Conservation of Armenian Historical Heritage in East Azerbaijan using the Italian Conservation Guidelines; Case Study: St. Sarkis Church in Tabriz

Gharehayaghi, Samira; Akhoundi, Farhad; Nami, Safiyeh

doi:10.22034/aaud.2025.493250.2946

Conservation of Armenian Historical Heritage in East Azerbaijan using the Italian Conservation Guidelines; Case Study: St. Sarkis Church in Tabriz

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Samira Gharehayaghi ¹

Farhad Akhoundi ²

Safiyeh Nami ³

¹ M.A. in Strengthening Historical Monuments, Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism, Tabriz Islamic Art University, Iran (Corresponding Author).

² Associate Professor of Architectural Technology, Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism, Tabriz Islamic Art University, Iran.

³ Instructor of Architectural Technology, Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism, Tabriz Islamic Art University, Iran.

10.22034/aaud.2025.493250.2946

Abstract

The architecture of Armenian churches holds a significant place in the history of Iranian architecture, particularly in northwest Iran, due to their age and cultural importance. One notable example is the St. Sarkis Church in Tabriz, which dates back to 1821 AD and represents the existence of various cultures and religions in the region. Unfortunately, this church has been neglected, and there has been limited research on it. The present study aims to investigate the architecture and typology of the St. Sarkis Church to assess its seismic behavior. It is mixed-method (qualitative-quantitative) research, in which the data are collected through library and field studies. In the qualitative section, the church is assessed according to the Italian conservation guidelines at the project site. In the quantitative section, its seismic behavior is examined using 3Muri software. The results demonstrate a seismic safety index of less than 1 for the building in both quantitative and qualitative assessments, indicating that the structure doesn’t provide sufficient safety when facing significant seismic events. Sensitivity analysis further confirms these results. A comparison of the qualitative and quantitative assessment approaches reveals that the qualitative method is more conservative, while the quantitative method shows a higher accuracy. The findings advocate for a hybrid(qualitative-quantitative) assessment approach as an effective tool for reaching a more comprehensive understanding of the seismic performance of historical buildings and identifying their seismic vulnerabilities. It is crucial for designing appropriate conservation strategies. Given the location of St. Sarkis Church in Tabriz, a seismic-prone area, and its cultural significance, the results underscore the importance of conserving and strengthening this building as a vital part of the region’s historical identity.

Keywords

Conservation of Historical Monuments

Churches of East Azerbaijan

St. Sarkis Church

Italian Conservation Guidelines

Seismic Vulnerability

Akhoundi, Farhad, and Mohammad Kheyrollahi Dehkharghani. 2023. “Guidelines for Evaluation and Mitigation of Seismic Risk to Cultural Heritage”. Tabriz Islamic Art University. [in Persian]
American Society of Civil Engineers. ASCE 41: Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings. Reston, VA: ASCE.
Arya, Anand S., Teddy Boen, and Yuji Ishiyama. 2014. Guidelines for earthquake resistant non-engineered construction. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000193029.locale=en.
Azizi, Maryam, and Arzhang Sadeghi. 2015. “Seismic Vulnerability of St. Stepanos Church in Jolfa.” Third International Congress of Civil Engineering, Architecture and Urban Development, Tehran. https://civilica.com/doc/469720/. [in Persian]
Betti, Michele, Andrea Borghini, Alberto Ciavattone, Sonia Boschi, Emanuele Del Monte, and Andrea Vignoli. 2017. “Assessment of the seismic risk of the museum of Casa Vasari in Arezzo (Italy).” International Journal of Masonry Research and Innovation 2(2-3): 107-133. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMRI.2017.085951.
Borri, Antonio, and A. De Maria. 2009. “Eurocode 8 and Italian Code. A comparison about safety levels and classification of interventions on masonry existing buildings.” In Eurocode 8 Perspectives from the Italian Standpoint Workshop, pp. 237-246. Neaples, Italy: Doppiavoce. http://www.episkeves2.civil.upatras.gr/wp-content/uploads/filebase/%CE%9A%CE%91%CE%94%CE%95%CE%A4/%CE%92%CE%99%CE%92%CE%9B%CE%99%CE%9F%CE%93%CE%A1%CE%91%CE%A6%CE%99%CE%91/Eurocode%208%20and%20Italian%20Code%20(1).pdf
Casarin, Filippo, and Claudio Modena. 2008. “Seismic assessment of complex historical buildings: application to Reggio Emilia Cathedral, Italy.” International Journal of Architectural Heritage 2(3): 304-327. https://doi.org/10.1080/15583050802063659.
Cultural Heritage Organization of East Azerbaijan Province
Deravansian, Nareh, Alina Karim Masihi. 2017. “Studying the Architectural Features of Churches.” Payman Magazine (80). [in Persian]
Fazzi, Eloisa, Stefano Galassi, Giulia Misseri, and Luisa Rovero. 2021. “Seismic vulnerability assessment of the benedictine basilica typology in central Italy.” Journal of Building Engineering 43: 102897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102897.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1999. Seismic Evaluation of Buildings (FEMA 310). Washington, DC: FEMA.
Fusco, Edoardo, Andrea Penna, Andrea Prota, Alessandro Galasco, and Gaetano Manfredi. 2008. “Seismic assessment of historical natural stone masonry buildings through non-linear analysis.” In Proceedings of the 14th world conference on earthquake engineering, pp. 12-17. https://www.iitk.ac.in/nicee/wcee/article/14_S11-081.PDF.
Nabipour, Iraj, Emad Shirveis, and Enayat Hashemi. 2007. “A Study on historical-cultural architectural fabric of Bushehr Port an Urban, cultural and sanitary approach.” Iranian South Medical Journal 10(1): 82-90. http://ismj.bpums.ac.ir/article-1-12-fa.html. [in Persian]
Hoviyan, Andranik. 2003. “Armenian Churches of Iran.” National Cultural Heritage Organization. [in Persian]
Huerta, Santiago. 2006. “Galileo was wrong: the geometrical design of masonry arches.” In Nexus Network Journal, pp. 25-51. Birkhäuser Basel. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00004-006-0016-8.
Karang, AbdolAli. 1972. “Ancient Monuments of Azerbaijan.” National Monuments Association. [in Persian]
Malekmian, Lina. 2001. “Armenian Churches of Iran, Tehran” Cultural Research Office. [in Persian]
New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering. 2006. “Guidelines for Seismic Assessment.” Canberra: NZSEE.
Noortman, Falko. 2019. “Applicability of the Pushover Method for the Seismic Assessment of URM Structures in Groningen: A Case Study of a Low-Rise Apartment Building”. https://resolver.tudelft.nl/uuid:2eef747e-441f-4358-996a-8db73571ad76.
NTC 18: Standards for Technical Communication. 2018. National Technical Committee.
Onescu, Iasmina, Anna Lo Monaco, Nicola Grillanda, Marius Mosoarca, Michele D’Amato, Antonio Formisano, Gabriele Milani, Francesco Clementi, and Mihai Fofiu. 2024. “Simplified Vulnerability Assessment of Historical Churches in Banat Seismic Region, Romania.” International Journal of Architectural Heritage 19(5): 825-838. doi: 10.1080/15583058.2024.2341054.
Permanent Committee for Revising the Iranian Code of Practice for Seismic Resistant Design of Buildings. 2014. Iranian Code of Practice for Seismic Resistant Design of Buildings, Standard No. 2800. 4th ed. Tehran: BHRC.
Simoni, Punik, and Isa Hojat. 2021. “Contextual Analysis of Church Architecture; Centralism: A Characteristic Feature of Eastern Church Architecture.” Journal of Fine Arts: Architecture & Urban Planning 25(4): 5-16. https://doi.org/10.22059/jfaup.2019.250718.672019. [in Persian]
Simoni, Punik. 2015. “Armenian Church Architecture in Azerbaijan.” First International Conference on Arts, Crafts and Tourism. https://civilica.com/doc/543558/. [in Persian]
Torelli, Giacomo, Dina D’Ayala, Michele Betti, and Gianni Bartoli. 2020. “Analytical and numerical seismic assessment of heritage masonry towers.” Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 18(3): 969-1008. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00732-y.
Xu, Tianqi. 2018. “Modeling the seismic response of a two-storey calcium silicate brick masonry structure with nonlinear pushover and time-history analyses”. https://resolver.tudelft.nl/uuid:dcc97b15-0b76-4b90-8a22-a86f23cffe3c.