pendentives of a cube were now placed on octahedrons and dioctahedrons, while the more complicated pendentives were now decorated with stalactites. The high solidity of baked brick made it possible to pass from tall elliptical arches to lower trifocal lancet arches. The use of baked brick in the exterior decoration was a revolutionary idea in architecture.

It was in the 9th-10th centuries that basic topoi (protoforms) of the Islamic cultic architecture began to form in the Central Asian Interfluve, which defined the new appearance of towns for the centuries to follow: mosques, minarets, mausoleums and so on. They developed out of a combination of western forms brought by the pan-Caliphate traditions with the local building methods of the pre-Arabic Sogdian, Khorezmian and Tokharistanian architecture. With very few exceptions, these buildings have not remained until our days; therefore we learn about their existence only from written sources, archaeological data and their more advanced forms realised in the following centuries.

At that time the common architectural format of the mosque was a closed court of the iwan type for a communal prayer, the size of which depended on the size of the local community. The largest were juma-mosques with courts, which due to their social and religious significance occupied a better position and dominated the surrounding urban architecture. The presence of the juma-

A fragment of a stucco mihrab in an early

Islamic mosque of 10 – early 11th centuries.

(State Museum of History of Uzbekistan).

Graphic reconstruction.

185

Uzbekistan

mosque became the characteristic feature of a town, making it different from a rural settlement. In the 10th century Ibn Khaukal, speaking on a large number of towns in Shash and Ilak, maintained that there was no country in Khorasan and Maverannahr, which could match them in the number of juma-mosques.

Archaeological excavations in Afrosiab, to south of the citadel, revealed a juma-mosque in the form of an enclosed ground with square pylons of mud brick, built on the site of an older temple. A cathedral mosque with a mihrab wall and wooden iwans around the court situated between the shakhristan and citadel in Bukhara, which was enlarged in the 10th century, was of the same type. A cathedral mosque and a house (rabad) for Sufis are reported to have been built in Nesef (Karshi), in 834, with the assistance of the Sufi sheikh Abu Abdurahman al-Kasani. No doubt, the first architectural decisions consisting in the main body of a mosque including domed buildings, which concealed, first of all, the mihrab, the ‘altar’ of the Islamic temple, belong to this period. A new vision appears in the iconography of the mihrab, marking the transition from the praying niche to the ‘image of holy gates’. The Makh mosque built on the site of the ancient temple of the Moon marks the appearance of another type of mosque. Excavations revealed there remains of fretted décor and 10th-century foundations indicating that the construction consisted of four pillars with many-domed roof.

Starting with the time of the caliph Khisham (691–743) the minaret 6, the declarative symbol of the juma-mosque, began to appear near the latter to become immediately, with respect to its height, a dominating unit of a town 7. The appearance of a temple sacral tower in the centre of a town was an absolutely new phenomenon in Central Asian architecture. According to different versions, their prototypes there were either signal and watch towers or the Indian declarative posts skambha. Chinese pagodas may have been another prototype coming from the east. However,

6 ‘Minaret’ – from the Arabic ‘manara’, a place where fire is lit, a lighthouse.7 It was thought that all who heard the call of a muezzin from the minaret must attend the Friday prayer.

Ornamental composition of an Afrasiab panel (Samarkand), 9th century. Analysis of the

building (by M.S. Bulatov).

186


this concerns only constructional decisions, as pre-Islamic temples did not have the forms of a tower. The Islamic minaret as a ‘stairway’ going upstairs, a ‘road to Heaven’, established a symbolic link with the supreme world of Cosmos, mystically connecting the Muslim community with Allah. The construction of a minaret was a sacral act of including certain lands in the world of Islam. The territory seen from a minaret was under its ‘protection’, and so it became the guard of a town. Narshakhi informs us about a minaret with a wooden top built near a cathedral mosque in 918-919 [Pribytkova, 1973. P. 58]. Excavations in the citadel of Paykend revealed the base of a 10th-century round minaret 11 m in diameter, which was also, apparently, a part of a cathedral mosque. These and other 10th-century minarets in Central Asia were also constructed of mud brick.

Islam changed completely the burial rites and the culture of attitude towards death, of the memory of those gone to the other world.

The commemoration of a person by public farewell and burial in a community cemetery 8 was also a new development. The construction of a mausoleum 9, a separate ‘eternal house’ for important persons, is a practice established in the early Islamic period. Prior to this, the cultural tradition kept only single personal burial places, such as the ‘graves’ of Afrosiab and Siyavush in Bukhara. The construction of courts (khazira) was a simpler architectural format of burial of outstanding persons. In this case burial places ‘under the open sky’ were covered with a gravestone (sagana) or a dakhma, while the court was enclosed in a brick wall with a portal entrance. The memorial of the imam Abu Khafs Kabir 10 (died in 832), an ancient sanctuary of Bukhara, and the khazira of Abu Bakr Saad (10th century), the founder of the dynasty of Juybar Seyids, which became the base for the later memorial Chor-Bakr, are the best known of ancient khazira. Another significant person, imam Mohammed ibn Jafar (9th-10th centuries), was, probably, buried in a khazira beyond the wall of the Samarkand rabad, in the place named Registan.

There are only three mausoleums from the early Islamic period that have survived to our days: the Samanid mausoleum in Bukhara (late 9th-early 10th century), the Arab-ata mausoleum in the village of Tim, Samarkand province, with an inscription on the portal dating it to 977/978, and

8 The culture and traditions of Islamic community cemeteries appears at this very time. Ancient town cemeteries indicate today the dislocations of town gates, behind which the burial of the gone Muslims began then.9 It was a paradox for Islam: the contradiction between the immortalisation of the personal and the depersonalisation before the absolute of Allah.10 The mausoleum in this place was built only in the early 21st century.

The map of Samarkand in the 11th-13th

centuries. 1 - aqueducts, 2 - pools, 3 - wall of

14-19th centuries, 5 - street, 6 - roads, 7 - the

probable line of the outer wall, names of

the gates (numbers in circles): 1 - Kesh, 2 -

Naubehar, 3 - Bukhara, 4 - China, 5 - Kuhak.

187

Uzbekistan

the Mir-Seyid Bahrom mausoleum (late 10th century). Their protoform were centric square buildings covered with brick domes. According to a number of scientists, this topos comes directly from the Sasanian chortak and temple of fire [Litvinsky, Zeymal, 1971, P. 44], and the Zoroastrian naus, open on four sides and made after the same tradition, which was described by Beruni [1966. P. 473]. Semantically it is a model of the macrocosm, a cosmogramme.

The Samanid mausoleum in Bukhara is the most outstanding and remarkable building of the early Islamic period in Central Asia. It is distinguished by a virtuosic technique of construction of baked brick and by perfect decoration of surfaces with fretted figured brick elements. While the arcade with a sort of bypass corridor hidden behind it is an attribute inherited from the pre-Islamic Sogdian architecture, all the proportions of the mausoleum, its brick hemispheric dome placed on a cube via dioctahedron, octahedron and complex corner pendentives is a phenomenon of the new, Islamic architecture. This earliest monument of Islamic architecture that has remained to our days embodies fully the principles of geometric harmonisation of architectural form. In the construction of its proportions the architect used the derivatives of three squares: the outer square and the inner one on the level of the plinth, and the inner square on the level of the pendentives, including their diagonal elements introducing the ratio of √2 [Bulatov, 1962. P. 45-74].

The proportions of the later Arab-ata and Mir-Seyid Bahrom mausoleums indicate that the principal ideas of geometric modelling had already passed from the mathematic science to the practical sphere of projecting buildings. The Samanid mausoleum is a construction open equally on four sides, while the other two mausoleums have an only entrance. It was decorated with peshtak, a portal presenting a full-scale (to the height of the building) image of ‘entrance’ (‘gates to the other world’) and framed in emblematic ‘protective’ sacral symbols (and holy Islamic texts), which testifies

The map of Termez. 1-arc 2-first shahristan, 3-second shahristan, 4-first rabad,

5-second rabad, 6-a suburb; monuments: 1-the mausoleum of al-Hakimi Termezi

2-Mosque Chor Sutun, 3-Palace of Termez Shahs 4-monastery Kara Tepe, 5-monastery

Fayaz Tepe.

188


to the birth of a new architectural method developed further in the following centuries.

Invading the long-established world of temple traditions, Islam could not but claim the graphic language of expression of religious formulas and of organisation of sacral spaces. However, due to its negative attitude to realistic depiction in the decorative sphere, the Islamic art adopting the ‘language’ of Central Asian ornamentation was developing towards the generation of new forms and formats of images, mainly of geometric construction. The geometric principle in the filigree ornament on the portals of the Arab-ata and Mir-Seyid Bahrom mausoleums is already absolute, while the early stage is still characterised by syncretic principle, where the geometric ‘context’ did not yet dominate the whole space, but participated equally with the ‘context’ of stylised symbolic depiction of the natural world in the formation of a declarative work of art.

The emblematic compositions of the Samanid and Ak-Astana-baba mausoleums are done in the same very manner, where the geometric figures, plant symbols, images of ‘the sun’ etc serve as textual elements. The mihrab with an image of the ‘tree of life’ found in Afrosiab and the early Islamic ganch (plaster) mihrab with a geometric medallion in the centre, kept in the State Museum of the History of Uzbekistan, indicate that initially the presentation of the new Islamic worldview in the symbolic graphic form was based on the ancient emblematic images.

The so-called Afrosiab panels with fine fretted stucco kept in the Samarkand Museum of the History of Culture and Art represent the same semantic type. They were found in the first decades of the 20th century in the course of excavations in the western part of the ancient shakhristan and are considered a part of the décor of two halls in the Samanids’ palace dated back to the 70s-80s of the 9th century [Akhrarov, Rempel, 1971, P. 143]. The craft technique used in the Afrosiab panels continues the line of the fretted ganch of the Abbasid capital Samarra, and with regard to the Central Asian tradition, of the alabaster décor of the Varakhsha palace. It is one of the earliest example of using complex geometric ornaments in the décor of Central Asia. As in the case with the Samanid mausoleum, they have to be explained by the ‘explosive’ birth of architectural ornament of a ‘new style’ [Rempel, 1978. P. 127].

All we know about the décor of the early Islamic architecture of Maverannahr demonstrates that it did not only serve the aesthetic decorative principle, but also carried out a sacral mission of an amulet, ‘protecting’ the building from ‘evil forces’ with the help of ‘strong’ and ‘kind’ cosmic signs, the iconography of which goes up to the pre-Islamic religious tradition. Thus, it is remarkable that the signs of the Samanid mausoleum can be ‘read’ as cosmogrammes [Bulatov, Arapov, Tuychiyeva,

Building a system of dynamic

rectangles (a geometric princi-

ple of proportioning in early Is-

lamic architecture).

189

Uzbekistan

2002. P. 120-125] coding laconically in the ideal graphic constructs the cosmic order of the world 11. They are based on geometric figures, which cannot be found in the décor of Varakhsha and the use of which becomes a new detail brought by the Islamic tradition. It means that in the transitional period the new geometric decorative ‘language’ was at first treated as a realistic one, complementary to the understandable images, and then, gradually, as the realistic elements were rejected, it took over their symbolic functions.

3. THE CLASSICAL OR PRE-MONGOL PERIOD (999-1220)

At the turn of the millennium the Samanid state, weakened by internal discords, finally collapsed under the pressure exerted from the east by nomadic Turkic tribes led by the khans of the Muslim Karakhanid dynasty. As a result, the eastern lands of Maverannahr for two centuries fell under the rule of the Karakhanid dynasty, which created there the state of the western Karakhanids. This eventually raised the status of Samarkand, which became the capital in the 11th-13th centuries. The southern lands, including Termez, were for the time being in the power of the Gaznevids. In the second half of the 11th century the Turkic Seljuks began to dominate the Islamic East; and the Karakhanids succumbed to their power. The Seljuks governors began to rule Khorezm. The considerable weakening of direct relations with the western Islamic world, and therefore of cultural adoption from it, became an important moment in this period of history, at which the Central Asian architecture took its own way of development.

The end of the Samanid statehood did not mean the ruin of spiritual and artistic culture. The Karakhanid dynasty, nomadic by origin, took possession of the urban culture so delicately that the change of power in the late 10th-early 11th century practically did not disturb the architectural, construction and craft traditions in Maverannahr. That is why in most cases it is very difficult for historians of culture and art to date remaining architectural and ceramic 12 monuments to the 10th or to the 11th-12th centuries. The Karakhanids and then the Karakitays, who had conquered the former, patronised the trade between Central Asia and China (and enriched themselves from it), which allowed them to implement large-scale construction projects transforming the appearance of the main towns, Bukhara and Samarkand. The same could be said about the Gaznevids, Seljuks and, later, about the Khorezmshahs. From then on baked brick became the principal material in monumental town construction. The main types of the Central Asian Islamic architecture acquired their ultimate forms (topoi).

11 Comparison with Tibetan mandalas says in favour of the interpretation of the ‘magic square’ of the Samanid mausoleum as a cosmogramme. It is also ‘read’ as a cosmogramme and acts as a flat image of an object of sacral architecture unfolded in space, the geometric proportions of which set the ratios of the sides of squares put inside one another as 1/√2. See Arapov A. V. ‘Buddiyskiye mandaly i simvolika Samanidov // «San’at», 2002, Nos. 2–3, P.12-16.12 In particular, the so called Afrosiab ceramics.

Plan of Magoki-Attari (Bukhara), 12th,

16th century.

190


The wide popularity of the Sufi tradition personified in the school-communes of Yusuf Hamadani, Abdukhalik Gijduvani, Ahmed Yassawi and Najm ad-Din Kubra became a new phenomenon in the spiritual life. The Sufi communities, which were broadening their inf luence, demanded a special position and places for performing their cultic practice and religious meditations (zikr); these places required some architectural design, which led to the appearance of khaneqahs. The sacral conceptions of the Sufis were based on the admission of the exceptional spiritual force of outstanding sheikh-teachers, which also remained after their death. Therefore, a prayer at the grave of a Sufi sheikh, a holy person, was considered a means to evoke his support. As a result, sacred memorial complexes consisting of a mausoleum, mosque (ziaratkhana) and, later, khaneqahs became another important place of praying for the Muslims.

The political instability and permanent military operations in the region slowed down but did not

stop the development of towns. They continued to grow, their trade-and-craft rabads expanding and breaking the ancient round, square or rectangular layouts. The castles (kyoshk) had practically disappeared from the urban landscape, the citadels were deserted, while the shakhristans were being reconstructed.

In the mid 11th century Samarkand, which had become the capital of the Karakhanid Tamgach-Bogra-khan Ibrahim (1040-1068), goes through a period of rise. The remaining vakufs give information about a hanifite madrasah, the Kusamiya, built in the shakhristan and a hospital in the rabad. Due to the active development in the 11th-12th centuries, the southern rabad excelled in its scale the old town in Afrosiab and took on its main trade and craft functions. In the 11th century it was a densely populated rabad shakhri darun (inner town) 13, located to the south of Afrosiab and enclosed within a wall with four gates. The main bazaar of Samarkand with its rows of stalls and caravanserais was functioning within the rabad, at the Kesh gates where the aqueduct went. When in the 11th-13th centuries Samarkand became the capital again, the rulers, the Western Karakhanids, built a new palace in the citadel of Afrosiab, which stood there for over 100 years. In the 11th century, the 10th-century Samanid mosque to the west of the Afrosiab citadel was reconstructed and turned into a juma-mosque. In the following two centuries the craftsmen’s quarters around the bazaar expanded, and the south and north entrances of the bazaar now faced the bazaar places. In the 12th century the Samarkand Namazgoh mosque was built to the west of Afrosiab, beyond the Shaykhzoda gates. Early in the 13th century Samarkand was captured by the Khorezmshah Muhammad, who made the town its actual capital in 1212. A new palace decorated with wall painting was built there for him,

13 The outer town (shakhri birun) was considered the vast territory within the Devori-Kiyomat wall.

Kusam ibn Abbas mosque (Samarkand),

11-12th century.

191

Uzbekistan

on the site of the Karakhanid palace. In these years the defensive walls of the town were fortified following the Khorezmshakh’s order.

Two main holy places of Samarkand were formed in the Karakhanid period to determine its town-building structure for the next centuries. The Registan became the centre of the outer town (shakhri darun); the main streets of the rabad converged there, at the holy mazar (grave of a holy person) of imam Muhammed ibn Jafar. The memory of Kusam ibn Abbas, the cousin of Prophet Muhammad, was perpetuated in the southeast of the shakhristan: in the 11th century a small mausoleum was built over his mythical grave in a place called Shakh-i Zinda (‘Living king’). At that very time, in the 11th-12th centuries, two Muslim cemeteries expanded beyond the boundaries of the old town and rabad: one (Sangresan) to the west of the citadel and the other (Chokardiza) to the east of the rabad. Chokardiza was made known by the Islamic theologian imam al-Maturidi (died in 944), who was buried there in the 10th century, near a fortress-outpost 14. There was the al-Maturidi mosque in the territory of Chokardiza. The status of the cemetery grew even higher when Muslim gazi soldiers, who died in the battle with the Karakitays in the Katavan steppe near Samarkand, were buried there in 1142.

Although the capital moved to Samarkand, Bukhara remained one of the main towns of the Western Karakhanids, a place, where the palaces of the rulers from this dynasty were situated. Unlike the Samanids, the Karakhanid rulers preferred demountable palaces with a wooden frame, built beyond the walls of Bukhara. Thus, the palace of the Karakhanid Shams al-Mulk with pastures and a nature reserve was built just outside the southern walls, in the garden of

14 Chokardiza – military fortress (from Iranian ‘chokar’ – ‘soldier’ and ‘dizo’ – ‘fortress’).

Minarets of the 11-12th centuries: the Chor-Sutun (Termez), Kusam ibn Abbas

(Samarkand), Kalan (Bukhara), the minarets in Jarkurgan and Vabkent.

192


Shamsabad, in the second half of the 11th century. In the late 11th century Ahmad-khan ordered to dismantle his palace in the Bukharian suburb Juybar to be moved to the citadel, where it was turned into a madrasah. With the development of the trade and craft districts of Bukhara in the 11th-12th centuries, the old dihkans’ castles disappeared completely and new buildings were constructed in their places, while the aristocratic quarters in the northwest, occupied earlier by the Samanid palaces, were deserted.

The Karakhanid ruler Arslan-khan III Muhammad (1102-1132), the father-in-law and vassal of the great Seljuk sultan Sanjar, paid a great attention to Bukhara. It is well-known that Arslan-khan III restored the citadel Ark and the town walls of Bukhara. In his time a mud-brick rampart was built around the town, and in 1119 the Namazgoh mosque was relocated to the territory of the garden Shamsabad. In 1121 Arslan-khan III ordered to build a new cathedral mosque within the shakhristan instead of the old one at the citadel wall, and in 1127 the remarkable minaret Kalyan was erected. In the mid 12th century the Ark was destroyed again: first by the Khorezmshakh’s troops and then by Seljuk mercenaries. In 1164/65 the Sadrs came into power and enclosed the shakhristan and rabad in a defensive wall, using for this purpose the baked brick from the foundation and towers of the Ark. Forty years afterwards the Khorezmshakh Muhammad restored the Ark and turned it into a military fortress. He also fortified the town walls (the wall of the shakhristan and the two rows of the walls of the rabad).

The changing climate led to the drop in the flow of the Zeravshan, which resulted in the fall of a number of settlements in its lower course, including Paikend. Arslan-khan III made an attempt to restore the town, but due to the impossibility to supply enough water there, it failed.

Termez, the town of the Termez-shahs, was being built actively in the 11th-12th centuries. In 1073/74 the walls of the Termez citadel were fortified and faced with baked brick. Outside the citadel, within the shakhristan, there was a mint, main bazaars and a prison. In the 11th century a mausoleum was built over the grave of a Sufi sheikh Khakimi at-Termizi, a person holy for

Sultan-Saadat (near Termez, Surkhandarya). The eastern façade. Mausoleums of 11th

century.

193

Uzbekistan

Termez who had been buried there. The second shakhristan appeared to the east of the old one, and after it the first and the second rabads of tradesmen and artisans, separated from one another by walls and enclosed in an outer ring of walls. The Chor-Sutun mosque built in the north of the first rabad is referred to the late 10th-early 11th century. And the palace of the Termez-shahs, the main administrative centre in the 11th-12th centuries, was situated in the outer rabad.

In the 11th century, al-Beruni and Mahmud Kashgari mentioned the capital of Shash (Binket) under the name of Tashkent, a name, which has remained to our days. The town had a citadel with two gates, a shakhristan with three gates and two rabads within concentric walls, the outer wall with seven gates and the inner one with ten. The contours of an archaeological site of the pre-Mongol time excavated under the town buildings of the latest centuries show the area of the shakhristan being 15 ha and the citadel, about 1 ha [Filanovich, 2010. P. 215]. Numerous bazaars, as well as religious, quarter and other centres were built near the gates of the inner rabad [Masson M.Ye., 1954. P. 105]. The town was damaged greatly in the war the Khorezmshakh Muhammad waged against the Karakitays and during the liquidation of the independent Karakhanid possessions, so that sources describing the Mongol invasion do not even mention Tashkent.

The early 11th century is marked by the highest scientific achievements embodied in the activity of al-Mamun’s academy in Khorezm and in the encyclopaedic works by Abu Raykhan Biruni and Abu Ali ibn Sino (Avicenna). The sheer scale of the scientific heritage of these outstanding scientists testifies to the high level of Central Asian scientific culture, which laid the theoretical base for both architecture and applied arts. The systematic, encyclopaedic and integral character of the knowledge generated at this time gave an idea of some completeness and canonisation of the Islamic worldview at that stage, which, in its turn, suggested the formation of the stable cosmography and canonisation of Islamic topoi.

In this period the Islamic architecture requires the entire spectrum of elementary topoi: the bearing topoi – the cube, square or rectangular prism and parallelepiped; the borne topoi

– cylinder, cone, pyramid, hemisphere and spherocone. The Islamic architecture solved the problem of their conjugation and steadiness, based on the laws of statics and the position of centres of mass, using sophisticated methods of applied geometry. It is no coincidence that Ibn Sino viewed architecture as one of the ‘branches of geometry’. The method of modelling of

Madrasah Tamgach-Bogra Khan (Shah-i-

Zinda, Samarkand), 12th century. Recon-

struction by N.B. Nemtsova

194


irrational dynamic rectangles, which made it possible to use the proportions √2, √3, √5 etc., gave the architects and artisans of the Islamic East initial geometric modules. The system of proportions thus formed was as important as the ‘golden section’ in the architecture of the Renaissance in the West.

The new level of architectural theory and the growing experience of the production and use of baked brick in the 11th-12th centuries made it possible to increase the size of monumental buildings considerably. The examples are minarets above 50 m in height (Kalyan, Jarkurgan) and portal about 20 m high (Rabat-i-Malik). In the 11th-12th centuries architects gradually cease to construct two-centred arches, which are replaced by three-centred and four-centred ones; double domes (domes consisting of two shells) are tried for the first time.

In the classical period the Central Asian architecture gradually frees itself from the constraints of the pre-Islamic construction art, which were still visible in the Samanid period [Khmelnitsky, 1996. P.9]. At that very time the geometric format of the Islamic architecture reaches a complete integrity, when the main topological forms – mosque, minaret, mausoleum and madrasah – become canonised and adopt their ultimate shape.

Mosques with courts and columned iwans with fretted wooden ceilings and earthen roofs are still common In the 11th-12th centuries [Pugachenkova, Rempel, 1965. P. 198]. According to the available archaeological data, the pre-Mongol cathedral mosque in Samarkand belonged to this type [Buryakov, Sadiyev, Fedorov, 1975, P.77–99]. The contemporary excavations of the mosque show that its pylons had a rectangular shape. At that very time a mosque with closed and covered (wintertime) space for praying is tried. The templar body of the mosque was not to hide the holy reliquary, but, on the contrary, to open inside itself a broad area for the community to pray facing the mihrab. The use of brick domed coverings became the architectural solution appropriate for this task. At this stage it is not yet a single dome, but small domes supported by columns and posts. Such are the 11th-12th-century mosque-gallery in the Khakimi at-Termizi complex, the four-columned mosques Chor-Sutun (10th-11th century, Termez) and Deggaron (11th century, Bukhara province), and

Palace of Termez Shahs (Surkhandarya, 11-12th centuries.): 1 - reconstruction of the

overall plan, 2 - Plan of the audience hall.

195

Uzbekistan

the six-columned Magoki-Attari mosque (12th century, Bukhara). The diameters of their domes are 2.5 m, 2 m, 3 m and 3.8 m respectively 15.

The Magoki-Attari, Bukhara’s oldest surviving mosque, was constructed in the 12th century on the site of the Makh mosque of the Samanid period. It had 12 domes resting on the walls and 6 internal column-pylons. The unique Deggaron mosque has been preserved in the village of Khazara, some distance from Bukhara. Its walls are built of pakhsa (rammed earth) and mud brick, and it is covered by nine brick domed vaults of the ‘balkhi’ type. Their pendentives rest on four internal columns made of brick and having limestone foundations. The multi-domed covering of the winter room was a natural continuation of the summer iwan sheds. As these buildings were low, they were lost in the surrounding town constructions. Therefore, additional architectural devices were required to emphasise the significance of this place in the urban landscape, the main of which was the construction of a minaret.

The Shakh-i Zinda ensemble represents the small format of this solution, where there is an 11th-century minaret at the Kusam ibn Abbas mosque with a flat roof and wooden consoles. The minaret of the Chor-Sutun mosque in old Termez (1032) had a larger size: its cylindrical trunk was 3 m in diameter and by the early 20th century it was 13 m high 16. There is no information about the existence of the dominating minaret in Samarkand, but in 1120s the sacred Bukhara, thanks to Arslan-khan III (1102–1130), acquired a new baked-brick juma-mosque 17 with a court with four iwans, and its main minaret Kalyan erected at the side of the mosque. Another minaret of a similar size was built on behalf of the sadr Burkhan ad-Din Abd al-Aziz, the spiritual ruler of Bukhara, in the late 12th century in Vabkent, near the town’s juma-mosque. There is a suggestion that the minaret in Jarkurgan (1108/1109) was also a part of a large juma-mosque.

15 The table data by Mankovskaya L.Yu.16 In the 20th century this minaret was lost.17 The later Kalyan mosque was constructed by the Sheybanids in the early 16th century within the limits of the older 12th-century mosque.

Building ornaments in 12th century: 1 - Palace of Termez Shahs (Surkhandarya), 2 -

Magoki-Attari (Bukhara). Analysis by M.S. Bulatov.

196


The four largest minarets of the 11th-12th centuries built successively in Termez, Jarkurgan, Bukhara and Vabkent survived for 8th-10th centuries. Their common characteristics are the baked-brick trunk narrowing towards the top, with narrow belts of ornament and epigraphic texts on the outside and a spiral stairway inside, erected on an octahedral plinth. The surface of the Jarkurgan minaret is decorated with sixteen semicircular corrugations; the diameter of its lower part is 5.4 m, the initial height exceeded 50 m, and the height of the remaining part is 21.5 m. It was built 75 years later than the minaret in Termez and bears the name of the master on one of its cornices: Ali, the sun of Muhammed from Serakhs, which may point at the vector of architectural influence 18. The Kalyan minaret in Bukhara and the minaret in Vabkent are round towers topped with a lantern and a stalactite cornice. The first one is 45.6 m high, with a diameter of 9 m at the base and 6 m at the top; the respective proportions of the second minaret are 39m, 6.2m and 2.8m. Initially the Kalyan minaret was higher, having an upper section over the lantern. It was lost due to some reason (perhaps, because of an earthquake), after which the later upper section appeared. On the cornice there is the name of an architect: Bako.

Of the existing monuments of the 11th-early 13th centuries mausoleums are the most numerous, which indicates that the process of ‘establishment’ of Islamic holy places and of deepening of the tradition of their reverence accompanied by the performing of ziarat, which was becoming a certain form of a ‘minor hajj’, had already begun. The construction of the mashad of Kusam ibn Abbas at the Karakhanid time is a vivid example of this trend. Four centuries after his mythical death,

18 It is known that Muhammed ibn Atsyz, another well-known architect, who built the Sultan Sanjar mausoleum in Merv, also originates from Serakhs.

Decorative plates from the audience hall of the palace of Termez Shahs (Surkhandarya),

12th century.

197

Uzbekistan

a memorial complex was built over his imaginary grave: a gurkhana with a gravestone, a funeral room with a mihrab and a room for a forty-day solitary prayer under it. This was the beginning of the Shakh-i Zinda memorial ensemble. At the same time the two first mausoleums of the necropolis of the Termez Seyids’, the Sultan-Saodat, were built. They were connected by an open mosque with a domed covering and iwans [Khakimov, Shvab, 1969. P. 32]. The first mausoleum of Abu Bakr Muhammad Kaffal ash-Shashi (died in 976/977) beyond the town wall of Tashkent (Binket) 19, which remained until the 13th century, probably, also appeared in the Karakhanid time. The burials of Sufi sheikhs were also among the most sacred personal memorials: in Termez the cultic memorial of the sheikh at-Termizi, the Khakimi at-Termizi with a mausoleum and a mosque-gallery, was built at about this time.

All known mausoleums in Maverannahr dated back to this period are rectangular domed buildings 20. The Shuburgan-ata, an 11th-century mausoleum near Karakul, Bukhara province, is a rare exception. The entrance in the form of a portal is a general rule for the mausoleum. According to their size, the mausoleums can be divided into small, medium and large ones. The small mausoleums are 4-5 m in size: the gurkhana of the Kusam ibn Abbas, the Shuburgan-ata mausoleum and the Iskhak-ata mausoleum (11th century, the village of Pudina, Kashkadarya province), which continue the line of the Mir-Seyid Bahrom mausoleum, the Arab-ata and the Astana-baba. The Sultan-Saodat and Khakimi Termizi mausoleums, close in proportions to the Samanid mausoleum, have the size of 9-10 m and can be referred to the medium mausoleums. Large domed mausoleums comparable in

19 Contemporary dislocation of the Khast Imam complex.20 Unlike Iran and Khorezm, where a considerable part of mausoleums are tower-like with conic coverings.

The Sayf ad-Din Bokharzi mausoleum. Bukhara, 13-14th cc. Plan and cross-section.

198


size with the mausoleum of the sultan Sanjar (diameter of the dome – 17.2 m, 12th century, Merv) have not been found in Uzbekistan.

The appearance of an independent architectural standard for the Islamic school (madrasah) in Maverannahr is connected with the classical period. The Buddhist monasteries with their cells around a common court – a place for lessons and cultic practice-are regarded as one of the architectural prototypes for the Central Asian school-madrasah. The earliest of the madrasahs of Maverannahr we know of today, the Kusamiya madrasah built by the Karakhanid Tamgach-Bogra-khan opposite the Kusam ibn Abbas mausoleum, represents a well-established type of madrasah. Archaeological excavations have shown that it was a one-storey building, 55 m by 45 m, with an inner court 20 m by 30 m in size. In the four corners there were domed rooms. The main (eastern) entrance was decorated with a portal with projecting pylons. On the outside the corners were decorated with towers (guldasta). According to a 1066 vaqf, the Kusamiya madrasah, in Nemtseva’s opinion, included a mosque, a library, classrooms and rooms for readers of the Koran and for teaching the adab.

A new architectural type of the caravanserai, which combined the functions of a roadside hotel, a storehouse and a place where caravans could stay, appears in the 11th-12th centuries. A good example is the Rabat-i-Malik caravanserai standing on the old road between Samarkand and Bukhara, which is dated to the Karakhanid period. The mud-brick walls of the caravanserai are faced with baked brick. The portal made completely of brick and decorated with fretted brickwork united three courts. The central court led to the main part under a big dome surrounded by a square of

small domes; two lateral courts opened up from there. The portal with lateral walls decorated with corrugations and minarets at the corners had been preserved by the early 20th century.

The palace of the Termez-shahs is a good example of palace constructions of that time. The main (western) entrance into this palace complex was decorated with an arched portal, beyond which there was a large court (more than 200 sq. m in area) surrounded by an iwan, with a pool in the middle. Opposite the entrance portal, on the eastern side, there was the palace’s main place – the reception hall of the Termez-shahs. Its entrance was decorated with a high arch, beyond which was the audience hall – a rectangular room (13.5 m by 11.5 m), divided by 10 pylons into a central part, covered with an arched vault, and lateral naves [Alpatkina, 2008, P. 24-25]. In the 11th century the mud-brick walls and pylons of the audience hall were faced with baked brick, including figured and fretted bricks. When in the second half of the 12th century an independent Karakhanid dynasty began to rule Termez, the walls, pylons and vault of the palace of the Termez-shahs was decorated

The Sheikh-Mukhtar-vali mausoleum.

Ostana village, 14th century. View in

cross-section.

199

Uzbekistan

over the brick facing with a fretted ornament on ganch (alabaster) plaster, close in style and spirit to the Samanid panels from Afrosiab.

When the topoi and architectural decisions are similar, the characteristic local style of the architecture of a certain region is created, as a rule, by architectural décor, closely connected with craft traditions of ornamentation of wooden and ceramic items, fabrics and carpets. In the 11th-early 13th centuries, brick patterns based on sawn, ground or hewn bricks dominated the décor of monumental buildings of Maverannahr, and fretted stucco was widely used in decoration: in the décor of the Kalyan minaret and the minarets in Vabkent and Jarkurgan fretted stucco is used in combination with the figured brick ornamentation, while the Namazgoh and Magoki-Attari mosques in Bukhara are decorated with fretted stucco combined with fretted terracotta and first examples of majolica.

By the time of the Mongol invasion, the ancient local traditions and the shapes common for the whole Caliphate had been completely replaced by the local vision of the semantics (‘language’) and the composition of ornament. The complex geometric girikh that was formed by the ideal shapes of intertwined lines regulated by harmonic proportions, into which plant pattern was often incorporated, became the essence of this vision [Pugachenkova, Rempel, 1982. P.20-21]. The later décor of the place of the Termez-shahs demonstrated that even in the late 12th century, the ornamentation of buildings, although within the strict geometry of girikhs, allowed the depiction of live, though fantastic, creatures. The epigraphic décor found itself in the same geometric field; this type of décor, which also included the inscriptions from the Koran, appeared in the early Islamic period and have become one of the principal methods of the decoration of monumental buildings.

The unified semantic field of the décor of the Maverannahr glazed ceramics of the Afrosiab type and the contemporary architectural décor is particularly noticeable [Arapov, 2004. P.17-19]. Glazed ceramic dishes were decorated, ‘protected’ with single geometric signs consisting of closed intertwined lines, which could be ‘read’ as symbols of tilled plots, water, the sun and the spread of the eternal, living natural force. The ‘texts’ of architectural ornaments contained the same, only expressed in more complex compositions.

4. THE MONGOL PERIOD (1220-1370) The cultural life of the towns of Maverannahr clearly shows that the Mongol period can be

subdivided into three phases: from 1220 to the 1270s – the time of integration of the region into the Mongol Empire; from the 1270s to the 1320s – the crisis period of the internecine wars between different groups of the Genghisids; and from the 1320s to the 1370s – the time of reconciliation in the Mongol Empire, when the history of the region becomes connected only with the history of the

The façade of the mausoleum built in 1361,

Shahi-Zinda (Samarkand). Photos of the

late 19th century.

200


Chagatay ulus. The invasion of the Mongol troops in 1220 led by Genghis-khan had a serious impact upon the urban culture of Maverannahr: most of the towns were pillaged and others were destroyed, while tens of thousands of artisans were forcibly taken to the east. Right after the occupation of Samarkand and Bukhara, Genghis-khan ordered to destroy their outer defensive walls. Termez, Akhsiket and Kuva suffered total destruction. The result of the Mongol invasion was the inclusion of Maverannahr in Genghis-khan’s empire: most of the territory of the Interfluve became part of the Chagatay ulus 21, and only left-bank Khorezm belonged to the Juchi ulus (the Golden Horde).

The Mongols did not mean to destroy Central Asian town centres, as it was now an important resource for the Mongol Empire. It is confirmed by the fact that in the 1330s-1370s Maverannahr’s economy was governed by Muslim tax collectors on behalf of the supreme kaan: first by Mahmud Yalavach and then by his son Masud-bek. At the same time the Mongol rulers did not allow any fortification of towns, fearing that they might regain independence and counteract their nomadic military force. That is why the pre-Mongolian town walls had been demolished. As early as the first years of the Mongol rule, trade and craft activity in the central towns was renewed; however, the monumental construction activity was frozen for three decades after Central Asia had been incorporated in the Mongol Empire. In major towns of the region it resumed only in the reign of Munke-kaan (1251–1259/1260) under Masud-bek. At that very time Marco Polo wrote about Bukhara and Samarkand as of large and prosperous towns in the Mongol Empire.

The internecine wars between the Genghisids in the 1270s and the 1320s, signifying the weakening of the unity of the Mongol Empire, struck a decisive blow upon large towns. At that time the towns of

21 In 1250s-1260s Maverannahr was under the control of Juchi ulus, so the towns of the region took in the garrisons of the Golden Horde, and in 1270s-1300s the eastern lands from Samarkand to Fergana were included in Kaydu ulus, proclaimed by the kaan at a kurultay (national assembly) in Talas, in 1269, to counterbalance Khubilay.

Geometry of the ornament of mausoleum of Khoja Ahmad at Shah-i Zinda

(Samarkand), 15th century. Analysis by M.S. Bulatov.

201

Uzbekistan

the Golden Horde and the Khulagu ulus excelled in their development the towns of Maverannahr. Thus in the 1270s, around 50 thousand inhabitants of Bukhara were killed [Trever, Yakubovsky, Voronets, 1950. P. 337-338], and about as many were enslaved and taken to the west, to the Khulagu ulus. After these events the Bukhara oasis was abandoned until in 1283, when the tax collector Masud-bek re-populated the area. In 1316, during the war between the Khulagids and Chagataids, the Khulagid army again invaded Maverannahr and pillaged Bukhara, Samarkand and Termez. In the middle of winter people had to leave their towns; most of them were taken to Khorasan.

Only in the 1330s the Central Asian lands found some peace, which is connected with reconciliation between the Mongols. In the 1320s-1340s the urban culture of Maverannahr and, therefore, the pre-Mongol architectural tradition, gradually recovered. At the same time the Chagatay nomadic aristocracy of Maverannahr was converted to the Islamic religion. The Arab traveller Ibn Battuta wrote that in the 1330s Samarkand, Bukhara and Termez became large towns again, noting, however, that there were many buildings damaged by the Mongol raids.

According to the Dao monk Chang-Chun, after the Mongol massacre only one fourth of the inhabitants of Samarkand remained in the town; however, the town bazaars continued to function and the local ruler, the Karakitay Akhay, lived in the Khorezmshakh Muhammad’s unfinished palace [Bartold, 1963. V.1. P. 518]. The urban life in Afrosiab stops only by the 1320s, after numerous massacres in the town, which was largely caused by the destruction of the ancient aqueduct supplying water. From that time the southern rabad, the centre of which is now the Registan square with a new cathedral mosque at the grave of imam Muhammed ibn Jafar, becomes the town proper. The restoration of the Kusam ibn Abbas mausoleum and the construction of new mausoleums in Shakh-i Zinda testify to the revival of the urban life in 1330-1360.

By the mid-13th century the ‘Sanjar palace’ still stood in Bukhara. At that very time, in the mid-13th century, the ‘Masudiye’ madrasah was built in Bukhara at the expense of the tax collector Masud-bek; the sheikh Sayf ad-Din Bokharzi, who had converted the Juchi khan Berke to Islam, became the rector of the madrasah. Another madrasah, ‘Khaniye’, was built in Bukhara from the donations made by Munke-kaan’s mother. In 1273, during a massacre in the town, the Masudiye madrasah was burnt down, but was later restored. After the death of Masud-bek in 1289, he was buried in this madrasa (probably, in one of the corner rooms). Neither of the two madrasahs has survived and their location is unknown.

After its total destruction by the Mongol troops in the 13th century, Termez revived in a new place, to the northeast of the old town. When the Chagataid Kepek-khan (1318–1326) moved his

The construction of the Buyan Kuli Khan

mausoleum’s ornament. Bukhara, 14th century.

Analysis by M.S. Bulatov.

202


headquarters within Maverannahr, a new palace (‘karshi’ in Mongolian) was built for him in the Kashkadarya valley near the town of Nesef. Later, a new town, Karshi, was built around the palace and the people of Nesef moved there. Kepeks successors again moved the Chagatay headquarters far to the east, but in the 1340s Kasan-khan returned it to Maverannahr and built the famous Chagatay palace, the Zanjir-Saray, to the west of Karshi 22. The significance of Kesh (Shakhrisabz) in the upper course of the Kashkadarya increased. The town, undamaged by the Mongol invasion, was included in the real property of the Barlas tribe and acquired a new cathedral mosque.

As technologies were transferred across large distances within the Mongol Empire, a radical change of facing material occurs in the Central Asian architecture of the 13th-14th centuries: the methods of glazing, fretting and tiling of terracotta begin to be in use, and then the

technique of facing walls with painted majolica and mosaic on the silicate base is developed. The first examples of decoration with glazed fretted terracotta of turquoise-blue range of colours can be seen in Shakh-i Zinda: the decors on the ziaratkhana of the Kusam Abbas mausoleum (1334) and on the Khoja Ahmed mausoleums, and the decoration of the Buyan-Kuli khan mausoleum in Bukhara. The early use of blue majolica can be found on the monuments of ‘microarchitecture’: the sagana of the mausoleum of Seyid Ala ad-Din (died in 1303) in Khiva and the five-tier ceramic gravestone in the Kusam ibn Abbas mausoleum.

An important feature of the spiritual life in the Mongol period was that Islam lost its position of the state religion and was not supported by the Chagatay khans up to the mid-14th century. A large number of mosques and madrasahs were damaged in internecine and external wars. The depreciation of the official status of Islam led to the elevation of the Sufi tradition, which is connected with the activity of such sheikhs as Sayf ad-Din Bokharzi, Zayn ad-Din Bobo Kuyi Arifani, Nur ad-Din Basir, Burkhan ad-Din Sagarji, Shams ad-Din Kulyal, Zangi-ata, Seyid Amir Kulyal and Bakha ad-Din Nakhshband. The Sufi schools ‘Khojagan’, ‘Yassaviya’, ‘Qubroviya’ and ‘Sukhravardiya’ were consolidated around these persons, as their teaching and spiritual practice grew increasingly more sophisticated, they carried out the mission of uniting Muslim communities in the hard years. After the death of Sufi teachers, remarkable mausoleums with funeral mosques and Sufi khaneqahs were built over their graves.

According to written sources and archaeological research, in the mid-13th century Zayn ad-Din, the sheikh of ‘Sukhravardiya’, settled in the village of Arifon near the northwestern part of the town wall, where he lived in a domed chillakhona, and began to preach in Tashkent. After the death of

22 The Zanjir-Saray palace was destroyed by the troops of Tokhtamysh-khan in 1387.

The modelling of proportions after

J. Kashi (15th c.): 1-square, 2-circle,

3- the difference between the diagonal

and side, 4-side of the octagon and half of

its diagonal.

203

Uzbekistan

the sheikh he was buried near the chillakhona and a mausoleum-chortak was constructed over his grave. The compositions of the mausoleum-gurkhana and the mosque-ziaratkhana in the memorials of Kusam ibn Abbas in Samarkand and Seyid Ala ad-Din in Khiva, both built in the 14th century, are close in type (only in the first case the mosque is attached from the north and in the second from the east). The memorial ensembles of the Bukhara’s sheikh Sayf ad-Din Bokharzi and the Khiva’s sheikh Mukhtar-vali in the village of Ostana are of another type: large domed khaneqahs, places for the Sufi vigils, were attached to the mausoleums of the ensembles. The mausoleum of the successor of the sheikh Bokharzi, the Genghisid khan Bayan-kuli (died in 1358), was constructed next to the mausoleum of the former. It is thought to have been built in the early Timurid time; however, in its style and elements of décor, like the Shadi-Mulk mausoleum built in 1372, it still belongs to the pre-Timurid architecture.

In the mid-14th century the geometric art of creating complex girikhs fully recovered in the architectural décor of Meverannahr. The 14th-century examples, the gravestones in the Khazret-Sheikh mausoleum in the Kashkadarya valley, the portals of the Khoja Ahmad mausoleum, the interior of the ziaratkhana of the Kusam ibn Abbas in Shakh-i Zinda and the portal of the Buyan-Kuli-khan mausoleum demonstrate the virtuous technique in fretted terracotta (including the glazed one),

Samarkand in the Timurid period (last decades of the 14-15th centuries).

A map of the town.

204


combining ideal geometry with botanical ornament. The same technique, with the addition of the use of majolica tiles, made it possible to introduce epigraphy into the canons of Islamic architecture: texts from the Koran and edifying texts of Arabic and Persian verses.

5. THE TIMURID PERIOD (1370-1500) A new period of cultural development

in the Central Asian Interfluve took place in the last third of the 14th century, when the territory torn apart by the conf licts between the Genghisids and then between the Chagataids, became the base of a large state created by Amir Temur (Tamerlane) (1370–1405), an outstanding Chagatay leader. Restoring the state unity of Maverannahr and then creating an empire of global significance, Tamerlane took advantage of

the declarative capacity and power of architecture, which had the task of demonstrating the power, prosperity and richness of the country he created. The ruler’s ambitions embodied in the well-known saying ‘If you doubt our power, see our constructions 23, determined the appearance and development of the imperial style of architecture in Tamerlane’s time. Samarkand and Shakhrisabz, Tamerlane’s two principal towns, the portals of the main constructions of which represented gigantic gates with spans about 20 m wide 24 and as tall as the Kalyan minaret, became the centres of the new style. To give the surrounding kishlaks (villages) the names of rival towns – Bagdad, Damask, Cairo, Sultania and Shiraz – was a demonstration of superiority of Samarkand, the capital of the empire.

The features that distinguished the imperial style from the styles of preceding periods were grandiose proportions and particularly fine decoration of buildings and constructions, which required the use of the cutting-edge architectural ideas and techniques of the East. The best architects, usto (masters) and craftsmen, from Maverannahr as well as from conquered countries (Khorezm, Khorasan, Iran, Azerbaijan, India and others), were attracted to implement this mission. The renewal of architectural and building practice reflects, in particular, the influence of Khorezm and Iran. The conic marquee-like covering in the Jekhangir mausoleum in Shakhrisabz and the Chashma Ayub mausoleum in Bukhara is considered to follow the Khorezm tradition. The architecture of major Samarkand ensembles demonstrates the influence of Iranian, in particular, Shiraz and Isfahan traditions 25. The use of marble columns and stone slabs in plinths was introduced under the influence of the Azerbaijani and Indian stone architecture [Pugachenkova, 1976. P. 14].

23 This text is a part of the epigraphy, which once decorated the portal of the Ak-Saray palace in Shakhrisbz.24 The span of the main portal of the Bibi-Khanum mosque is 18.8 m wide, and that of the Ak-Saray palace – 22.2 m.25 The architect Muhammad ibn Mahmud from Isfahan is known to be the architect of the madrasah and khaneqahs in the Muhammad-Sultan complex and of the Gur-Emir mausoleum and the Ulugbek madrasah in Bukhara.

The citadel of Amir Temur in Samarkand.

Late 14-15th centuries. Schematic plan.

205

Uzbekistan

Tamerlane spent most of his life in military campaigns; therefore, his main place of residence was his military camp, which was a movable ‘town’ with the ruler’s headquarters that was the camp palace, the state office and the headquarters at the same time, placed in the centre. It was a square marquee ‘… three spears high and one hundred steps wide’. The entrance into the marquee was made in the form of a portico on columns. A toothed tower with ‘…long posts at the corners, each with a copper apple and a moon’, crowned with a dome resting on 12 posts, rose above the marquee [Clavijo, 1990. P. 114-132]. The central marquee-residence was surrounded, in accordance with its status, with the marquees of Tamerlane’s retinue. The appearance of the hedonistic park architecture of the Timurids was caused by the preference for country way of life. For example, four garden-parks planned after parks in Shiraz were laid in the suburbs of Samarkand. Being closed places for the select few, they were enclosed in walls and moats filled with water. A many-storeyed wooden palace with a portal and domes, made in imitation of brick architecture, was situated in the centre of the park on a clay hill 26.

In the Timurid period, the towns of Maverannahr once again became the centre of state life and the concentration of principal cultural and material values. To protect them from strong nomadic tribes Tamerlane and his successors restored or built new town defensive walls; so the Timurid town was a khisar enclosed in a strong defensive wall. And although Tamerlane himself still preferred his marquee headquarters, in his time the main state palace constructions returned into towns.

After Tamerlane’s death his empire regained unity under the power of his younger son Shakhrukh (1409–1447), who relocated the capital into Herat, which caused the inclusion of Khorasan in the sphere of the Timurid architecture. Meanwhile, Maverannahr, ruled from Samarkand by Mirzo Ulugbek (1409–1449), the son of Shakhrukh, retained and multiplied the glory of the cultural and scientific centre. The rise of civilisation in the last decades of the 14th-first half of the 15th centuries, also reflected in the monumental architecture of Central Asia, was acknowledged by the world as the Timurid Renaissance – a cultural revival after 150 years of stagnation, a period of new development based on the synthesis of the world’s best achievements. The construction by Ulugbek of a unique observatory in Samarkand, in which a pleiad of great scholars created a series of significant scientific works crowned by ‘Ulugbek’s Zij’, is often lauded as the peak of this Renaissance.

A representative of the military nomadic elite, which had already adopted the Muslim religion and was following the directions of Sufi teachers, Tamerlane restored the official status of the Islamic religion that had been infringed at the time of the Mongols. However, the religious life for a long time

26 The parks and their constructions fell into decay in the late 15th century.

Gur-Emir. Samarkand, early 15th century.

Vertical cross-section.

206


at least, was mostly centred on the khaneqahs of Sufi fraternities and mausoleums instead of mosques. In this connection, in the Timurid time, the Sufi meditative practice became an important addition to the traditional Muslim education, so that the khaneqahs was always constructed at the side of the madrasah. In Samarkand, in Tamerlane’s time were built the madrasah and the khaneqahs of the Muhammad Sultan complex, at the time of Ulugbek – the khaneqahs and madrasah in Registan. The khaneqahs, together with the funeral mosque, became a necessary element of memorial complexes (the Dorus-Siadat and Dorus-Tilavat in Kesh, the Abdi-Darun mausoleum in Samarkand).

The mausoleums of esteemed Sufi sheikhs, not mosques, became the main and the most significant constructions built in the first decades of Tamerlane’s rule at the state treasury’s expense: the mausoleums of Nur ad-Din Basir (the Kutbi-Chakhar-Dukhum) and Burkhan ad-Din Sagarji (the Ruhabad) in Samarkand, the mausoleum of Shams ad-Din Kulal, Tamerlane’s spiritual teacher, in Shakhrisabz, and the mausoleums of Zain ad-Din bobo and Zangi-ata in Tashkent. Such mausoleums were large domed constructions signifying the high status of the buried sheikhs. No longer were they quiet, low buildings concealed in the verdure of cemetery trees, but large palace-sized buildings competing with juma-mosques for the attention and congregation of devout Muslims 27. They became large, complex structure with a number of rooms and floors, dominating over surrounding buildings. Constructing sacred mausoleums, not only did Tamerlane perform a godly deed, but declared that he and his dynasty were under the protection of these holy persons. This connection was strengthened by the creation of joint memorial complexes, where the Timurids

27 This style will reach its peak two centuries later in the Taj Mahal in Agra.

Bibi Khanum. Samarkand, early 15th century. Analysis of the construction plan

(Bulatov M.S.).

207

Uzbekistan

and Sufi sheikhs were buried together: the Dor as-Tilavat – the sheikh Kulal, the Gur-Emir – the Sheikh Omar [Arapov, 2002. P. 36-43].

The grandiose building projects of the Timurids required mass production of baked brick 28 on a state level. Samarkand got transformed from a clay town into a brick one, at least with respect to monumental construction. For example, the total volume of brickwork in the Bibi-Khanum mosque amounted to 40,000 cubic metres, or about 20 millions bricks. Ganch, a strong and elastic material, was widely used as the main binding material in brickwork. The new size of constructions set before the Timurid architects the task of calculating gigantic domed and arched coverings made of brick and the load of gigantic brick mass onto foundations, as well as raised the problem of choosing appropriate constructional methods to ensure seismic stability.

The planning, tectonic and constructional complexity of Timurid objects does not only indicate that architecture rose to the pre-Mongolian level, but also demonstrates that the theoretical views of architects, who used new methods of geometric proportioning and calculus mathematics, reached an absolutely new level. Therefore, it was quite natural that Giyas ad-Din al-Kashi (died in 1436/37), a genius of a global significance who was the first to use decimal fractions, which he considered his invention, and who calculated π to the seventeenth decimal digit, joined Ulugbek’s circle of outstanding scholars 29.

28 At that time mostly square bricks with the length of the side 24-28 cm and 4-6 cm thick were used. 29 In the European mathematics the decimal fractions were (re)invented by S. Stevin in 1585, while the calculation of π to the seventeenth decimal digit was carried out (again) by the mathematician Adrian van Romen in 1597.

Temurids’ Registan. Samarkand. 15th century. Schematic plan.

208


Al-Kashi wrote a mathematic treatise, where he expounds his theory and methods of constructing arches, vaults, domes and stalactites. The treatise describes a universal geometric method developing the scheme of constructing dynamic rectangles and making it possible to deduce the same circle of basic proportions from the modelling, which includes the initial square and the circle and octagon inscribed in it [Jemshid Giyas-ad-Din Kashi, 1954. P. 135]. Al-Kashi’s modelling methods generalised the principles of design that had already been established, the principles stipulating that all the proportions of a building must be derived from its plan or its basic module. The analytical modelling made by Bulatov M.S. demonstrates that this was the method of modelling proportionalities of the main Timurid monuments of the 14th-early 15th centuries. At the same time, in the Timurid period the ratios of derivatives of the semi-square – 1, 1/2, √5, √5/2, (√5-1)/2... – and the geometric progression of the ‘golden section’ on the basis of (√5-1)/2 were widely used together with the old methods of harmonisation of proportions based on the derivatives of the side and diagonal of the square [Bulatov, 1969. P. 99-100].

As for the decorative art, the tendency of the late Mongol period, when simple brick facing was gradually replaced by coloured glazed ceramic tiles, became fully established in the Timurid time, when the range of colours of most buildings made mostly in sapphire-turquoise hues began to dominate the architecture and the use of composite coloured and brick mosaic became the main method of decoration. The decoration of the outer surface of domes with blue tiles also became a well-established tradition, which made the dome a symbol of the sky 30. Probably, the special reverence for the blue-green colour (kuk) is connected with the Turkic and Mongol cultic worship of the Sky (Tengri), which echoed religious worship of the sky in the Chinese tradition. As a consequence, the Timurid type of ceramics with the blue-white range of colours and silhouette ornamentation imitating Chinese porcelain appeared at that very time 31. In the meantime, epigraphy became the semantically dominant element of the architectural décor of the Timurids: citations from the Koran, the names of Allah and Prophet Muhammad, Islamic

30 The Ilkhan Oljaytu mausoleum in Sultania with a short turquoise dome 24.5 m in diameter and 20 m high was the first construction of this type. Tamerlane saw this Khulagid building and wanted to make a larger one. 31 In Ulugbek’s time the blue ceramics was produced by ‘Chinni-khana’ (‘Chinese ceramic workshop’).

The geometry of construction plans of the Ulugbek madrasah in Samarkand, Bukhara

and Gizhduvan. The first half of the 15th century.

209

Uzbekistan

wishing of wellbeing and poetic adages cover the main body of Timurid buildings like an outer protective ‘chain mail’.

Having chosen Samarkand as his capital, Tamerlane decided not to restore the town in its former boundaries. Ignoring the broad contour of the old defensive walls, which had not withstood the Mongol invasion, he pragmatically opted for new, narrower boundaries of the town within the main construction core of the southern rabad. In 1370-1372, he hastily enclosed this smaller town in a new defensive wall 32 with six gates, and in its western part he constructed a new citadel separated from the town by a high wall and a moat.

Governmental palaces with four floors were built in Tamerlane’s citadel: the Kuk-Saray with the ruler’s columned throne room and the Buston-Saray. There were military barracks, a mint, an arms factory, a prison and houses of dignitaries. Apparently, the purpose of the construction of the high domed Kutb-Chakhar-Dukhum 33 mausoleum within the citadel, on the eastern crest of the wall, was to obtain a spiritual ‘guard’ of the inner fortress. The remains of Nur ad-Din Basir, the sheikh of ‘Sukhravardiya’ who died in the mid-13th century, were brought there. When the sheikh Burkhan ad-Din Sagarji, the head of the Muslim community and one of the followers of the sheikh Basir, died in Beijing in the 1370s, his son Abu Said, following the father’s will, buried him in the

32 Tamerlane’s wall defended Samarkand successfully against the rebellious Jalair emirs in 1376, and against Tokhtamysh’s troops in 1387.33 The Kutb-Chakhar-Dukhum – ‘the fourteenth kutb (pillar)’, the highest stage of the Sufi hierarchy of holiness. The mausoleum was de,olished in the late 19th century in the course of reconstruction of the Samarkand citadel.

Façade of the Ulugbek madrasah in Samarkand. 1417-1420. Analysis of the building

(Bulatov M.S.).

210


Samarkand land. As the ‘Sukhravardiya’ stood high in Tamerlane’s favour, a large mausoleum named ‘Ruhabad’ (‘abode of a spirit’) was built over the grave of Burkhan ad-Din Sagarji in the 1380s.

Later, the ensemble of Muhammad Sultan (Tamerlane’s elder grandson whom he declared his successor) consisting of a madrasah and a khaneqahs was built to the south of the Ruhabad. The minarets constructed in the corners of the court uniting the madrasah and the khaneqahs became an architectural novelty. These were not dominating sacral towers, but tall posts – corner ‘guards’ ‘protecting’ the inner space: such idea became a common practice for other Timurid constructions, including mosques, palaces and madrasahs.

To assert the ruling status of his dynasty on the Samarkand land, which was a new place to him, Tamerlane placed the female necropolis of his family at the Shakh-i Zinda memorial, an old holy place of Samarkand: there, the mausoleums of his sisters were erected at the crest of the ancient wall, and the mausoleum and mosque of his wife Tuman-aga was built closer to the Kusam ibn Abbas mausoleum. When Muhammad Sultan died unexpectedly in 1503, Tamerlane ordered to build for him a mausoleum in a single ensemble with the prince’s madrasah and khaneqahs. A

subterranean stone crypt was built at the southern wall of the court, and an octahedral mausoleum with a ribbed dome was constructed over it. Thus the Timurid necropolis Gur-Emir appeared, which became a place of burial of Tamerlane himself, and later of his sons Miranshakh and Shakhrukh and his grandson Ulugbek.

Undoubtedly, the main imperial construction in the city was Samarkand’s new central temple, the Bibi-Khanum mosque, a juma-mosque unparalleled in its size and grandeur for its time, built in 1399-1404 near the northern Akhanin gates together with the large Bibi-Khanum madrasah. It was a classical four-iwan construction with the main domed building of the mosque placed on the central axis opposite the portal entrance. Two lateral domed buildings with mihrabs also functioned as mosques. Mass praying in any weather was made possible by domed galleries on cylindrical stone pillars. The corners of the 5,000 sq.m. rectangular court were marked by slender minarets.

The portal of the main building of the mosque was 44 m high and, like the entrance portal, was flanked with minarets. The total weight of the construction is estimated at 72.7 thousands tonnes. However, the hastiness of its construction led to serious miscalculation in design and the structure

The ornamental décor of the Ulugbek

madrasah. Samarkand. 1417-1420.

211

Uzbekistan

of the mosque began to collapse in the 15th century under its own weight. In the following five centuries the mosque lost 40% of its constructions. The covering of the main building with a dome 18 m across did not withstand seismic waves [Ratiya, 1950. P. 33]. According to today’s experts’ opinion, the centre of gravity of the dome was located so high up that it was compensated neither by the five-meter-thick walls, nor by the plastic mortar of the brickwork, nor by the four arches, which shifted the load from the walls to the four pylons [Zasypkin, 1926. P.144].

The central square of the Registan rabad with a cathedral mosque of the Mongol period became the centre of Timurid Samarkand. The main streets stretching from the town gates converged there. Tamerlane laid a separate street, the Silver Row, from the citadel to the Registan, and while constructing the Bibi-Khanum mosque and madrasah he ordered to build a straight trade street from the Registan to the Akhanin gates. A domed shopping arcade (tim) was built in the northern part of the Registan on behalf of Tamerlane’s wife Tuman-aga.

The architectural code of Samarkand was renewed by Mirzo Ulugbek, who continued the large-scale building activity of his grandfather [Arapov, 2003. P. 132-137]. He reconstructed the Registan and made it the main square for official ceremonies, where military parades were held and governmental decrees announced. Supporting education, Ulugbek ordered two large buildings, a madrasah and a khaneqahs built opposite one another in the western and eastern parts of the square, which became the architectural dominant of the Registan. The Ulugbek madrasah had a high entrance portal, two lateral entrances, a mosque located on its main axis, four darskhana (classrooms) and four minarets at the corners, and became the largest one for its time. By that time Tuman-aga’s tim had been dismantled and removed to another place, and its site was used for the construction of the Mirzoi caravanserai, the profits from which were bequeathed to the madrasah. The Ulugbek khaneqahs, which has not survived to our days, had, according to Babur, a very high and, apparently, double dome. In the 1330s, in the southern part of the square, on the site of an old cathedral mosque, the Timurid nobleman Alike Kukeltash built a new mosque which had a broad court with 280 columns on marble bases and a domed building with a mihrab. A small mosque called the Mukatta was built near it.

Ulugbek’s unique observatory 40 m in diameter, the subterranean part of which was discovered in the early 20th century and the architectural appearance remains unknown and can be presented

Model of Ulugbek’s observatory. Samarkand, 1420. Version of Bulatov M.S. (1977-1979).

212


only in reconstruction, became another significant and unprecedented construction for Samarkand. Judging by the round plan and the main instrument, which was identified as a quadrant, the observatory’s architecture may be presented as a cylindrical building with several floors and a roof functioning as a ground for observations and, possibly, decorated with a portal.

Mirzo Ulugbek also added the eastern gallery and southern mausoleums to the memorial ensemble Gur-Emir. He also continued the family tradition of reverence for the Shakh-i Zinda memorial and built a stairway from the south, which led from the foot of the Afrosiab wall up to the mausoleums of the Timurid family. A chortak with a high portal was built on behalf of Ulugbek’s son at the bottom, at the beginning of the road to Shakh-i Zinda, and a high double-domed mausoleum of Ulugbek’s wet nurse to the left of the stairway. From the late Timurid period only two mausoleums built in the 1470s have survived in Samarkand: the Ak-Saray mausoleum and the Ishrat-khana mausoleum-khaneqahs.

Kesh (Shakhrisabz), the centre of the real property of Tamerlane’s native Barlas, became the second most important town of the country in his time. Tamerlane transformed it into a town-fortress protected by a moat with drawbridges at the gates and by defensive walls flanked with towers every 50 m. The regular rectangular plan of the town and its clear division by two main streets going from the four gates facing the points of the compass indicate that Timurid Kesh was constructed after a carefully thought-out town building plan. The streets divided the town into four parts, and

Mausoleum-khanaka Ishratkhana. Samarkand, the second half of the 15th century. Re-

construction of the north-eastern façade.

213

Uzbekistan

its central crossroads was marked by a Chorsu trade dome. The northwestern part was occupied by the quarters of noblemen and the clergy, while the northeastern part – by a governmental complex with the Ak-Saray palace.

This monumental government residence [Barry Lane, Lewcock, 1996. p.51] was the highest construction in Central Asia, not only of the Timurid time, but of the whole medieval period. The Ak-Saray palace had a four-iwan composition similar to that of the Bibi-Khanum mosque. The main portal of the palace, about 50 m wide and 70 m high, was a complex construction with several floors and numerous rooms, which was crowned with ‘kungra’ spikes. The height of the corner towers of the portal mounted on a polyhedral plinth reached 80 m [Billard, Schvoerer-Ney, 2008. p.27]. The court of the palace with a hauz (pool) in the middle was about 100 m long and ended in a building with a portal and a dome for receptions and meetings.

The special significance of Kesh becomes obvious in connection with the grandiose spiritual memorial complex Dor as-Siadat, created there by Tamerlane and comparable in size only to the Ak-Saray palace in Shakhrisabz and the Bibi-Khanum mosque in Samarkand, which included holy mausoleums, madrasahs, khaneqahsa and the family necropolis of the Timurids. The high Khazreti Imam mausoleum with a marquee-like dome, which is supposed to be the grave of Tamerlane’s son Omar-sheikh, has remained to our days. Reconstructing the architectural aspect of the Dorus-Siadat, Ye.I. Masson and G.А. Pugachenkova came to conclusion that there had been another building of this type, symmetrical to the Khazreti Imam mausoleum. Both these objects were built in the pylons of the large arched portal of the Dorus-Siadat, on the central axis of which there was a white stone crypt, which was planned as Tamerlane’s burial place [Pugachenkova, 1950. P.67-69]. The two pylon-mausoleums seem the most fundamental parts of the memorial: these are the two ‘guards’, ‘amulets’ of the Timurid memorial, which makes it possible to suppose that two significant Islamic spiritual persons were buried there. A number of scientists have already made a supposition that the Khazreti Imam mausoleum is the mausoleum of Shams ad-Din Kulal [Dresvyanskaya, Lunina, Sultanov, Usmanova, 1993. P. 65-66, 105].

In Kesh the new Kuk-Gumbaz juma-mosque, the huge dome of which excelled in size the dome of the Bibi-Khanum mosque, was built on the site of an old Karakhanid cathedral mosque in the time of Ulugbek. To increase the number of places for praying, the arched galleries covered with 40 small domes were constructed on two sides of the mosque. A large religious centre named Dor at-Tilavat (‘the house of prayers’) gradually developed around the new mosque. Apart from the mosque and a 14th-century Timurid mausoleum identified

Shakhrisabz in the last decades of the 14-15th

centuries. A map of the town.

214


today as the mausoleum of the sheikh Kulal, it included a madrasah and the Gumbazi Seyidon mausoleum, which were constructed later. The whole complex of buildings was united by a court with khujras and darskhanas built along its perimeter.

The Chashma Ayub mausoleum, which was built with the participation of Khorezmian masters, is the only construction in Bukhara confidently associated w ith Tamerlane’s r u le. Ulugbek’s reign was marked by a larger building – a madrasah with two storeys of khujras and a mosque, four domes and four minarets at the corners, which was constructed by the architect Ismail Isfahani in 1420. A text from a khadis – ‘Aspiration for knowledge is the duty of every Muslim man and woman’ – can be seen on the entrance door of this Bukhara madrasah. In 1432-1433 Mirzo

Ulugbek built one more mosque in the Bukharian oasis: a small one-storeyed madrasah with a portal at its eastern part was constructed next to the grave of the sheikh Abd al-Khalik Gijduvani (died in 1220) in Gizhduvan.

A mausoleum over the grave of the sheikh Zayn ad-Din and a small mausoleum for the Sufi sheikh Ay Khoji Zangi-ata were built near Tashkent in the time of Tamerlane, in the late 14th century. At the same time a fine gravestone of white marble was made for the sheikh Ay Khoji Zangi-ata. The funeral mosque (ziaratkhana) with an entrance portal was built at the Zangi-ata mausoleum in Ulugbek’s time already.

In the first decades of the 15th century the Timurid empire was again united thanks to the efforts of Abu-Said (1451-1468/9), who, with the support of the Uzbek khan Abulkhayr and the ‘Nakshbandiya’ sheikh Khoja Ahror, managed to capture first Samarkand and then, in 1457, Herat. The last significant Timurid constructions that appeared in Samarkand – the Ak-Saray and Ishrat-khana memorials – are dated back to this period. After the death of Abu-Said the Timurids’ state ultimately broke up into competing chiefdoms and the formal unity was based only upon the spiritual authority and influence of the Nakshbandiya order headed by Khoja Ahror. In these decades the centre of the cultural life of the Timurids moves to Heart, to the court of Khuseyn Baykara, while the monumental construction within Maverannahr stops for some time. The construction of a new cathedral mosque in the centre of Tashkent, which was built at the expense of the sheikh Khoja Ahror and which remained up to the 20th century, was a rare exception. In the late 15th-early 16th centuries, the Timurids’ Central Asian possessions were taken over by the nomadic Uzbeks led by the Sheybanid dynasty, who were a branch of the Genghisid family competing with the Chagataids.

Ak-Saray palace in Shakhrisyabz. The end of the

15th century. Version of the schematic plan (M.B.

Lane, 1996).

215

Uzbekistan

The sheer size, the accurateness of geometric proportions and the decorative sophistication of the Timurid constructions have been never surpassed and in the following centuries served as a good example of architectural style and an object of imitation and cloning. A different scale of statehood and economical resources of the following rulers of the Maverannahr khanates made it impossible for them not only to repeat the ambitious architectural projects of the imperial style, but even to maintain such Timurid constructions as the gigantic Ak-Saray palace, the Bibi-Khanum mosque and the Dor as-Siadat memorial. The incomparability of the Sheybanid architectural projects with the impressive Timurid heritage became one of the reasons for the total destructions in Shakhrisabz, when the Sheybanids ruined most of the Ak-Saray and Dor as-Siadat. The Timurid architectural tradition, however, went far beyond the borders of the region to influence strongly, in particular, the architecture of the Great Moguls (the Baburids) in India, so that the worldwide famous masterpiece of Indian architecture, the Taj Mahal mausoleum, can be seen as one of its descendants.

Following the development of the architecture of Maverannahr from the early Islamic period to the Timurid time, we can state that it was continuously developing within the Islamic civilisation, which took place, however, through deep revision of local pre-Arab architectural tradition, including the temple tradition, and its mathematic foundations. The original architectural appearance of the main historic towns of Uzbekistan was formed at that very time, and their uniqueness and cultural code were created for centuries ahead. For the perfection of harmony and canons the medieval Central Asian architecture was acknowledged as a world heritage, interesting for its theoretical principles and their relation with the advanced mathematic tradition of outstanding experts, from Khorezmi and Beruni to al-Kashi and Ulugbek. The appearance and development of the multiform and complex geometric décor, the semantics of which reveals the abstract ideas of Islamic context still using realistic images in the early medieval period, has the same foundation.

216

AZERBAIJAN

In the late 9th-early 10th centuries, political and economic life in the Middle East was characterised by unprecedented development. That time is characterised by the growth of urban centres. Azerbaijan was not left apart from this process common for the whole region. According to Arab historians, our cities were affluent in that period, trade was rapidly developing, while goods were extraordinarily cheap, and streets, squares and houses neat and beautiful. In the 9th-10th centuries, most of the Azerbaijani towns grew very fast, particularly those situated along the main caravan routes of the East. New relations and the development of trade and industry naturally resulted, along with the territorial growth, in the structural development of these towns. As it was in the Middle East, the citadel, the inner town – shakhristan, and the outer town – rabad were the basic components of towns’ structure.

Arab sources provide relatively detailed descriptions of such important urban buildings as bastions, fortresses, palaces, cathedral mosques, bazaars, bazaar squares, also providing us with some information concerning the layouts and location of these constructions within a town. These written facts in general terms clarify the character of communications between administrative, religious and trade centres. Here it is necessary to note that trade played an exclusive role in social and economic life of towns of that period and had a great influence on their structure.

In the period under study, as in the pre-Islamic time, there was a strong necessity to create powerful defensive system in order to protect towns. The citadel and the shakhristan were particularly fortified: they were surrounded by moats, strong fortified walls and towers. In some cases rabads were also surrounded by fortification systems. The following towns could be regarded as the most developed in the whole country: Shemakha, Shabran, Gabala, Baku and Derbend in Shirvan; Barda, Ganja and Beylagan in Aran; Nakhichevan, Ardebil, Tebriz, Maragha, Kazvin. Numerous monumental constructions were built in these towns, such as rulers’ palaces, mosques, madrasahs, bazaars, bathhouses, caravanserais and residential blocks surrounded by green gardens. The high level of the towns in the 9th-10th centuries is indicative of the existence of an advanced water supply network with a branching system of open and covered canals.

Mosques, the buildings of a new kind, play an increasingly important role in the architecture of Azerbaijan at the time. At first, old prayer houses used to be turned into mosques in the countries professing Islam, including Azerbaijan. Juma-mosques in Baku, Ardebil and other towns may serve as an example. But in the course of time, mosque goes through a complex evolutionary process and becomes an absolutely original and stable architectural type.

At the same period mountain fortresses common for Azerbaijan of the pre-Islamic period were being built. The stationing of large troops and the development of external relations required restoration of old bridges and construction of new ones. According to some historical sources, in the 7th century the base for the famous Khudaferin bridge containing 15 spans was built. The ruins of another bridge in the neighbourhood of Barda also belong to that time. A construction across the river Terterchay once had 16 spans and was 120 m long.

217

Azerbaijan

In the 7th-10th centuries the building of churches continued in the mountain part of the country. A monastery on the bank of the river Agoglan, Lachin region, the Amaras complex, the Lekhit temples (Gakh region) and ruins of other cultic buildings are indicative of the Christian influence in the territory of Caucasian Albania.

SELJUK PERIOD. The dominion of the Seljuks established in the second half of the 11th century struck a destructive blow to the outdated social and cultural traditions in Azerbaijan and the whole Middle East. On the one hand, there was a revival of the local ancient traditions, which, according to Ibn K haldun, prevented ‘the decay of the old habits’. On the other hand, proper conditions for independent development of towns were created. At this time, along with the military power, the Seljuks’ creative energy and artistic potency showed themselves with a renewed strength. And the viable nomadic traditions strengthened with their increasing influence the rationalistic and life-asserting character of the artistic creativity in the towns of the Near East. The development of humanistic views, unprecedented interest in the heritage and folklore and the strong aspiration for harmony and secular sciences became the principal factors of the development of the urban culture in Azerbaijan.

The rapid urbanisation in the Seljuk period was directly connected with the socio-economic progress. At that time, the towns of Azerbaijan expand, their population and socio-economic significance grows, while the architectural and artistic structures develop. Capitals of new states – Tebriz, Nakhichevan, Ardebil, Ganja, Shemakha – rise with striking rapidness; large trade and craft centres develop together with them.

At the time of the Seljuks and Atabeks many Azerbaijani towns, such as Maragha, Kazvin, Beylagan, Baku, Derbend, Khoy and others, were enriched with new buildings. Zakriya Kazvini (13th century) described a graphic model of a developed Muslim town of this period in one of his works. The model consisted of five concentric circles: Kuhendiz (the little town), shakhristan (the big town), gardens, vineyards and ploughed fields. This model was characteristic of large towns in Azerbaijan of the Seljuk period.

In the towns of Azerbaijan situated on the junctions of intercontinental trade routes appeared rabads, large suburbs, and vast open areas in the form of main town squares, on which the Juma-mosque was placed to become an ideological and compositional focus of the town centre. Such square was called a ‘bazaar square’, the main constructions of which were rows of stalls.

Domed halls of cathedral mosques of Central

Azerbaijan. 1. Urmia 2. Marand 3. Kirna

village 4. Nakhichevan.

218


The change in the social, economic and spiritual life in the 11th-13th centuries resulted in the rapid development and even spreading of towns over the country. The urban life created proper intellectual atmosphere and necessary prerequisites for artistic and literary activity. As a result, every large town turned into an important artistic and cultural centre.

The social and ideological development at the time of the Seljuks was reflected in artistic trends formed as part of the whole Azerbaijani architecture. Thus, the cultural and historical environment of that time proved favourable for the formation of local architectural and artistic schools based on the traditions and artistic and technical experience of the previous centuries. According to the previous research, natural and geographic factors, along with socio-economic processes led to the creation of four architectural schools in Azerbaijan, which formed around large towns: the Shirvan school in the north-east, the Aran school in the north-west, the Maragha-Nakhichevan school in the central part, and the Kazvin-Hamadan school in the south-east.

Despite the relative regional independence, the mentioned schools were not developing individually in a certain territory. Being parts of a larger whole, these schools were separate components of the Azerbaijani architecture, and their characteristic features merged to develop common and stable stylistic principles. The social structure of the country played a decisive role in this integration of the style.

Generally, the Seljuk period became a turning point in the history of the development of the Azerbaijani architecture in the medieval time. At that time extensive construction activity in Azerbaijan enriched the architecture with new types of buildings (towered mausoleum, madrasah), constructional methods (double domes, vaulted covering with a central supporting pillar), architectural forms (minaret with a cylindrical trunk, portal with two minarets), decorative devices (geometric ornament, glazed brick, facing with blocks) etc. It is the time of completion of the localisation of main artistic and cultural circles and architectural centres, as well as of the foundation of unique stylistic system common for the whole architecture of Azerbaijan.

The extraordinary rise in the cultic architecture of Azerbaijan in the 11th-13th centuries is the result of the blooming of Islam in the territory of the Seljuk empire and the evolution of cultic buildings connected with it. The spread of a specific type of mosques, which is known in the scientific literature under the name of ‘the Seljuk mosque’, known across the vast territory of the Muslim world, including Azerbaijan, reflects the fundamental process of forming of plans and constructions of cultic buildings. The most outstanding feature of the Seljuk mosque is the mihrab in the form of a kiosk covered with a dome (maksura). Maksura, the monumental

Sudzhas. Juma mosque. 12th century.

Plans, cross-sections, reconstruction (R.

Hillenbrand).

219

Azerbaijan

core of a mosque, is often the most well-preserved element of the building. That is why mosques of the Seljuk period are known in scientific literature as the ‘Seljuk kiosk’ or ‘Seljuk maksura’.

In the 11th-13th centuries there were many simple village or district mosques, and large majestic cathedral mosques. However, only the maksura, a part of monumental Juma-mosques, have survived.

The Juma-mosque in Ardebil (1078) consists of a square prayer hall and a deep eiwan adjoining it on the north. It is distinguished from other cathedral mosques by the eiwan and a gallery within the thick walls.

The Siniggala mosque (the Mohammed mosque) in Baku is the same age as the building in Ardebil, and is a unique monument, though smaller in size. The two-floor vertical building harmonising with the gently sloping landscape around, the free-standing minaret and the mihrab in the form of a semi-cylindrical tower projecting from the external wall, present an expressive and dynamic composition. The construction, each tier of which is covered with a lancet vault, was built by order of the rais Mohammed Abubekir oglu.

The two-f loor Ashur mosque, one of the district mosques of ancient Baku, is close in construction to the Siniggala mosque, but unlike the latter, is laconic and simpler in its composition. An inscription over a fretted mihrab says that the master Ashur Ibrahim oglu from Baku built this construction in 567 of the Hegira (1169).

The old Juma-mosque in Baku was being built in several stages and therefore had a complex plan. Its central, the oldest part – a square prayer hall covered with a conic dome – may be considered a monument of the Seljuk period.

The Khanegah complex on the river Pirsaat, the core of which is the Sheikh Pir Huseyn mausoleum (died in 1074), Navaghi village, Salyan region, is built of stone. There was time when the popularity of this sacred place went far beyond the limits of Shirvan. A small mosque adjoining the mausoleum resembles in composition and construction the district mosques in Baku built in the 11th-13th centuries. The minaret dominating the complex was built in 1256 by the master Mahmud Magsud oglu.

The Seljuk cathedral mosques that remain in south-east Azerbaijan are highly artistic monumental buildings. In the village of Sujas 52 km south-west of the town of Sultaniye, there is a cathedral mosque built, according to researchers, in 1100. Although the interior of the mosque is richly decorated with marvellous brickwork, applied decorative elements of gyazha and fine ‘kufi’ inscriptions, the outer surface bears no traces of decoration.

The Juma-mosque in Kazvin, the foundation of which was made in the 8th century and the building of which continued up to the mid 20th century, is famous with its prayer hall ‘Gunbadi Khumartash’. Khumartash, the ruler of Kazvin, built this square maksura between 1106 and 1114, in the reign of the Seljuk sultan Mahmud.

The main construction of a large monument in Kazvin called today the Heydariyye madrasah is a Seljuk maksura, close in time and construction to the dome of the Khumartash. The maksura of the Heydariyye madrasah is distinguished by the complete plan and structure and by high-quality decoration (brick and gyazha patterns).

One of the famous monuments of Hamadan is the Gunbadi Alaviyan, which was built at about the same time as the mosques in Kazvin and which differs from them in the absence of apertures in the lateral walls and the presence of star-like towers at the corners.

220


A Seljuk maksura is the c omposit iona l c ore of t he cathedral mosque in Marand. Afterwards the prayer hall was enlarged with constructions attached on three sides. Three constructions were later attached to the maksura of the cathedral mosque in Urmiye: the little hall on the east, and the oblong and three-nave halls on the west. At present, the cubic body of the maksura with a tall dome towers above the low adjoining rooms.

T h e c a t h e d r a l m o s q u e of the Atabeks ensemble in Nakhichevan was destroyed in the early 20th century, and today

it can only be studied by the remaining photographs and drawings. Its once monumental maksura was surrounded on three sides by additional rooms. The cathedral mosque in Nakhichevan is mainly built of brick, except for the vaults, arches and some details that are made of stone.

The ruins of a half-destroyed mosque in the village of Kirna resemble in composition the cathedral mosque in Nakhichevan. Delicate elements of the domed hall of the mosque in Kirna harmonise with each other. Judging by all its characteristic features, the mosque belongs to the 12th century.

It is necessary to note that a uniform model of cathedral mosque with a square prayer hall covered with a dome dominates across the whole Seljuk empire, including the territory of Azerbaijan. As a rule, the south wall of this model remained completely unchanged, and the mihrab was built in it. The other walls of the domed hall had broad arched doorways (2 or 3 in each wall). Such plan of the main hall enabled to enlarge the inner space by attaching additional rooms on three sides. These were mainly columned halls based on a system of pillars and arches. Thus, in several centuries, as a result of such attachment to the domed ‘Seljuk kiosk’, complexes and asymmetrical mosques were created. The cathedral mosques in Baku, Kazvin, Marand and Urmiye were formed in the same way.

Howe ver, t he ‘ k iosk ’- t y pe mosques of the Seljuk period in

Zanjan, Herve village, 12th century. Juma mosque (V.

Kleys).

Kazvin. Harrakan mausoleums. 11th century.

221

Azerbaijan

Azerbaijan had many characteristic features (decor, construction etc.) which place many of them apart from similar constructions in other regions of the Seljuk empire. Guided by general principles on the basis of which they built the cathedral mosques, Azerbaijani masters also followed ancient local traditions, creating unique, inimitable works of architecture.

The minaret, an inseparable part of a mosque, logical from the constructional aspect and perfect from the artistic point of view, indicates the level of cultic architecture in the Seljuk period. Mature style is a distinguishing feature of the minarets with cylindrical trunk in Azerbaijan in the 11th-12th centuries. There are some free-standing minarets among them, such as the Save ‘mil minare’ (1061), the Shamkur (late 11th century), and those attached to a mosque

– the Siniggala and the Pirsaat. On the basis of the materials from the Gudi khatun complex in Garabaglar and the Atabeks complex in Nakhichevan we also know about monumental portals with twin minarets, which were formed in the architecture of Azerbaijan in the reign of the Atabeks.

One of the most architecturally refined kinds of the Azerbaijani architecture of the 10th-12th centuries are towered mausoleums, which are unique and acknowledged as one of the best monumental forms of ritual architecture in the world. They are situated mainly in Anatolia, Azerbaijan and Khorasan. In scientific literature this type of mausoleum is known as the ‘Seljuk mausoleum’. In medieval written sources and among people they were often called ‘Gunbed’ or ‘Gunbez’.

These two-tier memorial constr uct ions of t he Oguz Turks were the result of the evolution of the ancient Turkic graves and were a combination o f k u r g a n - l i k e a n d y u r t-like tombs. The structure of the tower mausoleums was developed most intensively in the Seljuk period, and after its structural composition had been established in the 11th-12th centuries, it became a regular architectural form spread across a vast territory. The oldest of the numerous tower mausoleums that have survived in Azerbaijan belong to the second half of the 11th century, while the most monumental of them were built in the period between the 12th and the first half of the 14th century.

Two mausoleums in Harrakan known as the ‘Gosha imam’ are

Nakhichevan. Mausoleum of Yusuf ibn Kuseir. 1162.

Plan.

222


masterpieces of brick architecture. They are octagonal in plan and have cylindrical towers at the corners. One of them was built in 1067, the other in 1093, in commemoration of Turkmen beks. The mausoleums do not differ much either in plan or in constructional systems or in artistic and architectural decoration. Their author, the architect Mohammed Abul Mali from Zanjan, who had a deep knowledge of the art of working the brick, seemed to want to show on these monuments the material’s rich artistic and decorative potential.

The Gyrmyzy Gunbed (1148), a tower mausoleum in Maragha, is an interesting piece of architecture with a number of characteristic features. It is the first monument that has a central supporting pillar in the vault, and the first building known in Azerbaijan, in the architectural decoration of which glazed brick is used. In addition, the professional title of ‘memar’ (architect) is foumd for the first time in the inscription on the Gyrmyzy Gunbed mausoleum: the author of the monument is Bekr Muhammed, the son of the benna (builder) Bendan, the son of the memar (architect) Mokhsun. The building is square in plan and consists of a vault below and a room above.

On the top of a high hill at the Kharaba-Ghilan site (Ordubad region), there are remains of a mausoleum close in structure to those described above. A vault and its

mushroom-like support, both octagonal in plan, are what remain of the mausoleum.The Imamzade Veli mausoleum in the Kazvin village of Ziyadabad resembles in structure

and plan the Gyrmyzy Gunbed and is dated back to the 12th century. The outer surface of the Imamzade Yusif Khuseyr oglu mausoleum in Nakhichevan (1162, architect Ajemi Abubekr oglu Nakhichevani) is decorated with geometric patterns of baked brick. The two-tier building covered on the outside with an octagonal hipped roof is known among people as the ‘Atababa Gunbezi’. One of the octagonal mausoleums built in the 12th-13th century lies in ruins in the village of Niyag, Kazvin. There are no traces of decoration either on the outer or on the inner surface of this building, called the ‘Kafir Gunbedi’.

Cylindrical mausoleums constitute a separate group of buildings. The earliest of them, situated in Maragha – the ‘Dairevi Gunbed (the Round Tower, 1167), is round on the outside and decagonal on the inside. This mausoleum, like others in this region, has two tiers and a richly decorated portal. The Uch Gunbed mausoleum (1184, architect Abumansur Musa oglu) rising on the bank of the Urmiye, is round on the outside and square on the inside.

In Nakhichevan, only the Momine Khatun mausoleum (1186, architect Ajemi Abubekr oglu Nakhichevani) belonging to the once large architectural Atabeks complex, has survived. It was built in commemoration of Momine Khatun, the mother of the Atabek Jahan Pahlivan. In comparison with the preceding monuments this one is larger and has a complex plan. Its vault is decagonal in form with a strong decagonal support in the centre. The sides of the support

Pir Hussein Khanegahs. Tile

decor (Sankt-Peterburg State

Hermitage).

223

Azerbaijan

are connected with the sides of the vault by lancet vaults, forming a strong mushroom-like construction. The upper room of the Momine Khatun is decagonal on the outside and round on the inside. The structure was built strictly following the principle of decimal division, which is in its turn the base of golden section creating proportion and harmony. Today’s height of the mausoleum, the upper pyramidal covering of which has been destroyed, is 25 m.

The Geoy Gunbed mausoleum (1196, architect Ahmed Muhammed) is one of the famous monuments of Maragha and also has a many-sided tower. The corners of its octagonal body, as in the mausoleums in Harrakan, are strengthened by cylindrical towers. The outer surfaces of the mausoleum are decorated with two-layer relief patterns of bricks of a special profile. Blue glazed brick was used successfully and in large quantities in the decor of the Geoy Gumbed mausoleum, which inf luenced the colour of its external part.

The Gulistan mausoleum near Julfa constructed by architects from Nakhichevan is a gem of the art of stone. As the vault of this mausoleum is on the surface of the ground, it has two tiers on the outside. Its composition is based on the square base passing into a dodecahedral body. The mausoleum is built entirely of red tufa; its outer niches are covered with a pattern, in complexity and richness comparable only to the decor of the Momine Khatun mausoleum. But here the fine and delicate patterns are fretted in stone. The Gulistan mausoleum is one of the remarkable memorial monuments of the early 13th century, demonstrating the genetic commonality of the mausoleums in Azerbaijan and Anatolia.

The Melik Ajar mausoleum (Lachin region, the village Jijimli) dated back to the 12th -13th century in academic literature, is built of stone. According to a number of researchers, its octagonal body narrowing towards the top, the parabolic dome and chibouque-like corner pillars are a direct imitation of nomadic marquees.

The presented monuments show that in the 10th-13th centuries memorial constructions were developing actively over the whole vast territory of the empire. Azerbaijan was one of the main centres where the design of Seljuk tower mausoleums was developed. The vault, their main functioning part, was round, square or polygonal in plan and displayed a great variety of plans and structures. Often there are niches on the inner surfaces of the vault. In some cases niches served to improve the interior of the vault making it more spacious and expressive.

A particularly advanced type of the vault develops in the Maragha-Nakhichevan zone, in which architects pay particular attention to the plan and construction of subterranean

Maragha. Geoy Gunbed mausoleum, 1194.

224


rooms. Many-sided central pillars broadening towards the top and connecting with the corners of the vault were a steady, beautiful construction, forming the base of vaults of this type. Such great architectural concept did not only make the whole construction much stronger, but made the interior more expressive and artistic. The upper rooms of the towered mausoleums, round, square or polygonal in form, were covered with double domes. The inner dome was always sphero-conical. The outer ones in the Maragha-Nakhichevan zone had conic, pyramidal, ribbed and conic, or stalactitic forms, while in the Kazvin-Hamadan zone they were lancet-like or sphero-conic. In both zones such coverings quite harmonised with the general composition of mausoleums. However, in each case double domes covering upper rooms served both decorative and constructional purposes. Both the general form and the double coverings of the towered mausoleums

originated from the nomadic yurt. Certainly, it took a long time for the idea of double dome to develop and be realised in monumental architecture. In these mausoleums not only the outer covering of the upper room, but the whole structure resembles in form its prototype – the marquee and yurt. This resemblance can be easily seen in cylindrical mausoleums.

Apparently, the concept of towered mausoleums was developed from cylindrical mausoleums, the latter being a direct imitation in construction of the model of ancient Turkic marquee. However, the upper room – the symbolic marquee – was gradually increasing in size to evolve finally into a tall monument.

Prismatic mausoleums occupy the middle stage between cylindrical and cubic mausoleums; they also have symbolic significance and produce great visual effect. The smooth cylindrical form and the sharp cubic structure restrict to some extent the effect produced by contrasted light and shadow. Every facet of a polyhedral figure has its own tone and amount of light, producing thus a more dynamic composition. The faceted prismatic body of the mausoleum, remaining monumental, looks more upright, elegant and delicate. Apart from that, the polygonal shape of the body enables an architect to make its brick decor particularly rich.

Civil buildings, many of which have been destroyed or have disappeared without a trace, reflected all aspects of medieval life and the social structure of society. Some types of medieval civil architecture formed at this very time. A particularly interesting group of these monuments is bridges, distinguished by their clear typological integrity. A complicated landscape with lots of rivers was an important reason for building numerous bridges in Azerbaijan. They eliminated natural obstructions hampering internal relations, and also ensured activity on intercontinental trade routes going across the whole territory of Azerbaijan. Unlike the

Sultaniye. Oljaitu Khan Mausoleum.

225

Azerbaijan

Nakhichevan. Momine Khatun mausoleum. 1186.

226


Nakhichevan. Mausoleum of Yusuf Ibn Kuseir. 1162.

227

Azerbaijan

Mausoleum in Julfa. Gulistan. 13th century.

228


Garabaglar. Gudi Khatun mausoleum. 14th century. After restoration.

229

Azerbaijan

The architectural complex in the village of Garabaglar. 14th century.

230


The Blue Mosque in Tebriz. Portal, 15th century.

The Blue Mosque in Tebriz. Interior.

231

Azerbaijan

Khanegah Alinja in Julfa. 12-15th century.

Gabala fortress. Tower at the entrance.

232


Great Mardakan castle. 1187.

Little Mardakan castle. 1204.

233

Azerbaijan

Nardaran castle. 1301.

Khanegah Pir Hussein after restoration.

234


The complex of the palace of the Shirvanshahs.

Icheri Shekher in Baku.

235

Azerbaijan

Divankhana. Interior.

236


The complex of the palace of the Shirvanshahs. Divankhana, 15th century.


237

Azerbaijan

Icheri shekher. Baku. Siniggala Mosque. 1078.

238


Icheri shekher. Baku.

239

Azerbaijan

Mihrab of the mosque in Marand - a fragment. 1329.

Architectural decoration of the Momine Khatun mausoleum. 1186.

240


Architectural decoration of the

mausoleum in Gulistan.

Architectural decoration Momine

Khatun mausoleum. 1186.

Khudaferin bridge.

241

Azerbaijan

neighbouring countries, Azerbaijan had developed a solid tradition of building bridges. The ‘Girmizy Korpu’ – ‘The Red Bridge’ (the Kazakh bridge), the ‘Giz Korpusu’ – ‘The Maiden’s Bridge’, bridges in Khudaferin, Ardebil and Tebriz are considered perfect samples of these constructions built in the Seljuk period. The high technical and artistic level enables experts in Islamic architecture to regard the bridge in Gaflanty across the river Gizyluzen a gem of bridge-building in Western Asia.

The solidity of a bridge depends, first of all, on the place chosen for its building. And here the natural foundation plays the most important role. Rocks in the river bed were the strongest foundation on which supports and breakwaters of a bridge were built. The constructional system of a bridge was created of arched spans between the supports. The rock foundation, at the same time, made the bridge harmonise with the surrounding landscape. As a rule, the middle horizontal part of a bridge sloped down to the bank like a ramp, which made bridges with short spans look ‘humpbacked’. This form allowed builders to save on building materials and made the bridges resistant to mud torrents. The arches, the main constructional parts of bridges, were built of finely cut or baked brick. The other parts of the façade were constructed of roughly cut stone, cobblestone or texture imitating brickwork. In this way architects purposefully demonstrated the constructional scheme and the tectonic structure of the buildings.

Both the great Seljuk sultans and the Azerbaijani Atabeks were, first of all, commanders and professional military men. That is why military architecture could not but capture their attention.

Security of large cities depended, first of all, on the strength of the fortified walls surrounding them. In addition, the city gates were also protected by fortresses built on eminences in the neighbourhood. Written sources of that period mention the names of some fortresses near cities: the Dizmar, Ruin and Nov near Tebriz; the Alinja, Surmari, Tagmar, Fignan and Gakhram near Nakhichevan; the Bakhman, Shidan and Uf near Ardebil. Apart from these, the Arana-Shatar, Izz and Ekhna fortresses, as well as the ones situated in other regions of Azerbaijan – Shakhu, Tala, Firuzabad, Ali-Abad, Gotur, Balak, Baldug Gazaj and others, are mentioned in 13th-14th-centuries sources. Some of these fortresses have been destroyed, others restored, and a part of them was built in the 12th-13th century. The mere listing and historical evidence of that time confirm that both the Atabeks and the Shirvanshahs paid considerable attention to restoration and building of mountain fortresses, watchtowers, castles and other defensive buildings.

The Gulistan fortress - Giz Galasy (The Maiden’s Fortress), re-built and reinforced in the 12th century became the second internal fortress of Shemakha, the capital of Shirvan. The most well-known architects, builders and masons of the country were attracted to the building of the fortress that was of national significance. Among the mountain fortresses of Azerbaijan the Giz Galasy fortress in the Kelbajar, also called the ‘Namerd Gala’ (The Insidious Fortress) is distinguished by its monumental forms. This fortress was built of brick in the most arduous mountain conditions. This monument is considered an outstanding work of the Eldeghizid time. The main treasury of the Eldeghizids was kept in the Alinja fortress not far from Nakhichevan; therefore the majority of the constructions here were erected in the second half of the 12th-first half of the 13th century. The walls and ruins of the buildings of the Alinja fortress situated on a bare summit of a mountain rising in the middle of a broad plain testify to the high building culture.

242


Written sources of the Seljuk and Atabek time inform us about the building of luxurious fortified castles, summer palaces and pavillions in various parts of Azerbaijan. However, unfortunately, no whole specimen of these architectural types has reached our days. Monuments known under the name of the ‘Absheron castles’ and being purely defensive buildings of once existing castle complexes are in a little better condition.

The Absheron castle complex included palaces of local rulers, of a khan or general of the army who were subordinate to the Shirvanshahs, and also a mosque and a fortress. The fortress included in this complex was not suitable for permanent residence, and was only used as a temporary refuge or for defensive purposes. These fortresses built in accordance with the character of settlement of Absheron, its climate, relief and socio-economic conditions performed only the limited functions we have mentioned.

Of the Absheron fortresses only four still keep their initial appearance – the Great Mardakan (1187), the Little Mardakan (1204), the Ramana (12th-13th century), and the Nardaran (1301). These fortresses are identical in structure and consist of a large and tall main tower (donjon) and closed fortified walls surrounding it. The towers looking monolithic on the outside are divided into several tiers on the inside. In the large castles – the Great Mardakan (5 tiers) and the Ramana (4 tiers) the interior construction is even more complex.

The thick lateral walls (1.5 and 2.1 m) made the towers strong and solid, and the spiral staircase inside them provided communication between the floors. In three castles, excluding the Ramana fortress, the stairs begin from the second tier. A wooden or rope ladder was removed during a fight, thus making the upper tiers less accessible to the enemy. The Absheron castles were made of a roughly or well cut stone. The external stonework of the Little Mardakan fortress demonstrates a higher level of performance. The tops of the external walls and small and large towers of the castles were covered with large mashikuls in the form of a crown. As a rule, the Absheron castles had a system of wells dug in rocks.

The Bail castle (1234-1235) on a small island in the Bay of Baku repeating the form of the island is oblong in plan. It was probably built on a foundation of a more ancient complex. From the remaining inscription ‘Bender Gala’ we know that it was a fortress and a port. The

Zanjan. Gaflanty bridge. 12th century (Giz korpusu).

243

Azerbaijan

castle performed the same function in defending Baku as the Gulistan fortress in defending Shemakha. The same methods - artistic stone relief and fretted inscriptions and figures - were used in the architectural decoration of the Bail castle and other large defensive buildings of Shirvan. Above 700 stone slabs with deep fretwork taken out of the water that once girded the building are works of monumental calligraphy and sculpture. The Aydynbulag tower (Aydynbulag village, Shehin region) close in construction to the Absheron castles and being the only fortress built on a caravan route that has survived, was probably built at the same time as the castles. In general, the 11th-13th centuries were a period of resurrection for the military architecture of Azerbaijan, which is evident not only from the quantity of the remaining defensive constructions and the diversity of their types, but in the high building technique and functionality, and high level of performance in general and in details.

The architecture of Azerbaijan was based on the canons common for the whole Muslim architecture, and on the uniform scientific theoretical system. This unity visible in various fields of the art of building can be seen in architectural decor, and particularly, in artistic decoration of the surfaces of walls. The large quantity of patterns and geometric ornaments was connected with the need for decoration and symbolism at that time and, most important, with the strong influence of the Turkic traditions. As the masters often produced facing material by themselves, they very skillfully used its physical and aesthetic qualities creating astonishingly beautiful compositions on the surfaces of heavy constructions.

A lot depends on the natural characteristics of the material. From this aspect the Seljuk period was a triumph of baked brick used both in building and facing. Across the whole extent of the Seljuk empire, including some part of Azerbaijan – from Ganja to Kazvin – architects skillfully used bricks in the decoration in the ‘Seljuk style’, which was the most popular type of architectural decor. There were two types of brick facing technique – the smooth and relief brickworks; the second one was more widely spread in Azerbaijan. The minaret in Sava, the Harrakan mausoleums, the Gunbadi Kheydariye and the Momine Khatun mausoleum are the peak of the brick decoration technique.

In the 12th-13th centuries, the background of interior patterns of baked brick was delicately decorated with gyazha. Gyazha used often in interiors reached a high artistic level in decorating the mihrabs of mosques at the time of Nizami. The most ancient mihrabs are known to be in the Kazvin and Hamadan mosques. Due to the rapid development of glazed mosaic, since the 14th century the use of gyazha in the Azerbaijani monumental architecture falls.

Blue glazed bricks appeared in the main architectural centres of the Seljuk empire, including those in Azerbaijan, in the first half of the 12th century. At first they were used in the most important parts of buildings or in the form of belts of ornaments, patterns or inscriptions. It did not bring any change to the facing technique, but it prompted the development of building ceramic mosaic.

Although glazed bricks were used in many regions of the Seljuk empire, according to J. M. Rogers, ‘attempts to develop this decorative form were made only in Azerbaijan.’ In fact, the technical and artistic evolution of glazed decor is more obvious in the Momine Khatun and Geoy Gunbed mausoleums than in other territories.

Brick, gyazha and glazed brick, the types of decor widely spread in central and south Azerbaijan, were very unpopular in Shirvan, where stone with its plasticity and fretwork was regarded the principal building material. The Siniggala mosque and the ruins of the

244


Bail castle demonstrate the high level of the common Seljuk style of stone architectural decor of Shirvan in the 11th-13th centuries.

The variety of building and facing materials was the principal factor in the architectural appearance, form, size and proportions of buildings constructed in different parts of the country. This, in its turn, caused the formation of individual artistic tradit ions conforming w ith the local conditions. At the same time, regardless of the quality of the material, the monuments ref lected both the variety of forms of the Azerbaijani architecture and the unity of style.

The Seljuk period in the history of the Azerbaijani culture was marked by the presence of a few great scholars and artists. The Azerbaijani scientists and thinkers of that time taught at the most well-known madrasahs of the Muslim world, while their works were studied in the largest centres of the East. The works of famous Azerbaijani poets were known in the whole civilised world. To the list of outstanding Azerbaijani poets and philosophers respected throughout the whole Islamic culture, such as Abdulhasan Bahmanyar, Shihabeddin Sukhraverdi, Qatran Tebrizi, Khatib Tebrizi, Mehseti Ganjavi, Khagani Shirvani, Nizami Ganjavi and Shamseddan Tebrizi, can be added the names of the architects – Mohammed Zanjani, Bekr Mohammed, Ajemi Nakhichevani and Zeynaddin Shervani, and painters – Ahmed Tiflisi and Abdulmomin Khoyi, to complete the list of outstanding persons living in Azerbaijan in the 11th-13th centuries.

The Seljuk period is important from the informational aspect, which sets it apart from all the other periods. The names of the first Azerbaijani architects were found in inscriptions on buildings of that time. This very fact indicates the architect’s high position in society. Usually masters creating this or that architectural monument put their ‘author’s signature’. Names of some 11th-13th-century architects became known from these scanty ‘author’s signatures’, who might be said to represent all the regions and architectural and artistic schools of Azerbaijan.

The inscriptions made on the Azerbaijani architectural monuments of the Seljuk period contained a profession of their creator followed by his name: mukhandisa, benna, ustad, memar. Although these professions are rather close, at the Seljuk time mukhandisas occupied the highest step in the building hierarchy. Then came memars and bennas. Apart from these multi-skilled craftsmen, numerous artisans skilled in a particular craft, also took part in the construction process. The variety of types of buildings, the increasing complication of building processes, the diversity of the architectural decor and the rapid construction of large complexes – all this prompted the growth of the craftsmen’s professionalism and specialisation. The Azerbaijani architects of that time did not confine themselves to their own land, finding enough space for their artistic activity in other countries. Nizami Ganjavi, a 12th-century poet, noted in his

Baku. Bail castle, 1234. The plan of a

reconstruction.

245

Azerbaijan

historical essays that architects possessed a wide range of skills and scientific knowledge, which is also corroborated by medieval written sources. The Sheikh Yusif Shamsaddin from Tebriz brought Islam to the distant Maldive Islands in the Indian Ocean building there wonderful mosques, while Gasan Firuz oglu from Maragha, Ahmed Abubekr oglu from Marand, Haji Bakhtiyar from Tebriz and Ahmed Ibrahim oglu from Aran created interesting specimens of architectural art in Western Asia. The Seljuk period was, in general, auspicious for the creative development of medieval architects, who actively and widely propagated architectural and artistic traditions of Azerbaijan.

THE ILKHANID PERIOD Incursions in the early 13th century caused temporary fall in the economy and culture of

Azerbaijan. However, in the late 13th century, when Azerbaijan becomes a political centre of the Ilkhanid empire that included also Iran, Iraq, Caucasus and Anatolia, the country enters a period of strong rise in economical and cultural life. According to the major orientalist V. V. Bartold, ‘the vast areas conquered by Muslims’ and the ‘cultural and historical ground of a global significance’ they created, were the simplest and clearest causes of this progress. And Tebriz, which had scarcely been affected by the Mongol invasion, became one of the centres of the world communication.

The social and political situation at the Ilkhanid time created a favourable atmosphere for the broad and rapid development of cultural activity, particularly in the central regions of Azerbaijan. The relations of the Mongols with such different cultures as those of the Christian Europe and China brought new ideas in the intellectual life, trade and art (K.E. Bosworth).

The 13th-14th centuries is the most fruitful period for the Azerbaijani science. The scientific achievements of the mathematician Ubeyd Tebrizi, philosopher Mahmud Shabustari, music theoreticians Safiaddin Urmavi and Abdulgadir Maragai, astronomer Nasiraddin Tusi and historian Rashidaddin Hamadani acquired global significance.

At that time Tebriz became a well-known centre of calligraphy. Kazi Ahmed called it ‘the holy ground’ for the development of a whole generation of outstanding calligraphers, such as Mahmud Seyrafi, Seid Haydar, Safar Tebrizi, Abdulla Seyrafi, Murabekshah Zerrinkalem and others) known far beyond Azerbaijan.

T h e f o u n d a t i o n f o r t h e successful development of medieval architecture of Azerbaijan was laid in the Seljuk period, while such base for the miniature painting school of Azerbaijan (Tebriz) was created in the Ilkhanid period.

The Mongols discovered in Azerbaijan a highly developed culture of construction and a rich architectural heritage. The Ilkhans, whose ‘political power and prestige

Bridges of the 12th century at the Aran Islands: 1.

The Red bridge (the Kazakh bridge), 2. The bridge

in Barda.

246


concentrated in Azerbaijan’ (D. Wilber), wanted to overshadow with their numerous grand and solemn constructions the achievements of the preceding periods and consolidate their might in the central part of the country. Azerbaijan, and particularly its major architectural centres of the 11th-12th centuries, such as Maragha and Tebriz, which had become the Ilkhanid capitals, had big potentialities for broad and intensive building activities.

The architectural achievements of the late 13th-14th centuries testify to the appropriate historical context for creative activity. This period evidently surpassed the developments of the Seljuk period. The Ilkhans, having merely strengthened their positions, began broad reconstruction and building works. Hulagu-khan (1256-65), the founder of the state and favourite grandson of Genghis Khan, and Abaga-khan (1265-84), who transferred the capital from Maragha to Tebriz, used to build castles, palaces and temples. In 1259, an observatory, a major scientific complex, was built in Maragha by order of Hulagu-khan.

According to Rashid ad-Din, Argun-khan (1284-91), ‘like his father and grandfather…, was addicted to palaces and buildings’. He erected in Tebriz four cathedral mosques and several other buildings, in some regions of the country he built ‘many tall castles and impregnable forts’, and founded the towns of Arguniye and Sultaniye. Gazan-khan (1295-1304) surpassed his forerunners in scale, purposefulness and organisation of construction works. He was an innovator and reformer not only in government, army and economy, but also made considerable reformations in architecture and town building. The ruler, first of all, regulated the organisation of the construction process by appointing ‘respectable officials, honest and experienced scribes and architects able to make drawings’ to different positions (F. Rashid ad-Din). Besides, tentative calculations of all the materials, budget expenditures and work costs, together with intensified control on all stages of the process created strict order. Such advanced system of the work organisation allowed Gazan-khan to bring his grand architectural ideas to fruition. The construction of fortified walls around towns conducted at the government’s expense, the allocation of big sums for improvements, the construction of numerous open and subterranean canals - all this mobilised thousands of people. The ruler’s decree about the building of a

mosque and bathhouses in all villages and estates promoted the rise of building culture throughout the country. Gazan-khan himself supervised the construction of the largest objects in Tebriz and the erection of Gazaniye. He successfully resumed the construction work at Shenbe begun by Argun-khan and founded a new town between Zanjan and Kazvin, called Sultaniye, which was finished by the sultan Oljaytu-khan (1304-17). The rest of the monuments of the 14th century, the cathedral mosque in Marand, Fifteen span-long Khudaferin bridge.

247

Azerbaijan

the architectural complex in Garabaglar, the numerous tower mausoleums and caravanserais that have survived from Abu Said Bakhadur-khan’s time (1317-35) show that it was a period of intensive and large-scale construction. Despite the increasing inner strain and discord after Abu Said, ‘the last outstanding representative of the Ilkhanid dynasty’ (K. Bosworth), the architecture continued to develop. The large town ensembles – the Damashghiye and the Dovlatkhane, as well as the Ustad-Shaghird mosque appear in Tebriz at the time of the Jalairid and Chobanid emirs.

The court aristocracy and noble officials supported the building activity of the Ilkhanid rulers. Of the numerous buildings constructed by the vizier and scholar Rashid ad-Din the largest was the university campus Rashidiye in Tebriz, which, in A. Pope’s saying, ‘surpassed in majesty even the antique complexes’. Alishah Tebrizi, another Ilkhanid vizier and architect, erected a series of large town complexes in Bagdad, Tebriz, Sultan, Salmas, and also constructed numerous civil buildings.

The fantastically wide scope of the construction the Ilkhanid rulers carried out in Azerbaijan, the combination of various artistic traditions, and the important reforms of Gazan-khan led to incredible blooming of architecture and town building in south regions of the country, and to stylistic enrichment. The artistic forms and methods that had formed in the course of history continue to develop and become more complicated. The rich traditions of the 11th-12th centuries and the wish of the Ilkhanid rulers to erect majestic constructions conforming with the scale and power of the large empire are the two factors in the art of building at that time that were combined to create a new style and a new architectural school. Comparing the architectural works of the Maragha-Nachichevan and Tebriz schools it is not difficult to trace these changes and reveal their characteristic stylistic features.

The Ilkhanid monumental constructions are distinguished from like constructions of the 11th-12th centuries, first of all, by their large size and complex structural composition. The appearance of the grand palatial ensembles, cultic and trade complexes, gigantic cathedral mosques and monumental mausoleums symbolising might and power was conditioned by material and aesthetic needs of the society. The royal clients’ demands were thus clear: the epochal constructions they ordered must surpass all the monuments known in the East in size and composition. For example, the builders of the Gazan-khan mausoleum had the task of surpassing in size the Sultan Sanjar mausoleum (12th century), while the Alishah cathedral mosque in Tebriz was to be bigger that the Sasanid palace in Ktesifon.

The new large-scale conception influenced the construction and proportions of the buildings. Compositional methods used to make buildings look higher become more widely spread. The bodies of the towered mausoleums and the heavy Seljuk portals become slimmer, the domes become more sphero-conical and the vertical divisions become shorter. Vertical compositional

Tebriz. The mosque of Alishah, 14th century.

(reconstruction by J. Giyasi).

248


elements are often used – the minarets, high portals, narrow niches and others. The aspiration for verticality is also seen in interior compositions. Due to these changes architectural compositions become slimmer and more dynamic.

The increase of the size of constructions caused some constructional changes in the building technique. Vaulted constructions are widely used to cover vast undivided spaces. The progress in construction also meant that domed constructions became more sophisticated.

An unusual solemnity was another feature that distinguished the Tebriz architectural style from the more reserved style of the Maragha-Nakhichevan school. The composition with two minarets becomes common for cultic buildings; compositions with many minarets appear together with huge portals in the form of eiwans flanked by two minarets, while spatial compositions become more complex. The use of plastic elements, such as rich friezes, stalactite cornices etc., is rather wide. Different methods are used to enforce the expressiveness and artistic effect of architectural elements and decor.

The development of glazed brick production and the appearance of architectural tiles made it possible to cover large surfaces with many-coloured, ornamental carpets, creating thus the stylistic originality of the architectural decor of the Tebriz school, which had existed for many centuries. Composite fretted mosaic made it easier to create complex curvilinear ornamental compositions from the technical aspect. The new facing technique also influenced architectural epigraphy, where the geometric kufi hand had replaced the complex patterns of naskh and suls. The façade surfaces of huge constructions faced with bright, many-coloured tiles gained solemn and shining appearance, while the constructions themselves looked festive and pompous.

Apart from the fretted mosaic, the production of tiles in the form of a cross and six- or eight-point stars starts to develop at that time in the Tebriz zone. Usually, the central part of the star-like tiles was decorated with relief human or animal figures, or landscapes and plant ornaments. Often these tiles were framed with inscriptions. The tile production workshops

Marand. Juma mosque. 12th century. Plan.

249

Azerbaijan

of the Tebriz zone were situated in Tebriz, Sultaniye, Takht-i Suleyman and, apparently, in other large towns of Azerbaijan.

Tebriz did not only become a political and trade centre of global significance. The scale of construction activity carried out by the Ilkhanid rulers and noblemen made the capital Tebriz an architectural and artistic centre, where the Azerbaijani architects intensively collaborated with architects and other craftsmen from different countries. Masters from Turkestan, Iran and Iraq involved in the building played an important role in forming the style of the Tebriz architectural school. According to written sources, 14,400 men, a part of which were foreigners, participated daily in the building of the Gazan-khan mausoleum. The town of ‘Rashidiye accommodated men of arts and artisans coming from various countries’. According to Vassaf, Tajeddin Alishah moved 4,000 masters of art and skillful artisans with their families from Bagdad to Sultaniye.

The Uygur artisans were particularly respectable and influential as masters of miniature and architectural decoration. The Uygur artists Kutlug Buga, Altun Buga, Toktimur, Ayas and others took part in the formation of the Tebriz miniature school in the 13th-14th centuries.

No doubt, Uygur architects we do not know yet anything about played a leading part in the building of a number of constructions in the territory of Azerbaijan, such as Buddhist temples, kumirs, Mongolian obas and others architectural forms characteristic of Central Asian architecture. According to Nizari, a 13th-century Iranian poet and traveler, 30 dragons were depicted on the Hulagu-khan castle on Shakhu-tell Island. Colourful tiles of the late 13th century with relief images of dragons found in Takht-i Suleyman in some sense confirm his account. Just there, during the excavation of ruins of an Ilkhanid palace archaeologists found capitals of columns of red stone in the form of a bulb. According to specialists, those fragments decorated with relief images of dragons and plant ornaments, both in form and character are of East Turkestan origin.

Rashid ad-Din indicates in one place that Argun-khan ‘built a temple [in Tebriz] and pictured his images on the walls’. In the centre of a pool in the Alishah cathedral mosque in Tebriz masters created four sculptures of lions ‘disgorging water into the pool’. Such motifs uncharacteristic of the architecture of the Seljuk period are found on the 13th-14th-century architectural monuments in Western Asia and Iraq. There is no doubt that these elements characteristic of Central Asian architectural traditions were made by Uygur craftsmen brought there for that purpose. Images of a lion or dragon symbolising power and protection were widely used in the architectural decoration of buildings of Karakorum, the capital of the East Ulus of the Genghisids. Even some of the wall paintings on the Gazan-khan mausoleum built after Gazan-khan had adopted Islam and destroyed all Buddhist temples

Baku. Juma mosque. 12th century. Plan.

250


and kumirs were made by artists from the Far East.

The large-scaled international cultural exchange in the 13t h-14t h centuries prompted to some extent the formation of the Tebriz architectural school. Various building traditions the foreign masters brought enriched it considerably. This process helped Tebriz become a major and important architectural and artistic centre of the Western East.

In the second half of the 13th-14th centuries town building develops rapidly in Azerbaijan. At this very time many

new towns appear, while a number of old ones, such as Maragha, Tebriz, Ardebil, Ujan, Baku, Barda, Salmas and others are restored and increase their territory. In V. V. Bartold’s opinion, the consequences of the Mongolian destruction, ‘like the effects of any other defeat, were not at all that great and did not hinder the appearance of new towns’. And indeed, beginning from Hulagu-khan almost all the Ilkhanid rulers contributed to the town building. Abaga-khan restored the town Shiz, ancient Ganzak.

According to Rashid ad-Din, in the reign of Argun-khan ‘…Tebriz was like Egypt, and Arguniye like the capital city of Cairo’. The same source reports that Geoykhatu-khan who ruled only for four years founded the big town Kutlug Balyk (happy town) on the bank of the river Kura. Implementing ‘his systematic building programme’ Gazan-khan in his attempt to solve the numerous problems of town building arising with rapidly growing Tebriz established a town on the Caspian shore under the name of Makhmudabad.

The fortification wall of Tebriz was about 6 thousand steps long at the time before Gazan-khan; the new wall was 27 km in circumference. After several major reconstructions carried out by Gazan-khan the structure of Tebriz was considerably improved. Near each of the six big gates of Tebriz were trade complexes connected with each other and the main bazaar in the centre. Tebriz was one of the cultural centres in Muslim world, which resulted in the appearance of the town Rashidiye, an educational and scientific centre. The small town of Gazaniye was in a way a satellite town performing a number of governmental and trade functions of the capital.

The town citadel is known to have existed in Tebriz since the 9th century. The Seljuk sultan Togrul bey (1038-1663) lived for some time in the citadel of Tebriz. We do not know of any facts concerning the architecture of the Ilkhanids in Tebriz or their living in this town. Clavijo,

the Castilian ambassador, gives important information about Tebriz which he visited in 1403. He says that ‘Dovlatkhane’ s building in Tebriz built by the Uveys Sultan (1356-1374) is ‘a big house surrounded by a beautiful wall’ and consisting of 20,000 rooms. Most probably, it was a large palace complex that was located within the citadel of Tebriz in the late 14th century.

Built between 1290 and 1313, Sultaniye demonstrated architectural and town building concepts which were new and audacious for the medieval Middle East. According to original sources, it was 30,000 steps in circumference, and like Tebriz, had an annular-and-radial plan.

Julfa. Khanegahs Alinja. 12-15th centuries.

251

Azerbaijan

Apart from Sultaniye which, founded by Argun-khan, went though the final building stage at the time of Oljaytu-khan, two new towns sprang up in the Mugan steppe in this period. Of all the towns founded by the Ilkhanid rulers, Sultaniye was the most outstanding. Along with Tebriz it gives an impressive illustration to the great shift in the field of urban construction.

Although the first Ilkhanid rulers encouraged the construction of non-Muslim cultic buildings in the towns of Azerbaijan (Khoy, Maragha, Tebriz and others), the construction of kumirs, synagogues and churches was continued for a short time, many of these constructions having been destroyed later. The remaining mosques of the 13th-14th centuries demonstrate clearly the evolution of this architectural theme.

In the 11th-12th centuries, the square mosque with a dome in the centre became the most common type in the southern Azerbaijan, while the Ilkhanid period was the time when a new type of mosque developed, with a rectangular prayer room covered with a vault. Graphic documents depicting the ruins of buildings show that mosques in the Shenb-i Gazan complex (late 13th century) and the central mosque in Sultaniye (early 14th century) had a vaulted covering. The Alishah mosque in Tebriz (1310-1320) became the most mature and magnificent specimen of this type. The construction was one of the largest complexes of the Islamic world, having a clear and majestic architectural image. The grand prayer hall was crowned by the largest vault for the medieval time (30.15 m wide and 65.0 m long). The only remaining part of this gigantic cultic construction is the mihrab, which was turned in the 18th century into the citadel of the town of Tebriz, called the Ark Galasy (the Ark fortress). At present this is the largest mihrab of the cultic Islamic architecture.

The mosque in the village of Shikh near Baku built in the late 13th century and demolished in 1939 consisted of a small rectangular prayer hall and a minaret in its north-west corner. Most of the district mosques that have been preserved within the Icheri shekher, the fortress of Baku, were built in the 14th century and have no minarets: the Khydyr (1301), Ghilek (1308), Mirza Ahmed (1345), Chinili (1375), Molla Ahmed and Jin mosques. These stone district mosques, as well as the mosque in the village of Shikh (the Bibi-Eybat), have rectangular prayer halls covered with a lancet vault and in some cases divided by an arch wall. In comparison with other district mosques, the mosque in Keygubad which was a part of the Shirvanshahs’ palace complex, was rather large and its dome rested on four pillars. Built in the 14th century, this mosque was burnt down by the Armenians in 1918.

Gandzasar monastery. 13th century. General view of the façade.

252


According to building inscriptions, the Juma-mosque in Baku ‘was renewed’ in the early 14th century (1309-1310), and the ancient Juma-mosque in Derbend that had been damaged by an earthquake was restored in 1368 by Tajeddin, an architect-ustad from Baku. These cathedral mosques were quite large and had a more complex structure. The largest cultic construction of Shirvan in the Ilkhanid period is the Pir Huseyn Khanegah complex, consisting of a mausoleum, mosque, minaret, madrasah, caravanserai and auxiliary buildings. Its principal buildings were constructed between 1243 and 1303. Situated on the bank of the river Pirsaat on a once active caravan route, the Khanegah is enclosed in fortified walls with small semi-towers and known for its architectural decoration in the interior of the burial vault of Pir Huseyn, which consists in ceramic facing. The lustre colourful tiles of high artistic value once carried away from the monument are now exhibited in the museums of a number of European countries and around the world, such as the Hermitage (St Petersburg), the State Museum of Georgia (Tbilisi), the Nizami Museum (Baku) and others.

In the Ikhanid period considerable attention was also paid to the reconstruction and expansion of cultic buildings of the pre-Mongolian time. There were lots of ancient mosques of mixed styles with atypical plans and asymmetrical and original compositions, scattered across the whole country, which were reconstructed in the 13th-14th centuries. The initial appearance of some of them was changed by new sections attached to the square hall of the Seljuk period (the Juma-mosques in Urmiye, Marand and others), while others acquired new architectural decor (the Juma-mosques in Ardebil, Gurbade, Alaviyan and others). In both cases the architectural trends of the time changed considerably the appearance of these mosques.

The first Ilkhanid rulers either patronised Christians or themselves were Christians. Many khans married Christian ladies and therefore paid particular attention to the building of churches and monasteries. They carried out the building of the summer residence of the Ilkhans consisting of two monastery complexes in Karabakh. The Gandzasar and Khudavenk monasteries are the peak of Christian architecture in Azerbaijan. Architectural traditions of the Seljuk and, particularly, Ilkhanid periods are reflected in the forms and decoration of these monuments. The types of the sculptures, the use of birds and animals which is connected with the Turkic mythology, the East Turkestan motifs in ornamental compositions indicate that Uygur monks and masters participated in the making of architectural decors.

In the late 13th-14th centuries towered mausoleums were the principal type of memorial constructions in the central part of Azerbaijan, where cylindrical mausoleums were widely spread (the Geoy Burj in Maragha, the Sultan Haydar in Khiov, the Miri Khatun in Salmas, the Sheikh Sefi in Ardebil, the Gudi Khatun in Garabaglar, and the ‘Allah-Allah’ and Akhsadan-Baba in Barda). These mausoleums retained the earlier two-tier structure and hipped roof and became the main, traditional type of buildings of the Seljuk period. In the 14th century they became slimmer and more dynamic their composition, while their decorations became richer. The portals on the four or two sides of the upper room placed perpendicularly to one another made their composition look even more spatial and vertical, the latter quality being so characteristic of the mausoleums of this type.

Some 14th-century mausoleums (the Gunbedi Gaffariye in Maragha, Chelebi oglu in Sultaniye and others) reflecting the unchanging local traditions demonstrate at the same the gradual development of one architectural theme. A specific type of two-tier towered mausoleums appears at this time: the lower part is cubic and the upper one is either prismatic or cylindrical

253

Azerbaijan

(the Hamdullah mausoleum in Kazvin, a mausoleum in Sultaniye etc).

The Gazan-khan and Oljaytu-khan mausoleums, the most monumental c o n s t r u c t i o n s o f t h e m e m o r i a l architecture of the given period, made up a separate group that had been forming under the inf luence of Turkmenistan centric mausoleums with a gallery in the upper part of the body. In this respect the Oljaytu-khan mausoleum in the town of Sultaniye became the peak of the memorial architecture of Azerbaijan.

The main body of the Oljaytu-khan mausoleum is square in plan with two truncated corners. Its interior has the form of a prismatic octagon covered with a sphero-conical dome 25.50 m in diameter. A small rectangular burial vault adjoins the main body of the mausoleum and is situated on the axis of symmetry. On the exterior the mausoleum has two tiers, its lower cubic part being higher than the cylindrical one. The three bodies (cubic, prismatic and sphero-conical), each one above smaller than that below it, create a calm, but powerful vertical motion, despite the large size of the lower part (the main façade is about 40 m wide). The arcade of the gallery going along the perimeter of the second tier and eight delicate minarets at the corners suddenly increase the smoothly growing easiness of the upper part of the composition. With regard to the construction of the mausoleum, the Oljaytu-khan is also a perfect work of world architecture. The double dome, the system of arches that takes up part of the weight of the dome, and the minarets also giving additional load, formed a perfect construction system which, in O. Shuazi’s opinion, could only be the result of a thorough analysis. Thanks to these qualities the Oljaytu-khan mausoleum had for many centuries been an object of imitation over the whole territory of the Western Asia.

The memorial buildings of the 13th-14th centuries in the territory of the Tebriz Artistic Circle were built of baked brick, while the mausoleums standing on the banks of the river Araks and in Karabakh (in the villages of Baby, Ahmedallar, Ashaghi Veysalli, Demirchilar, Jijimli, Mamedbeyli, Shikhlar, Sharifan and others) were made of stone. The Gutlu Musa mausoleum (1314, architect Shahbenzer) in the village of Khachyn-Dorbatly, Agdam region, stands apart from other ones in the region. This unique monument successfully combines the local Muslim and Christian architectural traditions. The images of animals decorating the upper part of the niches and doorways of the dodecahedron of the mausoleum, and the complex and delicate stalactite dome covering the central part of the upper room are of particular artistic value. The mihrab is also a perfectly made element of the interior. An octagonal mausoleum in the village of Duzal situated on the south bank of the Araks river and made of brick was strongly influenced by the Momine Khatun mausoleum in Nakhichevan and is of particular interest.

Haji-Gabulov. Khanegahs Pir Hussein. 12-14th

centuries.

254


Civil buildings constructed by rulers and major feudal lords in the 13th-14th centuries and reflecting the style of the period were more solemn in composition than buildings of the previous time. The Maragha observatory is the first major Ilkhanid complex meant for scientific and research purposes. Occupying a vast territory the complex consisted of different buildings gathered around the main tower-like construction named ‘Gunbed’ in sources, from where observations of celestial bodies were carried out. The building was round in plan, with the interior 14 m in diameter. The library with a richest collection of 400,000 volumes which was also part of the complex was, apparently, also of a large size.

The Dar al-shafa (the House of Healing), one of the principal complexes of the town of Rashidiye in Tebriz, was not only a hospital, but served as a health scientific research centre. The Dar al-shafa in the Shenb-i Gazan complex performed functions of a pure hospital. Along with the traditional madrasah, an educational institution with four eiwans, a new kind of a moveable madrasah appeared in the Ilkhanid period. We may suppose that they resembled in construction the field dwellings of the nomadic tribes of Central Asia.

Like hospitals and madrasahs, town caravanserais also had a court in the centre surrounded by rooms. Caravanserais located along roads were distinguished from urban caravanserais by a larger court and big corridor-like rooms, and mostly had one floor (the Khulagu and Sarcham caravanserais).

Large palace and garden complexes founded in the major towns of Tebriz (the Sahibabad, Adiliye, Fathabad, Rashidabad and others) and in Sultaniye (the Karkhane-i Firdous), as well as

in the summer residence of Gazan-khan in Ujan (Baghi Ujan), had mainly a rectangular plan and were enclosed in fortification walls and towers that ended in merlons. Their compositional centre was the Altan Horde, or the Kushk (the Palace Pavillion). Archaeological excavations carried out in the ancient town of Shiz (today the site of Takht-i Suleyman) gave a more detailed picture of the palace building of the first Ilkhanids. Palace constructions in Shiz built at the time of Abaga-khan (1265-1282) are distinguished by a variety of forms: a rectangular vault – iwan, octagonal and decagonal pavillions, square ones with four sub-dome columns etc. Among them the so called Abaga-khan palace has the most complex structure, consisting of a central audience-hall (10 m by 10 m) covered with a dome, and rooms adjoining it. On the hall’s axis of symmetry there is a deep niche for the throne. The frontal part of the palace was accentuated by a deep columned eiwan facing a pool. The Adiliye palace built by

Tebriz. Ghazan Khan mausoleum. Late 13th

century. The plan, elevation and axonometric

view (reconstruction by J. Giyasi).

255

Azerbaijan

Argun-khan (1284-1291) near Tebriz has an identical plan which is testified by a 16th-century miniature.

The Khan’s Country House, a small construction situated in the village of Nardaran (14th

century) two kilometres away from the seashore, was a summer residence. The plan of the Khan’s Country House with a domed hall in the centre and rooms at the corners make it close to the palace buildings of the Abaga-khan and Adiliye. However, the palace pavillion in Nardaran, unlike the Abaga-khan palace, is square in plan and its main façade is stressed by a single large arched portal replacing the columned eiwan. These buildings demonstrate that a specific type of palace buildings formed in the Ilkhanid period.

THE KARA-KOYUNLU, AK-KOYUNLU AND SHIRVANSHAHS PERIODS (15th CENTURY) In the late 14th century Azerbaijan suffers a new series of invasions. Tebriz was seriously

damaged twice, in 1385 and 1386, in the course of the confrontation between Tokhtamysh-khan, the ruler of the Golden Horde and Tamerlane. In the Timurid time many gifted and experienced architects and craftsmen from Azerbaijan were sent to Samarkand, the capital of the Timurid empire, in which many majestic buildings were built at that time. The Azerbaijani craftsmen played an important role in the formation of the school of miniature painting in Herat and actively participated in the formation of the Timurid style in Central Asian architecture. Thus, although the Timurid rule hampered the development of architecture in Azerbaijan and particularly in its southern regions, it nevertheless enhanced the international reputation of the architecture of Azerbaijan and helped its architectural traditions to spread over a larger territory.

After a short Timurid dominion the state of the Kara-Koyunlu dynasty (1410-1468) springs up in the south part of Azerbaijan, which was replaced by the Ak-Koyunlu dynasty in the second half of the 15th century. Although these countries occupied a smaller territory than the Ulus of Hulagu-khan, they had a higher international authority and more developed economy, and their capital Tebriz remained a major international centre and had a considerable political and cultural influence.

The 15th century is characterised by the maturity of the artistic schools in Azerbaijan. The Tebriz school of miniature painting that had been constantly developing now forms ultimately which resulted in truly classical architectural works.

Intensive construction was carried out at the time of Jakhan-shakh (1438-1467) of the Kara-Koyunlu dynasty and Uzun Hasan (1453-1478) and Sultan Yakub (1478-1490)

Sultaniye. Mausoleum of Oljaytu Khan. 14th

century. Plan.

256


of the Ak-Koyunlu dynasty. Jahan-shah was a highly educated ruler, who patronised artists and scientists and wrote poems in Turkic and Persian under the nickname of Hagigi. Most of the buildings he erected in Tebriz had remained until the late 17th century. Evliya Chelebi, among other well-known monuments of Tebriz, mentioned the Jakhan-shakh Imaret, the Jakhan-shahs building, the Jahan-shah mosque, the Jahan-shahs bathhouse, the Jahan-shahs caravanserai, and told that the Jahan-shah madrasah was the largest in Tebriz. A number of large architectural complexes, such as the Kayseriye, Nasriye, Maksudiye, Hasht Bekhisht, Baghe-Shimal and others, appear in Tebriz at the time of Uzun Hasan and his son Sultan Yakub.

The political changes that took place in the 15th century in Western Asia also had an impact on the construction activity in Azerbaijan. The Tebriz architectural school now lacks in creative search and experiments so characteristic of its activity in

the 13th-14th centuries. However, being a mature artistic school it passes through a rather calm, stable and fruitful stage of its development. The reserved and tranquil forms, scrupulously and logically developed constructional systems and more or less plastically modelled elements and decorated planes change considerably the style of the time. Due to the classical proportions, rich decoration full of joy and grace, the compositions acquire an imposing look.

The increase of space and number of spatial elements in the composition (more accentuated portals, the appearance of small domes around the large central one) changes the appearance of many types of constructions. Although the monumental buildings of the 15th century lack in that grandeur that was characteristic of the Ilkhanid period, their new structure expressed mainly by the high drum and the magnificence of the rich decor endows the architecture with solemnity. At the same time 15th-century buildings bear fewer dynamic combinations of elements characteristic of the architecture of the previous period. Therefore, although at this period the number of compositionally significant spatial elements grow, the architectural compositions, in L.S. Bretanitsky’s opinion, ‘… were of specific monumental and static nature’.

The architectural decor also changes. Composite ceramic mosaic becomes the principal facing material in unique buildings. The colour range of the architectural decoration is enriched by green, red, yellow and other colours, while the interiors and exteriors are dressed in gorgeous ornamental garments. Complex and naturalistic botanical motifs begin to prevail in the tiniest ornamentation. The use of the blue colour reaches its peak. Thus, blue dominates in the décor of the Geoy and Uzun Hasan mosques, the most important 15th-century constructions in Tebriz.

Due to the extreme lack of factual data, it is difficult to give even a superficial account of the overall development of the urban architecture in Azerbaijan in the 15th century. Accidental information sources enable us to study (to a certain extent) the changes in the structure of Tebriz only in the second half of the 15th century.

Oljaytu Khan mausoleum.

Architectural decor.

257

Azerbaijan

In the late 15th century, Sultan Yakup carried out a number of construction projects in the centre of Tebriz. Thanks to the intensive construction of administrative, cultic, civil and trade buildings around the Sahibabad square, the town centre expanded and became more organised.

The large cultic Nasriye complex rose in the eastern part of the square in 1478-85. It was similar in the number and quality of the buildings to the Muzaffariye complex built in 1467 on the south bank of the river Meydanchay. Two more complexes – the cultic Makhsudiye complex and a health complex receiving a thousand visitors daily sprang up near the Nasriye at about the same time.

The western part of the square was intended for the building of a huge palace complex which consisted of a series of gardens, palace buildings and a library. It faced the square with the Ali-Gapy portal in the form of a pavillion. From a high balcony on this building one could observe events that took place on the square, such as various ceremonies, military parades, receptions of ambassadors, sporting competitions etc.

The southern part of the square was bordered by a river which made a natural boundary between the square and the Kayseriye trade complex built by Uzun Hasan. Thus, the administrative, cultic and trade complexes were joined together around one gigantic rectangular square to form the largest town centre.

The Hasht Bekhisht palace described scrupulously by an unknown Italian merchant was the central construction of the palace complex in the western part of the Sahibabad square. The reception hall of this palace pavillion was octagonal in form and was covered with a dome. A pool with a fountain was in the centre of the hall surrounded by eight corner rooms. The Hasht Bekhisht had four entrances on the main axes of symmetry. Its spatial composition consisted of a prismatic body with large deep arched lancet apertures and the high dome of the central hall. The famous Hasht Bekhisht palace pavillion in Isfahan (17th century) was erected after the model of the Hasht Bekhisht in Tebriz built in 861 of the Hegira (1486) and imitated its forerunner in plan and construction.

Sultan Yakub’s town building activity was not confined only to the construction of numerous buildings in the main town centre. In the south part of the town he laid out the large Baghe-Shimal garden (the Northern Garden), in the centre of which were a palace pavillion and a pool. A broad alley that lay on the main axis of symmetry of the garden connected it with the Muzaffariye complex. The alley might go up to the main centre of the town. Of the constructions

Khachyn-Dorbatly. Mausoleum Gutlu Hajj

Musa oglu. 1314.

258


built in Tebriz remain only small fragments and the Baghe-Shimal garden which has been reconstructed in the following centuries.

There were no 15th-century mosques with vaulted covering found in the Tebriz zone. The centric domed constructions become the main type of monumental mosques. Side galleries and columned halls attached to the central square construction make this type more complex in structure. Although the central hall remains dominating in the composition, the low long body of the whole construction, the small domes rising at the corners and the spatial portals make the composition less dynamic. At the same time the number of spatial elements – the critical points in a construction, makes the silhouette of a building richer and the composition more complex-structured.

In the 15th century, monumental mosques of the Tebriz zone obtain a stable composition with two minarets. Different methods and variants of placing of the minarets influenced considerably the architectural image of cultic buildings. The method of building cathedral mosques in a single complex with buildings of a different function continues to be in use. The largest cultic complexes of this kind were the Muzaffariye and Nasriye.

From the early 15th century to 1501, Shirvan, the northern part of Azerbaijan, remained a strong and independent country. In this period, for more than hundred years, three shahs of the Derbend dynasty ruled in the Shirvan state: Sheikh Ibrahim I (1382-1417), his son Halilullah I (1417-1465) and grandson Farrukh Yasar (1468-1501). In the external policy the

Tebriz. Miniature by Nasuh Matrakchy, 16th century (graphic reconstruction by

J.Giyasi).

259

Azerbaijan

Shirvanshahs were oriented to the powerful Timurides. Such flexible policy saved Shirvan from catastrophe of war and from devastation.

The country of the Shirvanshahs covered a much smaller territory than the states of the Kara-Koyunlu and the Ak-Koyunlu. However, due to the absence of feuds and dynastic wars characteristic of the south part of the country, the agriculture and crafts bloomed and developed, while the international trade broadened in this period. The Shirvanshahs paid considerable attention to urban culture development, patronising scientists and poets. The political stability, the rise of economy and industry and the broad trade, diplomatic and cultural links in the 15th century caused the high level of development of the architecture and town building in Shirvan.

Written sources contain data concerning Shirvanshahs’ activity in fortification and improvement of towns. Palaces, mosques, caravanserais, madrasahs, bathhouses and other buildings were constructed in towns and villages of Shirvan in Sheikh Ibrahim’s time. The main buildings of the Shirvanshahs palace complex in Baku were erected by order of Halilullah. His name remains in the inscriptions of many of the monuments of Shirvan. Farrukh Yasar was also engaged in building.

Shemakha, the principal town of Shirvan, from where ‘the best silk’ was taken to well-known cities of Western Europe and Middle East, participated actively in the international trade. The English traveller Antony Jenkinson, after visiting this ancient capital in 1562, called it a ‘beautiful royal town’. Shemakha for a long time retained its significance as an architectural and artistic centre even after the capital of Shirvan had moved to Baku in the 15th century.

Acccording to the historian Sharaf ad-din Yezdi, Tamerlane, after capturing the town-fortress Derbend, ‘ordered to restore the citadel of the town’ in 1396. In the 15th century, the

Baku. The complex of the palace of the Shirvanshahs. 12-16th centuries. Plan.

260


central cultic complex of Derbend is enlarged by a madrasah built within the court of the Juma-mosque; the new madrasah is interesting from the historical and architectural aspects.

In the 15th century, the town Baku in the north of the country became the capital of the Shirvanshahs and acquired great political significance. This fact had a big inf luence on the architecture and building of the town. Baku becomes still more important as the main port on the Caspian Sea. The Shirvanshahs carry out a series of works on strengthening the town-fortress, which makes it even more impregnable. The double town wall, the deep and wide moat and the strong towers (the Maiden’s tower and the Jebbekhana) made up a hard defensive system. The building of a palace complex was completed on the most elevated point of the town.

A street near the port parallel to the sea-shore became the trade centre of Baku. In the 15th century, a number of caravanserais, bathhouses and shops were built in this street. In 1437, Halilullah erected the minaret of the Juma-mosque, the main façade of which faced the trading street. At the same time the Shirvanshahs built the Shah Kahrizi, a new water supply system of the town. Other towns of Shirvan, such as Gabala, Shabran and Shehi developed in the 15th century as centres of trade, craft and building.

A large number of various remaining monuments prove that in the 15th century the Shirvan school went through the most fruitful and highest stage of its development. Although no absolutely new types of buildings appear in this period, the formation of a number of old architectural types is completed, while established architectural, artistic and building traditions continue to develop. From this aspect the Shirvanshahs palace ensemble in Baku is of particular interest.


261

Azerbaijan

The unique Shirvanshahs palace complex is situated on the summit of the hill of Baku with steep slopes. The complex, its base having been built in the 12th century, was being formed in the 15th century. Buildings of different function were grouped around courts of different form and size. The two-floor palace edifice (12th-15th century) and the Divankhana summer palace pavillion (15th century) are situated in the upper court.

In the southern court, the Seid Yahya Bakhuvi mausoleum stood at the lateral facade of the palace – a towered mausoleum where Seid Yahya Bakhuvi, a 15th-century court astrologist, was buried, the ruins of the Keygubada mosque (14th century) adjoining the mausoleum, and the so called Murad’s gates (1585), a free-standing magnificent portal. The Shirvanshahs mausoleum (1435) and the Shahs mosque (1441), other two great architectural works, are erected in this place. In the 15th century, the Shah bathhouse and the Shah ovdan (reservoir) were built in the lowest point of the territory of the Shirvanshahs palace complex.

The Shirvanshahs palace has been preserved to our days almost intact, which makes it a unique specimen of palace constructions in the history of Azerbaijan and the whole Middle East. Each building of the ensemble in Baku belongs to the final stage of the development of the given type of the Shirvan school. The Divankhana building was the most attractive for travellers and for specialists by its integral composition, perfect architectural forms, masterly fretwork in stone and delicate ornamental decoration.

The complex of the palace of the Shirvanshahs. Divankhana. Plan.

262


The most impressive and balanced types of cultic, memorial and civ il buildings of the 15th century have been preserved in the territory of Shirvan: the Tuba Shahi mosque in the village of Mardakan (1482), the Shahir-aga Imaret in the village Balakhany, the Sheikh Dursun mausoleum in Akhsu (1457), a group of mausoleums and the Haji Gaiba in Baku, a number of roadside caravanserais - the Sangachal, Miajik, Khilmilli and others. The Ziyaretgah Diri-baba (1402), a mausoleum in Maraza, is attractive by its unusual place of location

and original structure. The two-storey mausoleum is attached with its northern side to the wall of a steep rock above a deep gorge. A natural grotto in the wall is also turned into a room and included in the construction; the person in commemoration of which the mausoleum was built is buried in the room. The tall building with a spherical dome is made of finely cut stone of light colour, which looks very impressive against the background of the surrounding landscape.

The Haji Gaiba bathhouse, its large portal facing the main trade street of old Baku, is a classic specimen of this architectural type. It differs from like buildings that remain in Shirvan by the well-organised plan consisting of a large number of rooms grouped around a vestibule, and the expressive spatial composition where the different-sized domes decorated

with stone lanterns on the top play the leading role.

Among the remaining monuments of the 15th century, the Shirvanshahs ensemble in Baku is the most original of the constructions of the Shirvan architectural and artistic school, while the Geoy mosque in Tebriz is the most outstanding building of the Tebriz school. The Muzaffariye complex built in 1467 by Jahan-shah, a Kara-Koyunlu ruler, consisted, apart from the cathedral mosque, of a madrasah, library, Khanegah and a mausoleum. The majestic ruins of the well-known Geoy mosque (the Blue Mosque) is the only thing that has remained of this large architectural complex.

T h e T- s h a p e d p l a n o f t h e Geoy mosque is distinguished by

Fragment of the Harrakan mausoleum.

Tebriz. Geoy mosque. General view


263

Azerbaijan

compactness, clearness and functionality. As to its technical and structural characteristics, it is one of the major achievements of the Azerbaijani architecture. The thrust force in the central dome of this building, 16.5 m in diameter, is distributed evenly over the whole construction. The Geoy mosque had a unique and expressive spatial structure. Initially its main dome was surrounded by five smaller domes, and the symmetrical main façade was flanked by two delicate minarets. Almost all the types and achievements in the architectural decoration of medieval Azerbaijan were expressed in the Geoy mosque. The domination of blue in the fine and high-quality polychrome mosaic gave the monument its name.

A l l i t s a r c h i t e c t u r a l a nd a r t i s t i c c h a r ac ter i s t ic s , s uc h a s t he s p at i a l expressiveness, compositional steadiness, high tectonics, harmonious combination of

colour and ornament with the structure etc, placed the Geoy mosque on the top of the new stage of the Tebriz architectural school, while its mane façade with two minarets served as a prototype for a number of cultic constructions from India to Iraq. The Geoy mosque in Tebriz has deservedly become one of the masterpieces of the world architecture.

The Uzun Hasan mosque, the principal construction in the Nasriye complex, was one of the epochal constructions of the 15th centur y in Tebriz. A majest ic central dome of the prayer hall and two minarets at the entrance faced with colourful tiles played an important role in its structure. The Makhsudiye mosque (15th century), as well as the Uzun Hasan, has not withstood the test of time. The majestic Hasht Bekhisht palace complex in Tebriz built in 1486, has also been lost.

The 15th century was a period of maturity, when the unity of size, space, lines and colours reached its peak to create classic harmony

Tebriz. Geoy mosque. The main façade


Tebriz. Geoy mosque. 1465. The layout.

264


in the architectural compositions of the Tebriz and Shirvan schools. During this period the architects and craftsmen of Azerbaijan took an active part in the development of the Ottoman and Timurid architectural styles and thereby enlarged the sphere of influence of the Azerbaijani architectural and artistic traditions.

265

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abetekov A.K., Gavryushenko P.P., Zaurova Ye.Z., Kozhemyako P.N., Kozhomberdi-

yev I.K., Yunusaliyev M.B. Raboti arkheologov Kirgizii // Arheologicheskiye otkritiya 1967 goda.

Moskva, 1968.

Abytov B.A. Osh: fakti, sobitiya, lichnosti. Osh, 2000.

Adorno F., Adriani M., Apollonio M., et al. The World of Renaissance Florence. Flor-

ence: Cuinti, 1999.

Ageyeva Ye.I. Tsitadel / Arkheologicheskiye issledovaniya na severnikh sklonakh Karatau. Alma-

ata, 1962.

Al-Geyoushi M.I. Al-Tirmidhi’s Conception of the Areas of Interiority. The Islamic Quarterly, 1972.

V. 16, 3-4.

Ali Giyasiddin. Dnevnik pokhoda v Indiyu. Moskva: Izdatelstvo vostochnoy literaturi, 1958.

Al-Istahri. Masolik va Mamolik. Tekhron, 1340 hidzhra, na yaz.farsi.

Alpatkina T.G. Dvorec pravitelei Termeza XI–XIII vv. Moskva, 2008.

Amanbayeva B.E. Reznoy shtuk v interyere srednevekovikh zhilish Krasnorechenskogo gorodi-

sha // Krasnaya Rechka i Burana: Materiali i issledovaniya Kirgizskoy arkheologicheskoy ekspeditsii.

Frunze, 1989.

Amanbayeva B.E. Srednevekovaya banya-khammam v Oshe (predvaritelniye itogi izucheniya) // Izuchenie

drevnego i srednevekovogo Kyrgyzstana (Osh-3000 i kulturnoye naslediye narodov Kyrgyzstana. Vip. I). Bishkek,

1998.

Anarbayev A. Blagoustroystvo srednevekovogo goroda Sredney Azii. Tashkent, 1981.

Anarbayev A.A, Akhrorov I.A. Banya srednevekovogo Askhiketa // Istoriya materialnoy kulturi

Uzbekistana. Tashkent, 1991. Vip. 25.

Andreyev M.S. Derevyannaya kolonna v Matche // IRAIMK. Leningrad, 1924. T.4.

Arapov A.V. Memorialy epohi Amira Temura (na uzb. i rus.yaz) // Arhitektura i stroitel’stvo Uz-

bekistana, 2002, № 2-3.

Arapov A.V. Semantika arhitektury Temuridskogo Samarkanda / Sb. Urbanisticheskaya kul’tura

Uzbekistana. Tashkent, 2003.

Arapov A.V. Simvolicheskie «teksty» Afrasiaba // «San’at», 2004, № 3-4.

266


Arslanova F.H. Pogrebeniye zolotoordynskogo vremeni v Pavlodarskoy provincei // Po sledam

drevnikh kultur Kazakhstana. Alma-Ata, 1970.

Arkheologicheskie pamyatniki v Semireche i Kuldzhinskom krae // Turkestanskiye vedomosti. 1879.

№ 43.

Artem’yev V.I., Urmanova A.M. Minarety Kunya-Urgencha // Kul’turnyye tsennosti: Mezhd-

unarodnyy yezhegodnik, 1997-1998. Sankt-Peterburg, 1999.

Askarov A.A., Mukminova R.G., Akhmedov B.A., Kamalov S.K. i dr. Istoriya Uzbekistana.

T.3. Tashkent, 1993.

Askarov Sh.D. Arkhitektura Temuridov. Tashkent, 2009.

Akhmedov M.K. Urta Osiyo memorchilik tarikhi (Istoriya arkhitekturi Sredney Azii). Toshkent,

1995.

Ahrarov I.A., Rempel’ L. Reznoi shtuk Afrasiaba. Tashkent, 1971.

Ashurbeyli S.B. Istoriya goroda Baku. Period srednevekovya. Baku, 1992.

Babur-name. Zapiski Babura / Perevod M. Sale. Tashkent, 1993.

Babur, Muhammed Zakhiriddin. Babur-name. Tashkent, 1972.

Barry Lane M., Lewcock R. Rebuilding the Silk Road, Cultural Tourism and Revival of Heritage

in Uzbekistan, UNDP-UNESCO, Tashkent, 1996.

Baypakov K.M. Srednevekovaya gorodskaya kultura Yuzhnogo Kazakhstana i Semirechya. Alma-

Ata, 1986.

Baypakov K.M. Srednevekoviye goroda Kazakhstana na Velikom Shelkovom puti. Almati, 1996.

Baypakov K.M. Drevniye goroda Kazakhstana. Almaty, 2005.

Baypakov K.M., Yerzakovich L. Drevniye goroda Kazakhstana. Almaty, 1971.

Baypakov K.M., Savelyeva T.V., Chang K. Srednevekoviye goroda i poseleniya Severo-Vostoch-

nogo Semirechya. Almaty, 2002.

Basenov T.K. Ornament Kazakhstana v arkhitekture. Alma-Ata, 1957.

Basenov T.K. Arkhitektura Kazakhstana VII-XII vv. Alma-Ata, 1981.

Bartold V.V. Otchet o poezdke v Srednyuyu Aziyu s nauchnoy tselyu. 1893-1894 gg. Sankt-Peterburg,

1897.

Bartold V.V. Sochineniya: T.1. Turkestan v epokhu mongolskogo nashestviya. Geograficheskiy ocherk

Maverannakhra; Soch. T.II; Chast.I. Kirgizi. Moskva, 1963.

Baruzdin Yu.D., Brikina G.A. Arkheologicheskiye pamyatniki Batkena i Lyaylyaka. Frunze, 1962.

Bachinskiy N.M. Reznoye derevo v arkhitekture Sredney Azii. Moskva, 1947.

267

Bibliography

Bachinskiy N.M. Antiseysmika v arkhitekturnikh pamyatnikakh Sredney Azii. Moskva-Lenin-

grad, 1949.

Belenitskiy A.M. Mavzoley u seleniya Sayat // MIA SSSR, № 15. Moskva-Leningrad, 1950.

Belenitskiy A.M., Bentovich I.B., Bol’shakov O.G. Srednevekovyi gorod Srednei Azii. Lenin-

grad, 1973.

Bernshtam A.N. Banya drevnego Taraza i ee datirovka. Moskva, 1940.

Bernshtam A.N. Istoriko-arkheologicheskiye ocherki Tsentralnogo Tyan-Shanya i Pamiro-Alaya

// Materiali i issledovaniya po arkheologii Kyrgyzstana. Moskva-Leningrad, 1952. № 26.

Bernshtam A.N. K proishozhdeniyu Mavzoleya Babadzha-Khatun // Kratkiye soobshcheniya IIMK

AN SSSR. Moskva, 1956. Vip. 61.

Bernshtam A.N. Arkhitekturniye pamyatniki Kirgizii // Izbranniye trudi po arkheologii i istorii

kirgizov i Kirgizstana. Bishkek, 1997. T.II.

Bernshtam A.N. Osedliye poseleniya na Tyan-Shane v V-XV vv. // Izbranniye trudi po arkheologii

i istorii kirgizov i Kirgizstana. Bishkek, 1998. T.II.

Betger Ye.K. Izvlecheniya iz knigi «Puti i strany» Abu-l-Kasima Ibn Khaukalya // Trudi SAGU, no-

vaya seriya. Vip. 91. Istoricheskiye nauki, kn. 25. Tashkent: Uzb.SSR AN, 1957.

Biruni, Abu Raihan. Izbrannye proizvedeniya, t. III. Tashkent, 1966.

Bilalov A.I. Iz istorii irrigatsii Ustrushany. Dushanbe, 1980.

Billard A., Schvoerer-Ney N. Diagnostic du risque d’instabilité en l’état actuel des « pylônes »

du palais de l’Ak Saray à Shahrisabz (Ouzbékistan). Observations et études préliminaires, hypothèses

et recommandations, 2008.

Bolshakov O.G. Islam i izobrazitelnoye iskusstvo // Kultura i iskusstvo Vostoka. Vip. 7. / Tr. Gos.

Ermitazha. Leningrad. 1969. T.10.

Bolshakov O.G. Nekotorye voprosy izucheniya sredneaziatskogo goroda VIII–XII vv. v svete ob-

schei problematiki istorii gorodov Vostoka // Sb. KSIA, Vyp. 122, 1970.

Boyce M. Zoroastrians. Their Religious Beliefs and Practices. London-New York, 2001.

Bretanitskiy L.S. Zodchestvo Azerbaydzhana XII-XV vv. i ego mesto v arkhitekture Perednego

Vostoka. Moskva, 1966.

Bretanitskiy L.S. Khudozhestvennoye naslediye Perednego Vostoka epokhi feodalizma. Izbrannyye

trudy. Moskva, 1988.

Brilling S. Seysmostoykiye konstruktsii // TE. Moskva, 1933. T.20.

Brikina G.A. Karabulak. Moskva, 1974.

268


Brikina G.A. K istorii zemledelcheskogo naseleniya Yugo-Zapadnoy Fergany v V-XII vv. // KSIA.

Moskva, 1979. Vip. 122.

Bubnova M.A. Srednevekovoye poseleniye Aktobe 1 u s.Orlovki // Arkheologicheskie pamyatniki

Talasskoy doliny. Bishkek, 1963.

Bubnova M.A. Izucheniye pamyatnikov, svyazannykh s gornym promyslom, na territorii Tadzhikis-

tana v 1979 g. // ART. Vip. X (1970 god). Moskva, 1973.

Bubnova M.A. Okhrana prirodno-kulturnikh zapovednikov verkhovyev reki Pyandzh (Zapadniy

Pamir). Dushanbe, 1997.

Bulatov M.S. Postroenie arhitekturnoi formy mavzoleya Samanidov / Sb. Iskusstvo zodchih Uz-

bekistana. Tashkent, 1962.

Bulatov M.S. Iskusnye geometricheskie priemy v zodchestve Samarkand konca XIV-nachala XV vv.

Sb. Iskusstvo zodchih Uzbekistana. Vyp. IV. Tashkent, 1969.

Bulatov M.S. Geometricheskaya garmonizaciya v Srednei Azii IX-XV vv. Moskva, 1973.

Bulatov M.S. Mavzoley Samanidov - zhemchuzhina arkhitekturi Sredney Azii. Tashkent, 1976.

Bulatov M.S., Arapov A.V., Tuichieva Yu.G. Kosmogrammy ranneislamskih mavzoleev // Eje-

godnoe izdanie Moskovskogo otdeleniya Mejdunarodnoi Akademii Arhitektury. Moskva, 2002.

Burghart D.L. In the Track of Tamerlane: Central Asia’s Path to the 21st Century. In: In the track of

Tamerlane: Central Asia’s path to the 21st century. Edited by Burghart D.L., Sabonis-Helf T. Washington:

National Defence University, Center for Technology and National Security Policy, 2004.

Buryakov Yu.F. Torgovye trassy Transoksiany-Maverannahra v sisteme Velikogo Shelkovogo puti.

Samarkand, 2006.

Buryakov Yu.F., Sadiev M., Fedorov M.K. Sobornaya mechet’ Samarkanda v XI–nach. XIII vv.

/ Sb. Afrasiab, vyp. IV. Tashkent, 1975.

Buryakov Yu., Gritsina A. Maverannakhr na Velikom Shelkovom puti. Samarkand-Bishkek, 2006.

Bukhari, Khafiz-i Tanysh. Sharaf-nama-yi shahi (Kniga tsarskoy slavy). Moskva, 1983. Chast I.

Cawthorne N. Tyrants. History’s 100 Most Evil Despots & Dictators. New York: Barnes & Noble, 2005.

Clark P. Zoroastrianism. An Introduction to an Ancient Faith. Brighton-Portland: Sussex Aca-

demic Press, 1998.

Cohn-Wienner E. Turan // Islamische Baukunst in Mittelasien. Berlin, 1930.

Davidovich Ye.A., Litvinskiy B.A. Arhyeologicheskiy ocherk Isfarinskogo rayona // Tr. IIAE.

Stalinabad, 1955. T.35.

Dadaboyev R. Makbarai Sari Mazor // Adabiyot va sanati tochik. Dushanbe, 1989. T.2.

Dadaboyev R. Makbarai Bobo-Tago // EAST. Dushanbe, 1989. T.2.

269

Bibliography

Darkevich V.P. Argonavti srednevekovya. Moskva, 1976.

Denike B.P. Iskusstvo Sredney Azii. Leningrad, 1927.

Denike B.P. Arhitekturniy ornament Sredney Azii. Moskva-Leningrad, 1939.

Djemshid Giyas-ad-din Kashi. Klyuch arifmetiki. Per. B. Rozenfel’da. Sb. Istoriko-matemat-

icheskie issledovaniya, vyp. VII. Moskva, 1954.

Dobrosmyslov A.I. Goroda Sir-Darinskoy provincei. Moskva, 1912.

Drevnetyurkskiy slovar. Leningrad, 1969.

Drevnosti Tadzhikistana. Katalog vistavki. Dushanbe, 1985.

Dresvyanskaya G.Ya., Lunina S.B., Sultanov H.S., Usmanova Z.I. Shahrisyabz. Chast’ II.

Tashkent: Universitet, 1993.

Dupree L. Afghanistan. Princeton and New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1973.

Encyclopedia of the Renaissance. P.F. Grendler, Editor in chief. V. 2/6. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons,

1999.

Eshonkulov U. Nachalo issledovaniya istorii irrigatsii Verkhnego Zeravshana // Arkheologicheski-

ye otkritiya 1983 goda. Moskva, 1985.

Esin E. Baliq and Ordu (The Early Turkic Circumvallations in Architectural Aspects) // Central Asi-

atic Journal. Wiesbaden. 1983. V.27, 3-4.

Fedchenko A.P. Iz zhurnala zasedaniya Otdeleniya geografii matematicheskoy i fizicheskoy, 10

dekabrya 1871 g. // Izvestiya Zapiski russkogo geograficheskogo obshestva. T.VIII. Sankt-Peterburg,

1872. № 1.

Filanovich M.I. Drevnyaya i srednevekovaya istoriya Tashkenta v arheologicheskih istochnikah. Tashkent,

2010.

Filimonov V.M. Registan-maydan - drevneyshiy gradoformiruyushiy element Bukhari // Arkhitek-

tura i stroitelstvo Uzbekistana, 1986. № 6.

Galitskiy V.Ya., Ploskikh V.M. Starinniy Osh: Ocherki istorii. Frunze, 1987.

Gerasimov G.G. Pamyatniki arkhitekturi reki Kara-Kengir v Tsentralnom Kazakhstane. Alma-

Ata, 1957.

Gafurov B. Tadzhiki. Drevnyeyshaya, drevnyaya i srednevekovaya istoriya. Moskva, 1972.

Giyasi Dzh.A. Arkhitekturniye pamyatniki epokhi Nizami. Baku, 1991.

Golombek L., Wilber D. The Temurid Architecture of Iran and Turan. Princeton-New Jersey:

Princeton University Press, 1988.

Goryacheva V.D. Srednevekoviye gorodskie tsentry i arkhitekturniye ansambli Kirgizii (Burana,

Uzgen, Safid-Bulan). Nauchno-populyarniy ocherk. Frunze, 1983.

270


Goryacheva V.D. Kulturologicheskiye aspekti izucheniya drevnego i srednevekovogo Kirgizstana

// Central Asia and culture of Pease. 2001, № 1-2 (10-11). Bishkek, 2001.

Goryacheva V.D. Gorodskaya kultura tyurkskikh kaganatov na Tyan-Shane (seredina VI-nachalo

XIII v.). Bishkek, 2010.

Goryacheva V.D., Berenaliyev O. Raskopki Krasnorechenskogo gorodisha // Arkheolog. otkry-

tiya 1978 goda. Moskva, 1979.

Goryacheva V.D., Peregudova S. Ya. Arkheologicheskie raboty na Krasnorechenskom gorod-

ishe v 1988 g. / Rukopis arkheologicheskogo arkhiva Instituta istorii i kulturnogo naslediya Natsional-

noy akademii nauk Kirgizskoy Respubliki. Bishkek, 1989.

Goryacheva V.D., Peregudova S. Ya. Pamyatniki istorii i kulturi Talasskoy dolini. Bishkek, 1995.

Grazhdankina N.S. Nekotoriye sposobi povisheniya sokhrannosti gipsovogo dekora v pamyat-

nikakh XI-XIII vv. // Istoriya materialnoy kulturi Uzbekistana. Tashkent, 1963. Vip. IV.

Gulyamova E. Reznoy shtuk Khulbuka // Materialnaya kultura Tadzhikistana. Dushanbe, 1978.

Vip. 3.

Gulyamova E. Raskopki srednevekovikh gorodish Khulbuk i Sayed v 1978 godu // ART. Vip. XVIII

(1978 god). Dushanbe, 1984.

Gulyamova E. Izobrazheniye lvov v dekore i arkhitekture Khuttalya // Materialnaya kultura

Tadzhikistana. Dushanbe, 1987. Vip. 4.

Gulyamova E. U vorot stolitsy Khuttalya // Merosi niyogon. 1992. Vyp. 1.

Kallaur V.A. O mazarakh Aysha-Bibi i Karakhana. Sankt-Peterburg, 1896.

Kamolov Kh. Istoriya mazarov Severnogo Tadzhikistana. Dushanbe, 2005.

Kastane I.A. Drevnosti Kirgizskoy stepi i Orenburgskogo kraya. Sankt-Peterburg, 1910.

Kastane I.A. Nadgrobniye sooruzheniya Kirgizskikh stepey. Orenburg, 1911.

Klaviho, Rui Gonsales de. Dnevniy putshestviya v Samarkand ko dvoru Timura (1403-1406). Moskva,

1990.

Klyashtorniy S.G., Sultanov G.I. Gosudarstva i narody yevraziyskikh stepey. Drevnost i sred-

nevekove. Sankt-Peterburg, 2004.

Knysh A.D. Musulmanskiy mistitsizm. Moskva-Sankt-Peterburg, 2004.

Kozhemyako P.N. Osedliye poseleniya Talasskoy dolini // Arkheologicheskiye pamyatniki Ta-

lasskoy dolini. Frunze, 1963.

Kozhemyako P.N. Raskopki zhilish gorozhan X-XII vv. na Krasnorechenskom gorodishe // Drevn-

yaya i rannesrednevekovaya kultura Kirgizstana. Frunze, 1967.

271

Bibliography

Kozhemyako P.N. Karavan-saray na r. Manna-Keldi // Trudi Frunzenskogo politekhnicheskogo

instituta (arkhitektura i stroitelstvo). Frunze, 1968. Vip. 26.

Kozhemyako P.N. Gorodishe Sadir-Kurgan // Arkheolog. otkritiya 1967 goda. Moskva, 1969.

Kozhemyako P.N. Otchet o polevikh arkheologicheskikh rabotakh na Krasnorechenskom gorod-

ishe v 1961 godu // Krasnaya Rechka i Burana: Materiali i issledovaniya Kirgizskoy arkheologicheskoy ek-

speditsii. Frunze, 1989.

Kozhemyako P.N. Otchet o raskopochnikh rabotakh na Krasnorechenskom gorodishe v 1962-1963

gg. // Krasnaya Rechka i Burana: Materiali i issledovaniya Kirgizskoy arkheologicheskoy ekspeditsii.

Frunze, 1989-a.

Kozhemyako P.N. Otchet o polevikh rabotakh Tyan-Shanskogo arkheologicheskogo otryada v 1958

godu // MIAK. Bishkek, 2007. Vip. 2.

Krachkovskaya V.A. Evolyutsiya kuficheskogo pisma Sredney Azii // Epigrafika Vostoka, 1949.

Vip. 3.

Khakimov Z.A., Shvab Yu.Z. Sultan-Saadat / Sb. Iskusstvo zodchih Uzbekistana. IV. Tashkent, 1969.

Khmelnitskiy S.G. Issledovaniye arkhitekturnikh pamyatnikov v Ura-Tyube v 1959 g. // ART. Vip.

VII (1959 god). Dushanbe, 1961.

Khmelnitskiy S.G. Ravak // Iskusstvo tadzhikskogo naroda. Dushanbe, 1979. Vip. 4.

Khmelnitskiy S.G. Mavzoley Mukhammada Bosharo // Izv. AN Tadzh.SSR. Seriya: VIF. 1990. № 2 (18).

Khmelnitskiy S. G. Mejdu arabami i tyurkami. Ranneislamskaya arhitektura Srednei Azii IX-X vv.

Berlin–Riga, 1992.

Khmelnitskiy S. G. Obidai Childukhtaron // Merosi niyogon, 1995. Dushanbe. Vip.2.

Khmelnitskiy S.G. Mezhdu samanidami i mongolami. Arkhitektura Sredney Azii XI-nachala XIII

v. V dvuh chastyah. Berlin-Riga, 1996-1997.

Khmelnitskiy S.G. Mezhdu samanidami i mongolami (istoricheskii fon) // Merosi niegon, 1999. Dush-

anbe. Vip.4.

Khmelnitskiy S.G. Khodzha Mashad. Berlin – Riga, 2001.

Khmelnitskiy S.G. Chorku. Amir Khamza khasti polsho. Drevneysheye derevyannoye zdaniye Sredney

Azii s reznym i skul’pturnym dekorom. Berlin – Riga, 2002.

Khmelnitskiy S. Mavzoley Sheykha Muslikhiddina. Khudzhand, 2002.

Khmelnitskiy S.G. Dvortsy Khuttalya. Idei i formy grazhdanskoy arkhitektury Sredney Azii IX-XII ve-

kov. Berlin, 2006.

Khmelnitskiy S.G. Konstruktsiya i ornament. Ocherki istorii arkhitektury Sredney Azii. Moskva, 2013.

272


Khmelnitskiy S.G. Khmelnitskiy S.G., Negmatov N.N. Mihrabv s. Asht // Sovetskaya arkhe-

ologiya. 1963. № 2.

Khodzhaev M.K. K genezisu mavzoleya Samanidov // Arhitektura i stroitelstvo Uzbekistana, 1984. № 2.

Khodzhaniyazov T., Lunina S.B. Dinamika razvitiya Merva v VIII-XII vv. // Kul’turnyye tsen-

nosti: Mezhdunarodnyy yezhegodnik, 1999. Sankt-Peterburg, 2001.

Khofizi Abru. “Zayli Zafarnomai Shomiy” dan. Fors tilidan O. Buriyev tarzhimon / Temuriylar

bunyodkorligi davr manbalarida. Toshkent: A.Kodiriy nomidagi khalk merosi nashriyoti, 1997.

Lelekov L.A. Otrazheniye nekotorikh mifologicheskikh vozzreniy v arkhitekture vostochno-iranskikh

narodov v pervoy polovine I tysyacheletiya do n.e. // Istoriya i kultura narodov Sredney Azii (drevnost

i srednie veka). Moskva, 1976.

Litvinskiy B.A. Arkhitekturniy kompleks Khodzha Nahshran // TIIAiE. T. XVII v. Stalinabad,

1953.

Litvinskii B.A., Zeimal’ T.I. Adjina-tepe. Moskva, 1971.

Litvinskiy B.A., Sedov A.V. Kulti i rituali Kushanskoy Baktrii: pogrebalniy obryad. Moskva,

1984.

Mamadzhanova S.M. Arkhitekturniye pamyatniki Ustrushany VI-X vv. (Issledovaniye i rekon-

struktsii). Avtoref. diss ... kand.arkh. nauk. Moskva, 1983.

Mamadzhanova S., Mukimov R. Voprosi preemstvennosti traditsiy v zodchestve Maveranna-

khra IX-XI vv. // Abu Ali ibn Sino i ego epokha. Dushanbe, 1980.

Mamadzhanova S., Mukimov R. Entsiklopediya pamyatnikov srednevekovogo zodchestva

Tadzhikistana. Dushanbe, 1993.

Mamadzhanova S., Mukimov R. Mazari Tadzhikistana (Arkhitektura memorialnikh sooruzheniy

islamskogo perioda). Dushanbe, 1995.

Mamadzhanova S., Mukimov R. Traditsii i sovremennost v arkhitekture Istravshana // Daryo.

Dushanbe, 2002. № 1.

Mamadzhanova S., Mukimov R., Rakhmatov A. Khudzhand: arkhitektura vchera, segodnya,

zavtra. Dushanbe, 2001.

Mamedov M. Mavzoley sultana Sandzhara. Istanbul, 2004.

Mamedov M.A. Arkhitekturnyy kompleks Meana-baba. Sankt-Peterburg, 2008.

Mamedov M., Muradov R. Arkhitektura Turkmenistana: kratkaya istoriya. Moskva, 1998.

Mamedov M., Muradov R. Gurgandzh: Arkhitekturnyy putevoditel’. Istanbul, 2000.

Mankovskaya L.Yu. Tipologicheskiye osnovi zodchestva Sredney Azii (IX-nach. X v.) Tashkent, 1980.

Manyakhina A.I. Mavzoley Chorku // Merosi niyogon. Dushanbe, 1999. Vip. 4.

273

Bibliography

Margulan A.Kh. Arkhitekturniye pamyatniki v doline r.Kengir // Vestnik AN Kaz SSR. 1947. № 11.

Margulan A.Kh. Iz istorii gorodov i stroitelnogo iskusstva drevnego Kazakhstana. Alma-Ata,

1951.

Margulan A.Kh. Arkhitekturniye pamyatniki dolini reki Kara-Kengir. Alma-Ata, 1957.

Masson M.Ye. Retsenziya na kn. Zasipkin B.N. Pamyatniki arhitekturi Sredney Azii i ikh resta-

vratsiya. Tsentralniye gosudarstvenniye restavratsionniye masterskiye // Voprosi restavratsii. Moskva,

1926. Vip. I.

Masson M.Ye. K voprosu o proishozhdenii pamyatnikov derevyannoy arhitektury, otkritikh M. S.

Andreyevim v gorakh Samarkandskoy provincei // Po Tadzhikistanu. Tashkent, 1927. Vip. 1.

Masson M.Ye. Mavzoley Khodzha Akhmeda Yassavi. Tashkent, 1930.

Masson M.Ye. K periodizatsii drevney istorii Samarkanda // Vestnik drevney istorii. Moskva, 1950. № 4.

Masson M.E. Proshloe Tashkenta // Izvestiya AN UzSSR, 1954, № 2.

Masson M.Ye. Arkhitekturno-planirovochniy oblik Samarkanda epokhi Navoi (vtoraya polovina XV

v.) / Trudi SAGU. Arkheologiya Sredney Azii. Novaya seriya. Vip. 81. Tashkent, 1956.

Masson M.Ye., Pugachenkova G.A. Gumbez Manasa. Moskva, 1950.

Masson M.Ye., Goryacheva V.D. Burana: istoriya izucheniya gorodisha i ego arkhitekturnikh

pamyatnikov. Frunze, 1985.

Masson M.Ye., Pugachenkova G.A., Zasypkin B.N. i dr. Mavzoley Ishrathana. Tashkent, 1958.

Medoev A.G. Podzemnaya arkhitektura kochevnikov poluostrova Mangyshlak // Zhurnal “Pros-

tor”. 1969. № 6.

Mendikulov M.M. Nekotoriye danniye ob istoricheskoy arkhitekture Kazakhstana // Izv. AN Kaz SSR. 1959.

Vip.2.

Mendikulov M.M. Arkhitektura X-XIV vv. KSE Kaz SSR. Alma-Ata, 1981.

Mendikulov M.M. Pamyatniki narodnogo zodchestva Zapadnogo Kazakhstana. Alma-Ata, 1987.

Mirbabaev A.K. Uchebniye i nauchniye tsentry Blizhnego i Srednego Vostoka v drevnosti // Kho-

rezm i Mukhammad al-Khorezmi v mirovoy istorii i kulture. Dushanbe, 1983.

Mirbabaev A., Mukimova S., Usmanov K. Srednevekovaya gorodskaya kultura Tsentralnoy

Azii. Gl. 4: Kultura Gerata epokhi Bekhzada. Dushanbe, 2001.

Moskalev M.I. Uch-Chatskiy arkheologo-arkhitekturniy kompleks // Materiali i issledovaniya po

arkheologii Kyrgyzstana. Bishkek, 2005. Vip. I.

Mukimov R. Mazori Eshoni Mavlono // EAST. Dushanbe, 1989. T.2.

Mukimov R. Makbarai Khocha Abdulkodiri Geloni // EAST. Dushanbe, 1989. T.2.

Mukimov R. Istoriya i teoriya tadzhikskogo zodchestva. Dushanbe, 2002.

274


Mukimov R. Istoriya i teoriya tadzhikskogo gradostroitelstva. Dushanbe, 2009.

Mukimov R. Iskusstvo zodchikh Verkhnego Zeravshana. Dushanbe, 2010.

Mukimov R., Mamadzhanova S. Kiropol-Istravshan-Ura-Tyube. Dushanbe, 1993.

Mukimov R.S., Mamadzhanova S.M. Zodchestvo Tadzhikistana. Istoriya arkhitekturi i stroitel-

nogo dela Tadzhikistana. Ucheb. posobie. Dushanbe, 1990.

Mukimova S. Arkhitektura nauchnikh tsentrov Vostoka. Dushanbe, 2002.

Muminov I. Rol i mesto Amira Temura v istorii Sredney Azii v svete dannikh pismennikh istoch-

nikov. Tashkent, 1963.

Muminov I.M., Askarov A.A., Lev D.N. Istoriya Samarkanda. Tashkent, 1969. T.1.

Mukhtarov A. Gorod Ura-Tyube // Arkheologi rasskazivayut. Stalinabad, 1959.

Mukhtarov A. Guzary goroda Ura-Tyube // Materialy po istorii gorodov Tadzhikistana. Dushanbe, 1975.

Muradov R.G. Mechet’ i khanaka Mashad-ata v srednevekovom Dehistane. // Pamyatniki istorii i

kul’tury Turkmenistana. Ashkhabad, 2011.

Narodnoye iskusstvo Pamira. Dushanbe, 2009.

Nastich V.N. O metodakh datirovki srednevekovikh arabograficheskikh pamyatnikov epigrafiki

Fergani i Semirechya // Istochnikovedeniye Kirgizstana. Bishkek, 2004.

Nastich V.N., Kochnyev B.D. K atributsii yuzhnogo Uzgenskogo mavzoleya (epigraficheskiye i

numizmaticheskiye danniye) // Istochnikovedeniye Kirgizstana. Bishkek, 2004.

Negmatov N.N. Mavzoley Tuba-hana // Izv. AN Tadzh.SSR. Otdel. obshchestv. nauk. Vyp. 14. Stalina-

bad, 1957.

Negmatov N. Stranitsi iz istorii Khodzhenta // Arheologi rasskazivayut. Stalinabad, 1959.

Negmatov N.N. Issledovaniya v Severnom Tadzhikistane v 1970 g. // ART. Vyp. X (1970 god). Mosk-

va, 1973.

Negmatov N.N. K probleme kompaktnikh seleniy Ustrushani i Khodzhentskoy provincei v sredniye

veka // Materialnaya kultura Tadzhikistana. Dushanbe, 1978. Vip. 3.

Negmatov N.N. Khodzhent. Osnovniye etapy istorii // Issledovaniya po istorii i kulture Lenina-

bada. Dushanbe, 1986.

Negmatov N.N. Davlati Somoniyon. Dushanbe, 1989, na tadzh. yaz.

Nilsen V.A. Monumentalnaya arkhitektura Bukharskogo oazisa XI-XII vv. Tashkent, 1956.

Nilsen V.A. Observatoriya Ulugbeka v Samarkande. Tashkent, 1986.

Nurmukhambetov B.N. Nekotoriye itogi raskopok Borizharskogo mogilnika // Po sledam drevnikh

kultur Kazakhstana. Alma-Ata, 1970.

Nurmukhamedov Nagim-Bek. Mavzoley Yasavi Khodzha-Ahmeda. Alma-Ata, 1980.

275

Bibliography

Nurmukhamedova Sh.Z. Problemy antichnoy i srednevekovoy arkhitekturi Sredney Azii v issle-

dovaniyakh G. A. Pugachenkovoy. Avtoref. diss. ... kand. ist.n. Tashkent, 2008.

Nusov V.Ye. Arkhitektura Kirgizii s drevnyeyshikh vremen do nashikh dney. Frunze, 1955.

Nusov V.Ye. Pamyatniki arkhitekturi Kirgizstana. Frunze, 1963.

Nusov V.Ye. Arkhitektura Kirgizii s drevnyeyshikh vremen do nashikh dney. Frunze: Kyrgyzstan, 1971.

Onder O. Mevlana, Mevlevi Order, and Mevlana Museum. Ankara, 2007.

Otchety Imperatorskoy arkheologicheskoy komissii za 1892 g. Sankt-Peterburg, 1894.

Pantusov N.N. Tash-Rabat // Izvestiya Imperatorskoy arkheologicheskoy komissii. 1902. Vip. IV.

Perviye russkiye nauchniye issledovaniya Ustyurta. Moskva, 1963.

Peregudova S.Ya. Tash-Rabat. Frunze, 1989.

Peregudova S.Ya. K voprosu o garmonizatsii v srednevekovoy arkhitekture Kirgizstana: Analiz soraz-

mernostey planov pamyatnikov chuyskikh gorodish // Arhitektura i stroitelstvo Uzbekistana. 1991. № 5.

Persian Studies. 1979, V.17.

Pomaskin B.M. Gumbez Manasa. Frunze, 1972.

Pope A.U. Persian architecture. Shiraz, 1969.

Pribytkova A.M. Karavan-saray Daya-Khatyn. // Arkhitekturnoye nasledstvo. Vyp.3. Moskva, 1952.

Pribytkova A.M. Pamyatniki arkhitektury XI veka v Turkmenii. Moskva, 1955.

Pribytkova A.M. Materialy po zodchestvu Turkmenii. // Arkhitekturnoye nasledstvo. Vyp.8. Mosk-

va, 1958.

Pribytkova A.M. O «krasivoy» mecheti Danadanakana // Arkhitekturnoye nasledstvo. Vyp.17. Mosk-

va, 1964.

Pribitkova A.M. Arkhitektura Sredney Azii IX-X vv. // VIA, v 12-ti tomakh. T.8. Moskva: Stroyiz-

dat, 1969.

Pribitkova A.M. Stroitelnaya kultura Sredney Azii IX-XII vv. Moskva, 1973.

Protokoli zasedaniy i soobsheniy chlenov Turkestanskogo kruzhka lyubiteley arkheologii. 1897.

Pugachenkova G.A. O reznikh derevyannikh kolonnakh XIV-XV vv. v g.Turkestane. Izv. AN Kaz

SSR. ser.Arh. 1948. Vip.1.

Pugachenkova G.A. Zodchestvo Tsentralnoy Azii // Arkhitekturnoye nasledstvo, 1950. № 26.

Pugachenkova G.A. K voprosu o rekonstrukcii ansamblya Dorus-Ciadat, timuridskoi usypal’nicy

v Shahrisyabze / sb. «Materialy po istorii i teorii arhitektury Uzbekistana». Vyp.I, Moskva,1950.

Pugachenkova G.A. Sadovo-parkovoye iskusstvo Sredney Azii v epokhu Timura i Timuridov //

Trudi SAGU. Tashkent, 1951. T. XXIII.

276


Pugachenkova G.A. Arkhitekturnyye pamyatniki Dakhistana, Abiverda, Serakhsa. // Trudy Yu-

zhno-Turkmenistanskoy arkheologicheskoy kompleksnoy ekspeditsii, t.II. Ashkhabad, 1951.

Pugachenkova G.A. O Tash-Rabate // Trudi Instiuta yazyka, literaturi i istorii Kirgizskogo filiala

Akademii nauk SSSR. Frunze, 1952. Vip. III.

Pugachenkova G.A. Puti razvitiya arkhitektury Yuzhnogo Turkmenistana pory rabovladeniya i

feodalizma. Moskva, 1958.

Pugachenkova G.A. Mechet’ Anau. Ashkhabad, 1959.

Pugachenkova G.A. Vostochnaya miniatyura kak istochnik po istorii arkhitekturi XV-XVI vv. //

Arkheologicheskiye nauki Uzbekistana. Tashkent, 1960.

Pugachenkova G.A. Mavzoley Arab-Ata (iz istorii arkhitektury Maverannakhra IX-X vv.). // IZU. 1963.

Vip. 2.

Pugachenkova G.A. Samarkand-Bukhara. Moskva, 1968.

Pugachenkova G.A. I vse-taki - mavzoley! // Stroitelstvo i arkhitektura Uzbekistana. 1975. №12.

Pugachenkova G.A. Zodchestvo Tsentralnoy Azii. XV vek. Vedushiye tendentsii i cherti. Tashkent, 1976.

Pugachenkova G.A. Srednyeaziatskiye sadi i parki / Pugachenkova G.A. Iz istorii sokrovishnitsy

Srednego Vostoka. Tashkent, 1987.

Pugachenkova G.A., Rempel L.I. Istoriya iskusstv Uzbekistana s drevneyshikh vremen do se-

redini XIX v. Moskva, 1965.

Pugachenkova G.A., Rempel’ L.I. Ocherki istorii iskusstva Srednei Azii. Drevnost’ i srednevekov’e.

Moskva, 1982.

Ragulin P. Arkhitekturniye pamyatniki Kazakhstana // Arkhitektura SSSR, 1983. № 7.

Ratiya Sh.B. Mechet’ Bibi-Hanym v Samarkande.Issledovanie i opyt restavracii. Moskva, 1950.

Rempel L.I. Arkhitekturniy ornament Uzbekistana. Tashkent, 1961.

Rempel’ L.I. Iskusstvo srednevekovogo Vostoka. Izbrannye trudy po istorii i teorii iskusstv. Moskva,

1978.

Rempel L.I. Dalekoye i blizkoye. Bukharskiye zapisi. Tashkent, 1981.

Rtveladze L., Rtveladze E. Musulmanskiye svyatini Uzbekistana. Tashkent, 1996.

Ruziyev M. Reznoye derevo Chorku. Dushanbe, 1975.

Salamzade A.V., Mamedzade K.M. Pamyatniki Nahichevanskoy shkoli Azerbaydzhanskogo

zodchestva. Baku, 1985.

Satayev K., Bilibayev T. Arkhitekturnoye naslediye Sulayman-Too // Mazary Ferganskoy dolini. Bishkek,

2007.

277

Bibliography

Severtsev N.L. Orograficheskiy ocherk Pamirskoy gornoy sistemi // Zapiski russkogo geografichesko-

go obshestva po obshey geografii. Sankt-Peterburg, 1886. T.XIII.

Semenov G.L. Raskopki 1996-1998 gg. // Suyab - Ak-Beshim. Sankt-Peterburg, 2002.

Senigova T.N. Voprosi ideologii i kultov Semirechya. Alma-Ata, 1968.

Senigova T.N. Drevniy Taraz. Alma-Ata, 1972.

Subtelny M.E. The Poetic Circle at the Court of the Timurid Sultan Husain Bayqara and its Politi-

cal Significance. Dissertation. Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, May 1979.

Sukhareva O.A. Oboronitelniye steni Samarkanda / Kultura i iskusstvo narodov Sredney Azii v

drevnosti i srednevekovye. Moskva: Nauka, 1979.

Shalekenov U.Kh. Aktobe - srednevekoviy pamyatnik // Istoriya materialnoy kulturi Kazakhs-

tana. Alma-Ata, 1980.

Shamsaddin Abu Abdullah Mohammad ibn Ahmad al-Moqaddasi. Descriptio Imperii mos-

lemici. Ed. M. J. de Goeje. Bibliotheca geographorum arabicorum. Pars 3. - Lugduni-Batavorum, 1967.

Shardenova Z. Arkhitektura srednevekovikh gorodov Yuzhnogo Kazakhstana / Kumbez, 1997. №

2. Almati.

Shikhab-ad-din ibn bint amir Khamza. Zhitie Amira Kulala.

Shishkina G.V. Drevniy Samarkand i ego okruga // Gorodskaya kultura Baktrii-Tokharistana i

Sogda. Tashkent: Fan, 1987.

Sherbina-Kramarenko A. Po musulmanskim svyatynyam Sredney Azii. Puteviye zametki i vpe-

chatleniya // Spravochnaya knizhka Samarkandskoy provincei. T.IV. Tashkent, 1896.

Sherbina-Kramarenko A. Po razvalinam Sredney Azii // Zhurnal «Zodchiy». 1896-a. № 5.

Talbakova N.S., Nikitina O.M. Arkhitekturno-arkheologicheskoye issledovaniye mavzoleya

Sheykha Muslikhiddina v protsesse restavratsii // Issledovaniya po istorii i kulture Leninabada. Dush-

anbe, 1986.

Tasmagambetov I., Samashev Z. Saraychik. Almati, 2001.

The Letters of Kwaja Ubayd Allah Ahrar and His Associates. By A. Urinbaev and J.-A. Gross. Leiden-

Boston-Koln, 2002.

Togan Z.V. The Topography of Balkh Down to the Middle of the Seventeenth century // Central Asi-

atic Journal, Wiesbaden, 1970, V. XIV, 4.

Tolstov S.P. Po drevnim deltam Oksa i Yaksarta. Moskva, 1977.

Trever K. V., Yakubovskii A. Yu., Voronec M.E. Istoriya narodov Uzbekistana. T.1. S drev-

neishih vremen do nachala XVI v. Tashkent, 1950.

Trudi IV arheologicheskogo sezda v Rossii. Kazan, 1884. T.1.

278


Trudi Semirechenskoy arheologicheskoy ekspeditsii (Chuyskaya dolina) // Materiali i issledovaniya

po arkheologii Kirgizstana. Moskva-Leningrad, 1950. № 14.

TSNIISK im. Kucherenko. Zaklyucheniye o sostoyanii konstruktsii kompleksa Khodzhi Akhmeda-

Yassavi v g.Turkestane, 1975 g. Arkhiv ministerstva kultury KazSSR.

Tuyakbaeva B.T. Epigraficheskiy dekor arkhitekturnogo kompleksa Akhmeda Yasavi. Alma-Ata, 1989.

Vamberi G. Istoriya Bukhari s drevneyshikh vremen do nashikh dney. Sankt-Peterburg, 1873.

Veselovskiy V.G., Mukimov R.S. Etapy formirovaniya gradostroitelnoy strukturi Leninabada //

Issledovaniya po istorii i kulture Leninabada, Donish, 1986.

Vinnik D.F. Karavan-saray v doline San-Tash // Trudi Frunzenskogo politekhnicheskogo instituta.

Vip. 26 (arkhitektura i stroitelstvo). Frunze, 1968.

Vinnik D.F. Rabota v Uzgenskom oazise // Arkheolog. otkrytiya 1969 goda. Moskva, 1970.

Vinnik D.F. Rabota Uzgenskogo otryada // Arkheolog. otkrytiya 1970 goda. Moskva, 1971.

Vinnik D.F. Bashnya Burana // Pamyatniki Kirgizstana. Vip. II. Frunze, 1974.

Vinnik D.F. Otchet o polevikh issledovaniyakh arkheologicheskogo otryada po izucheniyu gornorud-

nikh promislov Issik-Kulskoy kotlovini v 1977 g. / Rukopis arkheologicheskogo arkhiva Instituta istorii i

kulturnogo naslediya Natsionalnoy akademii nauk Kirgizskoy Respubliki, inv. № 683. Frunze, 1978.

Voronina V.L. Reznoye derevo Zeravshanskoy dolini // Tr. STAE. T.1. MIA SSSR, № 15. Moskva-

Leningrаd, 1950.

Voronina V.L. Ob uzbekskikh banyakh // Sovetskaya etnografiya. 1951. № 11.

Voronina V.L. K kharakteristike arkhitekturi Sredney Azii epokhi Samanidov // Tr. AN Tadzh.SSR.

T.27. Stalinabad, 1954.

Voronina V.L. Narodnaya arkhitektura Severnogo Tadzhikistana. Moskva, 1959.

Voronina V.L. Cherty rannesrednevekovogo zhilishcha Srednyey Azii // Sovetskaya etnografiya

№ 6, Moskva. 1963.

Voronina V.L. Reznoye derevo Chorku // Arkheologicheskiye nauki. Moskva. 1967. Vip. 16.

Voronina V.L. Kolonni iz Otrara // Drevnosti Kazakhstana. Alma-Ata, 1975.

Voronina V.L. Rezba po derevu v doline Isfari // Arkheologicheskiye nauki. Moskva, 1969. Vip. 18.

Voronina V.L. Otchet o rabotakh 1972 g. v Ura-Tyube // ART. Vyp. XII (1972 god). Dushanbe, 1976.

Voronina V.L. Konstruktsii i khudozhestvenniy obraz v arkhitekture Vostoka. Moskva, 1977.

Voronina V.L. Ansambli srednyeaziatskikh gorodov // Arkheologicheskie nauki. Moskva, 1978.

Vyp. 24.

Voronina V.L., Kryukov K.S. Mavzoley Bosharo // Drevnost i srednevekovye narodov Sredney

Azii (istoriya i kultura). Moskva, 1978.

279

Bibliography

Vseobshaya istoriya arkhitekturi (VIA) v 12-ti tomakh. Moskva, 1968. T.5.

Vyatkin V.L. Vakufniy dokument Ishrathana. Mavzoley Ishratkhana. Tashkent, 1958.

Wilber D.N. The Timurid Court: Life in Gardens and Tents. Iran. Journal of the British Institute of

Persian Studies, 1979, vol.17. Edited by M.Stausberg. Leiden-Boston, 2004.

Zadneprovskiy Yu.A. Arkheologicheskiye raboti v Yuzhnoy Kirgizii // Trudy Kirgizskoy arkheol-

ogo-etnograficheskoy ekspeditsii AN SSSR. Moskva, 1960. T.IV.

Zadneprovskiy Yu.A. Arkheologicheskiye issledovaniya v Oshskom oazise // Arkheolog. otkritiya

1984 goda. Moskva, 1986.

Zasypkin B.N. Pamyatniki arhitektury Srednei Azii i ih restavraciya / Sb. Voprosy restavracii, vyp.

1. Moskva, 1926.

Zasypkin B.N. Pamyatniki Uzgena. Moskva, 1927.

Zasypkin B.N. Arkhitekturniye pamyatniki Fergani // Iskusstvo Sredney Azii. Moskva, 1930.

Zasypkin B.N. Arkhitektura Sredney Azii. Moskva, 1948.

Zasypkin B.N. Vidayushiesya pamyatniki arkhitekturi Kirgizii (rukopis). Arkhiv nauchno-issledo-

vatelskogo proektnogo byuro «Kyrgyzrestavratsiya». 1954 godu.

Zahidov P.Sh. Dvorets ili mavzoley? // Stroitelstvo i arkhitektura Uzbekistana. 1974. № 9.

Zeland N.L. Kashgariya i perevali Tyan-Shanya // Puteviye zapiski. Omsk, 1888.

Yakubovskiy A.Yu. Razvalini Signaka. Leningrad, 1929.

Yakubovskiy A.Yu. Dve nadpisi na Severnom mavzoleye v Uzgende // Epigrafika Vostoka. 1947. Vip. I.

Yassavi. Devoni khikmat. Toshkent, 1991.

The Artistic Culture of Central Asia and Azerbaijan in the 9th–15th centuries. Vol. IV.

Architecture.—Samarkand—Tashkent: IICAS, 2013.— 275 p.

Editor: I. Osmanova

Designer: A. Yuldashev

Computer layout: N. Memetova

Signed for print 22.05.2013

Copies 250.

ISBN 978-9943-357-13-6 (IICAS)

IICAS: 19, University Boulevard, Samarkand 140129, Uzbekistan

www.unesco–iicas.org

Printed by Mega Basim:

Baha Is Merkezi, Haramidere, Istanbul, Turkey

www.mega.com.tr

The Artistic Culture of Central Asia and Azerbaijan in the 9th-15th centuries. Volume IV....

Documents

Transcript of The Artistic Culture of Central Asia and Azerbaijan in the 9th-15th centuries. Volume IV....