This article was downloaded by: [maryam ashkan]
On: 03 October 2011, At: 11:14
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
International Journal of Architectural
Heritage
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uarc20
Pointed Dome Architecture in the
Middle East and Central Asia: Evolution,
Definitions of Morphology, and
Typologies
a
a
Maryam Ashkan , Yahaya Ahmad & Ezrin Arbi
a
a
Department of Architecture, University of Malaya, Lembah Pantai,
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Available online: 03 Oct 2011
To cite this article: Maryam Ashkan, Yahaya Ahmad & Ezrin Arbi (2012): Pointed Dome Architecture in
the Middle East and Central Asia: Evolution, Definitions of Morphology, and Typologies, International
Journal of Architectural Heritage, 6:1, 46-61
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15583058.2010.501400
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation
that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any
instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary
sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,
demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
International Journal of Architectural Heritage, 6: 46–61, 2012
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1558-3058 print / 1558-3066 online
DOI: 10.1080/15583058.2010.501400
POINTED DOME ARCHITECTURE IN THE MIDDLE EAST
AND CENTRAL ASIA: EVOLUTION, DEFINITIONS OF
MORPHOLOGY, AND TYPOLOGIES
Maryam Ashkan, Yahaya Ahmad, and Ezrin Arbi
Downloaded by [maryam ashkan] at 11:14 03 October 2011
Department of Architecture, University of Malaya, Lembah Pantai, Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia
This study aims at offering a closer view of pointed domes as the most significant and
important cultural features of Eastern domes in the Middle East and Central Asia. In contrast to previous general historical studies, this study addresses the better comprehension
of a formal architectural language of the pointed domes including their morphologies and
typologies based on epistemological premise of pointed domes’ structuralism. It starts with
defining the proper terminology of the pointed dome type, then, by analytic consideration
of selected examples, the study proposes their origin, evolution, formal morphological constitutions, geometrical designs, and finally definitions of three typologies and subtypes of
the pointed domes based on their shells’ compositions and geometrical profiles, from the
twelfth through sixteenth centuries. Despite varieties of forms and configurations of Islamic
domes, the research puts forward some recurring features and shared characteristics that
are incorporated into a specific style, that is pointed domes. Furthermore, this study on the
significance of pointed domes brings to light undiscovered facts about the essences of traditional dome constructions in the Middle East and Central Asia which may be employed in
providing historical documentation for any conservation interventions.
KEY WORDS: dome typologies, dome morphology, pointed domes, Middle East,
Central Asia
1. INTRODUCTION
Pointed domes, whether erected on single domical buildings or involved in huge
complexes, are considered as greatly significant and important items of Islamic architecture which were widely utilized for both architectural and symbolical purposes. This type
of Eastern masonry domes appears on the majority of monuments in Iran, Afghanistan,
Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. They are well known due to their graceful designs, proportion of constitutions, various typologies, and specific configurations.
Despite the existence of several historical considerations, studies regarding their formal
architectural language such as morphological compositions, typological organizations, and
geometrical characteristics are insufficient and the dispersed documents suffer from the
lack of profound architectural analysis as to the clarification of exact composition and
configuration hierarchies of such domes.
Received March 11, 2010; accepted June 11, 2010.
Address correspondence to Maryam Ashkan, Faculty of Built Environment, Department of Architecture,
University of Malaya, Lembah Pantai, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia. E-mail: [email protected]
46
Downloaded by [maryam ashkan] at 11:14 03 October 2011
POINTED DOME ARCHITECTURE
47
In this regard, this research is an exercise in understanding the architectural structuralism of pointed domes including their proper terminology, origin, evolution, morphological features, and finally their typological structures based on the systematic analysis of
certain samples. The central idea adopted in considering the selected pointed domes samples in this study distinguishes itself from the previous general historical analysis in such
a way that it dwells on the formalism of the space syntax production as an analytical tool.
Using this approach, the elements of a dome can be considered as vocabularies and its
typological characteristics as grammars for setting these words together to form a sentence,
a type of pointed domes herein. Beside that, such a process nevertheless requires understanding of their element evolutions and style developments over historic epochs. Thus,
a section of this research is devoted to defining an evolution map for exploring logical
time-form relations.
Such a study proposed the vital issues for perceiving the essential differences existing between the varieties of Eastern domes, especially, over Islamic periods. Additionally,
it may constitute a beginning for more researches aimed at concentrating structurally on
different aspects of these merited heritage buildings, with respect to conservation plans and
interventions.
Hence this paper is divided into four parts as follows: 1) a brief overview of origins
and developments of pointed domes since their beginnings until the sixteenth century by
analytic considerations of selected samples; 2) illustration of their regional evolution map
and general attributes; 3) elaborations of their common morphological features and typical
geometrical designs; and finally 4) classification of common typologies of pointed domes
based on the compositions of their shells over a specific time line.
2. POINTED DOMES
2.1. Terminology
All too often individuals note the commonality of shapes of Islamic domes, despite
considerable differences between their conceptual forms. Researchers have frequently used
both terms of onion and bulbous (Pope 1965; Wilber 1969; Michell 1978; Stierlin 2002) to
describe the type of domes under study that may create conflict in comparing their geometrical concepts. Needless to say, the lower part of a pointed dome profile is geometrically
tangent to two vertical lines passing from the end points of its span (Figure 1a) as opposed
to the profile traits of whether bulbous or onion domes (Figure 1b). As a result of their
profile considerations, the term of pointed stems as the most appropriate name according
to its dictionary meaning.
2.2. Origin and Types
Historically, the use of the pointed domes as the earliest form of domes was totally
unknown in Islamic architecture.1 In fact, such an architectural item rooted in long-term
developments of both ideology and form by various pre-Islamic civilizations and cultures
which inhabited in this particular region (Creswell 1958; Grabar 2006).
Chronologically, the earliest samples in the Middle East and Central Asia, which
were associated with mud brick-corbelled vaults and domes, often erected over round
1 All
drawings were developed by authors.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE 6(1): 46–61
48
M. ASHKAN ET AL.
Downloaded by [maryam ashkan] at 11:14 03 October 2011
Figure 1. Illustration of the main difference between both profiles of pointed and bulbous domes (color figure
available online).
buildings in Asur (ca. 2000 BC), and then developed in Mesopotamia and Egypt, dating back to 12th and 14th centuriesBC (Huerta 2007; Smith 1971) as well as the earliest
sample of the demolished dome of Nyssa in Turkmenistan, probably of the 1st century
AD (Grabar 1963). However, when the Rome Empire developed into the Middle East, a
majority of oval-shaped domes regularly covered sacred temples in Syria and the nearby
areas (Huerta 2007). Then, saucer domes became as the main features in covering monumental edifies and churches under the Byzantines such as Hagia Sophia (532–537 AD)
(Krautheimer 1984).
Then, before the coming of Islam, two common dome construction techniques
emerged in this boundary, which were basically adopted by Arabs into their early Islamic
dome architecture both symbolically and architecturally, these are, firstly, the semielliptical form of domes over Zoroastrian sacred fire temples in Iran (Ayatollahi 2003)
and wooden domes of the early Christian churches in Syria (Smith 1971). Accordingly, it
is noted that a majority of the pre-Islamic domes embraced semi-elliptical, oval, and saucer
shapes in the Middle East and Central Asia.
Later on, the combination of all previous techniques and thoughts appeared in the
construction of the wooden Dome of the Rock (685–691 AD) and the introduction of domes
in religious buildings through the Eastern-Islamic lands (Grabar 1963; 2006) (Figure 2a).
Figure 2. Two samples of the early pointed domes: a) Dome of the Rock, Jerusalem (Cowan 1977); b) Muntasir
mausoleum, Samarra (Creswell 1989).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE 6(1): 46–61
Downloaded by [maryam ashkan] at 11:14 03 October 2011
POINTED DOME ARCHITECTURE
49
In objective point of view, apart from wooden material context of the Dome of the Rock,
its well-designed proportion and primary pointed form became consequently a design
model for the construction of pointed domes, such as Muntasir mausoleum or Qubbat
al-Sulaybiyya (862 AD) at Samarra in Iraq which was later erected as the second earliest
sample of the pointed domes, despite the extreme Islamic prohibition against building of
tomb structures (Hillenbrand 1994). It embraces an octagonal hallway and was built on a
hill site, very similar to the Dome of the Rock (Creswell 1989; Figure 2b).
Apart from these primary examples, the final configuration of the pointed domes
resulted from both the continuous development of architectural styles and combination of
different local experiments (Creswell 1958) in which the previous technical methods were
improved by new artistic qualities, without destroying the older aspects (Bosworth 1996).
By the 12th century, the course of pointed dome renaissance mainly occurred with
the appearance of three major types in Iran and Turkmenistan. The first is the plain dome
configuration which was often placed on the most enduring masterpieces of Islamic edifices (Figure 3a; Blair and Bloom 1995) such as the Taj-al-Mulk dome (1086–1087 AD)
over the Isfahan Friday mosque. The second trend was associated with development of
the earliest continuous double-shell dome which was constructed over the Bersian mosque
(1105 AD) and the Friday mosque of Zaware (1135/1136 AD) at Isfahan (Figures 3b and
3c; Ayatollahi 2003). Then, such a dome topped the Sultan Sanjar mausoleum (1157 AD) at
Marv as one of the most predominant freestanding mausoleums (Hillenbrand 1999; Figure
3d). From the compositional point of view, the external shells of these domes were divorced
from the internal shells at approximately 22.5’—30’ angles from their bases. However,
their internal shells, which embrace both semi-circular and pointed forms, consist of either
six or eight brick ribs which appeared in more complicated composition of ribs in the
Sultan Sanjar mausoleum.
The third movement is associated with the appearance of the earliest known discontinuous double-shell domes2 in the world without using internal connectors which were
placed on Iranian twin tomb towers (1067–1093 AD) at Kharaqan in Iran (Mainstone 2001;
Figure 4).
Figure 3. Four celebrated samples of continuous double-shell domes in the 12th century: a) Taj-al-Mulk dome of
Friday mosque, Iran; b) Bersian mosque, Iran; c) Zaware Friday mosque, Iran (photo: Authors); d) Sultan Sanjar
mausoleum, Turkmenistan (color figure available online).
2 In
discontinuous double-shell domes, the distances between internal and external shells are considerable.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE 6(1): 46–61
Downloaded by [maryam ashkan] at 11:14 03 October 2011
50
M. ASHKAN ET AL.
Figure 4. Tomb towers topped with the primary sample of discontinuous double-shell domes, Iran (Photo:
Authors) (color figure available online).
These styles of designing dome constitutions likely mark atypical approaches in the
construction of the pointed domes that demonstrated early efforts in making a solution to
the conflict between their external appearance and aesthetic interior space.
Accordingly, the 14th century is the time for tracing the prior continuous doubleshell domes such as the Oljeitu tomb (1302–1312 AD) at Sultaniya in Iran, which was
listed in UNESCO World Heritage (Figure 5). The small brick connectors inserted between
two shells and small oculus of the Oljeitu dome noticeably distinguish it from the other
samples at the same time (Stevens 1979; Pope 1976). Professor Piero Sanpaolesi believed
that it might be the origin of the dome of the Cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore in Florence
because of some congruous aspects in their configurations (Vasseghi et al. 2007). As widely
known, this dome was constructed by the celebrated Italian architect Filippo Brunelleschi.
Nevertheless, a novel accomplishment was achieved by the construction of the dome
of Sultan Bakht Aqa, of 1351–1352 AD, at Isfahan in Iran as the earliest complete sample
of a pointed double-shell dome in the Middle East and Central Asia (O’Kane 1998; Wilber
1969; Figure 6). Soon after, the invention of using two different shapes of shells and
inserting the radial walls between them, namely discontinuous double-shell domes, rapidly
Figure 5. The continuous double-shell dome of the Oljeitu mausoleum, Iran (Photo: Authors); cross-section of
famous Cathedral Santa Maria del Fiore, Florence (Huerta, 2001) (color figure available online).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE 6(1): 46–61
Downloaded by [maryam ashkan] at 11:14 03 October 2011
POINTED DOME ARCHITECTURE
51
Figure 6. Sultan Bakht Aqa mausoleum, Iran: primary complete sample of the pointed discontinuous doubleshell domes at the 14th century (Photo: Authors) (color figure available online).
diffused through various regions of the Middle East and Central Asia which became a
breeding ground for the creation of the final united style of pointed domes in the 15th
century.
Along the final path of expansion, the pointed discontinuous double-shell domes
evolved into two major types with respect to their external appearances in the 15th century. Firstly, “Gadrooned domes” (Yaghan 2003) as the more common style established
in Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and Afghanistan, for example, those over the Khawaja Ahmed
Yasawi mausoleum (1389–1399 AD) at Hazrat-e Turkestan in Kazakhstan, which is the
UNESCO World Heritage site and the largest dome ever built in the Central Asia (Petersen
1999; Figure 7a) as well as the Gur-i Amir mausoleum (1404 AD), which is considered as
the masterpiece of the pointed dome architecture at Samarkand in this century (Gibb 1993;
Figure 7b). The projected-ribs on the surface of external shell of these pointed domes,
occasionally, gave a bulbous effect to their overall exterior shapes of such domes.
In this regard, the most enduring sample of this primary trend is the triple-shell
dome of the Gawhar Shad mausoleum (1417–1438 AD) at Herat in Afghanistan, which
exposes the advanced level of structural knowledge, proportional developments, and the
Figure 7. Illustration of the first type of pointed domes in the 15th century; a) Mausoleum of Khawaja Ahmed
Yasawi, Kazakhstan (photo: www.panoramio.com/photo/2898205); b) Gur-i Amir masuoleum, Uzbekistan (color
figure available online).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE 6(1): 46–61
Downloaded by [maryam ashkan] at 11:14 03 October 2011
52
M. ASHKAN ET AL.
Figure 8. Mausoleum of Gawhar Shad, Afghanistan (Photo: www.archnet.org, photographer: Stephen Shucart,
2002) (color figure available online).
prevailing of local architecture by using fan-shaped squinches (Knobloch 2002; Memarian
1988; Figure 8).
The second types of the 15th -century style are pointed domes that consist of plain
external shells (Byron 1977), which were constructed on the huge high drums, regionally
located in Iran, Afghanistan, and Uzbekistan, for example, domes over the holy Shrine
of Ali-al-Rida, of 1430 AD, at Mashad in Iran (Pirnia and Memarian 2003; Figure 9a),
the Tuman Aqa mausoleum, of 1440 –1441 AD, at Kuhsan (Figure 9b) in Afghanistan, and
finally the tomb of Qazizadeh Rumi, of 1436 AD, at Samarkand in Uzbekistan (Figure 10).
Meanwhile, the tomb of Qazizadeh Rumi (Figure 10a) is one of the most prominent
sample amongst the ‘Necropolis’ of Shah-i Zindeh (1066–circa 1350 AD) at Samarkand
(Byron 1982) that may be considered as the most essential testament of continuous
development of the pointed domes since the 12th until the 14th centuries in Uzbekistan
(Golombek and Wilber 1988).
The last generation of the pointed dome samples are those erected over the Kalyan
mosque, of 1542 AD, (Figure 11a) and the Mir Arab madrasa, of 1600 AD, (Figure 11b) at
Bukhara in Uzbekistan (Grangler 2004). These are well-known due to the specific shape
of their internal components, lighter structure, and shells which recalled their 15th century
context (Borodina 1987).
Figure 9. Illustration of the second type of the pointed domes in the 15th century: a) Ali-al-Rida shrine, Iran
(Photo: Authors); b) Tuman Aqa mausoleum, Afghanistan (Photo: www. archnet.org, photographers: Sheila Blair
and Jonathan Bloom, 1970) (color figure available online).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE 6(1): 46–61
POINTED DOME ARCHITECTURE
53
Downloaded by [maryam ashkan] at 11:14 03 October 2011
Figure 10. The cross-section of the Shah-i Zendeh complex, Uzbekistan; a) Detailed vertical section of the
Qazizadeh Rumi mausoleum after (Memarian 1988) (color figure available online).
Figure 11. Two samples of the pointed domes in the end of 15th century: a) Kalyan mosque, Uzbekistan (Photo:
www.panoramio.com/photo/2656872); b) Mir Arab madrasa, Uzbekistan (Photo: www.panoramio.com/photo/
2656843) (color figure available online).
2.3. Evolution
This section attempts at answering how stylistic attributes of pointed domes are
regionally distributed throughout the Middle East and Central Asian realm. The whole
studied cases in the above section have been chronologically arranged in the following
table. Note that time line is not constantly divided. In each region, other samples might not
be included. The arrows depict continuous replications of specific trends and do not denote
any historically acceptable transfer of architectural techniques.
It begins with the 10th century when the pointed domes appeared in isolation, which
can clearly establish theories about their origin and introduction into Islamic architecture (Figure 12). A great number of samples till the twelfth century demonstrated primary
considerable movements in both architectural forms and geometrical compositions of the
pointed domes if compared to other types of Eastern domes (e.g., conical domes) constructed during this blooming period.3 Furthermore, the prevailing skillfulness of local
architects made notable difference regionally between configurations of pointed domes
such as the Sultan Sanjar mausoleum in Turkmenistan in comparison with those Iranian
examples. In the 14th century, however, the only novel achievement was the construction
of the Sultan Bakht Aqa tomb, as the second major step of evolution of the pointed dome
compositions.
Looking again, compositionally, the striking resemblances are obviously manifested
in those studied domes, both in the overall form and arrangement in the 15th century.
3 Several examples of domes in this period are noted in Pope (1976) and the Foundation for Science,
Technology, and Civilization (FSTC, 2003).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE 6(1): 46–61
Downloaded by [maryam ashkan] at 11:14 03 October 2011
54
M. ASHKAN ET AL.
Figure 12. Evolution of the pointed domes based on the available data (Figure format adopted from Yaghan,
2003) (color figure available online).
What is more, the remarkable developments of their form and composition stemmed
from the collaboration between Islamic renowned mathematicians in both geometrical and
structural designs in this period.4
Following this prosperous period, the construction of the pointed domes gradually
became less prominent after the appearance of the Safavids (1501–1736 AD) and the
introduction of bulbous domes in Iran and nearby regions. However, it is obvious that,
consistently, the splendid forms that continued to be erected after the 15th century basically relied on all prior existing trends rather than devising something fundamentally new.
Consequently, three territories particularly remarkable in the final and actual development of the pointed domes are Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, and Kazakhstan in which their
geographical proximity make it possible to have influenced each other.
The crucial roles of quite special instructions of royal patrons and sponsors in the
erection of renowned domes cannot be overlooked such as the scale and complexity in the
cases of the Oljeitu mausoleum and the Gur-i Amir mausoleum configurations compared
to the small size and plain configuration of the Sultan Bakht Aqa mausoleum. One final
point is that in the construction of pointed domes, there were generally dominant skilful
use of diverse vernacular architectures and well-developed construction techniques in each
region whilst their main concepts and elements remained uniform.
4 The role of medieval mathematician comprehensively elaborated in Dold-Samplonius (2000) and Taheri
(2009).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE 6(1): 46–61
POINTED DOME ARCHITECTURE
55
3. MORPHOLOGICAL FEATURES OF THE POINTED DOMES
Downloaded by [maryam ashkan] at 11:14 03 October 2011
The morphological features of the dome rely on the basic understanding of both its
common internal and external spatial forms, called, “vocabularies of dome”. Eminently,
consideration of a traditional Eastern dome’s configuration as a sentence clearly indicates
its identical elements as vocabularies.
In this sense, the dome chamber and its related spatial forms put forward much
opportunities for promoting variety of spatial experiments both internally and externally.
Apart from the possibilities of marking compositional differentials of elements of a pointed
dome, the systematical estimation of its archetype revealed four identical vocabularies
respectively: supporting system, transition tier, drum, and shell(s). In fact, the evolutions
of these elements gave rise to complexity of the final appearances of the pointed domes
over the studied periods (Figure 13).
3.1. Supporting System
The combination of load bearing walls and tunnel-vaulted utterly provided the
structural requirements of the dome. Its dominant shapes comprise of whether square or
octagonal forms. The thicknesses of surrounding bearing walls, accordingly, vary between
1.80–5 m (Sultan Sanjar mausoleum). From the structural point of view, its main role is as
a buttress for transferring the load of upper components to the ground.
3.2. Transition Tier
The transition tier often consists of two stories of interesting trilobed arches,
which protrude over the lower row. According to the main meanings of squinches, these
mini-arches were used to bridge diagonally the four transition corners for easily converting
from square to the circular base of the internal shell. Here, distinct geometrical procedures allowed an infinite numbers of compositional variations of those mini arches to be
Figure 13. Illustration of the common morphological features of the pointed domes (Source: Authors) (color
figure available online).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE 6(1): 46–61
56
M. ASHKAN ET AL.
developed and also amalgamated the small fragments of these components. Architecturally,
these crossing mini-arches yielded a visual link between the body of dome and crowning
shell. Structurally, the role of these elements is to partially transfer the localized forces in
such a way that both vertical and horizontal forces are concentrated on small regions of the
transition tier.
3.3. Drum
Downloaded by [maryam ashkan] at 11:14 03 October 2011
The drum is the cylindrical part of the dome on which the external shell rests. It
is the most common component of the pointed dome in the 15th century for making the
dome as high as possible and its thickness is not less than 80 cm; structurally, this vertical
cylinder wall helps to neutralize the thrusts of the external shell according to the complex
and specific static reactions.
3.4. Internal Stiffeners and Wooden Struts
These stiffeners and struts are the composition of the radial brick walls with the
wooden struts. They were built in the empty space between two shells, not only to unify
the external shell to the lower components, but also to fulfill the structural requirements
of the whole system (Figure 14). Their arrangement and sizes strongly affiliated with both
vernacular architecture agreements and the scale of span. Chronologically, the introduction
of using internal stiffeners in the dome constructions occurred since the 14th century when
both structural and architectural sciences were enhanced. From the structural point of view,
these radial walls play an essential role in the stability of the double-shell domes, especially
against earthquakes; but unfortunately these elements were frequently changed or removed
during conservation interventions.5
Figure 14. Illustration of the different arrangements of the radial walls and wooden struts between the shells
(Source: Authors) (color figure available online).
5A
considerable sample and controversy are noted in Hejazi (1997, p. 68).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE 6(1): 46–61
Downloaded by [maryam ashkan] at 11:14 03 October 2011
POINTED DOME ARCHITECTURE
57
Figure 15. Illustration of the general geometrical concepts of the external and internal shells (color figure
available online).
3.5. Shell
In the double-shell domes, shells may be identified as the internal and external shells.
Both thicknesses of shells proportionally reduced from their bases to the top at either 25’ or
30’ angles, for the purpose of reducing the overall weight of shells structurally. The internal shell has the simple forms such as pointed, semi-circular, semi-elliptical, and saucer
(Figure 15), although the external shell is the final crowning element that is likely to appear
among the studied samples.
In addition to these elements, the key in understanding of diversities in the external
shell forms mainly dealt with studying of their geometrical concepts, namely, profile. This
profile can be obtained by diminishing the thickness of cross-section of the external shell.
It consists of a number of either two or four small arcs. Depending on the positions of their
center points, the shapes of these profiles are considerably different. Structurally, proper
geometrical forms utterly reduced tensions throughout the external shell (Frashad 1977;
Hejazi 1997).
The traditional methods of geometrical designs, drawings of small arcs and their
associated proportional relationships possess significant procedures which are beyond the
scope of this study.6 Moreover, the geometrical forms of shells of pointed domes clearly
mark advances in the architectural design amongst other types of Islamic domes which
certainly affected on their stability in such a way that they are still stand over hundreds of
years.
4. COMMON TYPOLOGICAL STYLES OF THE POINTED DOMES
One of the tenets of morphological survey was essentially to find out the programmatic approach for clarifying typological commonality of the pointed domes. Considering
again at the configuration of traditional pointed dome as a sentence clearly indicate that
its grammar for setting words, vocabularies of a dome herein, into a sentence is namely
6 For
more references see Dold-Samplonius (2000) and Hejazi (1997, p. 41).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE 6(1): 46–61
Downloaded by [maryam ashkan] at 11:14 03 October 2011
58
M. ASHKAN ET AL.
the typological characteristics. Because of structural requirements, though, the sequence
of the identical elements of a pointed dome is constant as follows: load-bearing system,
transition tier, internal shell, drum and internal stiffeners, and finally external shell.
Stylistic organization of a domical edifice, however, can deal with distinct arrangements of whether the whole components as a system or identical segments of dome for
creating diversities in a domical structure. In this regard, the body of dome (load-bearing
walls and transition tier) is subject to vernacular architecture and masonry of time; but, the
shells of a pointed dome can be a matter of style definition. With reference to systematical
consideration of the studied cases, in every dome, the treatment of shells as crowning elements are more or less the same, namely, top of dome which can be used as tools to rank
distinct dome typologies.
In contrast, based on how these shells are composed together, the pointed domes may
grammatically be categorized into single shell, double-shell, and triple-shell (Figure 16).
The few samples of triple-shell can verify its origin as a developed form of the double-shell
types in which a shell was often constructed for decorative purposes. Such architectural
configurations chronologically appeared in the early 15th century. On the whole, single
shell and continuous double-shell domes are common features between the 12th and 14th
centuries, while discontinuous double-shell domes were developed in the course of the 15th
century and included the majority of domes in the Middle East and Central Asia.
On the other hand, based on the variety of the rises of external shell’s profiles, the
pointed domes can be additionally ranked into three subtypes; these are shallow, medium,
and sharp (Figure 17). In fact, these attributes are fully conformed with the principles of
traditional designs of the pointed domes both geometrically and compositionally.
Figure 16. Illustration of the typological classifications of the pointed domes over historic era (Source: Authors)
(color figure available online).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE 6(1): 46–61
POINTED DOME ARCHITECTURE
59
Downloaded by [maryam ashkan] at 11:14 03 October 2011
Figure 17. Typological classifications of the pointed domes according to the variety of their external shell rises
(color figure available online).
5. CONCLUSION
The pointed domes definitely possess a unique monumental significance amongst
different Islamic heritage, which are still considered having symbolic meanings in the life
of modern Eastern societies. As stated at the beginning of this discussion, the pointed
domes underwent major and continuous systematic evolutions regionally, in Kazakhstan,
Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and Iran during the 12th and 15th centuries.
Common morphological components of pointed domes including supporting system, transition tier, drum, and shells make clear the distinguishing among primary and
secondary sustaining elements or vocabularies of the pointed domes. Arrangements and
compatibility of the compositions of these elements ensure the invariability of their
statically mechanical system. In the shell design of almost all instances, geometry proportionally served to obtain the ideal form of shell for the architectural and structural purposes.
In contrast, the results obtained from the studies of both geometrical concepts and morphological features of the studied cases demonstrated how exceptional the structural systems
were well-designed and constructed by traditional master builders. The typological shell
orders of the pointed domes, which are single shell, double-shell, and triple-shell, also significantly provide insight into the characteristics of structural designs of these imposing
structures.
This study has tried to show that the configuration of pointed domes in Islamic
architecture are more or less similar, despite the complexity of their main elements in the
samples which can be related to their sponsors, vernacular architecture, and the mastery of
technologies of the times. A unique dome style, pointed dome herein, was revealed according to some similarities and recurring features of dome elements, apart from some atypical
attributes in their configurations which may relate to local architecture. Future researches
can further explore the needs for detailed structural analysis of the pointed domes; to understand the static role of each component in such a dome configuration; and also open up
new programs for realizing the relationship between geometry and stability of the pointed
domes.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE 6(1): 46–61
60
M. ASHKAN ET AL.
Downloaded by [maryam ashkan] at 11:14 03 October 2011
REFERENCES
Ayatollahi, H. 2003. Book of Iran: The history of Iranian art., Tehran, Iran: The Ministry of Culture
and Islamic Guidance.
Blair, S. S., and J. M. Bloom. 1995. The art and architecture of Islam. New Haven, CT: Yale
University Press.
Borodina, I. 1987. Central Asia: Gems of 9th–19th century architecture. Moscow: Planeta Publishers:
128.
Bosworth, C. E. 1996. The new Islamic dynasties. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Byron, R. 1977. Timurid architecture. In A survey of Persian art, eds., A. U. Pope and P. Ackerman.
Tehran, Iran: Soroush Press, 1119–1164.
Byron, R. 1982. The road to Oxiana. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 121.
Cowan, H. J. 1977. A history of masonry and concrete domes in building construction. Journal of
Building and Environment 12(1): 1–24.
Creswell, K. A. C. 1958. A short account of the Early Muslim architecture II. Oxford, UK: Clarendon
Press.
Creswell, K. A. C. 1989. A short account of early Muslim architecture, eds., J. W. Allan. Aldershot,
UK: Scholar Press, 372–374.
Dold-Samplonius, Y. 2000. Calculation of arches and domes in 15th century Samarkand. Nexus
Network Journal 2(3): 45–55.
Farshad, M. 1977. On the shape of momentless tensionless masonry domes. Journal of Building and
Environment 12(2): 81–85.
Foundation for Science, Technology, and Civilization (FSTC). 2003. Architecture under Seljuk
Patronage (1038–1327). Available at: www.muslimheritage.com/features/default.cfm?ArticleID=
347 ) (accessed September 12, 2009).
Gibb, H. A. R. 1993. The travels of Ibn Battuta A. D. New Delhi, India: Munshiram Manoharlal
Publishers, 1325–1354.
Golombek, L. and D. Wilber. 1988. The Timurid architecture of Iran and Turan. New Jersey:
Princeton University Press.
Grabar, O. 1963. The Islamic dome: Some considerations. Journal of the Society of Architectural
Historians 22(4): 191–198.
Grabar, O. 2006. Islamic art and beyond: Constructing the study of Islamic Art, Vol. 3. Hampshire,
UK: Ashgate Publishers.
Grangler, A. 2004. Bukhara: The Eastern dome of Islam. Stuttgart, Germany: Axel Menges Press.
Hejazi, M. M. 1997. Historical buildings of Iran: Their architecture and structure. Southampton,
UK: Computational Mechanics Publications.
Hillenbrand, R. 1994. Islamic architecture: Form, function, and meaning. New York, NY: Columbia
University Press.
Hillenbrand, R. 1999. The Ilkhanids and Timurids, Islamic art and architecture. London, UK:
Thames and Hudson.
Huerta, S. 2001. Mechanics of masonry vaults: The equilibrium approach. In Proceeding of the 3rd
International Seminar of Historical Constructions: Possibilities of Numerical and Experimental
Techniques (November), Guimaraes, Portugal. Available at: www.civil.uminho.pt/masonry/
Publications/Historical%20constructions/Historical%20Constructions%202001%20–%20Índice.
htm (accessed July 5, 2006).
Huerta, S. 2007. Oval domes: History, geometry, and mechanics. Nexus Network Journal 9(2):
211–248.
Knobloch, E. 2002. The architecture and archaeology of Afghanistan. Stroud, UK: The History Press.
pp. 134–137.
Krautheimer, R. 1984. Early Christian and Byzantine architecture (4th ed.). New Haven, CT: Yale
University Press.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE 6(1): 46–61
Downloaded by [maryam ashkan] at 11:14 03 October 2011
POINTED DOME ARCHITECTURE
61
Mainstone, R. J. 2001. Vaults, domes, and curved membranes. In Developments on structural form.
London, UK: Architectural Press, 115–143.
Memarian, G. H. 1988. Statics of arched structures (Nîyâresh-e Sâzehâye Tâghî), vol. 1 [in Persian].
Tehran, Iran: University of Science and Technology Press.
Michell, G. (eds). 1978. Architecture of the Islamic world: Its history and social meaning. New York,
NY: Thames and Hudson.
O’ Kane, B. 1998. Dome in Iranian Architecture. Iranian Art and Architecture. Available at:
www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/Architecture/dome.htm (accessed September 12, 2009).
Petersen, A. 1999. Dictionary of Islamic architecture (reprint ed.) London, UK: Routledge Press.
Pirnia, M., and Memarian, Q. (2003). Recognition of Persian architectural styles [in Persian]. Tehran,
Iran: Pazhoohandeh.
Pope, A. U. 1965. Persian architecture, London, UK: Thames and Hudson Press.
Pope, A. U. 1976. Introducing Persian architecture. In A survey of Persian art, ed., J. Gluck, A. U.
Pope, and P. Ackerman. Tehran, Iran: Soroush Press.
Smith, E. B. 1971. The dome: A study in the history of ideas. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Press.
Stevens, R. 1979. The land of the great Sophy (3rd ed.). London, UK: Eyre Methuen Press.
Stierlin, H. 2002. Islamic art and architecture: From Isfahan to the Taj Mahal. London, UK: Thames
and Hudson.
Taheri, J. 2009. Mathematical knowledge of architecture in the works of Kashani. Nexus Network
Journal 11(1): 77–88.
Vasseghi, A., S. Eshghi, and M. Jabarzadeh. 2007. Preliminary seismic evaluation of the historic
Sultaniyeh Dome. Seismology and Earthquake Engineering Journal 8(4): 221–227.
Wilber, D. N. 1969. The architecture of Islamic Iran: The Il-Khanid period. New York, NY:
Greenwood Press.
Yaghan, M. A. 2003. Gadrooned-Dome’s Muqarnas-Corbel: Analysis and decoding historical
drawings. Journal of Architectural Science Review 46(1): 69–88.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE 6(1): 46–61