Knowledge Mobility and the Emergence of Contemporary Iraqi Architecture (1936–1958)

Abstract

Planned by the British in the aftermath of World War I, the new state of Iraq—ruled by the Hashemite kingdom (1921–1958) under British mandate—emerged on the land of Mesopotamia and inherited its enormous cultural and architectural legacy. Colonial discourse was adopted by the British during the Hashemite reign to impose Western culture and hegemony. This paper reviews the impact of this colonial discourse in terms of Western architectural knowledge mobility on shaping Iraqi contemporary architecture in this epoch. The paper traces the education of nine notable early Iraqi architects with Western architectural academic backgrounds and studies 13 of their public buildings executed in 1936–1958, to reveal the stance of those architects toward this discourse and how their buildings connected to the legacy of Iraqi architecture. Findings rest on a style-coverage of the main local architectural legacy and Western architectural façade’s characteristics to detect and examine the nature and intensity of the transformations that the façades of these buildings exhibit compared to local traditions. Findings show that knowledge mobility helped develop certain types of architects’ responses toward local architectural traditions and colonial discourse that evolved through time during the study target epoch.

1. Introduction

By the time World War I began in 1914, today’s Iraq was referred to as Mesopotamia. It was under the control of the Ottoman Empire for approximately four centuries. By 1918, the British had gained complete control over the land and began a relatively short occupation. The new layout of the state named Iraq was set and confirmed by the British, and the Hashemite monarchy was founded to rule under British mandate in 1921. An evident Western influence can be detected then, especially in education and the use of new technologies. Even when Iraq gained independence in 1932, Western influence continued to increase [1] (p. 448). The target epoch (1936–1958) was a significant epoch for Iraqi architecture because it witnessed the earliest work of several Iraqis who studied architecture in Europe and the United States and came back to Iraq to work as architects. They have been considered the earliest Iraqi contemporary architects. They worked beside the British and Western architects and institutions that dominated the architectural and urban fields in Iraq, particularly in the 1950s [2].

In 1936, Ahmed Mukhtar, a graduate of the Liverpool School of Architecture, returned to Iraq and was the first Iraqi appointed as a government architect—a position formerly exclusive to British military architects [3]—and consequently marked the emergence of contemporary Iraqi architecture by Iraqi architects with academic backgrounds. The post–World War II (WWII) Truman Doctrine (1947) and the Baghdad Pact (1955)—both outcomes of the Cold War (1945–1991)—were, according to Theodosis [4], along with establishing the Iraqi Development Board in 1950 the reason behind the increasing Western impact on architecture and urbanism in Iraq during the 1950s, celebrating the work of remarkable Western architects such as Walter Gropius and Gio Ponti [4] (p. 167). However, many Iraqi architects such as Ja’afar Allawi, Abdullah Ihsan Kamel, and Mohammed Makiya went abroad to study architecture and then returned to Iraq and worked based on their Western architectural knowledge background [5] (p. XXI), [6] (p. 440). The years 1916–1918 marked the end of Ottoman Empire control and the beginning of the British occupation and mandate (1918–1932) [7] (p. 76). After the 1920 revolute against the occupation, the British conducted an indirect rule of Iraq by establishing the monarchy in 1921. The Anglo-Iraqi treaty of 1922 granted Britain direct control over the Iraqi military, while the kingdom’s fiscal and political affairs would be guided by Britain’s advice if Iraq is under financial obligations to Britain. A Constitution passed in 1924 was also designed to foster British indirect rule. On the other hand, the British supported and protected the kingdom and proposed Iraq’s membership in the League of Nations [8,9] (pp. 20–23).

In 1932, Iraq gained its independence during the reign of King Faysal I. However, in June 1941, the British re-occupied Iraq. The second occupation was to support the ruling monarchy in Iraq [9] (pp. 50–88). Because of the domination of British control, Pieri [7] has labeled the epoch 1920–1958 as the British colonial period [7] (pp. 76–77). Said [10] and Loomba [11] have indicated through reviewing several literary texts that the British as part of European colonialism go beyond the form of military control and are rather a discourse of dominance that was not processed by force alone; it was sustained by language, narratives, and representations to normalize and justify colonial practices. The Oriental/Occidental binary was discovered consequently based on unneutral representations that were shaped by power dynamics, stereotypes, and cultural biases, where the colonized East was represented as the inferior and in need of civilization “other” vs. the superior civilized colonizer West. The target epoch of this study (1936–1958) is located within this important phase of the modern history of Iraq. Despite the significant achievements of the Hashemite Kingdom and the milestones reached toward building a modern Iraq, Marr and Al-Marashi [9] refer to the limited economic achievements, and the British influence principally on the foreign affairs, among others as reasons behind the increasing opposition to this regime inside Iraq, and its downfall eventually with the 1958 Military Coup (locally known as the 1958 Revolution) that ended the British colonization and announced the republic of Iraq [9] (p. 87).

During the target epoch, knowledge mobility among the colonial empires and the colonized countries occurred by various means (such as education, politics, and trade). The Western architectural knowledge was transferred by the Western architects who worked in Iraq, Iraqi architects who studied in Western countries and returned home and worked in Iraq, and/or by Iraqi architects who worked under the supervision of Western architects or were influenced by the dominating Western architectural education.

The first Iraqi department of architecture was founded a bit later, in 1959, at the University of Baghdad by a group of significant Iraqi architects with Western education backgrounds, such as Mohamed Makiya—a Liverpool graduate who earned his PhD from Cambridge in 1946 [5] (p. 79)—and Hisham Muneer—a Texas University graduate who earned his master’s degree from the University of Southern California in 1956 [12] (p. 309). Thus, Iraqi architecture was exposed to the broad colonial discourse’s influence.

Although several important studies—such as those of Al-Chalabi [13], Pieri [7], and Al-Sultany [14] besides the autobiographies of some early notable Iraqi architects like Chadirji [6] and Makiya [15]—were conducted about the projects of Iraqi and Western architects in Iraq, the impact of such powerful colonial discourse on shaping contemporary Iraqi architecture because of knowledge mobility was not addressed clearly. This study contributes to bridging this gap by providing coverage for the Western main styles that were imported to Iraq because of the architectural knowledge mobility and exhibiting how early Iraqi architects who were involved in this mobility used their obtained Western architectural knowledge to develop their own approaches to addressing the inherited local architectural traditions. The outcomes of the research present how architectural knowledge mobility under European colonialism shaped early Iraqi architects’ responses to the Western colonial discourse. The paper develops a thorough understanding of early Iraqi contemporary architecture and the process of importing and adopting Western styles. This in turn helps to understand the ways early Iraqi architects used to keep in touch with their rich historical architectural legacy while trying to stay connected to the global-dominated key styles—a matter that must be recognized and assessed to conclude lessons on how to maintain the local roots of contemporary architecture despite colonial discourse and to avoid disconnection with the local architectural traditions.

This research examines the transformations that occurred to the inherited legacy of Iraqi architecture because of this architectural knowledge mobility within the target epoch (1936–1958) to recognize the impact of the colonial discourse on shaping Iraqi contemporary architecture as a result of the knowledge mobility. This study focuses on reviewing the chronology of nine of the earliest remarkable Iraqi contemporary architects with Western academic backgrounds who designed public buildings executed during the target epoch and examining the nature and intensity of the transformations that their public buildings manifested compared to the local traditions to reveal how the early Iraqi architects responded to the addressed Western influence and developed their own approaches.

1.1. The Study Background

1.1.1. Colonial Discourse and Knowledge Mobility

Colonialism is defined by Loomba as “the conquest and control of other people’s land and goods” [11] (p. 20). Loomba added that colonialism transformed the preexisting frameworks of human knowledge [11] (p. 71). Colonialism is a system of colonial authority that seeks to exert control over the linguistic, literary, and cultural expressions of the defeated nation. It is a method of regulating what can be said with respect to empire. As a result, it fits to be identified as a colonial discourse [16] (pp. 1–2). Said used Michel Foucault’s notion of ‘discourse’ to identify orientalism as an aspect of colonialism [17] (p. 184). Said argues that colonial power was justified and served by orientalism [10] (p. 39). He believes that it is essential to examine orientalism as a discourse to fully comprehend the extensive and organized control that European culture exerted over the Orient in various aspects such as politics, sociology, military affairs, ideology, science, and imagination [17] (p. 184). Thus, “colonial discourse” is a way of thinking about how cultural, intellectual, economic, and political processes shape, and maintain colonialism. It examines ideas, institutions, knowledge, and power to broaden colonialism studies [11] (p. 69).

Foucault’s theory argues that discourse encompasses all forms of social communication and is simultaneously shaped by society [16] (p. 6). Gryshchenko’s study shows that “discourse” in Foucault’s theory includes anything written, spoken, or thought concerning a social object, activity, or stance in any historical time [18] (p. 1427). A discourse is a cohesive series of statements integrated and centralized in the representation of the subject’s nature. These sets of statements that construct discourses are interconnected in that their outcomes are impacted by one another [19] (p. 321). Hence, Khan and MacEachen define discourse based on Foucault’s theory as “an individualizable set of statements, including all utterances and statements which seem to form a grouping” [20] (p. 5). Poorghoban explains that each of these groups requires a representation of a physical form. The physical form of the discourse “basically is the set of behavior and practices that are generated from the statements which have created this discourse” [19] (p. 322). Discourse is, basically, a form of language and is identified as a non-interactive communication process [21] (pp. 182–184).

Discourse implies knowledge and contains numerous sorts of it; discourse and knowledge are interconnected. Knowledge is crucial to discourse creation and understanding. There is no discourse without knowledge; simultaneously, discourse processes and shares knowledge. This makes them interdependent [22] (pp. 5–6). Knowledge refers to the comprehension and experience gained through formal education and practical training. According to Foucault, knowledge is created through the collective understanding, agreements, and social activities that exist within and across different discourses. These factors are closely connected to an individual’s process of making sense of their surroundings [18] (p. 1427).

Foucault argued that modern power is the outcome of knowledge and that knowledge is the outcome of power, adding that knowledge is the base for productive power [23] (p. 168). It is the reason behind Foucault’s interest in the “formation of different forms of knowledge” and the interplay between subjectivity, power, and knowledge [24] (pp. 481–482). Discourse is not simply a way to control others; it is also a way to gain power. It does not simply control people who do not have power; it gives them the strength to take power. As Foucault said, we come into being through discourse, which combines power and knowledge. Discourse’s power comes from the fact that we accept truth as it is given to us [18] (p. 1428). Accordingly, discourse is deeply linked to both power and knowledge. It may serve as both a means and an impact on power. Our ability to exert power is intertwined with the influence and direction that our power has on our discourse. Power and knowledge may be considered two interconnected aspects of a unified process. Therefore, it is not only a means of control, but rather a tool that enables the power of authority. According to Foucault, discourses are always dynamic and never fixed. Instead, they are continuous interactions between individuals and organizations, and written materials produce systems of interpretation and control (power/knowledge) at the same time [18] (p. 1428).

Ibn Khaldun [25] highlights the role of colonialism in knowledge transfer, where the colonized community tends to adopt the practices of the colonizers. In addition, in their review of the Foucauldian perspective in examining mobility, Manderscheid, Schwanen, and Tyfield argue that mobility must be studied within its wider sociopolitical context [24]. Awang, Hussain, and Malek [26] define knowledge transfer or mobility as “a process of knowledge creation and application, knowledge mobilization and exchange, information search and transformation as well as the learning process at and outside the workplace” [26] (p. 95). Coey [27] highlights the important role of globalization in supporting the movement of academics, researchers, and students across borders, which significantly contributes to knowledge mobility. Colonialism and political situations also support knowledge mobility, as stated by Al-Wardi [28,29,30], Faist [31], Roudbari [32], and Fadhil and Jameel [33].

The term “knowledge mobility” describes how easily information may be moved about a community, whether it is shared, acquired, or used [34] (p. 136). According to Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, Olander, and Zedtwitz, people start knowledge mobility when they share what they know and take their knowledge with them as they move from ”one context to another”. One may argue that the capacity and desire of individuals to share and use new knowledge determines the efficacy of knowledge mobility [35] (p. 171). Heather Ellis notes that the academic knowledge producer’s interest for releasing knowledge and information for free, and their abilities and resources for creating a platform to transfer the knowledge is the base to successful transfer of knowledge and information. Likewise, the outcome is dependent on the prior knowledge of the receiver, information level, communication technology’s access, the ability and receiver’s desire to receive the content which may or not conflict with the receiver’s individual experience, values and cultural identity [36] (p. 6).

Architecture as a form of knowledge has been indicated in several studies that addressed architectural knowledge mobility; Al-Sultany [37,38] identifies foreign architectural practices and modernity as key mechanisms for the exchange of architectural knowledge among countries. Further, studies by Al-Chalabi [13], Al-Sultany [38], and Ponzini [39] emphasize the importance of foreign architects in transferring knowledge across borders. Transferring architectural knowledge includes traveling, communication technology, architectural competitions, publications, workshops, and connecting with expert communities of students and professionals. Information exchange with international architects [32,33], investors, designers (including starchitects and famous urban designers), businesses, and worldwide specialists plays an important role in this process [39].

Based on Foucault’s perspective, knowledge mobility has an essential role in the influence of colonial discourse, reflecting and sustaining power dynamics between the colonizers and the colonized. Therefore, understanding the role of architectural knowledge mobility in shaping Iraqi contemporary architecture provides a more in-depth understanding of how the architectural practices of Iraqi architects’ in the target epoch were shaped. Because colonialism as a “discourse” is a form of communication process, the architectural knowledge mobility is addressed in this study as a communication process to assess the influence of the discourse.

1.1.2. Architectural Knowledge Mobility as a Communication Process

The process of communication encompasses all acts of message transmission through channels that connect people to languages and symbolic codes; it also includes methods of message reception and storage as well as the laws, traditions, beliefs, and conventions that define and govern interpersonal interactions and social interactions. The goal of every communication is to persuade the recipient [40] (p. 3).

West and Turner [41] define communication as a social process in which people use symbols to create and interpret meaning around them. They identify five key terms to define communication—social, process, symbols, meaning, and environment—which is the position or context of the communication occurrence [41] (pp. 5–8). Ruler [42] refers to the concept of communication as has been addressed in early communication theories such as Shannon and Weaver theory (1949) as “a flow of information in which a sender disseminates a message to receivers by revealing its meaning within this message”, where the “flow of information” was the target of their attention, while other theories—including the recent studies—would rather emphasize the “meaning construction” process resulting from this flow [42] (p. 368).

Traditional communication media are crucial in emphasizing the significance of communication to a community. They play an important role in safeguarding and advancing the cultural heritage of people, encouraging community connection and unity, and addressing local issues and challenges. These modes of communication facilitate individuals in expressing their ideas, actions, and perspectives, as well as exchanging knowledge and expertise within their social group. Furthermore, they function as effective agents for the spreading of culture and the establishment of individual and collective identities [43] (p. 121).

Ruler [42] argues that in the communication process, there are a minimum of three approaches to presenting how communication occurs. The first approach is a one-way process of meaning construction, where the sender tries to build or reconstruct the meaning created by the receiver. The second is communication as a two-way process of meaning construction, where two or more people create new meanings together, and the final one is the omnidirectional diachronic process of communication for meaning construction—where the emphasis is on the ongoing development of meaning itself [42] (pp. 367–368). McRoy identifies two main forms of language and communication processes: discourse and dialog. Discourse is a non-interactive one-way communication that represents an individual narrative voice or perspective, while dialog is an interactive two-way communication process among multiple agents [21] (pp. 182–184).

Bass explains that, regardless of its approach, communication is a process that happens between at least two people who aim to communicate with one another. The person who tends to communicate is known as the sender. The sender should translate the message into symbols (encoding) that the receiver can interpret and understand. While the message is received by the other person, a decoding process occurs. Effective communication happens between the sender and the receiver when the images or messages of both sides match with one another [44] (p. 1–2); Figure 1.

Based on the communication process, knowledge mobility requires three main components: the source of knowledge (KN) represented by the sender, the medium or channel through which communication occurs between the sender and the receiver, and the destination that receives the KN, the receiver, as shown in Figure 2.

Singley [46] argues that the ability to interpret or read the conceptual resonance of a building is something that is naturally done as a part of humans’ daily lives as they move in their built environments. He adds that architecture differs from building because it holds surplus meaning and provides a message about its compositional logic [46] (pp. 5–6). Architecture is related to the system of communication as an object [47] (p. 1). The concept of communication theory is usually used to create a relationship between meaning and architecture [48] (p. 45). In architecture, buildings are communicators; through them, man can write on the earth to be read as texts and denote their function [49]. Eco, in his semiotics theory—which is based on the study of codes—notes that the communication of architectural function happens through its function. He, based on De Sausser’s definition of sign components, considers the architectural design as being composed of the form as a signifier, and the signified represents the function [48] (p. 45). However, Chomsky differentiates between surface (perceptual) and deep (conceptual) structures in linguistics and in terms of architecture; Eisenman defines the surface level as the physical aspect of architecture, while the deep level represents the syntactic aspect. Deep structures give an abstract or conceptual foundation for the formal regularities shared by all languages [50] (pp. 56–57), [51] (p. 91).

Architecture uses visual symbols and components, which give a diverse set of communication aspects that may be abstracted and combined. They are, like language, capable of articulation. Architecture conveys significance at both formal and non-formal levels. Formal communication in spatial design is a subset of semantics, focusing on language denotation. Formal articulation in architectural expression involves terms such as closed, open, narrow, dark, vertical, connected, and balanced, influencing visual arts, game ideas, and tension and release. Architecture’s non-formal connotation refers to a semiotics discipline that investigates communication meaning, understanding it as a metaphor rather than a language, an interacting rather than autonomous phenomenon [50] (pp. 56–57).

Accordingly, architectural knowledge mobility is a communication process; the source of the architectural signal is the architect, who sends the signal (message) using the architectural language (building design and education) as a channel to the destination/receiver of the signal (community). The design of a building communicates its purpose, function, and meaning and is a reflection of the values, beliefs, and aspirations of the society that produces it. The architect is the mediator in this process, interpreting the destination’s needs and desires and interpreting them into a physical form that can be experienced by people.

1.1.3. Iraqi Architecture

• Architecture legacy in Iraq

Modern Iraq has a rich historical background, which formed its national identity. Three different civilizations shaped the collective memory: ancient Mesopotamia, Arab-Islamic heritage, and the Islamic Ottoman Empire [9] (p. 1). Iraq is considered a cradle of civilizations. The architectural legacy in Iraq dates back more than 8000 years. According to Bahrani [52], the pre-Islamic Mesopotamia witnessed several important epochs with distinguished architectural features: as early as Eridu and Ubaid (6000–4000 BCE) and significantly with the Sumerian civilization (2900–2334 BCE); the Akkadians (2334–2154 BCE) and the third Dynasty of Ur (2112–2004 BCE); the Babylonians (1894–1595 BCE) then the Assyrians (1595–1155 BCE) and the New Assyrians (900–612 BCE); along with the New-Babylon dynasty (1000–539 BCE) followed by the Achaemenids in (559–331 BCE), Hellenism, Seleucids, and Parthians (331 BCE–241 CE), and concluding with the Sassanid epoch (224–636 CE). However, the main characteristics of Mesopotamian pre-Islamic architecture in the land of today’s Iraq can be summarized by the use of plano-convex mud brick, limestone, vaults, semicircular arches, colonnades; baked bricks, molded glazed bricks, terracotta bricks, molded ornamentation, and hypostyle and peristyle designs, with examples of massive entrances, ornate lintels, and sculptures.

Early centuries of the Islamic era adapted the main techniques and methods of the pre-Islamic architectural styles; these techniques became the basis for Islamic architecture in the Middle East [52] (p. 353). During the Islamic Abbasid era, architecture was characterized by the use of pointed arches and vaults with decorations as well as the use of aesthetic proportions. This influence lasted for many centuries, and its trace is still seen in Iraq [53] (p. 35). The conquest of Baghdad by the Islamic Ottoman Empire dates back to 1534 CE, yet notable developments happened in its architecture during the appointment of Madhat Pasha as ruler of Baghdad wilayat in 1869 [13] (p. XIV), [7] (p. 8). The construction of the Saray building and Qishla clock tower in 1869 changed the city’s skyline, and represented a new step in importing Western architectural style to the city. The importation of Western furniture changed the use of space within the houses. In 1915, the Ottoman authorities collaborated with the Germans to connect Baghdad (Iraq) and Berlin (Europe) by railway. During their stay in Iraq, the jack-arch construction was introduced by the Germans as they used the I-steel beams for the shallow brick arching [13] (p. XV).

In 1918, the British occupied the entire land of today’s Iraq, and the British colonial period lasted until 1958—despite the establishment of the Iraqi Kingdom in 1921 and Iraq’s independence in 1932 [7] (p. 7) as explained previously. During this period, three British architects—J. M. Wilson, H.C. Mason, and Cooper—played a major role in changing the local architecture as their designs for several public buildings influenced its scenes and character [13] (p. XVII). J. M. Wilson was a pupil of Sir Edwin Lutyens in New Delhi [13] (p. XVII), [54] (p. 428), [7] (p. 10). Wilson’s design approach is characterized by mixing between the Western new-classical style; with local materials, techniques, and elements of local Islamic architectural style, his style was influenced by the colonial architecture in India. Mason focused on the Western style, and Cooper’s designs were similar to Wilson’s, though Cooper focused on the Western approach rather than local [13] (p. XIV), [55] (pp. 64–65), [14] (p. 334).

This overview covers the main epochs and the remarkable features of the inherited architecture in Iraq before establishment of the Iraqi kingdom. For further details, see

Table 1. Elements of Iraqi architectural legacy styles until 1920. Source: Authors based on the literature review.

Epochs	Styles	Elements of Style
1. Mesopotamian/pre-Islamic	Sumerian	Building materials and components	Plano-convex mud brick, limestone, vaults, semi-circular arches. In the Neo-Sumerian era, baked bricks with bitumen mortar were used.
		Openings	Monumental entrances, decorated lintel on the top of the main entry supported by mosaic columns.
		Decorations	Elaborated elements with colored stones, mosaic design on walls and columns, sculptures, cast copper, white and black stone as figural narrative friezes, images of men and women on walls.
		More Details	Colonnades used in the white temple at Umm Al-Agarib, its walls and columns plastered by white gypsum. courtyards are available [52] (pp. 79–83).
	Akkadian	Building materials and components	Plano-convex mud brick, Flat bricks. Massive walls.
		Openings	Buttressed single entry.
		Decorations	The use of images on walls, and stamped bricks holding the name of the king.
		More Details	Central courtyards are surrounded by smaller courts and rooms; monuments are introduced [52] (pp. 127–133).
	Babylonian	Building materials and components	Clay bricks, molded glazed bricks.
		Openings	Monumental gates built with glazed terra-cotta bricks
		Decorations	Wall painting; Terra-cotta images; Glazed facades with figures and calligraphic texts built during Neo Babylonian city
		More Details	Inscriptions on the monuments justice and martial power. Graduation in courtyard sizes [52] (pp. 185–195, 278–286)
	Assyrian	Building materials and components	Molded brick, columns in the shape of palm trees. Neo Assyrians used mud bricks for walls with timber framing covered by sculptures, use of semi-circular arches
		Openings	Monumental gates guarded by human-headed, winged bulls and lions
		Decorations	Fresco paintings, sculptures, and terra-cotta, brick molded decorations
		More Details	Large courtyard surrounded by long galleries and rooms [52] (pp. 204–236)
	Persian (559-331BCE)	Building materials and components	Mixing between Mesopotamian and Persian materials and techniques, bell-shape column bases
		Openings	Monumental gates built with glazed terra-cotta bricks
		Decorations	Glazed brick decorations with images of Persian royal guards used in exterior walls
		More Details	Purely Persian-style Rectilinear columned halls (hypostyle) were built instead of Babylonian open-plan palaces [52] (pp. 293–296)
	Hellenism, Seleucid and Parthian (331BCE-241 CE)	Building materials and components	Babylonian brick, colonnades, hybrid designs raised by mixing between Mesopotamian (Babylonian) and Greek styles, limestone, classical columns, moldings, vaulted spaces, architraves
		Openings	Vaulted entrances
		Decorations	New terra-cotta designs, stone carving, decorative patterns by arches over Corinthian columns and moldings with figures, heads, and busts, western style entablature with decorations, use of colored mosaic, painted stucco and marble and limestone statuses
		More Details	Built of Greek open arena and agora, massive vaulted entrances (iwans), use of peristyle (building surrounded by columns) designs, glazed brick facades, sculpted stucco ornamentation, and massive calligraphy [52] (pp. 325–345)
2. Islamic from 636 CE	Abbasid	Building materials and components	mud brick, baked brick and roughly hewn stone laid in mortar, vaults, spiral minarets, pointed arches, massive walls, central courtyards and conical muqarnas dome, iwans, barrel vaults
		Openings	Doorway surmounted by taller pointed arch; windows located between the transverse vaults provide light to the interior space
		Decorations	Paintings, stucco work, brickwork decorations, calligraphy, Qura’nic versus, geometric and arabesque brick ornaments, and muqarnas vaulting
		More Details	Ukhaidhir as an early Abbasid architecture is similar to Sassanid architecture [56] (pp. 12, 29–30). Sassanid architecture was the mixture between Mesopotamian and Persian architecture in new form [52] (p. 352). The two-story brick Abbasid Palace is the most influential legacy from Abbasid architecture with the best preserved passages of original ornament in the vestibule, iwan, and eastern corridor vaulting. It represents the monumental form of late Abbasid in Baghdad [57] (pp. 317,323).
	Ottoman	Building materials and components	Mud brick, vaults, arches and domes, palm trunks are sometimes used for roofing; courtyards
		Openings	Low doorway surmounted by a much taller arch, prominent windows called “shanasheel”
		Decorations	Paintings, stucco work, brickwork decorations, calligraphy, Qura’nic versus
		More Details	During the early Ottoman state, traditional architectural designs remained unchanged [58] (p. 40). The main development is the one of the shrines at the Shiite holy cities [56] (pp. 125–126). The late Ottoman architectural style, precisely at its last century, was influenced by the European Renaissance as in the Qishla building which is widely regarded as a turning point in Iraqi construction. It has a square hollow tower in the center of the courtyard, roofed by a ribbed dome. Local materials such as brick and gypsum were used in its construction, and roofing was done using brick techniques [58] (p. 45).
3. British Colonial	Early Colonial 1916–1920	Building materials and components	Local brick
		Openings	Islamic styles
		Decorations	Islamic and Western decorations; brick work
		More Details	Mixing between Islamic characteristics and Western classicism. Symmetrical building plan; central dome [13].
4. British Colonial Architecture in Iraq during the early reign of the Hashemite Kingdom (1921–1936)	British Mandate 1921–1932	Building materials and components	Brick + concrete
		Openings	Islamic styles, metal windows
		Decorations	Classical orders, pitched roofs, Western characteristics
		More Details
	British Architecture after Iraq’s independence 1932–1936	Building materials and components	Brick+ concrete
		Openings	Islamic styles, Western styles
		Decorations	Islamic and Western decorations
		More Details	Early colonial style adopted local building materials, and techniques, made by local craftsmen. Later on the style relied on Western materials (steel and concrete) which need new techniques that cannot be offered by the local craftsmen, and since, the colonial style became with Western building materials and techniques. Local craftsmen are no longer hired [2].

.

• Emergence of Iraqi contemporary architecture

During the British occupation of Iraq, British military architects occupied the position of government architect until 1936 when the first Iraqi architect with an academic background was appointed to this position. The British architects J.M. Wilson, Mason, and Cooper, with a Western architectural background designed different public buildings such as Al-Al-Bait University, Baghdad Airport, Baghdad Central Railway Station, and hospitals [13] (p. XIV), [55] (pp. 64–65), [59] (p. 334). During their early colonial and mandate works in Iraq, the British architects mostly used the Western style with local material and relied on local craftsmen in building, thus their buildings have mixed Western–local characteristics, or “hybrid”, as described by Al-Chalabi in his video lecture [2,6] (p. 464).

During WWII, the architectural style had changed since Western design catalogs became common and were relied on as the source for design implementation in Iraq. Western designs were also imported by the first generation of Iraqi architects who returned home after completing their studies abroad [13] (p. XIV). In the 1940s, communication technology and media had developed notably, and the earliest society of fine arts in Iraq was the “Society of Art’s Friends” (1941); in the 1950s, three main art groups were formed—including the group “Baghdad for Modern Art” by Jawad Salim (1951), which called for inspiration from traditions while adopting Western principles of art. These groups had influenced architects such as Mohammed Makiya and Raf’at Chadirji, who were among their members [60,61,62].

The establishment of the Iraqi Development Board in 1950, the post-WWII Truman Doctrine (1947), and the Baghdad Pact (1955), all led to an increasing Western impact on architecture and urbanism in Iraq during the 1950s through inviting Western planners and architects such as Walter Gropius, Frank Lloyd Wright, and Le Corbusier to design major projects in Baghdad. Many Iraqi architects and engineers returned home as graduates of UK and U.S. universities, where they received education and training in architectural design based on Western aesthetics and theories and influenced by the dominant “International Style” and the Modern Movement [2]. While they were appointed to official positions, they also played an effective role in spreading Western style as well. Hence, the majority of the building traditions skills eventually became obsolete because the local builders and contractors were unable to compete with the unparalleled Western international firms that provided high technology that enabled large-scale projects to be completed swiftly and effectively. Therefore, in this period, local contemporary architecture tended to follow the international style [63] (p. 2), [59] (p. 131), [53] (p. 143).

The Western-style emphasized the architectural style in the period of the 1940s and 1950s as the open plans emerged, as well as the use of balconies and open-to-outdoor designs, while the courtyards disappeared. Grid planning became common instead of the old organic; new building materials and construction methods were imported, along with the use of imported steel doors and windows. The building’s façade design changed because they tended to be cladded with plaster (lime and sand or cement and sand) instead of brick. New architectural components were introduced for building finishing, such as curtains and screens which made the building appear different within its context. The earlier local architectural style had disappeared until the establishment of the Iraqi Republic in 1958 because this political event affected the architectural aspect [2].

1.1.4. Architectural Styles and Movement in the Early to Mid-Twentieth Century in the UK and U.S.

Our survey of Iraqi architects who graduated from Western schools of architecture and designed public buildings in Baghdad executed during the target epoch shows that they were all graduates of British and American universities, in particular. Therefore, this section covers the main architectural styles of the early and mid-20th centuries in the UK and U.S., the time in which these Iraqi architects studied there, and the main architectural culture they were in touch with during their studies. According to Jan Gympel [64] and Richard Ingersoll [65], the early to mid-twentieth century saw significant architectural styles shift in the UK and the U.S. because of sociocultural and technological advancements. Numerous basic movements and styles appeared in both countries.

In the UK, from the late nineteenth to the early twentieth century, the art and crafts movements started against the outcomes of the Industrial Revolution; their focus was on craftsmanship and traditional techniques. The impact of this movement was obvious from simple, functional, and handcrafted details [66] (p. 306). The early twentieth century also witnessed revivalist movements such as Neo-Classicism or Neo-Georgian, which looked to earlier architectural styles for inspiration, in addition to the continuation of Edwardian architecture, which was characterized by classical elements and symmetrical and proportional design. Edwardian architecture is characterized by a departure from the heaviness of Victorian architecture. Buildings of this period often featured lighter, more delicate detailing and incorporated elements of classical architecture [66] (p. 355). The international style that emerged between the 1920s and 1940s, however, was against decoration; the focus was on simplicity, clean lines, and ornament rejection. In the 1930s and 1940s, modernism was emphasized; it took inspiration from the international style, which focused on simplicity and functionality. After WWII, during the 1950s and 1960s, when modern architecture was still dominant, brutalist architecture was emphasized. It was characterized by the use of raw and bold concrete with geometrical forms for presenting material morality [67] (pp. 1–9).

In the US, the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries witnessed the dominance of the Beaux-Arts, which was distinguished by grandiosity and classical detailing [66] (p. 384). They also witnessed the emergence of tall buildings that marked the earlier form of today’s skyscrapers in the 1880s with the Chicago School of Architecture. Early skyscrapers had a modern appearance, yet they were treated as a classical column having a base, shaft, and capital [64] (p. 79). The Prairie School, founded in the 1890s and of which Frank Lloyd Wright was the most famous proponent, evolved in contrast to the elaborate styles of the day. Influenced by Wright’s designs, the Prairie School style focused on elongated horizontal masses, open spaces, and integration with the surrounding landscape [68] (p. 891). The Art Deco movement, which originated in the 1920s and became a main style in the 1930s, introduced sleek and anti-traditional geometric designs with rich decoration to American towns [68] (p. 873). The impact of European modern architecture found its way to the U.S., and a shift toward minimalism and the rejection of ornament in American architecture started around the 1920s and 1930s as well, with the adoption of simplicity. Modernism had risen to prominence in the US after WWII, precisely in the 1940s and 1960s. It was distinguished by its emphasis on functionality and simplicity and the use of modern materials such as steel, glass, and concrete [68] (pp. 848–850).

During the late nineteenth century to the mid-twentieth century, both countries went through different architectural movements, from the historical revival to modernism and brutalist architecture reflecting technological, social, and cultural changes. For further details, see

Table 2. Elements of UK and USA architectural key styles in early and mid-20th century. Source: Authors based on the literature review.

Country	Style or Movement	Elements of Style
UK	Art and crafts movements Early 20th	Building materials and components	Masonry and reveal the qualities of natural materials such as stone.
		Openings	Leaded and stained glass for windows and doors, Uniform rows of windows were common.
		Decorations	Handcraft details in interiors; tile-hung facades, overhanging eaves and horizontal bands of leaded windows were used.
		More Details	The facade was separated into masses using random window patterns, with Islamic-style ogee arched windows and stained glass used for aesthetic reasons [66] (pp. 306–313).
	Edwardian style Early 20th	Building materials and components	Brick and stone walls. Use of new building materials such as concrete and steel.
		Openings	Symmetrical arrangements of wooden sash windows, as well as use of metal frames for windows. Wooden doors placed on main entrances surrounded by dressed stone or terra cotta frame.
		Decorations	Classical decorations; metal work decorations for porches, canopies, windows protection rails and garden gates.
		More Details	Classical elements such as columns and pediments, symmetrical, and proportional façade design [66] (pp. 355–385).
	International style and modern architect 1920s–1940s	Building materials and components	Steel, glass, and concrete while abandoning old norms, smooth blank external facades, and flat roofs that could contain terraces and sun decks.
		Openings	Plain windows, expanses of glass.
		Decorations	Rejected decoration.
		More Details	Rejected decoration and welcomed the machine era; inventing new uses for materials while abandoning old norms. unrestricted layouts, typically with no internal load-bearing walls. Use of cantilevered floors [67] (p. 20).
	Brutalist architecture 1950s–1960s	Building materials and components	Concrete, steel, and glass were common, while traditional materials like as marble, stone, and brick were employed in an unusually modern manner.
		Openings	Inspirations from modern style.
		Decorations	Material morality.
		More Details	Large, often monumental, shapes were blended into a cohesive whole, with concrete that was sometimes unpainted and rough-cast [67] (p. 1).
USA	Skyscraper style Early 20th	Building materials and components	Masonry, steel, glass.
		Openings	Large glazed surfaces, row of geometrical windows.
		Decorations	No or little art nouveau decorations.
		More Details	In Skyscraper style iconic steel structures used. Building treated as a single classical column having base, shaft and capital. The base used as retail shops having large glazed windows; shaft related to the middle floors which used for offices and have regular grid windows; the flat roof of technical equipment floor projected as capital part having bulls’-eye windows and little art nouveau decorations [64] (p. 79).
	Prairie School Early 20th	Building materials and components	Cubic concrete block, elegant glazed brickwork, cut stones.
		Openings	Wide size openings.
		Decorations	Prismatic surface decoration, textile-like patterns, wood framing, and elegant glazed brickwork.
		More Details	Used asymmetrical plans, horizontal lines, connecting with nature, wide overhanging roofs, windows’ bands and projecting bases [66] (p. 539), [68] (p. 892).
	Art Deco 1920s–1930s	Building materials and components	Modern building materials (concrete and steel), geometrical forms.
		Openings	Row of geometrical windows.
		Decorations	Using classical decorations.
		More Details	Takes linear ornamental language and contrasting colors from classical styles; and rounded surfaces from Modern design. Towers have a white setback slab with vertical piers, horizontal bands, ribbon windows, and cantilevered floor. The top has a geometrically carved crown, and the cladding is brightly colored, with black and dark green terra-cotta sheathing and golden glazing [68] (p. 880).
	International style and modern architecture 1940s–1960s	Building materials and components	Steel, glass and concrete.
		Openings	Wide size openings.
		Decorations	None
		More Details	The design emphasizes utilitarian functionalism, contained spatial volumes, smooth industrial finishes, open, non-symmetrical designs, and a complete rejection of decoration, historical styles, and opaque materials [68] (p. 848).

.

2. Methodology

This research is a historical study with inductive approach that relays on a comparative analysis for a case study which consists of 13 projects for nine Iraqi architects. The following sub-sections elaborate the research design and the case study.

2.1. Research Design

• Research aims and approach: The research aims to examine the influence of the early twentieth century Western colonial discourse through knowledge mobility in the field of architectural education and practice on shaping Iraqi contemporary architecture in terms of public buildings’ façades during British colonialism in Iraq. The target epoch (1936–1958) refers to the first year the first Iraqi architect with an academic background (which was Western) started his work as a government architect, and ends with the last year of British colonialism in Iraq. The research uses a qualitative approach to provide understanding on the early contemporary Iraqi architects’ experiences, concepts, and design approaches—which were developed through this knowledge mobility during the colonial influence—and how they were reflected in their public buildings’ façades. This qualitative inductive approach helps detect and explore patterns of architectural responses to colonial discourse. The study therefore depends on a case study that consists of a range of projects by early Iraqi contemporary architects with Western academic backgrounds for being themselves agents of this architectural knowledge mobility.
• Data collection: The research is a historical study; therefore, it is dependent on documentation recourses for collecting the relevant data regarding the early Iraqi contemporary architects and their projects that were built during the target epoch. Accordingly, the authors have conducted a survey of Iraqi architects with Western academic backgrounds and their projects, which are listed in the Encyclopedia of Iraqi Architecture by Mohamed Ridha Al-Chalabi [5,12] because it is the most recent reliable comprehensive documentation of contemporary Iraqi architecture and architects.
• Case study selection: The projects have been selected based on the following criteria:
  • The project should have been designed by Iraqi architect/s who studied architecture in Western countries (UK, U.S., Europe) during the target epoch.
  • The project should be executed during the target epoch and located in Baghdad city as a research limit, because Baghdad, as the capital, was the main focal point of Western interest in Iraq and it has housed most of the important early contemporary architecture public buildings.
  • The project should be a public building as a research limit that can reflect the general approach of early contemporary architecture in Iraq, without being influenced by individual clients’ divergent preferences and budgets.
• Evaluation: The research relies on comparative analysis to recognize the transformations in buildings’ façades design. According to Calloway in the book ‘Elements of Style’, the elements that are considered guides for studying the façade of a style are: door, window, wall, metal, and wood works. These elements can be categorized within the façade design which includes building materials, structural system, building techniques, and building components, and are involved in the wall design. The façade decorations include metal and wood works, and the openings refer to the window and door design [66]. Hence, the authors have developed a style checklist that highlights the main façade’s characteristics in both the local architectural heritage legacy (Table 1), and the early to mid-twentieth century Western architecture precisely in the UK and the US—where those architects studied—(Table 2) provides a basis for discussing the way early Iraqi architects responded to the Western colonial discourse and how they connected with their architectural legacy and developed their own approaches.

The last local Iraqi architectural style before Western colonialism was the local Ottoman style; therefore, the local Ottoman style is considered here as the neutral reference point for detecting the transformations that occurred to the façades of the addressed public buildings, whether they rather approached the earlier inherited local architecture or the later Western styles.

Each selected building has a style checklist for its façade ends with a section that records the detected transformation (see the Results section). To detect these transformations, the façades of the selected projects have been compared to the architectural references from the legacy of Iraqi architecture and Western architecture.

Checklist results will be interpreted and discussed to show the influence of the knowledge mobility and to detect the design approaches of the addressed architects that represent their stances toward colonial discourse.

2.2. Case Study

According to the survey (see Data collection), 13 projects designed and executed during the target epoch met the research criteria (see Case study selection) designed by nine architects from three generations who worked in Iraq during the target epoch (1936–1958) as shown in

Table 3. Iraqi architects and their Public buildings during (1936–1958). Source: [Authors] based on the Encyclopedia of Iraqi Architecture [5,12].

	Iraqi Architect	Architect’s Generation	Architect’s Education Country	Projects Designed by Architect	Co-Architect(s)\Designer(s)	Design Year	Project No.
1	Ahmed Mukhtar Ibrahim (1908–1958)	Fore Founder	Liverpool School of Architecture, UK	Olympic Club Building		1939–1940	1
2	Ja’afar Allawi (1915–2005)	Fore Founder	Liverpool University, UK	Al Jafa’ariya School		1946	2
				Agricultural Bank	Abdulla Ihsan	1949–1952	3
				Al Hareree Secondary School		1953	4
				Extension of the Iraqi National Museum		1955	5
3	Midhat Ali Madhloom (1913–1973)	Fore Founder	Liverpool University, UK	Iraqi Dates Association		1957	6
4	Mohamed Makiya (1914–2015)	Pioneers (1st)	Liverpool University, UK	A Bank Building	Gabrial Khamo	1957	7
5	Abdulla Ihsan Kamel (1919–1984)	Pioneers (1st)	Liverpool University, UK	Waqf Khan Al Pasha		1957	8
				Mortgage Bank	Qahtan Al Madfai	1957	9
6	Numan Jalili (1922–1994)	Pioneers (1st)	Harvard University, USA	Iraqi Engineers Association		1950	10
7	Hussain Al Hasani (late 1920s–1990s)	Pioneers (1st)	Michigan University, USA	A Building within the Directorate of Surveying complex		1950s	11
8	Hazim Al Tek (1927–2013)	2nd	California University, USA	Al Ma’amoniyah School	Fadhil Lazzar	1956	12
9	Qahtan Al Madfai (1927–2021)	2nd	Wales University, UK	Al Muradiya Waqf Building		1957	13

and

Table 4. Public buildings during (1936–1958). Source: [Authors] based on the Encyclopedia of Iraqi Architecture [5,12].

1	Architect: Ahmed Mukhtar Project: Olympic Club Building (1939–1940)	2	Architect: Ja’afar Allawi Project: Al Jafa’ariya School (1946)
3	Architect: Ja’afar Allawi with Abdulla Ihsan Project: Agricultural Bank (1949–1952)	4	Architect: Ja’afar Allawi Project: Al Hareree Secondary School (1953)
5	Architect: Ja’afar Allawi Project: Extension of the Iraqi National Museum (1955)	6	Architect: Midhat Ali Madhloom Project: Iraqi Dates Association (1957)
7	Architect: Mohamed Makiya with Gabrial Khamo Project: Baghdad Bank (1957)	8	Architect: Abdulla Ihsan Kamel Project: Waqf Khan Al Pasha (1957)
9	Architect: Abdulla Ihsan Kamel with Qahtan Al Madfai Project: Mortgage Bank (1957)	10	Architect: Numan Jalili Project: Iraqi Engineers Association (1950)
11	Architect: Hussain Al Hasani Project: Building within Directorate of Surveying complex (1950s)	12	Architect: Hazim Al Tek and Fadhil Lazzar Project: Al Ma’amoniyah School (1956)
13	Architect: Qahtan Al Madfai Project: Al Muradiya Waqf Building (1957)

.

The study focuses on detecting the transformations that the selected architects made through their buildings in comparison with local architectural traditions and Western key styles to reveal the types of responses of the selected architects toward colonial discourse.

Table 5. Elements of the selected buildings’ facades in comparison with those of the local architectural legacy until 1921, and the key Western architectural styles in early and mid-20th century. Source: [Authors].

1. Architect: Ahmed Mukhtar. Project: Olympic Club Building. Year: 1939–1940

Elements of façade design

Source of inspiration/styles and movements

X.

Y.1

Y.2

Y.3

Results

X.1

X.2.1

X.2.2

Y.1.1

Y.1.2

Y.1.3

Y.2.1

Y.2.2

Y.2.3

Y.2.4

Y.3.1

Y.3.2

Y.3.3

Y.3.4

Building materials and components

Finishing Materials

Main

Unapplicable

Unapplicable

Local + Western

Secondary

Arches

None

Vaults

None

Colonnades

None

Openings

Door

Western

Window

Local + Western

Decorations

Ornament

None

Sculpture

None

Calligraphy

None

Glazed brick

None

Others

None

Transformation detection: The use of concrete in addition to local building materials, narrow and stripped shape of windows as well as the entrance design, they all refer to the Western style.

2. Architect: Ja’afar Allawi. Project: Al Jafa’ariya School. Year: 1946

Elements of façade design

Source of inspiration/styles and movements

X.

Y.1

Y.2

Y.3

Results

X.1

X.2.1

X.2.2

Y.1.1

Y.1.2

Y.1.3

Y.2.1

Y.2.2

Y.2.3

Y.2.4

Y.3.1

Y.3.2

Y.3.3

Y.3.4

Building materials and components

Finishing Materials

Main

Unapplicable

Local + Western

Secondary

Arches

None

Vaults

None

Colonnades

Local + Western

Openings

Door

Western

Window

Local + Western

Decorations

Ornament

None

Sculpture

None

Calligraphy

None

Glazed brick

None

Others

local

Transformation detection: The use of concrete along with brick as building materials, the arrangement of the windows and the shape of the door, they all refer to the Western modern architecture.

3. Architect: Ja’afar Allawi with Abdulla Ihsan Kamel. Project: Agricultural Bank. Year: 1949–1952

Elements of façade design

Source of inspiration/styles and movements

X.

Y.1

Y.2

Y.3

Results

X.1

X.2.1

X.2.2

Y.1.1

Y.1.2

Y.1.3

Y.2.1

Y.2.2

Y.2.3

Y.2.4

Y.3.1

Y.3.2

Y.3.3

Y.3.4

Building materials and components

Finishing Materials

Main

Local + Western

Secondary

Arches

None

Vaults

None

Colonnades

None

Openings

Door

Western

Window

Western

Decorations

Ornament

None

Sculpture

None

Calligraphy

None

Glazed brick

None

Others

Western

Transformation detection: Although the facade is covered by brick as a local material, the use of concrete, windows frames, wide size and the shape of windows, reflect clearly the Western architectural style.

4. Architect: Ja’afar Allawi. Project: Al Hareree Secondary School. Year: 1953

Elements of façade design

Source of inspiration/styles and movements

X.

Y.1

Y.2

Y.3

Results

X.1

X.2.1

X.2.2

Y.1.1

Y.1.2

Y.1.3

Y.2.1

Y.2.2

Y.2.3

Y.2.4

Y.3.1

Y.3.2

Y.3.3

Y.3.4

Building materials and components

Finishing Materials

Main

Western

Secondary

Arches

None

Vaults

None

Colonnades

None

Openings

Door

Western

Window

Western

Decorations

Ornament

None

Sculpture

None

Calligraphy

None

Glazed brick

None

Others

Western

Transformation detection: Although the facade is covered by brick as a local material, the use of concrete, windows frames, wide size and the shape of windows, reflect clearly the Western architectural style.

5. Architect: Ja’afar Allawi. Project: Extension of the Iraqi National Museum. Year: 1955

Elements of façade design

Source of inspiration/styles and movements

X.

Y.1

Y.2

Y.3

Results

X.1

X.2.1

X.2.2

Y.1.1

Y.1.2

Y.1.3

Y.2.1

Y.2.2

Y.2.3

Y.2.4

Y.3.1

Y.3.2

Y.3.3

Y.3.4

Building materials and components

Finishing Materials

Main

Local+ Western

Secondary

Arches

None

Vaults

None

Colonnades

None

Openings

Door

Local+ Western

Window

Local+ Western

Decorations

Ornament

None

Sculpture

Local

Calligraphy

None

Glazed brick

Local

Others

Local

Transformation detection: The transformations in this project went towards pre-Islamic architectural styles by using bricks, wood and marble, monumental solid volume, and ancient sculptures, while the location and form of the windows, reflect both the local architectural traditions in the Ottoman epoch and the Western modern architectural style. The solidity of the building goes with the modern architectural style as well.

6. Architect: Midhat Ali Madhloom. Project: Iraqi Dates Association. Year: 1957

Elements of façade design

Source of inspiration/styles and movements

X.

Y.1

Y.2

Y.3

Results

X.1

X.2.1

X.2.2

Y.1.1

Y.1.2

Y.1.3

Y.2.1

Y.2.2

Y.2.3

Y.2.4

Y.3.1

Y.3.2

Y.3.3

Y.3.4

Building materials and components

Finishing Materials

Main

Western

Secondary

Arches

None

Vaults

None

Colonnades

None

Openings

Door

Western

Window

Western

Decorations

Ornament

None

Sculpture

None

Calligraphy

None

Glazed brick

None

Others

Western

Transformation detection: The concrete use in walls, environmental treatments as well as the use of steel as a building material, and the shape of windows and their size are referring to the Western architectural style characteristics.

7. Architect: Mohamed Makiya with Gabrial Kham. Project: Baghdad Bank. Year: 1957

Elements of façade design

Source of inspiration/styles and movements

X.

Y.1

Y.2

Y.3

Results

X.1

X.2.1

X.2.2

Y.1.1

Y.1.2

Y.1.3

Y.2.1

Y.2.2

Y.2.3

Y.2.4

Y.3.1

Y.3.2

Y.3.3

Y.3.4

Building materials and components

Finishing Materials

Main

Western

Secondary

Arches

None

Vaults

None

Colonnades

None

Openings

Door

Western

Window

Western

Decorations

Ornament

None

Sculpture

None

Calligraphy

None

Glazed brick

None

Others

Western

Transformation detection: Presenting the morality of concrete as a building material. The size and form of the concrete decorations for the façade screen, as well as the size of the windows with their environmental treatments reflect the modern—brutalist architectural style.

8. Architect: Abdulla Ihsan Kamel. Project: Waqf Khan Al Pasha. Year: 1957

Elements of façade design

Source of inspiration/styles and movements

X.

Y.1

Y.2

Y.3

Results

X.1

X.2.1

X.2.2

Y.1.1

Y.1.2

Y.1.3

Y.2.1

Y.2.2

Y.2.3

Y.2.4

Y.3.1

Y.3.2

Y.3.3

Y.3.4

Building materials and components

Finishing Materials

Main

Western

Secondary

Arches

None

Vaults

None

Colonnades

Local + Western

Openings

Door

Western

Window

Western

Decorations

Ornament

Local

Sculpture

None

Calligraphy

None

Glazed brick

None

Others

Western

Transformation detection: The use of concrete for the façade’s screen, the simple columns of the colonnades, the windows behind the screen, the doors, and the balconies reflect the Western architectural style.

9. Architect: Abdulla Ihsan Kamel with Qahtan Al Madfai. Project: Mortgage Bank. Year: 1957

Elements of façade design

Source of inspiration/styles and movements

X.

Y.1

Y.2

Y.3

Results

X.1

X.2.1

X.2.2

Y.1.1

Y.1.2

Y.1.3

Y.2.1

Y.2.2

Y.2.3

Y.2.4

Y.3.1

Y.3.2

Y.3.3

Y.3.4

Building materials and components

Finishing Materials

Main

Western

Secondary

Arches

None

Vaults

None

Colonnades

None

Openings

Door

Western

Window

Western

Decorations

Ornament

None

Sculpture

None

Calligraphy

None

Glazed brick

None

Others

None

Transformation detection: The use of steel, concrete and glass dominate the façade design as building materials with the wide size of the openings, as well as celebrating geometrical forms by attaching a pure circular mass to the main regular rectangular-plan building. All these together reflect the intensive influence of the Western modern architecture on this building.

10. Architect: Numan Jalili. Project: Iraqi Engineers Association. Year: 1950

Elements of façade design

Source of inspiration/styles and movements

X.

Y.1

Y.2

Y.3

Results

X.1

X.2.1

X.2.2

Y.1.1

Y.1.2

Y.1.3

Y.2.1

Y.2.2

Y.2.3

Y.2.4

Y.3.1

Y.3.2

Y.3.3

Y.3.4

Building materials and components

Finishing Materials

Main

Local +Western

Secondary

Arches

None

Vaults

None

Colonnades

None

Openings

Door

Western

Window

Western

Decorations

Ornament

None

Sculpture

None

Calligraphy

None

Glazed brick

None

Others

None

Transformation detection: White colored concrete façade, steel screen grid decoration, strip recess for the windows, high solidity and pure geometric masses are imported from the Western modern architectural style.

11. Architect: Hussain Al Hasani. Project: Building within Directorate of Surveying complex. Year:1950s

Elements of façade design

Source of inspiration/styles and movements

X.

Y.1

Y.2

Y.3

Results

X.1

X.2.1

X.2.2

Y.1.1

Y.1.2

Y.1.3

Y.2.1

Y.2.2

Y.2.3

Y.2.4

Y.3.1

Y.3.2

Y.3.3

Y.3.4

Building materials and components

Finishing Materials

Main

Western

Secondary

Arches

None

Vaults

None

Colonnades

Local +Western

Openings

Door

Western

Window

Western

Decorations

Ornament

None

Sculpture

None

Calligraphy

None

Glazed brick

None

Others

Western

Transformation detection: The use of concrete in the walls’ construction, slab, colonnade and louvers, the stripped windows and the white color for finishing all are imported from the Western architecture.

12. Architect: Hazim Al Tek and Fadhil Lazzar. Project: Al Ma’amoniyah School. Year: 1956

Elements of façade design

Source of inspiration/styles and movements

X.

Y.1

Y.2

Y.3

Results

X.1

X.2.1

X.2.2

Y.1.1

Y.1.2

Y.1.3

Y.2.1

Y.2.2

Y.2.3

Y.2.4

Y.3.1

Y.3.2

Y.3.3

Y.3.4

Building materials and components

Finishing Materials

Main

Western

Secondary

Arches

None

Vaults

None

Colonnades

None

Openings

Door

Western

Window

Western

Decorations

Ornament

None

Sculpture

None

Calligraphy

None

Glazed brick

None

Others

Western

Transformation detection: Presenting the power of building materials through the size of the concrete walls and the louvers that are used as environmental treatments, in addition to the decorations of the entrance and windows are all imported from the Western international and brutalist architectural style.

13. Architect: Qahtan Al Madfai. Project: Al Muradiya Waqf Building. Year: 1957

Elements of façade design

Source of inspiration/styles and movements

X.

Y.1

Y.2

Y.3

Results

X.1

X.2.1

X.2.2

Y.1.1

Y.1.2

Y.1.3

Y.2.1

Y.2.2

Y.2.3

Y.2.4

Y.3.1

Y.3.2

Y.3.3

Y.3.4

Building materials and components

Finishing Materials

Main

Local +Western

Secondary

Arches

None

Vaults

None

Colonnades

Local +Western

Openings

Door

Western

Window

Western

Decorations

Ornament

Western

Sculpture

None

Calligraphy

None

Glazed brick

None

Others

None

Transformation detection: The use of concrete, rows of windows and simple columns for colonnades are imported from the Western modern and brutalist architectural style.

shows the comparison method between the chosen projects and the characteristics of the local and Western styles. The styles were coded using (X) to refer to the Mesopotamian architectural styles, i.e., (X.1) Mesopotamian/pre-Islamic styles, (X.2) Mesopotamian/Islamic styles, (X.2.1) Abbasid style, and (X.2.2) Ottoman style. In addition (Y) is used to refer to the Western styles, i.e., (Y.1) British colonial styles; (Y.1.1) early British colonial (1916–1920), (Y.1.2) British mandate (1921–1936), (Y.1.3) Iraqi independence with a British governmental architect (1932–1936), and (Y.2) UK styles and movements; (Y.2.1) Arts and Crafts movements; (Y.2.2) Edwardian style; (Y.2.3) international style and modern architecture; and (Y.2.4) brutalist architecture; while (Y.3) is used to refer to the U.S. styles and movements; (Y.3.1) Beaux-Arts and skyscraper style; (Y.3.2) Prairie School, (Y.3.3) Art Deco; and (Y.3.4) international style and modern architecture.

3. Results

This paper has detected and studied the transformations that occurred to the local architectural traditions through examining the main façade of 13 public buildings that were designed in 1936–1958 by nine Iraqi architects of Western architectural education background. Some of these buildings were designed by more than one architect (as shown in Table 3 and Table 4). The target epoch (1936–1958), focuses on the earliest two decades that witnessed the emergence of Iraqi contemporary architecture, during the increasing Western impact on Iraq because of the sociopolitical circumstances that kept it within the British circle of influence. Table 5 presents the detected styles, characteristics, and transformations for each building façade.

Based on the study of these projects, the influence of knowledge mobility via education in Western countries played a critical role in shaping the architectural approaches of the selected Iraqi architects. Their architectural education in the UK and U.S. introduced them to Western styles, which they used in their work in Iraq. The extent of reliance on Western styles and local traditions varied in their designs and it reflects the architect’s personal experience, stance, and responses to the sociopolitical situation at that time.

4. Discussion

The results of this study, which are exhibited in Table 5, show the facades’ styles and characteristics of the 13 selected buildings, as well as detecting the main transformations these façades presented to the local architectural traditions. This discussion provides an interpretation of these results. The results of the 13 individual projects in Table 5 are grouped in this section, interpreted and discussed according to their architect, then contextualized with socio-political events to detect the design approach of the nine Iraqi architects to reveal their stance toward Western influence and their local traditions:

1. Ahmad Mukhtar, in 1939–1940 through the design of the Olympic Club building, mixed Western and local styles. The simple, non-ornamented façade with stripped windows reflects the influence of the modern movement style on his approach as a result of the architect’s study in the UK during the flourishing of the modern and international styles, besides his work with Western architects when he returned to Iraq. At the same time, the location and the limited size of the windows can be related to the local common Islamic style before British colonialism, with its simple façade and top windows. The size of the façade’s finishing with local material (bricks) makes that gesture a clear mark of continuity with the local Iraqi architectural traditions. The architect selected Western elements and principles of the international style that harmonize with the local building traditions. However, with its use of bricks for cladding the largest part of the façade, the building can be taken as a normal evolution of the local façade (Table 5. 1). The architect here made a dialog where his signals were chosen carefully to be well received by the community. His respect for the local traditions suggests that he was selective when dealing with the Western influence and that he employed his Western education to fill the technological gap while keeping the sense of the local traditions.

2. Four projects were designed by Ja’afar Allawi from 1946 to 1955; he studied architecture in the UK, as shown in Table 1. During this period, Iraq went through several political stages, such as the post-WWII Truman Doctrine (1947) and the Baghdad Pact (1955) in addition to the establishment of the Iraqi Development Board in 1950 and inviting Western planners and architects to Iraq. His first two projects were designed during the late 1940s and early 1950s; his stance toward the Western wave in these projects shows a dialogue between Western style and local style. The size of the local wall finishing material, the environmental treatments of the windows inspired by shanasheel, and their size reflect inspiration from local architectural traditions, while the use of Western building materials and simple columns presents the influence of the Western modern architectural style in the first project. The Western influence increased in his second project with Abdullah Ihsan; as the size of openings increased but the size of local finishing material competed with the influence of the Western style, the continuity with the local architectural style was maintained (Table 5. 2 and Table 5. 3). This continuity was interrupted in his third project, which was designed in 1953 as he followed the Western style because of the increasing Western architectural practice in Iraq and the dominance of modern architectural principles at that time. The project reflects modern architectural style through its building materials and components; the size, location, and environmental treatments of the openings; and the finishing material and color (Table 5. 4). His fourth project was the extension of the existing design project, the Iraqi Museum. The extension continued the same approach as the existing building. The project reflects ancient Mesopotamian architecture through its building materials and components and its high solidity, which gave it a sense of monumentality. The architect aimed to present the magnificent architectural legacy of modern Iraq through its modern museum design. The architect here used a modern style to reflect the project’s function (Table 5. 5). The architect’s approach towards the Western influence in his two early projects eventually changed; it started as a dialogue between Western and local architectural styles by using Western architectural styles while applying a sense of local features. However, his approach changed to adopt the Western style in his third project. The fourth project was of a modern design as well, yet it presents a sense of locality using local materials to reflect the function of the building as a national museum.

3. Midhat Ali Madhloom’s project was designed in the second half of the 1950s. At that time, two Western waves influenced the work of this architect: his knowledge obtained in the UK and the trace of Western architects who were invited to work in Iraq. Madhloom showed in his project (Table 5. 6) that he adopted the modern and brutalist architectural styles using building materials and components, stripped openings and environmental protections, and its geometrical design. However, it is worth mentioning that, according to Al-Chalabi [5], Madhloom used to rely on four local master-craftsmen in achieving his buildings, which somehow connected him with local building traditions, although this did not appear in the level of the building façade.

4. Mohamed Makiya and Gabrial Khamo also adopted the brutalist style in 1957 in their building in Sinak, which is currently used to house a branch of the Bank of Baghdad. The impact comes from the architect’s educational background in the UK during the zenith of modern architecture—especially the brutalist style—and from the influence of Western architectural practice in Iraq. The designers followed the Western style by using modern building materials and presenting their influence through the concrete louvers (Table 5. 7). However, Makiya’s design approach would soon change, and he would become widely known for his local-tradition revival approach.

5. In 1957, Abdullah Ihsan Kamel had two public buildings included in this study. For the first building (Table 5. 8), continuity with local architectural traditions was achieved by using a façade decorated with a screen of open and closed hexagons. The concrete screen has large hexagonal frames covered by many smaller hexagons that shape stars in between to provide protection from the summer sun and to add privacy for the users of the building. The screen also has a group of large, open hexagon frames that enclose small balcony-like projections designed to hold and hide window-type air-conditioning units. The screen details call to mind the local traditional shanasheel, ornaments, and even the old way of cooling the air by placing wet camelthorns (alhagi) plants along the openings. These mental representations relate to the local Ottoman Islamic architectural style, despite the type of material used. The shape of the ornament and the size of the screen dominate the scene rather than their material of construction. The architect selected this approach to connect with local architectural traditions, even though he did not use local materials. The architect tended to adapt a mix of what he learned from the UK during the climax of modern architecture with the local architectural traditions; the output represents a dialogue between Western and local architectural styles. In contrast, in his second project (Table 5. 9) with Qahtan Al Madfai, the design follows the Western architectural approach and neglects local architectural traditions.

6. Numan Jalili’s project in 1950 was inspired directly from the modern architectural style, a result of the architect’s educational background in the US during the height of the modern architectural style. The use of white, simple faces and a row of windows in this building made it a clear example of the modern architectural style. However, the rearmass of the building is entirely cladded with bricks. The large size of the solid, taller rearmass, covered entirely by a local material, competes with the smaller Western-style white foremass. However, the color of the foremass and the way it sounds suspended while it rests on a row of columns make it the main focal point in the building. The architect transferred what he learned abroad to his country and attempted to create a dialogue with the local context (Table 5. 10).

7. The use of Western building materials, such as linear stripped windows and concrete screens that provide environmental treatments, in addition to the use of simple columns, made Hussain Al Hasani’s design reflect the modern architectural style. The design dates to the 1950s, which was the period of spreading modern architecture in the US, the country where the architect graduated. It is also the epoch during which Western ready-design catalogues were commonly used by Iraqi architects, along with the work of Western architects in Iraq; all these correlate with the influence of Western architectural knowledge on the architect’s approach toward Western architectural style (Table 5. 11).

8. In their design of Al Ma’amoniyah School in 1956, Hazim Al Tek and Fadhil Lazzar followed the steps of the modern international and brutalist Western architectural styles using materials, environmental protection treatments, and the openings’ style. The dominant architectural style during the architect’s education period in the US was the modern architectural style. The prevalent architectural styles at that time included modern architecture and Art Deco (Table 2). The school design relates to these styles. The details of the steel door and windows reflect the Western Art Deco style. The architects adopted the Western style in their designs, while there was no space for local architectural traditions (Table 5. 12).

9. As for the Qahtan Al Madfai building, though it clearly reflects the characteristics of Western modern and brutalist architecture, the use of brick along with concrete appears to be a gesture to create harmony with the local context. The Western architectural details for the façade’s screen, window size, and shutters somehow mimic the Shanasheel work in the local traditions; one can see these as possible modern replacements of the traditional ones while maintaining the concept. However, the influence of the Western approach due to architect’s education in the UK during the zenith of modern architectural style, along with the practice of Western architects in Iraq, is evident in this building (Table 5. 13).

Based on the study of these projects, the influence of knowledge mobility because of education obtained in Western countries, and practicing with Western architects played a critical role in shaping the architectural approaches of the selected Iraqi architects. Their architectural education in the UK and U.S. introduced them to Western styles, which they used in their work in Iraq. The extent of reliance on the Western styles and the local traditions varied in their designs and reflects the architect’s personal experience, stance and responses to the sociopolitical situation at that time.

As a communication system, the architectural knowledge mobility in Iraq during the Hashemite reign, has three main knowledge sources for the architectural local community: (see Figure 3)

• The Western styles with which Iraqi architects were familiar through Western architectural practice and education.
• The local architectural legacy with which Iraqi architects grew up, being exposed to the local heritage buildings in Iraq.
• The local architectural community (1936–1958) through their new buildings.

Although the Iraqi architectural community (1936–1958) represents the main knowledge destination for these three knowledge sources, the local community, however, clearly shared the role of the knowledge destination for the second and third knowledge sources, where it was encouraged to adopt new transferred features, materials, and techniques at the expense of other local traditional ones. This shows the extension of the Western colonial discourse via architectural knowledge mobility.

Seven of the selected projects present a sense of balance between the first and second sources—the Western educational knowledge and the local architectural traditions. As such, the work of these architects in this period made a significant transformation in Iraqi architecture. The architects of these projects acted as active agents in a dialogue with the colonizers. This reflects resilience, and they were aware of the importance of generating an architecture that meets modernity yet keeps its roots.

Six of the selected projects present the dominance of the first source—the Western educational knowledge—at the expense of the second source—the local traditions. The architects of these projects acted as passive agents in the colonial discourse, since the architects were highly impressed by the Western modernism, and their priority was to modernize the local built environment through importing Western styles and technology.

5. Conclusions

The target epoch of the study (1936–1958) is within the reign of the Hashemite in Iraq under British colonialism, and Iraq was exposed to the dominant Western colonial discourse. This paper examines the role of this discourse through knowledge mobility in shaping early contemporary architecture in Iraq. The findings show that the Iraqi architects followed what they learned abroad rather than following the local building traditions. However, their design approaches varied through time regarding the way they connected with the local building traditions, precisely during the target epoch.

Knowledge mobility highly contributed to shaping contemporary Iraqi architecture and eventually led to abandoning the earlier building traditions and techniques and adopting Western modernism and advanced building technology. This helped develop certain types of architects’ responses through time toward local architectural traditions and colonial discourse. These types can be recognized in the three design approaches of architects that disclose the way the knowledge mobility interacts with time and socio-political context in evolving architects’ design approaches which are representations of their stances towards the Western colonial discourse:

1. Late 1930s to mid-1940s: Iraqi architects adapted carefully selected Western architectural characteristics that somehow met the local architectural traditions. They focused on using local materials in cladding the entire building façades or most of them, to guard a sense of harmony and continuity with the local context. The influence of the British Arts and Crafts movement in the UK let the architects who studied in the UK, and witnessed and/or worked with the British architects in Iraq appreciate even more the local craftsmanship. Iraqi architects prioritized responding to their local environmental challenges while adopting new Western techniques. They tended to act as active agents in the communication process with the colonizers, conveying the colonial discourse into an interactive dialogue since they picked Western features and techniques that harmonized with their local built environment.

2. Post-WWII and Baghdad Pact from the late 1940s and 1950s: When Iraqi politicians showed their full willingness to build a modern state of Iraq through architecture and invited well-known Western architects to design Iraqi new highlights, Iraqi architects—within this context of considering the superiority of Western architecture as the symbol of modernity—tended to use what they had learned from Western countries without adding touches that connected them with their local architectural traditions. This suggests that the masterpieces of the Western pioneer architects in Iraq highly impressed the Iraqi architects and motivated them to confirm this superiority by following their steps as passive agents of colonial discourse willing to renovate their local built environment following the Western example.

3. Late 1950s: Iraqi architects witnessed a second wave toward connecting with the local architectural traditions. The architects here experienced connecting with the local architectural traditions using Western—modern style materials and characteristics while expressing some features or functions that evoke mental images of the past and local architectural traditions, rather than using local materials or features. They acted as active agents of an interesting dialogue again—however, this time they adopted Western materials and techniques to express their connection to their local building traditions.

The first and third approaches show an interactive dialogue between Iraqi architects’ main sources—Western architectural education and practice background and their local architectural traditions—in which Iraqi architects employed their new knowledge, using what they selected to adopt and transfer from the Western architectural features and techniques, to create a new local architecture with roots that appreciate the individuality of their local architectural traditions. However, the in-between, second approach marks the superiority of the Western architectural style for representing modernity and development at the expense of the local architectural traditions. The response to the colonial discourse varied with time. Iraqi architects showed that their responses to Western discourse varied and evolved, as explained previously, because of knowledge mobility and sociopolitical context.

This epoch was extremely important in the field of Iraqi contemporary architecture because new features were transferred to Iraq along with new technology while other traditional features and techniques were abandoned. The dilemma of how to stay in contact with the local architectural legacy and meet the local social needs while adopting new technology and a new lifestyle was experienced and revisited countless times during the last century and resulted in remarkable examples. The examined buildings show the earliest experiments in this regard. Iraqi architects who adopted and transferred Western architectural styles to Iraq at that epoch contributed to connecting Iraqi contemporary architecture with global architectural experiments and enriching the local experience and architectural solutions. In the meantime, the Iraqi architects who extended what they had learned to meet their architectural traditions highlighted the importance of their local architectural legacy besides facing their own local environmental challenges. Their work was the basis for later developing a distinguished Iraqi architectural style.

This research is limited to studying the main façades of the public building projects that were designed and executed in Baghdad during the reign of the Hashemite (1936–1958) by Iraqi architects who studied architecture in Western countries. Further studies can be conducted to identify the impact of colonial discourse via architectural knowledge mobility on other building types in the same period. Moreover, the studies can be extended to cover the periods before and after the Hashemite reign to provide a wider understanding of the long-term influence of knowledge mobility on shaping Iraqi contemporary architecture during the colonial and post-colonial periods. This study motivates a series of similar regional studies in different former European colonies in the so-called Middle East to detect the patterns of architectural responses towards local architectural traditions and the early twentieth century European colonial discourse based on knowledge mobility to reach more comprehensive findings about the stance of the Middle Eastern architects toward their local traditions and the colonial discourse in that epoch.

The research approach and findings of this study make a significant contribution to the literature because they reveal the way architectural knowledge mobility during the age of European colonialism influenced the response of those early Iraqi architects toward the Western colonial discourse. The study provides a detailed review of the development of Iraqi contemporary architecture and the process of importing and adopting Western architectural styles into the local architecture during the Hashemite monarchy, which demonstrates the impact of Western colonial discourse via knowledge mobility on shaping early Iraqi contemporary architecture.