Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

www.dabirjournal.org

Digital Archive of Brief notes & Review ISSN: 2470-4040

No.7.2020 Special Issue: Hellenism and Iran

1 xšnaoθrahe ahurahe mazdå Detail from above the entrance of ’s fijire temple, 1286š/1917–18. Photo by © Shervin Farridnejad The Digital Archive of Brief Notes & Iran Review (DABIR) ISSN: 2470-4040 www.dabirjournal.org

Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture University of California, Irvine 1st Floor Humanities Gateway Irvine, CA 92697-3370

Editor-in-Chief Touraj Daryaee (University of California, Irvine)

Editors Parsa Daneshmand (Oxford University) Shervin Farridnejad (Freie Universität /Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien) Judith A. Lerner (ISAW NYU)

Book Review Editor Shervin Farridnejad (Freie Universität Berlin/Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien)

Advisory Board Samra Azarnouche (École pratique des hautes études); Dominic P. Brookshaw (Oxford University); Matthew Canepa (University of Minnesota); Ashk Dahlén (Uppsala University); Peyvand Firouzeh (Cambridge Univer- sity); Leonardo Gregoratti (Durham University); Frantz Grenet (Collège de France); Wouter F.M. Henkel- man (École Pratique des Hautes Études); Rasoul Jafarian (Tehran University); Nasir al-Ka‘abi (University of Kufa); Andromache Karanika (UC Irvine); Agnes Korn (CNRS, UMR Mondes Iranien et Indien); Lloyd Llewellyn-Jones (University of Edinburgh); Jason Mokhtarain (University of Indiana); Mousavi (UC Irvine); Mahmoud Omidsalar (CSU Los Angeles); Antonio Panaino (University of Bologna); Alka Patel (UC Irvine); Richard Payne (University of Chicago); Khodadad Rezakhani (History, UCLA); Vesta Sarkhosh Curtis (British Museum); M. Rahim Shayegan (UCLA); Rolf Strootman (Utrecht University); Giusto Traina (University of -Sorbonne); Mohsen Zakeri (University of Göttingen)

Copy Editor: Philip Grant Logo design by Charles Li Layout and typesetting by Kourosh Beighpour Contents Articles 1 Domenico Agostini: On Jerusalem and Luhrāsp: A Closer Look 1 2 Daryoosh Akbarzadeh: Collapse of 7 3 Kiumars Alizadeh: The earliest in Iran toponyms and Persian ethnicity 16 4 Elshad Bagirow: Sassanid toreutics discovered in Shemakha, as artistic metalwork 54 in the art of Sasanian Iran 5 Majid Daneshgar: An Old Persian-Malay Anthology of Poems from Aceh 61 6 Morteza Djamali, Nicolas Faucherre: as viewed by the 19th century 91 French architect Pascal-Xavier Coste 7 Shervin Farridnejad: Cow Sacrifijice and the Hataria’s Dedicatory Inscription at the Zoroastrian 101 Shrine of Bānū-Pārs 8 Hasmik C. Kirakosian: New Persian Pahlawān 112 9 Khodadad Rezakhani: Notes on the Pahlavi Archives I: Finding *Haspīn-raz and the Geography 119 of the Tabarestan Archive 10 Yusef Saadat: Contributions to lexicography 128 11 Diego M. Santos; Marcos Albino: Mittelpersisch rōzag ‘Fasten’ 149 12 Ehsan Shavarebi; Sajad Amiri Bavandpour: Temple of Anahid and Martyrdom of Barshebya 168 Special Issue: Hellenism and Iran 13 Jake Nabel: Exemplary History and Arsacid Genealogy 175 14 Marek Jan Olbrycht: Andragoras, a Seleukid Governor of -Hyrkania, and his Coinage 192 15 Rolf Strootman: Hellenism and Persianism in the East 201 Reviews 16 Chiara Barbati: Review of Benkato, Adam. Āzandnāmē. An Edition and Literary-Critical Study 229 of the Manichaean-Sogdian Parable-Book. Beiträge Zur Iranistik 42. Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag, 2017. 216 p., 42 images, ISBN: 9783954902361. 17 Majid Daneshgar: Translation of Persian and Malay Literary Works in Malaysia and Iran 232 18 Yaser Malekzadeh: Review of Ghafouri, Farzin. Sanǧeš-e manābeʿ-e tārīḫī-ye šāhnāme dar 236 pādšāhī-ye ḫosrō anūšīravān [The Evaluation of Historical Sources of Shāhnāme in the Reign of Khusraw Anūshīravān]. Tehran, Mīrās̱-e Maktūb. 2018. 577+17 pp. ISBN 9786002031310. Digital Archive of Brief notes & Iran Review No.7.2020 ISSN: 2470 - 4040 © Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies & Culture University of California, Irvine

Special Issue: Hellenism and Iran 2020, No. 7 © Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture, University of California, Irvine ISSN: 2470 - 4040

Sasanian architecture as viewed by the 19th century French architect Pascal-Xavier Coste

Morteza Djamali (Avignon Université, CNRS, IRD) & Nicolas Faucherre (Aix Université, CNRS)

91

Abstract he 19th century French architect Pascal-Xavier Coste was one of the fijirst European artists to recognize TSasanian architecture as a distinct and signifijicant architectural style in . He considered this style to be parallel to Byzantine and in the Eastern and Western , respectively. Sasanian architecture, according to Coste, belonged to a period of ‘decadence of the arts’ following the fall of the Roman Empire, during which small construction materials replaced large masonry blocks. Despite this general ‘decadence’, Coste attributed several architectural inventions to Sasanians and described their buildings as precursors to (Islamic) architecture which, in turn, played a fundamental role in the shaping of . He saw Sasanian architecture as being characterized by the invention of ovoidal , , and use of small stones. The in Firuzabad, the Khosrow Palace in , and the monuments near display the whole array of these architectural features according to Coste.

Background Every archaeologist interested in the archaeology of Persia knows Pascal-Xavier Coste (1787-1879), the renowned architect from Marseille, for the two text volumes of the Voyage en Perse that he co-authored with Eugène Flandin (1809-1889), accompanied by six volumes of illustrations (Flandin and Coste, 1851). Indeed, many of these illustrations were originally drawn by Coste and attest to his extraordinary attention 2020, No. 7

to the architectural details of Persian monuments, whether still standing or in ruins. A comparison of the descriptions and drawings of Eugène Flandin and soon reveals diffferent styles in which the two French artists treated the archaeological ruins and monuments they observed in Persia in the mid- nineteenth century. While Flandin focuses on the aesthetic aspect of the monuments in the landscape and uses a more poetic writing style, Coste pays particular attention to the architectural details of the monuments and the surrounding landscape and tries to provide realistic images of these monuments (Armogathe, 1990). He was the one who measured, counted, dated, and calculated the precise appearance of the monuments. And with the exception of and to a lesser extent a few other monuments, Coste did not attempt to propose a reconstruction of the monuments he drew (Jasmin, 1990). However, Coste remained ‘laconic’ in his descriptions and left it to his drawings to express everything for the observer and reader, with only brief texts on the history and the architecture of the monuments (Bergdoll, 1990; Jasmin, 1990). Pascal Coste authored a detailed account of his travels to Persia in the fijirst volume of his Mémoires d’un artiste; notes et souvenirs de voyages, which original manuscripts are conserved in the municipal library of the architect’s home city Marseille (Coste, 1878). Together with Voyage en Perse, Coste’s memoirs provide a wealth of information on the socio-political situation of Iran and on the state of conservation of the country’s archaeological sites and monuments in the fijirst half of the nineteenth century. In addition, Coste gave a lecture in 1846 at the Académie des Sciences, lettres et arts de Marseille in which he summarized his views on the history and evolution of architecture and its importance in proposing a national architectural 92 style for nineteenth century France (Coste, 1846-1847). Interestingly, in this lecture, a clear place in the historical evolution of architecture was assigned to the Sasanians. This is the subject matter of the present paper. Coste’s lecture has already been used by diffferent scholars to analyze the viewpoints of the artist on diffferent subjects such as his religious monuments or Gothic architecture (e.g. Bergdoll, 1990; Thaon, 1990). On the occasion of the recent inclusion of the Sasanian monuments of Fars on the list of UNESCO World Heritage, we thought it interesting to propose this short article discussing the place of Sasanian architecture in the writings and thought of Pascal Coste, a signifijicant personality in the nexus of nineteenth century French architects who developed a particular passion for an interest in “Oriental” architecture. We base our discussion here in particular upon Coste’s lecture published in the Mémoires de l’Académie de Marseille (Coste, 1846) supplemented by his notes and observations of Persian monuments. It is emphasized that this article by no means aims to analyze the and the place of Sasanian architecture in it in broader terms beyond Coste’s intellectual and artistic position. We aim rather to analyze how this architectural style was perceived by a nineteenth century European architect who had a deep knowledge of both European and Near Eastern architectures and who had a keen interest in the then current debates on the origins of diffferent architectural styles found in Europe.

The historical evolution of architecture as viewed by Coste In 1846, Coste delivered a lecture to the Académie des Sciences, lettres et arts de Marseille in which he took up the question of defijining a national style for modern (nineteenth century) architecture in France (Coste, 1846). In this lecture he described the history of architecture as the metamorphosis of styles and as a process of creation in which the fijiliation, borrowing, and recomposition of characters had been commonplace (Thaon, 1990). Coste insisted on the fact that we can frequently fijind elements in common between diffferent architectural styles and concluded that the idea of creating a new architecture for nineteenth Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

century France made no sense. He suggested, in conclusion, that the developed during the period of Francis I (1513-1547) could be a convenient model to follow (Coste, 1846). The main text of his speech contains, however, interesting passages on ancient Persian architecture, including Sasanian architecture, which it is worth discussing here. Figure 1 is a schematic representation of the historical evolution of architecture according to Coste in his lecture. It is a modifijied version of a scheme presented by Bernard Thaon (1990) with the addition of the positions of some omitted architectural styles such as Parthian (Arsacid) and Assyrian architecture.

From the Egyptians to the fall of the Roman Empire: the beginning and development of architecture The starting point in this evolutionary history of architecture is Egyptian architecture. Coste believed that Egyptians were the fijirst to create an architectural order. Their architecture is characterized by one regular and constant order predating the Greek architectural orders (Coste, 1846, page 213). According to Coste, the three Greek orders--Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian--were borrowed from the Thebaid monuments of Egypt.

93

Figure 1. The historical evolution of architecture according to Coste (1846). See the text for description. 2020, No. 7

However, he added that the invented more elegantly decorated capitals and entablatures and paintings in the various architectural elements of their temples. After a short description of Greek architecture, more than two pages of his written speech are devoted to the of Persepolis or what he calls ‘Persepolitan architecture’: ‘It was only after the conquest of Egypt by Cambyses and the invasion of Greece by Artaxerxes that Persian architecture developed. The Persians borrowed from these two civilized nations the columns, the profijiles, the bases, the historical rock-reliefs, and the inscriptions that we can fijind nowadays in the monuments that have survived through time’, Coste writes (1846; page 214). According to Coste, the flat-arches (plat-bandes) composed of one large piece of stone, the vertically-fluted columns with their capitals and excessively ornamented bases were inspired by Egyptian and Greek architectural orders. However, he adds that ‘...the general disposition of the palaces of Persepolis and their decoration shows a particular taste and an original style.’ (Coste 1846; page 215). He thus considered Persepolitan architecture to be a new style which had developed parallel to Greek architecture (Fig. 1). Persepolitan architecture had one order, like Egyptian architecture, but with diffferent proportions, unlike Greek which had three distinct orders. After Persepolitan architecture, Coste took up Assyrian/Babylonian architecture. It is not clear why this latter architecture is not placed in its correct chronological order before Persepolitan architecture; but this may have been due to the very recent discovery of the Assyrian palaces of Khors-Abad excavated by the French consul in Mosul, M. Bolta (Coste, 1846; page 217). According to Coste, Assyrian architecture has one order like Egyptian architecture and presents large rock-reliefs that show high improvement compared to 94 Egyptian ones. Here, the construction materials are also diffferent and the walls were built using bricks with layers of bitumen. For Coste, Roman architecture is the continuation of Greek architecture. ‘The Romans, gentlemen, adopted Greek architecture in all its details of profijiles, ornamentation, and bas-reliefs; although Roman constructions were less perfect, they nonetheless present a grandeur that can hardly be found in Greek construction’ (Coste, 1846; page 218). The Romans adopted the three Greek orders and added two new ones: the Tuscan and Composite. The use of vaults and arcades are the main characteristics of Roman architecture which makes it distinct from Greek architecture.

The Sasanian-Byzantine period: the decadence of architecture The fall of the Roman Empire marked the beginning of a period of the ‘decadence of the arts’ or the ‘decadence of the fijine arts’ according to Coste (1846; pages 219-220). ‘, soon freed from the persecution of Polytheism, demolished everywhere ancient temples to reconstruct, using the same materials, churches in imitation of the Roman . It is this mixed construction devoid of the beautiful proportions, the profijiles, and the ornamentation of the monuments of Paganism that constitutes Byzantine art in the Eastern Empire and Romanesque art in the Western Empire’. The systematic construction of the basilica everywhere becomes the dominant architectural work under the Byzantines and the art of architecture becomes static with no progress from the sixth to the eleventh centuries (Coste, 1846; page 220). Coste describes this decadence as follows:

‘Architecture thus loses its beautiful proportions, the columns become short, heavy, and obese; the capitals no longer crown the profijiles…’. However, one of the most important changes for Coste concerns the construction materials. ‘Instead of using large blocks of stone and marble, one only builds with materials Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

of small dimensions. This caused the loss of solidity and of techniques for displacement of huge masses’ (Coste, 1846; page 220). Here Coste fijirst mentioned for the fijirst time both Parthian and Sasanian architecture and extended the decadence of the architecture into the east by stating:

‘And the remarkable thing is that this decadence was general; the East as well as the West were afffected by it. At the same epoch, Persepolitan art also witnessed a revolution. The Arsacids who succeeded Alexander’s lieutenants and then the Sasanians also changed their construction systems. They used exclusively materials of small dimensions; flat-arches were replaced by voussoirs1 and ceilings by domes à plusieurs cintres which took on a pronounced ovoidal form, a precursor of the ogival or pointed arches that the Arabs were the fijirst to adopt in the construction of their monuments. One can still see these ovoidal voussoirs in the Firuzabad and Sarvestan monuments of Farsistan of Persia; in the Great Palace of Khosro in Ctesiphon in Babylonia and in Altun-Kupri2 bridge in .’.

The origins of It is interesting that during his speech to the Académie des Science, lettres et arts de Marseille in 1846, Coste repeatedly mentioned that Islamic (‘Arabic’ in Coste’s terms) architecture is derived from Byzantine and particularly Sasanian architecture and that the pointed arches, frequently used in Arab architecture, originate from the ovoidal arches of the Sasanian period: 95 ‘They (Arabs) fijirst demolished the basilica, used their columns as supporting points over which they elevated their voussoirs by imitating the ovoidal voussoirs of the Sasanians; because they had already entered Persia…’ (Coste, 1846; page 222).

‘Arab architects, by imitating the ovoidal voussoirs of the Persians, changed them; they brought the curves into a single point towards the summit which formed the voussoir called ogive’. (Coste, 1846; page 222).

‘...Arabic art is born, it has its origin in the Sasanian and . This system of voussoirs was followed in all of their constructions… (Coste, 1846; page 226).

Coste’s particular attention to the origin of Islamic architecture stemmed from his previous work in Egypt (Coste, 1837-1838) as well as his personal interest in Gothic architecture, which he calls generally ‘ogival architecture’ due to the dominance of ‘ogives’ (pointed arches) (Thaon, 1990). At the time when Coste gave his lecture at the Académie de Marseille, two hypotheses were prevalent to explain the origins of this style:

1- Please note that in this article, the English word “voussoir” is a translation for the French word “voussure” used by Coste to describe the curvature of the cross section of a or an . It should not be confused with the other use of the word “voussoir”, i.e. the wedge-shaped stone elements used in the construction of vaults or arches. 2- Altun Kupri bridge, also called “Ayn Dīwār”, “Cizre” or “Ǧazīrat ibn ‘Umar” bridge, is a bridge from the Islamic period (twelfth century CE) located in the extreme north-east of Syria, and characterized by a series of bas-reliefs representing the signs of the zodiac, and particularly a series of arches, the middle one being the largest (Nicolle, 2014). 2020, No. 7

(i) an endogenic origin which considered Gothic architecture as the results of an autochthonous spirit; and (ii) an exogenic origin which accounted for the emergence of this architecture as having natural (forest?) or Oriental (Islamic) origins, being related to commercial and religious exchanges etc. (Thaon, 1990). The origin of the ‘ogive’ or ogival arch was also a major question for the historians of architecture (e.g. van Lokeren, 1839). Apart from the analogy he repeatedly drew between Sasanian ovoidal arches and Islamic pointed arches in his lecture, Coste the traveler seems to have seen the ‘fullness of a magic landscape’ in the ‘untidy mass of burrowed debris’ in Gothic monuments (Thaon, 1990).

Coste’s observations and notes on some major Sasanian monuments Coste visited a number of Sasanian monuments in Iran and Mesopotamia, of which the Palace of Ardashir in Firuzabad, the Sarvestan monument, and the Palace of Ctesiphon were of particular interest in the shaping of his view of the historical evolution of architecture. Here, we present some of his main observations and notes related to this article. Firuzabad. Before visiting the Palace of Ardashir, Coste and Flandin had visited the ruins of the Sasanian city of Gur near the present day Firuzabad. In his Mémoires, Coste describes the city as being founded by Ardashir but without mentioning the historical reference: ‘The ancient city of Firouzabad (Firuzabad) was built in 220 A.D. by Ardeschir-Babekan who revived the religion of Zarathustra. Firouz (Arabicized version of Peroz), the son of Yazdedjerdy (Yezdegerd), established his residence there in 458 A.D..’ (Coste, 1846; page 330). After visiting Gur, Coste and Flandin went north to study the ruins of the Palace of 96 Ardashir: ‘To the north of these ruins, towards the northeast and at 5 kilometers distance, are the remains of a great Sasanian palace. It is located at the entrance of a gorge from which a large river emerges to meander the plain of Firouzabad.’ (Coste, 1846; page 331). At the time of their visit the site was known as ‘Atesh-gâh’ (literally meaning ‘the place of fijire’) by local people. The authors, however, after detailed observations of the architecture and artworks used in the ruins of the site, proposed a residential function for the complex, refuting the idea that it was a fijire temple. Further, they assigned it, with ‘no hesitation’, to the era of the Sasanian Empire and suggested that it might have been constructed by a Sasanian Prince by the name of ‘Firouz’ (Peroz) (Flandin and Coste, 1851; volume 2; chapter XLVI). The well preserved condition of the site they described as ‘astounding,’ allowing them to provide a detailed description and precise drawings. Indeed, a detail of the architecture of the Palace of Ardashir particularly caught Coste’s attention, namely the voussoirs of the doorways and of the blind arcades inside and outside the palace, which are semi-circular, totally diffferent from those found in vaults and domes which are ovoidal in shape (Fig. 2): ‘All the doors and niches are framed with chambranles with . The moldings and the ornaments are imitations of the Persepolis palace but executed in plaster with little projection. The archivolts of voussoirs and the transoms have profijiles of very small moldings… The voussoirs of the doors and the niches are semi-circular. Only those of the vaults and domes are of ovoidal form.’ (Coste, 1846; page 332). Also in Flandin and Coste (1851; volume 2; chapter XLVI; page 346), Coste repeats that: ‘The voussoirs of all doors and niches are, as I already mentioned, semi-circular, and it is worth noting that this curving nature is exclusively applied/reserved to them because that of the vaults and domes is ovoidal’. The archivolts of voussoirs found in the arched openings and decorative blind arcades are drawn in spectacularly close detail by Coste (e.g. Fig. 2). Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

97 Figure 2. Section drawings of the Palace of Ardashir in Firouzabad made in 12 January 1841 by P.-X. Coste. Photo made of Manuscript number MS-1137-FOL-42, courtesy of Bibliothèque Municipale de Marseille, l’Alcazar. The photo was taken using a wide-angle exolens attached to an iPhone.

Sarvestan. In 30 January 1841, Coste visited the Sarvestan monuments without Flandin. ‘Monsieur Flandin went in the direction of Cohengean, the place of our stop, and I go to this ruin by hiring a guide. This ruin is a temple or rather a palace which some travelers have taken for a Muslim holy shrine. Its principal entry is in the west; it is formed of three large vaulted openings ornamented by columns engaged in the facade… All the rooms were vaulted; the voussoirs of the doors and windows were semi-circular but those of domes and vaults were higher and of ovoidal form, like those of the palace of Firouzabad.’ (Coste 1846; page 341). After a detailed description of diffferent rooms and the construction materials of the monument, Coste attributed the monument to the Sasanian period: ‘Having the same construction elements as those of Firouzabad, this monument is Sasanian.’ (Coste, 1846; page 341). Coste prepared several drawings from the Sarvestan monument particularly highlighting the ovoidal forms of domes (Fig. 3). Ctesiphon. A remarkable example of Coste’s extraordinary attention to the architectural details can be seen in his drawings of the famous Ayvān-e Kasrā (also Taq-i Kisra) or the Archway of Ctesiphon or the Palace of Ctesiphon. Coste drew very similar features in the ruins of the Palace of Ctesiphon as those of the Palace of Ardashir in Firuzabad (Fig. 4). The artist notes the spectacular similarities between this palace and that of Firouzabad (Flandin and Coste, 1851; volume 2; chapter LVI; page 506): ‘This monument, with its plan and the style of its external decoration reminds one of the palace of Firouzabad. If there are some slight diffferences in the style and character, they are not sufffijiciently signifijicant to prevent us from relating both of them to the same era and certainly that of the Sasanians.’ 2020, No. 7

98

Figure 3. Section drawings of the Sarvestan monuments made in 30 January 1841 by P.-X. Coste. Photo made of Manuscript number MS-1137-FOL-49, courtesy of Bibliothèque Municipale de Marseille, l’Alcazar. The photo was taken using a wide-angle exolens attached to an iPhone.

The analogies drawn by Coste between the Palace of Ardashir in Firuzabad, the Sarvestan monument, and the Palace of Ctesiphon clearly indicate that Coste perceives all these monuments as belonging to a common architectural style in Late Antiquity, with a distinct identity as Sasanian architecture. This architectural style is characterized by small construction materials composed of small stones laid up with plaster and lime mortar joints, frequent doorways, niches, and windows with semi-circular voussoirs and most remarkably by the presence of impressive ovoidal domes and vaults. Conclusions As an architect-traveler with a passion for exploring “Oriental” architecture, Pascal-Xavier Coste seems to have focused on fijinding clues to explain the origins of both Romanesque and Gothic architecture (particularly in France) through his long adventures in the Near East. His observations and notes suggest that these “Oriental” adventures contributed to the shaping of his view that Islamic architecture derived from Sasanian-Byzantine architecture and later played an essential role in the emergence of Gothic architecture, especially due to intensifijied contacts between European Christians and Muslims following the crusades. His detailed observations concerning both Near Eastern and European monuments of diffferent periods ranging from classical antiquity to the nineteenth century, although not commonly reflected in the architecture of his own great public monuments in Marseille, could have had an impact on some of his ecclesiastical designs and might also have indirectly influenced the work of some younger architects such as Léon Vaudoyer and Henri Espéradieu, who were in frequent contact with Coste. Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

99

Figure 4. Elevation drawing of the main façade of the Palace of Ctesiphon made in 29 July 1840 by P.-X. Coste. Photo courtesy of Bibliothèque Municipale de Marseille, l’Alcazar. The photo was taken using a wide-angle exolens attached to an iPhone.

Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank Barry Bergdoll, Professor at the Department of Art History and Archaeology, Columbia University, for his thoughtful comments on the manuscript and for improving the English. The authors are also grateful to the stafff members of the municipal library of Marseille, the Alcazar Olivier Polère and Thierry Conti (Fonds rares et précieux) for their generous help and cooperation during the bibliographic studies. Alireza Askari-Chaverdi, Professor in Shiraz University, is also thanked for his support during the authors’ visits to the Sasanian monuments of Fars. Nassim Komjan is thanked for her assistance in the preparation of fijigures.

Notes 1 Please note that in this article, the English word “voussoir” is a translation for the French word “voussure” used by Coste to describe the curvature of the cross section of a vault or an arch. It should not be confused with the other use of the word “voussoir”, i.e. the wedge-shaped stone elements used in the construction of vaults or arches. 2 Altun Kupri bridge, also called “Ayn Dīwār”, “Cizre” or “Ǧazīrat ibn ‘Umar” bridge, is a bridge from the Islamic period (twelfth century CE) located in the extreme north-east of Syria, and characterized by a series of bas-reliefs representing the signs of the zodiac, and particularly a series of arches, the middle one being the largest (Nicolle, 2014). 2020, No. 7

Bibliography

Alleaume, G., 1990. Pascal Coste et le Canal Mahmûdiyya. In: Armogathe, D., Leprun, S. (Eds) Pascal Coste ou l’Architecture Cosmopolite. L’Armattan, Paris. pp. 34-57. Armogathe, D., 1990. L’écriture devP.X. Coste. In: Armogathe, D., Leprun, S. (Eds) Pascal Coste ou l’Architecture Cosmopolite. L’Armattan, Paris. pp. 155-168. Bergdoll, B., 1990. Passé national et passé régional dans l’architecture religieuse marseillaise; Pascal Coste et Léon Vaudoyer. In: Armogathe, D., Leprun, S. (Eds) Pascal Coste ou l’Architecture Cosmopolite. L’Armattan, Paris. pp. 82-95. Bergdoll, B. 1994, Léon Vaudoyer : in the Age of Industry. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. Bertrand, R., 1990. P.X. Coste et l’inspiration orientale dans l’art funéraire marseillais. In: Armogathe, D., Leprun, S. (Eds) Pascal Coste ou l’Architecture Cosmopolite. L’Armattan, Paris. pp. 96-107. Cain, J.-R., Laugier, E., 2006. Trésors des églises de Marseille; Patrimoine Culturel communal. Ville de Marseille, Marseille. Coste, P., 1837-1838. Architecture arabe ou monument du Kaire. Paris. Coste, P., 1846-1847. Y a-t-il possibilité de créer une architecture nationale en France? Academie de Marseille, 209-227. 100 Coste, P., 1878. Mémoires d’un artiste; notes et souvenirs de voyages (1817-1877), Tome 1. Typographie et Lithographie Cayer et Cle, Marseille, p 588. Flandin, E.N., Coste, P.-X., 1851. Voyage en Perse (Tome 2). Gide et J. Baudry, Librairies Editeurs, Paris. Jasmin, C., 1990. Le dessin de Coste. In: Armogathe, D., Leprun, S. (Eds) Pascal Coste ou l’Architecture Cosmopolite. L’Armattan, Paris. pp. 133-141. Leprun, S., 1990. Pascal-Xavier Coste, professeur d’architecture (1829-1862) : un homme de mémoire. In: Armogathe, D., Leprun, S. (Eds) Pascal Coste ou l’Architecture Cosmopolite. L’Armattan, Paris. pp. 142- 154. Nicolle, D., 2014. The Zangid bridge of Ǧazīrat ibn ʿUmar (ʿAyn Dīwār/Cizre): a New Look at the carved panel of an armoured horseman. Bulletin d’Etudes Orientales LXII, 224-222. Raymond, A., 1990. ‘Alî et Pascal Coste. In: Armogathe, D., Leprun, S. (Eds) Pascal Coste ou l’Architecture Cosmopolite. L’Armattan, Paris. pp. 24-33. Thaon, B., 1990. P.X. Coste : notes d’un voyage au pays gothique. In: Armogathe, D., Leprun, S. (Eds) Pascal Coste ou l’Architecture Cosmopolite. L’Armattan, Paris. pp. 124-132. van Lokeren, A.D., 1839. L’ogive dans les monuments des temps les plus reculés. L. Hebbelynck, Imprimeur du messager des sciences historiques de Bélgique, Vieille Citadelle, 48.