Current Research in Sasanian Archaeology, Art and History: Proceedings of a Conference held at Durham University, November 3rd and 4th, 2001. Organized by the Centre for Iranian Studies, IMEIS and the Department of Archaeology of Durham University. Sponsored by the Iran Heritage Foundation with additional support from the British Academy and the British Council (Tehran) 9781407302997, 9781407333052

Table of contents :
Cover Page
Title Page
Copyright
Introduction
Conference Programme and participants
The Functional Layout of the Fire Sanctuary at Takht-i SulaimÁn
The Discovery of a Sasanian Period Fire Temple at BandiyÁn, Dargaz
A Sasanian Site at BÁrbÁr, BaÎrain
Sasanian Coins from ‘UmÁn and BaÎrain
Suburb or slum? Excavations at Merv (Turkmenistan) and Observations on Stratigraphy,Refuse and Material Culture in a Sasanian City
The Destruction of the Late Antique World Order
Bishops or Bureaucrats?: Christian Clergy and the State in the Middle Sasanian Period1
History and Historiography: the Court Genre in Arabic and the FatÎnÁmah-i Sind
Iranian Society in the Sasanian Period
The Great Families in the Sasanian Empire: some Sigillographic Evidence
Dionysiac’ Iconographic Themes in the Context of Sasanian Religious Architecture
A Metamorphosis in Sasanian Silverwork: the Triumph of Dionysos?
Royal and Religious Symbols on Early Sasanian Coins
New Perspectives on Sasanian Rock Reliefs

Citation preview

BAR S1810 2008 KENNET & LUFT (Eds) CURRENT RESEARCH IN SASANIAN ARCHAEOLOGY, ART AND HISTORY

B A R

The Iran Heritage Foundation

Current Research in Sasanian Archaeology, Art and History Proceedings of a Conference held at Durham University, November 3rd and 4th, 2001 Organized by the Centre for Iranian Studies, IMEIS and the Department of Archaeology of Durham University. Sponsored by the Iran Heritage Foundation with additional support from the British Academy and the British Council (Tehran)

Edited by

Derek Kennet Paul Luft

BAR International Series 1810 2008

The Iran Heritage Foundation

Current Research in Sasanian Archaeology, Art and History Proceedings of a Conference held at Durham University, November 3rd and 4th, 2001 Organized by the Centre for Iranian Studies, IMEIS and the Department of Archaeology of Durham University. Sponsored by the Iran Heritage Foundation with additional support from the British Academy and the British Council (Tehran)

Edited by

Derek Kennet Paul Luft

BAR International Series 1810 2008

ISBN 9781407302997 paperback ISBN 9781407333052 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781407302997 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

BAR

PUBLISHING

Contents Introduction Derek Kennet and Paul Luft………………………………………………………….

ii

Conference programme and list of contributors…………………………………………….

ix

ARCHAEOLOGY

The Functional Layout of the Fire Sanctuary at Takht-i SulaimÁn Dietrich Huff…………………………………………………………………………

1

The Discovery of a Sasanian Period Fire Temple at BandiyÁn, Dargaz Mehdi Rahbar………………………………………………………………………..

15

A Sasanian Site at BÁrbÁr, Bahrain Vesta Sarkhosh Curtis and Søren F. Andersen………………………………………

41

Sasanian Coins from ‘UmÁn and BaÎrayn Derek Kennet…………………………………………………………………………

55

Suburb or slum? Excavations at Merv (Turkmenistan) and Observations on Stratigraphy, Refuse and Material Culture in a Sasanian City St John Simpson………………………………………………………………………

65

HISTORY

The Destruction of the Late Antique World Order James Howard-Johnston…………………………………………………………….

79

Bishops or Bureaucrats?: Christian Clergy and the State in the Middle Sasanian Period Scott McDonough……………………………………………………………………

87

History and Historiography: the Court Genre in Arabic and the FatÎnÁmah-i Sind Valeria Fiorani Piacentini……………………………………………………………

93

Iranian Society in the Sasanian Period Hassan Karimian…………………………………………………………………….

99

The Great Families in the Sasanian Empire: some Sigillographic Evidence Rika Gyselen…………………………………………………………………………

107

ART HISTORY

‘Dionysiac’ Iconographic Themes in the Context of Sasanian Religious Architecture Pierfrancesco Callieri…………………………………………………………………

115

A Metamorphosis in Sasanian Silverwork: the Triumph of Dionysos? Mehdi Moussavi Kouhpar and Timothy Taylor………………………………………

127

Royal and Religious Symbols on Early Sasanian Coins Vesta Sarkhosh Curtis………………………………………………………………..

137

New Perspectives on Sasanian Rock Reliefs Hubertus von Gall……………………………………………………………………

149

i

Introduction Derek Kennet and Paul Luft ancient Mesopotamia and the Levant tend to loose interest with the fall of Babylon to Cyrus the Great in 539 BC, whilst those interested in the Islamic period often tend to take an interest in the Sasanians only in so far as they represent the origins of much that later became part of Islamic culture and tradition. So it is that this long and important period does not really punch its weight on the stage of world history. Still today, amidst almost complete ignorance amongst the general public, undergraduate students studying classics and classical archaeology often have only a very limited knowledge of the Sasanians and of what was going on to the east of the classical world.

Iranian (Persian) studies have a long history in Durham University. They were initially established after World War II as a part of the School of Oriental Studies and after 1988 became part of the Institute for Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies. In 1999 the Centre for Iranian Studies was born, which has since been very active in the promotion of research and cultural events. It has organised a number of successful conferences and workshops in particular about Iran in the modern world. During recent years Iranian studies have increasingly developed at interdisciplinary level in Durham. Thus, in the autumn of 2000 it was suggested that the Centre for Iranian Studies and the Department of Archaeology at Durham University might jointly organise a conference on some aspect of Iranian archaeology. The Sasanian period was quickly identified as the most urgent theme, partly because of the research interests of one of the conference organisers and partly because no international meeting on Sasanian studies had taken place for a number of years, despite the fact that an increasing amount of research, and especially archaeological fieldwork, was taking place. Funding was secured thanks to the generosity of the Iran Heritage Foundation, the British Academy and the British Council (Tehran), and so it was that on the 3rd and 4th of November 2001, thirtynine people met together in Durham to spend two enjoyable days presenting and listening to papers and discussing their research.

Whilst Sasanian studies may still be a relatively minor part of Near Eastern studies, it is happily far from the case that the subject is completely moribund. Indeed, after a lengthy lull in the aftermath of the Islamic Revolution, the 1992 Parthian and Sasanian Themes in Iranian Art conference at the British Museum marked something of a revival in activity. This was the first largescale conference in Britain for twenty years and the first international conference of its kind since the Islamic Revolution in 1979 (Curtis et al.1998: xi; Simpson 1992: 157). Twenty years earlier the 1972 Iranian Art and Archaeology conference in Oxford was the last in a series of six biennial meetings, many of which included papers on Sasanian topics (Moorey 1972). The 1972 conference marked the end of an era in ancient Iranian studies in the West. There was little activity during the following two decades; the silence being broken only by the seminal 1978 Royal Hunter exhibition in New York (Harper 1978). By contrast, the fifteen years since 1992 have seen an impressive number of conferences, edited volumes, exhibitions and lecture series. These have, along with a constant trickle of high-quality research papers and monographs, built up a considerable and increasing academic momentum in Sasanian studies amongst a small but robust community of scholars, many of whom were present in Durham and have contributed papers to the present volume. Table 1 lists those events that have taken place since 1978 and are known to the present editors, although some small events may have taken place, especially outside the U.K., that are not listed here. Conferences and exhibitions related solely to the Achaemenids and the Parthians have not been included and neither have exhibitions and publications with a wider chronological span that also cover the Sasanian period, for example the major exhibition of Iranian art 7000 Jahre persische Kunst that took place in Vienna, Bonn and Basel between 2000 and 2003.

The editors are painfully aware that, despite their best intentions, it has taken more than six years since the conference was held for these papers to reach publication. The task of collecting and editing such papers is always time consuming and subject to delay, especially in the midst of the busy schedules of authors and editors, but this is certainly far longer than would have been wished. There are numerous reasons for the delay, including problems of translation, transliteration, and the use of translated works in bibliographies. The editors regret the delay, and they can only be comforted by the fact that the 1992 conference, Parthian and Sasanian Themes in Iranian Art, that was edited by such esteemed and respected scholars as Michael Rogers, Robert Hillenbrand and Vesta Sharkhosh Curtis, took a similar amount of time to come to press (Curtis et al. 1998). Along with the Achaemenid and Parthian periods, research on the Sasanians tends to be the Cinderella of Near Eastern studies, being overshadowed by two much bigger areas of historical research. On one side the majority of the large group of scholars who work on

ii

Date 1978 winter 1992

23rd-25th March

1992

28th March

1993

12th February 25th April

1997

13th-22nd May

1997

14th July

1997 1st November 1998 15th June

2001

3rd-4th November

2003

16th July

2004

23rd-25th June

2005/6 29th June 8th January

2006

10th June

2006

15th September - 30th December

2006

30th September

2007

27th January

2007

14th February to 20th May

2007 2008

Title and venue Exhibition The Royal Hunter. Asia House Gallery, New York. Conference Parthian and Sasanian Themes in Iranian Art. British Museum/SOAS. Conference The Archaeology of the Silk Road: Sasanians and Sogdians in Central Asia and Iran. Ashmolean Museum. Exhibition Splendeur des Sassanides. L'empire perse entre Rome et la Chine [224-642]. Musées Royaux d'Art et d'Histoire, Brussels. Ehsan Yarshater Lecture Series In Search of a Cultural Identity: Monuments and Artifacts of the Sasanian Near East, 3rd to 7th Century AD. SOAS. Fourth seminar in memory of V.G. Lukonin Mesopotamia and Iran in the Parthian and Sasanian periods : rejection and revival c. 238 BC - AD 642. British Museum. Workshop From Persepolis to the Punjab British Museum. Conference Sasanian agriculture and industry: new directions of research. British Museum. Conference Recent advances in Sasanian archaeology and history. Durham University.

Reference Harper 1978.

Specialist workshop Parthian, Sasanian and Early Islamic Pottery: dating, definition and distribution. British Museum. Conference Central Asia after Alexander and before Islam. British Academy. Exhibition Iran before Islam: religion and propaganda AD 224-651. British Museum, Dept Coins and Medals. Symposium The Idea of Iran: the Early Sasanian Period. SOAS/British Museum. Exhibition Les Perses sassanides: Fastes d'un empire oublié (224-642). Musée Cernuschi, Paris. Colloquium L'art des Perses sassanides. Musée du Louvre, Paris. Symposium The Idea of Iran: the Late Sasanian Period. SOAS/British Museum. Exhibition Glass, Gilding, and Grand Design: Art of Sasanian Iran (224-642). Asia Society, New York. Edited volume of solicited papers From Persepolis to the Punjab. Exploring ancient Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan. Edited volume of solicited papers New Studies in Sasanian Archaeology: Settlement, Environment and Material culture.

http://the.british.museum/ane/ pottery_workshop.pdf

Curtis et al. 1998: xi-xii; Simpson 1992: 157-8. Simpson 1992: 160. Vanden Berghe & Overlaet 1993. Harper 2006.

Curtis 2000.

Some papers published in Errington & Curtis 2007. Selected papers to appear in Simpson forthcoming. Present volume.

Cribb & Herrmann 2007. No publication planned. Curtis & Stewart forthcoming. Demange 2006. No publication planned. Curtis & Stewart forthcoming. Demange 2007. Errington & Curtis 2007. Simpson forthcoming.

Table 1: Some of the key conferences, workshops, exhibitions, lecture series and edited volumes on the Sasanians that have taken place since 1978.1

iii

seven key families of the Sasanian court than it is possible to glean from historical sources or inscriptions alone. Karimian also uses a variety of sources, in this case to look at the hierarchical nature of Sasanian society more generally. An incidental archaeological illustration of this hierarchy is provided by Huff in his description of the two approaches to the central chahÁr-tÁq at the À¿ar Gushnasp temple.

As the intention of the conference was to present a snapshot of the nature of current research in Sasanian studies, the organisers did not attempt to impose any particular theme on the speakers and contributors to this volume. Instead participants were simply offered the chance to talk and write about their present research. Of the 23 papers that were presented at the conference, 14 are published in the present volume: five are principally archaeological, five historical and four art-historical and it is under these general headings that they have been ordered here for the sake of simplicity - although there is considerable thematic overlap between many of the contributions.

Three papers deal with the history of the late Sasanian and early Islamic period. Piacentini evaluates the historiographical problems relating to the late Sasanian and early Islamic periods in Sind, and discusses the issues related to using the FatÎnÁmah-i Sind as an historical source for this region. Howard-Johnston looks at the balance of power between the Sasanians and Byzantines through late antiquity, demonstrating how it was finally undermined by the Persian conquest of Byzantine Egypt and the Levant during the early seventh century. Relations between Iran and Byzantium are a topic that is also touched on by McDonough in the specific context of Yazdgard I’s policy towards the Christian Church in the Sasanian Empire.

For example a number of papers deal with aspects of religion and cult in the Sasanian world. McDonough examines the position and role of the Christians under Yazdgard I, basing his analysis largely on the evidence provided by the early ninth-century Synodicon Orientale, whilst there are detailed discussions of the layout and function of two important fire temples, one at Bandiyān near Dargaz (Rahbar) and the other the temple of À¿ar Gushnasp at Takht-i SulaimÁn (Huff) in which new information and new interpretations are presented. The complex syncretism of the period is examined through an analysis of the meaning of Dionysiac iconography by Callieri, in the context of fire temple complexes, and Moussavi Kouhpar & Taylor on Sasanian silver plates.

In a reflection of the trends in archaeological field work over the past 25 years, three papers move away from the Mesopotamian and Iranian heartlands to look at the fringes of the Sasanian world: aspects of the Sasanian period in Eastern Arabia are dealt with by Curtis & Andersen and Kennet’s paper, whilst Simpson looks at the site of Merv in Turkmenistan.

The development of a distinctively Sasanian iconography, involving a shift from Hellenistic/Roman-inspired techniques and symbolism to a more purely Iranian iconography and meaning, is a theme which underlies the papers of Curtis, Moussavi Kouhpar & Taylor, von Gall and to some degree Callieri. Each paper deals with this theme through a different perspective and medium; Curtis approaches the subject through a reappraisal of imperial imagery and propaganda on early Sasanian coins, whilst von Gall looks at the changing style of representations of the Sasanian ruler on rock reliefs. The same theme is treated via the development of Dionysiac symbolism by Moussavi Kouhpar & Taylor.

Other themes and topics unite the contributions in different ways; imperial image and propaganda (Curtis, von Gall, Huff), coins (Curtis, Kennet) and architecture (Huff, Rahbar, Simpson, Callieri) are some that have not been mentioned above. Taken together these 14 papers provide a useful overview of the research that is currently being undertaken and illustrate some of the key themes and approaches that are now being developed by scholars working on the Sasanian period.

The recent revival of archaeological field work on Sasanian sites is reflected in reports from ongoing excavations in Iran and elsewhere. As already noted, Huff and Rahbar discuss their own excavations at fire temples in Iran whilst Curtis & Andersen present an interesting reappraisal of material from previously unrecognised Sasanian levels at the Bronze Age site of BÁrbÁr in Bahrain, excavated some years ago by a Danish mission. Simpson reports on his own excavations at Merv providing a unique and detailed account of life in a major Sasanian city providing insights into Sasanian social structure, a subject that is otherwise barely mentioned by historical sources and about which we still have very little knowledge.

Summaries of Papers (in alphabetical order by author) Callieri Callieri takes a new look at the rare cases of Zoroastrian fire temple complexes with figural decoration. He points out that the theme of at least two of these, BÐshÁpÙr and HÁjÐÁbÁd, is clearly Dionysian and asks how iconography of a Dionysian nature should be understood in a Zoroastrian religious context. He points out that the fire temple was a cultural and administrative centre where ceremonies and feasts were held, the celebration of seasonal feasts being one of the major duties of the Zoroastrian faithful. Callieri draws on a number of textural and other sources to suggest that the celebration of feasts, which included music and drinking in halls having mosaics with Dionysian motifs, was present in the Zoroastrian tradition in a variety of situations, such as possibly funerary or royal banquets, but that these are not

Aspects of Sasanian society and social structure are also examined by Gyselen and Karimian. Gyselen uses evidence from seals to provide a clearer and chronologically broader understanding of the famous iv

seems more likely to be a title indicating military rank rather than a family name. Whereas the names mentioned on inscriptions refer predominantly to the third century, sigillography provides evidence of a later period, probably of the sixth century, thus allowing us to establish the existence and continuity of these families into the later phase of the Sasanian Empire. Gyselen’s research thereby makes an important contribution to the debate about the existence of a longstanding aristocratic class or court elite group.

represented in religious texts - this possibly being an example of the suppression of certain activities by the orthodox Zoroastrian clergy. Curtis Coins are one of the main sources for the understanding of the complex relationship between kingship and religion in the Sasanian period. In this paper Curtis examines the nature and development of imperial propaganda on coins of the early Sasanian rulers. Both Parthian and Sasanian kingship was divinely bestowed and this fact was fundamental to the legitimisation of the position of the ruler. The early Sasanian rulers continued the Parthian tradition of divine legitimization but instead of the Hellenistic-inspired iconography of the Parthian period, the Sasanian kings turned to symbols of Zoroastrian divinities and a Zoroastrian-influenced iconography. Curtis looks at the way in which divine kingship was represented by the Sasanian rulers and given the limited circulation of gold and silver coinage and the illegitibility of bronze coinage - asks who this propaganda was really intended for. She points out that ArdashÐr set an iconographic model for Sasanian coinage - the royal portrait on the obverse and the fire altar on the reverse - in a replica of the platform throne of Darius at Persepolis and concludes that the early Sasanian kings used religious symbolism to present themselves as the true inheritors of divine glory in order to justify their rule to the Parthian aristocracy, their external enemies and amongst themselves.

Howard-Johnston For much of antiquity the Sasanian and Roman/Byzantine empires co-existed in a bipolar balance of power with more or less stable territories, zones of influence and frontiers. Howard-Johnston provides a detailed analysis of the breakdown of this system, starting with the series of five wars that took place throughout the sixth and into the early seventh century and culminating in the initially successful 602 AD campaign of Khusrau II Parviz into Byzantine territory, followed by his disastrous defeat and overthrow at the hands of the Byzantine emperor Heraclius in 628 AD. This event heralded the final destruction of the antique world order and ultimately opened the way for the Islamic conquests. In narrating these events Howard-Johnston seeks to explain them, partly through the structural flaws in the Sasanian Empire and its dependencies which lead to a high degree of political volatility, but also through the - sometimes irrational - ideas, intentions and decisions of the governing elites.

Curtis & Andersen The lack of Sasanian period sites in Eastern Arabia is a notable problem given the relative wealth of historical evidence relating to this region. In this paper Curtis and Andersen report on a newly discovered Sasanian-period presence at the well known Bronze Age temple site of BÁrbÁr in Bahrain that was excavated by a Danish team some years ago. Sasanian-period activity at the site is suggested by pottery, sculpture fragments and a small inscription. Three intriguing fragments of a statue, probably datable to the third or fourth century AD that may have represented a worshipping male figure allow Curtis and Andersen to speculate that this site may have been one of some special importance, possibly continuing the sacred role that the site seems to have had since at least the Bronze Age.

Huff Research into the seat of the À¿ar Gushnasp fire temple at the large complex of Takht-i SulaimÁn has been going on for nearly five decades. Huff has been much involved in the archaeological excavations and further investigations over this lengthy period. In a detailed reassessment of the archaeological plan and construction, which is supported by written sources, he provides a clear description and analysis of the complex layout and the function of the various buildings, the fire temple included. Huff clearly refutes the idea that the holy fire was kept in an open chahÁr-tÁq structure. Instead he argues that the À¿ar Gushnasp fire was positioned in a walled, domed building which the general public and the royal court approached through separate entrances coming from opposite directions. In addition, he describes the existence of a second fire altar in the complex, smaller and inferior in rank to the À¿ar Gushnasp fire, that may have been reserved for royalty and nobility and which might have functioned as the personal fire of the Sasanian ruler kindled at his coronation, as is described in some historical sources.

Gyselen Gyselen deals in her paper with the importance of seals and their impressions on bullae as supplementary source material for the history of the seven great families of the Sasanian court. Compared with inscriptions and literary sources, seals provide a less biased source on this subject, although they have their own limitations. The names and titles as they appear on seals confirm the reliability of information from literary sources and assist in the identification or clarification of certain members of the court aristocracy mentioned in inscriptions. In some cases they also help to clarify confusion between personal names, names of families, and titles that are often found in the sources; for example the so-called Aspāhbeds that

Karimian Looking at a variety of sources, Karimian attempts to reconstruct the structure of Sasanian society, using religious sources such as the Avesta, inscriptions of rulers such as ShÁpÙr I and BahrÁm I, what he calls reports and letters from the Sasanian period that have been preserved in the early Islamic historical sources, and the early v

the way in which a Hellenistic motif, the ‘Triumph of Dionysos’ was progressively transformed into a distinctively Iranian theme. The authors’ contention is that, because of the Roman and Byzantine background of the majority of scholars, where attempts to identify mythological or devotional themes have been made in much previous work on Sasanian art there has been a lack of appreciation of potentially Iranian components. They argue that the scene on the plates concerned underwent a gradual evolution in composition, style and - crucially meaning. Pointing out that when mythical characters from one area or culture appear in the art of another it does not necessarily mean that the mythical functions remain the same. Instead they argue for a ‘semantic slippage’ in the iconography of the plates that ultimately envisaged Anāhitā in the form of Dionysos and Keresaspa in the role of Herakles.

Islamic sources themselves. Karimian concludes that there is general agreement in the sources on the hierarchical structure of Sasanian society and proposes a five-fold classification into aristocrats, clergy, military men, scribes/bureaucrats and the public/wealth producers. Kennet In recent years archaeological work outside the Iranian and Mesopotamian heartland has begun to throw light on the broader context of the Sasanian Empire. Merv is one example of this (Simpson infra), whilst Kennet takes a look at Eastern Arabia where there is considerable historical evidence of Sasanian involvement. In this paper he looks specifically at the distribution of the sparse coin finds and is able to identify a number of patterns, both geographical and chronological, that are indicative of notable differences in the Sasanian relationship with the two areas known respectively as BaÎrayn and ÝUmÁn. The coin finds challenge both the early Islamic historical accounts of the Sasanian relationship with Eastern Arabia, and also the notion that the Sasanian period was one of economic growth and increasing trade in the western Indian Ocean. The coin finds from Eastern Arabia suggest a very different picture. Only one small hoard and three sporadic finds of Sasanian coins are known from the whole of Eastern Arabia after the end of the fourth century suggesting very limited monetised economic activity from that time until some time after the Islamisation of the region.

Piacentini The Islamic conquest of the eastern provinces of the Sasanian Empire has often disappeared into the fog of history. This is either due to the non-existence of sources or, in the case of works of the genre known as the Kutub al-futÙÎ or ‘books of the conquests’, because these works are mainly written from the perspective of the victorious power and deliberately omit many important events. Too many gaps remain relating to the social, economic and cultural situation in this period of transition from Sasanian to Arab rule. Piacentini argues that there are two ways in which we can overcome this. The first is through a careful reading of the Arab historians that will often allow us to interpret what she calls the ‘omissions and silences’ as losses or defeats of the new masters in the region. The second is the FatÎnÁmah-i Sind, a source translated into Persian from an unknown Arabic manuscript during the 13th century. She points out that much in the FatÎnÁmah is in close agreement with the main Islamic tradition, and those events and names that are not mentioned in the Islamic sources should therefore be taken seriously. She argues that the FatÎnÁmah is the most detailed story of the role of the Arabs in Sind and western Panjab and is an important additional source for the conquests of this region, also providing insights into the pre-conquest situation.

McDonough The history of the Christians in the Sasanian Empire had its periods of suppression and persecution interspersed with periods of toleration and integration. McDonough deals with the position and role of the Christian hierarchy under Yazdgard I, during whose reign a new, mutually beneficial relationship evolved between bishops and king. Looking specifically at the extension of royal patronage to three successive Catholicoi based largely on the evidence provided by the early ninth-century Synodicon Orientale, McDonough shows how the ruler sought the bishops’ assistance in maintaining the external and internal security of the state. Of particular interest is the use of bishops in relations with the Roman Empire, which were an important factor in this policy, especially the countering of Roman propaganda and proprietary claims over all Christians. But the maintenance of control over the institution of the Church and its rulers within the empire is also likely to have been a key factor. McDonough argues that Yazdgard depended on the bishops to administer their specific corner of the state, and to guarantee its loyalty. The advantage to the Church elite, on the other hand, was the chance to organise the Church under royal protection and to enhance and further their personal positions.

Rahbar Rahbar reports on his ongoing excavations at Bandiyān near Dargaz. In an area measuring about 875 m2 he has uncovered the well-preserved remains of a fire temple, some notes on which have already been published elsewhere (Rahbar 1998; 1999; 2004). Rahbar gives a very detailed and well-illustrated archaeological description of the eight rooms of the complex, which include a columned hall with stucco decoration and Pahlavi inscriptions, ustÙdāns decorated with mythological scenes and a circular room, the like of which has not been found in any other Sasanian building that is thought to have been used for ritual purification. Interestingly, Rahbar suggests that some of the more unusual features of the complex may be related to local rather than orthodox traditions. He believes this temple complex to have been built by Bahrām V, after his

Moussavi Kouhpar & Taylor This paper deals with the major theme of the transformation of Iranian art from Hellenistic until late Sasanian times. Through the examination of four wellknown silver plates that span the late Parthian to the late Sasanian period, Moussavi Kouhpar and Taylor outline vi

victory over the Hephthalites in the middle of the fifth century, and to have been destroyed shortly afterwards in the wake of Pÿr½z’s defeat by the Hephthalite ruler KhÙshnavāz.

Acknowledgements The principal sponsor of the conference was the Iran Heritage Foundation to whom particular thanks are due, especially to its Executive Director Mr. Farhad Hakimzadeh. Grants were also received from The British Academy and The British Council in Tehran. The organisers would like to record their grateful thanks to all three organisations.

Simpson Urbanisation, the urban environment and the lives of ordinary people during the Sasanian period is something about which very little is known, certainly in comparison to the Roman world. Through the results of his own, still largely unpublished, excavations at Merv in Turkmenistan, Simpson provides a detailed exploration of the complexities of the Sasanian urban environment. The excavations at Merv provide the first detailed and quantifiable archaeological evidence for a wide range of activities from a major Sasanian urban centre. The Merv assemblage is a benchmark for Sasanian ceramics and contains a full environmental record that illustrates the depth and diversity of the Sasanian agricultural economy. One example is the presence of carbonised cotton, perhaps a Sasanian precursor to the ninth century AD industry of this region. Simpson’s description sheds light on basic domestic arrangements, building material, storerooms, waste disposal - not highly cultured, but fundamental aspects of life. The picture of the city that emerges is one of courtyard houses leading off refusefilled alleyways occupied by dogs - there appears to have been no integrated drainage system - some of which may have been closed off to restrict access to some parts of the city, which was probably garrisoned by troops. This paper provides an excellent archaeological analysis that draws on historical texts and ethnographic parallels offering an unparalleled glimpse into Sasanian daily life.

Thanks are also due to Seth Priestman, Tom Hullit, Charlotte Whiting and Graham Rutter who kindly helped with the organisation and running of the conference and to the Institute for Middle East and Islamic Studies at Durham, especially Dr Ali Ansari and Prof. Anoush Ehteshami, for kindly providing facilities and to the Department of Archaeology at Durham for support and assistance. This volume would never had appeared had it not been for the help and support of a number of individuals: Vesta Sarkhosh Curtis is owed special thanks for her help with the translation of Mehdi Rahbar’s paper and with other matters during preparation for the conference and the editing of papers. St John Simpson has also been a great source of help and advice. Louisa Gidney kindly helped with the first stage of editing, and Rich Hartis was responsible for the formatting of this volume Transliteration and dates Questions of terminology and transliteration are often a thorny problem in volumes such as the present one. In general the editors have allowed the contributors to use their own preferred terminologies. Transliteration of Farsi and Arabic words follows the conventions used in the Cambridge History of Iran, although in certain cases exceptions have been made, most notably place names for which technically incorrect transliterations have become widely accepted. In the transliteration of Syriac, Old Persian and Middle Persian etc, individual authors were allowed to use their own preferred systems.

von Gall Rock reliefs are undoubtedly one of the most important factors in the public display of the power and image of the Sasanian rulers. Von Gall takes a new look at their compositional structures. Basing his analysis partly on previous studies of his own, he divides them into two categories; one with a more conventional character such as equestrian combat scenes, investiture scenes and scenes showing the king surrounded by courtiers and a second category with features particular to individual rulers. As far as the equestrian combat scenes are concerned, von Gall proposes a re-dating of certain of them, based upon details in the compositions, and sets out an evolutionary schema from the ‘persecution scheme’ of the third and early fourth century to the ‘confrontational’ scheme of the later fourth century. When discussing the ‘individual’ scenes he similarly proposes a schema of development, this time from the Roman-inspired triumph scenes of ShÁpÙr I to those of BahrÁm II that demonstrate new themes of representation including a frontal style and a revival of Achaemenid formulas. Von Gall argues that this schema might provide greater certainty in doubtful cases of attribution than is possible by relying solely on antiquarian details.

Most dates are AD but works published in Iran are cited with solar dates without the Gregorian equivalents, which can be easily established by adding either 621 or 622 years. Islamic lunar dates have been given in the format AD/Sh. In the case of papers written in Iran, the editors decided to allow the citation of references from Farsi translations of the originals. Although this makes the checking of references difficult for scholars outside Iran, any other solution was impractical given the difficulty of obtaining the original works in Iran. Derek Kennet & Paul Luft Department of Archaeology & IMEIS Durham University South Road Durham DH1 3LE UK vii

Errington, E., Curtis, V.S. (eds). 2007. From Persepolis to the Punjab. Exploring ancient Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan. London. Harper, P. 1978. The Royal Hunter: Art of the Sasanian Empire. New York Harper, P.O. 2006. In search of a cultural identity : monuments and artifacts of the Sasanian Near East, 3rd to 7th century A.D. Biennial Ehsan Yarshater lecture series No. 2. New York. Moorey, P. R. S. (ed.). 1972. Excavations in Iran: the British contribution. Oxford. Rahbar, M. 1998. Découverte d’un monument d’époque sassanide à Bandian, Dargaz (Nord Khorasan). Fouilles 1994 et 1995. Studia Iranica 27/2: 213250. Rahbar, M. 1999. Decouverte de panneaux de stucs sassanides. Dossiers d'archeologie du Musee National d'Histoire et d'Art 243: 62-65. Rahbar, M. 2004. Le monument Sassanide de Bandian, Dargaz: un temple de feu d’après les dernièrs découvertes, 1996-98. Studia Iranica 33/1: 7-30. Simpson, StJ. 1992. Conference News. Iran 30: 157-160. Simpson, StJ. Forthcoming. New Studies in Sasanian Archaeology: Settlement, Environment and Material culture. Acta Iranica series. Louvain. Vanden Berghe, L., Overlaet, B. (eds). 1993. Splendeur des Sassanides. L'empire perse entre Rome et la Chine [224-642]. Brussels.

Notes 1 Thanks to StJohn Simpson and Vesta Curtis who helped with the compilation of this table.

References Cribb, J., Herrmann, G. (eds). 2007. After Alexander. Central Asia before Islam. Proceedings of the British Academy: 133. Oxford. Curtis, J. (ed.). 2000. Mesopotamia and Iran in the Parthian and Sasanian periods: Rejection and Revival c. 238 BC - AD 642. Proceedings of a seminar in memory of Vladimir G. Lukonin. London. Curtis, V.S., Hillenbrand, R., Rogers, J.M. 1998. The Art and Archaeology of Ancient Persia: New Light on the Parthian and Sasanian Empires. London. Curtis, V.S., Stewart, S. (eds). Forthcoming. The Sasanian Epoch. London. Demange, F. (ed.). 2006. Les Perses sassanides: Fastes d'un empire oublié (224-642): Catalogue d'exposition a la Musée Cernuschi, Paris, 15 septembre - 30 décembre 2006. Paris. Demange, F. (ed.). 2007. Glass, Gilding, and Grand Design: Art of Sasanian Iran (224-642). New York.

viii

Conference Programme and participants Saturday 3rd and Sunday 4th of November, 2001 Durham University Session 1: Current Excavations (Chair: Dr. G. Herrmann, UCL) Dr. StJohn Simpson (British Museum) Excavations at Merv in Turkmenistan. Dr. Massoud Azarnoush (Iranian Cultural Heritage Organisation) Excavations at Hajiabad. Mr. Mehdi Rahbar (Iranian Cultural Heritage Organisation) Excavations at Bandiyan at Darr Gaz in N.E. Iran. Dr. Derek Kennet (University of Durham) Sasanian occupation in historic ‘Uman - survey and excavation in Ras al-Khaimah (UAE). Session 2: Topographic Studies (Chair: Dr. G. Philip, Durham) Prof. Robert McC. Adams (University of California, San Diego) Central Strategies of Irrigation and Resettlement in the Late Sasanian Province of Kaskar: New Evidence from Satellite Imagery. Prof. Bruno Genito (Istituto Universitario Orientale, Naples) Sasanian settlements beyond the frontiers of the Empire: a territorial approach in Murghab Delta and in Buchara Oasis. Prof. Hugh Kennedy (University of St. Andrews) A Research Proposal for a Multidisciplinary Project on Fars in the Sasanian and E. Islamic period. Dr. Alastair Northedge (Sorbonne (Paris I)) The Sasanians and the Nahrawan canal. Session 3: History and Historiography (Chair: Dr. C. Robinson, Oxford) Dr. James Howard-Johnston (Oxford) Khusro II's Plans for the Post-War World. Prof. Valaria Piacentini (Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milan) History and historiography: the court genre in Arabic and the Fathnamah-I-Sind. Dr. Z. Rubin (University of Tel Aviv) Epigraphy and the historiography of the Sasanian empire . Session 4: Architecture (Chair: Dr. P. Luft, Durham) Prof . Robert Hillenbrand (University of Edinburgh) The evolution of the squinch from Sasanian to Islamic times. Dr. Robin Coningham & Hassan Karimian (Bradford University) The nature of social space in Sasanian and Islamic Bam. Prof. Huff (German Archaeological Institute, Orientabteilung) The functional layout of the Fire Sanctuary at Takht-i Sulaiman. Mrs. Zarintaj Sheibani (Iranian Cultural Heritage Organisation) Some points regarding Sasanid architecture based on the latest architectural finds from Tappeh Mil. Session 5: Art History and Material Culture (Chair: Prof. R. Hillenbrand, Edinburgh) Dr. Vesta Sarkhosh Curtis (British Museum) Propaganda on Sasanian Coins. Dr. R. Gyslen (Directeur de Recherche, CNRS) The Great Families in the Sasanian empire: some sigillographic evidence. Dr. H. von Gall (German Archaeological Institute, Berlin) New perspectives on Sasanian rock reliefs. Dr. Gabrielle Puschnigg (University College London) Material re-use in Sasanian Merv. Prof. P. Callieri (University of Bologna) “Dionysiac" iconographic themes in the context of Sasanian religious architecture. Mehdi Moussavi Kouhpar & Dr. Tim Taylor (Bradford University) Towards a new interpretation of so-called "triumph of Dionysos" iconography.

ix

Session 6: Christianity under the Sasanians (Chair: Dr. J. Howard-Johnston, Oxford) Dr. Cynthia Villagomez (Wake Forest University) Christian monasteries as economic foundations in the Sasanian world. Scott McDonough (University of California, Los Angeles) Bishops or Bureaucrats? Christian Clergy and the State in the Middle Sasanian Period. Other Participants In addition to the speakers and session chairs listed above, the conference was attended by the following people: Dr Maria Brosius (Newcastle), Prof. Anoush Ehteshami (Durham), Dr. Murray Lee Eiland (Frankfurt Am Main), Marion-Isabell Hoffmann (Munich), Dr Peter Morgan (Oxford), Shahrokh Razmjou (Tehran), Mariam Rosser-Owen (Oxford), Shapour Suren-Pahlav (London), Dr Emma Thompson (Sydney) and Dr Stephen Vernoit (Durham).

x

The Functional Layout of the Fire Sanctuary at Takht-i SulaimÁn Dietrich Huff When excavations began in 1959 at the Sasanian fire sanctuary on Takht-i SulaimÁn, the temple of À¿ar Gushnasp (Fire of the Stallion), the general view of the architectural type of Iranian fire temples was dominated by the fascinating but hypothetical theory of K. Erdmann (Erdmann 1941), based mainly on the meritorious but superficial observations of A. Godard and M. Siroux (Godard 1938). Rejecting earlier clear-sighted definitions by E. Herzfeld and others (Oelmann 1921; Herzfeld 1926: 256; 1935: 88-93; 1941: 301-4; Monneret de Villard 1936; Reuther 1938: 551-5), Erdmann tried to reconstruct a complicated development of Zoroastrian fire cult and temples. This started from Herodotus’ remarks on Achaemenian open air cult practices and ended up with the assumption that in Sasanian times the main element of a fire temple was an open chahÁr-tÁq, a canopy-like structure with a cupola, open to the outside by four wide arches. Here, he presumed, the sacred ceremonies took place, with the fire visible to the believers outside. Only in between the ceremonies was the fire brought to, and kept in, a small, closed room nearby, the Átash-gÁh.

105). The climatic conditions of the mountainous site at more than 2000 m altitude might have been taken as an argument for an exception from the presumed normal chahÁr-tÁq type. It was indeed correct to take Takht-i SulaimÁn as an exception, not because of its lack of an open chahÁr-tÁq but for its special relationship to the royal Sasanian court. The well attested tradition that it was the later Sasanian kings who made À¿ar Gushnasp prominent2 could be confirmed by excavations which showed that an older mud brick sanctuary was transformed into a stone and brick compound only after the later years of KavÁd I.3 Frequent pilgrimages by the late Sasanian kings to À¿ar Gushnasp are mentioned in the literature. Khusrau II withdrew here from the Byzantine army of Heraclius in 626 AD and he took the fire with him when he continued his escape (Minorsky 1964: 92; Sebeos 1999: I 81, II 214-5). With regard to certain repairs in the temples,4 the fire seems to have been re-installed and burnt here into early Islamic times. Examples of the normal type of major Sasanian fire temples are the great ruins of KÙh-i KhvÁjah in Sistan and the ChahÁr QapÙ at QaÒr-i ShÐrÐn (Schippmann 1971: 57-70 and 282-91). Although they are not completely excavated, their layout clearly shows the cella for the sacred fire at the end of a main axis of approach leading through gates and courtyards with surrounding arcades, aivÁns and rooms. The cella has enclosing corridors and a variety of rooms added.

The great number of canopy-like ruins in Iran made it tempting to believe in this theory (Vanden Berghe 1961; 1965; 1977; 1984; Duchesne-Guillemin 1961; 1962; Schippmann 1971; Yamamoto 1979; 1981). However, new research has shown that all such ruins, which justifiably might have been Zoroastrian temples, were in fact only the preserved core of closed buildings, with surrounding corridors, rooms or aivÁns (Huff 1975, 1982: 200-10, 1987a: 330-1, 1990: 637, 1993: 53-6; Boucharlat 1985: 467-71; Boyce 1975: 464, 1989: 9). Moreover, comparison with fire temples still in use in Zoroastrian communities shows that open chahÁr-tÁqs for a sacred fire do not exist in any of these sanctuaries (Gropp 1969; 1971). Finally, the Zoroastrian liturgical prescriptions of recent, as well as of ancient, times strongly forbid any exposure of a sacred fire to the outside world, not only to any kind of impurity but also to the rays of the sun or the moon.1 The essential pattern of a fire temple, as had been known and as had been already suggested a hundred years ago, is a closed room, frequently a closed chahÁrtÁq, where the consecrated fire is kept, fed and venerated by priests. Depending on its importance and public esteem, different rooms for congregation and adoration, for other religious ceremonies, administration and many kinds of social life can be arranged around this nucleus (Naumann & Huff 1975: 160-2; Huff 1982: 206-12).

Contrary to this clearly understandable arrangement, the plan of the À¿ar Gushnasp temple is confusing at first glance. The place has not one but two, approximately opposite, identical entrance gates in the oval defence wall, which encloses the sanctuary and a spring-fed lake on top of a hill. There is a main axis leading from the north gate through two inner gates and three courtyards to a large closed chahÁr-tÁq building, which clearly dominates the complete architectural layout, and which can scarcely have been anything else than the house of the À¿ar Gushnasp fire (Fig. 1 A). However, the axis does not end here, but continues southwards through the domed centre of the chahÁr-tÁq up to the middle of the lake. The continuous axis seems to devalue the chahÁrtÁq building in a manner inconsistent with the function of this obviously most important building of the site, and degrades it to a mere thoroughfare. A solution to this contradictory evidence can be found by analyzing the mass of ruins between the north gate and the lake. Three different building complexes were identified here during excavation. Two of them, within a square inner circumvallation, were temples (1 and 2), the third, at the southwest corner of the square, was a palace (Huff 2000: 107). All three complexes share the area between temples and lake as a common courtyard, the particular nature of which, however, is clearly determined

Kurt Erdmann, who had advocated fervently the open chahÁr-tÁq theory, although clearly pointing out its hypothetical character, was among those who chose Takht-i SulaimÁn as an excavation site. This was a courageous decision because earlier surveys had already indicated that there was little likelihood of an open chahÁr-tÁq temple among these ruins (Pope 1937: 921

DIETRICH HUFF the northern mud brick hostels. Finally, the royal forecourt south of the temple had dimensions and qualities incomparable with the rather narrow and modest northern courtyard, the southern front with arcades being five times wider than the northern one.

by the palace. This was a royal temple-courtyard, an area certainly not open to the public and requiring an access of its own into the main temple building (Fig. 1 & 2). From this point of view, the basic idea of the architectural layout of the main temple becomes clear: The architect had designed a temple with two facades, one towards the north, open to the public, the ordinary pilgrims, and another towards the south, reserved for the king and his entourage. The main temple can also be described as a combination of two temples of the normal type, joined together by a common cella with the fire. From this perspective, the identification of the central chahÁr-tÁq as the main fire sanctuary appears fully justified. There can be no doubt that this was the seat of À¿ar Gushnasp, the common destination of the ordinary and royal pilgrims, approaching from opposite directions.

The southern part of the hilltop is covered by thick layers of limestone, produced by the lime-rich spring water of the lake (Damm 1968: 11; E. Naumann in Osten & Naumann 1961: 15-38), preventing normal excavation. Few substantial Sasanian ruins could be traced here by soundings; however, south of the palace a wall with a bastion was found, identical and fully in line with the square, inner circumvallation north of the palace. From this we can conclude that another inner circumvallation, probably of the same size as the northern one, enclosed a vast courtyard with the lake as a natural Îauª, the traditional Iranian water basin in the centre (Fig. 1 & 2).

The differences in social rank between the two areas of approach are demonstrated by every topographical and architectural detail of the sanctuary. Ordinary pilgrims had to walk up the steep slope to the north gate; the mounting access continued through a first inner gate and two forecourts, up to the second inner gate (Osten & Naumann 1961: 44 ff.; Naumann & Huff 1975: 110 ff.). In a room (Fig. 1 Z) beside that gate, numbers of clay bullae were excavated which formerly sealed pieces of writing on leather or parchment (Göbl 1976; Huff 1987b). This must have been an office for acts of civil administration, like signing contracts or legalizing documents. Its location at a gate to an official area is typical for an office like that in oriental civilizations (Huff 2006: 336-39). Nearby were also traces of simple mud brick structures and toilets (Fig. 1 NA-G); some stray amulets identify the area as a resting place with hostels for ordinary pilgrims.

Consequently, it is presumed that there was another inner gate in the southern section of this supposed inner circumvallation, which could have served as the main access to the royal area. It might have corresponded with the non-axial southern gate in the oval outer defence wall. Whereas the northern outer gate was, without doubt, the public gate, the southern one seems to have been the royal gate. Its location may have been chosen for topographic reasons. It is situated on the highest ground of a saddle, which connects the temple hill with the next range of mountains; this means it is the easiest point from whence to get into the place. Whereas the normal pilgrims had to climb up the steep and high northern slope of the hill, the king and his nobles could comfortably ride up alongside the mountain slopes and enter the sanctuary nearly on level ground (Fig. 2).

After passing the second inner gate the pilgrims entered the northern temple court proper (Fig. 1 M), which was surrounded by arcades. Here, and in a rather small aivÁn (Fig. 1 I) and some chambers at the north facade of the temple, was the area of congregation and adoration of the ordinary faithful. As generally presumed, the pilgrims also might have been allowed into the corridor, which surrounds the central cella with the altar. However, irregularities in the badly damaged inner faces of the high but narrow axial door of the temple seem to indicate that there had been some kind of screening or even blocking of the entrance, perhaps leaving open a narrow door or only a window in a niche. There was a small side entrance into the temple through a lateral antechamber.

The palace, which mainly consisted of a huge aivÁn (Fig. 1WI) with lateral smaller halls, rooms and tiny private chambers, had three wide openings in its western front (Naumann & Huff 1975: 124, fig. 12). Protruding from the middle of the 275 m long western sections of the inner circumvallation it has the character of a “ÝÀlÐ Qapu” or “Sublime Porte” combined with a triumphal arch. It is not yet clear whether the openings actually were entrance gates into the palace; but as the monumental wall with its - probably 18 - bastions on both sides of the central cube of the building was obviously designed as a major showfacade, to be viewed from the western perimeter, the wide, arched openings certainly played some part in Sasanian imperial pomp.

This layout of the northern, public part of the sanctuary was repeated in principle by the southern, royal area, however on a greatly enlarged and embellished scale, suitable for a king and his courtiers. The choice of the ideologically privileged southern side of the temple alone must be seen as a royal prerogative. The southern aivÁn (Fig. 1 S) as well as the gate – or niche with window? – between aivÁn and the interior of the temple were considerably larger than their northern counterparts. Only the small side entrance is identical with the opposite northern one. The palace (Fig. 1 WI) takes the place of

Inside the royal courtyard there is another construction, which undoubtedly was connected with royal and state ceremonial, this time however in relation with the À¿ar Gushnasp fire. On the axis of the palace aivÁn and in front of the southern temple aivÁn stands an exceptionally well built podium with a small stair leading up from east, the squared blocks of stone polished better than anywhere else on the site. Its dismembered platform shows traces of a small parapet. This probably was the podium of a throne. It is interesting to note that the podium stands on the axis of the palace and not on the axis of the temple 2

THE FUNCTIONAL LAYOUT OF THE FIRE SANCTUARY AT TAKHT-I SULAIMĀN public part; originally there was no direct connection between the two groups of side rooms.6 A square courtyard (Fig. 1 E) with arcades and surrounding oblong rooms, arranged like windmill arms, may be regarded as another storage complex, although the rather elaborate workmanship of the construction points to a function of some importance. Also open to discussion is a cruciform room, another closed chahÁr-tÁq, at the north-eastern corner of the public courtyard.

but just in line with the western side wall of the temple aivÁn. Therefore it was not the person sitting on the podium who was in front of the fire in the temple but those who were standing in front of the podium. We must now turn to the main temple itself. The central square of the domed chahÁr-tÁq building (Fig. 1 A) was protected by thin walls with narrow gates, closing the four arches even towards the surrounding corridors. This clearly excludes any possibility that the central domed area was a thoroughfare or vestibule. In its centre, under the former cupola, treasure hunters have hacked a large pit through several layers of brick pavement, down to the natural rock, destroying the place where we have to presume the À¿ar Gushnasp altar stood (Fig. 3). Stone bases, brick settings, post holes and a narrow platform surround this central place and rather clearly give witness to the vanished altar (Naumann & Huff 1965: 622-35).

The core of the main temple, as well as the cruciform room with the basin, was completely built of baked bricks. The walls of the immediately adjoining structures had interchanging layers of baked bricks and stone; more distant walls were of dressed stone only. All arches and vaults of the early stone and brick structures were built of bricks. These differences of material are certainly no mere accident. One may argue, that the procedure of baking renders bricks especially pure and worthy for the cella of the sacred fire. However, other structures at Takht-i SulaimÁn, like the walls of the palace which has nothing to do with the sacred fire, are also of baked bricks. Therefore it seems more reasonable to presume that brick was regarded rather as the best and most prestigious building material, followed by dressed stone.

From the eastern corridor a central gate leads into a small, cruciform room (Fig. 1 B), a closed chahÁr-tÁq with a square basin of bricks (Fig. 4). This had an outlet 30 cm wide and 20 cm high and was filled with fine, sand-like material. A number of suggestions were made for its interpretation. Four depressions in its corners were considered to be footings of a table-like altar. Such a construction over an altar shaft is shown on Sasanian coins; it certainly symbolizes a throne for the BahrÁm or King Fire. However, such a construction is not possible here for practical reasons: a fire in the centre of a table altar 3 m square could not be tended by priests standing beside on the ground. There is also no reasonable explanation why a table altar should be placed in a basin. The lack of any convincing evidence of a fire altar in this room also negates the hypothesis that this room was an Átash-gÁh, from whence the sacred fire was carried into the central domed room for ceremonies (Naumann 1977: 49-50). More probable is the possibility that the corner posts of a light canopy were fixed in the depressions. The interpretation of the basin as a water pool was discussed either in connection with purification ceremonies or with the idea that the room was an AnÁhitÁ temple. However, the basin certainly was not built for water - which would have been carried up here in buckets - because the outlet could never be tightly closed. For the moment the most probable explanation seems to be that the ashes of the sacred fire were collected here, a practice which was in use in Zoroastrian temples until recently, where the ashes were also collected and distributed to the faithful for further use.5 It seems possible that the fine, sandy material in the outlet was in fact ashes and that the outlet served to clean out the basin from time to time.

The choice of material becomes relevant as a supplementary factor for the evaluation of the rank of the second fire temple, which came to light rather unexpectedly in the western section of the temple area (Fig. 1 Temple 2). This temple was built of dressed stone for the walls and of bricks for the vaults and columns of the most prominent rooms. Adjoining rooms of obviously secondary importance had brick vaults but walls of stone rubble, whereas clearly inferior rooms were completely built of rubble. It has to be noted, however, that the choice of building material to some degree may also have been connected with the different periods of construction of the second temple. Whereas the main temple was completed during one continuous, great building program, replacing – and destroying – a mud brick predecessor, the construction of the second one began at the same time, but was carried out over a very long period of time, replacing the old mud brick buildings step by step, partly using old mud brick and new-built masonry structures together (Naumann & Huff 1975: 142-68; Naumann 1977: 57-68). That the second temple did not have the same importance as the main temple is clearly proved by its position, not on the main axis but at the periphery of the temple area, its smaller size and its somewhat less precious building material. On the other hand, its position next to the palace and especially the fact that its entrance facade could be reached only from the southern, royal courtyard, indicates beyond doubt, that this temple was exclusively reserved for the use of the king and his court.

The cruciform room had a second southern gate towards the court between temple and lake, which means that it belonged to the royal area. The same goes for a pair of barrel vaulted chambers next to the cruciform room. Wide niches with devices for fixing shelves, and some coins found on the floor, raised the possibility that these were storage, archive or treasure rooms. The north-eastern area of the central temple complex obviously belonged to some degree to the northern,

The complex is separated from the main temple by a long, straight corridor which connects the royal courtyard in the south with the public one in the north. The layout of the second temple differs considerably from that of the 3

DIETRICH HUFF main temple. It has a series of two columnar halls, anterooms and a closed chahÁr-tÁq with the fire altar at the end of the sequence.

depressions, which at some later date were hacked into the three-stepped base at the places where the corners of the altar plate above would be expected. It seems possible that they were cut to provide footings for small supports of some kind of masonry, which were to keep up the particularly unstable and endangered corners of the altar plate, when this began to crack, or were built as a repair after the altar plate had been destroyed.

Of the two columnar halls, the first one, with square pillars of dressed stone, was empty - as far as it could be checked - except for some fire places and pot holes in its gypsum floor. The second hall (Fig. 1 PB & Fig. 5) had low walls or benches between the round brick pillars, dividing the three naves from each other. Along the benches stood conical gypsum stands (Fig. 6), the upper parts destroyed, and the fragments of round stone shafts with cubical endings, several of which had been found displaced in different parts of the ruin (Naumann & Huff 1975: 151, fig. 49-50). Because of their similarity with the representations on the reverse of Sasanian coins, they are interpreted as fire altars (Naumann 1967). However, as we shall see, this is doubtful. There are also podiums, water basins and small water canals in the floor of the side aisles. The central nave is nearly blocked by massive supports of masonry, added later to hold up the obviously cracking vault (Fig. 5).7

Whichever method of construction was chosen, the dimensions of this altar, which undoubtedly was the seat of a consecrated fire, are considerably greater than those of the above mentioned stone shafts, which generally are regarded as fire altars. In no case could any devices, like peg holes, for fixing an altar plate on top of these shafts be observed. The necessity to keep the ember of a sacred fire glowing during the time between the religious offices, required a sufficient quantity of ashes, and an altar table of adequate size should have been fixed on the shaft by a solid bond. Moreover, the fact that several of these small stone shafts were arranged together in the aisle of the second columnar hall clearly contradicts the prescription that two sacred fires should not burn within sight of each other (Boyce 1989: 5). Therefore it is scarcely possible to regard the stone shafts as altars of consecrated fires. They were probably stands for nonritual fires, kindled during other ceremonies, or, most probably, stands for incense burners, as are illustrated on the representation of a fire ceremony on the ustudÁnrelief at Issakvand (IsÎÁqvand) Dih-i Nau near Kirmanshah (Huff 1999: 19-27).

Whereas the first hall seems to have served for congregation and prayer, the second one obviously was a place for different ceremonies, which utilised the number of specific installations. Both halls were separated from each other by a transverse wall, which blocked the axis of the layout. Originally there were only narrow passages in the side aisles, later on gates were broken through in the central nave. Originally there was also no axial passage from the second hall to the anterooms of the cella. Here also, a door, cut through the brick wall which closed the central nave, was a later addition.

The rooms and courtyards beside the series of columnar halls and the cella with the altar obviously did not belong to the sacred area of the second temple proper. The complex of rooms next to the cella and its ante-rooms could be reached by a corridor with bastions alongside the columnar halls. Behind a large vestibule was a transverse corridor, from which the anterooms of the cella and the rest of the complex were accessible. Two rooms in succession, immediately beside the cella, deserve special interest. Their shifted doors block the view from the entrance of the first into the second room (Fig. 1 PF), which lies side by side with the altar room. It has an additional tiny, hidden chamber with small lamp niches, obviously some kind of very private cabinet. The group of rooms has the character of an apartment for well guarded and undisturbed sojourn, as close as possible to the sacred fire. We may presume that it was a special place for meditation near the fire, certainly reserved for the king or whoever was regarded worthy.9

The cella (Fig. 1 PD) behind the anterooms is a cubical, closed chahÁr-tÁq of roughly dressed stone with brick vaults. The three-stepped base of the original fire altar was preserved under a later stone floor, together with the lowest course of the altar shaft (Naumann & Huff 1975: 155-6, figs 53 and 55). 8 The base was moulded of stucco over layers of brick; the rounded square shaft was built of stone or brick (Fig. 7). At its lowest step the base is c. 1.60 m wide, the diameter of the shaft measured 0.65 m. According to representations of fire altars in the Old Iranian iconography we may restore an inverse, threestepped altar plate on top of the shaft. If we take only the size of the third step of the base as a model for the size of the altar plate, this would mean a width of about one meter for the plate. It might have been carved of a monolithic block of stone. However, we cannot rule out the possibility that it was constructed of corbelled layers of bricks, projecting from the rather massive shaft. A similar construction, only curved instead of stepped, was used for a rectangular table in a side room of the mud brick predecessor of the second temple (Naumann & Huff 1975: 147, fig. 45), and corbelled altar plates in NÙsh-i JÁn and Dahan-i GhulÁmÁn were even built by projecting less solid mud bricks (Roaf & Stronach 1973: 136, pl.VIb-VIIIa; Scerrato 1979: 729, fig. 18 and 19). The presumption of a corbelled construction here could be backed by four approximately rectangular holes or

The greater part of the complex was obviously used for banquets. The main hall is a large closed chahÁr-tÁq, connected with an oblong barrel vaulted hall. Neither of the two halls themselves provided clear evidence of their particular function. However, they were surrounded by courtyards with fire places, traces of sewage, great amounts of sherds of dishes, jugs and other vessels, and across one of the courtyards three toilets of considerable size were accessible (Naumann & Huff 1975: 157, fig. 54. 56-7). The layout of this part of the complex leaves 4

THE FUNCTIONAL LAYOUT OF THE FIRE SANCTUARY AT TAKHT-I SULAIMĀN Dietrich Huff Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Postf. 330014 D-14195 Berlin Germany [email protected]

no doubt that it served for the celebration of festivals by a great number of participants. This is in line with life in recent fire temples, where often festival halls with well equipped kitchens are added to the temple proper to celebrate religious or social events by communal meals. Another small, independent complex of rooms within the area of the second temple was built into the large, irregular courtyard (Fig. 1 PY) west of the columnar halls. The complex has two similar rectangular halls of differing dimensions and small chambers along a corridor. There is a long fire place for a number of cooking pots in a row in the courtyard along the facade of the larger hall. The area, which has several water basins and working platforms, was accessible from the arcade of the royal courtyard or from the side rooms of the palace.

Notes 1 For the ritual background of ancient and recent Zoroastrian cult buildings see e.g. Boyce 1968; 1975; 1989; Duchesne-Guillemin 1961: 58; 1962: 85 2 For antique and medieval sources see Minorsky 1964 and Schippmann 1971: 309-25 3 According to a majority of coin finds of late KavÁd I, of Khusrau I and Khusrau II. The earliest coin finds are of Pÿr½z (457-487 AD); see Naumann & Huff 1975: 164-8 4 Fragments of shattered stucco reliefs of the original wall decoration were found buried in clay fillings under the latest pavement of stone slabs in the second temple, perhaps witness of a restoration after the reported destruction by the soldiers of Heraclius; but there may have been other occasions, cp. Naumann & Huff 1975: 166-6; Sebeos 1999: I 81. II 214-5 5 E.g. for purification, see Boyce 1989: 4. There was also the custom that embers from other fires were brought to a fire temple to burn out with the ashes there. Boyce 1968: 66; 1975: 462; 1977: 45, 59, 72-3. 6 A door was later cut through the back wall of the northern bay of the room with the basin. 7 The damage to the now vanished barrel vault above the central nave is indicated by the leaning outward position of the columns, a result of the lateral thrust of the badly constructed vault. To support a cracking vault under the crown or key stone was a usual technique in Sasanian architecture; see e.g. the great palace at FÐrÙzÁbÁd. 8 Similar bases were excavated in the small fire temple on Turang Tepe (Boucharlat & Lecomte 1987: 52-71) and recently in a Sasanian chahÁrtÁq near ÍÁjiÁbÁd/DÁrÁb (communication by M. Azarnoush). 9 The tradition of places for private prayer and meditation lived on in Islamic religious architecture with small cabinets next to the tomb of a saint, e.g. in the mausoleum of ÍÁkim at Termizi in ancient Termez. 10 In the Yazd area fires from temples in Zoroastrian villages which had been abandoned were collected in one temple, but were given a separate room each. See Boyce 1989. A small, separate ambulatory temple for a second fire was added to the late nineteenth century Anjuman-i Àtash BahrÁm temple in Bombay, which has a surprising similarity to the second temple at Takht-i SulaimÁn. See Naumann & Huff 1975: 161-4.

There can be scarcely any doubt that the primary subject of the sanctuary at Takht-i SulaimÁn was À¿ar Gushnasp, the fire which we must presume to have burnt in the large, domed, central temple. This was the goal of pilgrimage of the king as well as of the ordinary people. A second fire beside À¿ar Gushnasp is not mentioned in the known literary sources. To have more than one fire burning in one temple complex is not without parallels in recent fire temples. However these cases seem to have occurred more or less at random, for example if refuge was given by an existing sanctuary to another fire which had lost its shelter through whatever circumstances.10 This could not apply to the À¿ar Gushnasp sanctuary, where the two temple complexes were doubtlessly part of the original design from the very beginning. The rather different layouts of both are remarkable; they indicate that both fires had different functions, and that both were connected with different ceremonies. A basic and somewhat contradictory difference between both fires is their rank and their social relationship. The À¿ar Gushnasp temple was evidently designed for both royal and ordinary pilgrims, and was clearly of superior religious rank. The second temple was clearly of inferior rank, although it was exclusively reserved for the king and the nobility. It is tempting to connect the second temple with the information from oriental and western sources that each Sasanian king had a personal fire, which was kindled at his coronation. However, the tradition is vague, the particular meaning or purpose of these fires is unknown, nor is it known how they were established, where or in which temple they were kept or whether they - exceptionally - travelled with the king during his frequent moves and expeditions (Boyce 1989: 3; Sebeos 1999: I,8). Given our current state of knowledge, only general interpretations can be derived from the layout of a monument and from accompanying archaeological observation, and it would be premature to draw final conclusions from uncertain traditions. However, it can be said with certainty that neither of the temples at Takht-i SulaimÁn included an open chahÁrtÁq, nor is there any possibility in the layout of the two sanctuaries that an open canopy might have been attached to one of the fire chambers.

References Primary sources Sebeos. The Armenian History attributed to Sebeos. I & II. Translated by R.W. Thomson. Translated Texts for Historians 31. Liverpool 1999. Secondary sources Boucharlat, R. 1985. Chahar taq et temple du feu sasanide: quelques remarques. Pages 461-78 in H. Huot, M. Yon & Y. Calvet (eds). De l`Indus aux Balkans, Receuil Jean Deshayes. Paris. Boucharlat, R., Lecomte, O. 1987. Fouilles de Tureng Tepe. 1. Les périodes sassanides et islamiques. Paris. Boyce, M. 1968. On the Sacred Fires of the Zoroastrians. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 31: 52-68. Boyce, M. 1975. On the Zoroastrian Temple-Cult of Fire. Journal of the American Oriental Society 95: 454-63. 5

DIETRICH HUFF Kunstform. Akten der Tagung in Toledo, 25 -27. 9. 2003. Mainz. Minorsky, V. 1964. Roman and Byzantine Campaigns in Atropatene. Pages 86-109 in Iranica. Twenty Articles by V. Minorsky. Publications of the University of Teheran, 775. Teheran. (First published in Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 11: 1943-46). Monneret de Villard, U. 1936. The Fire Temples. Bulletin of the American Institute for Persian Art and Archaeology 4: 175-84. Naumann, R. 1967. Sasanidische Feueraltäre. Iranica Antiqua 7: 71-76. Naumann, R. 1977. Die Ruinen von Tacht-e Suleiman und Zendan-e Suleiman. Berlin. Naumann, R., Huff, D 1965. Takht-i Sulaiman und Zendan-i Sulaiman. Vorläufiger Bericht über die Ausgrabungen in den Jahren 1963 und 1964. Archäologischer Anzeiger: 619-802. Naumann, R., Huff, D. 1975. Takht-i Sulaiman. Bericht über die Ausgrabungen 1965-1973. Archäologischer Anzeiger: 109-204. Oelmann, F. 1921. Persische Tempel. Archäologischer Anzeiger: 273-88 Osten, H. H.v.d., Naumann, R.1961. Takht-i- Suleiman. Vorläufiger Bericht über die Ausgrabungen 1959. Teheraner Forschungen i. Berlin. Pope, A.U. et al. 1937. The Institute`s Survey of Persian Architecture. Preliminary Report on Takht-i Sulayman. Bulletin of the American Institute for Iranian Art and Archaeology 11: 71-109. Reuther, O. 1938. Sasanian Architecture. Pages 550-7 in A.U. Pope (ed.). A Survey of Persian Art. ii. London/New York. Roaf, M., Stronach, D. 1973. Tepe Nush-i Jan, 1970: Second Interim Report. Iran 11: 129-40. Scerrato, U. 1979. Evidence of Religious Life at Dahan-e Ghulaman, Sistan. Pages 709-35 in M. Taddei (ed.). South Asian Archaeology 1977. Naples. Schippmann. K. 1971. Die iranischen Feuerheiligtümer. Berlin. Vanden Berghe, L. 1961. Récentes découvertes de monuments sassanides dans le Fars. Iranica Antiqua 1: 163-98. Vanden Berghe, L. 1965. Nouvelles découvertes de monuments du feu d`époque sassanide. Iranica Antiqua 5: 128-47. Vanden Berghe, L. 1977. Les chahar taqs du Pusht-i Kuh Luristan. Iranica Antiqua 12: 175-90. Vanden Berghe, L. 1984. Le chahar taq de Qanat-i Bagh (Fars) et l´inventaire des chahar taqs en Iran. Iranica Antiqua 19: 201-25. Yamamoto, Y. 1979. The Zoroastrian Temple Cult of Fire in Archaeology and Literature I. Orient 15: 19-53. Yamamoto, Y. 1981. The Zoroastrian Temple Cult of Fire in Archaeology and Literature II. Orient 17: 67-104

Boyce,

M. 1977. A Persian Stronghold of Zoroastrianism. Oxford. Boyce, M. 1989. Ataš. Atašdan. Ataškada. Encyclopaedia Iranica 2. Damm, B. 1968. Geologie des Zendan-i Suleiman und seiner Umgebung. Wiesbaden. Duchesne-Guillemin, J. 1961. Symbolik des Parsismus. Stuttgart. Duchesne-Guillemin, J. 1962. La religion de l´Iran ancien. Paris. Erdmann, K. 1941. Das Iranische Feuerheiligtum. Leipzig. Göbl, R. 1976. Die Tonbullen vom Tacht-e Suleiman. Berlin. Godard, A. 1938. Les monuments du feu. Athar-e Iran 3: 7-80. Gropp, G. 1969. Die Funktion des Feuertempels der Zoroastrier. Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran N.S. 2: 147-75. Gropp, G. 1971. Die rezenten Feuertempel der Zarathustrier II. Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran N.S. 4: 263-88. Herzfeld, E. 1926. Reisebericht, Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 80, N.S. 5: 225-84. Herzfeld, E. 1935. Archaeological History of Iran. London. Herzfeld, E. 1941. Iran in the Ancient East. London. Huff, D. 1975. Sasanian Čahar Taqs in Fars. Pages 24354 in F. Bagherzadeh (ed.). Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Symposium on Archaeological Research in Iran 1974. Teheran. Huff, D. 1982. Das Imamzadeh Sayyid Husain und E. Herzfelds Theorie über den sasanidischen Feuertempel. Studia Iranica 11: 197-212. Huff, D. 1987a. Architecture s.v. Sasanian. Encyclopaedia Iranica 2. Huff, D. 1987b. Technological Observations on Clay Bullae from Takht-i Sulaiman, Mesopotamia 22: 367-90. Huff, D. 1990. Čahartaq. s.v. Pre-Islamic Iran. Encyclopaedia Iranica 3. Huff, D. 1993. Architecture sassanide. Pages 45-61 in L. Vanden Berghe & B. Overlaet (eds). Splendeur des Sassanides. L'empire perse entre Rome et la Chine [224-642]. Brussels. Huff, D. 1995. Beobachtungen zum Chahartaq und zur Topographie von Girre, Iranica Antiqua 30: 7192. Huff, D. 1999. Das “medische” Grabrelief von Deh Now. Studia Iranica 28: 7-40. Huff, D. 2000. Takht-i Suleiman, Tempel des sassanidischen Reichsfeuers Atur Gushnasp. Pages 103-9 in Deutsches Archäologisches Institut. Archäologische Entdeckungen. Die Forschungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts im 20. Jahrhundert i. Mainz. Huff. D. 2006. Die Entwicklung der Stadt- und Palasttore in Zentralasien. Pages 325-44 in T.G.Schattner & F.V.Fernandez (eds). Stadttore. Bautyp &

6

THE FUNCTIONAL LAYOUT OF THE FIRE SANCTUARY AT TAKHT-I SULAIMĀN Figures

Figure 1: Takht-i SulaimÁn, general plan of the Sasanian period (dotted lines: limits of royal area).

7

DIETRICH HUFF

Figure 2: Takht-i SulaimÁn, view from southeast. In the foreground the (Royal) Southgate is visible, behind the lake the ruins of the palace and the low mound of the ruined À¿ar Gushnasp temple can be seen.

8

THE FUNCTIONAL LAYOUT OF THE FIRE SANCTUARY AT TAKHT-I SULAIMĀN

Figure 3: Room A in central building of temple 1.

9

DIETRICH HUFF

Figure 4: Basin in room B of temple 1.

10

THE FUNCTIONAL LAYOUT OF THE FIRE SANCTUARY AT TAKHT-I SULAIMĀN

Figure 5: Second temple, columnar hall PB from south; north gate in background.

11

DIETRICH HUFF

Figure 6: Plaster stands in niche of columnar hall PB in second temple.

12

THE FUNCTIONAL LAYOUT OF THE FIRE SANCTUARY AT TAKHT-I SULAIMĀN

Figure 7: Base of fire altar in second temple, room PD.

13

The Discovery of a Sasanian Period Fire Temple at BandiyÁn, Dargaz Mehdi Rahbar small mounds covering an area of more than four hectares. The highest mound is no more than 4 m above the plain level. The present dimensions are 30 x 30 m. The middle mound or Mound A, where excavations were conducted, has been almost completely destroyed by modern farmers and the other two mounds have also been seriously damaged. The exact limits of mounds A, B and C are not known, but we know that from the Sasanian period until now there is 150 cm of deposit above the remains at Bandiyān. This means that the floor of the Sasanian period has to be found in deeper levels. We can assume that at the time of the construction of the fire temple - which we found at this same level - the complex of buildings must have stretched as far as Yārim Tepe.

Introduction Excavations at Bandiyān near Dargaz began in 1994 and have resulted in the discovery of one of the most impressive Sasanian fire temples (Fig. 1) (Rahbar 1378; 1998; 1999; 2004). According to the Pahlavi inscription found in the miÎrāb, the fire temple is situated in a dastgird. The temple is significant because it follows traditional local architecture and is not related to state architecture. The hall also has the most extensive stucco decoration, unknown from any other important Sasanian fire temple, despite the fact that Dargaz is a long distance from Fars. Dargaz was known as ‘MuÎammad Àbād’ in the Qajar period. It is situated 250 km northwest of Mashhad. The etymology of the name Dargaz is uncertain, some regard it as part of ancient Nisā (Mithrādatkert), others see it as ancient Dārāgird and associate it with Darius III/ Dārā, the last Achaemenid king (Diakonov 1344: 41; Le Strange 1373; ZarrÐnkūb 1364: 326).

The Fire Temple The area including the fire temple measures 25 x 35 m, and like many Parthian and Sasanian buildings, the fire temple is oriented 40 degrees to the north. This complex consists of the following rooms (Fig. 2): Room A: Columned Hall. Room B: Storage place for votive objects and offerings. Room C: Ante-chamber. Room D: Fire temple. Room E: ustÙdāns. Room F: aivān. Room G: barashnūmgāh (circular space for purification). Room H: dashtānistān (khÁnih-i dashtān).

The plain of Dargaz is fertile and was therefore quite well-populated from the Neolithic period to the present time. This is indicated by a large number of Neolithic settlements and prehistoric and historic mounds. There are a number of other archaeological sites in the vicinity, for example mounds (tepehs) such as Yārim Tepe, Ànau, Jaitūn and Namāzgāh, which confirm that there was occupation in this region as early as the 5th millennium BC. This area, which was known as the satrapy of Parthia, played an important role in the Achaemenid and Parthian periods. In the Sasanian period this region was particularly exposed to pressure from invading nomadic tribes, such as the Huns, Khionites, Hephthalites, and the White Huns etc. At times these nomads, particularly the Hephthalites, occupied the whole of north-eastern Iran and resided for some time in that area, sometimes for several years (ZarrÐnkūb 1364: 461).

It is important to note that the material used for the structure is chÐnih, a type of hard mud which is also known in Central Asia as pÐsih[pÐse] or pakhsā (Belnitsky 1371: 187), while the mixture of straw and mud was rarely used. The surface is covered with a thin layer of mud plaster (kāhgil). Gypsum was used sparingly and only in particular places. For example it appears as stucco decoration in the columned hall or as the surface of the benches. In addition, gypsum was also used for the ustÙdāns.

As preparation for his future position, the crown-prince in the early Sasanian period was appointed as the local ruler to this region. Bandiyān seems to have been one of the most suitable places for his royal residence. It is obvious that the presence of the future king resulted in the construction of buildings fit for the ruler. Although the residential quarters of the dastgird mentioned in the inscriptions of the hall of the fire temple have not been excavated, the elaborate mujallal fire temple dating to the reigns of Bahrām V, Pÿr½z and Kavād I supports such an assumption.

The columns of the hall were made with the help of a cast, which was then filled with a mixture of pebbles from the river and gypsum, which, when bound together, made the column sufficiently strong (Fig. 3). On the basis of the position of the columns and the walls, one can assume that the hall had a flat roof made of wooden beams. But we have evidence that in some places the space was covered with a dome. The supporting wall, which had to carry the weight of the roof, measured about 170 cm in thickness, while subsidiary walls, which did not have to carry the weight of the room, or belonged to smaller area, measure about 60 cm.

Excavations at Bandiyān, Dargaz Bandiyān is situated 2 km northwest of Dargaz on the road to the village of Artiyān. The site consists of three

15

MEHDI RAHBAR A: Columned Hall

has a plaster floor mixed with earth with a thickness of between five and seven centimetres. The distance between the two western columns creates an area measuring 80 x 80 cm and the walls are covered with a thin layer of plaster. It is not yet clear whether this is all contemporary. Further on, on the floor of the hall at different distances from the southern walls, are postholes 25-30 cm wide and about 70 cm deep. We assume that these were caused by the scaffolding used in the making of the stucco decoration on the walls of the hall.

This hall, which was used for large crowds, measured 10.45 m in length and 8.50 m in width. Four plaster columns, consisting as usual of base, drum and capital, looked very impressive (Fig. 4). Their bases are made of three plaster cubes which are tapered from bottom to top. These cubes are not more than 18 cm in height. The bottom cube, which is the largest, measures 125 x 125 cm. The difference in form and shape of the column bases suggests that different casts were used. These columns are usually 40 cm in height. The column drums are 55 cm in diameter and there does not seem to be a difference between the upper and lower diameter. There is not much information about column capitals. Some fragments of plaster were found on the floor of the hall, which may have belonged to these (Fig. 5).

The space between the two eastern columns to the right of the main entrance of the hall had traces of a base measuring about 100 x 100 cm. At present this consists of only one layer of bricks measuring 40 x 40 cm. Its height is not known but as the benches in the fire temple are all about 55 cm high, this bench was probably the same height. There is no evidence that the exterior had stucco or other decoration. It seems that it was used as a table for offerings, but it is also possible that it had another function as described by al-BÐrūnÐ in his À³ār albāqiyyah:

The columns are situated close to the walls and therefore create more space in the centre of the hall. The distance between the columns and the walls to the right and the left is 140 and 160 cm respectively. The space between the columns in the central area measures 345 cm. Worshippers came into the hall of the fire temple from the eastern side, which was open, as no traces of a door were found. It is obvious that a heavy curtain, like the one depicted on the stucco decoration of the western wall of the hall, closed off the entrance so that the worshippers were protected in the winter. According toYa‘qūbÐ, Sasanian palaces did not have doors, but curtains (Ya‘qūbÐ: 216). A large courtyard or a garden was placed in front of the entrance. Here pomegranate trees normally grew, which were used for the holy barsum twigs.1

Now, Fêrôz went to the famous fire-temple in Ádharkhûrâ in Fârs; there he said prayers, prostrated himself, and asked God to remove that trial from the inhabitants of the world. Then he went up to the altar and found there the ministers and priests standing before it. They, however, did not greet him as is due to kings. So he felt that there was something the matter with the priests. Then he went near the fire, turned his hand and arms round the flame, and pressed it thrice to his bosom, as one friend does with another when asking after each other’s health; the flame reached his beard, but did not hurt him, Thereupon Fêrôz spoke: “Oh my Lord, thy names be blessed if the rain is held back for my sake, for any fault of mine, reveal it to me that I may divest myself of my dignity; if something else is the cause, remove it, and make it known to me and to the people of the world, and give them copious rain.” Then he descended from the altar, left the cupola, and sat done on the [?] made of gold, similar to the throne, but smaller. It was a custom for a famous firetemple to have a golden [?] for the purpose that the king should sit upon it when he came to the temple. Now the ministers and priests came near him and greeted him as is due to kings. The king spoke to them: “What has hardened your hearts, what has offended you and made you suspicious, that you did not greet me before?” They replied: “Because we were standing before another king more sublime than you. We were not allowed to greet you whilst standing before him.”(al-BÐrūnÐ: 215).

In the northwest corner of the hall there is a space measuring 280 x 270 cm at the back (Fig. 6). Because of the important stucco found inside this space and the existence of five Pahlavi inscriptions, which deal with the appointment of a person called Yazdād by an important government official, VÐd Mihr Shāpūr, we have called this a special place. It seems that the hall was originally smaller and without stucco decorations and that it then had only two columns in the west. Later, when it became necessary, it was decided to expand the hall and two columns were added to the eastern part. The stucco decoration was also added. It is hoped to find more evidence for this in the future. All walls of the hall have important stucco decoration at a height of about 60 cm above the ground. It consists of different scenes such as hunting scenes, battle scenes between the Sasanian king and his foreign enemies, victory scenes, and one religious scene which show Anāhitā pouring a libation. There are also other scenes, such as an image of the Hephthalite ruler, a fire altar and two attendants, and the image of one of the officials of this period, VÐd Mihr Shāpūr, a crowning (investiture?) scene and finally a banquet scene.

The above description suggests that we are dealing here with a similar feature although not made of gold but of bricks. B: Storage Place for Votive Objects and Offerings Fire temples usually enjoyed the protection and munificence of the aristocracy and noble men of the country. Sometimes a prince or a leader gave an endowment for the building of a fire temple (MuÒtafavÐ

All four columns of the hall have beautiful stucco decoration 85 cm above floor level. The decoration includes palmettos and braided bands (Fig. 7). The hall 16

THE DISCOVERY OF A SASANIAN PERIOD FIRE TEMPLE AT BANDIYĀN, DARGAZ 1338: 17). The gifts which the rulers sent to the fire temples from their booty created much wealth for the priests. Various provinces and townships also gave gifts to the fire temples. Gifts and votive offerings of the different classes of the people had to be registered and the objects had to be kept in the temple (ZarrÐnkūb 1364: 490). In the western corner of the columned hall at Bandiyān there is a room measuring 365 x 295 cm. This room is connected to the hall by a door measuring 70 cm in width. The threshold is about 25 cm above the floor level of the hall. In this room different clay sealings were found (Figs 8 & 9). Holes for the rope used to seal the objects are still visible. These clay sealings show the personal emblems and crests of the senders of the objects and include motifs such as griffins, deer, and cows, which usually have a mythological meaning. In addition there is also the image of a human torso that has around his head a Pahlavi inscription which reads yom shapil (rūz bih) which is commonly found on seals of this period (Bashāsh 1376: 34). One has to remember that during the year-long excavations at Bandiyān, important objects have not been found. We assume that the objects were removed before the arrival of the Hephthalites and only the traces/imprints of the seals which had no material value were left there.

the east and west measuring about 75 x 65 cm. These were placed 50 cm above the level of the main bench. We can only see traces of the plaster of the smaller benches. It seems that during the renovation of the fire temple these small benches were built over two columns with a diameter of 16 cm (Fig. 12). One can find the remains of these smaller columns of either side of the original bench. With regard to the low position of the above-mentioned areas, it seems likely that dried wood, which was used for burning in the fire temple, was kept here (Boyce & Grenet 1375: 328). Obviously, in the Achaemenid period the fire was worshipped in the open. But with the growing importance of the fire, and as sunrise diminished the lustre of the fire, it was decided to keep the fire in a semi dark place (Christensen 1368: 236; cf. RajabÐ 1375: 205). Due to the limited space in the fire temples it was necessary to use fire wood that was dry and smokeless. According to the religious rules, burning wet and smoky wood is a sin. This point is made clearly in the ArdÁ VÐrÁz NÁmag: And then the Fire, [son] of Hormuzd, Ï zad À¿ar: “Come let me show you the lake of water of the moist wood which you put on me.” And he took [me] to a place and he showed me a big lake of blue water, and he said: “This is the water which was driven out from the wood which you put on me.”(ArdÁ VÐrÁz NÁmag: 197).

C: Ante-Chamber A door measuring 120 cm in width in the western part of the hall leads to an area measuring 6 x 3 metres, laying 35 cm below the floor level of the hall. Around this space, except on the western side, are benches made of chÐnah 55 cm high (Fig. 10). These benches are 65 to 70 cm wide, on top them is a thin layer of plaster. The bench on the southern side is wide but simple in design, whereas those on the northern and eastern sides are decorated. The entrance was blocked off 25 cm above the floor level in order to prevent the ordinary people from entering (Fig. 11).

The wood which is destined for burning in the fire temple is often given by the believers as atonement of their sins (VendÐdād: 903). Towards the west of the fire temple is another bench measuring 60 cm wide and 52 cm high. This bench does not cover the whole width of the arch as 50 cm are open on its southern side. The bench towards the west has an ornate shape and its surface is mostly plastered. Exactly in the middle of the western bench, at the bottom of the fire temple, is another low bench, which is completely plastered, measuring 10 cm in height and 50 cm in width and extending to the fire place. On both sides of the arch towards the north are two benches and near the entrance door to Room E are two more small ones. The floor of the fire temple has no plaster layer. In its middle, leaning towards the south-eastern side and exactly opposite the western entrance of the hall, is a beautiful fire holder made of plaster. Like all other fire holders it consists of a base, a body and a top which, altogether, measure 102 cm (Figs 13, 14 & 15).3

On the southern side of this room is a narrow entrance about 70 cm wide. This entrance, which was for the mÙbadÁn entering the fire temple, leads to the aivān (Room F). D: The Fire Temple To the west of the columned hall (Room A) is first the ante-chamber (Room C), which is connected to a room measuring 4.10 x 4.10 metres resembling a chahār tāq.2 The width of the arch is only 270 cm, on the basis of this and the curve, the height of the arch can be estimated at 180 cm. Fragments of the collapsed arch made of plaster and earth were found in the fire temple.

The top part consists of three squares reducing in size from top to bottom and resembling three steps. The dimensions of the top part are 125 x 125 x 20 cm. It is interesting that the top part of the fire holder is exactly opposite the western entrance to the hall and it has the same width. The fire holder is not in the centre of the fire temple but is situated towards the south east. If the fire holder were in the centre then access to Room E would have been difficult.

The wall behind the arch is completely blocked towards the west and south but in the middle of the northern arch is an entrance 100 cm wide leading to a relatively large room. In the northern, western and southern parts of the fire temple there are benches. Below the southern arch there was originally a bench 54 cm high and 65 cm wide. Then followed the construction of two smaller benches to 17

MEHDI RAHBAR The base of the fire holder also consists of three squares placed on top of each other. The bottom one, which rests on the floor, measures 109 cm and is about 25 cm smaller than the actual fire holder.

It is obvious that the stucco decoration in the hall and also the mud benches, which had been built all over the fire temple, must have been influenced by Central Asia. Spuler wrote about how the Muslims dealt with fire temples. He states that fire temples existed in the neighbouring cities from which the Muslims took taxes. These structures were not, however, covered with white plaster like mosques (Spuler 1373: 248).

It is interesting that the total height of the three squares is 40 cm while the three squares of the base are only 15 cm high. The column of the fire holder contains two unfinished cones which appear as if placed upside-down. These cones are decorated with vertical plaster strips/cannellations. The meeting point between the two cones is decorated with a plaster band in high relief. The decorations on the altar column, which are similar to folds in textile, are placed around the altar column and the waist is tied with a ribbon. The stucco decoration inside the miÎrāb shows such fire altars. Each attendant on either side of the fire altar in the miÎrāb has in his hands similar fire holders. It can be said with certainty that the fire holders in this fire temple were used as a pattern for the fire altar on the stucco decorations.

The fire temple of Bandiyān, unlike some fire temples of this period, has no facility for circumambulation but resembles completely the Chahār Tāq B of the À¿argushnasp fire temple. The pilgrims assembled in the congregational hall of the fire temple of Bandiyān and witnessed a ceremony through the western doorway, which was conducted by the priests inside the fire temple. As the fire temple was on a lower level than the hall, the worshippers were at a higher level. Conducting the ceremony in a semi-dark place and with the chanting of the priests made the ceremony more impressive (Christensen 1368: 138).

The heaviness and compactness of the top part of the fire holder, which is made out of fragile material like mud and plaster, is not a strong structure. It is therefore possible that it had some additional support. Considering that traces of rubbings were found in the four corners on the base of the fire holder, we assume that four wooden posts once supported it on the four corners but are no longer preserved. This idea is supported by the image on the inside of the miÎrāb where the stucco decoration indicates carved wooden supports.

At the end of the ceremony the haoma drink was distributed amongst the worshipers. It is important to add that in the Zoroastrian religion animal sacrifice and intoxicating drinks are forbidden and the drinking of haoma, which was very intoxicating, was imposed on the Zoroastrian religion by the magÐ. Probably the reverence for fire, which later developed to an important ceremony, goes back to the period when fire was discovered. Human beings, who were afraid of the darkness of the night and suffered from the cold of the winter, regarded fire as divine love and made all the necessary arrangements to look after it. Soon fire entered the homes and in the middle of a large room the members of the family gathered around a hearth. The expression uchāq-i kūr (blind hearth) refers to a family which has no children. Worshipping in front of a fire and maintaining a fire temple is an ancient Arian tradition, which later became organised into a large institution incorporating the religious aspects of life. In the Sasanian period the royal institution found an opportunity to increase its own wealth and power by collecting resources for the fire temples so they could show off their own wealth and power (Boyce & Grenet 1375: 234). But gradually the fire temples became so powerful through votive offerings and endowments from the people that the kings had to appear in the fire temple and receive the blessing of the high priest (Christensen 1368: 241).

The highest level of the square of the fire alter contains a round hole which is 8 to 10 cm deep. The diameter of the hole is 109 cm. Around the hole is a band of plaster 2 cm thick and 3 cm high. This hole must have contained a metal bowl for the fire (Godard 1938: 15). G. Widengren thinks that a plate-shaped vessel was suspended above the fire altar and in addition there was also a bell that was used for the ceremonies (Widengren 1377: 477). The surface of the hole in particular in the centre of the fire holder was damaged by heat and was repaired at the time by the priests. Finger prints can still be seen on the plaster surface. It is quite clear that the damage was caused by heat but considering that the damage was relatively slight it seems that the fire holder was not used continuously. Perhaps the fire was lit elsewhere and then brought to the fire holder. There is no trace of smoke on the walls of the fire temple. The walls of the fire temple were covered with soft, straw-tempered mud. Traces of red colour were found on the walls of the fire temple and the semi-dark area outside.

The fire temples owned much land, cattle and slaves/servants.4 In addition to the religious ceremonies, pupils were also taught in fire temples (À¿argushasb 1352: 260; cf. Widengren 1377: 475; Frye 1373: 357). Fire temples were not only places of worship but were also used as courts, hospitals and schools and they also had extensive libraries (Riªā’Ð 1374: 152).

We have no information about decoration and plaster covering the walls of fire temples in the Sasanian period, above all the great fire temple of ShÐz at Takht-i Sulaimān and buildings connected with it. Therefore the halls of the fire temple at Bandiyān are the only examples which offer such information (cf. Callieri in this volume).

In addition to worship, the priests also collected information about the affairs of the state and wars inside the fire temple. An example of this kind of information is 18

THE DISCOVERY OF A SASANIAN PERIOD FIRE TEMPLE AT BANDIYĀN, DARGAZ represented in the stucco decoration of the hall at Bandiyān, which shows the victory of Bahrām V over the Hephthalites.

Unfortunately, as the northern side is less well preserved, only traces of these structures have remained (Fig. 16). On the basis of pieces of sandstone that have been found in this part of the temple, one can assume that the base of these ustÙdāns was covered with stone slabs. We have more information about the rest of the ustÙdān on the western and eastern side. Now it is clear that they were made in the same room in situ. The ustÙdān do not have a back wall. Because of their heavy weight and the fact that bricks and plaster are easily destructible material, they could not have been brought from another place. The framework of the ustÙdān is made of bricks measuring 20 x 20 x 2 cm and the base is decorated with bricks measuring 40 x 40 and 20 x 40 cm. The ustÙdān on the western side is resting on a beautiful six-layered base; probably the one on the eastern side was similar. Smaller bricks measuring 20 x 20 x 2 cm were held together with gypsum grouting and used for the body and the cover of the ustÙdan. It was coated with plaster on the inside and outside. As the thickness of the walls is only 5 to 6 cm, the plaster coating strengthened the construction and created a smooth surface for images. The ustÙdān in the western part provided enough information to allow the reconstruction of the destroyed one on the northern side.

Originally eight priests conducted the ceremony in the fire temple but the number was later reduced to two, probably in the Islamic period (Pūr Dāvūd 1374: 186). It is also important that according to the Nairangistān, women could take part in the chanting of the YasnÁ hymns during the religious ceremonies, even during menstruation. In addition they were also allowed to look after the holy fire. According to Vendidād chapter 14, the tools used in the fire temple included: tāziyānah [whip], shÐrdān [milk container], panām [square cloth with bands used in ceremony] , kharafstarzÁn [insect/snake-killer], davvāl-i tāzÐyānih [leather belt] mayazddān, [container for votive food], piyālih [flask], tasht [tub], haoma, barsum, mÁhrū [barsom-container], barsum-i chÐn [barsom cutter]and hāvin [mortar]. The mÙbad of ArdashÐr À¿argushnasp, besides listing the special tools of the fire temple, mentions a colander used for sieving haoma. In addition, the mortar is used for two purposes: for pounding the haoma and as a bell (À¿argushnasb 1352: 265). In ancient Iran dawn was also called hāvangāh because as the priest pounded the haoma the sound called the people for prayer.5

As already stated, the length of the ustÙdān corresponds to the width of Room E. Its approximate width is 85 cm and it has a crescent-shaped arch. The height of the ustÙdān, including the base and body, is about 200 cm. The base itself is 55 cm. The long side of the ustÙdān is divided into three sections (Fig. 17). The central section is 65 cm long, whereas the others are between 160 and 165 cm. Each of the sections has a little opening 20 cm above the floor like the frame of a door. The central door is smaller and does not measure more than 35 x 36 cm, whereas the small doors on both sides of it are about 80 x 35 cm (Fig. 18). The frame of the small doors is about 1.5 to 2 cm wide; set back and around the frame there are holes at fixed intervals. We believe that this was a small doorway which was blocked off by a board 1 to 1.5 cm thick. It is obvious that there would have been holes around the door frame for the nails.

It is thought that Ante-chamber C in the fire temple at Bandiyān may have been used for the preparation of haoma and its distribution to the worshipers. The special containers were placed on the benches, the plaster of which prevented direct contact with the soil. The bench on the western side of the fire temple was probably covered with gold-threaded brocade on which the holy book of the Avesta was placed. A lower bench above the floor of the fire temple may have served to keep the barsum bundles. With the exception of the southern bench, all benches had a layer of plaster. The priest probably sat on that bench. Although according to Nirangistān 28/28 the northern part of the fire temple, known as urvisgāh was used by the zūt (a special mÙbad) who read the Gatha (VendÐdād: 669).

The ustÙdān on the eastern side is smaller measuring 150 x 70 cm. Because of its small size, this ustÙdān has not been divided up. It only has a small doorway 70 by 30 cm with the same specifications as the western one. Indications of a cubic ustÙdān with a semi-spherical cover and a square, three-tiered handle were discovered in the central part of Room E (Fig. 19). This semispherical/conic cover is very similar to the ustÙdān in Central Asia. Although the body of this ustÙdān has disintegrated, we could establish that the dimensions were 70 x 70 cm and the thickness 7 cm. In the middle there is a disc/circle with a diameter of 58 cm (Fig. 20). The base of the structure has impressions of the upper structure. We have been able to reconstruct the ustÙdān in Room E on the basis of the information mentioned above (Fig. 21).

E: The UstÙdāns In the northern vault (tāqnāma) of the fire temple there is a doorway measuring 100 cm wide and on either side of the doorway there is a bench. A plastered threshold 20 cm above the floor of the fire temple separates it from Room E. It is possible that this door was opened only at certain times, but it was blocked with chÐnah. Room E measures 5.15 x 4.40 m and to the north, east and west side there are small chest-shaped constructions similar to covered clay sarcophagi of the Parthian period (so-called slipper sarcophagi) which we call ustÙdāns. Those on the western and northern sides take up the whole room, whereas those on the eastern side are smaller.

The outer surface of the ustÙdāns was decorated with beautiful mythological miniatures, some of them 19

MEHDI RAHBAR representations of individuals, others of groups (Figs 22 & 23). The most detailed scene is that of a hunt. The ruler is dressed for battle and has a diadem tied on his head. He is sitting on a galloping horse with a bow in his hand. He is aiming at the animals in the hunting ground. He has hit two animals, probably gazelles, with his arrow and the artist shows how they are collapsing to the ground. The other scene shows a wolf attacking a ram which has corn grain in its mouth. We have to bear in mind that in the Zoroastrian religion, among all the quadrupeds the wolf has to be destroyed (Àmūzigār 1374: 77). Among other images is a bird surrounded by chicks. As these fragments, showing a hunt, were discovered in the northern part of Room E near the floor, it is likely that they belonged to the northern ustÙdān. Other fragments found in this room display different scenes, for example a griffin attacking a cow which is carrying on its rear a swastika (Fig. 24). At the same time a snake is biting into its udder; it is not clear whether it is suckling or biting.6 It is interesting that most of the animals have either a stem of wheat in their mouths or their tails appear to be wheat stems. The bundle of wheat is probably a symbol of nature and blessing.

F: The Aivān To the south of Room C there is a narrow entrance which connects the fire temple and the ustÙdān room with aivān F. This doorway is the private entrance of the priest to the fire temple. The southern part of the aivān is completely open, but the western side has a doorway which ends in a circular space. The floor of the aivān is 40 cm higher than the floor of the congregational hall. G: Barashnūmgāh (Circular Space for Purification) In the north-western corner of the aivān is a 90 cm wide entrance that ends in a circular-shaped space (Fig. 26). Its diameter is 530 cm. Its floor is about 45 cm higher than that of the congregational hall. Considering the difference between the floor of the ātishkādih and the aivān and circle, there must have been three steps. The southern bench of Room C, which is broader than any other, had two purposes: one as stairs and two as a bench. But the height of the bench (around 53 cm) did not allow easy passage. At the bottom of the southern bench and above the floor of Room C we found steps. The last step was in front of the entrance between the aivān and Room C and was not very high. By taking three steps from the floor of the fire temple one reached the floor of the aivān.

The picture of the other ustÙdān shows a saddled horse in full gallop without a rider. The saddled horse is probably a symbol of MithrÁ, although some regard the white horse as a symbol of TÐshtrya (Sirius; angel of rain). Another image shows a donkey following another donkey. Although a swastika is drawn on the rear of the animal, scorpions appear inside his stomach. As the khrafstas (scorpion, snake) belongs to the world of evil they has be killed by devout Zoroastrians.7 These animals and creatures are closely connected with descriptions in the Yasna 42-2 (Boyce & Grenet 1375: 131) (Fig. 25).

The walls of the circular space are made of chÐnih, as all the other sections, and are covered with a layer of strawtempered mud. To the right side of the entrance, one metre distant, there is a bench measuring 57 x 55 cm and 32 cm above the floor level. The bench is also made of chÐnih but on the top is a stone slab. At the bottom of the tower there are shallow ditches/pits and the inside is hard and smooth. One of these pits is about 80 cm wide and about 12 cm deep. Access to the pit is completely smooth and firm. One can cautiously say that it has the form of the bottom of a barrel or jar which had been placed there for a while. The pit must have been finished by the time the stone bench was made. Between 30 to 50 cm has survived from the wall.

Another illustration on the ustÙdāns shows a swallow and the other a cockerel. The cockerel is the symbol of Sraosha. It sings at the break of dawn according to VendÐdād 18 and calls people to prayer and urges them to curse the demons (Pūr Dāvūd 2535: 317).

We cannot find a parallel for a round-shaped space in Bandiyān or in any other Sasanian building. The only building which is known to us is the plan of a round structure at Krylgan-Kala, which the Russian archaeologist S.P.Tolstov connects with the Hellenistic period. This building is situated to the south of the Aral Sea and the left bank of the Amu Darya. The central building, measuring 42 metres, is built on two floors. The dimensions increase gradually and the diameter reaches 93 metres. Some ustÙdān were found here (Grenet 1984: 49, pl. IVa). Tolstov believes this was a religious structure (Belnitsky 1371: 107) but F.Grenet clearly sees it as a mausoleum (Grenet 1984: 59). Belnitsky describes the shape of the building as unusual and does not understand its function (Belnitsky 1371: 107).

The cockerel appears on textiles, rock reliefs, stucco decoration and metalwork of the Sasanian period. Each miniature drawing on the ustÙdāns of Bandiyān has mythological meaning. Some of these creatures are Ahuric others demonic/Ahrimanic. There has been discussion about the location of the ustÙdāns. Some people consider their close proximity to a fire temple as being contrary to the Zoroastrian faith. Whilst a corpse is impure, once the flesh has been removed from the bones and they have been exposed to the sun they are no longer impure. Placing bones in an ustÙdān seems to be more of a ceremonial practice. Mary Boyce writes that in the past the corpses were laid out on a stone slab and three steps away a fire was lit (Boyce & Grenet 1375: 413). It is therefore obvious that placing bones in the vicinity of the fire temple is not wrong. It is also possible that local traditions, which were influenced by different religions, affected Zoroastrian practice in this region.

In 1379/1990-1 we found another important building on a hill near the fire temple at Bandiyān. Our investigations showed a central tower and a central space with radiating walls dividing the area into three sections. This building 20

THE DISCOVERY OF A SASANIAN PERIOD FIRE TEMPLE AT BANDIYĀN, DARGAZ dates to the Sasanian period and has a religious function but it is not a mausoleum as in the case of Krylgan-Kala.

sexual intercourse, will be unclean unless she goes to the fire temple, undresses in front of the hirbad, and washes herself with gumÐz” (IstakhrÐ: 106). JaihānÐ gives a similar description in the Ashkāl al-‘ālam (JaihānÐ 1368: 112).

Investigations in the circular area G, which is related to the fire temple, provided some interesting results. We regarded it as a barashnūmgāh or a purification place of the Zoroastrians. In his travelogue, Jackson writes about the beliefs and religious customs of modern-day Zoroastrians in Yazd and that helps us with the identification of this structure as a barashnūmgāh (Jackson 1352: 435). According to the doctrines of the VendÐdād, only a human corpse or dead animal or a menstruating woman or a woman who has given birth to a stillborn child can undergo purification in a barashnūmgāh. It is usually a round space where the purification of Nau shabah / Nushva takes place. A menstruating woman who undergoes the Nau shabah purification has to stay away from her family in a narrow and dark place (Boyce & Grenet 1375: 415). Mary Boyce also provides important information in this respect; she states that a barashnūmgāh has walls which confine the impurity and that it also has no roof so that the sunshine can be used for purification. She says that according to tradition, it always has to be circular so that evil cannot hide in a dark corner and that, in the past, nine pits were dug in this area and impurity was crouching in one of them - as purification took place it moved from one pit to another. Boyce states that later on the pits were abandoned and replaced by nine large stone slabs. The person to be purified sits on a stone bench and the priest pours gumÐz with a ladle over the head. This mixture of water and cow urine is antiseptic. In the past, instead of a ladle, the priest used instead a nine-knotted bamboo, which appears in the Avesta as the Nova Pixa (Boyce & Grenet 1375: 421; Mazdā Pūr 1369: 52 n 53).

H: Dashtānestān (KhÁna-yi Dashtān). To the east of aivān F there is a large room of which the southern side is completely open (no trace of a wall or doorway was found). On the eastern side there was an entrance measuring 75 cm wide. Although no objects were found inside this room, it is possible to regard it as a khÁna-yi Dashtān. According to the VendÐdād, a menstruating woman had to reside in a faraway place (VendÐdād: 179). For nine days and nights a purification process took place. She had to crawl into a narrow and dark corner so that her glance would not meet the clean earth, the flowing water, fire, the sky, the sun, the moon, plants and animals. During this time she wore old cloth and kept clean cloth for the period after purification. She slept in an isolated place and ate little and simple food from metal or lead containers. In her isolation she had more time for prayers. After this long and hard ceremony she wore a new white dress, tied her girdle (kushtÐ) with its nine knots and returned to her community (À¿argushasb 1352: 44; cf. Boyce & Grenet 1375:: 415 & 421). It seems that Room H of the fire temple served as such a purification place. Historical Events Related to the Building and Destruction of the Fire Temple of Bandiyān After the victory over the Hephthalites and the death of their ruler, which happened near Marv, in gratitude for this immensely important victory, Bahrām V gave the order for the construction of a fire temple in the Dastgird of Bandiyān. The victory over the Hephthalites is represented on the southern wall of the congregational hall of Bandiyān (Fig. 27). It is unknown how people in different parts of Iran heard about this event but we know that the crown and sceptre of the slaughtered ruler was sent to the fire temple of À¿argushnasp and the wife of the defeated ruler, the khātūn, became a servant in the fire temple (Procopius: 19).

The human beings to be purified and the tools of purification are called pādyābÐ. The cow urine is consecrated by priests reading the Avesta. This liquid was used both for purification and for healing as it had antidemonic powers (VendÐdād: 657, 662). The urine was poured into a container called a pādyāb. Although the barashnūmgāh had to be far away from fire and water (Boyce & Grenet 1375: 421), and according to the religious prescriptions of the VendÐdād the distance had to be 30 steps (VendÐdād 15-17; RazÐ 1371: 1074), there were historical and social changes throughout time. One of these changes affected the traditions of the Zoroastrians and here Mary Boyce points to India where the barashnūmgāh is not situated far away but is found within the perimeter of the fire temple (Boyce & Grenet 1375: 424). Those who object to the existence of the barashnūmgāh in the perimeter of the fire temple at Bandiyān have to consider this fact. In addition, in Masālik va mamālik by IsÔakhrÐ describes the barashnūmgāh as being situated in the perimeter of the fire temple, which is further evidence in support of this argument:

By presenting the crown of the khāqān to the fire temple of À¿argushnasp, Bahrām V wanted to inform the people of western Iran of his victory, at the same time this was also a gesture of thanksgiving to the gods. As is mentioned in historical sources, Pÿr½z, the Sasanian ruler, suffered two defeats at the hand of the Hephthalites and during the second encounter he was killed. Khushnavāz, the Hephthalite ruler, invaded northern Iran causing havoc and destruction. Amongst the cities destroyed that year by the Hephthalites was Dastgird-i Bandiyān, and especially its fire temple where the victory of Bahrām V and the Hephthalite king is shown in the congregational hall. Before we looked at the mudbrick buildings above the ruins of the fire temple, we were under the impression that the massive destruction in this area and the loss of the stucco decoration was caused by farmers. But it soon

“In ShÐrÁz there is fire temple which is called masūbān. In the Zoroastrian tradition it is said that every woman during pregnancy or while menstruating, or who has 21

MEHDI RAHBAR became clear that the destruction of the fire temple had been caused by the Hephthalite invaders. A few years after the destruction the surface was levelled and another mudbrick building was erected (Figs 28 & 29).

Procopius. Jang hā-yi Ïrān va Rūm. Translated by M. Sa‘ÐdÐ. Tehran 1365. VendÐdād. Translated by H. RÁzÐ. 2 Vols. Second Edition. Tehran 1376. YaÝqÙbÐ. TarÐkh-i YaÝqÙbÐ. Translated by I. ÀyatÐ. Tehran 1366.

Therefore the fire temple, which was built or extended and repaired at the time of Bahrām V, and which included important stucco decoration, survived only for a short time. Lukonin dates the victory of Bahrām V over the Hephthalites to the fourth decade of the fifth century AD (Lukonin 1372: 245). Therefore, the fire temple of Bandiyān may have survived for only 40 years or so.

Secondary sources

Àmūzegār, Z. 1374. TārÐkh-i asātÐr-i Irān. Tehran. À¿argoshasb, A. 1352. Marasim-i ma¿habi va adab-i ZartushtÐyān. Tehran. Bashāsh-Kanzaq, R. 1376. Qarā’at-i kātÐbah- hā-yi In concluding I would like to thank all those who were Bandiyān-i Dargaz (Dastgirdi Yāzā Shāpūrāb). involved in the excavations at Bandiyān, and would also Tehran. like to express my gratitude to Bihrūz Amūghly, the Head Belnitsky, A. 1371. KhorÁsān va Māvara’l-nahr of the Conservation Group of the MÐrā³-i FarhangÐ of Translated by P. Varjavand. Tehran. Khurasan. Boyce, M., Grenet, T. F. 1375. TārÐkh-i kÐsh-i Zartusht vol III. Translated by H. San’atÐzādah. Tehran. Christensen, A. 1368. Irān dar zamān-i Sāsāniyān. Mehdi Rahbar Translated by R. YāsamÐ. Tehran. Sazeman-e Miras-e Farhangi Dūstkhvāh, J. 1362. Avistā az guzārish-i Pūr DÁvūd. Khiaban-e Azadi Tehran. Nabsh-e Khiaban-e Zanjan Diakonov, M.M. 1344. Ashkāniyān. Translated by K. Tehran Keshāvarz. Tehran. Iran Frye, R. N. 1373. MÐrā³-e bāstāni-ye Irān. Translated by M. RajabnÐyā. Tehran. Notes Godard, A. 1938. Les Monuments du Feu. Athar-e Iran 1 Naumann 1374: 50. In Zoroastrian tradition the pomegranate is 3: 7-80. regarded as one of the fruits of heaven. Still today at weddings it is Grenet, F. 1984. Les pratiques funéraires dans Asie given to the bride by the groom in order to encourage fertility. See centrale sédentaire de la conquête grecque à ØshÐdārÐ 1371: 128. 2 l’islamisation. Paris. The À¿argushnasp fire-temple, one of the three biggest Sasanian firetemples, measures 8 x 8 m and is therefore almost twice as big as the Hidāyat, S. 1342. Nairangistān. (Third edition). Tehran. Bandiyān fire-temple. Naumann 1374: 52. Jackson, W. 1352. Safar-nāmah-i Jackson. Translated by 3 This conforms to what Boyce has said about the height of braziers, B.AmÐrÐ. Tehran. which were waist high so that the king could pray. (Boyce & Grenet Le Strange, G. 1373. Jughrāfiyā-yi tārÐkhi-yi sarzamÐnhā1375: 84). 4 Bal‘amÐ: 654 states that Mihr Narseh founded four villages and in each yi khalāfÁ-yi sharqÐ. Translated by M. Irfan. village he made a garden and in each garden he grew a cypress and Tehran. endowed a thousand olive trees and palm trees and a garden for each Lukonin, V. G. 1372. Tamaddun-i Ïrān-i SāsānÐ. fire-temple. 5 Translated by A.A. Reªā. Tehran. Dūstkhvāh 1362: 336; Widengren 1377: 477. Besides a mortar a bell is mentioned which was used in ceremonies. Mazdāpūr, K. 1369. Shāyist va nāshāyist, matnÐ bih 6 In Zoroastrian religion snakes and scorpions are Ahrimanic and it is zabān-i PārsÐ-amÐyānih (Pahlavi-yi SāsānÐ). essential to kill them but the same animals are thought to be Tehran. representations of the sun in Mihr customs. See RÁzÐ 1371. 7 MuÒtafavÐ, M. T. 1338. AÎammiyat-i tÁrÐkh-i Jirrah dar Hidāyat says killing animals, even dangerous ones, is not acceptable in the Zoroastrian religion because blood sacrifice are forbidden (Hedayat sarzamÐn-i Fārs. Majallih-i Bāstān Shināsi 3 & 1342: 18). 4. Naumann, R. 1374. VÐrānih hā-yi Takht-i Sulaimān va References Zandān-i Sulaimān. Translated by F. Najd SamБÐ. Tehran. Primary sources Pūr Dāvūd, I. 1374. Yasnā. Edited by B. FarahvashÐ. Tehran. ArdÁ VÐrÁz NÁmag. Translated and edited by F. Vahman, Pūr Dāvūd, I. 2535 [1355] Farhang-e Irān-e bastān. 1986. Scandinavian Institute of Asian Studies Tehran. Monograph Series 53. London. Rahbar, M. 1378. Mo’arrifi-yi āduriyān-i makshūfa-yi Bal‘amÐ. TārÐkh-i Bal‘amÐ. Edited by M.TaqÐ Bahār. daurah-i SāsānÐ dar Bandiyān-i Dargaz va Tehran 1353. barrassi-yi mushkilāt-i mi‘māri-yi Ðn bānā. al-Biruni. The Chronology of Ancient Nations. Translated AvvalÐn Kongrih mi‘mārÐ va shahr-sāzi-yi Ïrān. by C.E. Sachau. Oriental Translation Fund of (Bam) 2: 314-344. Tehran. Great Britain and Ireland. London 1879. Rahbar, M. 1998. Découverte d’un monument d’époque IstakhrÐ. Masālik va mamālik. Translated by I. Afshār. Tehran 1368. sassanide à Bandian, Dargaz (Nord Khorasan). JaihānÐ, A. 1368. Ashkāl al-‘alam. Translated by A. Kātib. Tehran. 22

THE DISCOVERY OF A SASANIAN PERIOD FIRE TEMPLE AT BANDIYĀN, DARGAZ Fouilles 1994 et 1995. Studia Iranica 27/2: 213250. Rahbar, M. 1999. Decouverte de panneaux de stucs sassanides. Dossiers d'archeologie du Musee National d'Histoire et d'Art 243: 62-65. Rahbar, M. 2004. Le monument Sassanide de Bandian, Dargaz: un temple de feu d’après les dernièrs découvertes, 1996-98. Studia Iranica 33/1: 7-30. RajabÐ, P. 1375. Jashn-hā-yi ÏrānÐ. Tehran. RazÐ, H. 1371. ÀÞ Ðn-i mihr. Tehran.

Riªā‘i, A.A. 1374. AÒl va nasab va dÐn- hā-yi Ïrāniyān-i bastān. Tehran. Spuler, B. 1373. TārÐkh-i Ïrān dar qurūni nakhustÐn-i IslāmÐ vol. 1. Translated by J. FalātūrÐ. Tehran. Ushidari, J. 1371. Dānish-nāmih-i Mazda Yasnā. Tehran. Widengren, G. 1377. DÐn-hā-yi Ïrān. Translated by M. Farhang. Tehran. ZarrÐnkūb, A. H. 1364. TārÐkh -i mardum-i Ï rān qabl az Islām. Tehran.

23

MEHDI RAHBAR Figures

Figure 1: Map showing the location of Dargaz.

Figure 2: Plan of the temple (north is to the top). 24

THE DISCOVERY OF A SASANIAN PERIOD FIRE TEMPLE AT BANDIYĀN, DARGAZ

Figure 3: Pillar of the columned hall showing the building material used.

Figure 4: Columned hall, view from west.

25

MEHDI RAHBAR

Figure 5: Possible plaster parts of the column capitals.

Figure 6: The northwest corner of the hall.

26

THE DISCOVERY OF A SASANIAN PERIOD FIRE TEMPLE AT BANDIYĀN, DARGAZ

Figure 7: Drawing of one of the pillars in the columned hall. 27

MEHDI RAHBAR

Figure 8: Example of the sealings found on the floor of Room B.

Figure 9: Example of the sealings found on the floor of Room B.

28

THE DISCOVERY OF A SASANIAN PERIOD FIRE TEMPLE AT BANDIYĀN, DARGAZ

Figure 10: Mud benches at the side of the ante-chamber of the fire temple; the entrance to the hall is on the right.

Figure 11: Low wall in front of the west entrance to the hall.

29

MEHDI RAHBAR

Figure 12: Small mud bench in the western corner of the southern platform of the fire temple.

30

THE DISCOVERY OF A SASANIAN PERIOD FIRE TEMPLE AT BANDIYĀN, DARGAZ

Figure 13: Inner space of the fire temple with the Room C on the right; the western platform is on the left.

Figure 14: The gypsum fire holder of the fire temple.

31

MEHDI RAHBAR

Figure 15: Drawing of the fire holder.

32

THE DISCOVERY OF A SASANIAN PERIOD FIRE TEMPLE AT BANDIYĀN, DARGAZ

Figure 16: Room E on the northern side of the fire temple.

Figure 17: Parts of the ustudān in the east.

33

MEHDI RAHBAR

Figure 18: Drawing of the ustudāns in the west showing cover, supports and dividing walls.

Figure 19: Half-cone cover made from mud in Room E.

34

THE DISCOVERY OF A SASANIAN PERIOD FIRE TEMPLE AT BANDIYĀN, DARGAZ

Figure 20: Square base with a round opening for the half-cone cover from the floor in Room E.

Figure 21: Reconstruction of the square ustudān on the eastern side. 35

MEHDI RAHBAR

Figure 22: Hunting scene of the ruler on the ustudān.

Figure 23: The Sasanian ruler hunting; one of the miniature paintings on the ustudān in room E.

36

THE DISCOVERY OF A SASANIAN PERIOD FIRE TEMPLE AT BANDIYĀN, DARGAZ

Figure 24: Fight between a fabulous creature and a cow whose udder is being bitten by a scorpion.

37

MEHDI RAHBAR

Figure 25: Ass with a swastika sign on its hind leg and a scorpion in its belly; the saddled horse is a symbol of MithrÁ.

Figure 26: The round space in the barashnūmgāh (Room G).

38

THE DISCOVERY OF A SASANIAN PERIOD FIRE TEMPLE AT BANDIYĀN, DARGAZ

Figure 27: Depiction of the battle between Bahrām V and the Hephthalite ruler

Figure 28: Traces of building activity occurring after the destruction of the fire temple by the Hephthalites.

39

MEHDI RAHBAR

Figure 29: Remains of the destroyed fireplace below more recent brick structure.

40

A Sasanian Site at BÁrbÁr, BaÎrain Vesta Sarkhosh Curtis and Søren F. Andersen At the Sasanian Conference, a selection of possible Sasanian pottery and eleven fragments of a life-sized, human stone sculpture were presented. These finds were uncovered during the Danish excavations in the 1950’s and early 1960’s of a Bronze Age temple complex at BÁrbÁr in BaÎrain, where more recent layers overlay the Bronze Age remains. These excavations are now published (Andersen & Højlund 2003) and some final results relating to the post Bronze Age activities can therefore be presented.

consists of two classes of pottery, the first is defined by alkaline-glazed pottery of types which do not belong in either the Seleucid/Parthian or the Islamic periods and the second by a very hard-fired fabric with lime grits. Exact parallels for some of the sherds of the first may be found from the excavation of the third century AD fortress at ed-DÙr in Umm al-Qaiwain (UAE). The large, glazed fishplate (Fig. 1) with a thickened, overhanging rim (Lecomte 1993: fig. 4.1) seems to be a late typological development of the fishplate. The concave bases (Figs 2–3) are not paralleled in the late Parthian material from Failaka or from QalaÝat al- BaÎrain, but similar bases appear at al-QuÒÙr, an early Islamic site on Failaka (Patitucci & Uggeri 1984: figs 57.609 & 58.629). However, the examples from al- QuÒÙr are without the internal incised rings seen on the one example illustrated from BÁrbÁr (Fig. 3). This is a feature which is commonly found on bases from late Parthian layers at the QalaÝat alBaÎrain (Højlund & Andersen 1994: 289), but not earlier, which indicates that this type of base was in use during most of the Sasanian and very early Islamic period, with the incised rings being a relatively early feature.

The exploration of the Sasanian period in Eastern Arabia has suffered from a scarcity of recognized Sasanian finds. However, the problem of identifying Sasanian pottery is slowly being resolved due to recent excavation of stratified sites in the UAE, e.g. KÙsh, Khatt, Mleiha and ed-DÙr. In BaÎrain an isolated house, or maybe a fire temple, was excavated near the modern village of SÁr by the Department of Antiquities. Within a rectangular building a coin dating to the fifth century AD and a few sherds were recovered, but the amount of finds from this site is very limited (Crawford et al. 1997: 20). At QalaÝat al- BaÎrain, which in most periods seems to have been the capital of ancient BaÎrain, a few sherds of beakers in Fine Orange Painted Ware document activities in the Sasanian period (Højlund & Andersen 1997: figs. 886895). Together with the sherds in Fine Orange Painted Ware, fragments of vessels in a very hard fired grey fabric with simple out-turned rims were recovered (Andersen 2001: 77-79). Exact parallels for both groups may be found in the material from the third century AD fortress at ed-DÙr in the UAE (Lecomte 1993: figs. 8.11 & 12.1-12.4) and it is therefore reasonable to suggest that the finds from the QalaÝat document an early Sasanian occupation of the site (Andersen 2001: 97-98). A Sasanian phase of the occupation of the so-called Coastal-Fortress at QalaÝat al- BaÎrain has also been suggested, but the related pottery only features one sherd that is securely datable to the Sasanian period and the argument seems therefore rather unconvincing (Lombard & Kervran 1993: 137-138, fig. 16.1). The majority of finds relating to the fortress can be dated to the Islamic period (Højlund & Andersen 1994: 293; Frifelt 2001: 3746). A few graves from the so-called Late Tylos period have contained glass vessels of a Sasanian date (Lombard & Kervran 1989: 86; Simpson 1992: 334-335) and some earthenware vessels (unpublished). However, a significant site from the Sasanian period in BaÎrain has yet to be found.

In the second class of pottery, characterized by a very hard-fired fabric with lime grits, close similarities to the ed-DÙr assemblage was also recognized. A simple outturned rim (Fig. 4) is a common type in the BÁrbÁr assemblage: all examples being in a dark grey fabric with lime grits up to 3 mm in diameter. The Thin Grey Ware from ed-DÙr is a good parallel to this (Lecomte 1993: fig. 8.11). The same form is known from KÙsh in a very hardfired fabric (CLINKY-ware), but reddish in colour (Kennet 2002: 157). However, that specific combination of form and fabric is not present in the BÁrbÁr collection, but a rim from a jug (Fig. 5) does illustrate the same characteristics as the fabric description for CLINKYware. The rim of a large vessel (Fig. 6) in a similar hardfired, dark-grey fabric is also closely paralleled at ed-DÙr (Lecomte 1993: fig 8.5). This is a quite common type of rim amongst the larger vessels in the BÁrbÁr assemblage and is also seen in a brown fabric with a sandy texture. Similar rims in the latter fabric have been reported from the Sasanian period site at JazÐrat al-Ghanam (de Cardi 1972: 306). A large group of body sherds from storage vessels is also present, with the distinctive feature of raised bands, c. 1.5 cm wide running around the vessel from the lower to the upper body. This feature is seen at the QalaÝat al- BaÎrain in the late Parthian period on vessels in a very hard-fired black fabric (Højlund & Andersen 1994: 288) and is abundant at ed-DÙr. At the late Sasanian site of ÍÁjÐÁbÁd in Fars Province, the same feature is also seen (Azarnoush 1994: 185.o). At BaÎrain this feature may continue until the ninth century AD or later, since a very large fragment in a hard-fired reddish fabric was recovered from the fill of the BÁrbÁr Well (Frifelt 2001: fig. 39).

The Pottery A huge amount of easily identifiable Bronze Age and Abbasid pottery was recovered from the excavations of the BÁrbÁr temple complex, but during the recent publication work a third group was discovered. This

41

VESTA SARKHOSH CURTIS AND SØREN F. ANDERSEN ankle and at the toes. The sole and the right side of the shoe are plain, while the top and inner side are decorated with a design of dots and lines. The lines are arranged in squares and one line runs diagonally across the ankle. At the meeting point of the diagonal and horizontal lines at the side of the foot some other carved lines are visible. These may have been part of a decorative clasp, perhaps made of metal.

The decorative pattern on the neck of a larger storage vessel (Fig. 7) is not paralleled in the published material from the excavated sites in the UAE, but is seen on vessels from ÍÁjÐÁbÁd (Azarnoush 1994: 174.f, 180.y, 183.a). The fabric of this sherd contains many black inclusions up to 2.5 mm in size. The rim of a jug (Fig. 8) is of a similar fabric and both sherds have traces of a black slip or wash. These features are not seen in the rest of the BÁrbÁr assemblage but are included in the general description of the material from ÍÁjÐÁbÁd (Azarnoush 1994: 186-187).

Fragment 3 (517.AKP, Figs 18-19): length 8 cm; width 8 cm, belongs to the front part of a shoe broken on three sides. The decoration consists of a line of dotted pearls at the top of the foot. The surface treatment on either side of the decorative strip is different: to the right the surface is well carved, while the other side is less well treated. This piece is not part of Fragment 2 (see above), as the breaks do not match, but both fragments could belong to one and the same statue.

The closest parallels for most of the datable sherds in the BÁrbÁr collection are found in the third century AD assemblage from ed-DÙr, but other sherds do illustrate different characteristics that strongly indicate a later date within the Sasanian period. The Sculpture Fragments

Fragment 2 is decorated on the left side. This indicates that the shoe was meant to be viewed from that side, but Fragment 3 has its decoration above the toes; the surface treatment to the right side of the dotted pattern indicates that the right side was visible to the viewer. As the two shoe fragments were to be seen from the side rather than the front, and as one piece seems to belong to the right foot (Fragment 2) and the other to the left foot (Fragment 3), we can assume that the feet were pointing out and therefore the inside of each shoe, which was visible, was decorated. The actual statue was probably placed against a wall, as was the custom with dedicatory statues from Hatra, for example, where the backs of the statues were often left unpolished (Matthiesen 1992: 213-215).

Altogether ten fragments of sculpture in the round and one inscribed fragment were found during the excavations in the BÁrbÁr Temple. All the fragments are carved from oolitic limestone. One fragment seems to be part of a human arm, while two others are parts of shoes. A small fourth piece has part of an inscription and the remaining seven small pieces cannot be identified. Five of them (Figs 9-13) do, however, illustrate folds or rows of dotted pearls as on fragments 1-3. Fragment 1 (517.FM, Figs 14-15): length 31 cm; width 11 cm, seems to belong to a human arm which is bent at the elbow. The hand is broken off and parts are missing inside the elbow. A pattern of dots arranged in one vertical and three horizontal lines indicates the decoration on the sleeve of the garment. Traces of diagonal folds are visible on the upper arm. The break inside the arm as well as the angle of the elbow and the rows of dotted pearls decoration indicate that the fragment belonged to a right arm, which was held close to the body.

In late Parthian art, the decoration on tunics and trousers is often repeated on shoes. This is noticeable at Palmyra, Dura Europos and Hatra, and also at Masjid-i SulaimÁn and Bard-i NishÁndih (Mathiesen 1992: figs 28, 82; Curtis 2000: 33, fig. 9, pl. III; 2001: pls VIII.a, VIII.b, X.a, X.e, XI.b). Also popular at this time, and in the Sasanian period, are shoes and boots decorated with round clasps on the ankles (Curtis 2001: X.e; Trever & Lukonin 1987: no. 17). This was also fashionable in Indo-Scythian and KÙshÁn art of the first and second centuries AD (Rosenfield 1967: pl. 120).

The statue may have originally been clad in a type of garment, which consisted of a long-sleeved tunic or jacket. It is possible that this was combined with a cloak, as folds on the upper arm indicate an outer garment. This type of costume was often combined with trousers in the Parthian and also Sasanian periods. Also common in late Parthian and Sasanian art was elaborate decoration on the sleeves of tunics and jackets. Statues, reliefs, terracotta figurines and wall paintings from the late Parthian period at Masjid-i SulaimÁn, Bard-i NishÁndih, SÙsÁ, WarkÁ, AshÙr and Hatra, and also Palmyra and Dura Europos of the late second and early third century AD show this type of appliqué work or embroidery on tunics and trousers (Andrae & Lenzen 1933: 109, fig. 46 and pl. 58e; Curtis 1998: IV.a, IV.b; 2000: 33, fig.9, pls 5, 7, 9 and III; 2001: pls VIIIX-VIIIXI). Similar decoration was also popular on Indo-Scythian and KÙshÁn-period sculpture to the east of the Parthian empire (Rosenfield 1967: pls 16, 20).

The frontal pose and gesture of adoration with one raised hand are characteristic of the art of the late Parthianperiod (Safar & Mustafa 1974: pls 1, 9, 25-33, 251, 326327; Curtis 1994: II-III; 2001: pl. X). At Bard-i NishÁndih and Masjid-i SulaimÁn standing male figures sometimes hold a cone, a palm leaf or a cornucopia in their left hand (Ghirshman 1977 II: pls XXIV.4, XXV, XXXVII). The cornucopia is also depicted at Tang-i Sarvak (Vanden Berghe & Schippmann 1985: pl. 28). Worshipping figures with the raised right hand are also popular on funerary stele from graveyards in BaÎrain (Lombard 1999: nos. 358-359, 361). There is a striking resemblance between these and Elymaian reliefs of the late second and early third centuries from Bard-i Nishandih and Masjid-i SulaimÁn in south western Iran ð

Fragment 2 (517.AKH, Figs 16-17): length 16.5 cm; width 11cm, belongs to a shoe. It is broken just above the 42

A SASANIAN SITE AT BĀRBĀR, BAðRAIN secular importance, possibly in the third or fourth century AD.

(cf. Curtis 1994: pl. I). Human figures at these two sites are represented frontally. Sometimes only one foot appears in profile (Ghirshman 1977 II: pls 32, 33), but mostly both feet are in profile and face outwards (Ghirshman 1977 II: pls XXV, XXXVI.1, LXXXIII.1-2). Elymaian rock reliefs, especially at ShimbÁr and Tang-i Sarvak, depict figures with both feet turned out (Vanden Berghe & Schippmann 1985: figs 4, 6, 8, 11). This pose also remained popular throughout the Sasanian period. For example, the Narseh relief at Naqsh-i Rustam of the late third century shows male and female figures with both feet facing opposite directions (Herrmann 1977: pls 11-13). The same pose is adopted on the fifth century relief of ArdashÐr II at TÁq-i BustÁn (Ghirshman 1962: pl. 233). Figures with feet pointing in opposite directions appear also on Sasanian silver plates (Trever & Lukonin 1987: nos 17, 19).

Vesta Sarkhosh Curtis Department of Coins and Medals The British Museum Great Russell Street London WC1B 3DG UK [email protected] Søren F. Andersen Department of Classical Archaeology University of Århus DK-8000 Århus C Denmark [email protected]

One of the most popular themes in late Parthian art was worshipping figures, who are shown either in a pose of adoration, e.g. at Hatra, Masjid-i SulaimÁn and Bard-i NishÁndih (Ghirshmann 1977 II: pls. XXIV.4, XXV, XXVIII.1, LXXXII.1-4, LXXXV; Safar & Mustafa 1974: pl. 197) or are shown sacrificing over an altar, e.g at BÐsitÙn, Bard-i NishÁndih, ShimbÁr, Tang-i Sarvak and Ashur (Andrae & Lenzen 1933: 109, fig. 46; Curtis 2001: pl. VIII; Ghirshmann 1977 II: pl. XIII.3; Vanden Berghe & Schippmann 1985: pls 22, 39, 45). It is possible that the fragments of sculpture from the BÁrbÁr temple may have belonged to a worshipping figure, as this tradition was popular in the Mesopotamian and Iranian world in the second and early third centuries AD.

References Andrae, W., Lenzen, H. 1933. Die Partherstadt Assur. Leipzig. Andersen, H.H., Højlund, F. 2003. The Barbar Temples. Jutland Archaeological Society Publications 48. Moesgård. Andersen, S.F. 2001. An investigation of the pottery from c. 300 BC to c. 600 AD from the Danish excavations at Qala’at al-Bahrain. MA-thesis (in Danish), University of Århus. [Unpublished]. Azarnoush, M. 1994. The Sasanian Manor House at Hajiabad, Iran. Florence. Crawford, H., Killick, R., Moon, J. 1997. The Dilmun Temple at Saar. London-Bahrain Archaeological Expedition: Saar Excavation Reports I. London. de Cardi, B. 1972. A Sasanian outpost in northern Oman. Antiquity 46: 305-10. Curtis, V.S. 1994. More Parthian finds from Elymais. Iranica Antiqua 29: 201-214. Curtis, V.S. 1998. The Parthian costume and headdress. Pages 61-73 in J.Wiesehöfer (ed.). Das Partherreich und seine Zeugnisse. Beiträge des internationalen Colloquiums, Eutin (27. – 30. Juni 1996). Stuttgart. Curtis, V.S. 2000. Parthian culture and costume. Pages 23-32 in J. Curtis (ed.). Mesopotamia and Iran in the Parthian and Sasanian periods. London. Curtis, V.S. 2001. Parthian belts and belt clasps. Iranica Antiqua 36: 299-327. Frifelt, K. 2001. Islamic Remains in Bahrain. Jutland Archaeological Society Publications 36. Moesgård. Ghirshman, 1962. Iran. Parthes et sasssanides. Paris. Ghirshman, R. 1977. Terrasses Sacrées de Bard-è Nechandeh et Masjid-I Solaiman. Mission Délégation archéologique en Iran 45. Leiden. Herrmann, G. 1977. Naqsh-i Rustam 5 and 8. Iranische Denkmäler II Lief. 8. Berlin. Højlund, F., Andersen, H.H. 1994. Qala'at al-Bahrain, volume 1. Jutland Archaeological Society Publications 30:1. Århus.

From the very limited evidence presented by the small pieces of sculpture from the BÁrbÁr Temple site, it is almost impossible to determine their exact date. However, it would not be far-fetched to suggest a late Parthian/early Sasanian date of perhaps the third or fourth century AD, particularly in view of the close parallels with Elymaian material of the early third century AD from south-western Iran. Fragment 4 (517.AKH, Figs 20-21): length 12.6; width 16 cm, shows traces of an inscription, probably in Aramaic (Prof. Mark Geller, personal communication). It is difficult to establish whether this fragmentary inscription was part of a statue base, as known from the sculpture of Hatra (Safar & Mustafa 1974: pls. 4, 197) or not, but in any case it is likely that it belonged to the same figure as the above fragments. Conclusion The pottery briefly presented in this paper indicates activities at the BÁrbÁr site from the late Parthian/early Sasanian period and throughout the Sasanian period, but the pottery alone does not give any idea of the nature of these activities. However, the recovery of the sculpture fragments suggests that it was not merely a settlement of local peasants working in the surrounding gardens, but the site could have been a place of some religious or 43

VESTA SARKHOSH CURTIS AND SØREN F. ANDERSEN der Seleukiden- und Partherzeit im südlichen Babylonien und im Golfgebiet. Tübingen. Mathiesen, H.E. 1992. Sculpture in the Parthian Empire. (2 vols). Århus. Patitucci, S., Uggeri, G. 1984. Failakah: Insediamenti Medievali Islamici, ricerche e Scavi nel Kuwait. Rome. Rosenfield, J.M. 1967. The Dynastic Art of the Kushans. Los Angeles. Safar, F., Mustafa, M.A. 1974. Hatra. The City of the Sun God. Baghdad. Simpson, St. J. 1992. Aspects of the Archaeology of the Sasanian Period in Mesopotamia. D.Phil. Thesis, University of Oxford. [Unpublished]. Trever, K.V., Lukonin, V.G. 1987. Sasanidskoye serevo. Sobranie Gosudarstvennogo Ermitazha. Xudozhestvennaja kul’tura Irana III-VIII vekov. Moscow. Vanden Berghe, L., Schippmann, K. 1985. Les relief rupèstres d’Elymaïde (Iran) de l’époque parthe. Ghent.

Højlund, F., Andersen, H. H. 1997. Qala'at al-Bahrain, volume 2. Jutland Archaeological Society Publications 30:2. Århus. Kennet, D. 2002. Sasanian pottery in Southern Iran and Eastern Arabia. Iran 40: 153-162. Lecomte, O. 1993. Ed-Dur, les occupations des 3e et 4e s. ap. J.-C.: contexte des trouvailles et materiel diagnostique. Pages 195-218 in U. Finkbeiner (ed.). Materialien zur Archäologie der Seleukiden- und Partherzeit im südlichen Babylonien und im Golfgebiet. Tübingen. Lombard, P. 1999. Bahrain. La civilisation de deux mers de Dilmoun à Tylos. Paris. Lombard, P., Kervran, M. 1989. Bahrain National Museum, Archaeological Collections Volume 1. Bahrain. Lombard, P., Kervran, M. 1993. Les Niveaux “Hellénistiques” du Tell de Qal’at Al-Bahrain. Données préliminaires. Pages 127-160 in U. Finkbeiner (ed.). Materialien zur Archäologie

44

A SASANIAN SITE AT BĀRB BĀR, BAðRAIN N Figures

Figure 1: Fisshplate in alkaaline-glazed ware w (Ø=32 cm).

Figure 2: Cooncave base inn alkaline-glazzed ware (Ø=7 cm).

Figure 3: Cooncave base inn alkaline-glazzed ware (Ø=6 cm).

Figure 4: Rim m of jar in harrdfired ware (Ø=13 ( cm).

Figure 5: Rim m of jar in harrdfired ware (Ø=8 ( cm).

Figure 6: Rim m of storage vessel v in hardffired ware (Ø Ø=24 cm).

Figure 7: Deecorated neck fragment f in hardfired h waree (Ø=18 cm).

Figure 8: Deecorated rim fragment f in haardfired ware (Ø=12 cm).

45

VESTA SARKHOSH CURTIS AND SØREN F. ANDERSEN

Figure 9: Sculpture fragment with rows of dotted pearls (Length 9.3 cm).

Figure 10: Sculpture fragment with rendering of drapery (Length 13.6 cm).

46

A SASANIAN SITE AT BĀRBĀR, BAðRAIN

Figure 11: Sculpture fragment with rendering of drapery (Length 11 cm). 47

VESTA SARKHOSH CURTIS AND SØREN F. ANDERSEN

Figure 12: Sculpture fragment with rows of dotted pearls (Length 12.1 cm).

Figure 13: Sculpture fragment with possible rendering of drapery (Length 8 cm). 48

A SASANIAN SITE AT BĀRB BĀR, BAðRAIN N

Figure 14: Fragment F 1, fraagment of arm m (Length 31 cm). c

Figure 15: Fragment F 1.

49

VESTA SARK KHOSH CURTIS S AND SØREN F. F ANDERSEN

Figure 16: Fragment F 2, fraagment of a shhoe (Length 16.5 1 cm).

Figure 17: Fragment F 2.

50

A SASANIAN SITE AT BĀRB BĀR, BAðRAIN N

Figure 18: Fragment F 3, fraagment of fronnt part of a shhoe (Length 8 cm).

Figure 19: Fragment F 3.

51

VESTA SARKHOSH CURTIS AND SØREN F. ANDERSEN

Figure 20: Fragment 4, fragment with a possible Aramaic inscription (Length 12.6 cm).

52

A SASANIAN SITE AT BĀRBĀR, BAðRAIN

Figure 21: Fragment 4.

53

Sasanian Coins from ‘UmÁn and BaÎrain Derek Kennet were used to refer to Eastern Arabia.2 Although the limits of these two areas are not precisely defined, and may have fluctuated through time, BaÎrain is usually used to refer to the area between modern Kuwait and Qatar, including the island of Bahrain, whilst ‘UmÁn is used to refer to the Oman Peninsula, although it should be noted that both toponyms were used by some sources to refer to the whole of Eastern Arabia as far north as southern Iraq (e.g. Beaucamp & Robin 1983: 175; Fiey 1969: 209 n. 196 & 198; Omar 1988: 29).

Introduction Eastern Arabia was only a marginal part of the Sasanian Empire but it may have been significant to the Sasanians for a number of reasons. Firstly, Arabia made up part of the western frontier with the Roman/Byzantine world and influence amongst the tribes that lived there may have been important to the security of the frontier. Secondly, unrest amongst the tribes of this region potentially threatened some of the core provinces of the Sasanian Empire, as was demonstrated by Arab raiding of coastal Fars in the 3rd century and again in the 7th century with the Islamic conquests. Thirdly, a significant amount of trade appears to have passed through the region during Hellenistic and Parthian times and this may have continued into the early Sasanian period. Control of this trade was potentially important to Sasanian interests. Fourthly, it has been argued that exploitation of the natural resources of the region was also of some importance, although the evidence for this is still rather thin (Morony 1380).

It is less certain what the different parts of the region were called by the Sasanians. MazÙn (Mzw[n]) is listed in the 3rd century AD province list of ShÁpÙr I (240-270 AD) on the KaÝba of Zoroaster at Naqsh-i Rustam and almost certainly covered at least the area called ‘UmÁn in the early Islamic tradition (Maricq 1958: 337; Potts 1985: 88-93; Potts 1990ii: 329-30, 339). However, there is no specific reference to the BaÎrain area in ShÁpÙr I’s province list and it is not certain how it was referred to or to which Sasanian province it belonged at that time. According to Brunner (1983: 757), the whole of the south shore of the Persian Gulf from Bahrain to the Straits of Hormuz, formed the province of MazÙn, whilst Frye (1983: 167-8) has suggested that the omission of any term referring specifically to the BaÎrain area was either because this area was considered a part of MazÙn, or because it came under the jurisdiction of Fars. As will be shown below, the possibility that ‘MazÙn’, as mentioned in ShÁpÙr I’s list, may have referred to the whole of Eastern Arabia including BaÎrain, has important implications for our understanding of the Sasanian relationship with ‘UmÁn at this time.

This paper will briefly re-examine the 76 known Sasanian coins from Eastern Arabia. It will be argued that they give some fresh insights into the nature of the region during the Sasanian period and that their geographical distribution and chronological profile reflect the differing sub-regional relationships with the Sasanian Empire and its satraps, the Lakhmids. Sasanian control over Eastern Arabia began with ArdashÐr I’s (224-239 AD) campaign of the early 3rd century. A second campaign into the region became necessary early in the reign of ShÁpÙr II (309-379 AD) in response to an apparent loss of control that resulted in Arab raiding into the Sasanian homeland. Sasanian influence appears to have declined during the late 4th and 5th century, and it was not until the reign of Khusrau I (531-579 AD) in the 6th century that control appears to have been once more established. This time it seems to have endured more or less until the Islamisation of the area in the 7th century. During this 400-year period the precise extent and nature of Sasanian control is uncertain. It clearly fluctuated through time and across the region; in some instances we hear of formal Sasanian governors but for most of the period control appears to have been exerted through the client Lakhmid dynasty based in ÍÐra.1 Based on archaeological evidence, the present author has recently argued that the Sasanian period witnessed a dramatic decline in economic activity across the whole of Eastern Arabia, resulting in the abandonment of urban centres and general depopulation (Kennet 2007).

The uncertainty expressed by Brunner and Frye surrounding the extent of MazÙn seems to result partly from the ambiguity surrounding the Nestorian ecclesiastical structure in the Gulf. The Nestorian ecclesiastical provinces and dioceses, which tended, by and large, to follow Sasanian civil divisions, are normally much better documented by extant sources. However, in this case there seems to be some uncertainty over whether or not the Bÿt QaÔrÁyÿ, which was centred on the BaÎrain area, encompassed the diocese of MazÙn or whether MazÙn was, to some degree, a separate entity (Fiey 1969: 177, 209-219; Beaucamp & Robin 1983: 171, 183-4). For example, as Potts has pointed out, it is notable that a bishop of MazÙn is the only bishop from the Arabian side of the Gulf listed as being present at the Nestorian synods of 424, 544 and 576 AD (Synodicon Orientale: 285, 328, 332 n.3, 368; Potts 1990ii: 247, 250, 252). It is also notable that MazÙn was not amongst the dioceses of the Bÿt QaÔrÁyÿ specifically listed by the Nestorian patriarch Išō’yahb III in his letter to the people of the Bÿt QaÔrÁyÿ around the middle of the 7th century (Išō’yahb III: letter 18, 193-4). These sources suggest a degree of separation between the two areas, however, MazÙn is grouped

‘UmÁn and BaÎrayn In the early Islamic historical tradition - that is, from about the 9th century AD - the names BaÎrain and ‘Umān 55

DEREK KENNET together with the dioceses of the Bÿt QaÔrÁyÿ in the list of those who attended the synod of 676 AD and also by Moses of Khorene, whose list of provinces probably reflects the situation during the late Sasanian empire (Synodicon Orientale: 482; Marquart 1901: 5-6, 16, 4244). It is difficult to be certain of the significance of these points, but they do seem to show that MazÙn and the Bÿt QaÔrÁyÿ were separate ecclesiastical entities - at least during the 5th and 6th centuries, although the situation may have changed after this time.

provinces in the list of KartÐr that was compiled about 30 years after ShÁpÙr I’s list at the Naqsh-i Rustam (Gignoux 1971: 92-3). Gignoux suggests two possible reasons for this omission; either MazÙn was included by KartÐr amongst the provinces of AnÿrÁn, or it had perhaps revolted and had ceased to be part of the Sasanian empire by the time KartÐr‘s list was compiled. If Brunner (1983: 757) is right about the geographical extent of MazÙn, it is also possible that ShÁpÙr I’s claim might have referred only to BaÎrain rather than to ‘UmÁn specifically or the whole of Eastern Arabia. Considering these points together, it might be argued that the ‘UmÁn area was not under Sasanian control during the reign of ShÁpÙr I and that it was not brought under Sasanian control by ArdashÐr’s campaign either.

It also appears to be the case that, for much of its history at least, the Bÿt QaÔrÁyÿ was considered to be a part of Fars, or ‘Persis and the Isles’ as it was sometimes called, which became a Nestorian ecclesiastical province in the early 5th century (Fiey 1969: 177-9, 209; Potts 1990ii: 244-7), but whether this indicates that the BaÎrain area also came under the jurisdiction of Fars in the civil administrative structure of the early Sasanian period, as Frye has suggested, is not certain.

It is also notable that ‘UmÁn is not specifically mentioned in the accounts of ShÁpÙr II’s Arabian campaign of c. 325 AD (e.g. al-Tha’ÁlibÐ: 517-521; ÓabarÐ: 54-56; Ibn alAthÐr: 393). If we accept Potts’ view that al-Tha’ÁlibÐ’s mention of Lakhmid control over ‘the area between alÍira and the ÍijÁz in the time of Bahram V GÙr (420-439 AD) does not include ‘UmÁn, then it is not until the first half of the 6th century in relation to the reinstatement of the Lakhmid king Mundhir III, that ‘UmÁn features specifically in historical sources as an area of Sasanian/Lakhmid control, but this appears to be a rather formulaic political claim and is not, therefore, necessarily to be taken literally (Potts 1990ii: 330, 334-335).

As the early Sasanian administrative structure of Eastern Arabia is somewhat nebulous, it is impossible to be certain whether or not the distinction that is made between BaÎrain and ‘UmÁn in many of the early Islamic sources that describe Sasanian Eastern Arabia is a projection back into the past of the early Islamic geographical divisions - themselves somewhat ambiguous - or whether it is an informed description of the situation during the Sasanian period. The ambiguity might be resolved by a detailed study of the historical sources but such a task is far beyond the scope of the present paper, for which purposes it is important only to note the uncertainty in our understanding of the Sasanian administrative divisions in Eastern Arabia and the fact that where, in the early Islamic sources, the names BaÎrain and ‘UmÁn are used to represent Sasanian geographical or administrative names, there might be some ambiguity in their precise meaning.

Whilst it might be wrong to make too much of these issues, they do leave open the possibility that ‘UmÁn and BaÎrain experienced quite different relationships with Sasanian/Lakhmid power throughout the 3rd to 7th century. Whilst BaÎrain appears to have been subject to a fluctuating degree of control from the time of ArdashÐr I onwards, it is possible that ‘UmÁn was completely outside formal Sasanian control, perhaps until as late as the reign of Khusrau I or beyond. There is, however, a great deal of uncertainty surrounding the sources and it is therefore important to approach the archaeological evidence without historical preconceptions.

With this ambiguity in mind it is worth noting some possible discrepancies in the early Islamic sources that might be indicative of differences in the history the Sasanian relationship with the two areas. The first is the apparent contradiction in the sources about whether or not ArdashÐr I’s original c. 240 AD East Arabian campaign involved the conquest of ‘UmÁn. As Piacentini has pointed out, there are two traditions; one is represented by al-DÐnawarÐ and the anonymous Nihāyat al-ÝArab which indicates that ArdashÐr’s campaign involved ‘UmÁn, BaÎrain and al-YamÁma whilst the other, represented by al-ÓabarÐ and Ibn al-AthÐr, suggests that it involved only BaÎrain (Piacentini 1985: 63-4. Potts 1990ii: 329, n. 305). The discrepancy might be a meaningless omission, or it might be a result of the ambiguity surrounding the Sasanian administrative names and their early Islamic equivalents, or it might be a reflection of historical reality.

The Archaeological Evidence The Sasanian-period archaeological evidence from Eastern Arabia has recently been reviewed by the present author (Kennet 2007). Once the large amount of wrongly dated evidence is removed from consideration there is surprisingly little evidence for activity, suggesting that this was a time of declining population and economic activity. It is also argued that there are two distinct zones within which the Sasanian-period archaeological evidence is concentrated; one comprising Bahrain and the adjacent coast of the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia and a second comprising the northern part of the Sultanate of ‘UmÁn and the United Arab Emirates. No reliable evidence has yet been reported from beyond these areas, but it is possible that this is at least in part due to a lack of archaeological fieldwork.

The potential significance of this discrepancy is increased by the fact that MazÙn is not listed amongst the Sasanian

56

SASANIAN COINS FROM ‘UMĀN AND BAðRAIN Sasanian period.3 With the exception of a single coin of Yazdgard II (438-457 AD) from Jabal Kenzan [Kinzan] there are no coins from the intervening hundred or so years, which is therefore designated the ‘middle period’ in this paper.

Clearly, the two zones of archaeological evidence coincide with the historical areas of BaÎrain and ‘UmÁn that have been discussed above. The archaeological evidence also indicates some notable differences between the two areas: the BaÎrain evidence consists primarily of coins and coin hoards, isolated luxury finds such as seals, rings and figurines, three settlements, two on Bahrain (Qa’alat al-Bahrain and BÁrbÁr) and one on the mainland (Darin), and a few graves, all of which are on Bahrain. Whilst in ‘UmÁn the pattern is different, settlements are the most common category of sites, there being seven or eight of these, whilst there are only about four graves, a very small number of coins and no isolated luxury finds at all.

The coins can also be divided into sporadic finds and hoard finds. Sporadic finds, of which there are 34 in total, are those coins that have come either from archaeological excavations, or have been picked up individually or in small numbers by archaeological surveys or amateur coin collectors. A further 42 coins come from four separate hoards: al-Rakah (Morris 1994); Tarut, which is unpublished but has been briefly described by Potts and Cribb (1995: 124-125); Sinaw (Lowick 1983) and Fujairah, about which a word of explanation needs to be given. The Fujairah hoard consists of 18 silver coins and some silver bangles and was found on the outskirts of Fujairah in the United Arab Emirates. Nothing has ever been published about the hoard apart from a very brief note that ascribed all of the coins to the reigns of Hormizd IV or Khusrau II (Hellyer 1995). However, recent examination of photographs of the coins by V. Sarkhosh Curtis has shown this to be incorrect. The hoard is, in fact, made up of nine coins of KavÁd I, seven of Khusrau I, one of BahrÁm VI and one of BalÁsh.4

There is potential overlap between these categories of finds: for example many of the isolated finds, and indeed some of the coins, may have originated either as grave goods or may have come from settlements. Nonetheless, there is a marked difference between the two areas which may be indicative of quite different patterns of occupation. The evidence from the mainland part of BaÎrain is perhaps suggestive of sparse, non-sedentary occupation by groups who possessed and perhaps also used some Sasanian coins and who also had some limited access to relatively high-status luxury goods such as seals, jewellery, glass and figurines from the Sasanian world, but who appear not to have used many lowervalue goods such as Iranian or Iraqi ceramics - perhaps because they were not needed. It is possible that the luxury goods represent the possessions of tribal sheikhs who are known to have been appointed governors of parts of the region by the Lakhmids, and who would no doubt have been offered gifts to cement political ties (Kister: 153; Potts 1990ii: 236). By contrast the evidence from ‘UmÁn suggests sedentary occupation in relatively small settlements, probably by agriculturalists whose trade contact with the Sasanian empire is demonstrated by predominantly low-value commodities such as pottery, probably from Fars and HormuzgÁn, that was used for storage, cooking and eating. The evidence from the island of Bahrain itself is less clear at the present time. There are known to be many more graves here than have been published, whilst only two settlements have so far been reported.

Of the four hoards, three (al-Rakah, Tarut and Sinaw) contain early Islamic coins, which date them to the late 8th century, 7th/8th century, and mid-9th century respectively. It is only the Fujairah hoard that is made up exclusively of Sasanian coins - of quite different types to the other three hoards - and can therefore be dated to the Sasanian period. Before moving on to a broader discussion of the significance of the coins, there is a question about whether the Sasanian coins from the three early Islamic hoards were actually brought to Arabia in the Sasanian or in the early Islamic period. It is well known that large quantities of Sasanian coins continued in circulation for over a hundred years after the Islamic conquests, during which time they played an important part in the economies of Iraq, Iran and other parts of the early Islamic world (Göbl 1983: 323, 333-4). The early Islamic coins in the three hoards under consideration here were all minted elsewhere and brought to Arabia during the early Islamic period, so it seems quite likely that the Sasanian coins with which they were hoarded arrived at same time. This conclusion is strengthened by the fact that of these 24 coins, twenty are attributable to Khusrau II, two to Hormizd IV and one coin each to Yazdgard III and KavÁd I, yet no other coins of Hormizd IV or Yazdgard III have occurred from Eastern Arabia at all, whilst only single sporadic examples of coins of Khusrau II and KavÁd I are known. Added together, this evidence suggests that it is most likely that all 24 of the Sasanian coins in these three hoards were brought to Eastern Arabia in the early Islamic period and should therefore be excluded from consideration of the Sasanian period.5

The Coins Of the archaeological finds the 76 Sasanian and Sasanianperiod coins are amongst the most informative. Taken as a group they show some quite distinct geographical and chronological patterns of occurrence. All of the known coins are listed in the appendix to this paper together with location, ruler, and publication reference. The find locations are shown in Figure 1. The coins can be divided into two separate periods: an ‘early period’ consisting of 31 coins dating from ArdashÐr I until the end of the reign of ShÁpÙr II (379 AD), and a ‘late period’ of 44 coins dating from the beginning of the reign of BalÁsh (484-488 AD) until the end of the

57

DEREK KENNET

ArdashÐr I Roman 3rd century ShÁpÙr I ShÁpÙr II Roman mid 4th century ShÁpÙr II to BahrÁm IV Yazdgard II BalÁsh KavÁd I Khusrau I Hormizd IV BahrÁm VI Khusrau II Yazdgard III Totals Early Period Middle Period Late Period All Periods

Total 3 1 1 22 3 1 1 1 11 7 2 1 21 1

Sporadic 3 1 1 22 3 1 1

31 1 44 76

31 1 2 34

Hoard

Period Early

Middle 1 10 7 2 1 20 1

1

1

Late

% hoards 0% 0% 95.5% 55.3%

0 0 42 42

Table 1: Summary of all 76 Sasanian-period coins from Eastern Arabia by reign categorised as sporadic or hoard finds. ArdashÐr I Roman 3rd c ShÁpÙr I ShÁpÙr II Roman mid 4th c ShÁpÙr II to BahrÁm IV Yazdgard II BalÁsh KavÁd I Khusrau I BahrÁm VI Khusrau II Totals Total Early Total Mid Total Late Total

Total 3 1 1 22 3 1 1 1 10 7 1 1

Sporadic 3 1 1 22 3 1 1

31 1 20 52

31 1 2 34

Hoard

Period Early

Middle 1 9 7 1

1

Late

1 % hoards 0% 0% 90% 34.6%

0 0 18 18

Table 2: The same analysis as Table 1 above, but excluding coins from hoards dated to the Islamic period. Early

Middle

Late

Total

Sporadic finds and hoards BaÎrain ‘UmÁn Total

28 3 31

1

19 25 44

48 28 76

Excluding all hoards BaÎrain ‘UmÁn Total

28 3 31

1

1 1 2

30 4 34

Excluding Islamic-period hoards BaÎrain ‘UmÁn Total

28 3 31

1

1 19 20

30 22 52

1

1

1

Table 3: Sasanian-period coin finds from BaÎrain and ‘UmÁn by region and period.

58

SASANIAN COINS FROM ‘UMĀN AND BAðRAIN The number of Sasanian coins under consideration is thereby reduced to 52, a total which stands in very marked contrast to the more than 1,700 coins that are known from the Hellenistic/Parthian period. As has been argued elsewhere, this suggests that there was very limited circulation of coinage during the Sasanian period and this appears to have been related to a severe and long-lived economic downturn that affected Eastern Arabia from about the 2nd century AD onwards (Kennet 2007: 105-6).

Such low numbers of sporadic coin finds and the presence of the earliest - and only - Sasanian-period coin hoard from the region suggests that a different pattern of coin usage had emerged by the ‘late period’, being indicative of more restricted economic activity and a less widespread use of coinage. The paucity of Sasanian coinage is confirmed, from the ‘UmÁn area at least, by the excavations at Kush which have revealed only a single Sasanian coin, despite the fact that around 100,000 litres of soil were sieved using a 3 mm mesh, over 65,000 of which come from Sasanian layers.

Tables 1, 2 and 3 summarise the coins by area, type of find and chronological period and make clear the pattern of occurrence both including and excluding the three early Islamic hoards. Some interesting and potentially important points emerge from these tables. Firstly, it is notable that, of the 31 ‘early period’ coins, all are the result of sporadic finds, as no hoards datable to the ‘early period’ have yet come to light. Secondly, of these coins, 28 (90.3%) are from sites in the BaÎrain area whilst only three are from ‘UmÁn. Thirdly, the picture is very different when we turn to the 20 ‘late period’ coins, 18 (90%) of which are from the Fujairah hoard in the ‘UmÁn area, and only two (10%) are the result of sporadic finds one from BaÎrain and the other from ‘UmÁn.

There is almost no evidence to indicate the purposes for which any of these coins were used. The payment of troops is one obvious possibility, and this has already been mentioned above in relation to the coins of ShÁpÙr II. Another possibility is that, along with other luxury goods, the ‘early period’ sporadic coin finds were prestige-gifts that resulted from Lakhmid and Sasanian patronage of local tribal leaders, some of whom may have lead a predominantly nomadic lifestyle. The absence of contemporary finds such as pottery might be thought to make this the most likely explanation. A carnelian seal apparently found close to a simple hearth at Dammam is perhaps indicative of the circumstances of deposition that some of these coins may have undergone (Potts 1989: 7778). If this interpretation is correct, it would mean that isolated finds of Sasanian coins, for example at Thaj (Potts 1990ii: 203), should not be taken as an indication of continuity of settlement but might instead indicate a period of non-sedentary occupation at a largely abandoned site.

This makes clear that there is a marked bias towards BaÎrain in the ‘early period’, which suggests that this area had relatively close links to the Sasanians/Lakmids, whilst ‘UmÁn itself appears hardly to have been touched by Sasanian coinage at this time. These points will be further discussed below.

Potts and Cribb (1995: 136-7) have suggested that the coins dated to the reign of Khusrau II may have been used to pay Sasanian soldiers stationed in Eastern Arabia during the late 6th and early 7th century. If this were the case, numerous sporadic finds of Khusrau II coins would be expected, but instead only a single example has come to light. It is more likely that these coins were only brought to Eastern Arabia during the early Islamic period, possibly by merchants or others engaged in transporting or storing large quantities of transportable wealth, as is suggested by the fact that they occur overwhelmingly in hoards.

It should be noted that 22 (70.9%) of the 31 ‘early period’ coins date to the reign of ShÁpÙr II. These might be related specifically to the campaign that this monarch launched into the region in about 325 AD, or to the resettlement of Arab tribes, founding of cities and perhaps the stationing of Persian soldiers that he is said to have undertaken following the campaign (Bosworth 1983: 603; Frye 1983: 168; ÓabarÐ 54-5). These activities could have lead to wider use of coinage in the region for a brief period of time (Potts & Cribb 1995: 134-6). As has been mentioned above, the absence of ‘UmÁn from the description of this campaign in the sources might be taken to suggest that the campaign did not involve ‘UmÁn. The relative rarity of coins of ShÁpÙr II from the area supports this conclusion.

Conclusion Although some interesting points emerge from a reexamination of these coins, it is important to be careful not to make too much of patterns of occurrence in such a small assemblage. It should also be kept in mind that it is impossible to know if some of the very numerous Hellenistic/Parthian coins from the region continued to circulate in the Sasanian period, in the same way that Sasanian coins continued to circulate in the early Islamic period.

In the ‘middle period’ only one sporadic coin find is known (from BaÎrain) and in the ‘late period’ only two, one from BaÎrain and one from ‘UmÁn. This shows that the already very low levels of coin deposition in the region declined even further from the late 4th century onwards. It also suggests that the ‘early period’ bias towards BaÎrain had disappeared as there is no appreciable difference in the coin distribution between the two areas except for the fact that the only hoard from this period comes from ‘UmÁn - which may, of course, simply be a coincidence of recovery.

Nonetheless, whatever the precise historical interpretation one draws from the geographical and chronological distributions of the coins discussed here, they are without doubt indicative of a significant difference in coin use 59

DEREK KENNET Another issue that emerges relates to the late 4th and 5th centuries AD. This was designated the ‘middle period’ above (c. 379 - 484 AD) and it is characterised by an almost complete lack of coinage. It will be recognised that it was during the 5th century that the Lakhmids lost power to the Kinda confederation, culminating in the Kinda interregnum at ÍÐra in the early 6th century. The absence of Arabian bishops at Nestorian synods during the period 423 - 544 AD has been noted by Potts, as has a general dearth of historical sources relating to Eastern Arabia for the same period (Potts 1990ii: 241, 246-7). The 5th century appears to have been an unstable and turbulent time and it should be no surprise to note an absence of numismatic evidence. This century also seems to have marked a turning point in coin use in Eastern Arabia, as is demonstrated by a very different configuration of coin finds during the 6th and 7th centuries.

between BaÎrain and ‘UmÁn during the early Sasanian period. They also strongly suggest that the pattern of coin use changed over the course of the five centuries with which we are concerned. One of the key questions to emerge from this study relates to the differences in the coin distribution between BaÎrain and ‘UmÁn in the ‘early period’. Is this an indication that the two areas had different relationships with the Sasanians? As has been suggested above, the precise nature of the relationship between ‘UmÁn and the Sasanians at this time is very difficult to determine from the historical sources. It was pointed out that there are contradictions relating to the initial Sasanian conquest of ‘UmÁn, whilst there is no indication that ShÁpÙr II’s campaign involved ‘UmÁn. Indeed, the only indication of early Sasanian control over ‘UmÁn is ShÁpÙr I’s inscription at Naqsh-i Rustam. If we are prepared to allow some ambiguity as to the precise geographical extent of MazÙn as mentioned in this inscription, then it is possible that ‘UmÁn did not formally come under Sasanian control until quite late in the Sasanian period. It could certainly be argued that the coins discussed here support such a conclusion.

Derek Kennet Department of Archaeology Durham University South Road Durham DH1 3LE UK [email protected]

60

SASANIAN COINS FROM ‘UMĀN AND BAðRAIN Appendix Tabulation of all known Sasanian and Sasanian-period coins from Eastern Arabia. No

Locality

Ruler

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

al-Rakah al-Rakah al-Rakah al-Rakah al-Rakah Tarut Tarut Tarut Tarut Tarut Tarut Tarut Tarut Tarut Tarut Tarut Tarut Tarut

Kavād I Khusrau II Khusrau II Khusrau II Khusrau II Hormizd IV Khusrau II Khusrau II Khusrau II Khusrau II Khusrau II Khusrau II Khusrau II Khusrau II Khusrau II Khusrau II Khusrau II Yazdgard III

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43

Thaj Thaj Jabal Kenzan Jabal Berri Jabal Berri Jabal Berri Jabal Berri Jabal Berri Jabal Berri Jabal Berri Jabal Berri Jabal Berri Khabar Khabar Jabal Kenzan Jabal Kenzan Jabal Kenzan Jabal Kenzan Jabal Kenzan Jabal Kenzan Jabal Kenzan Hofuf Jabal Kenzan Jabal Berri Jabal Kenzan

44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67

Thaj Thaj Thaj Thaj Jabal Kenzan Sinaw Sinaw Sinaw Sinaw Sinaw Sinaw Fujairah Fujairah Fujairah Fujairah Fujairah Fujairah Fujairah Fujairah Fujairah Fujairah Fujairah Fujairah Fujairah

Ardashīr I Ardashīr I Shāpūr I Shāpūr II Shāpūr II Shāpūr II Shāpūr I Shāpūr II Shāpūr II Shāpūr II Shāpūr II Shāpūr II Shāpūr II Shāpūr II Shāpūr II Shāpūr II Shāpūr II Shāpūr II Shāpūr II Shāpūr II Shāpūr II Shāpūr II Yazdgard II Khusrau II Shāpūr II to Bahrām IV Shāpūr II Roman mid 4th c Roman 3rd c Roman mid 4th c Roman mid 4th c Hormizd IV Khusrau II Khusrau II Khusrau II Khusrau II Khusrau II Kavād I Kavād I Kavād I Kavād I Kavād I Kavād I Kavād I Kavād I Kavād I Khusrau I Khusrau I Khusraw I Khusrau I

Hoard Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Islamic period hoard? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Period

Region Reference

LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE

BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain

EARLY EARLY EARLY EARLY EARLY EARLY EARLY EARLY EARLY EARLY EARLY EARLY EARLY EARLY EARLY EARLY EARLY EARLY EARLY EARLY EARLY EARLY MID LATE EARLY

BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain

Morris 1994: 1 Morris 1994: 2 Morris 1994: 3 Morris 1994: 4 Morris 1994: 5 Potts & Cribb 1995: 124-125, Table 1:1 Potts & Cribb 1995: 124-125, Table 1:2 Potts & Cribb 1995: 124-125, Table 1:3 Potts & Cribb 1995: 124-125, Table 1:4 Potts & Cribb 1995: 124-125, Table 1:5 Potts & Cribb 1995: 124-125, Table 1:6 Potts & Cribb 1995: 124-125, Table 1:7 Potts & Cribb 1995: 124-125, Table 1:8 Potts & Cribb 1995: 124-125, Table 1:9 Potts & Cribb 1995: 124-125, Table 1:10 Potts & Cribb 1995: 124-125, Table 1:11 Potts & Cribb 1995: 124-125, Table 1:12 Potts & Cribb 1995: 124-125 (omitted from Table 1; see Table 2 & p 124). Potts & Cribb 1995: 1 Potts & Cribb 1995: 2 Potts & Cribb 1995: 3 Potts & Cribb 1995: 4 Potts & Cribb 1995: 5 Potts & Cribb 1995: 6 Potts & Cribb 1995: 7 Potts & Cribb 1995: 8 Potts & Cribb 1995: 9 Potts & Cribb 1995: 10 Potts & Cribb 1995: 11 Potts & Cribb 1995: 12 Potts & Cribb 1995: 13 Potts & Cribb 1995: 14 Potts & Cribb 1995: 15 Potts & Cribb 1995: 16 Potts & Cribb 1995: 17 Potts & Cribb 1995: 18 Potts & Cribb 1995: 19 Potts & Cribb 1995: 20 Potts & Cribb 1995: 21 Potts & Cribb 1995: 22 Potts & Cribb 1995: 23 Potts & Cribb 1995: 24 Potts & Cribb 1995: 26

EARLY EARLY EARLY EARLY EARLY LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE

BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain BaÎrain ‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān

Howgego & Potts 1992: Thaj 1 Howgego & Potts 1992: Thaj 2 Howgego & Potts 1992: Thaj 3 Howgego & Potts 1992: Thaj 4 Howgego & Potts 1992: Jabal Kenzan 1 Lowick 1983: 1 Lowick 1983: 2 Lowick 1983: 3 Lowick 1983: 4 Lowick 1983: 5 Lowick 1983: 6 Hellyer 1995. Identification from photo. Hellyer 1995. Identification from photo. Hellyer 1995. Identification from photo. Hellyer 1995. Identification from photo. Hellyer 1995. Identification from photo. Hellyer 1995. Identification from photo. Hellyer 1995. Identification from photo. Hellyer 1995. Identification from photo. Hellyer 1995. Identification from photo. Hellyer 1995. Identification from photo. Hellyer 1995. Identification from photo. Hellyer 1995. Identification from photo. Hellyer 1995. Identification from photo.

61

DEREK KENNET 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76

Fujairah Fujairah Fujairah Fujairah Fujairah Gallah Gallah Tell Abraq Kush

Khusrau I Khusrau I Khusrau I Bahrām VI Balāsh Ardashīr I Shāpūr II Shāpūr II Kavād I

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

LATE LATE LATE LATE LATE EARLY EARLY EARLY LATE

‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān ‘Umān

Hellyer 1995. Identification from photo. Hellyer 1995. Identification from photo. Hellyer 1995. Identification from photo. Hellyer 1995. Identification from photo. Hellyer 1995. Identification from photo. Potts & Cribb 1995: 27 Potts & Cribb 1995: 28 Potts & Cribb 1995: 29 Unpublished.

Fiey, J.-M. 1969. Diocèses syriens orientaux du golfe Persique. Pages 177-219 in Mémorial Mgr Gabriel Khouri-Sarkis (1898-1968). Louvain. Frye, R.N. 1983. Bahrain under the Sasanians. Pages 167170 in D.T. Potts (ed.). Dilmun: new studies in the Archaeology and Early History of Bahrain. Berlin. Gignoux, P. 1971. La liste des provinces de l’Ērān dans les inscriptions de Šābuhr et de Kirdīr. Acta Antiqua Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 19: 83-94. Göbl, R. 1983. Sasanian coins. Cambridge History of Iran 3/1: 322-339. Hellyer, P. 1995. Safavid and Sassanian coins in Fujairah. Tribulus: Bulletin of the Emirates Natural History Group 5/1: 25. Howgego, C.J., Potts, D.T. 1992. Greek and Roman coins from Eastern Arabia. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 3: 183-189. Kennet, D. 2007. The Decline of Eastern Arabia in the Sasanian period. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 18/1: 86-122. Kister, M. J. 1968. Al-ÍÐra: some notes on its relations with Arabia. Arabica 15: 143-69. Lowick, N. 1983. The SinÁw hoard of Early Islamic Silver Coins. Journal of Oman Studies 6/2: 199-230. Maricq, A. 1958. Res gestae divi saporis. Syria 35: 295360. Marquart, J. 1901. Ērānšahr nach der Geographie des Ps. Moses Xorenac’i. Abhandlungen der Königlichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen. Philologische-Historische Klasse. Neue Folge Band III, 2. Berlin. Morony, M. 1380/2001-2. The Late Sasanian economic impact on the Arabian Peninsula. NÁma-yi IrÁn-i bÁstÁn 1/2: 25-37. Morris, R. W. 1994. An eighth century hoard from Eastern Saudi Arabia. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 5: 70-79. Olinder, G. 1927. The Kings of Kinda of the Family of Ākil al-Murār. Lunds Universitets Årsskrift 1, 23/6. Lund/Leipzig. Omar, F. 1988. The Islamisation of the Arab Gulf. Pages 29-40 in B.R. Pridham (ed.). The Arab Gulf and the Arab world. London. Piacentini, V. F. 1984. La presa di potere sasanide sul golfo Persico fra leggenda e realtà. CLIO Rivista trimestrale di studi storici 20/2: 1-38. Piacentini, V. F. 1985. ArdashÐr i PÁpakÁn and the wars against the Arabs: working hypothesis on the Sasanian hold of the Gulf. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 15: 57-77. Potts, D. T. 1984. Northeastern Arabia in the later preIslamic era. Pages 85-144 in R. Boucharlat, & J.F.

Notes 1 For general historical reviews of this period see Bosworth 1983; Kister 1968; Olinder 1927; Piacentini 1984; 1985; Potts 1984; 1985: 88-93; 1990ii: 150-152, 228-257, 328-340; Wilkinson 1973; 1975; 1977: 130133. 2 In this paper the distinction will be made between the terms BaÎrayn and ‘Umān, which will be used to refer to the Early Islamic geographical areas, and Bahrain and Oman, which will be used to refer to the modern sovereign states. In order to avoid confusion, the names of some archaeological sites mentioned in this paper follow the spelling generally used in the archaeological literature and have not been transliterated. The correct transliterations are, where they are known, as follows: Dammam (Dammām), Darin (Dārīn), Hofuf (Hufūf), Gallah (?), Jabal Berri (Jabal al-Barrī ), Jabal Kenzan (Jabal Kanzān), Khabar (?), Kush (Kūsh), al-Rakah (al-Raqah), Sinaw (Sanāw), Tarut (Tārūt), Tell Abraq (?), Thaj (Thāj). 3 In Kennet 2007 the ‘late period’ was said to begin with the reign of Kavād I (488 AD) but Dr Vesta Sarkhosh-Curtis’ re-examination of the coins from the Fujairah hoard has shown that a single coin of Balāsh is contained within this hoard. 4 Thanks are due to Dr Íamad Bin Saray for kindly providing photographs and to Dr Vesta Sarkhosh Curtis for identifying them. 5 On this point see Potts & Cribb 1995: 136-7.

References Primary sources Ibn al-AthÐr. Al-KÁmil fi al-TarÐkh. First Edition. Beiruit 1965. Išō’yahb Patriarchae III liber epistularum. Translated by R. Duval. Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium 12. Paris 1905. Synodicon orientale. Edited and French translation by J.B. Chabot. Paris 1902. ÓabarÐ. The History of al- ÓabarÐ. vol. v. The Sāsānids, the Byzantines, the Lakhmids, and Yemen. Translated and annotated by C. E. Bosworth. Bibliotheca Persica. Albany 1999. al-Tha’ÁlibÐ. Histoire des rois des Perses par Abôu ManÒ.ôur ‘Abd al-Malik Ibn MoÎammad Ibn Ismâ’îl al-Tha’âlibî. Edited and translated by H. Zotenberg. Paris 1900. Secondary sources Beaucamp, J., Robin, C. 1983. L’Évêché Nestorien de Mâšmâhîg dans l’archipel d’al-BaÎrayn (Ve – IXe siècle). Pages 171-195 in D.T. Potts (ed.). Dilmun: New studies in the Archaeology and Early History of Bahrain. Berlin. Bosworth, C. E. 1983. Iran and the Arabs before Islam. Cambridge History of Iran 3/1: 593-612. Brunner, C. 1983. Geographical and administrative divisions: settlements and economy. Cambridge History of Iran 3/1: 747-777. 62

SASANIAN COINS FROM ‘UMĀN AND BAðRAIN Salles (eds.). Arabie orientale, Mésopotamie et Iran méridonal de l’âge du fer au début de la périod islamique. Paris. Potts, D.T. 1985. From Qadê to Mazûn: four notes on Oman, c. 700 BC to 700 AD. Journal of Oman Studies 8/1: 81-95. Potts, D.T. 1989. Miscellanea Hasaitica. Carsten Niebuhr Institute Publications 9. Copenhagen. Potts, D. T. 1990. The Arabian Gulf in Antiquity. Oxford.

Potts, D. T., Cribb, J. 1995. Sasanian and Arab-Sasanian coins from Eastern Arabia. Iranica Antiqua 30: 123-37. Wilkinson, J. C. 1973. Arab-Persian land relationships in late Sasanid Oman. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 3: 40-51. Wilkinson, J. C. 1975. The Julanda of Oman. Journal of Oman Studies 1: 97-108. Wilkinson, J. C. 1977. Water and tribal settlement in southeast Arabia, a study of the aflÁj of Oman. Oxford.

63

DEREK KENN NET Figures

Figure 1: Maap showing thhe find spots off Sasanian coins in Eastern n Arabia.

64

Suburb or slum? Excavations at Merv (Turkmenistan) and Observations on Stratigraphy, Refuse and Material Culture in a Sasanian City St John Simpson To a European visitor the houses are “low flat roofed, without windows, placed in little connection. In vain he looks for what his idea of a street may be; he makes his way through the narrowest lanes, incumbered with filth, dead animals, and mangy dogs. He hears a language totally new to him, spoken by people whose looks and dress are equally extraordinary. Instead of our smooth chins and tight dresses, he finds rough faces masked with beards and mustachios, in long flapping clothes” (Morier 1818: 41). (Zavyalov & Simpson 2000; 2001; Zavyalov 2003). Thereafter Merv was successively held by GrecoBactrian, Parthian and Sasanian rulers until the Arab Conquest when the last Sasanian king, Yazdgard III (632651 AD), was murdered in the oasis on the instructions of the Persian city governor.

Introduction This nineteenth century description of the Persian Gulf city and port of Bushihr is a classic Orientalist perception of the east which challenges and contrasts with the familiar features of an equivalent European entity. However, the accuracy and possible antiquity of such an urban tradition has scarcely been explored. Analyses of urban development in the Near East have tended to focus on the third and second millennia BC in Mesopotamia or the Levant or on later Roman foundations (Adams 1966; Lampl n.d.; van de Mieroop 1999). Interpretations of what may have constituted an “Islamic” city are based on a limited number of sites (al-Janabi 1983; Benco 2004; Insoll 1999; Whitehouse 2002). The possible appearance and organisation of equivalent non-classical precursors have barely been addressed (Hakim 1986), although Whitcomb (1996) has attempted to define a distinct form of “Arab city”. The excavations at Merv now offer a detailed glimpse of life in an important Sasanian urban centre near the geographical and political interface of Iran and Central Asia.

The ancient city-site of Merv has been excavated sporadically since the 1890s, notably by Tashkent-based Soviet teams during the 1950s-1970s who pioneered the use of coins in the dating of archaeological remains in Central Asia. The Sasanian coin series at Merv begins late in the reign of ArdashÐr I (c. 224-240 AD), and continues unbroken until the Arab Conquest (Loginov & Nikitin 1993a; cf. Carter 1990). Excavations within ErkKala have revealed traces of late Sasanian construction close to the surface in the central, eastern and western parts of the site, either suggesting that large parts were abandoned soon after the Arab Conquest or that subsequent deflation has removed later remains. In the centre of the citadel was a raised platform surmounted by a palatial or administrative building, finds from which included Middle-Persian, Sogdian and Arabic ostraca, and two sheep scapulae possibly inscribed in Brahmi (Nikitin 1992: 105-14; 1996). The Middle-Persian ostraca either consist of “school texts” or draft legal, economic and business documents. They refer to a Zoroastrian priest (mubad), slaves, personal property worth 226 drachms, payment in silver to an astrologer and fortuneteller, gold and a number of different individuals. Somewhat surprisingly, no bullae have been reported from any of these investigations although this supports the pattern of archaeological and chance discovery of Sasanian bullae at smaller administrative centres and forts rather than large urban centres.

Merv lies near the heart of a major oasis watered by the river MurghÁb and its canals, and has been occupied since at least the Bronze Age (Hiebert 1994; Gubaev et al. 1998). Its rich agricultural resources formed the economic backbone of the city of Merv. In the early first century AD Strabo (2.1.14 = Jones 1969i: 273), probably following a lost account by Apollodorus of Artemita, commented on the exceptionally large size of the grapevines cultivated here.1 The tenth century historian Ibn Íauqal refers to how “the fruits of Merv are finer than those of any other place” (Ouseley 1800: 216), and in the mid-19th century Colonel Baker described the oasis as being “remarkable for its fine climate and extraordinary fertility. The soil yields no less than three crops a year” (quoted by Marvin 1881: 269-70). During the Achaemenid period, the focus of settlement shifted southwards from Yaz-Tepe to Erk-Kala but very little is known about its subsequent historical development and, despite claims in some of the Alexander literature, the oasis appears to have been deliberately bypassed during most of Alexander’s campaigns in Central Asia. The city of Merv was later re-founded as Antioch Margiana by Antiochus I (281-261 BC), who radically changed its appearance with its expansion to a city measuring almost two kilometres across, surrounded by impressive new vaulted mudbrick fortifications, and the transformation of Erk-Kala into a separately fortified de facto citadel

With the exception of the fortifications, levels of early periods are buried too deeply under Sasanian and Early Islamic occupation to be adequately explored over much of the lower city. However, excavations on isolated mounds in the less densely occupied north-east and south-east corners of Gyaur-Kala have revealed important structures. During the latter half of the fourth century a Buddhist monastery was founded in the extreme southeast corner of the city, with the kitchens almost touching the foot of the fortifications behind, and a low series of mounds connecting the front of the monastery with the main portion of the city to the north (Pugachenkova & Usmanova 1995; cf. Loginov & Nikitin 1993b: 253, 25658, 261-62, 264; Hobbs 1995). This was followed in the 65

ST JOHN SIMPSON (Simpson 2007). The combination of good stratigraphy, careful excavation and high numbers of identifiable coins have also provided the first reliable benchmark both for the study of fourth - seventh century ceramics and material culture (Simpson 1993; 1994; 1998; 1999; 2000; 2005; Herrmann, Kurbansakhatov et al. 1996: 4-15, pl. IIc-d; Puschnigg 1997; 1998; 1999; 2000; 2006), and for patterns of low-denomination coin circulation in this north-east portion of the Sasanian empire (Nikitin & Loginov 1994; Loginov et al. 1995; Smirnova 1998; 1999; 2000; 2001).

fifth or sixth century by construction in the north-east corner of a so-called “Oval Building” elevated on a high platform. This was perhaps a public storehouse rather than the Christian monastery it was initially interpreted as, and in it were a number of ostraca containing references to payments in drachms and to various agricultural commodities (Nikitin 1992: 114-18; Loginov & Nikitin 1993c: 283, 285, 287, 289-91, 292-93, 295; cf. Dresvyanskaya 1974). Immediately within the north gate of the city was an area which included two residential quarters, previously interpreted as a “Millers’ Quarter” or “craftsmens’ quarter” (Kazuris & Buryakov 1963). Low, poorly-defined mounds in this same portion of the city suggest the existence of other dwelling or workshop quarters, or possibly even rubbish dumps. By contrast, there appears to have been considerably less construction in the corresponding north-west and south-west corners of the city. Although the latter suffered more heavily from intensive agriculture after the 1890s, it is likely that there was a real difference in the character of these areas. One reason for this is that the only gate into the city that did not lead directly into a residential area was situated on the west wall of the north-west corner: this gate therefore offered unimpeded access to the foot of the citadel to the east and must be regarded as primarily a military gateway dedicated to the supply of Erk-Kala.

Furthermore, these investigations have yielded the first full environmental record from any substantial Sasanian site with a rich range of botanical, zoo-archaeological and charcoal remains (Nesbitt 1993; 1994; Boardman 1995; 1997; 1998; 1999; Smith 1997; 1998; 2000). These provide an invaluable quantified complement to the archaeological survey evidence, literary and other written sources which previously only hinted at the strength and diversity of the Sasanian agricultural economy, diet and cuisine (Simpson 2003a). The immediate hinterland of the Sasanian capital at Ctesiphon consisted of a tapestry of smaller towns, villages and villas set in a densely irrigated landscape of canals, fields, orchards and vineyards. This pattern must have applied to many of the major Sasanian cities, including Merv, as - like Baghdad, Cairo or Constantinople - their populations did not simply subsist on spices, cloth and jewels. As Costello (1977: 102) has remarked, it was “from the farmers in and around the cities that their real wealth was derived, and it was that which paid for luxuries”. The abundance of supplies in the vicinity of Ctesiphon where the countryside was “smiling … [and] planted with various crops … a rich region full of smiling orchards, vineyards, and green groves” was remarked on by Ammianus Marcellinus (XXIV.5-6; cf. also Eunapius V.27,5 = Blockley 1983: 41), and it is no coincidence that Mesopotamia reached its agricultural apogee at the same period as the development of these urban centres. Extensive archaeological surface surveys in the Merv oasis suggest that Merv was equally deeply embedded in a complex pattern of rural land-use (Nesbitt & O’Hara 2000). According to BalÁdhurÐ, Yazdgard III set up his last residence south of Merv, presumably in a fort similar to those excavated at Göbekli-Tepe or Ak-Tepe, and close to an enclosed paradise. The existence of enclosed “paradises” in the near vicinity of cities is mentioned in the description of Ctesiphon by Ammianus Marcellinus (XXIV.5), where Julian’s invading army came across “a royal lodge built in the Roman style … there was also a large circular park enclosed by a fence, where wild animals were preserved for the king’s enjoyment”; a similar interpretation may explain the walled feature located some seven kilometres south-west of ArdashÐr I’s round city of ArdashÐr-Khvarrah/Gôr (Huff 1974: 159, 165, fig. 1). In addition, the discovery of carbonised cotton seeds in a large number of fourth - seventh century contexts at Merv illustrates, for the first time, a Sasanian precursor for the cotton, mulÎam/malÎam and silk industries attested from Merv during the ninth century and later (Lamm 1937: 95-99, 199-200). “White cotton

Excavations from 1992-2000 Between 1992 and 2000, nine seasons of British Museum-supported excavations were conducted at Merv and co-directed by the author; annual preliminary reports have been published in the journal Iran. A series of monographs are in preparation as the final publication of the excavations, surveys and observations on the standing monuments, including the results of excavations in the principal areas of the early city, Erk-Kala and GyaurKala. Three of these areas contained Sasanian remains: a mid-Sasanian residential quarter in the lower city [MGK5], a late Sasanian residence in the citadel [MEK1] and the Sasanian fortifications in the south-west corner of the city [MGK6].2 These excavations have effectively provided the first detailed and quantifiable archaeological evidence for a wide range of activities from a Sasanian urban centre. They have enabled a clearer understanding of the organisation of space, methods of refuse disposal and recycling of materials (either objects or construction materials), and the development of the fortification system which encased the city. The discovery of a Christian mould within a domestic context in the citadel (Herrmann, Kurbansakhatov et al. 1994: 68, pl. Vd; Simpson 1996: 31), and Zoroastrian excarnated human remains carefully re-interred within the fortification system (Zavyalov & Simpson 2001: 18-20, figs 10-12), illustrate beliefs by the principal religious communities within the city at this period. The latter is exceptional archaeological evidence for the process of excarnation and reburial, which is otherwise represented from this period only by finds at Shahr-i QÙmis (Hansman & Stronach 1970) and sites on the Bushihr peninsula 66

SUBURB OR SLUM? EXCAVATIONS AT MERV (TURKMENISTAN) autumn, it is likely that this variation therefore reflects differing levels of household investment and possibly brick suppliers. The walls and floors were plastered with mud plaster, occasionally green in colour which probably reflects use of anaerobic clays from canals or low-lying swampy areas. Room size varied from c. 40 m2 to 90 m2, and there was clear evidence for progressive subdividing and periodic infilling in all of the structures.

cloth” is listed together with damask brocade in the Chou-shu (Miller 1959: 15-16) but, despite technical and art-historical studies of rare textiles found in Egypt and Europe, very little is known about the whereabouts of Sasanian textile industries. This discovery now suggests that Merv was one such centre which may now be added to the short list of places, including Be Mikse, Pumbadita and Shushtar in central Mesopotamia or south-west Iran, which are attested from occasional Talmudic and Arab references (Newman 1932: 23, 104-105; Oppenheimer 1983: 91).

One of the smaller houses in MGK5, designated Structure C, was fully excavated. It had an area of 155 m2 and was entered from an alley running along its eastern side. Separate doorways led into a long storeroom, and a living quarter consisting of four (later five) small interconnecting rooms varying in size from c. 10 m2 to 18.8 m2 with a combined floor area of 47.55 m2. This practical arrangement is paralleled by traditional housing in north-east Iran (Horne 1994: 23). Its small size suggests that it belonged to a relatively poor nuclear family and is broadly comparable to the smaller Sogdian houses at Penjikent, although these typically possessed two rooms on the ground floor with two or three rooms above (Marshak & Raspopova et al. 2004). The internal stratigraphy and character of each room was quite distinct, although it was not possible to conduct the intended micro-stratigraphic analyses as the export of earth samples was not permitted. A sequence of circular plastered hearths was found in one room (600). These measured c. 53-60 cm across, up to 18 cm deep, and were surrounded by a low plastered kerb. The interior walls and floors of the hearths were either blackened and scorched, particularly near the bottom, or burnt to a white colour and filled with compacted fine light grey ash perhaps resulting from burnt dung fuel. Identical hearths are reported from YuTAKE Trench 8 in Erk-Kala (Usmanova 1991: 30).4 Annually plastered hearths of similar size have been traditionally used as the source of heating during winter in living rooms in some Iranian villages: “During the summer, when it is not in use, the hearth is filled with a solid plug of clay, and the entire feature is covered with a rug” (Kramer 1982: 104). The use of mats, rugs, felts and cushions on the floors and low plastered benches would certainly have enhanced the comfort of the otherwise sparse furnishings in Structure C. Portable furniture such as tables and chairs are likely to have been the exception rather than the norm (cf. Curtis 1996: 238-44), whereas soft furnishings are frequently depicted on Sogdian wall-paintings (Azarpay et al. 1981: figs 27, 48, 52-53, pls 12-13, 27, 29-30), as well as on Sasanian stuccoes at BandÐyÁn (Curtis & Simpson 1998: 187, fig. 3).5

Within this overall context of the principal results of the recent investigations at Merv, the following remarks focus on how the excavations of part of a residential quarter illustrate aspects of daily life in a Sasanian city. Domestic Architecture: the Built Environment Between 1993 and 1999 a mound located approximately 250 m due south of the north gate into the city was investigated to reveal part of a large residential quarter designated Gyaur-Kala Area 5 [henceforth MGK5]. Following resistivity survey, an area totalling 14,525 m2 was cleared to expose the broad plan of seven mudbrick houses separated by alleys and occasional wider open spaces, and mainly dating from the fourth-fifth centuries. These houses appear to have varied in size from c. 120 m2 to over 315 m2. Each structure consisted of several interconnecting rooms with doorways measuring 0.801.10 m across but rarely fitted with door-sockets, a feature likewise noted in MEK1, and suggesting that fixed doors were scarce and hanging drapes may instead have been the normal way of ensuring internal privacy.3 Significantly, there was no evidence for courtyards, staircases, vaulting or aivÁns. Unlike the two-storey houses characteristic of Sogdian Penjikent, these houses therefore appear to have been one-storey buildings with flat or gabled roofs made of perishable materials supported on poles. Charcoal samples analysed by Rowena Gale from other Sasanian contexts at Merv indicate that suitable roofing materials were available locally. As most of the structures on MGK5 were freestanding this would have facilitated the positioning of ventilation holes under the eaves in the exterior walls, although large windows are unlikely as there is no evidence for window glass in this region prior to the Islamic period. This absence of windows and internal courtyards, which might otherwise have served as wells of light and fresh air into the heart of each building, may also explain the absence of fixed doors, noted above, as open doorways served to enable the necessary circulation of the limited light and air.

In one phase, one end of the largest room (841) was separated by a low wall enclosing a sequence of small circular domed ovens (tanÙrs); in addition to baking flat bread, tanÙrs may be used for preparing a variety of different foods as the top can support a cooking pot and other dishes can be cooked in the hot embers at the base. In the final phase, several small circular ceramic-lined sunken cooking installations c. 30 cm across and possibly akin to traditional Persian chÁla kursÐ or ÔÁbÙns were used in the adjacent room (cf. Šahri 1990). Fragmentary

The walls of these houses were constructed of mudbrick: the quality of the bricks themselves varied considerably between different reconstruction phases and structures, and ranged from poor sandy bricks to large wellcompacted bricks tempered with chaff. Given that mudbrick manufacture and construction are almost exclusively carried out in the dry months of summer and 67

ST JOHN SIMPSON under streets and alleys). This practice has been documented from recent villages in Iran where the direction of access to these is from shared spaces rather than private courtyards and even physical juxtaposition of a storeroom with other domestic rooms is no guarantee of single ownership (Kramer 1982: 106; Horne 1994: 189). Other documented instances of storerooms entered directly from the street or alley rather than a courtyard were designed to allow “the farmer to bring material (usually fodder) directly from his field or threshing floor into the storeroom” although the absence of dung spots appears to exclude dung fuel storage in this particular storeroom (Kramer 1982: 105-106).

quern stones were found associated with this house, as well as other structures in MGK5, and resemble earlier finds in the so-called “Millers’ Quarter” at Merv of rotary querns made of andesite, quartz, fused sandstone and granite, which were believed to mostly derive from sources in the upper Kushka region (Ajzenberg 1958). Within this context, it may be noted that large carefully made basalt grinding stones, presumably imported from basalt sources in north-east Syria, were said to be abundant at sites in the Nippur region of southern Iraq, implying similar long-distance transport within the Sasanian empire (Adams 1981: 211). This evidence therefore appears to support Talmudic references to millstones being a standard piece of Sasanian household equipment although bread baking was either done at home or in large communal bakeries (Newman 1932: 144-49). Indeed, bread probably played an important role as a staple food - it accounts for an average of 70% of daily calorific intake in modern Iran - hence its inclusion among compulsory daily food offerings at the fire temple, as prescribed by ShÁpÙr I (240-272 AD) and other Middle Persian and Manichaean sources (Desmet-Grégoire 1990).

Streets and Alleys: Quarters, Access and Drainage The maintenance of alleys running between each of the structures at MGK5 implies that movement was at ground level rather than using the rooftops. These alleys, or passages as they are referred to in the Soviet or medieval archaeological literature, were consistently some 2 m across. Their narrowness must have allowed a greater degree of shade and shelter, and is similar to those at SP7 at Kish (Moorey 1978: 143), Coche (Cavallero 1966, 65-66, 78, pls VI-VIII, XI-XIV) and Tell Dhahab (Kröger 1982: 41, fig. 15), although at Merv there is no evidence that these were permanently covered over as they were at Penjikent (Marshak & Raspopova et al. 2004). The occasional provision of a brick threshold across the entrance of some of the alleys in MGK5 implies that they could be closed at night, the significance of which is discussed below.

Immediately to the north of this structure was a storeroom, measuring 9.5 m long and 2.3 m across, lined with plastered benches constructed next to the walls and leaving a central walkway 0.70-1.10 m wide and entered through a doorway leading onto the alley which ran along the east side of Structure C. Rows of large coiled storage jars were set on these benches, their sagged bases propped and wedged with broken bricks and large potsherds. Only one jar survived complete but this had an approximate capacity of 490 litres; the precise functions of these vessels are uncertain as no traces of the original contents survived. They may have been multi-purpose, some being for the storage of cereals or pulses and others possibly as convenient larders: flotation sampling of deposits within this room yielded evidence for two varieties of wheat, barley, millet, lentils, peas and fruit (Boardman 1995; 1997; 1998; 1999). Nevertheless, nineteenth and twentieth century descriptions of domestic storerooms offer a hint of the possible original appearance of this room: in one Palestinian house there were shelves for fresh fruit, dried fruit hung from the rafters as well as cases, baskets, sacks and

The appearance of the deposits within the street and alleys in MGK5 was the same, namely a central refusefilled gully heavily stained with greenish organic residues flanked by low bricky pavements. The latter were constructed but doubtless were added to through the gradual melt of adjacent wall plastered faces (cf. Kramer 1982: 88: fig. 4.2). Similar pavements have been noted in streets excavated in the Sogdian cities of Penjikent (Marshak & Raspopova et al. 2004: figs 18-19, 29, 121, pl. V) and Paikend (Semenov 2004), as well as BÐshÁpÙr and possibly outside the “Central House” on the citadel at QaÒr-i AbÙ NaÒr (personal observations, 2000; Whitcomb 1985: fig. 30). These pavements functioned as raised walkways whereas the function of the gullies was to direct surface runoff during the rainy season away from the bases of the walls, as these were the most vulnerable part of the building. These gullies also served as domestic drains into which the household refuse was swept. Excavated sections through the predominantly greenish and/or ashy lensed street deposits suggest the disposal of organic and non-organic refuse into these areas followed by trampling and gradual wear; heavily worn areas were periodically infilled with “hardcore” consisting of fragments of reddish-brown fired brick or vitrified clay “slag”, plausibly added during the wet season, and the levelling of ruts in the streets is mentioned in the Babylonian Talmud (Oppenheimer 1983: 181). The evidence of dog gnawing on discarded animal-bones, coupled with the absence of house courtyards, implies

“large terra cotta jars, glazed inside, and rough without, ranged round the room, [which] often made me think of Ali Baba and the forty thieves. One held the smeed, another held flour, another bran, a fourth oil, and some rather smaller ones contained olives and goats’-milk cheese preserved in oil, and a store of cooking butter” (Rogers 1863: 154-55). The fact that access to the storeroom was not directly from Structure C raises the possibility that it may have belonged to several households, either related by blood or, more probably, by their juxtaposition within a discrete quarter (for which further evidence is discussed below 68

SUBURB OR SLUM? EXCAVATIONS AT MERV (TURKMENISTAN) levelling-up led to an average increase of approximately a metre for each century, thus offering a crude yardstick for estimating longevity of occupation.

that dogs were a common sight in the streets of Merv, and the occasional presence of coprolites in the drains therefore probably represent canine activity as well as the likely emptying of Sasanian chamber-pots.

This infilling was followed by the raising of the adjoining door thresholds in order to prevent dust and dirt from entering houses from the public spaces. This repeated raising on the same spot of the thresholds of doorways facing onto the adjacent alleys may be mistaken for permanent door blockings and explains why earlier excavators of, for instance, the so-called “Millers’ Quarter” at Merv, housing at Veh ArdashÐr, or area SP-7 at KÐsh, produced architectural plans which lacked doorways and which has occasionally given rise to the interpretation of these as cellars containing debris fallen from non-existent upper storeys (cf. Kazuris & Buryakov 1963: fig. 7; Cavallero 1966; Moorey 1978: 141). This remodelling of the doorways in turn also necessitated the regular raising of floor-levels within the buildings, particularly in those rooms directly entered from the street, and, where necessary, the construction of steps down into those further away until such a time when these were infilled to the same height. Finally, as rigid property boundaries prevented infringement on public spaces, it is not surprising to find that the walls themselves were regularly truncated, usually to a few courses above floor-level to serve as a foundation for a rebuild on exactly the same alignment. Determining the stratigraphic association of reconstructed walls and raised floor-levels was possible through careful tracing and removal of the respective layers of wall and floor plaster, and the articulation of individual mudbricks: an added bonus was the occasional recovery of coins embedded in the plaster whence they must have been deliberately added when the plaster was wet.

The original appearance of these Sasanian alleys at Merv is illustrated by Kramer’s (1982: 88) description of a traditional Iranian mudbrick village: “alley surfaces are embedded with animal bone, ceramic and glass sherds, shoe and textile fragments, and fragments of broken ovens, beehives, and bins. When not on roofs, dogs are often encountered in the alleys just outside their houses, as is their excrement”. The discovery that the alleys provided a convenient place of disposal for household refuse and “night soil” explains one of the key characteristics of the Sasanian city. Comparison with pre-modern Middle Eastern and Central Asian cities and villages gives a vivid impression of the appearance (and smell) of these public spaces. Another nineteenth century author describing Shiraz in 1875 wrote: “the streets during the summer months emit fetid odours, arising from the entire absence of sanitary arrangements. The refuse of each house is thrown indiscriminately before the doorway. No notice is taken of the accumulation of so rank a nuisance until the road becomes impassable; it may then be removed to some less-frequented place until some pestilential epidemic brings it to the notice of the authorities. In winter the nuisance exists in but a worse condition. The snow is shovelled from off of the roofs of the houses into the streets below, and this, combined with the continuous filthiness, impregnates the atmosphere with putrid fumes, which carry disease and death in every direction. In the capital itself no precautions are taken to avoid the dreaded plague which periodically visits the more thickly populated towns of Persia. Sanitary boards are as yet unknown by the subjects of the Shah, and a Persian depositing the rubbish of his house in the street adjacent imagines he has fulfilled all that is required of him, either by law or decency” (Anderson 1888: 63-64).

Material Culture and the Chances of Discovery Within MGK5, the careful infilling of some buildings with laid mudbricks to form solid platform-like masses of brickwork - perhaps for structures which have subsequently eroded away - might explain the square “platforms” which puzzled the excavators of a Sasanian residential area at KÐsh [SP-7] (Moorey 1978: 141-43, fig. P). In other cases the infilling was carried out using bricky rubble or simply earth containing high amounts of domestic refuse (mainly broken pottery and animal bone but also the occasional coin, broken figurine, fragmentary bone pin, bead or worn sherd disc). The date-range of the coins in this last variety of infilling implies some degree of residuality which is supported by the presence of earlier potsherds and some diagnostic small finds, such as a broken glass “Baubo” pendant of the first century BC first century AD (Simpson 2004). Nevertheless, most of the finds appear to be broadly contemporary with the structure. As the coins were all small, light and lowdenomination coppers, it is unlikely that they circulated for more than a few years as their value was low and they were easily lost (contra Zeimal 1994). Although time prevented exhaustive reconstruction of the excavated sherdage at MGK5, it should be noted that there did not appear to be a very high degree of reconstructability and

At Merv, the alleys were periodically infilled along their full length with mudbrick rubble. This process is unlikely to have been conducted by a single household as it impinged on all adjoining properties as well as affecting wider means of access, and it is likely that the whole quarter or perhaps even the municipal authorities were therefore involved in at least the decision-making process, if not the actual hire of men and materials to effect the necessary work. Stratified coins suggest that the 69

ST JOHN SIMPSON immediately west of MGK5 (Usmanova 1963), as well as at the Merv oasis site of Göbekly-Tepe where they were described as “iron ingots” (Gaibov et al. 1990: 58); “iron slag” is likewise reported from Italian excavations of the North block in the so-called “Artisans’ Quarter” of Veh ArdashÐr/Coche (Venco Ricciardi & Negro Ponzi 1985: 102). As none of the craft activity waste was found in primary contexts, it is unlikely that these represent domestic activities taking place within the excavated houses but instead they probably derive from another part of the site. The Dÿnkard includes references to ironsmiths or blacksmiths (MP Áhengar) making spades and axes, Áhen-paikar as “one who casts or moulds iron” and čelangar as “one who makes small ironware” (Tafazzoli 1974: 193-94). Passing references in the Talmud suggest that craftsmens’ stalls were occasionally situated in residential areas in Babylonia, as indeed were some street markets (Newman n.d.: 33-36), but most were probably located in bazaar areas either situated close to city gates or near the city centre.

none of the inscribed vessel sherds were successfully matched with other parts of the same vessel. The implication is that much, if not all, of the infilling material was procured from outside the household, particularly in the absence of internal courtyards which might otherwise have furnished a ready source of building material. The range of other finds was not particularly great, yet may be regarded as representative of mid-Sasanian inorganic material culture as perishable materials are not normally preserved in the damp and saline conditions at the site. These have been described in greater detail elsewhere (Simpson 2005) but a few general comments are worthwhile in the present context. Excluding ceramic vessels, the most common category was made of clay. This was notably used for making figurines. Metal objects were scarce, but they included iron tools and a short copper alloy pin decorated with inlaid chips of lapis lazuli and resembling a form found as far west as Roman Britain in this period. The reason for this scarcity of finished objects probably lies in intensive recycling of metal in antiquity, but there is a remarkable absence of the belt-fittings and strap-ends which characterise Late Antique assemblages from Corinth to Antioch. Apart from ceramic vessels, there was very limited evidence for containers or table/serving-wares. Wood, leather and metal vessels were presumably in common use but the evidence simply does not survive. Glassware was rare, and limited to some sixteen sherds: the types included straight-sided and open bowls, a probable unguentarium and one or two faceted vessels. No window-glass was found, nor were any drawn glass micro-beads of IndoPacific type found, although there is evidence for the circulation of these in the Persian Gulf region at this period (Simpson forthcoming a; cf. Simpson 2003b). Other items of personal adornment included furnacewound glass, carnelian, green stone and shell beads. Bone pins with crudely carved heads represent the eastern equivalent of the ubiquitous Roman hair-pin (Loginov et al. 1995: 41, pl. IIIc; Herrmann, Kurbansakhatov et al. 1999: 6, fig. 2-3; 2000: 3-4, fig. 1: 11). They appear to have become popular from Mesopotamia as far east as Kushano-Sasanian sites in Bactria during the fourth - fifth centuries, yet were rare in late Sasanian contexts in ErkKala (cf. Zavyalov 1993; Simpson 1997). Other items included decorated bone, plain ceramic or simple drilled potsherd spindle-whorls as evidence for domestic textile production, a single (possibly residual) biconical clay loom-weight, astragalus gaming-pieces and the ubiquitous sherd discs (Herrmann, Kurbansakhatov et al. 1998: 63, fig. 4: 2-3, 5).

The most likely source of the various materials used in the infilling must lie in communal refuse deposits or open zones within or on the edge of residential and craft areas. It is to such dumps that the Babylonian Talmud surely refers when it contrasts “the refuse heaps of Mata Mehasya” with “the mansions of Pumbadita” (Oppenheimer 1983: 417). This suggests the existence of municipal dumps which provided a ready resource not only for builders, but also for farmers concerned with adding manure to their fields (for which there is evidence from texts and surface surveys in Mesopotamia) and scrap merchants. Recycling is not a modern Western concept but is deeply rooted in human behaviour and economic practice. The scarcity of metal finds or even broken glass in the excavated infilling contexts at MGK5 thus may reflect scavenging and sorting at these dumps in order to remove recyclable or sharp items. Metalware does not break easily, least of all into small fragments, and it can therefore be easily picked out of refuse whereas the reuse of thick-walled sherds, ground stone, fired bricks and vitrified clay, etc. scavenged from other parts of the site are a common feature of mudbrick villages today (Horne 1994: 130). It is ironic that, although most of the finds excavated in any particular house therefore probably derive from several other households, the representativeness of the assemblage as a whole is enhanced. This pattern applies to any archaeological site where the principal building material is mudbrick, although the site-formation processes of these are often overlooked or misunderstood and assumptions frequently made that any contents derive from the household in question.

Small amounts of craftsmens’ debris were also found, in the form of worked bone offcuts, chopped horncores, smithing-hearth bottoms, a small mould for casting pendants, and fragments of what appear to be clay moulds for the casting of coin flans (Loginov et al. 1995: 41, pl. IIIb; Herrmann, Kurbansakhatov et al. 1998: 63, fig. 4: 4; 1999: 3, 6, fig. 2: 6).6 Smithing-hearth bottoms appear to have been found in earlier YuTAKE excavations of Partho-Sasanian levels on a mound

Discussion and Conclusions The excavations in MGK5 offer a rare glimpse into Sasanian everyday life; this is one of the few areas of domestic housing yet to be explored in detail for this period. It creates a vivid illustration of the longevity of urban tradition quoted at the beginning of this paper for Bushihr in March 1811. Comparative evidence from 70

SUBURB OR SLUM? EXCAVATIONS AT MERV (TURKMENISTAN) other parts of the Sasanian Empire is unfortunately very scarce and limited to a small number of sites in Mesopotamia and Iran (Huff 1993). Archaeological surveys, air photographs and limited excavations confirm that at least some of these urban centres were designed with rectilinear plans containing intersecting streets arranged on a grid, as at BÐshÁpÙr (Ghirshman 1971: vol. I, 27, fig. 1),7 Istakhr (Whitcomb 1979: 364-67) and QaÒr-i AbÙ NaÒr in Fars (Whitcomb 1985: 93-104, 22021), and AivÁn-i Karkha and Jundi-ShÁpÙr in Susiana (Wenke 1975/76: 70-75; Adams & Hansen 1968). According to MustaufÐ, the archaeologically unidentified Sasanian precursor of NÐshÁpÙr “was originally laid out on the plan of a chess-board, with eight squares to each side” (Le Strange 1905: 386). In a few other cases, notably the small Mesopotamian towns at Tell Dhahab and Ruqbat al-MadÁ’in, the street-plans appear to be arterial and perhaps dictated by underlying topography or adjacent canals (Kröger 1982: 41, fig. 15; Finster & Schmidt 1976: 153-57). The most notable exception is the two-km diameter round city founded by ArdashÐr I (c. 224-240 AD) at ArdashÐr-Khurrah/Gôr, which was deliberately planned as a series of concentric rings surrounding an innermost precinct enclosing the towerlike Takht-i NÐshÐn at the centre, with four principal gates through what have been described as “double ramparts of clay and a moat” (Huff 1972; 1974; 1987: 333; 1993: 56).8 The internal organisation of ArdashÐr’s second (almost) round city of Veh ArdashÐr, opposite Ctesiphon, is uncertain but near the outer edge one area was divided into rectilinear insulae measuring some 80 m across (Venco Ricciardi & Negro Ponzi 1985: 101). Rather than being the products of captured Roman engineers (for which the evidence is controversial at best), this more characteristic organisation of space may reflect the impact of Greek urban planning principles introduced in the Hellenistic period (see Wenke & Pyne 1990: 241). It is probably significant that all of these centres were fortified, as the existence and layout of fixed defences directs the internal organisation of space. This certainly applies to Merv where the successive rebuilding of the defences along the same line as the earliest Greek fortification wall guaranteed the fossilisation of the original street plan of Antioch Margiana into the later periods: the essential rectangularity of the built space reflected continuity of the principal axes between the east, west and south gates of the city, and the southern approach to Erk-Kala on the north side, and probably gave rise to an arrangement of rectilinear insulae. The occasional extensive regular hollows which are seen today on the surface of this built-up area most likely represent deliberately unoccupied spaces, but whether these reflect the positions of open reservoirs, as at Dal’verzin-tepe or NÐsÁ, abandoned residential quarters, or low-density public spaces such as the presumed agora, theatre and gymnasium of the Seleucid city, remains speculative. In the (barely excavated) town at QaÒr-i AbÙ NaÒr the insulae measured 80 m across and either 120 or 180 m long, the streets being aligned with alternating towers along the north wall (Whitcomb 1985: 220-21, fig. 80).9 At BÐshÁpÙr the main crossroads was marked by a

pair of columns commemorating the city’s foundation by ShÁpÙr I (240-272 AD), and it is likely that public monuments are to be found in the equivalent position at other Sasanian cities: significantly, at Merv this focal point was marked after the Arab Conquest by the BanÐ MahÁn mosque (cf. Kennedy 2002: map 43a). Military planning also ensured that there were open spaces or access roads running immediately within and parallel to the defensive walls at Veh ArdashÐr and Merv (Negro Ponzi 1966: 81; Kazuris & Buryakov 1963: 120, fig. 9), although not apparently at QaÒr-i AbÙ NaÒr, the northeast corner of Ruqbat al-MadÁ’in or even possibly Karkh FairÙz (Whitcomb 1985: 217; Finster & Schmidt 1976: 153-57; Northedge 1987: 254, fig. B). There were five main city gates at Merv, plus presumably a number of smaller entrances and military posterns although these are not clearly delineated by the present topography. The main gates were situated near the junction of the north wall and east side of Erk-Kala, midway along the east, south and west walls, and between the west gate and the north-west corner.10 None of these have been excavated but surface indications suggest that they were flanked by towers and by the latest phase included a bent-axis ramp or pandus, most clearly visible today at the north and north-west gates. Sasanian towns and cities were characteristically heavily defended, as underlined by the hard progress of the Arab Conquest, the massive double wall and ditch still partly surviving around ArdashÐr -Khurrah/Gôr (Huff 1974: 157, fig. 15), BÐshÁpÙr,11 Istakhr, AivÁn-i Karkha, and Veh ArdashÐr, and the impressive bastion, or so-called “podium” of the final report, that commanded the small gatehouse and narrow ramp leading up to the citadel at QaÒr-i AbÙ NaÒr (Whitcomb 1985: 198-99, figs 30-31, pls 29-32). Little is known about the typological development of these defences but the evidence from Merv indicates that they could be up to 20 m high with archers’ galleries, massive corner bastions (presumably housing ballistae or catapults) and interval towers; the discovery of refuse and hearths within the defensive system in MGK6 might suggest permanent stationing of troops rather than billeting within the city.12 Within these cities there must inevitably have been variation and development of the built environment. Many of the old Mesopotamian cities, such as Babylon, Borsippa, Nineveh and Uruk, continued to be occupied throughout this period and feature during the time of the Arab Conquest: the internal plans of these centres are obscure, despite their extensive excavation of earlier periods, but it is plausible that they lacked the regularity of other “new towns”. By contrast, Khusrau I’s (531-579 AD) foundation of the city called Veh Antioch Khusrau [“Khusrau’s City of Antioch”] was said to contain Byzantine-style baths, a hippodrome and was populated with deportees from Antioch which he had sacked in 542 AD: this evidently “Western-style” city was situated close to Ctesiphon, perhaps at the unexcavated site of alBustÁn (Simpson 2000: 60-61).

71

ST JOHN SIMPSON group solidarity, economic and administrative unity, and spokesmen elites, they were analogues of village communities inside the urban agglomeration” (Lapidus 1984: 95; cf. Costello 1977: 14-16).

A comparison of the domestic architecture from MGK5 with other Sasanian town-houses offers another significant insight into variation in vernacular architecture. Thus, whereas the sizes of those houses at MGK5 compare with average house sizes of c. 140-170 m2 at Veh ArdashÐr (e.g. cf. Cavallero 1966: pl. VI; Negro Ponzi 1966: pl. VIII) or c. 140 m2 in the case of the central building at Tell Dhahab (Kröger 1982: 41, fig. 15), the absence of aivÁns or courtyards provides a strong contrast. At Veh ArdashÐr and Umm as-Sa’atir the larger houses appear to have typically contained an enclosed courtyard with a central aivÁn facing the entrance (Cavallero 1966: pls VI-IX; Kröger 1982: fig. 21); a row of four aivÁns was also found in the single area excavated in the late Sasanian city at Uruk (Finster 1983). Courtyards also appear to have been the norm in houses on the Late Sasanian citadel at QaÒr-i AbÙ NaÒr (Whitcomb 1985: figs 30-31, 34), the Sasanian or later fortified “new town” at Ruqbat al-MadÁ’in (Finster & Schmidt 1976: 153-57), and the palatial houses or villas at KÐsh (Moorey 1978: 124-40) and at al-Ma’aridh on the southern edge of Ctesiphon (Kröger 1982: figs 41, 47, 49). Finally, a courtyard plan incorporating an aivÁn reception room flanked by two rectangular rooms with up to four rooms behind was also adopted for a late Sasanian village house excavated at Tell as-Sarah in the ÍamrÐn region of Iraq (Valtz 1985). The longevity of this tradition in Mesopotamia is illustrated by their recurrence as standard features in early Abbasid houses excavated at Samarra (al-Janabi 1983).

Locally available building materials normally dictate the general appearance of architecture. At Merv, as in lowland Mesopotamia or Susiana, the principal building material was mudbrick, whereas in highland Iran greater use was made of rubble consolidated with gypsum mortar. Fired brick was used for monumental architecture in lowland Mesopotamia, notably the TÁq-i KisrÁ, and Adams (1981: 254, 289) has indicated the possible existence of Sasanian brick kilns on survey in the Nippur region.14 At AivÁn-i Karkha the use of fired brick for some massive vaulted buildings (such as the “palace” partially excavated by Ghirshman), within a city where the private architecture was in mudbrick and was probably mostly one-storey, created a distinctive built environment with high-visibility public architecture (Ghirshman 1952: 10-12), whereas at Merv the city was dominated by the huge citadel and imposing central building at its centre. Sasanian urban municipal infrastructure is known to have included major religious buildings (fire-temples, churches, synagogues, temples, monasteries and centres of religious learning), prisons and occasionally bathhouses, a feature which, according to the Chronicle of Pseudo-Joshua the Stylite, is said to have been introduced by the emperors BalÁsh (484-488 AD) and KavÁd (488531 AD) (Trombley & Watt 2000: 16-17, 91). The location and appearance of Sasanian bazaars (Byzantine pazári from the Middle Persian bÁzÁr) are unknown, as are their organisation and regulatory bodies, but they must have functioned close to the commercial heart of any city and a “chief of markets” is mentioned among the list of nobles’ titles on ShÁpÙr I’s inscription on the KaÝbah-i Zardusht (Frye 1984: 373). Bazaars with segregated crafts, whereby every trade had its own series of shops in the bazaar, are mentioned in the Dÿnkard (Tafazzoli 1974: 192), and trade guilds are mentioned in Syriac sources; these are presumed to have been organised on the Byzantine model of state appointment rather than voluntary adhesion. In addition, a large number of professions are either directly attested from the Babylonian Talmud, ostraca and the Dÿnkard, or inferred from the archaeological evidence: ass-drivers, astrologers, bakers, barbers, bath-house attendants, blacksmiths, butchers, charcoal-burners, cloth-workers, confectioners, dough-kneaders, fortune-tellers, fullers, glassworkers, grave-diggers, ironsmiths, jewellers, leather-workers, merchants, perfumers, physicians, potters, sandal-makers, scribes, slaves, tailors, tanners, weavers, wood-sellers (Cohen 1937: 197, 205-207, 211, 213-14, 252; Newman n.d.; Tafazzoli 1974). Regular fairs and specialised markets are also attested in the written sources, such a “hay market” at Veh ArdashÐr (Oppenheimer 1983: 232), or fairs at Baghdad or near alAnbÁr where Arab raiders are said to have “filled their hands with gold and silver and commodities light to carry” or “carried as booty what there was in it” (al-

At Merv the discovery of the means of securing access to the alleyways resembles a feature noted in the residential quarters of the late medieval city of Otrar (FedorovDavydov 1983: 400), and explains a reference in the Babylonian Talmud to the locking of alley doors within the Euphrates town of Nehardea (Oppenheimer 1983: 277). It also supports the hypothesis that discrete residential quarters within the city may have shared responsibility (and the resources implied by the communal storerooms discussed above) as the equivalent of a housing association, which was represented at municipal level by members elected or selected by the municipal authorities, as was the case for Mamluk administration and argued elsewhere for Sasanian Iran and KÙshÁn India on the basis of textual sources (Perikhanyan 1973: 393, 496; Litvinsky 1994: 307).13 At Otrar, these quarters consisted of between six and fifteen houses and were interpreted as belonging to different family groups (Baipakov 1992), a feature which is mirrored in traditional Palestinian villages where separate quarters were named after patrilineal descent groups (Amiry & Tamari 1989: 11-15). In other Islamic cities these quarters were based on shared religious, ethnic or craft identity, but in all cases there appears to have been mixed social classes which were reflected in the sizes of the respective houses (Lapidus 1984: 85-92). MGK5 thus closely resembled a medieval quarter in an Islamic city with its winding alleys and cul-de-sacs, where it has been hypothesised that “many urban quarters were small, integrated communities. By quasi-physical isolation, close family ties, ethnic or religious homogeneity, strong 72

SUBURB OR SLUM? EXCAVATIONS AT MERV (TURKMENISTAN) the only remaining options. Evidence for both processes were found, both as physical remains in the alleys and through the indirect process of periodic deliberate infilling within rooms: the result was the loss of primary context for finds and in most cases those that were recovered strictly derive from tertiary contexts (cf. Cameron & Tomka 1993). This contrasts with the regular provision of deep silos, latrines, wells and cisterns in Islamic cities which had another entirely unexpected archaeological effect, namely of significantly enhancing the recovery-rate of metalwork, glassware and ceramic vessels as they were discarded into these conveniently recycled deep features (e.g. cf. Scanlon & Pinder-Wilson 2002: 13-14). Furthermore, despite the organised provision of water through inverse siphons and tunnels at JundÐ ShÁpÙr (Adams & Hansen 1968: 59-63), there is no evidence for the Sasanian equivalent of the elaborately paved or plastered cooking, ablution and bathroom areas which characterise Islamic architecture and reflect the effect of the Islamic emphasis on cleanliness and purity (cf. Insoll 1999: 220-22). Given that there is usually a close-knit relationship between living conditions and health, one might therefore speculate that the improvement of domestic water supply, drainage and hygiene had a markedly beneficial effect on personal health during the Early Islamic period, particularly with reducing the spread of communicable diseases such as cholera, typhoid, dysentery, diarrhoea and jaundice.

BalÁdhurÐ 246 = Hitti 2002: 394-95). These are likely to have occurred in open spaces, either inside or beyond the walls, or close to the city gates. The whereabouts of industrial activity is uncertain but the absence of surviving evidence for Sasanian pottery, brick or metal production at Merv suggests that, as in the Islamic period, it may have been outside the city walls. Excavations at Veh ArdashÐr indicated that large blocks of housing were separated by regular main streets measuring up to c. 7 m across, whereas individual houses were separated by narrower alleys paved with sherds (Cavallero 1966: 78; cf. Venco Ricciardi & Negro Ponzi 1985: 101).15 A similar variation in scale can be seen on the published plans of the excavated housing at Tell Dhahab, where the largest streets averaged 3 m across whereas the alleys measured 1.5 - 2 m wide (Kröger 1982: 41, fig. 15).16 This contrast implies different levels of investment according to different types of public space, one presumably managed by the municipal authorities and the other more likely co-ordinated at the level of the quarter. The different sizes of these streets and alleys further suggests that, whereas wheeled traffic, pack animals, horses and livestock brought to market must have been a familiar sight on the larger streets, the alleys must have been effectively limited to pedestrian traffic: thus the impediments to livestock caused by projecting properties and/or the narrowness of access explains occasional legal disputes described in the Babylonian Talmud (e.g. Oppenheimer 1983: 181). By the sixth century there appears to have been a major problem with drainage at Veh ArdashÐr as residential quarters in the southern part of the city were abandoned and there is archaeological evidence for the development of stagnant pools in the streets, partial abandonment and pitting of the deserted areas (Venco Ricciardi & Negro Ponzi 1985, 102), partly resembling the situation noted earlier at MGK5. In the case of Veh ArdashÐr, this development has been blamed on a shift in the course of the river Tigris which formerly flowed between Veh ArdashÐr and Ctesiphon, but there is another possible factor to consider, namely the apparent absence of integrated drainage systems at Sasanian cities. Comparison with cities in the developing world, such as Bombay, shows that this can easily lead to flooding during rain or when there is a raised water-table. The development of extensive cess-pools conceivably may have triggered a partial abandonment of old housing and a drift to new residential quarters elsewhere. It is easy to under-estimate the processes of urban change and decay but an appreciation of these human factors also helps explain the complex pattern of urban development in and around the Sasanian capital at Ctesiphon.

This essay has explored some of the complexities of the built environment and possible causes and effects on everyday life and recoverable material culture in a major Sasanian urban centre. Merv is the chosen case-study but much should apply to comparable city-sites in Iran or Mesopotamia, and not just for this period. A critical yet open mind is essential in archaeology, and assumptions need to be regularly challenged. The appearance of Bushihr and its inhabitants in the nineteenth century were as far-removed to an educated traveller such as Morier as these excavated remains are to us, yet much of this lies in our perceptions. The excavated area of housing at Merv may resemble a slum to a twenty-first century European observer, but is much more likely to have been typical of many urban quarters and villages across the Sasanian Empire. Rather than slum, its physical position within the city walls of Merv instead probably rendered it a suburb. St John Simpson Department of the Middle East The British Museum Great Russell Street London WC1B 3DG UK [email protected]

The combination of building materials and the organisation of space have fundamental effects on siteformation processes, and patterns of refuse-disposal and finds recovery. The absence of internal courtyards in MGK5 prevented the digging of refuse pits or wells into which refuse could later be dumped: sweeping out into open drains or transporting solid waste to communal dumps, either directly or through refuse-collectors, were

Notes 1 Apollodorus has been variously dated between c. 130 and c. 50 BC. The exceptional cultivation of the vine in Margiana led to this information being repeated by Pliny the Elder, Solinus and Capella (Nikonorov 1998).

73

ST JOHN SIMPSON 2 The first of these reports will be on excavations in Erk-Kala (Simpson forthcoming b); separate monographs in the same series will deal with the other excavations. 3 Brick pivots appear to have been fairly standard features in contemporary Sasanian courtyard housing at Veh ArdashÐr (Cavallero 1966: 66, 69, pls VI-IX). 4 Small oval hearths were found sunken into the floors to a depth of up to 15-20 cm in a number of the household rooms, including the reception aivÁns, at Veh ArdashÐr (Cavallero 1966: 77, pls VI-VII). 5 A 7th century Chinese list of Persian products includes references to felt and woollen rugs (Miller 1959: 15-16), and textiles decorated with woven blue and white chequers, red and blue woollen stripes, and parallel bands showing six-petalled rosettes on a red ground and white squares on a blue ground which were excavated in a 6th century or later context at Shahr-i QÙmis have been tentatively identified as a zÐlÙ or reversible flat-weave cotton floor covering (Hansman & Stronach 1970: 148, 154-55: fig. 7.3-5, pls IIb, IVb; cf. Vogelsang-Eastwood 1988; Afshar 1992). 6 Identical so-called “coin-flan moulds” have been recovered at KÙsh, al-ÍÐra and Aksum. 7 Cf. Huff 1993: 57; wrongly captioned as JundÐ-ShÁpÙr. 8 An initial surface survey suggested that the city was divided into twenty quarters by two main and eight secondary axes, although whether all of these surface features reflect original streets remains unproven (Huff 1974: 157). 9 A similar pattern was anticipated at the Sogdian city of Paikend but proven to be incorrect (Semenov 2004). 10 Kennedy’s (2002) map respectively identifies the north, east, south and west gates of Gyaur-Kala as the BÁb DÙr Mishkan, BÁb SanjÁn, BÁb al-Lain and BÁb al-MadÐna, but omits the gateway in the north-west corner and incorrectly locates a gate in the position of the late 19th century breach of the walls in the south-west corner next to MGK6. 11 According to Ghirshman (1971: vol. I, 29), only the palace and administrative area in the south-east corner of the city was fortified; a stretch of this wall has been excavated and proven to have semi-circular buttresses on the exterior facade, repeated at regular intervals. However, eroded ramparts still surround the city, which as late as the 10th century were still entered through four principal gates according to a description of the city by MuqaddasÐ (quoted by Ghirshman 1971: vol. I, 16). 12 Sasanian constructions along the summit of the walls of AmÐda during a siege in 503/504 AD are described by Pseudo-Joshua the Stylite who refers to how “It was difficult [for the Romans] to fight with them, especially as [the Persians] were on top of the wall, because all the way along it they had built small huts. They took up position inside them and fought, and were not visible to those outside” (Trombley & Watt 2000: 90). 13 There is no evidence for similar blocking of alleys at Penjikent where instead domestic security appears to have relied on installing fixed doors throughout the ground floor (Marshak, pers. comm. November 2003). 14 Nippur Survey sites 548 and 1539. 15 These were described in the preliminary report as having deliberately cambered surfaces made of asphalt mixed with clay, but further excavation proved this to be incorrect (Roberta Venco, pers. comm., May 2007). 16 The published plan of this site appears to comprise two completely different periods, with the houses and non-radial streets of one superimposed over the summit of an earlier squarish platform accessed by at least one pair of double-reversed staircases. The latter strongly resemble the means of access onto the citadel at Persepolis, and it is possible that the earlier of the two periods at Tell Dhahab therefore represents the remains of an Achaemenid construction.

Empire: Vol. II, Eunapius, Olympiodorus, Priscus and Malchus. Liverpool. Strabo. Jones, H.L., 1969. The Geography of Strabo. London. Secondary sources Adams, R.McC. 1966. The Evolution of Urban Society. Early Mesopotamia and Prehispanic Mexico. Chicago/New York. Adams, R.McC. 1981. Heartland of Cities. Surveys of Ancient Settlement and Land Use on the Central Floodplain of the Euphrates. Chicago. Adams, R.Mc C, Hansen, D.P. 1968. Archaeological reconnaissance and soundings in Jundi Shahpur. Ars Orientalis 7: 53-73. Afshar, Iraj. 1992. Zilu. Iranian Studies (Special Issue: ‘The Carpets and Textiles of Iran. New Perspectives in Research’) 25/1-2: 31-42. Ajzenberg, Y.B. 1958. Iz istorii ispol’zovaniya estestvennogo kamnya. Petrograficheskaya obrabotka arkheologicheskogo kamennogo materiala s mervskogo gorodishcha Gyaur-Kala I poseleniya Kara-depe u Artyka [Historical evidence for using natural stone. Petrographic treatment of archaeological stone artefacts from Merv-site Gyaur-Kala I, site of Kara-depe and Artyka]. YuTAKE Reports 8: 366-73. Amiry, S., Tamari, V. 1989. The Palestinian Village Home. London. Anderson, T.S. 1888. My Wanderings in Persia. London. Azarpay, G. et al. 1981. Sogdian Painting. The Pictorial Epic in Oriental Art. Berkeley/LosAngeles/London. Baipakov, K. 1992. Les Fouilles de la Ville d’Otrar. Archéologie Islamique 3: 87-110. Benco, N. (ed.). 2004. Anatomy of a Medieval Islamic Town: Al-Basra, Morocco. BAR International Series 1234. Oxford. Boardman, S. 1995. Archaeobotanical progress report. Pages 50-52 in G. Herrmann, K. Kurbansakhatov et al. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Third Season (1994). Iran 33: 31-60. Boardman, S. 1997. Archaeobotanical remains [and] Plant use in the Merv oasis. Pages 9-10, 16-17, 26, 29-31 in G. Herrmann, K. Kurbansakhatov, St J. Simpson et al. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Fifth Season (1996). Iran 35: 1-33. Boardman, S. 1998. The archaeobotanical programme. Pages 56-57, 67, 72 in G. Herrmann, K. Kurbansakhatov, St J. Simpson et al. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Sixth Season (1997). Iran 36: 53-75. Boardman, S. 1999. Archaeobotanical analyses. Pages 9 and 13 in G. Herrmann, K. Kurbansakhatov, St J. Simpson et al. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Seventh Season (1998). Iran 37: 1-24.

References Primary sources al-Baladhuri. Hitti, P.K. 2002. The Origins of the Islamic State. Being a translation of KitÁb FutÙh albuldân. New Jersey. [Reprint]. Ammianus Marcellinus. Res Gestae. Translated by J.C. Rolfe. London 1963. Eunapius. Blockley, R.C., 1983. The Fragmentary classicising historians of the Later Roman 74

SUBURB OR SLUM? EXCAVATIONS AT MERV (TURKMENISTAN) Herrmann, G., Kurbansakhatov, K. et al. 2000. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Eighth Season (1999). Iran 38: 1-31. Hiebert, F.T. 1994. Origins of the Bronze Age Oasis Civilization in Central Asia. American School of Prehistoric Research Bulletin 42. Cambridge, Mass. Hobbs, R. 1995. Roman coins from Merv, Turkmenistan. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 14/1: 97-102. Horne, L. 1994. Village Spaces. Settlement and society in north-eastern Iran. Washington. Huff, D. 1972. Der Takht-i Nishin in Firuzabad. Archäologischer Anzeiger: 517-40. Huff, D. 1974. An Archaeological survey in the area of Firuzabad, Fars, in 1972. Pages 155-79 in F. Bagherzadeh (ed.). Proceedings of the IInd Annual Symposium on Archaeological Research in Iran (Muzeh-e Iran-e Bastan, Tehran, Iran, 29th October - 1st November 1973). Tehran. Huff, D. 1987. Architecture. iii. Sasanian. Encyclopedia Iranica 2. Huff, D. 1993. Architecture sassanide. Pages 45-61 in L. Vanden Berghe & B. Overlaet (eds). Splendeur des Sassanides. L'empire perse entre Rome et la Chine [224-642]. Brussels. Insoll, T. 1999. The Archaeology of Islam. Oxford. al-Janabi, T. 1983. Islamic archaeology in Iraq: recent excavations at Samarra. World Archaeology 14/3 (February): 305-27. Kazuris, K., Buryakov, Yu. 1963. Izucheniye remeslennogo kvartala antichnogo Merva u severnykh vorot Gyaur-Kaly [A study of the craft area of ancient Merv near the north gate of Gyaur-Kala]. YuTAKE Reports 12: 119-63. Kennedy, H. 2002. An Historical Atlas of Islam. (Second edition). Leiden. Kramer, C. 1982. Village Ethnoarchaeology. Rural Iran in Archaeological Perspective. New York. Kröger, J. 1982. Sasanidischer Stuckdekor. Ein Beitrag zum Reliefdekor aus Stuck in sasanidischer und frühislamischer Zeit nach den Ausgrabungen von 1928/9 und 1931/2 in der sasanidischen Metropole Ktesiphon (Iraq) und unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Stuckfunde vom Taht-i Sulaiman (Iran), aus Nizamabad (Iran) sowie zahlreicher anderer Fundorte. Mainz. Lamm, C. J. 1937. Cotton in Mediaeval textiles of the Near East. Paris. Lampl, P. n.d. Cities and Planning in the Ancient Near East. London. Lapidus, I. M. 1984. Muslim cities in the later Middle Ages. Cambridge. [Reprint]. Le Strange, G. 1905. Lands of the Eastern Caliphate. Mesopotamia, Persia and Central Asia from the Moslem conquest to the time of Timur. Cambridge. Litvinsky, B.A. 1994. Cities and urban life in the Kushan kingdom. Pages 291-312 in J. Harmatta (ed.). History of Civilizations of Central Asia, Volume II. The development of sedentary and nomadic civilizations: 700 B.C. to A.D. 250. Paris.

Cameron, C.M., Tomka, S.A. (eds). 1993. Abandonment of settlements and regions. Ethnoarchaeological and archaeological approaches. Cambridge. Carter, M.L. 1990. Early Sasanian and Kushano-Sasanian Coinage from Merv. Bulletin of the Asia Institute N.S. 4: 11-16. Cavallero, M. 1966. The excavations at Choche (the presumed Ctesiphon): Area 2. Mesopotamia 1: 63-81. Cohen, A. 1937. Everyman’s Talmud. London. Costello, V.F. 1977. Urbanization in the Middle East. Cambridge. Curtis, V.S. 1996. Parthian and Sasanian Furniture. Pages 233-44 in G. Herrmann (ed.). The Furniture of Western Asia, Ancient and Traditional. Mainz. Curtis, V.S., Simpson, St J. 1998. Archaeological news from Iran: second report. Iran 36: 185-94. Desmet-Grégoire, H. 1990. Bread. Encyclopaedia Iranica 4. Dresvyanskaya, G.Ya. 1974. Oval’nyi dom Khristianskoi obtschiny v starom Merve [The ‘oval’ building of the Christian community at ancient Merv]. YuTAKE Reports 15: 155-81. Fedorov-Davydov, G.A. 1983. Archaeological research in Central Asia of the Muslim period. World Archaeology 14/3: 393-405. Finster, B. 1983. Grabung in der Sasanidenstadt (B’ XX). Vorläufige Berichte über die von dem Deutschen Archaologische Institut aus Mitteln der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft unternommenen Ausgrabungen in Uruk-Warka 31/32: 36-53. Finster, B., Schmidt, J. 1976. Sasanidische und frühislamische Ruinen im Iraq. Baghdader Mitteilungen 8: 1-169. Frye, R.N. 1984. The History of Ancient Iran. Munich. Gaibov, V., Koshelenko, G., Novikov, S. 1990. Chilburj. Bulletin of the Asia Institute N.S. 4: 21-36. Ghirshman, R. 1952. Cinq campagnes de fouilles à Suse (1946-1951). Revue d’Assyriologie 46/1: 1-18. Ghirshman, R. 1971. Bichapour. Paris. Gubaev, A. Koshelenko, G. & Tosi, M. (eds). 1998. The Archaeological map of the Murghab delta. Preliminary reports 1990-95. Rome. Hakim, B.S. 1986. Arabic-Islamic Cities: Building and Planning Principles. London. Hansman, J., Stronach, D. 1970. A Sasanian repository at Shahr-i Qumis. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society: 142-55. Herrmann, G., Kurbansakhatov, K. et al., 1994. The International Merv Project, Preliminary Report on the Second Season (1993). Iran 32: 53-75. Herrmann, G., Kurbansakhatov, K. et al., 1996. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Fourth Season (1995). Iran 34: 1-22. Herrmann, G., Kurbansakhatov, K. et al. 1998. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Sixth Season (1997). Iran 36: 53-75. Herrmann, G., Kurbansakhatov, K. et al. 1999. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Seventh Season (1998). Iran 37: 1-24. 75

ST JOHN SIMPSON International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Second Season (1993). Iran 32: 53-75. Nikonorov, V.P. 1998. Apollodorus of Artemita and the date of his Parthica revisited. Pages 107-22 in E. Dabrowa (ed.). Ancient Iran and the Mediterranean World. Proceedings of an international conference in honour of Professor Józef Wolski held at the Jagiellonian University, Cracow, in September 1996. Krakow. (Electrum 2). Northedge, A. 1987. Karkh Fairuz at Samarra’. Mesopotamia 22: 251-63. Oppenheimer, A. 1983. Babylonian Judaica in the Talmudic Period. Wiesbaden. Ouseley, W. 1800. The oriental geography of Ebn Haukal. London. Perikhanyan, A.G. 1973. Sasanidskiy sudebnik “Kniga tisyachi sudenbikh resheniy”. [Sasanian code of law “Book of the thousand legal judgements] Yerevan. Pugachenkova, G.A., Usmanova, Z.I. 1995. Buddhist monuments in Merv. Pages 51-81 in A. Invernizzi (ed.). In the Land of the Gryphons. Papers on Central Asian archaeology in antiquity. Florence. Puschnigg, G. 1997. The Ceramics. Pages 6-7 in G. Herrmann, K. Kurbansakhatov & St J. Simpson et al. 'The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Fifth Season (1996). Iran 35: 1-33. Puschnigg, G. 1998. The Sasanian ceramics. Pages 57-58 in G. Herrmann, K. Kurbansakhatov, St J. Simpson et al. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Sixth Season (1997). Iran 36: 53-75. Puschnigg, G. 1999. The Sasanian ceramics. Pages 5-7 in G. Herrmann, K. Kurbansakhatov, St J. Simpson et al. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Seventh Season (1998). Iran 37: 1-24. Puschnigg, G. 2000. The Sasanian and earlier pottery. Pages 7, 9 in G. Herrmann, K. Kurbansakhatov, St J. Simpson et al. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Eighth Season (1999). Iran 38: 1-31. Puschnigg, G. 2006. Ceramics of the Merv Oasis. Recycling the City. Walnut Creek. Rogers, M.E. 1863. Domestic life in Palestine. (Second edition). London Šahri, J. 1990. Brazier. ii. In Modern Times. Encyclopaedia Iranica 4. Scanlon, G., Pinder-Wilson, R. 2002. Fustat Glass of the Early Islamic Period. Finds excavated by The American Research Center in Egypt 1964-1980. London. Semenov, G. 2004. Raskopki v Paikende v 2003 godu [Excavations at Paikend, 2003]. St Petersburg. Simpson, St J. 1993. The Ceramics and Small Finds. Pages 52-55 in G. Herrmann, V.M. Masson, K. Kurbansakhatov et al. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the First Season (1992). Iran 31: 39-62.

Loginov, S.D., Nikitin, A.B. 1993a. Sasanian coins of the third century from Merv. Mesopotamia 28: 22546. Loginov, S.D., Nikitin, A.B. 1993b. Coins of Shapur II from Merv. Mesopotamia 28: 247-69. Loginov, S.D., Nikitin, A.B.1993c. Sasanian coins of the late 4th-7th centuries from Merv. Mesopotamia 28: 271-312. Loginov, S.D., Nikitin, A.B., Simpson, St J. 1995. Coins, ostraca, other small finds and ceramics. Pages 36-37, 41-42 in G. Herrmann, K. Kurbansakhatov et al. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Third Season (1994). Iran 33: 31-60. Marshak, B.I., Raspopova, V.I. et al. 2004. Otchet o raskopkakh goroditssha drevnego Pendzhikenta v 2003 godu. [Account of the excavations of the small town Penjikent in 2003] St Petersburg. Marvin, C. 1881. Merv, the Queen of the World; and the scourge of the man-stealing Turcomans. With an exposition of the Khorassan question. London. Miller, R.A. 1959. Accounts of the Western Nations in the History of the Northern Chou Dynasty. Berkeley/Los Angeles. Moorey, P.R.S. 1978. Kish Excavations 1923-1933. Oxford. Morier, J. 1818. A second journey through Persia, Armenia, and Asia Minor to Constantinople, between the years 1810 and 1816. London. Negro Ponzi, M. M. 1966. The excavations at Choche (the presumed Ctesiphon): Area 1. Mesopotamia 1: 81-88. Nesbitt, M. 1993. Archaeobotanical remains. Pages 56-58 in G. Herrmann, V.M. Masson, K. Kurbansakhatov et al. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the First Season (1992). Iran 31: 39-62. Nesbitt, M. 1994. Archaeobotanical research in the Merv Oasis. Pages 71-73 in G. Herrmann, K. Kurbansakhatov et al. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Second Season (1993). Iran 32: 53-75. Nesbitt, M., O’Hara, S. 2000. Irrigation agriculture in Central Asia: a long-term perspective from Turkmenistan. Pages 103-22 in G. Barker & D. Gilbertson (eds). The Archaeology of Drylands: Living at the margin. London/New York. Newman, J. 1932. The agricultural life of the Jews in Babylonia between the years 200 CE and 500 CE. London. Newman, J. n.d. The Commercial Life of the Jews in Babylonia between the years 200 CE and 500 CE. London. Nikitin, A.B. 1992. Middle Persian Ostraca from South Turkmenistan. East and West 42/1: 103-29. Nikitin, A.B. 1996. Cat. no. 124: Mittelpersisches Ostrakon. Pages 256, 410 in W. Seipel (ed.). Weihrauch und Seide: Alte Kulturen an der Seidenstrasse. Vienna. Nikitin, A.B., Loginov, S.D. 1994. Parthian, Sasanian and Post-Sasanian Coins. Pages 62-64 in G. Herrmann, K. Kurbansakhatov et al. The 76

SUBURB OR SLUM? EXCAVATIONS AT MERV (TURKMENISTAN) Simpson, St J. (ed.). Forthcoming b. Sasanian Remains in Erk-Kala. Louvain. Smirnova, N. 1998. The Coins. Pages 64-65 in G. Herrmann, K. Kurbansakhatov, St J. Simpson et al. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Sixth Season (1997). Iran 36: 5375. Smirnova, N. 1999. The coin evidence. Pages 7-8 in G. Herrmann, K. Kurbansakhatov, St J. Simpson et al. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Seventh Season (1998). Iran 37: 1-24. Smirnova, N. 2000. The coins. Pages 8-9 in G. Herrmann, K. Kurbansakhatov, St J. Simpson et al. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Eighth Season (1999). Iran 38: 131. Smirnova, N. 2001. The numismatic evidence, 1992-99. Pages 26-30 in G. Herrmann, K. Kurbansakhatov, St J. Simpson et al. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Ninth Season (2000). Iran 39: 9-52. Smith, I. 1997. Preliminary report on the animal-bone. Pages 31-32 in G. Herrmann, K. Kurbansakhatov, St J. Simpson et al. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Fifth Season (1996). Iran 35: 1-33. Smith, I. 1998. The zooarchaeological analyses. Pages 57, 72-73 in G. Herrmann, K. Kurbansakhatov, St J. Simpson et al. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Sixth Season (1997). Iran 36: 53-75. Smith, I. 2000. The zooarchaeological remains: faunal body part representation and taphonomic indications. Pages 10-11 in G. Herrmann, K. Kurbansakhatov, St J. Simpson et al. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Eighth Season (1999). Iran 38: 1-31. Tafazzoli, A. 1974. A List of Trades and Crafts in the Sassanian Period. Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran N.S. 7: 191-96. Trombley, F.R., Watt, J.W. 2000. The Chronicle of Pseudo-Joshua the Stylite. Liverpool. Usmanova, Z.I. 1963. Raskopki masterskoy remeslenika parfyanskogo vremeni na gorodischche GyaurKala [The excavations of the workshop from Parthian times in the city of Gyaur-Kala]. YuTAKE Reports 12: 164-200. Usmanova, Z.I. 1991. Kultovyi sosud s Erk-Kaly [Cult vessel from Erk-Kala]. Monuments of Turkmenistan 51 (1991/1): 30-31. Valtz, E. 1985. The Yelkhi countryside. Pages 69-71 in E. Quarentelli (ed.). The land between two rivers. Twenty years of Italian archaeology in the Middle East. The treasures of Mesopotamia. Turin. Van De Mieroop, M. 1999. The Ancient Mesopotamian City. Oxford. Venco Ricciardi, R., Negro Ponzi, M.M. 1985. Coche. Pages 100-10 in E. Quarentelli (ed.). The land between two rivers. Twenty years of Italian

Simpson, St J. 1994. Ceramics and Small Finds from MEK: 1. Pages 67-68 in G. Herrmann, K. Kurbansakhatov et al. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Second Season (1993). Iran 32: 53-75. Simpson, St J. 1996. Digging on Iran’s Doorstep. British Museum Magazine 24 (spring): 30-32. Simpson, St J. 1997. Bone, ivory, and shell: Artifacts of the Persian through Roman periods. Pages 34348 in E.M Meyers (ed.). The Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East, vol. 1. New York. Simpson, St J. 1998. The Sasanian Small Finds. Pages 59, 62-63 in G. Herrmann, K. Kurbansakhatov, St J. Simpson et al. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Sixth Season (1997). Iran 36: 53-75. Simpson, St J. 1999. Architecture, stratigraphy and Small Finds. Pages 2-7 in G. Herrmann, K. Kurbansakhatov, St J. Simpson et al. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Seventh Season (1998). Iran 37: 1-24. Simpson, St J. 2000. Mesopotamia in the Sasanian Period: Settlement Patterns, Arts and Crafts. Pages 57-66 in J. Curtis (ed.). Mesopotamia and Iran in the Parthian and Sasanian Periods: Rejection and Revival c. 238 BC - AD 642. Proceedings of a Seminar in memory of Vladimir G. Lukonin. London. Simpson, St J. 2003a. From Mesopotamia to Merv: reconstructing patterns of consumption in Sasanian households. Pages 347-375 in D.T. Potts, M. Roaf, & D. Stein (eds). Culture through Objects. Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Honour of P.R.S. Moorey. Oxford. Simpson, St J. 2003b. Sasanian beads: the evidence of art, texts and archaeology. Pages 59-78 in I.C. Glover, H. Hughes Brock & J. Henderson (eds). Ornaments from the Past: Bead Studies after Beck. London/Bangkok. Simpson, St J. 2004. “Baubo” at Merv. Parthica 6: 22733. Simpson, St J. 2005. Glass and small finds from Sasanian contexts at the ancient city-site of Merv: understanding patterns of circulation and retrieval of ancient material culture at a multiperiod mudbrick site. Pages 232-38 in V.P. Nikonorov (ed.). Central Asia from the Achaemenids to the Timurids: archaeology, history, ethnology, culture. Papers from an International Scientific Conference dedicated to the Centenary of Alexander Markovich Belenitsky, St. Petersburg, 2-5 November 2004. St. Petersburg. Simpson, St J. 2007. Bushehr and beyond: some early archaeological discoveries in Iran. Pages 153-65 E. Errington & V.S. Curtis (eds). From Persepolis to the Punjab. Exploring ancient Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan. London. Simpson, St J. Forthcoming a. The small finds. In D. Kennet (ed.). Excavations at Kush. London. 77

ST JOHN SIMPSON Zavyalov, V.A. 1993. Kostyanye predmety tualeta iz pamyatnikov srednei Azii kushanskogo i postkushanskogo vremeni [Bone Toilet Articles from Central Asian Sites of the Kushan and Post-Kushan Period]. Kratkie soobshchenia Instituta arkheologii [Short reports of the Institute of Archaeology] 209: 31-41. Zavyalov, V.A. 2003. Excavation of the fortifications in the south-western corner of Gyar-Kala. Pages 140-42 in T. Williams, K. Kurbansakhatov et al. The Ancient Merv Project, Turkmenistan. Preliminary Report on the Second Season (2002). Iran 41: 139-70. Zavyalov, V.A., Simpson, St J. 2000. The SeleucidSasanian fortifications. Pages 12-14 in G. Herrmann, K. Kurbansakhatov, St J. Simpson et al. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Eighth Season (1999). Iran 38: 131. Zavyalov, V.A., Simpson, St J. 2001. The SeleucidSasanian fortifications. Pages 14-22 in G. Herrmann, K. Kurbansakhatov, St J. Simpson et al. The International Merv Project. Preliminary Report on the Ninth Year (2000). Iran 39: 9-52. Zeimal, E.V. 1994. The Circulation of Coins in Central Asia during the Early Medieval Period (Fifth to Eighth Centuries A.D.). Bulletin of the Asia Institute N.S. 8: 245-67.

archaeology in the Middle East. The treasures of Mesopotamia. Turin. Vogelsang-Eastwood, G.M. 1988. Zilu Carpets from Iran. Studia Iranica 17/2: 225-40. Wenke, R.J. 1975/76. Imperial investments and agricultural developments in Parthian and Sasanian Khuzestan: 150 BC to AD 640. Mesopotamia 10/11: 31-221. Wenke, R.J., Pyne, N.M. 1990. Some issues in the analysis of Sasanian Iran. Pages 235-51 in F. Vallat (ed.). Contributions à l’histoire de ‘Iran. Mélanges offerts a Jean Perrot. Paris. Whitcomb, D.S. 1979. The city of Istakhr and the Marvdasht plain. Akten des VII. Internationalen Kongresses für Iranische Kunst und Archäologie (München 7.-10. September 1976). Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran, Ergänzungsband 6: 363-70. Whitcomb, D.S. 1985. Before the Roses and Nightingales. Excavations at Qasr-i Abu Nasr, Old Shiraz. New York. Whitcomb, D.S. 1996. Urbanism in Arabia. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 7/1: 38-51. Whitehouse, D. 2002. The houses of Siraf, Iran. Pages 35-42 in D. Waines (ed.). The Formation of the Classical Islamic World, vol. 10: Patterns of Everyday Life. Ashgate.

78

The Destruction of the Late Antique World Order James Howard-Johnston That it was genuine was made plain by the remarkable restraint shown in the second half of the century when domestic or foreign troubles on one side offered tempting prospects of gain to the other.2

The Sasanian empire was one of two great powers which dominated the affairs of western Eurasia in late antiquity. It disposed of immense resources, combining as it did the uplands and highlands of Iran and Transcaucasia with extensive fertile lowlands in Mesopotamia and along the southern Caspian shore. For four centuries, from 230 AD, it confronted the Roman empire on equal terms. Each state pulled rank over the other. Each claimed a preeminent place in earthly affairs, a key role in the working out of a cosmic scheme. Mutual antagonism was programmed in by conflicting political ideologies (in the Sasanian case, perhaps rooted in a legendary rather than a real imperial past) and by geography (the lack of a natural physical or cultural frontier in Armenia and northern Mesopotamia). But a realistic appreciation of each other’s military strength, especially of the solidity imparted by deep systems of defensive fortification led in due course to genuine mutual accommodation (Howard-Johnston 1995a; Rubin 2000; Wiesehöfer 2001: 153-221). An image, surely of Iranian origin, that of the two lights of the world (the sun and the moon), neatly captured the relationship which was established by the end of the third century: each acknowledged the great power status of the other without overtly asserting or relinquishing a claim to superiority; it was left unclear as to which of them was the brighter of the two luminaries.1

It is hard to determine what were the key structural features of the Sasanian Empire for lack of reliable detailed evidence, but what evidence can be gleaned, principally from contemporary Roman, Armenian and Syrian sources, suggests that it was a more brittle state than the Roman. Geographical diversity was greater, mountain ranges more extensive and more formidable. Communications were more difficult in a continental than in a maritime empire. But it was above all the dispersal of agrarian resources (outside Mesopotamia and the Caspian lowlands) in a series of naturally demarcated areas mountain valleys, upland basins, steppe oases and qanatirrigated sections of the fringe of the great salt deserts which loosened its structure. Distance and diversity were not countered by intensive commercial interaction. There was undoubtedly extensive Sasanian involvement in Indian Ocean commerce and a fair amount of longdistance trade overland through central Asia, but the economy was underdeveloped by comparison with that of the Mediterranean-centred Roman Empire. Finally the Sasanian Empire may have possessed an urban infrastructure, but, outside Mesopotamia, the cities were smaller and more widely dispersed than those of its Roman rival. Urban notables, so conspicuous a feature of medieval Iran, were not available to act as local agents of central government or as an effective counterweight to the entrenched local power of landowners, great and small (Christensen 1993: 117-220; Howard-Johnston 1995a: 203-11; Planhol 1968: 63-8, 200-3, 204-5).

After a new round of conflict, initiated at the very end of Constantine’s reign and culminating, in 363 AD, in Julian’s disastrous expedition against the Sasanian capital, the twin cities of Veh-ArdashÐr and Ctesiphon on either bank of the Tigris, a durable peace was established around the year 387 AD. The catalyst was almost certainly the irruption, in the middle of the fourth century, of Altaic nomads from the inner Asian frontiers of China into the west Eurasian steppes. They posed a significantly greater threat to both sedentary empires than their Indo-European predecessors. It took time for this new geopolitical reality to alter attitudes, but within a generation the notion of partnership between two preeminent powers took on real meaning. They now had a shared interest in policing the outer world of northern barbarians, and, in particular, in ensuring effective defence of the Caucasus. They agreed to disengage in the Near East. The status quo, in terms of directly administered territory and zones of influence, was recognised and an acceptable frontier was agreed. The settlement, satisfying as it did the essential interests of both sides, held firm. When disputes arose as they did twice in the first half of the fifth century, fighting was limited and the negotiations which followed broadened the scope of the treaty governing their relations. The ancient form of an arms race, construction of forts, hitherto largely confined to the frontier zones south of the Taurus, was halted before it could be extended throughout Armenia. The commitment of both sides to peaceful co-existence and co-operation was made explicit in a clause promising mutual assistance upon request.

Ideology, secular as well as religious, had to play an unusually large part in holding the Sasanian state together, supplementing and reinforcing the regular processes of government: Iran was offset against Turan, the world of the steppe nomad; Iran itself was the domain of order and justice; the king of kings was responsible for security and prosperity; a grand social compact between king and greater and lesser nobility stabilised the social order. This underlying ideology was constantly reinforced in the public statements of kings and in the carefully choreographed ceremonial of the court. It was remarkably effective. Its strength may be gauged from the pull which it exerted on Armenian culture (Christensen 1944: 397-415; Howard-Johnston 1995a: 220-6; Marlow 1997: 67-77; Russell 1987; Yarshater 1983: 366-77, 402-11). The social compact worked, sustaining a single dynasty throughout late antiquity, in marked contrast to the political flux at the apex of the Roman Empire. The Sasanian state more than held its own vis-à-vis its western and northern neighbours. However, the intrinsic brittleness remained and was to become an important cause of a marked deterioration in 79

JAMES HOWARD-JOHNSTON difficulty in 541 AD. These two offensive campaigns opened a war which continued, despite the coming of plague, on a grand scale for three years and was to drag on in Lazica until the late 550s AD (Greatrex & Lieu 2002: 102-34; Stein 1949: 485-521).

Persian-Roman relations in the sixth century. For, were disorder to enter the political arena, the disturbance could be extreme. Until the late fifth century, there were only short periods of internecine conflict, but defeat, disastrous defeat at the hands of the nomad Hephthalites, and the death in battle of the king himself (Pÿr½z) set off an unparalleled bout of disorder, which affected the religious and social as well as political spheres. Nearly twenty years (484-502 AD) passed before a semblance of stability returned, Pÿr½z’s son, KavÁd I, having been forced to take extraordinary measures to secure his throne and to assert his authority over his realm (Crone 1991; Greatrex 1998: 47-52; Rubin 1995). He then took the obvious course of action, to bind his fractious subjects together. He embarked on a grand foreign adventure, fullscale war, unprovoked, unexpected and fierce, against the rival western empire. This initiated a series of five wars, which extended through the sixth and into the early seventh century. Large forces were deployed from the first, the Romans fielding something approaching 100,000 men in the second year (504 AD) of their successful campaign to recover Amida, which had fallen in the autumn of 502 AD. Each war lasted longer than its predecessor. The first, short but violent, triggered a renewal of the arms race and aggressive diplomatic activity north and south of the main arenas of war, which culminated in a renewal of open warfare both north and south of the Taurus (527-31 AD), this time initiated by the Romans. After each side successfully parried the attacks of the other, an open-ended peace was negotiated in 532 AD which freed the hands of both young rulers, Justinian and Khusrau I AnÙshÐrvÁn, to embark on wideranging domestic reform programmes and, in the case of Justinian, to recoup prestige by dispatching an expeditionary force to the west (Howard-Johnston 1995a: 165-9; Greatrex 1998: 73-223; Greatrex & Lieu 2002: 62101; Jones 1964: 278-85; Rubin 2000: 654-9; Stein 1949: 311-68, 547-622).

The comprehensive peace treaty which brought this third war to a formal close in 561 AD was broken all too soon, when the Turks, who had created an empire which straddled the east and west Eurasian steppes, sent an embassy to Constantinople and offered to ally with the Romans against the Persians. The decision made by Justin II, in the winter of 568-9 AD, to pursue negotiations, was a fateful one. He was in effect casting aside the old partnership between the sedentary empires. He seems also to have encouraged Armenian dissidents to plan a general rising, with a promise of military support. Iran now faced the nightmare prospect of simultaneous attack in the west and east. The war which followed did not result in the swift, comprehensive victory expected by the Romans. Whether or not the Turks launched their promised offensive (nothing is reported about it in the extant sources), Persian defences held in the east. In the west, a brilliant enveloping movement resulted in the disorderly retreat of a large Roman invasion force, the capture of a key Roman fortress (DÁrÁ), and the reimposition (by the end of 577 AD) of Persian authority on Armenia. Fighting, confined largely to Transcaucasia from 574 AD, resumed south of the Taurus from 578 AD. It continued for over ten years, putting increasing strain on resources and souring relations yet further. Both sides paid a heavy price. The Romans began to lose control of the Balkans in the face of Avar and Slav incursions, while, in Italy, the Lombards strengthened their position in the Po valley and central Apennines. In Iran the almost unthinkable happened when BahrÁm Ch½bÐn, an aristocratic general, who had led successful campaigns against the Turks in the 580s AD, deposed and executed the Sasanian king of kings, Hormizd IV (in 590 AD) (Barfield 1989: 131-8; Greatrex & Lieu 2002: 135-72; Whitby 1988: 219-97).

The old modus vivendi was restored in the 530s. The prospect was one of symbiosis and co-operation, tempered by direct competition for prestige and diplomatic rivalry far a field. There were conflicts of interest, of course, above all over Lazica which could serve either as a Roman bridgehead threatening Persian Transcaucasia or as a Sasanian forward base on the Black Sea. An issue such as this was capable of provoking war, but, as long as both sides were committed to their traditional partnership, it should have been possible to contain any resulting conflict. It was a weakening of that commitment at specific junctures, when alluring prospects of gain opened up, first for Khusrau I AnÙshÐrvÁn in 540 AD, then for Justinian’s successor Justin II in the late 560s AD, which undermined the binary world order of late antiquity. Khusrau exploited Roman preoccupation with Italy to invade the Near East in 540 AD, and, having achieved complete surprise, was able to collect huge sums of money from captured and threatened cities. It was an extraordinarily successful campaign in another respect, in that it distracted Roman attention from his prime objective, the recovery and occupation of Lazica which was achieved without

The arrival of Hormizd’s son Khusrau on Roman territory and his appeal for Roman political and military backing, making much of the old imperial partnership and scoffing at the whole notion of universal rule (he called Alexander the Great a mere plaything of fortune), provided the Roman emperor Maurice with an opportunity which he exploited to the full.3 After some hesitation, presumably to improve the terms on offer, he agreed to help, in return for extensive territorial concessions. Khusrau regained his throne in a well co-ordinated joint campaign in 591 AD. The usurper was killed. The old order was restored, but the strategic balance had shifted markedly in the Romans’ favour. Control over the whole length of the Armenian Taurus gave them a clear advantage of inner lines, and Transcaucasia was now evenly divided, the frontier running menacingly close to the provincial capitals of Persian Iberia (Georgia) and Persian Armenia. However, relations were good on the surface. The two rulers co-operated in Armenia, to snuff out rebellion and raise troops for service elsewhere. Each was free to deal 80

THE DESTRUCTION OF THE LATE ANTIQUE WORLD ORDER destroyed. The main weight of the Persian offensive had to be shifted to the north before any real advance could be made. This occurred in 605 AD, when the general to whom Khusrau had handed over the supreme command, directed co-ordinated attacks south and north of mount Ararat, routed the opposing Roman forces, and drove them back across the pre-591 AD frontier.

with other pressing problems, Maurice striving to recover ground in the Balkans (with considerable success) and to contain the Lombards in Italy (unsuccessfully), Khusrau II fighting a long counter-insurgency war (595-600 AD) to suppress the rebellion of the Elburz highlanders led by his maternal uncle BistÁm (Christie 1995: 82-91; Howard-Johnston 1999a: 175-82; Greatrex & Lieu 2002: 172-81; Whitby 1988: 156-65, 297-306). Both states, though, were still under strain, and the rancour generated in the course of four closely-spaced wars was not to be dissipated in a mere decade. Were Khusrau to be offered an opportunity like that seized by Maurice in 590 AD, he would undoubtedly make use of it, above all to redress the strategic balance, to consolidate his authority and to bind Iran together after a long period of domestic turbulence.

A pause followed in 606 AD for raising and training large new drafts. The only effective way to counter the ability of the Romans to move troops swiftly between the two theatres of war, was to deploy large forces simultaneously in both. A second phase, which saw the Persian offensive gradually gather momentum, began in 607 AD. Theodosiopolis, the main Roman base in Armenia, was attacked and capitulated after a short siege. In the south operations were directed mainly against the heavily fortified TÙr AbdÐn massif. Roman resistance did not collapse. A counterattack on the district of Theodosiopolis had to be fended off in 608 AD, while, in northern Mesopotamia, it was only after the capture of the last stronghold in the TÙr AbdÐn (Mardin which held out until spring 609 AD), that the great cities of the region, foremost among them Amida and Edessa, opened their gates. Thus it took four years of remorseless pressure, aided by a gathering political crisis inside the Roman empire (608-10 AD), for the Persians to strip away Roman defences layer by layer and to reach the left bank of the Euphrates in 610 AD (Flusin 1992: II, 70-4, 79-81; Greatrex & Lieu 2002: 184-7; Howard-Johnston 1999a: 196-202).

As autumn was advancing in 602 AD at the end of yet another campaigning season in the Balkans, the Roman field army refused to obey an order to winter north of the Danube and mutinied. Before long a high-ranking officer, Phocas, took command with the backing of the mutineers and marched on Constantinople. He had little difficulty in taking over the city and seizing power. He sealed his coup with the execution of the male members of the imperial family. Khusrau thus gained much more than a pretext for going to war. In a replay of the events of 590 AD, he produced Maurice’s eldest son, Theodosius, whom he claimed, had managed to escape execution and make his way to the Sasanian court. Theodosius’ appeal for help, as the son of Khusrau’s brutally murdered benefactor, could not be ignored. There were no distractions in central Asia, the Turks being involved in one of several periodic bouts of internal conflict. That winter, as opposition, headed by the Roman commanderin-chief in the Near East, gathered to the new regime, Persian forces were mobilised north and south of the Armenian Taurus for Khusrau’s war of revenge (Greatrex & Lieu 2002: 182-4; Whitby 1988: 24-7, 165-9, 306-7).

The political crisis reached a climax in the autumn of 610 AD. The rebellion of Heraclius, military governor of North Africa, had gathered extraordinary momentum since its start in 608 AD. Egypt had been taken over and the authority of Phocas’ regime had been undermined throughout the Near East. Now the younger Heraclius, son of the rebel leader, sailed with an expeditionary force against Constantinople to deliver the coup de grâce (at the beginning of October) which was to result in his installation as emperor. The Persians evidently waited on events for much of the year. In the north they were probably fully occupied in pacifying western Armenia, while in the south they contented themselves with seizing, in August, a bridgehead at Zenobia on the right bank of the Euphrates. The main offensive was timed to coincide with the battle for power at the centre of the Roman empire.

Khusrau himself took command in the south. On this occasion, as once before (in 591 AD when his throne was at stake) and once later (in 624 AD when Asia Minor was apparently ripe for the taking), the prospective gains far outweighed the risks of taking direct responsibility for military operations in the field (contra Whitby 1994). The immediate objectives were two: to relieve Edessa where the rebel Roman general, Narses, was besieged by forces loyal to Phocas, and to capture the powerful forward base of DÁrÁ. Smaller forces were deployed in the north, with the task of preventing troop transfers from Armenia to the southern theatre. The opening phase of the war lasted three years. In spite of political division and the rebellion of Narses, the Romans fought hard and showed considerable resilience. DÁrÁ was only captured after a siege of a year and half in 604 AD. A first Persian thrust in the north (in 603 AD) was met on the frontier (east of mount Aragats) and ended in comprehensive defeat. A second, a year later, penetrated into open country west of mount Aragats, but again encountered serious resistance. The Roman defensive force, although outmanoeuvred and worsted in an engagement, was not

In October Persian forces pushed across the river into northern Syria and captured in swift succession the cities of Antioch, Apamea and Emesa. They were able to consolidate their position there, under cover of a bold, headline-catching, advance from western Armenia into Cappadocia in 611 AD, which resulted in the capture of Caesarea. A year passed before the Romans recovered Caesarea (in summer 612 AD). Only then could they concentrate their forces against the wedge of Persiancontrolled territory which separated Asia Minor and Cilicia in the north and west from the rich and exposed Roman Near East to the south. The delayed 81

JAMES HOWARD-JOHNSTON take back peace proposals but they had to come from the Senate, since Khusrau did not recognise Heraclius as emperor. At this the Senate agreed to dispatch an embassy of three high-ranking civilians, the Praetorian Prefect (of the East), the City Prefect and the Syncellus (responsible for liaison between church and state) and outlined the terms they were offering in a letter of introduction taken by the ambassadors (Chronicon Paschale: 706, transl. 159-60; Greatrex & Lieu 2002: 193-5; Howard-Johnston 1999a: 210-3; Sebeos: 78-9).

counteroffensive materialised in 613 AD. A large field army commanded by the new emperor in person (who thus invested a great deal of prestige in the campaign) marched towards Antioch, but was defeated and driven back behind the mountain defences of Asia Minor. The Roman Empire was now divided in two. The Persians could choose at will whether to strike north-west or south, knowing that the Romans could only move troops from theatre to theatre by sea and would in any case be reluctant to engage in open, orthodox combat. This third phase of the war ended with the extension of the Persian zone of occupation to cover the whole of Syria and northern Palestine in the year following the decisive battle outside Antioch. The only noteworthy event (of which much was later made in Roman propaganda) was the capture and brief occupation of Jerusalem in May 614 AD, an action taken in response to a Jewish appeal to halt a pogrom in the city (Flusin 1992: II, 74-9, 81-3, 151-72; Greatrex & Lieu 2002: 187-93; Howard-Johnston 1999a: 202-3, 206-8).

The formal letter of the Roman Senate is preserved in the Chronicon Paschale, a universal chronicle which was pieced together in the latter stages of the war by a member of the patriarchal staff in Constantinople. No historian of the Roman Empire can read it without a frisson of surprise. The tone was grovelling. The utmost care was taken to avoid giving any offence. The only reference to God was so vague as to be compatible with the tenets of Zoroastrianism. The failure of Heraclius’ regime to make contact previously with Khusrau was attributed to disturbed conditions at the time, whereas in reality Khusrau had had the ambassadors who brought news of Heraclius’ accession put to death. The claims of the pretender sponsored by the Sasanian ruler were neither accepted nor denied. A plea was made for Khusrau to keep the promise made by ShÁhÐn ‘that your superabundant Might would receive in appropriate manner those dispatched by us and send them off unharmed to return to us’. The key sentence comes near the end, again in the form of an entreaty: ‘we beg too of your Clemency to consider Heraclius, our most pious emperor, as a true son, one who is eager to perform the service of your serenity in all things’ (my italics). Here was the Roman Senate offering to submit to the superior authority of the Persian king of kings and pleading for recognition of Heraclius as legitimate client-ruler. Nothing was said about specific territorial concessions or future financial arrangements, but it may readily be supposed that the Senate was ready to recognise the gains made by Persian arms and to commit themselves to substantial annual payments of tribute (Chronicon Paschale: 707-9, translation 160-62).

We have now reached a turning point in the history of western Eurasia. The Sasanian Empire had established clear mastery over its traditional western rival. The Roman army was temporarily broken as a fighting force. Rich Roman territories were there for the taking. But it was no light matter to cast aside the binary world order to which both powers had been committed for many generations and for which Khusrau had once been so eloquent an advocate. On the other hand he now had a real opportunity to follow the example of Alexander and unite the civilised world under his rule. Would the arguments of his youth in favour of a segmentary system as the sole sure way of regulating human affairs and of securing civilisation still weigh with him, hardened as he now was by twenty-five years of rule and by twelve years of warfare against the Romans? Or would he decide that Iran should annex the Roman Near East, so as to increase its wealth and ratchet up its power in response to the unification of Turan by the Turks? A reminder of Turkish power had come in 614 AD. A Persian expedition east of the Oxus had prompted the Turks to intervene in force. The Persian army was defeated, its elderly Armenian general escaping ignominiously, and Turkish units pushed west around the salt desert as far as Ray (close to modern Tehran) and Isfahan (Howard-Johnston 1999a:183-9). This was a grave blow to Khusrau’s standing. He responded in 615 AD by reinforcing the army in the east which renewed its attack and, in the absence of the Turks (they turned their attention to China), caused widespread devastation from Herat in the south to Balkh in the north. It was in the west, though, that he sought to recoup the lost prestige. He dispatched ShÁhÐn, one of his two leading generals, with a large army against Asia Minor. Meeting little or no resistance (the Romans countered with a raid of their own into Armenia), ShÁhÐn marched north-west over the interior plateau and reached the Asian shore of the Bosphorus. There the emperor himself came out to parley, seeking peace at almost any price (even if it involved the surrender of his throne). ShÁhÐn agreed to

How seriously these Roman proposals were entertained we cannot tell. All we know is that by the end of the following winter Khusrau had decided to reject them and to break off negotiations. This time he detained the ambassadors rather than executing them. These actions made it plain that he was not satisfied with reducing the Roman Empire to client status but that he intended to annihilate it. He set about doing so over the following eleven years, which may be categorised as a fourth phase, the phase of final conquest. The whole of Palestine was annexed and occupied in 616 AD. Then, after a diversionary invasion of Asia Minor by two armies in 617 AD, preparations were made for the invasion, in 619 AD, of Egypt, the richest of all Roman provinces. The operation, which was on a massive scale and involved both senior Persian generals, ShahrbarÁz and ShÁhÐn, went smoothly. Alexandria was taken. The transfer of sovereignty was swiftly acknowledged elsewhere, and 82

THE DESTRUCTION OF THE LATE ANTIQUE WORLD ORDER the point of emulating the achievements of his Achaemenid predecessors. He had extended his authority over Transcaucasia and up to the Mediterranean frontage of Syria and Palestine, with a powerful forward bastion in the south (Egypt). Within a few months, with Constantinople in Avar hands and Heraclius’ army routed, he could expect to be embarking on the task of incorporating Asia Minor into his empire, as a second, northern bastion. The preparations for celebrating and commemorating his victories were naturally well in hand (Fukai et al. 1984; Salzmann 1976; Huff 1985).

before long Persian control became a visible reality as troops were dispatched to garrison key cities along the full length of the Nile valley. Two quiet years followed, in which the Persian authorities consolidated their hold on Egypt and all disposable field forces were redeployed to the north, for the final tasks, the invasion of Asia Minor, the capture of Constantinople and the elimination of the last Roman emperor (Altheim-Stiehl 1991; 1992; Flusin 1992: II, 177-80; Greatrex & Lieu 2002: 195-7). Problems were encountered, when the attack was launched. Asia Minor proved much more resilient than Egypt. A small, well-trained, fast-moving army led by Heraclius counterattacked from Bithynia in 622 AD and won a small engagement on the northern edge of the Anatolian plateau. But the Avar khÁqÁn entered the war that year, and news of the gathering crisis in the west where Thessalonica was under siege for over a month forced Heraclius abruptly to break off the campaign. Significant gains were made in 623 AD both by land (Ancyra fell) and by sea (several unspecified islands were taken), Heraclius being preoccupied in negotiations with the Avars, who, we may suspect, were well aware of the state of affairs in the east and nearly succeeded in capturing the emperor under cover of a summit meeting. In 624 AD, temporarily freed from the Avar threat, Heraclius launched a second, much more disruptive counterattack. The Persians were, it seems, planning a double invasion of Asia Minor: one army would enter the plateau from the south-east, while a second larger force, under Khusrau’s command, attacked through Armenia. By a swift advance through Armenia, Heraclius achieved complete strategic surprise, threw the army which was mobilising in Atropatene (Iranian Azerbaijan) into disarray, and sent Khusrau fleeing into the Zagros mountains. However, the trouble was contained by the beginning of the 625 AD campaigning season, when three armies were deployed in Transcaucasia and set about hunting down and destroying the last army which the Romans could field. Despite heroic feats of marching and countermarching, in which Heraclius outmanoeuvred and defeated his opponents in detail, the Roman army was forced to withdraw back towards Asia Minor. The grand Persian offensive postponed from 624 AD was launched in 626 AD: two Persian armies marched on the Bosphorus from the east and south-east, while, in Europe, the Avars, now in open alliance with the Persians, prepared to besiege Constantinople (Greatrex & Lieu 2002: 197-205; Howard-Johnston 1999a: 1-4, 14-9).

The familiar bipolar order of western Eurasia had been destroyed by 626 AD. If the historical projector is stopped at this point and an imaginative leap is made into the future without the benefit of hindsight, it can be said confidently that Iran was set to remain the dominant power of the region for many generations to come. The king of kings would be able to watch over the affairs of the northern steppes with more complaisance than hitherto. In the west he would gaze, perhaps somewhat bemused, at the spectacle of a post-Roman Europe, deeply divided, its economy sinking to a pre-Classical level, its social structures unravelling, and its rival Germanic leaderships already committed to incessant warfare. In the south, he was poised to extend his authority over the HijÁz, the only region of Arabia currently out of his reach, and to play a leading role in the long-term development of the Indian Ocean economic zone. The causes for the breakdown of the late antique world order have been outlined in the course of the summary narrative presented in this paper. Those normally sought out by historians - whether deep social cleavages destabilising individual states, or accelerating economic decline with the attendant impoverishment of populations, or attachment to incompatible imperial and religious ideologies - have not been in the forefront of the argument advanced. Two factors have been picked out as the most important: first there was a structural flaw in Iran and its dependencies, a relative looseness in the bonds holding localities together, which programmed an unusual degree of volatility into Iranian politics; but second, the ideas, intentions and decisions of small governing elites, their responses, influenced by emotion as well as reason, to changing circumstances, have been identified as prime movers in international relations in the deep past as they remain in the present. Hence attention has been focused on key episodes when the rulers and their advisers in the rival autocratic regimes - KavÁd I, Khusrau I, Justin II and Khusrau II - chose present advantage over the long-term benefits of mutual accommodation. Cumulatively the decisions which they took gradually eroded confidence in the old system, and, helped by the destabilising effect of aggressive diplomatic activity by both sides in Transcaucasia and Arabia, led in the early seventh century to the conquest of the one by the other.

The end was near. The outnumbered troops serving with Heraclius seemed doomed once they were shepherded back into the relatively open country of the Asia Minor plateau. They were in danger of being caught and crushed between two enemy armies. Constantinople itself, without the heartening presence of the emperor and forced to rely almost entirely on its own resources, was likely to succumb to the vast army (some 80,000 strong) with advanced siege weaponry which the Avars had amassed (Howard-Johnston 1995b). The remaining Roman territories in the west were ripe for picking by Avars, Slavs, Lombards, and Berbers. Khusrau was on

Of course, as all readers of this paper know, the outcome was very different from that foreseen and foreseeable in 83

JAMES HOWARD-JOHNSTON 626 AD. The military resistance put up by what remained of the Roman state exceeded all expectation. Assured by the authorities of church and state that they were fighting for the true faith as God’s agents on earth, energised by a Christian version of jihÁd, and led by a remarkable general, Roman troops performed heroic feats. A strategy which was consistently directed at a single overriding political aim, the discrediting of Khusrau II’s regime, eventually succeeded in triggering a virtually bloodless putsch. Khusrau was overthrown on the night of 23rd24th February 628 AD and executed four days later. His son and successor immediately opened negotiations in the vain hope of restoring the old world order and found a willing partner in the victorious emperor Heraclius (Greatrex & Lieu 2002: 205-28; Howard-Johnston 1999b: 4-7, 19-44).

References Primary Sources Chronicon Paschale. Chronicon Paschale. Edited by L. Dindorf. Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae. Bonn 1832. Chronicon Paschale. Chronicon Paschale 284-628 AD. Translated by M. & M. Whitby. Translated Texts for Historians 7. Liverpool 1989. FHG IV. Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum IV. Edited by C. Müller. Paris 1851. Sebeos. The Armenian History attributed to Sebeos, Part I Translation and Notes. Translated by R.W. Thomson.. Translated Texts for Historians 31. Liverpool 1999. Theophylact Simocatta. Historiae. Edited by C. de Boor, rev. P. Wirth.. Stuttgart 1972. Theophylact Simocatta. The History of Theophylact Simocatta. Translated by M.& M. Whitby. Oxford 1986.

Four historical phenomena, all quite out of the ordinary, played an even more important part than the endeavours of the Roman field army in altering the outcome of the war, in aborting Khusrau II’s new world order. Each can well be taken by believers as a plain case of divine intervention in human affairs. Doomed to fall to the overwhelming forces arrayed against it, Constantinople held out in 626 AD. Temporarily freed from Chinese entanglements, the Turks were able, for the first time since 614 AD, to intervene in force on the Roman side in the final three climactic years of the war (626-8 AD). The heavy snowfalls which made the Zagros impassable every winter held off until late February in 628 AD, thus enabling Heraclius to march to safety near lake Urmia. Finally the monotheist message propagated by a local prophet galvanised all the peoples of Arabia and set them, in place of the Persians, on the road to world conquest (Barfield 1989: 139-45; Chronicon Paschale: 731-2, translation: 186; Donner 1981; Howard-Johnston 1995b; 1999a: 40-2).

Secondary Sources Altheim-Stiehl, R. 1991. Wurde Alexandreia im Juni 619 n.Chr. durch die Perser erobert? Bemerkungen zur zeitlichen Bestimmung der sasanidischen Besetzung Ägyptens unter Chosrau II. Parwez. Tyche 6: 3-16. Altheim-Stiehl, R. 1992. Zur zeitlichen Bestimmung der sasanidischen Eroberung Ägyptens. Ein neuer terminus ante quem für Oxyrhyncos ist nachzutragen. Pages 5-8 in O. Brehm & S. Klie (eds). MOUSIKOS ANER. Festschrift für Max Wegner zum 90. Geburtstag. Bonn. Barfield, T.J. 1989. The Perilous Frontier: Nomadic Empires and China. Oxford. Blockley, R.C. 1992. East Roman Foreign Policy. Leeds. Christensen, A. 1944. L’Iran sous les Sassanides. Copenhagen. Christensen, P. 1993. The Decline of Iranshahr. Copenhagen. Christie, N. 1995. The Lombards. Oxford. Crone, P. 1991. Kavad’s Heresy and Mazdak’s Revolt. Iran 29: 21-42. Dodgeon, M.H., Lieu, S.N.C. 1991. The Roman Eastern Frontier and the Persian Wars AD 226-363. London/New York. Donner, F. McG. 1981. The Early Islamic Conquests. Princeton. Flusin, B. 1992. Saint Anastase le Perse et l’histoire de la Palestine au début du VIIe siècle. Paris. Fukai, S., Horiuchi, K., Tanabe, K., Domyo, M. 1984. Taq-i Bustan IV. Tokyo. Greatrex, G. 1998. Rome and Persia at War, 502-532. Leeds. Greatrex, G., Lieu, S.N.C. 2002. The Roman Eastern Frontier and the Persian Wars, Part II AD 363630. London/New York. Howard-Johnston, J. 1995a. The Two Great Powers in Late Antiquity: a Comparison. Pages 157-226 in

James Howard-Johnston Modern History Faculty Broad Street Oxford OX1 3BD UK [email protected] Notes 1

The image first surfaces at the beginning of an account, written in the sixth century by Peter the Patrician, of peace negotiations in 298 or 299 (FHG IV: 188-9; Dodgeon & Lieu 1991: 131-3. Cf. Whitby 1988: 205 and n.15). 2 Blockley 1992; Whitby 1988: 204-6. The most recent account of the evolving relations of the two great powers in the late fourth and fifth centuries is to be found in the compendium of translated source material edited by Greatrex & Lieu 2002: 1-61. 3 Khusrau’s arguments are presented in straightforward fashion in a formal written appeal addressed to the emperor Maurice but are subsequently elaborated (with the inclusion of the dismissive reference to Alexander) in a speech delivered on his behalf by an ambassador to the assembled Roman court: Theophylact Simocatta, 4.11.1-11, 13.4-26, translation: 117-8, 121-3.

84

THE DESTRUCTION OF THE LATE ANTIQUE WORLD ORDER A. Cameron (ed.). The Byzantine and Early Islamic Near East III. Princeton. Howard-Johnston, J. 1995b. The Siege of Constantinople in 626. Pages 131-42 in C. Mango & G. Dagron (eds). Constantinople and Its Hinterland. Aldershot. Howard-Johnston, J. 1999a. The Armenian History Attributed to Sebeos, Part II Historical Commentary. Translated Texts for Historians 31. Liverpool. Howard-Johnston, J. 1999b. Heraclius’ Persian Campaigns and the Revival of the East Roman Empire, 622-630. War in History 6: 1-44. Huff, D. 1985. Harsin. Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran N.S. 18: 15-44. Jones, A.H.M. 1964. The Later Roman Empire 284-602. Oxford. Marlow, L. 1997. Hierarchy and Egalitarianism in Islamic Thought. Cambridge. Planhol, X. de. 1968. Les fondements géographiques de l’histoire de l’Islam. Paris. Rubin, Z. 1995. Mass Movements in Late Antiquity Appearances and Realities. Pages 129-187 in I. Malkin & Z.W. Rubinsohn (eds). Leaders and Masses in the Roman World: Studies in Honour of Zvi Yavetz. Leiden.

Rubin, Z. 2000. The Sasanid Monarchy. Pages 638-661 in A. Cameron, B. Ward-Perkins & M. Whitby (eds). The Cambridge Ancient History XIV. Cambridge. Russell, J.R. 1987. Zoroastrianism in Armenia. Harvard Iranian Series 5. Cambridge MA. Salzmann, W. 1976. Die ‘Felsabarbeitung und Terrasse des Farhad’ in Bisutun. Ein spätsasanidisches Monument. Archäologischer Anzeiger 1976: 110-134. Stein, E. 1949. Histoire du Bas-Empire II. Paris/Brussels. Whitby, M. 1988. The Emperor Maurice and His Historian. Oxford. Whitby, M. 1994. The Persian King at War. Pages 227263 in E. Dabrowa (ed.). The Roman and Byzantine Army in the East. Krakow. Yarshater, E. 1983. Iranian National History. Cambridge History of Iran 3/1: 359-477. Wiesehöfer, J. 2001. Ancient Persia. London.

85

Bishops or Bureaucrats?: Christian Clergy and the State in the Middle Sasanian Period1 Scott McDonough In the second decade of the fifth century, Yazdgard, King of Kings (399-420 AD), received troubling reports from his nephew, the governor of Fārs.2 Nahrūz, the governor, reported that pirates had made off with jewels and other merchandise from trade ships. Not entirely convinced of the accuracy of these reports, the king resolved to send an envoy to confirm Nahrūz’s story.

Church of the East (410-775 AD), the Synodicon Orientale,14 I will argue that a new, mutually beneficial relationship between bishops and the king evolved during the early fifth century reign of Yazdgard. In this, the Sasanian crown extended its networks of patronage to include Christian bishops, and sought these bishops’ assistance maintaining the external and internal security of the state. Bishops profited from this attention in a number of ways, including: organizing the Church, enhancing their personal authority (by tying it to their monarch), and otherwise pursuing their individual interests: intellectual, fiduciary, or otherwise.

Leaving aside the incidental detail this account provides on the topics of administration and trade,3 the identity of the king’s inspector is itself quite intriguing. This “state official” was none other than the bishop, metropolitan of Seleucia-Ctesiphon and head of the Christian Church of the East, the Catholicos Ahaī. According to this story in the (admittedly late) Chronicle of Siirt, Ahaī traveled from his see at Seleucia-Ctesiphon to Fārs, assessed the truth of Nahrūz’s account, and took a side trip to the tombs of the Christians martyred under Shāpūr II (309-79 AD). On his return, Ahaī reported his findings to Yazdgard and was rewarded with “considerable authority” in the empire. He promptly put this newly acquired authority to use, encouraging his followers to set fire to homes tainted by sorcery or the instruments of magic.

Turning first to the bishops, it will be useful to examine the precise nature and terms of their new accommodation with the Sasanian monarchy. The Synodicon Orientale, which purports to preserve the acts of the Synod of Mar Isḥāq (held in Seleucia-Ctesiphon in 410 AD), contains a detailed, albeit not verbatim, recounting of Yazdgard’s “Edict of Toleration” (Synodicon orientale: 18). The text states that, in response to the pleas of both Mārūthā, a Roman ambassador, and bishop of Mayperqat,15 and Ishāq, the Catholicos at the time, Yazdgard allowed public Christian worship, allowed (or ordered) the restoration of Christian churches and altars destroyed in the persecutions, freed Christian prisoners, and allowed the free circulation of the leaders of the Church through the empire (Synodicon orientale: 18).

This narrative provides one of the earliest examples of a Christian bishop undertaking the administrative business of the Sasanian state.4 In itself, the incident represents a remarkable reversal on the part of both Christian bishops and Sasanian monarch.5 The status of the Christian communities of the Sasanian dominions prior to the fifth century was largely defined by official indifference (benign or otherwise) on the part of the Sasanian monarchy, or, worse, by prolonged bouts of statesponsored persecution, as in the mid-fourth century.6

However, at this time bishops sought (and received) more than the passive tolerance of the state. Yazdgard provided the bishops with external recognition of their authority over the Christian population of the empire. Arguably, this served to both confirm and enhance the standing of these bishops within the Christian community. Further, the king offered to support the bishops’ edicts and judicial decisions with the full coercive power of the monarchy. Several canons of the 410 Synod end with the ominous assertion that those who did not obey the dictates of the assembled bishops would not only be cast out of the Christian community, but that they would also suffer the full benefit of the King’s justice (imprisonment, or worse).16 Even the account of the process of convening the Synod points out the practical benefits of cooperation with monarch and state. Yazdgard placed the machinery of state power at the disposal of Mārūthā and Ishāq, the bishop of Seleucia-Ctesiphon, so they might use the post and marzpāns (marzubÁns, military governors) (see Morony 1960a) to disseminate information to the empire’s bishops, and bring them together in Seleucia-Ctesiphon (Synodicon orientale: 19). Through these concessions, Yazdgard proved himself an invaluable ally in these bishops’ pursuit of their pastoral duties.

In contrast, the reign of Yazdgard I7 was notable for that monarch’s accommodation of Christianity and its representatives.8 While Yazdgard’s 410 AD declaration of official toleration of Christianity marked a clear break with the approach of his predecessors (Synodicon orientale: 18), the above incident suggests an even more stunning reversal.9 After 410 AD, it would seem that Christian bishops (or at least their Catholicoi) were not simply given license to openly practice their faith, but that some actually became trusted allies of the Magian king.10 Given that only a few years earlier these bishops were, in the eyes of the state, the unofficial representatives of a politically suspect and persecuted minority, this must have been a considerable adjustment for both parties. In the following, I will explore the development of the Sasanian state's relationship with the Church of the East during the reign of Yazdgard I. Using the examples of three successive Catholicoi (Ishāq,11 Ahaī,12 and Ya[h]bhlāhā13), and the evidence provided by the early ninth-century compilation of the acts of the synods of the

Additionally, while acquiring royal support for the Church as an institution, individual bishops proved quite adept at exploiting the power of the state to achieve their 87

SCOTT MCDONOUGH personal ambitions. The active support of the King of Kings for his “friend”, the Catholicos Ishāq, seems to have definitively settled, in Ishāq’s favor, the question of primacy within the Church of the East.17 Also, Ishāq’s successors: Ahaī and his fellow “bishop-bureaucrat”, the Catholicos Ya[h]bhlāhā (Ahaī’s successor to the Catholicate), gained both spiritually and materially from their support for the monarch. On the inspection tour described above, Ahaī took the opportunity to sightsee and compile a martyrology. Subsequently, he used his personal leverage with the king to conduct a rather untidy (and possibly unpopular) pogrom against the users of magic (identified in the Chronicle of Sifiirt (1.69: 213) with Manicheans and Marcionites). In a similar manner, Ya[h]bhlāhā seems to have gained substantial prestige from his time as royal ambassador, hobnobbing with the Roman Emperor and the bishops of the West (Synodicon orientale: 37; Chronicle of Sifiirt 1.71: 215). He also appears to have benefited materially, as well, bringing back to his sea “silver and objects unseen in the Persian realm” (Chronicle of Sifiirt 1.71: 215).

Yazdgard’s public bestowal of royal largess on the bishops surely played to his advantage generally among the Christian faithful, but it is unlikely that this was of any great importance to the monarch. On the other hand, Yazdgard was interested in cultivating obligation among the Christian leadership. Returning to the example above: while toleration of the Christian minority allowed the monarch to reward Mārūthā for services rendered,22 ultimately the gesture gave the monarch license to expand his personal network of patronage to include formally the heads of the Christian Church. Cooperative bishops were rewarded with royal support for their activities, as in the cases of the Catholicoi Ishāq and Ahaī. Indeed, there are references in the sources to the presence of the Catholicoi at Yazdgard’s court, as the “friends of the king,” advisors, and courtiers (Chronicle of Sifiirt 1.69 and 1.71: 212-3 and 215). Perhaps Yazdgard’s assertion of his “universal authority”, discussed above, might be most usefully read in this light (Synodicon orientale: 19). Turning now to foreign policy, Yazdgard’s friendly stance towards the bishops of the Church of the East served to advance his state’s diplomatic interests, particularly its agenda with Rome.23 The very positive evaluation of Yazdgard in the Roman sources also indicates a Sasanian monarch avidly concerned with maintaining peace with the Romans.24 The precise reasons for this stance are not self-evident, although the apparent diversion of royal attention and military resources to the empire’s engagements on its northern and eastern frontiers may provide some part of the answer.25 If Yazdgard’s relations with the Magian aristocracy were strained, as late evidence suggests, this might also speak to motive - the Magian elites being traditionally the backbone of the Sasanian military. However, all speculation aside, at least four diplomatic exchanges between the empires took place during Yazdgard’s reign (Sako 1986: 14-16, 59-77; Garsoïan 1973/4: 124-6): c. 399 AD,26 408 AD,27 c. 418 AD,28 and 420 AD,29 all conducted by Christian bishops. The fate of Christians in the Sasanian sphere had long been a central point of contention in negotiations between Rome and Iran (and would remain so) (see Barnes 1985). Yazdgard’s declaration of tolerance for Christians was, therefore, a considerable concession to the Romans, and his endorsement of the Church of the East’s subordination to the Roman Patriarchate of Antioch and the canons of Nicaea even more so (Synodicon orientale: 18 and 20).

However, this accommodation between king and bishops, like all good patronage systems, worked to the advantage of both sides. Although Yazdgard’s declaration, recorded in the acts of the 410 Synod, that, “…the East and West shall be one empire under the authority of my rule,” 18 might reasonably be viewed as hyperbole, what can be said about the aims of the Sasanian monarchy? Given the lack of contemporary Middle Iranian testimony of Yazdgard’s motives, what the Sasanian monarchy gained from this new arrangement is hardly obvious. Both motive and benefit must be inferred from the testimony of Christian sources, whether Sasanian or Roman, with (presumably) very different views of the period. Further, any analysis must ultimately rest on the perilous assumption that the Sasanian monarchy tended to act out of rational self-interest. Despite this, the case will be made that advantages accrued to the monarchy from this new accommodation with the bishops of the Church of the East in at least three areas: patronage, foreign policy, and internal affairs. Arguably, in these, the services of bishops like Ahaī and Ya[h]bhlāhā advanced Yazdgard’s rather modest ambitions for state control and the exploitation of Christian elites. The authors of most of the available ancient sources: the Church History of Socrates, the Synodicon Orientale, and the writings of Greek and Syriac chroniclers; conclude that Yazdgard’s cooperation with the Church of the East was an expression of personal favor toward Mārūthā, the Roman ambassador and bishop of Mayperqat, mentioned above.19 This observation has been unjustly downplayed in modern scholarship, probably due to the intrusion of hagiographical tropes into the accounts of Mārūthā and Yazdgard’s relationship.20 Whether Yazdgard’s favorable disposition towards Mārūthā stemmed from his gratitude for a miraculous cure affected by the bishop, or his appreciation of Mārūthā’s efforts as ambassador, should not distract from the central role of patronage networks in political calculations within the Sasanian Empire (and the Ancient world at large).21

Yazdgard’s use of the Catholicos Ya[h]bhlāhā as his ambassador perhaps reflects a sophisticated version of this diplomatic calculation. On the face of it, the fact that a man of the Catholicos’s obvious Christian faith and high ecclesiastical rank would serve a non-Christian king was positive endorsement of Yazdgard’s character to the conspicuously pious Theodosian house (Harries 1994; Holum 1982; Liebescheutz 1990). Ya[h]bhlāhā’s public confirmation of the orthodoxy of the Church of the East before Theodosius II served as further indication that Yazdgard was a good steward over the Church of the East (Synodicon orientale: 35). This may be taken as a 88

BISHOPS OR BUREAUCRATS?: CHRISTIAN CLERGY AND THE STATE IN THE MIDDLE SASANIAN PERIOD Yazdgard’s relationship with the Christian Church under his dominion was largely passive. For the most part, Yazdgard seems to have been inclined to support the Church’s existing hierarchy. Confirming the subordination of the bishops of the Church to the bishop of Seleucia-Ctesiphon suited the King of Kings well. This both strengthened the position of the king’s Christian allies within the empire (and without) and ensured that the spokesperson for the Church would reside within easy reach of the monarch and the administrative core of the state, be a frequent attendant at court, and an occasional collaborator in the game of public relations (Brock 1982: 4).

counterpoint to the sort of anti-Sasanian propaganda that would be common currency during the conflict between Rome and the Sasanian state under Yazdgard’s son and successor, Bahrām V (420-38 AD) (Holum 1977). However, one must wonder how the image of a Christian bishop representing the Magian Yazdgard sat with an Emperor steeped in Roman and Christian claims to universal rule. Moreover, the journey of the ambassador and Catholicos Ya[h]bhlāhā to the court of the Roman Emperor generally stands as example of the interconnection of patronage networks, loyalty to the monarch, and diplomacy. Ultimately, the choice of Ya[h]bhlāhā as ambassador demonstrated the king’s authority over the bishops in his territories, and the loyalty of his Christian subjects. This rather neatly countered the Roman Empire’s proprietary claim over all Christian believers, a perpetual irritant to the Sasanian kings (Brock 1982).

A certain degree of independence for the Christian community was not undesirable from the point of view of the central government. In fact, a semi-autonomous institution whose elites actively professed their loyalty to the monarch, kept the peace, and paid their taxes had been the ideal in the Sasanian monarchy’s relations with the Magian32 and the Exilic Jewish communities of the empire (Neusner 1983).

But did Yazdgard seek to exploit more directly the elites of the Christian community, the bishops, in the management of the internal affairs of his empire? The evidence of this is rather more problematic.

At least to some degree, Yazdgard came to depend on the Christian bishops to administer their specific corner of the state, and to provide an example of loyalty for domestic and foreign observers. Whether the modern observer should view this as declaration of strength, or an admission of weakness is unclear, at least in theory the point can be argued either way. Most likely it was some combination of both of these alternatives. While Yazdgard could reasonably claim to control the bishops, they remained largely free to pursue independent agendas. Both parties went away reasonably content, at least until the interests of monarchy and Church diverged.33 However, that topic must be left for another occasion.

A close reading of the text of the Synodicon suggests that Yazdgard made an assortment of bold assertions of his rights over the Church of the East and its bishops. In its account of the Synod of Mar Ishāq, Yazdgard asserted the right to summon bishops to a Synod, or his presence (Synodicon orientale: 19, 20, 25); to enforce discipline within the Christian community (Synodicon orientale: 212); to approve the appointments of bishops (Synodicon orientale: 21); and even to designate the head of the Church of the East (Synodicon orientale: 21). At least rhetorically, Yazdgard envisioned the Church as a subsidiary to the state, in the fashion of a good centralizing monarch.30

Scott McDonough Department of History William Paterson University 300 Pompton Rd Wayne, NJ 07470 United States [email protected]

However, Yazdgard’s demands on the Church of the East appear to have been rather more modest than his bluster implies. While Yazdgard lent support to his clients and allies, there is nothing to indicate that the king had much occasion to assert the prerogatives he claimed over the Church at the 410 Synod.31 Nor, admittedly, is there much in the way of evidence for bishops acting primarily in the interests of the state, or under the direct command of the monarch, aside from the two odd examples of Ahaī and Ya[h]bhlāhā. However, it is clear that Yazdgard expected a public demonstration of the loyalty of the bishops to himself and the state, most significantly in their prayers for continuance of his reign (Synodicon orientale: 20. Morony 1984: 337). Theological questions about the efficacy of Christian prayer for a Magian king aside, this was a not inconsiderable concession to a descendant of Shāpūr II, the arch-persecutor of Christians. The missions of Ahaī and Ya[h]bhlāhā served as further testimony of the allegiance of the Church to the Sasanian crown, and the veracity of Yazdgard’s claim to command that loyalty.

Notes 1 My deepest gratitude to Dr. Claudia Rapp for her advice and assistance in many phases of the production of this paper. I also thank Dr. Michael Morony for leading me to the incident that inspired this paper; Dr. Cynthia Villagomez for her comments and moral support; and Dr. Yona Sabar for advice on transliteration (particularly the dreaded Ya[h]bhlāhā). Finally, I am grateful to the organizers of the “Current Research in Sasanian Archaeology and History” conference for their efforts, and to the presenters (and others in attendance) for two days of stimulating discussions. 2 Chronicle of Sifiirt 1.69: 212-3. The Chronicle of Sifiirt is, evidently, a tenth or eleventh century Arabic translation of an earlier Syriac chronicle. Morony (1984: 568), suggests that the second part of the text closely parallels the anonymous, late seventh-century KhÙzistān Chronicle. Although the historicity of the text has not generally been questioned, neither has its transmission been subjected to intense historiographical scrutiny, along the lines of Conrad 1992: 322-48.

89

SCOTT MCDONOUGH 3 For Sasanian trade in the gulf: Whitehouse & Williamson 1973; Gropp 1991 and Darayee 1999, among others. 4 Garsoïan 1969 and Garsoïan 1973/4 suggest an earlier incident in 358 AD involving the Armenian Catholicos Nersēs, serving as Shāpūr II’s intermediary with Musonianus, the Roman Praetorian Prefect, see: Ammianus Marcellinus, Res Gestae 17.5.2. The often cordial relations between the Sasanian monarchy and Armenian elites may point to a different cultural dynamic than the one explored in this paper. 5 Indeed, the refusal by the Catholicos Shemfiōn bar Sabbāfiē to collect a double poll tax on behalf of the Sasanian crown in the previous century (c. 339 AD) appears to have been a central justification for the persecution of Christians under Shāpūr II, see the accounts of the martyrdom of Shemfiōn bar Sabbāfiē: Kmosko 1907 and Bedjan 1968ii: 123-207. Additional primary sources on these events and the subsequent persecutions: Sozomen 2: 9-14; Chronicle of Sifiirt 1.23 and 1.27: 77-9, 86-95; and numerous martyrologies collected in Bedjan 1968. 6 See Brock 1982, for discussion. 7 For the general political history of Iran during Yazdgard’s reign, see Morony 1960b: 75, also Frye 1983a: 143-4 and Christensen 1944: 26973. For the end of Yazdgard’s reign see Greatrex 1993. 8 Labourt 1904: 87-99 and Christensen 1944: 269-73, provide the standard account of Yazdgard’s relations with the Church of the East. Most modern discussion of the topic draws heavily on their models, e.g. Asmussen 1983: 939-41; Frye 1983b: 318. Yazdgard appears to have been equally sympathetic to the empire’s Jewish minority, see Neusner 1983: 915. Indeed, Provincial Capitals of Irānshahr 47: 19 claims that he married Shōshendukht, the daughter of the leader of the Jewish exile (Rēsh Gālūthā). On the other hand, Yazdgard’s relations with the Magian aristocracy may have been quite strained. His three predecessors all appear to have died at their hands (Morony 1960b: 745). The late Arabic historical tradition might preserve an echo of the hostility of the Magian elite to Yazdgard (e.g. al-TabarÐ I: 847-850), although contemporary evidence is lacking. Following Nöldeke 1879: 74 fn. 3, many modern scholars have believed that the hostility of later Arabic and New Persian sources toward Yazdgard was founded in Magian distaste for his religious tolerance, see Labourt 1904: 91-2; Christensen 1944: 269 and Bosworth 1999: 71–2 fn. 191. 9 Some degree of official toleration for Christianity may have been in effect in the decades prior to Yazdgard's 410 declaration, possibly associated with the c. 387 AD treaty between Rome and Iran under Shāpūr III (383-388 AD), see Chaumont 1974: 71-80 and Greatrex 2000: 35-48. A cursory examination of the Bibliotheca Hagiographica Orientalis (Peeters 1954), an index of saint’s lives, suggests that the period 388-420 AD is almost entirely lacking in martyrdoms, or at least in incidents documented by extant martyrologies. 10 I use the term “Catholicos” thoughout this paper, rather than the more accurate “Grand Metropolitan,” to reflect the anachronistic practices of the surviving Christian sources. Further, I have chosen to use “Magian” after the practice of Morony 1984: 280-305. “Zoroastrian” is anachronistic, appearing first only with specific reference to the Mazdakite movement of the late fifth century (the “Zarādushtagān”, see Crone 1991). For the period under discussion, “Mazdaean” is overly specific and does not fully encompass the range of Iranian religious expression during the Sasanian period, particularly that of the ruling dynasty. 11 Catholicos c. 399-post 410 AD. Sources for his career as Catholicos: Synodicon orientale: 17-36 (description of the Synod of 410); Chronicle of Sifiirt 1.66: 205-7; Chronicle of Arbela (Arbēl): 67-8. See also Baumstark 1922: 54 n. 11, 55 n. 1. 12 Catholicos c. post 410-415/6 AD. Sources for his tenure as Catholicos: Chronicle of Sifiirt 1.69: 212-3. See Baumstark 1922: 54 n.8 for additional references. 13 Catholicos c. 415/6-420/1 AD. Sources for Ya[h]bhlāhā’s career and term as Catholicos: Synodicon orientale: 37-42 (description of the Synod of 420); Chronicle of Sifiirt 1.68 and 1.71: 209-12, 214-6. 14 The compilation of the Synodicon was undertaken at the behest of the Catholicos Timothy I (780-823 AD). The text evinces a number of anachronistic features, particularly in its use of ecclesiastical titles that are typically ascribed to scribal redaction or editing, see Gero 1982; de Halleux 1978; Fiey 1970: 78; and Fiey 1967: 15-22. Modern scholars have almost universally asserted the reliability of this text as an historical source, see Schrier 1992: 76, fn. 3 and Erhart 2001: 115, for recent examples. A modern critical study of the Synodicon Orientale is still lacking. 15 The account of the martyr cult of Mayperqat/Martyropolis, given in Fowden 1999: 45-59, provides the most recent bibliography on the

primary and secondary literature on the life of Mārūthā. See also Sako 1986: 59-70, for specific reference to the embassies of Mārūthā. Rubin 1986a: 33-6, discusses the proselytizing efforts of Roman Christians in the east, certainly a central motivation behind Mārūthā’s role in the organization of the 410 Synod. 16 Synodicon orientale: 21-2, 30. The so-called “double sanction” of the Late Sasanian period, see Morony 1984: 337. 17 Synodicon orientale: 18, 21, 23, 26-7. The primary role of the bishop of Seleucia-Ctesiphon in the Church of the East is discussed in Macomber 1968 and Widengren 1984: 10-12. 18 Synodicon orientale: 19. See also Fowden 1999: 54. 19 Socrates Scholasticus 7.8; Synodicon orientale: 18-23; Theophanes Chronographia A.M. 5916; and Chronicle of Sifirt, p. 317. This also features prominently in the various Vitae of Mārūthā, as might be expected, e.g.: Vita Arm. 23. Translated in Marcus 1932. 20 E.g. the topoi of the “miraculous cure” and the “scheming magi” featured in the account of Socrates Scholasticus 7.8. See Fowden 1999: 52-3 and Sako 1986: 63, nn. 14 and 15, for sources on the numerous (and varied) afflictions suffered by Yazdgard and his family members. 21 See the important collection of essays edited by Wallace-Hadrill 1989. 22 In addition, the hagiographies state that Mārūthā received permission from the king to transport the bones of Christian martyrs from Sasanian territory (Vita Arm. 29) to his see at Mayperqat (renamed Martyropolis), see Fowden 1999: 54-6. As Christian burial practices (and, by logical extension, the veneration of relics) were an affront to Magian religious sensibilities, Yazdgard was perhaps relieved to be rid of them; see Nicholson 1985: 668. 23 For Roman-Persian relations in the fifth century, see Rubin 1986b; Blockley 1992; Greatrex 1998 and Pauser 1999. 24 Discussed at length in Rubin 1986a: 678-80. Roman sources are effusive in their praise for the Sasanian monarch. See particularly: Procopius 1.2 and Socrates Scholasticus 7.8. Procopius’ account is the most remarkable, asserting that Yazdgard “adopted” the infant Theodosius II (408-50 AD), at the behest of his father, the dying emperor Arcadius (395-408 AD). Although the story is tenuous at best (even Procopius’ continuator, Agathias expresses some reservations: Agathias 4.26.3-4), it reflects the positive regard in which Romans held the Persian ruler even a century and a half after his death. 25 The confused chronology of Sasanian military, diplomatic and administrative activities in the east and north remains a great hindrance to the study of Sasanian imperial dynamics. Nevertheless, throughout the fifth century, the Sasanian monarchs were deeply concerned with maintaining the fortifications at Darband in the north, and repeatedly demanded Roman financial assistance, see John Lydus 3.53; ps-Joshua Stylites: 242-3; Menander Protector, fr. 6.1; and discussion in Rubin 1986a: 683-4. The dating of the origin of this arrangement is difficult to pin down. It might have been a condition of the c. 387 AD treaty arranged between Rome and Iran (see Greatrex 2000, for the most recent discussion of the evidence for this treaty), it may perhaps also be linked to the Hunnic invasion of Roman territory in Mesopotamia (c. 395 AD), described in Chronicon Edessenum 40: 6 and ps-Joshua Stylites: 9. More than likely the point will remain obscure. 26 First embassy of Mārūthā of Mayperqat to Ctesiphon. See Sako 1986: 59 n.4, for sources. 27 Second embassy of Mārūthā of Mayperqat to Ctesiphon, ibid. See also Codex Justinianus 4.63.4 28 Embassy of Catholicos Ya[h]bhlāhā to Constantinople. See Sako 1986: 71 n. 28, for sources. 29 Embassy of Āqāq (Acacius) of Amid to “Persia.” See Sako 1986: 75 n. 40, for sources. Chronicle of Sifiirt 1.71: 214 suggests an earlier embassy of Āqāq, as well. 30 The general degree of political and administrative centralization of the Sasanian state is a topic of some contention. On the late Sasanian period, see Howard-Johnston 1995 and Rubin 1995, for opposing points of view. 31 Although it does appear that Yazdgard (and his officials) played some role in the selection of Catholicoi, see Chronicle of Sifiirt 1.69, 1.71 and 1.72: 212, 214 and 216-7. However, whether this took the form of active interference in the process, or simple ratification of the decision of the bishops is unclear. 32 As noted above (n. 8), this relationship was perhaps strained during his reign. 33 The last year of Yazdgard’s reign was marked by a return to persecution, marked by a spate of martyrdoms of Christian ecclesiastics. This appears to have been provoked by the destruction of one or more fire temples at the hands of Christian bishops. See Theodoret: 5.38,

90

BISHOPS OR BUREAUCRATS?: CHRISTIAN CLERGY AND THE STATE IN THE MIDDLE SASANIAN PERIOD Theophanes A.M. 5906 [incorrectly dated to 413/4 AD], Bedjan 1968, v. 4: 250-3. By contrast, Socrates Scholasticus 7.18 also discusses the persecutions, but Socrates refuses to fault Yazdgard, instead placing the persecutions entirely in the reign of Bahrām V. The 421-2 AD war between Rome and Iran is linked to these internal upheavals. See Schrier 1992, Rubin 1986a, Holum 1977.

Theophanes. Chronographia. Theophanis chronographia. Edited by C. de Boor. Leipzig 1883-5. Vita Arm. = Armenian Life of Mārūthā. Varkfiew Vkayabanoutfiiunkfi Srbocfi: 17-22. Venice 1874.

References

Secondary Sources

Primary Sources

Asmussen, J.P. 1983. Christians in Iran. Cambridge History of Iran 3/2: 924-48. Barnes, T. D. 1985. Constantine and the Christians of Persia. Journal of Roman Studies 75: 126-36. Baumstark, A. 1922. Geschichte der syrischen Literatur, mit Ausschluß der christlich-palästinensischen Texte. Bonn. Bedjan, P. (ed.). 1968. Acta martyrum et sanctorum Syriace. Hildesheim. [Reprint of 1890-7 edition]. Blockley, R.C. 1992. East Roman Foreign Policy. Leeds. Bosworth, C.E. 1999. The History of al-Tabarī (TaÞ rīkh al-rusul wa’ l-mulūk). v. 5.The Sāsānids, the Byzantines, the Lakhmids, and Yemen. Translated and annotated by C. E. Bosworth. Bibliotheca Persica. Albany 1999. Brock, S.P. 1982. Christians in the Sasanian Empire: The Case of Divided Loyalties. Studies in Church History 18: 1-19. Chaumont, M.L. 1974. A propos d'un édit de paix religieuse d'époque sassanide. Pages 71-80 in A. J.B. Guillaumont (ed.). Mélanges d'histoire des religions offerts á Henri-Charles Puech. Paris. Christensen, A. 1944. L’Iran sous les Sassanides. (Second edition). Copenhagen. Conrad, L. I. 1992. The Conquest of Arwād: A SourceCritical Study in the Historiography of the Early Medieval Near East. Pages 317-401 in A. Cameron & L. I. Conrad (eds.). The Byzantine and Early Islamic Near East (Studies in Antiquity and Early Islam). Princeton. Crone, P. 1991. Kavad's Heresy and Mazdak's Revolt. Iran 29: 21-40. Daryaee, T. 1999. Sources for the Economic History of Late Sāsānian Fārs. Pages 131-48 in Matériaux pour l’histoire économique du monde iranien [=Studia Iranica. Cahier 21]. Paris. Erhart, V. 2001. The Development of Syriac Christian Canon Law in the Sasanian Empire. Pages 11529 in R.W. Mathisen (ed.). Law, Society, and Authority in Late Antiquity. Oxford. Fiey, J.-M. 1967. Les étapes de la prise de conscience de son identité patriarcale par l’église syrienne orientale. L’orient syrien 12: 3-22. Fiey, J.-M. 1970. Jalons pour une histoire de l’église en Iraq [=Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium 310, Subsida 36]. Louvain. Fowden, E.K. 1999. The Barbarian Plain: Saint Sergius between Rome and Iran. Berkeley. Frye, R.N. 1983a. The Political History of Iran under the Sasanians. Cambridge History of Iran 3/2: 11680. Frye, R.N. 1983b. The History of Ancient Iran. Munich.

Agathias Scholasticus. Historia. Agathiae Myrinaei Historiarum libri quinque. Edited by R. Keydell. Berlin 1967. Ammianus Marcellinus. Res Gestae. Ammiani Marcellini Rerum gestarum libri qui supersunt. Edited by C.U. Clark. Berlin 1910-15. Chronicle of Arbela (Arbēl). Die Chronik von Arbela. Edited and German translation with a commentary by P. Kawerau [=Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium 467-8, Scriptores Syri 199-200]. Louvain 1985. Chronicle of Sifiirt. Histoire Nestorienne (Chronique de Séert). Edited and French translation by A. Scher [=Patrologia Orientalis 4.3, 5.2, 7.2, 13.4]. Paris 1908. Chronicum Edessenum. Chronica Minora I. Edited and Latin translation by I. Guidi [=Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium 1-2, Scriptores Syri 1-2]: 1-13. Louvain 1903. Codex Justinianus [CJ]. Corpus Iuris Civilis III, Codex Iustinianus. Edited by P. Krueger. Berlin 1877. John Lydus. De magistratibus. Ioannis Lydi De magistratibus populi Romani libri tres. Edited by R. Wuensch. Stuttgard 1967. Ps.-Joshua Stylites. Incerti Auctoris Chronicon PseudoDionysianum vulgo dictam I. Edited and Latin translation by J.B Chabot [=Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium 91 Scriptores Syri 43]: 235-317. Louvain 1927. Menander Protector. The History of Menander the Guardsman. Edited and translated by R.C. Blockley. Liverpool 1985. Procopius of Caesarea. De bello persico. Procopius, Opera Omnia. Edited by J. Haury. Leipzig 1962. Provincial Capitals of Irānshahr. A Catalogue of the Provincial Capitals of Ērānshahr. Edited and annotated by J. Markwart. Analecta orientalia 3. Rome 1931. Socrates Scholasticus. Historia ecclesiastica [HE]. Kirchengeschichte. Edited by G.C. Hansen. Berlin 1995. Sozomen. Historia ecclesiastica [HE]. Kirchengeschichte. Edited by J. Bidez. Berlin 1960. Synodicon orientale. Edited and French translation by J.B. Chabot. Paris 1902. al-TabarÐ. TÁÞ rÐkh al-rusul wa‘ l-mulūk. Edited by M.J. de Goeje Leiden 1879-1901. Theodoret of Cyrrhus. Historia ecclesiastica [HE]. Kirchengeschichte. Edited by L. Parmentier. Berlin 1954.

91

SCOTT MCDONOUGH Macomber, W. 1968. The Authority of the Catholicos Patriarch of Seleucia-Ctesiphon. Orientalia Christiana Analecta 181: 179-200. Marcus, R. 1932. The Armenian Life of Marutha of Maipherkat. The Harvard Theological Review 25: 47-71. Morony, M.G. 1960a. Sāsānids. Encyclopaedia of Islam (Second Edition) 9. Morony, M.G. 1960b. Marzpān. Encyclopaedia of Islam (Second Edition) 6. Morony, M.G. 1984. Iraq After the Muslim Conquest. Princeton. Neusner, J. 1983. Jews in Iran. Cambridge History of Iran 3/2: 909-23. Nicholson, O. 1985. Two Notes on Dara. American Journal of Archaeology 89: 663-71. Nöldeke, T. 1879. Geschichte der Perser und Araber zur Zeit der Sasaniden. Leiden. Peeters, P.1954. Bibliotheca Hagiographica Orientalis. Profondeville. Pauser, C. 1999. Die oströmisch-sasanidischen Beziehungen im 5. Jahrhundert Völkerrechtliche, miliärische, wirtschaftliche und ideologische Aspekte im Verhältnis zweier spätantiker Großmächte 395-518 n. Chr. PhD. thesis, University of Vienna. Rubin, Z. 1986a. Diplomacy and War in the Relations Between Byzantium and the Sassanids in the Fifth Century A.D. Pages 677-95 in P. Freeman & D. Kennedy (eds). The Defence of the Roman and Byzantine East. BAR International Series 297. Oxford. Rubin, Z. 1986b. The Mediterranean and the Dilemma of the Roman Empire in Late Antiquity. Mediterranean Historical Review 1: 13-62. Rubin, Z. 1995. The Reforms of Khusro Anushirwan. Pages 227-97 in A. Cameron (ed.). The Byzantine and Early Islamic Near East III. Princeton. Sako, L. 1986. Le rôle de la hiérarchie syriaque orientale dans les rapports diplomatiques entre la Perse et Byzance aux Ve-VIIe siècles. Paris. Schrier, O.J. 1992. Syriac Evidence for the RomanPersian War of 421-422. Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 33: 75-86. Wallace-Hadrill, A. (ed.). 1989. Patronage in ancient society. London. Whitehouse, D., Williamson, A. 1973. Sasanian Maritime Trade. Iran 11: 29-49. Widengren, G. 1984. The Nestorian Church in Sasanian and Early Post-Sasanian Iran. Pages 1-30 in L. Lanciotti (ed.). Incontro di Religioni in Asia tra il III E il X Secolo d.C. Florence.

Garsoïan, N. 1969. Quidam Narseus – A Note on the Mission of St. Nersēs the Great. Pages 148-164 in Armeniaca, Mélange d’études arméniennes. Ile de Saint Lazare-Venise. Garsoïan, N. 1973-4. Le rôle de l’hiérarchie chrétienne dans les relations diplomatiques entre Byzance et les Sassanides. Revue des Études Arméniennes N.S. 10: 119-138. Gero, S. 1982. The See of Peter in Babylon: Western Influences on the Ecclesiology of Early Persian Christianity. Pages 45-51 in N.G. Garsoïan, T.F. Matthews & R.W. Thomson (eds). East of Byzantium: Syria and Armenia in the Formative Period. Washington. Greatrex, G. B.1993. The Two fifth century Wars between Roma and Persia. Florilegium 12: 1-14. Greatrex, G. B.1998. Rome and Persia at War, 502-532. Leeds. Greatrex, G. B.2000. The Background and Aftermath of the Partition of Armenia in A.D. 387. The Ancient History Bulletin 14.1-2: 35-48. Gropp, G. 1991. Christian Maritime Trade of the Sasanian Age in the Persian Gulf. Pages 83-88 in K. Schippmann, A. Herling, & J.F. Salles (eds). Golf-Archäologie: Internationale Archäologie 6. Buch am Erlbach. Halleux, A. de 1978. Le symbole des évêques perses au Synode de Séleucie-Ctésiphon (410). Pages 161190 in Erkenntnisse und Meinungen: Festschrift W. Strothmann II [=Göttinger Orientforschungen I.17]. Wiesbaden. Harries, J. 1994. Pius Princeps: Theodosius II and fifthcentury Constantinople. Pages 35-44 in P. Magdalino (ed.). New Constantines: The Rhythm of Imperial Renewal in Byzantium, 4th-13th Centuries. Aldershot. Holum, K.G. 1977. Pulceria’s Crusade and the Ideology of Imperial Victory. Greek Roman and Byzantine Studies 18: 153-72. Holum, K.G. 1982. Theodosian Empresses: Women and Imperial Dominion in Late Antiquity. Berkeley. Howard-Johnston, J. 1995. The Two Great Powers in Late Antiquity: a Comparison. Pages 157-226 in A. Cameron (ed.). The Byzantine and Early Islamic Near East III. Princeton. Kmosko, M. 1907. S. Simeon bar Sabbafie. Edited and Latin translation by M. Kmosko. Patrologia Syriaca 1.2: 659-1054. Labourt, J. 1904. Le Christianisme dans l’empire perse sous la dynastie sassanide (224-632). Paris. Liebescheutz, J.H.W.G. 1990. Barbarians and Bishops: Army, Church, and State in the Age of Arcadius and Chrysostom. Oxford.

92

History and Historiography: the Court Genre in Arabic and the FatÎnÁmah-i Sind Valeria Fiorani Piacentini meaning to certain events (causes-effects) and to certain chronological reconstructions.

Facts and Events The observations which follow refer essentially to the eastern regions of the Sasanian state apparatus, and take into consideration the span of time between its breakdown and the ‘transition’ under Arab military rule.

Silences and Omissions I have mentioned ‘silences’ and ‘omissions’. Here we come to the methodological approach to this historiographical material. As said before, when we focus on historiography in Arabic, it is certainly possible to state that, beyond the detailed traditions and accounts of the main political and ‘dynastic’ events, it enables us to deduce also valuable information of a social and cultural character referring to regions both within and outside the empire conquered by the Arabs and institutionally restructured by these conquerors. All in all, we are dealing with a ‘court’ historiography, in Arabic, which follows the classical pattern of ‘annal-writing’. The works of its main authors belong to the genre conventionally described as Kutub al-futÙÎ, or ‘Books of the Conquests’. Undoubtedly they contain extremely valuable material, which should however be used with caution, and always analysed and evaluated through a critical lens for the information it provides.

With regard to the written sources, the historiography in Arabic conventionally named the Kutub al-futÙÎ (or Books of the Conquests) enables us to deduce valuable information. Beyond the detailed accounts of political and military events, such as accession to the caliphate, civil wars and religious strife, pacta of amÁn and rebellions, understandings and alliances, resistance and conquests, battles, victories and defeats, this material - if carefully sifted - makes it possible to glimpse precious scraps of social, economic and local cultural realities. All in all, this genre so far remains largely unsurpassed. It is court history, according to the classical topoi of annal writing. For the period and area under consideration here, extensive use can also be made above all of the traditional chroniclers. Detailed accounts of the Arab campaigns to the East were written by al-ÓabarÐ and alBalÁdhurÐ. al-ÓabarÐ’s history (the TaÞ rÐkh al-rusul wa’lmulÙk) deals at length with the first expeditions and incursions to the East, and then more extensively with the Arab campaigns in Khurasan and in the MÁ’warÁ'lNahr. Place names are very accurate, and his transliteration and transcription of Iranian names and institutional functions are also precise, making it possible to sense this author’s direct knowledge (if not positive experience) of certain local realities. al-BalÁdhurÐ, on the other hand, in his KitÁb futÙÎ al-buldÁn, devotes several pages to the first expeditions by sea and on land to Kirman and Makran, and to Sind and Hind proper.1 His dry, concise chronicle concentrates on the essentials, and does not basically contradict the few notes given by alÓabarÐ and the account of another no less valuable historian, al-Ya‘qÙbÐ.2

In this context, one important element emerges, no less significant from a historiographical point of view, namely that of the ‘silences’ and/or ‘omissions’. These sometimes cover long spans of time and concern vast geographical areas. Obviously, we may try to fill these gaps with data provided by other forms of research, which become primary sources of no lesser importance in their turn (such as archaeology and related sciences), using a multi-disciplinary and interdisciplinary methodological approach, with each discipline making strict use of its own modus operandi. Such evidence may give us valuable clues and pointers to the reading and rereading of all written sources and literature, and fill in gaps, silences and omissions. Another approach can be represented by the re-reading of these chronicles through a different perspective.

Then, we may consider also the chronicles of two later historians, al- DÐnawarÐ and Ibn al-AthÐr; but, while providing some information in this connection, the chronicles of these latter are in fact abridged versions of al-BalÁdhurÐ’s and al-ÓabarÐ’s accounts, to which they add nothing new.

Let us concentrate on the latter. Bearing in mind that the above mentioned chronicles pertain to the classical ‘court genre’, and that these ‘court histories’ were written ad maiorem gloriam Araborum et Araborum imperii, then omissions too, may become eloquent, extremely important sources in their turn - and indeed they are no less significant than the facts narrated.

Lastly, we have the work of al-Tha‘ÁlibÐ, which is also proving an extremely precise source, particularly for the ‘eastern’ regions of the Sasanian empire, and the various links and interlinks between Sasanian emperors and princes, and the various rulers of the outlying regions. alTha‘ÁlibÐ’s history enables us to fill in many ‘silences’ and/or omissions of the previous annals, and to give

Thus, bearing in mind the precise nature of the Kutub alfutÙÎ, it becomes clear that lengthy historical silences occur for the most part when Arab expeditions are unsuccessful and military campaigns drag grindingly on, implying crushing defeats and severe loss of human life and money from the state coffers. Alternatively they may imply uprisings within the Arab army, defections, and

93

VALERIA FIORANI PIACENTINI religious rifts. Certainly, there is little mention of such events in the Kutub al-futÙÎ, and, when there is, it takes the form of the classical topos to be found in such historiography: the events recounted acquire an ‘exemplary’ and ‘apologetic’ value for Islam. Otherwise, for the court historian, silence is preferable until the ultimate moment of final victory. Thus, short historical hints and quick notes almost en passant may provide us with positive facts and realities, which may in their turn be integrated with evidence given by other forms of research: both approaches - when possible - are becoming strictly complementary.3

sieges, battles, pacta, rebellions, surrenders, conquests, the defeat and death of DÁhar, further conquests etc (FatÎnÁmah-i Sind: 69-186). The fourth part deals with the arrest and death of MuÎammad ibn al-QÁsim as the result of a conspiracy of the two daughters of DÁhar. The account is full of contradictions, with a possibly spurious one probably interpolated by al-KÙfÐ himself (FatÎnÁmah-i Sind: 187-191). Various opinions have been expressed regarding the reliability of the book, but no systematic attempt has so far been made to classify the information it gives, to establish its origins whenever possible, or to analyse the material and attitudes implied in some of the episodes related. Without getting involved in this debate, which has included respected scholars such as H.M. Elliot and J. Dowson, R.C. Majumdar, I.H. Qureshi, Irfan Habib, S.D. Goitein, Y. Friedmann, P. Hardy, A. Schimmel and F. Gabrieli,6 I shall restrict myself here to observing that the information provided by ‘AlÐ ibn ÍÁmid ibn AbÙ Bakr alKÙfÐ - leaving aside his sometimes positively fairytale embellishments - does not diverge fundamentally from that provided by the classical annal-writing in Arabic, above all al-ÓabarÐ, al-BalÁdhurÐ and al-Ya‘qÙbÐ. In other words, there is no doubt that this chronicle must be used with caution and carefully sifted. But, on a closer analysis, if we take the following steps:

The FatÎnÁmah-i Sind Still following this methodological line, we now come to another, later source, which pertains to this same historiographical genre. It is in Persian, hotly debated and challenged by historians and scholars from both East and West. This is the so-called FatÎnÁmah-i Sind, also known as the History of DÁhar, son of Chach, or TaÞrÐkh-i Hind va Sind, or, more simply, as the ChachnÁmah. 4 The circumstances of the discovery of this chronicle are well known to scholars. Briefly, in 613 AH (1216 AD), during the reign of SulÔÁn NÁÒir al-DÐn QabÁchah, ruler of Sind and South-West Punjab (602-625 AH/1205-1228 AD), a local scholar named ‘AlÐ ibn ÍÁmid ibn AbÙ Bakr al-KÙfÐ came across an Arabic manuscript on the early history of the Arab conquest of Sind. As recorded by alKÙfÐ himself in his introduction, the manuscript had remained preserved with an illustrious family of the qÁªÐs of ArÙr (Aror) and Bakhar in Sind (FatÎnÁmah-i Sind: 5). They would be the direct descendents of ‘UthmÁn b. AbÐ al-‘Às al-ThaqafÐ, thus belonging to the stock of the BanÙ ThaqÐf, whose members - as it is well known - played a major role in the conquest of Sind. Aware of the manuscript’s importance and considering that it was in Arabic, al-KÙfÐ undertook the task of translating it into Persian in order to circulate it (FatÎnÁmah-i Sind: 4-10). He does not mention either the title of the original Arabic work or the name of its author. In his translation, he frequently refers to it as the FatÎnÁmah, and that is all.5 There is no doubt that this chronicle is the most extensive account of the Arab invasion of Sind.

- disregard the epic undertakings of certain local heroes (duels, contest of prowess etc) and the distinctly fictitious palace intrigues and female scheming on which the author likes to linger; - allow for divergences concerning certain dates and chronological sequences; - allow for divergences concerning some details; - allow for some inaccuracies and corruptions of the traditionalists' chains we cannot fail to observe that there is a nucleus on which this text and the early Arab historiography are frequently in agreement, this is especially true of al-BalÁdhurÐ’s account.7 Examples include: the account of the first Arab expeditions and incursions overseas (Makran and Sind); the version of the traditions and names of the various participants and protagonists who also played a part in the events taking place at the time of the break up of the Sasanian state apparatus in these outlying eastern regions; the sequence of MuÎammad ibn al-QÁsim’s battles; the destruction of the flag-pole at Daibul; the wars, battles and expeditions against the Ahl-i KÙh-i KÐkÁnÁn (the Arà ahl al-QÐqÁn of the Arab historiography), and so on. It is significant, for example, that both the FatÎnÁmah-i Sind, and the KitÁb FutÙÎ al-buldÁn begin the description of the Arab incursions into Makran and Sind from 15 AH with the same tradition: raiding undertaken by ‘UthmÁn b. AbÐ al-‘Às al-ThaqafÐ during the caliphate of ‘Umar ibn al-KhaÔÔÁb.8 Most elements in both versions of the tradition are identical: the names of the main protagonists, the fact that these first incursions took place

The FatÎnÁmah-i Sind may be divided into four main parts. The first part, after an extensive basmalah, refers to how ‘AlÐ ibn ÍÁmid ibn AbÙ Bakr al-KÙfÐ came across the manuscript. (FatÎnÁmah-i Sind: 1-10). The second part of the book describes facts and events that took place in Sind on the eve of the Arab invasion. The story of the kingdom of ArÙr (Aror) and of DÁhar, son of Chach, its Brahman ruler, is interwoven with numerous accounts of Arab incursions and undertakings into Makran, Hind and Sind at the time of the first caliphs, up to MuÎammad ibn al-QÁsim (FatÎnÁmah-i Sind: 11-68). The third part lingers on DÁhar’s reign at the time of MuÎammad ibn alQÁsim’s invasion. Considerable space is devoted to palace intrigues and the illicit marriage of DÁhar with his sister. The military campaign is extensively dealt with:

94

HISTORY AND HISTORIOGRAPHY: THE COURT GENRE IN ARABIC AND THE FATðNĀMAH-I SIND

‘by sea’ and ‘across the sea’, ‘Umar’s prohibition against sending any further expedition to India (al-ÓabarÐ: 2595, 2820).

absent in other accounts of the conquests. This is important material which, however, does not seem to contradict the early Arab historiography. The FatÎnÁmah depicts the political and social structure of these peripheral regions of the Sasanian Empire, and the break up of the Sasanian state apparatus vis-à-vis the eastwards thrust of the Arab armies under the aegis of Islam. It gives us the ‘response’ of local rulers and populations to the Arab expeditions and invasion, the balances and links established between conquerors and vanquished. In other words, the minute chronicle of this work provides us with a vivid, realistic image of the local society with its population and its rulers (among them, the Ahl-i KÙh-i KÐkÁnÁn, for example, and the Jats or Jutts), and of the Indian princes and the local religious dignitaries and officials ruling at the time of the first Arab undertakings overseas (11 or 15 year after the Hijra) up to MuÎammad ibn al-QÁsim’s expedition to Hind and Sind (711-712 AD). It is an ‘inside view’, which does not seem to be part of the early Arab historiography.

In general, it may be said that a considerable number of Arab warriors who appear in the FatÎnÁmah-i Sind, are well known in the Arab tradition. The names of DÁhar, Jaisinha and Darwhar, for instance, are mentioned in alBalÁdhurÐ and other early Arab historians. The Persian text deals at length with episodes and battles, mentioning traditions, traditionalists and warriors whom it is not easy to locate in the Arabic historiography. However, the number of those who appear in both traditions is significant, as is the almost identical sequence of MuÎammad ibn al-QÁsim’s battles. Moreover, the FutÙÎ al-buldÁn says that ‘Letters of al-ÍajjÁj were received by MuÎammad ibn al-QÁsim and letters of MuÎammad ibn al-QÁsim were received by al-ÍajjÁj every three days. MuÎammad used to describe the situation to al-ÍajjÁj and ask his opinion about the proper course of the action’ (alBalÁdhurÐ: 437). This passage suggests an extensive correspondence between MuÎammad ibn al-QÁsim and the governor of Iraq. An exchange of letters between the two is incorporated in the FatÎnÁmah (FatÎnÁmah-i Sind: 163-165 et infra). All in all, this may lead to the conclusion that the FatÎnÁmah is dependent to a considerable extent on the Arab historical tradition. A similar conclusion can be reached by comparing numerous episodes in both sources, such as the destruction of Daibul’s flag-pole, or MuÎammad ibn alQÁsim’s ‘crossing of a river (nahr) which was on this side of the Mihran river, and there the Buddhist shamanis/priests of Sarbidas waited on him and concluded a peace treaty with him’ (BalÁdhurÐ: 438; alYa‘qÙbÐ ii: 327).

We find personalities, who also played a role in events taking place outside India, mentioned as such in Arab historiography (for example Qutaibah ibn Muslim,11 TamÐm ibn Zaid, MuÎammad ‘IlÁfÐ, SufyÁn ibn al-Abrad, JarrÁh ibn ‘AbdallÁh etc). However, all these personages and their undertakings, as they appear in the FatÎnÁmah, are not at variance with the sources in Arabic. One may even say that they integrate ‘explaining in detail’, and certainly add new information to the overall picture. Which may lead us to assume that - in all probability - the anonymous chronicler drew on other sources, probably local Indian traditions. In conclusion, we may say that the FatÎnÁmah-i Sind, contains a nucleus of undoubted historical value, which fits perfectly - without contradiction - with the Arab historiography mentioned above, and with the evidence brought to light by archaeology. Thus, it integrates and complements it, providing us with new and valuable elements, that represent a precious clue to the reading and re-reading also of the earlier chronicles, contributing to the historical reconstruction of one of the most sensitive transitional phases, and to the filling up of more than one silence and omission of the ‘court genre’ in Arabic.

There is little doubt that the FatÎnÁmah’s author had the Arab historiographical tradition at his disposal. Thence, we come to a second question: which early Arab history or histories - served as sources for this chronicle? Ibn alNadÐm mentions - in his KitÁb al-fihrist - two books by al-MadÁÞinÐ (135-225 AH/752-839 AD) which could have been used by the compiler of the FatÎnÁmah, namely ‘The Book of the Indian Frontier’ (KitÁb thaghr al-Hind) and ‘The Book of the Governors of India’ (KitÁb ‘ummÁl al-Hind) – and also likely ‘The Book of the Conquests of Sijistan’ (KitÁb futÙÎ al-SijistÁn).9 al-BalÁdhurÐ mentions ‘AlÐ b. MuÎammad b. ‘AbdullÁh b. AbÐ Saif (al-MadÁÞinÐ) as his source for the history of the Indian campaigns (alBalÁdhurÐ: 431). In this respect we have a connection that may suggest that the author of the FatÎnÁmah also draws largely - although not exclusively - on the lost works of al-MadÁÞinÐ. This suggestion may be supported by the fact that in the FatÎnÁmah we find more than one tradition specifically attributed to al-MadÁÞinÐ in the FutÙÎ al-buldÁn.10

Valeria Fiorani Piacentini Catholic University of the Sacred Heart Largo A. Gemelli, 1 20123 Milan Italy [email protected] Notes 1 It is worth noting the fact that Arab chroniclers and Muslim geographers in Arabic of the 9th and 10th centuries AD always distinguish Sind from Hind. With the place-name Sind, they approximately identify present Baluchistan and the lower regions of the Indus river (or the MihrÁn) up to ArÙr (Aror). 2 A further precious source is al-Ya‘qÙbÐ’s KitÁb al-buldÁn - which however pertains to another no less important genre, namely the geographical literature, which is not dealt with in this paper.

On closer analysis, we can actually see that episodes reported in the FatÎnÁmah do not appear in al-ÓabarÐ, alBalÁdhurÐ and al-Ya‘qÙbÐ's chronicles, and warriors and functionaries who are protagonists in the FatÎnÁmah are 95

VALERIA FIORANI PIACENTINI 3 Let us refer, for example, to the first Arab overseas military expeditions from the Arabian Peninsula, under the aegis of Islam. These began around the year 11 or 15 of the Hijra. These were incursions for the purposes of pillaging or piracy, punishment expeditions, individual undertakings without official backing from the caliph, exploratory probes into territories remote from the heart of the Arab Empire and for purposes still largely unknown, or - at the eve of the new century diversionary manoeuvres aimed at other eastern theatres, whose priority was regarded by the caliphs as strategically crucial. From a re-reading of the historiographical material some significant facts emerge: in the east the maritime policy of ‘Umar had been converted into action by three men, namely: ‘UthmÁn ibn AbÐ al-‘Às al-ÕhaqafÐ (‘Ámil governor - of Oman and Bahrain) and his brother Íakam; by MuÈÐrah ibn AbÐ al-‘Às (commander of an expedition to Daibul); and by AbÙ MÙsÁ ‘AbdullÁh ibn Qais al-Ash‘arÐ (governor of Basrah) (al-BalÁdhurÐ: 386-88, 391-2, 432, 433, 434 et infra). al-ÓabarÐ, on the other hand, on several occasions mentions ‘Umar’s aversion to the sea. Such aversion emerges with great clarity in his account of al-‘AlÁ ibn al-ÍaÃramÐ’s expedition to the Persian coasts (al-ÓabarÐ i: 2595, 2707, 2708, 2820, 2829 sqq.). To attribute the ban on carrying out expeditions overseas, and on attacking Fars, Kirman, Makran and Sind by sea from the Arabian Peninsula, to ‘Umar ibn al-KhaÔÔÁb or to the caliph ‘UthmÁn ibn AbÙ SufyÁn, does not necessarily imply any contradiction with, or any need for revision of, the traditional historiography. al-ÓabarÐ without contradicting al-BalÁdhurÐ - shifts the decision to put an end to an overseas policy to the year 29 AH. In this year ‘UthmÁn, who had just acceded to the caliphate, apparently sent ‘AbdullÁh b. Mu‘amar alTamÐmÐ to Makran and Sind to take the border back to ‘the River’ after the border had been violated by the ruler of Sind. According to alÓabarÐ, it was the caliph ‘UthmÁn who, after this, put in place the ban on going beyond this border and risking any further undertakings by sea. Indeed, ‘UthmÁn’s decision seems to be the logical continuation of a political strategy pursued by the first caliphs with absolute consistency, whether ‘out of fear of the sea’ (to quote al-ÓabarÐ), or for objective external reasons (concerning which the Kutub al-futÙÎ’s chronicles are less forthcoming, but not completely silent), or indeed for both reasons. For the ‘objective external reasons’ we return to the available literary sources, particularly to the annals in Arabic, and to those ‘silences/omissions’ in which this genre abounds. Beyond the veil of myth a few brief allusions may be captured which make it possible to draw a different picture, which is that of a Sasanian system of coastal defence, still firmly in place at the time of the first caliphs. Here, the omissions and silences of the Arabic sources make sense. Archaeological evidence, currently emerging all along the shoreline of the Sasanian east, seems to support such a working hypothesis. Cf. in this respect F. Piacentini (2002). 4 I have used the N. A. Baloch edition, hereafter cited as FatÎnÁmah-i Sind. 5 FatÎnÁmah-i Sind: 7-8, 10, 191 Persian text. However, in two other passages, the original Arabic chronicle is called TaÞrÐkh-i Hind...va FatÎ-i Sind (p. 6), or FatÎ-i bilÁd-i Hind va FatÎ-i Sind (p. 190). These references, and above all its content, allow us to include this work in the classical genre of annals-writing. 6 Both Elliot & Dowson (1976: 132) and Majumdar make a certain use of this chronicle ‘leaving aside the usual parables, verses and romantic stories, the book contains a kernel of historical facts’ (Majumdar 1931: 17-18). More extensive use of this text is made by Qureshi (1962: 37 ff). F. Gabrieli dismisses the FatÎnÁmah in his two studies, labelling it as pertaining to ‘Indian mythology’ and being nothing more than a ‘historical novel’ (Gabrieli 1989: 69-91; 1964-1965: 281-295). Scholars’ opinions range from statements which accept the FatÎnÁmah as one of the most authoritative sources (in this respect see Friedmann 1984: 23-37) to others which use this work with caution or definitely mistrust it (see in this latter respect Gabrieli). Among the most authoritative voices who specifically connect this text with al- MadÁÞinÐ are Goitein (1936: 14-15), Irfan Habib (1962-1963: 38-48); Hardy (1979) and Schimmel (1973). 7 al-BalÁdhurÐ: 431-446. The first part of al-BalÁdhurÐ’s chronicle documented on the authority of al-MadÁÞinÐ - is wholly incorporated in the FatÎnÁmah-i Sind. Besides, this latter contains other information which is reported on the authority of al-MadÁÞinÐ. Despite the fact that often the isnÁd have some lacuna (some chains standing mutilated and others partially omitted), we find several accounts scattered throughout the book for which al-MadÁÞinÐ is clearly cited as the authority. Cf. also Y. Friedman (1977). 8 al-BalÁdhurÐ: 431-432; FatÎnÁmah-i Sind: 52-53. However, according to the latter, when referring to MuÈÐrah’s incursion to Daibul, the author

states that the Arab commander died fighting in Daibul, while, according to al-BalÁdhurÐ (431), MuÈÐrah was victorious and was still alive after the Daibul expedition. Cf. also al-ÓabarÐ: 2703-2704, 25422551, 2594-2595, 2702, 2708; al-Ya‘qÙbÐ i: 286; ii: 192. 9 Ibn al-Nadîm, KitÁb al-fihrist (Flügel 1872: 100). Cf. also in this respect Friedmann 1977: 27 sqq.; Schimmel 1973: 12; Baloch, Introduction to the FatÎnÁmah-i Sind: 3 ff. 10 See for instance DÁhar’s death, after dismounting from the elephant and engaging himself in a fight with an Arab soldier: FatÎnÁmah-i Sind: 137-139; this report emanates from MadÁÞinÐ and is based on an eyewitness account. Cf. al-BalÁdhurÐ’s chronicle (al-BalÁdhurÐ: 438-9), who states that the man who killed DÁhar was a man from the tribe of KilÁb, and al-ÓabarÐ’s account (al-ÓabarÐ ii: 1031). 11 FatÎnÁmah-i Sind: 163. In the passage recorded in this chronicle, ÍajjÁj’s mention of Qutaibah by his surname QuraishÐ deserves attention. Cf. also al-ÓabarÐ ii: 1256, and al-Ya‘qÙbÐ ii: 246).

References Primary sources al-BalÁdhurÐ. KitÁb FutÙh al-buldÁn. Edited by M.J. De Goeje. Leiden 1866. al-DÐnawarÐ. al-AkhbÁr al-ÔiwÁl. Edited by I. Kratchkovsky. Leiden 1888. Ibn al-AthÐr. al-KÁmil fÐ’l-taÞrÐkh. Edited by C.J. Tornberg. Leiden 1851-1871. Ibn al-NadÐm. KitÁb al-fihrist. Edited by G. Fluegel. Leipzig 1872. al-KÙfÐ. Fathnamah-i Sind. Being the Original Record of The Arab Conquest of Sind (712-15 A.D.) Known later by such other names as ‘History of DÁhar son of Chach’, TÁrikh-i Hind wa Sind’, ‘TÁrikh-i Fath-i Sind alias ChachnÁma’, ‘TÁrikh-i QÁsimi’, or simply as ‘ChachnÁma’. Edited by N. A. Baloch. Islamabad 1403/1983. al-ÓabarÐ. TaÞ rÐkh al-rusul wa al-mulÙk. Edited by M.J. De Goeje. Leiden 1964. [Reprint of the Leiden edition of 1879-1901]. al-Tha‘ÁlibÐ. Ghurar akhbÁr mulÙk al-FÁrs - Histoire des Rois des Perses. Edited by H. Zotenberg. Amsterdam 1979. [Reprint of the Paris edition of 1900]. al-Ya‘qÙbÐ. TaÞrÐkh. Edited by M. T. Houtsma. Leiden 1883. Secondary sources Elliot, H.M., Dowson, J. 1976. The History of India, as told by its own Historians. (10 vols). Lahore. [Reprint of the London edition of 1867]. Fiorani Piacentini, V. 2002 The Arab expeditions overseas (seventh century AD). Working hypotheses concerning the dissolution of the Sasanian state apparatus along the eastern coastal strip of the Arabian Peninsula. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 32: 165-173. Friedmann, Y. 1977. A contribution to the early history of Islam in India. Pages 309-333 in M. RosenAyalon (ed.). Studies in Memory of Gaston Wiet. Jerusalem. Friedmann, Y. 1984. The origins and significance of the Chach NÁma. Pages 23-37 in Y. Friedmann, (ed.). Islam in Asia. (2 vols). Jerusalem. 96

HISTORY AND HISTORIOGRAPHY: THE COURT GENRE IN ARABIC AND THE FATðNĀMAH-I SIND

Nama. Bulletin of the Institute of Islamic Studies 6-7: 38-48. Hardy, P. 1979. Is the Chach NÁma intelligible to the historian as political history? Pages 94-132 in H. Khuhro (ed.). Sind through the centuries. Karachi. Majumdar, R.C. 1931. The Arab Invasion of India. Dacca University Bulletin 15: 12-21. Qureshi, I.H. 1962. The Muslim community of the IndoPakistan subcontinent. The Hague. Schimmel, A. 1973. Islamic Literature of India. Wiesbaden.

Gabrieli, F. 1964-1965. Muhammad ibn QÁsim athThaqafi and the Arab conquest of Sind. East and West 15: 281-295. Gabrieli, F. 1989. Gli Arabi in India. Muhammad ibn Qàsim ath-Thàqafi e la penetrazione araba nel Sind. Pages 69-91 in F. Gabrieli (ed.). L’Islam nella Storia. Bari. Goitein, S.D.F. 1936. Introduction. Pages 9-32 in S.D.F. Goitein (ed.). al-BalÁdhurÐ. AnsÁb al-ashrÁf. vol. 5. Jerusalem. Habib, I. 1962-1963. A study of Hajjaj bin Yusef’s outlook and policies in the light of the Chach

97

Iranian Society in the Sasanian Period Hassan Karimian Introduction

Sasanian Inscriptions

The usable sources pertinent to the social structure of Iranian society during the Sasanian period are numerous. By studying these sources, one is faced with different perspectives on Iranian society. Therefore in this research, an attempt has been made to summarise each set of sources and then reconstruct the social structure of Iranian society. In a framework of general classification, the sources used in this article can be presented as follows: First, religious sources, in which the most important is the holy book of Zarathustra, the Iranian prophet, i.e. the Avesta. The second set of sources are inscriptions pertinent to the Sasanian age written in the Middle Persian language and PahlavÐ writing. The remaining reports and letters from the Sasanian period and historical books are the third and fourth categories of sources respectively used in the present research.

Additional divisions of Sasanian society may be evidenced through inscriptions of this period. The inscription of ShÁpÙr I (240-272 AD), located near ÍÁjÐÁbÁd in the Fars province, was written in two languages of Parthian PahlavÐ and Sasanian PahlavÐ and is one of the most important documents of this period (Henning 1954). Groups of aristocrats were introduced after “shÁhÁnshÁh” or king of kings. The text includes a description of archery by ShÁpÙr I, the second Sasanian king, which had been performed before the high-ranking officials of the country. The groups, which had taken part in this audience comprised of shahryÁrÁn or sovereigns, shÁhzÁdigÁn or princes, vuzurgÁn or the great and nobles and ÁzÁdigÁn or liberals. Ghirshman introduces shahryÁrÁn as kings of large provinces like Sistan and Kirman or rulers of conquered states and under the dominance of Sasanian rule like the KÙshÁn (Ghirshman 1370: 371). The shÁhzÁdigÁn were kings of smaller states like Tabaristan and Gilan (Ivanov 1358: 161). VuzurgÁn (buzurgÁn) consisted of officials, ministers, heads of royal offices and other members of the royal family (Ivanov 1358: 161). The ÁzÁdigÁn (ÁzÁtÁn) or small nobles and owners of lands or heads of villages were responsible for collecting taxes from villagers (Lukonin 1983: 703; AbulqÁsimÐ 1375: 133).

Historical Sources on Sasanian Society Religious Sources The exact date of the appearance of Zarathustra, the Iranian prophet, is not clear, but undoubtedly, the time of his appearance dates back to the era before Median over lordship (700-550 BC) because Zoroastrian religion was officially recognised in Iran in the Median and subsequent Achaemenid periods (550-331 BC) (RavandÐ 1354: 482). One of the oldest descriptions of the social classification of Iranian society is recorded in the holy text of Zarathustra, the Avesta (Boyce 1988: 122-3). In it two kinds of classification are mentioned. The first type is a vertical classification in which the position of individuals is specified in units, such as family, clan, tribe and country (SarkaratÐ 1355: 230-31). The second type is a horizontal classification in which society was divided into three classes: high ranking clergy or magupats (mubadÁn), warriors or jangavarÁn, and farmers or kishavarzÁn (PÙr DÁvÙd 1358: 35; Lukonin 1983: 698707). Since the Zoroastrian religion was the only official religion in the Sasanian age, it can be accepted that the mentioned classification in Iranian society during the Sasanian age was also implemented (Schwartz 1985: 641; SarfarÁz 1374: 342). It seems that this classification had no political foundation, but was only an idealistic attitude towards society which attempted to locate people in three groups based on their professions (SarkaratÐ 1355: 230). The existence of three holy fire-temples namely, À¿ar Gushnasp, À¿ar BarzÐn, and À¿ar Farnbagh, each of which belonged to one of the mentioned classes, indicates that before the Sasanian period, the people of Iran were divided into the three mentioned classes (Christensen 1370: 149). There is only one phrase in the Avesta in which a fourth class was also mentioned and that was the class of craftsmen (PÙr DÁvÙd 1358: 36).

In another inscription dating to the rule of BahrÁm I (273276 AD), in the village of SarÁb, situated in the countryside of the NÙrÁbÁd region in the Fars province, BahrÁm is seen among four distinguished figures of the government. These are the religious leaders or general heads of the clergy (magupatÁn), the commander of armed forces (irÁn- spÁhbad), the Prime Minister or great minister (vazrak farmÁzÁr) and the head of salesmen or merchants or hartakhshÁn bÁz (SarfarÁz 1374: 344). Narseh (293-302 AD), in another inscription in the Paikuli area of Iraq, describing his victory over BahrÁm III (293 AD), mentions the nobles who met with him to express their congratulation on his success and writes, “the nobles and liberals sent us congratulations” (Lukonin 1372: 193). Reports and Letters from the Sasanian Period A further class of historical sources are Sasanian declarations and administrative reports. A number of these reports and letters were recorded in historical books from the Early Islamic centuries written in Persian and Arabic, which have been rewritten and published in this century. One of these sources is KÁrnÁmak-i ArdashÐr-i PÁpakÁn (the Deedbook of ArdashÐr, son of PÁpak), the founder of Sasanian dynasty. In this, we read, “the great nobles, who used to accompany ArdashÐr during his archery, were comprised of head of clergies, general commander of soldiers, the nobles who were in charge of 99

HASSAN KARIMIAN administrative organisations and liberals” (HidÁyat 1373: 103-105). In Andarz- nÁmah, a letter attributed to ArdashÐr I, it explains that Sasanian society is divided into four classes. In this classification, ArdashÐr compares each class to a part of the human body and writes, “among you, rulers are like a head and their duty is to coordinate other organs. Soldiers are like hands, which take away damages and bring the benefits closer. Businessmen act as hearts, which transfer blood to the body and farmers and garden owners are like other organs that constantly try to give assistance to other organs” (Tha’ÁlÐbÐ 1368: 305-306).

farmers and craftsmen (FirdausÐ 1341: 140). A. TafaÛÛulÐ states that the “name of the first class means guardians of fire. The second class (tisharÁn) are the military men. The word pasuhÐ, which had been used for the third class, is the same word used as in the Avesta, which means farmers and the name of the fourth class mentioned in the ShÁhnÁmah is the hukhshik/hutukhsh, which means artisan in PahlavД (TafaÛÛolÐ 1374: 7-12). Sasanian Social Structure Having paid careful attention to the classification in these sources, there is little doubt that Iranian society during the Sasanian period had a hierarchical system. The only difference between the sources is the exact position of the classes and their social hierarchy. For example, in NÁmayi Tansar the clergy were named as the first social class, after the royal domain, whilst in TajÁrib al-umam, that class is regarded as the second or third position. The reason behind these differences may be explored in the multiplicity of sources and the different dates of compilation. In addition, it should be accepted that in the long period of the Sasanian rule, some changes had taken place in their social hierarchy. However, what is more interesting is that in some sources, only groups relating to one class were mentioned. For example, the names of the nobles who used to accompany ArdashÐr during his hunting were mentioned in the KÁrnÁmak-i ArdashÐr-i PÁpakÁn, all of whom were from the aristocratic and royal class, but they were divided into smaller identifiable groups, which were mentioned by the king. To summarise, the common features we may conclude that people were classified into five classes of aristocrats, clergy, military men, writers and the public. Each of these was divided into smaller groups at a certain level, which will be explained briefly as follows.

Historical Books A final set of sources are historical texts complied during the early Islamic centuries in the Persian and Arabic languages. With regard to their diversity, only five, which are considered as the oldest sources, have been used. The first book is MurÙj al-dhahab and was compiled in the ninth century (MasÝÙdÐ 1365). In this book ArdashÐr, son of PÁpak, is introduced as a pioneer in regulating social classes and his successors followed him. According to this book, the nobles and companions of ArdashÐr I comprised of three classes. First, the cavaliers and princes whose positions were always to the right of the king and stood ten metres away from him. This class included the relatives of the kings, nobles, and scientists. The second class stood ten metres away from the first class and were the border guards, kings residing at court, and military commanders. The position of the third class was ten metres away from the second class and they were jokers and humorists (MasÝÙdÐ 1365: 239). The other book is TajÁrib al-umam or Experiences of Nations by Miskawaih. While describing the social structure of the Sasanian era, Miskawaih, which was compiled in the tenth century, quotes in his book ArdashÐr and writes, “after me, the kings must divide people into the same four categories.” These categories were military men, Zoroastrian clergies and worshippers, scribes that include astrologers and physicians, and finally the class of farmers, salesmen and businessmen (Miskawaih 1369: 120). In another book, which is known as NÁma-yi Tansar or Tansar’s Letter, Iranian society was classified into four main groups and contains sub-groups. The first group included religious men, and they themselves were divided into rulers, worshippers and teachers. The second group were warriors and included cavalry and infantry. The third group consisted of writers and this group was further subdivided into writers of books, letters, accounting books, contracts and also poets, physicians and astrologers. The fourth group were mahnih (mÁhnih) which included craftsmen, nobles, tradesmen, farmers, and other people (MÐnÙvÐ 1356: 57).

ShÁhÁnshÁh or King of Kings The king of the kings, or shÁhÁnshÁh, was at the top of the pyramid of the social classes and enjoyed farr or farri kiyÁnÐ. Farr is a divine power, which is entrusted in the entity of each human being (PÙr DÁvÙd 1378: 309). Farr helps people in conducting their duties and if somebody shows no interest in his/her duties or fails to perform it properly, it will desert him/her (ÀmÙzigar 1374: 35). Farr-i kiyÁnÐ is a kind of farr, which only belongs to Iranian dynasties and the honest Iranian kings keep it with them as a gift from the great god, AhurÁ MazdÁ (ÀmÙzigar 1374: 34). A golden ring and whip given to the Iranian kings, by AhurÁ MazdÁ, is a terrestrial manifestation of this very farr (Nöldeke 1358: 585). This ring and whip are shown in Sasanian inscriptions in the hands of the Sasanian kings (SarfarÁz 1375: 351). At the beginning of the Sasanian period, the king dissolved the Parthian mÁhistÁn parliament or parliament of the national noble, and centralised royal absolute power which was considered to be the manifestation of AhurÁ MazdÁ and sometimes brother of the moon and the sun (ZarrÐnkÙb 1371: 500). The holiness of the Sasanian king was to the extent that there were even restraints on

In the book Ahd-i ArdashÐr or Age of ArdashÐr, the Iranians were divided into four groups of religious, learned men, warriors, wise men and producers (ÝAbbÁs 1348: 78). FirdausÐ, in his ShÁhnÁmah compiled in 1004 AD, refers to four classes, namely clergy, warriors,

100

IRANIAN SOCIETY IN THE SASANIAN PERIOD speaking before him or looking at him. For example, those who could meet the king should avoid laughing and gluttony (JÁÎiÛ 1357: 195). JÁÎiÛ, the tenth century Arab literary man and writer stated that, “there was a curtain between the king and first group of royal officials and that curtain was 10 metres farther than the location where the king used to sit” (JÁÎiÛ 1357: 37). The glory and greatness of the Sasanian kings is revealed through the words and titles used. In the inscription at HÁjÐÁbÁd, in the Fars province, ShÁpÙr I (240-272 AD), names himself as “worshipper of the great god, king of Iran and other lands, whose race stems from god” (Christensen 1314: 133). In a letter sent to Constantine, the Emperor of Rome, he uses the title of “king of kings, husband of stars and counterpart of sun and moon” (Browne 1963: 224). Khusrau I (531-579 AD), in a letter addressed to the Roman Emperor Valerian (c. 258), introduces himself as “good nature, valuable, king of kings, pious, one who has been entitled to rule the vast lands by a great god, peerless powerful man and in equal size to god” (Browne 1963: 229). In the NÁma-yi Tansar or “Letter of Tansar”, which is thought to have been written during the early days of the Sasanian period, the king was described as: “the regulator of soldiers and other people, … and an ornament for honourable days and reliable shelter for days of fear of enemy” (MÐnÙvÐ 1356: 20). In the Sasanian era, the kingdom was patrimonial, on a hereditary basis and the royal succession was given to the eldest son. If there was no immediate heir, the nobles and clergies selected a member of the royal family as the king (Durant 1994: 174).

were placed in the first class. Due to the existence of these regional kings, the Sasanian kings called themselves shÁhÁnshÁh or “king of kings”, because a great number of rulers under them had the royal title as well. Princes: The second group consisted of princes or vispuhragÁn who were the heads of tribes. This group achieved power in the middle of the Sasanian age, but threatened Sasanian kings (Christensen 1374: 230). In the inscription of KaÝba-yi Zardusht, several people are mentioned as the heads of the tribes (Frye 1966). Great men: The third group includes the so-called “great men” or vuzurgÁn. Amid the historical sources and Sasanian inscriptions, there are some references to the position and existence of this group in solving the problems of the country (Lukonin 1983: 681-747). For example, in the inscription of Paikuli it states, “and sovereigns, the great and the liberals sent such replies” (Lukonin 1372: 193). Christensen believes that these “great men” (vuzurgÁn) were the top officials and representatives of the government (Christensen 1370: 168). Freemen: The last group was freemen (ÁzÁtÁn) who used to rule over small regions on behalf of the government and established links between central government and the villagers (Ghirshman 1370: 372). Clergy The head of this class was the magupat magupatÁn who enjoyed a rank equal to the prophets (MasÝÙdÐ 1349: 97). He was the guardian of religion and held the highest judicial position (KhvÁrazmÐ 1372: 112). His position was the highest in the KÁrnamak-i Ardashir-i PÁpakÁn. One part of this book states that ArdashÐr asked the magupat magupatÁn to make a judgement between him and his wife who attempted to kill him (HidÁyat 1373: 197). Ivanov believes that the holder of this post at the end of Sasanian age held the highest position after the king (Ivanov 1358: 161). Because of this, Sasanian kings always tried to reduce the power of the clergy (Pigulevskaia 1367: 79). The clergy was not only the executive of religious teachings, but they also taught these ceremonies to society (ZarrÐnkÙb 1371: 490). The clergy was divided into two groups of magupatÁn (mubad) and hirbadÁn (Ghirshman 1370: 379). KartÐr, the Zoroastrian clergy man, whose portrait is carved with an inscription at Naqsh-i Rajab beside the Sasanian king, mentions mubad and hirbad as two separate titles (Frye 1964/5: 219). Judgement, religious teachings, and supervision over good performance of religious orders were the responsibility of magupats. Whilst hirbads guarded the holy fire (KhvÁrazmÐ 1372: 112), and had a lower rank than the magupats (MasÝÙdÐ 1365: 97), although their leader had a rank equal to the head of magupats (ÓabarÐ 1362: 626). The clergy were also divided into four groups of judges, scholars, religious authorities, and teachers (Christensen 1370: 151).

Aristocracy This was the highest social class after royalty and was subdivided into four groups: Sovereigns: The sovereign groups were actually the kings of different minor states. In the first set, there were great and small rulers, who because of their recognition of the legitimacy of the Sasanian family, were granted their inherited crown and throne (Ghirshman 1370: 371). As they were rulers of independent regions in relatively remote areas, the title of king was used for most of them. Over the inscription of KaÝba-yi Zardusht, among the list of nobles at ArdashÐr I’s court, four kings from the east of Iran enjoyed this high position (Sprengling 1953: 18). Another branch of this class, which had the title of king, were the rulers of remote regions and due to their loyalty to the Sasanian king were given the title of shÁh. In Tansar`s Letter, the rulers of the western region of KhvÁrazm and Kabul were included in this group (MÐnÙvÐ 1356: 20). With the hope of taking the throne in the future, the third set were princes, who were assigned to rule a province in order to familiarise themselves with methods of governance (MÐrkhvÁnd 1373: 169). BahrÁm III (293 AD), who was the king of Sistan during the life of his father, was called Sakan ShÁh and BahrÁm IV (388399 AD), who was the ruler of Kirman, was called Ke[i]rmÁn ShÁh (Christensen 1374: 33). The only benefit of having a title of king for these rulers was that they

101

HASSAN KARIMIAN Military Men

Ahvaz were among the centres for textile industry in the Khuzistan province in southwest Iran (Ghirshman 1370: 410).

The Sasanian army included two sections of the cavalry and the infantry. The cavalry was divided into heavy and light cavalry. The heavy cavalry comprised of Iranian nobles (Ghirshman 1370: 376) and the light cavalry included lesser nobles and the sons of the rulers of states (ZarrÐnkÙb 1371: 501). The infantry had normal soldiers and also included villagers who served the army on a compulsory basis (ÓabarÐ 1362: 649; Christensen 1991: 289). The commander of the army was named the sipahbud [sipÁhbud] (Diakonov 1346: 426). By assigning four sipahbud [sipÁhbud] in the four quarters of the country, the Sasanian kings distributed military power among four people (Dīnawarī 1344: 96).

Out of the other groups who were among this class at the end of the Sasanian period were the ÁyÁrÁn or stalwarts. They were known for their manliness and generosity. They defended the oppressed against the oppressors and were blamed for being followers of MÁnÐ, the man who claimed to be a prophet and who demanded equality of all people in society and the removal of class discrimination (NafÐsÐ 1367: 130). The people of this class had independent fire-temples and their most important firetemple was at Rivand near Sabzivar (Khurasan province) and were known as À¿ar Barzÿnmihr (Pigulevskaia 1373: 384). The people of this class believed that Zoroaster brought fire from the sky (Müller 1363: 76). The heads were drawn from nobility and assigned directly by the king and their responsibility was to collect taxes (Pigulevskaia 1367: 81). Therefore, the financial offices of the regions were under their jurisdiction (Ivanov 1358: 162).

Secretariats or People Involved in Court Affairs The Sasanian court system was a vast, precise and very complex one. The function of that system was to establish unity in the country, to gather exact and written information over the condition of the country, to collect taxes and to establish justice (TafaÛÛolÐ 1374: 235; ZarrÐnkÙb 1371: 502). This class of secretariats was promoted to the third social class in the fifth and sixth centuries AD (Diakonov 1346: 425). Secretaries, writers of orders released by courts, writers of lease contracts, historians, physicians and astronomers formed the elements of this class (Christensen 1314: 151). Considering the important and sensitive duties, the most skilful writers were employed in this class (Pigulevskaia 1367: 82). These people undertook the role of politicians (Christensen 1370: 198). IrÁn dabÐrah or Iranian highranking writers were at the top of this class (Diakonov 1346: 422). ShÁh dabÐrah, the figure who enjoyed the highest position in this group, was in fact the head of the office of the Sasanian king (Ivanov 1358: 161).

Conclusion Sasanian social organisation may be characterised as extremely hierarchical with clear divisions relating to social order and occupation, modelled broadly on the four divisions noted within the Avesta - clergy, warriors, farmers, and craftsmen (PÙr DÁvÙd 1358: 35). Subdivisions of these groups existed within Sasanian society, but their roles were rigorously enforced by the monarch, allowing little social or occupational mobility (Miskawaih 1369: 120). These divisions appear to have been realised physically as illustrated by the writings of the tenth century AD scholar, JÁÎiÛ who records that the king was separated from his courtiers by ten paces (1357: 37). This report is in accordance with the ninth century AD MurÙj al-dhahab, which recorded that the king was separated from his knights and princes by ten paces, who were in turn ten paces from the military commanders and so on (MasÝÙdÐ 1365: 239). The pinnacle of Sasanian society was, of course, the monarch who was attributed titles like “king of kings, husband of the stars and counterpart of the sun and moon” (Browne 1963: 224). Moreover, many Sasanian bas-reliefs stress this differentiation by depicting a clear parallel between the Sasanian temporal monarch and the divine monarch, AhurÁ MazdÁ, the latter confirming the power and right of the former (SarfarÁz 1375: 351). Figures 1 and 2 were produced by the author and outline the system precisely.

Wealth Producers The wealth producers were the fifth group of Iranian people during the Sasanian age and included the bulk of the population who were the main source of national wealth and of government income (ZarrÐnkÙb 1371: 503). This class included three layers of craftsmen, businessmen, and farmers. Out of these, businessmen usually lived in the suburbs or in certain parts of the city and were part of a specific guild or organisation. Businessmen were regarded as important sources of national wealth and used to transfer the productions of different cities to other cities in Iran or abroad (MuÒÁhib 1374: 342). They had trading companies in some of the large cities in Iran (ShahzÁdÐ 1328: 80). Craftsmen also conducted activities in certain parts of the suburbs or were situated in the bazaar. Agricultural producers like farmers and gardeners lived in the suburbs of cities or villages and produced agricultural produce or bred animals (ÓabarÐ 1362: 703). As the rate of activity and population increased in some parts of the cities or certain regions, the cities of Iran generally became known for certain kinds of trade, agriculture or industrial activities (Pigulevskaia 1373: 323). For example, Shushtar and

Hassan Karimian The Institute of Archaeology Vali Asr Street Istgah Pesyan PO Box : 19615 - 619 Tehran 19617 - 33114 Iran [email protected]

102

IRANIAN SOCIETY IN THE SASANIAN PERIOD Memorial Volume. Bombay. [Reprinted in 1977 in Acta Iranica 15: 415-429]. HidÁyat, S. 1373. KÁrnÁma-yi ArdashÐr-i PÁpakÁn (the Deedbook of ArdashÐr, son of PÁpak). Tehran. Ivanov. W. 1358. TÁrÐkh-i IrÁn : IrÁn-i bastÁn. Translated by S. ÏzadÐ & H. TaÎvÐlÐ. Tehran. Lukonin, V.G. 1983. Political, Social and Administrative Institutions. Cambridge History of Iran 3/2: 681747. Lukonin, V.G. 1372. Tamaddun-i SÁsÁnÐ Translated by E. RiªÁ. Teheran. MÐnÙvÐ, M. 1356. NÁma-yi Tansar. Tehran. MÐrkhvÁnd, A. 1373. Rauªat al-ÒafÁ. Vol. I. Edited by A. ZaryÁb. Tehran. MuÒahib, M. 1374. DÁyirat al-maÝarif-i FÁrsÐ. Vol. III. Tehran. Müller F. M. 1363. IrÁn-i bastÁn. Translated by J. AmÙzigar. Tehran. NafÐsÐ S. 1367. TÁrÐkh-i tamaddun-i IrÁn dar Ýahd-i SÁsÁnÐyÁn. Tehran. Nöldeke, T. 1358. TÁrÐkh-i IrÁniyÁn va ÝArab-hÁ dar zamÁn-i SÁsÁniyÁn. Translated by A ZaryÁb. Tehran. Pigulevskaia, N.V. 1367. TÁrÐkh-i IrÁniyÁn az aghÁz tÁ pÁyÁn-i qarn-i 18 mÐlÁdÐ. Translated by K. KishÁvarz. Tehran. Pigulevskaia, N.V. 1373. Shahr-hÁ-yi IrÁn dar rÙzgar PartiyÁn va SÁsÁniyÁn. Translated by A. InÁyat. Tehran. PÙr DÁvÙd, I. 1358. Yasna. Second part. Edited by FarahvashÐ. Tehran PÙr DÁvÙd, I. 1378. Muqaddimah bar YashthÁ. Vol. 1. Translated by D. J. IrÁnÐ. Tehran. RavandÐ, M. 1354. TÁrÐkh-i ijtimÁÞÐ-yi IrÁn. Vol. I. Tehran. SarfarÁz, A.A. 1374. GuftÁr-hÁ-yi bÁstÁn-shinÁsÁnih dar khuÒÙÒ-i hunar-i IrÁnÐ qabl az IslÁm. Tehran. SarfarÁz, A.A. 1375. Hunar-i IrÁn dar Ýahd-i PartiyÁn va SÁsÁniÁn. Tehran. Sarkarati, B. 1355. Mafhūm-i milliyat dar farhang-i IrÁn-i bastÁn. Andīsha-hÁ-yi rastakhīz 1/2: 224-255. Schwartz, M. 1985. The old Eastern Iranian world view according to the Avesta. Cambridge History of Iran 2: 640-648. ShahzÁdÐ, R. 1328. MatÐgÁn-i hazar dÁtastÁn. (QÁnÙn-i madanÐ-yi ZartÙshtiyÁn dar ‘ahd-i SÁsÁniyÁn). Tehran. Sprengling, M. 1953. Third Century Iran. Chicago. TafaÛÛolÐ, A. 1992. Dabīre. Encyclopaedia Iranica 6. TafaÛÛolÐ, A. 1374. TÁrÐkh-i adabiyÁt-i IrÁn pÐsh az IslÁm. Tehran. ZarrÐnkÙb, ÝA. Í. 1371. TÁrÐkh-i mardumÁn-i IrÁn vol. I. Tehran.

References Primary sources Dīnawarī Abū Íanifa. 1344. Akhbar al-ÔiwÁl. Translated by N. DamghÁnÐ. Tehran. FirdausÐ, A. 1341. ShÁhnÁmah. Tehran. JÁÎiÛ, A.O. 1357. KitÁb al-tÁj. Translated by H. Naubakht. Tehran. KhvÁrazmÐ, AbÙ ÝAbdullÁh. 1372.. MafÁtiÎ al-ÝulÙm. Translated by H KhadÐva. Tehran. MasÝÙdÐ, ÝAlÐ Ibn Íusain. 1349. Al-Tanbih va al-ishrÁf. Translated by A. PÁyandih. Tehran. MasÝÙdÐ, ÝAlÐ Ibn Íusain. 1365. MurÙj al-Æhahab. Translated by A. PÁyandih. Tehran. Miskawaih R.A. 1369. TajÁrib al-umam. Vol. I. Translated by A. ImÁmÐ Tehran. ÓabarÐ, M.J. 1362. TÁrÐkh-i al-rusul wa’l-mulÙk vol. V. Translated by A. PÁyandih. Tehran. ThaÝÁlibÐ, ÝAbd al-Malik. 1368. TÁrÐkh-i ThaÝÁlibÐ. Translated by M FaªÁ’ilÐ. Tehran. Secondary sources ÝAbbÁs, I.. 1348. ÝAhd-i ArdashÐr. Translated by M A. ImÁm ShushtarÐ. Tehran. AbulqÁsimi, M. 1375. TÁrikh-i zabÁn FÁrsÐ. Tehran. ÀmÙzigÁr, J. 1374. TÁrÐkh-i asÁÔir-i IrÁn. Tehran. Browne, E.G. 1963. A Literary History of Persia. 4 Vols. Translated by A. P. ÑÁliÎ. Tehran. Boyce, M. 1988. Zoroastrians: their religious beliefs and practices. London. Christensen, A. 1314. Parastish-i AhurÁ MazdÁ dar IrÁni bastÁn. Translated by ¾. ÑafÁ. Tehran. Christensen, A. 1370. Millat va daulat dar daura-yi SÁsÁniyÁn. Translated by M. MÐnÙvÐ. Tehran. Christensen, A. 1374. IrÁn dar zaman-i SÁsÁniyÁn. Translated by R. YÁsimÐ. Tehran. Diakonov, M. M. 1346. TÁrÐkh-i IrÁn-i bastÁn. Translated by R. ArbÁb. Tehran. Durant, W. 1373. TÁrÐkh-i tamaddon (Story of Civilisation. Vol. IV. The Age of Faith). Translated by A SÁrimÐ & A PÁyandih. Tehran. Frye, R. 1964/5. The Middle Persian inscription of Kartir at Naqš-i Rajab. Indo-Iranian Journal 8: 211225. Frye, R. 1966. The Persepolis Middle Persian Inscription from the time of Shapur II. Acta Orientalia 30: 83-93. Ghirshman, R. 1370. IrÁn az aghÁz ta IslÁm. Translated by M. MuÝÐn. Tehran. Henning, W.B. 1954. Notes on the Great Inscription of Šhāpūr I. Pages 40 to 54 in Prof. Jackson

103

HASSAN KARIMIAN Figures

Figure 1: The Class system in the Sasanian period.

104

IRANIAN SOCIETY IN THE SASANIAN PERIOD

Class

Main class Dependent sub-classes

Position in social structure

Main functions

1

Aristocrats

1. Sovereign 2. Princes 3. Nobles 4. liberals

-Kings of states -Heads of tribes -Governmental representatives and inspectors -Rulers of small regions

-Maintaining and supporting the authority of Sasanian king over the country -Maintaining order and dominance of central government -Preparing report of situation of states and solving problems -Establishing links between people and rulers of states

2

Clergy

mubadÁn ( magupatÁn) hirbadÁn

-Judgement -Protect religion -Teaching religious affairs -Conducting ceremonies

3

Military men

1. The heavy cavalry 2. The light cavalry

4

Secretariats

5

Wealth producers

1. Secretariats 2. Writers of judicial orders 3. Writers of contract and lease contracts 4. Historians 5. Physicians 6. Astronomers 1. Businessmen 2. Craftsmen 3. Farmers 4. Peasants

-Highest judicial posts and religious teaching -Religious and maintain fire -Iranian nobles -Children of rulers of states -Villagers who had to serve military -Employees of governmental organisations at the centre of government and centre of government in states

-Well-to-do class (from ordinary people) -Middle class (from ordinary people) -Low income class

Figure 2: The Class system in the Sasanian period.

105

-Control of borders and sensitive installations -Confronting foreign intrusions -Collecting information and recording them -Collecting taxes and registering financial data -Writing and keeping orders of judicial courts, contracts, lease contracts, registration of country. -Scientific teaching -Conducting trade affairs -Establishing centre for preparing and distributing goods -Industrial productions -Agricultural productions

The Great Families in the Sasanian Empire: some Sigillographic Evidence Rika Gyselen sort of general context into which the different data can be fitted. On the other hand, the information given by the bullae comes as direct evidence of Sasanian society, and not as something that might have been manipulated by the powers that be. However, as it depends on the luck of the finds, the picture presented by the seals can only be, for the present, a very partial one.

The aristocracy with its “top” families played a predominant role in the Sasanian Empire. All the literary sources give a clear account of this and modern historians such as Christensen, having only such sources at their disposal, have discussed them to good effect (Christensen 1944). The various editions, translations and commentaries concerning the inscriptions on monuments dating from the third century have provided many details about the aristocracy and the outstanding families.1 However, by their very nature such epigraphic data are often very brief and their interpretation is simplified by comparison with the texts of the early authors. At the same time, it must not be forgotten that the epigraphic and literary data do not always cover the same period of the Sasanian era, a fact which explains a certain number of cases of inconsistency between the two types of source. Despite their conciseness, there can be no doubt that priority must be given to the information provided by these primary sources.

The secondary sources often refer to seven great families existing in the Sasanian Empire, the first one being that of the Sasanians themselves. Christensen, for example, gives a list of them, saying that apart from the ruling family of the Sasanians there were the Kārins, the Sūrēns, the Aspāhbeds, the Spandiyāds, the Mihrāns and perhaps the Zīks (Christensen 1944: 105). According to Christensen, the first three families named were of Arsacid ancestry and would have borne the additional name of Parthian (Christensen 1944: 103). The list given by Nöldeke is somewhat different, giving the Kārins, the Sūrēns and the Spandiyārs (sic), who also bore the name of Pahlaw, Parthian (Nöldeke 1973: 437-438).

Over the last few decades, a new primary source has gradually become of increasing importance, namely the seals and their impressions on bullae. Unfortunately, the information they give is even briefer than that of the inscriptions on the monuments, which at least give some

Since the number “7” has a symbolic significance, as is generally known, one cannot be certain that the number of leading families should be taken literally as seven. From the inscriptions related to monuments of the third century, the following names are obtained:

Inscription of Shāpūr I on the Ka‘ba of Zoroaster (ShKZ) 2 Court of Ardashīr I Court of Shāpūr I (224-241 AD) (241-272 AD) Dēhēn ī Varāz Ardashīr ī Varāz Sāsān ī Sūrēn Ardashīr ī Sūrēn Pērōz ī Kārin Ardashīr ī Kārin Gōg ī Kārin Ashtad dabīr Mihrān az Ray

Inscription of Narseh at Paikuli (NPi) 3 Court of Vahrām II (276-293 AD) Ardashīr ī Sūrēn Ohrmazd ī Varāz ...c-Narseh ī Kārin

Table 1: Great families of the Sasanian Empire from the inscription of Shāpūr I on the Ka‘ba of Zoroaster and the inscription of Narseh at Paikuli . This list makes no attempt at including all the members of the outstanding aristocratic families mentioned on monuments of the third century. One can be quite certain that such a personality as the “Lord of Andēgān”,4 or the one indicated as being “of Dumbāwand”,5 also belonged to the nobility. The same is probably also true of the Farragān (pldk’n) and also of the KadÙgān (ktwk’n).6 However, since none of these names are to be found as such in the secondary sources, their identification and precise position remain open to question. Neither do we find in the secondary sources the name of the Varāz family (literally, 'boar'). There are no traces in the inscriptions of such family names as Spāhbed,7 Spandiyād or Zīk,8 though these are mentioned in the

texts. Thanks to sigillography, some inconsistencies can now be explained.

of

these

The Sūrēns and the Kārins All the secondary sources agree in describing the Sūrēns and the Kārins as the two most important families, already playing an important role during the time of the Parthians, hence their additional name of Pahlav (e.g. Christensen 1944: 18, n. 2). Members of the Sūrēn family were to be found at the court of Ardashīr I (Sāsān ī Sūrēn) and of Shāpūr I (Ardashīr ī Sūrēn). The same Ardashīr was probably also

107

RIKA GYSELEN other members of the great families such as the Varāzs, the Sūrēns or the Kārins. So one may well wonder here if the word Mihrān does in fact stand for the celebrated Mihrān family.14 One may also note that, unlike the members of the other families, this particular Mihrān is further indicated by his function, dabīr, that is to say scribe, and by his place of origin, Ray. However, this should occasion no surprise since this same indication of origin is frequently associated with the Mihrān family name in the literary sources.15

at the court of Vahrām II. The formulation - proper name + izāfat + family name - does not present any problem of interpretation in this particular case. One may also note that in inscriptions the Sūrēns never have the addition of the epithet Parthian. This added name is also absent in the bilingual Pahlavi-Chinese inscription which a Sūrēn ordered to be engraved in Sian (Harmatta 1971: 363-76). To our personal knowledge, no seal has yet been found with the name of a member of the Sūrēn family (Gignoux 1986). Until quite recently, the name Kārin was also not known in sigillography (Gignoux 1986: number 491 “Kārin”).

Generally speaking, the name Mihrān causes difficulties by its very form, with -ān, which may be understood as indicating the personal name Mihrān, if not that of the family, or as the patronymic form meaning Son of Mihr (Gignoux 1986: number 630).

In the inscriptions on third century monuments, several Kārins are mentioned; there is Pērōz ī Kārin and Gōg ī Kārin at the court of Ardashīr I, Ardashīr ī Kārin at the court of Shāpūr I and ...c-Narseh ī Kārin at the court of Vahrām II. However, like the Sūrēns, one does not find any trace of the name Parthian (Pahlav) which the secondary sources add to them. Nonetheless, there is no reason to doubt the authenticity of this literary tradition since one finds the names of Kārin and Pahlav clearly associated in the impression of one and the same Sasanian seal.9 This seal bearing the name Frahād is a cabochon of important proportions (Fig. 1). Its motif of the winged horse is one that appears regularly in sigillographic iconography.

However that may be, Mihrān is now clearly in evidence on three spāhbed seals as a family name.16 On two of these seals the word Mihrān follows a personal name to which it is linked by the izafat. Both belonged to a spāhbed of the Northern Side. One was called Sēd-ōsh 17 and is described as Shahr-aspbed, “Commander of the Cavalry of the Empire (?)” (Fig. 3), while the other bears the name of Gōrgōn (Fig. 4). On the third seal the family name is not mentioned in the same way as on the two preceding ones as the name Mihrān has been added at the end of the inscription on a separate line (Fig. 5). This seal belonged to a certain Pīrag who was spāhbed of the Southern Side during the reign of Khusrau I (531-579 AD). It may be recalled that the secondary sources make mention of this same name Pīrag qualified by the term Mihrān (Christensen 1944: 274, 520), but for the period of Yazdgard I (399-420 AD).18

“Spāhbed” The third family which, according to Christensen, bears the additional name of Pahlav is that of the Aspāhbeds (Christensen 1944: 103). There can be no doubt that this name Aspāhbed is a corruption of the name spāhbed, which was probably never a family name but rather a title meaning army commander. At some time the Arab authors must have confused title with family name. It is clearly impossible to prove it, but one seal (Fig. 2), which bears at one and the same time the terms spāhbed, aspbed and pahlav, shows the complexity of the different titles, names and added names, and renders quite plausible any confusion in later times when they were not in current use.10 This particular seal belonged to Dād-Burz-Mihr, who is described as “aspbed ī pahlav”, that is to say the Parthian Aspbed,11 who served as Spāhbed of the Eastern Side under Ohrmazd IV (579-590 AD). There is also a personal seal that has been found, very probably belonging to this very Dād-Burz-Mihr, on which this same title of Parthian Aspbed appears.12

Varāz Another family named in the third century inscriptions is the Varāz family, with Dēhēn ī Varāz at the court of Ardashīr, Ardashīr ī Varāz at the court of Shāpūr I and Ohrmazd [Hormizd] ī Varāz at the court of Vahrām II. Unlike the preceding names, this one does not appear in the secondary sources as the name of a great family. Obviously, one might explain this absence by the confusion to be found constantly in the secondary sources between titles, names, appellations, and so on. It is also true that the name Varāz, meaning literally a boar, might easily have been understood as a title, especially as titles with the word varāz exist.19 Consequently, it is quite possible that the so-called “prince” of NisÁ who in the secondary sources is said to have borne the title of V[w]arāz (Christensen 1944: 501; Nöldeke 1973: 240, n. 1) or Shāpūr-V[w]arāz, marzbān of Ādurbādagān (Christensen 1944: 139, n. 2), was in fact a member of the Varāz family.

Mihrān The Mihrān family is often mentioned in the secondary sources.13 They must have exercised considerable power as one of their members, Vahrām additionally named Ch½bin, seized the royal throne at the beginning of the reign of Khusrau II (591-628 AD). In the inscription of Shāpūr I on the Ka‘ba of Zoroaster one finds at the court of Shāpūr I a certain Ashtad dibīr Mihrān az Ray. One may well be surprised at his low order in the listing of the dignitaries of the court of Shāpūr, a long way down after

The name Varāz appears in sigillographic sources as either a personal name or as the name of the father (Gignoux 1986: number 940). Now it also appears to have been a family name as it was borne by a person named Pērōz (or Farrokh Pērōz 20), who is called Varāz (Fig. 6).21 This seal, in the form of a stamp, is of 108

THE GREAT FAMILIES IN THE SASANIAN EMPIRE: SOME SIGILLOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE 2 The references have been taken from the most recent edition of this inscription: Huyse 1999. 3 See Skjævoe & Humbach 1983. 4 ŠKZ, Huyse 1999 i: 55 (line 29) and 58 (line 31); ii: 136. NPi, Skjævoe & Humbach 1983 transcribes it Undigān (iii.1: 33, line 7; 37, line 11/10; 50, line 23/21) and considers the word to be an ethnic name (iii.1: 83; iii.2: 44-5). 5 NPi, Skjævoe & Humbach 1983 iii.1: 72, l. 45/42. ŠKZ, Huyse 1999 i: 55 (only in the Parthian version), 59 (line 32), ii: 138 (§42.10) and 1601 (§47). See also Gyselen forthcoming. 6 These are two families which are “nurseries” of young princes (ŠKZ, Huyse 1999 i: 57 (line 31) and ii: 152-4 §45) who belong to the high nobility. 7 This title is taken by several authors as a family name. For this refer, for example, to Khurshudian (1998: 85, 147). It should also be noted that many titles, particularly those ending in -bed, became proper names (Gignoux 1986 inversed index: II/208). 8 The word Zīg appears as a proper name in the inscription of Shāpūr I (ŠKZ, Huyse 1999 ii: 128-9, §40.7). 9 All the bullae bearing the stamp of one of the seals discussed in this article are in the collection of A. Saeedi, whom we thank most warmly for his generosity and patience, and thanks to whom we have been able to study these objects, some photographs of which are presented for the first time here. We are grateful also to Bernard Hourcade, Director of the UMR “Monde iranien”, and to the CNRS, to which we belong, for having provided us with the funds necessary for the study of the collection of Sasanian seals and bullae in the A. Saeedi collection and for the presentation of some results at the colloquium on “Current Research in Sasanian Archaeology and History” (3rd/4th November 2001) at the University of Durham. 10 These seals of spāhbed have been analysed elsewhere: Gyselen 2001a. 11 For an alternative interpretation, see Gyselen 2001a. 12 On this subject see Gyselen 2001a. 13 Christensen 1944 (139, n.2) mentions “un marzbān de Bēth Darāïe et du district des Cosséens, un marzbān de Gurzān et d’Arran du nom de Pirān-Gu·nasp”. Other Mihrāns include Pīrag (under Bahrām Gōr), Raham and Yazd-Wishnasp (under Pērōz), and Pērōz (under Kavād I). The most famous without any doubt is Bahrām Čobin of Rai, son of Bahrām-Gushnasp, usurper of the throne of Khusrau II. Several Mihrāns are also mentioned in the struggle against the Arabs (Nöldeke 1973: 139, n. 3). It is also said that the position of spāhbed of Ērānshahr was hereditary in the Mihrān family (see for example Khurshudian 1998: 151). 14 Note how Huyse has doubts about considering the name Mihrān as a family name and how he prefers the interpretation dibir Mihrān, scribe of contracts (Huyse 1999 ii: 175-6). However, this translation of the word Mihrān is given only for the Pahlavi version, while in the Parthian and Greek versions Mihrān is understood as a family name. 15 Christensen 1944: 295 “Shāpūr de Rai de la famille Mihrān (sous Pērōz, Valax·et Kavād),” and 443 : “Vahrām....Tchoben.... originaire de Raï... de la grande famille des Mihrān.” 16 For discussion of these seals, see Gyselen 2001a. 17 The name is indeed written sydhwsh, but this may be a miswriting of shyd’wsh, a name which seems more appropriate (see Gignoux 1986, Sēd “brilliant” and sh “intelligence”). 18 On this topic see Gyselen 2001b. 19 For example Warāzbed (ŠKZ, Huyse 1999 i: 62, line 35, §50) or Shahr-warāz (Gyselen 2001b). 20 The word “Farrokh” is engraved in cursive script, while “Pērōz” is in lapidary writing. It is therefore possible that the engraver wished to make a distinction between the two words, one of which, farrokh, might represent the wish “blessed”, while Pērōz would be the proper name of the owner of the seal. 21 On the seal the name is written wl’c, whereas inscriptions on monuments give the spelling wr’c.

important dimensions, for the impression measures 29 by 26 mm. It bears the image of a boar passing to the right. It might well be that in choosing this motif the proprietor of this seal wished to make a reference to his name of 'boar'. Conclusions Despite the limited documentation, sigillography makes an important contribution to our knowledge of the great families of the Sasanian Empire. First of all it confirms the reliability of certain information handed down by the literary sources, about which one is often suspicious. It has now been proved that the Kārin family was in fact also called Pahlav - as is affirmed in the texts but about which the third century inscriptions on monuments reveal nothing. In other cases, while confirming the items of information to be found in the texts, the seals also allow us to correct them, in particular where there is confusion between personal names, names of families, and titles, and where chronology is concerned. So it is that one finds on seals an “Aspbed ī Pahlav” or yet again a “Pīrag (of the family) Mihrān”, allusions that one finds again in the literary sources. However, the seals make it clear that PÐrag Mihrān - unless it is a case of a homonym - did not live during the reign of Yazdgard I (399-420 AD) as the literary tradition indicates but rather lived during that of Khusrau I (531-579 AD). By comparison with the inscriptions on monuments, which reflect the situation existing in the third century, sigillography brings evidence of a later period, probably of the sixth century. Insofar as these two primary sources transmit the same information or do the contrary, while keeping a due sense of proportion one may judge whether there was continuity in the institutions between the third and sixth centuries or whether there were profound changes. This type of information appears all the more precious when one recalls that between these two periods there were many events which effectively modified Sasanian society, in particular the revolt of Mazdak and the royal reforms which followed it, aimed particularly at reducing the power of the high nobility. The seals furnish proof that these great families continued to play a predominant role during the late Sasanian period, one which they were still playing when the Arabs arrived, as the literary sources attest. Rika Gyselen 13 rue du Fond Garant 91440 Bures-sur-Yvette France [email protected]

References Christensen, A. 1944. L’Iran sous les Sassanides. Copenhagen. Gignoux, P. 1986. Noms propres sassanides en moyenperse épigraphique. Iranisches Personennamenbuch, II. Mitteliranische Personennamen. Vienna.

Notes 1 For the inscription of Shāpūr I on the Ka‘ba of Zarathustra (given in shortened version hereafter as ŠKZ), see Huyse 1999; for the one of Narseh at Paikuli (hereafter shortened to NPi) see Skjævoe & Humbach 1983.

109

RIKA GYSELEN Internazionale sul tema ‘La Persia nel Medioevo’. Rome. Huyse, P. 1999. Die dreisprachige Inschrift Šābuhrs I an der Ka‘ba-i Zardušt (ŠKZ). Corpus Inscriptionum Iranicarum III/i. London. Khurshudian, E. 1998. Die parthischen und sasanidischen Verwaltungsinstitutionen. 3. Jh. v. Chr. - 7. Jh. n. Chr. Jerewan. Nöldeke, T. 1973. Geschichte der Perser und Araber zur Zeit der Sasaniden. Aus der arabischen Chronik des Tabari übersetzt und mit ausführlichen Erläuterungen und Ergänzungen versehn. Leiden.[Reprint of 1879 edition]. Skjævoe, P.O., Humbach, H. 1983. The Sassanian Inscription of Paikuli. Part 3.1 & 3.2. Wiesbaden.

Gyselen, R. 2001a. The Four Generals of the Sasanian Empire: Some Sigillographic Evidence. Conferenze IsMEO 14. Rome. Gyselen, R. 2001b. Lorsque l’archéologie rencontre la tradition littéraire: les titres des chefs d’armée de l’Iran sassanide. Comptes rendus de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres. Paris. Gyselen, R. Forthcoming. Two seals of the Sasanian Dunbāwand-Wismagān. In E. Olijdam and R. H. Spoor (eds). Intercultural Relations Between South and Southwest. Studies in Commemoration of E.C.L During-Caspers (1934-1995). BAR International Series. Oxford. Harmatta, J. 1971. The Middle Persian-Chinese Bilingual Inscription from Hsian and the Chinese-Sasanian Relations. Pages 363-76 in Atti del Convegno

110

THE GREAT FAMILIES IN THE SASANIAN EMPIRE: SOME SIGILLOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE Figures

Figure 1: Bulla. A. Saeedi collection, London. Impression, 25.8 x 25.5 mm, of a cabochon. Winged horse to the right. In the field, at 10 o’clock, an eight-pointed star. Pahlavi inscription in lapidary script from 5 o’clock to 8 o’clock: plh’t ZY k’lny ZY phlswb, i.e. frahād ī kārin ī pahlaw “Frahād, Kārin, Parthian”. Photograph by the author. Scale 1.8: 1.

Figure 2: Bulla. A. Saeedi collection, London. Impression, 25.8 x 25.5 mm, of a cabochon. Rider (clibanarius type) to the right. Pahlavi inscription in lapidary script on two lines: 1. d’tbwlcmtly ZY ’[s]ppty ZY p’hlwby W hwytk’whlmzdy LB[A], 2. ’yl’n kwst' ZY hwl’s’n sp’hpty, and in cursive script on a third line: 3. ’pzwn' (?), i.e. dād burz mihr ī aspbed ī pāhlaw ud hujadag ohrmazd wuzurg ērān kust ī xwarāsān spāhbed // abzōn (?) “Dād-Burz-Mihr, Parthian aspbed and (having the honorary title) “well-omened (is) Ohrmazd”, grandee, Ērān-spāhbed of the side of the east”. “Prosperity!”. Photograph by the author. Scale 2:1.

111

RIKA GYSELEN

Figure 3: Bulla. A. Saeedi collection, London. Impression, 41.2 x 34.8 mm, of a cabochon. Rider (clibanarius type) to the right. Pahlavi inscription in lapidary script, on two lines: 1. sydhwshy ZY mtl’n shtl’[s]ppty W hwytkhwslwdy L[BAy ’yl’n], 2. kwsty ZY ’twlp’tk’n sp’hpty, i.e. sēdōsh ī mihrān shahr-aspbed ud hujadag-husrō wu[zurg ērān] kust ī Ādurbādagān spāhbed “Sēd-ōsh, (of the) Mihrān (family), aspbed of the empire and (having the honorary title) “wellomened (is) Khusrō”, grandee, Ērān-spāhbed of the side of the north”. Photograph by the author. Scale 2:1

Figure 4: Bulla. A. Saeedi collection, London. Impression, 40 x 33.5 mm, of a cabochon. Rider (clibanarius type) to the right. Pahlavi inscription in lapidary script, on two lines: 1. gwlgwny ZY mtl’ny ..... W hwytkhwslwdy L[BAy], 2. ’yl’n kwsty ZY ’twlp’tk’n sp’hpty, i.e. gōrgōn ī mihrān ..... ud hujadag-husrō wuzurg ērān kust ī Ādurbādagān spāhbed, “Gōrgōn, (of the) Mihrān (family), ... and (having the honorary title) “well-omened (is) Khusrō”, grandee, Ērānspāhbed of the side of the north”. Photograph by the author. Scale 2:1.

112

THE GREAT FAMILIES IN THE SASANIAN EMPIRE: SOME SIGILLOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE

Figure 5: Bulla. A. Saeedi collection, London. Impression, 41.5 x 35.7 mm, of a cabochon. Rider (clibanarius type) to the right. Pahlavi inscription in lapidary script, on two lines: 1. pylky ZY shtlwl’c W hwytkhwslwdy L[BA] ’yl’n kwsty [ZY, 2. nymlwcy] sp’hpty and on a third line: 3. mtr’n, i.e. pirag ī shahrwarāz ud hujadag-husrō wuzurg ērān kust ī nēmrōz spāhbed // mihrān “Pīrag, “boar of the empire” and (with the honorary title of) “well-omened (is) Khusrō”, grandee, Ērān-spāhbed of the side of the south”, “(of the) Mihrān (family)”. Photograph by the author. Scale 2:1.

Figure 6: Bulla. A. Saeedi collection, London. Impression, 29.2 x 26 mm, of a cabochon. Boar to the right. Pahlavi inscription in cursive script, from 4 o’clock to 2 o’clock: plhw, i.e. farrokh, and in lapidary script, from 1 o’clock to 8 o’clock: pylwc ZY wl’c, i.e. pērōz ī warāz “Farrokh Pērōz ī Warāz” or “Pērōz ī Warāz, blessed”. Photograph by the author. Scale 2:1.

113

‘Dionysiac’ Iconographic Themes in the Context of Sasanian Religious Architecture Pierfrancesco Callieri In Sasanian architecture, buildings with unequivocal cult functions and showing figural decoration are rare, particularly when considering the many uncertainties which still remain in the definition of religious architecture in ancient Iran (Callieri 1997). For the ProtoSasanian period, if the traditional dating is accepted (Mousavi 1999: 84), the prime example is Kuh-i KhvÁjah, where traces of reliefs in unbaked clay depicting horsemen have been identified at the entrance of the central hall of the chahÁr- tÁq complex north of the great central court (Stein 1928: 912, pl. 466; Kröger 1982: 37, pl. 7; Mousavi 1999: 84). Also at this site is the famous “Painted Gallery”, where, at the east entrance, there was a second relief depicting two standing personages holding a ring in the middle. The gallery is situated immediately below the chahÁr- tÁq complex, in a position suggesting it may have belonged to the latter unless, of course, the entire Kuh-i KhvÁjah complex had a religious function. For the Late-Sasanian period the key evidence is offered by Takht-i SulaimÁn, where fragments of coloured stuccoes belonging to anthropomorphic depictions were actually found right in the central room of the sovereign’s fire temple (room PD) (Kröger 1982: 146-47, pl. 60.3a-b, 4).

complex, the cult aspect is evidently pre-eminent and thus calls for an overall interpretation of all the scenes depicted, particularly the fragments of stucco high reliefs showing naked female figures shown at this conference by Rahbar. However, when the few sites listed above are considered, it becomes necessary to advance a further remark, that in two of the best preserved religious complexes there are evident indicators of an imagery which may best be defined, for the moment, conventionally as ‘Dionysian’. At BÐshÁpÙr, in the mosaics (Ghirshman 1956; Sarfaraz 1974) that adorned the floors of two halls adjacent to the hall now interpreted, on good evidence, as a chahÁr- tÁq, there appear dressed and nude female figures (Fig. 1) and heads with garlands and Dionysian thyrsus (Fig. 2). The walls of this great chahÁr- tÁq were arcaded with niches bordered with stuccoes bearing meanders, acanthus scrolls and flowers. Fragments of stucco reliefs showing animals were also found in this chahÁr- tÁq (Kröger 1982: 195) besides, as yet unpublished, crowned heads (Kröger 1982: 196). Other figural fragments, attributed to the late-Sasanian period, were recovered from the surrounding rooms (Ghirshman 1956: 149 ff., 160 ff.; cf. Keall 1990: 288). When Ghirshman published the only documentation of this evidence of mosaics in an Iranian environment, it appeared to be taken for granted that Dionysian themes should occur in the mosaics of the banqueting halls of the ShÁpÙr I palace (Ghirshman 1956: 179; cf. also Ettinghausen 1972: 8).

Since the 1980s, however, further sites have been added to the list. Apart from the various palace complexes of the Middle- and Late-Sasanian period with rooms probably related to the cult sphere, studied by Kröger (1982) (v. infra), there are two major sites with important figural decoration that have been attributed to cult functions. BÐshÁpÙr, of the Proto-Sasanian period, has mosaics and stuccoes, while HÁjÐÁbÁd, of the Middle-Sasanian period, has paintings and stuccoes. To this scant list Istakhr might be added, where a fragment of a stone relief is preserved portraying part of a nude female figure in profile, identified by Bier (1985) as an image of AnÁhitÁ. If the information supplied by Mas‘ÙdÐ can be credited, that outside the great fire temple of AnÁhitÁ there rose a wall with portrayals of personages, then this site, too, may be an example of figural decoration in a temple environment (Pellat 1862: sec. 1403)

Lukonin first proposed a more searching interpretation of the mosaics which – while taking the traditional approach to the complex as the palace of the Sasanian sovereign – saw the mosaics as connected with a Zoroastrian feast, and in particular the NaurÙz (Lukonin 1968: 183). Almost contemporaneously, von Gall also advanced a different iconographical interpretation of the mosaic subjects, making their Dionysian character particularly evident. The key to this interpretation lay in seeing Dionysus not so much as a god of the theatre and wine, but rather of the Indian triumph – that pompe which the Hellenistic sovereigns had imitated and associated with sovereign cult. Like the rock reliefs of BÐshÁpÙr III, showing a triumph of ShÁpÙr I that is not a military but a symbolic-representation imitating Dionysian pompe, the mosaics were also seen to stress the same theme (von Gall 1971).

The extremely important discovery of BandiyÁn can now be added to the discussion. This site does offer valuable leads with its display of iconographies that are not purely secular, adjacent to a chahÁr- tÁq, much like the other complexes dealt with by Kröger (Rahbar 1998; 1999; in this volume). The possible stratification over time of the various elements to be found there should be borne in mind, as invoked by Azarpay (1997: 196) to account for the apparent contradiction between fire altar, stucco reliefs and terracotta ossuaries. However, this author’s impression is that the overall picture offers us further elements of the new Sasanian architectural typology previously identified by Azarnoush at HÁjÐÁbÁd which is strikingly reminiscent of BandiyÁn from the compositional point of view. Whatever the origin of the

However, the new interpretation of the complex as a Zoroastrian fire temple, advanced by Azarnoush (1989) and shared by Huff (1994: 54), clearly calls for some further explanation. This was not addressed by, for example, Balty’s (1994) otherwise thorough reinterpretation of the mosaics, offered on the occasion of the seminal exhibition in Brussels Splendeur des 115

PIERFRANCESCO CALLIERI order to stress the connection of such silver jugs with the many Zoroastrian feasts (see infra).

Sassanides. In fact, while the catalogue chapter dedicated by Huff to the architecture proposed a new functional interpretation of the complex, Balty’s contribution – possibly through lack of coordination – continued to take the complex as the palace of ShÁpÙr I.

The apparent, and only partial, departure of this imagery from the Zoroastrianism of the texts does not by itself suffice to deny this repertoire its own sacred significance.

What role could such particular imagery have played in a Zoroastrian temple? While the association with banqueting halls hypothesised by Ghirshman raised no problems from the secular viewpoint (although some doubt was cast on interpretation of the motives as pertaining to banquets by Shepherd 1983: 1065), its presence in a fire temple certainly does call for some explanation, given that the iconographic choices of the ancient world were never purely arbitrary.

What is needed, therefore, is an approach based on the images themselves. Through iconographic interpretation in a Panofskian sense, the consistency of such depictions belonging to architectural complexes having a religious function may be assessed. The question, therefore, is how should iconography of a Dionysian nature in a Zoroastrian religious context be understood? Kröger’s volume on Sasanian stuccoes (1982) was a decisive contribution to the problem of interpreting wall and floor depictions in Sasanian architecture. Kröger noted that the stucco decoration is reserved only for some parts of the buildings such as aivÁn openings onto a courtyard and to halls with columns or pillars. The rooms with columns and stucco decoration at Takht-i SulaimÁn belong to the second fire temple and therefore certainly have the cult function mentioned at the beginning of this paper. Having demonstrated this point, Kröger then proceeded to analyse all the contexts which have produced stucco decorations. Evidence was sought to substantiate the hypothesis that if the stucco decoration did not derive from the chahÁr- tÁqs themselves, there was however a close link between halls with stucco decoration and chahar- tÁqs. Kröger has defined the Zoroastrian fire temple as a great cultural and administrative centre where ceremonies and feasts were held. Indeed, he ascribed the stucco figural decorations to the ambit of the numerous Zoroastrian feasts. On the basis of this association he then went on to interpret many of the buildings and places as complexes having, at any rate in part, cult functions.

The interpretative casebook on figural decorations in Sasanian architecture received a further addition of fundamental new evidence in the late 1970s with the excavation of HÁjÐÁbÁd. The authoritative publication is by Azarnoush (1994), who interpreted the complex as being divided into three parts: an official area, a residential area and a cult area. Particularly significant in the cult area for the purposes of interpretation are two rooms: L 104 and L 114. Room L 104 shows a cruciform plan, which Azarnoush compares with that of the great hall of BÐshÁpÙr. Adjacent to L 114, L 104 is the room that contained most of the preserved figural decoration. This decoration is predominantly in stucco and includes nude and draped female figures (Fig. 3), putti with bunches of grapes (Fig. 4), and lions. No such complex depictions are to be found anywhere else in Sasanian art. However, the fragments of a stucco relief portraying a nude female figure under an arched niche, found at Khunj in Southern Fars (Gropp 1970: 186, pl. 88; Kröger 1982: 198-99, pl. 92.1), suggest the existence there also of a building with rich decoration. To these may also be added the recently excavated stucco high reliefs with female figures from BandiyÁn (Rahbar, this volume). Taking the motifs represented at HÁjÐÁbÁd as a whole, the imagery there differs in no way from that of the “Dionysian” world in the broad sense of the term, as previously noted by Gignoux (1995). Also among the fragments retrieved were large tondi with portrait busts of sovereigns, which Azarnoush used to date the complex. One point to note in particular, regardless of the identification and interpretation of the busts, is that they are also present (but not solely) in the same archaeological complex as that of the ‘Dionysian’ images.

Celebration of the seasonal feasts is actually one of the major duties of the Zoroastrian faithful (Mēnôg-i Xrad IV. 5, see Gignoux 1994: 41; Sad Dar, VI. 2). Writing around the year AD 1000, al-BÐrÙnÐ tells us that in the course of the six gÁhÁmbÁrs - the compulsory feasts of the Zoroastrians - the faithful ‘used to assemble for eating and merriment’ (Sachau 1879: 221). Certainly a number of passages in the Zoroastrian literature indicate that entertainment comes among the duties of man (Boyce & Grenet 1991: 341). The presence of Dionysian iconographic themes and motifs within the Zoroastrian cultic buildings mentioned above can also be explained at a more complex interpretative level. For this, it is necessary to consider not only the Hellenistic-Roman world which created these images, but also the Semitic world, nearer to ancient Iran, where such imagery is linked to the ritual banquet and symposium.

The iconographic repertoire of HÁjÐÁbÁd and the BÐshÁpÙr mosaics reveals a marked affinity with an important aspect of Sasanian metalwork, namely the silver jugs. These jugs depict nude or draped female images, often appearing below arches which can be either architectural elements or formed by vine-scrolls, with bunches of grapes and flanking animals (Fig. 5). This iconography has been variously interpreted as secular or cultic (Ettinghausen 1972: 3-10). Either way, these images are in a setting clearly associated with the theme of the symposium. Lukonin spoke significantly of ‘toreutics of the feast cycle’ (Trever & Lukonin 1987: 81-103) in

One particularly significant example is that of Palmyra, where the wealth of iconography regarding banquets is complemented by the inscriptions. Here, banquets are 116

‘DIONYSIAC’ ICONOGRAPHIC THEMES IN THE CONTEXT OF SASANIAN RELIGIOUS ARCHITECTURE sacred repasts for the gods, and for the living and the dead, was probably known in Sasanian Iran and undoubtedly contributed to the rejection of the banqueting scene as a setting for the king of kings’ (Harper 1991: 100). The same reasons accounted also for the disappearance of the horn rhyton shape, so popular in pre-Sasanian Iran (Harper 1991: 100; cf. MelikianChirvani 1991).

termed MRZ’H, marzeha: the term is translated into Greek not only with symposion, but also with thiasos, the latter having an unequivocal connection with the Dionysian feast. It is often difficult to define the function of these Palmyrene banquets, which take the form of both ritual and funeral banquets, with a sense of the prevailing affinity between the two (Tarrier 1995; contra Seyrig 1951: 36-37). Participation in these banquets is attested by tesserae - clay receipts authorising participants to take part in the banquet - and by the lateral halls, adjacent to the temple, as at Bel and Ba’alshamin temples, characterised by masonry benches (Starcky 1949: 62 ff.). Certain divinities of the Semitic pantheon, from Adonis to Eshmoun and Malakbel, show marked Dionysian connotations (Augé & Linant 1986: 529). Interesting portrayals of Dionysus are attested at Palmyra, such as the relief bust with a leafy staff or thyrsus set on the lintel soffit of the temple of Bel (Colledge 1976: 35, fig. 12) or the figure of the reclining god painted in the ‘tomb of Dionysus’ (Colledge 1976: 87, fig. 118). This means, for example, that the Semitic religious observance included a whole ritual sphere connected with other-worldly moments in the cult that - like the Bacchic orgy - drew a mystic relationship between the ritual banquet and the eternal feast, as Cumont had earlier suggested (1942: 421). Moreover, if the ‘god of vegetation and the vine, dispenser of the joys of the table, and at the same time of delirium and ecstasy’ in Greece is associated with the underworld (Gasparri 1986: 414), in the Semitic world, too, the funerary sphere seems to be that in which the presence of Dionysus is prevalent (Cumont 1942: 418; Augé & Linant 1986: 529). The mystes became immortal and took part in what Cumont describes thus: ‘une fête perpétuelle analogue à celles qui réjouissaient les fidèles sur la terre. On célébrait ici des festins où le vin était versé à profusion et où régnait une douce ébriété. Cette ivresse, qui délivrait l'esprit des soucis et donnait l'illusion d'une vie plus heureuse et plus intense, était regardée comme une possession divine et une prélibation des joies d'outre-tombe’ (Cumont 1929: 202-3). The deceased, too, would participate ‘à la gaîté d'un banquet sans fin, où les convives, au son des instruments et des chants, s'enivraient des délices d’un vin inépuisable’ (Cumont 1929: 202-3).

Gyselen (1995) has demonstrated that the only known seal with this iconography does not actually depict a princely banquet. It is a seal conserved in the British Museum (Fig. 6; Bivar 1969: 65-66, CFI, pl. 8, no. inv. 119703) showing a ritual banquet based on bread, meat and wine, which the just man has in the presence of his den, and thus after his death - a funeral banquet or a ritual banquet on the occasion of a “shamanic journey” such as recounted by KartÐr [Kerdir] (Gignoux 1990). The importance of this artefact is evident, attesting as it does to the existence of the ritual, funerary banquet also in Sasanian Iran, although it finds no mention in the Zoroastrian religious texts (cf. Gyselen 1995: 246). It also demonstrates the fact that interpretative hypotheses well-founded on iconographic themes and motives should not be ruled out, even though no reference is found to them in the texts. Therefore, since there is also some evidence pointing to the existence in Iran of ritual and funerary banquets, the presence of busts in the Dionysian context at HÁjÐÁbÁd, which Kröger had already suggested might portray dead ancestors rather than living personages (Kröger 1994: 63), also appears particularly indicative. While the popularity of Dionysus in the Syro-Palestinian region is quite evident, it is not so manifest in the case of Iran. Nevertheless, the fragments of a stone basin displaying Satyrs and Silenus figures from DÐnÁvar, dating to the Seleucid period (von Gall 1971: 195) constitute evidence of note. To this may be added a Hellenistic statuette of Bacchus, said to be from the vicinity of Mashhad, in Khurasan (Warocqué 1916: 2526, no. 34; Cumont 1929: 196); some other Roman objects of Dionysian character said to have been found in Iran (Ettinghausen 1972: 8) and, above all, the Dionysian subjects on the friezes of the ivory rhytons of Old Nysa (Masson & Pugachenkova 1982: 107-24; Chuvin 1991: 26-29). Also of significance is the hymn in Greek in honour of Apollo found at Susa and dated around the first century AD, in which the sun god is identified with Dionysus. This is in accord with a far more ancient tradition (Cumont 1928: 94) corresponding exactly to the image of Bacchus with a radiate crown found in a tomb at Palmyra (Cumont 1928: 96). For the late-Parthian period, the rich and lively stucco decoration of the Qal‘ah-i Yazdigird, which is characterised by a strong Western Classical element, includes a ‘reclining figure who reaches for a bunch of grapes from a vine, flanked by winged youths who sport with the tail and head of a feline creature’, recalling ‘Dionysus, his cupid companions and a panther’ (Keall 1977: 6).

A reminder may be appropriate here of the great importance of banquet scenes in the art of Elymais in the Parthian period, associated with the Greek ‘Totenmahl als sakrales Symposion’ (von Gall 2000: 348); significant indicators over and above the non-Iranian characterisation of the Elymaean people and cults. In ancient Iran banquet scenes are indeed rare. According to Harper such scenes never appear on vessels produced in the Sasanian period (1991: 98, fn. 27). Neither is a banquet ever actually depicted as such in the mosaics of BÐshÁpÙr (v. supra). The scene represented at BandiyÁn therefore has a special interest. The reasons recounted by Harper for the absence of scenes of royal banquets among the Sasanian silver vessels is that the banquets were ‘solemn, even sacred, occasions’: ‘the significance, in non-Zoroastrian lands, of cult meals, myth banquets and 117

PIERFRANCESCO CALLIERI equal value, it matters not which it is, and have it consumed as it is proper; and so be ye discreet from your obedience, most correctly faithful in your speech, most saintly from your sanctity, best ordered in your exercise of power, least strained by oppressions, heart-easy with rejoicings, most merciful of givers, most helpful to the poor, fulfilling most the rituals,…’ (I.4) (Mills 1887: 368-69).

In Sasanian art, depictions of Dionysus are rare (Augé & Linant 1986: 526). According to Lukonin all of these are connected to a second wave of Western influences in which a search for exoticism is prevalent, for example the dish from the Oxus Treasure in the British Museum with the so-called ‘Triumph of Dionysus’ (Ettinghausen 1972: 5, fig. 13; Lukonin 1986: 127, 130; Augé & Linant 1986: 526, no. 127; Chegini & Nikitin 1996: 62; Moussavi Kouhpar & Taylor, this volume). The symptomatic feminisation of the iconographic model, evident on a silver dish in Washington (Ettinghausen 1972: 4, fig. 10; Augé & Linant 1986: 526, no. 128; Gunter & Jett 1992: 121-25), and another one in Moscow (Lukonin 1986: 91, fig. 81), suggested to Augé and Linant the possibility of seeing a sort of ‘avatars féminins de Dionysus’ in the female figures so frequent in the ‘Bacchic’ imagery displayed by metalwork (Augé & Linant 1986: 530).

At the same time, the connection between a Zoroastrian feast and wine is documented by information from Ctesias, referred to in Athenaios (Deipnosoph 10, 45: cf. König 1972: 129) and Eustathios (Ad Odyss 18, 3: cf. König 1972: 164). According to this source, in the Achaemenid period the king was allowed to become drunk on only one day, that of the sacrifice to Mithra, which probably corresponds with the MihragÁn gÁhÁnbÁr (cf. Hanaway 1988: 71). The information of Eustathios stresses the ‘Dionysian’ character of this feast, because on this occasion the king reputedly also danced the Persian dance (‘ote kai to Persikon orkheito’). The fact that the royal banquet of the Iranian kings, with its wine drinking, was celebrated, according to the epic tradition of the ShÁhnÁmah, on the occasion of the NaurÙz, MihragÁn and other Zoroastrian feasts (Melikian-Chirvani 1992: 96 ff.), evidences a remarkable continuity during the centuries.

A fundamental role in the Dionysiac thiasos is held by wine (cf. Ettinghausen 1972: 7). ‘Concerning wine,’ the Mēnôg -i Khrad tells us, ‘it is revealed that good and bad character can be revealed by wine, the goodness of man in his anger and his wisdom in sin’ (XVI, 20-21, see Gignoux 1994: 41). This coincides with references in Herodotus (I, 133) and Strabo about the Persians, who ‘decide the most important things during wine-parties, and deem them trustier than those taken when sober’ (Strabo XV, 3, 20). The Mēnôg-ī Khrad continues with the recommendation to make a moderate use of wine (‘But everybody must be conscious of drinking wine moderately’ (XVI, 36, see Gignoux 1994: 41), together with condemnation of excessive consumption ‘But he who drinks wine immoderately will suffer from many defects’, (XVI, 49, see Gignoux 1994: 41). It has, however, been rightly pointed out that the attitude the texts show towards drunkenness is never particularly severe, going no further than the constant call for moderation that characterises all the Zoroastrianism of the texts (Gignoux 1994: 32) and which is, after all, also to be found in the moderation of the Dionysian orgy in the Roman Age (Cumont 1929: 201; Teodorsson 1999). In particular, drunkenness does not appear among the sins for which the ArdÁ VirÁz NÁmag indicates punishment, nor is immoderate drinking held to constitute a sin in chapter IX of Dēnkard III (Gignoux 1994: 34). Moreover, wine combined with narcotics is the very drink that makes it possible for ArdÁ VirÁz to set out on travel in the afterlife. At the same time, the haoma-wine equation proposed by Cumont (1929: 200) cannot be accepted without due discussion, which is far beyond the scope of this paper, given the sheer size of the bibliography to be taken into consideration (cf. MelikianChirvani 1991: 123; Waldmann 1992: 48).

These hints from the Iranian tradition suggest also that the celebration of feasts, which included wine drinking and music, in halls having floors decorated by mosaics with openly Dionysian motifs, such as those brought to light at Arsameia on the Nymphaios (Waldmann 1992: 48), were not foreign to the Zoroastrian component of the syncretistic cults of Commagene. It is no cause for particular surprise if the doctrine enunciated by the texts of Zoroastrianism makes no explicit reference to the banquet as a deeply sacred rite: suffice it to recall that in Greece itself the esoteric aspect of the Dionysian world was taken to extreme limits. That common religious practice most certainly departed from the normative, “orthodox” character of the texts themselves has been demonstrated by Shaked (1994), and emerges clearly from examination of various other manifestations of the supernatural sphere such as magic, for example. To this we must add a marked time lag between the two series of evidence, matched by a notable evolution in Zoroastrianism itself. It is indicative in this respect that new-Persian poetry links the royal wine party specifically to the Zoroastrian traditions of the Magians, sunnat-i mughÁn according to the poet KhÁqÁnÐ (Melikian-Chirvani 1995: 190-91). It is therefore worthwhile taking a new look at the traditional positions on the religiosity of Sasanian Iran that, until not so long ago, were based solely on the texts. As has been demonstrated by Shaked (1994), who takes other evidence such as magical artefacts as a starting point, one should beware of being misled by the attempts made by the orthodox Zoroastrian clergy, like any other clergy, to repress the longing and aspiration deep within

However, perhaps even more revealing of the importance of the thiasos is the text of the ÀfrinagÁn gÁhÁnbÁr, where performance of the ritual involves ‘taking a piece of sound flesh from a choice beast, with a full flow of milk’ (I.3). In the following paragraph, however, we find added: ‘If ye are able to do this, (well); if ye are unable to do it, ye may take then (a portion) of some liquor of 118

‘DIONYSIAC’ ICONOGRAPHIC THEMES IN THE CONTEXT OF SASANIAN RELIGIOUS ARCHITECTURE Classica ed Orientale. Secondo Supplemento 1971-1994 vol. v. Rome. Chegini, N.N., Nikitin, A.V. 1996. Sasanian Iran – Economy, Society, Arts and Crafts. Pages 35-77 in B.A. Litvinsky (ed.). History of civilizations of Central Asia. Volume III. The crossroads of civilizations: A.D. 250 to 750. Paris. Colledge, M.A.R. 1976. The Art of Palmyra. London. Chuvin, P. 1991. Fêtes grecques sur les rhytons de Nisa. Pages 23-9 in P. Bernard. & F. Grenet (eds). Histoire et cultes de l'Asie Centrale préislamique. Sources écrites et documents archéologiques. Paris. Cumont, F. 1928. Inscriptions grecques de Suse publiées d'après les notes de Bernard Haussollier. Pages 77-98 in Mission de Susiane. Numismatique. Épigrafie grecque. Céramique élamite. Mémoires de la Mission Archéologique de Perse 20. Paris. Cumont, F. 1929. Les religions orientales dans le paganisme romain. Paris. Cumont, F. 1942. Recherches sur le symbolisme funéraire des Romains. Paris. Ettinghausen, R. 1972. From Byzantium to Sasanian Iran and the Islamic World. Three modes of Artistic Influence. Leiden. Gall, H. von. 1971. Die Mosaiken von Bishapur und ihre Beziehung zu den Triumphreliefs des Shapur I. Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran N.S. 4: 193-205. Gall, H. von. 2000. Das parthische Felsheiligtum von Tang-e Sarwak in der Elymais (Khuzestan). Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Iran N.S. 32: 319-59. Gasparri, C. 1986. Dionysos. Pages 414-514 in Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae. III. Zürich/Munich. Ghirshman, R. 1956. Bîchâpour. II. Les mosaïques sassanides. Musée du Louvre-Département des Antiquités Orientales, série archéologique VII. Paris. Ghirshman, R. 1962. Antica Persia. Parti e Sassanidi. Milan. Genito, B., Maresca, G. 2001a. Statuetta di dea (?). Pages 136-38 in Antica Persia. I tesori del Museo Nazionale di Tehran e la ricerca italiana in Iran. Rome. Genito, B., Maresca, G. 2001b. Pannello con putto. Pages 138-39 in Antica Persia. I tesori del Museo Nazionale di Tehran e la ricerca italiana in Iran. Rome. Genito, B., Maresca, G. 2001c. Brocca con danzatrici. Pages 140-41 in Antica Persia. I tesori del Museo Nazionale di Tehran e la ricerca italiana in Iran. Rome. Gignoux, P. 1990. Les inscriptions de Kirdir et sa vision de l’au-delà. Conferenze IsMEO, 2. Rome. Gignoux, P. 1994. Dietary laws in pre-Islamic and postSasanian Iran: a comparative study. Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 17: 16-42. Gignoux, P. 1995. Review of Azarnoush 1994. Studia Iranica 24/1: 147-9.

man to have some part in the sacred. In this process we certainly cannot omit interpretation of the figural evidence, which deserves the utmost attention not only on account of the artistic merits but also – and indeed above all – in consideration of the iconographic and iconological aspects. Pierfrancesco Callieri Dipartimento di storie e metodi per la conservazione dei beni culturali Università degli Studi di Bologna Via degli Ariani 1 48100 Ravenna Italy [email protected] References Primary sources Mills, L.H. (ed.). 1887. The Zend-Avesta. Part III. Sacred Books of the East, 31. Oxford. [Reprint Delhi 1994]. Mēnôg-i Xrad. West, E.W. (ed.).1885. Pahlavi Texts. Part III. Sacred Books of the East, 24. Oxford. [Reprint Delhi 1987]. Pellat, C. (ed.). 1862. Mas‘udi, Les prairies d’or (Murug al-dahab). Paris. Sachau, C.E. (ed.), 1879. Al-Biruni, The Chronology of Ancient Nations. London. [Reprint Frankfurt 1969]. Sad Dar. West, E.W. (ed.).1885. Pahlavi Texts. Part III. Sacred Books of the East, 24. Oxford. [Reprint Delhi 1987]. Secondary sources Augé, C., Linant de Bellefonds, P. 1986. Dionysos (in peripheria orientali). Pages 514-31 in Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae. III. Zürich/Munich. Azarnoush, M. 1989. Sassanian art in eastern Fars: The excavation of a manor house at Hājīābād, DÁrÁb, Iran. Ann Arbor (University Microfilm). Azarnoush, M. 1994. The Sasanian Manor House at Hājīābād, Iran. Monografie di Mesopotamia III. Florence. Azarpay, G. 1997. The Sasanian Complex at Bandian: Palace or Dynastic Shrine. Bulletin of the Asia Institute 11: 193-6. Balty, J. 1994. Les mosaïques. Pages 67-9 in L. Vanden Berghe & B. Overlaet (eds). Splendeur des Sassanides. L'empire perse entre Rome et la Chine [224-642]. Brussels. Bier, C. 1985. Anāhitā in arts. Encyclopaedia Iranica 1. Bivar, A.D.H. 1969. Catalogue of the Western Asiatic Seals in the British Museum. Stamp Seals, II: The Sassanian Dynasty. London. Boyce, M., Grenet, F. 1991. Zoroastrianism under Macedonian and Roman Rule. A History of Zoroastrianism. III. Leiden. Callieri, P. 1997. Tempio: Iran, dai Medi ai Sasanidi. Pages 642-7 in Enciclopedia dell'Arte Antica, 119

PIERFRANCESCO CALLIERI (ed.). Banquets d’Orient. Res Orientales IV. Bures-sur-Yvette. Melikian-Chirvani, A.S. 1995. Rekāb: the Polylobed Wine Boat from Sasanian to Saljuq Times. Pages 187-204 in R. Gyselen (ed.). Au carrefour des religions, mélanges offerts à Philippe Gignoux. Res Orientales VII. Bures-sur-Yvette. Mousavi, M. 1999. Kuh-e Khadjeh. Un complex religieux de l'est iranien. Empires perses d'Alexandre aux Sassanides. Dossiers d'archéologie 243: 81-4. Rahbar, M. 1998. Découverte d’un monument d’époque sassanide à Bandian, Dargaz (Nord Khorassan). Fouilles 1994 et 1995. Studia Iranica 27: 21350. Rahbar, M. 1999. Découverte de panneaux de stucs sassanides. Empires perses d'Alexandre aux Sassanides. Dossiers d'archéologie 243: 62-5. Sarfaraz, A.A. 1974. Ayvān-i musā’īk-i Bishāpūr. Pages 21-6 in F Bagherzadeh (ed.). Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Symposium on Archaeological Research in Iran, Persian section. Tehran. Seyrig, H. 1951. Les repas des morts et le “banquet funèbre” à Palmyre. Annales Archéologiques de Syrie 1: 32-40. Shaked, S. 1994. Dualism in Transformation. Varieties of Religion in Sasanian Iran. School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. Jordan Lectures in Comparative Religion XVI. London. Shepherd, D. 1983. Sasanian Art. Cambridge History of Iran 3/2: 1055-1112. Starcky, J. 1949. Autour d’une dédicace palmyrénienne à Sadrafa et à Du’anat. Syria 26: 43-85. Stein, A. 1928. Innermost Asia. London. Tarrier, D. 1995. Banquets rituels en Palmyrène et en Nabatène. ARAM 7: 165-82. Teodorsson, S.T. 1999. Dionysus Moderated and Calmed. Plutarch on the Convivial Wine. Pages 57-69 in J.G. Montes, M. Sánchez & R.J. Gallé (eds). Dioniso y el vino. Madrid. Trever, K.V., Lukonin, V.G. 1987. Sasanidskoe serebro. Sobranie Gosudarstvennogo Ermitazha. Xudozhestvennaja kul’tura Irana III-VIII vekov. Moscow. Waldmann, H. 1992. Die kommagenischen Bankette. Pages 45-9 in R. Gyselen (ed.). Banquets d’Orient. Res Orientales IV. Bures-sur-Yvette. Warocqué. 1916. Collection Raoul Warocqué: Antiquités égyptiennes, grecques et romaines. Mariemont.

Gropp, G. 1970. Bericht über eine Reise in West und Südiran. Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran N.S. 3: 172-208. Gunter, A.C., Jett, P. 1992. Ancient Iranian Metalwork in the Arthur M. Sackler Gallery and the Freer Gallery of Art. Washington. Gyselen, R. 1995. Une scène de banquet rituel dans la glyptique sassanide. Pages 244-54 in B. G. Fragner et al. (eds). Proceedings of the Second European Conference of Iranian Studies held in Bamberg, 30th September to 4th October 1991. IsIAO, Serie Orientale Roma, LXXIII. Rome. Hanaway, W.L. 1988. Blood and Wine: Sacrifice and Celebration in Manūchihrī’s Wine Poetry. Iran 26: 69-80. Harper, P.O. 1991. Luxury Vessels as Symbolic Images: Parthian and Sassanian Iran and Central Asia. Pages 95-100 in P. Bernard & F. Grenet (eds). Histoire et cultes de l'Asie Centrale préislamique. Sources écrites et documents archéologiques. Paris. Huff, D. 1994. Architecture sassanide. Pages 45-61 in L. Vanden Berghe & B. Overlaet (eds). Splendeur des Sassanides. L'empire perse entre Rome et la Chine [224-642]. Brussels. Keall, E.J. 1977. Qal’eh-i Yazdigird: the Question of its Date. Iran 15: 1-9. Keall, E.J. 1990. Bīšāpūr. Encyclopaedia Iranica 4. König, F.W. 1972. Die Persika des Ktesias von Knidos. Archiv für Orientforschungen, Beiheft 18. Graz. Kröger, J. 1982. Sasanidischer Stuckdekor. Baghdader Forschungen 5. Mainz. Kröger, J. 1994. Décor en stuc. Pages 63-5 in L. Vanden Berghe & B. Overlaet (eds). Splendeur des Sassanides. L'empire perse entre Rome et la Chine [224-642]. Brussels. Lukonin, V. 1968. Persia II. Archaeologia Mundi. Geneva. Lukonin, V. 1986. Kunst des alten Iran. Leipzig. Masson, M.E., G.A. Pugachenkova. 1982. The Parthian Rhytons of Nisa. Monografie di Mesopotamia 1. Florence. Melikian-Chirvani, A.S. 1991. Les taureaux à vin et les cornes à boire de l'Iran islamique. Pages 101-25 in P. Bernard & F. Grenet (eds). Histoire et cultes de l'Asie Centrale préislamique. Sources écrites et documents archéologiques. Paris. Melikian-Chirvani, A.S. 1992. The Iranian bazm in Early Persian Sources. Pages 95-120 in R. Gyselen

120

‘DIONYSIAC’ ICONOGRAPHIC THEMES IN THE CONTEXT OF SASANIAN RELIGIOUS ARCHITECTURE Figures

Figure 1: BÐshÁpÙr: mosaic panel (after Balty 1994: fig. 54).

Figure 2: BÐshÁpÙr: mosaic panel (after Balty 1994: fig. 51).

121

PIERFRANCESCO CALLIERI

Figure 3: Tehran, National Museum of Iran: fragment of stucco decoration from HÁjÐÁbÁd with a draped female figure, inv. no. GM 8681 (after Genito & Maresca 2001a: fig. 153). 122

‘DIONYSIAC’ ICONOGRAPHIC THEMES IN THE CONTEXT OF SASANIAN RELIGIOUS ARCHITECTURE

Figure 4: Tehran, National Museum of Iran: fragment of stucco decoration from HÁjÐÁbÁd with a putto, inv. no. GM 8676 (after Genito & Maresca 2001b: fig. 154).

123

PIERFRANCESCO CALLIERI

Figure 5: Tehran, National Museum of Iran: silver jug, inv. no. 2500 (after Genito & Maresca 2001c: fig. 158).

124

‘DIONYSIAC’ ICONOGRAPHIC THEMES IN THE CONTEXT OF SASANIAN RELIGIOUS ARCHITECTURE

Figure 6: British Museum: Sasanian seal, inv. no. 119703 (after Ghirshman 1962: fig. 297).

125

A Metamorphosis in Sasanian Silverwork: the Triumph of Dionysos? Mehdi Moussavi Kouhpar and Timothy Taylor Introduction

development. That we can nevertheless identify coherency in aspects of the iconographic transformation across these four plates supports the idea that production in any given area-period was fairly stereotypical. Whether the process of stylistic and contentual change over time and space was gradual, or whether historical and ideological events and transformations caused it to be ‘punctuated’ by periods of rapid motif development, semiotic shifts, inversions and innovations, is an issue that will eventually be seen to go beyond the scope of this paper. As a rule of thumb, we might expect stylistic changes to be more gradual, lagging behind potentially rapid contentual changes. If silversmiths were required to express new ideas using well-worn conventions and imagery then we should be able to detect tension or disjunction between what was actually being expressed and the form it took.

The term ‘Sasanian silverwork’ suggests many unresolved questions. Material recognized as Sasanian is distributed through many museum collections worldwide and the vast majority of pieces lack any archaeological provenance, let alone a more detailed stratigraphic context from which any closely-defined production or deposition date might be inferred. Further, it seems clear that, however we may choose to characterize the Sasanian style, it was influential and its products were desirable. Transported far afield, even in antiquity, Sasanian silverwork prompted emulation. The location of discoveries of Sasanian-type or Sasanian-inspired silverwork, such as those from the western Urals region, may provide clues to systematic trade relationships over considerable distances. Finally, there is the question of the origin of the Sasanian style – of the concepts, motifs and techniques which were drawn-upon, synthesized and elaborated to produce a distinctive impression we can still appreciate.

There is no space in this paper to examine the existing scholarship on the four pieces under study here in full detail, but it will be useful to make the general observation that, while previous studies have been sensitive to stylistic nuance and have provided for the most part adequate technical characterizations of the pieces, far less attention has been given to religious and ideological dimensions which, it must be assumed, were significant factors in the choice of motifs and in the overall iconographic expression. It would be fair to say that where attempts to identify mythological or devotional themes have been made, there has been a lack of appreciation of potentially distinctive Iranian components. This is understandable, given the background in Roman and Byzantine art studies of the majority of scholars who have looked at the material. Hellenistic motifs are, of course, clearly present in Parthian art. But their legacy in succeeding Sasanian art is not as straightforward as has been previously assumed. In this paper we propose that indigenous Iranian mythology and, in particular, Zoroastrian concepts, found expression in Sasanian silverwork through a careful manipulation and modification of Greek mythological and divine personae and tableaux. The case study we wish to present here looks at the metamorphosis of the so-called ‘Triumph of Dionysos’ theme.

In this paper we examine the way in which a Hellenistic motif, the ‘Triumph of Dionysos’ was incorporated and then progressively transformed through a series of four, richly detailed iconographic scenes on silver plates. Whilst we cannot date these plates with accuracy, and their region of production can only be generally known, it is clear that we are presented with a chronological sequence and an inter-linked iconographic development. The earliest object is a Parthian-period silver plate now in the British Museum (Fig. 1). The latest object is a provincial Iranian silver plate, possibly from Mazandaran on the south Caspian coast, which manifests a number of early Islamic iconographic conventions (Fig. 2). Somewhere in between, chronologically-speaking, are two plates considered as being Sasanian, one in the Historical Museum in Moscow (Fig. 3) and the other in the Freer Gallery of Art (Fig. 4). These demonstrate points of transformation in a common developmental trajectory. It should be borne in mind throughout the following analysis that we do not subscribe to a view that the identification of specific ‘ateliers’ is possible for the material under study, nor that there is any great likelihood that any combination of the makers of the four pieces had any direct access to each other’s work. As is clear from a number of calculations, the survivorship rate of reusable and valued metal such as silver in the archaeological record is no better than 0.01% (Taylor 1999). That is to say, we can only expect around one in ten-thousand items to have survived from any given koine of production. In these terms, it has to be accepted that the four pieces that we examine here represent more or less random snapshots of a far broader process of iconographic

The Identification of the Theme Let us begin with Dalton’s description of the scene on the British Museum plate, which deserves to be reproduced in full from his The Treasure of the Oxus: ‘Thick silver dish with the triumph of Dionysos in relief. The god is drawn in a car by a figure wearing a long tunic, escorted by a taller figure of a youth with a nimbus, similarly clad but with a mantle, which hangs from his right shoulder. His head is turned backwards toward the god, 127

MEHDI MOUSSAVI KOUHPAR AND TIMOTHY TAYLOR who is seated in a half-recumbent attitude holding out a hemispherical bowl in his right hand and nude but for light drapery on which he sits, part of which is drawn across his loins, while another part covers his legs below the knees. His left elbow appears to rest on the shoulder of a diminutive female figure (Ariadne), seated on the edge of the chariot and draped only over the lower limbs; on the forepart of the chariot a small winged genius stands erect, holding out a vessel with handle as if in the act of pouring. Behind the car moves Herakles with his left leg raised as if running; his up-lifted right hand holds his club over his shoulder. His left arm is partly covered by the lion’s skin. Behind him is a conventional tree, perhaps intended for a vine, the upper part of which bends over, its clusters of fruit or leaves forming a canopy for the head of Dionysos. In the air above, flies a winged genius holding a fishing-rod, the line of which is grasped for support by the other genius standing on the front of the chariot. A third genius kneels behind the wheel. The triumph proceeds upon an exergual line, below which is seen a panther with his head in a wide-mouthed vase, between two conventional plant-forms’ (Dalton 1964: 49-51).

left a small naked figure holds a decorated ewer and a whip; the other end of the whip is held by a flying winged figure above left. To the left of the chariot two female figures move to the left; they wear long sleeved garments and a form of loose trousers and hold scarves over their head or shoulders. In the exergue a panther drinks from a vase. A musician on the left plays a lutelike instrument; the figure on the right plays drums’ (Gunter & Jett 1992: 121). To summarise the above-mentioned studies, it could be said that the researchers suggest that these three pieces are merely imitating western method in form and particularly purport (Ettinghausen 1972: 6). At first sight, these three pieces demonstrate a gradual but considerable evolution in both form and style, so an attempt will be made to investigate them diachronically. The first plate is dated about 200 AD, and according to the evidence could be attributed to the Parthian age. It is the prototype of the scene series and, in itself, a composition displaying a unique amalgam of eastern and western elements. One could argue that the main problem with previous research is ignorance of the meaning and message behind the pictures. We may wonder why Parthian artists tried to depict Dionysos’ triumph on their work. Is it plausible that, in competition with Roman and Greek artists, they wanted to make mere imitations of foreign exemplars without any purpose? Undoubtedly, the Parthians could not compete with Graeco-Roman artists in the creation of a solely western composition. Although the main pattern has been borrowed, as shown on this plate, this is just to provide a primary plan with which to express meaning.

Although, there is, at least, an obvious difference between the main character, depicted on one Parthian and both Sasanian plates, the explanation of them is the same. As the description of the two Sasanian plates says: ‘They present a more complex iconographic theme: the triumph of Dionysos in the company of his followers. In the shade of a richly laden grapevine, the god is seen seated on his chariot where he is joined by his consort Ariadne; his escort consists of two maenads, a satyr, and four putii. The exergue underlines the main theme: two small musicians and a feline (leopard or panther) which is again greedily drinking from a large wine jar’ (Ettinghausen 1972: 5).

It is clear that the Parthians were strongly influenced by Greek civilisation with regard to policy, culture and art (Ghirshman 1954: 266-8). As the plate indicates, the original impact occurred in that period of Iranian history when the entire country, but particularly the court, was under the strong influence of Greek ideas. On Parthian coins not only are there Greek inscriptions, but at least ten kings also labelled themselves philhellene (Ettinghausen 1972: 7). It is obvious that Dionysos has always been presented as a male and the triumph scene is a famous symbolic representation of him. However, on the Parthian plate some other elements have been added which carry other messages. If the artist could design the central character, equated with Dionysos, in feminine form, it is possible that there would be fewer disputes over interpretations.

In another interpretation of the latest Sasanian plate it has been observed: ‘A seated Dionysos appears in the centre in a slightly awkward frontal rendering; he holds a fluted bowl in his right hand and a drapery edge in his left hand. His upper body is nude, drapery covers his legs; he wears a diadem, earrings, and necklace with pendant. Ariadne, nude except for drapery across her lower legs, sits to the right. She too wears a diadem, bracelets, and necklace with pendant. Both figures sit within a rectangular frame enclosed by beaded molding, representing the chariot of Dionysos. A standing Herakles, in profile and three-quarter view, frames the scene on the right; he holds a club and lion skin. Below the rectangular frame, two small winged figures flank an eight-spoked wheel on which the chariot rests. In the upper

The other matter is the presence of Herakles. The question arises of why Parthian and Sasanian artists were interested in depicting Dionysos and Herakles, rather than any other western deity or hero, on their plates. Is there any relationship between Dionysos and Herakles and an Iranian deity and hero, which could provide a reason to depict them on their metalwork? With regard to the Parthian plate, it could be reasoned that the artist attempted to discover a parallel divinity for Dionysos among his goddesses. 128

A METAMORPHOSIS IN SASANIAN SILVERWORK: THE TRIUMPH OF DIONYSOS? When considering the Iranian myths, it is apparent that Anāhitā, as a water and fertility goddess, was widely revered among the ancient Iranians. Temples dedicated to her were constructed throughout the country. ‘The existence of a temple or sanctuary of Anāhitā near Persepolis from the time of the Achaemenid Artaxerxes II to Ardashīr the Sasanian seems attested by a number of sources’ (Frye 1962: 205). The geographical and climatic situation of Iran inevitably affects human culture there (Hinnells 1973: 11), so the presence of the goddess Anāhitā has particular relevance for Iranians. Therefore, the Parthian artist, taking into account his own cultural background along with foreign cultural influences, tried to select those external elements close to his own culture to create a new composition expressing this synthesis. It seems reasonable that such influences should come from a common cultural background. The artist knew that Anāhitā always appeared as a female and Dionysos usually as a male, but he was endeavouring to find common ground between Iranian and western myths.

Myth and religion are central to the study of Sasanian art. According to the historical sources, there was a serious attempt to promote Zoroastrianism by the Sasanians, with all deeds being at the service of religion. Art, as adorning specific equipment, had a significant role to play. Consideration of the Sasanian rock reliefs, which generally contain a religious message, supports this view. In the Sasanian tradition, kings obtained their power from AhurÁ Mazda and with religious support from the Zoroastrian high priests. Therefore kings had to pay particular attention to religious advancement, and had to use all available resources to accomplish this. So metalwork, as a court art, should play a significant role in this connection. In contrast to the Parthian plate, on the two Sasanian plates all the characters are pictured in Iranian style. We should now address the question of the message that this process of change conveys. The identity of the main character, depicted as a youthful female quite different from the Parthian plate, could provide the answer. As mentioned above, to determine the identity of this character it is necessary to refer to the Avesta, where the following description of Anāhitā’s appearance is congruent with the figure on the two Sasanian plates. ‘Yea in truth her arms are a lovely hue, more strong than a horse; fair-adorned is she and charming. With a lovely maiden’s body, very strong, of goodly figure, girded high and standing upright. Nobly born, of brilliant lineage; ankle-high, she weareth foot-gear golden-latcheted and shining. She is clad in costly raiment, richly pleated and all golden. For adornment she hath ear-rings with four corners and all golden. On her lovely throat a necklace she doth wear, the mail full noble, Ardavī Sura Anāhitā. Round her waist she draws a girdle that fair-formed may be her bosom, that well-pleasing be her bosom. On her brow a crown she placeth, Ardavī Sura Anāhitā, eight its parts, its jewels a hundred, fair-formed, like a chariotbody, golden, ribbon-decked, and lovely, swelling forth with curve harmonious. She is clad in beaver garments, Ardavī Sura Anāhitā, of the beaver tribe three hundred’ (adapted from Carnoy 1945: 279). According to this description, it seems the central character on the two Sasanian plates, particularly the later one, is a representation of Anāhitā. It is clear the artist tried to picture her according to the details in the Avesta, in relation to figure, jewels, crown and cloth. It is now pertinent to reconsider the so-called triumph of Dionysos, in order to reach a new interpretation.

Both are deities of fertility and life. Anāhitā is the source of all fertility; purifying the seed of all males, sanctifying the womb of all females and purifying the milk in the mother’s breast (Hinnells 1973: 32). Similarly, Dionysos is the creator of milk, honey and the vine in nature (Lurker 1987: 97). It is possible that, as a symbol of attributes common to both deities, the artist tried to show the pouring of holy water on the heads of a couple, who are standing on the left side. The new image in this scene, of maenads having water poured on their heads, was not previously common and could possibly be used to refute the interpretation that the dancer maenads are shaking because they have seen Dionysos (Lurker 1987: 97). Even though a high proportion of the scene on this plate indicates a western motif, the signal point is the high intelligence and attention to detail of the Parthian artist, who tried to make a logical connection between the constituent images. Although it may be a working prototype of a new composition, which the artist devised according to his culture and mythology, it appears to have been successful. Using foreign artistic influences, the artist created a new primary motif. This attracted the attention of Sasanian artists, who developed the theme into a brilliant manifestation of Iranian culture and myth. As a final comment about this plate, it could be said that the Parthian artist, who was trained in an Iranian cultural milieu, chose some foreign elements to express himself and show that his work acted as an intermediary between western and Sasanian art styles.

Most divinities had a standard form of representation and a cult following based on one of their great or famous deeds or functions, for example the triumph of Dionysos. One would expect a similar situation for Anāhitā, who was a great goddess with many important functions. It is therefore possible to suggest that this scene shows one of her significant or special manifestations. Before a new interpretation of the details can be proposed, it is necessary to consider the most important principle of Zoroastrian religion. Zarathustra based his religion on dualism: ‘At first all divine goodness was comprehended within his person, and plurality and diversity came about

To commence the study of the two Sasanian plates, it is necessary to pose some questions which the ensuing discussion will endeavour to answer. What is the reason for Herakles’ presence in the scene, which belongs solely to Dionysos? Why is the spouse of Dionysos, Ariadne, seated with her back to Dionysos and facing Herakles, and what is the relationship between them in this scene? What is the role of the angels in this scene? What does the wheel under the chariot of Dionysos signify? What is the role of the animal shown at the bottom? 129

MEHDI MOUSSAVI KOUHPAR AND TIMOTHY TAYLOR only because of the existence also of evil divinity - for together with Ahura Mazdā in the beginning, and likewise uncreated, was another being who was opposed to him, the Hostile Spirit, Angra Mainyu [Ahriman]. These two Zoroaster saw with prophetic eye at their original encountering: “Now these two spirits, which are twins, revealed themselves at first in a vision. Their two ways of thinking, speaking and acting were the better and the bad. – Between these two (ways) the wise choose rightly, fools not so…”‘ (adapted from Boyce 1975i: 1923).

figure is interpreted as Anāhitā, what is the relationship between them? To maintain harmony in the scene, it is necessary to discover a parallel for this character in Iranian myth. If it is accepted that this part of the scene contrasts conceptually with the other part as a dualistic idea, we need to clarify what message is conveyed The man appears to be a famous hero. On consideration of the ancient Iranian heroes of the Avesta, it is possible that he could be identified with Keresaspa. This youthful hero, who wore side-locks and carried a club, was one of the great dragon-slaying heroes of ancient Persia. Like Farīdūn, he is not recognised as a god, and so a Zoroastrian cannot pray to him but only offer a sacrifice with a special dedication to him. There were many myths or legends about this great adventurer, but now they only exist in fragmentary form. He is said to have defeated the bloodthirsty golden-heeled monster Gandreva, whose head rose to the sun and whose huge jaws would devour twelve men at once. The battle with this awesome monster is said to have lasted for nine days and nights in the cosmic ocean. Many are the monsters, highwaymen and murderers who fell to Keresaspa. Another example is the giant bird Kamak, who hovered over the earth and whose wingspan was so great that the rain could not fall. Although Keresaspa is revered for his bravery, and though he may be invoked to repel violence by robbers, he will always remain something of a dubious character in the Zoroastrian tradition. He was a brave but ‘devilmay-care’ hero, who lacked respect for fire, the traditional centre of religious life, and had little concern for religion (Hinnells 1973: 46). According to the foregoing description, it could be said that holding the club may be seen as a particular symbol of Keresaspa and the lion skin may appear as another symbol of his deeds, as in his claim to flay the Gandareva from head to foot (Tafazzoli 1379: 107). If it is accepted that this figure might be Keresaspa, the next question that arises concerns the relationship between him and the female figure opposite. To answer that, it is necessary to understand the eventual fate of Keresaspa. In the Avesta it is recorded that: “the seventh country which I, ‘Ahoura Mazda’, created was Va-E-Kereta (now Kabul), wherein the evil-doing Angra Mainyu created the wicked monster ‘Khana-Sa-Eiti’, who, being shrewish, was joined to Keresaspa” (PÙr DÁvÙd 1999: 202). That is, Keresaspa was deceived by the monster Khana-Sa-Eiti into a union with her in Kabul. Subsequently he showed disrespect to the holy fire and became an outcast (AmÙzgar 1374: 57). With regard to the Keresaspa stories mentioned above, it is possible that the artist wanted to depict the famous story of the great hero Keresaspa and Khana-Sa-Eiti, with the moral being that nobody, not even Keresaspa, is safe against the evil-doing Angra Mainyu without a strong belief in, and respect for, AhurÁ Mazda and the symbols of his religion.

According to this viewpoint, if the scene were to be divided in two parts, in front of and behind Anāhitā, it could be surmised that every thing represented at the front is a symbol of good, and at the back of evil. With regard to the important duties of Anāhitā, as mentioned above (PÙr DÁvÙd 1999: 233-4), one could postulate that the pouring of water by a holy angel on the head of the couple in her presence may convey such an association. Probably it implies that a holy and pure marriage cannot happen without the confirmation and spiritual presence of Anāhitā; because of her attributes with regard to procreation, child bearing and suckling. The bowl full of grapes that she holds in her right hand may also be seen as a symbol of fertility. Anāhitā is celebrated in the Avesta as the life-increasing, the herdincreasing, the fold-increasing, who makes prosperity for all countries. All waters continually flow from the source Ardvi Sura Anāhitā , the wet, strong and spotless one. With this huge power and resource, she brings fertility to the fields (Carnoy 1945: 278). Thus it could be said that, by depicting her holding a bowl full of grapes in her right hand, the artist wanted to show a symbol of plenitude. The richly laden grapevine over her head probably has the same symbolism as the bowl. Who is the nude and seated woman beside Anāhitā? At first it may appear that she is a devotee who serves in the temple. This image may concur with the report of the Greek historian Strabo who reported that daughters of noble families were required to practice sacred prostitution at her shrine before marriage. It is difficult to say whether or not this was practised in Persia. All the religious texts condemn prostitution in the strongest possible terms, but it may be that such condemnations arose precisely because such a practice existed. It would be completely wrong, however, to suggest there was an orgiastic cult around the lady of the waters: ‘for we hear of priestesses who served her taking a vow of chastity’ (Hinnells 1973: 33). Since Anāhitā was a symbol of chastity, and prostitution was reproached in many parts of the Avesta, it is difficult to accept that there were prostitutes around the deity. So who does this female figure represent? The degree of nudity of the two central figures may provide an indication. It appears that the seated woman may be trying to sexually entice the man standing opposite. Now, what is the identity of the standing nude man with curly hair, holding a club in his right hand and a lion skin in left hand? Previous studies consider him to be Herakles. However, if the central

The eight-spoked wheel, flanked by two small-winged figures, under Anāhitā’s throne is considered next. It is difficult to ascertain whether these figures are pushing or pulling the cart: as they are seated opposite each other, the forces they exert would cancel each other out. Since it is clear that the wheel is directly under the middle of the 130

A METAMORPHOSIS IN SASANIAN SILVERWORK: THE TRIUMPH OF DIONYSOS? rectangular throne, according to the principle of dualism these figures could be representatives of good and evil, counterbalancing both the world and each other.

could be said that the main aim of the Parthian artist in using the Dionysos figure was to have an image of Anāhitā.

In the exergue a feline (leopard or panther), flanked by two small musicians, drinks from a large wine jar. This scene is open to two interpretations. Firstly, that the artist, when designing this section, wanted to show a symbol of the underworld. In this scenario, the animal drinking wine from a large jar may represent the destructive monster created by Angra Mainyu. This monster was reputed to roar occasionally and upset the balance of the world. Secondly, this scene could symbolise a being which is the cause of earthquakes, because in the Zoroastrian ideal every evil and good phenomenon in nature has a symbol.

Anāhitā, who appears on the two Sasanian plates, particularly the second one, is a manifestation of iconography introduced from the Avesta, as is the other character, Keresaspa. In conclusion, it seems impossible to fully understand the plates discussed in this paper by reference to any single and coherent mythological scheme; the basic iconography afforded a type of semantic slippage that was itself reflexive in terms of the stories then told around the images. Mehdi Moussavi Kouhpar Department of Archaeology Faculty of Humanities Tarbiat Modares University P.O. Box 14115-139 Tehran Iran [email protected]

The presence of two musicians, one on either side of the animal, could indicate an ancient tradition whereby, whenever a natural event like an earthquake, solar or lunar eclipse occurred, people took to the streets to beat a drum until the event ended. Alternatively, it could be postulated that the two musicians are trying to amuse the animal in order to distract it from wine drinking. Possibly a drunken monster was thought to be the cause of the evil events mentioned above.

Timothy Taylor Department of Archaeological Sciences University of Bradford Bradford BD7 1DP UK [email protected]

There are also other ideas about this part of scene. The Avesta states that Anāhitā is clad in beaver garments (Carnoy 1945: 279). The spots on the animal’s skin are quite similar to those on Anāhitā’s garments. Taking into account this description in the Avesta of Anāhitā’s clothing, one could suggest that the artist wanted to show that the animal’s skin was suitable for her apparel. Possibly, the two musicians are trying to amuse the animal before capturing it to flay its skin and make a garment for Anāhitā.

References ÀmÙzgar , Z. 1374. TÁrÐkh-i asaÔÐr-yi Irān. Tehran. Boyce, M. 1975. A History of Zoroastrianism. Leiden. Carnoy, A. J. 1945. Mythology of All Races. VI. Iranian. New York. Dalton, O.M. 1964. The Treasure of the Oxus. London. Ettinghausen, R. 1972. From Byzantium to Sasanian Iran and the Islamic World: three modes of artistic influence. Leiden. Frye, R. 1962. The Heritage of Persia. London. Ghirshman, R. 1954. Iran from the Earliest Times to the Islamic Conquest. Penguin. Gunter, A.C., Jett, P. 1992. Ancient Iranian Metalwork in the Arthur M. Sackler Gallery and the Freer Gallery of Art. Washington. Hinnells, J.R. 1973. Persian Mythology. London. Lurker, M. 1987 Dictionary of gods and goddesses, devils and demons. London. PÙr DÁvÙd, E. 1999. YashthÁ. Tehran. TafaÛÛulÐ, A. 1379. MÐnÙ-yi khrad. Translation and commentary, edited by JÁlih ÀmÙzgar. Tehran. Taylor, T. 1999. Envaluing metal: theorizing the Eneolithic ‘hiatus’. Pages 22-32 in S. Young, A.M. Pollard, P. Budd & R.A. Ixer (eds). Metals in Antiquity. Oxford.

Conclusion In summary, it may be argued that the composition and style of these three plates underwent a gradual temporal evolution from the Parthian to the Sasanian period. In the beginning, the artist was looking to construct a template. It would appear that the triumph of Dionysos was considered not as a mere imitation but as an anchor for his own imagination. Thus, he envisaged Anāhitā in the form of Dionysos and Keresaspa in the role of Herakles, together with some other elements. These are two angels or winged figures, two musicians and one animal drinking from a jar. Although the style is an imitation of Roman art, it is impossible to say whether the meaning remained constant; civilizations are bound to influence one another but when mythical characters appear in the art of other nations it does not necessarily mean that their mythical functions remain the same. In this scene, by changing the main character into a feminised form, it

131

MEHDI MOUSSAVI KOUHPAR AND TIMOTHY TAYLOR

Figure 1: Parthian/Sasanian plate in the British Museum.

132

A METAMORPHOSIS IN SASANIAN SILVERWORK: THE TRIUMPH OF DIONYSOS?

Figure 2: Post-Sasanian plate found in Mazandaran.

133

MEHDI MOUSSAVI KOUHPAR AND TIMOTHY TAYLOR

Figure 3: Sasanian plate in the Historical Museum, Moscow.

134

A METAMORPHOSIS IN SASANIAN SILVERWORK: THE TRIUMPH OF DIONYSOS?

Figure 4: Sasanian plate in the Freer Gallery.

135

MEHDI MOUSSAVI KOUHPAR AND TIMOTHY TAYLOR

136

Royal and Religious Symbols on Early Sasanian Coins Vesta Sarkhosh Curtis Achaemenid and Parthian kings, the Sasanian kings were blessed by AhurÁ MazdÁ/Ohrmazd with the God-Given Glory or Fortune, the Avestan xvarenah/ Old Persian farnah/ Pahlavi xvarrah, New Persian farr (Shahbazi 1980: 37; Wiesehöfer 2001: 192-3). It is described by de Jong (1997: 299) as a “visual substance which is possessed by the gods and accompanies rulers and heroes”.

Introduction Sasanian coins are not only important documents for the study of the economy of this period, but they are also a vital source for the art and iconography of the third to seventh centuries AD. This is particularly the case with coins of the early kings, ArdashÐr I, ShÁpÙr I, Hormizd I, BahrÁm (VarahrÁn) I and II, Narseh and Hormizd II. Despite their small size – they measure on average 2.72.8 cm – these coins are beautifully and very carefully executed. Considering that the Sasanian state was highly centralised, we can assume that the die carvers working on these coins must have followed strict iconographic guidelines set down by the central authority, which is the king and his royal court (Göbl 1962: 9).

In Achaemenid art of the fifth-fourth centuries BC, the farnah or God-Given Fortune/Divine Glory was symbolised by the winged symbol, while the Kingly Fortune was iconographically depicted as a winged human figure (Shahbazi 1980: 121).2 In Parthian art of the first century BC- second century AD, a diadem or ring, the symbol of kingship, is held by a bird behind the king’s head, as for example on the rock relief of Gotarzes II at BÐsitÙn and the relief of Hung-i NaurÙzÐ (College 1977: pl. 15; Vanden Berghe & Schippmann 1985: fig.1, pls 2-3). On the obverse of some Parthian coins of Orodes II (c. 57-38 BC), Phraates IV (c.38-2 BC) and Phraataces (c.2 BC- 4 AD) the diadem is held behind the king’s head, sometimes by a winged Nike, and at other times it is carried in the beak of a bird (Sellwood 1980: 42.1, 50.16, 52.6, 53.3, 57.1). Investiture scenes in the presence of a goddess, resembling the Hellenistic Nike or Tyche, but probably representing an Iranian deity,3 become common on the reverse of Parthian coins from the middle of the first century BC onwards, thus emphasising the importance of divine investiture in royal Parthian art (Sellwood 1980: 48.1, 50.1, 54.169.1, 75.1; Curtis 2004; 2007a: 16; 2007b: 420-422).

The centre of the Sasanian state was the king of kings. On his coins, the early king describes in the legend his religious affiliation as the Mazdayasnian Majesty, mazdayasna bÁy, worshipper of AhurÁ MazdÁ/Ohrmazd, the Lord of Wisdom. He also calls himself the king of kings of Iran- soon this title was extended to Iran and non- Iran - of divine origin, ke chihr az yazdÁn.1 The importance of the association of the king with divinity, as emphasised in the early legends, is best known in Sasanian art from various reliefs, where the king is involved in a divine investiture. He is shown in the presence of AhurÁ MazdÁ, which is god, who presents his chosen ruler with a diadem, a symbol of kingship. The religious iconography of the early coins is completely in tune with the coin legends. As stated by Guitty Azarpay (2000: 68), the art of the early Sasanian period can only be interpreted as a “fusion of royal ideology and religion” and a combination of “religious authority and secular rule”, a familiar concept in the art of the Ancient Near East. Just as the Achaemenid king Darius the Great and his successors describe that they came to power by the favour of AhurÁ MazdÁ, so ShÁpÙr I, for example, describes in his inscription at Ka’ba-yi Zardusht how he had the support of the gods, which helped him conquer many countries (Huyse 1999; Wiesehöfer 2001: 166). The Sasanian king claimed that he originated from the gods, but was not a god himself. Although the Greek term θεός is used by ShÁpÙr in the Greek version of his inscriptions to describe himself, the king was never a god, as there were no royal gods in Zoroastrianism (de Jong 1997: 311). This is also made clear in the different terminology for king and AhurÁ MazdÁ/Ohrmazd in the Pahlavi and Parthian versions of ShÁpÙr’s inscription at Ka’ba-yi Zardusht. Here, the Pahlavi word used for king is bÁy/Majesty, while the word for Ohrmazd is yazd/īzad. It seems that the word used for the Greek version was not an entirely accurate translation of the Pahlavi and Parthian originals (Huyse 1999, i: 22; ii: 2; Wiesehöfer 2001: 166). The king was chosen by god and acted as an intermediary between god and man (Choksy 1989: 37). At the same time, like the

The Kushan kings of Bactria showed on the reverse of their coins a variety of Zoroastrian deities, including Pharro, the God-Given Glory/Fortune, whose name is written in Bactrian but in Greek letters (Rosenfield 1967: 96). Some of the Iranian deities on Kushan coins are shown holding a diadem, the symbol of kingship and Divine Glory, in their right hand (Tanabe 1984:35). We have briefly touched upon the close relationship between kingship and religion in pre-Sasanian Iran, but it is with the advent of the Sasanians on the political scene and the appearance of early royal Sasanian art that religious iconography, and in particular a Zoroastrianinfluenced iconography becomes more prominent. In addition, the close link between religion and kingship is made apparent in the religious and historical texts of the Sasanian period. It is also important to bear in mind the religious background of the founders of the Sasanian dynasty, as ArdashÐr, the first Sasanian king, and his father PÁpak, were high priests of the goddess AnÁhitÁ at Stakhr. As Duchesne-Guillemin (1983: 874) has put it, “religion ascends the throne” in the early third century AD. The importance of the Zoroastrian religion, its priests and kingship is stressed in later Pahlavi texts – some of which, as for example the Letter of Tansar, are 137

VESTA SARKHOSH CURTIS supposed to have originated from the reign of ArdashÐr I – and also in early Islamic texts (Duchesne-Guillemin 1983: 876-7; Choksy 1988: 36-42). Phrases such as “Religion and kingship are like two brothers” and “Kingship preserves itself through religion” are attributed by early Islamic sources to ArdashÐr (Choksy 1988: 41) and indeed in the ShÁhnÁmah of Firdausi a reference to the brotherhood of kingship and religion is made in connection with ArdashÐr’s appointment of his son ShÁpÙr as co-regent (ShÁhnÁmah Book III: 559). Coins of the Sasanian kings are one of the important primary sources for the understanding of this close relationship between kingship and religion. They were issued by the king to portray the royal image as that of a king who enjoyed divine protection. He chose a variety of religious symbols which indicated support from divine beings. In this way, the Sasanian king wanted to show that he was the rightful and legitimate ruler. The iconography therefore provides a wealth of information about royal and religious symbolism, which can only be understood from a Zoroastrian perspective, regardless of whether or not the Zoroastrian religion was already the state religion under the first Sasanian kings (DuchesneGuillemin 1983: 877, 879; Schippmann 1990: 90-2; Wiesehöfer 2001: 214). The aim of this paper is to look at some of the symbolism and ask ourselves what messages these symbols conveyed and who they were meant for. Early Sasanian Coins and Symbols The first Sasanian coins were struck in the name of ArdashÐr’s father PÁpak - a local ruler of Fars - and ArdashÐr’s brother, ShÁpÙr, who died prematurely in mysterious circumstances. They show frontal and profile portraits on both obverse and reverse (Hill 1922: pl. XXXV, 4-8, 10-25, pl. XXXVII). When ArdashÐr’s portrait appears on this early type together with that of his father, he only uses the title “king”/shÁh (MLK’), and not the usual later title “king of kings”/shÁhanshÁh (MLK’n MLK’). These coins were probably issued when ArdashÐr was still local ruler of Stakhr (Alram & Gyselen 2003). A gold dinar of ArdashÐr in the British Museum collection has the short title -“king of Iran”- in combination with the portrait of the king wearing a tiara/kulÁh, but instead of another portrait on the reverse, as on coins in the name of PÁpak and ShÁpÙr, we find the motif of fire altar and throne (Fig. 1). This probably indicates that the typical ArdashÐr coin iconography of portrait on obverse and fire altar and throne on reverse was introduced after he succeeded his brother ShÁpÙr to the throne in 205/6 but before he defeated the Parthian king Artabanus IV (Alram 2002: 68, 69, 73; fig. 20). We have to remind ourselves that ArdashÐr’s accession to the throne as the new “king of kings” did not happen swiftly, indeed it took him some years to consolidate his power over the Parthian nobility, as well as over his own family (Wiesehöfer 2001: 171). ArdashÐr’s victory over the Parthian king Artabanus IV at the battle of HormizdgÁn in western Iran in 224 AD and his

consolidation of power as the new king of kings is commemorated in his victorious jousting relief at FÐrÙzÁbÁd (Ghirshman 1962: pls 163-166), but this did not mean an end to Parthian resistance, as there seems to be evidence for coins continuing in Mesopotamia under Artabanus’ brother, Vologeses VI, until 228 AD (Sellwood 1981: 290-296). Despite the political upheavals at the beginning of the Sasanian dynasty and the power struggle to establish himself as “King of Kings of Iran”, ArdashÐr sets an iconographic model for Sasanian coinage: the royal portrait on the obverse and the fire altar on the reverse. The Fire Altar The motif of the fire altar is new compared with coins of the previous Parthian period, although it did appear very occasionally on coins of the first century AD (Wroth 1903: pl. XIII/15, pl. XV/10; Senior 2002: 16-17).4 However, the fire altar was a common feature on coins of the local kings of Persis or FÁrs in the post-Achaemenid period. The local rulers or dynasts of Persis or FÁrs at the beginning of the third century BC, known according to their Aramaic coin legends as the FrÁtarÁka, meaning prefect or governor (Boyce & Grenet 1991: 111), minted coins, silver tetradrachms, with the obverse showing a portrait of the local dynast and the reverse showing a worshipping figure next to a building, perhaps of religious character, or an enthronement scene with the seated king holding a sceptre (Hill 1922: pl. XXVIII/7; Curtis 2007a: 18, fig. 21). This iconography is known to us from reliefs at Persepolis as well as from Achaemenid coins, as for example the Nablus hoard (Meshorer & Qedar 1991: 51, nos 36-38, pl. 3.21; 2007b: 414, fig. 1). From the middle of the second century BC, when Persis was under the control of the Parthians, silver drachms from this region depict on the reverse a scene where a figure holding a barsom in his right hand stands in front of a fire altar (Hill 1922: pl. XXXII/5-22; Curtis 2007a: 22, fig. 26), similar to scenes shown on Achaemenid seals of the fourth century BC (Shahbazi 1980: 134, figs 8-9). The survival of these motifs in Persis suggests strong links with royal Achaemenid art (Shahbazi 1980: 131, 134, figs 8-9; Wiesehöfer 1994: 104). On coins of ArdashÐr I, the royal throne is combined with the Zoroastrian fire altar in an exact replica of the platform throne of Darius at Persepolis, which in itself was inspired by earlier Near Eastern prototypes (Azarpay 1972: 109-10). The lion paws of the Sasanian throne appear exactly like the Achaemenid prototype. The Sasanian takht, like the Achaemenid platform throne, must be seen as a symbol of kingship. The Zoroastrian fire altar is described in the Middle Persian coin legend on the reverse as the fire of ArdashÐr, and together with the royal throne these two symbols stand for ArdashÐr’s kingship and not at this early stage of Sasanian history as an official announcement that Zoroastrianism is the state religion of Sasanian Iran (Pfeiler 1973: 107), as this did not happen until the reign of ShÁpÙr II in the fourth century AD. The Achaemenid-inspired iconography of

138

ROYAL AND RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS ON EARLY SASANIAN COINS the platform throne inevitably raises the question whether the Sasanians were in fact aware of the Achaemenids as an ancient Iranian dynasty or not. It has often been argued that this was not the case and the Sasanians merely linked the ruins of Persepolis and nearby Naqsh-i Rustam with the mythological Kayanid dynasty (Yarshater 1983: 388-391; Roaf 1998: 5). This approach has recently been questioned, as it is possible to show linguistic and structural parallels between Achaemenid and Sasanian royal inscriptions, which indicates that at least the early Sasanians were probably aware of the Achaemenids as an historical dynasty (Shahbazi 2001: 66-67; Daryaee 1380: 10, n. 32, 13-14). For example, Nicholas Sims-Williams has convincingly demonstrated that the recently discovered Rabatak inscription of Kanishka the Great has similarities with the Old Persian version of the inscription of Darius the Great at BÐsitÙn (Sims-Williams & Cribb 1995-6: 83; Huyse 1990: 183, n. 31) and has suggested that most probably at least one Aramaic version of the Achaemenid inscriptions survived into the Sasanian period and that these copies were kept in the royal archives.

ArdashÐr appears on some of his coins with a bejewelled kulÁh or tiara, which is regarded as an imitation of the royal hat of the Parthian king Mithradates II, who ruled in the second century BC. The adoption of the Parthian tiara is usually seen as ArdashÐr’s proclamation that he is the rightful successor to Mithradates II and his vast empire, which stretched from the Euphrates in the West to Bactria in the East. At the same time, a glance at the coins of Persis shows that the Parthian bejewelled tiara, which was first introduced by Mithradates II, was also worn by the kings of Persis in the first century BC, and again from the end of the first century AD to the end of the second century AD (Hill 1922: pl. XXXII/5-20, pl. XXXVI/1-23, pl. XXXVII/12-14; Curtis 2007 a: 14-15, 22, figs. 14-16, 28). It is therefore possible that the inspiration for ArdashÐr’s tiara came from Persis. We should also remember that the tiara was fashionable again in the late Parthian period. The Parthian king Artabanus IV is shown on his coins, on his relief from SÙsÁ and on ArdashÐr’s reliefs at FÐrÙzÁbÁd and Naqsh-i Rustam wearing a tiara (Ghirshman 1962: pls 70, 168; Sellwood 1980: 89.1).

Under ShÁpÙr I the Achaemenid-inspired throne is abandoned – it reappears later under ShÁpÙr II and some other mid-Sasanian rulers – we have instead the fire altar flanked by two figures (Göbl 1962: pl. 2). This composition is known from post-Achaemenid art, as for example on the rock carving at QizqapÁn (Edmonds 1934: pl. 1). Coins of the Sasanian king Hormizd I/Ohrmizd (272-273 AD) show that the two figures on the reverse are holding barsom in their hands (Göbl 1962: pl. 3.38). Under Hormizd II (303-309 AD) a human bust is placed in the flames on the fire altar and remains popular until the reign of BahrÁm V (420-438 AD). The human bust in the fire is generally regarded as the portrait of the king, whose royal fire was burning on the altar (Göbl 1971: 46; Shahbazi 1980: 132). Particularly with coins of BahrÁm V it is clearly visible that the bust in the flames on the reverse wears the crown of the king shown on the obverse. On Kushano-Sasanian coins, on the other hand, the flaming bust on a fire altar depicted the exalted god or Nana/AnÁhitÁ (Cribb 1997: 37-38, 62).

The Crenellated Crown From a religious point of view, the most interesting headgear of ArdashÐr is the crenellated crown, usually associated with AhurÁ MazdÁ/Ohrmazd (e.g. Herzfeld 1938: 109). Such a crown is worn by the Wise Lord on ArdashÐr’s “investiture” reliefs, e.g. at Naqsh-i Rustam, Naqsh-i Rajab and FÐrÙzÁbÁd, where he presents the king with a diadem, the symbol of kingship or Kingly Fortune. The identification of the two mounted figures at Naqsh-i Rustam is secured through the two tri-lingual inscriptions in Middle Persian, Parthian and Greek on the breasts of the horses. The figure on the right wearing a crenellated crown and holding a barsom in his left hand is AhurÁ MazdÁ/Ohrmazd, while the figure on the left is named as ArdashÐr (Luschey 1987: 379; Vanden Berghe & Overlaet 1993: pl. 59: Hinz 1969: pl. 60). It is interesting to note that on all these “investiture” reliefs ArdashÐr and AhurÁ MazdÁ are similarly dressed but have different crowns (Lukonin 1968: 114; Hinz 1969: pls 61-62), and at Naqsh-i Rajab God and King look similar with their long square beards (Hinz 1969: pl. 57). The portrait of AhurÁ MazdÁ with mural crown, long hair and beard, described by Lukonin (1968: 115) as the image idéal, is then used for ArdashÐr’s image on some of his coins (Göbl 1962: pl. 1/14-15). By doing this he was perhaps emphasising his close relationship with AhurÁ MazdÁ and the fact that he was the rightful and chosen possessor of the xvarrah/farr. After all, ArdashÐr is described as the king of kings, whose origin is of the gods (ke chihr az yazdÁn). This “ideal image” continues to play an important role in royal iconography under ArdashÐr’s son ShÁpÙr, who also adopts the crenellated crown of AhurÁ MazdÁ. The similarity between ShÁpÙr and AhurÁ MazdÁ at Naqsh-i Rajab is so strong that it is difficult to distinguish between God and King (Fig. 2). A crenellated crown is also worn by at least one of the so-called attendants on the reverse of ShÁpÙr’s coins, but it is

Crowns The importance of the Sasanian crown as one of the royal Sasanian insignia, has been the subject of many long discussions, notably by scholars such as Ernst Herzfeld (1938: 101-40), Kurt Erdmann (1951: 87-123), Vladimir Lukonin (1970: 106-116; 1979) and Robert Göbl (1959). With the accession to the throne, each Sasanian ruler adopted a new personal crown, with some, like ArdashÐr I, wearing a variety of crowns. The Sasanian crown consisted of several different components, each symbolising divine kingship. These were the diadem, which was tied around the head and ended in two long ribbons or ties, and the korymbos or globe, which appeared like a ball of hair on top of the head (see also Peck 1993: 414) and often had a shorter diadem tied around it. In addition, a variety of divine symbols, such as wings, birds, and also astral signs adorned the crown. 139

VESTA SARKHOSH CURTIS usually not combined with the korymbos, the symbol of kingship.5 The crenellated crown is later also adopted by ShÁpÙr II (309-379 AD) and from the fifth century onwards becomes a main component of the royal Sasanian crown (Göbl 1971: pls 9-15).

takes ten different forms, including a swift bird (Curtis 1993b :13). Verethragna and Cista were the principal companions of Mithra (Gnoli 1989: 510, 512), and Mithra and Verethragna were responsible for looking after the xvÁrenah/xvarrah, the Divine Glory, which was bestowed upon kings by the royal eagle, the Avestan vāreγna (Shahbazi 1980: 138-9; 1984: 314, 316; Curtis 2004).

The Radiate Crown BahrÁm I (273-276 AD), the son of ShÁpÙr I, adopted a sun-rayed crown, the symbol of Mithra, the god of pact and contract, the sun god. This indicates that BahrÁm’s main patron deity may have been Mithra, while the other was probably Verethragna, the god of Victory. The importance of the latter - at least in BahrÁm’s childhood – is firstly indicated by his name (BahrÁm/VarahrÁn), which is the same as Verethragna, and secondly by the two small figures on ArdashÐr I’s relief at Naqsh-i Rajab, which have been identified as the young prince BahrÁm in the presence of a nude Heracles/Verathragan (Hinz 1969: pl. 124; Shahbazi 1989: 515). Judging by BahrÁm’s relief at BÐshÁpÙr (Fig. 3), where the mounted king with radiate crown receives a diadem from AhurÁ MazdÁ, and also BahrÁm’s coins, where both on the obverse and reverse the radiate crown dominates (Fig. 4; Göbl 1971: pl. 3/40-47), one can only assume that upon ascending the royal throne, BahrÁm made Mithra his main patron deity. One of Mithra’s important duties was to look after the Divine Glory, the xvarrah/farr, a task which he shared with Verethragna, the God of Victory and Àdhur or Fire, the son of AhurÁ MazdÁ (Curtis 1993a: 14, 17). It is interesting that on the reverse of coins of Hormizd/Ohrmazd I (270-271 AD), the successor to ShÁpÙr I and a brother of BahrÁm I, Mithra with his radiate crown offers a diadem to the king (Göbl 1971: pl. 3/35-36). Here the radiate crown appears on its own and is not combined with the korymbos, as it is on BahrÁm’s rock relief at BÐshÁpÙr and the obverse of BahrÁm’s coins. The Winged Crown and Bird’s Crown There are two types of crown associated with birds in Sasanian iconography. One is the crown with one or two wings, as seen on coins and reliefs of BahrÁm II, BahrÁm IV, Pêroz and Khusrau II, and the other is the type of royal crown which ends in a bird’s head. The latter is worn by ShÁpÙr I (Fig. 5) and Hormizd/Ohrmazd II (Curtis 2007b: 432, fig.30). BahrÁm II is the first Sasanian ruler who wears a winged crown, the symbol of his patron deity Verethragna (Herzfeld 1938: 101; Erdmann 1951: 97, n. 38). His royal headgear consists of a large korymbos on top of a cap; the latter is decorated with a bird’s plumage and the wings are placed at the back of the cap. The diadem is tied as usual around the cap/crown. The wings most probably symbolise Verethragna or BahrÁm, the god of war and victory, who according to the BahrÁm Yasht or Yasht 14

The Kushan equivalent to the god Verethragna was Orlaγno, who wears a bird crown on the reverse of some Kushan coins (Rosenfield 1967: 95). On the obverse of a gold coin of Kanishka I the sceptre held in the king’s hand ends in a bird’s head, while the name of the god Orlaγno appears on the reverse (Curtis 2007b: 425, fig. 17).6 In the late Parthian art of the city of Hatra a number of royal statues wear an eagle-type headdress which could indicate the importance of Verethragna, the Iranian god of Victory, amongst the worshippers (Safar & Mustafa 1974: pls 6-7, 12, 14-15, 137-139). On coins of BahrÁm II, at least one of the figures on the reverse - the king himself - also wears a winged crown and korymbos. He is sometimes shown receiving a diadem or ring, the symbol of divine kingship, from a figure who wears a bird’s crown. The reverse of the same coins depicts an investiture scene with the king on the left side of the fire altar reaching out for a diadem, which is presented to him by a figure with a female body. The bird’s crown in Sasanian iconography, therefore, is often associated with AnÁhitÁ, the Iranian yazata of fertility and all waters, who was also as one of the bestowers of kingship (Trümpelmann 1971: 176, 184; Göbl 1971: 43; Choksy 1989: 132). She shared this task with the other Zoroastrian divinities, Mithra, Verethregna and Àdhur/Fire. The obverse of coins of this king with triple portrait busts frequently show figures wearing the bird’s cap. This has prompted some scholars to identify the female portrait next to that of BahrÁm II as the goddess AnÁhitÁ. This identification is no longer generally accepted since Lukonin’s (1979: 116) discovery of the name of ShÁpuhrdukhtak, and the title queen of queens, on a coin of BahrÁm II in the State Historical Museum, Moscow. Shahbazi (1983: 255-268) has also successfully demonstrated that not all representations of female figures in Sasanian art and on coins should be seen as the image of the goddess. He has argued convincingly that in cases when the hand of the female figure is covered, as for example in Narseh’s relief at Naqsh-i Rustam (Herrmann 1977: pl. 10), she cannot be identified as a goddess as in the ancient Persian tradition only subordinates to the king had their hands hidden, not divinities or the king himself (Shahbazi 1983: 262-263).7 But at the same time, not all female figures on the reverse of coins of BahrÁm II have their hands hidden. A femalelooking figure with a voluptuous body is often shown offering a diadem with ribbons to the king, who stands on the other side of the fire altar. This is probably the 140

ROYAL AND RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS ON EARLY SASANIAN COINS of a boar and a youth, and a white horse with golden trappings (Curtis 1993b: 13). It is difficult to draw any definite conclusion on the identification of the male youth (Fig. 7): is it a portrayal of the young crown prince, BahrÁm III, or other princes wearing the symbol of Verethragna, their patron deity, or is it a representation of the god himself? Göbl (1952: 133-135) sees here a close link with the multiple busts of Roman emperors and their family members on coins of the third century AD, and therefore suggests a similar interpretation for coins of BahrÁm II. Choksy (1989: 124-126), on the other hand, sees the figure of the Sasanian crown prince only in the portrait of the single male figure facing the king and wearing a simple Median-type hat.

goddess AnÁhitÁ (see also Choksy 1989: 131, 133). Contrary to Shahbazi’s suggestion (1983: 265-6), the female figure offering a diadem to the king does not hide her left hand in a sleeve and the fingers of her left hand are clearly visible (Fig. 6). The obverse of these coins shows a triple bust and the smaller figure on the right facing BahrÁm and his queen, or just BahrÁm on his own, wears a bird’s hat and is shown offering the king a diadem. As Choksy (1989: 127) rightly observed, this figure is similar to the one on the reverse, who offers the king a diadem over the fire altar. We have therefore a representation of AnÁhitÁ, as one of the bestowers of kingship, on both obverse and reverse. The crown of Hormizd/Ohrmazd II (Göbl 1971: pl. 5/8085) shows both wings as well as a bird with a pearl in its beak, combining the symbols of the royal falcon and kingship. This is similar to the earlier Parthian bird known from investiture scenes on coins and reliefs of the first century BC-second/early third centuries AD. A similar bird appears on the crown of young ShÁpÙr, as seen on coins as well as ArdashÐr’s Naqsh-i Rajab relief (Errington and Curtis 2007: 171, fig. 164, 2).

Choksy believes that the iconography of the coins of BahrÁm II must be seen within the concept of Iranian kingship and should not be regarded as his promotion of multiple heirs to the throne in the Roman sense. Regardless of the exact identification of the smaller figure/s, Choksy’s (1989: 135) suggestion that the kings used divine symbols for their own propaganda purposes seems more plausible (also Daryaee 1378: 292-293). Sasanian iconography should be interpreted within an Iranian - and in this context a Zoroastrian - ideology (Curtis 2007b: 413-433). We can only assume that the symbols are those of Verethragna.

Coins of BahrÁm IV (388-399 AD) show a combination crown made up of wings (Verethragna/royal falcon and kingship) and crenellations (AhurÁ MazdÁ) (Göbl 1971: pl. 8/137-141).

Conclusion Fluted Palmette Crowns and Twig Crowns

The question that inevitably springs to mind is who were the religious symbols meant for, the ordinary population or the aristocracy? It is unlikely that the ordinary subjects in the realm of the Sasanian king ever came into close contact with silver coins and certainly never came to see or touch gold coins. The iconography of the more commonly used much smaller copper coins was the same, but because of the very much smaller size of the “small change” it was not easy to identify the messages and symbolism. In view of this it is reasonable to assume that the iconographic messages were really intended for the aristocracy.

These two crown types are worn by Narseh (293-303 AD), and then again later by ShÁpÙr III (383-388 AD). Both symbols are usually associated with the goddess AnÁhitÁ (Göbl 1971: 7), as she is often associated with vegetation and enjoyed a prominent divine position during the rule of Narseh (see Lukonin 1979: 127, 132133). She is specifically referred to by name in the Paikuli inscription. AnÁhitÁ’s special role in Narseh’s successful attempt to overthrow BahrÁm III, has been the reason for the identification of the female figure on Narseh’s rock relief at Naqsh-i Rustam as AnÁhitÁ (Sarre & Herzfeld 1910: 84-88; Erdmann 1951: 98; Göbl 1971: 46). As shown above, this view is no longer universally accepted since Shahbazi demonstrated that the lady, whose hand is concealed by a sleeve, cannot be a goddess. Instead, Narseh is probably sharing the diadem with his wife and queen of queens (Shahbazi 1983: 267268).

We have to consider that it took ArdashÐr I more than twenty years to consolidate his position from his succession to his brother ShÁpÙr in 205/6 AD until the battle of HormizdgÁ in 224 AD, and another four years until 228 AD, when we have evidence for the last Parthian coin in Mesopotamia (Schippmann 1990: 1519). This indicates opposition to the new Sasanian dynasty from the Parthian aristocracy, which is hardly surprising after 400 years of Parthian rule. After the consolidation of power under ArdashÐr I and ShÁpÙr’s accession to the throne, a period of internal unrest caused by a struggle for power seems to have set in. This rivalry is particularly noticeable under ShÁpÙr’s sons and grandson BahrÁm I, Narseh and BahrÁm II and ends with the victory of Narseh over his great nephew BahrÁm III. It is in this political context that the early Sasanian kings used religious symbolism to present themselves as the true possessors of the divine glory and justify their kingship not just to the Parthian aristocracy, and their

The Boar Crown This crown type is also associated with Verethragna, the God of Victory. On coins of BahrÁm II with multiple portraits, both his queen and a smaller figure on the far right are often shown with boar-headed hats (BM 1866-41-54; Malek BahrÁm II- 48; Göbl 1971: pl. 4/63, 64, 68).8 This is again the symbol of Verethragna (Lukonin 1979: 124; Jamzadeh 1989: 514), the God of Victory, as according to Yasht 14, which is dedicated to him, amongst the forms he takes in addition to a bird are that

141

VESTA SARKHOSH CURTIS external enemies, but amongst themselves. The early Sasanian kings continued with the Parthian tradition of divine support for their rule, but instead of the Hellenistic-inspired iconography of the Parthian period, the Sasanian kings used symbols of Zoroastrian divinities for propaganda purposes: AhurÁ MazdÁ and his helpers, the yazata Mithra, AnÁhitÁ, Verethragna – and perhaps also Ashi 9- chose ArdashÐr and his clan to rule over Iran, and symbols such as the vāreγna bird, mural crowns, bird and animal crowns and crowns with vegetation all emphasised the Divine Glory of the victorious godchosen king. The Sasanian king was chosen by AhurÁ MazdÁ and divine beings, but did not regard himself as a divine being.

reign of KavÁd I (488-497, 499-531 AD) and wears the crenellated crown associated with AhurÁ MazdÁ, show the re-occurrence of a small figure facing the king and presenting him with a diadem (cf. coins of BahrÁm II, above). Rather than seeing this small figure as the portrayal of AhurÁ MazdÁ (Göbl 1971: 50, pl. 11/180, 181), he could perhaps be the personification of the Kingly Fortune, who wears the same crown as the king himself. The iconography of coins of JÁmÁsp recalls much earlier propaganda exercises to persuade a certain part of Sasanian society – probably the secular and religious aristocracy - that he is the legitimate owner of the xvarrah. Acknowledgements

ArdashÐr and his father and sons were all closely linked with the AnÁhid temples at Stakhr and enjoyed a special relationship with this goddess. KartÐr, the high priest under BahrÁm II, describes in his inscription at Naqsh-i Rustam his gradual rise to power, how ShÁpÙr made him “absolute and authoritative … in the rites of the gods”, how during the reign of “Hormizd, king of kings” he received “cap and belt” and became “Kerdir the Mobed of Ohrmezd”, and that finally under BahrÁm II he was made “…the Mobed of Ohrmezd”, “…director and authority over the fire of AnÁhid - ArdashÐr and AnÁhid the Lady” in Stakhr (McKenzie 1988: 57-58). He goes on to say that throughout the empire “the rites of Ohrmezd and the gods became more important and the Mazdayasnian religion and magians were greatly honoured” (MacKenzie 1988: 58). This inscription indicates the importance of religion, in particular the Zoroastrian religion and its arch magus KartdÐr, and “the rites of the gods” under the early Sasanian kings. While all Sasanian kings incorporated symbols of Divine-Glory, the varrah/farr, each ruler seemed to have his personal patron deity: BahrÁm I and II are closely associated with Verethragna, but Narseh, who finally emerged victorious when he deposed his great-nephew BahrÁm III, emphasised his allegiance to the goddess AnÁhitÁ both in his Paikuli inscription as well as on his crown (Lukonin 1979: 127-128). Religious symbolism and repeated allusions to divine kingship retain their importance throughout the Sasanian period. For example, in the mid Sasanian period, a time of political instability and unrest, symbols of divine kingship are still prominent on coins of the fifth century. Pêroz, whose turbulent reign included a quarrel with his brother Hormizd III and his captivity by the Hephthalite Huns in 469 AD, wears three different types of crown (Curtis 1999: 304-306). The third and final crown type, adopted after his release from captivity, re-introduces the combined symbols of the victorious god Verethragna, and the Divine Glory, the xvarrah, known to us from coins of BahrÁm II, Hormizd II and BahrÁm IV, but absent on Sasanian crowns since then. The victorious wings become once again the emblem of late Sasanian crowns, as seen on coins of Khusrau II (591-628 AD) until the time of Yazdgard III (632-651 AD). Also, coins of JÁmÁsp (497-499 AD), who temporarily interrupts the

This is a revised version of a paper which I gave at Durham in November 2001. It is dedicated to the memory of the late ShÁpÙr Shahbazi, who made several suggestions to my interpretations and helped with a number of references. I am grateful to my colleague Joe Cribb for his encouragement, help and inspiration. Finally, I would like to thank Dr Derek Kennet and Dr Paul Luft for inviting me to the conference. Vesta Sarkhosh Curtis Department of Coins and Medals The British Museum Great Russell Street London WC1B 3DG UK [email protected] Notes 1 The exact translation of this title has been the subject of many discussions, e.g. Sundermann 1988: 338-340 prefers “dessen Natur von den Göttern ist” and Huyse 1999, ii: 2 suggests “vom Samen der Götter”. See also Daryaee 2002: 80 who refers to “whose origin (is) from the gods”. Basically, the royal title emphasises the divine nature and origin of the Sasanian dynasty. 2 For the argument pro and contra of the winged figure as AhurÁ MazdÁ, see Shahbazi 1974: 135-144; 1980 119-147. Also see Lecoq 1984: 301326 and de Jong 1997: 299-301. 3 This is perhaps the image of Ashi, the goddess of Fortune and Wealth, who according to the AshÐ Yasht or Yasht XVIII, is the bestower of the Kingly Fortune (see Boyce 1975: 67-68; Schlerath 1987: 750-751), or perhaps AnÁhitÁ , the goddess of Fertility and all Waters, a bestower of the Divine Glory. I am grateful to Dr Sarah Stewart for drawing my attention to the important position of the divinity AshÐ as one of the early and important Iranian divinities. In the Kushan pantheon Ardoxsho is the goddess of fortune and the consort of Pharro, usually associated with AnÁhitÁ, see Rosenfield 1967: 74-75; Errington et al. 1992: 68, 297. 4 I am grateful to Joe Cribb for pointing out to me the article by Bob Senior. 5 Occasionally, a korymbos may be visible on the reverse, e.g. see BM 1894-5-6-1308. 6 See Göbl 1984: pl.8/29 obverse only. A new die for the reverse with an inscription giving the name of Orlaγno has now been discovered (J.Cribb, personal communication). I am most grateful to my colleague Joe Cribb for bringing this evidence to my attention. The role of Verethragna as a guardian of the Divine Glory and protector of the king has been much underestimated in Iranian iconography- as for example by Soudavar 2003:25-26, 69 and n.175. He claims that “it would be odd for a king to switch his god or goddess protector, especially from Anahita to Verethragna”. The Sasanian kings did not need to switch from one god/goddess to another. At times they needed the protection

142

ROYAL AND RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS ON EARLY SASANIAN COINS and support of all the deities linked with the Divine Glory. Also, I believe that a careful examination of actual coins of BahrÁm II shows that it is not “difficult to ascertain the exact nature of the animal on the finials”. 7 Soudavar 2003: 62-63, 70, 72-73 and n.182 prefers the identification as AnÁhitÁ and dismisses Shahbazi’s interpretation. He does not take into account that family portraits were common in Roman art of the time and, to some extent, could have inspired the iconography of Sasanian reliefs and coins. 8 A silver drachm in the Malek Collection shows the headdress of the small figure made up of boar’s head and wings. This is most unusual. I am grateful to H.M. Malek for allowing me to study his collection of Sasanian coins (Curtis 2007b: 431, fig. 27). Choksy’s reference (1989:132, pl. 10.6) to “a beaver-headed crown” as an attribute of the yazata AnÁhitÁ, is questionable, as the animal on the coin referred to is a boar and not a beaver. The idea of the beaver-headed crown stems from AnÁhitÁ’s description in ÀbÁn Yasht /Yasht V (XXX.129, where she wears a beaver garment). It is difficult to recognise a beaver amongst the animal-headed crowns on coins of BahrÁm II or a crown ending in horse protome 9 For the importance of the Iranian yazata of Fortune, Ashi, see note 3 above, and Curtis 2007b: 429).

References Primary sources Shahnameh. Mohl Edition. Tehran 1369. Secondary sources Alram, M. 2002. The beginning of Sasanian coinage. Bulletin of the Asia Institute N.S. 13/1999: 6776. Alram, M., Gyselen R. 2003. Sylloge Nummorum Sasanidarum 1. Ardashir I – Shapur I. Vienna. Azarpay, G. 1972. Crowns and some royal insignia in early Iran. Iranica Antiqua 9: 108-115. Azarpay, G. 2000. Sasanian art beyond the Persian world. Pages 67-75 in J. Curtis (ed.). Mesopotamia and Iran in the Parthian and Sasanian Periods. Rejection and Revival c. 238BC- AD 642. Proceedings of a Seminar in Memory of Vladimir G. Lukonin. London. Boyce, M. 1975. A History of Zoroastrianism. Leiden. Boyce, M., Grenet F. 1991. A History of Zoroastrianism III. Zoroastrianism under Macedonian and Roman Rule. Leiden. Choksy, J.K. 1988. Sacral kingship in Sasanian Iran. Bulletin of the Asia Institute N.S. 2: 35-52. Choksy, J.K.1989. A Sasanian monarch, his queen, crown prince, and deities: the coinage of Warhram II. American Journal of Numismatics 2nd series 1: 117-135. Colledge, M.A.R. 1977. Parthian Art. London. Cribb, J. 1997. Shiva images on Kushan and KushanoSasanian coins. Pages 11-66 in K. Tanabe, J. Cribb & H. Wang (eds). Studies in Silk Road Coins and Culture. Papers in honour of Professor Ikuo Hirayama on his 65th birthday. Kamakura. Curtis, V.S. 1993a. Parthian and Sasanian Furniture. Pages 233-244 in G. Herrmann (ed.). The Furniture of Western Asia. Ancient and Traditional. Mainz. Curtis, V.S. 1993b. Persian Myths. London. 143

Curtis, V.S. 1999. Some observations on coins of Peroz and Kavad I. Pages 303-312 in M. Alram & E. Klimburg-Salter (eds). Coins, Art and Chronology. Essays on the pre-Islamic History of the Indo-Iranian Borderlands. Vienna. Curtis, V.S. 2004. Investiture. ii The Parthian period. Encyclopaedia Iranica online. Curtis, V.S. 2007a. The Iranian revival in the Parthian period. Pages 7-25 in V.S. Curtis & S. Stewart (eds). The Age of the Parthians. The Idea of Iran vol. 2. London/New York. Curtis, V.S. 2007b. Royal and religious symbols on early Sasanian coins. Pages 413-434 in J. Cribb & G. Herrmann (eds). After Alexander: Central Asia before Islam. London. Daryaee, T. 1378/1999. NigÁhi be bid‘atgerÁyi dar daurayi SÁsÁni. IrÁn-nÁmeh 17/2(Spring): 291-294. Daryaee, T. 1380/2001-2. Memory and history: the construction of the past in late antique Persia. NÁma-yi IrÁn-i bastÁn 1/2: 1-14. Daryaee, T. 2002. The coinage of Queen Boran and its significance for late Sasanian imperial ideology. Bulletin of the Asia Institute N.S. 13/1999: 7782. Duchesne-Guillemin, J. 1983. Zoroastrian Religion. Cambridge History of Iran 3/2: 866-908. Edmonds, C. J. 1934. A Tomb in Kurdistan. Iraq 1: 183192. Erdmann, K. 1951. Die Entwicklung der sasanidischen Krone. Ars Islamica 1,15-16: 87-123. Errington, E., Cribb, J., Claringbull, M. (eds). 1992. The Crossroads of Asia. Cambridge. Errington, E., Curtis, V.S. 2007. From Persepolis to the Punjab. Exploring Ancient Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan. London. Göbl, R. 1952. Sasanidische Münzstudien ii. Römische und sasanidische Büstengruppen. Mitteilungen der Österreichischen Numismatischen Gesellschaft 7/10: 133-135. Göbl, R. 1959. Narse und nicht Bahram III. Numismatische Zeitschrift 78: 5-13. Göbl, R. 1962. Die Münzen der Sasaniden im Königlichen Münzkabinett. The Hague. Göbl, R. 1971. Sasanian Numismatics. Braunschweig. Göbl, R. 1984. System und Chronologie der Münzprägung des Kušanreiches. Vienna Gnoli, G. 1989. Bahram. Encyclopaedia Iranica 3. Ghirshman, R. 1962. Iran parthes et sassanides. Paris. Herrmann, G. 1977. Naqsh-i Rustam 5 and 8. Iranische Denkmäler II Lief. 8. Berlin. Herzfeld, E. 1938. Khusraus II Krone: al-tadj al-kabir. Die Kronen der sasanidischen Könige. Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran 9: 10140. Hill, G.F. 1922. British Museum Catalogue of the Greek Coins of Arabia, Mesopotamia and Persia. London. Hinz, W. 1969. Altiranische Funde und Forschungen. Berlin. Huyse, P. 1990. Noch einmal zu Parallelen zwischen Achämenidenund Sasanideninschriften.

VESTA SARKHOSH CURTIS Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran N.S. 23: 177-83. Huyse, P. 1999. Die dreisprachige Inschrift Šabuhr’s an der Ka’aba-i Zardušt. Corpus Inscriptionum Iranicarum 3. London. Jamzadeh, P. 1989. Bahram II. Representation in Iranian art. Encyclopaedia Iranica 3. Jong, A. de 1997. Traditions of the Magi. Zoroastrianism in Greek and Latin Literature. Leiden/New York. Lecoq, P. 1984. Ahura Mazda ou Xvarnah. Orientalia J.Duchesne-Guillemin emerito oblate. Acta Iranica 23: 301-326. Lukonin, V.G. 1968. Monnaie d’Ardashir I et l’art officiel sassanide. Iranica Antiqua 8: 106-17. Lukonin, V.G.1979. Iran in the third Century. Moscow. Luschey, H. 1987. Ardašir I. ii. Rock Reliefs. Encyclopedia Iranica 2. MacKenzie, D.N. 1988. Kerdir’s inscription. Pages 35-72 in G. Herrmann (ed.). The Sasanian Rock Reliefs at Naqsh-I Rustam 6, The Triumph of Shapur I. Iranische Denkmäler II Iranische Felsreliefs I. Berlin. Meshorer, Y., Qadar, S. 1991. The Coinage of Samaria in the Fourth Century BCE. Jerusalem. Vanden Berghe, L., Overlaet, B. (eds). 1993. Splendeur des Sassanides. L'empire perse entre Rome et la Chine [224-642]. Brussels. Peck. E. 1993. Crown ii. From the Seleucids to the Islamic conquest. Encyclopaedia Iranica 4. Pfeiler, I. 1973. Der Thron der Achaimeniden als Herrschaftssymbol auf sasanidischen Muenzen. Schweizer Muenzblaettter 23/91: 107-10. Roaf, M. 1998. Persepolitan Echoes in Sasanian Architecture. Did the Sasanians attempt to recreate the Achaemenid empire? Pages 1-7 in V.S. Curtis, R. Hillenbrand & J.M. Rogers (eds). The Art and Archaeology of Ancient Persia. London. Rosenfield, J.M. 1967. The Dynastic Art of the Kushans. Berkeley/Los Angeles. Safar, F., Mustafa, M.A. 1974. Hatra, the City of the Sun God. Baghdad. Sarre, F., Herzfeld, E. 1910. Iranische Felsreliefs. Berlin. Schippmann, K. 1990. Grundzüge der Geschichte des sasanidischen Reiches. Darmstadt. Schlerath, B. 1987. Aši. Encyclopaedia Iranica 2. Sellwood, D. 1980. An Introduction to the Coinage of Parthia. London

Senior, B. 2002. Some more rare Indo-Greek and IndoScythic coins. Oriental Numismatic Society Newsletter 172 (Summer): 16-17. Shahbazi, A.S. 1974. An Achaemenid symbol I. A farewell to ‘Fravahr’ and ‘Ahuramazda’. Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran N.S. 7: 135-144 Shahbazi, A.S. 1980. An Achaemenid symbol II. Farnah (God Given) Fortune symbolised. Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran N.S. 13: 119-147. Shahbazi, A.S. 1983. Studies in Sasanian Prosopography. Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran N.S. 16: 255-268. Shahbazi, A.S. 1984. “Vəreγna, the royal falcon,” Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 134: 314-17. Shahbazi, A.S. 1989. Bahram I and II. Encyclopaedia Iranica 3. Shahbazi, A.S. 2001. Early Sasanians’ claim to Achaemenid heritage. NÁma-yi IrÁn-i bastÁn 1/1: 61-73. Sims-Williams, N., Cribb, J. 1995/6. A new Bactrian inscription of Kanishka the Great. Silk Road Art and Archaeology 4: 75-142. Soudavar, A. 2003. The Aura of Kings. Legitimacy and Divine Sanction in Iranian Kingship. Costa Mesa. Sundermann, W. 1988. Kē čihr az yazdān. Zur Titelatur der Sasanidenkönige. Archív Orientální 4/56: 338-340. Tanabe, K. 1984. A study of the Sasanian disk-nimbus: farewell to its xvarnah-theory. Bulletin of the Ancient Orient Museum 6: 29-50. Trümplemann, L. 1971. Shapur mit der Adlerkopfkappe. Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran N.S. 4: 173-185. Vanden Berghe, L., Schippmann, K. 1985 Les relief rupèstres d’Elymaïde (Iran) de l’époque parthe. Ghent. Wiesehöfer, J. 1994. Die dunklen Jahrhunderte der Persis. Zetemata, Monographien zur klassischen Altertumswissenschaft, Heft 90. Munich. Wiesehöfer, J. 2001. Ancient Persia. (Second edition, revised). London. Wroth, W. 1903. Catalogue of the Coins of Parthiain the British Museum. London. Yarshater, E. 1983. Iranian National History. Cambridge History of Iran 3/1: 359-477.

144

ROYAL AND A RELIGIOU US SYMBOLS O ON EARLY SAS SANIAN COINS S Figures

Figure 1: Goold dinar of ArrdashÐr I show wing the Sasannian king on the t obverse annd a Zoroastriian fire altar and a throne onn the reverse. British B Museuum collection.

Figure 2: ShÁpÙr’s relief at a Naqsh-i Raj ajab, near Perrsepolis, show wing the Sasannian king receiiving a diadem m from AhurÁÁ Mazda/Ohrm mizd. Photograaph E. Pendleeton.

145

VESTA SARKHOSH CURTIS

Figure 3: Relief of BahrÁm I at BÐshÁpÙr, southern Iran. Photograph V. S. Curtis.

Figure 4: Obverse of silver drachm of BahrÁm I wearing a radiate crown. British Museum collection.

146

ROYAL AND RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS ON EARLY SASANIAN COINS

Figure 5: ShÁpÙr’s silver drachm showing the king with an eagle crown. British Museum collection.

Figure 6: Silver drachm of BahrÁm II with triple portrait on the obverse and an investiture scene on the reverse. British Museum collection.

Figure 7: Silver drachm of BahrÁm II. British Museum collection.

147

New Perspectives on Sasanian Rock Reliefs Hubertus von Gall Altogether there are 32 Sasanian rock reliefs in Iran with the majority of them, 27, in the province of Fars. Three other samples are located in Kirmanshah, one is in West Azarbaijan and one existed, but is no longer preserved, near Rayy in the province of Teheran (Vanden Berghe 1983; 1993).

last Arsacid king Artabanus or ArdavÁn IV by the first Sasanian ruler ArdashÐr I in 224 AD. This battle relief is divided into three single combat scenes, the relevant one being on the right side depicting ArdashÐr killing his opponent ArdavÁn with his long lance. Though vividly rendered by the flying gallop of the attacking horses, the relief is anything but realistic.

Sasanian rock sculpture can be roughly divided into two categories, the first being of a more conventional character and a second with reliefs bearing features particular to individual rulers. The first group consists of themes continuing through the development of Sasanian art from the beginning to the end of the dynasty. These are: the single combatant on horseback representing military triumph; scenes which are generally called investiture; and group scenes showing the king surrounded by an assembly of courtiers or princes. The second group is defined, as stated above, by representations of a more personal character, which are mostly restricted to only one ruler.

The Sasanian great kings, like their Parthian and Achaemenid predecessors, never took part in the battle personally. Probably the division into three scenes with the shÁhanshÁh to the right, the crown prince in the middle and a page to the left, each overwhelming an opponent of equal rank, reflects the social structure of the Sasanian Empire. Also the large ensigns, nishÁns, on their caparisons appear to stand for institutions and cannot be understood as personal coats of arms (von Gall 1990: 24). It is very important to note that on the relief near FÐrÙzÁbÁd the Parthian horsemen, or rather horses, are all depicted fleeing and none of them opposing the attackers. This scheme can also be seen on other early combat scenes like the relief at Naqsh-i Rustam (NRm V) showing Hormizd II (303-309 AD) in the act of killing an enemy (Herrmann & Howell 1977: 6-9). Here the pose of the defeated tumbling enemy horseman is a close parallel to the falling ArdashÐr IV at FÐrÙzÁbÁd.

Conventional Compositions of Iranian Origin The outstanding themes of Sasanian rock art (Alram 2000: 268-72) are the so-called investiture and the equestrian combat scenes, both introduced by the founder of the dynasty ArdashÐr I (224-241 AD). While both themes were not entirely new, there was greater integration into the dynastic propaganda than before. There is a remarkable difference between Arsacid and Sasanian investiture scenes. Among the Parthian sculptural scenes not a single one shows a divine investiture, but almost all concern the investiture of a local king or vassal by the Arsacid shÁhanshÁh. By contrast, in Sasanian rock art there are few which do not show a divine investiture (Yarshater 1971: 530). Apparently the Sasanian kings in their divine investiture scenes, often combined with the topic of a triumph, aimed principally at demonstrating the legitimacy of being gods themselves (De Waele 1989; Vanden Berghe 1988). This tendency finds its strongest expression on the late reliefs at TÁq-i BustÁn.

This scheme, which can be called the persecution scheme, is replaced towards the end of the fourth century by a composition showing the two combatants in confrontation (von Gall 1990: 89-91). The two superimposed reliefs at Naqsh-i Rustam (NRm VII) show the king above and the crown prince below defeating a mounted enemy whilst another adversary is lying dead on the ground (Fig. 1). The king, who is followed by a standard bearer, is usually, since Sarre 1923 (43 f.), attributed to BahrÁm II (276-293 AD). However, the wings on the headgear do not belong to an ordinary crown, but to a crown-shaped helmet where some kind of visor can still be seen covering the nose. The nearest parallel to such a helmet can be ascertained on the famous ShÁpÙr Cameo in the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris (Fig. 2). Here the Sasanian ruler is also wearing a helmet, in this case with cheek pieces. The scene on the cameo is normally understood as ShÁpÙr I (240-272 AD) taking prisoner the Roman emperor Valerian and at first sight this view seems quite convincing. There are, however, three points which contradict this identification. Firstly, on the indubitable reliefs of ShÁpÙr I this ruler is never shown in equestrian combat; secondly, ShÁpÙr I is usually depicted wearing a crown with crenellations, even in combat scenes; thirdly, ShÁpÙr I is never represented with the striated globes depicted on the Paris cameo. The striated globe as part of the crown does not seem to

Due to space limitations, the theme of the investiture cannot be dealt with in detail here, so the main focus will be on the reliefs showing the military triumph on horseback. The Equestrian Combat To show victory over an enemy or rebel the Iranians used, since Parthian times, the motif of an attacking king defeating an equally mounted and armed adversary in single combat. The oldest monument of this group is the large battle relief (total width 22.40 m) carved into the cliffs of a valley called Tang-i Àb near FÐrÙzÁbÁd in Fars (von Gall 1990, 20-8). This is probably the oldest of all the Sasanian rock reliefs and shows the overthrow of the 149

HUBERTUS VON GALL appear any earlier than on silver plates belonging to ShÁpÙr II (309-379 AD).

AD, but should be understood as a homage to his father ArdashÐr I, who was the founder of the city of DÁrÁbgird (Vanden Berghe 1983: 72; 1993: 83). The event depicted is difficult to determine, but it must have taken place at a time when ShÁpÙr was still co-regent, or for another reason wore the crown of his father.

Thus, the king on the ShÁpÙr Cameo is more likely to be ShÁpÙr II (von Gall 1990: 58). Also the charging horseman with the crown helmet on the upper part of the relief at Naqsh-i Rustam VII (Fig. 1) fits better with those from the fourth century AD, and therefore seems to represent BahrÁm IV (388-399 AD) rather than BahrÁm II.

Though the crown is indeed that of ArdashÐr, the large hair ball on either side is instead datable to the time of ShÁpÙr. It is probable that the relief at DÁrÁbgird is an expression of retrospective thought, which, to a lesser degree, is also recognizable on the other triumph scenes of ShÁpÙr.

The latest of the reliefs with the theme of equestrian combat is most probably Naqsh-i Rustam III, where the two riders are fighting closely, their contours partially overlapping each other (von Gall 1990: 34-6). Therefore, this relief seems to mark the end of this development and it is possible that it dates from the early fifth century, but it is certainly not earlier than the late fourth century.

Though the relief is undoubtedly the oldest of the rock cut triumph reliefs (Fig. 5a) it is obviously a copy of an earlier painted composition, most probably a wallpainting. Only in painting could one have rendered convincingly the depth of the massed heads of the prisoners on the upper right side, which, in the rock cut version, have turned out as real caricatures (von Gall 1990: 99). Contrary to the later triumph scenes, which show a more or less composite character, the relief near DÁrÁbgird is of one design and one composition.

E. Herzfeld, though attributing Naqsh-i Rustam III to the third century, was the first to recognize that, contrary to the first impression, what appears to be a crenellated crown is in fact a three-pointed hat or helmet (Herzfeld 1938: 135-6). Herzfeld’s comparison with the warriors on a Sogdian silver plate (Figs 3 & 4) is quite convincing, but this supports a late dating of the relief (von Gall 1990: 36).

The relief of BÐshÁpÙr II on the south side of the river has a central panel with the riding ShÁpÙr and the three Roman emperors already mentioned (Herrmann et al.1983: 11-27). Valerian is depicted kneeling, arms stretched out; Gordian III is prostrate under ShÁpÙr 's horse and Philip the Arab has his hand laid into that of ShÁpÙr, probably in the act of swearing an oath (von Gall 1990: 58). This central scene (Fig. 5b) is connected with a composition reflecting the Persepolis friezes (Gropp 1971: 48): behind the Great King the army and before him delegates of foreign peoples bringing gifts (von Gall 1998: 52-7).

Individual Compositions and Foreign Motifs The Triumph Reliefs of ShÁpÙr I In the third century, attempts had been made to copy the Roman way of rendering a historical scene. The most Roman in character of all reliefs depicting ShÁpÙr I in a triumph is the large rock cut image at a spring near DÁrÁbgird (width 9.10 m, height 5.54 m) in Southern Fars. Here the Sasanian shÁhanshÁh is depicted on horseback with the Sasanian aristocracy standing on foot behind him. Before him, also on foot, are three Roman emperors recognizable by their laurel wreaths. Above them bareheaded legionaries represent the defeated Roman army. This relief stands at the beginning of a whole series of triumph scenes carved into the rocks of BÐshÁpÙr and Naqsh-i Rustam in order to commemorate the victory of ShÁpÙr I at Edessa in 260 AD (Trümpelmann 1975). An entire Roman army was annihilated there and its commander, the emperor Valerian, taken prisoner. The success at Edessa helped ShÁpÙr to glorify his earlier encounters with the Romans too. In the inscription on the KaÞba-yi Zardusht at Naqsh-i Rustam he claims to have killed the emperor Gordian III and made Philip the Arab his vassal, thus covering a period from 244 to 260 AD.

In BÐshÁpÙr III an almost identical central scene is framed and surrounded by five figural friezes or registers (Herrmann & Howell 1980). On the left half we see the Sasanian cavalry lined up and on the right side a triumphal procession. This pageant is composed of the typical elements of a Greek pompe, that is a Dionysiac triumph, in which large drinking vessels, exotic animals and all kinds of booty were displayed (von Gall 1971: 198-202). The large relief at Naqsh-i Rustam (Figs 6 and 5c) already displays a reduction from the reliefs with many figures, omitting even one of the most prominent Roman opponents, Gordian III, the man prostrate under ShÁpÙr 's horse (Herrmann et al. 1989). On the other hand it is just this relief with its strong statuesque character, which shows best the Roman origin of the composition (Brilliant 1963: 194). The main scene of the triumphant ShÁpÙr, more than the reliefs of BÐshÁpÙr II and III, demonstrates the essential feature of these triumph reliefs, namely that we have to deal with a reversal of the image of the Roman emperor accepting the submission of a provincia capta in the shape of a kneeling figure with

Though neither Valerian, Gordian III nor Philip the Arab seem to be depicted on the relief at DÁrÁbgird, the central composition resembles the later triumph images (von Gall 1990: 36). Therefore the interpretation of Louis Vanden Berghe should be accepted, that the relief at DÁrÁbgird must have been carved after the decisive victory in 260

150

NEW PERSPECTIVES ON SASANIAN ROCK RELIEFS At any rate, it can be seen that the different sculptural programs of the Sasanian rock sculptures were to a great extent dependent on the personalities who stood behind them. This perspective helps one to be more precise in doubtful cases and to rule out, or to ascribe definitely, sculptures which cannot be identified solely by antiquarian details.

raised arms. A well known example is the medallion of Constantius I Caesar (Kent et al.1973: pl. 131 no. 591) being received by the personification of the city of London, Londinium, with a gesture expressing reception as well as submission (Fig. 7). Obviously the Roman pattern was not only adopted for artistic reasons, but also with the afterthought of defeating the emperor with his own image of triumph (Luschey 1968: 34).

Hubertus von Gall Dubrow Srs. 49 14129 Berlin Germany

Finally we find an Iranisation of the Roman motif on the relief of BÐshÁpÙr I (Herrmann et al. 1983: 7-10), where the figure of the kneeling Roman is flanked by two antithetic riders, ShÁpÙr I and AhurÁ MazdÁ, under whose horses two prostrate figures are opposed, probably Gordian III and Ahriman (Fig. 5d). This somewhat unsatisfying attempt to integrate a Roman motif into a Persian composition evidently marks the end of this development. No other attempt was made by Sasanian rulers after ShÁpÙr to reintroduce this, or any other Roman figural group into Sasanian art.

References Alram,

M. 2000. Die Kunst im Sasanidenstaat: Felsreliefs. Pages 268-72 in W. Seipel (ed.). 7000 Jahre persische Kunst. Vienna. Brilliant, R. 1963. Gesture and Rank in Roman Art. Memoirs of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences XIV. New Haven. De Waele, E. 1989. L'Investiture et le Triomphe dans la Thematique de la Sculpture Sassanide. Pages 811-830 in L. De Meyer & E. Haerinck (eds). Archaeologia Iranica et Orientalis. Miscellanea in Honorem Louis Vanden Berghe ii. Leuven. Gall, H. von. 1971. Die Mosaiken von Bishapur und ihre Beziehungen zu den Triumphreliefs des Shapur I.. Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran N.S. 4: 193-205. Gall, H. von 1990. Das Reiterkampfbild in der iranischen und iranisch beeinflufßten Kunst parthischer und sasanidischer Zeit. Teheraner Forschungen VI. Berlin. Gall, H. von 1998. The Representation of Foreign Peoples on the Rock Relief Bishapur II. Pages 52-57 in V. Sarkhosh Curtis, R. Hillenbrand & J. M. Rogers (eds). The Art and Archaeology of Ancient Persia. London. Gropp, G. 1971. Beobachtungen in Persepolis. Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran N.S. 4: 25-48. Herrmann, G. 1970. The Sculptures of Bahram II. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society: 165-171. Herrmann, G., Howell, R. 1977. Naqsh-i Rustam 5 and 8. Iranische Denkmäler II Lief. 8. Berlin. Herrmann, G., Howell, R. 1980. The Sasanian Rock Reliefs at Bishapur: Part I: Bishapur III. Triumph attributed to Shapur I. Iranische Denkmäler II Lief. 9. Berlin. Herrmann, G., Howell, R. 1981. The Sasanian Rock Reliefs at Bishapur: Part 2. Iranische Denkmäler II Lief. 10. Berlin. Herrmann, G., Mackenzie, D.M. & Howell, R. 1983. The Sasanian Rock Reliefs at Bishapur: Part 3. Iranische Denkmäler II Lief. 11. Berlin. Herrmann, G., Mackenzie, D.M. & Howell, R. 1989. The Sasanian Rock Reliefs at Naqsh-i Rustam 6. The Triumph of Shapur I. Iranische Denkmäler II Lief. 13. Berlin.

The Reliefs of BahrÁm II In Sasanian rock sculpture three kings can be distinguished from whom we have a good number of reliefs. These are ArdashÐr I, to whom we have referred at the beginning, and ShÁpÙr I with seven reliefs (apart from the triumph scenes treated above, two more conventional reliefs at Naqsh-e Rajab can be ascribed to him). However, the ruler excelling in the largest number of attributable sculptures is BahrÁm II (276 - 293 AD). Altogether, eight reliefs can be assigned to him. Georgina Herrmann was the first to remark that BahrÁm II was evidently discontented with the conventional themes of the investiture and the triumph on horseback and looked for other ways of representation (Herrmann 1970: 171). He was the first king to reintroduce frontality - at least for the ruler - on the relief of SarÁb BahrÁm (Herrmann et al. 1983: 27-31), whereas on two other reliefs he demonstrates a revival of Achaemenid formulas. Thus, in Sar Mashhad he is depicted killing a lion with his sword (Trümpelmann 1975) and receiving an Arab delegation (Fig. 8) on the relief BÐshÁpÙr IV (Herrmann & Howell 1981: 5-10). The reliefs at Tang-i QandÐl (Fig. 9) and Barm-i Dilak, with their scenes of offering a flower, are unusual. The central figure of the carving at Tang-i QandÐl (Herrmann et al. 1983: 31-6) must be BahrÁm II, according to its relationship with the panels at Barm-i Dilak. However, this king is not represented here with his official crown, but he is wearing a high cap with protruding top, which could be the headgear he wore when he was crown prince. The scene with the presentation of a flower (Shahbazi 1998) or fruit by a princess or queen to the later king BahrÁm II must therefore refer to an event from the time when this ruler was still crown prince. Presumably we have to understand the relief at Tang-i QandÐl as a retrospective and commemorative monument in a sense comparable to that of DÁrÁbgird (see above).

151

HUBERTUS VON GALL Herzfeld, E. 1938. Khusrau Parwez und der Taq i Vastan. Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran 9: 91158. Kent, J.P.C., Overbeck, B., Stylow, A.U., Hirmer, M.& A. 1973. Die Römische Münze. Munich. Luschey, H. 1968. Iran und der Westen von Kyros bis Khosrow. Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran N.S. l: 15-37. Sarre, F. 1923. Die Kunst des alten Persien. Berlin. Shahbazi, A. Shapur. 1998. Studies in Sasanian Prosopography III. Barm-i Dilak: Symbolism of Offering Flowers. Pages 58-66 in V. Sarkhosh Curtis, R. Hillenbrand & J.M. Rogers (eds). The Art and Archaeology of Ancient Persia. London. Trümpelmann, L. 1975. Das sasanidische Felsrelief von Darab. Iranische Denkmäler II Lief. 6. Berlin.

Vanden Berghe, L. 1983. Reliefs Rupestres de l’Iran Ancien. Brussels. Vanden Berghe, L. 1988. Les Scènes d'Investiture sur les Reliefs Rupestres de 1'Iran Ancien: Evolution et Signification. Pages 1511-31 in G. Gnoli & L. Lanciotti (eds). Orientalia Iosephi Tucci Memoriae Dicata iii. Rome. Vanden Berghe, L. 1993. La Sculpture. Pages 71-88 in L. Vanden Berghe & B. Overlaet (eds). Splendeur des Sassanides. L'empire perse entre Rome et la Chine [224-642]. Brussels. Yarshater, E. 1971. Were the Sasanians heirs to the Achaemenids? Pages 517-31 in Atti del Convegno Internazionale sul Tema: La Persia nel Medioevo. Rome.

152

NEW PERSPECTIVES ON SASANIAN ROCK RELIEFS Figures

Figure 1: Naqsh-i Rustam VII. Equestrian combat in two superimposed scenes (photo H. von Gall).

153

HUBERTUS VON GALL

Figure 2: Head of the Persian rider on the ShÁpÙr Cameo in Paris (after von Gall 1990).

154

NEW PERSPECTIVES ON SASANIAN ROCK RELIEFS

Figure 3: Head of the king in Naqsh-i Rustam III (after Herzfeld 1938). 155

HUBERTUS VON GALL

Figure 4: Head of a warrior on the Sogdian silver plate from Kulagysh (after Herzfeld 1938).

156

NEW PERSPECTIVES ON SASANIAN ROCK RELIEFS

Figure 5: Hypothetical chronological sequence of the triumph reliefs of ShÁpÙr I (drawing H. von Gall).

157

HUBERTUS VON GALL

Figure 6: The relief Naqsh-i Rustam VI (photo H. von Gall).

158

NEW PERSPECTIVES ON SASANIAN ROCK RELIEFS

Figure 7: Medallion of Constantinus II. Caesar entering Londinium (London).

159

HUBERTUS VON GALL

Figure 8: BÐshÁpÙr IV: BahrÁm II. receiving an Arab delegation (courtesy Deutsches Archäologisches Institut).

160

NEW PERSPECTIVES ON SASANIAN ROCK RELIEFS

Figure 9: Tang-i QandÐl: Offering of a flower (after Herrmann et al.1983).

161