“Hosseiniyeh”; İran Geleneksel Kentlerinde Bir Ara Mekan

Öz

Bu çalışma, geleneksel İran şehirlerinde bir mahalle meydanı olan Hosseiniyeh'in sosyo-mekânsal rollerini analiz etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Araştırmanın hipotezi, Hosseiniyeh'in hiyerarşik kentsel yapı içinde bir “ara mekân” olarak çalıştığıdır. Aradalık kavramı, çatışan alanlar arasındaki karşılıklı ayrılık ve bağlantı durumlarını destekleyen mimari nitelikleri ortaya çıkarmaktadır. Ara mekânlar, kentsel alanların bütünleşmesini koruyan temel unsurlardır. Modernist planlama sonucunda bu ara mekânlar yok olunca önemleri ortaya çıktı. Ara mekânları gerçek bağlamda yeniden düşünmek faydalı olacaktır. İran'ın tarihi şehirlerinin organik kentsel dokusunda, “Hosseiniyeh” kamusal (Çarşı) ve yarı kamusal alanlar (mahalle) arasında bir geçiş alanı olarak oluşturulmuştur. Eşsiz kentsel konumu ile bu mahalle meydanı, uygun bir ara mekân örneği olabilir. Şii Safevi devleti döneminde (1501-1736) geliştirilen Hosseiniyeh'nin ana işlevi, İslam dünyasının tek tiyatro gösterisi olan Ta'ziyeh için bir mekân olarak hizmet etmekti. Bu çalışma, Hosseiniyeh'in mimari niteliklerini ara mekânın teorik çerçevesine dayanarak değerlendirmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Meydanın mekânsal özellikleri ve mimari bileşenleri, ara mekânın çeşitli durumlarıyla karşılaştırılmıştır. Bulgular, tarihi meydanın bir ara mekân niteliklerini karşıladığını göstermektedir. Sosyal ve işlevsel olarak farklı iki alanı birbirine bağlayan Hosseiniyeh, bir kamusal alanın sonunu ve bir yerleşim bölgesinin başlangıcını gösteren bir ara kentsel mekândı. Meydan, kendine özgü sosyo-politik karakteriyle Şii kimliğini korumuş ve kentsel birliği pekiştirmiştir. Bu çalışma, gerçek kentsel bağlamda bir ara mekânın nasıl işlediğinin anlaşılmasına katkıda bulunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ara Mekân
• Hosseiniyeh
• Geleneksel İran Şehri
• Mahalle Meydanı
• Taziyeh

“Hosseiniyeh”; An In-between Space in the Iranian Traditional Cities

Öz

The present study aims to analyze the socio-spatial roles of Hosseiniyeh, a neighborhood square in traditional Iranian cities. The hypothesis of the research is that Hosseiniyeh acted as an in-between space within the hierarchical urban structure. The notion of in-betweenness reveals architectural qualities that support the reciprocal states of separation and connection between conflicting realms. In-between spaces are the key elements to preserve the integration of urban areas. When these intermediate spaces disappeared as a result of modernist planning, their importance was revealed. It is useful to reconsider in-between spaces in the real context. In the organic urban fabric of Iranian historic cities, “Hosseiniyeh” was configured as a transitional space between the public (Bazaar) and the semi-public realms (neighborhood). With its unique urban location, this neighborhood square can be an appropriate case of the in-between space. Developed during the Shiite Safavid government (1501 to 1736), the main function of Hosseiniyeh was to serve as a venue for Ta'ziyeh, the only indigenous theater engendered by the world of Islam. The present study aims to evaluate the architectural qualities of Hosseiniyeh based on the theoretical framework of the in-between space. The spatial characteristics of the square and its architectural components are compared with the various states of the in-between space. The findings illustrate that the historic square meets the qualities of an in-between space. Connecting the two socially and functionally different areas, Hosseiniyeh was an intermediate urban space that indicated the end of a public realm and the beginning of a residential district. With its specific socio-political character, the square protected the Shiite identity and reinforced the urban unity. The present study contributes to an understanding of how an in-between space acted in a real urban context.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• In-between Space
• Hosseiniyeh
• Traditional Iranian City
• Neighborhood Square
• Ta'ziyeh

Kaynakça

1. Alexander, C. (1977). A pattern language: towns, buildings, construction. Oxford university press.
2. Ayoub, M. (1978). Redemptive Suffering in Islam: A Study of the Devotional Aspects of ‘Âshûra’in Twelver Shi’ism. The Hague, the Netherlands. cited in: http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/asura
3. Balilan, L. Etesam, I. Eslami, S.G. (2011). In Persian: Nagshe Fazaye Beynabeyn dar Hoviyyat Bakhshi be Gostareye Fazaiye Bafthaye Tarikhiye Iran [The Role of In-between Space in Creating the Spatial Character of Historic Urban Fabric of Iran]. Hoviyyate Shahr. 8. 5. 59-71
4. Beeman, W. O. (1981). A Full Arena: The Development and Meaning of Popular Performance Traditions in Iran: The Dialectics of Continuity and Change. In Modern Iran: the dialectics of continuity and change (pp. 361-382). State University of New York Press.
5. Chelkowski, P. J. (1977). Ta'ziyeh: Indigenous Avant-Garde Theatre of Iran. Performing Arts Journal, 2(1), 31-40.
6. Dennis, R. (2008). Cities in modernity: representations and productions of metropolitan space, 1840-1930. Cambridge University Press.
7. Gehl, J. (1987). Life between buildings (Vol. 23). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
8. Kiani Bidgoli, S., & Fatehi, A. (2019). A comparison of Elements in Performing Naqqali (Iranian Dramatic Storytelling) and Ta’zieh (Shi’ites Passion play/Condolence Theater). Rhetoric and Grammar Studies, 9(15), 193-229.

9. Laiprakobsup, N. (2007). Inbetween place: The emergence of the essence. Texas A&M University.
10. Nakash, Y. (1993). An Attempt to Trace the Origin of the Rituals of Āshurā. Die Welt des Islams, 33(2), 161-181.
11. Oggiano, F. (2016). The Articulations of the In-between Realm in Sardinia. Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture, 10, 629-642.
12. Ramezani, S., & Hamidi, S. (2010). Privacy and social interaction in traditional towns to contemporary urban design in Iran. American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 3(3), 501-508.
13. Rezaei Badafshani M. (2007) Small and sustainable spaces, in: Techniques and technologies for sustainability: proceedings: international conference and summer school, editor: Adrian Atkinson, Berlin, ISR Sonderpublikation, 138-48
14. Roemer, H. R. (1986). The Safavid Period. The Cambridge History of Iran, 6, 189-350.
15. Salingaros, N. A. (2000). Complexity and urban coherence. Journal of urban design, 5(3), 291-316.
16. Soltanzadeh, H. (1993). in Persian: Fazahaye Vurudi dar Memariye Sonnatiye Iran [The entrances and its spatial features in the traditional architecture of Iran]. Shahrdari publication, Tehran
17. Stavrides, S. (2010). Towards the City of Thresholds. CreativeCommons Publication
18. Stevens, Q. (2006). Betwixt and between: Building thresholds, liminality and public space. In Loose Space (pp. 73-92). Routledge.
19. Tavassoli, M. (1990). In Persian: Mabani ve teknikhaye tarrahi shahri dar Iran. [Principles and Techniques of Urban Design in Iran]. Urban Planning and Architectural Research Centre of Iran, Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, Iran
20. Tavassoli, M., & Bonyadi, N. (1992). In Persian: Tarahiye Fazaye Shahri 1&2 [Urban Space Design 1&2]. Urban Planning and Architecture Research Centre of Iran, Tehran.
21. Trancik, R. (1991). Finding lost space: theories of urban design. John Wiley & Sons.
22. Van Eyck, A. (1968). Team 10 Primer, ed. Alison Smithson (Cambridge: MIT Press), p. 104.