LL NOTKIN DECODING SIXTEENTH-CENTURY MUQARNAS DRAWINGS Architectural drawings dating from before the nine- from our own.’ But this dialogue across the centuries teenth century are a rarity, but those few that do exist ‘understanding of the drafting methods sed permit us to look into the creative processes of earlier \l often we are confronted by drawings times and gain insight into the processes of architectural whose design language cannot easily be deciphered hat often reveal aworld of thought very different Even the partially published collection of mugarnas Fig. 1. Ustad Shirin Marado's sketches of stalactites and ther spatial trcatment in scale models made of paper. a) mugamas tugarnas sketch, () Sragimugarmas metl: (Sagi muqarna sketch,DECODING SIXTEENTH-CENTURY MUQARNAS DRAWINGS lag drawings by the well-known modern Bukharan master builder Ustad Shirin Muraclov (1880-1957) uses a system, of coded designs I could not have understood had I n met Muradov himself during restoration work on the monuments of Samarqand and Bukhara, when he explained how he created each of his sketches of muqar- nas vaults, capitals, and cornices.’ He executed each plan according to the laws of orthogonal projection, at the same time using a web a of lines and conventional signs to represent successive corbeled tiers of modular mugarnas cells (fig. 1a-d) In earlier centuries elevations and sections of muqar nas configurations were not completely worked out, a practice that was fully justified by the rational technology of mugarnas construction: the height of a muqarnas lier — whether of brick, terra cotta, stone, or plaster — within a framing niche or vault was often the same. Judg- ing by the lae-fifteenthcentury Timurid mathematical iad Fig. 2. Analogues of the sxteentrcentury sketches: stalactites in architectural the Khangah of Babauttin (sixteenth century): (3) the m (5) the madras of Abdulaziz Khan (165 sixteenth century); 710-71), an incomplete talactite decoratio treatise by Ghiyath alDin al-Kashi, in which the maga nas is discussed and by the information provided to me by Ustad Sh in Muradox, this scale was proportionally correlated with the horizontal divisions of modular ‘mugarnas units. In practice, however, it was adjusted t@ fic the format of any given space. For the realization of his spatial conception it was enough for the master build: er to enlarge the two-dimensional plan proportionally to full scale according to specific dimensions and to pre- pare and assemble all the compone! tion on the building site on the basis of a drawing on pa per. In principle, the tworimensional representation of the complex threedimensional mugarnas form was abbreviated according to tr ‘units of the eleva tional design conventions, A set of mugarnas drawings from the sixteenth century preserved today in the Uzbek Institute of Oriental Stuck les of the Academy of Sciences in Tashkent, illustrates onuments of Bukhara: (1) the necropolis of Chock das of Mir Arab (1585-86); (4 the madras of Juba ): and (6) the madrasa of Tau Jo150 well the sketchy manner in which mugarnas projections were rendered. The firs 10 note the existence of these drawings was N.B. Baklanov" In 1944 these drawings attracted his attention because they included, along with the muqaras projections and girls (two-dimensional geometric imterlaces), several ground plans which were more immediately comprehensible and therefore of Interest to Baklanov and other scholars who were stud ing the engineering and technological aspects of Central Asian architecture.’ G.A, Pugachenkova in her publica tions then commented on several of the more compl ued mugarnas drawings, bi decoding them — that is, she did not interpret the boundaries of their corbeled tiers which reflect the spatial conception of each sketch, My interest in these drawings first began in 1952, inspired by the work of B.L. Zasypkin (1891-1955) ° who had long, studied the work of traditional builders and craftsmen. From the forty-six folios of the architectural drawings discovered by AA. Semenox, who began the work of restoring them, and Baklanox, I selected thir six examples depicting maqamnas and Sragi (ve. stellate arch-net or squinch-net) yault projections. The dimen- sions ofthese drawings vary, but none exceeds 31 « eters. They were executed on thick paper and had been pasted at some later time on lightweight card- board. The sketches had deteriorated from prolonged use: the original designs (in black ink drawn with a reed pen or galam, and with colors rendered by brush or pen) are worn, and there are rips and tears along the edges of several folios. But on the whole they are legible, ancl one is immediately struck by their heterogeneity. Among the most impressive examples of mugarnas projections are some largescale drawings executed in a rather coarse technique (Aravwings 13-18; figs. 9-14) OF qual interest are some mediumscale ones, differing {rom the first group in their more confident drawing and the arrangement of a significantly greater number of tiers in a comparable area (drawings 19-82; figs. 15— 28); and smallscale sketches filled to the limit with a design of mugamas projections colored in yellow, red, green, and ochre tones, and sometimes using stippling as well (drawings 83-36; figs. 20-82). In the harmony of the whole and in the details, the graphic language of cach folio of this group of drawings bears a resemblance {0 QuPanic calligraphy: This parallel has is roots in the use of geometric modules, such as squares, rhombuses, and thomboids inthe proportioned letters ofthe Arabic alphabet and in mugarmnas drawings; the latter also fea {ure irregular pointed stars" without ‘The structural complexity” of mugarnas design reflects the evolutionary development of stalactite sys- tems." Complexity is relative and increases with the mul tiplication of the rhythmic waves of each row of muqar- nas tiers and their various comb survey of the aesthetic and structural transformations of the mugarnas over the centuries reveals rapid growth followed by a slowdown in century: The conventional muqarnas hal-vaults in the mausoleums of Shahi Zinda (Samarqand, fourteenth century), composed of several types of terracotta blocks, which had limited rhythmic possibilities, represent the simplest organisms of stalacti The fifteenth century was marked by the flowering of ‘Timurid architecture and the unusual inventiveness of the plaster (Persian, gach) mugarnas with rhythmically arranged multiple stars. This method continued in use in sixteenth-century Uzbek Bukhara. In the seventies of the sixteenth century stellate vaults of the Sragi" type (eg. in the madras of Kukeldash in Bukhara) were generated by se werseeting arches and fla stars." One ean note also the hypertrophy of structures created earlier (eg., the madrasa of Abdul-Aziz Khan, 1651-52) and the reduction in size and simplification of protorypes. In each evolving architectural form, however, several profound tectonic problems were resolved. For exam: ple, the task of bridging a square transitional zone with a spherical dome was invariably the same. While in the in- teriors of Central Asian monuments the architectonic components — squares, “sails (that is, kiteshaped vault sections that we will here refer was *kites") and squinches — are structurally articulated, plaster stalac tites consis of decorative shells that break down the trans sitonal zones of vaults and domes into multiple facets displaying a certain compositional unity. Like a chess game, the mugarnas vault consists of an “opening,” a “middle game,” “end game.” The opening invokes mainly standard moves, that is, of scalloped rings in the top tiers of the mugarnas; the middle fea tures waveshaped thythms generated with the help of ‘medium- and smallsized stars, The game ends with the fading energy ofthe middle waves atthe wall joint, where stars, which fill up the corners, play a role. Without a doubt, before working out each new plan for a mugarnas vault, the architect had to visualize its compositional scheme and typology, first in his heael and then schematically on paper. Although we h ten documents to support this, itis difficult to avoid reaching such a conclusion from the evidence of the nations. A historic novation after the fifteenthDECODING SIXTEENTH-CENTURY MUQARNAS DRAWINGS mugarnas drawings and surviving mugarnas vaults. In practice, there are a number of relationships between the geometry, function, and lighting of a space deco- rated with mugarnas vaulting and the type of stalactites, their dimensions, and their number of corbeled tiers. ‘Thus, for the mibrab niches and smalldomed chambers of the darvazakhina (Persian, gatehouse) type, two or three rows of mugarnas tiers were sufficient, but for large halls, their number could be five to ten times that Certain compositional premises and formal limita- tions are inherent in the plaster mugarnas, whose struc- tue has changed litle over the last five centuries, This is corroborated both by the partially surviving muqarnas examples in extant architectural monuments from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries and by the recent supervision by restorerarchitects! of the work done by traditional master builders in Samarqand and Bukhara creating similar structures today. On the floor under the prospective mugarnas vault, plaster slab was constructed, known asa takhmin (Arabic for “approximation”), on which a fullscale working sketch of the mugarnas vault was scratched. On this two dimensional pattern, where the edges of each mugarnas indicated with lumps of clay or ceramic bars, plaster plates of alternating two- and threecentimeter horizontal thicknesses were cast for all the tiers of the vault. These plates (constituting shelves parallel to the floor) were bonded to the wall and to the vault with plas ter and, if necessary, were supported by wooden struts that bore their weight, Correspondence to the plan on the takimin was verified by plumbline, Thin vertical plates provided additional structural strength to this construction, The plates were ereated between the cor beled horizontal layers of shelves according to the plan indicated on the takimin. On this skeletal framework, rendered with quick-drying plaster, a thin, hand-made carving of mugarnas cells was executed which fitted into the spatial grid of the horizontal and vertical openings, forming a unified whole. ‘As T developed an understanding of how plaster ‘mugarnas vaults (constituting decorative shells separate from the structural curve of the vault) were produced, the role of plans on paper became tundeniable. The most complex of the sixteenth-century Bukharan muqarnas drawings, which took many years to decode, required comparing the drawings with architectural remains. This was a slow, laborious process of tial and error; it took considerable practice to interpret traditional drawings with their coded conventions. The main problem they posed lay in determining the boundaries of their cor- ash beled rows. To do that, I covered a photocopy of one of the drawings with tracing paper on which I outlined the rows. Then I filled in the rows by assuming that what Joined them together consisted of a relatively standar- dized set of filler units. All the tiers, moving from top (© botiom, thus became distinguished. Difficulties arose because of deviations from the organic coordination of the successive rows and the appearance of atypical ele- ments where the corbeled tiers were connected to the facade of the building. The two-dimensional drawing appeared as a mass of tangled threads that had to be unraveled. The unraveling of the individual rows began with defining the junctures of the stars, the nichelike posi tion of the stars, their fall or truncated contours, and the thinning out oF thickening of the rows framing them that reveal great versatility both in extant monuments from the sixteenth and seventeenth century and in our drawings. At times three or four tiers can be counted simultaneously, leading to ambiguous situations (for ex: ample, the sloping, kiteike units atthe junctures of the rows become vertical rectangular plates which are not always marked on the plans), Often the stars remain dis- connected, as if 10 ofler the reader the opportunity to interpet them in several possible ways. All this allows us in some instances to extract several different, but log ically possible constructions, but in each case we chose & variant which seemed the most preferable design option, except in the case of the drawings in figures 21, 25, and 81 where we also show possible alternative constructions. ‘Technically the procedure required delineating the co! touts of the multiple corbeled tiers from the web of the _mugarnas drawing by outlining them in ink with contin- ‘uous lines, accompanied by stippling. The architects and designers did not include in their final drawing a projection of the faceted connecting fab- ric and the ledges which are formed at the junctures of the rows. Instead they used litle kiteshaped cells which resemble rhombuses or barley seeds at the juncture of rows with stars. Having decoded the mugarnas drawings we turned t© their massing of rows of stars to verify the continuity of | the rows and their rhythmic system denuded of details. A summary of our findings (fig. 85) takes into considera tion each drawing in terms ofits scale and level of struc: tural complesity: From it the following conclusions can be drawn: 1. The basic purpose of the initially incomprehensible ‘conventional signs on the Tashkent draviings is to distin _guish the edges ofthe successive rows from the web. The152 1 coded vocabulary of the system expanded as the muqar- nas system depicted became more complicated, For ex: ample, the relatively simple linear sketches of the Sagi vaults and cornices are completely devoid of conven- tional signs. The not very complex mugarnas projections of Ustad Shirin Muradov utilize only one sign, a stall ei Cle. The group of large-scale sixteenth-century drawings use only thick inking in black, while the small-scale draw ings mainly use nuanced, often colored drawings. In them multiple readings of the ambiguous rows is culti- vated, and the selective color scheme of the cells sup- porting the stars suggests that the master builder made fan effort to create an intricate drawing not so easy decipher, The coding was obviously intended for those ‘who understood the conventional system of the mugar- nas projections. The complexity of the designs reflected a desire 0 protect the designer's rights among col leagues initiated into the secrets ofthe eraft. The mugar- znas drawings in Tashkent appear to have been the out ut of a guild of Bukharan architects and designers of the sixteenth century whose eraft was based! on the work of their predecessors, 2. Judging by the inscriptions on the muqarnas draw- ings which Ustad Shirin Muradoy executed, it was neces sary to indicate type (Sagi, mugarnas), function (gum Jad, dome chamber; sharafa, cornice; kalla, capital; or ‘hazak, small dome on a coffered ceiling), and the num- Der of rows. In the Tashkent drawings, inscriptions are used only on some of the folios. Excluding the “iraqi group because of its limited adaptability and infrequent Use, the mugarnas projections fall into four basic catego- ries: (1) comice; (2) dome, either on a square base or on a faceted base of intersecting arches, or on columns, or ‘on an octagonal zone of transition formed by arches: (3) niiche-tike spaces, hhalfdomes, or other proportions based on two squares; and (4), kites in the squinch com ners, and square or triangular vault sections along the baseline of domes, The vault section, arranged in ner kite, was apparently the most valued arrangement. ‘To achieve it, itis necessary to flatten the border sections ‘of the middle rows and enclose them within the eurve of an arc. This complex operation is skillfully executed in all the sketches of niche and kite mugarnases in the Tashkent group. The mugarnas based on radical compo- sitions of underlying grid systems could be adapted to different architectural frameworks, no matter how com- plicated their structure. This testifies to the sophisticated spatial thinking of the sixteenth-century master builders and their skill in resolving design problems. iched niche or cor 3. The mugarnas can be regarded as a sort of wall sculpture; itis often decorated with ornamental painting and tile mosaics, and the artistic expressiveness of these ‘works shares an affinity with the plastic arts. The spatial structure of the mugamas can be decoded in surviving, drawings by noting the rhythmic distribution of the rows and stars in. multi-tiered reliefs, nicheshaped semi- domes, and faceted ledges formed by them Mugarnas drawings oscillating in convex-concave eu rhythmics can be classified in order of size from the sim- plest to the most complex compositions. Their contrast ing rhythms, laid out in tabular form, affirm the intimate connection between the relative scale of a muqarnas, the number of rows, and their formal complexity, with small: scale and multitiered mugarnas projections occupying. the highest level of complexity. Movement toward a eom- plex form is also conditioned by the practice of frag menting vaults into variously shaped compartments Through such a classife mugarnas vaults for chambers with square bases is revealed. as they encompass all the levels of complexity outlined. Structural complexity can be associated with the orig nality, maturity, and richness of content in the combina tion of heterogeneous elements. The classification chart wwe have provided (figs. 33-35) and its graphie models ‘an be used as an analytieal tool to create new stalactite systems encompassing similar qualities. 4. There is by now an extensive literature published by imy architectural colleages in Tashkent proving that in the premodern architecture of C methods of proportioning were used, based on the deriv- atives of a square, the golden section, equilateral tian- sles, and other geometric figures.” Designing irihs— planar repeat units of different geometric figures in reet- ular frameworks witha rational or irrational relation ship of sides — was particularly popular." Undoubtedly this entire arsenal of applied geometry was known to the architects who created muqarnas drawings. The skillful use of similar geometric operations with the help of a ‘compass and ruler is evident in the mugarnas eonfigura- tions of monuments from the twelfth and thirteenth cen- turies onward and in later adaptations of them that were used to fill portal century mausoleums. In time, however, this convenient system of construction with its rhythmic modularity along the baseline of the vault was exhausted, since it {encountered contradictions with its new primary role of providing radially symmetrical vault compositions using plaster mugarnas shells, Nevertheless, the individual diversity of the unusu ral Asia. various iches and comer kites in sixteenth-DECODING SIXTEENTIE-CENTURY MUQARNAS DRAWINGS ‘motifs of the girdbremained — the laying out ofthe stars, their frameworks, and the elastic turn of the axes of knots with minimal addition of atypical elements. All this ‘can be seen in a careful examination of the sixteenth- century Tashkent drawings — in the axial layouts, cir cles, and stippled stars. Eventually stalactite systems because homogencous and standardized. The sixteenth- century stalactites that belong to this later stage were cre- ated by a method of selecting standard grids of intersect- ing arcs and their derivatives that was devoid of aesthetic ng.” Analogies to the harmony of spatial relation- ships and the rhythms of sixteenth-century mugarnas drawings apparently should be sought not so much in the framework of Euclidean geometry as in the structure of anisotropic natural organisms and musical counter- point theory. 5. Along with some haphazard notations added in the 1930's to the original drawings (type of vault, number of rows), one of the sketches has an original inscription in Persian between the interval of a stalactite vault and a kiteshaped squinch (drawing 36, fig. 92). It reads as fol- lows: AE Ae ee eb ht ek oe BI OLN pee 15 Cale) ole oy) GL Dag 9 gle ge abe US gh NE =a MoStam: yandnci ahti nar bishad dar shumra in magarnas mugayyad baad shud ta a: hati in kama hagquhu habar yabi uw napindars in ghalat hardaas “May it be Known to the friends who are practitioners of this craft [art] that in counting this magarnas itis neces- sary to pay careful attention so that you may know about it as it ought to be and not think that this [fellow] has made a mistake."* ‘The muqarnas drawing has one of the most elegant groupings of rows with a resilient rhythm of stars, ar ranged in dual doublets. Equipping the plan with coded signs is normal for this group of multiple-rowed mugar- nas projections. The inticacy of its structure explains the significance the muhandi¢" attributed to the rebus. ‘The author's addressing “the friends who are practition- ers of this craft" indicates that the sketch would only be read by a narrow circle of colleagues. It does not, how ver, eliminate the possibility that the design worked out by the muhandisin the form ofa complex mugarnas pro- jection could have been constructed by other craftsmen. ‘Monumental inscriptions provide an analogous exam- ple, The calligrapher (kajiad) would work out the pro- 153 portions of the letters and the rhythm of the inscription in conformity with its size, the dimensions of the grave- stone or building, and choose the writing style. The exe ccuting craftsmen, who incidentally were sometimes illit- crate or semiliterate, used templates: made by the calligraphers, or the latter, in exceptional cases, designed the inscription on the surface himself This gives us an idea of how the sixteenth-century muhandives who were responsible for designing the ‘Tashkent drawings and the various types of multiple- tiered mugarnas projections contained in them worked, A reverent attinide toward these drawings is sometimes manifested by QuPanie quotations whieh fill the partments. For example, on folio 34, where a four. domed space (chahar gumbad) decorated with mugarnas is presented, the center of the composition is covered in squared Kufic script with “There is no god but God, and ‘Muhammad is the Prophet of God.” Repeated along the perimeter of the design is “Power belongs to God.” At st glance there is nothing unusual in someone's inscribing the profession of faith on an architectural drawing. But one must suppose that a muhandis under the influence of Sufi ideas also had notions about the trax ditional Islamic symbolism of architectural forms: from the point of view of Muslim cosmology, the chahar gun dad can be interpreted asan image of the real world, con- sisting of the four parts of the earth.” These are only hints as to the moral and ethical atti- tude of the sixteenth-century muhandis. Combined with his special drafting skills, they obviously supplement our knowledge of the premodern Central Asian building sys- tem and force us to reflect on the fact that, no matter how literate, in those times architects occupied the ‘eighth stratum of the twelve strata of the “feudal” social order. In sum, itis difficult not to see in these sixteenth-cen tury muqarnas drawings manifestations of a culture of unsurpassed synthesizing order and sophisticated imag- ination comparable on a global scale perhaps to the fan: cil flights of spirituality in the Buddhist architecture of India, China, and Japan and in the European Gothic style, What is surprising is that these architectural work: ing drawings, with their wide range of modifications ancl exclusive language for coding orthogonal projections, paradoxically result in a picturesque, artistically expres- sive final produet accessible 0 all ‘Could one-foretell exhaustion for this culture? By no means. Aside from an intellectual and pleasurable sup- ply of beautiful objects — one can imagine modern ex amples of plaster mugarnas being reproduced accordingto the design principles of the sixteenth-century draw: ings — the inspiration this visual music ean provide the contemporary composer is capable of enriching the art- istic work he creates today. A comparison of the struct ral genetic organization of the muqarnas and its algo- rithmic procedure of formation with a systematic approach can prove unexpectedly effective in various ar. ‘eas of engineering and urbanism, Latek Institute of Urban Development Tashkent, Republic of Usbekstan (@ranslated from the Russian) NOTES, [iors note: Because ofthe dificutes in translating the Russian {ext and in contacting a distant author, the editors have taken it ‘upon themselves to modi portion ofthe eanslation, They apol ‘gi for any deviations from the author's meaning that mas have resulted 1. Recent publications furnish evidence of this: litkeknow medieval sketches, predominantly of Ottoman architects ste supplemented by modes im construction: see Gira Necipor {HteKafadar, “Plane and Medel in 15th and Mil-Centry ‘Outoman Architectural Practice," Journal of he Scie of Arch lutural Historians 43 (September 186): 234-43. For the well [know album of drasings by Villard de Honnecourt and wt ten sourees relating to French Gothic architecture, see KM. Murals "Masters frantiieskoigotiki XIGXII veken” ks 1988, 2 OF the archival material relating to mugjrmas, LA Rempets “Ganch varkhitekture narednogo shilsicha ego anachenie dla sosremennogo soit nogo dela (ir opyta bukharskikh ‘navodnikh masters,” Miata U7 SSR p19, should be fnentioned. In it several terms sed by traditional architects are wanshated and a simplied clasfication of those relating o the compesition ofthe stasis given bn the same archive are several sketches simple in terme of constriction, of stalactites from the work of the Samarqand master Ku Jalil (book 12580) and a scr of twee sketches by Ust Shirin Suradon (collection 21, no, 4174), executed in fretand without ay delineation of the rows. The fist analyse publication of them eas iy Butharsase mea po gnc vrata Uso Shine ‘Murad asent 1961. 8. See LC. Bretanitsi and BA. Rorenteld,*Klluch arifmedhi™ ff Ghia 31 Din ab Kah, n kus Asbaidshana (Bake, 1956), 4. The manuscript collection ofthe Insite of Oriental Studies ofthe Academy of Siences of the Uzbek Soviet Socialist Re public (hereafter AN UrS8R),iny-no-6 (IV). The sheehes are ranged in fle nos 1.2.4.5, 0, Accord toa supplementary sheet in one ofthe fies, they were easlet inthe Sete Public Library (GP) of the Uzbek SSR; Professor LB, Balanow orgs nized them and retumed them tothe GBP on August 2,10, From this publication we know thatthe stration ofthe sx teenth century sketches was beyun by Profesor A.A. Semenon the curator of the Department of Manuscripts of the CPB of the Uabek SSR. See 1B. Baklanoy, “Arkhitekumnye chertezhi », 0 1.1. NOTKIN wubekskogo masters XVI v,” Akademie akittury SSSR Svcbschenia inde ster 4 tos ater, vol. (Moscon 1948), See KS. Kryuken, “Modul v pamiatnikakh srednearittshogo rochesta,” Aihitekture noses 17 (1964): VM. Fk. nox. “Osnony proeksiovania monumental nykh dani ved nei aii N-XI vehon.” in TasZNIIEP (publications ofthe Tas ent Regional Scientific Research Institute of Typical and Experimental Design for Residental and Public Buldings sol 8 (Tashkent, 1964); PSb, Zaki, Tskusae procktiten risa orchesve naroduykh zodchikh Usbekistan” Isso ochihh Cebtisiana 1 (1062): AM. Prbthova, "O metode procktirovania srednevekowykhzodehikh,” hn Itoi alta hand Sdn Au (Moscone Nath, 1976) See GA. Pugachenkors, "ArKhitehturnye zameth,” funstvo 2otchbh Udekisana | (1962): Wem. “Ob obshehestvennom polozheni i roll srednevehowogo zoWcheyo v Seediet A” Tieustosodaith Usektana (1960) Tors Nikolaevich Zayphin was the founder of the Soviet schoo! of scientific restoration of architectural monuments in Cental Ai. See A.M. Pribthova, “BI. Zayphin (nekrolog).” Aiitekturne nase 8 (1957). He was also my mentor and inspite this esearch, The ypes of salactites,detailsabout them and the terms used are farfrom synonymous in literary sources and among tecen rational master, and therefore merit a special stds. The di partes cam he seen on the following example: (1) all pes Stlactites (served, joined) are miagamnas a opposed to (2) tlements along with mugarnas which are characterized a “st Taeties” a spatial form consisting of graduate! combinations of arched cells See PSb, Zakhider, Samarkandskaia sola sd ‘hth XIX nachalo eka (Tashkent: Naka, 196), p. 163, This ‘ame author singles out Sagi magarns 6a variety of tala tte {which i form reminds one of the system of intersecting arches and stall shieldike kites. In contrast to the tar (Grom Arabic, meaning to have lower support or horizontal Shelf) mugarnas. i does not have lite horizontal shelves” (ibid, p 164). Our position wth regard to this selose to that ‘of PSh. Sahin, numbered the sketches from 11 6 according to their gree ing complesiy. The sketches an be found in the files ofthe archive of the Iesitute of Oriental Statics of the AN USSR ss Follows: ile 1 has nox. 20-28, 26,27, and 28; fle 2 has nos. 1, 119,24, and 28; fle 4 has nos. 25, 30,33, ane bile 6 has nos. 1, 32,34, and 35; and file 5 has now Io, an 1, Archistorian and historians are beginning to understand that atthe rootof the Muslim arte perception of the word isthe Arabic seript (see LL. Rempel, "robrazte ni anon ati tka form na Stedner Vostok,” in Problema hanna’ edneve ewom isbuston Asi ¢ Af (Moco Nat, 1978), p. 107; Shukueow, [hwo srduekonge fone (Moscow: Nauka, 1980), pp. 25,27 8 NIL Kondakov, Licht sar defines complexity as “the level of development ofa substance from which the complex ‘object x composed and the character of the mutual relations mong the elements ofthis objet.” Judging by the wellknown work of Arthur Upham Pope on the ‘rt of Persia and his crite citations of the works of his pede essors,stadies ofthe application of stalactites to architectural ‘monuments ofthe Methm Eas are very concise, an hanited lhronologealy tothe twelth-fourteenth centuries and teroval otran, See Arthas Upham Pape, Survey of ran An ‘ro (Loudon, IBE-30); B Cnt yp on Pe (Pari sit. res, Chensnihe Bander (Beri, 1918) Ande Dies. Mugaroa” Encetpad of om, 2, Supple tent (Leiden: Beil, 1867) U4, SCCLL Notkin, Seay XIV arpa Shahin, Zouch deans? (70) 15, Thlsdewclopment sugges that the eomelogy ou tratue thatthe term Sq derives fom ra kquestomabe {sce VV, Rest, Vote ent atheros 847) 16. Faplautioes bel dlgrne of there pforese by ort bitrian LE Borodina and architec AN. Vinogrador are preserved in {he archive ofthe Bare forthe Pewraton of Montment i Hatay and Caltre, Republic of Ubeitan, no ozo ns 17, See VM, Fibminoy, “Nelotore sionomernon ruta mmetologi afkbitekure, PhD. dg, Tashkent, 1970; MS Tutor Gams peraoniti seid IENV ne (enconeNaha 1978; and BSh Zahid, Oey Anon gormon are (Fa 1982) 18, fee GA Cogan, “Geomericheslormament Sede! A ‘httarce nee (1958), 8. Chelly “Siok i uaa” Deora hu SSR 1 (930) and LL Rem pel Ait orament Uns, or, retin Mi poten Tashkent AN USSR, 16 19, These ave dicussed in Nothin, “Btharsaia rex’ po gn chs pa 20, The alent scholar Baiiar Babadcanoy sak of this inscription that i ple sugest that the writer won erate die dat cern pecs mt for example the we of the complex preposition, often Foupd in mannscip and juried acto the aateenth ad eventcenh cotury aig din thei MUQARNAS DRAWINGS. 155 ‘gest a sixteentr century date, fone can draw any conclusions From such a small deta the txt writen in a Kind of nasa that supports such a dating. [Editor note: Because of ame ‘gully inthe original Russian the text of this inscription hie been revanseribed and retransated by Professor Wheeler ‘Thacksion, J, of Harvard University, to whim the editors cme hanks} For the siatcenth century and earlier, when the construction, fof some iyper of building was discused in the hisoreal sources, references were aay to master bilder (ben) Architects (mimardn), and) master engincers (minds) ‘wo were mainly designers and who knew abou constrcton, See Hafiz Tanish Bukhari, Sharfnama shah asi trans Tntion, introduction, notes, and indices by MA. Salakhetdt ton (Moncom, 1983) 1, 228, and reproduction of fol. 103 "The word yarn (friends) is apparently accepted 3x form address inthe corporations of eraftmen and mukendivs, and ‘Seem to originate inthe Sui wadtion. This is not surprising igven that practically all artis comporatione at that time Trelonged to Sufi brotherhoods, inthis case probably the Nagy shaban brotherhood (see AM. Boldytex. “Eshche raz k ‘ropresu o KhodzhaAkheate” in Dukhovensoo i poltchehain {hen Bichnow Sinem Vodke parade fodalina [Moscone Nauka, 1285], pp, 50-51, 6, and n. 20 Fordetilson the meaning of no. 4 and its symbolism in archi tectural forms and planning resolutions, see Nader Arslan and Leila Baka, The Soe of Unity: The Sufi Tran in Pt sion Archtetere (Chicago: Univesity of Chicago Pres, 1972 ‘See MY Valdas,“ vopromi o remeslennom proiwodsve ‘yBukharskom Khanstev SVEXVI.,” Obsehetnnnye nahi Usbeistana 4 (1960, Fig. 8 Plans of half an Sraginiche vale (range 1,2) bya Bukbaran master architect ofthe sixteenth centuryDECODING SIXTEENTIF-CENTURY MUQARNAS DRAWINGS 157 Fig. 7, Pans Fig. 8 Outlines of ni ites (drawing 12).DECODING SIXTEENTI-CENTURY MUQARNAS DRAWINGS 18 Fig. 8.0 inh kites (drawing 12)158 : Fig. 9 Four an161 TEENTH-CENTURY MUQARNAS DRAWINGS,Fig. 20.A quaner of a fveroDECODING SIXTEENTH-CENTURY MUQARNAS DRAWINGS 165166 1. NOTKINDECODING SIXTEENTH-CENTURY MUQARNAS DRAWINGS 167 Fig. 26, Fragments of muqarmas kites (a) a halfaquare,(b) a halFaiangle (drawing 30), Pig. 27. A quarter of tenon mugarnas (drawing 31),68 1.1. NOTKIN ing 38)DECODING SIXTEENTH-CENTURY MUQARNAS DRAWINGS 169 Fig. A quarter of a muqarnas170 LoL NOTIN Fig. $2. A quarter ofa mugamnas on an eightarched ter: eighteen rows i all'and sixteen of them full cons (drawing 36a). Kite de- Fig. $3. Decoded plans of stalactites in masses (drawings 1-18, pendent on this aul, five rows (drawing 306), 21624, 36-29, 1-82, 83),DECODING SIXTEENTH-CENTURY MUQARNAS DRAWINGS 17 Fig. 6. Massing of decoded plans of ing arches (drawings 19-20); niche (drawin rani he plan lum (drawing $4) (drawing 36a) ite (drawings 30 ane! 366) vom eight arches and levels of complet hes (3) ona central ol, Type dinalicates a ite: nthe pan there (1) nscale, Gsmallscle Tl IE TV, Vina levels square t ‘of complexity fom the lowes (1) 40 highest (V).