The character of this double wall and the appearance of the towers are exhibited in my illustration, which was taken from outside, in front of the principal gateway. The long line of fortifications is seen extending towards the east. Such walls are composed at Ani of an inner core of solid conglomerate, faced on either side with rectangular blocks of hewn stone. One admires the exquisite art with which the masonry is disposed and the minute fitting at the joints. We enter the enclosure between the two parapets, and walk for a short distance in an easterly direction. Above us, upon the face of the inner wall, is placed a fine bas-relief of a lion (Fig. 71); and almost immediately we arrive at the inner gateway, just west of the great tower. A somewhat effaced inscription is seen above the arch. It has been copied, but the interpretation and date are obscure.72 We know that these walls were originally built by King Sembat the Second (A.D. 977–989);73 but they must have been restored and towers added at later dates. The earliest inscription which has been discovered was found on a round tower not far from this entrance. It is in Cufic character, and records that the tower was erected by Manuchar the son of Chawir, or Abulsevar. We have already seen that Manuchar was the first ruler in Ani of the Kurdish family of the Beni-Cheddad (A.D. 1072). Other inscriptions belong to the latter half of the twelfth century and the commencement of the thirteenth. They are in Armenian and establish the fact that some of the towers were constructed by private persons as memorials to themselves.74

Once within the archway through the inner wall, the interior of the city is displayed in a long perspective to our gaze. But we might have to mount upon one of the parapets, in order to survey the irregularities of the large triangular space as far as the citadel at its further and narrow end. This north-easterly or broader portion of the site is covered with the débris of the private dwellings, not one of which has remained erect. They must have been packed together in a most uncomfortable manner, and they were probably built for the greater part of inferior material.75 It is as though a Persian runner had swished them away with his long cane to open the view to the noble monuments which still stand. Behind us, as we proceed, the long barrier of the fortifications opens out on either side. The inner walls of many of the towers have fallen in, and their vaulted interiors are laid bare. They suggest the appearance of a series of apses as they soar up into the sky.

Directing our steps towards the cathedral, the largest of the buildings, we pass the scattered fragments of an octagonal tower (No. 11 on the plan), which must have succumbed at a comparatively recent date. It has been seen while still perfect by my predecessors, who have described it as a minaret. It may have also served as a watch-tower. One huge block of masonry which has held together still displays the large proportions and the form of the structure. The remains of a spiral staircase engage the eye, and one is impressed with the excellence of the masonry. Two inscriptions have been found upon this pile. One in Persian bears the date Heg. 595 or A.D. 1198–99, and is to the effect that one Kei-Sultan of the Beni-Cheddad family “forbids the sale of sheep and camels in front of this mosque of Abu-l-Mamran.” The other is in Armenian and without date or personal sanction, being a mere exhortation to obey the order. One must suppose, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, that the minaret belonged to a mosque which has disappeared.76

The cathedral will surprise the traveller, even if he have come from Edgmiatsin. Although of small proportions, if judged by a European standard, it is nevertheless a stately building.77 It bears the imprint of that undefinable quality, beauty, and can scarcely fail to arouse a thrill of delight in the spectator. It is seen to great advantage, adjacent edifices having disappeared (Fig. 72). The extreme simplicity of the design—an oblong figure of four almost unbroken walls—at once appeals to the eye. The skill with which these plain spaces have been treated is the feature which is admired in the next place. The apse is only indicated by two niches which recess back from the face of the wall on the east (Figs. 72 and 73). Two similar niches are seen on the south, and, I think, also on the north side; but their purpose is ornamental and to secure uniformity of design. The remainder of the space is diversified by the lightest of false arcades, which rises almost to the roof, embraces the niches and extends to all four walls. My illustration (Fig. 72) displays the southern and eastern fronts; that on the north resembles its counterpart, but is less ornate. The façade is practically the same as the eastern front, but without the niches and with a low doorway. Similar doorways are conspicuous on the northern and southern sides. One remarks the tall and slender pillars of the false arcades, the cushion form of the capitals with their richly chiselled faces, the low spring of the rounded arches which curve inwards at the base, but scarcely suggest, so slight is the curve, the horse-shoe shape. The row of these arched mouldings is pleasantly broken at the doorway, which is surmounted by a narrow window with a rectangular frame of chiselled stone. And the bold arched moulding of pointed form, which envelops door and window, takes the eye above the tops of the neighbouring arches and leads it upwards to the loftier roof of the transept.

The architecture of the roof is less single of feature. Multiplicity of outlines and contrast of shapes are the characteristics which are here displayed. At one level you have the aisles, at another the nave and transept, at yet another the supreme crown of the dome. Here it is a group of gables; there the large circle of the drum of the dome; there again the cone formed by the roof of the dome. This uppermost member of the series has unhappily fallen in; but enough remains of the drum to enable the eye to complete the picture, and to reconstruct the delicate mouldings of a false arcade. We have in fact a roof scene essentially Byzantine in character, but which is quite free of that suggestion of a series of box-like elevations which is engendered by the appearance of some specimens of the style. On the contrary, we receive the impression of a stately simplicity underlying the diversity of outline and form.

The interior is quite remarkable from the standpoint of the history of architecture; it is also calculated to deserve the admiration of the lover of art. It has many of the characteristics of the Gothic style, of which it establishes the Oriental origin.78 The dome is supported by four massive piers of coupled pillars with plain capitals. Four similar piers are placed at either extremity of the building, a pair at the entrance and one on each side of the apse. A feature of the edifice is the extreme narrowness of the aisles and the corresponding constriction of the side chapels at their eastern extremity. The relative proportions of the apse and of these minor apses may be discovered by a glance at the illustration of the eastern front, where the extent of the latter is indicated by the two arches with little windows, one on either side of the niches. The Gothic appearance of the interior is still further accentuated by the bold pointed arches which spring from the piers. Our curiosity is aroused by these characteristics; but our emotions awake as we contemplate the magnificent apse (Fig. 74).79 That element of grandeur which we miss in Armenian churches is here made manifest in a high degree. It is imparted by the apse to the whole interior; and the apse becomes, by a happy inspiration of the architect, indeed the head and soul of the church.

Vestiges of paintings upon the ceilings have been observed by my predecessors; but I do not know that the building suffers from their destruction. The plaster has fallen, and the perfection of the masonry is exposed. The roofs as well as the walls are composed of stone, and, as usual in Armenian churches, no wood or metal has been used. Even at the present day the Armenian masons are possessed of exceptional skill; and their natural gifts have been here directed by the conceptions of genius. Although the interior is almost free of ornament, the art of the sculptor has been employed upon the enrichment of the outside niches, of the doorways and windows, and of the mouldings of the false arcade. In no case do we discover any trace of barbarism; the designs are sober and full of grace, the execution is beyond praise.80 The impression which we take away from our survey of these various features is that we have been introduced to a monument of the highest artistic merit, denoting a standard of culture which was far in advance of the contemporary standards in the West.

Several inscriptions in Armenian are visible upon the walls and have been copied and translated.81 The earliest in date is found upon the south wall and is of some length. It records that in the year 1010 (Arm. era 459), during the reign of Gagik, king of the kings of Armenia and Georgia, the cathedral, which had been founded by King Sembat, was completed by Katranideh, queen of Armenia and daughter of the king of Siunik, at the bidding of her husband, King Gagik. The queen adds that she had also embellished the church with precious ornaments, an offering to Christ on behalf of herself and of her sons Sembat, Abas, and Ashot.82 Two inscriptions belonging to the period of the occupation of Ani by the Byzantines figure upon the façade. Both appear to be without dates, but both refer to known personages. The one mentions the Empress Zoe (1042), and is a memorial to her general, Aron-Magistros, who was entrusted with the government of the city.83 The other is an edict of Bagrat-Magistros, governor-general of the eastern provinces, abolishing by order of Constantine Dukas (A.D. 1059–67) certain taxes which pressed upon the inhabitants. Other inscriptions detail offerings on the part of private individuals; and the date of one, if it has been copied correctly, is as late as 1486.84

An edifice of much smaller scale than the cathedral,85 but closely resembling it in plan and style, is the church which is dedicated to St. Gregory the Illuminator, and which occupies a secluded site at the eastern extremity of the town upon the side of the cliff which breaks away to the bed of the Arpa by a series of black crags (No. 4). It is indeed a romantic spot. The side valley already mentioned joins the valley of the Arpa at this point, and is flanked by walls which descend to the river with bold bastions. The stream hisses in a gloomy ravine of grey and lichened rock. Subterraneous passages lead inwards into the town. In presenting my photograph of the building I must ask my reader to imagine for a moment that the ruinous porch has been removed (Fig. 76). He will then seize the characteristics with which he is already familiar: the oblong figure of unbroken walls; the elegant false arcades; the roof scene of nave, and transept and aisles, surmounted by a polygonal dome with a conical roof. The niches in the exterior of this church are perhaps less pronounced than in the case of the cathedral; but they are discovered upon all four walls. The stone is uniform of hue. Tall double shafts support the arches of the false arcade which extends round the building. The face of these arches has been richly sculptured with the most elegant traceries, while the spaces above the capitals, between the arms of the arches, display the forms of birds and flowers in moderate relief (Fig. 77, from north side). The architect has wisely discarded the use of the pointed arch in any part of this gem-like structure. But the slender pillars suggest the Gothic. The Byzantine feature of a narthex is wanting both to this building and to the cathedral. The porch has been added at a later date and is purely Saracenic in character. It displays several traceries and designs of high merit, among which I would call attention to the zigzag moulding which is so common in Norman architecture (Fig. 78).

Entering the building we are at once impressed by its almost perfect preservation; the plaster adheres to the walls and ceilings, and the frescos with which they were adorned are still intelligible. Yet here we have a monument erected nearly 800 years ago, and which has not yet been touched by a restorer’s hand. The disposition of the interior resembles that of the cathedral; the dome rests on four piers, the apse is flanked by side chapels, which are of diminutive size. The frescos, which are also found upon the façade, represent Biblical subjects. They must have appreciably faded since they were seen and described by my predecessors.86 The legends which accompany them are all in Georgian or in Greek characters. This fact has led to the supposition that the church was designed for the Greek form of worship. But we know that it was built by an Armenian, as the church of an Armenian convent dedicated to an Armenian saint. One can scarcely fail to remark the dim lighting of the interior, a characteristic or defect which also belongs to the cathedral. Both might easily have been flooded with light from the dome.

The commemorative inscriptions are found upon the exterior and are in Armenian character. Within each of the three most easterly arches upon the south wall there is an inscription of twenty-five lines. It would appear that the lines are carried across, and that they constitute a single text. We are informed that in the year 1215 (Arm. era 664), during the government of Zakarea, chief of the mandatories, and of his son Shahanshah, one Tigran, of the family of Honentz, built a monastery upon this site in the hope that his good work would bring long life to his House and to the son of Zakarea. At the time when he bought it the place was covered with rocks and brushwood; but there was a building upon it known as Our Lady of the chapel. Tigran surrounded it with a wall, constructed dwellings for the monks, erected this church of St. Gregory, and enriched the church with ornaments and precious vessels. He also bestowed a permanent endowment upon the monastery.87 The edifice is therefore a work of the period of Georgian occupation. An inscription upon the east wall belongs to a later epoch, the date being given as 759 of the Armenian era, or A.D. 1310.88 But the city was still governed by a member of the family of Zakarea. It records that one Matheh, chief secretary of the ruler Shahanshah, restored some conduits which brought water to the monastery, but which had been destroyed during certain foreign or civil troubles. It supplies us with the names of two other personages—Khvandzeh, the wife of this Shahanshah, and Zakarea, their son.

In the immediate neighbourhood of this church, but upon a higher level, we observe two ruins which are of interest. The one consists of the remains of a massive wall and a chamber which stand in an isolated position (No. 22). They are of the character which is usually known as Cyclopean. The other ruin is that of a small and almost subterraneous bath. Recent excavations have disclosed subsidiary chambers and passages; but the bath itself, which is divided into four small vaulted chambers, could scarcely have accommodated more than four bathers at a time (No. 13).89

Not far from St. Gregory, as you follow down the stream of the Arpa, are met remains of a walled enclosure of the usual finished masonry and in fair preservation. The walls descend the cliff-side to a projecting mass of rock which rises from the bed of the river with almost vertical sides. On the edge of this promontory, overlooking the stream, is placed a little chapel which, although ruinous, still retains many of the elements of its former beauty (No. 9, Fig. 79). It is distinguished from the walls about it by the pink stone of which it is built. The form of the roof is a pleasant variation from the prevailing type, as is also the plan of the interior. Six semicircular recesses are crowned by the circle of the dome. Contiguous to this elegant monument is a chamber or chapel of different form. At the upper end of the enclosure are seen the ruins of the long vaulted staircase which was taken across the enclosure and through the wall on the west, in order to debouch upon the ravine on the western side of the promontory, and so to lead down to the water’s edge. About 300 yards still further down the current you observe the piers of a bridge of which the single arch has fallen in. It was on the cliff-side above this bridge that the remains of a gateway were seen by my predecessors, bearing an inscription of the year 1320. It commemorates the allocation of a tax on cattle to the monastery of St. Gregory by one Sargis, chief of the Custom-House. The gift is made for the repose of the soul of the master of Sargis, Shahanshah, and for the long life of Zakarea and the other sons of Shahanshah. Fragments of inscriptions found within the neighbouring enclosure yield the dates of 705 and 759 Arm. era (A.D. 1256 and 1310).90 I am inclined to think it possible that the enclosure and chapel may have formed part of the same monastery of St. Gregory of which I have already described the church.

One of the most conspicuous buildings is the mosque with the polygonal minaret (No. 10, Fig. 80). It rises from the cliff on the right bank of the Arpa and overlooks the ruinous bridge. An Arabic inscription, done in brick and inlaid in the masonry of the minaret not far from the summit of that lofty column, displays to the city in colossal characters the name of Allah. The mosque is the work of the first Mussulman prince of Ani, Manuchar, the son of Abulsevar. This fact appears to be established by a Cufic inscription which may be perceived in my illustration upon the north-west wall, the wall adjoining the minaret.91 Just above it is seen a long Persian inscription which must be over two hundred years later in date. It is in fact an edict of the Mongol king of Persia, Abu-Said, one of the successors of Jenghiz Khan. Abu-Said is styled Bahadur, or the brave. The edict is therefore posterior to the year 718 of the Hegira (A.D. 1318–19), when that sultan acquired this personal title. The contents of this text are to the effect that the inhabitants of the city and neighbouring provinces had been suffering from illegal exactions on the part of their rulers. They had been emigrating and selling their goods and houses. The obnoxious imposts are specified and their abolition decreed.92 Of the trilingual inscription which was found by Khanikoff I saw no traces; it was a mere fragment at the time of his visit. It mentions the name of Zakarea, to which is attached the title of Atabeg; and it may belong to the year 1237 and to the reign of Zakarea III.93

The architecture of the mosque resembles nothing that has yet been mentioned. Five massive and isolated pillars, of which originally there were six,94 are seen rising from the floor of the chamber and supporting the vaultings of the roof. The circumference of these pillars is 9 feet 2 inches. The dimensions of the chamber itself are insignificant, being only 47 feet by 41 feet. Beneath it and below the level of the ground on the north-west, but overlooking the river upon the south-east, are four square apartments with narrow windows. My illustration, which was taken from the south, does not embrace this feature; nor does it quite reproduce the peculiar effect of the masonry, in which pink and black stones have been variously employed.

During the summer preceding our visit excavations had been made in Ani by the Russian archæologist Mr. N. Marr.95 Not the least interesting result of his labours, as they were manifest upon the site, is the discovery of a line of walls with bastions, crossing the neck or narrowest portion of the platform from the ravine of the Arpa to that of the Tsaghkotz. The one extremity of this fortification starts from the former of these valleys in the immediate neighbourhood of the mosque. South-west of this neck, with its transverse rampart, the platform again opens out; and at the same time it attains its greatest elevation, gathering together and composing a hill with a flat top. The summit and sides of this hill display the substructures of walls and buildings; and at least two edifices in a fair state of preservation rise against the background of sky. One can scarcely doubt that this strong position was the site of the old fortress of Ani before it became a city and the residence of the king. It is flanked by the two ravines with the two rivers, which presently unite. It is only accessible from the level ground on the north-east. But on that side, as we have seen, it has the form of a narrow isthmus, easily defensible by a line of walls. This fortress must have composed the nucleus of the more recent city—that inner fortress of which we read. Upon the summit of the hill, some four hundred feet above the rivers, was built the citadel. And there is ground for supposing that the citadel was also the palace, as in the case of Trebizond and perhaps also of Melazkert.

Unfortunately nothing remains of the actual walls of the palace; and the buildings which I have mentioned are two small churches. One stands upon the north side of the fortified eminence, and the other upon the south. The former is not noteworthy, except for the fact that its northern wall rises from lower levels and composes part of the wall of the citadel. But the edifice on the south is of considerable interest. It consists of two vaulted chambers placed side by side, and having the inner wall in common (No. 28, Fig. 81, taken from the north). The more southerly is the largest; and the round arches which support the roof rest upon four pilasters of curious design. I photographed one of the best preserved among them, which is adorned with the figures of two birds in low relief (Fig. 82). They are represented in the act of pouncing upon animals. The pilasters are composed of blocks of black stone; while for the capitals and the upper portion of the building only pink stone has been used. The façade and the apse have fallen away. The dimensions are small: a length of 30 feet 9 inches and a breadth of 17 feet 4 inches. One of my predecessors discovered in the contiguous building a bas-relief upon which was portrayed two figures on horseback, one of which is St. George with the dragon at his feet. But this piece, as well as another, in which a mounted and aureoled archer is displayed, surrounded by the forms of birds and wild animals, is no longer to be seen. I showed the reproductions in Brosset’s Atlas to the aged priest; he recognised the latter of these sculptures and informed us that it had been stolen. Quite probably both are now lost in some museum.96 Elements derived from Assyrian art may be recognised in these bas-reliefs as well as the ornament of the pilaster. But in the absence of inscriptions one is thrown back upon internal evidence in assigning a date to the south chapel.

Such is the site of the ancient fortress of Ani, which must have enjoyed a fine view over the city. I observed that this view comprises the south and west sides of the cathedral, while the north side is turned towards the town. The fact that the south wall of that edifice has been more profusely decorated than its counterpart which faces north confirms the supposition that the palace was situated within the citadel, and that it was for the royal windows that the decorative resources of the architect were principally displayed.

If we descend the hill of the citadel in a southerly direction, as it falls away to the crags which separate the two ravines about the confluence of the rivers, we cross the remains of an inner wall and pass the ruin of a little chapel, of which the four piers as well as the cupola still stand. I photographed the charming detail of the doorway on the south, overlooking the Arpa Chai (No. 29, Fig. 83).97 What a contrast between these classical mouldings and the somewhat barbarous architecture of the chapel in the citadel, between the sobriety of the designs in these bands of sculptured stone and the wild spirit of the ornament on those pilasters! Ani is indeed a museum of architectural styles—a characteristic in keeping with her geographical position and with the inquisitive and impressionable culture of her inhabitants. Just west of this building is seen a piece of masonry which is in the last stage of decay (No. 30, Fig. 84). It may represent the apse of another chapel. From here the view ranges over the crags below the citadel, of which the most southerly is crowned by the walls of a third chapel. The Arpa is seen emerging from the deep ravine on the left of the ruin; it is joined by its affluent in the neighbourhood of the rock with the chapel.98

Just below the standpoint of this picture are situated the remains of the outer wall which encircled the peninsula. At the extremity of the figure stands a tower, which is concealed by the lie of the ground. But portions of the wall are visible in the illustration; and it appears to have extended along the valley of the Alaja in a northerly direction, and to have been joined to the outer fortifications of the city on the side of the plain. Where I examined the masonry of this wall I found it faced on both sides, and 3 feet 4 inches in thickness. Issuing from the citadel or inner fortress, we examined the substructures of a curious building which had been recently brought to light by Mr. Marr. But the length of this notice warns me that I must confine it to a description of the monuments which are still erect.

Let us therefore retrace our steps in the direction of the town, keeping as close as we may to the ravine of the Alaja, the ancient Tsaghkotzadzor or Vale of Flowers. On the summit of the cliff, in full view of the city, rises a circular building with a drum-shaped dome and a conical roof. Of this edifice, the chapel of St. Gregory (No. 5), I am able to present three photographs, one of the east side (Fig. 85), another of the entrance on the west (Fig. 86), and a third of the interior (Fig. 87). It is a charming little monument, which, like the cathedral, blends elements of Byzantine and Gothic art. But the niche is here again a prominent feature, a feature dear to the architecture of the East. The body of the edifice is polygonal rather than circular, having no less than twelve sides. Of these six are recessed, the niches facing the town being framed by ornamental arches with classical cornices. The six niches correspond with the same number of cavities in the design of the interior. Although the inside diameter is not more than about 30 feet, including these cavities,99 yet the impression as you enter the chapel is one of space and height. Especially remarkable is the great depth of the dome. Traces of paintings may be observed upon the walls. Two small vaulted chambers have been built into the wall on the east side, and are now in a ruinous condition. They are seen in the illustration on either side of the window. They may have served the purpose of sepulchral chambers, of which there are also vestiges outside the building upon the north side.

We learn from the inscriptions that the chapel was dedicated to St. Gregory; and it is a work of the period of the Armenian kings. It seems to have been used as a place of burial by the Pahlavuni or Pahlavid family, which furnished some of the most illustrious names in Armenian history. The great noble who led the faction which was opposed to the cession of Ani to the Byzantines was a Pahlavid, Vahram. He met his death in battle against the Beni-Cheddad of Dvin in A.D. 1047. Embodying as he did the policy of resistance à outrance both to Mussulmans and Greeks, he has been the idol of Armenian patriotism. The name of this hero figures in the inscription over the door, which, although without a date, is probably assignable to him. He bestows the revenue of certain shops upon the church of St. Gregory to defray the cost of masses for the soul of his son Apughamir. In the same place have been found inscriptions of the mother of Vahram, the lady Shushan, making over certain revenues to the same church and recording the number of the masses obtained in return. She is styled the wife of the prince Grigor. But a date is happily forthcoming to elucidate the identity of these personages. It is furnished by a long inscription of no less than fourteen lines upon the north wall. Record is made that in the year of the Armenian era 489 (A.D. 1040) Aplgharib, prince of Armenia, erected a sepulchre in this place100 for his father Grigor, of whom he describes himself as the youngest son, for his brother Hamzeh, and for his maternal uncle Seda. Masses are to be said for his mother Shushan, for his father Grigor, for his maternal uncle Seda, and for his brother Hamzeh. I cannot help thinking that the sepulchre referred to is represented by the remains which I observed upon the north side of this building. And the vaulted chambers in the east wall may be the tombs of Grigor and his wife Shushan, an inscription over the highly decorated window on that side being a prayer to Christ for mercy upon Grigor.101

A question of great interest with reference to this building is whether it may be regarded as the same church which is mentioned by the historians as a work of King Gagik I. We are informed by Samuel of Ani that in the year 447 (A.D. 998) a church of St. Gregory was completed by this monarch in the Tsaghkotzadzor. The same event is recorded in the pages of Kirakos, who gives the same date, and describes the situation as overlooking the Valley of the Tsaghkotz.102 Asoghik tells us that it was built on the model of a large church at Vagharshapat, dedicated to the same saint, which had fallen into ruin. He adds that the edifice of King Gagik was built on a high platform on the side of the Tsaghkotz, and in possession of an admirable view. He speaks of three doorways and of the marvellous dome, reproducing the appearance of the sky.103 I did not observe more than one door to this edifice, and perhaps the church which is referred to by these authorities was some larger building in the immediate neighbourhood which has disappeared.

The chapel of St. Gregory invites comparison with another monument of the same order in the opposite quarter of the town (No. 6, Fig. 88).104 My illustration was taken from the north. The design is less elaborate and the dimensions are rather larger, the dome especially having a much greater span. But the effect produced by the interior lacks the magic of the companion building, while the symmetry is marred by the recess for the altar on the east side. This building will not endure for many years longer, unless steps be taken to save it from falling in. The lower portions are in a state of advanced decay. The ornament on the exterior closely resembles that employed upon the cathedral. Inscriptions bristle upon the panels of the false arcades. One records that in the year 483 (A.D. 1034) the prince Aplgharib, having journeyed to Constantinople by order of Sembat Shahanshah, obtained with great difficulty and at considerable expense a piece of the Holy Cross. Upon his return he built this church, and directed that nightly services should be held within it until the coming of Christ. The name of Surb-Phrkich, or church of the Redeemer, is given in this and the following inscription, and may be applied either to this chapel or to some neighbouring church with which it was in connection. A second inscription belongs to the Armenian year 490 (A.D. 1041), and mentions the contemporary reign of Sembat, son of Gagik Shahanshah.105 The chapel of the Redeemer is therefore the work of the same Pahlavid, Aplgharib, who built the sepulchres to the chapel of St. Gregory, and it belongs to the period of the kings.106

Continuing our walk along the cliff above the valley of the Alaja, we pass a lofty mound, surmounted by the ruin of a wall (No. 31). The old priest was of opinion that it denotes the site of the priestly synod house, where endowments were received and other business of the Church transacted. A little further, and west of this mound we stay to examine a small chapel which has been hollowed out of a solid mass of rock. But our attention is distracted from this fantastic object by the walls and yawning apartments of the castle (No. 12, Fig. 89). It is situated in the extreme north-western angle of the town, where the ravine of the Alaja is joined by the side-ravine already mentioned in the description of the site. My photograph displays the southern side of this extensive edifice and the junction of the valleys. The entrance is on the east and faces the town (Fig. 90). You admire the exquisite masonry of the walls and the elaborate decoration of the doorway. That doorway is one of the most conspicuous objects in Ani; and inasmuch as this building has been sought to be identified with the royal palace, it has been despoiled of many of its mosaics by patriotic Armenians, who strip them off and carry them away as souvenirs. My reader will observe the recurrence of the form of a Greek cross in the ornament on the face of the gate. This ornament consists of inlays or, as one might say, mosaics composed of a light red and of a black stone. The effect is original and pleasant to the eye. In the absence of any inscriptions—we searched in vain for any trace of writing both on the outside of the edifice and within its walls—I am inclined to consider that this so-called palace was nothing more than a magazine and barrack, in close connection with the outer defences of the city on the vulnerable side, the side of the plain. The only ornament in the interior was found over a doorway, and consisted of a chain moulding and inlays of red and black stone. On the other hand, the uses of the place appear to be denoted by the vaulted passages and by the spacious underground chambers. Two of these chambers, smaller in size, have evidently served as dungeons.107

Two edifices of considerable interest remain to be mentioned. Both are situated in quarters of the town which must have been densely built over, and both are in an advanced state of decay. The more westerly is perhaps the most curious of all the monuments of Ani, and I do not pretend to have quite unravelled the complexities of its compound plan (No. 2). The eye is engrossed by the ruin of a spacious portal, longest from west to east. The western and southern walls have fallen away; but the east front and the whole of the vaulting of the most easterly portion have been spared by the ravages of time. Entering this portal from the west (Fig. 91), we are able to reconstruct in fancy the features of the design. There appear to have been three distinct domes to the roof, supported by arches resting on pillars. Of the three divisions which were thus introduced into the interior, the largest was that in the centre. That on the east alone remains; and we may gauge the dimensions of the whole figure when we consider that this division measures within the pillars a square of 19 feet. The architecture is pure Arab or Saracenic, recalling that of the mosque. It is certainly later than the period of the kings. As in the mosque, the effect is heightened by the mixture of black with reddish blocks of stone. A large stone, sculptured with a cross, is inlaid in the south-east wall, and may be the same as the one which has been described by my predecessors as containing the figure of a double-headed eagle.108 The walls are covered with inscriptions. The outer face of this portal or east front is extremely elaborate (Fig. 92). The doorway on that side forms the centre of a Saracenic façade in which honeycomb vaultings, false niches, and a mosaic of black and pink stones have all been made to play a part. Four inscriptions in Armenian are observed upon this front.

This portal must have served as an entrance to two or more chapels. Of these one alone remains. It is entered by a doorway with rich mouldings in the north wall of the most easterly division. The interior is of grey stone, and it is disposed in four semicircles.109 But the dimensions are small as compared to those of the portal, and the portal is much longer than the chapel. The ruinous masonry upon the west of the latter building indicates the site of a second and contiguous chamber or chapel. That of a third is denoted by similar evidence upon the east wall. This structure projected beyond the east front of the portal, to which it was placed at right angles. Traces of it may be seen in my illustration. It bears an Armenian inscription.

The inscriptions, which unhappily I had not leisure to identify, have been already published and translated.110 The earliest in date appears to have been found upon the doorway of the chapel, and identifies it as a work of the period of the kings. It records that in the year 480 (A.D. 1031) Apughamir, son of Vahram, prince of princes, bestowed an endowment upon this church of the Apostles for the health and long life of his brother Grigor. My reader is already familiar with these names of members of the Pahlavid family. The inscriptions upon the portal are of much later dates, ranging over the period of Georgian occupation when the city was governed by the Mkhargrdzels. Some are in the name of the Mongol overlord. Most are of the nature of public proclamations; and from the one latest in date we learn that in A.D. 1348 members of this Georgian family were still personages at Ani, and that the city had not yet been abandoned by her inhabitants.

The second of the monuments is also the last which I need mention; it is situated between the cathedral and the chapel of the Redeemer (No. 3). It is of small dimensions and, as usual, of great elegance; but the roof and the whole of the upper portion have unhappily fallen away. In fact, the only portions which are still erect are the north wall, the apse, and part of the south wall. A vaulted chamber extends around the edifice. Two bas-reliefs are seen in two of the panels of the arcade upon the north wall. The one on the left evidently represents the subject of the Annunciation; while that on the right probably portrays the figures of two saints. I could not discover any trace of an inscription. But the old priest bases his opinion that the ruin is that of a church dedicated to St. Stephen upon an inscription which has disappeared.111

My illustration of the castle (Fig. 89) will have revealed a characteristic of the ancient city which is of historical interest. The ravine of the Alaja, as well as both the side valleys, which open respectively to this ravine and to that of the Arpa, present the appearance of having been riddled into quite a network of cavities; such is the number of the troglodyte dwellings which they contain. Legend peoples this underground city with the souls of those citizens of Ani who, sooner than emigrate into distant lands, preferred to die in her defence. A stir and hum, as of a teeming and busy populace, may be heard by night above the rustling of the Arpa Chai.112 The tuff composing the cliffs must at all times have invited such burrowings; and we know that, when Ani was surprised during the reign of Thamar by the emir of Ardabil, the inhabitants, who were still numerous, took refuge in these caves.113

Our conception of the city of the kings would be wanting in an essential feature were we to pass over the neighbouring convent of Khosha Vank (Fig. 93). It was there, we can scarcely doubt, that the monarch was often wont to deliberate; and it was under the shadow of those walls that his bones were laid to rest by the side of his ancestors. The triumphal archway through which he would pass on his way from the capital may still be seen on the summit of the cliff on the right bank of the Arpa Chai (Fig. 94). The cloister is situated, as we have seen, upon the opposite or left bank,114 and is bordered on two sides by a loop of the river. The bridge has disappeared. A small village has grouped itself between the monastery and the bed of the stream, where repose beneath the gloom of lofty cliffs of lava the two chapels and the tomb of King Ashot.

The monastic buildings occupy a considerable area upon the high ground within the bend of the river. They are surrounded by a lofty wall. Entering from the west, we cross a court to an opposite doorway which opens into a vast and gloomy chamber (Fig. 95). On the further or eastern side of this chamber we perceive the door of the church. The architecture of this outer hall or pronaos is quite remarkable. In some respects it resembles that of the mosque at Ani. The ceilings are vaulted, and there are no less than four rows of pillars. The space is divided into the form of a nave and two aisles. The circumference of the pillars is 9½ feet. The central vaulting of the nave is surmounted by a dome, different in shape from any of the domes which have been described. Viewed from the outside, it becomes merged in a tall belfry, which is seen on the left of my illustration (Fig. 96), taken from the south-west. To the interior it displays a drum of eight panels; and the only light which it transmits comes from above. The panels are of stone and covered with sculpture in low relief. Here it is an architectural figure, there a beautiful vine pattern which is the subject of the ornament. One space displays the form of the Virgin Mary, set in a rich frame. The two extremities of the frame are supported by the shapes of animals, a bull and a lion. On the back of the lion is seated an eagle, and a child on that of the bull. Two angels keep watch, one on either side of the Mother of Christ. The gloom of the building is due to the design of this dome, as well as to the smallness of the round windows, resembling the port-holes of a ship, of which there are three in the north and two in the south wall.

The interior of this edifice is covered with inscriptions in Armenian, which none of my party were able to read. Perhaps they include some of those which were brought by Abich from this cloister and which have been translated by Brosset.115 One of these inscriptions records a donation in the Armenian year 650 (A.D. 1201) under the government of Zakarea. Another is to the effect that the monastery was restored in 1102 (A.D. 1652) by one Daniel, a monk from Tigranocerta. We are told that the buildings had previously fallen into ruin, and had become polluted by accumulations of dust and filth. The cloister is styled Horomosi Vank, and is described as having been constructed by the kings. I will not venture to express an opinion upon the age of the pronaos; but I would suggest that the belfry is perhaps of later date. The sculptures in the dome appear to belong to a hoary antiquity. The edifice may have served as a model for a rock chamber which is described by a modern traveller as belonging to the cloister of Surb Geghard.116

You enter the church through the door in the east wall of the pronaos, passing a slab engraved with a pastoral staff, which marks the place of burial of some spiritual dignitary. A spacious dome rests upon four piers, and there is a single apse with the usual daïs. The walls are covered with a coating of whitewash. The interior measures roughly 53 feet by 33 feet, the former dimension including the apse. The attendant priest showed us an old but undated manuscript, which proved to be an illustrated New Testament. It would appear from an inscription that the church was dedicated to St. Gregory,117 and it may perhaps be ascribed to the period of the kings.

The monastic buildings are placed upon the south of the church and pronaos, and are approached from the southern side of the entrance court. They are just outside the area embraced by my illustration of the south walls of the edifices just named. Two large apartments, communicating with one another, serve as antechambers to a great hall with pillars and vaulted ceilings, which is entered from the second of the two chambers, and in plan extends along the most easterly of its walls. The whole suite are impressive examples of the art of the mason and stone-sculptor, effect being gained by the regularity and perfect fitting of the blocks, while the stone takes an admirable surface. Friezes with stalactite patterns are employed in one room as a cornice for the ceiling. In the second and smaller room there is a square aperture in the centre of the roof with a stalactite ornament. The same feature belongs to the hall of the synod (Fig. 97), and is clearly seen in my photograph. At the further end of the two rows of pillars may be discerned a niche with a daïs, the recess being richly sculptured. It was there that was placed the throne. But I think these buildings are all later than the time of the kings, although they may have been used by the Georgian princes who governed Ani. We learn from an inscription, which was probably copied in the larger of the antechambers, that at least one of these apartments was constructed in A.D. 1229 to serve as a receptacle for the holy relics.118

On the north side of the church buildings there is nothing but a narrow and vacant space separating them from the wall of the cloister. But at the east end of this part of the enclosure, and in line with the east front of the church, are situated the roofless remains of a little chapel, crowning a ruinous substructure which is overgrown by rank weeds, and of which the sculptured stones litter the ground. The pendant of this building on the south side of the church is seen in my illustration (Fig. 96). It is much better preserved than the companion edifice, and the chamber in the lower storey is still intact. This chamber is oblong in shape, with a vaulted ceiling and an altar with sculptured stones. The chapel is of triple design, with three apses, the whole surmounted by a dome. It is possible that both these buildings, which so closely correspond, were designed to receive the remains of some high personages.

But the actual tomb of one of the kings has been spared by a happy chance, and may be found quite close to the second and larger of the chapels which repose in the bed of the Arpa Chai (Fig. 94). It is placed near the south-eastern angle of the building. With what a thrill of delight did we discover this eloquent relic—a rounded slab resting on two stone steps! In spite of the lichen and the wear of the stone, the words “Ashot Thagavor” (Ashot, the king) were distinctly legible. The chapels are placed in a line from west to east, and were originally three in number. Of these the most westerly is falling into ruin, a state which has already overtaken that on the east. The central member of the group is at once the largest and the best preserved. It contains an inscription over the south door to the effect that it was built in 460 (A.D. 1011) by one George, son of the patriarch Martiros. But I have not been able to identify this patriarch; and it is possible there may be some error in the translation made by my dragoman, who, although well educated, was not a scholar in old Armenian. The king whose name appears on the tomb is probably Ashot the Third.

The inscriptions establish the fact that the monastery was known by the name of Horomosi Vank, which probably signifies the convent of the Greek.119 History supplements and explains this information. We learn from Asoghik that it was founded in the tenth century under the reign of Abas by Armenian priests who had emigrated from Greek territory. It was burnt by the Mussulmans in A.D. 982.120 An inscription of King John Sembat, dated 487 (A.D. 1038), appears to have been found within its walls; and it has been inferred that the cloister was restored by that prince.121 We know that he was buried by the side of his predecessors who ruled at Ani; and we have an inscription of John Sembat by which he bestows the revenue of a village in support of the royal cemetery at this monastery of Horomos.122