Location: 32 mi (51 km) Northeast of Shiraz, Fars province Map
Constructed: 515 BC by Cyrus the Great
Destroyed: 330 BC by Alexander the Great
Persepolis was the capital of the Persian Empire during the
period Achaemenid. It is located about 70 km from the Iranian city
of Marvdasht (Fars province), near the place where the Pulwar River
flows into the Kur (Kyrus).
Its construction began in 521 BC.
C. by order of Darius I, as part of a vast program of monumental
constructions focused on emphasizing the unity and diversity of the
Achaemenid Persian Empire, the legitimacy of royal power and showing
the greatness of its kingdom. The works of Persepolis attracted
workers and artisans from all the satrapies of the empire and
therefore its architecture resulted from an original combination of
forms from these provinces that created a Persian architectural
style already outlined in Pasargadae and which is also found in Susa
and Ecbatana. . This combination of knowledge also marked the rest
of the Persian arts, such as sculpture and goldsmithing. The
construction of Persepolis continued for two centuries, until the
conquest of the empire and the partial destruction of the city by
Alexander the Great in 330 BC. c.
The site was visited over
the centuries by Western travelers, but it was not until the 17th
century that the ruins were certified as the ancient Achaemenid
capital. Numerous archaeological expeditions have allowed us to
better understand the structures, their original appearance and the
functions they fulfilled.
Persepolis comprises an enormous
palace complex on a monumental terrace that supports multiple
hypostyle buildings that had precise protocol, ritual, emblematic or
administrative functions: audiences, royal apartments, treasury
administration or reception. Near the terrace there were other
elements: royal tombs, altars and gardens. There were also the
houses of the lower city, of which almost nothing remains visible
today. Many bas-reliefs sculpted on the stairs and doors of the
palace represent the diversity of the peoples that made up the
empire. Others consecrate the image of a protective, sovereign,
legitimate and absolute royal power, where Xerxes I is designated as
the legitimate successor of Darius the Great. The multiple royal
inscriptions in cuneiform script from Persepolis are written in Old
Persian, Babylonian or Elamite. They are engraved in various places
on the site, intended for the same purposes and specify which kings
ordered the erection of the buildings.
The idea that
Persepolis had a solely annual and ritual occupation dedicated to
the reception by the king of tributes offered by the nations of the
empire during the ceremonies of the Persian New Year has long
prevailed. We now know for sure that the city was permanently
occupied and that it had a central administrative and political role
for the government of the empire. The many archives inscribed on
clay tablets discovered in the treasury buildings and fortifications
have made it possible to establish these functions and provide
valuable information about the Achaemenid imperial administration
and the construction of the complex. Persepolis has been on the
UNESCO World Heritage list since 1979.
The first capital of the Achaemenid Persian Empire was Pasargadae,
but around 512 BC. King Darius I the Great undertook the construction of
this massive palace complex, later expanded by his son Xerxes I and his
grandson Artaxerxes I. While the administrative capitals of the
Achaemenid kings were Susa, Ecbatana and Babylon, the citadel of
Persepolis maintained the function of ceremonial capital, where the New
Year festivities were celebrated. Built in a remote, mountainous region,
Persepolis was an inconvenient royal residence and was visited mainly in
spring. Furthermore, they say that the Achaemenids were nomads and that
is why they settled in one season each season.
In 330 BC,
Alexander the Great, in his Eastern campaign, occupied and sacked
Persepolis, burning down the palace of Xerxes, perhaps to symbolize the
end of the Panhellenic war of revenge against the Persians. In 316 BC,
Persepolis was still the capital of Persis, a province of the new
Macedonian Empire. The city gradually declined during the Seleucid
period and subsequent times. In the 3rd century, the nearby city of
Istakhr became the center of the Sassanid Empire.
After having continued the work of Cyrus II in Pasargadae and in
parallel with the important construction work undertaken in Susa, Darius
I decided to establish a new capital; This decision is generally
interpreted as a desire to distinguish themselves from the main branch
of the Achaemenids, to which Pasargada was strongly linked.
He
chose for this a city that has been identified with Uvādaicaya (Mattezsi
in Babylonian). This city must have already had some political
importance, since Darius had Vahyazdāta, his main Persian opponent,
executed in 521 BC. C. On the other hand, the presence of palaces and
monumental gates dating back to Cyrus and Cambyses II is attested, as
well as an unfinished tomb probably intended for Cambyses.
The
Babylonian tablets show that it was a developed, active and populated
urban center, which had commercial relations with Babylon and was
capable of ensuring the logistical and food means for a work of this
magnitude. Pierre Briant, historian of Achaemenid Persia, points out
that the implementation, chronologically close, of important works in
Susa and Persepolis entailed the mobilization of considerable resources.
In fact, these constructions fall within the framework of a global plan
to readjust the royal residences with a view to teaching everyone that
"the advent of the new king marks a refoundation of the empire."
Darius chose the lower part of the Kuh-e Rahmat rock formation as the
location for his new construction, which thus became the symbol of the
Achaemenid dynasty. He had the terrace, the palaces (Apadana, Tachara),
the Treasury rooms, as well as the walls erected. It is difficult to
precisely date the construction of each monument. The only irrefutable
indication is provided by the tablets found at the site that attest to
the existence of construction activity since at least 509 BC. C., when
the construction of the fortifications took place.
However, most
of the constructions can be attributed to the periods corresponding to
the reigns of later sovereigns.
Darius's constructions were then
finished and completed by his successors: his son Xerxes I added the
Gate of All Nations, the Hadish, or even the Tripylon to the complex,
and under Artaxerxes I in 460 BC. C., 1149 artisans were present at the
works. The site remained under construction until at least 424 BC. C.,
and perhaps until the fall of the Persian Empire: a gate was left
unfinished, as well as a palace attributed to Artaxerxes III.
Unlike other ancient monumental constructions, Greek or Roman, the
construction of Persepolis was not carried out with slave labor, but
rather workers from all the countries of the empire worked on it:
Babylon, Caria, Ionia or Egypt.
Protected by its location in the heart of the Achaemenid Empire,
Persepolis did not have solid defenses. Furthermore, the position at the
foot of Kuh-e Ramât represents a weak point due to the slight slope to
the east, between the terrace and the ground. This side was protected by
a wall and towers.
Information about the conquest and destruction
of Persepolis by Alexander the Great comes mainly from the texts of
ancient historians, especially Plutarch, Diodorus Siculus, and Quintus
Curtius Rufus.
Certain archaeological elements corroborate his
judgments, but his version of the destruction of the city is disputed:
Duruy questions it, because "we see that shortly after the death of the
conqueror, the satrap Peucestas sacrifices there the souls of Philip and
of Alexander".
According to Plutarch, Diodorus Siculus and
Quintus Curtius Rufus, the fall of Persepolis was followed by the
massacre of its inhabitants and the plundering of its wealth. Tiridatas,
guard of the treasury, had a letter of surrender brought to Alexander,
whose army was approaching, in which he offered to enter Persepolis as
the victor. In this way, Alexander could quickly gain possession of the
city's riches. The texts, however, do not mention his response. Diodorus
and Quintus Curtius Rufus also refer to the encounter of the Macedonian
army with a group of 4,000 mutilated Greek prisoners, or who had
suffered mistreatment by the Persians, on the way to Persepolis.
After having taken the city in 331 BC., Alexander left a part of his
army there and continued his march. He did not return to Persepolis
until some time later. At the end of a drunken day in honor of victory,
Persepolis was burned to the ground by order of the conqueror in May 330
BC. The reasons that motivated this destruction are controversial.
Plutarch and Diodorus relate that a wine-drunk Alexander would have
thrown the first torch on Xerxes' palace at the instigation of Tais,
later Ptolemy's wife, who threw the second. Tais would have incited
Alexander and his companions in arms to avenge the sack of Athens by
Xerxes I. This hypothesis could be corroborated by the intensity of the
destruction of the Tripylon and the Hadish, which shows that these
buildings built by Xerxes suffered in the fire. more than others. Some
authors affirm that the meeting of the mutilated prisoners, which
provoked the anger and sadness of the sovereign, constituted an
additional reason for reprisals.
In fact, historians often
maintain today that the reason for the destruction of Persepolis was
apparently political, reflecting a thoughtful decision on Alexander's
part. When the victor had ordered to save the captured cities and
especially Babylon, sparing no gesture to reconcile with the Persian
population, he made in Persepolis a highly symbolic gesture dictated by
the Persian context: the ideological heart of Achaemenid power was
always found in the Persian capitals. The population having made an act
of forced or voluntary submission, was nevertheless still ideologically
linked to Darius III, the legitimate sovereign, and was on bad terms
with the conquerors. The decision was, therefore, to burn down the
Persian dynastic sanctuary to make the change of power clear to the
population. Duruy says that in this way "Alexander wanted to announce to
the entire East, through this destruction of the national sanctuary, the
end of Persian rule."
Ancient writings mention repentance later
expressed by an Alexander saddened by his behavior. For Briant, this
repentance implies, in fact, that Alexander recognized his political
failure. The destruction of Persepolis marks the end of the symbol of
Achaemenid power. The first Persian Empire disappeared completely with
the death of Darius III, the last emperor of his dynasty. Hellenization
began with the Seleucids. Persepolis continued, however, to be used by
successive Persian dynasties. At the foot of the terrace is a temple,
perhaps built by the Achaemenids, and reused by the Seleucids, then by
the Fratadaras.
The lower city was gradually abandoned in favor
of its neighbor Istakhr in the Parthian era. Graffiti attributable to
the last kings of Persia under the Parthians or at the beginning of the
Sassanian era show that the site had, however, remained linked to the
Persian monarchy, at least symbolically. On the other hand, an
inscription in Pahlavi relates that a son of Hormuz I or Hormuz II gave
a banquet and proceeded to offer a cult service in Persepolis, which
could continue as a place of worship several centuries after the fire of
330 BC. Persepolis also served as an architectural reference for certain
elements of Sassanian constructions such as the palace of Firuzabad.
The ruins are known to the Sassanids by the Middle Persian name st
stwny ("the hundred columns"), and since the 13th century by Chehel
minār ("the forty columns"). The current name of Tajt-e Yamshid seems to
come from an interpretation of the reliefs that relates them to the
exploits of the mythical hero Jamshid. The site was the subject of
numerous visits by Westerners from the 14th century to the 18th century.
The simple anecdotal observations of the beginning were progressively
replaced by increasingly descriptive works.
On his way to Cathay
in 1318, a traveling monk named Odorico passed through Chehel minār
without stopping at the ruins. He is the first European to mention the
site. He was followed, in 1474, by a Venetian traveler, Giosafat
Barbaro.
The Portuguese missionary Antonio de Gouvea visited the
place in 1602. He observed the cuneiform inscriptions and
representations of "animals with human heads." The Spanish ambassador to
Abbas the Great, García de Silva Figueroa, described the archaeological
site at length in a letter to the Marquis of Bedmar in 1619. Relying on
Greek texts, he clearly found the relationship between Persepolis and
Chehel Minār. From 1615 to 1626, the Roman Pietro Della Valle visited
numerous Eastern countries. He brought from Persepolis copies of
cuneiform inscriptions that would later be used to decipher writing. He
was followed by the Englishmen Dodmore Cotton and Thomas Herbert from
1628 to 1629, whose purpose was to study and decipher the eastern
scripts.
From 1664 to 1667, Persepolis was visited by the
Frenchmen Jean de Thévenot and Jean Chardin. Thévenot wrongly noted in
his work Voyage au Levant that these ruins were too small to be the
abode of the kings of ancient Persia. Chardin clearly attributed the
site to Persepolis. The services of the draftsman Guillaume-Joseph
Grelot are added, who describes the royal city in a work whose quality
is praised by Rousseau. In 1694, the Italian Giovanni Francesco
Gemelli-Carreri noted the dimensions of all the ruins he came to and
studied the inscriptions. In 1704, the Dutchman Cornelis de Bruijn
observed and drew the ruins. He published his works in 1711: Reizen over
Moskovie, door Persie en Indie, then in 1718 in French: Voyages de
Corneille le Brun par la Moscovie, en Perse, et aux Indes Orientales.
The 19th and 20th centuries saw scientific missions to Persepolis
multiply. In 1840 and 1841, Eugène Flandin and Pascal Coste visited
several ruins in Persia, including Persepolis. They established a
topographical and descriptive relationship.
The first real
archaeological excavations were carried out in 1878. Motamed-Od Dowleh
Farhad Mirza, governor of Fars, directed the work that brought to light
a part of the Palace of One Hundred Columns. Shortly after, Charles
Chipiez and Georges Perrot made a very important exploration of the
site. Thanks to an architectural study of the ruins and excavated
remains, Chipiez drew surprising reconstructions of the palaces and
monuments as, in his opinion, they must have been in the Achaemenid era.
Franz Stolze explored the archaeological sites of Fars and published the
result in 1882. Jane and Marcel Dieulafoy carried out two archaeological
missions to Persia (1881-82 and 1884-86. They explored Persepolis, from
which they returned for the first time with photographic documents. They
carried out reconstructions and they brought numerous archaeological
pieces.
From 1931 to 1939, excavations were carried out by Ernst
Herzfeld and then by Erich Friedrich Schmidt, commissioned by the
Chicago Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. During the
1940s, the Frenchman André Godard, and then the Iranian A. Sami,
continued excavations on behalf of the Iranian Archaeological Service
(IAS). Then, the IAS, under the direction of A. Tajvidi, led the
excavation and partial restoration works in cooperation with the
Italians Giuseppe and Ann Britt Tilia, from the Istituto Italiano per il
Medio ed Estremo Oriente. These excavations have revealed the probable
existence of two other palaces attributed to Artaxerxes I and Artaxerxes
III, which have disappeared.
Not all of the structures at
Persepolis have yet been excavated. Two mounds remain east of Hadish and
Tachara, whose origins remain unknown.
In 1971, lavish ceremonies took place in Persepolis for three days to
celebrate the 2,500 years of the monarchy. Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi
invited many international personalities. The splendor of the
ceremonies, which mobilized more than 200 servants from France for the
banquets, sparked controversy in the press and contributed to tarnishing
the image of the shah. The amount of expenses was evaluated at more than
22 million dollars, and the financing was carried out to the detriment
of other urban or social projects. Furthermore, the festivities were
accompanied by repression of opponents of the Shah.
After the
Iranian revolution and in order to eradicate a strong cultural reference
to the pre-Islamic period and the monarchy, Ayatollah Sadeq Khalkhali
tried with his supporters to raze Persepolis using bulldozers. The
intervention of Nosratollah Amini, governor of the province of Fars, and
the mobilization of the inhabitants of Shiraz, standing in front of the
artifacts, saved the site from destruction.
Persepolis is a
fragile environment whose preservation may be compromised by human
activity. The harmfulness of certain chemical components of agricultural
pollution has been raised. A site protection program has recently begun,
with a view to limiting degradation linked to erosion and the passage of
visitors: covers have been put in place to protect certain elements,
such as the east staircase of the Apadana, and it is planned to cover
the ground of passing places. The construction of a barrier near
Pasargadae has motivated a controversy between the Iranian Ministry of
Archeology and the Ministry of Culture and Heritage. The rising waters
could damage numerous archaeological sites in the region. Furthermore,
the construction of a railway line, whose route could pass through the
vicinity of Persepolis and Naqsh-e Rostam, raises fears of damage.
Likewise, Persepolis is regularly the victim of thefts related to
antiquities trafficking. An expansion of the museum is planned, not yet
exactly defined: the site's classification as world heritage prohibits
any modification.
The Persians did not have their own architectural background: they
were a semi-nomadic people of shepherds and horsemen. Now, since its
foundation by Cyrus II, the Persian Empire has been equipped with
monumental buildings. Initially inspired by conquered peoples,
Achaemenid architects integrated these influences and quickly proposed
original art. If in Pasargadae, the general plan still shows nomadic
influences with its stretched buildings, dispersed in an immense park,
fifty years later that of Persepolis is proof of rationalization and
balance: the square plan is systematized, the columns are strictly
placed (6 ×6 in the Apadana, 10×10 in the Palace of the Hundred
Columns...), and includes most of the small rooms of the Harem and the
annexes of the palaces. The transitions from the porticos to the sides
are joined by angular towers in the Apadana. The two large doors and the
different steps distribute the circulation towards the main buildings.
These creations are original creations, whose style results from the
combination of elements resulting from subjugated civilizations. It is
not a hybridization, but rather a fusion of styles that create a new
one. Resulting from the know-how of architects and workers throughout
the empire, Persian architecture is utilitarian, ritual and emblematic.
Persepolis thus shows numerous elements that attest to these multiple
sources.
Indeed, with the inclusion of Ionia in the satrapies of
the empire, Achaemenid Persian architecture is marked by a strong Ionic
Greek influence, particularly visible in the hypostyle halls and
porticos of the palaces of Persepolis. The rise of the Ionic style in
Greece It is suddenly broken after the Persian invasion, but it is
expressed brilliantly in Persia, through grandiose monuments. Lydian and
Ionian architects were hired in the works of Pasargadae, later in those
of Persepolis and Susa, who made the main elements, and graffiti in
Greek is found in the quarries near Persepolis, which mentions the names
of the chief stonemasons. They play a main role in the emergence of the
Persian style. The participation of Greeks in the erection of columns
and in the ornament of palaces in Persia is mentioned in the Susa
inscription, as well as by Pliny the Elder. The columns of Persepolis
are effectively Ionic in style, with a slender, fluted shaft: the
diameter is less than a tenth of the height, no column of Persepolis is
wider than 1.9 m. Some capitals have griffins inspired by archaic Greek
bronze griffins.
Among the easily recognizable elements of the
Egyptian pharaonic style, we can mention the supports of the cornices
that protrude from the doors, as well as the birth of the capitals. Some
also attribute the contribution of the portico to the Egyptians.
The influence of Mesopotamia is very present, particularly in the
palatine formula associated with two palaces, one for the public
audience and the other for the private audience. This influence is also
visible in the motifs of palmettes or floral rosettes that decorate
reliefs and the palace, or in the serrated merlons that recall the shape
of ziggurats, and that adorn the staircases of the palaces. The enameled
and polychrome reliefs are of Babylonian inspiration. The orthostats
adorned with bas-reliefs of the Apadana, the winged bull-men of the
doors are of Assyrian style.
Present in the Middle East before
the Persians, the beginning of internal spaces created for wooden
supports and ceilings, the hypostyle hall becomes the central element of
the palace. The contribution of Greek techniques allows Persian
architecture to successfully carry out different constructions where
space has different functions: the clearing of vast spaces by means of
tall and fine columns constitutes an architectural revolution typical of
Persia. The hypostyle halls are intended for crowds and not only for
priests as in Greece or Egypt.
Most of the columns were made of
wood, and eventually rested on a stone base; They have all disappeared.
Only when the height was too important was stone used: in the Apadana,
in the Gate of the Nations. The stone columns that have survived are
very heterogeneous and show an influence from the different
civilizations of the empire, which is perhaps not innocent: the
bell-shaped base is an Achaemenid creation, but undoubtedly of Hittite
inspiration; the fluted shaft is Ionian; The capital, of an excessive
height that can reach up to a third of the column, begins with an
Egyptian-style capital followed by a square double-volute pillar, an
Iranian creation inspired by Assyrian motifs; The complex is crowned
with a theriomorphic fascia, another imported motif from Mesopotamia,
but its function of supporting beams is unprecedented. You can see there
a summary of the diversity of the empire.
Like all Achaemenid
palaces, those at Persepolis consistently had adobe walls, which may
seem surprising in a region where building stone is available in
quantity. It is, in fact, a characteristic common to all the peoples of
the East, who have reserved stone walls for temples and walls. No wall
of Persepolis has survived; the elements still standing are the door
frames and stone columns.
Although its construction spanned two
centuries, Persepolis shows a remarkable unity of style that
characterizes Achaemenid art: begun in Pasargadae, finished under Darius
in Persepolis, no notable evolutions are noted either in architecture,
decorations or techniques. . Only the last royal tombs have lost the
distinction from those of Naqsh-e Rostam, undoubtedly due to lack of
space, but their bas-reliefs are strictly identical to that of Darius.
The best known and most widespread form of Achaemenid sculpture is
the bas-relief, expressed particularly in Persepolis. They
systematically decorate the stairs, the sides of the palace platforms
and the interior of the openings. It is also assumed that they were used
in the decoration of the hypostyle rooms. You can see the Egyptian and
Assyrian inspirations, even Greek due to the finesse of the execution.
Most of the stereotypes of ancient oriental representations are found:
all the characters are represented in profile. If perspective is present
from time to time, the different planes are generally reflected one
under another. The proportions between the characters, the animals and
the trees are not respected. Furthermore, the principle of isocephaly is
strictly applied, even on different rungs of the stairs. The themes
represented are made up of parades of representatives of the people of
the empire, Persian nobles, guards, audience scenes, real
representations and combat figures that oppose a real hero to real or
imaginary animals. These bas-reliefs are notable for their quality of
execution, each detail is reflected with great finesse.
Very
little is known about round Achaemenid sculptures, that of Darius, found
in Susa, is the best known, but it is not, however, a unique example.
Herodotus and Plutarch refer, respectively, to a gold statue of
Artistona (royal wife of Darius I) and to a large statue of Xerxes I in
Persepolis.
However, numerous elements of the decoration can be
considered high reliefs. It is used, above all, for representations of
real or mythological animals, often even as architectural elements on
doors and capitals. They are essentially bulls, which are represented as
guardians of the doors, as well as in the porch of the Hall of the
Hundred Columns. The capitals of the columns end in imposts of animal
symbols: bulls, lions, griffins... The animals are very stylized,
without any variation. Some high-relief statues have been found, such as
the one representing a dog, which decorated a angular tower of the
Apadana.
The use of colors has often been dismissed due to the numerous
alterations that pigments undergo over time. Weathering, fragility of
the layers, or perishability of organic pigments are the main reasons.
Other degradations may occur due to manipulations, conservation
treatments, and renovation of the works. Cleaning, varnish applications,
protective layers, even colored touch-ups have been the cause of the
appearance of false dyes, or the degradation of objects. These
manipulations, such as the evidence of artificial components of modern
paintings on certain works, push scientists to carefully and prudently
examine any discovery of colored traces in Achaemenid sculptures and
objects.
The evidence of multiple colors in numerous works in
most Persepolitan palaces and buildings attest to the richness and
omnipresence of polychrome paintings in Persepolis. This is not only
evidence that rests on persistent pigment traces on the objects, but
also consistent evidence, such as agglomerates of paints that form
clumps, of colors that have been found en masse in containers, in
multiple places at the site.
These colors were used not only in
architectural elements (walls, reliefs, columns, doors, floors, stairs,
statues), but also in fabrics and other decorations. Varnished bricks,
lime floor covering colored with red ocher or grey-green plastered
floors, painted columns and other hangings thus decorated the interiors
and exteriors of the palaces with multiple colors. Few traces of red
have been found in the statue of Darius preserved in the National Museum
in Tehran.
The large palette of colors found gives an idea of the
polychrome richness: black (asphalt), red (opaque red glass, vermilion,
red ocher hematite), green, Egyptian blue, white, yellow (ochre or
gold). The use of plant pigments is suggested, but has not been
demonstrated.
It can, however, be difficult to accurately
reconstitute the true color palette present in a precise location;
several reliefs or restored palaces use pieces or fragments from various
locations. The examination of the differences between certain reliefs
and their previous drawings by Flandin has made it possible, for
example, to highlight the errors in restorations of a sphinx. Persepolis
was known as one of the richest cities in painting.
Terrace
The palatine complex of Persepolis rests on a terrace
measuring 450 m by 300 m and 14 m high, which has four 2 m levels. The
entrance leads to the level reserved for delegations. The noble quarters
are on a higher level. The quarters reserved for service and
administration are located on the lowest level. The real neighborhoods
are at a higher level, visible to everyone. The stone most used for
construction is gray limestone. The organization of the buildings
follows a rigorously orthogonal or hypodamic plan.
The eastern
side of the terrace is formed by the Kuh-e Rahmat, in whose rock wall
are excavated the royal tombs that dominate the site. The other three
sides are formed by a retaining wall whose height varies from 5 to 14 m.
The wall is made up of enormous carved stones, fitted without mortar and
fixed with metal pegs. The west façade constitutes the entrance to the
complex and presents the main access to the terrace in the form of a
monumental staircase.
Leveling the rocky soil is ensured by
filling the depressions with earth and stones. The final terracing is
made using heavy stones joined together by metal pegs. In the course of
this first preparatory phase, the drainage and water abduction network
is put into operation, sometimes carved in the rock itself. The blocks
have been carved and formatted with the help of burins and mining tools,
allowing the fragmentation of stones on flat surfaces. The lifting and
positioning of the stones have been ensured by means of timber.
On the south façade, trilingual cuneiform inscriptions have been found.
The text, written in Elamite, is compared to an inscription from the
palace of Susa. These inscriptions could correspond to the location of
the initial entrance to the complex, before the construction of the
monumental staircase and the addition of the Gate of All Nations.
The configuration of the terrace suggests that its conception has
taken into account imperatives of defending the site in case of attack.
A wall and towers constituted the perimeter, reinforced in the east by
an embankment and towers. The angularity of the walls allows the
defenders to cover a maximum field of vision from the outside. The
terrace supports an impressive number of colossal constructions, made of
gray limestone from the adjacent mountain. These constructions are
distinguished by the great use of colonnades and pillars, of which a
good number have remained standing. The hypostyle spaces are constant,
whatever their dimension. They associate rooms that have 99, 100, 32, or
16 columns, followed by variable arrangements (20x5 for a Treasury room,
10x10 for the Palace of a Hundred Columns). Some of these constructions
have not been finished. The materials and remains used by the workers
have also been found, not having been cleaned. Fragments of containers
that were used to store paint have been brought to light by chance in
2005 near the Apadana. They confirm the already known evidence that
attests to the use of paintings for the decoration of the palaces.
Access to the terrace is from the western façade, through a monumental, symmetrical staircase with two divergent sections that then converge. This access, added by Xerxes, replaces the original southern access to the terrace. The staircase then becomes the only important entrance. Some secondary accesses could have existed in the eastern section, whose height was lower due to the inclination of the ground. It is built with carved stone blocks joined together by pegs. Each section consists of 111 steps 6.9 m wide, 31 cm wide and 10 cm wide. The low side allows access for riders and horses. Some stones allowed the carving of five steps. The staircase was closed at the top by wooden doors whose hinges pivoted in alveoli carved into the floor. It ended in a small courtyard that opened on the gate of all nations.
The Gate of All Nations, or Xerxes Gate, was built by Xerxes I, son
of Darius. The supposed date of its construction is 475 BC. c.
The western entrance, guarded by two colossal bulls that make up the
stanchions, is 5.5 m high and is of Assyrian inspiration. It opens onto
a central hall of 24.7 m². Marble benches line the walls. The roof was
supported by four columns 18.3 m high, symbolizing palm trees, and whose
sculpted peaks represented stylized palm leaves. At the western entrance
there are two exits: one to the south, which opens onto the courtyard.
the Apadana, and another to the east, which opens onto the procession
route. The latter is guarded by a pair of colossal statues representing
winged bull-men, or lammasus. These protective figures are also present
on the capitals of the columns of the Tripylon. Remains of feet are
observed at the base of the uprights of the unfinished door. Each
entrance to the door of all nations was closed by a two-wing wooden
door, whose hinges pivoted in the alveoli carved in the floor. The doors
were decorated with precious metals.
A cuneiform inscription is
engraved above the bulls on the western façade, in the three main
languages of the empire (Old Persian, Babylonian, and Elamite):
Ahuramazda is a great god who created this earth, who created the sky,
who created man, who created the happiness of man, who made Xerxes king,
king of many, lord of many.
«I am Xerxes, the great king, king of
kings, the king of peoples with numerous origins, the king of this great
land, the son of King Darius, the Achaemenid.
King Xerxes
declares: «Thanks to Ahuramazda, I have made this Portico of all
peoples; There are many good things that have been done in Persia, that
I have done and that my father has done. Everything that has been done
beyond that, that seems good, we have done all of that thanks to
Ahuramazda.
King Xerxes declares: “May Ahuramazda protect me, as
well as my kingdom, and what I have done, and what my father has done,
may Ahuramazda protect him also.
This inscription suggests that
the Gate of All Nations was named by Xerxes in reference to the multiple
peoples and kingdoms that made up the Achaemenid empire. This
inscription is also found above the lammasus.
Bordering the northern part of the terrace from west to east, the procession route leads from the Gate of All Nations to a similar construction: the Unfinished Gate, also called the Unfinished Palace, so called because it was not finished when the destruction of the site by Alejandro. This door is located in the northeast corner of the terrace, and has four columns. It leads to a patio that opens onto the Palace of the 100 Columns. A double wall surrounded it on both sides, protecting the Apadana and the private palaces from prying eyes. Today only the lower part of these walls remains, but some think that they reached the height of the lammasus statues. You can see, in a room on one side of the road, two partially restored griffin heads that seem not to have been on the columns, perhaps intended for a later construction.
The Apadana was built by Darius the Great. The date of the beginning of its construction would be 515 BC., according to two gold and silver tablets found in the stone chests inserted in the foundations. Darius had his name and details of his empire engraved. The construction lasted a long time and would have been finished by Xerxes I. The Apadana is, with the Palace of 100 Columns, the largest and most complex of the monumental constructions of Persepolis. It is located in the center of the western part of the terrace. Located on a high level, it is accessible from the terrace, by two monumental stairs with double symmetrical and parallel ramps, which flank the plinth on the north and east sides.
The palace has a square floor plan of 60.5 m on each side. It
consists of 36 columns, of which thirteen are still standing. The
columns, about 20 m high, were probably erected using earthen ramps that
allowed them to be carried after placing the stones at the required
height. The ramps had to be raised at the same time as the columns
advanced, then the earth was evacuated. They testify to the Ionian
influence: the columns of the Apadana have the same diameter and a
similar height to those of the temple of Hera in Samos, in addition ,
have similar grooves.
The initial plans of the palace were
simpler: having later built the Persepolis Staircase and the Gate of All
Nations, access to the palace from the north became necessary. This
explains the addition of a staircase on the north side of the plinth.
The central part, a large square hypostyle hall, consisted of 36 columns
arranged in six rows. It was surrounded to the west, north and east by
three rectangular porticos with twelve columns each, arranged in two
rows. The southern part consisted of a series of small rooms, and opened
on Darius's palace, the Tachara. The corners were occupied by four
towers.
The roof was supported by beams that rested on protomes
of bulls and lions. Opposite, the protomes formed a bench on which a
main beam had been placed. The two heads thus formed a protrusion,
laterally, of around one meter. Transverse beams had been placed
directly above the heads, stabilized by the ears or horns of the
sculpted animal. These animal elements were fixed with lead. The
transverse beams joined the columns of neighboring rows. The remaining
spaces were covered by secondary beams. The whole was caulked and
covered with a layer of dry mud mortar. The beams were made of oak,
ebony, and cedar from Lebanon. The use of light cedar roofs together
with the techniques of the Ionian colonnades, allowed the liberation of
an important space: the separation of the rows of columns of the Apadana
It is 8.9 m, for a relationship between the diameter of the columns and
the distance between the shafts of only 1 by 3.6. In comparison, that of
the hypostyle hall of the Karnak temple is 1 by 1.2.
The whole
was richly painted as witnessed by the multiple traces of pigments found
on the bases of some columns, the walls and the bas-reliefs of the
stairs. The inside of the throat of a sculpted lion still has distinct
red remains. Covered with a layer of stucco of which fragments have been
found, the walls were adorned with gold embroidered hangings, ceramic
tiles, and decorated with paintings representing lions, bulls, flowers
and plants. The wooden doors and beams had gold plates, inlaid with
ivory and precious metals. The decorations on the column capitals differ
depending on their position: bulls for the columns of the central
vestibule and the north portico, and other animal figures for the east
and west porticos.
According to archaeologist David Stronach, the
configuration of a palace like the Apadana responds to two main
functions. Its dimensions could allow the reception of 10,000 people,
which facilitated the king's audience. On the other hand, its height
allowed the king to observe the ceremonies and parades that took place
on the plain. The excavations carried out in Susa, in a palace also
built by Darius I, have brought to light a slab of the Apadana, located
in the axis of the palace facing the south wall. Both palaces have
similar conceptions. The existence of a throne fixed to the floor of the
Apadana is probable. Furthermore, two nearby passes allowed the king to
retreat to the adjacent royal apartments and quarters.
When
Alexander the Great burned Persepolis, the roof of the Apadana collapsed
to the east, protecting the reliefs in this part from wear and tear for
nearly 2,100 years. A massive lion's head has been found in a hole, near
the wall that separates the Apadana from the Palace of 100 Columns. Its
function appears to have been to support a main roof beam. Its presence
in a hole located below ground level is not explained. A replica of the
Apadana portico is found in the site museum and gives an idea of the
magnificence of the palace.
Covered by the remains of the burned roof of the Apadana, the east
staircase is very well preserved. It is divided into three panels
(north, central, and south) and into triangles under the steps. The
north panel shows the reception of Persians and Medes. The south panel
shows the reception of characters who come from the subject nations. The
staircase consists of multiple symbols of fertility: pomegranate
flowers, rows separated by twelve-petaled flowers, or trees and seeds
that decorate the triangles. The trees, pines and palmettes symbolize
the palace gardens. The panels have inscriptions that indicate that
Darius built the palace, that Xerxes completed it and asked Ahuramazda
to protect the country from famine, crime, and earthquakes. The
characters in the reliefs display a haughty bearing. The ethnic
characters are meticulously reflected, and the details are worked with
fineness: skins, beards, hair are represented in small curls, costumes
and animals are worked with minute detail.
The examination of
unfinished scenes defends an organization of work, resorting to a
specialization of the worker (faces, hairstyles, dressings). The artists
and workers who participated in the construction did not have any
freedom of creation: they had to rigorously follow the guidelines
provided by the king's advisors. The execution of the works followed a
program that left no room for improvisation. The friezes, initially
polychrome, responded to the sovereign's imperatives: appreciation of
order and rigor. The staticity of the representations is reminiscent of
the orthostats of Assyrian palaces. The distribution by registers in
defined rows, and the rigidity of the subjects evokes the influence of
the severe Ionic style.
Triangles and central shelf. The
triangles are occupied by reliefs that symbolize the new year: a lion
devouring a bull. The spring equinox showed a sky where the
constellation of Lion was at the zenith, while that of Taurus
disappeared on the southern horizon. Noruz marks the beginning of
agricultural activity after winter. The meaning of the central panel is
religious. It shows Ahuramazda guarded by two griffins with human heads,
overpowering four Persian and Median guards. The Persians have a typical
round shield in their left hand, and assegais in their right hand. As in
the other reliefs at the site, the Persian guards are dressed in a long
draped dress, and wear fluted headdresses. The Medes wear short coats
and trousers, and are covered with round or pleated caps, and sometimes
with pigtails.
North shelf. The north panel is divided into three
registers and shows the reception of the new year in the form of a
parade.70 From the center to the northern end, the upper register shows
the Immortals followed by a royal procession. The Immortals wear a cap,
and are equipped with spears and quivers weighted by pommels that rest
on their feet. The royal procession consists of a Median officer
preceding the bearers of the royal chair. The royal chair is carried by
harnessed shoulder straps, which support two bamboos lodged across the
chair. The chair was composed of a sculpted wooden frame, the feet of
which were shaped like animal paws. A servant carries the footstool used
by the king, who was not supposed to touch the earth. His damaged legs
have traces of repair. The procession continues with the Median person
in charge of the royal stables, at the head of the king's horses, each
led by a page. The horses are finely crafted, revealing the detail of
the bits. The procession is closed by two chariots driven by an Elamite.
The draft horses are smaller and finer than the previous ones, of
another breed. They pull two chariots whose wheels have twelve sections
(symbolizing the twelve months of the year) and whose axles are
sculpted. The first chariot differs from the other: some lions sculpted
on the box seem to indicate that it is a hunting or war shot. The lower
and middle panels show the immortals followed by Persian nobles
(crenellated or feathered headdresses) and Medes (rounded headdress with
a small tail) alternated. Some carry luggage, others plant germs and
pomegranate flowers. Subtle differences in their costumes and jewelry
suggest different functions or status. The nobles are represented
arguing, and smiling. His attitude is relaxed and unceremonious. They
hold hands from time to time, turn towards each other, or put their hand
on the shoulder of the preceding one in attitudes that symbolize their
unity. The immortals in the lower panel are Persians; Armed with a
spear, bows and quivers, each one stands on a step of the ladder,
representing the ascension. Those in the middle shelf wear caps and are
armed only with spears.
South shelf. It is a notable panel
because it represents the arrival of delegations from twenty-three
subject nations, led alternately by Persian and Medes guides. Each
delegation is separated by pine trees. The guide leads the delegate at
the head, by the hand. The quality of the finish differs for each work:
all the reliefs have not been polished, and their detail is variable.
This parade features nearly 250 characters, forty animals, and cars.
With a height of 90 cm, the logs have a total length of 145 m. For Dutz,
the symbols of Persepolis are loaded with meaning, and their
organization is not the result of chance. The arrangement of the
representations could correspond to a protocol order, without it being
possible to know if such order follows a sequence determined by the
horizontal or vertical rows (see diagram). In any case, it would clearly
seem that the Medes were the first, and the Ethiopians the last.
Furthermore, none follow the sequential list of satrapies given by the
king's inscription. The arrangement of the delegations does not seem to
follow the order of incorporation of the different satrapies into the
empire either. Instead, it could be a function of the travel time that
separates them from Persepolis. This reasoning is supported by the texts
of Herodotus: "of all nations, the Persians honor first those closest to
them, secondly those that are more distant, and have less esteem for the
more distant ones." It is known from the Treasury tablets that the
offerings brought by the delegations do not correspond to a tax. They
correspond to gifts intended for the king or for ceremonial use. In the
absence of registration, the identification of the delegations is always
a problem, as it focuses mainly on costumes and offerings. Despite the
similarity with other representations, numerous uncertainties remain.
The presence or absence, the order of citation or presentation, even the
name of each town in the empire varies greatly, both in the sculptures
and in the royal inscriptions. The latter do not constitute an
administrative inventory carried out for posterity, but rather
correspond to the ideal vision of the empire whose king wishes to leave
his mark.
1 Medes: led by a Persian, this delegation is the most important. The
subjects wear suits, bracelets or bracelets, a sword, cups and a glass.
These are probably other Medes tribes than those that have served the
empire since its foundation, which would explain their subject status.
At the beginning of the empire, these tribes remained loyal to Astyages,
Cyrus having gathered the others.
2 Elamites: Elam has been Persian
since the founding of the empire by Cyrus the Great. The delegation led
by a Mede offers a lioness and two lions, as well as swords and bows.
3 Armenians: this delegation carries a finely crafted glass with two
handles and a horse.
4 Arachosians: Pants are still worn in
Balochistan. One of the subjects is dressed in a feline skin. The
offerings consist of a camel and jugs.
5 Babylonians: this delegation
offers a bull, bowls, and a hanging identical to those of the
representations of the palace of the 100 columns, the Treasury or the
Tripylon.
6 Assyrians and Phoenicians (or Lydians): this relief is
very detailed. The offerings consist of carved glasses and cups (bronze
or silver vessels), with double handles representing winged bulls,
jewelry (bracelets with brooches adorned with winged griffins), and a
chariot hitched with small horses. The costumes and hairstyles of the
subjects are very elaborate, even papillotes worn by Orthodox Jews can
be distinguished. The identity of the clothing maintains a controversy
over the origins of these delegations.
7 Aryans (or Arachosians): the
subjects of this satrapy correspond to the regions of Herat and Mashhad.
They are practically indistinguishable from the Arachosians. The
offerings consist of a camel and glasses.
8 Cilicians or Assyrians:
who come from southern Asia Minor, this delegation offers two rams,
skins, a suit, cups and glasses. This representation is meticulously
worked, and the detail of the costumes (laces, belts, caps) appears.
9 Cappadocians: characterized by the tying of their cape at the top of
the shoulder; They belong to the same group as the Armenians, Medes, and
Sagartians. They offer presents of a horse and costumes.
10
Egyptians: the high relief that represents this delegation has been
severely damaged by the destruction of the Apadana. The lower parts are
enough to identify the origin of the subjects, thanks to the
characteristics of their dress.
11 Scythians (also called Saks): This
satrapy extended from Ukraine to the steppes of the northern Caucasus,
as far north as Sogdiana. The subjects are wearing a typical Scythian
cap. They wear a horse, suits, and what could be bracelets with clasps.
12 Lydians or Ionians: these Greek satrapies were merged and
administered from Sardis. The subjects are dressed the same. They bring
fabrics, balls of thread and cups that perhaps contain dyes.
13
Parthians: Under the Achaemenids, the Parthians were subdued, and it is
only after the Seleucid Greek period that they will dominate Persia.
Parthia corresponds to current Turkmenistan. The delegation brings
glasses and a camel. The subjects are wearing a turban around their
necks.
14 Gandharians: This satrapy is located upstream of the Indus,
between Kabul and Lahore, west of modern-day Punjab. The subjects offer
spears and an Asian buffalo.
15 Bactrians: the delegation carries a
camel and glasses. Originally from Bactria in northern Afghanistan, the
subjects are headdressed with a ribbon.
16 Sagartios: their costumes
and gifts (suits and horse) are similar to those of the Medes,
Cappadocians and Armenians, which suggests belonging to the same group.
Its land of origin is poorly known: neighboring Thrace in Asia Minor, or
near the Black Sea and the Caucasus, even located in the steppes of
Central Asia near Bactria.
17 Sogdians: their origin was
Sogdiana, present-day Pakistan. This ethnic group belonged to the group
of the Scythians, those who wore the cap. They carry a horse, axes,
objects that may be bracelets, and a sword.
18 Indians: these
subjects, who came from Sind, the lower valley of the Indus, are dressed
in a loincloth, and are wearing sandals. They carry a donkey, axes, and
baskets with provisions carried on their backs by means of a scale.
19 Thracians (or Scythians): Thrace was located between the Aegean Sea
and the Black Sea, in a territory today shared by Greece, Turkey, and
Bulgaria. The subjects lead a horse. They wear a pointed cap with long
legs, similar to Scythian caps.
20 Arabs: these subjects come from
Phenicia - Assyria. They are shod with sandals, and dressed in tunics
with embroidered trim. They carry a dromedary.
21 Drangianians: there
is no agreement among the authors regarding the origin of this
delegation. For some, these are individuals who come from Merv in
Bactria, current states of Afghanistan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan). For
another, the subjects come from the Kerman region, eastern Iran.
Additionally, their hairstyle would support an origin near Kandahar, as
well as their shield, spear, and the type of ox they carry.
22
Somalis (or Lydians): the origin of this delegation is controversial.
Accompanied by a cart, the subjects bring a kudu or an ibex, they are
dressed in skins, but they are not negroid. The morphological type of
the individuals, as well as the presence of a chariot, would indicate a
Libyan origin, while the antelope and the skin dressings would support
an origin located further south, (Yemen or Somalia).
23 Nubians (or
Ethiopians or Abyssinians): these are Negroid subjects, who carry an
okapi or a giraffe, elephant defenses and a glass.
The northern staircase was added by Xerxes I, to facilitate access to
the Apadana from the Gate of All Nations. The reliefs on this staircase
present the same themes as those on the east staircase, but are more
degraded.
The central panel initially showed Xerxes I, Darius
the Great and an official. The latter could be a ganzabara (governor of
the Treasury), or a chiliarch (commanding officer of the guard). This
relief has been moved to the Treasury and has been replaced by another
one showing eight guards. A trilingual cuneiform inscription on the
staircase has largely taken up the text of that of the Gate of All
Nations, without specifying the name of the building.
Cross out
Named after an inscription located on a pillar of its south door, the
Tachara, or palace of Darius, is located south of the Apadana. It is the
only one of the palaces to have access to the south through a porch. The
entrance to the palace was initially from this side, via a double
staircase. Built by Darius I, the palace is then completed by Xerxes I
who expanded it, then by Artaxerxes III who added a second staircase to
the west. This new entry creates an unprecedented asymmetry. The
costumes of the Medes, Siliconians and Sogdian characters represented
are different from those of the other previous stairs, which suggests a
change in fashion, and reinforces the idea of a later construction.
The ceilings on the south staircase present symbols of Noruz: a lion
devouring a bull. The ascending parts represent Medes and Arachosians
bringing animals, jars and other things. These are probably priests who
come from Zoroastrian holy places such as Lake Urmia in Media and Lake
Helmand in Arachosia, and who carry what is necessary for the
ceremonies. The central panel shows two groups of new guards and three
panels carrying a trilingual inscription of Xerxes II, indicating that
this palace has been built by his father; It is crowned by the winged
disk, symbol either of Ahuramazda or of royal glory, framed by two
sphinxes.
The entrance to the palace is through a room, through a
door, where a relief represents the guards. This room is followed by
another door that opens to the main hall, above which there is a relief
representing the king fighting evil in the shape of an animal. This
theme is in other doors of the palace, in the Palace of 100 Columns, and
in the harem. The malefic figure is symbolized by a lion, a bull, or a
chimeric animal. The type of figure could have a relationship with the
function of the work, or with astrological themes.
A door opens
in the royal bathroom. It is adorned with a relief showing a king
prepared for a ceremony and followed by two servants who have an
umbrella and a fly swatter. The king is crowned, dressed in rich regalia
adorned with precious stones. He wears bracelets, and jewels hang from
his braided beard.Another relief probably shows a eunuch, the only
beardless representation at the site. He carries a bottle of ointment
and a napkin. The circulation of water was ensured by a covered channel
in the floor that passed through the middle of the room. You can see
remains of the red cement that carpeted the floor of the room.
The palace consists of two other small rooms located on its sides. The
south porch opens onto a courtyard surrounded by the other palaces. A
curious inscription is engraved on each lintel of the doors and windows:
stone window made in Darius's house.
The name Tachara comes from
a trilingual cuneiform inscription on each pillar of the south portico:
Darius the great king, the king of kings, the king of the peoples, the
son of Vistaspa, the Achaemenid, who has made this Tachara.
However, it is doubtful that this word, whose exact meaning is unknown,
designates the building itself: it has been found on the bases of
columns in other places in Persepolis, which bear inscriptions by Xerxes
and which mention this word:
I am Xerxes, the great king, the
king of kings, the king of the peoples, the king of this land, the son
of King Darius, the Achaemenid. King Xerxes declares: "I have made this
Tachara."
It gets its name from its three entries. The Tripylon, or audience
hall of Xerxes, or Central Palace, or Council Chamber, is a palace
located in the center of Persepolis. It is accessed from the north by a
sculpted staircase, whose reliefs mainly show Medes and Persian guards.
Other reliefs represent nobles and runners for a banquet. The southern
staircase of the Tripylon is located in the National Museum of Iran in
Tehran. A hallway opens to the east, to a door adorned with a relief
showing:
Above, Darius on his throne before Xerxes as a crowned
prince, sheltered under a canopy adorned with divine symbols, bulls,
lions and acorns; king and prince hold palm leaves in their hands, a
symbol of fertility;
Below, subjects from twenty-eight nations take
them.
This relief clearly designates to everyone Darius's will to
name Xerxes as legitimate successor to the throne.
The Hadish, or palace of Xerxes, is located south of the Tripylon; It
is built on a plan similar to Tachara, but twice as large. Its central
vestibule consisted of thirty-six stone and wooden columns. These were
tree trunks of large proportions and large diameters of which nothing
remains. It is surrounded on the east and west by small rooms and
corridors, whose doors have sculpted reliefs. There are royal
processions representing Xerxes I accompanied by servants who take cover
under an umbrella. The southern part of the palace is made up of
apartments whose function is controversial: once described as the
queen's, they are considered warehouses or annexes to the Treasury.
Access to the Hadish terrace was via a monumental staircase to the east,
double flights, first diverging and then converging, and a smaller
staircase with converging flights to the west; Both of them have the
same decoration as the south staircase of the Tachara: bulls and lions,
Persian guards, winged disk and sphinx.
Hadish is a word in Old
Persian that appears in a trilingual inscription in four copies, above
the portico and the staircase: it means "palace." It is archaeologists
who call this palace hadish, although the original name is not known.
The attribution to Xerxes is certain, since he, in addition to these
four inscriptions, had his name and his titles engraved at least
fourteen times.
Also called the Throne Room, it is shaped like a square with a side
of 70 m: it is the largest of the palaces in Persepolis. When it was
partially excavated, it was covered by a layer of earth and cedar ash
more than three meters thick. Very damaged by the fire, only the bases
of the columns and the uprights of the doors remain.
Two colossal
bulls constitute the bases of the main columns, 18 m long, that
supported the roof of the entrance portico, to the north of the palace.
The entrance was through a door richly decorated with reliefs. Among the
representations, one describes the order of things, showing from top to
bottom: Ahuramazda, the king on his throne, then many rows of soldiers
supporting him. The king therefore exercises his power as Ahuramazda,
who protects him, and commands the army that carries his power.
The palace is decorated with numerous reliefs in a remarkable state of
conservation, representing bulls, lions, flowers and acorns.
The
south gate of the palace presents a completely different relief. It
symbolizes the support provided to the king by the different nations
that make up the empire. The soldiers that make up the bottom five ranks
belong to many nations, recognizable by their headdress and weapons.
Turning towards the Treasury, this message is rather addressed to the
servants and reminds them that the riches that pass through this door
are due to the cohesion of the empire. Some cuneiform tablets detail the
tax archives, thus giving an estimate of the riches that passed through
these doors.
If the reliefs at the north and south entrances to
the palace essentially concern the affirmation of the monarchy, those at
the east and west parts present, as in other palaces, heroic scenes of a
king fighting evil.
Built by Darius I, it is a series of rooms located in the southeast
corner of the terrace, extending over an area of 10,000 m². The treasury
consists of two important rooms, whose roof was supported respectively
by 100 and 99 wooden columns.91 Wooden and clay tablets have been found,
detailing the amount of salaries and benefits paid to the workers who
had built it. According to Plutarch, Alexander the Great would have
needed 10,000 mules and 5,000 camels to transport the treasure from
Persepolis. According to some tablets, 1,348 people worked in the
Treasury in 467 BC.
The Treasury has been rebuilt and modified
many times. Many inscriptions have been found on solid blocks of
diorite, which mention King Darius. Two reliefs have been found, one of
which comes from the northern staircase of the Apadana. It is now in the
Tehran museum and represents Darius the Great on the throne. The king
receives a Median officer leaning forward, who raises his right hand to
his lips as a sign of respect. He could be a chiliarch, commander of
1000 guards, or a governor of the treasury, or Ganzabara). Xerxes and
the Persian nobles are standing behind the sovereign. Two incense
bearers stand between the king and his dignitaries. In excavations, this
building has been identified as the Treasury. Despite its large surface,
access was through two small narrow doors.
Between the Palace of the Hundred Columns and the mountain there are multiple rooms that made up the servants' and soldiers' quarters, the chancellery, and the offices. More than 30,000 tablets and fragments of tablets have been found in Elamite. According to Quintus Curtius Rufus and Diodorus, Alexander would have left 3,000 soldiers in the place, which gives an idea of the garrison capacity of Persepolis. North of these hut camps, there are the remains of a room that consisted of thirty-two columns, the function of which is not clear.
The harem is accessed through the south door of the palace of the 100
Columns. The building is "L" shaped, whose main wing has a north-south
orientation. The center consists of a colonnaded hall, open to the north
to a courtyard by a portico. This room had four entrances, the doors of
which were decorated with reliefs. The side reliefs still show scenes of
heroic combat reminiscent of those of Tachara or the palace of the 100
Columns. The king is shown fighting with a chimerical animal (horned and
winged bull-lion), with a crow's neck and a scorpion's tail, which may
be a representation of Ahriman, an evil divinity. The hero plunges his
sword into the belly of the beast that confronts him. The southern
relief shows Xerxes I followed by servants, according to a scene
identical to those in the Hadish. The southern part of the wing and the
other wing that extends it to the west consists of a series of 25
apartments, hypostyles with 16 columns each. The building also has two
stairs that link it to the Hadish, and two small patios that could
correspond to closed gardens.
It is not true that the harem could
have been a place of residence for women. According to some, the central
section could have been intended for the queen and her entourage. Others
think that the women lived outside the walls. The function of the
building is therefore controversial. The presence of elaborate reliefs,
as well as their location, at a high level is that of a building that
has an important function. On the contrary, its size and position
suggest rather an administrative function. The name "harem" is probably
erroneous: Western researchers have projected their vision of Ottoman
harems onto Achaemenid Persia, which lacked them.
The harem has
been excavated and partially restored by E. Hertzfeld by an anastylosis
procedure. He rebuilt several rooms, which served as restoration
workshops and presentation of the works found in the complex. A part of
the harem was transformed into a museum. The site museum presents a wide
variety of found objects:
ceramics, terracotta plates and glasses,
ceramic tiles;
pieces of coins;
tools of all kinds: masonry,
carving, kitchen, or mouth utensils, mortars;
wrought iron crafts,
spear and arrow heads, fragments of trumpets or metal ornaments, metal
pegs;
remains of fabrics or remains of wood that make up the
infrastructure;
metal bits and pieces of arrow;
engraved tablets.
There are works found in the surrounding area, dating from later,
Sassanid and Islamic, even earlier (prehistoric) occupations. The great
diversity of the works that collect daily uses allows us to have an idea
of the life of the time. Furthermore, the comparison of the works with
some pictorial works (snack, spears) gives an idea of the detail of the
work of the workers in carving the reliefs.
It seems that a palace was built in the southwest corner of the
terrace, belonging to Artaxerxes I. The ruins do not correspond to this
palace, but to a post-Achaemenid residential construction called Palace
H. The sculptures representing horns have been arranged near the wall of
the terrace, whose function is not known; They have been found buried at
the foot of the terrace.
Another structure called palace G, is
located north of the Haddish, and is a post-Achaemenid construction. It
appears to have been made on the site of a destroyed structure, which
could be the palace of Artaxerxes III. The remains of a construction,
called palace D, have been found east of the Haddish. Like the previous
ones, this construction after the Achaemenid dynasty has reused remains
and ornaments that come from the ruins of the terrace.
Numerous elements have been found outside the walls of the terrace. These are remains of gardens, homes, post-Achaemenid graves, or Achaemenid royal tombs. In addition, a complex network of intra- and extramural pipelines is under exploration.
They are ruins that have not yet been completely excavated and are visible 300 m south of the terrace. Possibly before the palaces, these constructions consist of many houses. The largest consists of a central hall surrounded by secondary rooms and is accessible by a staircase. They seem to have been intended for people of high social rank. A construction is located to the north of the terrace, whose function is unknown.
Recent geological explorations have revealed the ruins of Achaemenid gardens and their irrigation canals outside the complex. Some of them were harmed in 1971, during the ceremonies celebrating the 2,500 years of Iran's monarchy. Other damage has resulted from the construction of a paved road after the revolution. These gardens, called Pairidaeza (an ancient Persian word from which the word "paradise" comes), were often built next to the Achaemenid palaces.
The terrace's canalization system still contains precious secrets,
which motivates deep excavations. It involves extracting and analyzing
the sediments. More than 2 km of network have been discovered, which
runs along the terrace and its surroundings, and passes under the
palaces. The variable dimensions of the channels (60 to 160 cm wide, 80
cm to several meters deep) explain the importance of the sedimentary
volume and the value of the archaeological potential. The remains they
contain may thus prove precious: a part of the supposed throne of Darius
has been found, as have some 600 ceramic fragments that have preserved
their colors. The work encounters, however, a complex problem: the
removal of sediments allows water infiltration, which would harm the
structure of the complex.
The network of collectors and water
channels runs through the foundation and floor of the terrace. It is,
therefore, likely that the plans for the entire complex were drawn up in
detail before its construction. Cut directly into the stone at the base
of the walls, before their erection, the collectors made it possible to
evacuate rainfall infiltrations.
Located a few dozen meters from the terrace, two tombs dug into the rock of Kuh-e Ramat dominate the site. These tombs are attributed to Artaxerxes II and Artaxerxes III. Each tomb is surrounded by colonnaded sculptures that represent the palace facades, highlighted with engravings. These representations, like those of the tombs of Naqsh-e Rostam, have allowed us to better understand the architecture of Persian palatine buildings. At the top of the tomb of Artaxerxes III, the king is represented on a three-tiered pedestal, facing Ahuramazda and an equally enhanced sacred fire. One wall features a trilingual inscription recalling that Darius the Great has borne offspring, that he has built Persepolis, and lists his assets. Each version differs slightly from the other two. A third unfinished tomb lies further south. It seems to have been intended for Darius III, the last Achaemenid king. Remains of post-Achaemenid graves have been found at the foot of the mountain, one kilometer north of the terrace.
During the excavations of Herzfeld and Schmidt, two series of
archives were discovered in Persepolis, comprising numerous wooden and
clay cuneiform tablets. The first series is known as the Persepolis
Fortress Tablets as it has been found in the area corresponding to the
fortifications in the northeast corner of the terrace. It consists of
around 30,000 pieces of which 6,000 are legible. The content of 5,000 of
them has already been studied, but they have not been published in their
entirety. They mainly contain administrative texts republished in
Elamite, the language of the chancellors, between 506 BC. and 497 BC.,
but the reissued tablets in Aramaic about 500 texts have been
deciphered; one tablet in Akkadian, one in Greek, one in an Anatolian
language and spelling, one in Old Persian have been found.
These
tablets can be classified into two subgroups. The first concerns the
transportation of materials from one place to another in the empire; the
other is more of a ledger. These pieces have allowed us to obtain
precious information that allows us to understand the functioning of the
empire and its administration in the very diverse domains of
construction, circulation, mail, passports, or finances. Some bodies of
office may have been known this way, such as the governor of the
Treasury, or ganzabara. The tablets have also made it possible to know
the names of the people who worked in Persepolis, from the humble worker
to the governor of the Treasury. Furthermore, some allow us to specify
the status of women of all social classes in the Achaemenid era.
The other series, known as the Persepolis Treasure Tablets, has 139
pieces that describe payments made in gold and silver between 492 BC.
and 458 BC. Several are marked with the imprint of seals, and constitute
letters and memoranda addressed by officials to the governor of the
Treasury. The amazing preservation of dry clay tablets is explained by
the fact that they have been fired at high temperature by the fire of
Persepolis. This involuntary transformation into terracotta has
paradoxically allowed for better resistance to time, preventing them
from turning into dust.
Representing an invaluable scientific
heritage, they have contributed to a better linguistic knowledge of
Elamite and ancient Persian, or the political organization and religious
practices of the Achaemenids. This heritage is at the center of a
political controversy: a process that wants to obtain an embargo to
carry out a sale for the benefit of the "victims of Hamas terrorism."
The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago has custody of the
tablets since their discovery.
The Achaemenid Persian Empire had, in fact, several capitals.
Pasargadae was that of Cyrus the Great, Susa, Ecbatana, or Babylon were
his successors. Most authors agree on the importance of the protocol and
religious functions of Persepolis, illustrated by the strong symbolism
of the ornaments. However, the interpretation of the reliefs is delicate
since they would, in fact, present the idealized vision that Darius the
Great had of his empire. For Briant, the image offered is that of
sovereign and unlimited royal power, in a place conceived to express
Persian domination and the Pax persica. Through his virtues conferred by
the protection of Ahura Mazda, the king ensures the unity of a world
whose ethnocultural and geographical diversity is underlined.
There is controversy regarding the reality of the ceremonies described
by the reliefs, and various points of view are expressed. Some see
Persepolis as nothing more than a place reserved for the initiated. This
hypothesis is supported by the few ancient texts that mention the site
before its capture by Alexander the Great, which contrasts with the
number and diversity of the subjugated peoples. Likewise, the
delegations should have ensured Persepolis a greater notoriety.
According to this view, no reception would have actually taken place at
Persepolis. For others, such receptions had taken place. They rely on
the organization at the terrace level, which would respond to a clearly
defined function of separating the inhabitants according to their social
rank. The organization of the reliefs that mark the progression of the
tribute to the treasure, the existence of separate paths that lead
either to the Apadana or to the Palace of the 100 columns, are so many
arguments in this sense. According to this point of view, the protocol
and religious function of Persepolis is exercised through the
celebration of the new year (Noruz). The king of kings received the
offerings and received the tax from the delegations that came from all
the satrapies. The ceremonial obeyed strict rules dictated by respect
for the order of things: the delegations followed a precise order, and a
clear separation reflected to the different social classes, king and
people of royal rank, Persian and Medes nobles, Persian and Medes,
subject people). Not only were these not admitted to the same levels,
but they also followed different paths. After the arrival of the
delegations had been announced by the bell ringers, they were led
through the gate of all nations. While the subjugated continued along
the Procession Road to the unfinished Gate to be received, then, in the
Palace of the 100 Columns, the nobles headed through the other exit of
the Gate of All Nations to enter the Apadana. The magnificence and
splendor of the places would be intended to impress visitors, and to
affirm the power of the empire.
H. Stierlin, historian of art and
architecture, also elaborates on this point. The spaces freed by the
architecture of the palaces, such as the Apadana, allow large
receptions, banquets and court rites to be held. The use of libations
and royal banquets have spread from Persia, in fact, to most satrapies:
Thrace, Asia Minor, or North Macedonia, integrate such traditions.
Furthermore, the discovery of numerous Achaemenid or Achaemenid-inspired
goldsmith's objects dedicated to the arts of the table testify to the
importance of these banquets for the Persians. The configuration of the
site and the arrangement of the accesses testify to a desire to make the
real person unapproachable for some. It allows the following of a
rigorous etiquette that gives the sovereign an almost divine character.
There is controversy regarding the occupation of Persepolis. Taking
into account the reliefs, R. Ghirshman suggested a temporary annual
occupation of Persepolis. The city would have been occupied only during
the Noruz festivities, and would then have only a ritual function. This
thesis is increasingly discussed and Briant points out that, if there is
no doubt about the existence of festivals and ceremonies in Persepolis ,
numerous objections can be formulated regarding the hypothesis of an
occupation that is limited to the new year. The tablets undoubtedly
prove that Persepolis was permanently occupied, and that it was an
important economic and administrative center. Furthermore, he observes
that the Achaemenid court, even though it was itinerant, traveled
throughout the empire, and that the ancient texts do not mention its
presence in Persia except in autumn and not in spring. If the existence
of Noruz ceremonies cannot be excluded, it is possible that reliefs and
tablets refer to offerings and tributes received during the travels of
nomadic sovereigns:
Finally, for Stronach, it is necessary to first
consider the function of Persepolis from a political angle, taking into
account the conditions of Darius's accession to power. Dario had to
overcome great opposition). Such monuments would not have had the
literal function of reflecting the power or wealth of the empire, but
rather responding to immediate political imperatives. Built shortly
after the advent of Darius, Persepolis first enshrines the legitimacy of
his accession to the throne and affirms his authority to the ends of the
empire. Furthermore, the repetition of motifs representing Darius the
Great and Xerxes suggests the desire to legitimize his successor.
Likewise, the multiplicity of references to Darius by Xerxes I suggests
the desire to consolidate and ensure the succession to the throne.