| Summary: | Ayeneh-kari (lit. ‘mirror-work’), a term that refers to a surface encrusted with fragmented mirrored glass, is a form of architectural ornament found in myriad historic monuments across Greater Iran. This decorative medium first emerged in the celebrated palatial structures of the Safavids (r. 1501–1722) and culminated in the intricate geometric mosaics that became the preferred decorative schema for both palaces under the Qajars (r. 1789–1925). Despite this preeminence, at its zenith ayeneh-kari was largely denigrated by foreign visitors to Iran as garish and a feeble emulation of European ‘culture,’ an attitude which has unfortunately permeated the scant scholarly literature on the subject both in English and Persian. In response to the cursory inquiries dealing with the ornamental form, the present work examines the emergence of ayeneh-kari in early modern Iran and traces its evolution as both an ornamental form and an ideological mechanism. How did this medium evolve from an obscure ornamental program of Safavid palaces to a conspicuous decorative schema that became ubiquitous in Qajar monuments? What was the sociopolitical climate in which this peculiar surface ornament flourished, and how was it reflected by the self-conscious use of ayeneh-kari in palatial architecture? Herein lies the crux of the present study, which will treat ayeneh-kari as a multisensory art form in its own right and as a dialogic instrument wielded to simultaneously forge and enunciate the mystique, splendor, and authority of a sovereign figure. By tracing the transformations in composition, location, and scale of ayeneh-kari and contextualizing such shifts within their respective socio-historical moment, we can recognize how nearly four centuries of Iranian rulers have employed this ornamental form as an ideological contrivance. Ultimately, I contend that on account of its material, sensory and symbolic qualities, ayeneh-kari was methodically used in the architectural programs of the Safavids and especially the Qajars, whose imperial enterprise was contingent upon a symbolic linkage to their predecessors, to convey a distinctively Perso-Shi’i configuration of kingship.
|
|---|