Describing the Paradigm of Masons’ Conservation Intervention by using Masons’ Tacit Knowledge in Southern Khorasan, Iran

Throughout the history, interventions by masons and local builders have played a major role in the creation and continuity of Iranian architecture. Masons’ understanding and knowledge of conservation and architecture have been derived from experience and practice over the years. Nonetheless, conservation researchers have paid little attention, if any, to the masons’ knowledge, which can be seen in the contemporary literature of conservation. Moreover, local knowledge or indigenous know-how is often not registered except in the masons’ mind, which greatly contributes to the problem that the knowledge of this field is gradually fading away and we seem to be moving towards losing this invaluable information. Presently, and for different reasons, the remaining generation of vernacular architects or masons in Iran is at risk of disappearing. Furthermore, paying attention to masons - as one of the architecture and conservation’s oral resources- can be a valuable reference for identifying and explaining the paradigm of conservation intervention in the past, since this tacit knowledge could be extracted and possibly applied in today’s conservation. This research is to focus on masons’ tacit knowledge and their position in conservation interventions. The paper seeks an answer to the following questions in the context of Iranian Architecture: “What purpose did the masons’ conservation intervention serve? How and under what conditions were the decisions made?” Therefore the paper aims at explaining the paradigm of conservation intervention in the past”. With this intention at the focal point of this research, a group of experienced masons (20 Persons) in southern Khorasan, Iran, were identified, from whom data was collected through conversation as well as semi-structured interviews. Employing a combination of historical, descriptive, survey, and field study research methods, data were gathered through and then analyzed using Grounded Theory (GT) approach. This was done through coding for interviews text using MAXQDA 10 software. Analyzing the masons’ tacit knowledge, it is concluded that a wide spectrum of intervention could be identified. Which in general can be classified into three categories: namely “conditions”, “strategies”, and “consequences”. Each of which are further described and categorized. The toned for periodic repairs and maintenance, preventive conservation and stabilization, changes to accommodate changing life styles, emergency conservation, and beliefs are example of causal conditions. Contextual conditions also are: materials and architecture changing, values, norms, and problems and limitations. Degree and level of mason’s -that provided by their practices in architecture and conservation- and education process are the intervening condition. Among other measures, conservation strategies include repair, adaptation, renovation, and reconstruction. Continuity in function as well as structural stability can be considered as the main aims of conservation intervention, which are called “consequences” in this paper.