ii. ARCHEOLOGICAL EXPLORATIONS AND EXCAVATIONS
The first Germans who reported on the historical and archeological monuments of the ancient Persian world, were, as in other nations, adventurers and travelers of a different kind. Their reports can be significant as contemporary descriptions of the condition of monuments in late medieval times, particularly those which have vanished or are seriously altered nowadays; their interests in antiquities, however, were mostly determined and limited by their view of biblical history. The earliest of these reports came from Johannes Schiltberger, a fifteen-year old squire who was captured first at the battle of Nikopolis (1396) and then again at Ankara (1402 ) and consequently had to serve in the Ottoman and Timurid armies for thirty-two years. He saw the Oriental world from the Balkans and Egypt to India and Central Asia, and his vivid report is of considerable historical interest. His description of Babylon and other historical sites, however, has little scientific value. The same is true for the reports of Hans Christoph von Teufel and Georg Christoph Fernberger, who traveled across Persia from Hormuz to the northwest via Isfahan in 1589 and 1591 (Gabriel, pp. 65-66).
With the consolidation of Safavid rule, visits of Europeans to Persia, including Germans, increased dramatically. Heinrich von Poser, a well-educated Silesian, traveled in Persia between 1621 and 1624. He passed through Julfa, Tabrīz, and Solṭānīya on his way to Isfahan and continued via ʿAqdā, Torkābād, and Yazd, where he reported on the Zoroastrian population and buildings. He was one of the first Europeans to cross the desert on his way to Ṭabas, Farāh, and Qandahār towards India. On his return to Isfahan he traveled via Hormuz, Bandar ʿAbbās, Lār (where he observed fossils), Shiraz, and Persepolis. In Shiraz, he observed a ruined mountain fortress, most probably the Qalʿa-ye Pahandar or Šāh Mobāḏ, overlooking the tomb of Saʿdī, which has now completely vanished. His description of Persepolis documents the mythological interpretation of the site then prevailing in Persia. The original travel diary, written in Latin, is lost, but a posthumous abbreviated translation into German was published in 1675 (Beveridge; Kochwasser).
In order to open a trade route from the Baltic Sea to Persia via Russia, Prince Friedrich III of Holstein-Gottorp sent an embassy to the Persian court in 1635 to negotiate commercial arrangements. The embassy returned to Holstein in 1637. The secretary for the numerous staff was the librarian and mathematician Adam Olearius (Ölschläger), whose travel account is among the best sources about Safavid Persia. His route took him from the Caucasian shore of the Caspian Sea via Ardabīl, Solṭānīya, Qazvīn, Qom, Kāšān, and Naṭanz to Isfahan and back. As a mathematician he corrected the available map of Persia considerably by his measurements. Although not mainly concerned with archeology, the voluminous publication of his “Moscowitische und Persianische Reisebeschreibung” contains interesting remarks on monuments, and his many illustrations of cities, palaces, and court life, despite being completed, embellished, and partly distorted by the European engravers, are clearly based on realistic sketches at the spot. The drawings of cities such as Darband and Tarku are strikingly informative even today.
Another member of the Holstein embassy, the young squire Johann Albrecht von Mandelslo, who had shown special interest in historical monuments before, separated from the group in Isfahan in order to travel on to India and the Far East. He also left a diary, which after his early death in France was edited with scholarly commentaries by Olearius. On his way to Bandar ʿAbbās in 1638 he visited Pasargadae/Mašhad-e Mādar-e Solaymān and Persepolis/Čehel Menār. The curious illustrations of the two sites in the book seem to be reconstructions by the editor or engraver based on his text, rather than authentic drawings, although details of the tomb of Cyrus, shown as a European house with gabled roof, gave rise to serious discussions.
Olearius also edited the travel accounts of Jürgen Andersen, who, after being shipwrecked off the Chinese coast, came into Manshu and Mongol captivity in 1647, seeing and describing the Great Wall of China. He escaped to Samarkand and Mašhad, served in the Persian army under Shah ʿAbbās II in Isfahan, traveled in Persia from Erivan to Hormuz, and took part in the Persian campaign in Afghanistan before returning to Europe via Baghdad (then identified with Babylon), Jerusalem, and Alexan dretta (Eskandarūn) in 1650.
The first German traveler who came to Persia with clearly scientific ambitions was Engelbert Kaempfer from Lemgo. He went to Isfahan in 1683-84 as the physician and secretary of the Swedish embassy sent to Shah Ṣafī II in another unsuccessful attempt to open a trade route via Russia. In 1685 he left the embassy and entered the services of the Dutch East India Company (q.v.) in order to travel on to East Asia. But he was kept in the Dutch trading post in Gambron (Bandar ʿAbbās) until 1688, before he could continue his tour as far as Japan. Back in Lemgo in 1694, he could only publish part of his extraordinarily rich material, translated into Latin as Amoenitatum exoticarum in 1712. A German translation of the chapter on Isfahan by Walter Hinz appeared in 1940. His manuscripts were bought from his family after his death by Hans Sloane in 1725 and are now in the British Library (Kaempfer, ed. Meier-Lemgo; Hüls and Hoppe). Although Kaempfer’s main interest was biology, especially botany, he described and illustrated archeological and historical places with unprecedented extensity. His drawings often look naive, partly due to insufficiently skilled engravers, but are painstakingly precise. His records cover most intensely the Shiraz-Persepolis area and Isfahan, with an important bird’s-eye view of the city center, and by their authenticity considerably add to the information about 17th-century Persia. He seems to have been the first to use the term cuneiform to describe the Persepolis inscriptions.
The fall of the Safavid state in the early 18th century and the following period of instability caused a general reduction of European-Persian relations. It was only in 1765 that Carsten Niebuhr came to Persia for a brief but very successful visit. He was a student of mathematics, geodesy, and Oriental sciences at Göttingen and had been attached to a scientific expedition to Yemen sent by King Frederik V of Denmark in 1761, at the instigation of the theologian Johann David Michaelis, the founder of Oriental studies at Göttingen University. Niebuhr was the only surviving member of the expedition and on his way back traveled from Būšehr to Shiraz, Persepolis, and Pasargadae, and visited Ḵārg island. Since he was a surveyor and cartographer, his plans and drawings of towns and ancient monuments surpassed former attempts and his geodetic measurements resulted in essential corrections of contemporary Near Eastern cartography. His brilliant observations and lucid descriptions are illustrations of the works of a scientist in the modern sense. He convincingly argued for the location of Pasargadae at the site of Mašhad-e Mādar-e Solaymān and against Fasā in the then-ongoing dispute. After his return to Europe in 1767, he was in Copenhagen in the geographical services of the Danish military until 1778, then he returned to Germany and served in rural administration, as he could not find employment in any scientific institution. Already in Copenhagen he had published a description of Arabia (Niebuhr, 1772) at his own expense. The two first volumes of the full account of his expedition also appeared in Copenhagen (Niebuhr, 1774-78); the third volume was published posthumously in Hamburg in 1837.
Niebuhr’s copies of the Achaemenid inscriptions of Persepolis were the basic material for the first step in the deciphering of cuneiform texts by Georg Friedrich Grotefend (q.v.) in Göttingen in 1802. Grotefend was not an Orientalist, but a young high-school teacher who tackled the task as the result of a bet, solving the problem by observing recurrent patterns and making logical substitutions (Wiesehöfer, pp. 308-18, tr. pp. 231-38). During the following decades, the rapid development of cuneiform studies brought about an increased search for cuneiform inscriptions in the oriental countries. With the discovery of the Assyrian rock inscriptions in northeast Iraq and the Urartian ones in eastern Turkey, the adjacent northwestern provinces of Persia also became a focus of research. In 1828-29, the young orientalist Friedrich Eduard Schulz traveled around Lake Urmia, receiving support from the French Academy. Starting from Tabrīz and crossing through the mountains east of the lake, he visited Ūjān, Qalʿa-ye Zoḥḥāk, and Taḵt-e Solaymān, where he copied the inscription on a now collapsed wall of the Il-khanid palace. Continuing westward he critically checked Robert Ker Porter’s account of the Karaftu caves and the Greek inscription there. Passing into the mountains west of the lake, he discovered the Urartian stela on the Kelishin pass. His copy and notes, however, were lost, when he was robbed and murdered by Kurdish tribesmen soon afterwards near Başkale west of Urmia, in 1829 (Willock, pp. 134-36; Gabriel, p. 144). The earlier, still extant, part of his diary is currently being prepared for publication. Jules Mohl had an interim report on his earlier research published in 1840 (Sedillot). Another German explorer, R. Rosch, allegedly was assassinated when he was taking moldings of the Kelishin stela (Lehmann-Haupt, p. 245).
About 1857, Otto Blau explored the same area south and west of Lake Urmia. He reportedly took copies of the Urartian inscription of Tash Tepe (Tāš Tappa), west of Mīāndōāb, which designated the site as an Urartian outpost at the Mannean border, and made a cast of the Kelishin inscription, which, however, broke on the way back (Lehmann-Haupt, pp. 219-22). In 1898-99, Waldemar Belck and Carl Friedrich Lehmann-Haupt extended their archeological survey on Urartian sites in eastern Anatolia to the lake Urmia basin and controlled and updated earlier observations. Traveling around the lake they found that the Tash Tepe inscription had been blown off; fragments came into the possession of a German missionary and later of the British Museum (Lehmann-Haupt, pp. 219-22). They carried out test excavations, e.g., at Goek (Gök) Tepe (q.v.), and made complete copies of the Kelishin inscriptions. In 1884 and 1885, H. Pohlig, Alfred Rodler, and Theodor Strauss, Geman geologists working for Austrian institutions, excavated and studied fossils in the area of Marāḡa (Weithofer, p. 756).
Despite the 19th century focus on the inscription-rich northwest of Persia, interest in the historical center, Fārs and Persepolis, was not diminished. In 1874, the Prussian Ministry of Sciences and Education sent an astronomical expedition to Isfahan for observation of the transit of the planet Venus, which is still commemorated by an inscription tablet in the Armenian Museum in the Julfa suburb of Isfahan. The expedition’s photographer, Friedrich Stolze, was a professor at Berlin Technical High School, where not long before Albrecht Meydenbauer had developed the technique of photogrammetry. When the astronomical observations were finished, Stolze was ordered to carry out a photographical and photogrammetical survey on archeological monuments and inscriptions in Persepolis and southern Fārs, together with the orientalist Friedrich Carl Andreas, who later became the leading scholar of the Persian language at Göttingen, where Arthur Christensen, Kaj Barr, and Walter B. Henning studied with him. The photographic survey, which lasted until 1878, covered the area between Dārāb (q.v.), Tasūj, and Būšehr (q.v.). Near Būšehr soundings in search of bricks with inscriptions were carried out, and in Bīšāpūr (q.v.) the Sasanian reliefs were excavated and cleaned. In addition to archeological sites and monuments, architectural, ethnographical, and zoological subjects were documented. In Persepolis the expedition came across the excavations which the governor of Fārs, Farhād Mīrzā Moʿtamed-al-Dawla, had undertaken with six hundred workmen over a period of two months in 1877. Apart from making photographs, Stolze recognized and studied the mud brick wall which fortifies the terrace towards the west on top of the mountain ridge, and he prepared a photogrammetrical plan of the site which resembles a model of later excavation plans. Only a minor part of the expedition’s material was published, in two volumes with photographic plates, three plans, and very brief descriptions (Stolze and Andreas, 1882; Stolze, 1883).
There are a number of German publications by 19th to early 20th century travelers or residents which give some information or illustrations on archeological and historical sites. Heinrich Brugsch described the tour of the Prussian Embassy under Baron Julius von Minutoli in 1860-61 from Tiflis to Tehran, Hamadān, Isfahan, and Shiraz, where Minutoli died. The Austrian physician Jakob Eduard Polak, who lived in Persia for many years, published an extensive general account of Qajar Persia and both carried out and instigated research of archeological relevance (e.g., his proof that part of the gold ore from the gold washings in Hamadān was not native but imported, i.e., it came from ancient treasuries; Polak, 1865; idem, 1888, pp. 141-42). The Hungarian orientalist Armin Vambéry traveled in disguise as an Ottoman Sufi through Persia, Afghanistan, and the Central Asian khanates (just before the loss of their indepenence to Russia). From 1901 until 1903, the orientalist Oscar Mann crossed Persia from Būšehr to the northwest. He took photographs and moldings of the Pahlavi inscriptions at Hājīābād and of the Elamite reliefs at Malāmīr. He studied and documented the archeological monuments of the Kermānšāh-Bīsotūn-Harsīn area and of Qalʿa-ye Yazdegerd, as well as places around Lake Urmia (Mann, 1903; idem, 1904-5). Other travelers in the notoriously dangerous northwest region of Persia were the Austrian Ida Pfeiffer (1850), Moritz Wagner (1852, 1856), Max von Thielmann (1875), G. Pauli (1887), Hugo Grothe (1910), and E.-J. Westarp (1913).
At the end of the 19th century, interest in the Islamic art and civilization of Persia had also increased in Germany. Since 1897, the Islamic art historian Friedrich Sarre had visited Persia several times and studied Sasanian and Islamic monuments, with the transition from pre-Islamic to Islamic culture being his special interest (Sarre, 1899, 1902, and 1910). In the young scholar Ernst Herzfeld, Sarre found a congenial and complementary partner with the same outlook, who specialized in the earlier periods of the Near and Middle East and whom Sarre supported from the beginning.
Herzfeld was an architect with additional education in archeology, art history, and oriental philology. He had worked in the Assyrian excavations from 1903 until 1905, and from there he began to explore the western provinces of Persia. Persia and the influence which ancient Persian culture had exercised on the pre-historical, classical, and Islamic periods of the ancient world soon became his main field of interest. From the beginning he showed a superior capacity for setting archeological evidence into context with historical information. His comprehensive and convincing view of the development of Persian culture, which at that early stage of research necessarily was tentative and sometimes incorrect, was to influence scholarly opinions more than any other contemporary research for half a century. One of his earliest travels in Persia, 1905-7, was directed to the very nucleus of Persian history, that is, to Pasargadae and Persepolis. He graduated with a profound study on Pasargadae in 1907 from Berlin University (Herzfeld, 1908), where he did his habilitation in 1917 and held a chair in oriental archeology until 1935, most of the time being on leave for field work. Although an active excavator with interests also in prehistoric periods (Herzfeld, 1932, 1933), excavation was not his top priority and his methods in this field were criticized. He gathered extensive knowledge of the historical and archeological sites and monuments of Persia by almost permanent travels with long stays for studies and excavations. His first cooperative effort with Sarre covered Persian rock art and resulted in a joint publication (Sarre and Herzfeld, 1910). A second volume, devoted to the archeology and monuments along the ancient road connection from northern Mesopotamia to the center of Media, the “Gate of Asia,” was intended as a joint publication with the French archeological mission to Hamadān and Sar-e pol-e Zohāb under Charles Fossy. World War I halted the project and delayed the publication until 1920 (Herzfeld, 1920).
During an archeological survey in northern Mesopotamia together with Sarre in 1907-8, which was published in 4 volumes, Herzfeld specially studied the remains of the Sasanian palaces at Ctesiphon and Dastgerd (Sarre and Herzfeld 1911, I/3, 1920, II/4). Between 1911 and 1923, three trips to the northwestern Iraq-Persia border region around Solaymānīya resulted in the complete architectural and philological publication of the enigmatic tower at Paikuli with its long Pahlavi inscription of the Sasanian king Narseh (Herzfeld, 1914, 1924). A new edition of the inscription was published by Helmut Humbach and Prods O. Skjærvø in 1978-83. Herzfeld’s most extensive journey, from 1923 until 1925, took him from Baghdad once again via Ctesiphon, Qaṣr-e Šīrīn, Kermānšāh, and Hamadān to Tehran, and from there via Ḵorha, Isfahan, Persepolis, Shiraz, Fīrūzābād, Farrāšband, Kāzerūn, Fahlīān, and Ḵārg Island to Bušehr and on through Pakistan and Afghanistan to Sīstān (where he briefly excavated at Kūh-e Ḵᵛāja), Khorasan, Māzandarān, Dāmḡān, and back to Tehran. His superficial travel report (Herzfeld, 1926) points only briefly to the great amount of information and understanding he had achieved: e.g., his correct conception of Ardašīr’s buildings in Fīrūzābād, of the architectural system of Sasanian fire temples, of the temple at Kūh-e Ḵᵛāja being a Zoroastrian, not a Buddhist, sanctuary, and the identification of Šahr-e Qūmes with Parthian Hekatompylos.
From 1928 onwards, Herzfeld carried out research at Pasargadae, Persepolis, and Eṣṭaḵr, at first supported by German institutions and later by the Oriental Institute of Chicago. After 1934, his work in the Persepolis area was continued by Erich Friedrich Schmidt. Like Schmidt, Herzfeld had emigrated, living in Britain since 1934 and in the United States since 1936. Nevertheless, he continued to edit a series of publications in Germany until 1938, for which he himself was usually the principal author: the periodical Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Iran (beginning in 1929), its Ergänzungsbände (1938 onwards), and Iranische Denkmäler (after 1932). His Schweich Lectures in London in 1934 and his Lowell Lectures at Harvard were published as Archeological History of Persia and as Iran in the Ancient East. They were a splendid new summary of knowledge about ancient Iranian history and culture, although they lacked details such as final publications of his excavations in Fārs and Sīstān. In spite of the subsequent corrections of some of his ideas which have been necessary, e.g., of his dating of the western Persian rock tombs as Median, of his dating and interpretation of the Kangāvar ruin, and of his reconstruction of Ḵorha, his major works are fascinating reading matter even today.
The catalytic effects of Herzfeld’s research can be judged by the vivid positive and negative response he received and by the number of activities which he initiated. His reluctantly but clearly advanced view of the architectural type of the Zoroastrian fire temple as a closed building, which resulted from his scrupulous studies of so-called čahārṭāqs (q.v.), and with which he was in conformity with other scholars such as Franz Oelmann (1921), was not accepted by his most fervent scientific rival, the meritorious oriental art historian Kurt Erdmann. Erdmann elaborated the idea of the čahārṭāqsas an open canopy temple (Erdmann, 1941), an idea which was widely accepted but which meanwhile turned out to be a theoretical construction without any archeological and liturgical justification, whereas Herzfeld’s view proved correct (see below). Similarly, Erdmann’s rejection of the dating of Ṭāq-e Bostān by Herzfeld and others as belonging to Ḵosrow II (590-628 C.E.; Herzfeld, 1938, pp. 91-158) and his argument that it was a work of Pērōz I (457/59-483) because of the shape of the crown (Erdmann 1937; idem, 1954), is no longer unanimously accepted.
Just as Herzfeld’s excavations in Persepolis were carried on by others, his studies in Ctesiphon led to systematic excavations there in 1928-29 and 1931-32 under Oskar Reuther and Ernst Kühnel. Although for financial reasons only two seasons of work were possible, the second one already with American participation, there were basic results for the topography, architecture, and history of this Sasanian capital (Reuther, 1930; Kühnel, 1933).
Herzfeld’s early interest in Islamic archeology was instigated by the vast ruins of Sāmarrāʾ, which he began to study when working in Assyria. In cooperation and with the support of Sarre, he carried out his best organized and most completely published archeological works there (Herzfeld, 1923-48). Herzfeld’s excavation results at Sāmarrāʾ demonstrated the dominant Persian influence in the architecture and decoration of the ʿAbbasid period even outside Persia proper. With his analysis of the desert castle of Mshatta in Jordan, Herzfeld demonstrated that this influence had already begun to grow under the Omayyads (Herzfeld, 1910, 1921). His later publications also contain important contributions to Islamic archeology (Herzfeld, 1942-48).
In addition to Sarre’s early research on Islamic archeology, other German and Austrian missions started activities in Persia and Central Asia in the late 19th century. The founder of the Berlin Ethnological Museum, Adolf Bastian, collected pottery sherds and other archeological material in Afrāsīāb (q.v.) and Toi Tepe near Tashkent since 1989 (Grünwedel; Erdmann, 1942). Between 1912 and 1914, Ernst Diez from Vienna and Oskar von Niedermayer from Bavaria led an expedition to Khorasan intending to conduct excavation in Nīšāpūr. The permit that had been issued, however, was canceled and work had to be limited to a photographic survey during which a great number of Islamic monuments was surveyed and documented (Diez, 1918). Niedermayer collected rich photographic material during a military mission in Afghanistan in 1916-17 (Niedermayer, 1924).
Another photographic survey was carried out in Turkmenistan, Chorasmia, Uzbekistan, and Farḡāna in 1924-35 by the art historian Ernst Cohn-Wiener (1925, 1930).
In 1938, a German Institute was established in Isfahan under the Iranist Wilhelm Eilers (q.v.), who briefly took part in the Persepolis excavations. Activities were limited to philological and linguistic studies after 1939; in 1941 the institute was closed and Eilers deported to Australia. He returned to Persia in 1957 to carry out a first reconnaissance expedition, together with Kurt Erdmann and Ernst Kühnel, in preparation for future archeological work. A second expedition by the archeologist Hans Henning von der Osten and the Swedish prehistorian Bertil Almgren in 1958 resulted in the choice of the Sasanian fire sanctuary at Taḵt-e Solaymān and the neighboring Iron Age site of Zendān-e Solaymān in 1959. After von der Osten’s sudden death in 1960, excavations were directed by Rudolf Naumann until 1976 and by Dietrich Huff until 1978. On Zendān-e Solaymān, a hollow, conical rock, built up naturally by sediments of a calcinating source now dried out (Damm, 1968), an 8th-7th century B.C.E. fortification-like ring of rooms and terraces were uncovered, ascribed to the Manneans. A ceremonial function seems more probable than a military one (Boehmer, 1962, 1967, 1986; Kleiss, 1971; Naumann, 1977). At Taḵt-e Solaymān, excavation revealed a small, rural settlement with intramural burials of the Achaemenid period below a small and scarcely inhabited Parthian fortification aside the central lake. The first period of monumental Sasanian constructions of mud brick cannot be dated before mid-5th century, replacement by the existing buildings of masonry began only in the early 6th century, probably by Ḵosrow I Anōšīravān during the last years of the reign of his father, Kavād I. Thus Vladmir Minorsky’s suggestion is fully confirmed since, as he argued, the place is neither identical with Parthian Phraaspa, which Antonius tried to capture without success in 36 B.C.E., nor with the Sasanian city of Ganzaka (see GANZAK), which was Heraclius’ military base during his campaign against Ḵosrow II Parvēz in 627-28, but is rather the fire sanctuary which Heraclius, perhaps erroneously, called Thembarmais, where Ḵosrow II fled, before it was captured and destroyed by the Byzantines in 628 C.E. (Minorsky). Within the round wall a small palace was excavated beside two temples, the larger, central one obviously being the temple of Ādur Gušnasp (q.v.), frequently mentioned by medieval sources as one of the three most revered Sasanian sanctuaries. In the 8th-9th centuries C.E., when the Zoroastrian population had left or converted, the place was a small rural town, known as Šīz. In 1265, Abaqa Khan, the Mongol ruler of Persia, ejected the population and rebuilt the site as a palace. There is evidence of a brief re-occupation by a peasant population and of demolition of the palace during the 14th century. At least in the 15th century, the place was finally abandoned (Naumann, 1961, 1962, 1964, 1965, 1974, 1975, 1977; Huff, 1977b, 1969, 1987; R. Naumann and Huff; von der Osten and Naumann; R. Naumann, D. Huff, and R. Schnyder; Göbl, 1976; R. and E. Naumann; Harb; Kröger; Qūčānī; PLATE I).
In 1961, a branch of the German Archeological Institute was opened in Tehran (Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, q.v., Abteilung Teheran). The designated director Hans Henning von der Osten having died in 1960, the new branch was directed by Heinz Luschey, until 1971 and by Wolfram Kleiss until 1995. From its beginning, the Tehran branch continued the series of publications which Herzfeld had founded: Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Iran, Ergänzungsbände and Iranische Denkmäler. In addition, new series were started: Teheraner Forschungen (since 1960), Beiträge zur Archäologie und Geologie des Zendan-i Suleiman (since 1968), Tacht-e Suleiman (since 1976), Führer zu Archäologischen Plätzen in Iran (since 1977), Bastam (since 1979), and Materialien zur Iranischen Archäologie (since 1993). The first excavation and survey activities were carried out in the Bīsotūn (q.v.) area in 1963. Median-Achaemenian, Hellenistic-Parthian, Sasanian, and Islamic traces of occupation and constructions were uncovered below the Darius relief, near the Parthian reliefs, at the so-called Tarāš-e Farhād, in the village with its two caravansaries, and at the river banks (Luschey, 1968; Kleiss, 1970, 1972, 1974; Trümpelmann, 1968; Salzmann; Huff, 1985; 1998c; Kleiss and Calmeyer, 1996).
After extensive surveys in Azarbaijan, research on Urartian sites became another area of prime interest after 1968. During one season, in 1968, the small fortified place of Sangar with its rock tomb, west of Mākū, was excavated (Kleiss, 1969, 1970). In 1969 continuous excavations began in Besṭām (q.v.), north of Ḵoy (PLATE II). This third largest Urartian fortress is called Rusahinili in an inscription tablet of the Urartian King Rusa II (685-45 B.C.E) found there in 1910 by the German diplomat Count Kanitz. Gates, arsenal, depots, stables, and living quarters were uncovered on and below the fortress ridge; a stone platform probably was the site of a Haldi temple. The crest of the ridge is eroded and destroyed by later Armenian and medieval-Islamic occupation. Continuous surveys of Urartian sites accompanied the excavations (Kleiss, 1970, 1972; Kleiss and Kroll; Kleiss et al., 1979-88; Kroll; von Schuler).
Archeology of the early Sasanian period in Fārs was another major field of research. Research in the Fīrūzābād, Farrāšband, Kazerūn and Nūrābād area resulted in a geodetical surveying season in the round city of Ardašīr Ḵorra (q.v.) in 1972 and in excavations of the two palaces or Ardašīr I at Fīrūzˊabād (q.v.) from 1975 until 1978, in cooperation with the National Iranian Organization for the Conservation of Historical Monuments (Sāzmān-e mellī ḥefāẓat-e āṯār-e bāstānī-e Īrān), initiated by UNESCO as a preparation for restoration. The layout and the archeological sequences of the fortified palace of Qalʿa-ye Doḵtar above the entrance to the plain of Fīrūzābād was cleared. It was used mainly in the early years of Ardašīr, and again under Yazdegerd III, during the Arab conquest. The larger palace in the plain, wrongly called Ātaškada, fire temple, which clearly was a later construction of Ardašīr, had been partly cleaned out by local authorities since the 1960s. One season in 1978 provided evidence of a long Sasanian occupation with structural repairs and additions and a radical reconstruction in Buyid times (Huff, 1969-70, 1971b, 1972, 1974, 1976, 1978 ; Gignoux).
Between 1971 and 1975 a research program was carried out in the Behbahān-Lordagān region by a group under H. J. Nissen, at first on behalf of the Oriental Institute at Chicago and then for Berlin University. Studies of the earliest patterns of settlements resulted in the excavation of the 5th millennium site of Tepe Sohz (Sowz) near Behbahān, and there was a general survey of pre-Islamic sites in the Qalʿa-ye Rostam area near Lordagān (Nissen; Bernbeck). From 1971 until 1978, an Austrian expedition excavated an Early Iron Age manor house at Kordlar Tepe near Urmia (Lippert et al.).
In addition to excavations a number of surveys and research programs was carried out by the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut as well as by other institutions. Special attention was paid to Luristan culture (Calmeyer, 1964, 1969, 1973a-b). Persepolis and Pasargadae were subject of further investigation and Herzfeld’s and Sarre’s studies on Achaemenid sculpture and Persian rock art in general were continued (Calmeyer, 1973, 1981, 1992; von Gall, 1974b, 1990; Gropp, 1971b; Herrmann, 1977, 1980-83; Hermann and MacKenzie; Huff, 1984; Hrouda and Trümpelmann; Kleiss and Calmeyer, 1975; Krefter, 1971, 1973; Trümpelmann, 1975a-b; Walser). Persian tombs and funerary practices have long been under discussion in terms of their dating and interpretation, given the fact that the Old Iranian religion of Zoroastrianism forbids burial of corpses and instead requires exposure of the dead. Research on the so-called Median rock-tombs led to the conclusion that their date is not Median, but late or post-Achaemenid (Calmeyer, 1978; von Gall, 1966, 1974a, 1988; Huff 1971a; 1988; 1999b). During the study of the various kinds of rock monuments in south Persia, some of which are designated as ossuaries in inscriptions, typologies were established which show that the majority of the presumed open air fire altars, like the twin altars at Naqš-e Rostam, were in fact also receptacles for the bones of corpses that had been exposed (Gropp, 1970 pp. 203-8; Huff, 1975c, 1988, 1992, 1998; Kleiss, 1972, pp. 199-204). Studies on Zoroastrian fire temples were continued by the department as well as by the university institutes at Hamburg and Göttingen (Gropp, 1969; 1971a; Schippmann, 1971). Architectural studies at the so-called čahārṭāqs (domed structures on a square of four arches), corroborated the excavation results of the fire sanctuaries at Taḵt-e Solaymān and proved that Sasanian fire temples were enclosed buildings, as already recognized by Herzfeld, and that there were no canopy structures, as had become a common opinion since the suggestions of Kurt Erdmann and André Godard (Huff, 1975a-b, 1982; see also architecture iv; ātaŠkada; Čahārṭāq). Analysis of ancient and medieval domestic and representative architecture led to a typology of Persian palaces (Huff, 1993, 1999a; Kleiss, 1989). Dams, bridges, road connections, and caravansaries from the Achaemenid until Islamic periods were subjects of research projects (Kleiss, 1991, 1992, 1996-97). Besides Iranistics, Elamite studies were pursued mainly at Göttingen University (Hinz, 1964; Hinz and Koch; Seidl, 1986). From there as well as from Tübingen and other universities, surveys were carried out in different regions of Persia (e.g., Carls; Gaube, 1973a, 1980; Gropp, 1995; Hallier; Hinz, 1969; Pohanka; Schippmann, 1970; Schweizer). In Bamberg and Tübingen special importance was given to Islamic archeology (Finster; Leisten); in Vienna and Tübingen to numismatics and sphragistics (Gaube, 1973b; Göbl, 1971, 1973, 1976, 1984). Munich University became a center for paleozoological research (Boessneck; Boessneck and Krauss).
No excavation or major fieldwork was possible in Persia after 1978. After 1989, the activities of the Tehran Department were extended to Central Asia (Götzelt) and in 1993, together with the Uzbek Archeological Institute, excavations were begun in the Surkhandaria province of Uzbekistan, first at Dzhandaulat Tepe, a site of the Achaemenid to Kushan period, and then, since 1994, at the Bronze Age site of Dzharkutan (Huff, 1997).
In 1996 the Tehran Department was integrated into the new Eurasia Department (Eurasien Abteilung) of the German Archeological Institute, which, among other activities, began additional excavations and research in Uzbekistan in 1997. A project on early tin mining in the Karnab area and in the Tajik area of Panjikant, especially around Mushiston, is being carried out in cooperation with the German Mining Museum of Bochum, the Max Planck Institute in Heidelberg, and the Uzbek and Tajik Archeological Institutes. Another research program in Tajikistan was begun in the Kuljab area in 1997 in cooperation with the Tajik and Russian Archeological Institutes.
The publication series of the Tehran Department are partly carried on by the Eurasia Department: Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Iran (AMI), entitled Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Iran und Turan (AMIT) since 1997; Teheraner Forschungen; and Ergänzungsbände were united as Archäologie in Iran und Turan). A new journal, Eurasia Antiqua, and a series of monographs, Archäologie in Eurasien, have been published since 1995 and 1996, respectively.
In Afghanistan, new German archeological research was begun by Bonn University in 1955, when Klaus Fischer started continuous surveys mainly in the Qandahār region. Between 1969 and 1974 he carried out surveys in the western Afghan border province of Sīstān/Nīmrūz, mainly researching ancient and medieval settlements and fortifications (Fischer, 1967, 1971, 1973, 1974-76, 1981; Klinkott).
See also EXCAVATIONS and under individual scholars.
M. Alram, Nomina propria iranica in nummis: Materialgrundlagen zu den iranischen Personennamen auf antiken Münzen I, Vienna, 1986.
J. Andersen and V. Iversen, Orientalische Reise-Beschreibungen, Schleswig, 1969, repr. Tübingen, 1980.
S. Baghestani, Metallene Compartimentsiegel aus Ost-Iran, Zentralasien und Nord-China, Berlin, 1997.
R. Bernbeck, Die neolithische Keramik aus Qaleh Rostam, Berlin, 1989.
H. Beveridge, “Von Poser’s Diary in Persia and India,” The Imperial and Asiatic Quarterly Review and Oriental and Colonial Record, 1910, pp. 96-100.
R. M. Boehmer, “Volkstum und Städte der Mannäer,” Baghdader Mitteilungen 3, 1964, pp. 11-24.
Idem, “Forschungen am Zendan-i Suleiman in Persisch-Aserbeidschan 1958-65,” Archäologischer Anzeiger, 1967, pp. 573-85.
Idem, “Ritzverzierte Keramik aus dem mannäischen (?) Bereich,” AMI, N.S., 19, 1986, pp. 95-115.
J. Boessneck, “Tierknochenfunde vom Zendan-i Suleiman (7. Jahrhundert v. Christus),” AMI, N.S. 6, 1973, pp. 95-112.
J. Boessneck and R. Krauss, “Die Tierwelt um Bastam/Nordwest-Azerbaidjan,” AMI, N.S. 6, 1973, pp. 113-33.
H. Brugsch, Die Reise der Königlich Preussischen Gesandtschaft nach Persien, Leipzig, 1862.
P. Calmeyer, Altiranische Bronzen der Sammlung Bröckelschen, Berlin, 1964.
Idem, Datierbare Bronzen aus Luristan und Kirmanshah, Berlin, 1969.
Idem, Reliefbronzen im babylonischem Stil: Eine westiranische Werkstatt des 10. Jahrhunderts v. Chr., Munich, 1973a.
Idem, “Zur Genese altiranischer Motive I-XI,” AMI, N.S. 6, 1973b, pp. 135-52.
Idem, “Das Grabrelief von Ravansar,” AMI, N.S. 11, 1978, pp. 73-85.
Idem, “Figürliche Fragmente aus Pasargadae nach Zeichnungen E. Herzfelds,” AMI, N.S. 14, 1981, pp. 27-44.
Idem, “Zur Genese altiranischer Motive XI: eingewebte Bildchen,” AMI, N.S. 25, 1992, pp. 95-125.
H. G. Carls, Alt-Hormoz: Ein historischer Hafen an der Strasse von Hormoz, Munich, 1982.
E. Cohn-Wiener, “Die Ruinen der Seldschukenstadt von Merw und das Mausoleum Sultan Sandschars,” Jahrbuch der asiatischen Kunst 2, 1925, pp. 114-22.
Idem, Turan, Berlin, 1930.
B. Damm, Geologie des Zendan-i Suleiman, Wiesbaden, 1968.
E. Dietz, Churasanische Baudenkmäler, Berlin, 1918 (for complete bibliography see O. Aslanapa, ed., Beiträge zur Kunstgeschichte Asiens: In Memoriam Ernst Diez, Istanbul, 1963, pp. XIII-XV).
K. Erdmann, “Das Datum des Taq-i Bostan,” Ars Islamica 4, 1937, pp. 79-91.
Idem, “Der Taq-i Bostan und das Problem der sasanidischen Kunst” in 6. Internationaler Kongress für Archäologie, Berlin, 1939, II, pp. 249-25.
Idem, Das iranische Feuerheiligtum, Leipzig, 1941; repr. Osnabrück, 1969.
Idem, “Die Keramik von Afrasiab,” Berliner Museen 53, 1942, pp. 18-28.
Idem, “Zur Datierung des Taq-i Bustan und der Pariser Silberschale,” ZDMG 104, 1954, pp. 538-39 (for complete bibliography, see O. Aslanapa, R. Naumann, eds., Forschungen zur Kunst Asiens: In Memoriam Kurt Erdmann, Istanbul, 1969).
B. Finster, Frühe iranische Moscheen. Vom Beginn des Islam bis zur Zeit salğuqischer Herrscher, Berlin, 1994.
K. Fischer, “Alexandropolis metropolis Arachosias: Zur Lage von Kandahar an Landverbindungen zwischen Iran und Indien,” Bonner Jahrbücher 167, 1967, pp. 129-232.
Idem, “Historical, Geographical, and Philological Studies on Seistan by Bosworth, Daffinà and Gnoli in the Light of Recent Archaeological Field Surveys,” East and West 21, 1971, pp. 45-51.
Idem, “Archäologische Landesaufnahme in Norden von Afghanisch-Sistan,” AMI, N.S. 6, 1973, pp. 213-71.
Idem, “Archäologische Forschungen in Afghanistan 1974-1978,” in C. Rathjens, ed., Neue Forschungen in Afghanistan,Opladen, 1981, pp. 189-201.
K. Fischer, D. Morgenstern, and V. Thewalt, Nimruz, Geländebegehungen in Sistan 1955-1973 und die Aufnahme von Dewal-i Khodayad1970, 2 vols., Bonn, 1974-76.
A. Gabriel, Die Erforschung Persiens, Vienna, 1952.
H. von Gall, “Zu den “medischen” Felsgräbern in Nordwestiran und Iraqi Kurdistan,” Archäologischer Anzeiger, 1966, pp. 19-43.
Idem, “Neue Beobachtungen zu den sog. medischen Felsgräbern,” Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Symposium on Archaeological Research in Iran, Tehran, 1973, Tehran 1974a, pp. 139-54.
Idem, “Die Kopfbedeckung des persischen Ornats bei den Achaemeniden,” AMI, N.S. 7, 1974b, pp. 145-61.
Idem, “Das Felsgrab von Qizqapan: Ein Denkmal aus dem umfeld der achämenidischen Königsstrasse,” Baghdader Mitteilungen 19, 1988, pp. 557-82.
Idem, Das Reiterkampfbild in der iranischen und iranisch beieinflussten Kunst parthischer und sasanidischer Zeit, Berlin, 1990.
H. Gaube, Die südpersiche Provinz Arrağān, Kūh-kīlūyeh von der arabischen Eroberung bis zur Safavidenzeit, Vienna, 1973a.
Idem, Arabo-sasanidische Numismatik, Braunschweig, 1973b.
Idem, “Im Hinterland von Sīrāf: Das Tal von Galledār/Fāl und seine Nachbargebiete,” AMI, N.S. 13, 1980, pp. 149-67.
Ph. Gignoux, “Pithos-Inschriften von Qalʿa-ye Dukhtar,” AMI, N.S. 11, 1978, pp. 147-50.
R. Göbl, Sasianian Numismatics, Braunschweig, 1971.
Idem, Der Sasanidische Siegelkanon, Braunschweig, 1973.
Idem, Die Tonbullen vom Tacht-e Suleiman, Berlin, 1976.
Idem, System und Chronologie der Münzprägung des Kušanreiches, Vienna, 1984.
T. Götzelt, Ansichten der Archäologie Süd-Turkmenistans bei der Erforschung der “mittleren Bronzezeit” (Periode Namazga V), Espelkamp, 1996.
G. Gropp, “Die Funktion des Feuertempels der Zoroastrier,” AMI, N.S. 2, 1969, pp. 147-75.
Idem, “Bericht über eine Reise in West- und Südiran,” AMI, N.S. 3, 1970, pp. 173-208.
Idem, “Die rezenten Feuertempel der Zarathustrier,” AMI, N.S. 4, 1971a, pp. 263-88.
Idem, “Beobachtungen in Persepolis,” AMI, N.S. 4, 1971b, pp. 25-49.
Idem, Archäologische Forschungen in Khorasan, Iran, Wiesbaden, 1995.
H. Grothe,Wanderungen in Persien, Berlin, 1910.
A. Grünwedel, “Bericht über die Reise des Herrn Bastian,” Zeitschrift für Ethnologie 22, 1890, pp. 347 ff.
W. Hallier, “Ribat-i Sefid (Khorasan),” AMI, N.S. 8, 1975, pp. 143-66.
U. Harb, Il-khanidische Stalaktitengewölbe, Berlin, 1978.
G. Herrmann, “Naqsh-i Rustam 5 and 8: Sasanian Reliefs Attributed to Hormuzd II and Narseh,” Iranische Denkmäler 8, Berlin, 1977.
Idem, “The Sasanian Rock Reliefs at Bishapur I-III,” Iranische Denkmäler, Berlin, 1980-83.
G. Hermann and D. N. MacKenzie, The Sasanian Rock Reliefs at Naqsh-i Rustam: Naqsh-i Rustam 6, The Triumph of Shapur I (together with an Account of the Representations of Kerdir), Iranische Denkmäler 13, Berlin, 1989.
E. Herzfeld, “Pasargadae,” Klio, 8/1, 1908, pp. 1-68.
Idem, “Die Genesis der islamischen Kunst und das Mshatta-Problem,” Der Islam 1, 1910, pp. 27-63.
Idem, Die Aufnahme des sasanidischen Denkmals von Paikuli, Abhandlungen der Königlich preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische Klasse 1, Berlin, 1914.
Idem, Am Tor von Asien, Berlin, 1920.
Idem, “Mshatta, Hira und Badiya,” Jahrbuch der Kgl. Preussischen Kunstsammlungen 42, 1921, pp. 104-46.
Idem, Die Ausgrabungen von Samarra I-V, Berlin, 1923-30; VI, Hamburg 1948.
Idem, Paikuli: Monument and Inscription of the Early History of the Sasanian Empire, Berlin, 1924.
Idem, “Reisebericht,” ZDMG 80, N.S. 5, 1926, pp. 225-84.
Idem, Vorgeschichtliche Denkmäler I-II: Steinzeitlicher Hügel bei Persepolis,Berlin, 1932; III-IV: Niphauanda, Berlin, 1933.
Idem, Archaeological History of Persia, London, 1935.
Idem, “Khusrau Parwēz und der Ṭāq i Vastān,” AMI 9, 1938, pp. 91-158.
Idem, Persia in the Ancient East, Oxford, 1941; repr. Tehran, 1976.
Idem, “Damascus: Studies in Architecture I-IV,” Ars Islamica 9-14, 1942-48 (for complete bibliography, see G. C. Miles, “The Writings of Ernst Herzfeld,” Ars Islamica 7, 1940, pp. 82-92 and idem, ed., Archaeologica Orientalia in Memoriam Ernst Herzfeld, Additions to the Bibliography of Ernst Herzfeld, New York 1952, pp. 279-80).
W. Hinz, Am Hofe des Grosskönigs, Leipzig, 1940; repr. Tübingen and Basel, 1977.
Idem, Das Reich Elam, Stuttgart, 1964. Idem, Altiranische Funde und Forschungen, Berlin, 1969.
W. Hinz and H. Koch, Elamisches Wörterbuch, Berlin, 1987.
B. Hrouda and L. Trümpelmann, “Sarpol-i Zohāb: Die Felsreliefs I-IV, das parthische Felsrelief,” Iranische Denkmäler 7, Berlin, 1976.
D. Huff, “Takht-e Suleiman,” Iran 7, 1969, pp. 192-93.
Idem, “Zur Rekonstruktion des Turmes von Firuzabad,” Istanbuler Mitteilungen 19-20, 1969-70, pp. 319-38.
Idem, “Das Felsgrab von Fakhrikah,” Istanbuler Mitteilungen 21, 1971a, pp. 161-71.
Idem, “Qalʿa-ye Dukhtar bei Firuzabad: Ein Beitrag zur sasanidischen Palastarchitektur,” AMI, N.S. 4, 1971b, pp. 127-71.
Idem, “Der Takht-i Nishin in Firuzabad" Archäologischer Anzeiger, 1972, pp. 517-40.
Idem, “An Archaeological Survey in the Area of Firuzabad,” Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Symposium on Archaeological Research in Iran, 1973, Tehran, 1974, pp. 155-79.
Idem, “Takht-i Suleiman: Bericht über die Ausgrabungen 1965-73,” Archäologischer Anzeiger, 1975a, pp. 137-68.
Idem,”Sasanian Čahar Taqs in Fārs,” Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Symposium of Archaeological Research in Iran, Tehran 1974, Tehran 1975b, pp. 243-54.
Idem, “Nurabad: Dum-i Mil,” AMI, N.S. 8, 1975c, pp. 167-209.
Idem, “Ausgrabungen auf Qalʿa-ye Dukhtar 1975,” AMI, N.S. 9, 1976, pp. 157-73.
Idem, “Fīrūzābād, Wiege des Sassanidenreiches: Die Paläste des Königs Ardaschir,” Bild der Wissenschaft 11, 1977a, pp. 48-60.
Idem, “Takht-i Suleiman,” AMI 10, 1977b, pp. 211-30.
Idem, “Ausgrabungen auf Qalʿa-ye Dukhtar bei Firuzabad 1976,” AMI, N.S. 11, 1978, pp. 117-47.
Idem, “Das Imamzadeh Sayyid Husain und E. Herzfelds Theorie über den sasanidischen Feuertempel,” Stud. Ir. 11, 1982, pp. 197-212.
Idem, “Das Felsrelief von Qir (Fārs),” AMI, N.S., 17, 1984, pp. 221-47.
Idem, “Harsin,” AMI, N.S. 18, 1985, pp. 15-44.
Idem, “Technological Observations on Clay Bullae from Takht-i Suleiman" Mesopotamia 22, 1987, pp. 367-90.
Idem, “Zum Problem zoroastrischer Grabanlagen in Fārs I. Gräber,” AMI, N.S. 21, 1988, pp. 145-76.
Idem, “Zum Problem zoroastrischer Grabanlagen in Fārs II,” AMI, N.S. 25, 1992, pp. 207-17.
Idem, “Sassanidische Architektur/Architecture sassanide,”in Splendeur des Sassanides: L’empire perse entre Rome et la Chine (224-624), catalogue of exposition at the Musées royaux d’art et d’histoire (12 February-25 April, 1993), Brussels, 1993, pp. 45-61 (Fr. tr. defective).
Idem, “A General Survey of Iranian Capitals before the Islamic Period,” in M. Y. Kīānī, ed., Pāytaḵthā-ye Īrān/Iranian Capitals, Tehran, 1995, pp. 1-92 (Eng.), pp. 1-72. 407-46 (Pers.).
Idem, Deutsch-uzbekische Ausgrabungen auf dem Džandaulattepe und in Džarkutan, Süduzbekistan, 1993-1995,” Mitteilungen der Berliner Gesellschaft für Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte 18, 1997, pp. 83-95.
Idem, “Fire Altars and Astodans,” in V. Sarkhosh-Curtis, R. Hillenbrand, and J. M. Rogers, eds., The Art and Archaeology of Ancient Persia, London, 1998, pp. 74-83.
Idem, “Traditionen iranischer Palastarchitektur in vorislamischer und islamischer Zeit,” in B. Finster, ed., Rezeption in der islamischen Kunst, Beiruter Texte und Studien 61, Beirut, 1999a, pp. 141-60.
Idem, “Das ‘medische’ Grabrelief von Deh Now,” Stud. Ir. 28, 1999b, pp. 7-40.
H. Hüls and H. Hoppe, eds., Engelbert Kaempfer zum 330. Geburtstage, Lemgo, 1982.
H. Humbach and P. Skjærvø, The Sassanian Inscription of Paikuli, 3 vols., Wiesbaden, 1978-83.
E. Kaempfer, Amoenitatum exoticarum, Lemgo, 1712; repr. Tehran, 1975 (no imprint).
Idem, Die Reisetagebücher Engelbert Kaempfers, ed. K. Meier-Lemgo, Wiesbaden, 1968.
W. Kleiss, “Die Sasanidischen Kapitelle aus Venderni,” AMI N.S. 1, 1968a, pp. 143-47.
Idem, “Urartäische Plätze in Iranisch-Azerbaidjan,” Istanbuler Mitteilungen 18, 1968b, pp. 1-44.
Idem, “Bericht über zwei Erkundungsfahrten in Nordwest-Iran,” AMI, N.S. 2, 1969, pp. 7-119.
Idem, “Bericht über Erkundungsfahrten in Nordwest Iran im Jahre 1969,” AMI, N.S. 3, 1970, pp. 107-32.
Idem, Zendan-i Suleiman: Die Bauwerke, Wiesbaden, 1971.
Idem, “Bericht über Erkundungsfahrten in Iran im Jahre 1971,” AMI, N.S. 5, 1972, pp. 135-242.
Idem, “Die urartäischen Anlangen in Bastam nach der Grabung 1973,” AMI, N.S. 7, 1974, pp. 107-14.
Idem, Die Entwicklung von Palästen und palastartigen Wohnbauten in Iran, Sitzungsberichte der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse 524, Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für Iranistik 22, Vienna, 1989.
Idem, “Wasserschutzdämme und Kanalbauten in der Umgebung von Pasargadae,” AMI, N.S. 24, 1991, pp. 23-30.
Idem, “Dammbauten aus achaemenidischer und aus sasanidischer Zeit in der Provinz Fārs,” AMI, N.S. 25, 1992, pp. 131-45.
Idem, Karawanenbauten in Iran, 2 vols., 1996-97.
W. Kleiss et al., Bastam, 2 vols., Berlin, 1979-88.
W. Kleiss and P. Calmeyer, “Das unvollendete achaemenidische Felsgrab bei Persepolis,” AMI, N.S. 8, 1975, pp. 81-98.
W. Kleiss and P. Calmeyer, eds., Bisutun: Ausgra bungen und Forschungen in den Jahren 1963-1967, Berlin, 1996.
W. Kleiss and S. Kroll, “Früharmenische Burgen in Nordwest-Azerbaidjan,” AMI, N.S. 12, 1979, pp. 289-302.
M. Klinkott, Islamische Baukunst in Afghanisch-Sistan, Berlin, 1982.
H. Kochwasser, “Persien im Spiegel der Reisebeschreibung von Heinrich von Poser (1620-1625),” in Festgabe deutscher Iranisten zur 2500-Jahrfeier Irans, Stuttgart, 1971, pp. 80-93.
F. Krefter, Persepolis. Rekonstruktionen: Der Wiederaufbau des Frauenplastes, Rekonstruktionen der Paläste. Modell von Persepolis, Berlin, 1971.
Idem, “Persepolis. A Propos: Beiträge zur Funktionsbestimmung,” AMI, N.S. 6, 1973, pp. 153-61.
J. Kröger, Sasanidischer Stuckdekor:Ein Beitrag zum Reliefdekor aus Stuck in sasanidischer und frühislamischer Zeit ,Baghdader Forschungen 5, Mainz, 1982.
S. Kroll, Keramik urartäischer Festungen in iranisch-Azarbaidjan, Berlin, 1977.
E. Kühnel, Die Ausgrabungen der zweiten Ktesiphon-Expedition, Winter 1931/32, Berlin, 1933. C. F. Lehmann-Haupt, Armenien einst und jetzt I, Berlin, 1910.
T. Leisten, Architektur für Tote: Bestattungen in architektonischem Kontext in den Kernländern der islamischen Welt zwischen 3./9. und 6./12. Jahrhundert, Berlin, 1998.
A. Lippert, et al., “Die österreichischen Ausgrabungen am Kordlar-Tepe in Persisch-Westaserbeidschan (1971-1978),” AMI, N.S. 12, 1979, pp. 103-53.
H. Luschey, “Die Datierung der sasanidischen Kapitelle aus Bisutun und des Monuments von Taq-i-Bustan,” AMI, N.S. 1, 1968, pp. 129-42.
Idem, “Das qadjarische Palais am Taq-i Bostan,” AMI, N.S. 12, 1979, pp. 395-414.
J. A. von Mandelslo, Morgenländische Reysebeschreibung, ed. A. Olearius, Schleswig, 1658.
O. Mann, “Archäologisches aus Persien,” Globus 83, 1903, pp. 327-331.
Idem, “Reisen im westlichen Persien,” in Sitzungsbericht 9.11.1904, Mitteilungen des Vereins für Erdkunde, Leipzig, 1905, pp. 33-38.
V. Minorsky, “Roman and Byzantine Campaigns in Atropatene,” in idem, Iranica: Twenty Articles, Tehran 1964, pp. 86-109.
R. Naumann, “Takht-i Suleiman und Zendan-i Suleiman,” Archäologischer Anzeiger, 1961, pp. 30-53; 1962, pp. 636-66; 1964, pp. 8-27; 1965, pp. 620-98; 1975, pp. 109-204.
Idem, “Vorbericht über die Ausgrabungen auf dem Taxt-e Soleymān 1973,” in Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Symposium on Archaeological Research in Iran, Tehran, 1974, pp. 194-215.
Idem, Die Ruinen von Tacht-e Suleiman und Zendan-e Suleiman, Berlin, 1977.
R. and E. Naumann, Takht-i Suleiman, Munich, 1976.
R. Naumann and D. Huff, “Takht-i Suleiman,” Bāstān-šenāsī wa honar-e Īrān 9-10, 1972, pp. 7-25.
R. Naumann, D. Huff, and R. Schnyder, “Takht-i Suleiman: Bericht über die Ausgrabungen 1965-1973,” Archäologischer Anzeiger, 1975, pp. 109-204.
C. Niebuhr, Reisebeschreibungen nach Arabien und anderen umliegenden Ländern, 3 vols., I-II, Copenhagen, 1774-78; III, Hamburg, 1837; repr. Graz, 1968.
O. von Niedermayer, Afghanistan, Leipzig, 1924.
H. J. Nissen, “Tepe Sohz,” Iran 11, 1973, pp. 206-7.
F. Oelmann, “Persische Tempel,” Archäologischer Anzeiger, 1921, pp. 273-88.
Adam Olearius, Vermehrte Newe Beschreybung der Muscowitischen und Persischen Reyse, Schleswig, 1656; repr. Tübingen, 1971.
H.-H. von der Osten, Die Welt der Perser, Stuttgart, 1956. H.-H. von der Osten and R. Naumann, Takht-i Suleiman Berlin, 1961.
G. Pauli, “Von Tabriz bis Van,” Mitteilungen der Geographischen Gesellschaft, Lübeck 11, 1887.
J. Pfeiffer, Eine Frauenfahrt um die Welt, 3 vols., Vienna, 1850.
R. Pohanka, Burgen und Heiligtümer in Laristan, Südiran,Sitzungsberichte der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-historische Klasse 466, Vienna, 1986.
J. E. Polak, Persien, das Land und seine Bewohner, 2 vols., Leipzig, 1865.
Idem, “Beiträge zur Expedition nach Persien im Jahre 1882,” Mitteilungen der K. K. Geographischen Gesellschaft in Wien, N.S. 21, 1888, pp. 136-42.
ʿA.-A. Qūčānī (A. Ghouchani), Ašʿar-e fārsī-e kāšīhā-ye Taḵt-e Solaymān/Persian Poetry on the Tiles of Takht-i Sulayman, Tehran, 1992.
O. Reuther, Die Ausgrabungen der deutschen Ktesiphon-Expedition im Winter 1928/29, Berlin, 1930.
W. Salzmann, Die “Felsabarbeitung und Terrasse des Farhad,” in Bisutun: Archäologischer Anzeiger, 1976, pp. 110-34.
F. Sarre, “Reise von Ardebil nach Zendschan im nordwestlichen Persien,” H. Petermanns Mitteilungen 45, 1899, pp. 215-17.
Idem, “Reise nach Mazenderan,” Zeitschrift der Gesellschaft für Erdkunde, Berlin, 1902, pp. 99-111.
Idem, Denkmäler persischer Baukunst, Berlin, 1910.
Idem, Die Kunst des Alten Persien, Berlin, 1922 (for complete bibliography see: J. H. Schmidt, ed., Friedrich SarreSchriften, Berlin, 1935).
F. Sarre and E. Herzfeld, Iranische Felsreliefs, Berlin, 1910.
Idem, Archaeologische Reise im Euphrat- und Tigris-Gebiet, 4 vols., Berlin, 1911-20.
J. Schiltberger, Reisen des Johannes Schiltberger (1394-1427), ed. K. F. Neumann, Munich, 1859.
K. Schippmann, “Notizen einer Reise in den Bachtiaribergen,” AMI, N.S. 3, 1970, pp. 231-37. Idem, Die iranischen Feuerheiligtümer, Berlin, 1971.
E. von Schuler, “Urartäische Inschriften aus Bastam,” AMI, N.S. 3, pp. 93-106; 5, 1972, pp. 117-34.
G. Schweizer, Bandar Abbas und Hormuz: Schicksal und Zukunft einer iranischen Hafenstadt am Persischen Golf, TAVO, B 2, Wiesbaden, 1972.
M. Sedillot, “Mémoire sour la Lac Van et ses environs, par M. Fr. Ed. Schulz (Envoyé à Paris le 8 juin 1828),” JA, 3rd series, 9, 1840, pp. 257-374.
U. Seidl, Die elamischen Felsreliefs von Kurangun und Naqš-e Rustam, Berlin, 1986.
F. Stolze, “Persepolis,” Verhandlungen der Gesellschaft für Erdkunde Berlin 10, 1883, pp. 251-76.
F. Stolze and F. C. Andreas, Persepolis: Die achaemenidischen und sassanidischen Denkmäler und Inschriften von Persepolis, Istakhr, Pasargadae, Shāpūr, 2 vols., Berlin 1882.
M. von Thielmann, Streifzüge im Kaukasus, in Persien und in der asiatischen Türkei, Leipzig, 1875.
L. Trümpelmann, “Die Terrasse des Ḫosrow,” Archäologischer Anzeiger, 1968, pp. 11-17.
Idem, “Das sasanidische Felsrelief von Sar Mašhad,” Iranische Denkmäler 5, Berlin, 1975a.
Idem, “Das sasanidische Felsrelief von Darab,” Iranische Denkmäler 6, Berlin, 1975b.
H. [A.] Vambéry, Reise in Mittelasien, Leipzig, 1865.
Idem, Meine Wanderungen und Erlebnisse in Persien, Budapest, 1867.
M. Wagner, Reise nach Persien und dem Lande der Kurden,Leipzig 1852.
G. Walser, Die Völkerschaften auf den Reliefs von Persepolis: Historische Studien über den sogenannten Tributzug an der Apadanatreppe, Berlin, 1966.
K. A. Weithofer, “Über Jura und Kreide aus dem nordwestlichen Persien,” Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Mathematisch-Naturwiss. Klasse 98, 1889, Vienna, 1890, pp. 756-73.
E. J. Westarp, Unter Halbmond und Sonne, Berlin, 1913.
J. Wiesehöfer, Das antike Persien von 550 v. Chr. bis 650 n. Chr., Zurich, 1994; tr. A. Azodi as Ancient Persia, London and New York, 1996.
A. D. H. Willock, “Notice of the Circumstances Attending the Assassination of Prof. Schultz,” JRAS 1, 1834, pp. 134-36.
Originally Published: December 15, 2001
Last Updated: February 7, 2012
This article is available in print.
Vol. X, Fasc. 5, pp. 519-530