|dc.contributor.author||Esfanjary Kenari, Eisa||
|dc.description.abstract||The intellectual boundaries of heritage have developed considerably during the last half-century.
The theme ‘historic urban landscape’ has replaced such older expressions as
‘monuments’, ‘historic area’, and ‘old town’, and the term ‘conservation’ has been
reinterpreted as a sustainable basis for development. Despite these more flexible meanings
the spatial boundaries of ‘heritage’ often remain tightly restricted to ancient monuments and
sites, and nowhere is this more evident than in Iran where the preservation of outstanding
monuments is constantly in tension with the spatial demand of the modern cities.
Maibud provides the basis from which a new methodological approach to
conservation is developed. It is a city that has a history of several millennia yet has a scale
that renders it manageable as a case study with archaeological remains that range across
several phases of building development. It is, arguably, an archetypal example of middle-sized
Iranian cities, and affords the possibility to study the entire urban landscape and its
spatial, functional and morphological iterations. Within this overall picture a methodology
was developed to explore and analyse various typological elements of the city, the three key
components of which are the town plan, the building type, and construction materials. The
analysis combines a rigorous survey and observation of the standing structures with scarce
archaeological and written sources that shed light on an interpretation of the urban fabric.
The methodologies developed as the basis for a study of Maibud provide new perspectives
on Islamic urbanism in general, and Islamic urbanism in Iran particularly.
An analysis of the town plan illustrated a slow process of change over many centuries
that contributed to the permanence of street systems and property boundaries. This durability
of the town plan explains how the inherited urban nucleus of late antiquity mutated gradually
in the early Islamic period and how there was concentration of development around the early
mosque. The building fabric demonstrated that there existed not only commonalities between
buildings of the same period, but between buildings of different periods in the same region.
A gradual mutation of building form and its synchronic and diachronic progression was
noted, through the identification of building typologies as characterised in the urban fabric of
Maibud. Consequently, it has been hypothesised that the pre-Islamic matrix of char-suffa, a
small courtyard house, gradually developed into medieval and late-medieval houses, and that
this incremental development of traditional houses of the region ultimately reached its latest
transformation in its modern form.
A study of earthen construction and the inherent feature of mud brick has been
advanced, featuring its availability, flexibility, homogeneity, sustainability, as well as its
vulnerability. A detailed study of these characteristics, coupled with an ability to date the
different types and sizes of mud bricks has facilitated an understanding of construction and
allows researchers to meet the challenge of dating and interpreting buildings. By
concentrating on the ‘laboratory’ city of Maibud and the specificities of its earthen
construction, a chronological table of mud brick has been developed.
A synthesis has been advanced, based on archaeological, architectural, epigraphic and
textual evidence, that the streets of the town plan are the most durable feature of urban
landscapes and once laid out, they change very little. Consequently, property boundaries
have essentially remained fixed with most dating back to the medieval period. By contrast,
buildings and particularly residential buildings were the least durable element of the urban
fabric, and changed faster based still on earlier designs. It is imperative that these interrelationships
− of town plan, buildings and materials – must be understood in order to
formulate an approach for the management and conservation of historic urban landscapes.||en
|dc.publisher||The University of Edinburgh||en
|dc.relation.hasversion||Leila Zakerameli and Eisa Esfanjary, ‘Khana-ha-yi Muzaffari-yi Maibud’, in Eisa Esfanjary (ed.), Maibud Shahri ki Hast (Tehran, 1385/2007), 157-208.||en
|dc.relation.hasversion||Eisa Esfanjary, ‘Maramat va ihya-yi khna-yi Salar’, Miʿmar, 27 (1383/2004), 113-16.||en
|dc.relation.hasversion||Eisa Esfanjary and Leila Zakerameli, ‘Miʿmari-yi Khana-ha-yi Safavi-yi Maibud’, in Majmuʿa Maqalat-i Miʿmari va Shahr sazi-yi Maktab-i Isfahan, 1387/2009, 69-121.||en
|dc.relation.hasversion||Eisa Esfanjary, ‘Masjid-i Jamiʿ-yi Dih-Nu-yi Maibud’, Asar, 38/39 (1384/2005), 3-54.||en
|dc.relation.hasversion||Eisa Esfanjary, ‘Shaluda-yi kuhan-i shahr sazi-yi Maibud’, in Eisa Esfanjary (ed.), Maibud Shahri ki Hast (Tehran, 2007), 27.||en
|dc.subject||historic urban landscape||en
|dc.title||New methodological approaches to the interpretation of historic urban landscapes: the city of Maibud (Iran) as a case study||en
|dc.type||Thesis or Dissertation||en
|dc.type.qualificationname||PhD Doctor of Philosophy||en