Читать книгу A Companion to the Achaemenid Persian Empire, 2 Volume Set - Группа авторов - Страница 172

Contrasting with the Bronze Age, at the end of the second millennium a fundamental change occurred in religious life with the abandonment of the burial practices by the sedentary societies. While the inhumation survived in the steppic societies (to the point that the study of their cultures relies almost entirely on their necropoles) and is represented by various mausoleums in the peripheral Chorasmia, the sedentary populations of Central Asia were devoted to new funerary rituals materialized by the absence of human remains, the corpses being exposed to open sky for emaciation. These changes coincide with the emergence of the Mazdaean and Zoroastrian religion during the early Iron Age.

Among the most ancient parts of the Avesta, the first chapter of the Vendidad, composed not long before the Achaemenids, refers to a geography whose scheme radiates in Central Asia across a territory which coincides with the area covered by the “Oxus” cultures of Yaz I and II. The center into which this geography converges is not political but religious, since it corresponds to the place of the Illumination of Zoroaster, in northeastern Afghanistan (Grenet 2005). Therefore, at the arrival of the Achaemenids the Central Asian area is already inserted into the heart of a large common religious sphera.

The religious architecture is concentrated on a rather small corpus of sanctuaries and temples, whose identification and dating are often doubtful. One of the older performances of a fire cult has been evidenced at Koktepe/Gava in a pre‐Achaemenid courtyard monument (period II), possibly in connection with an only partially excavated platform (Figure 23.2 A and P).

The Achaemenids did not impose a centralized religion, as the presence of varied types of monuments illustrates. According to Herodotus I, 131–132, and Strabo XV, 3, the most ancient rituals were practiced in the open air. This statement could correspond to sacred platforms whose tradition goes back to the Bronze Age (Nad‐i Ali in Seistan) before a renewal at a more modest level during the Iron Age in the northeastern regions (Erk‐kala in Margiana, and Koktepe, Sangir‐tepe, Pachmak‐tepe, and Pshak‐tepe in Sogdiana). This architectural tradition lasted beyond the Achaemenids, as evidenced by the Hellenistic sacred platform and the stepped podiums on which stand the two main temples of Ai Khanum.

The existence of complex altars devoted to open‐air rituals in courtyard sanctuaries like at Dahan‐i Ghulaman is however not proved to the north of the Hindukush, although such a structure is not excluded for the unexcavated sanctuary of Cheshme‐Shafa to the south of Bactra. In Chorasmia, the worship in the open air seems to have occurred in two circular sanctuaries (Kalaly‐gyr 2 and Gjaur‐kala 3). More to the east, it is not clear in what measure the Saka Haumavarga (in Ustrushana?) associated Zoroastrianism to their nomadic kurgan funeral practices.

It is usually considered that the covered temples (intended to house cult statues) appeared rather late in the Achaemenid period, perhaps even during the Seleucid period. Recent discoveries reveal, however, that in Central Asia both open‐air and covered architectural types broadly coexisted already from the early decades of the Achaemenid rule. A covered temple at Sangir‐tepe (period III, earlier phase) seems indeed to coexist with the sacred platform in Koktepe (period III: Figure 23.2C. The temple of Sangir‐tepe was later replaced by a platform, whilst in the Surkhan‐darya other covered temples were erected during the fourth century BCE (Kuchuk‐tepe(?) and Kindyk‐tepe near Bandykhan). It is not excluded that the Oxus treasure (infra) belonged to a similar temple.

The Graeco‐Bactrian covered temples comprise a cella surrounded by sacristies and preceded by a porch or a pronaos. Since it appears rather late in Persia (see the Seleucid Frataraka temple at Persepolis), this scheme could derive from local early Achaemenid buildings (see Sangir‐tepe in Sogdiana). It is therefore not clear whether the ancient Mesopotamian area (see the sanctuary of Anu‐Antum of the Bit‐resh at Uruk) played a role in its development. A significant difference must be noted between the Mesopotamian and the Iranian worlds, since in the first case the lateral sacristies open on the pronaos (Bard‐e Neshandeh and Masjid‐e Solaiman), while in Central Asia they communicated directly with the cella. In this context, it means that the sacred treasure belonged somehow exclusively to the divinity.

While during the first centuries they were aniconic and addressed to the natural elements like fire and water, the Central Asian Zoroastrian cults progressed into an iconic polytheism which later differed from the proper Parthian and Sasanian aniconic cults of fire.

The scarce traces left by the earlier rituals are usually compatible with Zoroastrian features. Some of them correspond to rituals performed during the foundation of the sanctuaries (Koktepe and Sangir‐tepe), while others evidence a worship centered on the natural elements (Sangir‐tepe and Kindyk‐tepe). The oldest iconic representations are known through the treasures of Mir‐Zakah 2, of the Oxus, and of Takht‐i Sangin. These treasures include Achaemenid, Hellenistic, and nomadic pieces of art such as statuettes, vases, bracelets, necklaces, rings, gems, votive plaques depicting Zoroastrian priests, donors, and animals dedicated to a temple and coins. The original context or dating of the Oxus treasure are the source of conflicting interpretations, but it can be considered that these objects were part of votive deposits sheltered in a monument which was replaced by the temple of Takht‐i Sangin during the Graeco‐Bactrian period.

Under the Graeco‐Bactrian rule the Central Asian cults present a polytheist form whose divinities are iconographically Hellenized (Takht‐i Sangin, Ai Khanum), while the sanctuaries are closely connected to the Achaemenid period through the artifacts of their sacred treasures. The Oxus river divinity was worshiped in Takht‐i Sangin before the transformation of part of the temple in a “fire‐temple” of Parthian‐Sasanian tradition. The main divinity worshiped in Ai Khanum, in the temple with indented niches, at a distance of 100 km from the Oxus, seems to have been rather a Zeus‐Mithra or Zeus‐Belos (hypothesis of Frantz Grenet). The common ground is enhanced by the discovery at Ai Khanum and Takht‐i Sangin of two identical plaques illustrating Cybele associated to a ritual on a stepped altar raised on rocky ground which evokes also the traditional rituals on stepped platforms.

In conclusion, it appears that the intrusion of the Achaemenid power had no fundamental effects on Central Asian cultural life. Part of the transformations observed during this period results from a local evolution which began during the formative period of the Iron Age and continued long after the collapse of the empire. In this general context, marked by a slow evolution of cultural traditions, the appearance of innovative elements in pottery does not immediately follow political changes. The objects related to the royal administration and to the aulic Persian art are limited to the treasuries, but the main impact of the real power of the Achaemenians can be identified through the best dated examples of monumental architecture, that is the palaces and sanctuaries.