logo
Volume 45, Issue 106 (12-2024)                   Athar 2024, 45(106): 127-151 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Roohi Azizi M, Samanian K, Khoddari Naeini S. (2024). Investigation and Analysis of History and Archaeological Display in the National Museum of Iran Short. Athar. 45(106), 127-151. doi:10.22034/45.106.5
URL: http://athar.richt.ir/article-2-1737-en.html
1- PhD Candidate in Restoration of Cultural and Historical Objects, Department of Restoration of Cultural and Historical Objects, Faculty of Conservation and Restoration, Iran University of Art, Tehran, Iran
2- Associate Professor, Department of Restoration of Cultural and Historical Objects, Faculty of Conservation and Restoration, Iran University of Art, Tehran, Iran. (Corresponding Author) , Samanian_k@yahoo.com
3- Associate Professor, Department of Museum Studies, Faculty of Conservation and Restoration, Iran University of Art, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract:   (993 Views)
Abstract
The National Museum of Iran is an archaeological museum that directly acquires a vast majority of its artifacts from excavations at archaeological sites. Compared to other museums around the world that possess or exhibit Iranian artifacts, this is a unique advantage for the National Museum of Iran. However, considering the museum's new mission in the contemporary era, focusing on audience engagement, meaning-making, and storytelling, the question arises: How has the National Museum of Iran leveraged this advantage in displaying its artifacts to not only raise awareness about the importance of preserving and protecting the past heritage but also to educate visitors about archaeology? What are the special characteristics of archaeological objects and collections that a museum can utilize for interpretation and education? And how are these characteristics reflected in the ways artifacts are displayed and presented in the museum? This article, after reviewing the literature related to the history and mission of archaeological museums, will examine the unique values of archaeological collections for museum display and then, through a structural and content analysis, evaluate the National Museum's work in displaying archaeological objects and collections. The research approach is qualitative, and data collection methods include the use of library data, direct observation, and interviews with museum staff. The research findings indicate a predominance of chronological classification based on major archaeological periods and royal dynasties, which is complemented by a thematic approach and highlighting of significant objects. Additionally, efforts to recreate historical contexts and an aesthetic approach to the arrangement of archaeological collections, through the juxtaposition of objects of similar size and type with precise order and spacing, are among the National Museum's other measures for displaying archaeological objects. Finally, this article, drawing on theoretical foundations of displaying archaeological objects and the missions and goals of this type of museum, proposes the use of approaches such as living history and contemporary archaeology in the museum's displays.
Keywords: Museum of Archaeology, Display, Archaeological Collection, National Museum of Iran, Education.

Introduction
The National Museum of Iran holds a distinguished position among archaeological museums due to its direct access to artifacts from excavation sites across the country. Unlike many other institutions that rely on acquired artifacts, this museum benefits from the continuous influx of archaeological discoveries, which enriches its collections and provides a unique opportunity for education and interpretation. The role of archaeological museums has evolved beyond mere preservation, shifting toward audience engagement and meaningful storytelling. Consequently, the National Museum of Iran faces the challenge of effectively utilizing its rich collections to educate visitors about Iran’s historical and archaeological heritage.
This study aims to examine the museum’s exhibition strategies, focusing on how it presents archaeological objects to create awareness about cultural preservation and education. It explores whether the museum employs methods that align with contemporary trends in archaeological museology and evaluates the extent to which its displays contribute to historical understanding. Through a qualitative research approach, including literature review, direct observation, and interviews with museum staff, this research identifies the main techniques used in the museum’s display strategies.
Findings suggest that the National Museum of Iran primarily employs a chronological classification system, organizing artifacts according to major archaeological periods and dynasties. This method provides visitors with a clear historical framework while incorporating thematic approaches that highlight significant objects. The museum also attempts to recreate historical contexts by arranging artifacts in a manner that reflects their original use. These strategies align with established museological principles but also reveal areas where further enhancement could enrich visitor experience.

Discussion
The National Museum of Iran adopts a structured approach to artifact presentation, integrating both chronological and thematic methods. The chronological classification serves as the foundation, presenting artifacts in a sequential order that traces Iran’s historical development. This arrangement is supplemented by thematic groupings, where objects are displayed based on material composition, function, or cultural significance. For instance, pottery, inscriptions, and metalwork are often grouped to facilitate a comparative understanding of craftsmanship and usage across different periods.
A distinctive feature of the museum’s display strategy is its effort to recreate historical contexts. Objects are arranged with careful consideration of size, type, and spatial organization to evoke the environments in which they were originally used. This approach enhances visitor engagement by offering a more immersive experience. However, despite these efforts, there are certain limitations in the museum’s display methods. While the arrangement effectively conveys historical continuity, it could benefit from incorporating more interactive elements to foster deeper engagement.
Additionally, the museum’s current presentation methods could better integrate contemporary archaeological perspectives. Featuring ongoing excavations, conservation efforts, or insights from archaeologists could establish a stronger connection between past and present. Such an approach would not only emphasize the relevance of archaeology in modern society but also encourage visitors to appreciate the dynamic nature of historical interpretation.
The museum also employs various techniques to provide contextual information, including explanatory panels, maps, and historical illustrations. While these aids support visitor comprehension, their effectiveness could be enhanced through improved design and accessibility. A more structured and visually engaging interpretive framework could further facilitate audience engagement, making the exhibitions more informative and appealing to diverse visitor demographics.

Conclusion
The National Museum of Iran plays a crucial role in preserving and presenting the country’s archaeological heritage. Its direct access to artifacts from excavation sites provides an invaluable resource for education and storytelling. By employing a chronological classification system supplemented by thematic arrangements, the museum successfully provides visitors with a structured understanding of Iran’s historical evolution. Additionally, efforts to recreate historical contexts contribute to a richer exhibition experience, allowing visitors to visualize ancient environments.
However, the museum’s current display strategies, while effective, leave room for improvement. Enhancing visitor engagement through interactive elements and contemporary archaeological narratives could strengthen the museum’s educational impact. The integration of archaeological fieldwork, conservation efforts, and research findings into exhibitions could create a more dynamic and comprehensive experience for visitors. Moreover, refining interpretive materials, such as exhibition labels and informational panels, could further improve accessibility and comprehension.
In conclusion, while the National Museum of Iran has made significant strides in archaeological display, adopting innovative and audience-centered approaches could elevate its role as an educational and cultural institution. By aligning with global best practices in museology and prioritizing visitor engagement, the museum can fulfill its mission of preserving Iran’s heritage while inspiring future generations to appreciate its historical significance.
 
Full-Text [PDF 1099 kb]   (299 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original Research Article | Subject: Conservation and restoration of historical-cultural monuments
Received: 2024/08/2 | Accepted: 2024/09/22 | Published: 2024/12/19

References
1. - برنامه‌ی همکاری ایران – ایتالیا جهت بازسازی موزه ایران باستان (1386). ترجمۀ اسماعیل سلامی، تهران: گویا.
2. - بیگدلو، رضا، (1398). «کارکرد نهاد موزۀ ایران باستان در اندیشه دولت ملت دوره پهلوی». پژوهش‌های تاریخی، 2(55): 117-129.
3. - بیگلری، فریدون. مصاحبه شخصی، 10خرداد، 1401.
4. - تهرانی مقدم، احمد، (1369). «نگاهی به موزۀ ملی ایران:. موزه‌ها، 10-9: 2-13.
5. - درخشان، کیومرث، (1379). «موزۀ ملی ایران یکی از شش موزۀ معتبر دنیا». کتاب ماه کلیات، 7(31), 31-34.
6. - دهقان، نبی‌الله، و شریفی‌تهرانی، محمد، (1390). «برنامه‌ریزی راهبردی موزۀ ملی ایران». مطالعات مدیریت گردشگری، 16(7): 53-90.
7. - خاموشی، لیلا، (1388). «چگونگی وقف اشیاء بر بقعۀ شیخ صفی‌الدین اردبیلی و وارد شدن آنها به موزۀ ملی ایران». میراث جاویدان، 66(17): 72-77.
8. - روح‌فر، زهره، (1402). رونمایی از کتاب هنر اسلامی و موزه. سخنرانی در دانشگاه هنر ایران.
9. - سپیدنامه، فیروزه. مصاحبه شخصی، 24شهریور، 1401.
10. - طالبی، فرامرز، (1380). «پژوهش های باستان شناسی فرانسه در ایران». موزه‌ها،8 (29): 62-58.
11. - کارگر، محمدرضا. مصاحبه شخصی، 12خرداد، 1401.
12. - وصال، زینب، (1386). «بررسی نقش پرنده در سفال دوران اسلامی موزۀ ملی ایران». کتاب ماه هنر، 104-103: 86-92.
13. - (بی‌تا). موزۀ ملی ایران. https://irannationalmuseum.ir/fa/معرفی-موزه-ملی./
15. - Barker, A. W., (2010). “Exhibiting archaeology: Archaeology and museums”. Annual Review of Anthropology, 39: 293–308. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.012809.105115.
16. - Bigdeloo, R., (2019). “The Function of the Museum of Ancient Iran in the Thought of the Nation-State of the Pahlavi Period”. Historical research, 11(2), 99-117. https://doi.org/10.22108/jhr.2019.116596.1697 (In Persian).
17. - Bitgood, S., Patterson, D. and Benefield, A., (1988). “Exhibit Design and Visitor Behavior Empirical Relationships”. Environment and Behavior, 20(4), 474-491. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916588204006.
18. - Brouwers, J., (2015). “The purpose of an archaeological museum”, Ancient World Magazine, http://www.joshobrouwers.com/articles/purpose-archaeological-museum/
19. - Childs, T. S. and Sullivan, L. P., (2003). “Curating archaeological collections: From the field to the repository”. Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press. http://primo.getty.edu/GRI:GETTY_ALMA21116702750001551.
20. - Dehghan, N. and Sharifi Tehrani, M., (2011). “Strategic Planning of the National Museum of Iran”. Quarterly Journal of Tourism Management Studies, 16(7), 53-90. https://doi.org/10.22054/tms.2012.5091 (In Persian).
21. - Derakhshan, K., (2000). “The National Museum of Iran is one of the six most prestigious museums in the world”. Book of the Month Generalities, 7(31), 31-34. https://ensani.ir/fa/article/download/299986 (In Persian).
22. - Fahlander, F. and Oestigaard, T., (2004). “Introduction – Material culture and post-disciplinary science. In Material culture and other things: Post-disciplinary studies in the 21st century”. Department of Archaeology, University of Gothenburg. https://oestigaard.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/mcbokall.pdf.
23. - Falk, J. H. and Dierking, L. D., (2013). “The museum experience revisited”. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315417851.
24. - Gerbich, C., Kamel, S. and Lanwerd, S., (2012). “Do you speak Islamic art? The museological laboratory”. Islamic art and the museum: Approaches to art and archaeology of the Muslim world in the twenty-first century (201–208). Saqi Books. http://www.topoi.org/publication/39394/.
25. - Ginzburg, C., (1979). “Clues: Roots of a scientific paradigm”. Theory and Society, 7(3), 273–288. https://www.jstor.org/stable/656747.
26. - Gustafsson, A., (2009). “Once upon a time: A discussion about how to present archaeology in museums”. University of Gothenburg. Tutor: Per Cornell, Department of Historical Studies; Opponent: Emelie Larsson.
27. - Hampp, C. and Schwan, S., (2014). “The Role of Authentic Objects in Museums of the History of Science and Technology: Findings from a visitor study”. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 5(2), 161–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2013.875238.
28. - Hodder, I., (2012). “Entangled: An archaeology of the relationships between humans and things”. Wiley Blackwell.
29. - Kelsey Museum of Archaeology; University of Michigan. (n.d.). Mission. https://lsa.umich.edu/kelsey/about-us/mission.html
30. - Khamooshi, L., (2009). “How objects were donated to the tomb of Sheikh Safi al-Din Ardebili and how they were brought to the National Museum of Iran”. Eternal Heritage, 66(17), 72-77. https://ensani.ir/fa/article/download/238752 (In Persian).
31. - Lee, J. and Basil, M. D., (2013). “The psychology of visual communication: A primer for the museum”. Journal of Museum Education, 38(2), 99–113.
32. - Lynott, M.J. and Wylie, A., (eds.). (1995). “Ethics in American Archaeology: Challenges for the 1990s”. Society for American Archaeology. https://archaeologicalethics.org/book/ethics-in-american-archaeology-challenges-for-the-1990s-edited-volume/.
33. - Lyons, C. L., (2016). “On Provenance and the Long Lives of Antiquities”. International Journal of Cultural Property, 23(3), 245–253. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0940739116000199.
34. - Mao, R. and Fu, Y., (2021). “Interweaving multiple contexts for objects in museum exhibitions: a contextual approach”. Museum Management and Curatorship, 37(5), 491–512. https://doi.org/10.1080/09647775.2021.1914141
35. - McCarthy, C., (2007). “The role of authenticity in museum exhibits: A case study”. Museum Management and Curatorship, 22(3), 263–276.
36. - Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. (n.d.). IUMAA mission. https://iumaa.iu.edu/about/mission.html
37. - Museum of Art and Archaeology. (n.d.). Mission statement and governance. https://maa.missouri.edu/mission-statement-and-governance
38. - Nash, S. E. and O’Malley, N., (2012). “Archaeology in Society: Its Relevance in the Modern World”: The changing mission of museums. 97, 109.
39. - Pearce, S., (1995). “On collecting: An investigation into collecting in the European tradition”. Routledge.
40. - Salami, I., (2007). “The renovation program of Iran Bastan Museum”. Goya House of Culture and Art (In Persian).
41. - Schwan, S. and Dutz, S., (2020). “How do Visitors Perceive the Role of Authentic Objects in Museums?”. Curator The Museum Journal, 63(2), 217-237. https://doi.org/10.1111/cura.12365.
42. - Sharjah Authority Museums. (n.d.). Sharjah archaeology museum. https://www.sharjahmuseums.ae/en-US/Museums/Sharjah-Archaeology-Museum
43. - Southern Adventist University. (n.d.). Mission statement. https://www.southern.edu/administration/archaeology/museum/mission.html
44. - Talebi, F., (2001). “French archaeological research in Iran”. Museums,29(8), 58-62 (In Persian).
45. - Tehrani Moghaddam, A., (1990). “Review to the National Museum of Iran”. Museums, (9-10), 2-13. https://ensani.ir/fa/article/download/285288 (In Persian).
46. - Toftdal, M., Kirk, S. and Pécseli, B., (2018). “Once upon a time ago: An interdisciplinary collaboration between archaeology, museology, and pedagogy”. Public Archaeology, 17(4). https://doi.org/10.1080/14655187.2019.1680033.
47. - Tufte, E. R. (1990). “Envisioning information”. Graphics Press.
48. - Vesal, Z., (2007). “Studying the role of birds in pottery from the Islamic era, National Museum of Iran”, Art Month Book, (103-104), 86-92 https://ensani.ir/fa/article/download/90327 (In Persian).
49. - Wahlgren, K. H. and Svanberg, F., (2008). “Public archaeology as renewer of the historical museum”. Public Archaeology, 7(4), 241–258. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51726-1_2792-1.
50. - Watson, O., (2012). “The museum of Islamic art, Doha. In Islamic art and the museum: Approaches to art and archaeology of the Muslim world in the twenty-first century”, Saqi Books, (264–269). https://doi.org/10.1080/17432200.2016.1172773
51. - Wetmore, R. Y., (1985). “Archaeology in the museum setting”. SCIAA Newsletter-Notebook, 17, 19-48.
52. - Yang, P. (2021). “Public archaeology and museum: A humanistic education”. EDConference Proceedings, 57–64.

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.