عنوان مقاله [English]
Kharghan towers are two precious heritages of Saljuk dynasty. Nobel architecture, wall paintings, historic inscriptions and several fabioulos brick works are their special featurs that have made these towers as a distinguished tomb architecture of Saljuk age. Several unique brick work and glorious architecture that have made these heritages distinguished marks of saljuk era along with building towers in an abandoned area and lack of names of the founders of these buildings, has made them an ambiguous question. Although this ambiguity has not been neglected by western scholars, no approach and theory have been suggested to solve this qustion. It seems inorder to suggest a new solution. The previous theories must be doubted. In fact, these current ambiguities are the natural consequece of western scholar’s theory who believed that founders of buildings are turkish and mililtary commanders of the region who affiliated with governement and another theory is that these towers are the result of supporting artistic works founded by people who were affilated with governement but none of these theories has answered the question that why there is no name for the founders of these monuments. However, according to the historical texts and evidences, dated back to seljuk era, it is clear that a distinguished person, Khajeh Nizam al-Mulk, had always criticized the act of giving too much governement titles. In this paper, the dominant social structure of Saljuk age has been studied as one of the most important influential factors in forming of the art works. Due to this Factor and the formation of new social class which was evolved as a reason of development of the commercial relations, the founders of these tower were introduced as a member of the developing mid-level of society who were able to financial supporting of these towers and according to their indenpendency from the contemporaneous governement, their builders did not need to have the governemental titles and position.
Keywords: Seljuk, Tittles, Social Structure, Architecture.
Intorudction & Method
The most important uncertainties about the Kharqan towers are the lack of titles and common definitions and prevarications in front of the names of the owners of the tombs. This point is a scumbag because it is not justifiable, the head of the Turkish race for the great had his name to build such magnificent, costly and prolific buildings, but their name was simple and without any title and glory under the name of the architect to build up. Although this is not the case, however, there has been no hypothesis about the uncertainty. Stern said it: “it is safe to say that this assumption cannot be a definite reason for the lack of titles. However, this issue remains vague” (Stronakh, 74:1349). This article is intended to overcome this ambiguity and the author intends to present an approach based on the social conditions of the Seljuk era not only on the issue of why the title is not referred to but also about the theory of the formation of towers in the Kharqan area.
This research has been carried out by an interpretive-historical method based on library resources and field research. The information of this research which has been interpreted based on field research and the collection of historical documents collected with the inference of thought has provided a new hypothesis in the field of research.
The main question of the research is the lack of title for the names of Kharqan tower builders and the underlying question of the formation of magnificent towers in the remote area of Kharqan which has been addressed in this paper through some field and library research and focused on analysis and reasoning.
Changes in social structures and the emergence of new social classes, often traders and the ability to replenish the order for the construction of works of art and magnificent memorials have served as the ordering of the construction of towers of Kharqan. This new class due to the small percentage of dependence on the government and military commanders (and probably native in the place) does not need to have a titular title, hence their name without mentioning the title below is the constructive name of the building.
According to Stern and Hillenbrand, the building was built as a tomb and to commemorate the names of two breeders and owners of the pastures in that area. Consequently, it is far from the mind that the two-ordinary people from the lower classes of the society who do not have any nicknames (neither carnal nor even informal) are unable to finance the financing of these two tall, decorative towers, which are somewhat excellence in the architecture of the Seljuk era have. Also, in none of the Seljuk monastery`s tombstones, especially the monumental buildings of this era which have historical inscriptions, the lack of titles has not been observed. The author searches for an understanding of this subject in the social conditions prevailing in the Seljuk period. In fact, the lack of titles for the builders of the towers, if their builders are considered to be two descendants of the region is rightly ambiguous. But it seems essential to ignore the previous hypothesis. The materials presented about the role and importance of social structures and the formation of new classes that were leading their trades and their support for the production of works of art, the need to review the views of Western scholars and their inadequate understanding of the social conditions governing the Seljuk era. Accordingly, if we assume that the founders of the building are likely to be from the growing middle class who through the existence of a business have an upward trend in their class and have the ability to replenish financially enough to build the towers have earned. Many of the uncertainties surrounding the formation of towers in this area, and in particular the lack of official titles will be resolved by the founders.
Kharqan towers were built during Nizam al-Mulk’s office and while according to the textbook of the policy book (Siasat-Name), khaje has complained about much of the titles of the language, there is no sign of the builders of these two important buildings. The absence of the title is a questionable issue in the few years, the supporters of the production of artwork, often the court or individuals and families attributed to the court. According to Western scholars, the owners of these two buildings should have been distinguished from prominent military leaders and Turk descendants. Therefore, the lack of title was not justifiable to them. But with a proper understanding of the social conditions of the Seljuk era and given the political and social changes of that era, we find that new classes have been created in the community that has enough financial ability to order works and buildings. Thus, the lack of titles for building supporters is not ambiguous and questionable due to this view.