The Art of Ancient Iran, Pre-Islamic Cultures
Pacifist
MrMojoMan
This article is old and outdated (1962), and it also contradicts itself. It
starts with, "Iranian art created relatively few works of major importance".
The first immediate question that comes to mind is what is the definition
for "a work of major importance"? Is it size? Is it beauty? Is it
creativity? or what?! :-)
The author goes on, "The small number of plates makes it impossible to give
a detailed survey of Iranian art from the beginnings to the advent of
Islam."!! If this is so, then how can one make the previous statement?! :-)
She goes on and refers "the most spectacular finds of metal-work have been
made in western Iran", "prehistoric pottery", "Luristan bronzes". Of the
Achaemenid and Sassanian period's art (samples) she says "these are
nevertheless merely samples of the rich remains now known from these
periods". Please note "rich"! But yet somehow they are not considered of
"major importance"!!! I think the author is a bit confused :-)
According to this very article modern excavations in Iran began as late as
1931-32. I imagine there was a pause of 5 - 10 years during and after WWII.
The article was written in 1962. This gives the archeologists only 20 years
of time to research! Very little time in the world of archeology, history,
and research. Since then there have been many more excavations.
The attached text is an introduction from Encyclopedia Britannica on
"Iranian Art"
"Any reservation about attributing to Iran primary status among the
countries contributing to the art of the ancient Middle East must be
associated with the discontinuity of its early history and the comparatively
incomplete state of its archaeological exploration. Nevertheless, it is
clear that Iranian art maintained a distinctive identity from prehistoric
times onward; thus, characteristics seen in designs on painted pottery of
the 4th millennium BC can also be recognized, for instance, in the sculpture
of the Achaemenian Persians. One of these characteristics--manifest in
bronze casting and stone carving as well as in painted ornament--is the
predominance of decoration over representation. Such purely Iranian
predilections seem, surprisingly, to have survived the historical hiatus in
the 2nd and 3rd millennia BC, during which the more culturally advanced
regions of the country were so profoundly influenced by the ideas and
artistic formulas of neighboring Mesopotamia. During the better-documented
years of the 1st millennium, they again survived, side-by-side with the
innovations imposed by Greek and other foreign craftsmen, and were later in
fact reciprocally transmitted to Europe."
Also read below a comment about the art found in ancient cities of Petra and
Palmyra:
"The architecture of Palmyra is more conventionally Roman, but it is freely
associated with sculpture, and many bas-relief carvings decorate the tombs
of rich merchants and other notables. Parthian influence is to be seen in
their style, particularly in the frontality of the human figures."
Read the following regarding Achaemenian art:
"Relief sculpture is by far the most striking manifestation of Achaemenian
art. Adopted as the basis of the new style was the straightforward technique
of the Assyrians, with its engraved detail and lack of modeling. The
employment of Ionian sculptors resulted in a complete break with this
tradition, and the full plastic rendering of human or animal figures became
the rule. A compromise between the aesthetic sensibility of the Greek
sculptors and the disciplined precision of the Iranian tradition in
metalwork produced a stylistic synthesis of unrivaled elegance."
If you have read this far by now let me know! :-) I will be glad to provide
you with sources that more up to date on this topic, and I can also provide
you with more information on some of the items that this author mentions,
such as Luristan bronzes. Now tell me, have you gotten this far? :-)
--
MrMojoMan
--
"Pacifist" <Nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:3c7124dc$0$227$cc9e...@news.dial.pipex.com...
> http://www.noteaccess.com/Texts/Porada/Preface.htm
>
>
Pacifist
Why does it say notebook 1993 on top of each page? Does\ it mean it was
considered valid then?
P
"MrMojoMan" <mr_mo...@yahoo.com.NOSPAM> wrote in message
news:3Jbc8.10079$BR3.5...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
I.K. Flin
two horned animals flanking a tree were symbols of the fertility and
water goddesses of the middle east and not demonic in any way. To the
Canaanites her name was Ashurah, to the Iranians and Persians the
fertility goddess was Anahita. Ashurah's symbol was the tree. The
symbols for Anahita are the dove and peacock. The fertility goddesses
have disappeared in modern religions with the exception of the symbol of
the dove (the holy spirit of the trinity). Anahita's consort was the god
Mithra. The goddess Anahita originated from the Babylonian goddess
Ishtar whose name means immaculate. These goddesses were once worshipped
prior to the onset of monotheism. When monotheism took root, the
fertility goddesses and nature worship were considered "evil".
Pacifist wrote:
MrMojoMan
whole thing, did you?! :-)
Do me a favor and read my last sentence, just for fun! :-)
I actually traced this article on the net and found out that it was a very
valuable document at its time, and even now it is referred to occasionally.
Edith Porada and R.H. Dyson published "The Art of Ancient Iran: Pre-Islamic
Cultures " in 1962, originally in German. It was republished as "Ancient
Iran: The Art of Pre-Islamic Times" in 1965.
Edith Porada was a professor of Art History and Archeology at Columbia
University. She was born in 1912 and died in 1994.
--
MrMojoMan
--
"Pacifist" <Nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:a4rtu2$dua$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
Pacifist
the sentences before the last one ;-)
I have to say that the following statement raised a cynical smile in yours
truly:
"One of these characteristics--manifest in bronze casting and stone carving
as well as in painted ornament--is the predominance of decoration over
representation."
Don't you think that defines one of the problems with the Persian character,
right up to this date? (I'm not just talking about art!!).
Anyway. I have a couple of questions that you, with your interest in
archaeology can consider.
1-) I am a frequent visitor to the British Museum. (The entrance is free,
and it's a nice, warm place to while away a dreary Sunday afternoon in the
winter.)
There are free tours of each section (India, China, Near East, Britain,
Egypt, the Roman World, to name but a few) (lasting about 45 minutes or so),
and if you go on different days, there are different guides with different
interests and perspectives on the same subject (the guides are volunteers).
It seems to my untutored eyes (and ears) that most of the Persian artefacts
and masonry (very particularly Persepolis) aren't distinguishable from
other, older Mesopotamian (and occasionally Egyptian) stuff.
My question is this: How original were the Ancient Persians and what was
their specific contribution?
Isn't it fair to say that the Persian culture, including art and
architecture (up to and including the Achaemenid time) was simply a subset
of the greater Near Eastern / Mesopotamian culture and the works in places
like Persepolis were quite unoriginal and derivative? For sure the
Mesopotamians pre-dated the Persians and it seems that we adopted their
ways. The Achaemenids achievements being mainly military ones, but
embellished with Darius the Great's tremendous organisational abilities, and
the deeds of Cyrus (which in terms of justice and tolerance) were a couple
of thousand years ahead of their time.
Try not to be emotional / nationalistic in your response. (We get enough
rant elsewhere!!).
2-) One thing that surprises me about the Iranian archaeology is the
relative absence of Iranian scholars.
The Egyptians have many experts on their own history.
Is this because within Iran, there hasn't been much funding and hence they
have not been able to attract people of good calibre?
Admittedly, even in the ancient times, we had no chroniclers of our history.
It was left to Xenophon and Herodotus :-)
Best regards.
P
"MrMojoMan" <mr_mo...@yahoo.com.NOSPAM> wrote in message
news:7rgc8.30779$Nv5.1...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Pacifist
goddess was represented by cybele (Cybil in today's English) who was shown
as a fat woman with many breasts.
Admittedly, I cannot think of an example of it in an Iranian context.
For sure, different nations adopted each others' gods. I guess it's the
same today :-)
"I.K. Flin" <rs...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:3C718DCB...@cox.net...
MrMojoMan
Paper! :-)
1) IMHO your observation is accurate, but your conclusion wrong! Yes, there
was a lot of cultural exchange, but it is not accurate to say that nothing
Iranian was original. Take Taxteh JamSid columns, the body of the column
may look like any other Greek column, but if you look up, on top of it
you'll see something that is not Greek at all! :-) Have you seen pictures
of evAneh madAyen in tisfun? That is a sample of Persian architecture as
well.
If we use your argument regarding originality, man has not build one single
original piece of art work in ages! Have you seen the columns in NY Public
library? Look very Roman to me. And all those Roman columns look very
Greek to me :-)
What is painting? It is colors over paper after all! Nothing new! ;-)
If you read the text I posted regarding Petra and Palmyra, it says:
"Parthian influence is to be seen in their style, particularly in the
frontality of the human figures." Sounds like originality, doesn't it? :-)
You will find similar samples in metal work, and other artwork as well.
BTW, don't you think the same argument for lack of originality can apply to
the Greeks too?
Anyway, this is SCI and I have never seen two people convincing each other
of anything, and do not expect us to be the first.
Cheers,
--
MrMojoMan
--
"Pacifist" <Nos...@nospam.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3c724ba0$0$8514$cc9e...@news.dial.pipex.com...
Pacifist
whole thing is purely Persian (like the Pyramids were purely Egyptian).
BTW, what are the examples of Parthian architecture within Iran? I cannot
think of any!
AND, have you heard that the Shah Nameh might be the story of Parthian
princes?!
P :o)
"MrMojoMan" <mr_mo...@yahoo.com.NOSPAM> wrote in message
news:kytc8.12148$BR3.6...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
MrMojoMan
centuries. remember that all these cultures co-existed for centuries. The
Parthians did not disappear over night to be replaced by sassanians for
example. Sassanians ruled for a few centuries. Lack of good research in
Iran (unfortunately) has not done us justice. We know very little about our
history considering the ocean of evidence that we literally walk on
everyday. The most compelling archeological evidence from the Parthian era
has been discovered in the north East of Iran and the neighboring countries
in that area.
Shahnameh was about them all. From pre Achaemenian up (almost) until
Ferdowsi's time. So, yes it included Parthian princes too :-)
--
MrMojoMan
--
"Pacifist" <Nos...@nospam.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3c726cb0$0$230$cc9e...@news.dial.pipex.com...
I.K. Flin
Pacifist
deity :o)
"I.K. Flin" <rs...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:3C745A46...@cox.net...
MrMojoMan
Actually Anahita and Cybele are not the same. However, Anahita and Artemis
are! Anahita was Goddess of war, royalty, and fertility. The Greeks
identified her with Artemis and Athena, and the Romans with Diana. In
Avesta she is called Ardvi Sura Anahita ("Damp, Strong, Untainted").
In Iran it was under Achaemenid king of Persia Artaxerxes II (ardeSir-eh
dovvom) that her role was made prominent amongst Persians.
Cybele on the other hand was the Great Mother of the Gods. Greeks also
called her Agdistis. Her Roman name was Mater Deum Magna Idaea, which meant
..... guess what?!! .... Great Idaean Mother of the Gods :-)
Cheers,
--
MrMojoMan
--
"Pacifist" <Nos...@nospam.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3c74c6cc$0$8505$cc9e...@news.dial.pipex.com...
I.K. Flin
meshed across the cultural landscape.
Pacifist
are doubly so!!
My understanding (meagre as it is) is that different nations adopted each
other's Gods or saw one God as an aspect of another.
The enclosed link suggests that the Greeks thought Cybele and Artemis are
the same.
Now using some elementary "Algebra",
If Cybele = Artemis (as per the link)
and if (as you say) Anahita = Artemis,
Then Cybele = Anahita...QED ;-)
The Phrygic mother and fertility goddess. Her name could mean 'Great
Mother'. Another explanation for her name is "she who lives in a cave'.
Cybele is the goddess of life and death, she is a fertility goddess and
protector of wild life. The Greek named her Artemis and Rhea.
http://www.missgien.net/misc/cybele.html
LOL :-)
"MrMojoMan" <mr_mo...@yahoo.com.NOSPAM> wrote in message
news:wO7d8.16601$BR3.9...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
I.K. Flin
isn't discussions of goddesses much more satisfying to you than say
discussions of piety according to modern religions?!!
MrMojoMan
You've got that right. Personally, I find worshiping a Goddess a lot easier
than a God!! I mean, what is hard about imagining a Cindy Crawford look a
like with a ton of superior power, and trying to plead and bargaining with
her to do for you what you want?!!! I am already on my knees boys!! :-P
--
MrMojoMan
--
"I.K. Flin" <rs...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:3C75636A...@cox.net...
MrMojoMan
You got that right my friend! I recently saw this stand up comedy show by a
fellow named Rob Becker, it is called "Defending the Cave Man". It is a
hilarious attempt to explain why the communication difficulties between men
and women. And he takes it all the way back to the cavemen's time when men
were hunters and women were gatherers, men were killers, and women were
cultivators, etc. If it is on video, see it. It'll make you laugh.
Anyway, I got curious and did some research on and off line and this is what
I found out:
The picture on this web page is certainly that of Artemis, BUT according to
the Greeks, Artemis was the daughter of Zeus and Leto and the twin sister of
Apollo. Cybele, according to this web page, is the daughter of Uranus and
Gaia and she is married to Kronos! So they can not be the same!
However, I also found out that Greeks saw a resemblance between Cybele and
their own Mother of Gods, Rhea. Rhea was married to Cronos (Kronos) and
Zeus was their child. that makes Rhea (Cybele) Artemis's grandmother!! :-)
So this is your equation:
Rhea = Cybele and Rhea <> Artemis => Cybele <> Artemis
Go figure! :-)))))
--
MrMojoMan
--
"Pacifist" <Nos...@nospam.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3c7527e2$0$233$cc9e...@news.dial.pipex.com...
Pacifist
"MrMojoMan" <mr_mo...@yahoo.com.NOSPAM> wrote in message
news:dZjd8.18964$BR3.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...