University of ZurichZurich Open Repository and Archive

Winterthurerstr. 190

CH-8057 Zurich

http://www.zora.uzh.ch

Year: 2006

Moscheen und Madrasabauten in Iran 1785-1848: Architekturzwischen Rückgriff und Neuerung

Ritter, M

Ritter, M. Moscheen und Madrasabauten in Iran 1785-1848: Architektur zwischen Rückgriff und Neuerung. Leiden,Boston, 2006.Postprint available at:http://www.zora.uzh.ch

Posted at the Zurich Open Repository and Archive, University of Zurich.http://www.zora.uzh.ch

Originally published at:Ritter, M. Moscheen und Madrasabauten in Iran 1785-1848: Architektur zwischen Rückgriff und Neuerung. Leiden,Boston, 2006.

Ritter, M. Moscheen und Madrasabauten in Iran 1785-1848: Architektur zwischen Rückgriff und Neuerung. Leiden,Boston, 2006.Postprint available at:http://www.zora.uzh.ch

Posted at the Zurich Open Repository and Archive, University of Zurich.http://www.zora.uzh.ch

Originally published at:Ritter, M. Moscheen und Madrasabauten in Iran 1785-1848: Architektur zwischen Rückgriff und Neuerung. Leiden,Boston, 2006.

MOSCHEEN UND MADRASABAUTEN IN IRAN1785-1848

IHC-62-ritter.qxd 11/10/2005 4:32 PM Page i

ISLAMIC HISTORYAND CIVILIZATION

STUDIES AND TEXTS

edited by

WADAD KADIAND

ROTRAUD WIELANDT

VOLUME 62

IHC-62-ritter.qxd 11/10/2005 4:32 PM Page ii

MOSCHEEN UND MADRASABAUTEN IN IRAN 1785-1848

Architektur zwischen Rückgriff und Neuerung

VON

MARKUS RITTER

BRILLLEIDEN • BOSTON

2006

IHC-62-ritter.qxd 11/10/2005 4:32 PM Page iii

Umschlagabbildung: K§à§n, Madrasa-i Sulã§nÊ, begonnen 1221/1806 im Auftrag des Herrschers FatÈ #AlÊ ’§h: Hof, Blick vom Torraum zum Kuppelbau (Foto Markus Ritter).

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Ritter, Markus, 1967-Moscheen und Madrasabauten in Iran 1785-1848: Architektur zwischen Rückgriff und

Neuerung / von Markus Ritter.p. cm. — (Islamic history and civilization. Studies and texts, ISSN 0929-2403 ; v. 62)

Summary in English.Includes bibliographical references.ISBN 90-04-14481-1 (alk. paper)1. Mosques—Iran. 2. Madrasahs—Iran. 3. Architecture, Islamic—Iran. 4.

Architecture—Iran—18th century. 5. Architecture—Iran—19th century. I. Title. II. Series.

NA4670.R58 2005726’.2’095509034—dc22

2005050839

ISSN 0929-2403ISBN 90 04 14481 1

© Copyright 2006 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The NetherlandsKoninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill Academic Publishers,

Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and VSP.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, storedin a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic,

mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior writtenpermission from the publisher.

Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personaluse is granted by Brill provided that

the appropriate fees are paid directly to The CopyrightClearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910

Danvers MA 01923, USA.Fees are subject to change.

printed in the netherlands

IHC-62-ritter.qxd 11/10/2005 4:32 PM Page iv

INHALTSVERZEICHNIS

Abbildungen im Text ................................................................ xiiiZur Benutzung ............................................................................ xv

Vorwort ...................................................................................... xvii

Kapitel I Einleitung1 Forschungsstand und -geschichte: Material und

Hypothesen ............................................................................ 42 Frage, Vorgehen und Aufbau .............................................. 143 Material und Quellen zu Bauten und Umfeld .................. 22

Kapitel II Bauen im Kontext: Moschee und Madrasa imfrühqà[àrischen Iran

1 Historische Einführung ........................................................ 322 Die religiöse Bautätigkeit: Phasen und Verlauf ................ 43

Die Zäsur des 18. Jahrhunderts .......................................... 44Einzelbauten zur Zeit À©à Mu˙ammad ›àns bis 1796 .... 46Die landesweite Blütezeit herrschaftlichen Bauens unter

Fat˙ 'Alì ”àh bis zum Einbruch unter Mu˙ammad ”àh 1834 .......................................................................... 49

Die wachsende Bautätigkeit städtischer Eliten 1797–1848 ........................................................................ 58

3 Die Auftraggeber: herrschaftliche und städtische Stände,Gruppen und Personen ........................................................ 58

4 Politische und religiöse Funktionen: Bau und Stiftung .... 665 Bausignaturen und Meistertätigkeit .................................... 76

1 Inschriftenbelege .............................................................. 772 Die Frage eines Hofbauamtes ...................................... 86

Kapitel III Die monumentale Vieriwanhof-Moschee mitKuppelraum: Modernisierung und Varianten des Schemas herrscherlicher Bauten

1 Allgemeine Definition und Probleme .................................. 90Vorläufer ................................................................................ 93

RITTER_f1_v-xviii 11/11/05 6:56 PM Page v

vi inhaltsverzeichnis

2 Das Standardschema herrscherlicher Bauten ...................... 98a Grundform: Arkadenhof mit drei achsialen Portalen

und Hallentrakten .......................................................... 101Qazwìn, M. ”àh: monumentale Neudefinition ............ 101Teheran, M. ”àh: Gleichmaß mit quadratischem

Hof und Dreiteilungsschema ...................................... 111Burù[ird, M.-Mad. ”àh: betonte Qiblaseite mit

Längshallen .................................................................. 118b Einfache Variante mit Unterkunftstrakten .................... 126

Zan[àn, M.-Mad. ]àmi' .............................................. 1273 Neue Varianten mit gestuften Trakten und

Unterkunftsräumen .............................................................. 132a Simnàn, M. ”àh: Variante des Standardschemas in

übersteigerten Formen .................................................... 133b Ißfahàn, M.-Mad. Sayyid: Lokale Grundrißform,

Neuerung und Eklektizismus .......................................... 1464 Renovierungen: Einvernahme bestehender Bauten ............ 1605 Charakteristika ...................................................................... 165

Der Grundrißtyp: Rückbesinnung und Neudefinition ...... 165Vieriwananlage mit Kuppelraum .................................... 165Dreiportalanlage ................................................................ 166Grundrißform mit hypostylem Schema und schmalen

Jochzeilen ...................................................................... 168Vorhöfe und städtebauliche Einbindung ............................ 170Betonter Portalbau ................................................................ 172Kuppelraum .......................................................................... 175Stützenhallen der Qiblaseite ................................................ 177Galeriehallen der anderen Hofseiten .................................. 179Verwendung von Fenstertüren: geschlossene und offene

Hallen ................................................................................ 180Neue Form gestufter Trakte aus Hallen und Terrassen:

Plastische Fassadengliederung und die Funktion ............ 181Hoffläche: Gartenanlage mit Wasserbecken und

asymmetrische Gliederung .............................................. 187Einbindung von Waschanlagen .......................................... 190Gliederung der Hoffasssaden .............................................. 192Kuppel: Formen und Dekoration ........................................ 196Minarette: eingeschränkte Verwendung und

Minarettpaare im Fassadenaufriß .................................... 199Dachpavillon (Guldasta) ........................................................ 203

RITTER_f1_v-xviii 11/11/05 6:56 PM Page vi

inhaltsverzeichnis vii

Minbar .................................................................................. 2066 Herrscherliche Moschee und modernisierte Form ............ 207

Kapitel IV Die Madrasahofanlage mit Vieriwanschema: Formen und Varianten herrschaftlicher Bauten

1 Allgemeine Definition .......................................................... 215Vorläufer und vorangegangene Entwicklung ...................... 216

2 Varianten eines Standardschemas mit betontem Saal an der Hauptachse und Sälen an der Querachse .................. 224a Bauten mit Kuppelraum, Seitenhallen und betonten

Iwanbauten ...................................................................... 226Kà“àn, Mad. Sul†ànì: Kuppelraum mit schmalen Querhallen, Eckhöfe 226 – Aràk (Sul†ànàbàd), M.-Mad. Sipahdàr: Kuppelraum mit Stützenhallen 235

b Bauten mit dreiteiligem Abschlußsaal .......................... 239Kirmàn, Mad. Ibràhìm ›àn: Grundschema mit betontem Portal 240 – Teheran, Mad. ›àn-i Marwì:betonte Iwane und erweiterte Ecken 244 – Yazd, Mad. ”àhzàda: tiefer Abschlußsaal, abgesenkter Innenhof 245 – Ißfahàn, Mad. Íadr/›wà[ù: betonteEcken, angelagerte Stützenhalle 247

c Frühe Bauten mit abweichendem Schema .................. 250Ißfahàn, Mad. Íadr/Pà-i Qal'a: kurzer Hof mit einfacher Querachse 250 – ”ìràz, Mad. Àqà Bàbà›àn: Zweiiwanschema 251

3 Monumentale Vieriwanhofanlagen nach lokalen Vorläufern: Betonung der Tradition .................................... 253a Ißfahàn, Mad. Íadr/Basar: zwei Portale, Eckhöfe ...... 254b Bauten an Schreinen: Hofanlage mit betonten

Iwanen .............................................................................. 256Qum, Mad. Faiûìya: Portaliwan und breite Seiteniwane 257 – Ma“had, Ía˙n-i ]adìd: zweigeschossige Hofanlage mit Portaliwanen 258

4 Charakteristika ...................................................................... 260Gerichtete Anlage mit betontem Betraum ........................ 260Vieriwanschema mit dreigliedrigen Iwanbauten ................ 262Portalbau und Straßenvorhof .............................................. 264Iwanbauten mit Saal und Obergeschoßräumen ................ 265Variierte Eckanlage .............................................................. 267

RITTER_f1_v-xviii 11/11/05 6:56 PM Page vii

viii inhaltsverzeichnis

Arkadennischen und Unterkunftsräume................................ 270Hofansicht: eingeschossige Fassaden, gegliedert durch

schmale Arkaden ................................................................ 270Gliederung der Hoffläche ...................................................... 272Zur Funktion als Madrasa und Betort ................................ 273

5 Zusammenfassung .................................................................. 276

Kapitel V Hofmoscheen mit Kuppelraum und betontemQiblaiwan

1 Allgemeine Definition und Vorläufer .................................. 2792 Quartiermoscheen in Teheran ............................................ 283

a M.-Mad. Óakìmbà“ì: Kuppelraum abgeschlossen ........ 283b M. 'Azìzullàh: Kuppelraum und Seitenhallen ............ 288c M.-Mad. Ra[ab 'Alì: Kuppelraum und

abgeschiedene Säle ........................................................ 2903 Nachfolger spätqà[àrischer Zeit .......................................... 2954 Charakteristika ...................................................................... 297

Allgemeines zur Entwicklung als Typ .................................. 297Formen des Qiblatraktes mit Kuppelraum ........................ 297Hofgliederung mit betontem Qiblaiwan .............................. 298Durchlaufende Nordhalle ...................................................... 300Qiblafassade: zweigeschossige Gliederung und

Dreibogenmotiv .................................................................. 300Straßenlage und Grundstücksanpassung .............................. 302Bescheidenes Portal in Eck- und Seitenlage ........................ 303Zur Funktion .......................................................................... 303

5 Der Typ als aufgewertete Quartiermoschee ...................... 304

Kapitel VI Hypostyle Moscheen: regionale Kontinuität vonBauten mit Stützenhalle

1 Allgemeine Definitionen und Probleme .............................. 307Vorläufer und vorausgehende Entwicklung ........................ 309

2 Gegliederte Hofanlage mit Stützenhalle und seitlichem Portal .................................................................................... 316a Westiran: breite Halle direkt am Hof – Grundform

und Varianten ................................................................. 316Vierstützenhalle mit rückwärtigem “Kuppelraum” ...... 317Halle an der Nordseite des Hofs .................................. 317

b Sananda[, M.-Mad. Dàr al-I˙sàn: geschlossene Halle mit Portaliwan – Herrscherlicher Bau mit zentraliranischen Formen .............................................. 318

RITTER_f1_v-xviii 11/11/05 6:56 PM Page viii

inhaltsverzeichnis ix

c Kà“àn, M.-Mad. Tabrìzìhà: geschlossene Vierstützenhalle und abgesenkte Hofanlage ................ 336

3 Gegliederte Hofmoschee mit achsialem Portal: Yazd, M. Mahd 'Ulyà ........................................................ 340

4 Stützenhalle ohne Hof .......................................................... 341a Allgemeines und Holzstützenbauten .............................. 341b Große Neubauten an alten Hauptmoscheen ................ 343

Tabrìz, M. Hu[[at al-Islàm .......................................... 344Teheran, Ostbau des Mìrzà Masì˙ an der M.

]àmi' .......................................................................... 347c Quadratische Vierstützenhalle ........................................ 348d Stützenhalle mit betonter Achse: Einzelbeispiele ........ 350

Große Quadrathalle: Ardabìl, M. Mìrzà 'Alì Akbar ... 350Dreireihige Längshalle mit Mittelschiff: Làhì[àn,

M. Akbarìya ................................................................ 3515 Charakteristika ...................................................................... 352

Grundriß: regionale Unterschiede und Gemeinsamkeiten der Entwicklung ................................................................ 352

Hallenraum ............................................................................ 354Stützen, Wölbung, Verwendung von Dekoration .............. 356Portale und Außenbau ........................................................ 357Verbreitung im westlichen Iran .......................................... 357

6 Stellenwert und Auftraggeber .............................................. 359

Kapitel VII Hofanlage mit Dreikuppelhalle in Eriwan undQazwìn: Ortstradition und Austausch

1 Einleitung und Problem ...................................................... 3612 Eriwan, Moschee in der Zitadelle: Hofanlage und

Dreikuppelhalle mit Nebenräumen .................................... 3623 Qazwìn, Mad. Sardàr: Zweigeschossige Hofanlage mit

durchlaufender Dreikuppelhalle ............................................ 3714 Typ und Beziehungen .......................................................... 382

Zwei Varianten eines Grundrißtyps aus Eriwan .............. 383Die Frage von Vorläufern und Parallelen des Typs ........ 384Gemeinsamkeiten des Aufrisses .......................................... 387Verbindungen in der Dekoration ........................................ 388Die Frage eines Entstehungszusammenhanges .................. 389Die Auftraggeberverbindungen ............................................ 390

5 Stellung .................................................................................. 394

RITTER_f1_v-xviii 11/11/05 6:56 PM Page ix

x inhaltsverzeichnis

Kapitel VIII Hofanlagen mit zwei Iwanen und monumentalem Kuppelraum in Yazd und Kà“àn: Lokale Eigenständigkeit

1 Einleitung .............................................................................. 3962 Yazd, M.-Mad. Mullà Ismà'ìl – Archaisierender

Rückgriff: Zwei-Iwan-Hof mit monumentalem Qiblaiwan,Kuppelraum und Längshallen ............................................ 397

3 Kà“àn, M.-Mad. Àqà Buzurg – Neuschöpfung: Gestufter Hof mit Eingangsbau und zentralbauartige Kuppelhalle mit Seitenhöfen .................................................................... 409

Kapitel IX Form und Entwicklung, Traditionen undAuftraggeberkreise

1 Formale Merkmale frühqà[àrischer Architektur in Moschee- und Madrasabauten ............................................ 438Schematisierung der Grundrisse und Vereinfachung der

Bauformen ........................................................................ 439Betonte Räume an den Hofachsen und nüchterne

Innenräume ...................................................................... 442Fassaden: variierte Schemata und gewandelte

Proportionen ...................................................................... 444Bogen- und Fensterformen .................................................. 447

Spitzbogen 447 – Konsolbogen 448 – Drillings- undRundfenster 449 – Spiralige Rundprofile 450

Dekorative Wölbeformen .................................................... 451Netzrippenwölbungen 452 – Pendentifs 453 – Ausgreifende Wölbungen 453 – Zellenförmige Wölbungen 457 – Muqarnaswölbungen 459

Kontrastreiche Dekoration .................................................. 459Fliesendekoration 461 – Glasurziegel- und Backstein- dekoration 464 – Stein 465 – Stuck und gemalte Dekoration 466 – Holz 466

Inschriftenbänder .................................................................. 4672 Neue Definition und Konvention in herrschaftlicher

Architektur: der offizielle Stil unter Fat˙ 'Alì ”àh ............ 4721 Herrscherliche Typen: Rückgriff und Variation .......... 473

Haupttypen in Zentraliran ............................................ 473Randregionen .................................................................. 475

2 Hoheits- und Würdezeichen .......................................... 476Vieriwananlage, Vieriwanschema, Iwane ...................... 476

RITTER_f1_v-xviii 11/11/05 6:56 PM Page x

inhaltsverzeichnis xi

Kuppelraum, Kuppel, Minarettpaar ............................ 478Fliesendekoration ............................................................ 480“Marmor” ........................................................................ 480Herrschername und emblematische Motive ................ 482

3 Restaurative Staatsbaukunst .......................................... 4863 Varianten, Alternativen und lokale Tradition im Kreis

städtischer Eliten: Neue Tendenzen im Zeichen derEigenständigkeit .................................................................... 4891 Allgemeines ...................................................................... 489

Wahl der Typen ............................................................ 490Neue Formen der Verbindung von Moschee und

Madrasa ...................................................................... 491Private Bauten mit Grablege ........................................ 492

2 Monumentalbauten führender Geistlicher .................... 493Rückgriff auf das lokale Mittelalter und

Übersteigerung ............................................................ 493Variante manierierter Form .......................................... 496Variante eklektizistisch safawidischer Lokaltradition .... 498Neuschöpfung, Zitat und lokale Hausarchitektur ........ 502

3 Neue Eigenständigkeit .................................................... 5064 Rückgriff und Neuerung ...................................................... 508

Die Entwicklung der Form: Vereinfachung und Eklektizismus ...................................................................... 508

Wurzeln im 18. Jahrhundert .............................................. 512Einheimische Traditionen und das Verhältnis zu

Europa .............................................................................. 513Zur Frage gewandelter Quellen .......................................... 517Parallelen in anderen Künsten ............................................ 519Die Entwicklung in der Zeit .............................................. 521

English Summary ........................................................................ 525

KatalogMaterial und Aufbau .................................................................. 541Inhaltsübersichten

Bauten und Baumaßnahmen ................................................ 545Stiftungstexte ........................................................................ 550Bauinschriften in Übersetzung ............................................ 551

Moschee- und Madrasabauten nach Orten .............................. 553

RITTER_f1_v-xviii 11/11/05 6:56 PM Page xi

xii inhaltsverzeichnis

AnhängeA Chronologie der Baumaßnahmen ...................................... 915B Maße und Proportionen ...................................................... 919C Auftraggeber und Baubeauftragte ........................................ 921D Meister .................................................................................. 931

1 Baumeister ...................................................................... 9312 Fliesenmeister .................................................................. 9323 Kalligraphen .................................................................... 9334 Andere Handwerkskünste ................................................ 936

E Verfasser inschriftlicher Baugedichte .................................. 938

Literaturverzeichnis .................................................................... 939

Index ............................................................................................ 963

Tafeln

Abbildungsnachweis .................................................................... 999

Fotos und Abbildungen ................................................ Tafel 1–167Schwarzweiß ...................................................................... 1–142Farbe .............................................................................. 143–158Vergleichsbauten ............................................................ 159–167

Architekturpläne .................................................................... 168–199Vergleichsbauten ............................................................ 200–202

RITTER_f1_v-xviii 11/11/05 6:56 PM Page xii

ABBILDUNGEN IM TEXT

Verzeichnis und Nachweis

1 Karte Irans und der Nachbargebiete in frühqà[àrischer Zeitmit Orten der Bauten im Katalog ............................................

2 Teheran 1858, Ausschnitt des Stadtplans von K®zi≥ (Nachdruck1977). Moschee- und Madrasabauten frühqà[àrischer Zeit her-vorgehoben ....................................................................................

3–4 Sul†ànàbàd (Aràk) und Daulatàbàd (Malàyir): Frühqà[àrischeStadtgründungen mit Moschee-Madrasa (vereinfachte Umzeich-nung nach dem Stadtplan Gìtà ”inàsì, Aràk und Umzeichnungnach Momeni, Malàyir, Abb. 7) ................................................

5 Ißfahàn, Stadtplan des Sul†àn Riûà von 1923 (nach Màhiru"n-Naq“, Mas[id-i Óakìm, Falttafel nach S. 18). Frühqà[àrische undbestehende Bauten hervorgehoben ............................................

6 Verlauf der frühqà[àrischen Bautätigkeit bei Moschee- undMadrasabauten ............................................................................

7 Bau und Stiftung in den Beziehungen von Gruppen ..............

8 Ecklösungen von Madrasahofanlagen ..........................................

9 Die Qà[àren von Eriwan und ihre Bauaufträge........................

10 a–b Schema einer Netzrippenwölbung aus zwölf Bögen: a überquadratischem Grundriß (nach Ra"ìszàda/Mufìd, Mi'màrì-i sunnatì,Abb. S. 33); b über rechteckigem Grundriß (Pirnìyà/Buzurgmihrì,Handasa dar mi'màrì, Abb. S. 23) ...............................................

11 Herrscherliche Motive der Fliesendekoration im Vergleich ......

12 Sul†ànàbàd 1851, russischer Stadtplan (nach Mihrìyàr u.a.,”ahrhà-i Ìrànì, Abb. S. 160) ..........................................................

13 Burù[ird 1850, russischer Stadtplan (nach ebd., Abb. S. 208)

14 Eriwan 1837, Zitadelle, Ausschnitt des russischen Stadt- undUmgebungsplans (nach Arutjunjan u.a, Erevan, Abb. 45) ........

35

48

50

53

56–57

71

269

393

454

483

554

569

587

RITTER_f1_v-xviii 11/11/05 6:56 PM Page xiii

15 ›ùy 1827, Siedlung und Befestigung, Ausschnitt des russischenStadt- und Umgebungsplans (nach Mihrìyàr u.a., ”ahrhà-i Ìrànì,Abb. S. 77) ..................................................................................

16 ”ìràz, Mad. Àqà Bàbà ›àn: Steinmetzzeichen ..........................

17 Tabrìz, Komplex um die M. ]àmi' (Mu¢lisì, Fihrist, 102)

18 Teheran, Komplex der M. ]àmi' (Gan[nàma, Bd. 3, 178)

19 Yazd, Gebiet um die M. ]àmi' (Tawassulì u.a., arà˙ì, 32)

614

825

835

867

897

xiv abbildungen im text

RITTER_f1_v-xviii 11/11/05 6:56 PM Page xiv

ZUR BENUTZUNG

Richtungsangaben – Die Orientierung des Baus wird im Text genannt und ist in diePläne eingetragen. Zur Vereinfachung werden dann schematisierte Angaben derHimmelsrichtungen gebraucht. D.h. bei Bauten, die zur Qibla gerichtet sind, welchein Iran je nach Ort im Südsüdwesten oder Südwesten liegt, wird diese mit Südenangegeben, entsprechend die anderen Seiten; für die Ecken: Südost, Südwest usw.

Datumsangaben – Auf Jahresangaben muslimischer Zeitrechnung nach der Hi[ra folgtmit Schrägstrich die Umrechnung in das christliche Datum. Dabei ist stets die Hi[ra-Angabe die entscheidende Referenz. Die Umrechnung dient der Orientierung: Fälltdas muslimische Mondjahr auf zwei christliche Sonnenjahre wie meist der Fall, istin der Regel nur das erste Jahr angegeben. Hi[ra-Datierungen ohne Umrechnung(im Katalog) sind durch nachstehendes h gekennzeichnet. Jahreszahlen nach demmodernen iranischen Sonnenkalender Hi[ra-”amsì (im Literaturverzeichnis) sinddurch “ bezeichnet.

Umschrift des Persischen und Arabischen folgt den Richtlinien der DeutschenMorgenländischen Gesellschaft. Konsonanten, die in den zwei Sprachen unter-schiedlich lauten, sind einheitlich auch bei arabischen Begriffen persisch transkri-biert, es sei denn es handelt sich um einen arabischen Text. Lang- und Kurzvokalesind durchweg wie im Arabischen unterschieden. Für konsonantisches wau steht ein-heitlich w. Das persische Iûàfa-Zeichen wird unabhängig von Schreibweise undAuslaut immer mit -i wiedergegeben. Bei türkischen Personennamen (in Àçarbài[àn)kann ergänzend zur persischen Umschrift die türkische Lautung angegeben sein.Im „English Summary“ folgt die Transliteration der Cambridge History of Iran.

Begriffe, Namen, Zitate – Fremdsprachige Termini sind im fortlaufenden Text umschriftlichin normaler Type angegeben und den deutschen Grammatikbildungen unterwor-fen. Lexikalisierte Wörter erscheinen ohne Umschrift (z.B. Koran, Sure, Mihrab).Für Ortsnamen ist durchweg Umschrift verwendet; Ausnahme: Teheran. Bei per-sischen Personennamen wird die Zusammenschreibung aufgelöst: Fat˙ 'Alì ”àh und”a'ban 'Alì (originalschriftlich: Fat˙'alì ”àh und ”a'bàn'alì). Mehrteilige arabischeNamen werden überwiegend mit Binnenvokalisierung in einem Wort wiedergegeben(z.B. 'Abdullàh). Für die Bauten werden die historischen Namen benutzt, z.B. M.”àh, nicht M. Imàm. Textzitate werden durch Anführungsstriche, längere Passagendurch kleine Type und Einrücken kenntlich gemacht. Persische und arabische Zitatein Umschrift sind kursiv gesetzt.

Abbildungen und Numerierungen – Die Tafeln (Taf.) mit den Architekturplänen undFotos sind wie der Katalog nach Orten geordnet. Fußnoten sind kapitelweise, Textab-bildungen (Abb.) durchlaufend numeriert.

Abkürzungen – Die in persischen Baubenennungen übliche Bezeichnung “Moscheedes (Mas[id-i )”, “Madrasa des (Madrasa-i )” gefolgt vom Namen des Auftraggeberswird mit M., Mad. bzw. M.-Mad. abgekürzt. In den Anmerkungen und im Kataloggilt für die Archive der verwendeten Pläne: D”B = Architekturfakultät der UniversitätDàni“gàh-i ”ahìd Bihi“tì in Teheran; MF = Sàzmàn-i Miràß-i Farhangì (Organisationfür Kulturelles Erbe), die nationale iranische Denkmalbehörde in Teheran mitÄmtern auf Provinz- und Stadtebene.

RITTER_f1_v-xviii 11/11/05 6:56 PM Page xv

RITTER_f1_v-xviii 11/11/05 6:56 PM Page xvi

VORWORT

Architektur des 18./19. Jahrhunderts in Iran ist lange unterschätztworden, eine kunsthistorische Aufarbeitung stand aus. Der vorliegendeBeitrag dazu ist die leicht überarbeitete Version meiner 2003vorgelegten Dissertation an der Otto-Friedrich-Universität Bamberg.Sie geht auf zwei mehrmonatige Aufenthalte in Iran in den Jahren1996–97 zurück (Moschee und Madrasa der frühen Qà[àrenzeit inIran: Form und Geschichte religiöser und politischer Architektur1785–1848).

Ich danke herzlich Frau Prof. Dr. Barbara Finster und Herrn Prof.Dr. Bert Fragner für freundschaftliche Beratung, anregende Diskussionund tatkräftige Unterstützung. Barbara Finster hat die Arbeit imFach Islamische Kunstgeschichte und Archäologie, Bert Fragner imFach Iranistik betreut.

Es ist mir eine Freude, den Kollegen und Institutionen zu danken,die die Arbeit unterstützt und gefördert haben. In Iran hat diestaatliche Denkmalbehörde Sàzmàn-i Mìràß-i Farhangì-i Ki“war(Organisation für Kulturelles Erbe des Landes), vertreten durch diezuständigen Herren Direktoren Nùrzàda ’iginì und Mu˙ammadGul“àn die Forschungserlaubnis erteilt. Unterstützung habe ich vonDr. Bàqir ”ìràzì und in den Provinzvertretungen von den HerrenAmìnìyàn, Amìrìyàn, Anßàrì, Balàdì, Ba˙rul'ulùmì, Dàni“dùst,Fat˙'ali“àhì, ]aukàr, ]àwarì, Hudà"ì, Mihrkiyàn, Muqaddam,Muqaddasì, Muhà[ir, NaΩarìyàn, Umìd und Urù[ì erfahren. Dr.Haedeeh Laleh, jetzt Vertreterin des Fachs Islamische Archäologieund Kunstgeschichte an der Staatlichen Universität Teheran hat dieArbeit herzlich gefördert. Das Auslandsamt der Universität unter Dr.Fà"izìpùr hat mir Gastaufenthalte ermöglicht. An der Universität”ahìd Bihi“tì, Fakultät für Architektur fand ich freundliche Aufnahmedurch Dr. Kàmbìz Óà[[ì-Qàsimì und Herrn Zand Harìr‘ì.

Für Hinweise oder Rat danke ich Dr. Chahryar Adle, Dr. ArdawànAmìr“àhì, Dr. Oliver Bast, Prof. Dr. Marianne Barrucand, Dr. GeorgeBournoutian, Prof. Dr. Burchard Brentjes, Dr. Levon ’ukasziyan,Dr. Roxane Haag-Higuchi, Frau Gisela Helmecke, Prof. Dr. BirgittHoffmann, Dr. Jens Kröger, Dr. Mu߆afà Mu"minì, Dr. StephanPopp, Dr. Giorgio Rota, Dr. Anna Vanzan, Dr. Christoph Werner.

RITTER_f1_v-xviii 11/11/05 6:56 PM Page xvii

xviii vorwort

Den institutionellen Förderern gilt aufrichtiger Dank. Die Studien-stiftung des Deutschen Volkes hat durch ein dreijähriges Doktoranden-stipendium die Ausarbeitung und einen Forschungsaufenthaltermöglicht. Die Kulturabteilung der Iranischen Botschaft in Deutschlandhat die Arbeit mit zwei Stipendien für Aufenthalte in Iran unter-stützt. Den Beginn hat die Gerda Henkel-Stiftung in Düsseldorf miteinem Forschungsstipendium möglich gemacht. Die Station Teherandes Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts hat zeitweise Unterkunftgewährt, die Deutsche Botschaft in Teheran administrativen Beistandgeleistet.

Für die großzügige Überlassung von Plänen zur Veröffentlichung,bzw. die Erlaubnis zur Reproduktion aus ihren Veröffentlichungendanke ich der Organisation Mìràß-i Farhangì und der Architek-turfakultät der Universität ”ahìd Bihi“tì in Teheran; für Abbildungs-vorlagen dem Museum für Islamische Kunst in Berlin (StiftungPreußischer Kulturbesitz). Das Victoria & Albert-Museum in Londonund die Biblioteca Marciana in Venedig haben die freundlicheErlaubnis gegeben, Material ihrer Bestände zu veröffentlichen. WeitereAutoren, Fotografen und Verlage, die im Abbildungsnachweis genanntsind, haben Reproduktionen erlaubt.

Dem Institut für Iranistik an der Österreichischen Akademie derWissenschaften unter Leitung von Bert Fragner (Wien) danke ich fürdie Möglichkeit, die Arbeit im Rahmen meiner Tätigkeit für denDruck fertigzustellen. Frau Bettina Hofleitner sind neue Umzeichnungenvon Textabbildungen zu verdanken. Den Herausgeberinnen, Prof.Dr. Wadad Kadi (Chicago) und Prof. Dr. Rotraud Wielandt (Bamberg)bin ich für die Aufnahme in die vorliegende Reihe verpflichtet.

Von Herzen danke ich meiner Frau Kirsten Timme für uner-müdliche Kritik und großartiges Verständnis. Meinen Eltern ver-danke ich mehr als geduldige Unterstützung. Ihnen ist die Arbeitgewidmet.

Wien, im Juni 2005

RITTER_f1_v-xviii 11/11/05 6:56 PM Page xviii

ENGLISH SUMMARY1

This study examines the architecture of Iranian mosque and madrasabuildings during the period of early Qàjàr rule, e.g. the late 18thand the first half of the 19th century. For a long time Iranian archi-tecture of this period, like “late” Islamic architecture in other coun-tries, has been treated only in passing. Relations to the architectureof the 17th century have been noted as continuity, changes as adecline under European influence, but there has been little attemptto interpret the innovative aspect of this architecture on the basis ofthe history of the period. Formal studies of groups of works or ofindividual monuments are lacking, and no reliable survey with pho-tographs and plans exists (chapter I.1).

The present study tries to break ground in two directions. First,it seeks to describe formal developments by analyzing and compar-ing a wide array of mosque and madrasa buildings within a typo-logical framework: Schemes and forms in ground plan, elevation,and elements are distinguished. Through comparison, traditions andreferences to models can be traced, changes and innovations exam-ined, developments and stylistic tendencies described. Second, aninterpretation is attempted within the history of the period, drawingfrom the political context of monumental religious architecture: Theleading question is how to relate formal developments and tenden-cies to the patron circles belonging to the ruling and to the urbanelites (chapter I.2).

The main material of the study is represented by buildings visitedand described in the course of this work, using plans that were acces-sible in archives or published in Iranian secondary literature. As his-torical sources, the inscriptions and foundation texts related to thebuildings, Persian local histories and European travel accounts of theearly 19th century are used inter alia (chapter I.3). Basis of the dis-cussion is a systematic catalogue including a substantial body of

1 The reader is kindly asked to refer for citation to the relevant chapters andparts of the German text only. By its very nature, this English summary constitutesno more than an orientation and a guide to the text. Transliteration follows thesystem used in the CHI.

RITTER_f11_525-537 11/10/05 10:55 AM Page 525

526 summary

buildings seen by the author and supplementary buildings mentionedin sources and secondary literature. Each building is described, thedating and the names of masters and patrons are established, thecontent of architectural inscriptions is listed, and relevant sources arecited. Plates with photographs and plan drawings form the visualbasis. Appendices provide an overview on crucial data.

The perspective of interpretation is explained by examining the con-ditions and the context of religious buildings in Iran during the earlyQàjàr period, 1200–64/1785–1848 (chapter II). The 18th centuryafter the fall of the Safavid empire was characterized by changes inthe nature and location of political power. Under the new dynastywhich sprang from the Qàjàr tribe, a re-emergence of monarchicalrule and a rise of urban elites including the religious-legal scholars('ulamà, clerics) became significant (chapter II.1).

Religious building activity of the period has not been discussedby historians, though it may shed light on the relation between reli-gion and state and on the development of cities. An analysis basedon the material included in the catalogue reveals phases (chapterII.2) and different groups of patrons (chapter II.3, appendix C).Mosque and madrasa building suffered a long decline in the 18thcentury. The military rule of Nadir Shàh has left no significant build-ings, while the government of Karìm Khàn Zand did so only at itsown seat in Shìràz. Still under the first Qàjàr ruler Àghà Mu˙ammadKhàn, who secured power over Iran and had himself crowned shah(assassinated 1211/1797), no major religious building was undertaken.A possible exception, unproven so far, may have been the founda-tion of a monumental mosque at Qazvìn that remained unfinished,but in any case it would have been an isolated project.

The beginning of building all-over the country during the reignof his successor, Fat˙ 'Alì Shàh (1212–50/1797–1834), may haveappeared to the contemporaries as a new flowering paralleled inother arts sponsored by the court. It started around 1220/1805 withthree royal buildings simultaneously under construction: the monu-mental Friday mosque at Tehran, the mosque at Qazvìn, and thelarge madrasa at Kàshàn. In what can be called a building pro-gramme, patrons from the Qàjàr ruling elite and local rulers inalliance with them ordered mosques and madrasas in provincial citiesand in the new capital, Tehran. In newly founded cities in WesternIran like Sul†ànàbàd (today Aràk) and Daulatàbàd (Malàyir), they

RITTER_f11_525-537 11/10/05 10:55 AM Page 526

summary 527

were built at the centre of a cross-axial master plan. The precisereasons for the origin of a building programme at this time, apartfrom general considerations mentioned below, remain unclear. Ten-tatively one can relate it to a measure of stabilization when war withRussia had been declared, and to a change in the administrativeorganization when Mu˙ammad Óusain Khàn, governor of Ißfahànand himself one of the earliest patrons, became minister of financesand later prime minister.

The period of the third Qàjàr ruler, Mu˙ammad Shàh (1250–64/1834–48), reveals a shift in building activity. The chronology showsthat orders by the ruling elite stopped abruptly. The building ofmosques and madrasas was entirely left to private patrons. Theirsignificance had started under Fat˙ 'Alì Shàh when a growing num-ber of buildings by the urban elites can be noted. They includedmonumental mosque-madrasas which were equal to or even beyondthe pretension of architecture by the ruling house, erected by orderand on initiative of prominent 'ulamà. The immediate reason for thedisappearance of a whole class of patrons under Mu˙ammad Shàhcan be related to his policy of depriving the Qàjàr princes of powerand finances; the two lost wars with Russia may have added con-crete problems and a feeling of disillusion. In the long run, how-ever, the rise of urban elites and changes in the relation between'ulamà and state in the 18/19th century can be cited as explanationfor the growing importance of private building activity.

Monumental religious buildings can have a political and legitimizingfunction (chapter II.4). Mosques and madrasas as representationalbuildings and as legal foundations based on waqf, connect patrons,believers and the religious-legal scholars who work in the buildingand administer it. Through the allocation of posts and salaries thefoundation can be used as an instrument to build client groups.

Regarding the patrons from the Qàjàr ruling elite under Fat˙ 'AlìShàh, one can speak of a policy of using religious buildings to anchorpower and legitimization in the cities. According to the Shiite the-ory of state formulated by the religious-legal scholar Ja'far Kashfì in1807, Qàjàrs and 'ulamà were equally legitimate representatives ofthe ultimate power delegated to the Hidden Imàm: the formerentrusted with the royal power of rule, the latter with the religious-legal task. The building of mosques and madrasas could tighten thealliance between the Qàjàrs and the 'ulamà.

RITTER_f11_525-537 11/10/05 10:55 AM Page 527

528 summary

Concerning the patrons from the urban elites, monumental build-ings erected by religious scholars appear to be a new phenomenonin comparison to the 17th century. They reflect the autonomy of'ulamà, who were supported by urban classes and could act as theirrepresentatives. Their mosques and madrasas were primarily a placefor their own activities as religious leaders. If one follows the thesisthat the political power of the 'ulamà grew during this period, build-ing activity must be considered as a part of it.

The names of masters and craftsmen involved in erecting the buildingsconstitute a prime source for the art history of the period (chapterII.5.1). More than 90 different names can be collected from signaturesin inscriptions (appendix D). Although a large part of them relatesto calligraphers, the number of signatures is relatively high as mostof them belong only to the years of Fat˙ 'Alì Shàh’s reign. Theyare analyzed with regard to their use and to the creation of buildings.

According to the nisbas, the names relate to Central Iran, mostoften Ißfahàn and Kàshàn. The position and frequency of signaturesmirror self-confidence. Building masters appear to sign more oftenthan in medieval periods. In one case, the distinction between amaster planning the building and one overseeing the constructioncan point to a division of duties analogous to that between archi-tect and executing master; a comparison with earlier periods willrequire closer investigation. Signatures of calligraphers at buildingsordered by patrons from the ruling elite are absent from buildingsby private patrons.

This leads, concerning court architecture, to the question of a cen-tral institution for designs and planning (chapter II.5.2). On the evi-dence of its use by one master, the title mi'màrbàshì (e.g. first or headof building masters) appears to be related to the painting and designatelier of the court (naqqàsh-khàna). The formal relations in the groupof buildings ordered by the ruling elite would make one assume thata relatively small group of craftsmen and a few leading masters wereresponsible for the main developments. Yet this is not reflected inthe signatures of builders and tile-makers, although it is possible thatthey represent simply the craftsman who carried out the work, whilethe master of the blueprint and the design remained anonymous.

After the introductory chapters looking into the historical, functionaland institutional background, the following six chapters distinguish

RITTER_f11_525-537 11/10/05 10:55 AM Page 528

summary 529

different types and forms of mosque and madrasa architecture in theearly Qàjàr period.

Monumental four-ivan-mosques with dome-chamber (chapter III)were built by the Qàjàr ruler and his sons as the new central con-gregational mosques in cities of Northern and Western Central Iran:Qazvìn, Tehran, Simnàn, Burùjird and Zanjàn. At Ißfahàn a remark-able building was ordered by the leading cleric of the city. Also oldbuildings of a related similar scheme were appropriated by Qàjàrpatrons through renovation.

The early Qàjàr scheme of the type is characterized by a widecourtyard, emphasized in the axes by four large ivans and repre-sentative portals, and surrounded by rows of uniform arcades. In thestandard plan as it evolved in mosques of the Qàjàr ruler, the useof three axial portals at the courtyard axes is a new feature notfound in the preceding century. Corresponding to the dome cham-ber with ivan at the qibla side, they underline the ideal and repre-sentational symmetry of the plan scheme. The arrangement of portal,ivan and corridors in a block turns individual 17th-century exam-ples into a widely used scheme. Further change that can be tracedin different elements, appear as a development based on 17–18thcentury models. The use of terraces introduces another innovationin two building with individual features. Formally, it breaks theflatness of courtyard façades into a structure of blocks. Functionally,it presents a new solution for integrating the mosque and accom-modation rooms of a madrasa.

These early Qàjàr mosques are with their spacious courtyard thelargest of the four-ivan-type with dome chamber in Iranian historyand indeed in the whole Islamic world during the first half of the19th century. Generally speaking, the type is related to the traditionof four-ivan-mosques with dome-chamber which had become thepreferred scheme for congregational mosques by royal patrons sincemedieval times. Yet no such mosque had been ordered since the17th century. After one and a half centuries (even two if royal orderonly is counted), the buildings of the Qàjàr period revive and redefinethe scheme. Its use appears as a sign of sovereignty and royal power,as the first example at Qazvìn can be interpreted as an architec-tural claim to it. An analogous expression is sought in the buildingat Ißfahàn which constitutes a variant of the royal buildings and wasordered by one of the most powerful 'ulamà in the period. To whatdegree the Qàjàr scheme relates specifically to medieval buildings

RITTER_f11_525-537 11/10/05 10:55 AM Page 529

530 summary

beyond a general share in the tradition of the type remains a ques-tion. The return to a modest single-storey elevation that differs fromthe high façades of many 17th century buildings, and the uniformarcades on a hypostyle grid are reminiscent of early Islamic andmedieval architecture. Such features, however, can be equally wellrelated to a simplification and standardization of forms in the earlyQàjàr period.

Madrasas consisting of a courtyard with a four-ivan-scheme (chap-ter IV) which relates to the scheme of monumental mosques, wereexclusively erected by patrons from the Qàjàr ruling class. This typeof madrasa represents in many examples variations of a standardscheme that turns the side ivans into closed halls. It had been evolvedin the madrasa of Fat˙ 'Alì Shàh at Kàshàn which is distinguishedby a dome chamber, and is followed by a sequence of smaller build-ings erected by governors in provincial cities. A different monumentalscheme with four open ivans is used in a few buildings. They fol-low prestigious local precursors, as in the new madrasas at the Shiiteshrines of Qum and Mashhad and in the Mad. Íadr in the bazaarof Ißfahàn.

While some basic features of the standard scheme relate to themodel of late Safavid madrasas of 17/18th century Ißfahàn, clearchanges and new characteristics are to be noted. The courtyardacquires an oblong-rectangular shape and is usually oriented towardsthe qibla, leading to a prayer room in the main axis. Neither fea-ture was mandatory in earlier buildings. In some cases a plan com-bining madrasa courtyard with a dome chamber with flanking hallsmakes the building similar to a congregational mosque. The monu-mental portal type with vestibule, ivan and flanking entrance corridors,which was usually preceded by a forecourt, follows the example ofthe great contemporary mosques. Side ivans with closed rooms canbe found in 17th century madrasas; now they constitute a new formof a lecture hall erected on a tripartite plan with doors at the court-yard, which is analogous to mosques with ivans flanked by corridors.

Unlike two-storey precursors that are marked by a high façadeand a large number of accommodation rooms, the aesthetical andfunctional preference is now a single storey that cuts the façade andthe number of rooms by half. It allows an elevation that emphasizesthe expanse of the courtyard planted as garden like in houses, and

RITTER_f11_525-537 11/10/05 10:55 AM Page 530

summary 531

it singles out the ivans and ivan-like blocks at the axes, thus under-lining the cross-axial scheme. An interest in structuring courtyardfaçades is evident from the small arcades which open at corridorsand doors thus contrasting with the normal size arcades. Used atthe corners and arranged in tripartite groups in the middle of thesides, they impose a calm rhythm on the sequence of arcades.

A group of buildings in Tehran provides evidence for a type of smallmosques distinguished by a dome chamber (chapter V). They func-tion as neighbourhood mosques with an integrated madrasa. Theycomprise variations of a courtyard mosque that appears to be areduced form of a four-ivan-scheme emphasizing the main ivan atthe qibla side. The connection between qibla-ivan and dome cham-ber is stressed, while any adjoining side halls are separated by cor-ridors or omitted. At the north side of the courtyard a continuoushall runs between the corners, while there is no ivan. This side canform a terrace placed above an underground hall. The portal isplaced at a side or a corner of the courtyard, not at the main axis.

While this type is much smaller and different in scheme from themonumental four-ivan-mosques, dome chamber and ivans are ana-logous signs of dignity. They claim a rank that puts these buildingwhich were ordered by urban notables beyond the simple schemesof quarter mosques.

Hypostyle mosques that consist of halls on pillars or columns arecommon throughout Iran, but dominate in Western Iran (chapterVI). Different forms and variations are found. Regional continuitydetermines their use. Buildings consisting of closed halls without acourtyard are mostly used for modest mosques. Large buildings erectedat the existing old central mosques with courtyard in Tabrìz andTehran, are attached to locations dignified by age and custom. Here,the hypostyle scheme with a simple and unstructured grid devoid ofemphasis on a particular axis or part in the building appears to have been chosen because it could be associated with modesty andtradition.

Hypostyle mosques with a preceding courtyard usually comprisea madrasa with accommodation rooms arranged around the court-yard. Still the prayer hall constitutes a self-contained element in theplan. A structured scheme emphasizing the main axis by wider arcades

RITTER_f11_525-537 11/10/05 10:55 AM Page 531

532 summary

is used in a building at Yazd. It may be related to local traditionor to the patroness’ rank, a wife of Fat˙ 'Alì Shàh.

More often the prestige of a building is expressed by elementsadded and by the richness of decoration. Thus the Sunni congregationalmosque M.-Mad. Dàr al-I˙sàn at Sanandaj comprises a column-hallwith one ivan added at the exterior, another one connecting the hallwith a madrasa-courtyard on a four-ivan-scheme, and a double mina-ret. This appears to be a pastiche of architectural elements, each ofwhich can be traced to a local or regional tradition and to modelsin Central Iran. The courtyard-scheme and the rich tile decorationfollow the current forms of royal architecture in Central Iran. Thiscan be understood as reflecting the political and family relationship ofthe patron, the Kurdish leader Amànullàh Khàn, with the Qàjàr court.

An exchange between Central Iran and the Qàjàr ruled part ofSouth Caucasus can be made evident in two buildings at Qazvìnand Erevan (chapter VII). The scheme, a hall of three domed baysin a transverse aisle at a courtyard with accommodation rooms, iswithout earlier precedent in Iran. The first example is the citadelmosque at Erevan in Qàjàr Armenia which went into oblivion afterits destruction earlier in the 20th century, but can be reconstructedfrom old photographs and descriptions. Based on formal evidenceand written accounts, it can be dated to the early Qàjàr period.Comprising a three-bay hall with side rooms, the scheme appearsto take up a local tradition of 17–18th century buildings. In a sec-ond example at Qazvìn in Iran a comparable scheme combined witha double-storied courtyard appears in the Mad. Sardàr. Direct rela-tions between the two buildings can be pointed out. The formal con-nection between the buildings situated in distant regions can becorroborated and given meaning by historical evidence. The build-ing in Qazvìn was ordered by the governor of Erevan and by hisbrother, both descended from a Qàjàr line settled in Armenia. Thecitadel mosque at Erevan was erected under the rule of the samegovernor, or possibly ordered by him. The recourse to local tradi-tion in Erevan and its influence on the building at Qazvìn can beinterpreted as personal reference to models current in the region ofhis power and ancestry.

Two quite different courtyard mosques with madrasa at Yazd andKàshàn represent independent solutions originating from local traditions

RITTER_f11_525-537 11/10/05 10:55 AM Page 532

summary 533

as well as from more distant models (chapter VIII). The buildingordered by the religious-legal scholar Mullà Ismà"ìl at Yazd takes themedieval M. Jàmi" of the city as a model. It is realized in a mon-umental schematized form that incorporates contemporary elementsbut looks back to medieval models, as is also evident in the decoration.

The unique M.-Mad. Àqà Buzurg in Kàshàn, erected for the reli-gious-legal scholar Mahdì Naràqì, combines traditions of religiousbuildings in the province and motifs of 17th century architecturewith elements and forms of local house architecture in a highly imag-inative way. The singular plan of a hall with central dome cham-ber that opens to several courtyards, merges several motifs and pointsto an expanded function. One comparison can be made to ˙usainìya-buildings for religious Shiite mourning assemblies that were growingin public significance during this period.

General stylistic characteristics and developments in mosque andmadrasa architecture of the early Qàjàr period can be summarizednow (chapter IX.1). There is a remarkable schematization of plansand forms which, in view of the changes brought about by the 18thcentury, is not so much a simplification within continuity but ratheran idealization and systematization. In ground plans a central motifdominates and is given pronounced expression. For example, theidea of a cross-axial scheme defined by ivans is expanded beyondthe courtyard by three portals complementing the dome chamber atthe fourth ivan. The motif of a single-aisle transverse hall which atErevan consists of different rooms is reduced to a hall of three equalsquares at Qazvìn.

Regarding elevation, ordered static symmetry predominates. A widecourtyard surrounded by single storey arcades is typical; the 17thcentury courtyard enclosed by double storied arcades disappears. Astraightforward structure with resting proportions emphasizes the hor-izontal lines rather than the vertical rise.

Yet the structuring of courtyard façades constitutes a departurefrom earlier forms. Façades step down from the ivan in the middletowards the corners. An entirely new formal possibility is offered bythe use of terraces. They enable a structuring in sculptural blockswhich breaks away from the tradition of flat running façades at thecourtyard. An alternation in the size of the arcades contributes to acalm rhythm, supplemented by a regular alternation of colours andmotifs in the fields of decoration.

RITTER_f11_525-537 11/10/05 10:55 AM Page 533

534 summary

The architectural and decorative focus is on the rooms at the axesof the courtyard: portal- and ivan buildings and dome chamber.White-washed halls and other interior rooms remain sober and with-out decoration. The decoration is subordinated to the architecturallines with no attempt to achieve a unified decorative covering as insome buildings of the 17th century.

Decorative vaulting which had preferred simple forms in the 17thcentury, shows a development that emphasises more ornamental andcomplicated patterns of lines. Preference is given to a specific typeof net-ribbed vaulting that ultimately fuses several bays into onesingle shell creating a unified room. This is especially related to thedevelopment of portal rooms in the period. New effects include theuse of contrasting colours in neighbouring vaulting fields.

Polychrome tile work with wall-paper-like repeating patterns of de-tailed vegetal motifs contrasts with bold geometrical patterns of glazedbrick. An alternation of motifs and of blue and yellow in the ground oftile work adds another regular rhythm in the fields above the arcades;fields with white ground accentuate. Techniques do not differ fromthe 17th century, but in several cases they are put to new use. Forexample, at the main portal of the M. ”àh in Tehran the muqar-nas vaulting consists of cells made in the haft-rangì technique like intiles.

The tile work draws from an amazingly wide array of differentsources, expanding the repertory of themes and motifs. Although aseparate study of the subject is necessary, one can pinpoint the useof ornament from several different media such as textile motifs andgeometrical motifs from woodwork. In a few cases, an adaptationand integration of different types of European ornament such as therocaille is possible; they can have been transmitted by engravings.Yet in this period it is very far away from an alleged strong Europeaninfluence. It is just one, and rather minor source among many oth-ers including older indigenous examples, as can be shown also fromthe study of the form of inscriptions. Thus a search for new motifsand a play with techniques is behind such an extraordinary field oftilework as it is found much damaged in the dome chamber of theM. Jàmi" at Qum, imitating in paint not only earlier mosaic faiencebut also the arch of brickwork which would have framed it.

Two main tendencies of the period, the development and change of17th century forms and the discovery of local traditions, can be

RITTER_f11_525-537 11/10/05 10:55 AM Page 534

summary 535

studied in buildings from the circles of royal and urban patrons. Themost numerous group is constituted by buildings of patrons from theQàjàr ruling class (chapter IX.2). Here one can speak of a styleclearly defined by a canon of types, forms and elements repeatinguniform schemes and using representative decoration. Local tradi-tions are integrated and respected more than in the 17th century.This royal and official style of the state leaves a mark on the periodof Fat˙ 'Alì Shàh and accounts for many of the above mentionedcharacteristics. It clearly departs from 17th century Safavid archi-tecture but relates to its forms and elements in a conservative aca-demic manner. The development of plans is a re-definition after thebreak which took place in the 18th century. Artistically and func-tionally, variations concentrate on the detail. Reformulation of anddeparture from schemes have a mannered notion. Yet up to the endof this period builders cling to the basic forms of earlier times usingthem as an increasingly sterile convention.

In these buildings, the four-ivan-scheme and dome chamber appearas signs of royal power. The use of precious tile decoration or stonepanels of “marble” is virtually exclusive to them and brings out akind of royal iconography of the materials. Seen on the historicalbackground of an alliance between ruler-ship and 'ulamà, this reli-gious architecture appears as a conservative restorative state archi-tecture, adapted also in border regions such as Kurdistan and Armenia.

More individual variations and independent forms that reliedstronger on local tradition are found already at the start of the periodin mosque and madrasa buildings erected by urban notables (chap-ter IX.3). Four case studies of monumental buildings ordered by andfor leading 'ulamà in a city analyze how formal traditions and solu-tions can be interpreted in this context. While the M.-Mad. MullàIsmà'ìl at Yazd revives a medieval model casting it into contempo-rary forms, the M.-Mad. Sayyid at Ißfahàn uses the four-ivan-typeof contemporary royal mosques. However, it refers to local precur-sors and incorporates elements from local buildings as copy and cita-tion. It is characterized by an eclecticism which is much moreapparent than in any royal building, and by what may be called a“neo-Safavid” taste. The building of the M. Shàh at Simnàn, althoughofficially ordered by the ruler, relates to a local initiative and departsfrom the conventional static pose of royal buildings in the use ofterraces and the form of portals. Finally, the M.-Mad. Àqà Buzurgsuccessfully combines regional traditions and motifs of geographically

RITTER_f11_525-537 11/10/05 10:55 AM Page 535

536 summary

distant royal buildings with elements and the taste of the local res-idential architecture.

These buildings overstep the bounds of academic convention incontemporary royal architecture and vary established schemes in away that looks both eclectic and mannered. The building can showa departure from royal architecture reflecting the independent posi-tion of the patrons. They look rather to local than royal traditionexcept when in need of signs of dignity. The way is paved for dis-solving the canon when royal building activity under Mu˙ammadShàh ceases.

In conclusion, early Qàjàr mosque and madrasa architecture can beunderstood in a much broader spectrum than has been possible sofar (chapter IX.4). The main formal developments can be summa-rized under two headings: a simplification which standardizes andsystematizes forms, reducing and in a way idealising them into cen-tral motifs; and an eclecticism which draws from both the 17th cen-tury and in some case earlier traditions. This would not have beenpossible without a fore-going detachment from the formal traditionof the 17th century. The few existing examples of 18th-century pre-Qàjàr architecture at Shìràz and near Mashhad indicate a re-orientation as they turn away from existing types and seek to establishnew solutions by putting together forms of different sources, proba-bly even of different periods.

This kind of eclecticism continues in the early Qàjàr period underthe conditions of a monarchy that seeks to establish a recognizable,official style re-defining specific types, and a rising urban elite thatlooks for forms in traditions relevant to their own position. Changesand innovations can be made evident. Formal tendencies can berelated to different patron circles and their position, although theyare not mutually exclusive and can be simultaneously at work. Thespread of a uniform architectural canon all over the country isachieved by the buildings of the ruling elite. The discovery and reval-uation of local traditions dominate buildings by urban notables fromthe class of religious-legal scholars.

So far, the formal development of early Qàjàr architecture seemsto be indigenous, relying on traditions within Iran. Different fromreligious architecture in the Ottoman empire, Egypt or India, nei-ther significant formal influence from European architecture nor bor-rowings from other Islamic regions can be noticed. Formal eclecticism,

RITTER_f11_525-537 11/10/05 10:55 AM Page 536

summary 537

however, remains basically receptive to all sources. Yet the specificuse of tradition can be taken as sign for a changed relation to thepast. This might be a parallel to the eclecticism and historicismprevalent in European 18/19th century architecture. To what extentthe growth of such a phenomenon in Iran is to be explained byindigenous factors, which was the concern of this study, and howfar it can be related to an adaptation of external ideas, opens a newdiscussion.

RITTER_f11_525-537 11/10/05 10:55 AM Page 537