تشخیص دانه های عملکردی مجموعه شمسیه یزد با استناد به وقفنامه جامع الخیرات (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
مجموعه شمسیه واقع در محله چهارمنار یزد، اثر منحصربه فردی ست که علاوه بر بقایای کالبدی، شواهد متنی مهمی درخصوصش به جای مانده است. بااین وجود هنوز ابهاماتی درخصوص آن، به خصوص موقعیت اجزای عملکردی و کالبدی آن ازجمله خانقاه و دارالسیاده وجود دارد. وقفنامه جامع الخیرات که به سفارش واقفین این مجموعه نوشته شده، حاوی اطلاعات ارزشمندی درخصوص شمسیه، ازجمله اجزاء عملکردی آن است. نگارندگان این مقاله، یکی از مهم ترین کلیدهای حل ابهامات درخصوص این مجموعه را بازخوانی دقیق جامع الخیرات می دانند. این پژوهش درصدد است با بازخوانی جامع الخیرات و بررسی دقیق ارجاعات این متن به مجموعه شمسیه، به این پرسش پاسخ دهد که دانه های عملکردی این مجموعه مرکب از کدام اجزاء اصلی و فرعی بوده است؟ و مطابق این وقفنامه، چه می توان از نسبت کالبدی این اجزاء و عملکرد ها فهمید؟ روش این پژوهش تفسیری تاریخی است و با مداقه در سلسله ارجاعات متنی وقفنامه و بررسی فرضیات برآمده از آن ها ، اجزاء مجموعه و موقعیتشان را به دست می آورد. این فرضیات با کمک شواهد متنی دیگر آن دوره و شواهد کالبدی باقیمانده مورد صحت سنجی عمیق تر قرار می گیرد. مقاله نتیجه می گیرد که مجموعه شمسیه یزد – که از آن با نام «ابواب الخیر» نیز یاد شده - متشکل از ۳ جزء اصلی به انضمام ۲ جزء مکمل بوده است که شامل مدرسه، خانقاه، دارالسیاده می شده و بیت الادویه و دارالکتب، دو جزء مکمل مدرسه بوده اند. همچنین طبق متن وقفنامه مدرسه و خانقاه به لحاظ کالبدی به یکدیگر مربوط و متصل بوده اند، درحالی که دارالسیاده کالبدی جدا داشته است.Identifying the Functional Units of the Yazd Shamsiya Complex with Reference to Jame’ al-Khairat Endowment Document
Background and Objectives :
The Shamsiya Complex in Chaharmanar district of Yazd is a unique historical site with both physical remains and textual evidence from its era. Despite valuable research on the Muzaffarid period architecture of Yazd, particularly the Shamsiya school, there is still no clear consensus regarding the complex’s functional units and their interrelationships. The Waqfnama (endowment letter) of Jame’ al-Khairat, commissioned by the benefactors of this complex, provides valuable insights into Shamsiya, including its functional components. The authors believe that a re-examination of the Jame’ al-Khairat script can help resolve ambiguities surrounding the complex.
This research aims to answer the following questions: (1) What were the primary and secondary functional units of this complex? (2) What can be inferred about the physical and functional relationships between these components based on the document?
Methodes:
The first step in identifying the functional units of the Shamsiya Complex involves compiling a list of functions from the Jame’ al-Khairat document. The second step entails a detailed analysis of the historical text to understand the examples and references to these functions. Four main purposes guide this analysis: (1) Recognizing correct textual references to Shamsiya; (2) Understanding physical and spatial separations; (3) Understanding functional and situational co-appearance; (4) Interpreting the reason for co-appearances.
To achieve these four purposes, inferences are made from the text and then verified by cross-referencing with other sources. Single references, even if scattered, can provide valuable information about specific structures and their physical conditions, aiding in confirming or rejecting hypotheses.
Findings:
At first, according to physical evidence (such as the presence of the marble sanctuary stone in Shamsiya) and verbal evidence (including the presence of “Sar-e Kooche Bahrok” in Chaharmanar district), it was confirmed that the remains of the building called “Seyyed Shamsuddin mausoleum” in Chaharmanar are indeed the Shamsiya complex mentioned in the Jame’ al-Khairat Waqfname.
The entirety of the Shamsiya complex is referred to in the Jame’ al-Khairat by two names: “Abwab al-Khair” and “Beqa’e Khams” (Afshar I., 1975, 396-470). This complex comprises five main components: Madrasa, Beyt al-Adwiya, Dar al-Kotob, Dar al-Siyada, and Khanqah (Afshar I., 1975, 396). The “Beqa’e Khams” (five spots) mentioned in the text refers to these five main units. However, two of these five (Beyt al-Adwiya and Dar al-Kotob) are subsumed under the Madrasa (Afshar I., 1975, 396). For this reason, many parts of the Jame’ al-Khairat text mention only three of its units (Madrasa, Khanqah, and Dar al-Siyada) to refer to the entire complex.
In cases where the components of this complex are mentioned separately, the co-occurrence of the Madrasa and Khanqah is consistently observed, while the Dar al-Siyada is often mentioned separately (Afshar I., 1975, 517-551). Additionally, the endowments for the Dar al-Siyada are cited separately from those of the other two main components in the Jame’ al-Khairat (Afshar I., 1975, 476).
In technical terms, the costs of lighting the Khanqah and the Madrasa at night are stated together in the same account (Afshar I., 1975, 475), while the cost of lighting the Dar al-Siyada is stated separately (Afshar I., 1975, 479). Furthermore, while the doorman of the Madrasa and Dar al-Siyada is explicitly mentioned in the Waqfname (Afshar I., 1975, 474), no doorman is mentioned for the Khanqah. This suggests a high probability that the entrance door of the Khanqah shared the entrance door of one of the other two functional units.
There is a discrepancy between the texts of “Tarikh-e Yazd” (History of Yazd) (Ja’fari J., 2007, 110-111) and “Tarikh-e Jadid-e Yazd” (The New History of Yazd) (Kateb A., 2007, 118) and the Jame’ al-Khairat regarding the number of Madrasas mentioned for Shamsiya. This discrepancy could be attributed to a possible change in the function of one of the buildings, such as the Dar al-Siyada, to a Madrasa in later eras.
Conclusion:
In most cases where the phrase “Madrasa and Khanqah” on “Sar-e Kooche Bahrok” appears in the text, it should not be interpreted as encompassing the entire complex. Rather, this phrase typically refers only to the Madrasa and Khanqah, and their respective subsets, excluding other units such as the Dar al-Siyada. The function of the Dar al-Siyada has been clearly distinguished from the other main functions, both in terms of endowment and physical entity.
The functions of the Khanqah and the school were likely intertwined physically, possibly sharing a single building. Alternatively, they may have been two separate but connected buildings, with the entrance to the Khanqah situated within the Madrasa. This would explain the absence of a designated doorman for the Khanqah. Furthermore, the presence of four narrow spaces around the dome space of the mausoleum supports the hypothesis of a unified Khanqah and Madrasa.
Highlights:
- Providing a method for studying the architectural implications of the historical text;
- Identification of the physical structure of Shamsiya historical complex based on textual evidence.
Shamsiya,Jame’ al-Khairat,Muzaffarid architecture,Madrasa,Khanqah,
تبلیغات
