• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

SAMARQAND REFASHIONED Editor’s preface he historic cities of Central Asia are a never-ending source of fascination for the traveller. For here, after all, is the heart T of the Silk Roads, the homeland of the Sogdian merchants and savants such as al-Biruni and al-Kashgari, where some of the great monuments of Islamic architecture were erected. The traveller, whether there for the fi rst time or re-visiting famil- iar friends, may well wonder though, what, exactly, is it that one now sees. That is, to what extent do the city spaces and the historic buildings correspond to those which were there in an earlier era? And, to the extent that they do or do not, why? Elena Paskaleva’s travel notes refl ect on such questions, inspired by her recent trip to Uzbekistan. If lured by the appeal of Silk Road travel to almost any place one might choose, be it Turkey, Iran, Uzbekistan, China..., arguably one should expect to witness the impact of modern development, for economic, political or other reasons. That is, to anticipate recapturing historic vistas and their buildings “as they once were” would undoubtedly be naive, even if such sites are now inscribed by UNESCO as part of “World Heritage.” This hardly should come as a surprise. After all, “tradition” and “history” in a sense have always been moving targets. Sites that are still lived in or ones that are abandoned have never been immune to change, decay, re-building or “restoration,” in general refl ecting the priorities of those in whose times they are being altered. Sensibility about “preservation” and “restoration” of some original conception is a modern development and one fraught with controversy. Is there a standard of “preservation” or “conservation” which might be generally accepted, and if so, how then does one determine exactly how in practice it might be applied at a location where little that has survived to the present is arguably “original”? All too often, even with the best intentions, “restorations” end up constructing an imagined past or running roughshod over evidence that might point in a direction of a different answer to questions about what once was there. Some of the most controversial examples of the modern treatment of historical sites may be found along the routes we term the “Silk Road.” Modern development in China and Iran, for example, has raised grave concerns over the preservation of historically important remains. The issue is not merely one of undertaking projects to “modernize” living spaces and promote economic development, but often involves more complicated questions of perceptions about identity and tradition, where political regimes or economic interests have ideas which are at odds with what scholarly experts may advocate. How then are such matters illustrated in Uzbekistan? It is well known that many historic Central Asian cities have various chronological layers, which often can be distinguished even on the superfi cial level of looking at a map. Students of the Russian colonial regime, for example, will point to maps showing regular grids of streets in the areas of a city that housed the Russian colonial population and administration, quite distinct from the irregular, narrow and meandering alleyways that characterized traditional city residential quarters. In Samarqand, the pre-Islamic Afrasiyab on what is now the outskirts sits alongside the area which was developed most fully under the Timurids, and that in turn abuts the Russian and Soviet colonial town. Arguably, since independence in 1991, we have entered yet another phase of city construction or re-construction, which can hardly be seen to respect any of these earlier delineations. If that is the case then, what is to be made of Samarqand’s status on the UNESCO World Heritage list? —Daniel C. Waugh A TRAVELLER’S IMPRESSIONS, AUGUST 2013 Elena Paskaleva Leiden University Institute for Area Studies (LIAS) If it is said that a paradise is to be seen International Institute for Asian Studies (IIAS) in this world, then the paradise of this Leiden, the Netherlands world is Samarqand. —quoted by ‘Ata-Malik Juvaini (Boyle transl.) own through the centuries, Samarqand has in- D spired poetic superlatives for the richness of its location, its fl ourishing economic and cultural life, highlighted how rapidly the urban landscape of this and its dazzling architecture. Travel brochures today famous city is being altered, alas not necessarily for invariably highlight the city’s architecture and bazaars the better. What follows here are some impressions as one of the chief attractions of any adventure along from that recent trip, ones which invite an examina- the historic “Silk Road.” As a historian of Timurid ar- tion of the policies that underlie the ongoing transfor- chitecture, I fi nd the city endlessly fascinating, having mation. This is a subject that will reward future study fi rst been there in 2006. My visit again in August 2013 in greater depth. The Silk Road 11 (2013): 139–153 + Plate VII 139 Copyright © 2013 Elena Paskaleva Copyright © 2013 The Silkroad Foundation Fig. 1. The Ulugh Beg madrasa before 1910 (photograph by Friedrich Sarre, Denkmäler persischer Baukunst [Berlin, 1910] and in 2006 (photo by author). Note: Except where other- wise indicated, the photos which follow are by the author. A little historical background is in order. Even though the city’s history is very ancient, much of what attracts us to Samarqand traces its origins in the era when Timur/Tamerlane (d. 1405) had his capital there beginning around 1370. Clavijo, the Spanish ambas- sador from the king of Castile, who visited Samar- qand in the early fi fteenth century witnessed dramatic changes that were underway. The mausoleum Timur had erected for his grandson, what we now know as the Gur-i Amir, had recently been completed, and work on the huge Friday Mosque, the Bibi Khanum, was ongoing. But the ruler’s attention was not con- fi ned to building monumental religious structures. On his way to Samarqand, Clavijo had passed through Kesh (today’s Shahr-i Sabz), where he described the imposing Ak Saray palace Timur had built. And, of particular relevance here is Clavijo’s observations on the urban renewal project to create a main commercial thoroughfare through the centre of Samarqand that would be the focal point for the fl ourishing interna- tional trade that was being promoted by the ruler. The street was to be an integral part of the urban fabric, even though it came at a cost. As Clavijo reported what was “original” to the buildings that are now be- (1928, pp. 278–80), Samarqand citizens tried to claim ing “restored.” Beyond the major buildings, now, as compensation for their land and the houses levelled in Clavijo’s day, portions of the old city are being on Timur’s orders, especially in the surroundings of levelled to create open spaces around Timurid build- the Friday Mosque and the bazaar. Timur’s angered ings, though not, it seems, with the intent of integrat- reply was that he was the sole owner of the land in ing those buildings into the fabric of a living city. Samarqand and he could produce written evidence of this within a day. Redevelopment around the Registan Timur’s successors, notably starting with his grand- Although the present layout of the Registan Square son Ulugh Beg (r. 1409–1449), continued to adorn evolved during the 15th–17th centuries, the current the city with major buildings, even as, it seems, ones state of the madrasas (Islamic religious schools) is the recently built (the Friday Mosque in particular is in product of numerous restorations campaigns. The question here) may already have begun to decay. By northern and southern facades of the Ulugh Beg the 19th century, when we begin to get foreign travel madrasa (1417–1420), the oldest surviving monument accounts, drawings and photographs to document on the square, were piles of rubble at the beginning the state of the monuments, most of the great build- of the 20th century, as testifi ed by the photographs of ings were in ruins. Plans to rebuild or restore some of Friedrich Sarre, published in 1910 (Fig. 1). Thus, its them were developed as early as the fi rst Soviet years, entire courtyard had to be rebuilt and the epigraphic but the most signifi cant projects were not implement- program designed anew. The characteristic hauz ed until the last third of the 20th century beginning in (water tank) to the southeast was destroyed. One of the years prior to Uzbekistan’s declaration of inde- the western minarets collapsed in 1870. In the autumn pendence in 1991. Much of the Friday Mosque and the of 1918 it was noticed that the north-eastern minaret missing minarets on the Gur-i Mir were rebuilt; sev- of the Registan façade had started to tilt. As a result, eral mausolea in the Shah-i Zinda complex on the out- a lot of engineering effort went into the straightening skirts of the city were re-created from the ground up of the original minarets along the Registan. The fi rst and missing elements of the upper facades “restored”. reconstruction project was initiated in 1920 by Mikhail These projects have been controversial, not in the least F. Mauer, the chief architect of Samarqand since 1917, because it may be impossible to document precisely and A. N. Kuznetsov. After a decade of preparations 140 restorations focused mainly on the rebuilding of the three Registan madrasas with reinforced concrete. The main scientifi c adviser, Konstantin S. Kriukov, believed that the exterior decoration was a sheer gar- ment worn by the construction itself (Demchenko 2011, p.

Load more

  17

Copy Link