CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS AND TECHNIQUES in Persian architectureCONSTRUCTION MATERIALS AND TECHNIQUES in Persian architecture. Materials Mud. The most frequent building material in Iranian cultural areas has always been mud, which is available everywhere. When wet, it can simply be plastered on walls without shaping. Alternatively, it can be tempered and formed into large blocks with more or less rectangular sides; the most common dimensions of such blocks, even today, are about 80 x 80 x 60 cm. Mud can also be manufactured into bricks (q.v.) and either dried (ḵešt) in the sun or baked (ājor). Sun-dried mud bricks were generally larger in antiquity and the early Middle Ages than they are today. For example, those used in Urartian (7th and 8th centuries b.c.e.) fortress walls measured about 50 x 50 x 12 cm (Kleiss, 1977), whereas modern mud bricks are approximately 22 x 22 x 5-6 cm. Plano-convex bricks, which are shaped like cushions or bread loaves, with one flat and one convex face, first appeared in Persia in the 8th-7th millennia b.c.e. in the walls of the Neolithic settlement at Tepe Ganj Dareh (Ganj Darrah Tappa) in Kurdistan (Smith), where they were set in mud mortar. Sun-dried mud bricks, usually quadratic in form, predominated until the end of the Achaemenid period. In the 2nd millennium b.c.e. painted and glazed bricks were also used in Elam. Under the Parthians (3rd century b.c.e.-3rd century c.e.) and especially the Sasanians (3rd-7th centuries c.e.) large baked bricks set in mortar became more and more common in Persia. In about the 10th century molded, cut, and relief-carved bricks, often painted or glazed as well, became a significant feature of Persian architectural decoration. Rubble. In prehistoric and early historic times rubble, naturally fragmented or deliberately chipped rock of no specific shape, was the most frequent building material after mud; it was used primarily in foundation walls, on top of which the main walls were constructed of mud (packed [čīna], chunks, or bricks). The rubble walls consisted mainly of flat pieces of stone, which were carefully laid with loose pebbles filling the interstices; the whole was cemented with mud mortar. In historical times lime mortar has also been used. Cut stone. Cut-stone architecture appeared in Persia in the Urartian period, around the beginning of the 1st millennium b.c.e. Sometimes mighty stone boulders weighing several tons were broken up frames. Gravel and paving. They had probably learned it from the Armenians. cornices. and other special forms—were crudely worked with iron tools as early as the Achaemenid period. 1976.). building forms. wood played only a subordinate role in such constructions. were meant to be evened and smoothed often cannot be determined. In Islamic cities brick was sometimes used to pave major streets (Kiani. on each of which walls could be erected. being used for scaffolding. the Urartians developed this technique to the highest level of perfection (Kleiss. pp. probably under the technical influence of Greek stonemasons. from both coniferous and deciduous trees. Whether or not these wall surfaces. Wood. for “insulation. in the terrace at Persepolis such manmade boulders were laid in courses with small. the whole is then covered with mud. and paved with relatively unworked stone blocks.). Techniques Preparing the site. however. which has first been levigated and tempered with straw. In the 8th and 7th centuries b. the technique of making use of the rock surface of a site as foundations for walls was known. which were frequently marred by convex humps and roughhewn edges or with protective rims projecting along the edges. either coarse or fine. 28 ff. medieval. Whereas in Urartu.). across which smaller wooden boards are laid and on top of them reed mats or thatch. For example. as in Hittite Anatolia in the 2nd millennium b. wall niches. especially poplar. Flat terraces of different sizes and elevations were carved out of the uneven rock surface following the specific conformation of the site. in the Islamic period bridges were built primarily of stone or brick and vaulted. In ancient.v. it is still important today for supports and roof construction in the traditional rural architecture of Persia. temporary supports.c. rubble or ashlar walls rested on terraces hacked out of living rock or on leveled rock . Another building material was wood.e. and capitals. it must be assumed that the large number of bridges known from this period consisted of horizontal wooden structures resting on top of stone piers. and often for reinforcement in the vaulting. thus preparing a series of level platforms of the required dimensions. who had received it as part of their cultural heritage from the Urartians. shafts.c. and jambs. The Achaemenids also made extensive use of this technique at Persepolis and other sites. On the other hand. pp. pulley weights. Those parts of the rock on which there was to be no construction were generally left unworked.e. and modern times road embankments have been constructed of gravel. In the Sasanian period wood also played a role in construction of bridges (q. 230ff.” Along the Caspian Sea coast wooden architecture predominates..into smaller pieces and used in construction. door sills. particularly post-and-lintel houses with thatched roofs. Roofs and ceilings are constructed of logs. Already in ancient Persia. Stone architectural members—like column bases. crudely hewn stones filling the gaps. crenellations. to prevent ground moisture from rising through the unmortared dry wall of the foundation into the mud-brick walls and causing them to collapse. Over the top of the foundation there was a layer of white lime 1-2 cm thick. in the Middle Ages lime mortar.surfaces. became common in the Urartian and Achaemenid periods.c. The upper walls were normally coated with plaster. pp. that of an Urartian temple. the so-called “bridge of Valerian” at Šūštar. Vaults. and they are also known from bridge constructions of the Sasanian period. the dimensions of the topmost surface were determined by the width of the mud-brick wall to be erected on it (Kleiss. Normally such a staircase led from within a fortress to an underground well or spring (Kleiss. whenever possible natural crevices in the stone platforms were exploited for this purpose. at the Elamite site of Haft Tepe (Negahban). for example. 1979. recesses for plaques containing foundation inscriptions were frequently cut into the rock at the points where the corners of the walls were to rest (Kleiss. All these early features were achieved by carving out the living rock with picks. which is considered to have been built by Roman engineers after 260 c. 1977. 1971).e. rubble foundations. pp. known from as early as the Neolithic. 28-29). Evenly spaced projections from the walls served the primarily aesthetic purpose of articulating the facade. Larger pieces of broken stone were carefully laid in courses with smaller stones filling the interstices. in the Achaemenid period such rock-cut terraces served as foundations for walls of mud brick (Kleiss. When the surface of the site was somewhat concave. In antiquity mud mortar was used. p. mostly for mud-brick walls. In Urartian architecture rubble foundations were constructed as stepped terraces. In the Urartian and the ensuing Median periods staircase passages were also cut through the living rock. Walls. 1963-64). In ancient times mud-brick walls were usually plastered with mud tempered with chaff. 154). toward the top pebbles of diminishing size were used. 35-36).e. Semicircular vault forms are depicted in Urartian architectural representations. Parabolic vault forms began to appear in Sasanian architecture. after the walls were built their function was to drain off groundwater that collected inside the walls and thus to keep them dry (Kleiss. for example. Lime plaster. 1976. but in rare instances they also served to buttress the construction or even as part of the fortifications. on which the lowest course of the mud-brick wall rested. Vaulting became common in Persia in the 2nd millennium b.. From early in the Islamic period the pointed arch was also in use in stone and mud-brick . in fact genuine vaults of baked brick with gypsum mortar had already been introduced. were generally preferred. In preparing the site. in order to produce a level surface. Drainage channels were also hollowed out of the rock surface at several points before the walls were constructed. in order to save stone. This layer of lime was obviously intended as a damp course. for example. in order to ensure the provision of water during a siege. In Achaemenid quarries wedge-shaped holes averaging about 20 cm long. especially in bridge construction. Either lime or gypsum mortar was used. Earthen dams. wooden wedges had then been driven into the rock at the back. 1981. given way to the basket-shaped arch with its much wider span. pp. Mortaring. Important differences can be observed in the consistency of the mortar used in the piers and in the vaulted portions of the bridge. but clamps in the form of swallowtails were more frequent (Schmidt. These dams were as a rule intended to provide protection from the periodic extreme variations in water levels in the streams. 197-98). as well as in buildings of baked brick. were used in ashlar construction. pp. A particular feature of Islamic architecture from the 11th century was moqarnas (oversailing courses of small niche sections) vaulting. 8 cm wide. One specifically Persian feature is found in bridge building: earthen dams with paved surfaces. Whenever possible quarrying was carried out where stratified stone was bedded horizontally and would fracture in sheets. mostly of iron. They were particularly popular as interior architectural decoration but also sometimes appeared on building exteriors. pointed profile of this type of arch became progressively wider and shallower until the 17-18th centuries. Some were simple bands. as in bridge piers or canal walls. they are particularly frequent in Persia. In order to articulate the otherwise . too. 1975. Blocks could then be cut from the sheets with chisels or crowbars at no great expense. which might undermine bridge piers. rendering deep shafts and the use of wedges unnecessary (Kleiss. straight channels 30-50 cm deep were cut into the rock and wedge-shaped holes closely spaced along them. Such vaults could be constructed of stone or bricks but were more often simply decorative shells carved from gypsum or limestone mortar (Harb). In the quarry south of the terrace at Persepolis rough passages or channels had been cut around the blocks. pp. The original tall. Although they have also occasionally occurred in other cultures. Clamps. The clamps were cast in lead molds. especially facades. which became increasingly common with the passage of time.). In the 19th century the European round arch gained increasing influence. They were also useful in diverting streams into subsidiary canals for irrigation purposes. From the Achaemenid period onward metal clamps. for example. This technique was lost until recent times and was only reintroduced in connection with modern construction methods. and 8-10 cm deep can be observed at wide intervals. Quarrying. 61-63. on the facing walls of bridge piers. again especially in bridge construction. 81 ff. in order to split off the stone blocks in parallel layers. however. I. A road paved with stone chips linked the quarry face to the workings along the upper facade and an adjacent terrace (Kleiss. Kleiss and Calmeyer). depending on the required degree of durability and the necessity for special protection. In the Sasanian period. which were subject to the continuous action of water.construction. In the Sasanian period band-shaped iron clamps were used most often. by the end of the century it had. A few basic forms. it was probably through them that it came to be adopted for medieval Saljuq architecture. 84-85). Under Darius I (q. They were used in work on large buildings. there are no immediately apparent differences that can be taken as evidence for identifying different workshops or different historical periods (Kleiss. dating from the 7th century b. in order to document the performance of the individual stonemasons and to serve as an aid in reckoning payment. Stronach. when it was introduced by Greek stonemasons (Nylander. who have continued to make use of it until modern times. It was built into the upper leveling courses of the stone foundations of the wall and surrounded on all sides by mud.c.8 cm long and 5. They were also used in the subsequent crude shaping of the blocks. and the open rectangle.v. In Achaemenid architecture color effects were achieved mainly through the use of stones of different hues. as well as to secondary working of building stone. In stone architecture flat chisels were used to cut deep. but it did not come into general use until somewhat later. . Traces of color remaining on some Achaemenid architectural elements suggest that certain parts of buildings were at least partially painted.monotonous wall surface. This technique was already known in the Urartian period and was passed on to the Armenians.v. 1979a. from the time of the Achaemenids until the reign of the Qajar dynasty (1193-1341/1779-1924). in column bases. pp. 53-56. Achieving color effects.) a toothed chisel was employed only occasionally. the cross. In comparing the repertoire of stonemasons’ marks at different Achaemenid building sites. the rectangle. pp. Stonemasons’ marks are known in Persian architecture from the Achaemenid period. owing to Greek influence (Stronach. pp. Stonemasons’ marks. Tools. The final smoothing of the stone surface must have been accomplished by means of abrasion with harder stones in conjunction with water and fine sand.7 cm wide and would have lent itself to the cutting away of the stepped terraces of the rocky subfoundation. the triangle. Red marks were also used as an aid in joining together different building elements in the Achaemenid palaces at Pasargadae and as guidelines for squaring and smoothing the building blocks. pp. traces of this work are still clearly visible. recurred in all periods. It is 19. for example. 21-22). in early Islamic architecture mortar-filled vertical joints were made thicker than the horizontal joints and decorated with stamped or incised designs. It has a chisel-shaped point (Kleiss.e. as well as in the buildings of the period from the Safavids through the Qajars. I. narrow channels around projecting blocks. like the circle. it is thus to be associated with the original dedication of the building.). before that time they were not known in Persia. it is therefore clear that the equal-armed cross had nothing to do with identifying Christian workmen. The oldest stone-working tool so far known from Persia is an iron chisel found in the Urartian fortress at Besṭām (q. 1980). 99-100). The same is true of stonemasons’ marks in Sasanian and early Islamic architecture. A proposed building. were brought on wheels drawn by work animals over inclined tracks leading to the construction area. like those in the terrace at Persepolis. or a jog in the course of the wall was planned. for example. Measuring apparatus must also have been used in laying out building sites. like the Urartian fortress at Besṭām and the structures at Pasargadae and Persepolis. was marked out precisely on the site.Transport. The precise planning and execution of buildings. already apparent in the Urartian period but even more highly developed under the Achaemenids. it was done so precisely that. a support. would nevertheless have necessitated such instruments. were cut away. The question of how doorjambs. and capitals were transported from the Achaemenid period onward can be answered only by assuming that level tracks were prepared. Laying out the plan. a buttress. the outline of the plan can be clearly gauged by the limits of the rock cutting ww. column shafts.org/articles/construction-materials-and-techniques-in-persian-architecture Capital in Iranian Architecture By: Wolfram Kleiss 1990 .iranicaonline. even where the walls have completely disappeared. Only those parts of the rock on which a specific part of the building. The partly worked stone blocks. as can be recognized from the rock cutting at Besṭām and in the Kūh-e Raḥmat at Persepolis. whether a single structure or a larger complex. but no ancient examples of such apparatus are known. . Iranian influence is particularly reflected in the lion sculptures on bell shaped capitals from Sarnath and the volute capitals from Pataliputra (Rowland. 1988. 376).c. 320). also from Estaskhr (Herzfeld. It can be seen in the red-sandstone capitals from Bard-e Nešānda (q. 224-641) can be divided into four groups. especially during the reign of Aśoka (r. as has sometimes been suggested (Figure 2). which are worked to a greater or lesser degree. at Sidon. articulated on each of its four sides by superimposed volutes and resting in turn on a double corolla of petals (Figure 1d). p. 375). Kleiss. Whether decorated or not. and especially in the large audience hall (apadāna). 23. 173 74. all belong to the “basket capital” type. 181-82.v. From this forked grip the transverse beam soon developed. but the floral form of the bell -shaped lowest element suggests an entirely indigenous feature. owing nothing to ancient Egyptian art. Whether or not the volutes.g. 1973. 277. pp. After the Achaemenid period the animal-protome capital lived on in the Hellenistic world. Herzfeld. Nevertheless. Achaemenid architectural features also had a strong impact on the Maurya architecture of India. ca. In the Parthian period (3rd century b. fig. Hellenistic capitals in Iran include an acanthus capital from 3rd. 3). 18-19). as well as a palmette capital on a strongly convex echinus molding (Figure 1j). The Achaemenid double-protome capital can be viewed as an Iranian invention. the first artistic version of the simple transitional element between support and beam in Iranian architectural history. A third type comes from the area around Estaskhr: the capital of an engaged column. 351ff. As a rule such capitals rested directly on smooth or fluted columns. with a diameter of 1. however. at the door to the royal palace. the capitals from the Parthian palace precinct of Qaḷ‛a-ye Zoh hāk (Figure 2b. the column shafts. fig. Estaskhr. figs. for example. 9-10. fig. when a tree trunk was inserted in the earth with another trunk or branch laid in the fork to carry the roof construction (Figure 1a). 1966). 1964. p. carved in the form of a corolla of everted leaves (Figure 1k. At the so-called “Median” stone tombs. there are scroll capitals somewhat resembling Ionic forms (e.c. pp. 68.). like the fluting of the column shafts. fig. 14). though Mesopotamian influences in the representation of composite creatures are also recognizable (Figure 1d-g). 1948. Ghirshman. reflected the influence of Greek stone masons is uncertain. 274-37 b. 557ff. The construction of the three-part double-protome capitals. see Figure 1h). p.or 2nd-century b. From the Assyrian transverse beam there evolved the Achaemenid double-protome capital. but the transition from the basket . which are now recognized as the burial places of late Achaemenid notables (Gall.-a. the double-protome capital was supplemen ted by a second transitional element. at the tribute gate. 72 fig.d.. figs.). This ancient building technique is still widespread in rural construction in Iran. The published capitals from the Sasanian period (a. 23). pp. 279. On the other hand. Egyptian influence is clearly recognizable in the details of the lotus flowers (Figure 1e). now in the museum at Persepolis (Figure 1i.(Click to enlarge) CAPITALS. fig.. 177.d. on Delos and Thasos. measuring 8 m high on columns about 19 m high. and the capitals from the Part hian columned hall (palace) at Ḵorha (village 12 miles north of Mahallāt. Figure 2c. the trunks (columns) stand on stone bases. 1948. Kleiss. 29). p. limited to Persepolis and Susa (Schmidt. p. Gall. 20. 3rd century) Greek and Roman influence on the volute forms of Persian capitals is unmistakable.60 m. pp. p. with the animal heads (usually bulls but also eagles and lions) flanking the transverse beam at right angles. In Persepolis. was an entirely Persian development. in the course of time it came to be worked and richly decorated (Figure 1b-c). In other capitals at Persepolis. pp. perhaps they were even carved by Egyptian stonemasons. and at Salamis (Ghirshman. are too large to have been imported from Egypt. 1973. The development of the capital began in Assyria. those on the tomb of Qyzqapan. 1962. in architectural terminology transitional elements between weight-bearing supports and the roofs or vaults supported (Wasmuths Lexikon. a form that had its forerunners in ancient Near Eastern art.c.) in the museum at Susa (Figure 2a). cut -stone versions occur as impost capitals in the Shah Mosque in Isfahan (1025/1616. and capitals thus also appeared more fre quently. In the period of Karīm Khan Zand at Shiraz (1163-93/1750-79) and during the Qajar period (1193 1342/1779-1924) columns were used more frequently as supports. from the period of Shah ‛Abbās I. Figure 3h. 124. 16). Figure 3d. 1981. Moqarnas capitals of Safavid origin were also reused in the Qajar period. Figure 3f. Kleiss. 13). the Čehel Sotūn (q. They show unmistakable Roman influence in the volutes. fig. 186f. 172-77. can be dated between the mid-3rd and mid-5th centuries (Huff. and some of the vase capitals are richly decorated. Kleiss. Kleiss.. From Bīšāpūr and Nūrābād two large capitals in a style related to the Corinthian have also been published as from the Sasanian period. 1969. though it is unclear whether or not they were imported (Naumann. those from Bīsotūn (Ṭāq-e Bostān)/Hājjīābād and Sar(-e) Pol-e Šāh (Figure 2e). 177. however. 53. Isfahan (ca. ca. 36/1-3).v. In the 13th/19th-century Qajar kiosk near Qasr-e Qājār in Tehran stepped impost capitals were used (Figure 3m). as can be seen in the mehrāb (prayer niche) of the Great Mosque of Nā’īn (Survey of Persian Art VIII. Figure 3i). basked capitals encircled by vertical sprays of acanthus leaves. can also be distin guished at Taxt-e Solaymān. 1053/164344.v.50/1797-1834) European influence became apparent in Persian architecture. Beginning in the reign of Fath-‛Alī Shah (1212. reflecting Western influence. p. both the city and Qaḷ‛a-ye Kohna (Figure 2d). pl. occur in royal buildings like the ‛Ālī Qāpū (q. and those from Isfahan and the museum in Tehran (Figure 2g). 4. in a mosque at Čūrs in Azarbaijan piers and capitals were carved as single members (Figure 3p. 1972. In the covered portions of the Waqīl mosque. Kleiss. on the groups of three columns that carry the central cupola the stone capitals are carved with moqarnas (oversailing courses of small niche segments. pp. they probably crowned commemo rative columns (Figure 2h-i) and. A Survey of Persian Art VIII. pl. In the later Safavid period (11th/17th century) columns or piers with capitals were the exception. 19/2). Survey of Persian Art VIII.v. Figure 3i). Würfel. Figure 3c.century bath of Ebrāhīm Khan there is a version with moqarnas (Figure 3n. 1975. On the east portal of the mausoleum of Sh aikh Yūsof Sarvestānī in Sarvestān (682/1283. pl. p. Vase capitals appear on the stucco columns that flank the mehrāb of the Great Mosque in Neyrīz i n the Saljuq period (Figure 3b. pls. 130). 394) and in mehrābs at the Great Mosques of Rezā’īya (676/1277. 396). fig. 69. 399).3). Kleiss. A few examples of vase capitals are known from the Timurid and early Safavid period. 996-1038/1588-1629). Figure 3e. p. Sāmī. p. Today in photographs of Tehran it is pos sible to see the great variety of these capital forms. for example at a caravansary north of Marand and at Airandibi (‛Oryān Tepe. Qajar architects revived historicizing capital forms like the Achaemenid double protome (Figure 3o) but of course without under standing the weight-bearing function of the originals (Kleiss.form to the quadratic upper surface—the presence or absence of a molding and the form of the molding—permits classification in the following groups: those from Kermānšāh. 1969. pl. Survey of Persian Art VIII. 392. pls. built by Karīm Khan Zand in 1187/1773. reflecting Western classical influence (Figure 3l. fig. 68). in the early 13th/19th. at Kermān. pp. In the early Islamic period antique capital forms died out. 1972. p. 89. 58/2). pl. Figure 2f). 500). 269A) from the 4th/10th century (Figure 3a). fig. Stierlin. Kleiss.. 17/1). Both the vase and impost capitals appear in the Mongol building at Taxt-e Solaymān (7-8th/13-14th century. 710/1310. 122). Capitals on octagonal piers assumed special forms. pl. But capitals consisting of corollas of leaves. and Marand (731/1330. pl. pl. those from Vondānī (Vendernī. 702/1302. Moqarnas capitals in wood did.. and the Hašt Behešt in Isfahan (Figure 3j. ranging from leaf capitals to capitals in a . 1972. 1081/1670). 58/3) the vase capital was translated into stone (Figure 3g). Survey of Persian Art VIII. and new forms were developed in carved stone and espe cially in molded stucco. p.. After the first European visit of Nāser-al-Dīn Shah (1290/1873) it grew stronger and was especially noticeable in the forms of capitals (Figure 4). 1970. fig. this type continued basically unchanged but with evolution in details at the shrine of Bāyazīd at Bestām (q. on the grounds of their stylistic parallels. i. Stepped capital with moqarnas. 1187/1773. 1337 Š. Naumann. Sasanian capital from the region of Isfahan. Scroll capital from the tomb of Qyzqapan.S. 731/1330. Great Mosque at Marand. Palmette capital from Estaskhr. which were worked as single pieces. The profiles of balconies encircling some minarets. “Das Felsgrab von Qizqapan. 702/1302. Idem. Schmidt. 129-42. b. 1974. Double-protome capital with lions from Persepolis. Berlin. Vase capital. there are undecorated capitals consisting of globular and quadratic sections combined. N. from scroll capitals set upon basket capitals with leaf diadems and leaf-decorated impost capitals to figural capitals with human masks or animal heads combined with leaf ornament. “Bericht über Erkundungsfahrten in Iran im Jahre 1971. shrine of Bāyazīd at Bestām. repr. Parthians and Sassanians. Such capitals were also molded in stucco and are still manufactured in that technique today for new buildings. “Fund plätze sasanidischer Kapitelle in Venderni und in Kermanshah. N. j. Dum-i Mil. 143-47. . a. 1983. d. 362). Waqīl mosque. an Achaemenid noble. Würfel. H. H. Idem. Tehran. j. k. 676/1277. Great Mosque at Isfahan. 1988. 4th/10th century. D.” AMI. 1953. e. Persia.” Archäologischer Anz. 1981. pp. 682/1283. 1966. Sasanian column in Corinthian style from Nūrābād Figure 3.. Rowland. g. Sarvestān. F. Sasanian column in Corinthian style from Bīšāpūr. S. Vase capital. Idem. in paper 1970. m. In addition. pp. Persepolis I. Isfahan.” AMI 18. Vase capital. 163. Transverse beam resting in cleft of tree trunk. “Bemerkungen zum Säulenbau von Khurha. “Zur Datierung der sasanidi schen Kapitelle aus Bisutun and des Monuments von Taq-i-Bostan. Double-protome capital with bulls from Persepolis. 7 8th/13th-14th century. Lausanne and Paris.” in Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Symposium on Archaeological Research in Iran 1973. from the Great Mosque at Nā’īn. Eng. 167. e. 135-242. 1985. 7th/13th century. Kleiss. “Bericht über zwei Erkundungsfahrten in Nordwest-Iran. Front and side views of capitol with transverse beam carrying roof beams. N. Šīrāz. N.S.S. i. Figure 1. Isfahan. Sandstone capital from Bard-e Nešānda. “Der Säulenbau von Khurrha. “Qal’eh Zohak in Azarbaidjan. Gilbert and J. Double-protome capital with bull men. d. n. Gilbert and J. “Nurabad. f. 1975. Shiraz. c. “Neue Beobachtungen zu den sogenannten medischen Felsgräbern. 6. Stone moqarnas capital. Bibliography : H. Sarvestān. pp. Great Mosque at Neyrīz.S. N. 1973./1958. d. 1967. London.” AMI 16.predominantly Corinthian style. ‛A. W. pp. 1976. 317 -23. Sasanian capital from Bīsotūn. Wooden moqarnas capital. Buddhist-Hindu-Jain. Capital in the Hellenistic style from the Estaskhr district Figure 2. Wasmuths Lex ikon der Baukunst III. 1931. Image du paradis.” AMI. 65-67. 3rd or 2nd century b. 1970. Die Ruinen von Tacht-e Suleiman and Zendan-e Suleiman. K.” AMI. Persepolis. 682/1283. which are articulated on the exterior by moqarnas. Stone vase capital. l. 11th/17th century. f. Stierlin. from Shah Mosque. 173-80. “Die sasanidischen Kapitelle aus Venderni. Harmondworth. Idem. Isfahan. recall the forms of such capitals. 3rd ed. Šahr-e Sa‛dī wa Hāfeẓ. Vase capital. 1972. Sasanian capital from Vondānī. 1962..c. N. London. 20 -29. 1968. Tehran. Iran. pp. pp. Stucco engaged column. von Gall. Huff. 1025/1616.” AMI 14. Ispahan. tr. 7-119. b. Shiraz. Emmons. 557 -61. pp. The Art and Architecture of India. From the Origins to Alexander the Great.88. Idem. a. N. Sāmī. B. 5.” AMI.” Baghdader Mitteilungen 19. pl. Stucco vase capital. Idem. Zurich.. 1977. e. h. pp. i. k. Basket capital. c. pp.S. 3. g. 1969. a. Idem. Great Mosque at Rezā’īya. Capitals in various forms. Floral capital from Persepolis. 13th/19th century. by S. h. Idem. 2. 1964. Parthian capitals in stone and stucco from Qaḷ‛a-ye Zohhāk. Stepped capital. Idem. “Zu den "medischen" Felsgräbern. pp. pp. Moqarnas capital. 107-32. especially the Saljuq minarets of Isfahan (Survey of Persian Art VIII. h. R. 1.S. Ghirshman. “Bericht über Erkundungsfahrten in Nordwest-Iran im Jahre 1969.209. f. Sasanian capital from Kermānšāh. Fragmentary acanthus capital from Estaskhr. Taxt-e Solaymān.” AMI. Luschey. 139 -54. šahr-e gol o bolbol. pp. 8. tr. Front and side views of support with transverse beam carrying roof beams. c. Emmons.” AMI. 1974. 1968. pp. 1. b.” AMI. g. 710/1310. E.S. R. Parthian capitals from Ḵorha. 17374.). Egyptian influence is clearly recognizable in the details of the lotus flowers (Figure 1e).d. Nevertheless. articulated on each of its four sides by superimposed volutes and resting in turn on a double corolla of petals (Figure 1d). in the course of time it came to be worked and richly decorated (Figure 1b-c). 224-641) can be divided into four groups. there are scroll capitals somewhat resembling Ionic forms (e. a form that had its forerunners in ancient Near Eastern art. pp. In other capitals at Persepolis. 20.) in the museum at Susa (Figure 2a).). but the floral form of the bell -shaped lowest element suggests an entirely indigenous feature. 29). now in the museum at Persepolis (Figure 1i. 351ff. and at Salamis (Ghirshman. 320). 13th/19th century. p. A third type comes from the area around Estaskhr: the capital of an engaged column. on Delos and Thasos. Double-protome capital. those on the tomb of Qyzqapan. After the Achaemenid period the animal-protome capital lived on in the Hellenistic world. o. at Sidon.. carved in the form of a corolla of everted leaves (Figure 1k. 1962. 18-19). At the so-called “Median” stone tombs. perhaps they were even carved by Egyptian stonemasons.c. for example. though Mesopotamian influences in the representation of composite creatures are also recogniz able (Figure 1d-g). Whether or not the volutes. like the fluting of the column shafts. The published capitals from the Sasanian period (a. Achaemenid architectural features also had a strong impact on the Maurya architecture of India. when a tree trunk was inserted in the earth with another trunk or branch laid in the fork to carry the roof construction (Figure 1a). Tehran. fig. also from Estaskhr (Herzfeld. 1966).or 2nd-century b. the trunks (columns) stand on stone bases. 375). 72 fig. p. however. 3). The development of the capital began in Assyria. 14).60 m. From this forked grip the transverse beam soon developed.v. 23). Ghirshman. in architectural terminology tran sitional elements between weight-bearing supports (see COLUMNS) and the roofs or vaults supported (Wasmuths Lexikon. 9-10.d.-a. pp. 3rd century) Greek and Roman influence on the volute forms of Persian capitals is unmistakable. This ancient building technique is still widespread in rural construction in Iran. The Achaemenid double-protome capital can be viewed as an Iranian invention. pp. the double-protome capital was supplemen ted by a second transitional element. From the Assyrian transverse beam there evolved the Achaemenid double-protome capital. 181-82. 1973. Herzfeld. especially during the reign of Aśoka (r. Estakhr. fig. fig. with the animal heads (usually bulls but also eagles and lions) flanking the transverse beam at right angles. On the other hand. owing nothing to ancient Egyptian art. the capitals from the Parthian palace precinct of Qaḷ‛a-ye Zoh hāk (Figure 2b. 13th/19th century. Figure 2c. 23. are too large to have been imported from Egypt. p. reflected the influence of Greek stone masons is uncertain. 68. 13th/19th century. . as well as a palmette capital on a strongly convex echinus molding (Figure 1j). with a diameter of 1. p. ca. the first artistic version of the simple tran sitional element between support and beam in Iranian architectural history. In Persepolis. Kleiss. 1948. at the tribute gate. p. Iranian influence is particularly reflected in the lion sculptures on bell shaped capitals from Sarnath and the volute capitals from Pataliputra (Rowland. It can be seen in the red-sandstone capitals from Bard-e Nešānda (q. 274-37 b. 376).c. As a rule such capitals rested directly on smooth or fluted columns. Hellenistic capitals in Iran include an acanthus capital from 3rd. fig. The construc tion of the three-part double-protome capitals. limited to Persepolis and Susa (Schmidt. fig. Tehran. and especially in the large audience hall (apadāna). 1973. figs. 1964. In the Parthian period (3rd century b. Čūrs Figure 4. p. at the door to the royal palace.g. figs.. 557ff. Klei ss. was an entirely Persian development.c. 279. 1948. Gall.early 13th/19th century. Octagonal pier and capital carved as a single piece. pp. which are worked to a greater or lesser degree. Capitals showing European influence. which are now recognized as the burial places of late Achaemenid notables (Gall. p. 1988. measur ing 8 m high on columns about 19 m high. pp. CAPITALS. see Figure 1h). 277. and the capitals from the Parthian columned hall (palace) at Ḵorha (village 12 miles north of Mahallāt. the column shafts. as has sometimes been suggested (Figure 2). 177. Kermān. pls. pl. 17/1). 1975. pp. Würfel.v. Qajar architects revived historicizing capital forms like the Achaemenid double protome (Figure 3o) but of course without under standing the weight-bearing function of the originals (Kleiss. A few examples of vase capitals are known from the Timurid and early Safavid period. Sāmī. all belong to the “basket capital” type. They show unmistakable Roman influence in the volutes. Kleiss. Isfahan (ca. 36/1-3). Survey of Persian Art VIII. p.. and new forms were developed in carved stone and especially in molded stucco. fig. On the east portal of the mausoleum of Shaikh Yūsof Sarvestānī in Sarvestān (682/1283. 1981. built by Karīm Khan Zand in 1187/1773. 396). cut -stone versions occur as impost capitals in the Shah Mosque in Isfahan (1025/1616. After the first European visit of Nāser-al-Dīn Shah (1290/1873) it grew stronger and was especially noticeable in the forms of capitals (Figure 4). Survey of Persian Art VIII. 1970. p. p.3). Figure 3i). pl. in the early 13th/19th. Figure 3d. 186f.. those from Vondānī (Vendernī. 58/3) the vase capital was translated into stone (Figure 3g). 69. 710/1310. 89.century bath of Ebrāhīm Khan there is a version with moqarnas (Figure 3n. 500). fig. and Marand (731/1330. Today in photographs of Tehran it is . on the groups of three columns that carry the central cupola the stone capitals are carved with moqarnas (oversailing courses of small niche segments. 269A) from the 4th/10th century (Figure 3a). Capitals on octagonal piers assumed special forms. Both the vase and impost capitals appear in the Mongol building at Taxt-e Solaymān (7-8th/13-14th century. 177. p. 392.. Kleiss. 19/2). can also be distinguished at Taxt-e Solaymān. at Kermān. however. 394) and in mehrābs at the Great Mosques of Rezā’īya (676/1277. But capitals consisting of corollas of leaves. 13). Figure 3c. 702/1302. 122). they probably crowned commemo rative columns (Figure 2h-i) and. In the period of Karīm Khan Zand at Shiraz (1163-93/1750-79) and during the Qajar period (1193 1342/1779-1924) columns were used more frequently as supports. pl. those from Bīsotūn (Ṭāq-e Bostān)/Hājjīābād and Sar(-e) Pol-e Šāh (Figure 2e). 399). Kleiss. the Čehel Sotūn (q. and capitals thus also appeared more frequently. ca. 1972. Beginning in the reign of Fath-‛Alī Shah (1212. 1972. 1969..50/1797-1834) European influence became apparent in Persian architecture. in a mosque at Čūrs in Azarbaijan piers and capitals were carved as single members (Figure 3p. and the Hašt Behešt in Isfahan (Figure 3j. pl. occur in royal buildings like the ‛Ālī Qāpū (q. 996-1038/1588-1629). Figure 2f). reflecting Western classical influence (Figure 3l. Figure 3i). In the covered portions of the Waqīl mosque. reflecting Western influence.Whether decorated or not. Stierlin. though it is unclear whether or not they were imported (Naumann. both the city and Qaḷ‛a-ye Kohna (Figure 2d). 1972. fig. pl. 172-77. In the early Islamic period antique capital forms died out. From Bīšāpūr and Nūrābād two large capitals in a style related to the Corinthian have also been published as from the Sasanian period. pp. A Survey of Persian Art VIII.v. and those from Isfahan and the museum in Tehran (Figure 2g). Vase capitals appear on the stucco columns that flank the mehrāb of the Great Mosque in Neyrīz in the Saljuq period (Figure 3b. Kleiss. Kleiss. pl. fig. Survey of Persian Art VIII. can be dated between the mid-3rd and mid-5th centuries (Huff. 1081/1670). from the period of Shah ‛Abbās I. 53. pls. 130). but the transition from the bas ket form to the quadratic upper surface—the presence or absence of a molding and the form of the molding—permits classification in the following groups: those from Kermānšāh. 16). 124. 68). Moqarnas capitals in wood did. basked capitals encircled by vertical sprays of acanthus leaves. Kleiss. Figure 3h. Figure 3f. for example at a caravansary north of Marand and at Airandibi (‛Oryān T epe. this type continued basically unchanged but with evolution in details at the shrine of Bāyazīd at Bestām (q. In the 13th/19th-century Qajar kiosk near Qasr-e Qājār in Tehran stepped impost capitals were used (Figure 3m). pl. on the grounds of their stylistic parallels. In the later Safavid period (11th/17th century) columns or piers with capitals were the exception. fig. 58/2). p. and some of the vase capitals are richly decorated. pl. as can be seen in the mehrāb (prayer niche) of the Great Mosque of Nā’īn (Survey of Persian Art VIII. p. 1053/164344. Figure 3e. Moqarnas capitals of Safavid origin were also reused in the Qajar period. 1969. 4.v. recall the forms of such capitals. from scroll capitals set upon basket capitals with leaf diadems and leaf-decorated impost capitals to figural capitals with human masks or animal heads combined with leaf ornament. The profiles of balconies encircling some minarets. there are undecorated capitals consisting of globular and quadratic sections combined. which are articulated on the exterior by moqarnas. ranging from leaf capitals to capitals in a predominantly Corinthian style. . In addition.pos sible to see the great variety of these capital forms. which were worked as single pieces. pl. especially the Saljuq minarets of Isfahan (Survey of Persian Art VIII. 362). Such capitals were also molded in stucco and are still manufactured in that technique today for new buildings. . . htm .com/CAIS/Architecture/capital_in_iranian_architecture.cais-soas.http://www. Xerxes . Darius .
Report "99702028 Construction Materials and Techniques in Persian Architecture"