PERSIAN ARCHITECTURE
=Combination of Style.=--In the days before their supremacy the Persians,
as agriculturists and breeders of cattle and horses, preserving their
simple existence, had no desire or need of monumental architecture. But
when Cyrus had overthrown the domination of the Medes, made himself
master of Mesopotamia and extended his conquests to the shores of the
Ægean Sea, he too was minded to immortalise in architecture the might of
the Persian Empire. Accordingly, as his race had no traditions in
building, he borrowed from the methods and styles of the nations he had
conquered. Thus Persian architecture represents a mingling of Median,
Assyrian, Asiatic Greek and, in a small degree, Egyptian.
The boyhood of Cyrus was spent at the court of Astyages the Mede, so
that the Median palaces at =Susa= and =Ecbatana= were familiar to him. Those
of the latter city, according to Polybius consisted of porticoes and
hypostyle halls, the columns being of cedar or cypress, overlaid with
plates of silver. These have long since disappeared, and the remains
which now exist at =Ecbatana= are of columns of stone, which are supposed
to be part of the restoration of the palace under the Persian Kings. For
the substitution of stone for wood in the columns distinguishes
everywhere the Persian architecture.
=Tombs and Palaces; No Temples.=--The remains of Persian architecture
comprise tombs and palaces. The
[Illustration: TOMB OF DARIUS I
EXCAVATED IN THE MOUNTAIN SIDE, PERSEPOLIS. P. 82]
[Illustration: PALACE OF DARIUS I, PERSEPOLIS
CONJECTURED RESTORATION. OF WHICH THE TOMB FAÇADE WAS AN IMITATION. P.
82]
[Illustration: TYPES OF PERSIAN COLUMNS P. 83]
[Illustration: HALL OF ONE HUNDRED COLUMNS, PERSEPOLIS
CONJECTURED RESTORATION. P. 85]
[Illustration: THE PALACES OF PERSEPOLIS
CONJECTURED RESTORATION. P. 84]
Zoroastrian religion had no use for temples made with hands. Its temple
was the universe; the floor of it the mountain tops of Persia from which
countless altars, tended continually by the Fire-Kindlers, sent up
flames in worship of the element of Fire. Meanwhile it was the desire of
every Persian Monarch whom war and government obliged to be absent so
much from the homeland, that, when they died, their bodies should be
brought home “to the Persians.” Accordingly, when Cyrus erected a palace
at =Pasargadae=, the modern Marghab, he also built himself a =Tomb=, which
still exists.
Its style is a singular mixture of Assyrian and Asiatic Greek. Built of
large blocks of white polished marble, it consists of a platform of
seven steps, on the top of which is a small shrine or cella, rectangular
in plan, covered by a pitched roof that terminates in the front and
rear, in a gable-end or pediment. It is, in fact, a Greek temple of very
rudimentary simplicity, mounted on a ziggurat. The ruins show that the
tomb was surrounded on three sides by colonnades.
Following the Assyrian precedent, the =Palace of Cyrus= occupied a
platform, of about 40,000 square feet, which still exists and is known
to the natives as “The Throne of Solomon.” But here the terrace is of
natural rock, faced round the sides with cut stone walls distinguished
by the beauty of the masonry. It is the earliest instance known of the
so-called _drafted_ masonry, of which a magnificent example is found in
the terraces of Herod’s temple at Jerusalem. It represents a method of
cutting, which leaves the surface of the block of stone rough-hewn, as
when it left the quarry, but dresses the edges to a “draft,” or smooth,
bevelled surface.
Such scanty remains as have been found suggest that Cyrus’s palace was
of the simplest kind, including a central hall, the roof of which was
carried by two rows of stone columns, thirty feet high, with porticoes
_in antis_. The latter is a feature borrowed from Greek-Asiatic
temple-building; the term, _in antis_, being used when the columns of
the portico are set between the prolongation of the side walls of the
main building.
It is, however, from the remains of the group of buildings at =Persepolis=
that the magnificence of Persian architecture can be best appreciated.
Here, again, is a terrace of natural rock; but of vast size, covering an
area of about one million six hundred thousand square feet. This, like
the terrace of the Escoriál of the Spanish Kings, projects from the foot
of a rocky mountain side. The Escoriál includes a royal mausoleum, built
within the confines of the palace; but, at Persepolis, three tombs, one
of them unfinished, are excavated behind the palace in the mountain
wall. Two are supposed to be the resting places of later kings,
Artaxerxes II and III, while the unfinished one is that of Arses, who
reigned only two years.
Meanwhile the =Tomb of Darius I=, the founder of Persepolis, has been
identified as one of four tombs, eight miles distant from the palace.
These also are excavated in the mountain side, and at such a height from
the bottom of the valley, that they corroborate the account which
Ctesias, the Greek historian of Persia, gives of the tomb of Darius,
that it was on the face of a rock and only to be reached by an apparatus
of ropes. The three other tombs of this group are ascribed to Xerxes I,
Artaxerxes I, and Darius II.
The Tomb of Darius I is of special interest because it bears upon its
face a sculptured representation of the palace which he built at
Persepolis. This mode of decorating a tomb was probably derived from the
Lycians, whose custom it was to face their rock-cut tombs with a
representation of the house which the deceased had occupied while alive.
Meanwhile, there is little doubt that the Lycians derived the idea of
the rock-hewn tomb from Egypt.
The sculptured front of Darius’s tomb shows the portico of the palace,
and above it, upon the roof, the monarch himself upon his throne. The
latter is an immense cube, the face of which is decorated with an upper
and a lower row of warriors, or perhaps, tribute-bearers, while the
corners are buttressed with baluster-shaped columns, surmounted by
bulls’ heads. The monarch stands before the altar, with hands uplifted
in worship of the sun and moon. This recognition of the religion of the
Babylonians and Assyrians is characteristic of the Persian attitude
toward conquered nations, and recalls Cyrus’s proclamation to these
nations, guaranteeing them their life and property and designating
himself the favourite of their own sun-god, Marduk, Bel-Merodach.
The lower part of the façade of the tomb represents the portico of
Darius’s palace. The four columns are set _in antis_, but we have to
imagine the second row of columns as well as the windows which flanked
the door, and, like the latter, were constructed, as the ruins of the
palace shows, with monolithic jambs and lintels.
The =columns= suggest two considerations: first, the use of them, as
compared with the entire absence of the structural column in Assyrian
and Babylonian architecture, and, secondly, the peculiar design of their
capitals. The use was derived through the Medes probably from
Asiatic-Greek models; but the form of the capital is peculiar to
Persian architecture. It is composed of the head and forelegs of two
recumbent beasts, which have been called bulls, but bear much more
resemblance to horses, and when they have a horn, to the unicorn, a
fabled creature that early legend attributed to India. It was identified
with strength and fleetness and might well have been used symbolically
by a race that derived from the same Aryan source as the Indians; while
the use of the horse in decoration would come naturally to a nation of
horse-lovers. It is also noticeable that these beasts are embellished
with trappings that suggest harness.
However this may be, the tomb carving shows between the heads, the ends
of the beams that support the cornice and roof. As these are not found
in the case of the columns at Persepolis, it appears that the roofs of
the palaces were constructed of wood, which perished in the fire of
Alexander. It has been remarked that the character of this whole
portico, taken in connection with the wooden columns at Pasagardae,
suggests that the style of Persian palace architecture was derived
originally from a primitive wooden construction. But, while this may be
true, its development into stone construction was not affected by the
Persians themselves. They employed Asiatic-Greek workmen whose style of
temple-building, like that of the Mainland-Greeks, shows the traces of
primitive wood construction.
Before leaving this tomb, there is one other feature to be noticed;
namely, that the lintel of the doorway is surmounted by a
cavetto-cornice, decorated with rows of conventionalised lotus-petals,
derived through Lycia, from Egypt.
The restored plan of the platform of palaces at Persepolis exhibits a
monumental approach on the west side, formed of a double flight of
marble steps, set in double ramp. The steps are 22 feet wide, with a
rise of 4 inches and a tread of 15, so that they could easily be mounted
by horses. The stairs led to a terrace, paved, as was the whole
platform, with marble, in the centre of which was the entrance gate, or,
to use the later classic term, a Propylæa. This was square in plan, with
a portal, front and rear, flanked by winged bulls, while the ceiling was
supported by four columns. Its walls, like those of the other buildings,
built of sun-dried bricks or _rubble_ masonry, set with clay mortar,
have long since crumbled into ruins.
The earliest palace of the group is that of Darius I, to the portico of
which we have already alluded. Its plan shows a room, right and left of
the portico, in which may have been stairs leading to the roof; then a
square hypostyle hall of sixteen columns, set in rows of four, with
various chambers, along the sides and at the end.
In one building, the =Hall of a Hundred Columns=, the roof was carried by
ten ranges of ten columns; for the hall, as indeed were all the halls at
Persepolis, was square in plan. This can scarcely have been a mere
coincidence. Is it fanciful to imagine that a people, trained in
Zoroastrianism, found in the principle of the square a fitting symbol of
“Creative Strength” and “Right Order”?
But the most important building at Persepolis, “one of the most
stupendous relics of antiquity,” is the great =Palace of Xerxes=. Elevated
on a terrace of its own, twenty feet high, which was ascended on the
north side by four flights of steps, it occupied an area of one hundred
thousand square feet, more than double that of the Great Hall at Karnak,
and larger than that of any Gothic cathedral in Europe, Milan and
Seville alone excepted. Two rows of six columns supported each of the
three porticoes, and six times six the ceiling of the Hall: in which
combination one may perhaps detect a symbol of the Six Helpers of
Ahuramazda, “the spiritual Wise One” or “Great Wisdom.”
The columns, including base and capital, rose to a height of 65 feet,
which may be compared with the 69 feet of the central nave columns in
the Hall of Karnak. The latter, however, had a diameter of 12 feet, and
were separated by intervals of scarcely twice that width; while those in
Xerxes’ palace were set at a comparatively far greater distance from one
another and measured in diameter only about 5 feet. Moreover, instead of
a minimum of light percolating through a clerestory as at Karnak, the
light and air streamed freely through the windows in the walls of
Xerxes’ palace, so that in every respect the impression produced by the
two halls must have been very different.
The grandeur of Karnak was weighted down with mystery and awe, while
Xerxes’ “lordly pleasure house” was an exalted symbol of the Zoroastrian
belief in the joy of life. For in addition to the grandeur of its
structural features, the imagination must picture the accompanying
gladness of marble floors, water basins, fountains, and flowers, and
varicoloured rugs and hangings. The walls, also, may have been
resplendent with brilliantly enamelled tiles as in Xerxes’ other palace
at =Susa=, where the French explorer, M. Dieulafoy, discovered the
magnificent frieze of archers, a frieze of lions, and other decorations
executed in bright-coloured enamels on concrete blocks. That Xerxes
spared no pains to render his palace at Persepolis as superb as possible
may be inferred from the columns in the hall and north portico. For in
them the double capital of beasts does not rest directly on the fluted
shafts, but is supplemented by two lower members; the first a curious
arrangement of scrolls or volutes, the second a sort of conventionalised
calyx of the lotus, beneath which, in bell-like form, is a
conventionalisation of pendant leaves. In the volutes a suggestion of
the Ionic capital has been detected, while the lower points to an
Egyptian origin.
This medley of motives has a certain decorative value, but lacks the
supreme beauty of architectural relationship between the parts and the
whole. That is to say, the use of the various parts has not been
regulated by _constructive_ logic, necessity, or fitness; but represents
a purely whimsical and arbitrary multiplication of motive. The student
may assure himself of this by comparing the Persian column with the
Doric Order. In the latter he may observe a superior quality of fitness
in the relationship of the parts and of the sense of an inevitable
logical growth in the composition as a whole.
The fantastic elaboration of the columns at Persepolis, as well as the
general conglomeration of motives in Persian architecture, points to the
fact that the latter was the work of foreign artists, imported from
various parts of the great Persian Empire. It represents the character
of the empire--a variety in unity; a unity, however, not of natural
growth, but one that, having no artistic traditions of its own, puts the
world under tribute to supply motives for the exploitation of its
magnificence.