Pierfrancesco Callieri, Architecture et représentations dans l’ sassanide. Paris: Association pour l’avancement des études iraniennes, 2014. 298 pp., 127 figures.

Katsumi Tanabe*

This is the seventh volume in the series entitled Conferences of Iranian Studies (Conférences d’études iraniennes Ehsan et Latifeh Yarshater) established jointly in Paris in 2000 by the Per- sian Heritage Foundation (New York), Collège de France and the research group Mondes Iranien et Indien (CNRS UMR7528). The volume is composed of five lectures delivered by Pierfrances- co Callieri, Professor of Archaeology and Art History, University of Bologna, well-known for his archaeological work in Gandhara. Professor Callieri is one of a few scholars specialized in South Asian archaeology who has also an expertise in Iranian archaeology. His abilities have already been well attested by his previous publication, L’archéologie du à l’époque hellénistique, Paris, 2007. The purpose of this book is, as remarked by the author in the introduction, to present criti- cally the current situation of problems concerning the architectures and figurative arts of the Sasanian period in the light of recent archaeological discoveries and of the new evidences he acquired through his survey of archaeological sites in Iran. The author does not, therefore, set out to offer a comprehensive study of Sasanian culture as a whole. The book consists of follow- ing five lectures: (I) “Royal and aristocratic residences”; (II) “Questions of the fire sanctuary of the Sasanian period”; (III) “Stucco art in the light of recent archaeological finds”; (IV) “Sasanian rock-cut reliefs: artistic centers”; (V) “Questions of style and technique of Sasanian stamp-seals: centers of production.”

Chapter I Many architectural remains of the Sasanian period are known, but the functions of most of them are not yet clear. Therefore, the author attempts to reexamine the established identifications and theories about palatial and aristocratic architectures in the light of newly found building com- plexes. He takes into consideration two preceding theories proposed by D. Huff: palatial build- ings are arranged along one axis while religious ones are based on plural axes, and by J. Kröger: building complex composed of ivān and columned halls has a cultic function related to Zoroas- trianism. Following these two hypotheses, the author makes a critical survey of almost twenty ‘palatial’ architectural remains and classified them broadly into three kinds as follows:

(1) Palatial (Sasanian King of Kings) (2) Aristocratic (Manor House) (3) Religious (Fire Sanctuary and Temple).

* Member of Trustees, Ancient Orient Museum, Tokyo

Vol. 51 (2016) 165 The following are the author’s new identifications of relevant architectures. The so-called fire temple (Ateshkade) at Firuzabad is identified by him as a palace within the city on the basis of the new evidences (ivān, basin, court) that he acquired. As for the func- tion of the so-called palace complex or great ivān hall at Bishapur, the author identifies it as a fire sanctuary, while the palace of (241–272) at this site is attributed to the unexcavated ruins of Qal‘e-ye Dokhtar outside the fortified city-wall of Bishapur. The well-known remains of Sarvistan, formerly regarded as a hunting pavilion, is identified by him as a Zoroastrian chahār tāq (fire temple). These new identifications proposed by him seem to be quite plausible. In the last part of this chapter, the author offers his observations about a few units or compo- nents of architectural complexes. Firstly, as regards the square domed hall, it was constructed as a throne room in the third century AD, but in later period it was exclusively used for fire temple architecture (chahār tāq at Sarvistan). As for the ivān, it was employed for both palatial and aristocratic architecture. In palatial complexes it was used as an audience hall (Taq Kisra at Cte- siphon) while in aristocratic buildings as a reception hall (Hajjiabad). Columned halls are also at- tested in the ground plans of excavated sites, and were used for palaces, landlord residences and Zoroastrian fire sanctuaries (Bandiyan). Open or enclosed courts were also an important element of architectural complexes, often surrounded by ivāns (Firuzabad). Lastly the author presents a few interesting observations about pavilions and aristocratic residences. The most typical pavilion is represented by the rock-cut ivān at Taq-i Bustan within a paradeisos of Sasanian kings of kings. This is decorated with three kinds of reliefs: investiture scene, equestrian image and two royal hunting scenes. He rightly refers to the tripartite ideol- ogy of Sasanian kingship reflected in these reliefs. In addition, as this ivān is beside a fountain, he rightly points out that the water symbolizes xvarnah, an indispensable element for legitimate kingship. As for aristocratic residences, the author proposes that those of Hajjiabad and Kish are con- nected with ancestor-cult on the basis of male bust. As regards two-storied palatial buildings (Firuzabad, Taq Kisra, Qal‘e-ye Dokhtar), Huff interpreted the second-floor as a private resi- dence and the ground floor as a reception hall, but the author admits only the latter, claiming that the former is speculative. In conclusion, although there remain many incomprehensible features as regards palatial architectures, the author insists that single axial ground plan and ivān opening to a courtyard principally indicate a palatial building. As for columned halls decorated with symbolic stucco images, their function is related not only to Zoroastrian fire cult but also to the celebration of no- bility.

Chapter II In the last century the chahār tāq (at Sarvistan) and āteshgāh (āteshkade) were regarded as representative of Sasanian religious architecture. However, more complex sanctuaries or fire temples, consisting of many buildings and rooms, were known at Takht-i Sulaiman and Bishapur. Taking into account current problems of Zoroastrian architecture, the author attempts to synthesize the two categories of architecture in the light of new discoveries from Bandiyan and

166 ORIENT Pierfrancesco CALLIERI, Architecture et représentations dans l’Iran sassanide

Mele Hairam. The author starts from introducing three preceding hypotheses proposed by Huff, Kröger and R. Boucharlat. Although cult of fire is very important element of Zoroastrianism, the author pays due attention to the importance of water among the Zoroastrian rites and rituals, following the observations carried out by G. Kreyenbroek and by Huff about Firuzabad and Takht-i Sulai- man complexes. What is more, he takes for granted the fact that Zoroastrian sanctuaries like those at Takht-i Sulaiman and Bishapur also had multiple functions such as administrative, jurid- ical and also commercial activities as Huff clarified. However, the structures of Takht-i Sulaiman are dated to the Sasanian mature period. Therefore, in order to get sufficient data for understand- ing early the author turns his attention to that of Kuh-i Khwaja in Seistan of which the date and chronology is open to question, and then he attempts to establish the chronology of this site. Based upon C14 dating, axial ground planning, painting, chahār tāq, fire altar etc., he proves that a Zoroastrian fire sanctuary already existed in the early Sasanian period. The author also admits that another fire sanctuary is attested by the grand complex of Bishapur, composed of a big chahār tāq and a multi-axial ground planning including a subterranean canal bringing water to the temple of of the 3rd century with later modifications. Next, the author describes numerous religious installations of fire sanctuary excavated in southern Turkmenistan and north-eastern Iran: Mele Hairam and Bandiyan of the mid-Sasanian period. Bandiyan is important as it consists of a columned assembly hall, a room for offerings, a sacred fire room (āteshkade), a room for ossuaries (ostodān), an ivān and a hall for purification. Mele Hairam is furnished with an assembly hall, sacred fire altar rooms and an oven for preserv- ing glowing charcoal. The assembly halls of both sites are decorated with stucco bas-reliefs. The images of these bas-reliefs are interpreted to be connected with festivals of Zoroastrian com- munity as Kröger maintained. Through investigating these two sanctuaries the author clarifies that Zoroastrian sanctuaries were composed of numerous buildings fulfilling the various needs of each sanctuary’s multiple functions and activities. Lastly the author investigates two ground plans of a unique architectural complex with many niches excavated in southern Iran, which E. Yaghma’i regards as Mithraeums. The author rightly refutes this identification and says that they were installations for preserving the bones of the Zoroastrian dead (ostodān) and therefore related instead to a funerary function.

Chapter III As regards Sasanian stucco architectural decoration, we have many excavated materials from Iran and Iraq since the last century, and Kröger has made a comprehensive study of them in his monumental Sasanidischer Stuckdekor, Mainz am Rhein, 1982. Since then, two unique Sasanian architectural complexes have been excavated at Hajjiabad and Bandiyan in Iran, bringing to light important more stucco architectural decorations. That is the reason why the author attempts to examine the hypotheses proposed by Kröger in the light of these new discoveries of stucco bas- reliefs and statues, as excavated at these two sites and at Mele Hairam in southern Turkmenistan. In the above-quoted monograph Kröger clarified that there exist three kinds of representational styles applied to stucco-reliefs and that stucco-reliefs were painted. The author agrees with his

Vol. 51 (2016) 167 classification and coloring, and adds rightly that the two hunting bas-reliefs of the larger grotto at Taq-i Bustan were modeled after stucco bas-reliefs rather than wall-painting as E. Herzfeld wrongly maintained in 1920. However, the most important hypothesis or observation proposed by Kröger is that stucco mural decoration is concentrated in columned hall and ivan opening to a courtyard, and that its function is related exclusively to Zoroastrian ritual, as it pertained to the Sasanian dynasty, its nobility and the Zoroastrian community. Therefore, the author attempts to investigate the ground planning of the relevant structures and their mural bas-reliefs, and so verifies Kroger’s hypoth- esis by investigating religious structures decorated with stucco bas-reliefs at Bandiyan and Mele Hairam. What is more, focusing particularly on the stucco bas-reliefs of Bandiyan, the author de- scribes minutely their images, following the excavation report by M. Rahbar, and clarifies that the figurative themes of hunting, war, victory, Zoroastrian deities, funeral rites and so forth are related to Zoroastrian ancestor cult. This cult, which had already been pointed out by Kröger as regards Kish and other sites, is also attested and confirmed by the stucco busts of kings (Shapur II), and female (Bacchantes) statues excavated at Hajjiabad. Additionally the author proves that the bas-relief decoration of Bandiyan, although only its lower portion remains, is based upon a narrative dedicated to deceased ancestor of a Zoroastrian family. However, as the narrative style is exceptional among Sasanian stucco mural decoration, he suggests plausibly that there was influence from Central Asian narrative wall painting. Lastly the author insists that there is a need for physico-chemical analysis to be applied to the stucco itself as excavated at various Sasanian and early-Islamic sites of Iran and Iraq, because this kind of research has been rarely carried out and if it is developed, then a lot of more reliable data for the chronology of Sasanian stucco decoration can be obtained.

Chapter IV The Sasanian kings of kings made many rock-cut reliefs in Iran and Afghanistan. Almost forty examples are now known. Their dates, names of the kings, places and iconographical themes have been clarified comparatively well. From the chronological view-point, the rock-cut reliefs are divided into three groups: Early, Middle and Late. In this chapter the author attempts to identify artistic centers responsible for the production of these rock-cut reliefs. In order to prove his hypothesis he adopts three criteria: (1) drawing and composition, (2) sculptural techniques with instruments, and (3) representational styles. As for the first Early Group belonging to (224–241), he followed the chronologi- cal order proposed by L. Vanden Berghe and M. Canepa as follows:

1. Ardashir’s Victory over Artaban IV (Firuzabad I) 2. Investiture on foot (Firuzabad II) 3. Investiture on foot (Naqsh-i Rajab III) 4. Investiture on horse-back (Naqsh-i Rustam I) 5. Conquest of Armenians (Salmas).

168 ORIENT Pierfrancesco CALLIERI, Architecture et représentations dans l’Iran sassanide

As for the artistic center the author proposes two: the first one for southern Iran (Firuzabad and ) and the second for Salmas situated in north-west Iran. He insists that the first center inherited sculpturing technique from the Elymaean rock-cut reliefs (2–3rd centuries) while the workshop of Salmas, far away from Fars, is local and independent from the first. As the tradition of rock-cut sculpture prior to Sasanian period was that of the Elymaeans, the first center of Firuzabad got artistic influence from Elymaean sculpture. Then, in order to prove this fact, the author attempts to describe convincingly several observed iconographical and stylistic correspondences between them such as flat method of carving, incised outline of details, polish- ing of sculpted surface, beribboned ring, investiture on foot and so on. What is more, he tries to demonstrate that the workshop of Firuzabad moved to Istakhr to make Naqsh-i Rajab III by comparing it with Firuzabad II from a stylistic and iconographic view-point. Furthermore, he maintains that Naqsh-i Rustam I which has been regarded as the most developed among Ardashir I’s rock-cut reliefs, shows the involvement of a foreign (Roman) sculptor. Next, the author attempts to identify the two centers of production under the reign of Shapur I (241–272), (273–276), Bahram II (276–293), Narseh (293–303), Hormuzd II (303– 309). Shapur I left many victory reliefs at Bishapur, Naqsh-i Rajab/Rustam, and (south- ern Iran), as well as the Rag-i Bibi relief (northern Afghanistan) that must have been related to Shapur I’s eastern campaign (invasion into the Kushan empire). The author claims that there were three centers, not workshops, under that king’s reign. In addition to that of Naqsh-i Rajab/ Rustam, a new center of Bishapur appeared when Shapur I built the capital there, while that of Firuzabad disappeared. The third one, according to the author, was situated in Bactria and was influenced by Gandharan Buddhist and Bactrian art. In the following period up to Hormuzd II, the first two centers continued to work but the third one was abandoned. The characteristic of Bishapur center is that of Roman influences brought by artisans from Antioch and environs through Shapur I’s victory over the Romans, while that of Istakhr center lacks in this characteristic. Next, the author treats the reliefs of Shapur II (309–379), Ardashir II (379–383), Shapur III (383-388). All the reliefs, except those of Bishapur VI and of so-called Bahram IV (388–399), are located at Taq-i Bustan near Kermanshah in north-western Iran, quite distant from Fars. The date of Bishapur VI is controversial, but he adopts the most plausible identification by Vanden Berghe, who assigned it to Shapur II. The author concentrates his investigation on the two reliefs at Taq-i Bustan belonging to Shapur II or Ardashir II (Taq-i Bustan I) and Shapur III or Shapur II (Taq-i Bustan II) and main- tains that in the fourth century around Kermanshah there existed a new center responsible for these rock-cut reliefs. As regards its origin he rightly proposes the contribution of Late Antique art rather than that of the Bishapur center. He redates to the fifth century the supposedly seventh century images in the round of the larger grotto at Taq-i Bustan III–IV, rejecting the influence from the Byzantine Empire because in this century there was no Byzantine tradition of images in the round. However, most scholars including the reviewer, date Taq-i Bustan III–IV from the

Vol. 51 (2016) 169 seventh century either under the reign of Khosraw II (591–628) or Ardashir III (628–630). If Taq-i Bustan III–IV are dated from the seventh century, then there exists an almost 250-year gap between Taq-i Bustan II–II and III–IV, so the continuation of the same center seems not to be plausible. Generally speaking, the idea of an artistic center, rather than a workshop, seems to be a timely innovation, but due to the paucity of internal and literary evidence such an approach exclusively based on external observations cannot go beyond serious limits for the time being. Therefore the author’s hypothetical center including the definition of the term must be verified or scrutinized by future studies, although I am willing to admit that he thus opens a new horizon for the study of Sasanian rock-cut reliefs.

Chapter V As is the case with coins, a lot of seals and seal-impressions (bullae) of the Sasanian period have been unearthed and are housed in several museums such as the Bibliothèque Nationale. They show a variety of shapes, images, representational styles and engraving techniques. Until now iconographic classifications and studies of seals have been proposed, but most scholars held negative views on the possibility of chronological classification and identification of places or workshops of their production, as is mentioned in N. C. Ritter’s praiseworthy monograph, Die altorientalischen Traditionen der sasanidischen Glyptik, Wien, 2010. Therefore, the author challenges the preceding views and attempts to clarify the possibility of identifying centers of production. Firstly he claims that the seven well-known precious gems and seals once owned by Sasanian kings of kings and princes attest to the existence of workshops of Iranian tradition, different and independent from Mesopotamian tradition. Following this premise he turns his attention to seals of upper hierarchies of the administra- tion and aristocracy. In this connection, the author makes good use of R. Gyselen’s catalogue of the Bibliothèque Nationale (1993) and examines the 153 seals depicting a male bust as classified by her into seven ‘series’. Among these 153 seals, after having investigated minutely each of them, the author succeeds in selecting twenty-six pieces which he divides into eleven groups fea- turing a common origin of production from the iconographic, technical and stylistic viewpoints. Based upon this classification and grouping, he concludes that these eleven groups corre- spond to unitary production centers. If this conclusion is correct, then the author’s method can be applied convincingly to other kinds of Sasanian seals depicting standing male and female figures and animals. What is more, the author remarks that these eleven groups can be divided chronologically and topographically when compared with Sasanian coins and other seal-impressions, and that qualitative differences of engraved seals correspond to the social and economic status of owners. Unfortunately, the definition of the term ‘center of production’ is not clear and therefore, this terminology is open to question as the author himself admits that the details of centers are diffi- cult to clarify.

From the first to fifth chapter, the author succeeds in presenting vividly and concretely sev-

170 ORIENT Pierfrancesco CALLIERI, Architecture et représentations dans l’Iran sassanide eral current problems of and archaeology, through his detailed presentations and investigations, stimulating ideas and masterly treatment of materials that I cannot unfortunately describe in this review due to limitation of words allowed for reviewing. This monograph is fur- nished with a well-selected bibliography (23 pp.) and 127 figures, and long English summaries (24 pp.) that enable those unable to understand French to have access to this enlightening and timely publication. Although not all of Professor Callieri’s conclusions might be acceptable with- out qualification, I am convinced that this monograph will be essential reading for anyone with an interest in Sasanian art and archaeology.

Vol. 51 (2016) 171