Analytical Study of Spatial Configuration Indicators of Intermediary Spaces in Safavid-Era Historical Buildings (Case Studies: Imam Mosque of Isfahan, Akhavan-Haqiqi House, and Ganjali-Khan Complex)
Subject Areas : معماری اسلامی
Mehrdad Mahi Khamaneh
1
,
Hossein Moradi Nasab
2
*
,
Hamed Sheikh Taheri
3
1 - Ph.D. Student, Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Semnan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Semnan, Iran.
2 - Associate Professor, Department of Architecture, Semnan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Semnan, Iran.
3 - Assistant Professor, Department of Architecture, Garmsar Faculty of Engineering and Technology, Semnan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Semnan, Iran.
Keywords: Safavid Architecture, Intermediary Spaces, Space Syntax, Spatial Configuration, Imam Mosque of Isfahan.,
Abstract :
Analytical Study of Spatial Configuration Indicators of Intermediary Spaces in Safavid-Era Historical Buildings (Case Studies: Imam Mosque of Isfahan, Akhavan-Haqiqi House, and Ganjali-Khan Complex)
Mehrdad Mahi-Khamaneh*
Hossein Moradi-Nasab**
Hamed Sheikh-Taheri***
This research, focusing on Safavid architecture, conceptualizes intermediary spaces not merely as transitional corridors but as structural mechanisms for the organization of meaning, social relations, and climatic responsiveness. Three cases (Haqiqi House, the Imam Mosque of Isfahan, and the Ganjali-Khan Complex) are purposefully examined through a historical–interpretive approach combined with space–syntax analysis using DepthmapX. The analysis of connectivity, integration, and depth illustrates that centralized courtyards and iwans across all typologies construct an interconnected ritual–social and circulatory network, whereas peripheral spaces consolidate territorial privacy. Accordingly, intermediary spaces become a spatial–semantic language that produces sacred experience and symbolic status, a systematic, recurrent, and space-configuring grammatical structure.
Keywords: Safavid Architecture; Intermediary Spaces; Space Syntax; Spatial Configuration; Imam Mosque of Isfahan.
Introduction
The Safavid era (1501–1736 CE) represents a pivotal reconfiguration of Iranian architectural production in which, especially under Shah Abbas I, expansive building and urban programs consolidated an articulation between indigenous design lineages and broader Islamic spatial paradigms through increasingly complex configurational logics (Zarei, 2023; Eskandari, 2019; Salari, 2020). Within this milieu, intermediary spaces (courtyards, corridors, passageways, and semi-open halls) function as spatial mediators that bind programmatic components, script sequential movement, and stabilize microclimatic performance. Accordingly, they operate not only as connective tissue in the physical morphology of buildings, but also as semantic infrastructures through which social relations, hierarchies of access, and legibilities of ritual and civic order are staged across architectural and urban fabrics (Haeri, 2009; Rasoulpour, 2021; Karimi et al., 2020; Dari & Talischi, 2017; Benyani et al., 2018). Yet, prevailing scholarship has largely remained within qualitative description and symbolic exegesis, leaving intermediary spaces under-theorized in terms of comparable, quantitative syntactic indices. This has constrained the emergence of an integrative framework capable of correlating cultural, social, and sacred registers with measurable attributes of spatial configuration.To respond to this methodological lacuna, the present study formulates and tests a hybrid analytical framework grounded in Space Syntax and implemented in DepthmapX. In this model, connectivity, integration, and spatial depth are treated as operational proxies through which socio-political, climatic-functional, and symbolic-sacred performances of intermediary spaces can be inferred with analytic rigor. The investigation proceeds through a comparative reading of three Safavid exemplars (Haqiqi House and the Imam Mosque in Isfahan, and the Ganjali-Khan Complex in Kerman)selected to span private, public–ritual, and semi-public urban conditions, thereby enabling analytical generalization. The guiding question asks how the configurational structure of intermediary spaces registers socio-cultural, environmental, and political exigencies, and which latent design principles govern their disposition.
Research Method
Methodologically, verified plans were collected, redrawn and calibrated in AutoCAD, then analyzed in DepthmapX under fixed settings. Axial and segment analyses generated connectivity and integration values, while VGA produced measures of spatial depth. Outputs were examined via descriptive statistics, correlation, and regression, and then interpreted in relation to historical, climatic, and symbolic readings to articulate Safavid spatial logic and its correspondence with deeper semantic layers.
Results
Table 1. Architectural and historical features of the studied buildings
|
Building |
Address |
Architectural Features |
Plan |
|
Haqiqi House |
Isfahan, Takhti Crossroad, Lower Chaharbagh, Pardis Alley |
Central Courtyard: A rectangular courtyard paved with brick, featuring a pool and garden beds. Shahneshin (Reception Room): Designed with exquisite sash windows (orsi), and decorations including muqarnas, painted motifs, and “rasmibandi” (geometric–structural painting). Symmetry: Flanking rooms of the shahneshin are symmetrical, except for the northeast room which contains distinctive gilded decorations. Materials and Ornamentation: High-quality wood, wall paintings, stucco, and mirrorwork characterize the structure. Sash Windows: Orsi windows with lattice patterns and double-colored glass designed to minimize thermal exchange. |
|
|
Imam Mosque of Isfahan |
Isfahan, southern side of Naqsh-e Jahan Square, adjacent to the Safavid royal complex (Ali Qapu Palace) and Sheikh Lotfollah Mosque |
The mosque follows the four-iwan typology and includes a forecourt, entrance vestibule, central courtyard, main domed sanctuary, two madrasas (Solaymanieh and Naseri), and winter prayer halls. The tilework employs the seven-color technique. Motifs such as chahar-leaf (chilepa), trees, birds, and living creatures inspired by Timurid aesthetics are used. The double-shell dome spans 20 meters in diameter and rises 52 meters high. Its acoustic reflection and light rotation create a unique spatial effect. The central dome displays a peacock motif that appears animated under natural light. The eastern prayer hall is plain and undecorated, while the western hall is embellished with seven-color tiles. |
|
|
Ganjali-Khan Complex |
Kerman, historical center, adjacent to the Grand Bazaar |
Square: Main plaza with brick arcades, pool, and green space. Bazaar: Includes coppersmiths’ bazaar, shops, and arcades. Bathhouse: Featuring decorated entrance, changing hall, hot chamber, and specialized skylighting system. Madrasa–Caravanserai: Initially a madrasa later converted into a caravanserai, currently functioning as an arts faculty. Mint House: Located on the northern side of the square, featuring a domed structure with skylights; now a coin museum. Cistern: Located on the western side, serving as the water supply for the complex. Mosque: On the northeast of the square with a prayer hall, iwan, and mihrab. Architectural Style: Based on the Isfahani school. Tilework and Stucco: Demonstrated throughout the complex, including the bathhouse entrance. Bathhouse Paintings: Depicting mythological and historical narratives. Skylights: Specialized roof lighting in the bathhouse and mint house. Changing Hall: Spacious central hall with smaller alcoves, featuring sculpted stone basins and decorative carvings. |
Table 2. Visual Graph Analysis (VGA) of Connectivity, Integration, and Spatial Depth Indicators in the Three Case-Study Buildings
|
Building |
Connectivity Index |
Integration Index |
Mean Spatial Depth |
|
Haqiqi House |
|||
|
Imam Mosque |
|||
|
Ganjali-Khan Caravanserai |
Table 3. Numerical Values of Connectivity Index in the Studied Buildings
|
Building Name |
Connectivity Index |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Mean |
|
Haqiqi House |
3 |
915 |
269.012 |
212.38 |
|
Imam Mosque of Isfahan |
4 |
11,767 |
2,695.97 |
2,576.59 |
|
Ganjali-Khan Complex |
5 |
1,864.92 |
4,625 |
1,479.9 |
Table 4. Numerical Values of Integration Index in the Studied Buildings
|
Building Name |
Integration Index |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Mean |
|
Haqiqi House |
1.53 |
9.02 |
5.09 |
1.56 |
|
Imam Mosque of Isfahan |
2.00 |
12.65 |
6.67 |
1.90 |
|
Ganjali-Khan Complex |
0.97 |
16.97 |
10.23 |
3.09 |
Table 5. Numerical Values of Mean Spatial Depth in the Studied Buildings
|
Building Name |
Mean Spatial Depth |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Mean |
|
Haqiqi House |
1.96 |
6.67 |
2.89 |
0.69 |
|
Imam Mosque of Isfahan |
2.00 |
7.34 |
3.11 |
0.76 |
|
Ganjali-Khan Complex |
1.63 |
12.02 |
2.17 |
0.53 |
Table 6. Visual Graphs of Correlation between Spatial Connectivity, Integration, and Average Depth of Intermediary Spaces in the Studied Buildings
|
Building |
Correlation between Connectivity and Integration |
Correlation between Connectivity and Mean Spatial Depth |
|
Haqiqi House |
Correlation Coefficient: 0.78 |
Correlation Coefficient: 0.55 |
|
Imam Mosque |
Correlation Coefficient: 0.74 |
Correlation Coefficient: 0.44 |
|
Ganjali-Khan Caravanserai |
Correlation Coefficient: 0.936 |
Correlation Coefficient: 0.46 |
Discussion and Conclusion
The syntactic findings reveal a consistent, transferable rule of Safavid spatial organization across house, mosque, and urban complex. In Haqiqi House, despite an introverted plan, connectivity is relatively high and peaks in the central courtyard and adjacent iwans, which operate as the household’s socio-ritual core. Peripheral rooms show low connectivity/integration and higher depth, producing a clear privacy gradient and controlled access; the strong connectivity–integration fit (R²≈0.78) and the inverse link between connectivity and depth confirm a cohesive core with segregated peripheries aligned with the andaruni/biruni logic and gendered territoriality.
In the Imam Mosque, connectivity and integration peak at the courtyard and principal iwans, forming a multilayered network where intermediary spaces serve as primary nodes of congregation, circulation, and ritual staging, with ancillary educational/service areas structurally anchored to them. The robust connectivity–integration relation (R²≈0.74) and depth pattern indicate that main pilgrimage trajectories align with highest integration and lowest depth, intentionally directing movement and vision toward the sacred center; the entrance iwan functions as an integrated threshold that filters and frames this transition.
At the urban scale, the Ganjali-Khan Complex exhibits a three-tier configuration: a highly integrated socio-commercial core (square and main passages), mediating intermediary rings linking public space to specialized programs (caravanserai, bathhouse, madrasa), and deeper, less integrated zones for controlled functions. Across all cases, high integration/connectivity with low depth concentrates social exchange, ritual intensity, and environmental moderation, while deeper, less connected spaces secure privacy, visual control, and role differentiation. Hence, syntactic measures act as objective mappings of social order, ritual structure, and environmental equilibrium, positioning intermediary spaces as configured carriers of meaning within Safavid spatial systems.
References
Eskandari, A. (2019) Iranian Architecture in the Safavid Era. Tehran: Poursaeb. https://www.gisoom.com/book/11570963.
Rasoulpour, H. (2021) Architectural Reading of Space (1st ed.). Tehran: Shahrsazi Publishing. https://www.shahrsaziiran.com/product.
Zarei, M., &Soltanmoradi, Z. (2016) Examining the relationship between political stability and water management in Safavid Isfahan. Islam & Iran History (New Series), 26, 31(121), 100–102.
https://ensani.ir/fa/article/367049/
Salari, A. A. (2020) Architecture Art from Safavid to Contemporary. Tehran: Ravian Miras Kohan. https://taaghche.com/book/198647/
Salari, A. A. (2020) Architecture Art from Safavid to Contemporary. Tehran: Ravian Miras Kohan. https://taaghche.com/book/198647.
Haeri, M. R. (2009) The Role of Space in Iranian Architecture: Seven Essays on the Language and Capability of Architecture. Tehran: Office of Cultural Research. https://www.gisoom.com/book/1599178.
Karimi, M., Hosseinpour-Tavani, N., & Delshad-Siahkali, M. (2020) A comparative study of intermediary space in Iranian and world architecture. Architecture Studies, 3(17), 43–55.
https://ensani.ir/fa/article/447084.
Dori, A., &Talischi, G. (2017) Clarifying the spatial structure of Iranian architecture in the Safavid period (Case study: Hasht-Behesht Pavilion & Imam Mosque of Isfahan). Iranian–Islamic City Studies, 7(27), 41–50.
https://www.sid.ir/FileServer/JF/24213962704.pdf.
Bonyani, F., Memarzia, K., Habibi, A., & Fattahi, K. (2018) Spatial continuity in transitions from open to enclosed space. Architectural Thought, 2(4), 63–76.
https://sid.ir/paper/267822/fa.
* Ph.D. Student, Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Semnan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Semnan, Iran.
m.mkhamene@yahoo.com
0009-0005-7498-0026
** Corresponding Author: Associate Professor, Department of Architecture, Semnan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Semnan, Iran.
moradi1352@iau.ac.ir
0000-0002-4421-5848
*** Assistant Professor, Department of Architecture, Garmsar Faculty of Engineering and Technology, Semnan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Semnan, Iran.
taheri_arch@yahoo.com
0009-0006-0919-8078
اسکندری، آراد (۱۳۹۸) معماری ایرانی در عصر صفوی، چاپ اول، تهران، پورصائب.
برخوردار، بابک و لیلا زارع و سیدمصطفی مختاباد امرئی (۱۴۰۰) «بازخوانی نقش هویت اجتماعی در ساخت فضای جمعی (نمونه مورد مطالعه: میدان نقش جهان اصفهان بهمثابۀ فضای جمعی عصر صفوی)»، منظر، سال سیزدهم، شماره ۵۶، صص30-43.
https://doi.org/10.22034/manzar.2021.265457.2108.
بنیانی، فاطمه و کاظم معمار ضیا و امین حبیبی و کاوه فتاحی (۱۳۹۷) «پیوستگی فضایی در گذار از فضای باز به بسته»، اندیشه معماری، سال دوم، شماره ۴، صص 63-76.
10.30479/at.2018.1539.
پنجهپور، هدیه (۱۴۰۱) «تأثیر کالبد ساختاری میادین دوره صفوی در ارتقای تعاملات و پایداری اجتماعی (نمونه موردی: میدانهای تاریخی میدان نقش جهان اصفهان و میدان گنجعلیخان کرمان)»، معماریشناسی، سال بیست¬وسوم، شماره ۵، صص 75-89.
https://memarishenasi.ir/fa/archive.php?pid=562&rid=25.
پیرنیا، محمدکریم و غلامحسین معماریان (۱۳۹۴) سبکشناسی معماری ایرانی، چاپ شانزدهم، تهران، معماریان.
حائری، محمدرضا (۱۳۸۸) نقش فضا در معماری ایران: هفت گفتار درباره زبان و توان معماری، چاپ اول، تهران، دفتر پژوهشهای فرهنگی. حبیبی، سیدمحسن (۱۳۹۵) از شار تا شهر: تحلیلی تاریخی از مفهوم شهر و سیمای کالبدی آن: تفکر و تأثر، چاپ پانزدهم، تهران، دانشگاه تهران، مؤسسه انتشارات و چاپ.
خسروی، مولود (۱۳۹۹) «چوگان و نقش جهان؛ واکاوی دوباره فرهنگ و هویت معماری ایرانی - اسلامی»، معماری و شهرسازی ایران، سال یازدهم، شماره ۲، صص 253-273.
doi: 10.30475/isau.2020.147682.1086.
دری، علی و غلامرضا طلیسچی (۱۳۹۶) «تبیین شفافیت ساختار فضایی معماری ایران در دوره صفویه (مطالعه موردی: کوشک هشتبهشت و مسجد امام اصفهان)»، مطالعات شهر ایرانی اسلامی، سال هفتم، شماره ۲۷، صص ۴1-۵۰
. https://www.sid.ir/FileServer/JF/24213962704.pdf.
رستمی قلعهلانی، مجید و الهام بختیاریمنش (۱۴۰۰) «بررسی رابطه درون - بیرون و سیر تحولات آن در مساجد ایران (از آغاز تا دوران صفوی)»، معماری اقلیم گرم و خشک، سال نهم، شماره ۱۳، صص ۱۱9-۱۳۸ .
doi: 10.29252/ahdc.2021.16054.1503.
حائری، محمدرضا (۱۳۸۸) نقش فضا در معماری ایران: هفت گفتار درباره زبان و توان معماری، تهران، دفتر پژوهشهای فرهنگی.
رسولپور، هژیر (۱۴۰۰) خوانش معمارانة فضا، چاپ اول، تهران، انتشارات شهرسازی.
روحالامین، سارا و محسن افشاری (۱۴۰۳) «واکاوی ویژگیهای ترکیبکنندههای فضایی در حوضخانه خانههای تاریخی اصفهان (دورههای صفوی و قاجار »، مطالعات شهر ایرانی - اسلامی، سال پنجاه¬ودوم، شماره 14، صص 57-85.
http://iranculturalstudies.com/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=215.
زارعی، محمدابراهیم و زهره سلطانمرادی (۱۳۹۵) «بررسی ارتباط ثبات سیاسی با مدیریت آب در اصفهان صفوی»، تاریخ اسلام و ایران (دوره جدید)، سال بیست¬وششم، شماره ۳۱ (پیاپی ۱۲۱)، صص 100-102.
https://doi.org/10.22051/hii.2016.2517.
سالاری، علیاصغر (۱۳۹۹) هنر معماری از صفوی تا معاصر، تهران، راویان میراث کهن.
شیرازپور، پگاه و فرح حبیب و نسیم اشرافی (۱۴۰۲) «بازخوانی مفهوم «وصال» در معماری فضاهای بینابینی مساجد (شیعی) ساختهشده در دوره صفوی شهر اصفهان»، مطالعات هنر و معماری اسلامی، (مجلۀ منتشرشده در SID)، صص 160-19، قابل دسترسی در: https://www.sid.ir/paper/1362592/fa .
صالح، علی (۱۳۹۹) «تحلیل و بررسی معماری عصر صفویه»، مطالعات علوم اسلامی انسانی، سال دوم، شماره ۳۷، صص 142-148.
میرسلامی، مهسا (1401) تحلیل گونهشناسی فضاهای بینابینی در سلسلهمراتب کالبد معماری مساجد و نقش آن بر ساز وکار رفتاری (مطالعه موردی: عرصههای بینابینی مساجد قزوین)، مطالعات جامع در مدیریت شهری، ۳(۱۰)، صص 44-55.
doi: CSUM-2304-1076.
علیزاده، سیامک (۱۳۹۱) «بررسی و فنشناسی تحول هنر نقاشی در دوره اول قاجاری (با اشاره به خانههای تاریخی اصفهان از جمله خانه حقیقی)»، نگره، سال ششم، شماره ۲۲، صص 45-62.
https://negareh.shahed.ac.ir/article_49.html#ar_info_pnl_cite.
فتحیزاده، مجید (۱۳۹۹) «تحلیل عوامل مؤثر بر شکلگیری گره درودگری در معماری خانههای تاریخی ایران (نمونه: خانه حقیقی اصفهان)»، فصلنامه هنرهای صناعی ایران، سال دوم، شماره ۴، صص 99-118.
doi:10.22052/3.2.61.
فلامکی، محمدمنصور (۱۳۹۲) شکلگیری معماری در تجارب ایران و غرب، چاپ سوم، تهران، فضا (وابسته به مؤسسه علمی و فرهنگی فضا).
کرمانی، فریبا (۱۴۰۳) میدان صفوی: نمود بینش و منش فرمانروا، از میدانهای شاهی تا میدان گنجعلیخان، دوفصلنامه علمی مطالعات معماری ایران.
doi:10.22052/jias.2024.253822.1260.
کریمزاده، جمشید و جمالالدین مهدینژاد درزی و باقر کریمی (۱۴۰۰) «سنجش عملکرد عناصر اقلیمی خانههای سنتی بافت تاریخی شیراز با رویکرد آسایش حرارتی (موردپژوهی: ایوان)»، مطالعات معماری ایران، سال دهم، شماره ۲۰، صص 89-115. doi: 10.22052/jias.2022.111875.
کریمی، مطهره و نیلوفر حسینپور توانی و مهسا دلشاد سیاهکلی (۱۳۹۹) «مطالعة تطبیقی فضای بینابین در معماری ایران و جهان»، معماریشناسی، سال سوم، شماره ۱۷، صص ۴3-۵۵.
https://ensani.ir/fa/article/447084.
کنبی، شیلا (۱۳۸۸) هنر و معماری صفویه، چاپ دوم، تهران، فرهنگستان هنر، مؤسسه هنری متن.
کیانی دهکیانی، غلامرضا (۱۴۰۲) «اصفهان شهر نظاره: بازشناسی معماری نظرگاهی صفوی»، باغ نظر، سال بیستم، شماره ۱۲۵، صص 5-۲۲.
doi: 10.22034/bagh.2023.376585.5307 .
محبوبی، قربان و سیدمصطفی مختاباد امریی و ایرج اعتصام و مصطفی عطار عباسی (۱۳۹۷) «هم¬زیستی درون و برون معماری در اَرسن نقش جهان»، باغ نظر، سال پانزدهم، شماره ۵۸، صص 51-64.
https://www.bagh-sj.com/article_59577.html.
مهردوست، مجیدرضا (1388) گزارش تصویری مأموریت اصفهان و کاشان، شمسه.
https://shamseh.aqr-libjournal.ir/article_49518.html.
هدایتی، فاطمه و کمال رهبریمنش (۱۴۰۲) «تبیین رابطۀ پیکرهبندی فضاهای بینابین و کیفیت انعطافپذیری با تأکید بر تطبیقپذیری در مساجد جامع سلجوقی»، باغ نظر، سال بیستم، شماره 126، صص 17-34.
doi: 10.22034/bagh.2023.378019.5311.
گلستانی، سعید و عیسی حجت و مهدی سعدوندی (1396) جستاری در مفهوم پیوستگی فضا و روند تحولات آن در مساجد ایران. نشریه هنرهای زیبا: معماری و شهرسازی، (۴)22، صص 29-44.
doi: 10.22059/jfaup.2018.65695.
Ardalan, N., & Bakhtiar, L. (1973) The sense of unity: The Sufi tradition in Persian architecture. University of Chicago Press. https://cir.nii.ac.jp/crid/1130000795669831936.
Asadi, S. (2023) Power discourse: Reflecting Shah Abbas I’s political thoughts on Safavid architecture and urban development (Isfahan’s Baghshahr utopia). Arts & Humanities Open Access Journal, 5(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.15406/ahoaj.2023.05.00165.
Khajegir, A., Afroogh, M., & Fahim, A. (2018) The art of Islamic architecture during the Safavid period and the introduction of the teachings of Islam. Journal of Fine Arts, 27(3), 45–56.
Utaberta, N., Mamamni, H., Surat, M., Che-Ani, A., & Abdullah, N. (2012) The study on the development of ornamentation in the architecture of the Safavid dynasty. International Journal of Civil, Environmental, Structural, Construction and Architectural Engineering, 6(5), 465–469.
https://publications.waset.org/13277.
Hillier, B., & Hanson, J. (1984). The social logic of space. Cambridge University Press.
Peponis, J., & Wineman, J. (2002). The spatial structure of environment and behavior. In R. B. Bechtel & A. Churchman (Eds.), Handbook of environmental psychology (pp. 271–291). John Wiley & Sons.