armenian-seljuk parallels in architecture

[aurguplu]

the superficial similarity between the drums of the armenian churches and the seljuk kümbets (mausolea) have long been noted. in the past, it was customary to ascribe the similarity to armenian influence on seljuk turks, and during the early republican period it was customary to deny it (on the part of the turks).

 

with the fall of the soviet union and the emergence of the central asian states, however, much architectural material dating from before the seljuk conquest of anatolia and azerbaijan came to light that looked just like the seljuk stuff in turkey. so minds got confused once more.

 

recently i read in an old book by talbot-rice (famous art historian couple) something to the effect that the architecture of the whole area, which was under parthian and then sassanian rule, and thus politically unified, could have sprung from a common third source, and/or might have something to do with the conical nomad tents commonly seen in the region (these are turkic, though) that admittedly do bear a very strong similarity to the forms in stone.

 

does anyone know anything about this subject?

 

cheers,

[bellthecat]

If the stone architecture of the kumbet was derived from an architecture of wood and rope and felt and fabrics then we would expect to see some aspects of that origin "fossilised" somewhere on at least some kumbets. I don't know of a single kumbet that displays any tent-like motifs.

[bellthecat]

And were the pre-Seljuk Turks buried in tents? I wouldn't think so! They would have been buried underground, I assume.

 

Which brings us to the main difference between Kumbets and Armenian church domes. Kumbets are on two levels. The basement, which is underground or partially underground, contains the tomb. The upper level, which is above ground level and is roofed by the dome, is used as a prayer room. So probably the form of the lower level originates in central asia, and the upper level, which gives the kumbet its characteristic shape, may be influenced by Armenian churches.

[bellthecat]

...and the external transition between the square lower level and the circular upper level of a kumbet is done via triangular planes. This sort of transition is not found on the domes of Armenian churches, except on late medieval ones that must have been inspired by kumbet architecture.

[gamavor]

One can only laugh at any "similarities"!!!

 

Mosques' look intriguingly alike Russian style Orthodox Churches.

[bellthecat]

Not any mosque I have seen!

[joseph]

Some mosques look like they are counting down to go to the moon.look at the mosques in istanboul.I mean the menarets that look like misiles.

[Arpa]

Yes Hovsep, they are going to the moon, one way or another, and those missiles and missile like structures will find their appropriate appertures to fill. To quote that famous American philosopher, Jackie Gleason; "One of these Alice, one of these days. Pow!!! To the moon!"

Who was it? Charents? When a Turkish poet had objected to Armenians using Mt. Ararat as a national symbol saying that the mountain was not Armenian, that it was in Turkey, Charents had retorted: "You have the moon on your national symbol(flag). You will never own the moon but one of these days we will own Ararat".

 

BTW. "kumbet" as used by the Turks to mean dome is an Armenian word. As is the custom, when Turks borrow(steal) Armenian words they distort it to comply with their enunciations. They took the word "orinak" (model, example) and use it to sound "oernek", "oe" as in the French "oef". They took the word "gmbet" and pronounce it as "kumbet", "u" as in the French "sur".

Gmbet is an Armenian word that is also found in the Persian (phlv. kumbath), Arabic and other ME languages. Its origin is a little obscure but it is believed to be from the Assyrian "qubbetha". There are variations of the word, one of which may be familiar to those who know the neighborhood of Aleppo where some villages are totally made up of little domelike mud huts which are popularly known as "qubbe"s.

Arnenians use the word in several variations (provincial colloquials), i.e goumbeth, gumbeth, gmbeth, kmpet, kmbeth etc.

[gamavor]

"qubetha" or "kube - kubeta" is a loan word also in south-western Slavic languages.

 

As to the similarities between mosques and Russian "quebeths", I trust Bellthecat that he has never seen Russian Orthodox Church.

Only "qubeths" (minarets) are similar of course.

[bellthecat]

Come on!! Be realistic!!! It is not an Armenian word, it is a word that is used in Armenia.

 

And the Turks did not borrow or steal it. It comes from Persia, which was under Turkish rule before the Turkish invasions of Anatolia. There are kumbets in Persia which predate any of the Anatolian kumbets.

 

Nor is it pronounced differently. Whether it is pronounced by a "g" or a "k" is purely down to regional differences. There are plenty of places in Turkey where it has a "g" sound". Same for the sound of the "u".

[Arpa]

I am neither an architect nor do I know much about the subject. One word above caught my attention and it made no sense until I read about the subject. The word "drum" is mistranlslated by those "experts". The Armenian word that it alludes to is "thmbuk". This is the diminutive form (ending in "uk/ik") of "thoumb"(some of us will recognize it as "toump") that means mound, also used in the sense of dam, again a mound to hold water back. It is used in reference to the process of building a dome. The structure was built over a dome shaped mound and shaped like one. Yes "tmbuk" to mean drum is also spelled similarly but the nuance is in the context.

I think those so called expert are marching to a different drum beat. Assumptions based on limited knoweldge of the Armenian language will lead to ridiculous conclusions as calling a dome drum shaped.

BTW, BTC I did say that it is thought to have been from the Assyrian. In any case, whether the Turks learned it from us, the Persians or other, it definitely is not a Turkic word, they lesarned both the word and the art in the ME, they did not bring it from Transcaspia.

[Arpa]

Yes Gamavor, I omitted the fact that Slavs also use the word in its varietions. If one would dare go even further the Latin word "cupola" is thought to have derived from the same root, cumpota, cumpola?

Russian churches don't feature "minarets". If we were to call narrow steeples, belltowers, zangakatuns minarets then the Russian structures may also qualify. The Russian, (and other Salvic) churches are best characterized and described by their "onion shaped" domes.

 

A word about "minaret". Even though this word has come to exclusively mean the tower attached to a mosque it does not impart the true meaning and purpose. The word(minaret) is from the Arabic (if slightly altered) "manara(t)" which in fact means "light house", from noor/nar, light. I don't think the Arabs call that structure a "minaret", the correct word for the tower is "midhan /mizzan", i.e. a structure from where the "azan/call to prayer" is broadcast.

[aurguplu]

i was expecting some intelligent discussion, all i got is a stream of insults again...

 

anyway, steve made a few good points, and i shall address them, and then the word "kümbet/gümbet".

 

i understand the point about the tent ornamentation/structure being absent from the gümbets and this weakening the case. but if you look at tents carefully (i have seen a few real ones, plus pictures of many others) they do not have much of an external structure apart from a few ropes, but even these are absent from some examples (they are run from the inner covering to the bottom to the pikes).

 

the gümbets resting on an octagonal base and being connected to that base by way of triangles is i guess an islamic element, at least it is found in islamic architecture from very early on.

 

no, pre-islamic turks were not buried in tents, they were usually buried (the practices differed from region to region and religion to religion) in underground chambers, but a tent-like element rendered in stone above the burial chamber has been recorded in a few places. and since a squat cylinder topped by a low conical dome is the characteristic tent shape among turks, and a looser one where the dome appears lobed is another characteristic shape, the comparison is not at all that out of place i think.

 

the main issues here are

 

1. that broadly the same form (usually decorated with glazed tiles) is found in central asia with many variations, some of which do very clearly look like a tent rendered in stone (especially some from urgench).

 

2. the similarities and differences in surface decoration (of those rendered in stone) and other architectural elements like colonnades (these are armenian i guess).

 

3. the use of rubble as an infill in armenian churches and its presence or absence from the seljuk/central asian examples. do you know anything about this?

 

the most important issue, of course, is whether these elements were present in central asian architecture (the earlier periods of which, i.e. before the 6th century a.d., were not turkic) before they appeared amongst the armenians and the turks. this is possible and such cross-cultural influences can be found in quite a few other traditions.

 

for instance, the onion spires of russian churches are ultimately (very ultimately) derived from a reed hut type somewhere in india (that of the taj mahal is also derived from there, but probably through a different route). the cupola common to byzantine architecture and later adopted by islamic architecture with modifications was originally from somewhere in northern syria.

 

in the centuries preceding the turkic conquest of much of present-day central asia (i.e. before 6th century ad) most of the place was under iranian rule. armenia was also under iranian rule/vassalage in the same periods and cultural elements may very well have flown one way or the other, so we don't have to rush to prove or disprove whether it was turkic or armenian. i merely asked that question because it keeps puzzling me, not to prove that it is turkic or to disprove that it is armenian.

 

itelligent comments are welcome.

 

by the way, i am sure the turkish architects never thought of the minaret-missile connection!

[aurguplu]

the word "kümbet/gümbet" in turkish is from persian "gunbad". i don't know if this word is armenian. i understand a fair proportion of the armenian vocabulary is of persian origin, so this might just be another persian word common to the middle east.

 

the word "orenag/örnek". this is an intersting one on which i had written an essay when i was a high scholl student. at that time i myself had thought the word was armenian. the armenian orenag is derived from old persian avdenag meaning the same think. but lo and behold, precisely the same word (örnek) appears in central asian turkish as "örenek" and originally meant "weaving pattern" (the motifs on carpets), and is thought to have derived from the turkish root ör- "to weave" with the suffix "-enek" (a common deverbal noun forming suffix). as far as i know the controversy still lingers on. it may very well be that the two words are similar by chance (though i am inclined to discount that possibility) and so far i can't make head or tail of either argument. comments welcome.

 

by the way, when was the earliest dated armenian structure of the conical dome shape built? anyone knows?

 

cheers,

[aurguplu]

arpa i wasn't having "an ulterior motive" or "an axe to grind" when i was referring to the drums of armenian churches. i was using the terminology by godfrey goodwin, a historian on ottoman architecture.

 

o.k. let's call it "the main body" or "the octagon" or the cylinder" if you want. or if there is a special word for it that you know of in english, i am prepared to use it.

 

cheers,

[Boghos]

Dear Mr. Urguplu,

 

Kindly list the insults you refer to for the benefit of other forum members and/or visitors.

[gamavor]

The only (very obvious parallel) between Armenian church architecture and barbarian turks architecture is the "transformation" of the former into the later.

Then you can invite people like Ali Ugurpulu, (udurdundin, ugurdin, all of them originally from turkmenistan) and some other polished historians to render scientific explanation of nonexistent similarities, although they are all well meant, since they (ugurdundin and the historian) are doing this for a very noble cause, which makes all of us sick.

[bellthecat]

Boghos, read Gamavor's comment below for a readily accessible example.

[bellthecat]

I mean, below your comment!

[bellthecat]

Probably some time in the 10th century, mid 10th century perhaps. A lot of churches had their roofs remodeled in later centuries - the roof of the dome was made steeper and pointed, originally they were shallower and more rounded. (For an example, compare the model of the church on the facade of the Acht'amar church with the present design of the roof.

[MJ]

Arpa,

 

Correct me, if I am wrong, plesae. Doesn't the words "orinag" in Armenian originate fromt eh Ancient Armenian (Grabar) "zororinag?" In such case, I think it would raise serious doubts on some of the interpretations of the word, above, i think.

[gamavor]

Bellthecat,

 

Please explain to me which part of my post is derogatory or offensive. To say something like this it should be a lie.

Which part is not true. That turks "reshaped" many Armenian churches into mosques, that Ali's original family name steams probably from Turkmenistan, or the fact that turks are barbarians. Which one is not true?

[aurguplu]

i tell you which ones:

 

1. i don't know of a single turkish mosque converted from an armenian mosque, probably with good reason, because as far as i can see the shape of the armenian churches would not support a muslim-style congregation. there are examples of greek churches turned into mosques, and some very early ottoman mosques scarcelyy distinguishable from byzantine churches, but this is at least partly because some greek shapes partially fit the need for muslim worship. if there are any armenian churches turned into mosques, please tell me which ones.

 

2. my original family name doesn't stem from turkmenistan. it stems from ürgüp in cappadocia. if this is going to make you happy, ürgüp is a corruption of the greek "procopios", which in turn is very likely to have been a corruption of some hittite or luwian name (i had seen in one - turkish - source that it came from the hittite "ur-kup" meaning soft stone, but since i know no hittite and haven't seen it elsewhere i take it with a huge grain of salt.

 

3. i won't get into yet another row about whether we are barbarians or not. it's getting boring.

[aurguplu]

mj,

 

i would be happy if you could provide me with info what "zororinag" means and whether it can be analysed back to an armenian root. the explanation i had provided above may of course be wrong (i know no armenian to check) and both views were propounded during the republic but the issue had got tangled in left-wing - right wing politics concerning the language reform, so we probably do not have reliable info on it over here.

 

the source advocating an armenian origin for "örnek" said that the armenian form "orenag" from which it had derived had in turn derived from the old persian "avdenag". since i am not a specialist of either armenian or old persian, i cannot comment on it.

 

on the other hand "ör-enek" sounds like a perfectly turkish word and just the word you would coin to describe the motifs on textiles, which is what it apparently originally meant.

 

cheers,

[aurguplu]

this is interesting. are these the first known armenian churches with conical domes, or the earliest extant/known examples of armenian architecture? i had read somewhere that a very few pagan structures have survived in ROA, and was always puzzled by the fact that none of the references i had about armenian churches and/or other buildings in turkey much predated the 10th century. is this correct?

 

cheers,