شناسايي ساختار ثانويه شهر ايراني در دوره قاجاريه

Recognition of Secondary Structure of Iranian Cities in Qajar Period

در دوره قاجاريه، ساختار كلي شهر ايراني در صورت گذشته خود باقي ماند. ساختاري كه با محورهاي اصلي مابين دروازه ها و مركز شهر و عناصر و فضاهاي شهري پيرامون آنها تعريف مي شد، صورتي برجاي مانده از مكتب اصفهان در شهرسازي. اما مشخصه دوران قاجاريان، رشد نفوذ مذهب شيعه بود كه پيدايش ساختار ديگري را در شهر ايراني اين دوره سبب شد؛ ساختاري متشكل از مكان ها (به ويژه تكيه ها) و مسيرهاي ميان آنها كه مكان برگزاريِ مهم ترين مراسم اجتماعي دوره، عزاداري ماه محرم، بود. ساختاري كه براساس رفتار مذهبي ساكنان، نوع استفاده از فضا و نقش آن در زندگي اجتماعي و معناي فضاها شكل گرفته بود و مردم، با وجود همه تغييرات به وجود آمده در شهرهاي ايراني طي دوره معاصر، هنوز آن را مي شناسند. ساختاري كه با برقراري پيوند ميان محلات نقشي مهم در ابراز هويت اجتماعي آنها داشت. در اين مقاله با بررسي و تحليل مطالعات محققان بر روي شهرهاي مختلف ايران و بررسي اسناد درجه اول دوره قاجاريه، تلاش مي شود تا وجود چنين ساختاري در شهر ايراني نشان داده شده و روشن شود كه چگونه چنين ساختاري شكل گرفته و به چه ترتيب مكان ها و مسيرهاي ميان آنها براي مردم معنادار شده است.

Basic structure of Iranian cities preserved its past form in Qajar Period. It constituted of main axis which led from gates to the center of the city and city elements and spaces (mosque, madraseh, Bazaar, caravanserai, square, Bazarcheh, etc.) gathered along them. It was a form remaining from Safavid period which its extensions were the continuation of the former one. The characteristic of Qajar period was the growth in influence of Shiite religion. Increase in religious emotions gave form to a structure in Iranian cities which comprised of places (especially Takyah, Husayniyyah) and paths linking them with each other. These were the places for the most important social event of this time; Muharram mourning. In Muharram and Safar (The months of mourning in Shiite religion) people gathered in these places and mourned. Taazieh was a dramatic theatre performed in Takyah and at first was specific to these rituals. People had also mourning processions in the alleys which led from one residential quarter to another one and during it residents of a quarter went to see other quarters and join their mourning in a cyclic form. Everyone participated in this event: residents of the quarters endowed their houses for the rituals of Muharram; they gave meal to mourners during the ceremony; allocated a place in their houses which had a frontage to alley for burning candles; prepared some rooms in their houses or their courtyards for Tazieh performance and other forms of mourning; and thus the city actively joined the whole process of rituals. The places and paths where Muharram rituals were performed formed a structure which is being recognized by city inhabitants even now; regardless of all of the transformations in the urban form and life during 20th century. Different studies by scholars on cities like Ardebil, Dezful, Aran, Naein, Lahidjan, Gorgan, Sabzevar proves this. Thus the structure was formed on the basis of: religious behavior of inhabitants; the way they used spaces for rituals; the meanings they attributed to these spaces and places; and the roles that these spaces had in their social and urban life. This structure was usually distinct from symbolic or main structure of the city. The places and paths between them linked residential quarters (mahalleh) with each other and had an important role in their social identity and their identification. In this paper, I’ll try to show the existence of this structure in Iranian cities, by reviewing and analyzing different studies on Iranian cities and comparing the findings with first hand documents of Qajar period. I’ll try to explain how this structure was formed and its places and paths got meaning for people. Revealing the differences between these secondary structures in Iranian cities can further the knowledge about the social structure of Iranian cities in Qajar period; while showing their similarities can help the urban designers and planners to deepen their knowledge of historic cities, its structures and inhabitants’ images of them. These findings can help in decision making for intervention in historic cities.