Representation of Natural Forms in Kashan Luster-glazed Tiles from the 6th to 8th Century AH/ 12th to 14th Century AD on the Basis of Coomaraswamy’s Theories

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

PhD, Assistant Professor, Department of Art Research, Faculty of Art and Architecture, Sistan and Baluchestan University, Zahedan

10.22070/negareh.2022.15377.2924

Abstract

Tilework has been of great significance in Persian architecture from a long time ago. This architecture owes a major deal of its magnificence to masterly tilework; enjoying unique decorative forms and motifs. Besides technical development in applying different materials, ornamentation is considered as well a distinctive aspect of Persian tilework creating wonderful works in different historical periods. Pictorial tiles constitute a substantial part of this rich and marvelous field. This art was being paid considerable and serious attention to in the 6th century AH/ 12th century AD in Kashan, Iran. In that time, in addition to various types of fine tiles such as those applied in delicate mihrabs (prayer niches) and distinct mosaics, a set of connected and juxtaposed elements consisting of stars and crosses, and intertwined hexagons with fine designs painted on which provided tile makers with plenty of artistic opportunities. A great number of such tiles represent some sort of royal magnificence in their designs and motifs. Natural forms are among the most important pictorial themes used in the star-and-cross-shaped tiles in the 6th to the 8th century AH/ 12th to 14th century AD Kashan.
Tile makers of the mentioned works of art made a successful attempt in offering a representation, in other words mimesis, of the nature in its best mode. Despite the artistic value of these tiles as a part of the visual repertoire of Persian art, they haven’t been considered and studies properly. Accordingly, the present essay aims to find answers for the following questions: 1- Which natural elements have been used more than others in the star-shaped tiles of Kashan? 2- What criteria were considered in representing these elements in conformity with Coomaraswamy's views?
 In order to discover reasonable answers for these matters, this research has examined the issue of mimesis and representation of natural forms in luster-glazed tiles of Kashan on the basis of Ananda Coomaraswamy’s views, which are fairly significant in the realm of Eastern art studies. The research method was descriptive- analytical. The results indicate that it would not be possible to realize any close and exact likeness (homoiosis) between the artwork and nature in these tiles’ pictures and designs, but we can only refer to three issues: mutatis mutandi, expressive likeness, and imagination.
In the first issue, that is mutatis mutandi, likeness is the most important feature in luster-glazed tiles of Kashan which could be seen in three aspects: likeness in main lines and elements, analogical adaptation, and finally, imitation.
In the second issue, that is expressive likeness, two general fields, i.e. participation and symbolism, are recognized. Here, participation has a wider thematic arena. Incidentally, in the field of symbolism of the tiles’ motifs, the representation of natural elements has usually adopted cultural function, mostly expressing concepts such as growth, life, eternity, perfectionism, and the disastrous aspects of drought and evil. All these are in close relation with nature and life.
Besides the mentioned issues, the third one, that is imagination in painting, is another significant feature in artistic creation. The relationship between imagination and knowledge of the essence of human’s entity, connecting him to other worlds, including the world of ideas, is a significant matter in the field of mimesis and representation of nature in the luster-glazed tiles of Kashan from Islamic viewpoint.
In most cases which were studied here, the designs and their distinctions were done according to contours. Incidentally, the main motif was placed in the center, usually in bigger size in comparison with others. The way other visual elements were designed with the object of emphasizing the main motifs is another point to achieve balance and harmony, best manifested in the Kashan star-shaped tiles.
Generally, with regard to Ananda Coomaraswamy’s opinions on nature mimesis and its manifestation in the star-shaped tiles from Kashan, we can conclude that observation and perception are the most prominent factors in recognizing the nature for its representation. The normal process of human’s mind in representing natural elements is an intellectual and intuitive one which could not be justified only through mere visual imitation. Meanwhile, mimesis is nothing but the artist’s conscious will in displaying the general truth of existence on the basis of his knowledge of this matter. Such mimesis should undoubtedly be considered as a means of reputation, beauty, attraction and survival for these tiles for centuries.

Keywords

References

Al-Farabi, Abu-Nasr. 1364/1985. Ahsā’ al-Olum. Translated by Hossein Khadivjam. Tehran: Elmi va Farhangi.
Avicenna. 1363/1984. Al-Mabda’ va al-Ma’ād. Edited by Abdollah Nourani. Tehran: Islamic Studies Institute.
Behdani, Majid; Ahmadpanah, Seyed Abutorab. 1400/2021. “Baztabe Andishe-ye Nojumi-ye Asre Ilkhāni dar Noqush-e Kāshi-hāye Zarrinfame Kokabi” Pazhouheshhā-ye Tarikhi. No. 2. pp. 69-94.
Behdani, Majid; Khazai, Mohamad.1399/2020. “Barrasi-ye Noqush-e Kāshi-hāye Zarrinfam ba Mozu-e Sovare Falaki dar Emāmzāde Jafar-e Damghan (bā Takid bar Noskhe-ye Sovar Al-Kavākeb 700 AH)”. Negareh. No. 56. pp. 39-51.
 Behzadi, Roghayeh. 1380/2001. “Namād dar Asātir (Farhang-e Negāre’i-ye Namād-hā dar Sharq va Qarb)”. Ketāb-e Māh-e Honar. No. 35-36. pp. 52-56.
Boylston, Nicholas. 1387/2008. “Ananda Coomaraswamy and Interpretation of Symbols” (Farsi Translation). Translated by Mojtaba Safipour. Pazhouheshnāmeh-ye Farhangestān-e Honar (Research Journal of the Iranian Academy of Arts). No. 9. pp. 81-92.
Carboni, Stefano & Masuya, Tomoko. 1993. Persian Tiles. Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York.
Carboni, Stefano & Tomoko Masuya. 1381/2002. Persian Tiles (Farsi Translation). Translated by Mahnaz Shayestehfar. Tehran: Institute for Islamic Art Studies.
Coomaraswamy, Ananda. K. 1994. Christian And Oriental Philosophy Of Art.  New Delhi.
Coomaraswamy, Ananda. 1384/2005. “The Theory of Art in Asia” (Farsi Translation). Translated by Saleh Tabataba’i. Khiyāl (Iranian Academy of Art Journal). No. 9. pp. 4-51.
Coomaraswamy, Ananda. K. 1974. The Transformation of Nature in Art. New Delhi.
Coomaraswamy , Ananda. K. 1977.  “Imitation, Expression and Participation”. in Selected Paper, Vol 1. Edited by Roger Lipsey. Princeton University Press.  PP 276 - 85.
Coomaraswamy, Ananda. K. 2004. The Essential Anand. K. Coomaraswamy. Edited by Rama P. Coomaraswamy. World Wisdom Publisher.
Coomaraswamy, Ananda. 1384/2005. The Transformation of Nature in Art (Farsi Translation). Translated by Saleh Tabataba’i. Tehran: Farhangestan-e Honar (Iranina Academy of Art).
Coomaraswamy, Ananda. 1389/2010. Traditional Art and Symbolism (Farsi Translation). Translated by Saleh Tabataba’i. Tehran: Farhangestan-e Honar (Iranina Academy of Art).
Faranbaq Dādegi. Bundahishn (Collection of Zoroastrian Cosmogony and Cosmology). Translated by Mehrdad Bahar. Tehran: Tous.
Hospers, John. 1377/1998. “A History of Aesthetics”. ‎ History and Problems of, Aesthetics, in‎ Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (Farsi Translation). Translated by Mohsen Fatemi. Tehran: Howze-ye Honari.
Ibn Arabi, Abu-Abdollāh Mohiyoddin. 1377/1998. Fusus al-Hikam (The Seals of Wisdom). Edited by Tajoddin Hossein Kharazmi. Research by Hassan Hassanzadeh Amoli. Qom: Daftar-e Tabliqāt-e Eslāmi (Islamic Propagation Office).
Kiani, Mohammad-Yusof; Fatemeh Karimi & Abdollah Ghouchani.1362/1983. Moqaddameh’i bar Honar-e Kāshikāri-ye Irān. Tehran: Reza Abbasi Museum.
Laskari, Arash; Akbar Sharifinia & Somayyeh Mohajer-Vatan. 1393/2015. “Barrasi-ye Noqush-e Kāshi-hāye Zarrinfam-e Āveh  Dowreh-ye Ilkhāniān”. Negareh. No. 32. pp. 39-53.
Mohammad-Hassan, Zaki. 1366/1987. Al-Fonun al-Irāni fi Asr-e al-Eslāmi (Farsi Translation). Translated by Mohammad-Ali Khalili. Tehran. Eghbal.
Nasri, Amir. 1386/2007. “Hekmat-e Sharqi: Mohākāt-e Tabiat az Manzar-e Anāndā Kumārāswāmi”. Esragh. Nos. 4-5. pp. 137-159.
Nikkhah, Haniyeh & Ali Sheikh-Mahdi. 1389/2011. “Rahyāft-hāyi beh Siyāst-hāye Farhangi-ye dar Sade-ye 7/13 dar Vākāvi-ye Noqush-e Sofāl-hāye Zarrainfām-e Irān”. Motāle’āt-e Honar-e Eslāmi. No. 13. pp. 109-129.
Plato. 1383/2004. The Republic (Farsi Translation). Translated by Fo’ad Rohani. 9th reprint. Tehran: Elmi va Farhangi Pub.
Pope, Arthur & Phyllis Ackerman. 1387/2008. Seyri dar Honar-e Irān az Dowrān-e pish az Tārikh tā Emruz (Farsi Translation). Editor-in-chief: Sirous Parham. Vol. 9. Tehran: Elmi va Farhangi Pub.
Pourdavoud, Ebrahim. 1347/1968. Yasht-hā. Vol. 2. Tehran: Tahouri.
Rezabeigi, Maryam. 1387/2008. “Moqāyese-ye Tatbiqi-ye Asātir-e Melal-e Mokhtalef”. Adabyāt Journal of Mashad Āzād University. 5/20. pp. 155-175.
Samanian, Samad & Elham Pour-Afzal. 1396/2018. “Tahlil-e Tatbiqi-ye Sofalineh-hāye Zarrinfām bā Negāreh-hāye Noskhe-ye Kelileh va Demneh-ye 707 AH Āl-e Inju”. Negareh. No. 44. pp. 5-19.
Scarce, J. 1374/1995. “Tile-work” (Farsi Translation). In: The Arts of Persia by Ferrier, R.W. Translated by Parviz Marzban. pp. 271-294.
Selden, Raman. 1377/1998. “Representation and Realism …” (Farsi Translation). Translated by Mansour Ebrahimi. Farabi Journal. No. 28. pp. 28-32.
Shahab al-Din Suhrawardi. 1348/1969. Majmu’e Āsār-e Fārsi-ye Sheikh-e Eshrāq. Edited by Hossein Nasr & Henri Corbin. Tehran: Iran and France Institute.
Talebpour, Farideh. 1387/2008. “Barrasi-ye Noqush-e Kāshi-hāye Kākh-e Ābāqākhān dar Takht-e Soleimān”. Negareh. Nos. 8-9. pp. 19-29.
Vaheddoust, Mahvash. 1378/1999. Nahādine-hāye Asātiri dar Shāhnāme-ye Ferdowsi. Tehran: Soroush.
Watson, Oliver (1382/2003). Persian Lustre Ware (Farsi Translation). Translated by Shokouh Zakeri. Tehran: Soroush.
Yahaghi, Mohammad-Jafar. 1375/1996. Farhang-e Asātir va Eshārāt-e Dāstāni dar Adabyāt-e Fārsi. Tehran: Soroush.
Zekrgou, Amirhossein. 1378/1999. “Ta’ammoli bar Ārā’e Kumārāswāmi”. Farhangestān-e Olum (Iranian Academy of Sciences). No. 14-15. pp. 61-76.
Zekrgou, Amirhossein. 1385/2006. “Mafhum-e Form va Darajāt-e Kamāl-e Honari dar Ārā’e Kumārāswāmi”. Khiyāl. No. 18. pp. 68-75.
 
https://www.noormags.ir
https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/image/301995001: (Accessed: January 4, 2021).
https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/image/1227171001: (Accessed: March 27, 2021).
https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/image/943633001: (Accessed: March 27, 2021).
https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/image/1613560643: (Accessed: March 27, 2021).
https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/451743: (Accessed: November 18, 2020).
https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/444453:  (Accessed: November 18, 2020).
https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/W_G-491: (Accessed: January 4, 2021).
https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/447157: (Accessed: November 18, 2020).
https://ids.lib.harvard.edu/ids/view/18730304: (Accessed: January 4, 2021).
https://www.sothebys.com/en/auctions/ecatalogue/2013/arts-of-the-islamic-world-l13223/lot.15.html: (Accessed: October 11, 2020).
http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O276577/tile/tile-unknown: (Accessed: January 4, 2021).
https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/450427: (Accessed: January 4, 2021).
 
Negareh Journal
Volume 18, Issue 67
September 2023
Pages 191-207

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 02 March 2022
  • Revise Date: 14 February 2023
  • Accept Date: 22 February 2023

Share

How to cite

Statistics