The Spanish-Moorish Mudekhar code in the Crimean cultural landscape

Kotliar Elena Romanovna PhD in Art History Associate Professor, Department of Visual and Decorative Art, Crimean Engineering and Pedagogical University named after Fevzi Yakubov 295015, Russia, Republic of Crimea, Simferopol, lane. Educational, 8, room 337 allenkott@mail.ru Other publications by this author

Khlevnoi Vladimir Aleksandrovich Lecturer, Department of Fine and Decorative Arts, Crimean Engineering and Pedagogical University named after Fevzi Yakubov 295015, Russia, Republic of Crimea, Simferopol, lane. Educational, 8, of. 337 allenkott@mail.ru

One of the main directions of cultural studies is to determine the multidimensional nature of culture, the laws of its development, forms and features of its manifestation. Among these parameters, a special place is occupied by the self-identification of ethnic groups in the process of ontogeny and phylogeny, including religious, moral, ethical, aesthetic norms, as well as features of the semiotics of the culture of each ethnic group ^{[2, p. 6]}.

This issue was actualized at the turn of centuries and millennia, when, on the one hand, it was about saving the "idea of culture" against the background of universal globalization, and, on the other, when there was a "clash of civilizations", ethnic identity ^{[2, p. 4-6]}.

The founder of German classical philosophy Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) put forward theses on the creation of a civil society regulating the moral improvement of people who differ in their social status, upbringing, and abilities in his philosophical treatises. The idea of the "morality" of society and man has become, in his opinion, the highest function of culture.

The ideas of the cultural unity of mankind were put forward by the outstanding academician of the USSR Academy of Sciences, philologist, art critic and culturologist Dmitry Sergeyevich Likhachev (1906-1999), who called culture an "organic whole", "home", putting into this concept everything that was created by man ^{[14, p. 91]}.

D. S. Likhachev introduced the term ecology of culture into the scientific thesaurus, putting into it the idea of preserving the socio-cultural space through the recognition of the intrinsic value of all types of culture (in particular, ethnic), its components. These ideas follow from his "moral laws", in particular, on interethnic tolerance: "Morality is what turns the "population" into an orderly society, humbles national enmity, forces the "big" nations to take into account and respect the interests of the "small" (or rather, the small)" ^{[14, p. 94]}.

The ideas of unity and integrity of culture based on the interaction and integration of ethnic groups and civilizations as unique cultural subjects, despite the identification of individual "cultural and historical types", are contained in the work of the Russian sociologist and culturologist, one of the founders of the civilizational approach in history, Nikolai Yakovlevich Danilevsky (1882-1885): "Russia and Europe: A look at cultural and political relations of the Slavic world to the Germanic-Romance" ^[4]. Danilevsky called the cultural-historical type or civilization the totality of science, religion, art, civil, political, social and economic development of groups of ethnic groups in a certain territory, the main parameter of the community of which is the kinship of languages. Among the regularities of the development of cultural and historical types considered by the author, the following statement is contained: "A civilization peculiar to each cultural and historical type only reaches completeness, diversity and richness when the ethnographic elements that make up it are diverse - when they, without being absorbed into one political whole, using independence, form a federation or a political the system of states" ^{[2, p. 113]}.

The arguments of D. S. Likhachev and N. Y. Danilevsky relate to multinational territories, which also include the territories of polyethnic Russia and Crimea in particular, in which the cultures of each of the numerous nationalities and groups of closely related peoples represent a unique whole, while not violating their own cultural boundaries of ethnic identity. An appeal to the concept of interethnic dialogue of Crimean cultures is impossible without an appeal to the concept of "cultural landscape".

The term cultural landscape is based on a number of concepts put forward by scientists who have considered it from different angles. Based on the concept of the noosphere, designated by the Russian multidisciplinary scientist-encyclopedist Vladimir Ivanovich Vernadsky (1863-1945), D. S. Likhachev introduced the term homosphere, designating it as "the sphere of influence and impact on the surrounding world of human activity" ^{[14, p. 91]}. In the studies of D. S. Likhachev devoted to the ecology of culture, the cultural or historical landscape called by him is characterized as a natural and cultural territorial complex formed as a result of long-term interaction between man and nature, his socio-cultural and economic activities ^{[14, p. 144]}.

Since the beginning of the 1990s, world science has been paying special attention to cultural landscapes as a special heritage that ensures the interaction, interdependence and interpenetration of natural and cultural components. In the "Operational Guide for the Implementation of the UNESCO World Heritage Convention", the definition of "cultural landscape" appeared and its place among the heritage sites was established. In this document, the term "Cultural landscape" is understood as the result of "the joint creation of man and nature", the defining role of social, economic and cultural factors in the interaction of man and his environment is noted. With regard to Crimea, this definition is absolutely logical and meets all the main parameters, such as the clear definition of the geocultural region, as well as the presence of distinctive cultural elements of this region.

The Soviet and Russian geographer and classification theory specialist Vladimir Leopoldovich Kagansky (born 1954) characterized the cultural landscape as an archetype characterized by a number of aspects, which, in addition to the features of geography, interaction and transformation of the environment by people, include ethical, semiotic, aesthetic and sacred components. "A cultural landscape is an earthly space, the living environment of a sufficiently large (self–preserving) group of people, if this space is both integral and structured, contains natural and cultural components, mastered utilitarily, semantically and symbolically" ^[7]. According to the author, the cultural landscape is dialectical, since it includes natural and cultural components, while it is distinguished by a combination of continuity and discontinuity, a productive neighborhood of autonomous components, contact transition zones, and the coexistence of various population groups. V. L. Kagansky cited a metaphor, presenting the cultural landscape as a "carpet of places", an "iconic text", to comprehend which requires a change of positions, movement in space ^[7].

V. L. Kagansky also focused on ethnocultural landscape studies, noting the influence of traditions of various nationalities on the change and development of natural lands, the formation of various cultural and economic types, the introduction of each of the ethnic groups of their own features into a single cultural landscape. Accordingly, we can talk about the cultural landscape, in particular, of the multi-ethnic Crimea, as a mosaic in which the overall picture is created with the help of many separate ethnic components (languages, everyday and religious traditions, culture of mastering nature, semiotics of art, architectural traditions, etc.) ^[7].

The definition of the term "cultural landscape" is impossible without reference to interdisciplinary research, in particular, to regionalism. The main focus of such studies is the study of the development of specific cultural trends within a certain geographical space determined by landscape, climatic, territorial and administrative boundaries. The subject of research on regional culture is polylinguism, polyethnicity, polyconfessional nature of certain regions.

The works of Dmitry Nikolaevich Zamyatin (born 1962), a culturologist and geographer, founder of the "Center for Humanitarian Studies of the Space of the Russian Research Institute of Cultural and Natural Heritage named after D. S. Likhachev", presents such an interdisciplinary field of research as humanitarian geography, which initially developed within the framework of anthropogeography, and later – within the framework of economic and social-economic geography. This branch of science is a synthesis of cultural landscape studies, cognitive geography, figurative (imaginative) geography, mythogeography, sacred geography ^[6]. The author notes that research activity in humanitarian geography is shifting towards the formation and development of mental constructs. Important for our research is such a direction of humanitarian geography as figurative (imaginative) geography, which studies "the patterns of formation of geographical images, their structures, the specifics of their modeling, methods and types of their representation and interpretation" ^[6]. The concepts of imaginal geography include such terms as regional identity (regional self-consciousness), local myth, figurative-geographical space, cultural landscape, mental-geographical space. The author defines the term "geographical image" as a system of interrelated symbols, stereotypes and archetypes that characterize any territory and directly depend on the development of the culture of this territory, i.e. as a variant of the cultural landscape. 

D. N. Zamyatin also focused on the role of various cultural texts in the formation of a geographical image (the term was introduced into the thesaurus of the basic concepts of cultural studies by A. Ya. Flier), both verbal and nonverbal, in particular, visual art, music, architecture, as well as the importance of local myths in this process. In this case, Crimea is a striking example of a region with clear geographical boundaries, since its cultural landscape was formed and is being formed thanks to the texts of cultures that inhabited earlier and now inhabit it of numerous nationalities, as well as their dialogue and polylogue.

The theory of one of the key concepts in this study – the text of culture – was developed on the basis of the works on semiotics by the famous Russian semiotic and cultural critic Yuri Mikhailovich Lotman (1922-1993) ^[15], as well as the philosopher, orientalist, philologist Alexander Moiseevich Pyatigorsky (1929-2009).

Chief Researcher of the Russian Research Institute of Cultural and Natural Heritage named after D. S. Likhachev, theorist of cultural studies A. Ya Flier (born 1950), calls a cultural text "a set of cultural meanings expressed in a symbolic form." The author points to the semiotic component of all cultural phenomena: intellectual, material, artistic, social, since they all carry information about themselves (phenomena, products, processes), as well as about time, society and the region for which this or that phenomenon or process is characteristic. the fact that the study of culture outside of textual and semantic characteristics leads to the loss of the subject of study, because culture in its essence is always a text. The author singled out artistic works, both verbal and non-verbal, operating in figurative language, into a special group of cultural texts.

Historically, from ancient times to the present, Crimea has been a multinational region, on the territory of which, as a result of constant migrations, the interaction of individual ethnocultures took place, the formation of a special ethno-cultural field consisting of codes of many different cultures. "Crimea is a multicultural space, irreducible to one foundation, to ethnic one–dimensionality" ^{[2, p. 12]}. The history of Crimea, due to its geographical location on the way "from the Varangians to the Greeks", at the intersection of trade routes, has been associated since ancient times with a constant change of ethnic groups, some of which disappeared in the subsequent process of assimilation, the culture of others has been preserved, having experienced the influence of integration in one form or another, however, all ethnic groups or ethnic groups, even the completely disappeared ones have left their mark on the culture of the Crimea. The unconditional role in the formation of Crimean cultural texts (both visual symbolism and mythological component) belongs to successive ancient cultures: Cimmerians, Taurians, Alans; cultures that came to Crimea in the era of antiquity: Scythians (Tavroskifs), Greeks, Jews, Sarmatians, Goths; ethnoses that came or formed on the territory of Crimea in the Middle Ages: Armenians, Crimean Tatars, Turks, Karaites, Crimeans, Italians (Genoese); numerous peoples who came to Crimea in Modern Times, thanks to the development of the Crimean lands by the Russian Empire: first of all, Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians, as well as peoples of Western and Eastern Europe: Moldovans, Germans, Ashkenazi Jews, Czechs, Bulgarians, Baltic peoples, etc. The large influx of representatives of various ethnic groups to the Crimea influenced the development of crafts, brought diversity to both architecture and art.

Russian mathematician, philosopher and political scientist Oleg Arshavirovich Gabrielyan (born 1956) considers the main characteristic of Crimea to be its autonomy, due not only to the peninsular nature of the place – topos, but also its inner idea, essence, stable structure of being – logos. Citing historical examples proving the logic of the autonomy of the Crimea, O. A. Gabrielyan notes that the ontological essence of the Crimea is polytextual, "this ecumene with its diversity of cultural worlds gave rise to various Crimean "texts": literary, architectural, toponymic, demographic and many others" ^{[2, p. 21]}. At the same time, the scientist draws attention to the fact that none of these texts concerning both large cultural entities (Scythian, Crimean Tatar, Russian) and more modest ones (Greek, Jewish, Armenian, Bulgarian, German, etc.) has become dominant, overwhelming.

Yu. M. Lotman, based on the theory of French structuralists, put forward the theory of the semiosphere – a closed space consisting of separate cultural layers and texts expressed through symbols. According to Lotman, the semiosphere is haarcterized by a continuum of different texts within common borders, but these internal texts must be either related or understandable from each other's point of view, unlike external texts, for which an additional translation mechanism is needed. Thus, the internal heterogeneity and diversity of the content of the semiosphere constitute its unique integrity. Yu. M. Lotman also points to the algorithm for the formation of new texts within the semiosphere, which requires, on the one hand, some similarity of the original cultural codes, and on the other, differences between them ^[15].

O. A. Gabrielyan points to an important vector of development of the Crimean culture – the Crimean semiosis, i.e. the process of interpreting the sign, generating meaning, testifying to the development of various cultures on a single territory in conditions of autonomy. The origin of the term "semiosis" meaning "interpretation of symptoms" goes back to ancient Greek physiologists who used it to make a diagnosis. The analysis of the components of the Crimean culture, thus, allows us to conclude about the ontological essence of the Crimea – its isolation.

The idea of cultural unity in a multiethnic society is impossible without a productive dialogue of cultures, which in turn forms a unique semiotic space of the multinational Crimea. According to the Russian culturologist and philosopher D. S. Berestovskaya (1934-2020): "Spiritual comprehension of the essence of other cultural worlds, carriers of other cultural values, comprehension of the "codes" of diverse pictures of the world, cultural texts is the basis of mutual understanding, dialogue and polylogue of cultures" ^{[2, p. 12]}.

The famous existentialist philosopher Martin Buber (1878-1965), who put forward the theory of dialogue in art (artistic culture) as a spiritual experience, for which it is necessary to understand the language of art, the "soul of culture", as a special sacrament, addressed the characteristic of the concept of dialogue of cultures. The Soviet and Russian cultural critic, philosopher, and cultural historian Vladimir Solomonovich Bybler (1918-2000) considered dialogue to be "the optimal form of human communication" both in everyday life and in art. The Soviet and Russian cultural critic, philosopher, author of studies on the theory of value, the history of culture and aesthetics, Moses Samoilovich Kagan (1921-2006), expanded the concept of dialogue on the relationship between nature and culture, past and future, West and East. The philosopher put forward the idea of multidimensional dialogues, calling dialogue a way and condition for the existence of man and culture.

In the monograph "Dialogicity of the holiday" by D. S. Berestovskaya and the Russian culturologist Olga Vladimirovna Bryzhak (born 1959), two directions of dialogue development are described: diachronic – provoking changes (worldviews, values) over time, and synchronous – the development of dialogue in a single socio-cultural space. In the synchronous development of the dialogue, its subjects are various social groups: subcultures, generations, etc. The main ones of such a dialogue are ethnic groups, especially those associated with a common compact territory of residence ^{[1, p. 41]}. In the case of the presence of "contact zones", within the boundaries of the intersection of information, these boundaries perform the role of "translating" cultural texts of one ethnic group, as a subject of dialogue, into a language ("culture code") understandable to another subject. Thus, the dialogue within these borders generates the emergence of a single semiotic space in which there are differences between individual subjects (ethnoses), and their common features are formed. The closely related cultural codes of the peoples of the Crimea, formed over the centuries, are an example of such a dialogue.

An important aspect of the topic of this study is "The problem of dialogue as a paradigm of the modern socio-cultural process and as a phenomenon peculiar to the cultural situation of the Crimea" ^{[1, p. 37]}. In the context of globalization, the erasure of cultural boundaries, in connection with the universal spread of "mass culture" through means of communication, primarily the Internet, and on the other hand, the transformation and substitution of ethnic and religious values and the formation of socially dangerous trends in a multinational society leading to disasters, the issue of constructive interethnic and interethnic dialogue is particularly acute. This trend is noted by the Russian sociologist Felix Vasilyevich Lazarev (born 1938).

The dialogue of cultures, mutual study of texts of each other's cultures, as interaction, leads to understanding and acceptance of each other (tolerance) and at the same time to the formation of their own identity, i.e. it is a necessary condition for the optimal development of each of the subjects (ethnic groups) and the further development of the cultural landscape as a whole.

Important aspects of this study are the identification of individual texts and codes of ethnic cultures and their elements in the general multilingual space of the Crimean ecumene, as well as the fixation of their visual and meaningful transformation as a result of the inevitable mutual influence in the process of long-term coexistence in close proximity.

"The goal of the Crimean culturologists is to find ways and means of peaceful interaction and mutual enrichment of the cultures of the peoples of the Crimea, to determine the specifics of the cultural landscapes of the Crimea, distinguished by historical value and diversity" ^{[2, p. 19]}.

Let's consider one of the numerous visual codes of the cultural landscape of the Crimea – the Mudekhar style, embodied in the architecture of the peninsula during the Art Nouveau period. The results of the study of the historical prerequisites for the emergence of the Mudekhar culture and monuments of Moorish architecture are contained in the monograph of the Russian art critic Henri Yurievich Kaptikov (born 1947) ^[9]. The author emphasizes the uniqueness of the Arab-Moorish style, which was formed on Spanish territory, and absorbed both eastern and Western features. The Russian philosopher, art critic Anatoly Ivanovich Kovalenko (born 1949) wrote about the history and some features of the Crimean Art Nouveau architecture ^[10]. Orientalism in the Crimean Art Nouveau architecture and its decor is the subject of articles by the Russian art critic Lyudmila Alexandrovna Efremova ^[5], as well as our works ^[12],[13]. The work of the Crimean historian, local historian Nikolai Nikolaevich Kalinin (1938-2000) ^[8] is devoted to the history of the life and work of the leading architect of the Crimea of the Art Nouveau period, Nikolai Petrovich Krasnov. Palace and park architectural complexes, their history and styles are considered in the work of the Russian art critic Ekaterina Mikhailovna Kolyada ^[11].

The term "Mudejar style" was coined by art critic Jose Amador de los Rios in honor of the Mudejars, who played a leading role in introducing Islamic decorative elements to the Iberian Christian kingdoms. Mudehars began to be called Muslims who remained in the former areas of Al-Andalus after the conquest by Christians in the Middle Ages, who were not initially converted to Christianity or expelled. Their name was borrowed from the Arabic word mudajan, which means "tamed or domesticated". The term probably originated as a mockery, since the word was applied to domestic animals, especially poultry ^[3]. The term mudehar is also translated from Arabic as "the one who is allowed to stay", which literally shows the situation of that time. The Mudejar style arose as a result of the mixing of Moorish and European styles during the Arab caliphate on the Iberian Peninsula after the Spanish Reconquista.

The Muslims who lived in the medieval Christian kingdoms of the Iberian Peninsula, who were called Mudehars, were treated with tolerance, and they could practice their religion with certain restrictions. However, soon after the transition of the last Muslim stronghold on the Granada peninsula to Christian Castile in 1492, Muslims were faced with a choice: become Christians or leave, first to Castile, and soon to Aragon. Those who decided to convert to Islam and stay were called Moriscos, they were often suspected of secretly practicing Islam, and after 1609, they were expelled from Spain ^[18].

The preservation of the Mudekhar culture in medieval Christian kingdoms depended on the ratio of the Christian and Muslim populations, the competing interests of the monarchy and the papacy, and economic needs. As a result of this local change, the synthesis of Islamic stylistics and Christian architectural practices became the basis of the "Mudekhar style" ^[3]. Cultural mixing, typical of Mudejar, began to arise in Spain in the XI century as a result of the coexistence of European and Moorish cultures. Mudejar is an exclusively Spanish–speaking phenomenon that existed in the XII–XVI centuries, as a mixture of Christian (Romanesque, Gothic, Renaissance) and Muslim artistic trends, which served as a link between the art of Christians and Muslims.

The characteristic features of the mudekhar style are:

1) The use of soft materials in the decoration of buildings, such as brick, plaster, ceramics or wood, which contributed to the decorative abundance.

2) The use of certain architectural elements and decorative themes.

There are various variants of mudejarism: brick Romanesque style (Leon, Valladolid, Avila and Segovia), Western mudejar art (from Tagus to Portugal), Aragon mudejar (with an abundance of glazed decorative ceramic elements and great development in the Ebro, Halon and Giloka valleys), Extremadura, Andalusia (Granada, Cordoba and Seville) and The Valencian community (Castellon, Valencia and Alicante) ^[18].

This style had its own peculiarities depending on the region and the name, among which Mudejar Toledo, Leonese, Aragonese and Andalusian stand out. The style went beyond the Iberian Peninsula and spread, among other things, to the Spanish colonies on the American continent. The most obvious features of mudekhar, borrowed from Muslim art, include the use of geometric patterns, intricate tiles and brickwork, as well as calligraphy as a means of decoration. Despite the fact that many early Mudejar-style buildings were built by Muslim craftsmen, over time these methods and techniques were borrowed by the Spaniards and soon took a significant place in the Spanish architecture of that time. Interestingly, in the XIX century in Madrid there was a revival of this style, known as neo-mudejar. It was very popular at the beginning of the XX century, in the era of Art Nouveau that spread throughout Western and Eastern Europe. As in mudejar, geometric figures, arabesques and patterned tiles were used in it. The famous Catalan architect Antonio Gaudi experimented with neo-mudejar in his House Vicens (Casa Vicens) ^[18].

Despite the fact that mudejar was spread throughout Spain, in some regions it gained particular popularity. The most notable is the northeastern region of Spain, Aragon, where numerous Mudejar-style buildings have been awarded UNESCO World Heritage Status. In particular, these are the Cathedral of Santa Maria de Mediavilla de Teruel in the city of Teruel and the Alhaferia Palace in Zaragoza. One of the most impressive examples of mudejar outside of Aragon is the Royal Alcazar Palace in Seville (Fig. 1), the foundations of which were laid by the Moors in the VIII century. The complex was built in the XIV century on the ruins of the Arab fortress by Pedro I of Castile. There are several other outstanding examples of the combination of European and Moorish art in Toledo: for example, the 14th-century El Transito Synagogue. Also worth mentioning is Santa Maria la Blanca, a former synagogue that today belongs to the Catholic Church and functions as a museum.

Fig. 1. Royal Alcazar Palace in Seville, Spain. 1364

At the end of the XIX-th and the beginning of the XX-th century in Spain and Portugal there was a revival of the neo-mudejar style. In the new style, Mudekhar arches, tiles and brickwork were combined with modern architecture and materials, including metal and glass.

Some Spanish architectural firms have turned their attention to construction projects in the modern Arabic-speaking world, in particular in Eastern Arabia, Morocco, Algeria, where Mudejar art was used as the preferred style of residential buildings. The historical Mudekhar style continues to serve as the basis for modernization in other, more modern styles. Currently, Muslim architects have achieved impressive success in the field of modern architecture, reflecting technical and engineering achievements, as well as aesthetic experience based on the heritage of Mudekhar ^[18]

The neo-mudekhar style did not accidentally become popular in Crimea, whose culture initially historically represented a synthesis of Eastern and Western traditions, combining elements of East and West. The use of the basic principles of the Mudekhar style in Crimean architecture is associated with the formation and spread in the Art Nouveau era of the South–coast palace type of buildings - palaces, mansions, dachas and hotels, for which the elegant style of buildings decorated with oriental ornaments has become one of the most common. According to the historian of Russian art, Vladimir Vasilyevich Stasov (1824-1906), ethnic ornament, all elements of which have an archaic semantic meaning, is a characteristic feature, a cultural code of art of any ethnic group, and carries not only a decorative function, but also an important semantic role ^[17], being a determinant of style, an accent that gives buildings a certain flavor (in this case, Eastern Moorish).

The Art Nouveau style, widespread in the late XIX – early XX centuries, was the result of a kind of eclecticism, a mixture of historical architectural styles and the use of their elements in an arbitrary combination. Talented architects who worked in the modern era in the Crimea created projects that reflected the wishes of customers in accordance with their ethnic component and interests, but the presence of impeccable taste of architects allowed them to avoid dissonance and create unusual and harmonious ensembles ^[10]. During this period, the designs and decor of mansions and public buildings manifested both world art styles (neoclassicism, Neo–Gothic, Neo-Baroque) and characteristic features of the national art of the peoples who inhabited the Crimea - Russians, Crimean Tatars, Armenians, Crimeans, Jews, Karaites, Greeks and others ^[16]. Despite a number of common features that make it possible to attribute this or that architectural structure to the Art Nouveau period, buildings designed in this style are distinguished by a pronounced individuality, as well as regional and ethno-national flavor. This, in particular, is explained by the fact that mansions, and sometimes public buildings were built taking into account the wishes of the customer, and, accordingly, could contain elements of national artistic culture.

In the planning and decoration of the architecture of the Art Nouveau period in Crimea, the oriental style is often traced, which is an alloy of elements of Turkish and Arabic architecture, Armenian architecture, Crimean Tatar structures of the Golden Horde, Karaite and Crimean elements. Simultaneously with ethnic elements, in the Crimean modern architecture, as well as in other regions of Russia and Europe, elements of ancient classicism, Baroque, Gothic are manifested, to a greater or lesser extent, depending on the nature of the building and the preferences of the customer. However, the regional character of the buildings of the Crimea, according to A. I. Kovalenko, is almost always distinguishable due to the fact that: "for the Crimea, in this case, the East and ancient Greece have always served as the dominant. That is why the "symbiosis of traditions" in the architectural monuments of the Crimea has its own unique plastic appearance, which makes it possible to accurately identify its geographical origin" ^[10]. The Mudekhar style, which in itself is such a synthesis, is firmly entrenched in the architecture of the peninsula.

The Mudekhar style was by definition suitable for the construction of Jewish religious buildings, due to the Eastern origin of the religion as a whole, and also because the Sephardic branch of Judaism directly originates from Moorish Spain.

One of the striking examples of the Moorish style is the Choral Synagogue (Fig. 2), erected in 1881 in the center of Simferopol, on Salgirnaya Street (now Kirova Street). Choral synagogues, as a rule, were built in large communities, mainly in cities, and belonged to the reformist trend of Judaism that arose during the Haskalah period. These were spacious, bright and elegant buildings in which cantor singing was practiced (a synagogue choir under the direction of a "cantor" – regent, or conductor). It is the presence of the choir that determines the common name of synagogues of this type – "Choral Synagogue".

The building of the Choral Synagogue was a rectangular two-story structure, the altar part of which is oriented to the east. The western (entrance) facade, facing the central Salgirnaya Street (now Kirova Street), was a two-story structure in which each floor was separated by a projecting cornice. The facade was divided vertically into three parts, including the main volume and two rectangular towers on the sides. In accordance with religious regulations regarding synagogues, the central part of the facade includes three large arched openings on both floors (the entrance was located in the central lower one), and one window on each floor in the turrets. The eastern Moorish flavor of the building is given by the jagged edges of the towers, the central pediment in the form of an arch (a symbol of the Tablets of the Covenant) and a balustrade on both sides of the pediment. The pointed windows of the second floor in the towers also belong to the Mudekhar style.

The elegant building in the Moorish mudekhar style, generally accepted for the architecture of choral synagogues of the late XIX century, harmonizes with other ceremonial buildings and palaces of the Crimea: similar elements and outlines in the form of crenellated turrets, balustrades on cornices and rectangular silhouettes with lancet windows have the Livadia Imperial Palace of Nicholas II, the Alupka Vorontsov Palace, the Dulber Palace in the Koreiz of the Grand Duke Peter Nikolaevich, Villa Victoria" Solomon of the Crimea in Feodosia, etc.Fig. 2. The building of the Choral Synagogue of Simferopol. 1881 Photo 1972, during its functioning as a cinema.

Another characteristic Mudekhar-style building is the Simferopol Karaite kenasa (Fig. 3), built at the expense of the Karaite community in 1891-1896. Kenasa is located on Karaimskaya Street. Its architecture is a synthesis of Mudekhar and Renaissance styles. The elegant, bright building of Kenasa is built of Bodrack stone. The characteristic details of the Moorish style include the crenellated design of the turrets on the sides of the pediment, as well as on the cornices. The tops of the turrets on both sides of the entrance have an oriental character, the complex lancet shape of two narrow windows above the entrance, the stripes decorating the facade imitating brick stripes in Andalusian buildings, the pattern of stucco under the cornice.

Fig. 3. Karaite kenasa, Simferopol, 1896

In the neo-Mudekhar style, the now extant Choral Synagogue was built in Feodosia (Fig. 4). Its construction was carried out on Lazaretnaya Street at the expense of the community and completed in 1904. Next to the synagogue in the photo is the building of the spiritual school for boys – Talmud Torah, built simultaneously with the synagogue. The synagogue building has a solid appearance due to the simplicity of its basilic volume, its beauty and elegance consists in a combination of Renaissance proportions and stucco decoration in the Mudekhar style. The traditional Moorish-style turrets between the jagged cornice and the round window on the facade gave the building a solemn, ceremonial appearance, which corresponded to the significance of the main Choral synagogue of the city. An interesting fact is that both Ashkenazi Jews and Krymchaks prayed in the Feodosiya Choral Synagogue.

Fig. 4. Synagogue and Talmud Torah, Feodosia. 1904 Postcard of the early twentieth century .

Nikolai Petrovich Krasnov (1864-1939), the "architect of the highest court", the chief architect of Yalta, the author of the famous Livadia Imperial Palace, made a huge contribution to the creation of the style of south-coast Crimean architecture. Nikolai Krasnov, a graduate of the Moscow School of Painting, Sculpture and Architecture, who had a peasant origin, was awarded the noble rank of state councilor for his outstanding projects in the field of architecture. His authorship belongs to a large number of palaces and mansions in the Crimea. Nikolai Krasnov skillfully used characteristic techniques of various styles in the decoration of buildings, including the mudekhar style, which is extremely common in the Crimea. ^[8].

As examples of the use of the mudekhar style in the works of N. P. Krasnov, one can cite the palace "Dulber" of Grand Duke Pyotr Nikolaevich Romanov in Koreiz (Fig. 5, 6). The project of the palace was created by N. P. Krasnov based on drawings and sketches of his customer, Peter Romanov, who traveled a lot in the Arab East and was fond of Oriental culture. The palace was built in 1897 . At the heart of the structure, as in all examples of buildings in the Moorish style, are simple geometric shapes, in terms of the palace resembles the letter "p". The central entrance facade is made in the form of a protruding tower topped with a dome with a spire, which is very characteristic of the palaces of Andalusia. The shape of the windows has a pronounced oriental character, from lancet to omega-shaped forms. The bright individuality and elegant beauty of the building is given by the oriental ornamental decor of small segments, made in the form of shallow reliefs. Also a characteristic feature is the cornice decor protruding in the form of teeth. The overall appearance of the palace impresses with oriental luxury, simultaneous simplicity of volumes and classical harmony of proportions, combined with the beauty of ornamental decoration.

Fig. 5. The Palace "Dulber" of Grand Duke Pyotr Nikolaevich Romanov in Koreiz. Architect N. P. Krasnov. 1897

Fig. 6. The Palace "Dulber" of Grand Duke Pyotr Nikolaevich Romanov in Koreiz. Architect N. P. Krasnov. 1897 Fragment of the entrance.

Another landmark structure, which uses elements of the Mudekhar style, can be called the Victoria cottage of the Prime Minister of the Crimean regional government Solomon of Crimea in Feodosia (Fig. 7). The combination of strict arched Renaissance forms and a characteristic Moorish tower to the right of the central facade, a mixture of Seljuk and Moorish ornaments in the facade decor gives the building a completely unique the image, which is a synthesis of styles, epochs, ethnic identities ^[12].

Fig. 7. Villa "Victoria" S. S. of Crimea, Feodosia.

Architect N. P. Krasnov. 1914

In the center of Simferopol in 1913, N. P. Krasnov built the bank of the Mutual Credit Society, for the impression of unshakable grandeur, monumental tranquility, reliability, as befits a bank, called the "Golden Calf" (Fig. 8, 9). This feeling was created by the architect due to the combination of classical, Roman simplicity of the proportions of the building's volumes in combination with large arched glazed openings, powerful columns in front of the facade, balustrades of balconies and Moorish elements: elegant small ornamentation in the design of the top of the facade, as well as imitation of turrets, with which the frieze is decorated ^[13].

Fig. 8. The building of the bank of the Mutual Credit Society "Golden Calf", Simferopol. Architect N. P. Krasnov. 1913

Fig. 9. The building of the bank of the Mutual Credit Society "Golden Calf",

Simferopol. Architect N. P. Krasnov. 1913 Fragment.

The Roffe baths (Fig. 10) in neo-mudekhar style were built according to the project of N. P. Krasnov in 1897 in Yalta in the courtyard of the hotel "France", commissioned by merchant A. I. Roffe. As in the palace "Dulber" and in the house of Solomon of Crimea, the architect used the Moorish motif of a rectangular tower, the facade of which is decorated with pointed arched finials of the entrance doors and the gallery of the second tier. The entrance is decorated in the form of a semicircular portal, richly decorated with geometric Moorish ornaments. The combination of simple forms of the foundation of the building and small ornaments in the decor, favored by the Mudekhars, gives the building a unique, recognizable oriental look.

Fig. 10. Roffe baths, Yalta. Architect N. P. Krasnov. 1897

Analyzing a number of buildings built in the Crimea during the Art Nouveau period, in which elements of the Moorish mudekhar style were used, it can be noted that this style has become especially popular in Crimea due to the organic combination of eastern and western elements in it, which is characteristic of the Crimean cultural landscape as a whole. The cultural image of the Crimea is also unique and original, as it consists of numerous cultures of eastern and Western peoples who have left a mark in the history of the peninsula. Like the combination of features of the East and west in the Mudekhar style, the ethnic cultures of the Crimea do not dissolve into each other, but coexist harmoniously, representing a unique, recognizable flavor of the area. Thus, it is possible to note the connotation of the foundations of the Mudekhar style and the Crimean cultural landscape as a whole, and the Mudekhar cultural code can be called one of the notable codes in the cultural landscape of Crimea.