Document Type : Original Research Paper


1 Ph.D Candidate in Architecture, Faculty of Arts and Urbanism, Islamic Azad University (Najafabad Branch), Najafabad, Isfahan, Iran

2 Assistant Professor,Faculty of Arts and Architecture, Islamic Azad University (Mashhad Branch), Mashhad, Iran


In the face of the arrival of modernism in the Middle East, the first achievement of the Republic of Turkey led by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk was disconnection from the visual symbolic past. Turkey succeeded in rebuilding itself and became a role model for its neighbor, including Iran during the Pahlavi regime. Thus, the impact of modernism on the symbolic and visual structures of the past is particularly important. Therefore, the influence of Cubic architecture on the avant-garde architecture of these two leaders is
essential. The current paper aims at investigating this process and its roots. This is a qualitative comparative analytical research method with a morphological analysis strategy. Data was collected with reference to library sources. For morphological analysis and comparative study, Saad Abad and Chankaya palaces were selected. Then, the indices were determined and compared. The results show that the
intercultural exchanges in the twentieth century significantly transformed the urban and residential culture in Iran and Turkey. Therefore, one cannot speak of producing "universal" pure architecture in an abstract space far from the influence of local conditions or of pure "local" architecture while one place is entirely dependent on other places. Saad Abad and Chankaya are not just influenced by local or universal architecture but rather influenced by the impact of the locally and universally features. Therefore, the morphological comparison of Saad Abad and Chankaya palaces is more than the content of the cubic architecture. It is not merely a modernist imitation of Western architecture, and the past (local) architectural traditions of these countries have not been completely abandoned, and in fact they have been interconnected or compatible with the traditional and modern concepts and forms.


-        اتابکی، تورج (1393). تجدد آمرانه جامعه و دولت در عصر رضاشاه، انتشارات ققنوس، تهران، ص. 67.
-        بانی‌مسعود، امیر (1388). معماری معاصر ایران (در تکاپوی بین سنت و مدرنیته)، نشر هنری معماری قرن، تهران.
-        جانی­پور، بهروز (1380). سیرتحول معماری مسکونی تهران در دوران پهلوی، رساله دکتری، دانشگاه تهران، تهران.
-        حسن­پور، ناصر؛ سلطانزاده، حسین (1395). عوامل پس زمینه تحولات معماری معاصر ایران در دوران پهلوی دومو مقایسه تطبیقی آن با ترکیه، مجله باغ نظر، شماره 44، تهران.
-        رجبی، پرویز (1355). معماری ایران در عصر پهلوی، مرکز تحقیقات ایران‌شناسی دانشگاه ملی ایران، چاپ نقش جهان، تهران.
-        زرکش، افسانه (1388). نقش و تأثیر عوامل دولتی‌ در معماری بناهای خصوصی‌ در دوره‌ی پهلوی اول، کتاب ماه هنر، شماره 136، تهران.
-        سروشیان، س؛ دانیل، و؛ شافعی، ب (1387). معماری وارطان هوانسیان، نشر دید، صص. 69-60.
-        سهیلی، جمال‌الدین؛ دیبا، داراب (1389). تأثیر نظام‌های حکومتی در ظهور جنبش‌های ملی گرایانه معماری ایران و ترکیه، مجله باغ نظر، شماره 14، تهران.
-        کیانی، مصطفی (1383). معماری دوره پهلوی اول: دگرگونی اندیشه­ها، پیدایش و شکل­گیری معماری دوره بیست ساله معاصر ایران 1320-1299، مؤسسه مطالعات تاریخ معاصر ایران، تهران.
-        منابع تصاویر بناهای پهلوی اول، مجله آرشیتکت (1325). شماره­های یک، صص. 4-33، دو، ص. 84، پنج صص. 18,179,167.
-        Akcan E. (2012). Architecture in translation: Early twentieth century german-turkish exchanges in land settlement and residential culture, PhD Dissertation, Columbia University.
-        Bilgen D. (2010). Against style: Re-reading new architecture in early republican period in turkey, PhD Dissertation, Izmir Institute of Technology.
-        Bozdoğan S. (1996). Modern life: Cubic house in early republican Turkey, artistic exchange, Proceedings of the 28th International Congressof the History of Art, Berlin, Akademie Verlag.
-        Bozdoğan S. (2001). Modernism and nation building: Turkish architectural culture in the early republic, Seattle and London, University of Washington Press.
-        Bozdoğan S., Esra A. (2012). Turkey: Modern architecture in history, London, Reaktion Books Ltd.
-        Bozdoğan S., Kasaba R. (2000). Rethinking Modernity and Identity in Turkey, Uneversity of Washing Press.
-        Collins P. (1967). Changing ideals in modern architecture 1750-1950, Montreal, McGill University Press.
-        Colomina B. (1997). Where are we? in architecture and cubism, Cambridge, MIT Press.
-        Crowther P. (2016). Morphological analysis of the city for achieving design for disassembly, In Brebbia, A (Eds.) The Sustainable City XI, WIT Press (UK), Southampton, U.K, pp. 15-26.
-        Imamoğlu B. (2010). Architectural production in state offices: an inquiry into the professionalization of architecture in earl republican turkey, Phd Dissertation, Technical University of Delft.
-        İmamoğlu B., Ergut EA. (2010). Cumhuriyetin Mekanları, Zamanları, İnsanları, Ankara: Dipnot Yayınları.
-        Kanpinak O. (1998). Modernism & Dwelling: Residential Architecture in Early Republican Turkey, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
-        Khan HU .(1995). Contemporary Asian architects. Köln, Taschen.
-        Kropf K. (2014). Ambiguity in the definition of built form. Urban Morphology journal, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 41-5.
-        Kruft HW. (1994). A history of architectural theory from vitruvius to the present, trans. Ronald Taylor, Elsie Callander and Antony Wood, New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.
-        Madanipour A. (1998). Tehran: The Making of a Metropolis. Academy Press.
-        Marefat M. (1986). Building to power: architecture of tehran 1921-1941, PhD Dissertation, Massachusetts institute of Technology.
-        Overy P. (1997). The Cell in the City. in Architecture and Cubism, Cambridge, MIT Pres.
-        Sanders P., Woodward S. (2015). Morphogenetic analysis of architectural elements within the townscape. Urban Morphology Journal, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 5-24.
Ünlü T., Baş Y. (2017). Morphological processes and the making of residential forms: morphogenetic types in Turkish cities, Urban Morphology Journal, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp. 105–122.