1 Introduction
In second and first millennia BC, Ancient Iran Witnessed the emergence of columned halls with wooden-beamed ceilings as a prominent element in architecture. Although Achaemenid architecture is renowned for these structures, archaeological evidence confirms their emergence in pre-Achaemenid Iran. During the Median period, columned halls were built in historical sites such as Nush-i Jan and Godin. Remnants of such structures have also been found at sites such as Baba Jan, Hasanlu and other ancient sites. Historically, the earliest known examples, dating to 1300–800 BCE, originate from Hasanlu, where three successive phases of columned halls are documented.
According to archaeological evidence, the Iron Age marks the beginning of columned hall construction. The Iron Age―
divided into three phases (Iron I, II and III)―is a culturally, socially and architecturally dynamic period in Iran, especially in the northwest and central Zagros and provides extensive changes in social structures, settlements and architecture. Archaeological findings from the sites of Hasanlu, Baba Jan, Godin, Nush-i Jan among others have played a pivotal role in elucidating of these developments. The Iron Age II in the western half of Iran is largely known based on the data obtained from Hasanlu. Based on archaeological data, this period is essentially a continuation and cultural expansion of its predecessor, the Iron Age I, or according to Levin, the Iron Age II is the injection of new elements into the Iron Age I complex (
Levine, 1971, p. 41). The architectural innovations in the construction of the columned halls at Hasanlu, which are the basis for dating the Iron Age in the western half of Iran, are attributed to this period (
Dyson, 1989). During this period, Hasanlu is one of the most important settlement sites in the region, covering approximately 2–3 ha. A major fire that occurred at the end of Phase IVb and caused widespread destruction of the settlements is considered a turning point in the history of this period. The Hasanlu columned halls are located in Layer IV and in the Iron Age II and they were ultimately all destroyed by the major fire that ended the Iron Age II at Hasanlu (
Danti, 2013).
The beginning of the Iron Age III is accompanied by widespread fires that destroyed the Iron Age II settlements. This era sees the arrival or rise of new peoples in the northwestern and western regions. During this period, despite the extensive fires at Hasanlu, evidence from Hasanlu and Baba Jan indicates the continuation of the columned hall architecture. Similar structures from this period have also been documented at Godin Tepe and Nush-i Jan. Danti dates the beginning of this period at Hasanlu, due to the importance of its layer IVb, to coincide with the fire in this layer, around 800 BC and its end to 550 BC (
Danti, 2013). Archaeological evidence from this period points to social stratification and complex systems, exemplified by burial of exquisite objects and fortified structures. During Iron Age III, northwestern Iran becomes a contested zone between major empires-notably Assyria and Urartu-while the presence of tribes such as the Manaean, Urartian and Scythian in the region also influences its cultural and architectural developments. These interactions lay the groundwork for subsequent empires, including the Achaemenids, who inherites and expands upon earlier architectural traditions, such as columned halls.
The columned halls at Pasargadae, Susa and Persepolis were constructed between the 6th and 5th centuries BC. At Pasargadae, Cyrus the Great erected the Private Palace’s columned hall and the public hall around 540 BC, marking some of the earliest examples of Achaemenid architecture. Darius I commissioned the Apadana at Susa (518–512 BC), while its counterpart at Persepolis was initiated during his reign (c. 518 BC) and completed under Xerxes I (c. 460 BC). Similarly, the Hundred columns hall at Persepolis was begun under Xerxes and finalized during the rule of Artaxerxes I (c. 460 BC).
These columned halls, constructed across various historical periods, emerged in response to diverse functional demands. Despite their shared structural principle of supporting roof loads through columns, each, in terms of function, displays differences in terms of overall form details and space organization so that they not only respond to the needs of their time, but also act as a platform for artistic and identity expression. These columned halls play an important role in representing the cultural and social identity of their communities. Analyzing their form and space details through a functional lens reveals how they represent the interaction between functional requirements and space organizations in the architecture of different societies.
The aim of this article is to examine how function influences the space organization of columned halls. Despite the diversity of such halls, the study focuses on the earliest examples, ranging from Hasanlu to the first example of the Achaemenid columned halls, namely Pasargadae. While these halls share technical and structural similarities, they exhibit functional differences. The following questions guide this research (Fig. 1):
1) What are the similarities and differences between these columned halls in terms of function?
2) How does functional needs shape the space organization of these halls?
The chronological sequence of these architectural sites is as follows:
The columned halls of Hasanlu (1300–800 BC) (
Dyson, 1977,
1989a).
The columned halls of Baba Jan (9th–8th centuries BC) (
Goff, 1977).
Nush-i Jan columned hall (800–700 BC) (
Stronach et al., 1978).
Godin columned hall (800 BC) (
Young, 1968).
The columned halls of Pasargadae (540 BC) (
Stronach, 2000).
To gain a deeper understanding of this topic, it is essential to systematically review and analyze the findings of prior research. Table 1 outlines current knowledge and the context in which it is understood and summarizes key findings and major viewpoints:
Most research has focused on physical features, architectural components and lexical studies. These studies have focused on exploring the origins and historical development of these halls in ancient Iran. However, they often describe function superficially without analyzing space organization in relation to diverse functions to find the characteristics of it for functional purposes. So, there is a research gap in the lack of a coherent conceptual framework for understanding the patterns of space organization based on function in the columned halls of ancient Iran. The logical relationship between functional developments and spatial changes in different halls and, consequently, the role of function as a key driver of space organization remains unexplored. This knowledge gap seriously highlights the necessity of the present study. An incomplete understanding of this dynamic interaction prevents a comprehensive interpretation of the space organization of ancient columned halls and the logic underlying the design of them. By filling this theoretical gap, this study presents an analytical-comparative model to decipher the dynamic interaction of function and space in columned halls.
This study establishes a comparative analytical model to decode the functional-spatial interplay in these halls, revealing how architectural forms dynamically respond to utilitarian needs. By correlating adaptive configurations (e. g., column density, access routes) with specific functions across eras, it demonstrates how evolving socio-cultural requirements drive spatial innovation. The findings provide heritage practitioners with empirical strategies to harmonize preservation with adaptive reuse, while the methodology offers a replicable template for analyzing historical structures globally. Pedagogically, it fosters systemic thinking about form-function synergies, enabling students to merge ancient Iranian spatial logic with modern design technologies. The research redefines Iran’s architectural identity by foregrounding its foundational principles of responsive functionalism and spatial intelligence, thereby bridging historical legacy with culturally rooted contemporary innovation. Therefore, the necessity of this research lies not only in filling the theoretical gap in understanding the relationship between function and space organization of ancient columned halls, but also in its capacity to provide a practical framework for intelligent conservation, education and the revival of Iranian design principles in the present era. This research opens a path to understanding why spaces are formed, beyond merely describing their appearances.
2 Materials and methods
In this study, the “Function-Space Analytical-Comparative” research method, as a qualitative approach in the field of architecture and urban planning, combines two main approaches―spatial analysis and comparative case studies―to examine the two-way relationship between function and space organization in columned halls. Focusing on prominent examples such as the columned halls of Hasanlu, Nush-i Jan, Godin, Baba Jan and Pasargadae, this method seeks to identify structural differences resulting from functional diversity (ritual and religious, ceremonial, residential and multifunctional). Its goal is to find patterns, similarities, differences and ultimately, to extract general principles or meaningful conclusions. In the first step, relying on reliable archaeological data, spatial maps and documents of each hall are analyzed to extract the overall form, spatial relationships and behavioral effects of space on its functional understanding. Then, the space organization of the halls is compared in the form of comparative tables and visual diagrams, with an emphasis on indicators such as the column arrangement pattern, access hierarchy and relationship to the surrounding spaces. This process allows for the identification of recurring or distinctive patterns within each functional group.
The validity of the research is ensured through the multi-purposeness of the samples (including different periods and geographical regions of ancient Iran) and the systematic use of primary sources (reconstructed maps, excavation reports and images). Qualitative data analysis is conducted in a descriptive-interpretive manner, in which the similarities and differences of each work are examined. For example, ritual halls may show a stronger central pattern and symmetrical layout than ceremonial halls or multifunctional spaces may have greater flexibility in organizing architectural elements.
The findings of this research, by extracting spatial patterns consistent with each function, both contribute to the generalizability of existing knowledge and provide a framework for testing previous theories. If similar patterns are observed in co-functional halls in different regions, hypotheses can be put forward about design principles that meet common functional needs. Also, the discrepancies discovered between the examples provide the basis for revising common classifications or discovering unknown functions of the halls. Finally, by establishing a systematic link between functional and spatial layers, this research leads to a deeper understanding of the logic governing ancient Iranian architecture and the interplay between the use of space and architectural function.
3 Functional understanding of columned halls
Columned halls have had diverse and occasionally overlapping, functions depending on cultural and historical contexts. Archaeological research on these halls can reveal valuable insights into their religious, administrative and ceremonial, social and residential functions. By analyzing evidence and findings, along with reconstructing the halls’ functions using tangible archaeological data and comparing them with historical documents, we can better understand how these spaces are utilized and their significance in ancient societies. This process not only clarifies the relationship between architecture and function but also enables a general classification of their function in antiquity.
Among the columned halls at Hasanlu, which exhibit variations in size, column numbers and architectural details between periods IVC and IVB, columned hall II stands out as the largest and most significant structure. Scholars debate the function of this building.
Dyson (1977) analyzes features such as its indirect anteroom, portico, furniture, hearth and end room proposes a religious function and identifies it as a temple. In later work,
Dyson (1989) further emphasizes its political-religious role by examining architectural elements, ritually significant utensils and the presence of a fire altar.
Danti (2013) contextualizes Hasanlu as a hub for elite secular and religious activities, specifically interpreting columned hall II as a temple based on available archaeological evidence. Similarly,
Roaf (2012) scrutinizes the architectural elements and cites previous research to characterize the hall as a space for formal and ceremonial purposes. This interpretation is echoed by
Dyson and Voigt (2003), who reaffirm its classification as a temple.
The two columned halls at Baba Jan are studied by Clare
Goff (1977), who offers distinct interpretations of their functions. Goff analyzes the first hall as a formal tribal assembly space intended for communal gatherings, while interpreting the second as a private retreat for elite leadership or a secular reception hall. She argues that both structures lack religious significance, a conclusion drawn from her systematic evaluation of architectural features and contextual evidence. In contrast, by comparing the doorways of Baba Jan’s halls to those of Middle Eastern temples and analyzing their space organization,
Roaf (1998) posits that these buildings were originally constructed as religious structures and later repurposed for residential use.
Roaf and Stronach (1973) characterize the columned hall at Nush-i Jan as a ceremonial court space functionally linked to adjacent religious and military complexes, notably the Western Temple.
Roaf (1998) further emphasizes the hall’s proximity to sacred architecture, suggesting its role in facilitating rituals or politico-religious activities.
The Godin complex features a large columned hall and a smaller one, which
Young and Levine (1974) associate with the political and social authority of a local ruler, likely a khan or prince, during its occupation. They propose that the columned hall functions as a palatial structure, reflecting the ruler’s military and defensive priorities, as well as their wealth and political influence.
Huff (2005) interprets the architectural design of the columned hall as a multifunctional space for hosting political, social or even religious gatherings attended by the ruler’s clientele.
Roaf (1998), however, distinguishes between the hall’s primary role and adjacent structures, suggesting that while an adjoining room may have served religious purposes, the columned hall itself lacks clear evidence of such functions.
Columned halls in Achaemenid architecture, such as those in Palaces S and P at Pasargadae (
Stronach, 2000), the columned hall at Susa (
Grishman, 1966) and the Apadana at Persepolis (
Herzfeld, 1941), are widely interpreted as multifunctional spaces central to ceremonial, administrative and socio-political activities. Scholars emphasize their role in royal receptions, official ceremonies and the projection of imperial power (
Huff, 2005;
Vergazov, 2016). These structures, characterized by their open, column-supported layouts, facilitate both public and private interactions, blending governance with communal life. Columned hall of the Palace of P in Pasargadae can serve as a key case study for analyzing how function influenced the spatial and formal design of Achaemenid halls.
Current archaeological evidence supports the functional classification of structures such as Hasanlu (columned hall II), Baba Jan halls, Nush-i Jan, Godin and Palace P’s columned hall at Pasargadae (Fig. 2‒6). These classifications remain provisional, as future discoveries and research may refine interpretations of their roles and functions (Table 2).
4 Structural and spatial understanding of columned halls
To comprehensively analyze the form and space organization of columned halls, it is essential to evaluate their architectural dimensions and structural components. Key considerations include the hall’s orientation, placement within its architectural ensemble and the role of primary and secondary entrances in shaping access hierarchies and delineating public versus private zones. Spatial dynamics are further defined by functional zoning, movement and visual axes, focal points and principles of symmetry. The arrangement, quantity, dimensions and spacing of columns critically influence the subdivision of subspaces and the overall interior environment. Vertical space organization is shaped by variations in ceiling height, multi-level configurations and stepped platforms, while openings modulate natural lighting, ventilation and visual connectivity. Material selection and furniture placement further affect environmental character and user experience. A holistic understanding emerges from examining these elements both individually and synergistically and decodes the hall’s spatial, visual, kinetic and functional relationships and architectural logic.
4.1 Orientation
Columned hall II Hasanlu: Northwest-Southeast (Azerbaijan―Cold mountainous climate).
Baba Jan first hall: North-South (Lorestan―Cold mountainous climate).
Nush-i Jan: East-West (Hamdan―Cold mountainous climate).
Godin: North-South (Kermanshah―Cold mountainous climate).
Palace P in Pasargadae: Northeast-Southwest (Fars―Hot and dry climate).
Baba Jan second hall: Northeast-Southwest (Lorestan―Cold mountainous climate).
4.2 The columned hall’s position in the building complex
At Hasanlu, columned hall II functions as a central organizing space, accessed through a northwestern portico and anteroom. Surrounded by rooms on three sides, it remains structurally independent from adjacent halls despite later additions of gates and corridors in Period IVB, which facilitates limited circulation within the lower courtyard. In Baba Jan, the initial columned hall (Room 4) is integrated with surrounding rectangular rooms and connects to a southern anteroom and spiral staircase before being repurposed as a central courtyard in its second phase. At Nush-i Jan, the irregularly planned hall, with entrances on its western and eastern sides, occupies a transitional zone between the older western temple, central temple and military fortress, reflecting its dual religious and defensive significance. The hall’s open northern and southern sides further emphasize its accessible positioning. In Godin Tepe, the large columned hall aligned with the complex’s western wall features a northwestern tower (Tower 13) and adjacent specialized spaces: a small single-column room (potentially ritualistic) and a connected room opposite it. Pasargadae’s Palace P houses a five-aisled columned hall flanked by two porches, a long entrance porch and a simpler one. Rectangular rooms bordered the latter, while the hall’s transverse walls lack adjacent structures. At Baba Jan’s second hall, the painted hall, originally symmetrical with hypothetical eastern and western annexes, includes a northern annex and overlooks a large open courtyard (
Belali Oskouei and Ashtiani, 2019;
Goff, 1977;
Gopnik, 2010;
Naqshine, 2018;
Roaf and Stronach, 1973;
Stronach, 2000;
Tourovets, 2014a;
Young and Levine, 1974).
4.3 Entrances, motion and visual axes
At Hasanlu, columned hall II features a rectangular portico and anteroom with non-aligned entrances, obstructing direct visibility into the hall while regulating airflow. Three pairs of wooden columns partition the entrance, two rows of columns are placed on either side of the opening and the third row is placed in its center. The rear wall includes a central doorway with three grooves leading to a small chamber via a peripheral bench, while side doors likely connect to external or ancillary spaces. Indirect pathways, a widened central corridor and columnar transitions direct visitors toward the focal point of the hall, distinguishing ceremonial from secondary waiting spaces. In Baba Jan, the first columned hall is accessed through four asymmetrical doorways, with the primary entrance from an east-connected antechamber. A centrally positioned doorway in the north wall, marked by four rabbets, links to an adjacent room (Room 6), underscoring its significance. At Nush-i Jan, access to the hall is controlled via a vestibule and entrance in the west and another entrance in the east, with another northwestern side entrance that connects via a spiral ramp from the hall to the old western structure (1.80 m above the hall). In Godin, the main entrance to the large columned hall is through an anteroom from the south, in addition to three entrances from within the hall to other rooms, the most important of which is the small single-column hall in the east. In Pasargadae’s Palace P, the columned hall features two primary entrances positioned off-center between the fifth and sixth columns on longitudinal walls, prioritizing the centrality of the southeast porch’s royal throne. Two smaller transverse doors further modulated spatial access. At Baba Jan’s second hall, the painted hall, the entrance facing an open courtyard. It is located on the north side and has two other grooved entrances to two other rooms and it seems that the northern room is the more important room (
Goff, 1977;
Gopnik, 2010;
Naqshine, 2018;
Roaf, 1998,
2012;
Stronach et al., 1978;
Stronach, 2000;
Tourovets, 2014a).
4.4 Division of public and private spaces and different functions
At Hasanlu, columned hall II (Fig. 7), the main anteroom provides access to a large central hall flanked by service or storage and sometimes ritual side rooms and residential areas on the second floor reached via staircases. Similarly, Baba Jan’s central hall is linked to Room 6 by a doorway with four rabbets in its axial position, highlighting the significance of this space. It is further linked to adjacent rooms through additional doorways. These rooms (3 and 5) appear to have fulfilled utilitarian purposes, while Room 5 potentially functioning as a private religious space due to its mihrab. Nush-i Jan’s columned hall, integrated with temple and fortress structures, likely facilitates gatherings. The central halls and adjacent single-column rooms at Godin are primarily utilized for large-scale receptions and ceremonial activities, with benches and honorary chairs in the single-column rooms suggesting spatial continuity with the main hall and potential ritual functions. The tower-like room and Room 10, directly connected to the main hall, further underscore the architectural and functional integration of these spaces. In Pasargadae’s Palace P, the columned Apadana hall functions as a public reception area, with controlled access through porches and adjoining private or service rooms. The secondary painted hall at Baba Jan, connected via a three-rabbeted doorway to a smaller room featuring a fireplace and linked by a northern doorway to a potential kitchen annex, reflects a functional division between secular reception areas and service-oriented spaces (
Dyson, 1989;
Goff, 1977;
Gopnik, 2010;
Gopnik and Rothman, 2011;
Naqshine, 2018;
Roaf, 1998,
2012;
Stronach, 2000).
4.5 Principles of symmetry in architectural plan and form
In columned hall II at Hasanlu, symmetry along the longitudinal axis is maintained through aligned columns, benches and entrances with an equal number of rabbets in doorways though the main entrance deviates from the central axis. The First Baba Jan hall lacks longitudinal symmetry due to irregular column placement and fireplace placement. At Nush-i Jan, overall symmetry in the longitudinal axis is evident in terms of the placement of columns and niches, but the benches and entrances have disrupted this symmetry and In Godin, overall symmetry in the longitudinal axis is maintained in terms of the position of columns, benches, and entrances, but the position of the tower-like room number 13 disrupts this balance. In Palace P (Fig. 8), the longitudinal and transverse axes determine the overall symmetry of the space, although the main entrances deviate from the central axis. In the Second Baba Jan hall, symmetry in terms of the position of columns is observed, but the position of the fireplace and room number 20 create asymmetry in the space.
4.6 Column arrangement and its impact on space organization
The porticoes of columned hall II at Hasanlu employ both engaged and freestanding columns, occasionally arranged in pairs or triplets. The main hall (24 m × 18 m) features two parallel rows of four columns, supplemented by columns embedded within benches. This configuration emphasizes a central corridor―wider than its flanking aisles―where a hearth and throne are positioned, delineating primary and secondary spaces. The columns not only structurally support the hall but also guide movement from the portico into the interior, reinforcing the building’s axial focus. An irregular third column in the hall’s first row, likely a later addition, deviates from the original symmetrical plan (
Belali Oskouei and Ashtiani, 2019;
Dyson, 1977,
1989;
Gopnik, 2010;
Naqshine, 2018;
Roaf, 2012). In Baba Jan’s first hall (Room 4; 11.5 m × 12 m), three irregularly spaced columns with varying dimensions are present. Due to their structural insufficiency for roof support, a hypothesized fourth column has been proposed to complete a trapezoidal arrangement (
Goff, 1977). The Nush-i Jan columned hall (19 m × 15 m) likely contains three rows of four columns, though only four bases have been identified. Their regular spacing suggests a cohesive yet subdivided spatial layout, balancing unity with functional zoning (
Roaf and Stronach, 1973;
Stronach et al., 1978;
Tourovets, 2014a). In contrast, the Godin Tepe Hall lacks a central focal point, with uniformly spaced columns emphasizing verticality and creating an impression of boundless space (
Belali Oskouei and Ashtiani, 2019;
Gopnik, 2010). Palace P’s columned hall in a nearly square shape (22 m × 24 m) utilizes 30 columns (6 × 5 grid), enables by technological advances in column spacing (
Vergazov, 2016;
Tourovets, 2014a). Such halls, expanded via columned porches, accommodated ceremonies and governance and emphasize the vastness of the territory and display power (
Belali Oskouei and Ashtiani, 2010). The second hall in Baba Jan, the painting room, utilizes two evenly spaced columns, demonstrating a simpler organizational approach.
4.7 The role of openings and natural lighting in connecting spaces and ventilation
At Hasanlu columned hall II, the presence of a stone pavement near the first row of columns reinforces the hypothesis of an open ceiling in this area. In the Baba Jan hall I, the possibility of the presence of clerestory windows in room number 4 and its elevated height compared to adjacent rooms has been suggested. In the Nush-i Jan columned hall (Fig. 9), narrow rectangular windows under the ceiling provide light and ventilation. At Godin Tepe, the lighting of the columned hall is ambiguous. The columned hall of Pasargadae’s Palace P, skylights in the upper parts of the walls improve the limited light that shone through the entrance doors. Lastly, Baba Jan’s second hall, the painting room, has not been discovered except for the entrance facing the open courtyard facing outwards (
Dyson, 1977;
Goff, 1977;
Naqshine, 2018;
Stronach et al., 1978;
Stronach, 2000).
4.8 Vertical and height space creation
At Hasanlu hall II, side walls are estimated to exceed 7 m, though uncertainties persist regarding the height of adjacent structures and whether porticos are single- or double-storeyed. Central halls typically feature single-storeyed layouts with high ceilings, while surrounding rooms are often two-storeyed. In Baba Jan’s Hall I, Room 4―interpreted as a single-storey hall―may have reached 12 m, potentially incorporating clerestory windows. However, the slender columns in this room have prompted skepticism about their structural capacity. In the columned hall of Nush-i Jan and Godin Tepe, the height of the spaces is ambiguous. Palace P at Pasargadae provides clearer evidenc. its central hall, supports by columns nearly 10 m tall, stands higher than the surrounding porticos. Meanwhile, the Second hall of Baba Jan’s painted chamber featurs a roof structure of primary and secondary beams with glazed tiles, suggesting a lower ceiling than Room 4, While ambiguities remain, the eastern annexes of this chamber may have included a second floor (
Goff, 1977;
Dyson, 1977,
1989a;
Roaf, 2012;
Vergazov, 2016).
4.9 The influence of furniture on space organization
The Hasanlu hall II features benches along the walls, a central hearth (interpreted as a possible mihrab or offering table), a throne positioned at the center of the end wall and stoves. Two rows of columns define a central aisle, directing focus toward the hearth and throne. Grooved wall niches and an entrance staircase further organize the space (
Roaf, 1998,
2012;
Tourovets, 2014b;
Dyson and Voigt, 2003;
Naqshine, 2018;
Dyson, 1977;
Belali Oskouei and Ashtiani, 2019). At Baba Jan, the first hall’s spatial layout is shaped by recessed doorways (
Roaf, 1998). The Nush-i Jan columned hall includes a low brick platform parallel to the south wall and niches of varying sizes on all walls, some later modified into doorways (
Stronach et al., 1978;
Roaf and Stronach, 1973;
Roaf, 1998). The Godin hall features plastered benches on three sides, a central hearth and a lack of central axis, with vertical columns emphasizing communal gathering spaces (
Young and Levine, 1974;
Gopnik, 2010). In Pasargadae’s palace, a stone bench with alternating black and white stones demarcates interior and exterior zones, Opposite the Takhtgah porch, the northwest porch lacks benches. (
Stronach, 2000). Baba Jan’s second hall, the painting room, includes a red plaster line, a west wall with a whitewashed blind window and a fireplace and a red door (
Goff, 1977).
4.10 Materials used
The columned halls at Hasanlu feature walls constructed with a roughly 1-m uncut stone foundation topped by rows of bricks. Wooden columns, prevalent in these structures, stand on irregular, uncarved stone slab bases typically concealed beneath a mud covering. Brick platforms or benches are frequently attached to the interior walls. Similar construction methods are observed at Baba Jan, where hall I yields a high-quality plaster floor, an elaborately decorated brick wall and bases for three wooden columns. The columned hall at Nush-i Jan and Godin likewise employs irregular flat stone column bases resting directly on the floor, likely hidden, with surrounds of smaller stones, mud brick or mud plaster, their walls sit upon mudbrick platforms. In contrast, Palace P at Pasargadae utilizes more refined materials: polished white and black stones for floor, sub-columns, columns and doorways, with rough colored stone for foundations. Brick and painted plaster are used for walls, columns and decorations. The second hall, Baba Jan, also exhibits stone foundations, plaster-decorated mudbrick walls and wooden columns (
Dyson, 1977;
Goff, 1977;
Gopnik, 2010;
Naqshine, 2018;
Stronach et al., 1978;
Stronach, 2000).
5 Similarities and differences
The columned hall at Hasanlu (hall II), Baba Jan I & II, Godin, Nush-i Jan and Pasargadae are integrated into their respective complexes through connecting elements like anterooms (Hasanlu, Baba Jan I, Godin, Nush-i Jan) or porches (Pasargadae) or the yard (Baba Jan II). While generally possessing spatial independence, they maintain connections to adjacent areas (Tables 3 and 4).
At Hasanlu and Pasargadae, the halls serve as central organizing elements for the entire complex, whereas at Godin, Baba Jan (I & II) and Nush-i Jan, they operate more integrally within a larger spatial scheme. Pasargadae exhibits symmetrical space organization emphasizing porches, contrasting with Hasanlu’s complex circulation defined by multiple entrances. Entrances govern both access routes and spatial hierarchy. Halls at Hasanlu (hall II), Baba Jan I, Nush-i Jan and Godin feature anterooms or indirect entrances, indicating controlled visual and movement sequences. In contrast, Pasargadae and Baba Jan II employ direct axial movement.
Hasanlu (hall II), Baba Jan I and Godin display hierarchical designs combining multiple entrances. Hasanlu’s columns and pathways specifically direct visitors towards a place of honor, while Pasargadae prioritizes the southern porch’s royal position. This creates closer parallels between Hasanlu (hall II), Baba Jan I and Godin, though Hasanlu remains distinct in its internal movement guidance (Table 5).
Focusing on the functional differentiation between public and private spaces, public spaces, centrally located with multiple accesses, contrast with private areas situated in side rooms or upper floors at Hasanlu, Baba Jan I and Godin. anterooms or doorways act as transitional zones between these functional domains (Table 6).
Symmetry in column arrangement is fundamental across all sites except Baba Jan I. Despite disruptions from features like benches (Nush-i Jan) or entrances, a general spatial balance is maintained. Entrances themselves are typically asymmetrical (Hasanlu, Godin, Pasargadae), reflecting functional and kinetic priorities alongside visual principles. Absolute symmetry is absent, elements such as fireplaces (Baba Jan), benches (Nush-i Jan), defensive towers (Godin) or deviated entrances (Pasargadae, Hasanlu) demonstrate a blend of aesthetics and practicality. Pasargadae achieves the highest symmetry with a regular geometric grid. Hasanlu, Godin and Nush-i Jan exhibit longitudinal axis symmetry, balanced by asymmetrical elements like entrances. Baba Jan I displays the least symmetry, evident in its irregular column placement and fireplace position (Table 7).
Column arrangement significantly influences spatial perception. At Hasanlu (hall II), columns define specific movement paths, divide space, help delineate lateral areas and reinforce a strong central axis using an axial pattern. Conversely, at Baba Jan I, Godin, Nush-i Jan, Pasargadae and Baba Jan II, columns primarily serve structural roles, resulting in less directed circulation and more integrated spaces organized in a decentralized or scattered pattern (Table 8).
Regarding natural lighting and ventilation, Nush-i Jan and Pasargadae incorporate specific windows or skylights controlling light and airflow. Evidence suggests possible skylights at Hasanlu and Baba Jan I, though unconfirmed. Information is insufficient for Godin and Baba Jan II, where light and air may have relied solely on main entrances (Table 9).
Vertical planning features prominent central halls at Baba Jan I and Pasargadae, where increased height reinforces centrality. Evidence for possible second floors in peripheral spaces at Hasanlu and Baba Jan II points to potential residential, storage or service uses. Precise height data is lacking for Nush-i Jan and Godin, though a similar pattern is probable (Table 10).
Furniture significantly impacts space organization at Hasanlu (hall II), Godin, Pasargadae and Nush-i Jan. Benches provide seating and space organization. In Hasanlu and Godin, honor platforms aid organization and stoves act as focal points and in Hasanlu and Nush-i Jan, niches facilitate storage and spatial articulation. Hasanlu uniquely employs furniture to emphasize the main spatial axis, a focus absent elsewhere (Table 11).
Construction utilizes locally available materials―stone, brick, mud, plaster and wood with variations dictated by geography, period and structural demands. A common pattern (Hasanlu, Baba Jan, Nush-i Jan, Godin) combines stone foundations, mud walls and wooden columns. Pasargadae represents a more advanced pattern, featuring extensive use of polished stone for floors, columns and doorways (Table 12).
6 Findings
Comparative analysis of the identified columned halls reveals distinct spatial patterns corresponding to their primary functions. Addressing the first research question, the findings demonstrate that, halls serving multifunctional purposes, encompassing ceremonial, administrative and socio-political activities (Nush-i Jan, Godin, Baba Jan I and Pasargadae) exhibit significant similarities across five or six cases. These shared characteristics include entrance and movement axes, column arrangement and relative symmetry, furniture types, construction materials and vertical space-making strategies. Conversely, the hall dedicated to religious function demonstrates some similarities with these multifunctional halls but diverges notably in key aspects: its position within the complex and role in the overall space organization, movement and visual axes, column arrangement, furniture and vertical space-making. Baba Jan II, serving a residential function, displays the least similarity to the others. This comparative study thus identifies relatively distinct patterns deliberately employed to address diverse functional requirements, observable across these sites and indicating a purposeful approach to space organization.
Addressing the second research question, the findings demonstrate that, spaces designed exclusively for ritual functions, exemplified by Hasanlu Hall II, exhibit a consistent set of fixed features emphasizing focus, control and the direction of ceremonies. The rectangular form, characterized by greater elongation and a strong central axis, provides a fundamental structural framework. The central and prominent placement of a focal element, such as a hearth or throne, acts as the primary locus for movement and attention. This centralization is reinforced through restricted access. The entrance is equipped with a prespace to regulate the sequence of entry and other accesses are located in the corners. Furthermore, the linear arrangement of seating platforms around the perimeter serves a dual purpose: providing designated areas for participants while inherently directing movement towards the central focal point and facilitating close monitoring of the ceremonial proceedings. This combination―a strong axis, central focus, controlled entrance and peripheral platforms―constitutes a fundamental pattern for dedicated ritual spaces.
In contrast, multi-purpose halls integrating ceremonial, administrative and socio-political functions (e.g., Nush-i Jan, Godin, Baba Jan I and particularly Pasargadae) display a distinct design pattern prioritizing flexibility, spatial connectivity and the facilitation of diverse interactions. A key and recurring feature is the regular and extensive use of columns, enabling large, unobstructed floor areas and adaptable layouts. Essential to these spaces are easy and direct visual and movement connections with adjacent areas, enhancing the flow of people and activities between them. The presence of peripheral seating platforms (as seen at Godin and Nush-i Jan) addresses the need for more informal gatherings. Additional characteristics confirming the accessible and flexible nature of these multi-functional halls include multiple entrances (Nush-i Jan) and the absence of a rigid movement hierarchy (Godin).
Compared to residential spaces (such as Baba Jan II, characterized by functional independence, lack of specific ritual elements and adaptation to everyday needs), these multi-functional halls establish wider spatial connections within their complexes, permit multiple access points, feature less controlled and more combined movement paths and foster broader, freer links with other areas. This highlights the paramount importance of interaction within the complex for court and ceremonial spaces. Among these examples, Pasargadae exhibits the greatest geometric coherence, consistent with its formal and ceremonial nature, achieved through high symmetry, prominent porches and a regular structure facilitating extensive administrative interactions via symmetrical column arrangements and connections to lateral porches.
Residential spaces, typified by Baba Jan II, constitute a third distinct pattern. These spaces are defined by relative functional independence and the absence of strict planned symmetry. Unlike ritual or ceremonial halls, they lack focal ritual or governmental elements such as central hearths or prominent thrones. Instead, the presence of functional elements like fireplaces and a decentralized column arrangement indicates that design flexibility, catering to the daily needs of inhabitants, takes precedence. The inclusion of side rooms or storerooms attached to the main space represents a common and practical pattern, fulfilling requirements for storage and secondary domestic activities. This combination―the lack of prominent ceremonial elements, decentralized arrangement and presence of ancillary storage spaces―defines a fundamental pattern for spaces serving residential and daily functions. Consequently, design in residential spaces is freer and more flexible, lacking fixed patterns in symmetry and movement paths.
These distinct patterns indicate that function is the primary factor shaping the architectural spatial form of the identified columned halls. This functional influence manifests at three key levels: the establishment of specific movement hierarchies through column arrangement, entry points and furniture placement (guided and controlled in ritual spaces, freer in multi-purpose halls), the definition of spatial relationships (marked by independence in ritual spaces versus organic connection in multi-purpose halls) and the determination of scale and height (greater height and monumentality in ceremonial spaces, such as Pasargadae’s approximately 12-m height, contrasting with the lower height of about 7 m and greater elongation in centralized ritual halls like Hasanlu Hall II). Naturally, these fundamental functional patterns are modified and complemented in practice by contextual factors, including advances in construction technology (affecting column spans and enabling regular grids, as seen at Pasargadae), climatic considerations (optimal orientations for light and ventilation) and political ideologies (the expression of power through grandeur and symmetry, evident at Pasargadae).
The results of this comparative analysis are evidence of the complexity and intelligence of Iran’s historical architecture, which was shaped to meet the functional, cultural and social needs of its society. Preserving this heritage and continuing research on it is not just an archaeological task, it is a human necessity with multiple dimensions. These columned halls are a reflection of social systems, rituals and ways of human interaction in the past. Their destruction or demolition erases part of the historical memory of society. Physical preservation and careful documentation of these spaces provide the opportunity to reinterpret cultural identity and continue the connection of generations with their civilizational roots. The adaptive design principles discovered in these buildings-from the flexibility of multifunctional spaces to the centralization of religious spaces-can inspire today’s architecture in the face of issues such as multifunctional collective spaces, social sustainability or human interaction with the environment. Using these models provides contemporary architects with solutions based on historical experience and the process of preserving and introducing these places, if done with the participation of the local community, not only contributes to sustainable local development (through responsible tourism), but also strengthens the sense of belonging and responsibility of citizens towards the common heritage. This participation is itself an indirect education in respect for cultural diversity. The preservation and research of columned halls and the like goes beyond preserving stone and brick, preserving the lived experience of man throughout history. These places are a three-dimensional archive of the cultural intelligence, adaptability and creativity of our ancestors. Neglecting them is not only a material loss, but also a severance of the thread connecting man with the depth of his civilization. Investing in this area is, in fact, an investment in a future in which architecture does not ignore the past, but stands on its shoulders.
2095-2635/2025 The Authors. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communications Co. Ltd.
PDF
(12342KB)
