Maps and images of Mount Ararat, from early engravings to satellites
For most of its history, Mount Ararat was known in Europe through pictures drawn by travellers who saw it from the plains. Friedrich Parrot, who studied the mountain in 1829, reviewed those pictures one by one and found most of them wrong in shape. Measured survey work followed in the nineteenth century, and since the 1970s the mountain has been recorded from space. This page explains what each kind of image or map is, and what it can and cannot show. The features named on maps are described on features on a map.
Early views and why they mislead
In his Journey to Ararat, Parrot surveyed the views of the mountain published before his expedition:
- Jean Chardin (journal of his travels, London, 1686). The two plates are the earliest views Parrot knew. The view from Erivan is “a complete failure in every respect”. The view from Echmiadzin is “not amiss in the outlines”. Bryce adds that Chardin’s views show the ark perched on the summit of Great Ararat, perhaps only as an emblem.
- Tournefort (1718). The drawing is done with spirit and nearly every line follows nature, “but with the most grotesque exaggerations”.
- James Morier (1813 and 1818). A drawing of both peaks from the east. Parrot thought it untrue to nature; Little Ararat appears “a mere rock in the shape of a thimble”.
- Sir Robert Kerr Porter (1822). Beautiful but far too abrupt, with Little Ararat drawn as a needle-shaped point.
- M. von Kotzebue (1819). Aquatint engravings. The main features are recognisable, but the slopes are much too steep; the belt of clouds around the mountain is “well done, and characteristic”.
- Sir William Ouseley (1823). Three views. Parrot judged the one from the plain of Erivan, although only two inches square, the best picture yet: both peaks in correct outline and at their true relative size.
- Loose prints: a Russian plate without date or author, a drawing inscribed as made in 1784 by P. d’Engelmann from the south, and a large recent engraving by the St Petersburg academician Mashkov. Parrot found the Mashkov engraving interesting but too steep, and the mountains set too close to the foreground.
The common fault, Parrot explained, is an optical illusion that affects most free sketches of isolated mountains: the slopes are drawn far too steep, and the smaller peak too high or too pointed.
Parrot’s method for a true outline
To avoid that error, Parrot used a simple device for his own drawings. It was a small pasteboard frame about three inches by two and a half, divided by eight fine threads of dark silk into a grid, with matching numbered lines pencilled on his drawing paper. Holding the frame at a fixed position before his eye, he traced the outline of the mountain square by square. He used it for the views published with his book, to which, he wrote, he had taken much pains to give “a character of perfect truth”.
Survey work
Measured maps require measured angles and distances. Parrot’s expedition took the first steps: his colleague Fedorov measured the distance between the two summits geodetically at 12,440 yards, and Parrot records measuring a base-line. The larger work came with the Russian triangulation survey of Transcaucasia. According to James Bryce, its leader, General Chodzko, climbed Ararat in 1850 in the course of that survey and stayed on the summit for three days. Nineteenth-century heights and coordinates from these sources are listed on elevation and measurement and geographic setting.
Official maps today
The Turkish General Directorate of Mapping provides official maps through its public GeoPortal. It was used as a map reference by the earliest pages of this site, but has not been re-read for this page. An official map is the right source for place names, roads and the relative position of settlements. It does not show current snow cover, access rules or the condition of a route.
Satellite images since 1977
The U.S. Geological Survey’s EROS Center has published a set of satellite images of Ararat and explains how they were used to measure the summit glacier:
- 12 September 1977, Landsat 2;
- 10 October 1980, Landsat 3, Return Beam Vidicon (RBV) camera;
- 3 October 2001, Landsat 7;
- 5 September 2017, Landsat 8;
- 29 September 2018, Sentinel-2B.
A study of all glaciers in Turkey used the 1980 RBV images, together with dozens of other Landsat images and high-resolution commercial images. It found that the glacier area of Ararat fell from 8.9 km² in 1977 to 5.6 km² in 2008, with most of the loss on the southern, western and eastern sides. USGS notes that the RBV camera had high spatial resolution, but that the near-infrared and shortwave infrared bands of later Landsat sensors show the extent of ice more clearly. The full area series, to 2013, is on snow and ice on Mount Ararat.
What each kind of image can show
- An engraving or drawing records how a traveller saw the mountain and what he believed about it; the ark on Chardin’s summit is an example. It is evidence of perception, not of shape.
- A measured survey gives heights, distances and positions as they were determined at the time, with the instruments of the time.
- An official map gives the authority’s names and positions of features and settlements.
- A satellite image records the surface on one date, including snow that may be seasonal. Only a series of images taken in comparable seasons, like the late-summer and autumn scenes listed above, supports statements about change.
Sources
- Friedrich Parrot, Journey to Ararat, translated by W. D. Cooley, New York: Harper and Bros., 1846, ch. VII pp. 146–150, ch. XI. Internet Archive. Read 25 September 2026.
- James Bryce, Transcaucasia and Ararat, 3rd ed., London: Macmillan, 1878, ch. VI pp. 207–208, 237. Internet Archive. Read 25 September 2026.
- USGS EROS Center, RBV Images Mount Ararat. Checked 14 September 2026.
- Harita Genel Müdürlüğü, GeoPortal. Service reference; used on this site’s earlier pages (31 August 2026), not re-read for this page.