The Semiotics of Pir-e Shaliar Ritual Ceremony in Cultural Landscape of Hawraman

Document Type : Research Article


1 Faculty member of Islamic Azad University of Mahabad Branch

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Architecture, Sanandaj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sanandaj, Iran.

3 Scientific member of Islamic Azad University of sanandaj


Introduction: The current study is a both a field and library research to introduce and restore the meaning of Pir-e Shaliar ritual ceremony in the cultural Landscape of Hawraman of Sarvabad in the province of Kurdistan in terms of semiotics. A significant matter in semiotics is the production of meaning and the meaningfulness of the world by the system of signs. Meaning is a concept expressed by a sign.
Problem statement: The customs, traditions, and rituals, as Cultural signs/representation of human thoughts offer an interpretation of the world and the human’s worldview through symbolic means, which are on the verge of oblivion by the dominance of virtual communication in the contemporary world, and their entire exploitation in various aspects of development is impossible.
Research objective: The main purpose of this study is to discover and articulate the implications of meaning in Pir-e Shaliar ceremony and the system of meaning derived from its symbolic signs /representations. So by that, steps have been taken to facilitate cultural exchanges and to provide development opportunities in the region.
Methodology: The present study is based on a qualitative method in which data is collected through ethnographic and documentary methods, and analyzed through semiotic method.
Conclusion: The results reveal that Pir-e Shaliar ceremony is a symbolic sign of the ethnic and collective beliefs of people in the cultural landscape of Hawraman, which presents a new layer of implicit meanings to the audience. Also, this ceremony narrates an implicit scheme of a mystical tradition from the semiotic point of view, that objectifies the deism of Iranian people in a social cohesion in the Cultural Landscape of Hawraman.


Ahmadi, B. (2001). The Temt -stucture & temtual interpretation. Tehran: Markaz.
Amini, M. R. (2014). Ourman ra behtar beshnasim [Know Ourman better]. (1th ED.). Mariwan: Rebaaz Publication.
Cassara, S. (2008). ‏Peter Eisenman: feints. Translated by Panahi, S. Tehran: Ganj- e Honar Publication.
Chandler, D. (2015). Semiotics : the basics. Translated by Mehdi Parsa. (5th ED.). Tehran: Soore Mehr Publication.
Culler, J. D. (2011). The pursuit of signs : semiotics, literature, deconstruction. Translated by Sadeghi, L. & Amrollahi, T. (2nd ED.). Tehran: Elm Publication.
Dabbagh, A. M. & Mokhtabad Amrei, S. M. (2014). Reading the architecture of contemporary mosques in Tehran with semiotics approach. BSNT, 4 (2): 22-35.
Eshrati, P. & Hanachi, P. (2015). A new definition of the concept of cultural landscape based on its formation process. A new definition of the concept of cultural landscape based on its formation process. BSNT, 5 (3): 42-51.
Fayaz, E., Sarfaraz, H. & Ahmadi, A. (2012). Semiotic of Cultural Landscapes in Cultural Geography; a Conceptual Approach for Detection and understanding Meaning. Iranian Cultural Research, 4 (4): 91-116.
Ghafari, A., & Falamaki M. M. (2015). Semiotic theories of architecture and city reflected in readings. Urban Management, 1 (5): 339-350.
Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society. London: Polity Press.
Guenon, R. (2002). Maani- ye namadin- e gonbad [The Symbolism of the Dome”, Fundumental Symbols: The Universal Language of Sacred Science]. Translated by Farzin Frdanesh. Khiyal Quarterly, (4): 72-77.
Guiraud, P. (2013).Semiologie. Translated by Mohammad Nabavi. (2nd ED.). Tehran: Agah Publication.
Habib, F. (2006). Kan va kavi dar mana- ye shekl- e shahr [A Search of the Meaning of the City]. Journal of Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba, 25 (25): 5-14.
Hamejani, Y. (2018). Looking for meaning in architecture from cultural semiotics aspect, Case study: architectural bases of hawraman-takht of Iran’s Kurdistan. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Islami Azad University, Sanandaj Branch, Sanandaj, Iran.
Hamejani, Y., Bayzidi, Q. & Sahabi, J. (2018). A Qualitative Study of Implications of Meaning in Hawraman-Takht Architecture from Semiotics Perspective. Bagh- e Nazar, 14 (57): 45-62.
Hanifi, P., Ebrahimi Dehkordi, A. & Beladi Dehbozorg, S. E. (2016). Recognition cultural-religious landscape Hooraman with emphasis on Pilgrimage celebrations of Pir-e shalyar. Journal of Urban Landscape Research, 2 (4), 5-14.
Javadi, M. A. & Nikpei, A. (2010). Ide va mafhum- e sakhtargerayi ba barresi- ye araye Saussure va Levi Strauss [Idea and concept of structuralism by examining the views of Saussure and Levi Strauss]. Journal of Ma’rifat-i Farhangi Ejtemaii, (3): 177-203.
Kazemi, A. & Behzadfar, M. (2013). Bazshenasi- ye Nezam- e manaee- ye mohiti dar mohitha- ye tarikhi [Recognizing the System of Environmental Meanings in Historical Environments (A Case Study of Saiqalan Neighborhood of Rasht)]. Journal of Urban studies (Motaleate Shari), 2 (6): 75-87.
Mahmoudi, M. (2016). Farhang- e joghrafiyayi- ye Ouraman [Geographical Culture of Ouraman]. Sanandaj: Kordestan Publication.
Majedi, H., & Saiedeh Zarabadi, Z. S. (2010). An Investigation in the Urban Semeiology. Journal of Armanshahr Architecture & Urban Development, 3 (4): 49-56.
Memarian, G., Azimi, S. & Kaboodi, M. (2014). Investigating the roots of applying blue color in windows of traditional residential buildings (case study: residential buildings of Uraman). Iran University of Science & Technology, 2 (2): 46-59.
Mirshahzadeh, Sh., Eslami, Gh. & Einifar, A. (2012). The Role of Borderline-Hybrid Space in Signifying Process: Evaluation of Interpretation Potentiality of the Space Employing Semiotic Approach. Hoviatshahr, 5 (9): 5-16.
Monadi, M. (2007). Ethnography. Methodology of Social Sciences and Humanities, 13 (51): 111-130.
Mottalebi, G. (2001). Ravanshenasi- ye mohiti, daneshi no dar khedmat- e memari va tarahi- ye shahri [Environmental Psychology, New Knowledge in the Service of Architecture and Urban Design]. Journal of Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba, (10): 52-67.
Noghrekar, A. & Raeesi, M. M. (2011). Semiology’s analysis of Iranians housing system based on relations of text/housing layers. Journal of Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba, 3 (46): 5-14.
Norberg-Schulz, C. (2012). Significato nell’ architettura occidentale. Translated by Qayyumi Bidhendi, M. Tehran: Matn Publication.
Ogden, C. K. & Richards, I. A. (1923). The Meaning of Meaning: A Study of the Influence of Language upon Thought and of the Science of Symbolism, Magdalene College, University of Cambridge.
Peirce, C. S. (2002).  Mantegh be masabeh- e neshaneshenasi, nazariye- ye neshaneha [Logic as Semiotic The Theory of Signs]. Translated by Sojoodi, F. Journal of Zibashenakht, (6): 51-63.
Poor Jafar, M. R., Sadeghi, A., & Youssefi, Z. (2009).  Recognition of the Meaning Effect on Perpetuity of Place: A Case Study of Hawraman-E-Takht village in Kurdistan. Housing And Rural Environment, 28 (125), 2-17.
Raeesi, M. M. (2013). Semantics in Architectural Works to Promote Designing of the Mosque (A Case Study of Meaning in Contemporary Mosques in Tehran. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Iran University of Science & Technology, Tehran, Iran.
Sauer, C.O. (1925). The Morphology of Landscape, In: Leighly, J. (Ed.); Land and life: A selection from the writings of Carl Ortwin Sauer. Berkeley; California: University of California Press.
Sojoodi, F. (2011). Neshaneshenasi: nazari- ye va amal [Semiotics: Theory and Practice]. Tehran: Elm Publication.
Sojoodi, F. (2014). Neshaneshenasi- ye karbordi [Applied Semiotics]. (3th ED.). Tehran: Elm Publication.
Tajik, M. R. & Rezaee panah, A . (2010). The Foundations of Criticizing and Rethinking the Political Sociology in Jacques Rancière’s Thought. Iranian Political Science Association, 5 (4): 7-39.
Zaimaran, M. (2003). Daramadi bar neshaneshenasi- ye honar [Introduction to Semiotics of Art]. Tehran: Gheseh Publication.