IranicaAntiqua, vol. L, 2015 doi: 10.2143/IA.50.0.3053522 A HIGHLAND ELAMITE ARCHER FROM KŪL-E FARAH IV, CI:4 BY Javier ÁLVAREZ-MON (Macquarie University) NositeinPersiaismorelikelytorepaythoroughexplo- rationandcopyingofinscriptionsthanthis(MalAmir). Lord G.N. Curzon (1892; reprinted 1996: 196) Abstract: This article follows in the footsteps of a handful of scholars who, since George N. Curzon’s time, have sought to underscore the significance of Elamite reliefs from the highland valley of Īzeh/Mālamīr. This study first introduces the reader to the Elamite reliefs from the highlands of Īzeh/Mālamīr and secondly offers new evidence for one of the best preserved sections of the relief known as Kūl-e Farah number IV (KFIV), an Elamite archer (number 4) located in Panel CI (CI:4).1 Keywords: Kūl-e Farah, Īzeh, Mālamīr, Elamite sculpture, Archers Introduction The Zagros highland region of Īzeh/Mālamīr is nestled in a mountain valley about 800m above sea level. The valley is a gateway linking the lowlands with the high plateau. In contrast to the arid landscape of the lowlands, Īzeh/Mālamīr receives high rainfall and snow runoff washing down to seasonal lakes occupying the central part of the valley. Excellent grazing land and steep mountain slopes studded with oak trees add to the stunning scenery.2 In the words of Austin H. Layard: MálAmírisperhaps themostremarkableplaceinthewholeoftheBakhtiyáríMountains.On allsidesthemostprecipitousmountainsrisealmostperpendicularlyfrom theplain(Layard 1846: 75). Carved on the surface of cliffs and boulders 1 For a recent study of KFIV see Álvarez-Mon 2013a. 2 “There is more timber than in any part of Persia with exception of the Caspian prov- inces” (Curzon1892; reprinted 1966: 285). 97513.indb 251 23/02/15 10:18 252 J. ÁLVAREZ-MON in four different locations in the valley are a total of twelve Elamite bas- reliefs: four in Shekaft-e Salmān, six in Kūl-e Farah (henceforth KF), one in Shāh-Savār, and one in Xong-e Azdar (Hung-i Naurūzī-i). All of the reliefs are estimated to be more than 2500 years old. Those from Shāh-Savār and Xong-e Azdar are generally dated within the Old Elamite period (ca. 2000-1500 BCE), while most scholars presently date the reliefs from the Shekaft-e Salmān cave, spring and seasonal waterfall to the end of the Middle Elamite period, sometime between 1200 and 950 BCE. A late Neo-Elamite (7th-6th century BCE) date for KFI is accepted in accordance with a large Elamite cuneiform inscription engraved over its surface, but there has been lack of consensus regarding KFII, III, IV, V, and VI. These latter five reliefs were once considered to be a single group sculpted sometime during the Neo-Elamite period.3 E. Carter (1984: 172), however, proposed a pre-1000 BCE date for KFIV, and following P. Calmeyer (1973) acknowledged “some iconographical features [in this relief] seem to presage conventions found in the art of the Achaemenid Empire”. P. Amiet (1992: 86-7) followed this higher date for KFIV and extended it to KFII, III and VI, suggesting the reliefs manifested the expression of a local monarchy that developed in eastern Elam after the invasion of the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar I (ca. 1104 BCE), or perhaps slightly later, at the beginning of the 10th century BCE. More recently, I have proposed a 9th-8th century BCE date for Kūl-e Farah IV (Álvarez-Mon 2013a: 227). The earliest reference to the Mal-Émir/Mál-Amír reliefs in Western lit- erature was made by Major Henry C. Rawlinson in 1836. Rawlinson was leading an armed expedition of 3000 Guran Kurds and heavy weaponry through the Zagros Mountains into Bakhtiary territory when he heard about the existence of “one of the great curiousites of the place”; reliefs, inscrip- tions, and a natural cave (Shekaft-e Salmān), “a place of pilgrimage to local Lurs” (Rawlinson 1839: 84; Adkins 2004: 68). In 1841 Austin H. Layard and Baron Clement A. de Bode visited the valley to coincide with an assembly of the Bakhtiary Khan and the Governor of Isfahan, with Layard offering a preliminary account of the cuneiform inscriptions and 3 Jéquier (1901: 142) dated the reliefs to the “époque Elamite récente”, Calmeyer (1973: 152) suggested the “period of Elamite-Persian cohabitation”, De Waele (1976a: 337; 1981:52) a broader 9th-6th century BCE range and Vanden Berghe (1963: 39; 1984: 102-3) the 8th-7th centuries BCE. 97513.indb 252 23/02/15 10:18 A HIGHLAND ELAMITE ARCHER FROM KŪL-E FARAH IV, CI:4 253 a brief description of some of the carvings (Layard 1842; de Bode 1843a, 1843b). Commenting on the overall artistic quality of Kūl-e Farah I, which portrays Hanni ruler of Aiapir, Layard declared: “the design is bold and the execution good” (Layard 1846: 74).4 The archaeological, epigraphic and artistic significance of Īzeh/Mālamīr became the subject of small com- mentaries by William S.W. Vaux (1855: 448) and Lord George N. Curzon (1892; reprinted 1966: 196). Members of the French archaeological mis- sion in Persia followed in 1898 and in 1901 Gustave Jéquier produced the first comprehensive study of the reliefs which included epigraphic work by Father Vincent Scheil and sketches by Jacques de Morgan.5 However, the lack of adequate visual documentation remained one of the most significant limitations to the ongoing study of the reliefs. An attempt to address this problem was made in 1963 by a Belgian archeological mission under the direction of Louis Vanden Berghe, followed by a more ambitious undertaking by Eric De Waele between 1970 and 1975.6 De Waele’s work came in the form of an unpublished doctoral dissertation (1976) and a string of seven articles with selected photographs and line- drawings of the reliefs and surrounding topography. Despite the considerable value of the aforementioned investigations and in particular the commendable foundational work of E. De Waele, these reliefs have remained largely ignored by the broader academic community. The reasons for such neglect are complex and require far-reaching discus- sion of the impact that contemporary political circumstances have had on the study and preservation of Elamite cultural heritage and, more impor- tantly, on the intellectual paradigms that have guided Elamite and Persian historiographic discourses.7 In addition, earlier travelers and scholars were faced by two challenges of practical nature, namely: reaching a secluded 4 For a complete bibliography see De Waele (1976a: 5-8). 5 The study by the French Mission provided the first indication that the Elamite sculp- tural reliefs from Izeh/Malamir held significant information regarding the genesis and characteristics of Persian sculptural arts. “Für den Entwicklungsgang der persischen Kunst, und nicht nur für die Kunstgeschichte, sondern für die Geschichte selbst ist das Verhältnis des Audienzreliefs zu einem Relief von Kul i Fara von groβer Bedeutung” (Sarre and Herzfeld 1910: 144). The contributions of Calmeyer, Vanden Berghe and De Waele have in various ways stressed such continuity and significance. 6 For the study of the reliefs in the interluding period 1901-1963 see historiographic record in Vanden Berghe (1963). 7 These topics are the subject of discussion in a forthcoming work by this author (Álvarez-Mon forthcoming b). 97513.indb 253 23/02/15 10:18 254 J. ÁLVAREZ-MON and fiercely independent region of the Zagros Mountains and the task of documenting reliefs positioned high above ground or seldom exposed to natural light.8 As a result, there has been a lack of systematic analysis of the carvings supported by line-drawings and detailed photographic docu- mentation. This absence has prevented the establishing of chronological, formal and interpretative criteria and, hence, the articulation of the radical historical significance of the carvings; radical enough, I believe, to chal- lenge former assumptions about the participation of Elam in the socio- political, religious, and artistic heritage of Persia. In April 2003 I had the opportunity to visit Īzeh/Mālamīr and make a digital photographic record of the reliefs. As a result of this work I have offered a selective study of the platform bearers represented in Kūl-e Farah III and a detailed study of Kūl-e Farah IV (Álvarez-Mon 2010a; 2010b; 2013a). In addition, in April 2012 in the course of a lecture in the National Museum of Iran (Tehran), I had the privilege of being presented with a latex cast of one of the best preserved sections of the Kūl-e Farah IV relief which depicts an individual archer (CI:4).9 This cast unveils significant additional detail of the relief allowing for further study and appreciation of Elamite sculpture. Kūl-e Farah IV Kūl-e Farah IV is a sizeable sculptural enterprise covering about 100 square meters (c. 17.70m long × 6m high) of a vertical rock surface. This relief was conceived as a single unit depicting a communal banquet centred on the enthroned figure of a high-ranking individual presumed to be an Elamite king (see Pls. 1 and 2). The relief depicts no less than 141 individuals partaking in a ritual featuring the consumption of a morsel of food, most likely a piece of meat. Social hierarchy is determined by place- 8 In the words of Jéquier written in 1898: Loindetoutevoiedecommunication,perdue dans les montagnes, la vaste plaine de Malamir est restée en dehors de la civilization actuelle (Jéquier 1968: 106). The reliefs of Shekaft-e Salmān I and II, for instance, are carved on the vertical side of the cliff about 8.5 m high and the grand relief of Kūl-e Farah IV includes sections carved inside crevices. In this regard De Waele (1981: 58) comments: IlestimpossibleparexampledephotographierendetailKūl-eFarahIIIetIV. 9 I received this cast from the hands of Iranian authorities in an official public cere- mony as a token of appreciation for my work on the preservation and study of Elamite art and culture.