There are basically two reasons for visiting Dogubeyazit. İshak Paşa Sarayı and Mount Ararat. According to the Lonely Planet Guide the best time to see Ararat is just after dawn before it is obscured by clouds. With that in mind I set the alarm for 6.00am. Furthermore mindful of how cold it might be so early in the mortning and how cold it had been in Artvin the night before I put on another bit of kit that it was suggested I should take along namely thermal underwear a thermal vest and longjohns.
It was a 5km walk from my hotel to İshak Paşa Sarayı and along the way there were superb views of Mount Ararat along the way. I particularly like the one of the mountain with tanks in the foreground. I remember that a soldier hove into view after I took my picture and wagged a disapproving finger at me. I didn't try another one.
I carried on my march up to Isak Pasa Sarayi. Ilhan Aksit in the book I bought is right when he says: "Perched on the cliffs like an eagle's nest five kilometers from Dogubeyazit, the Serai of İshak Paşa is a structure that in every sense is worth seeing". It is a very photogenic site indeed. A picture postcard palace. Here's a postcard I bought and sent home.
Of course the site was not chosen for its photogenic nature not least because photography had not been invented at the time. It was selected so as to control the trade route, the silk road, between Iran and Anatolia. The location is close to the present day Armenian, Azerbaijani and Iranian borders. It was completed in 1784 being commenced by Cildiroglu Colak Abdi Pasha and completed by his heir İshak Paşa.
I quote from the Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture: "The complex is an intentional Seljuk revival example with many Turkish Baroque elements. Situated on a long spur overlooking the Ararat plateau, the saray is divided in the traditional Ottoman manner into three sections: the first is service court; the second is the selamlik court; and the third is the haramlik court. The splendid decorative program is an eighteenth century interpretation of the twelfth-thirteenth centuries Seljuk precedents, and is all achieved in stone carving."
It is said that the magnificent gate in main entrance (facing east) was appropriately embellished with gold-plated doors but that they were removed and carried off by the Russians. Due to its proximity to the Russian and Persian borders of the empire, Iİshak Paşa Sarayı suffered serious damage during several wars, beginning with the Russian seige in 1828. Stones were removed from the abandoned palace during the re-location of the city in 1934. The upper wooden structure also vanished during this period.
Ilhan Aksit says: "They also say that once the Persian ambassador stayed in this imposing palace as a guest and later when he came to Topkapi Sarayi in Istanbul he mentioned the reigning sultan (Selim III) how magnificent Ishak Pasha serai was and that as a result, Ishak Pasha fell from favour owing to the sultan's displeasure"
It took something like an hour to get from the town to the palace. So I was there around 7.00am. I think I can recommend this time as a very good time to visit since there was absolutely nobody else around.
The setting of the palace is terrific and I scrambled around to get views from further away to put it in its context.
Here's a view from even further away...
..and finally from even further away still one from a mosque. I think that far enough away now.
Having been abandoned and neglected at least until the mid 1960's the interiors aren't much to look at. Ilhan Aksit tells me that the general plan follows that of Ottoman palaces but there are traces of Seljuk influences in the monumental portals. Excluding the terraces the building is 115m x 50m an area of 7,600m squared in which there are two internal courtyards around which are masterfully located buildings such as a U-shaped structure containing the men's apartments, a mosque, the harem, the kitchens and baths. It is said that the two-storey serai had 366 rooms.
The picture below shows the mosque, mausoleum and portal to the harem. I think the octagonal structure in the corner before the mosque is the turbeh where Abdi Pasha and Ishak Pasha are buried.
Below is a picture of the inner courtyard in the harem.
The following picture could very well be a corridor leading to the interior of the mosque. I didn't make it very clear on the slide. The one below that is the ceiling of the mosque.
In my researches to plug the holes in my memory and pad out the sketchy knowledge i had I came across this video. By the look of it there may have been some serious restoration work done since I was there just over 17 years ago.
So by now it must have been about 8.15am and the sun was beginning to warm up. I couldn't really say that it was very cold anyway. Around 8.30 I began the march back to the town. Below an image I like very much taken as I walked along in my trekking trainers wrapped up against the non-existent cold.
I had made two mistakes. First, throughout the time I was up at İshak Paşa Sarayı, upon my return and for the rest of the time I was in Dogubeyazit the summit of Mount Ararat was clearly visible with scarcely a wisp of cloud anywhere near the summit. So perhaps I needn't have got up so early. Second, by the time I got back to the hotel I was sweltering. I couldn't get the thermals off fast enough.
So there it was. It's amazing what you can achieve if you get up early enough. By midday I had showered, repacked and had checked out of the hotel and was on a Dolmus to Van, once the capital of the 9th Century BC Kingdom of Urartia.
Below are two postcards I sent back of Mount Ararat the traditional resting place of Noah's Ark. It might actually be up there. I don't see why it would be nor why any of it would have survived the thousands of years up there if it had been there. It is something that causes me a degree of annoyance that at the time I was there and no doubt today teams of climbers were/are clambering over the mountain (or perhaps expertly climbing it, whatever) sponsored by churches who think that it is worthwhile to try to locate some relic of Noah's Ark. To me, it is indicative of doubt in what some may profess to believe that compels them to try to prove themselves right. Does it really matter? I suppose to those who think that what they believe is right and that non believers are worse than wrong it does matter. They really need some evidence that the biblical story is literally true to validate their faith. Somehow I think this misses the point.
