fa jalali 1404 9 1 gregorian 2025 12 1 46 110 online 1 fulltext

fa مسجد ملک زوزن در مسیر لشکرکشی‌های مغول: بررسی نمونه‌ای کهن از حفاظت میراث‌فرهنگی در شرایط جنگی مسجد ملک زوزن در خراسان از ابنیۀ معظم دورۀ خوارزمشاهیان به‌شمار می‌آید که ساخت آن در اوایل قرن هفتم هجری‌قمری آغاز شده است. مطالعات و کاوش‌هایی که در دهه‌های ۱۳۶۰ و ۱۳۷۰ه‍.ش. در این مسجد انجام شد، پرده از بسیاری از مسائل مبهم در رابطه با این بنا برداشت؛ مسائلی هم‌چون احداث مسجد بر روی بقایای یک مسجد پیشین سلجوقی، نیمه‌کاره ماندن عملیات ساختمانی به‌دلیل آغاز حملات مغول در سال ۶۱۶ ه‍.ق. و در نهایت، یافت‌شدن محراب گچ‌بری قدیمی متعلق به دورۀ سلجوقی که به‌صورت بسیار استادانه در میان لایه‌های خشت و ماسه‌بادی محافظت شده بود. اقدامی که مشخص نیست با هدف حفاظت از محراب در طول عملیات ساختمانی صورت‌گرفته یا به‌سبب بیم از هجوم مغولان بوده است. این پژوهش قصد دارد برای نخستین‌بار، ضمن بررسی مسیر حملات مغولان در خراسان، میزان در خطر بودن مسجد ملک زوزن را در این سال‌ها ارزیابی کند و هم‌چنین، با برشمردن برخی از مفاد کنوانسیون‌ها و معاهدات جهانی در زمینۀ حفاظت از اموال فرهنگی در طول جنگ و نبردهای مسلحانه، اقدامات انجام‌شده درخصوص محافظت از محراب سلجوقی را در آستانۀ حملات مغولان با مفاد این معاهدات مقایسه نماید. نتایج پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که مسجد ملک زوزن از میان چهار حملۀ اصلی مغولان به خراسان، در مسیر سه حملۀ عمده قرار داشته و از این منظر، خطر بالایی شهر را تهدید می‌کرده است. هم‌چنین، بررسی مفاد مرتبط با حفاظت صورت‌گرفته در مورد محراب، بیانگر هم‌خوانی این اقدام با برخی از مهم‌ترین مفاد کنوانسیون‌های بین‌المللی است.   Abstract Malek Zuzan Mosque in Khorasan is among the major architectural works of the Khwarazmshahian period, with its construction beginning in the early 13th century CE. Studies and excavations conducted in this mosque during the 1980s and 1990s revealed many previously unclear aspects regarding this structure, such as its construction over the remains of a previous Seljuk Mosque, the interruption of building operations due to the onset of Mongol attacks in 1219 CE, and the discovery of an old Seljuk stucco mihrab, which had been masterfully protected within layers of mud bricks and fine sand. It remains unclear whether this protective measure was taken intentionally to preserve the mihrab during construction or out of fear of the Mongol invasion. This study aims, for the first time, to evaluate the level of threat faced by Malek Zuzan Mosque during these years while examining the routes of the Mongol attacks in Khorasan. Additionally, by referring to certain provisions of international conventions and treaties on the protection of cultural property in armed conflicts, the study compares the protective measures taken for the Seljuk mihrab on the eve of the Mongol attacks with these provisions. The findings indicate that Malek Zuzan Mosque lay along the routes of three out of the four main Mongol attacks on Khorasan, thereby placing the city at high risk. Furthermore, the review of the protective measures applied to the mihrab demonstrates their alignment with several key provisions of international conventions. Keywords: Khwarazmshahian, Mongols, Khorasan, Zuzan, Hague Convention.چ Introduction After the end of World War II in 1945, the reconstruction of vast ruins and the protection of cultural heritage became one of the main concerns of the international community. The enormous destruction caused by the war, particularly in the fields of culture and art, paved the way for the establishment of institutions and conventions aimed at preventing the recurrence of such tragedies. The most important of these documents is the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, which, together with its Additional Protocols (1954, 1999), created the first international legal framework in this field. This Convention marked the beginning of a global approach to the protection of heritage in times of crisis. Although the protection of cultural property during wartime was formally addressed in legal terms in the twentieth century, historical evidence suggests that this concern has much deeper and older roots. A remarkable historical example in this regard is the protective measures taken during the Mongol invasions in the thirteenth century. The devastating campaigns of Chinggis Khan destroyed many of the great cities of the Iranian plateau, such as Khwarazm, Nishapur, Herat, and Rey, and annihilated a large number of cultural monuments. However, amidst this widespread destruction, there are examples of deliberate and conscious efforts to preserve cultural objects. A prominent example of such an effort is the Seljuk mihrab of the Malek Zuzan Mosque, which was discovered almost intact during excavations directed by Rajab-Ali Labbaf Khaniki in the 1980s. Archaeological investigations revealed that, in the thirteenth century, the mihrab had been protected in its original location by enclosing it within a brick casing filled with sand. This action was probably taken because construction work was interrupted following the Mongol invasions. The present study, which forms part of a broader project on the annual movements of the Mongols, aims to analyze this conservation measure and compare it with modern principles of heritage protection during armed conflicts. The paper addresses two main questions: first, to what extent was the region of Zuzan threatened by the Mongol invasions in the thirteenth century? and second, how comparable are the protective methods used for the mihrab to contemporary standards and approaches? The research methodology is based on the analysis of historical sources and the examination of archaeological reports, followed by a comparison of the findings with the provisions of international conventions and guidelines, including The Hague Convention and the recommendations of ICCROM and ICOMOS. This study seeks to demonstrate that the concern for safeguarding cultural heritage during times of war has deep historical roots and existed long before the emergence of modern legal frameworks. Discussion The Malek Zuzan Mosque, located in the Zuzan plain of southern Khorasan Razavi, represents the substantial remains of an early 7th century AH / 13th century AD mosque. Archaeological investigations indicate the site underwent at least four distinct construction phases, from the early Islamic centuries through the 6th century AH / 12th century AD. The mosque’s development peaked during the Seljuk period, featuring a hypostyle plan with a stucco mihrab. However, in the early 7th century AH / 13th century AD, under the Khwarazmshahs, a new architectural project was initiated. This new design replaced former adornments, including terracotta decorations, with glazed tiles and bricks. The colossal mosque was planned with two large iwans (east and west), but its construction was abandoned following the Mongol invasions commencing in 616 AH / 1219 AD. Evidence such as incomplete brick bonding and unfinished decorative elements substantiates that the project remained unfinished. Zuzan was situated on the path of multiple Mongol military expeditions into Khorasan. Historical sources confirm that the region lay on the route of at least three major campaigns: those led by Subutai and Jebe, Tolui, and later Hulegu. A specific historical account notes Sultan Jalal al-Din’s passage through Zuzan while fleeing the Mongols; the local ruler, fearing Mongol retaliation, refused him entry. This incident underscores the direct threat the city faced. This persistent state of threat undoubtedly contributed to the suspension of all construction activities at the mosque (Figure 1). A significant archaeological discovery was a valuable Seljuk-period mihrab, which had been protected in the 7th century AH / 13th century AD using an ingenious conservation method. The technique involved constructing a brick casing in front of the mihrab, filling the intermediate space with a row of stacked bricks, and packing the final gap with fine sand (Figures 2–5). This preemptive safeguarding measure aligns remarkably with modern principles for protecting cultural heritage during conflicts. The methodology corresponds with stipulations of the 1954 Hague Convention, such as the obligation to undertake protective measures during peacetime. It also resonates with the ICCROM Risk Preparedness guidelines concerning threat assessment, designing emergency in-situ protection plans, and creating a secure concealment for the artifact. Consequently, the protective strategy employed at Zuzan can be regarded as a pioneering example consistent with contemporary conservation standards (Table 2). Conclusion The construction of the Malek Zuzan Mosque began in the early 7th century AH (13th century AD) but was abandoned unfinished following the Mongol invasions of 616–617 AH (1219–1220 AD). Erected upon the remains of an earlier Seljuk Mosque, the new structure extensively reused building materials from its predecessor, particularly bricks. Among these salvaged elements, the Seljuk stucco mihrab held exceptional significance, valued both for its religious sanctity and its historical-artistic importance. The patrons intended to reinstall it in the new building, a plan ultimately thwarted by the Mongol incursions. The Mongol invasions of Khorasan unfolded in three primary phases. While Zuzan was not directly threatened during the first wave in 617 AH (1220 AD), the second offensive, led by Tolui, passed alarmingly close to the city. A third phase, the same year, involving the pursuit of Sultan Jalal al-Din, posed a direct threat to Zuzan, though historical evidence suggests its fortifications initially spared it from destruction. A final passage of Mongol forces under Hulegu in 653 AH (1255 AD) further underscored the region’s prolonged instability. This persistent state of danger forced the master builders to halt construction and implement ingenious protective measures for the site’s most valuable assets, notably the Seljuk mihrab. Their solution was a remarkable example of in-situ conservation: carefully encasing the mihrab within a protective shell of adobe bricks and sand. A comparison of this 13th-century method with modern principles, such as those in the 1954 Hague Convention, reveals a profound alignment with contemporary concepts of “preventive conservation” and “protective preparedness.” This study demonstrates that traditional conservation practices, even over seven centuries ago, were guided by rational and effective principles comparable to modern theory. The historical case of Zuzan thus serves as a valuable model, highlighting the importance of integrating ancestral ingenuity with contemporary systems and reaffirming the critical role of human foresight and proactive planning in safeguarding cultural heritage during times of crisis. Khwarazmshahian, Mongols, Khorasan, Zuzan, Hague Convention.  خوارزمشاهیان, مغولان, خراسان, زوزن, کنوانسیون لاهه. 7 27 http://athar.richt.ir/browse.php?a_code=A-10-2257-4&slc_lang=fa&sid=2 2025/08/31 1404/6/9 2025/09/28 1404/7/6 Shahin Garakani Dashteh PhD in Islamic Archaeology Postdoctoral Researcher in Archaeology and Islamic Art, Institute of Archaeological Sciences, Goethe University, Frankfurt am Main, Germany (Corresponding Author). شاهین گرکانی‌دشته dashteh@em.uni-frankfurt.de 0000-0002-9665-1486 Yes پژوهش‌گر پسادکتری باستان‌شناسی و هنر اسلامی، مؤسسه علوم باستان‌شناسی دانشگاه گوته، فرانکفورت، آلمان (نویسندۀ مسئول). Mohammad Mortezayi Associate Professor, Department Archaeology of Cultural Heritage and Tourism Research Institute, Tehran, Iran. محمد مرتضایی m_mortezayi2008@yahoo.com 0000-0002-3763-0888 No دانشیار گروه باستان‌شناسی دوران اسلامی، پژوهشکدۀ باستان‌شناسی، پژوهشگاه میراث‌فرهنگی و گردشگری، تهران، ایران.

fa رد پای جنگ جهانی اول در پل کهنه (پل قره‌سو)، کرمانشاه کرمانشاه در طول جنگ جهانی اول (1914-1918م.) به‌دلیل موقعیت استراتژیک صحنۀ درگیری‌های متناوب بین نیروهای عثمانی، روسیه و بریتانیا بود؛ این شهر چندین‌بار اشغال، تخلیه و بمباران شد که خسارت جانی و فرهنگی سنگینی برجای گذاشت. پل کهنه (پل قره‌سو) یکی از پل‌های تاریخی کرمانشاه است که در جنوب‌شرقی این شهر قرار دارد. پایه‌های سنگی آن متعلق به دورۀ ساسانی بوده و شواهدی از مرمت‌های دورۀ سلجوقی نیز در پل مشاهده می‌شود. با این‌حال، بیشترین بخش‌های برجا‌مانده از پل مربوط به دورۀ صفوی است و به‌همین دلیل، ساخت آن‌را به «شیخ‌علی‌خان زنگنه» وزیر «شاه‌عباس صفوی» نسبت می‌دهند. در جنگ جهانی اول، هنگامی‌که قوای روس از شرق کرمانشاه پیش‌رَوی می‌کردند، نیروهای ملی ایران همراه با نیروهای عثمانی برای کُند کردن حرکت آن‌ها دو چشمه از پل را با دینامیت منفجر کردند. اسناد کتابخانۀ ملی که برای نخستین‌بار در این پژوهش بررسی شده‌اند، به‌روشنی تخریب این دو دهانه و گزارش تعمیرات اضطراری پل را نشان می‌دهند. این اسناد که بین سال‌های ۱۲۹۶ تا ۱۳۳۶ه‍.ش. تنظیم شده‌اند، شامل مکاتبات اداری، برآوردهای مالی و گزارش‌های کارشناسی برای مرمت پل پس از جنگ هستند و اهمیت پل را در عبور کاروان‌ها و دریافت عایدات نواقل بازگو می‌کنند. داده‌های کتابخانه‌ای نیز وقوع انفجار و انهدام پل را تأیید کرده و نشان می‌دهند که درگیری‌ها در نزدیکی کوره‌های آجرپزی ساحل رودخانه رخ داده و توپخانۀ روس‌ها این محدوده را هدف قرار داده ‌است. مرمت‌های متعدد پل بین سال‌های ۱۳۴۷ تا ۱۳۸۳ه‍.ش. نیز مؤید آن است که آسیب‌های ناشی از انفجار، موجب فرسودگی پی‌درپی تاق‌ها شده و به بازسازی کامل چشمه‌های تخریب‌شده انجامیده است. انتشار این اسناد مغفول‌مانده، گذشتۀ تاریخی پل را روشن‌تر کرده و می‌تواند در بازنگری حریم حفاظتی پل کهنه و ثبت بخش‌هایی از پیرامون آن مانند کوره‌های آجرپزی، نقش مؤثری داشته باشد.  Abstract Despite its national registration as heritage No. 1388 (23 Azar 1355 SH), earlier restoration reports (1347–1383 SH) overlooked this explosive wartime damage, misattributing subsequent structural issues—such as cracks, subsidence, and arch instability—to natural factors like river sedimentation, vegetation growth, or heavy traffic wear, resulting in repeated and inefficient interventions. Objectives and necessity: This study aims to analyze the bridge’s World War I destruction based on eleven previously unpublished archival documents from Iran’s National Library (1296–1336 SH), evaluate the long-term impact on subsequent restorations, and underscore the critical role of exhaustive documentation in heritage conservation. The necessity stems from the need for accurate damage pathology to prevent misguided repairs, preserve historical authenticity, minimize unnecessary interventions, and support the potential expansion of protective boundaries. What novel historical and pathological insights do these overlooked documents provide regarding the bridge’s history? How can their publication contribute to enhanced protection measures and boundary delimitation? Hypothesis: Detailed recognition of the explosive origin of the damage enables more precise pathology assessment, targeted conservation strategies, and reduction in redundant, costly restorations. Descriptive-analytical approach combining critical analysis of eleven National Library archival documents, cross-verification with published library sources (memoirs by Qaim-Maqami, Dowlatabadi, etc.), and on-site field inspections conducted in 1403 SH. The documents unequivocally confirm the deliberate dynamiting of two spans (one fully destroyed, one partially); immediate temporary timber repairs; detailed cost estimates ranging from 1500 to 3000 toman; administrative debates, urgency warnings, and eventual Cabinet approval of 1500 toman in 1336 SH (recoverable via temporary tolls). Full reconstruction of the affected arch in 1354 SH ultimately stabilized the structure, though prior misdiagnoses persisted. Publishing these documents significantly enriches the bridge’s archival corpus, illuminates its strategic wartime role, and provides strong justification for extending protective boundaries to include adjacent historic brick kilns as sites of related conflict events. Keywords: Old Qarasoo Bridge, World War I, Restoration Documents, Kermanshah, Destruction.  Introduction War constitutes one of the gravest human-induced crises, inflicting profound and often irreversible damage on both human lives and irreplaceable cultural heritage. According to Iran’s Crisis Management Organization Act, a crisis is defined as a sudden or uncontrollable condition—whether natural or anthropogenic—necessitating immediate and extraordinary interventions. Historical conflicts involving direct military presence have frequently targeted strategic infrastructure, such as bridges essential for military logistics, civilian mobility, and economic exchange. The Old Bridge (Qarasoo Bridge) in Kermanshah exemplifies this vulnerability. Positioned in the southeastern sector of the city along the Qarasoo River, it historically served as a primary east-west transit corridor. Its stone foundations are attributed to the Sasanian era, with visible traces of Seljuk restorations in surrounding brick fragments, yet the predominant surviving architecture reflects Safavid-era reconstruction, commonly ascribed to Sheikh Ali Khan Zangeneh, vizier under Shah Abbas I (also linked to the Bisotun Caravanserai). The bridge was inscribed as National Heritage No. 1388 on 23 Azar 1355 SH, measuring 78 meters in length and 9 meters in width, featuring six pointed brick arches, hexagonal piers with plaster mortar and rubble stone cores clad in rectangular stone blocks, triangular cutwaters opposing the current, and lateral flood barriers. During World War I, Kermanshah’s border proximity rendered it a hotspot for intermittent clashes among Ottoman, Russian, and British forces. In late 1295 SH, Iranian national troops, in coordination with Ottoman allies, dynamited two spans to impede Russian eastward advance and facilitate the evacuation of state officials and residents. Temporary repairs using timber and beams permitted continued use, though full restoration was hampered by bureaucratic hurdles and seasonal flooding risks. Problem statement: Preceding restoration documentation (1347–1354 SH) failed to acknowledge this explosive wartime origin, erroneously linking ongoing structural degradation to environmental factors alone, thereby perpetuating inefficient, repetitive interventions. Objectives and necessity: The research seeks to rigorously examine the destruction through archival evidence, trace its cascading effects on later conservation efforts, and advocate adherence to international principles of comprehensive documentation (Venice Charter, Article 14; Athens Resolution, Article 19). This is essential for evidence-based pathology, authentic preservation, cost-effective management, and informed boundary expansion. Main Text  Located approximately 5 km east of Kermanshah near traditional brick kilns (locally termed “kureh-par-khaneh”), the bridge spans the Qarasoo River, a historically vital waterway. Its structural composition includes hexagonal piers constructed internally with plaster mortar and rubble stone, externally faced with precisely cut rectangular-cubic stone blocks. Triangular cutwaters deflect water flow upstream, while lateral flood barriers protect against seasonal surges. Each arch rises approximately 4.4 meters from riverbed to apex, formed with pointed brick vaults (Registration File, 1355 SH). Archival documents from the National Library (1296–1336 SH) reveal that repair initiatives commenced merely four months after the incident. Documents 1 and 2 (1296 SH) describe Ottoman forces destroying two spans during retreat—one completely demolished, the other half-ruined—followed by hasty timber repairs for emergency passage. Architect Mohammad, a trusted state engineer, estimated reconstruction costs at 1700–2000 toman, stressing the bridge’s economic significance as a caravan route and toll collection point. Subsequent correspondence (Documents 3–11) outlines administrative processes: detailed material breakdowns (bricks, gypsum, lime, timber, labor), estimate discrepancies among experts (1730, 1500, and 3000 toman), repeated urgency alerts warning of potential cost escalation to 30,000 toman if delayed beyond the dry season, and eventual deferral to spring. The Cabinet finally authorized 1500 toman in 1336 SH, stipulating recovery through temporary transit fees. Later conservation efforts (1347–1383 SH) focused on crack repairs (1347 SH: attributed to sedimentation and tree roots) and complete rebuilding of the second western arch (1354 SH), which incorporated modern materials and techniques, yielding enduring stability—yet without knowledge of the explosive trauma, interventions exceeded the principle of minimal interference. Discussion and Analysis  Cross-verification of archival documents with contemporary library sources (Qaim-Maqami & Saadvandian, 1398; Dowlatabadi, 1387) confirms the intentional destruction by Iranian-Ottoman forces to obstruct Russian artillery-supported advance amid bombardment of nearby brick kilns. The explosions severely disrupted original material continuity, inducing long-term physical-chemical alterations, bond failures, and progressive subsidence that persisted despite multiple interventions. Administrative bottlenecks—seasonal constraints, budgetary disputes, and inter-ministerial referrals—prolonged vulnerability and compounded deterioration. Subsequent pathology reports erroneously diagnosed symptoms as purely natural, prompting superficial consolidations that failed to address underlying explosive-induced weaknesses, necessitating further interventions. The 1354 SH comprehensive rebuilding, replacing degraded elements with contemporary materials and reinforced foundations, finally stabilized the affected span. However, this approach sacrificed portions of historical authenticity. Had conservators been aware of the wartime explosive origin, they could have pursued targeted, less invasive techniques (e.g., structural consolidation rather than wholesale replacement), better aligning with minimal intervention principles and reducing long-term expenditure. This case vividly illustrates war’s devastating legacy on cultural heritage: deliberate blasts cause degradation patterns distinct from gradual environmental wear, demanding specialized diagnostic and remedial methodologies. Publication of these documents complies with international charters, substantially enriching the bridge’s historical record, elucidating its pivotal strategic function during the conflict, and providing robust evidence to advocate boundary expansion to encompass adjacent brick kilns—recognized as contemporaneous event loci—potentially qualifying for additional national heritage designation. Conclusion Conclusion This investigation conclusively demonstrates, through eleven National Library documents (1296–1336 SH) corroborated by published memoirs, that two arches of the Qarasoo Bridge were deliberately dynamited in late 1295 SH (1917) by Iranian and Ottoman forces to delay Russian military advance and enable Kermanshah’s evacuation. Temporary timber repairs were implemented immediately, followed by protracted administrative deliberations culminating in a 1500-toman reconstruction budget approval in 1336 SH. The explosive shock inflicted enduring structural instability, which was systematically misdiagnosed in subsequent conservation phases as natural deterioration. Awareness of this origin could have directed more nuanced, evidence-based interventions, averting redundant work and preserving greater material authenticity. The eventual full rebuilding in 1354 SH successfully stabilized the structure, albeit at the partial cost of original fabric integrity. By disseminating these previously neglected records, the study adheres to foundational international heritage principles (Athens and Venice Charters), markedly augmenting the bridge’s archival heritage and highlighting its wartime strategic importance. It also furnishes compelling justification for broadening protective boundaries to incorporate neighboring historic brick kilns as integral components of the conflict landscape, potentially facilitating expanded national registration of the surrounding area. The research ultimately reinforces the indispensable prerequisite of thorough archival scrutiny prior to any conservation action. Comprehensive documentation facilitates precise diagnosis, optimizes resource allocation, safeguards cultural significance, and enhances resilience against future threats. Future heritage practice should prioritize systematic digitization and public accessibility of such records, ensuring historical insights inform sustainable, conflict-resilient protection strategies in an era of persistent global instability. Old Qarasoo Bridge, World War I, Restoration Documents, Kermanshah, Destruction.  پل کهنۀ قره‌سو, جنگ جهانی اول, اسناد مرمتی, کرمانشاه, تخریب. 25 42 http://athar.richt.ir/browse.php?a_code=A-10-3401-19&slc_lang=fa&sid=2 2025/08/312025/08/17 1404/5/26 2025/09/282025/11/1 1404/8/10 Maliheh Mehdiabadi Faculty Member, Research Institute for the Protection of Historical and Cultural Monuments, Research Institute of Cultural Heritage and Tourism, Tehran, Iran (Corresponding Author). ملیحه مهدی‌آبادی m.mehdiabadi@richt.ir 0009-0006-8243-3791 Yes عضو هیأت علمی پژوهشکدۀ حفاظت آثار تاریخی و فرهنگی پژوهشگاه میراث‌فرهنگی و گردشگری، تهران، ایران (نویسندۀ مسئول). Shamsi Khadamlou شمسی خادملو Sh.khademloo@richt.ir No کارشناس ارشد پژوهشکدۀ زبان‌شناسی، کتیبه‌ها و متون، گروه متون دوران اسلامی، پژوهشگاه میراث‌فرهنگی و گردشگری، تهران، ایران.

fa نقش سرمایۀ اجتماعی در پدافند نرم میراث‌فرهنگی: چارچوبی برای مواجهه با تهدیدات فراملی و تنش‌های منطقه‌ای میراث‌فرهنگی، به‌ویژه در بافت‌های تاریخی دارای تنوع قومی و فرهنگی، در معرض تهدیدات نمادین، تهاجمات فراملی و چالش‌های ژئوپلیتیکی فزاینده قرار دارد. در چنین زمینه‌ای، سرمایۀ اجتماعی به‌مثابه ظرفیتی نرم، درون‌زا و انعطاف‌پذیر، می‌تواند نقشی بنیادین در تقویت پدافند نرم فرهنگی ایفاء نماید. بر این‌اساس، پژوهش حاضر با هدف طراحی چارچوبی مفهومی برای تبیین نقش سرمایۀ اجتماعی در پدافند نرم میراث‌فرهنگی ایران، در پی پاسخ به این پرسش اصلی که، سرمایۀ اجتماعی به چه صورت می‌تواند به‌عنوان عاملی راهبردی، در مواجهه با تهدیدات فراملی و تنش‌های منطقه‌ای، نقش‌آفرینی نماید؟ با رویکردی کیفی و مبتنی‌بر روش تحلیل مضمون انجام گرفت. داده‌ها از سه منبع اصلی شامل اسناد راهبردی (همچون: اسناد پدافند غیرعامل و مهندسی فرهنگی)، پیشینه‌های نظری منتخب، و مصاحبه‌های نیمه‌ساخت‌یافته با ۱۲تَن از خبرگان حوزه‌های میراث‌فرهنگی، جامعه‌شناسی، و مطالعات امنیت فرهنگی گردآوری‌ شده و با استفاده از نرم‌افزار MAXQDA تحلیل گردید. در روند تحلیل، از تکنیک مثلث‌سازی داده‌ها و ادغام لایه‌ای مفاهیم استفاده شد که حاصل آن، استخراج پنج مضمون اصلی در پیوند میان سرمایۀ اجتماعی و راهبردهای پدافندی بود. بر پایۀ این مضامین، چارچوبی مفهومی با ساختاری سه‌لایه شامل: «لایۀ اجتماعی»، «لایۀ هویتی-فرهنگی» و «لایۀ نهادی-راهبردی» طراحی گردید که هر یک بازتاب‌دهندۀ سازوکارهای مقاومت نرم در برابر تهدیدات فراملی می‌باشد. چارچوب نهایی، ضمن اتکاء بر بنیانی نظری و داده‌بنیاد، قابلیت به‌کارگیری در سیاست‌گذاری‌های فرهنگی، مدیریت مخاطرات غیرنظامی، و تدوین راهبردهای حفاظتی بومی در بافت‌های تاریخی کشور را داراست. Abstract Cultural heritage—particularly in historical contexts marked by ethnic and cultural diversity—is increasingly exposed to a spectrum of symbolic threats, transnational aggressions, and complex geopolitical challenges. also, in such environments, social capital emerges as a soft, endogenous, and adaptive resource that can play a foundational role in reinforcing cultural soft defense mechanisms. Accordingly, this study aims to develop a theoretical framework that clearly explains the strategic role of social capital in the cultural soft defense of Iran’s historically significant heritage. Therefore, the central research question guiding the inquiry is: How can social capital function as a strategic mechanism in the soft defense of Iran’s cultural heritage against transnational threats, regional tensions, and emerging socio-political pressures? To address this, the study adopts a qualitative approach grounded in thematic analysis. Data were collected from three primary sources: (a) national strategic documents and official policy papers; (b) a curated body of relevant theoretical literature and scholarly articles; and (c) semi-structured interviews conducted with twelve experienced experts in the fields of cultural heritage, urban sociology, soft security, and crisis management. MAXQDA software was employed for data coding and organization. Through a triangulated analytical process, five overarching themes were identified that illustrate the conceptual mechanisms linking social capital to effective cultural defense strategies. These themes were structured into a tripartite conceptual model consisting of: (1) the social layer, encompassing concepts such as trust, cohesion, and civic participation; (2) the cultural-identity layer, highlighting memory, belonging, and symbolic continuity; and (3) the institutional-strategic layer, focused on localized policy tools and participatory defense strategies. This layered framework offers both analytical depth and practical applicability, enabling policymakers and heritage practitioners to develop context-sensitive protection strategies grounded in local social resilience. It also establishes a conceptual foundation for integrating cultural heritage protection into broader models of soft security governance. Keywords: Social Capital, Soft Defens, Cultural Heritage, Transnational Threats, Regional Tensions. Introduction In the context of accelerating global transformations, cultural heritage—particularly in historically rich and ethnically diverse settings—faces increasingly complex, hybrid, and multilayered threats. These threats arise not only from natural hazards such as earthquakes, droughts, and environmental degradation, but also from human-induced factors, including unregulated urban expansion, weakening of institutional stewardship, intergenerational disconnect, rapid social change, erosion of meaning systems, and intensifying transnational and regional tensions. Under such conditions, cultural heritage, as a dynamic ground for meaning-making, collective identity, and historical continuity, necessitates comprehensive, multidimensional strategies rooted in societal and cultural capacities that transcend mere physical preservation. This has necessitated a shift in heritage policies toward soft, people-centered approaches informed by local social infrastructures. In this regard, the concept of soft defense has emerged as a proactive, participatory strategy that emphasizes components such as social trust, local cohesion, collective memory, and voluntary engagement as key to resisting environmental, ideological, and political threats. Within this framework, social capital serves as a soft infrastructure for cultural defense, comprising trust-based social networks, participatory experiences, and place-based attachment, which enhances cultural resilience and sustainability in a crisis context. At the national level, Iran’s cultural heritage has faced increasingly intertwined challenges. Beyond natural causes, these stem primarily from uncoordinated urban development, the weakening of heritage institutions, declining local social capital, and growing geopolitical pressures. Therefore, these dynamics have disrupted the cultural security infrastructure, eroding local engagement and diminishing the resilience of heritage assets. Consequently, there is an urgent need to rethink protective policies and transition toward strategies grounded in soft defense logic. As a community, cultural, political, or economic. Despite these needs, a review of the literature reveals a lack of analytical frameworks for assessing and modeling the role of social capital in cultural soft defense within Iran. In response, this study aims to develop a conceptual and analytical model for assessing the nexus between social capital and cultural soft defense, focusing on Iran’s heritage sector. It addresses the central question: How can social capital function as a strategic mechanism in the soft defense of Iran’s cultural heritage against transnational threats and regional tensions? Methodologically, the study employs a qualitative approach, utilizing thematic analysis. Theoretical components were extracted from national policy documents and semi-structured interviews with experts in heritage and soft security, and analyzed via MAXQDA software. The result is a contextualized conceptual framework linking social capital to soft defense in Iranian heritage governance.  Discussion The qualitative analysis revealed that social capital, as a multilayered cultural, social phenomenon, plays a pivotal role in enhancing cultural soft defense capacities in historically diverse urban contexts. The extracted themes, grouped into five key categories, demonstrated strategic responses to transnational threats, cultural transformations, and socio-political pressures. First, foundational social capital—represented by constructs such as trust, social cohesion, and shared community norms—emerged as the connective infrastructure enabling collective reactions to symbolic aggression and cultural pressures. While this finding resonates with prior research (e.g., Fabbricatti, 2020; Chen et al., 2024) that underscores the role of social trust in post-crisis recovery, this study adds a distinct dimension by linking these constructs to localized cultural frameworks, embedding them with historical, symbolic, and socio-cultural value. Second, active social capital, manifested in civic participation, cultural solidarity, collaborative engagement, and place attachment, functions not only as a deterrent against cultural invasion but also as a means of sustainable identity regeneration. Although aligned with studies by Garcia (2022) and Shahpari Sani et al., (2022), the findings highlight underexplored dynamics such as symbolic participation, cultural narration, and community-led initiatives, framing them as latent, proactive forms of social action under threat. Third, cultural defense capacities, including critical awareness, adaptive behavioral resilience, and anticipatory decision-making, reframed social capital not as merely reactive but as a forward-looking, strategic resource. Heightened sensitivity to endangered heritage surfaced as a form of collective alertness capable of producing preemptive strategies—marking a clear departure from conventional passive approaches to cultural risk management. Fourth, resilience mechanisms—particularly cultural memory-making, decentralized defense, and community storytelling—reflected how reimagined heritage narratives can transform into dynamic, contextually grounded tools for symbolic resistance. Unlike prior literature that treated collective memory as static identity capital, this study evidences its role as a participatory, adaptive, and socially embedded defense mechanism—a cornerstone of symbolic defense. Fifth, the dimension of policy challenges and transnational threats revealed structural disjunctions such as generational fragmentation, institutional fatigue, declining local engagement, and identity erosion. While previous research emphasized the affirmative capacities of social capital, this study delineates how systemic gaps, distorted media representations, and socio-political disruptions can erode local resilience and cultural continuity. Overall, by triangulating qualitative data from policy documents, field interviews, and theoretical studies, this research constructs a concise, context-sensitive, three-tiered model—social, cultural, and institutional—of how social capital can underpin a culturally embedded soft defense strategy for heritage resilience in Iran. Conclusion  This study aimed to conceptualize and thoroughly explain the critical role of social capital in the cultural soft defense of Iran’s heritage against transnational threats and complex geopolitical challenges. Focusing on historical urban contexts—characterized by high cultural diversity, institutional fragility, and symbolic pressures—the research sought to answer the central question: How can social capital serve as a strategic and adaptive resource for enhancing cultural resilience and defensive capacity in the face of external threats? To that end, a qualitative methodology based on thematic analysis was employed, using data triangulated from strategic policy documents, scholarly literature, and semi-structured interviews with twelve subject-matter experts. Findings revealed that social capital operates not merely as a relational or community-based phenomenon, but as a multi-layered mechanism encompassing cultural, institutional, and participatory dimensions. Five major thematic constructs emerged: foundational social capital, agentive social capital, cultural defense capacities, mechanisms of resilience reinforcement, and policy-related challenges and transnational threats. Each theme reflected specific aspects of how trust, local cohesion, ritual-based participation, collective memory, and cultural storytelling interact with various forms of symbolic aggression and cultural erosion. These findings demonstrated that social capital can simultaneously act as a defensive shield and a dynamic force for cultural regeneration in times of crisis. The primary innovation of this research lies in integrating three distinct levels of analysis—crisis, society, and protection—into a cohesive and indigenous conceptual framework. Unlike previous studies that often focused narrowly on individual components such as trust or participation, this model presents a more comprehensive structure for understanding how soft, internal capacities can function against both material and symbolic threats. The framework is adaptable to policy development, strategic cultural planning, and the design of participatory defense mechanisms in historically vulnerable urban areas. In addition, it emphasizes the necessity of embedding social capital strategies within broader cultural policy systems, strengthening institutional responsiveness, fostering collaborative governance, encouraging community engagement, and ensuring sustainable, long-term governance structures and resilient heritage management approaches. Ultimately, this research underscores the strategic role of social capital as a soft infrastructure for cultural defense and resilience. By highlighting the interplay between social trust, collective identity, and institutional memory, the study provides a theoretical and practical foundation for rethinking heritage protection through non-militarized, community-driven approaches. Based on these insights, the next section offers a set of actionable recommendations—both practical and research-oriented—that aim to bridge the conceptual framework with real-world policymaking and academic inquiry. Social Capital, Soft Defens, Cultural Heritage, Transnational Threats, Regional Tensions. سرمایۀ اجتماعی, پدافند نرم, میراث‌فرهنگی, تهدیدات فراملی, تنش‌های منطقه‌ای. 43 81 http://athar.richt.ir/browse.php?a_code=A-10-4071-1&slc_lang=fa&sid=2 2025/08/312025/08/172025/08/6 1404/5/15 2025/09/282025/11/12025/10/9 1404/7/17 Hossein Esmailisangari Assistant Professor, Department of Building and Structure Research Institute, National Cultural Heritage Research Institute, Tehran, Iran (Corresponding Author). حسین اسمعیلی‌سنگری h.esmaeeli@richt.ir Yes استادیار گروه بنا، پژوهشکدۀ ابنیه و بافت، پژوهشگاه میراث‌فرهنگی و گردشگری، تهران، ایران (نویسندۀ مسئول). Raheleh Parvin Ph.D. Candidate Architecture, Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran. راحله پروین raheleh.parvin2015@gmail.com No دانشجوی دکتری معماری، گروه معماری، دانشکدۀ معماری و شهرسازی، واحد تبریز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تبریز، ایران.

fa معماری اضطراب و تجربۀ مردم از فضا در شرایط جنگی: مطالعۀ مردم‌نگارانۀ رخداد جنگ 12 روزه در تهران در پی رخدادهای نظامی اخیر و بالا گرفتن نگرانی‌های عمومی از حملات هوایی یا موشکی در ایران، شهروندان تهرانی تجربه‌ای جدید و اضطراب‌آمیز از فضاهای روزمرۀ خود یافتند. این پژوهش با رویکردی مردم‌نگارانه، به تحلیل تجربۀ زیستۀ مردم تهران از فضا در لحظات تهدید و بحران اخیر می‌پردازد. پرسش اصلی پژوهش آن است که چگونه احساس ترس و ناامنی ناشی از تهدید جنگی، معنا، کارکرد و ادراک فضایی مکان‌های روزمرۀ درون‌خانگی و برون‌خانگی را مانند خانه، خیابان، مترو، حیاط، پله‌ها، پشت‌بام‌ها یا مکان‌های عمومی تغییر می‌دهد. در این پژوهش از طریق انجام مصاحبه‌های کیفی، مشاهدۀ مشارکتی و تحلیل روایت‌های مردمی دربارۀ بازۀ زمانی جنگ 12 ‌روزه، داده‌هایی گردآوری شده است که نشان می‌دهند فضای شهری در تهران، نه‌تنها ساختاری فیزیکی، که مرتبط با ابعاد فضایی هویت بوده و بستری احساسی، روانی و اجتماعی برای ظهور تفسیر و تجربۀ جدید از درک فضای شهری است. در زمان هشدار حمله یا شایعۀ تهدید، برخی فضاها به «پناهگاه‌های نمادین» و برخی دیگر به «ناامن‌ترین نقاط» تبدیل می‌شوند. این پژوهش هم‌چنین نشان می‌دهد که حافظۀ جمعی ناشی از رخدادهای دیگر چون زلزلۀ بم، همه‌گیری ویروس کرونا و جنگ ایران-عراق در دهۀ ۱۳۶۰ه‍.ش.، چگونه در ادراک فضایی بازتاب یافته و این موارد با معماری اضطراب در فضاهای امروزی تهران مقایسه می‌شود. در نهایت، نویسندگان پیشنهاد می‌کنند که بازاندیشی در طراحی معماری شهری در شرایط بحران، نیازمند توجه به تجربه‌های زیستۀ مردم از فضا، ترس و امنیت است.   Abstract ollowing the recent military incidents and rising public fears of aerial or missile attacks in Iran, the citizens of Tehran encountered a new and anxiety-laden experience of their everyday spaces. This article, based on ethnographic research, analyzes how Tehran’s residents lived and perceived urban and domestic spaces during moments of threat and crisis. The central question concerns how fear and insecurity caused by wartime threats transform the meaning, function, and spatial perception of ordinary places such as homes, streets, subways, courtyards, staircases, rooftops, and public areas. Through qualitative interviews, participant observation, and analysis of popular narratives collected during the Twelve-Day War period, the study reveals that Tehran’s urban space is not merely a physical structure but also a spatial dimension of identity—a psychosocial and emotional ground for the reinterpretation of space. During times of alerts or rumored attacks, some places were redefined as “symbolic shelters,” while others were perceived as “zones of maximum insecurity.” The study also explores how collective memories of past catastrophes—such as the Bam earthquake, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the Iran–Iraq War of the 1980s—shape current spatial perception and emotional geographies of fear. By comparing these experiences, the article conceptualizes the “architecture of anxiety” as a dynamic system of lived spatial relations under threat. The authors finally argue that rethinking urban architectural design under conditions of crisis must take into account people’s lived experiences of space, fear, and security. Keywords: Spatial Anxiety, Urban Ethnography, Collective Memory, Lived Experience, Tehran. Introduction Any event that disturbs the mental image of the city in the collective imagination of Iranians can become the ground for the emergence of new meanings and experiences of urban life. From this perspective, people’s lived experiences of everyday spaces during wartime help us to understand the “architecture of anxiety” not as an architectural style or form but as a socio-sensory phenomenon. Within this architecture, space becomes a medium for fear, unease, intrusive memory, and insecurity. As will be discussed, historical and cultural memory intertwines earlier horizons of disaster with the present moment, intensifying spatial perception and emotional impact. Historical precedents such as the mass departures during the Mongol and Ghalzai invasions of the thirteenth century—when cities like Rayy, Neyshabur, Tabriz, and Isfahan were abandoned—illustrate how leaving one’s home or birthplace became synonymous with the loss of safety and belonging. Similarly, the Tabriz earthquake of 1169 CE or the Rudbar earthquake of 1990 show how forced migration redefines the meaning of home and space (Hassanzadeh, 2015; Karimi & Hassanzadeh, 2021). More recent experiences of droughts and the formation of abandoned villages in Iran further demonstrate the spatial dimension of collective trauma (Banavand, 2006). In the modern and contemporary history of Iran, the Iran–Iraq War (1980–1988) remains a central reference point in the collective memory of war experience. Its echoes are still visible among post-war generations, especially under the shadow of new threats (Salimi, 2017a; 2017b). Memories of leaving home, bombardments, urban destruction, and the redefinition of domestic safety spaces persist in social consciousness. Likewise, during the COVID-19 pandemic, spatial perception underwent radical transformation, as fear and isolation reshaped everyday life (Hassanzadeh & Asadzadeh, 2021). Thus, the interplay of long-term and short-term memories creates what may be called an “intrusive memory” that amplifies the sense of catastrophe, producing what we may term a “multiplied disaster” within the urban experience. This framework allows us to understand how the architecture of Tehran under threat becomes both a physical and emotional landscape—a city where anxiety itself takes spatial form. Discussion  The ethnographic findings of this study demonstrate how the recent wartime event profoundly transformed Tehran citizens’ lived experience and perception of space at psychological, embodied, symbolic, and social levels. The crisis reconfigured both private and public spatial meanings, destabilizing the affective geography of home and city. Similar to observations by Low (2017) and Lefebvre (1991), the participants’ accounts reveal that “space” became an extension of embodied fear. Homes—once sites of comfort—were reimagined as fragile and unsafe. Participants frequently relocated their sleeping areas away from windows, sharing rooms collectively as a form of emotional solidarity and corporeal protection. Physical symptoms of anxiety such as insomnia, chest pain, and headaches became somatic expressions of spatial insecurity. A salient theme was the reactivation of collective and individual memories from earlier disasters, including the Iran–Iraq war, the Bam earthquake, and the COVID-19 pandemic. These intrusive memories, or intervening memories (Young, 1995; van der Kolk, 2014), re-emerged involuntarily through flashbacks, dreams, and bodily sensations. The phenomenon corresponds to Lefebvre’s notion of the “representation of memory in space,” where trauma transforms familiar spaces into mnemonic landscapes of loss. Individuals displaced during the 1980s war reported heightened anxiety, as domestic interiors evoked memories of bombardment and forced migration. This process reconstituted a “domestic architecture of grief,” where houses embodied vulnerability and recurrence of absence. Dreams and compulsive behaviors also reflected the unconscious internalization of threat. Nightmares of collapse, separation, and burial under debris symbolized spatially situated fear. Compulsive phone calls to loved ones and restrictions on children’s movement revealed anxiety as a social and spatial phenomenon. As Hoffman (2002) notes in post-earthquake contexts, such fears reflect the “monstrous imagination of space” that emerges after catastrophe. Moreover, citizens’ avoidance of public places—streets, cafés, and parks—signified a collapse of urban sociability and the emergence of “spatial nostalgia.” Participants expressed longing not only for familiar urban settings but also for national heritage sites such as Hafeziyeh, Pasargadae, and Ferdowsi’s tomb—symbolic spaces representing continuity and security (Goodman, 2009). These imagined returns to heritage sites suggest that cultural memory functions as a spatial refuge during crisis. Comparative analysis with past Iranian disasters (Bam earthquake, Iran–Iraq war, and COVID-19) reveals overlapping experiential patterns: somatic anxiety, spatial displacement, and mnemonic intrusion. Across all cases, trauma reshaped the sensory order of space—its sounds, smells, textures, and rhythms. Following van der Kolk (2014), such embodied memories illustrate how trauma is not only remembered but also “lived” through the body and the materiality of space, linking collective suffering to the reconstruction of identity and belonging in post-crisis urban life. Conclusion  This ethnographic study has demonstrated that social and military crises—such as war, earthquakes, and pandemics—deeply shape people’s lived perception of space, memory, and temporality. Heightened sensory anxiety, intrusive memory, and the disruption of spatial and temporal order have collectively transformed everyday environments from familiar and secure settings into unstable and threatening landscapes. In the case of Tehran, these phenomena redefined the meanings of domestic and urban spaces: the home, the street, and other ordinary locations were no longer neutral or safe but became emotionally charged and symbolically fragile. The closure of public and cultural institutions—such as museums, parks, and libraries—further intensified this sense of spatial deprivation. These places, which normally function as repositories of collective memory and identity, became inaccessible, leading to symbolic loss and a rupture in cultural continuity. This deprivation not only affected citizens’ sense of belonging but also weakened the shared emotional infrastructure of the city. The findings suggest that in times of crisis, urban planning and architectural design should move beyond physical considerations to include affective, psychological, and mnemonic dimensions of spatial experience. Recognizing fear and insecurity as integral to spatial life under threat requires a new conceptual and practical approach to architecture—what this study terms the architecture of anxiety. This architecture is not solely about defensive design or material resistance; rather, it concerns the capacity of spaces to absorb, reflect, and heal collective emotional trauma. To rebuild a sense of safety and identity after crises, architects and policymakers must engage deeply with the lived experiences of citizens, particularly their emotional geographies and memory-laden relationships with place. Designing for resilience, therefore, is not only about reconstructing infrastructure but also about reconstructing the sensorial and symbolic layers of space that sustain everyday life. Ultimately, the study argues that crisis-driven urban transformation offers a rare ethnographic window into the intertwined dynamics of fear, memory, and belonging. It calls for a rethinking of how cities are conceptualized and lived during states of emergency. By centering the ethnographic voice of residents, this research contributes to a broader understanding of how urban anxiety becomes materialized in architecture and how the imagination of public and domestic spaces may foster collective recovery, cultural continuity, and the reconstitution of hope in post-crisis Tehran. Spatial Anxiety, Urban Ethnography, Collective Memory, Lived Experience, Tehran. اضطراب فضایی, مردم‌نگاری شهری, حافظۀ جمعی, تجربۀ زیسته, تهران. 65 84 http://athar.richt.ir/browse.php?a_code=A-10-2865-1&slc_lang=fa&sid=2 2025/08/312025/08/172025/08/62025/08/17 1404/5/26 2025/09/282025/11/12025/10/92025/09/29 1404/7/7 Alireza Hassanzadeh Associate Professor, Anthropological Research Center, Cultural Heritage and Tourism Research Institute, Tehran, Iran (Corresponding Author). علیرضا حسن‌زاده Parishriver@gmail.com Yes دانشیار پژوهشکدۀ مردم‌شناسی، پژوهشگاه میراث‌فرهنگی و گردشگری، تهران، ایران (نویسندۀ مسئول). Mansur Moradi Assistant Professor, Anthropological Research Center, Cultural Heritage and Tourism Research Institute, Tehran, Iran. منصور مرادی mansourmoradi22@gmail.com 0000-0001-9368-770X No استادیار پژوهشکدۀ مردم‌شناسی، پژوهشگاه میراث‌فرهنگی و گردشگری، تهران ایران. Somayeh Karimi Assistant Professor, Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies, Tehran, Iran. سمیه کریمی s.karimmi@gmail.com 0009-0006-7184-0447 No استادیار پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی، تهران، ایران.

fa بررسی شاهنامۀ فردوسی به‌منزلۀ منبع تاریخی-ادبی در حفاظت از میراث‌فرهنگی در شرایط جنگ شاهنامۀ فردوسی، فراتر از یک اثر ادبی، سندی تاریخی-فرهنگی است که بازتاب‌دهندۀ میراث ملموس و ناملموس ایران در بستر جنگ و صلح است. هدف این پژوهش بررسی این است که شاهنامه چگونه روایت‌های جنگی را نه صرفاً به‌عنوان صحنه‌های نبرد، بلکه به‌منزلۀ عرصه‌ای برای حفاظت یا تهدید میراث‌فرهنگی بازنمایی می‌کند. روش پژوهش توصیفی-تحلیلی و مبتنی‌بر مطالعۀ کتابخانه‌ای است و ویرایش انتقادی جلال خالقی‌مطلق به‌عنوان متن معیار انتخاب شده است. ابیات مرتبط با میراث‌فرهنگی استخراج و در پنج محور دسته‌بندی گردید: بناها و مکان‌ها، آئین‌ها و جشن‌ها، زبان و ادبیات، شخصیت‌ها و قهرمانان، و صنایع و هنرها. یافته‌ها نشان‌داد که در شاهنامه، پیروزی‌ها معمولاً با حفاظت یا بازسازی میراث‌فرهنگی همراه‌اند و شکست‌ها تهدیدی برای نابودی آن محسوب می‌شوند. پرسش اصلی پژوهش مبنی‌بر چگونگی بازنمایی حفاظت از میراث‌فرهنگی در شرایط جنگ پاسخ داده شد و فرضیۀ پژوهش که «فردوسی» جنگ را به‌منزلۀ دفاع از هویت فرهنگی معرفی می‌کند، تأیید گردید. نتیجۀ نهایی این است که شاهنامۀ علاوه‌بر ارزش ادبی، الگویی الهام‌بخش برای سیاست‌گذاری‌های فرهنگی امروز نیز به‌شمار می‌آید و نشان می‌دهد که حفاظت از فرهنگ و هویت، خود شکلی از مقاومت و تضمین بقای ملت است. Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh, beyond its literary significance, is a historical–cultural document that reflects both tangible and intangible heritage of Iran in the context of war and peace. The aim of this study is to examine how wartime narratives in the Shahnameh represent not only battle scenes but also the safeguarding—or endangerment—of cultural heritage. The research employs a descriptive–analytical method based on library study, using Khaleghi-Motlagh’s critical edition as the main reference. Verses related to cultural heritage were extracted and categorized into five domains: buildings and places, rituals and festivals, language and literature, characters and heroes, and arts and crafts. The findings show that in the Shahnameh, victories are consistently linked to the preservation or reconstruction of cultural heritage, while defeats are portrayed as threats to its loss. The central research question—how cultural heritage protection is represented in wartime—was addressed, and the hypothesis that Ferdowsi presents war as a defense of cultural identity and continuity was confirmed. The conclusion highlights that the Shahnameh, in addition to its literary value, serves as an inspiring model for contemporary cultural policy, demonstrating that safeguarding culture and identity is itself a form of resistance and a guarantee of national survival. Keywords: War, Cultural Heritage Protection, Iranian Epic, Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh, National Identity. Introduction Cultural heritage—tangible (architecture, urban sites, artifacts, crafts) and intangible (language, ritual, narrative, vernacular knowledge)—constitutes the historical and social “ID” of Iran. Across Iranian history, warfare has threatened not only political sovereignty but also the survival, transmission, and legitimacy of this heritage. Armed conflict disrupts cities, fractures memory, and accelerates cultural loss, often with effects that persist long after hostilities cease. Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh, while pre-eminently poetic, is also a continuous cultural record of how conflict imperils or preserves material and immaterial assets. Its war narratives—battles, sieges, invasions, and recoveries—repeatedly stage moments in which the fate of identity is negotiated alongside military outcomes. This study asks how Shahnameh’s war narratives simultaneously document cultural heritage and propose modes of safeguarding it under wartime pressure. The inquiry is shaped by two premises. First, Shahnameh is a suitable historical–cultural source because it systematically intertwines descriptions of cities, palaces, fortresses, banners, crafts, and courtly protocol with the deeper structures of festivals, ethics, language, and collective identity. Physical settings are rarely neutral backdrops; rather, they are saturated with symbolic meaning and social function. Second, the epic consistently frames the consequences of war in cultural terms: victory consolidates symbols (sites, rites, speech), while defeat threatens to unravel them. Military success or failure is therefore measured not solely by territorial gain but by the endurance or erosion of cultural order. Accordingly, the central research question is: how does Shahnameh enact protection—understood as continuity, transmission, repair, and revival—of cultural heritage during and after war? Subsidiary questions examine which tangible and intangible elements appear most frequently in wartime contexts and how heroic figures operate as stewards of identity. The working hypothesis holds that Ferdowsi deliberately binds military narrative to cultural safeguarding, such that epic heroes defend not only borders but also the language, rites, and symbols that render those borders meaningful. In this view, warfare becomes a testing ground for cultural resilience rather than a purely destructive force. Methodologically, the study adopts a descriptive–analytical design. The Khaleghi-Motlagh edition is used as the base text for accuracy and critical reliability, while salient variants are cross-checked against the Moscow and Mohl editions to manage textual uncertainty and diachronic transmission. Verses pertaining to cultural heritage are extracted and coded under five content domains: 1) places and sites (cities, central places), fortresses and defensive structures, palaces and royal architecture; 2) rituals and festivals (Nowruz, Sadeh, Mehregan); 3) language and literary memory (lexicon, standardization, narrative framing); 4) culture-bearing heroes and leadership; and 5) arts and industries (architecture, armory, crafts, ceremonial objects). To ensure analytical rigor and applicability, “protection” and “threat” are defined operationally, allowing the findings to remain evidence-driven and policy-portable. The contribution of this study is twofold. Substantively, it offers a structured inventory of tangible and intangible heritage elements and clarifies their wartime functions within the epic. Conceptually, it proposes a dual model—deterrence and prevention—that translates Shahnameh’s narrative logic into actionable insights for contemporary cultural-heritage risk planning. Deterrence operates through material and symbolic presence (“don’t attack this”), while prevention functions through identity immunization via language, ritual, and narrative continuity. The result is a text-based framework in which safeguarding culture is not peripheral to war but central to societal endurance. Discussion The evidence extracted from Shahnameh clusters along two complementary axes: tangible heritage as cultural deterrence and intangible heritage as cultural prevention. A third, mediating axis—heroes as cultural stewards—connects and animates both. 1) Tangible heritage as cultural deterrence: onumental architecture and fortified sites function as visible assertions of continuity, technical mastery, and sovereign order. Their presence signals not only defensive capacity but also a deep investment in civilization itself, thereby raising the psychological, political, and moral cost of aggression. The narration of the Arch of Ctesiphon (Taq-e Kesra) is especially revealing in this respect. Ferdowsi devotes sustained attention to engineering standards—foundation depth, wall testing, time allowed for settling—as well as to staged inspections and expert evaluations. Such details imply a normed culture of construction in which durability, foresight, and accountability are integral values. Beyond engineering, the arch’s ritual and social functions—court seating hierarchies, Nowruz ceremonies, public benefaction, and proclamations of justice—transform it into a performative space where power, ethics, and community intersect. The “aura” of such architecture produces a form of soft deterrence: attacking it is not merely a tactical act but a symbolic assault on order, legitimacy, and collective memory. Fortresses such as the White Fortress similarly serve as pivot points of defense and morale. Their survival or fall carries cultural meaning beyond immediate military consequences. In the epic, the defense of a fortress often coincides with the defense of hope, continuity, and national self-confidence. Royal architecture in the Jamshid cycle adds a further layer: splendor is explicitly linked to farreh (divine glory), and its loss follows ethical failure. Hubris corrodes legitimacy, thereby weakening the cultural foundation upon which deterrence rests. Tangible symbols such as banners and regalia extend this logic. The Kāveyānid standard, transformed from a blacksmith’s leather apron into a jewel-studded emblem, condenses collective memory, revolt, and legitimacy into a single object. To damage or capture it is to strike at cohesion itself. In this way, material culture in Shahnameh functions as a deterrent system in which architecture, objects, and spaces communicate the costliness of destruction. 2) Intangible heritage as cultural prevention: If tangible heritage raises the cost of attack, intangible heritage reduces the probability of cultural collapse once conflict occurs. Language and ritual operate prophylactically: they pre-commit communities to shared meanings and mobilize bonds before, during, and after crisis. Ferdowsi’s deliberate standardization of Persian at a time of Arabic dominance constitutes a preventive act against linguistic and identity displacement. The epic’s lexicon—terms such as far, eyvān, and derafsh—preserves cultural concepts that scaffold collective action under stress. Festival cycles perform a comparable function. Nowruz encodes renewal and moral reset; Sadeh celebrates light, technology, and communal cooperation; Mehregan emphasizes justice and social balance. These rituals are not narrated as decorative backgrounds but as operative social technologies. They refresh collective memory, distribute hope, and rehearse ethical norms, including generosity, inclusion of the poor, and lawful governance. In wartime contexts, such practices stabilize society, counter despair, and provide temporal anchors that prevent identity fragmentation. Narrative itself functions as a preventive archive. By recording patterns of loss, rebuilding, ethical failure, and recovery, Shahnameh supplies templates of meaning that later generations can draw upon. Cultural prevention, therefore, is achieved not through physical protection alone but through the endurance of stories that explain why protection matters. 3) Heroes as cultural stewards: Heroes mediate between material deterrence and intangible prevention. Rostam’s interventions consistently occur when cities, rituals, or symbols face existential threat, framing heroism as a dual mandate: territorial defense intertwined with protection of meaning. Fereydun embodies post-conflict reordering through justice and ritual legitimacy, while Kay Khosrow models ethical leadership that privileges national moral order over personal power. The Gudārz lineage exemplifies banner-ethics and trust transmission in battle. Across the epic, leadership is measured less by conquest than by the continuity of heritage through and after war. A successful hero ensures that symbols, language, and rites endure, allowing society to regenerate rather than merely survive. Taken together, these strands yield an integrated picture. Deterrence, embodied in monuments and emblems, elevates the cost of aggression; prevention, enacted through language, ritual, and narrative, reduces vulnerability to cultural collapse. Shahnameh thus emerges not only as a witness to destruction and rebuilding but as a manual for keeping culture intact when swords are drawn. Conclusion This study demonstrates that Shahnameh functions as a historical–cultural sourcebook for protecting heritage in wartime. Through systematic coding and analysis of verses across five domains—places and sites, rituals and festivals, language and literary memory, culture-bearing heroes, and arts and industries—a consistent logic becomes visible: military outcomes are evaluated by the survival of culture. Warfare is meaningful insofar as it preserves or endangers identity. Tangible heritage supplies deterrent force. Fortified sites, royal architecture, and emblematic objects make aggression politically, psychologically, and morally costly by embodying continuity, legitimacy, and collective investment. Intangible heritage supplies preventive strength. Standardized language, ritual calendars, and narrative memory inoculate society against disorientation, enabling rapid social mobilization, ethical orientation, and post-shock recovery. Methodologically, grounding the analysis in the Khaleghi-Motlagh edition while managing significant variants from the Moscow and Mohl editions anchors the findings in stable readings without neglecting the epic’s textual history. Conceptually, the deterrence/prevention dyad translates Shahnameh’s narrative wisdom into a policy-ready lens that bridges literary analysis and contemporary heritage governance. Practical implications follow directly. These include: 1) heritage-risk mapping for historic cities and fortress belts; 2) creation of a “Cultural Deterrence List” of emblematic monuments for protective diplomacy and international signaling; 3) continuity planning for ritual calendars through venue protection, documentation, and youth education; 4) language-protection toolkits, such as crisis glossaries and media style guides, for heritage managers; and 5) integration of narrative communication into emergency protocols to prevent symbolic losses from cascading into identity crises. Crucially, Shahnameh evaluates heroes by their capacity to protect both land and meaning. Success is redefined: a campaign that preserves the banner, the festival, the language, and the palace preserves the nation’s self, even when borders fluctuate. Conversely, victories that neglect symbols and rites sow long-term cultural defeat. In this sense, Shahnameh is more than an archive of the past; it is a strategic map for the present. It demonstrates how engineering can be bound to ethics, ceremony to security, and narrative to response, ensuring that heritage remains alive even under arms. For contemporary policy, the epic’s lessons argue for integrated planning in which cultural-heritage protection is not an adjunct to defense and relief but a primary objective of national resilience. War, Cultural Heritage Protection, Iranian Epic, Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh, National Identity. جنگ,حفاظت از میراث فرهنگی,حماسه ایرانی,شاهنامۀ فردوسی,هویت ملی 85 106 http://athar.richt.ir/browse.php?a_code=A-10-3744-3&slc_lang=fa&sid=2 2025/08/312025/08/172025/08/62025/08/172025/08/16 1404/5/25 2025/09/282025/11/12025/10/92025/09/292025/10/4 1404/7/12 Dariush Zolfaghari Assistant Professor, Persian Language and Literature, Research Institute of Cultural Heritage and Tourism, Tehran, Iran داریوش ذوالفقاری d.zolfaghari@richt.ir 0000-0002-4913-796X Yes استادیار پژوهشکدۀ زبان و ادبیات فارسی، پژوهشگاه میراث‌فرهنگی و گردشگری، تهران، ایران.

fa طراحی مدل یکپارچۀ ظرفیت‌سازی برای مدیریت بحران میراث‌فرهنگی در ایران: رویکردی مبتنی‌بر تحلیل سه‌سطحی  میراث‌فرهنگی ایران به‌عنوان گنجینه‌ای بی‌بدیل از هویت و تمدن ملی، همواره در معرض تهدیدات ناشی از بحران‌های طبیعی و انسان‌ساخت قرار دارد. این پژوهش با هدف طراحی مدل یکپارچه ظرفیت‌سازی برای مدیریت بحران میراث‌فرهنگی در ایران انجام شده است. روش تحقیق از نوع آمیخته (کیفی-کمّی) بوده و داده‌ها از طریق مصاحبه با متخصصان، پرسشنامه و تحلیل اسناد گردآوری شدند. یافته‌ها نشان‌داد که سیستم مدیریت بحران میراث‌فرهنگی ایران با چالش‌های ساختاری عمیقی در سه سطح فردی (کمبود نیروی متخصص، ضعف آموزش)، سازمانی (نبود ساختار یکپارچه، مشکلات مالی) و اجتماعی (فقدان مشارکت مردمی، آگاهی پایین) مواجه است. مدل پیشنهادی ICCHRM در سه لایۀ «پیشگیری هوشمند»، «پاسخ یکپارچه» و «بازیابی تاب‌آور» و در سه سطح کلان، میانی و خُرد طراحی شده و هستۀ مرکزی آن یک سامانۀ هوشمند پایش و تصمیم‌یاری (ICCHRM-SOS) است. ارزیابی مدل با روش شبیه‌سازی مونت‌کارلو نشان‌داد که اجرای کامل مدل در بازۀ پنج ساله می‌تواند منجر به کاهش ۵۵% خسارات مالی، افزایش ۷۰% سرعت پاسخ‌گویی و بهبود ۸۰% رضایت ذی‌نفعان شود. تحلیل حساسیت نیز مؤثرترین مؤلفه‌های مدل را آموزش نیروی انسانی و راه‌اندازی سامانۀ پایش هوشمند شناسایی کرد. این مدل به‌عنوان نقشۀ راهی جامع و بومی می‌تواند تاب‌آوری سیستم مدیریت بحران میراث‌فرهنگی ایرآن‌را به‌طور معناداری ارتقاء بخشد. اجرای موفقیت‌آمیز این مدل نیازمند عزم ملی، برنامه‌ریزی دقیق و نظارت مستمر است.  Abstract Iran’s cultural heritage, an unparalleled repository of national identity and civilization, is persistently threatened by natural and human-made disasters. This research aims to design an integrated capacity-building model for cultural heritage crisis management in Iran. Utilizing a mixed-methods (qualitative-quantitative) approach, data was gathered through expert interviews, questionnaires, and document analysis. Findings revealed profound structural challenges at three levels: individual (lack of expertise, inadequate training), organizational (absence of an integrated structure, financial issues), and social (lack of public participation, low awareness). The proposed ICCHRM model is designed across three layers—”Intelligent Prevention,” “Integrated Response,” and “Resilient Recovery”—and operates at macro, meso, and micro levels. Its core is an intelligent monitoring and decision-support system (ICCHRM-SOS). Monte Carlo simulation evaluation indicated that full implementation over five years could lead to a 55% reduction in financial losses, a 70% increase in response speed, and an 80% improvement in stakeholder satisfaction. Sensitivity analysis identified human resource training and the intelligent monitoring system as the most effective model components. This model serves as a comprehensive, indigenous roadmap to significantly enhance the resilience of Iran’s cultural heritage crisis management system, requiring national resolve, precise planning, and continuous monitoring for successful execution. Keywords: Crisis Management, Cultural Heritage, Capacity Building, Resilience, Integrated Model, Iran. Introduction Iran, with its ancient civilization, possesses a rich and diverse treasure of cultural heritage. However, this invaluable legacy faces significant threats due to the country’s location in a crisis-prone region. Experiences such as the devastating Bam earthquake (2003) and the fire at the Shahr-e Sukhteh museum (2014) underscore this high vulnerability and the critical need for effective crisis management. In the realm of cultural heritage, crisis management differs fundamentally from other sectors, as it aims not only at the physical rescue of objects and structures but also at preserving their authenticity, spiritual values, and identity-bearing significance. This complexity necessitates a preventive, comprehensive, and systematic approach centered on the concept of capacity-building. Despite scattered studies on this topic in Iran, most prior research has been limited to case analyses of past incidents or fragmented solutions, lacking a holistic, integrated, and indigenous perspective for capacity-building. This research gap highlights the need for a systematic study to analyze existing challenges and capacities and propose a comprehensive model for enhancing the resilience of cultural heritage. Accordingly, this study seeks to answer the main research question: “What components should the optimal capacity-building model for crisis management of Iran's cultural heritage include, and how can it be presented as an integrated indigenous framework?” To address this, the research employs a mixed-methods (qualitative-quantitative) approach with the following objectives: to comprehensively identify and analyze the existing challenges and capacities in managing cultural heritage crises in Iran; to conduct a comparative review of successful international experiences and lessons from domestic crises; and to design and propose an integrated indigenous model for capacity-building. The proposed model, titled the Integrated Cultural Heritage Crisis Management (ICCHRM) model, is structured to operate across macro, meso, and micro levels. This framework aims to strengthen abilities, skills, structures, and resources for effective prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery. The article will proceed by reviewing theoretical foundations and prior research, explaining the methodology, and presenting findings from the analysis of the current situation alongside the proposed model. It will conclude with a discussion, final conclusions, and practical recommendations. Findings and Discussion This study reveals profound, multi-level challenges in Iran's cultural heritage crisis management system, alongside key opportunities for improvement. Current Challenges Analysis identifies critical structural weaknesses at three levels: • Individual/Human: A severe shortage of trained crisis management specialists (absent in 92% of provincial museums), minimal annual staff training (1.2 hours vs. international standards of 20+ hours), and workforce burnout (45% of experts have over 20 years of experience). • Organizational: Lack of an integrated coordination structure (cited by 87% of interviewees), chronic underfunding for preparedness (only 1.7% of annual budget), and technological deficiencies (78% of museum/historic structures non-compliant with safety standards). • Social/Participatory: Low public participation (under 8% NGO involvement) and insufficient community awareness (86% unaware of heritage value and protection methods). Potential and Proposed Model Despite these challenges, significant potential exists, including specialized human resources, institutional frameworks, and access to international expertise and digital technologies. A risk assessment matrix confirms natural hazards like earthquakes and floods pose the highest risk. In response, the study proposes the Integrated Cultural Heritage Crisis Resilience Management (ICCHRM) model. This operational framework is built on three pillars: Smart Prevention, Integrated Response, and Resilient Recovery. The model's technical core is the ICCHRM-SOS, an intelligent monitoring and decision-support system integrating environmental sensors, remote sensing, Digital Twins for simulation, and an Early Warning System. It operates through three functional layers and is designed for execution across macro (policy), meso (coordination), and micro (field operations) levels, emphasizing community participation. Effectiveness Evaluation Quantitative simulations predict that full implementation over five years would yield statistically significant improvements: • A 55% reduction in financial losses from disasters. • A 70% increase in response speed. • An 80% improvement in stakeholder satisfaction. • A 40% enhancement in international standing. Sensitivity analysis highlights that investment in human capital training (35% impact) and the smart monitoring system (30% impact) are the most effective components for success, even more than budgetary increases alone. In conclusion, the ICCHRM model provides a comprehensive, evidence-based, and actionable roadmap to systemically enhance the resilience of Iran's cultural heritage by simultaneously addressing human, organizational, technological, and social factors. Conclusion  Safeguarding cultural heritage against crises requires fundamental transformation, an integrated approach, national resolve, and comprehensive stakeholder collaboration. The proposed ICCHRM model serves as a comprehensive roadmap, blending traditional conservation knowledge, modern crisis management technologies, and participatory public structures. Achieving this vision rests on five pillars: political will, appropriate organizational structure, sustainable financial resources, specialized human capital, and active community participation. Systematic planning and implementation of this model can lead to the sustainable protection of national cultural heritage. Recommendations Based on the findings and the ICCHRM model, actionable recommendations are proposed across four levels:   A) Macro-Level (Policy & Legal): • Enact a comprehensive law for heritage crisis protection, establishing a Supreme Council for Cultural Heritage Crisis Management with high-level membership for oversight and funding. • Designate cultural heritage as a "critical cultural infrastructure" in national crisis planning to prioritize resources. • Create a National Fund for Heritage Crisis Support, resourced through government budgets, international aid, tourism levies, and philanthropy, with transparent, risk-based allocation. • Develop bilateral and multilateral international agreements for technical knowledge transfer, funding access, and specialist training. B) Meso-Level (Organizational & Managerial): • Launch a pilot phase of the ICCHRM-SOS intelligent monitoring system for 10 museums and 5 World Heritage sites before national rollout. • Establish provincial Cultural Heritage Rapid Response Teams (CHRRTs) of multi-disciplinary experts equipped with emergency kits. • Found a National Training Center for Heritage Crisis Management to certify 1,500 specialists by 2026 and develop national protocols. • Mandate annual risk assessments for all national/provincial museums and registered sites to guide funding and protective actions. C) Micro-Level (Operational & Participatory): • Implement a "Every Citizen, a Monitor" program using mobile apps for public reporting on heritage conditions. • Integrate basic heritage conservation concepts into school curricula and public awareness media campaigns. • Provide low-interest loans to owners in historic districts for retrofitting aligned with conservation standards. • Conduct bi-annual simulated crisis drills at major heritage sites and museums with all relevant agencies. D) Future Research: • Explore AI and machine learning for data analysis, predictive risk modeling, and automated damage detection. • Investigate novel technologies like nanoparticles for surface consolidation and 3D printing for reconstruction. • Conduct comparative studies on successful public-private partnership models in countries like Italy and Japan. • Perform a detailed socio-economic cost-benefit analysis of the ICCHRM model's implementation. These interconnected recommendations require national commitment, precise planning, and continuous monitoring. It is proposed that a dedicated working group be formed to operationalize the ICCHRM model within a five-year framework, prioritizing foundational legal, pilot-system, and human-capacity building actions. Crisis Management, Cultural Heritage, Capacity Building, Resilience, Integrated Model, Iran مدیریت بحران, میراث‌فرهنگی, ظرفیت‌سازی, تاب‌آوری, مدل یکپارچه, ایران. 107 130 http://athar.richt.ir/browse.php?a_code=A-10-2625-5&slc_lang=fa&sid=2 2025/08/312025/08/172025/08/62025/08/172025/08/162025/09/7 1404/6/16 2025/09/282025/11/12025/10/92025/09/292025/10/42025/11/1 1404/8/10 Fatemeh Alimirzaei Ph.D. in Conservation and Restoration, Expert at the Research Institute of Cultural Heritage and Tourism (RICHT), Tehran, Iran. فاطمه علیمیرزایی F.ALIMIRZAEI@RICHT.IR Yes دکترای حفاظت و مرمت، کارشناس پژوهشگاه میراث‌فرهنگی و گردشگری، تهران، ایران.

fa تحلیل بازشناسی چالش‌های پیشِ‌روی حفاظت از نسخ خطی در بحران‌های نظامی: مورد جنگ 12 روزه  کشور ایران، یکی از غنی‌ترین مجموعه‌های فرهنگی و تاریخی نسخ خطی را در اختیار دارد که شامل متون دینی، علمی و ادبی است. این نسخ نه‌تنها به‌دلیل محتوای غنی خود، بلکه بنا بر ارزش‌های هنری مانند خوشنویسی و تذهیب، دارای اهمیت ویژه‌ای هستند. شرایطی تحمیلی جنگی در کشور سبب بروز نگرانی‌هایی در این حوزه شده است و ارزیابی وضعیت نسخ خطی در ایران در چنین شرایطی می‌تواند ضمن روشنگری وضعیت دقیق این گنجینه‌های ارزنده به ارائۀ راهکارهای سیاستی در راستای حفظ بیشتر آن‌ها منجر شود. بدین‌ترتیب در مطالعۀ حاضر تلاش شده است با اتخاذ روش کیفی به ارزیابی وضعیت نسخ خطیِ ایران در شرایط جنگی پرداخته شود. یافته‌های پژوهش حاکی از آن است که وضعیت فعلی نسخ خطی در ایران در این وضعیت با چالش‌های جدی مواجه است که می‌توان آن‌ها را ذیل هشت مقولۀ کلی ساماندهی و طبقه‌بندی کرد. امکان آسیب‌های فیزیکی ناشی از شرایط محیطی، کمبود منابع مالی و کارشناسان متخصص، پراکندگی نسخ در مجموعه‌های خصوصی و عمومی و فقدان فهرست‌نویسی جامع ازجملۀ این چالش‌های احصاء شده در پژوهش حاضر‌اند. در ادامه راهکار‌هایی به‌منظور برون‌رفت از وضعیت فعلی ارائه شده است. این راهکارها شامل دیجیتال‌سازی نسخ، بهبود فهرست‌نویسی، آموزش متخصصان و تدوین سیاست‌های ملی حفاظت است.  نسخ خطی، آسیب‌شناسی، میراث‌فرهنگی،جنگ نظامی. Abstract Manuscripts, as a valuable and irreplaceable component of cultural heritage, play a vital role in preserving collective memory, sustaining national identity, and transmitting intellectual traditions across generations. However, these priceless treasures are extremely vulnerable during periods of instability and crisis, particularly within the context of armed conflicts, when cultural assets often face destruction, displacement, or illicit trafficking. The present study seeks to diagnose and critically examine the multifaceted challenges associated with the preservation of manuscripts under wartime conditions, focusing specifically on the hypothetical scenario of a military confrontation between Iran and the Israeli regime. Adopting a qualitative research design grounded in the Glaserian model of grounded theory, the study collected data through semi-structured interviews with sixteen specialists and professionals in the domain of manuscript preservation, conservation, and heritage management. The data were subjected to thematic analysis to extract the underlying dimensions and relationships among the identified challenges. The findings indicate that the obstacles to effective preservation can be categorized into five major domains: (1) organizational and managerial factors, including the lack of flexible administrative structures and absence of comprehensive contingency planning; (2) technological and digitalization-related limitations, stemming from inadequate infrastructure and outdated systems; (3) financial and economic constraints, reflected in budget reductions and low prioritization within national policy frameworks; (4) legal and religious ambiguities concerning ownership rights, property regulations, and religious rulings; and (5) ownership-related issues, such as theft, smuggling, and illicit trade in cultural property. Collectively, these interrelated challenges weaken institutional resilience and threaten the survival of collective memory and cultural identity. Consequently, the research recommends key strategic measures—preventive digitalization, human resource empowerment, strengthening of protective legal mechanisms, and enhanced institutional collaboration—to ensure the sustainable and effective safeguarding of this invaluable documentary heritage. Keywords: ManManuscript Heritage, Collective Memory, Cultural Resilience, Preservation Pathology, Crisis Management, Digitalization, Preservation Challenges. Introduction Manuscripts have always been exposed to various threats, ranging from natural deterioration to the challenges caused by insufficient preservation facilities and institutional constraints. During military crises, these threats intensify and, especially through the deliberate targeting of cultural symbols by hostile forces, the danger of cultural erasure becomes a serious concern. Contemporary wars have demonstrated that scientific and cultural centers are often subjected—directly or indirectly—to destruction, while written heritage, as one of the most fragile cultural assets, sustains the greatest losses (UNESCO, 2010). The current wartime situation has generated understandable concerns regarding the protection of cultural heritage, particularly manuscript collections held in governmental repositories. In general, despite the recognized significance of these invaluable treasures, and independent of wartime conditions, preliminary assessments indicate that challenges related to the preservation and management of manuscripts persist. Limited attention has been devoted to their identification, restoration, and utilization. This negligence not only jeopardizes the physical safety of these cultural assets but also doubles the risk of damage and loss during times of crisis such as war. Ensuring the protection and conservation of the nation’s manuscripts requires cohesive and coordinated cooperation among subject-matter experts, research groups, governmental and non-governmental organizations, cultural institutions, and mass media. Such collaboration must be organized within a well-structured framework to maximize the use of national and international capacities for preservation, restoration, and dissemination. Systematic efforts in the collection, protection, organization, and public communication of manuscript heritage—based on evidence-driven assessments—can restore the diminished position of these invaluable resources and safeguard them against imminent threats, both during wartime and in peacetime. Accordingly, this paper seeks to examine, in particular, the challenges of safeguarding manuscripts during wartime conditions, while acknowledging that similar preservation challenges exist even under normal circumstances. The initial premise of this study is that the protection and maintenance of manuscripts—especially rare ones—constitute an intrinsic duty of the state in upholding national identity. Naturally, the role of the government becomes even more crucial under crisis conditions such as armed conflicts. Therefore, the present research aims to identify and analyze the major challenges to the preservation of manuscript heritage during war, specifically within the hypothetical context of the twelve-day conflict between Iran and the Israeli regime. The evaluation of these challenges is expected to yield effective policy-oriented strategies to safeguard this cultural legacy and strengthen the foundations of Iran’s rich Islamic–Iranian identity. Discussion During times of crisis, particularly armed conflicts, manuscripts—as a vital component of written heritage and collective memory—face severe threats. The findings of this study reveal that the challenges of safeguarding manuscripts in Iran can be categorized into five major domains: organizational and managerial, technological and digitalization-related, financial and economic, legal and religious, and ownership and property-related. In the organizational and managerial dimension, the absence of flexible institutional structures during emergencies, the lack of comprehensive crisis management plans, weak inter-agency coordination, and the absence of preventive policies constitute the main obstacles. One expert noted that “in times of war, everything is reactive; there is no predefined plan or unified directive for prioritizing and transferring valuable collections to safe zones.” This observation indicates that effective manuscript preservation requires structured planning, skilled human resources, inter-organizational coordination, and national-level policymaking. The technological and digitalization challenges stem from the shortage of portable and secure digitization equipment, frequent power and internet outages, and the lack of trained specialists capable of operating under wartime conditions. The absence of standardized emergency digitization protocols and the risk of cyber intrusion or data destruction further endanger digital archives (UNESCO, 2017). From a financial and economic perspective, wartime conditions drastically reduce cultural budgets, as national resources are redirected toward military and defense priorities. The resulting funding shortages hinder the procurement of protective equipment, data backup systems, and the retention of technical staff. Dependence on international or governmental financial aid exacerbates the situation during periods of instability or sanctions. In the legal and religious sphere, uncertainties regarding ownership, endowment status, and religious regulations present additional obstacles. However, Islamic jurisprudence, based on the principle of al-ḍarūrāt tubīḥ al-maḥẓūrāt (“necessity permits the prohibited”), allows temporary flexibility to protect sacred heritage, provided that respect for sanctity and purity is maintained. Collaboration between clerics and heritage professionals is thus essential in crisis management. Finally, ownership-related challenges—such as theft, illicit trafficking, and disputes over custody—intensify during armed conflicts. Weak administrative supervision and the exploitation of cultural assets by armed groups for financial or political leverage pose serious ethical and security risks (UNESCO, 2017). Overall, the findings indicate that despite Iran’s rich civilizational legacy and the recognized importance of manuscript heritage, the lack of shared understanding among policymakers and managers has marginalized preservation efforts during crises, placing this invaluable cultural legacy in persistent jeopardy. Conclusion  Manuscripts, as a crucial part of humanity’s written heritage, have played a fundamental role in the transmission of knowledge, the dynamism of civilizations, and the formation of national cultural identities. Their significance in the history of thought, as well as in scientific and social developments, has led scholarly centers around the world to regard manuscripts not merely as material or museum artifacts, but as living and active sources for the production and reproduction of knowledge. In this context, Islamic countries—particularly Iran, given its rich civilization, diverse sources, and historical scientific legacy—rank among the most important custodians of these invaluable treasures. However, the lack of a shared and widespread understanding of the strategic importance of these resources, especially among policymakers, academic institutions, and even cultural intellectuals, remains a fundamental challenge to their preservation. Cultural heritage reflects the historical memory of nations, and neglecting it constitutes a rupture from the past, weakens social capital, and undermines national identity cohesion. Although many manuscripts have survived natural disasters, wars, plundering, and foreign invasions over the centuries, without systematic collection, documentation, organization, and preservation in specialized centers that meet scientific standards under the supervision of legal authorities, they face severe threats from emerging risks. Drawing on research findings in wartime conditions, several key recommendations are proposed in this regard: 1. Digitalization Strategy as a Preventive Measure: Creating digital copies of manuscripts and storing them in secure databases to protect the content in case the originals are damaged or destroyed during war or other potential crises. 2. Human Resource Empowerment Strategy: Providing specialized training for staff in libraries, archives, and cultural centers on identifying, preserving, restoring, and emergency-transferring manuscripts, with an emphasis on preparedness during crises. 3. Comprehensive and Integrated Cataloging Strategy: Developing an accurate and up-to-date inventory of all manuscripts held in public and private centers to better understand cultural assets and prioritize protective actions in emergencies. 4. Strengthening Laws and National Policies Strategy: Enacting supportive legislation and formulating clear policies for the protection of manuscripts in wartime, including establishing legal responsibilities for relevant institutions in their preservation and safeguarding. 5. Institutional Cooperation and Organizational Coordination Strategy: Establishing mechanisms for collaboration among cultural institutions, libraries, relief organizations, crisis management authorities, and security agencies to ensure rapid and coordinated responses to threats. The above solutions combine urgent and strategic measures aimed at the preservation, restoration, and accessibility of manuscripts, ensuring that this invaluable cultural heritage survives for future generations and remains protected against destruction, loss, or illegal transfer. It is hoped that identifying these challenges and presenting the proposed strategies in this research can contribute to more conscious and effective preservation efforts. Moreover, these findings may pave the way for more coherent and responsible policymaking in the field of written heritage under crisis conditions. ManManuscript Heritage, Collective Memory, Cultural Resilience, Preservation Pathology, Crisis Management, Digitalization, Preservation Challenges. نسخ خطی, آسیب‌شناسی, میراث‌فرهنگی,جنگ نظامی. 131 147 http://athar.richt.ir/browse.php?a_code=A-10-4065-1&slc_lang=fa&sid=2 2025/08/312025/08/172025/08/62025/08/172025/08/162025/09/72025/07/28 1404/5/6 2025/09/282025/11/12025/10/92025/09/292025/10/42025/11/12025/09/24 1404/7/2 Mahdieh Bod Assistant Professor, Department of Tourism, Research Institute of Cultural Heritage and Tourism, Tehran, Iran (Corresponding Author). مهدیه بد M.bod@ritch.ir Yes استادیار گروه گردشگری، پژوهشگاه میراث‌فرهنگی و گردشگری، تهران، ایران (نویسندۀ مسئول). Zahra Raji Adjunct Lecturer, Department of Social Policy, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran. زهرا راجی zahra.raji@ut.ac.ir No مدرس مدعو، گروه سیاست‌گذاری اجتماعی، دانشکدۀ علوم اجتماعی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. Zeynab Rahmani PhD Student in Tourism, Department of Tourism, Faculty of Management and Accounting, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran. زینب رحمانی zeynab_rahmani@atu.ac.ir No دانشجوی دکتری گردشگری، گروه گردشگری، دانشکدۀ مدیریت و حسابداری، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران. Saeed Shafiaa Researcher, Research Center of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, Tehran, Iran. سعید شفیعا s.shafia@mrc.ir No پژوهشگر مرکز پژوهش‌های مجلس شورای اسلامی، تهران، ایران.

fa حفاظت از کتابخانه‌ها و آرشیوها در دوران جنگ: اصول بین‌المللی و درس‌های جهانی میراث مستند، شامل: کتابخانه‌ها، آرشیوها و مجموعه‌های موزه‌ای، شریان حیاتی حافظۀ جمعی و هویت فرهنگی ملت‌هاست. این منابع، نه‌تنها سوابق تاریخی را حفظ می‌کنند، بلکه زیربنای توسعۀ دانش و آموزش نسل‌های آینده را تشکیل می‌دهند؛ با این‌حال، درگیری‌های مسلحانه همواره این گنجینه‌ها را به‌صورت هدفمند یا جانبی نابود کرده‌اند؛ نابودی‌ای که فراتر از خسارت فیزیکی، پیوند یک ملت با گذشته‌اش را قطع می‌کند و آن‌را از برنامه‌ریزی برای آینده محروم می‌سازد و در برخی موارد نسل‌کشی فرهنگی است. این پژوهش با روش کیفی و تحلیل محتوای استقرایی، الگوهای تاریخی تخریب فرهنگی را از قرن بیستم میلادی تا امروز بررسی می‌کند. شواهد نشان می‌دهد قرن بیستم میلادی ویرانگرترین دوره برای میراث مکتوب بوده است؛ به‌طور مثال، بیش از ۱۵ میلیون جلد کتاب در لهستان (۷۰-۸۰%)، ۳٫۳ میلیون جلد و 300/17 نسخۀ خطی در یوگسلاوی سابق، بیان‌کنندۀ این است که این تخریب‌ها اغلب بخشی از پاک‌سازی قومی و ایدئولوژیک بوده و هویت جوامع را ریشه‌کن کرده‌اند. چارچوب حقوقی بین‌المللی شامل: کنوانسیون لاهه ۱۹۵۴م. (با پروتکل‌های اول و دوم)، کنوانسیون‌های یونسکو ۱۹۷۰ و ۱۹۷۲ م.، توصیه‌نامه‌های ۱۹۶۴ و ۱۹۶۸ م.، سند نارا ۱۹۹۴م. و اصول ایفلا ارائه‌دهندۀ ابزارهایی برای حفاظت است، اما نقاط ضعف جدی دارند که گاه آن‌ها در شرایط جنگ بی‌تأثیر شده‌اند. ایران با گنجینه‌های عظیم نسخ خطی و موقعیت ژئوپلیتیکی پرریسک، نیازمند تدوین فوری برنامۀ ملی بحران میراث مستند است. بدون اقدام پیش‌گیرانه، جنگ‌ها حافظۀ ملت را برای همیشه محو خواهند کرد. حفاظت از میراث مستند، نه‌تنها یک تعهد حقوقی، بلکه ضرورت اخلاقی برای بقای تمدن و توسعۀ پایدار است. درس‌های جهانی که تنها پیش‌گیری عملی مؤثر است. این پژوهش یک مدل چهارمرحله‌ای پیش‌گیرانه پیشنهاد می‌کند که شامل مرحلۀ پیش‌گیرانه، مرحلۀ هشدار، مرحلۀ درگیری فعال و مرحلۀ پساجنگ است. Abstract This qualitative study, using inductive content analysis, traces patterns of cultural destruction from the 20th century to today. The 20th century proved the most ruinous for written heritage: over 15 million books in Poland (70–80%), 3.3 million volumes and 17,300 manuscripts in the former Yugoslavia, 30–50% of Iraq’s national collections, and most recently, at least 22 cultural institutions in Gaza were obliterated. Such losses were frequently components of ethnic and ideological purges, eradicating community identities. The international legal framework—the 1954 Hague Convention (with First and Second Protocols), 1970 and 1972 UNESCO Conventions, 1964 and 1968 Recommendations, 1994 Nara Document, and IFLA principles—offers protective tools but harbors critical flaws that neutralize them in wartime. The vague “military necessity” exemption, non-binding status of many instruments, disregard for digital heritage, dependence on state cooperation amid conflict, and absence of military training render enforcement unfeasible. Iran, holding immense manuscript treasures and facing high geopolitical risk, urgently needs a national documentary heritage crisis plan. Without proactive measures, wars will permanently erase national memory. Safeguarding documentary heritage is both a legal duty and an ethical imperative for civilization’s survival and sustainable development. Global experience proves only practical prevention works. This study proposes a four-stage preventive model: Preventive Phase: Training, digitization, dispersal. Alert Phase: Threat monitoring, transfer readiness. Active Conflict Phase: Emergency safeguarding, damage documentation. Post-War Phase: Reconstruction, identity restoration. Keywords: Documentary Heritage, Libraries and Archives, Protection, Armed Conflict, Cultural Destruction. Introduction Documentary heritage, including libraries, archives and museums, constitutes the collective memory and cultural identity of nations. These resources not only preserve historical and legal documents, but also form the basis of knowledge and education for future generations. As representatives of the nation’s memory, national archives play a key role in writing history and strengthening national identity (Ryden, 2023). Armed conflicts pose a serious threat to this heritage. UNESCO’s “Culture under Attack” exhibition showed that cultural institutions are targeted or collaterally destroyed in crises. The destruction of libraries goes beyond the loss of paper, severing a nation’s connection with its past, present and future (UNESCO, 2017). Deliberate and ideological attacks on cultural heritage erase the identity of societies and undermine their historical continuity in order to facilitate the domination of the occupier. This destruction, like the uprooting of an old tree, makes society vulnerable (Al-Houdalieh, 2025). Systematic destruction of heritage is a recurring theme in history, from the ancient Library of Alexandria to the wars in the Balkans and the Middle East (Al-Houdalieh et al., 2024). Due to its geopolitical location, Iran has witnessed numerous wars from the Median era to the present day. One of the prominent incidents is the burning of the libraries of Iran and Alexandria by the Arab army, which had a profound negative impact on the global discourse of Islam (Oudi and Ramezani, 2008). Abu Raihan Biruni also mentioned the book burning in Khorezm in his “Athar al-Baqiyyah” (Biruni, 2010). Authentic historical documents confirm the occurrence of these incidents. These events show that wars target historical memory in addition to human lives. Therefore, the need for strong international standards for protection in peace and war is essential. The key question is: should cultural heritage workers accept destruction as a reality or is there a way to prevent it? Current programs lack integration for severe war scenarios. The lack of a preventive and operational model based on the lessons of global crises has created a serious management gap. Therefore, it is essential to learn from historical experiences and develop and implement a comprehensive preventive model to save cultural treasures from destruction. Discussion This article examines the threats posed by armed conflict, focusing on documentary heritage (libraries, archives, and museum collections) as the lifeblood of collective memory. Using a qualitative approach and inductive content analysis, the author presents historical patterns of cultural destruction. Systematic destruction is prominent in the wars in the Balkans, Iraq, and most recently Gaza. For example, Riedlmayer’s report on the destruction of over 3.3 million volumes and 17,300 manuscripts in the former Yugoslavia (1991-1999) as an act of ethnic cleansing, Al-Tikriti and Johnson’s report on the looting and burning of the National Library (30-50% damage) and archives (60% of modern history) in Iraq, and librarians’ and archivists’ reports on the state of libraries in Gaza demonstrate the extent of destruction in libraries and the works they contain (Al-Tikriti, 2007). The documents reviewed have weaknesses that make them ineffective in crisis situations. For example, in the latest example regarding Gaza, IFLA’s response to librarians and archivists was that the parties were as follows: “We call on all parties, as parties to the 1954 Hague Convention, to recognize their obligation under international law to take all possible measures to protect and respect all cultural property in the region. As an organization rooted in the realization of human rights, we call for respect for international humanitarian law and the protection and safety of civilians, journalists and cultural heritage. Only through respect for our common humanity can lasting peace be achieved.” (IFLA,2023) A checklist of practical measures for the protection of libraries and archives in times of war Based on the 1954 Hague Convention, IFLA Principles, UNESCO, Blue Shield, and global lessons, a checklist of necessary measures can be considered in the preventive, warning, active conflict, and post-war phases. 1. Preventive phase (peace or imminent threat) 4. Post-war phase (reconstruction) 3. Active conflict phase 2. Warning phase (imminent war or limited attacks) Conclusion  The 20th century was the most devastating period for written heritage; a UNESCO report (1996) documented over 100 destructions from Leuven (1914) to China (1966-76) and Cambodia (1976-79). Poland lost 15 million volumes (70-80%) in WWII. Yugoslavia (1991-99) destroyed 3.3 million books and 17,300 manuscripts in ethnic cleansing (Riedelmeyer). Iraq 2003: 30-50% of national collections and 60% of archives looted/burned (Al-Tikriti, 2007). In Gaza (2023-24) 22 institutions damaged, central archive (150 years of documents) destroyed, 30,000 books looted; 6 librarians killed. These destructions are ideological, culturally genocidal and identity-eradicating. International principles provide a legal framework but are weak. The Hague Convention of 1954 (with protocols) requires general/superior protection, marking and criminalization; Iran acceded in 2000. The Convention of 1972 protects world sites, 1970 prohibits trafficking in manuscripts. The Recommendations of 1964 (prevention of trafficking) and 1968 (preventive protection) are non-binding. The Nara document prioritizes authenticity and diversity. IFLA (2023) condemns conflict, emphasizes neutrality, professionalism and cooperation with UNESCO/Blue Shield; the PERSIST program promotes digital preservation. Weaknesses: ambiguity of “military necessity”, digital neglect, IFLA’s neutrality (e.g. calls for respect for the law in Gaza). Lessons emphasize practical prevention; pre-war evacuation (Poland 1939) saved precious works. The proposed model has four stages: preventive (cataloging, digitization), warning (risk monitoring), conflict (shelter-building), post-war (reconstruction). Iran, with its manuscript treasures and high-risk situation, should develop a national model: while focusing on the principles of international documents such as The Hague/IFLA in the laws, it should prioritize military training, budget for digitization of documentary heritage, Blue Shield cooperation, and develop the aforementioned four-stage proactive model for itself. The preservation of documentary heritage is a legal-moral obligation for the survival of civilization. Qualitative research showed that destruction beyond the physical cuts off a nation’s connection to the past. From Alexandria to Gaza, wars have targeted identity. Existing principles are not enough; practical prevention, global cooperation, and historical lessons are essential to preserve heritage as an artery of sustainable development and peace and prevent tragedies from recurring. Documentary Heritage, Libraries and Archives, Protection, Armed Conflict, Cultural Destruction. میراث مستند, کتابخانه‌ها و آرشیوها, حفاظت, درگیری مسلحانه, تخریب فرهنگی. 149 169 http://athar.richt.ir/browse.php?a_code=A-10-2101-9&slc_lang=fa&sid=2 2025/08/312025/08/172025/08/62025/08/172025/08/162025/09/72025/07/282025/08/9 1404/5/18 2025/09/282025/11/12025/10/92025/09/292025/10/42025/11/12025/09/242025/10/19 1404/7/27 Fezeh Rahimi Kharvana PhD in Conservation and Restoration of Historical-Cultural Objects, Research Center for Conservation of Cultural Relics, Research Institute of Cultural Heritage & Tourism, Tehran, Iran. فضه رحیمی‌خاروانا rahimifezeh@gmail.com Yes دکترای حفاظت و مرمت اشیاء تاریخی-فرهنگی، پژوهشکدۀ حفاظت و مرمت آثار تاریخی فرهنگی، پژوهشگاه میراث‌فرهنگی و گردشگری، تهران، ایران.

fa بازسازی میراث‌فرهنگی بَعد از جنگ، چالش‌ها و تمهیدات آثار تاریخی و میراث‌فرهنگی هر کشور، بیانگر هویت، تاریخچه و تمدن ملت‌ها و سرزمین‌ها می‌باشد؛ که حراست از آن امری ضروری است. حفاظت از بناهای تاریخی نیازمند مدیریت هوشمندانه است، اما بحران‌هایی نظیر جنگ، چالش‌های مهمی را ایجاد می‌کنند که مستلزم آمادگی و تمهیدات مناسب است. بازسازی پس از جنگ فرآیندی پیچیده است که اولویت دادن به مرمت میراث‌فرهنگی در آن، کلید انسجام اجتماعی و التیام غرور ملی است؛ زیرا جنگ اغلب هویت فرهنگی را هدف قرار می‌دهد. بازسازی پس از جنگ، شامل بازسازی فیزیکی و روانی مناطق آسیب‌دیده می‌شود. این فرآیند نیازمند یک رویکرد جامع و هماهنگ است که نه‌تنها شامل ترمیم خرابی‌های ناشی از جنگ می‌شود، بلکه می‌تواند فرصتی برای انسجام‌ اجتماعی، بازسازی میراث و ارتقائ کیفیت ‌زندگی مردم شود. با استفاده از مطالعۀ تجارب دیگران می‌توان برای آمادگی در برابر این مهم برنامه‌ریزی نمود. با توجه به مخاصمات اخیر، ضرورت توجه به آمادگی و برنامه‌ریزی برای خرابی‌های ناشی از جنگ در مورد ابنیۀ میراث‌فرهنگی نمود پیدا می‌کند؛ لذا با مطالعه نمونه‌های موردی تجارب داخلی و خارجی و چالش‌های آثار میراث‌فرهنگی در مخاصمات و نحوۀ مواجهه، تمهیدات لازم در برابر این چالش‌ها را مطالعه می‌نماییم. این پژوهش با بهره‌گیری از رویکرد کیفی و روش توصیفی-تحلیلی به بررسی نمونه‌های تخریب‌شده در اثر جنگ در داخل کشور و نمونه‌های خارج از کشور، برای پاسخ به پرسش اصلی که چالش‌ها و تمهیدات بازسازی پس از جنگ ‌‌می‌باشد، پرداخته است و نتایج نشان می‌دهد «مطالعه روش‌های سنتی و بومی ساخت‌و‌ساز»، «مستندنگاری دقیق آثار»، «آموزش نیروی متخصص مرمت»، برای پیش از حادثه و «ارزیابی و شناسایی خسارات و آسیب‌ها»، «مشارکت مردم محلی»، «تعیین رویکرد مواجهه» و «روش مداخله» برای بَعد از حادثه، از مهم‌ترین تمهیدات لازم می‌باشند.   Abstract Cultural heritage embodies the identity, history, and civilization of nations, necessitating its protection and preservation. The management of historical sites requires strategic planning, yet crises such as wars pose significant challenges that demand preparedness and appropriate strategies. Post-war reconstruction is a complex process, prioritizing the restoration of cultural heritage as a key to social cohesion and national pride, as wars often target cultural identities. This process encompasses both the physical and psychological rehabilitation of affected areas, requiring a comprehensive and coordinated approach that not only addresses the damage caused by war but also provides opportunities for social unity, cultural revival, and improved quality of life. This study employs a qualitative approach and descriptive-analytical methodology to explore the challenges and strategies related to the reconstruction of cultural heritage after conflicts. By examining case studies of damaged cultural heritage within Iran and other war-affected regions globally, this research addresses the fundamental question of what challenges and strategies exist for effective post-war reconstruction. By examining the theoretical foundations of smart management in post-disaster reconstruction within historical contexts and cultural heritage, we found that intelligent analysis and precise and rapid assessment of damages can significantly facilitate the reconstruction process by creating coordination among various entities and aligning data analysis with local needs. This is crucial for effective decision-making and precise analysis in conservation management. Furthermore, the study of resources, indicates that community-based cultural heritage conservation is founded on respect for the roles of local communities, indigenous knowledge, preservation of heritage authenticity, and the establishment of participatory management frameworks. The findings highlight that critical strategies include the study of traditional and indigenous construction methods, meticulous documentation of cultural assets, training specialized restoration personnel before crises, thorough damage assessment and identification post-crisis, community involvement, and the establishment of appropriate intervention strategies. Keywords: Cultural Heritage, Post-War Reconstruction, Challenges, Strategies, Community Involvement. Introduction The preservation of cultural heritage is not only a national and historical duty but also an international necessity that binds future generations to their past (Feilden & Jokilehto, 1998). These artifacts serve as cultural symbols, playing a crucial role in shaping collective memory and fostering national pride (Smith et al., 2022). Even under normal circumstances, the prudent management of these resources and the dedication to safeguarding them are fundamental aspects of cultural heritage protection (Avrami, 2010). However, crises such as wars and sudden destruction pose serious threats to cultural heritage, leading to not only physical damage but also social, psychological, and economic challenges (Stanley-Price, 2021). Post-war reconstruction is a multidimensional process that encompasses not only the physical restoration of damaged sites but also the economic, social, and cultural rebuilding of affected areas. This process requires a comprehensive and coordinated approach that can create opportunities for social cohesion, cultural revival, and enhanced quality of life (Logan, 2007). Given the recent conflicts and the pressing need for attention, preparation, and planning for the damages inflicted by wars on cultural heritage sites have become evident (UNESCO, 2024). Therefore, studying domestic and international case studies of cultural heritage resilience and reconstruction can inform effective strategies and enhance preparedness. The primary objective of this research is to identify and analyze the main challenges and strategies for the reconstruction of cultural heritage after wars in both domestic and international contexts. The research questions center around the challenges faced in post-war reconstruction and the strategies that can be implemented to address these challenges effectively. By examining the theoretical foundations of smart management in post-disaster reconstruction within historical contexts and cultural heritage, we found that intelligent analysis and precise and rapid assessment of damages can significantly facilitate the reconstruction process by creating coordination among various entities and aligning data analysis with local needs. This is crucial for effective decision-making and precise analysis in conservation management. In the field of management, artificial intelligence can be utilized for automated data analysis, predicting stakeholder behaviors, suggesting optimal restoration and conservation strategies, and even supporting strategic decision-making. Discussion  The analysis of post-war reconstruction experiences reveals that the process is fraught with unique challenges that differentiate it from standard urban development projects. The successful reconstruction of a war-torn city must address a wide range of dimensions, including physical destruction, social and cultural disintegration, economic collapse, and environmental degradation. Key challenges include Physical and Cultural Destruction: Wars lead to significant physical damage to buildings and infrastructure, as seen in the historical mosques of Iran and the ancient sites in Iraq. The destruction of cultural heritage not only erodes the physical landscape but also dismantles the cultural identity of communities. Financial Constraints: Securing adequate funding for the restoration of cultural heritage is a major hurdle. Both domestic and international projects have faced financial shortfalls, hampering comprehensive restoration efforts. Community Participation: The lack of local community involvement in reconstruction efforts often results in a disconnect between the restored sites and the community’s cultural identity. Successful projects highlight the importance of engaging local populations in the planning and execution of restoration initiatives. The diagram below illustrates community-based heritage conservation for post-war reconstruction and the measures that need to be taken in response to challenges before the occurrence of a war crisis, as well as the measures that should be implemented in the aftermath of a war crisis. As shown in the diagram, all necessary actions and measures in cultural heritage must be directed towards and committed to specific points of community-based conservation. These include: 1- Attention to both tangible and intangible heritage, 2- Sustainability and protection, 3- Respect for indigenous knowledge and active participation, 4- Managerial and participatory requirements, and 5- The social and economic value of heritage conservation. Adhering to all these aspects can significantly assist in better protection during the post-war reconstruction of cultural heritage.   Effective Strategies Utilizing Traditional and Indigenous Construction Methods: Successful restoration projects often incorporate traditional building techniques and materials to maintain the authenticity of the cultural heritage site. This approach not only preserves the historical integrity but also fosters community pride. Comprehensive Documentation: Detailed documentation of cultural assets prior to crises serves as a critical foundation for reconstruction efforts. This practice ensures that restorations are informed by accurate historical data. Training Specialized Personnel: Developing skilled restoration professionals through targeted training programs is essential for effective rebuilding. This investment in human capital fosters sustainable practices in heritage management. Community Engagement: Encouraging local participation in the decision-making process enhances the sense of ownership and responsibility towards cultural heritage, fostering social cohesion and resilience. Conclusion  The findings of this study underscore the necessity of prioritizing cultural heritage preservation in post-war reconstruction efforts. The interplay between cultural identity and community resilience highlights the importance of restoring not just physical structures but also the cultural fabric of society. The analysis of case studies from both Iran and international contexts illustrates that successful reconstruction is contingent upon a multifaceted approach that integrates social, cultural, economic, and technological dimensions. In responding to the research questions, it is evident that the major challenges in post-war reconstruction of cultural heritage include physical destruction, financial constraints, and insufficient community involvement. Addressing these challenges requires strategic measures such as employing traditional construction methods, ensuring meticulous documentation, training specialized personnel, and fostering community participation. The insights gained from this research contribute to the broader discourse on heritage preservation and reconstruction. By highlighting the significance of cultural heritage in fostering national pride and social cohesion, this study advocates for a holistic approach to post-war reconstruction that not only addresses the immediate needs for restoration but also lays the groundwork for sustainable development and cultural revival. Cultural Heritage, Post-War Reconstruction, Challenges, Strategies, Community Involvement. میراث‌فرهنگی, بازسازی پس از جنگ, چالش‌ها و تمهیدات. 171 196 http://athar.richt.ir/browse.php?a_code=A-10-4108-1&slc_lang=fa&sid=2 2025/08/312025/08/172025/08/62025/08/172025/08/162025/09/72025/07/282025/08/92025/09/16 1404/6/25 2025/09/282025/11/12025/10/92025/09/292025/10/42025/11/12025/09/242025/10/192025/11/18 1404/8/27 Fatemeh Haddadeadel . PhD in Urbanism Planning, Iran University of Science and Technology, Research Expert, Research Institute of Historical Buildings and Textures, Cultural Heritage and Tourism Research Institute, Tehran, Iran. فاطمه حدادعادل f.haddadeadel@richt.ir 0009-0007-7254-3329 Yes دکترای شهرسازی، کارشناس پژوهشگاه میراث‌فرهنگی و گردشگری، تهران، ایران.

fa راهبردهای مدیریت بحران برای حفاظت از آثار فرهنگی-هنری در فضای باز در برابر تهدیدات ناشی از جنگ جنگ به‌عنوان یکی از مخرب‌ترین بحران‌های بشری، تهدیدی جدی و فوری برای آثار میراث‌فرهنگی روباز محسوب می‌شود. آثار فرهنگی و هنری روباز، به‌عنوان میراث‌فرهنگی و عناصری هویت‌ساز، نقش تعیین‌کننده‌ای در منظر شهری و تقویت حافظۀ جمعی ایفاء می‌کنند. این آثار شاخص که عموماً حاصل خلاقیت هنرمندان برجسته هستند، اهداف زیبایی‌شناختی، فرهنگی و اجتماعی را در بافت شهر پیوند می‌زنند. این آثار به‌دلیل ماهیت پراکنده بودن در سطح شهرها، آسیب‌پذیری ذاتی و عدم امکان جابه‌جایی حین جنگ در معرض آسیب‌های مستقیم (مانند: بمباران  یا برخورد ترکش‌ها و ریزش آوار) و غیرمستقیم (نظیر: لرزش ناشی از انفجار، ایجاد تَرک، ریزش و تغییر شرایط محیطی) و آسیب‌های انسانی قرار دارند. این پژوهش با روش توصیفی-تحلیلی و با استناد به روش‌های مطالعاتی اخیر، به بررسی مهم‌ترین چالش‌های مدیریت بحران این آثار و ارائه راهبردهای عملی برای بهبود ظرفیت‌های حفاظتی می‌پردازد. یافته‌های این پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که مهم‌ترین چالش‌های پیشِ‌رو در مواجهه با جنگ عبارتنداز: عدم آگاهی عمومی نسبت به این آثار، نبود برنامه‌های مدون و تمرین‌شدۀ مدیریت بحران اختصاصی برای این آثار، کمبود شدید بودجه و تجهیزات تخصصی، ضعف در هماهنگی بین‌سازمانی در شرایط بحرانی و نبود بانک اطلاعاتی دقیق و به‌روز برای تصمیم‌گیری‌های سریع. در پاسخ به این چالش‌ها، پژوهش حاضر یک چارچوب راهبردی چندمرحله‌ای (پیش از بحران، حین بحران و پس از بحران) ارائه می‌دهد. تدوین برنامۀ عملیاتی نجات شامل: اولویت‌بندی آثار، نقشۀ دسترسی و پروتکل‌های هماهنگی با نهادهای امنیتی و نظامی و سایر ارگان های مرتبط نیز از موارد مهم در این مقوله می‌باشد. نتیجه‌گیری این پژوهش حاکی از آن است که رویکرد پرواکتیو (فعال) به‌جای رویکرد ری‌اکتیو (واکنشی)، با سرمایه‌گذاری برروی آماده‌سازی، آموزش و فناوری‌های دیجیتال، تنها راه افزایش تاب‌آوری این میراث غیرقابل جایگزین در برابر ویرانی‌های احتمالی ناشی از جنگ است.  Abstract War is one of humanity’s most destructive crises, posing a serious and immediate threat to outdoor cultural heritage. Outdoor cultural and artistic works, as components of cultural heritage and identity-forming elements, play a decisive role in urban landscapes and in reinforcing collective memory. These emblematic works, often the product of prominent artists’ creativity, connect aesthetic, cultural, and social objectives within the urban fabric. Due to their dispersed nature across cities, inherent vulnerability, and the impossibility of relocation during war, they are susceptible to both direct (e.g., bombardment, shrapnel impact, and debris) and indirect damages (e.g., ground shaking from explosions, cracking, collapse, and environmental changes), as well as human harm. This article adopts a descriptive-analytical approach and, drawing on recent methodological studies, examines the major challenges of crisis management for these works and proposes practical strategies to strengthen protective capacities. Findings indicate that the key challenges in confronting war are: a general lack of awareness about these works, the absence of formal, practiced crisis-management plans tailored to them, severe shortages of funding and specialized equipment, weak interagency coordination in crisis conditions, and the absence of a precise, up-to-date information database to support rapid decision-making. In response to these challenges, this paper presents a multi-stage strategic framework (before, during, and after a crisis). Developing an operational rescue plan prioritizing preservation of the works, access mapping, and coordination protocols with security and military agencies and other relevant entities—is also a crucial component of this framework. The study concludes that a proactive approach, rather than a reactive one, implemented through investment in preparedness, training, and digital technologies, is the only viable path to enhancing the resilience of this irreplaceable heritage against potential devastation arising from war. Keywords: Crisis Management, Outdoor Objects, War, Cultural Heritage, Conservation. Introduction Outdoor cultural heritage (including sculptures and cultural elements), as identity-building elements in the urban landscape, play a fundamental role in strengthening collective memory. A significant number of these works are either of historical value or are the creations of renowned national and international artists, many of which are registered in the National Register of Monuments. Due to their fixed nature, widespread dispersion in cities, and difficulty in moving, they become highly vulnerable during armed conflicts and social unrest, and face the threat of deliberate destruction and theft. Recent historical examples, from the deliberate destruction of the Buddha statues in Bamiyan to the widespread damage to cultural heritage in Ukraine, emphasize the need to address this issue. Motivated by this urgency, this article seeks to answer a fundamental question: “What are the most effective crisis management strategies for protecting outdoor cultural heritage from war-related threats?” The ultimate goal is to provide a systematic framework to reduce risk and increase the resilience of these valuable assets. Discussion Main challenges in protecting outdoor heritage during wartime Protecting outdoor heritage from war-related threats confronts complex, multi-dimensional challenges that can be categorized into five broad groups: Physical and intrinsic challenges: The fixed, non-movable, and dispersed nature of these works makes them vulnerable to a wide range of threats. These threats include direct damage (shrapnel, bombs, collisions with military vehicles), indirect damage (ground shaking from blasts leading to cracks and collapse), environmental damages (chemical contamination, fluctuations in temperature and humidity), deliberate destruction motivated by ideology, and theft due to the material or artistic value of the works. Administrative and planning challenges: These fundamental challenges manifest in the following items: Lack of an operational, rehearsed plan: absence of a comprehensive, dedicated crisis-management program. Unclear prioritization framework: no explicit framework to answer the critical question of “which work to save first?” based on criteria such as irreplaceability, national value, and vulnerability. Absence of access maps and coordination protocols: lack of emergency access maps and transparent protocols for collaboration with military and security agencies, leading to delays and confusion during salvage operations. FMultiple Governing Bodies and Dispersed Responsibilities: management of dispersed works by multiple bodies (e.g., Ministry of Culture heritage tourism, municipalities, Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance) causing role overlap and reduced efficiency under crisis conditions. Financial and equipment challenges: Heritage protection budgets do not rank highly among national crisis priorities. Severe funding shortages, along with limited access to specialized materials and equipment (fire-suppressing coverings, protective gear, specialized cases) and a suitable transport fleet, constitute major obstacles. Informational challenges: The absence of a unified, up-to-date information database for each asset (including technical data, precise location, and visual documentation) renders rapid and efficient decision-making in critical moments impossible. Human and social challenges: These include a shortage of trained professionals capable of conducting salvage operations in hazardous conditions and a lack of public awareness about the value of these works, which results in protection not being prioritized by citizens or even decision-makers. To overcome these challenges, a proactive, systematic, and cross-sectoral approach is necessary to enhance the resilience of this irreplaceable cultural heritage in the face of war. To overcome these complex challenges, a multi-phased strategic framework is proposed that defines key actions in three phases. Pre-crisis phase (Preparation and Prevention): This stage is the most important and decisive phase. • Digital documentation: employing technologies such as 3D laser scanning and photogrammetry to create a secure and accurate archive for each outdoor artwork. These data form the foundation for all future protective and preservation actions. • Development of a GIS database: creating an integrated geographic information system that collects technical data, precise locations, structural status, and 3D models of the artworks. • Prioritization and risk assessment: forming a committee of specialists to rank artworks based on criteria such as national and international value, irreplaceability, and intrinsic vulnerability. • Development of an operational rescue plan: drafting a concrete plan that clearly defines responsibilities, the chain of command, coordination protocols with security and military agencies, and the list of required equipment (Boylan, 1993). • Training and capacity building: organizing training courses and simulated workshops for staff and the local community. Crisis phase (Response and Action): This stage focuses on the rapid and precise execution of pre-identified plans. • Activation of the Crisis Management Center for Cultural Heritage: establishing continuous liaison with security and military authorities. • Execution of the rescue plan: initiating operations according to the prioritized sequence, including covering artworks with protective and fire-resistant materials, installing protective scaffolding, and, where feasible, evacuating smaller works to safe locations. • Documentation of damages: recording all damages immediately after the incident for use in the recovery phase. Post-crisis phase (Recovery and Reconstruction): This stage addresses damage repair and lessons learned for the future. • Damage assessment: deploying expert teams to conduct precise damage evaluations using previously documented data. • Emergency protection and stabilization: implementing initial measures to prevent further degradation, such as stabilizing at-risk structures. • Review and update of plans: analyzing performance and updating crisis-management plans based on practical experiences gained.     Conclusion  War, as a harsh reality of the contemporary world, seriously threatens the survival of outdoor cultural heritage, including statues and cultural elements. Findings from this study indicate that the only way to increase the resilience of this irreplaceable heritage is to adopt an active, systematic, and multidisciplinary approach grounded in precise planning, investment in technology, and training, as well as inter-agency coordination. In this context, the strategic framework presented in this article can serve as a practical roadmap for the overseeing institutions in Iran. Effective implementation of this framework requires attention to strategies tailored to the material nature and the development of an interdisciplinary perspective. On the one hand, emergency protection of outdoor artefacts, predominantly metal and stone, demands planning aligned with the intrinsic properties of each material, prior to a crisis. Consequently, the choice of protective methods—from scaffolding and camouflage coverings to fill materials—must be made with meticulous regard to these properties to prevent secondary damage. Drafting an initial plan for each work, in which the optimal methods of covering, securing, and relocating are pre-determined according to material, dimensions, and environmental conditions, enables rapid and effective response in a crisis. On the other hand, it should be emphasized that protecting heritage in times of war is not merely a technical issue; it is a fusion of international law, technology, crisis management, and policy. In this vision, investment in digital documentation and the promotion of international dialogue to establish “cultural safe zones,” even during wartime, constitute indispensable necessities in this field. Finally, it must be stressed that protecting these works is not solely the responsibility of specialists, but a collective duty that demands national resolve and international cooperation. The future of our historical memory depends on the quality of protective actions taken today.   Crisis Management, Outdoor Objects, War, Cultural Heritage, Conservation. مدیریت بحران, آثار فرهنگی روباز, جنگ,  میراث‌فرهنگی, حفاظت. 197 213 http://athar.richt.ir/browse.php?a_code=A-10-4154-1&slc_lang=fa&sid=2 2025/08/312025/08/172025/08/62025/08/172025/08/162025/09/72025/07/282025/08/92025/09/162025/09/3 1404/6/12 2025/09/282025/11/12025/10/92025/09/292025/10/42025/11/12025/09/242025/10/192025/11/182025/10/19 1404/7/27 Shaiba Khadir Senior Research Expert, Research Institute of Cultural Heritage and Tourism, Tehran, Iran. شیبا خدیر shaiba.khadir@gmail.com Yes کارشناس ارشد پژوهشی، پژوهشگاه میراث‌فرهنگی و گردشگری، تهران، ایران.

fa حفاظت از میراث‌فرهنگی در جنگ و درگیری‌های مسلحانه: واکاوی نقش و اقدامات کمیتۀ جهانی سپر آبی در عراق، مصر، سوریه و اوکراین میراث‌فرهنگی به‌عنوان یکی از ارکان هویت ملی و حافظۀ تاریخی ملت‌ها در شرایط بحران‌های انسانی و طبیعی همواره در معرض تهدیدهای جدی قرار دارد. جنگ‌های داخلی، اشغال نظامی، انقلاب‌های سیاسی، تروریسم و بلایای طبیعی ازجمله عواملی هستند که به تخریب، غارت یا نابودی آثار فرهنگی منجر می‌شوند. در این‌میان، تدوین راهبردهای حفاظتی چندلایه و بهره‌گیری از ظرفیت‌های بین‌المللی برای صیانت از میراث‌فرهنگی ضرورتی انکارناپذیر است. کمیتۀ بین‌المللی سپر آبی (Blue Shield International) براساس مفاد کنوانسیون ۱۹۵۴م. لاهه و پروتکل‌های الحاقی آن از سال ۱۹۹۶م. با هدف حفاظت از میراث‌فرهنگی در شرایط بحران فعالیت می‌کند. این نهاد با همکاری سازمان‌هایی چون: یونسکو، ایکوم، ایکوموس، ایفلا و ایکا راهبردهایی در زمینۀ آموزش نیروهای نظامی، تدوین فهرست‌های اضطراری، مستندسازی و مدیریت مخاطرات فرهنگی ارائه داده است؛ پرسش اصلی پژوهش آن است که، اقدامات کمیتۀ سپر آبی در شرایط جنگی چگونه بر تاب‌آوری میراث‌فرهنگی تأثیر گذاشته‌اند؟ فرضیۀ اصلی نیز بر این مبناست که تلفیق ظرفیت‌های داخلی با همکاری‌های بین‌المللی، موجب افزایش اثربخشی حفاظت اضطراری در بحران‌های فرهنگی می‌شود. روش پژوهش به‌صورت کیفی و تطبیقی بوده و با تحلیل اسناد معتبر، گزارش‌های رسمی و مطالعات موردی در چهار کشور منتخب انجام شده است. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد که اثربخشی اقدامات کمیتۀ سپر آبی به عواملی چون: نوع تهدید، سطح آمادگی داخلی، میزان بهره‌گیری از فناوری و همکاری بین‌نهادی بستگی دارد. تجربۀ اوکراین در استفاده از فناوری‌های نوین، مصر در پیوند با نهادهای قضایی، و سوریه و عراق در مستندسازی و آموزش محلی، الگوهایی متنوع از حفاظت اضطراری ارائه کرده‌اند. Abstract Cultural heritage as one of the pillars of national identity and collective memory of nations, has constantly been subject to great threat in times of humanitarian and natural crisis. Civil war, military occupation, political revolution, terrorism, and natural disasters are the main factors that can lead to the destruction, plundering, or annihilation of cultural monuments. In this context, formulation of protective multi-layered strategies and utilizing international capacities is an undeniable imperative for safeguarding cultural heritage. The international committee of Blue Shield has been operating based on the contents of the 1954 Hague convention and additional protocols with the goal of protecting cultural heritage in times of crisis. The goal of this research is to comparatively study the actions of Blue Shield in the four countries of Iraq, Egypt, Syria, and Ukraine and analyzing its effect on cultural resilience. The main question of the study is “How these measures have been able to safeguard cultural heritage against serious threats and what factors have influenced their effectiveness.” The main hypothesis of the study is that the combination of domestic capacities with international cooperation, especially via Blue Shield, has improved cultural resilience in times of crisis. The research method has been qualitative and comparative, and the data have been gathered through analyzing the official documents of Blue Shield, institutional preparedness level, Reports from UNESCO and ICOMOS, national law, and case studies. The findings show that the effectiveness of the measures of Blue Shield depends on factors such as type of threat, institutional preparedness level, the extent of technology use, and inter-institutional cooperation. Ukraine’s experience in applying new technologies, Egypt’s engagement with judicial institutions, and Syria and Iraq in training local forces and documentation, have provided various examples of emergency safeguarding. The conclusion of the study is that designing a local safeguarding framework in Iran should be based on combining domestic capacities with international cooperation, in order for the country’s cultural resilience to improve against crises. Keywords: War, Protection, Blue Shield, Cultural Heritage, Resilience. Introduction Cultural heritage, both tangible and intangible, is an inseparable part of nations’ historical and social identity and plays an important role in the preservation of collective memory. The importance of this heritage doubles in times of crisis, since on one hand as a symbol of national identity, and on the other hand as a cultural and spiritual asset, enhances societies’ cultural resilience. However, wars and armed conflicts are the greatest threats that put cultural heritage in danger of destruction, plundering, and annihilation. The recent experiences in Iraq, Syria, Egypt, and Ukraine demonstrate that historical monuments, museums, and archeological sites are among the first victims of political and military crises and the consequences go beyond material losses, leading to undermining social identity and cohesion. To take action against these threats, the international committee of Blue Shield was formed based on the 1954 Hague convention and its additional protocols and was tasked with protecting cultural heritage in wartime through drafting protective strategies, training military and local forces, emergency documenting, and inter-institutional cooperation.  The goal of this study is to analyze the protective measures taken by Blue Shield in the four countries of Iraq, Egypt, Syria, and Ukraine in order to identify the factors that influence the effectiveness of safeguarding interventions and create the ability to design a local framework for countries like Iran.  The necessity of this study stems from the fact that Iran, a country with a rich cultural heritage, is facing multiple natural and anthropogenic threats, but so far, has not attained official and practical membership in the committee of Blue Shield. Analyzing international experiences can make ground for drafting local strategies, increasing cultural resilience, and strengthening heritage diplomacy. The main question of the study is: How the actions of the international committee of Blue Shield during times of war have affected the cultural heritage resilience of the aforementioned countries. The main hypothesis is: Combining local capacities with international cooperation, especially via Blue Shield, has led to the enhancement of cultural resilience in times of crisis. And additional hypotheses include: 1) Utilization of new technologies in emergency safeguarding increases the effectiveness of the interventions. 2) Training local forces and accurate documentation plays a key role in decreasing cultural damages. 3. In situations of political instability, assessment and documentation missions are more effective than on-site actions. Manuscript The theoretical foundations of the study are based on the legal and executive frameworks of the 1954 Hague convention and its additional protocols and introduce principles such as prevention, documentation of damages, and respecting heritage during military operation as the core pillars of the activities of Blue Shield. These principles are reinforced by UNESCO’s complementary instruments, the Venice Charter, and the Statute of the International Criminal Court and provide the basis for a comparative analysis of Blue Shield’s actions in different countries. In this text, the four countries of Iraq, Egypt, Syria, and Ukraine have been chosen as case studies. These choices have been made based on geographical diversity, differences in the type of confrontation, the level of technological infrastructure, and the amount of intervention by the International Committee of Blue Shield. Iraq and Syria demonstrate security and institutional challenges in the Middle East, while Egypt presents a distinct experience when it comes to confronting internal unrest and preventative safeguarding. Ukraine is also surveyed as an example of the utilization of new technologies in cultural safeguarding in the context of total war. The comparative study shows that the measures taken by Blue Shield in every country have been different based on the type of threat and institutional capacities. In Iraq, military occupation and the terrorism of the ISIS led to the widespread destruction of monuments; Blue Shield was able to restore parts of monuments through documentation, training military personnel, and international cooperation. In Egypt, the crisis of the 2011 revolution led to the plundering of museums and warehouses; assessment missions and reinforcing cultural heritage police were the key measures. In Syria, protracted civil war and targeted destruction of monuments restricted the effectiveness of the measures; documentation and local training only reduced the damages. In Ukraine, total war with Russia was a great threat to heritage; utilization of new technologies such as GIS and 3D Scanning, and extensive institutional cooperation led to relative success. Comparative analysis shows that the difference in the success level of the actions of Blue Shield is not only a result of the technical quality of the interventions, but also depends on the political, institutional, and social context. In Iraq, institutional inability and the high level of political corruption caused many of the safeguarding measures to face obstacles. Meanwhile, low social capital and public distrust of official institutions restricted the effectiveness of the interventions. In Egypt, the presence of long-standing cultural institutions and a long history of safeguarding heritage provided the ability for faster restoration. However, political constraints and intense government control over international activities restricted cooperation opportunities. In Syria, civil war conditions and the extensive unsafety posed serious danger to Blue Shield agents. Additionally, the accusation of foreign intervention and government constraints hindered the full execution of the programs. In Ukraine, a rather more transparent political structure and higher social capital, coupled with the feasibility of active cooperation with NGOs and volunteers, caused the actions of Blue Shield to be more effective. The rate and quality of restoration in this country were notable compared to others. Overall, the role of NGOs, museum owners, and volunteers in countries like Ukraine and Egypt was able to compensate for the institutional void; however, in Iraq and Syria, this capacity was less utilized. Conclusion The findings in this research demonstrate that the actions of the International Committee of Blue Shield in wartime have been effective when coupled with local capacities of the countries and local institutions have participated in the process of safeguarding. Analysis of the four countries of Iraq, Syria, Egypt, and Ukraine showed that the type of threat, level of local preparedness, type of intervention, and utilization of technology have been considered the determining elements in the level of cultural heritage resilience. Establishing National Committees of Blue Shield provides the possibility of active participation in international programs, upgrading institutional preparedness, and decreasing escalatory actions. These committees, with a governmental and participatory approach, integrate the operational capacities of the state, civil institutions, and military forces and focus on protecting cultural heritage in times of crisis. The secondary effects of this approach, like strengthening the process of democratization in the armed forces and preventing politicization of cultural safeguarding, play an important role in improving cultural governance and national cohesion. To answer the main question of the research, stating how the actions of Blue Shield have affected cultural resilience in wartime, it can be said that these actions, if executed in a targeted way and suitable to local conditions, play an effective role in decreasing cultural damages and protecting collective memory. The main hypothesis of the study, stating that integrating local capacities with international cooperation leads to the enhancement of cultural resilience, was confirmed. Moreover, additional hypotheses were studied during the comparative analysis: utilization of new technologies in Ukraine has enhanced the effectiveness of emergency safeguarding; training local forces and accurate documentation in Syria and Iraq have played big roles in safeguarding cultural monuments; and assessment missions in Egypt at a time of political instability proved more effective than on-site interventions. Given the richness of Iranian culture and the presence of multiple natural and humanitarian threats, officially and practically joining the International Committee of Blue Shield can be a strategic step toward enhancing the country’s safeguarding capacities. This membership, in addition to benefiting from global experiences and international standards, will pave the way for the reinforcement of cultural diplomacy, increase in international credibility, and regional exemplification for Iran.  Practical suggestions are: • Establishing the Iranian National Committee of Blue Shield with the collaboration of the Ministry of Cultural Heritage, universities, military institutions, and NGOs. • Holding collaborative workshops with the International Committee of Blue Shield in order to train local forces and managers in the heritage sector.  • Formulation of localized safeguarding manuals based on global standards and the specific conditions of Iran. • Establishing a national digital database to record and legally track endangered monuments. • Strengthening Iran’s cultural diplomacy through membership in international institutions and utilizing the supportive capacities of UNESCO, ICOM, ICOMOS, and IFLA. War, Protection, Blue Shield, Cultural Heritage, Resilience. جنگ, حفاظت, سپرآبی, میراث‌فرهنگی, تاب‌آوری. 215 231 http://athar.richt.ir/browse.php?a_code=A-10-4158-1&slc_lang=fa&sid=2 2025/08/312025/08/172025/08/62025/08/172025/08/162025/09/72025/07/282025/08/92025/09/162025/09/32025/09/1 1404/6/10 2025/09/282025/11/12025/10/92025/09/292025/10/42025/11/12025/09/242025/10/192025/11/182025/10/192025/10/23 1404/8/1 Sara Ababaf M.A. in Conservation of Historic Buildings and Cultural-Historic Fabrics, Technical Director for National Heritage Site of Morvarid Karaj, Iran (Corresponding Author). سارا عباباف ababaf.s@gmail.com 0009-0002-2223-2374 Yes کارشناس ارشد مرمت بناها و بافت‌های تاریخی فرهنگی، پایگاه میراث ملی کاخ مروارید، کرج، ایران (نویسندۀ مسئول). Ali Darabi Associate Professor, Political Science for IRIB University, Deputy Minister and Vice President for Iranian Cultural Heritage, Ministry of Cultural Heritage, Tourism and Handicrafts, Karaj, Iran. علی دارابی drdarabi.ali@gmail.com 0000-0003-4373-2669 No دانشیار گروه علوم‌سیاسی، دانشگاه صداوسیما، تهران، ایران. Abdolmahdi hemmatpour Ph.D. Researcher in Islamic Period Archeology, National Heritage Site of Morvarid Palace, Karaj, Iran. عبدالمهدی همت‌پور hemmatpourmehdi@gmail.com 0000-0002-7802-5908 No دکتری باستان‌شناسی دوران اسلامی، پایگاه میراث ملی کاخ مروارید، کرج، ایران.

fa حفاظت از آثار تاریخی و هنری در سایۀ جنگ: تجربیات تاریخی نجات‌بخشی و رویکردهای نوین حفظ آثار این پژوهش با بررسی تجربیات تاریخی و معاصر، به تحلیل چالش‌های حفاظت از میراث‌فرهنگی در دوران جنگ می‌پردازد. ابتدا با مرور بر موارد تاریخی مصادره، تخریب و غارت آثار در جنگ‌های جهانی و منازعات منطقه‌ای مانند جنگ جهانی دوم، جنگ ایران-عراق، بحران سوریه و جنگ اوکراین، نشان می‌دهد که میراث‌فرهنگی اغلب به‌عنوان ابزاری برای جنگ روانی و تضعیف هویت ملی مورد هدف قرار می‌گیرد؛ سپس، چارچوب‌های حقوقی بین‌المللی نظیر کنوانسیون ۱۹۵۴ لاهه و پروتکل‌های الحاقی آن‌را به‌عنوان پایه‌های قانونی حفاظت معرفی می‌کند. بخش اصلی پژوهش به تجربیات نجات‌بخشی در کشورهای روسیه، فرانسه، لهستان، سوریه، سوئد، ایران و اوکراین اختصاص دارد؛ از جمله عملیات تخلیۀ اضطراری، پنهان‌سازی آثار و استفاده از فناوری‌های نوین مانند دیجیتال‌سازی سه‌بُعدی، هوش مصنوعی، واقعیت مجازی و پروژه‌هایی هم‌چون SUCHO و Rekrei. هم‌چنین، دیدگاه‌های نظریه‌پردازانی مانند: «پیتر استون» و «برایان دنیلز» بر لزوم همکاری میان نهادهای میراثی، نظامی و بشردوستانه و حمایت از کارکنان فرهنگی تأکید می‌ورزد. درنهایت، پژوهش نتیجه می‌گیرد که حفاظت مؤثر آثار نیازمند برنامه‌ریزی پیشگیرانه، مستندسازی دیجیتال، حمایت مالی بین‌المللی و تقویت مقاومت فرهنگی جوامع است تا از نابودی حافظۀ جمعی و هویت ملت‌ها جلوگیری شود. In contemporary conflicts, cultural heritage faces unprecedented levels of risk. Armed violence now threatens not only historic buildings, artifacts, and archival materials but also the cultural identity and collective memory of nations. The deliberate destruction of heritage increasingly functions as a form of “cultural genocide,” used to weaken morale, erase identity, and reshape historical narratives. These losses carry profound and often irreversible consequences for societies. This research addresses the critical question of how cultural heritage can be effectively protected and rescued during armed conflicts. Its significance stems from the limited availability of practical field guidance in many war-affected regions, where cultural professionals often lack the resources, training, and frameworks necessary for emergency interventions. The study therefore aims to provide applicable strategies for crisis preparedness and heritage protection in wartime conditions. The research is guided by the hypothesis that the most effective protection results from combining preventive planning, international cooperation, and the use of modern technologies. Methodologically, it is based on documentary analysis and comparative case studies. Experiences and historical data from France, Poland, Russia, Sweden, Iran, Syria, Afghanistan, and Ukraine illustrate the diversity of challenges and responses across different conflicts. Findings show that successful heritage protection during war consistently depends on three key components: 1-Pre-crisis planning, including inventories, risk assessments, prioritization of collections, and the establishment of secure storage facilities. 2- Emergency operations, such as evacuation, concealment, and rapid documentation of threatened heritage. 3- Use of technology, including 3D digitization, artificial intelligence, satellite imagery, block chain-based authentication, and cloud storage, which together ensure both physical and digital preservation. Ultimately, the study concludes that cultural heritage protection is an inherently cross-sectoral effort requiring coordination among heritage specialists, military actors, humanitarian agencies, and international organizations. Without such cooperation, significant parts of humanity’s shared heritage will remain at risk in future conflicts. Keywords: War, Emergency Evacuation, 1954 Hague Convention, Modern Technologies, Rescue of Artifacts. Introduction Cultural heritage, as part of the historical and identity identity of nations, has always been exposed to threats arising from political and military developments, but the intensity and nature of these threats have acquired new dimensions in the wars of the 20th and 21st centuries. In a situation where wars have expanded from traditional arenas to psychological, identity, and media battles, historical and cultural monuments are destroyed not only accidentally but also intentionally as symbolic targets. From the perspective of war psychology, the destruction of cultural monuments is an attempt to break the spirit of a nation and sever the connection of the population with its past and historical legitimacy. Examples such as the destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas by the Taliban, the burning of Bosnian libraries, the destruction of Assyrian artifacts in the Mosul Museum, or the widespread looting of artifacts during the colonial era and World War II are evidence of this pattern. The aim of this study is to examine global experiences in protecting cultural heritage during war and to provide a practical model for preparedness and crisis management in countries facing the risk of conflict. The need for research arises from the fact that many countries lack detailed and operational guidelines for rapid response to war threats, and existing solutions are more theoretical and less based on field experiences. The main research question is: In war situations, what strategies and methods are most effective for protecting and rescuing cultural artifacts? Sub-questions also include the following: What patterns in World War II and contemporary wars can be generalized to other countries? What is the role of new technologies in rescuing cultural heritage? And what common obstacles and challenges are observed in rescue operations? The main hypothesis of the research is that: The protection of cultural heritage will only be successful if coordinated and structured actions are taken at three levels: prior preparation, emergency operations, and post-war reconstruction. In this regard, it should be said that modern technologies can largely compensate for the gap caused by physical damage, the participation of the military, museum workers and international organizations is a necessary condition for effective protection, and the lack of training and planning is the biggest factor in the failure of rescue operations. Discussion A comparative study of the experiences of different countries shows that the model of protecting cultural heritage during wartime, although affected by political and geographical conditions, is based on common principles. During World War II, European countries and Russia, realizing the widespread threats posed by bombing and military occupation, undertook complex and unprecedented operations to save cultural artifacts. In the Hermitage Museum, thousands of valuable objects were packaged and transported to safe areas, and the Louvre in France also hid its masterpieces of art in secret. Despite being completely occupied, Poland was able to recover some of the looted artifacts after the war, relying on cultural networks. These experiences proved that pre-crisis planning and establishing protective structures are the most effective tools for reducing damage. During the Cold War, Sweden, studying European experience, developed a comprehensive set of guidelines that included classifying artifacts based on their importance, building underground bomb shelters, and moving archives to sturdy structures. This demonstrated that even neutral countries understood the need for cultural-defense preparedness. In the West Asian region, the examples of Iran, Afghanistan, and Syria illustrate the difficult field conditions and the importance of the role of local staff. In Susa, despite the lack of adequate equipment, museum staff were able to save portable artifacts with their ingenuity and dedication. In Afghanistan, organized looting of cultural artifacts and the weakness of the state structure led to the destruction of a large part of the heritage. In Syria, Ma’mun Abdul Karim, relying on a network of local experts, guerrilla hiding, nighttime transfers of artifacts, and meticulous documentation, rescued thousands of objects from extremist groups. In the Ukrainian war, in addition to field operations, the presence of technology was raised to an unprecedented level. With an archive of over 50 terabytes of digital data, the SUCHO project has introduced a new paradigm for intangible and online conservation. These efforts, combined with educational exhibitions and systematic documentation, have transformed museums from purely cultural institutions into actors of identity resistance. In general, common threats include deliberate destruction, looting, military neglect, military use of historical monuments, lack of education, and the cessation of conservation activities. In contrast, key solutions include prior preparation, emergency operations, no-go lists, cooperation with the military, community participation, and the use of new technologies such as 3D scanning, artificial intelligence, block chain, satellites, robots, and cloud storage. These technologies help preserve cultural memory and the possibility of reconstruction even in the event of physical destruction. Conclusion The analysis of the experiences presented shows that the protection of cultural heritage in times of war is a civilizational necessity and cannot be achieved by superficial measures or momentary reactions. The first important conclusion of the research is that prior planning - including inventorying, prioritization, training and the creation of safe havens - is the most effective part of the protection process. Countries that have taken structural measures before the war have managed to preserve a large part of their monuments. The second conclusion is that emergency rescue operations in the battlefield depend more than anything on the presence of local workers, cultural motivation and community participation. The examples of Iran, Syria and Ukraine show that cultural workers, even without full state or international support, have in many cases played a decisive role in preventing the complete destruction of monuments. Thirdly, organized looting and deliberate destruction remain the greatest threat to cultural heritage. These threats are sometimes carried out not only by armies, but also in many cases by non-state groups, militias, trafficking networks or even local individuals. The creation of stronger international mechanisms, standard digital registration and cooperation with international police to trace artifacts is essential. The fourth finding of the research is the importance of new technologies in reducing damage and post-conflict reconstruction. 3D digitization, artificial intelligence, block chain and 3D printing allow for the accurate documentation and reproduction of artifacts and compensate for the gaps caused by the physical limitations of war. These technologies, even in the worst-case scenario, save a nation’s cultural memory from complete destruction. Finally, for short-term and long-term planning, it is suggested that governments and international institutions focus on training military forces, investing in digital technologies and creating support networks to strengthen cultural heritage as a foundation for sustainable peace and the reconstruction of post-conflict societies. Otherwise, the risk of irreparable loss of a part of human history will increase. War, Emergency Evacuation, 1954 Hague Convention, Modern Technologies, Rescue of Artifacts. جنگ, تخلیه اضطراری, کنوانسیون ۱۹۵۴ لاهه, فناوری‌های نوین, نجات‌بخشی آثار. 233 249 http://athar.richt.ir/browse.php?a_code=A-10-2042-3&slc_lang=fa&sid=2 2025/08/312025/08/172025/08/62025/08/172025/08/162025/09/72025/07/282025/08/92025/09/162025/09/32025/09/12025/08/30 1404/6/8 2025/09/282025/11/12025/10/92025/09/292025/10/42025/11/12025/09/242025/10/192025/11/182025/10/192025/10/232025/04/10 1404/1/21 Manijeh Hadian Dehkordi Associate Professor, Research Center for Conservation of Cultural Relics, Research Institute of Cultural Heritage and Tourism (RICHT), Tehran, Iran. منیژه هادیان دهکردی m.hadian@richt.ir Yes دانشیار پژوهشکدۀ حفاظت و مرمت آثار تاریخی-فرهنگی، پژوهشگاه میراث‌فرهنگی و گردشگری، تهران، ایران.