Page:A History of Architecture in All Countries Vol 2.djvu/490

474 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE. PAiiT IT. little models of the domes of Armenian churches placed on the ground, though perhaps it would be more correct to say that the domes were co2:)ied from the tombs than the reverse. The most elegant of all those hitherto made known is one found at Ani, illustrated in Woodcuts Nos. 927, 928. Notwithstanding the smallness of its dimensions, it is one of the most elegant sepulchral chapels known. Another on a larger scale (Woodcut No. 929) is borrowed from Mr. Layard's book. This tomb shows all the peculiarities of the Armenian style of the 11th or 12th century. Though so much larger, it is by no means so beautiful as the last mentioned tomb at Ani. In its ornamentation a further refinement is introduced, inasmuch as the reed-like columns are tied together by true love-knots instead of capitals — a freak not uncommon either in Europe in the same age, or in the East at the present day, but by no means to be recom- mended as an architectural expedient. With scarcely an exception, all the build- ings in the Armenian jirovinces are so small that they would hardly deserve a |)lace in a history of architecture were it not for the inge- nuity of their plans and the elegance of their details. The beauty of the fatter is so remarkable that, in order to convey a coi'rect notion of the style, it would be neces- sary to illustrate tliGjn to an extent incompatible with the scope of this Aovk. In them too will 1)6 found much has hitherto ascribed to 931. Capital at CTelatlii. (From Grimm.) 930. Capital at Ani. (From Grimm.) that been other sources. The annexed capital (Woodcut No. 930), for instance, would generally be pt;t down as Saracenic of the best age, but it belongs, with a great deal more quite as elegant, to one of the churches at Ani ; and the capital from Gelathi (Woodcut No. 931) would not excite attention