year 8, Issue 27 (5-2024)
Parseh J Archaeol Stud 2024, 8(27): 225-257 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Amiriazar E, Anisi A. (2024). Analyzing the Architectural Features of the Fortresses on the Western and Southern Boundary of Kerman’s Lut Desert. Parseh J Archaeol Stud. 8(27), 225-257. doi:10.22034/PJAS.8.27.225
URL: http://journal.richt.ir/mbp/article-1-891-en.html
URL: http://journal.richt.ir/mbp/article-1-891-en.html
1- PhD student in Architecture, Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, School of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
2- Associate Professor, Building and cultural contexts research institute, Research Institute for Cultural Heritage and Tourism (RICHT), Tehran, Iran ,Anisi61@yahoo.co.uk
2- Associate Professor, Building and cultural contexts research institute, Research Institute for Cultural Heritage and Tourism (RICHT), Tehran, Iran ,
Abstract: (1300 Views)
Abstract
Lut desert is located in southeastern Iran. The area, despite having many historical monuments, including numerous castles, has not received enough attention from architectural historians. This study aims to clarify the architectural features and the purpose for the multiplicity of these fortresses in this region, it has been tried to study and investigate them with descriptive, analytical, and logical cognitive methods. The research was carried out by library and field studies of 140 castles, as case studies, in the region. The study’s results show that the climate and security factors are the main reasons for erecting the castles. Abundant water and location on the trade routes made the region rich, and on the other hand, point water sources and their limitations caused dispersion and distance between the structures and increased insecurity. According to historical sources, desert outlaws have also had a large presence in the region. Besides, the techniques to deal with violent sandstorms had caused them to build cities and villages in the middle of high barriers, or to build a castle inside or around it for use in times of need, which caused the number of castles in the investigated area. This has also caused the majority of castles in the region to have residential functions and be built inside or around cities and villages, and other functions and establishments are less frequent. The architecture of the castles and defense fortifications of the region also follows the common architecture of the central plateau castles, excluding incomparable cases. So, most of the castles follow the square and rectangular geometry, and in some cases, the irregular, trapezoidal, and parallelogram geometry is derived from the climatic and contextual conditions. The materials used were canvas and due to the ease of construction, speed of mass production, lower cost and camouflage, mud and mud brick in plain fortresses, and stone in mountain ones. Most of the towers are built in the corners and the middle of the sides with observational, defensive, and structural functions, and in some cases, towers are seen in the middle of the castle with only observational functions. The fortresses’ defense structure mainly is based on the barrier and tower, and as the wealth and population of residential castles increased, more defense boundaries were added.
Keywords: Fortress, Defensive Fortifications, Lot Desert, Kerman.
Introduction
Castles were military or civilian fortifications that were built using natural geographical features to maintain security (Sultani Mohammadi and Bulouri Bunab, 2015: 75). There are many variations in their use and they have a form of residence and social structure, different from the structure of the village and city (Parsi, 1383: 136; Nurbakhsh, 1366: 147).
In Iran, the formation of enclosed group buildings with various methods has a history of three thousand years (Kleiss, 1383: 160). The early forts in Iran can be seen as a relic of the agricultural civilization, when humans started to settle down and needed to maintain their security (Kiani, 1374: 78). In the past, next to many settlements and cities of Iran, there were one or more fortresses, which became people’s shelters during unrest and insecurity (Pirnia and Me‘marian, 2007: 82). Their functions were different, and the smallest of them was a military base or post, and the largest of them were guarded shelters for caravans and military and defensive forts (Siro, 1357: 54). Also, some of them were the central core of the ancient cities of Iran, and the main life of the people was often formed inside the fortresses and old forts (Zarei and Heydari Baba Kamal, 2016: 202). Some scholars believe that castles were built first and then towns were formed around them (Zuka, 1374; Na‘imi, 1389). These defense structures were usually built by the governments to protect the strategic and border cities against the enemy’s invasion and the encroachments of nomadic desert rovers (Wiley, 2016: 26).
Owing to political, economic, and geographical requirements, in both pre-Islamic and Islamic eras, numerous fortresses, and defensive buildings were built. The southern and western edge of the Lut desert in Kerman province is one of them, due to its special geographical location, has many historical castles that have not been studied and investigated in detail, and the studies conducted are limited to archaeological investigations and identifications and monographs. It is related to buildings. This area consists of important cities such as Ravar, Shahdad, Bam, Fahraj, Regan and Narmashir. Each of these cities had political, social and economic prestige at some point in history from the third and fourth millennium BC to the middle Islamic centuries (Qazvini, 1373: 243; Muqadsi, 1361: 680 and 684; Istakhari, 1373: 246; Yaqut, 1383: 269 and 296; Zarei and Heydari Kamal, 1393: 196, Hakimi, 1385: 28; Hakeimi, 1351: 78; Kabuli, 1369: 213). Considering the importance of this type of building in understanding the historical architecture of Iran, as well as the process of their destruction due to natural and human erosion, it is necessary to examine them with a closer look and in more detail. The upcoming research has investigated the castles of this area with such an approach and tried to answer two main questions: 1- What are the architectural characteristics of the fortress in the geographical area of the southern and western border of the Lut desert? 2- What is the main reason for the appearance, formation, and number of fortresses in this region?
Discussion
The structure used in the barrier of all the load-bearing wall castles and the materials used in the fence of all the plain castles the mud and mud brick and mountain areas, stone and baked brick are used for strengthening the base of the barriers. Stone has been the main material in the few mountain castles in the region. Although various decorations are used in the castles, due to functional reasons, they are seen in a limited number.
In terms of shape, the majority of castles in the region are square and rectangular, that is, the dominant form of such buildings in the central plateau of Iran. However, there are several castles with special trapezoidal, parallelogram, and irregular geometries, which were built in this way due to the specific topography of the environment and climatic conditions, such as facing sandstorms.
The dominant form of the towers is also cylindrical. In some cases, rectangular cube forms and square bases have been used, all of which have led to more structural resistance of the towers. The semi-cylindrical form has also led to the optimal use of space. Only one case of a triangular tower foundation has been seen in the castles, which is considered an exception. In terms of the location of the towers, the majority are placed in the corners and middle of the sides, which is by the usual architecture of castles. However, the construction of towers in the middle of the castle is surprising in many cases.
The defense structure of the castles of the region is based on two types, fenced and unfenced. Most of them consist of walls and towers, and several fences and ditches have been added. In some cases, the position of the bed in the mountain castles has been used and, on some sides, the fence has been removed. Most of the castles are located inside or outside of villages and cities for security and climatic reasons. The forts on the road and near the rivers were also built for security reasons.
To determine the exact function of fortresses is unclear, however, based on the previous data, the purpose can be recognized to some extent. Therefore, the castles that were built at the critical points between the road and the water divide had military use in strategic locations. The fortresses that were built in the center and around the villages were the lords’ fortifications that had either a residential position or an economic function. In the case of expansion and adding spaces such as the guard’s room, posts, and spaces similar to the military function, they become residential and if they are located in a prosperous city and court spaces are located inside them, they have a ruler’s seat. Fortresses that are located next to villages and cities have a shelter function.
Conclusion
the research studied the architectural features of the fortifications and defensive structures of the western and southern border of the Lut desert from 5 aspects: construction method, defensive structure, form, location, and function. The results of this study show that the fence structure of all the castles under investigation of the load-bearing wall is mainly made of mud and mud bricks, and in some cases, stone and brick have been used in combination with them for more strength. The richness of mud and mud bricks, cheapness and lower construction expenses, riches of mass production, faster production, matching the color with the environment, and helping to better camouflage compared to bricks and non-woven materials. Also, few mountain castles are built with stone materials due to their availability and the possibility of camouflage. The defense structure of most castles is based on fences and towers, and the number of towers and fences has been reduced and increased according to demand, and moats have been used. In general, as the wealth and population of castles, one of whose functions was residential, increased, rulers and residents increased the number of defense layers. There is also a type without fence, which is built due to climate and derived from the form of nuclear villages. In this way, the height of the external walls was increased to prevent the entry of sand into the central structure, no doors and windows were opened to the outside, and the passage was made only through the gate. This is not only to deal with climatic problems but also increases the security of the castle. The dominant form in the castles of the region is square and rectangular, but due to climatic and contextual reasons, many rhombus-shaped, trapezoidal, and irregular castles have also been built. The castles built based on the plan, follow the traditional square and rectangular geometry of the castles of the central plateau of Iran. The castles that have expanded over time and the castles that have been designed using the characteristics of the bed and the background (such as mountain and riverside castles) have irregular geometry. Most of the towers are built in the middle of the sides and corners however, in some cases, the construction of towers is in the middle and outside of the fortress. The towers in the middle of the castle had only an observation role, but the towers located in the corners and the middle of the sides had a defensive and structural role. Also, due to structural and spatial reasons, some castles are made of rectangular cube towers, cube bases, and semi-cylindrical towers.
The number of castles in the region is affected by the forces of security and climate. The inhabitant areas of the western and southern border of Lut have been very rich due to plentiful water and are located on commercial roads. On the other hand, the limitation of point water sources such as wells, aqueducts, and springs had caused the creation of irregular and scattered villages in the middle of the desert with a distance from each other and increased insecurity. According to historical sources, desert outlaws have also had a large presence in the region. All these factors, in addition to the techniques to deal with violent sand storms, had caused cities and villages to be built in the middle of the fence, or to build a castle inside or around it for use in times of need, which has caused the number of castles in the investigated area. This has caused the majority of fortresses in the region to have residential functions and to be built around and inside villages and cities, and other functions and settlements are less frequent.
Lut desert is located in southeastern Iran. The area, despite having many historical monuments, including numerous castles, has not received enough attention from architectural historians. This study aims to clarify the architectural features and the purpose for the multiplicity of these fortresses in this region, it has been tried to study and investigate them with descriptive, analytical, and logical cognitive methods. The research was carried out by library and field studies of 140 castles, as case studies, in the region. The study’s results show that the climate and security factors are the main reasons for erecting the castles. Abundant water and location on the trade routes made the region rich, and on the other hand, point water sources and their limitations caused dispersion and distance between the structures and increased insecurity. According to historical sources, desert outlaws have also had a large presence in the region. Besides, the techniques to deal with violent sandstorms had caused them to build cities and villages in the middle of high barriers, or to build a castle inside or around it for use in times of need, which caused the number of castles in the investigated area. This has also caused the majority of castles in the region to have residential functions and be built inside or around cities and villages, and other functions and establishments are less frequent. The architecture of the castles and defense fortifications of the region also follows the common architecture of the central plateau castles, excluding incomparable cases. So, most of the castles follow the square and rectangular geometry, and in some cases, the irregular, trapezoidal, and parallelogram geometry is derived from the climatic and contextual conditions. The materials used were canvas and due to the ease of construction, speed of mass production, lower cost and camouflage, mud and mud brick in plain fortresses, and stone in mountain ones. Most of the towers are built in the corners and the middle of the sides with observational, defensive, and structural functions, and in some cases, towers are seen in the middle of the castle with only observational functions. The fortresses’ defense structure mainly is based on the barrier and tower, and as the wealth and population of residential castles increased, more defense boundaries were added.
Keywords: Fortress, Defensive Fortifications, Lot Desert, Kerman.
Introduction
Castles were military or civilian fortifications that were built using natural geographical features to maintain security (Sultani Mohammadi and Bulouri Bunab, 2015: 75). There are many variations in their use and they have a form of residence and social structure, different from the structure of the village and city (Parsi, 1383: 136; Nurbakhsh, 1366: 147).
In Iran, the formation of enclosed group buildings with various methods has a history of three thousand years (Kleiss, 1383: 160). The early forts in Iran can be seen as a relic of the agricultural civilization, when humans started to settle down and needed to maintain their security (Kiani, 1374: 78). In the past, next to many settlements and cities of Iran, there were one or more fortresses, which became people’s shelters during unrest and insecurity (Pirnia and Me‘marian, 2007: 82). Their functions were different, and the smallest of them was a military base or post, and the largest of them were guarded shelters for caravans and military and defensive forts (Siro, 1357: 54). Also, some of them were the central core of the ancient cities of Iran, and the main life of the people was often formed inside the fortresses and old forts (Zarei and Heydari Baba Kamal, 2016: 202). Some scholars believe that castles were built first and then towns were formed around them (Zuka, 1374; Na‘imi, 1389). These defense structures were usually built by the governments to protect the strategic and border cities against the enemy’s invasion and the encroachments of nomadic desert rovers (Wiley, 2016: 26).
Owing to political, economic, and geographical requirements, in both pre-Islamic and Islamic eras, numerous fortresses, and defensive buildings were built. The southern and western edge of the Lut desert in Kerman province is one of them, due to its special geographical location, has many historical castles that have not been studied and investigated in detail, and the studies conducted are limited to archaeological investigations and identifications and monographs. It is related to buildings. This area consists of important cities such as Ravar, Shahdad, Bam, Fahraj, Regan and Narmashir. Each of these cities had political, social and economic prestige at some point in history from the third and fourth millennium BC to the middle Islamic centuries (Qazvini, 1373: 243; Muqadsi, 1361: 680 and 684; Istakhari, 1373: 246; Yaqut, 1383: 269 and 296; Zarei and Heydari Kamal, 1393: 196, Hakimi, 1385: 28; Hakeimi, 1351: 78; Kabuli, 1369: 213). Considering the importance of this type of building in understanding the historical architecture of Iran, as well as the process of their destruction due to natural and human erosion, it is necessary to examine them with a closer look and in more detail. The upcoming research has investigated the castles of this area with such an approach and tried to answer two main questions: 1- What are the architectural characteristics of the fortress in the geographical area of the southern and western border of the Lut desert? 2- What is the main reason for the appearance, formation, and number of fortresses in this region?
Discussion
The structure used in the barrier of all the load-bearing wall castles and the materials used in the fence of all the plain castles the mud and mud brick and mountain areas, stone and baked brick are used for strengthening the base of the barriers. Stone has been the main material in the few mountain castles in the region. Although various decorations are used in the castles, due to functional reasons, they are seen in a limited number.
In terms of shape, the majority of castles in the region are square and rectangular, that is, the dominant form of such buildings in the central plateau of Iran. However, there are several castles with special trapezoidal, parallelogram, and irregular geometries, which were built in this way due to the specific topography of the environment and climatic conditions, such as facing sandstorms.
The dominant form of the towers is also cylindrical. In some cases, rectangular cube forms and square bases have been used, all of which have led to more structural resistance of the towers. The semi-cylindrical form has also led to the optimal use of space. Only one case of a triangular tower foundation has been seen in the castles, which is considered an exception. In terms of the location of the towers, the majority are placed in the corners and middle of the sides, which is by the usual architecture of castles. However, the construction of towers in the middle of the castle is surprising in many cases.
The defense structure of the castles of the region is based on two types, fenced and unfenced. Most of them consist of walls and towers, and several fences and ditches have been added. In some cases, the position of the bed in the mountain castles has been used and, on some sides, the fence has been removed. Most of the castles are located inside or outside of villages and cities for security and climatic reasons. The forts on the road and near the rivers were also built for security reasons.
To determine the exact function of fortresses is unclear, however, based on the previous data, the purpose can be recognized to some extent. Therefore, the castles that were built at the critical points between the road and the water divide had military use in strategic locations. The fortresses that were built in the center and around the villages were the lords’ fortifications that had either a residential position or an economic function. In the case of expansion and adding spaces such as the guard’s room, posts, and spaces similar to the military function, they become residential and if they are located in a prosperous city and court spaces are located inside them, they have a ruler’s seat. Fortresses that are located next to villages and cities have a shelter function.
Conclusion
the research studied the architectural features of the fortifications and defensive structures of the western and southern border of the Lut desert from 5 aspects: construction method, defensive structure, form, location, and function. The results of this study show that the fence structure of all the castles under investigation of the load-bearing wall is mainly made of mud and mud bricks, and in some cases, stone and brick have been used in combination with them for more strength. The richness of mud and mud bricks, cheapness and lower construction expenses, riches of mass production, faster production, matching the color with the environment, and helping to better camouflage compared to bricks and non-woven materials. Also, few mountain castles are built with stone materials due to their availability and the possibility of camouflage. The defense structure of most castles is based on fences and towers, and the number of towers and fences has been reduced and increased according to demand, and moats have been used. In general, as the wealth and population of castles, one of whose functions was residential, increased, rulers and residents increased the number of defense layers. There is also a type without fence, which is built due to climate and derived from the form of nuclear villages. In this way, the height of the external walls was increased to prevent the entry of sand into the central structure, no doors and windows were opened to the outside, and the passage was made only through the gate. This is not only to deal with climatic problems but also increases the security of the castle. The dominant form in the castles of the region is square and rectangular, but due to climatic and contextual reasons, many rhombus-shaped, trapezoidal, and irregular castles have also been built. The castles built based on the plan, follow the traditional square and rectangular geometry of the castles of the central plateau of Iran. The castles that have expanded over time and the castles that have been designed using the characteristics of the bed and the background (such as mountain and riverside castles) have irregular geometry. Most of the towers are built in the middle of the sides and corners however, in some cases, the construction of towers is in the middle and outside of the fortress. The towers in the middle of the castle had only an observation role, but the towers located in the corners and the middle of the sides had a defensive and structural role. Also, due to structural and spatial reasons, some castles are made of rectangular cube towers, cube bases, and semi-cylindrical towers.
The number of castles in the region is affected by the forces of security and climate. The inhabitant areas of the western and southern border of Lut have been very rich due to plentiful water and are located on commercial roads. On the other hand, the limitation of point water sources such as wells, aqueducts, and springs had caused the creation of irregular and scattered villages in the middle of the desert with a distance from each other and increased insecurity. According to historical sources, desert outlaws have also had a large presence in the region. All these factors, in addition to the techniques to deal with violent sand storms, had caused cities and villages to be built in the middle of the fence, or to build a castle inside or around it for use in times of need, which has caused the number of castles in the investigated area. This has caused the majority of fortresses in the region to have residential functions and to be built around and inside villages and cities, and other functions and settlements are less frequent.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Interdisciplinary
Received: 2023/08/3 | Accepted: 2024/01/31 | Published: 2024/05/30
Received: 2023/08/3 | Accepted: 2024/01/31 | Published: 2024/05/30
References
1. - اسکندری، نصیر، (1391). «بررسی و شناسایی باستانشناسی بخشهای شهداد و گلباف شهرستان کرمان». تهران: مرکز اسناد پژوهشکدۀ باستانشناسی پژوهشگاه میراثفرهنگی (منتشرنشده).
2. - اشپولر، برتولد، (1384). تاریخ مغول در ایران. ترجمۀ محمود میرآفتاب، تهران: نشر علمی و فرهنگی.
3. - اصطخری، ابواسحاق، (1373). الممالک والمسالک. ترجمۀ محمد بن اسعد بن عبدالله تستری، بهکوشش: ایرج افشار، تهران: مجموعۀ انتشارات ادبی تاریخی موقوفات محمود افشار.
4. - افضلالدین کرمانی، ابوحامد احمدبن حامد، (1356). عقدالعلی للموقف الاعلی. تصحیح: علیمحمد عامرینایینی، تهران: روزبهان.
5. - بلاذری، احمدبن یحیی، (1337). فتوحالبلدان. ترجمۀ محمد توکل، تهران: نشر نقره.
6. - امیرحاجلو، سعید؛ و سقایی، بصیرا، (1400). «بررسی مؤلفههای پدافند غیرعامل در سازمان فضایی و کالبدی قلعۀ تاریخی مورچهخورت اصفهان». معماری اقلیم گرم و خشک، 9(13): 241-217. DOI: 10.29252/ahdc.2021.16400.1534
7. - پارسی، فرامرز، (1383). «قلعه رودخان». معمار، 28: 139-134.
8. - پازوکی، ناصر، (1376). استحکامات دفاعی در دورۀ اسلامی. تهران: انتشارات سازمان میراثفرهنگی و گردشگری.
9. - پروندۀ ثبت جهانی بم و منظر فرهنگی آن، (1383). تهران: سازمان میراثفرهنگی، صنایعدستی و گردشگری.
10. - پوراحمد، احمد، (1376). جغرافیا و کارکردهای بازار کرمان. کرمان: مرکز کرمانشناسی.
11. - پیرنیا، محمدکریم؛ و معماریان، غلامحسین، (1387). معماری ایرانی. تهران: انتشارات سروش دانش.
12. - جودکی، اسدالله، (1391). «کاوشهای باستانشناسی مسیر کانال انتقال آب سد نسا به بم و بروات». کرمان: پایگاه میراثفرهنگی بم، (منتشرنشده).
13. - چمنکار، محمدجعفر، (1384). «عوامل اثرگذار بر بازرگانی خلیجفارس در عصر مغول (حاکمیت اقتصادی-سیاسی ایران بر خلیجفارس و دریای عمان)». تاریخ روابط خارجی، 24 و 25: 28-1. https://elmnet.ir/doc/1251824-63611
14. - حاجیابراهیمزرگر، اکبر، (1378). درآمدی بر شناخت معماری روستایی ایران. تهران: مرکز چاپ و نشر شهید بهشتی.
15. - حاکمی، علی، (1351). «کاوشهای حاشیۀ دشت لوت، کشف تمدن پیشازتاریخ در خبیص شهداد». هنر و مردم، 126: 83-75.
16. - حاکمی، علی، (1385). هشت فصل حفاری در شهداد. گردآوریشده توسط: محمود موسوی، تهران: سازمان میراثفرهنگی و گردشگری و صنایعدستی.
17. - حناچی، پیروز؛ و آرمان، فهیمه، (1392). «شناخت ساختار کالبدی قلعه روستای خرانق با رویکرد تأثیرپذیری از الگوهای رفتاری». مطالعات معماری ایران، 2(4): 86-65. https://jias.kashanu.ac.ir/article_111716.html
18. - خلعتبری، اللهیار؛ و دلریش، بشری، (1382). کارکردها و نقش سیاسی اجتماعی قلاع در تاریخ میانه ایران. تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه شهیدبهشتی.
19. - دپلانول، گزاویه، (1358). مطالعاتی دربارۀ جغرافیای انسانی شمال ایران. ترجمۀ سیروس سهامی، ج 2، مشهد: نشر مشهد.
20. - ذکا، یحیی، (1374). «مفهوم دژ و ارگ یا هستۀ مرکزی ایجاد شهرها در ایران». مجموعه مقالات کنگرۀ تاریخ معماری و شهرسازی ایران ارگ بم، ج 1، تهران: سازمان میراثفرهنگی کشور، اسفند 1374: 227-209.
21. - زارع، شهرام، (1387). «بررسی باستانشناسی شهرستان بم». کرمان: پایگاه میراثفرهنگی بم (منتشرنشده).
22. - زارع، شهرام، (1391). «گزارشهای باستانشناسی بم: منطقۀ دامنه جبال بارز و ابارق تا رحیمآباد». کرمان: پایگاه میراثفرهنگی بم، (منتشرنشده).
23. - زارع، شهرام، (1391). «گزارش بررسیهای باستانشناسی بم». کرمان: پایگاه میراثفرهنگی بم (منتشرنشده).
24. - زارع، شهرام (1397). «بررسیهای باستانشناسی منظر فرهنگی بم، گزارش باستانشناسی منطقه ریگان- فهرج». تهران: مرکز اسناد پژوهشگاه میراثفرهنگی (منتشرنشده).
25. - زارعی، محمدابراهیم؛ و حیدریباباکمال، یدالله، (1393). «اهمیت قلاع و استحکامات دورۀ قاجار منطقه شهداد در برقراری امنیت اجتماعی حاشیۀ غربی کویر لوت». پژهشهای باستانشناسی ایران، 4 (6): 211-195. https://nbsh.basu.ac.ir/article_849.html
26. - سازمان جغرافیایی نیروهای مسلح، (1382). فرهنگ جغرافیایی آبادیهای استان کرمان، شهرستان کرمان. تهران: سازمان جغرافیایی نیروهای مسلح.
27. - سازمان جغرافیایی نیروهای مسلح، (1382). فرهنگ جغرافیایی آبادیهای استان کرمان، شهرستان راور. تهران: سازمان جغرافیایی نیروهای مسلح.
28. - سازمان جغرافیایی نیروهای مسلح، (1383). فرهنگ جغرافیایی آبادیهای استان کرمان، شهرستان بم. تهران: سازمان جغرافیایی نیروهای مسلح.
29. - سایکس، سرپرسی، (1395). سفرنامۀ ژنرال سرپرسی سایکس یا دههزار میل در ایران. ترجمۀ حسین سعادتنوری، تهران: نشر علمی فرهنگی.
30. - ستوده، منوچهر، (1362). قلاع اسماعیلیه. تهران: انتشارات طهوری.
31. - سقایی، سارا؛ امیرحاجلو، سعید؛ و مقبلیقرائی، فریده، (1397). «علل گسترش و تخریب شهر کهن نرماشیر کرمان؛ بر پایه نظریه بومشناسی وات». باغ نظر، 15 (67): 70-53. DOI: 10.22034/bagh.2018.80614
32. - سلطانیمحمدی، مهدی؛ و بلوریبناب، محمد، (1396). «درآمدی بر شناخت معماری قلعههای شهر بافران». اثر، 37(75): 38-19. https://journal.richt.ir/athar/article-1-715-fa.html
33. - سیرو، ماکسیم، (1357). راههای باستانی اصفهان و بناهای وابسته به آن. ترجمۀ مهدی مشایخی، تهران: سازمان حفاظت آثار باستانی.
34. - صفا منصوری، هادی؛ و رنگچیان، علی، (1398). «بررسی قلعه حصاری گازران اسفراین؛ قلعهای رعیتی در خراسان شمالی». اثر، 40 (87): 300-284. https://athar.richt.ir/article-2-506-fa.html
35. - عطایی، محمدتقی، (1391). «گزارش بررسی روشمند محوطه باستانی گسل بم-بروات (بم-کرمان)». کرمان: پایگاه میراثفرهنگی بم (منتشرنشده).
36. - عمید، حسن، (1390). فرهنگ فارسی. تهران: انتشارات امیرکبیر.
37. - فاضل، لیلا؛ محمدیفر، یعقوب؛ همتیازندریانی، اسماعیل؛ و قمری، مسعود، (1401). «بررسی اهمیت خط سیر باستانی فهرج- اسپی (نصرتآباد) در اواخر دورۀ ساسانی تا پایان عصر سلجوقی با تکیه بر کاروانسرای (رباط) نویافته بیابان گرگ در حاشیه لوت جنوبی». شهر ایرانی اسلامی، 12(46): 68-53. DOR: 20.1001.1.2228639.1400.12.46.1.7
38. - فاضل، لیلا، (1400). مطالعات باستانشناسی ناحیه منظر فرهنگی بم، شهرستانهای فهرج و ریگان استان کرمان. شیراز: کتیبۀ نوین.
39. - فاضل، لیلا، (1394). «مطالعات باستانشناسی منظر فرهنگی بم- بررسی مقدماتی قلاع موجود در منظر و محور فرهنگی بم (1391-1394)». تحتنظر: شهریار عدل، کرمان: پایگاه میراثفرهنگی بم (منتشرنشده).
40. - فرمانفرما، عبدالحسینمیرزا، (1383). مسافرت نامه کرمان و بلوچستان. تهران: نشر اساطیر.
41. - فرمانفرما، فیروزمیرزا، (1379). سفرنامه کرمان و بلوچستان. بهکوشش: منصور اتحادیه و سما پیرا تهران: انتشارات تاریخ ایران.
42. - قاسمخانی، و قطبی، (1385). نقشهبردار پرونده ثبت ملی 21503، قلعه کشیت. تهران: سازمان میراثفرهنگی.
43. - قزوینی، زکریا بن محمد بن محمود، (1373). آثارالبلاد و اخبارالعباد. ترجمه و اضافات: جهانگیرمیرزا قاجار، بهتصحیح: میرهاشم محدث، تهران: انتشارات امیرکبیر.
44. - کابلی، میرعابدین، (1368). «شهداد». مجموعه مقالات شهرهای ایران. بهکوشش: محمدیوسف کیانی، تهران: وزارت فرهنگ و ارشاد اسلامی: 106-66.
45. - کابلی، میرعابدین، (1369). «روابط فرهنگی و بازرگانی شهداد و منطقه ترکستان در هزاره سوم پ.م.». مجموعه مقالات کرمانشناسی، بهکوشش: محمدعلی گلابزاده، کرمان: انتشارات کرمانشناسی: 224-206.
46. - کریمی، علیرضا؛ و علیپورسیلاب، جواد، (1392). «نگاهی به مفهوم تاریخی دفاع غیرعامل در عصر اسلامی». مطالعات تاریخ اسلام، 5(18): 116-93. http://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.22286713.1392.5.18.5.2
47. - کلایس، ولفرام، (1383). قلاع در معماری ایران دورۀ اسلامی. گردآوری محمدیوسف کیانی، تهران: سمت.
48. - کیانی، محمدیوسف، (1374). تاریخ هنر معماری ایرانی در دورۀ اسلامی. تهران: انتشارات جهاد دانشگاهی.
49. - گلابچی، محمود؛ و جوانیدیزجی، آیدین، (1392). فنشناسی معماری ایران. تهران: دانشگاه تهران.
50. - لسترنج، گای، (1337). سرزمینهای خلافت شرقی. ترجمۀ محمود عرفان، تهران: بنگاه ترجمه و نشر کتاب.
51. - لمبتون، ا.ک.س.، (1362). مالک و زارع در ایران. ترجمه: منوچهر امیری، تهران: علمی فرهنگی.
52. - مستوفی، احمد، (1351). شهداد و جغرافیای تاریخی دشت لوت. تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.
53. - مستوفی، احمد، (1348). «گزارشهای جغرافیایی لوت زنگیاحمد». پژوهشهای جغرافیایی، (1): 27-3.
54. - مشکور، محمدجواد، (1371). جغرافیای تاریخی ایرانباستان. تهران: نشر دنیای کتاب.
55. - معین، محمد، (1375). فرهنگ فارسی معین. تهران: انتشارات امیرکبیر.
56. - مقبلیقرائی، فریده؛ امیرحاجلو، سعید؛ و سقایی، سارا، (1396). «مطالعه و تحلیل باستانشناختی استحکامات نظامی-دفاعی دوران سلامی در دشت نرماشیر کرمان». مطالعات تاریخ فرهنگی (پژوهشنامه انجمن ایرانی تاریخ)، 9(34): 155-125. https://chistorys.ir/article-1-539-fa.html
57. - مقدسی، ابوعبدالله بن احمد، (1361). احسنالتقاسیم فی معرفهالاقالیم. ترجمۀ علینقی منزوی، تهران: شرکت مترجمان و مؤلفان ایران.
58. - ملازاده، کاظم؛ و محمدی، مریم، (1385). قلاع و استحکامات نظامی. تهران: پژوهشگاه فرهنگ و هنر اسلامی.
59. - نوربخش، حمید، (1366). ارگ بم، تاریخ مختصری از تحول شهرنشینی و شهرسازی در ایران. تهران: انتشارات جهاد دانشگاهی.
60. - نعیمی، آتریهاتف، (1389). «گونهشناسی قلاع مسکونی در ایران (باززندهسازی قلعۀ مورچهخورت اصفهان)». پایاننامۀ کارشناسیارشد مرمت و احیای بناها و بافتهای تاریخی، تهران: دانشگاه تهران (منتشرنشده)
61. - ویلی، پیتر، (1386). آشیانه عقاب (قلعههای اسماعیلی در ایران و سوریه). ترجمۀ فریدون بدرهای، تهران: نشر پژوهش فروزان روز.
62. - یاقوت حموی، (1383). معجمالبلدان. ج 2، ترجمۀ علینقی منزوی، تهران: سازمان میراثفرهنگی.
64. - Amir Hajloo, S. & Saghayi, B., (2021). “An Investigation of the Strategies of passive defense in the Spatial Organization and Architecture Features of the old Mourcheh Khort Citadel [Research]”. Architecture in Hot and Dry Climate, 9(13): 217-241. 10.29252/ahdc.2021.16400.1534 (In Persian).
65. - Amid, H., (2011). Farhang Farsi. Tehran: Amirkabir Publications. (In Persian).
66. - Atayi, M., (2012). Report on the systematic investigation of the ancient site of the Bam-Barwat fault (Bam-Kerman). Kerman: Bam Cultural Heritage Base (unpublished). (In Persian).
67. - Balazari, A., (1958). Fotooh Alabdan. Translated by: Mohammad Tawakal, Tehran: Noghreh. (In Persian).
68. - Chmankar, M., (2005). “Factors influencing Persian Gulf trade in the Mongol era (Iran's economic-political dominance over the Persian Gulf and Oman Sea)”. History of Foreign Relations, 24 & 25: 1-28. (In Persian). https://elmnet.ir/doc/1251824-63611
69. - Eskandari, N., (2012). Archaeological investigation and identification of Shahdad and Golbaf parts of Kerman city. Tehran: Archeology Research Institute Document Center, Cultural Heritage Research Institute (unpublished). (In Persian).
70. - Fazel, L.; Mohammadifar, Y.; Hemati Azandariani, E. & Ghmari, M., (2022). “Investigation of the importance of the ancient Fahraj-Spi (Nusratabad) route in the late Sassanid period until the end of the Seljuk era, relying on the newly renovated caravanserai (Rabat) of the Garg desert on the outskirts of the southern Lut”. Iranian Islamic City, 12(46): 68-53. DOR: 20.1001.1.2228639.1400.12.46.1.7 (In Persian).
71. - Fazel, L., (2021). Archaeological studies of Bam cultural landscape area, Fahraj and Regan cities of Kerman province. Shiraz: Katibeh Novin. (In Persian).
72. - Fazel, L., (2015). “Archaeological studies of the cultural landscape of Bam - a preliminary survey of castles in the landscape and cultural center of Bam (2014-2015)”. Under the supervision of Shahriar Adl, Kerman: Bam Cultural Heritage Base (Unpublished). (In Persian).
73. - Farmanfarma. A., (2004). Kerman and Baluchistan travel book. Tehran: Asatir Publishing. (In Persian).
74. - Farmanfarma. F., (2000). Travelogue of Kerman and Baluchistan. by the efforts of Mansour Liangh and Sama Pira, Tehran: Tarikh Iran Publications. (In Persian).
75. - Geographical Organization of the Armed Forces, (2003). Geographical culture of settlements in Kerman province, Kerman city. Tehran: Geographical Organization of Armed Forces. (In Persian).
76. - Geographical Organization of the Armed Forces, (2003). Geographical culture of settlements in Kerman province, Raver city. Tehran: Geographical Organization of Armed Forces. (In Persian).
77. - Geographical Organization of the Armed Forces, (2004). Geographical culture of settlements in Kerman province, Bam city. Tehran: Geographical Organization of Armed Forces. (In Persian).
78. - Ghasemkhni & Ghotbi, (2006). Surveyor of National Registration File 21503, Keshit Castle. Tehran: Cultural Heritage Organization.
79. - Ghazvini, Z., (1994). Athar albaladan va Akhbar alebad, translation and additions: Jahangir Mirza Qajar. corrected by Mirhashem Mohhaddeth, Tehran: Amir Kabir Publications. (In Persian).
80. - Golabchi, M. & Javani Dizaji, A., (2013). Iranian Architectural Technology. Tehran: University of Tehran. (In Persian).
81. - Haji Ebrahim Zargar, A., (1999). An introduction to understanding the rural architecture of Iran. Tehran: Shahid Beheshti Publishing Center. (In Persian).
82. - Hakemi, A., (1972). “Excavations of the Margin of Lot Plain, Discovery of Prehistoric Civilization in Khabis Shahdad”. Art and People, 126: 83-75. (In Persian).
83. - Hakemi, A., (2006). Eight Seasons of Excavation in Shahdad. compiled by Mahmoud Mousavi, Tehran: Organization of Cultural Heritage, Tourism and Handicrafts. (In Persian).
84. - Hanachi, P. & Arman, F., (2013). “Knowing the physical structure of the castle of Kharanagh village with the influence of behavioral patterns”. Iranian Architectural Studies, 2(4): 65-86. https://jias.kashanu.ac.ir/article_111716.html (In Persian).
85. - Joodaki, A., (2012). “Archaeological excavations of the water transfer channel of the Nesa dam to Bam and Barwat”. Kerman: Bam Cultural Heritage Base, (unpublished). (In Persian).
86. - Kaboli, M., (1989). Shahdad. A collection of essays on the cities of Iran. by the effort of Mohammad Youssef Kiyani, Tehran: Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance: 66-106.
87. - Kaboli, M., (1990). “Cultural and commercial relations between Shahdad and Turkestan region in the third millennium BC”. Collection of articles on Kermanology, by Mohammad Ali Gulabzadeh, Kerman: Kermanology Publications: 206-224. (In Persian).
88. - Karimi, A. & Alipoor Seylab, J., (2013). “Looking at the historical concept of passive defense in the Islamic era”. Islamic History Studies, 5(18): 116-93. http://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.22286713.1392.5.18.5.2 (In Persian).
89. - Khalatbari, A. & Delrish, B., (2003). Functions and social political role of castles in the middle history of Iran. Tehran: Shahid Beheshti University Press. (In Persian).
90. - Kiani, M., (1995). History of Iranian Architectural Art in the Islamic Period. Tehran: Jihad University Press. (In Persian).
91. - Kleiss, V., (2004). Castles in Iranian Architecture of the Islamic Period. compiled by Mohammad Youssef Kiani, Tehran: Samt. (In Persian).
92. - Lambton, A., (1983). Malek and Zare in Iran. Translated by: Manouchehr Amiri, Tehran: Ilmi Farhani. (In Persian).
93. - Le Strange, G., (1958). The lands of the Eastern Caliphate. Translated by: Mahmoud Irfan, Tehran: Book Translation and Publishing Company. (In Persian).
94. - Mashkoor, M., (1992). Historical Geography of Ancient Iran. Tehran: Donyay Kitab Publishing. (In Persian).
95. - Maghdasi, A., (1982). Ahsan altaghasim fi Marefat Alagjalim. Translated by Alineghi Manzavi, Tehran: Iran Translators and Authors Company. (In Persian).
96. - Moein, M., (1996). Farhang Farsi Moein. Tehran: Amirkabir Publications. (In Persian).
97. - Mostofi, A., (1972). Shahdad and historical geography of Dasht Lot. Tehran: Tehran University Press. (In Persian).
98. - Mostofi, A., (1969). “Geographical reports of Lot Zangi Ahmad”. Geographical researches, (1): 3-27. (In Persian).
99. - Moghbeli Gharaee, F.; Amirhajloo, S. & Saghaee, S., (2017). “Archaeological study and analysis of the military-defense fortifications of the Salami period in the Narmashir plain of Kerman”. Cultural History Studies (Research Journal of Iranian History Association), 9(34): 155-125. https://chistorys.ir/article-1-539-fa.html (In Persian).
100. - Molazadeh, K. & Mohammadi, M., (2006). Castles and military fortifications. Tehran: Research Institute of Islamic Culture and Art. (In Persian).
101. - Naeemi, A., (2010). “Typology of residential castles in Iran (revival of Isfahan's Anteater Castle)”. Master's Thesis on Restoration and Revival of Historical Buildings and Textures, Tehran: University of Tehran (unpublished). (In Persian).
102. - Noorbakhsh, H., (1987). Arg Bam, a brief history of urbanization and urban development in Iran. Tehran: Jihad Daneshgahi Press. (In Persian).
103. - Parsi, F., (2004). “Roodkhan Castle”. Architecture, 28: 134-139. (In Persian).
104. - Pazooki, N., (1997). Defense Fortifications in the Islamic Period. Tehran: Publications of the Cultural Heritage and Tourism Organization. (In Persian).
105. - Pirnia, M. & Memarian, G., (2008). Iranian Architecture. Tehran: Soroush Danesh Publications. (In Persian).
106. - Planhol, X., (1979). Studies on the Human Geography of Northern Iran. Translated by Siros Sohami, vol. 2, Mashhad: Mashhad Publishing. (In Persian).
107. - Poor Ahmad, A., (1997). Geography and Functions of Kerman Market. Kerman: Kermanshenasi Center. (In Persian).
108. - The global registration file of Bam and its cultural landscape, (2004). Tehran: Organization of Cultural Heritage, Crafts and Tourism.
109. - Safa Mansoori, H. & Rangchian, A., (2019). “Inspection of the fenced castle of Gazran Esfrain; A serf castle in North Khorasan”. Athar, 40 (87): 284-300. https://athar.richt.ir/article-2-506-fa.html (In Persian).
110. - Saghaee, S.; Amir Hajloo, S. & Moghbeli Gharaee, F., (2018). “Development and Destruction of the Old City of Narmashir in Kerman Province; through the Lens of Kenneth Watt’s Ecological Theory”. Bagh Nazar, 15 (67): 53-70. DOI: 10.22034/bagh.2018.80614 (In Persian).
111. - Sajjadieh Khajaviee, F.; Bakhtiari, S. & Ghobadi, S., (2021). “The Impact of Country Risk Management on Economic Growth in the Selected OIC Countries [Research]”. Planning and Budgeting, 26(3), 101-130. https://doi.org/10.52547/jpbud.26.3.101 (In Persian).
112. - Siraux, M., (1978). Ancient roads of Isfahan and related buildings. Translated by: Mehdi Mashayikhi, Tehran: Antiquities Protection Organization. (In Persian).
113. - Soltani Mihammadi, M. & Boloori Bonab, M., (2017). “Introduction to the knowledge of the architecture of the castles of Bafran city”. Athar, 37(75): 19-38. https://journal.richt.ir/athar/article-1-715-fa.html (In Persian).
114. - Sotoodeh, M., (1983). Esmailiyeh Castles. Tehran: Tahori Publications. (In Persian).
115. - Spuler, B., (2005). History of the Mongols in Iran. Translated by: Mahmoud Mir Aftab, Tehran: Scientific and Cultural Publication. (In Persian).
116. - Sykes, P., (2016). The Travelogue of General Sarpersy Sykes or Ten Thousand Miles in Iran. Translated by: Hossein Saadat Nouri, Tehran: Scientific and Cultural Publishing. (In Persian).
117. - Willey. P., (2007). Eagle's nest (Ismaili fortresses in Iran and Syria). Translated by: Fereydoun Badraei, Tehran: Forozan Rooz Research Publishing. (In Persian).
118. - Yaghoot, H., (2004). Majam Albaladan. vol. 2, Translated by: Alineghi Manzavi, Tehran: Cultural Heritage Organization. (In Persian).
119. - Zoka, Y., (1995). “The concept of fortress and citadel or the central core of creating cities in Iran”. Proceedings of the Congress on the History of Architecture and Urbanization of Iran, Arg Bam Citadel, Vol. 1, Tehran: Iran's Cultural Heritage Organization, March 1995: 227-209. (In Persian).
120. - Zare, S., (2008). “Archaeological survey of Bam city”. Kerman: Bam Cultural Heritage Base (unpublished). (In Persian).
121. - Zare, S., (2012). “Archaeological reports of Bam: the area of the Jebal Barez and Abaraq mountains to Rahim Abad”. Kerman: Bam Cultural Heritage Base, (unpublished). (In Persian).”
122. - Zare, S., (2012). “Archaeological survey of Bam city. Kerman: Bam Cultural Heritage Base (unpublished). (In Persian).
123. - Zare, S., (2018). “Archaeological surveys of the cultural landscape of Bam, the archaeological report of Rigan-Fahraj region”. Tehran: Cultural Heritage Research Institute Document Center (unpublished). (In Persian).
124. - Zarei, M. & Heidari Babakamal, Y., (2014). “The Role of the Qajar Fortifications of the Shahdad Region in the Social Security of Western Margins of the Lut Desert”. Archaeological Researches of Iran, 4 (6): 195-211. https://nbsh.basu.ac.ir/article_849.html (In Persian).
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |