Armenian Art: An Overview

The distinguishing traits of Armenian art are only discernible from a careful examination of the monuments or objects created. Simply stated, Armenian art is that produced in Armenia or by Armenians. Such a definition presents few difficulties for the ancient and medieval periods. For modern times a problematic has been created in both literature and the arts. Are we to consider the artistic creation produced by ethnic Armenians in a distant diaspora as Armenian art?. No simple answer can be given.

Similarly, no simple list of the distinguishing characteristics of Armenian art can be made, since the art of this nation shares much with that of its neighbors near and far. Styles in architecture and painting varied from region to region, and like all art from century to century. Therefore it is foolish to be categorical about what constitutes Armenian art, because it is so diverse, so varied, and so changing. Each medium reveals peculiar characteristics, and within a medium, for instance painting, each century, each region, produced a special range of effects unique to it, thus, broad generalizations can only be proposed after the totality of available works of art of the school or period are studied.

Certain generalizations or constants are, however, apparent from even a casual look at the corpus of Armenian art. Armenian architecture was devoted to building in stone and the solving of problems associated with the heavy weight of stone roofs and domes. Armenian painting, one might add ceramic arts and rug weaving, always favored rich and vivid colors. Apparent is the love for decorations, often very intricate in design. Armenian art and artists always seemed open to influences from neighboring traditions and absorbed and transformed new ideas as quickly as they discovered them.

ARCHITECTURE, FIRST OF THE ARTS

Of all the arts, architecture is supreme. For the general public used to visiting museums filled with paintings of compact size easily hung by the hundreds, the priority given to architecture in the art world may seem strange. But buildings are not susceptible to display in museums, when reduced to photos or models, they seem pale next to the immediate beauty of original art works. Thus, architectural monuments are only accessible to the public by distant travel or through specialized books. Art historians have always put architecture in a different category; they have measured the value of monuments by standards other than those appropriate to smaller decorative creations in whatever medium.

So, too, in the realm of Armenian art, architecture takes pride of place. It was the first of the arts of Armenia to be seriously studied, and to this day Armenian architecture receives more scholarly attention than all of the other arts combined. The separateness of architecture from the other arts is not due just to size, though certainly the immense mass of any building compared to other works of art is so disproportionate that no real comparison is possible, nor to the labor, in the case of architecture perforce collective, required for its creation. Because buildings are natural vehicles for decoration, they differ from other art objects by often incorporating in themselves the two most important of the other arts: painting and sculpture.

In the study of architecture, however, primary attention is given not to the decoration, but to the structural forms of buildings and their evolution. Thus, monuments are analyzed by their architectural aspects -- the general design or look of the interior and exterior of buildings -- and architectonic considerations -- the methods used to construct them. Classes of buildings are studied by their plans; their names immediately evoke specific images: skyscraper, lighthouse, pyramid, windmill, stadium, Greek temple. Other types of buildings are less precisely visualized, because their forms are diverse: houses and churches, for instance, vary greatly in different parts of the world. The are differentiated architectonically by materials and methods of construction, architecturally by their shape. Armenian architecture is similarly classified according to the evolution of church forms.

The history of Armenian architecture is in reality the history of the development of a single type of building: the church. Since the church is a Christian building for worship, and since Armenia was converted as a nation in the early fourth century, does that mean that there is no architecture in Armenia before Christianity? We know very sophisticated building techniques were in use in Armenia and a strong architectural tradition in stone was exercised for more than a thousand years before the first church was built, but few monuments survive and they are from three distinct epochs: Urartian, Hellenistic, and late Roman. A considerable number of temples and fortified garrison cities are known belonging to the kingdom of Urartu (ninth to the sixth centuries B.C.), the most famous examples being the garrisons of Erebuni and Karmir Blur in Armenia, Toprakkale, the royal capital near Van, and the temple of Mousasir (known from an Assyrian carving). None of these survived above ground; they were all discovered by archaeological excavations. At the site of Garni, some fifty kilometers northeast of modern Erevan, a number of constructions survive from three different periods. The oldest is a defensive wall dating to the first century made up in parts of enormous monolithic stones carefully carved and placed upon each other without the use of mortar. The second period is represented by the splendid, though small temple of Garni, following the general Greco-Roman design so characteristic of the Mediterranean world. The most recent architectural vestige at Garni is the bath, probably of the fourth century, built of brick and volcanic stone with a tepidarium, caldarium, and frigidarium.

Church Architecture

Beside these limited ancient examples and the civil architecture of the twentieth century in the Armenia Republic, Armenian architecture is church architecture, thus, Christian architecture. Its productive history spans the period from the fourth to the seventeenth century. Though it should be noted that in modern times, the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, especially in the diaspora, churches continued to be built and are now being erected in large numbers, scholars have not yet studied this phenomenon, leaving modern Armenian church architecture rootless and for the moment outside the art historical tradition.

A second observation arising from the idea of Armenian architecture being confined to Christian buildings is the lack of any secular construction. Were there not palaces and fortresses for the kings and catholicoi, houses for ordinary people, or bridges and caravansaries to accommodate the extensive trade that passed through the country? The answer is yes, but few examples have survived. An extremely large number of fortresses with their inner complex of residences, churches, and other buildings were constructed in Greater Armenia (Amberd) and Cilicia (Sis, Lampron, Korikos), and these have been recently studied by the Mekhitarist father M. Hovannisian, and especially for Cilicia, Robert Edwards.

Thousands of Armenian churches were built during the long history of Christianity in that land. They varied in size from very small to large, though there were no giant structures built in Armenia like St. Peters in Rome or Hagia Sophia in Constantinople or the large cathedrals of Europe. Some churches were intended to stand alone, others were parts of monasteries. A large number of types were developed providing a great variety of exterior shapes and interior volumes. Most types are found in adjoining Christian areas, but in Armenia their plans were usually modified to conform to local conditions. A number of unique church forms were invented by Armenian architects in their pursuit of ever more efficiently built and aesthetically conceived houses of worship.

The facts of architecture, like any scientific discipline, are first arranged chronologically and according to similarities of features. The convenience of such a methodology should never obscure the reality that such labels as medieval, renaissance, modern are made up by scholars, whereas the architects and builders themselves were totally oblivious to such considerations. They erected buildings as they were needed with the material available and in a style either asked for by the patron or within their competence and preference.

Despite the large diversity in the types of early churches, often tracing the progress in the development of innovating constructional techniques, Armenian architecture achieved a distinctive style through the combination of a number of common characteristics and materials. The compositional employment of these traits was unique to Armenia, though its northern neighboring Georgia was also to benefit by a flourishing of building activity. By the late sixth or early seventh century a unique national style of church architecture came into being. Some scholars have called this phenomenon the first national style in Christian architecture, having been achieved long before the Byzantine, Romanesque, and Gothic or the less known Ethiopian, Scandinavian, and Slavic styles were concretely formed.

What are the features that make an Armenian church instantly recognizable? First, all churches are built entirely in stone. The scarcity of wood prevented its architectural use in medieval Armenia. With rare exceptions, the stone used is a volcanic tufa abundant in Armenia in many colors and shades: pink, red, orange, black. It is an ideal material for construction because it is light of weight, easy to sculpt, and has the property of becoming harder and more durable with exposure to air and the passage of time. Second, ceiling were always vaulted. Since wood was not available for making simple flat roofs, stones were employed, but their weight demanded they be arranged in arcs so that the thrust of their mass could be directed to the robust stone walls and thence to the ground. This produced buildings with thick walls and few and small openings to comfortably accommodate the pressure from above.

Third, the Armenian preference or weakness for the dome manifested itself very early. By the end of the sixth century, a church without a dome was unthinkable. With a few early exceptions, the dome or cupola was elevated above the other vaulted ceilings by the use of a cylindrical or polygonal drum. The prevalence of the dome forced the architects to think in terms of centrally planned buildings.

Fourth, roofs were composite in their appearance because they had to cover the vaults and domes of a complex, though symmetric, group of inner spaces. Like the inner and outer walls and the drum, they too were made of tufa thinly cut into uniform shingles.

These are not all the features common to Armenian architecture, rather they are the ones that provide the stylistic likeness so quickly perceived by the eye when looking at Armenian churches. Yet, each church is an individual creation, distinguished by its inner and outer form, its size, and its decoration. Most belong to a certain class of building, though some are unique. Almost all monuments of whatever period have a groundplan elaborated during the fourth to seventh centuries, the formative period, when the creative energies of Armenian architects seemed to overcome all obstacles in seeking solutions to the problems engendered by construction in stone which sought both ever more inner space and less massive structures.

Contemporary Church Architecture

Modern Armenian architecture, especially in church design, is extremely dependent on the ancient tradition. Most new buildings either consciously imitate the most famous monuments of the fourth to the seventh centuries, substituting modern constructional advances like reinforced and poured concrete for the traditional Armenian methods, or they combine features -- either tectonic or decorative -- from several old churches with results that are often hybrid and inconsistent. Unfortunately, despite the large number of Armenian architects in Armenia and the diaspora, new innovation and inspiration seems lacking. The willingness of Armenian architects and masons of the past to constantly experiment with new forms has given way to conservative contemporary builders who seem afraid to deviate from the ancient and glorious tradition.

PAINTING: THE ART OF ILLUMINATION

If painting in its broadest meaning is the representation of an image on a flat surface -- on walls (fresco), on wood (icon), in manuscripts (miniature), on canvas (painting), on floors (mosaic) -- the history of Armenian painting is known almost exclusively from the study of the decoration of manuscripts. Monumental wall painting was practiced in Armenia, but was much less generalized than neighboring Byzantine or Coptic traditions and very little of what was produced has survived. The few mosaics that have come down to us are strongly influenced by foreign traditions. Icon painting was never practiced in Armenia. Canvas painting is relatively plentiful, but dates for the most part to the eighteenth century and later. Thus, whereas the history of Byzantine painting in the Middle Ages is dependent more on icons and architectural decoration (mosaics and frescoes) than on illuminations, the Armenian tradition is known almost exclusively from the miniature paintings found in manuscripts. The dependence of the history of Armenian art on a single medium, manuscript painting, is not as serious a handicap as it may seem. Fortunately, a very large number of Armenian manuscripts are preserved, more than 31,000, dating from the ninth to the nineteenth centuries, and produced in every region inhabited by Armenians.

Armenian art often innovated on the accepted iconography as developed in the earliest Christian centuries or in imperial Byzantine circles. T'oros Roslin is among several important Armenian artists, some of them anonymous, who illustrated the standard cycle in new ways or who painted episodes rarely represented. In style, there was among the upper classes a strong dependence on Byzantine Greek models in the illumination of the most luxurious Gospel, favored a classicizing manner. Much Armenian art, however, shows a style far removed from classicizing tendencies. Various ways have been used to describe such non-classical styles: naive, primitive, provincial, monastic, native. We find native or Armenian styles in the Vaspourakan school of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, or in such early manuscripts as the Gospel of 966 in Baltimore, or the Gospel of 1038 in Erevan, or of 1064 in Jerusalem. These works in general are indifferent to the canons of classical representation, show more interest in the expression of the figures, use color and design for purely decorative purposes, and often show a wonderful naive quality. This dualism between an imported classicism and an indigenous parochialism continues to the sixteenth century when European artistic tastes begin to overwhelm Armenian painting.

The Production of Manuscripts

Manuscript production was carried on exclusively by monks or priests employed in churches or monasteries. The performance of the church service was dependent on liturgical books, foremost of which was the Gospel. There was, thus, a constant need for them. Each monastery had its scriptorium where manuscripts were copied, illustrated and bound by a team. The problems of attribution of works of art in Armenian painting are much fewer than in Byzantine or medieval European art. Armenian scribes from the earliest times seldom failed to leave a precise memorial at the end of a manuscript after the copying was finished. In a sense a manuscript was considered incomplete without the personal colophon (in Armenian hishatakaran) of the scribe and also at times the artist or binder.

There is really only a single subject for Armenian miniature painting, at least until the late medieval period: The Life of Christ. The single work most reproduced in the Armenian manuscript tradition was the Four Gospel. With few exceptions, all of the surviving, illustrated Armenian manuscripts dated before 1300 are Gospels. The earliest secular works to be illustrated also date from the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, but they are very rare, the most popular being the Alexander Romance and the Histories of Eghishe and Agathangeghos.

The illustrating of a Gospel manuscript followed a fixed pattern. In addition to the texts of the four Evangelists, the complete Gospel had an elementary index arranged in a series of tabular columns called canons placed at the beginning of the book. These canon tables were usually decorated and preceded by a text in the form of a letter explaining their use. It was also customary, at least for illustrated Gospels, to include a portrait of each of the Evangelists facing the usually lavishly decorated first page of the text. In the body of the book, there were marginal decorations of various kinds -- birds, fish, crosses, floral and geometric motifs, even small narrative scenes. Finally, in most Gospel manuscripts there was a series of full page paintings usually gathered together at the beginning of a manuscript, just after the Canon Tables. These were of three types: symbolic representations (a cross, a shrine), portraits (the Virgin, Christ), narrative scenes from the life of Christ (Nativity, Baptism, etc.).

The greatest moment of Armenian miniature painting is the thirteenth century The wealth of the new Armenian kingdom of Cilicia situated on the Mediterranean coast allowed the nobility and high ranking clergy to sponsor the production of luxury Gospels. Contact with the west through the Crusades and Italian merchants also helped toward the creation of a highly sophisticated and eclectic art.

The most distinguished artist of the epoch was indisputably T'oros Roslin, who during the 1260s headed the scriptorium at the catholicossal see of Hromkla. Seven of his signed manuscripts have survived. His art is characterized by a delicacy of color, a very fine classicizing treatment of figures and their garments, an elegance of line, and an innovative iconography. Roslin was also a very accomplished scribe as well. Unfortunately, we know almost nothing about Roslin's life nor the dates of his birth and death.

In the seventeenth century, in Constantinople but also New Julfa and other centers, there was a conscious revival of the Cilician style of miniature painting. The best artists understood that painting had greatly declined in the fifteenth and especially sixteenth century and consciously copied miniatures from the best Cilician Gospels available to them. Manuscript production continued in Armenia even into the late eighteenth century, even though Armenian book printing had begun in the sixteenth. The copying of Gospel manuscripts, however, practically stopped after the first printing of the Armenian Bible in Amsterdam in 1666.

The influence of western artistic tastes became evident after the sixteenth century. The interest in European painting grew among the wealthy in such Armenian centers as Constantinople and Isfahan-Julfa and Armenian artists began painting on panel and canvas. The history of Armenian art begins to included an ever increasing quantity of larger framed paintings. The art of manuscript illumination declines, despite sporadic production throughout the eighteenth.

Inevitably in a country with an architectural tradition in stone dating back to Urartian times, the craftsmen who so carefully carved these blocks of stones for walls, fortresses, and sanctuaries had acquired the skill to sculpt stone as relief decorations for buildings or as independent works of art. Little sculpture has survived, however, from the pre-Christian period. The major exception is a series of extremely large carved monolithic stones found in various parts of Armenia and often associated with water sources. Their shape is that of a large tailless whale. On them are fish-like designs, but they are know as vishap-k'ar, dragon stones. They date from the second and first millennium B.C.

Excavations have uncovered a miscellany of sculptures from the Artaxiad and the Arsacid periods, roughly the second century B.C. to the fourth century A.D. The famous bronze head of Aphrodite, found at Satala near Erzinjan, now in the British Museum, or the small female torso in white marble dug up at Armavir, testify to the popularity of Hellenistic sculpture in Armenia. Other stone heads, anonymous but no doubt of Armenian nobility, display a static pose far removed from the classical style.

In Christian times relief sculpture on the façades of churches is very abundant. Almost all sixth and seventh century churches have carved decorative bands, but some like Ptghni, Mren, Zvart'nots' and Odzun have figural reliefs around windows and in the tympana of door ways. The capitals of Zvart'nots', uncovered during the excavations of this seventh century monument, are especially elaborate. Recessed in a niche to the north of the altar at Odzun is a finely sculpted Virgin and Child in the Byzantine pose known as the "Guide" (Hodegetria). The most famous series of relief sculptures in Armenian art are those which cover the entire facade of the tenth century church of the Holy Cross on the island of Aght'amar. The church with its external carvings and internal frescoes was built as a palace church between 915 and 921 for King Gagik Artsruni. The unusually deep carving combined with the monumental character of Christ and other figures make this collection of sculpture unique in Armenian and in world art. Elaborate sculpted scenes above church entrances and on the drums supporting the domes have a remarkable flourishing in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The monasteries of Tatev, Geghart, Hovhannavank', Saghmosavank', Magaravank, Noravank' at Amaghou, Haghartsin, and Kech'aris, are among the most famous.

The most characteristically Armenian medium for sculpture was the khatchk'ar, from the word for cross (khatch) and stone (k'ar). These free standing rectangularly shaped cross-stones are found everywhere in Armenia; there are thousands of them in all sizes from forty centimeters to three meters high. Without exception the central motif is a cross, elaborately and elegantly carved. Smaller khatchk'ars are often found inserted into the walls of churches; they were used both as gravestones and as commemorative memorials.

Khatchk'ars were often inscribed with the date, the name of the person remembered, and at times the name of the artist. The earliest examples from the ninth, tenth and eleventh centuries are usually very simple in their design, though often elegant in execution. The cross is always framed by an elaborately carved band and sometimes surmounted by an arch. Leaves sprout upwards from each side of the base of the cross of a khatchk'ar towards its arms; they are usually stylized and in the early period in the form of palmettos. This foliage symbolizes the living cross. Its wood is not dead. The cross of the Crucifixion was thought to be from the Tree of Life, and like the Crucifixion itself, was not a mark of death, but of rebirth through Christ's Resurrection. The living cross, the flowering cross, symbolizes this hope of a new life. Because the cross was the symbol of the ultimate Christian message of salvation through the Crucifixion and Resurrection, in Armenia it became the most powerful religious image, more prevalent than the Virgin or even Christ Himself.

The carving of khatchk'ars has continued into modern times. But the art has been gradually transformed into the modern forms of gravestones we see in cemeteries of western countries. The consistence with which these cross monuments were employed is unique to Armenia; the only comparable tradition is the much less developed and short lived one of early medieval Ireland.

What remains of sculpted or carved wood from medieval Armenia are church doors, capitals used on the columns of the ninth century church at Sevan, an important carved tenth century plaque of the Crucifixion, and a few miscellaneous items including lecterns. The most important wooden doors are dated by inscriptions: 1) 1134, double paneled doors, Monastery of the Holy Apostles, Mush, now in Erevan, 2) 1253, single panel door, Monastery of Tat'ev, 3) 1327, double paneled doors, Church of the Nativity, Jerusalem, 4) 1486, single panel door, Church of the Holy Apostles, Sevan, now in Erevan.

The craft of wood craving continues to flourish in Armenia. In villages utilitarian items for the household, especially kitchen utensils, are still delicately fashioned. The folk-arts museum in Erevan has an impressive collection of nineteenth and twentieth century wood carving. Hand carved gifts of very high quality are readily available in shops in Erevan.

One pre-Christian mosaic has survived on the floor of the Roman-styled bath, probably of the third century A.D., excavated in the precinct of the temple of Garni. The small mosaic, about two meters square, depicts a water scene with mythological figures with the goddess Thetis. Inscriptions on the mosaic are Greek, but the figural types are oriental. Though artistically the mosaic is of inferior quality, historically it is of major importance. The only other mosaics that can be regarded as Armenian are a group of some half dozen pavements of former Armenian churches and chapels in Jerusalem. Like the Garni mosaic, these were uncovered during the past century and remain in situ. Unlike the Garni mosaic, they bear Armenian inscriptions and can be stylistically dated to the Christian era -- the late fifth or sixth centuries. The inscriptions are of immense historical value because they represent the oldest surviving examples of Armenian writing. Artistically they are of a very high quality and represent varieties of paradisal garden scenes with cornucopia and geometric section-patterns framing various birds and fish. Stylistically, they are similar to the mosaics of the period found in non-Armenian churches and synagogues in Jerusalem and its environs.

High quality burnished red ware was manufactured in Armenia already in the second millennium B.C.; some believe this type, known throughout the Near East, may have originated there. Bowls and pots of various shapes have been uncovered in excavations. In the Urartian period, the quality and diversity of ceramics is notable. Skilled potters cleverly imitated metal vessels such as the famous shoe-shaped rhyton or drinking cu from Erebuni. The excavations at Dvin and Ani, the capitals of Armenia for long periods from the fifth to the eleventh centuries, brought to light a good deal of very interesting pottery, but how much of it was produced locally is unclear. For example, the yellow and green splash ware or the turquoise blue faience was produced in great quantity in neighboring Islamic countries as well as eastern Iran. Ceramics painted with light green on a white or light yellow ground with figures of birds copy a very common Byzantine type found through the Middle East. However, many pots have painted human, animal and hybrid motifs typically Armenian in style, and some even bear Armenian inscriptions. There is no doubt that from the eleventh to the thirteenth century the ceramics industry in Armenia, especially at Ani, was important and of high quality.

In the post-medieval period the Armenian ceramics industry flourished at one major center: Kütahya, a city in western Asia Minor 125 miles southeast of Constantinople. An Armenian colony is already noted their in the thirteenth century and in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries there was an active scriptorium too. Armenian manufactured ceramics came to dominate the craft industry of the city. The earliest dated pieces, inscribed on the bottom in Armenia, are from the early sixteenth century. They are decorated in the characteristic blue and white of early Kütahya ware. By the seventeenth century a highly polychrome ceramics were manufactured with yellow, green and the famous tomato red or "Armenian bole." The town became renowned as an Armenian ceramic center in the Ottoman Empire, and was the major competitor of Iznik, the famous source of most "Islamic" tiles and vessels. The Kütahya potters also produced square tiles for wall decorations. These were used in a number of mosques, mostly in Constantinople, as well as churches. The most spectacular display of Kütahya tiles is in Armenian Cathedral of St. James in Jerusalem.

One of the most popular forms originating from the kilns at Kütahya was the egg-shaped ornaments hung on the chains from which oil lamps were suspended in churches and mosques. They may have had more than just an ornamental use; some experts considered them as barriers against mice who, attracted by the animal fat used in these lamps, would slide off the slick surface of the egg as they made there way down the chain to the vessel bearing the oil. Kütahya eggs are variously decorated, but the most common type displays seraphim, the famous six-winged guardian angels. Other popular shapes of these ceramics are the demi-tasse cups without handle, saucers, monogrammed plates, rose-water flasks, and lemon squeezers. Armenian inscriptions abound on Kütahya vessels, whether eggs or water jugs, flasks or incense burners. The Armenian ceramic industry in Kütahya flourished until the Armenians were forced to leave the city during the troubles of World War I. Several families settled in Jerusalem, where they continue to produced the polychrome Kütahya style ceramics as souvenirs of the Holy Land.

New Julfa, the Armenian suburb of Isfahan, founded in the first years of the seventeenth century, also was a center of Armenian tile production. Large pictorial panels made of square tiles painted in yellow and blue are found in situ in various Armenian churches of the city. Functional pottery continued to be made in Greater Armenian right up into the twentieth century. It is a craft still practiced with much skill. During these modern centuries, the traditional shapes known from pottery finds at Dvin and Ani continue to be practiced in villages throughout the land, confirming the consistent tradition ceramic fabrication has always had.

The Armenian plateau, rich in metal ores, was one of the first regions of the world to practice metallurgy and was in advance of its neighbors in the use of bronze and iron. Throughout history Armenians have been master metalworkers and jewelers. There is a near continuous tradition of metal objects from the first millennium B.C. to the present. Armenian metal craft can be divided conveniently into three categories: 1) silver and bronze coins; 2) gold and silver works of art; and 3) bronze and other non-precious metal objects. Under Armenian dynasties, the Orontid (Ervandian, fourth to second century B.C.) and Artaxiad (Artashesian, second to first century B.C.), coins were minted providing the art of engraving a natural outlet. During the first ten Christian centuries, however, Armenians did not strike coins. It is only under Cilician Armenian dynasties of the twelfth to the fourteenth century that the numismatic tradition of the Artaxiads is renewed.

Gold and silver objects were by definition luxury items destined for royalty, the church, and the rich. The earliest examples are rhytons or drinking vessels in silver found at the Urartian site of Arin Berd-Erebuni; they date, however, from the post-Urartian period. Armenia was one of the first and most important wine producing regions in the world, explaining in part the popularity of such vessels in metal and in ceramic. Virtually nothing survives of precious metalwork or jewelry in the centuries A.D. until the Cilician period. It is only from the thirteenth century on that we have a nearly continuous series of objects in silver, often washed with gold, and a few pure gold items. They are almost exclusively objects related to the cult: bindings of Gospel manuscripts, reliquaries, chalices, patens, and other vessels. The greatest repositories of this church plate are in the treasuries of the Catholicossate at Etchmiadzin and the Armenian Patriarchate in Jerusalem.

In the eighteenth and especially nineteenth centuries large quantities of silver belts , buckles, earrings, purses in filigree work, and communion boxes were manufactured in such centers as Van, where the black and silver niello technique was popular, but also Constantinople and other cities. The metalworking tradition still thrives in Armenia. Liturgical objects continued to be made, especially in the early part of our century, but after 1920 craftsmanship was directed toward domestic objects like silverware and trays.

The first major artistic use of baser metals, copper and bronze, was during the Urartian Kingdom (nine to sixth century B.C.). The excavations of sites such as Toprakkale/Van, Arin Berd (Erebuni-Erevan), and Karmir Blur have yield a vast quantity of weapons, domestic objects and votive statues. Urartian bronzes were coveted throughout the Mediterranean world, thus explaining their appearance in excavations in many parts of the Middle East and Europe, especially Etruscan Italy. Embossed shields and helmets, large caldrons, and statues are now in the major museum collections from Leningrad and Erevan to London and New York. These dark bronzes are beautifully crafted; the shields have elaborate processional designs in repoussé work.

An important object, associated with Armenia because it was found at Satala near Erzinjan, is a magnificent bronze head of Aphrodite from the Hellenistic period. It was probably imported into Armenia by the royal court. The excavations at Dvin and Ani are the source for almost all the bronze metalwork from the early medieval period. A large number of utilitarian objects - knives, scissors, jugs -- are known as well as a number of candle holders in the form of animal sculptures, large cauldrons, a chandelier for oil lamps from Ani, and a number of molded small incense burners with scenes from the life of Christ.

The great bulk Armenian bronze, copper, and occasionally pewter vessels date from the seventeenth century and after. The cities of Tokat and Caesarea/Kayseri were major centers of this Armenian metalwork. Hundreds of plates , bowls, jugs, trays, and other vessels in tinned copper with Armenian inscriptions have been preserved in various museums and private collections. Another category of popular metal objects are pilgrim flasks in pewter almost always bearing the figure of a warrior saint killing a dragon and sometimes inscribed.

The complex history of Armenian weaving and needlework was acted out in the Near East, a vast, ancient and ethnically diverse region. Few are the people who, like the Armenians, can claim a continuous and consistent record of fine textile production from the time of the ancient Assyrians to the present. Armenians today are blessed by the diversity and richness of a heritage passed on by thirty centuries of diligent practice, yet burdened by the pressure to keep alive a tradition nearly destroyed in 1915, and now subverted by a technology which condemns handmade fabrics to museums and lets machines produce perfect, but lifeless cloth.

The oldest existing tufted carpet, dating from the fifth to the third century B.C., was excavated from the frozen Scythian burial mounds at Pasyryk northeast of the Caucasus. Called the Pasyryk carpet and preserved in the Hermitage Museum in Leningrad, this extraordinary rug predates other whole examples by more than 1500 years. The rug is in a near perfect state of preservation; it is roughly six feet square and the predominate color is red-brown. Recent scholarship inclines toward Armenia as the place where it was woven, because of the similarity of motifs in late Urartian and some early Armenian artifacts, and the long history of tufted carpet weaving in Armenia. The Scythians, according to this theory. acquired the rug when passing through the Caucasus.

Whether or not the oldest carpet in the world was made in Armenia, early Greek, Armenian, and Arabic historical sources repeatedly speak about the fine rugs and other textiles woven there. Carpets are mentioned as part of the annual tribute from Armenia to the Caliph of Baghdad in the late eighth century. In the later medieval period, Marco Polo praises the rugs woven by Armenians. The characteristic red Armenian dye (vordn karmir) was prized throughout the Mediterranean world. Unfortunately, no rugs have survived from these early centuries. There are a few fragments from the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, uncovered in mosques in Eastern Anatolia, but no convincing origin has been established for any of them, though Armenia has been proposed for several. Until very recently, scholars have dismissed the possible Armenia origin of these carpets. Though there has been much debate during this century on the origin of the famous "dragon" carpets, A. Sakisian and others after him propose an Armenian origin for these. The Armenian province of Artsakh (Karabagh) has retained the dragon design into modern times, reinforcing the Armenian origin of seventeen and eighteenth century examples. A number of these dragon rugs have Armenian inscriptions. The earliest dated Armenian rug is also one of the largest and most exquisite, the famous Kohar carpet made in the Karabagh (Artsakh) with an inscription identifying the weaver, Kohar, and the date 1700.

In the past two decades a new interest in Armenian weaving and rug making has resulted in the reestablishment of the identity of Armenian carpets, which in this century have been, unfortunately, gradually subsumed under the heading of Islamic or Turkish carpets. What has helped in the scientific study of the rugs produced by Armenians has been the habit, already remarked upon in other arts, of leaving a written memorial. Armenian inscriptions were often woven directly into the rugs with names and dates. Hundreds of these inscribed Armenian rugs have now been recorded and several major exhibitions organized around them.

Woven and Stamped Textiles

Cloth weaving and textile manufacture is universal. Nearly all cultures engaged in this craft simply because of the need for clothes and coverings. Carbonized fragments of woven textiles have been found in very early excavations in Armenia, but they offer little information about the design and style of early textiles. The fragility of cloth is the major cause for our lack of early examples. The dry desert climate of Egypt or the frozen conditions of the Scythian tombs like Pasyryk offer the very rare conditions by which early textiles have survived in quantity.

Our knowledge of pre-seventeenth century woven textiles stems mainly from their representation in art, sculptured reliefs such as those of Aght'amar and especially Armenian miniature painting, but also from actual fragments preserved as doublures on the inside covers of manuscript bindings. These textile fragments are in various types of cotton, silk, linen and other fabrics and have both woven and stamped patterns. Thousands of these textile samples are preserved, but fewer than a hundred have been published. From the late seventeenth and especially the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries there are a large number of altar curtains, both stamped and embroidered, preserved especially in the collections of the Catholicossate in Etchmiadzin and the Armenian Patriarchate in Jerusalem. Most of the eighteenth century examples are rich in color and form and were produced in Madras, India, a major center of stamped fabrics, where Armenians were well established.

Needlework: Lace & Embroidery

Richly embroidered Armenian textiles have survived in much greater number than plain or printed fabrics. These embroideries are mostly church related: clerical robes and accessories, altar curtains, chalice covers, and miscellaneous. The earliest surviving embroidery is a large thirteenth century fragment from Ani showing asymmetrical lions. The most famous embroidery is the processional banner of 1448, still kept at Etchmiadzin, with full-length portraits of Gregory the Illuminator flanked by King Trdat and St. Hrip'simé.

Embroidery was commonly used to decorate towels, bags, stockings, kerchiefs, table clothes and various textiles. Among the most famous from the nineteenth century was that of the city of Marash characterized by polychrome geometric and floral designs on dark or colored backgrounds. The stitching was done following various grid patterns, designs being built up from star, cross and braided motifs. This embroidery work, whether of the luxurious variety or the more modest type was done in all Armenian families, often during the isolation of the cold winter months. Many of the richly decorated elements of clerical garb were votive offerings donated by the pious on pilgrimage.

Armenian lace, called janyak or oya, is executed with a single needle and has an extremely ancient history. It's technique was known by all women and passed on from generation to generation. There are different styles and stitches from the various regions of Armenian are known; among the best known as the Aintab stitch, the Vaspurakan stitch, the Baghesh (Bitlis) stitch and the Kharpert stitch. The delicacy and intricacy of Armenian lace has long been recognized and in recent years specialized studies and exhibits have been devoted to it. Early laces of silk and gold thread or decorated with pearls and jewels were made into chalice covers, and cross and Gospel holders. Lace borders were also often added to embroidered articles. Scarves and kerchiefs were often fringed with a variety of miniature lace flowers.

Few pre-nineteenth century laces have survived. The tradition, however, is very ancient in Armenia. Lace making in Europe was a craft that arrived in the late middle ages from Asia Minor. Many scholars believe that the origin of Venetian lace, one of the oldest and most developed lace making centers, should be sought in Armenia. The merchant cities of Italy were in close touch with Armenians during those centuries, so there was ample opportunity to import laces and the technique of making them.

The eclectic quality of Armenian art made it both complex and diverse, encompassing ideas from the Orient and the Occident, from the Classical and Byzantine world, the vast realm of Islam, and even China. Despite this interest in other traditions, Armenian art managed to remain independent and was rarely imitative. Art had a special role in Armenian life. The commissioning of an illustrated manuscript, an altar curtain or a church vessel was considered a pious act, as was the fashioning of the object. Most works of art had a Christian meaning; many were regarded as symbolic prayers to God. Whether a stone cathedral, a manuscript miniature, a cross-stone, or an embroidered chalice cover, each object displayed both artistic beauty based on color and line, but also an inner symbolic glory according to its meaning or use.

Inheritors of a millennia old traditions, Armenians continue today to paint, sculpt, and build churches. Though the details of the history of the art of Armenian may not be known to modern artists, all of them are aware of a ancient and rich tradition and are certainly strengthened by the knowledge that they are the contemporary bearers of this creative heritage.

Dickran Kouymjian
Haig Berberian Professor of Armenian Studies
Director, Center for Armenian Studies
California State University, Fresno
Paris, 29 May 1995

Dickran Kouymjian (unpublished)