semi-sacred tombs. Though few other monuments can be traced back to the
age of the founder of the Persian sovereignty, the heroic Cyrus, fortune
appears to have preserved his tomb almost entirely intact in
architectural respects. The description of it by Arrian is not precise,
but his account may still be identified with an interesting and
evidently ancient Persian monument, now known as Medshed
Mader-i-Suleiman, the tomb of the mother of Solomon. Its situation is in
Murgab, not distant from the ruins of Pasargadæ, which contain
inscriptions with the name of Cyrus, and reliefs commemorating his
exploits. The monument consists of a terrace seven times stepped,
covering a ground surface of 12.5 by 13.5 m.; it is built of enormous
blocks carefully joined, and bears a cella with gabled roof. The simple
and gently curved mouldings of the cornice and base of the cella do not
betray Greek influence, but it is possible that the form of the roof,
rare in the Orient, may be attributed to reminiscences of Hellenic
construction observed during the campaigns of Cyrus in Asia Minor. The
entrance, described by Arrian as very small, is 0.9 m. broad and 1.2 m.
high; the exterior of the cella is 5.2 m. broad and 6.3 m. long; the
chamber itself only 3 m. long and 2.1 m. broad and high. There is
naturally no longer any trace of the objects once within the
interior--the table, coffin, and bier of solid gold; the garments of
royal purple. The inscriptions have, unfortunately, also disappeared.
The blocks of the chamber floor are swallow-tailed into each other with
great exactness; to which circumstance, and to the exact jointing of all
the massive masonry, this exceptionally fine state of the building’s
preservation is to be ascribed. The whole structure gives the impression
of a terraced Chaldæan temple. It is not improbable that the Tomb of
Cyrus received this sacred form because the character of a hero of
Western Asia was attributed to the king soon after his death. A
colonnade appears to have enclosed the sombre pile; several drums of its
columns still project above the ground. The accounts of Greek authors
refer to buildings erected for the priests to whose care the monument
was intrusted; these are believed to have been recognized in the remains
of a neighboring caravansary.
The tombs of later Persian kings, which, during the entire dynasty of
the Achæmenidæ, were almost alike, are of a totally different nature
from that of Cyrus, being cut in and upon the face of the rock. Upon the
steep cliff of Naksh-i-Rustam and Persepolis there are seven of these
facades, which form an imposing feature of the landscape, whether viewed
in the vicinity or from afar. All follow the type of the Tomb of Darius
described above, giving a representation of the royal dwelling upon the
wall before the grave-chamber. (_Fig._ 83.) Only the lower half of the
door is used as an entrance, the upper part being closed by an imitation
of slat-work. It leads to a corridor running parallel to the face of
the cliff; in the Tomb of Darius this extends to the left, beyond the
breadth of the façade, to three chambers, each of which is arranged for
three coffins. All these graves had been plundered when investigated by
Coste and Flandin. A rock-cut tomb at Serpul-Zohab is of still simpler
disposition; originally it had two columns upon the front, but was not
further decorated; the interior consisted of a small chamber, providing
only sufficient space for two sarcophagi. It is not certain whether
other monuments in the vicinity of Naksh-i-Rustam and of Pasargadæ
should be regarded as tombs. They resemble towers; their corners are
strengthened by pilasters, and they have oblong niches upon each side,
the frames of which are triply stepped. Of the tombs of Persian subjects
nothing whatever is known; it may be possible that the people of that
nation were accustomed formerly, as at present, to carry down their dead
from the highlands to the Necropolis of Chaldæa, where millions of
graves still await scientific investigation.
As little is known of Persian domestic architecture. No vestiges of
private houses have been found which belong to an historical period
earlier than that of the Roman emperors. The habitations of subjects
were not to be compared with the magnificent palaces of their despotic
rulers, and must have been built of the most destructible materials. We
may imagine the Persian house somewhat to have resembled, in disposition
of plan, the royal dwellings, though of course greatly simplified by the
substitution of an open court for the hypostyle hall, by the omission of
terraces, columns, and carvings, and by the reduction of all spaces and
dimensions to a minimum.
The Persians developed far less independence in sculpture than in
architecture. They showed themselves, in their carvings, to be but
meanly endowed scholars of the Assyrians, and gained little by
subjecting themselves to the influence of other nations, the spirit of
which they did not comprehend or employ towards any possible improvement
of Assyrian traditions. The Mesopotamians were, in their artistic
development, thrown upon their own resources; they therefore looked
earnestly to the fountain-head of nature as the model of their
sculptured work; but the Persians, in the wider extent of their
kingdom, instead of profiting by the study of nature, so requisite to
true progress, depended upon forms and methods inherited from the
Assyrians, upon which they engrafted certain peculiarities borrowed from
the Egyptians, and also, in still greater measure, from the higher art
practised among the Greeks of Asia Minor in the time of Darius and
Xerxes. In this adoption of foreign properties, in this mingling of
Mesopotamian, Egyptian, and Hellenic manners of expression, they utterly
sacrificed originality and simplicity of style, and made of their
sculpture a repulsive hybrid of inharmonious elements. It may well be
conceived that with this lifeless imitation the creative impulse
languished, and art became more and more limited, until it shrank at
last into mere ornamental handiwork. The Persians could the more easily
forego the revetment of their walls with carved slabs, after the
Assyrian fashion, as their architecture itself, far more than that of
Mesopotamia, fulfilled its own aim,--accomplished with its own means
what was elsewhere effected by sculpture and painting.
With Persian statues in the full round we have no acquaintance. Several
examples remain of colossal monsters in the half round, like those met
with in Assyrian sculpture. In conception and in detail, in proportion
and in situation, they scarcely differ from those of Assyria: they are
only somewhat stiffer; their strap-like sinews and veins, their muscles
and hair, are conventionalized almost to pure ornament; they have
entirely lost the life-like natural truth of the works of Nineveh. The
tendency towards decoration is well expressed in the wings of these
monsters. The rectilinear feathers of the models upon the Tigris were in
Persia transformed into the graceful but unnatural curves seen also in
the griffins of Greek architecture. This Colossus is found in the best
state of preservation at the Propylæa of Xerxes near the ascent of the
terrace of Persepolis. On the front are perfect bulls, with
proportionately small heads; on the back are the cherubim already
mentioned, with long-bearded, tiara-crowned human heads. These purely
Assyrian monsters of the gateway may perhaps be regarded as trophies
from Mesopotamia, which, in the course of time, had become naturalized
into the Persian practice of palace architecture.
[Illustration: Fig. 91.--Relief for a Portal of Persepolis. (See Fig.
86.)]
If the masonry, probably of brick, had received a richly sculptured
stone revetment, like that which covered the Assyrian walls, some
remains of this would certainly have been found. It seems, however, that
the wall surfaces were ornamented only with paintings. In proportion as
carved decoration was diminished, the architectural treatment of the
enclosing masses was increased, by doors, windows, and niches, and by
the repeatedly stepped epistyle beams and its crowning scotia, richly
ornamented with leaves over the lintels. Only the inner surfaces of the
door-jambs were used for representations in relief, the subjects being
partly mythological, partly ceremonial. The ruins of Pasargadæ show such
a mythological figure, in long, close-lying garments without folds,
according to the Assyrian tradition, though of somewhat lighter
proportion. It has a less pronounced Semitic profile, Egyptianized by
long twisted ram’s horns upon the head, and with the irrelevant
ornaments of the Nile situla, disks, and uræos-serpents; the greater
part of it is so destroyed that only the outline is recognizable. Upon
the terrace of Persepolis there is repeated a kingly or divine being
lifting a lion into the air while strangling it, such as appears in more
vigorous design upon the reliefs of Nineveh; or this figure pierces with
a short sword a bull, lion, or griffin standing upright upon its hinder
legs. One of these peculiar mythological representations is given in
_Fig._ 91. The head of the male figure, ornamented with a diadem, is
distinguished from the Assyrian type only by a longer and less
protruding nose, and by some diminution of the luxuriant hair and beard.
The exposed limbs, the arms and legs, have more slender proportions;
with a softer and somewhat Hellenized swing of the outlines, there is
less modelling than was found upon the Tigris. The expression of great
muscular power, of striking and healthy energy of action, peculiar to
the Assyrians, is lost in Persia. The garments are not sack-like and
close-fitting; with the richly patterned treatment of surfaces, there is
an attempt, not altogether fortunate, to indicate the folds of drapery
and the free flow of cloth. It is possible to recognize in this respect
the influence of Asiatic Hellas, falling, indeed, upon rather sterile
ground, and received with little understanding. The strapped shoes take
from the cramped foot its true form, being curved in the sole even more
than is the case with the naked instep. The power, long since acquired
by the Greeks, of so raising the hinder foot of a moving figure that
only the toes touch the ground, was as far from being possessed by the
Persians as was the power of causing the whole body to take part in an
action--carrying forward the momentary position. The human being is
apparently able neither to turn the animal away from himself, nor, by
additional exertion, to give the death-blow. The opposing griffin is
similarly petrified; it here appears with eagle’s head and feathered
tail, occurring in other representations with lion’s head and scorpion’s
tail. Both paws of the fore feet, and one of the eagle’s claws of the
hind feet, are in the position of attack; one paw grasps the right arm,
as it reaches towards the head of the monster; the other is laid upon
the left, which pierces its body with a broad and pointed dagger. At the
same time, one of the bird-like hinder legs touches the front knee of
the human figure. But nowhere is there the energetic movement of
seizing or pressure found upon Assyrian sculptures; there is a posture,
but no action; and thus the lion-eagle monster has no frightful
power--only something hatefully comical in figure and bearing. Nor has
the bull or lion, which occasionally takes the place of the griffin,
anything of the Assyrian force; the scene might be considered as a
harmless play of the man with the animal, were it not for the sword half
buried in the body.
The most accessible subjects for such an art were naturally mere
ceremonial representations, where the action, reduced to a minimum, was
naturally neither momentary nor energetic. There are the promenades of
the king, with staff and lotos-flower in his hands, followed by eunuchs,
one third of his size, who carry his handkerchief and sunshade, and cool
him with a fan of peacock’s feathers. It is worthy of curious notice
that, upon a door at the back of the palace, the sunshade is omitted
from the relief, as being of use only in going out. A casual observation
of Persian sculpture may be deceptive, and we may seem to recognize
quiet dignity in what is mere want of all expression. It is thus with
the frequently repeated ceremonial scenes, the architectural employment
of which has been mentioned above. (_Fig._ 87.) The canopied throne
appears raised upon an elevation; the king sits with his feet resting
upon a footstool, his retinue before him with censers. Three superposed
rows of men stand as supporters of the throne, with outstretched arms
bearing the platform. The figures are placed in such regular position
that the effect is purely ornamental; but are individually interesting,
in so far as they are intended to represent, in feature and costume, the
different nationalities of the Persian empire. Notwithstanding the
celebrated description of the review of the Persian army upon the banks
of the Hellespont given by Herodotos, it would be hopeless to attempt to
recognize among the figures the types of known tribes. Of a similar kind
are the upper parts of the rock-cut reliefs upon the tombs of the
Achæmenidæ, the architectural peculiarities of which have already been
mentioned. Because of the sacred character of these graves, the kings
are not represented enthroned, but standing upon a stepped platform
before an altar, over which floats the winged and encircled deity, near
the disk of the sun or moon. A consideration of the exterior treatment
of the upper story of the palaces would here be in place if it could be
shown that the ornamentation was indeed carved.
Persian sculpture received its most extensive application upon the
buttresses of the steps placed before every palace. Here are found the
ceremonial scenes of the Assyrian courts in a feeble rendering, far
removed from the sharp and careful cutting of the details, and the
naturalistic modelling of the bodies, peculiar to the works of
Mesopotamia. Long processions of men represent different nationalities,
characterized by their costumes and by the treatment of hair and beard;
by their various feather-caps, hoods, capuchins, pointed hats; short
skirts, with wide pantaloons; long garments, with great fulness at the
bottom, and sleeves falling in multiplied folds; by the skins of animals
worn as mantles; by girdles, sword-belts and swords, bows and quivers;
by peculiar sandals, shoes, boots, and the like. These subjects bring to
the monarch most manifold gifts--horses, dromedaries, musk-oxen, rams,
goats, a wagon, elephants’ tusks, stuffs, garments (among which various
kinds of stockings are even distinguishable), swords, double-headed
hammers, bracelets for the arms; censers, with vessels for incense;
salve, in little bowls, borne upon trays which hang like scales;
wine-skins, goblets, globular and flat cake-like loaves of food, carried
in the palm of the hand; carved cups and saucers; little bags, etc.
Others bear only lotos-flowers and pomegranates. They are slim,
narrow-chested figures; the short upper body is given in profile,
without anatomical truth in general form or detail; not only without
motion, but apparently incapable of it. At times the position of the
arms shows, not, indeed, a gesture, but some attempt of varied position;
the hands lie upon one another, or touch the mouth, the end of the
beard, the hilt of the sword hanging at the side, or the quiver, or are
extended so as to rest upon the shoulders of the preceding figure in the
procession.
[Illustration: Fig. 92.--Relief from the Stairs of the Palace of
Darius.]
Lifeless as these appear, they are still superior to the guards, armed
with a lance, who march towards each other from opposite sides, in long
processions. (_Fig._ 92.) The heads differ from the Assyrian type only
in the pointed chin-beard; the bodies alternate between uniforms of two
fixed patterns. One of these is without a shield, in a closely fitting
leathern garment, with awkward pantaloons bound at the ankles, and a
globular cap of surpassing clumsiness. The other, distinguished by
shield and plumes, with a long robe drawn up at the hips, and with wide
sleeves hanging in folds, is more tolerable. The elliptical shields,
like those of Bœotia, have a round cut upon both sides, in which the
lance was probably placed; they are strengthened by a circular plate
riveted to the centre. Upon the terrace stairs, in the triangles formed
by the ascending steps, are groups of animals--lions seizing bulls from
behind. Though the forms are rendered with but little understanding of
detail, the entire composition is well fitted to the triangular space
allowed it, and thus has a certain decorative and architectural value.
The parapet of the staircase terrace is decorated with rows of highly
conventionalized lotos-flowers upon leafy stems; in its centre is the
winged divinity of the disk between crouching lions. These carvings upon
the staircase buttress, though monotonous, were still so rich that they
gave to this member much the same distinction as that of the gable in
Greek architecture, to which it is somewhat similar in outline, the
ascent from each side forming a triangle. The representations upon it
are, in their subjects, suited to the palace fronts, where guards were
in place, as well as gift-bearing deputies from tributary nations.
Though the division of the surface into several horizontal stripes by
rows of figures, one over another, is not artistically beautiful, it
still has the advantage that the standard of proportion is not infringed
upon, as is so often the case when colossal statues are placed before
buildings; the disadvantage may perhaps be less when life-sized figures,
like these, are dwarfed by being brought into comparison with enormous
edifices.
Only one important historical scene is known--the rock-cut relief of
Bi-Sueton. A king, followed by guardsmen, sets his foot and bow upon a
victim lying backwards on the ground, who stretches up his hands in a
beseeching manner, while a procession of nine prisoners approaches,
their hands tied behind them, and bound one to the other. Above is the
winged deity. The proud bearing of the king, and the stooping of the
helpless enemies, show a slightly superior artistic ability. Though
Persian sculpture was successful in some rare instances, the conviction
must still remain that, in comparison with the art of Assyria, it was
not only a dependent imitation, but failed to attain any of the
superiorities of its model. That which was borrowed from other lands
than Mesopotamia was superficially carried into execution in unimportant
details. Strictly speaking, we can hardly acknowledge the existence of
the art of sculpture in Persia, as it was without either independent
foundation or any progress of its own.
Of Persian painting there are no remains or information. The walls were
without doubt plastered and colored. If there had been a revetment of
glazed tiles, according to the Mesopotamian practice, some fragments of
this almost indestructible material would surely have been found. From
analogy of the carvings, it is probable that paintings upon the walls
were chiefly ornamental and of subordinate importance. Upon the
principal front of the buildings there remained but little space where
painted decorations could be employed; the façade of the Tomb of Darius
was largely covered with inscriptions. On the other hand, the
restoration of the Palace of Darius, at the head of this chapter (_Fig._
77), shows that the aid of color was particularly needed upon the other
sides, which would have been bare and monotonous without painted
ornaments. We may suppose that the Persians felt this need, and that
decorative painting was extensively employed; they were led to it by
familiarity with the methods of Assyrian art, and with the colored mural
decorations universal in Egypt, both which lands they considered their
tributary provinces. Though we cannot speak of monumental independence
in Persian sculpture and painting--of which, indeed, no ancient
Orientals had any conception--the art of the land had at least the
superiority that its three branches, in their application, stood in true
relations to each other, inasmuch as architecture employed and brought
forward the sister arts as secondary, decorative aid; painting and
sculpture did not predominate in the excessive degree characteristic of
the older nations of the East. The Egyptians, whose architecture,
otherwise so richly developed, was chiefly restricted to the interior,
made excessive use of painting and coilanaglyphics to enliven the dead
masses of exterior walls. The Assyrians needed sculptured revetment and
painted stucco to support and hide the weakness of their masonry, and
its incapacity for architectural treatment, within and without. Merely
decorative art thus gained an undue supremacy in both countries. Among
the Persians, on the other hand, architecture attained its full rights
by important and harmonious advances, while decorative sculpture and
painting withdrew to their proper subordinate positions.
[Illustration: Fig. 93.--Rock-cut Tombs of Myra.]
PHŒNICIA, PALESTINE, AND ASIA MINOR.
The primitive tradition which makes the valley of the Euphrates and
Tigris the centre of the most advanced culture of the earth is
illustrated by the extraordinary expanse of Mesopotamian influence in
both time and space. Extending eastwards even to the Ganges, in a
westerly direction passing beyond the Adriatic, bounded on the north
only by inhospitable Scythia (Siberia), and on the south by the Indian
Ocean, its roots, long after the advent of the Christian era, sent forth
fresh shoots into Western Asia, recognizable in the monuments of the
Sassanidæ and in the works of the world-conquering Arabians. The spring
of native civilization was not entirely exhausted, although, after the
fall of the Persian empire and the foundation of a Greek Asiatic
monarchy by Alexander the Great, Hellenism had expanded itself over
Western Asia for five centuries,--first among the luxurious Seleucidæ,
who had attached to themselves the Asiatic half of the Macedonian
empire, and in later times under the strict military power of the
imperial Roman period. Nor could the barbarism of the Parthians wholly
obliterate from the land the reminiscences of ancient Persian and
Mesopotamian culture. These influences appear again when the Persian
Ardshir--boasting a direct descent from the Achæmenidæ, and therefore
called Artaxerxes by the Byzantine Greeks--shook off the yoke of the
barbaric Parthians in the year 226 after Christ, as his forefather
Cyrus, eight centuries previously, had founded his empire upon that of
the Medes. Ardshir was the first ruler of a new national Persian
dynasty, named after his father, Sassan,--a race under whose sway the
land east of the Tigris was raised to a glory and importance which made
itself felt even in distant and powerful Rome. One Roman emperor, the
unhappy Valerian, was even forced to languish during the last ten years
of his life in a Persian prison, the Romans not venturing to free him
from the despicable slavery of the Sassanian Shahpur I., who meanwhile
took care to hand down to posterity that world-renowned result of
Persian bravery and cunning by numerous monuments and rock-carved
reliefs, which testify, as a leaf of authentic history, to an event so
humiliating to Rome.