Iran 03 (1965)

IRAN
Journal of the British Institute of Persian Studies
VOLUME III 1965
CONTENTS
Page
Governing Council . . . . . . . ii
Statement of Aims and Activities . . . . . iii
Director's Report . . . . . . . . . . v
The Mechanics of Ancient Trade in Western Asia, by M. E. L. Mallowan I

Excavations at Pasargadae, Third Preliminary Report, by David Stronach 9
Coin Hoards from Pasargadae, by G. K. Jenkins . . . . 41
A Comparative Ceramic Chronology for Western Iran, 50oo-5oo B.c.,
by T. Cuyler Young, Jr . . . . . . . . 53
Zoroastrian Survivals in Iranian Folklore, by R. C. Zaehner . . 87
The Area ofJijjarm in Western Khurisin, by Brian Spooner 97
Arghiymn.
New Material for the Text of IHjffiz, by R. M. Rehder . . . og
Iranian Dress in the Achaemenian Period, by Georgina Thompson . 12I
Le Vase en or de Hassanlu, by Madame Pouran Diba . . . 127
Publishedannuallyby
THE BRITISH INSTITUTE OF PERSIAN STUDIES
c/o The British Academy, Burlington Gardens, London, W. I
Price: ?2 Ios. od.

NOTES FOR CONTRIBUTORS
TITLES The titles of books and periodicalsshould be printed in italics (in typing, underlined), while
the titles of articles in periodicals should be in Roman letters between quotation marks.
REFERENCES Where references are made, the volume and date of publication of a book should
both be cited in the first reference to it. The number of a volume in a series should be given in
Roman numerals.
ILLUSTRATIONS Only clear glossy prints of photographs or strong outline drawings should be
submitted. Photographs reproduced as half-tones or collotypes will appear as " Plates ", numbered
in capital Roman numerals. All line drawings, including maps, will appear as " Figures ", numbered
consecutively in Arabic numerals throughout each article.
TRANSLITERATION The transliteration into Roman script of names and words in Oriental
languages (other than modern Turkish) should be in accordance with the system employed by learned
bodies such as the Royal Asiatic Society. Modern Turkish names and words should be written in the
current Turkish orthography.
MEMBERSHIP OF THE INSTITUTE
Anyone wishing to join the Institute should write to the Honorary Secretary, J. E. F. Gueritz,
Esq., M.A., 85 Queen's Road, Richmond, Surrey. The annual subscription for Membership of the
Institute is ?1, while the total sum of ?2 Ios. od. entitles the subscriber to receive the Journal.
Application Forms opposite page I32.
IRAN
Journal of the British Institute of Persian Studies
VOLUMEIII 1965
CONTENTS
Page
Governing Council . . . . . . . . . ii
Statement of Aims and Activities . . . . . . . iii
Director's Report . . . . . . . . . . v
The Mechanics of Ancient Trade in Western Asia, by M. E. L. Mallowan I
Excavationsat Pasargadae,Third PreliminaryReport, by David Stronach 9
Coin Hoards from Pasargadae, by G. K. Jenkins . . . . 41
A Comparative Ceramic Chronology for Western Iran, 1500-500 B.c.,
by T. Cuyler Young, Jr . . . . . . . . 53
Zoroastrian Survivals in Iranian Folklore, by R. C. Zaehner . . 87
Arghiyan. The Area ofJajarm in Western Khurasan, by Brian Spooner 97

New Material for the Text of H~fiz, by R. M. Rehder . . . o09
Iranian Dress in the Achaemenian Period, by Georgina Thompson . 121
Le Vase en or de Hassanlu, by Madame Pouran Diba . . . 127
Publishedannuallyby
THE BRITISH INSTITUTE OF PERSIAN STUDIES
c/o The British Academy, Burlington Gardens, London, W.I

BRITISH INSTITUTE OF PERSIAN STUDIES
GOVERNING COUNCIL
President
*Professor M. E. L. MALLOWAN, C.B.E., M.A., D.Lit., F.B.A., F.S.A.
Vice-President
Professor A. J. ARBERRY, M.A., Litt.D., D.Litt., F.B.A.
Members
R. D. BARNETT, Esq., D.Lit., F.B.A., F.S.A.
*Sir MAURICE BOWRA, M.A., D.Litt., Litt.D., LL.D., F.B.A.
J. A. BOYLE, Esq., B.A., Ph.D.
The Hon. Sir PATRICK BROWNE, O.B.E., T.D.
Sir TRENCHARD COX, C.B.E., D.Litt., F.S.A., F.M.A.
ProfessorW. B. FISHER, B.A., D. de l'Univ., F.R.A.I.
Professor C. J. GADD, C.B.E., D.Litt., F.B.A., F.S.A.
BASIL GRAY, Esq., C.B.E.
Professor A. K. S. LAMBTON, O.B.E., D.Lit., Ph.D.
Professor SETON H. F. LLOYD, C.B.E., M.A., F.B.A., F.S.A., A.R.I.B.A.
GERALD R. REITLINGER, Esq., B.Litt.
*Sir MORTIMER WHEELER, C.I.E., M.C., T.D., D.Lit., F.B.A., F.S.A.
Professor R. C. ZAEHNER, M.A.
Hon. Editor
LAURENCE LOCKHART, Esq., Litt.D., Ph.D., F.R.Hist.S.
Hon. Treasurer
Sir JOHN LE ROUGETEL, K.C.M.G., M.C.
Hon. Secretary
JOHN E. F. GUERITZ, Esq., M.A.
OFFICERS IN IRAN
Director
DAVID STRONACH, Esq., M.A., F.S.A.
Assistant Director
BRIAN SPOONER, Esq., B.A.
c/o The BritishAcademy, P.O. Box 2617,

BurlingtonGardens, Tehran,
LONDON, W.I. IRAN.
*DenotesFounderMember
STATEMENT OF AIMS AND ACTIVITIES
I. The Institute has an establishment in Tehran at which British scholars, men of learning versed in
the arts, friends of Iran, may reside and meet their Iranian colleagues in order to discusswith them
subjectsof common interest; the arts, archaeology, history, literature, linguistics, religion, philosophy
and cognate subjects.
2. The Institute provides accommodation for senior scholars and for teachers at British Universities
in order that they may refresh themselves at the source of knowledge from which their teaching
derives. The same service is being rendered to younger students who show promise of developing
interests in Persian studies.
3. The Institute, whilst concerned with Persian culture in the widest sense, is particularly concerned
with the development of archaeological techniques, and seeks the co-operation of Iranian scholars
and students in applying current methods to the resolution of archaeological and historical
problems.
4. Archaeological excavation using modern scientific techniques as ancillary aids is one of the
Institute's primary tasks. These activities, which entail a fresh appraisal of previous discoveries,
have already yielded new historical, architectural, and archaeological evidence which is adding
to our knowledge of the past and of its bearing on the modern world.
5. In pursuit of all the activities mentioned in the preceding paragraphs the Institute is gradually
adding to its library, is collecting learned periodicals, and is publishing a journal, Iran, which
is expected to appear annually. The Institute aims at editing and translating a series of Persian
texts, the first of which, the Humay-Nama,edited by ProfessorA. J. Arberry, has already appeared.
6. The Institute arranges occasional seminars, lectures and conferences and enlists the help of
distinguished scholars for this purpose. It will also aim at arranging small exhibitions with the
object of demonstrating the importance of Persian culture and its attraction for the world of
scholarship.
7. The Institute endeavours to collaborate with universities and educational institutions in Iran
by all the means at its disposal and, when consulted, assists Iranian scholarswith technical advice
for directing them towards the appropriate channels in British universities.
iii
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
June Ist 1963 to May 31st 1964
During the past year the Institute's new premises in Avenue Takht-i-Jamshid have proved an
invaluable asset, providing the necessary space for our expanding library, a suitable hall for lectures,
and sufficientlygenerous accommodation to meet the needs of all those wishing to stay at the Institute.
At the same time, an unusually rewarding season at Pasargadae, where our third campaign culminated
in the discovery of an Achaemenian gold treasure, has helped to draw attention to the varied forms of
field research that are sponsored by the Institute.
Guests
Visiting expeditions and individual scholars have again made very full use of the Institute's hostel
facilities. Those staying at the Institute since June 1963 have included the following:
Mr. Nicholas Jardine King's College, Cambridge. Botanical collecting in Northern
Mr. David Crowther Iran.
Mr. Jonathan Parry King's College, Cambridge. Social anthropological research
Mr. Richard Tapper among the Shah Savan.
Miss S. C. Hayman Girton College, Cambridge. Modern Persian.
Dr. Charles McBurney Cambridge Archaeological Expedition to N.E. Iran.
Mr. and Mrs. K. E. Wilson Cambridge Archaeological Expedition to N.E. Iran.
Mr. T. Ware Cambridge Archaeological Expedition to N.E. Iran.
Mr. John Clegg Cambridge Archaeological Expedition to N.E. Iran.
Mr. David Seddon Cambridge Archaeological Expedition to N.E. Iran.
Mr. Garry Hume Cambridge Archaeological Expedition to N.E. Iran.
Mr. Rhys Jones Cambridge Archaeological Expedition to N.E. Iran.
Mr. Simon Harris Oxford University Soil Survey Expedition to North Iran.
Mr. Hereward Corley Oxford University Soil Survey Expedition to North Iran.
Mr. G. Williams Oxford University Soil Survey Expedition to North Iran.
Mr. Peter Pritchard Oxford University Soil Survey Expedition to North Iran.
Dr. Keith McLachlan Department of Economics and Politics, S.O.A.S., engaged in ten
months research on rural economics.
Mr. R. Pinder Wilson Department of Oriental Antiquities, British Museum, on a four
months study tour.
Mr. Peter Willey Samiran Expedition.
Mr. David Towill Samiran Expedition.
Mr. J. M. Rogers Samiran Expedition.
Mr. C. H. Cooper Samiran Expedition.
Mr. D. A. Parkins Samiran Expedition.
Mr. C. A. Clayton Samiran Expedition.
Mr. Colin Harris Samiran Expedition.
Mr. Gaynor Hagen Samiran Expedition.
Mr. Shaun Gordon Samiran Expedition.
Mr. Hugh Herbert-Burns Oxford Expedition to Girdkuh.
Mr. Nigel Read Oxford Expedition to Girdkuh.
Mr. Nicholas Newman Oxford Expedition to Girdkuh.
Professor R. B. Sergeant Professor of Arabic, S.O.A.S., London University. Passing
through.
V
Dr. Edith Penrose Director of the Department of Economics and Politics, S.O.A.S.
Economic development and oil affairs.
Mr. John Burton-Page Lecturer in Hindi, S.O.A.S. Visiting Islamic monuments.
Dr. Mary Boyce Reader in Persian Studies, S.O.A.S. Study of Zoroastrianreligious
cycle near Yazd.
Mrs. Penelope Betjeman Visit to Isfahan and Shiraz.
Dr. J. A. Boyle Lecturer in Persian, University of Manchester. Passing through.
Mr. and Mrs. P. Hulin Cuneiform epigraphical enquiries.
Mr. R. M. Rehder Persian studies.
Dr. Hans Helbaek Field study of plant remains from Ali Kosh and Tepe Sabz,
Dehloran, Khuzistan.
Mr. John Carswell Associate Professorof Art, American University of Beirut. Study
of tilework in Julfa, Isfahan.
Mr. W. G. Lambert Lecturer in Akkadian, Johns Hopkins University. Visit to
museums.
Professorand Mrs. G. Redard Atlas of Iranian Languages.
Mr. R. L. Raikes Hydrological studies at Mohenjodaro. Passing through.
Dr. A. P. Treweek Reader in Classics, University of Sydney. Visiting museums and
monuments.
Rear-Admiral and Mrs. Plant collecting in Iran and Afghanistan.
Paul Furse
Dr. Eric Sunderland Lecturer in Social Anthropology, Durham University, engaged
in anthropological research near Yazd.
Miss Judith Travers Research Student from the Department of Geography, Durham
University, engaged in six months anthropological research near
Yazd and Jajarm.
Dr. and Mrs. Geza Feherviri S.O.A.S. Visiting Islamic monuments.
Dr. C. E. Bosworth Lecturer in Arabic at St. Andrews University. Historical research
in Iran and Afghanistan.
Professorand Mrs. Visiting museums and historical monuments.
Francis Wormald
Mr. David Darwent Research Student from the Department of Geography, Durham
University, engaged in a Study of Urban Development in Meshed.
Dr. Marion Bowley Reader in Economics at University College, London. Visiting
projects of economic interest.
Mrs. M. S. Drower Senior Lecturer in Archaeology at University College, London.
On study leave, visiting archaeological sites.
Visitors
Among many other visitorsto the Institute during this same period, we were very pleased to welcome
Professor K. Barr, Professorand Mrs. A. Bausani, Mr. R. Curiel, ProfessorJ. Deshayes, Mr. L. P.
Elwell-Sutton, Dr. E. Ettinghausen, Dr. N. R. Keddie, ProfessorA. K. S. Lambton, Professor G.
Lazard, Dr. W. Leslau, and Professor and Mrs. S. Weinberg.
Lectures
On June 29th, in a lecture introduced by Dr. Hafez Farmanfarmaian, Director of the Institute of
Historical Research at Teheran University, Dr. Gavin Hambly read a paper entitled " The Economic
Organization of Iran under the Early Qajars ". Some six months later, Dr. R. D. Barnett spent some
three weeks in Iran, giving a series of lectures in both Teheran and the provinces under the joint
auspices of the Institute and the British Council. In his opening lecture at the Institute on January
I9th, Dr. Barnett spoke on " The Earliest Illustrations of the Persians ", while in his second lecture,
vi
given the next day at the British Council, his subject was " Sir Robert Ker Porter: A Visiting Artist
to Persepolis in 1819 ". Following the second occasion, Dr. Barnett was the guest of honour at a
reception organized by the Society for the Preservationof National Monuments, at which H.E. the late
Mr. Hussein Ala presided. During the provincial part of his tour Dr. Barnett repeated his first lecture
at both Isfahan and Shiraz. At the same time he was also able to see something of the Institute's
excavations at Pasargadae, to visit the monuments at Persepolis, and to join Mr. Stronach and Mr.
Keall in a brief archaeological perspection in the Malamir basin, east of Khuzistan.
Early in April, Professor R. C. Zaehner, the Institute's second Visiting Lecturer, came out to
Teheran to give a series of two complementary lectures at the Institute and the Ancient Iranian
Cultural Society. In his talks, each of which was extremely well attended, he gave a very full account
of the character and significance of the remarkable work " Irradiant " which, by a series of chances,
had come into his hands little more than a year before. The text of the first of his two papers, " Zoro-
astrian Survivals in the Folklore of Luristan ", appears in the present volume of Iran while the text of
his second is promised for the succeeding issue. Finally, the Institute was fortunate enough to obtain
Dr. C. E. Bosworth as a further guest lecturer in May. His paper on " Mahmud of Ghazna in Con-
temporary Eyes and Later Persian Literature " again attracted much interest and it is hoped that the
text will also appear in Iran IV.
AnnualGeneralMeeting
On the occasion of the Institute's first Annual General Meeting, held in the rooms of the British
Academy last November, a distinguished audience met to hear Mr. Basil Gray, C.B.E., deliver a
lecture on " Illuminations in Persian Manuscripts at Shiraz under the Timurids ".
The XXVIth Orientalists'Congress

Apart from three members of the Governing Council, Professor A. K. S. Lambton, Dr. R. D.
Barnett and Dr. J. A. Boyle, both Mr. Stronach and Mr. Spooner were able to attend the XXVIth
Orientalists' Congress,held in New Delhi fromJanuary 4th to ioth. During the course of the Congress,
Mr. Stronach gave an illustrated paper describing the results of the Institute'swork at Pasargadaeover
the past three years, while Mr. Spooner, in a brief visit to Kabul after the Congress, was successfulin
exploring certain possibilitiesfor anthropological research in Afghanistan.
Excavationsat Pasargadae
The Institute's third season of excavations at Pasargadaeagain began in October and lasted through
to December. The field staff consisted of the following: Mr. David Stronach (Director), Mr. M. E.
Weaver (Architect and Surveyor), Miss Elisabeth Beazley (Architect), Miss Olive Kitson (Photo-
grapher), Mr. Edward Keall (Architect and Field Assistant), Mr. Ferdinand Hinzen (Architect), and
Mr. Mahmoud Aram (Representative of the Iranian Archaeological Service).
In the course of an active and varied season, in which architectural studies were well to the fore,
detailed surveys were carried out at the Gatehouse, the Audience Hall, the Private Palace and the
Zendan. In addition, Mr. Weaver's general survey of the site made excellent progress.
As the result of yet another season of excavations on the Citadel Hill, we can now point to the
existence of four distinct building periods, the first three of which date to between the sixth and the
third centuries B.C. and the last of which almost certainly dates to the early Islamic period.
With reference to Period II (c. 522-280 B.C.), many new parts of the Citadel were examined for the
first time. One particularly rewarding sector of the site lay along its northern edge where, apart from
recovering important details of the defences, we were also fortunate enough to find a hoard of thirty-
four silver tetradrachms. Buried in the debris of the violent destruction that brought Period II to an
end, the coins at last seem to fix the date of this event at 280 B.C.
Another place of great interest to be examined was the so-called Sacred Area, where we were able
to reveal the ground plan of the dry-stone terrace walls that surround the " temple mound "; the
flight of stone steps that affords the only means of access to the mound; and the extent of a small
vii
mud-brick platform on the summit. In addition, an examination of the two limestone podia that stand
at the eastern end of the Sacred Area showed that each had been provided with a polished black
limestone border, flush with the level of the surrounding turf.
Elsewhere, two other discoveries of importance were totally unexpected. In the flat ground west
of the Gatehouse the discovery of an isolated limestone block led to the recovery of the complete plan
of a fifteen-columned bridge that had once spanned an ancient canal or watercourse that ran through
the site. And lastly, between the Palace of Audience and the Private Palace, the excavation of a small
garden pavilion led to the recovery of an intact, and remarkablywell preserved,cache of Achaemenian
jewellery. Among the objects, which are described in the main report below, were three pairs of gold
earrings; a pair of beautiful ibex-headed gold bracelets; two silver spoons; three lion-shaped beads;
and an infinite variety of smaller gold spacer-beads,pearls, and stone beads. Taken as a whole, indeed,
the collection representsan important addition to the relatively small range of Achaemenian jewellery
that has come to light in the course of scientific-as opposed to clandestine-excavations.
Fieldwork
During the late spring and early summer of 1964, the Assistant Director, Mr. Brian Spooner,
continued his social anthropological research in Persian Baluchistan.
Mr. Spooner's main aim was to study in greater detail the period of transition from the peak of
agricultural and pastoral activity in the spring to the period of the date harvest, which, commencing
in the warmer areas in late June and spreading to the higher and cooler zones throughout the summer,
causes an influx of population in the date groves and reciprocates the movement out to the pastoral
areas each spring.
In completing his study-in a period that extended for some two months beyond May 1964-Mr.
Spooner was also able to observe a climatic condition of particular interest. For, in the Makran range,
as well as in the country south of it, there were almost daily rainstormsfrom the end of June onwards.
Often the rain was very heavy and the main rivers were flooded several times. Even when there was
no rain low grey cloud kept most of the sun from the dates which, as a result, began to rot instead of to
ripen, though, in other parts of the country, this same rain meant an extra crop of wheat. Apparently
this type of summer weather, although it does not occur every year and seems never to have been
properly described, is a frequent enough phenomenon to have a special name "bash"-and is a theme
often found in Baluch poetry.
As in the past, Mr. Spooner enjoyed full official backing from the Institute of Social Studies and
Research of the University of Teheran, and, during the year as a whole, collaboration between the
Institute and the Institute of Social Studies and Research became particularly close. Apart from the
value of regular informal discussionsbetween people in relevant fields passing through the Institute and
teachers and students of the Institute of Social Studies and Research, the Institute was able to organize
field training for two Persian students from the Institute of Social Studies and Research, one of whom
went to join MissJ. Travers in Jajarm and the other of whom went to work with Mr. D. F. Darwent in
Meshed. In addition, Dr. K. S. McLachlan and Mr. B. J. Spooner combined to give a joint lecture in
English and Persian to Teheran University students on some social and economic problemsinvolved in
the development of Khorasan.
In connection with further archaeological work, the Institute was also able to extend its assistance
to three British groups working in the northern half of the country. The first, under the direction of
Dr. C. B. M. McBurney of Cambridge University, was engaged in a preliminary survey of Palaeolithic
cave deposits in N.E. Iran; the second, under Mr. Peter Willey, was able to complete a brief campaign
of rescue excavations at the partly flooded site of Samiran; and the third, an undergraduate expedition
from Oxford led by Mr. Hugh Herbert-Burns, carried out a most useful survey of Girdkuh-the famous
Assassin castle near Damghan which succumbed to the Mongols only after a siege lasting many years.
WolfsonFellows
As one of the Institute's two Wolfson Fellows for the year I963/4, Mr. David Brooks has been
engaged in a social anthropological study of a section of the Bakhtiari tribe. After several months of
viii
research in the field-in which he has taken part in the annual spring migration and also spent some
time in the tribe's summer quarters-Mr. Brooks has already amassed important information that
promises well for the future of his study.
The Institute's second Wolfson Fellow, Mr. Edward Keall, has embarked on a field study of
Sasanian remains, with particular emphasis on the architectural and artistic features of the period.
One of his most valuable contributions to date, in what must also be a prolonged programme of study,
has been his isolation of certain regional and chronological criteria that pertain to Sasanian methods
of construction and pottery decoration.
Secretary
In view of the increasing scale of office work in Teheran, Miss Amirzadeh Madjd was appointed as
the Institute's Secretary last February. As time goes on it is also expected that Miss Madjd will take
an increasingly active part in caring for the Institute's library.
Library
Thanks to the very generous grant from the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation mentioned in last
year's Report, the library has more than doubled its size since last June. Important acquisitions have
included both Persian and Arabic works and the Institute's present collection of books already con-
stitutes a most useful working library.
It is also a pleasure to acknowledge the British Embassy's most generous loan of over I2o books,
including several rare volumes of the E. J. W. Gibb Memorial Series. In addition, a special word of
thanks is due to Franklin Publications Inc. for their welcome donation of the Persian edition of
E. Schmidt's PersepolisI-a work that still eludes us in the original.
Publications
Lastly, in pursuit of one of the Institute's chief scholarly concerns, ProfessorA. J. Arberry'srecent
study of an early Persian epic, the Humay-Nama, has allowed the Institute to publish the first of a series
of Persian texts which will appear from time to time in the form of Institute Monographs.
ix
1
THE MECHANICS OF ANCIENT TRADE IN WESTERN ASIA

Reflectionson the location of Magan and Meluhha
By M. E. L. Mallowan
I am indebtedto Dr. A. Ghosh,Director-General
of Archaeologyin Indiafor his kind permissionto publish here the substanceof a lecturewhich1
deliveredto the OrientalCongressin Delhi, in 1961
Anyone whose professionis excavation has sooner or later found some ancient objects which in their
time had been imported from abroad, and has no doubt asked himself: how did these foreign goods
reach their destination? To me this question and the problems which it invokes have always been
most rewarding, for the answers are fundamental to our understanding of human progress. The
movement of goods must imply the transit of ideas; it is a function of archaeology to elicit the evidence
and to draw the proper conclusions from it.
Let me begin with two concrete examples from prehistoric sites in Mesopotamia. Many years ago
I was working in a North Syrian settlement called Chagar Bazar which flourished during the fifth
millennium B.c. and there, satisfactorilystratified, I found a little decorative shell of a variety known
as CypraeaVitellus.1It had been imported from the Indian Ocean, probably from that end of it which
we now know as the Persian Gulf-a distance of perhaps a thousand miles or so. Who brought it there ?
Was it carried all the way by a lonely prehistorictrader, or did it pass through many hands on its long
journey? Behind this little bead there lies a long forgotten story of prehistoric travel which helps to
explain the widespread evidence of technological ideas at this very time, for the contemporarypainted
pottery of the southern Euphratesvalley in the city of Eridu, not far from the Persian Gulf, was already
reflecting the gay designs of a village ware that was then in use and truly at home a thousand miles to
the north.
Belonging to that same period we found at Arpachiyah, not far from Mosul, in the upper Tigris
valley, large quantities of obsidian.2 There was an obsidian necklace; there were the component parts
of what seem to have been a helmet, thousands of obsidian blades, knives and scrapers together with
large cores from which they had been struck. Now obsidian, which may be popularly described as a
kind of natural volcanic glass, is a comparatively rare commodity and in this case we happen to know
exactly where it came from: the region of Lake Van where three varieties, including a clear crystalline,
a tortoise-shell, and a shiny black, exactly comparable to the discoveries at Arpachiyah, have been
located together. In order to obtain supplies of this commodity prehistoric caravans probably had to
make a returnjourney of about 400oomiles between Northern 'Iraq and Eastern Asia Minor.3
Again we ask ourselves the question how were these journeys organized? What was given in
exchange? Were any of the craftsmen who struck and fashioned the obsidian northerners? Did they
live in Arpachiyah, or did the northerners supply the goods and the Mesopotamian natives fashion
them? Why eventually did this trade die out? The answers are shrouded in the mists of prehistory.
But again we learn that such movements had even wider ramifications, for not far from the obsidian
quarries we also find prehistoric village settlements at places such as Tilki Tepe,4 where the peasants
were using an inferior variety of the now familiar painted pottery known as Tell Halaf ware which was
then the household crockery of villages in the upper Tigris region. At Arpachiyah the women drank
cream from Halaf pots while the men shaved with Vannic obsidian razor blades.
1 Iraq III, part I (1936), p. io, note 4. inhabitants of Arpachiyah and it remains to be seen if we are
2 Iraq II, part I entitled to draw any definite conclusion in the matter.
(1935), pl. XI. I have now learned that an article discussing this problem
* The subject of obsidian is one that is is likely to appear soon; see J. R. Cann and A. C. Renfrew in
being at present extensively
investigated by Mr. Colin Renfrew and his conclusions when the Proceedingsof the SocietyXXX, London, 1964.
published will be of great interest and relevant to this problem. ' Iraq VIII (1964), "Excavations in the Balikh Valley",
It may be that other sources of supply were available to the p. I 15, note 4.
2 JOURNAL OF PERSIAN STUDIES
Thus far we are obliged to speculate, but fortunately in Mesopotamia, quite early on, written
documents break through the silence of prehistory. Let me give you an example. A little before
2350 B.c. King Sargon who reigned at Agade, a city still undiscovered,and as I think, buried beneath
the far-flung silt of Babylon, was called to rescue a colony of the merchants who were being sorely
oppressed by the local ruler of a city called Parsuhanda5which was situated in the middle of Asia
Minor; its relief therefore involved a march of nearly a thousand miles. Unfortunately, this heroic
episode was rememberedfor more than a thousand years in the archives of the Hittite and the Egyptian
capitals.6 It seems most probable that the motive for the march was King Sargon's determination to
defend the interestsof fellow nationals who were doubtless trading in cloth and in garments in exchange
for silver and other commodities. Here we have an amusing ancient parallel for the resort to force by
early traders of the East India Company, who by some most distinguished authorities have been
condemned for pleading the defence of an acquisitive trade as an excuse for imperial aggrandizement.
But to return to Sargon, that episode properly recorded on clay tablets was long thought by
epigraphists to have been a traditional romance, a mere travesty of history. Archaeology has proved
how wrong they were, for about fifty years after those tablets had been deciphered an expedition which
I directed at Tell Brak in the Habur valley of North Syria discovered an enormous Palace-Fortress
which had been built by Sargon's grandson, Naram-Sin, certainly for the express purpose of guarding
his lines of communication with Asia Minor.' A palace built at Assur on the Tigris, as I think at about
the same time, was planned on very similar lines to the one at Brak and shows how in the last quarters
of the third millennium B.c. Akkadian trade had in its train brought with it the spread of a uniform
architectural planning. An improved architecture was in fact a by-product of the trade in metal and
in wool.
The Sargonid dynasty which achieved these things was remembered for nearly 2,000 years as the
classical pattern of Mesopotamian monarchy.8 Its military organization brought it into touch with
more distant fields than had ever been reached before: with Cappadocia and the Mediterranean Sea;
with Assyriaand the PersianGulf; and by a treaty,with the King of Elam. Their worksof art, sculpture,
bronzes and seals, many of them supreme triumphs of craftsmanship,spread to all these places.
As a part of this hitherto unparalleled expansion we find an inscription of Sargon who ascended the
throne in about 2370 B.c. proclaiming that ships destined for Tilmun, Makkan and Meluhha were
moored in the harbour of Agade (Fig. i). Here for the first time in history we have documentary
evidence for trade with the fringes of India, already attested by the tangible evidence of archaeology.
This trade, which continued over a period of at least four centuries, was based largely on the exchange
of Mesopotamian garments, wool, silver, perfumed oil and leather, against large quantities of copper
and smaller but no less valuable supplies of ivory, beads, semi-preciousstones and onions. It was above
all the ivory, both raw and manufactured, and perhaps also the beads which came from the Indian end
of this far-flung trade route. I need not discuss this evidence in detail for it must be familiar to most of
you, and indeed many of my colleagues have written learnedly about it: the relevant texts from Ur were
first brought into perspective by A. L. Oppenheim in a classic paper entitled The SeafaringMerchants
of Ur.9 There it was rightly stressedthat Tilmun-probably the island of Bahrain, or if not Bahrain,
then a locality near to it-was the entrep6t for the trade between Babylonia and Makkan-Meluhha.x0
Exactly where these latter places are to be located we do not yet know, and doubtless their boundaries
'J. Garstang and 0. R. Gurney, The Geographyof the Hittite 9 Journal of theAmericanOrientalSociety74, No. i, January-March
Empire, p. 64; located near the modern Neveehir, see map 1954.
opposite p. I. 10 Recent discoveries in Bahrain were the subject of an interesting
paper read at this Congress by Geoffrey Bibby. We await with
* For discussion of the sources see interest his publication of a number of cylinder seals, Meso-
Sidney Smith, Early Historyof
Assyria, p. 8I f. potamian in character, which may provide strong confirmation
for the chronology of Indianesque seals and other material
7 Iraq IX (i947). found in the island. See also " The Ancient Indian Style
Seals from Bahrain " by the same author in AntiquityXXXII,
8 Good account of the Sargonid dynasty in B. Hrozny, Ancient No. 128, December 1958. The island of Failaka, about forty
History of WesternAsia, " India and Crete ", pp. 69-76, and miles south of Basrah, the scene of recent excavations, also
see also The Cambridge Ancient History I, ch. XIX has claims for identification as Tilmun, but conclusive proof
(x963),
C. J. Gadd, The Dynastyof Agade and the GutianInvasion. is still lacking.
THE MECHANICS OF ANCIENT TRADE IN WESTERN ASIA
BLACK,
SEEA.,
/d
#
'>i::::::::R::J ! . S.
S1, 4,.
1A.ZtTZYAN
Chagar
Bzr -411
I ..........
'Tell. .~pazai.Va-h
1?%/ .......""'"-g" /
_/_I
% k
I
,%
"-'IrT ?1
AuI MI h-
ks% .
'• ?
'. .Ih.
_
SLR I::::8::::::::??:::::
I IU
I'I0 ' hwundat

. . . . .. .
... ..Lrman. '.n.
.-... __S•....---...
'~ BriW. aNhunda
........
................. o
............
,l
1..hahb ....
...A.t-n
Scale: 1:7,500,000 or 118mwiles to the inich

50
o too
10 0 • 20 oo00 300 40
, 500 500 600
Statute. iles
(M~A Ar APPROXIMATE
APSHOWING tfese two courtes were OF
tOCATlON MM(KAN
tzougit Arabia and inIN
to 6e in&rMELURHH ABltT 2000 B
Africa
ootferpepjoda
Fig. i.
were never exactly defined, but the problem needs reinvestigation since T. Jacobsen has recently
challenged the assumption that they are to be connected with India and asserted that they should be
identified with Egypt and Ethiopia respectively." Weidner had perhaps better grounds for suggesting
that at a period much later than the one with which we are concerned their geographical setting had
been switched to the Arabian foreshore.12However that may be, for several centuries before and after
2000 B.C. they certainly lay on the route to India. This has now been decisively proved by Ilya
Gershevitch through a fresh examination of a passage in one of the Achaemenian inscriptions.13
Gershevitch has identified the old Persian name of the timber imported by Darius for his palace at
Susa as the Sissoo tree, a Himalayan species of hard wood which still grows freely in S. Iran, for
example in the district of Kermdn. Now in the Akkadian version of Darius's trilingual inscription this
same Sissoo tree (0. P. Yaka) is referred to as the mesuwood of Makkan. And to that same country
and to Meluhha adjacent to it a Sumerian priest-king named Gudea sent expeditions in the twenty-
second century B.C. in search of the same hard wood.14 In these early inscriptionsmany passages make
it perfectly clear that Magan or Makkan was a part of Iran beyond Elam, and next to the mountains
of Kimash from which Gudea also extracted copper and made maces. Magan, the country of mines,
also supplied him with a hard stone, probably diorite, and it is clear that foreign enterprisewas attracted
by the prodigious wealth of copper in the Zagros, archaeologically best attested by the innumerable
bronzes of
Luristmn.
As to Melulha, that really was regarded by men of Mesopotamia as the back of beyond. A recently
published clue to its location comes in a proverb,'6most probably written in the old Babylonian period,
about I8oo B.C., from Nippur which runs:
The donkey of Anshan
The ... of Parahse
The cat of Meluhlha
The elephant of the steppe . .. which bite off willow as though it were a leek.
MeluBha was thus deemed to be situated beyond two districts of S.W. Iran next to a country in which
the elephant had its habitat.
The testimony of this text is strengthened by a complementary passage in the Survey of Sargon's
Empire (Sargon of Agade) which states that 12O biru(about 8oo miles) [is the distance] from the tail
of the Euphrates to the border of Meluiha.'6 If, as seems probable, the " tail of the Euphrates " lay
approximately on the latitude at which this river flowed into the marshy lakes at the southern end of
11 Iraq XXII (1960), p. 184, note 16. I suppose was in the vicinity. The text is one of a series
12Iraq XXII (1960), p. 184, note 16, reference quoted. relating to the coronation of Ibbi-Sin. A series of religious
"
is BSOAS XIX (1957), part 2, Sissoo at Susa ". ceremonies were performed on various days at Ur, Nippur,
14 Called egu or KAL in the texts. and Uruk. Meluhha is closely associated with Magan
15 B. W. G. Lambert, Babylon WisdomLiterature,p. 273. (especially) but also with Anshan, Parahse, Tukrish, and
16 This
passage in the text is quoted by Sidney Smith, Early another land called Sherikhum, which is in the Sargon
History of Assyria, p. 89. It is therein stated that at " the inscriptions. None of these can at present be satisfactorily
border of MeluhhiBais Bit-Sin, which Sargon, the king of hosts, located with geographical limits, but it is certain that they
when he conquered all heaven.. .". Consequently an ancient were all lands in W. and S.W. Persia, and very probable that
site of this period should be identifiable on the western frontier at least Magan and Meluhha were somewhere on the N. shores
of Meluhha. The latest and best edition of the text is by of the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman, how far eastward
Weidner in AFO XVI (1952-3) and in that article there is a extending we have yet to obtain satisfactory evidence, but I
full discussion of Melubia. Furthermore I owe the following have no doubt it is now only a question of time. It seems to me
reference and comment to the kindness of Professor C. J. Gadd: certain, in any case, that Meluhha was-in this early period at
" Another interesting reference to Meluhba is in a variant, least-a land to the east of Babylonia, and nowhere in Africa at
unpublished as yet, from Ur of the 'Enki and Ninhursag' all. But despite all this it seems we cannot dismiss the African
myth edited by Kramer. Here Meluhha with the same location for other ages, difficult as it looks to us to admit such
characteristic products comes between Tukrish and Markhashi an enormous variation; references in the Amarna letters of
(or Parabse). The trouble with all these eastern districts is Rib-Addi appear the most decisive, where it seems impossible
location. For Paraihse, see E. Sollberger, JCS X, 1956, p. 19: to suppose anywhere else implied." Furthermore in the neo-
'Five fat sheep for Banana, the man of Marhaii (as he was) Assyrian period, seventh century B.c. (Sargon II of Assyria to
going to Uruk: they were loaded in the boat.' In the next Assur-bani-pal) Melutba was certainly thought of as lying
paragraph there is a reference to the man of Simanum which beyond Nubia.
THE MECHANICS OF ANCIENT TRADE IN WESTERN ASIA 5
Sumer below the city of Eridu,17we may reckon that the western boundary of Meluhha must be sought
at least as far east as modern Jask on the Persian Gulf, and if so the littoral of this province would
probablyhave comprisedthe localitiesof Chihbdr, Gwadar, and perhapsPasniat its eastern end (Fig. I )."1
There are therefore good grounds for the conclusion that in the early second millennium B.c. the
eastern end of Meluiha marched with the very confines of ancient India, against that part of it which
today is denominated as independent Pakistan. Moreover there is a possible allusion to Meluhha in
classical Sanskrittexts where a word Mleccha, said to be of non-Indo-Aryan origin " was used to denote
foreign tribes and languages, especially those peoples who did not respect vedas and the Aryan way of
life ".19 If we can accept the usage of this word as the equivalent of the ancient Meluhha we have a
powerful reinforcement to our previous arguments.
The products of Meluhha that attracted trade were much the same as those of Magan: copper,
mesuor sissoo wood, onions, ivory, as is appropriate to a country near to India, and above all a coveted
form of ivory ornament, a bird called the DAR (muSen)Me-luh-ha: can it have been the peacock so
often represented on Harrapan pottery?
In the time of Sargon of Agade goods from these distant parts may have been carried by men who
were not native to Mesopotamia, for it is less likely that Akkadian sailors from the middle Euphrates
would have ventured so far. Two centuries later under King Ur-Nammu (c. 210oo B.c.) who revived
the coastal trade which had evidently ceased in the confusion at the end of the Agade dynasty, this
situation had changed. Thereafter, until the Larsa period (c. 1900 B.c.) the trade was organized
by a class of merchantswho styled themselvesalik Tilmunwhich may be freely translated" the go-getters
of Tilmun ". These men were natives of Ur and accredited to this coastal entrep6t. Makkan ceased
to be mentioned altogether in the old Babylonian period; the supply of ivory then dwindled to
nothing, and with the collapse of Larsa these enterprisescame to an end.
It was at the time when Ur was subject to Larsa that the widely diffused Indianesque seals most
strikinglyattest the transmaritimerange of a far-flungmerchandiseand remind us of the part played by
men such as the Tilmun merchants. For a year or two I was familiar with one of them, if I may put
it that way, for in I925-31 I worked in the city of Ur and still have a vivid memory of digging out the
17 Ur and possiblyEridu were the two largest cities at this early seem to be based on the fact that sea-shells abound in the
periodon the southernconfinesof Sumer,but it is knownthat district. It is thus probable that the transit of goods depended
below that latitude there were still a number of ancient on a combination of overland with maritime traffic: Akkadian
settlements,all of themin marshycountry. Theselatterplaces, texts provide clear evidence that shipping was much used from
with the exceptionof a site named Abfi Salabikh,seem for the the Agade to the Larsa period. Stein believed that the
mostpart not to be much earlierthan the firstmillenniumB.c., archaeological material from Sutkagan Dor was at least in part
and in any case are likelyto have been thoughtof as below the contemporary with that of Periano Ghundai, Moghul Ghundai,
" tail of the Euphrates". On the other hand it seems not and Sur Jangal: there is nothing against its having been
unlikelythat a part of the area now underwaterwas relatively occupied towards the end of the third millennium B.c., and it
dry, especiallyalong the lower reachesof the Euphrates,and may well have lain on or near the confines of Makkan-
if so we might easilycalculatethe westernconfinesof MeluBba MeluhBa. For the evidence see Memoirs of the Archaeological
as lying as much as Ioo miles east ofJask. For the topography Surveyof India, No. 43; Sir Aurel Stein, An Archaeological Survey
of ancient settlementsin the marshesof southernIraq see the of Gedrosia,p. 61 f. The problem of the location of Meluhha
article by Dr. GeorgesRoux entitled " Recently Discovered has been discussed at length, recently, with the evidence well
Ancient Sites on the Hammar Lake District (Southern summarized by W. F. Leemans, Foreign Tradein the old Baby-
Iraq) ", SumerXVI (196o), p. 20 f. lonian Period, p. 159 f., who had independently suggested that
18There does not appearto be any very ancient sea-porton the the bird of Meluhha might have been the peacock. On p. I6i
barren and inhospitable coast of the Makran, but two loc. cit., Iran should I think have been added as a possible
Harappancoastalsiteshaverecentlybeenidentified-see note22 alternative; Leemans was not aware of the article by
below. Inland along the Kej valley a number of ancient Gershevitch which proves that mesuis the sissoo tree. Lastly if,
settlementsinvestigatedby Aurel Stein may have represented as is possible, uknuis lapis lazuli, and gug gi-rin-e is carnelian,
stages on an overlandroute through Makkanand Meluhba. both mentioned, e.g. in the Gudea texts as imports from
Interestingin this context is SutkaganDor which now lies Meluhha, it may well be inferred that this country extended
some fifty miles upstreamfrom the bay of Gwadar, on the as far as Afghanistan at the time; indeed Sogdiana supplied
Dasht river which however only becomes navigable some Darius I with both of these stones for his palace at Susa. For
thirty-sixmiles below SutkaganDor, and allowing for con- the inscription and the Old Persian text see R. G. Kent,
siderablechangesin the alluviumduring the last 4,000 years Old Persian GrammarText Lexicon,p. 142 f.
can hardlyhave been accessibleto shipping,even in antiquity. L9Quoted from W. F. Leemans, Journal of Economicand Social
The Balfichtraditionthat SutkaganDor was once reachedby History III, part I, April Ig6o, whose attention had been
the sea and served as a harbour," bandar", would however drawn to this reference by Professor C. J. Gadd.
house once owned by a Tilmun merchant c. 1900 B.C.20 My then chief and great master, Sir Leonard
Woolley, had to wait twenty-five years for the full significance of the many cuneiform texts which we
found in that house to be revealed by the brilliant work of A. L. Oppenheim. And rather more than
thirty years later I had the pleasure of setting foot in Mohenjo-daro and seeing with my own eyes a
Harappan city built of burnt-brick which to my mind was a striking technological reflection of the
builders' methods used in these contemporary merchant houses at Ur.
Oppenheim's researcheshave given us a glimpse of the changing mechanism in this trade. At the
beginning of the Agade and Third Dynasty of Ur periods it was under ecclesiastical and royal super-
vision. In the Larsa period it seems to have been privately financed by merchant trading-companies,
and the ventures were so risky that the capitalists who laid out the bulk of the money for the journeys
shared only in the profits and not in the losses. I do not think, as Oppenheim seems to imply, that we
yet have enough evidence to show whether or not this change was the result of a progressivedevelop-
ment in economics-I mean from state to private trading. Throughout the long period of
Mesopotamian economy you find evidence for both, alternately or together, according to the contem-
porary political situation. The tablets which provide the bulk of our evidence for private trade in the
direction of India come from Ur at a period when direct royal control was vested in the city of Larsa,
and it would certainly be interesting to excavate the business houses in that place now represented by
the great mound of Senkereh, and see whether or not trading conditions there were similar or different.
I commend this project to my distinguished 'Iraqi colleagues who have done so much recently for the
rehabilitation of the ruins at Ur. In Iran who knows what may not come to light by working on the
littoral of the country where the limits of Magan and Melubia are still but dimly defined. In India
archaeologistshave once again been adding quite recently to the evidence which has a bearing on this
problem. I must mention especially the revealing work of Sri Rao and his colleagues at Lothal; else-
where we have new evidence from the excavations by Dr. F. A. Khan at Kot Diji in Pakistan, and from
Amri.21 Only recently two more Harappan coastal stations have been added to the map, namely:
Sotka Kon, and Bala Kot; the former lies not far from Pasni, in the Makran coast; the latter, about
fifty miles from Karachi-see Map (Fig. I).22 In all these directions a concerted effort is bound to
widen and deepen our knowledge of this fascinating trade.
As archaeologists we have to concentrate for the most part on the material evidence, but a pre-
occupation with it should not distract us from recalling that such materials are only of real value in so
far as they are the expression of the spirit, intellect and emotions of the men who made them. From
time to time we must reflect on the human background of archaeology. What then of our traders,
Akkadian, Iranian, Indian, or our middlemen, whoever they may have been? Did they behave in
2000 B.C. much as we do now, or were they different? Were they more advanced or were they more
primitive? The answer again lies in our Babylonian and Assyrian tablets, and it is that they behaved
in much the same way as merchants do the world over today; they had their laws, and much more
important, their codes of honour, which their weaker brethren transgressedfrom time to time. When
there were disputes the root cause was almost invariably a matter of quality which would involve
doubtless an appeal, first to honour, then to arbitration, and only lastly to law. " Behave like a gentle-
man " (lu awelati)was a favourite expressionbetween one disgruntled Assyrian merchant and another.
In Sumer Ea-nasir, the famous Tilmun merchant of Ur, once got himself into serious trouble because
of the poor quality of his copper ingots which he had gracelessly delivered with the quip " take it or
leave it ". " Who am I to be treated in this manner " his colleague replies: " that such a thing could
happen between gentlemen!" But in fact such letters imply the recognition of a standard and of an
accepted ethical code which can be the only stable basis for all long-term operations between one
human being and another.
Let me conclude on a lighter vein with a letter written in about I 800 B.C. from one merchant prince
20 AntiquariesJournal XI, p. 364, pl. XLVII. of the Ancient Cities of the Indus ", p. 290; and G. F. Dales,
21 Subject of an interesting paper by M. Jean-Marie Casal read AntiquityXXXVI, No. 142, June 1962, pp. 86-92, " Harappan
to the Congress in Delhi, in 1961. Outposts on the Makran Coast ". The unorthodox views
22 For mention of these two sites, see R. L. Raikes, American espoused by Raikes have been criticized by Mortimer Wheeler
Vol. 66, No. 2, April 1964, article entitled " End
Anthropologist, in AntiquityXXXVIII, No. 152, December 1964, pp. 307-9.
THE MECHANICS OF ANCIENT TRADE IN WESTERN ASIA 7
to another. I quote an extract of what was written by a prince of Qatna in the Orontes valley of W.
Syria to Ishme Dagan, the eldest son of the King of Assyria. This document was found in the Palace
of Mari on the Euphrates; this is a free reading of it: " Here is a matter which I can hardly bear to
mention, but to ease my heart, I must. You, a great King, asked me for the two horses of your desire,
I had them sent to you. And believe it or not, you then sent me only 40 lb. of tin. Was there any
bargaining, any reservation when you had from me the objects of your desire? And you have the
effrontery to send me this small quantity of tin! Had you sent me nothing at all, it is true that on
account of my father's god my heart would have been vexed. The price of these horses at our place in
Qatna is 6oo shekels of silver, and now you have sent me 40 lb. of tin. When anyone comes to hear of
this whatever will he say? He will be unable to put us on the same footing. And yet your house is my
house. What is lacking in your house that one brother cannot satisfy another brother's desire? Had
you sent me no tin at all my heart would have had no reason whatever for being vexed. You are no
great King! Why have you done this? Yet this house is your house!"23 There ends the letter, and on
that human note I think we may agree to infer that those concerned in the trade which linked the
Indian Ocean with the Persian Gulf 4,000 years ago were neither better nor worse in their human
relationships than we are today. But on a more hopeful note let me conclude by recalling what I
hinted in the beginning: that in the free exchange of ideas which accompanies the exchange of things
the only glimmer of hope for the future lies. A gathering such as this of scholars and craftsmenlinked
by a common love of their pursuit is as a small beacon of light ready to kindle a greater flame.
s Archivesroyalesde Mari V, " Correspondance de Iasmah-Addu " by G. Dossin, letter 2o.

2
9
EXCAVATIONS AT PASARGADAE:THIRD PRELIMINARY REPORT
By David Stronach
The third season of excavations at Pasargadae again lasted for two months, from October I5th to
December I5th. The work was conducted by the writer assisted by Mr. M. E. Weaver (Architect and
Surveyor), Miss Elisabeth Beazley (Architect), Miss Olive Kitson (Photographer), Mr. Edward Keall
(Architect and Field Assistant) and Mr. Ferdinand Hinzen (Architect and Field Assistant). Mr.
Mahmoud Aram acted as the Representative of the Iranian Archaeological Service, and valuable local
assistancewas also received from Mr. A. Hadavi, the resident Curator at Pasargadae.
The work at the site was supportedby grants from the BritishAcademy, the Royal Ontario Museum,
the Ashmolean Museum, the University of Sydney, the Iran Oil Operating Companies and the British
Institute of Persian Studies. In addition our warm thanks are due to Mr. H. Mashun, Director-General
of the Iranian Archaeological Service, Mr. F. Tavallali, Director of Antiquities in Fars, and Mr. J.
Ra'nai, Director of the Persepolis Museum, for loans of equipment and other generous help.
Summaryof the 1963 Campaign
The 1963 season proved an unusually varied one, despite the fact that we were no longer concerned
with any of the prehistoric soundings that had occupied us in both 1961 and 1962.' Architectural
studies were particularly prominent, and detailed surveys, accompanied by limited excavations, were
carried out at such major monuments as the Gatehouse, the Audience Hall, the Residential Palace and
the Zendan. In addition, Mr. M. E. Weaver was able to complete the necessaryfield measurementsfor
an accurate site plan that will embrace all the main monuments.2
As in the past, our principal excavations were concentrated on the Citadel, or, to give this domina-
ting position its local name, the Tall-i-Takht or Throne Hill (Figs. I and 4). But elsewhereseveral new
excavations were attempted for the first time in both the Sacred Enclosure (Figs. 5-7) and in the flat,
but by no means featureless, ground that extends between the Gatehouse and the Residential Palace.
In the latter area we were rewarded with the plan of two hitherto unrecorded stone monuments, the
columned Bridge (Fig. 8) and the Garden Pavilion (Fig. 9), while, in certain final soundings near the
last structure,we also had the great good fortune to unearth a simplejar (P1.VIc) that had been used to
secret a collection of late Achaemenian gold and silver jewellery (Pls. X-XIV).
Architectural theAudienceHall andthePrivatePalace
Surveysof the Gatehouse,
As part of the expedition's plan to complete a series of architectural studies of the principal
monuments at Pasargadae, the Gatehouse (Fig. I) was one of the first of the major buildings to be
examined during the past season. First excavated by Herzfeld in 1928,3and again by Sami in the early
fifties,4it yielded relatively few undisturbed areas. But among other points of interest, an examination
of the old ground surface outside the eastern doorway revealed a mass of stone fragments, all of which
constitute important evidence for the detailed decoration and design of the winged bulls that once
guarded the entrance. For, despite the value of Herzfeld's observation5 that the figures were paired as
in the Gate of All Nations, he appears to have left us without illustrations or any comprehensive record
of the fragments recovered. A second point of significance is the fact that none of the earlier plans of the
Gatehousee indicate the presence of two opposed side chambers, each of which probably afforded access
1 For accounts of the two previous campaigns see D. Stronach, Architect's Department, which generously allowed Mr.
Iran I, pp. 19-42 and Iran II, pp. 21-39 (henceforth Iran I Weaver special leave to join the expedition for a second time.
and Iran II); and C. Goff, Iran I, pp. 43-70 and Iran II, pp. 3 E. E. Herzfeld, AMI I, p. Io C.
4 A. Sami, Pasargadae,1956, p. 59 f-
41-52.
s At present in the final stages of preparation, a part of the plan 5 AMI I, p. 1.
appeared in Iran I (fig. 3). In mentioning the progress of this 6 See IAE, pl. XLII; H. Frankfort, The Art andArchitecture of the
project, it is also a pleasure to record our debt to the L.C.C.'s AncientOrient, I954, fig. Iog; and Sami, op. cit., p. 66.
SACREDPRECINCT /
... TALLI'TAKHT-
I ZENDAN
PALACE,-
RESI•kNTIAL ,,
CARDEN PAVILION4
P
PALACEOOITULA
OF AUDIENCE*. l CE
CATEHOUSE
-•
TALL-I-NOKHODI
\IMADAR - -SULEIMAN
TANCTOMO
BULACOUR
MOBARAKABADR
TA
B"ULAC"H"N
NC--NOKHO
.
~~~~~I O 00MT•
/~ '.
LAH
• o*• -sMe
TALL-INOKHO\
Fig. I. SketchPlanof Pasargadae.

EXCAVATIONS AT PASARGADAE: THIRD PRELIMINARY REPORT 11
to the battlements above. But in one other context our brief soundingswere less productive, for, despite
several attempts to locate the limits of the adjoining defensive wall, we failed to find any traces of
mud-brick and had to conclude that, in this area at least, deep ploughing had robbed us of even the
foundation courses.7 But, if nothing else, the plan, together with certain changes in the surfacedressing
of the exterior of the Gateway, would seem to indicate the width and position of such walls as were
built up against the structure.
Like the Gatehouse, the Audience Hall called for relatively little excavation before detailed planning
could begin. Indeed, the only major obstacle came from the modern protective wall that was found to
run over many of the stones at the edge of the platform. The presence of this wall and the deposits
behind it also complicated our search for traces of the surrounding terrace and steps which Herzfeld
apparently found during his original excavations.8 But it is again possible that such outlying features
could have been more or less ploughed out during the intervening years.9
In undertaking fresh work at the Residential Palace-the third of these major buildings which is
due for proper publication in a future report-we were fortunate to have the experienced assistanceof
Mr. Ferdinand Hinzen of the German ArchaeologicalInstitute in Teheran. For, apart from completing
a detailed architecturalsurvey of the building, which is at present being drawn out for final publication,
Mr. Hinzen also took charge of the trial excavations within the area. Among other results, the excava-
tions produced several new fragmentsof sculpturedstone from the east door of the main hall; numerous
fragmentsof column bases, column drums and other minor architecturalelements; and even a spherical
object in black stone which could represent part of a knobbed, stone throne leg. On the other hand,
nothing was recovered of the wall frescoes that are mentioned by the site's two earlier excavators.10
The unusual open areas that lie to the north and south of the central hall were also examined with
particular attention, but unfortunately nothing more than vestigial traces could be found of the doors
and cross-wallsthat appear in Herzfeld's small scale plan of the palace." In many ways this last loss
is particularly unfortunate, for Herzfeld's impression that the palace was a residential building largely
rested on the domestic appearance of these features, and now that they have virtually disappeared
without any adequate documentation, it is extremelydifficult to judge the validity of his interpretation.1"
Architectural
Surveyof theZendan
In completing this brief notice of architecturalwork carried out at largely free-standingmonuments,
a rather more full account must also be given of the resultsof last season'ssurvey of the structurethat is
known today as Zendan-i-Suleiman or Solomon's Prison.13 As can be seen from the present drawings
(Figs. 2 and 3), each of which stems from a careful study of the existing standing and fallen remains
(P1. Ia-c), it is now possible to describe the original appearance of the Zendan without continual
recourse to its better preserved replica, the Ka'bah-i-Zardusht at Naqsh-i-Rustam.
The structurewas built in the form of a house (Figs. 2 and 3), its three rows of false windows giving
the impression that it was three storied. The lower part of the tower was solid, however, and the
handsome stairway on the north-west face led to but a single, lofty chamber. The total height of the
monument from its base to the apex of its shallow roof was 14- 15 m. In plan the tower was almost
exactly square: the north-west and south-east walls each measuring 7 25 m. in length while the north-
east and south-westwalls measured 7 22 m. in length. Also, while the three steps of the plinth measured
I4-82 x 14-72 m., I2 "05 X I'56 m. and 8 -95 x 8 m. respectively, the total paved area at the base
"80
of the monument-excluding the undressed borders at the northern and western corners-measured
19'51 x 82 m.
14.
7 As we know from an earlier examination of the outer fortifica-
x1See IAE, pl. XLII; and H. Frankfort, op. cit., fig. 0o9.
tions of the Citadel Area (Iran I, p. 41) large sections of 12 Ghirshman, for instance, has
already challenged Herzfeld's
Pasargadae's perimeter defences were built entirely of mud-
brick. interpretation and has offered his own view that the building
was a Reception or Banqueting Hall. R. Ghirshman, Persia
8 See IAE, pl. XLIII.
9 Of course the onus of from the Originsto Alexanderthe Great, 1964, p. 134.
proof may rest with Herzfeld. We have
13 The
none of his large scale plans and he may have felt that certain present name was probably bestowed on the building in
embellishments were permissible in his reconstructions. early Islamic times when, to judge from many another such
10 See AMI I, p. 13; and Sami, op. cit., p. 58. label, Solomon's name was held in particular esteem.
ceilinglevel
n lI
nI i n n n
restored front elevation restored side elevation

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 METRES
PASARGADAE
"THE ZENDAN+-SULEIMAN"
the above
the above restorations
restorations are
are entirely on the
based on
entirely based the detailed
detailed measurement of stonework
measurement of stonework on
on the
the site
site. . november. 1963.
november.1963. e. beazley&
e. beazley& m.e.weaver•
mne weaver a.o.dipls
ao.dipls
Fig. 2. RestoredFront and Side Elevationsof the Zendan.
m.n.december.1963.
"THE ZENDAN-I-SULEIMAN" pan.

xonom
reconstruction
PASARGADAE
mens et dlt m.e.weaver &e. beazley a.a.dipls.
1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10.METRES.
Fig. 3. Plan of Zendanwith Axonometric of Roof and Upper Walls at right.

Reconstruction
Equipped with twenty-nine steps, the staircase measured 8 -02 m. in length and 7 -76 m. in height.
Each individual step approached 27 cm. in height-a height almost identical to that of the steps in the
Citadel's A and B staircases14not to mention that of the steps that still survive in the Sacred Precinct
(Fig. 7). The much damaged door appears to have been I -83 m. high and 94 cm. broad-measure-
ments that make it 44 cm. taller and 16 cm. wider than the door to the Tomb of Cyrus. As to the
chamber, which shared an elevation of 7 - 76 m. with the top step, its original area probably measured
to two in
3-21 x 3.98 m. while, possibly because the architects wished to reduce the roof courses
number, its height reached 4. 73 m. (Pl. Ib). The pitch of the roof measured 40 45'.
Coming to the surface detail of the tower, it was composed of seventeen horizontal coursesof white
limestone, each of which was carefully graded in size save that, for obvious structuralreasons, the three
uppermost courses were somewhat larger than those immediately beneath them. As in the Tomb of
Cyrus, the courses were extremely finely jointed, set without mortar, and reinforced by lead and iron
clamps. To relieve the monotony of the white wall surface, and possibly to simulate a distinction
between certain of the brick and wooden parts of a composite prototype, black limestone facings were
inserted both in the frameworkof the doorway and in the deep sockets that were left for window frames
(Fig. 3). In addition, as a further device for ornamenting this otherwise starkly designed structure, a
series of narrow, rectangular recesseswere let into the upper surfaceof each wall. Disposed alternately
in horizontal rows, these shallow recessesmay have been inspired by the narrow observation windows
that appear to have been common in Urartian, and also perhaps Median, architecture15or else by
something as simple as the vertical interstices in a mud-brick wall. Further Urartian influences seem
to be present in the double faciae frameworkof the windows, in the dentil cornice that representsthe
wooden beam-ends of the roof, and in the corner buttressesthat find a parallel in a tower at Karmir
Blur.16
Seen from ground level, the upper stages of the Zendan would have lookedjust as abruptly truncated
as those of the Ka'bah still do today. However, as can be seen from the reconstructionin Fig. 3, the
roof was probably composed of four massive blocks, each of which was cut to accord with a uniform
pyramidal design."7 From the arbitrary treatment of the blocks, which are shaped without any regard
for the position of the joints between them, it is clear, in fact, that the architectsof the Zendan were only
interested in reproducing the outline of a wooden form of roof in another, heavier medium. But
whereas the internal span of the Tomb of Cyrus (2 - Ii m.) was evidently considered short enough to
-
permit the constructionof a heavy, steeply pitched stone roof, the internal span of the Zendan (3 21 m.)
seems to have been considered too long for any similar, wholly faithful, reproduction. Accordingly,
much to the detriment of its external appearance-and that of the Ka'bah at a later date-the Zendan
was only granted the shallow, emasculated version of a pyramidal roof that appears in the present
reconstructions(Figs. 2 and 3).
The architrave of the doorway, which is only represented today by a fragment of an up-turned
terminal and an open slot for certain missing elements (P1. Ic) has had to be restored almost entirely
on the evidence of the Ka'bah's well preserved architrave. Precisely where this complex, originally
wooden composition was first evolved we do not know; all that can be said is that, in view of so many
other northern parallels, it is more than likely to have had a North West Iranian or Urartian origin.
The interior of the doorway has attracted little in the way of comment, save that Sami, who would
like to see the tower identified as a tomb, has made the claim that the door was " set in a stone frame "
and " permanently closed ".*s He has supposed, in fact, that the surviving "jamb " on the south-west
side of the doorway is a true jamb and has noted that it lacks anything like a proper socket near its
outer edge. But, as we can see from its three clamp recesses (Fig. 3), combined with the presence of
miniature dowel holes and chisel marks on the adjoining floor, the surviving "jamb " could never have
14 Iran The details for the reconstruction are partly taken from a study
I, p. 31. 17
of fallen blocks at the Zendan itself and partly from a compara-
15 See R. D. Barnett, Iraq XII, pt. x, pl. i; and E. Herzfeld,
tive study of the Ka'bah. It should be added that, despite the
ArchaeologicalHistory of Iran, 1935, fig. 2. Also R. D. Barnett,
testimony of Dieulafoy's well-known illustration (L'Art
Iraq XIX, pt. I, p. 74.
Antique de la Perse I, fig. 26) the Ka'bah had only four, and
16 R. D. not twenty-two, roof-stones.
Barnett, ibid. Also Oganesyan, KarmirBlur IV, x956,
pls. 58 and 59. 18 Sami, op. cit., p. 79-
been a true jamb. Instead the existing " jamb " appears to have been a solid structural anchor for a
decorative black stonejamb with a very similar profile. What is more, the width of the truejamb would
almost certainly have allowed it to reach, and mask, the one complete door pivot that we still have,
while elsewhere it was very probably cut back to allow the south-west door-leaf to lie flush with the
reveal. Unfortunately, the opposite side of the doorway is too broken to reveal nearly as much, although
certain surface indications have been marked in Fig. 3.
Not surprisingly, some of the closest parallels to all these arrangements come from the Ka'bah-i-
Zardusht, where double-leaved doors of almost identical width were again masked from the outside by
separate blocks of black stone. In fact, the chief difference between the two entrances probably lies in
the quite distinct methods that seem to have been used to insert the doors. For, while the Ka'bah would
seem to illustrate an exceptionally rigorous example of the normal methods of " trough insertion
the Zendan, with its shallow, intact, floor socket, would seem to show that other methods were some- ",1,9
times used as well. But, in the absence of the upper sockets from the Zendan, we shall never know
whether the doors were mounted simultaneouslywith a specially prepared lintel or whether the upper
sockets were enlarged after the building had been completed. If the latter system were employed, the
sockets would have to have been packed with a stone or metal shoe as soon as the doors had been
inserted.
Within the chamber itself it is interesting to find that the surviving walls still show a detail that is
definitely paralleled in the Tomb of Cyrus and probably also paralleled in the Ka'bah. This consists
of the semi-circularbead moulding, cm. in diameter, which lies immediately below the ceiling and
5"5 timber
which seems to represent a skeuomorphic, wall-plate.
Lastly, the double-socketedstone threshold that lies directly in front of the staircase (Fig. 3) would
seem to give obvious substance to the suggestion that the immediate environs of the Zendan were
provided with a mud-brick enclosure wall, pierced by a double-leaved entrance.20 But, while ample
traces of mud-brick have been located at a slightly greater distance from the Zendan,21it should be
stressed that no traces have been detected immediately beside or behind the threshold, where twin
flagstonesmay have formed part of a paved approach, and that even the threshold itself is only bedded
in loose earth. In short, the testimony of these isolated stones is not quite so clear-cut as it first appears
and we should perhaps consider the possibility that all three stones were still only temporarily bedded
when the Zendan fell out of use.
Functionof theZendan
Without the assistance of Dr. Erich Schmidt's definitive publication of the Ka'bah-i-Zardusht,
which is due to appear in the next volume of the Persepolis report, it would seem advisable to defer
certain more detailed structural comparisonsbetween the Ka'bah and the Zendan to a later occasion.
But since the architecturalfeaturesof the two monuments accord so closely, and since our own work has
thrown fresh light on at least two or three points, it may not be inappropriate to say something about
the original function of both structures.
As is well known, both buildings have been a source of controversyfor almost a century. Dieulafoy,
Herzfeld, Perrot, Chipiez, Curzon and Sami have all maintained that they must have served as tombs,
while Sarre, Erdmann, Ghirshman and others have taken the view that they must have been built as
fire temples.22
In consideringthe towers as tombs their orientation, their isolation, their imitation of a distinct type
of house, and their megalithic construction have all been used, on perfectly sound grounds, to suggest
that they should be identified with the tradition of free-standing tomb construction that we know to
have existed in Iran during the greater part of the sixth century B.c. Even the substantial elevation of
the single chamber, which must have been demanded by functional as well as by structural factors,
could be taken as a corroborative detail. But very few other arguments carry conviction. Herzfeld,
for instance, has tried to substantiate the view that, even in the face of his probable identification of
19 Paralleled in the Tomb of 21
Cyrus but more especially in the See below, under p. 16.
rock-cut Tomb of Darius. 22For a comprehensive bibliography see K. Erdmann, " Das
IranischeFeuerheiligtum", Sendschriftiz DeutscheOrient-Gesellschaft
20 See Sami, op. cit., p. 8o. (hereafter Sendschriftii D.O.G.), p. 17 f.
Takht-i-Rustam as the tomb of Cambyses II,23 We still require other mausolea at Pasargadae and
Naqsh-i-Rustam for such personages as Cambyses I, the father of Cyrus, and Hystaspes, the father of
Darius.24 And yet, if we consider the merits of such candidates, we must wonder why Cambyses I
should have had to leave it to his son to provide him with a tomb after a reign of forty years and why
Darius should have chosen to inter his father in an identical, archaic type of tomb at a time when we
know rock-cut tombs to have been returning to favour as one of the symbols-religious or otherwise-
of his own line.
A second argument that has been used to bolster the tomb theory has been Dieulafoy's contention
that the floor troughs in the entrance to the Ka'bah were each cut to facilitate the introduction of a
heavy load, such as a sarcophagus.25 But, as a number of other parallels show, such deep, partly
shelving troughs were almost certainly cut to assist in the introduction and subsequent retention of the
doors and nothing else. Equally, Sami appears to be definitely over-simplifyingthe case when he states
that, because the doorway representedthe only source of ventilation in the Ka'bah, the two towers must
have been tombs rather than fire temples.26 Apart from the fact that such an assumption dismissesany
alternative functions that either building might have had, it overlooks the fact that, during its long
history, the Ka'bah's lofty chamber might have made a not inadequate sanctuary for the slow burning
" eternal fire ".27
Finally, before leaving the tomb theory entirely, mention must be made of the suggestion that the
towers were built as temporary tombs, where the body of the king could always have been laid to rest
pending the completion of his permanent tomb. If nothing else this novel interpretation accounts for
the presence of a ceremonial approach to the door-something that is otherwise only found on late
Achaemenian tombs of the fourth century B.c. But in every other sense such a theory has little to
commend it, since it largely depends on the close proximity of the Ka'bah to the tombs at Naqsh-i-
Rustam and takes no account of the fact that the Zendan and the Tomb of Cyrus share no such
relationship.
Turning to the second school of thought, Sarre and Erdmann have each taken the resemblance
between the towers and certain altar-bearingdevices that appear on Fratadara coins of the second half
of the third century B.C. as an important indication that the towers must have served as fire temples in
Achaemenian times.28 The fact that the coins are still early enough to reflect Achaemenian religious
practicescannot be denied, but, at the same time, there are important considerationswhich would seem
to prove that the towers themselvescannot be representedon the coins. To begin with the altar supports
do not appear in isolation: they are shown beside a standing figure of a priest and, to judge from such a
scale, they could not have been very much more than 2 m. high-a height that compares very closely
with that of the two limestone supportsthat survive in the sacred enclosure at Pasargadae.29 Secondly,
the points of resemblance between the towers and the devices on the coins are not precise: in particular,
elaborate crenellations-in themselves nearly a third of the height of the structure below-are often
shown on the corners of such supports.30 And lastly, the actual construction of the two towers would
seem to rule out any possible relationship, since neither of them was equipped with a flat roof let alone
any staircase leading to the roof.31
25 E. Herzfeld,IAE, p. 214.- XXIV, 1944-45, p. 175 f.) he draws an initial picture of a
24 E. Herzfeld, ibid. deliberate separation of fire temples and fire altars, such as
25Dieulafoy, L'Art Antiquede la Perse
III, p. 2, note 2. would still allow our isolated sixth century towers their proper
26 Sami,
op. cit., p. 94. place in the early part of an evolutionary sequence, and then,
27 The sacred fire in a modem Zoroastrian temple, for instance,
with the observation that the distance between the temple and
the altars in the fourth century ayadana temple at Susa was
is almost always slow-burning, almost smokeless, in character.
28See K. Erdmann, Sendschriftix D.O.G., p. 19 only i6 m., he goes on to argue that a continuously closer
f. association ultimately led to a coupling of the two elements in a
29See Figs. 5 and 6. single structure. Finally, as a visible proof of his last contention
20 Cf. G. F. Hill, GreekCoins
ofArabia, MesopotamiaandPersia, 1922, he cites the Tower of Nurabad-a Parthian structure suffi-
pls. 29 and 30. ciently like the Ka'bah to suggest a measure of inspiration from
31 It should be added that Professor Ghirshman has that quarter, with also, of course, a staircase to the all-
put forward
yet another theory that appears to obviate such objections and important roof and an internal chamber that is presumed to
even appears to add a measure of support to the fire temple have been large enough to have housed a perpetual fire.
theory from an otherwise unexplored direction. In stating his Unfortunately, however, the evidence adduced to support this
case (in his article entitled " La Tour de Nurabad " in Syria [continuedoverleaf
Still further interest in the fire temple theory has grown from Sprengling's study of a Pahlavi
inscription of Shapur I that was found on the lower walls of the Ka'bah during Schmidt's excavations
in the mid-1930's.32 In two separate papers setting out his views33Sprengling has suggested (a) that
the Ka'bah must have been connected with the enthronement ceremonies of the Sasanian kings, (b)
that the Ka'bah could have been used to house the crown jewels and (c) that the Ka'bah almost
certainly served as the shrine of the Anahit fire of Istakhr in Sasanian times. But, apart from stressing
that the Sasanians would not necessarily have been aware of the Ka'bah's original function, and that
they might well have found new purposes for the building, it should be remembered that, even with
regard to the Sasanian period, all such suggestions are purely interpretative. The Ka'bah is never
referred to as a fire temple; it is only inferred that this must have been its r6le.
Fortunately, a much firmer clue to the function of the building, in at least Sasanian times, has
emerged from a study of a second Pahlavi inscription, found at a still lower level, which was erected by
KARTIR, the founder of the Sasanian national church. In commenting on this inscription, Professor
W. B. Henning has observed that the Ka'bah itself was referredto as " this foundation house " (bwny
BYT' = bun-xanak), and, from this wording, which represents the only direct descriptive reference
that we have, he suggeststhat the building must have been destined " for the safe keeping of the charters
and records of the Sasanian Church among them . .. the principal copy of the Avesta ".34 As we see,
there is no hint, in either the Pahlavi designation or in ProfessorHenning's interpretation, of the two
conflicting theories that have commanded so much attention in the past. Moreover, it is probably
true-even if the somewhat evasive term " foundation house " should not have come down to the
Sasanians from the Achaemenians35-that a search for a unique function of this kind will take us further
than any other line of enquiry.
In terms of our own work, there are perhaps three new points that deserve attention. In the first
place, a fresh examination of the fragmentary Zendan inscription, which representsthe only contem-
porary inscription associated with either tower, has shown that the first, much damaged sign in the
initial Old Persian line has always been misread in the past and that, far from confirming the structure
as the tomb of Cambyses II or that of any other monarch, the whole inscription stands as a purely
enigmatic document, still without any obvious bearing on the problem before us.36 Secondly, our
excavations in the immediate vicinity of the Zendan have confirmed the fact that it was probably
surrounded, at no great distance from its stone platform, by a mud-brick enclosure wall.37 Thus,
instead of standing in a spacious garden as the Tomb of Cyrus did, the Zendan appears to have been
much more closely enclosed and, if we may believe the corollary, still more rigidly guarded. Finally,
to make a point that pertains to both towers, there is a discrepancy in the dressingof the two buildings
that has never been commented upon. For, while the dressingof the Zendan is virtually free of broad,
32 E. Schmidt, OIC, no. 21, p. 103. 37 Limited excavations in line with the main staircase have proved
M. 126 f. and that a much-denuded mud-brick wall, or possibly a platform,
s3 Sprengling, A.J.S.L. LIII, 1937, p. Z.D.M.G.
stood only some 5 m. from the edge of the stone platform. In
XCI, p. 652 f.
addition a further mud-brick wall or platform has been
4 W. B. Henning, in the Introduction to CorpusInscriptionum
encountered behind the Zendan, again at a distance of little
Iranicarum,pt. III, vol. II, portfolio II. more than 5 m. from the platform. In the almost complete
65As Hinz has already stressed. W. Hinz, Zarathustra,1961, p. 17. absence of potsherds of any kind, brick sizes would still seem to
"e See Iran II, p. 38 f. confirm an Achaemenian date for the structures concerned.
continuedfrom previouspage] or the later Fratadara temple at Persepolis. In addition,

theory of gradual fusion-with its implicit confirmation of the Erdmann's demonstration that the Ka'bah and the somewhat
rble of the two earlier towers-is relatively limited in its range remote fire altars at Naqsh-i-Rustam cannot have been
and turns too heavily on the testimony of a single, as yet associated before Sasanian times, since the latter have definite
unparalleled, structure of Parthian or, as Herzfeld thought, Sasanian characteristics (Erdmann, M.D.O.G. 81, 1949, p. 6 f.),
Sasanian date. It would seem far more relevant, in fact, to must surely be enough to destroy, or most seriously weaken, the
make direct comparisons between the twin towers and such supposed connection between the Zendan and the still more
Achaemenian or relatively early post-Achaemenian fire distant Pasargadae altars. Equally, the unique qualities of the
temples as we have. And here it can only be stated that, even two towers would seem to rule out S. Wikander's suggestion
if we allow for certain religious changes in the reign of that, in keeping with the known presence of other such shrines
Artaxerxes II or still further changes by the middle of the third throughout the Empire, the Zendan and the Ka'bah could have
century B.C., there is still not the slightest sign of any relation- been built as temples to the goddess Anahita. (See Wikander,
ship between the towers and either the ayadanatemple at Susa in KleinasienundIran, 1946, p. 68 f.).
Feuerpriester
multi-toothed chisel marks, that of the Ka'bah, in keeping with all other free-standing monuments of
Darius and his successors,is amply covered with such marks. The importance of this discrepancyneed
hardly be stressed; taken together with the archaic architectural features that both monuments
share-such as a use of black and white stone-it proves that the Ka'bah was almost certainly built by
Darius as a direct substitutefor the Zendan, and that the Ka'bah was not, as might otherwise have been
supposed, a still more ancient monument, at least as old as the Zendan itself.38
The possible motives behind this last substitutionare of interest. Such a replacement may have been
dictated by nothing more dramatic than the construction of a new dynastic centre that had to be
complete in itself. Or, as Hinz first suggested,39we may even have a reference to the substitution, and
the immediate reason for it, in the Bisitun inscription where Darius says-in a phrase that is tantalizing
because we know so little of such places-" As before, so I made the sanctuaries which Gaumata the
Magian had destroyed."40 Certainly the identical appearance of the two buildings is a most curious
and arresting phenomenon: Darius himself was not afraid of innovation, yet he seems to have
deliberately sought to produce nothing less than a slavish imitation of the Pasargadae tower. In fine,
whatever the function of either tower may have been, it would seem possible that this extremely rigid
imitation depended, more than anything else, on the wanton destruction of the Zendan and Darius'
determination to make precise, exact amends for the outrage.
Whether or not these same observationshelp to prove that the towers were mentioned in the early
Bisitun inscriptionis still debatable. But, if this were so, and if the towers should be defined by the term
ayadana-the word that is taken to mean a sanctuary in the Bisitun inscription-it may only reflect the
considerable breadth of that term. For, as we have seen, we have tried to define a unique type of
structure, with a singular, still obscure function, that seems to have had no specific spatial relationship
with any other class of building although always being assuredof an important, central position in the
dynastic home of the day.41
Excavationson theCitadel
As a consequence of last season's excavations it is now possible to distinguish four distinct phases of
occupation on the Citadel: the monumental phase of stone construction initiated by Cyrus the Great
(Period I); the succeeding phase of mud-brick construction which we now know to have lasted from
early in the reign of Darius to c. 280 B.c. (Period II); the still later phase of largely mud-brick con-
struction which probably falls within the years 280-230 B.C. (Period III); and, as a last addition to
this sequence, a brief phase of early Islamic occupation (Period IV).
PeriodI (c. 550-522 B.C.)
In two or three final sondages connected with Period I, little fresh information could be added to
that already gained during our two previous seasons.42 It was only at the north-easterncorner of the
southern recess, in trench Z, that we were able to recover at least some evidence of the plans that were
originally entertained for the great stone platform. At this strategic point, a relatively deep
sounding revealed the apparent beginnings of a Period I ground plan (Fig. 4). Consisting of a line of
four heavy stones running into the heart of the platform, the blocks in question would seem to have
been intended as part of a substantial north-south cross-wall, separating the bulk of the platform from
the rest of the hill behind. But, as was to be expected from the unfinished nature of so much Period I
stonework elsewhere, nothing else was found beyond the fourth stone and, despite an intensive search,
we were unable to locate any complementary cross-walls, either at the north side of the platform or at
the western limit of the south recess.
In trench Z again, a massive, unfinished corner-stone (P1. Id) and a small iron shoe (P1. VIa)
would also seem to illustrate the abrupt suspension of all Period I construction. The block itself still
S8 For an earlier discussion of the significance of the multi- 41The search for still further clues-both architectural and
toothed chisel, see Iran II, p. 27. epigraphical-would probably be most rapidly promoted by a
fresh examination of the deep, but still largely unexplored
39 W. Hinz, GeistigeArbeit, 1942, pp. 1-2. Achaemenian level at Naqsh-i-Rustam.
40 R. G. Kent, Old Persian Grammar, Texts, Lexicon, 1953, 42 For earlier reports on Period I see Iran I, pp. 30-7 and Iran II,
p. 12o. PP.
30-3?
lies where it was abandoned, and where it was subsequently covered by the higher floor of Period II,
only a few metres from its intended position at the south-east corner of the recess, while the small shoe
still sits in the more northerly of two stone sockets, each of which were almost certainly connected with
an important lifting rig.43
Another discovery of much interest from trench Z is represented by the first course of a stone
parapet which, from certain dressingchannels on the stone course below (Pls. Id and IIa) can be said
to have run from the eastern to the western limits of the southern recess. With recessed panels at its
base on its inner (P1. IIa), as well as its outer, face it appears to prove that the floor level of at least
this part of the platformwas intended to be nearly a metre lower than the later street level of Period II.44
Also, from the relatively modest width of the parapet's first course, we can be sure that it was not
intended to rise to any great height. With other building plans in mind there may even have been a
conscious effort to preserve as much of the attractive southern view as possible.
Period II (c. 522-280 B.c.)

During the past year many new parts of the Period II Citadel were examined for the first time,
with the result that almost all the uneroded areas of the site have now been excavated. Beginning in
the area of room I14, at what might be termed the eastern edge of the Citadel's western rectangle,
where the ground level begins to rise and the deposit starts to thin, the most impressivefeature consisted
of a large water tank (P1. IIb), 5 m. long and almost 3 m. wide, which had been cut into bed-rock for
a depth approaching 4 m. Marked on the site plan as 130, this deep tank appears to have served as the
site's chief reservoir throughout Period II. Its sides are far from regular, showing many an awkward
bulge, but, as a protection against seepage, the entire pit was evidently plastered and replastered
several times. At the top of the pit itself a distinctive wall, with a stone exterior and a mud-brick
centre, probably carried the top of the tank to a point several metres above ground level. Inside the
pit, a mass of boulders at the base would all seem to have come from a collapse, or a seriesof collapses,
in the original superstructurewhile, at a higher level, a series of ash bands can be directly related to
the extensive fire that spelt the end of the Period II occupation.45
Room I 14 itself representsone of the largest chambers in this particular portion of the site. But
despite the fact that it was heavily burnt in the II destruction, it yielded hardly any objects. One of the
few featuresof any unusual interest proved to be an incomplete partition wall, which looks as if it may
have served as a makeshift roof-supportin the final years of the II occupation.46
North of room I14 a smaller room, 200, gave access to what may have been an open area still
further to the east. But because the ground level rises very steeply at this point, all contiguous traces
of II or III occupation were swept away in the levelling process that preceeded the construction of the
Period IV settlement. Where more evidence does survive, north of room 200, the hearths in rooms
65 and 66 and the paved " washing area " in room 68 all seem to point to the domestic nature of a string
of small rooms (65-68 and I117) that taper into eroded areas east and north of room 68. Indeed, the
presence of yet another domestic range of rooms on the southern side of the Citadel (76-79 and 145-147)
almost certainly indicates that important elements of the garrison were permanently billeted near the
junction of the Citadel's eastern and western rectangles (Fig. 4). One of the more interestingfeaturesof
the southern range consists of the miniature plastered bathroom (room 146) seen in P1. IIc. Entered
from room147, where the water was heated over a semi-circular fireplace, the bathroom consists of
two miniature chambers with the remains of a low partition between them. The larger, outer chamber
is plastered throughout with a smooth floor sloping towards a small, circular drain-hole at the north-
west corner. By contrast the small inner chamber has no drain-hole; but it was furnished with two
remarkable features: a low, square plinth and an adjoining bowl-shaped depression. Quite what
these unusual features were used for is not certain: the plinth almost seems too low for a proper seat
43The sockets in question are each marked by dots in the S.E. 45 See p. 22.
extension of trench Z. 46 Cf. the late walls that were added to the northern end of the-
"4The higher Period II level probably had the advantage that, Reception Hall once it had fallen into disrepair. Fig. 4 andc
apart from anything else, it covered all unfinished stonework Iran II, p. 34.
wherever it happened to occur.
3
TALL-I-TAKHT
I
10 0 10 20 30 40 50 METRES POSITO
1 18 18
m.n dec.1963.16
p 2 21
117
least 6567 66
20 20 111 200 152 15
18 1
0 21a1
45o
.7 21b110 17 4 153 1552
o
46 9 18 201
I
CC 4 12
,
o
1 137
515 1
49,.
147
SPo e s14et6
37
I79
S"39 7177
1
35 70 72 7
78 6a
336 1
13
B Period I exposed
SPeriod IImud brick walls
stonework
A rain
r -
Ir
-
M Additions to the above
M Period IIImud brick walls

f
m Period IVwalling L... r-i I
facing page i8.] Fig. 4. Plan of Citadel.

3 4
!-L-- ,---- r"--rJ L

-~~- -
-~
x
X 186
I
2x ,o
69
L
18 18 85b 86b 6 a 7 6 90 91 93 94 95 96 9 19 192 r 'L- J
21 210 197
pL 2- 9
2' 2
9, S196 97
I rr_ _..
least 117 65
ImI
6
67 68
r
- I
11 I IiL
152 15
21153 155 18
110 :114
K
C 160
173
170 16
17
Summit
Terrace
147
146-
79
71
70 72 78 6a 76b 103
I36 -
38 H
Orain POSITION
OF COINHOARD
L
I
? r Ii
,
,g
III
- - I I I
I---
I ----------------,I
l -- -, I I I I
--------
I,, -----l
Fig. 4. Plan of Citadel.

and the shelving sides of the hollow in the floor would hardly seem to fit the requirementsof a practical
foot-bath.
Owing to much recent disturbance in this same quarter of the site, no other room proved quite so
well preserved. But at the same time the earlier II floor in room 76a still had much of its original plaster
surface, and its northern corner even produced a bronze model of a couchant ram, 3 - I cm. high and
4 - o cm. long.
The limits of this last crowded area appear to have been defined by a heavy, curved wall of boulders
to the north-east and by a continuous, solidly constructed mud-brick wall to the south. While the
former marksthe probable limits of a central summit terrace, the latter may have flanked an important
access route to the ground floor corridorwithin the outer wall. Certainly some such point of access to
the corridor would seem to have been required to balance those connected with streets I east and 85a
on the northern side of the Citadel.
As can be seen from Fig. 4, the street 85a divides one area of original Period II construction from
another of distinctly secondary date. The earlier rooms to the west provide little evidence of their
former function, although it is interesting to note that many of their walls were truncated and levelled
after the II destruction and that at least two Period III walls (in rooms 189 and 216) were then built
against the outer fortificationsat a new ground level about a metre above the old (P1. IId and Fig. 4)-
Moving east along the inner side of the northern defences, rooms 86a, 86b and 87 each appear as
relatively late II additions, with the last but one Seleucid floor in room 86a still associated with a
small hoard of four Alexandrine drachms, the latest of which date the floor to the last decade of the
fourth century B.C.47 Further east again, towards the north-eastcorner of the Citadel, we find evidence
of a number of regular II structures in the angle of the outer wall (rooms 99 and 190-192) while a
series of less regular apartments (rooms 93-97) seem to mark a certain measure of building activity in
the later years of Period II.48 The dividing wall between the two areas is of particularinterest since its
plan suggests the presence of occasional buttressed towers along its length. Presumably it also ran
back to the north-east corner of the summit terrace, where some formof internal gate may have helped
to regulate the flow of traffic inside the walls.
Finally, in areas K and H, our work was concentrated on the two successivedrainage systems that
were used to channel water away from the inner face of the defensive wall. As regards the first system,
there is every reason to suppose that the preparation of its open jubes and heavy stone-lined outlets
must have preceded all other work on the wall itself, and, since the stoneworkof the B drain is of very
high quality, it has already been suggested that such preliminariesdate back to Period I.49 But as time
went on the local ground level appears to have risen, and we find that, with the jubes abandoned, new
covered drains took their place. These last drains, with a sinuous, meandering course (Fig. 4), were
built from whatever materials came to hand, notably large pithos fragments, stones and baked bricks.
But in one case this haphazard use of different materials led us to a most important discovery, for, in
the middle of the K trench, at a point just over 35 m. east of the B drain, we found that an almost
complete, beautifully finished, grey limestone foundation tablet had been used as a makeshift drain-
cover (P1. IIIa).
The text of the tablet is well known. It represents the third known copy of the famous Daiva
Inscription in which Xerxes attacks the cult of the Daivas and extols the worship of Ahuramazda.50
With sixty lines of Old Persian cuneiform divided into two panels of twenty-seven lines and two panels
of three lines (P1. V), the tablet measures 52 x 51 cm. with a maximum thickness of lo09 cm. The
broken, top left-hand corner accounts for part of the text of lines 1-8, 50-57 and 58-60. But despite
this defect it is still perfectly clear that we are dealing with an exact copy of the only complete Persepolis
4' Information kindly supplied by Mr. G. K. Jenkins, Deputy in antiquity. See G. K. Jenkins, p. 50 and pl. IV, bottom
Keeper of Coins and Medals at the British Museum. See also right.
p. 41. 49See Iran II, p. 33. Also note that a stone-lined drain of much
poorer construction runs out under the floors of rooms 2 1o and
48 Even the earliest group of buildings appears to have remained 187, east of street 85a.
in use until a late date, the latest floor of room 192 producing 50 See Herzfeld, " Xerxes' Verbot des Daiva-Cultes ", AMI VIII,
the joining halves of a late fourth century or early third century 1937, PP. 56-77; Schmidt, op. cit., pp. 12-15; and Kent, op.
forged, silver plated tetradrachm that had been broken in half cit., pp.
150-2.
text; not only are there no variant readings in the surviving text but, more than that, each word and
each individual character lies in precisely the same relative position on each tablet.51
As a result of this exact correspondence,the Pasargadae tablet can hardly be said to add anything
freshfrom a linguistic point of view. Instead its chief significancelies in what it tells us about Pasargadae
itself, for the very fact that a foundation tablet should have been sent to the site during the reign of
Xerxes (486-465 B.C.) is an independent testimony to the attention that was still paid to the old
dynastic home long after the death of its Founder. Also, to be more specific, the provenance of the
tablet is an important clue to the scale of building that must still have been in progresson the Citadel
well into the fifth centuryB.C.52
The context in which the tablet was found is not out of keeping with the other secondary uses to
which such tablets were sometimes put. At Persepolis, for instance, we know that a whole series of
Xerxes' stone tablets, including the other copies of the Daiva Inscription, were incorporated in a
mud-brick bench and other such appointments in the garrison quarters.53 Thus, from all the evidence
that we have, it would appear that out-dated, unused foundation stones were only respected for a
limited period of time before they were made available for almost any convenient, secondary purpose.54
The Plan of thePeriodII Defences

A relatively well preserved stretch of the perimeter wall between towers I and 4 did much to
illustrate the whole nature of the Citadel's defensive system, while still further excavations on the
south side of the Citadel would seem to have revealed the probable location of the main entrance
(Fig. 4)-
Beginning in area V, on the north side of the Citadel, we were at last able to define the true outline
of tower I, which now appears to have been the only projecting redoubt in an otherwise unbroken
fagade from area A to X. It was also found that the base of tower i was strengthened by a line of
boulders, while, at a still higher point, above an artificial ground surface, repeated coats of white
plaster evidently added to the spruce appearance of the defences. The north-south section through
trench V also confirmedlast season'sconclusion that the upper part of the defensive wall east of tower i
had fallen inwards rather than outwards at the time of the II destruction.55
In area X, where the mud-brick deposit grew particularly thin, it often proved difficult to trace the
line of the fagade. But fortunately two or three stretchesof stone foundations,such as those found at the
base of tower i, still filled most of the gaps, making it almost certain that there was no major entrance
at this point.
At the corner marked P, where the deposit again grew deeper, the external fagade was distinguished
by the presence of a deep niche which extended to within 55 cm. of ground level. 56 The practical value
of such a niche remains uncertain; but it should be noted that in at least one place, just east of tower 3,
it was complemented by what would seem to have been either a lightwell or a ventilation shaft within
the perimeter corridor.
Despite its apparently exposed position, tower 2 represents the most informative example of all
5' Compare our illustrations with Schmidt, op. cit., fig. Io; and essential part of any site at this period. Cyrus, like Darius,
Kent, op. cit., pl. IIIa. would not have overlooked the point.
r3 See Schmidt, op. cit., p.
52 The assumption that Darius was mainly responsible for the
I i f.
conversion of the Tall-i-Takht from a strong, but unfinished, In these notes on the tablet, I would like to express
54 concluding
palace platform to a more mundane mud-brick citadel (see my warm thanks to the Reverend Norman Sharp for his
Iran I, p. 36 f.) is probably not affected by the discovery of the
unfailing readiness to examine any new inscribed material as it
tablet, which presumably only confirms the length of the task. was found, as well as my equally warm thanks to Professor E.
As we have seen, thereis ample evidence of the extremely rapid Benveniste for his constant interest in our epigraphic discoveries
start that was made to the original conversion, which still and for his valued comments on them.
preserved loose iron shoes in their original position. It might
also be added that none of the details recovered from the r5 See Iran II, p. 35. The width of the fall alone would suggest
that our walls must have been at least II m. high. But if
Citadel can be said to lend any support to Professor x-50(Schmidt, op. cit.,
Ghirshman's theory, formulated before our work began, that we also take account of Schmidt's estimate
the platform dates from the time of Cambyses I (Ghirshman, p. 8) that the slightly broader walls of Persepolis sometimes
attained a height of I5 m., it is perfectly possible that our walls
op. cit., p. 131). For prestigious and almost unnecessary as
also attained heights of 13 and 14 m.
Cyrus' additional building efforts on the Tall-i-Takht may
seem, we must still remember that a defensible citadel was an 56Possibly the height of the artificial ground level at this point.
the towers that were excavated, and, with its almost equally well preserved twin, tower 3, it allows us
to describe what seems to have been the standard ground plan of all the towers disposed along the
Citadel's defences. Linked to the rest of the defensive system by a ground level corridor within the
perimeter wall, each individual tower was supplied with a small ground floor chamber, 3 80 x 40 m.
2"
in area. In the absence of any mud-brick steps within such chambers, however, it can only be assumed
that ladders were used to reach the upper stories. Taking a still wider range of evidence into account,
almost every tower on a straight stretch of wall would seem to have had three distinct buttresseson its
inner face, while twin corner towers would always seem to have shared a compressed, central buttress.
Finally, within the perimeter corridor itself, certain slight but notable constrictionsat the edge of each
tower would seem to point to the special provision of weight-bearing arches wherever any extra load
was likely to be felt.
Throughout most of its long, 740 m. circuit, the spacious perimeter corridor appears to have been
level, save perhaps at its inner corners D and X, where it almost certainly had to climb to meet the
natural contours of the Citadel Hill. In each case, however, flights of mud-bricksteps (P1.IIIb) would
seem to have eased the ascent or descent.57 Regular points of access, such as the entrances marked 44,
I east and 85a, also representa typical feature of the corridor,wherever it happens to be well preserved.
Indeed, from such doorways, we can guess that the corridor not only served as a valuable link at
moments of crisis, but that it also served-particularly as the centre of the Citadel became more
cluttered with secondary buildings-as a not insignificant artery of everyday communication.
In completing the present brief description of the defences, it must be stressed that the eastern
extremitiesof the northern wall, and the whole length of the eastern wall have been reconstructedon a
minimum of evidence. The denuded north-eastcorner, for instance, may have had a still more complex
plan that anchored it to the outer fortificationsthat encircled the valley to the north.58 But at the same
time the surviving buttress in trench H, and the excellently preserved buttressesin area 12o, are each
of value in supporting the reconstructionof the southern wall shown in Fig. 4. In particular, the right
angle turn in the inner face of the wall in area 12o presents a unique variation in plan which-for all
the sad degree of denudation further east-would still seem to speak for the existence of an entrance,
or some other quite exceptional feature, in the immediate vicinity. Further than this one probably
cannot go-save to say that the proposed entrance stands at the head of much the easiest ascent to the
Citadel, along which even wheeled traffic could have completed most, if not all, of the climb.59
TheSummitTerrace
Facing the largely denuded entrance, at a distance of 30-35 m. to the north, is the indented facade
of a monumental mud-brick terrace that seems to have straddled the summit of the Citadel (Fig. 4)-
Now denuded at many points, it is impossible to reconstructits entire plan. But from its relatively well
preserved south-eastern corner in area R, from a fragment of facade found in trench Y, and from a
segment of curved walling found east of room 147, it is perhaps possible to calculate that its approximate
dimensions exceeded 70 m. in one direction and approached 6o m. in the other. The very thickness
of its retaining wall, which is best illustrated by an inner wall-face in area 173, also provides a valuable
clue to the original height and purpose of the terrace. For although the summit boasts no ground
plan, but only the earth and pebble deposit that formed the core of the terrace, we can still guess that it
once supported an elevated, inner redoubt consonant with the scale of the outer defences. Also, it may
not be entirely an accident that the base of the terrace should have produced some of the deepest ash
associated with the II destruction.60
60 The
5' Although the evidence at the D corner is too tenuous to prove deepest layers were found in areas Ioo and 104. It should
whether or not any steps existed there, the evident change in be added that certain domestic additions to the base of the
the contours is certain to have called for them. terrace, such as room I6o, do not necessarily invalidate the
58 For an account of our earlier examination of these fortifications military character of the terrace; such relatively early addi-
see Iran I, p. 41. The valley floor itself was not tested until the tions probably only reflect the prior consideration that was
past season, but unfortunately our excavations failed to reveal given to internal building needs at a time when almost any
any sign of permanent Achaemenian habitation. inner fortification must have seemed a remote requirement.
59The modern track in this position is clearly visible from almost
any southern vantage point (pl. IXd).
The Date of thePeriodII Destruction

During the past season one of the most important single events was the discovery of a large hoard
of Hellenistic silver coins,'x all of which were found lying on the floor of the internal corridor that runs
between towers 3 and 4 (Fig. 4). Scattered over a radius of some 20 cm. (P1. IIIc) they were sealed
beneath the thick band of debris that partially choked the corridor between areas I86a and I86d at
the time of the II destruction. Consistingof thirty-foursilver tetradrachms,the coins represent no less
than ten mints, five of which are new to Pasargadae. But apart from the intrinsic interest of certain
of the earlier issues, such as that of a coin from Ake-Ptolemais that bears a date equivalent to 313-312
B.C.,62 it is the latest coins-the eight tetradrachms bearing a helmeted portrait of Seleucus I-that
necessarilysupply the date of the hoard and the II destruction. For the first time, in fact, we now have
incontrovertible evidence that the great fire, which swept over the site from tower 2 to the deep
reservoir (130) was not the work of Alexander, but rather a product of still later events that took place
in the first quarter of the third century B.C.
The precise date of the attack obviously hinges on two points: the date of Seleucus' helmeted issue
and the condition of the eight coins concerned. With regard to the first point, there is still no absolute
certainty as to the date of the issue, although it is generally agreed that the coins were minted to
commemorate Seleucus' victory at Ipsos in 301 B.C.; with regard to the second, a number of the coins
are sufficientlyworn to suggest that they may have been in currency for something approaching twenty
years. Thus, on the evidence of at least this one hoard, which is embedded in the clearest context one
could ask for, the destructionof the Period II settlement could have taken place as late as 280 B.C., the
year in which Seleucus I died.63
This late date for the II destruction also leads to several other observations. In particular it shows
that the isolated, secondarystructuresin trench H-which were associatedwith a coin hoard of identical
chronological value-were destroyed with the rest of the II Citadel.64 The absence of any earlier
battle scars also seems to show that the Pasargadae garrison was not called upon to play any active
part in the struggle between Eumenes and Antigonos. Indeed, the apparently peaceful conditions at
Pasargadae would seem to confirm the fact that the fighting between the two armies was confined to
regions still further to the north.65
PeriodIII
As can be seen from the above evidence, the date of the Citadel's third settlement now has to be
adjusted to a period that begins after 280 B.C. Equally, the extent of the II destruction now appears
to have been much greater than had been supposed.
With regard to the more damaged sectors of the perimeter wall certain repairs had to be put in
hand at once. In order to afford fresh access to tower 4, and presumably other parts of the debris-
choked northern defences, a narrow secondary passage was driven through the north wall of room 87.
With rough reveals on one side and a crude hearth on the other (P1. IIId) it bears all the marks of a
hurried secondary construction. Still further to the east, a series of wall reinforcementsin rooms 88, 91
and 95, and a totally new floor level in room 191, may also be associated with repairs to the defences.
But elsewhere, wherever the perimeter seems to have remained more or less intact, hardly any efforts
were made to renovate the wall or even, as far as one can see from trench H and trench R, to repair
such damaged structuresas lay inside the defences. Indeed, the great majority of Period III construc-
tion now appears to have been concentrated in area C-the point where it was first met in 196I-
and where it sits directly over some of the worst of the II debris (P1. IVa).
In objects the III settlement also appears poorer than we had thought, although its pottery,
including several whole vessels from area C, is still closely related to much that we know from Period II.
61 For full details see G. K. Jenkins, pp. 41-52. smallpotterydice thatwasfoundearlylast season. Likecertain
62 G. K. Jenkins, p. 47. earlierexamplesfromTell el Ajjiil (F. Petrie,AncientGazaIII,
63 Cf. G. K. Jenkins, p. 52.
I933, pl. XXVIII), it only differsfrom a moderndice in the
64 This hoard is again discussed in Mr. Jenkins' article. For way that its dots indicate the numberthree (pl. VIb).
previous references see Iran II, pp. 36 and 38. One other object 15For details of the engagementsconcernedsee Diodor. XIX.
of unusual interest from the destruction level in trench H is a 21 f. Also E. Bevan, TheHouseof Seleucus I, 1902,pp. 43-6.
from the west.
Pl. Ia. Zendan-i-Suleiman Pl. Ib. Zendan-i-Suleiman
from the east.
Pl Ic. Detail of the damageddoorway. Pl. Id. LookingnorthtowardsunfinishedPeriodI

stoneconstruction
in trenchZ.
P1. Ha. Looking west along inner edge of parapet in trench Z. Pl. IIb. The plastered cistern (130) in
Pl. MIc. The miniature bathroom (146) showing the " seat " Pl. MId. Internal angle of outerfortifications in area P sh
and "footbath " in the foreground. and door to tower 2.
Pl. Ilia. Part of thecoveredK drainshowingthe originallocationof the Daiva Inscription. P1. IIIb. The perimetercorridor(186a) in thecourseof exca
and staircaseleadingto area X
found on thefloor of theperimetercorridor(i86c).
Pl. IIIc. The hoardof silver tetradrachms Pl. IIId. Lookingnorththroughthe secondaryPerio
levelsof
P1. IVa. Viewfrom the south-westcornerof the cisternshowingthe superimposed
settlementsII, III and IV.
Pl. IVb. Viewoverwesternend of Citadelshowingremainso
Pl. IVc. Detail of PeriodIV externaldoorwayshowinglowestcourseof mud-brickblockingwith Pl. IVd. The Pillared Hall from the north. A secondarycr
part of protectivetowervisibleat right.
Pl. V. The Daiva Inscription.
Pl. VIa. A small ironshoefrom trenchZ. level in trenchH.
Pl. VIb. A potterydicefrom theII destruction Pl. VIc. View of tre
Pl. VIe. Fragmentof Old Persianinscription
fou
Pl. VId. Part of a steppedfire altarfound near the Tombof Cyrus.
edgeof Palace Area.
P1. VIIa. Thefire altar supportsbeforeexcavation. P1. VIIb. The southplinth showingthe remainsof two c
level.
Pl. VIIc. Detail ofjoiningfaces betweencentralcubeand staircaseblock. Pl. VIId. The northplinthfrom the west showing
Pl. VIIIa. The SacredPrecinctfrom the east showingthe TerracedMoundin the courseof excavation. Pl. VIIIb. The northstaircasewithpart of the adjoinin
Pl. VIIIc. Part of thepaved terracebetweenthe thirdandfourth terracewalls. Pl. VIIId. The gold hoardfrom thepaved te
Pl. IXa. View of centralsectionthroughBridge lookingeast towardsthe
Gatehouse.
Pl. IXb. Detail of completecolumnfrom northcornerof Bridge withpit in

foregroundshowingrammedboulderfoundations.
Pl. IXc. The banded,water-worncolumnsin the centralrow. Pl. IXd. The GardenPavilion seenfrom the south. The Zendanand the
Citadelappearin the background.
P1. Xb. Detail of gold bracelet.
PI. Xc. Detail of gold bracelet
Pl. Xa. Pair of gold ibex-headedbracelets,
Pl. XIa. Pair of gold earringseach with hollow gold meshon outside,threerows of gold pendants Pl. XIb. Pair of gold earrings each with two concentric circles of go
in centreand large lapis lazuli pendantat base. and sixteen free-standing rosettes round the ou
Pl. XIc. Detail of gold earring showing dot of granulation at end of each petal. P1. XId. Pair of gold earrings each with inset plates and three-sidedp
turquoise coloured paste.
~9~\
99
~lig~isll~t
~"
9 9 9~ 9 99'~'Z~ 99 '~
~
~
99 ~999999~99~99
99..
9 9~
99999999999
9~ ' '~
t3
1 11 $:?~9
Pl. XIIIb. The completecollectionof elevengo
P1. XIIIa. Four miniaturegold bells, threewith theirclappersstill in position.
Pl. XIIId. The completecollectionof gold c
Pl. XIIIc. Selectionof large and small gold lotus-shapedspacerbeads
Pl. XIVb. Triple spacerbeadseach with miniaturegold discs
surroundedby granulation. P1. XIVc. Fragm
Pl. XIVa. Selectionof gold beadsand spacerbeadswith
granulateddecoration.
Pl. XIVf. Small gold rod
P1. XIVd. Plain gold quadruplespacerbeads. P1. XIVe. Selectionof largergold beadsincludinga gold and
silverpendantat bottomright.
Pl. XIVg. Gold objectsincludingtwopendantsand tw6 P1. XIVh. Selectionof perforatedpearls. Pl. XIVi. A
segmentedbeadswith colouredinlays. the variousfo
In the face of such evidence, which points to diminished architectural standards, an unexpected
tolerance of extensive debris within the limits of the site, and a reduced building area, it is tempting
to suppose that we are dealing with an indigenous re-occupation that met its end in some form of local
conflict, possibly in the second half of the third century B.c. Also, from what little we can learn from
the available written and numismatic evidence, the pattern of historical events in Fars would accord
with such a picture. In the first place, the latest literary reference to fourth century Fars reflects the
growth of a strong nationalist party at least as early as 316 B.C. ;66 secondly the date of the destruction
of the II Citadel strongly suggests that an immediate revolt must have attended the death of Seleucus;
and thirdly, as the coins from the Persepolishoard seem to indicate,67the coins of Seleucus I were not
followed by those of his successor,Antiochus I, but rather by those of Bagadat, the first king of Persis
to mint his own money.
PeriodIV
Apart from last year's work on the Achaemenian and Seleucid phases, the past season also saw a
much more intensive examination of a short-lived Islamic occupation that first attracted attention in
1962.68 As can be seen from Fig. 4, most construction was concentrated on the crown of the hill,
east of area C and north of trench R.
In the former area we were fortunate enough to find a long stretch of the perimeter wall, complete
with an entrance, a protective tower, and a mass of small rooms within the fortification. Although now
very largely reduced to its boulder foundations, the entire plan is still remarkably clear (P1. IVb).
The projecting portion of the tower is rounded, with a diameter of 4-90 m., while the broad doorway
still shows the remains of a secondary, mud-brick blocking (P1. IVc). Individual bricks from the
settlement are seldom completely regular, but the average size, 39 x 39 x I cm., is appreciably larger
than anything found in either the Achaemenian or Seleucid levels. Within the rooms themselves,
simple beaten earth floors always seem to have been the rule.
In comparison with these rather mundane quarters the Pillared Hall at the summit of the Citadel
(17o, i17') is a much more imposing structure (Fig. 4 and P1.IVd). With its broad stone walls, plastered
both inside and outside, its carefullyplastered floor and two square, plasteredcolumn bases, it represents
much the most elaborate building that survives from this late occupation.69 As it stands, however, it
is a curiously isolated phenomenon, and one can only conclude that it must have been built as part of
an unfinished quarter that was abandoned long before it could be completed.
The actual duration of the settlement probably barely lasted fifty years. Almost the only signs of
secondary construction come from the Pillared Hall itself, where a rough stone cross-wall eventually
took the place of one of the columns (P1. IVd), and from the broad external doorway, where the
exigencies of defence probably called for a hasty blocking. As to the end of the settlement, this was
again violent: the clearest evidence of sudden burning and desertion coming from a Period IV floor
that had been cut into the summit terrace near area 100oo;70from two or three scattered vessels on the
floor of room 153; and from a distinct layer of ash on the floor of the Pillared Hall.
The pottery from Period IV is quite distinctive, with a predilection for rather heavy, ribbed and
grooved vessels. In colour it is usually pale buff, brown, grey or black with a matt, or, on occasion, a
burnished, finish. Shapes include large, round-bodied storage jars, often with a " water holding"
collar on the shoulder;V7smallerjars with a flat base, globular body, constricted neck and out-turned
rim; and heavy, almost coarse, bowls with a flat base and flaring sides.
Turning to the date of the settlement, it appears perfectly clear that it had no connection with the
thirteenth century Atibeg occupation that grew up near the Tomb of Cyrus.72 Instead the almost
total absence of glazed pottery-none at all could be said to be properly stratified-is a most valuable
66 The inner edge of the floor is marked on fig. 4 by the thin white
Diodor., op. cit., loc. cit. 70
7' See E. T. Newell, Coinageof the Eastern SeleucidMints, 1938, line that appears east of area Ioo.
p. I6o. 71 See Iran II, pl. VIIb.
68 Iran II, p. 36, note 47.
69 Pottery from the Hall proved identical with that from the ~2 See Sami, op. cit., p. 0ol.
barrack-like structures east of area C.
indication of a very early Islamic, or possibly even a very late Sasanian, date. At. both Istakhr and
Naqsh-i-Rustam, for instance, Schmidt found that glazed ware was virtually unknown before 750 A.D.73
Also, although Schmidt has still to publish his pre-Abbasid pottery, it cannot be without significance
that close parallels to our Period IV vessels are to be seen in the Persepolis Museum.74
TheSacredPrecinct
In undertaking the first survey of the isolated Sacred Precinct (Fig. I) since ProfessorHerzfeld's
limited soundings of 1928, we were able to complete a series of independent excavations at the two
limestone plinths (Figs. 5 and 6), at the Terraced Mound (Fig. 7), and at certain strategic points along
the line of the enclosure wall (Fig. 7, Inset).
As largely free standing monuments, the two plinths at the western end of the enclosure (P1.VIIa)
have long been recognized as twin fire altar supports of early Achaemenian date.75 As such they not
only disprove Herodotus' statement that it was not the Persian practice " to make and set up statues
and temples and altars ",76 but they also demonstrate the high antiquity of the fire altar plinth and the
equally long tradition behind the use of twin altars.7 The actual dedication of the altars is still un-
certain. Olmstead regards them as twin altars " to the tribal divinities Anahita and Ahuramazda ";"1
Ghirshman considers that, with a third altar elsewhere, they may have been dedicated to the triad
Ahuramazda-Mithras-Anahita;79 and Godard suggests that they may have been intended for
offerings to the sacred elements, fire and water.80 In the present discussion, however, we shall be less
concerned with these varying opinions than with the evidence as it stands, for in many ways remarkably
little has been said about the complex nature of the Precinct and its individual monuments.
Turning first to the readily datable twin fire altars, the central cube of the southern plinth (Fig. 5)
consistsof a hollow white limestone block approximately 2- I6 m. high and 2 43 m. square at the base.
Its lower edge is marked by a narrow protruding step 35 cm. high and 9 cm. wide while its upper
edge is characterized by a pair of deep channels or recessed steps, the upper one of which was either
unfinished or else purposely irregular in plan. To judge from a shallow recess on the upper inner face
of the staircase block, as well as the presence of deep dowel holes on each channel (Fig. 5), such upper
steps were intended to accommodate a series of black limestone additions to the upper part of the
monument. Also, if we should take yet another slot on the inner face of the staircase as a proper guide
(Fig. 5 and P1. VIIc), it would seem possible that still other embellishments were planned at various
medial points. But, more important still, the base of the monument was particularly well furnished
with black stone additions. As can be seen from Fig. 5 a highly polished black limestone border enclosed
both the plinth and the staircase block, while each corner of the plinth border was also marked by a
small protruding rectangular plinth, 70 x 52 cm. in size.
The precise function of such miniature plinths remains a mystery, save that the nature of their
surface dressing seems to indicate that each of them must have supported a further stone object of
almost identical size. Had they been situated somewhat closer to the walls of the main plinth it might
have been supposed that they could have supported corner pilasters leading up to an overhanging
superstructure,sibut as it is their present position hardly accords with the very slight overhang that
probably existed.82 In these circumstances only one other immediate solution suggests itself. For
although there is no representation of any such arrangement, nor anything in the known religious
beliefs of the time to support such a suggestion, it does seem faintly possible that a series of four
subsidiary fire altars could have stood on such plinths in addition to the main altar above. At the
78 A. T. Olmstead, Historyof the PersianEmpire, 1948, p. 6x.
7' Schmidt,op.cit., p. ioI.
4'Thesearemarkedsimplyas " Istakhr: Islamic". The Curator
writesto me that the Museumcataloguesbear nothingbut the "7 R. Ghirshman, op. cit., p. 229.
same description. 80 A. Godard, op. cit., p. 67.
71 See A.
Godard, " Les Monumentsdu Feu ", Athar-e-IranIII, 81 Such an arrangement seems to be illustrated in some of the
p. 65 f. altar supports depicted on Fratadara coins. See G. F. Hill,
76Herodotusi. 131.
op. cit., loc. cit.
7 Twin altarsof the steppedvarietyalsoappearin the earlytomb
relief of Sakawand,south of Kirmanshah. See Herzfeld,IAE, s82The best evidence for the width of the overhang comes from the
p. 205 f. and fig. 316. shallow cut in the upper face of the staircase (pl. VIIc).
1 0 1 2 3 4 5. METES.
;5?
I- I'
OF ft?;
@U=
?2SAM= .-..
Cr
P081
SUM'''2
COPSAMM I I -I
- "-- .
UV9LNOUCH?;~?:::~: SQ f -H . .Or-7rhW. ?
Elevation E61NT
Side rn-ew e'b. 1963.
FiPlg. an an 5. Ekvation of te South Plinth
momen the nly irectSuppot fo sucha noton cmes fom th uppr hal of stepe wie imstn
fire requsite
alar of sale he (Pl V~d),3which as foud in a urely econdar contet, clos to th
Tomb of Cyrus.?:~:~'?:?'
The fondatins
ofthe suther plinh conist o from ne tothreemassie bloks ofstone thos
me w. e.b. 1963.
Fig. 5. Plan and Elevationof the SouthPlinth.
moment the only direct support for such a notion comes from the upper half of a stepped white limestone
fire altar of the requisite scale (P1. VId),83 which was found in a purely secondary context, close to the
Tomb of Cyrus.
The foundations of the southern plinth consist of from one to three massive blocks of stone, those
under the main cube approaching a depth of 90 cm. To the north of the monument the excavations
also revealed the remains of a rough pavement (Fig. 5) which almost certainly served as an original
working surface.
Finally, with regard to the date of the monument and its probable ascription to Cyrus, there is
little that could suggest any other author for such a rigorous construction. Only the absence of the
swallow-tail clamp is unusual. But against this one detail the eight individual risers of the staircase
block each fall within the standard scale that obtains for all other monumental steps found at
Pasargadae.
In a number of ways the northern plinth (Fig. 6 and P1. VIId) appears to have been a rather more
simple monument than its southern counterpart. Its upper stages are unchannelled; its central plinth
is composed of at least three stones instead of one; and last but not least its polished black limestone
border appears to have been without any corner plinths. At the same time, however, its finely joined
stones reflect a high standard of workmanship; its contrasted dressing marks on its upper surface
83
The broadest measurement at the top of the altar (which is inverted in the photograph) is 54 cm. Its central, shelving bowl has
a maximum diameter &o
of cm.
I ...IIl l. ... .
1 0 4 5. METRES.
1--------3
me.w e.b. 1963
Fig. 6. Plan and Elevationof the North Plinth.
indicate the probable addition of a black limestone capping; and, as one can see from Pl. VIId, its
massive foundations lose nothing in comparison with those from the southern plinth (P1. VIIb).
In height the northern plinth is 2 0om. high while its base is 2 -80 m. square. The narrow step at
the base is present once more although this time measuring 46 cm. in height as against 9 cm. in width.
Also, the larger stone is again hollow. But in this case the attempt to reduce the weight of the stone
appears to have had serious consequences, for, from all the evidence available, the stone would only
seem to have reached the site in a damaged condition, without the better part of its north-eastern
corner. As a rather hurried solution both the upper and the lower stones were cut back to admit the
insertion of a new L-shaped block, and, as one can see from Fig. 6, the latter was then clamped to the
upper surface of the upper stone. In the course of time, however, the clamps were removed, the
blocking stone-the last obstacle in the path of any treasure seekers-was either carried off or broken
up, and the full extent of the original gap was again revealed.84
The foundations of the northern plinth easily exceed a metre in depth and above all else they
illustrate the extensive use of " retaining foundations" that seem to have been inserted purely to
prevent any lateral movement on the part of the central core (P1. VIId). But, despite the oft-repeated
assertion that the steps at the base of the Tomb of Cyrus must have come from this particular altar,85
* In point of fact the four steps concerned could only have
Any suggestion that there was meant to be some sort of door in 85
this position is not only refuted by the above mentioned dowel formed half the necessary flight.
marks but also by the almost jagged profile of the internal
ceiling at the original point of breakage (fig. 6).
it must be noted that there was no trace of any suitable foundation slab for a staircase. Indeed, the
evidence is so clear on this point-particularly if we compare the foundations of the two altars-that
we can hardly escape the conclusion that the northern plinth was never intended to have a staircase.
In some ways this intelligence should not come as a surprise; we still know remarkably little about
appointments of this kind and it is just this kind of distinction that will ultimately lead us to a closer
identification of the little material that we have.
THE TERRACEDMOUND
PASARGADAE
mems et delt me weover & e beaoley oa dpis
5 0 5 10 15 20 25 metres
m 0 50 100
section showing wall & terrace *Y" on ine A -A p•mof sacred precinct
inset
Fig. 7. Plan and Sectionof TerracedMound with Inset Plan of SacredPrecinct.
Coming next to the less securely dated Terraced Mound, which lies 123 m. to the west (Fig. 7 and
P1. VIIIa), it must be confessed that Herzfeld's original descriptions of the monument leave much to
be desired.86 As far as one can see, one of the chief reasons for this was that Herzfeld himself was
strongly convinced that there was an essential architectural symmetry between the Tomb of Cyrus
and the Mound. Regarding the two monuments as complementary tiered structures-deliberately
placed at the extreme south-west and the extreme north-west corners of the site-he felt that they were
bound to mirror each other in almost every respect. As a consequence he suggested that the uppermost
mud-brick platform could have supported a stone cella similar to the gabled portion of the Tomb;
that there were six rather than five terraces; and that each succeeding terrace shared a regular, rather
than a quite irregular, plan.
In choosing the site of the monument the original architects were clearly bent in extracting as much
help as possible from the natural rock outcrop that forms the core of the Mound. But at the same time
the precise alignment of the Mound, which is very close to that of the fire altars, and the slight
irregularities in its outline, cannot be said to have been entirely dictated by the shape of the rock layers
beneath the surface. As to actual measurements, the length of the mound is more or less constant at
85 m. while its width varies from 46 m. at its southern end to 50 40 m. at its northern end. Its
74"
summit stands some m. above the "65
level of the surrounding plan.
In contrast to some 5-40
of the shallower terrace walls at a higher level, the better preserved parts of the
B6 See E. Herzfeld, IranischeFelsreliefs, I9Io, p. 90 f.; AMI I, p. 8 f.; IAE, p. 215 and pl. XLIV.
outer wall often exceed 2 m. in height (P1.VIIIb). But in construction alone there is hardly anything
to choose between the first four walls since all illustrate the same use of dry-stone masonry. Only the
scale of the stones seems to show a slight reduction as one reaches the fourth terrace (P1.VIIIc), while
the fifth and last terrace is very largely composed of mud-brick.
The outer approaches appear to have been two in number. On the north face a probable external
entrance is indicated by the remains of a dry-stone staircase some 2 - 20 m. high and -50 m. broad
(P1.VIIIb). Unfortunately the surviving evidence from the adjoining east face-opposite the altars-
is far from as clear. But an obvious discrepancy in the alignment of this face leads one to believe that
another staircasemight well have existed at the point where a narrow gap appears in the plan (Fig. 7).
Above the first terrace there is only one other indication of an approach to the summit. It consists of
nothing more than a narrow gap in the second terrace opposite the head of the north staircase, but in
this position it seems to speak for a relatively direct, northern approach to the topmost terrace.
As to the arrangementof the terracesas a whole, they present a most unusual and yet symmetrical
plan (Fig. 7) in which the fifth and last terrace seems to define the absolute limits of any appointments
that may have crowned the whole structure.87
In construction the summit itself consists of nothing more than a most carefully built mud-brick
platform. It is now almost certainly denuded, but the important point is that it possessesa uniformly
even surface without any trace of burning or destruction or any sign of eroded mud-brick walls. Also,
to make only one other observation, the extensive pavement on the third terrace (P1. VIIIc) may
indicate that several of the other lower terraces were equipped with a similar flooring.
To complete this descriptive account of the Sacred Precinct, it should be stressed that the oddly
aligned enclosurewall (Fig. 7, Inset) attests the same dry-stone technique as that found in the Mound's
terraced walls.88 Also, if we consider the rather curious angles of the enclosure wall, it must be
admitted that they bear a not dissimilar appearance to some of those found on the Mound itself.89
Thus, despite all that has been said in the past about the probable association of the altars and the
Mound, and the probable secondary date of the wall,90it would seem perfectly clear that any discrep-
ancy in date must come between the altars and the other two structuresthat share so many similar, less
finished details.
From the very fact that Cyrus would never have considered erecting two such magnificent altars
without taking steps to improve any associated appointments in the same area, we can conclude that
the Mound and the wall each representlater, rather than earlier, constructions. At the same time the
brick sizes from the fifth terrace would seem to indicate that the Mound and the wall cannot have been
very much later additions. Falling within the standard range used at Pasargadae throughout the
Achaemenian and early Seleucid periods (c. 32 x 32 x 12 cm.), the bricks alone reflect a construction
date between the sixth and the third centuries B.C.
Thus, from all that we know of the energetic, if somewhat economical programmesof construction
undertaken on the Citadel during the reigns of both Darius and Xerxes we might wonder if these last
additions owe their existence to one or other of these monarchs. It might be added that Period I walls
with similardry-stonemasonry-and even similar angles-can be found in variousparts of the Citadel!91
As to the pottery from the Mound this was meagre and disappointing to a degree. Most of it
consisted of small, worn fragments that could have fallen anywhere within the centuries mentioned
above. But one example, a little more distinctive than the rest, probably indicates some form of
occupation even in Seleucid times.92
One other discovery consisted of a small hoard of gold objects from the paved terrace (Fig. 7 and
P1. VIIId). Buried in a broken patch of paving near the fourth terrace wall, in an area without any
trace of a later floor, the objects appear to have been secreted either at the end of the active life of the
87 The available space approaching 15 x 20 m. 86. 60 m., length of south wall I86 . 6o m., and length of
88 But in the present condition of even the northern junction (the north wall 20oo0 8o m.
last I5 m. of the southern wall have had to be restored on the 00 See E. F. Schmidt, PersepolisI, I953, p. 20.
31 Cf. rooms
plan) it is not possible to say whether or not there was any 118, 117, 65, etc.
degree of bonding between the two structures. **A full study of all the Pasargadae pottery will appear in the
8* The internal measurements of the enclosure wall are: width final report.
mound or at some still later period. Unfortunately the hoard itself has hardly any dating charac-
teristics,consisting of nothing more than three perforated, terminal strips of gold, several intermediate
strips of gold of varying length and thickness, a plain gold sleeve, and a split carnelian barrel bead.
Accordingly, if we should incline to date the objects to the end of the life of the mound, it can only be
because this would seem the most likely period for such precious objects to have been hidden on the
site.
To conclude this survey of the Precinct, then, what can be said about the original function of the
Terraced Mound? Apart from all other considerations,it seems very likely that Cyrus' grand design
was never brought to completion, and that the effortsof his successorsconstituted an attempt to complete
the outline of an earlier plan that had already envisaged some degree of construction on the adjoining
hillock. Also, from the evidence of the topmost terrace, we can probably rule out any notion that the
Mound was built to support a temple, and we can perhaps agree with Erdmann93that the open summit
was either a stage for sacrificial rites or else a support for a third altar.
The PalaceArea
The extensive Palace Area, which stretches from the Gatehouse to the Residential Palace in one
direction and from the Palace of Audience to the base of the Citadel Hill in the other, was also the
scene of several new discoveries. Not least in interest were one or two objects from the surfaceincluding
a fragment of a black limestone bas-relief with part of a single line Old Persian cuneiform inscription
(P1.VIe). Measuring only 10 6 x 8-5 cm. in size, the fragment is still distinguished by several folds of
a robe, a rivet hole for some form of metal embellishment, and a determinant part of the phrase
xldyaO8ya: vazrakaor Great King.94 Indeed, from its several characteristicsone can hardly mistake it
for anything save a part of one of the lost CMc inscriptions,all of which served to identify the figures of
Cyrus in the doorways of the Residential Palace with the words " Cyrus the Great King, an Achae-
menian ".95 Only the odd position of the fragment, which was found close to the stones of a northern
boundary wall, at a point 210om. north-east of the Zendan, would seem to cast a slight doubt on this
attribution. But even this is not a serious criticism. It only underlines the fact that, at a site with so
little cover, a great many stones were broken up and moved to secondary positions.96
TheBridge
In completing our survey of the southern half of the Palace Area particular efforts were made to
recover the surviving plan of the stone water channels and basins that had once irrigated the royal
gardens.97 But a still more interesting revelation came from the discovery of a single white limestone
block that barely broke the surface of the ground at a point almost 150 m. west of the Gatehouse.
For, on further investigation, this apparently isolated stone proved to be part of the buried foundations
of a bridge (Fig. 8 and P1. IXa) that had once spanned a large watercourse in this part of the site
(Fig. i).
Unparalleled by any other structure, the partly excavated foundations consist of two opposed
limestone side walls with five rows of three columns between them. Almost square in plan (Fig. 8) the
bridge appears to have had a width of m. and a span of m. The average space between
15"95was 15"6o
the diameter of each column
columns, measured from centre to centre, 3 90 m. while normal
appears to have been 85 cm.98 The original height of each column seems to have been somewhat over
2 m. Also, as can be seen from the plates, each column seems to have stood on a rammed boulder
" K. Erdmann, SendschriftI D.O.G., p. 13 f. It is most unfortunate, for instance, that the Zendan inscription
94 Still visible are part of an initial divider, virtually the whole of should not have been noticed (Sami, op. cit., p. 99) until the
the first ideogram, another divider, and part of the first Department's excavations were over and all hope of studying
character of the second word. the surrounding stratigraphy had gone.
9* These single line inscriptions, cut in the folds of the king's 0' Such channels were first studied in detail in I951 (Sami, op.
garments were first observed and reported by Herzfeld (A.M.I. cit., pp. 7-7). Our own results will be embodied in Mr.
I, p. 14 f.). On the basis of the evidence from the Palace, Kent Weaver's forthcoming site plan.
describes the Old Persian text of such trilingual inscriptions as
" entirely destroyed " (Kent, op. cit., p. Io7). " In keeping with the rather rough finish of all these foundation
**This columns, diameters vary from as little as 77 to as much as
important point should never be forgotten in considering
the history of any block with a poor or uncertain stratification. 86 cm.
mn dec.1963.
1 O 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 METRES.
THE BRIDGE
PASARGADAE /
mens et delt m.e.weaver. & e beazley aa.dipls
Fig. 8. Axonometric
Plan showingExcavatedAreasof the Bridge.
foundation with nothing more than a rough, almost square, stone base beneath its lightly (P1. IXb) or
heavily (P1. IXc) eroded drum. Capitals were not used.99 As to the well-dressed limestone side walls,
the north-west one measures m. in length while the south-east one measures I6- Jo m. in length.
15"95
Both stand on a similar foundation block, that of the north-west wall having an internal projection of
20 cm. and an external projection of 90 cm. Including such foundation blocks, both walls would seem
to have shared a maximum height of 2 36 m. Beam recesses, such as still can be seen opposite the first
two rows of columns to the north-east, seem to have measured 37 cm. in depth and I m. in width.
Also, as a rather rare addition, one or two joints in the side walls illustrate the use of swallow-tail
clamps.100
The watercourse itself runs along what always was-and still is-a natural line of drainage through
the site. In all probability, therefore, the original architects first took advantage of this circumstance
in order that they could float heavy building blocks right to the heart of the site. But once having
" Above all else, the varying condition of the columns would x0OMetal clamps of some kind also seem to have been used to
seem to reflect the relative hardness or softness of the stones counter any cracks in the columns themselves (P1. IXb).
employed.
dredged such a canal it is more than likely that they also decided to retain it as a valuable addition to
the amenities of the royal gardens. Certainly the construction of the bridge itself can only support
such a conclusion as does the silt on the base of the canal (Fig. 8) and the excellent quality of the canal's
dry-stone walls above and below the limits of the Bridge.10oAs for the eventual abandonment of the
canal, the deep erosion on some of the central columns (Pl. IXc) would seem to show that it must have
remained in use throughout most of the Achaemenian period. But at the same time the eventual
collapse of the canal's dry-stone revetments appears to have been almost enough to keep it permanently
hidden from view.'02
Unfortunately no trace of any superstructure survives above the Bridge's present foundations,
although, from the existing plan alone, it is tempting to suppose that a light, possibly wooden, columned
pavilion once stood above the waters of the canal, making a most attractive inner entrance to the
Palace Enclosure. Also, whether or not any such superstructureexisted, the surviving substructure
still remains of the greatest interest, both as a remarkably early example of a columned bridge and as
yet another illustration of the Achaemenian genius for adapting and transformingknown architectural
elements.
The GardenPavilion
One of the expedition's last tasksin the Palace Area was to complete the excavation of a small stone
structure that was already partly exposed at a point I20 m. due north of the Audience Hall (Fig. I).
As it stands today, the building consists of a rectangular platform of dressed stones, approximately
I I - 70 X I - 15 m. in area, with what were probably the foundations of elaborate porticoes on its
north-eastern and south-westernsides (Fig. 9 and P1. IXd).
To describe this small building's quite varied features in turn, the platform itself not only shows
multiple plough marks but it also illustrates the curious occurrence of a series of tightly grouped
circular depressionsnear the south-westernentrance (Fig. 9). Quite what the purpose of such random
markings may have been it is difficult to say, but from the present depressed surface of the stones
concerned (P1. IXd) it at least seems possible that they document a somewhat laborious method of
lowering the level of a stone floor-largely by means of a circular drilling process. The twin stones that
projectfrom the middle of each of the platform'sshortersides (Fig. 9) almost certainly mark the presence
of two paved doorways, each of which appearsto have lost part of its central paving at some earlier date.
The narrow gap at each side of such doorways, between the platform and the foundation stones of the
two porticoes, strongly suggeststhe presence of an original mud-brick wall which not only enclosed the
central hall but which also ran out, possibly as a somewhat thinner partition, along the opposed arms
of the porticoes themselves. Further confirmation of this last suggestion possibly also comes from the
baked brick and stone reinforcementsthat appear at the extremities of the two north-eastern arms.
As regardsthe porticoes themselves-each of which had a depth of m. and a width of 17-30 m.
4"30
-it is more than likely that each was enhanced by the addition of two, not four, small columns. But
if
since neither the north-westernnor the south-eastern recessesseem to have possessedany direct access
to the main hall it is perhaps less likely that they were adorned in the same way. Indeed the only
distinctive features from the two long sides of the building consist of certain marginal strips of stone
which may have served yet again as some sort of wall foundation.
Meagre as they are, these details comprise almost all that can be said about the architectureof this
small yet distinctive structure which, from the form of its masonry, dates from the reign of Cyrus and
which, from its size, position and appointments, would seem to have served a decorative rather than a
utilitarian purpose in one of the more favoured parts of the Palace gardens. Yet at the same time this
modest, much denuded structureled us, at the very close of our last season, to perhaps the most striking
discovery ever made at Pasargadae.
The Treasure
Work had been in progress at the Pavilion for some days when our excavations near the southern
arm of the south-west portico happened to reveal the remains of a tall, buff ware Achaemenian water
101 One such wall was traced for a distance of over 8 m. 102 Notethe depth of the stone debris in fig. 8, particularly that
towards the north end of the north-west wall.
m.n. nov.1963.
+ JAR CONTAINNCTREASURE
0 5 10METRES.
THE GARDEN PAVILION PASARGADAE

mens et delt m.e.weaver & e. beazley a.a. dipls
Fig. 9. Plan of the GardenPavilion.
jar that had formerlyserved either the Pavilion itself or the surroundinggardens. (Fig. 9).103 Reduced
by continuous ploughing to little more than a third of its original height (P1. VIc),104 the upper walls
of the jar still contained some 15 cm. of earth while the lower part contained the rich range ofjewellery
shownin Pls. X-XIV.
As a whole the objects from the jar were still remarkably well preserved. The larger pieces each
rested in what would seem to have been their original positions, the only bracelets (P1. X) lying at a
horizontal angle near the base while three pairs of earrings (P1. XI) and a silver spoon (Pls. XIIa and b)
each stood at a somewhat higher level, stacked against each other at a vertical angle. The fact that
matching pieces were always found side by side may also mean that all the more important paired
objects were tied to each other before interment. Unfortunately, the smaller elements proved to
have been much less carefully buried. Consisting almost entirely of the multiple elements of several
different necklaces (Pls. XIId-XIVi), they would seem to have been interred above, below and even
between the principal objects with the result that they eventually fell into almost total disorder.x05
Apart from the larger objects already mentioned, the treasure also included one other notable
piece: a single gold button with a delicate cloisonn6 pattern. Altogether the material from the jar
includes 1,162 objects, described below under thirty-seven different heads.
103 The jar was found I m. fromthe stonefoundations of the the vessel may once have approached60 cm. in height.
southernarmand2 2o m. fromtheplatform. 100Withthe decayof thevariousnecklacestringspracticallyall
'0" Still standingto a heightof 25.5 cm., with a maximum thesmallerbeadsfell to thebaseof thepotwhilemostof the
existingdiameterof cm. and a basediameterof 7 cm., majornecklaceelementsat leastslidoutof place.
17"5
CATALOGUE
i. Pair of gold bracelets, each with a spirally twisted wire hoop and detachable, ibex-headed
terminals (Pl. X). Composed of multiple, twisted wires, each slender hoop shows a slight inward bend
opposite the opening. Each terminal consists of a cast ibex head with a hollow, decorated collar.
While each head possesses inset ears and horns, the latter formed from a single beaded loop set in
granulated sockets, each collar is encircled by two opposed, beaded bands, a fine wire chain, a series of
filigree spirals, and a zigzag wire pattern that masks the true edge of the sleeve. Maximum diameter
of upper example in P1. Xa 6 5 cm., of lower example, 7-o cm.; respective weights of each 41-8 grm.
and 42 -8 grm.
2. Pair of penannular gold earrings, each with a large lapis lazuli pendant at the base (P1.XIa).lo0
Enclosed,in a hollow wire mesh with small globules masking each join between its component wires,
each earring boasts three rows of pendants at its centre. In each case the upper two rows contain eight
and twelve pomegranate-shapedpendants respectively while the lower knobbed bar supportssix discs.
Regardless of their shape all such pendants were hung as loosely as possible, each shimmering and
trembling at the slightest movement. At the base of each earring a broad ring supportsan oval piece
of lapis lazuli in a wire mesh cage, which is itself furnished with small internal caps at either end; the
base of the cage takes the form of a seven-pointed filigree star with a pyramid of hanging granulation
at its centre. The catch on each earring includes a thick, hinged pin, that is still anchored at one side
-
by a spherical-headed split-pin.107 Diameter of each example 5 - I cm.; thickness of each 0o9 cm.;
weight of each 20 grm.
3. Pair of penannular gold earrings,each with a disc and rosette design (Pls. XIb and c). Divided
into an inner register with eight two-sided discs, each encrusted with granulation, a central register
with twelve slightly larger discs, and an outer register with sixteen free-standing, three-dimensional
wire rosettes, each earring is without any form of inlaid decoration. But as a further decorative detail
each petal of each rosette still bears a small drop of granulation near its point (P1. XIc). Towards the
top of each earring a single metal strip supports three miniature pendants while the catch itself attests
a nail-headed, rather than a spherical-headed,split-pin. Diameter of each example cm.; thickness
of each o -9 cm.; weight of each 19 grm. 4"9
4. Pair of penannular gold earrings, each with up to three free-hanging pendants (P1. XId).
Bordered by a double row of granulation on the inside and pyramids of granulation on the outside,
the central register of each earring consists of a double set of open wire scrolls, each of which support
eight oval plates set back to back. Each inlaid with turquoise coloured paste at one time, several such
plates still retain fragments of their original inlay. Below the main register each earring was formerly
equipped with three segmented pendants, each piped with granulation and each inlaid with turquoise
paste in one base, and three side, compartments. Diameter of each example 3 -6 cm.; weight of single
complete example 9 grm.
5. Silver spoon with duck or swan's head handle (Pls. XIIa and b). The bowl is broad shouldered,
tapered, with a flat rim save at the tip. The handle, freshly broken above the bowl, is circular in section,
double curved, and terminates in a duck or swan's head. Incised lines mark the top of the neck while
still others define the nostrils, bill markings, eyes and feathers of the broad-billed head. Overall length
15 cm.; maximum width of bowl 3 4 cm.; weight 40 5 grm.
6. Silver spoon with a zoomorphic handle ending in a cloven hoof (P1. XIIc). The bowl is almost
flat, circular, with only a trace of a rim towards the beginning of the handle. The handle, with its
clearly marked hock, fetlock and hoof, is flat near the bowl although fully circular in section towards
the hoof. The hoof itself is cleft down the front as well as along its underside. Overall length cm.;
8"3
maximum width of bowl 2 -6 cm.; weight 13 -6 grm.
106 I am much indebted to Mr. M. Rustami, the Teheran treasure form part of Miss Kitson's admirable field record.
Museum photographer, for the present carefully lit illustra- x'07The free end was probably held in place by a second spherical-
tion of these earrings as well as for the details shown in Plates headed pin that simply dropped into place-to be secured by
Xb and c and XIc. The remaining photographs of the wire binding if necessary.
7. Carnelian bead in the form of a couchant lion (P1. XIId left). Equipped with a single longi-
tudinal perforationclose to the base, the bead also possessesa further parallel groove on its base-such
as could have been fitted to a lower string in order to keep the bead upright. Incised lines depict the
facial features,the heavy mane, and other details of the legs and body. Length I cm.; height I -o cm.;
width o -6 cm. "9
8. Amethyst bead in the form of a couchant lion (P1. XIId centre).Without any groove on its flat
base, the bead only attests the normal longitudinal perforation at a slightly higher level. Lightly
etched lines indicate the facial, and certain body, features. Length I -7 cm.; height I cm.; width
cm. .o
0o5
9. Lapis lazuli bead in the form of a couchant lion (P1.XIId right). Identical in size and treatment
to No. 8.
Io. Eleven gold bell-shaped pendants, nine with their clappers still in position (Pls. XIIIa and b).
Each equipped with a flanged suspension loop, ten of the eleven examples possess horizontally ribbed
walls while the two longest examples also possess a flanged lower rim. The one unique example
(P1. XIIIa second from right), which largely depends on granulated motifs for its visual effect, shows,
among other decorative elements, a denticulated fringe, concentrations of granulation in a free field,
and triangles of granulation near the base. Length of longest example I -6 cm.; length of shortest
I I cm.
I I. Two large, terminal, gold spacer beads, each with the profile and stylized petal markings of a
lotus bud (P1.XIIIc bottom row). Made from two separate gold sheets, each bead is hollow with five
individual string holes at one end and a single broad opening at the other. Length of longest example
- -
2- I cm.; length of the other 2 o cm.; maximum thickness of each o 3 cm.
12. Twelve small, terminal, gold spacer beads, each with the stylized profile and petal markingsof
a lotus bud (see selection in P1. XIIIc top and centre rows). Similar in construction to the two larger
models, four examples possessfour string holes while the remaining eight possessonly three. Of the last
four pairs, two are decorated on one face only. Length of longest example I - 2 cm.; length of shortest
I - I cm.; maximum thickness of each o-25 cm.
I3. Fifty-one gold charms, each depicting a cast, full-face view of the head of the Egyptian god Bes
(P1.XIIId top three rows). Plain on the reverse side, each charm is suspended from a small gold bead
o 2 cm. in diameter and from two interlocking rings of similar size. Overall length of each example
I-3 cm.
14. Thirty gold charms similar to those described above, each depicting a human head in profile
with a simple, ring-like earring, a flat-topped hat, and a prominent bun of hair (P1. XIIId fourth and
fifth rows). Overall length of each example I - 2 cm.
15. Twenty-six gold charms, again of the same type, each depicting an ibex head in profile with
one horn thrust forward and the other bent back over the long, slender line of an ear (P1. XIIId sixth
and seventh rows). Overall length of each example I I cm.
I6. Twenty-four gold charms, also of the same type, each depicting a lion head in profile (P1. XIIId
bottom two rows). Overall length of each example o -9 cm.
I7. Gold button with a domed section. The convex outer face bears a delicate cloisonn6 pattern
in which a series of small roundels, petals and triangles, inlaid with turquoise, white and grey coloured
paste, surround a central, four pointed gold boss. The hollow inner side possesses a small gold loop
for fastening. Diameter 2 9 cm.; height o07 cm.
18. Four large gold beads, each consisting of a central cylinder surrounded by external granulation
(P1. XIVa third row). Diameter of largest cm.; diameter of smallest cm.
o'7 o.6
19. Elementsof twenty-one triple gold spacer beads (Pl. XIVa first, second, fourth and eighth rows).
Each complete spacer bead consists of three individual beads, each with a central cylinder surrounded
by one large and four small, flanking rows of granulation. Length of each complete spacer bead I 2 cm.
20. Elements of thirty-fourquadruple gold spacer beads (Pl. XIVa fifth, sixth and seventh rows)
Each complete spacer bead consists of four individual beads, each of which is composed of a double
thickness of seven minute granulations. Length of each complete spacer bead o 9 cm.
21. Fifty-two triple gold spacer beads, each faced on one side with triple gold caps with granulated
edges (Pl. XIVb). Backed by nothing more than three plain, transverselyperforated, cylinders, with
a plain metal strip on the reverse face, each spacer bead appears to have been strung immediately next
to its neighbour,108the whole collection making a continuous string at least 21 cm. long. Length of
each spacer bead I - I cm.; breadth of each 0o4 cm.
22. Elements of twenty-nine quadruple gold spacer beads, each composed of plain beads c. o 2 cm.
in diameter (Pl. XIVd). Length of each complete spacer bead o -85 cm.
23. Five hundred and seventeen gold beads with an average diameter of 0-2 cm.
24. Three plain, spherical gold beads, two (Pl. XIVe top left and top right) with diameters of
0o-4 cm. and one (Pl. XIVe left centre) with a diameter of 0 -75 cm.
25. Three ring-like gold beads, one (Pl. XIVe top centre) with a diameter of o -3 cm.; a second
(Pl. XIVe right centre) with a diameter of 0 5 cm.; and a third (Pl. XIVe bottom left) with a
diameter of o -65 cm.
26. Two ring-like gold beads, each composed of a series of globules, soldered together and then
-
lightly smoothed with a file (Pl. XIVe centre examples in second row). Diameter of each o 6 cm.
27. Gold and silver pendant, consisting of a partly crushed gold globe suspendedfrom a silver loop;
the join between the two parts is masked by a silver collar (P1.XIVe bottom right). Height of pendant
o -8 cm.
28. Composite globular bead with alternating turquoise and lapis lazuli segments. Its metal parts
include vertical gold dividing walls, a medial, horizontal dividing wall and a central cylinder without
flattened caps. Diameter 0 9 cm.
29. Composite globular bead with turquoise, lapis lazuli and brown paste segments. Its metal
parts include vertical gold dividing walls and a central cylinder ending in flattened caps (P1. XIVg
bottom right). Diameter -7 cm.
30. A composite bead similar to No. 29, with alternating red and green paste segments (P1. XIVg
bottom left). Diameter o -6 cm.
3'. Lunate-shaped gold pendant109 with a small loop at the top; section rhombic to circular
(P1. XIVg top left). Height I .7 cm.
32. Cage-shaped gold pendant with a loop at the top and a pyramid of hanging globules at the base;
originally composed of four rough gold strips, one of which is now detached (P1. XIVg top centre and
top right). Height cm.
2"3
33. Small gold rod with a hand worked, faceted surface (P1. XIVf). Bent, twisted, and also broken
at one end, it clearly represents a fragment of some larger object. Length 6 2 cm.
34. Fragment of unworked pink coral (P1. XIVc). Length 2 2 cm.
35. Fifty minute pink coral beads, each rather less than o 2 cm. in diameter.
108At least half a dozen beads still lay next to each other at the the whole ornament could have been inverted and worn from
base of the jar. the ear. Cf. a gold earring from Persepolis with a bell-shaped
x09 It is also possible that this same ornament was first used as an pendant hanging from its smaller, closed loop. E. Schmidt,
earring, for, if the lower point should once have been longer, PersepolisII, 1957, pl. 45, 30.
36. Two hundred and forty four pearl bead? (see selection in Pl. XIVh) consisting of I8O beads
with diameters close to o 2 cm. and a further sixty-four with maximum measurementsranging from
0o3 cm. to 0o9 cm.
37. Twenty-five stone beads (Pl. XIVi) comprising ten onyx or carnelian spacer beads, each with
a segmented upper surface (average length I -4 cm.); nine singly perforatedonyx eye stones (average
diameter -9 cm.); four singly perforatedcarnelian beads; one speckled black and white bead with a
single perforation; and the greater part of an onyx pendant (length 2 2 cm.) which represents the
only damaged stone object in the collection.
As one of the rare groups of Achaemenian jewellery to have been found on a scientific excavation,
the present collection representsa most welcome addition to the scant range of material that can claim
both an exact provenance and an exact series of associations.110But as such an unusual discovery it is
all the more unfortunatethat it should not have come from a more firmly dated context. For although
the jar containing the objects was found only a metre away from the limits of an Achaemenian building,
the whole adjoining area proved bereft of any stratigraphicdetail that might have helped to date either
the installation of the vessel or the deposition of the objects.111Furthermore, the coarse nature of the
jar itself, or at least that part of it that still survives, is such that one can hardly hope to date it within
narrow limits.112Thus, despite all the evidence that might have emerged under less disturbed condi-
tions, the date of the treasureand the date of its secretion can only be said to rest-save for the broadest
of estimates-on the testimony of the objects themselves.
In admitting this, and in relying on such evidence for dating purposes, it must be conceded that
any attempt to date Achaemenian jewellery on grounds of style alone is fraught with difficulties. In
spite of the scientific discoveries already alluded to we still have much too little dated material to be
sure of the various lines of stylistic development and we can only advance certain working hypotheses.
If we should consider the evidence and assumptions that support the present, broadly accepted,
chronological classification of at least one important form, the caprine-headed bracelet, we shall
perhaps illustrate the complexities of the situation.
Different types of caprines-ibex, gazelle and antelope-are widely represented in art of the
Achaemenian period and, in particular, we possess a series of bracelets decorated with the heads of
such animals. Unfortunately, however, none of these bracelets is narrowly dated. At Vouni alone, the
probable date of the destruction of the palace, which the excavators set at 380 B.C.,113 furnishes an
approximate terminus antequem.As to style, it is more than probable that it evolves from an early form
of stiff, schematic representationto a later form of more supple, naturalistic representation. But, even
if this should be granted, who is to say that such an evolution was a continuous, uniformly gradual
process?
Apart from the style of the animal heads one must also consider the nature of the rest of each
bracelet: the form and decoration of the hoop and the decoration of the sleeves between the hoop and
the animal finials. It is certain, for instance, that, among the older bracelets, we can include those that
were made in one piece while, among the more recent examples, we can include those with separately
made finials that were affixed to the end of the hoop. But in this context too the distinct traditions of a
region, a workshop or even an individual goldsmith must always be allowed for. In the case of the
bracelets from the sarcophagus burial at Susa we are almost certainly confronted with single-piece
bracelets of late, rather than early, fourth century date'14 and the same may be said for a number of
single-piece examples from the famous Oxus treasure.115
110o Earlier scientific discoveries include a complete collection of 112At best, it can only be ascribed to a period between the sixth
feminine jewellery recovered from a late fourth-century and third centuries B.C.
sarcophagus burial at Susa (J. de Morgan, M.D.P. VIII, Its E. Gjerstadt, op. cit., pp. 278, 285-8.
1905, PP. 29-58) and a collection of gold and silver objects,
including two gold and fifteen silver bracelets, from Vouni 1xi For a detailed discussion of the date of the Susa material see
(E. Gjerstadt, The SwedishCyprusExpeditionIII, p. 238 f.). P. Amandry, AntikeKunst I, 1958, P. 2I.
iii Deep ploughing proved to have removed even the earliest i15 Again see Amandry, op. cit., p. 21 f. Also, for particularly
working floors, such as might have been associated with the obvious parallels to the Susa torques and bracelets see O. M.
construction of the Pavilion. Dalton, The Treasureof the Oxus, 1926, nos. I8, 12o and 132.
With such reservationsin mind, then, we may perhaps set out the following chronological classifica-
tion of caprine-headed bracelets, which is central to the dating of not only our own bracelets but also
that of the Pasargadaetreasure as a whole:116
I. Single-piece gold bracelet from the Badisches Landesmuseum, Karlsruhe. Sixth to fifth
centuries B.C.117
2-3. Pair of single-piece gold bracelets from Vouni. Second half of the fifth century to the
beginning of the fourth century.118
4-5. Pair of single-piece gold bracelets from Anatolia, now in the Schmuckmuseum, Pforzheim.
Date as above.
6-7. Pair of single-piece gold bracelets from Sardis (?), each with a horizontally fluted hoop.""
Date as above.
8. Detached gold head of a bracelet of unknown provenance, now in Paris.120Mid fourth
century.
9. Detached gold head of a bracelet of unknown provenance, now in Berlin.121Mid fourth
century.
So-i I. Pair of gold bracelets with detachable heads and with each hoop composed of spirally
twisted bands and beaded threads. From the Wiberg Collection, Stockholm.122 Second
half of the fourth century.
12-13. Pair of gold braceletsfrom Macedonia with detachable heads and with each hoop composed
of spirally twisted bands.123End of fourth century.
14. Single gold bracelet with detachable heads and with a hoop composed of spirally twisted
bands. National Museum, Taranto.'24 End of fourth century.
From this list covering at least two centuries it is clear that the Pasargadae bracelets cannot be too
far removed from a series of developed bracelets, each with separate finials and twisted hoops, that
belong to the fourth, and more particularly to the second half of the fourth, century B.c. At the same
time, however, the Pasargadae heads (P1. X) still reflect a number of archaic features, notably in the
stylized, straight lined, treatment of the beard,125in the careful delineation of the tuft of hair on the
forehead,'26 in the upright set of the ears,127and in the use of inset ears as well as horns,'28that must
divide them from the main body of such late bracelets. Admittedly the eyebrows are not drawn in
with the distinct, bulbous outline that is so obvious in the Pforzheim and Sardisheads, but eyebrows of
this traditional Achaemenian type are already replaced by 'grooved' eyebrows in several other heads
that should be at least as old as the Pforzheim and Sardis examples.129Thus if we take full account of
these various small points-not to mention the intermediate position of the faithfully modelled
Pasargadaeheads between the stiff, stumpy heads of the early series (nos. I to 7) and the subtler, more
116 In embarking on this discussion it is a particular pleasure to 121 Found in Anatolia. See P. Amandry, op. cit., p. 15, n. 51 and
record the debt that I owe to Professor Amandry for his warm pl. 12, no. 34-
interest and help as well as to acknowledge the further help 123 Found in the region of Pang~e. R. Zahn, op. cit., p. 7;, no. 2;
that I have received from both Mrs. R. Maxwell-Hyslop and H. Luschey, op. cit., col. 771 and fig. 6; and H. Greifenhegen,
Professor H. Luschey. ArchiiologischerAnzeiger, 1961, col. Io8 and fig. 52.
11? Found in Greece in I887. See P. Jacobsthal, Early Celtic Art, 12' See G. Becatti, Oreficerieantiche dalle minoichealle barbariche,
p. 32, n. 6 and P. Amandry, op. cit., p. I2. 2955, P. 96, no. 373.
118sThe inferences that can be drawn from Gjerstadt's destruction 15 Best paralleled in the ibex heads of a single-piece silver
date are summarized in Amandry, op. cit., p. 2o. bracelet of probable fifth century date from the former Reber
11uR. Zahn, Austellungvon Schmuckarbeiten in Edelmetall aus den in the
Also prominentow GenSardis
o the nSardis heads (nos. 66 and
heads (nos. and 7).
StaatlichenMuseenzu Berlin, 1932, P. 22, no. 17 and H. Luschey, Cf 7).
ArchiologischerAnzeiger, 1938, no. 53, col. 771, fig. 20 A combination also found on a stratified, loop-earring finial
as0 Acquired in Teheran in 2955. P. Amandry, op. cit., 5. p. ;5, n. 49 from fifth century Ashdod. N. Dothan, I.L.N., December 7th,
and pl. 12, no. 33. P. 944 and fig. '.
11 R. Zahn, op. cit., loc. cit., no. and H. Luschey, op. cit., loc. cit. 128 x963,
Cf. the gold ibex heads from Vouni (nos. 2 and 3).
x8
elongated heads of the later series (nos. 8 to 14)-we may place the Pasargadae bracelets somewhere
between the bracelets of the Vouni-Pforzheim-Sardis group and the isolated heads (nos. 8 and 9)
from Paris and Berlin.
The treatment of the hoop may also be said to accord with this relative position, which would date
the bracelets to the first half of the fourth century B.c. Although the fifth century saw the introduction
of quite a wide range of coiled elements in such articles as rings and vase handles,130and possibly in
hoop-earrings as well,131we still cannot point to any bracelets with spirally twisted hoops that were
definitely produced before the fourth century. More than this, the Pasargadaehoops may well illustrate
the first, relatively simple, form of twisted hoop to be produced. Not only would one except hoops of
plain coiled wire of uniform thicknessto represent the archetype of all the more complex forms of hoop
that later developed-such as those composed of coiled wires of two different sizes,132or of flat, twisted
bands,133or of isolated, beaded wires used against a smooth groundl34-but also one or two other small
clues would seem to support such a possibility. In the case of one of the very first bracelets not to rely
,on a penannular tube or rod-namely the fifth century snake-headed bracelet from the tumuli of the
Seven Brothersin the Kubanl35-we again find an exclusive use of thin wire of uniform diameter, even
if the hoop itself should be composed of a cross-linkedchain.136Also, two slim armletsfrom Greece, each
with coiled hoops of alternate plain and beaded wires of uniform diameter,137may well document
something of the gradual elaboration that overcame simple hoops of the Pasargadae type during the
second half of the fourth century.'38
Turning to the collars or sleeves of the Pasargadae bracelets, they appear at first sight to be
surprisingly large and surprisingly complex for finials of early date. Contrasted with the minimal
sleeves of the separate Paris and Berlin heads (nos. 8 and 9) and even those of certain still later bracelets
from Macedonia (nos. 12 and 13), they stand out as remarkably accomplished components. In the
actual arrangement of their various decorative elements-the simple zigzag border excepted-they
find frequent links with the filigree motifs found on hoop-earringsof Hellenistic date'39and they even
find their closest parallel in the sleeve ends of a late fourth century or third century torque from Kul
Oba.140 But the one piece of evidence that again seems to confirm our original date-apart from the
long life of all the decorative elements in question-comes from a close consideration of the probable
evolution of the zigzagged motif that is found at the edge of the sleeve. For, if we consider the nature
of this ornament as it is found on such probable fifth century products as the Ashdod finial and a gold
plated bracelet with ram's head finials from Curium,'4'it seems to have first appeared as a border motif
that only rested on the surfaceof the sleeve. Then, as evinced by the Paris and Berlin heads (nos. 8 and
9), it became an open wire pattern that definitely crept beyond the limits of the sleeve, while finally,
as shown by large numbers of later braceletsx42and earrings,143it developed into a solid, protruding
petal. Thus, as can be seen from P1. X, our own relatively simple zigzag pattern again accords with
what seems to have been a largely early to mid fourth century form of decoration.
Among the earringsfrom Pasargadae,the outstanding pair in P1.XIa may be said to have much the
most important bearing on the date of the treasure. Closely related to a fourth century pair from
Akhalgori, which also attests a partly granulated, penannular tube and certain suspended, internal
1s0See P. Amandry,Collection
HilLneStathatos
I, I953, p. 72, no. terminals from Macedonia (G. Becatti, op. cit., pl. XCV,
214 and Collection
HdlneStathatos III, 1963, p. 244, n. 3. no. 37I).
aS' E. Coche de la Fert6, Les BijouxAntiques,I956, P.59 and 135Compte rendudela Commission imperiale 1877, pl. II,
archeologique,
io and M. Rostovtzeff,op.cit., pl. XV, I.
pl. XVII, I.
3asE.g. the silver bracelets from Taman with ram terminals. xs3Possibly best illustrated by Amandry in CollectionH61zne
M. Rostovtzeff, Iraniansand Greeksin SouthRussia, 1922, StathatosIII, p. 240.
133 pl. XV,
2. 1'37P. Amandry,AntikeKunstI, p. 19 and pl. 14, no. 46.
E.g. nos. 138For still later thin wire survivalssee R. A. Higgins, Greekand
134 E.g. the gold braceletswith sphinx terminalsfrom Kul Oba
xo-14, Roman Jeellery, 96I, p 72 andp. 53G
(S. Reinach, Antiquitisdu BosphoreCimme'rien,1892, pl. XIII, 1 R J r, 16, p. 7 and .
I); the gold braceletwith lion-headedterminalsfrom Temir
Gora (HermitageT.G. 6); the gold braceletwith lion-headed 140S. Reinach, op.cit., pl. VIII.
terminals, of unknown provenance, now in New York 14 R. A. Higgins, op.cit., p. I29 and pl. 30A.
(MetropolitanMuseumof Art no. 45.1x.Io); and the bracelet 14 E.g. nos. Io-14.
with a rock crystaland gold wire hoop and gold ram's head 'ts R. A. Higgins,op.cit., pl. 47, C and E.
elements,144these examples are still more notable for their diagnostic use of wire mesh. For, with
dominant penannular tubes composed of hundreds of small wire elements, each sweated together with
small globules to mask the joins, they can only be associated with a particular technique of wire mesh
decoration that first evolved during the fourth century and lasted through to the second."14Further-
more, it is probably relevant that large rings and pendants are also found at the base of Etruscan
earrings of the fourth and third centuries B.C.146
Distinguished by a small row of delicately suspended, internal pendants, a prominent central
aperture, and a light, aerial appearance, the two earringsin Pls. XIb and c are again in the developed,
fourth century tradition of those in P1l.XIa. But although disc ornamentation is to be found on at least
one pair of earringsof similar date,'4"there is still no immediate parallel for the three-dimensionalgold
rosettesthat march round the circumferenceof each earring. All that can be said, perhaps, is that such
rosettes are not dissimilar in conception to the short-stemmedpellets that stud the circumferenceof a
somewhat earlier earring in the Louvre148 and those that are found on at least two other earrings from
Deve Huyuk.149
The last two earrings, which have an almost identical central aperture to the Susa earrings,15'are
perhaps most notable for their openwork scroll design (P1. XId). Ultimately descended from a con-
siderably older pattern,'"' such scrolls reflect the revival of openwork filigree that marks the fourth,
and also the third, century. The addition of inlaid plates is of course in line with the Achaemenian
predilection for inlay, although here we see a pleasing spirit of restraint not always shown. The use
of triple pendants also seems to be a known fourth century feature.152 In individual design, however,
the Pasargadae pendants appear closest to an older, three-sided pattern from Assur,153which is other-
wise unparalleled in Iran. Finally, the pyramids of granulation on the circumferenceare too common
a phenomenon to have any particular dating value, although more or less contemporary parallels can
be found as far afield as Tell el Ajjil.54S
Turning to some of the other objects in the collection, the beautifully proportioned spoon in
Pls. XIIa and b representsyet another outstanding article that can claim a certain chronological value.
For although it finds no very close parallel among other Achaemenian spoons or ladles, many of
which also terminate in duck's head handles,'55it does bear a striking resemblance to a partly looped
" handle ", with a small calf's head at one end and a stiffly stylized duck's head at the other, which
probably dates from the early fifth century.s56 And, since the duck's head on the Pasargadae spoon
illustrates a much more naturalistic form, it can at least be argued-on the stylistic grounds advanced
above-that our example from the treasure represents a later product, stemming from either the
second half of the fifth century or perhaps even the fourth century.
To seek the immediate origins of Achaemenian cloisonne work one should almost certainly look
to Assyria, where the technique was firmly established in all principal industrial centres. Apart from
all other evidence to this effect, a cloisonne button from Assur'57representsa remarkable parallel to
x14 R. Ghirshman, Persia from the Origins to Alexanderthe Great, century date, possibly from Anatolia, with small granulated
fig. 559; and J. I. Smirnov, Der Schatz von Achalgori, '934, rosettes on the ends of similar, flat-topped pellets. Sotheby's
p. 23 and pl. III, 25a and 25b. Catalogue,October sgth 1964, no. 38.
"5 For lists of examples see B. Segall, MuseumBenaki, Katalog der 1s0 See J. de Morgan, op. cit., pl. V, nos. 3 and 4-
Goldschmiede-Arbeiten, 1938, p. 4i; P. Jacobsthal, Early Celtic 151 Cf. an Etruscan earring of seventh century date from Vulci.
Art, 9Ig44, pp. 148-9; and P. Amandry, CollectionHillne E. Coche de la Fert6, op. cit., p. 45 and pl. V, I and R. A.
StathatosI, pp. I 13-6 and III, p. 253, n. 2. A particularly Higgins, op. cit., p. I37 and pl. 32F.
close parallel comes from part of a tubular bracelet or necklace in
which is covered with a filigree mesh and which dates either See n. 147 above.
to the last years of the fourth century or to the third century. x5sA. Haller, Die Graberund Griiftevon Assur, I954, p. I6I and
See E. Coche de la Fert6, op. cit., p. 69 and pl. XXV, I. pl. 38c.
146 R. A. Higgins, op. cit., p. I51 and pl. 43D. 154 F. Petrie, AncientGaza IV, p. 6 and pls. XIII and XIV, nos.
'47One example, with only one of its triple pendants still in 28 and 29.
position, appears in R. Ghirshman, Persiafrom the Origins to 16 See P. Amandry, CollectionHilene StathatosIII, pp. 268, 269,
Alexanderthe Great,fig. 324. n. I and pl. XXXVIII, no. 181; H. Luschey, BerlinerMuseen
1s E. Coche de la Fert6, op. cit., p. V, 4 and R. Ghirshman, LIX, Heft 4, p. 8I; and Materialsfor the ArchaeologyofRussia,
Persiafrom the Originsto Alexanderthe Great,fig. 323. 1894, pl. VI, figs. 2 and 3.
u4 C. L. Woolley, L.A.A.A. VII, p. 123 and pl. XXIII, 5 and 7. 156 See Amandry, AntikeKunst I, p. I3 f. and pl. Io, I5, I6.
Cf. also a pair of gold earrings of probable early fourth 1'5 A. Haller, op. cit., p. I29 and p1. 28b.
both a pair of such buttons from Susa'58as well as to the single Pasargadae button (cat. no. I7)-which
again underlines the continued popularity of this form in fourth century Persia.
Among the small gold charms in the Pasargadae collection (Pl. XIIId) it is also worth noting that
our own lion-headed pendants are by no means dissimilar to the lion-headed pendants at Chicago,
which Professor Helene Kantor has ascribed " with considerable probability " to the reign of
Artaxerxes II (404-359 B.c.).159 Stone beads in the form of a couchant lion or bull are known from
both Elamite and Achaemenian contexts160while small bell pendants, very like our own, are attested
both in the Oxus treasurel61and at Persepolis.162As for still other small elements, many of which were
probably in vogue for a considerable period of time, it is important to note that gold spacer beads,
cylindrical beads, segmented beads, stone barrel beads and minute pearl beads, can all be paralleled
amongst the necklace ornaments in the Susa collection.163
To conclude, the stylistic evidence of the bracelets is broadly supported by the rest of the objects
from the treasure,which seem to range in date from the second half of the fifth century to the middle
years of the fourth century B.c. Also from the fact that we know the women of this period to have
been richly adorned, often with a very similar range of jewellery,164we can perhaps assume that we
are dealing with the personal finery of a great lady of the Achaemenian court. More than this, the
date of the treasure and the nature of its secret deposition would even suggest that it might have been
hidden at the express orders of its owner, as Alexander the Great advanced on Persepolis and as
members of the Achaemenian court began to flee northwards in the years 331-330 B.c. But, whether
or not this last suppositionshould be correct, the treasureas a whole still stands as a remarkableaddition
to the known range of Achaemenian jewellery as well as a vivid testimony to the skill and artistry of
the Achaemenian goldsmith.
168 J. de Morgan, op. cit., pl. IV, nos. 2 and 3. 6s J. de Morgan, op. cit., pls. IV-VI. Also, for further parallels
'" H. Kantor, J.N.E.S. XVI, I957, p. 20. to our cylindrical beads, see Schmidt, PersepolisII, pl. 43, 7;
o60See M.D.P. VII, pl. XIII, 13; and Schmidt, PersepolisII, and C. Densmore Curtis, Sardis XIII, 1925, pl. V, no. 25.
pl. 43,1. 164 The quantity and range of the material from the female burial
'x O. M. Dalton, op. tit., pl. XXI, I50. at Susa is very similar indeed, including only one pair of
16 E. F. Schmidt, PersepolisII, pls. 44, 22 and 45, 30. bracelets and at least half a dozen necklaces.
41
COIN HOARDS FROM PASARGADAE

By G. K. Jenkins
This account is concerned with the Hellenistic coins found in 1962 and 1963 during the excavations
on the Tall-i-Takht or Citadel Hill at Pasargadae. The two main groups of coins are Hoard I (1962)
found with miscellaneousjewellery in room 82,1 and Hoard II (1963) from the corridor near room 187.
These two hoards each comprise (a) coins of the type minted for Alexander the Great both during his
life and posthumously, and (b) coins of Seleucus I of a type minted principally at Persepolis. The
general character of Hoards I and II is closely similar and there is every sign that the two hoards are
of approximately the same date. Their discovery is fortunate as it helps to determine the date of the
destruction associated with the archaeologists'Period II-the date in question is towards or at the end
of the reign of Seleucus I, when the rule of the Greeks in this area came to an end as the result of a
native uprising which it is fair to put at about 280 B.c. Hoard III, consisting of only four drachms of
the Alexander type, found in room 86A, could be somewhat earlier, with a terminus of c. 300 B.C.
Finally there is an isolated piece, perhaps a barbarousimitation, from room 192.
In the description of the coins which follows, the list will be given of each hoard separately, with
details of the coins arranged by mints from west to east: the mint attributions are those determined
by the great American numismatist E. T. Newell, and most of them appear in his published works.
For some of the unpublished attributions I am deeply indebted for much kind help and advice to
Margaret Thompson of the American Numismatic Society.2
It will be observed that the weights of the coins as given are highly irregular: this is presumably
due to the state of preservation, but it seems unprofitable to discuss the matter, not having seen the
originals. The maximum diameters are given in centimetres as a check on the scale of the illustrations.
Bibliography and abbreviations:
ESM: E. T. Newell, Eastern Seleucid Mints (New York, 1938).
WSM: E. T. Newell, Western Seleucid Mints (New York, I94i).
Demanhur: E. T. Newell, The Demanhur Hoard (Numismatic Notes and Monographs
No. 19, New York,
1923).
Reattributions: E. T. Newell, Reattributions of certain tetradrachms of Alexander the Great
(New York, 1912).
Miiller: L. Muiller,Numismatique d'Alexandre le Grand (Copenhagen, I855).
E. T. Newell: Dated Alexander Coinage of Sidon and Ak (New Haven, 1916)
Appelgren: T. G. Appelgren, Doktor Otto Smiths Miinzensammlung im Kgl. Muinz-
kabinett Stockholm (Stockholm, 193I).
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE COIN TYPES
TYPES OF ALEXANDER THE GREAT
Obverse: Head of Herakles to right, wearing headdress composed of lion's scalp, with the front paw
of the lion knotted around the neck.
Reverse: Zeus enthroned, to left, holding sceptre in his left hand, and his right hand outstretched with
an eagle perched on it.
(Details and inscriptions below.)
TYPES OF SELEUCUS I
Obverse: Head of Seleucus I, to right, wearing helmet with cheekpieces, adorned with bull's horn and
ear; the whole surface is covered with a leopard skin. Around the neck, the skin of the leopard is
shown with the paws knotted together.
1
Stronach, Iran II, p. 36. for her help over ESM 420 in connection with nos. Ii and 12 of
2
I am grateful also to Miss Helen Mitchell for sending me the Hoard I; to Miss Olive Kitson for the photos of Hoard I; and
weights of coins no. 5, 8 and 13 from Hoard I (which are now to Mr. K. A. Howes for the drawings of the monograms.
in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford); to Mrs. Ulla Westermark
42 JOURNALOF PERSIANSTUDIES
Reverse: Nike standing with open wings, placing a wreath on a trophy which consists of helmet,
cuirass and shield decorated with a star, arranged on a tree stump with sprigs of leaves below.
Inscription: BAZIAEU (on right); ZEAEYKOY (on left).
(Further details below.)
TABLE OF MONOGRAMS
2
At 3 4
EE1 5
1 VI 6 7
t 8
& 9
PT
I I0
1 12 13 5 6 2i 9
14 17
21 22 23 24 26 1 2 29 30
HOARD I
Discovered in 1962 in room 82
TYPES OF ALEXANDER
Mint: AMATHUS
i Tetradrachm. c. 325-319 B.C.
Zeus has one leg drawn back, both feet on footstool; throne without back.
In the left field, symbol, prow.
Inscription: AAE EANAPOY (on right).
Weight gm. Diam. 2-9.
16"45
Cf. Demanhur 271I, Reattributions, pl. 30.1 I, 12; the style of the obverse is however finer than
that of the specimens illustrated by Newell.
PAS 62/243.
Mint: Uncertain of CAPPADOCIA or N. SYRIA

2 Tetradrachm. c. 319-301 B.C.
Zeus has crossed legs on foot stool; throne with high back.
In the left field, symbol, Corinthian
helmetand letter Z.
Weight 17 gm. Diam. 2 -85.
"45
As regards the attribution of this specimen, I am indebted to Margaret Thompson for the
following information. A specimen from the same obverse die was placed by Newell with
a group of further coins (Miiller 1465-67) in his collection under the mint of Tarsus;
however, it appears from notes left by Newell that he later envisaged attributing the group
of coins in question to a mint in the region of Cappadocia or N. Syria, the later products of
which are those detailed in WSM 1332, etc. Cf. Hoard II, no. 5 (below).
PAS 62/244.
COIN HOARDS FROM PASARGADAE 43
Mint: ARADUS
Zeus' legs not crossed; throne without back.
Below the throne, monogram I.
Inscription: AAE EANAPOY (on right); BAIIAE LQ (below).
Weight oo grri. Diam. 2-8.
I6.
Demanhur 3302, Miiller 1360.
PAS 62/253.
4 Tetradrachm. c. 319-317 B.c.

Zeus' legs not crossed; no footstool; throne with high back.
In left field, monogram 2.
Below throne, letter I.
Inscription: bIAIHIIOY (on right); BAZIAEDEL(below).
Weight 16.35 gm. Diam. 2-75-
Cf. WSM, pp. 192 ff. and pl. XLIII.B. Miiller I o.
PAS 62/252.
Mint: MARATHUS
5 Tetradrachm. c. 317 B.C.
Zeus' legs not crossed; footstool; throne with high back.
Below throne, monogram 4.
Inscription: bIAIIIIIOY (on right); BAMIAEUM(below).
Weight 16.49 gm. Diam. 2 75.
Cf. WSM, p. 194 and pl. XLIII.G.
PAS 62/251.

In left field, symbol, anchorand monogram 5.
Inscription: AAE EANAPOY (on right); BAMIAE~L (below).
Weight 16-55 gm. Diam. 2-65-
Cf. WSM, p. 194 and pl. XLIII.H, I. Miiller 1492-1501 (monograms cf. gold stater, Miiller
1494)
PAS
62/245.
Mint: BABYLON
7 Tetradrachm. c. 323-32o B.C.
Zeus' legs crossed; footstool; throne with high back.
In field and under throne, letters M B.
Inscription: IAIIIIIOY (on right); BAIAE GL (below).
Weight Diam. 2.62.
7"35 gm.
Demanhur 4601.
PAS 62/250.
Mint: ECBATANA
8 Tetradrachm. c. 31 -303 B.C.
Zeus has crossed legs; footstool; throne with high back.
In left field, monogram 7 and symbol, grazinghorse.
Weight 16- 13 gm. Diam. 2-8.
ESM 439. Perhaps same obverse die as ESM pl.
XXXIII.I5.
PAS 62/246.
TYPES OF SELEUCUS I
Mint: PERSEPOLIS
(all c. 300-280 B.C.)
9-I o Drachms.
Reverse, left field, letter H; centre field, letters A X.
Weights 4-o5, 4-05 gm. Diams. I -68, i -6I.
ESM 418.
PAS 62/254, PAS 62/255.
I1-12 Tetradrachms.
Reverse, left field, letter M; centre field, letters A X.
Weights 17 -35, 16'9 gm. Diams. 2 2 -73.
ESM 420. Both obverses from this.72,
same die (not illustrated by Newell, but cf. Appelgren
no. 257), as also Hoard II, nos. 32-34-
PAS 62/247, PAS 62/248.
13 Tetradrachm.
Reverse monograms 9 and Io.
Weight I6.31 gm. Diam. 2-65-
ESM 424-
PAS 62/249.
14 Drachm.
This specimen was not suitable for illustration, but appears to have been of the same type as
nos. 9-io above; the exact variety could not be identified.
Weight 4 - gm. Diam. I
PAS "7.
62/256.
HOARD II
Discovered in 1963 in the corridor near room 187
TYPES OF ALEXANDER
Mint: AMPHIPOLIS
I Tetradrachm. c. 328-327 B.C.
In the left field, symbol, cock.
Weight I6-8 gm. Diam. 2
"4.
Demanhur 792.
PAS 63/307.
2 Tetradrachm. c. 325 B.c.

Obverse very corroded, but reverse generally similar to no. I; symbol uncertain.
Inscription: AAE EANAPOY (above); BAZIAE IE (on right).
Weight I5 I5 gm. Diam. 2 -7.
Demanhur 1o43 ff., Group G; cf. Reattributions pl. 9.5-12.
PAS 63/311.
Mint: KITION
In left field, monogram 11 (name of the mint).
Inscription: BAZIAE •Z (on right); AAE EANAPOY (below: effaced).
Weight I5 '9 gm. Diam. 2 -48.
Cf. Demanhur 2546, 2619.
PAS 63/302.
Mint: MYRIANDROS
Weight Io- 7 gm. (probably plated). Diam. 2 6.
Cf. Demanhur 2766.
PAS 63/310.
Mint: Uncertain of CAPPADOCIA or N. SYRIA
In left field, symbol, helmetand letter E.
Weight I6 15 gm. Diam. 2'79-
On the attribution, see note to Hoard I, no. 2 (above).
PAS 63/306.
Mint: ARADUS
Zeus' legs not crossed; left leg slightly drawn back; throne with high back.
Probably monogram I below throne, together with a letter in left field; also inscription:
AAE EANAPOY BAUIAE Z; all these details are however effaced. The identification
is nevertheless certain, on account of the style of the obverse, which fits perfectly for the
earlier issues of the mint of Aradus.
Weight I4-O gm. (very worn). Diam. 2-7.
Demanhur 3302 ff.; cf. Reattributions, pl. 22.7-12.
PAS 63/304.
7 Tetradrachm. c. 319 B.c.
Zeus' legs not crossed; throne with high back.
In left field, symbol, caduceus.
Below throne, monogram i.
Inscription: AAE EANAPOY (on right); BA~IAE i2 (below).
Weight gm. Diam. 2.52.
i6.5
Cf. Demanhur 3467.
PAS 63/293.

On left, monogram I3.
Inscription: IAIHIIIOY (on right); BAXIAEfGL(below).
Weight 6 -5 gin. Diam. 2 74.
Not in M*iller; cf. generally WSM, pp. 192 if.
PAS 63/301.
9-I Tetradrachms. c. 319-317 B.C.
On left, monogram 14 and symbol, grapes.
Inscription: 0IAIIIIIOY (on right); BALIAEUE (below).
Weight I6-3, 17 -o, 15-0 gm. Diams. 2*75, 2 2-6.
"9,
Cf. WSM, pp. 192 ff.; Muiller56.
PAS 63/281, PAS 63/283, PAS 63/299.
12-13 Tetradrachms. c. 319-317 B.C. or after.
Zeus' legs parallel; footstool; throne with high back.
On left, monogram 14 and symbol, grapes.
Inscription: AAE EANAPOY (on right); BAZIAEGLX(below).
Weight 15 15 gm. Diams. 2-7, 2-8.
"3, but
Not in Muiller, "4
cf. Muiller56 of Philip III (no. 9 above); cf. generally WSM, pp. 192 ff
In the absence of a full study of the Aradus series it is difficult to determine whether this
issue, which is clearly linked to that in the name of Philip (no. 9 above), is contemporary
with the latter or not; the same may be said of no. 14 below.
PAS 73/288, PAS 63/3o8.
14 Tetradrachm. c. 319-3I7 B.C.
In left field, symbol, prow (?).
Below throne, letters AI, I.
Inscription: AAE EANAPOY (on right); BAZIAEO• (below).
Weight 13 .8 gm. Diam. 2-52.
Cf. Muiller I275 (prow with letters AY above, and I below throne).
PAS 63/289.
Mint: BYBLOS
15-16 Tetradrachm. c. 320 B.C.
Zeus' legs crossed; footstool; throne without back.
On left, monogram 16.
Weight 16-9, 15'7 gm. Diams. 2-8.
2"75,
Demanhur 3624.
PAS 63/285, PAS 63/303.
17 Tetradrachm. c. 32o B.c.

As no. I5, but the throne has a short back.
Weight gm. Diam. 2- 8.
15.6
PAS 63/292.
Pl. I. Coin Hoard Ifrom Pasargadae (1962). Nos. 1-13.
PI. IIH.CoinHoardII from Pasargadae(1963). Nos. 1-12.
Pl. III. Coin Hoard H from Pasargadae (1963). jNos. 13-24.
Pl. IV. CoinHoardI from Pasargadae Nos. 25-34-
(I963).
Bottomright: four drachms,HoardIII from Pasargadae(1963), and plated tetradrachm
from Pasargadaeroom192.
The monogram which appears on nos. 15-17 is interpreted by Newell as that of the local king of
Byblos, Adramelek, successor to Ainel (Enylos) who was reigning there at the time of
Alexander's arrival and whose initials in Phoenician letters appear on the first coins of the
Alexander type minted at Byblos (Demanhur pl. VI.3).
Mint: AKE
18 Tetradrachm. 313-312 B.c.
Zeus' legs crossed; footstool; throne without back.
On left Phoenician date 35 (313-312 B.C.) and mint name in Phoenician letters, ok.
Weight (?). Diam. 2-78.
Newell, Dated Alexander Coinage of Sidon and Ake; Ake no. 40o.
PAS 63/291.
Mint: BABYLON
Zeus' legs crossed; throne with high back.
On left, symbol, wheel(not visible on this specimen) and monogram 17.
Inscription: bIAIH11IOY(on right); BAZIAEUE (below).
I4.9
Cf. Demanhur 4609.
PAS 63/282.
2o Tetradrachm. c. 316-306 B.C.
Zeus' legs crossed; footstool; thrown with high back.
On left, monogram 19.
Below throne, letters MI.
Inscription: AAEEANAPOY (on right); BAZIAELU2(below).
Weight I6-65 gin. Diam. 2-78.
Miiller 734-
PAS 63/290.
Mint: SUSA
Below throne, letters AA.
Inscription: IAIIIHHOY(on right); (below).
Weight 16 25 gmin. Diam. BAXIAE2E.
2.5.
Cf. Miller 85.
PAS 63/300.
Similar to no. 21. In left field, monogram 20o.
Below throne, letters AA.
Inscription: AAEEANAPOY (on right); BALIAEfl (below).
Weight gm. Diam.
16.6 2.7.
Miiller 831.
PAS 63/287.

Similar to no. 21.
Inscription: AAE EANAPOY (on right); BAZIAE Z (below).
Weight 16-9 gm. Diam. 2-65-
PAS 63/286.
For the attribution of no. 23, I am indebted to Margaret Thompson. The style is close to that
of nos. 21-22, and the date thus probably the same. For the dating of Alexander type coins
of Susa to the period of Antigonos Monophthalmos' rule there, see Bellinger,Byblos hoard,
(BerytosX), p. 45.
Mint: ECBATANA
Zeus' legs crossed; footstool; thrown with high back.
Below throne, monogram 8 (not visible on this specimen).
I6.o
ESM 434 (obverse die same as pl. XXXIII.Io). Newell (ESM, p. 167) emphasizes the appro-
priateness of the horse symbol at the mint of Ecbatana in allusion to the famous Nisaean
horses of Media.
PAS
63/294.
25 Tetradrachm. c. 31I-3o3 B.C.
Similar to no. 24.
Weight 16-3 gm. Diam. 2-7.
ESM 447.
PAS 63/305.
Similar to no. 24.
In left field, monograms 8 and 25; symbols, anchorand horse.
Below throne, letters 2: .
Inscription: AAEEANAPOY (on right).
Weight I6-8 gm. Diam. 2
ESM 473- "75.
PAS 63/284-
TYPES OF SELEUCUS I
Mint: SUSA
27 Tetradrachm. c. 300oo-298 B.c.
Reverse: in left field, letters AP; in centre field, monogram 22.
Weight I6.9 gm. Diam.
Same obverse die as ESM2.68. 301, which was hitherto the only recorded specimen of this type of
tetradrachm for the mint of Susa (and which is now in the British Museum). ESM 301
however, is a different variety, having a symbol, Helios bust, in the centre field, with the
monogram in the right field. The arrangement on the present coin is the same as on the
drachm ESM 302.
PAS 63/277.
Mint: PERSEPOLIS
28-29 Tetradrachms. c. 300-280 B.C.
Reverse: in left field, monogram 26; in centre field, letters ALI.
Weights I6. I, I6-5 gm. Diams 2-75, 2-8.
ESM 413. Both from the same obverse die as ESM, pl. XXXII.I.
PAS 63/274, PAS 63/278.
Reverse: in left field, letter H; in centre field, letters AX.
Weights I6-8, I6-o gm. Diams. 2-8, 2-5.
ESM 4i7. Both obverses from same die (probably that of ESM, pl. XXXII.9).
PAS 63/276, PAS 63/279.
Reverse: in left field, letter M; in centre field, letters AX.
Weights 17o-0, 15.4, i6.6 gm. Diams 2-7, 2-7, 2-7.
ESM 420. All three obverses from same die as that of Hoard I, nos. I11-12 (q.v.).
PAS 63/273, PAS 63/280, PAS 63/275-
HOARD III
Discovered in 1963 in room 86A, floor III
TYPES OF ALEXANDER
Mint: BABYLON
I Drachm. c. 329-326 B.C.
In left field, letter M.
Weight 3 gm. Diam. I - 18.
"9
Cf. Demanhur 4331 (tetradrachm).
PAS 63/295.
Mint: SUSA
2 Drachm. c. 318-316 B.C.
Letters or monograms not clear, but possibly a trace of letters AA below throne.
Inscription not clear but perhaps VIAIIIHIOY(on right).
Weight 4 I gm. Diam. I -i18.
Mtiller 86 (?). Cf. Hoard II, no. 21 (above).
PAS 63/295.
3 Drachm. c. 3Io-3oo B.c.
Weight gm. Diam. I
4"8 ?65.
PAS 63/297.
4 Drachm. c. 310-3oo00 B.C.

Similar to no. 3.
In left field, monogram 3o.
Below throne, letters AP.
Weight 3 gm. Diam. I -67.
"9 below the throne ESM
For the letters cf. 292. The style of the obverse is not very like the latter,
but the Zeus is extremely similar. There seems little doubt that nos. 3 and 4 are from the
same mint; their precise date however must remain provisional for the moment.
PAS 63/296.
I am much indebted to Margaret Thompson for her help over nos. 2-4 above, and for the
information that there is in the Newell collection a drachm similar to no. 3, but nothing like
no. 4 (which thus appears to be, for the moment at least, unique).
Single coin discovered in 1963 in room 192

TYPES OF ALEXANDER
Tetradrachm. c. 300 B.C. (?).
Zeus' legs are crossed; throne with high back.
In the left field, symbol, wreathand perhaps another symbol below it.
Below throne, indeterminate letters.
Weight 13 25 gm. (plated). Diam. 2-4-
This specimen seems to be an unofficial base metal imitation probably of a tetradrachmsimilar
to ESM 284 of the mint of Susa, where the wreath in the left field is accompanied by a
horned horse's head symbol (of which there is perhaps a trace on the present specimen).
The inscription is quite obscure.
PAS 63/309-
The significance of these finds, especially of Hoards I and II, consists of course mainly in the coins
of Seleucus I which they contain. Before discussing these however it may be convenient to say some-
thing about the earlier coins: these include a fairly wide selection of the currency of Alexander's
empire both from his own lifetime and from the subsequent period when the coins continued to be
minted virtually unchanged by the successors in their own territories. One change which occurs
temporarily is the replacement of the name of Alexander by that of his titular successor Philip III,
until his death in 317 B.C.; examples from the present material are to be found listed above under the
mints of Aradus, Marathus, Babylon and Susa. After 317 B.C. however the name of Alexander is
resumed, though later still the name of Seleucus occurs on that king's issues of the Alexander type.
The number of coins in Hoards I and II is scarcely large enough to furnish much in the way of
statistical evidence for the circulation of the coinage by comparisonwith other hoards. A glance at the
tabular summary above serves to reveal only that the mints whose coins are represented are virtually
confined to the eastern section of the Macedonian empire-Cyprus, Phoenicia, Mesopotamia and Persia.
There are only two western coins, from the important mint of Amphipolis in Macedonia, whose
enormous output under Alexander and until c. 319 B.c. is so prominent in the great Demanhur hoard
from Egypt. It was the evidence of this hoard which formed the basis of Newell's masterlyreconstruction
of Alexander's coinage, and largely for this reason it is convenient to take 319 B.c., the burial date of the
Demanhur hoard, rather than 323 s.c. the date of the death of Alexander, as the dividing line between
earlier and later coins (see the tabular summary). In the period of Alexander'ssuccessors,and especially
after 319 B.c., it is generally found that coins of the western mints do not tend to reach eastern hoards,
and this is already clear from such larger hoards as those from Byblus, Phacous and Kuft.3 On the
SA. R. Bellinger, Byblos hoard, in Berytus X, 1950-51, pp. (AmericanNumismaticSociety) IX, pp. I7 ff.
37-49; G. K. Jenkins, Phacous hoard, in Museum Notes
Tabular summary of the coins from Hoards I and II
Lifetime of AlexanderAfter 319 B.C.

and to c. 319 B.C.
HoardI HoardII HoardI HoardII
Typesof Alexander
Amphipolis . . . 2
Amathus . .. I
Kition . . . . I
Cappadocia or N. Syria . I
Myriandros. . . I (imitation ?)
Aradus . . . 2 I 7
Marathus . . . . 2
Byblus . . . 3
Ake . . . . I
Babylon . . . 2
Susa . . . . 3
Ecbatana . . . . I 3
Typesof Seleucus
Susa . I
.0.
Persepolis . 6 7
other hand the great preponderanceof coins of Babylon which is a notable feature of these other hoards
is not noticeably paralleled in the selection of Alexander coins which we have from Pasargadae. Here
instead it seems to be the issues of Phoenicia, especially of Aradus, which are most prominent; and
inasmuch as these Phoenician issues were mostly made at the time when this area was in the orbit of
Antigonos, it is clear that the coins circulated freely enough irrespective of political frontiers. In fact
the coins attributed by Newell to Aradus and Marathus have been found before in Babylonia (cf.
WSM, p. I93). Likewisethe coins of Susa from Hoard II seem to have been minted during Antigonos'
control of that region. Of the eastern issues in the hoards, only the later specimens of Babylon and
those of Ecbatana were minted in Seleucus' territory. So far, the Pasargadae hoards remain virtually
alone as a concrete example of the circulation of the coins of Alexander at the period in question from
southern Iran.
It is however the coins of Seleucus I with the helmeted portrait of the king which form the important
feature of Hoards I and II. The portrait seems youthful and is almost certainly idealized, by contrast
with more purely realistic portraitsof the king which were subsequentlyproduced on coins at Pergamon4
and elsewhere. As Newell and others have pointed out, there seems a deliberate parallelism between
the iconography of this head and that of the Herakles head on the coins of Alexander: the leopard skin
which covers the helmet and is knotted around the neck is an interesting feature, perhaps as has been
suggested intended to recall Dionysos the mythical invader and conqueror of India and so to suggest
a similar role for Seleucus after the considerable success of his campaign against India in 304-303 B.C.5
The precise significance of the further adornment of Seleucus' helmet, the bull's horn and ear, is not
clear beyond the fact that these attributes symbolize power and royalty: as such the same emblems
occur on the helmet worn by Eukratides of Bactria on his coins of over a hundred years later.6 But
' Newell, WSM, pl. LXIX. 6 Seltman, Greek Coins, pL LV.5.

if the helmeted portrait of Seleucus is supposed to evoke his activities in India, it has been universally
agreed by numismatiststhat the reverse showing a Nike or victory crowning a trophy was intended to
mark the occasion of the decisive victory of Seleucus over Antigonos at the battle of Ipsos in 301 B.C.
As a result of this victory Seleucus was assured of the control of a large part of Alexander's erstwhile
empire. There seems no reason to doubt that this was indeed the occasion for the issue of the coins in
question: it is even possible, as Newell argues that the star which decorates the shield of the trophy
on the reverse may be an allusion to Demetrios Poliorketes,son of the defeated Antigonos.7
The issue of these coins was confined to the mints of Susa and Persepolis. Extant specimens of the
very brief Susa issue are of great rarity, the fine specimen from Pasargadae (Hoard II, no. 27) being
only the second known of the tetradrachm. The issue at Persepolis was rather more extensive,
though still of limited quantity, as is attested by the fewness of the dies used to strike the specimens
extant: the remaining specimens in the Pasargadae hoards are all of that mint. Newell's attribution
to Persepolisdepended, apart from various indirect arguments, on the occurrence of a single specimen
in a hoard found by Herzfeld at Persepolisitself in 1934-35: with it were coins of the succeeding kings
of independent Persis (Bagadat, Oborzos, Autophradates I).8 Now the discovery of further tetra-
drachms and drachms at Pasargadae may be said to confirm Newell's attribution, unless the mint was
at Pasargadae itself, which remains a possibility.
These coins then were minted after Ipsos, and their beginning may be put at about 300 B.C.:
Newell estimated that the issue at Persepolis lasted until towards the end of Seleucus' reign, viz.
280 B.C. This seems reasonable, particularly in view of the argument that the breakaway of Persis
from the Seleucids is less likely to have occurred during the lifetime of Seleucus than during the period
of confusion immediately after his death (280 B.c.). The concealment or loss of Hoards I and II must
evidently have taken place at about this time. It is worth stressingthat there is virtually no difference
between the two hoards as regards the latest coins contained in each. It is admittedly true that of the
three groups into which Newell divided the Persepolisissue, only groups A and B appear in Hoard II,
and only B and C in Hoard I.9 But this is a comparatively trivial difference, and even if it is insisted
on, the date of the two hoards cannot be regarded as differing by more than a very few years at most:
in fact they are with far greater probability to be regarded as contemporary. Since Hoard II is securely
associated with the destruction of Period II, it seems necessarynow to conclude that Hoard I should
be connected with this same destructionand not as had originally been thought with that of Period III.10
Thus the combined evidence of the two hoards, the contents of which are well dated, has an important
bearing on the history of the Pasargadae site.
' ESM, p. 158. 10 Cf. Stronach, Iran II, p. 36; also AntiquityXXXVIII, 1964,
8 ESM, pp. 159-60.
pp. 14-15. I am most grateful to Mr. Stronach for discussing
9 Hoard II: Newell, ESM 413
(group A) and 417, 420 (both this point with me and for communicating his revised views.
group B); Hoard I: ESM 418, 420 (both group B) and 424 See further p. 22 in the present volume of Iran.
(groupC).
53
A COMPARATIVE CERAMIC CHRONOLOGY FOR

WESTERN IRAN, 1500-500 B.C.
By T. CuylerYoung,Jr.
June Ist 1964
This paper is a discussion of the comparative ceramics of western Iran in the proto-historicperiod
(c. 1500-500 B.C.). A second article, to appear at a later date, will deal with the historical sources
which refer indirectly to this important period and the relationship of those sources to the ceramic
evidence.'
The present discussion is divided into three principal parts: first, a brief and rather selective
presentation of new ceramic materials from the excavations at Hasanlu in Azarbaijan and from a
surface survey of Ziweye in Kurdistan; second, a re-examination of the stratigraphy and internal
chronology of the late second and early first millennium levels at Tepe Sialk, Tepe Giyan and the
Achaemenid Village at Susa; and third, a comparative typology and chronology, with absolute datings
where possible, of materials from these primary sites and from several other sites in western Iran. The
main emphasis throughout is on pottery. The quantity of available materials combined with practical
limitations of space and time led to this emphasis. It is furtherjustified, in the author's opinion, by the
fact that ceramics are the most sensitive measure of cultural and chronological change in the period
under consideration.
Before turning to the evidence itself, it is imperative to stress the tentative nature of the conclusions
to be presented. The recent increase in archaeological activity in Iran, particularly in western Iran,
has made a preliminary synthesis such as this possible. Yet it is also true that the continuation of such
activity and the final publication of the resultsof excavations now reaching conclusion will undoubtedly
call for a marked modification of our conclusions. The value of the discussion, therefore, lies largely
in its usefulnessas a point of departure for the consideration of a mass of interrelated questions and in
the hope that it will make possible an even more rapid increase in the available data by pointing the
way to future opportunitiesfor profitable field work. If this and the paper to follow stimulate discussion
which leads to both more evidence and a better synthesis,they will have performedtheir most important
function.
New Materialsfrom Hasanluand Ziweye

Recent excavations at Hasanlu Tepe in Azarbaijan have established a well-documented sequence
of late second and early first millennium ceramics.2 Since this sequence provides the framework for
much of the discussionto follow, it is necessaryto describe briefly the pottery from periods VI to III at
Hasanlu, and to establish, on internal evidence, the cultural and chronological relationships between
these periods.3
PeriodIII: (Figs. I and 2.) Period III, the most recent of the four periods at Hasanlu which
concern the present discussion, is stratigraphically divided into two sub-periods, IIIA and IIIB.
Pottery from sub-period IIIB, the earlier of the two, can be sorted into three wares distinguished by
1 This and the article to follow are based on the author's doctoral R. H. Dyson, Jr., " Digging in Iran: Hasanlu 1958 ", Expedi-
dissertation presented to the University of Pennsylvania in tion 1(3): 4-17, 1959; R. H. Dyson, Jr., " Hasanlu and Early
May 1963. The author would like to thank publicly Professors Iran ", Archaeology13(2): 118-29, 1960; V. E. Crawford,
Mark J. Dresden and Robert H. Dyson, Jr. for the time, " Hasanlu 1960 ", Metropolitan Museum of Art Bull. 20(3):
energy and wisdom that they put at his disposal as dissertation 85-94, 1961; and R. H. Dyson, Jr., " The Hasanlu Project ",
advisors. Science135(3504): 637-47, I962.
2The principal preliminary reports on the excavations at S The author wishes to thank Robert H. Dyson, Jr., Director of
Hasanlu are: R. H. Dyson, Jr., " Iran, 1957: Iron Age the Hasanlu Project, for permission to use these materials in
Hasanlu ", University Museum Bull. 22(2): 25-32, 1958; advance of the publication of the final excavation report.
3 I4
56
77 8
10
NIASAINLU III
COMION
WAil
Fig. I
A COMPARATIVE CERAMIC CHRONOLOGY FOR WESTERN IRAN, 1500-500 B.C. 55
quality of paste: Smudged Coarse Ware; Common Ware, in three varieties, plain buff, red-slipped,
and painted; and Fine Ware, found in the same three varieties as Common Ware. The colour of this
pottery, with the exception of the red-slipped varieties of Common and Fine Ware, varies from light
tan to reddish buff. Vessels which are slipped are covered both inside and out with a dark red maroon
coloured slip. The painted varieties of Common and Fine Ware are decorated with simple geometric
designs drawn in a purplish-brown paint. In Smudged Coarse Ware and Common Ware a matt or
smoothed finish is most common. Burnishing is usual on vessels or sherds with a red slip, and a very
high burnish which approaches a polish is characteristicof all three varieties of Fine Ware. Finally,
a few sherds of a blue-white glazed ware also occur in Period IIIB.
The pottery of sub-period IIIA essentially continues the traditions of IIIB with only a few minor
exceptions. The Fine Ware seems to disappear. The painted variety of Common Ware continues, but
rare sherds of a bichrome ware with brownish-black and red lines painted on a cream-buff ground
are now found. New shapes such as a canteen jar with paired shoulder strap handles,jars with a small
hole at the base of a strap handle and pouring jars with large trefoil rims appear. On the whole,
however, given these slight changes in the ceramic complex, sub-periodsIIIA and IIIB should probably
be considered as simply phases within a larger period. Such a conclusion, based on the pottery alone,
is not contradicted by stratigraphic excavation in areas on the mound where the two sub-periods are
found superimposedone above the other with some structuresused in both periods.
PeriodIV: (Figs. 6 and 7.) Four wares, again distinguished by quality of paste, occur in period
IV. A Coarse Ware appears in three varieties: plain buff, smudged or smoke blackened, and red-
slipped (rare). A Common Ware occurs in the same three varieties. Coarseand Common Ware, except
for the red-slipped variety, is always light tan to reddish-buffin colour, and is either matt or smooth
finished. Fine Ware comes in two varieties: medium fine and thin fine or " palace ware ". Pottery
of the medium fine variety is almost always grey in colour, having been intentionally fired in a reducing
atmosphere. The occasional brown to buff sherd which does occur is very probably a firing error.
Surfacesare almost always burnished. Some examples of" streakburnishing " with vertical lines which
do not form any particular pattern are found. The thin fine variety is much less common. Ninety
per cent of all sherdsor vesselsof this variety are dark grey or jet black in colour, and the rare examples
of brown to buff ware are again probably firing errors. Only about one or two per cent of this pottery
is intentionally fired red-buff. The surface is always highly burnished, often to the point where the
burnish marks are no longer visible. Finally, a Glazed Ware is found, with a very coarse paste covered
by a grey, yellow-green or blue-white glaze rather crudely applied and with a tendency to crackle.
Some imported Late Assyrian black, yellow and blue-white glazed ware is also found. Detailed
statistical studies of the pottery from period IV have not yet been attempted, but a general impression
of the assemblage suggests that something like forty per cent of the pottery is grey ware and hence one
of the two varieties of Fine Ware, and the remaining sixty per cent of the complex is buff ware and
hence either Coarse or Common Ware. Statistically, the Glazed Ware represents an insignificant
proportion of the total complex.
PeriodV: (Fig. 8.) Excepting the Glazed Ware and the thin fine variety of Fine Ware, all of the
wares of period IV are found in period V. Statistically, the plain wares of period V divide into grey
and buff wares in almost the same proportionsfound in period IV. Surface treatment is, on the whole,
similar to that found in period IV, but also includes true pattern burnishing, the most common design
being a band ofcross-hatching on the vessel shoulder. In addition to these plain wares, a Painted Buff
Ware with a blackish-brown or reddish-brown paint on a tan to buff-white ground is found in very
limited quantity in period V.
Period VI: For present purposes it need only be noted that the pottery of period VI represents a
markedly different ceramic tradition from that of period V. The complex is a mixture of plain and
painted wares, with the painted ware representing a considerable proportion of the whole. The plain
ware is all buff coloured, ranging from a pinkish orange to yellow, and a distinctive variety of incised
ware is fairly common. With the exception of the very rare painted vessels of period V, which appear
to be survivals of the painted ware of period VI, none of the other wares of period V appears in
period VI.
III
SHASANLU
WAlR
SCOMMON
FIN WARE
Fig. 2
The InternalChronology andCulturalRelationships of HasanluVI to III

PeriodsVI to V: Excavation has not yet established the fine points of the stratigraphicrelationships
between these two periods, but it would seem that there is no marked erosion surface between the
upper stratum assigned to period VI and the lowest stratum of period V. Approaching the problem
from the point of view of the ceramics, the very restrictedsurvival of a few painted vessels of period VI
type in period V is the only evidence for cultural continuity between the two periods. This carry-over
suggests that no great lapse of time occurred between VI and V. On the other hand, the evidence for
discontinuity between these two periods is striking. Of particularimportance is the fact that: (I) period
VI is principally a painted ware complex, whereas period V is a plain ware complex; (2) grey ware
appears at Hasanlu for the first time in period V; (3) the red-slipped and other varieties of Common
and Coarse Ware are first introduced in period V; (4) none of the incised wares, so common in period
VI, occurs in period V; (5) most of the shapes found in period VI are not found in period V; and
(6) the diagnostic shapes of period V-the button-base and pedestal-basegoblet, for example-are not
found in period VI. Period V, therefore, representsa distinct cultural break in the ceramic traditions
of Hasanlu.
PeriodsV to IV: As yet, excavation has revealed no stratigraphicevidence for any important chrono-
logical gap between periods V and IV. Evidence for both cultural continuity and cultural change
between these two periods is marked, however. On the side of continuity one finds that: (I) there is a
fundamental similarity of the two ceramic complexes-in both, plain ware predominates in approxi-
mately the same proportions of grey and buff ware; (2) with the exception of the rare painted ware
of period V, all of the wares and varieties of wares found in V continue into period IV including the
distinctive red-slipped variety of Common Ware; and (3) all of the principal shapes of the Common
and CoarseWare of period V occur in period IV. In favour of cultural change one should note: (I) the
complete absence of any painted ware in period IV; (2) the appearance of a great many new shapes
and special features in period IV; (3) the first appearance of the thin fine variety of Fine Ware in
period IV; (4) the first occurrence of Glazed Ware in period IV; and (5) the disappearanceof several
of the diagnostic shapes of period V with the beginning of period IV.
Whether one decides for or against basic cultural continuity between these two periods depends
entirely on how these several items of evidence are weighted. On the whole, it would seem that the
evidence for continuity is as convincing as that for change. Taking this view, period IV gives the
impression of being principally an elaboration of a ceramic tradition first introduced at Hasanlu in
period V, augmented by the introduction of several new elements which could be either the result of
local developments or features brought into the complex from some neighbouring source. Certainly
there is no evidence in the pottery for any chronological gap between periods V and IV.
Such a chronological conclusion is borne out by radiocarbon dates from these two periods. Dates
for period V range from I1217 122 B.C. (P--98) to IoI6 + 45 B.C. (P--49).4 A total of eight samples
taken from charred beams in structures built at the beginning of period IV, and hence dating the
construction of these buildings and the start of period IV, range from 1050 + 56 B.C. (P-42I) to
945 ? 64 B.C. (P-439)- It is at once clear that there is a considerableoverlap between the earliest date
for period IV and the latest date for period V, supporting the conclusion that an extremely short period
of time is involved in the shift from period V to IV.
Periods IV to III: The stratigraphic evidence for discontinuity between periods IV and III, despite
the facts that the main citadel fortification wall foundation from period IV was re-used in period III
and that some of the period III house walls were founded on stumps of period IV walls, is impressive.
The complete destruction of the period IV citadel is itself the type of calamity that often leads to
discontinuity in the occupation of a site, although there is some evidence for a short period of" squatter "
occupation in the period IV ruins. There is no relationship either in building plans or in quality of
construction between the architecture of period III and period IV. Finally, the stratification, when
viewed in section, reveals a considerable erosion surface over the top of the initial period IV collapse,
SAll radio-carbon dates have been calculated with the Libby half life value of 5568 + 30 years.
ZIWEYE
COMMON WARE
0 5
Fig.3
followed by a fairly deep level of secondary collapse mixed with fine silt which underlies the structures
and occupation debris of period III. The stratigraphic evidence, therefore, suggests a considerable
chronological gap between these two periods.
The ceramic evidence supports the stratigraphic data, but leaves a thread of doubt as to just how
complete the cultural discontinuity between periods IV and III may be. In many rather crucial
respects period III is not at all like period IV. For example: (I) the grey ware firing technique,
introduced at the beginning of period V and so characteristic of period IV, is missing in period III;
(2) in period III a distinctive painted ware appears for the first time; (3) a wide range of shapes and
features such as tubular and trefoil spouts or canteen jars appears for the first time in period III; and
(4) most of the distinctive shapes and features of period IV do not carry over into period III. On the
other hand: (I) the red-slipped variety of Common Ware carries over from period IV to period III;
(2) a few of the less distinctive shapes of IV linger in III; and (3) the thin fine variety of Fine Ware in
period IV could be considered the proto-type of the fine-walled Fine Ware so characteristicof period
III. The general impressionis of a rather marked cultural shift, but not of a total cultural discontinuity
between the two periods.
The radio-carbon dates, however, confirm the evidence for a considerable chronological gap
between these two periods. The average of two samples which provide preliminary dates for the end
of period IV-one a sample of charred grain and the other a sample of charred grapes-is 862 + 49 B.c.
Two radio-carbon dates of period III context (probably from sub-period IIIB) yield figures of 647 ? 54
B.C. (P-399) and 597 + 54 B.c. (P-398). Thus the gap between periods IV and III may be as much
as one hundred and fifty to two hundred years, that is, from the late ninth to the late seventh century.
Ziweye(Figs.3 and 4)
On several occasions members of the Hasanlu expedition have been able to visit the site of Ziweye
in Kurdistan and to collect a considerable number of potsherds.5 Large groups of these sherds were
found heaped up beside the extensive trenches opened by commercially licensed diggers who cut into
the site after the discovery of the famous Ziweye Treasure. What little stratigraphic evidence can be
gleaned from these trenches indicates that the structures on the summit of the Ziweye hill probably
represent only a single period of occupation, for no evidence of architectural rebuilding is visible, and
no sequence of occupational debris can be traced in any of the exposed sections.
The conclusion that Ziweye is a one period site is borne out by an examinationof the ceramic complex
found. The pottery from Ziweye may be sorted into five wares on the basis of quality of paste: Heavy
Coarse Ware, Coarse Ware, Common Ware, Fine Ware and Glazed Ware. Heavy Coarse Ware is
usually matt finished, but sometimes is burnished, and ranges in colour from light to reddish buff.
Coarse Ware may be subdivided into two varieties on the basis of surface finish, matt and burnished.
The matt finishedvariety varies in colour from light brown to cream buff. The burnishedvariety occurs
in four sub-varieties: (I) plain buff, with a colour range from light brown to white; (2) red-slipped,
with vesselscovered inside and out with a light red to maroon slip; (3) brown, with a colour range from
light to dark brown; and (4) grey, varying in colour from light to dark grey. The red-slipped, brown
and grey sub-varieties tend to be highly burnished. Common Ware also occurs in two principal
varieties, matt and burnished. The matt finished variety ranges from a light brown to an almost white
colour. The burnished variety occurs in three sub-varieties: (I) plain buff; (2) red-slipped; and
(3) painted. The plain buff and red-slipped sub-varieties are in all respects, except quality of paste,
similar to their counterparts in Coarse Ware. Some " streak burnishing" occurs on the plain buff
sub-variety. The painted sub-variety is usually decorated with a blackish-brown pigment on a cream
to cream-buff ground, though a single sherd of bichrome pottery with red and black lines on a white
ground was found. Fine Ware is always highly burnished, usually to the point where no burnish marks
are visible and a true polish is achieved. Four varieties, based on surface colour, may be distinguished:
(I) plain buff, ranging in colour from buff to reddish-buff; (2) red-slipped, in all respects similar to the
" R. H. Dyson, Jr., " Archaeological Scrap: Glimpses of History at Ziweye ", Expedition5(3): 32-7, 1963.
ZIWEYE
COARSE and FINE WARE
Fig. 4
red-slipped pottery in other wares; (3) white-slipped, ranging in colour from a light reddish-white to
a true white and always highly polished; and (4) painted, with a light brown to buff ground decorated
with reddish-black paint. As on the painted Common Ware, only simple geometric motifs are used.
Finally, one finds a very few sherds of a grey-blue to white Glazed Ware, plus a single sherd which
displays a pattern in shades of blue and white.
The plain buff and white-slipped Fine Wares, the plain buff burnished Common Ware and the
matt finished Coarse Ware are often decorated with incising. Patterns are mostly variations on a
suspended triangle or diamond motif and are usually arranged in horizontal bands on the upper half
of the vessel. Other less common incised patterns include: checker boards, chevrons, multiple looped
lines, cross-hatched zig-zags and small drill circles. Fluting and deep grooving are also common
decorative techniques.
Several interesting points emerge from a statistical study of Coarse, Common and Fine Ware at
Ziweye (Fig. Io). For example: (I) the bowl is the dominant shape in all three wares; (2) Common
Ware accounts for almost fifty per cent of the total collection; and (3) painted and red-slipped pottery
is very rare. The most important observation that can be drawn from these statistics, however, is that
this sherd collection appears to represent a single ceramic complex. In other words, if one considers
the collection from the point of view of the types of wares represented, proportions of one ware to
another, relationshipsbetween special features and the several wares, and the uses to which the pottery
was probably put (Coarse Ware representing " kitchen or cooking " pottery, Common and Fine Ware
the " table china "), there are no striking gaps or duplications of categories in the complex. This
suggests that even though the sample came to hand by means of surface collection from the dump of
commercial excavations, it probably representsa reasonable sample of the pottery available at the site.
Most important of all, it does not reveal any of the quantitative or typological characteristicswhich one
might expect were more than a single, homogeneous ceramic period representedin the collection.
The Stratigraphy
andInternalChronology Villageat Susa
of TepeSialk, TepeGiyanand theAchaemenid
TepeSialk
The two periods at Tepe Sialk which concern the present discussion are Necropoles A and B,
hereafter referredto as Sialk V and VI respectively.6
The pottery from Sialk V is divided by the excavator into four principal wares on the basis of surface
colour: Grey-black Ware, Red Ware, Common Ware and Painted Ware.7 Grey-black Ware pre-
dominates (eighty-two per cent of the complex), ranges in colour from light grey to black, and is either
smoothed or burnished. Decorative techniques such as pre-firingincising, post-firingincising with the
grooves then filled with white paste, and pattern burnishing are found. Red Ware is slightly more
coarse than Grey-black Ware, ranges in colour from light to dark red, and is always matt finished. It
representsonly eight per cent of the complex. Common Ware is tempered with large grit inclusions,
is a terra cotta colour, and is always matt finished. It also accounts for only eight per cent of the
complex. Painted Ware is very rare; only three vessels were found. The ground colour ranges from
yellow to greenish-yellow and the paint is either grey-black or brown.
The ceramic remains from Sialk VI also divide into four main wares: Common Ware, Black Ware,
Red Ware and Painted Ware.s Further study of the vessels listed as Red Ware, however, indicates that
a red-slipped and plain red variety can be distinguished. Common Ware, representing nineteen per
cent of the complex, is apparently much like the Common Ware of period V. Black Ware, the surface
treatment of which usually involves burnishing to the point of a high polish, represents twenty-four per
cent of the collection. Red Ware-both varieties-is dark red in colour. The red-slipped variety
accounts for seventeen per cent of the complex, whereas the plain red variety represents only six per cent
of the collection. The Painted Ware, by far the most common pottery in the period (thirty-four per cent
6 See R. Ghirshman, Fouilles de Sialk pris de Kashan, vol. II. 7 Sialk 2, pp.
5-9.
Paris, 1939. Hereafter Sialk 2. 8 Sialk 2,
pp. 29-40.
of the complex), has a pale brown or light yellow-buff ground colour and is decorated with light red
or pink to a true vermillion or purple paint. Clay " rivets " and fluting are common decorative
techniques on all but Common Ware.
A very long cultural and chronological gap separates Sialk IV and V, and the latter period marks
a totally new occupation of Sialk.9 Would that the cultural and chronological relationship between
Sialk V and VI were as clear ! On the whole, there is very little evidence for cultural continuity between
these two periods. The Grey-black Ware so characteristic of period V is found in period VI as well,
but in greatly diminished proportions.Red Ware, on the other hand, is found in both periodsin roughly
similar proportions. A few vessel shapes which appear in Sialk V were continued or further developed
in period VI. Spherical pots from V (e.g. Sialk 2, P1. XLV, S. 659b) occur in VI. Bottles with
elongated necks and handles which appear in V (e.g. Sialk 2, P1 XXXVIII, S. 45Ib) develop in VI,
where they are much more common. Similar bottles, without handles, (e.g. Sialk 2, P1. XL, S. 475)
also occur in V and have a strong development in VI. A single trough spout attached to the vessel rim
occurs in V (Sialk2, P1. XLVII, S. 677a), whereas eighteen are known in VI. Free standing shoulder
spouts occur in both periods (e.g. Sialk 2, P1. XLV, S. 66oa), but in details of form the examples in V
are not paralleled in VI.
Ceramic evidence for marked cultural discontinuity between these two periods, on the other hand,
is considerable. The three vessels of Painted Ware from period V are stylistically quite unlike those of
VI. It is even possible, since they are so very rare, that they are not of local manufacture. Sialk VI,
however, is justly famous for its remarkableand distinctive Painted Ware, the most common pottery in
the period. A large number of the vessel shapes characteristicof period V are absent from period VI.
Concave-sided bowls (e.g. Sialk 2, P1. XLI, S. 498b), tripod bowls, pedestal-base bowls, spherical pots
with concave lower halves, and pedestal-base goblets, all common in V, disappear in VI. Conversely,
many shapes common in period VI are not found in V. Several bowl types, ewers, tubular shoulder
spouts, canteen jars (e.g. Sialk 2, P1. LXXIV, S. 913), and several types of vessels with rather elaborate
shapes (e.g. bottles linked together in groups of three) are all found in VI and entirely missing in V.
Finally, fluting and the application of clay " rivets " in imitation of metal forms are found only in Sialk
VI, whereas pattern burnishingand white-filled incisions are decorative techniques confined to Sialk V.
This considerablecultural discontinuity between Sialk V and VI may also representa chronological
gap, but how long the hiatus between the two periods may have been is difficult to say on the internal
evidence alone.10 For one thing, the chronology is complicated by the fact that the Sialk VI cemetery
clearly covers a considerabletime span. Several of the tombs showed signs of disturbanceduring period
VI, one (T. 52) yielded three bodies superimposed, and several tombs (e.g. T. 7) showed signs of
multiple use at different times. Furthermore,trilobate arrow heads (e.g. Sialk2, P1.XCII, Nos. 17 and
18) and canteen jars, both known to be fairly late horizon markers in the proto-historic period, are
documented for Sialk VI. In the final analysis, the size of the chronological gap between the quite
different cultures of Sialk V and VI can be determined only by comparative archaeology.
TepeGiyan
For the present discussionwe are concerned only with periods I and II at Tepe Giyan."
For some time it has been recognized that period I at Tepe Giyan covers a long time span and is
not a homogeneous cultural unit. Thus it has become standard procedure to break down Giyan I into
three sub-divisions called periods IA, IB and IC. Period IA includes graves 63 to 60 and is a transitional
period between Giyan II and I; period IB includes graves 59 to I and is the main part of Giyan I; and
period IC includes two graves, numbers 53 and 3 of the so-called "genre Luristan", which are said
to represent an intrusive element in the sequence." Like the rest of the Giyan sequence when first
excavated, these three sub-divisions of Giyan I were defined purely on stylistic grounds. It is possible,
* D. E. McCown, The ComparativeStratigraphyof Early Iran. 11 See G. Contenau and R. Ghirshman, Fouilles du Tipi-Giyan
Chicago, 1942, p. 54. pros de Ndhavand. Paris, 1935. Hereafter Giyan.
10 Sialk
2, pp. 96-7. 1i L. Vanden Berghe, Archiologiede l'Irdn Ancien. Leiden, I959,
pp. 89-9o. See also Gjyan,pp. 77-8.
iii~
•!iii;•ii i~
ziiii~ ~i~;~ i~ ~~i~
•;i~
iii•!iiii~!ii~
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iii~i i~
~iiii~
!•~
iii~
ii iiii~
!!iil
~iiiiiiiii•iiii i~
i• i!ii•i ii~
iiiiii~ i~iiiiii•iii•i~iiiiii•iiiiiii~ii liiii i~
• i i~i liiiiiiiii!:!iiii•ii
iiiiiii~ iiiiiiliiii i! ii i
iiiiiiiilli!iiii: ::
•ii•iii i i
i;iil!;:~
'••i:i ••''iiii•''"''q
t iii!
i:iiiiii:iiii~iiii~~~iiii~ii ~iii~~~~~~ii%
••••; 9•
• 7••••••••
'':ili•i.@•:.:.::iiiiiii:::
:i'iiiiii,
iiiiii:, i iM io i ii
'''iiiiiii'''''''iiiiiii':iii
iiiiiiiiii.:i.:ii•i:i.i:.i!
iiii:iiiiiiiiiiii.iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii•
i!!iiii~iiii;,,ili~ iIi %•!!~
Bichrome
t C•....
?'iiiiiiii
Red* grown#
o m
Fig. 5
No. 10 1:3
MISCEIIANIOUS WARES Nos. 2-4, 7and 8 1:2
Fig. 6
64 JOURNALOF PERSIANSTUDIES
however, to suggest a different set of sub-divisionsfor Giyan I based on a re-examination of the strati-
graphy of the site as it can be reconstructedfrom the excavation reports. These suggested divisions of
Giyan I will, it is hoped, prove useful for purposesof comparative archaeology.
The key to the understanding of the stratigraphyof Giyan I is the relationship between the graves
of the period and the remains of a large building called Construction I which covered the main part
of the area excavated. The mud brick walls of this structurewere first encountered at a depth of
1.25 m.
below the surfaceof the mound, and were preserved above the tops of their stone foundations to heights
varying between 3.00 m. and 0o50 m. The tops of the stone foundations were at a depth of 3.00 m.
and the foundations themselves ranged in height from 0.40 to o060 m. A stone door socket (Crapau-
dine C), associatedwith a small patch of brick pavement and a large slab of stone forming the threshold
of a doorway, was uncovered at a depth of 1.25 m. below surface. These finds, along with a similar
door socket (Crapaudine D) and another patch of brick pavement uncovered some 3.50 m. to the
north, have always been considered as integral parts of ConstructionI.13
A closer look, however, suggests that all of these features were actually part of a building later in
date than Construction I. Door sockets, threshold stones and pavements normally bear a functional
relationship to the walls of the buildings which they serve. Yet door sockets C and D, their associated
pavements and the threshold stone with Crapaudine C bear no such meaningful relationship to the
walls of Construction I.14 In fact, according to the plan presented, the pavement with door socket C
actually extended over the top of one of the walls of Construction I.15
The vertical or sectional view of these architectural elements as reported shows conclusively that
two distinct structures are involved, one stratigraphically above the other. Horizontally positioned
architectural features such as door sockets, brick pavements and threshold stones must also be related
to a floor level. Thus the question arises as to what depth below the surface of the mound the floor of
Construction I lay. Although this question cannot now be answered with certainty, a reasonable guess
is that the floor lay at the top of, or somewhere below the top of, the stone foundations. That is, the
floor must have been between 3.00 and 3.60 m. below the surface of the mound. In any case, it would
not have been at 1.25 m. below surface, for that was the depth at which the mud brick walls of Con-
struction I were first encountered. Since in part, at least, the walls continued below this level for
another 2.35 m., to put the floor of the building at 1.25 m. would mean that if the foundations were
set in a trench, the trench would have been sometimes 2.35 m. deep and the walls themselvessunk into
the ground some 1.75 m. above the tops of their stone foundations. This is nonsense architecturally
speaking, since it ignores one of the major functions of stone foundations-that is, to protect the mud
brick walls from the erosive action of ground water. Yet the two door sockets, the brick pavements and
the threshold stone were found at a depth of I .25 m. below surface. Since these features must rest on a
floor, and since the floor of Construction I cannot have been at 1.25 m. below surface, these features
cannot have been part of Construction I and must belong instead to a structure stratigraphicallylater
in date than Construction I. For ease of reference this structure can be called Construction IA.
The walls of Construction I were definitely set in foundation trenches, for it is recorded that these
cut through three of the period I graves. To allow a reasonable margin of error, let it be assumed that
the walls were sunk to the full height of their stone foundations. This puts the surface of the mound
at the time ConstructionI was built at 3.00 m. below the surfaceof the mound at the time of excavation,
and means that the debris of Construction I filled a depth of from 1.25 m. to 300oom. Just how much
of this total of I.75 m. of debris accumulated while the building was in use, and how much resulted from
the collapse of the structure is difficult to determine. The record of a " petit bas-relief en cloche "
having been found " engage dans le debris d'un mur en briques crues de cette construction" at a
depth of 2.80 m. suggests,16 however, that perhaps only about 0o20 m. of debris accumulated during
the life of the building and, as we should expect, that the bulk of the debris represents the collapse of
the building after its destruction or abandonment.
Turning to the relationship between the graves of Giyan I and Construction I and IA, and recalling
is Gjyan,pp. 8-9.
14 Giyan, p. 9. 16GVyan,
16
pl. 4.
Giyan, p. 9.
Nos. 2-6 1:2
HASANLU IV
MEDIUM FINE WARE
Fig. 7
that ConstructionI covered almost the whole of the main area excavated, we note first that graves 29
and 31, at a depth of 3-oo m. below surface, and grave 34, at a depth of 3.20 m., are describedas having
been cut by the foundation trench of Construction I.17 These graves, therefore, clearly predate Con-
struction I, and we may assume that all graves below a depth of 3oo00m. are older than ConstructionI.
This group of graves, numbers 59 to 29, thus becomes the first major sub-division of Giyan I. The
remaining graves postdate the building of Construction I.
In sub-dividing these remaining twenty-eight graves, it would seem safest to assume that some of
them were dug at a time when Construction I was in use. Graves 20 to 28, which cluster between 2-80
and 2-90 m. below surface, are therefore,considered to be of uncertain date but perhaps contemporary
with Construction I. This group of graves representsthe second new sub-division of Giyan I.
Having established this margin of safety, it becomes reasonably certain that graves I to 20 were
sunk into the collapsed debris of Construction I and thus postdate its destruction or abandonment.
The existence of ConstructionIA, however, makes possible yet a further division of this group of graves.
Graves I to 5, in the depth range of 1.50 to I-oo m. below surface, were probably either contemporary
with or later than Construction IA, and form the fourth new sub-division of Giyan I. Graves 6 to 20,
therefore, are marked off as a group of graves sunk into the collapsed debris of Construction I before
Construction IA was built and define the third new sub-division proposed for Giyan I.
Using a new terminology to avoid confusion with the older sub-divisionsof Giyan I, the discussion
thus far can be summarized as follows:
Giyan 14 Graves 59 to 29 between 3.70 and 3-00 m. below surface: earlier than the building of
Construction I.
Giyan I3 Graves 28 to 20 between 3-00 and 2-80 m. below surface: of uncertain date, but perhaps
contemporary with Construction I.
Giyan I2 Graves 19 to 6 between 3.80 and 1.50 m. below surface: postdating the collapse of
Construction I and predating Construction IA.
Giyan I1 Graves 5 to I between 1-50 m. and the surface: either contemporarywith or later than
Construction IA.
The original division between Giyan I and Giyan II (graves 64 to 82) was based wholly on stylistic
grounds."s Any new proposed division of the Giyan sequence at this point must still, unfortunately, be
based on typological considerationsand is thereforerather arbitrary.It is here suggested that Giyan II
proper be only graves 82 to 70, for these graves reveal a ceramic content which is fairly homogeneous.
Painted pottery accounts for some eighty-nine per cent of the published complex and the collection is
marked by several distinctive vessel shapes and decorative motifs.
If Giyan II so defined is compared with Giyan I (consideredfor the moment as a unit), it is at once
clear that there is very little cultural continuity between the two periods. Giyan I consistsof ninety-five
per cent plain ware, and the painted ware that does appear is totally unrelated to that of Giyan II
and so rare as to suggest that it was not of local manufacture. Among the plain wares, a highly
burnished Fine Red and Fine Grey Ware, a Red-slipped Ware and a burnished or polished Medium
Coarse Ware all appear at the site for the first time in period I. Finally, with one exception, the vessel
shapes of Giyan I and II are quite different.
Yet that one exception is of some importance. A pedestal-base is a common feature of Giyan II,
where it occurs on small and medium sized spherical pots (e.g. Gi3yan,T. 80, 2 and T. 73, 2). In Giyan
I, the hallmark of the period is a slender drinking goblet with a pedestal-base, and a similar base again
appears on cups or small spherical pots (e.g. Giyan, T. 35, I and T. 42, 2 and 3). Thus, despite the basic
cultural discontinuity between periods II and I, there is at least one important ceramic link between
the two complexes, and the pedestal-base goblet of Giyan I may be considered as a direct development
of the pedestal-base pots in Giyan II. In the old division of Giyan I into sub-periods, Giyan IA,
graves 63 to 60, was considered a transitional period between Giyan II and I primarily on the grounds
17 Giyan,p. 9-Io. sur les fouilles de T6p6 Giyan pres de N6havand (Perse)",
18Cf. G. Contenauand R. Ghirshman," Rapport pr6liminaire Syria14, x pl. II, No. 2 with Giyan,pl. 2., T. 76, No. i.
q3,
No. 7 1:3
Nos. 8-14 1:2
HASANLU V
MISCELLANEOUS WARES
0 5
Fig. 8
that the pedestal-basegoblet in its characteristicperiod I form is found in these graves, but painted in a
style clearly linked with period II. Using the same criteria, it would seem more useful to designate
graves 69 to 6o as such a transitional period, for the first true pedestal-base goblet occurs in grave 69.
Furthermore,the pedestal-basegoblet occurs in graves 69, 67 and 66 in plain ware as well as in painted
ware. If graves 69 to 6o are all considered as representing a transition period, then sixty-one per cent
of the complex is plain ware-a figure which seems to indicate a trend toward the almost pure plain
ware tradition of Giyan I. To summarize: it is proposed that Giyan II be considered as graves 82 to
70 only, that graves 69 to 6o be considered as a transitional period between Giyan II and I called
Giyan II-I, and that Giyan I (as divided above) be graves 59 to I. In the end, all of these attempts to
distinguish a transition period between Giyan II and I will perforce remain based on stylistic con-
siderations, and thereforeit is still impossible to say on the internal evidence alone whether the marked
cultural discontinuity between Giyan II and I is in fact a sudden or a gradual development.
On the whole, the four sub-periods of Giyan I are quite alike in their material remains. Two
internal developments of importance, however, stand out against this background of similarity. First,
the pedestal-base goblet, popular early in Giyan I, became less common and eventually disappeared.
This shape accounts for thirty-five per cent of the Giyan 14 complex, eight per cent of the Giyan Is
complex, and sixteen per cent of the Giyan I2 complex. It is not found at all in Giyan I'. Second,
except for a single iron spear head in grave 23 in Giyan I1, no iron objects were found in Giyan 14
to 2.x19 On the other hand, in Giyan Ix twenty-nine per cent of all metal objects were made of iron.
This marked increase in the use of iron in period I, taken with the complete disappearance of the
pedestal-base goblet in the same period, indicates that though Giyan I-I2 remain difficult to distin-
guish on internal evidence alone, Giyan I" definitely representsa period of significant cultural change.
The Achaemenid Villageat Susa

A brief examination of the stratigraphy and the ceramic remains of periods I to III of the
Achaemenid Village at Susa indicates that: (I) the later periods, II and III, should probably be
considered as a unit for comparative purposes; and (2) there is a cultural and chronological break
between periods I and II-III.20
At the time of excavation it was often difficult or impossible to distinguish between the walls of
period II and period III, and no distinction is attempted in the final report.21 The two periods are not,
therefore, very accurately defined. An examination of the ceramic evidence confirms this conclusion.
In both periods II and III four wares are reported: Heavy Common Ware, Grey-black Ware, Red
Ware and Glazed Ware.22 Making some allowance for the fact that the period III complex is not large,
all of these wares seem to be found in each period in roughly the same proportions. Vessel shapes in
the two periods are also much the same. Given these fundamental ceramic similarities and the rather
uncertain stratigraphic and architectural evidence for distinguishing these two periods, Achaemenid
Village II and III are considered, for the purposes of this discussion, as a single period called
Achaemenid Village II-III.
In contrast to the situation observed for periods II and III, the ceramic evidence points to a
considerable cultural discontinuity between periods I and II-III. Four main wares are reported from
period I: Heavy Common Ware, Fine Common Ware, Painted Ware and Glazed Ware.23 A single
sherd of Red Ware was also found in this level, but probably represents a stray from level II where
this pottery is common. We have already noted the four main ceramic wares reported from period
II-III: Heavy Common Ware, Red Ware, Grey-black Ware and Glazed Ware. A single sherd of
Painted Ware was found in level II, but, as with the single Red Ware sherd in level I, probably
representsa stray. Two wares, therefore,which are found in period I, Fine Common Ware representing
19 The Hereafter
appearance of an iron object in Giyan I could perhaps t. XXXVI Village Perse-Achiminide.Paris, I954.
be explained on the grounds that grave 23 is an intrusive burial Ach. Vill.
from the Giyan IF time range. The other objects in this grave,
2s Ach. Vill., p. 15 and Plan 3.
however, are not sufficiently diagnostic to prove such an 2 Ach. Vill.,
assertion. pp. 25-9.
o20See R. Ghirshman, Mtmoiresde la Mission Archlologiqueen Iran, u Ach. Vill., pp. 2 1-5.
KHORVIN - CHANDA.R
WARES
MISCELLANEOUS
0 5
Fig. 9
six per cent of the published complex and Painted Ware representing twenty-three per cent of the
complex, are entirely missing from period II-III. Conversely,neither Red Ware nor Grey-blackWare,
representing seventeen per cent and nine per cent of the period II-III complex respectively, is found
in period I. Only Glazed Ware and Heavy Common Ware appear to link the two periods.
An examination of the Heavy Common Ware in the two periods, however, shows that the ware
of each period is quite different if one considers both paste and vessel shapes.24 The period I ware is
made of very poorly levigated clay, is often badly fired and is usually very friable. Vessels are thick
walled and were thrown on a slow wheel. Heavy Common Ware in period II, on the other hand, is
reasonably well levigated, has fewer and less coarse inclusions, is more smoothly finished and in general
displays much better workmanship than the Heavy Common Ware of period I. More significant of
the difference between the two wares, however, is the fact that four of the principal shapes found in
Heavy Common Ware in period I, goblets (e.g. Ach. Vill., P1. XXV, G.S. I201); small cups without
handles (e.g. Ach. Vill., P1. XXV, G.S. 954); spouted jars (e.g. Ach. Vill., P1. XXIX, G.S. 957); and
open " flower " pots (e.g. Ach. Vill., P1. XXVIII, G.S. 1262), are not found in period II-III. Con-
versely, four of the diagnostic period II-III shapes, small bottles (e.g. Ach. Vill., P1. XXXVI, G.S.
2130); canteen jars (e.g. Ach. Vill., P1. XXXV, G.S. 1270 and P1.XXXIX, G.S. 1176); large shallow
bowls (e.g. Ach. Vill., P1.XXXVII, G.S. 1222); and flat-bottomed pitcherswith handles (e.g. Ach. Vill.,
P1. XXXV, G.S. 2241), are not found in period I. Thus, even in Heavy Common Ware, there are
distinct differences between the two complexes, and, considering all of the ceramic evidence, there
appears to have been a marked cultural discontinuity between Achaemenid Village I and II-III.
The stratigraphic evidence available seems to indicate a chronological as well as a cultural gap
between these two periods. A change in building plan occurred after period I and the walls of period
II-III were not always set directly over the walls of period I.25 When the author visited the site in
1961 there appeared to be a stratigraphicdisconformitybetween the tops of the period I walls and the
base of the period II-III walls. At several points, but particularly in rooms I, 2, 7 and 8, and in the
section to the north of the structure, an erosion stratum approximately 0.25 m. thick composed of
water washed earth, clay, pot sherds and pebbles separated periods I and II-III. The presence of such
a stratum, and the architectural variations between the two periods, suggests the presence of a chrono-
logical hiatus in addition to the cultural discontinuity between periods I and II-III. How long this
hiatus may have been cannot be determined on the internal evidence alone.
Comparative TypologyandChronology
The integration of the foregoing ceramic data from proto-historic western Iran into a coherent
picture involves three steps: first, the documentation of typological parallels between the several sites;
second, the establishmentof the relative chronology of the various complexes; and third, the assigning
of absolute dates to this relative chronological structure wherever possible.
TypologicalComparisons
The basic documentation for the typological comparisonsof the pottery from the five sites discussed
above and from the other relevant sites in Iran (Geoy Tepe, the Zendan at Takht-i Suleiman, Khorvin-
Chandar, Persepolis/Pasargadaeand Tepe Hissar) is presented in tabular form in Figs. I I, 12 and 13.
The discussion which follows is an analysis based on those tables.
A rapid review of the sites under discussion indicates that they fall naturally into three typological
groups: first, an Early Western Grey Ware Horizon; second, a much later Late Buff Ware Horizon;
and third, a Late Western Grey Ware Horizon of intermediate date which is, on the whole, not a true
horizon in the sense of sharing a unified ceramic tradition, but rather a collection of diverse but inter-
connected complexes.
Th/eEarly WesternGrey Ware Horizon (data in Fig. I I)
Hasanlu V, Giyan Ie-I, Sialk V, Khorvin-Chandar and Geoy Tepe B all share a common ceramic
tradition characterized by a mixture of plain grey and buff ware and by the rare and quantitatively
24 Ach.
Vill., pp. 21-3 and 25-6. 25 Ach. Vill., p. Is.
ZIWEYE: SHERDANALYSIS
WARES, MAJORSHAPESand FEATURES
H O O
HH 0- 0
t t~ tv- l
oo w 64
JARS
JARS 64
BOWLSN3 00 w
Lk>n *.o J Ln m
00 229
-
DEEP BOWLS
F- 3
POTS 12
POT SS 12
STRAPHANDLE w 00 24
BARHANDLES - - -
-
2
00 13
HORIZN BARSE
LUGS---
BAR-TOP KNOBS _ - - - - - - - 5
TAB HANDLES 55
TAB HANDLES I
SH, SPOUTS F- 12
ATT. SPOUTS 4
TREFOIL F-"___ 4
RIM SPOUTS ____ 2
FLAT BASES 6
DISC BASES - H - - - 3
POINTEDBASE I 1 1
INCISED o w 51
TOTAL H H H
I-
o-' , 4o-
Fig. zo
limited occurrence of painted ware. Three very distinctive vessel shapes are horizon markersfor this
group and are found at all five sites: simple cups with handles, jars with free standing pouring spouts
and pedestal-base goblets.
Two of these three common vessel shapes, a slightly divergent form of the cup with a handle and
the jar with a free standing pouring spout, link this Early Western Grey Ware horizon with the Hissar
IIIB-IIIC complex. Another shape, the " istikhan ", links Hasanlu V, Giyan I4-PI and Sialk V with
Hissar IIIB-IIIC. Pattern burnishing, so distinctive a decorative technique in Hissar III, is also found
at Hasanlu V, Sialk V and Khorvin-Chandar.26Giyan Sialk V, Khorvin-Chandar and Hissar
IIIB-IIIC are linked typologically by trough rim spouts, I4-I3,
vessels with concave lower halves, and
bottles with elongated necks.
Within the Early Western Grey Ware horizon itself, a total of nine ceramic parallels link Sialk V
with Khorvin-Chandar (see Fig. 9). Significantly, four of these parallels are not shared by the more
western sites in the group. These specific comparisons of vessel shape are supported by a general
similarity in the grey ware fabric of Sialk V and Khorvin-Chandar. In terms of firing, temper and
surface finish the grey ware from the two sites cannot be distinguished by macroscopic examination.
Indeed, the grey ware at these two sites is so similar that were sherdsfrom both mixed into one collection,
it would be impossible to sort them out again by site. That Sialk V and Khorvin-Chandar are clearly
very closely related is not too surprisingin view of their geographical proximity.
Thirteen ceramic parallels link Sialk V and Giyan I4-I2. Of these, eight are also found at other
sites, and five are found onlyat Sialk and Giyan. One of these parallels occurs at Giyan in Giyan 12I1
(long necked bottles and jars with vertical bar handles), one occurs only in Giyan I2, one appears in
Giyan I4I2 but is much more common in I4-IS (pedestal-base goblets), and the remainder (ten) all
occur in Giyan I4-I3 only. It would seem, therefore,that Sialk V is related most closely to Giyan I4-I3,
is only rather tenuously linked with Giyan I1, and is not related in any important way to Giyan I'.
Seven parallels link Sialk V typologically with Hasanlu V. Only one of these, vertically pierced
lugs, is found exclusively at Hasanlu and Sialk. On the other hand, eight parallels connect Hasanlu V
with Giyan. Three of these links are found exclusively at Hasanlu and Giyan: carinated bowls with
everted rims in Giyan I-I3, and pedestal-base goblets with painted horizontal bands and flat-rimmed
bowls with painted groups of radial lines on the rim in Giyan II and II-I. The remainder of the
Hasanlu-Giyan parallels, with the exception of the jars with vertical bar handles, all occur primarily in
Giyan I4-I3. On the whole, therefore,Hasanlu V appears to be related principally to Giyan I-I3, but
shares with Giyan at least two ceramic traits which occur in Giyan II and II-I and are thereforeearlier
than anything linking Sialk V and Giyan.
Only five typological comparisons link Hasanlu V with Geoy Tepe B, three of which are shared
by the entire Early Western Grey Ware horizon. The other two are found exclusively at Hasanlu and
Geoy Tepe. Geoy Tepe B, therefore,despite its being geographically near Hasanlu, has fewer parallels
and is more marginal to the horizon as a whole than is Hasanlu V. Hasanlu V in turn has fewer
parallels to either Sialk V or Giyan I-I than the latter two sites share between themselves. It is,
therefore, also perhaps somewhat marginal to the Early Western Grey Ware horizon, but is, neverthe-
less, closer to this ceramic tradition than is Geoy Tepe B. In general, Sialk V and Giyan P-I- define
the geographic centre of the Early Western Grey Ware horizon.
The Late Buff Ware Horizon (data in Fig. I 2)

The sites in this group can be divided geographically into a northern sub-group including Hasanlu
III, Ziweye and the Zendan, and a southern sub-group including the Achaemenid Village at Susa
and Persepolis/Pasargadae.
Seventeen ceramic parallels link Hasanlu III with Ziweye, the most striking perhaps being the
Painted Ware parallels (see Fig. 5). Thirteen of the links between Ziweye and Hasanlu III occur in
6
The pottery from Khorvin-Chandarillustratedin Fig. 9 was this sherd collection, but is known on a vessel certain to be
collected by the author on severalvisits to these twin sites in from Khorvin-Chandarin the collection of the Smithsonian
ig61. Patternburnishingis not documentedfor this site from Institute,Washington,D.C.
GEOYTEPE HASANLU GIYAN SIYALK KHORVINE-CHANDAR HISSAR
Fig. 33, No. 1004 SIMPLE
PRESENT;CUPS
NOTWITH HANDLES:
ILLUSTRATED PL 16. T. 43, No. 3 (I
Pl. S.671a
XLVII,and
b
PL. XXXIX, S. 454
XLVII S 671
POTS WITH SINGLE HANDLE:
db
Fig. 9, No. 2
PL XLIV, S. 610 Pl. XLI,. . $33 (Imc)
Fig. 34, No. 38 PEDESTAL-BASE GOBLETS: PL 19, T. 54, No. 3 PL. IV. Nos. 4 and S Fig. 9, No. 4
Fig. 8, Nos. 1, 2, 9 and 10 PL 19. T. 57. No. 2 Pl. XLIII, S. 523a
PL 14, T. 33, No. 2 PL XLVI, S. 668
PL 10, T. 10, Nos. 1 aod 3 Pl. XLVII. S. 671a
PL 1S, T. 35, No. 1
COMMON IN 14 I3: FOUND
ALSO IN I
PL 32, No. 37 UNBRIDGED POURING SPOUTSr PL 39 XL, S. 478

PRESENT; ILLUSTRATED Pl. Fig. 9, No. 8 PI. XXXVIII, H. 5084 (Is)
NOT PERHAPS: PL 18, T. 52, PI. XLV, S. 660& LOUVRE COLLECTION:
P4 XX, No. I -
GIAN;
No. (4
ISTIKHANS: Fig. 8, Nos. 11 - 14 PL 22, T. 72, No. 1 (II) PL. XL, S. 472 PI. XXXVIII, H. 01
(IB)
PL 17.
, T. 49, No. 3 (1)
Pl. 14, T. 30. No. 1 (61
JARS WITH SINGLE VERTICAL BAR PL. 5, No. Z (5I) PL XXXVII

HANDLES: Fig. 8, 'No. S, 485b
9, To
PL. U, T. 16o No. (
BOWL WITHOUT LUG: CARINATED BOWLS: PRESENT;

Fig. 33, No. 1015 NOT ILLUSTRATED
Fig. 34, No. 22 BOWLS WITH APPLIQUE

DECORATION IN SHAPE OF
SMALL WORM: PRESENT;
NOT ILLUSTRATED
CARINATED BOWLS WITH Pl. 15, T. 35, No. 4. OCCURS

EVERTED RIMS: Fig. 8, No. 8 IN II - I; COMMON IN 14 13
PEDESTAL-BASE POTS WITH PL 21, T. 65, No. 3. OCCURS

PAINTED HORIZONTAL BANDS: IN II AND II- I ONLY
Fig. 8, No. 3
FLAT-RIM
BOWLS
WITH PL 23, T. 76, No, 2, OCCURS
PAINTED GROUPS OF RADIAL IN II
LINES ON RIM: Fig. 8, No. 6
PATTERN BURNISHING: PL. XLII, S. 503a and d PL XXXVII,.H. 3841

Fig. 8,.No. 4
P4. XL, H. 3933
PL XXXVII, H. 2391
VERTICALLY PIERCED LUGS: PL XLIV. S. 611 Fig. 9, No. 5
FigS. 8, No. 8
SHALLOW PLATTERS: PRESENT;

NOT ILLUSTRATED
TROUGH RIM SPOUTS: Pl. 15, PI. XLVII, S. 677a PRESENT: NOT SI.USTRATED PL LVII, H. 4883(IIIC)
T. 39, Nos, 4 and 5 (II) LOUVRE COLLECTION:
Pl. XX, No. 2 GIYANC
HANDLES WITH HORN - LIKE PL IV, Nos. 1 and 2

PROJECTIONS ON TOP: PL 13
T. 28, No. I (EARLY1I
BAR HANDLES WITH IMITATION P1. XLIV, S. 608

RIVET: P. 12, T. 20, No. 5 (13)
POTS WITHCONCAVELOWER Pl. XXXVIII, S. 438 PI, XXXVII, IL 2406 (IIIB)

HALVES: PL 14, T. 31, No. 1 P. XL, S. 481b and c PL XLIII, H. 3305 (IUC)
PL 15, T. 39, No. 1 P . 497
Pl. 18, T. SO, No. 1 (ALL 1)
PL 19, T. 57, No. 1
CUPS WITH HANDLES AND PL XXXVII, S. 442 and S. 436

PEDESTAL BASES. PL XXXIX, S. 453d
PL 9, T. 8, No. 2 A(I PL XL, S. 481a and 473a
PL 12, T. 24, No. 1 PL XLVII, S. 671a
PL 14, T. 32, No. 2
Pl. 16, T. 44. No. 2 (ALL It)
PL 19, T. 55, No. 2
P1. 19, T. 58, No. 3
BOWL WITH ANIMAL HEAD P1. XXXVII, S. 440

LUG: P 14, T. 310.No, 2 (2w)
LONG NECKED BOTTLES: PL XL, S. 475 PL XXXVII, H. 4993 (IIB)

S P.
PL 1, T. 17, No. (Il XLII, SO3a
P. XLV, S. 660b
TRIPOD BOTTLES. P. XLVII, S. 673

P. 13, T. 26, No. 1
(1"
DEEP BOWLS WITH FLAT Fig. 9, No. 6
BASES AND FLARING SIDES
S. 474,
P. XL
479 470, S.
S. sad S. 480b
TRIPOD BOWLS: NOT

P3, PRESENT; ILLUSTRATED
5. 430 XXXiI,
PEDESTAL-BASE BOWLS PI, Fig. 9, No. 3

S. 439
XXXVIIY,
INCISING: P1 XLVI, S 662 Fig. 9, Nuo.7

and 667s and P1 XLI, S. 493
Fig. II
both Hasanlu IIIB and IIIA, three are with Hasanlu IIIB only (those which involve Fine Ware at
Hasanlu), and one is exclusively with Hasanlu IIIA (bichrome painted ware). Ten of these same
parallels link Hasanlu III and the Zendan, all ten being equally at home in Hasanlu IIIB and IIIA.
Three other features, bowls with round bases and slightly thickened everted rims, tab handles, and
incising, are found at Ziweye and the Zendan but not at Hasanlu III. These three sites, therefore,
form a related ceramic horizon, with Hasanlu III typologically closer to Ziweye than to the Zendan.
This northern Late Buff Ware Group is linked to the west with the Late Assyrian pottery found at
Nimrud. In general, the Nimrud complex belongs to a buff ware tradition, and the quality of some
of the Fine Ware at Ziweye and Hasanlu is matched by the Fine Ware at the Assyrian site. It is also
perhaps significant that the excavators of Nimrud report a red-slipped ware which they feel may have
been imported.27 Specific parallels between Hasanlu III and Nimrud are:
I. Sharply carinated bowls with incurving sides and simple pinched rims: cf. Fig. 2, No. 6 with
Oates II, P1. XXXVII, No. 2.
2. Bowls with gently curving sides and simple pinched rims: cf. Fig. I, No. I with Oates II,
P1. XXXVII, No. I.
3. Small bottles with slender necks and opposed handles: cf. Oates I, P1l.XXXVIII, No. 89.
Hasanlu III example not illustrated.
4. Small bottles in reddish clay with a light slip: cf. Oates I, P1l.XXXVIII, No. 88. Hasanlu III
example not illustrated.
Specific parallels between Ziweye and Nimrud are:
I. Sharply carinated bowls with rounded bases: cf. Fig. 3, No. 6 with Oates II, Pl. XXXVII,
Nos. 7 and 8.
2. Bowls with a distinct ridge just below the rim: cf. Fig. 3, No. 4 with Oates I, P1l.XXV, Nos.
12 and 25. The parallel is not exact, but the principle is the same.
3. Bowls with a slight carination, short straight collar and a slightly everted, rolled rim: cf. Fig. 3,
No. 3 with Oates I, P1. XXXV, No. I I.
4. Saucer lamps: cf. Fig. 4, No. 4 with Oates I, P1. XXXIX, Nos. I04, 105 and io6.
In the south, eleven parallels link the Achaemenid Village at Susa with Persepolis/Pasargadae.
Eight of these ceramic characteristics are found only at these two southern sites; and all but two,
painted upright shoulder spouts and vessels with pointed bases, occur in Achaemenid Village II-III.
This southern Late Buff Ware horizon is related typologically with the Late Buff Ware horizon in the
north. Hasanlu III is linked with Achaemenid Village II-III by eight parallels, two of which are
found exclusively in Hasanlu IIIA and the remainder in either Hasanlu IIIA or IIIB. Four parallels
connect Hasanlu III with Persepolis/Pasargadae: two in either Hasanlu IIIA or IIIB and two
exclusively in Hasanlu IIIA. Only one of these parallelsis not also found at Achaemenid Village II-III.
Three of these several north-south parallels, bowls with rolled rims, bowls with everted sloping rims,
and trefoil shoulder spouts, are also found in the north at Ziweye. It is of considerablesignificancethat
there are no links between the two southern Late Buff Ware sites and the Zendan, and that no parallels
exist between Achaemenid Village I and any of the northern Late Buff Ware sites.
The Late WesternGrey Ware Group (data in Fig. 13)

Hasanlu IV, Geoy Tepe A (in part, for it is a mixed complex), Sialk VI and Giyan 11 (and perhaps
in part I2) form a Late Western Grey Ware horizon that falls typologically and chronologically between
the Early Western Grey Ware horizon and the Late Buff Ware horizon. The typological relationships
between the sites in this group are considerably weaker than are those for the earlier and later groups.
a7J. Oates, " Late Assyrian Pottery from Fort Shalmaneser ", " Late Assyrian Pottery from Nimrud ", Iraq 16(2): 164-7,
Iraq 21(2): 136, 1959. Hereafter, Oates I. See also, J. Oates, 1954. Hereafter, Oates II.
HASANLU ZIWEYE ZENDAN ACH. VILL. FARS
BOWLS WITH WIDE FLARING Fig. 3, Nos. 6 and 11; Pl 50, Nos. 6, 7 and 8 PER II, P. 7Z, No. 1;
COLLARS AND SIMPLE PINCHED Fig. 4., No. 6 PtW No.$
RIMS: Fig. 2, No. 6
CARINATED BOWLS WITH
INCURVING COLLARS AND Fig. 3, No. 14 PL. 56, Nos. 7, 8 and 9
SIMPLE PINCHED RIMS:
Fig. 1, Nos. 2 and 4
CARINATED BOWLS WITH

THICK, FLAT, EVERTED Fig. 4, No. I PL 56, No. 22
RIMS: Fig. I, No. 6
BOWLS WITH INCURVING SIDES

AND ROUNDED RIMS: Fig. I, 3, No. 1 PL 56, No. 4
Fig.
No. 1
POTS WITH EVERTED NECKS

AND SIMPLE PINCHED RIMS Fig. 3, No. 13 PL 55. No. 14
IN COMMON WARE: Fig. I, No. 9
POTS WITH FLATTENED RIMS

AND A GROOVE RUNNING DOWN Fig. 4, No. 3 PL 60, No. 11
THE RIM CENTER: Fig. 1, No. 8
OMPHALOS BASES: Fig. 1, No. 7 Fig. 3, No. 12 PL 50, Nos, 7 and 8
CRUDE "TRAYS" WITH FLAT PRESENT; NOT

BASES AND STRAIGHT SIDES: ILLUSTRAIED P. 60, Nos. 16, 17 and 18
PRESENT; NOT.ILLUSTRATED
BOWLS WITH ROLLED RIMS: Fig. 3, No. 19 PERII, P1. 89. No. 10
o0
Fig. I, Nos. 3 and 5P7Z No. S
BOWLS WITH EVERTED SLOPING Fig. 3, No. 2 Pl. XL, G.S. 1248c (11 - III)
RIMS: Fig. 2, No. 10
POTS WITH EVERTED NECKS Fig. 4, No. 8

AND SIMPLE PINCHED RIMS IN
FINE WARE: Fig. Z, No. 11
TREFOIL SHOULDER SPOUTS: PRESENT; NOT P1. XXXVII, G.S. 1221c OICG No. 21. Fig. 62, PT3 261
Fig. 2, No. 4 ILLUSTRATED (U - I) 5-• ACH. VILL., P. XXIV, No. 6
CROSS-HATCHED TRIANGLES
ON THE INSIDE OF THE VESSEL 5
Fig.
RIM: Fig. 2, No. 8
DIVIDED TRIANGLES ON A
FLAT, EVERTED BOWL RIM,
WITH THE TRIANGLE SOME- Fig. 5
TIMES HALF SOLID: Fig. 5
LOOPS ALONG THE VESSEL Fig. S

SHOULDER: Fig. 5
SWIRLS OR SIMPLE SPIRALS

ON THE INSIDE OF BOWLS WITH Fig. 5
FLARING NECKS: Fig. 5
LINES IN BICHROME: RED AND

BROWN PAINT ON AN UNSLIPPED Fig. 5
WHITE-CREAM GROUND: Fig. 5
POTS WITH EVERTED NECKS

AND SIMPLE PINCHED RIMS:
Fig. 1, No. I0 Pi 60, Nos. 7 and 8
SPOUTS BELOW BOWL RIM.

OUTLET IN SHOULDER: Fig. P1. 45, No. 1
2, No. 5
CANTEEN JARS: PRESENT; NOT

ILLUSTRATED G.S. 1176 (II I) OIC, No. 21, Fig. 62, PT3 145
PL XXIX, -
TREFOIL RIMS: Fig. 2, No. 7
P1. XXIX, G.S. 1221d (UI- DI) OIC. No. 21, Fig. 62, PT3 294
IMITATION "RIVETS": Fig. 2
Nos. and 3 PL. XXXIX, G.S. 1249d
(II - III)
POTS WITH TRIPLE SHOULDER
RIBS: PRESENT; NOT ILLUSTRATED PL XXXVI, G.S. IZl8e (I- I)
JARS WITH SHORT, UPRIGHT,

BRIDGED SHOULDER SPOUTS: PL XXXVII. G. S. 1221b and P.
Fig. 2, No. I XL, G.RS. 1251 )
(11-
SMALL JARS WITH OPPOSED
LUGS: Fig. 2, No. 9 PL XL, G.S. Z342 (UH- HI)
BOWLS WITH ROUND BASES

AND SLIGHTLY THICKENED, PI. 56, No. 1
EVERTED RIMS: Fig. 4. No. 7
TAB HANDLES: Fig. 4, No. 9

PL 57, Nos. 8B-1
INCISING: PRESENT; NOT

ILLUSTRATED P 49
POINTED BASES: P1. XXVI, OIC, No. 21, Fig. 62, PT3 311
G.S. 2383 (I)
JARS WITH SHORT NECKS AND

SLIGHTLY OVERHANGING RIMS:
PAINTED JARS WITH UPRIGHT

TREFOIL SHOULDER SPOUTS: VANDEN BERGHE, P1. 61a
P1. XXXII, G.S. 787 (I)
JAR STANDS: P1. XXXVDI, PER U, P1. 72, No. 4

O.S. 12;1 (U-ID)
SQUAT BOTTLES: P1 XLI, PER II, P1 72. No. 8:
0.S. 830 (UID= ) PUEW No. 6
SHORT, CbNICAL SHOULDER PER . PL 74, No. 41

SPOUTS: P1 XL, G.S. 2372 H_
(U - ID)
TURTLE JARS: P1. XXXV, PER UI, P1. 72, No. 13

G.S. 1270 (U -IDm)
SIMPLE, FLAT BASES: P1. PER0, P1 72, No. 16

XL, G.S. I2NOo
Fig. 12
In fact, it could be argued that at these levels we are not dealing with a culturally related ceramic
horizon at all. On the whole, compared with either the Early Western Grey Ware horizon or the Late
Buff Ware horizon, the Late Western Grey Ware horizon is a time of considerable ceramic diversity
in western Iran.
Despite the fact that Geoy Tepe A is a mixed complex, with some traits related to Hasanlu III, it
is predominantly a Late Western Grey Ware level. A total of eleven parallels link Geoy Tepe A with
Hasanlu IV. In this period, these two sites share more common ceramic elements than any two other
sites in the group.
Hasanlu IV and Sialk VI share one important general ceramic trait: the Grey-black Ware of
Sialk VI, which, as we noted, formed twenty-four per cent of the total complex, parallels the thin fine
variety of Fine Ware at Hasanlu by being consistently grey-black in colour and having a highly
burnished or polished surfacefinish. Yet only five specific ceramic traits link Hasanlu IV with Sialk VI,
suggesting that the ties between these two sites in this period were not particularly strong.*2 This is
borne out by a comparison of the general, over-all characteristicsof the two assemblages. Sialk VI,
quite unlike Hasanlu IV, is a mixed plain and painted ware complex, the painted ware of which is
unique at present in all of western Iran. The important point to be made here, therefore,is that though
Hasanlu IV and Sialk VI are sufficiently related to one another to prove roughly contemporary, they
are actually quite different complexes-an issue whose cultural implications are discussed in greater
detail in the article to follow.
Still within the Late Western Grey Ware horizon itself, only four ceramic parallels link Sialk VI
and Giyan I1_I2. One other trait, a tripod bottle, is found in Sialk VI and Giyan 13, but this shape is
also found in Sialk V and is one of the few links between that period and Sialk VI. Sialk VI, therefore,
is more closely related chronologically to Giyan I1_I2 than to any other sub-period of Giyan I, but,
as when comparing Sialk VI and Hasanlu IV, it must be stressedthat no sub-period of Giyan I is really
very closely related to Sialk VI. Underlining the ceramic diversity of western Iran in the Late Western
Grey Ware horizon is the fact that there are no parallels between Hasanlu IV and late Giyan I.
The Late Western Grey Ware horizon is linked, on the one hand, to the Early Western Grey Ware
horizon principally by connections between Hasanlu IV and V, and, on the other hand, with the Late
Buff Ware horizon by connections between Hasanlu IV, Ziweye and the Zendan and between Sialk
VI, Giyan I1_I2 and Achaemenid Village I.
We have already discussed above the close connections between Hasanlu IV and V. In this same
vein it is important to note that two ceramic parallels link Hasanlu IV and Sialk V: knob handled
goblets, possibly prototypes for the tab handled vessels of Hasanlu IV, are attributed to Sialk V by the
excavator (Sialk 2, P1. IV, Nos. I and 2), and tripod bowls are common in Sialk V (Sialk 2, P1. III,
Nos. I, 4 and 5) and also are found in Hasanlu IV (not illustrated).
Nine ceramic parallels link Hasanlu IV with the Zendan in the Late Buff Ware Group, six of these
traits also being found at Geoy Tepe A. Four of these parallels are found at Ziweye. One link, " streak
burnishing ", between Hasanlu IV and Ziweye is not found at the Zendan. This evidence suggests
that, in terms of relating the Late Western Grey Ware horizon as found at Hasanlu IV with the Late
Buff Ware horizon, the Zendan is closer typologically to Hasanlu IV than is Ziweye.
Curiously enough, there are as many ceramic links between Sialk VI and the Achaemenid Village
as there are between Sialk VI and either Hasanlu IV or Giyan I. A total of five featureslink these two
sites, four of which are found at the Achaemenid Village exclusively in period I, and one of which,
the canteen jar, is found only in Achaemenid Village II-III. Giyan I, in turn, yields four ceramic
parallels with the Achaemenid Village. Three are in either Giyan Ii or I', and one is common from
Giyan I4 to 12 (the pedestal-base goblet); all are found principally in Achaemenid Village I. Giyan
I1_I2, Sialk VI and Achaemenid Village I thus overlap to a limited extent.29
28 It is strikingthat no fewer than nineteen distinct typological Furtherstudieswhich involve more than the ceramicevidence
parallelslink Hasanlu IV and Sialk VI if metal objectsfrom will certainlyalter and augmentthe presentdiscussion.
the two sites are compared. This is a clear illustrationof how " Despite the parallels between Sialk VI and Achaemenid
differentaspectsof materialculturecan have separatehistories, Village I, it carries the argument too far to suggest that
and is an indication of the limitationsinherent in discussing AchaemenidVillage I is basicallyonly a late manifestationof
only one aspect of the material culture of a site and period. the cultureof Sialk VI. See Ach.Vill.,p. 56.
HASANLU GEQY TEPE ZENDAN ZIWEYE SIYALK GlYAN AC44.,VILL.
JARS WITHSHOULDER Fig. 40. No. 1177
RIB: Fig. 6, Nos. I and 9
SMALL JARS WITH Fig. 38, No. 20

SHOULDERRIB: Fig.
7, No. 9
LOOPED TAB HANDLES: Fig. 14, No. 102

Fig. 7, No. 3 Fig. 36, No. 102
Fig. 37, No. 120
SHORT, TUBULARSPOUTS: Fig. 35, No. 126

Fig. 7, No. 7
TAB HANDLES: Fig. 6, Fig. 35, No. 284 PL 57, Nos. 8 - Fig. 4, No. 9 HANDLESWITHHORN-LIKE
g PROJECTIONS: LII, S. 571;
3, No.17 P. PL
17 PL3 Fig.
No LXIIo S. 770; LXIII,
. 3, N. S. 850; Pl. LXIX, S. 946; P1.
LXXI, S. 889 and Pl. LXXIX,
S. 985a and 986
Fig. 38, No. 1034 PL 54, No. 9 PRESENT; NOT

POTS WITHFLUTINGON
SHOULDER: Fig. 6,ILLUSTRATED
No. 7
CARINATEDPOTS: Fig. 6, Fig. 37, No. 984

No. 5 Fig. 38, Np. 399
PL 51, No. Z4 Fig. 4, No. 5 FOR EXAMPLE: Pl. XII, No, 6 PL XXXVIII, G.S. IZZIb and
BRIDGEDPOURINGSPOUTS: Fig. Fig. 38, No. 1032 PL G.S. I I
6, No. 8 and Fig. No. 2 UNBRIDGED XL,
7, (U-IIf)
LUGS IN THE SHAPE OF Fig. 36, No. 915 PL 57, No, 6
ANIMALHEADS:PRESENT;
NOT ILLUSTRATED
BOWLSWITHINSTEP AT zig. 37, No. 650

SHOULDERAND SIMPLE
PINCHEDRIMS: Fig. 7, No. I
CARINATEDBOWLSWITH Fig. 36, No. 103 P1. 56, Nos. 23 and 24

INCURVINGCOLLARSAND
SIMPLE PINCHEDRIMS: Fig.
6, Nos. Z and 4
"TRAYS"IN COARSEWARE; PL 60, Nos. 16 - 18 PRESENT; NOT

PRESENT; NOT ILLUSTRATED ILLUSTRATED
CARINATEDBOWLSWITH PL 56, Nos. 26 - 33

SINGLEHANDLE: Fig. 7. No. 8
RAISEDSPIRAL RIDGESAS P1. 54, No. 4

DECORATION:Fig. 6, No. 10
UPTURNEDTABULARLUGS: ; P1. 46b

PRESENT; NOT ILLUSTRATED
STREAKBURNISHING:PRESENT; PRESENT, NO'

NOT ILLUSTRATED ILLUSTRATED
PL LII, S. 568
FRUIT STANDS: Fig. 7, No. 5
PL LX, S. 624 andS. 637
LONG, TUBULARSPOUTS: Fig. LXU, S. 772b
PL LXII,
7, Nos. 4 and 6PL
PL LXXVIII, S. 962e
P1,. LX, S. 651

COLLANDERS: Fig. 6, No. 6 '
JARS WITHSHORTNECKS PL 8, T. 1, No. 2 (II
AND A SINGLEHANDLE: Pl. P I (I1)
LIX, S. 648 and PL LXIII, 8, T. 2, N. (1
S. 853b PL I1, T. 16, No. I (2)
JARS WITHOUTHANDLES: PL 11, T. 17, No. 2 (I1)

PL LXXIII, S. 934b andd PL 11, T. 18, No. 2 (I2)
TRIPOD BOTTLES: Pl. LXIII,. PL 13, T. 26, No. 1 (13

S. 848; Pl. LXIV, S. 863 and
PL. LXXVIII, S. 964a
BOWLSWITHRIM TROUGH PL XIV, No. 5

SPOUTSAND A SINGLE
HANDLE: P1. XVII
TUBULARSHOULDERSPOUTS: PL 39
PI. LX, S. 624 and S. 637 Pl. 8, T. 2, No 2 (11)
SHORT, STUBBY SHOULDER PL XXIX, G.S. (1)

SPOUTS: Pl. LXXI, S. 890OC 957
BRIDGEDUPRIGHTSHOULDER P1. XXXI, G.S. 2394 ()

SPOUTS: Pl. LXXIX, S. 987a
FAN-SPOUTS or SHORT, PL XXXII, G.S. 787 (1)

STUBBY, UPRIGHTSHOULDER
SPOUTS: P. XIII, Nos. 1,2,3,
and
CANTEEN JARS:
913 and Pl. P1.
XVIII, 1
LXXIV,
No. G.S. 1270
XXXIX,G.S.
PL XXXV, 1176 (II-III)
5.
Pi. XX, No. (1)
PAINTED ZOOMORPHIC
VESSELS: P1. XXI, No. 3
PEDESTAL-BASE GOBLETS: PL XXX, G.S. 1206a and
PL I, T. 19, No, 3 0G.S. 1205 (I)
PL 15, T. 37, No. Z
P. SNo. 4 2 -I 4
16, T. 42,
CommoninoPeriodsI
SMALL SPHERICALJARS P1. XXXI, G.S. 863 (1)

WITHOPPOSED PIERCED PL XL, G.S. 2342 (11- I)
LUGSON SHOULDER: PL. 2
9, T. 6, No.
I "(I)
TREFOIL SPOUTS: PL 39 PL XXXII, G.5. 787 (1)
PL XXXVIlI, G.S. 1221g (II-.II)
ZIG-ZAGDECORATION:P1. P1. XXXI, G.S. 863 (I)

8, T. 3, No. 1
(II)
Fig. 13
The evidence clearly indicates that the Late Western Grey Ware horizon was far more fragmented
into individual ceramic traditions than was either the Early Western Grey Ware horizon or the Late
Buff Ware horizon. Each site yields a few ceramic connections with other sites in the group and with
one or two of the Late Buff Ware sites, but there is no series of unifying traits binding Hasanlu IV,
Geoy Tepe A, Sialk VI and Giyan I-I2 together into a cultural whole.
RelativeChronology (Fig. 14)

On the basis of these typological comparisons and the discussion of the internal chronology of the
five principal sites above it is now possible to make relative chronological distinctions between these
various sites and levels.
As we have seen, the internal evidence at Sialk indicates a fairly marked cultural disconformity and
probably a chronological hiatus between periods V and VI. On the other hand, Hasanlu V blends
culturally and chronologically into Hasanlu IV. The typological links between Hasanlu V and Sialk
V are sufficiently strong to suggest that these two periods are probably in the main contemporary,
though the few ceramic links between Sialk V and earlier Hissar IIIB and C, three of which do not
occur at Hasanlu V, suggest that Sialk V may have begun slightly before Hasanlu V. It must be kept
in mind, however, that the closer ties between Hissar IIIB and C and Sialk V may be only a result of
greater geographical proximity. The temporal relationship between Hasanlu IV and Sialk VI and V
is much less clear than that between Hasanlu V and Sialk V. The fact that there is a gap between the
two Sialk periods and no gap between Hasanlu IV and V, considered with the two rather tenuous
ceramic links between Hasanlu IV and Sialk V, suggests that Hasanlu IV may have begun slightly
before Sialk VI sometime in the hiatus between Sialk V and VI. In general, however, these two
periods are probably for the most part contemporary.
Geoy Tepe B can probably be considered contemporary with Hasanlu V; but the chronological
relationship between Sialk V and Khorvin-Chandaris perhaps not so clear. To judge from the pottery
collected at the twin sites of Khorvin and Chandar (both cemeteries) by the author in 1961, on which
the typological connections between this site and Sialk V discussedabove are based (see Fig. 9), the two
sites are in the main contemporary. On the other hand, a good number of ceramic traits documented
by collections made by others at Khorvin-Chandar and by materials proporting to come from these
sites suggest that these two cemeteries may have first been used some time prior to the beginning of
Sialk V and may have remained in use down into the Sialk VI time range.30 Until more material of
certain provenance is published the question must remain open, but it seems safe to conclude that, on
the whole, Khorvin-Chandar is contemporary with Sialk V.
Hasanlu V shows a few links with Giyan II and II-I, but the bulk of the parallels between Hasanlu
V and Giyan are in Giyan I4-I3. On internal evidence, the transition from Giyan II to Giyan I4
appeared to be bridged to some extent by Giyan II-I, although we noted the possibility of a circular
argument in this regard since Giyan II-I is something of an artificial period originally defined in terms
of its transitional nature. When Giyan II and Giyan I (early) were considered separately, a marked
cultural disconformity between the two periods was at once apparent. At Hasanlu the cultural shift
from period VI to period V appears to be no less radical than that from Giyan II to Giyan I, but at
Hasanlu the stratigraphic evidence suggests that there was probably no major hiatus between periods
VI and V. Hasanlu VI, despite the fact that it is not yet adequately defined by excavation, is probably
roughly contemporary with Giyan II. On the basis of the few links between Hasanlu V and Giyan II
and II-I, and the clear parallels between Hasanlu V and Giyan IP-I, it seems possible to suggest that,
like the shift from Hasanlu VI to V, the cultural shift from Giyan II to Giyan I, radical as it may be,
does not represent any significant chronological gap. Hasanlu V, sharing as it does a few traits with
Giyan II and II-I, probably began slightly before Giyan IP, but is, in the main, contemporary with
GiyanI-I3.
The bulk of the evidence indicates that Sialk V is essentially contemporary with Giyan I-IS, with
so See L. Vanden Berghe, Archologie de l'Irdn Ancien. Leiden, 1959, pp. 123-4 and pls. I53-8. For bibliography, see, ibid., p. I96.
KHORVIN
CHANDAR SIALK GI YAN GEOY TEPE HASANLU ZIWEYE ZENDAN ACH.VILL.
1500
1450
1400 \\ II C VI
1350
1300
1250
1200
V
1150 B V
950
_2
850 VI GAP A
800 -.
750
700
650
600
III B
I
500 sI I
•
,,
450
400
I
350
300
Fig. r4
only a few traits linking it to Giyan I2 as well. We have seen that Sialk V may have begun slightly
before Hasanlu V, and we have also suggested that Hasanlu V may have begun slightly before Giyan 14.
Therefore, it follows that Sialk V probably began before Giyan 14. The complete absence of any traits
in Sialk V which can be linked with the painted pottery complex found at Giyan II and Hasanlu VI
does not stand against this conclusion, since Sialk V, in fact, represents what is essentially a new
beginning of the Sialk cultural and ceramic sequence after a very long hiatus.
Sialk VI on the whole shows the most parallelswith Giyan I1_I2, and these two periods can probably
be considered as in part contemporary. Sialk VI also yields a few parallels with Achaemenid Village I,
and the later part of VI, therefore,may overlap Achaemenid Village I. Such a conclusion is supported
by the fact that Giyan I~I2 also has some links with Achaemenid Village I. These connections between
Sialk VI and the Achaemenid Village in period I are not, as they might seem at first, too surprising,
for we have observed above that on the internal evidence alone-and particularly on the basis of the
appearance of late horizon markers such as the canteen jars and trilobate arrow heads-Sialk VI is
probably a very long lived period. The same holds true for Giyan I.
Before turning to the relative chronology of the Late Buff Ware sites, a further word on Giyan 12is
perhaps necessary. This period appears to be related to such widely diverse ceramic cultures as
Achaemenid Village I on the one hand, and Hasanlu V, Giyan I4-I3 and Sialk V on the other. Clearly
this level at Giyan is not a pure manifestationof the Early Western Grey Ware horizon, nor is it a pure
example of the Late Buff Ware horizon. Chronologically it must, therefore, be later than Hasanlu V,
Giyan IP-I3 and Sialk V, but cannot be as late as Giyan I' or Achaemenid Village I. Thus, more or
less by default, it falls into the Late Western Grey Ware period-a conclusion supported somewhat by
its connections with Sialk VI. It seems to represent a continuation of certain ceramic traits found in
the Early Western Grey Ware horizon into the time range of the Late Western Grey Ware.
On the basis of the internal evidence we have postulated a chronological gap between Achaemenid
Village I and II-III as a partial explanation of the cultural discontinuity between these two periods.
Achaemenid Village II-III is clearly related to Persepolis/Pasargadaeon typological grounds, and is
linked thereby to the historical Achaemenids. Achaemenid Village I thus is probably pre-classical
Achaemenid in date, a conclusion borne out by the connections which it has with Giyan I1_I2and
Sialk VI, neither of which, no matter how long lived they may have been, can have lasted until the
occupation of Persepolis/Pasargadae.
In the north, Hasanlu III is largely contemporarywith Ziweye and in part contemporarywith the
Zendan at Takht-i Suleiman. We noted, however, the strong case to be made for a considerablehiatus
between Hasanlu IV and III. Thus, since the Zendan shows several rather fundamental connections
with Hasanlu IV, it must have begun a good deal before Hasanlu III at some time after the grey ware
tradition of Hasanlu IV had died out, but while many of the ceramic features of Hasanlu IV were still
in use. Perhaps,since the Zendan has no parallels that are exclusivelywith Hasanlu IIIA (later Hasanlu
III), its occupation ended before the end of Hasanlu III. Ziweye, like the Zendan, also shares some
features with Hasanlu IV which are not found in Hasanlu III, and therefore probably began slightly
before Hasanlu III. On the other hand, Ziweye is quite closely linked with Hasanlu III (more so than
the Zendan) and must be for the most part contemporary with that period. Since one of the links
between Ziweye and Hasanlu III (bichrome ware) is found exclusively in later Hasanlu IIIA, Ziweye
probably was occupied longer than the Zendan.
Finally, Hasanlu III is fairly well tied in with Achaemenid Village II-III in the south, and more
tenuously with Persepolis/Pasargadae. In the main, Hasanlu III and Achaemenid Village II-III are
probably contemporary. Whether the chronological relationship between these two sites can be more
closely drawn must remain an open question, but the fact that Achaemenid Village II-III has no
parallels with Hasanlu III that are exclusively in Hasanlu IIIB and does have two parallels with the
northern site which are found only in late Hasanlu IIIA suggests that Hasanlu III probably began
sometime shortly before Achaemenid Village II-III. Such a conclusion is supported by the fact that
of the four Hasanlu III-Persepolis/Pasargadae parallels, there are two from either Hasanlu IIIA or B,
two from Hasanlu IIIA only and none from Hasanlu IIIB only. Achaemenid Village I is, therefore,
certainly earlier than Hasanlu IIIA, perhaps in part (by inference) contemporary with Hasanlu IIIB,
but probably is on the whole earlier than any of Hasanlu III. The complete absence of any parallels
between Achaemenid Village I and Ziweye or the Zendan makes it difficult to establishjust how much
earlier than Hasanlu III Achaemenid Village I may have begun.
To summarize the comparative conclusions thus far: Hasanlu V, Sialk V, Giyan I4-I3, Geoy
Tepe B and Khorvin-Chandar are, on the whole, contemporary. Sialk V may have begun slightly
before Giyan I4-I and Hasanlu V, and Hasanlu V probably began a little before Giyan 14. Khorvin-
Chandar perhaps began before Sialk V and may have lasted longer than any of these sites, but the
present evidence does not permit any firm conclusions on this point. All of these sites are partly
connected with Hissar IIIB and IIIC, though Sialk V may be slightly closer to the latter complex than
the other western Iranian sites. Hasanlu IV and Sialk VI are in part, at least, contemporary, though
Hasanlu IV may have begun in the hiatus between Sialk V and VI. Sialk VI is contemporary with
Giyan I1I2, in part, and may also overlap a bit with Achaemenid Village I. Giyan I-I2 is linked to
Achaemenid Village I, but shows no connections with Hasanlu IV. Giyan I2 representsa continuation
of the Sialk V, Hasanlu V and Giyan 4~-I3tradition into the period of the Late Western Grey Ware.
After the end of Hasanlu IV, sometime in the gap between Hasanlu IV and III, a buff ware horizon
appears in northwestern Iran, probably first at the Zendan, slightly later at Ziweye and finally at
Hasanlu III. Sometime in the same time range falls the occupation of Achaemenid Village I. Achae-
menid Village II-III is contemporary with Hasanlu III, and most closely with Hasanlu IIIA. By
means of the relationships between Achaemenid Village II-III and, to a lesser extent Hasanlu IIIA,
and Persepolis/Pasargadae,the Late Buff Ware horizon is firmly tied to the historical Achaemenids.
AbsoluteDates
The points of departure for establishing absolute dates for these various periods and sites are:
(I) the radio-carbon dates from Hasanlu, (2) parallels between Hasanlu III, Ziweye and the firmly
dated pottery from Nimrud, (3) the certain Achaemenid date of Achaemenid Village II-III, and
(4) the date of the door sockets of Construction IA at Tepe Giyan. The absolute dating of a relative
chronology is very difficult, and even when this much evidence is available one must proceed with
caution. Nevertheless, the attempt must be made so that we may eventually translate the archaeological
evidence into historically meaningful patterns.
The LateBuf WareHorizon

We have seen that Achaemenid Village II-III is most closely related to Persepolis/Pasargadaeand
is, therefore, of Achaemenid date. The bulk of the parallels between the village at Susa and the
Achaemenid sites of Fars is found at Persepolis, suggesting that Achaemenid Village II-III did not
begin until the reign of Darius I or later. The few parallels which come from Pasargadaeindicate that
this period may have begun as early as the reign of Cyrus (559-530 B.C.). The recent excavations at
Pasargadae,however, have establishedthat the site was occupied for the greater part of the Achaemenid
period and thus even the bulk of the ceramic material from Pasargadaeprobably dates to afterthe reign
of Cyrus.31Consideringall of the evidence, a date between 550 and 500 B.C. for the start of Achaemenid
Village II-III appears reasonable. The end of the period does not concern the present discussion.
The absolute dtees for Achaemenid Village I depend (I) on the length of the hiatus between
periods I and II-III, and (2) on the date of the most recent material in Sialk VI and Giyan II2.
Both of these issues are discussed further below.
The two Hasanlu III radio-carbon dates mentioned above, which are probably from Hasanlu IIIB,
yield an average date of 622 ? 38 B.c. If the range of possible error is doubled so that there are twenty-
one out of the twenty-two chances that the true date falls within the range allowed, Hasanlu IIIB falls
somewhere between 700 and 550 B.C. The one date available which provides a terminus ante quemfor
Hasanlu IIIA is 467 + 54 B.c. (P-420), giving a range of 575 to 350 B.c. On the comparative side of
the argument, we have noted that Hasanlu III is in roughly the same time range as Achaemenid Village
31 D. Stronach, " Excavations at Pasargadae, First Preliminary Report ", Iran 1: 42, 1963.
II-III, with Hasanlu IIIB probably having begun slightly earlier than Achaemenid Village II-III.
Since most of the parallels between these two sites are found at Hasanlu in either IIIA or IIIB, it is not
likely that only the end of Hasanlu III overlaps with the beginning of Achaemenid Village II-III.
Furthermore,there are a few ceramic links between Hasanlu III (both A and B) and the Late Assyrian
pottery from Nimrud, all of which is dated by the excavators with considerable certainty between 612
and 550 B.C.32 Finally, it is probably significant that there are no parallels between Hasanlu IIIB and
Achaemenid Village I. All of the evidence, considered as a whole, suggeststhat Hasanlu IIIB probably
did not begin much before 650-600 B.c. The beginning of Hasanlu IIIA cannot be set with any
certainty given the present evidence. That Hasanlu III certainly continued well down into the
Achaemenid time range is indicated by the radio-carbon date for IIIA. Again, the end of the period
is not a concern of the present discussion.
Ziweye, since it is on the whole contemporary with Hasanlu III-perhaps slightly more with
Hasanlu IIIB than with IIIA-thus also dates to around the mid seventh and early sixth centuries B.C.
The links between Ziweye and Hasanlu IV, however, have suggested that Ziweye was probably first
occupied slightly before Hasanlu IIIB. The beginning of occupation at Ziweye, therefore, will fall
sometime between c. 675 and 625 B.c. Since Ziweye appears to have been a single period site, it
probably was not occupied nearly as long as Hasanlu III. Unfortunately, there is no evidence for an
absolute date for the end of Ziweye.
The occupation of the Zendan began slightly before the occupation of Ziweye since it shows more
parallels to Hasanlu IV than does the latter site. Still, it is in the main contemporarywith Ziweye and
has some parallels to Hasanlu III (A and B). Thus a possible guess for the beginning of occupation
at the Zendan might be somewhere in the range of 700 to 650 B.c., and it is clear that occupation
here continued down to at least the end of the seventh century B.c. if not longer.
The Late WesternGreyWareHorizon

The average radio-carbon date for the start of Hasanlu IV is oo001+ 20 B.C. The average radio-
carbon date for the end of the period (a preliminary date since there have been only two runs so far)
is 862 + 49 B.C. If one allows a maximum margin of error, these dates indicate that Hasanlu IV may
have begun as early as 1050 B.C. and ended as late as 750 B.C. Allowing for the possibility that this
period may have begun sometime between Io5o and I000 B.C. and may have ended sometime shortly
after 8oo B.C., the absolute dates for Hasanlu IV are roughly Iooo to 8o00B.C.
Since Hasanlu IV may have begun sometime in the hiatus between Sialk V and VI, Sialk VI would
have begun sometime after O5O0-loooB.C., say perhaps between Iooo and 9oo B.C. The date for the
end of Sialk VI depends on the date of Giyan Ix and Achaemenid Village I. We have established that
the tombs of Giyan IP were either contemporary with or later than the two door sockets found in
Construction IA at Tepe Giyan. R. Ghirshman, on the basis of Assyrian parallels, has dated these
door sockets to the eighth century B.C.33 Giyan Ii, on this evidence, would be eighth century or later.
This rather slim evidence is all that is available to establish the absolute date of the end of Sialk VI,
the end of the Giyan I sequence and the start of Achaemenid Village I, all of which overlap typologically
to some extent. Thus Sialk VI may have ended as late as sometime between 750 and 700 B.C., a
suggestion supported by the appearance in Sialk of the late horizon markers, trilobate arrow heads
and canteenjars.34 Giyan Ii may last equally long. Achaemenid Village I, on the other hand, probably
overlaps Sialk VI and Giyan I' at its start only, for, unless the hiatus between Achaemenid Village I
and II-III is very large, and that seems unlikely, occupation at the Village could not have begun much
before 750 B.c. Unfortunately, the actual length of this all important gap still cannot even be estimated
with any accuracy.
32 Oates I, p. 130. of Alexanderthe Great. New York, 1964, p. 279. For a contrary
88 Sialk 2, p. 95 and Ach. Vill., p. 6o. opinion, see Ach. Vill., p. 55. Whether from Sialk VI tombs
3"As this article went to press the attribution of trilobate arrow or not, the trilobate arrow heads found at the site still require
heads to Sialk VI was challenged by the excavator: see R. explanation. The canteen jar for Sialk VI remains firmly
Ghirshman, The Arts of AncientIran From its Origins to the Time documented.
The Early WesternGreyWareHorizon

The radio-carbon dates for Hasanlu V indicate that the period may have begun sometime around
I250 B.C. The dates for the end of the period overlap the dates for the start of period IV, and we have
seen that there is no cultural discontinuity or chronological gap between these two periods at Hasanlu.
Thus the dates for Hasanlu V are 1300/1250 to I050/100oooB.C.
On the basis of comparative typology, we have suggestedthat Sialk V may have begun shortly before
Hasanlu V. Thus, given the Hasanlu radio-carbon dates, Sialk V may have begun sometime around
the end of the fourteenth and the beginning of the thirteenth centuries B.C. Allowing for the indicated
gap between Sialk V and VI, the end of Sialk V probably falls sometime between Io5o and 10ooo B.C.,
or about the same time as the end of Hasanlu V. Khorvin-Chandaris, in the main, contemporarywith
Sialk V, but may have begun sometime in the fifteenth century (or earlier) and have lasted down into
the Sialk VI time range (post Iooo B.C.).
Giyan 14,since it probably began sometime shortly after the start of Hasanlu V, began around I200
B.C. Giyan I4~I3 may have lasted no longer than Hasanlu V or Sialk V, but there is no way to be
certain on this point. We noted that some of the traits of the Early Western Grey Ware horizon carried
over into Giyan I2, but that this period is also typologically linked with the Late Western Grey Ware
horizon by parallels with Sialk VI. Both the beginning and end of this period, therefore, cannot be
determined with any degree of certainty. Finally, the possibilityof a hiatus between the end of Giyan I2
and Giyan I', should be considered.
Conclusion
A series of typological comparisons has enabled us to establish three main ceramic horizons in
proto-historic western Iran, to order these groups by sites into a relative chronology, and, combined
with other evidence, to establishrough absolute dates for the sequence. It remains to discussthe cultural
dynamics of the archaeological evidence so ordered, and to compare the archaeological data with the
written sources on proto-historicwestern Iran in an effort to shed some light on a few of the historical
problems of the period. This will be the substance of a second paper.
The tentative nature of the conclusionsreached must again be stressed. Although the argument was
consciously limited to the ceramic evidence, this is not the end of the matter. What has been attempted
with pottery must be tried with the other categories of material and cultural remains from these several
excavations, so that eventually a much more comprehensive and well integrated chronology can be
constructed for proto-historic western Iran. With a more complete archaeological picture, a suitable
general terminology can be developed to replace the working terms used here.
FIGURE CATALOGUE
No. Ware Variety Finish Colour

Fig. r
No. I Common Plain buff Matt Buff*
No. 2 Common Red-slipped Burnished Red
No. 5 Common Plain buff Burnished Buff
No. 7 Common Plain buff Matt Buff
No. Io Common Plain buff Matt Buff
Fig. 2
No. i Common Plain buff Burnished Buff
No. 4 Common Plain buff Burnished Grey
No. 6 Fine Red-slipped Burnished Red
No. 8 Fine Painted Polished Buff
No. Io Fine Plain buff Burnished Buff
No. ii Fine Painted Polished Buff
Fig. 3
No. I Common Plain buff Matt Buff
No. Io Common Plain buff Burnished Buff
No. I Common Plain buff Burnished Buff
No. I8 Common Plain buff Burnished Buff
No. I9 Common Plain buff Burnished Brown
Fig. 4
No. I Common Red-slipped Burnished Red
No. 2 Coarse Plain buff Matt Buff
No. 3 Coarse Plain buff Burnished Buff
No. 4 Heavy Coarse Matt Buff
No. 5 Coarse Plain buff Burnished Buff
*Thetermbuffdesignates
a colourwhichrangesfroma lighttan throughshadesof lightredto brown.
No. Ware Variety Finish Colour

No. 6 Fine Plain buff Burnished Buff
No. 7 Fine White-slipped Polished White
No. Io Fine Plain buff Burnished Buff
No. i i Fine Plain buff Burnished Buff
No. I2 Fine Plain buff Burnished Buff
Fig. 6
No. I Common Plain buff Burnished Buff
No. 3 Fine Thin fine Burnished Buff
No. 5 Fine Medium fine Burnished Grey
No. 7 Fine Thin fine Polished Grey
No. 9 Fine Mediumfine Burnished Grey
No. Io Common Red-slipped Burnished Red
Fig. 7
No. I Fine Mediumfine Smoothed Buff
No. 2 Fine Medium fine Smoothed Grey
No. 3 Fine Mediumfine Matt Grey
No. 4 Fine Mediumfine Polished Black
No. 5 Fine Mediumfine Burnished Red-slipped
No. 6 Fine Mediumfine Burnished Red-slipped
No. 7 Fine Mediumfine Smoothed Red-slipped
Fig. 8
No. I Fine Mediumfine Burnished Grey
No. 3 Common Painted Matt Buff
No. 5 Fine Mediumfine Smoothed Grey
No. 6 Common Painted Matt Buff
No. Io Fine Medium fine Burnished Grey
No. 1I Common Plain buff Matt Buff
Fig. g
No. I Common Burnished Grey
No. 2 Fine Burnished Grey
No. 3 Common Burnished Grey
No. 4 Fine Burnished Grey
No. 5 Common Smoothed Grey
No. 6 Common Smoothed Grey
No. 7 Common Burnished Brown
No. 8 Common Burnished Grey
87
ZOROASTRIAN SURVIVALS IN IRANIAN FOLKLORE
By R. C. Zaehner
Visitors to the Vatican Museum in Rome will remember that the very first monuments, flanking
the entrance to the first room in the vast gallery that leads ultimately to the Sistine Chapel, are neither
saints not angels but what appear to be devils: for at each side of the entrance door, guarding it with
their baleful presence, stand two most un-Christian deities with the head of a lion and gaping jaws.
In both hands they bear keys, a snake encircles their bodies, and the Signs of the Zodiac are impressed
on their limbs. Coming face to face with these awesome figures Christiansmay well recall the words
of St. Peter: " Be sober and watch; because your adversary, the devil, as a roaring lion, goeth about
seeking whom he may devour " (I Pet. 5.8). The serpent too which envelops the body of the lion-
headed deity is all too familiar, and one is tempted to identify it with that selfsame serpent which
tempted our first mother, Eve, to eat of the forbidden fruit.
Yet, interestingthough the Christianparallelsmay be, we have long known that this rather repulsive
deity has nothing to do with the Christian devil, for he figured in a cult that was for long Christianity's
most potent rival in the early Roman Empire. This rival religion which has left monuments throughout
the length and breadth of the Roman Empire is known as Mithraism, and its roots were originally in
Iran; for the god Mithra, from whom the New Persian word mehr,meaning both the " sun " and
" affection " derives, was, in the Zoroastrianismof the later Achaemenian Empire, second only to the
supreme Deity, Ahura Mazdah himself.
Everything in the history of Zoroastrianismis obscure, and not least the relationship between the
Mithraism so widely practised in the Roman Empire and the varieties of Zoroastrianism we must
assume to have existed in Iran. With the central figure of Mithra-Mithras himself we are not for the
present concerned. Though the r61leof Mithras in the Mithraic mysteries is quite different from that
of the genuinely Iranian god Mithra of the later Avesta, at least we know that the Roman Mithras,
whose slaying of a bull in sacrifice is recorded in innumerable monuments, must ultimately derive
from the Iranian Mithra, the divine guardian of the compact, if for no other reason than that the name
is the same.
The lion-headed deity, however, who, next to Mithras himself, is the most frequently met with
among all the deities of the Mithraic pantheon, was until quite recently a much more puzzling figure.
The great Belgian scholar, Franz Cumont, had identified this sinister figure with the Iranian god of
time and fate, Zurvan, largely because the statues are often adorned with the Signs of the Zodiac;
and such was this scholar's immense prestige that lesser men followed all too tamely in his footsteps.
It was left to another Belgian, ProfessorJacques Duchesne-Guillemin (Ohrmazdet Ahriman,p. 128)
and myself (BSOAS, 1955, p. 237) to point out that this truly " diabolical " god can scarcely have
been other than the Zoroastrian devil, Ahriman, however surprising that might seem to be. Among
the various dedications to Mithraic deities that survive there are none to Zurvin or to any corresponding
Roman God of time or fate, but quite a number deo Arimanio," to the god Ahriman ". Common sense
should have told us long ago that the gaping lion-headed monster must in fact be Ahriman himself.
As I then wrote:
It seems to me certain that the god represented is not Zurvin, as Cumont had supposed, but Ahriman.
It would seem inconceivable that this deity which is of more frequent occurrence than any except the Mithras
Tauroctonus himself should not be mentioned in any Mithraic dedication. Prima Facie then the lion-headed
deity whose body is encircled by a snake would represent the deusArimaniusto whom votive tablets are dedi-
cated. That there should be no dedications at all to a deity which obviously played an extremely important
part in the cult seems incredible; and of the deities to which votive tablets are dedicated, none can conceivably
be the leontocephalous monster except Arimanius-Ahriman.
Mithraism, however, though it is unquestionably of Iranian origin, differs so radically from any
form of Zoroastrianismwe know of in the Iranian sources that we have to look for possible affiliations
elsewhere. What, indeed, distinguishes Mithraism from the main forms of Zoroastrianism we know
from the Avesta, the Pahlavi books, and the later Zoroastrian sources written in New Persian is the
cult it offers to Ahriman. To a Zoroastrian,to offer homage to such a being would be as unthinkable
as it would be for a Moslem, whether ShPI or Sunni, to prostrate himself to IblIs. Yet we know that
there were persons, claiming to be Zoroastrianswho did precisely this, for we read in Plutarch's De
Iside et Osiride(369D-37oD):
Some [Iranians,he writes]recognizetwo gods,-as it were rival artificers,-the one the creatorof good
things,the otherof bad: but otherscall the better[power]God, and the othera " daemon", as does Zoroaster
the Magus. . . . He called the one Horomazes (Ohrmazd) and the other Areimanios (Ahriman); and he
showed too that of all sensiblethings the formerresembledchiefly light, but the latter, on the other hand,
resembleddarknessand ignorance. Betweenthe two is Mithras,whereforethe Persiansalso call Mithrasthe
Mediator. And he taught them to sacrificeto the one votive offeringsand thanks-offerings, but to the other
offeringsfor avertingevil, thingsof gloom.
Theologically this correspondsfairly closely to what we learn from the Pahlavi books, but the cult
offered to Ahriman, even for the understandable purpose of averting evil, is absolutely anathema to
any orthodox Zoroastrian. Of all sins the propitiation of Ahriman and his attendant demons was
considered to be the worst. What Plutarch calls the teaching of Zoroaster was in fact abhorred by
Zoroastrian orthodoxy: it is what the Zoroastrian texts call divdsnZh or " devil-worship ". This is
frequently mentioned and condemned in the Pahlavi books, but we learn very little from them about
the actual beliefs and practices of these much-persecuted people. " Thus ", I wrote in 1955, " in
seeking to interpret Mithraism against the background of these ' devil-worshippers', we run the risk
of seeking to explain the unknown from the unknown. It is, however, legitimate ", I added, " to see
in the Mandaeans and YezTdisof Iraq and in the Ahl i Haqq of Kurdistanremote survivorsof precisely
such a religion. It is true that the Ahl i Haqq texts appear in Shl'a, or more precisely 'All-Ildhl guise,
but the pagan substructurestill shows clearly through."
This hunch that light might one day be thrown both on what the Zoroastrians call " demon-
worship " and on Mithraism which seemed to be a Western offshoot of it, has recently been confirmed
in a quite extraordinary way, for I now have in my rooms in Oxford an enormous work which can
only be described as a popular Epic and which, so far as I know, has never before been written down.
It originates in Luristan.
Just how this remarkable work came into my hands is so peculiar and so full of coincidence that I
must recount it in some detail. The story begins at the end of the last war when I was working in the
British Embassyin Tehran and when, to my immense regret now, my thoughts were no longer directed
towards Zoroastrianism,let alone to the folklore of Luristin, of which I in any case knew nothing and
in which at that time I had no interest.
When the British and American armies left Iran a whole mass of servants and menial workerswere
temporarily thrown out of work, and their former employers naturally tried to find jobs for them with
those of their compatriots who remained in Iran. One such person came my way, and although I did
not really have any employment to offer, so remarkablewas he that I took him on as an extra houseboy.
In appearance there was nothing extraordinaryabout him. He came from a village called Raykhan
in southern Luristan. Throughout the war he had taken on odd jobs with American or British units
in Tehran, but he never seemed to stay long as he had often to return to Luristin to help his family
out there with what money he had earned in the capital. What, however, distinguished him from the
vast majority of his own kind-for, it must be remembered, he came from a very poor peasant family-
was that not only was he wholly literate in Persian, but in the course of the war years he had become
literate in English too. I do not mean that he had picked up a word or two in his day-to-day dealings
with the Americans and British; no, he had painstakingly taught himself the language with practically
no assistance from outside. And this was not all. When he came to my notice he was engaged in
writing what appeared to be a very long novel in English, and he had already written some ioo,ooo
words.
ZOROASTRIAN SURVIVALS IN IRANIAN FOLKLORE 89
Now, one might have supposed that with these astonishing linguistic achievements to his credit,
he might have sought a clerical job, but he never did. On the contrary, he had a strong aversion to
clerical work of any kind, and an even stronger one for the kind of person normally employed on this
type of work. Being very much of the earth, he deeply mistrusted the townsman, and this made him
somewhat anti-social and incapable of co-operating with others who were on the surfaceso much more
" polished " than himself. Of his personal appearance he took no care whatever, and this made it
extremely difficult to fit him in. In fact he only stayed with me about six weeks and then simply
vanished. I have never seen him again.
During this short time, however, he did occasionally consult me about his " novel ". In English it
was called " Irradiant " (the Persian, as I have subsequently learnt, was nir-afgan)which was the
hero's name. Another prominent character in the book had the evocative name of " Chandelier "
(here again we happen to know that the original Persian was chehel-cherdgh). The basis of the story, I
imagined (correctly), must derive from folklore, and the names certainly suggested an ultimately
Zoroastrianorigin-some version, that is, of a struggle between the powers of light and the powers of
darkness. However, the author, 'Ali Mirdrakvandi, for such was his name, disappeared, taking the
unfinished manuscript with him, and I thought no more about it.
Fortunately, a former employer and friend of Mirdrakvandihad been more farsighted than myself.
This was Mr. J. F. B. Hemming, now resident in Cornwall, who had been in touch with him for much
of the war. Mirdrakvandiwas literally obsessed with the idea of learning English, and Mr. Hemming
used to correct the letters he sent to him from time to time. These became longer and longer, so that
Mr. Hemming finally asked him whether he didn't know a story he could write for him in English.
He replied, Yes, he did know one story. This was Irradiant,and by the time Mr. Hemming left Iran
less than half the story had been actually written. Arrangements, however, were made by which the
story was to be sent on in instalments to England. In the end the book was completed and Mr.
Hemming found himself with the colossal manuscript of nearly 400,000 words, not knowing what, if
anything, could be done with it. With the paper shortage prevailing after the war plainly the publica-
tion of so immense a work was out of the question; so it had to be put away in cold storage. Meanwhile
he continued to correspond with Mirdrakvandi, but no letter has been received from him since 1949.
Whether he is still alive we do not know, and this is, of course, one of the things I should still like to
ascertain.
Here the story might have ended, but in the autumn of 1963 Mr. Hemming again bethought
himself of the mammoth manuscript in his charge, and started to make enquiries at the London School
of Oriental and African Studies as to whether this material had any academic interest; and so in due
course I received a letter from him. I was immediately interested, first because I too had known Ali
Mirdrakvandiat first hand, and secondly because I thought that Irradiantmight contain material which
would help to illumine some of the knottier Zoroastrian problems. I confess that I was not over-
optimistic; and the first instalment I received seemed to me no more than a very good and extra-
ordinarily imaginative fairy-tale with very little religious significance. I had hoped for something along
the lines of the Ahl i Hlaqqtales published by Ivanow, and I was disappointed that Irradiantor Nir-afgan
contained no obviously religious myth as the Kurdish tales did. Nar-afgan,despite his name, was no
incarnation of the Sun-god as are the heroes of the Ahl i HIaqqtales, but simply the son of very poor
and very aged parents in the best fairy-tale tradition.
When I reached Book II, however, I began to rub my eyes, for the first words I read were these:
The Lionish-God was sitting on his throne and his crown on his head. His orb was sitting in his left hand.
All the Prophets of high rank were sitting behind him, every one in his own place.
Well, this certainly seemed interesting. In 1955 I and Professor Duchesne-Guillemin had suggested
that the prototype of the lion-headed god in Mithraism was the Zoroastrian Ahriman, and here I had
stumbled into a " Lionish-God sitting on his throne and his crown on his head ". Surely, I thought,
this must be Ahriman himself surviving in a folk-tale.
Before proceeding any further I must say a few words about the setting of the story. In Book I we
have so far heard nothing about Lionish God: all we know is that there are two religions practised
in the country in which Irradiant was born: these are called respectively" deists " or " true-believers"
on the one hand and " heathens " on the other. In Persian this would presumably beyazddn-parastdn
or mo'menin on the one hand and kofdfror kdfirdnon the other. All this, of course, might very well be
Moslem, and the " heathens " might represent any non-Moslem or pre-Moslem sect; for so far we
have been told very little about the beliefs of either religion. We are, however, told that the
" heathens " are also worshippers of Satan, and this puts us in mind of the YezIdIspopularly called
" devil-worshippers" by their enemies. Not very much is known about their beliefs except that they
pay especial honour to a " Peacock Angel " or " Peacock of the Angels " whom their enemies identify
with Satan and who is most beautiful.
In Irradiant,at the end of the first of the many wars of which this Epic tells, when the unbelievers
have been conquered, most of the vanquished submit and agree to give up the worship of Satan and
to turn to the worship of the true God who dwells in heaven. One very old man, however, refuses.
" 'Why you don't believe in God who is in Heaven when all your fellows have done?' asked the king.
'My fellows are foolish but I'm not, I have seen the Satan with my eyes, he is more beautiful than
Irradiant. He can be seen, but your God who is in Heaven can't be seen'." This myth is certainly of
Semitic origin-Satan being Lucifer, the " bringer of light " whose fall is occasioned by his refusal to
serve God. In Mohammadan tradition Satan is sometimes spoken of as having been designated to rule
the lowest heaven, and he was only deprived of this dignity when he refused to bow down to Adam.
Worship of a most beautiful Satan is thus easily explained from the Mohammadan tradition itself.
Satan is a Semitic devil with nothing Iranian or Zoroastrianabout him. In Book II, however, we come
to know Lionish God, who, as we shall see, is almost certainly a survival of the Iranian devil, Ahriman;
and it is somewhat surprising,then, that we are told that Satan and Lionish God are in fact brothers.
This is, however, the way religious syncretism works: old ideas are dressed up in new forms and the
most surprisingidentificationstake place. Beforewe try to explain this surprisingconjunction, however,
we must return to the plot of the story.
Irradiant is born of very aged and very poor parents who are true-believers, and they live in a
predominantly heathen country whose king is a heathen. They are persecuted and imprisoned, but
Irradiant escapes and, after a long series of adventures, he overthrowsand kills the king and makes his
father king in his place. Before doing this, however, he overthrowsthe king of a neighbouring country
who becomes a true-believer, destroysthe king of a third heathen country and makes an " inn-keeper"
who had befriended him and who is himself a true-believer, king, and saves what at this stage of the
story is the only country of true-believersfrom an enchantment which had literally paralysed its queen
and all her subjects. With these allies he overthrowsthe king who had persecutedhis parents and makes
his own father king in his place. At this point, one would have thought, the story would naturally
come to an end. It is, however, only the prelude to a far more titanic struggle between Irradiant and
his allies on the one hand and Lionish God of whose very existence we were ignorant throughout
Book I on the other.
Book II, as we have seen, opens with Lionish God sitting on his throne with his crown upon his
head. This is the first we have heard of Lionish God, and though, in the first book, we have met with
all manner of supernatural creatures--demons, hags, satyrs and so on-none of these is ever referred
to as a god. Lionish God, on the other hand, is repeatedly called " god ", and he refers to himself as
the Creator. Moreover, he is surrounded by what appears to be an angelic court; for we read on:
Gabriel prostrated himself before Lionish God, and he said, " Thou certainly knowest [that] who is
standing outside thy high palace." " Yes, I know who he is, but I like you to tell me ", replied Lionish God.
Now, there are two points worth noticing here. First, what is the Angel Gabriel doing in the
company of Lionish God ? And secondly, why does Lionish God who is believed to be omniscient,
still insist on being told who is outside the palace ? The answer to the second question is that he has
to ask because he is not really omniscient, and only believes himself to be so. The significance of this
will become clear later. The presence of Gabriel presents further problems, the answers to which is
not plain.
Lionish God, as I hope to show, is really related to the lion-headed deity of Mithraism and is there-
fore the lineal descendant of the Zoroastrian Ahriman. Does this mean that the original authors of
this Epic wished thereby to identify their own Ahriman with the God of the conquering Moslems ?
It is very hard to say since there are obviously level upon level of interpolation and addition within the
main story, and one of these at least is Moslem, since the " true-believers" give the Koranic account
of Satan's refusal to pay homage to Adam, and later in the book the " true " Gabriel turns up in the
presence of Lionish God's rival, " Heavenly God ".
To return to the second point, however. Lionish God claims to be omniscient, but in fact he knows
very little, even of what is going on in his own kingdom. Similarly the Zoroastrian Ahriman is
described as a-ddn," without knowledge ", and as duldkds," evilly conscious "; he deceives himself
(Dinkart,ed. Madan, 585.8) into believing that he is omnipotent and omniscient. So too in Irradiant
the fall of Lionish God is largely due to the gradual realization among his subjects that he is in fact
neither omniscient nor omnipotent. These resemblancesmay not amount to very much, but there are
further resemblanceswhich are very striking indeed.
In Irradiantthere are two gods, the true one-Heavenly God-who is the creator of heaven and
earth and dwells in heaven and is invisible, and the false one-Lionish God-whose realm is this earth,
who believes himself to be omnipotent and omniscient, and who claims to be creator of the earth but
not of heaven. In the Zoroastriancreation myth too we have two gods-Ohrmazd who dwells in the
lights on high, and Ahriman who dwells in the darknessin the depths. The chief difference, of course,
betwen the two accounts is that the ZoroastrianAhriman dwells in eternal darknesswhile Lionish God
is representedas being an earthly king. Yet I think that there is more to it than this; for it is quite clear
that Irradiantreflects a form of Zoroastrianismthat is by no means orthodox-a form that allowed
very much more power to Ahriman than is allowed to him either in the Avesta or in the Pahlavi books.
This appears to have been the case in Mithraism too, for on many of the statues of the Mithraic lion-
headed deity the Signs of the Zodiac are embossed, and almost invariably this sinister deity holds a
key in each hand. The symbolism of this appears to be that this god controls the fate of the world
through the heavenly bodies and that he holds the keys of heaven too. He is, then, a malign power
that keeps the soul imprisoned in the world and prevents it from rising up to heaven. Ahriman then,
in the Mithraic system, is the prince of this world.
This idea is not unknown in other sources, for we read in the Moslem heresiographerShahristdnI
(Cureton, p. 183) that according to one sect of the Zoroastrians,the Zurvanites, Ahriman did in fact
" master the world " and that for a time Ohrmazd had no power against him. Again according to the
Armenian Christian polemist, Eznik of Kolb, Ahriman rules the world for nine thousandyears, while
Ohrmazd rules above him, presumablyin heaven: the one is king in time, the other in eternity (Venice
edition, p. 139). In the Pahlavi sources themselves a measure of earthly power is granted to Ahriman,
though he never really has a chance of winning. According to the Bundahishn:
Ohrmazdknewin his omnisciencethat withinthesenine thousandyearsthreethousandwouldpassentirely
accordingthe will of Ohrmazd,threethousandwouldpassaccordingto the will of bothOhrmazdand Ahriman,
and that in the last battle the DestructiveSpirit would be made powerlessand that he himselfwould save
creationfromaggression(p. 7).
This pattern is precisely what we find in Irradiant.Before passing on to that, however, we must
describe the original state of existence as it is found in Zoroastrianmythology and see how oddly this
same situation reappears in the form of a fairy-tale in Irradiant. In both the scene is dominated by two
rival gods, the one good and the other evil. The situation in the Zoroastrian myth is described by the
Bundahishnin this way:
Ohrmazd was on high in omniscience and goodness; for Infinite Time he was ever in the light. The light
is the space and place of Ohrmazd: some call it the Endless Light. Omniscience and goodness are the totality
of Ohrmazd ....
Ahriman, slow in knowledge, whose will is to smite, was deep down in the darkness: [he was] and is, yet
will not be. The will to smite is his all, and darkness is his place: some call it the Endless Darkness.
Similarly in Irradiant Heavenly God is depicted as dwelling above in heaven, Lionish God, like the
Mithraic rather than the Zoroastrian Ahriman, holds sway here below on earth. Further just as
Ahriman is " slow in knowledge ", so is Lionish God extremely badly informed: he lays claim to
omniscience, yet always has to ask what is going on. He knows little, and what little he knows, he
knows too late. Again, like Ohrmazd, Heavenly God " was and is and evermore shall be ", whereas
Lionish God " was and is, yet shall not be ", for he is slain by Irradiant at the end of the story with his
own sword. Similarly in the popular version of the destruction of Ahriman we are told that they
dragged him outside the sky and cut off his head (Aflydtkdri Zdmdsaik, ed. Messina, 14.17) with his
own sword (Mortezd Rdz4, ed. Eqbal, Tehran, I313, p.
I3).
Ahriman, of course, being eternal in time past, believes himself also to be eternal in time future,
and this view is shared by Lionish God in Irradiant; for his daughter who bears the astonishing name
of Twinkling Starlet, says of him: " My father has been reigning for the past Ioo years; he will reign
forever, and he will never die." So far the resemblances are astonishingly close. Let us see how the
Zoroastrian myth goes on:
Ohrmazd in his omniscience knew that Ahriman existed, that he would attack and, since his will is envy,
would mingle with him; and from the beginning to the end [he knew] with what and how many instruments
he would accomplish his purpose. In ideal form he fashioned forth such creation as was needful.
Ahriman, ever slow to know, was unaware of the existence of Ohrmazd. Then he rose up from the depths
and went to the border from whence the lights are seen. When he saw the light of Ohrmazd intangible, he
rushed forward. Because his will is to smite and his substance is envy, he made haste to destroy it. Seeing
valour and supremacy superior to his own, he fled back to the darkness and fashioned many demons, a creation
destructive and meet for battle.
Ahriman, then, once he comes to know of Ohrmazd's existence, sets out to destroy him, but before
doing so he makes a preliminary reconnaissance at the borders of Ohrmazd's heavenly realm which,
it should be noted, is intangible. This too is faithfully reflected in Irradiant. There it is not indeed
explicitly stated that Lionish God does not know of the existence of Heavenly God since in the fairy-
tale the episode does not take place at the beginning of time, but the Zoroastrian story of the two gods
preparing their instruments for the battle does re-appear, for Lionish God, after his attack on heaven
has failed, says: " Heavenly God had set himself against me from old days and also he had prepared
all the instruments of war on me ". This recalls the Bundahishnphrase: " In ideal form he fashioned
forth such creation as was needful."
Let us return to the Bundahishnto see how the situation between the two gods,.develops there. Each
has now created a spiritual armament with which to combat the other, but the difference between
the two is that whereas Ahriman is bent on destroying Ohrmazd and his whole creation, Ohrmazd,
in his goodness, desires only peace. And so:
Ohrmazd, knowing in what manner the end would be, offered peace to Ahriman, saying; " O Ahriman,
bring aid to my creation and give it praise that in reward therefor thou mayest be deathless and unageing,
uncorrupting and undecaying. And the reason is this that if thou dost not provoke a battle, thou shalt not
thyself be powerless, and to both of us there shall be benefit abounding. But Ahriman cried out: " I will not
bring aid to thy creation nor will I give it praise, but I shall destroy thee and thy creation for ever and ever:
yea, I shall incline all thy creatures to hatred of thee and love of me." And the interpretation thereof is this,
that he thought Ohrmazd was helpless against him, and that therefor did he offer peace. He accepted not but
offered threats. And Ohrmazd said: " Thou canst not, O Ahriman, accomplish all, nor canst thou bring it
about that my creation should not return to my possession."
All this reappears in closely parallel form in Irradiant. Lionish God attacks heaven on two occasions.
The first attack seems to correspond to the preliminary reconnaissance of the kingdom of light by
Ahriman to which we have already referred. God's spiritual creation, as we have seen, is intangible,
and this too emerges from Irradiant. As Lionish God prepares his attack, a false friend urges him on
in these words:
"Thou surely wilt destroy the Heavenly God and conquer Heaven if thou settest thy armies against him,
for the Heavenly God has no armies. He hath only several bands of angels. The angels have no armour, nor
can they fight. They can only worship their God and praise him."
This exactly corresponds to Ahriman's belief that " Ohrmazd was helpless against him, and that
therefor did he offer peace ". Lionish God's treacherous adviser, however, failed to point out that
Heavenly God's creatures in heaven were spiritual beings, and therefore, as the Bundahishntoo has it,
" intangible ". This is demonstrated in the most vivid way when the attack actually takes place:
They went to heaven with all speed. Ten hours passed. They reached a place where they could not see
the earth any more, either by their telescope (sic) or by the magnifier. Twenty-five hours passed. They reached
the air where they could see the sun no more, nor could they see the moon either, or the stars. The Lionish God
was exceedingly angry. His commanders said to him: " Thy godly knowledge is much greater than is any of
ours (Text: 'is much over all of us ', sc. az hamehmd bdldtarast), but we think that the heaven has been taken
away and the heavenly God has escaped himself." " I think so ", replied the Lionish God and his angriness
increased from minute to minute,
Then Heavenly God said to heaven: " Go down where my creatures may reach thee and see thee." So
the Heaven came down by the power of Heavenly God.
" O that is heaven ", cried all the troops.
A furious attack on heaven is now unleashed. Arrows pour into heaven from all directions, but
there seems to be no one there. So:
The Commanders said to the Lionish God: " We think that the heavenly God has eloped(!) and the
heaven has been evacuated, for we have not seen any angel living or being killed, although we have entered
the heaven by about five miles." . . . All the angels began to laugh.
And they besought Heavenly God that they might be permitted to hurl the aggressor out, but
Heavenly God replied: " Nay, nay, No, I don't allow you to destroy them; let them be happy, let
them carry on their business and let them bully(!) me, for they don't understand." This surely is the
Zoroastrian Ohrmazd speaking, the God of whom the Minik i Khrat (28) says: " Ohrmazd, the Lord,
is the most patient; for for nine thousand years he sees Ahriman [inflict] misery on his creatures, yet
he does not smite him except with justice and patiently."
Like Ahriman's preliminary reconnaissance Lionish God's first attack on heaven comes to nothing,
but for different reasons. Ahriman returns to the darkness because he realizes he is not yet strong
enough to attack, Lionish God returns because there is no solid food to eat in heaven and because the
provisions he had brought with him turn into camphor ! In neither case is anything effective done.
It is at this stage of the Zoroastrian myth that Ohrmazd offers peace to Ahriman, and the same
happens in Irradiant. Lionish God returns from heaven with a captive lion who is really Heavenly God's
messenger. This messenger is imprisoned, but Lionish God allows his daughter, Twinkling Starlet, to
visit him, and he tells her about Heavenly God, his power, and his peaceful ways. So she duly reports
back to her father and says:
Heavenly God is stronger than the other creators and has authority all over the world. . . . But Heavenly
God is a peaceful creator, and he likes the other creators, albeit he is able to destroy all other creators ere long.
He says that Heavenly God never wishes to persecute any creature, nor any creator at all without any cause.
My father and my creator, my original desire is that thou wouldst make this poor lion free, and forgettest about
the heavenly God and heaven. My father, make a peace between thee and Heavenly God, and let this poor
lion go, I pray thee, I am sure Heavenly God will send many gifts for thee, if thou wilt make a peace, for
heavenly God is surely wilful of the peace.
Here again the correspondence with the Zoroastrian sources is extraordinary. Heavenly God offers
peace as in the Bundahishn,and in addition he offers gifts-the gifts being, according to the Bundahishn,
immortality and " benefit abounding ". The offer of peace is, however, rejected, and Ahriman
threatens either to destroy Ohrmazd and his creation or to cause his creation to love him and to hate
Ohrmazd. So too in IrradiantLionish God issues dire threats against Heavenly God (I keep the strange
English of the original to give you some idea of the curious flavour of the book). This is what he writes:
Verily I say unto you, my greatest and highest wrath has been spread into the air, it is floating on air, on
earth, and upon where no one knows but myself. It shall not cease, unless you be murdered and your heaven
be conquered. I shall excuse you no more, neither shall you reign up in heaven any more, nor shall another
creator live any more, but I, who am called " Excellence Lionish God ".
Againjust as Ahrimanclaimsthat he will causeOhrmazd'screaturesto hate theircreator,so is it

said of LionishGod that he " has causedthe creatureson earthto forgettheiroriginalCreatorwho is
HeavenlyGod"; he " has set the creatureson earth againsttheir principalCreatorwho is Heavenly
God ". The exactitudeof theseparallellismsis reallyquite astonishing.
The next episodein the Bundahishn is the compactwhich Ohrmazdand Ahrimanmake together
according to which the conflict will be limited to nine thousand years. In the words of the Bundahishn:
Ohrmazdsaid to Ahriman: " Fix a time so that by this pact we may extend the battle for nine thousand
years." For he knew that by fixing a time in this wise Ahrimanwould be made powerless. Then Ahriman,
not seeingthe end, agreedto that treaty,just as two men who fighta duel fix a term[saying]," Let us on such
a day do battle till night falls."
Or in the words of the Minoki Khrat:
For nine thousandyears [Ahriman]made a treaty with Ohrmazd through infinite Time and till it is
completed no one can change it or make it different. And when nine thousandyears have fully elapsed,
Ahrimanwill be made powerless.
This " treaty " is paralleled in Irradianttoo though the details do not agree. After the first attack
on heaven Lionish God writes a letter to Heavenly God in which he threatens to destroy him. And his
letter is followed by an agreement signed by the " Creator of Earth, Excellence Lionish God ". It has
ten articles none of which, however, exactly correspond to the much simpler Zoroastrian account.
The agreement starts in this way:
AGREEMENT. I-I shallagree: The war betweenme and HeavenlyGod shall continueuntil Heavenly
God be destroyedand the originatorof all becomesone, who I am. 2-There shall never be peace between
me and HeavenlyGod.
He further promises to destroy Heavenly God and to burn up all who continue to worship him.
With Heavenly God thus disposed of, " My brother devil shall be the judge on the judgment day-
Io-Heavenly God shall never be taken out from Hell, after he has been cast down into it."
Admittedly the terms of the treaty are not the same in the two accounts, but the fact that the treaty
reappearsat all amounts to additional proof that this strange Epic which has survived purely by chance
is really based on the Zoroastrianmyth of the conflict between Ohrmazd and Ahriman, which probably
dates back at least to the fourth century B.c. Every phase of the myth duly reappearsin the story from
Lurist~n.
Beforepassing on to the next episode it is worth pointing out that Lionish God, though he claims to
be a creator, never claims to have created anything but the earthand all that it contains: he is creator
of what is now called the dunyd; he is not nor does he claim to be the creator of the 'dlamor universe.
This may well have been the belief of the so-called " demon-worshippers" and of the Roman Mithraists
as we shall see in our next article.
In the BundahishnOhrmazd and Ahriman have now agreed to limit the battle to nine thousand
years. Ahriman now attacks again, and is again repulsed:
Then Ohrmazdchantedthe Ahunvar ...: and he showedto Ahrimanhis own final victory,the powerless-
ness of Ahriman,the destructionof the demons, the resurrection,the Final Body, and the freedomof all
creation from all aggressionfor ever and ever. When Ahriman beheld his own powerlessnessand the destruction
of the demons, he was laid low, swooned, and fell back into the darkness. . . . Unable to do harm to the
creatures of Ohrmazd for three thousand years Ahriman lay crushed.
This second defeat of Ahriman, surely enough, reappears in Irradiant. Lionish God collects a
massive army which he transports to heaven on demons. He reaches what the text calls the " resem-
blance of heaven " at midnight; but suddenly " a voice came from heaven saying, ' O, Lionish God,
fear Heavenly God and take your troops back on earth, otherwise, you will get trouble.' " Lionish
God disregards the voice and sends some of his troops towards the sun. " Suddenly the same voice
came from heaven to Lionish God saying, '0O, Lionish God, you will be faced with danger, if you
don't take your armies back on earth.' " Again Lionish God pays no attention and bids his com-
manders attack. His words to them are worth quoting if only to give you some idea of the peculiar but
charming English in which this amazing Epic happens to have survived:
" I said [says Lionish God] don't listen to that bad voice; attack from that direction, get on the ball."
[Then] the voice came from heaven thrice [so] loud and strong. .. . The voice said to Lionish God wrath-
fully, " This is my last voice. Take your armies back on earth ; fear your God who has given you authority
on earth."
Lionish God, however, is undeterred, and he and his troops rain arrows into heaven. Then,
After they had shot for fifteen minutes, suddenly a little black piece of cloud came over the armies and it
begun to thunder quickly. After the cloud had thundered for one minute, suddenly one thunderbolt came out
among the thunders and it was explosion. The voice of the explosion of the thunderbolt was so offensive and
so strong and so light that the distance between heaven and earth had been lighted like day time. All the
armies had been fainted, some had been died and some had been deaf. ... All the armies began to fall [off]
coming down from heaven to earth. But the part of Lionish God's troops who had gone to the direction
of sun, they were yet continuing their....
attacks on heaven from the direction of sun. Suddenly a very little star
came out from the sun and it was burst, after it had entered among [that] part of [the] troops. A kind of fire
came out from the small star. That kind of star was so vigorous that all [that] part of the troops had been
burnt up during five minutes. ... Lionish God's armies reached a hundred miles far from earth during their
fainting.
Here the resemblance between the two accounts is quite astonishing. In the BundahishnOhrmazd
causes Ahriman to lose consciousness by chanting the Ahuna Vairya prayer. Similarly in Irradiant
Heavenly God warns Lionish God three times and his voice is followed by thunder and lightning which
cause Lionish God to lose consciousness and fall down to earth. The " fainting " and the " falling "
could almost be a literal translation of the Pahlavi words sturt ut abj6 used in the Bundahishn,so exactly
do the two accounts correspond. Moreover, the Ahuna Vairya prayer itself is in three parts, each
comprising seven words, and, according to the Bundahishn,this is the effect it has:
When one third thereof is recited, Ahriman shudders for fear; when two thirds are recited, he falls on his
knees; when the prayer is finished he is powerless.
Thus the three voices mentioned in Irradiant again reflect an ancient Zoroastrian tradition.
In the Bundahishn account Ahriman remains unconscious for three thousand years. During this
period Ohrmazd creates the material world as a bulwark against Ahriman when he again attacks.
When this third attack at last comes it is devastatingly effective, and Ahriman succeeds in defiling
everything Ohrmazd has created, first the sky, then the waters, then the plants, the prototypes of the
animal kingdom and of man, and finally fire. He has achieved what appears to be a complete victory,
and he exultantly exclaims:
Perfect is my victory: for I have rent the sky, I have befouled it with murk and darkness, I have made it
my stronghold. I have befouled the waters, pierced open the earth and defiled it with darkness. I have dried
up the plants, and brought death to the Bull, sickness to Gay6mart. . .. I have seized the kingdom. On the
side of Ohrmazd none remains to do battle except only man; and man, isolated and alone, what can he do ?
(Zdtspram,2.18).
In his first war against the material creation, then, Ahriman wins a crushing victory. How do
matters stand in Irradiant ? After his second defeat which sent him swooning back to earth, Lionish
God is utterly dejected, not knowing what to do. One night he dreams, and in his dream " suddenly
he saw a very beautiful young-man come to him. Lionish God asked him,' Who are you, although I
know you.' The young-man replied,' I am thy brother Devil and have come to show thee how givest
a blow to Heavenly God.' " The Devil then goes on to tell him that he can never conquer heaven or
kill Heavenly God, and he counsels him to concentrate his efforts on destroying the true-believers.
This episode is interesting for the Devil here fills the r61e of Ohrmazd in the Bundahishn; for in
reciting the Ahuna Vauryaprayer Ohrmazd " showed Ahriman his own final victory, the powerlessness
of Ahriman, the destruction of the demons ", and so on. In Irradiantit is the Devil who shows Lionish
God that he cannot hope to conquer heaven or destroy his heavenly rival. The most that he can hope
to do is to destroy or convert the believersin Heavenly God. How and why it is the Devil who gives this
truthful advice I shall try to explain in my next article. Suffice it to say that Lionish God follows the
Devil's advice, and, just as Ahriman does in the Zoroastrian legend, he wins an instantaneous and
crushing victory. Two of the four countries which worship Heavenly God are instantly overrun; their
kings, of whom Irradiant's father is one, are slain, the population is either slaughtered or converted
back to the worship of Lionish God and his brother, the Devil, the countrysideis pillaged and wrecked,
and the cities are demolished. The wreckage is complete. All this again tallies with the Bundahishn
account and with the character of Ahriman " whose will is to smite and whose substance is envy ".
In both accounts the Evil One's victory on earth, in the material world, is instant and apparently
complete; but in both accounts it is really only the beginning of the end; and the counter-attack,
when it comes, is relentless. As the Bundahishn says:
This too did Ohrmazdknow in his omniscience,that within these nine thousandyears three thousand
would passentirelyaccordingto the will of Ohrmazd,threethousandin mixturewould passaccordingto the
will of both Ohrmazdand Ahriman,and that in the last battle Ahrimanwould be made powerlessand that
he himselfwould save creationfrom aggression.
This chronology of the Bundahishn which is repeated throughout the Pahlavi texts does not appear
in Irradiantexcept in one passage, but this is a crucial one. After Lionish God has crushed two of the
kingdoms of the true-believers and slain Irradiant's father, there is a counter-attack in which
Chandelier, not Irradiant, is the commander. The forces of Lionish God are expelled, and a great rite
is celebrated commemorating the creation-a rite lasting six days and called in English the " general
origination days ". On reaching this point in the manuscript I thought that here at last we were going
to be told the secret doctrines of whatever sect Ali Mirdrakvandibelonged to. I was, however, bitterly
disappointed: forty-two pages had been left blank with only this note to explain the lacuna:
Notice: It is very difficultto write about what the true believersdid duringSunday,Monday,Tuesday,
Wednesday,and Thursday.
Yet despite this maddening lacuna,we do learn that for three thousand years men will forget to
prostrate themselves before Heavenly God-this surely a dim memory of those three thousand years
which " pass according to the will of both Ohrmazd and Ahriman ".
I hope that I have said enough to convince you that there exists in the folklore of Luristan an Epic
which, in its oldest level, is based on the Zoroastrianreligious myth of the conflict between Ohrmazd
and Ahriman, God and the Devil. The resemblances are too many and too exact to be fortuitous.
97
ARGHIYAN1
The area of Jdjarm in western Khur sdn
By Brian Spooner
Introduction
The extreme west of Khurds.n, whether we think of the present ustdnor the historical province, has
never contained a large city. Between Sabzavar, the Gurgan Plain and Bastim (or Shdhrid) has always
been relatively empty border country between Khurdsan and the central provinces. In the north are
the mountains, which separate the plateau from the Qara Qum, and the Atrak corridor. In the south
lies the Great KavIr. But between these stretches a long, narrow plain, which because of its position
has naturally formed throughout its history a channel for east-west traffic. The routes through this
plain have depended naturally on the position and prosperity and decline of the cities they serve
outside it. The plain itself has never contained anything approaching the size of a provincial capital,
and the settlements which it does contain have shared the vicissitudes of the cities served by the roads
which pass through them.
The main names in this plain are reasonably well known: Juvain, Isfardyin and Ja-jarm. The first
two are the names of regions, although the second is now the name of the main town in its region, which
is a not unusual development.2 It is thereforeunusual that the town of Jajarm (according to Sani'ud'-
Dauleh in the Matla'u'sh-Shams, I301 A.H., a corrupt form of Jd-i garm-" the hot place ") should
have remainedJajarm, and the old name of the region-Arghiyan, often found in pre-Mongol writings,
should have died out, for the writer knows of no mention of it since Rashldu'd-DIn (1306-I i).3 How-
ever, as there is no other name which implies the region, I have retained it in this article.
The plain has always formed a hinterlandof whichever of the surrounding cities has been most
flourishing. For example, it was dependent on NIshatpir in the first five centuries of Islam, and on
Sabzavar under the Sarbadar dynasty. At present, it is divided between Sabzavar, ShThriid and
Bujnurd.
From a modern study of the area it would appear that the most likely reason for there never having
been a large centre of population in the plain, particularly in Arghiyin, is lack of water. If the history
of Persia is the history of areas, it is relevant to divide the areas into independent and dependent.
Cities such as NIshdpiir or Gurgan, though the size of their respective cities has varied greatly, have
always retained a sufficientpull over the surroundingcountryside to be regarded as relatively indepen-
dent, local, economic and political units; whereas our plain, lacking the water supply for a large city
and deriving major economic benefit from long-distance traffic, must always be dependent on a neigh-
bouring independent area.3a
Sources for the history of the plain are for the most part scrappy and vague. There are many
references, but most of them inform us simply (in the histories) that so-and-so passed through, or (in
the geographies) give a subjective impression that such-and-such a village is prosperous, or such-and-
such an area has so many villages-when we know neither the writer's criterion of prosperity nor the
2 Cf. GunAbid for
1 The substance of this article formed part of a lecture delivered Jfymand, Darreh Gaz for MuhammadTbdd,
at the British Institute of Persian Studies in Tehran in Decem- Sirjin for Sa'dIdbad, JIruft for Sabzavaran, and even Khurisan
ber 1962. The purpose of the lecture was to demonstrate how for Mashhad in modern usage.
scholars from different disciplines working together in the s Historyof GhazanKhan, ed. Karl Jahn, E. J. W. Gibb Memorial
field and the library could contribute towards the knowledge New Series XIV, 1940, pp. 23, 28.
and understanding of an area-an ecological unit. The reason 3a Cf. The areas of Sar-i Kavir (Rishm and Husaindn) South of
for the choice of the particular region treated in this article is DAmghin, and Biydbinak (Khfir and Jandaq) North East of
due simply to the writer's familiarity with it. Among the NA'in which have been dependent administratively at various
several people who have contributed to discussions on the ideas times on each of the cities which border on the western half of
here presented I should like in particular to thank Mr. R. M. the great Kavir: Yazd, Ni'in, Tehrdn, Simnin, Shahrfid.
Rehder.
extent of the area which contained that number of villages. It is true that a close critical study and
collation of all these references might yield more evidence for the economic condition and political
dependence of the plain at certain periods, but it is unlikely that such evidence would be definitive,
and the aim of this article is simply to outline general trends of prosperity and decline and ecological
dependence, and to point out features which may prove typical in the historical ecology of Persia.
The historical sources cited are thereforeconfined to those with more direct relevance to the condition
of the plain. It is noteworthy that the length of referencesgenerally increasesas the degree of prosperity
apparently declines, but this is most likely due to the fact that writers in the first centuries of Islam
treated the world, whereas in the nineteenth century they were dealing with only a very much
diminished Iran.
Geographical
The plain stretches in a wide arc from in the west to within Ioo kilometres of Nlshdpiir in
the east. It is nearly 200 miles long and something
Bast.m under forty miles across at its widest point. It falls
traditionally into four distinct divisions separated by natural features. These natural features have
been regarded as boundaries throughout history and are the basis of present-day administrative
divisions. The western end of the plain once centred on Bastam and belonged to the mediaeval province
of Quimis. Today it belongs to the shahristdn (sub-province)of Shahrtidwhich is part of the independent
governorship (farmdnddri-i kull) of Simnin. It is the most desert and least important part of the plain,
containing only the bakhshof Mayamay, which consists of Mayamay itself under the mountain of the
same name and the Kaldt-hd-a group of small villages--down in the plain. This section of the plain
drains eastwardsand either side of the line of drainage is a strip of treacheroussoft salt earth, such as is
normally referred to as " kavir", and by the local people-" lut ". The KMl-iShfir, for the most part
of the year sluggish, meagre and highly saline, flows from the north-eastcorner of the plain to the centre
where it turns south and cuts deep into the plain with salt flats extending up to half a mile on either
side of it. It collects the drainage from the other parts of the plain and aims straight for the KavIr
proper, at the north of which it passesunder the Pul-i Abrisham-the Bridge of Silk, which traditionally
divides Qfimis from Khurdsin. The present-day bridge appears quite new, but Curzon's picture of it
looks identical and he observes that it was built by Nadir Shth and restorednot long before he passed
over it in 1889. The Bridge is mentioned at the end of the fifteenth century in the History of Heratt.4
Today the new railway bridge over the Kdl-i Shfir seems to have usurped the name. Neither bridge is
any longer justified by the trade in silk, and it is interesting that Pul-i-db-i raushanis heard as an
alternative name.
Of the remainder of the plain the southern part is a long, comparatively narrow corridor known as
Juvain and famed in the middle ages for its fertility, its 400 villages, each with one or two qandtswhich
never failed.5 The corridor drains westwards into the KMl-iShir but there is no river bed to take the
surpluswater and at certain seasonsof the year a swamp forms at the lower end of the plain which cuts
off motorized communication between Jajarm and the railway. Juvain is the most fertile section of the
whole plain, and is historically the best known. It is traditionally a part of the old province of Baihaq
which lies on the other side of the Jughatdy mountains, and is today dependent on Sabzavar. The
name Juvain is (according to Ydqfit, 1224 A.D.) an arabized form of Griyan, which was the old name of
the district. The main town has been variously Az-dv1r, Furimad (which is strictly speaking not in
Juvain at all), and is now Jughatay.
North of the Juvain corridor and separated from it by a low ridge lies the plain of Isfardyln, also
very fertile and well known in particular for its fruit. The proper name of the main town is Miy~•nbad.
An earlier town on this site appears to have borne the name is at present an
Mihrajmn.6 IsfarayIn
independent shahristdnin the province of but until the visit of then prime minister IqbMl in
Khurismn,
1958, it belonged to the shahristdnof Bujnurd.
West of Isfar~yIn and north-west of Juvain in a bay in the mountains and commanding a pass to
5
4 Rauzdt-al Janndt fi Awsdf-i Madinat-i Herdt, University of Qazvini, Athdru'l-Bildd,Beirut, 196o, p. 352-
Tehran 1339, part 2, pp. 142, 145, 6
YRqfit, Mu'jamu'l-Bulddn,Beirut, iqyrr, vol. I, p. 177.
353-
Map of the Plain showiug Modern outes
and Old and New PlacV Names
o Ow4m
$*f laitwy Road Tradc laud owr 4000 ft
0 t0 50o too K S*
Ifasht -
Gunbad- i-Qibits
Ssan1
eNardin%
Garmeh .00S
1~*bit-i
kprp4
S- I
do b -lo
4 lop4
14
hA4
*agh2*0
)tFuti
ast~itn
shwlwMayamay
'AbbSiibid
Maz~inzi .
* l(AVRI.-
facing page 98.] Fi

lBtjnurd. -LOCAT ION
hhad
,' Tehran
iks* Miyinawd Qdcu

hSFAXRYINt
iv~r~-~ JUYNIU
N1
KHttRASAN
*Jugbatay
iimnad
Nish~pftr
Sabzavar
'BALHAOL
zg. I.
ARGHIYAN-THE AREA OF JAJARM IN WESTERN KHURISiN 99
Gurgdn and the north-west lies the smallest of the four divisions of the plain, isolated from the other
three by the pattern and the nature of the drainage of the whole plain. The main town is Jajarm,
which is the centre of a bakhshwhich stretches north-west up to the main northern road and the pass
which leads down on to the Gurgdn plain, and north-east past Sankhas about half way through the
mountains on the way to Bujnurd. This was the district of Arghiyvn, though it is not known how far it
extended northwardswhen the name was in use.
It is in this last division that I am primarily interested. A quick glance at the town today suggests
that it is now only a shadow of its former self, for it is surroundedby the remains of ruined walls. In its
present situation it stands on the edge of saline ground which slopes away very gently towards the
Kdl-i Shoir,about five miles away to the south-east. This circumstanceallows it to draw its water supply
from the north and west only. There are the ruins of four considerableforts or fortifiedvillas within the
area of the present town, one of which stands on a high steep-sided mound in the centre of the older
part of the town. An even more substantial fort known as Qal'eh-i Jalalu'd-Dln may be seen three
miles away to the north-west on an isolated hill which overlooks the entrance to the pass which leads
to NardIn and the Gurgdn plain. Jajarm in fact guarded two important ways of access to the Persian
plateau. When Persia's north-eastern border was less definite, or when the Turkoman were raiding,
this was an important consideration, but it is no longer so, and this shows us one reason for the decline
in the importance of the town.
About three-quarters of a mile to the south of Jajarm a long low mound stretches about two
kilometres in an east-west direction. It is locally known as Tappeh-iPahlavdnand yields mostly Islamic
pottery. Further south, and approximately two-and-a-half miles from the town lies another mound of
a more interesting nature: for it gives the appearance of a small high mound with a fortificationwall,
and a large proportion of its pottery is painted, chalcolithic, suggesting occupation of one period only,
probably in the fourth millennium B.c.7 The first of these mounds at present marksthe southern limit
of cultivation around Jajarm. The second is completely without vegetation and surroundedonly by
the sparsestdesert scrub, leaving no easy answer to the question as to how it once obtained a sufficient
water supply. The presence of these mounds suggests that the centre of the town has moved slowly
northwards away from the desert and towards the mountains throughout a fairly long history. How-
ever, this apparent progressnorthwardsof the salinity and the desert and the resultant decrease in the
amount of cultivable land aroundJajarm, although it is a natural processunder conditions of intensive
irrigation, provides no immediate answer to the problem of its decline, since there is still land far in
excess of the amount of water available for irrigation.
Other smaller Islamic mounds and graves spread over a large area of unwatered land attest the
prosperity quoted in some of the old travellers for the district of Arghiyvn.
Communication
Unfortunately any information about the region in prehistoric times will have to await scientific
archaelogical excavation. Although at the present time this enormous plain cannot boast a single road,
but only a few barely "jeepable " tracks, it used to carry a main west-east highway. Owing to the
pattern of motor road development in the last quarter century or so, the entire plain has become
suddenly isolated from the main arteriesof communication. The completion of the railway connection
to Mashhad in I958, which passes roughly through the centre of the plain was a step towards remedying
this situation. But the railway is no substitute for a road, and anyway only serves the Kalit-hi and
Juvain directly, while J.jarm is doubly cut off from it for some six months of the year by the swamp
at the entrance to Juvain, and the Kil-i Shair. It is interesting and I suggest typical generally of the
ecology of Persia that these four natural divisions look not across the open plain at each other, but, at
least more immediately, over to the other side of the mountains under which they shelter and to which
they owe their meagre water supply. Juvain looks to Sabzavar, Isfarayin to Bujnurd, Jaijarm to
Bujnurd and Gunbad-i Qtbis.8 Centres of plains on the plateau are often saline, waterless and some-
7 I am grateful to Mr. D. B. Stronach for this evaluation of the s Only recently, in the era of motorized transport, the pull of the
pottery I collected there. capital has greatly increased traffic from Isfariyln to Sabzavir,
and from Jijarm to
Shihrnid.
times treacherous; mountain ranges are invariably dissected by river courses which are passable for
most of the year. Modern administrative divisions are here and often drawn through the centres of
plains-not along ranges of mountains. The real line of demarcation in this area is the K|l-i Shir, a
perennial but hopelessly salt and useless water course-except for a few fresh springs near its source,
which however are not suitable for agricultural use. It flows through the middle of the plain and
separates in the east-west section of its course the Bujnurd region from the province of Baihaq, and,
when it turns south, Khurisdn from the west.
The earliest information available about routes in the area is from Ibn Khurdddbih (864 A.D.),
who with all the earlier itinerariesdescribesthe main west-east road as passing through Mazinan and
Sabzavar.9 This has probably always been the post route, and is, of course, slightly more direct. It is
attracted away from the plain by the richer region of Baihaq, which, since it would appear always to
have supported a centre somewhat bigger than anything in the plain to the north of it, compensated
for the long, exposed march (over 250 kilometres) over waterless desert from Bastam. Le Strange,
in his synthesis of the geographies, describes (without clear references) two routes from Bastam to
Nlshpaiir. " The more direct, the post road, lies along the edge of the desert, going through Sabzavir.
The longer caravan road is to the north, and curves through the great upland plain of Juvain which
is separatedfrom the Great Desert by a range of hills."10 In the middle of the eleventh century, Baihaqi
records that " Amir Mas'id proceeded from Nishpfir to Gurgin via IsfariyIn ".11 It is not clear from
the context whether Mas'fid would have been travelling by the main route or not. The journey was
made in the winter and there was a strong cold wind.12 It is surprising that Isfardyin is specially
mentioned, but there is no mention of any place between Isfardyin and Gunbad-i Qdbis (" Turbat-i
Qdbifs"). At the beginning of the thirteenth century we know from Yaqiit that caravansfrom Bastam to
NIshpiir passed throughJuvain,13presumably thereforemissing both Sabzavar and Isfarayin, though
very likely calling at Jajarm if only for the sake of water (for a direct route from Azadvar to the Kalatha
or Maydmay would in present conditions present water supply difficultiesfor a caravan). This was in
fact the case in the mid-fourteenthcentury when MustaufI wrote. According to him, the caravan route
passed through the following stages: to Maghz-7 parasangs; then Dih-i Sultan 7 parasangs;
Rabat-i Savanj 3 parasangs;Jajarm Bast.m6 parasangs; then south across the KMl-iShfr and the stretch of
kavfrto Azadvar 8 parasangs; and thence through the Juvain corridor to Nlshapfir, totalling 65 para-
sangs in all from Bastam to Nishapiir14-in fact only some 2 parasangslonger than today's motor road.
Rabat-i Savanj is now known simply as Rabdt or Rabdt-i Jajarm-since now of course nobody passes
through it except to go to J-jarm, for there is no longer any through traffic. Again there is no hint that
they called at Isfarayin.
At the beginning of the fifteenth century (I403-O4) Clavijo stopped at Jatjarm on the way to Timur's
court. He was immediately provided with fresh horses and was well impressed by the fact that Timur
had built caravanserais and kept good supplies of horses at post stops along the route right up to
Samarqand.15
Finally, Ndsiru'd-Din Shah Qajar, on his pilgrimages to Mashhad, camped at Jajarm (1283-
1300 A.H.). The Mirdtu'l-Bulddn and the Matla'u'sh-Shams (3o01 A.H.) give us two routes: one the old
southern post road through Sabzavar and the other from Bastam north to NardIn, east to Jajarm,
and on to Mashhad via SankhiSand Bujnurd,16-which surelyreflectsthe decline of all parts of the plain
and the rise in importance of Bujnurdunder the ShdlG kurdswho had been moved up to the Atrak by
Shah 'Abbas. Jajarm is the only section of the plain left on a main route, and Jajarm was also,
according to Curzon,x included in Shah 'Abbas' road from Gurgan to Mashhad, but in Qajar times
at least this would seem to be due merely to its position half way between BastHm and Bujnurd rather
9 Le Mustaufi, .Nuzhatu'l-Qulfb, ed. Le Strange, E. J. W. Gibb
Strange, Lands of the EasternCaliphate,1930, p. 430. 14
o0Ibid., p. 391. Memorial, XXIII, 1, 1915, p. 174.

11 Tdrikh-i
Bayhaqi, Tehrin, 1324 AHS, p. 448. 15 Clavijo, Embassyto Tamerlan,14o3-6, trans. Le Strange,
I928,
12 This strong wind is of frequent occurrence in the plain and
p. 176.
may occur at any season. Once it rises it normally takes about 16Matla'u'sh-Shams,Tehran, 1301 AHS, pp. 6, 107.
five days to blow itself out. In the summer the peasants wait
for it for the winnowing. 17 Curzon, Persia and the Persian Question,1892, vol. I, p. 358. Cf.
Ygqfiit, op. cit., vol. 2, p. 192. Alfons Gabriel: Die Erforschung Persiens, Wien, 1952, P. 127-
ARGHIYAN-THE AREA OF JXJARM IN WESTERN KHURASXN 101
than to any attraction in the town itself. Jajarm then, having entered written history as an entrep6t
at a major cross-roads,had dwindled in the nineteenth century to being simply a village on the way, so
that when it came to defining distinct lines of communication for motor trafficin this century the whole
plain was left isolated and the district of Arghiyan, in particular, stranded.
Historical
In pre-Mongol times Jajarm is clearly stated to have been a frontier borough on the road to Gurgan
from NIshipir, and the emporium of Gurgan as well as QOimisand Nlshapuir. It was situated within
the confines of the district of NTshdpir.s1Our plain thereforecarried the commerce of three provinces,
which met in Jajarm, and the whole eastern part of the plain despite its barren character naturally
prosperedby this. Though no longer prosperous,it is still a frontier borough and it is not quite certain
to which province it should belong. For Mashhad is almost as far to the east as
Tehran is to the west,
and Shihrtid is no less accessible than Bujnurd.
The pre-Mongol sources in general speak well of the plain, though unfortunately not often in any
concrete terms. In the Hudtidu'l-'Alam (982-983 A.D.),Azadvar was a pleasant borough in the desert
on the road to Gurgdn.19In MuqaddasI (985 A.D.) it was the chief town of the Juvain corridor, which
was very fertile in foodstuffs.20 And in Yaqit (1225) it was populous and had fine mosques, and
outside its gate was a great khdnfor merchants, for its markets were much frequented. The gardens of
its villages stretched continuously all down the valley and the water for their irrigation was brought by
underground water courses from the springs in the southern hills. One hundred and eighty-nine
villages were dependent on it.21 Muqaddasi describesIsfardyin as growing much rice [sic !] and fine
grapes. It was very prosperousand had good markets. J*ajarmhad a fine Friday mosque and was a
well-fortifiedcity with seventy villages dependent on it.22 Arghiyan contained seventy-one villages, and
Jajarm, now strangely mentioned separately from Arghiydn, had many villages-some of which are in
the range overlooking Azddvdr-an area which is now deserted.23 Azddvdr was still the main centre
of Juvain.
The next detailed mention comes in Mustaufi in the middle of the fourteenth century. The
Mongols had passed through, but apparently without very serious results. The capital of Juvain had
changed to Furilmad (then spelt Fariyiimad), which is in fact not in the Juvain plain at all, but some
miles south of the western end of it, and separated from it by the beginning of the Jughatay range. It
used to be part of the tumdnof Bayhaq, but is now independent (mufarrad).Isfardyin,which was ravaged
by the Mongols in I220,24 had now become a city of medium size with nearly fifty dependent villages
and a strongly fortified castle to the north.25 In the middle of the fourteenth century it was for a while
brought under the control of the shortlived Sarbadar dynasty in Sabzavar.26 When Clavijo passed
through on his way to Samarqand in the summer of 1404 Isfardyin was a very fine place with many
fine buildings, both private houses and mosques, but " all is now for the most part without inhabi-
tants!"27
Mustaufl describesJajarm as a medium-sized town, and since for one or two days'journey all round
the pasturage was of a poisonousherb, it was quite impossible for any army ever to approach the place.
This poisonous herb still exists north of Jajarm over a fairly wide area and shepherds have to be very
careful that their flocks do not stray near it, but it does not grow in any other quarter and the assertion
that no army could ever approach Jajarm because of it should perhaps be attributed to Mustaufi's love
of wonders. He also mentions a strong castle in Jijarm, and says that there are many villages dependent
on Jajarm, and that houses are not easily obtained within the town. Crops of corn and fruit were
abundant.2 A little later (in I376) the castle of Jajarm was taken together with that of a village in
3 Yqiqt, Beirut.
18sHudadu'l-'Alam,trans. Minorsky, E. J. W. Gibb Memorial New
Series XI, 1937, pp. I02-3- 24 Encyclopaedia of Islam.
19 2 Mustaufi,
Op. cit., p. o02. op. cit., pp. 149-50.
20 Muqaddasi, apud Le
Strange, Lands of the Eastern Caliphate, 28 Ibn Batuta, apud Rauzdt-al Janndt fi Awsaf-i Madinat-i Herdt,
p. 391. vol. 2, p. 378.
21
Y.qfit, apudLe Strange, Landsof theEasternCaliphate,p. 392. 27 Op. cit., p. 176.
22
Muqaddasi, ibidem. 28 Op. cit., p. 150.
Juvain.29 A little later still Clavijo gives the following account ofJajarm: " The town stands in a plain
at the foot of some bare mountains, and from these they have tunnelled conduits to bring the water
down. Standing in the middle of the town there is a castle crowning a low hillock artificially built up
on clay foundations and the town itself has no wall round it. During the past winter much snow had
fallen, and this, when the summer heat had set in, had melted and flooded the water conduits. A
freshet had recently come down, and half the town had been destroyed by the waters, which too had
overwhelmed the castle ! Further the floods had drowned out all the corn lands ...".30 Despite this,
Clavijo's company with their royally appointed escort were immediately provided with fresh horses.
During the Mongol period, therefore, unlike the rest of the plain, the Jajarm area would seem not to
have declined, but rather to have grown in importance and prosperity-perhaps at the expense of
IsfardyIn. But if this is true, the reasons are obscure. In the Zlnatu'l-Majdlis,written in 1595, IsfardyIn
is still described as a middle-sized town, but would appear to have been destroyed again by the Uzbegs
shortly after this.31
At the beginning of the eighteenth century we learn from the Tazkiratu'l-Muliik that Azddvdr was
again the main centre in Juvain, but that the district of Juvain was much less important than
Isfariytn.32 According to local tradition, recorded by Yate in 1900oo, IsfarayInwas again destroyed by
the Afghans, and, when he passed through, the ruins of the old town were still visible and extensive and
adjoined the new town.33
A hundred and fifty years later there is an interesting Collection ofJournalsandReportsby Capt. the
Honourable G. C. Napier, who travelled extensively in the area and published his notes in 1876. He
refers often to a serious drought and consequent famine which had recently afflicted the area. In
Furilmad the famine had emptied a hundred houses and the ruins were visible in every direction. The
town of Jughatdy (which had now displaced Furfimad and Azddvar as the most important centre in
Juvain) contained the stronghold of the chief of Juvain, Allahydr Khdn, who, with his brother, Ja'far
Khan, had held all the country as far as MazIndn and Sabzavar, but was defeated by Fath'All Shah
in person shortly after the latter's accession. The town was nearly destroyed by the famine, and only
about a hundred houses remained occupied. For more than a mile around the village of
the principal of a group of four villages-the ground was covered with remains of ruined houses and
Sankh.s-
walled gardens. However, Napier writes that on enquiry he was told that " the evident decrease in
population was not due to the famine, for it had fallen lightly on these villages. The fine springsforming
the source of their water supply had not been materially affected by the three years' drought, but had
continued to yield sufficientto irrigate the village lands and to support the population. The true causes
are obscure, for within the recollection of the predecessorsof the present oldest inhabitant, from whom
I received the information, Sankhis numbered 750 houses, it has now only 200."34
Famine, particularlyas the result of drought, is not a rare phenomenon in Persia. The main feature
of the precipitation pattern in Khurisan-in so far as we have enough figuresto judge-is its variability
and unreliability.35It is reasonableto assume that subsistencefarming has been progressivelyincreasing
since the Mongol invasions, simply because of general insecurity, particularly outside the cities. A
small settlement tending to farm at subsistencelevel, when faced with the inevitable drought of several
years, will stand little chance of pulling through intact, or even reattaining its formerlevel of prosperity,
except by the efforts, expense and investment of a powerful man with a direct interest in the village
community and its land. From the written evidence available there is every reason to suspect that such
conditions did not obtain for the villages in the plain.
Between and JLjarm, besides two or three springs at the foot of the hills, Napier found no
potable water. Mounds of ruined qandtshere and there proved the existence in former times of villages,
Sankh.s
but the waste was then abandoned to the wild ass and the gazelle and the Turkoman raiders, who had
probably been the main instrument in reducing it to its present state. Nevertheless, he continues, for
29 C. E Yate, Khorasanand Sistan, 1900, p. 383 ft.
Rauzdt-al-Janndt fi Awsdf-i Madtnat-i Herwt,vol. 2, p. 33. 8I
30
Op. cit., p. 176. 34 Pp. 25, 26, 71, 73 f.
31 Encyclopaediaof Islam. of PotentialResourcesin KhurasanProvince,
38 A PreliminaryAssessment
32
Tarkiratu'l-Mulak,trans. Minorsky, E. J. W. Gibb Memorial, Iran, K. S. McLachlan and B. J. Spooner, Italconsult, Rome,
I943, P. 103. 1963-
ARGHIYAN-THE AREA OF JAJARM IN WESTERN 103
KHURASAN
many months past, the road had been as safe as roads in Persia usually are. Small parties of thieves
lurked about the hill skirts, but the extensive ravages of former years had ceased.
Jajirm was a small straggling town of 400 houses. " In the centre of the town is one of the high
circular mounds, so frequently met with in northern Khurasan, surmounted by the ruins of a mud fort
of not very ancient date. It bears the name of Ali VerdI Khan, the first chief of the Giraili Turks
settled in the country. A small Imamzideh, lying a mile to the south east of the walls, contains a tomb
covered with large blue tiles, on which are verses from the Qur'an. ... For some miles to the south the
ground is covered with fragments of small red brick and blue glazed tiles, indicating the site of one of
the towns founded after the Arab occupation.... Three miles to the north-westis a stone fort crowning
a low isolated lime stone rock in good preservation.... The rock within the walls is pierced by a shaft
to a depth of about Ioo feet, from which it is said a communication exists with the village of Garmeh,
half a mile to the west. That the excavation was never of use as a well was evident from the remains of
a number of large earthen vessels built into the foot of the outer wall which could only have been
provided as receptacles for storing water. The only coins known to have been found are some silver
pieces stamped (it is said) on one side with the usual inscription of the Khalifat, on the other, with the
name of the city of Jajarm.35aThere are no other visible traces of remains other than those of a small
town of the period of Arab occupation, the dispersion of fragments of masonry to so great a distance
being accounted for by the fact that the plain is liable to sudden inundation from the mountains to the
north.
" That the present population of Jajarm, four hundred families, is only a remnant, is clear from the
great extent of the old walls; in the time of Nadir Shah there were some 5,000 families [sic !],36 and as
late as the reign of Fath'All Shah, the town furnished 200 men to the regiment known as the Lashkar-i
'Arab va 'Ajam. Its decline is attributed entirely to the Turkomans, who after the death of Nadir
devastated the country, destroying the irrigation works by which only so large a population could have
been maintained. The mounds of numerous qandts,now dry, surround the cultivated area. With the
water supply at the present time available, the crops raised are insufficient for the inhabitants, who
import largely from Shahrid and the Gurgan plain, supplying in exchange salt obtained from the water
of the Kal-i Shtir, a briny stream flowing through the plain to the south. The scanty revenue of the
' belfik' of four villages-Jajarm, Garmeh, Iver, and Darreh,37in all seven hundred families-is
entirely devoted to the maintenance of one hundred horsemen for border defence. These are to a great
extent mounted by the Elkhan of Bujnurd, who relies on them to hold the passes north of the town."38
Shortly after Napier, Colonel C. M. MacGregorpassed through the plain, and noticed there remains
of an old wall much beyond the then limits of Sankhassuggestingit had once been much larger than the
200 houses it then contained. " The whole country around ", he writes, " is very much exposed to
Turkoman raids and consequently the whole plain is dotted with towers of refuge, which are speaking
monuments of the havoc committed by these wretches." MacGregor thought that the village of
Jajarm " may contain three hundred houses, though there seems to be more. It boasts a good deal of
cultivation some of which is dependent on rain and some on water brought by Karezes from the hills.
Nearly the whole plain on which this cultivation is situated is covered by Turkmun towers, showing
what a dangerous spot this is . ...39 The Turkoman entered the plain by a ravine, known as Guddr-i
to the north ofJajarm, which carries perennially a small amount of water through the first range
Gazd
from a valley behind.40 Their main objective was the main road between Mayamay and MazInan
which they reached in one waterless stage from the spring at Ktih-i Baba.
ba Mongol coins fromJR-jarm

are quite numerous,but few have therefore most likely repeating exaggerated tales of former
been published. For examplessee the Catalogue of the Oriental prosperity heard on the spot.
Coinsin theBritishMuseumby S. Lane Poole, vol. VI, pp. 66 "7 Iver and Darreh are within a parasang to the west of Garmeh.
and 1o0. There are unfortunatelyno published sources for 88 Op. cit., pp. 73
ff.
determiningthe life of the mint. Coins minted at Isfariyin 39 Narrative of Journey throughthe provinceof Khurasanand on the
under the early Safavidsare cited in Coins,Medals,andSealsof North West frontier of Afghanistan in 1875, Colonel C. M.
theShahsof Iran (1500-194.) by H. L. Rabino di Borgomale MacGregor, vol. II, 10o4 f
(1945). (I am indebted for these referencesto Dr. A. D. H. 40 Most of this water sinks into the plain as soon as it leaves the
Bivar.) mountains, but a certain amount of it is carried in a jab to a
36Napier gives no source for this astoundingassertion,and is patch of cultivated land not far from Ja-jarm.
Of the three main Persian sources on the area for this period-the Mir'dtul-Bulddn, Ndsiru'd-DIn
Shah's Journey to Khurasan, and the Matla'u'sh-Shams-thelast gives the most comprehensive and
detailed description of Jajarm. On his pilgrimages to Mashhad Nisiru'd-DIn Shah passed only
through that part of our plain which used to bear the name on a route: Bastam, Nardin,
Arghiymn,
Garmeh, Jajarm, Sankhis, Bujnurd, on which Jajarm marked a stage. The was
Ma.tla'u'sh-Shams
compiled by SanT'u'd-Daulehfrom what was observed on the second of the Shah's pilgrimages in the
year 1300ooA.H.Q. At this time Garmeh contained 200 peasant (ra'fyat)families, a hammim and a mosque.
There is mention of the qal'eh-iJaldlu'd-Dlnwhich is described as being built of stone, brick and plaster
(gach),and having six turrets (burj)and several rooms (chandyurt).The well-shaftinside was filled in to
a depth of twenty zar', and it is suggested that it was originally meant simply for storing water brought
up from the spring, whereas the cisterns on the outside were perhaps for flour. The spring at the foot
of the hill on which the qal'ehis situated, is estimated to have a flow sufficient to turn five millstones
(panjsang db) in the summer, of which two-thirds was crown property (khdliseh-idivdn)and one-third
belonged to the peasantry. " Jajarm itself was once more prosperous than it is now. It is now a
reasonable town with a fort and turretsand extensive gardens." The town is encompassedby a fortified
wall and details of the turretsare given. Seven quartersare named within the town, and the population
is made up of ten distinct descent groups (tayifeh). Two of these are Giraili Turks who claim to have
come from KIlpish (in the mountainous country to the north-east) during the reign of Aghd
Muhammad Shah, one is from Ganjeh, another is " Arab from the 'Persian Arabs' (Arab 'ajamhd=
Persian pastoral nomads ?) of Shihriid and Bastam "; a fifth are Uzbeg from Khwadrazm; a sixth
from Bukhari; a seventh are sayyids;the eighth are Fakhrani; the ninth HiajjIs; and the tenth dihqdnhf
or peasants. The governorshipused to be invested in one of the Giraili groups.41
We may presumably interpret this to mean that there were eight tribal elements of comparatively
recent appearance, the peasants and being descendants of the peasants, small landowners and
merchants of the old population. The.hdljfsnew tribal !lite would naturally refer to these sections as other
tribes.
There are seven mosques, a fine caravanseraiand a good hammdm.The " Friday mosque " is very
old and large enough to take 200 men. Two shrines are mentioned: one over the grave of an 'All ibn
Mahziydr (Muhammad Ziyar) known as Khwajeh Mahziydr, which prospers (ba kulli dbddast);
the other which is in ruins is known as KhwatjehKamal. Its ruin was being accelerated by the peasants,
who, as they often do, were carrying away its building materials for use elsewhere. There are also
remains of several other shrines.
Eight qandtsare named as serving Jajarm and the neighbouring small villages. The products are
wheat, a little rice, a few types of tree fruit, melons, etc. Gazelle, wild sheep, and wild ass were to be
found in the plain still, and Nasiru'd-DIn Shah was very keen to hunt. The flats on either side of the
KAl-i Shiir provided salt for Gurgan, Bujnurd and Juvain.
Most of the streetsin the town had been paved with rough stones, but were now in disrepairthrough
lack of attention. Three millstones existed in the town of a size far too large for any of the existing mills.
The author was at a loss to explain their existence, as were the local people. Sani'u'd-Dauleh records
that Ja-jarmhad been once a part of Bastam, once of Astarabad, and then in the reign of Fatlh'AllShah
when Isma'll Mirza was governor of Shahrid and Bastam it became part of that province. When
MulhammadShah came to
Khlpnish he made Jajarm part of Nardn. .... Now it was part of Bujnurd,
whereas at one time Bujnurd had been part of Jajarm!42
In I9oo00another traveller, C. E. Yate, records that Jajarm contained about 500 houses, and that the
.Ndyibor governor's deputy was still a Giraili. The area was badly supplied with water, and what there
was was used up in the growing of cotton43for export to Russia through the Armenian traders in
Sabzavar. The village did not even grow sufficient grain for its own consumption and the silk industry
it formerly possessedhad quite died out.
41
Matla'u'sh-Shams,vol. I, 1o7
"2Ibidem. The sudden surfeit offf.
interestingsidelighton the Qajir r6gime.
detail, when the relative impor- **Author'sitalics.
tance of the area has obviously diminished, provides an
ARGHIYIN-THE AREA OF JIJARM IN WESTERN KHURiSIN 105
The Present
There is much in the story of Jajarm which, put in general terms, would seem to be typical of much
of Persia-particularly the eastern provinces. It is perhaps not possible to date the peak of prosperity,
but the decline is obvious, and its relation to the change in the pattern of communications. It is tempting
to interpret the evidence to mean that there used to be far more water than there is now. That rice
could have been grown in Jajarm now seems astonishing, but it was probably never grown on any
scale, and was simply a means of making use of what water there was during the summer after the
wheat had been harvested. Cotton, a cash crop, has now taken its place.
The nadir of decline was probably touched only a few decades ago. Since then a slow upward
trend has begun which is probably entirely due to Westernizationand (comparative) ease of communi-
cation with the capital. The people can still name the seven quarters (mahall),each of which appears
to be dominated by one or more extended families. However, the change is obvious, and the word
" tRyifeh" is no longer heard.
For Jajarm, of course, Westernization is really " Teheranization ". On the one hand there are
new laws which affect the status quo. A very obvious example is Land Reform. On the other hand,
there are effortsto change the appearance of the town. For example, all towns must have a khiydbdn-
a broad, straight, main street. To build the khiydbdnmeans destroying many houses and so changing
the pattern of some of the quarters. When it has been built, those of the population with more contact
with Teheran and other towns start to want houses on the khiydbdn,and the traditional relationship
between kinship and neighbourhood begins to break up. For though this is a sedentary community
and J-jarm has a long history, most of the more wealthy and powerful members of the present popula-
tion came to Jajarm not so very long ago, since the Mongol invasions, and came organized on tribal
lines. There is a definite connection between this tribal origin of the more influential part of the
population of Ja-jarmand the general insecurity of the area up until very recent times. Jajarm is
situated at the northern edge of the eastern side of the plateau which is Persia proper, and its situation
guards two main ways of access on to the plateau. It must thereforehave sufferedthe maximum effects
of any border insecurity in the north-east of Persia throughout its history, and the invaders have
invariably been tribal. The two most influential sections of the population now are known as the
N[dyibihd and the Sdddt. We know from Yate that at the end of the nineteenth century the Nayib was
a Giraili. But many of the NMyiblhi are offended at the suggestion that they are therefore Turkish,
and protest that they came from Ganjeh. We may perhaps therefore assume that the Ganjeh-i and
Giraili tribes mentioned in the Matla'u'sh-Shams have intermarried to the extent that they no longer
distinguish between each other, and so far as the present politics of Jtjarm are concerned have become
one element. The same would now appear to be happening between the Nayibhia and the Sdatt.
They are already intermarried to a high degree, but are kept apart for the time being by rivalry for
official posts in the municipality.
However, the number of people remaining who can name three or more ascending generations is
few. The basis of former wealth-land and water-is no longer secure. The distinction with the
" dihqdnhd"-perhaps descendants of original, non-tribal, peasants-is disappearing. And so the
pattern of personal relationshipsin the tribal elements gradually becomes that which is typical of the
normal cognatic peasant society, and alien wealth and status values replace traditional ones.
The present population is reckoned to be about 5,500 or 800 households, of which some 30 per cent
own some land either around Jajarm itself or in the lower part of Juvain. Dasht in the north-west is
largely owned and settled by Jajarmts, and many Jajarmis emigrate to Similqan and the Gurgin plain.
There has been no immigration to Jijarm for a long time. Apart from agriculture most of the people
in Jijarm own or have some interest in flocks, and the main pasturage areas are along the upper part of
the K1-i Shiir, the lower end of the Juvain corridor, and to the north-west towards Dasht-nowhere
less than nine miles from Jajarm. Exports from the town, in a good year, consist of cotton, fruit, wool,
dairy products and some corn.
Any conversation in Jajarm sooner or later turns to the subject of water. There is any amount of
land to be cultivated, but no water to irrigate it. As much as two-thirdsof the town's total water supply
comes in an open jib three miles across the desert from the spring at the foot of Qal'eh-i Jaldlu'd-Dln.
There is only one good qandt. Another one which was started recently has hit conglomerate rock and
although its yield is good so far, it has become uneconomic to proceed with it. Any water tapped from
the south or east of the town draws from the Kavir and is saline. East of north the ground slopes away
and so does not allow the construction of a qandt.Was there more water in prehistoric or medieval
times ? The Nuzhatu'l-Qulfib in its fantastic way tells of a mountain in the " neighbourhood of
Jajarm which rises like a perpendicular wall and from the midst of this mountain wall three springs
burst forth side by side, each sufficientin volume to turn a millwheel. For the space of an arrow flight
they flow as through a spout, and then serve to irrigate many of the lands of Jajarm, and of the neigh-
bourhood. The length of the stream is twelve leagues ".44 Legends of this nature are still alivein
Jajarm and serve further to frustratethe present population, and expensive efforts and expert opinions
in the last few years45have not succeeded in finding any untapped sources of any significance.
Clavijo witnessed severe floods when he passed through Jajarm, and this is a phenomenon which
has to be reckoned with over much of the plateau, particularly in the spring. Enormous quantities of
water released by cloudbursts pour off the mountains across the plains and disappear again into the
desert as quickly as they had come. In some parts46a certain amount is caught behind a " band" or
improvised dam and, allowed to sink through, after which a good crop can be grown on the land. But
since Clavijo does not mention any such arrangement, it would not seem that Jajarm ever took any
advantage of flood waters in this way. The problem remains unanswered, but a very large extent of
Jajarm's former prosperity must have been due to its position on important trade routes which now
bypass the whole plain.47
The borders of Arghiydn, or the area dependent on Jajarm, to the south seem to have varied little,
but to the north-through the mountain and valley systems which mark the end of the plateau-in
the periods of its prosperity extended beyond Similqan and eastwards towards Bujnurd to include
whatever settlements sought its protection. But Jajarm never appears to have been an important
provincial centre and nor does anywhere in the plain. Perhaps Miyanabad is on or near the site of the
largest town the plain has held. This plain is in many ways typical of the areas into which the settled
part of the Persian plateau may be divided. It is for the most part dry and barren. It has at times
supported a much larger population than it does now, but shows some improvement now on the begin-
ning of this century. The pattern of settlement in it tends to hug the base of the surroundingmountains,
except in cases where the lie of the land allows the qandtsto tap more water if the settlement is further
out in the plain. The villages rely for their prosperity on irrigation works which are expensive and
complicated. These have fallen into disuse owing to lack of political and social security-special factors
in this area being the Turkoman raiders on the one hand and on the other: the lack of any one land-
owner powerful and wealthy enough to provide the investment to start things going again-even if he
had felt secure enough to make it worth his while. However, this area is somewhat unusual in that it
has never had a real focal point within it. The influences on it have always been centrifugalrather than
centripetal, which makes its plight all the more serious in the context of the present communications
system, for there is no longer anything to bring people to the area. An interesting indication of this
condition is the number of names of distinguished men which can be read in histories and anthologies
ending in the nasab: ArghiynlT,JajarmI,IsfardyIni,Jughata-I, and of courseJuvaini. But none of these
men made their reputation in the plain they were born in, and very few, if any of them, returned to
it to die.
Jajarm is a bakhshsituated roughly halfway between Khurasan, Gurgan and what used to be called
Qilmis. At various stages of its history, it has been subordinate in turn to each of the larger centres
4 Op. cit., p. 228. 46 E.g. Baydukht in the GundbAd plain. In the enormous plain
45 In I958 Jijarm officially became a shahr (town) with an west of Kiih-i Taftdn in the sarbadd country of Balfichistdn
anjuman(council) and a shahrddr(mayor = executive officer of there are many remains of this type of band, which are, how-
the anjuman). This made it possible for the first time for ever, no longer used in the area. In mountainous country they
programmes to be undertaken in the name of the town. The are found in the Qa'inat, and the MakrAn range.
main aim of the shahrddr(who is one of the Sadit: the h;sdbddr-i 47 Similar arguments for other areas are presented in BetweenOxus
shahrddrzis from among the Nayiblhd) from the start has been Jumna, Arnold J. Toynbee, O.U.P., 1961.
and
to increase the town's water supply.
ARGHIYAN-THE AREA OF JAJARM IN WESTERN KHURiASN 107
which surround it: (Shdhroid),Baihaq, NIshapir, Nardin (eight parasangs to the west) and
now belongs, because the main land owners of the area have for some time past
Bujnurd to which it Bast.m
been Shadlfi Kurds who live in Bujnurd. There is now talk of applying to be attached once more to
the shahristdnof Shahroid,because of the decline in the influence of the landowners and the pull of the
capital.
Water and roads are the two outstandingneeds of the region. The people of the area feel, reasonably,
that they have been left out of the present social revolution in Iran. They have done little to help
themselves, and talk of lack of confidence in the future, although justifiable, cannot be accounted the
sole reason for the absence of minor investment activity and agriculturalimprovement. The individual's
solution is migration: to Tehran, or the Gurgan plain. There is little interest in Bujnurd or Khurdsdn
in general, for in Persia everywhere one looks towards the capital. But no ordinary Persian villager
lightly exchanges the dry climate of the plateau for the damp lowlands, or the freedom of village life
for the commotion of Tehrin. With a little government investment, it would probably not be difficult
to halt the migration and even attract back some of those who have migrated in recent years. But the
only real answer lies in communications. The obvious route now for a road through the plain is
Bujnurd-Jajarm-Shdhr-id.48Automatically Jajarm would once more become an important stage on
an important road-from the north-east to the capital, and in a new ecological and economic context
might perhaps manage to resume its former function and prosperity.
48 Cf. K. S. McLachlan and B. J. Spooner, op. cit., p. 4o.

109
NEW MATERIAL FOR THE TEXT OF HAFIZ
By R. M. Rehder
The most recent, comprehensive and reliable surveys of Hjafizare: H. Ritter, " ", ISLAM
ANSIKLOPEDISI, v. 5 (1950) ; H. Roemer, " Probleme der Hafizforschung und der
.Hfiz Stand ihrer
Losung ", Akademie der und
Wissenschaften der Wiesbaden
Literatur, (I 951); A. J. Arberry,Fifty Poems of
Hafiz (" Reprinted with corrections 1953, Reprinted 1962 "); and J. Rypka, IranischeLiteratur-
geschichte(p. 256-65), ( 959). None of them contains eithera full discussionof the problemsof an edition
or a complete inventory of the oldest manuscripts; but they all touch the problem of the text of IH~fiz
and they are the most up-to-date sources for its problems. Since their publication, however, new
material has appeared which representsan important advance in our knowledge of the text of IH~fiz:
I. Elisabeth Boelke, Zum Textdes Photostelle der Universitat zu K81n, 1958. Dr. Boelke has
H.dfiz,
collated three manuscriptsand the Qazvinl-GhanI edition of H~fiz against the text in the Buldq edition
(1250/1834) of Sridi'scommentary. The manuscripts she has used are: (a) Aya Sofya 3945, the very
old and important MS. which Prof. Ritter described in " Philologika XI ", Der Islam, v. 26
(I942),
and of which he writes: " Dieser alteste, nur 22 Jahre nach des Dichters Tode in seiner Vaterstadt
fiir den damaligen Herrscher dieser Stadt geschriebene Textzeuge darf sicherlich die h6chste Autoritit
beanspruchen" (p. 241). The MS. is dated 813/14 and contains 458 ghazals. (b) British Museum
Or. 3247 (number 268 in Rieu's Supplement,p. 177) which is dated 907 and contains 182 ghazals. This
is known not to be a copy, but a recension made in Harit for Prince Farldfin Iusayn Khan, a son of
Sultan IHusaynBayqard, and it is said many MSS. were collected and used for this work. The preface
to the recension and details may be found in Roemer's Staatsschreiben (1952). (c) A
der Timuridenzeit
MS. dated 911 containing 346 ghazals,which belongs to the Max Freiherrvon Oppenheim Foundation.
The choice of the Buliq edition of Sfdi as the base for the collations is unfortunate as copies of it
are very rare, and neither Sildl nor the Oppenheim MS. and the interesting British Museum MS. can
be considered as authorities in establishing the text of I;Ifiz (unless it can be demonstratedthat they
represent an old MS. tradition which in these cases is dubious). This is particularly true now when
one may count thirteen and perhaps fifteen MSS. older than the Khalkhil MS., dated 827/1424,
which is the base for the Qazvini-Ghani edition and which was once considered the oldest MS. of
HIfiz. Nevertheless, the ordinary reader may make use of most of Dr. Boelke's variants using her
book and the Qazvlnl-Ghani edition, and her collation of Aya Sofya 3945 is enough to make her book
valuable.'
2. Parvlz Khanlarl, Ghazalhd-i Khvdjeh ldfiiz-i Shirdzz,Tehrdn, Sukhan, 1337-1959. In this book
Dr. KhtnlarI has published a MS. of IHfiz's poems copied in 813 and 814 which forms part of a majmu'
in the British Museum (number 261/27; described in Rieu's Catalogue,v. 2, p. 868). The copy, con-
taining 152 ghazals, was made for the Amir Jalil al-DIn Iskandar, who ruled in Firs for his uncle
Shdhrukh. He was killed in a rebellion in 817. Therefore, his name on the MS. is additional evidence
for its age. This copy, like Aya Sofya 3945, was made in Firs where I~Ifiz lived and where one may
assume there was the best chance of finding reliable copies of his poems (although MSS. were commonly
moved as booty). Moreover, one may assume that whatever oral tradition there was would be there
stronger and more reliable.
Dr. Kh~nlari explains in his introduction that he has" corrected " the 813-14 MS. after comparing
it with the Qazvint-GhanI text and two other MSS. This" corrected " text is the one he has published;
however, all the original readings happily are printed in the notes at the end of the book. The two
SI thank Dr. Boelke for her special kindness in sending me a copy of her book.
other manuscriptswhich he has used are: (a) a MS. in the Majlis Library, Tehrdn, dated 855, which
was formerly part of TImimrtash's library and (b) a MS. belonging to Prof. Sddiq Gauharin of Tehran,
dated 862. Dr. Khanlarl, like Dr. Boelke, appears to have made a more-or-less random choice of
second MSS. He gives no reasons why these two MSS. should be considered in the edition of HIafiz's
text. The older MS. is, again, of course, of capital importance.
3. ParvCzKhlnlarl, Chandnuktehdar tashih-iDivdn-i Tehrin, Sukhan, I337. These notes,
I.dfiz, with the text of individual bayts,and
which appeared originally in the magazine, raghmd,are concerned
occasionally explanations are given for words and phrases.2 This pamphlet contains what Dr. KhinlarI
considersare the important variants vetween the 8 13-14 MS., and his two other MSS. and the QazvinI-
Ghanl Divdn. It is an adjunct to his book.
4. G. Galimova, " The Oldest Manuscript of the Poems of Hafiz ", Sovetskoe Vostokovedeniye(1959),
p. Io5-12.3 Dr. Galimova describes what she believes to be the oldest IH~fizMS., number 555 in the
oriental collection of the Academy of Sciences of the Tajik S.S.R. in what was Stalinabad. This is a
majmu'with 41 ghazals and two qit'asby IjIfiz copied in its margins. The dating and other aspects of
the MS. and the article I shall discuss below. The first reference to this MS. was made by S. Sh.
Mulladjanov in his " Divan-i dastkhatti-i qadimtarin-i 'Ubayd-i Zakani ", Sharq-i Surkh (1948), i/p.
30-33-
Mahdi Kamiliyan, "Nuskheh-i Divan-i HIfiz ", Farhang-i Irdn Zamin (I337),
5-. badalhi-i
v. 6, pp. 204-72. This MS. is dated 818, contains 358 ghazals and I8 qit'asand rubd'is,and belongs,
he says, to the " Indian Library " in New Delhi. Mr. Kamaliyan has collated this MS. only with the
Qazvlnl-Ghanl Dzvdnand has published unfortunatelyonly those variants which he believes have value
and merit (" vdjid-imadzyatva rujhdn"). He does not describe the MS. This, however, is the MS.
described in Manuscripts from Indian Collections,DescriptiveCatalogue(National Museum, New Delhi,
1964, PP. 90-i). The MS. which contains Kalilah wa Dimnah,Mantiq al- Tayr, and a Dvdn-i HJifiz,
comprises231 folios and is in the National Museum on loan from the State Central Library, Hyderabad.
The Dzvdnbegins in the margin of f. I37a. The Catalogue declares: " This is probably the oldest copy
of the work."
The sum of these publications is to make available three old Hafiz MSS. dated813/14, 813-14 and
818, and thereby to present us with a new foundation for the text of Hafiz. All of these MSS. will take
their place in any future critical edition (unless radical new discoveries are made) and Aya Sofya
3945, because of the number of poems it contains (and its age), replaces the Khalkhall MS. of 827 as
the base for any future critical edition. Whether or not the Stalinabad MS. can be accepted in the new
canon of IHafizMSS. it is too early to say, but there are reasons for doubting some of Dr. Galimova's
arguments.
The Stalinabad MS. contains 156 folios, and, according to Dr. Galimova, 25 works of various kinds
by various authors, including several medical treatises, a book of hadith, chronograms, works by
al-IHallaj,'Iraql and 'Ubayd-i ZakanI, together with the poems by HIfiz and some poems by Ibn
Yamin. The names of only two copyists are given. The main text (f. Ia-14oa) was copied by
Muhammad b. 'Abd al-Wahid al-Marvi and finished shawwdl805 (April 1403). The rest of th maine
text was written by at least two other hands. There is a text in the margins (f. Ia-I36a with at least
one intermission) which, " in general ", says Dr. Galimova, is the work of one person, a very skilful
writer commanding several scripts, who gives his name as Ibn Mayman b. 'Abd-ullah b. 'Umar
al-Hafiz al-Mu'allim Abarqihi. No more details, except on the poems of HIfiz, are given about the
handwriting of the MS.
The place of copying, she says, is noted in the margin of f. 34a as Abarqih, " a great centre under
the Muzaffarids ", but this, it must be noted, does not prove the whole MS. was copied there. She
2 raghmd, v. I (1327), p.p 266-70, 325-7, 361-4, 393-6; v. 2 8 1 thank Prof. M. B. Dickson for providing me an English
Literatur- translation of this article and Mr. Donald Stilo for helping me
(I328), pp. 22-7, 302-7, 319-23. Rypka, Iranische
geschichte,p. 256, n. 62a, mentions both KhAnlari's book and the with several points of Russian. I must also thank Dr. W.
articlesin raghmdi. Millward for helping me with some of the Arabic in this essay
NEW MATERIAL FOR THE TEXT OF HAFIZ 111
states, furthermore, that a colophon (f. I4oa) indicates that the copy was made for " a highly placed
person " who she suggests may have been a local ruler of Abarqfih. His name, she says, is not cited in
the colophon, only his titles are given.
Three photographsshowing four pages of the MS., which I call in order of their appearance: A, B,
C, D, illustrate Dr. Galimova's article. She does not identify them. From the dated colophons I have
identified A as f. 45a, B as f. I39b, C as f. I4oa (the photograph shows the open MS.), but I have not
been able to identify D. The poems are copied in the " excellent naskhkdfi" and the page is the recto
side of the folio.
The colophon for " a highly placed person " may be read from the photograph of the open MS.
There is one line on the bottom of f. I39b, the rest, with the name of al-Marvl (not Ibn Mayman
Abarqiihi) and the date, shawwdl805, is on f. I4oa. The copyist's note of his name and the date is
below the rest of the colophon (which is the main text of the page), written at an angle to the main text
in a smaller and somewhat different script. The whole colophon is in Arabic, and appears after a work
Dr. Galimova identifies as the Dlvdn-iMa~hmad b. Muhammad.The main text reads (in my transcription;
I have given the sum of Dr. Galimova's work above):
" Tamma al-diwan wa al-hamdu lillah rabb al-'Alamln kutiba li-rasm al-khidmat li-khizanat
al-kutub al-a'zam al-aqdam malja' wa maladh al-fuqara bayn al-umam wa law zadat
fakhran
al-alqdb li-s.hib la-zidtuhu walakin bihi al-alqab yasmu wa yafkharu a'ni jandb 'all wa muhatt rihdl
majd wa ma'll a'la Allah ta'ala fl'l-khafiqayn sha' nahu 'izzan li'l-dawlat wa al-din wa lI zala
matharan.
karim lahu khuluq fi'-l-saifa karih al-shamal wa mi al-ghima[m]
taliq al-muhayya 'amim al-nada raz.ziyual-shamal saffiyu al-karam "
From this we learn only that he was the owner of a library and had books copied for him, which
suggests he was a rich man. Prof. Mo'in of Tehran tells me that the title sdhibal-a'zamindicates that
he was a vaztror perhaps a prime minister.
IjIfiz's poems were written by two different hands in the margins of the MS. There are 34 ghazals
copied in an " excellent naskh kdf! " (f. I36b-40oa; 145a-151b) and seven ghazals and two qit'as in
" a distinctive hand with numerous shikastehligatures " (f. 45a-46a; I39b; I4ob-I4Ia; I52b; I54b).
Dr. Galimova prints the of all 43 poems, copied from the MS., marking with an asterisk those
ma.tla's
in the second script, and gives the full text of one ghazal and qit'a which are not in the Qazvlni-Ghani
Divdn. These poems appear in the Pizhman edition as numbers 284 and 707 respectively. There the
is listed under " doubtful " qita'dt.
qi.t'a
There are seven dates in the MS. which are, with the exception off. 45a, written out completely in
Arabic. Three of these dates appear in the main text. The first, at the end of the major section copied
by al-Marvi (f. 14oa), reads shawwdl 805/April 1403. The other two read II rabl' 8o6/October 1403
(f. 145a) and 20 II rabl' 8o6/6 November 1403 (f. 152a). Dr. Galimova estimates that there are eight
to ten pages missing at the beginning of the MS., but mentions no pages missing at the end. The main
text continues until the end (f. I56b) and there is no final colophon. The dating of this section is
obvious.
About five months later the MS. was taken up by another person and most of the margins were
filled. There are four dates in the margins. They are, as Dr. Galimova gives them: 22 ramaddn806/3
April I404 (f. I2a); I rabl' 8o7/September 1404 (f. 34a); 20 I rabZ'807/26 September I404 (f. 45a);
I I shawwdl 807/12 April I405 (f. I3ia). It is not clear from Dr. Galimova's description how many of
these colophons are by Ibn Mayman Abarqihi, who is responsible for most of the marginal text, or
which colophons in the MS. give the names of the two copyists. In the photographs one can read the
name of al-Marvi on f. I4oa and see that only the date is given in the margin off. 45a. This date reads
25 I rabl' 807, not 20 as Dr. Galimova gives it.
The poems by were, it appears, copied in the margins of the MS. after I I shawwdl 807, on at
least two separate .Hjfiz
occasions (there are two handwritings) for which no date is given. The text in the
margins goes to f. 136a, with, as I have noted above, at least one intermission, because there are some
poems by on f. 45a-46a. Space was left in the margins of these pages (as can be seen in the
of f. 45a, one of the works in the margin ends on this page) and filled by the same distinctive
photograph.Hafiz
hand which then(?) copied poems at the end of the MS., beginning on f. I39b. All the other
poems appear after f. I36a, beginning on f. i36b, because the rest of the margins had been filled. One
.H1fiz's
notes that the two handwritings overlap. Only study of the whole MS. can tell us whether any con-
clusions can be drawn from this fact. Dr. Galimova does not discuss this.
The problem then is when after iII shawwdl 807/12 April 1405 were the poems copied, and is that
date or time such that we may call this the oldest MS. of ? Three arguments are advanced by
Dr. Galimova for the age of the MS. .H1fiz
I. On three occasions, she states, dated works finish on the same page as ghazals. This refers
to f. 45a, f. I4oa and f. I45a. She maintains that the time of the copying of the poems is " undoubtedly
.Hifiz's
near the indicated dates ".
This is not, by itself, a very sound argument. The poems were copied after the dated works and
necessarily copied into the empty margins. Pages where works ended in dated colophons were pages
with empty space. Proximity of texts in a MS. does not prove proximity of their date of copying. The
poems may have been written in the MS. the same month or year as the colophons, but from the
evidence given we have no way of knowing this. They may also have been copied fifty years later. We
confront the immutable fact that the poems are not dated.
That the MS. was used for more or less random jottings (probably over the whole period of its
existence) is suggested by the small curious Arabic prose poem "in praise of Baghdad" which appears
below the colophon in the margin of I4oa. Moreover, its handwriting appears to be different from that
of the two HIjfiz copyists and from al-Marvi.
2. Over many of the poems, in both handwritings, is given name and the formula marhuim.
A variety of other formulas also appear: rahmatalldh (f. 45a), rahmat .Hfiz's alldh 'alayhi (f. 46a), rafa'a alldh
(f. I37a), nawwara marqadahu (f. I38a), rahmat alldh anfdsahu (f. I38b), taghammadahualldh bi-
r.ahahu
ghufrdnihi (f. I39b, 154b), thardhu(f. I4oa). These superscriptions says Dr. Galimova " emphasize
that the poet died not long .tdba
before the copying ".
This is possible, perhaps even probable, but neither certain nor precise. The variety and number
of the formulas may be the most significant and strongest part of this argument, nevertheless, some of
these formulas (for example: marlham,rahmatalldh, rahmdtalldh 'alayhi) can be seen used for men fifty
even a hundred years after their deaths. In so far as I know, no one has ever tried to discover whether
any of these formulas was ever used in a precise way. The date 792 is given by the Mujmal-i Fashiz for
the death of Hdfiz (Prof. Ritter writes that this is the earliest mention of the date of his death). Even
were we to accept 807, the date of the last colophon, as that of the copying of the poems, then these
formulas would have been used, at the very least, fifteen years after had died.4 The formulas
do not date the MS., nor can they guarantee that the MS. was copied within .Hifiz fifty years of JIfiz's death.
3. The two qit'as which appear in the MS. each have explanatory notes. Prefixed to one qit'a (f.
I52b; " fragment " 36, Qazvini-Ghani edition) is the note that the references to seven and a half and
ten refer to the pension of ten dirhamspaid by Shah Shuja' to the learned men of Shirdz which was
reduced by a later treasurer to seven and a half, then restored. By the other qit'a (Dr. Galimova does
not give the MS. page; Pizhmin 707) is the note that the poem was written about the appointment of
Mauln 1
Sa'd al-Din Anasi qd+dito and Shaykh Farld to nadim. Dr. Galimova declares that " as far
as we know in other MSS. of HIrfiz similar notes are not found. Such details could only be known close
to the time of the poet's life ". The texts of the notes are not given.
As for the story of the pension, Ghani (op. cit., p. 416) says it appears in many of the tazkirehs, so its
presence here does not mean it was necessarily written by a contemporary or near-contemporary of
HI•fiz. Sa'd al-DIn Anasi was well-known in the Shiraz of his time. He collected Shiah Shuja"s poems
and letters, and wrote a preface for them. I cannot identify Shaykh Farld. Unfortunately, neither the
4 Mujmal-i FasiLh (ed. M. Farrokh), v. 3, p. I32; Ritter, ISLAM ANSIKLOPEDISI, v. 5, p. 66; Ghani, Tdrikh-f'Asr-t
p. 354, accepts the same date. Hdfi.
NEW MATERIAL FOR THE TEXT OF HIFIZ 113
presence of these stories nor whether they are true or false can help us with dating the MS. The second
story might have been invented at any time to " explain " the qit'a by someone who knew of Sa'd
al-DIn AnasI. Such " explanations " are one of the habits of the Persian mind. The tazkireksare full
of stories and information of this kind. There is so much suspicious material that we will probably
never be able to sift out the truth, and the truth in this case still would not give us a date. Moreover,
one might argue conversely, with equal force, that if the poems were copied close to the time of
death when the occasions for writing the poems were fresh in people's minds, no need would have been
.~Ifiz's
felt to annotate them. The occasions would have been common knowledge and would have presented
no problems.
All three, therefore,of the argumentsare shaky. None of them can stand by itself, but together they
are strongerand do establish a possibility that this is an old text of The colophons show the MS.
to be older than the text of IjIfiz's poems; but, unfortunately,in this subject there are no scientific tests
.Hfiz.
for the age of paper and ink, and generally estimates by experts from paper, ink and handwriting have
a margin of error of a hundred years, sometimes fifty years. Thus the best way and the only satisfactory
way for the approximate dating of this MS. is by collating it with the oldest dated MSS. of HIHfizto see
if by the texts, by the variants, they may be grouped together. Qazvlnl has shown that the text ofI~Ifiz
was changed considerably after the ninth century hijrz(his introduction to the Qazvlnl-GhanI edition,
p. Id-Ib); if radical or significant changes can be shown to have taken place between the death of
(792) and the writing of the KhalkhTll MS. (827) this job of work will be easier. It is possible
that the problem admits of no definite solution.
.Hfiz
Would this then be the oldest MS. of IH~fiz? The answer is no, because of the saflnehreported by
Prof. S. Nafisl in his Dar pfrdman-i... Ndfiz (I943) (p.P 6-12). This MS., which Prof. Naflsi says is
described in his edition of Ibn Yamin, is in the municipal library of Isfahin. The MS. is a collection
of poems and statements by important men of Shiriz made by the vazir,Taj al-din 'All nam, between
safar 782 and shawwdl782, ten years beforethe death ofIHfiz. There are two poems by in this
collection. One of these poems is also in Dr. Galimova's MS., but not in her photographs. Ij.fiz
The next oldest dated MS. of IHjfiz, so far as we know now, is Kopruilui 589. This is another
majmii',similar in some ways to Dr. Galimova's MS. There are older texts dated 750-54, but blank
pages were left in the MS. which were later filled by poems of Igfiz and others. These poems are
dated 811. There was, one notes, a space of over fifty years between the two copyings.5
It is to be regretted that after all the careful work Dr. Galimova has expended on the MS. she has
not published it, because, although not the oldest, it may be a very old MS. of and an important
addition to the canon. She writes that in 21 ghazalsthere are differencesin theI.Hfiz
order of the baytsfrom
the QazvinI-Ghani edition, in 16 ghazals there are one to three fewer baytsfrom the Qazvlnl-Ghant
edition, and in 3 ghazals there is one baytmore. In all the ghazals there are about 90 variants, " some
of these are vital ". This MS. (which has been known since I948), she wrote (1959), " merits the
quickest publication ". Since that time it has not been published, nor, to my knowledge, has any
attention been paid to Dr. Galimova's article. Because of this, because of the possible value of the MS.
and the importance of I have copied the poems from her photographs, and collated them with
the oldest MSS. available
I.Hfiz, me and with the Qazvlnl-Ghanl edition. Dr. Galimova knew of the
to
existence of Dr. Khdnlarl's book, but was unable to see a copy.
The texts of six ghazals are given here. They are presented in Dr. Galimova's order. She has
arranged them in alphabetical order by rhyming letter and numbered them. The poems are Galimova 4
(f. 139b-14oa), 5* (f. 139b), 15 (f. 140a), 23* (f. 45a; This poem is presumably incomplete as only five
bayts are on the page and the signature line is missing), 30 (this is the poem which is not in QazvlnI-
GhanI and its full text is given by Dr. Galimova), and 39 (photograph D).
I have copied the poems as they are from the photographs, putting in brackets what I could not
read or any reading I considered dubious. The MS. has in some cases (as Dr. Galimova notes):
dadl-imanq.teh, hamzek over alif, a vertical kasrehunderye, three dots under the sin, be for pe and jim for
SI am indebted for my information about this MS. to the this essay. Prof. Ritter mentions K6priilfi 1589 in " Philologika
generosity of Prof. M. Minovi of Tehran, who also kindly XI ", op. cit., p. 241, n. 2, but says only that it should be used
allowed me to use his copy of the Buliq S&dI in my work on in any critical edition.
chim. In the six poems which follow gdf is written as kdf in the MS.; the distinction is mine. In the
collations these abbreviations are used: G for the Stalinabad MS., A for Aya Sofya 3945 as published
by Dr. Boelke, Kh for British Museum 261/27 as published by Dr. Khanlarl, D for Mr. Kamdliydn's
publication of the 818 New Delhi MS., and Q for the Qazvini-Ghanl edition of HIifiz.
The order of the baytsin D does not always appear to be given, but when a poem is not in the
Qazvlnl-Ghanl edition it is printed complete. The order of the baytsin the six ghazalsis given below.
I have used the order in the Stalinabad MS. as the base for my numbering. If an order is not given for
one of the MSS. which I have used, then the poem does not appear in that MS. unless it is stated that
it does appear. In this last case the presence of the poem in that MS. is indicated by the sigla for that
MS. This means that the poem is in the MS., but that I do not have the order of the bayts. Only for A
does the number of the ghazal give its place in the series of the poems in that MS.
G4 (A62, Qi8, D): The number and order of the baytsis the same for G, A and Q.
G5* (A46, Q28): G and A: I 2 3 456 7
Q: I 2 3 5 6 a b 7 (the small letters stand for the baytsin Q which do
not appear in G; the baytsare given in the collation).
G I5 (A59, Q67, D): G: 12342567
AandQ: I 263457
G23* (A4I, Q9I, D): G, A and Q have the same order for the first five bayts;however, what is
available of G is incomplete. In A the poem is seven baytsand in Q ten.
G30o(A326, D): G and A: I 2 345678

D: 1324678
G39 (A212, Kho2, Q3o7): G and A: I 2 3456 78

Kh: 1245 78
Q: I2435678
These five ghazalsand a fragment are not enough for us to make any definitive or general statements
about either the age of the MS., or the relationship between the number and kind of variants and the
meaning of the poems. They are a straw in the wind. There are a few things which can be noted and
suggested. In five of these six poems the number and order of the baytsin G and A are identical. The
differences in this between Q and the other MSS. are inconclusive.
The variants offer us less. In every poem there are differences between G and A, but the most
striking variations are those between Q and the other MSS. However, none of the variants here (with
the exception of the two extra baytsin Q for G5) affect what may be called the drift or purport of the
poems, although their cumulative effect would be important in any discussion of HIafiz'sstyle. Cer-
tainly if his use of certain words and his employment, for example, of conjunctionsand prepositionswere
to be tabulated these small variations might tip the balances.
The evidence of these collations furthersuggestswhat one has already suspected, that a critical edition
of I;IHfizwill not solve the problems of the criticism of that the text will never be absolutely
fixed, and that a criticism must be made which will take account of all this and which will not fail
.Hfiz,
because of a variety of readings. The text of some of the poems appears to be in better order than the
text of others (G4 as opposed to G34), and perhaps those poems which appear in the best order in the
largest number of old MSS. might be used as a foundation and touchstone for the criticism of
and also suggest a way of criticizing other texts in a similar condition. I.tfiz
NEW MATERIAL FOR THE TEXT OF HXFIZ 115
G4
/i J
1;9 4* .A
>. r&•),•>
l
"•r - f. , ,
L4 ,
-%.A
,-,*' U<..J" •. <.
1D 4' "~
+A c.r A 4I: DA (3) J~ia:A(2) ri r- A (1i
G5*
(.rs> :
>1CM1s~I
&-o
J.,~Z .A J
yAsA
%0 4 *
AI
&A--f.A
[csA.A%.A
>'*AL a A L.
<3
of
P10 ,
499 9 + A (J) > :(3Ab

b9~~?pM) Q wi~ 4
:A
;?, iai
dJ g 4.1.* A (,J
A - ('
14 9 1)
.~ Lt :q yW U> ) : q (C) tb 9+A (5)
***st v4.s a wdA

L45 wo l5).1sd~~even
tsI t
a~~k Esfea t)L tl'5* 4bort rt, missh
a;lk I
V9, J:4f(S) 4i,%4 -J0)''~ * 4DJ

NEW MATERIAL FOR THE TEXT OF HXFIZ 117
G15
Ic
Sovoo.;
I+ A
*A) . C aq :4) ) :sQ+A A)

A (VAJ) Q 'r 0C
(')
.. .),
•.L'.,r)"*:A()C)
G23
L 2 L
Ij vo .
.... ob D () o , . ,
bei~~rI~;
j 'o k L.
l L
, .r .,
NEW MATERIAL FOR THE TEXT OF HIFIZ 119
G39
L;
w tol El~
.I
0f ;),- AtyJAA~
jLu C~I3L~if LL~j j?.0
Ala 3
A
%ZA.A"
A&A4;
rL
r A
I
i * I4, tp Ms L s w t re :v Qasie
.r >ves.
J C4ULM2
I
S *Ar MS$,.?,l C$'J./I~
q~iv;%; %'VS w hW M S A,%

pv
I
)
A *K
W%
!(1*
coop,)K***>I (ki ;
tk'kt 014,4081 VS IMS iAIAIV*CS W~L

t
tk tIvvL
r~v-Jsjv 0 pis.
Jes .AAJWd
a sk; i~te <* :svbV *.Phi;O** DAr +2. st v,- ai (q..3s) ..i4martit s
Q4A E AAA
(C .A p (I.u frSAD Ws J,}.II,4.7:Q+A * Ka4)
121
IRANIAN DRESS IN THE ACHAEMENIAN PERIOD

Problemsconcerningthe Kandysand other garments
By Georgina Thompson
Persian and Median dress, so frequently represented at Persepolis, has been described by many
writers, both ancient and modern. The Persians represented on the monuments at Persepolis are
shown wearing a two-piece robe, consisting of a pleated skirt and a cape, and a high cylindrical hat:
the Medes are dressed in a fashion practical for nomadic life-a close-fitting knee-length tunic, belted
at the waist, trousers and a high rounded hat. They are often shown wearing in addition a long
sleeved coat, which is slung on their shoulders.
Schmidt in his great work on Persepolis' has called the two-piece Persian robe the kandys.He was
following Rawlinson's2SevenGreatMonarchies written in 1875, where however it was admitted that this
description was not universally accepted.3 Some thirty years after this Dalton4 had already suggested
that the word kandyswas more properly applied to the coat or mantle with empty hanging sleeves,
worn by the Medes. He supported this by reference to Greek texts, particularly to the works of
Xenophon. Indeed the relevant passages in Xenophon seem conclusively to prove the kandysto be
the long Median mantle.
In his imaginary work on Cyrus the Great, inspired by his admiration for Cyrus the Younger,
Xenophon tells us that Cyrus wore Median dress consisting of a purple tunic and a mantle
(X-rdv)
1 E. F. Schmidt, 'Ibid., p. 339, note 263.
PersepolisI, OIC LXVIII, p. 163, note 38.
2 George Rawlinson, The Seven Great Monarchies the Ancient
of SO0. M. Dalton, The Treasureof the Oxus, London; first edition
Eastern WorldII, Chicago and New York, 187i5, p. g39f. 19o5, p. 51; second edition 1926, p. xxxi f.
(Kcv8vS) and that he persuaded his companions to do likewise.5 Xenophon draws a vivid picture of
Cyrus:
" upon a chariot... wearinghis tiara upright,a purpletunic shot with white..., trousersof scarlet
(x-eor'v)
dye about his legs and a mantle (Kdv8vs) all of purple ".6
Cyrus presented a majestic and colourful figure, clad in the angry reds and purples of the warrior.
Red and purple long remained in Persian literature the colours appropriate to mighty warriors.7
Xenophon's description of an incident when Cyrus' baggage waggons were in difficulties confirms
our definition of the kandys:
" Whereverthey (the Persians)happenedto be standing,they threw off their purple mantles (KcW8veS) and
rushedforward... wearingthose expensivetunics (Xrrc'vas)which they have, and embroideredtrousers."8
Another passage from the Cyropaedia is perhaps even more decisive, for it states that cavalrymen only
put their arms through their mantles ~'rv KaV8JWv)when being inspected by the king.9 This
(St&
immediately recalls to our minds the pictures of the mantles with the empty sleeves shown at Persepolis.
It is perhaps relevant to note here that while modern authorities have applied the word kandysboth
to the Persian robe and to the Median mantle, only one contemporary writer in fact used it-namely
Xenophon. Herodotus prefers the words etla or bipos,10while Strabo uses kirTCov.11 Diodorus Siculus,
however, writing in the first century B.C.and presumably following Xenophon, does use the word
kandysin a description of Alexander, who after capturing Persepolis donned Iranian dress:
" Alexanderdressedhimselfin a white tunic (XL'riva)and the Persiansash and everythingelse except the
trousers and the long-sleeved upper garment (KV8UvoS)."'12
The word kandysitself is probably Iranian in origin. Widengrenl3 has identified it with the Polish word
kontusz(kontuJ),a great coat, and tracesit back to an Iranian kantuJ.It is to be expected that Xenophon,
who had lived among Iranians and was familiar with their habits, should have used the proper Iranian
word in order to describe their coats.
The kandyswas fastened by cords or lappets over the breast, and was often bordered with fur,
perhaps beaver as Iranians were especially fond of beaver-skins. In one of the Zoroastrian hymns
Anahit is described as wearing a garment made of three hundred beavers.14 The hymn claims that
it was necessary for each beaver to have given birth to four, for only then would the skins shine upon
the beholder with the glint of silver and gold. Quintus Curtius, writing in the first century A.D.,
describes the king's mantle as being made of cloth of gold, ornamented with golden hawks, attacking
each other with their beaks.15 These hawks were probably cut from thin sheets of beaten gold and
sewn on to the rich stuff of the mantle. A number of gold ornaments of this type in the form of lions
and griffinsare now in the Cincinnati Museum.16 In her descriptionof these gold plaques Miss Kantor
draws attention to the reliefs from Persepolis where the hems of the robes of Darius and Xerxes are
adorned with lines of marching lions. Similarly, the trousersof a man sketched on a gold plaque from
the Oxus treasure are ornamented with engraved birds.17 This custom of gold applique work long
precedes the Achaemenian era, as has been demonstrated by Oppenheim.18
s Xenophon, CyropaediaI, iii, 2 and VIII, ii, 40. M. E. L. Mallowan has kindly made available to me a letter
Ibid., VIII, iii, I3. written to him by Professor Sir Harold Bailey, who comments
' R. C. Zaehner, Zurvan, a ZoroastrianDilemma, Oxford, as follows: Iranian had a word kan to cover, which with the
1955,
p. 122. A fragment from the first chapter of the Greater common suffix tu would suitably give kan-tu,covering. Middle
Bundahisn: " Vay ... dons the red, wine-coloured and jewel- Parthian in Manichean texts has qntmg kantuy, a cloak; Pasto
bedecked robe of warriorhood ". In JNES XXII, 1963, of Afghanistan, kandzol, upper garment; Sanskrit and Pall,
pp. xo4--8, Lloyd B. Jensen writes on Tyrian purple, its kancukaand kanculika; Kroraina Prakrit (c. 300 A.D.) kanculi,
manufacture and the range of colours covered by that term; jacket; Nepali, kajuli.
14
deep red to bluish-purple. The reds and purples worn by Yasht 5, I29. I am indebted to Mr. George Morrison for this
Cyrus were probably all of Tyrian manufacture. reference.
6 Xenophon, AnabasisI, v, 8. 15 QyintusCurtiusIII, iii, 17.
* Xenophon, CyropaediaVIII, iii, io. 1 XVI, 1957, pp. 1-23. Helene J. Kantor, Achaemenid
JJNMES
10 HerodotusIII, 20 and IX, 0og. Institute.
Jewelleryin theOriental
17
x1 Strabo, GeographyXV, iii, 19. Dalton, ibid., second edition, No. 70.
12 DiodorusSiculus
XVII, 77, 5. Js ?NES VIII, 1949, pp. 172-93. A. L. Oppenheim, The Golden
1s Geo. Widengren, Artica(Uppsala)XI,pp. 235and 237. Professor of theGods.
Garments
IRANIAN DRESS IN THE ACHAEMENIAN PERIOD 123
The kandysserved as a coat probably common to all Iranian tribes, not only to the Medes, forJustin19
remarks that the later Parthians also wore it. The modern equivalent is the pizstin,a long coat
with narrow sleeves made of sheepskin, and this also is often worn slung over the shoulders rather
than with the arms inserted. Oriental shepherds in the hills from beyond Afghanistan to Iraq and
Turkey still wear this garment today.
Under their mantles the Medes wore tunics and trousers. Strabo20describes an army commander
as wearing three pairs of trousers and two tunics, of which the under-tunic was white and the outer
varicoloured. Common people also wore two tunics, which were probably made of leather, for one
of the arguments Sandanis used when trying to dissuade Crossusfrom making war on Cyrus was:
" Thou art about, my king, to make war againstmen who wear leatherntrousers,and have all their other
garmentsof leather."21
Leather tunics must have afforded good protection against spear-thrusts and wounding by arrows.
The tunic was belted at the waist by a girdle from which was suspendeda dagger, the akinakes.Quintus
Curtius describes the king as wearing a golden belt, girt woman fashion. 5 The Avesta also speaks of
golden belts, zaranydaiwydonghana.22 The belts worn today by the Parsees, symbolizing man's readiness
to serve God, are probably a continuation of earlier Zoroastrianbelief.23
Persian dress as depicted at Persepolis provides a contrast with the Median, for while the latter
was well adapted to the way of life pursued by nomad warriors and hunters, the Persian robe did not
share this advantage, being full and voluminous. A continuation of the custom of wearing voluminous
robes on ceremonial occasions can be seen in India today.24 Parsee bridegroomsput on a ceremonial
dress consisting of a loose flowing robe full of folds and curls, considered appropriatefor solemn or state
occasions. To this day the folds of these garments symbolize mystery, respect and rank, and it was
doubtless similar concepts that suggested the use of such robes to the Achaemenians, as is borne out
by their use in the scenes at Persepolis. These record a ceremony of great importance-the occasion
when all the peoples of the many lands conquered by the Great King came to lay their tribute and
submission at his feet. The Persians, the superior race, are shown wearing the flowing robe denoting
rank and lineage, as is to be expected on such a day of pageantry. Furthermore it is interesting to
observe that, although this robe must have hampered violent movement, it was none the less considered
appropriate that the king should wear it when involved in ritual combat with a ceremonial character.
The skirt of the robe was already known and worn on important religious occasions before the
Achaemenian era. A bronze idol now in a private collection in Paris shows a man seated between two
horse protomes; he is wearing an elaborate skirt similar to that worn by the Persians at Persepolis.25
It is even more clearly shown on the silver plaque now in the Cincinnati Art Museum26 which is thought
to represent Zurvan giving birth to the twins Ahuramazda and Ahriman. Zurvan was attended by a
number of priests, carrying branches. Two of the priest-figures wear the Persian skirt. Professor
Ghirshman has suggested a date for these two objects of the eighth to the seventh centuries B.C.
The exact construction of the Persian dress as seen at Persepolishas been disputed. Herzfeld27has
suggested that it was similar to the Greek chitonand consisted of a single piece of material, almost two
yards wide, with a hole in the middle through which the head passed and that it was belted round the
waist. Roes,28however, disagreeswith this and conclusively proves that the garment cannot have been
as described by Herzfeld. Having studied the Persepolis reliefs and the silver statuette from the Oxus
Treasure, she attempted, with the aid of a dress designer from Utrecht, to reconstruct the robe: the
skirt on the basis of narrow lengths of material sewn to produce the elaborate folding seen in the
sculptures; the cape with separate pieces inserted to give the effect of the side pleats. While she was
the first to demonstrate that the garment consisted of two pieces, yet her reconstruction failed to take
19 R. Ghirshman, Persia, From the Origins to Alexanderthe Great,
Justin, xli, 2. 25
so StraboXV, iii, Ig. Thames & Hudson, 1964, pl. 55.
21Herodotus 26 Ghirshman, ibid., pl. 64.
I, 71.
nTashtXV, 57. 27 F. Sarre and E. Herzfeld, IranischeFelsreliefs, Berlin, 1910,
2'J. J. Modi, The Religious Ceremoniesand Customsof the Parsees, p. 51; E. Herzfeld, Iran in theAncientEast, London, 1941, p. 259-
Bombay, 1937, P. 173. 28 BibliothecaOrientalis8, 1951, pp. 137-41, pl. III, Anne Roes,
"4 Modi, ibid., p. 21. The AchaemenidRobe.
full account of the extreme stylization both of the sculptures at Persepolis and the silver statuette. It
would be as misleading to attempt to reconstruct by stitched folds many of the garments on Jan van
Eyck's Ghent altar-piece, so carefully and unrealistically arranged by the artist for the sole purpose of
enriching his painting.29 Similarly at Persepolis there is clearly a tradition of sculptural stylization
evident throughout the entire decorative concept. It remains, however, to elucidate the dress form on
which the sculptor based the details of his stylization.
The upper part of the robe certainly appears to consist of a loose cape, put on over the head and
tucked into a belt at back and front. Additional fullness was given to the back of the cape by the four
loose pleats inserted behind the elbow.
The folds of the skirt are much accentuated by the stylization of the sculptures, as is most clearly
shown by the Oxus silver figurine. Here the folds are completely subordinated to the general design,
particularly at the back, where semi-circlesdescend the length of the skirt at spaced intervals, with no
possibility of portraying the actual folds of the skirt.
A further problem to any reconstruction of the skirt is that when it is represented frontally at
Persepolis it is shown with two distinct groups of pleats, continuing the line of the knotted belt-ends.
This might suggest that the skirt was made with two pleat groups, only one of which would show in
profile views of the skirt. But the Oxus figurine, one of the few figuresin the round of the Achaemenian
period, shows only one central pleat. On the available evidence it is impossible to decide if the skirt
had one set of pleats or two. The double pleats on the Persepolisfigures may well be no more than a
sculptural mannerism; on the other hand, the maker of the Oxus statuette, who only showed a single
pleat, was also confined by sculptural limitations and could hardly have placed double pleats on so
small a figure. He may thus have been forced to reproduce only a single line where there were in
fact two.
Whichever may have been the case, any reconstructionof the skirt must show loose folds curving
round the body and being pulled up into pleats, either in a single or in double groups. This method
29 M. J. Friedlinder, From Van Eyck to Breugel, Phaidon Press, 1956, pls. I-xo.
IRANIAN DRESS IN THE ACHAEMENIAN PERIOD 125
takes into account both the Oxus skirt with its semi-circularcurves down the back and the Persepolis
sculptures. A possible construction may be suggested by the skirt of the Indian sari, for here too
material is wrapped round the body and bunched into vertical pleats in front. The general effect
created is of loose folds curving downwardsfrom the waist and of a group of central pleats-a simplified
version of the stylized Persian skirt.
While on the subject of Persian dress it is perhaps relevant to note here the various types of hat
worn by the king, his nobles, warriorsand servants. While the Medes are seen wearing only two types,
one for nobility and another for servants, wearers of the flowing Persian robe are shown with no less
than six different forms of hat.
The head-dressworn by the king and his Persiancourtiersare basically all of one type-a cylindrical
hat, called by Schmidt the tiara,of which there are the following four variations:
(a) A simple circlet, low and unfluted-so low that the crown of the man's head can be seen rising
out of it.
(b) Exactly the same type as (a) but higher.
(c) The same high cylinder as (b), but fluted.
(d) A much higher version of (c), appearing somewhat exaggerated and in fact seen only on the
inscribed relief of Artaxerxes III on the western staircase of Darius' Palace.
Types (a), (b) and (c) are worn both by the king and his nobles without any apparent distinction, while
type (d) is seen only on attendant Persians flanking a late inscribed panel.
Antecedents of the fluted Persian hat can be found at least as early as the ninth century B.c. Dyson,
in a discussion on the appearance of ninth century men in Western Iran has pointed out that objects
found at Hasanlu show representationsof men wearing hats similar to those worn much later by the
Medes and Persian at Persepolis.30The fluted hat is again recorded on one of the Luristan series of
bronze pins,31dated a century or so later. While the version on the Luristan pin seems to be made of
feathers, it is impossible to be at all certain of what the Persepolis hats were made-certainly not
feathers, as the sculptors would surely have indicated this, but perhaps leather or felt.
A further variation of Persian head-dressis the simple cord or fillet (e), worn by the guards from
Susa. This is a continuation of the old Elamite custom of going into battle almost bareheaded, as can be
seen on Assyrian reliefs from Nmeveh.
The final shape of Persian hat recorded at Persepolis is worn by servants, and consists of a loose
covering, probably made of strips of linen (f). This is suggested by Strabo's20statement that common
so R. H. Dyson, " Ninth Century Men in Western Iran ", 31 Ghirshman, ibid., pl. 96.
Archaeology17, Spring 1964, PP. 3-I I, fig. 5.
people wore pieces of linen wrapped round their heads. The linen covering is wound round the chin,
although the mouth is left free. In real life it is probable that the linen band covered the mouth,
because anything borne by the servants to the king needed to be protected from defilement by their
breath. Zoroastrian tradition still preserves the belief that breath defiles all it touches. A similarly
shaped chin-guard is also shown on the Median servants (g) who may be presumed to have worn it
for the same reasons. It is only this chin covering that differentiates the hat of Median servants
from that worn by the nobility of this tribe (h).
(C) (f) (g) (h)
Any discussionof the dress of the Achaemenian period must perforce be based very largely on the
evidence of the reliefs at Persepolis, together with occasional references from Greek authors, both
contemporary and later. Just as any interpretationsof the literary referencescan only be a matter of
opinion, the evidence of the sculptures is equally difficult to reconstruct. Previous writers on this
subject have perhaps been insufficiently aware of the fact that the sculptors must have been as much
influenced by their traditional mannerisms as by their attempts to interpret actual garments.
Pl. Ia. Le vase de Hassanlu, avec son monde de divinitis, de monstres et de he'ros. . . reprisenteun des documentsinsignes
de l'archdologie du Moyen-Orient ancien.
susceptibled'itre l'expressionmaltressede cetteconception

Pl. Ib. Frise de la borduresupe'rieure, symbolique.
des dilmentsconduisantle cfar au taureau,de la boucheduqueljaillit un grandflot.
P1. IIa. Le dieusupre"me
P1. IIb. . . . et le roi-priteen libationdevantson dieu.

Pl. III. Biliers sculpte'ssur lesfrises del'escalierde l'Apadanade Persipolis (Ve s.av.J.C.). Timoignage
saisissantde la permanence des traditionsa traversles sidcles.
127
LE VASE EN OR DE HASSANLU
Le Defile du Cortege divin.*
By Madame PouranDiba
(Dipl6mfe de l'Ecole du Louvre)
Le vase de Hassanlu, avec son monde de divinit s, de heros, et de monstres, de meme que par sa
rare finesse de travail, se classe parmi les oeuvres maitresses de l'Iran occidental,et represente un des
documents insignesjusqu'ici connus dans I'archeologiedu Moyen-Orient ancien.1
'
Il represente l'interet majeur de provenir des fouilles scientifiques des niveaux stratigraphiques
bien determines. Sa valeur documentaire consiste d'une part dans son iconographie, et d'autre part
dans son style lineaire incomparable pour la realisationduquel diff6rentestechniques ont 6te employees.
L'equilibre, I'harmonie et l'homogen6it6 de son execution permettent de supposer la main experi-
ment e d'un seul artiste, en meme temps que son appartenance directe au courant traditionnel de
l'orfivrerie de l'Iran occidental.
La definition de cette tradition dans le contexte et dans le temps est le problkme mame que pose
l'etude de cette piece.
La vase est-il sortie d'un atelier local ou bien posside-t-il une autre origine? Son execution precede
t-elle de peu la date du IXe sidcle avant J.C., 6poque oh il a 6tC enterrt, ou bien est-il I'hfritage d'une
epoque anterieure?
Une autre question se pose 6galement: les sujets et les themes repr6sentfs ont-ils 6tC choisis par
l'orfivre dans un but purement dfcoratif, ou bien existe-t-il un programme symbolique et didactique
determine avec des relations definies entre eux ?
Dans I'absence totale de textes 6pigraphiquesjusqu'ici, seule une analyse du style et de l'iconographie
peut permettre de formuler certaines hypotheses.
Quelquessuggestionssur les sourcesd'inspirationdes themes.

Nous ignorons tout, t l'heure actuelle, de la culture spirituelle du peuple t qui a appartenu le vase
de Hassanlu. Cependant, quel que soit le culte, les scenes reprfsentfes semblent exprimer un symbolisme
qui, a la fagon d'une fresque d'abside destin6e a l'enseignement des fiddles, devait r6sumer l'essence
m~me de cette culture.
De ce symbolisme, il importe de dfgager I'interpritation et les origines, tout en essayant de dfmaler
'
la part des emprunts ext rieurs et celle des 16lmentsindigenes qui auraient participe6 la composition
t la fois subtile et magistrale de cette page mythologique.
Les monuments archdologiques du Moyen-Orient ancien qui suivent de trbs pros les textes littdraires,
constituent a priori une base de comparaison et unl'interprgtation
apport valable pour des scenes du
vase.
Il est cependent certain que adoption d'une telle source implique ndcessairementla notion d'une
identitu de vie spirituelle et la pratique de mythes semblables.
* This article is based on a book by Madame Diba which is to be published in 1965 under the title
Un Universcosmique. Le Vaseen Or de Hassanlu.-Editor
1 R. H. Dyson, Jr., " Digging in Iran, Hasanlu 1958 ", dans Andr6 Godard, L'Art de l'Iran, Paris 1962, pp. 95-6.
Expedition, the bulletin of the University Museum of the Pouran Diba, " L'Orfivrerie en Iran au dibut du premier
University of Pennsylvania. Printemps 1959, 1/3, PP- 4-18. millinaire avan J.C., d'apris le vase de Hassanlu". M6moire
R. H. Dyson, Jr., " Where the golden bowl of Hasanlu was soutenu A l'Ecole du Louvre, Paris, Fevrier 1963-
found ", ILN, 23 Janvier 1960, pp. 132-4; 13 Fevrier 5960, Miss Edith Porada, "The Hasanlu Bowl", Expedition,
pp. 250-1; 30 Septembre 1961, pp. 354-7. printemps 1959, pp. 19-22.
Exposition, " 700oooans d'Art en Iran ", Paris, Petit-Palais, E. Porada, Iran Ancien,Albin Michel, Paris 1963, pp. 83-9.
1961, cat.
En nous engageant dans cette voie, nous allons constater au cours du developpement qui suit, des
modifications sensibles des themes qui nous sont deja connus, introduites par I'orfivre Iranien. C'est
precisement cette diff6rence d'expression qui constitue, a notre sens, l'6`1ment autochtone de la
composition. Precisons toutefois, que cette consideration ne s'applique qu' Il'iconographie, alors que
le style et le traitement semble appartenir a la tradition artistique de l'Iran, sur laquelle nous reviendrons
plus loin.
Bien qu'il n'existe pas de relation apparente entre les scenes, il est n6anmoins possible, que l'id e
maitresse de cette conception symbolique se trouve dans la frise des motifs de la bordure sup6rieure
du vase:
- La triade de divinit6s conductrices de char.
- Le taureaux aux flots jaillissants et le porteur du gobelet.
- Les offrandes de moutons.
Tandis que l'ensemble des scenes qui occupent le reste de la panse, sans souci de zones ni de registres,
concourt a% interpreter une s6rie de mythes 16gendaires ou 6piques, qui faisaient partie inh6rente de la
litterature religieuse chez presque tous les peuples de I'Asie-Ant6rieure.
- La d~esse nue sur bdliers.
- Le personnage de I'archer et I'aigle portant une femme.
- La triade des lutteurs.
- La
d6esse au lion et les trois poignards.
- La libation devant un tr6ne vide.
- Le combat du
h6ros contre le personnage hybride.
- La presentation du nouveau-ne.
L'origine de ces 16gendes remonte en grande partie aux poemes mythologiques ou heroiques des
scribes m6sopotamiens, bien qu'ils ne soient pas toujours exprim6s sous un meme aspect. Ainsi, les
mythes akkadieris sont de6j diff6rents de ceux des Sumeriens, et varieront chez les peuples qui ont subi
leur influence. Neanmoins la tradition saest transmise d'age en age et la r6daction reste, a peu de chose
pres, la meme dans les divers textes.
Analyse et interpritationde la frise des chars

Le d6fil6 des trois divinitis montdes sur char, nous rapproche distinctement des anciens cultes de
l'Asie-Mineure.
La conception du dieu de l'orage avec le taureau comme attribut, est une idde largement r6pandue
dans tous les pays montagneux de la Syrie du nord, chez les Hittites comme chez les Hourrites.
Les premiers exemples apparaissent dans les tablettes cappadociennes du IIe millknaire proto-
hittites,2 oh chaque ville importante semble avoir eu son propre dieu de l'orage.
Post6rieurs at ces tablettes, les monuments qui illustrent le mieux ce culte sont les bas-reliefs hittites
des sanctuaires en plein-air de Malatya et de Yazilikaya, s'6tageant du XVe au XIIe sikcle avant J.C.3
Entre les deux, la glyptique fournit un certain nombre de documents dont le cylindre dit Tyszkie-
wicz, qui etablit la liaison entre les empreintes sur tablettes cappodociennes et les monuments hittites
classiques.4
Sur le vase de Hassanlu, le conducteur de char attelk au taureau occupe vraisemblablement le
premier rang, tout comme le dieu de l'orage des bas-reliefs de Malatya et le grand relief de Yazilikaya.
En effet, les proportions imposantes de l'animal et le caracthre l61abor6de son traitement semblent
appuyer cette hypothbse. Si bien que malgr6 l'aspect enchevetr6 et le rythme d&cousu des scenes, on
est tentt de considfrer ce groupe comme 6tant le symbole-clk des actions qui se diroulent dans ce chaos.
Si le costume et la coiffure ne sont pas strictement identiques t ceux du personnage des monuments
que nous venons de citer, par contre un detail important attire l'attention: la figure du vase porte sur
2 Rent Dussaud, Les tablettes cappadociennes du muste du K. Bittel, R. Naumann, H. Otto, razilikaya, Leipzig, J. C.
Louvre, dans La Lydieet ses voisinsaux hautesipoques. Geuthner, Hinrichs, 1941.
Paris 1930, p. 54, fg 4, pl. III: 2. W. Andrae, Alte Feststrassenim Hahen Osten, Leipzig 1941.
3 Louis Delaporte, Malatya Arslantdpd, fac I, Paris
1940o. 4 H. Frankfort, CylinderSeals, Londres 1939, Macmillan, pl.
XIiii(n), (o).
LE VASE EN OR DE HASSANLU 129
ses 6paules un e16ment qui pourrait s'interpr6tercomme une paire d'ailes. Or, parmi les multiples
repr6sentationsdes dieux de l'orage on en trouve un sur les reliefs de Malatya qui est precisement muni
d'ailes, et qui se tient debout sur un lion ailk. Trait que les sp6cialistes considerent comme une
importation hourrite dans l'iconographie hittite.5
D'autre part, la figure de Hassanlu a comme animal attribut le taureau. Or, l'iconographie du dieu
hittite Teshoub comme la divinit6 phenicienne Adad de la tempete, est toujours li6e a*celle de la
chauvauch6e, symbole des nudes, 6tant entendu qu'a cette 6poque on ne chauvauchait qu'en char on
ne montait pas a cheval, mais on attelait a des chariots, boeufs onagres, puis chevaux.
Cette attitude change cependant selon les modes et les 6poques. Ainsi, sur un cylindre cappadocien
le dieu apparait debout sur le taureau, tandis que la figure traditionnelle du dieu de la foudre telle que
la concevaient les Assyriensnous est conservee par la belle stdle d'Arslan-Tash, avec un pied pos6 sur
les cornes du taureau et l'autre appuy6 sur sa croupe.6
Par cons6quent, le personnage du vase de Hassanlu a bien des chances d'etre identifi6 avec la
divinit6 de l'orage Teshoub ou Adad, d6rivant du panth6on hittite, hourrite ou phenicien du IIe
millknaire avant J.C.
Le second et le troisiemeconducteursde char attele a un cheval ou un onagre, sont coiff6srespective-
ment de disque ail6 et de croissantde lune, et rappellent par leurs coiffuresles divinit6s Shamash et Sin.
Ce rapprochement ne nous parait guere insolite, puisque dans la ville d'Assur et dans la th6ologie
babylonienne le culte d'Adad 6tait associ6aux dieux c6l6stesShamash et Sin, et que dans l'tpilogue du
Code de Hammurabi le nom d'Adad, " maitre d'abondance, crue de la source " est joint ta celui de
Shamash dans l'exercise de la justice.7
En outre, sur les bas-reliefs rupestres de Maltai au N-E de Khorsabad, ex6cutes sur l'ordre de
Sennach6rib et repr6sentant des corteges divins conduits par Assur,8 nous avons successivement les
divinites cosmiques associ6es: Adad, Shamash, Sin, dans la serie ofi figurent 6galement Assur et Ishtar,
et ofi Shamash est debout sur un cheval, donc toujours li6 t l'id6e de la chevauchee. Tandis qu'on
retrouve Shamash dans la meme attitude sur la stdle d'Asharhadon provenant de Til-Barsib.9
A moins que nous n'ayons sur le vase de Hassanlu une transpositiondu theme de la procession de
Yazilikaya, ofUTeshoub est accompagn6 dans une intention symbolique, des deux taureaux " Seri " et
" Hourri ", le premier dont le nom aurait le sens de "jour " place aupres de la deesse Soleil; et le
second, dont le nom signifit " nuit ", aupres du dieu de l'orage et de l'obscurcissement.10
Dans ce cas, nous serionsen presence du grand dieu de l'orage, divinit6 des elements a qui le temple
est peut-etre d6di6, accompagn6 de ses deux acolytes clestes.
En dehors de ce defil6 cosmique consacr6 aux dieux des 6l1ments, dont l'importance est soulignte
par leur symbolisme meme, nous voyons figures deux des rites traditionnels du culte du Moyen-Orient
ancien: la libation, et le sacrifice.
La libation est essentiellementdans le culte un acte d'offrande exerc6 par le roi ou le pretre. Mais
elle est en meme temps un rite de fertilite, qui symbolise et attire la pluie indispensable a la vegetation.
Ainsi, la libation du Sum6rien Gud6a retombe sur un vase dans lequel plonge une plante.'1
Or, sur le vase de Hassanlu, nous avons le grand taureau attribut de Teshoub, qui dtverse un flot
puissant de liquide devant un personnage de profil qui lkve a deux main un gobelet.
Le theme de taureau crachant des flots est en lui-meme significatif, car il atteste une fois de plus
l'identification du conducteur du char avec le dieu de la fertilit6.
Ce motif relativement rare dans l'iconographie du Moyen-Orient ancien, nous l'observonstoutefois
sur deux monuments du IIIe milltnaire: Un cylindre provenant d'Ur, de l'6poque d'Akkad,12 et un
' R. Dussaud, Les religionsdes Hittites et des Hourrites,des Phinicicns Georges Contenau, MAO, III, p. i280. Andr6 Parrot, Assur,
et des Syriens,collection " Mana ", Paris 1949, p. 338. Gallimard, Paris 1961, p. 71.
* Andr6 Parrot, Sumer,Gallimard, Paris I96o, fg 84, provenant * F. Thureau-Dangin et M. Dunand, Til-Barsib, p. 152, pl. XII.
de Hadatu (Arslan-Tash), VIIIe av. J.C. Idem.: fg 89, le dieu 10R. Dussaud, op. cit., p. 347-
Teshoub, fin IIe-d&but Ier millUniare, provenant de Til-Barsib. 1x Andr6 Parrot, Sumer,fg 281-2. Il s'agit de la stble d'Ur-Nammu
Mus&edu Louvre et d'Alep. (XXIIe s. av. J.C.), mus6e de Philadelphie.
'Ed. Dhorme, Les religionsde Babylonieet d'Assyrie. Mana, Paris 12 L. Legrain, Ur ExcavationX, fg 186.
1949, P. 97 ss, et 126-7. 13 H. Frankfort, The Art and Architectureof the Ancient Orient,
8FranCois Thureau-Dangin, RA, XXI, i924, pp. 185-97. Penguin Books, Middlesex, 1954, fg 9.
vase en steatite provenant de Khafadjeh, au British-Museum.13Sur le premier document, le taureau

crache un double filet de liquide qui envahit la ligne du sol, tandis que dans le coin un petit bison
accroupi se trouve place au-dessus du cartouche portant le nom du libateur.
Si l'identification exacte des trois conducteurs nous 6chappe, neanmoins les relations de cette
dernieres image avec les mythes de fertilit6, chers aux croyancesmesopotamiennesdemeurentcertaines.
Des flotsjaillissant de la bouche du taureau de Khafadjeh surgit une plante tout comme le vase devant
lequel Gudea execute sa libation.
Et enfin, bien que sous un aspect diff6rent, il ne serait peut-etre pas risque de faire un rapproche-
ment avec le theme bien connu des " vases jaillissants ", dans lesquels les specialistesreconnaissent ce
meme symbole de la fertilite.
On comprend ais6ment l'origine de la conception de ce culte et sa manifestation frequente dans le
domaine artistique. Les Manneens, cette population qui est supposee avoir habite le site de Hassanlu,
aussi bien que leurs voisins les mesopotamiens, avaient a compter sur les facteurs climatiques qui
conditionnaient leur existance et leur prosperit6. Sur ces versants montagneux des Zagros de meme
que sur les plateaux voisins, l'eau de la fonte des neiges et celle des pluies printanieres alimentait les
canaux d'irrigation. Il est donc normal que des figurationscomme celles dont nous venons d'6tudier et
jusqu'aux certaines conceptions telle que la c&r6moniedu nouvel an, illustrent cet eldment essentiel de
la vie qu'est la fertilitY,et occupe le tout premier plan de leurs croyances spirituelles.
'
Quant au personnage du libateur, serait-il, le roi, le pretre, ou les deux la fois? Il est difficile de
le determiner.
Toujours est-il que son costume et plus particulierement sa coiffure diffbre de celle des autres
personnages du vase, et rappelle la tenue sacerdotale des officiants des temples.
II pourrait tre une variante des multiples figures sacerdotales que nous connaissons dans les
monuments sumero-akkadiens. Il suffit de se rappeler a titre d'exemple, les plaques religieuses de
Lagash, le vase rituel d'Uruk, les statuettes de Khafadjeh, ou les statues de pr&tresdes temples, de Mari,
dans lesquels les personnagessont representestant6t barbus tant6t imberbes, mais ofi la nudit6 du crane
est de stricte rigueur.
Il est meme des cas oi0 le roi accomplissantla fonction religieuse, rev&tune calotte qui imite cette
denudation.
Donc, roi ou pretre, le personnage du vase accomplit un geste de libation, dont il est difficile de
savoir s'il s'agit d'une offrande ou d'une supplication, puisque la divinite semble pr6cisementrepondre
a cette requete en prodiguant les flots bienfaisants.
Derriere le pretre s'avancent deux personnages tenant chacun un mouton par la criniere et par la
croupe.
Nous avons ici le sacrifice proprement dit, le sacrifice sanglant, car dans les traditions les plus
archaiques le sang repandu etait analogue tala libation. Sur ce genre de sacrifice les documents sont
nombreux. Parfois la representationde la c6r monie dans ses details donne pr6t xte a des r6alisations
artistiques pleines de naturalisme et de sens d'observation.
Le mouton est I'animal qu'on immole de pref6renceen l'honneur des dieux, il est meme surprenant
de constater dans les textes religieux les chiffres d'entries du gros et du petit betail dans les temples de
Sumer et d'Akkad.
Nombre de bas-reliefsnous font assisterat un sacrifice sanglant et montrent que l'acte important de
ce rite 6tait l'offrande du sang. On peut voir I'illustration de ce theme dans une vari~t6 de monuments
m~sopotamiens.
Une plaquette de nacre grav~e, provenant de Mari de l'dpoque pr~sargonique, pr~sente un sacrifice
de belier dans toutes ses phases avec une prodigieuse minutie.14
Le panneau de peinture du musde du Louvre provenant 6galement du palais de Mari, d~crit la
c~rtmonie du sacrifice du taureau, dans une composition d'une incomparable grandeur.15
14 Andr6 Parrot, Sumer, fg 171 b, mus6e pent deux hommes. La piece provient du temple de Shamash,
d'Alep. Il s'agit d'un
ensemble disloqu6, qui reconstitu6 repr6sente une scene de secteur 25 P.
sacrifice rituel, " l'immolation du b6lier ", A laquelle partici- 15 Andr6 Parrot, op. cit., fg 344-5, et Syria 1937, fac 4. Mus6e du
Louvre.
LE VASE EN OR DE HASSANLU 131
Les textes nous apprennent que le serviteur amine l'animal a sacrifier, et dans des circonstances
exceptionnelles, le roi lui-meme fait l'offrandedu sang en le versant aux pieds des dieux. Et ils ajoutent,
qu'a cet effet le roi se met en 6tat de sacerdoce en revetant un grand manteau et une calotte comme
coiffure.l6
Cettedescriptionsemblecorrespondrea la scenedu vasede Hassanlu.Careffectivementle person-
du
nage gobeletpourrait au
s'identifier roi dans l'executiondu rite, auquelles serviteursamenentles
animaux B immoler.
Ainsidonc, en attendantque quelquetextevienneconfirmernotrehypothese,pourrions-nous voir
danscettefriseune transposition
des dieuxdu pantheonhourrite,hittiteou mesopotamienet leursrites,
dont le culte se pratiquait 6galement chez les Iraniens du debut du Ier millhnaire av. J.C. ?
Friseconqueavec une sobriet6exceptionnelledansson symbolisme,ouidefilele dieu supremedes
accompagn6 de son cortege de divinitis acolytes, d'adorant et de sacrificateurs. Mais 6gale-
1Clments
ment un prdludecrdant une atmospherede puret6 mystique, qui prepare le spectateur et lui fait mieux
comprendrela valeursymboliquede la 1kgendedontla suitedes episodesserontexprimespar les autres
schnes illustrdessur le vase.
Quelquesremarquessur les traditionsde l'orfevrerieiranienne

Le jeu inevitable des emprunts dans la culture artistique d'un peuple ne peut enlever a celle-ci son
originalit6. Ce qui constitue l'originalitt d'une culture est la fagon dont elle a adapt6, assimilt et
transformf selon ses propres gofts les apports regus afin de faire surgir un nouvel art, celui-la meme qui
incite Ades recherches.
La personnalitC d'un art n'est pas son refus des apports, mais dans sa fagon de les accueillir et de les
interptdter, et pour cela I'Occident est le meilleur exemple.
Le vase de Hassanlu, d'apres les quelques scenes dont nous venons d'analyser, porte dans son
iconographie l'empreinte inddniable de presque tous ses voisins du Moyen-Orient ancien, contem-
porains ou antrieurs t sa conception. Fait qui ne doit pas nous suprendre lorsqu'on tient compte du
r6le joue par les guerres dont il resultait des apports nouveaux dis aux pillages, aux impositions. Le
r61e du commerce et des ?changes ne doit pas non plus 6tre oubliC.
Les themes repr~sentis sur le vase attestent une transposition flagrante des textes littdraires et des
monuments plastiques de la M~sopotamie du Nord, de l'Urartu, de l'Anatolie m6ridionale et meme de
la Phtnicie.
Ses personnagesde divinit6s ou de
hsros rappellent sans hesitation les rdcitslgendaires akkadiens,
babyloniens, hittites, ou hourrites, et l'attitude de chacun dans leurs divers exploits est d'une similitude
transparente avec ce que nous connaissons
detjte dans l'art et la littrature des uns et des autres.
Cependant, ce qui constitue l'originalit6 de l'orf6vrerie artistique de l'Iran ancien, et dont il est
difficile de lui contester le caractere, est cette transmutation savamment realisdequi eclate telle une
marque d'atelier sur les elements empruntes aux voisins.
Le vase de Hassanlu, de meme qu'un nombre djat considerable d'objets provenant soit des fouilles
clandestines des dernieres annees, soit des fouilles scientifiques recentes consid6res par les specialistes
comme 6tant relativement ses contemporains, composent l'un des ensembles decoratifs les plus
homogenes que l'on connaisse dans I'histoireartistique d'un peuple.17
Cette race de montagnards et de cavaliers que nous retrouvons en ce debut du premier millknaire
av. J.C., est frfquemment en conflit mais surtout attaquie par ses voisins de l'Ouest et du Nord. Est-ce
pr6cis~ment sa condition d'insdcurit6 territoriale qui la pousse t la production d'objets prfcieux,
facilement transportables, que constitue I'orfivrerie? Est-ce le climat dconomique et social du pays qui
favorise I'exdcution de telles commandes, et encourage ce luxe aristocratique?
Toujours est-il qu'd Hassanlu, ou il nous semble avoir affaire t des s~dentaires qui ont laiss6 les
vestiges d'une trbs belle architecture, la production artistique du travail du metal se manifeste avec
autant de maitrise et de gocit.
16 Ren6 Dussaud, op. cit., p. 348. nous avons consacr6un chapitre (Confrontationavec d'autres
"7 Dans notre m6moire " L'Orfivrerie en Iran au d6but du oeuvresiraniennes),Aune 6tudecomparativeentre le Vase de
premier mill6naire avant J.C., d'apres le Vase de Hassanlu ", Hassanluet quelquespiecesprovenantdes r6gionslimitrophes.
Chez les uns comme chez les autres, le travail de l'orfavrerie semble base sur une tradition aux
de l'ensemble.Il s'agit d'un mode d'expression
caracteres distinctifs,dont le plus saillant est la conception
fonda sur l'imagination illimitee de l'artiste, en dehors de tout conformiseet independant des formules.
Il emploit tant6t la symetrie la plus stricte tant6t un d6sordrevoulu degag6 de la monotonie ennuyeuse
d'une composition agencee.
Une schimatisation savamment doslequi traduit au moyen de termes sobres les motifs reperables a
travers le jeu des emprunts, sans pour cela negliger totalement le c6t6 realiste de l'etre vivant.18
C'est un art a la fois simpleet humain,sans exces de symbolisme et qui emprunte ses 6~Cmentsa la
nature meme pour exprimer le surnaturel.
Sauf dans des cas exceptionnels comme celui du vase de Hassanlu, dont le decor est intentiellement
didactique, dans l'ensemble il s'agit d'une plastique dont le but est avanttoutdecoratif.Le souci majeur
de l'artiste est d'obtenir l'effet ornemental, pour la realisation duquel il puise indiff6remment dans le
rtip6rtoiredes voisins aussi bien que dans ses propres sources.
C'est un art dont le caractbre hiroiquedominele symbolismeet dont le sens humain depasse le fabuleux.
Dans plusieurs scenes du vase, pour representer les personnages mythiques de la litt6rature du
'
Moyen-Orient ancien, l'artiste n'a pas hesit6 leur preter une allure de heros en pleine action.
La procession des trois divinites en char, bien qu'elle symbolise un mythe religieux, semble mal
cacher le pr6texte de representerun defilk d'auriges, dans lequel le sens du mouvement et la perfection
plastique des montures, les onagres en particulier, renvoie au second plan la presence divine des
conducteurs.
Ces caracteristiquess'appliquent, quant au vase de Hassanlu, A presque toutes les scenes illustries.
Malheureusement le cadre restraint de cet expos6 ne permet pas de les decrire entierement ni de nous
etendre davantage.
En dehors des particularitis de forme et de style, dont nous venons de signaler, le vase de Hassanlu
presente au point de vue de I'histoire de I'Art, un des documents inestimable dans I'archdologie
Iranienne.
IL apporte une lumiere toute neuve sur l'hiatus historique qui a exist6 jusqu'ici dans la culture
iranienne occupant des zones d'ombre au'-dela de l'avenement de l'Empire des Medes.
L'int&retstratigraphiqued'une part, et d'autre part la position geographique du site de Hassanlu,
dans le Mannai du nord, centre de rayonnement des ateliers artistiquesdu travail du metal, augmente
considerablementla portee scientifique des recherches de la Mission.
En effet, le vase de Hassanlu est un temoignage precieux de la permanence des traditions de l'art
Iranien tout le long de son histoire. Car si l'orf6vreriea subi des influences 6trangeres,la lignee de ses
grands artistes semble avoir maintenu son originalit6 dans un art essentiellement divers.
Sans une pareille continuit6, comment expliquer la ressemblancesaisissantedes bdlierssur le vase,
'
avec sa reproduction fiddle sur les frises de l'escalier de l'Apadana Persepolis. Sinon comme une
preuve de la survivance et de la compinetration, a quatre si&clesd'intervalle, dans les arts plastiques
de l'epoque Achem6nide, d'un style n6 sur le sol iranien, qui s'est constamment maintenu, et dont tres
certainement un jour les decouvertes a venir fourniront les chainons qui manquent.
18 " 7000 amns

L'Exposition illustr6lesexemplesde ce traitoriginalde l'artIranien.
d'Arten Iran", Paris1961,a abondamment
BRITISH
INSTITUTE
OF PERSIANSTUDIES
APPLICATION MEMBERSHIP
FORINDIVIDUAL
NAME............
..........................................................................................................................................................
DESCRIPTION
.......................................................................................................................................................
(Title, Decorations, Degrees)
ADDRESS
..............................................................................................................................................................
OCCUPATION
.......................................................................................................................................................
Interestin or connectionwith Iran......................................................
I wish to applyfor Membershipof the BritishInstituteof PersianStudiesas an

individualsubscribingmemberpaying"?I/?2 10s. per annumand *enclosecheque/
banker'sorder for this sum.
*I wish to makea covenantfor a periodof seven years.
Signature
.............................................................................................................................
Date..............................................................
* Delete whichever is inapplicable.
Paymentmaybe madein Dollarsor Rialsat current rates of exchange,e.g. ?2 10s.=$7.25.
APPLICATION
FORMEMBERSHIP
BY A CORPORATE
BODY
NAME.E
....................................................................................................................................................................
ADDRESS
.............................................................................................................................................................
Applicationis hereby made for Membershipof the BritishInstituteof Persian

Studies as a corporatesubscribingmember paying the sum of ?50 per annum.
A *cheque/banker's order for this sum is enclosed.
Signature...............................
Date................................................
* Delete whichever is inapplicable.
MEMBERSHIP-SUBSCRIPTIONS
Under paragraph i i of the Articles of Association of the Institute, the

Council has prescribed the following scale of subscription for members.
I. Individuals
(a) Those subscribing ?2 los. per annum or more. They will have the
right to receive an invitation to the Annual General Meeting and other
meetings of the Institute and will receive the Journal of the Institute,
which it is hoped to publish annually.
(b) Those subscribing ?i per annum. They will have rights as in (a)
above, except that they will not receive the Journal; they will, how-
ever, be able to purchase the Journal, if they wish, at a price ofi1 I15s.
for each issue.
2. Corporate bodies
The subscription will be a minimum of ?50 per annum. They will
have the right to nominate one representative to attend meetings of
the Institute and vote thereat (paragraph9 of the Articles). They will
receive one copy of the Journal.
3. Unincorporated bodies
The subscription will be a minimum of ?50 per annum and the
privileges will be as for corporate members subject to the provision
of paragraphs 7 and 8 of the Articles of Association.
4. Forms should be sent to the Hon. Secretary, J. E. F. Gueritz, Esq., M.A.,

85 Queen's Road, Richmond, Surrey.
FORM OF COVENANT
I .........................................................................................................................................................................................
ofof
.........................................................................................................................................................................................
hereby covenant with the British Institute of PersianStudies that for a period of seven
years from the date of this Deed or during my lifetime (whichever shall be the shorter
period) I will pay to the said Society from my general fund of taxed income such an
amount annuallyas after deduction of income tax at the Standard Rate yields the net
sum of
.................
............................................................................................................................................................
The first payment is to be made on the.......................................................
Dated this ....................................... day of ........................................ 19........

Signed, sealed and delivered by the said:
In the presence of:
NOTICE
It is hoped that as many as possible of those applying for Membershipof the Institute will
undertakea seven-yearcovenant,thus makinga furthersubstantialcontributionto the resourcesof
the Institute.
BANKER'SORDER
To ............. BAN K
....................................................................................................................................................
ADD RESS
.....................................................................................................................................................................
Please pay to the British Bank of the Middle East, 7 King William Street, London
E.C.4,for the credit of the BritishInstitute of PersianStudies, the sum of ?
now and a similar sum on Ist Januaryof each year until further notice/for the next
six years.+
Signed..................................
Date........................................
*
Delete whichever does not apply.
ABBREVIATIONS
AASOR Annual of American Schools of Oriental Research

AfO Archiv fur Orientforschung
AJA AmericanJournal of Archaeology
AJSL American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures
AJ Antiquaries'Journal
AMI E. E. Herzfeld, Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran
ANET Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts
AOr Archiv Orientalny
AS Anatolian Studies
BASOR Bulletin of American Schools of Oriental Research
Belleten Turk Tarih Kurumu: Belleten
BSA Annual of the British School at Athens
BSOAS Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies
CAH Cambridge Ancient History
EI Encyclopaedia of Islam
IAE E. E. Herzfeld, Iran in the Ancient East (i94I)
ILN Illustrated London News
JA Journal Asiatique
JAOS Journal of American Oriental Society
JEA Journal of Egyptian Archaeology
JHS Journal of Hellenic Studies
JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies
JRAI Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute
JRAS Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society
KF Kleinasiatische Forschungen
LAAA Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology, Liverpool
MAOG Mitteilungen der altorientalischenGesellschaft
MDOG Mitteilungen der deutschen Orientgesellschaft
MDP M6moires de la D616gationen Perse
MJ Museum Journal, Philadelphia
OIC Oriental Institute, Chicago, Communications
OIP Oriental Institute, Publications
PEQ Palestine Exploration Quarterly
QDAP Quarterly of Department of Antiquities in Palestine
RA Revue d'Assyriologie
RCAS Royal Central Asian Journal
REI Revue des 1tudes Islamiques
SAOC Oriental Institute, Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilisation
SS Schmidt, H., Heinrich Schliemanns Sammlung trojanischerAltertumer
TT Turk Tarih, Arkeologya ve Etnografya Dergisi
WVDOG WissenschaftlicheVeriffentlichungen des Deutschen Orientgesellschaft
/. ..250so Mies
4ooAilomletres
S. S. R.
T
rabriz sEC/. .(U. dat
.
SAARBAIJAN . -....
L.'-ezayeh 00 I
.e
, .Gorga . "
.::........ *Meshed
SQazviI.tNDARAN ?1R *Danmg'taL .-'
. TEHRAN i
, HamadaL
K H URAS A N
( .Kermanshak .
C"
.Kasham i
I., I R A N
"NAsfahan i
Susa
,
. aYa
Ker /
epolis
:.'Pasarqadae?
.'Pers ERMA mai
Sh.iraz
-,E
,
R-.
SA 'Abbas
-D tBandar
ARABIA /I A A N
3-A.'
J A.
PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN BY HEADLEY BROTHERS LTD

109 KINGSWAY LONDON WC2 AND ASHFORD KENT

Iran 03 (1965)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Iran 03 (1965)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Iran 03 (1965)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IRAN

Journal of the British Institute of Persian Studies

VOLUME III 1965

The Mechanics of Ancient Trade in Western Asia, by M. E. L. Mallowan I

Le Vase en or de Hassanlu, by Madame Pouran Diba . . . 127

THE BRITISH INSTITUTE OF PERSIAN STUDIES

c/o The British Academy, Burlington Gardens, London, W. I

Price: ?2 Ios. od.

MEMBERSHIP OF THE INSTITUTE

Journal of the British Institute of Persian Studies

Statement of Aims and Activities . . . . . . . iii

Arghiyan. The Area ofJajarm in Western Khurasan, by Brian Spooner 97

THE BRITISH INSTITUTE OF PERSIAN STUDIES

c/o The British Academy, Burlington Gardens, London, W.I

c/o The BritishAcademy, P.O. Box 2617,

The XXVIth Orientalists'Congress

THE MECHANICS OF ANCIENT TRADE IN WESTERN ASIA

I'I0 ' hwundat

Scale: 1:7,500,000 or 118mwiles to the inich

s Archivesroyalesde Mari V, " Correspondance de Iasmah-Addu " by G. Dossin, letter 2o.

EXCAVATIONS AT PASARGADAE:THIRD PRELIMINARY REPORT

Fig. I. SketchPlanof Pasargadae.

restored front elevation restored side elevation

Fig. 2. RestoredFront and Side Elevationsof the Zendan.

"THE ZENDAN-I-SULEIMAN" pan.

Fig. 3. Plan of Zendanwith Axonometric of Roof and Upper Walls at right.

continuedfrom previouspage] or the later Fratadara temple at Persepolis. In addition,

Period II (c. 522-280 B.c.)

M Period IIImud brick walls

facing page i8.] Fig. 4. Plan of Citadel.

!-L-- ,---- r"--rJ L

Fig. 4. Plan of Citadel.

The Plan of thePeriodII Defences

The Date of thePeriodII Destruction

Pl Ic. Detail of the damageddoorway. Pl. Id. LookingnorthtowardsunfinishedPeriodI

Pl. IXb. Detail of completecolumnfrom northcornerof Bridge withpit in

me.w e.b. 1963

Fig. 6. Plan and Elevationof the North Plinth.

Fig. 7. Plan and Sectionof TerracedMound with Inset Plan of SacredPrecinct.

THE GARDEN PAVILION PASARGADAE

Fig. 9. Plan of the GardenPavilion.

COIN HOARDS FROM PASARGADAE

Mint: Uncertain of CAPPADOCIA or N. SYRIA

4 Tetradrachm. c. 319-317 B.c.

6 Tetradrachm. c. 317-301 B.C.

2 Tetradrachm. c. 325 B.c.

8 Tetradrachm. c. 319-317 B.c.

17 Tetradrachm. c. 32o B.c.

23 Tetradrachm. c. 318-316 B.c.

4 Drachm. c. 310-3oo00 B.C.

Single coin discovered in 1963 in room 192

Tabular summary of the coins from Hoards I and II

Lifetime of AlexanderAfter 319 B.C.

HoardI HoardII HoardI HoardII

' Newell, WSM, pl. LXIX. 6 Seltman, Greek Coins, pL LV.5.

A COMPARATIVE CERAMIC CHRONOLOGY FOR

New Materialsfrom Hasanluand Ziweye

The InternalChronology andCulturalRelationships of HasanluVI to III