Landmarks of the Persian Renaissance (Monumental Funerary Architecture in Iran Central Asia)

412 Pages·2007·64.31 MB·English

by  Michailidis

LANDMARKS OF THE PERSIAN RENAISSANCE:
MONUMENTAL FUNERARY ARCHITECTURE IN IRAN AND CENTRAL
ASIA IN THE TENTH AND ELEVENTH CENTURIES
By
Melanie Dawn Michailidis
B.A. Russian, French, Political Science
University of Tennessee, 1988
MA History of Art and/or Archaeology
School of Oriental and African Studies
University of London, 2000
SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE IN PARTIAL
FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN ARCHITECTURE: HISTORY AND THEORY
OF ARCHITECTURE
AT THE
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
SEPTEMBER 2007
@2007 Melanie D. Michailidis. All rights reserved.
The author hereby grants to MIT permission to reproduce and to distribute
publicly paper and electronic copies of this thesis document in whole or in part in
any medium now known or hereafter created.
OF
SEP
LIBRARIES
DISSERTATION COMMITTEE
Dissertation Supervisor: Nasser Rabbat
Title: Aga Khan Professor of Islamic Architecture
History, Theory and Criticism of Architecture Section
Department of Architecture, MIT
Reader: P. Oktor Skjxervo
Title: Aga Khan Professor of Iranian
Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations
Harvard University
Reader: Heghnar Watenpaugh
Title: Associate Professor of Art History
University of California, Davis
LANDMARKS OF THE PERSIAN RENAISSANCE:
MONUMENTAL FUNERARY ARCHITECTURE IN IRAN AND CENTRAL
ASIA IN THE TENTH AND ELEVENTH CENTURIES
By
Melanie Dawn Michailidis
Submitted to the Department of Architecture on August 10, 2007 in Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in
Architecture: History and Theory of Architecture
ABSTRACT
This dissertation investigates the sudden proliferation of mausolea in Iran and Central
Asia in the tenth and eleventh centuries and how their patrons, who were secular rulers of
Iranian descent, drew on the pre-Islamic past in new ways specific to each region.
Mausolea constructed in the tenth and eleventh centuries have a wide geographical spread
across modem Iran and the ex-Soviet Central Asian republics. However, the monuments
take two different forms: the tomb tower and the domed square. There are formal and
functional differences and a different geographical distribution, with the earliest tomb
towers concentrated in the inaccessible Alborz Mountains in northern Iran. This remote
region had a very different historical trajectory from that of Central Asia, where the
earliest extant domed square mausolea are located. Historians of architecture have often
noted that certain features seen in these mausolea have some vague connection with the
pre-Islamic past, but this connection has never been precisely defined or explained; I
argue that the cultural dynamics which resulted in particular architectural forms were
very different in these two regions, so that pre-Islamic Iranian traditions were selectively
continued in the Caspian region of northern Iran, whereas other elements of the Iranian
past were consciously revived in Central Asia. Two of the mausolea that I analyze, the
Samanid mausoleum and the Gunbad-i Qabus, are well-known monuments which appear
in virtually every survey of Islamic art, whereas most of the others are almost completely
unknown. This dissertation situates these buildings in their historical context for the first
time and examines them in a new way as an expression of the Persian Renaissance, a
term borrowed from literary historians which describes the florescence of Iranian high
culture which occurred at this time. Since this group of mausolea was influential not only
in the development of funerary architecture, but also in the development of Islamic
architecture as a whole, understanding their origins and formation is important for the
history of Islamic architecture.
Dissertation Supervisor: Nasser Rabbat
Title: Aga Khan Professor of Islamic Architecture
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ............................................................................... 9
Introduction ...................................................................................... 11
Chapter I:
The Buildings and Their Historiography................................... 28
Chapter II:
Sasanians, Sogdians, and Conversion to Islam................................ ... 119
Chapter III:
The Persian Renaissance ....................................................... .............. 165
Chapter IV:
The Domed Square Mausolea ............................................................... 224
Chapter V:
The Tomb Towers.......................................................276
Conclusion.....................................................................................318
Illustrations .................................................................................... 325
Appendix:
Inscriptions ....................................................................................... 372
Bibliography............................................ ............................... 375
Acknowledgements
This dissertation would not have been possible without the help of a number of
individuals and institutions. First and foremost, I would like to thank the members of my
committee, Nasser Rabbat, Heghnar Watenpaugh, and Oktor Skjaervo, for their guidance
and encouragement, not only on this project, but throughout my graduate school years.
At MIT, I benefited greatly from exchanges with my HTC colleagues, and in particular
Glaire Anderson, Michele Lamprakos, Talin Grigor, Lara Tohme, Deborah Kully, and
Kirsten Weiss have provided encouragement as great friends as well as fellow scholars.
Jose Luis Arguello, Anne Deveau and Renee Caso helped me to navigate bureaucratic
requirements with both humor and efficiency. Scott Johnson kindly printed the archival
copies of the dissertation for me.
My research in Iran was funded by the Aga Khan Program and the Department of
Architecture at MIT. The complicated logistics of that trip were beautifully organized by
Hossein Garshaspi and Mehran Mehrabi, and Mehran also turned out to be a great
companion as well as my obligatory guide. My fieldwork in Uzbekistan was funded
through a Fulbright grant from the Institute of International Education. The Academy of
Sciences, the Institute of Oriental Studies, and the Committee for the Preservation of
Monuments were all kind enough to allow me to conduct research at their institutions. Of
the many individuals who helped me in Uzbekistan, I would particularly like to thank
Minavar Ablakulova, who not only facilitated my research in her capacity as an archivist
but became a great friend as well. Bakhtiyar Babajanov was a tremendous help in
introducing me to fellow scholars and advising me on conducting research in Tashkent,
and he and Sanobar were also terrific landlords. Edward Rtveladze very generously gave
me permission to use his private library, and Lidia provided help with my research as
well as endless cups of tea, delicious lunches and great conversation. Jaloliddin Mirzo
shared his extensive knowledge of Surkhandariya with me, while the volunteers of the
American Corner in Termez kindly helped organize the logistics of that trip. I am very
grateful to all.
The writing of the dissertation, as well as an additional research trip to western
Europe, was funded by the Center for Advanced Study in the Visual Arts. In Paris,
Sophie Makariou and Annabelle Collinet of the Louvre were very helpful with access to
the pottery storage. In Washington, I was lucky to have a superb group of colleagues at
CASVA, but would like to especially thank David Binkley, Dan Sherman, Amy Freund,
Amy Buono and Aden Kumler. I am very grateful to Ann Gunter for sponsoring me at
the Freer and Sackler Gallery, so that I was able to acquire a cubicle and library access at
that institution. Jackie Ghanem was a terrific colleague at the Sackler. At the Library of
Congress, the staff of the European Reading Room were particularly helpful in
facilitating my research.
It would be remiss of me not to also thank Shirin, my furry little muse, who
facilitated the portions of the dissertation written at home by her constant companionship.
But most of all I have to thank my husband, Omid, who has helped in so many ways. On
the practical side, he has translated German texts for me, and has dealt with a myriad of
requests from Washington to locate and send photocopies, look up references, and other
such tasks. It was Omid who first urged me to get a PhD, and in recent years he has
patiently tolerated long months apart. So it is to Omid that I dedicate this dissertation,
with many thanks and much love.

Introduction
In the center of Bokhara in modem Uzbekistan, in a park near the citadel, sits a
small domed brick building known as the Samanid mausoleum (fig. 1). When I visited
the site in the spring of 2005, it was a hive of activity, with bulldozers and dump trucks
removing earth in order to enlarge the paved plaza around the building, while battalions
of schoolboys with shovels manually assisted this project to one side. As three of the
four entrances were closed with metal grilles, with the rusted metal imitating the star and
cross shapes of Mongol-era tiles, I entered through the one open entrance to find a bored
female caretaker sitting on a chair in one corner. Entrance was free, but she did ask what
I was doing, not when I began photographing the building, but when I produced a
notebook and a compass. A group of French tourists arrived, admired the basket-like
brickwork, took a few photographs, and quickly left. Meanwhile my companion waited
outside, chatting to an amiable older gentleman who explained to him that the mausoleum
is a symbol of Tajik rather than Uzbek identity, since the Samanids spoke Persian. Later
I returned to photograph the building in the evening shadows, without the movement and
dust of the bulldozers. The caretaker was gone, and the building was locked. A busload
of teenagers arrived, talking excitedly in Uzbek. They grew quiet as they approached the
building, and knelt down before the locked metal grate, silently mouthing prayers.
Several touched the brick wall reverently, while others craned their necks to get a
glimpse of the cenotaph inside, while others traced the name of Isma'il the Samanid on
the plaque to the left of the doorway.
Back in Tashkent, at the archives of the Committee for the Preservation of
Monuments, I perused faded photographs which hinted at other meanings the building
has held for other users. Just as now, only one entrance was open; on three sides of the
mausoleum, the cenotaphs of those who for centuries had clamored to be buried near
Isma'il abutted directly against the walls and the sealed doors. The open entrance was
accessed through a long corridor of shoulder-high cenotaphs, and above the door was a
set of ram's hornms, indicating the type of popular religious practices still current today at
shrines throughout Central Asia. The local worshippers lined the corridor, looking
suspiciously into the camera, perhaps suspecting that their shrine was about to be
transformed into a monument. Other photographs show local workers stripping away the
accoutrements of centuries to expose the Samanid core, with detailed images of otherwise
inaccessible areas of the building such as the comer domes and the arcaded gallery.
Archival documents by Zasipkin and Viatkin speak enthusiastically of progress, scientific
restoration, and the expansion of knowledge.
Royal tomb, shrine, archaeological site, tourist attraction, and object of scholarly
inquiry: the Samanid mausoleum has had multiple layers of meaning during its
thousand-odd years of existence. To those concerned with its restoration and its status as
a monument, it has signified Soviet progress, Uzbek identity, and Tajik identity. It even
appears on the largest banknote of Tajikistan, a currency appropriately named "samani."
For the many Soviet scholars who studied the building, it represented the culmination of
the pre-Islamic architectural traditions of Central Asia. For Western scholars, it signifies
the beginning of a long trajectory of domed Islamic mausolea. It is a familiar building
which appears in every survey of Islamic art and architecture, just as reliably as it appears
in every Uzbek tourism brochure.