Archaeology and the Meanings of Persepolis

Donald Whitcomb
The Oriental Institute
University of Chicago

 

Introduction
Persepolis was the Achaemenian capital, called Parsa, for less than
two centuries.  The great platform and remains of its palaces were burnt by
Alexander the Great and briefly re-occupied by local dynasts, the
Fratadara.  The majority of its long existence has been as ruins, almost
2000 years.  The purpose of this paper is to explore the effect these ruins
had on the Persian population of this part of Iran.  This inquiry is based
on an assumption, too often ignored by archaeologists, that long before
scientific excavation and historical studies, ancient ruins were an active
part of the social ecology of this region.  Far from being inert testiments
to the past, these ruins were constantly used and explained.

In contrast to the careless graffiti left by modern visitors to
Persepolis, a number of medieval inscriptions record formal "state" visits
to these ruins.   A particularly interesting example, written in Kufic,
reads:
"The prince Abu Shuja, Adud al-Dawla, God strengthen him, was
present here in Safar month, in the year 344/ 954,    and the
writing on these ruins was read to him.   It was read by Abi ibn al-
Sarri, the secretary from Karkh, and by Marasfand, the mobad of
Kazerun." (Donohue 1973, 78)

The secretary and mobad, a Zoroastrian priest, may have read Pahlavi
inscriptions left by Sasanian visitors;   if they found some cuneiform,
they may have faked it and improvised a story for the amir.

Adud al-Dawla, who ruled Baghdad and much of Iran, made his capital
in nearby Shiraz.  His visit was about 1000 years ago, and it was about
1000 years earlier that Persepolis was last occupied; in other words, he
saw ruins only half as ancient as they stand today.  What did these ruins
mean to him?  He was not an archaeologist, yet he had more than a great
respect for ancient Iran, he tried to revive its ancient glories. Adud
al-Dawla styled himself in an ancient manner (more Sasanian than Achaemenid
to our eyes; Bahrami 1952); he took the title Shahanshah and built a
pavilion near Shiraz, at Qasr-i Abu Nasr, which was actually a museum with
examples of carvings from Persepolis.

The precise history of Persepolis had been lost and replaced by
legends.   There is a connecting link between ancient Persepolis and the
ruins of the 10th c. -- this was the city of Istakhr.  A few years after
Adud al-Dawla's visit to Persepolis, the Arab geographer Muqaddasi (living
in Shiraz and possibly using Adud al-Dawla's library) wrote a description
of Istakhr:
"Istakhr is a capital of great antiquity, well known in the old
books, renowned by mankind, great in fame and in size.  Originally here was
the government chancellery, now in our time,  it is only a provincial town
with a small population and little importance.  I found it similar to
Mecca, since it also lies in two valleys and two mountains immediately
close around it. (436)"

Istakhr excavations
The ruins of Istakhr were first mapped by Flandin and Coste in 1841
(1851, 70); excavations did not begin until Herzfeld's work at Persepolis
in 1932 and 1934, for the Oriental Institute.  Schmidt continued these
excavations, at both Persepolis and Istakhr in 1935 and 1937 (of which all
are published, except Istakhr).  Schmidt took a series of air photographs
of the site, which revealed the city plan, the houses, streets and city
wall --the town of the 9th-10th c. (the Abbasid and Buyid periods; Schmidt
1939).  In 998, much of the city was destroyed and only a small village
continued.  One can see blocks of housing (FH trenches) oriented with a
major avenue to the West Gate.   Again Muqaddasi's description a few
decades before the destruction helps:
"At the Khorasan gate is a magnificent bridge and a beautiful park.
They build their houses of mud-brick.  On this side, the river comes near
the city.  ... The river water is unhealthy, since it flows over the rice
fields.  Istakhr produces much grain, pomegranates, and cereals;
nevertheless the people are simple. (436)"

The trenches north of the mosque include a row of shops with formed the
border of the bazaar.  Behind these shops was a residential complex, three
individual houses of which were excavated.
Houses all had a central court, rooms opening onto the court, and a
narrow entryway flanked by rectangular buttresses.  The court and entryway
were paved with stone or brick.  This house type is paralleled at Siraf,
the major port on the Iranian coast of the Persian Gulf, also dated to
9-10th c.  The Siraf houses seem to have been residences of wealthy
merchants;  at Istakhr, the proximity to the bazaar suggests similar
merchants' dwellings.  One house, excavated by Herzfeld (1941, 276, Grab
2), was so fancy he decided to call it the hospital.
Study of the air photographs and excavations reveal an earlier
organization now hidden under the Abbasid buildings.   The houses were
arranged into blocks and enclosed in a square, 400 x 400m, an area of 100
jarib in medieval measurement.  This arrangement seems to be one of several
urban plans utilized in the early years after the Muslim conquest (Whitcomb
1994).   The SW quadrant of the early Islamic town contained the Friday
Mosque, the bazaar and possibly a palace.  The orientation follows that of
the Friday Mosque; thus this part of the town may date from the mid-7th c.
A clue is provided by Muqaddasi, who says that:
"The Friday mosque stands in the bazaar.  The bazaar surrounds the
mosque on three sides.  In the middle of the city is a valley-like
depression."
The mosque is readily identifiable from the one standing column and others
found in Herzfeld's excavations.
"It is built according to the style of Syrian mosques with round
columns, (according to Muq.)  each of which has a cow at the top.  They say
that it was a fire temple in former times. (436)"

These Achaemenian stones suggested the presence of an Achaemenian palace to
early travelers, such as Flandin and Coste.   Even Herzfeld, after his
excavations, retained the idea that there existed "a pre-Muhammadan
sanctuary, which became incorporated into the mosque," an idea continued by
Creswell and other architectural historians.
I would argue that the mosque is entirely an Islamic construction,
since the columns were placed upon stone foundation plinths, a construction
practice uncommon for the Achaemenians.  In addition, the orientation of
these foundations and absence of Achaemenian sherds make an earlier
sanctuary is unlikely.  Who then built the mosque, using materials probably
from Persepolis?  Ziyad ibn Abihi came to Istakhr to put down a Sasanian
rebellion and stayed on as governor from 659 to 662 AD.  Ziyad was a severe
disciplinarian, but he also recognized the crucial role of the mosque in
the social organization of the city; he made the Friday mosque an imposing
structure of stone by freely borrowing from the splendid courts of
antiquity.
The lessons Ziyad learned at Istakhr, he repeated in the turbulent
camp towns of Basra and Kufa, in the latter borrowing columns from nearby
al-Hira.  As the historian, Baladhuri, put it:
"For the remembrance of Allah, Ziyad raised a monument of stone,

and no longer of simple bricks.  Without the intervention of human hands,
who worked on the building, we would have attributed it to the work of
jinns. (347)"

Curiously, it is precisely these same sentiments, the attribution to demon
labor, which struck most medieval commentators on the ruins of Persepolis.
While Ziyad was learning aspects of ancient Persian monarchy, to be grafted
onto the new Islamic culture,  he was dependent on Sasanian lore for
understanding this antiquity (Whitcomb 1979, 366).

Sasanian Istakhr
Outside the rigid grid pattern of the early Islamic city, is a more
organic radiation of streets and alleys.  The Center Test shows this
transition; the deepest levels revealed buildings with another regular
orientation.  The Sasanian town was also laid out in a grid pattern, like
Bishapur and other Sasanian cities. (only a portion of the site)  This was
excavated only in the West Test, with its massive mud-brick walls and
Sasanian artifacts (the only Islamic materials seem associated with a kiln,
suggesting this was an abandoned area in later periods).  Istakhr was an
important city, where the Sasanian kings received their investiture (where
indeed Sasan is said to have been priest in the temple of Anahita).  The
lack of Sasanian materials is surprising and was disappointing for both
Herzfeld and Schmidt; one block was found of a Sasanian relief, possibly
like the fine Sasanian reliefs at nearby Naqsh-i Rustam (Bier 1983).  Even
Sasanian coins were rarely found (Miles 1959); the resulting picture
remains an archaeological enigma and suggests the need for further research
at this site.

The Meanings of Persepolis
By the time of the first European visitors to Persepolis, there was
little precise information on the history and meaning of these ruins.  As
Michael Rogers has observed:
"The monuments of Persepolis and Istakhr no more awakened
interest in Achaemenid or Sasanian life and history than ancient
Rome was resurrected by the Renaissance antiquarians." (1974, 20)

A view of the terrace in 1626 shows on the hillside the prophet Daniel, an
association no doubt related to Herbert by local guides.  The loss of
knowledge of the Achaemenians was remarkably quick, esp. in contrast to
Egypt.  Well before 300 AD,  the Sasanians called Persepolis sat sutun (100
columns), a purely descriptive name.  Late in the Sasanian period,
Persepolis was associated with Jamshid and known as Takht-i Jamshid, the
throne of Jamshid (a name it still retains);  to this hero and others were
attributed  other monuments, Istakhr with Homayun, etc.
The Islamic conquest began a new set of attributions, in which
Iranian heroes were replaced by Biblical (or Quranic) figures.  Persepolis
became the Mosque of Solomon, who commanded the Jinns to build it.
(According to legend, Jamshid also commanded Jinns or demons to build
Persepolis, pride in which caused God's anger and the fall of Jamshid; a
familiar story).  It should be noted that medieval scholars vigorously
opposed this identity of Jam and Solomon (Melekian-Chirvani 1971).
The connection of monuments with Solomonic themes was a strong
feature of Sufi speculations from the 13th c.  Rulers frequently enjoyed
the title "heritors of the realm of Soloman," and by extension, the
population of this region inhabited sanctified ground.  The great gifts of
Solomon, wisdom and justice, were contrasted with the theme of the vanity
of worldly things, an idea easily evoked by once magnificent ruins.   Again
Sufi meditations on images (here carved) vs. reality, and on the nature of
existence gave these ruins a sacred purpose, as testified by numerous
inscriptions at Pasargadae and Persepolis.

By the time of Adud al-Dawla, Shiraz had replaced Istakhr as
provincial center and capital.  Shiraz, a beautiful city of palaces and
mosques, became the physical heritor of Istakhr and of Persepolis.  Among
the Buyid embellishments of this city, a subsidiary settlement was founded.
This was Kard Fana Khosrow, with its palaces, estates for courtiers,
textile industry and a mint supporting this industrial-trading center.
Part of this town must have incorporated the archaeological site of Qasr-i
Abu Nasr, 8 km east of Shiraz.  Below the acropolis of this site was an
building complex featuring architectural elements brought from Persepolis;
this Western Area has been reconstructed as an Achaemenid pavilion, a
portion of Adud al-Dawla's palace (Whitcomb 1985, 40-41).
This same structure was reconstructed during the 13th century as a
khanegah, with a chahar fasl and rooms around a courtyard.  Nearby was a
domed structure with stucco decorations and tomb fragments suggesting a
mausoleum and cemetery (Whitcomb 1985, fig. 9 and 10).  This shrine
complex, located near the tomb of Sa'di, may be one mentioned by Ibn
Battuta as belonging to Shams ed-din al-Semnani.  The continued attraction
of the Achaemenid features suggests a development may have been under the
patronage of Sa'd ibn Zangi, the Salghurid atabeg of Fars; Qasr-i Abu Nasr
may have been another example, with Pasargadae and Persepolis, of the realm
of Solomon (Melekian-Chirvani 1971; Whitcomb 1985, 37).  This khanegah and
shrine complex may thus represent a part of the growth of Sufi orders in
southern Iran during the 13th and 14th centuries.

In summary, one may suggest that the study of ancient monuments
should not neglect their existence as ruins, and, in Islamic archaeology,
one might reach an understanding of their historical relationship to the
present.  While Achaemenian stones were used at Qasr-i Abu Nasr and
Istakhr, the ruins of Persepolis were otherwise untouched.  People in
medieval times, as today, observe their ancient ruins and interpret them as
part of their culture.  The mythologizing cycle is codified in the great
Shahnameh, immensely popular Persian stories.   We can see the beginnings
of this process,  in the mythologizing around George Washington or the
popular legends of Paul Bunyon or Johnny Appleseed.  Such stories are
better adapted for moral education,  and are certainly more entertaining
than factual history.




References
Bahrami, M.
  1952 A gold medal in the Freer gallery of art, Archaeologica orientalia
in memoriam Ernst Herzfeld.  G. C. Miles, ed.  New York, American
Numismatic Society.  5-20.
Bier, L.
  1983 A Sculpted building block from Istakhr, AMI 16, 307-316.
Donohue, J. J.
  1973 Three Buwayhid inscriptions, Arabica 20, 74-80.
Flandin, E., and P. Coste
  1851-52   Voyage en Perse:  Relation du voyage.  2 vols.  Paris.
Finster, B.
   1994 Früh Iranische Moscheen.   Berlin, AMI Erganzbd. 19.
Herzfeld, E.
  1941 Iran in the ancient Near East.  London.
Hitti, P. Kh.
  1916 The origins of the Islamic state:  Kitab Futuh al-Buldan of
al-Baladhuri.  Part 1.  New York, Columbia University.
Melekian-Chirvani, A. S.
  1971 Le Royaume de Salomon, Le Monde iranien et l'Islam 1, 1-41.
Miles, G. C.
  1959 Excavation coins from the Persepolis region.  New York, American
Numismatic Society.  19-84.
Muqaddasi, Shams ed-Din
  1967 Ahsan al-Taqasim fi Ma'rifah al-Aqalim.  M. de Goeje, ed.  Leiden,
Bibliotheca Geographorum Araborum III.  3rd ed.
Murgotten, F. C.
  1924 The origins of the Islamic state:  Kitab Futuh al-Buldan of
al-Baladhuri.  Part 2.  New York, Columbia University.
Rogers, J. M.
  1974 From antiquarianism to Islamic archaeology.  Cairo.
Schmidt, E.
  1939 The treasury of Persepolis and other discoveries in the homeland of
the Achaemenians.  Chicago, 1939.
  1970 Persepolis III:  The royal tombs and other monuments.  Chicago, The
Oriental Instiute.
Whitcomb, D. S.
  1979a Trade and Tradition in medieval southern Iran.  Ph.D. dissertation,
University of Chicago.
  1979b The city of Istakhr and the Marvdasht plain,  Akten des VII.
International Kongresses für Iranische Kunst und Archäologie, München,
7.-10. September 1976.  Berlin, Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Iran,
Erganz. bd. 6, 363-70.
  1985 Before the roses and nightingales:  Excavations at Qasr-i Abu Nasr,
old Shiraz.  New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art.
  1994 The misr of Ayla: Settlement at al-'Aqaba in the early
Islamic period, The Byzantine and early Islamic Near East, II:  Land use
and settlement patterns.  G. King & A. Cameron, eds.  Princeton, Darwin.
155-70.