Chapter 19

FOOTNOTES:[1]Travels into East India and Arabia Deserta, London, 1665, p. 263.[2]Travels from India to Italy by Land, London, 1710.[3]Les Six Voyages, t. i, liv. 2, ch. 3, p. 136, Paris, 1681[4]M. Saladin quotes Tavernier’s words inL’Architecture Musulmane, p. 327.[5]Reisebeschreibung, vol. ii, p. 225, note.[6]Journey from India to Persia, London, 1773.[7]Travels from England to India, vol. i, p. 243, London, 1779.[8]Erdkunde, vol. xi, pp. 956, 1039.[9]The height above sea-level is Sir W. Willcocks’s reduced level, arrived at by his own observations on the Persian Gulf. Sir W. Willcocks,The Irrigation of Mesopotamia, p. 15, Plate 2.[10]Professor Musil, early in 1912, visited Ukhaiḍir and continued his journey south, parallel with the ṭâr which he names ṭâr al-Ṣeihed.Proceedings of the K. Akad. der Wiss. in Wien, No. 1, 1913, p. 10.[11]When I was there in March 1911 many of the palm-trees had been killed, and the rest severely damaged by the snow which had fallen in January and February. In the memory of no living man had snow fallen in Shethâthâ, and the inhabitants, when they woke to find the ground covered with white, were at a loss to know what the strange substance could be. Some took it to be flour. Snow fell as far south as Nedjef, and in the desert round ‘Aṭshân, between Ukhaiḍir and the Kerbelâ-Nedjef road, it lay for some days. When I passed I saw each abandoned camping ground of the Bani Ḥasan marked by a ring of dead animals, donkeys, sheep, and goats, which had perished in the unwonted cold.[12]Ibn al-Athîr, ed. Tornberg, vol. ix, p. 423, ‘Shefâthâ w’al ‘ain.’ Shethâthâ is a colloquial corruption for Shefâthâ, and the official maps still spell it in the latter fashion.[13]Ed. de Goeje, p. 117.[14]Ed. Wüstenfeld, vol. iii, p. 759.[15]Ocheïdir, p. 12.[16]Dr. Reuther gives the square as 2·85 metres. In my first account of the palace I had described this dome as oval in plan, but, as I felt very doubtful on this point, on my second visit I took particular care to re-examine the whole tract between the north gate and the door of the great hall. My second measurements gave a square of 3·10 metres to the dome. The difference between us is, however, too small to be of much importance.[17]Ocheïdir, p. 3.[18]Ocheïdir, p. 21.[19]Dr. Reuther observes here the funnel leading from the bottom of the niche to the top of the arch which had been described in the outer gates.[20]The decoration as well as the funnel had escaped my notice, but when Dr. Reuther called my attention to the former I was able to verify the correctness of his observation on one of my own photographs.[21]Journal of the Hellenic Society, vol. xxx, 1910, p. 77.[22]In the spring of 1910, I asked M. Viollet, who was then on his way to Mesopotamia, to clear away the ruins from the middle of the south wall and ascertain whether there were any sign of a miḥrâb. Upon his return he informed me that he had discovered the niche at the point which I had indicated and that he felt no hesitation as to its being in fact the miḥrâb. When I was at Ukhaiḍir in 1911, I uncovered the niche still further and photographed it carefully. Two of these photographs I sent to Dr. Wetzel for publication in the German work, and they are there reproduced,Ocheïdir, Figs. 22 and 23. Professor Brünnow has suggested that since prayer niches with flanking colonnettes were known to the Nabataeans, the Mohammadan niche, with its non-Arabic name, was certainly derived from pre-Mohammadan usage. (’Zur neuesten Entwicklung der Meschetta-Frage,’Zeitschrift für Assyriologie, August 1912, p. 129.) This view is not likely to find acceptance. It is expressly stated that the miḥrâb was a feature of the mosque which was borrowed from the Christian cult and that it was not adopted until the beginning of the second century of Islâm. (See Lammens, Ziâd ibn Abîhi,Rivista degli Studi Orientali, vol. iv, 1911, p. 246 (94), note 1, and Becker, ‘Zur Geschichte des islamischen Kultus,’Der Islam, vol. iii, 1912, p. 392.) I continue, therefore, to regard the niche at Ukhaiḍir as a clear proof that the building was originally intended for a mosque.[23]Ocheïdir, p. 24.[24]There seems to me to be an error in the reconstruction of the north façade given inOcheïdir, Plate 24. Dr. Reuther makes the wall of the chemin de ronde, immediately to the west of the gate-house, stand flush with the outer edge of the vault between the gate-house and the tower. I do not think that this is correct. The chemin de ronde projected no further here than it projected between the other towers, i.e. it was flush with the face of the pilasters, and in my Plate 11, Fig. 1, its windows can be seen behind the balcony. If the wall had been flush with the edge of the balcony vault, the fall of that vault, partial to the west of the gate-house, total to the east, must have entailed the fall of the wall also. But this is not the case; the chemin de ronde is intact on either side.[25]Aiwân is the Persian form, very commonly used in the Shâhnâmah. It has become lîwân in Arabic by the incorporation of the article al-Aiwân. (Note by Sir Charles Lyall.)[26]Ocheïdir, p. 5.[27]It appears in one of M. Massignon’s photographs;Mission en Mésopotamie, PlateXX[28]Dr. Reuther observed that in No. 69 the vault at the north end had been constructed without centering, while the vault at the south end had been constructed over a centering;Ocheïdir, p. 43.[29]Rooms 63 and 65 are vaulted without centering;Ocheïdir, p. 5.[30]As has been mentioned on p. 10, the original intention was to carry this same wall round the fourth side (the north side) also; but when the great outer wall was added to the scheme, it replaced the smaller, less important wall of the first design.[31]The authors ofOcheïdirrestore a south wall running from No. 150 to No. 152, thus converting the open space to the south of 141 into a court on the analogy of courtF. I saw no trace of such a wall.[32]Dr. Reuther gives a detailed photograph (Ocheïdir, Fig. 50), showing a band of rhomboids round the window frame.[33]It was visited by Massignon and appears in his map,Mission en Mésopotamie, vol. i, p. 21.[34]Cf. the crenellated motive round the archivolt of the doors of corridors 5 and 6 at Ukhaiḍir.[35]M. Massignon heard of it under the name of Makhḍah or Madjḍah, but he did not visit it. Op. cit., p. 30.[36]Le Strange,Lands of the Eastern Kaliphate, p. 92.[37]Residence in Koordistan, vol. i, p. 40.[38]Amurath to Amurath, p. 191. Massignon,Mission en Mésopotamie, vol. ii, p. 41.[39]Tower tomb at Bostân, dated on the miḥrâbA.D.1300-1301,Denkmäler persischer Baukunst, p. 116, and Plate 85. Tower tomb at Rhages, twelfth or thirteenth century, ibid., p. 57. Tower tomb at Veramîn, twelfth or thirteenth century, ibid., p. 59. Minaret of Khodja ‘Alam at Iṣfahân, probably end of fourteenth or beginning of fifteenth century, ibid., p. 76 and Plate 62.[40]Sarre, op. cit., p. 76; Fergusson,History of Indian and Eastern Architecture, p. 494.[41]M. Massignon heard of a ruined khân called ‘Aṭishân, op. cit., p. 30. He places it too far east in his map.[42]Cf. the east, west, and south gates of Ukhaiḍir.[43]Cf. a calotte in the central court at Ukhaiḍir, Plate 26, Fig. 2.[44]This seems to be the road to which al-Ḥadjdjâdj alludes (Ṭabari, vol. ii, p. 945): ‘And if you have come opposite to Hît, leave the Euphrates road and al-Anbâr and take your way to ‘Ain al-Tamr so that you may reach al-Kûfah.’[45]Mission scientifique en Perse, vol. iv, Plates40,42, and46.[46]Cf. with these passages the vaulted passages to one side of the lîwân groups at Ukhaiḍir in courtsB,C,G, andH.[47]In the photograph there seems to be a low archway on the south side of the gate; it is, however, merely a hole in the wall, and I satisfied myself that there was originally no opening here.[48]In the palace of Firûzâbâd the dome is of stone, but at Sarvistân it is of brick. The construction of the squinches at Chehâr Qapû is not like that of the Firûzâbâd squinches, but it is exactly similar to the Sarvistân work. Dieulafoy,L’Art antique de la Perse, vol. iv, Plates 5 and 14. Sarvistân is much nearer in date to Chehâr Qapû, see below,p. 92.[49]Ibn Ḥanbal, Musnad III, 163, quoted by Lammens, ‘La Bâdia et la Ḥîra sous les Omaiyades,’Mélanges de la Faculté orientale de Beyrouth, vol. iv, p. 95.[50]Lammens, op. cit., p. 92. In this brilliant article, and in a series of studies on the Umayyad khalifs, published in the same journal, Lammens has restored to the Umayyad period, which was neglected or wilfully misrepresented by Mohammadan historians, its capital importance. See too Musil,Qṣeir ‘Amra, p. 150 et seq.[51]Lammens, op. cit., p. 106. Sir Charles Lyall me the following note: ‘I feel considerable doubt as to Lammens’s theory that the word ‘ḥîrah’ was used in the time of the Umayyads. The word is Syriac, not Arabic. See Nöldeke,Sassaniden, p. 25, note 1.’[52]Ed. Wright, p. 46. See too John of Ephesus, iii, 42, where al-Mundhir’s sons are described as pitching a great ḥertâ in the desert.[53]Nöldeke,Die ghassanischen Fürsten aus dem Hause Gafna’s, p. 47.[54]Possibly at Djâbiyah. Teano;Annali dell’ Islam, vol. iii, p. 928.[55]De Vogüé,La Syrie centrale, vol. i, p. 69; Bell,The Desert and the Sown, p. 125.[56]De Vogüé, op. cit., vol. i, p. 71.[57]Dussaud,Mission dans les régions désertiques de la Syrie moyenne, p. 31.[58]Bruno, Meissner, ‘Von Babylon nach den Ruinen von Ḥîra und Huarnaq,’Sendschriften der deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft, No. 2, p. 18.[59]Le Strange,Lands of the Eastern Khalifate, p. 76, n. 1.[60]Ṭabari, ed. de Goeje, Prima Series, p. 853, Bell.Amurath to Amurath, p. 141[61]Nöldeke,Perser und Araber, p. 79.[62]Rothstein,Die Dynastie der Lakhmiden in al-Ḥîra, p. 15. Ṭabari does not mention this fact, though he quotes a poem by ‘Abd al-’Uzza in which Sinimmâr is alluded to as ‘al-’ildj’, the stranger, non-Arab.Ṭabari, vol. i, p. 852.[63]Yâqût, vol. ii, p. 375.[64]Rothstein, op. cit., p. 115. See Massignon,Mission en Mésopotamie, vol. i, pp. 32 et seq., for Lakhmid topography. Sir Charles Lyall calls my attention to a verse of al-Aswad ibn Ya’fur in which he gives a list of the Lakhmid buildings: al-Khawarnaq, al-Sadîr, Tzâriq, and ‘the pinnacled castle of Sindâd’.[65]Encyclopédie de l’Islam, under Anbâr. The site was ancient.[66]Reisebeschreibung, vol. ii, p. 236.[67]Since this was written I learn that Ḥiyyadhiyyeh was visited in 1912 by Prince Sixtus of Bourbon and Professor Musil, see theVorberichtof the latter in the report of the K. Akad. d. Wiss. in Wien, 1913, No. 1, p. 11. Journeying southwards from Ukhaiḍir they passed through Ḥiyyadhiyyeh, which is described as ‘eine festungsartige kleine Ortschaft am rechten Ufer des wâdi al-Kherr’. On the way from Ḥiyyadhiyyeh to Nedjef they passed by Ṭaquṭqâneh (Niebuhr’s Tukteqâne) and Ruḥeimeh.[68]Le Strange,Lands of the Eastern Khalifate, p. 76.[69]Massignon, op. cit., p. 41.[70]Mentioned by Massignon under Ruḥbeh, op. cit., p. 41.[71]Erster vorläufiger Bericht über die Ausgrabungen von Sâmarrâ, p. 40.[72]Mas’ûdi, Marûdj al-Dhahab, ed. Barbier de Meynard, vol. vii, p. 192.[73]See Lane,Arabic and English Dictionary, underriwâq.[74]Rothstein, op. cit., p. 130.[75]Idem, pp. 69, 74, 81.[76]Bell,Amurath to Amurath, p. 139.[77]Sarre-Herzfeld,Iranische Felsreliefs, p. 237.[78]Ausgrabungen in Sendschirli, pt. ii. There is some doubt as to whether Zindjirli was actually occupied by Hatti. No Hittite inscriptions have been discovered there; but further researches have shown that architecturally Zindjirli belongs to a group of settlements the Hittite origin of which it is impossible to doubt. Professor Garstang has found a khilâni palace at Sakcheh Geuzu (Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology, vol. v, Plate 3), Baron Oppenheim a very remarkable palace of the same type at Râs ul-’Ain, of which the plan has not yet been published.[79]Ausgrabungen, p. 173, and Fig. 82, p. 184.[80]Ausgrabungen, Fig. 83, p. 184.[81]Puchstein, ‘Die Säule in der assyrischen Architektur,’Jahrbuch des k. d. arch. Instituts, 1892, p. 11.[82]Koldewey gives a chronological series of Assyrian khilânis and shows that the development in Assyria was a faithful copy of the development which he had noted at Zindjirli, op. cit., pp. 188 et seq.[83]Dr. Herzfeld suggests that it may have been transmitted to the Achaemenids through Media;Iranische Felsreliefs, p. 186.[84]Dr. Herzfeld calls attention to the significant fact that the Babylonian theatre, while it exhibits a good Greek plan, is built of sun-dried brick, doubtless by local workmen, and is technically indistinguishable from local structures of an earlier age.Iranische Felsreliefs, p. 225. To a reconstruction of a later period belongs the stage, with its burnt brick foundations, wooden superstructure, and ornaments of carved stucco, and here too technique and material are of local origin. The theatre is not yet published. A very short account of the excavations is to be found inMitt. der D. O.-G., No. 21, p. 9, and No. 22, pp. 4 et seq.; a longer description in Koldewey,Das wieder erstehende Babylon, p. 293.[85]Loftus,Chaldaca and Susiana, p. 225. See Sarre-Herzfeld,Iranische Felsreliefs, p. 227, for a comprehensive enumeration of Parthian remains.[86]Dieulafoy,L’Art antique de la Perse, vol. v, p. 29.[87]Hilprecht,Explorations in Bible Lands, p. 564, compares it to the ancient Greek houses at Delos, for which see Durm,Baukunst der Griechen, p. 516. The juxtaposition of megaron and andron, each group of rooms opening into its own court, recalls irresistibly a yet older type; cf. the plan of Tiryns, Perrot-Chipiez,Histoire de l’Art, vol. vi, Plate 2. It is curious to note that the audience halls at Niffer are the oriental latitudinal chambers; indeed they have the closest connexion with the old Babylonian house type, which, as Professor Koldewey has observed, postulates invariably a court with a large chamber to the south of it. The Niffer palace is little more than a reproduction of such houses as the big house in the Merkes at Babylon, plus the column, which was due to Greek influence. See Koldewey,Das wieder erstehende Babylon, pp. 279 et seq.[88]Mitt, der D. O.-G., No. 25, p. 39.[89]Ibid., No. 28, p. 59.[90]Stoae of Attalos at Athens and at Pergamon, Durm,Baukunst der Griechen, p. 504.[91]The Assur palace is not yet published, but seeMitt. der D. O.-G., No. 42, pp. 45-50. The plan is given on Plate 4 of Andrae’sFestungswerke von Assur.[92]Andrae,Hatra, pt. ii, Plate 6.[93]The literature on this subject is of vast extent. See Choisy,L’Art de bâtir chez les Byzantins, p. 32; Dieulafoy,L’Art antique de la Perse, vol. iv, p. 14; Perrot-Chipiez, vol. ii, pp. 143-7, 163-81, 231-46. Delbrück’s chronologicalrésuméof the history of the vault has brought order into chaos;Hellenistische Bauten in Latium, pt. ii, pp. 63-85.[94]Place,Ninive, vol. i, pp. 176, 255.[95]Idem, vol. i, pp. 254 et seq.[96]Layard,Nineveh, vol. i, p. 127, and vol. ii, p. 260.[97]I must refer briefly to his new work.Das wieder erstehende Babylon, wherein the question of Babylonian vaults is fully discussed on pp. 90 et seq.[98]Delbrück,Hell. Bauten in Latium, vol. ii. Table A, p. 64. The widest span is found in the cisterns of the theatre at Delos; it is 6.55 metres.[99]Early Hellenistic barrel vaults in the Mediterranean coast-lands. Delbrück, op. cit., pt. ii. Table A, p. 64. Cut stone vaults showing characteristics of brick construction, such as vaulting in concentric courses, vaults outlined by mouldings, vaults with uncentered joints, and a single example of the horse-shoe vault at Chiusi, idem, Table B, p. 67. In Egypt and in western Asia solutions were sought to further problems of stone vaulting, the intersection of stone barrel vaults, vaulting in inclined planes, the stone dome with or without voussoirs. At first these were in general confined to the East; the evolution in the West begins in the Roman Imperial period. Delbrück, pt. ii. pp. 77-80. Development of the Egyptian cut stone vault out of sun-dried brick construction, idem, pp. 80-3.[100]Delbrück, op. cit., pt. ii, Table C, p. 70.[101]Bridge at Pergamon, Delbrück, pt. ii, Table D, p. 72.[102]Andrae,Hatra, pt. ii, p. 2, assigns it to the second century, after Trajan and before Septimius Severus; a more accurate dating is not possible without excavation. The largest of the palace vaults spans 14·80 metres.[103]Choisy,L’Art de bâtir chez les Byzantins, p. 154.[104]Podium of the altar and of the upper gymnasium at Pergamon, Delbrück, pt. ii, p. 104. The whole subject is admirably handled by him, pt. ii, pp. 108-11, where the accounts left by Diodorus and by Strabo of the substructure of the Hanging Gardens are examined, and the mutual interaction of India and western Asia is considered. See Koldewey,Das wieder erstehende Babylon, p. 90, for a description of the vaulted substructions which he believes to have supported the Hanging Gardens.[105]Strabo, xvi, 1, 5.[106]Chaldaea, at Mughair, sun-dried brick; Perrot-Chipiez, vol. ii, p. 232. Egypt, at Dair el-Baḥri, 18th Dynasty; Perrot-Chipiez, vol. i, p. 536; and a brick dome at Abydos; Choisy,Histoire de l’Architecture, vol. i, p. 19. Syria, dolmenic tomb at Ridjm el Melfûf;Annual of the Palestine Exploration Fund, 1911, p. 9. Knossos; Evans,Prehistoric Tombs of Knossos, p. 139. Numerous other examples are cited by Durm in two articles in theJahreshefte des öst. arch. Instituts, vol. x, 1907.[107]Mitt. der D. O.-G., No. 27, p. 29.[108]In one of these only is the springing of the vault preserved. Bell,Amurath to Amurath, Fig. 109.[109]Sâmarrâ,Amurath, Fig. 154.[110]Cf. the stone vaults at Medinet Abu, Delbrück, op. cit., pt. ii, p. 81.[111]Dieulafoy,L’Art antique de la Perse, vol. iv, Fig. 10;Mitt. der D. O.-G., No. 40, Fig. 10, a late Assyrian tomb.[112]Dieulafoy,L’Art antique, vol. iv, Plate 7.[113]Bell,Churches and Monasteries of the Ṭûr ‘Abdîn, p. 100 (44).[114]Idem, pp. 65 (9), 71 (15), &c.[115]Mau,Pompeii, its Life and Art, p. 199.[116]Delbrück, op. cit., pt. ii, Fig. 45.[117]Idem, p. 146.[118]Fergusson and Burgess,Cave Temples of India, Plates 9 and 11.[119]De Vogüé,La Syrie centrale, Plate 7, and Delbrück, op. cit., pt. ii, Fig. 77. The records only have survived; the buildings themselves have disappeared.[120]Delbrück, op. cit., pt. ii, p. 145.[121]Butler,Ancient Architecture in Syria, Sect. A, pt iii, Fig. 185; de Vogüé,La Syrie centrale, vol. i, p. 47.[122]Tâg-i-Îwân, Dieulafoy,L’Art antique, vol. v, p. 80.[123]Dieulafoy, ibid., vol. v, p. 80.[124]Andrae,Hatra, pt. i, p. 18.[125]Pergamon,Athenische Mitt., vol. xxix (1904), p. 136, Plate 13; Delbrück, op. cit., pt. ii, Table G, and p. 103.[126]Delbrück, op. cit., pt. ii, p. 104.

FOOTNOTES:

[1]Travels into East India and Arabia Deserta, London, 1665, p. 263.

[2]Travels from India to Italy by Land, London, 1710.

[3]Les Six Voyages, t. i, liv. 2, ch. 3, p. 136, Paris, 1681

[4]M. Saladin quotes Tavernier’s words inL’Architecture Musulmane, p. 327.

[5]Reisebeschreibung, vol. ii, p. 225, note.

[6]Journey from India to Persia, London, 1773.

[7]Travels from England to India, vol. i, p. 243, London, 1779.

[8]Erdkunde, vol. xi, pp. 956, 1039.

[9]The height above sea-level is Sir W. Willcocks’s reduced level, arrived at by his own observations on the Persian Gulf. Sir W. Willcocks,The Irrigation of Mesopotamia, p. 15, Plate 2.

[10]Professor Musil, early in 1912, visited Ukhaiḍir and continued his journey south, parallel with the ṭâr which he names ṭâr al-Ṣeihed.Proceedings of the K. Akad. der Wiss. in Wien, No. 1, 1913, p. 10.

[11]When I was there in March 1911 many of the palm-trees had been killed, and the rest severely damaged by the snow which had fallen in January and February. In the memory of no living man had snow fallen in Shethâthâ, and the inhabitants, when they woke to find the ground covered with white, were at a loss to know what the strange substance could be. Some took it to be flour. Snow fell as far south as Nedjef, and in the desert round ‘Aṭshân, between Ukhaiḍir and the Kerbelâ-Nedjef road, it lay for some days. When I passed I saw each abandoned camping ground of the Bani Ḥasan marked by a ring of dead animals, donkeys, sheep, and goats, which had perished in the unwonted cold.

[12]Ibn al-Athîr, ed. Tornberg, vol. ix, p. 423, ‘Shefâthâ w’al ‘ain.’ Shethâthâ is a colloquial corruption for Shefâthâ, and the official maps still spell it in the latter fashion.

[13]Ed. de Goeje, p. 117.

[14]Ed. Wüstenfeld, vol. iii, p. 759.

[15]Ocheïdir, p. 12.

[16]Dr. Reuther gives the square as 2·85 metres. In my first account of the palace I had described this dome as oval in plan, but, as I felt very doubtful on this point, on my second visit I took particular care to re-examine the whole tract between the north gate and the door of the great hall. My second measurements gave a square of 3·10 metres to the dome. The difference between us is, however, too small to be of much importance.

[17]Ocheïdir, p. 3.

[18]Ocheïdir, p. 21.

[19]Dr. Reuther observes here the funnel leading from the bottom of the niche to the top of the arch which had been described in the outer gates.

[20]The decoration as well as the funnel had escaped my notice, but when Dr. Reuther called my attention to the former I was able to verify the correctness of his observation on one of my own photographs.

[21]Journal of the Hellenic Society, vol. xxx, 1910, p. 77.

[22]In the spring of 1910, I asked M. Viollet, who was then on his way to Mesopotamia, to clear away the ruins from the middle of the south wall and ascertain whether there were any sign of a miḥrâb. Upon his return he informed me that he had discovered the niche at the point which I had indicated and that he felt no hesitation as to its being in fact the miḥrâb. When I was at Ukhaiḍir in 1911, I uncovered the niche still further and photographed it carefully. Two of these photographs I sent to Dr. Wetzel for publication in the German work, and they are there reproduced,Ocheïdir, Figs. 22 and 23. Professor Brünnow has suggested that since prayer niches with flanking colonnettes were known to the Nabataeans, the Mohammadan niche, with its non-Arabic name, was certainly derived from pre-Mohammadan usage. (’Zur neuesten Entwicklung der Meschetta-Frage,’Zeitschrift für Assyriologie, August 1912, p. 129.) This view is not likely to find acceptance. It is expressly stated that the miḥrâb was a feature of the mosque which was borrowed from the Christian cult and that it was not adopted until the beginning of the second century of Islâm. (See Lammens, Ziâd ibn Abîhi,Rivista degli Studi Orientali, vol. iv, 1911, p. 246 (94), note 1, and Becker, ‘Zur Geschichte des islamischen Kultus,’Der Islam, vol. iii, 1912, p. 392.) I continue, therefore, to regard the niche at Ukhaiḍir as a clear proof that the building was originally intended for a mosque.

[23]Ocheïdir, p. 24.

[24]There seems to me to be an error in the reconstruction of the north façade given inOcheïdir, Plate 24. Dr. Reuther makes the wall of the chemin de ronde, immediately to the west of the gate-house, stand flush with the outer edge of the vault between the gate-house and the tower. I do not think that this is correct. The chemin de ronde projected no further here than it projected between the other towers, i.e. it was flush with the face of the pilasters, and in my Plate 11, Fig. 1, its windows can be seen behind the balcony. If the wall had been flush with the edge of the balcony vault, the fall of that vault, partial to the west of the gate-house, total to the east, must have entailed the fall of the wall also. But this is not the case; the chemin de ronde is intact on either side.

[25]Aiwân is the Persian form, very commonly used in the Shâhnâmah. It has become lîwân in Arabic by the incorporation of the article al-Aiwân. (Note by Sir Charles Lyall.)

[26]Ocheïdir, p. 5.

[27]It appears in one of M. Massignon’s photographs;Mission en Mésopotamie, PlateXX

[28]Dr. Reuther observed that in No. 69 the vault at the north end had been constructed without centering, while the vault at the south end had been constructed over a centering;Ocheïdir, p. 43.

[29]Rooms 63 and 65 are vaulted without centering;Ocheïdir, p. 5.

[30]As has been mentioned on p. 10, the original intention was to carry this same wall round the fourth side (the north side) also; but when the great outer wall was added to the scheme, it replaced the smaller, less important wall of the first design.

[31]The authors ofOcheïdirrestore a south wall running from No. 150 to No. 152, thus converting the open space to the south of 141 into a court on the analogy of courtF. I saw no trace of such a wall.

[32]Dr. Reuther gives a detailed photograph (Ocheïdir, Fig. 50), showing a band of rhomboids round the window frame.

[33]It was visited by Massignon and appears in his map,Mission en Mésopotamie, vol. i, p. 21.

[34]Cf. the crenellated motive round the archivolt of the doors of corridors 5 and 6 at Ukhaiḍir.

[35]M. Massignon heard of it under the name of Makhḍah or Madjḍah, but he did not visit it. Op. cit., p. 30.

[36]Le Strange,Lands of the Eastern Kaliphate, p. 92.

[37]Residence in Koordistan, vol. i, p. 40.

[38]Amurath to Amurath, p. 191. Massignon,Mission en Mésopotamie, vol. ii, p. 41.

[39]Tower tomb at Bostân, dated on the miḥrâbA.D.1300-1301,Denkmäler persischer Baukunst, p. 116, and Plate 85. Tower tomb at Rhages, twelfth or thirteenth century, ibid., p. 57. Tower tomb at Veramîn, twelfth or thirteenth century, ibid., p. 59. Minaret of Khodja ‘Alam at Iṣfahân, probably end of fourteenth or beginning of fifteenth century, ibid., p. 76 and Plate 62.

[40]Sarre, op. cit., p. 76; Fergusson,History of Indian and Eastern Architecture, p. 494.

[41]M. Massignon heard of a ruined khân called ‘Aṭishân, op. cit., p. 30. He places it too far east in his map.

[42]Cf. the east, west, and south gates of Ukhaiḍir.

[43]Cf. a calotte in the central court at Ukhaiḍir, Plate 26, Fig. 2.

[44]This seems to be the road to which al-Ḥadjdjâdj alludes (Ṭabari, vol. ii, p. 945): ‘And if you have come opposite to Hît, leave the Euphrates road and al-Anbâr and take your way to ‘Ain al-Tamr so that you may reach al-Kûfah.’

[45]Mission scientifique en Perse, vol. iv, Plates40,42, and46.

[46]Cf. with these passages the vaulted passages to one side of the lîwân groups at Ukhaiḍir in courtsB,C,G, andH.

[47]In the photograph there seems to be a low archway on the south side of the gate; it is, however, merely a hole in the wall, and I satisfied myself that there was originally no opening here.

[48]In the palace of Firûzâbâd the dome is of stone, but at Sarvistân it is of brick. The construction of the squinches at Chehâr Qapû is not like that of the Firûzâbâd squinches, but it is exactly similar to the Sarvistân work. Dieulafoy,L’Art antique de la Perse, vol. iv, Plates 5 and 14. Sarvistân is much nearer in date to Chehâr Qapû, see below,p. 92.

[49]Ibn Ḥanbal, Musnad III, 163, quoted by Lammens, ‘La Bâdia et la Ḥîra sous les Omaiyades,’Mélanges de la Faculté orientale de Beyrouth, vol. iv, p. 95.

[50]Lammens, op. cit., p. 92. In this brilliant article, and in a series of studies on the Umayyad khalifs, published in the same journal, Lammens has restored to the Umayyad period, which was neglected or wilfully misrepresented by Mohammadan historians, its capital importance. See too Musil,Qṣeir ‘Amra, p. 150 et seq.

[51]Lammens, op. cit., p. 106. Sir Charles Lyall me the following note: ‘I feel considerable doubt as to Lammens’s theory that the word ‘ḥîrah’ was used in the time of the Umayyads. The word is Syriac, not Arabic. See Nöldeke,Sassaniden, p. 25, note 1.’

[52]Ed. Wright, p. 46. See too John of Ephesus, iii, 42, where al-Mundhir’s sons are described as pitching a great ḥertâ in the desert.

[53]Nöldeke,Die ghassanischen Fürsten aus dem Hause Gafna’s, p. 47.

[54]Possibly at Djâbiyah. Teano;Annali dell’ Islam, vol. iii, p. 928.

[55]De Vogüé,La Syrie centrale, vol. i, p. 69; Bell,The Desert and the Sown, p. 125.

[56]De Vogüé, op. cit., vol. i, p. 71.

[57]Dussaud,Mission dans les régions désertiques de la Syrie moyenne, p. 31.

[58]Bruno, Meissner, ‘Von Babylon nach den Ruinen von Ḥîra und Huarnaq,’Sendschriften der deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft, No. 2, p. 18.

[59]Le Strange,Lands of the Eastern Khalifate, p. 76, n. 1.

[60]Ṭabari, ed. de Goeje, Prima Series, p. 853, Bell.Amurath to Amurath, p. 141

[61]Nöldeke,Perser und Araber, p. 79.

[62]Rothstein,Die Dynastie der Lakhmiden in al-Ḥîra, p. 15. Ṭabari does not mention this fact, though he quotes a poem by ‘Abd al-’Uzza in which Sinimmâr is alluded to as ‘al-’ildj’, the stranger, non-Arab.Ṭabari, vol. i, p. 852.

[63]Yâqût, vol. ii, p. 375.

[64]Rothstein, op. cit., p. 115. See Massignon,Mission en Mésopotamie, vol. i, pp. 32 et seq., for Lakhmid topography. Sir Charles Lyall calls my attention to a verse of al-Aswad ibn Ya’fur in which he gives a list of the Lakhmid buildings: al-Khawarnaq, al-Sadîr, Tzâriq, and ‘the pinnacled castle of Sindâd’.

[65]Encyclopédie de l’Islam, under Anbâr. The site was ancient.

[66]Reisebeschreibung, vol. ii, p. 236.

[67]Since this was written I learn that Ḥiyyadhiyyeh was visited in 1912 by Prince Sixtus of Bourbon and Professor Musil, see theVorberichtof the latter in the report of the K. Akad. d. Wiss. in Wien, 1913, No. 1, p. 11. Journeying southwards from Ukhaiḍir they passed through Ḥiyyadhiyyeh, which is described as ‘eine festungsartige kleine Ortschaft am rechten Ufer des wâdi al-Kherr’. On the way from Ḥiyyadhiyyeh to Nedjef they passed by Ṭaquṭqâneh (Niebuhr’s Tukteqâne) and Ruḥeimeh.

[68]Le Strange,Lands of the Eastern Khalifate, p. 76.

[69]Massignon, op. cit., p. 41.

[70]Mentioned by Massignon under Ruḥbeh, op. cit., p. 41.

[71]Erster vorläufiger Bericht über die Ausgrabungen von Sâmarrâ, p. 40.

[72]Mas’ûdi, Marûdj al-Dhahab, ed. Barbier de Meynard, vol. vii, p. 192.

[73]See Lane,Arabic and English Dictionary, underriwâq.

[74]Rothstein, op. cit., p. 130.

[75]Idem, pp. 69, 74, 81.

[76]Bell,Amurath to Amurath, p. 139.

[77]Sarre-Herzfeld,Iranische Felsreliefs, p. 237.

[78]Ausgrabungen in Sendschirli, pt. ii. There is some doubt as to whether Zindjirli was actually occupied by Hatti. No Hittite inscriptions have been discovered there; but further researches have shown that architecturally Zindjirli belongs to a group of settlements the Hittite origin of which it is impossible to doubt. Professor Garstang has found a khilâni palace at Sakcheh Geuzu (Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology, vol. v, Plate 3), Baron Oppenheim a very remarkable palace of the same type at Râs ul-’Ain, of which the plan has not yet been published.

[79]Ausgrabungen, p. 173, and Fig. 82, p. 184.

[80]Ausgrabungen, Fig. 83, p. 184.

[81]Puchstein, ‘Die Säule in der assyrischen Architektur,’Jahrbuch des k. d. arch. Instituts, 1892, p. 11.

[82]Koldewey gives a chronological series of Assyrian khilânis and shows that the development in Assyria was a faithful copy of the development which he had noted at Zindjirli, op. cit., pp. 188 et seq.

[83]Dr. Herzfeld suggests that it may have been transmitted to the Achaemenids through Media;Iranische Felsreliefs, p. 186.

[84]Dr. Herzfeld calls attention to the significant fact that the Babylonian theatre, while it exhibits a good Greek plan, is built of sun-dried brick, doubtless by local workmen, and is technically indistinguishable from local structures of an earlier age.Iranische Felsreliefs, p. 225. To a reconstruction of a later period belongs the stage, with its burnt brick foundations, wooden superstructure, and ornaments of carved stucco, and here too technique and material are of local origin. The theatre is not yet published. A very short account of the excavations is to be found inMitt. der D. O.-G., No. 21, p. 9, and No. 22, pp. 4 et seq.; a longer description in Koldewey,Das wieder erstehende Babylon, p. 293.

[85]Loftus,Chaldaca and Susiana, p. 225. See Sarre-Herzfeld,Iranische Felsreliefs, p. 227, for a comprehensive enumeration of Parthian remains.

[86]Dieulafoy,L’Art antique de la Perse, vol. v, p. 29.

[87]Hilprecht,Explorations in Bible Lands, p. 564, compares it to the ancient Greek houses at Delos, for which see Durm,Baukunst der Griechen, p. 516. The juxtaposition of megaron and andron, each group of rooms opening into its own court, recalls irresistibly a yet older type; cf. the plan of Tiryns, Perrot-Chipiez,Histoire de l’Art, vol. vi, Plate 2. It is curious to note that the audience halls at Niffer are the oriental latitudinal chambers; indeed they have the closest connexion with the old Babylonian house type, which, as Professor Koldewey has observed, postulates invariably a court with a large chamber to the south of it. The Niffer palace is little more than a reproduction of such houses as the big house in the Merkes at Babylon, plus the column, which was due to Greek influence. See Koldewey,Das wieder erstehende Babylon, pp. 279 et seq.

[88]Mitt, der D. O.-G., No. 25, p. 39.

[89]Ibid., No. 28, p. 59.

[90]Stoae of Attalos at Athens and at Pergamon, Durm,Baukunst der Griechen, p. 504.

[91]The Assur palace is not yet published, but seeMitt. der D. O.-G., No. 42, pp. 45-50. The plan is given on Plate 4 of Andrae’sFestungswerke von Assur.

[92]Andrae,Hatra, pt. ii, Plate 6.

[93]The literature on this subject is of vast extent. See Choisy,L’Art de bâtir chez les Byzantins, p. 32; Dieulafoy,L’Art antique de la Perse, vol. iv, p. 14; Perrot-Chipiez, vol. ii, pp. 143-7, 163-81, 231-46. Delbrück’s chronologicalrésuméof the history of the vault has brought order into chaos;Hellenistische Bauten in Latium, pt. ii, pp. 63-85.

[94]Place,Ninive, vol. i, pp. 176, 255.

[95]Idem, vol. i, pp. 254 et seq.

[96]Layard,Nineveh, vol. i, p. 127, and vol. ii, p. 260.

[97]I must refer briefly to his new work.Das wieder erstehende Babylon, wherein the question of Babylonian vaults is fully discussed on pp. 90 et seq.

[98]Delbrück,Hell. Bauten in Latium, vol. ii. Table A, p. 64. The widest span is found in the cisterns of the theatre at Delos; it is 6.55 metres.

[99]Early Hellenistic barrel vaults in the Mediterranean coast-lands. Delbrück, op. cit., pt. ii. Table A, p. 64. Cut stone vaults showing characteristics of brick construction, such as vaulting in concentric courses, vaults outlined by mouldings, vaults with uncentered joints, and a single example of the horse-shoe vault at Chiusi, idem, Table B, p. 67. In Egypt and in western Asia solutions were sought to further problems of stone vaulting, the intersection of stone barrel vaults, vaulting in inclined planes, the stone dome with or without voussoirs. At first these were in general confined to the East; the evolution in the West begins in the Roman Imperial period. Delbrück, pt. ii. pp. 77-80. Development of the Egyptian cut stone vault out of sun-dried brick construction, idem, pp. 80-3.

[100]Delbrück, op. cit., pt. ii, Table C, p. 70.

[101]Bridge at Pergamon, Delbrück, pt. ii, Table D, p. 72.

[102]Andrae,Hatra, pt. ii, p. 2, assigns it to the second century, after Trajan and before Septimius Severus; a more accurate dating is not possible without excavation. The largest of the palace vaults spans 14·80 metres.

[103]Choisy,L’Art de bâtir chez les Byzantins, p. 154.

[104]Podium of the altar and of the upper gymnasium at Pergamon, Delbrück, pt. ii, p. 104. The whole subject is admirably handled by him, pt. ii, pp. 108-11, where the accounts left by Diodorus and by Strabo of the substructure of the Hanging Gardens are examined, and the mutual interaction of India and western Asia is considered. See Koldewey,Das wieder erstehende Babylon, p. 90, for a description of the vaulted substructions which he believes to have supported the Hanging Gardens.

[105]Strabo, xvi, 1, 5.

[106]Chaldaea, at Mughair, sun-dried brick; Perrot-Chipiez, vol. ii, p. 232. Egypt, at Dair el-Baḥri, 18th Dynasty; Perrot-Chipiez, vol. i, p. 536; and a brick dome at Abydos; Choisy,Histoire de l’Architecture, vol. i, p. 19. Syria, dolmenic tomb at Ridjm el Melfûf;Annual of the Palestine Exploration Fund, 1911, p. 9. Knossos; Evans,Prehistoric Tombs of Knossos, p. 139. Numerous other examples are cited by Durm in two articles in theJahreshefte des öst. arch. Instituts, vol. x, 1907.

[107]Mitt. der D. O.-G., No. 27, p. 29.

[108]In one of these only is the springing of the vault preserved. Bell,Amurath to Amurath, Fig. 109.

[109]Sâmarrâ,Amurath, Fig. 154.

[110]Cf. the stone vaults at Medinet Abu, Delbrück, op. cit., pt. ii, p. 81.

[111]Dieulafoy,L’Art antique de la Perse, vol. iv, Fig. 10;Mitt. der D. O.-G., No. 40, Fig. 10, a late Assyrian tomb.

[112]Dieulafoy,L’Art antique, vol. iv, Plate 7.

[113]Bell,Churches and Monasteries of the Ṭûr ‘Abdîn, p. 100 (44).

[114]Idem, pp. 65 (9), 71 (15), &c.

[115]Mau,Pompeii, its Life and Art, p. 199.

[116]Delbrück, op. cit., pt. ii, Fig. 45.

[117]Idem, p. 146.

[118]Fergusson and Burgess,Cave Temples of India, Plates 9 and 11.

[119]De Vogüé,La Syrie centrale, Plate 7, and Delbrück, op. cit., pt. ii, Fig. 77. The records only have survived; the buildings themselves have disappeared.

[120]Delbrück, op. cit., pt. ii, p. 145.

[121]Butler,Ancient Architecture in Syria, Sect. A, pt iii, Fig. 185; de Vogüé,La Syrie centrale, vol. i, p. 47.

[122]Tâg-i-Îwân, Dieulafoy,L’Art antique, vol. v, p. 80.

[123]Dieulafoy, ibid., vol. v, p. 80.

[124]Andrae,Hatra, pt. i, p. 18.

[125]Pergamon,Athenische Mitt., vol. xxix (1904), p. 136, Plate 13; Delbrück, op. cit., pt. ii, Table G, and p. 103.

[126]Delbrück, op. cit., pt. ii, p. 104.

Back to Index Next