طبقه بندی تاریخ معماری و شهرسازی در ایران؛ تدوین عناوین، معانی و مفاهیم

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استاد شهرسازی، دانشکده شهرسازی، پردیس هنرهای زیبا، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.

2 استادیار معماری، دانشکده معماری، پردیس هنرهای زیبا، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

تاریخ نگاری هنر و طبیعتاً معماری و شهرسازی از جمله علومی است که گرچه می توان ریشه های تاریخی برای آن در ایران یافت ولی در شکل کنونی، در پی مواجه جامعه ایرانی با تغییرات و تحولات علمی و صنعتی غرب به آن توجه و اقبال نموده است. در فرآیند این امر فراز و فرودهایی را شاهد بوده و نگرش ها و گرایش های متفاوتی را تجربه کرده و با محاسن و معایب آن از نزدیک آشنا شده است. اما همچنان و علیرغم گذشت نزدیک به یک قرن هنوز تعریف واضح و روشنی از عناوین مورد استفاده و بار معنایی  نها در دست نیست. در راستای حصول به هدف تبیین و تدوین ادبیات مناسب برای این منظور، سوال اصلی این است که کدام واژه و یا ترکیب واژگان می تواند عنوانی مناسب و کارآمد در زمینه طبقه بندی تاریخ هنر و خصوصاً معماری با جایگاه ویژه سرزمینی در ایران به دست دهد. در این مقاله سعی شده است که با استفاده از روش تحقیق تفسیری تاریخی و تکنیک های روش تحقیق استدلال منطقی ضمن بررسی دقیق معنای تحت اللفظی واژگان کلیدی در این زمینه مانند شیوه، سبک، مکتب، دوره، و مشابهات لاتین آن ها که در تاریخ نگاری معماری و شهرسازی بسیار مورد استفاده قرار گرفته اند و مطالعه پیرامون سیر تاریخی به کارگیری آن ها در این روند و همچنین بررسی و تحلیل آراء و نظرات اندیشمندانی که دستی در این موضوع دارند به درک مفاهیم عمیق تری از آنها برسد و تأثیر هریک را بر فرآیند تدوین تاریخ معماری و شهرسازی ایران مطالعه نماید. در این مسیر نقش این عناوین در تنظیم تاریخ سایر هنرها اعم از قدیم و جدید نیز بررسی شده و در نهایت به نظر می رسد که استفاده از یک ترکیب سه وجهی متشکل از واژه شیوه و وجه سرزمینی و همچنین زمانه تولید اثر می تواند ترکیب مناسبی برای تاریخ نگاری معماری و شهرسازی ایران باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

A Classifying the History of Architecture and Urbanism in Iran;The Collection of Terms, Definitions and Concepts

نویسندگان [English]

  • Seyed Mohsen Habibi 1
  • Mohammad Hassan Khademzade 2
1 Professor of Urban Planning, College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
2 Assistant Professor of Architecture, College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Basically, historical classification offers a better understanding of the intended time span and its relation with the whole history. In this regard, art history is no exception. That is why certain similarities and distinctions may be found among the artistic creations not only in different eras but also within a specific era. As a result, the sensible evaluation criteria, in terms of historical classification, may be provided.There are, of course, those who reject the idea of classification as an undue act believing that classification may mislead the artists and cause a sort of confusion. Despite the existing doubts, classification seems inevitable in order to examine the art history of Persia. Of course, doing such a classification should not be made at the cost of ignoring the individual/ characteristic aspects of Persian art including historical continuity and coherence. In other words, the historical classification views may be applied within a domestic framework.Although some efforts have been made by the Iranian scholars in the field of art historiography (including architecture and urbanism), this interest has accelerated recently due to modern scientific achievements. Obviously, the whole trend has had ups and downs; various perspectives have been posed and the strong and weak points of each have become clear. Notwithstanding, it seems that there is not still a general consensus on the terms and their connotations as applied in the issue under question.The present article has aimed to elaborate an untreatable terminology, in terms of scientific and cultural aspects, in order to classify the history of Persian architecture and urbanism.Regarding to that, it has tried to answer these questions: What is/are the rationale for the classification of Persian architecture and urbanism? What are the connotations of the applied terms? To what extent such terms are capable to reflect a specific attitude?What is the best possible single or combinatory term to denote the classification of Persian Art specifically in the scope of architecture?Based on a logical interpretive methodology towards the existing historical sources, the present study has aimed to illuminate the exact concepts of commonly used terms especially in the fields of architecture and urbanism- such as technique, style, school and era. To do that, in one hand, the usage of such terms in the course of history as well as their possible changes has been studied and in the other hand, diverse views of experts and scholars have been critically examined. The main objective was to reach a better understanding of the mentioned concepts and their impacts on historiography of Persian architecture and urbanism.Regarding to that, the usage of the term era as used by orientalists and western researchers has been regarded based on central power/authority; an approach which has not been fault free for three basic reasons. Firstly, the simultaneous analysis of severalapproaches in one single era is a difficult task. Secondly, more than being the creatorsof artistic trends, dynasties are often the consumers of them. Thirdly, often, there is no a clear-cut correspondence between an artistic trend and one single dynasty, in that, there may be neatly diverse authority zones in a given land with certain cultural realms. Also, the application of the term style in Iran may be addressed in two different aspects:1- Style, as used in visual arts such as miniature painting, calligraphy and illumination, etc. In this case, the date of creation, the place/workshop and the name(s) of the builder(s) are recognizable.2- In the realm of architecture, despite the existence of an apprentice-master system, there aren’t academies to instruct rules formally. Secondly, the common style in a given era is not attributable to certain person(s). Thirdly, the most determining factor in making stylish shifts seems to be commonly accepted aesthetic tastes as well as technical capabilities of the intended time. Fourthly, in the course of Persian history, art has been more under the influence of mysticism than of philosophy.In art and architecture, style and technique have been, semantically, used rather interchangeably both for denoting technical characteristics of a work. The term technique implies that the artist and his/her work is a considerable extent, influenced by society.In the present study, the role of technical terminology, old and new, in compiling the historiography has been addressed. Finally, it concludes that three basic considerations should be taken into consideration in historiography of Persian architecture and urbanism: common technical features; social and geographical aspects; and the creation time of the work. Yazdian style in the 11th century and Fars style in the 13th century are two typical examples in this respect.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Historiography of Art
  • method
  • style
  • School
  • Period

-- Abedinee, R. (2001). Posters of Polish School in National House of Artists. Tavoos, Quarterly of Iran’s Art. (4/3).

-- Ahmadian, M. (2007). Classification in Art History. A Published Lecture Delivered At Naghsh-E-Jahan Art Studies

Centre Accessible at www.honar.ac.ir

-- Arianpour, A., M. (1990). English-Persian Dictionary, Tehran: Amir Kabeer

-- Amirkhani, G. (2011). The Art of Bookbinding in 16th Century Khorasan, HONAR-HA-YE-ZIBA, (37).

-- Ahari Z. (2007). Isfahan School in Urbanism, Tehran: Art Academy.

-- Barahimi, M. (2007). Classification in Art History. A Published Lecture Delivered At Naghsh-E-Jahan Art Studies

Centre Accessible At www.honar.ac.ir

-- Dehkhoda Ali Akbar. Nd. Dictionary of Persian Words. Tehran: Amir Kabeer

-- Dieulafoy, J. (1991). Travelogue. The Memoirs of Archeological Discoveries in Shush (Iraj Farah Vashi, Trans.),

Tehran: Tehran University Publication.

-- Gardner, H. (1996). Art through Ages. (Mohammad Taghi Faramarzi, Trans.). Tehgran: Agah Publication.

-- Gerhard, D. (2006). Periodization in History, (Beeta Pouvash, Trans.). Golestan-E-Honar. (1).

-- Ghayoumi Beedhendi, Mehrdad. (2007). Classification in Art History. A Published Lecture Delivered at

Naghsh-E-Jahan Art Studies Centre Accessible at www.honar.ac.ir

-- Godar, A., Godar, Y., Sirro, M. (1992). Asar’e Iran, (Abolhasan, Sarv Ghad’e’moghadam, Trans.), Mashhad:

Astan’e’ghods

-- Habibi, S. M. (1997). From Building to City: A Historical Analysis of the Concept of City and Its Fabric. Tehran:

Tehran University Publication.

-- Hojjat, M. (2002). Cultural Heritage in Iran. Policies for an Islamic Country. Tehran: National Cultural Heritage

Organization.

-- Jabbari, S. (2009). Emergence and Evolution of Nastaleegh Calligraphy during the 15th and 16th. HONAR-HAYE-

ZIBA.

-- Khanmohammadi, A. A. (1993). Principles for Builders, SOFFEH, (5).

-- Khaki, Mohammad Reza. (1997). Emergence of New Ways of Acting in 19th and the First Half of the 20th Century.

HONAR-HA-YE-ZIBA (34).

-- Khoshnevis M. H. (1997). Fatola Yof, Sh.S, Architectural Typology of the Mosques in Azerbayejan Republic. Robenshe,

Leila and Others, Translators. Tehran. Office of the Cultural Studies.

-- Malek-O-Shoara Bahar, Mohammad Taghi (1943). Persian Literary Schools. Tehran: Amir Kabeer Publication.

-- Moeein, M. (1997). Dictionary of Persian Words. Tehran: Amir Kabeer Publication.

-- Oxford ADVANCED LERNER`S Dictionary (2004). A. S. Hornby, Sixth Edition, (Sally Wehmeier, Ed.). OXFORD

UNIVERSITY PERESS, 1141-1142.

-- Peernia, M. K. (2009). Styles in Persian Architecture, Compiled By Gholam Hossein Memarian. Tehran, Soroush-

E-Danesh

-- Peerniakan, D. (2009). Schools of Playing Tar. HONAR-HA-YE-ZIBA. (34).

-- Upham Pope, Arthur. (1986) Persian Architecture: The Victory of Shape and Color. (Keramatollah Afsar, Trans.).

Tehran: Yasavoli