عنوان مقاله [English]
Reading images in the field of art studies has always been the focus of many enthusiasts who have approached this issue with different approaches and different theories and methods in this field have always been proposed. Ervin Panofsky (1892-1968) was one of the theorists who, by emphasizing the views of great philosophers and artists such as Hegel and Warburg, formed his ideas and discussed the field of iconography. He made a methodical distinction between iconography and iconography. An icon is a symbol that refers to the subject that represents it only through the forms of the subject itself. Panofsky’s idiomatic theory can be applied to any pictorial platform that depends on the field of content and meaning. And this method includes a wide range of visual references. In the discussion of iconology, it is necessary to first examine the concept of iconography. The term “icon” is used only where the visual cues are legible and their meaning and concept outside the realm of the image are their concern. The pictorial language of the icons is primarily symbolic, and the verbal and narrative values are secondary. The icon is a mystical image that goes beyond the apparent values of historical events. Iconography is both the artist’s way of writing the image and what the image itself writes, the story that the image tells. The purpose of iconography is to define the subject and content of the work of art. It can be acknowledged that the image of the battle of Rostam and Ashkboos on the royal wall of the Shiraz court building from the Zandieh period is the only sculptural work related to this historical period that has a narrative-epic aspect. Unlike other sculptural works of this period, which remain in buildings such as Karim Khan Citadel, Vakil Mosque, Bagh-e Nazar Mansion, etc., and all of them are abstract and natural images of plants, bergamot, flowers and plants. The artistic values of this work and the symbols embedded in it have received less attention from researchers. There is no independent research in recognizing and introducing this sculpture, and this work is very different from other sculptural motifs of its time. Ervin Panofsky’s methodology of iconography makes it possible to discuss and recognize a new reading in this field. In this reading, the relationship between the literary aspect of the work, the cultural and social characteristics of the Zand era in the formation of the work and the use of the building will be examined. Accordingly, the purpose of this study is to study and analyze the conceptual aspects of the work and reading of carving based on the iconic theory of Ervin Panofsky and seeks to answer these questions: what is the image of Rostam and Ashkboos in carving? And what does the sculpted role have to do with the social and functional context? In order to achieve the research goal and answer the questions raised in this field, the research method is descriptive-analytical. At first, Ervin Panofsky’s iconic theory has been studied and then his views on the relief of the courthouse have been challenged according to its role and function in order to analyze the content of this work based on Panofsky’s theory. The tools used are library studies, visuals and field observations. Iconology as a method of artistic analysis created a new opportunity in the sculptural study of the battle of Rostam and Ashkboos in the Divankhaneh mansion. A work that has many symbolic and artistic values. Karim Khan Zand is depicted in the symbol of Rostam, Ashkboos and Khaqan in the symbol of enemies. The iconological analysis of the work states that the battle of Rostam and Ashkboos, taken from the war of the seven divisions of Kamusi Keshani in Shahnameh, is a symbol of the victory of the Iranians over the Turanians. There are pictures. Rostam with his own panther costume and hat, which have such features in almost all of his illustrations and can be seen well in tiling and painting. Ashkboos is also depicted with his shotgun, which is described in great detail in the Shahnameh. The iconic interpretation of the work shows that this sculpture serves as a visual medium to express the political power of Karim Khan and to overcome the enemies and those who intend to invade Iran. The selection of this sculpture in the court building with the use of a court (justice) and the meeting place of ambassadors and ministers shows the clever look of Karim Khan. The building has been both a place of public litigation and a meeting of properties. The significance and symbolic function of this role throughout Zand’s history has remained on the building of Karim Khan Court, which is the place of court proceedings, and has retained its value.