Orient & Occident: Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν: Κέντρο του Ζωροαστρισμού σε 3000 μ υψόμετρο δίπλα στην Ιερή Λίμνη της Ατροπατηνής, του Αρχαίου Αζερμπαϊτζάν

ΑΝΑΔΗΜΟΣΙΕΥΣΗ ΑΠΟ ΤΟ ΣΗΜΕΡΑ ΑΝΕΝΕΡΓΟ ΜΠΛΟΓΚ “ΟΙ ΡΩΜΙΟΙ ΤΗΣ ΑΝΑΤΟΛΗΣ”

Το κείμενο του κ. Νίκου Μπαϋρακτάρη είχε αρχικά δημοσιευθεί την 14η Σεπτεμβρίου 2019.

Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν: Κέντρο του Ζωροαστρισμού σε 3000 μ υψόμετρο δίπλα στην Ιερή Λίμνη της Ατροπατηνής, του Αρχαίου Αζερμπαϊτζάν

https://greeksoftheorient.wordpress.com/2019/09/14/ταχτ-ε-σουλεϋμάν-κέντρο-του-ζωροαστρι/

===================

Οι Ρωμιοί της Ανατολής – Greeks of the Orient

Ρωμιοσύνη, Ρωμανία, Ανατολική Ρωμαϊκή Αυτοκρατορία

Πριν από ένα χρόνο ανέβασα σε βίντεο και ανάρτησα ως αναδημοσίευση αποσπάσματα από το εξαιρετικό βιβλίο του Έλληνα ανατολιστή, ιστορικού και πολιτικού επιστήμονα, καθ. Μουχάμαντ Σαμσαντίν Μεγαλομμάτη ‘Έξι Άστρα της Ανατολής’ (εκδ. Δόμος, Αθήνα 1994) στα οποία ο διακεκριμένος ιρανολόγος κάνει μια εντυπωσιακή σύγκριση μεταξύ δύο πολύ ‘αντιπάλων’ ιερών χώρων: του Νέμρουντ Νταγ της Κομμαγηνής (σήμερα στην Κεντρική Ανατολία, Τουρκία) και του Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν της Ατροπατηνής (σήμερα στον νομό του Δυτικού Αζερμπαϊτζάν, στο βορειοδυτικό Ιράν).

Νέμρουντ Νταγ της Κομμαγηνής και Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν της Ατροπατηνής

Και οι δύο χώροι εντάσσονται στην αρχαία ιρανική πολιτισμική κληρονομιά καθώς δύο άκρως αντίπαλα θρησκευτικά συστήματα, ο μιθραϊσμός κι ο ζωροαστρισμός, επικρατούν – ο πρώτος στο Νέμρουντ Νταγ κι ο δεύτερος στο Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν. Ωστόσο, το Νέμρουντ Νταγ της Κομμαγηνής είναι επίσης ίροις καθοριστικό τμήμα της αρχαίας ελληνικής πολιτισμικής κληρονομιάς, εφόσον ο τοπικός μονάρχης εκαυχάτο για ταυτόχρονη καταγωγή από τον Μεγάλο Αλέξανδρο και τον Αχαιμενίδη Σάχη Δαρείο και τα αρχαία ελληνικά ήταν η γλώσσα των πολλών επιγραφών που διασώζονται μέχρι και σήμερα επί των μεγαλειωδών μνημείων.

Τα μνημεία του Νέμρουντ Νταγ (2150 μ υψόμετρο) χρονολογούνται στον 1ο προχριστιανικό αιώνα και το βασίλειο της Κομμαγηνής θεωρείται το τελευταίο των Επιγόνων. Τα μνημεία του Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν (3000 μ υψόμετρο) χρονολογούνται στα σασανιδικά χρόνια (224-651 μ.Χ.) και στα ισλαμικά χρόνια αλλά ο χώρος ήταν το κεντρικό ιερό του ζωροαστρισμού ήδη πριν από την αχαιμενιδική δυναστεία (550-330 π.Χ.) κι έχουν ανευρεθεί μνημεία που χρονολογούνται στα αχαιμενιδικά και στα αρσακιδικά (250 π.Χ. – 224 μ.Χ.) χρόνια. Ως χώρος αυστηρά μονοθεϊστικής κι ανεικονικής θρησκείας, το Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν ήταν ένας από τους ελάχιστους χώρους που δεν κατέστρεψαν οι ισλαμικές στρατιές, όταν κατέλαβαν το Ιράν (636-651), και η λειτουργία του ιερού συνεχίστηκε μέχρι τα μογγολικά χρόνια. Τα προαναφερμένα κείμενο και βίντεο μπορείτε να βρείτε εδώ:

Νέμρουντ Νταγ (Ελληνο-Ιρανικό Ιεροθέσιο Κορυφής Κομμαγηνής) στην Τουρκία και Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν (Οίκος της Αβέστα στην Ατροπατηνή) στο Ιράν: ο Κορυφαίος Μύστης Μουχάμαντ Σαμσαντίν Μεγαλομμάτης συγκρίνει

https://greeksoftheorient.wordpress.com/2018/09/26/ νέμρουντ-νταγ-ελληνο-ιρανικό-ιεροθέσ/

Ένας απαράμιλλος ελληνοϊρανικός θρησκευτικός συγκρητισμός είχε συσταθεί στο Νέμρουντ Νταγ, όπου θεοί του Μιθραϊσμού είχαν ταυτιστεί με αρχαιοελληνικούς θεούς: ο Άχουρα Μαζντά με τον Δία, ο Βεραθράγκνα με τον Ηρακλή, ο Μίθρας (Μιτρά ή Μεχρ στα αρχαία περσικά) με τους Απόλλωνα, Ερμή και Ήλιο, και η θεϊκή υπόσταση της χώρας, η Κομμαγηνή, με την θεά Τύχη. Και τα ιρανικά ονόματα είχαν αρκούντως εξελληνισθεί: Ωρομάζδης έγινε ο Άχουρα Μαζντά, κι Αρτάγνης ονομάστηκε ο Βεραθράγκνα, όπως άλλωστε κι η αρχαία ασσυριακή επαρχία Κουμούχ είχε αποδοθεί ως Κομμαγηνή.

Αντίθετα, ούτε ίχνος μιθραϊσμού ή άλλης ιρανικής θρησκείας δεν είχε παρεισφρύσει στο ‘άντρο’ της ζωροαστρικής ορθοδοξίας, το Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν, όπου είχε ζήσει ο Ζωροάστρης και διετηρείτο το αρχικό αντίγραφο της Αβέστα, προφανώς σε σφηνοειδή (Old Achaemenid).

Οι δυο χώροι είχαν λειτουργήσει πολύ αντίθετα: το Νέμρουντ Νταγ είχε λειτουργήσει ως προβολέας Μιθραϊσμού ανάμεσα στους Έλληνες, στον Πόντο, στην Καππαδοκία, στην Κιλικία, στην Ιωνία και στην Ελλάδα, όπου Έλληνες μιθραϊστές πειρατές βεβήλωσαν κι ακύρωσαν την αρχαιοελληνική ιερότητα πολλών ιερών, επιβάλλοντας ακόμη και στην κορυφή του Ολύμπου τον Μιθραϊσμό ως θρησκεία των αρχαίων Ελλήνων. Από κει, η θρησκεία που στο Ιράν ήταν το αντίπαλο δέος του Ζωροαστρισμού διαδόθηκε δυτικώτερα και κυριάρχησε στην Ρώμη και σε όλη την Ευρώπη.

Αντίθετα, το Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν είχε λειτουργήσει ως κάστρο του αυθεντικού Ζωροαστρισμού κι ως κυματοθραύστης εναντίον των πολυθεϊστών Μάγων του Μίθρα: όταν αυτοί κυριάρχησαν απ’ άκρου εις άκρον του Ιράν, στο Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν διαμορφώθηκε ένα απροσπέλαστο τείχος – πολύ ισχυρώτερο από το εκεί σωζόμενο μέχρι σήμερα λίθινο, κυκλικό τείχος γύρω από την Ιερή Λίμνη – και καμμιά μιθραϊστική έννοια, ιδέα, θεωρία, δοξασία ή πίστη δεν μπόρεσε να παρεισφρύσει.

Τα ονόματα με τα οποία αμφότεροι οι χώροι ονομάζονται σήμερα δεν είναι βέβαια τα αρχικά τους. Το Νέμρουντ Νταγ ονομαζόταν τύμβος υψιπετής καθώς ήταν ένα ιεροθέσιο κορυφής στην Κομμαγηνή, όχι μακριά από την πρωτεύουσα του μικρού αλλά πλούσιου βασιλείου, την Αρσάμεια του Νυμφαίου. Το Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν ήταν γνωστό ως Αδάρ Γουσνάπ, και το πρώτο από τα δύο ονόματα παραπέμπει σ’ αυτό της Ατροπατηνής (στα αρχαία περσικά: Αδάρ Μπαταγάν), δηλαδή την αρχική μορφή του ονόματος του Αζερμπαϊτζάν. Το Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν ονομαζόταν επίσης Παρά Ασπ, λέξη από την οποία προέρχεται η αρχαία ελληνική και λατινική ονομασία του τόπου: Πράασπα (Praaspa).

Αν και έχω επισκεφθεί το Ιράν, δεν έχω πάει στο απομακρυσμένο Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν που για επτά ή οκτώ μήνες τον χρόνο είναι βουλιαγμένο στα χιόνια λόγω του υψομέτρου. Σε χθεσινό κείμενο ομολόγησα ότι δεν έχω πάει ούτε στο Ταγ-ε Μποστάν. Σχετικά:

Ταγ-ε Μποστάν: Σασανιδικός Παράδεισος, Ιερή Λίμνη, Μιθραϊκά Ανάγλυφα κι Αναπαράσταση Ιουλιανού του Παραβάτη Ηττημένου

https://greeksoftheorient.wordpress.com/2019/09/13/ταγ-ε-μποστάν-σασανιδικός-παράδεισος/

Αλλά υπάρχει μια μεγάλη διαφορά: το Ταγ-ε Μποστάν βρίσκεται σε μικρή απόσταση από το Κερμανσάχ που είναι μια μεγάλη πόλη κι είναι επιπλέον πάνω στην οδική αρτηρία που συνδέει την μεγάλη πόλη αυτή με το Χαμεντάν (Εκβάτανα). Η όλη περιοχή είναι το κέντρο της Αρχαίας Μηδίας, εφόσον άλλωστε και τα Εκβάτανα (Χεγκμάτ-ανέ στα αρχαία περσικά) ήταν η πρωτεύουσα του Κυαξάρη, γνωστή για τα επτά ομοκέντρα τείχη της.

Αντίθετα, το Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν είναι πολύ πιο βόρεια, στα πιο απρόσιτα σημεία του Βόρειου Ζάγρου, πιο βόρεια από την Σαναντάτζ, πρωτεύουσα του νομού Κορντεστάν, και από το Μπιτζάρ, μια μικρή πόλη, και πιο κοντά στο Τεκάμπ, μια κωμόπολη. Το κέντρο της ζωροαστρικής ορθοδοξίας βρίσκεται επίσης αρκετά πιο νότια από τις νότιες όχθες της λίμνης Ουρουμίγιε (: η ‘μη Ρωμέικη’) και τις τριγύρω πόλεις Ουρουμίγιε, Μαχαμπάντ, Μιαντοάμπ και Μαραγέ.

Πιο πρόσφατα έχει βελτιωθεί ο δρόμος που συνδέει τον σημαντικώτερο αρχαιολογικό χώρο του βορειοδυτικού Ιράν με το Ζαντζάν που είναι μια μεγάλη πόλη ανατολικά του Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν και δυτικά της Τεχεράνης, πάνω στην οδική αρτηρία που συνδέει την ιρανική πρωτεύουσα με την Ταμπρίζ, πρωτεύουσα του κατεχόμενου (από το Ιράν) Νότιου Αζερμπαϊτζάν.

Νέμρουντ Νταγ και Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν: που οφείλονται τα νεώτερα ονόματα

Χάρη σε συζητήσεις με τον κ. Μεγαλομμάτη έμαθα που οφείλονται τα νεώτερα ονόματα των δύο αρχαιολογικών χώρων αυτών της Κομμαγηνής και της Ατροπατηνής. Μετά την διάδοση του Ισλάμ σε χώρους όπου είχαν αναπτυχθεί αρχαίοι ανατολικοί πολιτισμοί και όπου διασώζονταν ακόμη μνημεία κι αρχαιότητες, οι μουσουλμάνοι συνέδεσαν αυτούς τους χώρους με σημαντικές προσωπικότητες του παρελθόντος που αναφέρονται είτε στο Κοράνι είτε στις Χαντίθ (ομιλίες του Μωάμεθ) είτε στην ισλαμική ιστοριογραφία.

Αλλά η απόδοση των διαφόρων αρχαιοτήτων και μνημείων σε κάποια πρόσωπα της Αρχαιότητας, όπως αυτή ήταν γνωστή στους μουσουλμάνους, δεν ήταν μια αυθαίρετη και τυχαία διαδικασία: εξέφραζε απόλυτα ένα ισλαμικό συμπέρασμα και μία κριτική (θετική ή αρνητική) των μουσουλμάνων για την ιστορία των μνημείων και των πίστεων και θρησκειών των ανθρώπων που είχαν ανεγείρει τα κατά τόπους μνημεία που πλέον ήταν σε ερείπια στα ισλαμικά χρόνια.

Κατά τις ισλαμικές διδασκαλίες, το προϊσλαμικό παρελθόν χωρίζεται ποιοτικά σε δυο κατηγορίες πολιτισμών, θρησκειών, λογοτεχνιών, τεχνών, ηγεμόνων και κρατών: μονοθεϊστικά καθεστώτα και πολυθεϊστικά καθεστώτα. Αυτή η διαίρεση βέβαια είναι μια αληθινή, πραγματική διαίρεση των αρχαίων πολιτισμών όπως επιβεβαιώνεται κι από τις σύγχρονες επιστημονικές έρευνες.

Όμως στις ισλαμικές παραδόσεις, αυτή η διαφορά δεν είναι μια ουδέτερα αναφερόμενη αντιπαλότητα ανάμεσα σε διαφορετικές θρησκείες και πίστεις του παρελθόντος αλλά μια αναζήτηση ισλαμικής ταυτότητας στο προ του Μωάμεθ παρελθόν και μια έκφραση συμπάθειας προς τους προϊσλαμικούς μονοθεϊστές και ταυτόχρονα μια αποδοκιμασία κι απόρριψη προς τους προϊσλαμικούς πολυθεϊστές κι ειδωλολάτρες.

Εν προκειμένω χρησιμοποιώ ουδέτερους όρους για να περιγράψω μια κατάσταση που βιωνόταν από τους μουσουλμάνους των πρώτων και μέσων αιώνων του ισλαμικού πολιτισμού αναφορικά με το παρελθόν το προ του Μωάμεθ.

Οι ίδιοι οι μουσουλμάνοι έχουν εντελώς άλλο τρόπο να περιγράψουν αυτή την κατάσταση. Σύμφωνα με τις θέσεις τους, ο Μωάμεθ μόνον αποκάλυψε την πιο πλήρη και τελική εκδοχή του Ισλάμ (: η αραβική λέξη αυτή σημαίνει ‘υποταγή’ ή ‘επικοινωνία’ με τον Θεό). Αλλά το Ισλάμ προϋπήρχε του Μωάμεθ κι όλοι οι πιστοί μονοθεϊστές θεωρούνται ως αυθεντικοί μουσουλμάνοι από τους μουσουλμάνους: όπως ο Ιησούς, ο Ιωάννης Βαπτιστής, ο Δανιήλ, ο Ζαχαρίας, ο Ιωνάς, ο Ηλίας, ο Σολομών, ο Δαυίδ, ο Ααρών, ο Μωϋσής, ο Ιακώβ, ο Ισαάκ, ο Ισμαήλ, ο Αβραάμ, ο Νώε, ο Ενώχ κι ο Αδάμ θεωρούνται ‘προφήτες’ του Ισλάμ, έτσι κι οι μονοθεϊστές οπαδοί τους θεωρούνται μουσουλμάνοι.

Εκτός της εβραιοχριστιανικής παράδοσης, κατά τους μουσουλμάνους, υπήρξαν κι άλλοι ‘προφήτες’ και ‘μουσουλμάνοι’ οπαδοί τους: ο Ζωροάστρης θεωρείται προφήτης, ο Βούδας θεωρείται προφήτης, ο Μέγας Αλέξανδρος (Δου ‘λ Καρνέυν) θεωρείται προφήτης.

Αντίθετα, ο Μάνης δεν θεωρείται προφήτης και υπάρχει στο Ισλάμ πολύ αρνητική αποτίμηση για τους Μανιχαίους (Μαναουΐγιε) και τον Μανιχεϊσμό. Αλλά δεν είναι μόνον οι τρεις προαναφερόμενοι. Κατά το Ισλάμ υπήρξαν πολλοί προφήτες (: κήρυκες του μονοθεϊσμού και της υποταγής του ανθρώπου στον Θεό) που δεν έμειναν γνωστοί στην Ιστορία ως τέτοιοι – αλλά ήταν αντιληπτοί ως προφήτες στους μονοθεϊστές (‘μουσουλμάνους’) οπαδούς τους.

Έτσι, αυτοκράτορες και φαραώ, σάχηδες, ηγεμόνες, αρχιερείς, μύστες,ιεροφάντες και φιλόσοφοι που εφάρμοσαν μια μονοθεϊστική αρχή ή κήρυξαν μια μονοθεϊστική αντίληψη του κόσμου είναι – δυνητικά – ‘προφήτες’ κατά τους μουσουλμάνους. Σε αυτούς μπορούμε να κατατάξουμε τον Σαργώνα της Ακκάδ, τον Χαμμουραπί της Βαβυλώνας, τον Αχενατόν, φαραώ της 18ης δυναστείας που επέβαλε ένα ανεικονικό μονοθεϊσμό καταργώντας τον πολυθεϊσμό, τους Σαργωνιδείς της Νινευή που δέχθηκαν το κήρυγμα του Ιωνά, τους Αχαιμενιδείς που τήρησαν το κήρυγμα του Ζωροάστρη, ή ακόμη τον Σωκράτη.

Αντίθετα από τους προαναφερμένους, μια σειρά ηγεμόνων της Αρχαιότητας που επέβαλαν πολυθεϊστικά κι ειδωλολατρικά καθεστώτα διά της βίας και κατεδίωξαν τους μονοθεϊστές παρουσιάζονται μέσα στο Ισλάμ ως διαχρονικά πρότυπα του Αντιχρίστου, αρνητικοί αποδέκτες της ενέργειας του Σατανά, άπιστοι και παραδείγματα προς αποφυγήν. Ένας τέτοιος είναι ο Νιμρούντ, κυρίαρχος της Μεσοποταμίας στα μετακατακλυσμιαία χρόνια, που εξανάγκασε τον Αβραάμ να φύγει από την Ουρ και να καταφύγει στην Χαναάν. Ο Νιμρούντ (ή Ναμρούντ ή Νέμρουντ ή Νέμρουτ) δεν είναι άλλος από τον βιβλικό Νεβρώδ, τον οποίο η σύγχρονη επιστημονική ασσυριολογική έρευνα ταυτίζει με τον μυθικό Γκιλγκαμές των μετακατακλυσμιαίων ασσυροβαβυλωνιακών επών.

Χοὺς δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν Νεβρώδ. οὗτος ἤρξατο εἶναι γίγας ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς· οὗτος ἦν γίγας κυνηγὸς ἐναντίον Κυρίου τοῦ Θεοῦ· διὰ τοῦτο ἐροῦσιν, ὡς Νεβρὼδ γίγας κυνηγὸς ἐναντίον Κυρίου. (Γένεση Ι’ 8-9)

Ένας άλλος, πολύ αρνητικός ηγεμόνας, είναι ο δεύτερος από τους φαραώ με τους οποίους συνομίλησε ο Μωϋσής (αραβ. Μούσα), ο οποίος κατά την σύγχρονη επιστημονική αιγυπτιολογική έρευνα ταυτίζεται με τον Μερμνεφθά.

Ένα τρίτο αρνητικό παράδειγμα είναι αυτό του Ναβουχοδονόσορα, βασιλιά της Βαβυλώνας (αραβ. Μπουχτανάσαρ). Γενικώτερα, πολλές βιβλικές και χριστιανικές παραδόσεις κι αφηγήσεις, γενόμενες τμήμα του χριστιανοϊσλαμικού πολιτισμού, αποδόθηκαν από τους μουσουλμάνους σε χώρους ερειπίων κι αρχαίων μνημείων.

Για παράδειγμα, τα ερείπια της πτολεμαϊκής αποικίας που ονομαζόταν Πτολεμαΐς Θηρών και βρισκόταν στα παράλια του σημερινού Σουδάν ονομάσθηκαν Σουάκιν (αραβ. Σάου Γκεν), δηλαδή ‘Τόπος των Τζιν’ (: των κακών πνευμάτων), επειδή υποτέθηκε ότι, όταν ταξίδεψε η Βασίλισσα του Σαβά (αραβ. Μπαλκίς) από την Υεμένη στο Αρχαίο Ισραήλ για να επισκεφθεί τον Σολομώντα (αραβ. Σουλεϋμάν), διασχίζοντας την Ερυθρά Θάλασσα, παρέμεινε στο συγκεκριμένο σημείο ένα βράδι, και τότε τα εκεί τζιν άφησαν τις κοπέλλες της βασιλικής συνοδείας …. σε κατάσταση εγκυμοσύνης! Σχετικά:

Ίμια & Σουάκιν: ελληνικό, πτολεμαϊκό το νησί που αγόρασε ο Ερντογάν στο Σουδάν – αποκαλύπτει ο κ. Μεγαλομμάτης

https://greeksoftheorient.wordpress.com/2018/02/23/ίμια-σουάκιν-ελληνικό-πτολεμαϊκό-το/

Η Μάχη της Ραφίας, Σελευκιδείς, Πτολεμαίοι, Μερόη (Αρχαίο Σουδάν), κι ο ρόλος της Πτολεμαΐδος Θηρών (Σουάκιν) στην Ερυθρά Θάλασσα

https://greeksoftheorient.wordpress.com/2018/05/14/η-μάχη-της-ραφίας-σελευκιδείς-πτολεμα/

Θυμάμαι ότι, όταν συζητούσαμε με τον κ. Μεγαλομμάτη αναφορικά με το Νέμρουντ Νταγ και το Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν και τις ισλαμικής έμπνευσης νεώτερες ονομασίες των δύο τόπων, μου είχε πει περίπου τα εξής:

– Είναι χαρακτηριστική η οξυδέρκεια των μουσουλμάνων που τον 11ο – 12ο αιώνα ονόμασαν την Αδάρ Γουσνάπ ‘Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν’ και το ιεροθέσιο κορυφής της Κομμαγηνής ‘Νέμρουντ Νταγ’. Ακόμη και αν οι εμπνευστές των νεωτέρων ονομασιών δεν μπορούσαν να διαβάσουν αρχαία περσικά, παρθικά, μέσα περσικά και αρχαία ελληνικά, κατάλαβαν αμέσως και πολύ καλά τον χαρακτήρα της πίστης και της θεουργίας που επετελείτο στους δύο αυτούς χώρους.

Νέμρουντ Νταγ, δηλαδή ‘Βουνό του Νεβρώδ’ είναι μια πολύ αρνητική επονομασία ενός τόπου εμφανέστατα πολυθεϊστικού κι ειδωλολατρικού με έντονα κυνηγετικά χαρακτηριστικά εξαιτίας του Ηρακλή – Αρτάγνη. Και ποιος είναι ο Νεβρώδ εκτός από τον ‘κυνηγό εναντίον του Κυρίου’; Ακριβώς όπως ο Γκιλγκαμές θεσμοθέτησε στην Μεσοποταμία την θήρα λεόντων ως ύπατη αυτοκρατορική απασχόληση…

Αντίθετα, Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν είναι μια πολύ θετική επονομασία που επιβραβεύει τον ανεικονικό, μονοθεϊστικό χαρακτήρα του τόπου. ‘Θρόνος του Σολομώντα’ θεωρήθηκε το σασανιδικό ανάκτορο μέσα στον κυκλικό περίβολο και τείχος που περικλείει τα περί την ιερά λίμνη σωζόμενα μνημεία. ΄

Υπάρχει άλλωστε εκεί κοντά και το Ζεντάν-ε Σουλεϋμάν (‘Φυλακή του Σολομώντα’). Αυτό είναι το πυρείο που βρισκόταν στην κορυφή ενός κωνικά διαμορφωμένου λόφου περίπου 2 χμ έξω από το κυκλικό τείχος της Αδάρ Γουσνάπ.

Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν

Μνημείο της ΟΥΝΕΣΚΟ (World Heritage Site) από τον Ιούλιο του 2003, η αρχαία Αδάρ Γουσνάπ είναι ένας εντυπωσιακός αρχαιολογικός χώρος με ερείπια ανεγερμένων οικοδομημάτων γύρω από μια λίμνη που είχε θεωρηθεί ιερή. Αυτό δεν ήταν τυχαίο. Η λίμνη είναι διαμορφωμένη σε ένα κρατήρα σβυσμένου ηφαιστείου από όπου αναβλύζει νερό που εκχέεται από εκροή ειδικά διαμορφωμένη σε ένα σημείο της άκρης του κρατήρα και που χρησιμεύει για την άρδευση της τριγύρω περιοχής.

Η Αδάρ Γουσνάπ κατέχει ξεχωριστή σημασία ως ιερός τόπος σε όλες τις φάσεις της ιρανικής γραμματείας, μνημονεύεται σε όλα τα ιερά κείμενα και τις επικές παραδόσεις του προϊσλαμικού και του ισλαμικού Ιράν, και εμπλέκεται σε ιστορίες καθοριστικής σημασίας για την έκβαση της Ανθρώπινης Ιστορίας (δείτε παρακάτω σχετικό άρθρο Ādur Gušnasp από την επιστημονική εγκυκλοπαίδεια iranicaonline).

Ο Μέγας Αλέξανδρος δεν έφθασε ποτέ στην Πράασπα. Η πορεία του Μακεδόνα στρατηλάτη παρουσιάζει ένα ελάχιστα μελετημένο χαρακτηριστικό: απέφυγε να διασχίσει όλες τις εκτάσεις της κεντρικής και ανατολικής Τουρκίας και όλο το βορειοδυτικό Ιράν. Μετά τον Σαγγάριο, πορεύθηκε νότια για να φθάσει στην Κιλικία (μάχη του Ισσού), αφήνοντας στα ανατολικά του το κεντρικό οροπέδιο της Καππαδοκίας. Μετά την κατάληψη της Συρο-Παλαιστίνης, της Αιγύπτου και της Μεσοποταμίας, δεν διέσχισε την οροσειρά του Ζάγρου στα κεντρικά αλλά στα νότια τμήματά της (που έχουν μικρότερο πλάτος) κι έφθασε στο οροπέδιο, το κέντρο της αχαιμενιδικής αυτοκρατορίας. Αλλά δεν εβάδισε ποτέ δυτικά της γραμμής ανάμεσα στα Εκβάτανα και τις Ραγές (που βρίσκονται στον χώρο της σημερινής Τεχεράνης).

Στην Πράασπα έφθασε κοντά αλλά χωρίς αποτέλεσμα ο Μάρκος Αντώνιος το 36 π.Χ.

Εξήμιση αιώνες αργότερα, ο Ηράκλειος έφθασε κι αυτός κοντά, κατέστρεψε μια σημαντική ιρανική πόλη νότια της λίμνης Ουρουμίγιε, την Γάνζακα, αλλά στην συνέχεια στράφηκε στα δυτικά κι έφθασε στην βόρεια Μεσοποταμία, κοντά στην Νινευή (Νινευΐ). Ορισμένοι επιστήμονες λαθεμένα ταύτιζαν το Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν με την Γάνζακα (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ganzak) και γι’ αυτό ισχυρίστηκαν ότι η Πράασπα καταστράφηκε από τον Ηράκλειο.

Στην συνέχεια, μπορείτε να δείτε ένα πεντάλεπτο βίντεο για το Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν, να διαβάσετε επιλεγμένα κείμενα και άρθρα που αναδημοσιεύω, και να βρείτε συνδέσμους για περισσότερη μελέτη.

Στο τέλος μιας συζήτησης για την σύγκριση των δύο χώρων που κάνει στο προαναφερμένο βιβλίο του, ερώτησα τον φίλο κ. Μεγαλομμάτη:

– Γιατί τελικά είναι το Ταχτ-ε Σουλεϋμάν πιο σημαντικός χώρος από το Νέμρουντ Νταγ;

Η απάντησή του μου έδωσε να καταλάβω πόσο σημαντική επιστήμη ήταν για τους αρχαίους πολιτισμούς που είχε εκείνος μελετήσει η ανύπαρκτη σήμερα επιστήμη του γεωγραφικού ντετερμινισμού και πόσο συνυφασμένα στις γνώσεις, αποτιμήσεις και συμπεράσματά τους ήταν το ψυχικό και το υλικό σύμπαν.

– Γιατί ένας χώρος είναι πιο σημαντικός, αν σε κάνει να κυττάς προς τα πάνω παρά προς τα κάτω. Γιατί ένας χώρος που αντανακλά σκέψεις, ιδέες κι αρχές πάνω στην επιφάνεια της Γης είναι λιγώτερο σημαντικός από ένα χώρο που αντανακλά την ανθρώπινη ενέργεια στους Ουρανούς. Δεν είμαστε γήινοι κάτω από τους Ουρανούς. Είμαστε ουράνιοι πάνω στην Γη. Γιατί ο άνθρωπος λέγεται αουίλου στα ασσυριακά, κι αυτό σημαίνει ‘ο ωσεί θεός’. Καμμιά άλλη γλώσσα δεν μπορεί να περιγράψει καλύτερα ποιοι είναι οι άνθρωποι και ποιες είναι οι εκτάσεις της Αγαθής Γης που τους αντιστοιχούν.

Δείτε το βίντεο:

Тахте-э Сулейман, Прааспа для греков и римлян: самый святой храм зороастрийцев в Западном Азербайджане (Иран)

https://www.ok.ru/video/1506438482541

Περισσότερα:

Техт-е Солейман (перс. تخت سلیمان) — группа развалин Сасанидской эпохи вокруг заполненной водой кальдеры древнего вулкана близ города Текаб на северо-западе Ирана (провинция Западный Азербайджан). В 2003 г. объявлена ЮНЕСКО памятником Всемирного наследия.

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Тахт-е_Солейман

Тахте-Солейман («Трон Соломона»)

Городок Текаб в иранском Западном Азербайджане ничем не примечателен – но всего в 42 км от него (вас ждет один из самых известных археологических комплексов Ирана, в 2003 году внесенный в Список объектов культурного наследия ЮНЕСКО. Он представляет собой группу развалин Сасанидской эпохи вокруг заполненной водой кальдеры древнего вулкана.

Крепость, которой уже полторы тысячи лет, была известна как Азергошасб («Огонь царей-воинов») – духовный центр зороастризма III в. н.э. Для зороастрийской святыни было важно сочетание четырех элементов. Земли и воздуха (ветров) тут хватало в изобилии. Естественный вулканический источник газа, направляемый по керамическим трубам, позволял поддерживать «вечное пламя» в Храме огня. А кристально чистую воду брали в озере внутри вулканического кратера.

Во времена Сасанидов Азергошасб представлял собой один из важнейших храмовых комплексов зороастризма. Предполагается, что храму покровительствовала воинская каста (артештар). В состав комплекса входил также храм богини Анахиты (VI-VII вв.)

Причем же тут царь Соломон? Во времена арабского нашествия VII в. зороастрийские жрецы не знали, как защитить свою святыню. Тогда они придумали красивую легенду, связав это место с именем Соломона: якобы, знаменитый царь навеки запер бесов внутри древнего стометрового вулкана, который нынче называют Зейдане-Солейман («Тюрьма Соломона»), в трех километрах от святыни. А потом, в стенах цитадели, сотворил красивейший пруд… Арабы уважительно относились к библейским пророкам. И храм не был разрушен!

Позднее он пришел в запустении, а в XIII в. здесь некоторое время находилась летняя резиденция Ильханидов. Нынешние остатки гордых строений, стены и арки высятся на фоне великолепных пейзажей, как напоминание о славном прошлом Персии.

https://sajjadi.livejournal.com/376264.html

Тахте Солейман; волшебное место рождения Заратуштры

Тахте Солейман (или храм Азаргошнасба) – это название большого исторического района, расположенного в провинции Западный Азербайджан. До исламского периода Тахте Солейман считался самым большим центром образования, религии и социальной жизни и местом поклонения иранцев; однако в 624 году по христианскому календарю в результате нападения на Иран римского императора Гераклия, этот центр был разрушен. Племянник монгольского правителя Халакохана Абагахан, ориентировавшийся на ислам, на руинах Тахте Солейман построил мечеть, которая впоследствии также была разрушена и от которой остались только изразцовые плитки с выполненными на них рисунками и выпуклыми надписями. В настоящее время такие изразцовые плитки хранятся в музее.

Исторический комплекс, включающий в себя природное озеро и храм Азаргошнасба (для поклонения огню), расположен на просторах широкого и утопающего в зелени ущелья Саруг. Комплекс находится на севере Текаба к югу от озера Урумийе. Само здание, которое раньше служило храмом для восхваления Анахиты, выполнено в форме четырех арочного здания и включает большой зал и падишахский дворец.

Здание, построенное на одной природной известняковой платформе, и сегодня известно под названием Тахте Солейман, его золотые времена относятся к периоду правления династии Сасанидов, которые почитали и ценили его подобно тому, как династия Ахаменидов почитала и ценила Персеполис.

Храм Азаргошнасба является самым большим культовым сооружением в Иране среди храмов для поклонения огню. Он был построен по приказу сасанидского царя Ануширвана, сегодня он считается четвертым иранским памятником, зарегистрированным в перечне мирового культурного наследия ЮНЕСКО. Многочисленные события, включая поражение сасанидской империи от римлян, приход ислама в Иран и удаление Ирана от центров связей, привели к забвению этого комплекса. И это продолжалось до тех пор, когда при монгольском хане Ильхане снова стали проявлять уважение к храму огня и снова этот комплекс превратился в процветающий район. На верху холма Тахте Солейман расположено озеро, глубина которого составляет 110 метров. Это озеро, известное под названием «Озеро Хосров», питается родниковыми водами. Особенностью этого озера является то, что из-за повышенного количества известняка в воде, в этом озере нет живых организмов. Озеро с прозрачной водой, расположенное между замком и горами круглой формы, представляет собой красивый пейзаж, привлекающий к себе взгляд. Причина, по которой этот комплекс называется Тахте Солейман, заключается в том, что местные жители с давних времен приписывали такую славу исключительно Солейману (Соломону), поэтому они считали это место местом отдыха Солеймана.

https://sanaei.livejournal.com/180231.html

Δείτε το βίντεο:

Takht-e Suleyman, known as Praaspa to Greeks and Romans: the Holiest Temple of Zoroastrians in Western Azerbaijan (Iran)

https://vk.com/video434648441_456240303

Περισσότερα:

Αν και ο Μάρκος Αντώνιος τον 1ο προχριστιανικό αιώνα κι ο Ηράκλειος τον 7ο χριστιανικό αιώνα προσέγγισαν το κυριώτερο ιερό του Ζωροαστρισμού βαθειά μέσα στον βόρειο Ζάγρο, δεν κατάφεραν να το καταλάβουν. Ο χώρος όπου φυλασσόταν το αρχικό αντίγραφο της Αβέστα δεν καταστράφηκε ούτε από τα ισλαμικά στρατεύματα που κατέκτησαν το Ιράν: φαινόταν ως ένα απόλυτα μονοθεϊστικό ιερό. Το ιερό βρίσκεται ολόγυρα από την ιερή λίμνη που έχει διαμορφωθεί στον κρατήρα ενός σβυσμένου ηφαιστείου σε 3000 μ. υψόμετρο. Ο τόπος έχει θεωρηθεί σαν ένα από τα ιερώτερα σημεία της Γης από την ιρανική μυθική εποποιΐα κι εσχατολογία. Αλλά ακόμη και σήμερα είναι αρκετά δυσπρόσιτος και απόμακρος.

Takht-e Soleymān (Persian: تخت سلیمان), is an archaeological site in West Azarbaijan, Iran from Sasanian Empire. It lies midway between Urmia and Hamadan, very near the present-day town of Takab, and 400 km (250 mi) west of Tehran.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takht-e_Soleymān

Техт-е Солейман (перс. تخت سلیمان) — группа развалин Сасанидской эпохи вокруг заполненной водой кальдеры древнего вулкана близ города Текаб на северо-западе Ирана (провинция Западный Азербайджан). В 2003 г. объявлена ЮНЕСКО памятником Всемирного наследия.

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Тахт-е_Солейман

Περισσότερα:

The fortified site, which is located on a hill created by the outflow of a calcium-rich spring pond, was recognized as a World Heritage Site in July 2003. The citadel includes the remains of a Zoroastrian fire temple built during the Sassanid period and partially rebuilt (as a mosque) during the Ilkhanid period. This temple housed one of the three “Great Fires” or “Royal Fires” that Sassanid rulers humbled themselves before in order to ascend the throne. The fire at Takht-i Soleiman was called ādur Wishnāsp and was dedicated to the arteshtar or warrior class of the Sasanid. A 4th century Armenian manuscript relating to Jesus and Zarathustra, and various historians of the Islamic period, mention this pond. The foundations of the fire temple around the pond are attributed to that legend. Takht-e Soleyman appears on the 4th century Peutinger Map.

This site got its biblical name after the Arab invasion of Iran in the 7th century. Folk legend relates that King Solomon used to imprison monsters inside a nearby 100 m deep crater which is called Zendan-e Soleyman “Prison of Solomon”. Solomon is also said to have created the flowing pond in the fortress.

Archaeological excavations have revealed traces of a 5th-century BC occupation during the Achaemenid period, as well as later Parthian settlements in the citadel. Coins belonging to the reign of Sassanid kings, and that of the Byzantine emperor Theodosius II (AD 408-450), have also been discovered there.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takht-e_Soleymān

Техт-е Солейман (перс. تخت سلیمان) — группа развалин Сасанидской эпохи вокруг заполненной водой кальдеры древнего вулкана близ города Текаб на северо-западе Ирана (провинция Западный Азербайджан). В 2003 г. объявлена ЮНЕСКО памятником Всемирного наследия.

Во времена Сасанидов представлял собой один из важнейших храмовых комплексов зороастрийской религии — великий огонь Адур-Гушнасп (перс. آذرگُشنَسب), покровительствующий артештар, воинскому сословию Сасанидского Ирана. К поклонению огню предрасполагало расположение храма в районе вулканической активности. В состав комплекса входил также храм богини Анахиты.

После арабского завоевания храм был переименован в «трон Соломона» (нынешнее название). Красивая легенда о том, что под водами вулканического озера царь и пророк Соломон запер бесов, спасла языческое, по представлениям мусульман, святилище от полного разрушения. Ильханы выстроили на этом месте одну из своих загородных резиденций.

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Тахт-е_Солейман

==============================

Διαβάστε:

Ādur Gušnasp

Ādur Gušnasp, an Ātaš Bahrām, that is, a Zoroastrian sacred fire of the highest grade, held to be one of the three great fires of ancient Iran, existing since creation (see further under Ādur Burzēn-Mihr). The name Gušnasp, presumed to be that of the fire’s unknown founder, means “Stallion.” The fire was installed somewhere in Media at an unknown date, presumably in the late Achaemenid or Parthian period.

It was probably in early Sasanian times that the fire was first classified by Persian scholastics as that of the warrior estate, to which the kings themselves belonged. The priests of Ādur Gušnasp seem to have skillfully promoted the royal connection thus created for their fire and to have enhanced its dignity by fashioning legends which linked its founding with the earliest days of Zoroastrian tradition. This they probably did partly in rivalry to Ādur Burzēn-Mihr, the fire of conquered Parthia.

Thus in Bd. 18.12 it is related that Ādur Gušnasp, like the other great fires, used once to move freely about, giving its protection to the world; but when Kay Ḵosrow the Kayanian was “destroying the image-shrine of Lake Čēčast, it settled on the mane of his horse, dispelling darkness and shadow, and shedding light, until he had destroyed the image-shrine. In that same place, upon Mt. Asnavand, he established fire-altars. For this reason it is called “Gušnasp,” because it settled upon the mane of his horse (asp).” It is plainly impossible to extract any precise historical facts from this legend; but it certainly suggests that at some time, possibly in the late Parthian period, a powerful iconoclast had the images of yazatas destroyed in some great Median shrine, and that Ādur Gušnasp was installed triumphantly in their stead.

There is no means of knowing whether it was before or after this that the Median priests annexed the whole of the early Zoroastrian tradition, from the pagan Kayanians down to the prophet himself, for their own province, transferring it thus from northeast to northwest Iran. So Lake Čēčast (Av. Čaēčasta) was identified with Lake Ormīa (Bd. 12.3) and Mt. Asnavand (Av. Asnavant) too was said to be in Azerbaijan (Bd. 9.29), while Ādur Gušnasp was declared to be “at the deep lake Čēčast of warm water which is opposed to the dēvs. Know that the Religion became manifest even there” (Zand ī Vahman Yašt, ed. B. T. Anklesaria, Bombay, 1957, 6.10). At whatever epoch these identifications were made, they can hardly have found acceptance outside western Iran during the overlordship of the Parthians, who were the natural guardians of the traditions of the northeast.

It seems probable, therefore, that one should attribute to the Sasanian period—a time of western Iranian ascendancy—an extension of Ātaš nīāyeš 4 or possibly the creation of this whole section of the prayer. Its opening lines, with their invocation of “Fire, the son of Ahura Mazdā” and of Xvarənah, were understood by the Persian priests to be an invocation of their fire Ādur Farnbāg. There follows abruptly the invocation of Kavi Haosravah, the lake of Kavi Haosravah, Mt. Asnavant, and Lake Čaēčasta. The Medes and Persians, it is plain, almost never committed the sacrilege of adding anything new to the Avesta, so that to introduce the actual names of Ādur Farnbāg or Ādur Gušnasp into an Avestan prayer was impossible. Instead, it seems, these lines were put together from familiar Avestan elements, in such a way as to convey to all those conversant with their legends that these were invocations of the two great sacred fires.

In the following section of the prayer a brief invocation of Mt. Raēvant is sufficient to include Ādur Burzēn-Mihr in a triple supplication. All this is made clear by glosses to the Pahlavi translation, in which each of the fires is explicitly named. Further, and still more audaciously, a commentator on Ātaš nīāyeš 4 adds that “it was this Ādur Gušnasp which lamented and cried for help before Ohrmazd.” Ādur Gušnasp appears to be thought of here as representing the totality of fires, which, like all else belonging to the invisible creation, must have been reluctant to be created again in the physical state and so be exposed to defilement and danger of extinction; and presumably Ādur Gušnasp was thus singled out because its name linked it with the creatures of Vahman, represented originally by the Uniquely-Created Bull, which wailed and complained before Ohrmazd (Y. 29).

Of the actual history of Ādur Gušnasp more is known than of the other two great fires, for two reasons: First, its temple in Azerbaijan was not far from the western frontier of Iran and so attracted the notice of a number of foreign visitors. Second, the Sasanian kings accorded it favor from the early 5th century onward; as a result, it won frequent mention in the latter part of the royal chronicle (the Xwadāy-nāmag) and in the Šāh-nāma (where it is also called Āḏar Ābādagān).

Where Ādur Gušnasp was first installed is uncertain; but some time before A.D. 400, it seems, it was transferred to a site in Azerbaijan of exceptional beauty and fittingness, known in Islamic times as Taḵt-e Solaymān, but presumably named by the Median priests Mt. Asnavand. This is a hill formed by mineral deposits from a spring which wells up within it, so that its flat top holds a lovely lake high above the level of the surrounding countryside.

Here a new temple was built for Ādur Gušnasp; and the royal connection of the fire was so successfully fostered that it became the custom in the later Sasanian period for each king to make a pilgrimage there on foot after his coronation (though the accounts in the Šāh-nāma suggest that the monarch walked only from the base of the hill itself, in token of deep reverence).

Royal gifts were lavished on the shrine; and the legend was naturally evolved that the first monarch to enrich it was Kay Ḵosrow himself, coming to pray there with his grandfather Kāvūs for help against Afrāsīāb (see Šāh-nāma, ed. Borūḵīm, V, p. 1386.2228-37).

There are several references in the epic to visits to the fire by Bahrām V (A.D. 421-39), who is said to have spent the feasts of Nowrūz and Sada there (Šāh-nāma, ed. Borūḵīm, VII, p. 2205.1599-1602) and, on another occasion, to have entrusted to its high priest an Indian princess, his bride, to be converted to the faith (ibid., VII, pp. 2249-50.2385-91).

Ṯaʿālebī (Ḡorar, pp. 559-60) relates how, when Bahrām returned from his campaign against the Turks, he bestowed the ḵāqān’s crown on the shrine and gave his wife and her slaves to it as servitors. Subsequently Ḵosrow Anōšīravān is said to have visited Āḏar Gošnasp before setting out on a campaign (Šāh-nāma, ed. Borūḵīm, VIII, p. 2339.500-09), and later he bestowed on the fire-temple a vast amount of treasure out of tribute received from Byzantium (ibid., VIII, p. 2446.2379-86).

His namesake Ḵosrow Parvēz also prayed at Āḏar Gošnasp for success in battle (ibid., IX, p. 2768.1634-41 ) and later gave a rich share of spoils to the sanctuary (ibid., IX, p. 2797.2160-67). Nor, plainly, was it only kings who made their petitions and offerings there, for in the Ṣaddar Bondaheš 44, which is concerned with “praying for one’s wants,” it is prescribed that when praying for the restoration of eyesight, one should vow “I shall make an eye of gold and send it to Āḏar Gošasp” (44.18; ed. D. N. Dhabhar, Bombay, 1909); or, if one wishes a child to be intelligent and wise, “I shall send a present to Āḏar Gošasp” (par. 21).

It is in keeping with the literary records that the ruins of Ādur Gušnasp should be the most impressive to survive of any Zoroastrian place of worship. To make the sanctuary inviolable the whole hilltop was enclosed by an enormously thick wall of mud-brick; and later (probably towards the end of the Sasanian period) another stone wall was built along the very rim of the hill, 50 feet high and 10 feet thick, with thirty-eight towers strung out along it, each within bowshot of the next. The temple precinct itself was enclosed on three sides by yet another wall, being open on the south side to the lake; and excavation has revealed much of the groundplan of the great complex.

The approach from the north brought one into a large courtyard, fit for the reception of many pilgrims; and from this a processional way led toward the lake. This included a square, domed room open to north and south, which was richly appointed, and may possibly have been used for prayer and ceremonial ablutions. It ended in a large open portico looking out over the waters.

A covered way then led along the front of the building to an impressive series of pillared halls and antechambers, running south to north on the west side of the processional way; and at the northernmost end of these, it seems, was the sanctuary of Ādur Gušnasp itself, at first a flat-roofed, pillared structure of mud-brick, which was later replaced by a stone one with a domed roof.

The walls of this sanctuary were adorned with a stucco frieze in high relief. And beneath the dome was found the three-stepped pedestal of a great fire-altar, and the base of its rounded, pillar-like shaft. Fragments of lesser altars and of ritual vessels have been unearthed in and near the pillared halls which led to the sanctuary, in which there was doubtless a constant activity of devotion, with offerings, prayers, and religious ceremonies.

The great temple complex held numerous other rooms, including lesser shrines and the temple treasury, which must have housed many priceless gifts. No clearly datable objects have been found in the ruins earlier than the reign of Pērōz (A.D. 457-84); but a room by the main entrance yielded a store of over 200 clay sealings, among which were eighteen that bore the words “high-priest of the house of the fire of Gušnasp” (mowbed ī xānag ī Ādur ī Gušnasp).

In A.D. 623 the Byzantine emperor Heraclius, during his wars against Ḵosrow Parvēz, sacked the temple of Ādur Gušnasp, casting down its altars, setting fire to the building; and slaying every living creature there. The great fire itself was evidently carried off to safety, however, and later reinstalled.

There may well be a memory of the destruction of Ādur Gušnasp’s shrine in the pseudo-prophecy contained in the Persian Zand ī Vahman Yašt (see Dhabhar, Rivayats, pp. 467, 469): “They will remove Ādur Gušasp from its place . . . on account of (the devastation of) these armies, Ādur Gušasp will be carried to Padašxwārgar.”

Once enthroned again in its temple on the hill, Ādur Gušnasp continued to burn there for many generations after the coming of Islam; but harassment grew, and the great fire had probably been extinguished by the end of the 10th or, at the latest, the early 11th century A.D. The ruins of its temple were subsequently quarried to build a palace on the hilltop for a local Muslim ruler.

Την αναφερόμενη βιβλιογραφία μπορείτε να βρείτε εδώ:

http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/adur-gusnasp-an-atas-bahram-see-atas-that-is-a-zoroastrian-sacred-fire-of-the-highest-grade-held-to-be-one-of-

————————————————–

Taḵt-e Solaymān

Taḵt-e Solaymān, outstanding archeological site with substantial Sasanian and Il-khanid ruins in Azerbaijan, between Bijār and Šāhin-dež, about 30 km north-northeast of Takāb, at about 2,200 m elevation, surrounded by mountain chains of more than 3000 m height. The place was obviously chosen for its natural peculiarity; an outcrop of limestone, about 60 m above the valley, built up by the sediments of the overflowing calcinating water of a thermal spring-lake (21° C) with about 80 m diameter and more than 60 m depth on the top of the hill (Damm).

The place is mentioned in most of the medieval Oriental chronicles (e.g., Ebn Ḵordādbeh, pp. 19, 119 ff.; Ṭabari, p. 866; Nöldeke, p. 100, n. 1; Belʿami, p. 942, tr., II, p. 292; Ebn al-Faqih, pp. 246, 286; Masʿudi, ed. Pellat, sec. 1400, tr., IV, pp. 74 f; idem, Tanbih, p. 95; Abu Dolaf, pp. 31 ff.; Ferdowsi, pp. 111 ff.; Yāqut, Beirut, III, pp. 383-84, tr., pp. 367 ff; Qazvini, II, pp. 267; Ḥamd-Allāh Mostawfi, p. 64, tr., p. 69, who attributes its foundation to the Kayanid Kay Ḵosrow) and was visited and described repeatedly by western travelers and scholars since the 19th century (e.g., Ker Porter, pp. 557 ff.; Monteith, pp. 7 ff.; Rawlinson, pp. 46 ff.; Houtum Schindler, pp. 327 f.; Jackson, 1906, pp. 124 ff.).

It was erroneously taken for a second Ecbatana by Henry Rawlinson, and defective Byzantine sources caused it to be confused with the great Atropatenian city of Ganzak and other places (Minorsky). A first archeological survey was carried out by the American Institute of Iranian Art and Archaeology under Arthur Upham Pope in 1937. Between 1959 and 1978 archeological excavations were conducted by the German Archealogical Institute together with the Iranian Antiquity Sevices (Edāra-ye koll-e ḥefāẓat-e āṯār-e bāstāni wa banāhā-ye tāriḵi), which, during the first three seasons, has been working with Swedish cooperation. At present restoration and research are done by the Iranian Archeological Research Center (Pažuhešgāh-e bāstān-šenāsi).

The mention of the thermal lake in the Middle Persian Zoroastrian literature (Humbach), the medieval literary tradition, as well as the inscriptions on clay bullae found during the excavations (Göbl), provide grounds for identifying the site as the sanctuary of Ādur Gušnasp, the fire of the warriors and kings and one of the three most revered fires of the Sasanian period (Boyce, pp. 8 ff.).

Up to the early Islamic time the geographical name of the place and the region was Šiz, probably derived from the name of the Lake Čēčast, which also seems to apply to Lake Urmia. In the Il-khanid period its name was Soqurluq / Suḡurluq or Saturiq (Rašid-al-Din Fażl-Allāh, ed. Jahn, pp. 70, 86; ed. ʿAlizāda, pp. 200, 205; Ḥamd-Allāh Mostawfi, p. 64). The name Taḵt-e Solaymān (lit. Throne of Salomon), together with the surrounding mythological ensemble of Zendān-e Solaymān (Prison of Salomon), about 3 km west of Taḵt-e Solaymān, and Ṭawila-ye Solaymān (Stable of Salomon), and Taḵt-e Belqis (the throne of the queen of Sheba) appeared only after the Timurid conquest of Persia (still referred to as Soqurloq in 810/1407; Ḥāfeẓ-e Abru, I, p. 222)

The earliest settlement on the hill was a rather small and poor agglomeration of houses with stone socles and clay or mud brick walls at about 60 m northwest of the lake (Naumann and Huff, 1975, pp. 138 ff.). It is dated into the Achaemenid period by pottery and few small finds, like three-winged bronze arrowheads, beads of semiprecious stone and an elbow-shaped fibula. Intramural burials were placed in the corners and next to the walls of the houses and courtyards in pits cut into the rocky ground and partly covered by benches or walls.

There were also dog burials. Earth burials are unexpected here in ancient Media, where, according to Herodotus (1.140), exposure of the dead was practiced. Traces of canals show that the water of the spring-lake was lead off for agricultural irrigation. Abandoned after a few generations, the clay buildings were washed down by the unregulated water that covered the site with a layer of limestone sediment.

During the Parthian period a small fortification was built at the northern edge of the lake. A rough-stone socle of a semicircular bastion and two branching off curtain walls were excavated under the great ayvān of the later temple. The scanty and seriously disturbed archeological layers delivered only some fragments of cinnamon ware for the Parthian dating. (Naumann, Huff, and Schnyder, 1975, p. 184)

The history of monumental architecture on the site began with mud brick buildings and foundations of rough-stone, laid out on a master plan, which determined all later building activities. Traces of this mud brick period, which itself had several phases, could only be uncovered in limited areas and sondages within the later massive stone and brick structures (Naumann and Huff, 1975, pp. 142 f.). The summit of the hill was surrounded by a mud brick wall, 12 m thick, with semicircular bastions.

A northern gate and its semicircular gate towers were of baked bricks; we may presume the same for an early southern gate. In the more spacious area between the northern gate and the lake, a square area was enclosed by an inner mud brick wall, open to the lake side and with a northern inner gate of baked bricks in line with the outer northern gate. Here we have to presume the main buildings, which, however, were mostly destroyed by the massive stone and brick constructions of the later rebuilding.

Traces of a large edifice with rooms along a rectangular hall or courtyard and an axial square room with four round columns of baked brick, accompanied by rectangular side rooms and an antechamber were unearthed in the western part of the square area. A regular layout of mud brick rooms was also found in the northeastern part of the square. A kiln for the production of bull’s eye glass was installed there probably during the period of reconstruction into stone buildings. There is no evidence for which windows the glass roundels were employed.

Some coins of Sasanian emperor Pērōz (r. 457-84) and a newly coined gold dinar of the Byzantine emperor Theodosius II (r. 408-50) give an approximate date for the mud brick period. (Naumann, Huff, and Schnyder, 1975, p. 164-68) There is no archeological evidence of the function of the mud brick buildings, but with regard of the undoubtedly religious nature of the later fire sanctuary we may justly presume the same function for the predecessor.

The replacement of the mud brick architecture by masonry constructions of stone and baked brick was a gradual process with periods of coexistence of mud brick and stone buildings side by side. According to find coins from the last years of reigns of Sasanian Kavād I (since 528) and his successor Ḵosrow I Anōširavān (531-79) in the layers above razed parts of the mud brick buildings, we may hypothetically presume that the process of architectural transformation began after the suppression of the Mazdakite movement about 528 C.E. and with the reestablishment of the Zoroastrian state church, which was carried out by Ḵosrow I, who was the crown prince at that time.

The main parts of the sanctuary, the first to be replaced, are distinguished by cut blocks of stone and well-baked bricks; later periods used rough stone. The exterior mud brick wall was coated by a rough-stone wall with a facing of large stone slabs, imitating stretching and heading bond, obviously a copy of the technically more perfect masonry of the great Caucasian wall of Darband, which is ascribed to the reign of Ḵosrow I Anōširavān.

The northern stone gate, built exactly on the place of the older one and badly damaged now, was obviously identical with the well-preserved southern gate with its gallery of blind windows above and its lateral semicircular bastions (Osten and Naumann, pp. 39 ff). The lower part of the gate is covered with debris, only the upper part, that is less than half of the gate height, being visible today.

The wall had an uncovered passage with parapet and stepped crenellations, tower chambers above the massive bastions, and connecting vertical shafts down to the gate-house, probably for interlucation. The inner brick wall was replaced by a stone wall with interior vaulted corridor and semicircular bastions outside. The old inner gate of baked brick was kept in use unchanged.

Traces of rough-stone foundations in a sounding west of the lake suggest that another mud brick wall with inner corridor and bastions enclosed the lake and the southern part of the precinct as a second square, in line with the northern area. This wall however was never replaced by a stone structure, and so probably were kept all other buildings in this southern area, with the result that the clay material was dug away and reused by post-Sasanian occupation and the remains were washed off by the water, which in the end covered all the area with a thick sediment of limestone, making excavation nearly impossible here.

The architectural layout inside the oval exterior wall may be reconstructed as a walled in rectangle, long twice its width, fortified by semicircular bastions and with a high and bulky building protruding from the center of its impressive western front of 280 m length.

This building was a palace with rooms of different size surrounding an ayvān, the biggest construction of the site. The three rooms at its western front have wide openings to the outside, perhaps for ceremonial purposes. The ayvān was open to the area north of the lake, obviously a royal courtyard. The western, eastern, and southern banks of the lake probably served as a forecourt with the lake as a natural pooling the center. There should have been an inner southern gate, continuing the access from the outer southern gate, but this could not be verified.

The square enclosure on the north side of the royal court was the temple area proper, accessible from the north gate as well as from the royal courtyard in the south, where its facade consisted of two wings of arcades on either side of the big temple ayvān. The northern enclosure is divided into two unequal parts by a straight corridor, connecting the royal court with the northern temple court.

The main building in the larger part is a massive čahārṭāq with surrounding corridors, located exactly on the main north-south axis of the layout. In its central, domed cella (A), the gonbad, we have to presume the place of the Ādur Gušnasp fire altar, now destroyed by treasure hunters who have hacked open the brick floor, which originally was paved with yellow travertine. Traces of podiums, socles, and stands or poles surrounding the center indicate that it is the place of the altar (Naumann and Huff, 1965-66, pp. 622 ff.). The cella was shielded from the corridors by thin walls or parapets.

There were gates from outside in line with the main axis, but broken off thin brickwork seems to be the remains of some kind of closure of contraction of the opening. Narrow-sided doors lead into the eastern corridor from north and south. There is no sufficient evidence to explain in detail how the interior of the temple was used by priests and devotees. However, the superficial impression of openness given by the axis, which ran through the temple uninterruptedly from the outer north gate to the center of the lake is misleading.

In fact there were two opposite ways of approach from north and south, each ending up in an ayvān in front of the central temple building (Huff, forthcoming). The southern approach from the royal courtyard, doubtlessly was reserved for the king and his court. A special link between the temple and the royal palace is a podium of perfectly polished blocks of freestone with a small stair, standing on the axis of the palace ayvān but immediately in front of the temple ayvān. This probably carried an open-air throne.

The northern approach, certainly the access for the normal pilgrims, is a diminished repetition of the southern royal one. The northern ayvān (I), closed by a front wall with a door for climatic reasons during a later period, and the door into the temple were considerably smaller at the north side. The arcades, starting from the northern ayvān with an identical design as in the south, enclose a comparatively small northern forecourt.

The pilgrims, after scrambling up the high northern slope of the hill, had to continue climbing on from the outer north gate through the inner northern gate up to the gatehouse of the northern forecourt, a painstaking access, compared with the comfortable southern approach for the king through the higher situated outer southern gate.

Traces of simple mud brick structures on the west side of the second northern forecourt were obviously the remains of shelters, hostels and toilets for the pilgrims, taking the place of the royal palace in the south. Especially here some small amulets or votive plaques of gold, silver and bronze were found, with anthropomorphous or symbolic representations.

A specific civilian function must be attributed to a room (Z) between the gate house of the northern temple court (M) and the entrance to the north-south corridor; a hoard find of clay sealings of documents, so-called bullae (Göbl; Huff, 1987), indicates that this was a room for scribes and an office and archive for acts of civil administration, duties of which the Sasanian clergy was in charge. The location at a “high gate,” at the entrance to an official area, is typical for places of this kind.

The very specific layout of the eastern rooms of the great temple got varying interpretations, which are difficult to verify. An inner courtyard (E) with arcades and a windmill-like arrangement of surrounding rooms may have been a depot or treasury. Of special interest is a cruciform room with a central dome, another closed čahārṭāq,the only one with a direct, axial connection with the gonbad. In its center a basin, 3 m², was set up on the brick floor by side walls, 33 cm high (Osten and Naumann, pp. 57 ff). The room was alternatively interpreted as a room for permanently sheltering the sacred fire (atašgāh), from which the fire was carried into the great gonbad for official ceremonies, a theory developed by Kurt Erdmann (1941, pp. 48-65 ),which meanwhile has proven obsolete, as a room for ritual washing, as an Anāhitā water temple, which also must be excluded, because a wide opening on the south side of the basin could not be tightly closed to keep the water.

As quantities of fine grayish material were found in the basin, which might have been ashes, it seems possible, that the ashes of the sacred fire was collected and stored here, to be distributed to the faithful, a tradition which still exists in contemporary fire temples (communication with members of Yazd Zoroastrian community).

The western part of the sacred enclosure, which was separated from the main sanctuary by the north-south corridor, was identified as a completely independent, second fire temple, with subsidiary buildings of its own. The temple proper consisted of a straight sequence of two three-winged columnar halls, the first with rectangular, the second with round pillars of stone and baked bricks respectively, of anterooms and of a cruciform, domed cella, where the lower part of a fire altar was preserved (Naumann and Huff, 1975, pp. 147 ff.).

Before the rebuilding of the sanctuary the fire burned in the square mud brick room with four columns, which was found beneath the later anteroom, and this older brick cella was even preserved as an anteroom when the cruciform stone cellar was built and the fire transferred there; it was replaced by the stone anterooms only during a later reconstruction.

The two columnar halls of the stone temple were separated by a thin brick wall with narrow gates in the side wings only, and in the second hall too the direct access to the altar room originally was blocked by a thin brick wall, so that there was no possibility to view or walk along up to the fire altar.

The second hall had benches or platforms in between both tiers of columns with niches on either side, in which several round, conical gypsum objects were placed, broken off at the top, perhaps supports or stands for ritual purposes. Beside several of the columns, the lower parts of roughly worked, rounded shafts of lime stone with cubical base and a decorative ring at mid height were preserved, fragments of which had been found in several places on the site. As they resemble the shafts of fire altars on Sasanian coins, they are generally interpreted is such. This is doubtful, however, because of their small size. They may be supports for incense burners, as depicted on the Issakvand and near Kermān (Huff, 1999, pp. 23-27) tomb relief, or of some other liturgical requisite.

The altar of a sacred fire was considerably bigger and more steadfast, as demonstrated by the remainders in the altar room of the second temple. The altar there, walled up of brick, stone, and mortar, had a shaft of 65 cm diameter; the three-stepped socle was 1.63 m², and the altar table must have had about 1 m side length.

Fragments of anthropomorphous, theriomorphous, and floral plaster reliefs as well as column flutings, deliberately buried and preserved in the clay fill of a secondary floor, demonstrate that especially the altar room and the halls of the second temple, but in analogy also the great main temple and the palace, were richly decorated with stucco. They also indicate a severe destruction of the buildings and a period of obviously less luxurious restoration. This might be connected with the devastation of the site during the Persian campaign of the Byzantine emperor Heraclius 624-28 C.E., who described the demolition of the idols in the heathenish temple in his report to the senate of Constantinople (Minorsky, pp. 91 ff.; Sebeos, tr., I, pp. 80 f. II, pp. 214 ff).

The western part of the second temple obviously served for more profane purposes. However, a sequence of two rooms immediately beside the anteroom and the altar room show a special relationship to the sacred area. With view blocked by shifted doors and a very small side cabinet with lamp niches in the wall, the second room, side by side with the altar room, seems to have served as a place next to the sacred fire for private meditation and prayer of the king or other prominent persons.

A large cruciform hall with central dome, surrounded by rooms and courtyards with great quantities of pottery sherds and traces of rotten organic material, as well as a kitchen court and three toilet rooms, are clearly a compound used for festivities with banquets.

The access to the second temple was only from the royal courtyard and from the side rooms of the palace. From this we must conclude that this temple was exclusively reserved for the king and his entourage. Whether the tradition that each Sasanian king had a fire of his own should be related to the second temple, and whether these personal fires were permanently installed in one and the same sanctuary, or whether they traveled with the king, is an open question.

The area between the rectangular enclosure and the oval outer wall was at least partly occupied by mud brick houses, probably of priests and officials; one house on the east side was replaced by a stone building. A small settlement of rough stone and mud brick houses existed outside below the wall at the foot of the western hillside.

During the Arab conquest, a peace treaty with the margrave (marzbān) of Azerbaijan guaranteed religious integrity to the sanctuary and allowed the population of Šiz to dance undisturbed in their festivities (Balāḏori, p. 326); but with the Sasanian dynasty disposed and the royal buildings without owner at least in the 9th century, the population had moved into the walled area. It is not clear, when exactly and under which circumstances the sanctuary was given up and whether the fire or fires were taken along with the emigrating Zoroastrian population. The place developed as a prospering Islamic town, still under the name of Šiz, with its greatest density of population during the Saljuq period.

After the Mongol invasion, Abaqa, the second Il-khan of Persia, dislodged the inhabitants and had a palace built an the foundations of the ancient sanctuary shortly after his accession to the throne in 1265 (Mostawfi, p. 64, tr., p. 69). The palace was to be used mainly by women and princes of the Il-khanid dynasty. Bringing the original Sasanian layout to perfection, a new southern gate was cut through the oval wall exactly on the northsouth axis. A straight access across two forecourts and an entrance ayvān led into the great palace courtyard with the lake in the center, surrounded by arcades, which replaced the old Sasanian ones, although these must have completely vanished by that time.

Opposite the entrance, the great southern ayvān of the fire temple, the vault of which had collapsed like all the other major Sasanian vaults, was considerably enlarged and a great stair was built in it, leading up to a vast hall, which was placed on top of the re-vaulted fire temple. Also the vault of the Sasanian palace ayvān was rebuilt with a considerably greater height and the palace enlarged by two octagonal kiosks (kušk)and upstairs rooms beside the ayvān.

At the north east corner of the great courtyard an opposite ayvān was built and behind the arcades rooms and kiosks of a great variety of types and shapes were lined up, partly forming small palaces of their own. The palace is a unique example of pre-Safavid palatial architecture in Persia. A square building with decorated door frame and with four central columns of red sandstone stands in the western area, divergent from the directions of the main grid. Its interpretation, for which an assembly hall or a Buddhist temple is suggested, is unclear. Several small palace pavilions, kiosks, are arranged in line with the transverse axis of the master plan and on special view-points on the wall; they may have been set in a garden layout.

Other comparatively rich houses may have belonged to the administration staff of the palace. An excavated example showed a division into a domestic and a representative part, the latter on the layout of the kiosks, with three ayvāns around a central hall. In general the northern area inside the oval wall was reserved for workmen and workshops during the construction of the palace. There ware kilns for the production of at least part of the glazed wall tiles (Naumann, 1971), which, beside stucco and painting, were the most prominent decorative elements, mainly applied at the palace building with the great ayvān and the ayvān and hall on the former fire temple (Qučāni; Masuya).

Already during its palatial period, the northern area of the site developed into the civilian settlement of Saturiq/Saḡurluq with the ancient north gate as an entrance of its own, and a small bāzār along the ancient way up to the temple. With the end of the Mongol rule, the whole site was re-occupied by the peasant population.

There was destruction and squatter occupation in the palatial buildings. Columns and decorative blocks of stone were pulled out and reused for the construction of a small mosque beside the ancient inner north gate, for another square mosque or mausoleum above the ancient pilgrim’s courtyard north of the fire temple, for a bathhouse, and for simple living houses.

Later on another mausoleum was attached to the eastern wall of the enlarged Il-khanid ayvān of the fire temple. The complete wall decoration of glazed tiles in the palace was cut down and probably sold to be reused at other representative buildings somewhere else. Only great amounts of small, broken off fragments were found, dumped in corners of rooms and in debris pits, some reused as decoration of the new peasant’s houses.

The existence of the civilian town of Saturiq lasted for approximately half a century only; no substantial amount of post-14th century pottery was found. Its abandonment may have been a consequence of the Timurid conquest of Persia.

Την αναφερόμενη βιβλιογραφία μπορείτε να βρείτε εδώ:

http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/takt-e-solayman

————————————–

Takht-e Soleyman

The archaeological site of Takht-e Soleyman, in north-western Iran, is situated in a valley set in a volcanic mountain region. The site includes the principal Zoroastrian sanctuary partly rebuilt in the Ilkhanid (Mongol) period (13th century) as well as a temple of the Sasanian period (6th and 7th centuries) dedicated to Anahita. The site has important symbolic significance. The designs of the fire temple, the palace and the general layout have strongly influenced the development of Islamic architecture.

Outstanding Universal Value

Brief Synthesis

The archaeological ensemble called Takht-e Soleyman (“Throne of Solomon”) is situated on a remote plain surrounded by mountains in northwestern Iran’s West Azerbaijan province. The site has strong symbolic and spiritual significance related to fire and water – the principal reason for its occupation from ancient times – and stands as an exceptional testimony of the continuation of a cult related to fire and water over a period of some 2,500 years. Located here, in a harmonious composition inspired by its natural setting, are the remains of an exceptional ensemble of royal architecture of Persia’s Sasanian dynasty (3rd to 7th centuries). Integrated with the palatial architecture is an outstanding example of Zoroastrian sanctuary; this composition at Takht-e Soleyman can be considered an important prototype.

An artesian lake and a volcano are essential elements of Takht-e Soleyman. At the site’s heart is a fortified oval platform rising about 60 metres above the surrounding plain and measuring about 350 m by 550 m. On this platform are an artesian lake, a Zoroastrian fire temple, a temple dedicated to Anahita (the divinity of the waters), and a Sasanian royal sanctuary. This site was destroyed at the end of the Sasanian era, but was revived and partly rebuilt in the 13th century. About three kilometres west is an ancient volcano, Zendan-e Soleyman, which rises about 100 m above its surroundings. At its summit are the remains of shrines and temples dating from the first millennium BC.

Takht-e Soleyman was the principal sanctuary and foremost site of Zoroastrianism, the Sasanian state religion. This early monotheistic faith has had an important influence on Islam and Christianity; likewise, the designs of the fire temple and the royal palace, and the site’s general layout, had a strong influence on the development of religious architecture in the Islamic period, and became a major architectural reference for other cultures in both the East and the West. The site also has many important symbolic relationships, being associated with beliefs much older than Zoroastrianism as well as with significant biblical figures and legends.

The 10-ha property also includes Tepe Majid, an archaeological mound culturally related to Zendan-e Soleyman; the mountain to the east of Takht-e Soleyman that served as quarry for the site; and Belqeis Mountain 7.5 km to the northeast, on which are the remains of a Sasanian-era citadel. The archaeological heritage of the Takht-e Soleyman ensemble is further enriched by the Sasanian town (which has not yet been excavated) located in the 7,438-ha landscape buffer zones.

Criterion (i): Takht-e Soleyman is an outstanding ensemble of royal architecture, joining the principal architectural elements created by the Sasanians in a harmonious composition inspired by their natural context.

Criterion (ii): The composition and the architectural elements created by the Sasanians at Takht-e Soleyman have had strong influence not only in the development of religious architecture in the Islamic period, but also in other cultures.

Criterion (iii): The ensemble of Takht-e Soleyman is an exceptional testimony of the continuation of cult related to fire and water over a period of some two and half millennia. The archaeological heritage of the site is further enriched by the Sasanian town, which is still to be excavated.

Criterion (iv): Takht-e Soleyman represents an outstanding example of Zoroastrian sanctuary, integrated with Sasanian palatial architecture within a composition, which can be seen as a prototype.

Criterion (vi): As the principal Zoroastrian sanctuary, Takht-e Soleyman is the foremost site associated with one of the early monotheistic religions of the world. The site has many important symbolic relationships, being also a testimony of the association of the ancient beliefs, much earlier than the Zoroastrianism, as well as in its association with significant biblical figures and legends.

Integrity

Within the boundaries of the property are located the known elements and components necessary to express the Outstanding Universal Value of the property, including the lake and the volcano, archaeological remains related to the Zoroastrian sanctuary, and archaeological remains related to the royal architecture of the Sasanian dynasty. Masonry rooftops have collapsed in some areas, but the configurations and functions of the buildings remain evident.

The region’s climate, particularly the long rainy season and extreme temperature variations, as well as seismic action represent the major threats to the integrity of the original stone and masonry materials. Potential risks in the future include development pressures and the construction of visitor facilities in the buffer zones around the sites. Furthermore, there is potential conflict between the interests of the farmers and archaeologists, particularly in the event that excavations are undertaken in the valley fields.

Authenticity

The Takht-e Soleyman archaeological ensemble is authentic in terms of its forms and design, materials and substance, and location and setting, as well as, to a degree, the use and the spirit of the fire temple. Excavated only recently, the archaeological property’s restorations and reconstructions are relatively limited so far: a section of the outer wall near the southern entrance has been rebuilt, using for the most part original stones recovered from the fallen remains; and part of the brick vaults of the palace structures have been rebuilt using modern brick but in the same pattern as the original. As a whole, these interventions can be seen as necessary, and do not compromise the authenticity of the property, which retains its historic ruin aspect. The ancient fire temple still serves pilgrims performing Zoroastrian ceremonies.

Protection and management requirements

Takht-e Soleyman was inscribed on the national heritage list of Iran in 1931, and it is subject to legal protection under the Law on the Protection of National Treasures (1930, updated 1998) and the Law of the Iranian Cultural Heritage Organization Charter (n. 3487-Qaf, 1988). The inscribed World Heritage property, which is owned by the Government of Iran, is under the legal protection and management of the Iranian Cultural Heritage, Handicrafts and Tourism Organization (which is administered and funded by the Government of Iran).

Acting on its behalf, Takht-e Soleyman World Heritage Base is responsible for implementation of the archaeology, conservation, tourism, and education programmes, and for site management. These activities are funded by the Iranian Cultural Heritage, Handicrafts and Tourism Organization, as well as by occasional international support. The current management plan, prepared in 2010, organises managerial strategies and activities over a 15-year period.

Sustaining the Outstanding Universal Value of the property over time will require continuing periodic on-site observations to determine whether the climate or other factors will lead to a negative impact on the Outstanding Universal Value, integrity or authenticity of the property; and employing internationally recognised scientific standards and techniques to properly safeguard the monuments when undertaking stabilisation, conservation, or restoration projects intended to address such negative impacts.

http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1077