مطالعۀ نمونه های کمتر شناخته شدۀ کاشی کاری در دورۀ ایلخانان و جانشینان آن ها (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
بسیاری از ابنیه دوران ایلخانی و مظفری تا به امروز باقی مانده اند؛ اما آثار کاشی کاری برخی از آن ها دیگر بر بدنه بناها قرار ندارد، به موزه ها منتقل شده اند یا برای همیشه از بین رفته اند. درمیان ابنیه دارای تزئینات کاشی کاری این دوران، مواردی وجود دارد که در منابع نامی از آن ها برده نشده، یا بررسی های صورت گرفته از آن ها مختصر و مربوط به سال های دور است و وضعیت کاشی کاری آن ها تا به امروز بسیار تغییر کرده است. مقاله حاضر، با طرح این پرسش که، تزئینات کاشی کاری ناشناخته و کمتر شناخته شده دوران ایلخانی و مظفری شامل چه مواردی می شود و جایگاه آن ها در سیر و تحول کاشی کاری ایلخانی و مظفری چیست؟ با رویکردی تاریخی - تطبیقی، به معرفی، مستندنگاری و بررسی تزئینات کاشی کاری آن ها پرداخته است. داده های این پژوهش، براساس واکاوی منابع مکتوب و بررسی های میدانی در ایران کنونی، ازمیان ۶۴ بنا شناسایی و گردآوری شده اند. تأکید بر آثاری است که هم چنان در ابنیه باقی مانده اند و فاقد تاریخ دقیق هستند. در این راستا، ابتدا بناها به طور اجمالی معرفی شده اند، سپس تزئینات مورد نظر توصیف و شرایط کنونی آن ها ذکر شده و درنهایت، با مقایسه با موارد مشابه، تاریخی برای آن ها پیشنهاد شده است. در این بررسی ها مشخص شد انواع کاشی، مانند معرق، معقلی، تراش، تا انواع کاشی هایی ازجمله طلاچسبان و زرین فام، در ابنیه این دوران وجود دارند که هم چنان ناشناخته باقی مانده اند. مقایسه آن ها نشان می دهد درحالی که تأثیرات بین منطقه ای وجود داشته است؛ به طورمثال، -میان آذربایجان تا ورامین- سنت های منطقه ای نیز در جریان بوده اند.A Study of Lesser-Known Examples of Tilework during the Ilkhanid Period and Their Successors
As a result of significant developments and innovations in tilework during the Ilkhanid and Muzaffarid periods, a large number of architectural structures from this era were adorned with various types of decorative tiles. Many examples of these artworks have survived to the present day; however, the tilework of some buildings has either been removed from the original structures, transferred to museums, or lost entirely. Through field investigations conducted by the authors, it was discovered that several buildings from this period still retain tile decorations, yet have received little to no scholarly attention. In some cases, the existing studies are outdated, and the tilework has undergone substantial changes since they were last documented. Revisiting these lesser-known examples is essential for both preserving them and gaining a deeper understanding of the evolution of Iranian tilework. This article explores the following key question: What are the lesser-known or undocumented examples of tile decoration from the Ilkhanid and Muzaffarid periods, and what roles do they play in the broader trajectory of tilework development during these eras? Employing a historical-comparative approach, this study identifies, documents, and analyzes these lesser-known tile decorations. The data presented are derived from a combination of literary sources and fieldwork conducted across present-day Iran, resulting in the identification of 64 relevant buildings. The focus is primarily on surviving tile decorations lacking precise dates. Each structure is briefly introduced, its decorative elements are described, their current conditions outlined, and comparative analysis used to suggest chronological placement. Findings indicate a variety of tile types such as Mosaic (Muʿaraqe), Maʿqilī (Square Kufic), and cutting (tarash), as well as styles like luster and Gilded still exist but remain understudied. Comparative analysis reveals both interregional influences (e.g., between Azerbaijan and Varamin) and the persistence of local artistic traditions.
Keywords: Tilework, Mosaic (Muʿaraqe), Luster, Ilkhanids, Muzaffarids.
Introduction
A comprehensive understanding of the quality and extent of tilework during the Ilkhanid period and its successors is vital for a deeper appreciation of how this decorative tradition developed in subsequent eras. Tilework in this period experienced significant artistic and technical innovation, making it a pivotal stage in the history of Iranian architectural decoration. With this in mind, the authors examined nearly one hundred buildings attributed to the Ilkhanid and post-Ilkhanid periods. Among these, 64 structures were identified as still preserving original tile decorations, though in varying states of completeness and preservation.
Through field studies and archival research, it became clear that the tilework in a number of these buildings remains either entirely undocumented or insufficiently explored in scholarly literature. In many cases, existing studies are outdated and provide only minimal references to tile decorations often limited to a brief mention of their presence, without any in-depth analysis, description, or photographic documentation. Additionally, the condition of these decorations has frequently changed over time due to looting, vandalism, environmental exposure, or restoration efforts, making previous studies less reliable.
For example, while the Shamsiyya School and the Shahab al-Din Qasim Taraz School in Yazd are well-known monuments from this era, parts of their tilework remain ambiguous or largely unexplored. Furthermore, the tile decorations of sites like Imamzadeh Hood in Darjazin and Imamzadeh Sultan Seyed Eshaq in Saveh have received virtually no scholarly attention. Thus, reevaluating these lesser-known works is essential for both documentation and conservation purposes.
This study aims to identify, record, and analyze previously unknown or neglected examples of Ilkhanid and Muzaffarid tilework that are currently at risk of deterioration. The research is guided by two central questions: What are the unknown or lesser-known examples of tile decoration from this period? And how do these works contribute to our understanding of the historical development of tilework?
Twelve buildings were selected for detailed examination. Although previous scholars such as Sarre (1910), Wilber (1986), Godard (1992), Afshar (1995), Pope (2008), Blair (2008), and Pickett (1997) have studied Ilkhanid architecture and decoration, the buildings chosen for this study have received little focused attention. Each monument is briefly introduced, the tilework described, and comparative analysis used to position these examples within the broader evolution of Iranian tilework during this formative period.
Discussion
The findings from the examined structures reveal a diverse range of tilework from the Ilkhanid and Muzaffarid periods, each reflecting distinct historical and regional influences. The tilework of the tomb chest at Imāmzādi Habyb ibn-Musā in Kāshān, based on comparative analysis, dates to approximately 670 AH, with the relief tiles being characteristic of the late Ilkhanid period. Furthermore, the disordered state of the tilework of the tomb chest suggests that some pieces may have originally belonged to other parts of the building or a different structure entirely.
The mihrab of Imāmzādi Shah Husayn in Varāmyn demonstrates a continuation of Seljuk traditions, blending local styles with newer tilework patterns seen in the Varāmyn Congregational Mosque. This indicates that the mihrab likely dates to a similar period, or slightly earlier, than the mosque itself. The external decoration of the octagonal structure likely predates the mihrab, dating to the late 7th or early 8th century AH.
The tilework of the tomb chest of Imāmzādi Sultan Sayyid Isaac in Sava, through comparative study, appears to be from the late 7th century AH, possibly after 676 AH, with tiles likely originating from different parts of the building. Similarly, the inscription tilework of the tomb chest of Imāmzādi Muhammad Bastām can be placed in the late 7th century AH.
The Isfastān Sarāb structure, dating from the late 7th century to around 704 AH, shows influence from Anatolian tilework traditions, as does Imamzadeh Shuʿayb Duzāl Ahar, likely dating between 700 and 715 AH. The remaining Mosaic(Muʿaraqe) tilework of Imāmzādi Hud Darjazyn in Hamidān, similar to that of Shaykh Hiydar Tower in Mishkyn Shahr, points to a late Ilkhanid or early Muzaffarid production.
At the Shamsiyyih School of Yazd, two pieces of Gilded and Mosaic tilework on the northern side of the entrance iwan represent the only surviving examples from the Muzaffarid period. The unique white and lapis lazuli relief tiles at) Shahāb al-Din Qāsim Tarāz School in Yazd, irregularly set, belong to the end of the Ilkhanid period transitioning into the Muzaffarid era. Many such decorations, including the luster tiles, have since been lost.
The luster tiles at the Shaykh ʿAli Banymān Byd-Akhavyd in Yazd likely originated from another building and are among the last productions of Kashan. Lastly, the tilework of East entrance of Dār al-Zyāfa Minaret in Isfahan and the Shaykh Ahmad Fahadān Mausoleum in Yazd, dating between 740-770 AH, mark the transition from the Ilkhanid successors to the Muzaffarid period.
Conclusion
Various types of tilework and tiles used during the Ilkhanid and Muzaffarid periods have roots in earlier traditions, such as cut-tilework and lusterware, while some techniques, like Mosaic tilework, were introduced for the first time during the Ilkhanid period.
The main types of tilework and decoration methods used in these periods include cut-tile combined with brick, stucco and Terracotta; Mosaic tilework; Maʿqilī (Square Kufic); luster; Gilded tiles; Monochromatic tiles; underglaze and overglaze painting, produced both with Molding and by Molded and Handmade(Pyshpur) techniques.
According to the discussions in this article, the position of these lesser-known decorations in the development of Ilkhanid and post-Ilkhanid tilework can be outlined as follows:
The structures of Isfastān Sarāb, Imāmzādi Sayyid Abu al-Qāsim Ajabshyr, and Imamzadeh Shuʿayb Duzāl Ahar in Ahar represent a regional tradition in Azerbaijan, influenced by Anatolia, likely predating the Soltaniyeh Dome project and continuing until the end of the Ilkhanid period, as evidenced in the Gunbadi Ghaffāryih in Marāgha.
The Imāmzādi Shah Husayn in Varāmyn reflects both influence from Gunbadi Sultāniyyih and continuation of older traditions that even shaped Soltaniyeh itself. The tile-and-brick Strapwork here follows the legacy of Seljuk architecture in Iran.
Tilework at the Shamsiyyih and Shahāb al-Din Qāsim Tarāz schools, together with the Kamāliyyih Mausoleum (dated 720-740 AH), displays a strong regional tradition in Yazd during the third quarter of the 8th century AH.
Imāmzādi Hud Darjazyn in Hamidān, along with the Kāj and Dashty Mosques in Isfahan, offers insight into the tilework of the late Ilkhanid period and the transition into their successors#8217; era.
The Eastern entrance of Dār al-Zyāfa Minaret, alongside the North fa#231;ade of North Shabistān of Great Mosque of Isfahan (768 AH), clarifies the development of tilework between the Bābā Qāsim Mausoleum in Isfahan (741 AH) and approximately 770 AH. This also aids the study of the tilework at the Imāmy School in Isfahan, where several now-lost inscriptions were once reported.
The tilework of the tomb chests at Imāmzādi Habyb ibn-Musā in Kāshān, Imāmzādi Sultan Sayyid Isaac in Sava, and Imāmzādi Muhammad Bastām presents a glimpse of their decoration in the late 7th century AH, although their structures have been entirely rebuilt.
Additionally, twelve other buildings, such as the Jameh Mosque of Haftador and the Radkan Tower, contain tilework that remains largely unknown.
تبلیغات
