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

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 several approaches in one single era is a difficult task. Secondly, more than being the creators of 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.