Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Iranian Studies
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713427941
To cite this Article Litvinsky, B. A.(1998) 'Archaeology and pre-Islamic art', Iranian Studies, 31: 3, 333 — 348
To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/00210869808701914
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00210869808701914
This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Iranian Studies, volume 31, numbers 3-4, Summer/Fall 1998
B. A. Litvinsky
logical order. It should be noted that the Afghan International Center for Kushan
Studies has now published a collection of articles in Western languages and
Persian (Tahqlqat-e-Kushanl, ed. Khalil Poladian [Kabul, 1984]) on the pre-
Islamic sites.
Dupree fails to include the Rodney Young excavation of 1953, when part of
the city wall of the lower city of Balkh was excavated.1 Moreover, when she
deals with stone and bronze age monuments, there is very little data and only
cursory reference to publications. Missing is any attempt at the definition of
specific features of the cultures and their links with neighboring areas and cul-
tures. Dupree's discussion of the Folul Hoard is imprecise. She fails to compre-
hend its close resemblance to the art of Elam, even though the first studies of P.
Amiet had been published by then. P. Amiet proposed the idea that groups of
artisans from Elam moved to Bactra.2
Historical periods are constructed as simple lists of monuments. Yet by the
time of writing this article the very full reference book on monuments of
Afghanistan compiled by Warwick Ball in collaboration with J. G. Gardin had
already been published. This work of two volumes has been widely used by N.
H. Dupree, but in her bibliography she cites it incorrectly (W. Ball is not the
editor, the book has two volumes, not three, and its title is Archaeological
Gazetteer not Gazatteer).
The article AZERBAIJAN ii. Archeology (W. Kleiss) is organized chrono-
logically, and the most important excavations and monuments are described for
each period. The author faced a difficult problem: by 1978 a total of 101 Urartian
forts, settlements, and other sites and inscriptions had been discovered and identi-
fied. The most significant among them was Bestam, excavated by W. Kleiss
himself. But the article is based only on the materials from Iranian Azerbaijan;
materials from Northern Azerbaijan (the former Azerbaijan SSR) are totally
excluded. This is rather strange because in the beginning of the article the author
states with good reason that before the partition in the nineteenth century,
G. Azarpay, author of vi. pre-Islamic Eastern Iran and Central Asia, refrained
from describing or even listing the most important monuments, but instead used
her section to define the main lines of artistic development. Unfortunately many
constituent parts of the arts of Central Asia have not been mentioned (toreutics,
coroplastic, textiles, ceramics, etc.). The Hellenistic period is described only on
the basis of the materials of Ay Khanom, without reference to Takht-i Sangin
and the Temple of the Oxus. It should be noted that the reliefs found at Airtam
was limestone, not alabaster (p. 597). Azarpay correctly dates Khalchayan not
from the 2nd century B.C.E. as G. A. Pugachenkova does, but from the lst-2nd
centuries C.E. (p. 593).
AFGHANISTAN ix: Pre-Islamic Art by F. Tissot, the curator of the
Guimet museum—a repository of remarkable works of art from Afghanistan—
provides a general overview. There are some omissions in the article. The author
does not mention the Fulol Hoard, without which it is difficult to understand the
origins of art in Afghanistan. Bactrian seals have also been omitted, although the
first series of them had been published by the time the article was published.5
Contrary to the author's opinion, the inscription from Sorkh Kutal gives no
explanation of the functions of the Temple. Tissot describes Hephthalite atti-
tudes concerning Buddhism without taking into account the full complexity of
related to a common homeland.7 Nor has G. Tucci's remarkable work8 been used
or the valuable work by H. P. Francfort.9 Unfortunately there is also no indica-
tion in the article of the results of expeditions to the upper part of the Indus val-
ley, during which more than ten thousand petroglyphs and one thousand inscrip-
tions—among them many Iranian inscriptions—were found. These contain the
most important data on the history of the Dards and Dardestan.10 Y. A. Rapoport
superbly summarizes the written sources and the results of archaeological expedi-
tions in CHORASMIA i. Archaeology and pre-Islamic History.
2. Archaeological periods
O. Grabar, author of the brilliant article AYVAN, sets forth his ideas on the
origin of the ayvdn, the problem of the four ayvans, and the practical, sym-
bolic, and esthetic properties of the ayvan, all of which are very important for
the history of architecture of Iran and Central Asia.
AYVAN (or TAQ)-E KESRA (E. Kelly) is also very interesting. He right-
Downloaded By: [Swets Content Distribution] At: 22:14 24 February 2011
fully describes it as the most famous of all Sasanian monuments (p. 155), and
provides a thorough discussion of the dating of the building.
APADANA (D. Stronach) provides not only a brief description of apaddnas
in Susa and Persepolis but also makes convincing arguments about the genesis
of the apadana type and the dating of the apadanas of Susa and Persepolis. He
also provides a judicious review of the functions of the apadana and the entire
complex of Persepolis, which has been the subject of long-lasting debate.
DOMES (B. O'Kane) has used Central Asian material hardly at all. For the
typology of early domes and squinches, it provides a sound overview. The earli-
est genuine domes had diameters exceeding the diagonal of the square bases
which is why they did not need squinches. The intermediate types consist of
arches between domes without squinches and domes supported by squinches. The
construction, typology, and evolution of domes and squinches have been studied
in the works on Central Asia more thoroughly than for Iran proper.
Unfortunately the author has made little use of this literature.
One of the lengthier articles, CLOTHING, consists of 28 sections, all by
different authors. As a whole, this is a comprehensive and serious entry. In its
introduction, it is correctly emphasized that the study of costume is still in its
initial, descriptive phase. The authors of the introduction dwell on such prob-
lems as sources and classification as well as on potential methods of studying
clothing; they describe three main approaches and also some theoretical prob-
lems.
After the introduction there is a section on pre-Islamic and Islamic clothing,
followed by clothing of pre-Islamic Eastern Iran, the Sogdians, and the Iranian
tribes on the Pontic steppes and in the Causasus. The entry concludes with two
valuable linguistic sections: xxvii. Historical lexicon of Persian clothing
(Golam-Hosain Yosofi) and xxviii. Concordance of clothing terms among ethnic
groups in modern Persia (-Eds. of EIr). The article is illustrated with 30 draw-
ings and 116 plates and is equipped with an extensive bibliography. I must men-
tion, however, two important gaps. The history of costume here has its start in
the Median and Achaemenid periods. Obviously, this should have been preceded
by a section on pre-Median clothing, which is widely reflected in the iconogra-
11. "Problems of the Ethnic History of Central Asia in the 2nd Millennium B.C.E.
Central Asian aspects of the Aryan problem," Ethnic Problems of Central Asia in the
Early Period (second millennium B.C.E.) (Moscow, 1981), 154-69.
Archaeology and Pre-Islamic Art 339
phy of early Iron Age Iran. Secondly, it is strange that although there is a sec-
tion on Sogdia there is nothing on Chorasmia or Bactria, even though we have
significant iconographic sources for them, such as murals (Diberjin, Dalverzin,
Khalchayan, Toprak-Kala, Ba'alyk-Tepe, Ajina-Tepe, etc.), sculpture (Surkh
Kotal, Khalchayan, and Toprak Kala), coroplastic (from many places), and textile
remnants (including full costumes from Termez). I would have hoped that all of
this would have been included in the section on pre-Islamic Eastern Iran, but in
this undeservedly short entry these materials have not even been mentioned. Nor
has material from central and southeastern Afghanistan been used. A few lines on
p. 753 are devoted to the dress of the Iranian population of Eastern Turkestan,
but the great bulk of iconographic material from this region has been over-
looked. The author has referred to some terms from Khotanese and Sogdian, but
there are no references to the relevant works of H. M. Belenitskii, W. B.
Downloaded By: [Swets Content Distribution] At: 22:14 24 February 2011
Henning, and V. B. Livshits. I believe that this particular section of the entry on
clothing requires much more work and should have a much more complete bibli-
ography.
J. W. Allan in ARMOR quite naturally bases the first part of his contribu-
tion (concerning prehistoric Iran) on archaeological data. However a great deal of
the data has not been mentioned. For example, there is a warrior in armor with
conical helmet depicted on a silver vessel from Marlik.12 At Hasanlu IV (about
900 B.C.E.) bronze and iron scales from scale armor were found and also a piece
of a metallic shoulder armor plate. A bronze rectangular scale was also found at
Ziwije.13 A bronze statuette from Hurvin has plate armor on its chest and abdo-
men.14 At Ziwije golden plates from a suit of plate armor were found and warri-
ors were depicted clothed in jackets with rows of little squares.15
There are helmets in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, supposedly from
Elam (fourteenth century B.C.E.), fashioned in a very artistic manner. A large
number of bronze and iron helmets dating from the ninth to seventh centuries
B.C.E. of different types come from Western Iran and pictures of them are found
in the art of that provenance. This material has been studied by several scholars.
The Avestan materials should also have been cited as written sources. The list of
classic written sources providing information on Persian armor is far from com-
plete. Babylonian documents of the Achaemenid epoch mentioning the armor of
Achaemenid warriors have not been used. The iconography has not been used at
all.16
Periods (E. H. Peck) both contain rich material and deal with Central Asia,
Siberian Scythians, and Hatra as well as Iran itself. Regarding the second sec-
tion, it is important to note that composite belts were very widespread in the
sixth-ninth centuries C.E. from Japan and T'ang China in the east to Hungary in
the west.
In Central Asia and Sinkiang, the metallic details of belts have been found
in many places as well as being depicted in the murals of seventh-eighth centu-
ries C.E. at Ajina Tepe, Afrasiab, Balalyk Tepe, Shahristan, Varakhsha, Kalai-
Kafirnihan, and elsewhere. The situation in China, where emperor Kao Tsu
(618-626) had introduced a rule that the type of belt worn must depend on rank
and nobility, would have influenced the practice of wearing belts in Central
Asia.24
25. See E. H. Schafer, The Golden Peaches of Samarkand. A study of T'ang Exotics
(Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1963), 227.
26. B. A. Litvinsky, Ukrasheniya iz mogil'nikov zapadnoi Fergany (Jewelry from
burial courtyards in the west Ferghana Valley) (Moscow, 1973), 102-3; L. M.
Levina, Etnokul'turnaya istoriya Vostocnogo Priaral'ya (The Ethnocultural History
of the eastern part of the territories adjacent to the Aral Sea) (Moscow, 1996), 2 3 8 -
39.
27. See R. B. Wartke, Toprakkale: Untersuchungen zu den Metallobjekten im
Vorderasiatischen Museum zu Berlin, Schriften zur Geschichte und Kultur des Alten
Orients, 22 (Berlin, 1990).
28. See B. A. Litvinsky, Drevnie kochevniki "Kryshi Mira" (Ancient nomads of
the "Roof of the World"), 1972; B. A. Litvinskii, Eisenzeitliche Kurgane zwischen
Pamir und Aral See (Miinchen, 1984).
29. For example: C. Bonner, "The Standard of Artaxexes II," The Classical Review,
61 (1947): 9-10.
342 Litvinsky
CERAMICS is one of the longest archaeological articles in the encyclope-
dia. It covers the period from the emergence of ceramics in the Neolithic period
(7,000 B.C.E.) to the 19th century C.E. The material is arranged chronologically
and geographically. Twenty tables of drawings of the shapes and ornamentation
of ceramics are included in the text. There are also 35 photos of ceramics of the
Islamic period. Every section concludes with a detailed bibliography. The com-
parison of this article with the corresponding article in Survey of Persian Art
demonstrates clearly the degree to which our knowledge in this field has grown
in the half of a century since the first edition of the Survey of Persian Art.
Progress in the field of pre-Islamic ceramics is especially noteworthy.
Nevertheless I must make several comments.
1. When preparing the entry, the geographical limits were not clearly
defined. Most of the authors present and explain ceramic material that comes
Downloaded By: [Swets Content Distribution] At: 22:14 24 February 2011
from the territory of modern Iran. There are only sporadic references to the cul-
tures of southern Turkmenia, though it was a part of Khurasan. There are only
single references to ceramics from Afghanistan and Afrasiab (Samarkand). But
these are not based on any familiarity with the material itself but on secondary
and random articles. One is left to wonder whether Afghanistan and Central Asia
were excluded deliberately. If so, the reason should have been explained.
Naturally without them the picture is not as complete as it might otherwise have
been. In my opinion ceramics from Afghanistan, Margiana, Bactria, Sogd,
Chach, and Chorasmia should have been included, perhaps under separate head-
ings. This is even more important because ceramic development and the charac-
terization of distinct periods for several areas of Central Asia have been worked
out in great detail. The entry thus lacks a description of the characteristic ceram-
ics of specific periods, for example the Kushanian period.
2. The authors of most of the sections describe ceramics only in terms of
form and ornament. These are very important, of course, but the history of
ceramics is not so limited. Also there are no definitions of techniques and tech-
nology. The composition of ceramic paste, the ways of making vessels and cor-
responding tools and devices, the method of coating the walls of vessels with
slip, applying ornament before firing, the types of glaze and their ingredients,
pottery kilns (types, construction, auxiliary stock), single or double firing, the
painting of the finished products and so on—all these are missing from the
entry.
M. Alram has written a very fine entry, ARSACIDS iii. Arsacid Coinage,
with two tables of coins. At the end of the article he speaks of indigenous dynas-
ties that exercised the right to mint coins and largely displaced Arsacid currency
from their domain. He might also have mentioned Margiana here. In the ancient
city of Merv many such coins were found. In nearby regions two hoards with
500 and 600 examples were discovered. On the obverse of the coins is the head
of the ruler and on the reverse a seated archer with the sign n under his bow.
Russian numismatists generally agree that coins of this type come from a local
Margianian mint. V. N. Pilipko presented a detailed typological classification
and attempted to date individual issues.30 The group as a whole belongs to the
4. Monuments
logical monuments in Darab and its district and underscores the importance of
Darab in early Sasanian history. This is clearly shown by three rock reliefs
(DARAB iii. Rock reliefs by G. Herrmann) and by a building from the time of
Shapur II.
Z. Tarzi is the author of BAMLAN. In 1977 he published two volumes of
his work on the architecture and art of Bamiyan. In this article he gives informa-
tion about the history of Bamiyan and a short description of its architecture and
art. He follows the idea of an "Irano-Buddhist" art of Bamiyan, which has been
especially elaborated by Rowland. The bibliography here is too short, and it con-
tains a misprint: the text of Huichao and translation into German by F. Fuchs
was published in 1938 not in 1928. About the same time that the encylopedia
article was being published, D. Klimburg-Salter's The Kingdom of Bamiyan:
Buddhist Art and Culture of the Hindu Rush (Naples, Rome, 1989), came out.
This latter work, certainly, is a serious step forward in the study of Bamiyan.
Mehrdad Shokoohy's article on the caravansary DAYR-E GACIN does not
report the size of the building (the outer dimensions are 108 x 108 m.; the
courtyard 68 x 68 m.) nor that it is surrounded by a rectangle of walls.34
Shokoohy does provide valuable information about the chronology of the cara-
vansary.
5. Varia
fifteenth centuries the term dehqan meant a large landowner and, sometimes, the
head of the local administration.36 This situation existed not only in Central Asia
but also in Sistan. There is relevant material in Bada0^ al-waqa3ic, by Zayn
al-Din Wasifi. While narrating the events of the end of the fifteenth century, he
tells us about a dehqan named Farrukhi who was the owner of a village with
over 2000 families and possessor of much wealth.37 Hence different parts of Iran
and Central Asia witnessed different evolutions of the class of dehqans.
The historical part of M. E. Bonine's article BAZAR is surprisingly poor as
concerns written sources, and there are no archaeological data at all. The excava-
tions in Pendjikent give an idea of the nature of bazaars in Sogdian towns on the
eve of the arrival of Islam and of the position of bazaars in city planning. It is a
pity that the author did not use available studies like V. I. Raspopova, "Odin iz
bazarov Pendzhikenta VII-VIII vv." (One of the bazaars of Pendjikent in the sev-
enth-eighth centuries), Strany i narody Vostoka 10 (1971).
The section of BUDDHISM i. In pre-Islamic times (R. E. Emmerick) con-
cerning archaeological monuments of Buddhism in West Turkestan is based
solely on the works of Russian scholars that have been translated into western
languages. The data therefore are very incomplete and inexact. There is no infor-
mation on written Buddhist documents from Termez, Merv, and so on. Though
Buddhism was not widespread in Sogd, Buddhistic objects and motifs are found
in the art of Panjikent. The statement of Emmerick that Sogdiana was totally
non-Buddhistic therefore should have been made not quite so categorically. There
is no "Bagram c Ali" in the Merv oasis but there is the modern urban site
"Bayram cAli". The data about the Buddhistic monuments in Afghanistan are
also imprecise. The colossal Buddhas in Bamiyan date not from the Kushan
period but from post-Kushanian times, most likely from the sixth to the seventh
35. E. A. Davidovich, "O monetahkh dikhkanov Ilaka kontsa X-nachala XI v." (On
the coins of the dehqans of Ilaq at the end of the lOth-beginning of the 11th C),
Drevnost'i i srednevekov'e narodov Srednei Azii. Istoriya i kultura, ed. B. Gafurov
and B. A. Litvinsky (Moscow, 1978), 80-100.
36. A. M. Mukhtarov, "Nadgrobnye kairaki XIH-XVI vv s upominaniem termina
'dihkan' (gravestones with the term 'dehqan')," Epigrafika Vostoka, 18 (1967): 8 0 -
93.
37. Zayn al-Din Wasifi, BadaDic al-waqa'i, vol. 2 (Moscow, 1961), 1215-18.
Archaeology and Pre-Islamic Art 347
centuries C.E. The author proposes a very unusual and strange notion concerning
Surkh Kotal: "It may have been the site of a dynastic cult or of an unusual
Buddhist sect" (p. 493). What sort of a sect is that? One unknown to the author
and undoubtedly unknown to anybody on earth. In this regard I would like to
remind the reader that the main investigator of Surkh Kotal, the late D.
Schlumberger, believed with good reason that there were no Indian features in
Surkh Kotal art, that Indian influence had not yet touched this monument.38 It
was local Bactrian art. But two kilometers from the acropolis of Surkh Kotal,
there is another monument. Its decoration is a twin of Surkh Kotal, but at the
same time there are also Buddhistic pictures there. This is evidence of a
Buddhistic (Gandharan)-Bactrian synthesis, but it is not Surkh Kotal.
Emmerick's bibliography also includes none of the late H. J. Klimkeit's valu-
able works.
Downloaded By: [Swets Content Distribution] At: 22:14 24 February 2011
thoroughly researched for Central Asia, Transcaucasia, and the Scythians, for
example, than for Iran proper itself, this has meant an opportunity to expand the
horizon of knowledge on that particular subject has been lost.
2. The inclusion in the EIr of articles on minor archaeological monuments
or groups of artifacts seems to be another problematic issue. Thus, for example,
J. G. Shaffer's article DEH MORASl GONDAY, though well-written and
researched, still is one whose inclusion in the encyclopaedia is by no means
obligatory. It would have been sufficient simply to mention the name of this
monument in AFGHANISTAN viii. Archeology. This monument and others
like it have not played a significant part in history or the history of culture.
Similar articles are AYBAK, DANESTAMA, and DAM. Articles like these
would be appropriate only in a specialized work like an archaeological gazetteer,
which contains a full list of monuments or groups of artifacts in Iran or
Afghanistan. In contrast, articles dealing with the archaeology of Central Asia,
Transcaucasia, and the Scythians stand out like a sore thumb for the lack of ref-
erences to even the most important cultures and monuments.
3. The articles on monuments vary in their organization and content. Some
articles have no specific or concrete descriptions and a text containing only theo-
retical data, while in other cases the text contains only specific facts and informa-
tion. Some articles are accompanied by excellent illustrations; others are devoid
of illustrations.
4. Many articles are too short. But I understand that there is a limit to the
size of the encyclopaedia.
Finally, I think that in spite of individual shortcomings the published vol-
umes of Encyclopaedia Iranica are a great contribution to the study of Iran and
the Iranian peoples. These volumes enrich world civilization.