DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.27365#0013
INTRODUCTION
The Akhtala murals are the most important monument of mediaeval wall painting
in Armenia. Their good state of preservation and artistic qualities place them among
the finest artistic achievements of Eastern Christianity. Indeed, it would be hard to
overestimate the importance of these paintings for the history of art. However, to this
day they remain not only unstudied but also unpublished. Their exact date has not
been established nor has an analysis been made either of the significance of the
iconographic programme or of the stylistic approach involved. Although they have
more recently become the subject of increased interest by specialists the Akhtala
murals largely remain a blank page in the history of mediaeval art. Moreover, the
opinions already expressed about the paintings sometimes demand considerable
revision since they have not been based on a careful examination of all the available
evidence. This makes the need for a thorough study of the murals all the more
pressing.
The existing literature on the Akhtala wall paintings consists for the most part of
isolated references and brief descriptions in general works on Armenian and Georgian
art. The earliest description of the paintings dates back to the mid 19th century and is
to be found in part two of A.N. Muraviev's Almtem'a and Georgia i, written in the then
popular genre of the archaeological journey and introducing the Russian reader for the
first time to many Christian monuments in the Caucasus. The book contains some
fascinating legends about the origin of the Akhtala monastery which are not, however,
borne out by historical fact.
Muraviev gave a description of the paintings and, unlike most of his
contemporaries, drew attention to their artistic merits and state of preservation. He
named the memorable representations, listing in particular the holy bishops from the
lower tier of the sanctuary paintings. Today this list has become a unique source since
some of the representations and inscriptions to be seen in the last century are now no
longer extant. The text of Muraviev's work is repeated, almost word for word, in
Platon Iosseliani's Travel Motex/root Ti/Ks to AUtia/a^, which appeared two years later.
However, the latter author made an important amendment to the description of the
Akhtala wall paintings. Having read the Georgian inscription, he showed that the
image which Muraviev had taken to be Queen Tamar was actually St Catherine. The
1 A.N. Muraviev, Graz/a / zlrmeni'a (Georgia and Armenia), Ft. H, St. Petersburg, 1848, pp. 326-
329.
- P. Iosseliani, Patesye zopuP; at 7*(/?Aa do ,4k7aa?y (Travel Notes: From Tiftis to Akhtala), Tifiis,
1850, pp. 29-32.
The Akhtala murals are the most important monument of mediaeval wall painting
in Armenia. Their good state of preservation and artistic qualities place them among
the finest artistic achievements of Eastern Christianity. Indeed, it would be hard to
overestimate the importance of these paintings for the history of art. However, to this
day they remain not only unstudied but also unpublished. Their exact date has not
been established nor has an analysis been made either of the significance of the
iconographic programme or of the stylistic approach involved. Although they have
more recently become the subject of increased interest by specialists the Akhtala
murals largely remain a blank page in the history of mediaeval art. Moreover, the
opinions already expressed about the paintings sometimes demand considerable
revision since they have not been based on a careful examination of all the available
evidence. This makes the need for a thorough study of the murals all the more
pressing.
The existing literature on the Akhtala wall paintings consists for the most part of
isolated references and brief descriptions in general works on Armenian and Georgian
art. The earliest description of the paintings dates back to the mid 19th century and is
to be found in part two of A.N. Muraviev's Almtem'a and Georgia i, written in the then
popular genre of the archaeological journey and introducing the Russian reader for the
first time to many Christian monuments in the Caucasus. The book contains some
fascinating legends about the origin of the Akhtala monastery which are not, however,
borne out by historical fact.
Muraviev gave a description of the paintings and, unlike most of his
contemporaries, drew attention to their artistic merits and state of preservation. He
named the memorable representations, listing in particular the holy bishops from the
lower tier of the sanctuary paintings. Today this list has become a unique source since
some of the representations and inscriptions to be seen in the last century are now no
longer extant. The text of Muraviev's work is repeated, almost word for word, in
Platon Iosseliani's Travel Motex/root Ti/Ks to AUtia/a^, which appeared two years later.
However, the latter author made an important amendment to the description of the
Akhtala wall paintings. Having read the Georgian inscription, he showed that the
image which Muraviev had taken to be Queen Tamar was actually St Catherine. The
1 A.N. Muraviev, Graz/a / zlrmeni'a (Georgia and Armenia), Ft. H, St. Petersburg, 1848, pp. 326-
329.
- P. Iosseliani, Patesye zopuP; at 7*(/?Aa do ,4k7aa?y (Travel Notes: From Tiftis to Akhtala), Tifiis,
1850, pp. 29-32.