architectural ceramics of uzbekistan; 2006 -...

Architectural Ceramics of

Uzbekistan.

attife //C

>V.v

V

N.S.GRAZHDANKINA. M. K. RAKHIMOV. I.E.PLETNEV

ARCHITECTURAL CERAMICS

OF UZBEKISTAN.

TASHKENT 2006

Published in 2006 with the financial and technical assistance of the United Nations

Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization within the framework of the

UNESCO/Japan Funds-in-Trust project "The Blue of Samarkand: Inventory andRevival of the Traditional Ceramics of Uzbekistan".

The authors are responsible for the choice and the presentation of the facts

contained in this book and for the opinions expressed therein, which are not neces¬

sarily those of UNESCO and do not commit the organization. Nor do they the

expression of any opinions as the part of UNESCO concerning the legal status

of any country.territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimita¬tion of its frontier or boundaries.

First published in Russian Language in 1968 by the publishing house "Science"

USSR, Tashkent.

Director of Publication: Michael Barry Lane.

Project Cordinator: Sanjar Allayarov.

Project Assistant: Muhayyo Makhmudova.

Editor of the English edition: Alisher Rakhimov.

English Translation: Eric Wahlberg.

Text revision: Sussanah McBain, Michael Barry Lane.

Design and Photo materials: Alisher Rakhimov.

Printed by: Seal-Mag, Tashkent

© UNESCO 2006

All rights reserved

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER I

CHAPTER II

CHAPTER

CHAPTER IV

APPENDIX

ILLUSTRATIONS

BIBLIOGRAPHY.

CONTENTS

Outline of the development of facing ceramics

in the architecture of Uzbekistan.

by N.S.Grazhdankina

Early ceramic decorations.

Architectural ceramics IX - XIII centuries

Ceramic facing XIV century

Ceramic facing of the late XIV- XV centuries.

Ceramic facing in the XVII - XXth centuries.

Towards a history of construction techniques of

Uzbekistan, by N.S. Grazhdankina

(The technology of facing ceramics production

and their qualitative indicators)

by N.S.Grazhdankina

Clay ceramics.

Ceramics on Faience foundation.

The work of the Samarkand ceramics

workshops, by M.K. Rakhimov

Basic materials.

Components of mass for forming tiles and

majolica tiles.

Materials for preparing glazes.

Methods of preparing alkali and lead glaze.

Structure of the kiln for firing ceramic tiles and

the firing process.

The experience of restoring facing ceramics on

architectural monuments of Uzbekistan.

by I.E. Pletnev

Basic stages of repair-restoration work.Conservation of architectural-artistic ceramics.

Restoration of architectural ceramics.

Restoration of carved glazed ceramics fasades

Restoration ceramics masters in Samarkand

Tile masters by M.K. Rakhimov

Master restorers.

11

13

14

21

28

33

39

49

55

58

60

70

72

74

79

82

88

93

101

109

110

113

145

Introduction.

INTRODUCTION

The following articles examine the different types of medieval ceramic tiles

used in architecture, and the methods of preparation used by modern masters

based on the techniques of their predecessors. Unfortunately only a few experts

remain. The work of Usto Bakiev Abdukadyr, usto Umarov Usman and usto Khodjaev

Azimmurad, renowned masters proficient in ceramic firing techniques, is discussedbelow. Authors such as K.Ya. Peshcherev and others have written about ceramics

as a craft and the system of construction work in the medieval architecture of

Central Asia, but there is a need for further architectural study.

A few words about the authors and their methods of research: N.S.

Grazhdankina shows how architectural ceramic techniques have developed from

the earliest examples to the present day. Much can be learned from analogy as the

basic methods of silicate production are uniform. But specific aspects such as local

climate, raw materials, architectural forms and cultural traditions necessitate some

changes in the established types of architectural ceramics, and also highlight their

originality and variety. Grazhdankina shares her long years of research and de¬

scribes the technological thinking of masters of the past.

She uses many examples to show that the links of form, technique and

composition of the various types of facing are nonetheless maintained, while not

excluding elements of a creative approach. In contrast with Chapters I and II,

Chapters III and IV by I.E. Pletnev and M.K. Rakhimov are chronicles of masters.

Their general conclusions are few and are based on their personal observa¬

tions. Rakhimov is descended from a family of ceramicists and is a national artist

and researcher in his own right. I.E. Pletnev is an architect and the instigator of

many facing restoration projects in Samarkand, with close contacts with master

ceramicists. Opinions vary as to methods of restoration. Pletnev classifies and

evaluates various conservation and restoration techniques with examples ofarchitectural ceramics.

8 Introduction.

He reveals little known details of facing techniques. Soviet specialists car¬

ried out important research into preserving traditional techniques. An example of

this is the technique of carved mosaics, composed of thousands of shaped glazed

and coloured details, all fitting exactly together to form a smooth mirror-like surface

with finely painted details. In the 1930s scientists believed that this was done using

metal baffled stamps. Then they realized that each piece was cut. Exactly what

constituted the ceramic mass for carved mosaic has only recently become clear,

and experts have been able to restore all the processes of majolica preparation and

assembling for monument restoration. The production of complex ornamentation

and compositions in carved mosaic was undertaken in Samarkand.

Consider architectural faience, usually associated with delicate white bowls.

With the help of chemical analysis Grazhdankina determined that the faience mass

to which the glaze binds so effectively, and which has a special cleanness and

depth of tone, was used not only for carved mosaic, but was also combined with

ceramics on a clay foundation in majolica facing and tiles. At times, faience became

the leading mass for facing material. Grazhdankina clarifies the terminology of ar¬

chitectural ceramics, correcting the conventional terminology about facing on the

basis of visual valuation. She faced resistance at first. Grazhdankina's conception

of 'architectural faience' is close to that of the 'modular composition of 15th century

tiles' of Pletnev.

Up to now, it has been thought that the matte and glazed facing brickwork in

large geometric patterns found on the surface of monuments from the Timurid pe¬

riod, was composed using the so-called direct assembling method, by which each

brick was separately affixed to the foundation with alabaster paste and separated

from its neighbours ones by horizontal and vertical seams also made from paste.

Pletnev discovered clear traces of modular structure during his restoration work

and more importantly, the scarcely noticeable fixed brickwork, which solved the

problem of the invisible joint of large blocks.

Assembling these blocks is done today as it was then: on the ground in

special areas known as takhmin. It is likely that both direct and modular assem¬

blage of tiles occurred in the 15th century, and this needs to be determined, as well

as the special qualities and 'spheres of influence' of the various facing ceramics.

This requires specialists to experiment using various technical blueprints of assem¬

bling facing.This method is used to determine the composition of an ancient ce¬

ramic mass and how it was fired. There are many formulas whose authors are

Introduction.

now unknown. Studying the ceramic arts of ancient times is of great importance,

especially with regard to the restoration of monuments. Problems in reviving old

techniques include the lack of appropriate kilns, long-flame fuel sources and localraw materials.

M.K. Rakhimov concentrates on details such as the selection and location of

loess, how it is cleaned, made into a useable mass, and dried, and on defects in

firing, as he challenges established rules and reveals the methods of ancient

ceramic art. The task remains of determining the composition of glazes and clarify¬

ing the regime of firing and cooling. Kilns do not give even temperatures on all

levels inside. This complicates the production and colouring of architectural ceram¬

ics and in our view amounts to a production fault. Earlier, they introduced a natural

variety to the dry rhythmic composition of ornaments. Preparing new architectural

facing is a complex process using old techniques, local materials, empirical

methods and scientific recommendations. Thus new methods are constantly

infiltrating the old handicrafts, with mechanisation and other labour-saving processes.

Scientists work with Samarkand ceramics masters to adapt new techniques

to old traditions. Any monument restoration must be weather-resistant. Modern

technology and chemistry can help here. The interaction between experts and sci¬

entists enriches the process of restoration. Much remains to be done. The differ¬

ences between the restoration work and the original mirror-like surfaces, the jewel¬

like delicacy of the joints, the depth and richness of the ceramic glaze colours in

carved mosaic, and the wide variety of tiles are apparent even to the non-profes¬

sional eye. One should not be able to distinguish between the original and the

restored. The work of the old masters in painting majolica tiles or individually carved

terracotta blocks is impossible to replicate, and before restoration the question arises:

how to strengthen the dilapidated facing and restore its missing parts beside the

original, without losing the complex form of the monument. There are no absolute

answers. What works in one case does not necessarily apply in the next. Each case

is unique, but the experience of restoration can contribute to resolving this problem

in the future. Restoration is a scientific discipline. The decisive factor here is our

knowledge of the technology of preparing and strengthening architectural facingceramics.

I.I. Notkin

Chapter I. 1 1

CHAPTER I

Outline of the development of facing ceramics in thearchitecture of Uzbekistan

(from ancient times to the early 20th century)

by N.S. Grazhdankina

On the terminology and sources of architectural ceramics

Architectural ceramics may be categorised into two groups, according to thematerials used:

1 . Clay ceramics made from loess, loess soil, clays and mixtures of loess

and clay;

2. Faience made from quartz powder with clay and lime.

The form of facing ceramics varies depending on its use in decorative

construction. A detail may be made from clay or faience. However it is rare to see

forms intended for the same use but made from different materials, since the

plasticity, and structural and stylistic possibilities of comparable materials vary.

Clay ceramics of Central Asia have the following forms:

1 . Facing bricks differing from construction burnt bricks only in polishing and

facing colour.

2. Architectural terracotta which is used today. Architectural terracotta refers

to ceramic unglazed material with porous shard. Terracotta mass, depending on the

material used, has a natural or artificial colour, mostly red-orange, sometimes light

in tone1. Smooth tiles and facing tiles with relief ornaments, cut out or stamped onthe surface are included.

3. Cut glazed ceramics, in form exactly like terracotta with relief ornament,

covered with coloured matte glaze.The superficial similarity of ornament and form

of the two types of ceramics means that the second was called 'poured terracotta'.

This is not correct as terracotta, literally 'burnt soil', refers to unglazed facing

1. A.E.Filippov, S.V. Filippova, F.G. Brik. Architectural terracotta. Moscow, USSR Academyof Architecture Publishing House, 1941, p. 5.

12 N.S. Grazhdankina

ceramics, which can have any covering. The term 'poured terracotta' also is incor¬

rect when referring only to facing products with cut ornament.

4. Majolica: ceramic products with porous shard, covered by a non-trans¬

parent or transparent glaze. The shard, depending on the use of clay, can be white

or coloured2, i.e., it can have the drying of clay ceramics and a red-pale, orange

tone. Originally, majolica referred only to coloured shard under a non-transparent

glaze. The term majolica is usually associated with tile ceramics under a variegated

glaze cover and painting with ceramic colours, but majolica also includes special

facing details: tiles, cornices, stalactites, cylinders for facing columns, mosaic de¬tails and others.

Faience ceramics (architectural faience) refers only to glazed products. Here,

the type of architectural decoration dictates the material. Due to the powdered quartz

3 in faience it gives even less of a smooth finish than clay. This and the lack of

plasticity explain the lack of carved ceramics in faience. The use of faience is lim¬

ited by majolica, where it takes almost the same forms as majolica using clay.

Faience details are rarely large: stalactites and cornices are usually made

from faience mosaics. Coloured faience shards allow the extensive use of transpar¬

ent glazes, often with painting underneath, sometimes using matte glaze and in

combination with painting over the glaze. Mosaic is a special type of architectural

faience. In contrast to the usual European mosaic used today, the ornament here is

made not from single cubes differing only in colour, but from various details cut in a

special pattern, hence 'carved mosaic', which often refers to mosaic faience deco¬

ration. Ceramic mosaic refers to tile mosaic4 and majolica carved mosaic5. In

essence this is faience mosaic (in material) or carved ceramic mosaic, as in the

2 S.V. Filippova. Architectural majolica. M., State Publishing House on publication of litera¬ture on building materials. 1956, p. 3.3 The grain size of the loess and argillous material rarely exceeds 0.01 mm. As to the grainsize of quartz powder for faience is concerned in some cases it can be 0.5 mm but usuallyit makes 0.3 - 0.2 mm.

4 B.P. Denike. Architectural ornament in Central Asia. M.-L., The Publishing House of the

Ail-Union Academy of Architecture, 1939, p. 134; R.R. Abdurasulev, L.I. Rempel. Unknownmonuments of architecture of the Kashkadarya region, The art of architects of Uzbekistan.

Uzbek SSR Academy of Science, T., 1962, pp. 32-33.5 G. N. Tomaev. Carved majolica mosaic in the architecture of Central Asia. M., StatePublishing House on publication of literature on construction and architecture, 1951.

Chapter I. 13

East there are instances of the use of mosaics from ordinary clay ceramics. Be¬

sides mosaics, tiled majolica from faience includes strips with epigraphs, plants or

geometric ornaments, often with shallow relief (to 1 .5-2.0 mm) six-cornered or square

tiles for filling in large surfaces, coloured strips and bits with stone carving and

terracotta. Larger details were done for a short period (16th century) using faience

tiles. This explanation of terms shows the variety of materials, forms, and orna¬

ments. Some types of architectural ceramics lasted for many centuries, some onlyfor a short while.

The rise of architectural ceramics is connected with the desire to provide

artistic form to buildings. Earlier details were purely decorative, a simple continua¬

tion of architectural decoration from unburnt clay, seen in ancient Khorezm and

Varakhshi. Early ceramics and tiles from burnt brick usually cover crude walls. The

rise of glaze covering in architectural ceramics was partly for decorative reasons,

but was also seen as a means of protecting the building and precious ceramic tile

details from erosion. Fully covered cupolas provided a rich decorative tiled facade.

In the development of architectural ceramics in Uzbekistan, the progress in decora¬

tion and technological complexity are considered, from simple details of loess

ceramics to complex faience mosaic, the culmination of the development of ce¬ramic decoration.

EARLY CERAMIC DECORATION

The art of pottery was mastered long ago and the techniques were trans¬

ferred to architecture. The materials (ordinary loess) were plentiful. The raw clay is

easy to mould by hand6 and by the 1st century BC architectural ceramics began to

appear in decoration.

There are many examples of early ceramic decoration in the architecture of

Uzbekistan. On a silver Khorezm dish there is a fortress (6th-7th century) whose

facade is decorated with figures and the upper part of the walls shows three-pronged

teeth7. Archaeologists often find fragments of large ceramic details with these three-

pronged teeth with three-cornered or arched cut-outs in the middle, circles with

6 For more details on materials and techniques of producing architectural ceramics seeChapter 11 "The background of construction technology in Uzbekistan".7 V.A. Nilsen. Rural constructions of early feudalism in Uzbekistan. Architecturalinheritance, Issue 17, M., Publishing House for construction, 1964, p. 192, III.5.


crosses in the centre and lambdas (as on the 1st century BC Khanaka-tepa palace

building near Denau or the 5th-6th century BC Ak-tepa fortress near Tashkent. The

fragments measure 26-31 cm and 4.5-5 cm in thickness). Similar ones are found in

Kyrgyzstan. In Turkmenistan, the halls of the palace of ancient Nisa (1st to 2nd

century BC) were decorated with various terracotta details of complex forms8.

Carved terracotta tiles in half-circles with a diameter of 43 cm and a thick¬

ness of 6.8-7.8 cm were found in digs at the Vrakhsh palace (6th-8th century). At

Afrosiab in the 9th century buildings from raw brick and panels from ceramic tiles

were made with the form of an extended six-sided figure. For burnt brick floor

coverings, thin, lightly burnt right-angled and six-sided tiles with printed ornament

were used (illustrations 1 and 2). In the 8th century ceramic hearths were widely

used in house interiors, covered in stamped ornament for household, cultural and

decorative purposes9.

ARCHITECTURAL CERAMICS

IX - XIII centuries

In the 9th century facing ceramics were introduced along with the early use

of burnt brick as a wall material. Earlier buildings were built from raw brick with

revetment from burnt clay (the Kalpyridjeb mausoleum near Khodjeili), often in

combination with cut gypsum (the Rabati-Malik caravansarai near Malik). Only a

few unique buildings, such as the Samarid mausoleum in Bukhara and the Arab-ata

mausoleum in Tim were completely made from burnt brick.

The simplest type of ceramic revetment was burnt brick usually with the

same format as raw brickwork. A typical example is the Kalpyridjeb mausoleum of

the 10th-11th century near Khodjeili in Karakalpakstan. The walls are made from

square raw brick (27-28 cm x 5-5.5 cm). For the facade only the bricks whose

facing surface was carefully polished on stone were burnt. The cupola was made of

8 G.A. Pugachenkova. Architectural monuments of Nisa. Proceedings of the YuTAKE, vol.1, Ashkhabad, 1949, pp. 222-223, III. 10-11; N.S. Grazhdankina. Ancient building materialsof Turkmenistan, Proceedings of the YuTAKE, vol. VIII, Ashkhabad, 1958, p. 43, Table 8,"acanthus" column.

9 G.A. Pugachenkova. Elements of the Sogdian architecture on medieval terracottas. Pro¬ceedings of the Institute of History and Archaeology, Materials on archaeology and ethnog¬

raphy of Uzbekistan. Vol. 11, Tashkent, Academy of Science of the UzSSR, 1950, p. 47.

Chapter I. 15

burnt brick. Fiered brick was used in the monumental raw brick buildings of 9th-

10th century Kyrk-kyz in ancient Termez. At present, only a few pieces of the revet¬ment of the external walls and towers remain. Burnt brick was used in several con¬

structions in arches and coverings of windowed passages. As with raw brick, the

size is 29-34 x 29-34 x 4.5-6 cm. They were not polished. Often one feature of the

brickwork was the carving of one rib along the lower bed (the reason is explained in

Chapter II "Towards the history of construction techniques of Uzbekistan").

Facing brick, as with any ceramics fired in old kilns which do not have uni¬

formity of temperature, have varying colouration: pink, red, blue, brown, pale, yel¬

low and green. To make a uniform surface for walls in entrances, the external side

of the brick polished was covered with ochre paint. The Kalian minaret of 1127 was

covered with a lacquer similar to a salt/sun glaze. Along with the simple brick facing

covering the exterior, sometimes the inner walls were treated to extend their ser¬

vice, and decorative revetment in ceremonial buildings developed. At first this was

mainly done using brick, with the usual brickwork replaced by figurative ornamenta¬tion: smooth and relief.

Bright sunlight highlights the relief of the brickwork, as in the Samarkand

mausoleum of the 9th-10th century. Simple square brick (22.5-23 x 2.5-3 cm) cre¬

ates an impression of open work in an unusually light construction, thanks to skilled

laying in vertical and horizontal batches, and deep relief. A few figurative details are

executed from the same brick with gypsum added. The results are rings, four-pet-

aled rose windows, leaves, straight-edged, curled columns and others. In a light

gallery in the interior there are some strips carved in gypsum (illustration 3).

The same method of figurative ornamental brickwork was used in the facing

of the mausoleums of the 10th century Mir-Said-Bakhram10 in Kermina. Here the

burnt brick (21 x 21 x 2.5 cm) used to build the entire mausoleum is laid so that

beautiful geometric ornaments in strips cover the main facade. Corner columnshave relief areas of the same brick.

Thus in the facing details there are additional figurative elements besides

the burnt brick, prepared first from the brick, then cut and supplemented with gyp¬

sum. First the decorative revetment covers all the building facades and then the

decoration is concentrated on the facing, which transforms into the portal.

The interior is decorated only if intended for frequent visiting, as in the sanctum of

the mausoleums of the Samanids in Bukhara and the Sultan-Saadat in ancient


Termez. The ceramic facing in the interior, protected from the climate, is often re¬

placed by paintings on gypsum plaster and carvings in gypsum. In mosques thereare often mikhrab.

Relief brickwork from facing brick, ornamental motifs made from pieces of

brick with carved gypsum, as in the mausoleum of the Samanids, took the followingornamental forms:

1 . The composition of relief brickwork of ceramic details with gypsum served

as decorative additions to the holes and large recesses between details, ornamen¬

tation of seams between bricks, and large independent ornamental motifs of gyp¬

sum included in massive ceramic ornamentation. Ornamentation from gypsum is

carved and rarely stamped. An early example of facing of this type is to be found on

the 10th century Arab-ata mausoleum in Tim. The portal is covered with figured

brick made with carved gypsum. The side and rear facades are covered by paired

bricks (23-23.5 x 23-23.5 x 4 cm) with wide vertical seams, filled with gypsum orna¬

ments. This method was used in framing edges of the 1 2th century Yusuf ibn Kusseiir

in the Nakhichevani mausoleum and in the facing of part of the 1 1 th century minaret

in Urgent.

In the first facing of the mosque in the Khakim at-Termezi mausoleum this

method was modified: the pairs of bricks were placed tightly, without a large vertical

gap between them, but the upper corners were cut so that a free space formed,

filled with gypsum with a carved bantik. Later the wall was covered completely by

gypsum plaster with some carving of these bantik. A second plaster layer dates

from 11th century.

Paired bricks with large empty seams (26.5-28.5 x 26.5-28 x 5 cm) cover the

external walls of the 11th century Sultan-Saadat mausoleum in ancient Termez (il¬

lustration 4). Also to be included here is the trimming on the caravan-sarai portal of

the 11th century Rabati-Malik near Malik, the portal of the 12th century Magoki-

Attari in Bukhara, and the 11th-12th century Shakhi-Zinda, the remains of which

were discovered together with the nameless mausoleum No 2 in 1959. In the

composition of its revetment, there is a panel of the type found in the portal of the

Magoki-Attari mosque. The panel was made of lattice, with details cut out of brick,

and the mould filled with gypsum (illustration 5). A whole group of ceramic details for

lattices was discovered in 1958 in the digs at Afrosiab. Here also belong the inscrip-

Chapter I. 17

tions or ornaments made of ceramic details, between which lies carved gypsum, as

in the mikhrab of the 11th century Khakim at-Termezi mausoleum, the inscription on

the 12th century eight-sided Djarkurgan minaret, the strip of inscription of the 14th

century Kunia-Urgench mausoleum, and the Yusuf ibn Kusseiir mausoleum in

Nakhichevani.

2. The composition of the brickwork relief with figurative ceramic details

making up the ornamental panels, strips, and borders, the method widely used in

Uzbekistan in the 11th and 12th centuries. For example the 12th century minarets

of Bukhara and Vabkent, the lower part of the small minaret at the 1 1 th-1 2th century

Kusam ibn Abbasa mausoleum in Shakhi-Zinda, the west wall of the 12th century

mosques in Namazgakh and Magoki-Attari in Bukhara, and the 11th century mau¬

soleum in Sultan-Saadat in Termez (illustrations 6,7).

3. Terracotta with carved epigraphs and decorative ornaments used in the

simpler facing with polished, sometimes figurative brick, forming borders, belts,

separate decorative motifs as found on columns in 12th century minarets in Bukhara

and Vabkent and on minarets in Djarkurgan and ancient Termez. Most 11 th-1 2th

century architectural details covered with complex carving have been found in digs

in Samarkand. All types of facing illustrate the complexity and perfection of ceramic

art in the 11th and 12th centuries. Several traditions are involved: a well known

categorization of details of facing ceramics was created and specific methods es¬

tablished that are still recognised today. Ceramic carved mosaic developed to such

an extent during this period that it supplanted almost all earlier forms of ceramic

decoration.

The architectural facades of buildings like mausoleums, khanaki and

mosques came into being at this time. The main facade stands out, highlighted by a

portal. The portal decorations are rich, using one of the three methods or some

combination. The large surfaces of the walls, sometimes the sides, and wide strips

on the minaret columns are covered by facing tiles singly or in pairs of polishedbrick as in earlier times.

Empty vertical seams were filled not with gypsum, which did not last long,

but by special tile cross pieces made from one of the common forms called bantik.

The earliest surviving tile crosspieces are found in the mid-1 1th century Sultan-

Saadat mausoleum. The crosspieces are very strong and are found even in monu-


ments of the 1 7th-1 8th century at the Char-Bakr cemetery near Bukhara. A bantik is

a typical tile in its classical form, the upper side decorated and the underside stretched

to form a spike for attaching to the building or other tiles. The size of the facing side

is closed at a height corresponding to one or two bricks laid prone, and the width of

one brick. Rumpa in this period has three forms: a long one from 10-16 cm, linking

tiles directly with the brickwork; medium of 5-7 cm, connecting only with facing

brickwork, and short, of 2.5-3 cm fixed in gypsum at a special depth.

In the first group are tile crosspieces on the minaret of the Kusam ibn Abbas

mausoleum, on the foundations of the unnamed mausoleum No 2 beside the Shakhi-

Zinda monument and on the column of the Kalian minaret in Bukhara.Tiles of me¬

dium rumpa are found on the west face of the Namazgakh mosque in Bukhara, on

the columns of the interior of the central mausoleum Sultan-Saadat in Termez, and

in the Muzlum-khan-sulu mausoleum near Khodjeili. A short rumpa is seen in the

bantik with blue glaze found in excavation around the Kalian mosque from 1126. In

the facing of portals, the strips of basic decoration are very important, in the form of

the letter f framing the niche at the entrance.

The most important part is the inscription done in high relief with a back¬

ground of lower plant ornaments, and the strips of geometric ornament with deep

relief producing an impression of transparent latticework. An example of this orna¬

ment is found in the brick relief brickwork on the top of the azan of the Kalian

minaret, on the portal of the Magoki-Attari mosque and others. Strips are made

from separate tiles the same width as the strip.

The length of the tiles with epigraph ornament was not constant and de¬

pended on the alteration of the long Arabic letters ' ' and ' ', which determined

the size of the strip. Lattice tiles usually include one or two ornamental motifs and

are cut between them. Sometimes, for example in mikhrab of the Namazgakh mosque

in Bukhara, the lattice is found on the wall made from separate sections both trian¬

gular and square in form (illustration 8).

The transition from the plane of the portal grooves in corners of the entrance

is reinforced by ? columns, usually with a corner strip having a transverse profile of

the facing surface in the form of a flowing curve, and the reverse side in the form of

a corner. The facing surface is partly covered by carved epigraphic ornamentation.

The columns are made from separate blocks, with carving on the open surface and

Chapter I. 19

a lengthened shtrob on the reverse side to the groove, which strengthens the block

at the brick ledge in the corner of the wall. The capitals and bases of columns are

also made in the form of blocks.

The blocks of the columns are joined to each other and to the base and

capital with special keystones in the blocks in the form of deepened, gypsum-filled

material. Some columns are made of profiled horizontal tiles as thick as bricks. On

the sides of the entrance arches there are carved panels, consisting of several

elements. Arches in ancient passageways are laid with specially profiled tiles.

Tympanums in entrance niches are covered by carved tiles. In ancient

doorways and squinches (sails, most likely referring to the belt around the lower

interior of the cupola, which is shaped like a sail) in interiors as well as the azan in

minarets with their columns, a system of intricately formed stalactites is used.

Together with the intricacy of form and ornament of carved decorations arises

the necessity of filling space between strips and panels of leading ornaments and

framing them. Alongside the complex carving in facing portals or mikhrab of mosques,

and sometimes on the side facades appear two to three types of simple tiles:

1) narrow strips 2-2.5 to 3-4 cm wide, 10-20-30-50 cm long with a

rumpa of slightly wedged form 6-15 cm deep;

2) tiles of the same size and type but with the facing side having the

profile of a plinth;

3) small tiles with facing side 7-12 x 3-4 cm with a wedged rumpa,

placed 7-10 cm inside the wall. From such tiles, laid horizontally in

vertical strips and vertically in horizontal strips, are formed strips sepa

rating the main ornamental strips. Later they were made in blocks

only separated by little bricks.

Tiles of the first type served as frames of narrow strips of geometric orna¬

ments, plinths, for framing wide strip ornaments and panels. Besides their

decorative purpose, these tiles, due to the large deepening of the rumpa in the

span, served as a support for large tiles, forming ribbon ornaments. Considering

the service role of these tiles, they will be referred to as 'service tiles' (illustration 9).


On the lower part of walls there are sometimes panels of large carved plinths with

various ornaments. Continuous ceramic facing covers the outer walls of buildings.

In the interior in this period the mikhrab niches of mosques (Namazgakh in Bukhara,

Khakim at-Termezi) and paru are decorated.

The walls of interiors are often covered with paintings (Ziaratkhana mauso¬

leum Kusam ibn Abbas). No mausoleums with carved terracotta facing have

survived, though there are many fragments of this decoration that can be easily

dated from monuments in Kyrgyzstan (Uzgent) and later (14th century) mausole¬

ums whose facing preserves these forms and differs only in the continuous glazed

cover. In the 11th and 12th centuries glazed ceramic details appear in building

decoration. The first use of glaze is hard to establish, because no entire monument

from this period survives, but fragments of ceramics on tiles allow us to date theintroduction into architecture of ceramics to the 11th and 12th centuries.

Thus in the foundation of decorative columns on the facade of the left mau¬

soleum of the 11th century Sultan-Saadat, there are remains of a narrow strip of

ceramic ornament covered with blue glaze. On the minaret Kalian in Bukhara there

was a band of large tiles with painting cut in high relief (1 .5-1 .8 cm). Tiles covered in

blue opaque glaze date from the building of the minaret in 112711. The cut panels

with round carved framing in the centre, covered with blue opaque glaze, was found

in Afrosiab at the site of the mausoleum determined by M. E. Masson as the

Karakhanid Ibragim ben Khusein mausoleum (1186-1199).

At Afrosiab near the 12th century Karakhanid mosque fragments of tiles

with blue and white and sometimes manganese-cherry glaze were found, made

using a technique of limiting variegated glazes of deep cut. The tiles of this type with

complete covering of blue glaze and even geometric drawing with white and cherry

glaze with limited colours of the cutting, dated to the 11 th-1 2th centuries, were used

for laying floors, and probably for building panels in ruins near Don-aryk Chuis

district and at Sadovoi near Belovodsk in Kyrgyzstan (illustration 10).

10 Dated by G.A. Pugachenkova. The Arab-ata mausoleum. The art of architects ofUzbekistan, II, Tashkent, 1963, p.103.

11 The fragments of tiles are kept in the branch of the Bukhara Museum, in the former

Sitorai-Makhi-Hosa palace.

Chapter I. 21

Many fragments of carved terracotta with relief, partially covered with blue

glaze, were found in various districts near Samarkand and Shakhrisabz. Ribbons

with epigraph carved ornament under blue glaze frame the arches of the entrance

to the Magoki-Attari mosque in Bukhara. Thus, the use of glaze in architecture

began in the first quarter of the 12th century (Kalian minaret) and even in the 11th

century (Sultan-Saadat). The uses of glaze at this time: partial interspersion in

terracotta with carved ornament, framing in terracotta facing, completely glazed

tiles and three-colour tiles with limited shades of blue glaze of up to 5mm deep

carving.

CERAMIC FACING XIV century

The Mongol war in the 1220s delayed the development of construction in

Central Asia. New buildings began to be constructed only in the mid-1 4th century,

among them the Buian-Kuli-khan mausoleum (1358) in Bukhara, the Mukhammad-

Boshsharo mausoleum (1324-43) in Mazari-Sherif, and mausoleums in Shakhi-Zinda.

The 14th century was a time of outstanding development in decorative ce¬

ramics in Uzbekistan. It was as if ceramicists were seeking to make up for lost time

by reviving old methods and hungrily absorbing new ideas. The last quarter of the

century was especially productive as the campaigns of Temur paved the way for

vast new construction possiblities. At the beginning of the century facing ceramics

was not limited to the area of modern Uzbekistan and was developed in other partsof Central Asia.

There are many similarities with the early period: the same traditional orna¬

ment in carved tiles, though these are now fully glazed, the same principles of

assorted ceramic details completely covering the building.The facing technique of

the 1 2th century was used extensively on buildings of the 1 4th century: Mazar Manasa

in Talassk valley (Kyrgyzstan) and the minaret in Kunia-Urgench (Turkmenistan).The decorative as well as the construction traditions of the 1 1 th-1 2th centuries were

preserved. Both buildings are covered by cut terracotta, with paired bricks with

bantik crosspieces. The paintings on the bands of the minaret were done in the

11 th-1 2th12 century traditions from separate ceramic elements fixed in place with

a thick layer of gypsum solution.

12 N.S. Grazhdankina. Ancient building materials of Turkmenistan, Proceedings of theYuTAKE, vol. VIII, Ashkhabad, 1958, pp. 169-170.


The Mukhammad-Boshshro mausoleum in Tajikistan has facing of the tran¬

sition type: from terracotta to completely glazed ceramics. These are richly carved

with ornaments on terracotta in the form of traditional ribbons of epigraphs on a

background of plant weaving and open work lattice strips, framed by blue glaze

service tiles. The centres of geometric motifs were filled with deep insets now

almost completely lost. There are blue glaze covered and square crosspiece tiles

with deep relief, close in construction to Khorezm crosspieces of the 13th-14th cen¬

turies (illustration 1 1 ). Early ceramics of this period include carved four-colour glazed

facing in the interior of the ziaratkhana at the 1 331 Kusam ibn Abbas mausoleum in

Shakhi-Zinda (illustration 12).

Green-blue, faded blue, cherry and white glaze highlights delicate plant re¬

lief decoration. Of especial note are the white irises on a blue background of stalac¬

tites in the parus. At the beginning of the 14th century, the secondary facing of the

portal between the older mausoleums in the Sultan-Saadat complex in ancient

Termez was made. The character of the painting and the colour of glaze on the

variegated majolica of the portal is close to the 14th century facing ceramics on themausoleums of Shakhi-Zinda.The characteristic detail in the first half of the 14th

century in the mosaic facing of columns framing the entrance of the middle building

is identical to mosaics in Azerbaijan mausoleums of the 1320s (Barda, Karabagliar).

In both the mosaic details are mostly geometric forms made from ordinary loess

paste. These early attempts to use mosaic in architecture in the East were not

continued. The difficulty of processing clay ceramics forced builders to use ready-

made mosaics of faience, which could be easily cut.

These examples of early 14th century ceramic facing underwent a marked

development later that century.The first of the main types of facing ceramics were

carved ones fully covered in glazed details, based on the methods and traditions of

carved terracotta of the 12th century. They are so similar to each other that some

terracotta details found in digs at the necropolis of Shakhi-Zinda look factory-made

(illustration 16).

The mausoleum built in 1360 in the Shakhi-Zinda necropolis and the Buian-

Kuli-khan mausoleum (1358) in Bukhara are covered with carved glazed ceramic

facing. White, cherry, blue and green-blue glazes cover delicate carving on portals

and the interiors. The back and side facades were more modestly tiled. In a 1360

Samarkand mausoleum, they are covered by paired bricks with blue crosspieces

Chapter I. 23

in the form of bantik with short rumpa; in a Bukhara mausoleum such facing was

only on the suf (raised platform encircling the building), and on corner columns

were guldast (flower ornaments). On the sides of the Buian-Kuli-khan mausoleum

there were panels of ceramics, of which only part of the framing remains.

Carved glaze ceramics dominate the facing of several other mausoleums in

Shakhi-Zinda, but alongside the second type appearing in the 14th century: painted

majolica on clay ceramic foundation (late 14th century mausoleum attributed to the

Emir of Bukhara, the 1375-6 Tuglu-Tekin mausoleum and the 1886 Emir-zade mau¬

soleum). The range of glaze and ceramic colours in the painting increases: to the

basic four colours, yellow, green and salad-green are added. Red is rarely used,

only to cover white glaze undercoating. Black and brown are used for outlining the

contours of the figure, partly as new ornamentation, partly to preserve the glaze

from mixing during baking. From the last quarter of the 14th century gilding is used,

usually as a strip of fine foil of real gold, attached by hot or cold means to the glazedsurface.

Together with the two types of ceramics there are instances of facing using

coloured majolica on a clay ceramic foundation (late 14th century mausoleum of

master AN Nesefi in Shakhi-Zinda). In the mid-1 4th century faience appears on

facing with carved glazed ceramics and multicoloured majolica on clay foundations:at first as a ribbon with a weakly printed relief and the same square tiles (Khodja-

Akhmad mausoleum in Shakhi-zinda), later in the form of large tiled details of as¬

sembled panels (the panel on the main facade and in the interior of the 1 372 Shadi-

Mulk mausoleum in Shakhi-Zinda, illustration 13).

Later faience separates from carved ceramics and is combined only with

tiled majolica on a clay ceramic foundation, as in the unnamed mausoleum No 2 in

Shakhi-Zinda of the late 1 4th century. In its decoration there is a panel of fine faience

elements, figured faience finishing of blue ceramic latticework, large faience tiles

painted in many colours, continuous clay ceramic details, covered in multicoloured

glaze for finishing tympanums, bright gilded facing tiles on clay, ribbons of faience

tiles, and finally, eight-pointed stars and crosses on a panel or covering of a tomb.

As a leitmotif through all the decoration there are small stars formed of three

crossing strips of gold foil on all details (illustrationl 4). Further development of faience

facing in the 14th century is evident in the six-colour carved ceramic mosaic, a fine


example being the facing of the 1385 Shirin-beka-aka mausoleum. Rich facing on

the mausoleum and khanaka Tuman-aka of the early 14th century is the logicalcontinuation of mosaic facing development. The Tuman-aka mausoleum is the cul¬

mination of this development, as the later buildings of the 15th-16th centuries and

later did not add anything to this style. Let us look more closely at the placing and

composition of various forms and types of facing ceramics relating to the decoration

of portals. Traditions of the 11 th-1 3th centuries are preserved in the 14th century,and develop further.

Masters with their new, more convenient material, faience, which glazes

better than clay ceramics thanks to coloured glazes and gilding, begin to make

more intricate facing and create new methods of masking seams between details.

In the mausoleums of 1360, Tuglu-Tekin, Shadi-Mulk, Khodja-Akhmad, Emir-zade,

there are portal facings with wide strips of epigraphs on a background of fine carv¬

ing or painting, the main ornament and a deep girikh (plant ornament), resemblinga transparent latticework. Tiles of the main ornament are held by plinths.

The free space between them is filled with service tiles, imitating bricks,

placed perpendicular to the strips. The transition from the faience flatness of the

portal to the corner columns of the entrance to the niche is done with the help of

corner joint support, usually covered with carved coloured kufi. Columns are made

of separate blocks, the sidepieces of the entrance arches are covered with panels,and stalactites with stars made of rhombuses.

Details of the facing are covered with fine carving. The carving of the

ribbons on the tiles and columns on the blocks covered as much space as possible

coinciding with the borders of details to the long Arabic letters or masking with

ornament. In the Shadi-Mulk mausoleum, an intelligent method of masking seams

is used. The wide ribbon of the main ornament of an eight-petaled rosette is cut

finely in the middle. In the middle of the cut there are small circular indentations

in the tiles, where round tiles are placed with various finely drawn ornaments. In the

same mausoleum the ribbon painting is done not by carving on clay foundation, but

by a light printing on faience.

Even on the portal of the Bukhara mausoleum Buian-Kuli-khan (1358) the

traditional elements of ceramic facing are preserved, though in architectural forms it

differs from mausoleums in Shakhi-Zinda. The exception is the portal of the mauso-

Chapter I. 25

leum of the master AN, covered in unique painting of convex crosspiece ribbons of

kufi inscriptions, made of lengthened tiles and in places of joining cross-shaped

forms. In mausoleums with facing ceramic mosaics, the forms of decoration are

wide strips of epigraphs and basic ornaments composed of fine details carved

in faience. The role of service tiles is carried out by narrow strips of mosaic border

with simple unbroken or repeating ornament and small ribbons of monochrome

faience in blue, light blue or black.

Portals have facing of various types, and the columns with guldast at the

portal corners are covered with the corresponding type of facing. In mausoleums

where portals were decorated with carved glaze ceramics (1360 mausoleum in

Shakhi-Zinda) or with ceramics in combination with majolica on faience foundation

(mausoleum Khodja-Akhmad of the mid-1 4th century in Shakhi-Zinda), they are

covered with multicoloured glazed tiles with ornaments. This type of facing of guldast

is seen in the 12th century mausoleum in Uzgent. In the 14th century, only glaze isadded.

The guldast of the Tuglu-Tekin mausoleum, where the facing consists of

carved glazed ceramics with multicoloured majolica on clay foundation, are cov¬

ered with shaped majolica tiles with painting in many colours and gilding. The third

type of guldast seen in the 14th century is the facing of hollow blocks in the form of

a ? cylinder, covered in brick and organically connected with the brickwork of the

portal column, with the surface of the blocks corresponding to the decoration of the

portal. It was covered either by carved glazed tiles (Shadi-Mulk mausoleum in Shakhi-

Zinda) or with painting with ceramic colours on a smooth glazed surface (mauso¬

leum of master AN in Shakhi-Zinda, illustration 15).

Portals and the remaining facades may be richly decorated, depending on

where the monument is located or remain bare, with paired bricks and blue glazed

crosspiece tiles. Paired bricks can be whole with special carving for a crosspiece.

Sometimes they are cut in half and sharpened into a wedge (1360 mausoleum

in Shakhi-Zinda), and sometimes simple tiles with the facing side are divided by a

pair of bricks (14th century mausoleum of master AN in Shakhi-Zinda13). Cupolas

13 It is interesting to note that during repair works in this mausoleum which might be under¬taken in the 14th c. they used Dutch tiles with short ? simulating both a pair of bricks and abow" band printed with stamping on the end of the tile and covered with blue glaze.


are covered with tiles of clay ceramics. Few cupolas remain to which no repairs

have been done so it is difficult to comment on the types of facing. We can only

suppose that the old traditions of covering them with blue tiles continued.

Some cupolas were covered with large tiles with blue glaze and ornaments

on a terracotta tile foundation (Shirin-beka-aka mausoleum in Shakhi-Zinda). In the

14th century interiors were richly decorated. In the early 14th century in the

ziararatkhana mausoleum Kusam ibn Abbas of 1331, there were carved ceramics

covering the inside of the cupola and the squinch, and the walls were covered with

painting. In the Buian-Kuli-khan mausoleum and mausoleums in Shakhi-Zinda,

except for Khodja-Akhmad and Emir-zade, the interiors were covered with

variously painted and ornamented ceramics. On the lower part of the walls there

are panels separated from the rest of the wall by horizontal ornamental ribbon.

Panels consist of frames of ornaments, with a border of service tiles, with

continuous six-cornered tiles, consisting of a uniform surface, as in the Burunduk

or Shirin-beka mausoleums. Sometimes panels consist of parts finished in a sepa¬

rate form, as in the mausoleum of Ali or finished with full carved glazed ceramics,

as in the Buian-Kuli-khan mausoleum. Stalactites are made of separate blocks.

In the upper part of the walls are tiles of various forms and panels finishing the

tympanums of the arches in the squinch area and covering the inner side of cupo¬las.

The tiles are mostly of small and medium size; large ones are the exception,

as in the panels in the sides of the entrance arch and in the panels of the interior of

the mausoleum of AN, whose facing surface measures 90 x 58.5 cm, 4.8 x 5.0 cm

thick, and the height of the printed relief about 0.5 cm. Six-cornered tiles on clay

ceramic foundation do not exceed (corner to corner) 20-30 cm with sides 15-15.5

cm and 3 cm thick. In the smaller tiles, these dimensions correspond to 11, 55 and

1.5-2 cm.

The surface of the tiles is covered in variously coloured glazes and ceramic

colours. Sometimes there is gilding (illustration 18). Tiles of this type in faience are

different sizes: largest - 20.5; 10; 1.5-18 cm; smallest - 13.6; 5/ 1.5. Faience six-

cornered tiles covered in one-coloured glaze sometimes have gold drawing.Thus,

in the 14th century, architectural ceramics are represented by the following forms:

Chapter I. 27

1. Carved terracotta of the 11 th-1 3th century type;

2. Carved terracotta, sometimes covered in light blue glaze or made up of

small glazed details;

3. Carved ceramics with complete covering of glaze of four colours: light

blue, faded blue, white and cherry, and in one or the other element we can find two

or three colours of glaze. Rarely we see drawn contours of carved red ceramic

colour with a covering of relief gilding;

4. Majolica on clay ceramic foundation, including:

a) tiles of various types with one-colour or two-colour glaze - white, light

blue, faded blue, cherry, violet blue. Yellow is used only to cover painting. There are

some paintings on glaze with fine white and red lines and gilding.

b) tiles of various sizes and uses (stalactites, blocks of columns, capitols,

bases, cornices) of one colour and many coloured glazed and under-glazed paint¬

ing and gilding. The colour of glaze is light blue, white, blue, yellow, green and

salad-green, and occasionally red. This is not really glaze but the ceramic colour,

always applied to real glaze covering and which has no shine.

To prevent mixing of the coloured glazes during baking, the following meth¬

ods were used: cutting, printing of convex or deepening of the drawing, drawing

over the contour of the drawing with black, brown or red slow-melting dye. The

glaze is opaque and like enamel. Majolica designs differ in the large assortment

of motifs and a tendency to standardize details. The tiles are square, right-angled

and six-cornered. When most of the surface is covered, they have the same size

and design. An exception is large tiles on the drum (tympanum) of the mausoleum

by AN, where some of the kufi letters are drawn so that when the tiles are placed,

a design of large letters appears.

5. Majolica on faience foundation in the form of tiles, large and small details

of a group panel or panels with one-colour and multicoloured glaze coverings, with

underglaze and overglaze painting on smooth surfaces or surfaces stamped with

light relief. The glaze and ceramic colours in addition to the colours of the clay

ceramics are brown and dark green. Gold is used widely. The tendency to standard¬

ize details on faience is not common. The assortment of tiles is broad and changes

depending on the use. The ornament on painting, as on majolica on clay ceramics,

is done as one detail per tile, even if a large part of the facing is composed of these

details (Shadi-Mulk-aka mausoleum).


6. Mosaic on faience with glaze in six colours: white, blue, green, black, light

blue and gold-yellow, with traces of gilding. Occasionally pale-grey-light-blue is found

(drum of Shirin-beka-aka mausoleum) and light-cherry (tiles on the walls of the

entrance to the Khodja-Akhmad mausoleum). Red, characteristic of Khorezm and

Golden Hoard mosaics, were not used here. Fine mosaic details without glaze and

even coloured with rose coloured aquarelle are found. Sometimes faience even

has a rose colour, if it was baked at a high enough temperature.

In conclusion, we underline the characteristic trait of this period, the unusual

blossoming of skill. While not ignoring the pre-Mongol period, masters of the 14th

century developed and perfected the technique of mass production of glazed items

on clay ceramics and faience.

New forms of ceramic details appeared, all ceramic covering became more

complex and sophisticated, new forms of ornament appeared, richly coloured

contents were used, and new techniques of gilded glaze covers were used. New

methods of artistic and constructive application of various forms of architectural

ceramics were developed.

CERAMIC FACING

of the late XIV- XV centuries.

At the beginning of the 1 5th century, Uzbekistan was the site of grand build¬

ings such as the mosque ensemble of Temur in Samarkand known as Bibi-khanum,

the Ak-Sarai palace and the mausoleum Djakhangir (Khazret-lmam) in Shakhrisabz,

the Akhmad lassavi mausoleum in Turkestan. Even today the scale and richness of

the ceramic decoration are impressive. Less grand buildings such as the Gur-Emir

mausoleum in Samarkand, the mausoleum and women's khanaka of Timur

Tuman-aka in Shakhi-Zinda, the Zengi-ata near Tashkent also date from this period.

In the early 1 5th century in Bukhara, Samarkand, Shakhrisabz and Gijduvan,

Ulugbek built several large buildings with ceramic facing. The large buildings with

their many rooms could not maintain the same types and forms of facing traditional

in earlier years for relatively small, often one-room, buildings. In the new buildings,

old well-known types of architectural ceramics are used, though with new

mounting.

Chapter I. 29

An innovation of this period is the use of carved stone in facing combined

with faience and clay ceramics. A strip of glazed faience is cut in stone following

a design (Ulugbek mosque in Samarkand). There are tympanums, colossal

entrance arches, decorative panels and exterior walls panels covered with figures

with carved ornamental stone, in combination with mosaics and multicoloured

majolica.

Large surfaces of walls, portals, and trunks of minarets that needed to be

covered with facing stimulated the development of mosaics composed of tiles with

large ornaments which could be seen from afar. Mosaics consist of glazed tiles of

blue, light blue, occasionally white or green, depicting ornaments on a foundation of

polished glazed tiles of that size. The painting of the ornament was done directly on

the wall by means of 'freezing' the tiles with fast-drying gypsum paste.

The facing side of large and small tiles had three standard units, which for

each group had the same width of facing side 'a' and length of the main tile T, for

the medium about 2/3 x I, for the small - 1 = a, i.e., the small tile had a square form

of facing surface. For large tiles of the late 14th-15th century, I = 19.8-21 cm,

a = 5.5-6 cm, and in small tiles I = 17.5-18.5 cm, a = 4.5-5.3 cm.

Faience mosaics with fine festive painting were interspersed with tile mosa¬

ics composed of smooth terracotta or carved stone. Shaped tiles of multicoloured

majolica were combined with terracotta, as for example on the faceted minarets of

the main building of Bibi-khanum or on the faceted towers framing the entrance

portal of the Ak-Sarai Palace in Shakhrisabz. The same method is used for decorat¬

ing the entrance of the Ulugbek Medressah in Samarkand (1420).

Majolica on a clay ceramic foundation is used extensively during this period.

Its details preserve the appearance of the previous century, but are much larger

in scale. The size of some of them (stalactites, cornices) is so great that attaching

them to the brickwork required ceramic 'buttonholes' (petlia) and lugs on the back.

For smaller details, ceramics with paste of a special deepening of diameter 1-2 and

depth 1-1.5 cm was used.

Wide strips with decorative and epigraphic ornaments were made from large

tiles which were square, right-angled, and six-cornered. For the facing the columns

of some panels, or of arch and niche tympanums, six-cornered tiles were used,

30 M.K. Rakhimov

covered with coloured glazes and ceramic colours with lavish gilding. The orna¬

mental subject was usually placed in a frame of one detail, however, in this period

the tendency to standardize details of ceramic facing hides the traces of the many

types of facing, the lavish ornaments and many different combinations between

separate types of facing materials.

Bright colours of surface glazes, lavish gilding, huge surfaces completelycovered with various ceramics: these are the features of architectural decoration

of the late 14th and early 15th century. Even for smaller buildings covered in ceram¬

ics carved ceramics were not used. Only at great heights, in one of the upper rooms

of Ak-Sarai, is there facing of tiles with glazed light blue and white, separated from

each other by cutting, and in one of the country palaces of Ulugbek there are

exquisite examples of carved terracotta in the Chinese pavilion, used for the combi¬

nation with Chinese porcelain six-cornered tiles under white with cobalt painted

glaze (illustration 17).

Faience, widely used in mosaic, is also used in the construction of panels,

especially in interiors. Six-cornered tiles, covered in dull blue or transparent green

glaze, are framed by ribbons of mosaic bordure with delicate plant runners. Some¬

times the panel is completely covered in monochrome majolica. Smaller buildings

of the early 15th century (mausoleum and women's khanaka Temur Tuman-aka)

were completely covered with carved mosaic on faience. In the late 15th century,

as Alisher Navoi noted, a new type of building was constructed in Samarkand with

new principles as to the use of ceramic facing. This was the Ak-Sarai, now in ruins,

and the better preserved Ishratikhana mausoleum.

With the change in the architectural aspect of buildings, the facing also

changed. The heavy, vibrant, rich Timurid ceramics, so varied and dazzling in na¬

ture, gave way to fine delicate work, carefully designed ornaments and ceramic

production. On a base of one-toned, polished terracotta tiles, there are small faience

tiles with a transparent glaze of light blue or blue with four-pointed black or white

stars in the centre in harmonious combination (illustration 19).

Five-light stars and six-cornered tiles of faience under a white transparent

glaze with cobalt painting are sometimes placed among ornaments of polished

terracotta, with narrow strips of blue faience. Ribbons are unique, and mosaics

create the impression of quiet, enchanting harmony. The assortment of facing is

Chapter III. 31

unusual, clay ceramics are there only as a foundation. Exquisite faience facing in

the interiors combines with fine colourful wall paintings.

In Central Asia there are no analogous facings. There is some similarity in

the general principles of construction of mausoleum facings in the 12th and 14th

centuries in Kunia-Urgench. There the same fine ceramic mosaics are found

on a foundation of polished terracotta, but the similarity is somewhat remote. Thus,

of the wide assortment of facing ceramics in use in the late 14th to 15th centuries,

only the multicoloured majolica on clay foundation and the one-colour on faience,

used mostly in panels, tiles and carved ceramic mosaics, survived.

Carved glazed ceramics disappeared completely, and carved terracotta and

multicoloured majolica on faience with printed relief are rarely seen. However, this

more limited assortment of facing underwent extensive development and achieved

perfection. In the late 15th century, the decoration is more modest, but the more

sophisticated majolica on faience under transparent coloured glaze with under-glaze

painting is seen. During the 15th century, smooth polished terracotta plays a signifi¬

cant role in creating the background for glazed ceramics.

FACING IN THE XVI century

In the 16th century the centre of cultural life in Central Asia moved to the

capital of the Uzbek state of the Sheibanids: Bukhara. This was a period of exten¬

sive construction work: medressahs, mosques, burial vaults. Abdul-la-khan

(1557-1598) was especially active, and his name is connected with many buildings

(Khanaka Faizabad, Medressah Abdulla-khan, Madari Abdulla-khan, Kukaldash,

much of the Char-Bakr ensemble and others).

Tashkent also saw new building work: the Barak-khan medressah, Kukaldash,

the Mukhammad Abu-Bakra Kaffal-Shashi mausoleum. In Samarkand some repairs

were carried out and the Childukhtaran burial vault of the Sheibanids was built.

Compared to the techniques of the 15th century, glaze is less in use and polished

facing brick is used more. The Kaffal-Shashi mausoleum is covered with this facing

under a dull multicoloured glaze. The small one-room mosque of Baliand in Bukhara

has rich finishing in the interior, but almost no decoration on the outside walls.

The mikhrab was covered with carved ceramic mosaic and beautiful panels of fine

faience six-cornered tiles with blue and green gilded glaze, combined with painting


of the ceiling and upper part of the walls. Many trade areas and cupolas covering

street intersections do not have glaze facing.

For facing of large buildings the following architectural ceramics were used:

1 . Multicoloured majolica on faience, covered mostly with transparent glaze.

Ornaments are usually outlined with black paint, but the easily melting multicoloured

glazes (white, blue, light blue and green) often meld together, creating an unusual

variety of colour. Majolica tiles are mostly right-angled and square.

The ornament subject is not placed in the frame of one tile, but over large

areas. Even the bordure that in the 15th century was always a separate ribbon of

mosaic or majolica on a clay foundation is found here on the same tiles as the basic

ornament. The thickness of the tiles is 1 .5-2 cm and the sides vary from 20-30 cm.

A notch or cut or small round incision was made on the back of the tiles for fixingthem to the walls.

As before, six-cornered tiles with monochrome glaze and gilding are used

(illustration 20). The type of panel found on the balconies in the centre of the

outside portal of the Abdulla-khan medressah in Bukhara was made of faience

six-cornered tiles covered with white glaze with cobalt painting. The tiles are copies

of porcelain six-cornered tiles from the Chinese pavilion of Ulugbek's chinnikhana.

This is the only example of this.

2. Tiles of various forms and sizes: from large ones with light blue glaze for

facing cupolas (Barak-khan Medressah in Tashkent, Mir-Arab Medressah in Bukhara,

Khanka Abdulla-khan in Char-Bakr and others) to small ones, from which the

geometric ornaments in Char-Bakr are made, with their glaze of blue, light blue,

white, yellow and black. The material used is faience, occasionally cut from clay (on

the facade of the medressah Kukaldash in Tashkent).

3. Cut ceramic mosaic on faience used for decorating portals of some build¬

ings (Char-Bakr) and for constructing panels (Samarkand, Childukhtaran); the latter

are assembled from mosaic, with the size of details increased and the ornament

made geometric (gurkhana in the Medressah Mir-Arab, the interior of the mosque

Khodja-Zainuddin in Bukhara, the mosque in the Kusam ibn Abbas mausoleum

in Samarkand).

Chapter I. 33

4. Smooth polished terracotta tiles forming geometric designs bordered by

thin ribbon of glazed tiles, as on the side facade of the Khanaka Khodja-Kalian

(Char-Bakr). Terracotta details of this type are found on the ornamental panels and

tympanums of arches on portals of this Khanaka, but here narrow ribbons of glazed

faience of blue and light blue separate them. This method, finished with eight-pet-

aled blue rosettes of faience and half rosettes, is used in the Abdulla-khan Medressah.

The connection with the facing style of Ishratkhana is clear (illustration 21).

5. Facing of polished brick. This short list of architectural ceramics of the

16th century suggests that there was less variety as compared to the 15th century.

The ambitious building projects of the 16th century stipulated specific facing.

Multicoloured gilded majolica on clay ceramic foundation fell out of use, as did other

forms of glazed ceramics on the same foundation. Faience was widely used.

Indeed the 16th century could be known as the century of architectural faience.

Glazes of a chemical composition similar to faience and its relatively high porosity

suit faience tiles better than clay. Glazing faience resulted in less damage to details.

During this period, facing of polished terracotta develops with faience en¬

crustation, but it does not achieve the level of originality of late 15th century facing,

though in some cases it is very beautiful (as on the Abdulla-khan Medressah). There

is a decline in the quality of carved ceramic mosaic; the fine detail, exquisite lines

and colours of the 14th and 15th centuries are lost and only occasionally recall the

past level (Baliand mosque).

CERAMIC FACING IN THE XVII - XXth centuries

Despite the economic decline of the 17th century, work continued on monu¬

mental buildings with ceramic facing. In Bukhara the ensemble of Nadir-Divan-begi,

the Grand Medressah Abdulazis-khan, the Djuibari-Kalian Medressah, and several

burial vaults at the cemetery Char-Bakr and others were built.

In Samarkand, Nadir-divan-begi built the Namazgakh mosque and Khodja-

Akhrar Medressah, and lalangtush the ruler of Samarkand, built two medressah at

the Registan: Shirdor and Tilliakari. Near Samarkand the mausoleum Khodja Abdu-

Birun was built. The facing on these buildings is not nearly as fine as that of earlier

periods. The buildings of Bukhara, with the exception of the Abdulazis-khan

Medressah, are not fully covered with ceramic. For example, at the 17th century


Djuibari-Kalian Medressah only the portal is covered with ceramic mosaic. In the

ensemble Nadir-divan-begi, the decorations on the main facade are minimal. Faience

is much less in evidence, used only for mosaics, while tiles and majolica are made

only of clay. The glaze colours are crude and bright: yellow, green, light blue.

The ornament paintings are no longer as delicate.

The Abdulazis-khan Medressah is of superior quality, an example of com¬

bining virtually all types of architectural decoration. Ceramics here are seen

in mosaic brickwork using tiles, coloured mosaic on faience and majolica of an

original type with relief ornaments, where from right-angled tiles, large panels are

assembled with a uniform subject, often on separate tiles.

The majolica and ceramic mosaics are done in yellow and green, and

appear too bright, without the former richness of tone. The glaze, especially in ma¬

jolica, does not shine well. The ceramic decoration of Samarkand buildings, in par¬

ticular the Shirdor Medressah, is closer to past traditions. The mosaic facing

of tympanums and the main portal is done in rich colours: blue, white, green, light

blue, black and especially gold-brown with a wide range of transitions from very

bright to deep dark tones.

The fine ornament and shiny glaze mosaic ensembles on the walls of the

medressah recall the best of the 1 4th-1 5th centuries. The tile mosaics have changed

somewhat: the tiles are much smaller and are assembled in separate blocks on the

building area, which are then used to strengthen the walls. They are not separated

from each other by seams, but are closely laid edge to edge on the glazed sides.

Majolica is prepared as in the 15th century.

The facing of the Tilliakari Medressah is in the same style, but the quality is

much worse: the colours are either faded or too sharp, the glaze is duller. The

gilding, from which the medressah derived its name, is made from false gold, unlike

in the 14th-17th centuries. In the Khodja-Akhrar Medressah, the foundations of the

facing small-format tiles are made of bright white high quality faience.

The 17th century did not have strong traditions and brought few innovations

to architectural ceramics. Masters turned to the past: at the Char-Bakr cemetery

near Bukhara, we find facing of paired bricks, with crosspieces of the type of primi¬

tive bantik. The small minaret is faced with a brickwork relief of unglazed tiles.

Chapter I. 35

The minaret Gaukushan in Bukhara, built in the late 16th and early 17th century,

tries to imitate the Kalian minaret. There was little construction in the 18th century,

though things did pick up towards the end of the century until the early 20th century.

Khiva, ruined by fighting, was rebuilt, and many new buildings were constructed in

Bukhara and other cities.

Ceramics were the main form of decoration, but did not aspire to the levels

of the 14th-1 6th centuries. Styles of facing were mixed and clear principles

of ceramics construction on buildings no longer existed; they were decided accord¬

ing the whim of the builder or client. The collection of ceramics lost its traditional

forms. The colours and quality of glaze declined sharply. In the Namangan mauso¬

leum Khodjamni Kabri of the late 18th century there was an attempt to revive the

carved terracotta of the 12th century and the carved glazed ceramics of the 14th

century. However, despite the relatively successful carving, the master covered it

with glazes of dark green, orange-red and light blue, destroying the harmony of the

facing.

In the country palace of the last Bukhara emir Sitorai-Makhi-Khosa (1914-

1917), the second portal is covered with mosaics of faience tiles, and the glaze

includes raspberry-red, unusual for Central Asia. One of the larger buildings of the

late 19th century is the Khudoiar-khan Palace in Kokand. It has a complete ceramic

facing, made from small majolica tiles, with some examples of multicoloured painted

majolica. The glaze colours are bright and sharp: blue, light blue, red, white, yellow,

dark green, terracotta. The durability of the facing ceramics is not high. Poorly baked

red tiles disintegrate in frost.

Only the Khiva buildings of the 1 9th century deserve mention for their stylis¬

tic unity of facing, of terracotta and majolica on clay ceramic foundation. The ma¬

jolica is mostly covered in white glaze, the ornaments are outlined in black, and

separate elements of ornaments are covered in blue, light blue and occasionally

green glazes. Ornamental subjects are often found on large areas composed of

square and right-angled tiles. To avoid mistakes in positioning the tiles on the walls,

they were often numbered.

This was done previously though not consistently. Numbers or marks were

made on the back. On 19th century Khiva majolica, numbers were written on the

glazed side in blue on white. The numbers became part of the ornament. The 19th


century Khiva glaze is noted for its less shiny finish, dryness and lack of clarity of

colours, and the paintings on majolica for their few details, which sometimes merged

together with the glaze. From the 17th century, there was a decline in facing

architectural ceramics. In a few cases, such as the Shirdor Medressah or partly

in the facing of the Khodja-Akhrar Medressah in Samarkand, ceramics attain

the level of the 15th century.

Occasionally there are flashes of brilliance in some details of later facing but

for the most part facing loses its former artistic quality. Already the striving for the

new seems to be over; there are no improvements. Masters only repeat the work

of their predecessors, and none too faithfully. Carved ceramic mosaics are not found

after the 17th century. In the mosque Khazrat-Khyzr in Samarkand, the entrance

portal and minaret are covered by gypsum plaster painted with dyes of many colours

under facing tiles.

In conclusion, let us recall the characteristics that each period brought to the

development of architectural facing ceramics in Uzbekistan. Before the 10th

century there is a period of searching, when ceramics are only occasionally

included in building decoration, sometimes as a substitute for or in combination with

natural details. In the 10th century ceramic facing becomes an established part

of decoration, starting with facing brick and brick details. Later, it becomes more

sophisticated, with the use of carved gypsum, and in the 12th century it becomes

central to decoration, predominating building covering.

Without colours at their disposal for expressing artistic designs, masters

refine their work in the artistic processing of ceramics, achieving a remarkable level

of quality. In the 12th century glazes begin to appear in architectural ceramics,

outlining and highlighting the beauty and refinement of carved ornaments.

The 14th century is a time of bright, multi-faceted development of architec¬

tural ceramics, characterized by the widespread use of glaze and the creation

of new types of ceramic facing, reaching a zenith of unique standardization of fac¬

ing ceramic details that began even before the Mongol period. The variety of types

of ceramics, the richness and care taken in their production attests to the high skill

and artistic taste of ceramicists of that time. In the 15th century, the amount

of monumental construction increases the demand for fashionable ceramic facing.

The huge quantity of ceramics is accompanied by great skill in finishing and

Chapter II. 37

individuality in architectural style. There is an exaggerated splendour and richness

of detail, but towards the end of the century a new delicacy and reserve emerges.

The 16th century is the period of architectural faience. Masters for the most part

used material that was more efficient and complex than clay ceramics. Facing is

reserved and individual, slightly less impressive than earlier ceramics. The 17th

century introduces nothing new, maintaining the previous level. Later we see the

slow decline of ceramics and expertise.

Our historical heritage is of great value and attests to the great creative skill

of the people who managed to produce such artistry in difficult conditions.

Chapter II. 39

CHAPTER II

Towards a history of construction techniques of Uzbekistan(The technology of facing ceramics production and their

qualitative indicators) by N.S. Grazhdankina

CLAY CERAMICS

The production method for all types of clay ceramics is essentially the same.

We can therefore look into the selection of raw material and the preparation of the

clay mass for facing brick, architectural terracotta and glazed items all together,

noting any exceptions. The many chemical analyses of clay ceramics of different

types and eras from the earliest 1st and 2nd century BC clay ceramics to the 19th

century show that loess is used, a material which is available throughout Central

Asia. The coarse sand only needs to be removed when preparing ceramics with

fine carving.

The preparation process has been preserved in a few places. After careful

separation of the surface soil and cultural remains, a hole is dug with ketmen (hoes),

water is poured in and the soil thoroughly mixed to create a fine mixture. Water is

poured in from time to time to wash the salt from the soil. The mass is stored over

the winter in piles so that it freezes, which helps to loosen the soil. Lengthy process¬

ing of the soil (freezing, soaking, hoeing) improves the future mass as has been

proven: crumbling increases the plasticity and density of the mass and the longevity

of the tiles. Removing the salt guarantees the absence of salt residue during

baking, and reduces the moisture content of the mass. To reduce residue deforma¬

tions of early ceramic details, some adobe was added.

To prepare the mass for carved ceramics, fine straw and horsehair were

added to prevent cracking, especially for fine relief work. For very fine relief work

reed fluff is sometimes added, especially in the production of fine pottery. Bricks


from ancient times were formed in frames on a flat area. The mass was packed into

the frame, cut with a wooden bar or by hand, and carefully removed. If the mass

was very plastic, then pressing it into the frame makes part of the mass flow out of

the form, forming a distinct edge on one or the other side. This helps determine how

it was made. In 9th-10th century clay ceramics this was carefully cut away with

a knife, later it was ignored. Sometimes ceramics were simply cut with a knife out of

a mass of plastic clay.

Separate ceramic details of the early period were formed like brick. Thus,

the merlons of Khanaka-tepa in Surkhandarya province were made in bottomless

moulds from well-prepared mass with a lot of adobe. The mass was rather liquid

and often flowed out of the moulds. The merlons in the Ak-tepa fortress near Tashkent

were cut from the plastic mass, not strengthened clay, sometimes using moulds.

The formed mass was strengthened with some adobe, introduced to preserve the

mass from cracking during drying. Brick and large details were dried on the platformwhere the bricks were formed.

Simple details of ceramic facing of 11 th-1 2th century clay ceramics (small

bars, baffles, plinths) used to make unique latticework with nests made of carved

gypsum were simply cut from baked brick. Large figured details (the main part

of the braids on portals of the caravanserai Rabati-Malik) were cut from dried unbaked

brick. Small parts of ornaments with figures were usually cut by a knife from slightly

strengthened raw mass.

This is the same for tiles and crosspieces. The exception is the Kalian mina¬

ret which was finished with baked brick, similar to monuments in Turkmenistan.

Layers (courses) of clay, from which all types of ceramics were cut, were specially

prepared. The well mixed clay mass was spread in a layer of necessary thickness

on a stone or wooden sheet with bars placed on the sides. The clay was sometimes

rather liquid, as suggested by water bubbles in the material.

After leaving it in a dark place, from one to four days depending on the

temperature of the air, the clay was cut into pieces of the necessary size, beaten out

with a stone or ceramic punch to make them compact, after which the item was

finished and dried to the point when handling would not produce deformations.

On the facing surface, a net was marked for cutting the relief. After complete drying,

the item was baked. Cutting out complex two-plan ornaments on raw clay required

Chapter II. 41

great mastery and care. The water content of the clay had to be constant. Remains

of carvers' instruments suggest the mass was firm during cutting. To prevent over-

drying of unfinished items during breaks in the work, the items were covered with a

damp cloth. The drying of cut items was done where evaporation would not occur

too rapidly. The traces of the assisting net used for carving the drawing are notice¬able on most terracotta.

The foundations for the glazed items were prepared in a similar way. If the

items were produced as a series, the clay mass was cut with a form after beating.

The forms were not identical, so almost all items were further worked on after bak¬

ing. If the glaze was limited to the side (bortik) or the cut surface, then the partially

dried surface was stamped with the relief, and afterwards shliker (baking glaze)

was poured or the carving of grooves using a form was done.

The foundations of glazed tiles for facing cupolas and walls was cut from

layers of formed mass (16th-18th centuries) or attached from raw lightly processed

clay with the help of smooth rulers (14th-15th centuries). Using the latter method,

standard sizes were hard to maintain, thus almost all glazed tiles of this time have

traces of reworking after baking. Dried items were baked in the kilns as were the

bricks. The temperature and degree of baking was different in various parts of the

kiln. On analysis the temperature of baking ceramics has been determined to be

8507-1 200?C, usually 9007-1000? C.

Red under-baked tiles are often seen, while one rarely finds over-baked or

charred tiles. The widely varying shades are evidence of the uneven temperatures

in kilns, which meant that non-glazed items, especially facing brick and tiles, had to

be painted after baking with ochre paint to give a building a uniform colour. There

are traces of red and yellow paint on carved terracotta. After baking, the reworking

was done, probably on-site. Unglazed tiles were prepared from burnt bricks and

fortified by making an incision in two parts, a crude rumpa podteska, and polishing

the surface. The facing side of facing brick was polished, and parts of the sides

were lightly polished.

Glazed items were reworked after the second and final baking: they were

trimmed and polished on the sides to make the facing side the necessary size.

Earlier prepared glaze was ground into a powder to prepare the shliker, and

dissolved in water to the consistency of cream. If the surface was covered in a glaze


of one colour, it was simply dipped in shliker and dried. When the glaze cover was

applied to only part of the item or when various coloured glazes were used at once,

the shliker was applied by brush.

Carved glazed ceramics with epigraphic ornaments were mostly painted in

two colours to highlight the letters. The method of glaze production was as follows:

to produce white letters on a blue or light blue background, the carving with the

lower relief was covered with shliker last with the corresponding colour using

a brush, trying to avoid covering the surface of the letters of the higher relief.

After absorbing the moisture, white shliker was painted on the letters of the

higher relief. The surface of the ceramics with short one-plan relief was covered

completely with shliker, used for covering the deeper part of the relief, while the

shliker of the second colour was applied by brush on top of the first, also after

absorbing moisture. In the Shakhi-Zinda digs in 1961, a fragment of carved ce¬

ramic with a thin, possibly printed relief was found. Ceramics were first covered by

light blue glaze, then the contours of the relief were outlined with red lines, blue

glaze was poured in the deeper part, and then after baking the relief was covered in

gold foil. The facing surface of the majolica was polished on a stone after the first

utility baking. Sometimes the sides were tapped along the contour of the lower

edge for better adhesion with the paste.

The prepared surface tiles were dipped in glaze shliker forming the back¬

ground of the painting. Usually two colours were used: white or blue. After the ex¬

cess moisture from the shliker was absorbed by the ceramic, black paint was used

to outline the drawing and the under-glaze painting was done. Often on a white

background the parts of the drawing which were to remain white or be covered by

gilding were left open, while the rest of the surface was covered with blue glaze or

the painting was done in green, light blue, salad green, violet or black colours.

Red was occasionally used to cover fine details or for drawing contours, usually

where sheets of gold foil were to be attached.

The second glazing baking was usually done at a lower temperature than

the first, depending on the content and plasticity of the glaze. Lead glaze melts at

720 C, so the second glazing baking required this temperature, while the basic

baking required a temperature of 900-950 C. After cooling, the gilding was done.

Pure gold was spread in a fine foil, and sheets were attached to the prepared places.

Chapter II. 43

When hot gilding was used, the ceramic was lightly baked (similar to the modern

muffling) at a temperature of 500-600 C. The glaze softens and the gold is ab¬

sorbed into it. The cold method requires gluing the gold foil using organic glues of a

complex content. The hot method is more durable.

The last stage of the process is polishing and trimming to make the ceramic

the exact size. The basic material for glaze (40-60%) is quartz (Si02). There are

quartz mines in Uzbekistan which are still in use for preparing glass. The best known

is Chupan-ata near Samarkand, Maisk near Tashkent and Darbazinsk near Darbaz

station.

M. K. Rakhimov says that the Kaidaronsk and Lakkonsk sites in the Fergana

province1 were also important. The best sand is found in Maisk and Chupan-atinsk.

Darbaz sand contains impurities. Apart from quartz sand, quartzites can be used to

produce glaze. They are also widely available in Uzbekistan. Quartzites are found

in Chupan-ata, and often contain iron. They are also found in Ziaddin, Almalyk and

Aktash (near Tashkent). The second main component of glaze is alkali. This is

produced from ashes of plants found in the desert and steppe zones. Their ashes

contain up to 50% alkali, primarily sodium. Magnesium, calcium, amorphous sili¬

cate and even gypsum are used in small quantities.

Some amount of plastic clay is added, improving the quality of glaze shliker

and making it compatible with the shard, as are limestone and dolomite for increas¬

ing plasticity. To make the glaze less shiny, which is necessary when applying it to

a red-brown clay foundation, tin (stannic oxide) is mixed into the glaze; to give

the glazed surface a bright shine and allow baking at a lower temperature, lead is

added. Lead glazes melt at 700? C. Besides lowering the temperature of baking,

lead gives the ceramic colour a special clarity.

White glaze is made from a mix of the following components: for colour

glazes, mineral dyes are used (copper oxides for light blue, manganese for cherry-

brown). Copper ores are mined in Uzbekistan, Armenia, and Kazakhstan. In the

9th-10th centuries, copper was mined in the Kara-Mazar mountains near Almalyk,

1 M.K. Rakhimov. Artistic ceramics of Uzbekistan. Tashkent, PH of the Uzbek SSR Acad¬

emy of Science, 1961, p.34.


in llak2 (Akhangaran river and Chirchik), Fergana and the Chu river valley3.

Managanese was mined in the Chatkal mountains and near Chupan-ata nearSamarkand. Lead-silver mines existed near llak and the western Tian Shan foot¬

hills. Lead and copper were mined in the Kani-Gut mine on the north slope of the

Turkestan range4 and in the Fergana province5. Tin was mined till the end of the

12th century in the Zerabulak-Ziaddin mountains6.

Materials for the glaze were sorted, ground, measured out, mixed and again

ground. The alkali and quartz were melted together first, then tin, lead and colour

were added. The ready glaze was carefully ground and mixed in water to produce

the shliker. During the 1 1 th-1 2th centuries, lead-sodium-tin-silicate glaze, or in other

words, alkali-lead-tin was used.

Samarkand glazes, used for covering certain details of ornaments of carved

terracotta and majolica tiles, were coloured with copper oxide for a light blue colour.

The presence of iron was not a special addition but present in the ore, giving the

glaze a light green shade. Cherry colour glazes were made with manganese at that

time; white ones had no dye added. Bukhara glazes of the 12th century were simi¬

lar, only one glaze from the belt of the figure on the Kalian minaret differs from the

Samarkand glazes by a high lead content and a low alkali content.

The light blue belt on the column of the Sultan-Saadat mausoleum in old

Termez and the bantik on the portal belongs to the low-lead alkali-tin formula. Early

glazes in Shakhrisabz and old Merv are similar to the Samarkand ones. Almost all

early glazes differ from later ones in their excellent quality, beautiful shine, and

glassy, even, well-baked mass. The intermediate layer between the foundation and

the glaze is not clear and consists of a thickness of less than 0.1 of the thickness of

the glaze layer. The layer of the glaze is not stable and for different items, changes

2 llak - the llak district of Maverannakhr included almost the entire valley of the Akhangaran

River and a part of the left bank of the Chirchik River. The History of the Peoples of Uzbekistan.Vol. I, Tashkent, Publishing House of the UzSSR Academy of Science, 1950, p. 225.3 O.I. Islamov. The origin of the geological knowledge in Central Asia. Essays on the historyof geological studies on Central Asia. Tashkent, Publishing House of the UzSSR Academyof Science, 1956, pp.39-40.

4 Ibid. p. 39.5 M.Ye. Masson. The background of the mining art on the territory of Uzbekistan. Tashkent,1953, p. 17.

6 O.I. Islamov. The origin of the geological knowledge in Central Asia, p. 40.

Chapter II. 45

in the range of 0.1-2 mm. In deep reliefs, glazes are up to 4 mm thick. The hardness

on the Moos scale is class 7 (quartz), with the exception of one Afrosiab light blue

glaze, having a hardness of 6 microklin (microquoins). A hardness of 7 (maximum

for quartz glazes) attests to the high quality of early glazes. The melt temperature of

early glazes was 700-710 C.

Glazes for carved ceramics and tiles in the 14th century were opaque and

mostly had a good shine. Their surface was covered in a network of hair-like

fissures.The hardness of the glaze on the Moos scale was class 67. Using spectral

analysis, these glazes are found to relate to the same type as the early alkali-lead-

tin glazes. The melt temperature was 700-850 C. Light blue glaze used copper,

cherry (manganese), blue (cobalt) and copper. A faded shade resulted from mixing

a damper (tin and lime). White glaze and its shades (pink or yellow) depended on

the natural impurities in the raw material (iron, manganese). Different coloured glazes

on majolica in the 14th-15th centuries were mostly opaque due to the introduction

of a damping agent. Only blue glaze on a white foundation was transparent. This

glaze was a dark shade, and remained transparent even on tiles without masking

the natural colour on the foundation, while the bright glazes were carefully made

duller.

Dyes for blue and light blue glazes were the same as for carved ceramics.

To obtain yellow iron was used and for cherry and black, manganese. Iron with an

admixture of aluminium oxides gives a red-brown tone. Sometimes, yellow is

achieved by chrome combined with iron. Local dyes used malg'ash (ore contain¬

ing iron and chromium oxides). To produce red, ferriferous ochre was used, easilyobtainable in the mountains of Uzbekistan. Green combines iron and copper. Salad

green was achieved with a two-layer cover of light blue and yellow glaze. The same

technique was used in Khorezm and by the Golden Horde. The baking temperature

is the same as for carved ceramics, but the over-glaze colour was baked at a lower

temperature (700C). The hardness is class 6 on the Moos scale. Preserving their

high blue cobalt glazes through the centuries changes the colour to dirty-yellow or

brown. Clay ceramics differ in their longevity. Under-baking results in deterioration

from frost if they are in the open air, and from salts if the level of the ground water

is high. The physical-mechanical indicators of under-glazing of clay facing ceramics

is proof of their high quality, as shown in the table.

7 The mineralogical hardness scale includes 1 0 minerals. Hardness is established by scratch¬ing of the glaze with minerals. The hardness class determines the mineral which producesa scratch mark on the glaze.


Physical-mechanical indicators of under-glazing of clay facing ceramics:

Ceramic Baki

ng

tempera-

ture

(°C)

Contents Specificgravity

(g/cm3)

Water

conten

t (%)

Strengthwhen

dry

compres

sed

(kg/cm3)

Strengthwhen

wet

compres

sed

(kg/cm3)

Reducti

on of

strengthfrom

wetness

(%)Details of 1st

centurydecoration

800-

900

Loess with adobe 1.41-

1.47

23.3-

26.0

210-245 110-181 19-21

Facing brick10th- 13 th

century

800-

950

Loess with adobe 1.46-

1.64

22.1-

26.0

106-240 84-226 4.6-31

Carved

terracotta

12,h-13'h

century

750-

1000

Loess cleaned of

large impur-ities; infine carved tiles

hair, wool or reedfluff

1.39-

1.55

27.50-

31.83

95-260 92-253 2.7-28.6

Carved

ceramics with

partial glazedornaments

12th- 13th

century

900-

950

Ditto 1.62-

1.92

12.10-

15.92

325-452 318-445 1.5-2.2

Glazed

majolica 12th-13 century

900-

1000

Loess 1.45-

1.46

28.40-

31.33

117-169 65-160 5.4-44.5

Carved glazedceramics

14th century

850-

950

Loess cleaned of

large impurities; infine carved tiles

hair, wool or reedfluff

1.34-

1.53

12.44-

25.70

211-438 155-279 23.3-

49.8

Majolica onclay ceramicfoundation

14th century

850-

1000

Loess 1.34-

1.70

21.1-

26.8

119-582 87-193 26.88-

51.3

14"1 centurytiles

850-

950

Loess 1.30-

1.58

22.8-

394

22-77 17-46 2.64-

41.3

Majolica onfaience

foundation

14,h century

950-

1200

Quartzite, clay andlime

Majolica onfaience

foundation

14th century

950-

1150


1.50-

1.58

20.50-

30.10

82-165 15-124 8.5-25.0

Majolica onclay ceramicfoundation

15th century

900-

950

Loess 1.55-

1.70

16.25-

27.67

122-340 111-300 9.0-23.2

15 th centurytiles

800-

950

Loess 1.38-

1.63

20.46-

28.90

88-307 71-232 8.0-31.5

Chapter II. 47

Majolica onfaience

foundation

15th century

1000

1100


1.44-

1.68

6.00-

23.6

48-135 27-128 5.2-43.7

Majolica onfaience

foundation

15 th century

950-

1150


1.59-

1.75

19.18-

38.0

63-238 52-347 17.0-

47.6

Majolica onfaience

foundation

16th century

900-

1100


1.60-

1.83

16.3-

26.5

53-130 34-101 12.2-73

Majolica onfaience

foundation

16th century

900-

1100


ÍDO¬

LOS

17.0-

59.0

43-174 22-120 29.2-

48.9

Tiles on

faience

foundation

16th century

900-

1100

Quartz sand, clayand lime

1.61-

1.88

11.40-

20.6

29-155 18-100 10.10-38

Tiles on clayceramic

foundation

17th century

900-

1100

Loess 1.43-

1.67

21.17-

22.30

70-155 60-91 16.0-

35.8

Mosaic on

faience

foundation

17th century

950-

1150


1.45-

1.47

21.3-

25.1

102-223 14.5-

41.00

Majolica on

clay ceramicfoundation

1 9th century

850-

950

Loess, sometimeswith added sand

1.67-

2.04

13.89-

22.3

18-92 17-92

Majolica onfaience foun¬

dation bySamarkand

master in

1961 for rest¬

oring portal ofShirdor

Medressah

See "Experience ofSamarkand ceramic

masters"

0.0-41.2

Materials of earlier ceramic decoration and architectural terracotta, like the glazed

majolica of the 9th to 12th centuries, in most cases exceed the demands of contem¬

porary bricks of mark 100 and 150. Ceramics of the 12th and 13th centuries with

partial glazing benefited from the innovations and are very durable and do not dete¬

riorate even when exposed to water and frost.14th century carved ceramics, as

with majolica on clay ceramic foundation, are noted for their durability and excellent

features, though they are surpassed by earlier partial glazed ceramics.The 15th


century produced outstanding examples of majolica and tiles on a clay ceramics

foundation. Glazes on this majolica are the same as 14th century ones. White and

light blue glazes, yellow, red and salad green ceramic colours are opaque as a

result of the dulling effect of tin and lime.

Blue glaze is always transparent except when over-baked and mixed with

a dull white under-layer. Clay ceramics in the 17th century had a high durability.

The glazes and ceramic colours are as in the previous period. The materials used in

the 18th century have not been tested, but the degree of durability, despite their

poorer artistic quality, is high.

19th8 century majolica has average durability indicators but excellent firm

mass. Multicoloured Khiva majolica was completely covered with white crystal engobe

before the first baking, on top of which ornaments were drawn in black or dark

green slow-melting colour. After baking, the cooled tiles were covered with colour.

The foundation was decorated with blue cobalt glaze, using brushes (as the dabs

clearly show) creating an uneven colour. The white figured ornament was left open,

then the entire tile was covered with clear alkali glaze.

After baking, a clear glaze resulted: sometimes shiny, sometimes dull. All

the glazes of this time, with a few exceptions, were alkali. Lead was added in only

small amounts to the raw material or colour. The hardness of the glaze was usually

6. Crosspiece tiles in the form of bantik in the Tash-Khauli (Khiva) were covered by

dark green dull glaze with hardness 7, and one example of majolica with glaze

coating has hardness of only 4, clearly a defect. 19th century majolica of the facing

of Khudoiar-khana in Kokand has bright colours, a fine shiny glaze, hardness for

light lube, white and yellow at 6, and for blue 7. Glazes have lead in their colours.

White parts of ornaments are made with transparent, colourless glaze on

white engobe applied roughly. Comparing the indicators of architectural clay

ceramic foundations with the indictors of contemporary architectural ceramics

demonstrates that the former had very high durability for facing ceramics. This is

explained by the carefully prepared raw material: better mixing, maintenance, sealing

and baking.

8 Physical and mechanical rates of the 19th c. majolica have been determined using asmall number of tests in contrast to materials of the 10th - 16th cc.

Chapter II. 49

CERAMICS ON FAIENCE FOUNDATION

Faience ceramics have a special place in Central Asian architecture. Start¬

ing in the 12th century (Khorezm, Azerbaijan, Iran), it grew in importance until the

16th century. In the 17th century it became secondary to clay ceramics. Features

such as bright tiles with high durability, easy moulding and good fusing with its glaze

covering, made faience excellent material for public buildings. Its relatively high

cost as compared with clay ceramics because of the higher temperature of baking

and labour intensiveness were not barriers to its wide use, since there were less

defective results.

In contemporary classification, faience belongs to soft faience lime material,

and the historical faience differs from that used today. Faience consists of quartz,

clay and lime. In Samarkand and Shakhrisabz it contains 75-85% quartz and 25-

15% clay and lime (in half proportions). Faience of this content is also found in

Azerbaijan; Bukhara faience contains more quartz, less lime and clay, and is closer

to the high silicate faience of Khorezm9.

The technological process of preparing faience facing details is as follows:

quartz ingredients in the form of quartzite in lumps, quartz pebbles or sand contain¬

ing up to 90-95% silicate and small admixtures of calcium, magnesium, iron and

clays, are baked in the ceramic kiln or simply on a fire till they crack, then are

beaten with hammers into sand and ground to pieces of 0.1-0.3 mm. In some faience,

particles up to 0.5 mm are found, but nothing larger.

The smallest particles are like dust. Lime and fine white clay particles are

dissolved in water, resulting in quartz powder. Depending on the amount of clay

added, a more or less plastic mass is achieved, never achieving the plasticity of

clay mass10. It has a lower formative consistency, which means that forming somesorts of vessels requires pressing the mass on wooden forms, sometimes covered

with cloth. Facing ceramics of faience mass usually are prepared without a form.

The forming mass is spread on boards, smoothed out, and cut with a knife as nec-

9 N.S. Grazhdankina Techniques of chemical and technological researches into ancientceramics. Archeology and Science. M., Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sci¬ence, 1965, pp.1 59-1 60.

10 N.S. Grazhdankina. Techniques of chemical and technological researches into ancientceramics, p. 158.


essary. Drying does not present the problem of clay drying, thanks to the hard quartz.

Thus with faience there are never traces of organic impurities. It requires double

baking: first, a utility baking at 1000-1200 C, then the glaze baking at lower tem¬

peratures depending on the melting point of the glaze.

Faience usually bakes yellow or white; pink and red indicate the tempera¬

ture was too low. In the 14th-15th centuries pink faience was rare, in the 16th-17th

centuries it was common. The durability of the faience depends not only on the

temperature of baking, but on the density of the mass. Porous material of up to 45%

moisture does not allow complete baking of its mass, as it sticks to the glass-like

melt only where it touches it directly. This makes for brittle faience, which is easily

cut with a knife. Thanks to this, from the early 1 4th century, faience was widely used

as mosaic.

1 4th century faience belongs to the low-durability material section (see table)

and is very different from the earlier faience (12th-13th centuries) of Khorezm and

Persia, whose durability when compressed achieved almost 300 kg/cm11

(N.S.Grazhdankina: Methodology of chemical-technological research of ancient

ceramics, p 1 58). The durability of 1 5th century faience varied, though it was some¬

times quite high. This was also the case with later faience. In some cases, the

density of the formed mass was not high. Very porous material, when well fired, was

easily cut. Thus the higher indicators of durability belong to early faience, from

which majolica was made, while the lower indicators belong to later (14th century

onwards) types used for mosaic.

The link between the faience foundation and its glaze cover was mostly

good. Sometimes the glaze comes off because the glaze on the faience is under

pressure limiting the ability to form hairline cracks and therefore flaking occurs.

Side pressing of pieces of mosaic together does not help, as the back of the touch¬

ing surfaces have a wedged form.

Glaze that is well attached to its faience foundation results from rather po¬

rous material, guaranteeing the formation of a strong intermediary layer which soft¬

ens the difference between the coefficients of expansion of glaze and foundation.

11 N.S. Grazhdankina. Techniques of chemical and technological researches into ancientceramics. P. 158, Table 2.

Chapter II. 51

These coefficients differ less than in clay ceramics. Glazes covering faience are

divided into transparent alkali-lead, or simply alkali, and opaque alkali-lead-tin, closer

to glaze on clay ceramics. Most often in the 14th-15th centuries white and light blue

glazes are opaque on the drum of the Shirin-beka-aka mausoleum, forming a back¬

ground for mosaic ornament. In the 17th and even 1 6th century white glaze is formed

from pure white quartz engobe under lead glass-like glaze. Blue, green, manga¬

nese-black and various yellow glazes are transparent.

Widespread dulling of white glaze in the 14th and 15th centuries is due to

the lack of white dye. Transparent glass-like lead glaze showed all the defects of

the foundation with unusual clarity; though very bright, it still came in various shades

of yellow, pink and earth tones. Introducing tin into the glaze allowed an even white

tone without reducing the shine. Dulling light blue glazes allowed the defects in the

foundation to be concealed and the overall effect of a one-colour glaze for the build¬

ing to be preserved. Light blue glaze, as well as its use in mosaics, was used for

tiles covering cupolas. When blue tiles were made, the glaze was transparent, as

with mosaics. Dark colours covered defects in the foundation. This confirms that

production of high quality transparent glazes for ordinary ceramics was possible by

the 12th century.

In the 14th century cups and plates with black under-glaze painting with

light blue transparent glaze became popular. We see this in architectural ceramics

only with blue transparent glaze on faience tiles in the portal of the Khadja-Akhmad

mausoleum in Shakhrisabz (14th century).

Glazes on faience usually have hardness 7, sometimes 6, with the excep¬

tion of pure lead glazes, with hardness of only 5. The realisation that faience could

easily be cut gave new impetus to mosaic facing throughout the Middle East. Mo¬

saic was well known already12 but using a clay ceramic foundation, which meant

that only large details and crude paint was possible. With the appearance of faience,

it was possible to cut fine details, with thickness of only 2-3 mm. Cutting such ele¬

ments demanded brittle, porous material. This explains the decline in faience dura¬

bility with the development of carved ceramic mosaic (14th-18th centuries) in com¬

parison with earlier majolica on faience foundation.

12 Barda - a mausoleum built in 1322; in some places it has mosaic facing.


to faiences used in Uzbekistan, was completely different in the texture of shard,

unusually dense and fine-grained, with high indicators. However once transferred

to local soil, the faience was processed for local demands and using local materi¬

als.

Local masters achieved fine results in architectural details from faience and

mastered the complexity of its production so well that it was widely used in 16th

century construction and all kinds of ceramic facing were made exclusively from

faience. The shiny transparent glazes highlighted the gilded details and blue and

green ones. Such a glaze was possible only on faience, thus it replaced majolica

and carved mosaic, which were more labour intensive, perhaps more artistic, though

less bright and shiny. We can compare all types of ceramic facing, but it is almost

impossible to determine the best of them, since each type has its advantages both

artistically and in production.

With modern science we can marvel at the mastery of the past and try to

reproduce it. It was found that the temperature of baking and melting of glazes

came within a fairly narrow range of temperatures, showing the great accuracy of

old masters. The number of defects was small. Usually they were not discarded, but

were used where they would not be noticed. The great care taken by old masters at

each step in the creation of complex decorative coverings of buildings is clear.

Chapter II. 53

Architectural ornament.

Pakhlavan Makhmud mausoleum, Khiva.

Chapter III. 55

>""^t m . V - ' f " T W y ». i

C*T*T|»T<»T*T0T<Ö8> -* -* -*- - -* A * A à

CHAPTER III

The work of the Samarkand ceramics workshopsBy M.K. Rakhimov

The production of facing ceramics for the restoration of architectural monu¬

ments in Samarkand was organized in 1 920-22. Two work areas and a kiln were set

up in the Tilliakari Medressah. The task of the workshop was to use local materials,

simple equipment and the experience of local ceramicists to produce facing ceram¬

ics to preserve the architectural monuments of Samarkand. This required much

experimental laboratory work. The first head of the workshop was the senior

Samarkand usto Abdukadyr Bakiev, who was both a master builder and specialist

in facing ceramics1 .

Usto Bakiev's tiles were distinguished by their faded colour, a dirty brown

shade, and did not correspond to the bright, shiny ancient ceramic facing. Despite

the initial failures, usto Bakiev nonetheless was the first to produce facing ceramics

on a large scale for restoration2. Later laboratory research showed that usto Bakiev

used calcine glaze3 . The glaze contained quartzite with iron impurities from Agolyk

and yellow quartz sand, both with admixtures of iron, which meant the glaze was

dull.

However, the Central Asian committee for preserving monuments

(Sredazkomstaris) created a Samarkand commission to preserve monuments

and instructed Bakiev to continue experimenting with ceramic tile production,

and provided the necessary materials4.

1 . Usto Bakiev participated in construction of three mosques in Samarkand (guzars of Kazy-Abdurasul, Shakhrisabz and Chamduzli) in 1920 to 1923. Their entire decoration was done

by Usto Bakiev.2. B.N. Zasypkin. Issues of restoration. Collection of works of the central state restorationworkshops. M., 1926, p. 141.3. Calcine is an oxidation product of a lead and tin alloy when heated at the temperature ofabout 400?C.

4. L.I. Nechkin. The Sredazkomstaris News, Issue 1, 1926, No. 13.

56 M.K. Rakhimov

In 1929 the famous Gijduvan ceramicist usto Usman Umarov5 came and

worked in Samarkand till 1934. After much effort, usto Usman achieved positive

results: the first tiles made with potash glaze were produced, both with and without

engobe. To achieve blue tones, usto Usman used double baking5 of components to

ensure thorough mixing. The result is a much brighter and stronger glaze. The tiles

produced by usto Usman in 1928-31 were used to restore the bordure (zanjir) over

the marble panel of the minaret of the Shirdor Medressah in Samarkand. Usto

Abdugafur, Mirmukhammed Bobo, and usto Tursun assisted him.

The workshop produced blue, light blue and white tiles that were used with

success on the facades and walls of the Shirdor, Ulugbek and Tilliakari Medressahs.

As the restoration work expanded, more ceramicists joined the team, including

Azimmurad Khodjaev, usto Shafii, usto Tashmukum, usto Gafurov Nasim and oth¬

ers. The increased production necessitated two additional kilns and mechanical

millstones to grind materials for the glaze and dyes. The workshop expanded at theTilliakari Medressah.

At the start of WWII some masters were conscripted and the work slowed

down. After the war, the work picked up again. In addition to Samarkand monu¬

ments, the Khodja-Akhmad lassavi mosque in Turkestan, the palace of the former

Kokand Khan Khudoiar and monuments in Bukhara were included in restoration

plans.

At the Samarkand workshop, a special lab equipped with electric muffle

kilns and modern equipment was organized. Specialists were brought in. By the

end of 1948 there were thirty people working there. Both theory and practice im¬

proved. Specialists used consultants from the Soviet Academy of

Architecture (headed by professor A.V. Filippov); in 1939 a team of master

ceramicists (Khodjaev A., Gafurov N.) spent a month in Moscow at the Dulev ce¬

ramics factory and in the laboratory of Professor Filippov. To fully restore the cupo¬

las on the Gur-Emir and Kazy-zade Rumi mausoleums, extra strong tiles were

5. Ceramist artisan Usto Umarov worked during 1929 to 1934.

6. Fritting is baking of ishkor with quartzite in the proportion of 70 to 30% with subsequentcrushing. In two time fritting the procedure was repeated twice.7. At the laboratory of general chemistry of the Uzbek State University in 1948 to 1948, atthe laboratory of Central Asia Research Institute of Irrigation (SANIIRI) (N.S.Grazhdankina).

Chapter III. 57

prepared. New ingredients for shard and glaze were prepared, a new regime for

baking made, and all the while tiles were tested in the lab7 for frost resistance,

temperature variability and other indicators of

longevity. It is clear now that the quality of tiles produced at that time was not

sufficient. Adherence to the tile body weakened after two to three years, and the

glaze began to flake off. The reason was the lack of systematic quality control. New

experimental lab work was begun. In 1951 at the Tashkent fire-resistant materials

factory, engineer-chemist P. I. Balaban and ceramicist M. K. Rakhimov introduced a

new ceramic mass8: Angren clay:fire-clay = 60:40.

Tests carried out by the ceramics factory of the Uzbek Ministry of Industrial

Construction Materials showed that the tiles could withstand fifteen cycles of freez¬

ing and thawing9. In 1958-60 the ceramics workshop started producing facing tiles

for restoring monuments in Samarkand, Bukhara, and Tashkent. In Tashkent the

facade of the Kukaldash Medressah (16th century) was restored using ordinary and

majolica tiles with mosaics.

Restoration work increased in Bukhara (Kalian mosque, Mir-Arab, Abdulla-

khan, Ulugbek, Kukaldash and other medressahs) and the Samarkand workshop

could not keep up with demand. So in 1958 a workshop was set up at the Abdulla-

khan Medressah in Bukhara under the direction of the Gijduvan master Usman

Umarov. The basic input, loess, was supplied from three sites: from near the for¬

tress walls by the old Mugilon gates, about 2 km from the workshop for terracotta

tiles; from Uba in Vabkent district, 25 km from Bukhara (cleaner and more plastic)

for the glazed tiles. To improve the quality of the mass and increase its plasticity,

loess from Kyzyl-tepa was used. For engobe, Karrnab light grey clay from Sukaity,45 km from Kermine station was used.

In 1 958-60 the workshop was supposed to start work on restoring the Ulugbek

Medressah with ordinary tiles, coloured mosaic and painted majolica tiles. How¬

ever, little was done. In 1 961 work declined and the workshop closed. In 1 960-2 the

Samarkand workshop produced ceramics for the Samarkand Shirdor Medressah.

Majolica painted tiles, mosaic tiles and calligraphic writing in mosaic were produced

8. 60% of Angren clay and 40% of chamotte.9. The laboratory of the research ceramics plant of the Ministry for production of buildingmaterials of the Uzbek RRS, Report #1.

58 M.K. Rakhimov

for restoring the portal pishtak10. During its forty years, the Samarkand workshop

has trained many specialists. Nasim Gafurov, Tashmukim Kurbanov, Meli Kambarov

and others learned the art of producing architectural ceramics, the ceramic mass,

coloured glazes, alkali potash glaze and local dyes (manganese (brown), iron and

chromium oxides (yellow), mis-tupon (green) and others)11. They made large painted

tiles (60 x 40 cm), sharafa (stalactite bordures) and sitora (six-pointed stars).

Their work has helped save the monuments, though there has still not been

enough research into the production process. Research has been sporadic. We

still do not understand the flaking of glaze, the effects of weather and isolation at

different times of the year, and the influence of salts. More work is needed on the

local raw materials and the bonding of glaze to different shard (smooth or rough),

e quality of ceramics is not stable and is often unsatisfactory. The reasons: inad¬

equate skill in using modern equipment and insufficient laboratory facilities. This

leads to a non-systematic control of quality.

BASIC MATERIALS

Ceramics at the Samarkand workshop are used primarily for restoration of

monuments. To ensure the durability of such ceramics, very high standards are

necessary, taking into account the temperature and humidity of the local climate.

This requires careful selection and preparation of clay, thorough mixing and pro¬

cessing of the mass ensuring a solid shard with even structure and strong fusion

of the glaze to the shard, and a correct baking regime, both the utility (xompaz)

and glazing (sirlik).

Mostly loess and plastic potter's clay, cleared of impurities, are used.

Samarkand masters use Gilma12 clay . It is grey or black and is found in Chupan-

atinsk, 12 km from Samarkand. Loess is also mined near the Samarkand republi¬

can hospital. The loess is carefully processed, with the stones, limestone chunks,

roots, and other bits being removed by hand. It is dried in the open air and ground

up with a shovel or ketmen.

10. Mosaic calligraphy inscription over the portal was done and installed by a craftsmanfrom Samarkand Usto Gafur Khakkulov in 1961-1962.

11. Maghil is a manganese-brown paint, malgash is yellow, mis-tupon is green.12. Guilmaya is expanded clay of average plasticity; when burned it acquires reddishterracotta tints. It can be used for ceramics only when mixed with some other clay.

Chapter III. 59

The Gilma clay is full of impurities: gypsum, mica, small stones, and roots.

The high plasticity of this clay means it must be thoroughly dried, as the raw mass

fuses poorly with other components. It is dried in the summer sun for three to four

days, or in the winter, for seven to eight days over a cooling kiln. It is then ground

further with wooden mallets and ketmen (the back is used) and mixed with loess.

Ferriferous red clay (jusha or kyzyl-kesak) is used as engobe colour13 . Sometimes

it is introduced to the mass for a terracotta colour. Kyzyl-kesak is highly plastic and

leaves much sediment when dried. Thus, tiles cannot be from pure red clay without

the addition of thinning materials (quartz sand, fire-clay and others).

Red clays are found in many areas of Uzbekistan, but Humsan (Tashkent

province), Karnab (Bukhara province) and Mugilon14 (near Shakhrisabz) sites are

the best. To achieve a white colour for mosaic carved tiles, Bukhara and Samarkand

potters, and masters at the Samarkand restoration ceramics workshop, use Karnob

grey Gilbota15 clay for engobe. It is of medium plasticity, and after baking has a

white matte finish. Plastic clays leave much sediment on drying and baking.

To prevent deformation and cracks or breaking, and to reduce the sediment,

thinning materials are introduced. Samarkand masters add up to 20% quartz sand

to make large tiles (30 x 40 cm). Thinning materials evenly distributed throughout

the mass make the circulation of moisture easier during drying. It is important when

mixing the mass that the grains of thinning materials are distributed in the clay

evenly and thoroughly. The right consistency of the clay mass requires grains of

various size, so that the distance between the large grains is filled with smaller

grains, achieving a compact packing of thinning materials.

For faience mass used for mosaics, quartz sand from Chupan-atinsk site is

used, and quartzite from Agolyk (18 km from Samarkand). Reed fluff16 is also a

thinning material. It is added to mass to form tiles and majolica painted tiles, espe-

13. To produce facing tiles and plates of red-brown colour used during restoration of thefaçade of the Khodoyar khan palace (Urda) in the town of Kokand they used red engobecomposed of 75% of red clay from Khumsan and 25% of Angren clay.14. M. K. Rakhimov. Artistic ceramics of Uzbekistan, p. 35.15. Ibid, p.34

16. Koshinpaz master Azimmurat Khojaev from Samarkand identifies two types of lukh, viz.saryk-lukh, short-fibred and ok-lukh, long-fibred. It is ok-lukh that is mainly used for produc¬tion of architectural ceramics.


cially large ones. Usto Azimmurat and usto Tasha recommend it for drying the mass,

as it does not lead to deformation or cracking. Reeds grow near Samarkand on both

sides of the Zarafshan River. In September or October masters and apprentices

spend one to two days gathering reed fluff for the next year.

Quartzite is the main material used for thinning for ceramic mass and glazes.

Quartzite is mined in Agolyk in large chunks with pink and grey veins. Large chunks

are broken up and loaded for a preliminary baking in a round kiln with direct

or reverse flame. This makes grinding easier. The baking takes six to eight hours

at 500-600 C with at least two hours at the maximum temperature. The pieces are

reduced to pellets and sorted into white and other colours and impurities removed.

White pieces of quartzite are added to glaze and ceramic dyes after grind¬

ing in a millstone, and pieces with yellow ferriferous veins are added to carved

ceramics and mosaics to approximate ancient faience. As one of the components

of glaze, engobe and faience mass, white quartzite sand is used. In nature, sand

is often mixed with earth and clay, mica and limestone. Masters know the quality

of sand this way: when spread on white paper,

if no dirty spots remain, or when mixed in water, the water stays clear, then

the sand is clean. Admixtures can be removed by rinsing the sand and passing it

through a sieve. The main sites for quartz sand for facing ceramics are Maisk, 3 km

north-east of Pervomaisk and 26 km east of Tashkent, Darbazinsk in Kazakhstan,

4-5 km from Darbaz railway station and 40 km north of Tashkent, and Chupan-

atinsk, 15 km north-west of Samarkand. For alkali and lead glazes and for white

engobe, only clean quartz sand is used.

COMPONENTS OF MASS FOR FORMING TILES AND MAJOLICA TILES

Components of mass for forming tiles and majolica tiles The clean ground

materials are combined in a dry condition to create a uniform consistency. This is

necessary so that the forming, drying and baking are successful and strong tiles

result. The plastic Gilma clay is given a preliminary soaking with excess water, and

left overnight so that it absorbs the water thoroughly. The liquid clay is then passed

through a sieve (64 holes per cm)

Chapter III. 61

Using faience inarchitectural ceramicswas a big step forward in its develop¬

ment. Early high strength faience, despite its similarity in raw mass

and then poured in the clay mass, which has been ground and mixed with quartzite

sand. The mass is carefully mixed with a shovel or ketmen.

It is mixed like this three to four times and then is then mixed by foot.Themass is divided into mounds and thrown on the floor so that one mound covers the

edge of the next one. This is repeated and the mounds are covered by a home¬

made canvas. The mass is left like this in a damp place for 24 hours to allow it to

bind and to improve the quality17. The mass must be uniform in quality. Rich plastic

clays absorb more water and the mass is thinner, with varying density, and they

react unpredictably to press during pressing (in machines or when formed by hand).

The rich pieces will settle more than the less plastic ones, creating cracks and

sometimes layering.

Gilma and white sand from Chapan-atinsk have more shiny scales of mica,

easily seen by the naked eye. Small amounts of mica do not affect the quality of the

ceramic mass and act like a fusing agent. As for gypsum, its presence is unwanted,

as it affects the colour and creates spots on the finished tiles.Samarkand masters

used the following method in 1958: they ground the rich Gilma clay after drying and

sorting, then mixed it in lots of water and left it for twelve hours, then passed it

through a sieve (64 holes per cm?). They added the correct amount of loess, and

again passed it through a sieve. The result was mixed by shovel and left for ten to

twelve hours. Sand was added and the mass mixed again. It was then poured for

draining into a pit with a brick floor or into large gypsum containers.

The reason for cracks and defects is poor processing of the clay. Poor mix¬

ing or poorly crushed clay does not produce a uniform mass. This results in dry

pieces of clay or uneven texture, causing cracks. At the suggestion of the author, a

consultant in 1956-7 to the Samarkand restoration workshop,

17. They were used so before 1947-1948. At present mud mixers of a horizontal type areused for mixing moulding compound.

18. Trial compounds were arranged at the Samarkand ceramics workshop under supervi¬sion of the author. Facing bricks produced from this substance were tested at the laboratoryof general chemistry of the Uzbek State University, Samarkand (by V.l. Sudakov on

30.08.1950, Protocol No. 1) and proved to be quite frost-resistant.

62 M.K. Rakhimov

the following recipe for preparing mass for glazed and unglazed tiles was used (in

%)18:

I. Loess from the Samarkand republican hospital 60

Gilma from Chupan-atinsk 25

White sand from Chupan-atinsk 15

II. Loess from the Samarkand hospital 70



The formed mass19, after thorough mixing in water with a shovel and by

hand, then twice passing the mixture through a horizontal type clay-brake, retains

its moist consistency from three to eight days. Mass kept for eight days, when formed,

dried and baked, is better than mass kept for only one to three days, which has a

4% rate of cracking. The longer the mass is kept in a moist form, the better its

quality and plasticity.

Contents of mass for forming majolica painted tiles20 (%):

Loess from the Samarkand hospital 55



Reed fluff 1

After it is thoroughly mixed with a ketmen and three times by foot, then kept

in a moist condition for six days, the mass is formed into tiles 30 x 40 or 35 x 60 cm.

The dried ready tiles are painted with under-glaze or over-glaze painting with a dull

coloured glaze. In 1950-1, stalactites for restoring the upper part of the drum of the

cupola of the Kazy-zade Rumi mausoleum were prepared this way. Cracks and

deformations did not appear.

Contents of mass for forming carved ceramics (terracotta from glazed

ceramics) (%):

Loess from the Samarkand hospital 58


1 9. The trial matter was composed at the Samarkand restoration workshop under the author's

supervision in 1956-1957.20. Ibid.

21. Production mass was done according to the recipe of the Samarkand restoration work¬

shop.

Chapter III. 63


Again, careful crumbling and sifting is necessary to remove impurities which inter¬

fere with carving.

Contents of mass for carved mosaic ceramics21 (%):

Grey Karnab plastic clay from Sukaita (Karnab) 15

Quartzite from Ogolyk 85

Finely ground quartzite is added. Quartzite with ferriferous veins and other

admixtures is used but is ground to a uniform consistency. When preparing mass

for carved ceramic mosaics, it has to be remembered that after baking the tiles

must be easily cut with a knife and ground using a fine file without crumbling, and

that they must keep their contours. Mosaic carved tiles are covered in a transparent

coloured glaze or matte enamel, since they are made from grey-white Karnab

or Angren clay (with a large portion of white quartzite sand), and turn a bright colour

after baking. Mostly the shard is pink or yellow, depending on the type of sand.

FORMING THE MASS AND DRYING THE TILES

There are different ways to form clay mass for ceramic facing tiles. When

the tile requires ornamentation or a smooth surface, with oval, faceted or some

other complicated configuration, it is formed in gypsum moulds: the entire tile or in

sections, sometimes metal, rarely burnt clay. Until 1940 facing details were formed

from the working mass using the otminka method [pugging].

The porous walls of the gypsum mould absorb the water from the clay mass,

the details take on some sediment, and as a result the formed item soon peels

away from the walls of the mould. The gypsum mould can be used 250 times.

In 1938-40 in the Samarkand workshop, three sizes (iakbaxsha, dubaxsha,

sebaxsha) used the pugging method for mass of medium moisture content. Small

tiles of different shapes for restoring the facade of the Khudoir-Khan Palace in Kokand

were made.

Wood as well as gypsum was also used for the tile moulds. A large lump of

clay was pressed by hand into the mould and smoothed off. Excess clay was cut

with a damp wooden knife or fine string. So that the tile could be removed easily

from the mould, it was moistened and sand was sprinkled in it. Five hundred items

64 M.K. Rakhimov

could be produced in an eight-hour day.This is the traditional method. From 1940

onwards masters formed tiles from dried clay valiushka (moulds). The prepared

clay mass is beaten on a special forming table on the edge of which a lath or rod

(reyka) is attached which is slightly thicker than a tile. Fine sand is spread on the

table. Then the clay mass is beaten till it is the thickness of the reyka, and smoothed

with a wet ruler. The mass is left to dry overnight: in the open air in summer, and

inside in winter. The next day the master takes the dried clay valiushka in his right

hand and throws them face-up on a polished marble table, then hits them three or

four times with a wooden mallet so that the mass is even (illustration 22-23).

Next, the workers place a metal mould (the size of the tiles determines its

size, taking into account drying and settling) on the half-finished product. Then with

a sharp knife they cut the edges the entire thickness of the mass along the edge of

the mould. On two sides of the tiles, they cut a small groove for attaching with paste

to the wall. Metal moulds (illustration 26) are formed in six- and eight-faceted stars

(sitora, yulduz), triangles (uchburchak), rectangles (murabba'a) and various right-

angles (iakbaxsha, dubaxsha, sebaxsha).

To make moulds, special 2 mm thick metal plates are used. Recently, to

lighten work and reduce costs, Samarkand masters started using moulds for half-

finished convex ceramic facing tiles or tiles with line imprints for ornamentation, in

which the ornament easily transfers to the clay. To paint the tile in the bounds of

printed facets with coloured engobe, glaze and enamel is much faster. This method

lightens the work of masters considerably. Earlier, using only manual means, mas¬

ter could make ten to twenty tiles per day, nowadays fifty to sixty are possible22.

The edges of each metal mould should be absolutely smooth, without jagged

edges, so that a knife can move easily along them, cutting the ornament along the

mould. The knife should be at a slant, about 2-3 degrees inward. This achieves a

compactness of the tiles necessary for mounting the tile composition. The tiles are

then paired, touching by means of the facing sides, first for the preliminary drying in

a closed place, then in the open air, in the summer for five days, in winter up to

fifteen days. We should mention some typical mistakes of Samarkand masters dur¬

ing ceramics production. During preparation of the clay mass placed in separate

layers, fine sand was spread on the forming table so that the lower layer of the

22. Samarkand workshops have been using metal templates since 1957.

Chapter III. 65

mass did not stick to the table. In preparing the separate layers of mass, weighing

more than 10-15 kg, sometimes layers of sand resulted, which can lead to un¬

wanted layering during drying and baking. Layering of baked shard may not occur

at once, but later, during storage or use of the tiles in construction.

Such tiles can be identified by a tinkling, impure sound, and less durability

and lower frost-resistance. The tiles layer precisely at the spots where sand layers

occurred. The pounding of the mass on the table also affects the durability of the

shard. Sometimes a layer of mass was placed on already pounded mass. If new

mass is pounded from thicker clay, and the earlier mass from thinner clay, then

stretching on one side and less binding on the other occurs between the two layers

during drying. As a result cracks appear. Unmixed pieces of rich Gilma clay also

harm the quality of product, since they distend during baking. They have different

degrees of drying and settling than the main mass.

During preparation of tiles from a large quantity of mass, before light press¬

ing by hand and processing with valiushka, the mass is left for twenty-four hours for

maturing. During this period, the edges and upper layer of the facing side of the clay

valiushka dry out and develop a dense crust from contact with air. The middle and

backside of the valiushka dry more slowly.Thus, when the valiushka are hit against

the marble board, different thicknesses occur. And if the edges and facing side of

the valiushka are too hardened, then when hit on the edges, small cracks appear in

the half-finished tile, which as a consequence of different internal pressures, open

up during baking. Such tiles are not suitable for restoration work, as they have

lower durability and frost resistance.

Even distribution of air in the ceramic material is very important for the struc¬

ture of the shard, and affects the length and evenness of its drying. Drying in dry air,

which is intensively circulated and hot, results in many cracks. This occurs because

of the rapid evaporation of moisture from the surface, resulting in the stopping up of

pores and uneven drying. Stretching pressure builds up on the formed crust slowly,

destroying the structure of the shard, which will eventually lead to the appearance

of cracks, making the shard unusable.

After forming or pressing, drying is done. In 1958 at the Samarkand work¬

shop in laboratory conditions, the moisture content of tiles ready for drying was

determined. It was 16-20%. For baking it should be 3-5%. During drying, moisture

66 M.K. Rakhimov

found between the pieces of tile slowly evaporates23, and the more moist the air, the

longer the drying takes. As moisture is lost, the shard settles, changing its shape.

This often leads to deformation and cracking. For normal (intensive) even drying, it

is necessary that the air in the drying chamber have a constant humidity. Circulation

of air is achieved with pipes or fans24.

For tiles made from rich clay, slower drying is necessary, since these clays

do not release moisture as quickly. Drying in small workshops is done in the usual

working place over the kiln so as not to interfere with work. The medium time for

drying without ventilation is ten to twelve days, and with crude ventilation eight to

ten days. This requires a large drying area. Furthermore drying can be unhealthy

because of the high moisture content of the air. Thus in planning new workshops,

separate drying areas should be included. This will allow more even humidity and

ventilation using the heat from the kiln.

PREPARATION OF ENGOBE LOY, COLOURED ENGOBE DYES, AND

METHOD OF APPLYING ENGOBE TO TILES:

In those cases where the clay shard has a dark grey shade, for facing tiles,

a dull glaze (enamel) or preliminary engobe (i.e., applied to the clay shard prepared

from simple clay, the second thin layer of light-burnt clay) is used. The composition

of the engobe is as follows: the engobe should have the same drying and settling

properties as the shard and should be plastic enough so that it can be applied on

more moist shard (with the help of special brushes or simply poured on). Engobe

should not flake off after baking.

To reduce settling of rich clay and the ingredients of engobe, less plastic

materials25 are used to minimize changes in volume during drying and baking. These

include quartz26 (quartzite) finely ground, quartz white sand, also finely ground, and

feldspar. Caoline is sometimes used to reduce air and igneous settling.

All these materials should be finely ground, so as to pass freely through a

sieve (900 openings per cm). The amount of water added to dry engobe before

23. P.P. Budnikov. The technology of ceramics. Part 1, Ukrtechizdat, 1937, p. 117.24. P.V. Sokolova. Ceramics. Proceedings of KISTROY, 1957, p. 51.

25. S.A. Chikildin. Decoration of potter's items with engobes. M., 1948, p. 31.26. G. Gekht. Ceramics. L.-M., 1938, p. 56.

Chapter III. 67

applying to the shard must be determined each time. In general water content should

be 45-50%. The recipe for coloured engobe used by Samarkand workshop masters

(in %):

White engobe under lead glaze

Karnab clay 80%

Quartzite 20

Red engobe

Karnab or Angren clay 25

Jusha red clay from Humsan 75

Engobe loy (white engobe under alkali glaze)27

Karnab or Angren clay 25

Quartzite 75

Green

Angren clay 95

Copper oxide (mis-tupon) 5

Blue

Angren clay 96

Cobalt oxide28 4

Black

Angren clay 68

Manganese oxide 30

Cobalt oxide 2

All components are mixed in dry form, and the sand or quartzite is first well

ground or passed through a mill. Then the mix is soaked in water till the consistency

of sour cream is reached. The mass applies well to shard and lumps or gaps should

not appear. Before covering the shard with engobe, dust should be removed from

27. The recipe of loi engobe was developed at the Samarkand ceramic workshop in 1958/59.

28. Local craftsmen usually call a blue dye as lajyvard which should not be confused withsilver nitrate glaze used in wall painting.

68 M.K. Rakhimov

the shard and other spots, which would weaken the engobe's binding to the

shard. Facing tiles are usually covered in engobe when the tile is completely dried,

though sometimes when still semi-hard29. The engobe is poured from a ladle or the

tile dipped in the engobe (illustration 24). According to Gijduvan ceramist master

Usman Umarov, particles of clay and other materials making up the engobe are

best kept soaking for twenty-four hours. Then the mass is passed through a thick

cloth. To guarantee the best adhesion of the engobe to the shard, from 1932-7,

masters30 introduced fine potash treated by frittovanie (see beginning of Chapter III)

and glass powder. This increased the brightness of colours, especially green, blue

and black. By adding extra potash, master Umarov achieved an engobe which ad¬

hered well to the shard.

Coloured engobes and over-glaze dyes are local and factory made (pig¬

ments). Malgash - mineral added to white engobe (0.5-5%), pale yellow colour.

Jusha - red ferriferous clay. Dries well, crumbles and easily dissolved. Left for

twenty-four hours. More water is added to produce shliker (mass), passed through

a coarse calico cloth or sieve (900 holes per cm?). When it makes up 50-75% of

mass (in white engobe) it gives a red or dark brown colour.

Oxang-sop - iron oxide. This metal is combusted in a kiln and the resulting

deposit is a dark brown colour. It is finely ground in an iron mortar and passed

through a fine sieve. The powder is mixed in water, ground on the bottom of an iron

cauldron. When it is added (3-6% of mass), an orange-red, pink or brown colour is

achieved. Mis-tupon - copper oxide is obtained from burnt metallic copper in an

unglazed lagan. The deposit is beaten and baked again. It is then ground, sifted,

ground in water on the bottom of an iron cauldron. When it is added (2-4% of mass),

a green or light blue colour is achieved.

Cobalt - added as cobalt oxide. Magil - mineral containing manganese.

Added to engobe (1 5-25% of mass) after grinding in a mortar and passed through a

sieve, then ground in water on the bottom of an iron cauldron or in a granite cup

(xarsang-tash) till it dissolves completely. It produces shades of black and brown.

Factory dyes include cobalt oxide, chromium, manganese and antinomy. Dyes from

29. The optimal state of the base.30. In 1935/36 ceramist Usman Umarov of Gizhduvan in addition to the main material, i.e.

raw clay from Karnab, introduced fritted ishkor and ground glass powder into the engoberecipe.

Chapter III. 69

Dulevsk factory are now used. In 1 953-4, as an experiment, coloured majolica glazes

were produced there: brown No 3106, light blue No 3124, blue No 3086, yellow No

282 and 252.

SELECTION OF LOCAL MATERIALS FOR PREPARING TRANSPARENT AND

COLOURED GLAZES AND ENAMELS

The technology of preparing glazes developed slowly, and for a long time

was a trade secret, passed on from one master to another. Samarkand ceramicists

used the experience of ancient masters, the result of long searching and trial and

error.

The selection of materials for glazes was done empirically. The quantitative

relation of materials used by kulol for preparing glazes was insufficiently studied

and there were no precise data on ingredients and results of chemical analysis for

each material. Besides, many different local materials were used, needing labora¬

tory and factory-scale analysis.

Glaze should have the consistency of glass, and appear as an amorphous

complex silicate. At the same time it should adhere firmly to the clay shard and have

the same coefficients of expansion and physical-thermal indicators, and not have

defects such as shadings or air bubbles. If the coefficients of expansion and the

contents of the shard and glaze are not in agreement, then when baked, defects

arise.

Thus some masters (Gijduvan usto Usman Umarov and Rishtan usto

Mazoir)31 sometimes introduce ground glass powder or potash treated by frittovanie

[see above] for agreement of coefficients of expansion of glaze and shard. Fusing

of glaze and shard does not take place only as one linking of the layer of glaze with

the shard, but thanks to the chemical interaction between the glaze and shard sur¬

face. Thus the glaze composition should be carefully determined in agreement with

the clay mass composition. This is the main goal of selection of glaze materials.

However, many properties of the glaze and shard depend not only on their compo¬

sition, but on the regime of firing, since the glaze at a certain temperature of firing

can correspond to a certain shard content, and at another temperature another

31 . In 1 933 Usto Usman Umarov experimented with the composition of the tile matter intro¬

ducing about 20% of ground glass powder and Usto Mozaeer about 15% of fritted ishkor.

70 M.K. Rakhimov

shard content. Thus, the firing regime is the most crucial part of the process of

ceramics production and is done by the most experienced masters.

MATERIALS FOR PREPARING GLAZES

There are many possible materials for glazes and enamel. We will consider

only those necessary for glazing facing ceramics. Silicate (white sand or oq kum) is

the basis of any glaze. It is found in the form of white quartz sand, mostly from

Chupan-atinsk. Good, clean sand, containing 97-98% silicate and 2-3% admixture,

has a light cream colour or is colourless. Quartz sand is often dirty, so it must be

well rinsed and sifted through a fine sieve. Masters also use quartzite (oq tash),

which is ground into a powder. White or red clay is used in glaze in those cases

where it must be thick ned (kattik sir). Kurgoshin (lead oxide) is the most common

ingredient in glaze, as it fuses with silicate in almost any proportion. It produces a

hard and easily made glaze. It is used in the following forms:

Glet (PbO) - shiny yellow plate made from melting lead in air and

then crystallizing it by rapid cooling;

minium (PbO - red lead) - a red powder made by heating glet

without air;

lead ingots, melted in a cauldron at 400 C. Mixed with a metal

spoon, the mass slowly turns into a grey-green powder. Lead oxide

gives the glaze plasticity, shine, and a clean clear look.

Tin oxide (Sn02) in combination with lead (1 :4) is fired on a relatively low

flame with access to air such that with the lead, it produces lead glet. The result,

calcine (kalailik kurgoshin), is added to produce a dull glaze. To obtain a coloured

glaze, especially blue, turquoise and white, like ancient tiles, since 1928 masters

have introduced potash treated by frittovanie32. Various soluble metal oxides form¬

ing coloured silicates are also added. For blue: 1-4% cobalt oxide or 2-3% phos¬

phor, or cobalt arsenic-acid. Sometimes to get a red tone, 1-2% zinc oxide is used.

For brown: 6-8% iron oxide or the same amount of manganese oxide. For yellow:

1-3% iron oxide, 2-3% chrome-pic or antinomy oxide or 1-2% iron and chromium

oxide. For a bright rich colour, masters increase or reduce the amount of quartzite,

32. Fritted ishkor has been included into glaze at the Samarkand ceramics workshop since

1928.

Chapter 71

potash, tin and lead. Although in glazes there are oxide salts, at high temperatures

and rapid cooling, they do not crystallize and remain amorphous. This happens

more often with lead oxide (PbO). This explains the wide use of lead and lead-tin

glazes.

For coloured glazes used by Samarkand restoration workshop (%)Blue Lead 55

Potash (frittovanie) 25

Quartzite 12/5

Beaten glass 5

Tin oxide 2

Cobalt oxide 0.5

Light blue

Turquoise

White

Brown

Black

Lead 55


Quartzite 10

Copper oxide 2

Tin oxide 8


Quartzite 10

Tin 8

Copper oxide 2

Lead 50


Tin oxide 10

Quartzite 15

Beaten glass 5

Lead 70

White sand 27

Manganese oxide 3

Lead 70

White sand 26

Manganese oxide 3

Cobalt oxide 1

72 M.K. Rakhimov

Green Lead

White sand

Copper oxide

70

27

3

Depending on the content of the glaze, firing is done at 800-900 C .Because

Samarkand masters had no thermometer, the temperature was determined

visually, resulting in firing at a lower temperature, which harmed the quality of the

glaze.

METHODS OF PREPARING ALKALI AND LEAD GLAZE

All glazes used by masters for facing ceramics fall into two groups: kattik sir

(local stiff-flowing potash glaze) and iumsha sir (soft lead glaze). The former melts

at 900 C, the latter at 800-850 C. Depending on the under-glaze colour on the

shard, either an alkali or lead glaze is used. Under a clear alkali glaze turquoise,

blue, brown and green-white colours come out well. Under a clear lead glaze red,

yellow, dark blue, green, orange, brown and black colours come out well.

Alkali glazes are prepared as follows. Potash, the main component, is pro¬

duced by firing the roots of various plants containing Na20 - 45%; K20 - 5.94;

MgO - 2.25; CaO - 1.9; Ca203 - 1.52; AI203 - 0.18; Si02 - 5.34; and S03 -

8.8633. Usually these plants are gathered in autumn and used as needed. The con¬

tent of the potash depends on the type of plants. Many different materials are used.

In ancient times, the method of alkali potash glazing ishkor sir was used34.

Potash is the ash remaining after firing of these plants which are rich

in alkali in the form of sodium compounds.

They include:

Rishtan

Gijduvan

Samarkand

Shakhrisabz

kirk bugin or choroynak

choroynak

sari tirnok

choroynak

Chartak (Andijan

prov.)

Karnab (Sukoyta)

Zirabulak

(Kattakurgan)

Mugilon and

33. According to the data of ceramist P.S. Avanesova, 1938.34. M.Kh. Rakhimov. Artistic ceramics of Uzbekistan, p. 61 .

Chapter 73

Khorezm prov.

Tashkent

Chogon, kirchop karakvarak

kirk bugin

Kupkuygoch mtns

Sultn-ata and

Tashauz province.

Turkmenistan)

Mirzachul and Sary-

agach

The preparation of this glaze is labour intensive and complex. The potash

and clean ground quartzite or white sand are ground and combined in a ratio of 7:3

in a small amount of water. There are various recipes (%):

I

Potash

Quartzite

White sand

70

30

75

25

60

40

Small bricks are made of the prepared ingredients and are well dried. For

frittovanie, these bricks are put in clay dishes in the ¡shkorxona, a special place in

the firebox, with a two-step rising. These bricks are placed on the upper step. They

are melted at a high temperature (1000-1100 C), and the potash flows to the lower

step. The resulting potash is removed, cleaned, ground to fine pieces, and passed

through a mill. It is then used for colourless and coloured glazes.

To improve the quality of the frittovanie-treated potash, masters in Rishtan

and Samarkand repeat the process. The bricks are put back in the firebox just as

the firing is completed, and after the final cooling of the kiln are removed. On the

next firing, the bricks are placed in the firebox on the ishkorxona for the final frittovanie.

Good potash from kirk bugin after the second frittovanie takes on a bright green

colour, like melted glass. The treated potash is ground on a granite stone (xarson

tosh), soaked in water, and passed through a mill (iaruguchak). Sometimes

Samarkand masters use lesser quality potash called saksaul.

For facing ceramics, alkali glaze in a pure form is rarely used by Samarkand

masters. The glaze liquid mass is passed through a 10-20 I sieve before use. The

master carefully mixes it with a wooden ladle so that particles do not settle on the

bottom, so as to keep a uniform consistency. Before applying, the glaze liquid

74 M.K. Rakhimov

surface is cleaned of dust and lightly sprinkled with water. There are two methods of

glazing: small items are dipped in the glaze, large ones have glaze poured on them

from a ladle. Glaze is painted with a brush on painted majolica (illustration 27).

After glazing and drying, the edges are smoothed. Before glazing, some

masters pass the frittovanie through a mill and add a gluey substance of ochres

made from boiled flour (50 g flour to 8 kg dry glaze). This is so that the glaze does

not drip off before firing. To achieve a brighter colour glaze, especially black, yellow,

and brown, Samarkand masters use pure lead glaze.

It melts at 825-900 C and is used mostly in raw form. In the lead glaze, pure

lead oxide, quartzite white sand, and to get the necessary colour metallic oxides

(cooper, iron, manganese and others) are added. After weighing, all components

are carefully mixed in dry form, water is then added and the mixture passed through

a mill.

STRUCTURE OF THE KILN FOR FIRING CERAMIC TILES AND THE FIRING

PROCESS.

The firing kiln of Samarkand masters is the same as a potter's kiln. There

are two types: one- and two-chamber kilns. In 1958-60 for experimental work in

Samarkand35, an electric muffle kiln was installed. For firing small tiles, masters use

the one-chamber cylindrical kiln with a working chamber 1 .5 x 1 .7 m and firebox 1 .2

x 1.2 m. The kiln was built in one of the huja (cell) of the Tilliakari Medressah, well

protected from damp. Moisture has a negative effect on the glaze, its brightness

and fusing properties. It was built under the experienced usto Mukhammed and

usto Umar. The main material was guval (raw brick) and burnt brick. The chimney

was built in four places between vertical walls of the kiln and continued to the top.

The kiln capacity is 100-200 tiles.

For large items, a round kiln with vertical walls and flat top, different from the

one-chamber kiln, is used. In the middle are clay shelves (raf). The inner working

chamber is 1 .95 x 2.20 m, the firebox 1 .8 x 1 .7 m. To increase the durability of the

kiln and preserve the walls from cracking during firing, one third of the area is below

ground level. The firebox is separated from the working chamber by an arch with

35. Ye.M. Peshchereva. Potter's art in Central Asia. L, 1059, p. 191.

Chapter III. 75

14-18 passing openings to allow the flame and gases through. To ensure even

heating in the working chamber, the diameter of the openings nearer the walls should

be larger. Loading and unloading items is done through a round opening diameter

0.5-0.6 m in the centre of the entrance to the working chamber, which is closed

during firing by a clay cover (sarpush or tova) 5 cm thick.

The two-chamber kiln is much larger than the one-chamber, and besides

large tiles, sharafa (stalactite cornices), mukannas (capitols) and figured tiles 45 x

60 and 60 x 70 cm can be fired. An expedition of the UzSSR Institute of history and

archaeology conducted digs at Afrasiab in the potters' quarter, and found a kiln with

two rows of pins for firing household ceramics36. They mostly likely used a similar

kiln for architectural ceramics. Experienced masters put the tiles in the kiln, as the

shelves must be placed accurately and the firing area used fully, while leaving space

for the flame and heat to circulate (illustration 25).

After the final cleaning of the firebox and working chamber, the master places

the shelves according to the thickness of the items, taking into account that be¬

tween the upper and lower shelves and the items placed there, a space of 1 .5-2 cm

is necessary. For placing the shelves, there are special clay-sand-reed fluff fired

tiles 2 cm thick slightly rounded which are placed around the firing chamber. Clay

supports between the tiles serve as supports for the shelves, with dimensions of 4

x4x4, 6x6x6, and 3x4x4 cm, placed on the four corners of the tiles. Depending

on the thickness of the fired items the gaps between the shelves are increased ordecreased.

After the shelves are in place, loading begins. The upper shelves are loaded

first, then the middle and lower ones. This prevents sand and clay from falling be¬

tween the cracks in the shelves onto the items below. The central opening is then

closed with the sarpush, made from clay and adobe (thickness 5 cm). For release of

moisture during the initial firing, between the sarpush and wall, three or four small

openings are made. They allow observation of the firing and melting of the glaze on

small discs placed there as samples. Then the four chimney openings are opened

and the firebox starts. Firing demands great skill. Archaeologists show that ancient

masters had various methods of firing. Great significance is attached to the fuel.

The fuel should be dry and long-burning.Samarkand masters use willow and poplar

36. Reported by Sh. T. Tashkhojaev, a research worker of the Institute of Art Studies of theUzbek Academy of Science who took part in the 1961/62 expedition.

76 M.K. Rakhimov

chips. Firing in a one-chamber kiln is three to eight hours, and in a two-chamber kiln

ten to eighteen. In the first period of firing, when the 'smoking' of the items (kuritish

- drying) takes place, the flame should not be too great. Then the temperature is

gradually increased. During the 2nd period, the 'middle flame' period, the tempera¬

ture reaches 700-800 C.

The third and final period is decisive. If soot settles on the items during the

early firing, then not waiting for the melting of the glaze, the master changes the

intensity of the flame to destroy the soot. In the firebox, an even strong flame is

maintained (toza alanga) so the heating takes place with extra oxygen. With this in

mind, the crack under the door of the firebox is widen to allow more air in. however,

the oxygen firing should not be for long, as even a tiny amount of iron admixture,

under the influence of an oxygen flame, produces rust, spoiling the glaze. An expe¬

rienced master determines when the firing is finished by watching the incandes¬

cence of the items. If he sees in the inner part of the chamber that the incandes¬

cence is the same colour on items, those near the walls are visible and the glaze

gives an even shine, the firing is finished. Young masters determine the end of firing

by a probe which they remove from the kiln. If the glaze on it is melted and has the

desired tone, then the firing is finished.

Some glazes, for example, white and light blue, require higher temperatures

than blue, yellow, brown and black. Thus, items covered in white and light blue are

fired separately or are placed in spots in the kiln where the temperature is lower.

The firing range is 900-980 with a delay of 1 .5-2 hours so that all parts of the work¬

ing chamber are the same. When firing is over, the four chimney openings and the

firebox and closed. After eight to twelve hours, to speed up cooling, part of the

firebox is broken up, and the sarpush is opened a third. Large items such as sharafa,

mukannasa and others should cool more slowly to avoid cracking of the glaze.

In the Samarkand workshop, double firing is used: before and after glazing.

Recently new equipment, in particular, a globular mill, has been acquired. The tem¬

perature of the kiln is fixed using cones from the Lomonosov factory. There are

more specialists. In 1961 engineer-technologist V. lartseva began work there.

Chapter III. 77

At present the Samarkand workshop produces good ceramics for restoration

including:

tiles made to ancient specifications for mosaics, both glazed and

terracotta;

service tiles for use under blue glaze;

majolica on a clay-ceramic base;

glazed cupola tiles;

large facing details: cornices (sharafa), stalactites (mukannasa), plaits

(urama) and others;

carved glazed ceramics;

carved ceramic mosaic on faience base.

Practical use of ceramics by the Samarkand workshop is discussed in the next

chapter.

Chapter IV. 79

CHAPTER IV

The experience of restoring facing ceramics on architectural monu¬ments of Uzbekistan

I.E. Pletnev

CONSTRUCTION AND TYPES OF DEFORMATION OF CERAMIC

FACING TILES.

Tiles used in monumental buildings in Central Asia are made of burnt brick

using clay and gypsum mortar as an adherent. Arches and cupolas are sometimesmade of alabaster1. The facing tiles were added some time after the building was

finished to allowing for settling. This division of tasks allowed the formation of guilds,each of which fulfilled certain types of work, allowing skills to be honed and experi¬

ence accumulated which could then be passed on from generation to generation.

The specific nature of stonemasonry and tile-bricklaying gave rise to a lack of commu-

1. This short information on mortars needs some explanation. As a rule wall masonry was

laid in their centre on pug clay. Outer masonry courses were laid on gypsum mortar: prior to

the 14th c. mainly pure semi-aquatic gypsum was used (Bukhara, Mazar Sherif) or naturalclay-gypsum which is a natural mixture of slightly baked gypsum, loess and semi-aquaticgypsum (Samarkand). Later, in the 14th c. to fix facing, they also began using clay andcemanka mortars; cemanka is crushed ceramics, a waste product of facing brick polishing.

Vaults and domes were laid using this binding mortar.In the 15th c masonry of large constructions was sometimes laid on natural clay-

gypsum (Bibi-khamim, Ishratkhana). In some cases a compound two or three componentmortar was used for outer mortar courses till the 13th c, it was gypsum + plant ash (theKalan minaret and a minaret in Vabkent) and gypsum + plant ash (or cemanka crushed

ceramics) + lime (a minaret in Kunia-Urghench). Pure semi-aqueous gypsum (alabaster)was used quite rarely depending on raw material resources of the region where construc¬tion took place. Clay-alabaster mortars or ganch-khok were also applied very seldom: only5 to 6 cases could be found across entire Central Asia and even in those cases they were

applied rather for some parts than entire structure, e.g. on landings in the portal of UlughbekMadrassah, parts of Ahmad Yassavi mausoleum and others, (the note of the executiveeditor).

80 I.E. Pletnev

nication as to the size of decoration areas and the facing tiles to be applied. The tile

layers had to find a way to correct defects in bricklaying due to variations in the

thickness of the facing layer. Thus, niches in the facing of court hujra of the

Samarkand Ulugbek Medressah are evenly placed; however, in construction lay¬

ing, they have a 10-15 cm variation.

Sometimes the dimensions of the surfaces under the facade were inad¬

equate to fit all the ornamental composition, but the tile layers succeeded anyway.

For example, in the length of the circumference of the drum under the external

cupola of the Tilliakari mosque an entire group of full elements of the geometric

pattern (girih) was omitted. By increasing the thickness of the facing along the

entire perimeter of the drum, the masters were able to achieve the circumference

that corresponded exactly to the entire girih.

A contrary example is the trimming of excess brickwork. On the Ulugbek

Medressah in Samarkand there are many arches that were trimmed during facing.

Thus the tile layers carefully matched the dimensions of all facing surfaces with the

chosen plan of decorative patterns and solved construction problems of facing ac¬

cordingly. Facing construction includes the facing itself and the process of evening

out and lengthening. Depending on how well the facing brickwork corresponded in

size and form to the architectural-artistic design of the tile layer, the layouts vary inthickness and method of execution.

If the size and form of construction needs no correction, the facing is 'frozen'

in alabaster mortar directly onto the brick, and individual minor irregularities are

easily corrected by varying the thickness of the paste applied. In this case the

facing is done directly from component facing elements. If the thickness of facing

has to be increased by 4-6 cm (visually to lengthen the facing surface), a prelimi¬

nary layer of gypsum solution is applied to the wall mixed with pieces of burnt brick,

to which the facing tiles are later attached. When the facing surface has to be

increased by 5-12 cm, a sleeve is made: prone bricks, sometimes two or three

layers thick, are 'frozen' to the brickwork.

Finally when the dimensions of the building have to be adjusted during lay¬

ing (up to 50 cm), a small transverse wall (xatoba) of brick is made to which the

facing may be attached. Wooden scaffolding is put up for the facing work. Once it is

finished the beams, cut to approach the decorative wall, are securely attached to

Chapter IV. 81

the facing layer. There are two types of production of facing work: direct assembly

when the facing depiction is done from pieces on the very surface to be decorated,

and modular when modules are assembled from pieces and then mounted.

From the mid-1 4th century, when polychrome ceramic facing was widely

used, the modular method was preferred. Modules were joined after being adjusted

and fitted. An impressive monolithic character of facing resulted. The borders of

individual modules in 14th-15th century facades are invisible, and this led some

researchers to conclude that they were made using the direct method2. But

research during restoration on the south facade of the Ulugbek Medressah in

Samarkand revealed places where modules had been joined on the back of facing

tiles using xatoba. Analysis of methods used by the oldest restorers, M. lunusov,

Sh. Gafurov, A. Umarov and others, and observations and discussions have led us

to conclude that the modular method was most often used from the mid-1 4th cen¬

tury onwards. In the 16th and 17th centuries the technique of facing work was sim¬

plified. The joints were not hidden and the facade is clearly modular. The main

reasons for deformations and destruction of tiles are two: the continental climate

and earthquakes causing uneven settling of different parts of the buildings.

Extreme temperatures weaken the binding of the glaze to the shard, as the

coefficients of linear expansion are different. As a result the glaze cracks and falls

off. Elements of mosaic expand and press against the glaze during heating. The

mortar changes colours and pieces of mosaic fall off. Facing tiles that face south

and southeast are most susceptible to deformation. But the most deformations arise

if moisture penetrates the mortar. The hydroscopic paste absorbs moisture and

expands, making the tiles convex. The moisture weakens the adhesion of the mor¬

tar and destroys the fusion of the facade and its sleeve with the construction brick¬

work, and the entire facade layer is ruined (illustration 28).

Earthquakes are equally harmful to facades. Cracks form, layers fall off.

Where the different parts of the building join, cracks penetrate between the con¬

struction brickwork and facing layers, often due to uneven settling. The facing near

the cracks deforms and ruins the facade. Irreparable harm has been done by thieves.

2. V. Vyatkln. Ancient monuments of Samarkand. Samarkand, 1927; B.N. Zasypkin. Archi¬tectural monuments of Central Asia. M., 1928; G.N. Tomaev. Restitution of facing of archi¬tectural monuments in Samarkand. Collected works of the Moscow Architectural Institute,

Issue 1, M., 1940.

82 I.E. Pletnev

A traveller wrote in 1 894 that he bought from mullah Gur-Emir "Five pieces of tile for

five roubles" and that he had a whole bag of "fragments from the monument"3. Theft

before the revolution was so severe that the military governor had to issue a special

resolution, "On measures against misuse of Samarkand regional monuments"4, which

had little effect. The mullahs themselves stole from their own buildings. "The theft

of tiles increased when suppliers and agents of antiquity trading firms appeared the

archaeological commission in St Petersburg has long tried to stop this theft and

confiscate the best pieces for museums. This has helped."5

The lack of any effective system of control of old buildings and irresponsible

officials led to many artistic tiles being stolen.The artistic ceramic facade also serves

as a protective shell for the body of the building. Thus restoration work has

an important role to play in the effort to preserve the monuments.

BASIC STAGES OF REPAIR-RESTORATION WORK.

There have been attempts to preserve crumbling buildings and strengthen

and rebuild remaining facades at various times and using various techniques. We

use the term repair-restoration work. This refers to urgent engineering-strengthen¬

ing measures: construction of counterforces, support walls, and so on. Now more

accurate terms exist: a) conservation - preserving constructions and decoration

in their present condition; b) restoration - renewal on the basis of research and

documents of early building facades and decoration; c) repair work - strengthening

individual deformations of buildings and details of early building facades and deco¬

ration on the basis of research and documents; d) improvements.

Scientific restoration can be partial or complete depending on the degree of

loss and the iconographie material. Restoration work is preceded by a thorough

study of the building's history, construction and materials, and the architectural-

decorative plan, a complete and detailed measurement of all parts, and, where

necessary, archaeological work. On the basis of research, a plan of reconstruction

3. L. Dmitriev-Kavkazski. Across Central Asia. Notes of an artist. St. Petersburg, 1894, p.108.

4. Mandatory regulation by the military governor of the Samarkand region published ac¬cording to Article 421 , vol. II, 1892 "On measures against deliberate spoiling ancient monu¬ments in the Samarkand region", "Turkestanskie Vedomosti", 1897, No.75.

5.in the Samarkand region", "Turkestanskie Vedomosti", 1905, No. 134.

Chapter IV. 83

according to the original condition of the monument is made. If there are original

documents on this, the question of partial or total reconstruction is raised. The char¬

acter and methodology of conducting restoration or conservation work is deter¬

mined case by case, and depends on practical viability, the degree of research, and

the technical possibilities. Scientific restoration of buildings to their original condi¬

tion is still in the early stages.

The first trials took place thirty years ago. In the intervening years there

have been several major restoration projects. In the process of solving problems

connected with theoretical development and practical work, several general prin¬

ciples and concrete approaches to restoration have emerged. They serve

as a basis for working out one of the most important divisions of the methodology

of restoration work6.

The pre-revolutionary practice of preserving ancient monuments has noth¬

ing in common with scientific restoration, since it had one goal: preserving the

remains without any attempt to restore the loss. In this respect, the repair of the

Shakhi-Zinda ensemble is instructive. It was undertaken in the 1870s by the

Russian administration and carried out by military engineers. Dilapidated parts of

the walls and socles of many mausoleums were dismantled and rebuilt with

European-style brick; the facade remains, both outer and inner, were plastered,and weak extrusions were discarded. It is clear now that this method of work was

not viable and it is vital that all documentary remains now be carefully preserved

with a view someday to renewing the lost pieces.

Pre-revolutionary repairs did serious damage to the buildings. An archaeo¬

logical commission sent to Samarkand in the 1890s to organise measures to pre¬

serve ancient buildings did little more than describe their sorry appearance, and

conclude that it was impossible to preserve most of them. To preserve facades,

they suggested that brick walls should be built under them, fully or as arches, and

where the facade had separated, that it should be attached to the walls with iron

staples7. These suggestions remained on paper, and meanwhile the facades

6. "Methods of restoration of architectural monuments" published by the Academy of con¬

struction and architecture in 1961 ignores completely issues on conservation and restora¬tion of architectural and art ceramics.

7. N. Veselovski. About the Samarkand antiquities. "Turkestanskie Vedomosti", 1899, No.55.

84 I.E. Pletnev

continued to decay. Uncontrolled repairs were limited to plastering pieces of fallen

tiles and fissures. The Tsarist administration was not interested in seriously strength¬

ening the monuments of Asian territories, and the money earned from selling

precious items stolen by mullahs was not used for restoration. In 1895, the Ministry

of Finance gave 13,000 roubles to preserve Samarkand monuments, but this was

only enough to prepare blueprints for Gur-Emir. Various commissions made pro¬

posals but had no funds or power. The relationship to monuments changed radi¬

cally with the revolution. In 1920, a special state organ to preserve monuments was

organized. The main method of preserving monuments was to preserve them in

their existing state.

Practically this method was not useful for Uzbekistan: the losses required

some remedial materials to preserve some parts from moisture, wind, and other

elements. To protect the facades against the aggressive actions of moisture

required constructive measures: building brackets on upper parts of dilapidated

buildings and adding insulating covers. This introduced some foreign elements which

changed the appearance of the monuments.

The first work, done in 1920-22 by engineer B.N. Kastalskii, is a good ex¬

ample of this. When strengthening the facade to mausoleum No 2 at Shakhrisabz,

he attempted to neutralize the white colour of the plaster addition by introducing red

clay into it. The experiment was unsuccessful: the mix of red clay gave an unpleas¬

ant bright red shade, which clashed with the background of blue tiles. The rest

of the conservation was done very carefully; only the absolutely necessary areas

were touched, which only marginally affected the original facing.

In 1 923 at the request of the USSR Academy of Science B.N. Zasypkin was

sent to Samarkand to manage the repair-restoration work in Uzbekistan. He invited

Abdukadyr Bakiev, Shamsuddin Gafurov, Shirin Muradov, Mirkhamid lunusov and

others to work with him. At that time no Russian architects or engineers were famil¬

iar with gypsum mix brickwork, unlike local masters. In 1922-30 tiles were strength¬

ened with gypsum mortar and fragments of majolica mosaic in many monuments

in Samarkand and Bukhara8. Besides the task of preserving facades, some first

steps were taken to work out methods for reproducing lost ceramic details. The first

8. I.I. Umnyakov. Architectural monuments of Central Asia. (Research. Repair works. Res¬toration. 1920-1925). Tashkent, 1929.

Chapter IV. 85

experiment in this area was the restoration of braiding framing the portal arches of

the Shirdor Medressah done in 1 925 along with re-laying of the vault over the niche

of the portal. The missing majolica decorative braiding was filled with gypsum plas¬ter, reproducing the form of the spirals. Reed stalks were used as reinforcement,

and to attach it, ancient arched consoles were used, to which blocks of the original

facing were fused. The master A. Bakiev carried out the restoration of the braidingunder the supervision of B.N. Zasypkin.

In 1938, the conservation was carried out on the facade of the mausoleum

Shadi-Mulk in Shakhrisabz. Reinforcement of the upper parts of the portal was

done using the methods worked out (relaying of brickwork of destroyed brick

construction, reattaching of facade, filling in defects with smooth plaster). There

were missing areas in the corner columns of the socle part of the mausoleum, made

from carved glazed terracotta. Master N. Yunusov made a form and filled the miss¬

ing parts of the two capitals and base. Clay tinted with loess was used for filler.

Although ornamented relief details were weak, the result was still an accurate

reproduction of the architectural form of the columns. Seen in contrast to the

remaining facade, the columns gave an accurate reproduction of the original

appearance without hiding the fact that it was a repair. Both examples used

gypsum. Remaining bits were used to reproduce analogous details. These remains

were not changed, and the restoration was true to the form indicated by the

remains, though the colour and style differed from the original.

By the end of the 1930s several general principles had emerged from the

work by restorers to reinforce the facades, which were followed by all restorers. The

means of preserving facades depended on the degree of loss and the character of

the ruined facade layer. In cases where there was destruction to the mortar holdingthe surface layer to the brickwork, but the surface style was in good condition, it was

not necessary to redo the facade completely. For example, on the side walls of the

niche at the northern entrance to the mosque in the Tuman-aka mausoleum the

bulging layer of the facade was reattached with fine metal spikes, and the space

between the facade and the brickwork was filled with gypsum mortar.

In other cases, where there was a gap between the facade and the brick¬

work and bits of mosaic were coming loose and falling, as for example on the drum

of the courtyard facade of the Mir-Arab Medressah in Bukhara, the damaged parts

of the facade, after preliminary photographing, were glued with sacking, removed

86 I.E. Pletnev

and after cleaning the facing layer on the backside of dilapidated filler, attached withsockets to the new mortar. At the Shirin-beka-aka mausoleum, the destruction of

the facing was more complex. Here there were large pieces of facing that had sepa¬

rated from the brickwork, and parts fallen off, with large empty areas. The question

arose of what to do in those areas where pieces of mosaic had fallen, and where

the remaining pieces could still be used to make a general composition. B.N. Zasypkin

proposed using a new method of conservation which involved the following9:

Each bordure, panel or belt was always framed by light blue or blue ribbons

that the restorers at the Samarkand workshop were able to prepare. It was pro¬

posed that the framing of architectural articulations should be restored in the empty

places, and on the edges of some strips and panels all the remaining bits of facing

or the mortar with prints of fallen mosaic pieces should be attached. The repair

plaster was carefully removed from the area under conservation, under which there

were various parts: completely lost facing layer, mortar with prints of fallen

elements of mosaic, and finally remaining fragments.

The prints drew special attention, since it was possible to make a drawing ofthe lost mosaic from them. The master A. Umarov did the work under the supervi¬

sion of the artist M.F. Afanasiev, who kept a diary with drawings. Restoration was

done from glazed strips of framing of all architectural articulations. As a result,

on the preserved surface, the exact contours of belts, panels and ribbons are clearly

seen. Parts with lost facing layer are filled with tinted gypsum mortar. Unique parts

of the mosaic, preserved in the prints, were not plastered, but attached with

polychlorvinyl.

The outbreak of the war in 1941 put an end to the preservation programme,

but it marked the beginning of an improvement in conservation methods. On the

Shirin-beka-aka mausoleum it was used and later developed and used elsewhere

(illustration 30). In 1924-5 under the supervision of B.N. Zasypkin, repair work onthe Shirdor mausoleum was undertaken. The relaying of the fault of the portal and

deformed cupolas marked a transition in restoration practice to a higher level:

together with palliative measures already in place, decisive intervention in thedeformed constructions was undertaken to preserve them in the long run. The full

scale nature of the work meant a new approach to solving the question of conserva-

9. B.N. Zasypkin. Issues of research and restoration of the Shakhi-Zinda ensemble inSamarkand. Archives of the UOPMK, file No.540.

Chapter IV. 87

tion of facing tiles on facades of the medressah, changing the appearance of the

city streets. In the process of cleaning the medressah, many fallen tiles were found.

They were used for restoration in some areas of destroyed facades, and the other

places with extensive loss were filled with facing tiles of square prone brick. This

was the first case of restoration of polychrome architectural-artistic ceramics in

Uzbekistan. It showed the possibility of conducting work like this on a broad scale.

But it was first necessary to learn how to prepare tiles which corresponded to the

colour and durability of old tiles. From 1925 onwards, experiments on ancient

ceramics and how to produce them were undertaken. After ten years, Samarkand

masters had learned how to prepare tiles very similar to ancient tiles. This allowed

the restoration of mosaic tiles on large areas. Now, where there are sufficient

remains, full restoration is possible.

In 1939-41 missing parts of the facing from the lower parts of the pylons

of the Ulugbek Medressah portal and the main facade of the Tilliakari Medressah

in Samarkand were restored using new tiles (illustration 31). A small collective

of masters under B.N. Zasypkin worked on small, relatively simple restoration

projects. In 1941 the Uzbek government issued a resolution on the general restora¬

tion of the Gur-Emir ensemble and the question of strengthening the Samarkand

restoration workshop with specialists. On the initiative of B.N. Zasypkin, a school

for restorers was set up in Samarkand, which existed till 1943, which in those two

years managed to prepare several specialists (I. Shermukhamedov, I. Nigmatov

and others), who played an important role in later restoration. For work on Gur-

Emir, A. Umarov, M. Yunusov, Sh. Gafurov, K. Djalilov and their students Sh. Isakov,

A. Kuliev and others were invited to participate. There was not the same quality

of specialists in architectural restoration research. Universities did not prepare

specialists.

This specialty could only be obtained through experience. To carry out re¬

search, surveying and project work, B.N. Zasypkn invited architects, engineers and

technicians from time to time. They included M.F. Mauer, G. I. Soloviev, M.K.

Rakhimov, V.V. Samoilov, A.K. Lazarev, and P.V. Dudukin. Some graduates of the

Tashkent Polytechnic Institute in the 1950s studied restoration. The need for a col¬

lective of architects devoted to the study and restoration of monuments led to the

organization of a restoration production workshop where specialists gathered.

1 0. Conservation of the tympanum and braid on the main portal of the Ulughbek Madrassahwas accomplished according to the project and under supervision by architect I. Ye. Pletnev.

88 I.E. Pletnev

The coordination of research, project and restoration work for Samarkand was done

by I.E. Pletnev, for Bukhara by K.S. Kriukov, for Khiva by I.I. Notkin, and for Termez

by V.M. Filimonov. Constant creative discussion between restorers and leading

architects was mutually beneficial and allowed for successful solutions to many

practical and theoretical questions in restoration, especially ceramic facing. Below

is a description of the outstanding work in conservation and restoration of ceramic

facing from 1 925-60.

CONSERVATION OF ARCHITECTURAL-ARTISTIC CERAMICS.

The conservation of the tympanum and braiding on the main portal of the

Ulugbek Medressah in Samarkand was a major work. When research was done

in 1955, many deformations and crooked parts in the body of the tympanum were

discovered, and almost complete destruction of the mosaic facing was observed10

(illustration 32). The upper part of the north pylon of the portal was leaning outward,

and had separated from the tympanum, and as a result, on the edge between them

a fissure had formed. The vault in the shelyg was sagging, the part of the parapet of

the wall over it was sitting on it, and a vertical fissure in the north-eastern corner had

formed, running from the top through to the bottom of the tympanum.

Ancient builders had made a serious mistake fatal to the facing of the tym¬

panum: the weight-bearing arch over the vault was fully in contact with the brick¬

work of the vault without room for the braiding, as for example on the main portal

of the Shirdor Medressah. The facing of the tympanum in some places 0.5 m thick

is a large part of the weight, and it was bearing on the braiding, forcing that purely

decorative form to act as a weight-bearing part of the construction. Even a small

deviation in the joining of the facing with the brickwork of the tympanum resulted

in excess load on the braiding, destroying it together with the facing bearing down

on it.

The construction brickwork of the tympanum was done carelessly and

already during production was crooked and leaning from the vertical, forcing a varia¬

tion in the thickness of the facing. The facing preserved in the lower right corner

of the tympanum was 15-35 cm thick, and on top of the arch up to 50 cm, on the left

edge falling to 30 cm. The facing itself everywhere on the tympanum was the same

thickness, about 8 cm (2 cm faience tiles and 6 cm gypsum). Correction of the

uneven brickwork of the facing surface was done by immediate construction

Chapter IV. 89

of lining in the form of square brickwork prone. If there was excess gypsum mortar,

the sleeve would hold firm to the facing, and a unit would form, increasing the over¬

all mass of the facing layer. This facing layer was held on the vertical smooth wall

only by the mortar, since the console girders, usually placed for strengthening the

facing, were not used on the tympanum of the Ulugbek Medressah. Probably, the

original builders worked from the back when doing the brickwork of the parapet

of the wall, and the scaffolding was built on beams extending from the pylons of the

portal. Preserved fragments of the tympanum facing show the technique

of ensemble majolica mosaic in combination with white marble framing and reliefornament.

The composition of geometric patterns on the tympanum was made

on a diagonal square network and appears as a composition of large sixteen- and

eight- cornered figures with small five-cornered stars around them. There is no right

geometrical construction to the composition. Large many-sided figures are placed

in corners of square networks and linked diagonally. Five-pointed stars and many-

cornered figures between them, including uneven six-sided figures, were done with

other elements inserted between them. The form of many five-pointed stars is dis¬

torted and six-cornered figures vary one from another. The entire composition,

despite the geometric basis, is not accurately formed in the top of the tympanum.

The horizontal distance between the centres of the many-sided figures is greater

than the vertical. There are extrusions due to the necessity of placing one of the

vertical axes right in the middle of the tympanum. But the mistake in the spacing

of the tympanum which is visible to the eye, is hardly noticeable from the ground.The builders no doubt took this into account, and the mosaic work itself on the

tympanum was done very carelessly in comparison to the panel in the lower parts of

the portal. The masters had a surprising feeling of size when decorating the tympa¬num.

They were able to determine the size that was absolutely necessary of all

elements of the composition done at a great height, and create the overall image

of stars in the sky, of which each detail is clearly seen from the ground, and which

resemble jewels. Some coloured spots on the tympanum are impressive sizes. The

lack of experience and mosaics experts in Samarkand meant it was not possible

to restore the pattern of the tympanum in its original form, using majolica mosaic,

although graphic reconstruction of the composition of the tympanum was done byus in all details on the basis of remaining fragments. Earlier restoration work showed

90 I.E. Pletnev

that plastering over lost areas of facing gave a short term effect; in two to three

years, the plaster began to crumble and fall off, sometimes taking the original facingwith it. It was natural for restorers to turn to terracotta as a material. Of all the facing

on the tympanum, only 10% remained. Because the tympanum was covered

in terracotta, the original composition became unintelligible. Thus it was decided

to execute the geometric pattern of the tympanum on terracotta. All elements of the

ancient facing (stars and other figures) from the outer side were outlined in lightblue.

Renewing only this edging would have been in essence a graphic restora¬

tion of the geometric pattern of the tympanum in its natural dimension, but the

preserved ancient fragments gave a clear indication of the actual basis of restora¬

tion in their nature. At the same time, a network of girih would lighten and liven the

amorphous terracotta smooth surface of the restored tympanum. The thickness

of the facing was substantial in places. To even out the surface of the tympanum,

it was necessary to add to the facing layers. Adding prone bricks, as done in ancient

lining under facing resulted in the creation of conditions which ultimately led to the

destruction of the tympanum. To repeat the mistake made no sense. Thus,

the restoration project tried to create a construction which would take the weight

from the facing and transfer it to the portal brickwork.

An important decision in the project was the following: metal consoles were

placed in the construction brickwork of the tympanum, and onto them metal beamswere affixed, adding several tiers to the plane of the tympanum. In the lower part of

the tympanum, on the braiding, a metal belt was built, bent out according to the

shape of the arch, and attached to the consoles. The beams and belt acted as a

support base for the facing wall of the tympanum, whose thickness could be re¬

duced to a half brick. The gap between the original and restored walls of the tympa¬

num was covered on top by an iron plate, fastened with ribbing to the pylons of the

portal. The number of consoles was reduced to a minimum, and thus the opening inthe construction brickwork of the tympanum for their placement. In the final version

of the project there are 38 openings.

The restoration of the tympanum was begun in 1956. Renewing the geo¬

metric composition on the tympanum was done by I. Shermukhamedov. Attaching

the remaining fragments of facing and using them as the basis of the composition,he determined the centres of the basic figures of the girix. Gypsum mortar was used

Chapter IV. 91

in the brickwork, without vertical seams; horizontal seams were carefully removed;

the facing facets of the brickwork were polished. On the smooth surface of the

tympanum around the centres, the master outlined double pencil lines, depicting

the pattern of girix taking into account the width of the tile ribbons. But for this in the

brickwork, it was necessary to make grooves 2 cm deep, which was not easy. He

tried using an electric drill with the appropriate thickness. This worked, and the

most labour-intensive part of the job moved quickly. In the grooves, light blue tile-

ribbons were affixed with gypsum mortar, prepared by A. Khodjaev (illustration 33).

Alongside this work, the braiding was done, framing the portal of the arch. The

upper part (15 m) collapsed and was restored with gypsum plaster. There was sig¬

nificant loss of spirals.

Ancient braiding was done with majolica blocks of double curvature, made

on the lining of beaten brick and gypsum mortar and attached to the beams extend¬

ing from the brickwork of the vault. The spirals were not close to each other. Be¬

tween them was a gap of 4 cm. The branches of the spirals were on a half-cylindri¬

cal surface and moved at a 60 angle to the contour of the arch of the vault. The

length of one spiral along its branch was 130 cm. Majolica spirals were covered

with geometric and plant patterns of three types made with great delicacy. The

symmetry in the spirals and patterns was not uniform (¡llustration 36). In the restora¬

tion of braiding, experience was gained from similar work on the portal of the Shirdor

Medressah in 1925. Then, the form of lost majolica braiding was renewed with

gypsum. However, the question of restoration of braiding from ceramics was raised,

and only the lack of appropriate technology prevented it.

To restore braiding on the Ulugbek Medressah portal, it was decided to use

ceramic blocks prepared in the forms of ancient tiles, but without glaze, using the

method used on Shirdor, only with better materials. The experiment in preparing

ceramic blocks of double curvature was successful. In a gypsum form taken from

an old spiral, well-soaked clay was pressed. To ensure durability of the clay, reed

fluff was added during drying of the formed blocks. Each spiral consisted of three

blocks 19 cm wide and a maximum of 50 cm long. To determine the necessary

number of spirals, a graphic construction of the screw was made. Between the first

and last points of the screw, with full turning, four widths of the screw were made,

i.e., the framing of the niche of the portal could be seen as a cylindrical form with

four parallel waves (goffers). But in fact, half of the cylindrical form was embedded

one quarter in the edges of the niche, and the spirals appeared as extrusions from

92 I.E. Pletnev

the wall going back into the wall after a half-turn. To restore the destroyed part of the

braiding, it was necessary to prepare seventy half-spirals or two hundred and ten

ceramic blocks. And that was only for restoration of the completely destroyed parts.

But there were also losses on other spirals, and for their repair, another fifty block

were necessary (illustration 34). Spirals of braiding on the left and right parts of the

framing go in different directions. The character of their intertwining is not known.

Framing with braiding of portal arches was widely used at the end of the

14th-15th centuries. Braiding decorates the portals of the mosques Bibi-khanum,

the Ok-Sarai palace in Shakhrisabz, the Ulugbek Medressah in Bukhara and

others. However, nowhere has the braiding been preserved to the top of arches;

the upper parts are destroyed. In some 14th-17th century buildings in Iran, the

braiding framing of arches has been preserved (Madjid-I-Djami in Kurman, 1349;

Madjid-I-Shakh in Isfahan, 1603, and others). There, the spirals gradually become

more vertical as they approach the keystone, and at the keystone on the facade

side are completely vertical. This pattern was used for restoration of braiding in the

portal of the Ulugbek Medressah.

The lower parts of the restored tympanum lean against a metal belt framing

the arch of the portal. This belt was made with a space from the edge of the arch for

making a quarter in which the new spiral was mounted. On the reverse side of the

ceramic blocks used to make the spiral of braiding, lugs were made to attach blocks

with a wire to the metal belt. Along the braiding, every 1 .5-2 m in the brickwork iron

pins were placed to attach the blocks. After mounting the axis between the brick¬

work of the arch and the blocks was filled with mortar. Making the braiding from

terracotta was a great creative success (illustration 35).

Terracotta as a complementary material has several universal qualitiesbecause of the nature of the material itself. The active colour forced restorers

to continue looking for better inert fillers for losses of coloured facing. We experi¬

mented using previously glazed majolica tiles painted only with coloured spots,

which fitted the colour scheme of the restored composition. Trial completion of losses

in the majolica tympanum on the east facade of the Ulugbek Medressah in

Samarkand showed the possibility of using such tiles for completing small areas of

11. B.N. Zasypkin. Restoration of the Ismail Samanid mausoleum. Archives of the UOPMK,file No.540.

Chapter IV. 93

loss in artistic ceramics on monuments. On the south facade of the same medressah,

lost tympanum decorative arches were completed with majolica tiles. We can make

some recommendations about this method. Majolica tiles with colouring can be

used for small losses in majolica or mosaic compositions (tympanums, panels, strips)

at a long distance from the viewer.

RESTORATION OF ARCHITECTURAL CERAMICS.

Restoration of facades from unglazed terracotta. In 1928 under the direc¬

tion of B.N. Zasypkin, mausoleums in Uzgent were repaired, including general

strengthening work (repair of cupolas, relaying of brickwork in deformed parts of

socles, walls, facades). The restoration of small parts of loss was done with terracotta

tiles. Old fragments found during digs were used as the basis for the walls of the

mausoleums, though some parts of the facing details were rebuilt from old bricks.

The south-eastern corner columns of the south mausoleum and braiding on the

pylon of the middle mausoleum were partly restored this way. The experience was

successful and confirmed the possibility of restoring losses in decoration with un¬

glazed terracotta. Experimental restoration of elements of terracotta facing tiles

made from old bricks was a step forward in comparison with plastering. This expe¬

rience was used in the major restoration of the Ismail Samanid mausoleum inBukhara11 in the 1930s.

At the beginning of the research in 1 926, the mausoleum in the centre of the

small cemetery was scarcely noticed, surrounded on all sides by brick vaulted graves

(sagana). In 1926-8, archaeologist V.L. Viatkin dug up the monument on all sides

and the mausoleum then stood in a wide trench. During the next decade, the land¬

scape around the monument changed: the cemetery was liquidated, and instead of

the half-destroyed living quarters, a ring road was built around it, and a park was

laid out. The question of restoring the mausoleum arose (illustration 37). In 1937-9,

B.N. Zasypkin conducted detailed research and worked out scientific recommenda¬

tions for restoration. The main principle was the full preservation of all old parts

(even the smallest elements) in their place. Therefore the removal of the repair

layer from the walls of the mausoleum was done under the direct observation of

researchers, so that every detail would be detected. For restoring partly lost ele¬

ments, as many fragments as possible had to be collected. All arches over niches

and embrasures were supported by columns, and remains of one of these columns

were found on the south side. They confirmed the pattern for the other columns

94 I.E. Pletnev

covered under layers of plaster. In fact, fragments on the west side were then

discovered and in other places, providing essential material for a detailed restora¬

tion of the columns.

No less complex was the solution to the question of how to complete the

destroyed walls. On three sides, no remains were found under plaster, except the

smooth, slightly deepened frieze, which had been moved during a previous repair.But details of a cornice were discovered on the north-eastern corner and north wall

under various layers,. The walls had been completed by a belt frieze with rings,

made of small bricks and ganch. It was impossible to put rings in the curved corners

of the frieze, and these places were filled with brick on its side.

After removing the plaster from the corner cupolas in cylindrical parts and

the brickwork, consisting of paired bricks typical for mausoleums (23 x 23 x 3 cm),

it was clear that the cupolas themselves had been positioned rather carelessly.

They had been made from oblong brick and added in the 12th century. Nothing

of the original form of the cupolas was remaining. Thus the small cupolas were left

as is, and seams were added of mortar. The large cupola of the mausoleum was left

as is. The walls of the interior were cleaned of plaster. They were strong, though

with salts on the brick in the lower parts, which were removed with hot water.

During the restoration of lost details problems of an artistic-technical nature

arose. In the facing of the mausoleum, old masters used bricks prepared in a primi¬

tive way, which did not have a standard form or even edges. The style of the mau¬

soleum and the light grey-yellow colour of the brickwork added greatly to the beautyof the monument. The introduction of details made from new brick would introduce

dissonance. It was decided that only ancient Samanid bricks, found during excava¬

tions around the mausoleum, should be used for restoration. But what mortar should

be used? The mausoleum used gypsum mortar. The original white colour of the

mortar had darkened during the intervening ten centuries.

Pure gypsum would produce a white line. The idea of using old mortar from

the destroyed living quarters nearby and cemetery arose. In the kiln built nearby,

a dark grey mortar was produced and used for the facade. Hidden work was done

with white gypsum. The restoration team was headed by the people's master Shirin

Muradov. Despite his wide experience and first-rate expertise, Muradov was not

successful at first in restoring the lost parts. In some cases, the new brickwork

Chapter IV. 95

looked 'better', 'more correct', than the old, and did not blend in; in other cases,

when the intention was to imitate the old, the result was slovenly. These parts had

to be redone until the appropriate process was settled on. The columns of the upper

arches, friezes, lower parts of corner columns and many details and losses in fa¬cade walls were then done.

At present, the mausoleum has the look of a well-preserved monument. All

old parts are in their proper place, and the restored details do not stand out from the

general appearance. They may only be identified from photographs (illustration 38).

The solution to similar problems during the restoration of the portal of the Magoki-

Attari mosque in Bukhara was somewhat different, though by the same team

of restorers12. Digs in 1934 revealed lower parts of the main facade with remains

of 12th century ceramic facing. The fragments showed the unique composition

of the facade, though they were too few to enable reconstruction of the overall

composition. Thus the solution was to reattach the fragments and to plaster the lost

areas with gypsum. The resulting patches stood out and destroyed the effect of the

beautiful brickwork style. To prevent this it was decided that the fallen bits and even

dilapidated bricks which had lost their form should be renewed with ancient technol¬

ogy, i.e., from pressed and polished bricks.

This way, besides the artistic effect, restorers would guarantee a strongconstructive reinforcement of the facade. Muradov was unable to achieve the nec¬

essary colour with new bricks, which were lighter, so the restored places are visible.

However, they have darkened with time, and in a few more decades, the difference

will have disappeared (¡llustration 40). Restoration of tiled facades. The first major

work to restore tiled facades was carried out on the ribbed cupola of the Gur-Emirmausoleum.

The cupola is 12 m high and 15 m in diameter. The surface is articulated

with 64 half-cylindrical intertwined seams. On the lower part at a height of 3.9 m the

seams are parallel and strictly vertical, then gradually blend into the upper cupolain the form of pointed arches. Under each seam is a double-tiered cell of stalactite

cornice which forms a harmonic transition to the smooth cylinder of the drum.

The tiled facing on the stalactite cornice and on the vertical part of the seams was

1 2. B.N. Zasypkin. Restoration of the facing of the 1 2th c portal of the Magoki-Attari mosque

in Bukhara. Archives of the UOPMK, a manuscript, file No.540.

96 I.E. Pletnev

still there when the restoration started. The pattern of the facade of the lower part of

the cupola, composed of light blue, blue and yellow glazed square (8x8 cm) tiles,

repeats the same geometric motif. Would it be possible to restore the mosaic pic¬

ture on the rest of the cupola? This was the restorers' first question.

During digs at the mausoleum in 1924 and 1943, many slightly convex tiles

from the cupola were found. They all had the same size (8 x 8) sometimes with

variation of 3 mm on one side. Light blue glazed tiles in the form of truncated half-

conuses were also found. The largest were 17 cm in diameter, the smallest 2.5 cm,

and from these restorers could deduce that the cupola facade of the upper

preserved parts continued the geometric pattern made from tiles, and closer to the

top the seams were covered by light blue tiles. To confirm this, all remaining frag¬

ments were studied, including those covered by plaster. In 1947 the architects B.N.

Zasypkin and A.K. Lazarev analysed the seams from the repair layers. They deter¬

mined that the upper part of the cupola in a radius of 2 m from the top was covered

with glazed tiles, and the remaining surface with mosaic tiles.

The pattern of mosaic at all heights was the same, but because of the thin¬

ning of the seams it was cut off at the edges. The project to restore the cupola wasdone in the form of conventional entwining of four seams.Great attention was paid

to the study of the construction and technology of the facing work by ancient mas¬

ters. The thickness of the cupola was mostly two bricks (50 cm) and the projection

of the seam 35 cm. Seams in the lower part were bound in the brickwork of the

cupola, in the upper part with the false brickwork.

The joining of seams mostly had the form of crossing over with two half-

circles at their meeting. But there were gaps between the seams of up to 7 cm

covered in light blue tiles. This is because during construction, masters, determin¬

ing the diameter of the seams as 1/64 of the length of the circumference of thedrum, could not observe accurate geometric sizes, since there were irregularities

between the brickwork and cupola, and the preliminary seams.

The large dimensions of the cupola excluded the possibility of solving this

using a rotating curve piece. Probably the curve piece was affixed in one place,

and the brickwork was adjusted with a twine attached to a pole in the centre of the

cupola. Measuring the twine along the curve piece radiuses and placing them

at any point of the circumference, masters were able to shape the cupola with the

Chapter IV. 97

necessary contour. The presence of seams meant that when the brickwork of the

cupola was being done with rings, division into 64 parts was maintained. The twine

was also used as indicators for facing the seams. Research into the preliminary

brickwork of the seams revealed wooden sticks fanning out every 70-100 cm alongthe top of the cupola, which were used as indicators. The middle ones marked the

direction of the seams, and the edge ones the width of the seams at the given

height. Measurement for the facing work was done at the same time as the prelimi¬nary brickwork of the cupola by one specialized team.

Before restoring the facade, it was necessary to solve the problem of the

form of the cupola. Fissures in the north part of the cupola had destroyed the brick¬

work and seriously distorted its form; the cupola bulged there, and the lower part of

the seams leaned inward. Regarding the cleaned seams from the top of the cupola,

it was easy to see that they were not centred. With the help of theodolite, a math¬

ematically correct axis of the cupola was determined as 60 cm to the south east of

the centre of the existing cupola, i.e., the cupola shifted in height to the north west

from its original position. This revealed a complex deformation, distorting the formof the cupola in all directions.

It meant determining the character of distortion of each seam, and for this it

was necessary to determine with as much accuracy as possible the form of distor¬

tion of the cupola. The distortion was determined as the result of the intersection

of two ellipses. A model made of wood was erected to verify this. Without dwellingon the character of the deformation in each seam, the determination of the elliptical

model showed that to restore the cupola to a correct geometric form required rais¬

ing the brickwork 30-35 cm on the west side and lowering it the same amount on the

north and north east sides. Moving the model and attaching it to seams, the mas¬

ters laid out brick column-indicators in those places necessary due to the destruc¬

tion of the brickwork, and noted those spots where it was necessary to reduce it.

In some spots the brickwork should be cut up to 50 cm according to the model.

But this would weaken the thickness of the walls. Therefore restorers de¬

cided to reduce it less and make corresponding corrections to the form of the seams,

such that the remaining defect was not so noticeable. To restore four seams that

were completely lost, a separate model was made. The basic brickwork of the cu¬

pola was carefully repaired. Large fissures were filled with brickwork; the surface of

the seams was evened out with gypsum mortar. Work to restore the facing of the

98 I.E. Pletnev

cupola was done by senior Samarkand masters A. Umarov, M. Yunusov, Sh. Gafurov,

K. Djalilov and students Sh. Isakov, I. Nigmatov, and A. Kuliev under the direction of

B.N. Zasypkin13 (illustration 39).

The masters proposed that one of the seams on the west side of the cupola

be chosen as a standard; its plaster gave it the appearance it should have when

facing was done. The standard seam was divided into a ring of height 50-75 cm (1 0-

15 horizontal rows of facing). With each ring, step by step upwards, the gypsum

form was removed and was used for gathering blocks of facing. For convenience,the form was cut in two halves. The surface of the mould was articulated on

a network of horizontal and vertical rows of facing, corresponding to the plan devel¬

opment (reaming). The tiles were laid on the form or mould in the necessary order

face down and liquid gypsum mortar was poured on them. The blocks thus pre¬

pared guaranteed a uniform size and order for mounting.

The team usually consisted of four to five men. The master conducted all

necessary accounting for the preparation of blocks (trimming the seams along the

height on blocks, spreading out the net on the moulds) and when mounting the

facing, joined the blocks together. Two students prepared the form and collected

the blocks from tiles; one or two workers assisted. The seams were mostly joined

directly, but sometimes there were gaps. The masters tried to fill these gaps, which

meant that half the mosaic blocks at the joint were moved and in the middle of the

seam there was a depression.

The desire not to cut off the edge in spots where seams joined too tightly

meant joining halves of a block with a sharp corner. In both cases, the smoothness

of the network of seams was violated. There were breakthroughs in the joining

of blocks placed one on top of the other. The standard used for preparing blocks

was a medium form of seam; each concrete seam deviated from this form. Observ¬

ing the smoothness of the curve at a height of 10-15 rows was impossible. The

prepared blocks had to be cut in rings in 3-5 rows. Sample seams were redone

several times until the technique of installing the mosaic blocks was mastered; then

work proceeded quickly and without mistakes. The seams had changing cutting:

from 70 cm in diameter in the lower part to 18 cm in the upper. Observing the exact

13. B.N. Zasypkin. Research report on restoration works undertaken at the Gur Emir en¬semble in 1948. Archives of the UOPMK, a manuscript, file No.540.

Chapter IV. 99

curvature of tiles in this range was very complex and practically impossible. In most

cases the tiles were even, despite the fact that before firing masters tried to give

them a gauged form. But that was not important until the lower parts of the seams of

diameters of 70, 60, 50 and 40 cm were assembled, since the curvature changed

little. Otherwise they could get on with the upper parts of the seams. Here, either

changing the curvature of the tiles every several rows or changing to smooth curva¬

ture like those half-cylinder many-faceted seams was necessary.

Guessing the curvature of the tiles was not successful since it developed in

waves (goffer). Thus the seams, as they approached the top, began gradually to

change in a way unnoticeable from below. The mosaic seams ended 2 m from the

centre of the cupola, with light blue conical tiles continuing, and 0.4 m from the top,

yellow tiles. A. Khodjaev's method of making tiles is interesting. On a potter's wheel,

he prepared conical pipes of the necessary diameter, then cut them lengthwise in

half and put them in forms. Unburnt tiles were produced of the correct shape. Hemade 64 sets for the 64 seams. The work on the south facade of the Samarkand

Ulugbek Medressah in 1958 was done this way.

The 18th century restoration plan called for the facade of the wall to be

restored to its two-storey height. 650 m? of surface had to be tiled; there were 67

m? of fragments. Several teams of restorers worked on it , including M. Yunusov, I.

Shermukhamedov, and Sh. Isakov (illustration 41). As the tiled facade with seams

between tiles was done by ancient masters by direct composition, it was proposed

that master M. Yunusov do the same. He refused, saying that tiled facing with seams

was always done using the modular method in order to achieve the necessary pre¬

cision of pattern and size of seams. He was supported by other masters. Each team

prepared an installation model and mapped out a grid of squares. Each area was

divided into rows of tiles. Modules were assembled according to a blueprint.

Tiles were laid face down on the appropriate sport with the left and upper

edges along the lines of the grid. The necessary thickness of the seams between

the tiles was determined as a result. Facing bricks, cut at the edge of the module,

were not used. Their place was filled by clay plugs. The assembled module was

covered with liquid alabaster mortar. To avoid the mortar sticking to the model,

14. Architect Kh. Mamyshev is the author of the project on restoration of the facing of theanaratkhona dome at the Kusam ibn Abbas mausoleum. An experimental model and theshape of relief draft was made by sculptor I. Feodoridis.

100 I.E. Pletnev

it was coated with oil. The size of the modules was usually less than 80 cm. This

made them easy to transport and put in place. Before assembling the lower row of

modules, a mooring line was placed along the facade to keep all parts of the facade

straight. This work was done by the master himself. First the modules were as¬

sembled dry, their desired position obtained, and pins adjusted. Between the mod¬

ules seam-gaps were left of the necessary width.

When the assembling was agreed, they were attached to the wall with gyp¬

sum mortar poured in the gap between the modules and the brickwork. Clay plugs

on the edges of modules were removed; mortar was put in the socket and the

necessary facing element attached. Thus, strip by strip, the facade was assembled.

The modules allowed for uniformity in the positioning of elements and the

thickness of the seams of tiled mosaic in all modules. After attaching and mounting

the common elements of the mosaic in adjacent modules according to the continu¬

ity of the pattern between blocks, the edges of the blocks were no longer visible.

More than a thousand modules were used but in such a way that it is not noticeable,

and the facade appears to be made by direct composition (assembling) (illustration

42).

The seams between 14th-15th century tiles were maintained, similar to ear¬

lier ones, though later ones were done more simply. They were made by direct

assembling. In the 16th century the modular method gave birth to the technique of

seamless facing. Seams between elements of tiled mosaic were not necessary;

they only complicated the process of assembling the modules. Masters began to

lay tiles during the assembling of modules right against each other.

The work of masking the edges when linking the modules disappeared dur¬

ing mounting: the edge elements of the mosaic were cut at the edges of the mod¬

ules and laid directly during assembly. A certain carelessness in linking modules

can be seen. Often the patterns of adjacent modules do not correspond. All this was

studied during the restoration of the Shirdor mausoleum in 1960 by M. Yunusov.

The general method of work for restoring seamless tiled mosaics was and remains

the same as for facades with seams (illustration 43).

Chapter IV. 101

RESTORATION OF CARVED GLAZED CERAMICS FASADES.

So far there has been only one attempt at this. In 1956 on the walls of theziaratkhana at the mausoleum Kusam ibn Abbas in the Shakhrisabz ensemble,

three layers of plaster preserving paintings from various times were discovered14.After research by the artist G.N. Nikitin, a graphic reconstruction of the decorationof the ziaratkhana was made. The possibility of restoring the painting required that

the whole interior be restored. The cupola of the ziaratkhana was completely cov¬

ered in ceramic facing at some point, of which only a strip at the base 1 m wide had

been preserved. The form of the cupola and composition of the facing of its upper

part was not known exactly, but fragments and analogous cupolas in other mauso¬leums of the Shakhrisabz ensemble (Shadi-Mulk and usta Ali) were known.

Carved glazed ceramics dampers (tiaga), oval in cross-section, surroundedthe base of the cupola. Rising in pairs vertically, they divided the cupola into eight

sectors, and spreading out from the top, formed a star with eight rays. The surfacewithin each sector was filled with three-coloured tiled mosaic. Graphic reconstruc¬

tion of the mosaic was done simply: the girih, unfolding on the surface of each

sector, filled the field and practical restoration of the tiled mosaic proved straightfor¬

ward for the Samarkand workshop masters.

It was different with carved dampers with complex plant patterns and relief.

There was no experience, and imitation would spoil the job. A damper was made

from cylinders whose lower part in transverse section was right-angled, and whose

upper part was rounded and covered with repeating pattern of shoots done in lightblue relief. It was necessary to prepare seventy running meters of relief dampers or

235 cylinders of 30 cm in length. At first it seemed that the form taken from oldsamples could serve as a stamp for new details, and the experiment began with the

preparation of a form and an attempt to use it to get the necessary pattern andrelief. It was not successful: the deepening in the model had complex curved linesand the form could not be removed from the model. Then it was decided to fill the

opening in the model almost completely before preparing the form, leaving only a

small relief (0.5 cm). The cylinders thus formed had a clear enough pattern and

traces of grooves that could be deepened later. However the form made from theancient sample gave raw details of the size that should result after firing, and con¬

sequently had to be increased to take the shrinkage into account.A new model was

prepared of the necessary dimension and forms were poured with it for restoring

102 I.E. Pletnev

the dampers. The cylinders formed with weak relief had to be further processed: the

grooves were deepened with specially prepared metal discs. It took three hours to

process each cylinder. After drying they were covered in glaze and fired once. The

fragments of carved glazed ceramics prepared were almost identical to the originalthe results were successful. Restoration of carved ceramic mosaic. This was a dif¬

ficult process.

The restoration of the south facade of the courtyard of the Mukhammad-

Sultan ensemble in Gur-Emir was done this way. The south wall had a belt of con¬

tinuous ribbon with eight-pointed mosaic stars. Masters in Samarkand did not have

experience in mosaic work. Nonetheless the sockets for the stars could not be left

unfilled or filled with other material (e.g., gypsum mortar) in the facing, since it would

give an impression of disharmony. It was decided to finish the stars using painted

majolica, which Samarkand masters knew. First attempts by T.K. Schmidt-Prokopieva

gave adequate results with respect to colour, but the painting was too crude and

partly distorted. This attempt allowed the solution by imitating mosaic stars with

majolica framing. Masters trying to approximate the mosaic were assisted by M.K.

Rakhimov. He tried to make a sample of a mosaic star (illustration 44).

Faience tiles were of good quality and colour. However the technique of

preparing the mosaic was simplified by Rakhimov and the necessary result was not

achieved. Instead of cutting elements of mosaic out of burnt tiles, they were made

from raw mass and were fired after glazing. The star assembled from these pieces

was very different from the original. It did not have a smooth mirror-like surface; the

elements did not fit well together; the painting was crude in some places. This first

experiment was very labour intensive and could not be recommended for mass

production. As for improving the majolica stars, under M. K. Rakhimov samples

were made corresponding to the requirements though the painting was still not

adequate.

In 1949-50 the necessary quantity of majolica stars was prepared and

mounted in sockets on the belt. In the subsequent fifteen years, much has changed

in restoration methods, as has the Samarkand workshop. Now there are experi¬

enced mosaics masters. If the question of restoring the facades of the Mukhammad-

Sultan ensemble is resolved, the lost mosaic stars would be made using the origi¬

nal technique. Our conclusion: inadequate production base and lack of specialists

should not determine the method of production in the sense of replacing old mate-

Chapter IV. 103

rials and methods by imitation, since in the future, the possibility of doing the work

on a higher level may occur. Another criticism: construction materials used in resto¬

ration, including majolica stars were not tested in the lab for salt-resistance and

durability. Now, in the brickwork of the lower parts of the walls, salt residues are

visible, and the glaze from most of the majolica stars has flaked off.

The experience with ceramic mosaics begun by M.K. Rakhimov was contin¬

ued by Samarkand master G.I. Krzhanovskaya who attempted to restore the lost

mosaic belt on the south-west minaret of Mukhammad-Sultan ensemble. The pre¬

served belt on the south-east minaret was used as a model. A technique of prepar¬

ing tiles and glaze was worked out based on experience (¡llustration 46).

Krzhanovskaya made a careful assessment of the process of assembling

the mosaic. Studying the many fragments of mosaic on Samarkand monuments,

she discovered in almost all elements clear traces of processing using a file and

whetstone. Her work yielded good results. Files and whetstone were necessary. In

1955 Krzhanovskaya left Samarkand without finishing the experiment. However

her work was very important in the development of skills in restoring ceramic mosaic.

During her stay, masters learned the technique of making precise elements of mo¬

saic from different coloured tiles, which they used in restoring the facades of the

Ulugbek Medressah.

In 1 956 research was carried out on the courtyard facades of the medressah

with detailed measurements and drawings of all elements, removal of plaster layers

and sounding of the construction15 (illustration 45). In this basis, a project of de¬

tailed restoration of the first floor of the medressah was worked out, foreseeing the

restoration of the courtyard arcade in its original form and restoration of all tiles

on the sides and niches; remaining fragments of ceramic mosaic and majolica were

preserved, and experimental restoration was done in one area. For this, a piece

of destroyed mosaic belt was used which skirted the courtyard arcade. The pattern

on the belt was a rhythmic alternating on a terracotta background with mosaic fig¬

ures in the form of diagonally placed squares and rhombuses. The composition

of vertical and horizontal belts was accented on diagonally placed squares. The

centres of the preserved figures relative to the conventional horizon revealed

15. Architect I. Ye. Pletnev was in charge of the research of the courtyards of the UlughbekMadrassah, development of restoration projects and research supervision of restorationworks.

104 I.E. Pletnev

a picture of local shrinkage of foundations between the arches and some disagree¬

ment in the distance between the centres of figures, although all squares, rhom¬

buses and patterns looked the same.

The lower parts of belts were not preserved, but under a layer of plasterin the north-east corner were found remains of mosaic and sockets from elements

of a madaxil figure, the upper part of which corresponded almost exactly to the

upper part of the rhomboid figure of the belt, and the lower right-angle fitted per¬

fectly into the framework of the belt. The recreation of the madaxil was done

on a slightly larger scale on a working model in the workshop using tracing paper

and ammonia-based copying. On the model the colour of each element of the mo¬

saic was indicated. The tracing paper was placed face down on the model.

They copy was cut along its contours so that each cut-out was a model of

the necessary element. The models were sorted according to colour and glued on

the faience glazed tiles. Then a rough cutting of tiles with a fret-saw or fine hacksaw

was done on the separate parts and each element was polished in a whetstone or

filed to the necessary shape; the corners were filed at a slight angle on the back for

better binding with mortar. The prepared elements of the mosaic were placed face

down on the tracing paper model and liquid gypsum was applied. After the com¬

pleted module was positioned, the paper model was cleaned off its surface (illustra¬

tion 48).

Experimental restoration gave good results, although the earlier ideal smooth

mosaic surface was not achieved even after the passage of some years. Masters I.

Shermukhamedov and Khakulov were asked to restore more complex mosaics on

the tympanum and panels. They used the methods described above, though there

were few fragments remaining. They had to attach the old fragments to sacking,

remove them, place them on the appropriate place in the model, and fill the lost

areas with new elements. All panels and tympanums on the courtyard facades of

the medressah were done this way. Larger restorations of ceramic mosaic were

done recently on the tympanum of the main portal of the Shirdor Medressah. Photo¬

graphs and drawings from the late 19th century show all the details of the well

known composition of this tympanum. The bright spots of sun rays surrounded by a

halo of light, and the figures of tigers and fallow deer show almost no traces of

destruction; only the centre of the composition (the joint of two halves of the tympa¬

num) covered a large piece of repair plaster (illustration 47).

Chapter IV. 105

Photos made twenty years later show a deterioration of the tympanum: the

plaster covered a larger area. Research into the facing of the tympanum and recon¬

struction of its painting was begun in 195916. The entire tympanum (100 m) was

covered with a netting 1 m from the side, the edges of the net affixed with metal

plugs, and the squares numbered. In each square, the number and arrangement of

preserved mosaic fragments were recorded, as were the number of fragments in

the form of sockets from fallen elements, the size of the area of loss, the condition

of the brickwork and facing layers. All this data was complied in a special journal

with photos of each square. The next stage was making a copy of the tympanum on

tracing paper.

Special attention was paid to delineating the contours of the sockets from

fallen pieces of mosaic, since they held the key to filling in gaps in the picture. The

sockets in most cases were coated with mortar and for fixing they had to be cleaned

with great care. The colour of the lost mosaic tiles was determined from the pre¬

served elements of the picture. To assist in the reconstruction of the picture on the

tympanum, copies were reduced to 1/10 of the real size. There were many blank

spots with no prints from the mortar. The overall composition of the tympanum was

made with great difficulty. The pattern on both halves of the tympanum was almost

the same, the copies corresponded, and as a result many blank spots could be

filled in: what was lacking on one half was usually found on the other.

The patterns reconstructed according to the contours of the sockets were

added. The iconographie fragments were a great help. Thus the entire picture

on the tympanum was restored. The 1/10 size model served as a basis for prepar¬

ing full-scale moulds. Each square metre of the mould was numbered and the

old preserved fragments stood out by their colour. In the Samarkand workshop,

preparation for restoring the tympanum took place under the direction of N.S.

Grazhdankina, F.A. Burnasheva and V.N. Yartseva, who tried to make tiles as simi¬

lar as possible to old tiles using faience and glaze. Each batch of raw materials and

ceramics was tested in the lab for durability and frost-resistance. I. Shermukhamedov

directed the work. In front of the portal, a special mounting model was prepared

where the pattern of the tympanum was outlined on a form. Study of the preserved

16. Research, measurement and project works on restitution of the tympanum of the mainportal of the Shirdor Madrassah were carried out by architect A, Freitag and artist V. Gorokhov

under supervision by I. Ye. Pletnev.

106 I.E. Pletnev

facing showed that it had lifted away from the brickwork in many spots; elements of

mosaic were loose and came out of their sockets easily. It was necessary in some

places to remount them in fresh mortar. The tiles removed were affixed to sackingand transferred to the model, first being cleaned of old mortar, dust and dirt, and

each element was placed in its exact spot. Lost elements were cut from new tiles.

After removing the facing layer from the tympanum, xatoba (intermediate

constructions between the brickwork and the facing layer with unfilled empty space

of up to 25 cm) were found. The xatoba were largely destroyed, requiring re-laying

and strengthening. To make identical conditions for the entire facing layer, a liningwas laid preserving the earlier construction. The modules assembled on the mount¬

ing area were put in place, wrapped in moulds and only then were adjacent

elements joined and the modules assembled. The work was done first on one half

of the tympanum and then on the other (illustration 49). Restoration of paintedmajolica.

This has proved to be the most complex in technique, and results are still

disappointing. The first attempt to restore majolica was by M. Yunusov in 1949

when he tried to fill in the losses in the cornice of the small cupola of the Kazy-zade

Rumi mausoleum in Shakhrisabz with terracotta tiles specially prepared as ma¬

jolica with painting according to preserved samples. The colouring of the majolica

was satisfactory, but the picture clearly differed from the original: the contours were

too fine and vague and the coloured areas were crude. Though the difference was

not all that noticeable, it was decided to change the restored majolica. This was not

done. The Samarkand workshop lacked professional ceramics artists. A. Khodjaev

was not a painter and there were no others (illustration 50).

In the restoration work at the Gur-Emir complex, instead of mosaic stars

framing the courtyard arcade, majolica ones were used. The lack of artists was

again a problem. The desire to simplify the work resulted in a technique without

artistic majolica which was somewhat primitive: the contours of the painting were

not made with thick paint, which in ancient majolica was called 'dead edge', pre¬

venting running during firing together with the colour ingredients, but were pressed

into the raw tile with the formation of edging which did not allow mixing with the

glaze. Of course, the painting had to be the same tor all stars, since only one stampwas used.

Chapter IV. 1 07

This technique of pressed majolica was later improved. The lost lattice

of the panjar in the hujra of the Shirdor Medressah, formerly made using ceramic

mosaic, was redone in three-coloured six-facetted majolica tiles. On a metal disk

lines of girih from the lattice were engraved. This was used as a mould from which

clay tiles of the necessary form were cut and stamped, giving the tile a patterned

impression. Each element of the pattern was coloured accordingly and after firing

the lattice was assembled. The character of the pattern (a combination of right-

angled geometric figures), the identical quality of the restored details, and the large

number of tiles made the experiment a success, and the new lattice looked exactly

like the old work. The attempt to use such a method in restoring majolica framing

in niches of the courtyard arcade of the Ulugbek medressah in Samarkand was not

so successful. The walls and soffits of the niches were framed using majolica tiles

with two different types of patterns.

Restorers prepared two metal stamps for each type of pattern. Artistic qual¬

ity was lost by using a stamp, and the glaze on the tiles was cloudy (illustration 51).

Attempts at artistic majolica with painting not using a stamp were unsuccessful.

Some mildly successful attempts were made to prepare majolica stars for restoring

the framing of the side walls and soffits in the main portal of the Ulugbek Medressah.

Without artists such experiments were generally unsuccessful (illustration 52).

We have looked at the major restoration work in Uzbekistan. Not all questions have

been addressed. Work to perfect methods of preserving monuments continues, but

the time has come for scientific development of preservation methods in which

architectural artistic ceramics should take the leading role.

109

APPENDIX

Restoration ceramics masters in Samarkand

TILE MASTERS

by M.K. Rakhimov

N. Zasypkin states in his work that the restoration team with Moscow archi¬

tects included Abdukadyr Bakiev and the chairman of the religious property (vakuf)commission Abdusaidov. In 1922-5 Bakiev was included.

Abdukadyr Bakiev (1860-1933) made an important contribution. In 1924-6

he took active part in rebuilding the vault of the main portal of the Shirdor medressah,

which was seriously deformed.

Under Zasypkin worked Bakiev's students: masters Akram and Shamsutdin.

Usto Abdukadyr proposed covering the vault of Shirdor with alabaster mortar to

preserve it from moisture.

Usto Abdukadyr Bakiev built several large buildings which blend with

Samarkand1 architecture. He took part in the north-eastern minaret reconstruction

of the Ulugbeg Medressah and the Bukhara Kalian minaret. His father, usto Baki,

was also well known as a restorer, having restored the lattice of the Gur-Emir2

mausoleum. Zasypkin wrote: "In the words of usto Bakiev, the facing of the vault of

the Tilliakari Medressah was already lost five years before the arrival of the Rus¬

sians in 1868 when his father usto Baki did the plastering of the zhgut on the south

side of the arch."3 Though already old, usto Abdukadyr continued restoration work

on the Registan and the Shakhrisabz mausoleums, teaching students. Descended

from a family of potters, master Usman Umarov (1900), one of the best ceramics

masters of Uzbekistan, studied with the famous Gijduvan master usto Mukhammed

Sadykov. Till 1 929, he worked with Gijduvan and Katta Kurgan masters usto Muitdin,

1. P.Sh. Zakhidov. Folk architects of Samarkand of the 19th - the beginning of the 20th cc.Abstracts of the Candidate of Science Degree, Tashkent, 1962, p. 45.2. There is an inscription on the restored panjara lattice. Refer to M.Ye. Masson. The results

of the archeological supervision for repairing and restoration works undertaken bySamkomstaris on the Gur Emir mausoleum, Ak-saroi in Samarkand in 1924. Central Asia

Committee News, Issue I. Tashkent, 1926, pp. 98-99.

3. B.N. Zasypkin. Monuments of architecture in Central Asia and their restoration. Vol. I. M.,1926, p. 173.

110

usto Khidoiat, usto Tursun and usto Tash. From 1 929-34 he worked in the Samarkand

restoration workshop. He experimented with ceramic mass, choosing materials for

glazes, dyes, engobe, and others. In 1930-2 he invited Samarkand potters ustoNurmukhamed, usto Tursun and usto Azimmurad, and the students Nasim Gafurov,

Kambarov, Meli and Toshmukim Kurbanov. In 1958 in Bukhara he organized a ce¬

ramics workshop in the Abdulla-khan Medressah headed by Usman Umarov. In

1960 the workshop was closed and Umarov went to Gijduvan. Ceramics master

Azimmurad Khodjaev (1909) is from Samarkand. His grandfather and father were

potters. He studied with usto Guliam in Gijduvan and worked with him making paintedceramics. From 1 931 -33 he worked in his late master's workshop. In 1 934 he joined

the Samarkand workshop and experimented with terracotta and glazed facing ce¬ramics.

In 1 936 he directed the workshop and produced facing ceramics for restora¬

tion. In 1938-9 he made glazed stalactite cornices for corner towers of the Tilliakari

Medressah. 84,000 blue, turquoise and yellow tiles for facing the cupola of the Gur-Emir mausoleum were made. He used the direct method of laying mosaics. He

worked with Akram Umarov, Mukhammed Yunusov, Kuli Jalilov and Shamsutdin

Gafurov4. To restore Bukhara monuments Kukaldash, Abdulazis-khan and Mir-Arab

and the Turkestan mausoleum Khodja-Akhmad-Yassavi, he chose glazed and un¬

glazed tiles. He made mosaic panels on the theme of cotton for the exhibition inMoscow in 1959. His best student was the son of the potter usto Gappor, usto

Nasim Gafurov (1924), who worked at the Samarkand workshop from 1937. Hebecame a master ceramicist and worked in Samarkand, Bukhara, Shakhrisabz,

Turkestan and Kokand. Usto Toshmukim Kurbanov (1 928) worked in the Samarkand

workshop, specializing in coloured glazes, glazed tiles and majolica. Usto Meli

Kurbanov (1930) has worked in the Samarkand workshop since 1946 on clay mass,

tile forming, painting facing ceramics, engobe and coloured glazes.

MASTER RESTORERS.

Usto Akram Umarov (1899-1956) studied with his father usto Umarand usto

Abdukadyr Bakiev. In 1921 he started restoring monuments in Samarkand, relaying

the vault of the portal and facing walls of the Shirdor medressah, adjusting the

minaret of the Ulugbek Medressah and the facing walls of the Tilliakari and Ulugbek

Medressahs. He worked on restoration of the cupola and drum of the Kazy-zade

4. B.N. Zasypkin. Artistic and decorative art in the Soviet architecture of Uzbekistan. Amanuscript, academic funds of the Institute of Art Studies, inventory No. 285, p. 62.

rv\_

Rumi mausoleum in Shakhrisabz and the cupola and drum of the Gur-Emir mauso¬

leum. His students include masters Shafi, Mukhtar and Turdy. Usto Mirkhamid

Yunusov (1 890) is from Samarkand and worked with his father till his death in 1 923.

He worked on restoring the Shirdor Medressah, the Tilliakari Medressah, and the

Ulugbek Medressah, as well as the Gur-Emir mausoleum. In 1953-4 he restored

the portal and walls of the Khudoiar-Khan Palace in Kokand. He helped strengthenthe foundations of the Ok-sarai and Khzret-lmam ensembles in Shakhrisabz. In

1962 he directed the work on the Khodja-akhmad mausoleum in Shakhrisabz. He

works in carved ganch. He taught courses in Samarkand (1943-6) and was a tal¬

ented artist and teacher. Usto Kuli Jalilov (1891-1960) directed the restoration of

the north-east minaret of the Ulugbek Medressah in 1932 and the east facade of

the Shirdor Medressah and courtyard walls and facade of the Ulugbek and Tilliakari

Medressahs. In 1936-8 usto Kuli worked in Shakhrisabz on Ok-sarai, Kok-gumbaz

and the Mirzo Ulugbek mosque. In 1955-6 he worked in Turkestan. He was also an

artist in carved ganch. His panels are excellent. He did the Samarkand hall in the

Navoi Theatre in Tashkent (1946-7). Usto Shari Iskhakov (1899) worked in the

Samarkand workshop and in 1 946 worked with usto Akram and Ynusov. In 1 950 he

worked independently and also on restoring the Registan and the Kazy-zade Rumi

mausoleum in Shakhrisabz. Ibragim Shermukhamedov (1928) worked on the res¬

toration of the Shirdor Medressah and with usto Muradov on carved ganch. He

worked on the Bukhara hall of the Navoi Theatre (1946-7) and the Mukimi Theatre,

as well as cinemas in Tashkent and Samarkand. In 1951 he worked independently

in Samarkand on restoration. He helped restore lost majolica and terracotta tiles. In

1957-61 he fully restored the carved ceramic mosaic facade of the Ulugbek

Medressah and the portal of the Shirdor Medressah. In 1958-60 he worked on the

Kukaldash Medressah portal in Tashkent. Abdugaffur Khakkulov (1933) works incarved mosaics. He studied with usto Akram Umarov and Shamustdin Gafurov. In

1957 he started work independently. He works in carved mosaic panels and carved

ceramic mosaics. In 1959 with two students he developed a system to speed up

work on polishing, assembling and installing details on the spot. In 1961-2 he re¬

stored the carved ceramic mosaic courtyard walls and south portal of the Ulugbek

Medressah and restored the mosaic text on the portal of the Shirdor Medressah.

Khakkulov exhibited his work in Moscow at the 1959 exhibition where his panel

"Cotton" was shown. In 1962 he presented an ornamental mosaic panel with cottonheads.

il:

ILLUSTRATIONS

114 Illustrations

Fig 1 . Carved terracotta floor tile from Varakhsha.

Fig 2. Hexagonal tile of the 10th c. with a stamped ornamentfrom a house of the IX c, Afrasiab.

Illustrations 115

Fig 3.Detail of brick facing of the mausoleum of Ismail Samani, IX-X c, Bukhara.

Fig 4. Detail of facing in the interior of the mausoleum of Sultan-Saodat , XI c,Termez.

116 Illustrations

Fig 5. Combination of relief masonry of breck and carved gypsum on the portal ofa mausoleum of 1152 in Uzgent.

Illustrations 117

Fig 6. Combination of relief brickwork and figured ceramic elements:a) - first half of the XI c, Termez; b) - 1126/27, Bukhara.

Fig 7. Facing with coupled bricks with crosspiece tiles, XII c.

a) Un named mausoleum 1-2, Shakhi-Zinda, Samarkand.

b) Kalan minaret, Bukhara.

118 Illustrations

Fig 8. Lattice band assembled fromindividual elements, Namazgoh

mosque, Bukhara XII c.

Fig 9. Detail of portal of the southern mausoleum, Khiva, Urgench, 1186/87.1. Wide band of an epigraphic ornament. 2. Lattice 3.Corner connecting the plane

of the portal with entrance niche. 4. Functional drick tiles. 5. Column blocks.

Illustrations 119

Fig 10. Glazed tiles with separation of multi-coloured carved glazes from a dwell¬

ing house of the XI-XII, Kyrgyzstan.

Fig 11. Muhammad-Boshsharo mausoleum, Tajikistan, 1342/43. Detail of portal.Facing of carved terracotta.

1 - functional brick tiles. 2 - sites of lost glazed blue inserts.

120 Illustrations

Fig 12. Ceramic stalactites of the anaratkhona of the mausoleum of Kusam ibnAbbas, Samarkand 1321/32.

Fig 13. Panel assembled from individual faience elements. Samarkand,Shadi-Mulk mausoleum, 1372.

Illustrations 121

Fig 14. Panel assembled from faience elements in the framing of a ceramic glazelattice with faience inserts. Samarkand, Shakhi-Zinda, a mausoleum of the XIV c.

122 Illustrations

Fig 15. Types of facing of corner columns"guldasta" in the XIV c.

a) - blocks in the form of cylinders and multi¬coloured majolica (Samarkand, Usto AN

mausoleum).

b)- blocks from glazed carved ceramicsof the same type (Samarkand, Shadi-Mulk mausoleum).

c)- facing of curved tiles with glazed

crosspieces (Bukhara, Buyan-Kuli Khan

mausoleum).

Illustrations 123

Fig 16. Detailt of portal in a mausoleum dated 1360, Shakhi-Zinda.

Arrangement of decorative bands.

1 - strip of epigraphic ornament on fine vegetative background (white lettersagainst a blue background). 2 - Wide band of carved ornament with white, dark

blue, light blue and cherry glaze. 3 - Lattice under blue and cherry glaze. 4 -Corner with white Kufic inscription on background of blue vegetative ornament.5 - functional tiles separated with grooves simulating blue and white bricks. 6 -plinths with cherry-colour glaze. 7 - blue functional band tiles. 8 - functional tiles

under blue glaze.

;'.

Fig 17. Carved terracotta, first half of the XV c. from the Chinese Ulughbekpavilion, Samarkand.

124 Illustrations

Fig 18. Panel of multi-coloured majolica hexagons in the interior of the EmirBurunduk mausoleum, XIV c. (Shakhi-Zinda, Samarkand).

Fig 19. Faience tile under transparent blue glaze with black under glaze orna¬ment, Ishrat Khana, Samarkand.

Illustrations 125

Fig 20. Facing of tympanum with majolica ornamentst, Abdulla Khan Madrassah,Bukhara, XVI c.

Fig 21. Facing of polished terracotta with incrustation of glazed faience as¬

sembled from rhombuses and a trapezium with deep joints. Khanaka of Khoja-

Kalan, Chor-Bakr ensemble, Bukhara XVI c.

126 Illustrations

Fig 22. Craftsman Usto Shafi levelling plastic clay for subsequent cutting ofbricks.

Fig 23. Craftsmen Usto Mili and Usto Nasim making elements of facing from

plastic clay.

Illustrations 127

Fig 24. Craftsman Usto Tashmukim engobing bricks.

Fig 25. Stacking facing bricks in the kiln for firing.

128 Illustrations

Fig 26. Metal "yulduzcha" (star-like) templates for producing majolica tiles.

Illustrations 129

Fig 27. Craftsman Usto Khojaev painting an ornament on a tile.

130 Illustrations

Fig 28. Various types of "fixing methods" for facing:a) - Layer of gypsum plaster (Tillakari mosque, Samarkand).

b) - Brick course fixed flat (Ishratkhona mausoleum, Samarkand).c) -Transversal "khatoba" walls (Tillakari mosque, Samarkand).

Illustrations 131

Fig 29. Restorated column, Shadi-Mulk mausoleum, Shakhi-Zinda ensemble.

Fig 30. Detail of facing of Shirin-bek-aka mausoleum, Shakhi-Zinda ensemble,after conservation.

132 Illustrations

Fig 31 . Detailt of main facade of the Tillakari Madrassah after restoration

of the tile facing.

Illustrations 133

Fig 32. The main portal of the Ulughbek Madrassah, Samarkand, beforeconservation.

134 Illustrations

Fig 33. Reconstructed panel of geometrical ornament on the portal tympanum ofthe Ulughbek Madrassah in Samarkand.

Fig 34. Installation of ceramic elements of the braid on the main portal of the

Ulughbek Madrassah, Samarkand, in the process of restoration.

Illustrations 135

Pic 35. Main portal of Ulughbek Madrassah, Samarkand, after restoration.

Fig 36. State of the braid on the main portal of the Ulughbek Madrassah,Samarkand, before conservation.

136 Illustrations

Fig 37. Mausoleum of Ismail Samanid, Bukhara, during restoration.

Fig 38. Mausoleum of Ismail Samanid, Bukhara, after restoration.

Illustrations 137

Fig 39. Dome of the Gur Emir mausoleum after restoration.

Fig 40. Magoki-Attari, mosque, Bukhara, after restoration.

138 Illustrations

Fig 41 . Detail of the southern facade of the Ulughbek Madrassah, Samarkand,before restoration.

Fig 42. Southern facade of the Ulughbek Madrassah, Samarkand, afterrestoration.

Illustrations 139

Fig 43. Southern facade of Shirdor madrassah after restoration.

Fig 44. Simulation of assembled mosaic stars with majolica stars on the courtyardfacades of the Gur Emir ensemble,

140 Illustrations

Fig 45. Courtyard arcade of the Ulughbek Madrassah, Samarkand, before resto¬ration.

Fig 46. Experimental assembled mosaicbelt, southwestern minaret of the Gur

Emir ensemble.

Illustrations 141

Fig 47. Detail of tympanum, Madrassah Shirdor before restoration.

SZJSw *m

Fig 48. Courtyard arcade of Ulughbek Madrassah, Samarkand, after restoration.

142 Illustrations

Fig 49. Tympanum on the portal of Madrassah Shidor after restoration

Illustrations 143

Fig 50. Majolica cornice on the drum of Mausoleum of Kazi-zade Rumi, Shakhi-Zinda, Samarkand, Restoration.

144

Fig 51 . Tiles of partition majolica usedfor restoration of courtyard facades ofthe Ulughbek Madrassah, Samarkand.

Fig 52. Majolica stars used in restorationof the main portal of the UlughbekMadrassah, Samarkand.

145

BIBLIOGRAPHY.

1. Avgustinik A.I. Ceramics. Moscow, Promstroyizdat, 1957.2. Apukhtin O.K. Materials for conversations about fine arts. Tashkent, 1960.

3. Bezborodov A. Building materials of the Anau Mausoleum. News of the USSR

Academy of Science, Turkmenistan branch, vol. 1, Ashkhabad, 1948.

4. Berdel E. Production of ceramic weights, glazes and paints. Translated by V. P.

Zubganikov, GIZ, 1931.

5. Budnikov P. P. Ceramic technology, Pt. I, Ukrtehizdat, 1937.

6. Bulavin A.I. Production of ceramic tiles. M, The State Publishing House on con¬struction materials, 1949.

7. Burshtein I.I. News in manufacture of building materials, Tashkent, the State

Publishing House of the UzSSR, 1961.8. Veimarn. B. V. Architectural and decorative arts of Uzbekistan, M, the State archi¬

tectural publishing house, 1948.9. Voronin L. N. The brick texture of the wall. Works of the Central Asian Industrial

Institute. Issue 4. Elements of architecture of Uzbekistan. Tashkent, 1939.

1 0. Grazhdankina N.S. Ancient construction materials of Uzbekistan. Collected works.

Construction materials of Uzbekistan, Tashkent, the UzSSR Acad. Sei. PublishingHouse, 1951.

11. Grazhdankina N.S. Ancient construction materials Turkmenistan. Works of the

YuTAKE, vol. VIII, Ashkhabad, the Turkmen SSR Acad. Sei Publishing House, 1 958.12. Grazhdankina N.S. Building materials of Mizdah Khan mausoleums. The archi¬

tectural heritage of Uzbekistan, Tashkent, 1960.1 3. Grazhdankina N.S. Tiles of the XIV-XVIII centuries as a material for dating monu¬

ments of architecture. History of material culture of Uzbekistan, Issue VII, Tashkent,1966.

14. Gulamov Ya. I. The monuments of Khiva. Works of UzFAN of the USSR, series

1, History and archeology, Issue 3, Tashkent, 1941.15. Denike B.P. The art of Central Asia. M., 1927.

16. Denike. B.P. The architectural ornament of Central Asia. M.- L., The Publishing

house of the All-Union Academy of Architecture, 1939.

17. Dudin S. M. Ornaments and the current state of ancient Samarkand mosques.

News of the archaeological commission. Issue 7, St Petersburg, 1903.18. Dudin S.M. On the issue on techniques of tile mosaics of Central Asia, News of

the Russian Academy of the history of the material culture.Vol. IV, 1925.

19. Zheludkov V.I, Facing of facades of buildings with ceramics. The state publish¬

ing house of literature on construction and architecture, 1953.20. Zasypkin B. N. Monuments of architecture in Central Asia and their restoration.M., 1926.

21. Zasypkin B. N. Ancient constructions of Central Asia. «New East», 1926, Nos.10, 11.

22. Zasypkin B. N. Brick in architectural constructions of Central Asia of the

146

pre-Mongol period (IX-XIII centuries). "Construction industry", 1928, No.5.23. Zasypkin B. N. Architectural monuments of Central Asia, Issues of resto ration.Vol. Il, M., 1928.

24. Zasypkin B. N. Monuments of monumental art of the Soviet East. Art culture ofthe Soviet East, M., 1931.

25. Kverfeld E.K. Ceramics of the Near East. L, 1947.

26. Kovelman N. Front facing brick. «The architecture of the USSR », 1 940,Nos1 -3.

27. Mankovskaja L. Yu. Restoration of decorative facings of the Ahmed YaseviMausoleum in the town of Turkestan. Proceedings of scientific works of the Re¬

search Institute on construction in Tashkent. Issue III, Tashkent, Publishing house

of the Academy of construction and architecture, 1962.28. Mankovskaya L.Yu. On methods of restoration of architectural monuments.«Construction and architecture of Uzbekistan», 1962, No. 1.

29. Mankovskaya L.Yu. Restoration of mosaic covers of a ridged dome of theAhmad Yassavi Mausoleum in the town of Turkestan. Proceedings of theTashZNIEP,Issue VI, Tashkent, 1964.

30. The technique of restoration of monuments of architecture. M., 1961.31. Orbeli I.A. Muslim tiles. L, The State Hermitage, 1923.

32. Orlov E.I. Glazes, enamels and ceramic paints. M. - L., 1937.33. Pletnev I.E. Restoration and reinforcement works on the Gur-Emir ensemble.

Civil construction and architecture in the 4th building and climatic zone. Issue IV,Tashkent, 1966.

34. Pletnev I.E. Restoration of the dome of the Gur-Emir Mausoleum. Proceedingsof the TashPI, Issue 28, Tashkent, 1966.

35. Pozdnev A.I. Ceramics in city construction. Municipal economy, M., 1954.

36.Pribpitkova A. M. Monuments of the XI century architecture in Turkmenistan. M.,1955.

37. Pugachenkova G.A., Rempel L. I. Outstanding monuments of the architectureof Uzbekistan. Tashkent, the UzSSR State Publishing House, 1958.

38. Rempel L.I. Architectural ornaments of Uzbekistan. Tashkent, UzSSR Acad.Sei. Publishing House, 1961.

39. Root N. Artistic ceramics. Published by A.F.Marx Partners, 1908.

40. Skramtaev B. T., Galaktionov A. Building materials and products. Pt II, Finish¬

ing and facing materials and products, M. - L., 1938.41 . Technology of ceramics and fire-resistant materials. The state publishing houseof literature on construction materials, 1955.

42. Tomaev G. N. Restoration of brick facing of architectural monuments of

Samarkand. Proceedings by MAI, Issue I, M., 1940.43. Tomaev G. N. Carved majolica mosaic in the architecture of Central Asia. M.,1951.

44. Umnyakov I.I. Archaeological and repair-restoration work of the Sredazkomstarisin 1927. News of the Central Asian committee on museums and protection of an-

147

cient monuments, arts and the nature. Issue. 3, Tashkent, 1928.

45. Umnyakov I.I. Architectural monuments of Central Asia, Tashkent, 1929.46. Fedorov A.T Report on the techniques of the Samarkand mosaics pre sented atthe Institute of archaeological technology under the GAIMK. M., 1924.47. Filippov A.V. Ceramics and architecture. «The Academy of architecture», 1936,No.7.

48. Filippov A.V. Old Russian tiles. Issue 1. The publishing house of the Ail-UnionAcademy of Architecture, 1938.49. Filippov A.V. Filippova S.V, Brik F.G. Architectural terracotta. The state architec¬tural publishing house, 1941.50. Filippova S.V. Architectural majolica. M., the State publishing house of litera¬ture on construction materials, 1956.

51. Khigerovich M. I. Corrosion of finishing materials, salts on walls of buildings.Reports and proceedings of the Ail-Union Academy for architecture. M., 1936.52. Chepelev V. N. Essay orvthe architecture of Central Asia before the Karakhanids.The Art of Central Asia, RANION, M., 1 930.

53. Yakubovsky A.Yu. The culture and art of the East. L., 1937.

UNESCOJAPAN

UNESCO/Japan Funds-in-Trust project"Blue of Samarkand" Inventory and Revivalof the Traditional Ceramics of Uzbekistan.

architectural ceramics of uzbekistan; 2006 -...

Documents