Armenian Church Architecture

This paper contains memories about Armen Zarian (1914-1994),  son of Gostan(Kostan) Zarian famous Armenian writer. Armen Zarian was well known architect and the historian of the Armenian medieval architecture and was active in Italy, Morocco and Armenia.

By “the propaedeutic of the Temple”, we mean the process of the birth of the temple consciousness and the actual idea of the Temple. We turn to the formation of the temple consciousness and the idea of the Temple in the period of the formation of ethno-religious features of the early biblical narrative. Temple propaedeutic is an important part of the temple consciousness, it establishes such an important set of rules and things necessary for the erection of the Temple. For this reason, it would be logical to create a set of themes and motives that would make up the necessary rules, semantic knots and concepts of the propaedeutic of the Temple. In the process of becoming the idea of the Temple, great importance is acquired by the patriarch Abraham — on his way to Canaan he builds altars. The construction of the altars is accompanied by a dynamic beginning, which together provides an example of the origin of the idea of the Temple and, accordingly, the formation of the temple consciousness. This process over time will encompass an increasing number of realities of the biblical narrative and apocrypha. The altars and sacrificial trees are a mnemonic mechanism for remembering the name and image of God for ourselves and our descendants.
The motive for “finding the city”, which Ehud Benzvi draws attention to, is associated not only with the city, but also with the Temple. From Salim of Melchizedek to Jerusalem during the reign of the kings David and Solomon and up to our days, the city has always remained a City-Temple. First, in the Christian, and then in the Muslim era, Jerusalem
greatly deepened its temple horizon of the city. The propaedeutic of the Temple provides for the precondition of pre-temple and architectural motifs, such as the altars that the patriarchs built, for example, the one built by King David, Jacob’s ladder, the Moses tabernacle.

Öz : Tarih boyunca gerek İslam toplumlarında gerekse Osmanlı döneminde yaşayan gayrimüslim halkın eğitim ve dinsel ihtiyaçlarının belli kurallar çerçevesinde yerine getirildiği görülmektedir. Osmanlı yönetiminde yaşayan gayrimüslim cemaatin kilise, okul vb. gibi kendi ihtiyaçları için inşa edeceği veya onaracağı yapılarında, yapım/onarım izni için izlenmesi gerekli olan süreç çalışmamız için de veri sağlaması açısından önemli olmaktadır. Bu süreçteki tüm yazışmalar yapı inşa faaliyeti için bize bilgiler vermekte ve bu başvurunun eki olarak hazırlanılan çizimler de mimarlık tarihi açısından belge niteliğini taşıyan çalışmalar olarak karşımıza çıkmaktadır. Ermenilere ait Yalova örneğinde incelediğimiz onarım ve inşa faaliyetlerine bakıldığında, ilk örnek olarak karşımıza çıkan Çukurköy Ermeni Kilisesi'nin, 1894 depreminde hasar gördüğü ve yerel imkanlarla bazı kısımlarının onarıldığı anlaşılmaktadır. Yapılan renklendirilmiş çizimde, onarım yapılan kısımlar ve hasar almış bölge günümüzdeki rölöve anlayışı ile çizilerek durum tespiti yapılmıştır. Günümüzde Yalova sınırları içerisinde yer alan Çengiler (Sugören) Köyü'ndeki yeni inşa edilecek kilise ve okulun ayrıntılı çizimleri de günümüze gelmeyen bu üç yapı için pek çok ayrıntıyı vermesi açısından önemli olmaktadır. Çalışmamız Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivi, arazi ve sözlü tarih çalışması ile desteklenerek, sadece sözlü anlatılarda karşımıza çıkan Yalova Ermenilerine ait mimari eserleri yapılan araştırma ile ortaya çıkarmayı amaçlamaktadır. Abstract: Throughout history, education and religious needs of non-Muslim populations in Islamic communities as well as those living in the Ottoman Empire were catered within certain rules. The process through which construction/restoration permits were obtained by non-Muslim communities in order to construct or restore a church, school etc. during the Ottoman period provides us with important data for our research. Correspondence during this process gives us information on building construction activities while the drawings accompanying this correspondence have document value in terms of architectural history. The Armenian examples examined in Yalova demonstrate that, firstly, the Çukurköy Armenian Church was damaged in the 1894 earthquake and that some parts of it was restored with local means. The coloured survey drawing indicates damaged and restored parts in the current understanding of architectural condition surveys. The detailed drawings of a church and school planned to be constructed in the Çengiler (Sugören) Village within the borders of Yalova are significant in that they reveal many details of these no longer extant buildings. The sources of this research are documents from the Prime Ministry's Ottoman Archive as well as site surveys and oral history studies in order to uncover Armenian buildings in Yalova, whose existence are only glimpsed at in oral narratives.

Bu çalısmada, Eskisehir’in Sivrihisar ilçesinde bulunan Surp Yerortutyun Kilisesi hakkında
yapılan arastırmalar sunulmaktadır. Arastırma kapsamında, Surp Yerortutyun Kilisesi
incelenerek ayrıntılı fotografları çekilmistir. Yapının tarihçesi, konumu, mimari ve süsleme
özellikleri konusunda bir degerlendirme yapılmıstır. Mimari ayrıntılar tanımlanmıs ve Ermeni
kiliseleri ile karsılastırılarak benzer mimari uygulamalardan bahsedilmistir. Yapının mevcut
durumu degerlendirilerek Ermeni kilise mimarisi içindeki konumu açıklanmıstır.

Medieval Armenian churches located within the boundaries of the Province of Kars are being studied since 2010 within the framework of the surface survey named Medieval Armenian Churches in Kars and Its Environs (except Ani). The purpose of this article is to introduce Karmirvank (Çoban Kilise) which we studied in years 2010-2012, 2014 and 2017 and which is not so well known in Armenian architecture, by revealing its architectural and ornamental characteristics and evaluating opinions about its construction date. Throughout the text, first the location and present condition of the monastery have been mentioned, then the architectural structure, ornaments and inscriptions have been explained in the light of data collected during our field survey, supported with images and drawings and finally a general evaluation has been made taking into consideration information in relevant publications.
Very little information has been found about Karmirvank in 19.-20. Century publications on Armenian architecture. T. Toramanyan was the first researcher who examined and introduced the monastery’s architecture to the world of science. The original dedication of Karmirvank is unknown. It has been named as Karmirvank in publications since it is mentioned so on the inscription found in the monastery’s church. Locally it is known as “Çoban Kilise”. It is not possible to identify neither the construction date nor the original dedication of the church although there are three inscriptions in Armenian in Karmirvank. However, the inscription on the southern facade dated to 1165 provides significant evidence that the structure was present before this period. The monastery’s construction date is estimated to be early 10th or 11th century considering the architectural features of Karmirvank, its location between Ani and Horomos Monastery and construction activities during the Armenian Kingdom.
In conclusion, Karmirvank is one of the important examples of Medieval Armenian architecture having survived to present with its architectural structure and inscriptions, although there is very little information about it in publications. Within this context, all available data has been evaluated and a detailed introduction of Karmirvank is aimed to be given in this article supported with drawings and images.

As a part of an ongoing study on female patrons in the Medieval Armenian religious architecture and the buildings they constructed, the aim of this text is to discuss Princess Maryam who is distinguished with the buildings that she provided patronage for starting from the second half of the 9th century. It is known from the written sources about that era and the inscriptions that the constructions of Sevanavank, Şoğakavank and Vanevan Monasteries, all located on the banks of Lake Sevan, were founded the first two, contributed to the establishment of the third by Princess Maryam who was the daughter of King Ashot I Pakraduni, the sister of King Smbat I and the wife of Siunik Prince Vasak. Surp Arak’elorts and Surp Asdvadzadzin Churches in the Sevan Monastery and Surp Bedros Church in the Şoğakavank Monastery were founded by her personally. Surp Krikor Lusavoriç Church in the Vanevan Monastery was built by his brother Sepuh under the supervision of her. Those churches built under the patronage of the princess, especially the ones in the Sevan Monastery are considered as the beginning of the Western Siunik ecole.
In this study, after a general introduction is made, information about Princess Maryam found in the sources about that period is given, military and political atmosphere in the Siunik region is mentioned where relevant, buildings constructed under her patronage are denoted and the architectural features of the monasteries built by her are briefly specified. Inscriptions with Maryam’s name are also mentioed in this study. Finally, the Western Siunik architectural ecole is examined with Princess Maryam at the focus and a general evaluation is made about the Medieval Armenian religious architecture.
Keywords: Princess Maryam, Sevan, Monastery, Medieval Age, 9th century

Апстракт: Детаљна анализа остатака цркве који се називају Манастириште Свете Петке Русалне код Сврљига показује да се ради о цркви са основом у облику триконхоса уписаног у правоугаоник и са три међусобно независне, апсидално завршене просторије на источном крају. Истовремно, дошло се до информација о начину грађења, пропорцијским односима и вероватном првобитном изгледу, као и о могућим наменама појединих простора цркве. Расположиви историјски подаци не допуштају прецизно датовање објекта, али се чини да је његов настанак највероватније везан за средњи век. Циљ овог рада је да се скрене пажња на ову цркву занимљиве основе, да се подаци о њој сакупљени на терену учине доступним стручној јавности и да се подвуче неопходност даљег и потпунијег истраживања, које би укључило и систематско археолошко ископавање.
Кључне речи: Сврљиг, црква, архитектура, триконхос уписан у правоугаоник, олтарски простор, пастофорије, нартекс, пропорцијски односи, средњи век

Since late antiquity, northern Mesopotamia had been the cradle of two main Christian communities, namely, the Church of the East and the Syriac Orthodox Church of Antioch. From the late Middle Ages onwards, however, their newly-created Catholic counterparts, as well as Protestant offshoots in the modern period, have further added to this uneasy and often antagonistic mix. Despite these Churches sharing a common Syriac liturgical language, and their members speaking Neo-Aramaic and sharing a common Assyrian ethnicity and heritage, they have time and again found themselves at loggerheads in the historical record over differences in theology, Christology, allegiance and claims to apostolic succession. With this diversification of creeds and loyalties amongst the Syriac Churches, there also came a need for each community to legitimise, consolidate and renew itself as it saw fit in order to be able to remain in competition with its ‘rivals.’ Part of this process was embodied in the appropriation of churches and monasteries belonging to the ‘others’ and their modification to conform to the ecclesiastical norms of the new owners.

In this study, cases of churches which have largely changed hands between the Church of the East, Syriac Orthodox Church, Chaldean Catholic Church and Syriac Catholic Church will be discussed in an effort to illustrate this un-Christian process of control, appropriation and dispossession, as well as the transferral and imposition of one form of Christian expression on an edifice which previously belonged to another denomination. Examples of church buildings in Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran will hence be discussed in an effort to understand the way in which this heritage is appropriated and transferred, as well as the method through which one denomination’s own heritage can be transferred to an existing structure built by an opposing one.

Surveys of the Medieval Armenian Churches (except Ani) in and around Kars have been carried out since 2010 with the permission of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism General Directorate of Cultural Heritage and Museums, and the General Staff. Shortly, the purpose of the survey is to identify and document the Armenian monasteries and churches built in the Middle Ages in and around Kars (except Ani), which are included in our cultural heritage belonging to different civilizations, to prepare the building catalogs and to make architectural evaluations of a period.

In 2010, which was the first season of the research, Armenian monasteries and churches in the central districts and villages of Kars, especially the military border, were examined. This report is contained survey, plan and photograps of Surp Arak'elots Church (Aziz Havariler Kilisesi / Kümbet Mosque), Beşik Mosque, Kümbet Church in Kars center district, Kızıl Church (Karmirvank/Dprevank) in Yağkesen village, the church in Oğuzlu village, Bagnayr Monastery (Kozluca Monastery) in Kozluca village, Shepherd Church near Ani, the church in Ölçülü Village (Greek Church), the church near Mezraa village and Horomos Monastery, Shepherd Church / Karmirvank and Taylar Church located in a military forbidden zone.

A Settlement in the Region of Ankara from Ottoman Period: Buyuk Istanos

Buyuk Istanos was an Ottoman Turkish and Armenian settlement. Only few remains  survived. Evliya Celebi observed many famous rope acrobats in Buyuk Istanos when he reached the area and he presented interesting rocks of the place by exaggerating in his travel notes. Istanos was the stopover point where 19th century travelers and foreign missionaries drank grape juice on their routes to the west as they passed through Ankara and rested in the shade of a willow by the Engurusu (Zir Stream). Moreover, Ankara's white goats with their silky white hair were the livelihood for the people of the settlement and Istanos had a significant role in the production of fleece wool in 19th century Ankara. We do not have the opportunity to make a clear inference as to population at the settlement, but the majority of the people were Armenians  subordinating to the Ottomans and this was an Anatolian town in its own way. Furthermore, in 1934, a black-and-white documentary named




"Turkey's Heart: Ankara" was directed by Russian directors S. Yutkevich and L. O. Arnstam. At the first moments of the film, Istanos as a small town of Anatolia was appeared with its two-to-three storey mudbrick houses adjacent to each other next to Zir Stream, and its narrow streets. The town was completely abandoned after a major inundation and landslide in 1957.
A rock-carved monastery from Byzantine period, a stone bridge from the Ottoman era, a destroyed Armenian cemetery, a ruined house, most of remained beneath the ground or a number of building remains have been examined. In this research,  history of the location is mentioned within the framework of historical and modern sources, cartographic sources, travel notes and mission reports written about the town, Armenian cemetery and other ruins are mentioned. Besides, it is noteworthy that no comprehensive study of the settlement has been referring up  to date. This study aims to document the last remains of the destroyed area.

The site called Manastirište Svete Petke Rusalne ("the former Monastery of St. Petka Rusalna) is located between the villages of Ribare and Djurinac, southeast of the present-day town of Svrljig. Remains of the church are visible on the site, showing that the church was of considerable dimensions, and of an interesting and atypical plan. It features a triconchal interior space inscribed in a mass of walls that are perpendicular to the outside, a unique solution in church architecture in Serbia for the time being. There are three rooms in the eastern part of the structure, each with its own apse, which is semi-circular on the outside and inside alike. These rooms are not interconnected, but each opens only to the nave. In addition, the two lateral rooms are placed obliquely with respect to the axis of the central one, certainly the sanctuary, probably thereby adjusting to the curves of the lateral conchs on which they rely. In the western part of the church, which probably served as a narthex, lateral spaces of unequal sizes and unknown purposes were noted, with semi-circular finishes on the east side.

The analysis of the preserved forms, reconstructed spaces and proportions, as well as the possible purpose of some parts of the building revealed that the remains belonged to a church whose morphological and geographic closest relatives are found in present-day Northern Macedonia and Bulgaria. First of all, these are two churches with almost identical foundations and both preserved only in the remains, a church in the village of Krupište (near Štip) and a church in the village of Kulata (near Petrich). The first is dated to the period from the 7th to the 9th century, while the second is ascribed to the period from the 10th to the 12th century. Both churches are most commonly associated with the Cappadocian and Armenian churches of this type and, in particular, with two churches in southern Greece, St. Nicholas in Aulis (mid-11th century) and St. Demetrius in Varassova (10th or 11th century). A number of churches of the same or similar plan can be found in Armenian architecture of the same or later time, and it is possible that the church presented here was built for the needs of an unknown Armenian enclave or as a result of the patronage of some Armenian notable, although there is no historical data to suggest links with this geographically remote area. In addition to these, the comparative analysis also takes into account churches that, strictly speaking, do not belong to the type under consideration, but share with them the concept and organization of interior space, especially the presence of chapels integrated into the mass of the church, characteristic of the Middle Byzantine period. On the basis of all this, as well as considering the historical circumstances in the region of Svrljig, it is proposed to date the Ribare church in the 10th or 11th century, with the possibility that the building was erected precisely as part of the Byzantine ecclesiastical and architectural restoration in the central Balkans after the reintegration of these geographical areas to the Byzantine Empire in 1018.

Surveys of the Medieval Armenian Churches (except Ani) in and around Kars have been carried out since 2010 with the permission of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism General Directorate of Cultural Heritage and Museums, and the General Staff. Shortly, the purpose of the survey is to identify and document the Armenian monasteries and churches built in the Middle Ages in and around Kars (except Ani), which are included in our cultural heritage belonging to different civilizations, to prepare the building catalogs and to make architectural evaluations of a period. In 2014, which was the fifth season of the research, Armenian monasteries and churches in the central districts and villages of Kars, the central and villages of Digor town, the central and villages of Kağızman town especially the military border, were examined. This report is contained survey description, plans, drawings and photograps of Church/Monastery in Alaca village (Argo Aritch?), Magazberd Castle, Tekor Kathedral/Surp Sarkis Church, Mren Kathedral, Çengelli Church/Surp Asvadzadzin Church, Chuch in Keçivan Castle (Tunçkaya village).

The Gotlanders massive presence in Miklagarðr and the Gotlandic Varangian Ingr’s daughter becoming Empress in 867 must have contributed to the formation of an independent Gotlandic Church that during the first 300 years was purely Byzantine in its outlook.
In the 900s we know of 55 wooden churches and most population in the upper layer is believed to have become Christians. 
From the beginning of the 1000s the churches are built in stone after the Armenian model.
How to explain the mutually so dismissive attitude of these yet so related forms? If they partly coincide in time, which is the older? Which are its roots? Why did the Gotlanders change from wood to stone end of the 900s. How much has the contacts with the Macedonian Renaissance art and Armenian church architecture influenced the Gotlandic Romanesque art. What is Hegwaldr, Majestatis, Semi-Byzantios and Byzantios relationship with the Ottonian art?
Both Hegwaldr, Majestatis and Byzantios are exclusively typical of their own island. Here we encounter a question that can only be solved through individual study of the works of these masters.
The oldest groups of Gotlandic baptismal fonts, that seem in the large to follow the same pattern, have a cup and a low cylinder with conical tapered bottom. On the foot are four diametrically projecting heads. Almost every point is decorated with one in diametric contrast of the other. This gives immediately a remarkably wide horizon for the Gotlandic art and unites the principal amount of problems in itself that the Gotlandic history of sculpture offers.
The direction of the cultural current is even more apparent when one looks at some other preserved fragments of Gotlandic architecture of the 1000s, which are related to Lund. The reclining lion that crowns the abutment of the arch on the north portal in Hablingbo, by Majestatis ca 1040, with similar ones on both later portals in Lund. The tower portal in Grötlingbo where the animals between tendrils adorn an Archivolte reminds on the outermost Archivolts of the later south portal in Lund.
The Gotlandic Romanesque churches had already in the early 1000s been based on the Armenian churches within the Macaedonian Renessance art. This was the base with a few novelties that would remain for the Gotlandic churches until the “Egypticus lodge” came with the Contra-Gothic style after the civil war in 1288.
There is a line of stone mason lodges from Hegwaldr’s lodge beginning end 900s until the large Egypticus lodge in the 1300s. These early churchbuilders had the Gotlandic picture stone art in their baggage and got their education in the Byzantine Macedonian Renaissance art. The model for the earliest Gotlandic stone churches in the early 1000s was the Armenian church architecture.


The complex of monastic buildings of Horomos is one
of the largest in medieval Armenia and the whole
Christian East. In the course of the study of Horomos,
I paid particular attention to a number of buildings
which marked the shaping of new architectural types:
the fore-church hall called zhamatun; the entry arch
with two chapels above the pylons; the two-story
mausoleum with tree chapels above the liturgical hall;
and hall-reliquaries. Such creativity was extremely
rare for the medieval architectural tradition in Armenia,
with its well-established typology and a limited number
of architectural plans. In Horomos, however, there
were not less than four new building plans, each of
which initiated a new architectural type. The largest
church of the monastery and the zhamatun are both
dated to 1038 by an inscription that mentions the patron,
Hovhannes Smbat Shahinshah Bagratouni. Like
other twelfth- and thirteenth-century ‘copies’ of the
Horomos zhamatun, most of which looked like
covered cemeteries, that building may have had a funerary
function, and was, probably, built as a royal
mausoleum.
The article analyzes the architecture of this 16-column
hall. I will focus on the origin of this composition and
to the carved decoration. Unlike traditional concepts
of this architectural type’s development from local domestic
architecture, I offer some architectural models
that were based on new concepts: among these were
the late antique churches of Armenia, such as Ejmiatsin
cathedral and Zvartnots, and the Anastasis Rotunda.
This research brings us closer to an understanding
of the conceptual architectural idea that was
shaped in the last years of the so-called “Armenian
renaissance” of the end of the tenth and the first half
of the eleventh century.

Kars Surp Arak'elots Church (Kars Katedrali/lHavariler Kilisesi/Kümbet Camii)

During the 10th century the city Kars used to be the capital of the Armenian Kingdom under the reign of King Abas (928-952) and continued to act as such until 961 when Ashot 3rd moved his capital to Ani. According to the historian Stephanos Asogik Daronetsi who lived during the 10th and the beginning of the 11th century, a large number of construction activities took place in the Armenian Kingdom during the era of King Abas. Contemporary sources and research results, therefore, give credit to King Abas for the construction of Surp Arak'elots Church, situated at the center of the city Kars. This article intends to present a detailed description of Surp Arak'elots Church in Kars, to discuss its position in Armenian architecture and to evaluate the data gathered during the field surveys and at libraries.
Surp Arak'elots Church has a tetraconchos plan type in which the corners of the central square extend outwards. That the application of the layout of the central square is repeated on the outer walls, that is, the inner separation of the rooms is reflected on the facades is a rarity in Armenian architecture. The earlier examples of this plan type, called the "Mastara type" in Armenian architecture, appear in four other churches all situated within the boundaries of the state of "Ararat". It is rather interesting to find out that this plan type occurred for the first time in the churches of Surp Arak'elots and Kümbet Kilise and was not repeated any more in any other region. This situation can be evaluated either as tradition or as a repetition of an earlier church in the vicinity by native masons. Thus, the application of this plan type during the 10th century only in the churches Surp Arak'elots and Kümbet Kilise can be evaluated as traditional or regional.
The system of the transition elements in Surp Arak'elots Church seems to be unique, especially the depiction of the symbols of the Evangelists in the squinches is again a rarity in Armenian art. The identity of the figures depicted on the facade of the cupola as disciples is rather disputable. On the other hand, the hierarchic location of the figures, their positions and numbers recall the figures of the disciples in Byzantine murals and Armenian manuscripts. Therefore, we tend to agree with the argument that the twelve figures on the cupola of the Surp Arak'elots Church are the symbols of the disciples and for that reason we agree with the name of the church as "Arak'elots". The depiction of the twelve disciples in East Christian art can be observed in the apse’s cupola, on the walls of the tambour, rarely on the lower part of the cupola since the early Christian era, yet the arrangement of Surp Arak'elots Church is unique. It is also interesting to find out that all of the earliest examples of the symbols of Evangelists in Armenian architecture appear during King Abas period.
The construction material of the church is mainly well-cut tuff. The "fili-in wall system" masonry is built in rows of equal height with the employment of evenly-cut stones. The masonry technique, however, does not include specific features that can help to date the church securely.
Surp Arak'elots Church has three entrances, west, east and north. This arrangement is seldom in Armenian architecture. On the other hand, the rectangular, narrow but high windows with round arches and the Omega-shaped and ornamented blind arches at Surp Arak'elots Church are typical for Armenian architecture.
Finally, we sum up by repeating some important facts of Surp Arak'elots Church at Kars like the plan type that presents regional properties, the figures depicted on the cupola that are unique in Armenian art, the composition of a fıgure with a serpent placed above the western window as a very seldom application, the symbols of the Evangelists depicted in the squinches that can only be found at the churches belonging to King Abas period, or the system of transition elements of the cupola that remains as a speciality within the Armenian architecture, whereas the entrances, the facade, cupola and the tambour arrangements that appear often and are evaluated as typical for Armenian architecture.

Some of the settlements located within the boundaries of the
current Province of Kars had become the capital of the Armenian
Kingdoms that existed in Eastern Anatolia in the medieval period as
vassals of great empires of that time. Peace and prosperity prevailed in
the region where Kars is situated during the 10th century and early 11th
century. This provided an opportunity for the Armenian church which
had developed under difficult political, cultural and religious conditions,
leading to the construction of numerous monasteries and churches in
the region. We learn from the history book of Stephanos Asoğik
Daronetsi, an Armenian historian who lived during the end of the 10th
and the beginning of the 11th century about plenty of building activities
within the territory of the Armenian Kingdom.
Taylar Church is located 45 km to the east of Kars and 2km to the
north of Horomos monastery. Its original Armenian name and date of
construction is unknown, and it is now known as the Taylar Church.
Taylar Church has a “domed hall” plan type of spesific Armenian
Architecture. This type is a single nave partitioned into three sections
with a dome over the central section. The drum is octogonal within and
without, and rested on pandantives supported by semicircular arches.
The earliar examples of this plan type in Armenian Architecture, appear
Zovuni Surp Bogos-Bedros Church (6th), Ptghni Church (7th), Aruch
Surp Gregor Church (7th) ve Dedmaşen Surp Tadeus Church (7th). So
far in our research, the plan of type Taylar Church-with minor
differences (windows, doors, ornaments etc.)- has been observed
extensively applied after numerous churches in the 9th century in
Armenian architecture.
The purpose of this article is to introduce the Taylar
Church within the Armenian architecture and to discuss its problems
like identity and dating, by means of collected material through
research on previous written sources as well as through the
architectural data gathered during our field survey.
Key Words: Armenian, Taylar, Church, Kars, Architecture,
History.

A new attention is focused in this article to the activity of the Ani Archaeological Expedition (Ani Institute) of the Emperial Archaeological Commission in 1892–1893 and 1904–1917. The goal of the analysis is the demonstration of a variety of works conducted by Professor Nikolay Marr and his colleagues in the city of Ani and other monuments of medieval architecture of Armenia, as well as the understanding of the scientific basis and that which economic success is based on, which seems relevant after a centenary. The complex character of the activity of the Institute has included archeological discoveries and the measurement of monuments, their multi-topic examination, stabilization of the conditions of the ruined buildings and museumification of more important fragments. The creation of the museum and publishing activities were the proviso of the work of the expedition. The systematization of the facts has testified to the fact that the parallel governmental and social funding afforded us a possibility to construct the organizational model of the development of the Ani Institute. This model became viable during the years of the Institute’s work; the same model can be a worthy example applied to the present day.

In recent years, twelve Armenian inscriptions and fragments of inscriptions were found in Cilicia. Before this, the epigraphic heritage from the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia encompassed only about twenty Armenian, Old French and Latin texts. My paper presents a study of the inscriptions discovered in 2016–2017 among the church ruins in the village of Maksutoluğu (northeastern Cilicia) and in so-called Dağlı Kalesi (western Cilicia), as well as a review of other epigraphic pieces found recently in other parts of Cilicia.

I will also make a presentation of the ecclesiastical edifice situated in the village of Kıbrıslar (northern Cilicia). Earlier, I had identified this medieval site with the holy cloister of Drazark, burial place of the kings and queens of Armenia, other members of the Armenian princely and royal house, as well as of catholicoi. Further study, in which Prof. Patrick Donabédian (Head of the Laboratory of the Mediterranean Medieval and Modern Archeology, Aix-Marseille University) and Jirair Christianian (Independent Researcher) are taking part, revealed that some architectural elements of the structure resemble those of Eastern Armenian memorial churches dated within the first half of fourteenth century (Surb Astuacacin / Eghvard; “Burt‘elashen” Surb Astuacacin / Noravank‘; Surb Minas / Kaputan). This part of the paper includes the first presentation of a hidden medieval cave complex located near Kıbrıslar-Drazark.

By the end of the presentation, the audience will have information about contributions of these recent discoveries to various issues of Armenian studies and about perspectives for further research in this field.

Some of the settlements located within the boundaries of the current Province of Kars had become the capital of the Armenian Kingdoms that existed in Eastern Anatolia in the medieval period as vassals of great empires of that time. Peace and prosperity prevailed in the region where Kars is situated during the 10th century and early 11th century. This provided an opportunity for the Armenian church which had developed under difficult political, cultural and religious conditions, leading to the construction of numerous monasteries and churches in the region.  Various applications of central plan type were used in the construction of these buildings in addition to plans applied in the 7th century. Feudal lords, their wives and bishops provided patronage for the monastic establishments and contributed to the development of art and literature.
The purpose of this article is to introduce the Armenian monasteries, churches and chapels which were built in Kars in the 10th century. While doing this, first the city of Kars and its history until 1064, especially in the 10th century has been briefly referred to. Second, the Armenian church and its history has been mentioned in general terms. And finally, buildings located within the boundaries of the current Province of Kars have been explained supported by architectural drawings and visual material.

The purpose of this article is to determine where the Armenians were located in Anatolia during the Byzantine Empire. The issue is addressed chronologically with the history of the Armenian church, the lives of the Armenians, their relations with their neighbors, political relations, economics, cultural change, interaction and development. Finally, a general assessment has been made. However, when this issue is addressed, not Armenians who were assimilated by the Byzantine Empire, but Armenians who took their lives in vassal kingdoms located in the east of Anatolia separated from the official religious policy of the empire were taken into consideration…
Historically, in summary, the eastern Anatolian region inhabited by the Armenians was divided between the Byzantine Empire and the Sassanids by the end of the 4th century. From the middle of the 5th century onwards, the conflicts between the two powers continued into the mid-6th century, this time the region has been divided again in order to remain mostly in Sassanids. From the middle of the 7th century the control of the region passed over to the Abbasids. During this period, the Armenians accepted the domination of the Abbasids Caliphate from the middle of the 7th century, preserving the feudal structure of the limited empire. From the 8th century onwards, in the region, the pressures increased and confusion emerged. In the mid-9th century, Byzantine emperors connected with the Armenian principal families and gradually began to advance to the East. The region was under the control of the Byzantine Empire in the first half of the 11th century and in the second half of the same century it was dominated by the Seljuks. With the Byzantines dominating the region, the Armenians began to spread to the Central Anatolia and Cilicia regions, had important qualities in Cilicia and founded the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia in the late 12th century. They continued their lives in Cilicia until the middle of the 14th century as the independent principalities…
There is little information in medieval Armenian sources, translated into most Western languages, in the Eastern Anatolian region, where Armenians are mostly settled before the 10th century, how the land is exchanged, what are the living conditions of the people, and how the tax system is like. There is sufficient information about Armenian noble families in these sources, and it is obvious that a feudal work is being done in this region. Yet little is known about how relations between noble families and peoples are…
As a result, the eastern Anatolian region, where the Armenians were established as feudal principals, is a place where the borders are constantly changing during the Byzantines along the Middle Ages and the wars between the Sassanids and then the Arabs. There are three main reasons why the region is the struggle of the great empires. The first is military, the second is economic, the third is religious. The region is important in terms of military resources, because every feudal prince has his own troops. For this reason, the Armenians who lived in the region were important for both great powers in the East and the West. Sometimes they continued to exist in the Byzantine Empire, sometimes in the great empires of the East. However, according to the attitudes of the Armenians in the struggles between the great empires in the region, were sometimes forced migrations by the Byzantine Empire, and sometimes this migration was with their own preferences…

Ամփոփում. Հոդվածում ներկայացված է «Ճարտարապետական եւ տեղանվանական հայկական հուշարձանները աշխարհում» բազմահատորյա ատլաս-դիվանից մի գլուխ, որն նվիրված է Մոլդովաին: Հոդվածում համառոտ ներկայացվում է գաղթօջախի ստեղծման եւ զարգացման պատմությունը, տարածման աշխարհագրությունը, եկեղեցու, կրթության և պարբերական մամուլի իրավիճակը: Հոդվածի հիմնական մասն է կազ-մում Մոլդովայի հայկական ճարտարապետական ու տեղանվանական հուշարձանների ցուցակ-աղյուսակը, որի վերջում զետեղված է գրականության ցանկ: Մոլդովան ծանոթ եր հայերին դեր վաղ ժամանակվանից: VII դ. Պրուտի եւ Դնեստրի միջագետետքը մաս դարցավ Բուլղար թագավորության: Այդ ժամանակվանից ի վեր հայերի ներթափանցումը Մոլդովա էլ ավելի դարցավ: Սակայն առաջին գաղթօջախները հիմնադրվեցին միայն XI դ. կեսերից ի վեր. երբ հայրենիք ներխուժեցին թուրք-սելջուկների բարբարոս ցեղերը: Մեզ հայտնի առաջին կաթողիկոսական կոնդակը մոլդովական հողում հայ եկեղեցիներին վերաբերում է 1364 թ. երբ Մեսրոպ Ա Արտազեցին հպատակեցրեց «լյախերի եւ օլախների երկրում» գտնվող հայ եկեղեցիները Լեմբերգում ստեղծված առաջնորդարանին: Գաղթօջախները ստվարացան Աբդուլհամիդյան ջարդերից եւ Առաջին համաշխարհային պատերազմի տարիներին (1914–18) երիթուրքերի կողմից հայոց ցեղասպանության հետեվանքով: Վերջին ժամանակնե-րում գաղթօջախները համալրվեցին Արցախյան պատերազմից հետո:

Abstract: The article presents the head of a multi-volume atlas of the catalog «The monuments of Armenian architecture and place names abroad». It presents an overview of the history and development of the community, the geography of its settlement, the state of the church, education and Armenian media. The main part of the article is a table-list of Armenian monuments of architecture and toponymy in Moldava, after which a list of literature is given. Moldova has been familiar with the Armenians since ancient times. In the VII century, the Prut and Dniester rivers became part of the Bulgarian kingdom. Since those times, the penetration of Armenians into Moldova has intensified. However, the first settlements were founded only in the XI century, when Turkish-Seljuk barbarian tribes attacked the Armenian homeland. The first patriarchal decree known to us relating to the Armenian churches of the Moldovan land was issued in 1364, when Mesrop I Artazetsi subordinated the Armenian churches " in the country of Lyakhs and Olachs " to the patriarchate created in Limberg. The community was formed after the Abdulgamid pogroms, the Genocide (1915), the subsequent beatings and pogroms (1918-20) in Turkey and the forcible eviction of the Armenians of Cilicia (1920-22).

Öz Ait oldukları uygarlıkların sosyal, kültürel, ekonomik yapısını, yaşam felsefelerini, estetik kaygılarını, dini görüşlerini ve teknolojik olanaklarını somut bir şekilde yansıtan tarihi yapılar, kent içinde önemli hafıza mekânları olarak, kentsel sürekliliğin sağlanmasına ve kültürel değerlerin korunmasına katkıda bulunan önemli birikimlerdir. Ülkenin çok katmanlı yapısına bağlı olarak geniş yelpazede çeşitlenen tarihi eserler içinde toplumun kültürel çeşitliliğinin somut simgesi olan kiliseler, Anadolu'nun çok sesli yapısının birer temsilcisi olarak toplumsal bellek içinde önemli bir yere sahip mimari oluşumlardır. Demografik yapıdaki homojenleşme ve kültürel dönüşüm nedeniyle bugün atıl durumda bulunan kiliseler mimari ve mekânsal yapıları, bezemeleri ve inceltilmiş yapısal detayları ile kullanılmayı ve değerlendirilmeyi bekleyen önemli bir yapı stoku oluşturmaktadır. Sahip olduğu yoğun kültürel miras nedeni ile Türkiye, tarihi eser koruma, yenileme çalışmalarının, kuram ve kararların sürekli tartışıldığı bir ülke konumundadır. Geçmişi geleceğe bağlayan, toplumsal yaşamı ve kültürel değerleri sürdürülebilir kılan mimari çevreler içinde gerçekleştirilen koruma uygulamalarına bakıldığında çağdaş koruma kuramı çerçevesinde bilimsel verilere uygun olarak gerçekleştirilmiş iyi örneklere rastlandığı gibi, toplumsal duyarlılıktan ve düşünsel derinlikten yoksun rant kaygısıyla gerçekleştirilmiş niteliksiz uygulamalara da rastlanabilmektedir. Değişim/dönüşüm ve devamlılık paradoksunu içinde barındıran yapısı ile zor ve karmaşık bir alan tanımlayan koruma uygulamaları kentin anlam katmanlarını oluşturan toplumsal, algısal, yaşamsal, tarihsel dinamikleri etkilediği için toplumun her kesimi tarafından izlenen bir alan oluşturmaktadır. Günümüzde bilimsel çalışmalarının yanı sıra toplumsal alanda da öncü bir rol üstlenen üniversiteler, taşıdığı misyon gereği tarihi eserlerin çağdaş koruma kuram ve ilkeleri çerçevesinde korunması, yaşatılması, günümüz ortamında yeniden kullanımının sağlanması yönünde önemli çalışmalar gerçekleştirmektedirler. Üniversitelerin gerçekleştirdiği çalışmalar, ticari kaygılardan uzak bilimsel duruşu ve kuramsal temele dayalı bir ilişkiler ağı içinde yeniliklere kapı aralayan üretken yaklaşımları ile koruma çalışmalarına katkı sağlayan önemli uygulamalardır. Bu tip çalışmalara bir örnek oluşturan Erciyes Üniversitesi Mimarlık Fakültesi Döner Sermaye İşletmeleri kapsamında
gerçekleştirilen Çepni Surp Sarkis Ermeni Kilisesi Rölöve, Restitüsyon, Restorasyon ve
Konservasyon çalışmaları bu makalenin konusu olarak belirlenmiştir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Çepni, Surp Sarkis Ermeni Kilisesi, Kilise, Koruma, Rölöve, Restitüsyon, Restorasyon.

Surveys of the Medieval Armenian Churches (except Ani) in and around Kars have been carried out since 2010 with the permission of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism General Directorate of Cultural Heritage and Museums, and the General Staff. Shortly, the purpose of the survey is to identify and document the Armenian monasteries and churches built in the Middle Ages in and around Kars (except Ani), which are included in our cultural heritage belonging to different civilizations, to prepare the building catalogs and to make architectural evaluations of a period. In 2012, which was the third season of the research, Armenian monasteries and churches in the central districts and villages of Kars, the central and villages of Digor town, especially the military border, were examined. This report is contained survey description, plans, drawings and photograps of Horomos Monastery (main complex, chapel, Surp Minas Church, Surp Kevork Church and Aşot Chapel), Kilittaşı Church (Bagaran), Çoban Church (Karmirvank) and  Mren Cathedral.

Nach einer zwanzigjährigen Pause besuchte der Vortragende – diesmal von Georgien aus – auf drei Reisen in den Jahren 2010-2011 wieder das ehemals georgische Gebiet von Tao-Klarjeti, das er in seiner 1996 vollendeten Dissertation ausführlich beschrieben hatte. Dabei gelangen ihm im Grenzgebiet zu Georgien einige Wiederentdeckungen, wie die Burgen „Kalla Bojnja“ und Kurtkale, die bisher wegen ihrer Lage für moderne Forscher nicht zugänglich waren.
Südlich davon konnte nicht nur das jetzt in ein Freilichtmuseum umgewandelte Ani, die Hauptstadt Großarmeniens im Mittelalter, besucht werden, sondern auch einige Baudenkmäler in der Nähe, wie Karmir Vank‘, Oghuzlu und das Horomos-Kloster; ferner Gyumri, Marmašen, Ereruk, Noravank‘ und Tat‘ev. Den Abschluss bildet ein kurzer Besuch in Berg-Karabach / Arcax (Stepanakert, Dandivank‘, Ganjasar).

An Armenian Church in Kars: “Kümbet Kilise”

Kars used to be the capital of  the Armenian Kingdom during the reign of King Abas (928-952) until the year 962 when Aşot III. removed his capital to Ani. We learn from the history book of Stephanos Asoğik Daronetsi, an Armenian historian  who lived during the end of the 10th and the beginning of the 11th century about plenty of building activities within the territory of the Armenian Kingdom during King Abas era. Results of our research works let us come to the conclusion that King Abas himself had the Surp Arak’elots church in Kars built. Fruthermore, our recent researh works enable us to presume that Kümbet Kilise—with disputable dating, without an original Armenian name or evidence through written sources—can still be evaluated as one of the donations of  King Abas. Therefore, the presented paper intends to place the Kümbet Kilise within the Armenian architecture and to discuss its problems like identity and dating, by means of collected material through  research on previous written sources as well as through the architectural data gathered during our field surveys.

St. Makaravank monastery: the present and the past
Few people know about the existence of St. Makaravank monastery located in the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, especially about its history and current situation.
Since 1970s neither art critics nor architects have shown interest in Makaravank monastery and its architecture. Moreover, there is no literature about the monastery.
The visit in March, 2014 sums up the present condition and architecture of the monastery. The history of St. Makaravank is also presented.