Incorporation of Cultural Heritage Symbols to Urban Planning and Contextualisation of Its Role in the Development of a Sense of Common Identity: Case Study of the Contemporary Jiroft, Southern Kerman Region

Habibi, Hossein

doi:10.22054/urdp.2025.86211.1712

Incorporation of Cultural Heritage Symbols to Urban Planning and Contextualisation of Its Role in the Development of a Sense of Common Identity: Case Study of the Contemporary Jiroft, Southern Kerman Region

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

Hossein Habibi

Department of Archaeology, University of Jiroft

https://doi.org/10.22054/urdp.2025.86211.1712

Abstract

Based on an interdisciplinary approach, the present research adopts its methodology according to the “material culture” concept in anthropology and archaeology and the “theory of practice” in the social sciences. This work is especially focused on the function of the cultural heritage symbols in the public spaces of the contemporary Jiroft city. Data were gathered through archival and field techniques and examined via a descriptive-analytic method. The sociopolitical milieu of such adaptations of cultural symbols in the urban development projects is contextualised spatially (southern Kerman region) and diachronically (roughly mid to late 14th century of the Iranian solar calendar). It is argued that the hysteresis of the 1350s and 1360s may be inferred in the region. In the 1380s, Jiroft’s ancient heritage turned into a hot topic in the academia internationally and then in the region’s social spheres. Firstly, local endeavours to reach competitive positions in the field of economy were rather controlled by the field of power. Therefore, the strategies were chiefly limited to the field of knowledge. Scientific achievements brought about the popularity of the concepts of distinguished identity and heritage in the communal habitus in the region. This zeitgeist had reflections in the public space of the urban environment.

Keywords

southern Kerman

Jiroft

theory of practice

cultural heritage symbols

common space

Subjects

Urban and Regional Development Planning

- Alizadeh, A. (1385/2014). Jiroft: Archaeology or Pseudo-archaeology. Bāstānpazhūhi, 1(1), 50-62 (in Persian).
- Azarnoush, M. and Helwing, B. (2005). Recent Archaeological Research in Iran – Prehistory to Iron Age. ArchaologischeMitteilungenaus Iranund Turan, 37, 189–246.
- Blaikie, N. W. H. (1384/2005). Designing Social Research: The Logic of Anticipation, Transl. by H. Chavoshian. Nashr-e Ney (in Persian).
- Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice. R. Nice (transl.). Cambridge University Press.
- Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. R. Nice (transl.). Harvard University Press.
- Bourdieu, P. (1998). On Television and Journalism. Pluto.
- Crossley, N. (2010). Social Class, in M. Grenfell (ed.). Pierre Bourdieu: Key Concepts, pp. 87–100. Acumen.
- Deer, C. (2010). Doxa, in M. Grenfel (ed.). Pierre Bourdieu: Key Concepts, pp. 119–130. Acumen.
- Desset, F. (2012). Premières écrituresiraniennes: Les systèmes proto-élamite et élamitelinéaire. Università degli Studi di Napoli ‘L’Orientale’, Dipartimento Asia Africa Mediterraneo Series Minor 76 (hal-03471089).
https://hal.science/hal-03471089
- Dyke, Ch. (1995). Burdeauean Dynamics: The American Middle-Class Self-Constructs. in R. Shusterman (ed.). Bourdieu: A Critical Reading, pp. 192–213. Blackwell.
- Graham, H. (2020). Hysteresis & the Sociological Perspective in a Time of Crisis. Acta Sociologica, 63(4), 450–2.
- Grenfell, M. (2010). Introduction. in M. Grenfell (ed.). Pierre Bourdieu: Key Concepts, pp. 1–8. Acumen.
- Hafeznia, M. R. (1389/2010). An Introduction to the Research Method in Humanities. Samt (in Persian).
- Hansman, J. F. (1978). The Question of Aratta. Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 37(4), 331–36. https://doi.org/10.1086/372671
- Hardy, Ch. (2010). Hysteresis. in M. Grenfell (ed.), Pierre Bourdieu: Key Concepts, pp. 131–148. Acumen.
- Madjidzadeh, Y. (1976). The Land of Aratta. Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 1(2), 105–13.
- Majidzadeh, Y. (1380/2001). Is Arrata the Origin of Sumerian Civilisation? New Evidence from Halil-rud Shores, Kerman Province. Bāstān-šenāsivaTāriḳ, 16(31), 3-13 (in Persian).
- Majidzadeh, Y. (2003a). La découverte de Jiroft. Dossiers d’Archéologie, 287, 18–63.
- Majidzadeh, Y. (2003b). La premiérecampagne de fouilles à Jiroft dans le bassin du Halil Roud (janvier et février 2003). Dossiers d’Archéologie, 287, 64–75.
- Majidzadeh, Y. (1382/2003). Jiroft: Most Ancient Oriental Civilisation. Ministry of Culture Publication (in Persian).
- Majidzadeh, Y and Perrot, J. (2004). Récentesdécouvertes à Jiroft (Iran): résultats de la campagne de fouilles 2004 (note d’information). Comptesrendus de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, 148(3), 1105–17.
- Maton, K. (2010). Habitus. in M. Grenfell (ed.). Pierre Bourdieu: Key Concepts, pp. 49–66. Acumen.
- Moqaddam, A. (2009). Ancient Geometry and “*Proto-Iranian” Scripts: South Konar Sandal Mound Inscriptions, Jiroft. in C. Allison, A. Joisten-Pruschke, and A. Wendtland (eds.). From Daēnā to Dîn: Religion, Kultur und Sprache in der iranischen Welt. Festschrift für Philip Kreyenbroekzum 60. Geburtstag, pp. 53–103. Harrassowitz.
- Moore, R. (2010). Capital. in M. Grenfell (ed.). Pierre Bourdieu: Key Concepts, pp. 101–18. Acumen.
- Muscarella, O. W. (2005). Jiroft and “Jiroft-Aratta”. A Review Article of Yousef Majidzadeh, Jiroft: The earliest Oriental Civilization. Bulletin of the Asia Institute, 15, 173–98.
- Perrot, J. and Madjidzadeh, Y. (eds). (2003). Jiroft, fabuleusedécouverteen Iran (Dossiers d’archéologie, 287). Editions Faton.
- Perrot, J. and Madjidzadeh, Y. (2005). L’iconographie des vases et objetsen chlorite de Jiroft (Iran), Paléorient, 31, 123–52.
- Perrot, J. and Madjidzadeh, Y. (2005). L’iconographie des vases et objetsen chlorite de Jiroft (Iran), Paléorient, 31, 123–52.
- Potts, D. T. (2004). Exit Aratta: Southeastern Iran and theLand of Marhashi. Nāme-ye Irān-e Bāstān, 4(1), 1–11.
- Potts, D. T. (2016). The Archaeology of Elam: Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State (2^nd). Cambridge University Press.
- Shanks, M. (2005). History of Social Practice, in C. Renfrew and P. Bahn (eds). Archaeology: The Key Concepts, pp. 179–81, Routledge.
- Sharifi, O. (ed.). (1403/2024). “Logbook of Firuz-Mirza Farmanfarma”: Daily Journal of Jiroft Trip. Irānšenāsi (in Persian).
- Shusterman, M. (1995). Introduction: Bourdieu as Philosopher. in R. Shusterman (ed.). Bourdieu: A Critical Reading, pp. 1–13, Blackwell.
- A. T. (2001). The Limitations of Doxa: Agency and Subjectivity from an Archaeological Point of View, Journal of Social Archaeology, 1(2), 155–71.
- Steinkeller, P. (1982). The Question of Marḫaši: A Contribution to the Historical Geography of Iran in the Third Millennium B.C., Zeitschrift für Assyriologie, 72, 237–65.
- Steinkeller, P. (2012). New light on Marḫaši and its contacts with Makkan and Babylonia, in J. Giraud and G. Gernez (eds). Aux marges de l’archéologie: Hommages à Serge Cleuziou, pp. 261–74, Travaux de la Maison René-Ginouvès 16.
- Taylor, Ch. (1995). To Follow a Rule, in R. Shusterman (ed.). Bourdieu: A Critical Reading, pp. 29–44, Blackwell.
- Thomson, P. (2010). Field. in M. Grenfell (ed.). Pierre Bourdieu: Key Concepts, pp. 67–84, Acumen.
- Vallat, F. (1980). Suse et l’Elam, Recherche sur les grandescivilisations.
- Vallat, F. 1985. Éléments de géographieélamite (résumée), Paléorient, 11, 49–54.
- Vallat, F. (1993). Les nomsgéographiques des sourcessuso-élamites, Wiesbaden, RGTC 11.
- Vanstiphout, H. L. J. (1983). Problems in the “Matter of Aratta”. Iraq, 45(1), 35–42.