The article focuses on the debate which is ongoing in the academic circles since 1980s. It concerns forming and development of the early Medieval ecclesiastic architecture in Georgia and the methodology linked to the issue.

Catholicon of the Khakhuli Theotokos nunnery in Akhali Shuamta is one of the distinguished buildings of the Late Middle Ages (1540s), being commissioned by Levan, King of Kakheti, or rather his ex-spouse Queen Tinatin. Artistic concept of the church, its plan layout and design of facades, all reflect complicated historic realities of the epoch and artistic tendencies widespread at that period. Catholicon of the monastic complex, a remarkable sample of its epoch, was more than once repaired and transformed during its “life history”. Especially drastic was the demolition of the ambulatory on three sides of the church in the mid-19th century. Far not easier was the period of the totalitarian regime and total atheism, when the building was used with the function absolutely inappropriate for the sacred space. 1990s marked the difficult course of renewed monastic life, during which part of the monastic buildings were renovated. In 2017, reconstruction of the catholicon started, aimed at the rebuilding of the ambulatory of this remarkable locus of the spiritual and historic memory of Georgia. It should be noted that revival of the monastic life after the hard-Soviet atheism is the essential continuation of the historic Christian course of the country; however, it is important, how renovation and further maintenance of the cultural and spiritual heritage of our country will be carried out. Special efforts should be undertaken in future for the intense collaboration between the Church and the scholarly community, in order to avoid unqualified and incorrect attitude towards the cultural heritage, as exemplified by the rebuilding of the gallery-ambulatory of the Akhali Shuamta monastery catholicon.

The research expedition was conducted the frame of the winner project – "Basiani - bilingual printed and online catalog of material culture monuments" [NFR – 19 – 12539] which was announced by Shota Rustaveli National Science Foundation of Georgia (SRNSF) in 2019 within state scientific grant competition - Scientific Research of Material and Spiritual Heritage of Georgia Aboard. The project is being implemented by Research Center of Georgian Culture and Tourism Resources. The expedition report was prepared by: Professor Teimuraz Khutsishvili (the head), Nodar Aronishidze, David Gachechladze, Bebur Gozalishvili, Ana Imedashvili, Shalva Koghuashvili, Professor Davit Maisuradze, Levan Tsikarishvili. The consultants: Dr. of Philosophy in History, Professor Kakha Shengelia; Dr. of Philosophy in History, Professor Teimuraz Jojua; Dr. of Archaeology Sami Pataci (Turkey). The expedition report is printed by Shota Rustaveli National Science Foundation of Georgia funding. The material is sorted alphabetically by the names of the described monuments. Photos that are not indicated the owner or the author are taken during the expedition work. The reports of 30 expeditions conducted by the group of authors in the Republic of Turkey in 2012-2019 have been published since 2015.

The research expedition was conducted the frame of the winner project – "Basiani - bilingual printed and online catalog of material culture monuments" [NFR – 19 – 12539] which was announced by Shota Rustaveli National Science Foundation of Georgia (SRNSF) in 2019 within state scientific grant competition - Scientific Research of Material and Spiritual Heritage of Georgia Aboard. The project is being implemented by Research Center of Georgian Culture and Tourism Resources. The expedition report was prepared by: Professor Teimuraz Khutsishvili (the head), Nodar Aronishidze, David Gachechladze, Bebur Gozalishvili, Ana Imedashvili, Shalva Koghuashvili, Professor David Maisuradze, Levan Tsikarishvili Davut Hakan Berk (Mofinadze). The consultants: Dr. of Archaeology Sami Pataci (Turkey). The expedition report is printed by Research Center of Georgian Culture and Tourism Resources funding. The material is sorted alphabetically by the names of the described monuments. Photos that are not indicated the owner or the author are taken during the expedition work. The reports of 31 expeditions conducted by the group of authors in the Republic of Turkey in 2012-2023 have been published since 2015.

In early 21st c. the so called “Durujispira” (the same – Dolochopi) church was discovered and excavated 6-7 km. from the regional centre Kvareli (Kakheti, eastern Georgia), on the left bank of the river Duruji. This is a large (36 x 22 m.) three-aisled basilica with south and north annexes. Main space of the church is divided into three parts by five pairs of cross-shaped pillars; a horseshoe shaped apse is in the East, flanked by square pastophoria, connected with the aisles by the doors (there is one more door in the north-east pastophorium leading to the east chamber of the north aisle); the church is provided with 5 entrances – one, in the West, 2 on each of the longitudinal walls; on the North, one entrance is shifted westwards and on the South – eastwards, while the rest are arranged in the middle of naos, opposite each other (their corresponding aisles-dividing arches are wider than the others). South annex is divided into two, while the north one – into three; in both cases, there are chambers with apse in the East (north apse is horseshoe shaped, while the south one is semi-circular, projecting from the east façade line; both have separate doors from the outside: south-west chamber – from the West, in other parts of the north wing – central one has a door and the west one – an arcade. A chamber of late date is attached to the church obliquely (Mr. Nodar Bakhtadze thinks that initially a narthex was located here). 4th-7th cc. western Georgian basilicas with projecting apse and narthex (in certain cases the latter is linked with the aisles, forming an ambulatory) connected with the Byzantine tradition proper, give little clue for the understanding of the composition of Dolochopi basilica. Basilicas of Kartli and Kakheti are more eloquent in this respect: Bolnisi Sion (478-483), firstly due to its cross shaped pillars and existence of south and north annexes, although articulation of the longitudinal wings is different, as well as location of the doors and projecting apse without pastophoria, which indicate different compositional and functional solution; preserved east part of the old basilica of Vachnadziani monastery, with lateral annexes also point to the three-aisled basilica, and the apse is provided with the lateral chambers, but they have doors leading eastwards, which implies less developed functional aspect; 5th c. Svetitskhoveli church inMtskheta, erected by the King Vakhtang Gorgasali, has lesser features in common with Dolochopi, showing greater affinity with Bolnisi Sion. Basilican scheme is the only feature that Dolochopi church has in common with the old basilica of Samtavro monastery in Mtskheta – even the pastophoria, if there are contemporary to the church (G. Kipiani) and not built to it later (D. Khoshtaria), give absolutely different picture: lateral chambers and faceted apse are independent volumes arranged along the common line, with triangular areas between them. Dolochopi has certain traits (shape of the pillars, location of the entrances opposite each other, projecting tri-partite south annex) in common with the early 6th c. Anchiskhati church, however, a door in the East (walled up before long – R. Gverdtsiteli) again draws them apart. On the other hand, Dolochopi has much in common with the Urbnisi basilica (even the asymmetry of the east façade, although here the south annex surface is set back compared to others), which points to their chronological closeness and a distance from the predecessors – ca. to the mid-6th c. The same is confirmed by the comparison with the Katsareti Trinity church (first decades of the 6th c.), where the east wall follows a straight line, but instead of pastophoria here we see aisles along the entire depth of the apse and Vazisubani basilica with its developed ambulatory, which can be ascribable to the late 6th c. and even 7th c. Additionally, reference can be made of Kondoli church (showing affinity with Katsareti) and Khirsa (mid-6th c.) basilica – most likely indicative of non-straight-line development. On the other hand, Natkori basilica, which should rather be dated to the mid-6th c. than 6th-7th cc., after excavation (see Vakht. Gagnidze’s publication) appeared by have many features similar to Dolochopi.

In Vachnadziani monastery, near the famous 9th c. domed church, eastern part of the dome less church is preserved, which, based on the material available in the first half of the 20th c., was supposedly identified as a “three-church basilica” and dated to the early period. Based on the current data, middle tripartite composition with lateral wings should rather be a three-aisled basilica (narrowness of the lateral parts of the central core, lack of pilasters on the lateral walls of pantophobia). At the same time, existence of the eastern entrances, which finds analogies in Tbilisi Anchiskhati (early 6th c.) and Dzveli Gavazi (6th c.), as well as in Constantinople (churches of St. John the Studied and of St. Sophia) and Thessaloniki (basilica of St. Demetrius) makes it possible to date the church to the 5th-6th cc., rather – 5th c.; introduction of additional lateral wings is also characteristic of this epoch (Bolnisi Sion, Urbnisi, Anchiskhati). It should also be taken into consideration that flourishing of this region takes place in late 5th c., in the reign of St. King Vakhtang Gorgasali.

First of all, it should be noted that the present letter includes the research of one part of the material culture monuments of the historical Basiani region, currently in Eastern Turkey (Fasinler, Kofrukoy) - samples of megalithic, cyclopean construction. We note here that the aim of the work is the primary, scientific presentation of the material identified by the expedition team. Part of the material found by us as a result of field-expedition works is published for the first time - thus, an attempt of scientific study is attached to it in the form of historical-cultural analysis of the region, scientific annotation of cultural monuments and their classification-dating. The issues raised within the research, conclusions, attempts to date and classify the monuments are obviously primary in nature and require future study. In the Basiani region (Turkey), within the scope of the expeditions, we traced more than two dozen monuments of megalithic culture, although the present letter will present an attempt at scientific analysis of only about ten of them. A large part of the mentioned monuments have been destroyed almost to the ground, which complicates the possibility of a more or less complete scientific reasoning about them. Monuments with plans that have survived in a relatively complete form were selected for the study - it was by taking into account planning features, construction techniques and materials that the typological differences of the given cyclopean construction were highlighted. Different types of planning, construction techniques and materials allow us to more or less determine the time range of the construction of monuments. It is important that a complete study of the mentioned monuments is impossible without archaeological excavations. Nevertheless, the art-scientific analysis of the presented group of monuments gave us important results, which became even clearer in the light of historical research. By analyzing the historical sources and studying the morphology of the monuments, it was possible to determine the general time range of the construction of this large group of almost destroyed buildings.

First of all, it should be noted that the present letter includes the research of one part of the material culture monuments of the historical Basiani region, currently in Eastern Turkey (Fasinler, Kofrukoy) - samples of megalithic, cyclopean construction. We note here that the aim of the work is the primary, scientific presentation of the material identified by the expedition team. Part of the material found by us as a result of field-expedition works is published for the first time - thus, an attempt of scientific study is attached to it in the form of historical-cultural analysis of the region, scientific annotation of cultural monuments and their classification-dating. The issues raised within the research, conclusions, attempts to date and classify the monuments are obviously primary in nature and require future study. In the Basiani region (Turkey), within the scope of the expeditions, we traced more than two dozen monuments of megalithic culture, although the present letter will present an attempt at scientific analysis of only about ten of them. A large part of the mentioned monuments have been destroyed almost to the ground, which complicates the possibility of a more or less complete scientific reasoning about them. Monuments with plans that have survived in a relatively complete form were selected for the study - it was by taking into account planning features, construction techniques and materials that the typological differences of the given cyclopean construction were highlighted. Different types of planning, construction techniques and materials allow us to more or less determine the time range of the construction of monuments. It is important that a complete study of the mentioned monuments is impossible without archaeological excavations. Nevertheless, the art-scientific analysis of the presented group of monuments gave us important results, which became even clearer in the light of historical research. By analyzing the historical sources and studying the morphology of the monuments, it was possible to determine the general time range of the construction of this large group of almost destroyed buildings.

Determination of the date of erection of Matani “Tskhrakara~ church was of special significance for the understanding of the development of Early Christian Georgian architecture. Based on studies undertaken by G. Chubinashvili as early as 1920-1920s and later on, in 1950s, the church was ascribed to the 5th c., similar to Dzveli Shuamta basilica. New observations carried out on the church proved that, due to its structural, artistic and functional characteristics, it shows closer affinity with the architecture of the Transitional Period, namely, 8th-9th cc. and not of earlier epoch. For the first researcher of the church, decisive factor for the determination of the date of its construction was similarity of the plan layout of Matani church with Early Christian basilica in Dzveli Shuamta, while Akhmeta “Gvtaeba~ church, dated to the 6th c. by that time, which was referred to for the comparative analysis, served as an additional argument. In 1980s, I. Elizbarashvili has studied a group of churches, which she identified as the two-nave church typological group and, within this group, convincingly dated Akhmeta church to the 8th c. Our study has clearly shown crucial differences revealed by the comparative analysis of Dzveli Shuamta and Matani churches, which definitely point to the later period of construction of the latter. Great affinity of various elements of Matani church and of the tendency manifested in them with such monuments of the Transitional Period as Akhmeta “Gvtaeba~ church, Baikho Trinity church, Davati church of the Virgin, Nedzisi “Bziana~ church, Sakdrioni church of St. George, three-nave basilica in Sno Akhaltsikhe, Tskhvarichamia “Didi Sakdari~, Bagiantkari church, Tabakini, Tsirkoli, Kabeni churches, Telovani church of Holy Cross, Nekresi domed church, Vachnadziani Kvelatsminda church, etc. give grounds to ascribe Matani church to the Transitional Period, namely, 8th-9th cc.